Posts Tagged ‘HIllary Clinton’

Hypocrisy Abounds in Hollywood: Praising Hillary While Protecting Weinstein

October 7, 2017

untitled (181).png

hypocrisy:  the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one’s own behavior does not conform; pretense.

Late Thursday evening, Hollywood, once again, celebrated the loser of the 2016 Presidential Election, Hillary Clinton, as if she had actually won. While doing so, they were simultaneously patting themselves on the back for how brilliant and progressive they were for “empowering” women to “take their rightful place”.

Or, something like that.

According to yahoonews.com

Hillary Rodham Clinton visited The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon, and the show’s female writers were so impressed with the former presidential candidate that they couldn’t wait to give her thank-you notes.

One by one, the female writers came out and read aloud cards thanking Clinton for several things. One writer named Caroline said, “Thank you, Hillary, for always sticking to the issues even as people criticized you for superficial things like your hair, your wardrobe, and your appearance. You showed girls everywhere that politics isn’t a popularity contest, because if it were, you would have won by about 3 million votes.”

Miley Cyrus was the musical guest, and she also got in on the thank-you card action. Fighting back tears, Cyrus said, “Thank you, Hillary, for being a constant beacon of strength, hope, and determination for me and millions of other young women. You’ve been a role model and an inspiration, and the voice of reason in uncertain times. I could go on and on, but I’d like to get right to the point. Can I give you a hug?”

Clinton gave Cyrus a hug, and then she penned a thank-you note to all women, saying, “Thank you, Miley, The Tonight Show writers, and all of the women and young girls out there. You are smart, strong, and deserving of every opportunity. Together, we’ve made our voices heard, we’ve done great things, and we’ve come a long way. But as Miley would say, we can’t stop, and we won’t stop.”

While that projectile-vomit inducing display of hubris-filled Liberal Idolatry was taking place, a scandal involving one of Hollywood’s major figures was busting wide open…evidently like his robe in front of Hollywood starlets had many times before.

Foxnews.com reports that

“Who is Harvey Weinstein?” is a perfectly acceptable question in light of a bombshell story The New York Times broke Thursday that reports decades of his alleged serial sexual harassment and settlements with women in Hollywood.

Putting it bluntly, Harvey Weinstein, for a time, was the most powerful producer and studio head in Hollywood. He is almost singlehandedly responsible for the indie-to-mainstream film explosion in the 90’s (backing “Pulp Fiction,” “Good Will Hunting” and “Shakespeare in Love” to name just a few examples). His influence in Hollywood is unparalleled.

But it’s his influence out of Hollywood that has parts of media and the political left flummoxed to the point of silence. Weinstein, fresh off producing a media-hailed documentary titled “The Hunting Ground,” about sexual assault on college campuses, has also taken a leave from his production company, The Weinstein Company. Who would have guessed the only real hunting ground, according to women interviews by the newspaper, was Harvey Weinstein’s casting couch?

Actress and dedicated liberal women’s rights activist Ashley Judd went on record for the New York Times story, which states: ‘Two decades ago, the Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein invited Ashley Judd to the Peninsula Beverly Hills hotel for what the young actress expected to be a business breakfast meeting. Instead, he had her sent up to his room, where he appeared in a bathrobe and asked if he could give her a massage or she could watch him shower, she recalled in an interview.

“ ‘How do I get out of the room as fast as possible without alienating Harvey Weinstein?’ Ms. Judd said she remembers thinking.”

Weinstein has amassed a small army of professional political spin doctors, image consultants and PR wizards to help blunt any damage from the allegations of settled lawsuits involving several actresses. He has even gone so far as threatening legal action against the Times for its report, calling in favors from the highest ranks of Democratic party operatives.

After fundraising almost $650,000 for Barack Obama and a few thousand more for Hillary Clinton, Weinstein was bound to earn some favors, including advice to blame the NRA for his transgressions.

Lawyer Lanny Davis is defending Weinstein, which is great because Davis has experience in defending important people from sexual abuse allegations – most prominently President Clinton in the Monica Lewinsky scandal. Also advising Weinstein is Democratic powerhouse PR firm SKDKnickerbocker Managing Director and former Obama White House Communications Director Anita Dunn.

SKDK ran interference for Planned Parenthood when undercover videos inside the organization hit the media last year. SKDK also ran promotions for the Women’s March against Donald Trump’s inauguration this past January, where Ashley Judd was a prominent speaker. SKDK insists Weinstein is not a client in any capacity, which is technically true, as Dunn has stated she is advising Weinstein pro-bono. That’s neat.

Another attorney advising Weinstein is Lisa Bloom. If that name sounds familiar it’s because Bloom has made waves recently both organizing the campaign against Bill O’Reilly when he was at Fox News and representing victims against comedian and actor Bill Cosby.

Bloom’s advocacy on behalf of victims seems to stop at the water’s edge of where principled stands for victims end and politics begins. One other slightly important detail regarding Bloom? Weinstein has optioned her book for a mini-series. Convenient.

For a side of the aisle that has been grandstanding about the rights of women who made accusations against President Handmaid’s Tale, Weinstein’s Democratic defenders sure don’t seemed all that concerned with the rights of women who report being victimized by their biggest donors.

With Weinstein’s political influence came close connections to the Obama White House as well, meeting with then President Obama 13 times. At a gathering, former First Lady Michelle Obama described Weinstein, who was in attendance, “as a wonderful human being, a good friend and just a powerhouse.” Malia Obama, upon exiting the White House and appearing to show an interest in the film industry, took an internship with The Weinstein Company.

Malia Obama should be left out of any debate concerning her father’s loyalty and his relationship to Weinstein. But the question has to be asked, if people are claiming that Weinstein’s alleged sexual harassment was worst-kept secret in the media and Hollywood for years, than why was he  allowed repeatedly wield influence this close to the former president and his family?

Democrats en masse are rushing to return or donate campaign donations they received from Weinstein. These include the biggest names considered possible presidential candidates in 2020, like Sens. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Cory Booker of New Jersey, who have vowed to donate their contributions from Weinstein to charity.

Another prominent Democrat who met with Weinstein prior to publication of The New York times story was rising star Sen. Kamala Harris of California, took a private meeting with Weinstein in the Hamptons in July.

On top of Democratic politicians embracing Weinstein for years, is the question of how, if Weinstein’s alleged behavior was such an open secret for so long, did this go unnoticed and unreported in media?

In the wake of the New York Times article, reporter Rebecca Traister wrote in The Cut: “I have been having conservations about Harvey Weinstein’s history of sexual harassment for more than 17 years.”

Discussing an incident that she says took place in 2000, Traister wrote that Weinstein called her a vulgar name referring to women when he complained about a question she asked, and then attacked her reporting colleague and then-boyfriend Andrew Goldman when Goldman tried to calm Weinstein down and get an apology.

“Weinstein went nuclear, pushing Andrew down a set of steps inside the Tribeca Grand – knocking him over with such force that his tape recorder hit a woman, who suffered a long-term injury – and dragging Andrew, in a headlock, onto Sixth Avenue,” Traister wrote.

Traister added that Weinstein was so powerful back then and “there were so many journalists on his payroll, working as consultants on movie projects, or as screenwriters, or for his magazine” that he was able to suppress the new coverage of the incident, even though news photographers captured photos of his actions.

“After that incident … I began to hear from lots of other people, now other reporters, who were working, often for years, to nail down the story of Harvey’s sexual abuses,” Traister wrote.

Democracy was apparently not only dying in darkness, but needed a defibrillator when it came to Harvey Weinstein.

Both media and the entertainment figures were happy to applaud Vice President Joe Biden taking the stage at the Oscars last year on behalf of his “It’s On Us” campaign against sexual assault. They called on everyone to speak up and join Biden, President Obama and survivors of abuse in taking the pledge to “intervene in situations when consent has not or cannot be given.”

But as reported in The Daily Beast, in the wake of the Weinstein settlements, Hollywood has been rendered mute.

There are those who have spoken out in defense of Judd since publication of the New York Times article. They including noted feminist, writer, director and actress Lena Dunham, along with actress Rose McGowan. Both deserve credit for doing so, as well as Ashley Judd, who has risked her career by going on record against a man who has employed some of her closest friends and allies to defend him.

Still silent is a media industry too dependent and obsessed with access to the upper echelon of Hollywood and its stars for content, and who have no problem lecturing America from their late-night talk show stages about health care or guns but are unable to find words of criticism when it comes to one of their own.

Remember that come this February, when Jimmy Kimmel is hosting another Oscar show where people in an industry that covered up for Weinstein for decades are once again lecturing us about the virtues of Hollywood, and the tolerant progressivism that comes with it. 

Okay. so, Weinstein the Wolf’s proclivities were widely known by both the Movers and Shakers and the rank and file workers in the Movie Industry in Tinseltown.

He was active in politics as well as a supporter of Former President Barack Hussein Obama.

I wonder if Barry and Mooch knew that he was a lech when they let Malia intern at his company?

And now, here we are. This same bunch of “I’m smarter than you are” Hollywood Liberals, who have been insulting and talking down to average Americans, simply because we believe in Traditional American Faith and Values and we would not swallow the Kool-aid they we offering during the 2016 Presidential Campaign and elected Donald J Trump as President, instead of the Queen of Mean, knew all along about the Casting Couch of Harvey Weinstein, considering it Standard Operating Procedure.

Boys and girls, do you realize what magnitude of hubris and hypocrisy it took for them to live with themselves by passively accepting the seducing of young starlets by a lecherous old producer, while at the same time, didactically pointing a finger at all of us between the coasts?

The Host of “Wheel of Fortune”, Pat Sajak, nailed these hypocritical harlequins in a recent tweet, sarcastically explain…

OK, let me explain this again: We’re celebs. We’re wiser & more empathetic than you. We are famous. Please take our opinions more seriously.

As I have written before,

To those of you in Tinsel Town who believe that your ability to stand of a piece of tape on a set, mug for the camera, and read lines on a cue card or even memorize a few of them, somehow gives you the authority to insult, demean, and act superior to those of us here in the Heartland who were responsible for the election of Donald J. Trump as President of the United States of America…HERE’S A REALITY CHECK FOR YOU:

Average Americans, such as myself and my readers, really don’t give a tinker’s damn about your opinions of our intelligence or the Citizen Statesman whom we put into the Oval Office.

And now, with this revelation about Harvey Weinstein, we don’t need to hear about how wonderful you are for “championing Women’s Rights”.

The only “Women’s Rights” you trained monkeys champion are the right of failed female professional politicians to somehow still remain relevant and the right turn young starlets had to make into Harvey Weinstein’s office in order to be sexually assaulted on his Casting Couch.

Be proud, Hollywood Liberals.

Your hypocrisy knows no bounds.

And, average Americans are NOT your “Huckleberry”.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Advertisements

JudicialWatch.org Appeal for Release of Whitewater Records to be Heard This Friday. Then and Now: New Book. Same Lyin’ Hillary.

September 21, 2017

untitled (178)

In a television interview with Barbara Walters in January, the first lady recited a favorite children’s verse to explain her predicament:

“As I was standing in the street as quiet as could be,A great big ugly man came up and tied his horse to me.”

The image is of a mere bystander, a good person victimized. But an examination of Hillary Clinton’s public statements suggests someone less passive in her behavior, less consistent in her answers, and less committed to full disclosure than the figure in her own self-portrait. “Hillary Clinton and the Whitewater Controversy: A Close-Up”, The Washington Post, Sunday, June 2, 1996

Last night, the following article was posted on judicialwatch.org

(Washington DC) – Judicial Watch today announced oral argument will be heard Friday, September 22, 2017, in Judicial Watch’s appeal (No. 16-5366) regarding its Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit seeking the draft indictments of Hillary Clinton over what is popularly known as the Whitewater scandal. The National Archives confirmed that draft indictments of Clinton exist but refused to release the records.

Date: Friday, September 22, 2017
Time: 9:30 a.m. ET
Location: Courtroom 20
United States Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit
333 Constitution Ave NW
Washington, DC 20001

The appeal stems from a March 9, 2015, FOIA request and an October 20, 2015, Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit (Judicial Watch v. National Archives and Records Administration (No. 15-cv-01740)) seeking:

All versions of indictments against Hillary Rodham Clinton, including but not limited to, Versions 1, 2, and 3 in box 2250 of the Hickman Ewing Attorney Files, the “HRC/_ Draft Indictment” in box 2256 of the Hickman Ewing Attorney Files, as well as any and all versions written by Deputy Independent Counsel Hickman Ewing, Jr. prior to September of 1996.

The draft indictments relate to allegations that Clinton provided false information and withheld evidence from federal investigators to conceal her involvement with the defunct Madison Guaranty Savings & Loan, the collapse of which lead to multiple criminal convictions.  Clinton provided legal representation to Madison Guaranty as an attorney at the Rose Law Firm in Little Rock, Arkansas.  Clinton’s Rose Law Firm billing records, long sought by prosecutors, were found in the private quarters of the White House shortly after an important statute of limitations had expired.

The National Archives argues that the documents should be kept secret, citing grand jury secrecy and Clinton’s personal privacy.

Judicial Watch attorneys argue that since an “enormous amount of grand jury and other information from the independent counsel’s investigation of Clinton has already been made public, including a January 5, 2001 Final Report of the Independent Counsel and a 206-page “Summary of Evidence Memorandum” detailing the potential charges against Clinton, there is no secrecy or privacy left to protect.”

Judicial Watch believes the records include an evolving set of draft indictments, written between 1996 and 1998.  The draft indictments reportedly arose out of the Office of Independent Counsel investigation into Clinton’s involvement in an allegedly fraudulent transaction, Castle Grande, involving the assets of Madison Guaranty Savings & Loan. Clinton was alleged to have drafted an option agreement that concealed from federal bank examiners a fraudulent $300,000 cross-loan to the Castle Grande project.  Mrs. Clinton’s grand jury testimony – and her alleged concealment of her role in this fraudulent transaction, including the hiding of her Rose Law Firm billing records concerning her legal work for Madison – reportedly became the subject of an obstruction of justice and perjury investigation.

In March 1999, Ewing testified that three years prior he had drafted and circulated but abandoned an indictment of Mrs. Clinton.  The New York Post reported:

Ewing said he “had problems” with some of her statements to investigators in April 1995 and drafted an indictment shortly after September 1996. He said he showed it to other prosecutors in Starr’s office but went no further.

Last year, Judicial Watch separately reported “Mrs. Clinton ‘may have been involved in a crime in 1986,’ according to never-before-seen portions of an Office of Independent Counsel (OIC) memorandum.”

“Why on Earth is President Trump’s Justice Department defending Hillary Clinton by keeping information about her well-known corruption secret? Who is running the store at the Justice Department?” asked Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Tax dollars are wasted as the Deep State rolls along in its frantic efforts to protect Hillary Clinton. President Trump should demand to know why his agencies are defending Hillary Clinton.”

Friday’s oral argument is scheduled to be heard by DC Circuit Judges Judith W. Rogers, David S. Tatel and Laurence H Silberman.

This may seem repetitive, but please allow me to translate the Whitewater Scandal into English from the legalese above.

As alluded to in the above article, in 1978, while Bill “Bubba” Clinton was Attor­ney Gener­al of Arkansas, Hillary and he partnered with James and Susan McDougal in a purchase of 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 Bill 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 unexpect­ed­ly discov­ered copies of missing documents from the Rose Law Firm that described 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.

These 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.

From the last couple of weeks, Failed Democratic Presidential Candidate Hillary Clinton, has been making the Obligatory Liberal Media Rounds hawking her new book, “What Happened”, which blames everybody and their brother for her failure to win the 2016 Presidential Election.

I honestly believe that Hillary Rodham Clinton has never taken any blame for any failure in her life.

Not even for Bubba’s philandering.

 

Her alcohol-riddled mind simply can not cope with the reality that average Americans believe that she stinks on ice.

She ran a lousy campaign, in which she spouted epitaphs and insults aimed at the very Americans whose confidence she needed to gain in our to be elected President: the Middle Class.

“You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic—you name it.”

Hillary is a sociopath, who envisioned herself to be smarter than everybody else, above the law, and White House-bound, because she believed that she was going to be handed the Presidency, simply because “it’s her turn”.

Oopsie.

Americans disagreed.

The name Hillary Rodham Clinton will become synonymous with the untrustworthy nature of professional politicians.

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.

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 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 Whitewater to Travelgate to Benghazigate, and to Emailgate, Hillary Clinton proved to be a ruthless, untrustworthy, Machiavellian professional politician, who only cared about herself and her ascension to the Presidency of the United States of America.

In conclusion, it was not just one incident which cost Hillary Clinton the Presidency .

It was A LIFETIME OF LIES.

Average Americans, from the Rust Belt to the Bible Belt, were familiar with Mrs. Clinton.

They knew who she was and what she was.

Heck, even Walmart discounted her book 40% before it even hit their shelves.

Average Americans have known for quite a while that Hillary would walk 20 miles across the scorching desert sand to tell a lie rather than step across on of Obama’s infamous Red Lines and tell the truth.

Observe her on this book tour.

Hillary Clinton and reality took divergent paths a looong time ago.

Hillary has no one to blame but herself for losing to Donald J. Trump.

But, of course, she never will.

For, after all, accepting responsibility for one’s words and actions is as repulsive to a Modern American Liberal like Hillary as a Crucifix is to a Vampire.

So, perhaps Hillary will come up with more excuses for losing the 2016 Presidential Election, but, to quote the Former First Lady herself,

What difference at this point does it make?

Until He Comes,

KJ

Former FBI Director Comey Wrote Clinton’s E-mailgate Exoneration Letter Before Beginning His Investigation

September 1, 2017

untitled (172)

Two years ago, in a post about Hillary Clinton’s E-mailgate, I asked the following question…

What if the Obama Administration and their minions are shouting down the voiced concerns of Republican Primary Candidate Donald J., Trump, the American People, and those in Congress, and dragging their feet on having the DOJ issue indictments, because they knew “what was going on” all along?

…and simply did not care?

Well, I don’t know about all of the Administration, but, it now appears that the FBI Director did.

Foxnews.com reports that

Then-FBI Director James Comey began drafting a statement exonerating Hillary Clinton in the investigation into her private email use before interviewing key witnesses, including Clinton herself, two Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee said Thursday.
 
“Conclusion first, fact-gathering second—that’s no way to run an investigation,” Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley and South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham wrote in a letter this week to the FBI. “The FBI should be held to a higher standard than that, especially in a matter of such great public interest and controversy.”

Grassley and Graham said they learned about Comey’s draft “exoneration statement” after reviewing transcripts of interviews with top Comey aides.

“According to the unredacted portions of the transcripts, it appears that in April or early May of 2016, Mr. Comey had already decided he would issue a statement exonerating Secretary Clinton,” the senators said.

They added, “That was long before FBI agents finished their work. Mr. Comey even circulated an early draft statement to select members of senior FBI leadership. The outcome of an investigation should not be prejudged while FBI agents are still hard at work trying to gather the facts.”

Clinton, the Democratic presidential nominee in 2016, was investigated by the FBI for using a private email address and server to handle classified information while serving as secretary of state.

In July 2016, Comey famously called Clinton’s email arrangement “extremely careless” though he decided against recommending criminal charges.

In a news release Thursday, the senators said Comey began drafting a statement in April or May 2016, which was before the FBI interviewed 17 key witnesses, including Clinton herself and other top aides.

The statement preceded the FBI entering into an immunity agreement with top Clinton aides with Cheryl Mills and Heather Samuelson.

The transcripts are from interviews conducted by the Office of Special Counsel, which interviewed James Rybicki, Comey’s chief of staff, and Trisha Anderson, the principal deputy general counsel of national security and cyberlaw, the senators said.

“It is unclear whether the FBI agents actually investigating the case were aware that Mr. Comey had already decided on the investigation’s outcome while their work was ongoing,” the senators wrote.

In the Wednesday letter to FBI Director Chris Wray, the two senators said they have requested all records relating to the drafting of the statement.

Comey was fired as FBI director by President Trump in May amid tensions over the Russia investigation.

In a related story, posted last night by The Daily Caller

A federal judge ordered the FBI Thursday to publicly release previously unseen documents related to the investigation into former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server.

U.S. District Judge James E. Boasberg ordered the FBI to produce uncensored court documents describing the grand jury subpoenas issued to force Clinton’s internet service providers to turn over information related to her private server use, according to a statement released by Cause of Action Institute.

The ruling was made in response to a motion filed in June as part of a suit brought by Cause of Action Institute and Judicial Watch. The organizations claim the Department of State violated the Federal Records Act by failing to maintain records related to Clinton’s handling of classified information.

Boasberg justified his ruling on the basis that the set of documents in question “rehashes information already made public, thus obviating any need for secrecy.”

Cause of Action President and CEO John J. Vecchione praised the decision in a statement released Thursday following the court’s ruling.

“I applaud the court’s opinion. The government attempted to end a case with evidence no one could review. This order makes public details submitted by the government about the FBI’s efforts to recover then-Secretary Clinton’s unlawfully removed emails,” he said. “Americans deserve to know the full scope of that investigation, and we, as Plaintiffs, should have an opportunity to contest the relevance of the government’s facts.”

Former FBI Director James Comey called Clinton’s use of a private email address and server to handle classified information “extremely careless” in his July Congressional testimony but stopped short of filing charges.

The requested documents relate specifically to subpoenas related to emails Clinton sent on two Blackberry accounts during her first few weeks in office.

Boasberg’s order overrules objections made by the Trump administration, who previously claimed that publicly releasing the documents would violate grand jury secrecy rules.

The order comes days after the FBI refused to turn over documents related to their investigation into Clinton’s private email server, citing a lack of public interest to justify denying the FOIA request.

Comey never had any intentions of honestly investigating Hillary Clinton.

Why?

Obama hired him.

Comey is a Professional Bureaucrat. He is a Political Weasel.

He remained loyal to King Barack The First after President Trump decided to keep him on as FBI Director.

That is why he took notes in meetings with Trump and did not document his meetings with anyone in the Previous Administration, including Hillary Clinton and Barack Hussein Obama.

However, try as they might, the purposeful obfuscation and political chicanery by ex-FBI Director Comey and the Professional Bureaucrats, who are members of the “Deep State”, plotting against President Trump, will never be able to redeem Hillary Clinton’s Political Career.

“Unjust attacks” on the Queen of Mean were not responsible for her loss to Donald J. Trump on November 8, 2016.

Neither are any of the other silly excuses which her, the Democratic Party, their Propaganda Arm, the MSM, and their Social Media Minions offer to explain her defeat.

Hillary Clinton, as shown by her “sound bites’, before, during, and after 2016’s history-making Presidential Election, views herself as smarter than average Americans.

She comes off in public as being snotty, cold, and insincere…because she is

This is nothing new.

In the Spring of 1974, Hillary 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.

Witness her behavior during the entire investigation regarding the events of that horrific night of September 11, 2012, on the grounds of the U.S. Embassy Compound in Benghazi, Libya.

We learned on October 26, 2012, that there were two drones circling overhead, as four brave Americans were being slaughtered. Obama and his Administration knew exactly what was happening, yet, for the sake of political expediency, chose to do nothing about it.

What Hillary’s appearance before the Benghazi Hearings showed, was a pathological predilection for dishonesty, insincerity, and inappropriateness, not only on the part of Former Secretary of State, Hillary Rodham Clinton,  but the whole Obama Administration, as well, from the top on down.

They all knew that the cause of the attacks was not some stupid Youtube Video, but a full-blown Muslim Terrorist Attack.

However, for the sake of Political Expediency…and the re-election of President Barack Hussein Obama and the legacy of his rapidly failing Foreign Policy, known as Smart Power!, they had to quickly come up with an excuse for their liability in the deaths of those four brave Americans.

Hillary Rodham Clinton, with her Oscar-worthy Performance in front of the House Committee, which included circuitous answers to Yes or No Questions and inappropriate smirks, accompanied by cackling laughter, echoes across the years, proved completely true and accurate as to what I and my fellow Conservative Bloggers were saying about her all along:

Hillary is a sociopath, who envisioned herself to be smarter than everybody else, above the law, and White House-bound, because she believed that she was going to be handed the Presidency, simply because “it’s her turn”.

Oopsie.

Americans disagreed.

The name Hillary Rodham Clinton has already become synonymous with the untrustworthy nature of professional politicians.

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.

Whether the revelation of “the gift” of massive quantities of Uranium to the Russians (an irony lost on the conspiratorial Democrats perpetuating the Russia-Trump Collusion Fable)  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 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 Emailgate, Hillary Clinton proved to be a ruthless, untrustworthy, Machiavellian professional politician, who only cared about herself and her ascension to the Presidency of the United States of America.

In conclusion, it was not just one incident which cost Hillary Clinton the Presidency .

It was A LIFETIME OF LIES.

Average Americans, from the Rust Belt to the Bible Belt, were familiar with Mrs. Clinton.

They knew who she was and what she was.

They knew that she would walk 20 miles across the scorching desert sand to tell a lie rather than step across on of Obama’s infamous Red Lines and tell the truth.

Hillary has no one to blame but herself for losing the Presidency to Donald J. Trump.

But, of course, she never will.

For, after all, accepting responsibility for one’s words and actions is as repulsive to a Modern American Liberal as a Crucifix is to a Vampire, jus as she showed in her speech about a “Divided America” the other day, when she “came out of the woods”.

Just like their failed Presidential Candidate, the Democrats and their operatives in the Main Stream Media who have made up all of the Fake News Stories concerning the Russians somehow tampering with the election, refuse to accept the reality that average American rejected their political ideology and sent a Citizen Statesman to Washington on November 8, 2016, instead of a Professional Politician, even with Deep State Political  Operatives in the FBI,  including Director Comey himself ,working on her behalf.

Donald J. Trump remains the President of the United States of America.

And, all of the “Special Snowflakes” can continue their National Temper Tantrum, if they wish.

For after all,

What difference at this point does it make?

Until He Comes,

KJ

Shepard Smith Joins the Liberal National Temper Tantrum Over Trump With an On-Air Rant. Trump Still President.

July 15, 2017

shep-800x430

Fox News’ Liberal News Anchor let his mask slip off and fall completely to the ground yesterday, leaving his colleague, Chris Wallace, speechless.

Aaron Blake wrote the following article yesterday titled “‘Lie after lie after lie’: Fox News’ Shepard Smith has a Cronkite moment on Russia” for his blog, “The Fix”, which can be found in The Washington Post

Between its “Fox and Friends” morning show and Sean Hannity at night, Fox News has become a haven for those who think this whole Russia thing is nonsense. On Friday morning, Steve Doocy even declared that “the Russia story is starting to fall apart.”

But on Friday afternoon, a Fox host went off on the Trump administration’s handling of Russia in a way we’ve rarely seen.

Shepard Smith is no stranger to challenging the administration and occasionally launching into personal editorials — including one about refugees back in 2015. But on Friday afternoon, he took it a step further, repeatedly accusing the administration of lying, deception and a coverup.

After reporting that there appeared to be more people in that meeting with Russian lawyer than previously acknowledged, Smith had either a Howard Beale or a Walter Cronkite moment, depending on your perspective, and he lit into the White House.

Here’s the transcript:

“We’re still not clean on this, Chris [Wallace]. If there’s nothing there — and that’s what they tell us, they tell us there’s nothing to this and nothing came of it, there’s a nothingburger, it wasn’t even memorable, didn’t write it down, didn’t tell you about it, because it wasn’t anything so I didn’t even remember it — with a Russian interpreter in the room at Trump Tower? If all of that, why all these lies? Why is it lie after lie after lie? If you clean, come on clean, you know? My grandmother used to say when first we practice to — Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive. The deception, Chris, is mind-boggling. And there are still people who are out there who believe we’re making it up. And one day they’re gonna realize we’re not and look around and go, Where are we, and why are we getting told all these lies?”

Most journalists are reluctant to use the L-word — “lie.” This blog has covered the administration’s contradictory claims and misleading statistics regularly, but calling something a lie implies you know that it was intended to deceive.

An exasperated Smith had clearly had enough of dancing around that word on Friday afternoon.

Where was ol’ Shep when “The Lightbringer” and the 2016 Democratic Presidential Nominee were lying their hindquarters off?

Here is a list of Obama’s biggest lies, posted on Kevin Jackson’s theblacksphere.net on March 7, 2015…

“I, Barrack Hussein Obama, pledge to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America.”

 

I will have the most transparent administration in history.

 

The stimulus will fund shovel-ready jobs.

 

I am focused like a laser on creating jobs.

 

The IRS is not targeting anyone.

 

It was a spontaneous riot about a movie.

 

If I had a son.

 

I will put an end to the type of politics that “breeds division, conflict and cynicism”.

 

You didn’t build that!

 

I will restore trust in government.

 

The Cambridge cops acted stupidly.

 

The public will have 5 days to look at every bill that lands on my desk

 

It’s not my red line – it is the world’s red line.

 

Whistle blowers will be protected in my administration.

 

We got back every dime we used to rescue the banks and auto companies, with interest.

 

I am not spying on American citizens.

 

Obama Care will be good for America . You can keep your family doctor. Premiums will be lowered by $2500. If you like it, you can keep your current healthcare plan. It’s just like shopping at Amazon.

 

I knew nothing about “Fast and Furious” gunrunning to Mexican drug cartels.

 

I knew nothing about IRS targeting conservative groups.

 

I knew nothing about what happened in Benghazi .

 

I have never known my uncle from Kenya who is in the country illegally and that was arrested and told to leave the country over 20 years ago. And, I have never lived with that uncle. He finally admitted (12-05-2013) that he DID know his uncle and that he DID live with him.

And then, there’s the “woman who should have been elected”, Hillary Clinton.

Lord knows she is not crooked.

Neither is a dog’s hind leg.

Here’s a list of Hillary’s indiscretions, courtesy of The Washington Times

• Flunked the D.C. Bar Exam.

• Was removed from her House Judiciary Committee staffer job because of incompetence and lying.

 • The Whitewater scandal.

• Married a serial liar and cheater, who occasionally had sexual encounters with nonconsenting partners.

• Lied about “sniper fire” in an attempt to simulate exposure to danger in a war zone.

• The subject of a “vast right-wing conspiracy” that led to the impeachment and disbarment of her husband

• Took crockery, furniture, artwork and other items from the White House — had to return and/or pay for them.

• Said “what difference, at this point, does it make” about four brave people killed in Libya as a direct result of her failure to protect them on the anniversary of 9/11.

• Totally ignored the structure and rules for the handling of sensitive national security information.

• Amassed a personal fortune with “speaking fees” and payments from private sector political donors and foreign governments into transparent “foundations” in obvious exchange for future political favor.

Two conclusions emerge from this nefarious list of “accomplishments”:

First, Hillary’s brief solo “professional” career [without Bill] was a total failure, and of her own doing. This despite high-level political sponsorship to get her a key “entry level” job as a legal staffer on the Nixon Impeachment investigation in the early 1970s. But she flunked the D.C. Bar Exam [perhaps the easiest in those days] and got fired from her staff job.

Second, she is identified today in friendly media solely by her “career” post-marriage to Bubba. This is the part that Barack Obama recently described as making her “probably the best qualified person ever to run for president.” This is both laughable and ironic, as she is better qualified than was Mr. Obama, arguably the most unqualified person ever elected president. And, as presidential aspirants go, they had one professional “qualification” in common: Neither had ever worked in a “real job.”

As quickly as the Murdoch Brothers booted Roger Ailes and Bill O’Reilly, they should move with as great a speed to get rid of Shepard Smith.

It is not simply the fact that he is a Liberal. And, it is not because he came out and told the American Public recently what we already knew, that he is homosexual,

It is because he is supposed to be a “news reporter”, not a Liberal attempting to relive the “Glory Days” of Air America, a Liberal Radio Network which disappeared faster than a box of donuts in front of Rosie O’Donnell.

Shepard Smith stands out like a sore thumb on the Fox News Channel.

If he wishes to be a Liberal Political Pundit, great. Let him and Juan rotate on “The Five”, like Juan Williams and Bob Beckel used to.

For the Former Ole Miss Cheerleader to launch into a rant resembling the National Temper Tantrum being thrown by immature Liberals from coast to coast is not only unseemly, it’s unprofessional.

As I have listed, the guy who occupied the Oval Office for the last eight years and his “chosen successor”, whom average Americans rejected like the other two bachelors on “The Dating Game”, have left behind them a Grand Canyon full of lies and corruption, which is full to overflowing, as we are finding more and more shady dealings committed by both of them every day.

In fact, as we are finding out more about Donald Trump, Jr’s meeting with that “Russian Lawyer”, it is looking more and more like a Democratic Party Set-up.

So, if I were Shepard Smith, I would take some Xanax, keep my histrionics to myself, and act like a Professional News Anchor.

Americans are not buying what these temper tantrum-throwing Liberals are attempting to sell.

Until He Comes,

KJ 

 

Liberal Democrat Disconnect: The Candidacy of Hillary Clinton and the Failure of Greentech Automotive

July 14, 2017

thEST7W2B6

Terry McAuliffe is an American businessman, fundraiser, politician, and former chairman of the Democratic Party. He served as chairman of the Democratic National Committee from 2001 to 2005 and served as co-chairman of President Bill Clinton’s 1996 re-election campaign and as chairman of Hillary Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign. He was an unsuccessful candidate for the Democratic nomination in the 2009 Virginia gubernatorial election, who came back to win the 2013 Virginia gubernatorial election.

Judicialwatch.org reported on July 7th that

An electric car company that folded after taking millions of taxpayer dollars was founded by Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe, the chairman of Hillary Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign and former Democratic National Committee (DNC) chair, but the mainstream media is ignoring this pertinent fact. The Mississippi-based company, GreenTech, shut down in January but is back in the spotlight because this week the state’s auditor demanded the firm repay $6.4 million in public funds. Only a small Richmond, Virginia newspaper prominently reported McAuliffe’s ties to the scandal, stating in the headline that “Mississippi auditor demands $6.4M repayment from McAuliffe’s former electric car company.”

Most mainstream news outlets ignored the story altogether and a few kept McAuliffe’s name out the minimal coverage. Washington D.C.’s mainstream newspaper went with a lengthy wire service story that matter-of-factly mentions McAuliffe in the very last sentence. “Among former insiders is Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe,” the end of the article states. “He resigned as the firm’s chairman in December 2012 and said he divested his interest.” How convenient! The article omits that, as GreenTech founder, McAuliffe brokered the deal in which the company got millions in public funds by promising to invest $60 million locally and creating hundreds of new full-time jobs. That never happened and instead taxpayers got fleeced. Now Mississippi State Auditor Stacey Pickering is ordering that the money be repaid with interest and investigative costs. The exact figure is $6,360,019.60.

McAuliffe is a renowned Democratic fundraiser who made a fortune with shady investments in a telecommunications giant that went bankrupt. He started his fundraising career in Jimmy Carter’s 1979 reelection campaign and has raised big bucks for Democrats over the years, but not without controversy. McAuliffe was investigated for campaign-finance abuses during the 1996 presidential election and was deposed by the Senate committee investigating the matter. In 2002 the Virginia governor was investigated for his role in an unprecedented case of political profiteering for turning a $100,000 investment in telecommunications giant Global Crossings into an $18 million profit. The company later made the fourth-largest bankruptcy filing in history and McAuliffe insisted he only did “political work” for the company’s founder who, incidentally, donated $1 million to Bill Clinton’s Presidential Library.

In 2013, McAuliffe appeared on Judicial Watch’s most corrupt politicians list and last year Judicial Watch sued the governor on behalf of Virginia voters for signing an executive order to restore voting rights to about 206,000 convicted felons. In court proceedings, Judicial Watch argued that the blanket restoration of rights to felons violates “provisions of the Virginia Constitution mandating that voting rights may only be restored on an individual basis, following a particular, individualized review and a finding of sufficient grounds for restoring such rights.” Plaintiffs alleged that their votes and the lawful votes of other Virginians will be cancelled out or diminished by felons who are not eligible to vote under Virginia’s laws and constitution.

Though his pals in the mainstream media are keeping his name out of the GreenTech scandal, McAuliffe could still be in serious trouble. The Virginia paper that reported his key role in the bankrupt electric car company points this out: “McAuliffe’s office has said the governor has had no involvement with the company since stepping down as its chairman and divesting his financial stake. But the escalating standoff in Mississippi raises the likelihood that the business deal McAuliffe brokered could be headed toward a bitter end in court. Ending his four-year term as governor with a higher national profile and record as an exuberant pitchman for Virginia, GreenTech’s unraveling could dog McAuliffe amid speculation about a 2020 presidential bid.”

According to McAuliffe, in an op ed piece which was published on August 13, 2016 in the Washington Post

I’ve not been contacted in any way by those conducting the investigation and have no knowledge of it beyond what has been reported. From what has been reported, the investigation appears to be looking at a document allegedly prepared for potential investors — something I was not responsible for as chairman.

Republicans have also criticized the company for employing only about 100 people. Of course, that’s about 100 jobs that would not have existed if we had not taken a risk on this company. The company has taken longer to develop than many people expected, including me, but taking a risk on an innovative company is a critical part of the American system, and most business leaders I speak with agree that it’s not uncommon for a company to face challenges meeting its goals.

GreenTech was started because those involved invested their own money in high-tech manufacturing. In this case, it was manufacturing a small electric vehicle that had already won an annual award. Like every start-up during the Great Recession, the company faced headwinds. Those included a bureaucratic slowdown in a bipartisan visa program known as EB-5, which brings capital from overseas to create jobs here in the United States for many companies. I joined a variety of business and political leaders from both parties who expressed frustration to officials at the agency overseeing the program.

A further headwind is that manufacturing isn’t easy, and manufacturing a new kind of car is even harder. The company has invested in research and development, testing and safety to perfect the design. While Nissan worked to develop electric vehicles for about 18 years before launching the Leaf, GreenTech made progress in just a few years during a more challenging economic time. If GreenTech succeeds, it will be a step forward for innovative manufacturing.

I have an interest — both personally and financially — in the company succeeding, and I believe that it will. As a minority shareholder, my return will be determined by the success of a long process of testing, manufacturing, marketing and selling vehicles all over the world.

Like every other Liberal Democrat Politician, Terry McAuliffe has a history of promising the world and delivering squat.

Democrats incessantly proclaim that they are the party of the average American.

In reality, under the rule of a democrat congress, and eight years of a Democrat president , America’s economy was sent on a plunge straight down the old porcelain receptacle.

The “temporary” Greentech Automotive Plant, which was supposed to provide a lot of jobs here in Northwest Mississippi, used to sit just a couple of miles down the road from where I am writing this post. The fact is, according to former employees, fewer than 100 workers produced no more than one car every two or three days…a legacy of over-promising and under-delivering, which led to another Democrat-approved “Green Energy” failure.

This legacy would have been multiplied one thousand-fold if Hillary Clinton had been allowed to gain the Presidency of the United States of America.

Greentech Automotive was nothing but a poorly thought out con game from the get-go.

The “energy-efficient” two-seat cars that they built, only delivered a maximum speed of around 35 mph.

They were envisioned as a car to be used by Europeans to drive around the town square, not to be driven on America’s six-lane highways.

McAuliffe was their “American Representative” and with his Democrat Party Pull, they were able to “set up shop” in the Magnolia State, first in the city of Horn Lake and then, in a plant built especially for them down by the casinos in Tunica.

Just like a Hillary Clinton Presidency was known to be a “sure thing” by Liberals Democrats, the adaptation of the European Electric two-seaters manufactured by Greentech Automotive were believed to have been enthusiastically received by average Americans.

In both cases the overestimation of their own intelligence and their disconnect from average Americans, was their undoing.

And, in both cases, average Americans hit the brakes on Liberal Democrats’ ambitious plans.

Until He Comes,

KJ

White House Fires Back…Says That “Russiagate” is Actually a DNC/Clinton Scandal. Why They’re Right.

July 13, 2017

T-Jr-Email-600-LA

Why aren’t the same standards placed on the Democrats. Look what Hillary Clinton may have gotten away with. Disgraceful! – @realDonaldTrump, Twitter, 7/12/17

Foxnews.com reports that

The White House went on offense Wednesday amid the firestorm over Donald Trump Jr.’s campaign-season meeting with a Russian lawyer, trying to turn the tables by alleging the Democratic National Committee and the Clintons are the ones caught up in “collusion.”

The White House has been grappling all week with revelations of a meeting the president’s eldest son held last year with Russian attorney Natalia Veselnitskaya, who was said to have dirt on Hillary Clinton as part of a Russian government effort to help the Trump campaign.

But Deputy White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders used Wednesday’s off-camera briefing to highlight DNC and Clinton ties to foreign governments including Russia and Ukraine.

“If we’re looking at Russia relationships with anybody, it would be directly with the Clintons,” she said, citing examples of a speech former President Bill Clinton gave in Russia for which he reportedly earned over $500,000 and reports of then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton selling what Sanders described as “a third of the world’s uranium” to Russia.

Putting more distance between himself and Russia, even on the heels of a meeting with Vladimir Putin, President Trump also said in an interview with the Christian Broadcasting Network set to air Thursday that he believes there are “many reasons” Putin would prefer Hillary Clinton in office over him.

“We are the most powerful country in the world and we are getting more and more powerful because I’m a big military person. As an example, if Hillary had won, our military would be decimated. Our energy would be much more expensive. That’s what Putin doesn’t like about me. And that’s why I say why would he want me?” Trump said.

Meanwhile, Sanders drew attention Wednesday to other alleged examples of Democratic coordination with a foreign government.  

“If there’s been any evidence of collusion in 2016 actually happening, it would have been between the DNC and the Ukrainian government,” Sanders said.

Sanders was referring to a Politico report published in January. The report cited a meeting between Ukrainian government officials who allegedly tried to help Clinton undermine Trump by publicly questioning his fitness for office and shared research and damaging information on Trump and his advisers with Clinton allies.

The Politico investigation exposed that a Ukrainian-American DNC operative –Alexandra Chalupa, who worked in the Clinton White House—met with officials in the Ukrainian Embassy in Washington in an effort to expose ties between Trump’s then-top campaign official Paul Manafort and Russia. Manafort later resigned.

In Wednesday’s briefing, Sanders was effectively picking up where Trump left off on Twitter.

On Wednesday morning, Trump took to Twitter to rip Clinton over what he described as a double standard for their respective associates’ alleged cooperation with foreign governments in the 2016 campaign.

Trump first drew attention to a Washington Times article claiming Democrats had used false information from Russia to attack him and his campaign.

“@WashTimes states ‘Democrats have willfully used Moscow disinformation to influence the presidential election against Donald Trump,” the president tweeted.

He added, “Why aren’t the same standards placed on the Democrats. Look what Hillary Clinton may have gotten away with. Disgraceful!”

The news report refers back to the questionable dossier—written by former British intelligence agent Christopher Steele and allegedly distributed by Fusion GPS—which contained unverified allegations against the Trump team. Fusion GPS, the Democrat-funded opposition research firm, allegedly paid Steele with money from a Clinton backer. The dossier eventually fell into the hands of the FBI.

As Sanders referenced such reports at Wednesday’s briefing, she said: “This is the only collusion I’ve seen, and it’s certainly been proven.”

Even as the White House sought to shift the focus to Democrats, the Trump team is facing mounting bipartisan scrutiny over both the Trump Jr. meeting and the administration’s handling of the latest revelations.

Sanders told reporters on Wednesday that she was “not aware of” any additional meetings with Trump officials and Russian nationals.

“Our goal is to be as transparent as humanly possible and put every bit of information at the forefront,” Sanders said. “We are willing to cooperate with anybody looking into this matter.”

Sanders was asked to respond to criticism from House Oversight Committee Chairman Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., who told Fox News Tuesday night that the “drip, drip, drip is undermining the credibility of this administration.”

“I think it’s actually undermining the credibility of the media because they drip, drip, drip, without having much to do about anything,” Sanders said.

Regarding Hillary’s Uranium Deal with Russia…

As reported in April of 2015…

–Bill and Hillary Clinton had helped a Canadian financier named Frank Giustra and a small Canadian company obtain a lucrative uranium mining concession from the dictator in Kazakhstan;

–The same Canadian company, renamed Uranium One, bought uranium concessions in the United States;

–The Russian government came calling and sought to buy that Canadian company for a price that would mean big profits for the Canadian investors;

–For the Russians to buy that Canadian company, it would require the approval of the Obama administration, including Hillary’s State Department, because uranium is a strategically important commodity;

–Nine shareholders in Uranium One just happened to provide more than $145 million in donations to the Clinton Foundation in the run-up to State Department approval;

–Some of the donations, including those from the Chairman of Uranium One, Ian Teler, were kept secret, even though the Clintons promised to disclose all donations;

-Hillary’s State Department approved the deal;–The Russian government now owns 20 percent of U.S. uranium assets. 

In short, here was what you might call a radioactive scandal. It included secret donations, the Russian government, foreign financiers, more than $145 million, and Bill and Hillary Clinton.

And then, there was the “Steele Dossier”…

Hillary Clinton and her campaign colluded with the Russians to influence the 2016 Presidential Elections through payment to create a dossier designed to bring Trump down by defaming him. This operation also involved Russian Intelligence and a wealthy Democratic Donor.

Can you say, “George Soros”, boys and girls?

Curiously enough, there is a person who was involved in all of this chicanery, now working in the Trump White House…

The “Special Counsel” appointed by President Trump, himself.

Robert Muller was appointed FBI Director by George W. Bush whom he served under for 10 years. When Barack Hussein Obama became President, Mueller served under him for 2 more years. During that time, he acted as a “mule” for Secretary of State Clinton, carrying a sample of the before-mentioned seized uranium BACK to Vladimir Putin via the Russian Embassy.

Mueller’s past, plus his present staff activity has lead me and others to throw up a red flag about this guy, fearing that he may be another Establishment Political Weasel like James Comey, who followed Mueller as Director of the FBI. President Trump needs to go ahead and fire Mueller and appoint a new Special Prosecutor.

One Former FBI Director/Washington Establishment Political Weasel on his staff caused enough trouble already.

“Russiagate” is an invention of the Democratic Party in more ways than one. Not only was Hillary Clinton guilty of nefarious dealings with the Russians when she was Obama’s Secretary of State, she and her Campaign Staff worked with the Russians in an attempt to sabotage the campaign of Donald J. Trump in order to overcome her own shortcomings and win the Presidency. When that didn’t happen, she, along with the Democrat Elite, made up the version of “Russiagate” which the MSM and Liberal Political Activists (but, I repeat myself) have been bombarding skeptical Americans with for the past 7 months.

But, of course, just like all the other shady dealings committed by Democratic Politicians in the past several decades…

It’s different when THEY do it.

Until He Comes,

KJ

What the Dems Need to Do to Win an Election and Why They Won’t Do It (A KJ Analysis)

June 26, 2017

Heavy-Wt-Pelosi-NRD-600

Contrary to what we learn from progressives in education and the media, the history of the Democratic Party well into the twentieth century is a virtually uninterrupted history of thievery, corruption, and bigotry.  – Dinesh D’Souza 

Yahoo News reports that

Frozen out of power in Washington and having lost a string of congressional races this year, Democrats are struggling to craft winning strategies to convert disillusionment with President Donald Trump into victory in 2018’s midterm elections. The party fielded a hodgepodge of candidates in four special elections in recent months, including a banjo-strumming cowboy poet in Montana. Most recently Democrats nominated a young novice in Georgia, where the party, judging it had its best pick-up opportunity, threw millions of dollars into the race.

Yet each time, Republicans beat back the advances. And Democratic lawmakers, strategists and party officials have been left scratching their heads about how to turn it around and launch a viable bid to reclaim Congress next year.

“They’re definitely licking their wounds,” Kerwin Swint, professor and chair of the political science department at Georgia’s Kennesaw State University, told AFP.

Debate has swirled among Democrats about what strategy to deploy: going all in with a nationwide anti-Trump agenda, or tailoring individual races to local economic issues in a bid to repair fraying connections between the Democratic Party and the common voter.

The Georgia race showed “the effectiveness of Trump’s staying power” despite the scandals rocking the White House, Swint said.

“Democrats should not focus their campaigns about him, they should be about jobs,” he added. “They need a much more focused economic pitch.”

At the same time, Zac Petkanas, who directed Hillary Clinton’s rapid-response operation during her 2016 presidential campaign, said Republicans should not see their four congressional victories as a sign all is well in Trumpworld.

In a normal political environment, the races in Georgia, Kansas, Montana and South Carolina — to fill seats vacated by congressmen who joined Trump’s cabinet — would be blowouts for Republicans, given the overwhelming, ruby-red nature of the districts, Petkanas said in a telephone interview.

Instead, they were all within seven percentage points.

Trump and Republican lawmakers have gloated over the wins, “but I think in private they’re actually very scared,” he said.

“They are in for the races of their lives, and they know it.”

– ‘Unique opportunity’ –

As Democrats seek to regroup, they are hobbled by a glaring omission: no clear party protagonist has emerged as a potential challenger to Trump in 2020.

Absent such a standard-bearer, some Democrats have begun urging House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, the icon atop the party’s hierarchy, to step aside and allow new blood into leadership.

“I don’t think people in the Beltway are realizing just how toxic the Democratic Party brand is in so much of the country,” congressman Tim Ryan, who unsuccessfully challenged Pelosi for the leadership position last year, told CNN in a blunt postmortem after the June 20 loss in Georgia.

The California congresswoman pushed back tensely against her party’s rebels, insisting she has brought unity to the Democrats.

“My decision about how long I stay is not up to them,” Pelosi, who is 77, told reporters.

Asked about the Democrats’ doldrums and Pelosi’s future role, Trump quipped that it would be “very sad for Republicans” if the congresswoman — a favorite target of Republicans — stepped down.

“I’d like to keep her right where she is, because our record is extraordinary against her,” he told Fox on Friday.

The party in presidential power traditionally fares poorly during US midterm elections. In 2010, two years into Barack Obama’s first term as president, Democrats got hammered, losing 63 seats and control of the 435-member House of Representatives.

Democrats now need to gain 24 seats to reclaim the House, and analysts say there are several dozen Republican-held seats in play.

In a memo this past week, Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee chairman Ben Ray Lujan described at least 71 districts that are more competitive than the four contested so far this year.

“We have a unique opportunity to flip control of the House of Representatives in 2018,” he wrote.

One reason Lujan is banking on victory: the Republican health care bill.

Senate Republicans on Thursday unveiled their plan, which would repeal much of Obama’s signature health care reforms.

It has had a frosty reception. Democrats are counting on voters revolting against any lawmaker who supports legislation that could leave millions of Americans without health insurance.

“A lot will depend on where Trump’s approval rating is next year, and health care will obviously mold that climate,” Professor Swint said.

I disagree.

(I know. You’re shocked.)

The Democrats are now the “The Minority Party” in Congress and are out of the White House for a very logical reason:

Their Far Left Political ideology is repugnant to the majority of Average American Voters.

The Modern Liberals in the Democratic Party attempting to position themselves, as they did in the Georgia Congressional Race, as Fiscal and Social “Moderates”, are as believable as their last Presidential Candidate, Hillary Clinton, claiming that she was “in the best of health”.

American Voters did not buy that lie, either.

For the Democratic Party to begin winning elections again, they are going to have to abandon the Far Left Political Ideology, inspired by Karl Marx and Saul Alinsky, which they have bitterly clung to as their “religion” for the past several decades.

The absurdness and downright anti-Americanism of their “Tenets of Faith” has been anathema to Americans living in America’s Heartland, the ones responsible for an American Businessman and Entrepreneur being elected our 45th President.

Those who sit in judgment of us average Americans like the Pharisees in the ancient Holy Land are going to have to climb down from their barstools at the Washington Capitol Hill Country Club, and come home to visit us “common” people, attend ballgames, picnics, charitable public events, and even…GASP!…attend church with us, if they wish to represent average Americans in our Sovereign Nation’s Halls of Power again.

However, realistically, I do not see any of my suggestions coming to pass.

Democrats are too ensconced is their own belief system which states that…

  1. Americans are “jingoistic”.
  2. America is responsible for all of the world’s ills.
  3. The evils of American Capitalism are responsible for the world’s climate, not the God of Abraham.
  4. Perversion is perfectly normal.
  5. We ARE “The Smartest People in the Room”.

There are many more “Tenets of Faith” that the Democrats believe. However, for the sake of brevity, I will move on.

Years ago, the Democratic Party and reality took divergent paths.

Unless they can find their way back to reality, their political party will go the way of the Whigs.

Considering their fondness for relative morality, situational ethics, and purposeful obtuseness, perhaps they should keep traveling the path that they are presently on.

Their party’s slow, painful demise will be great for the Popcorn Industry.

Pass the salt and butter, please.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

 

 

Senate Judicial Committee Launches Probe Over Lynch’s Possible Obstruction of Hillary Investigation

June 24, 2017

141108-loretta-lynch-mn-1235_808848110e47a65f68a0851a20700aea

When President Barack Hussein Obama announced his pick to succeed Eric Holder as Attorney General, the first reports profiled her as an “overqualified” Prosecutor from Brooklyn, NY. While Ms. Lynch may or many not actually have had the legal skills for the position, it is a certainty that she had the correct political ideology, racial animus, and situational ethics to work within the Obama Administration.

And, now, the Senate would like to speak with her.

The Washington Times reports that

The Senate Judiciary Committee has opened a probe into former Attorney General Loretta  Lynch’s efforts to shape the FBI’s investigation into 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, the committee’s chairman announced Friday.

In a letter to Ms. Lynch, the committee asks her to detail the depths of her involvement in the FBI’s investigation, including whether she ever assured Clinton confidantes that the probe wouldn’t “push too deeply into the matter.”

Fired FBI Director James B. Comey has said publicly that Ms. Lynch tried to shape the way he talked about the investigation into Mrs. Clinton’s emails, and he also hinted at other behavior “which I cannot talk about yet” that made him worried about Ms. Lynch’s ability to make impartial decisions.

Mr. Comey said that was one reason why he took it upon himself to buck Justice Department tradition and reveal his findings about Mrs. Clinton last year.

The probe into Ms. Lynch comes as the Judiciary Committee is already looking at President Trump’s firing of Mr. Comey.

Sen. Charles E. Grassley, chairman of the committee, said the investigation is bipartisan. The letter to Ms. Lynch is signed by ranking Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein and also by Sens. Lindsey Graham and Sheldon Whitehouse, the chairman and ranking member of the key investigative subcommittee.

Letters also went to Clinton campaign staffer Amanda Renteria and Leonard Benardo and Gail Scovell at the Open Society Foundations. Mr. Benardo was reportedly on an email chain from the then-head of the Democratic National Committee suggesting Ms. Lynch had given assurances to Ms. Renteria, the campaign staffer, that the Clinton probe wouldn’t “go too far.”

At a Senate hearing earlier this month, Mr. Comey told lawmakers that Ms. Lynch had attempted to change the way the FBI described its probe of Mrs. Clinton’s use of a private email server. The change appeared to dovetail with how Mrs. Clinton’s supporters were characterizing the probe.

“At one point, [Ms. Lynch] directed me not to call it an ‘investigation’ but instead to call it a ‘matter,’ which confused me and concerned me,” Mr. Comey said during his June 8 testimony before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. “That was one of the bricks in the load that led me to conclude I have to step away from the department if we are to close this case credibly.”

Acknowledging that he didn’t know whether it was intentional, Mr. Comey said Ms. Lynch’s request “gave the impression the attorney general was looking to align the way we talked about our investigation with the way a political campaign was describing the same activity.”

Mr. Comey said the language suggested by Ms. Lynch was troublesome because it closely mirrored what the Clinton campaign was using. Despite his discomfort, Mr. Comey said, he agreed to Ms. Lynch’s language.

On June 29th of last year, Former President Bill Clinton and then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch met in her private jet sitting on the tarmac on an airport runway.

That meeting occurred just hours before Department of Justice Officials filed a motion in federal court seeking a 27-month delay in producing correspondence between former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s four top aides and officials with the Clinton Foundation and Teneo Holdings, a closely allied public relations firm that Bill Clinton helped launch.

The next morning I wrote,

“Now, why would someone as smart as Bill Clinton, the former president of United States of America comma and attorney general Loretta Lynch, have a meeting that has such an appearance of impropriety?

At the time, I thought that there were several possibilities.

The first possibility was obvious. Bubba met with the attorney general in order to plead with her to let Hillary off the hook and to not invite her for her treasonous behavior in her email scandal.

The Clintons have always thought they were above the law. Hillary has left a trail of bodies between Arkansas and Washington DC, and nothing has ever happened to her. But comma even for the Clintons, such a blatant move would be inherently stupid. And, it would not help her presidential campaign one bit.

Or, perhaps it was Loretta Lynch’s camp that leaked the information of the clandestine meeting to the local news station in order to recuse herself from the matter.

The last possible Theory as to why Bubba and Miss Loretta had the clandestine meeting on that jet is that he was trying to leverage her by offering her a possible position on the Supreme Court if Hillary got elected President the United States of America. Again, the Clintons have always considered themselves to be above the law and they’re not beyond political chicanery such as that.

The bottom line is, whatever the purpose of that meeting on the tarmac was, I believed that nothing would happen, at the time. Simply because, boys and girls, Democrat Politicians seemed to be above the rules that apply to you and me. It does not matter if there is an appearance of impropriety nor does it matter if actual political chicanery, including bribery, happened onboard that plane.

It appeared at the time that, as far as the Political Elite’s involvement up on Capitol Hill, nothing would happen.

Now, almost one year later, it appears that the meeting on the tarmac, to “talk about their grandchildren”, was just the top of the proverbial iceberg.

And, if the Senate follows through with its call for Former AG Lynch to appear before them, and if they ask the right questions, the Democrats and the MSM will get the “Obstruction Case” that they have been shouting to the heavens about.

And, there will be a President involved in it.

However, it will not be President Donald J. Trump.

It will be the 44th President, Barack Hussein Obama.

Because, boys and girls, if “Sweet” Loretta (from the song “Get Back” [Lennon/McCartney])starts singing, the fecal matter will hit the rotary oscillator…and travel uphill.

Start buying your popcorn now.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

The Real Story of “Russiagate”: How Hillary and the Dems Colluded With the Russians…With Mueller’s Help

June 20, 2017

23158392405_d3e3b60cb8_o

As every American has witnessed, thanks to Social Media, American Liberals have been throwing a National Temper Tantrum for the last seven months.

The cause of this devolvement of political activists into crying infants is the fact that they didn’t get their way on November 8, 2016., when American Businessman and Entrepreneur Donald J. Trump defeated Former First Lady and Professional Politician Hillary Rodham to become President of the United Stats of America.

The Liberals, when they take their thumbs out of their mouths, have been claiming that Russian Interference on behalf of Trump cost Hillary the election.

However, to this day, there has been no collusion between Trump and the Russians proven.

There is a very good reason for that.

Forbes.com offers the following detailed summary of the situation…

According to an insider account, the Clinton team, put together the Russia Gate narrative within 24 hours of her defeat. The Clinton account explained that Russian hacking and election meddling caused her unexpected loss. Her opponent, Donald Trump, was a puppet of Putin. Trump, they said, “encourages espionage against our people.” The scurrilous Trump dossier, prepared by a London opposition research firm, Orbis, and paid for by unidentified Democrat donors, formed a key part of the Clinton narrative: Trump’s sexual and business escapades in Russia had made him a hostage of the Kremlin, ready to do its bidding. That was Hillary’s way to say that Trump is really not President of the United States—a siren call adopted by the Democratic party and media.

Hillary and the Orbis Dossier

The most under covered story of Russia Gate is the interconnection between the Clinton campaign, an unregistered foreign agent of Russia headquartered in DC (Fusion GPS), and the Christopher Steele Orbis dossier. This connection has raised the question of whether Kremlin prepared the dossier as part of a disinformation campaign to sow chaos in the US political system. If ordered and paid for by Hillary Clinton associates, Russia Gate is turned on its head as collusion between Clinton operatives (not Trump’s) and Russian intelligence. Russia Gate becomes Hillary Gate.

Neither the New York Times, Washington Post, nor CNN has covered this explosive story. Two op-eds have appeared in the Wall Street Journal  (Holman Jenkins and David Satter). The possible Russian-intelligence origins of the Steele dossier have been raised only in conservative publications, such as in The Federalist and National Review.

The Fusion story has been known since Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) sent a heavily-footnoted letter to the Justice Department on March 31, 2017 demanding for his Judiciary Committee all relevant documents on Fusion GPS, the company that managed the Steele dossier against then-candidate Donald Trump. Grassley writes to justify his demand for documents that: “The issue is of particular concern to the Committee given that when Fusion GPS reportedly was acting as an unregistered agent of Russian interests, it appears to have been simultaneously overseeing the creation of the unsubstantiated dossier of allegations of a conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the Russians.” (Emphasis added.)

Former FBI director, James Comey, refused to answer questions about Fusion and the Steele dossier in his May 3 testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee. Comey responded to Lindsey Graham’s questions about Fusion GPS’s involvement “in preparing a dossier against Donald Trump that would be interfering in our election by the Russians?” with “I don’t want to say.” Perhaps he will be called on to answer in a forum where he cannot refuse to answer.

The role of Fusion GPS and one of its key associates, a former Soviet intelligence officer, must raise the question as to whether the Steele dossier, which was orchestrated by a suspected unregistered agent of Russia, was a plant by Russian intelligence to harm Donald Trump?

David Satter, one of our top experts on Russia and himself expelled by the Kremlin, writes:

Perhaps most important, Russian intelligence also acted to sabotage Mr. Trump. The ‘Trump dossier, full of unverified sexual and political allegations, was published in January by BuzzFeed, despite having all the hallmarks of Russian spy agency ‘creativity.’ The dossier was prepared by Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence officer. It employed standard Russian techniques of disinformation and manipulation.

Much of the credibility of the Orbis dossier hinges on Steele’s reputation as a former M15 intelligence agent. Satter writes, however, that “after the publication of the Trump dossier, Mr. Steele went into hiding, supposedly in fear for his life. On March 15, however, Michael Morell, the former acting CIA director, told NBC that Mr. Steele had paid the Russian intelligence sources who provided the information and never met with them directly. In other words, his sources were not only working for pay. Furthermore, Mr. Steele had no way to judge the veracity of their claims.”

If Steele disappeared for fear of his life, we must suspect that he feared murder by Russian agents. The only secret he might have had to warrant such a drastic Russian action would be knowledge that Russian intelligence prepared the dossier.

According to a Vanity Fair article, Fusion GPS was first funded by an anti-Trump Republican donor, but, after Trump’s nomination, Fusion and Steele were paid by Democratic donors whose identity remains secret. Writes Satter: “Perhaps the time has come to expand the investigation into Russia’s meddling to include Mrs. Clinton’s campaign as well.”

As someone who has read every word of the Steele Trump dossier and has studied the Soviet Union/Russia for almost a half century, I can say that the Steele dossier consists of raw intelligence from informants identified by capital letters, who claim (improbably) to have access to the highest levels of the Kremlin. The dossier was not, as the press reports, written by Steele. No matter how experienced (or gullible) Steele might be, there is no way for him to know whether his sources are clandestine Russian intelligence agents.

In Stalin’s day, some of the most valued KGB (NKVD) agents were called “novelists,” for their ability to conjure up fictional plots and improbable tales to use against their enemies. Some of Steele’s sources claim detailed knowledge of the deepest Kremlin secrets, such as Putin’s personal control of Clinton emails or negotiations with Putin’s head of the national oil company. If they truly had such knowledge, why would they “sell” it to Steele? The most likely explanation is that the Steele dossier is the work of Russian intelligence “novelists” charged by the Kremlin with defaming Trump and adding chaos to the American political system.

Mueller’s Difficult Task

While leaks from within the investigation focus on possible obstruction of justice, Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s writ – to investigate Russian interference in the 2016 election – requires him to consider “matters” that Dems would prefer be left alone.

Special Counsel Mueller has been given a broad charge and no deadline — a formula for trouble. He is supposed to “investigate Russia’s intervention in the 2016 election.” Given the many accounts of Russian contacts of Trump campaign officials and hangers-on, Mueller must follow these leads, which apparently have lead nowhere over a nine month investigation as reported even by Trump unfriendly sources like CNN. Mueller, therefore, should not require much time to rule out coordination between the Trump campaign and Russia state actors. Mueller must be careful to avoid detours into loosely related issue by scalp-hunting investigators. Mueller also must shut down leaks from within his office, if he wishes his reports to be credible to the American people.

Mueller must also conduct an investigation which is perceived as fair to both sides. On the Clinton/Democratic side, there are a number of unanswered questions related to Russian electoral intervention. Among them is the question of whether the “wiped clean” Clinton e-mails are in Russian hands (as asserted by the Steele dossier), whether  the tarmac meeting of Bill Clinton and the Attorney General quashed the investigation of Hillary’s e-mails, and whether the  Clintons and Russian uranium interests engaged in quid pro quo and “pay to play” operations. 

The most important unanswered question is whether the Clinton campaign funded the Orbis Trump smear campaign and did they understand the campaign could be conducted by Russian intelligence?

Mueller must question Steele himself on his sources and some of the sources themselves, investigate whether they could be Russian intelligence agents, and determine the role of Clinton donors and campaign officials in the funding of the anti-Trump dossier.

The Fusion-Steele matter is explosive because it suggests that Russia’s most damaging intervention in the 2016 campaign may have been its creation of the Steele Dossier, remarkably paid for by the Clinton campaign! If so, the Clinton campaign (not Trump) was the prime sponsor of Russia’s intervention in the 2016 election.

Yep.

And, boys and girls, the plot sickens…

Yesterday, Zerohedge.com reported that…

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton facilitated the transfer a highly enriched uranium (HEU) previously confiscated by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) during a 2006 “nuclear smuggling sting operation involving one Russian national and several Georgian accomplices,” a newly leaked classified cable shows.

So-called “background” information was provided in the cable which gave vague details on a 2006 nuclear smuggling sting operation in which the U.S. government took possession of some HEU previously owned by the Russians.

 “Over two years ago Russia requested a ten-gram sample of highly enriched uranium (HEU) seized in early 2006 in Georgia during a nuclear smuggling sting operation involving one Russian national and several Georgian accomplices.  The seized HEU was transferred to U.S. custody and is being held at a secure DOE facility.”

The secret “action request,” dated Aug. 17, 2009, was sent out by Secretary of State Clinton and was addressed to the United States Ambassador to Georgia Embassy Tbilisi, the Russian Embassy, and Ambassador John Beyrle.

It proposed that FBI Director Robert Mueller be the one that personally conduct the transfer a 10-gram sample of HEU to Russian law enforcement sources during a secret “plane-side” meeting on a “tarmac” in the early fall of 2009.

“We require that the transfer of this material be conducted at the airport, on the tarmac near by the plane, upon arrival of the Director’s aircraft.”

The FBI Director was originally scheduled to ‘return’ a sample from the DOE stockpile to the Russians in April but the trip was postponed until September 21.

Paragraph number 6 of the leaked cable confirms Dir. Mueller’s Sept. 21 flight to Moscow.

“(S/Rel Russia) Action request: Embassy Moscow is requested to alert at the highest appropriate level the Russian Federation that FBI Director Mueller plans to deliver the HEU sample once he arrives to Moscow on September 21. Post is requested to convey information in paragraph 5 with regard to chain of custody, and to request details on Russian Federation’s plan for picking up the material. Embassy is also requested to reconfirm the April 16 understanding from the FSB verbally that we will have no problem with the Russian Ministry of Aviation concerning Mueller’s September 21 flight clearance.”

But possibly even more shocking is the fact that the State Department wanted the transfer of the HEU to take place on an “airport tarmac” which is rather reminiscent of the infamous Loretta Lynch/Bill Clinton meeting which occurred on a Phoenix, Arizona, tarmac back in June of 2016.

Past dealings with the Russians were also mentioned in the cable, signifying that previous deals have taken place.

Okay. Let me attempt to summarize this political chicanery by the Democrats which includes a traitorous betrayal of our Sovereign Nation by a sitting Secretary of State…

  1. It was actually Hillary Clinton and her campaign who colluded with the Russians to influence the 2016 Presidential Elections through payment to create a dossier designed to bring Trump down by defaming him. This operation also involved Russian Intelligence and a wealthy Democratic Donor. Can you say, “George Soros”, boys and girls?
  2. Robert Muller was appointed FBI Director by George W. Bush whom he served under for 10 years. When Barack Hussein Obama became President, Mueller served under him for 2 more years. During that time, he acted as a “mule” for Secretary of State Clinton, carrying a sample of seized uranium BACK to Vladimir Putin via the Russian Embassy. Mueller’s past, plus his present staff activity has lead me and others to throw up a red flag about this guy, fearing that he may be another Establishment Political Weasel like James Comey, who followed Mueller as Director of the FBI. President Trump needs to go ahead and fire Mueller and appoint a new Special Prosecutor. One Former FBI Director/Washington Establishment Political Weasel on his staff caused enough trouble already.

CONCLUSION: “Russiagate” is an invention of the Democratic Party in more ways than one. Not only was Hillary Clinton guilty of nefarious dealings with the Russians when she was Obama’s Secretary of State, she and her Campaign Staff worked with the Russians in an attempt to sabotage the campaign of Donald J. Trump in order to overcome her own shortcomings and win the Presidency. When that didn’t happen, she, along with the Democrat Elite, made up the version of “Russiagate” which the MSM and Liberal Political Activists (but, I repeat myself) have been bombarding skeptical Americans with for the past 7 months.

It is time to put a stop to this Political tail-chasing and get on with the business of making American Great Again.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Senate Republicans Want to Hear From Lynch about “E-mailgate”. While You’re At It, How About “Foundationgate”, too?

June 19, 2017

bberry-grandma-nrd

Wouldn’t it be nice to see a public figure who actually deserves it, be called in front of a Congressional Investigative Committee, for a change?

It’s time to turn the heat up on Hillary.

Thehill.com reported yesterday that

Senate Republicans are clamoring to hear from Loretta Lynch after former FBI Director James Comey raised concerns about her involvement in the Hillary Clinton Hillary Rodham email investigation.
 
Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee are seizing on Comey’s testimony earlier this month that he was concerned over the former attorney general telling the FBI to refer to the Clinton investigation as a “matter,” which resembled the Clinton campaign line.
 
The move could allow Republicans to attempt to pivot away from the investigation into Russia’s election meddling — which top GOP lawmakers have signaled belongs to the Intelligence Committee — and focus on Lynch, who has long been a target of Republicans.
 
Sen. John Cornyn, the No. 2 Senate Republican who is a member of both the Intelligence and Judiciary committees, said it “would be very helpful” for Lynch to testify before the Judiciary panel, which oversees the Justice Department.
 
“Frankly, a lot of what Hillary Clinton was exposed to by Director Comey’s misconduct and the way he handled that was apparently in response to his lack of confidence in the attorney general, and I think there is a lot we could learn from that,” Cornyn said.
 
Sen. Lindsey Graham also wants to hear from Lynch and is pushing for the Judiciary Committee to “get more involved.”

“The accusations now that … the current and former attorney general were political — that has nothing to do with Russia as much as it has to do with how the Department of Justice is being run,” he said. “I want to find out all about that.”

A spokesman for Sen. Chuck Grassley, the Judiciary Committee chairman, stressed that no decisions have been made and staffers needed to first “gather evidence.”

But the spokesman said it was “likely” after Comey’s remarks before the intelligence panel that Lynch’s testimony before the Judiciary Committee “will become necessary at some point.”

President Trump has seized on the Obama administration official as the federal investigation into possible ties between his campaign and Russia heats up.

“A.G. Lynch made law enforcement decisions for political purposes…gave Hillary Clinton a free pass and protection. Totally illegal!” Trump tweeted this week.

Other Trump allies, including the Republican National Committee, have also questioned Lynch’s behavior.

“Why is no one investigating Attorney General Lynch’s Department of Justice for obstruction of justice in the Clinton email investigation. .. .There is compelling evidence to back up the claim that AG Lynch engaged in obstruction of justice,” read one RNC talking point leaked to a Washington Post reporter this week.

The talking points were in response to a Post report that after Comey’s firing last month, special counsel Robert Mueller is investigating whether Trump obstructed justice.

A spokesman for Sen. Ted Cruz said the Texas Republican would “absolutely” support Lynch testifying.

“Well, I kind of would like to get the whole thing behind us, but she should be interrogated [by a committee] because there’s some real questions about whether her actions were proper,” Sen. Orrin Hatch Orrin HatchSenate GOP shifts focus to LynchSen. Hatch jokes he was behind Nickelback prank on Sen. SasseUtah GOP narrows field for Chaffetz seat MORE (R-Utah) said when asked if Lynch should testify as part of a larger obstruction of justice probe.

Comey apparently raised concerns about Lynch before he was fired. He told the Judiciary Committee in early May that he had been worried the Justice Department couldn’t “credibly” decline to prosecute Clinton without “grievous damage to the American people’s confidence in the justice system.”

He also privately told Intelligence Committee members that he confronted Lynch on whether she had agreed to shut down the FBI’s investigation. Comey worried her controversial meeting with former President Bill Clinton Bill ClintonSenate GOP shifts focus to Lynch had created a conflict of interest, according to Circa, a website tracked closely by conservative media.

Though GOP lawmakers have long been wary of Lynch, placing her back in the spotlight could backfire if it also keeps the public’s focus on Comey amid continued fallout over the FBI chief’s firing in early May.

Grassley has signaled that potential obstruction of justice during the Obama administration should be included in the committee’s work. The GOP chairman has argued that such a move is relevant because the Trump White House initially pointed to Comey’s handling of the Clinton email investigation to justify his firing.

“The Committee is examining the removal of Director Comey and allegations of improper influence on the FBI’s handling of the Russia and Clinton email investigations. In his recent appearances before both the Senate Judiciary and Intelligence Committees, Mr. Comey raised issues about whether these investigations were subjected to inappropriate political influence,” said Taylor Foy, a spokesman for the Iowa Republican.

GOP senators appeared surprised by Grassley’s decision to expand his committee’s investigation, which would also include looking at potential political interference by Trump’s Justice Department into FBI investigations.

The move comes after some Republican members of the committee were already skeptical of Grassley’s threat to subpoena Comey to testify before the Judiciary Committee after the former FBI director met with the intelligence panel.

The two Senate panels are conducting separate investigations into Russia’s election meddling, which includes Comey’s firing. But Sen. Richard Burr, the Intelligence Committee chairman, said his panel would steer clear of investigating obstruction of justice, telling CNN that it has “never been part of our” probe.

Any push to pivot to Lynch and the Clinton email investigation would also likely spark pushback from Democrats, who are increasingly frustrated by the lack of progress on the committee’s push to get answers on Russia’s election interference and Comey’s firing.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the Judiciary Committee’s top Democrat, signaled that the panel should look into whether Lynch tried to downplay the FBI’s investigation into Clinton’s email setup.

“I think we need to know more about that. And there’s only way to know about it, and that’s to have the Judiciary Committee take a look at that,” she told CBS in a recent interview.

But she’s also called for bringing in a swath of top Trump administration’s officials, including Attorney General Jeff Sessions. Other top Democratic lawmakers have held off endorsing digging into Lynch.

Asked about Feinstein’s comments to CBS, Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer sidestepped saying he wanted to hear from the former Obama official.

“Well, before I say anything further on this, I want to hear what Loretta Lynch’s side of the story is. I haven’t heard that yet,” he told reporters.

Sen. Dick Durbin added he wanted to talk to Feinstein but warned against rehashing Clinton scandals when “we have a front-and-center investigation that relates to the national security of the United States.”

“Going back in the previous administration, I guess all of us have some questions about it, but we have a current investigation that is front and center in the American people’s attention span, and that’s what we ought to focus on,” he said.

Of course, the Democrats don’t want to “Rehash Clinton Scandals”.

While there is no “There” there, regarding the Democrats’ Quixotic Quest to find some sort of Russian Collision on the part of President Trump, to justify their candidate, Hillary Clinton’s failure to win the presidency, there is plenty “there” as pertains to her involvement in “E-mailgate” and “Foundationgate”.

  1. E-mailgate – Foxnews.com  reported on August 1st of last year that

    Hillary Clinton is getting hammered for saying on “Fox News Sunday” that FBI Director James Comey confirmed her statements on her email scandal were “truthful” – with one prominent fact-checker giving the claim four “Pinocchios.”

    The former secretary of state cited Comey when asked to account for her repeated claims that she never sent or received material marked classified on her personal email account. When host Chris Wallace noted that Comey said those things were not true, Clinton disagreed.

    “That’s not what I heard Director Comey say … Director Comey said that my answers were truthful and what I’ve said is consistent with what I have told the American people, that there were decisions discussed and made to classify retroactively certain of the emails,” she said.  

    The Washington Post Fact Checker picked apart that statement, ultimately giving it four “Pinocchios,” its worst rating for truthfulness.

    “Clinton is cherry-picking statements by Comey to preserve her narrative about the unusual setup of a private email server. This allows her to skate past the more disturbing findings of the FBI investigation,” the Post wrote, noting that she was relying on Comey’s statement to Congress: “We have no basis to conclude she lied to the FBI.”

    However, the FBI director did not say the same about her statements to the American public. And during testimony before a House committee, Comey said it was “not true” that nothing Clinton sent or received was marked classified. To the contrary, he said, “there was classified material emailed.”

    The Post concluded: “While Comey did say there was no evidence she lied to the FBI, that is not the same as saying she told the truth to the American public — which was the point of Wallace’s question. Comey has repeatedly not taken a stand on her public statements.

    “And although Comey did say many emails were retroactively classified, he also said that there were some emails that were already classified that should not have been sent on an unclassified, private server. That’s the uncomfortable truth that Clinton has trouble admitting

  2. Foundationgate – 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]

With 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 later revelation involving “dual-staffer” Cheryl Mills, “FoundationGate” caught the attention of the American Public as 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 most recently with E-mailgate and the Clinton Foundation, Hillary Clinton has proven to be a ruthless, untrustworthy, Machiavellian professional politician, who only cared about herself and her planned ascension to the Presidency of the United States of America.

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 use public servers to transmit Top Secret Information which endangered American Operatives and to have the hutzpah to practice “Pay-For-Play” on a Global Scale, while holding the Office of Secretary of State of the United States of America, Clinton showed herself to be downright treasonous.

So, Republican Members of Congress, it is time to turn up the heat and to fight fire with fire.

American Voters elected Trump…and those same American Voters can send you home.

Time to get up off your keisters and to defend President Trump.

And, the best defense is a good offense.

it is way past time for a THOROUGH investigation of the nefarious actions of Former United States Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

What’s “good” for the winner of the 2016 Presidential Election…is much better for the loser.

“What difference at this point does it make?”

Well…perhaps it would make all of the Liberals who have been throwing a National Temper Tantrum hollering “Russia, Russia, Russia” for seven months with no proof whatsoever to back them up to hold their breath until they turn blue…and pass out.

Ahhh…blessed silence.

Like when a baby cries themselves to sleep.

Until He Comes,

KJ