On the other hand, Schweizer and Eggers note that Hillary Clinton actually violated federal election rules in 2016, in a case directly related to the work of G-A-I. Schweizer’s 2015 book, Clinton Cash, exposed Hillary Clinton’s involvement with the takeover of an American uranium mining company by Russia. That revelation so terrified Clinton’s presidential campaign they decided to pay for the infamous Steele Dossier, with its lurid, unsubstantiated claims that Donald Trump was a Russian stooge. Hillary’s campaign essentially accused the Trump campaign of doing what they were, in fact, guilty of themselves.Peter Schweizer
Everyone knows she stood by her man, blamed his women, and perhaps was a psychological co-rapist for the sake of her political ambitions. Before the next president is elected, Hillary will not only have an albatross around her neck, she will be covered with names like Wellstone, Broaddrick, Moffet, Ward Gracen, Brown, Dowdy, Jones, Ferguson, Zercher, Willey, and more. A majority of those one hundred people will remember the evil the Clintons did, and their legacy will be lost in the folds of tattered dresses and bleeding lips.
SAUDI DIRTY MONEY ENDS UP IN THE CLINTON FOUNDATION FAMILY SLUSH FUND
Jesse Watters: The Clintons' crooked connections
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tnPSvkxKuLg
HOW MANY OF THESE PIGS ARE GAMER LAWYERS?
“Protect and enrich.” This is a perfect encapsulation of the Clinton (LAWYERS-2) Foundation and the (LAWYERS-2) Obama book and television deals. Then there is the Biden (LAWYERS-3) family corruption, followed closely behind by similar abuses of power and office by the (LAWYER) Warren and Sanders families, as Peter Schweizer described in his recent book “Profiles in Corruption.” These names just scratch the surface of government corruption (YOU CAN ADD LAWYER KAMALA HARRIS AND LAWYER CHUCK SCHUMER TO THE PATHEION OF DEMOCRAT BRIBES SUCKING CORRUPT LAWYER POLITICIANS!). BRIAN C JOONDEPH
One topic that Hillary is quick to criticize President Trump on is his relationship with Saudia Arabia. It’s ironic given the Clinton Foundation’s refusal to state that they will no longer accept financial donations from The Kingdom as others have.
But the Clinton Foundation, to which donations declined dramatically after Clinton’s 2016 defeat, has taken multi-million dollar contributions from Saudi Arabia in the past and isn’t ruling out continuing to accept them.
The Clinton Foundation accepted between $10 and $25 million from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, with donations coming as late as 2014. A now-defunct group named “Friends of Saudi Arabia,” which was reportedly co-founded by a Saudi Prince and often worked as a PR front for the kingdom, also donated between $1 and $5 million.
Qatar's longstanding efforts to buy influence in the United States have, quite unsurprisingly, included substantial donations to the Clinton Foundation. In 2011, for example, the foundation accepted a $1 million gift from Qatar in honor of former president Bill Clinton's 65th birthday. Hillary was serving as secretary of state at the time, but failed to disclose the massive donation to the State Department despite her pledge to keep the agency apprised of the foundation's foreign donors.
Clinton pulled the 'dirtiest, dirtiest' tricks in American politics: Goodwin
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0MnyIh51EcY
All criminal roads lead back to Hillary Clinton: Former US attorney
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7rTyFs8gbpU
Pollak: DOJ Never Prosecuted Hillary Clinton for ‘Conspiracy to Defraud U.S.’ with Russia Hoax
Special Counsel Jack Smith charged former President Donald Trump on Tuesday with four counts relating to his challenges to the 2020 presidential election, including “conspiracy to defraud the United States.” The supposed act of “fraud” was that Trump said the election had been stolen, despite knowing, or at least being told, otherwise. But if pushing a false claim of stolen elections is a federal crime, then Hillary Clinton, the Democratic Party, the media, and the Department of Justice itself should be charged.
To recap: Hillary Clinton falsely claimed in 2016 that Russia was colluding with Trump. With help from election lawyer Marc Elias, Hillary’s campaign, and the Democratic National Committee, hired the Fusion GPS opposition research firm to create the phony “dossier” on Trump’s Russia ties. They shopped it, successfully, to the FBI, which began spying on a Trump campaign aide. Aides like Jake Sullivan (now the National Security Advisor) continued to spread the “Russia collusion” claim within the media.
After Trump won, the hoax took on new life. Despite conceding to Trump the morning after Election Day in 2016, Hillary kept claiming that the election had, in fact, been stolen. The Department of Justice renewed surveillance warrants even after it knew the “dossier” was false. Outgoing FBI director James Comey triggered the appointment of Special Counsel Robert Mueller to investigate, though he had reason to know there was no evidence of “Russia collusion” — and, indeed, none was ever found.
The hoax undermined the legitimacy of the incoming Trump administration and interfered with its ability to conduct foreign policy. Even after Mueller came up empty, the hoax took on new life in the form of the 2019 impeachment investigation, which focused on Trump’s conversation with the Ukrainian president but implied that the president was secretly trying to help Russia. In the 2020 election, the perpetrators of the old hoax claimed, falsely, that Hunter Biden’s laptop was “Russian disinformation.”
In short, there has never been a greater or more consequential hoax in modern American history than the “Russia collusion” hoax. And yet no one has ever been prosecuted for it — least of all Hillary Clinton, who was ultimately responsible for it. The Department of Justice, through Special Counsel John H. Durham, pursued a few low-level prosecutions, but no one was ever targeted for the overall “fraud” — even though the story of how the “Russia collusion” hoax was concocted eventually emerged.
Arguably, “fraud” is not an applicable charge. Earlier this year, the Supreme Court issued two decisions, Percoco v. United States and Ciminelli v. United States, that restrict the use of fraud statutes. As one summary put it: “For decades, the Court has grappled with federal fraud prosecutions creeping further and further from offenses grounded in traditional property interests … the Court sent a clear signal that the wire fraud statute has its limitations and that it is not a catchall for any and all deceptive conduct.”
But if “fraud” is to be used, the “Russia collusion” hoax certainly qualifies. And it is more obviously a fraud than Trump’s “Big Lie” about the 2020 presidential election. While Jack Smith’s indictment claims that “These claims were false, and the Defendant knew they were false,” the indictment does not show direct evidence of Trump’s state of mind — only that he was told by aides that his allegations were untrue. There is overwhelming evidence in the public record to suggest Trump really believes that he won.
Regardless, the fact that the Department of Justice is willing to prosecute one side’s claim of a stolen election, and not the other, as a “fraud against the United States,” suggests a deep political bias in the agency, despite Attorney General Merrick Garland’s assurances. And it also points to the fact that senior officials at the Department of Justice, through their false warrant applications and leaks to the media, were co-conspirators in perpetrating the fraud of “Russia collusion,” for years, on the American people.
Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News and the host of Breitbart News Sunday on Sirius XM Patriot on Sunday evenings from 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. ET (4 p.m. to 7 p.m. PT). He is the author of the recent e-book, Neither Free nor Fair: The 2020 U.S. Presidential Election. His recent book, RED NOVEMBER, tells the story of the 2020 Democratic presidential primary from a conservative perspective. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.
No comments:
Post a Comment