Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
May be some who want to cuff her
and transport her to jail
after she said so many times
that the FBI cleared her
in recent campaign speeches...
Hollery hasn't smiled as
much after her meds wore
off after last debate...
And it is very possible that
Hollery may stumble from the
exhaust of working 3 or 4
days in a row in the week ahead...
It's still mind boggling that
the Democrats were so desperate
to nominate H. Clinton with
hopes of slipping in with
the women's vote...
Most women are NOT dumb
when it comes to money
and tighter family budgets...
My wag is still Trump by up
to double digit national vote
while electoral vote is close
due to N.Y. and Cal. liberals...
Cal cities harboring criminal
illegal aliens will lose
Fed Funding on day 1 if
Trump takes office...
Do You Feel Safer?...
in a weird way i love how insane and innane all of this presidential race is slugging on. i mean,...just when you think it can't get stranger, it happens !
thanks for your posts,..you post some great info 8^)
Conspiracy...only takes two to tango...
https://www.whitecollarcrimeresources.com/federal-conspiracy-charges.html
Case setting precedence in computer
fraud and deleting info...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Airport_Centers,_L.L.C._v._Citrin
Conspiracy charge is often a
tough nut to crack by a defense...
Do You Feel Safer?...
DOJ's Loretta Lynch Tried To Squash Comey's Letter To Congress
Oct 29, 2016 11:00 AM
Last night a leaked memo was revealed, indicating FBI director James Comey's stated reasons for reopening the Clinton email probe upon discovering what now appear to be tens of thousands of Huma Abedin emails located on Anthony Weiner's notebook. Comey revealed two core reasons for the action: a sense of obligation to lawmakers and a concern that word of the new email discovery would leak to the media and raise questions of a coverup. What he did not reveal, and as has emerged overnight from a report by the New Yorker's Jane Mayer, is that Comey also acted in contravention to DOJ practices, and more importantly, acted contrary to the "preference" of DOJ head Loretta Lynch, whose infamous meeting with Bill Clinton on the Phoenix tarmac at the end of June will likely be reassessed in light of these latest revelations.
According to the New Yorker, "Comey’s decision to make public new evidence that may raise additional legal questions about Clinton was contrary to the views of the Attorney General, according to a well-informed Administration official. Lynch expressed her preference that Comey follow the department’s longstanding practice of not commenting on ongoing investigations, and not taking any action that could influence the outcome of an election, but he said that he felt compelled to do otherwise."
Traditionally, the Justice Department has advised prosecutors and law enforcement to avoid any appearance of meddling in the outcome of elections, even if it means holding off on pressing cases. One former senior official recalled that Janet Reno, the Attorney General under Bill Clinton, “completely shut down” the prosecution of a politically sensitive criminal target prior to an election. “She was adamant—anything that could influence the election had to go dark,” the former official said.
And the punchline:
"according to the Administration official, Lynch asked Comey to follow Justice Department policies, but he said that he was obliged to break with them because he had promised to inform members of Congress if there were further developments in the case. He also felt that the impending election created a compelling need to inform the public, despite the tradition of acting with added discretion around elections. The Administration official said that Lynch and Justice Department officials are studying the situation, which he called unprecedented."
The Hill confirms as much, reporting today that Comey went against the wishes of Attorney General Loretta Lynch when he sent a letter to Congress Friday notifying them that the agency was reviewing new emails “pertinent” to the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email server.
A government official who requested anonymity to discuss the matter told The Hill that the Justice Department’s stance was to abstain from taking any actions that could impact the presidential race.
“The AG’s position is consistent with the department’s position not to take investigative steps that would influence an election so close to an election and to not comment on ongoing investigations. Director Comey decided to operate independently of that guidance by sending that letter to the Hill.”
While Loretta Lynch's reputation may now be tarnished, alongside that of James Comey, who is almost certainly a dead public servant walking, and will be promptly fired by either republicans or democrats after the election, one wonders how events would have played out under Lynch's predecessor Eric Holder:
Matthew Miller, a Democrat who served as the public-affairs director at the Justice Department under Holder, recalled that in one case, the department waited until after an election to send out subpoenas. “They didn’t want to influence the election—even though the subpoenas weren’t public,” he said. “People may think that the public needs to have this information before voting, but the thing is the public doesn’t really get the information. What it gets is an impression that may be false, because they have no way to evaluate it. The public always assumes when it hears that the F.B.I. is investigating that there must be something amiss. But there may be nothing here at all. That’s why you don’t do this.”
Miller added that “Comey is an outstanding law-enforcement officer but he mistakenly thinks that the rules don’t apply to him. But there are a host of reasons for these rules.” Or perhaps the DOJ's rules pandering to politicians were flawed from the beginning?
One thing appears obvious: by killing the probe into Clinton this summer, Comey burned one half of the bridge; reopening the probe on Friday was the other half.
“I don’t really blame Comey,” another former Justice Department official said. “But it’s troubling.” This official thought that Comey “didn’t want to look tainted. This new information comes to him, and he’s afraid if he doesn’t make it public until after the election he’ll be impeached. People will say he lied to Congress. But in the end he did the self-protective thing. Was it the right thing? Put it this way: it isn’t what previous Administrations have done.”
Of course it isn't, and that's what the Clinton campaign had been betting on.
Meanwhile, having been the Democrats' best friend, Comey is now - according to prominent Democrat Howard Dean - on the same side as Putin.
Howard Dean
?
@GovHowardDean
Ironically Comey put himself on the same side as Putin.
8:33 AM - 29 Oct 2016
344 344 Retweets
511
At least when things don't go your way, you can still just blame the Russians...
Why The DOJ Is Having Trouble Accessing The Thousands Of Huma Abedin Emails Discovered "Weeks Ago"
Oct 30, 2016 3:24 PM
What has made Friday's political fiasco - which started with the FBI's announcement it has reopened its probe into Hillary's emails - especially chaotic is that, at least officially, few official institutions have had access to the Abedin emails that are at the center of the new probe for various legal reasons as described below, and is the reason why the Clinton Campaign has been so forceful in demanding that the FBI provide additional information into what is contained among the "tens of thousands of emails" found on Anthony Weiner's notebook, which as the NYT reported was seized on October 3.
Federal authorities had seized four devices from Abedin and her estranged husband Weiner, including a laptop the former congressman used to send the sexual messages to the fifteen-year old girl. According to The New York Post, agents did not read the e-mails seized, because their warrant only covered Weiner’s messages.
This also means that FBI agents knew early this month about the new emails that the agency now says are "pertinent" to the investigation into Hillary Clinton's private server, but did not brief FBI Director James Comey until late last week. Comey was reportedly told about the new messages on Thursday, The Washington Post reported.
The FBI director said the team should "take appropriate investigative steps designed to allow investigators to review these emails." The Washington Post reported that it is not clear why the FBI agents waited to brief Comey after discovering in early October the emails in question on a computer it seized in connection with a separate investigation.
The Clinton campaign responded to the news with campaign spokesman Brian Fallon tweeting, “In other words: Comey officially does not know what he is talking about.”
Follow
Brian Fallon ? @brianefallon
In other words: Comey officially does not know what he is talking about.
…New from @Isikoff: As of tonight the FBI still does not have a warrant to review the Huma Abedin emails. https://t.co/O8SLRVBM3e
— Daniel Klaidman (@dklaidman) October 29, 2016
….@BretBaier emails Chris Wallace while he's on air: Weiner has given FBI permission to search computer so no warrant needed. @FoxNewsSunday
— Josh Rogin (@joshrogin) October 30, 2016
Doug Band To John Podesta: "If This Story Gets Out, We Are Screwed"
Oct 30, 2016 11:46 AM
Until the Friday blockbuster news that the FBI was reopening its probe into the Hillary email server, the biggest overhang facing the Clinton Campaign was the escalating scandal involving the Clinton Foundation, Doug Band's consultancy firm Teneo, and Bill Clinton who as a result of a leaked memo emerged was generously compensated for potential political favors by prominent corporate clients using Teneo as a passthru vehicle for purchasing influence.
In a section of the memo entitled "Leveraging Teneo For The Foundation," Band spelled out all of the donations he solicited from Teneo "clients" for the Clinton Foundation. In all, there are roughly $14mm of donations listed with the largest contributors being Coca-Cola, Barclays, The Rockefeller Foundation and Laureate International Universities. Some of these are shown below (the full details can be found in "Leaked Memo Exposes Shady Dealings Between Clinton Foundation Donors And Bill's "For-Profit" Activities")
Band also laid out the millions in speaking fees arranged by Teneo:
Foundation Donations
Further, the head of Teneo also offered the following commentary on the "$50 million in for-profit activity" he was able to secure for Bill Clinton (as of November 2011) as well as the "$66 million in future contracts, should he choose to continue with those engagements."
Independent of our fundraising and decision-making activities on behalf of the Foundation, we have dedicated ourselves to helping the President secure and engage in for-profit activities – including speeches, books, and advisory service engagements. In that context, we have in effect served as agents, lawyers, managers and implementers to secure speaking, business and advisory service deals. In support of the President’s for-profit activity, we also have solicited and obtained, as appropriate, in-kind services for the President and his family – for personal travel, hospitality, vacation and the like. Neither Justin nor I are separately compensated for these activities (e.g., we do not receive a fee for, or percentage of, the more than $50 million in for-profit activity we have personally helped to secure for President Clinton to date or the $66 million in future contracts, should he choose to continue with those engagements).
With respect to business deals for his advisory services, Justin and I found, developed and brought to President Clinton multiple arrangements for him to accept or reject. Of his current 4 arrangements, we secured all of them; and, we have helped manage and maintain all of his for-profit business relationships. Since 2001, President Clinton’s business arrangements have yielded more than $30 million for him personally, with $66 million to be paid out over the next nine years should he choose to continue with the current engagements.
In effect, what Band was doing, as the NYT's Nick Confessore summarized, "was selling his clients on idea that giving to foundation was, in essence, a way to bolster their influence. Clinton & Band built a platform for executives to bolster their companies' images, bathe in BC's praise, and do some good, while Teneo extracted earnings for Band and, depending on what you see in these e-mails, Clinton himself. Teneo paid Clinton until late '11."
As Confessore also pointed out, "I guess you can wave it all off as a nothingburger. But Chelsea Clinton and some of Clinton's other aides were clearly freaking out."
And he concluded by saying "Generally, the emails show Clinton's *own closest aides* troubled or horrified by things that her surrogates have spent years waving off."
Today, with this context, we focus on one particular email disclosed in the latest Podesta email release, in which an email from Doug Band to Cheryl Mills and John Podesta dated November 12, 2011, or just days before the abovementioned memo was sent out, admits that "I'm starting to worry that if this story gets out, we are screwed."
Here is the full email:
Need get this asap to them although I'm sure cvc [Chelsea Clinton] won't believe it to be true bc she doesn't want to Even though the facts speak for themselves.
John, I would appreciate your feedback and any suggestions I'm also starting to worry that if this story gets out, we are screwed. Dk [Declan Kelly] and I built a business. 65 people work for us who have wives and husbands and kids, they all depend on us. Our business has almost nothing to do with the clintons, the foundation or cgi in any way. The chairman of ubs could care a less about cgi. Our fund clients who we do restructuring and m and a advising the same just as bhp nor tivo do. These are real companies who we provide real advice to through very serious people. Comm head for goldman, dep press secretary to bloomberg, former head of banking, and his team, from morgan stanley for asia and latin am.
I realize it is difficult to confront and reason with her but this could go to far and then we all will have a real serious set of other problems. I don't deserve this from her and deserve a tad more respect or at least a direct dialogue for me to explain these things. She is acting like a spoiled brat kid who has nothing else to do but create issues to justify what she's doing because she, as she has said, hasn't found her way and has a lack of focus in her life. I realize she will be off of this soon but if it doesn't come soon enough...
Four years later, the story is out, not thanks to Chelsea Clinton as Doug Band was concerned, but due to a hack of John Podesta's email account.
However, in light of the latest FBI scandal involving Anthony Weiner, It remains to be seen if either Band or the Clintons are screwed - it appears that the general public has more than enough distractions to forget about this potential graft scandal involving the Clintons and their influence-peddling clients.
650,000 Emails Found On Anthony Weiner's Laptop: FBI Expects "Weeks Of Work Ahead"
Oct 30, 2016 3:34 PM
Yesterday, we reported that the FBI has found "tens of thousands of emails" belonging to Huma Adein on Anthony Weiner's computer, raising questions how practical it is that any conclusive finding will be available or made by the FBI in the few days left before the elections
Now, according to the WSJ, it appears that Federal agents are preparing to scour roughly 650,000 emails that, as we reported moments ago were discovered weeks ago on the laptop of Anthony Weiner, to see how many relate to a prior probe of Hillary Clinton’s email use, as metadata on the device suggests there may be thousands sent to or from the private server that the Democratic nominee used while she was secretary of state, according to people familiar with the matter.
As the WSJ adds, the review will take weeks at a minimum to determine whether those messages are work-related emails between Huma Abedin, a close Clinton aide and the estranged wife of Mr. Weiner, and State Department officials; how many are duplicates of emails already reviewed by the Federal Bureau of Investigation; and whether they include either classified information or important new evidence in the Clinton email probe, which FBI officials call “Midyear.”
And, as we further reported earlier today, the FBI has had to await a court order to begin reviewing the emails, because they were uncovered in an unrelated probe of Mr. Weiner, and that order was delayed for reasons that remain unclear.
More stunning is just how many emails were found on Weiner's computer. And while one can only imagine the content of some of the more persona ones, the WSJ writes that the latest development began in early October when New York-based FBI officials notified Andrew McCabe, the bureau’s second-in-command, that while investigating Mr. Weiner for possibly sending sexually charged messages to a minor, they had recovered a laptop with 650,000 emails. Many, they said, were from the accounts of Ms. Abedin, according to people familiar with the matter.
Those emails stretched back years, these people said, and were on a laptop that both Mr. Weiner and Ms. Abedin used and that hadn’t previously come up in the Clinton email probe. Ms. Abedin said in late August that the couple were separating.
The FBI had searched the computer while looking for child pornography, people familiar with the matter said, but the warrant they used didn’t give them authority to search for matters related to Mrs. Clinton’s email arrangement at the State Department. Mr. Weiner has denied sending explicit or indecent messages to the teenager.
As reported yesterday, it appears that there are potentially tens of thousands of Abedin linked emails on Weiner's computer:
In their initial review of the laptop, the metadata showed many messages, apparently in the thousands, that were either sent to or from the private email server at Mrs. Clinton’s home that had been the focus of so much investigative effort for the FBI. Senior FBI officials decided to let the Weiner investigators proceed with a closer examination of the metadata on the computer, and report back to them.
The WSJ then connects the dots between how the Weiner emails were linked to the Clinton reopening of the Clinton probe, despite Loretta Lynch's and the DOJ's vocal urges not to do so:
At a meeting early last week of senior Justice Department and FBI officials, a member of the department’s senior national-security staff asked for an update on the Weiner laptop, the people familiar with the matter said. At that point, officials realized that no one had acted to obtain a warrant, these people said.
Mr. McCabe then instructed the email investigators to talk to the Weiner investigators and see whether the laptop’s contents could be relevant to the Clinton email probe, these people said. After the investigators spoke, the agents agreed it was potentially relevant.
Mr. Comey was given an update, decided to go forward with the case and notified Congress on Friday, with explosive results. Senior Justice Department officials had warned Mr. Comey that telling Congress would violate well-established policies against overt actions that could affect an election, and some within the FBI have been unhappy at Mr. Comey’s repeated public statements on the probe, going back to his first press conference on the subject in July.
But wait it gets better.
Recall that this is the same Andrew Mcabe whose wife the Wall Street Journal reported last week received $467,500 in campaign funds in late 2015 from the political action committee of Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe, a longtime ally of the Clintons and, until he was elected governor in November 2013, a Clinton Foundation board member.
Mr. McAuliffe had supported Dr. McCabe in the hopes she and a handful of other Democrats might help win a majority in the state Senate, giving Mr. McAuliffe more sway in the state capitol. Dr. McCabe lost her race last November, and Democrats failed to win their majority.
FBI officials have said Mr. McCabe had no role in the Clinton email probe until he became deputy director, and there was no conflict of interest because by then his wife’s campaign was over.
A tangent on the Clinton Foundation probe:
The Washington field office was probing financial relationships
involving Mr. McAuliffe before he became a Clinton Foundation board
member, these people said. Mr. McAuliffe has denied any wrongdoing, and
his lawyer has said the probe is focused on whether he failed to
register as an agent of a foreign entity. The FBI field office in New York had done the most work on the Clinton Foundation case and received help from the FBI field office in Little Rock, the people familiar with the matter said.
In February, FBI officials made a presentation to the Justice Department, according to these people. By all accounts, the meeting didn’t go well.
Some said that is because the FBI didn’t present compelling evidence to justify more aggressive pursuit of the Clinton Foundation, and that the career public integrity prosecutors in the room simply believed it wasn’t a very strong case. Others said that from the start, the Justice Department officials were stern, icy and dismissive of the case.
“That was one of the weirdest meetings I’ve ever been to,” one participant told others afterward, according to people familiar with the matter.
Needless to say, the probe into the Foundation faded.
But back to the Clinton probe, according to a person familiar with the probes, on Aug. 12, a senior Justice Department official called Mr. McCabe to voice his displeasure at finding that New York FBI agents were still openly pursuing the Clinton Foundation probe, despite the department’s refusal to allow more aggressive investigative methods in the case. Mr. McCabe said agents still had the authority to pursue the issue as long as they didn’t use those methods.
At this point a question emerges: did McCabe seek to defend or press on with a Clinton probe:
Mr. McCabe’s defenders in the agency said that following the call, he repeated the instruction that he had given earlier in the Clinton Foundation investigation: Agents were to keep pursuing the work within the authority they had.
Others further down the FBI chain of command, however, said agents were given a much starker instruction on the case: “Stand down.” When agents questioned why they weren’t allowed to take more aggressive steps, they said they were told the order had come from the deputy director—Mr. McCabe. Others familiar with the matter deny Mr. McCabe or any other senior FBI official gave such a stand-down instruction.
At this point the two probes, into Hillary's email and the Clinton Foundation converged:
For agents who already felt uneasy about FBI leadership’s handling of the Clinton Foundation case, the moment only deepened their concerns, these people said. For those who felt the probe hadn’t yet found significant evidence of criminal conduct, the leadership’s approach was the right response to the facts on the ground.
Things accelerated over the past two months, when in September, agents on the foundation case asked to see the emails contained on nongovernment laptops that had been searched as part of the Clinton email case, but that request was rejected by prosecutors at the Eastern District of New York, in Brooklyn. Those emails were given to the FBI based on grants of partial immunity and limited-use agreements, meaning agents could only use them for the purpose of investigating possible mishandling of classified information.
Some FBI agents were dissatisfied with that answer, and asked for permission to make a similar request to federal prosecutors in Manhattan, according to people familiar with the matter. Mr. McCabe, these people said, told them no and added that they could not “go prosecutor-shopping.”
Not long after that discussion, FBI agents informed the bureau’s leaders about the Weiner laptop, prompting Mr. Comey’s disclosure to Congress and setting of the furor that promises to consume the final days of a tumultuous campaign
While much of the latest developments are known, or could have been inferred assuming more corruption within government agencies, the punchline is that the weeks if not months of upcoming work means that if Clinton wins the White House, she will likely do so amid at least one ongoing investigation into her inner circle being handled by law-enforcement officials who are deeply divided over how to manage such cases. It also means that Trump will be hounding Hilllary for the remainder of the campaign as being the only presidential candidate to seek election with a recently reopened criminal probe hanging over her head.
Clinton Manager Robby Mook Lied About Bob Creamer Relationship, Podesta Emails Reveal
Oct 30, 2016 1:40 PM
Shortly after the first Project Veritas video revealed efforts by Robert Creamer and Scott Foval, working in concert with the DNC and Clinton campaign, to incite violence at Trump rallies across the country, Hillary Clinton campaign manager, Robby Mook, took to CNN where he vehemently denied all accusations to Jake Tapper. Among other things, Mook said that Creamer and Foval "never had a relationship with the Clinton campaign."
“These individuals no longer have a relationship with the DNC. They've never had a relationship with the Clinton campaign."
“It’s unacceptable for anyone from either party to do that. But, again, no one who was working for the DNC or the Clinton campaign was doing that. This is again an attempt by Donald Trump to distract from the real issues of this campaign. He’s spiraling after his last debate, and he doesn’t want to talk about substance.”
ABC / Wapo Clinton "Lead" Shrinks To 1-Point As New York Times Sees 4-Point Trump Advantage In Florida
Oct 30, 2016 12:50 PM
Yesterday we revealed that the ABC / Wapo poll is a complete farce after even their own pollsters admitted that the recent 10-point convergence between Clinton and Trump, in a matter of just a couple of days, was "not mainly about people shifting in their candidate preference, but about changes in who’s intending to vote"...so it wasn't about voter preference but about how ABC / Wapo chose their "oversamples."
In any event, the latest results, out today, show Hillary's lead shrinking further to just 1-point. The poll was conducted October 25-28, so, in theory, it includes 1 day of the FBI announcement. That said, the FBI announcement didn't really hit the media until late in the day on Friday so it's unclear if it has impacted this particular poll as of yet. To be sure, ABC / Wapo clearly made an effort to maintain a slight Hillary lead in this latest poll by expanding their democrat "oversample" margin from 8-points yesterday to 9-points in today's poll.
METHODOLOGY – This ABC News/Washington Post poll was conducted by landline and cellular telephone Oct. 25-28, 2016, in English and Spanish, among a random national sample of 1,160 likely voters. Results have a margin of sampling error of 3 points, including the design effect. Partisan divisions are 37-28-30 percent, Democrats-Republicans-independents.
Interestingly, ABC / Wapo found that "a third of likely voters say they’re less likely to support Clinton given FBI Director James Comey’s disclosure Friday that the bureau is investigating more emails."
About a third of likely voters say they’re less likely to support Clinton given FBI Director James Comey’s disclosure Friday that the bureau is investigating more emails related to its probe of Clinton’s use of a private email serverwhile secretary of state. Given other considerations, 63 percent say it makes no difference.
The potential for a pullback in motivation of Clinton supporters, or further resurgence among Trump’s, may cause concern in the Clinton camp–especially because this dynamic already was underway. Intention to vote has grown in Trump support groups in the past week as the intensity of criticisms about him has ebbed, including allegations of sexual misconduct, disapproval of his position on the election’s legitimacy and his poorly rated final debate performance.
Not that we have any confidence in these numbers, but here is how ABC / Wapo see the current state of play in the 2016 presidential election:
Former FBI Asst. Director Accuses Clintons Of Being A "Crime Family"
Oct 30, 2016
During a radio interview with John Catsimatidis, former assistant FBI director James Kallstrom heaped praise on Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump before slamming the Clintons. Kallstrom, known for leading the investigation into the explosion of TWA flight 800 in the late '90s, said on Sunday that Bill and Hillary Clinton are part of a “crime family” and argued top officials hindered the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email server while she was secretary of State. He also accused Hillary Clinton of being a “pathological liar.”
“The Clintons, that’s a crime family. It’s like organized crime, basically. The Clinton Foundation is a cesspool." Kallstrom added that “It’s just outrageous how Hillary Clinton sold her office for money. And she’s a pathological liar, and she’s always been a liar. And God forbid if we put someone like that in the White House."
Going off on a tear, Kallstrom also blasted Attorney General Loretta Lynch, claiming that she impeded the investigation into Clinton’s private server.
“The problem here is this investigation was never a real investigation,” he said. “That’s the problem. They never had a grand jury empanelled, and the reason they never had a grand jury empanelled, I’m sure, is Loretta Lynch would not go along with that.”
The ex-FBI official, who praised Donald Trump as a “good human being” and “patriot,” also went after his former employer. “This investigation was never a real investigation,” he said.
“They never had grand jury empaneled. And the reason … was that Loretta Lynch would not go along with that. So this investigation was without the ability to serve subpoenas, serve search warrants, and obtain the evidence that they ended up begging for. It was just ludicrous what went on,” he added.
Kallstrom said that the FBI “left so much stuff on the table,” but he defended the agents on the case. “This is not the FBI agents who’s to blame for this fiasco going on. This is the leadership. This is Jim Comey … The agents are furious with what’s going on. I know that for a fact,” he said.
* * *
Kallstrom's bashing of the Clinton's followed another interview he gave last night with Judge Jeanine PIrro to discuss the latest announced FBI investigation of Hillary Clinton, in which he said "I think there’s something happening. People are asking me what is this about. I think something big is going to happen. I don’t know what it is. It’s just my gut feeling. I think so.
Judge Jeanine: So he wouldn’t have come out unless he knew it was coming out?
James Kallstrom: Well, I think he couldn’t hold onto it any longer. OK. Because who knows? Maybe the locals would have stepped in on this.
Judge Jeanine: …I think he had to do it.
Billions to bail out Hillary next week
if action moves quickly...
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=126156155
Middle East backers could have
her in the lap of luxury, out
of country, with a text request...
Do You Feel Safer?...
Watergate's Carl Bernstein: FBI Wouldn't Reopen A Probe Unless It Is "A Real Bombshell"
Oct 28, 2016 7:30 PM
In the aftermath of the so-called Cocktober surprise unveiled this afternoon by the FBI when the bureau announced it was reopening a probe into Hillary Clinton's email server because "new evidence has come to light" after "materials" were found on equipment belonging to Anthony Weiner and Huma Abedin, the question on everyone's lips - and certainly Hillary Clinton's and most democrats - is why did the FBI do this now, 11 days before the election, in a way that did not even coordinate with the White House?
One opinion belongs to Watergate journalist Carl Bernstein, who just days after his infamous peer Bob Woodward said that the "Clinton foundation is corrupt, it's a scandal" said that "her conduct in regard to the e-mails is really indefensible and if there was going to be more information that came out, it was the one thing, as I said on the air last night, actually that could really perhaps affect this election. We don't know what this means yet except that it's a real bombshell. And it is unthinkable that the Director of the FBI would take this action lightly, that he would put this letter forth to the Congress of the United States saying there is more information out there about classified e-mails and call it to the attention of congress unless it was something requiring serious investigation. So that's where we are..."
Courtesy of Real Clear Politics is the full transcript:
CARL BERNSTEIN: Well, there's no question that the e-mails have always been the greatest threat to her candidacy for president, that her conduct in regard to the e-mails is really indefensible and if there was going to be more information that came out, it was the one thing, as I said on the air last night, actually that could really perhaps affect this election.
We don't know what this means yet except that it's a real bombshell. And it is unthinkable that the Director of the FBI would take this action lightly, that he would put this letter forth to the Congress of the United States saying there is more information out there about classified e-mails and call it to the attention of congress unless it was something requiring serious investigation. So that's where we are...
Is it a certainty that we won't learn before the election? I'm not sure it's a certainty we won't learn before the election.
One thing is, it's possible that Hillary Clinton might want to on her own initiative talk to the FBI and find out what she can, and if she chooses to let the American people know what she thinks or knows is going on. People need to hear from her...
I think if she has information available to her from the FBI or any other source as to her knowledge of what these e-mails might be, hopefully she will let us know what they are and what is under discussion here.
Right now we're all talking in a vacuum but I want to add here that in the last, oh, 36, 48 hours, there has been an undercurrent of kind of speculative discussion among some national security people that something might surface in the next few days about e-mails, and I think the expectation in this chatter -- and I took it as just chatter but informed chatter, to some extent -- was that it would relate to another round of WikiLeaks e-mails, which our Justice Department people seem to be saying is not the case, but there has been some noise in the national security community the last day or two of this kind of possibility of some kind of revelation.
But this is her achilles heel and we have to remember that it also comes on the -- back to the word heel -- of the revelations about the Clinton Foundation. So the confluence of all of this is bad for her as it stands now but with some knowledge she might be able to stop, turn things around, and give us some idea of what's going on in a way we might not otherwise know, and also it's very possible that some members of congress very quickly are going to get an idea of what these e-mails are, and what this is all about, and for whatever purpose put some information out there.
Another Black Swan Hits The US Presidential Election
Submitted by Mike Krieger via Liberty Blitzkrieg blog
Oct 28, 2016 9:40 PM
By now, everyone on planet earth has heard about the bombshell news just announced by the FBI that it was re-opening its investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email server.
Here’s the text of FBI head James Comey’s letter to Congressional leaders.
Obviously, lots of people are out there pontificating on what, if anything, this means. As such, I’m going to add my two cents to the conversation.
I’ve prided myself on unemotionally calling this election how I see it the whole time, because I’m neither a Hillary Clinton nor Donald Trump supporter. Being free of the tremendous baggage that comes with cheerleading a particular candidate in this contentious election, I had consistently predicted a Trump victory until the Access Hollywood tape emerged. At that point I penned a thought-piece titled, Donald Trump is in Trouble – Part 2, in which I changed my forecast to a Hillary Clinton victory.
Here’s some of what I wrote:
After watching yesterday’s audio and reading through the Wikileaks revelations, my prediction has changed for the first time this election. All things equal from here on out (meaning no additional huge revelations against Hillary), I think Hillary Clinton will defeat Donald Trump. I don’t think it’s going to be a landslide, but I think she’s probably going to win. The audio was very harmful for Donald Trump, and now I’m going to explain why.
First of all, if you want to accurately forecast the outcome of this election you need to get into the minds of the masses. Just like trading financial markets, what you think is right doesn’t matter. What matters is what everyone else collectively thinks, and whether or not they’re going to get off their asses and vote. A big part of why I thought Trump would win related to the fact that I believe many people were simply looking for an excuse to vote for him. Justified disgust with the status quo in general, and Hillary Clinton in particular, pushed millions of Americans into the camp of being willing to take a gamble on Trump despite disliking him personally and disagreeing with him on many issues. I felt strongly that there were millions upon millions of Americans you could place into this category — people who were “flirting with the idea of voting Trump.” I believe a significant amount of these people will not vote for him as a result of the audio. Will it be the majority of them? Probably not, but it will be a material number and arguably enough to swing the election. No, I don’t think these voters will shift to Hillary, and no, I don’t think committed Trump voters will change their minds. However, I do think enough of these willing to be convinced, leaning-Trump types will now stay home or vote third party. It’s these voters who I expected to swing the election in Trump’s favor, and they are now unreliable.
Does Trump’s vulgarity excuse the incalculable crimes of Hillary Clinton and her husband, making them preferable in this election? No it doesn’t, but that’s not the point of this article. Most voters are too superficial, too busy trying to survive and too uninformed to weigh all the very important issues rationally. As an example, think about how most conversations are going to go down this weekend. Let’s say you’re out with a bunch of friends for drinks tonight. Someone says, “so have you seen the Trump audio?” If someone in the group hasn’t, someone will pull out their phone and it’ll be watched in 3 minutes. What if someone then says, “yeah, but have you seen the leaked Hillary emails?” What will your response be? You can’t adequately explain the importance of that to your friends in 3 minutes. Instead, you’ll have to send them a lengthy article that they’ll never read. So by the end of this weekend, pretty much everyone in America will have heard the Trump audio, while maybe 10% will take the time to analyze what came out of Wikileaks. There goes your election.
Understanding the craziness of the election, I finished the piece with the following.
Despite all of that, I still can’t say with certainty that Hillary will win. However, I do think the landscape has changed enough, that for the first time this entire election season, I am no longer confident of a Trump victory. Then again, I was absolutely convinced that Hillary was unelectable after she collapsed on 9/11 and mislead everyone about her health, and I was wrong about that. That’s how completely crazy this election is, and there’s still a month to go. Anything can happen, particularly with the debate coming up this Sunday. So while it’s certainly not out of the question, there will have to be some very material events over the next month to put Trump back in the driver’s seat.
While the Wikileaks emails have been an important factor in keeping this race close, I didn’t think they were sufficient to alter my forecast of a Clinton victory. I think the reopening of the FBI investigation is enough of a black swan to materially change the course of this race.
Clinton supporters will read this and think I’m insane. They will think this because they are anticipating a landslide victory for Hillary. I never expected a landslide, so I think this news tips the election into a total tossup situation. My reasoning for the change is the same that led me to switch my forecast to Hillary after the Access Hollywood video was released. The primary reason I initially thought Trump would win related to the fact I believed enough people would be willing to vote for a person they don’t really like in order to blow up the status quo. I felt that the video recording of Trump’s vulgar commentary was enough to put those people into the absentee or third party column, despite millions of Americans looking for an excuse to vote for Trump due to the well understood awfulness of Hillary. This has changed, and voters now have the excuse to vote Trump they needed.
That reason is simple. The problems with Hilary Clinton will never go away. They will always resurface or new problems will emerge, and it has nothing to do with a “vast rightwing conspiracy.” It has to do with her. It has to do with the fact that her and her husband are career crooks, warmongers, and shameless looters of the American public. This re-opening of the FBI investigation just hammers all of that home for everyone. We know what 4 years of Hillary will look like. It’ll be Obama cronyism on steroids, plus endless investigations with a side of World War 3. I don’t think people want that, and so more Americans than the pundits realize will take a gamble on Trump.
As a caveat, the above forecast assumes this new FBI investigation is not closed before November 8th. If it is, I think she’ll win. If not, I think Trump has even odds to win, if not better.
Of course, with 11 days left in this crazy election, many more black swans could emerge. Stay tuned.
Hillary Clinton under Federal Investigation...
https://www.rt.com/usa/364586-comey-reopens-clinton-investigation/
It only took 1 count of
using an unauthorized device
to transmit Gov't info to
disqualify Clinton from any
future public Federal Office...
US, at 19 trillion in debt,
didn't have time to waste
or money to waste in pursuit
of efficient law interpretation...
Do You Feel Safer?...
It Is Happening Again! Voting Machines Are Switching Votes From Donald Trump To Hillary Clinton
October 26, 2016
Is the 2016 election in the process of being stolen? Just a few weeks ago I issued a major alert warning that this exact sort of thing might happen. Early voting has already begun in many states, and a number of voters in Texas are reporting that the voting machines switched their votes from Donald Trump to Hillary Clinton. The odd thing is that none of the other choices were affected when these individuals attempted to vote for a straight Republican ticket. If Hillary Clinton is declared the winner of the state of Texas on election night, a full investigation of these voting machines should be conducted, because there is no way that Donald Trump should lose that state. I have said that it will be the greatest miracle in U.S. political history if Donald Trump wins this election, but without the state of Texas Donald Trump has exactly zero chance of winning. So those living down in Texas need to keep reporting anything unusual that they see or hear when they go to vote.
Most Americans don’t realize this, but the exact same thing was happening during the last presidential election. The state of Ohio was considered to be the key to Mitt Romney’s chances of winning in 2012, and right up to election day the Romney campaign actually believed that they were going to win the state.
Unfortunately for Romney, something funny was going on with the voting machines. In a previous article, I included a quote from an Ohio voter that had her vote switched from Mitt Romney to Barack Obama three times…
“I don’t know if it happened to anybody else or not, but this is the first time in all the years that we voted that this has ever happened to me,” said Marion, Ohio, voter Joan Stevens.
Stevens said that when she voted, it took her three tries before the machine accepted her choice to vote for Romney.
“I went to vote and I got right in the middle of Romney’s name,” Stevens told Fox News, saying that she was certain to put her finger directly on her choice for the White House.
She said that the first time she pushed “Romney,” the machine marked “Obama.”
So she pushed Romney again. Obama came up again. Then it happened a third time.
“Maybe you make a mistake once, but not three times,” she told Fox News.
And we did see some very, very strange numbers come out of certain areas of Ohio four years ago.
For example, there were more than 100 precincts in Cuyahoga County in which Barack Obama got at least 99 percent of the vote in 2012.
If that happened in just one precinct that would be odd enough. But the odds of it happening in more than 100 precincts in just one county by random chance are so low that they aren’t even worth mentioning.
And of course this didn’t just happen in Ohio. Similar things were happening all over the country.
The reason why I bring all of this up is to show that there is a pattern. If a fair vote had been conducted, Romney may have indeed won in 2012, and now it appears that voting machines are being rigged again.
In Wichita County, Texas so many people were reporting that their votes were being switched from Trump to Clinton that it made the local newspaper…
Shortly after early voting booths opened Monday in Wichita County, rumors swirled online about possible errors in the process. Several online posts claimed a friend or family member had attempted to vote straight party Republican ticket, but their presidential nomination was switched to the Democratic nominee, Hilary Clinton. None of the local reports were from people who experienced the situation first hand. A Bowie woman posted that a relative who lives in Arlington saw her votes “switched.” The post was shared more than 100,000 times Monday.
And Paul Joseph Watson has written about some specific individuals that are making allegations that their votes for president were switched by the machines. One of the examples that he cited was a Facebook post by Lisa Houlette of Amarillo, Texas…
Gary and I went to early vote today…I voted a straight Republican ticket and as I scrolled to submit my ballot I noticed that the Republican Straight ticket was highlighted, however, the clinton/kaine box was also highlighted! I tried to go back and change and could not get it to work. I asked for help from one of the workers and she couldn’t get it to go back either. It took a second election person to get the machine to where I could correct the vote to a straight ticket. Be careful and double check your selections before you cast your vote! Don’t hesitate to ask for help. I had to have help to get mine changed.
I don’t know about you, but major alarm bells went off in my head when I read that.
A similar incident was reported on Facebook by Shandy Clark of Arlington, Texas…
Hey everyone, just a heads up! I had a family member that voted this morning and she voted straight Republican. She checked before she submitted and the vote had changed to Clinton! She reported it and made sure her vote was changed back. They commented that It had been happening. She is trying to get the word out and asked that we post and share. Just want everyone’s vote to be accurate and count. Check your vote before you submit!
And of course they weren’t the only ones reporting vote switching. It turns out that lots of other Texans have also experienced this phenomenon…
http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/Texas-Votes-Being-Switched-From-Trump-To-Clinton-Facebook-460x899.jpg
New Evidence Links Voting Machines And Clinton Foundation
Oct 27, 2016
Submitted by Stefanie MacWilliams via PlanetFreeWill.com,
Could these connections be enough to implicate the Clinton Foundation in the alleged early vote rigging in Texas?
As usual, the internet has come through as the ultimate watchdog while the supposed safeguards of our democracy have failed.
A Gab user by the name “Special Prosecutor Will Logan” has found some stunning information.
Note: as Gab is a members only site, you’ll have to join to see his actual posts, but we included all pertinent information in the article.
According to OpenSecrets, the company who provided the alleged glitching voting machines is a subsidiary of The McCarthy Group.
The McCarthy group is a major donor to the Clinton Foundation – apparently donating 200,000 dollars in 2007 – when it was the largest owner of United States voting machines. Or perhaps the 200,000 dollars went to paying Bill Clinton for speeches?
Either way, it doesn’t look good.
But there’s more.
As the same user notes in this post, Dominion Voting Systems and The Clinton Foundation did a 2.25 million dollar charity initiative in developing nations together called the DELIAN Project.
According to the project’s own website:
In 2014, Dominion Voting committed to providing emerging and post-conflict democracies with access to voting technology through its philanthropic support to the DELIAN Project, as many emerging democracies suffer from post-electoral violence due to the delay in the publishing of election results. Over the next three years, Dominion Voting will support election technology pilots with donated Automated Voting Machines (AVM), providing an improved electoral process, and therefore safer elections. As a large number of election staff are women, there will be an emphasis on training women, who will be the first to benefit from the skills transfer training and use of AVMs. It is estimated that 100 women will directly benefit from election technology skills training per pilot election.
Of course, this is all speculation, and we are not making any claims of illegal activity by the Clinton Foundation.
However, it presents a very troubling conflict of interest. Most Americans would certainly agree that voting machines should have zero connection to presidential candidates and their foundations.
Consider the implications further abroad, as well. Could this DELIAN Project be designed to influence elections in developing nations?
It can certainly be argued that electronic voting machines do not in fact provide an “improved electoral process” or provide “safer elections”
Again, this is speculation.
But we will be keeping an eye on this story if and when more information becomes available.
Clinton Foundation Corrupt to Core
Martin Armstrong
Oct. 28, 2016
In a 2011 memo http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2016/10/27/memo-shows-bill-clintons-wealth-tied-clinton-foundation/92842822/ , an aide to Bill Clinton laid out the unethical relationship between the Clinton Foundation and Bill’s sudden wealth. Bill’s personal interests were linked as was Hillary selling influence. The memo details how some foundation donors paid Clinton to speak and provide consulting services.
Hillary has said that the Foundation will continue http://altoday.com/archives/12112-hillary-clinton-defends-family-foundation-says-work-will-continue to operate when she is president.
Meanwhile, Chelsea is on record saying she will remain running the Foundation if Hillary is elected.
Bill says he will leave the Foundation http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/trailguide/la-na-trailguide-updates-bill-clinton-will-leave-clinton-1471887320-htmlstory.html , obviously he will be busy having coffee with world leaders wives. Not sure if that is letter a kid run a candy store. This is a real scandal. We will have a President running a pay-for-play deal for access to the President of the United States. This level of corruption is really just beyond contemplation.
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/north_america/2016-u-s-presidential-election/clinton-foundation-corrupt-to-core/
Woo-woo,,,Money Train Media Rollcall...
Project Veritas 4: Robert Creamer's Illegal $20,000 Foreign Wire Transfer Caught On Tape
Oct 27, 2016
Project Veritas has just released Part IV of it's multi-part series exposing numerous scandals surrounding the DNC and the Clinton campaign, including efforts to incite violence at Trump rallies and, at least what seems to be, illegal coordination between the DNC, Hillary For America and various Super PACs.
Part IV focuses on a $20,000 foreign donation made by an undercover Project Veritas journalist to Americans United for Change (AUFC). Ironically, shortly after the $20k donation wire was released, the contributor's "niece" was offered an internship with Creamer's firm, Democracy Partners.
In the new video, Creamer says: “Every morning I am on a call at 10:30 that goes over the message being driven by the campaign headquarters … I am in this campaign mainly to deal with what earned media with television, radio, with earned media and social media, not with paid media, not with advertising.” He also mentions a conference call discussing a woman potentially coming forward to accuse Trump of inappropriate behavior.
Creamer, a seasoned Chicago activist who is married to Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), whose Republican opponent, Joan McCarthy Lasonde has called for her to resign over her husband’s activities, also talks about his work with Barack Obama, whom he says he has known since the 1980s, when Obama was a community organizer in Chicago: “He’s a pro, I’ve known the President since he was a community organizer in Chicago.”
Elsewhere, Creamer adds: “I do a lot of work with the White House on their issues, helping to run issue campaigns that they have been involved in. I mean, for immigration reform for the… the health care bill, for trying to make America more like Britain when it comes to gun violence issues.”
In the effort to prove the credibility of the undercover donor featured in the videos and to keep the investigation going, Project Veritas Action made the decision to donate twenty thousand dollars to Robert Creamer’s effort. Project Veritas Action had determined that the benefit of this investigation outweighed the cost. And it did.
“First thing, like I said, thank you for the proposal. And I’d like to get the $20,000 across to you. The second call I’m going to make here is to my money guy and he’s going to get in touch with you and auto wire the funds to you,” said the PVA journalist.
Creamer told the PVA journalist to send the money to Americans United for Change. Shortly after the money was released, the “donors” “niece” - another Project Veritas Action journalist - was offered an internship with Creamer.
In an effort to see how far Creamer would go with the promise of more money, another Project Veritas journalist posing as the donor’s money liaison requested a meeting with Creamer. During that meeting, Creamer spoke about connections he had with Obama and Clinton.
AUFC President, Brad Woodhouse, subsequently returned the money, after Project Veritas started to release their undercover videos, citing "concerns that it might have been an illegal foreign donation." Oddly, Woodhouse was not terribly concerned about the "legality" of the donation when he chose to accept it a month prior.
In an unexpected twist, AUFC president Brad Woodhouse, the recipient of the $20,000, heard that Project Veritas Action was releasing undercover videos exposing AUFC’s activities. He told a journalist that AUFC was going to return the twenty thousand dollars. He said it was because they were concerned that it might have been an illegal foreign donation. Project Veritas Action was pleased but wondered why that hadn’t been a problem for the month that they had the money.
Leaked Memo Exposes Shady Dealings Between Clinton Foundation Donors And Bill's "For-Profit" Activities
Oct 27, 2016 3:10 AM
We have written frequently in recent weeks about a feud that erupted between Chelsea Clinton and Doug Band back in 2011 after Chelsea raised concerns about potential conflicts of interest between Band's firm, Teneo, the Clinton Foundation and the State Department (see here, here, here and here). The feud ultimately resulted in Band being forced to draft a memo spelling out, in vivid detail, the many entangled relationships between himself, Teneo, the Clinton Foundation and the State Department. Fortunately, today's Wikileaks dump included that memo which reveals, for the first time, the precise financial flows between the Clinton Foundation, Band’s firm Teneo Consulting, and the Clinton family’s private business endeavors.
The memo starts with a brief background on Teneo, which was created in June 2011, shortly after Declan Kelly resigned from his position as "United States Economic Envoy to Northern Ireland," a position to which he was appointed by Secretary Clinton.
In June 2009, DK Consulting was founded by Declan Kelley. Mr. Kelly served as COO of FTI Consulting until June 2009, when he stepped down and established DK Consulting. At that time, he also became the United States Economic Envoy to Northern Ireland. Pursuant to the terms of his exit agreement with FTI and consistent with the ethics agreement of his uncompensated special government employee appointment at the State Department, Mr. Kelly retained and continued to provide services to three paying clients (Coke, Dow, and UBS) and one pro bono client (Allstate). In late 2009, Declan retained me as a consultant to DK Consulting to help support the needs of these clients.
In May 2011, Mr. Kelly resigned his Envoy position at the State Department. In June 2011, Mr. Kelly and I founded Teneo Strategies; simultaneously, Mr. Kelly closed DK Consulting and shifted its clients to Teneo.
Throughout the past almost 11 years since President Clinton left office, I have sought to leverage my activities, including my partner role at Teneo, to support and to raise funds for the Foundation. This memorandum strives to set forth how I have endeavored to support the Clinton Foundation and President Clinton personally.
In a subsequent section of the memo entitled "Leveraging Teneo For The Foundation," Band spells all of the donations he solicited from Teneo "clients" for the Clinton Foundation. In all, there are roughly $14mm of donations listed with the largest contributors being Coca-Cola, Barclays, The Rockefeller Foundation and Laureate International Universities.
The donations from Dow Chemical are particularly notable for several reasons. First, because of other emails revealed by WikiLeaks and other FOIA requests, we now know that Dow Chemical CEO, Andrew Liveris, was granted special access to then Secretary Clinton back in July 2009 at the same time he was embroiled in ongoing litigation with another Clinton Foundation donor, Kuwait, over a failed joint-venture that would have netted Dow $9BN in cash. As Band notes in his memo, 1 month after being granted special access to Secretary Clinton, Liveris invited President Clinton and Band out for a day of golf. Moreover, shortly after his meeting with Secretary Clinton and golf outing with President Clinton, Liveris decided to donate $500,000 to the Clinton Global Initiative...very convenient timing for all involved.
In August of 2009, Mr. Kelly invited Mr. Liveris to play golf with President Clinton and me. Mr. Kelly subsequently asked Dow to become a CGI sponsor at the $500,000 level, which they did, as well as making a $150,000 donation to the Foundation for President Clinton to attend a Dow dinner in Davos.
The story gets even more bizarre when Band reveals in the following footnote that Liveris provided the Dow Chemical plane to fly President Clinton and his staff from New York to California and then California to North Korea for their golf outing. We would assume this is a simple typo by Band and/or he's just geographically challenged...if not, this certainly raises a whole other set of questions for Bill.
Mr. Liveris provided the Dow plane to fly President Clinton and his staff to and from California for our trip to, and from, North Korea. As a private trip, the Foundation had to pay the costs of airfare; Mr. Liveris’ in kind contribution saved the Foundation in excess of $100,000.
According to the Dialy Caller, Dow Chemical paid Teneo $2.8 million in 2011 and $16 million in 2012 for a variety of "consultancy services". Of course, Bill Clinton was an honorary chairman of Teneo and, as such, was set to be paid $3.5 million for that position even though he ultimately only kept $100,000 because of the scandals that erupted around the firm, including their advisory relationship with MF Global.
Finally, Band also offers the following commentary on the "$50 million in for-profit activity" he was able to secure for Bill Clinton (as of November 2011) as well as the "$66 million in future contracts, should he choose to continue with those engagements."
Independent of our fundraising and decision-making activities on behalf of the Foundation, we have dedicated ourselves to helping the President secure and engage in for-profit activities – including speeches, books, and advisory service engagements. In that context, we have in effect served as agents, lawyers, managers and implementers to secure speaking, business and advisory service deals. In support of the President’s for-profit activity, we also have solicited and obtained, as appropriate, in-kind services for the President and his family – for personal travel, hospitality, vacation and the like. Neither Justin nor I are separately compensated for these activities (e.g., we do not receive a fee for, or percentage of, the more than $50 million in for-profit activity we have personally helped to secure for President Clinton to date or the $66 million in future contracts, should he choose to continue with those engagements).
With respect to business deals for his advisory services, Justin and I found, developed and brought to President Clinton multiple arrangements for him to accept or reject. Of his current 4 arrangements, we secured all of them; and, we have helped manage and maintain all of his for-profit business relationships. Since 2001, President Clinton’s business arrangements have yielded more than $30 million for him personally, with $66 million to be paid out over the next nine years should he choose to continue with the current engagements.
A big part of those "for-profit" activities was a $3.5mm annual payment from Laureate...
Foundation Donations
...and millions in speaking fees arranged by Band.
Foundation Donations
Confused? Here is a simpler recap from the NYT's Nick Confessore:
Follow
Nick Halloween ? @nickconfessore
This Doug Band memo, in the latest Podesta dump, is the Rosetta stone of the Teneo-Clinton Foundation complex. https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/32240 …
10:43 AM - 26 Oct 2016
103 103 Retweets 102 102 likes
20h
Nick Halloween ? @nickconfessore
In essence, the memo & footnotes describe Teneo as the revenue-generating arm of Clinton, Inc.--for Clinton speeches, foundation $, etc.
Follow
Nick Halloween ? @nickconfessore
Band's argument: I am not get fully compensated for all of the stuff I do for Clintonworld, so you should let me do Teneo. Everyone wins.
10:54 AM - 26 Oct 2016
27 27 Retweets 31 31 likes
20h
Nick Halloween ? @nickconfessore
Band's argument: I am not get fully compensated for all of the stuff I do for Clintonworld, so you should let me do Teneo. Everyone wins.
Follow
Nick Halloween ? @nickconfessore
Now, you could argue: So what? If Band gets his clients to pop over money to a charity, why is that bad?
10:55 AM - 26 Oct 2016
20 20 Retweets 15 15 likes
20h
Nick Halloween ? @nickconfessore
Now, you could argue: So what? If Band gets his clients to pop over money to a charity, why is that bad?
Follow
Nick Halloween ? @nickconfessore
But consider that Band was selling his clients on idea that giving to foundation was, in essence, a way to bolster their influence.
10:56 AM - 26 Oct 2016
29 29 Retweets 27 27 likes
20h
Nick Halloween ? @nickconfessore
Teneo-Foundation-Clinton in a nutshell, if you want to parse. You can look at it a few different ways. pic.twitter.com/fk0gy0LtCF
Follow
Nick Halloween ? @nickconfessore
Clinton & Band built a platform for executives to bolster their companies' images, bathe in BC's praise, and do some good, while...
11:17 AM - 26 Oct 2016
4 4 Retweets 4 4 likes
20h
Nick Halloween ? @nickconfessore
Clinton & Band built a platform for executives to bolster their companies' images, bathe in BC's praise, and do some good, while...
Follow
Nick Halloween ? @nickconfessore
...Teneo extracted earnings for Band and, depending on what you see in these e-mails, Clinton himself. Teneo paid Clinton until late '11.
11:19 AM - 26 Oct 2016
5 5 Retweets 4 4 likes
Follow
Nick Halloween ? @nickconfessore
I guess you can wave it all off as a nothingburger. But Chelsea Clinton and some of Clinton's other aides were clearly freaking out.
11:20 AM - 26 Oct 2016
9 9 Retweets 5 5 likes
Follow
Nick Halloween ? @nickconfessore
Generally, the emails show Clinton's *own closest aides* troubled or horrified by things that her surrogates have spent years waving off.
11:23 AM - 26 Oct 2016
99 99 Retweets 97 97 likes
With that, we look forward to Donna Brazile's explanation of how this is all just an attempt to "criminalize behavior that is normal."
The full memo can be viewed here:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-26/doug-band-memo-offers-vivid-details-foundation-corporate-donors-and-bills-profit-act
Hillary’s Lawyer – “We have to clean this up!”
Martin Armstrong
Oct. 26, 2016
The Wall Street Journal broke the story on Sunday night about the connections surfacing between the Democrats and Jill Mcabe’s run for the Senate who is the wife of one of the top FBI investigators into the Hillary emails. According to the Journal, the finance records show Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe’s PAC gave $467,500 to Jill McCabe’s 2015 state Senate campaign. Then the Virginia Democratic Party itself spent an additional $207,788 on her campaign. McCabe, who ended up losing to the Republican incumbent, is married to Andrew McCabe, the FBI’s deputy director.
On top of all that, now an email from 2015 reveals Hillary’s top aide and lawyer Cheryl Mills wrote to Podesta, “we need to clean this up,” referencing the communications between President Obama and Hillary Clinton where she was clearly using her private server. “He has emails from her – they do not say state.gov,” Mills wrote.
In a CBS interview in March 2015, Obama was bluntly asked when he first learned about Clinton’s private server that she used as Secretary of State. He answered: “The same time everybody else learned it through news reports.”
However, Obama clearly signed this memorandum to which Hillary would have been a party. Her claiming it was allowed is plain out right a lie. There are emails from Obama to Hillary’s private server, proving he knew what she was doing. Clinton keeps trying to dodge the criticism and distort the degree to which the rules have changed since previous secretaries of state were in office. On August 24, 2012, Obama signed a directive to the heads of the executive departments, which would have included Hillary (Directive to Hillary 2012 m-12-18). Hillary was Secretary of State between 2009 and 2013. Therefore, Obama knew she had a private email server and sent this directive, which she IGNORED. This latest email from Mills to Podesta shows Hillary was outside of the rules and law.
Podesta wrote in return to use Executive Privilege to cover-up the issue just like Richard Nixon. “Think we should hold emails to and from potus? That’s the heart of his exec privilege. We could get them to ask for that. They may not care, but I(t) seems like they will.”
Indeed, the New York Post exposed that Obama used a fake name to communicate with Hillary on her private server obviously because he KNEW what she was doing.
Unquestionably. Trump is right. We have to “drain the swamp” in Washington, DC.
Why hasn't Biden replaced Obama yet?...
Has the Official duty of
Office been properly done?...
Article 2, Section 3 of The
Constitution of the United States...
http://constitutionus.com/
; he shall take Care that the
Laws be faithfully executed, and
Everyone watching the pin the
tail on Hillary trilogy may
not have their eye on the ball...
Looks like they hired college students...
to Vigilante at the Trump Bus
stops thru election day...
Could be out of work folks
wearing College school names
and giving those schools a
bad name also...
Cash paid can't be traced
on anything preset before
O'Keefe and Creamer quit...
Do You Feel Safer?...
Dilbert Creator Adams Exposes The Real Bully Party
Oct 25, 2016 2:47 PM
Authored by Dilbert Creator, Scott Adams
I’ve been trying to figure out what common trait binds Clinton supporters together. As far as I can tell, the most unifying characteristic is a willingness to bully in all its forms.
If you have a Trump sign in your lawn, they will steal it.
If you have a Trump bumper sticker, they will deface your car.
If you speak of Trump at work you could get fired.
On social media, almost every message I get from a Clinton supporter is a bullying type of message. They insult. They try to shame. They label. And obviously they threaten my livelihood.
We know from Project Veritas that Clinton supporters tried to incite violence at Trump rallies. The media downplays it.
We also know Clinton’s side hired paid trolls to bully online. You don’t hear much about that. Yesterday, by no coincidence, Huffington Post, Salon, and Daily Kos all published similar-sounding hit pieces on me, presumably to lower my influence. (That reason, plus jealousy, are the only reasons writers write about other writers.)
Joe Biden said he wanted to take Trump behind the bleachers and beat him up. No one on Clinton’s side disavowed that call to violence because, I assume, they consider it justified hyperbole.
Team Clinton has succeeded in perpetuating one of the greatest evils I have seen in my lifetime. Her side has branded Trump supporters (40%+ of voters) as Nazis, sexists, homophobes, racists, and a few other fighting words. Their argument is built on confirmation bias and persuasion. But facts don’t matter because facts never matter in politics. What matters is that Clinton’s framing of Trump provides moral cover for any bullying behavior online or in person. No one can be a bad person for opposing Hitler, right?
Some Trump supporters online have suggested that people who intend to vote for Trump should wear their Trump hats on election day. That is a dangerous idea, and I strongly discourage it. There would be riots in the streets because we already know the bullies would attack. But on election day, inviting those attacks is an extra-dangerous idea. Violence is bad on any day, but on election day, Republicans are far more likely to unholster in an effort to protect their voting rights. Things will get wet fast.
Yes, yes, I realize Trump supporters say bad things about Clinton supporters too. I don’t defend the bad apples on either side. I’ll just point out that Trump’s message is about uniting all Americans under one flag. The Clinton message is that some Americans are good people and the other 40% are some form of deplorables, deserving of shame, vandalism, punishing taxation, and violence. She has literally turned Americans on each other. It is hard for me to imagine a worse thing for a presidential candidate to do.
I’ll say that again.
As far as I can tell, the worst thing a presidential candidate can do is turn Americans against each other. Clinton is doing that, intentionally.
Intentionally.
As I often say, I don’t know who has the best policies. I don’t know the best way to fight ISIS and I don’t know how to fix healthcare or trade deals. I don’t know which tax policies are best to lift the economy. I don’t know the best way to handle any of that stuff. (And neither do you.) But I do have a bad reaction to bullies. And I’ve reached my limit.
I hope you have too. Therefore…
I endorse Donald Trump for President of the United States because I oppose bullying in all its forms.
I don’t defend Trump’s personal life. Neither Trump nor Clinton are role models for our children. Let’s call that a tie, at worst.
The bullies are welcome to drown in their own bile while those of us who want a better world do what we’ve been doing for hundreds of years: Work to make it better while others complain about how we’re doing it.
Today I put Trump’s odds of winning in a landslide back to 98%. Remember, I told you a few weeks ago that Trump couldn’t win unless “something changed.”
Something just changed.
Read more here... http://blog.dilbert.com/post/152293480726/the-bully-party
Equity Risk Tumbles As Trump Closes Gap On Clinton
Oct 25, 2016 3:20 PM
Despite the constant puke of propaganda that a Trump presidency will bring hell on earth and crash stock markets (remember Brexit?), it appears market participants are much more concerned about a Clinton win...
As Clinton's lead soared following 'pussy-gate', so investors piled into protection, bidding VIX up from 13 to 18...
During the last week, Trump has regained some momentum and VIX (equity risk) has tumbled.
Perhaps tyranny is what markets are most afraid of, as Larry Lindsay warned,
"it's pretty clear what side the news media is on here and that is something that should worry markets after the election... If Mrs. Clinton becomes President, who will keep an eye on her, on the kinds of side-deals that may be happening, on the regulatory abuses...?"
But we do note that the Peso remains convinced of a Clinton victory (or Trump loss)...
Hillary's #1 aide Huma Abedin: Undeniable ties to terrorists & 9/11 funders
Clinton - Career Criminal
Oct 25, 2016
fantastic concise video of Hitlary';s crimes against the American people.
Larry Lindsey Silences CNBC: "The Most Dangerous Candidate Is The One The Media Is Paying The Least Attention To"
Oct 24, 2016
"Polling today isn't the way it used to be, they are not random," explains a calm Larry Lindsey to an 'innocent' CNBC anchor, before pointing out that just how biased (as we have detailed previously) the Clinton-tilted polls are.
One clever anchor retorts - seemingly proclaiming innocence (or ignorance) - "what's the incentive for the polling organizations to try and cook the books here... pretty short-sighted I would think."
Lindsey eloquently explains that "they are creating a bandwagon effect... it's pretty clear what side the news media is on here and that is something that should worry markets after the election... If Mrs. Clinton becomes President, who will keep an eye on her, on the kinds of side-deals that may be happening, on the regulatory abuses...?"
Finally, Lindsey lays the hammer, after CNBC smugly notes that he is not a Trump supporter, the director of the National Economic Council exclaimed,
"I live in a state where I have the luxury of not having to pick between two evils... and vote for Gary Johnson...
but the most important thing as people are deciding between the lesser of two evils, the real question you should be asking is, which is the most dangerous of the two evils, and that one's easy... the most dangerous evil is the one the press is not focused on..."
Sit back, relax, and watch 5 minutes of uncomfortable truths unleashed on an unsuspecting CNBC anchory...
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-24/larry-lindsey-silences-cnbc-most-dangerous-candidate-one-media-paying-least-attentio
We Can Prove the Podesta Emails Released by Wikileaks Are Authentic... Here's How
Oct 24, 2016
Anyone with half a brain or an ounce of honesty left, knows that the John Podesta emails released by Wikileaks are authentic. If they weren’t, everyone implicated in them would have immediately and aggressively denied their claims rather than simply change the subject by blurting out some incoherent nonsense about Russia and Vladimir Putin.
So while most of us were already confident in their authenticity, a key tactic of corrupt Democratic operatives has been to try to cast doubt on them being real in order to sway the minds of some of our more cerebrally challenged fellow citizens. As such, any technical proof that the emails are genuine is of great significance, and we can thank Robert Graham of Errata Security for providing this.
He first grabbed my attention on the topic a few days ago with a series of tweets:
Follow
Rob Zombie Graham?? @ErrataRob
BTW, Donna Brazile is a big fat liar. We can verify some of the Wikileaks emails, including this one
7:15 PM - 21 Oct 2016
217 217 Retweets 234 234 likes
21 Oct
Rob Zombie Graham?? @ErrataRob
BTW, Donna Brazile is a big fat liar. We can verify some of the Wikileaks emails, including this one pic.twitter.com/K9qDMXHyvp
Follow
Rob Zombie Graham?? @ErrataRob
I know it's funny, but Hillary did her own email servers well enough that we can verify, with crypto, she got debate questions in advance.
7:16 PM - 21 Oct 2016
103 103 Retweets 125 125 likes
He then expanded on his thoughts in a post published yesterday titled, Politifact: Yes we can fact check Kaine’s email.
Here’s what we learn:
This Politifact post muddles over whether the Wikileaks leaked emails have been doctored, specifically the one about Tim Kaine being picked a year ago. The post is wrong — we can verify this email and most of the rest.
In order to bloc spam, emails nowadays contain a form of digital signatures that verify their authenticity. This is automatic, it happens on most modern email systems, without users being aware of it.
This means we can indeed validate most of the Wikileaks leaked DNC/Clinton/Podesta emails. There are many ways to do this, but the easiest is to install the popular Thunderbird email app along with the DKIM Verifier addon. Then go to the Wikileaks site and download the raw source of the email https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/2986.
As you see in the screenshot below, the DKIM signature verifies as true.
If somebody doctored the email, such as changing the date, then the signature would not verify. I try this in the email below, changing the date from 2015 to 2016. This causes the signature to fail.
There are some ways to forge DKIM-signed emails, specifically if the sender uses short keys. When short keys are used, hackers can “crack” them, and sign fraudulent emails. This doesn’t apply to GMail, which uses strong 2048 bit keys, as demonstrated in the following screenshot. (No, the average person isn’t supposed to understand this screen shot, but experts can).
What this means is that the only way this email could’ve been doctored is if there has been an enormous, nation-state level hack of Google to steal their signing key. It’s possible, of course, but extraordinarily improbable. It’s conspiracy-theory level thinking. Google GMail has logs of which emails went through its systems — if there was a nation-state attack able to forge them, Google would know, and they’d be telling us. (For one thing, they’d be forcing password resets on all our accounts).
Since DKIM verifies this email and most of the others, we conclude that Kaine is “pants on fire” lying about this specific email, and “mostly untrue” in his claim that the Wikileaks emails have been doctored.
On the other hand, Wikileaks only shows us some of the emails. We don’t see context. We don’t see other staffers certain it’s going to be somebody else for VP. We don’t see related email discusses that cast this one in a different light. So of course whether this (verified) email means they’d firmly chosen Kaine is “mostly unproven”. The purpose of this document isn’t diagnosing what the emails mean, only the claims by Hillary’s people that these emails have been “doctored”.
As a side note, I offer a 1-BTC (one bit coin, ~$600 at today’s exchange rate) bounty to anybody who can prove me wrong. If you can doctor the above email, then you win the bounty. Some rules apply (i.e. it needs to be a real doctored email, not a trick). I offer this bounty because already people are trying to cast doubt on whether DKIM works, without offering any evidence. Put up or shut up.
Once the above gets in front of a wider audience, expect Russia demonization from Democratic hacks to go exponential.
Great work Mr. Graham.
Media Video review of Veritas video...
Health Insurance going up 25% in 2017?...
Hillary proposes to raise fines
on those not enrolled to make
the increased health care premiums
look more Affordable...
Do You Feel Safer?...
Bill Clinton lost majority vote Twice...
in 2 campaigns for President...
But the Democrats had a focus
on where to win electoral
votes in each election...
Majority of American Voters
didn't want Clinton for President...
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781456.html
But Clinton got in and repealed
banking laws that led to the
Depression of 2009...
Republicans have to focus on
boots on the ground watching
election polling operations...
Do You Feel Safer?...
Soros-Linked Voting Machines Cause Concern Over Rigged Election
Submitted by Joseph Jankowski of Planet Free Will
Oct 24, 2016 1:02 PM
A U.K. based company that has provided voting machines for 16 states, including important battleground states like Florida and Arizona, has direct ties with billionaire leftist and Clinton crusader George Soros.
With recent WikiLeaks emails showing that Hillary Clinton received foreign policy directives and coordinated on domestic policy with Soros, along with receiving tens of millions of dollars in presidential campaign support from the billionaire, concerns are growing that these shadowy players may pull the strings behind the curtains of the upcoming presidential election.
As Lifezette reports, the fact that the man in control of voting machines in 16 states is tied directly to the man who has given millions of dollars to the Clinton campaign and various progressive and globalist causes will surely leave a bad taste in the mouth of many a voter.
The balloting equipment tied to Soros is coming from the U.K. based Smartmatic company, whose chairman Mark Malloch-Brown is a former UN official and sits on the board of Soros’ Open Society Foundation.
According to Lifezette, Malloch-Brown was part of the Soros Advisory Committee on Bosnia and also is a member of the executive committee of the International Crisis Group, an organization he co-founded in the 1990s and built with funds from George Soros’ personal fortune.
In 2007 Soros appointed Malloch-Brown vice-president of his Quantum Funds, vice-chairman of Soros Fund Management, and vice-chairman of the Open Society Institute (former name of OSF).
Browns ties also intertwine with the Clintons as he was a partner with Sawyer-Miller, the consulting firm where close Clinton associate Mandy Grunwald worked. Brown also was also a senior advisor to FTI Consulting, a firm at which Jackson Dunn, who spent 15 years working as an aide to the Clintons, is a senior managing director.
When taking that into account, along with the poor track record Smartmatic has of providing free and fair elections, this all becomes quite terrifying.
An astonishing 2006 classified U.S. diplomatic cable obtained and released by WikiLeaks reveals the extent to which Smartmatic may have played a hand in rigging the 2004 Venezuelan recall election under a section titled “A Shadow of Fraud.” The memo stated that “Smartmatic Corporation is a riddle both in ownership and operation, complicated by the fact that its machines have overseen several landslide (and contested) victories by President Hugo Chavez and his supporters.”
“The Smartmatic machines used in Venezuela are widely suspected of, though never proven conclusively to be, susceptible to fraud,” the memo continued. “The Venezuelan opposition is convinced that the Smartmatic machines robbed them of victory in the August 2004 referendum. Since then, there have been at least eight statistical analyses performed on the referendum results.”
“One study obtained the data log from the CANTV network and supposedly proved that the Smartmatic machines were bi-directional and in fact showed irregularities in how they reported their results to the CNE central server during the referendum,” it read.
With such suspicion and a study which claims to prove that the U.K. firm’s equipment tampered with the 2004 Venezuelan recall election, should be enough for states to reject these machines if they desire a fair election.
Smartmatic is providing machines to Arizona, California, Colorado, Washington DC, Florida, Illinois, Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri, New Jersey, Nevada, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Washington and Wisconsin, which means these Soros and Clinton linked machines are going to take the votes of thousands of Americans.
While GOP nominee Donald Trump has been voicing his opinion that the elections are indeed rigged due to media bias, and the proof that mainstream polls are heavily weighted to favor Clinton, it is needless to say that if the results show Hillary as a winner in November, there is going to a mess to shuffle through to find signs of honesty.
"Don’t Repeat That To Anybody" - Hillary Clinton And Donna Brazile Implicated In Latest Project Veritas Video
by Tyler Durden
Oct 24, 2016 1:07 PM
Last week, Jame O'keefe and Project Veritas Action potentially altered the course of the U.S. election, or at a minimum raised serious doubts about the practices of the Clinton campaign and the DNC, after releasing two undercover videos that revealed efforts of democrat operatives to incite violence at republican rallies and commit "mass voter fraud." While democrats have vehemently denied the authenticity of the videos, two democratic operatives, Robert Creamer and Scott Foval, have both been forced to resign over the allegations.
Many democrats made the rounds on various mainstream media outlets over the weekend in an attempt to debunk the Project Veritas videos. Unfortunately for them, O'Keefe fired back with warnings that part 3 of his multi-part series was forthcoming and would implicate Hillary Clinton directly.
Follow
James O'Keefe @JamesOKeefeIII
Anything happens to me, there's a deadman's switch on Part III, which will be released Monday. @HillaryClinton and @donnabrazile implicated.
3:41 PM - 21 Oct 2016
17,085 17,085 Retweets 19,824 19,824 likes
Now, we have the 3rd installment of O'Keefe's videos which does seemingly reveal direct coordination between Hillary Clinton, Donna Brazile, Robert Creamer and Scott Foval to organize a smear campaign over Trump's failure to release his tax returns. Per Project Veritas:
Part III of the undercover Project Veritas Action investigation dives further into the back room dealings of Democratic politics. It exposes prohibited communications between Hillary Clinton’s campaign, the DNC and the non-profit organization Americans United for Change. And, it’s all disguised as a duck. In this video, several Project Veritas Action undercover journalists catch Democracy Partners founder directly implicating Hillary Clinton in FEC violations. “In the end, it was the candidate, Hillary Clinton, the future president of the United States, who wanted ducks on the ground,” says Creamer in one of several exchanges. “So, by God, we would get ducks on the ground.” It is made clear that high-level DNC operative Creamer realized that this direct coordination between Democracy Partners and the campaign would be damning when he said: “Don’t repeat that to anybody.”
Within the video both Clinton and Brazile are directly implicated by Creamer during the following exchange:
"The duck has to be an Americans United for Change entity. This had to do only with some problem between Donna Brazile and ABC, which is owned by Disney, because they were worried about a trademark issue. That's why. It's really silly.
We originally launched this duck because Hillary Clinton wants the duck.
In any case, so she really wanted this duck figure out there doing this stuff, so that was fine. So, we put all these ducks out there and got a lot of coverage. And Trump taxes. And then ABC/Disney went crazy because they thought our original slogan was 'Donald ducks his taxes, releasing his tax returns."
They said it was a trademark issue. It's not, but anyway, Donna Brazile had a connection with them and she didn't want to get sued. So we switched the ownership of the duck to Americans United for Change and now our signs say 'Trump ducks releasing his tax returns.' And we haven't had anymore trouble."
As Project Veritas points out, this direct coordination between Clinton, Brazile and Americans United For Change is a violation of federal election laws:
"The ducks on the ground are likely 'public communications' for purposes of the law. It's political activity opposing Trump, paid for by Americans United For Change funds but controlled by Clinton/her campaign."
Hillary Clinton Was Protected by Shadow Government!
Oct 23, 2016
Watergate's Bob Woodward: "Clinton Foundation Is Corrupt, It's A Scandal"
Oct 24, 2016 7:25 AM
It's one thing for the right-wing press to accuse the Clinton foundation of cronyism, corruption, and scandal (especially if the facts, and internal admissions by affiliated employees, confirm as much) - it tends to be generally ignored by the broader, if left-leaning, media. But when the Watergate scandal's Bob Woodward, associate editor at the liberal Washington Post, says very much the same, Hillary Clinton's campaign has no choice but to notice. This is precisely what happened today when journalist Bob Woodward told a Fox News Sunday panel that the Clinton Foundation is "corrupt" and that Hillary Clinton has not answered for it.
Here, courtesy of RealClearPolitics, is the transcript of today's exchange:
CHRIS WALLACE, FOX NEWS SUNDAY: Then there are the allegations about the Clinton Foundation and pay to play, which I asked Secretary Clinton about in the debate, and she turned into an attack on the Trump Foundation.
But, Bob, I want to go back to the conversation I was having with Robby Mook before. When -- when you see what seems to be clear evidence that Clinton Foundation donors were being treated differently than non-donors in terms of access, when you see this new -- new revelations about the $12 million deal between Hillary Clinton, the foundation, and the king of Morocco, are voters right to be troubled by this?
BOB WOODWARD, THE WASHINGTON POST: I -- yes, it's a -- it’s corrupt. It's -- it’s a scandal. And she didn't answer your question at all. And she turned to embrace the good work that the Clinton Foundation has done. And she has a case there. But the mixing of speech fees, the Clinton Foundation, and actions by the State Department, which she ran, are all intertwined and it's corrupt. You know, I mean, you can't just say it's unsavory. But there's no formal investigation going on now, and there are outs that they have.
But the election isn't going to be decided on that. I mean Karl was making the point about this, I'm not going to observe the result of the election. I mean that's -- that’s absurd. I mean it has no consequence. If Trump loses, they're not going to let him in the White House. He’s not going to have a transition team. And -- and to focus on that, I think, is wrong. I think the issue is, what's going to be the aftermath of this campaign.
So it's corrupt, it's a scandal, and... it will have no consequences at all. It's time to look up the latest definition of Banana republic again.
12,073,443 views/ Hillary Clinton lying for 13 minutes straight.
11:11 Films
11:11 Films
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dY77j6uBHI
" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=
i remember this one lots. faker/
re;
Platform of Falsehood...
Bosnia landing during sniper
fire and told to run for cover...
A Vote For Hillary Is A Vote For Felony
The Market Ticker ®
by Karl Denninger
2016-10-19
The Veritas exposes' thus far have been very bad.
But let's take a look at just one of the things we discovered -- Bob Creamer, who "resigned" after being "outed" in a video discussing wide-scale voter fraud -- literally obtaining credentials for non-eligible people and then getting them to the polls to intentionally defraud the election process by casting votes en-masse.
He flat-out admits to voter fraud on video: "We’ve been bussing people in to deal with you f*****g *******s for fifty years....."
Project Veritas has additionally exposed explicit connections between Democrat operatives who on tape have taken credit for intentionally inciting violence at Trump rallies, and a search of the FEC reports have disclosed that at least one of those people who so-bragged was on Hillary Clinton's campaign payroll just a few days before the infamous Chicago "performance" which prevented Trump from holding his rally there.
One could take a look at this dispassionately and say "oh but that's just one."
But.... it's not.
The Creamer expose is especially galling because he is a convicted felon, and the spouse of a Congresswoman. His crime? He swindled financial institutions while running a "public interest group" and pocketed income taxes instead of depositing them!
Not only was he still (in his own words) conspiring to commit criminal acts 10 years later, in this case voter fraud, but in addition he appears 342 times in the White House visitor log during Obama's two terms, including dozens in which he met with Obama himself.
You don't have to like Trump. There are plenty of things that I don't personally care for when it comes to Trump myself. But I cannot, and will not, vote to place in the White House someone who I truly believe is a felon, albeit un-indicted and un-convicted (so far), along with a bunch of associates who have admitted, on tape, to actual crimes, some of whom have been convicted of prior felonies, and who additionally have now been caught on tape admitting to or conspiring to commit even more unlawful acts including the most-important crimes of all in a political context -- subverting and corrupting our elections.
A vote for Hillary is a vote for criminality -- not just in Hillary herself but also through those who she associates herself with and pays through her campaign.
Are you really crazy enough to vote for criminality in the White House?
Are you willing to vote for and sanction the literal destruction of all authority with regard to the Executive, who I remind you is responsible for enforcement of the law under our Constitution? Such an act could quite conceivably lead to an actual war -- either with other major world powers or, possibly worse, a civil war right here in America.
And finally, what makes you so sure that all this corruption, fraud and blatant refusal to prosecute criminal acts won't be used against you?
this is going to be the most rigged election ever. the Clintons' never play fair,..they play to cheat to win.
Hitlary is the surface Establishment and underground Dark State's little girl to do their criminal biddings.
i smell a revolt in the makings
this is one wild video !!!!,...Hillary And DNC Busted!
Caught Lying In Debate!
Judge And NSA “The Big Deception”!
Brazile Guilty!
THIS is What Happens When You Tell the Truth About Hillary on MSM
god forbid anyone speak the truth about Hitlary,...
HERE'S WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU DO,...
...Platform of Falsehood...
Bosnia landing during sniper
fire and told to run for cover...
Today's Top Stories
Early Voting In Florida Shows Trump Winning Election By Landslide
WikiLeaks Bombshell: ‘There Is No US Election’.
http://investmentwatchblog.com/crooked-hillary-walked-while-fbi-seeks-jail-time-for-general-cartwright-for-mishandling-classified-info/
<iframe width="950" height="534" src=""" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/embed/
<iframe width="950" height="534" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/IRE0QKZZZRI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Sweeping Cyber Attack By Government On WIKILEAKS/TWITTER…Not RUSSIA!
It’s Happening! The Democrats are COMPLETELY Losing Their SH*T Over the Morrocan Wikileaks. WATCH This Guy Go Off on Bill Hemmer
Trey Gowdy tells Obama “F**K Off with Your Executive Order!”
Start digging, folks! Podesta Emails #14 from Wikileaks just dropped
The support for Trump is staggering
Once You Realize What The Media Is Doing, You Will Understand What We’re Up Against
7 Reasons Why ‘Conspiracy Theorists’ May Actually Be ‘Indigo People’
Trump went SAVAGE – the elites went full boobird! LA Times reporter: “What stuck out to me about Trump’s
CROOKED HILLARY WALKED WHILE FBI SEEKS JAIL TIME FOR GENERAL CARTWRIGHT FOR MISHANDLING CLASSIFIED INFO
Submitted by IWB, on October 19th, 2016
http://investmentwatchblog.com/crooked-hillary-walked-while-fbi-seeks-jail-time-for-general-cartwright-for-mishandling-classified-info/
[-chart]nteb-mudflowermedia.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/crooked-hillary-clinton-no-charges-fbi-comey-general-cartwright-prosecuted-933x445.jpg[/chart]
GENERAL CARTWRIGHT IS PAYING THE PRICE FOR HILLARY CLINTON’S SINS
<iframe width="950" height="534" src=""" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/embed/
<iframe width="950" height="534" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/NBfxmfGeFL0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
EDITOR’S NOTE: If you’re name is HIllary Clinton, you can LIE to the FBI, you can DESTROY 13 Blackberries with a hammer, you can operate an ILLEGAL email server, and you can DELETE 33,000 emails with BLEACHBIT. If you’re name is not HIllary Clinton, you’re going to jail. General Cartwright, who did so much less than Crooked Hillary did, is getting fined and going to jail. Hillary gets off scot-free. If this is the kind of power and influence she has a private citizen, can you IMAGINE what she will do as president?
The Obama administration Justice Department has investigated three senior officials for mishandling classified information over the past two years but only one faces a felony conviction, possible jail time and a humiliation that will ruin his career: former Joint Chiefs of Staff vice chairman General James E. Cartwright. The FBI’s handling of the case stands in stark contrast to its treatment of Hillary Clinton and retired General David Petraeus — and it reeks of political considerations.
Monday marked a stunning fall from grace for Cartwright, the man once known as “Obama’s favorite general,” who pleaded guilty to the felony charge of lying to the FBI during its investigation into the leaking of classified information about covert operations against Iran to two journalists. His lawyer Greg Craig said in a statement that Cartwright spoke with David Sanger of the New York Times and Dan Klaidman of Newsweek as a confirming source for stories they had already reported, in an effort to prevent the publication of harmful national security secrets.
Under his plea deal, General Cartwright could face up to five years in prison and a $250,000 fine. Last year, Petraeus cut a deal with the Justice Department after admitting he had lied to the FBI and passed hundreds of highly classified documents to his biographer and mistress Paula Broadwell. He pleaded guilty to a single misdemeanor of mishandling classified information and was sentenced to two years probation and a $100,000 fine.
reading/ « AWFUL! Wikileaks Reveals Clinton Camp Was Posting FAKE “Sexist Trump Job Ads” On Craigslist Diamond and Silk: Hillary is Up in the Poles!! »
http://investmentwatchblog.com/george-soros-owns-voting-machines-in-16-states/
George Soros owns voting machines in 16 states!
Submitted by IWB, on October 15th, 2016
In the US, Smartmatic has offered technology and support services to the Electoral Commissions of 307 counties in 16 States:
Arizona
California
Colorado
District of Columbia
Florida
Illinois
Louisiana
Michigan
Missouri
New Jersey
Nevada
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Virginia
Washington
Wisconsin
http://www.smartmatic.com/case-studies/article/united-states-elections/
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/smartmatic-sgo-malloch-brown-soros-operative-buys-election-cj-wilson
http://www.smartmatic.com/about/our-team/detail/lord-mark-malloch-brown/
]/b]
good morning, happy wkend. have see this one, the dems set map for election is all in their favor.
money man soros in gamer things.
some say russia what soro and elites sway our voting for special interest groups.
re;
Soros owns voting machines in 16 states...
http://investmentwatchblog.com/george-soros-owns-voting-machines-in-16-states/
Good of a place as any to have
an army of trained Republican
poll watchers...
And park a van nearby with sign
on side of it that reads...
'If you were paid
to vote, stop here
first'...
Just keep it simple...
Do You Feel Safer?...
Followers
|
3
|
Posters
|
|
Posts (Today)
|
0
|
Posts (Total)
|
254
|
Created
|
03/21/16
|
Type
|
Free
|
Moderators |
Volume | |
Day Range: | |
Bid Price | |
Ask Price | |
Last Trade Time: |