Forget emails, FBI now may have Clinton Abedin Text messages

10/31/2016

If recent news is correct and the 650,000 emails on Anthony Weiners computer is an ongoing backup of wife Huma’s phone then there may be gold in them there hills.

According to Anthony Weiner the 650,000 emails on his computer came from backups of Humas phone there may be more evidence there in addition to the emails.

Unless they are deleted or told not to backup all text messages are backed up. Think about it. IF Hillary used text as most of us do, we may be sitting on a treasure trove of TEXT messages from and to Hillary Clinton and her top advisers.

The Piratearian

Must attribute if resent or retweeted

hillary-clinton-email-un-20150310

Copywrite 10/31/2016

 

Staffer who leaked DNC documents executed in D.C. Is there a serial DNC murderer out there?

Individuals connected with the DNC are being murdered in short order.

Questions: Who did it? Who ordered it?
Get the answers and the DNC is destroyed.

 

BREAKING: Murdered DNC staffer was Wikileaks’ source, Assange admits in interview

In July, a Democratic National Committee staffer named Seth Rich was gunned down in the Bloomingdale neighborhood of northwest D.C.  The police said his murder may have been the result of a robbery.

Now, however, Wikileaks founder Julian Assange is saying there is more to the story.

julian

In an interview with a Dutch media outlet known as Nieuwsuur on Tuesday, Assange admitted that Rich, a staffer in the voter data department of the DNC, was Wikileak’s source within the organization.

In recent weeks, Wikileaks has released a torrent of information from inside the DNC — from emails to memos to voicemails — that has resulted in the resignation of top party officials, including Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz.  According to Assange, Rich arranged a large portion of this information.

After Rich’s murder, Assange announced that Wikileaks was offering a $20,000 reward for anyone who could provide information leading to an arrest and conviction in Rich’s murder case.

Assange’s interview with Nieuwsuur on Tuesday was the first time that the Wikileaks founder ever has revealed one of their sources.

The video of Assange’s encounter with the Dutch media outlet can be found at http://nos.nl/nieuwsuur/artikel/2124316-assange-belooft-nieuwe-onthullingen-over-clinton.html?title=assange-belooft-nieuwe-onthullingen-over-clinton

http://townhall.com/columnists/rachelalexander/2016/08/09/clinton-body-count-or-leftwing-conspiracy-three-with-ties-to-dnc-mysteriously-die-n2203000

Clinton Body Count or Left-Wing Conspiracy? Three With Ties to DNC Mysteriously Die
Rachel Alexander
Rachel Alexander
|
Posted: Aug 09, 2016 12:01 AM
Clinton Body Count or Left-Wing Conspiracy? Three With Ties to DNC Mysteriously Die
Trending

hillary-clinton-email-un-20150310

Since the Democratic National Committee emails were leaked a few weeks ago, three people associated with the DNC have all been found dead under what could be questionable circumstances. Some — including Bernie Sanders supporters — suspect the Clintons were behind the deaths, just more episodes in the alleged “Clinton body count” dating back to the 1990s. Others dismiss the speculation as left-wing conspiracy nuts. But until the police have completed their investigations and the medical examiners have released autopsy reports, it is premature to make any determinations.

Seth Rich (See above)

DNC staffer Seth Rich was mysteriously murdered in the streets of Washington, D.C., on July 10. Although it is being investigated as a robbery, his wallet, credit cards and watch were not taken. The 27-year old was shot in the back on July 10 at 4:15 a.m. near his affluent neighborhood, while he was reportedly walking home from his girlfriend’s apartment. Police still have no suspects, witnesses or motive. His mother told the local NBC station that there were bruises on his face, knees and hands, apparently from trying to fend off his attackers.

Some are speculating that Hillary Clinton is behind the murder, because Rich could have been the DNC staffer responsible for leaking the 20,000 damaging DNC emails to Wikileaks. The allegation is that powerful Sanders allies convinced Rich to leak the data. He had previously worked on the U.S. Senate campaign for Nebraska businessman Scott Kleeb, who lost his election. The Clinton Global Initiative provided funds for a clean energy business started by Kleeb, which had come under investigation after losing $300,000 in 2010 and another $300,000 in 2011 despite the subsidies. Rich was also previously employed at a data firm that had worked with the Clintons. After news of possible corruption emerged between the Clinton Global Initiative and Kleeb, supposedly that led to Sanders’ cronies pressuring Rich to leak what was going on.
CARTOONS | Glenn McCoy
View Cartoon

Rich was a data analyst, so it is very possible he could have had access to the DNC’s emails. Julian Assange of Wikileaks said recently on TV that it wasn’t Russian hackers who intercepted the emails, as the Hillary Clinton campaign has alleged; instead, any one of a number of staffers within the DNC could have leaked them.

Emily Zanotti of HeatStreet, who is no leftist, has written a skeptical article about the conspiracy theories surrounding his death, analyzing Reddit threads. Reddit has contributors covering the circumstances of his death extensively, but they aren’t professional journalists, are mostly anonymous and can get things wrong, which hurts the credibility of the speculation.

The myth-debunking site Snopes labeled the suspicion over Rich’s death as false. This is strange, since how does Snopes know that it is false? The police haven’t even completed their investigation yet, which Snopes admits. Many murders go unsolved, including several of the strange deaths of people associated with the Clintons. A $25,000 reward is being offered for information about who killed Rich.

There should be no rush to judgment either way. Two people were robbed at gunpoint within the hour before Rich was murdered, a little over a mile away. If Rich was really the victim of a robbery, why didn’t the robbers take his valuables? It is possible that Rich refused to turn his valuables over, so the robbers shot him, and then fled without the valuables due to the noise from the gunshot. Police investigators will likely speak with the victims of the earlier two robberies and ask if they can recall what the gun looked like to see if the ballistics match the two rounds that killed Rich.

Shawn Lucas

Shawn Lucas, along with filmmaker Ricardo Villaba, served the DNC on July 3 with a complaint and summons in a fraud action on behalf of Sanders supporters. In the video, he can be seen grinning, happy to do it.

On August 2, he was found lying on the bathroom floor dead by his girlfriend when she came home that evening. His girlfriend said he was in good health.

John Ashe

The former President of the United Nations General Assembly, John Ashe, mysteriously passed away on June 22, a few days before he was scheduled to begin pretrial meetings involving shady financial dealings regarding a former Clinton crony. Local police officers said he died from dropping a barbell on his throat while working out, but the UN oddly first claimed he died of a heart attack. The 61-year-old was supposed to testify against Chinese real estate developer Ng Lap Seng, who was implicated in the “Chinagate” scandal for funneling money to the DNC for Bill Clinton through Arkansas restaurant owner Charlie Trie. Ashe was arrested last year for allegedly taking over $3 million in bribes from Chinese businessmen, including over half a million from Ng Lap Se, in exchange for building a United Nations conference center in Macau.

Dominican attorney Henry Shillingford questioned his death, “It is strange for Antigua’s most senior diplomat to be implicated and die under such troubling circumstances.” The New York Post’s Page Six ran a skeptical article questioning the circumstances. A source told the paper, “During the trial, the prosecutors would have linked Ashe to the Clinton bagman Ng. It would have been very embarrassing. His death was conveniently timed.”

However, his widow, Dr Anilla Cherian, said it was the third time that her husband had been found collapsed at their home.

More suspicious deaths recently of people with ties to the Clintons

Victor Thorn, who wrote four books exposing the Clintons, reportedly killed himself with a gun on his 54th birthday, August 1, while on top of a mountain near his Pennsylvania home. The books he wrote were Hillary (And Bill): The Sex Volume, Hillary (And Bill): The Drugs Volume, and Hillary (And Bill): The Murder Volume, and his latest which was published in February, Crowning Clinton: Why Hillary Shouldn’t Be in the White House.

According to the Inqisitr, Thorn had appeared multiple times on The Russell Scott Show and told the host, “Russell, if I’m ever found dead, it was murder. I would never kill myself.”

Joe Montano, an aide to Hillary’s running mate Tim Kaine, died of a heart attack on July 25. He had worked for the DNC and was only 47.

A man named Larry Nichols claimed on the Pete Santilli Show that he was hired as a hitman for the Clintons, and killed several people years ago.

What is comes down to is this: how many other politicians have you heard of who have had so many mysterious deaths associated with them? You don’t hear of a Bush body count — not even an Obama body count. Snopes, the left-leaning internet myth debunker, labels the Clinton body count as false. However, the main site that hosts a list of the Clinton body count reports that is constantly under attack by hackers of Hillary’s.

Regardless of whether there is any truth to the Clintons being behind these deaths, at a very minimum, the gun laws in DC need to be changed to allow people to protect themselves. After being robbed while housesitting for a friend, former Washington Times columnist Emily Miller wrote a book about how difficult it was to obtain a gun for self-protection in DC, Emily Gets Her Gun. Fortunately, there is now ongoing litigation challenging these draconian laws. Whether Rich was killed by robbers or someone else, a gun likely would have saved his life.

This post has been updated to fix an error.

Who Hacked Clinton and the DNC? Hint “It was not the Russians”

Updated 8/9/2016

Funny how the DNC AKA the “Clintonistas” are so quick to blame Putin and “The Russians” for the hacking of the DNC, Clinton campaign but not her “private” server.

hillary-clinton-email-un-20150310

This all came after James Comey announced that if her server was hack, the best hackers would leave no trace. Yet on the DNC hack we are told that the Russians left clues all over the hack. THIS IS A DIVERSION!

The Clinton campaign led by Robbie Mook was very quick to blame the Russians of leaking to Wikileaks and Julian Assange then insinuate that Donald Trump may be involved. I guess the apple does not fall far from the Clinton tree in being dishonest.

Being a Pirate has its advantages. We hang and recognize fellow Scalawags whether they are flying the skull and crossbones or not.

When I heard everyone blaming the Russians I knew it was a red herring. It was too obvious. Clinton just needed a scapegoat that was plausible to create a new enemy and link to Trump.

When I heard that the DNC hacks were practically signed by the Russians the hair on the back of me neck stood up.

Now I know a lot of people who hang in dark Pirate bars. Patriots who were formally employed by our government and were trained to use technology as part of their “special” training. Many of these Patriots have been disgusted with not only the purge of very good men in our military leadership by Obama, but how Clinton has been dishonest, let Americans die in Benghazi, supported our enemies and allowed the rise of ISIS and the disaster of her “Arab Spring”.

hack

It is my guess that there are multiple hackers supplying wikileaks. (Turns out 1 was a murdered DNC staffer) These hacker could be retired U.S. Military and / or U.S. Intelligence.
They are proud patriots who want to save America. They know that if Clinton wins the White House that there is a good chance our nation will cease to exist as we know it. Clinton will open our borders, take away our 2nd amendment rights and start new wars to sacrifice the lives of our men and women in uniform.
They know that the system is rigged and without exposing the true criminality of Clinton and her campaign.

I watched Clinton today on Fox News. She denied that Comey confirmed that she commuted crimes, that she sent and received classified information. That she lied to the American people.
She said “That is not what I heard.”
Well this pirate may be hard of hearing, but I heard the questions Trey Gowdy asked Comey under oath and I heard his answers. He confirmed that she was dishonest and DID commit crimes but that he knew that the Obama justice department would never prosecute.

So I hope to see what comes next. I consider it sauce for the goose as Clinton was so loose in protecting Americas secrets it is only fair that HER secrets are exposed.

AMERICA cannot afford to have Hillary Clinton as our President. It would spell doom for America and for all of our freedoms!

– The Pirate.

Hillary destabilized the Middle East and made MILLIONS for her and Bill

Clinton Foundation Donors Got Weapons Deals From Hillary Clinton’s State Department

466520736
Under Hillary Clinton, the State Department approved $165 billion worth of commercial arms sales to 20 nations whose governments had given millions to the Clinton Foundation. Yana Paskova/Getty Images

Even by the standards of arms deals between the United States and Saudi Arabia, this one was enormous. A consortium of American defense contractors led by Boeing would deliver $29 billion worth of advanced fighter jets to the United States’ oil-rich ally in the Middle East.

Israeli officials were agitated, reportedly complaining to the Obama administration that this substantial enhancement to Saudi air power risked disrupting the region’s fragile balance of power. The deal appeared to collide with the State Department’s documented concerns about the repressive policies of the Saudi royal family.

But now, in late 2011, Hillary Clinton’s State Department was formally clearing the sale, asserting that it was in the national interest. At a press conference in Washington to announce the department’s approval, an assistant secretary of state, Andrew Shapiro, declared that the deal had been “a top priority” for Clinton personally. Shapiro, a longtime aide to Clinton since her Senate days, added that the “U.S. Air Force and U.S. Army have excellent relationships in Saudi Arabia.”

These were not the only relationships bridging leaders of the two nations. In the years before Hillary Clinton became secretary of state, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia contributed at least $10 million to the Clinton Foundation, the philanthropic enterprise she has overseen with her husband, former president Bill Clinton. Just two months before the deal was finalized, Boeing — the defense contractor that manufactures one of the fighter jets the Saudis were especially keen to acquire, the F-15 — contributed $900,000 to the Clinton Foundation, according to a company press release.

The Saudi deal was one of dozens of arms sales approved by Hillary Clinton’s State Department that placed weapons in the hands of governments that had also donated money to the Clinton family philanthropic empire, an International Business Times investigation has found.

Under Clinton’s leadership, the State Department approved $165 billion worth of commercial arms sales to 20 nations whose governments have given money to the Clinton Foundation, according to an IBTimes analysis of State Department and foundation data. That figure — derived from the three full fiscal years of Clinton’s term as Secretary of State (from October 2010 to September 2012) — represented nearly double the value of American arms sales made to the those countries and approved by the State Department during the same period of President George W. Bush’s second term.

The Clinton-led State Department also authorized $151 billion of separate Pentagon-brokered deals for 16 of the countries that donated to the Clinton Foundation, resulting in a 143 percent increase in completed sales to those nations over the same time frame during the Bush administration. These extra sales were part of a broad increase in American military exports that accompanied Obama’s arrival in the White House.

American defense contractors also donated to the Clinton Foundation while Hillary Clinton was secretary of state and in some cases made personal payments to Bill Clinton for speaking engagements. Such firms and their subsidiaries were listed as contractors in $163 billion worth of Pentagon-negotiated deals that were authorized by the Clinton State Department between 2009 and 2012.

The State Department formally approved these arms sales even as many of the deals enhanced the military power of countries ruled by authoritarian regimes whose human rights abuses had been criticized by the department. Algeria, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Oman and Qatar all donated to the Clinton Foundation and also gained State Department clearance to buy caches of American-made weapons even as the department singled them out for a range of alleged ills, from corruption to restrictions on civil liberties to violent crackdowns against political opponents.

As secretary of state, Hillary Clinton also accused some of these countries of failing to marshal a serious and sustained campaign to confront terrorism. In a December 2009 State Department cable published by Wikileaks, Clinton complained of “an ongoing challenge to persuade Saudi officials to treat terrorist financing emanating from Saudi Arabia as a strategic priority.” She declared that “Qatar’s overall level of CT cooperation with the U.S. is considered the worst in the region.” She said the Kuwaiti government was “less inclined to take action against Kuwait-based financiers and facilitators plotting attacks.” She noted that “UAE-based donors have provided financial support to a variety of terrorist groups.” All of these countries donated to the Clinton Foundation and received increased weapons export authorizations from the Clinton-run State Department.

Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign and the Clinton Foundation did not respond to questions from the IBTimes.

In all, governments and corporations involved in the arms deals approved by Clinton’s State Department have delivered between $54 million and $141 million to the Clinton Foundation as well as hundreds of thousands of dollars in payments to the Clinton family, according to foundation and State Department records. The Clinton Foundation publishes only a rough range of individual contributors’ donations, making a more precise accounting impossible.

Winning Friends, Influencing Clintons

Under federal law, foreign governments seeking State Department clearance to buy American-made arms are barred from making campaign contributions — a prohibition aimed at preventing foreign interests from using cash to influence national security policy. But nothing prevents them from contributing to a philanthropic foundation controlled by policymakers.

Just before Hillary Clinton became Secretary of State, the Clinton Foundation signed an agreement generally obligating it to disclose to the State Department increases in contributions from its existing foreign government donors and any new foreign government donors. Those increases were to be reviewed by an official at the State Department and “as appropriate” the White House counsel’s office. According to available disclosures, officials at the State Department and White House raised no issues about potential conflicts related to arms sales.

During Hillary Clinton’s 2009 Senate confirmation hearings, Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind., urged the Clinton Foundation to “forswear” accepting contributions from governments abroad. “Foreign governments and entities may perceive the Clinton Foundation as a means to gain favor with the secretary of state,” he said. The Clintons did not take Lugar’s advice. In light of the weapons deals flowing to Clinton Foundation donors, advocates for limits on the influence of money on government action now argue that Lugar was prescient in his concerns.

“The word was out to these groups that one of the best ways to gain access and influence with the Clintons was to give to this foundation,” said Meredith McGehee, policy director at the Campaign Legal Center, an advocacy group that seeks to tighten campaign finance disclosure rules. “This shows why having public officials, or even spouses of public officials, connected with these nonprofits is problematic.”

Hillary Clinton’s willingness to allow those with business before the State Department to finance her foundation heightens concerns about how she would manage such relationships as president, said Lawrence Lessig, the director of Harvard University’s Safra Center for Ethics.

“These continuing revelations raise a fundamental question of judgment,” Lessig told IBTimes. “Can it really be that the Clintons didn’t recognize the questions these transactions would raise? And if they did, what does that say about their sense of the appropriate relationship between private gain and public good?”

National security experts assert that the overlap between the list of Clinton Foundation donors and those with business before the the State Department presents a troubling conflict of interest.

While governments and defense contractors may not have made donations to the Clinton Foundation exclusively to influence arms deals, they were clearly “looking to build up deposits in the ‘favor bank’ and to be well thought of,” said Gregory Suchan, a 34-year State Department veteran who helped lead the agency’s oversight of arms transfers under the Bush administration.

As Hillary Clinton presses a campaign for the presidency, she has confronted sustained scrutiny into her family’s personal and philanthropic dealings, along with questions about whether their private business interests have colored her exercise of public authority. As IBTimes previously reported, Clinton switched from opposing an American free trade agreement with Colombia to supporting it after a Canadian energy and mining magnate with interests in that South American country contributed to the Clinton Foundation. IBTimes’ review of the Clintons’ annual financial disclosures also revealed that 13 companies lobbying the State Department paid Bill Clinton $2.5 million in speaking fees while Hillary Clinton headed the agency.

Questions about the nexus of arms sales and Clinton Foundation donors stem from the State Department’s role in reviewing the export of American-made weapons. The agency is charged with both licensing direct commercial sales by U.S. defense contractors to foreign governments and also approving Pentagon-brokered sales to those governments. Those powers are enshrined in a federal law that specifically designates the secretary of state as “responsible for the continuous supervision and general direction of sales” of arms, military hardware and services to foreign countries. In that role, Hillary Clinton was empowered to approve or reject deals for a broad range of reasons, from national security considerations to human rights concerns.

The State Department does not disclose which individual companies are involved in direct commercial sales, but its disclosure documents reveal that countries that donated to the Clinton Foundation saw a combined $75 billion increase in authorized commercial military sales under the three full fiscal years Clinton served, as compared to the first three full fiscal years of Bush’s second term.

The Clinton Foundation has not released an exact timetable of its donations, making it impossible to know whether money from foreign governments and defense contractors came into the organization before or after Hillary Clinton approved weapons deals that involved their interests. But news reports document that at least seven foreign governments that received State Department clearance for American arms did donate to the Clinton Foundation while Hillary Clinton was serving as secretary: Algeria, Oman, Qatar, Kuwait, Thailand, Norway and Australia.

Sales Flowed Despite Human Rights Concerns

Under a presidential policy directive signed by President Bill Clinton in 1995, the State Department is supposed to specifically take human rights records into account when deciding whether to approve licenses enabling foreign governments to purchase military equipment and services from American companies. Despite this, Hillary Clinton’s State Department increased approvals of such sales to nations that her agency sharply criticized for systematic human rights abuses.

In its 2010 Human Rights Report, Clinton’s State Department inveighed against Algeria’s government for imposing “restrictions on freedom of assembly and association” tolerating “arbitrary killing,” “widespread corruption,” and a “lack of judicial independence.” The report said the Algerian government “used security grounds to constrain freedom of expression and movement.”

That year, the Algerian government donated $500,000 to the Clinton Foundation and its lobbyists met with the State Department officials who oversee enforcement of human rights policies. Clinton’s State Department the next year approved a one-year 70 percent increase in military export authorizations to the country. The increase included authorizations of almost 50,000 items classified as “toxicological agents, including chemical agents, biological agents and associated equipment” after the State Department did not authorize the export of any of such items to Algeria in the prior year.

During Clinton’s tenure, the State Department authorized at least $2.4 billion of direct military hardware and services sales to Algeria — nearly triple such authorizations over the last full fiscal years during the Bush administration. The Clinton Foundation did not disclose Algeria’s donation until this year — a violation of the ethics agreement it entered into with the Obama administration.

The monarchy in Qatar had similarly been chastised by the State Department for a raft of human rights abuses. But that country donated to the Clinton Foundation while Hillary Clinton was running the State Department. During the three full budgetary years of her tenure, Qatar saw a 14-fold increase in State Department authorizations for direct commercial sales of military equipment and services, as compared to the same time period in Bush’s second term. The department also approved the Pentagon’s separate $750 million sale of multi-mission helicopters to Qatar. That deal would additionally employ as contractors three companies that have all supported the Clinton Foundation over the years: United Technologies, Lockheed Martin and General Electric.

Clinton foundation donor countries that the State Department criticized for human rights violations and that received weapons export authorizations did not respond to IBTimes’ questions.

That group of arms manufacturers — along with Clinton Foundation donors Boeing, Honeywell, Hawker Beechcraft and their affiliates — were together listed as contractors in 114 such deals while Clinton was secretary of state. NBC put Chelsea Clinton on its payroll as a network correspondent in November 2011, when it was still 49 percent owned by General Electric. A spokesperson for General Electric did not respond to questions from IBTimes.

The other companies all asserted that their donations had nothing to do with the arms export deals.

“Our contributions have aligned with our longstanding philanthropic commitments,” said Honeywell spokesperson Rob Ferris.

“Even The Appearance Of A Conflict”

During her Senate confirmation proceedings in 2009, Hillary Clinton declared that she and her husband were “committed to ensuring that his work does not present a conflict of interest with the duties of Secretary of State.” She pledged “to protect against even the appearance of a conflict of interest between his work and the duties of the Secretary of State” and said that “in many, if not most cases, it is likely that the Foundation or President Clinton will not pursue an opportunity that presents a conflict.”

Even so, Bill Clinton took in speaking fees reaching $625,000 at events sponsored by entities that were dealing with Hillary Clinton’s State Department on weapons issues.

In 2011, for example, the former president was paid $175,000 by the Kuwait America Foundation to be the guest of honor and keynote speaker at its annual awards gala, which was held at the home of the Kuwaiti ambassador. Ben Affleck spoke at the event, which featured a musical performance by Grammy-award winner Michael Bolton. The gala was emceed by Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski, hosts of MSNBC’s Morning Joe show. Boeing was listed as a sponsor of the event, as were the embassies of the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Qatar — the latter two of which had donated to the Clinton Foundation while Hillary Clinton was secretary of state.

The speaking fee from the Kuwait America Foundation to Bill Clinton was paid in the same time frame as a series of deals Hillary Clinton’s State Department was approving between the Kuwaiti government and Boeing. Months before the gala, the Department of Defense announced that Boeing would be the prime contractor on a $693 million deal, cleared by Hillary Clinton’s State Department, to provide the Kuwaiti government with military transport aircraft. A year later, a group sponsored in part by Boeing would pay Bill Clinton another $250,000 speaking fee.

“Boeing has sponsored this major travel event, the Global Business Travel Association, for several years, regardless of its invited speakers,” Gordon Johndroe, a Boeing spokesperson, told IBTimes. Johndroe said Boeing’s support for the Clinton Foundation was “a transparent act of compassion and an investment aimed at aiding the long-term interests and hopes of the Haitian people” following a devastating earthquake.

Boeing was one of three companies that helped deliver money personally to Bill Clinton while benefiting from weapons authorizations issued by Hillary Clinton’s State Department. The others were Lockheed and the financial giant Goldman Sachs.

Lockheed is a member of the American Chamber of Commerce in Egypt, which paid Bill Clinton $250,000 to speak at an event in 2010. Three days before the speech, Hillary Clinton’s State Department approved two weapons export deals in which Lockheed was listed as the prime contractor. Over the course of 2010, Lockheed was a contractor on 17 Pentagon-brokered deals that won approval from the State Department. Lockheed told IBTimes that its support for the Clinton Foundation started in 2010, while Hillary Clinton was secretary of state.

“Lockheed Martin has periodically supported one individual membership in the Clinton Global Initiative since 2010,” said company spokesperson Katherine Trinidad. “Membership benefits included attendance at CGI annual meetings, where we participated in working groups focused on STEM, workforce development and advanced manufacturing.”

In April 2011, Goldman Sachs paid Bill Clinton $200,000 to speak to “approximately 250 high level clients and investors” in New York, according to State Department records obtained by Judicial Watch. Two months later, the State Department approved a $675 million foreign military sale involving Hawker Beechcraft — a company that was then part-owned by Goldman Sachs. As part of the deal, Hawker Beechcraft would provide support to the government of Iraq to maintain a fleet of aircraft used for intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance missions. Goldman Sachs has also contributed at least $250,000 to the Clinton Foundation, according to donation records.

“There is absolutely no connection among all the points that you have raised regarding our firm,” said Andrew Williams, a spokesperson for Goldman Sachs.

Federal records show that ethics staffers at the State Department approved the payments to Bill Clinton from Goldman Sachs, and the Lockheed- and Boeing-sponsored groups without objection, even though the firms had major stakes in the agency’s weapons export decisions.

Stephen Walt, a Harvard University professor of international affairs, told IBTimes that the intertwining financial relationships between the Clintons, defense contractors and foreign governments seeking weapons approvals is “a vivid example of a very big problem — the degree to which conflicts of interest have become endemic.”

“It has troubled me all along that the Clinton Foundation was not being more scrupulous about who it would take money from and who it wouldn’t,” he said. “American foreign policy is better served if people responsible for it are not even remotely suspected of having these conflicts of interest. When George Marshall was secretary of state, nobody was worried about whether or not he would be distracted by donations to a foundation or to himself. This wasn’t an issue. And that was probably better.”

This could be devastating for Bill and Hillary. Cannot even balance a checkbook

The New York Times takes down the Clinton Foundation. This could be devastating for Bill and Hillary

By  US politics Last updated: August 14th, 2013

233 Comments Comment on this article

An internal review of the Clinton Foundations’ workings has proved troubling

Is the New York Times being guest edited by Rush Limbaugh? Today it runs with a fascinating takedown of the Clinton Foundation – that vast vanity project that conservatives are wary of criticising for being seen to attack a body that tries to do good. But the liberal NYT has no such scruples. The killer quote is this:

For all of its successes, the Clinton Foundation had become a sprawling concern, supervised by a rotating board of old Clinton hands, vulnerable to distraction and threatened by conflicts of interest. It ran multimillion-dollar deficits for several years, despite vast amounts of money flowing in.

Over a year ago Bill Clinton met with some aides and lawyers to review the Foundation’s progress and concluded that it was a mess. Well, many political start-ups can be, especially when their sole selling point is the big name of their founder (the queues are short at the Dan Quayle Vice Presidential Learning Center). But what complicated this review – what made its findings more politically devastating – is that the Clinton Foundation has become about more than just Bill. Now both daughter Chelsea and wife, and likely presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton have taken on major roles and, in the words of the NYT “efforts to insulate the foundation from potential conflicts have highlighted just how difficult it can be to disentangle the Clintons’ charity work from Mr Clinton’s moneymaking ventures and Mrs Clinton’s political future.” Oh, they’re entangled alright.

The NYT runs the scoop in its usual balanced, inoffensive way – but the problem jumps right off the page. The Clintons have never been able to separate the impulses to help others and to help themselves, turning noble philanthropic ventures into glitzy, costly promos for some future campaign (can you remember a time in human history when a Clinton wasn’t running for office?). And their “Ain’t I Great?!” ethos attracts the rich and powerful with such naked abandon that it ends up compromising whatever moral crusade they happen to have endorsed that month. That the Clinton Global Initiative is alleged to have bought Natalie Portman a first-class ticket for her and her dog to attend an event in 2009 is the tip of the iceberg. More troubling is that businessmen have been able to expand the profile of their companies by working generously alongside the Clinton Foundation. From the NYT:

Last year, Coca-Cola’s chief executive, Muhtar Kent, won a coveted spot on the dais with Mr. Clinton, discussing the company’s partnership with another nonprofit to use its distributors to deliver medical goods to patients in Africa. (A Coca-Cola spokesman said that the company’s sponsorship of foundation initiatives long predated Teneo and that the firm plays no role in Coca-Cola’s foundation work.)

In March 2012, David Crane, the chief executive of NRG, an energy company, led a widely publicized trip with Mr. Clinton to Haiti, where they toured green energy and solar power projects that NRG finances through a $1 million commitment to the Clinton Global Initiative.

This is typical Clinton stuff. The second thing I ever wrote for this website was about how corporations invest in politicians as a way of building their brand and raising their stock price. It can lead to some funny partnerships. This, from 2011:

Just this month, bedding manufacturer Serta announced that it will be sponsoring Bill Clinton’s keynote address to an industry conference in August. “To us,”’ said the head of the company, “Clinton represents leadership. This appearance shows Serta is a leader and is taking a leadership position. This singles us out.” Some might say that it is beneath a former president to basically endorse Serta’s new “Perfect Sleeper” line, even with its “revolutionary gel foam mattress”.

The cynical might infer from the NYT piece that the Clintons are willing to sell themselves, their image, and even their Foundation’s reputation in exchange for money to finance their personal projects. In Bill’s case, saving the world. In Hillary’s case, maybe, running for president.

It’s nothing new to report that there’s an unhealthy relationship in America between money and politics, but it’s there all the same. While the little people are getting hit with Obamacare, high taxes and joblessness, a class of businessmen enjoys ready access to politicians of both Left and Right that poses troubling questions for how the republic can continue to call itself a democracy so long as it functions as an aristocracy of the monied. Part of the reason why America’s elites get away with it is becuase they employ such fantastic salesmen. For too long now, Bill Clinton has pitched himself, almost without question, as a homespun populist: the Boy from Hope. The reality is that this is a man who – in May 1993 – prevented other planes from landing at LAX for 90 minues while he got a haircut from a Beverley Hills hairdresser aboard Air Force One. The Clintons are populists in the same way that Barack Obama is a Nobel prize winner. Oh, wait…

Flashback #Benghazi American in Libya was on intel mission to track weapons (State Dept gave to Syrian Rebels? / Terrorists?)

American Killed in Libya Was on Intel Mission to Track Weapons

PHOTO: Glen Doherty

Anti-Islam Film Producer Guilty on Drug, Fraud Charges
AUTO START: ON | OFF

Share+
Sept. 13, 2012

 

One of the Americans killed alongside Ambassador Christopher Stevens in an attack on a U.S. diplomatic mission in Libya Tuesday told ABC News before his death that he was working with the State Department on an intelligence mission to round up dangerous weapons in the war-torn nation.

In an interview with ABC News last month, Glen Doherty, a 42-year-old former Navy SEAL who worked as a contractor with the State Department, said he personally went into the field to track down so-called MANPADS, shoulder-fired surface-to-air missiles, and destroy them. After the fall of dictator Moammar Gadhafi, the State Department launched a mission to round up thousands of MANPADS that may have been looted from military installations across the country. U.S. officials previously told ABC News they were concerned the MANPADS could fall into the hands of terrorists, creating a threat to commercial airliners.

READ: Nightmare in Libya: Thousands of Surface-to-Air Missiles Unaccounted For

PHOTO: Glen Doherty
Courtesy Doherty Family
Glen Doherty, a former U.S. Navy SEAL, was… View Full Size
Prophet Movie Rage Could Lead to Increased Violence Watch Video
American Embassies Under Siege Across Middle East Watch Video
Epic Prank Tilts Brother’s Room 90 Degrees Watch Video

Doherty said that he traveled throughout Libya chasing reports of the weapons and once they were found, his team would destroy them on the spot by bashing them with hammers or repeatedly running them over with their vehicles. When ABC News spoke to Doherty in late August, he was enjoying a short time off in California before heading back to Libya just days ago.

The State Department declined to comment on Doherty’s involvement in the MANPADS program, but pointed to a previous statement from State Assistant Secretary for Political-Military Affairs Andrew Shapiro in which he said the department was looking at “every possible tool to mitigate the threat.”

According to military records provided to ABC News, Doherty joined the Navy in 1996 and was a combat medic and a decorated member of the elite SEAL teams by the time he left active duty in 2004. He’s described in glowing terms as a top-tier SEAL and better friend in the book “The Red Circle,” written by Doherty’s longtime friend and SEAL sniper school partner, Brandon Webb.

“Glen was a superb and respected operator, a true quiet professional,” Webb told ABC News today. “Don’t feel sorry for him, he wouldn’t have it. He died serving with men he respected, protecting the freedoms we enjoy as Americans and doing something he loved. He was my best friend and one of the finest human beings I’ve ever known.”

Doherty’s mother, Barbara, told ABC News’ Boston affiliate WCVB she had been notified of her son’s death late Wednesday.

“He was the most wonderful person,” she said. “We are all in pain and suffering.”

Ambassador Stevens and State Department information management officer Sean Smith were killed in the first wave of attacks in Benghazi when the building they were in was set on fire around 10 p.m. local time Tuesday, a senior administration official told reporters. Doherty was apparently one of two other Americans who were killed in a firefight nearly two hours later, while the facility was still under attack. The fourth victim was Tyrone S. Woods, also a former Navy SEAL, according to a State Department news release.

ABC News’ Dana Hughes contributed to this report.

#Benghazi It’s about Gunrunning #Stupid Obama, Clinton in their own Iran Contra but WORSE

Mainstream Media on Benghazi: It Was About Gun-running

Written by  

  • Mainstream Media on Benghazi: It Was About Gun-running

The mainstream media in the United States have increasingly come to the conclusion that the Benghazi attacks were related to a secret gun-running operation managed by the U.S. government to ferry weapons that had been used by Libyan rebels to Syria. Establishment media outlets reporting on the reputed CIA gun-running operation over the past week included Fox News’ Geraldo Rivera, London’s Daily Telegraph newspaper, and CNN television. The New American reported the same likely theory back in October and December 2012.

The September 11, 2012 terrorist attacks against the U.S. government compound in Benghazi in Libya resulted in the death of U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans.

Stevens was officially on a diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya’s second largest city, though it has become abundantly clear that the U.S. “Special Mission Compound” building had more to do with the CIA than diplomacy. The idea that Stevens could have been involved in redirecting arms from Libya to Syria is hardly a stretch. He had the perfect résumé for gun-running, as he had helped manage gun-running to the Libyan rebels during the insurgency against former dictator Moammar Gadhafi. The White Housenamed Stevens liaison to the Libyan rebels in March 2011, months before Gadhafi’s August 2011 ouster.

The August 1 CNN story on Benghazi mentioned above reported the gun-running story only as “speculation,” but CNN charged that there were “dozens of CIA operatives on the ground during the Benghazi attack,” and that “the CIA is involved in what one source calls an unprecedented attempt to keep the spy agency’s Benghazi secrets from ever leaking out.” These attempts include “frequent, even monthly polygraph examinations, according to a source with deep inside knowledge of the agency’s workings,” in an attempt to intimidate witnesses who may be called before congressional investigators.

The CIA has responded to the CNN story with denials that it is trying to quash whistleblowers. “CIA employees are always free to speak to Congress if they want,” a CIA statement to the August 2 London Telegraph claimed. “The CIA enabled all officers involved in Benghazi the opportunity to meet with Congress. We are not aware of any CIA employee who has experienced retaliation, including any non-routine security procedures, or who has been prevented from sharing a concern with Congress about the Benghazi incident.”

Of course, the same cannot be said of State Department employees. State Department officer Gregory Hicks told congressional investigators, in the words of the New York Times, that he “was later ‘effectively demoted’ to desk officer at headquarters, in what he believes was retaliation for speaking up” to congressional investigators.

The most significant impact of the revelations of the gun-running operations lies in the fact that gun-running to oust a foreign government is an act of war, and the gun-running had not been authorized by Congress (which has the exclusive power over war under Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution).

Almost as important as the constitutional violations is that revelations of a gun-running operation would put the lie to the Obama administration’s reports on Benghazi. A petulant December 2012 report by the U.S. State Department’s Accountability Review Board (under then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton) investigating Benghazi put all the blame on Congress for the deaths: “One overall conclusion in this report is that Congress must do its part to meet this challenge and provide necessary resources to the State Department to address security risks and meet mission imperatives.” The report also concluded that “the Board did not find that any individual U.S. Government employee engaged in misconduct or willfully ignored his or her responsibilities, and, therefore did not find reasonable cause to believe that an individual breached his or her duty so as to be the subject of a recommendation for disciplinary action.”

The Accountability Review Board report didn’t touch on anything resembling an alleged gun-running operation other than a passing reference that Ambassador Stevens was in Benghazi to meet with an unnamed “Turkish diplomat” on an undisclosed topic. The gun-running story — as originally reported in both The New American and Fox News back in October — involved the distribution of Libyan guns to Syria through Turkey, which borders Syria.

According to Fox News Channel back on October 25, 2012:

“Through shipping records, Fox News has confirmed that the Libyan-flagged vessel Al Entisar, which means ‘The Victory,’ was received in the Turkish port of Iskenderun — 35 miles from the Syrian border — on Sept. 6, just five days before Ambassador Chris Stevens, information management officer Sean Smith and former Navy SEALs Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty were killed during an extended assault by more than 100 Islamist militants.” Arms being sent to Syria reportedly included Libyan-owned, Russian-made anti-aircraft weapons called MANPADS.

That same Fox News story also noted that the Turkish-based charity that chartered the ship denied it had been involved in gun-running. According to Fox News, the Foundation for Human Rights, and Freedoms and Humanitarian Relief (IHH) in published Turkish reports said it “will take legal action against this article which was written without concrete evidence. It is defamatory, includes false and unfair accusations and violates publishing ethics.”

Gun-running revelations would also cast the CIA talking points memo scandal in a completely different light.

A September 14 draft CIA memo on Benghazi noted: “The Agency has produced numerous pieces on the threat of extremists linked to al-Qaeda in Benghazi and eastern Libya. Since April, there have been at least five other attacks against foreign interests in Benghazi by unidentified assailants, including the June attack against the British Ambassador’s convoy. We cannot rule out that individuals had previously surveilled the US facilities, also contributing to the efficacy of the attacks.” This reference was deleted before the final version was released, and the White House stressed: “The currently available information suggests that the demonstrations in Benghazi were spontaneously inspired by the protests at the US Embassy in Cairo and evolved into a direct assault against the US Consulate and subsequently its annex.”

Benghazi wasn’t the first time unauthorized gun-running schemes initiated by the Obama administration have cost American lives. Indeed, the Obama administration — though it has publicly attacked America’s gun laws for American civilians as not restrictive enough — has a long history of gun-running. The U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (still known as ATF) gave some 2,000 high-powered weapons to Mexican-based drug cartels in 2009 and then lost track of the guns. The death toll from weapons used in the ATF program (dubbed “Fast and Furious”), according to the Dallas Morning News, is “more than 200 deaths to Fast and Furious weapons,” and it is continuing to rise. Among the dead was U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry.

Former Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul noticed this pattern back in May: “The Islamic radicals who attacked Benghazi were the same people let loose by the US-led attack on Libya. They were the rebels on whose behalf the US overthrew the Libyan government. Ambassador Stevens was slain by the same Islamic radicals he personally assisted just over one year earlier.” The former congressman added: “The real lesson of Benghazi will not be learned because neither Republicans nor Democrats want to hear it. But it is our interventionist foreign policy and its unintended consequences that have created these problems, including the attack and murder of Ambassador Stevens. The disputed talking points and White House whitewashing are just a sideshow.”

Photo of gunmen in Benghazi, Libya: AP Images

CIA ‘running arms smuggling team in Benghazi when consulate was attacked’

CIA ‘running arms smuggling team in Benghazi when consulate was attacked’

The CIA has been subjecting operatives to monthly polygraph tests in an attempt to suppress details of a US arms smuggling operation in Benghazi that was ongoing when its ambassador was killed by a mob in the city last year, according to reports.

CIA running arms smuggling team in Benghazi when consulate attack: The U.S. Consulate in Benghazi is seen in flames during a protest by an armed group in this file photo taken September 11, 2012.

The U.S. Consulate in Benghazi is seen in flames during a protest by an armed group, September 11, 2012. Photo: REUTERS

11:06AM BST 02 Aug 2013

Up to 35 CIA operatives were working in the city during the attack last September on the US consulate that resulted in the death of Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans, according toCNN.

The circumstances of the attack are a subject of deep division in the US with some Congressional leaders pressing for a wide-ranging investigation into suspicions that the government has withheld details of its activities in the Libyan city.

The television network said that a CIA team was working in an annex near the consulate on a project to supply missiles from Libyan armouries to Syrian rebels.

Sources said that more Americans were hurt in the assault spearheaded by suspected Islamic radicals than had been previously reported. CIA chiefs were actively working to ensure the real nature of its operations in the city did not get out.

So only the losses suffered by the State Department in the city had been reported to Congress.

“Since January, some CIA operatives involved in the agency’s missions in Libya, have been subjected to frequent, even monthly polygraph examinations, according to a source with deep inside knowledge of the agency’s workings,” CNN reported.

Frank Wolf, a US congressman who represents the district that contains CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia, is one of 150 members of Congress for a new investigation into the failures in Benghazi.

“I think it is a form of a cover-up, and I think it’s an attempt to push it under the rug, and I think the American people are feeling the same way,” he said. “We should have the people who were on the scene come in, testify under oath, do it publicly, and lay it out. And there really isn’t any national security issue involved with regards to that.”

A CIA spokesman said it had been open about its activities in Benghazi.

“The CIA has worked closely with its oversight committees to provide them with an extraordinary amount of information related to the attack on US facilities in Benghazi,” a CIA statement said. “CIA employees are always free to speak to Congress if they want,” the statement continued. “The CIA enabled all officers involved in Benghazi the opportunity to meet with Congress. We are not aware of any CIA employee who has experienced retaliation, including any non-routine security procedures, or who has been prevented from sharing a concern with Congress about the Benghazi incident.”

Hillary picked the wrong Scapegoat for #Benghazi Will she #VinceFoster him?

GOV’T OFFICIAL (AND POET) PUT ON LEAVE AFTER BENGHAZI FINALLY BREAKS HIS SILENCE — AND HE’S MAKING SOME BIG CHARGES AGAINST HILLARY AND HER TEAM

May. 21, 2013 10:26am 

  • Raymond Maxwell Accuses Hillary Clintons Team of Making Him Scapegoat

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. (Getty Images)

Raymond Maxwell, one of four State Department employees recently disciplined by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, made headlines this month for penning slightly cryptic verses critical of the agency’s handling of the Sept. 11, 2012, terrorist attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi.

And now Maxwell, who was placed on forced “administrative leave” despite his claim had no role in consulate-related security issues, is back in the news for ditching the poetry and outright accusing former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton of making him the Benghazi scapegoat.

“The overall goal is to restore my honor,” Maxwell said in an interview with The Daily Beast.

The former deputy assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern Affairs, who is currently stuck in a sort of legal limbo, has filed grievances regarding his treatment by the State Department’s human resources bureau and the American Foreign Service Association, the report notes.

Maxwell is the only official in the bureau of Near Eastern Affairs (i.e. the group responsible for Libya) to lose his job over the September 11 attacks.

“I had no involvement to any degree with decisions on security and the funding of security at our diplomatic mission in Benghazi,” he said.

Maxwell was placed on forced “administrative leave” on December 18, the day after the Accountability Review Board released its report on the Benghazi attack. The department placed him on leave so that it could decide whether he should be permanently “let go.” However, here we are five months out and no decision has been made.

The disciplined State Department official sits at home and waits.

A department spokeswoman declined to comment on why Maxwell and three other State officials were disciplined, saying only that the ARB suggested someone be disciplined over the death of four Americans.

“As a matter of policy, we don’t speak to specific personnel matters,” State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki told The Daily Beast.

Maxwell said the reason for him being put on leave has never been explained to him, he has never seen the classified portions of the ARBreport that detail personnel failures leading up to the attack, and because his “administrative leave” is not a formal disciplinary action, he has no legal means to appeal his status.

And although he planned on retiring in September 2012, Maxwell remained at his post voluntarily so that he could assist the department in responding to the disastrous attacks. Now, after being singled out for the death of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans, Maxwell refuses to let it go until his name has been cleared.

“They just wanted me to go away but I wouldn’t just go away,” he said. “I knew Chris [Stevens]. Chris was a friend of mine.”

“He is seeking a restoration of his previous position, a public statement of apology from State, reimbursement for his legal fees, and an extension of his time in service to equal the time he has spent at home on administrative leave,” the Daily Beast reports.

Raymond Maxwell Accuses Hillary Clintons Team of Making Him Scapegoat

“For any FSO being at work is the essence of everything and being deprived of that and being cast out was devastating,” he said.

Maxwell said that soon after he was removed from his post, a State Department official visited him at his home one night and asked him to sign a letter acknowledging his removal and “forfeiting” his right to enter the State Department building.

He refused. He said that the letter amounted to an admission of guilt.

So who placed him on leave?

“The decision to place Maxwell on administrative leave was made by Clinton’s chief of staff Cheryl Mills, according to three State Department officials with direct knowledge of the events,” the report notes.

“On the day after the unclassified version of the ARB’s report was released in December, Mills called Acting Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Beth Jones and directed her to have Maxwell leave his job immediately,” it adds.

Raymond Maxwell Accuses Hillary Clintons Team of Making Him Scapegoat

But there may be a reason why Maxwell, of all people, was removed from his office the day after the release of the ARB report.

“One person who reviewed the classified portion of the ARB report told The Daily Beast that it called out Maxwell for the specific infraction of not reading his daily classified briefings, something that person said Maxwell admitted to the ARB panel during his interview,” the report claims.

“The crime that he is being punished for is not reading his intel,” this person said.

When asked about this specific claim, Maxwell said he has not been “officially counseled” on any wrongdoing and has not been allowed to read the ARB’s classified report.

But here’s his bombshell claim: Maxwell believes Hillary Clinton’s staff headed the review of the disastrous Benghazi attack – not an independent review board.

“The flaws in the process were perpetrated by the political leadership at State with the complicity of the senior career leadership,” he said. “They should be called to account.”

Click here to read the full report

Follow Becket Adams (@BecketAdams) on Twitter

Featured image Getty Images.