Pamela Karlan Unleashed: ‘Trump Has Sexually Assaulted More Women than 99.99%’ of All Illegal Immigrants
2:43
Standford Law School professor Pamela Susan Karlan, one of three Democrat witnesses testifying before the House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday as part of the ongoing impeachment inquiry, once asserted hyperbolically that President Donald Trump “has sexually assaulted more women than 99.99 percent of all of the people” who have illegally entered the United States.
Karlan made the remark, among other rants that were critical of the president, speaking on a 2017 panel organized by the American Constitution Society featuring Bill Kristol, founder of the defunct Weekly Standard, and moderated by the Washington Post‘s Ruth Marcus.
“Every day Trump says something outrageous and people go, ‘ah, at least it’s not as outrageous as the day-before thing,’ the professor began. “I remember this during the campaign, where he would say things, and you would think, ‘okay, that’s the end.’ When he mocked John McCain for having been shot down. When he made fun of the reporter with the disability. When the infamous tapes about grabbing women came out, and you kept thinking… Donald Trump has sexually assaulted more women than 99.99% of all of the people who have entered this country illegally.”
“By himself, he’s done more. And people have stopped — think about it, because it’s just like every day it’s a new one. And I worry about that, because I think that may stop us from ever getting to the red-light moment,” she added.
Karlan’s comments have resurfaced as she told House Judiciary panel members today that President Trump’s activities with Ukraine are impeachable offenses by using an analogy about a hypothetical disaster in Texas or Louisiana to explain why the president should be ousted.
“Imagine living in a part of Louisiana or Texas that’s prone to devastating hurricanes and flooding. What would you think if you lived there and your governor asked for a meeting with the president to discuss getting disaster aid that Congress has provided for? What would you think if that president said, ‘I would like you to do us a favor? I’ll meet with you, and send the disaster relief, once you brand my opponent a criminal,’ she said. “Wouldn’t you know in your gut that such a president has abused his office? That he’d betrayed the national interest, and that he was trying to corrupt the electoral process? I believe the evidentiary record shows wrongful acts on those scale here.”
Karlan began her appearance before the House committee on a contentious note, scolding the panel’s ranking member, Rep. Doug Collins (R-GA), in her opening statement and taking a bizarre dig at Trump’s teenage son Barron.
Joining Karlan in appearing before the panel were University of North Carolina Law School’s Michael Gerhardt, Harvard Law School’s Noah Feldman, and George Washing University law professor Jonathan Turley, the sole Republican witness.
Donald
Trump And The Making Of A Predatory President
“He likes
porn stars, as we’ve seen throughout his life. And he has these habits. He’ll
push somebody against the wall and try and kiss them. He’ll grab a breast or a
buttock. When he’s in a property that he owns, whether it be a hotel or Mar-a-Lago,
he feels that he has the right to walk in on a woman in her room.”
Donald
Trump And The Making Of A Predatory President
In “All The President’s Women,”
journalists Barry Levine and Monique El-Faizy uncover 43 new sexual assault
allegations against the world’s most powerful man.
In “All The
President’s Women,” journalists Barry Levine and Monique El-Faizy uncover 43
new sexual assault allegations against the world’s most powerful man.
In the New
York Military Academy’s 1964 yearbook, there is a striking photo of a young man
with a young woman by his side. He stares smugly into the camera under the
caption “Ladies Man.”
This young
man would go on to become president of the United States.
“The young lady in the picture, however, was
not graduating senior Donald Trump’s girlfriend. Nor was she a visiting
friend,” write journalists Barry Levine and Monique El-Faizy in their new book,
“All The President’s Women: Donald Trump and the Making of a Predator.”
“The woman in
the picture is 19-year-old Fran D’Agati Dunn, a secretary who worked at the
school at the time and was asked to step in for the photo. Nothing more than a
prop.”
It is this
sort of narration, combined with a stunning 43 new allegations of Trump’s
sexual misconduct, that makes “All The President’s Women” such an impactful
read. Levine and El-Faizy painstakingly document Trump’s decadeslong history of
treating women as objects and accessories, from making derogatory comments to
walking into the dressing rooms of underage beauty queens to alleged rape.
In early
2018, when adult film star Stormy Daniels was dominating the news cycle, Levine
took notice. Between Daniels’ claim that Trump had paid her hush money and the
accounts of 20 other women who came forward against Trump during the 2016
election, Levine knew there had to be more there.
Once he
started digging, he realized he wanted to collaborate with another seasoned
journalist, specifically a woman, on the project. After a couple of initial
conversations, he decided he wanted to work with El-Faizy to tell a story that
went beyond individual allegations of inappropriate behavior.
“I think we
wanted to look at not just what he had done, but why and what it meant,” said
El-Faizy. “How he came to be formed as the predator he became.”
HuffPost
spoke with Levine and El-Faizy about the more than 100 interviews they
conducted over the year they were writing the book, the patterns that emerged,
and what the predatory behavior of the “most visible man on earth” says about
our culture at large.
You reported
43 new allegations of misconduct against the president in this book. How did
you all just go about locating the women that you spoke to? And also what made
these women want to share their stories publicly?
Levine: It
was extremely difficult. It was a very intensive period to cover, and that’s
why I focused on the reporting while Monique was able to shape the narrative.
But in terms of the women, I was fortunate ― in addition to finding Monique ―
there were two other journalists that I was able to put together on my small
team. One was Whitney Clegg, an investigative producer who re-interviewed some
of the victims who came forward in 2016. And then I also was able to
collaborate with Lucy Osborne, a producer for the BBC in London, who had done a
documentary on Donald Trump and women. She had some leads on some women,
particularly young models, that she had wanted to chase down. So she went off
in one direction, Whitney went off in another direction, Monique was taking all
the interviews as we were filing them and, under a tremendous deadline, turned
the book into what I would consider a great read.
But I’ll just
tell you one story, about Karen Johnson. She’s the woman who made the
allegations about the night at Mar-a-Lago during a New Year’s Eve party,
[during the time] when Melania Trump was dating Donald Trump. [Johnson says
that] when Melania was upstairs, she was attacked [by Trump]. She said he had
actually done to her [what he described doing in] the “Access Hollywood” tapes,
in terms of grabbing her. She was someone who held onto this story for many,
many years, and was fearful originally to come out with this story because she
had been a dancer in her earlier life. And she thought, if I come out and say
this, they’re going to attack me, they’re going to call me a liar because I had
once been a dancer. And so she kept this secret.
It took me
two full months before she even felt comfortable to begin telling me the
details. So, it’s been a very emotional journey in terms of getting these brave
and courageous women to come forward. And I just have to say, I’m just so
thankful that I was able to work with Monique and Lucy and Whitney to pull all
this together.
What patterns
emerged for you as you were going through all of the reporting?
El-Faizy: To
me, that was the unexpected power of the book. We’ve all heard the stories, the
women would come forward one by one. But when you put it all in one space,
first of all, it’s enormous, and that’s shocking in and of itself, but these
patterns really do emerge. [Trump] clearly has a thing for younger women. He
started talking about Ivanka being sexy when she was around the same age as
these models that he was kind of staring at backstage and pursuing at parties.
So that’s one of the patterns.
He likes porn
stars, as we’ve seen throughout his life. And he has these habits. He’ll push
somebody against the wall and try and kiss them. He’ll grab a breast or a
buttock. When he’s in a property that he owns, whether it be a hotel or
Mar-a-Lago, he feels that he has the right to walk in on a woman in her room.
What’s
interesting is that there were very few one-offs. We only put things in [the
book] that fit the pattern, because he has such well-established patterns over
the years. What was powerful about that is, when we would interview the women,
almost all of them in some way blamed themselves: “What kind of vibe was I
putting off? What was I wearing?” And when you look at them in the context of
these patterns, you realize it has almost nothing to do with that woman. If it
wasn’t that woman, it would’ve been another woman wearing something else and
putting off a totally different vibe.
He’ll push
somebody against the wall and try and kiss them. He’ll grab a breast or a
buttock. When he’s in a property that he owns, whether it be a hotel or
Mar-a-Lago, he feels that he has the right to walk in on a woman in her
room.El-Faizy
I think that
really comes across in the book, especially when you get to the end and you’re
reading the appendix, which outlines every single allegation. There are stories
that you’ll get to one and say, oh, that sounds exactly like that other woman’s
story, down to the details. It’s very striking.
Levine: About
six months into the reporting, we were getting all these new stories, in
addition to cataloging the earlier allegations that were made in 2016. And at
the same time, I was also digging into research and finding stories about
[Trump’s] inappropriate behavior with women that had popped up in the media but
had never really been cataloged ― everything from making horrible comments to a
model that was seated at a table with Graydon Carter, to incidents where he
himself said that he attacked women, [like] pouring a glass of wine on a
reporter in New York.
To me, [these
incidents] all needed to be cataloged. I think it’s very powerful, after you go
through the beautifully shaped narrative that Monique wrote, that you then get,
in very black and white fashion, every single allegation of inappropriate
behavior, in addition to the disparaging comments that I found he made
involving so many women. I just think when you read them one after another, it
is extremely impactful. And so the appendix of this book, to me, is as
important as the narrative itself.
As you both
alluded to earlier, you take a deep look into Trump’s early years, which is
probably something that most readers will know less about. To me, it seemed
like his treatment of women as objects and accessories began very early. Would
you say that that’s accurate?
El-Faizy:
Absolutely. That’s why I chartered the book the way I did. In his graduation
photo from the military academy, the woman standing next to him is an
accessory. To me, that said it all.
And I think
that that comes from his father, too. His father would bring these young,
pretty girls up to the academy. From what his classmates say, these were not
women that Donald Trump knew or had any kind of relationship with. They were
just girls that his dad would bring up for him, presumably for the image of it.
So I think that he didn’t develop that attitude in a vacuum.
And how do
you think those early experiences with women then impacted his relationship
with women later on in his life?
El-Faizy:
What’s interesting is that he never changes. We interviewed one of his
classmates, Sandy McIntosh, who said, “We were in an all-male academy. We
learned about women and girls from Playboy magazine. But then we got out and
realized, oh no, that’s not an appropriate way to look at women.”
And Trump
just never made that change. To me, what’s interesting is that nothing later in
his life impacted him enough to force him to reconsider his attitude.
The book also
gets into Trump’s obsession with models, with Playboy, and with beauty
pageants. You include a quote from a former Miss Arizona who says that she
believes Trump purchased the Miss Universe organization explicitly “to utilize
his power to get around beautiful women.” What did you take away from that?
El-Faizy:
Trump is, at his heart, a business guy. And if that’s your mind state, you buy
whatever you want in life. He had the money to do it; he wanted these women, so
he just went out and bought access to women, with the beauty pageant, with the
modeling agency. And I think for a lot of these men, it’s as much about being
around the women as it is how it looks to other men.
There’s a
story in the book from a hairstylist who used to blow-dry Marla Maples’ hair.
And he told me that Trump would come into the salon and just stand by her chair
and look around and see who was watching him be with Marla. So it wasn’t that
much about, “Oh, I want to see my girlfriend Marla.” It was about, “I want to
be seen in the presence of this young, beautiful blonde.” It’s the equivalent
of driving a red Ferrari.
Levine: I
tend to take a much darker view of those years. It’s absolutely clear in the
book that for Donald Trump, creating his own modeling agency and being a part
of some of these other beauty pageants and contests that he would arrange
parties for at the Plaza Hotel in the ’90s — that became his personal hunting
ground.
Take the
story, for instance, that Heather Braden told. Heather was a model, and she
told a story where Trump and these actors were in this giant Miami Beach
mansion with like 50 models. It really wasn’t a party. The whole thing was an
exercise for Donald Trump and these three other men to see how many of these
models they could take in the private rooms, sometimes two or three women at a
time.
Heather was
older at the time, and she was kind of watching everything take place. She
turned down Trump, but she said these younger models didn’t know any better.
And they would come out disheveled; they would look very uncomfortable when
they came out of the private rooms, and there was no question in her mind that
these were sexual experiences taking place. Donald Trump had created this
private hunting ground to allow himself access to young models. And he formed a
very tight relationship with John Casablancas, the founder of the Elite
modeling agency.
For Donald
Trump, creating his own modeling agency and being a part of some of these other
beauty pageants and contests ... that became his personal hunting ground.Barry
Levine
This book
puts all of these allegations together and uncovers a lot of new information,
but for years now, there has been a pretty well-documented history of Trump’s
misogyny and sexual misconduct. And yet it largely has not been seen as a
dealbreaker for his supporters. Why do you think that there are a lot of people
who feel allegations of sexual misconduct can be dismissed or overlooked?
El-Faizy:
Yeah, it’s interesting. I had written a book about evangelical Christianity
years ago, so I went back to that community for this book because, of course,
the evangelical community is probably what put Trump over the edge in 2016.
That community is very much run by male leaders, and so it was the men who
really drove that train for Trump.
One of the
evangelical women I spoke to and I said, “What is it? Why are they supporting
him?” She said, “I think that a lot of them think, ‘If I wasn’t a Christian,
that’s what I would be doing.’” Trump is surrounded by porn stars and beautiful
blondes and whatever. And so she thought there was a certain kind of male envy.
The structure
of the evangelical church, where Trump gets the bulk of his support, is very
patriarchal. For them, this kind of patriarchy is what God has instructed them
to do, and they find all kinds of different ways of rationalizing it. Early on,
I called an old source of mine. I said, “how on earth are you supporting him?”
And they said, “God uses imperfect vessels.” So they rationalize it by saying,
[Trump] is being used, he’s a tool of God. He doesn’t need to be perfect, we’re
all sinners. But at the very core of their support is just a comfort with
patriarchy and the idea that women are supposed to be submissive to men.
And then the
more cynical answer is the community supports him because he does what they
want him to do. He gets them conservative judges, he’s helping roll back
abortion laws, things like that. But in terms of the women being able to
support him, it’s because they live within a world in which they’ve completely
accepted the idea of patriarchy.
I feel like
another sentiment that I hear a lot, even among people who believe that Trump
is predatory, is exhaustion and frustration that these allegations don’t seem
to stick to him. So, why bother? What would you say to those people?
El-Faizy: I
think that’s part of the reason why it was important to put all these
[allegations] in one place, because it is easier to dismiss individual
behaviors. But when you look at it all in the aggregate, you realize it’s not
really just about one man’s behavior; it is about systems that allow this
behavior to go on for decades and decades. Trump is one of many men who has
been able to be predatory with women. I would argue, right now, he’s the one we
should be looking at because he’s the most visible man in the world and he sets
an example. But there needs to be a look at the systems that allow this to go
on.
When we brush
aside or when we say we’re tired of this, we’re being complicit, we’re letting
it go on. We have to get outraged about every one of these things. I’m now sort
of going off-topic a little bit, but when I read the Ta-Nehisi Coates book
“Between the World and Me,” that was the thing that I came away with. We can’t
just say, “Oh, there’s another black kid getting shot.” We have to be outraged
every time or this never ever changes.
It’s not
really just about one man’s behavior; it is about systems that allow this
behavior to go on for decades and decades.El-Faizy
Levine: This
is a man who wants another four years to be president of our country. You can’t
say, ‘Who cares?’ You can’t turn away from the truth.
Given the
sheer breadth of allegations that exist against President Trump, do you think
that we should be speaking about him in the same way that we speak about
predatory men like Bill Cosby or Harvey Weinstein?
El-Faizy: I
think absolutely.
Levine: The
reporting shows that Donald Trump has been a predator over the course of many
decades. There needs to be a reckoning here of his behavior. And we had to
attempt to connect the dots to show not only the actual instances of the allegations
but also to talk about how he became a predator. And I hope that the readers
will get answers to that.
Why is it so
essential for the American public to grapple with Trump’s predatory behavior?
What does this one man’s story say about our culture at large?
El-Faizy: I
think it’s his behavior, but also his policies. His behavior reveals an
attitude about women, and that attitude is being held by the man who formed
policy for American women and also for women around the globe. And we see the
manner in which those attitudes are affecting women around the world, and the
systems that are supporting these kinds of things.
What was so
hurtful about the confirmation [of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh] was
that you had an accuser [Christine Blasey Ford] who came forward, she was
credible, people listened to her. And yet there was very little investigation
and he was confirmed anyway. So I think a lot of women felt like, we thought we
made all these advances since the ’60s, but in fact, the patriarchy is alive
and well and still completely in control of the system. And I think that’s
important to examine.
So now the
book is out there in the world and we have this information. What should we be
doing with it? What do you hope comes next?
Levine: I
really think it is so important now, despite everything else going on with the
impeachment inquiry, that investigative news organizations take the time to
pick up these allegations and dig deeper because there are still so many
stories. There is so much more material out there on Donald Trump and women.
When I was
wrapping up the book, the E. Jean Carroll allegations [that Trump had attempted
to rape Carroll in the mid-’90s] surfaced. And first of all, after the
reporting I had done, everything that she said rang true. But beyond that,
there were news organizations who were wrestling with whether they were going
to present her allegations to begin with. And to me, that is the absolutely
wrong thing. We need to allow these women to tell their stories. To me, that’s
the most important thing.
El-Faizy: I
think that we’ve seen that women are not fully valued in society and we need
massive change. And I think that the midterm elections with all these young,
newly elected women, were the beginning of that. And I hope that that’s not
just a one-off and that that continues, because until we reach parity in the
power structures of organizations and in government, this is not going to be
fully addressed and fully changed. We need to see more women getting elected
and that this is not just a moment, but actually the beginning of some real
change.
Levine: I
hope that even if people hear these allegations and don’t even read the book,
that it will make them aware that the story of Donald Trump and women, his
predatory behavior, has not been fully written, and that this is something they
should remember when they consider whether or not they want him to be president
for another four years.
This
interview has been edited and condensed for clarity.
And there's more than a few indicators that Clinton wasn't
naive at all about Epstein. Though he wasn't accused by Epstein's credible
accuser Virginia Giuffre, Clinton's been accused repeatedly being a sexual
predator by others earlier.
Hillary the Punisher: Ronan Farrow says he was cut dead from
Clinton circles after he exposed Weinstein
Bill and Hill - and the Evil that Men Do
Hillary Clinton Is not just a sore loser, she is a total loser
Monica Lewinsky says Bill Clinton hinted she should perjure
herself, arranged a farewell Christmas tryst before dumping her
Allegation: S-exual assault
Anonymous female student at Yale University (1972)
Anonymous female student at the University of Arkansas (1974)
Anonymous female lawyer (1977)
Juanita Broaddrick (1978)
R-ape
Carolyn Moffet (1979)
Elizabeth Ward (1983)
Sally Perdue (1983)
Paula Jones (1991)
Sandra Allen James (1991)
Christy Zercher (1992)
Kathleen Willey (1993)
Monica Lewinsky. 22-year-old intern working for the President
Ronan
Farrow: Bill Clinton ‘Credibly’ Accused of Rape, Investigation Is ‘Overdue’
https://www.breitbart.com/entertainment/2019/11/03/ronan-farrow-bill-clinton-credibly-accused-of-rape-investigation-is-overdue/
Pulitzer
Prize-winning journalist Ronan Farrow said on HBO’s Real Time With Bill Maher, that
“credible” accusations of rape had been
made against former President Bill Clinton by Juanita Broaddrick, adding that
an investigation into the allegations is now “overdue.”
Where were the HOWLERS
when serial rapist Bill Clinton, Bill Cosby and Harvey Weinstein were on the
prowl?
http://hillaryclinton-whitecollarcriminal.blogspot.com/2016/07/30-lies-of-hillary-clinton-and-thats.html
Leaked Julian Assange
Message:
Hillary Is A ‘Well Connected,
Sadistic Sociopath’
Bill Clinton Accusers Speak
Out After Ronan Farrow Says Ex-President Was ‘Credibly Accused of Rape’
Then-Republican presidential candidate
Donald Trump (C) sits with, (L-R)Paula Jones, Kathy Shelton, Juanita
Broaddrick, and Kathleen Willey, before the second presidential debate with
Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton at Washington University in
St. Louis, on Oct. 9, 2016. (Evan Vucci/AP Photo)
O.K., Prince Andrew's out
of public life. Why isn't Bill Clinton?
MeToo movement "never wanted anything to do with the
victims of Bill Clinton” | Sky News Australia
Is someone gonna ask the
Clintons about all those trips to Epstein's 'cowboy village'?
Convicted sex offender and Mueller witness
George Nader indicted for illegal contributions to boost Hillary Clinton
And there's more than a few indicators that Clinton wasn't
naive at all about Epstein. Though he wasn't accused by Epstein's credible
accuser Virginia Giuffre, Clinton's been accused repeatedly being a sexual
predator by others earlier.
She is incredibly incompetent, fundamentally dishonest, and
criminally corrupt, and these are her good qualities. KENNETH ELIASBERG
Harvey
Weinstein has been exposed in the media as the sexual predator he is, and Hillary
Clinton has been exposed as the craven money-grubber she is; money over
morality is the mantra she lives by. PATRICIA Mc CARTHY – AMERICAN
THINKERcom
Hillary the Punisher: Ronan Farrow says he was cut dead from
Clinton circles after he exposed Weinstein
Apparently, the queen and her moneymen are not to be
challenged.
Young Ronan Farrow learned that the hard way when he found
out he was persona
non grata from charmed social circles of Hillary Clinton
following his investigation into Hollywood movie producer Harvey Weinstein's
long career of sexual harassment and intimidation, an investigation which won
him the Pulitzer prize.
Which culminates a long road of indignities for the young
man. Seems the threats from Weinstein's minions to him were not enough. Nor was
the rejection he encountered from assorted media organizations who refused to
run his work until the New Yorker finally picked it up. Nope, the punishment
Farrow endured also extended to House Clinton, which cut him dead.
Which, to the rest of us, seems like a good thing, given their
long history of moral turpitude. But to young Ronan, it was another sling and
arrow, because he was a Democrat and that was his social circle.
“It’s remarkable how quickly even people with a long relationship
with you will turn if you threaten the centres of power or the sources of
funding around them,” Farrow told the Financial Times.
“Ultimately, there are a lot of people out there who operate in
that way. They’re beholden to powerful interests and if you go up against those
interests, you become radioactive very quickly,” he said.
Clinton appointed Farrow as her special adviser on global youth
issues in 2011 when she was secretary of state. Farrow said he had worked with
Clinton “for years” when he was looking into the Weinstein story.
Instead of praising young Ronan for standing up for the
interests of sex-harrassed women, for igniting the #MeToo movement, Hillary,
that supposed big champion of women's progress, shut him out, probably
refusing to take his calls, and in his view, solely on the grounds that
one of her most important moneymen was put out of commission. He was dead to
her.
And that tells us a lot more about Clinton than it does about
Farrow.
It's a reminder of Clinton's pay-to-play orientation, and
privilege-of-kings morality. Rules of decency do not apply to her. Women's
rights, or anyone's rights, are window dressing. Money talks. Maybe that
can be brought up next time someone bruits about her name for president again.
Everyone knows she stood by her man, blamed his
women, and perhaps was a psychological co-rapist for the sake of her political
ambitions.
Bill and Hill - and the Evil that Men Do
If you asked one
hundred people what they think about when they hear the name Bill Clinton, a
goodly number will say womanizer, cheater – a few will use the dreadful word
rapist. And that number will increase. Time and neurology are working against
the Clintons.
Most memory training programs are simply a matter of learning how to associate memories with emotionally charged ideas. This is because the brain is designed to remember where the dangers and the goodies lie and to forget the dry statistics. The brain is more inclined to remember Jennifer Flowers than the unemployment rate in 1996. This effect has tainted the collective memory of many presidents, for example, disclosures about the mistresses of Franklin Delano Roosevelt and John Kennedy. This effect will increase for Bill Clinton both because of the outrageous nature of his conduct and the way it has and will be reported.
Most memory training programs are simply a matter of learning how to associate memories with emotionally charged ideas. This is because the brain is designed to remember where the dangers and the goodies lie and to forget the dry statistics. The brain is more inclined to remember Jennifer Flowers than the unemployment rate in 1996. This effect has tainted the collective memory of many presidents, for example, disclosures about the mistresses of Franklin Delano Roosevelt and John Kennedy. This effect will increase for Bill Clinton both because of the outrageous nature of his conduct and the way it has and will be reported.
People tend to cut
quite a bit of slack for the weaknesses of the flesh because there’s a lot of
that going around. But Hillary will gain no benefit from that latitude.
Everyone knows she stood by her man, blamed his women, and perhaps was a
psychological co-rapist for the sake of her political ambitions. Before
the next president is elected, Hillary will not only have an albatross around
her neck, she will be covered with names like Wellstone, Broaddrick, Moffet,
Ward Gracen, Brown, Dowdy, Jones, Ferguson, Zercher, Willey, and more. A majority
of those one hundred people will remember the evil the Clintons did, and their
legacy will be lost in the folds of tattered dresses and bleeding lips.
Lives -- after them, the good is oft interred with their bones. So let it be with the Clintons.
Lives -- after them, the good is oft interred with their bones. So let it be with the Clintons.
If you asked one
hundred people what they think about when they hear the name Bill Clinton, a
goodly number will say womanizer, cheater – a few will use the dreadful word
rapist. And that number will increase. Time and neurology are working against
the Clintons.
Most memory training programs are simply a matter of learning how to associate memories with emotionally charged ideas. This is because the brain is designed to remember where the dangers and the goodies lie and to forget the dry statistics. The brain is more inclined to remember Jennifer Flowers than the unemployment rate in 1996. This effect has tainted the collective memory of many presidents, for example, disclosures about the mistresses of Franklin Delano Roosevelt and John Kennedy. This effect will increase for Bill Clinton both because of the outrageous nature of his conduct and the way it has and will be reported.
People tend to cut quite a bit of slack for the weaknesses of the flesh because there’s a lot of that going around. But Hillary will gain no benefit from that latitude. Everyone knows she stood by her man, blamed his women, and perhaps was a psychological co-rapist for the sake of her political ambitions. Before the next president is elected, Hillary will not only have an albatross around her neck, she will be covered with names like Wellstone, Broaddrick, Moffet, Ward Gracen, Brown, Dowdy, Jones, Ferguson, Zercher, Willey, and more. A majority of those one hundred people will remember the evil the Clintons did, and their legacy will be lost in the folds of tattered dresses and bleeding lips.
Lives -- after them, the good is oft interred with their bones. So let it be with the Clintons.
Most memory training programs are simply a matter of learning how to associate memories with emotionally charged ideas. This is because the brain is designed to remember where the dangers and the goodies lie and to forget the dry statistics. The brain is more inclined to remember Jennifer Flowers than the unemployment rate in 1996. This effect has tainted the collective memory of many presidents, for example, disclosures about the mistresses of Franklin Delano Roosevelt and John Kennedy. This effect will increase for Bill Clinton both because of the outrageous nature of his conduct and the way it has and will be reported.
People tend to cut quite a bit of slack for the weaknesses of the flesh because there’s a lot of that going around. But Hillary will gain no benefit from that latitude. Everyone knows she stood by her man, blamed his women, and perhaps was a psychological co-rapist for the sake of her political ambitions. Before the next president is elected, Hillary will not only have an albatross around her neck, she will be covered with names like Wellstone, Broaddrick, Moffet, Ward Gracen, Brown, Dowdy, Jones, Ferguson, Zercher, Willey, and more. A majority of those one hundred people will remember the evil the Clintons did, and their legacy will be lost in the folds of tattered dresses and bleeding lips.
Lives -- after them, the good is oft interred with their bones. So let it be with the Clintons.
Hillary Clinton Is not just a sore loser, she is a total loser
As one can readily see, Hillary Clinton has been unable to recover
from having lost the 2016 presidential election -- a self-inflicted wound that
she will never cop to. Or, possibly, an act of divine intervention. She has
come up with well over a dozen reasons for her defeat -- every one but the real
one, i.e. she is a loser -- not just a sore loser, but a total loser. She
is incredibly incompetent, fundamentally dishonest, and criminally corrupt, and
these are her good qualities. In addition, she is bereft of a trace of
integrity or character, has absolutely no judgment, and is devoid of people
skills ( she’s very easy to dislike and distrust and thereby become a member of
her deplorables). The 2016 race was hers to lose, and by failing to listen to
advice on where to campaign, she managed to do just that -- lose! Thank God --
a Hillary Clinton presidency would be the last nail in America’s coffin.
We could go through the litany of Hillary Clinton’s failures –
Cattlegate, Whitewater, Travelgate, Filegate, her clumsy and opaque handling of
the health care assignment her husband handed her, her tour of duty in the U.S.
Senate, or her stint at the State Department, starting with her failure to get
the Russian word for “reset” correct and ending with her dereliction of duty in
the case of Benghazi (which produced four dead Americans, including her
“friend” Ambassador Christopher Stevens), which, on testifying before Congress,
she fobbed off with “what difference, at this point, does it make?”
But, for present purposes, I would just like to focus on the
liberties that she has always taken with the truth. When Bill Safire of the New
York Times called
her a congenital liar, he flattered her. You
see, the Clintons don’t just tell lies, they live them.
Consider her most recent whopper -- the one in which she observed,
on being asked what was her most difficult decision, that it was remaining in
her marriage. Why was this her biggest whopper? Because she had no choice but
to remain in her marriage, if, indeed, the arrangement that the Clintons have
qualifies as a “marriage,” rather than a political partnership looking to
advance the ambitions of each of the partners.
Some have applauded her incredible loyalty to Bill in view of his
tawdry behavior. However, if all they had was an “arrangement” to advance their
ambitions, his infidelities were irrelevant as far as hurt feelings were
concerned.
But they were necessary to make her both the object of sympathy
(although one has to wonder why you are deserving of pity on your husband’s
1000th marital transgression). Also, every time he got caught, so it goes,
he owed her one. Ergo, the health care assignment, her Senate term, and,
finally, her stint as Secretary of State. In each of these situations
she distinguished herself more for her failures than any accomplishment.
The point here is that Hillary had no choice but to stay in her
marriage. Without her connection to Bill Clinton, Hillary could not be
nominated for, let alone be elected to, dog catcher of even the smallest of
communities. Her successes in securing all of these positions was
achieved by attaching herself to Bill’s coattails and riding them to each one
of these positions.
So why did Hillary lose the 2016 Presidential election? Because
she’s Hillary Clinton, a born loser. And, more to the point, Hillary Clinton
belongs in the Big House, not in the White House.
BILL CLINTON: SERIAL RAPIST and his enabler, Hillary!
MONICA’S VIDEO ON SERIAL RAPIST BILL CLINTON, HUSBAND OF
SWAMP EMPRESS HILLARY CLINTON, CHARITY FOUNDATION FRAUDSTER
Harvey Weinstein has been exposed in the
media as the sexual predator he is, and Hillary
Clinton has been exposed as the craven money-grubber she is; money over
morality is the mantra she lives by. PATRICIA Mc CARTHY – AMERICAN THINKERcom
Monica Lewinsky says Bill Clinton hinted she should perjure
herself, arranged a farewell Christmas tryst before dumping her
Why is no
one helping or caring about all these women? Who Hillary Viciously went after. The
hypocrisy right now on the left is utterly stunning me. Bill Clinton-12 women
on record telling their stories of him sexually assaulting them starting back
in college! Imagine all the women who still have never told their stories about
him?
Eileen Wellstone (1969)
Allegation: S-exual assault
Anonymous female student at Yale University (1972)
Anonymous female student at the University of Arkansas (1974)
Anonymous female lawyer (1977)
Juanita Broaddrick (1978)
R-ape
Carolyn Moffet (1979)
Elizabeth Ward (1983)
Sally Perdue (1983)
Paula Jones (1991)
Sandra Allen James (1991)
Christy Zercher (1992)
Kathleen Willey (1993)
Monica Lewinsky. 22-year-old intern working for the President
Ronan
Farrow: Bill Clinton ‘Credibly’ Accused of Rape, Investigation Is ‘Overdue’
https://www.breitbart.com/entertainment/2019/11/03/ronan-farrow-bill-clinton-credibly-accused-of-rape-investigation-is-overdue/
3 Nov 20192,510
2:29
Pulitzer
Prize-winning journalist Ronan Farrow said on HBO’s Real Time With Bill Maher, that
“credible” accusations of rape had been
made against former President Bill Clinton by Juanita Broaddrick, adding that
an investigation into the allegations is now “overdue.”
Maher asked Farrow, who is
best known for helping uncover the Harvey Weinstein sexual assault scandal,
whether Clinton could have survived in today’s political climate of
hyper-awareness about sexual misconduct.
“I think that it is very important
to interject that Bill Clinton is a different conversation,” responded Farrow.
“He has been credibly accused of rape. That has nothing to do with gray areas.
I think that the Juanita Broaddrick claim has been overdue for revisiting.”
Broaddrick, a former nursing
administrator, first made the allegations against Clinton in 1999, claiming
that he raped her in her hotel room in Little Rock in 1978, when he was
Arkansas attorney general and running for governor. Clinton has denied the
allegation through his attorney.
Farrow recently accused Hillary
Clinton in his best-selling book Catch
and Kill of pressuring him during his investigations into
Harvey Weinstein’s behavior. According to Farrow, Clinton’s publicist Nick
Merrill described the story as “a concern” for her reputation.
Meanwhile,
Maher also pressed Farrow on longtime rumors that he is the son of singer
Frank Sinatra, with his mother Mia Farrow having been romantically involved
with the singer and the pair bearing a strong physical resemblance.
“Now, what do you think your father
would think about what you’re doing now?” Maher asked Farrow, in reference to
his investigative reporting.
“I knew I was walking into that so I
asked,” Farrow said. “I didn’t want to give you the sound-bite of ‘Which one?’”
In
2013, Mia Farrow said in an interview with Vanity Fair that Sinatra could
“possibly” be her son’s biological father.
“I feel like there’s no one more
#MeToo-y than Frank Sinatra,” Maher said, asking. “You do own a mirror, don’t
you?”
Farrow eventually admitted that he
“doesn’t know” what Sinatra would have thought of his journalism, but joked
that Maher could “ask my mom” for answers.
Where were the HOWLERS
when serial rapist Bill Clinton, Bill Cosby and Harvey Weinstein were on the
prowl?
http://hillaryclinton-whitecollarcriminal.blogspot.com/2016/07/30-lies-of-hillary-clinton-and-thats.html
Harvey Weinstein has been exposed in the
media as the sexual predator he is, and Hillary
Clinton has been exposed as the craven money-grubber she is; money over
morality is the mantra she lives by. PATRICIA Mc CARTHY – AMERICAN THINKERcom
"But
what the Clintons do is criminal because they do it wholly at the expense of
the American people. And they feel thoroughly entitled to do it: gain power,
use it to enrich themselves and their friends. They are amoral, immoral, and
venal. Hillary has no core beliefs beyond power and money. That should be clear
to every person on the planet by now."
---- Patricia McCarthy -
AMERICANTHINKER.com
Leaked Julian Assange
Message:
Hillary Is A ‘Well Connected,
Sadistic Sociopath’
"But what the
Clintons do is criminal because they do it wholly at the expense of the
American people. And they feel thoroughly entitled to do it: gain power, use it
to enrich themselves and their friends. They are amoral, immoral, and venal.
Hillary has no core beliefs beyond power and money. That should be clear to
every person on the planet by now."
---- Patricia McCarthy -
AMERICANTHINKER.com
Hillary, Billary,
Cosby, Buttman Affleck, Oliver Stone, Harvey Weinstein and their boy Obomb…..
new definitions of
degradation and
sleaze.
Harvey Weinstein has been exposed in the
media as the sexual predator he is, and Hillary
Clinton has been exposed as the craven money-grubber she is; money over
morality is the mantra she lives by. PATRICIA Mc CARTHY – AMERICAN THINKERcom
"But
what the Clintons do is criminal because they do it wholly at the expense of
the American people. And they feel thoroughly entitled to do it: gain power,
use it to enrich themselves and their friends. They are amoral, immoral, and
venal. Hillary has no core beliefs beyond power and money. That should be clear
to every person on the planet by now."
---- Patricia McCarthy -
AMERICANTHINKER.com
DO
YOU GET SICK AND TIRED OF HOLLYWOOD’S STAGGERING HYPOCRISY???
RICH LIBERALS AND
THEIR CELEBRATES P IMPS AND PERVS
…. The parasitism
of Hillary, Billary, Obomb, Heffner, Cosby, Buttman
Affleck, Oliver Stone, Weinstein and the rest.
Harvey Weinstein has been exposed in the
media as the sexual predator he is, and Hillary Clinton has been exposed as the craven money-grubber she is; money over morality is the mantra she lives
by. PATRICIA Mc CARTHY – AMERICAN
THINKERcom
Former
President Bill Clinton speaks during a plenary session at a Clinton Global
Initiative meeting in Marrakech, Morocco, on May 6, 2015. (Abdeljalil
Bounhar/AP Photo)
Bill Clinton Accusers Speak
Out After Ronan Farrow Says Ex-President Was ‘Credibly Accused of Rape’
November 6, 2019 Updated: November 6, 2019
Share
Juanita Broaddrick, who has long accused
former President Bill Clinton of sexual assault, said that she
agrees with comments made by reporter Ronan Farrow.
Farrow wrote
the book “Catch and Kill: Lies, Spies and a Conspiracy to Protect Predators,”
touching on NBC News’ attempts to silence his reporting about Harvey Weinstein.
He told “Real Time with Bill Maher” that Broaddrick had credibly
accused Clinton of rape.
“Bill Clinton is a different conversation.
He has been credibly accused of rape … That is, I think the Juanita Broaddrick
claim has been overdue for revisiting,” he said on Nov. 1.
He was
answering a question from Maher, who asked a panel, “Could Bill Clinton,
if he had done what he did in 1998 survived today? Or would his own party have
thrown him under the bus?”
According to the Daily Caller, three women who have accused Clinton of assault,
including Broaddrick, said they are hoping for justice.
Clinton has
denied all of the allegations.
“I always have
thought that this should be revisited. … I would like for something to be done
in order to expose this man for all of the things that he has done and possibly
get all of his past presidential perks taken from him,” Broaddrick told the
website. “That would be my biggest goal, because I don’t think anything else can
be done after 40 years.”
Broaddrick
said that the allegations of assault never amounted to anything because of the
power he wielded.
“I think it’s
because of who it was,” she said. “[Lauer and others] are all lower characters.
Who should have been exposed was the president of the United States.”
She accused
him of rape when he was campaigning for governor of Arkansas in 1978.
Leslie
Millwee, another Clinton accuser, told the Daily Caller that she was pleased to
hear Farrow’s interest in the allegations.
“I absolutely
agree that it’s long overdue. … I think that more things are going to come to
light,” Millwee said. “I’m really excited that Ronan’s looking into it. I was
sexually assaulted three times by Bill Clinton … and I would not only like for
Juanita to get justice, you know, I’d like to get justice. I’m elated that he’s
looking into this.”
“I don’t care
what your political affiliation is—whether you lean left or right—sexual
assault is bad and wrong and it should be looked at in that way, and nothing to
do with political affiliation,” said Millwee, a former Arkansas reporter.
And Kathleen
Willey, a former aide in the White House, said that she doesn’t believe
Farrow’s interest in the topic will actually lead to charges against Clinton.
“The world
knows that the Clintons have everybody in their back pocket, and I just don’t
know who’s willing to come forward and take something like that on,” she told
the news outlet. “I certainly agree with what Ronan Farrow said. … What
does ‘revisit’ mean? Is the [district attorney] going to look into this? Is the
special counsel?” Willey said. “It’s been 40 years, and I can’t see anybody
picking the ball up and running with it.”
Willey claimed
that Clinton assaulted her in 1993 in the Oval Office while she volunteered as
an aide, according to Business Insider. Clinton denied the allegations.
Millwee alleged that the former president
sexually assaulted her in 1980 several times at the television station where
she worked. She came forward with the allegations in 2016, speaking to Breitbart.
Clinton
eventually was impeached in 1998 by the House of Representatives for lying
under oath and obstruction of justice following the publication of his
relationship with Monica Lewinsky.
The Senate
ultimately acquitted him in 1999 and he served out his second term until
January 2001.
O.K., Prince Andrew's out
of public life. Why isn't Bill Clinton?
The press is making a big deal out of Britain's Prince Andrew now
being ousted from public life, based on his pretty gamy associations with
pedophile Jeffrey Epstein. He had his hand draped around the bare midriff of a
17-year old, in one photo. He kibbitzed with Epstein after his Florida
slap-on-the-wrist conviction and there's a photograph there, too. Flight
records show he rode the Lolita Express. And incredibly, he claims he
never knew anything untoward was going on.
U.K.'s Daily Mail has this comprehensive report, reasonably
explored from a U.K. perspective. But the U.S. press has been all over it,
too. Here's CNN, Washington Post, Vanity Fair, CNBC, Time, Fox News...
It's good clean fun for the American press, given that the British
royal family is unimportant here, and relies on a pristine public image to
maintain U.K. public support which is pretty incompatible with jetting around
with Epstein, but it also raises questions about why that other famous friend
of Epstein's, Bill Clinton, who rode the Lolita Express again, and again, and
again, isn't getting the same pariah treatment. Fact is, the press hasn't
brought the disgusting thing up at all, even as Clinton's wife (and daughter)
gallivant around the country on a thinly disguised campaign for Hillary as
president.
Joe Biden's gotten all kinds of questions based on his son
Hunter's gamy business dealings. But Hillary Clinton remains immune -- and
not a word has been said in the media about hubby Bill, who's still carrying on
his public life as usual. It's as if he's out of the picture, and all those
denials he's thus far made are simply factual ... albeit about as factual
as Prince Andrew's denials.
And there's more than a few indicators that Clinton wasn't
naive at all about Epstein. Though he wasn't accused by Epstein's credible
accuser Virginia Giuffre, Clinton's been accused repeatedly being a sexual
predator by others earlier. Someone like Clinton turning up with Epstein, is pretty
obviously a matter of public interest, particularly with his wife's presidential
ambitions. Just recently, one of Clinton's accusers, Juanita Broaddrick,
gave this interview to Australia's Sky News, bringing up the constant
issues with the much-vaunted Democratic ex-president, and still seeking
justice. She's not getting any so far:
My
interview with Sky News Australia this evening
MeToo
movement "never wanted anything to do with the victims of Bill Clinton” |
Sky News Australia https://www.skynews.com.au/details/_6108127574001 …
MeToo movement "never wanted anything to do with the
victims of Bill Clinton” | Sky News Australia
Which brings up again why Clinton isn't getting any attention, let
alone ostracization, on his well-known relationship with Epstein. Why not? The
Brit press is interested in British angles, the American press should be
similarly interested in American angles. But only Prince Andrew gets the full
press attention. Maybe that's because he's not a Democrat to protect?
It just shows the press's credibility problem in conveniently
attempting to protect another Democrat from any uncomfortable questions.
Is someone gonna ask the
Clintons about all those trips to Epstein's 'cowboy village'?
The press is piling on against the U.K.'s
Prince Andrew, who's been probably credibly accused of participating in
"suicide" pervert Jeffrey Epstein's sex-with-little-girls operations.
Yes, it's wretched and
appalling. It's bad for a royal family that for decades has
portrayed itself as the embodiment of middle-class values. This
is Shaka Zulu or Genghis Khan territory.
But it's also of limited interest, given
that Prince Andrew is not even important in the royal succession lineup, and
frankly, who cares what some rich overseas princeling is up
to? The media sure didn't, up until now.
There's likely a reason for it — to
deflect attention from the growing evidence that Bill, Hillary, and
even Chelsea Clinton have had a pretty spectacularly intense association
with the very same pervert.
The Daily Mail has been on the job and has
found another credible witness, a former contractor of Epstein's at his
New Mexico "cowboy village" ranch who says the Clintons jetted in
annually on Epstein's Lolita Express and had a grand old time on Epstein's
many-camera'ed grounds. Some opening points from the Mail:
- Bill and Hillary
Clinton would stay at Jeffrey Epstein's New Mexico ranch frequently after
they left the White House, former estate workers told DailyMailTV
- The former president
was Epstein's closest 'celebrity mate' and the Clintons visited Zorro
Ranch 'a whole bunch of times', a former contractor who ran the IT system
at the property said
- The family never
stayed in the main house but bunked down in a special cowboy-themed
village created by Epstein, which lies a mile south of his own villa,
sources said
- The guest homes are
next to other traditional Wild West-style buildings such as an old
schoolhouse and saloon bar, which are all near Epstein's private airstrip,
where he arrived on his private planes
And to read the details of the report is
enough to give the gross-outs to anyone. Why were the Clintons going
to a place Epstein called his "baby-making ranch"? What
was that about Epstein having an eight-person "party
shower"? Did the Clintons do the "party
shower"? Was it on film? How many times? And
who else was in the pen with them? What about that party
room with the stripper poles? Did the Clintons go there,
too? What was the Secret Service thinking, or did Bill bug out again
on his Secret Service? And why are taxpayers paying for this farce?
Why again did Epstein have that icky
portrait of Bill Clinton wearing a blue dress on his Manhattan mansion wall?
'My contact
was Brice, their main concern was that there was no video surveillance on the
property at all. I thought this was a simple request, as they wanted
surveillance to protect their investment. It's a huge site.
'But what was
weird was that the whole time I was on site, Brice would be bragging about how
the Clintons would visit, the whole family. Not just Bill, but Bill, his wife,
their kid, and they would stay on the ranch itself.
More ickiness about Epstein's obsession
with cameras:
Instead of
using an expensive, robust camera system, which used underground cables, he
wanted a 'point-to-point wireless fluid mesh design', which means cameras are
operating via antenna, and is considerably cheaper.
After Kellogg
did an estimate and sent in a plan, he never heard back.
He said:
'They had this huge facility, but it felt like they didn't have the money to do
anything. They were trying to find the most cost-effective way to transmit
video footage and we had to come up with a point-to-point wireless fluid mesh
design because normally we want to trench everything. It saves money as you
don't have to build a trench and put in a cable.
Sound like someone who's been
blackmailed? You decide.
Now, arguably, one could argue that the
press is saying nothing about this, given that the contractor was a different
kind of witness from Virginia Giuffre, the credible young woman who says
Epstein trafficked her with Prince Andrew when she was a teenager.
But the Mail slips in something that
hasn't appeared significantly in the press at all: that Giuffre also says she
saw Bill Clinton at Epstein's pervert haunts being honored by the pedophile
himself.
Why aren't the media covering
that? Now we have the Clintons pinned at two places — the
"cowboy ranch" and the Caribbean pervert island — and no one's saying
anything. It's all about Prince Andrew.
Yet Eptein was obsessed with cameras and
obviously blackmail. He roped in Prince Andrew. But the
real question is to what extent he got the Clintons. With all these
new revelations rolling out, why is the press silent?
Image
credit: Photo montage by Monica Showalter from public domain sources.
Convicted sex offender and Mueller witness
George Nader indicted for illegal contributions to boost Hillary Clinton
Convicted sex offender George Nader, who was a key witness in
special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation, has been indicted by
United States prosecutors for his alleged role in a scheme to conceal large
sums of illegal campaign contributions to help Hillary Clinton in the 2016
election.
Nader, a 60-year-old Lebanese American lobbyist, is accused of
conspiring with Ahmad “Andy” Khawaja, the Los Angeles-based 48-year-old chief
executive of Allied Wallet, to conceal the source of more than $3.5 million in
campaign contributions to political committees associated with a presidential
candidate to gain influence during and after the 2016 campaign.
Nader and Khawaja were charged on Nov. 7 as part of a 53-count
indictment dealt by a federal grand jury in the District of Columbia. The
indictment was unsealed on Tuesday.
Khawaja gave more than $4 million to Clinton's campaign and
other Democrats during the 2016 cycle but later donated $1 million to President
Trump's inaugural committee after Clinton lost, according to the Associated Press. As he shifted his focus to Republicans after the 2016
election, the Lebanese-born Khawaja met with Trump at a Manhattan fundraiser
and got a photo with the president in the Oval Office.
The Justice Department announced on Tuesday that Khawaja
allegedly conspired with Nader to make $3.5 million in straw donations to boost
a presidential candidate from March 2016 through January 2017.
No candidate is mentioned by name, but the indictment and
campaign finance records make it clear that the money was directed towards
helping Clinton during the 2016 campaign.
"By design, these contributions appeared to be in the names
of Khawaja, his wife, and his company. In reality, they allegedly were funded
by Nader," Assistant Attorney General Brian Benczkowski of the Justice
Department’s Criminal Division and FBI Washington Field Office chief Timothy
Slater announced in a statement.
"Khawaja and Nader allegedly made these contributions in an
effort to gain influence with high-level political figures, including the
candidate. As Khawaja and Nader arranged these payments, Nader allegedly
reported to an official from a foreign government about his efforts to gain
influence," they continued.
According to the indictment, after the election Khawaja used his company to steer $1
million to Trump's inaugural committee and attended Trump's inauguration with
Nader.
The other charges in the indictment allege Khawaja and six
associates — Roy Boulos, Rudy Dekermenjian, Mohammad “Moe” Diab, Rani El-Saadi,
Stevan Hill, and Thayne Whipple — conspired to conceal executive contributions,
totaling more than $1.8 million, to various political committees in 2016
through 2018. "Among other things, these contributions allegedly allowed
Khawaja to host a private fundraiser for a presidential candidate in 2016 and a
private fundraising dinner for an elected official in 2018," Benczkowski
and Slater said.
Khawaja is also charged with obstructing the grand jury investigation
in the summer by providing a witness called to testify in the case with false
information about Nader and his connection to Khawaja’s company, while four of
his associates are charged with obstruction by lying to the FBI.
Nader is already in federal custody on other charges. In July,
he was charged with
sex trafficking for allegedly transporting a 14-year-old boy from Europe and
then abusing him. Nader pleaded not guilty in federal court in Alexandria,
Virginia.
Part of a rap sheet dating to the 1980s, Nader pleaded guilty in
1991 to a federal child porn charge involving footage of 13- or 14-year-old
boys and received a six-month sentence, served at a Baltimore halfway house.
Nader acted as a connection between Trump’s circle and Russian,
United Arab Emirates, and Saudi Arabian officials in 2016 and 2017 as he
pursued business deals in the Middle East. This included helping to set up a
January 2017 meeting in the Seychelles between Trump associate and Blackwater
founder Erik Prince and a Russian official with close ties to Russian President
Vladimir Putin.
As reported by the Washington Examiner, records indicate Nader visited the White House at least 13
times to meet with Trump’s then-chief strategist Steve Bannon.
Nader was interviewed by Mueller's team on multiple occasions
regarding possible UAE efforts to influence members of Trump's campaign, and was mentioned in
Mueller's final report more than 100 times.
An attorney for Nader declined
to comment to the Washington
Post, and an attorney for Khawaja could not immediately be reached by the
outlet.
Federal Election Commission records detail the
millions of dollars Khawaja admitted donating to Democratic candidates, campaigns,
and political action committees.
Khawaja told the Federal Election Commission he donated $2,700
in October 2015 and $2,700 in July 2016 to Clinton’s 2016 presidential
campaign, Hillary for America. He said he donated $135,000 in March 2016,
$150,000 in April 2016, $68,400 in June 2016, and $60,000 in September 2016 to
the Clinton campaign’s joint fundraising committee, the Hillary Victory Fund.
The records also show a donation totaling $200,400 in July 2016 to the Hillary
Action Fund, a joint fundraising effort between Clinton’s campaign and the
Democratic National Committee.
Khawaja told the FEC about donations to the DNC totaling
$231,100, in addition to donations to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign
Committee totaling $33,400 in 2016 and $43,900 in 2017 and the Democratic
Congressional Campaign Committee totaling $233,400 in 2016, $230,000 in 2017,
and $237,300 in 2018.
Khawaja also reported donating massive sums to liberal PACs,
including $1,100,000 to Priorities USA Action, the primary super PAC supporting
Clinton's campaign, and $100,000 to Senate Majority PAC in 2016. He also
donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to Senate and congressional races
around the country with a special focus on his home state of California,
including $4,200 in 2016 and $3,900 in 2017 to Schiff for Congress, the
campaign committee for House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff.
In addition, Khawaja’s company, Allied Wallet, reported giving
$550,000 to the Philadelphia 2016 Host Committee, the Democratic National
Convention’s fundraising arm, in July 2016. The business also donated hundreds
of thousands of dollars to Democratic super PACs in 2017 and 2018.
FEC records show Nader reported giving $595 in donations to
Trump’s presidential campaign committee in 2016, as well as $100 dollars to Ben
Carson's campaign, but not to any Democrats that election cycle.
Nader was a business associate of Elliott Broidy, a top Republican fundraiser and deputy
finance chairman of the Republican National Committee who resigned from
that position in April 2018 after reports that Trump lawyer Michael Cohen
negotiated a $1.6 million settlement in 2017 between Broidy and a former
Playboy model who said Broidy impregnated her. Nader and Broidy worked to influence U.S.
foreign policy in the Middle East prior to Broidy's resignation and Nader's
arrest in June.
No comments:
Post a Comment