Author Topic: Hillary Clinton: Incompetence, Corruption, Sleeze, Lies, Deceit, Theft Thread  (Read 45676 times)

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39387
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Clinton legal team moves to block deposition in email lawsuit
By JOSH GERSTEIN 07/12/16 12:31 PM EDT

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
Lawyers for Hillary Clinton are going to federal court for the first time to block efforts to force her to testify in a civil lawsuit related to her private email set-up.

Clinton's attorneys submitted a legal filing Tuesday morning in a bid to shut down a conservative group's request for an order forcing her to submit to a deposition in the midst of her presidential campaign.
Story Continued Below

Clinton’s legal team said her testimony was unnecessary and superfluous in light of her questioning before the House Benghazi Committee last October and several State Department inquiries into the issue.

“Despite this public testimony and the various investigative reports, Judicial Watch claims that it needs to depose Secretary Clinton, a former Cabinet Secretary, about six purportedly unanswered questions," the filing states. "The record, however, already answers those questions or makes clear that Secretary Clinton has no personal knowledge to provide.”

Judicial Watch has asked to depose Clinton in a pair of Freedom of Information Act lawsuits which have raised questions about whether her private email system was created in part to avoid making messages accessible under FOIA.

“In any event, the discovery requested by Judicial Watch is futile," the filing states. "Even if this Court had authority to issue such unprecedented relief, Secretary Clinton has nothing to produce, as the server equipment used to host her @clintonemail.com account is in the possession of the FBI.”
U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan has set a hearing for Monday on the request for Clinton’s testimony in one of the suits.
Clinton's legal team has never previously intervened directly in the lawsuits, which name the State Department as defendant.

However, last year, Clinton did submit a declaration under penalty of perjury saying she'd instructed her attorneys to turn over all federal records in her possession to the State Department. Clinton said it was her belief that had been done.
The State Department is also resisting efforts to call Clinton for depositions in the suits.


Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/hillary-clinton-block-deposition-email-225418#ixzz4EE0LCRzV


Follow us: @politico on Twitter | Politico on Facebook


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39387
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
New York Post: FBI Agents Tell Us Lynch and Clinton Struck a Deal on That Plane
Katie Pavlich Katie Pavlich |Posted: Jul 13, 2016 2:20 PM  Share (196)   Tweet
New York Post: FBI Agents Tell Us Lynch and Clinton Struck a Deal on That Plane

Just one week before FBI Director James Comey announced the Bureau would not recommend charges be filed against former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for storing and transferring top secret, classified information on multiple private, unsecured email servers, Attorney General Loretta Lynch had a private meeting with former President Bill Clinton on her private jet in Phoenix.

After being caught by a local reporter, Lynch claimed the email investigation wasn't discussed and that social topics like grandchildren and golf were the topics of the day. She said the same yesterday during congressional testimony.
ADVERTISING




But according to a report from the New York Post, FBI agents believe an inside deal was struck on that plane to keep Hillary Clinton free of indictment. Considering the severe retaliation inside the Obama administration against those who speak out, FBI agents are cited anonymously. FBI agents investigating the Clinton email servers were also forced to sign a non-disclosure agreement.

In an unusual move, FBI agents working the Hillary Clinton e-mail case had to sign a special form reminding them not to blab about the probe to anyone unless called to testify.

Sources said they had never heard of the “Case Briefing Acknowledgment” form being used before, although all agents must initially sign nondisclosure agreements to obtain security clearance.

“This is very, very unusual. I’ve never signed one, never circulated one to others,” said one retired FBI chief.

Meanwhile, FBI agents expressed their “disappointment” over FBI Director James Comey’s decision not to recommend charges against Clinton, sources close to the matter told The Post.

“FBI agents believe there was an inside deal put in place after the Loretta Lynch/Bill Clinton tarmac meeting,” said one source.

Another source from the Justice Department was “furious” with Comey, saying he’s “managed to piss off right and left.”
Move along, nothing to see here.

Primemuscle

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40739
New York Post - LOL

The Post has been criticized since the beginning of Murdoch's ownership for sensationalism, blatant advocacy, and conservative bias. In 1980, the Columbia Journalism Review stated "the New York Post is no longer merely a journalistic problem. It is a social problem – a force for evil."

Perhaps the most serious allegation against the Post is that it is willing to contort its news coverage to suit Murdoch's business needs, in particular that the paper has avoided reporting anything that is unflattering to the government of the People's Republic of China, where Murdoch has invested heavily in satellite television.

Critics say that the Post allows its editorial positions to shape its story selection and news coverage. Post executive editor Steven D. Cuozzo has responded that the Post "broke the elitist media stranglehold on the national agenda."

According to a survey conducted by Pace University in 2004, the Post was rated the least-credible major news outlet in New York, and the only news outlet to receive more responses calling it "not credible" than credible (44% not credible to 39% credible).

The Public Enemy song "A Letter to the New York Post" from their album Apocalypse '91...The Enemy Strikes Black is a complaint about what they believed to be negative and inaccurate coverage blacks received from the paper.

The Post's coverage of the murder of Hasidic landlord Menachem Stark prompted outrage from Jewish communal leaders and public figures.

Primemuscle

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40739
New York Post - what a joke!

In certain editions of the February 14, 2007, newspaper, an article referring to then-Senator Hillary Clinton's support base for her 2008 presidential run referred to then-Senator Barack Obama as "Osama"; the paper realized its error and corrected it for the later editions and the website. The Post noted the error and apologized in the February 15, 2007, edition. Earlier, on January 20, 2007, the Post received some criticism for running a potentially misleading headline, "'Osama' Mud Flies at Obama", for a story that discussed rumors that Obama had been raised as a Muslim and concealed it.

Primemuscle

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40739
More on the New York Post....rag

Why nobody takes it seriously

On 11 December 1980, the Post ran a large morgue photo of John Lennon on its front page.

On 16 June 1986, based on information planted by spooks reliable sources, the Post ran a front page story that Muammar al-Gaddafi was really a drug-addicted cross-dresser. The headline: MADMAN MOAMMAR NOW A DRUGGIE DRAG QUEEN. The picture: Gaddafi wearing lipstick, mascara, eyeliner, hoop earrings and a permed, spit-curled, middle-aged woman's hair style
.
On 17 February 2009, the Post ran a cartoon about two NYPD officers who had just shot dead a chimpanzee. The dialog balloon of one of the officers read, "They'll have to find someone else to write the next stimulus bill."

In November 2009, Sandra Guzman — a Latina who was fired as an associate editor after protesting the "chimp cartoon"— claimed that the newsroom at the Post is operated like a racist, sexist frat house. She also claimed that the Washington, D.C. bureau chief has stated that his objective is to "destroy Barack Obama."

On 2 March 2014, a Post hack argued that NBA owner Donald Sterling's punishment for a record of racism was equivalent to being "lynched."

On 28 September 2014, the Post exhibited their long-time displeasure of the Clintons by... mocking their day-old grandchild.

Laughable levels of red-baiting, to the point of calling Bernie Sanders a communist for disagreeing with US foreign policy during the Cold War. They even photoshopped an image of his head on Lenny's.

In the 1980s, Murdoch asked a friend of his (the CEO of an upscale department store chain) why his stores didn't advertise in the Post. The friend's reply: "But, Rupert, your readers are my shoplifters."

Primemuscle

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40739
New York Post front page headlines


Primemuscle

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40739
More ridiculous headlines from the New York Post....err Inquirer


Las Vegas

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7423
  • ! Repent or Perish !
Quote
Perhaps the most serious allegation against the Post is that it is willing to contort its news coverage to suit Murdoch's business needs, in particular that the paper has avoided reporting anything that is unflattering to the government of the People's Republic of China, where Murdoch has invested heavily in satellite television.

lovely, lovely!

 ::)

He belongs in prison for the hacking effort and other things, I'm sure.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39387
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
EDITORIALS

Scandal Without End: Is The Clinton Foundation A Fraud?

http://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/scandal-without-end-is-the-clinton-foundation-a-fraud/


Have former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton used their charitable foundation for fraudulent purposes? Some in Congress think so.  (AP)

Have former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton used their charitable foundation for fraudulent purposes? Some in Congress think so. (AP)
6:11 PM ET

FacebookTwitterLinkedInP rintShare Reprints

Corruption: The Clinton Foundation's questionable money dealings have raised eyebrows for years. Now, a letter circulating in Congress alleges that the Clinton family's supposed do-gooder foundation is in fact a "lawless, 'pay-to-play' enterprise that has been operating under a cloak of philanthropy for years."

Those are pretty tough words for a former president and his wife, who happens to be the leading candidate to be our next president. But the congressional letter, which the Daily Caller News Foundation got its hands on, was written by Republican Rep. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., who plans on asking the FBI, IRS and Federal Trade Commission to launch a "public corruption" investigation.

Is it warranted, or just politics? It sure looks like the former. As Blackburn's letter says, there is a "pattern of dealing that personally enriched the Clintons at the expense of American foreign policy."

Blackburn cites the for-profit education business Laureate Education, which paid Bill Clinton some $16.5 million to serve part-time as "honorary chancellor" starting in 2010, a year after Hillary became secretary of state. Laureate, for its part, gave the Clinton Foundation some $1 million to $5 million. Nothing illegal about that, per se.

However, the Daily Tennesseean reports that Blackburn's letter also details how "the International Youth Fund, whose board members include Laureate's founder, Douglas Baker, received more than $55 million in grants from the U.S. Agency for International Development while Hillary Clinton was secretary of state." AID is a part of the State Department.

Get instant access to exclusive stock lists and powerful tools on Investors.com. Try us free for 4 weeks.
Then there's Uranium One. Hillary Clinton, the Daily Tennesseean notes, "was one of several Obama administration officials who approved the sale of uranium to the Russian-operated company, whose chairman also has donated $2.35 million to the Clinton Foundation." A number of other people involved in the deal also gave money to the Clintons.
"The appearance of 'pay-to-play' transactions involving Laureate and Uranium One also raises serious allegations of criminal conduct requiring further examination," Blackburn's letter says.

That's not all of the questionable activities.

As we noted back in May, the Clinton Foundation took in some $100 million in donations from a variety of Gulf sheikhs and billionaires who no doubt expected to reap political benefits from a future Hillary Clinton presidency, with Bill serving not just as first gentleman in the White House but also possibly as bagman. Among donors dumping bags of cash on the Clintons include Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates.

Lost in the shuffle is Bill Clinton's special "business partnership" from 2003 to 2008 with Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid al-Maktoum, the strongman ruler of Dubai. That deal netted Clinton some $15 million in "guaranteed payments," tax records show. And then there's the $30 million delivered to the Clintons by two Mideast foundations and four billionaire Saudis. For the betterment of humankind, no doubt.

As national security analyst and writer Patrick Poole said in May, "These regimes are buying access. ... There are massive conflicts of interest. It's beyond comprehension."

It took Wall Street financial analyst and investment advisor Charles Ortel -- whom the Sunday Times of London once described as "one of the finest analysts of financial statements on the planet" -- to untangle the mess in a series of ongoing reports. Ortel alleges that contribution disclosures by the foundation often don't fit with what donors' own records say -- big red flag.

"This," Ortel summed up, "is a charity fraud."

As a reminder, this isn't just some political vendetta. As far back as 2013, an alarmed New York Times warned that the foundation had become "a sprawling concern, supervised by a rotating board of old Clinton hands, vulnerable to distraction and threatened by conflicts of interest."

It turns out that's a gross understatement.

Testifying last week to Congress, FBI chief James Comey called Hillary Clinton "extremely careless" about her use of a private email server while secretary of state. But, curiously, he refused additional comment "on the existence or nonexistence of any other ongoing investigations." This needs to be disclosed. Americans deserve to know whether the person they're likely to put into the White House this November is merely a misunderstood career public servant -- or a pocket-lining career criminal.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39387
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
How the Clinton Foundation Got Rich off Poor Haitians Bill Clinton speaks to the media during a visit to Port-au-Prince, Haiti, January 11, 2011. (Kena Betancur/Reuters) SHARE ARTICLE ON FACEBOOKSHARE   TWEET ARTICLETWEET   PLUS ONE ARTICLE ON GOOGLE PLUS+1   PRINT ARTICLE   ADJUST FONT SIZEAA by DINESH D'SOUZA   July 18, 2016 4:00 AM @DINESHDSOUZA It filtered money through Haiti and back to itself. EDITOR’S NOTE: The following article is excerpted from Dinesh D’Souza’s new book, Hillary’s America: The Secret History of the Democratic Party. In January 2015 a group of Haitians surrounded the New York offices of the Clinton Foundation. They chanted slogans, accusing Bill and Hillary Clinton of having robbed them of “billions of dollars.” Two months later, the Haitians were at it again, accusing the Clintons of duplicity, malfeasance, and theft. And in May 2015, they were back, this time outside New York’s Cipriani, where Bill Clinton received an award and collected a $500,000 check for his foundation. “Clinton, where’s the money?” the Haitian signs read. “In whose pockets?” Said Dhoud Andre of the Commission Against Dictatorship, “We are telling the world of the crimes that Bill and Hillary Clinton are responsible for in Haiti.” Haitians like Andre may sound a bit strident, but he and the protesters had good reason to be disgruntled. They had suffered a heavy blow from Mother Nature, and now it appeared that they were being battered again — this time by the Clintons. Their story goes back to 2010, when a massive 7.0 earthquake devastated the island, killing more than 200,000 people, leveling 100,000 homes, and leaving 1.5 million people destitute. The devastating effect of the earthquake on a very poor nation provoked worldwide concern and inspired an outpouring of aid money intended to rebuild Haiti. Countries around the world, as well as private and philanthropic groups such as the Red Cross and the Salvation Army, provided some $10.5 billion in aid, with $3.9 billion of it coming from the United States. Haitians such as Andre, however, noticed that very little of this aid money actually got to poor people in Haiti. Some projects championed by the Clintons, such as the building of industrial parks and posh hotels, cost a great deal of money and offered scarce benefits to the truly needy. Port-au-Prince was supposed to be rebuilt; it was never rebuilt. Projects aimed at creating jobs proved to be bitter disappointments. Haitian unemployment remained high, largely undented by the funds that were supposed to pour into the country. Famine and illness continued to devastate the island nation. The Haitians were initially sympathetic to the Clintons. One may say they believed in the message of “hope and change.” With his customary overstatement, Bill told the media, “Wouldn’t it be great if they become the first wireless nation in the world? They could, I’m telling you, they really could.” I don’t blame the Haitians for falling for it; Bill is one of the world’s greatest story-tellers. He has fooled people far more sophisticated than the poor Haitians. Over time, however, the Haitians wised up. Whatever their initial expectations, many saw that much of the aid money seems never to have reached its destination; rather, it disappeared along the way. Where did it go? It did not escape the attention of the Haitians that Bill Clinton was the designated UN representative for aid to Haiti. Following the earthquake, Bill Clinton had with media fanfare established the Haiti Reconstruction Fund. Meanwhile, his wife Hillary was the United States secretary of state. She was in charge of U.S. aid allocated to Haiti. Together the Clintons were the two most powerful people who controlled the flow of funds to Haiti from around the world. Haitian deals appeared to be a quid pro quo for filling the coffers of the Clintons. The Haitian protesters noticed an interesting pattern involving the Clintons and the designation of how aid funds were used. They observed that a number of companies that received contracts in Haiti happened to be entities that made large donations to the Clinton Foundation. The Haitian contracts appeared less tailored to the needs of Haiti than to the needs of the companies that were performing the services. In sum, Haitian deals appeared to be a quid pro quo for filling the coffers of the Clintons. For example, the Clinton Foundation selected Clayton Homes, a construction company owned by Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway, to build temporary shelters in Haiti. Buffett is an active member of the Clinton Global Initiative who has donated generously to the Clintons as well as the Clinton Foundation. The contract was supposed to be given through the normal United Nations bidding process, with the deal going to the lowest bidder who met the project’s standards. UN officials said, however, that the contract was never competitively bid for. Clayton offered to build “hurricane-proof trailers” but what they actually delivered turned out to be a disaster. The trailers were structurally unsafe, with high levels of formaldehyde and insulation coming out of the walls. There were problems with mold and fumes. The stifling heat inside made Haitians sick and many of them abandoned the trailers because they were ill-constructed and unusable. The Clintons also funneled $10 million in federal loans to a firm called InnoVida, headed by Clinton donor Claudio Osorio. Osorio had loaded its board with Clinton cronies, including longtime Clinton ally General Wesley Clark; Hillary’s 2008 finance director Jonathan Mantz; and Democratic fundraiser Chris Korge who has helped raise millions for the Clintons. Normally the loan approval process takes months or even years. But in this case, a government official wrote, “Former President Bill Clinton is personally in contact with the company to organize its logistical and support needs. And as Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton has made available State Department resources to assist with logistical arrangements.” InnoVida had not even provided an independently audited financial report that is normally a requirement for such applications. This requirement, however, was waived. On the basis of the Clinton connection, InnoVida’s application was fast-tracked and approved in two weeks. The company, however, defaulted on the loan and never built any houses. An investigation revealed that Osorio had diverted company funds to pay for his Miami Beach mansion, his Maserati, and his Colorado ski chalet. He pleaded guilty to wire fraud and money laundering in 2013, and is currently serving a twelve-year prison term on fraud charges related to the loan. Several Clinton cronies showed up with Bill to a 2011 Housing Expo that cost more than $2 million to stage. Bill Clinton said it would be a model for the construction of thousands of homes in Haiti. In reality, no homes have been built. A few dozen model units were constructed but even they have not been sold. Rather, they are now abandoned and have been taken over by squatters. THE SCHOOLS THEY NEVER BUILT USAID contracts to remove debris in Port-au-Prince went to a Washington-based company named CHF International. The company’s CEO David Weiss, a campaign contributor to Hillary in 2008, was deputy U.S. trade representative for North American Affairs during the Clinton administration. The corporate secretary of the board, Lauri Fitz-Pegado, served in a number of posts in the Clinton administration, including assistant secretary of commerce.The Clintons claim to have built schools in Haiti. But the New York Times discovered that when it comes to the Clintons, “built” is a term with a very loose interpretation. For example, the newspaper located a school featured in the Clinton Foundation annual report as “built through a Clinton Global Initiative Commitment to Action.” In reality, “The Clinton Foundation’s sole direct contribution to the school was a grant for an Earth Day celebration and tree-building activity.” The Clintons claim to have built schools in Haiti. But the New York Times discovered that when it comes to the Clintons, ‘built’ is a term with a very loose interpretation. USAID contracts also went to consulting firms such as New York–based Dalberg Global Development Advisors, which received a $1.5 million contract to identify relocation sites for Haitians. This company is an active participant and financial supporter of the Clinton Global Initiative. A later review by USAID’s inspector general found that Dalberg did a terrible job, naming uninhabitable mountains with steep ravines as possible sites for Haitian rebuilding. Foreign governments and foreign companies got Haitian deals in exchange for bankrolling the Clinton Foundation. The Clinton Foundation lists the Brazilian construction firm OAS and the InterAmerican Development Bank (IDB) as donors that have given it between $1 billion and $5 billion. The IDB receives funding from the State Department, and some of this funding was diverted to OAS for Haitian road-building contracts. Yet an IDB auditor, Mariela Antiga, complained that the contracts were padded with “excessive costs” to build roads “no one needed.” Antiga also alleged that IDB funds were going to a construction project on private land owned by former Haitian president Rene Preval — a Clinton buddy — and several of his cronies. For her efforts to expose corruption, Antiga was promptly instructed by the IDB to pack her bags and leave Haiti. In 2011, the Clinton Foundation brokered a deal with Digicel, a cell-phone-service provider seeking to gain access to the Haitian market. The Clintons arranged to have Digicel receive millions in U.S. taxpayer money to provide mobile phones. The USAID Food for Peace program, which the State Department administered through Hillary aide Cheryl Mills, distributed Digicel phones free to Haitians. Digicel didn’t just make money off the U.S. taxpayer; it also made money off the Haitians. When Haitians used the phones, either to make calls or transfer money, they paid Digicel for the service. Haitians using Digicel’s phones also became automatically enrolled in Digicel’s mobile program. By 2012, Digicel had taken over three-quarters of the cell-phone market in Haiti. Digicel is owned by Denis O’Brien, a close friend of the Clintons. O’Brien secured three speaking engagements in his native Ireland that paid $200,000 apiece. These engagements occurred right at the time that Digicel was making its deal with the U.S. State Department. O’Brien has also donated lavishly to the Clinton Foundation, giving between $1 million and $5 million sometime in 2010–2011. Coincidentally the United States government paid Digicel $45 million to open a hotel in Port-au-Prince. Now perhaps it could be argued that Haitians could use a high-priced hotel to attract foreign investors and provide jobs for locals. Thus far, however, this particular hotel seems to employ only a few dozen locals, which hardly justifies the sizable investment that went into building it. Moreover, there are virtually no foreign investors; the rooms are mostly unoccupied; the ones that are taken seem mainly for the benefit of Digicel’s visiting teams. In addition, the Clintons got their cronies to build Caracol Industrial Park, a 600-acre garment factory that was supposed to make clothes for export to the United States and create — according to Bill Clinton — 100,000 new jobs in Haiti. The project was funded by the U.S. government and cost hundreds of millions in taxpayer money, the largest single allocation of U.S. relief aid. Yet Caracol has proven a massive failure. First, the industrial park was built on farmland and the farmers had to be moved off their property. Many of them feel they were pushed out and inadequately compensated. Some of them lost their livelihoods. Second, Caracol was supposed to include 25,000 homes for Haitian employees; in the end, the Government Accountability Office reports that only around 6,000 homes were built. Third, Caracol has created 5,000 jobs, less than 10 percent of the jobs promised. Fourth, Caracol is exporting very few products and most of the facility is abandoned. People stand outside every day looking for work, but there is no work to be had, as Haiti’s unemployment rate hovers around 40 percent. The Clintons say Caracol can still be salvaged. But former Haitian prime minister Jean Bellerive says, “I believe the momentum to attract people there in a massive way is past. Today, it has failed.” Still, Bellerive’s standard of success may not be the same one used by the Clintons. After all, the companies that built Caracol with U.S. taxpayer money have done fine — even if poor Haitians have seen few of the benefits. Then there is the strange and somehow predictable involvement of Hillary Clinton’s brother Hugh Rodham. Rodham put in an application for $22 million from the Clinton Foundation to build homes on ten thousand acres of land that he said a “guy in Haiti” had “donated” to him. “I deal through the Clinton Foundation,” Rodham told the New York Times. “I hound my brother-in-law because it’s his fund that we’re going to get our money from.” Rodham said he expected to net $1 million personally on the deal. Unfortunately, his application didn’t go through. Rodham had better luck, however, on a second Haitian deal. He mysteriously found himself on the advisory board of a U.S. mining company called VCS. This by itself is odd because Rodham’s resume lists no mining experience; rather, Rodham is a former private detective and prison guard. The mining company, however, seems to have recognized Rodham’s value. They brought him on board in October 2013 to help secure a valuable gold mining permit in Haiti. Rodham was promised a “finder’s fee” if he could land the contract. Sure enough, he did. For the first time in 50 years, Haiti awarded two new gold mining permits and one of them went to the company that had hired Hillary’s brother. I wouldn’t go so far as to say the Clintons don’t care about Haiti. Yet it seems clear that Haitian welfare is not their priority. The deal provoked outrage in the Haitian Senate. “Neither Bill Clinton nor the brother of Hillary Clinton are individuals who share the interest of the Haitian people,” said Haitian mining representative Samuel Nesner. “They are part of the elite class who are operating to exploit the Haitian people.” Is this too harsh a verdict? I wouldn’t go so far as to say the Clintons don’t care about Haiti. Yet it seems clear that Haitian welfare is not their priority. Their priority is, well, themselves. The Clintons seem to believe in Haitian reconstruction and Haitian investment as long as these projects match their own private economic interests. They have steered the rebuilding of Haiti in a way that provides maximum benefit to themselves. No wonder the Clintons refused to meet with the Haitian protesters. Each time the protesters showed up, the Clintons were nowhere to be seen. They have never directly addressed the Haitians’ claims. Strangely enough, they have never been required to do so. The progressive media scarcely covered the Haitian protest. Somehow the idea of Haitian black people calling out the Clintons as aid money thieves did not appeal to the grand pooh-bahs at CBS News, the New York Times, and NPR. For most Democrats, the topic is both touchy and distasteful. It’s one thing to rob from the rich but quite another to rob from the poorest of the poor. Some of the Democratic primary support for Bernie Sanders was undoubtedly due to Democrats’ distaste over the financial shenanigans of the Clintons. Probably these Democrats considered the Clintons to be unduly grasping and opportunistic, an embarrassment to the great traditions of the Democratic party. — Dinesh D’​Souza is the author of Hillary’s America: The Secret History of the Democratic Party.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/437883/hillarys-america-secret-history-democratic-party-dinesh-dsouza-clinton-foundation

Primemuscle

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40739
Interesting wallpaper. It lacks color though.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39387
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Interesting wallpaper. It lacks color though.

Let me help you out - the clinton crime family are two disgusting pigs

Primemuscle

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40739
Let me help you out - the clinton crime family are two disgusting pigs

So does this mean I should endeavor to read that wall? It's just too much!  The argument therein (what ever it is) would be more effective if it were more succinct, had punctuation and was more colorful. At this juncture, I am not interested in reading it, nor I suspect are most other folks.  So if no one is interested, what was the point of posting it?


andreisdaman

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 16720
sigh...the 8 year rant against Hillary is starting already :'( :'(

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39387
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Hillary to Be Nominated while under State Department Investigation
nationalreview.com ^ | July 22, 2016 | DEROY MURDOCK
Posted on 7/22/2016, 1:56:22 PM by PROCON

Only a Trump Justice Department can put Hillary behind bars.

‘Lock her up! Lock her up! Lock her up!”

Republicans convened in Cleveland this week and rhythmically chanted for the incarceration of Hillary Clinton, the candidate the Democrats will nominate for president next week in Philadelphia. Some pundits found the Republicans’ new slogan harsh and extreme.

But who are the real extremists here?

In what must be a historical first, Democrats are about to anoint a contender for the White House who faces at least four federal investigations and a serious, private anti-corruption lawsuit. Even after the Watergate break-in, Richard Nixon’s legal woes were not this grave at this stage of the 1972 election.

(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...

andreisdaman

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 16720
Hillary to Be Nominated while under State Department Investigation
nationalreview.com ^ | July 22, 2016 | DEROY MURDOCK
Posted on 7/22/2016, 1:56:22 PM by PROCON

Only a Trump Justice Department can put Hillary behind bars.

‘Lock her up! Lock her up! Lock her up!”

Republicans convened in Cleveland this week and rhythmically chanted for the incarceration of Hillary Clinton, the candidate the Democrats will nominate for president next week in Philadelphia. Some pundits found the Republicans’ new slogan harsh and extreme.

But who are the real extremists here?

In what must be a historical first, Democrats are about to anoint a contender for the White House who faces at least four federal investigations and a serious, private anti-corruption lawsuit. Even after the Watergate break-in, Richard Nixon’s legal woes were not this grave at this stage of the 1972 election.

(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...

Stop ranting...even you know Hillary doesn't deserve jail time....she's an idiot and at worst a liar...but not a criminal

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39387
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Stop ranting...even you know Hillary doesn't deserve jail time....she's an idiot and at worst a liar...but not a criminal

She is a Far Leftist Democrat - worst of all

andreisdaman

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 16720
She is a Far Leftist Democrat - worst of all

So is Trump :D

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39387
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
So is Trump :D

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/foreign-governments-gave-millions-to-foundation-while-clinton-was-at-state-dept/2015/02/25/31937c1e-bc3f-11e4-8668-4e7ba8439ca6_story.html

The Clinton Foundation accepted millions of dollars from seven foreign governments during Hillary Rodham Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state, including one donation that violated its ethics agreement with the Obama administration, foundation officials disclosed Wednesday.

Most of the contributions were possible because of exceptions written into the foundation’s 2008 agreement, which included limits on foreign-government donations.

The agreement, reached before Clinton’s nomination amid concerns that countries could use foundation donations to gain favor with a Clinton-led State Department, allowed governments that had previously donated money to continue making contributions at similar levels.

ADVERTISING


The new disclosures, provided in response to questions from The Washington Post, make clear that the 2008 agreement did not prohibit foreign countries with interests before the U.S. government from giving money to the charity closely linked to the secretary of state.

In one instance, foundation officials acknowledged they should have sought approval in 2010 from the State Department ethics office, as required by the agreement for new government donors, before accepting a $500,000 donation from the Algerian government.

The money was given to assist with earthquake relief in Haiti, the foundation said. At the time, Algeria, which has sought a closer relationship with Washington, was spending heavily to lobby the State Department on human rights issues.

While the foundation has disclosed foreign-government donors for years, it has not previously detailed the donations that were accepted during Clinton’s four-year stint at the State Department.

A foundation spokesman said Wednesday that the donations all went to fund the organization’s philanthropic work around the world. In some cases, the foundation said, foreign-government donations were part of multiyear grants that had been awarded before Clinton’s appointment to pay for particular charitable efforts, such as initiatives to lower the costs of HIV and AIDs drugs and curb greenhouse gas emissions.

“As with other global charities, we rely on the support of individuals, organizations, corporations and governments who have the shared goal of addressing critical global challenges in a meaningful way,” said the spokesman, Craig Minassian. “When anyone contributes to the Clinton Foundation, it goes towards foundation programs that help save lives.”

Some of the donations came from countries with complicated diplomatic, military and financial relationships with the U.S. government, including Kuwait, Qatar and Oman.

Other nations that donated included Australia, Norway and the Dominican Republic.

The foundation presents a unique political challenge for Clinton, and one that has already become a cause of concern among Democrats as she prepares to launch an almost-certain second bid for the presidency.

Rarely, if ever, has a potential commander in chief been so closely associated with an organization that has solicited financial support from foreign governments. Clinton formally joined the foundation in 2013 after leaving the State Department, and the organization was renamed the Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation.

Foreign dollars
The Washington Post reported last week that foreign sources, including governments, made up a third of those who have given the foundation more than $1 million over time. The Post found that the foundation, begun by former president Bill Clinton, has raised nearly $2 billion since its creation in 2001.

Foreign governments and individuals are prohibited from giving money to U.S. political candidates, to prevent outside influence over national leaders. But the foundation has given donors a way to potentially gain favor with the Clintons outside the traditional political limits.

In a presidential campaign, Hillary Clinton would be likely to showcase her foreign-policy expertise, yet the foundation’s ongoing reliance on foreign governments’ support opens a potential line of attack for Republicans eager to question her independence as secretary of state and as a possible president.


The Wall Street Journal reported last week that the foundation had accepted new foreign-government money now that the 2008 agreement has lapsed.

A review of foundation disclosures shows that at least two foreign governments — Germany and the United Arab Emirates — began giving in 2013 after the funding restrictions lapsed when Clinton left the Obama administration. Some foreign governments that had been supporting the foundation before Clinton was appointed, such as Saudi Arabia, did not give while she was in office and have since resumed donating.

Foundation officials said last week that if Clinton runs, they will consider taking steps to address concerns over the role of foreign donors.

“We will continue to ensure the Foundation’s policies and practices regarding support from international partners are appropriate, just as we did when she served as Secretary of State,” the foundation said in a statement.

Foreign governments had been major donors to the foundation before President Obama nominated Clinton to become secretary of state in 2009. When the foundation released a list of its donors for the first time in 2008, as a result of the agreement with the Obama administration, it disclosed, for instance, that Saudi Arabia had given between $10 million and $25 million.

In some cases, the foundation said, governments that continued to donate while Clinton was at the State Department did so at lower levels than before her appointment.

Foundation officials said Wednesday that the ethics review process required under the 2008 agreement for new donors — or for existing foreign-government donors wishing to “materially increase” their support — was never initiated during Clinton’s State Department years.

But, they added, on one occasion, it should have been.

Algeria donation
The donation from Algeria for Haiti earthquake relief, they said, arrived without notice within days of the 2010 quake and was distributed as direct aid to assist in relief. Algeria has not donated to the foundation since, officials said.


The contribution coincided with a spike in the North African country’s lobbying visits to the State Department.

That year, Algeria spent $422,097 lobbying U.S. government officials on human rights issues and U.S.-Algerian relations, according to filings made under the Foreign Agents Registration Act. Data tracked by the Sunlight Foundation shows that while the Algerian government’s overall spending on lobbying in the United States remained steady, there was an increase in 2010 in State Department meetings held with lobbyists representing the country — with 12 visits to department officials that year, including some visits with top political appointees. In the years before and after, only a handful of State Department visits were recorded by Algeria lobbyists.

The country was a concern for Clinton and her agency.

A 2010 State Department report on human rights in Algeria noted that “principal human rights problems included restrictions on freedom of assembly and association” and cited reports of arbitrary killings, widespread corruption and a lack of transparency. Additionally, the report, issued in early 2011, discussed restrictions on labor and women’s rights.

“Algeria is one of those complicated countries that forces the United States to balance our interests and values,” Clinton wrote in her 2014 book, “Hard Choices.” She said that the country was an ally in combating terrorism but that “it also has a poor human rights record and a relatively closed economy.”

Clinton met with the president of Algeria during a 2012 visit to the country.

A State Department spokesman referred questions about the ethics-office reviews to the charity. Nick Merrill, a Clinton spokesman, declined to comment.

Besides Algeria, a number of the other countries that donated to the foundation during Clinton’s time at the State Department also lobbied the U.S. government during that time.

Qatar, for instance, spent more than $5.3 million on registered lobbyists while Clinton was secretary of state, according to the Sunlight Foundation. The country’s lobbyists were reported monitoring anti-terrorism activities and efforts to combat violence in Sudan’s Darfur region. Qatar has also come under criticism from some U.S. allies in the region that have accused it of supporting Hamas and other militant groups. Qatar has denied the allegations.

The 2008 agreement laid out that the new rules were intended to allow the Clinton Foundation to continue its “important philanthropic work around the world,” while also avoiding conflicts. It was signed by Bruce Lindsey, then the foundation’s chief executive, and Valerie Jarrett, who was co-chair of Obama’s transition team.


Jennifer Friedman, a White House spokeswoman, said in a statement that the agreement was signed “to avoid any appearance of conflict of interest” and “in keeping with the high standards we set for our nominees.” She said the deal went “above and beyond standard ethics requirements.”

Clinton Foundation fundraising, particularly from foreign governments, came up repeatedly at Clinton’s confirmation hearings for secretary of state.

Then-Sen. Richard G. Lugar (Ind.), who was the ranking Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, called the foundation “a unique complication that will have to be managed with great care and transparency” and called on the organization not to take any new foreign-government money while Clinton was serving as secretary of state.

“The Clinton Foundation exists as a temptation for any foreign entity or government that believes it could curry favor through a donation,” he said then. “It also sets up potential perception problems with any action taken by the secretary of state in relation to foreign givers or their countries.”

Local Politics Alerts
Breaking news about local government in D.C., Md., Va.
Sign up
Lugar also called on the foundation to release more information about its donors, including how much each gives annually. (Since 2008, the foundation has released only how much donors have given cumulatively over time.) He said ethics officials should review donations from all foreign sources, not just governments, because of the close ties in many countries between wealthy interests and government officials.

Then-Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.), the committee’s chairman at the time, called Lugar’s concerns a “legitimate question.” Kerry, who succeeded Clinton as secretary of state, suggested the potential at least for appearance problems if her official duties seemed to coincide with her husband’s fundraising efforts.

“If you are traveling to some country and you meet with the foreign leadership and a week later or two weeks later or three weeks later the president travels there and solicits a donation and they pledge to give at some point in the future but nobody knows, is there an appearance of a conflict?” Kerry asked.

At the hearing, Clinton said foreign governments donated to the foundation in part because the U.S. government had been slow to press for reductions in the cost of HIV and AIDs drugs. She said the agreement went beyond what was required by law.

“I will certainly do everything in my power to make sure that the good work of the foundation continues without there being any untoward effects on me and my service and be very conscious of any questions that are raised,” she said. “But I think that the way that this has been hammered out is as close as we can get to doing something that is so unprecedented that there is no formula for it, and we’ve tried to do the very best we could.”

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39387
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
So now it turns out that Hillary Clinton has been using the DNC as a cut-out in a massive dirty-tricks campaign against Sen. Bernie Sanders.

A cut-out, for those who don’t read espionage novels, is “a mutually trusted intermediary facilitating the exchange of information between parties.”

The parties in this case being the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton Crime Family, working in tandem to destroy Sanders and his free-stuff crusade.

I know what you’re thinking: the primary campaign is over, so what difference, at this point, does it make?

But on the eve of the Democratic convention, this leak of 20,000 emails among the DNC hacks has enraged the Bernie bros. It confirms that the DNC and the Hillary campaign have always been one and the same — and that the entire primary process was “rigged,” as Donald Trump keeps putting it in his tweets.

(I am pleased to report that my name appears in these WikiLeaks. Not as one of the in-the-satchel reporters, but in a forwarded newspaper story about an interview I did with Maine Gov. Paul LePage in April.)

Hillary’s jackbooted thugs at the DNC even went after Bernie’s religion, or lack thereof.

This came from the DNC’s chief financial officer two months ago. It’s best read aloud in a German accent: “For KY and WVA can we get someone to ask his belief. Does he believe in a God? He had skated on saying he has a Jewish heritage. I think I read he is an atheist. This could make several points difference with my peeps. My Southern Baptist peeps would draw a big difference between a Jew and an atheist.”

Not quite certain how to interpret that, but no reading is very flattering, especially if, like Hillary, you’re trying to promote a diversity-celebrating persona.

In the state-run media yesterday you had a better chance of finding out the Munich shooter’s real first name than you did of coming across a comprehensive story about the collusion of the Democrats and their lickspittles in the mainstream media.

What makes this even more ironic is the way Clinton’s media sycophants tore Donald Trump apart for days over his retweeting of a badge in the form of a six-pointed Star of David. Not to mention the alleged Nazi salute by Laura Ingraham at the GOP convention last week.

In both cases there was no “there” there, but Hillary’s bumkissers and lapdogs went nuts anyway. Now, though, they’re giving this smoking-gun email a good leaving-alone.

Among other things, we now know that when CBS News prepares a story on a poll, they run the first draft by the DNC (also known as Hillary) to make sure they’re spinning the data to her benefit.

We also learn that Politico reporters show first drafts of their stories to the DNC. We have always known that Chuck Todd is a useful idiot for his Democrat masters, but it’s even worse than that. There’s now a leaked email detailing how Todd conspired to “discredit” MSNBC’s Mika Brzezinski when she went off the reservation on the subject of DNC chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Blabbermouth.

I’m sure he’ll address his ethical lapse at the top of “Meet the Press” this morning. Right, right?

And of course the DNC also went after Donald Trump. They planted fake help-wanted internet ads to make him look like a sexist and a misogynist — in other words, like Bill Clinton.

Again, have you read a word about any of this anywhere except on conservative websites?

RELATED ARTICLES


‘This is a silly story. (Sanders) isn’t going to be president’


Gelzinis: Trump a disgrace to the heroes of GOP’s past


Ayla Brown: I’m not the conductor, but definitely aboard the Trump train

Compare the media blackout on these “dirty tricks” to the endless stories two months ago about how Trump acted as his own PR man in conversations with a magazine reporter in 1990.

It was the lead story on the “NBC Nightly News,” four minutes believe it or not, reported by an “investigative” reporter. But now … nothing to see here folks, move along.

Listen to Howie 3-7 every weekday on WRKO AM 680.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39387
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Report: Hillary’s State Dept OK’d $50 Million in Bill Clinton Speeches
by BREITBART NEWS
12 May 2015



Bill Clinton reportedly made nearly $50 million from more than 220 paid events that the State Department approved while Hillary Clinton was

Secretary of State, according to an Associated Press report.

Mainstream media outlets have been scrutinizing the Clintons, especially Bill Clinton’s speaking fees that doubled or tripled after his wife became Secretary of State, after the many revelations in Breitbart News Senior Editor-at-Large and Government Accountability Institute President Peter Schweizer’s Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich. NBC News reporter Andrea Mitchell said Schweizer’s blockbuster book was a “playbook” for any news organization investigating the Clintons and was “overshadowing” Hillary Clinton’s campaign rollout.

According to the Associated Press, the Office of Government Ethics reportedly warned that the State Department’s office “has extremely limited capacity to respond to the increased demands on its program” and said that it was “concerned about the lack of compliance with statutory and regulatory requirements in the areas of financial disclosure, annual training and ethics agreements.”

Foreign governments with atrocious human rights records and banks dealing with scandals paid Clinton hefty sums for appearances.
Barclays paid Clinton $650,000 for two appearances in 2011 just months after it “agreed to pay nearly $300 million in penalties for violating financial sanctions against Iran, Cuba, Sudan, Libya and Burma.” The Associated Press also found that UBS Bank paid Clinton $840,000 for five events in 2011 and 2012 “less than two years after the Swiss bank had acknowledged a massive tax evasion scheme aiding American clients and paid $780 million in penalties.”

In December of 2011, the United Arab Emirates reportedly paid Clinton $600,000 to appear at a “government-sponsored event.” In 2010, the State Department approved a Bangkok event that was reportedly “sponsored by a Thai government energy ministry and state gas firm.”
The report found that the State Department did not approve of an event at the China Philanthropy Forum in 2012 because of “concerns that the event’s sponsor was an association made up of former and current senior Chinese government officials.” But nine months after Hillary Clinton left the agency, Bill Clinton “eventually spoke at the forum’s annual conference.”

Bill Clinton has vowed to continue his paid speeches and appearances while his wife runs for president, telling NBC News, “I got to pay our bills.”
Read More Stories About:
Big Government

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39387
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Another Clinton Email Scandal

As the Democratic National Convention prepares to kick off, a massive leak of hacked emails renews old questions about how the Clintons and their associates operate.


Mary Altaffer / AP



http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/07/another-clinton-email-scandal/492833

 
RON FOURNIER  JUL 24, 2016   POLITICS

Subscribe to The Atlantic’s Politics & Policy Daily, a roundup of ideas and events in American politics.


PHILADELPHIA—What’s with Hillary Clinton and email? The Democratic presidential nominee who shattered her credibility over a rogue email system while serving as secretary of state now must deal with an electronic snafu at the Democratic National Committee.

Among 20,000 DNC emails posted by WikiLeaks on the eve of Clinton’s nominating convention, there are scores in which party employees criticized and mocked Bernie Sanders during his primary campaign against Clinton. (Caveat: We don’t formally know the emails are authentic).

The email dump jeopardizes Clinton’s ability to unify the party in Philadelphia and avoid the public fratricide that spoiled Donald Trump’s convention in Cleveland. While some of the DNC emails criticized Clinton, the overwhelming number of anti-Sanders correspondences create an indelible impression that the DNC violated its oath of neutrality.

The email story also is important because:

This is part of a pattern that goes back decades. So righteous in their cause and paranoid of their enemies are the Clintons, that they cut corners to victory—even when, as was the case in the race against Sanders, they would likely win without shenanigans. Clinton Democrats stacked the DNC with people determined to smooth her path to the nomination.

Another hallmark of the Clinton tradecraft is to keep a safe distance from the dirty work while others get soiled. In this case, DNC chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz announced her resignation  Sunday, effective later this week, pushed from the job in hopes of ending the controversy.
Sanders and his advisers complained privately and publicly for months that the DNC was working against them. The Clinton world responded as it usually does to a political crisis: Deny the charge and attack. "Everything our fans have been saying—and they were beaten down for and called conspiracy theorists—and now it's in black and white,” Rania Batrice of the Sanders campaign told ABC News.

Clinton’s campaign manager Robby Mook claimed Sunday that the leaks were part of a Russian effort to help Donald Trump. While the Russians may have hacked the DNC, there is no solid evidence that Moscow is actively trying to aid the Republican presidential candidate. Mook’s attack is brazenly hypocritical, given the fact that Clinton herself exposed U.S. secrets to electronic theft by running an off-the-books email system in violation of administration policy.

Which raises two questions nobody can answer: Did a foreign country hack Clinton’s homebrewed server? Did her deleted emails, the thousands unrecovered by the FBI, include any embarrassing information now in the hands of another country? If the answer is yes to either one of those questions, October might come with a surprise.

The emails suggest the Republican Party doesn’t have a monopoly on intolerance. Among the exchanges were plans to plant questions about Sander’s faith and some casual, homophobic humor. “I love you too,” said an email attributed to the DNC finance chairman. “No homo.”
If a candidate can’t run a political convention, they’re probably not up to the challenge of running a country. Trump flunked his test in Cleveland last week. Clinton is off to a poor start.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39387
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.