Topic: Is Hillary Clinton Trustworthy? - page 44. (Read 234761 times)

Hillary will never see jail. Nor will she see anything but the Oval Office - Obama will Pardon her And if he does not - when she becomes President she will Pardon herself. There is nothing you can do. The 20 somethings, the cities, the blue states with lots of electoral votes - it is almost a mathematical certainty that Hillary will be President.

The Secret Life of Timothy McVeigh

One of the most revealing podcastumentary that implicates the Clintons in the typical problem, reaction, solution driven operations of the deep state.

From this point it deals specifically with the Clintons, but its worth watching the whole podcast to see how the whole operation, it hauntingly has the same aftertaste as 9/11.

https://youtu.be/Vgfi1QZILxk?t=51m15s

State Department Can’t Release Next Round of Clinton Emails Because It’s Too Snowy

Follow
State Department Can’t Release Next Round of Clinton Emails Because It’s Too Snowy

Ashley Feinberg
42 minutes agoFiled to: STATE DEPARTMENT

The State Department already isn’t great at keeping track of emails. But keeping track of emails in the snow? Please, they’re not gods.

The department tried to explain this in a filing earlier today, in which they asked for a month extension on the next round of a 55,000-strong Clinton email release.

 
Leaked Private Emails Reveal Ex-Clinton Aide's Secret Spy Network
Starting weeks before Islamic militants attacked the U.S. diplomatic outpost in Benghazi, Libya,…
Read more
Basically, the State Department’s request explains that in the push to meet the final deadline, it suddenly realized that about 7,200 pages needed to be sent out to various agencies for review. Though while delivery to some of the agencies has been completed, “delivery of the remaining documents has been interrupted by the storm, and is anticipated to be completed next week.”

But it promises that it can get its homework done by February 29.

As long as there’s no rain or snow or high levels of UV rays or a particularly pollen-y day. For real this time.

http://gawker.com/state-department-can-t-release-next-round-of-clinton-em-1754598052?utm_campaign=socialflow_gawker_facebook&utm_source=gawker_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow

If you are an American citizen you should care about what she did with the email server, simply because those records do not belong to her but to the American citizen, even if those records stay secret.

As you said it is about the character and the commitment of somebody to judge, and be judged by the same rules... She is not above the law, yet she wants to rule...

Campaigner-in-Chief Bill Clinton Is Worried


Former President Bill Clinton, campaigning for his wife in New Hampshire Wednesday, bluntly admitted how much more difficult than expected Hillary Clinton's race for the Democratic presidential nomination has become.

“This has turned into an interesting election,” the candidate's husband told a rally in Salem. “We’re fighting it out in Iowa. We’ve got a little lead that I think is solidifying and maybe growing a little bit. We’re on a home-field disadvantage here."

With less than two weeks before the first ballots of the election are cast in Iowa, Hillary Clinton, who promised that she would “work for every vote,” is having to do just that. News of endorsements withheld and renewed questions about her e-mail practices as secretary of state continued the drip-drip-drip of small setbacks that have prevented her from gaining the traction she needs to stride confidently into the first contests. Instead, she and her team seem to be trying to navigate a slippery floor.

Most of all, the Clinton campaign itself—through its stepped-up activity against her chief rival, U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont—suggested that the once-prohibitive Democratic front-runner sees herself in a competitive battle with a septuagenarian self-described socialist.

“Hillary does not consider Planned Parenthood a member of the establishment and I don't see how anybody else could,” her husband told an audience in Concord. He was responding to Sanders' characterization a day earlier of the women's reproductive rights group that Republicans in Congress have sought to defund and that endorsed Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign.  

The nation needs “not anger but answers,” the former president went on to say, taking on Sanders' efforts to portray Clinton as an insider and himself as an agent of change. “I think you should vote for her because she is the best change-maker I've ever met,” he said of his wife.

“The real issue is: Who can win the election? Who’s prepared the do the job? Who can make real change?” the former president added.

Until now, Bill Clinton has more often cast his wife as the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee and focused on Republicans as the enemy, while ignoring or downplaying Sanders.

But Hillary Clinton took a more aggressive approach than in the past to Sanders in Sunday's primary debate in Charleston, South Carolina. One day after her foreign policy surrogates questioned Sanders' readiness, Clinton told NPR that Sanders' comments about the Middle East are cause for “concern,” questioning his understanding of the shifting alliances in the Middle East, and emphasizing her own credentials and links to the current occupant of the White House.

“President Obama, when he was elected, immediately turned to me. He trusted my experience and my judgment,” Clinton said.

Meanwhile her campaign released new ads in Iowa and New Hampshire emphasizing her experience.


But the formidable resume that her husband alluded to, and that Clinton and her supporters hoped would make her the prohibitive favorite to become the nation's first female president, may be more a handicap than an asset in a year when voters in both parties are exasperated with the nation's financial and political establishment. In a Bloomberg Politics/Des Moines Register Iowa Poll taken earlier this month, 44 percent of likely Democratic caucus-goers described themselves as anti-Wall Street, 43 percent described themselves as socialist, and 22 percent described themselves as politically “independent,” rather than Democrat.

In an e-mail to supporters on Wednesday, Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook wrote that a higher proportion of Sanders' supporters appear to be funding his campaign than hers “and that worries me.”

On the stump Wednesday night in Burlington, Iowa, the candidate herself argued that she and Sanders have substantial areas of agreement but favor different approaches. “Let’s not fight about health care. Let’s keep improving it. We can get to universal coverage,” she said. When it comes to Wall Street, she added, the Democratic field is “in a vigorous agreement but we’re not exactly seeing eye to eye.”

But, like her husband, Clinton also called out Sanders' comments on Planned Parenthood and the Human Rights Campaign, saying she was “somewhat confused” by his comments and could only wish that women's rights and gay rights were settled issues. “We have to keep working to make sure that people are not taken advantage of, are not stripped of their rights,” she said.

This all comes as polls show Clinton facing a closer-than-expected race against Sanders on Feb. 1 in Iowa and the prospect of defeat to Sanders on Feb. 9 in New Hampshire, which shares a border with Sanders' home state. Meanwhile, some voices Clinton would have liked in her corner are withholding a verdict.

Billionaire environmental activist Tom Steyer told Reuters on Wednesday he isn't yet ready to endorse Clinton and didn't rule out supporting Sanders, even though Steyer last May held a $2,700-a-person fundraiser for Clinton.

Nevada's Culinary Union said it will not endorse ahead of the state's Feb. 20 caucus. The 57,000-member union, an affiliate of the hotel worker union UNITE HERE, is Nevada's largest and most politically powerful.

Amid a dispute over caucus sites days before the 2008 contest in Nevada, UNITE HERE, which had endorsed Obama, ran an radio ad declaring “Hillary Clinton does not respect our people.” But the Culinary's political director told Bloomberg in August that members are “ready to learn where Senator Clinton is at today, and feel her out, without holding any grudges about what happened in 2008.”

In September, Clinton joined Sanders and O'Malley in calling for a repeal of Obamacare's so-called “Cadillac tax,” levied on the kind of generous health benefits unions negotiate. The Culinary had identified eliminating the tax in August as its top issue in the race.

And Clinton may face a new headache in the controversy over her use of private e-mail servers while she was secretary of state, after reports this week that intelligence officials identified information that was more than top secret. In the interview with NPR, she dismissed the findings as a “continuation of an interagency dispute” over when to classify information and suggested she's the victim of a politically motivated leak. “I never sent or received any material marked classified,” she said.

“I know we're in a hard fight here and I know we're running against one of your neighbors,” Bill Clinton told the crowd in Concord. “This state has been so good to me and Hillary,” he said, an indirect reference to his close second-place finish there in 1992 that earned him the nickname “The Comeback Kid” and to her 2008 primary win in New Hampshire over Barack Obama. He and Hillary both had learned “a great deal” about what's going on in America from what people told them in New Hampshire, Bill Clinton said.

He refrained from using Sanders' name, repeatedly referring instead to his wife's opponent. He hinted rather than hammered at the idea that Republicans would rather run against Sanders than Clinton. “They're good at this,” he said of Republicans. “They don't want to run against her. They have sent us a clear signal.” He also said, as if it were an acknowledged fact, that his wife is “the only person” from either party ready for the job, before asking, “So what's going on out there?” And he laid out an analysis of Americans' fears across various demographic groups about everything from wages to terrorism.

Republicans, he said, in no particular order blame “Muslims, Mexicans, President Obama” for what's wrong with the country. “Or they blame Hillary.” Meanwhile, “Hillary's opponent says this was all caused by Wall Street and billionaires,” which are “a better object of our hatred and more accurate” but also, he indicated, not entirely on point. Hillary, he said, saw the nation's difficulties since the 2008 economic collapse in large part as failures of government. He said she is committed to reforms that can win enough bipartisan support to be implemented. In contrast, he said, Sanders' newly unveiled plan for Medicare for all is “a recipe for gridlock” and “we cannot afford to waste a year or two.”


http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-01-21/campaigner-in-chief-bill-clinton-is-worried

The thing is that this is a customary way to handle yourself in government.  Many people have dropped their job as this and that to take up an election attempt.  I don't care what you did with this and that email server, I understand that there are compromises that are made to the moral framework to accomplish things for the country.  I just want to see someone with the commitment to finish out a term and then use that job record as a run for president or whatever.

It's worse. Harpy lost the presidency to 0bama and demanded to have a job in his administration, becoming secretary of state...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U9uDUnywMu0

What gets me about the elections and the way that things are set up is the fact that many politicians make a commit to perform a duty for the country, like Secretary of State.  Then, when the grass is greener on the election front, they drop that commitment and take up the campaign trail.  I think that anyone that quite their job to try for a new one is showing the next "employer" that they are only around until the pay is better somewhere else.  If you become something like Secretary of State and want to run for another office then either wait until your current job is done or do both at the same time.

VIDEO: Six people greet Hillary in Texas — and she ignored them!



Texas is not Hillary Clinton country.

The former secretary of state made a fundraising stop in Beaumont, Texas Wednesday and KFDM reports only six people showed up at the airport to greet Clinton.

“Some people just wanted to catch a glimpse of the presidential candidate,” according to the reporter who was on hand.

But that didn’t happen. The news report shows Hillary’s motorcade driving quickly out of the airport.

She didn’t say hello or visit with anyone while at the airport,” according to KFDM.

Meanwhile, 12 News Now reports Clinton was in West Beaumont to attend a fundraiser organized by Pakistani businessman Tahir Javed.

The news station reports the campaign collected about $500,000, “making it one of the top five private fundraisers Clinton has had in this country.”

“Many of the Pakistanis at the event were pleased with Clinton’s vocal support of the Muslim religion,” 12 News Now reports.

“Talking about Muslims and favoring Muslims, so I really appreciate her whatever effort she is making against Islamaphobia, so I really think she needs to be the next President of the United States,” Aisha Zahid says.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNj2ScPW-eg


http://www.theamericanmirror.com/video-six-people-greet-hillary-in-texas-and-she-ignored-them/

Hillary the Criminal cries foul, she is the poster child of foul, She is a clear and present danger to the United States.

This simple chart shows exactly how much Wall Street loves Hillary Clinton

In Politics by Drew Salisbury / January 20, 2016

It’s long been established that Hillary Clinton has close ties to Wall Street — as she would tell it, because 9/11 — but a recently released a chart from the non-partisan, non-profit Center for Responsive Politics clearly shows just how close those ties are.





http://www.deathandtaxesmag.com/277601/chart-how-much-wall-street-loves-hillary-clinton/

Not Governor, Mayor of New York City.

-----------------------------------------------------------

‘Weiner’ could become another unwelcome distraction for Hillary Clinton

Dylan Stableford
Senior editor
January 19, 2016




Anthony Weiner and Huma Abedin at a news conference in New York in 2013. (Photo: Eric Thayer/Reuters)

Hillary Clinton said she is too busy campaigning to see “13 Hours,” Michael Bay’s new movie about the deadly Sept. 11, 2012, attack on the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya — an assault that once threatened to dog the former secretary of state’s 2016 presidential bid. Now another film — a documentary about the sexting scandal that derailed Anthony Weiner’s 2013 mayoral run — is poised to give the Clinton campaign headaches once more.

The reason: Huma Abedin, Weiner’s wife and Clinton’s longtime aide, is featured prominently in “Weiner,” which premieres Sunday at the Sundance Film Festival in Park City, Utah. From its description on the Sundance website:


Many politicians have seen their careers careen off the tracks, but few instances have been captured so completely on film as the incisive and painfully funny Weiner. With unprecedented access to Anthony Weiner, his family, and his campaign team as they mount his New York City mayoral campaign, the film documents the impending political meltdown of epic proportions. What begins as an unexpected comeback from a disgraced ex-congressman takes a sharp turn once Weiner is forced to admit to new sexting allegations. As the media descends and rips apart his every move, Weiner tries desperately to forge ahead, but the increasing pressure and crippling 24-hour news coverage halts his political aspirations dead in their tracks.

The New York Times, which was given an exclusive screening ahead of the documentary’s Sundance debut, describes how Abedin tries to maintain calm as her husband’s political career is imploding for a second time:


Just after the news broke that Mr. Weiner had exchanged lewd messages with women online using the pseudonym Carlos Danger, Ms. Abedin maintained a steely calm.
When a young campaign staff member, on the verge of tears over the revelations, prepared to leave the couple’s Park Avenue apartment, Ms. Abedin offered some advice. “Just a quick optics thing.” she said to the woman. “I assume those photographers are still outside. So, you will look happy?”

While Clinton herself doesn’t appear in the 90-minute film, the subtext of watching Abedin deal with a sex scandal involving her husband — not unlike the one Clinton had to navigate as first lady — puts the Democratic frontrunner front and center in viewers’ minds.

And with “Weiner” scheduled to be released in theaters on May 20 and on Showtime in October, it could be an unwelcome distraction for Clinton in a general election, should she become the Democratic nominee.

Directors Josh Kriegman, a former political consultant and campaign adviser for Weiner, and Elyse Steinberg began shooting the film simply to document the former congressman’s mayoral bid. When the sexting scandal broke, it became something much more intriguing.

“We’ve seen countless celebrity meltdowns and scandals play out on cable news and in the headlines, but here we get a front-row seat as it happens,” Steinberg said in an interview with the Sundance website. “The film pulls back the curtain and shows what it’s really like to be at the center of a media firestorm.”

READ MORE

https://www.yahoo.com/politics/weiner-huma-hillary-clinton-sundance-164009468.html

Clinton Spokesman: Obama Appointed Inspector General Is Too Political





https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r4yWoho0Q1A

Yep.

I saw somewhere something about that Weiner weirdo. Some film I think about his weirdness, probably dick-selfies etc. and I guess also Hillary´s body-woman weirdness thereby.

Didn´t Hillary´s fan club plan to make that weirdo screwball governor of New York State or something back then. Their tastes are very consistent.

’90s Scandals Threaten to Erode Hillary Clinton’s Strength With Women








This month, Lena Dunham, wearing a red, white and blue sweater dress with the word “Hillary” emblazoned across the chest, told voters how Hillary Clinton had overcome sexism in her political career.

“The way she has been treated is just more evidence of the fact that our country has so much hatred toward successful women,” Ms. Dunham, the creator and star of the HBO series “Girls,” said at a Clinton campaign event in Manchester, N.H.

But at an Upper East Side dinner party a few months back, Ms. Dunham expressed more conflicted feelings. She told the guests, at the Park Avenue apartment of Richard Plepler, the chief executive of HBO, that she was disturbed by how, in the 1990s, the Clintons and their allies discredited women who said they had had sexual encounters with or been sexually assaulted by former President Bill Clinton.

The conversation, relayed by several people with knowledge of the discussion who would speak about it only anonymously, captures the deeper debate unfolding among liberal-leaning women about how to reconcile Mrs. Clinton’s leadership on women’s issues with her past involvement in her husband’s efforts to fend off accusations of sexual misconduct.

The issue emerged last month when Mrs. Clinton accused the Republican presidential candidate Donald J. Trump of having a “penchant for sexism” and he in turn accused her of hypocrisy, given her husband’s treatment of women. And in recent weeks, the scandals of the 1990s and Mrs. Clinton’s role in them have taken on a life of their own, delivering an unexpected headache to a campaign predicated on inspiring female voters.

Mrs. Clinton had hoped to galvanize women late last month in her critique of Mr. Trump. Instead, two weeks before the Iowa caucuses, her campaign has found itself trying to shore up support among women as discussions about past Clinton scandals have moved from conservative critics to broader public consciousness.

“She’s not a victim. She was an enabler,” Mr. Trump told Fox News last week. “Some of these women have been destroyed, and Hillary worked with” her husband.

Ms. Dunham declined a request for comment. Her spokeswoman, Cindi Berger, said that Ms. Dunham is “fully supportive of Hillary Clinton and her track record for protecting women,” and that the description of her comments at the dinner party was a “total mischaracterization.”

But the resurfacing of the scandals of the 1990s has brought about a rethinking among some feminists about how prominent women stood by Mr. Clinton and disparaged his accusers after the “bimbo eruptions,” as a close aide to the Clintons, Betsey Wright, famously called the claims of affairs and sexual assault against Mr. Clinton in his 1992 campaign.

Even some Democrats who participated in the effort to discredit the women acknowledge privately that today, when Mrs. Clinton and other women have pleaded with the authorities on college campuses and in workplaces to take any allegation of sexual assault and sexual harassment seriously, such a campaign to attack the women’s character would be unacceptable.

Back then, Mr. Clinton’s aides, having watched Gary Hart’s presidential hopes unravel over his relationship with Donna Rice in the 1988 Democratic primary race, were determined to squash any accusations against Mr. Clinton early and aggressively, former campaign aides explained. Mrs. Clinton had supported the effort to push back against the women’s stories.

Much of her involvement played out behind the scenes, and was driven, in part, by her sense that right-wing forces were using the women and salacious stories to damage her husband’s political ambitions. Her reflex was to protect him and his future, and, early on, she turned to a longtime Clinton loyalist, Ms. Wright, to defend him against the allegations, according to multiple accounts at the time, documented in books and oral histories.

“We have to destroy her story,” Mrs. Clinton said of one of the first women to come forward during her husband’s first presidential campaign, Connie Hamzy, in 1991, according to George Stephanopoulos, a former Clinton administration aide who described the events in his memoir, “All Too Human.’’ (Three people signed sworn affidavits saying Ms. Hamzy’s story was false.)

When Gennifer Flowers later surfaced, claiming that she had a long affair with Mr. Clinton, Mrs. Clinton undertook an “aggressive, explicit direction of the campaign to discredit” Ms. Flowers, according to an exhaustive biography of Mrs. Clinton, “A Woman in Charge,” by Carl Bernstein.

Mrs. Clinton referred to Monica Lewinsky, the White House intern who had an affair with the 42nd president, as a “narcissistic loony toon,” according to one of her closest confidantes, Diane D. Blair, whose diaries were released to the University of Arkansas after her death in 2000. Ms. Lewinsky later called the comment an example of Mrs. Clinton’s impulse to “blame the woman.”

Brian Fallon, a spokeswoman for Mrs. Clinton, said that “these are attempts to draw Hillary Clinton into decades-old allegations through recent fabrications that are unsubstantiated.” He added that Mrs. Clinton “has spent her whole life standing up for women, and charges to the contrary are grossly unfair and untrue.”

Over the years, the Clinton effort to cast doubt on the women included using words like “floozy,” “bimbo” and “stalker,” and raising questions about their motives. James Carville, a longtime strategist for Mr. Clinton, was especially cutting in attacking Ms. Flowers. “If you drag a hundred-dollar bill through a trailer park, you never know what you’ll find,” Mr. Carville said of Ms. Flowers.

Now that the stories are resurfacing, they could hamper Mrs. Clinton’s attempts to connect with younger women, who are learning the details of the Clintons’ history for the first time. Several news organizations have published guides to the Clinton scandals to explain the allegations to a new generation of readers.

Alexis Isabel Moncada, the 17-year-old founder of Feminist Culture, a popular blog, was not old enough to remember the 1990s, but lately she and her thousands of young female readers have heard a lot about the scandals.

“I heard he sexually harassed people and she worked to cover it up,” Ms. Moncada said of Mr. and Mrs. Clinton. “A lot of girls in my age group are huge feminists, and we don’t react well to that.”

A warning Mr. Trump issued to Mrs. Clinton on Twitter — “Be careful Hillary as you play the war on women or women being degraded card” — initially grabbed attention last month. Then, Paula Jones, who had accused Mr. Clinton of exposing himself while she was an Arkansas state employee, and Juanita Broaddrick, an Arkansas nursing home executive who alleged that Mr. Clinton sexually assaulted her in 1978 when he was attorney general of Arkansas, re-emerged in the news media.

Mr. Clinton maintained he was innocent but eventually paid Ms. Jones $850,000 to settle her sexual harassment case. He has denied, through his lawyer, assaulting Ms. Broaddrick.





“You have to give Trump credit,” said Jennifer Weiner, a best-selling novelist and feminist. “He’s a genius at poking and prodding his competitors until he finds their soft spots.”

By reminding voters about the jarring terms that Mr. Clinton and his advisers used to describe these women, Mr. Trump has sought to diminish one of Mrs. Clinton’s biggest strengths: her commitment to helping women.

Mr. Trump’s attacks make Mrs. Clinton look less like “a strong, self-actualized feminist leader who women can proudly get behind,” Ms. Weiner added, and more “like a craven opportunist, and an apologist for a predator.”

Mrs. Clinton’s defenders strongly object to that characterization and say there is no truth to political adversaries’ accusations that Mrs. Clinton muzzled her husband’s accusers. They note that Ms. Broaddrick, for example, has not provided any evidence to show Mrs. Clinton pressured her to stay silent about the assault accusation.

Many of Mrs. Clinton’s supporters say it is the ultimate act of sexism to hold her culpable for her husband’s transgressions. “Show me the wife who, when she finds out her husband is having an affair with a much younger woman, says, ‘Oh, I feel such sisterhood with her,’” said Katha Pollitt, a feminist poet and columnist for The Nation.

After Mr. Trump’s initial Twitter post, the debate quickly spread to prominent female writers, who offered opinion columns in Cosmopolitan, Slate and New York Magazine, among other outlets. Even the women on “The View” weighed in.

“It’s not about Bill Clinton’s peccadilloes,” said Camille Paglia, a feminist author and professor at the University of the Arts in Philadelphia, and a supporter of one of Mrs. Clinton’s rivals, Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont. “It’s about Hillary Clinton’s behavior towards her husband’s accusers for all those years.”

Any threat to Mrs. Clinton’s support among women could prove problematic. A CNN/WMUR poll released Tuesday showed that Mr. Sanders had opened up a surprising 27-point lead over Mrs. Clinton in New Hampshire, helped by his support among younger women.

Mrs. Clinton has devoted her campaign to prioritizing issues important to women, including protecting abortion rights, promoting equal pay and combating sexual assault on college campuses — positions that many Democratic women say transcend whatever transpired in Mr. Clinton’s campaigns more than two decades ago.

“Every survivor of sexual assault deserves to be heard, believed, and supported,” Mrs. Clinton wrote on Twitter in November.

In the past month, two of Mrs. Clinton’s town-hall-style events in New Hampshire have been interrupted with questions about Mr. Clinton’s behavior. At one, a young woman asked Mrs. Clinton about several women who alleged her husband sexually assaulted them.

“You say that all rape victims should be believed,” the woman said. “Should we believe them as well?”

Mrs. Clinton replied, “Well, I would say that everybody should be believed at first until they are disbelieved based on evidence.”

Supporters of Mrs. Clinton say Mr. Trump’s strategy could backfire and suggested that the real estate billionaire — who frequently makes remarks about women and their attractiveness — is a poor messenger for a charge of sexism.

“It strains credulity for me to feel like Donald Trump is deeply concerned about the nefarious and terrible effects of slut shaming,” said Nita Chaudhary, a founder of UltraViolet, a women’s advocacy group. But, she added, the way Mr. Clinton’s accusers were treated “was a big ball of ugly.”


http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/21/us/politics/90s-scandals-threaten-to-erode-hillary-clintons-strength-with-women.html

NBC News-YouTube Democratic Debate (Full)

These mothaafuckaas right hurrrr

The Clinton campaign is scrambling to deal with the unforeseen possibility that the nomination for the office of President of the United States might be determined by a series of contests in which various states’ voters cast votes as to which candidate they prefer, rather than simply being declared in advance. The evangelical Republican voters, on the other hand, are not preparing to choose a nominee so much as accommodating themselves to some foregone conclusion of a Trump victory.

http://gaw.kr/52ziwGV

Clinton Cash Still Rolling in for Bill’s Pardon of Fugitive Marc Rich





Fifteen years ago this month, on Jan. 20, 2001, his last day in office, Bill Clinton issued a pardon for international fugitive Marc Rich. It would become perhaps the most condemned official act of Clinton’s political career. A New York Times editorial called it “a shocking abuse of presidential power.” The usually Clinton-friendly New Republic noted it “is often mentioned as Exhibit A of Clintonian sliminess.”

Congressman Barney Frank added, “It was a real betrayal by Bill Clinton of all who had been strongly supportive of him to do something this unjustified. It was contemptuous.”

Marc Rich was wanted for a list of charges going back decades. He had traded illegally with America’s enemies including Ayatollah Khomeini’s Iran, where he bought about $200 million worth of oil while revolutionaries allied with Khomeini held 53 American hostages in 1979.

Rich made a large part of his wealth, approximately $2 billion between 1979 and 1994, selling oil to the apartheid regime in South Africa when it faced a UN embargo. He did deals with Khadafy’s Libya, Milosevic’s Yugoslavia, Kim Il Sung’s North Korea, Communist dictatorships in Cuba and the Soviet Union itself. Little surprise that he was on the FBI’s Ten Most Wanted List.

Facing prosecution by Rudy Giuliani in 1983, Rich fled to Switzerland and lived in exile.






What bothered so many was that Clinton’s clemency to Rich reeked of payoff. In the run-up to the presidential pardon, the financier’s ex-wife Denise had donated $450,000 to the fledgling Clinton Library and “over $1 million to Democratic campaigns in the Clinton era.”

Judge Abner Mikva, a counsel in the Clinton White House and mentor to President Obama, noted that even Obama “was very, very dismayed by the Marc Rich pardon and the basis on which it appears to have been granted.”

But does the story end there? Is it possible the payoffs continued after he left office?






The stench of the scandal in early 2001 sent people scurrying. Days after it was revealed that a senior UBS executive named Pierre de Weck had written a letter to Clinton “to support his request for a pardon,” the Swiss banking giant canceled its discussions with Clinton about a lucrative post-White House speech, apparently “worried that a large speaking fee would create an appearance of impropriety.”

Even Bill Clinton eventually admitted that the pardon had been “terrible politics.” “It wasn’t worth the damage to my reputation,” he said.

But while the pardon was a political mistake, it certainly was not a financial one. In the years following the scandal, the flow of funds from those connected to Marc Rich or the pardon scandal have continued to the Clintons.

    Rich’s business partners, lawyers, advisers and friends have showered millions of dollars on the Clintons in the decade and a half following the scandal.

Rich died in 2013. But his business partners, lawyers, advisers and friends have showered millions of dollars on the Clintons in the decade and a half following the scandal.

Nigerian businessman Gilbert Chagoury is well known as a close ally and business associate of Rich. The Nigerian media declared in 1999 that the “Gilbert Chagoury-Marc Rich alliance remains a formidable foe.” They sold oil on international markets together. In 2000, Chagoury was convicted in Geneva of money laundering and aiding a criminal organization in connection with the billions of dollars stolen from Nigeria during the reign of dictator Gen. Sani Abacha.

As part of a plea deal, the conviction was later expunged.

Chagoury has been very generous to the Clintons in the years following the Rich pardon. He has organized an event at which Bill was paid $100,000 to speak (in 2003), donated millions to the Clinton Foundation and in 2009 pledged a cool $1 billion to the Clinton Global Initiative. The Chagourys were also active in Hillary’s 2008 presidential bid. Michel Chaghouri, a relative in Los Angeles, was a bundler and served on her campaign staff. Numerous other relatives gave the maximum $4,600 each to her campaign.



Read it here:
http://nypost.com/2016/01/17/after-pardoning-criminal-marc-rich-clintons-made-millions-off-friends/

Inspector General: Clinton emails had intel from most secretive, classified programs






EXCLUSIVE: Hillary Clinton's emails on her unsecured, homebrew server contained intelligence from the U.S. government's most secretive and highly classified programs, according to an unclassified letter from a top inspector general to senior lawmakers.

Fox News exclusively obtained the text of the unclassified letter, sent Jan. 14 from Intelligence Community Inspector General I. Charles McCullough III. It laid out the findings of a recent comprehensive review by intelligence agencies that identified "several dozen" additional classified emails -- including specific intelligence known as "special access programs" (SAP). 

That indicates a level of classification beyond even “top secret,” the label previously given to two emails found on her server, and brings even more scrutiny to the presidential candidate’s handling of the government’s closely held secrets.

“To date, I have received two sworn declarations from one [intelligence community] element. These declarations cover several dozen emails containing classified information determined by the IC element to be at the confidential, secret, and top secret/sap levels,” said the IG letter to lawmakers with oversight of the intelligence community and State Department. “According to the declarant, these documents contain information derived from classified IC element sources.”

Intelligence from a "special access program,” or SAP, is even more sensitive than that designated as "top secret" – as were two emails identified last summer in a random sample pulled from Clinton's private server she used as secretary of state. Access to a SAP is restricted to those with a "need-to-know" because exposure of the intelligence would likely reveal the source, putting a method of intelligence collection -- or a human asset -- at risk. Currently, some 1,340 emails designated “classified” have been found on Clinton’s server, though the Democratic presidential candidate insists the information was not classified at the time.

“There is absolutely no way that one could not recognize SAP material,” a former senior law enforcement with decades of experience investigating violations of SAP procedures told Fox News. “It is the most sensitive of the sensitive.”

Executive Order 13526 -- called "Classified National Security Information" and signed Dec. 29, 2009 -- sets out the legal framework for establishing special access programs. The order says the programs can only be authorized by the president, "the Secretaries of State, Defense, Energy, and Homeland Security, the Attorney General, and the Director of National Intelligence, or the principal deputy of each."

The programs are created when "the vulnerability of, or threat to, specific information is exceptional,” and “the number of persons who ordinarily will have access will be reasonably small and commensurate with the objective of providing enhanced protection for the information involved," it states.

According to court documents, former CIA Director David Petraeus was prosecuted for sharing intelligence from special access programs with his biographer and mistress Paula Broadwell. At the heart of his prosecution was a non-disclosure agreement where Petraeus agreed to protect these closely held government programs, with the understanding “unauthorized disclosure, unauthorized retention or negligent handling … could cause irreparable injury to the United States or be used to advantage by a foreign nation.” Clinton signed an identical non-disclosure agreement Jan. 22, 2009.

Fox News is told that the recent IG letter was sent to the leadership of the House and Senate intelligence committees and leaders of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, as well as the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) and State Department inspector general.

Fox News has asked the committees to make the letter public because its findings are unclassified.

Representatives for the ODNI and intelligence community inspector general had no comment, but did not dispute the findings.

The intelligence community IG was responding in his message to a November letter from the Republican chairmen of the Senate intelligence and foreign relations committees that questioned the State Department email review process after it was wrongly reported the intelligence community was retreating from the “top secret” designation.

As Fox News first reported, those two emails were “top secret” when they hit the server, and it is now considered a settled matter.

The intelligence agencies now have their own reviewers embedded at the State Department as part of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) process. The reviewers are identifying intelligence of a potentially classified nature, and referring it to the relevant intelligence agency for further review.

There is no formal appeals process for classification, and the agency that generates the intelligence has final say. The State Department only has control over the fraction of emails that pertain to their own intelligence.

While the State Department and Clinton campaign have said the emails in questions were “retroactively classified” or “upgraded” – to justify the more than 1,300 classified emails on her server – those terms are meaningless under federal law.

The former federal law enforcement official said the finding in the January IG letter represents a potential violation of USC 18 Section 793, “gross negligence” in the handling of secure information under the Espionage Act.


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/01/19/inspector-general-clinton-emails-had-intel-from-most-secretive-classified-programs.html