Thursday, October 19, 2017

BANKSTER RENT BOY ERIC HOLDER SAYS HILLARY'S INNOCENT EVEN IF SHE'S NOT INNOCENT


Surprise: Eric Holder Defends Comey's Premature Exoneration of Hillary

Guy Benson
|
Posted: Oct 19, 2017 10:25 AM
Surprise: Eric Holder Defends Comey's Premature Exoneration of Hillary
In fairness, if there's anyone in the country who understands how to run an airtight law enforcement operation, it's this guy.  Plus, he's a straight-shooter who unfailingly tells the truth and always respects the free press, so his credibility is beyond reproach.  Starting to draft memos clearing Hillary Clinton of legal wrongdoing before she and other key players in here email scandal were even interviewed by investigators was a-okay, Eric Holder explains.  But of course:
Anyone who isn't a partisan Democrat -- Holder is as partisan as they come, and may be auditioning for his party's base these days -- would likely take issue with the head of the FBI starting the process of 'exonerating' a presidential candidate of alleged crimes prior to the substance of the probe being completed. Any appearance of impropriety or political favoritism should have been zealously guarded against.  Instead, we had a preliminary exoneration being crafted long before crucial facts were mined and witnesses grilled, and we had a secretive meeting between the Justice Department chief(Holder's successor) and the subject's husband, details of which are still dripping into the public eye.  
Even if you're inclined to agree with Holder's Comey apologia (somewhat ironically, he's blasted Comey's handling of the entire matter in the past), major holes remain in the fired FBI director's judgment.  As I've written for months, Comey was wrong on the law (the relevant statute within the Espionage Act did not require proof of criminal intent) and wrong about his excuse for ignoring the letter of the law (Clinton's conduct and subsequent string of lies were robust indications of intent).  Add in this latest evidence suggesting that Comey made up his mind before decisive facts were gathered, and the whole thing starts to stink.  A cynic might even be forgiven for wondering if the system was, to borrow a phrase, "rigged."  Trey Gowdy is right:
“Whenever somebody decides to charge someone, there are lots of layers of scrutiny. When you decide not to charge someone, there aren’t that many layers of scrutiny but there ought to be at least a couple,” Gowdy said. “The media should do it but also Congress should look at this decision not to charge and whether or not it was made before you interviewed two dozen witnesses, including the target of the investigation, yeah we need to talk to him again.” ... “His ostensible reason for taking that decision away from the Department of Justice was that meeting on the tarmac but yet a month and a half earlier he is memorializing a decision he’s already made so the chronology does not add up,” Gowdy said. “His answers have been all over the map.”
More testimony, please.  The polarization over Comey is extraordinary. Ask Republicans, and he let Hillary off the hook (I agree; see above). Ask Hillary, and he 'shivved' her by making a necessary disclosure to Congress that the FBI was pursuing newly-discovered information pertinent to the case. Parting thought: Aside from Congressional hearings, what -- if anything -- will be done about this Russia-tied investigation? Does bribery count as collusion?
"Lenin famously said the last capitalist will sell the rope with which
he ends up hanged.  Nobody is greedier than Hillary Clinton." -----
Lowell Ponte

Obama Admin’s Russia-Uranium Deal Gets ‘Full-Scale’ Corruption Probe from Senate Judiciary Committee





The Senate Judiciary Committee has begun a corruption probe investigating the Obama administration’s approval of the Uranium One deal first brought to light in Clinton Cash, the explosive book by Government Accountability Institute (GAI) President and Breitbart News Senior Editor-at-Large Peter Schweizer.

From The Hill:
The Senate Judiciary Committee has launched a full-scale probe into a Russian nuclear bribery case, demanding several federal agencies disclose whether they knew the FBI had uncovered the corruption before the Obama administration in 2010 approved a controversial uranium deal with Moscow.
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), the committee chairman, gets his first chance to raise the issue in public on Wednesday when he questions Attorney General Jeff Sessions during an oversight hearing.
Though the hearing was scheduled for other purposes, aides said they expected Grassley to ask Sessions questions about a story published in The Hill on Tuesday that disclosed the FBI had uncovered evidence showing Russian nuclear officials were engaged in a racketeering scheme involving bribes, kickbacks and money laundering designed to expand Russian President Vladimir Putin’s atomic energy business on U.S. soil.
The evidence was first gathered in 2009 and 2010 but Department of Justice officials waited until 2014 to bring any charges. In between that time, President Obama’s multi-agency Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) gave approval to Russia’s Rosatom to buy a Canadian mining company called Uranium One that controlled 20 percent of America’s uranium deposits.
The committee’s members at the time included former Attorney General Eric Holder and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, whose husband collected large speech fees and millions in charitable donations from Russia and other entities interested in the outcome of the decision.
Read the rest of the story here.

Schweizer on Decline in Clinton Fdn Fundraising: With Nothing to Sell, People Are Not Going to Give Money








Monday on Fox News Channel’s “Tucker Carlson Tonight,” Breitbart News senior editor-at-large Peter Schweizer, author of “Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich,” discussed the Clinton Foundation’s refusal to return money embattled Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein had donated.
He also commented on lower fundraising numbers for the Clinton non-profits, which he attributed to former President Bill Clinton and 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton being out of power and having nothing to offer.
“[T]hey have two arms of this — the Clinton Foundation and then, of course, the Clinton Global Initiative, CGI,” he explained. “CGI shut down after the 2016 election. It no longer exists. And that was really the central marketplace for influence peddling. Clinton Foundation has tried to position itself in a different way. They tried to amass an endowment over the last couple of years, so they probably got $150 million parked away. So, they can certainly give this money to someone else. They have it.”
“But the long-term and medium-term prospects are not good. They don’t have access to sell, as that same Chelsea Clinton review pointed out, that internal review. A lot of the high-dollar donors were expecting quid pro quos. And if you don’t have anything to sell, people are not going to give money to your organization. And that is precisely the problem the Clintons are running into.”
Follow Jeff Poor on Twitter @jeff_poor


"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 & Harvey: Birds of a feather...



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.  

These people, the D.C. and Hollywood elite, live by different rules, rules under which faith, hope, and love have no place, no place at all.  They are about two things and two things only: power and money.  
And the two species feed off each other.  The entertainment industry wants and craves the deference of Democrat elites.  The D.C. Democrat establishment relies on the financial magnanimity of the film and television crowd, from the studio heads to the actors.  That is a lot of people with a lot of money, all of whom have an inflated view of their own importance on the world stage.  None of these folks ever gives a thought to the hopes, dreams, or concerns of citizens who live between the coasts or exist outside their own privileged bubbles.  They are a bother.  If they voted for Trump, they are worthy only of contempt.
Harvey Weinstein allegedly has been a sexual predator for decades – at least thirty women have come forward now – while joined at the hip with the Clintons and the Obamas.  These are the poster children for how this particular symbiosis functions.  Not one of them ever gave a thought to the morality of how they operate.  Weinstein's contract allowed for his molestations as long as he paid settlements with his own money.  Who agrees to that?  
These leftists "own" all of the mainstream media outlets.  They can get any unflattering story squashed with a bribe.  They avoid criminal charges the same way.  The laws do not apply to them the way they do to the rest of us.  
Consider the many, many crimes of the Clintons over their years on the public stage, from Whitewater to Travelgate, to name only a few, to Bill's sexual predations to the well documented financial corruption of the Clinton Foundation that was so fantastically enriched by Hillary's pay-to-play term as secretary of state.  These people belong in prison for their crimes, as does Weinstein.  He should have been prosecuted and convicted twenty years ago for his countless crimes against women.  But his pals in high places and big checks kept him out of jail, just as the Clintons have escaped punishment for their thirty-year record of greed and malfeasance.
The real tragedy is that the left still reveres Bill and Hillary.  They revered Weinstein until a week ago, when what they have all known for years became public.  Now they are stepping over each other to condemn him – all these same film people who have championed Roman Polanski for years!  Give us a break.  
Harvey and Hillary are essentially clones of one another; neither has a conscience, a code of ethics, or any sense of morality.  And yet they feel free to lecture the rest of us constantly.  Hillary's book tour is an embarrassment of monumental proportions as she day after day blames others for her electoral loss.  The progressive left's late-night comics, their news outlets (ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, NYT, WaPo), their films, their television series actively promote their lack of values, their contempt for anything traditionally American.  The rare exceptions to their poisonous output will be panned and mocked by the critics who work for their publications.  The worst of their product is celebrated as "art."
There is a line at the end of the film Scent of a Woman, a rare contribution to the good, indeed: "Makers of men, creators of leaders, be careful what kind of leaders you're producing here."  For the last fifty years or so, from Eisenhower onward, real leaders elected were few; really, only Eisenhower and Reagan.  The rest have been flawed; LBJ was a Harvey Weinstein, Carter was incompetent, the Bushes were weak, the Clintons and Obama were corrupt.  And make no mistake: Obama was as corrupt as they come.  All of this has given us Harvey Weinstein and Hillary Clinton, two peas in a pod. 
The other Americans, the normals, as Kurt Schlichter rightly calls us, the ones who elected Donald Trump, have awakened to damage done to their country and want a do-over, a reboot.  The establishment of both parties is doing its best to foil his agenda, but he is hanging in there and making progress.  Let us hope the mystery of the NYT's decision to expose Weinstein once and for all means the end of the Clintons and their coattails.  Maybe even the NYT has had enough of this bunch, these shameless, corrupt birds of a feather. 

VIDEO:

THE DEMOCRAT PARTY’S LEADING LAP 

DANCERS:

Hillary, Billary, Cosby, Buttman Afleck, Oliver Stone, Harvey Weinstein and their boy Obomb….. new definitions of
degradation and sleaze.                          


RICH LIBERALS AND THEIR CELEBRATES P IMPS AND PERVS
…. The parasitism of  Hillary,  Billary, Obomb, Heffner, Cosby, Buttman Afleck, Oliver Stone, Weinstein and the rest.


THE DIRTY DEALS of DIRTY HILLARY….. looting anything that moves!

HILLARY CLINTON! 
THE LIFE OF HILLARY CLINTON: AMORAL PSYCHOPATH and GLOBAL  LOOTER OF THE POOR….. But she served Obama’s crony bank$ter$ well!








**LIVE UPDATES** Weinstein Co. Saved By Investor? NYPD Opens Case Against Harvey. HBO’s Oliver Goes Where Kimmel Won’t. Rose Nukes Bloom.

All the latest news in the mushrooming Harvey Weinstein sexual misconduct scandal. Refresh for updates.

UPDATES BELOW: All times Eastern… 
Original livewire from all of last week can be accessed here.
Update – 2:30 p.m.: The LAPD is urging women who say they were victims of Harvey Weinstein to come forward.
From the LA Times: 
The Los Angeles Police Department said women who feel they were victims of a crime at the hands of movie mogul Harvey Weinstein should report what happened to authorities.
“We absolutely encourage anyone who may be a victim of sexual assault to come forward and report the crime,” Josh Rubenstein, the LAPD director of communications, said Monday.
Los Angeles Police Capt. Billy Hayes, who oversees the Robbery Homicide Division that handles sex crimes, said the LAPD currently does not have any active investigations into Weinstein.
More here.
Update – 12:38 p.m.: Clinton Foundation refuses to return Weinstein donations.
Update – 10:16 a.m.: Weinstein Co. saved by new investor? What seemed impossible just a few minutes ago (see 9:42 a.m. update below) appears to at least be trying to happen. Colony Capital is going to pump cash in The Weinstein Company in order to save it:
Thomas J. Barrack, Jr., founder and executive chairman of Colony Capital, said in a statement, “We are pleased to invest in The Weinstein Company and to help it move forward. We believe the Company has substantial value and growth potential, and we look forward to working with the Company’s critical strategic distribution and production partners to help preserve and create value for all stakeholders, including its employees. We will help return the Company to its rightful iconic position in the independent film and television industry.”
Colony has been intricately involved with Harvey and Bob Weinstein’s show business odyssey, especially its most recent chapters.
One wonders, though, how Colony will overcome a toxified brand no one wants to be seen doing business with.
However, the piece attracted some criticism, with readers accusing Bialik of implying that women may be to blame for being harassed because of the way they dress.
“I have to say I was dressed non provocatively as a 12 year old when men on the street masturbated at me,” actress Patricia Arquette responded to Bialik. “It’s not clothing.”
Taking to Twitter on Sunday, she explained that her words had been taken out of context by some readers.
“I’m being told that my N.Y. Times piece resonated with so many and I am beyond grateful for all the feedback,” she wrote. “I also see a bunch of people have taken my words out of context of the Hollywood machine and twisted them to imply that God forbid I would blame a woman for her assault based on her clothing or behavior.”
Update – 10:07 a.m.: Piers Morgan BLASTS Kate Winslet’s hypocrisy for hitting the Weinstein Woody, Polanski trifecta:
Yet how does the same Kate Winslet square all this with the fact that has no problem at all working for both Woody Allen and Roman Polanski?
Last month, Ms Winslet gave an interview to the New York Times in which she explained why she recently agreed to make Allen’s film “Wonder Wheel”.
‘Here’s the catalyst,’ she said, ‘(I) probably wasn’t going to get another go-around with Woody Allen, so it’s now or never. Plus I knew my parents would be incredibly proud of me working with Woody Allen.’
The Times then asked: ‘Did the allegations against Woody Allen give you pause?’
‘Of course one thinks about it,’ she replied. ‘But as an actor in the film, you just have to step away and say, I don’t know anything really… having thought it all through, you put it to one side and just work with the person. Woody Allen is an incredible director.’
Then, unprompted, she added: ‘So is Roman Polanski. I had an extraordinary working experience with both of those men and that’s the truth.’
More here.
Update – 9:42 a.m.: BREAKING –> Report: Weinstein Company’s assets go up for sale
The Weinstein Company is in negotiating period with Colony Capital for a potential sale of all or a significant portion of the Company’s assets, Bloomberg News reports.
This is almost certain to be a fire sale, a total break up of the company. TWC cannot survive in its present form. It is now a toxic brand no one will ever again have anything to do with. The Board has to go, and the assets (film library, copyrights, properties owned — franchises, characters, literary acquisitions, etc.) sold off and repackaged under a different owner and whole new name.
Update – 9:21 a.m.: Rose McGowan accuses “feminist” attorney Lisa Bloom of trying to buy her silence.
Because Bloom’s reputation and career are not already in tatters, McGowan now alleges this:
“I feel like people should know that you’ve been calling my literary agent and saying there’d be money for me if I got on the ‘Harvey’s Changed’ bandwagon,” McGowan writes. “You told her that I should care about HIS reputation. How HE has a family now and HE has changed. Well, guess what? I’ve always had a family and that didn’t stop him from assaulting me.”
McGowan goes on to lay out what she claims are the details of six months of pressure from Bloom and Weinstein’s other attorney, Charles Harder, to accept the hush money. “You and your vile partner in evil … have been hounding me for months now,” McGowan claims. “Terrorizing me at every turn. Trying to silence me.”
Bloom has denied the allegations.
Update – 9:18 a.m.: HBO’s John Oliver does what the other Late Night guys refuse — scorches Weinstein AND Hollywood:
Yes, finally! The group that counts among its current members Roman Polanski, Bill Cosby, and Mel Gibson has found the one guy who treated women badly and kicked him out. So, congratulations, Hollywood! See you at the next Oscars where — and this is true — Casey Affleck will be presenting Best Actress.” Oliver said in response to the Academy booting Harvey.

Update 8:00 a.m.: Hollywood director J.J. Abrams unloaded on what he called the “viciously repulsive” Harvey Weinstein at the Hammer Museum’s Gala Sunday, calling the disgraced movie producer a “monster.”
“Someone said to me the other day that they are sick of hearing people talk about how disgusting it is,” the Star Wars: The Forces Awakens director said of the mushrooming Weinstein sexual misconduct scandal. “I don’t think enough can be said about how viciously repulsive his abuse of power was. He’s a monster. There are other monsters but there are those who fight monsters and tonight is all about those who fight monsters.”


VIDEO:
THE DEMOCRAT PARTY’S LEADING LAP DANCERS:

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

RICH LIBERALS AND THEIR 

CELEBRATES PIMPS 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

"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

THE LIFE OF HILLARY CLINTON: AMORAL PSYCHOPATH and GLOBAL

LOOTER OF THE POOR….. But she served Obama’s crony bank$ter$ well!


THE DIRTY DEALS of DIRTY HILLARY….. looting anything that moves!







Report: FBI Uncovers Confirmation of Hillary Clinton’s Corrupt Uranium Deal with Russia




New evidence has emerged to confirm Peter Schweizer’s account in his bestselling book Clinton Cash about the corrupt tactics behind former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s approval of Russia’s purchase of 20 percent of U.S. uranium.

John Solomon and Alison Spann report in The Hill:
Before the Obama administration approved a controversial deal in 2010 giving Moscow control of a large swath of American uranium, the FBI had gathered substantial evidence that Russian nuclear industry officials were engaged in bribery, kickbacks, extortion and money laundering designed to grow Vladimir Putin’s atomic energy business inside the United States, according to government documents and interviews.
Federal agents used a confidential U.S. witness working inside the Russian nuclear industry to gather extensive financial records, make secret recordings and intercept emails as early as 2009 that showed Moscow had compromised an American uranium trucking firm with bribes and kickbacks in violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, FBI and court documents show.
They also obtained an eyewitness account — backed by documents — indicating Russian nuclear officials had routed millions of dollars to the U.S. designed to benefit former President Bill Clinton’s charitable foundation during the time Secretary of State Hillary Clinton served on a government body that provided a favorable decision to Moscow, sources told The Hill.
The racketeering scheme was conducted “with the consent of higher level officials” in Russia who “shared the proceeds” from the kickbacks, one agent declared in an affidavit years later.
Rather than bring immediate charges in 2010, however, the Department of Justice (DOJ) continued investigating the matter for nearly four more years, essentially leaving the American public and Congress in the dark about Russian nuclear corruption on U.S. soil during a period when the Obama administration made two major decisions benefitting Putin’s commercial nuclear ambitions.
Read the rest here.
As Breitbart News has previously reported, Hillary Clinton’s State Department was one of eight agencies to review and sign off on the sale of U.S. uranium to Russia. However, the then-Secretary of State Clinton was the only agency head whose family foundation received $145 million in donations from multiple people connected to the uranium deal, as reported by the New York Times.

Where the Russian uranium scandal might lead



Before the Obama administration approved Russia's acquisition of more than 20 percent of America's uranium supply, the Federal Bureau of Investigation found Russian racketeering involved.
This shocking news is in a must-read investigation by reporters John Solomon and Alison Spann in The Hill on October 17.
"Russian nuclear officials had routed millions of dollars to the U.S. designed to benefit former President Bill Clinton's charitable foundation during the time Secretary of State Hillary Clinton served on a government body that provided a favorable decision to Moscow," sources told Solomon and Spann.
But acting FBI investigators at the time – including then-U.S. attorney Rod Rosenstein and Robert Mueller, the man Rosenstein would later choose to investigate possible Russian collusion that helped Donald Trump win the 2016 election – apparently did not share this information about Russia with key members of Congress.
Solomon, Spann, and The Hill might win a Pulitzer Prize for their excellent investigative reporting...if it incriminated Republicans.  But since it instead found potential wrongdoing by Democrats, the mainstream media will either ignore or find fault with it.
This investigation points to important issues it does not spell out, so we shall use it as a stepping stone to touch on three of them:
1. The new investigation clearly indicates that Mueller and Rosenstein knew of Russian millions paid to Bill and Hillary Clinton's foundation.  This foundation served as a slush fund that paid for some of her political activities and subsidized her campaign staff before 2016.
This is a priori evidence of Russian influence in American politics – in the form of more than $145 million funneled by Russia to the Clintons.  Ms. Clinton ran for president in 2008 and was clearly positioning herself to run again in 2016.
Yet Mueller persists in not investigating Ms. Clinton as a suspect in his fishing expedition that seeks some crime of "election collusion by Russia," yet to be found, committed only by President Trump.  Can Mueller continue stonewalling after this new evidence?
2. Russia has been doing more than trying to corner the world uranium market, as China has done with rare-earths.  Russia also builds reactors for others, reportedly including eight reactors it has contracted to build for Iran.  Could American-supplied uranium already be part of the reactor fuel supplied to Iran for a Russian-built reactor now in operation, despite the non-proliferation spirit of the Iranian nuclear deal?
3. Has Hillary Clinton created not a "Circle of Life," but a circle of death by profiting from selling to Russia the very nuclear materials that Iran could soon turn into ICBM warheads or terrorist nuclear weapons?  Will Iranian (or North Korean) nukes that come home to roost and destroy American cities have an invisible sign on them that says "Made in USA"?  Is this to be the Clintons' and President Obama's legacy?
Lenin famously said the last capitalist will sell the rope with which he ends up hanged.  Nobody is greedier than Hillary Clinton.
Lowell Ponte is a veteran think-tank futurist and author or co-author of eight books.  He can be contacted for interviews at radioright@aol.com.

October 18, 2017

Obama's Russian collusion




The Hill’s release of information on the collusion between American corporate interests, U.S. government agencies and Russia seems to be all-new material. The text outlines the failure of the U.S. government under Obama to take account of information generated by the FBI on attempts by Russia to gain a financial advantage in the U.S. nuclear industry. “The Swamp” is reflected in the matter of Rosatom at every angle from which it can be viewed. While Rosatom has been in the news before, nothing has brought it to the level of significance seen in these primary documents and the specificity of the charges found in the text of the article. Deputy attorney general Rod Rosenstein should be summarily fired, along with anyone else who touched these papers above the level of the FBI. The responsible individuals must be dragged into the court system where their actions can at the very least become part of the public record.
According to the Hill:
“Before the Obama administration approved a controversial deal in 2010 giving Moscow control of a large swath of American uranium, the FBI had gathered substantial evidence that Russian nuclear industry officials were engaged in bribery, kickbacks, extortion and money laundering designed to grow Vladimir Putin’s atomic energy business inside the United States, according to government documents and interviews.
Federal agents used a confidential U.S. witness working inside the Russian nuclear industry to gather extensive financial records, make secret recordings and intercept emails as early as 2009 that showed Moscow had compromised an American uranium trucking firm with bribes and kickbacks in violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, FBI and court documents show.”
The article includes redacted documents with official date and time stamps. The identity of whoever leaked these documents will become an issue for those wanting to deflect attention from the article’s contents, but the shocking details ought to prevent its source(s) from becoming the center of attention. 

No comments: