Christine Pelosi on Epstein’s Arrest: “Quite Likely Some of Our Faves are Implicated”…True…Epstein Was a Clinton Fundraiser

maxresdefault (8)

Start buying your popcorn now, gentle readers.

FoxNews.com reports that

Christine Pelosi, a Democratic National Committee official and daughter of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, warned conspicuously on Saturday evening that it is “quite likely that some of our faves are implicated” in the “horrific” sex-trafficking case against politically connected financier Jeffrey Epstein.

Epstein is due in court following his sudden arrest Saturday in New York on new sex-trafficking charges involving allegations dating to the early 2000s, according to law enforcement officials. He has been accused of paying underage girls for massages and sexually abusing them at his mansion in Palm Beach, Fla., and in New York City. His 72-acre private estate on the Virgin Islands, a home said to be nicknamed “Orgy Island,” also has been under scrutiny.

“This Epstein case is horrific and the young women deserve justice,” Pelosi tweeted. “It is quite likely that some of our faves are implicated but we must follow the facts and let the chips fall where they may – whether on Republicans or Democrats.”

It was unclear exactly to whom Pelosi was referring, but Epstein has long been connected with high-profile figures, including Britain’s Prince Andrew and former President Bill Clinton. Court documents obtained by Fox News in 2016 showed that Clinton took at least 26 trips flying aboard Epstein’s private jet, known as the “Lolita Express,” and apparently ditched his Secret Service detail on some of the excursions. Records showed that President Trump may have flown on the jet at least once.

The president previously called attention to Clinton’s dealings with the financier.

“Nice guy — uh, got a lot of problems coming up, in my opinion, with the famous island, with Jeffrey Epstein,” Trump told Fox News’ Sean Hannity in 2015, referring to Clinton’s connections with Epstein. “A lot of problems.”

Meanwhile, Trump biographer Tim O’Brien this weekend reposted an excerpt fom a 2002 profile of Epstein in New York Magazine, in which Trump told a reporter, “I’ve known Jeff for fifteen years. Terrific guy. He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side.”

However, Trump’s legal team more recently has denied the two were friends.

Trump banned Epstein from his Mar-a-Lago estate “because Epstein sexually assaulted an underage girl at the club,” according to court documents filed by Bradley Edwards, the lawyer who has represented several Epstein accusers. That claim has not been confirmed by Trump or Mar-a-Lago.

Miami Herald investigative reporter Julie K. Brown said following Epstein’s arrest that Trump and Epstein “went to dinner parties at each other’s houses, Trump was also on his plane. Probably not as much as a lot of other people because, you know, Trump had his own plane.”

Epstein was being held at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in Manhattan, according to the Federal Bureau of Prisons website. The wealthy hedge fund manager is slated to appear Monday in Manhattan federal court.

Flight logs showed Clinton flew on Epstein’s private jet dozens of times. (File)
Epstein’s arrest, first reported by The Daily Beast, came amid renewed scrutiny of the once-secret 2008 plea deal that ended the federal investigation against him.

He ultimately served 13 months in jail and registered as a sex offender after pleading guilty to two lesser state prostitution charges, with one involving a girl whom prosecutors called a prostitute — even though she was only 14 years old.

Epstein had faced a possible life sentence prior to that plea deal, which has been challenged in Florida federal court. The deal also required he reach financial settlements with dozens of his once-teenage victims and register as a sex offender.

Epstein’s deal was overseen by former Miami U.S. Attorney Alexander Acosta, who is now Trump’s labor secretary. Acosta has defended the plea deal as appropriate under the circumstances, though the White House said in February that it was “looking into” his handling of the arrangement.

“This matter has been publicly addressed previously, including during confirmation hearings,” a Labor Department spokesperson told Fox News. “The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Florida has defended the actions in this case across three administrations.”

U.S. District Judge Kenneth Marra of Florida ruled earlier this year that Epstein’s victims should have been consulted under federal law about the deal, and he was weighing whether to invalidate the non-prosecution agreement, or NPA, that protected Epstein from federal charges.

Wealthy financier Jeffery Epstein faced up to life in prison, but never went to trial, over allegations he sexually molested dozens of underage girls at his Palm Beach mansion; senior correspondent Rick Leventhal reports.

It was not immediately clear whether the cases involved the same accusers since nearly all have remained anonymous.

The accusers in the Florida case have until Monday to respond to the Justice Department’s filing.

Investigators said at least 40 underage girls were brought into Epstein’s Palm Beach mansion for what turned into sexual encounters after fixers looked for suitable girls locally and in Eastern Europe and other parts of the world, according to court records in Florida.

In addition, some girls allegedly were brought to Epstein’s homes in New York City, New Mexico and a private Caribbean island, according to court documents.

Saturday’s arrest also came just days after a federal appeals court in New York ordered the unsealing of nearly 2,000 pages of records in a since-settled defamation case involving Epstein.

Former President Bill “Bubba” Clinton’s relationship with Epstein was more than just friendship.

Jeffery Epstein was actually a Clinton Fundraiser!

Back in January of 2015 The Daily Mail reported that

A new lawsuit has revealed the extent of former President Clinton’s friendship with a fundraiser who was later jailed for having sex with an underage prostitute.

Bill Clinton’s relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, who served time in 2008 for his illegal sexual partners, included up multiple trips to the onetime billionaire’s private island in the Caribbean where underage girls were allegedly kept as sex slaves.

The National Enquirer has released new details about the two men’s friendship, which seems to have ended abruptly around the time of Epstein’s arrest.

Tales of orgies and young girls being shipped to the island, called Little St. James, have been revealed as part of an ongoing lawsuit between Epstein and his former lawyers Scott Rothstein and Bradley Edwards.

It is unclear what the basis of the suit is, but they go on to call witness testimony from some of the frequent guests at Epstein’s island to talk about the wild parties that were held there in the early 2000s.

Flight logs pinpoint Clinton’s trips on Epstein’s jet between the years 2002 and 2005, while he was working on his philanthropic post-presidential career and while his wife Hillary was a Senator for their adopted state of New York.

‘I remember asking Jeffrey what’s Bill Clinton doing here kind fo thing, and he laughed it off and said well he owes me a favor,’ one unidentified woman said in the lawsuit, which was filed in Palm Beach Circuit Court.

The woman went on to say how orgies were a regular occurrence and she recalled two young girls from New York who were always seen around the five-house compound but their personal backstories were never revealed.

At least one woman on the compound was there unwillingly, as the suit identifies a woman as Jane Doe 102.

She ‘was forced to live as one of Epstein’s underage sex slaves for years and was forced to have sex with… politicians, businessmen, royalty, academicians, etc,’ the lawsuit says according to The Enquirer.

Epstein’s sexual exploits have been documented since 2005, when a woman in Palm Beach contacted police saying that her 14-year-old daughter had been paid $300 to massage him and then have sex.

The claim prompted a nearly year-long investigation that led to the eventual charge of soliciting prostitution which came as part of a plea deal. He spent 13 months of a 18-month sentence in jail and remains a registered sex offender. 

Several of his famous friends cut ties- including Clinton and then-New York Governor Eliot Spitzer who returned his campaign donations- but not all of them: Prince Andrew reportedly stayed at Epstein’s mansion in New York in 2010, months after he was released from jail.

Before you question The Daily Mail’s source, just remember, it was the National Enquirer who ended the political career of John Edwards.

I have watched this past weekend as the Democratic Party’s Propaganda Arm, the Main Stream Media, have been trying to link President Trump with Epstein, failing miserably.

They, like Christine Pelosi, realize that a lot of their “faves”, meaning the movers and shakers of the Democratic Party, politicians, fundraiser, and administrators, are very likely to be exposed (please pardon the image) as perverts and pedophiles during the upcoming Federal Trial of Jeffrey Epstein.

For the last 3 years, we have witnessed the Far Left Democratic Party, from their “Politboro” to their “New Bolsheviks” remain outrageously outraged over President Donald J. Trump’s locker room talk in a private one-oon-one conversation with another wealthy individual about the gold-diggers hanging all over eligible men at a party.

Then, we watched as they took the word of any woman who came forward years later, including Professional Stripper and Porn Star Stormy Daniels, who had a salacious accusation to bring against the 45th President from years ago.

I wonder if there will be any Liberal outrageous outrage over this?

I’m shocked. Shocked, I tell you.

Those Glass Houses will get you…every time.

**snort**

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Hillary Claims Bill’s Affair With Monica Not An “Abuse of Power”

Bill_Clinton_and_Monica_Lewinsky_on_February_28_1997_A3e06420664168d9466c84c3e31ccc2f

It was that chemistry. And was the fact that he was president part of that chemistry? I don’t know. Maybe. Probably. But it was – I was there because there was chemistry. I wasn’t there because, oh, this is the president. – Monica Lewinsky

Uh huh.

FoxNews.com reports that

Hillary Clinton vehemently denied in an interview Sunday that her husband’s extramarital affair with then-White House intern Monica Lewinsky was an abuse of power and added that former President Bill Clinton was right not to resign amid a scandal that led to his impeachment on perjury and obstruction charges.

“Absolutely not,” the former first lady said during the CBS “Sunday Morning” interview when asked if Bill Clinton should have stepped down.

“It wasn’t an abuse of power?” CBS News correspondent Tony Dokoupil asked.

Clinton responded: “No. No.”

Hillary Clinton, who went on to be elected to the Senate and served as President Obama’s secretary of state, said the relationship was not an abuse of power because Lewinsky “was an adult.” At the time of the affair, Lewinsky was 22.

Separately, in 1999, former nursing home administrator Juanita Broaddrick said Clinton raped her in a hotel room in 1978, when he was attorney general of Arkansas. Clinton denied the accusations.

Hillary Clinton ultimately brought the topic of conversation to President Trump.

“But let me ask you this: Where’s the investigation of the current incumbent, against whom numerous allegations have been made, and which he dismisses, denies, and ridicules?” she said. “So, there was an investigation [of Bill], and it, as I believe, came out in the right place.”

Clinton’s comments came quickly after she rejected any comparisons between her husband’s actions and the allegations of sexual misconduct leveled against Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh during the confirmation process.

Calling Kavanaugh’s swearing-in ceremony at the White House “a political rally” in a CNN interview last week, Clinton lambasted the justice and Trump.

“It further undermined the image and integrity of the court,” she said. “And that troubles me greatly, it saddens me, because our judicial system has been viewed as one of the main pillars of our constitutional government.”

Clinton also blasted Trump’s treatment of Christine Blasey Ford, who testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee about her allegation that Kavanaugh assaulted her at a high school party in 1982. 

“The president’s been true to form,” Clinton said, according to The Hill. “He has insulted, attacked, demeaned women throughout the campaign, really for many years leading up to the campaign, and he’s continued to do that inside the White House.”

What a hypocrite.

It appears that “The Queen of Mean” is counting on Americans having short memories.

Let’s take a stroll down Memory Lane, shall we?

Back in the Bill Clinton era, White House advisor Betsey Wright coined the term “bimbo eruptions” to describe a long list of presi­den­tial gal pals.

BIll “Bubba” Clinton’s Bimbo List” includ­ed, but is not limit­ed to (I’m sure) Jennifer Flowers, Former Miss Ameri­ca Eliza­beth Ward, Paul Corbin Jones, and, of course, Monica Lewin­sky.

The Lewin­sky scandal was a sensa­tion that enveloped the presi­den­cy of Bill Clinton in 1998–99, leading to his impeach­ment by the U.S. House of Repre­sen­ta­tives and acquit­tal by the Senate.

Paula Corbin Jones, a former Arkansas state worker who claimed that Bill Clinton had accost­ed her sexual­ly in 1991 when he was gover­nor of Arkansas, had brought a sexual harass­ment lawsuit again­st the presi­dent. In order to show a pattern of behav­ior on Clinton’s part, Jones’s lawyers questioned sever­al women believed to have been engag­ing in sex  with him. On Jan. 17, 1998, Bubba took the stand, becom­ing the first sitting presi­dent to testi­fy as a civil defen­dant.

During this testi­mony, Clinton denied having had an affair with Monica S. Lewin­sky, an unpaid intern and later a paid staffer at the White House who worked in the White House from 1995–96. Lewin­sky had earlier, in a deposi­tion in the same case, also denied having such a relation­ship. Kenneth Starr, the indepen­dent counsel in the White­wa­ter case, had already received tape record­ings made by Linda R. Tripp (a former cowork­er of Lewinsky’s) of telephone conver­sa­tions in which Lewin­sky described her involve­ment with the presi­dent. Assert­ing that there was a “pattern of decep­tion,” Starr obtained from Attor­ney Gener­al Janet Reno permis­sion to inves­ti­gate the matter.

The presi­dent publicly denied having had a relation­ship with Lewin­sky and charges of cover­ing it up. His advis­er, Vernon Jordan, denied having counseled Lewin­sky to lie in the Jones case, or having arranged a job for her outside Washing­ton, to help cover up the affair. Hillary Clinton claimed that a “vast right-wing conspir­a­cy” was trying to destroy her husband, while Repub­li­cans and conser­v­a­tives portrayed him as immoral and a liar.

In March, Jordan and others testi­fied before Starr’s grand jury, and lawyers for Paula Jones released papers reveal­ing, among other things, that Clinton, in his January deposi­tion, had admit­ted to a sexual relation­ship in the 1980s with Arkansas enter­tain­er Gennifer Flowers, a charge he had long denied. In April, howev­er, Arkansas feder­al judge Susan Webber Wright dismissed the Jones suit, ruling that Jones’s story, if true, showed that she had been exposed to “boorish” behav­ior but not sexual harass­ment; Jones appealed.

In July, Starr grant­ed Lewin­sky immuni­ty from perjury charges, and Clinton agreed to testi­fy before the grand jury. He did so on Aug. 17, then went on televi­sion to admit the affair with Lewin­sky and ask for forgive­ness. In Septem­ber, Starr sent a 445-page report to the House of Repre­sen­ta­tives, recom­mend­ing four possi­ble grounds for impeach­ment: perjury, obstruc­tion of justice, witness tamper­ing, and abuse of author­i­ty.

On Dec. 19, Clinton became the second presi­dent (after Andrew Johnson) to be impeached, on two charges: perjury—in his Aug., 1998, testimony—and obstruc­tion of justice. The vote in the House was large­ly along party lines.

In Jan., 1999, the trial began in the Senate. On Feb. 12, after a trial in which testi­mony relat­ing to the charges was limit­ed, the Senate reject­ed both counts of impeach­ment. The perjury charge lost, 55–45, with 10 Repub­li­cans joining all 45 Democ­rats in voting again­st it; the obstruc­tion charge drew a 50–50 vote. Subse­quent­ly, on Apr. 12, Judge Wright, who had dismissed the Jones case, found the presi­dent in contempt for lying in his Jan., 1998, testi­mony, when he denied the Lewin­sky affair. In July, Judge Wright ordered the presi­dent to pay nearly $90,000 to Ms. Jones’s lawyers. On Jan. 19, 2001, the day before he left office, Presi­dent Clinton agreed to admit to giving false testi­mony in the Jones case and to accept a five-year suspen­sion of his law license and a $25,000 fine in return for an agree­ment by the indepen­dent counsel, Robert W. Ray (Starr’s succes­sor), to end the inves­ti­ga­tion and not prose­cute him.

In a later inter­view, Hillary claimed that Bill suffered child­hood abuse which may have caused him to philan­der­er and experi­ence “bimbo eruptions” later in life. She described her philan­der­ing husband as “a hard dog to keep on the porch”.

Fast forwarding to her own scandals…

What Americans witnessed during the FBI’s lackadaisical investigation of Hillary Clinton’s Scandal known as E-mailgate, was an unequal application of the rule of law as applies to Professional Politicians in general and, in this case, specifically, a former member of the Obama Administration.

Leading up to that fateful day on which Hillary Clinton’s unholy quest for power got derailed, the CBS Morning News presented a poll in which 60% of Americans believed that Clinton lied about her mishandling of emails containing top secret information which could have potentially put the lives of our military and covert operatives at risk.

Now, that was a CBS poll, which of course was weighted heavily in favor of Liberals, so you can imagine how folks like you and me out here in Flyover Country feel about the situation to this very day.

On top of that was the Clinton Foundation Scandal…

Senior foundation officials coordinated with the State Department to give “Friends of Bill” Clinton preferential treatment during earthquake recovery efforts in Haiti in 2010, according to emails obtained by the Republican National Committee through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit.

Canadian mining magnate Frank Giustra pledged $100 million to the foundation in 2005 and later benefited from the foundation’s work in Colombia, where he used the land he acquired in the country to set up an oil business, according to the Post.

The foundation has received millions of dollars from foreign governments such as Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the Netherlands, Canada, Sweden and Ireland.

But donations to the foundation have dropped by 37 percent to $108 million last year after allegations that Hillary Clinton used the charity to solicit million-dollar donations from foreign governments and corporations in exchange for favorable treatment from the State Department while Hillary was Secretary of State.

Hillary Clinton left the Clinton Foundation in April 2015 to run for president.

Our government was never meant to be a feudal system. America remains a Constitutional Republic.

American  Politicians were never meant to be Lords, who would remain in power in perpetuity. Our Founding Fathers envisioned Citizen Statesman, who after serving their country and their communities for a short period of time, would return to their homes, to their families, and to their trades.

The Democrats, like Hillary herself, wanted to rule our nation in perpetuity and are throwing a never-ending National Temper Tantrum, which they have named “The Resistance”, over the fact that average Americans, like you and me, ruined the best-laid plans of mice and Pajama-boys by electing Donald J. Trump to be the 45th President of the United States of America.

Hillary’s hypocritical never-ending attacks of President Trump are just the accusations of a dejected over being rejected politician attempting to remain relevant within her own political party.

For all of the Liberals’ “concern” over Trump, they have yet to show evidence of collusion with the Russians nor evidence of a crime which he has committed.

And, for Hillary to be encouraging a continued division of America, is the biggest display of sour grapes that America has ever seen.

Like Golem went into the volcano after his “Precious”, so the Liberal Democrats, including Hillary, are ending their political lives with their quest to overthrow the wish of the American People to have Donald J. Trump as our 45th President.

The 2018 Midterm Elections are not just going to be a Red Wave…they are going to be a Red Tsunami.

And, the Far Left Democrats will have no one to blame but themselves.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Clinton Says Impeachment Hearings Would Be Underway If a Dem Was President

monica-lewinsky-bill-clinton-2

 

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1003328970069331968

FoxNews.com reports that

Former President Bill Clinton argued Sunday that impeachment hearings would already be in full swing if a Democrat were in the Oval Office and if the special counsel’s investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election were as deep as it is now.

“I think if the roles were reversed — now, this is me just talking, but it’s based on my experience — if it were a Democratic president, and these facts were present, most people I know in Washington believe impeachment hearings would have begun already,” Clinton told “CBS Sunday Morning.”

Clinton, who appeared alongside James Patterson to promote the political thriller “The President is Missing” that the two penned together, noted that these are “serious issues” that the country is facing.

So far, the special counsel’s investigation, which is headed up by former FBI director Robert Mueller, has charged 19 people – including three former campaign aides of President Trump – along with three companies, and has received five guilty pleas. Perhaps the most high-profile of those guilty pleas came from Trump’s former national security adviser Michael Flynn.

Clinton, whose wife, Hillary, lost the 2016 election to Trump, is no stranger to impeachment hearings. After a lengthy investigation by independent counsel Ken Starr, the Republican-controlled House in 1998 voted to impeach Clinton for perjury and obstruction of justice in relation to the Monica Lewinsky scandal.

Clinton, however, was acquitted of both the perjury and obstruction of justice charges when the impeachment trial went to the Senate.

During the interview with CBS, Clinton also blasted Trump for the president’s bombastic style and his use of nicknames to poke fun at political opponents. Trump labeled Florida Sen. Marco Rubio “Little Marco” and Texas Sen. Ted Cruz “Lyin’ Ted” during the 2016 campaign season, has referred to North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un as “little rocket man” and continues to refer to Clinton’s wife as “Crooked Hillary.”

“I don’t like all this. I couldn’t be elected anything now ​be​cause I just don’t like embarrassing people​,” Bill Clinton said. “My mother would have whipped me for five days in a row when I was a little boy if I spent all my time badmouthing people like this.”

While the former president said that the press would have been just as “hard, or harder” in covering a Democratic president, he did defend the media against Trump habit of labelling certain news outlets as “Fake News.”

“I think they have tried by and large to cover this investigation based on the facts,” Clinton said.

Don’t you just love it?

Bill “Bubba” Clinton is now THE Moral Arbiter.

Back in the Bill Clinton era, White House advisor Betsey Wright coined the term “bimbo eruptions” to describe a long list of presi­den­tial gal pals.

BIll “Bubba” Clinton’s Bimbo List” includ­ed, but is not limit­ed to (I’m sure) Jennifer Flowers, Former Miss Ameri­ca Eliza­beth Ward, Paul Corbin Jones, and, of course, Monica Lewin­sky.

The Lewin­sky scandal was a sensa­tion that enveloped the presi­den­cy of Bill Clinton in 1998–99, leading to his impeach­ment by the U.S. House of Repre­sen­ta­tives and acquit­tal by the Senate.

Paula Corbin Jones, a former Arkansas state worker who claimed that Bill Clinton had accost­ed her sexual­ly in 1991 when he was gover­nor of Arkansas, had brought a sexual harass­ment lawsuit again­st the presi­dent. In order to show a pattern of behav­ior on Clinton’s part, Jones’s lawyers questioned sever­al women believed to have been engag­ing in sex  with him. On Jan. 17, 1998, Bubba took the stand, becom­ing the first sitting presi­dent to testi­fy as a civil defen­dant.

During this testi­mony, Clinton denied having had an affair with Monica S. Lewin­sky, an unpaid intern and later a paid staffer at the White House who worked in the White House from 1995–96. Lewin­sky had earlier, in a deposi­tion in the same case, also denied having such a relation­ship. Kenneth Starr, the indepen­dent counsel in the White­wa­ter case, had already received tape record­ings made by Linda R. Tripp (a former cowork­er of Lewinsky’s) of telephone conver­sa­tions in which Lewin­sky described her involve­ment with the presi­dent. Assert­ing that there was a “pattern of decep­tion,” Starr obtained from Attor­ney Gener­al Janet Reno permis­sion to inves­ti­gate the matter.

The presi­dent publicly denied having had a relation­ship with Lewin­sky and charges of cover­ing it up. His advis­er, Vernon Jordan, denied having counseled Lewin­sky to lie in the Jones case, or having arranged a job for her outside Washing­ton, to help cover up the affair. Hillary Clinton claimed that a “vast right-wing conspir­a­cy” was trying to destroy her husband, while Repub­li­cans and conser­v­a­tives portrayed him as immoral and a liar.

In March, Jordan and others testi­fied before Starr’s grand jury, and lawyers for Paula Jones released papers reveal­ing, among other things, that Clinton, in his January deposi­tion, had admit­ted to a sexual relation­ship in the 1980s with Arkansas enter­tain­er Gennifer Flowers, a charge he had long denied. In April, howev­er, Arkansas feder­al judge Susan Webber Wright dismissed the Jones suit, ruling that Jones’s story, if true, showed that she had been exposed to “boorish” behav­ior but not sexual harass­ment; Jones appealed.

In July, Starr grant­ed Lewin­sky immuni­ty from perjury charges, and Clinton agreed to testi­fy before the grand jury. He did so on Aug. 17, then went on televi­sion to admit the affair with Lewin­sky and ask for forgive­ness. In Septem­ber, Starr sent a 445-page report to the House of Repre­sen­ta­tives, recom­mend­ing four possi­ble grounds for impeach­ment: perjury, obstruc­tion of justice, witness tamper­ing, and abuse of author­i­ty.

On Dec. 19, Clinton became the second presi­dent (after Andrew Johnson) to be impeached, on two charges: perjury—in his Aug., 1998, testimony—and obstruc­tion of justice. The vote in the House was large­ly along party lines.

In Jan., 1999, the trial began in the Senate. On Feb. 12, after a trial in which testi­mony relat­ing to the charges was limit­ed, the Senate reject­ed both counts of impeach­ment. The perjury charge lost, 55–45, with 10 Repub­li­cans joining all 45 Democ­rats in voting again­st it; the obstruc­tion charge drew a 50–50 vote. Subse­quent­ly, on Apr. 12, Judge Wright, who had dismissed the Jones case, found the presi­dent in contempt for lying in his Jan., 1998, testi­mony, when he denied the Lewin­sky affair. In July, Judge Wright ordered the presi­dent to pay nearly $90,000 to Ms. Jones’s lawyers. On Jan. 19, 2001, the day before he left office, Presi­dent Clinton agreed to admit to giving false testi­mony in the Jones case and to accept a five-year suspen­sion of his law license and a $25,000 fine in return for an agree­ment by the indepen­dent counsel, Robert W. Ray (Starr’s succes­sor), to end the inves­ti­ga­tion and not prose­cute him.

In a later inter­view, Hillary claimed that Bill suffered child­hood abuse which may have caused him to philan­der­er and experi­ence “bimbo eruptions” later in life. She described her philan­der­ing husband as “a hard dog to keep on the porch”.

THIS is the guy who wants to judge President Donald J. Trump.

Which prompts the question:

IMPEACH TRUMP FOR WHAT???

The House Investigative Committee found no evidence of collusion and as Harvard Law Professor Emeritus (and Liberal) Alan Dershowitz explained in an interview with Fox News’ Brian Kilmeade on December 3, 2017…

I think if Congress ever were to charge him with obstruction of justice for exercising his constitutional authority under Article II, we’d have a constitutional crisis. You cannot charge a president with obstruction of justice for exercising his constitutional power to fire [former FBI Director] James Comey and his Constitutional authority to tell the Justice Department who to investigate, who not to investigate. That’s what Thomas Jefferson did, that’s what Lincoln did, that’s what Roosevelt did.

We have precedents that clearly establish that. When George Bush, the first, pardoned Casper Weinberger in order to end the investigation that would have led to him, nobody suggested obstruction of justice. For obstruction of justice by the president, you need clearly illegal acts. With Nixon, hush money paid. Telling people to lie. Destroying evidence.

Even with Clinton they said that he tried to influence potential witnesses not to tell the truth. But there’s never been a case in history where a president has been charged with obstruction of justice for merely exercising his constitutional authority. That would cause a constitutional crisis in the United States, and I hope Mueller doesn’t do that and Senator Feinstein simply doesn’t know what she’s talking about. When she says it’s obstruction of justice, to do what a president is completely authorized to do under the constitution.

A majority of the members of the House must vote for these charges in order to impeach the president. After the charges of misconduct are filed, the Senate has the power to try impeachment cases like a court. Two-thirds of the senators must vote for conviction.

With the congress being controlled by the Republicans, there is no way that President Donald Trump can be impeached unless his party can be convinced that he is guilty of impeachable offenses, qualifying charges that are undeniable.

And, after one year of Special Council Robert Mueller and his cadre of Democratic Donors investing Trump as if they were accountants with the IRS, they have found exactly two things: “diddly” and “squat”.

So, Former President Clinton, I hate to disappoint you, but the 45th President of the United States of America, Donald J. Trump has done nothing to be impeached for.

I mean, it is not as if he used a smitten young intern as a humidor for his cigars during an extramarital fling.

By the way, Bubba. What would your mother have said about that?

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

As More Info is Revealed About Obama’s “Weaponized” FBI, It Becomes Clear Why Bill Clinton and AG Lynch Met on the Tarmac

 

lynch-998x699

“Oh, what a tangled web we weave…when first we practice to deceive.” – Sir Walter Scott

TheHill.com reports that

Former Attorney General Loretta Lynch knew well in advance of FBI Director James Comey’s 2016 press conference that he would recommend against charging Hillary Clinton, according to information turned over to the Senate Homeland Security Committee on Friday.
 
The revelation was included in 384 pages of text messages exchanged between FBI officials Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, and it significantly diminishes the credibility of Lynch’s earlier commitment to accept Comey’s recommendation — a commitment she made under the pretense that the two were not coordinating with each other.
 
And it gets worse. Corey and Lynch reportedly knew that Clinton would never face charges even before the FBI conducted its three-hour interview with Clinton, which was supposedly meant to gather more information into her mishandling of classified information.
 
On July 1, 2016, as the Lynch announcement became public, Page texted Strzok:

Page: And yeah, it’s a real profile in couragw [sic], since she knows no charges will be brought.

There are other revelations within the text messages. But in the cover letter accompanying them, the FBI notified Congress that many additional text messages are missing. According to the FBI, its “technical system for retaining text messages sent and received on FBI mobile devices failed to preserve text messages for Mr. Strzok and Ms. Page from December 14, 2016 to approximately to [sic] May 17, 2017.”
 
The reason?

(M)any FBI-provided Samsung 5 mobile devices did not capture or store text messages due to misconfiguration issues related to rollouts, provisioning, and software upgrades that conflicted with the FBI’s collection capabilities. The result was that data that should have been automatically collected and retained for long-term storage and retrieval was not collected.

In a letter to FBI Director Christopher Wray sent yesterday, the head of the Senate Homeland Security Committee Ron Johnson, a Republican from Wisconsin, called the loss of records “concerning.”
 
Strzok and Page communicated in a voluminous fashion via text message while allegedly having an illicit affair. Strzok was a key figure in the Hillary Clinton exoneration and reportedly interviewed President Trump’s former national security adviser Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn (which resulted in Flynn pleading guilty to lying to the FBI). Until last summer, Strzok and Page were both members of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team investigating the allegations of collusion between Russia and Trump’s campaign. Neither has been accused of wrongdoing.
 
The text messages seem to indicate that some within the FBI were making investigatory decisions based on Trump’s ascendancy among the Republican field of presidential candidates. On May 4, 2016 Strzok and Page had the following text message exchange:

Page: And holy shit Cruz just dropped out of the race. It’s going to be a Clinton Trump race. Unbelievable.
 
Strzok: What?!?!??
 
Page: You heard it right my friend.
 
Strzok: I saw trump won, figured it would be a bit…Now the pressure really starts to finish MYE…
 
Page: It sure does. We need to talk about follow up call tomorrow.

“MYE” stands for “midyear exam” and was the FBI case name for the Clinton email investigation.
 
The text exchanges also indicate the FBI substituted, and then omitted, damaging language in FBI Director Comey’s July 5, 2016 statement that recommended Clinton not be charged. The original draft noted that Clinton had improperly used personal email to contact President Obama while abroad in the territory of sophisticated adversaries. According to the text exchange, an FBI official then removed President Obama’s name and stated that Clinton had simply emailed “another senior government official.” In the final statement as delivered by Comey on July 5, both references were omitted entirely.
 
Other texts suggest Strzok and Page intended to subvert rules governing preservation of their discussions about FBI matters. In April of 2016, Page texted:

Page: so look, you say we text on that phone when we talk about Hillary because it can’t be traced…

In previous text messages produced to the House of Representatives, Strzok and Page discussed needing an “insurance policy” in the event Trump were to become president. The newest batch of text messages turned over on Friday show that in February of 2016, Page texted Strzok that then-candidate Trump “simply can not [sic] be president.”
 
Any neutral observer would have to be concerned about supposed missing evidence from a premier law enforcement and intel collection agency as well as the types of discussions and conflicts of interest apparently at issue with key officials within the FBI. It’s one more piece of a developing story that unfortunately points to alleged misconduct by some at top levels in our intelligence community. If the allegations bear out, it could have huge implications for a number of investigations handled by the officials in question over the past decade — not just cases related to the 2016 campaign.
 
The FBI did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

You’d better believe that Lynch knew ahead of time that Clinton would not be charged.

Remember a certain “Tarmac Meeting” between Former President Bill “Bubba” Clinton and Attorney General Loretta Lynch which happened on June 27, 2016?

That meeting occurred just hours before Department of Justice Officials filed a motion in federal court seeking a 27-month delay in producing correspondence between former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s four top aides and officials with the Clinton Foundation and Teneo Holdings, a closely allied public relations firm that Bill Clinton helped launch.

The next morning I wrote,

“Now, why would someone as smart as Bill Clinton, the former president of United States of America comma and attorney general Loretta Lynch, have a meeting that has such an appearance of impropriety?”

At the time, I thought that there were several possibilities.

After the revelations from the new documents released last Friday, I believe that it is patently clear why Bubba met with AG Lynch in that jet idling on the tarmac.

FoxNews.com reported some additional information about that clandestine meeting in an article posted on December 1, 2017…

The revelation last year of an unorthodox tarmac meeting between former President Bill Clinton and then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch set off a frenzied scramble at the FBI to track down the source, newly released documents show. 

Conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch, which on Thursday released 29 pages of FBI emails related to the 2016 meeting, said the messages show officials were more concerned about the leak than the substance of the report. 

“These new FBI documents show the FBI was more concerned about a whistleblower who told the truth about the infamous Clinton-Lynch tarmac meeting than the scandalous meeting itself,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in a statement. 

The FBI initially claimed it had no documents pertaining to the meeting, until uncovering the files later turned over to Judicial Watch. 

The watchdog group, in releasing the files, said FBI officials sent a flurry of emails after the meeting was reported in New York’s Observer.

One email sent from an unidentified FBI account on July 3, 2016 said, “We need to find that guy” and bring him or her before a supervisor. Another said the source should be banned from working security details. 

Officials speculated that the source of the leak was a Phoenix police officer. One official said they contacted the Phoenix office and would try to “stem any further damage.” 

One official, in a July 2 email, said the article represented a “breach in security protocol” and the Phoenix division would be pressured to “identify the source of the breach.” 

Judicial Watch said all names on the emails were redacted and there is no documentation showing concern over the meeting itself.

The tarmac meeting fueled Republican complaints at the time that Lynch had improperly met with the husband of an investigation subject, just before the probe into Hillary Clinton’s personal email use was completed with no charges filed.

Fired FBI Director James Comey, in Senate testimony, described the tarmac meeting as problematic. The tarmac meeting came days before Comey held a news conference informing the media that Hillary Clinton would not be charged.

Comey in July 2016 said Clinton was “extremely careless” in handling classified and other emails on the servers but recommend no criminal charges — a conclusion Lynch accepted.

Lynch later expressed regret that she sat down with Bill Clinton while his wife was under federal criminal investigation, a chance encounter she acknowledged “cast a shadow” on the public’s perception of a case bound to influence the presidential campaign.

“I certainly wouldn’t do it again,” Lynch said of the meeting.

Well, gosh, gentle readers. I wonder why the FBI was more worried about the source of the leak than they were about the impropriety of the meeting, itself?

Well, duuuuh.

It’s because the FBI had orchestrated it with the Clintons.

It was a strategy session.

With these new revelations contained in the documents released last Friday Night, the probability of the existence of a weaponized FBI being used to keep Donald J. Trump from becoming President while protecting the candidacy of Hillary Clinton has solidified into a certainty.

I mean just look at how the dominoes are lining up in place, ready to all be toppled over.

While this Russian Collusion Probe has been traveling around throwing up a smoke screen like a clown car in a circus, Former President Barack Hussein Obama has been traveling overseas, meeting with foreign leaders as if he never left office. And, on top of that, he has been denigrating President Donald J. Trump and his Administration, undermining their Foreign Affairs Strategy.

Obama is desperately trying to ensure that his mission to turn the Greatest Country on the Face of the Earth into a Third World Socialist Paradise is not derailed by the unexpected loss of his hand-picked predecessor to a “Citizen Statesman”.

Additionally, you have a Former Nazi Sympathizer, now a Billionaire “Philanthropist”, funding Far Left Causes.

Faced with the reality of a splintered Democratic Party, which has alienated its base by moving to the Extreme Far Left of the Political Spectrum, this Former President , while still in office, decided to spy on the one candidate who might actually have a chance to beat his own party’s lousy candidate in a fair Presidential Election, through the means of “weaponizing” the FBI and turning it into a “Political Hit Squad”, making the days of J. Edgar Hoover’s political shenanigans seem mild in comparison.

After all that political chicanery failed and the Citizen Statesman became the President, the Former Petulant President Pantywaist encouraged “rebellion”, as if the reality of a nation being torn asunder was some sort of “Star Wars” Movie, through the use of his “benefactor’s”(the Former Nazi Sympathizer) money in the funding of manufactured protests and a Media-Driven, Community -Organizing Assault, which includes the Former President’s own “Organizing For America” Website, which has taken the cheesy name of “The Resistance”.

Not unlike the Bolsheviks of the Russian Revolution, this “Resistance”, with their willing accomplices in the Main Stream Media and within OUR Federal Government, launched a massive assault, through the dissemination of propaganda, manufactured protests, and Fake News, in order to somehow diminish the sitting President, in the hopes of regaining their lost power and continuing their mission, inspired by Karl Marx and Saul Alinsky.

Unfortunately for them, they underestimated the power of the New Media and the resiliency of the average American, here in the Heartland, who stopped believing their lies some time ago.

Meanwhile, Mueller and his cadre of Liberal SS Troops continued to undermine Trump through the continuance of their Dog and Pony Show, which they euphemistically called “an investigation”.

The more that Mueller and his troops insisted that they were non-biased, the more information came forth that they have been and still are holdovers from the Clinton Administration, working as Deep State Operatives to do unto Trump as Brutus did unto Caesar.

They have proved themselves to be nothing but Trump Haters with no actual evidence of any kind that President Trump “colluded” with the Russians.

Meanwhile, the Democrats in Congress have yet to present any sort of bill which is beneficial to average Americans.

And now, they have foolishly shut down the government in a phony “defense of The Dreamers”, weakening the momentum of their “Resistance” and strengthening the resolve of both the sitting President and the average Americans who voted him into office, against all odds.

It is time to release the “Kraken”…otherwise known as “The Memo”, a 4-page document which is supposed to illuminate the activities of the Obama Administration and their Deep State Operatives in a manner which will leave no doubt as to corrupt and treasonous activities which were carried out by the Obama Administration and their Deep State Operatives in the FBI in an effort to circumvent the will of the American People.

It is not just time to “drain” The Swamp.

It’s time to FLUSH it.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Sh-thole, Indeed: A Look Back at The Clinton Foundation Haitian Relief Scam – A KJ Sunday Special Report

042415_an_baier2_640

In a private meeting with members of Congress earlier this week, President Donald J. Trump used harsh language in questioning the existing policy of allowing chain migration from devastated third-world countries, such as Haiti, whose population often do not have the skills, nor the ambition, to be productive citizens when they are allowed into our Sovereign Nation.

Needless to say, once his comments were leaked out by Democratic Senator Dick Durbin, the Democrats all had a nationwide screaming hissy fit.

The problem with that is, at least part of the reason for the wretched condition that Haiti is in, can be directly linked to two of the Democrats’ idols whom they have put on a pedestal for years.

This fact has not gone unnoticed by those who pay attention to such things.

Err…like myself…

And, one of these “idols” has lashed back against the criticism.

On July 18, 2016, Townhall.com posted the following…

EDITOR’S NOTE: The following article is excerpted from Dinesh D’Souza’s new book, “Hillary’s America: The Secret History of the Democratic Party”.

In January 2015 a group of Haitians surrounded the New York offices of the Clinton Foundation. They chanted slogans, accusing Bill and Hillary Clinton of having robbed them of “billions of dollars.” Two months later, the Haitians were at it again, accusing the Clintons of duplicity, malfeasance, and theft. And in May 2015, they were back, this time outside New York’s Cipriani, where Bill Clinton received an award and collected a $500,000 check for his foundation. “Clinton, where’s the money?” the Haitian signs read. “In whose pockets?” Said Drood Andre of the Commission Against Dictatorship, “We are telling the world of the crimes that Bill and Hillary Clinton are responsible for in Haiti.”

Haitians like Andre may sound a bit strident, but he and the protesters had good reason to be disgruntled. They had suffered a heavy blow from Mother Nature, and now it appeared that they were being battered again — this time by the Clintons. Their story goes back to 2010, when a massive 7.0 earthquake devastated the island, killing more than 200,000 people, leveling 100,000 homes, and leaving 1.5 million people destitute.

The devastating effect of the earthquake on a very poor nation provoked worldwide concern and inspired an outpouring of aid money intended to rebuild Haiti. Countries around the world, as well as private and philanthropic groups such as the Red Cross and the Salvation Army, provided some $10.5 billion in aid, with $3.9 billion of it coming from the United States.

Haitians such as Andre, however, noticed that very little of this aid money actually got to poor people in Haiti. Some projects championed by the Clintons, such as the building of industrial parks and posh hotels, cost a great deal of money and offered scarce benefits to the truly needy. Port-au-Prince was supposed to be rebuilt; it was never rebuilt. Projects aimed at creating jobs proved to be bitter disappointments. Haitian unemployment remained high, largely undented by the funds that were supposed to pour into the country. Famine and illness continued to devastate the island nation.

The Haitians were initially sympathetic to the Clintons. One may say they believed in the message of “hope and change.” With his customary overstatement, Bill told the media, “Wouldn’t it be great if they become the first wireless nation in the world? They could, I’m telling you, they really could.”

I don’t blame the Haitians for falling for it; Bill is one of the world’s greatest story-tellers. He has fooled people far more sophisticated than the poor Haitians. Over time, however, the Haitians wised up. Whatever their initial expectations, many saw that much of the aid money seems never to have reached its destination; rather, it disappeared along the way.

Where did it go? It did not escape the attention of the Haitians that Bill Clinton was the designated UN representative for aid to Haiti. Following the earthquake, Bill Clinton had with media fanfare established the Haiti Reconstruction Fund. Meanwhile, his wife Hillary was the United States secretary of state. She was in charge of U.S. aid allocated to Haiti. Together the Clintons were the two most powerful people who controlled the flow of funds to Haiti from around the world. Haitian deals appeared to be a quid pro quo for filling the coffers of the Clintons.

The Haitian protesters noticed an interesting pattern involving the Clintons and the designation of how aid funds were used. They observed that a number of companies that received contracts in Haiti happened to be entities that made large donations to the Clinton Foundation. The Haitian contracts appeared less tailored to the needs of Haiti than to the needs of the companies that were performing the services. In sum, Haitian deals appeared to be a quid pro quo for filling the coffers of the Clintons.

For example, the Clinton Foundation selected Clayton Homes, a construction company owned by Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway, to build temporary shelters in Haiti. Buffett is an active member of the Clinton Global Initiative who has donated generously to the Clintons as well as the Clinton Foundation. The contract was supposed to be given through the normal United Nations bidding process, with the deal going to the lowest bidder who met the project’s standards. UN officials said, however, that the contract was never competitively bid for.

Clayton offered to build “hurricane-proof trailers” but what they actually delivered turned out to be a disaster. The trailers were structurally unsafe, with high levels of formaldehyde and insulation coming out of the walls. There were problems with mold and fumes. The stifling heat inside made Haitians sick and many of them abandoned the trailers because they were ill-constructed and unusable.

The Clintons also funneled $10 million in federal loans to a firm called InnoVida, headed by Clinton donor Claudio Osorio. Osorio had loaded its board with Clinton cronies, including longtime Clinton ally General Wesley Clark; Hillary’s 2008 finance director Jonathan Mantz; and Democratic fundraiser Chris Korge who has helped raise millions for the Clintons.

Normally the loan approval process takes months or even years. But in this case, a government official wrote, “Former President Bill Clinton is personally in contact with the company to organize its logistical and support needs. And as Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton has made available State Department resources to assist with logistical arrangements.”

InnoVida had not even provided an independently audited financial report that is normally a requirement for such applications. This requirement, however, was waived. On the basis of the Clinton connection, InnoVida’s application was fast-tracked and approved in two weeks.

The company, however, defaulted on the loan and never built any houses. An investigation revealed that Osorio had diverted company funds to pay for his Miami Beach mansion, his Maserati, and his Colorado ski chalet. He pleaded guilty to wire fraud and money laundering in 2013, and is currently serving a twelve-year prison term on fraud charges related to the loan.

Several Clinton cronies showed up with Bill to a 2011 Housing Expo that cost more than $2 million to stage. Bill Clinton said it would be a model for the construction of thousands of homes in Haiti. In reality, no homes have been built. A few dozen model units were constructed but even they have not been sold. Rather, they are now abandoned and have been taken over by squatters.

THE SCHOOLS THEY NEVER BUILT

USAID contracts to remove debris in Port-au-Prince went to a Washington-based company named CHF International. The company’s CEO David Weiss, a campaign contributor to Hillary in 2008, was deputy U.S. trade representative for North American Affairs during the Clinton administration. The corporate secretary of the board, Lauri Fitz-Pegado, served in a number of posts in the Clinton administration, including assistant secretary of commerce.The Clintons claim to have built schools in Haiti. But the New York Times discovered that when it comes to the Clintons, “built” is a term with a very loose interpretation. For example, the newspaper located a school featured in the Clinton Foundation annual report as “built through a Clinton Global Initiative Commitment to Action.” In reality, “The Clinton Foundation’s sole direct contribution to the school was a grant for an Earth Day celebration and tree-building activity.” The Clintons claim to have built schools in Haiti. But the New York Times discovered that when it comes to the Clintons, ‘built’ is a term with a very loose interpretation.

USAID contracts also went to consulting firms such as New York–based Dalberg Global Development Advisors, which received a $1.5 million contract to identify relocation sites for Haitians. This company is an active participant and financial supporter of the Clinton Global Initiative. A later review by USAID’s inspector general found that Dalberg did a terrible job, naming uninhabitable mountains with steep ravines as possible sites for Haitian rebuilding.

Foreign governments and foreign companies got Haitian deals in exchange for bankrolling the Clinton Foundation. The Clinton Foundation lists the Brazilian construction firm OAS and the InterAmerican Development Bank (IDB) as donors that have given it between $1 billion and $5 billion.

The IDB receives funding from the State Department, and some of this funding was diverted to OAS for Haitian road-building contracts. Yet an IDB auditor, Mariela Antiga, complained that the contracts were padded with “excessive costs” to build roads “no one needed.” Antiga also alleged that IDB funds were going to a construction project on private land owned by former Haitian president Rene Preval — a Clinton buddy — and several of his cronies. For her efforts to expose corruption, Antiga was promptly instructed by the IDB to pack her bags and leave Haiti.

In 2011, the Clinton Foundation brokered a deal with Digicel, a cell-phone-service provider seeking to gain access to the Haitian market. The Clintons arranged to have Digicel receive millions in U.S. taxpayer money to provide mobile phones. The USAID Food for Peace program, which the State Department administered through Hillary aide Cheryl Mills, distributed Digicel phones free to Haitians.

Digicel didn’t just make money off the U.S. taxpayer; it also made money off the Haitians. When Haitians used the phones, either to make calls or transfer money, they paid Digicel for the service. Haitians using Digicel’s phones also became automatically enrolled in Digicel’s mobile program. By 2012, Digicel had taken over three-quarters of the cell-phone market in Haiti.

Digicel is owned by Denis O’Brien, a close friend of the Clintons. O’Brien secured three speaking engagements in his native Ireland that paid $200,000 apiece. These engagements occurred right at the time that Digicel was making its deal with the U.S. State Department. O’Brien has also donated lavishly to the Clinton Foundation, giving between $1 million and $5 million sometime in 2010–2011.

Coincidentally the United States government paid Digicel $45 million to open a hotel in Port-au-Prince. Now perhaps it could be argued that Haitians could use a high-priced hotel to attract foreign investors and provide jobs for locals. Thus far, however, this particular hotel seems to employ only a few dozen locals, which hardly justifies the sizable investment that went into building it. Moreover, there are virtually no foreign investors; the rooms are mostly unoccupied; the ones that are taken seem mainly for the benefit of Digicel’s visiting teams.

In addition, the Clintons got their cronies to build Caracol Industrial Park, a 600-acre garment factory that was supposed to make clothes for export to the United States and create — according to Bill Clinton — 100,000 new jobs in Haiti. The project was funded by the U.S. government and cost hundreds of millions in taxpayer money, the largest single allocation of U.S. relief aid.

Yet Caracol has proven a massive failure. First, the industrial park was built on farmland and the farmers had to be moved off their property. Many of them feel they were pushed out and inadequately compensated. Some of them lost their livelihoods. Second, Caracol was supposed to include 25,000 homes for Haitian employees; in the end, the Government Accountability Office reports that only around 6,000 homes were built. Third, Caracol has created 5,000 jobs, less than 10 percent of the jobs promised. Fourth, Caracol is exporting very few products and most of the facility is abandoned. People stand outside every day looking for work, but there is no work to be had, as Haiti’s unemployment rate hovers around 40 percent.

The Clintons say Caracol can still be salvaged. But former Haitian prime minister Jean Bellerive says, “I believe the momentum to attract people there in a massive way is past. Today, it has failed.” Still, Bellerive’s standard of success may not be the same one used by the Clintons. After all, the companies that built Caracol with U.S. taxpayer money have done fine — even if poor Haitians have seen few of the benefits.

Then there is the strange and somehow predictable involvement of Hillary Clinton’s brother Hugh Rodham. Rodham put in an application for $22 million from the Clinton Foundation to build homes on ten thousand acres of land that he said a “guy in Haiti” had “donated” to him.

“I deal through the Clinton Foundation,” Rodham told the New York Times. “I hound my brother-in-law because it’s his fund that we’re going to get our money from.” Rodham said he expected to net $1 million personally on the deal. Unfortunately, his application didn’t go through.

Rodham had better luck, however, on a second Haitian deal. He mysteriously found himself on the advisory board of a U.S. mining company called VCS. This by itself is odd because Rodham’s resume lists no mining experience; rather, Rodham is a former private detective and prison guard.

The mining company, however, seems to have recognized Rodham’s value. They brought him on board in October 2013 to help secure a valuable gold mining permit in Haiti. Rodham was promised a “finder’s fee” if he could land the contract. Sure enough, he did. For the first time in 50 years, Haiti awarded two new gold mining permits and one of them went to the company that had hired Hillary’s brother. I wouldn’t go so far as to say the Clintons don’t care about Haiti. Yet it seems clear that Haitian welfare is not their priority.

The deal provoked outrage in the Haitian Senate. “Neither Bill Clinton nor the brother of Hillary Clinton are individuals who share the interest of the Haitian people,” said Haitian mining representative Samuel Nesner. “They are part of the elite class who are operating to exploit the Haitian people.”

Is this too harsh a verdict? I wouldn’t go so far as to say the Clintons don’t care about Haiti. Yet it seems clear that Haitian welfare is not their priority. Their priority is, well, themselves. The Clintons seem to believe in Haitian reconstruction and Haitian investment as long as these projects match their own private economic interests. They have steered the rebuilding of Haiti in a way that provides maximum benefit to themselves.

No wonder the Clintons refused to meet with the Haitian protesters. Each time the protesters showed up, the Clintons were nowhere to be seen. They have never directly addressed the Haitians’ claims. Strangely enough, they have never been required to do so. The progressive media scarcely covered the Haitian protest. Somehow the idea of Haitian black people calling out the Clintons as aid money thieves did not appeal to the grand pooh-bahs at CBS News, the New York Times, and NPR.

For most Democrats, the topic is both touchy and distasteful. It’s one thing to rob from the rich but quite another to rob from the poorest of the poor. Some of the Democratic primary support for Bernie Sanders was undoubtedly due to Democrats’ distaste over the financial shenanigans of the Clintons. Probably these Democrats considered the Clintons to be unduly grasping and opportunistic, an embarrassment to the great traditions of the Democratic party.

Regarding the Clinton Foundation, I would probably be underestimating its impact if I said that it was the Biggest Pay-For-Play scheme ever cooked up by a husband and wife Political Team in American History.

Per discoverthenetworks.org,

By the time Clinton left office in February 2013, the charity had received millions of dollars in new or increased payments from at least seven foreign governments. Five of the governments came on board during her tenure as secretary of state while two doubled or tripled their support in that time, according to data provided by CHAI spokeswoman Daley…CHAI should have told the State Department before accepting donations totaling $340,000 from Switzerland’s Agency for Development and Cooperation in 2011 and 2012. However, it did not believe U.S. authorities needed to review the other six governments, including Britain and Australia, she said, citing various reasons.” [Reuters, 3/19/15]

However, it was not just governments who sent money to the Clintons through their Foundation, as was noted by Dinesh D’Souza, in the excerpt from his book seen above.

Again, according to discoverthenetworks.org…

* “The Clinton Foundation swore off donations from foreign governments when Hillary Clinton was secretary of state. That didn’t stop the foundation from raising millions of dollars from foreigners with connections to their home governments, a review of foundation disclosures shows. Some donors have direct ties to foreign governments. One is a member of the Saudi royal family. Another is a Ukrainian oligarch and former parliamentarian. Others are individuals with close connections to foreign governments that stem from their business activities. Their professed policy interests range from human rights to U.S.-Cuba relations.” [Wall Street Journal, 3/19/15]

* During Secretary Clinton’s tenure at the State Department, “More than a dozen foreign individuals and their foundations and companies were large donors to the Clinton Foundation… collectively giving between $34 million and $68 million…. Some donors also provided funding directly to charitable projects sponsored by the foundation, valued by the organization at $60 million.” [Wall Street Journal, 3/19/15]

With the revelation of “the gift” of massive quantities of Uranium to the Russians or the formation of an Iranian Connection, as a result of money given to the Clinton Foundation,  as was previously reported in 2015, or the later revelation involving “dual-staffer” Cheryl Mills, “FoundationGate” caught the attention of the American Public as a scandal involving money and unscrupulous political ladder-climbing through the peddling of “favors”, the actions of Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State crossed the line into the abhorrent abyss of a Conflict of Interest involving possible Treason.

Time and time again, from Watergate to Travelgate to Benghazigate, and most recently with E-mailgate and the Clinton Foundation, Hillary Clinton has proven to be a ruthless, untrustworthy, Machiavellian professional politician, who only cared about herself and her planned ascension to the Presidency of the United States of America.

And what about her philandering husband, Former President of the United States of America, Bill “Bubba” Clinton?

Do you believe him when he claimed in his tweet yesterday that none of the money used for daughter Chelsea’s Weeding came from the Clinton Foundation?

Just remember…

After nearly 14 hours of debate, the House of Representatives approves two articles of impeachment against President Bill Clinton, charging him with lying under oath to a federal grand jury and obstructing justice. Clinton, the second president in American history to be impeached, vowed to finish his term.

So, Dinesh D’Souza’s detailing of the Clinton Foundation Haitian Relief Scam and the Clinton’s role in it should surprise no one.

The Democrats’ had better wise up and move on past President Trump’s comments about Haiti’s wretched condition.

They are, at least in part, responsible for it.

Until He Comes,

KJ

America’s Pharisees: Liberals and the Main Street Media Judge Christians Who Support Moore to be “Immoral” – A KJ Sunday Morning Reflection

untitled (191)

Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples, “The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat, so practice and observe whatever they tell you—but not what they do. For they preach, but do not practice.” – Matthew 23: 1-3

“I respect women. I don’t respect men who don’t.” – Senator Al Franken (D- Minn.)

Newsbusters.org reports that

They began the week-in-review segment on Friday’s PBS NewsHour with the Al Franken groping scandal, and both liberal Mark Shields and pseudoconservative David Brooks felt that Franken’s offense was minor compared to the Roy Moores and Bill Clintons…and Donald Trumps.

Brooks repeated his recent Charlie Rose line that Clinton’s impunity in these matters in the 1990s created a hostile environment for all women – and then added a new spin for “balance.” Christian defenders of Roy Moore at this point are practicing “idolatry” and are simply “heretics,” he proclaimed.

“DAVID BROOKS: If I could add one thing on the — first on the Clinton thing, I think it’s — we just have to look back and say the people who ignored the testimony of Kathleen Willey and Juanita Broaddrick helped set the stage for this. And the Democrats who defended Clinton in those cases, they helped set the atmosphere for what we’re seeing and for the behavior that Harvey Weinstein and the rest can get away with.

The second thing to be said is, there is a word for what defenders of Roy Moore are doing, the people who said they were vote for him nonetheless, and — well, two words. One word is idolatry, and the other word is heresy, because the people who are putting — who are going to sacrifice morality for politics are making an idol out of politics.

They’re saying politics is higher than morality. And no honest person can possibly believe that. And if you’re putting politics above personal morality, above the way we treat each other, above the nature of your own soul, you’re just — you’re making an idol out of it. And that is the ultimate in heresy. And to see — I saw a tweet from Franklin Graham, Billy Graham’s son, defending Moore, you know, sort of, oh, they’re all a bunch of hypocrites up there. It’s just appalling. It’s just — it’s almost mind-boggling that people who — especially people who have been steeped in any faith could make this kind of fundamental error, which is warned against again and again in the Bible, and to be heretics. They’re heretics.”

One can understand the “making an idol out of politics” part, but “heresy” means something different to religious folks than it does to David Brooks. It means a false teaching against the core teachings of Christianity, a rejection of orthodoxy. He’s not exactly separating church and state on the special election. Personally, I think the charges against Moore are serious enough that I would withhold my vote from him. But a Christian could look at the two choices left on the ballot and say if I need a Senator to vote against abortion, against the LGBT agenda, and for religious liberty, one cannot vote for the Democrat. That would be closer to a heretical vote, if we’re buying the Brooks definition. 

Franklin Graham spoke to Roy Moore on the phone, and is accepting Moore’s denials of wrongdoing. He tweeted “The hypocrisy of Washington has no bounds. So many denouncing Roy Moore when they are guilty of doing much worse than what he has been accused of supposedly doing. Shame on those hypocrites.” This drew angry tweets from CNN’s Jake Tapper and Andrew Kaczynski. But on its face, if Rev. Graham is talking about the Clintons and their defenders, then he has a point. The Broaddrick rape charge is a very serious charge that a vast majority of liberal journalists have dismissed as fake news for decades — which makes them look hypocritical on Moore. 

(No one at PBS is going to bring up how Brooks dumped his wife of 28 years to marry his researcher, Anne Snyder, 23 years his junior. So he’s nobody’s moral teacher.) 

On Franken, Shields admitted that “for a party that has based an awful lot of its appeal on identity politics, that we are the women’s party, that we believe in women’s rights, that we respect women, and that Republicans don’t, this is a body blow. And Al Franken has been a major fund-raiser for Democrats, and he has been an aggressive inquisitor on committees and — representing the Democrats. So, I think it is serious.”

But then substitute anchor Hari Sreenivasan noted Trump had tweeted against Franken, so “Does this at this point open him up to a line of criticism, saying, well, if this is what you’re going to say about this person that was accused of misconduct, what about the 15 or so women who have publicly come out against you?” Shields unloaded on the president as a draft dodger and shameless smear artist:

“MARK SHIELDS: Well, I guess I should not be surprised that somebody who found a friendly family podiatrist in 1968 to avoid the military draft and to not serve his country in Vietnam, and then went on to attack and disparage the heroic service of John McCain, who spent five and a half years as a prisoner of war, and saw no inconsistency in that hypocrisy, indefensibility, morality — morally about what he did, I shouldn’t be surprised that he, facing charges — having pledged that he was going to sue these women who had accused him of sexual harassment, sexual molestation and worse, and never having initiated any kind of action, never having responded to them, would go after Al Franken and duck the Roy Moore matter.

I mean, why he’d want to — it just invites the replaying of the “Access Hollywood” tape and his own how-to manual on how to molest women and how, if you’re rich and powerful, women are irresistible or indefensible to what you do. I mean, so, I guess I shouldn’t be surprised. But, still, he does surprise me from time to time on his shamelessness. He’s a shameless man.”
 
Nowhere in this PBS discussion is there any questioning the timing or the liberal tilt of The Washington Post, who for whatever reason couldn’t locate these charges until the very convenient (for Democrats) time that Alabama could not change the ballot. There was no reflection by Brooks that the Post sat on its Juanita Broaddrick story in 1999 — as did NBC News — until Bill Clinton was safely spared in a Senate impeachment trial. So are they hypocrites, or heretics? Once again, the press doesn’t discuss its own political manuevering. 

Have you ever heard the old expression “One lies and the other swears to it.”?

Whoever came up with it must have had today’s Democratic Party and Main Stream Media in mind.

In the case of Judge Roy Moore, as I have archived in a previous post, he almost lost his judgeship because he refused to remove a plaque of the Ten Commandments from his courtroom.

Does that sound like an individual who would have the morals of an alley cat?

The Judge has been well-known to be a Christian Conservative for a long time.

So far that has been no evidence produced that he has ever been anything but what he claims to have been all of his life.

On the other hand, the Modern American Liberals and the political party which they control, the Democrats, appear to be imploding like vampires exposed to sunlight with new accusations of sexual harassment coming forth every day from coast to coast.

Still, they seen to be pretty much oblivious to these accusations, as the above article references.

Just as the vainglorious Pharisees in Christ’s time, these new Pharisees have their noses so far up into the air that they fail to recognize their own sin while accusing others of sinful behavior.

And, now that Americans are reminding them of their political party’s own “discretions”, like President Clinton and Monica, they have doubled down on cluelessness in their attempt to sabotage Judge Moore’s campaign.

The Democrats have lost all their credibility by launching witch hunt after fruitless witch hunt against Republican Candidates.

Given their Liberal belief system, which includes approval of ripping babies out of their mother’s womb and turning the sacred ceremony of marriage into a justification ritual for the same behavior that got Sodom and Gomorrah wiped off the map, that’s one heck of a Glass House that they’re throwing stones from.

I am glad for their sakes that the Libs in the Democratic Party and the Main Stream Media can reach back and “snatch a little purity” as Paul Simon wrote and sang in his song “Loves Me Like a Rock”.

However, they are fooling no one with their claims to possess the Moral High Ground.

For as Christ said in James 2:19…

You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that–and shudder.

And, as regards their Liberal Hypocrisy, Matthew 7:5 gives the Democratic Party and their Propaganda Arm, the Main Stream Media, some great advice…

You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Liberal Hypocrisy and the Alinsky Playbook: Defend “Boudoir Bubba” Clinton. Savagely Attack Judge Roy Moore.

US-VOTE-DEBATE

12. “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.“ Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. – from “Alinsky’s 12 Rules for Radicals”

As the good name of Judge Roy Moore continues to be besmirched every day by the Liberal Main Stream Media, some Liberals have finally figured out that perhaps they did not respond properly in the case of the sexual misconduct of Former President Bill “Bubba” Clinton, a guy who has been around more times than the turnstiles at Disney World.

Gee, DiNozzo. Ya think?

The Ultra-Liberal New York Times reports that

Another woman went on national television this week to press her case of sexual assault by a powerful figure. But the accused was not Roy S. Moore or Harvey Weinstein or Donald J. Trump. It was Bill Clinton. “I feel like people are starting to believe and realize that I was truly sexually assaulted by Bill Clinton,” Juanita Broaddrick said on Fox News nearly two decades after first going public with her story. “All victims matter. It doesn’t matter if you’re a Democrat or a Republican. Who cares if you’re straight or you’re gay, or if you believe in God or not. We all have a right to be believed.”

The cultural conversation about women, power and sexual misconduct that has consumed the United States in recent weeks has now raised a question that is eagerly promoted by those on the political right just as it discomfits those on the political left: What about Bill? While Fox News and other conservative outlets revive years-old charges against Mr. Clinton to accuse Mr. Moore’s critics of hypocrisy, some liberals say it may be time to rethink their defense of the 42nd president.

Matthew Yglesias, a liberal blogger who once worked at the Center for American Progress, a pillar of the Clinton political world, wrote on Vox.com on Wednesday that “I think we got it wrong” by defending Mr. Clinton in the 1990s and that he should have resigned. Chris Hayes, the liberal MSNBC host, said on Twitter that “Democrats and the center left are overdue for a real reckoning with the allegations against him.”

Caitlin Flanagan, a social critic who calls herself a “lifelong Democrat, an enemy of machine feminism and a sexual assault survivor,” wrote on The Atlantic’s website that “the Democratic Party needs to make its own reckoning of the way it protected Bill Clinton.” Michelle Goldberg wrote a New York Times column headlined, “I Believe Juanita.” David Rothkopf, a former Clinton administration official, said Monica S. Lewinsky “deserves an apology from many of us she has never received.”The emerging revisionism may influence a historical legacy that Mr. Clinton and his allies have spent the past 17 years scrubbing of scandal. Despite his impeachment on perjury and obstruction for covering up sexual liaisons with Ms. Lewinsky, Mr. Clinton until lately had made progress in framing the national memory of his presidency as a time of peace and prosperity.

But the arrival of President Trump on the political stage has chipped away at that. To counter damage from the “Access Hollywood” tape recording him boasting about groping women as well as allegations by a number of women that it was more than just “locker room talk,” Mr. Trump recruited Ms. Broaddrick and other women who had accused Mr. Clinton to join him on the campaign trail last year.

The spate of sexual misconduct stories in recent weeks has brought those cases back into the public spotlight.

“It’s about time,” Kathleen Willey, another woman who accused Mr. Clinton of sexual harassment, said Wednesday in a telephone interview from her home in Richmond, Va. “We’ve waited for years for vindication.”

She expressed bitterness that liberals and feminists did not believe her or the other accusers at the time. “They’re hypocrites,” she said. “They worship at the altar of all things Clinton. They’re all over Roy Moore, but they had nothing to say about Bill Clinton when he was accused of doing what he was accused of doing.”

Some Democratic leaders rejected the comparison. “I don’t think there’s any double standard here,” Senator Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, the chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, said last weekend on “Fox News Sunday.” “You were also talking in this case, as you know, about allegations of child sexual abuse.”

Mr. Clinton’s behavior, proved or otherwise, has long been an uncomfortable subject for Democrats. Many chose to defend him for his White House trysts with Ms. Lewinsky because, despite the power differential between a president and a former intern, she was a willing partner. To this day, Ms. Lewinsky rejects the idea that she was a victim because of the affair; “any ‘abuse’ came in the aftermath” when the political system took over, as she wrote in 2014.

Ms. Willey, Ms. Broaddrick and Paula Jones, however, described unwilling encounters. Ms. Jones asserted that Mr. Clinton, while he was governor of Arkansas and she was a state employee, summoned her to a hotel room, dropped his pants and requested oral sex. Ms. Willey, a former White House volunteer, accused him of kissing and groping her in the Oval Office. Ms. Broaddrick, an Arkansas nursing home owner, alleged that Mr. Clinton forced her to have sex during a meeting on the campaign trail in 1978.

Mr. Clinton’s lawyers have disputed all three charges, although he eventually paid $850,000 to settle a sexual harassment lawsuit by Ms. Jones without admitting wrongdoing, citing the political costs of continuing to fight it. None of those cases was part of the impeachment articles against Mr. Clinton, which rested on whether he lied under oath about his interactions with Ms. Lewinsky and coaxed her to lie, too. The House impeached him along party lines in December 1998, but the Senate acquitted him two months later.

Many Democrats condemned Mr. Clinton at the time, but they opposed his removal from office, citing what they considered the partisan nature of the attempt. The fact that some of his accusers willingly collaborated with Mr. Clinton’s conservative opponents troubled some. Others seized on inconsistencies in the women’s accounts. Ms. Broaddrick, for instance, initially denied that anything happened, saying later that she did so because she did not want to be dragged into the political arena. Ms. Willey later said she suspected the Clintons were somehow involved in the death of her husband, which was called a suicide.

Gloria Steinem, who at the time wrote a column generally defending Mr. Clinton, remains unmoved by time. “Most important is to listen to the women themselves,” she said in an email forwarded by her office on Wednesday. “Please watch Monica Lewinsky’s TED talk. It is important, moving and tells you who the abusers are.” She did not respond to questions about Ms. Broaddrick or the others.

Of course, many liberals and Democrats stood by Mr. Clinton despite the allegations because they agreed with his policy stances and did not want to reward those on the other side. Nina Burleigh, a journalist, wrote a column at the time joking that she would give Mr. Clinton oral sex for protecting abortion rights.

In an email on Wednesday, she said she did not mean to imply she supported sexual harassment. “As far as I know, Monica Lewinsky was a willing participant, not a victim,” she said. As for the other accusations against Mr. Clinton, she said, “Was he a Harvey Weinstein? I doubt it, but I have no evidence either way.”

Still, some on the other side in the 1990s have noticed a change. “Some of the same people who dismissed the women who came forward” then, “it seems like they’re evaluating these issues differently now than they did during that time,” said Gov. Asa Hutchinson of Arkansas, a Republican who was one of the House impeachment managers.

Mr. Clinton has kept publicly quiet amid the flurry of sexual misconduct stories lately, and his office had no comment on Wednesday. But other Democrats were not as willing to come to his defense this week. Of a dozen prominent political activists contacted on Wednesday, none went on the record on Mr. Clinton’s behalf.

Liberals always point the finger at others while ignoring their own hypocrisy.

Let’s look a little deeper at Bubba’s “excursions into exploring his sexuality”, shall we?

Back in the Bill Clinton era, White House advisor Betsey Wright coined the term “bimbo eruptions” to describe a long list of presidential gal pals. BIll “Bubba” Clinton’s Bimbo List” included, but is not limited to (I’m sure) Jennifer Flowers, Former Miss America Elizabeth Ward, Paul Corbin Jones, and, of course, Monica Lewinsky.

The Lewinsky scandal was a sensation that enveloped the presidency of Bill Clinton in 1998–99, leading to his impeachment by the U.S. House of Representatives and acquittal by the Senate.

Paula Corbin Jones, a former Arkansas state worker who claimed that Bill Clinton had accosted her sexually in 1991 when he was governor of Arkansas, had brought a sexual harassment lawsuit against the president. In order to show a pattern of behavior on Clinton’s part, Jones’s lawyers questioned several women believed to have been engaging in sex  with him. On Jan. 17, 1998, Bubba took the stand, becoming the first sitting president to testify as a civil defendant.

During this testimony, Clinton denied having had an affair with Monica S. Lewinsky, an unpaid intern and later a paid staffer at the White House who worked in the White House from 1995–96. Lewinsky had earlier, in a deposition in the same case, also denied having such a relationship. Kenneth Starr, the independent counsel in the Whitewater case, had already received tape recordings made by Linda R. Tripp (a former coworker of Lewinsky’s) of telephone conversations in which Lewinsky described her involvement with the president. Asserting that there was a “pattern of deception,” Starr obtained from Attorney General Janet Reno permission to investigate the matter.

The president publicly denied having had a relationship with Lewinsky and charges of covering it up. His adviser, Vernon Jordan, denied having counseled Lewinsky to lie in the Jones case, or having arranged a job for her outside Washington, to help cover up the affair. Hillary Clinton claimed that a “vast right-wing conspiracy” was trying to destroy her husband, while Republicans and conservatives portrayed him as immoral and a liar.

In March, Jordan and others testified before Starr’s grand jury, and lawyers for Paula Jones released papers revealing, among other things, that Clinton, in his January deposition, had admitted to a sexual relationship in the 1980s with Arkansas entertainer Gennifer Flowers, a charge he had long denied. In April, however, Arkansas federal judge Susan Webber Wright dismissed the Jones suit, ruling that Jones’s story, if true, showed that she had been exposed to “boorish” behavior but not sexual harassment; Jones appealed.

In July, Starr granted Lewinsky immunity from perjury charges, and Clinton agreed to testify before the grand jury. He did so on Aug. 17, then went on television to admit the affair with Lewinsky and ask for forgiveness. In September, Starr sent a 445-page report to the House of Representatives, recommending four possible grounds for impeachment: perjury, obstruction of justice, witness tampering, and abuse of authority.

On Dec. 19, Clinton became the second president (after Andrew Johnson) to be impeached, on two charges: perjury—in his Aug., 1998, testimony—and obstruction of justice. The vote in the House was largely along party lines.

In Jan., 1999, the trial began in the Senate. On Feb. 12, after a trial in which testimony relating to the charges was limited, the Senate rejected both counts of impeachment. The perjury charge lost, 55–45, with 10 Republicans joining all 45 Democrats in voting against it; the obstruction charge drew a 50–50 vote. Subsequently, on Apr. 12, Judge Wright, who had dismissed the Jones case, found the president in contempt for lying in his Jan., 1998, testimony, when he denied the Lewinsky affair. In July, Judge Wright ordered the president to pay nearly $90,000 to Ms. Jones’s lawyers. On Jan. 19, 2001, the day before he left office, President Clinton agreed to admit to giving false testimony in the Jones case and to accept a five-year suspension of his law license and a $25,000 fine in return for an agreement by the independent counsel, Robert W. Ray (Starr’s successor), to end the investigation and not prosecute him.

In a later interview, Hillary claimed that Bill suffered childhood abuse which may have caused him to philanderer and experience “bimbo eruptions” later in life. She described her philandering husband as “a hard dog to keep on the porch”.

In hindsight, it would have probably would have been a less unwanted image if Hillary would have called Bubba “a difficult dog to keep on the porch”, instead.

Just sayin’.

As we return to the present, we are witnessing the Trial By Media of Judge Roy Moore, Republican Candidate for Jeff Sessions’ vacated Senate Seat in Alabama.

As Judge Moore continues to experience a manufactured “Bimbo Eruption”, some striking differences between what is happening against him and the women who came forward against President Clinton are very clear.

There was not as long a period of time between Bubba’s actions and his accusers coming forth as there was in the case of Roy Moore.

And, the Democratic Establishment and the Main Stream Media did not take them seriously, as opposed to the sainthood status given to the accusers of Judge Moore.

And, as opposed to William Jefferson Blythe Clinton, Judge Roy Moore has not admitted to any inappropriate sexual behavior.

And finally, Judge Moore knows what the definition of what “is” is.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Senate Judicial Committee Launches Probe Over Lynch’s Possible Obstruction of Hillary Investigation

141108-loretta-lynch-mn-1235_808848110e47a65f68a0851a20700aea

When President Barack Hussein Obama announced his pick to succeed Eric Holder as Attorney General, the first reports profiled her as an “overqualified” Prosecutor from Brooklyn, NY. While Ms. Lynch may or many not actually have had the legal skills for the position, it is a certainty that she had the correct political ideology, racial animus, and situational ethics to work within the Obama Administration.

And, now, the Senate would like to speak with her.

The Washington Times reports that

The Senate Judiciary Committee has opened a probe into former Attorney General Loretta  Lynch’s efforts to shape the FBI’s investigation into 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, the committee’s chairman announced Friday.

In a letter to Ms. Lynch, the committee asks her to detail the depths of her involvement in the FBI’s investigation, including whether she ever assured Clinton confidantes that the probe wouldn’t “push too deeply into the matter.”

Fired FBI Director James B. Comey has said publicly that Ms. Lynch tried to shape the way he talked about the investigation into Mrs. Clinton’s emails, and he also hinted at other behavior “which I cannot talk about yet” that made him worried about Ms. Lynch’s ability to make impartial decisions.

Mr. Comey said that was one reason why he took it upon himself to buck Justice Department tradition and reveal his findings about Mrs. Clinton last year.

The probe into Ms. Lynch comes as the Judiciary Committee is already looking at President Trump’s firing of Mr. Comey.

Sen. Charles E. Grassley, chairman of the committee, said the investigation is bipartisan. The letter to Ms. Lynch is signed by ranking Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein and also by Sens. Lindsey Graham and Sheldon Whitehouse, the chairman and ranking member of the key investigative subcommittee.

Letters also went to Clinton campaign staffer Amanda Renteria and Leonard Benardo and Gail Scovell at the Open Society Foundations. Mr. Benardo was reportedly on an email chain from the then-head of the Democratic National Committee suggesting Ms. Lynch had given assurances to Ms. Renteria, the campaign staffer, that the Clinton probe wouldn’t “go too far.”

At a Senate hearing earlier this month, Mr. Comey told lawmakers that Ms. Lynch had attempted to change the way the FBI described its probe of Mrs. Clinton’s use of a private email server. The change appeared to dovetail with how Mrs. Clinton’s supporters were characterizing the probe.

“At one point, [Ms. Lynch] directed me not to call it an ‘investigation’ but instead to call it a ‘matter,’ which confused me and concerned me,” Mr. Comey said during his June 8 testimony before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. “That was one of the bricks in the load that led me to conclude I have to step away from the department if we are to close this case credibly.”

Acknowledging that he didn’t know whether it was intentional, Mr. Comey said Ms. Lynch’s request “gave the impression the attorney general was looking to align the way we talked about our investigation with the way a political campaign was describing the same activity.”

Mr. Comey said the language suggested by Ms. Lynch was troublesome because it closely mirrored what the Clinton campaign was using. Despite his discomfort, Mr. Comey said, he agreed to Ms. Lynch’s language.

On June 29th of last year, Former President Bill Clinton and then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch met in her private jet sitting on the tarmac on an airport runway.

That meeting occurred just hours before Department of Justice Officials filed a motion in federal court seeking a 27-month delay in producing correspondence between former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s four top aides and officials with the Clinton Foundation and Teneo Holdings, a closely allied public relations firm that Bill Clinton helped launch.

The next morning I wrote,

“Now, why would someone as smart as Bill Clinton, the former president of United States of America comma and attorney general Loretta Lynch, have a meeting that has such an appearance of impropriety?

At the time, I thought that there were several possibilities.

The first possibility was obvious. Bubba met with the attorney general in order to plead with her to let Hillary off the hook and to not invite her for her treasonous behavior in her email scandal.

The Clintons have always thought they were above the law. Hillary has left a trail of bodies between Arkansas and Washington DC, and nothing has ever happened to her. But comma even for the Clintons, such a blatant move would be inherently stupid. And, it would not help her presidential campaign one bit.

Or, perhaps it was Loretta Lynch’s camp that leaked the information of the clandestine meeting to the local news station in order to recuse herself from the matter.

The last possible Theory as to why Bubba and Miss Loretta had the clandestine meeting on that jet is that he was trying to leverage her by offering her a possible position on the Supreme Court if Hillary got elected President the United States of America. Again, the Clintons have always considered themselves to be above the law and they’re not beyond political chicanery such as that.

The bottom line is, whatever the purpose of that meeting on the tarmac was, I believed that nothing would happen, at the time. Simply because, boys and girls, Democrat Politicians seemed to be above the rules that apply to you and me. It does not matter if there is an appearance of impropriety nor does it matter if actual political chicanery, including bribery, happened onboard that plane.

It appeared at the time that, as far as the Political Elite’s involvement up on Capitol Hill, nothing would happen.

Now, almost one year later, it appears that the meeting on the tarmac, to “talk about their grandchildren”, was just the top of the proverbial iceberg.

And, if the Senate follows through with its call for Former AG Lynch to appear before them, and if they ask the right questions, the Democrats and the MSM will get the “Obstruction Case” that they have been shouting to the heavens about.

And, there will be a President involved in it.

However, it will not be President Donald J. Trump.

It will be the 44th President, Barack Hussein Obama.

Because, boys and girls, if “Sweet” Loretta (from the song “Get Back” [Lennon/McCartney])starts singing, the fecal matter will hit the rotary oscillator…and travel uphill.

Start buying your popcorn now.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

MSM Not Appreciating Being Punked by Trump

not-mine-600-li

The Main Stream Media needs a bottle and a nap.

TheHill.com reports that

President-elect Donald Trump and the news media are settling into an uneasy relationship.

Distrust and ill feelings are held on both sides, and no one is predicting the acrimony that characterized the final months of the presidential campaign will disappear.

At the same time, Trump in his Tuesday meeting with reporters and editors at The New York Times offered an olive branch, acknowledging that he’s a longtime reader and pledging a willingness to develop a professional working relationship.

“I would like to turn it around,” Trump said. “I think it would make the job I am doing much easier.”

Trump’s words may do little to assuage the press’s fears.

White House reporters are worried about access to Trump, who didn’t allow reporters on his campaign plane and ditched media staking out Trump Tower last week to have dinner with family at New York’s 21 Club.

The president-elect’s frequent threats to the press have added to a sense that the rules for covering this White House might be different.

“Every incoming president has basic, generally agreed upon rules of the road,” said Joe Lockhart, who served as White House press secretary for President Bill Clinton.

“The Trump team has decided they’ll blow up and the road and build a new one. Where it goes from here will be a test of how far the new president and his team want to push things, and the strength and will of the press to push back.”

Trump’s transition team says it is committed to having a press pool, which allows for a small group of reporters to remain stationed near the president to document his movements. The pool was on hand for the assassination of John F. Kennedy and the attempted assassination of Ronald Reagan, and when George W. Bush was on the move on 9/11.

“In order to cover the president-elect, we need to have a pool of reporters present and there when the entire press corps can’t be there,” White House Correspondents’ Association president Jeff Mason said this week on MSNBC. “That’s the purpose of the White House pool, and that’s certainly something the correspondent’s association has pressed for.”

But there are no laws requiring that an administration maintain a press pool or even that news outlets have access to administration officials, the briefing room or White House grounds.

During his primary campaign, Trump blackballed some news outlets from covering his rallies, which were open to the public, because he was unhappy with their coverage of him.

He also singled-out individual reporters for ridicule and would whip up a frenzy against the media at his rallies, where Trump supporters would jeer at the press pen.

Trump has not held a formal press conference — where reporters from a range of media outlets can ask him with questions — since July.

But Trump has little incentive to go through traditional media channels, some experts say.

Facebook and Twitter combine to give him one of the most powerful social media presences in the world.

He has former Breitbart executive Stephen Bannon at his side in the White House, giving him a powerful ally in the massively influential world of right-wing news.

And when Trump releases a straight-to-camera video to announce his 100-day agenda — as he did this week, in lieu of a press conference — it elicits the same volume of coverage as a press conference would.

Trump was lavished with billions of dollars worth of free airtime and exposure during the campaign, irrespective of how he chose to engage.

Press advocates are worried that the president-elect appears to be holding all the cards.

“Over the last 20 to 30 years, each White House has thrown up more obstacles and become more obsessed with controlling their own message,” said Craig Aaron, president of the advocacy group Free Press. “But this is a new apex, and it’s really dangerous. There used to be basic norms. You have to assume anything is possible now.”

Of course, the media will get little sympathy from the public, with a favorable rating sitting at an all-time low in the latest Gallup survey. Only 32 percent of Americans say they have a great deal or fair amount of trust in the press.

And Trump’s allies believe all of their moves to beat back at what they view as a hopelessly biased liberal media are justified.

They’re fuming over what they see as a press corps that has dropped any pretense of objectivity in covering Trump, and they’re sick of what they view as breathless coverage of frivolous stories, like the “Hamilton” actor who chided Vice President-elect Mike Pence.

Trump allies are apoplectic over the media’s obsession with the alt-right and the neo-Nazis that gathered in Washington, D.C., over the weekend to pledge fealty to Trump, arguing that Trump has condemned racism repeatedly and has no ties to either group.

By several accounts, there were as many reporters and protesters at the event as there were white nationalists, raising questions about why the event has attracted so much attention.

In an interview on Tuesday, Republican National Committee strategist Sean Spicer exploded at anchor Wolf Blitzer for badgering him on the issue.

“You’ve asked me eight times the same question,” Spicer shouted.

“It’s the news media over and over again,” Spicer said. “But I don’t know how many times he has to answer that question and you figuring out the way and fashion he should do it next. If he gives a speech, should he then write it in the sky in an airplane? At what point is it enough?”

Unfortunately, President-elect Trump will never be able to please the Main Stream Media.

Nor should he have to.

The Presidency of the United States of America is the most important leadership position on the Face of God’s Green Earth.

The Main Stream Media knows that.

The problem is, the Main Stream Media is still having a conniption fit (Southern colloquialism for being upset over something to the point insanity) over the election of Donald J. Trump as the next President by us rubes here in Flyover Country.

In fact, they are so upset that they have retaliated by publishing all of that “Fake News” that Barack Hussein Obama, the current resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington, DC, keeps referring to, in that same Main Stream Media.

Ironic, eh?

The Main Stream Media not only has lost their meal ticket with the defeat of the Queen of Mean, Hillary Clinton, but they also have the reality of being “punked” for at least four years by Donald J. Trump, who treats them like a school of Largemouth Bass, baiting the hook with the promise of a big announcement or story, causing them to pack the room wherever Trump is speaking, only to find out that they have been used to gain free publicity for Mr. Trump and whatever cause he is trying to forward that day.

In fact, Trump has made the Media look tremendously naïve and stupid on several occasions, in scenes reminiscent of Lucy Van Pelt promising to hold the football for Charlie Brown to kick, only to pull it away at the last minute leaving a helpless Charlie Brown to wipe out, tumbling head over heels.

The Main Stream Media are no longer in control of the dissemination of the news…and they know it.

Between Trump’s playing them like Charlie Daniels playing a fiddle and average Americans becoming their own reporters through the use of Social Media, “professional journalists” have watched their influence over the daily lives of Americans dwindle and diminish right before their very eyes.

And, quite frankly, they don’t like it one bit.

That is why they continue to try to bring down Trump.

They are behaving like spoiled little brats who need a timeout.

And, judging from the TV Ratings of their newscasts, Americans are giving them one.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

#SpiritCooking,E-mailgate, Foundationgate, and WikiLeaks: The Devil is in the Details?

041116sick

For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. – Ephesians 6:12

For a while now, Alex Jones, owner and operator of the political website, InfoWars, who has been the subject of ridicule from both Conservatives and Liberals, has accused members of our government of being engaged in occult practices.

Danged if he wasn’t right.

In what is undoubtedly the most bizarre Wikileaks revelation to date, Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta was invited to a “spirit cooking dinner” by performance artist Marina Abramovic, to take part in an occult ritual founded by Satanist Aleister Crowley.

In an email dated June 28, 2015, Abramovic wrote, “I am so looking forward to the Spirit Cooking dinner at my place. Do you think you will be able to let me know if your brother is joining? All my love, Marina.”

Tony Podesta then forwarded the email to his brother John Podesta (Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman), asking him, “Are you in NYC Thursday July 9 Marina wants you to come to dinner.”

What is “spirit cooking”?

Spirit cooking refers to “a sacrament in the religion of Thelema which was founded by Aleister Crowley” and involves an occult performance during which menstrual blood, breast milk, urine and sperm are used to create a “painting”.

According to Marina Abramovic, if the ritual is performed in an art gallery, it is merely art, but if the ritual is performed privately, then it represents an intimate spiritual ceremony.

The video embedded above depicts the bizarre nature of the ceremony. Abramovic mixes together thickly congealed blood as the “recipe” for the “painting,” which is comprised of the words, “With a sharp knife cut deeply into the middle finger of your left hand eat the pain.”

The ceremony is, “meant to symbolize the union between the microcosm, Man, and the macrocosm, the Divine, which is a representation of one of the prime maxims in Hermeticism “As Above, So Below.”

“Abramovic is known for her often-gory art that confronts pain and ritual. Her first performance involved repeatedly, stabbing herself in her hands. The next performance featured her throwing her nails, toenails, and hair into a flaming five-point star — which she eventually jumped inside of, causing her to lose consciousness,” writes Cassandra Fairbanks.

Another image shows Abramovic posing with a bloody goat’s head – a representation of the occult symbol Baphomet.

Some are even linking the spirit cooking revelation to claims that the Podesta emails contain “code for child sex trafficking” that is hidden behind mentions of types of food.

Others are connecting it to Laura Silsby, the missionary who was jailed for six months after her organization, New Life Children’s Refuge, attempted to smuggle 33 children out of Haiti into the Dominican Republic after the 2010 Haiti earthquake.

Wikileaks emails reveal that Hillary’s top aide Huma Abedin forwarded numerous articles about New Life Children’s Refuge to Clinton.

“Julian Assange claimed that the Wikileaks would send Hillary Clinton to prison,” writes Cernovich. “The releases initially disappointed many people, this reporter included, as the evidence of corruption was slim. Assange was right. The real story was hidden in view.”

While the child trafficking and pedophile connections to Clinton remain unproven, the fact that her campaign chairman is apparently into spooky occult rituals involving menstrual blood and semen is easily one of the most disturbing Wikileaks revelations to date.

Is all this upheaval our nation is currently facing, which is sending our nation in an out-of-control downhill spiral, due to some sort of Satanic Influence attempting to tip the scales in the fight between Good and Evil, across our land?

Noah Webster (REVOLUTIONARY SOLDIER; JUDGE; LEGISLATOR; EDUCATOR; “SCHOOLMASTER TO AMERICA”), wrote

[T]he religion which has introduced civil liberty is the religion of Christ and His apostles… This is genuine Christianity and to this we owe our free constitutions of government.129

The moral principles and precepts found in the Scriptures ought toform the basis of all our civil constitutions and laws.

All the… evils which men suffer from vice, crime, ambition, injustice, oppression, slavery and war, proceed from their despising or neglecting the precepts contained in the Bible.131

[O]ur citizens should early understand that the genuine source of correct republican principles is the Bible, particularly the New Testament, or the Christian religion.

[T]he Christian religion is the most important and one of the first things in which all children under a free government ought to be instructed. No truth is more evident than that the Christian religion must be the basis of any government intended to secure the rights and privileges of a free people.

The Bible is the chief moral cause of all that is good and the best corrector of all that is evil in human society – the best book for regulating the temporal concerns of men.

[T]he Christian religion… is the basis, or rather the source, of all genuine freedom in government… I am persuaded that no civil government of a republican form can exist and be durable in which the principles of Christianity have not a controlling influence.

A man, who would be considered a cornball by the standards of today’s Socially-Liberal Fiscally Conservative Liberals, Moderates, and “Libertarians”, wrote a prophetic analysis that ties in perfectly to the situation in which we, as Americans, find ourselves.

This speech was broadcast by legendary ABC Radio commentator Paul Harvey on April 3, 1965:

If I were the Devil . . . I mean, if I were the Prince of Darkness, I would of course, want to engulf the whole earth in darkness. I would have a third of its real estate and four-fifths of its population, but I would not be happy until I had seized the ripest apple on the tree, so I should set about however necessary to take over the United States. I would begin with a campaign of whispers. With the wisdom of a serpent, I would whisper to you as I whispered to Eve: “Do as you please.” “Do as you please.” To the young, I would whisper, “The Bible is a myth.” I would convince them that man created God instead of the other way around. I would confide that what is bad is good, and what is good is “square”. In the ears of the young marrieds, I would whisper that work is debasing, that cocktail parties are good for you. I would caution them not to be extreme in religion, in patriotism, in moral conduct. And the old, I would teach to pray. I would teach them to say after me: “Our Father, which art in Washington” . . .

If I were the devil, I’d educate authors in how to make lurid literature exciting so that anything else would appear dull an uninteresting. I’d threaten T.V. with dirtier movies and vice versa. And then, if I were the devil, I’d get organized. I’d infiltrate unions and urge more loafing and less work, because idle hands usually work for me. I’d peddle narcotics to whom I could. I’d sell alcohol to ladies and gentlemen of distinction. And I’d tranquilize the rest with pills. If I were the devil, I would encourage schools to refine young intellects but neglect to discipline emotions . . . let those run wild. I would designate an atheist to front for me before the highest courts in the land and I would get preachers to say “she’s right.” With flattery and promises of power, I could get the courts to rule what I construe as against God and in favor of pornography, and thus, I would evict God from the courthouse, and then from the school house, and then from the houses of Congress and then, in His own churches I would substitute psychology for religion, and I would deify science because that way men would become smart enough to create super weapons but not wise enough to control them.

If I were Satan, I’d make the symbol of Easter an egg, and the symbol of Christmas, a bottle. If I were the devil, I would take from those who have and I would give to those who wanted, until I had killed the incentive of the ambitious. And then, my police state would force everybody back to work. Then, I could separate families, putting children in uniform, women in coal mines, and objectors in slave camps. In other words, if I were Satan, I’d just keep on doing what he’s doing.

Paul Harvey, Good Day.

The reason that our nation is facing the difficulties we are is the belief by those who proclaim themselves to be the “smartest people in the room”, that they are above the old-fashioned, passe notions of morality and ethics, good and evil, and the Sovereignty of God.

They have made a grave mistake.

Evil exists and these fools opened the door to Satan in our society a long time ago.

Now that the “best laid plans of mice and men” have gone awry, and it appears that Donald J. Trump is on the threshold of becoming the next President of the United States of America, and their dream of making America a “Socialist Utopia” is in the process of crashing down around them,

What are Hillary and all of those who have been involved in this out-of-control corruption in America’s Halls of Power going to say?

Who are they going to blame?

The Devil made me do it?

Until He Comes,

KJ