America Faces No Greater Threat Than Joe Biden and the Democrat Party. Their Assault to Our Borders Is As Great As Their Assault to Free Speech and Free Elections
Thursday, May 25, 2023
THE TWO MOST CORRUPT WOMEN IN POLITICS - BUT WAIT! WHAT ABOUT INSIDE TRADER NANCY PELOSI AND BRIBES SUCKER KAMALA HARRIS??? - Hillary Clinton Wants Dianne Feinstein to Reject Resignation Calls
DO A SEARCH FOR FEINSTEIN AND WAR PROFITEER AND RED CHINA. FEINSTEIN EMPLOYED A CHINESE SPY FOR 20 YEARS.
On the other hand, Schweizer and Eggers note that Hillary Clinton actually violated federal election rules in 2016, in a case directly related to the work of G-A-I. Schweizer’s 2015 book, Clinton Cash, exposed Hillary Clinton’s involvement with the takeover of an American uranium mining company by Russia. That revelation so terrified Clinton’s presidential campaign they decided to pay for the infamous Steele Dossier, with its lurid, unsubstantiated claims that Donald Trump was a Russian stooge. Hillary’s campaign essentially accused the Trump campaign of doing what they were, in fact, guilty of themselves.Peter Schweizer
His (BILLARY CLINTON) wife is equally and personally devious and corrupt; she had the fake “dossier” concocted she was certain would take Trump out of the running for president in 2016. Hillary used her position as Secretary of State to rake in millions of dollars to her phony Clinton Foundation, much of that money from other nations that sought to benefit from her largesse when President. PATRICIA McCARTHY
“Protect and enrich.” This is a perfect encapsulation of the Clinton Foundation (TWO GAMER LAWYERS) (WHAT ABOUT THE CHINA BIDEN PENN CENTER?) and the Obama (TWO GAMER LAWYERS) book and television deals. Then there is the Biden family (FOUR GAMER LAWYERS - JOE, HUNTER, JAMES, FRANK) corruption, followed closely behind by similar abuses of power and office by the Warren (GAMER LAWYER) and Sanders families, as Peter Schweizer described in his recent book “Profiles in Corruption.” These names just scratch the surface of government corruption (ADD GAMER LAWYER KAMALA HARRIS AND HER LAWYER HUSBAND AND THE BANKSTERS’ RENT BOY, LAWYER CHUCK SCHUMER). BRIAN C JOONDEPH
Is it a signal that she's back in the game because she's selling her president-ability to the world's global billionaire crowd and laying the groundwork for more funds? There are all kinds of ways for foreign billionaires to get money to the U.S. without consequences, after all. What's more, it's pretty much the biggest base of support she has, which is at least one reason why she lost the 2016 election.
“The couple parlayed lives supposedly spent in “public service” into admission into the upper stratosphere of American wealth, with incomes in the top 0.1 percent bracket. The source of this vast wealth was a political machine that might well be dubbed “Clinton, Inc.” This consists essentially of a seedy money-laundering operation to ensure big business support for the Clintons’ political ambitions as well as their personal fortunes.
The basic components of the operation are lavishly paid speeches to Wall Street and Fortune 500 audiences, corporate campaign contributions, and donations to the ostensibly philanthropic Clinton Foundation.”
"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 Clinton Wants Dianne Feinstein to Reject Resignation Calls
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) should not resign from office despite her health travails. So says twice-failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton who has cautioned her to stay on in the face of Republicans who would seek to block Democrats from filling a vacancy on the Judiciary Committee and stall President Joe Biden’s judicial nominees.
“Here’s the dilemma: The Republicans will not agree to add someone else to the Judiciary Committee if she retires,” Clinton laid out to Time magazine Monday during an interview with Charlotte Alter at the Chicago Humanities Festival.
“I want you to think about how crummy that is. So I don’t know what’s in her heart about whether she really would or wouldn’t, but right now, she can’t. Because if we’re going to get judges confirmed, which is one of the most important continuing obligations that we have, then we cannot afford to have her seat vacant.”
Feinstein’s ongoing battle with her health has been well documented, as Breitbart News reported.
She only returned to work in D.C. last week after a three-month absence during which she reportedly had “several complications,” many of which have not been publicly disclosed, after she returned home from being hospitalized for shingles.
Plenty of Democrats called for Feinstein to retire from her seat at the time of her absence, a move she rejected outright.
She did agree to have her seat on the Judiciary Committee filled temporarily, but Republicans blocked Senate Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) from replacing her on the panel in April with Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.).
Clinton, 75, acknowledged Feinstein has suffered several health setbacks that have kept her away from Washington but sees the alternative of her permanent absence as too much to bear.
She further outlined in the interview things would be different if Republicans were to “do the decent thing and say: ‘Well, this woman was gravely ill, she had just lost her husband to cancer … of course we will let you fill this position if she retires.’”
File/Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., laughs about her illness yesterday with the media and Sen. Diane Feinstein, D-Calif., after the Senate Luncheons, Tuesday, 01 February, 2005. (Tom Williams/Roll Call/Getty Images)
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) attends a business hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee on Capitol Hill May 11, 2023 in Washington, DC. This was Feinstein’s first hearing after fighting a case of shingles and being absent from the Senate for almost three months. (Drew Angerer/Getty Images)
“But they won’t say that,” she said. “So what are we supposed to do? All these people pushing her to retire: Fine, we get no more judges? I don’t think that’s a good trade-off.”
Clinton’s backing for Feinstein to stay on appears at odds with her thoughts when she addressed the 80-year-old Biden’s fitness for office at the Financial Times Weekend Festival in Washington, saying “his age is an issue, and people have every right to consider” it, according to Fox News.
The former secretary of state and senator from New York delivered her view after Times editor Edward Luce pointed to Biden’s trouble negotiating a simple flight of stairs during last week’s G-7 summit in Hiroshima, Japan, as evidence of his decline.
“There was that heart-stopping moment when he almost fell over coming down the stairs a day or two ago,” Luce said.
“Every time that happens, your heart is in your mouth because these things could be consequential. Is that a concern?”
“It’s a concern for anyone. We’ve had presidents who had fallen before who were a lot younger, and people didn’t go into heart palpitations,” Clinton replied.
The former first lady also said she believes Biden is determined to run for another term, claiming he has a “good record” in office.
“But, you know, he has this great saying — and I think he’s right — don’t judge him for running against the Almighty but against the alternative. I am of the camp that I think he’s determined to run.”
Durham Report Reveals FBI Shut Down Four Criminal Investigations into the Clintons
Special Counsel John Durham’s highly-anticipated report on the origins of the FBI’s investigation into the Trump campaign in 2016 revealed that top leaders at the Bureau shut down four criminal investigations into Hillary and Bill Clinton.
In 2014, the FBI investigated a “well-placed” confidential source’s claims that an unnamed foreign government intended to “contribute to Hillary Clinton’s anticipated presidential campaign, as a way to gain influence with Clinton should she win the presidency,” the report said.
The field office investigating these claims “almost immediately” sought a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant, but it remained “in limbo” for approximately four months, primarily due to Clinton’s then-expected presidential campaign.
According to another agent, the application lingered because “everyone was ‘super more careful’” and “scared with the big name [Clinton]” involved. 321 “[T]hey were pretty “tippy-toeing’ around HRC because there was a chance she would be the next President.”
Durham’s report also revealed that three separate FBI field offices in Washington, DC; Little Rock, Arkansas; and New York City, New York, opened investigations into “possibly criminal activity involving the Clinton Foundation” less than one year before the November 2016 presidential election.
One of these investigations was spawned by Breitbart News contributor Peter Schweizer’s book, Clinton Cash, which exposed the Clinton Foundation’s global nexus of influence peddling.
Beginning in January 2016, three different FBI field offices, the New York Field Office (“NYFO*), the Washington Field Office (“WFO*), and the Little Rock Field Office (“LRFO**), opened investigations into possible criminal activity involving the Clinton Foundation. The IRFO case opening communication referred to an intelligence product and corroborating financial reporting that a particular commercial “industry likely engaged a federal public official in a flow of benefits scheme, namely, large monetary contributions were made to a non-profit, under both direct and indirect control of the federal public official, in exchange for favorable government action and/or influence.” The WFO investigation was opened as a preliminary investigation, because the Case Agent wanted to determine if he could develop additional information to corroborate the allegations in a recently-published book, Clinton Cash by Peter Schweizer, before seeking to convert the matter to a full investigation. Additionally, the LRFO and NYFO investigations included predication based on source reporting that identified foreign governments that had made, or offered to make, contributions to the Foundation in exchange for favorable or preferential treatment from Clinton.
Speaking with the DailyMail, Schweizer said he received “a call from somebody from the New York FBI office after the book came out.”
“There was a New York Times piece on Uranium One. It was kind of confirming what we had in the book. That’s what I think triggered the interest,” Schweizer said. “With the Clinton Foundation, you have the transfer of large sums of money, you had policy positions that were affected, and you had certifiable evidence.”
“I’m not a lawyer, so I can’t say what was illegal. But there was definitely a there there, with all the speeches, donations, and policy effects, and nobody’s ever really disputed that,” he added.
Ultimately, FBI leadership held a joint meeting with the three field offices, FBI Headquarters, and appropriate United States Attorney’s offices. The first joint meeting occurred on February 1, 2016. However, the Department of Justice Public Integrity Section Chief, Ray Hulser, said the FBI briefing at that meeting was “poorly presented,” and saw “insufficient predication for at least one of the investigations.”
A second joint meeting occurred on February 22, 2016, which former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe chaired.
McCabe “initially directed the field offices to close their cases,” but later agreed to “reconsider the final disposition of the cases,” Durham’s report noted.
Paul Abbate, who was the FBI Washington Field Office’s Assistant Director-in-Charge at the time, described McCabe’s demeanor during the joint meeting as “negative,” “annoyed,” and “angry.”
According to Abbate, McCabe stated “they [the Department] say there’s nothing here” and “why are we even doing this?” At the close of the meeting, Campbell directed that for any overt investigative steps to be taken, the Deputy Director’s approval would be required.
Durham’s report also revealed that former FBI Director James Comey demanded, through an intermediary, the New York Field Office “cease and desist” their Clinton Foundation investigation.
Earlier in the week, McCabe claimed the Durham report was “never a legitimate investigation.”
“We knew from the very beginning exactly what John Durham was going to conclude, and that’s what we saw today. We knew from the very beginning this was never a legitimate investigation,” McCabe said. “This was a political errand to exact some sort of retribution on Donald Trump’s perceived enemies and the FBI.”
Durham’s report highlighted the FBI’s different approaches regarding their investigations into Clinton and former President Donald Trump.
“The use of defensive briefings in 2015 contrasts with the FBI’s failure to provide a defensive briefing to the Trump campaign approximately one year later when Australia shared the information from Papadopoulos,” the report stated.
Florida Republican Rep. Matt Gaetz, who sits on the House Judiciary Committee’s Weaponization of the Federal Government subcommittee, told the DailyMail that Durham’s report warrants “additional exposure and review.”
“The Clintons had a team of people at the FBI running interference for them to avoid criminal culpability,” Gaetz told the outlet. “These matters absolutely warrant additional exposure and review.”
Former Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) said the FBI’s investigations into the Clintons “were shut down by the higher-ups who had an obvious political desire to see Donald Trump lose and Hillary Clinton win.”
“It’s disgusting really. Absolutely these investigations should be revisited,” he told DailyMail. “There’s no reason why Congress can’t have a series of hearings with the field agents who were pursuing the Clinton Foundation, and public interviews with them as well.”
Oh, not about the election of Donald Trump, of course, if his public statements were any indication.
He was supposedly angry, so angry, at Russia and its supposed interference in our 2016 election that he got out his pen and phone and expelled 35 Russian diplomats.
WASHINGTON — President Obama struck back at Russia on Thursday for its efforts to influence the 2016 election, ejecting 35 suspected Russian intelligence operatives from the United States and imposing sanctions on Russia’s two leading intelligence services.
The administration also penalized four top officers of one of those services, the powerful military intelligence unit known as the G.R.U.
Intelligence agencies have concluded that the G.R.U. ordered the attacks on the Democratic National Committee and other political organizations, with the approval of the Kremlin, and ultimately enabled the publication of the emails it harvested to benefit Donald J. Trump’s campaign.
The Hill reported that it was quite an array of sanctions at the time:
The measures include a slate of economic sanctions, diplomatic censure, and public “naming and shaming.” The president also hinted at possible covert cyber measures but did not provide details.
The president also announced that the State Department will expel 35 Russian intelligence operatives and shutter two Russian compounds, in Maryland and New York, used by Russia for intelligence purposes.
Taken together, the sweeping actions announced by the White House, the Treasury, the State Department and intelligence agencies on Thursday amount to the strongest American response yet to a state-sponsored cyberattack. They also appeared intended to box in President-elect Trump, who will now have to decide whether to lift the sanctions on Russian intelligence agencies when he takes office next month.
Obama even amended his own executive order to extend his powers to sanction, with travel bans and asset freezes on some Russian officials.
Just one problem: The Russians didn't do what the embittered Democrats claimed they were doing -- to Get Trump.
Nothing. They didn't hack the DNC and they didn't collude with Donald Trump to get him elected to the presidency. The charges, the expropriations, the sanctions -- were all for innocent people. Even the Russian state was innocent.
That was what Sundance at The Conservative Treehouse found buried at the bottom of the Durham report.
♦ First, John Durham clearly shows in his 306-page report with a 48-page classified appendix, that Russia did nothing to interfere in the 2016 election. The entire Russian Interference operation was a Clinton fabrication, later enhanced by a Federal Bureau of Investigation who used the fabrication as a cover-up justification to hide their surveillance of the Trump campaign.
♦ Second, accepting the empirical, factual, and inherently true reality of the first point – consider that President Barack Obama expelled 35 Russian diplomats to retain the Clinton fabrication and FBI lies. Think about this one carefully, the Obama administration expelled Russian diplomats in order to retain a domestic political ruse! President Obama did this *after* CIA Director John Brennan briefed him about the Clinton fabrication.
There were no Russian diplomats involved; there was no Russian election interference; there was no Russian hacking of the DNC; it was all a fraud created by the intelligence community (IC), FBI and Main Justice to support Hillary Clinton’s lies and then cover their own targeting tracks.
♦ Third, Robert Mueller, Andrew Weissmann, with the full support of Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, indicted 14 Russian entities under completely bogus pretenses. All of that effort was done to assist the Clinton narrative, cover for Obama and then use the special counsel to cover up the Trump targeting operation. The totally bogus construct explains why the fabricated indictments were sealed in the DOJ National Security Division in perpetuity, thereby keeping the fraudulent construct hidden from public review forever.
So Obama's wrath was nothing but a fiction to protect the partisan Democrat narrative that they had been promoting about Trump and the Russians, which originated from the embittered political camp of losing Democrat candidate Hillary Clinton.
How would you feel about that if you were a Russian, especially now, reading that it was all a political hoax with you the one chosen to be the whipping boy? You got sanctioned, you got kicked out, you got travel bans, you incurred costs, and some "name and shame" all based on lies.
Might you start thinking of the U.S. as kind of a sleazy, dishonest player on the world scene? Would you have problems trusting them? Might you step up your activities against it? It would seem natural.
The Russians, remember, had already calculated by their own devices that Hillary Clinton would win the 2016 election and the Kremlin was planning for that, so they were as surprised as anyone that the American voters thought otherwise when the election results came in in November 2016.
That they were blamed for the result and sanctioned for hacking and colluding they didn't do, and knew they didn't do, and knew that Obama knew they didn't do, surely must have made them angry.
Russian President Vladimir Putin initially adopted a wait-and-see attitude to see if Trump would set things back to rights, but by March of 2017, three months into his term, Trump had appointed Democrat ally Fiona Hill to be his Russia advisor, and although she was smart enough to generally pooh-pooh the Russia collusion claims in her statements, apparently nothing was done to restore the Russia relations after Obama's partisan fit of pique at Russia's expense.
Net result: By May, Putin expelled 755 American diplomats and staff and expropriated two American properties in retaliation. That was to get the numbers of embassy personnel even, as the U.S had a much bigger official diplomatic presence in Russia than the Russians had in the U.S. That certainly didn't serve U.S. interests to say the least, given that the U.S. must have had a much bigger spy operation going on against Russia than Russia did against the U.S., or, at the least official one which seems most likely.
In other words, how did it serve U.S. interests to falsely accuse and sanction Russia for something it didn't do?
Stuff like that makes countries mad, and fosters considerable distrust. Was that in the U.S. interest? Did that raise our standing and reputation in the world or did it contribute to emerging problems? The Russians were remarkably patient for a while as the accusations were leveled but the lies kept coming and then things got ugly.
It's horrible stuff when we consider the bigger picture, and the picture we see today. Right now, the U.S. and Russia are in a proxy war against one another over Ukraine, with several hideous sideshows involving cowardly and let-the-Americans-do-it allies, as well as huge amounts of money spent at a time of high inflation with little accountability. Our military readiness has been affected just on the supply front. There are odd fires at U.S. food factories over here even as we read reports of strikes at strategic assets inside Russia. The Nordstream II gas pipeline somehow got blown up and somehow nobody knows who did it.
And as this unwelcome, unpopular, and costly entanglement with Russia goes on, China is on the rise, with increasingly aggressive actions amid reports out there that they could beat us in a shooting war. Another inconvenient development: Russia has allied with China.
The worst of this is that it need never have happened. Foreign policy should always be off limits to partisan disputes, but apparently not by Obama. Relations with Russia could have been good and ties friendly. Russia could have advanced economically and moved closer to the West had these sleazy Obama fictions never happened.
Russia has always been torn between leaning east or leaning west, and for most of the 21st century has leaned westward. Keeping Russia friendly to the U.S. would have been a boon for keeping China in check and Russia peaceable. Instead, the Russians were a convenient target for abuse by Democrats and were thrown to the wolves, all to promote the lie that Democrats were "victims" of Russian machinations instead of simply rejected by U.S. voters for their utterly repellent agenda.
That's been an expensive lie for us in the aftermath because any smart superpower should go out of its way to keep as many friends as it can, especially among the those with nuclear weapons. Making Russia an enemy for nothing more than partisan political purposes is not the act of someone who represents America. It's the act of a community organizer, a partisan political hack, a creep who shouldn't be anywhere near the levers of power, owing to an inability to distinguish the national interest from the partisan interest.
That's the old Obama we know however, and now he's disgraced us on the world stage as a dishonest sleazeball country, not a nation founded on fairness and democracy. His act and the acts of the Deep State were not only detrimental to democracy here, they were very detrimental to foreign policy abroad. False charges open the door to harsher spying, retaliation, and belligerent actions. It was yellow journalism and other schemings on the American side that got us into the Spanish-American war of 1898 when Spain was baselessly blamed for blowing up an American ship in the Caribbean. Any questions as to why Brittney Griner got such a harsh sentence for such a piddly crime in Russia? Or why a young Wall Street Journal reporter sits in some Russian prison on phony espionage charges? What on earth do the Russians think? And how can anyone fail to understand them at least for whatever they are doing with this blotch on our nation's record? Who started this garbage? How do the decent among us make it right?
HE ENABLED, ABETTED AND CONDONED HILLARY CLINTON'S SELL OUT TO PUTIN AND THE MUSLIM DICTATORS TO FUND HER PHONY CLINTON FOUNDATION FAMILY SLUSH FUND,
CLINTON WAS ENABLED BY NOT HAVING TO REPORT THE BRIBES AS SEC. OF STATE.
“Protect and enrich.” This is a perfect encapsulation of the Clinton Foundation (TWO GAMER LAWYERS) (WHAT ABOUT THE CHINA BIDEN PENN CENTER?) and the Obama (TWO GAMER LAWYERS) book and television deals. Then there is the Biden family (FOUR GAMER LAWYERS - JOE, HUNTER, JAMES, FRANK) corruption, followed closely behind by similar abuses of power and office by the Warren (GAMER LAWYER) and Sanders families, as Peter Schweizer described in his recent book “Profiles in Corruption.” These names just scratch the surface of government corruption (ADD GAMER LAWYER KAMALA HARRIS AND HER LAWYER HUSBAND AND THE BANKSTERS’ RENT BOY, LAWYER CHUCK SCHUMER). BRIAN C JOONDEPH
James Comer Believes Barack Obama Knew of Biden Family’s Foreign Deals
House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer (R-KY) suggested Friday that former President Barack Obama knew of the Biden family’s foreign deals with adversaries of the United States.
Speaking with Lou Dobbs on the Great America Show, Comer said Obama must have known about the Biden family business.
“I believe, Lou, that it’s because he knew what Joe Biden was doing the last year of his vice presidency,” Comer said in reference to payments worth millions the family’s business collected.
Comer revealed Wednesday that over the course of several years the family business received over $10 million from schemes in Romania and China in return for what appears to be influence peddling.
“He knew his son [Hunter Biden] was no good, and he knew this was nothing but a political liability not just for our country, not just for the democrat party, but for Obama’s legacy,” Comer added. “Because a lot of this happened during the Obama administration.”
U.S. President Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden attend the annual Easter Egg Roll on the South Lawn of the White House on April 10, 2023 in Washington, DC. (Drew Angerer/Getty Images)
Comer also believes Obama’s knowledge of the family’s business informed his opposition to Joe Biden’s 2020 candidacy.
“So, I think that’s why Obama didn’t want Joe Biden to run for president. I think they knew about this,” Comer said about the business. “And remember, a lot of these coverups would have happened during the Obama administration with Obama appointees in these deep state bureaucracies.”
Comer said an establishment media journalist should ask Obama if Comer’s hunch is true: “This would be a great question for Obama: Were you aware of what was going on with Joe Biden with respect to foreign policy and some of these ragtag countries around the world?”
Friday on FNC’s “Hannity,” Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) blasted the FBI and the Department of Justice for how it has handled the investigation into possible wrongdoing of the Biden family while attempting to indict former President Donald Trump for misdemeanors.
The South Carolina lawmaker said her track record showed she wasn’t in the tank for Trump and asserted the amount of evidence against first son Hunter Biden was “ridiculous.”
“I will tell you, this is, as you say, Sean — everything you said was a hundred percent true, and this is just the tip of the iceberg,” she said. “And here we have a DOJ and FBI, who are who are indicting Trump on misdemeanors and then will not investigate Biden for betraying his country. And I have to tell you, absolutely, no one can accuse me of being hyper-partisan or being in the tank for Donald Trump. But good lord, the amount of evidence, in this case, is ridiculous. They weren’t hiring Hunter Biden for his brains. They weren’t hiring certainly Hunter Biden for his brawn. They were hiring him to pay for access to the White House, and we see this pattern repeat itself over and over and over again.”
“The reports that we saw at the Treasury would appear to be racketeering,” Mace added. “That comes to mind money laundering, wire fraud. Why were they able to enrich themselves with tens of millions of dollars, including as you say, a grandchild, nieces and nephews, current wives, ex-wives, a brother, a son, you name it, and the list goes on? That family tree is very, very big, and they made a lot of money off of Joe Biden.”
No comments:
Post a Comment