3 boggling facts in Hillary email cover-up/Dallas shooting
By Jon Rappoport
By Derrick Broze – July 7, 2016
As WikiLeaks released another 1,000 emails about the Iraq War from Hillary Clinton’s private server the FBI announced that they would not be recommending any charges against the former Secretary of State.
In honor of Independence Day 2016 WikiLeaks published more than 1,000 emails about the Iraq War from Hillary Clinton‘s private server during her time as secretary of State. The move by the whistleblowing site came one day before the Federal Bureau of Investigations announced that they are not seeking charges against Clinton for improperly storing classified emails.
On Monday WikiLeaks tweeted a link to 1,258 emails that Clinton sent and received. The emails were part of a larger cache of documents released by the State Department in February. WikiLeaks identified all the emails related to the Iraq War and compiled them into a searchable database.
“We could proceed to an indictment, but if Loretta Lynch is the head of the [Department of Justice] in the United States, she’s not going to indict Hillary Clinton,” Assange told London-based ITV. “That’s not possible that could happen.”
It seems as if Assange’s prediction will ultimately be proven correct after FBI Director James B. Comey announced the Bureau is not recommending that Attorney General Loretta Lynch seek charges against Mrs. Clinton. Lynch previously said she would defer to the FBI decision on whether or not to indict Clinton.
“Our investigation looked at whether there is evidence classified information was improperly stored or transmitted on that personal system, in violation of a federal statute making it a felony to mishandle classified information either intentionally or in a grossly negligent way, or a second statute making it a misdemeanor to knowingly remove classified information from appropriate systems or storage facilities,” Director Comey said in a statement.
Comey also said the investigation sought to “determine whether there is evidence of computer intrusion in connection with the personal e-mail server by any foreign power, or other hostile actors.” The FBI was able to determine that 110 e-mails contained classified information when they were sent or received. Eight of these emails contained Top Secret information, 36 were marked Secret, and another eight were labeled Confidential.
Ultimately, Comey concluded “we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.”
Disturbingly, Director Comey said although “there is evidence of potential violations” the Bureau believes “that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.” The FBI encouraged the Department of Justice to let Hillary Clinton go free because “no charges are appropriate in this case.”
Probably the most upsetting aspect of Director Comey’s remarks is the fact that he admitted that someone without the credentials or connections of Hillary Clinton who took the same actions would likely face punishment. “To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences,” Comey said. “To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now.”
The announcement burst the hopes of millions of people around the United States who were hoping that, for once, a member of the political class would be held accountable for their actions. The newly organized emails from WikiLeaks are also unlikely to knock Clinton down from her throne as most of the deadstream (previously known as the mainstream) continues to ignore the crimes of the Clinton family. In fact, Clinton seems to be protected from all angles, including by social media giant Facebook.
In March, WikiLeaks demanded Facebook to stop censoring their content. The activist group posted a message to their Twitter account, saying “stop censoring our Hillary Clinton email release,” with a saved screenshot of a Facebook error message on the attempted post. WikiLeaks was attempting to share the first batch of emails from the former Secretary of State’s emails, but was apparently censored from sharing the link via Facebook.
I hate to say it, friends and family, but if you actually believed Hillary Clinton would be held accountable for her email crimes you are ignoring the amount of corruption and deceit that exist within the U.S. political system. It’s time for the people of this land to stop acquiescing and giving away our power. It’s time to stop looking to presidents as saviors. The only hope we have to turn this situation around is for each and every individual to begin participating in massive campaigns of non-resistance, non-compliance, and creation of new institutions that can replace the centralized government we have today. Let’s do it.
Derrick is available for interviews. Please contact Derrick@activistpost.com
This article may be freely reposted in part or in full with author attribution and source link.
by Jon Rappoport – July 29, 2016
In his recent speech in Pennsylvania, Trump clarified and intensified his anti-Globalist position. The Associated Press reports:
“‘This wave of globalization has wiped out totally, totally our middle class,’ said Trump.”
“Trump…criticized [Hillary Clinton’s] past support for the Trans-Pacific Partnership [TPP trade deal], which he described as ‘the deathblow for American manufacturing.'”
“He vowed to renegotiate North American Free Trade Agreement [NAFTA] to get a better deal ‘by a lot, not just a little,’ for American workers – and threatened to withdraw the U.S. from the deal if his proposals aren’t agreed [to].”
“Trump has vowed to bring back [US] manufacturing jobs, in part, by slapping tariffs on goods produced by [American] companies that move manufacturing jobs offshore.”
“He said the North American Free Trade Agreement, which was signed by Bill Clinton, was a ‘disaster’…”
Trump didn’t leave much room for doubt on his anti-Globalist stance.
There are many people who have yearned to hear this rhetoric from a major Presidential candidate…but absolutely don’t want to hear it (or anything else) from Trump.
To them, he’s a fast-talking cowboy, a hustler, a bullshitter of the first order, a rank egotist, a narcissist, a racist.
Well, we had another candidate who was a mad dog for attacking Globalism, although he didn’t go quite as far. We had Bernie Sanders. He’s gone. He’s voting for Hillary.
Too little, too late, Bernie just wrote an editorial in the New York Times. His subject: Globalism. Here’s an excerpt:
“In the last 15 years, nearly 60,000 factories in this country have closed, and more than 4.8 million well-paid manufacturing jobs have disappeared. Much of this is related to disastrous [Globalist] trade agreements that encourage corporations to move to low-wage countries…”
“We need to fundamentally reject our ‘free trade’ policies and move to fair trade. Americans should not have to compete against workers in low-wage countries who earn pennies an hour. We must defeat the Trans-Pacific Partnership [TPP].”
Sounds pretty much like Trump.
Of course, Bernie points out that this new revolution must NOT be headed by Donald Trump. It must be led by Hillary Clinton. Bernie doesn’t actually mention Hillary by name. He uses the phrase, “a new Democratic President.”
That’s because, as he well knows, the idea that Hillary will overturn free trade treaties and slam back the force of Globalism is so absurd it’s laughable. Bernie knows Hillary is the last person in America who would try to torpedo these trade deals. So he just bites his lip and writes “a new Democratic president.”
But Bernie is a straight shooter. He’s not a bullshitter. Heavens, no.
I wonder which new Democratic President Bernie has in mind? Perhaps it’s Moses coming down from the mountain with ten strategies to create jobs in America.
In past months and years, we’ve had other candidates who’ve come out strongly against Globalism—Rand Paul (didn’t have the intensity); Ron Paul (lacked intensity of delivery, and the media/GOP cut him out of debates and withdrew coverage); Ralph Nader (never had a prayer).
So, for all those people who can admit Trump is saying the right things about Globalism and making all the right promises—but hate him for various reasons—we obviously need someone else who will say what Trump is saying, get it across, attract huge crowds, and garner widespread support. Who is that? Where is he? Where is she?
Therefore, let’s all vote for Hillary, right? Because at least she isn’t a bullshitter or a wild cowboy, and she can maintain stability here at home while US forces launch a few dozen wars under her guidance. No? No good? Hillary’s a…what? A demented vulture? Really?
Is it possible to perform some kind of surgery on Trump’s brain, so he emerges saying the same things about Globalism, but actually means them, minus the ego and the narcissism? Could his brain be shifted over from that of a hustler to a man of the people? No? No such surgery exists?
Too bad, eh? Because this real estate gunslinger is actually talking about canceling NAFTA and refusing to ratify the TPP, two cornerstones of the Globalist agenda. He’s talking about punishing US companies who shift manufacturing jobs overseas, by laying on tariffs when they export their products back to US customers.
Maybe brain-dead indoctrinated college students don’t understand what all this means, but US workers who’ve been thrown out of their jobs sure as hell do.
Trump actually makes a distinction between Globalism and what’s good for America. He doesn’t pull back from doing that. Because, after all, if you bring the lost US jobs home from the clutches of Globalists, that is, in fact, good for the people of the US, right? And therefore, it’s good for America.
But of course Trump is completely insane and he’s a major league liar, so he’s out.
How about this? A mind-control experiment in which everything Trump has been saying about Globalism is automatically transferred into the brain of LeBron James. Then LeBron shows up at the Democratic National Convention, announces his candidacy, throws down a few thundering dunks, and steals the nomination from Hillary.
Can we pull that off?
Oh well. It’s only 4.8 million lost US jobs (and more coming). It’s only 60,000 US factories closed down (and more coming).
So where are we? Let’s look at the leaderboard.
On one side, we have Hillary Clinton. She’s in the pocket of Big Pharma, she’s dedicated to the advance of Globalism on every possible front (“it takes a village”), she can’t sleep at night unless US planes are bombing some helpless population.
On the other side, we have Donald Trump, who’s saying all the right things about Globalism’s attack on America, but he just happened on this rhetoric by accident, he doesn’t mean any of it, he’s lying all day and all night, he wants to change the name of the White House to Trump Tower II. We know he’s lying because Bill Maher and John Oliver say so.
I have an idea. Finally. Let’s all pledge our allegiance to HUMANITY without describing what the word means. Let’s just go with the generality. Let’s feel good about it. We’re pledged to The Human Family and The Future. Just leave it hanging out there. No need to get specific. That’s how we’ll ID ourselves. “We’re for humanity, we’re for everybody else.” See, isn’t that better?
Then we can say, “Hillary is also devoted to Humanity. She says so every chance she gets, so it’s a perfect match. Let’s give the political leadership of the country to her. And then, whatever she does, we can assert it’s because she cares. And so do we. We all care. It makes us virtuous.
And that’s all that important: giving the appearance of being virtuous.
All those factories that have closed down and all those people who are out of jobs? Screw them. They’re impediments to a much higher cause.
What are they complaining about? The government will take care of them. Right?
The government will take of everybody. That’s what caring means. Right?
We and Hillary are on the same page.
I knew it would work out.
I knew it would.
It always does.
The Presidency is a character issue. Hillary pretends she has character. Trump doesn’t. That’s all we need to know or ever will need to know.
By Jon Rappoport – June 24, 2016
How many times are the dynamic duo allowed to wander off the reservation?
by Jon Rappoport – June 3, 2016
Mainstream press outlets are mounting a new brand of coverage on Hillary Clinton’s campaign. They’re questioning her ability to win the nomination and/or the general election. All of a sudden, the done deal is not done.
What’s behind this switch?
Aside from fear of The Donald, there is the boiling Hillary email scandal. There is also the specter of further revelations about the syndicate known as the Clinton Foundation. That’s a big one. A very big one.
As I’ve previously reported, the sale of 20% of the uranium in the US to Putin—that’s right—involved donors to the Foundation—unreported donors—as well as the participation of Mrs. Clinton’s State Department. Detailed by the NY Times, the scandal has lain there for several months like a poisoned meal, with the press afraid to touch it further.
Now, enter a financial analyst named Charles Ortel. Ortel made a name for himself by publishing his analysis of serious problems in General Electric’s financial reports (2008). On his website, he has begun taking apart the entire Clinton Foundation, brick by brick. Here is an explosive excerpt from his overview:
“In financial terms, the size of criminal activities directly involving the Clinton Foundation exceeds $2 billion—counting affiliated and indirect criminal activities, the size exceeds $50 billion. The geographic scope of these unprosecuted criminal activities touches all 50 U.S. states, the District of Columbia, and more than 100 foreign countries where Clinton Foundation entities operate or solicit donations.”
“Beginning late in 2008, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, and others expanded efforts to cover up illegal operating and fundraising activities of the Clinton Foundation since inception. Working ultimately with individuals inside the I.R.S. and elsewhere, these persons led efforts to ‘restructure’ the Clinton Foundation to make it appear that it had been legally constituted and validly operated in compliance with applicable laws, when this was certainly not the case.”
“Trustees and other persons have been engaged in an unprosecuted criminal conspiracy to operate the Clinton Foundation in the guise of a public charity, when it is, instead, an illegal money-laundering and influence peddling scheme.”
“In fact, the Clinton Foundation has engaged in widespread unauthorized activities, including illegal operations internationally and in the U.S., and illegal fundraising across state and national boundaries, using telephones, mail, and the internet.”
“Moreover, the Clinton Foundation has never validly been authorized by the I.R.S. to pursue tax-exempt purposes other than serving as an archival records repository and research facility in Little Rock, Arkansas.”
“Instead of concentrating upon its specifically-authorized tax-exempt purposes, trustees performed lax oversight and installed ineffective controls, creating conditions where Bill Clinton, Ira Magaziner, and others deliberately and illegally diverted substantial sums from the Clinton Foundation and its affiliates.”
In light of Ortel’s analysis, to say the Clintons have wandered off the reservation would be a vast understatement.
So…how have they remained free of this tsunami of a scandal? Who has been protecting them?
Let us return to the period when Bill Clinton was the Governor of Arkansas—and a 1995 book titled Compromised, by Terry Reed (former CIA asset) and John Cummings (former Newsday reporter).
According to the authors, Bill Clinton was involved with the CIA in some very dirty dealings in Arkansas-and I’m not just talking about the cocaine flights landing at the Mena airport.
It seems Bill had agreed to set up secret CIA weapons-making factories in his home state, under the radar. But because Arkansas, when it comes to money, is all cronies all the time, everybody and his brother found out about the operation and wanted in. Also, Bill was looking for a bigger cut of the action.
This security breach infuriated the CIA, and a meeting was held to dress down Bill and make him see the error of his ways. His CIA handlers told him they were going to shut down the whole weapons operation, because Bill had screwed up royally. A screaming match ensued—but the CIA people backed off a bit and told Bill he was still “their man” for the upcoming 1992 run for the Presidency.
Of course, there are people who think Reed and Cumming’s book contains fiction, but John Cummings was a top-notch reporter for Newsday. He co-authored the 1990 book, Goombata, about the rise and fall of John Gotti. He exposed US operations to destroy Cuban agriculture with bio-weapons. It’s highly doubtful he would have put his name on Compromised without a deep conviction he was correctly adding up the facts.
Here, from Compromised, is an account of the extraordinary meeting, in Arkansas, between Bill Clinton and his CIA handlers, in March of 1986, six years before Clinton would run for the Presidency. Author Terry Reed, himself a CIA asset at the time, was there. According to the authors, so was Oliver North, and a man named “Robert Johnson,” who was representing CIA head Bill Casey.
Johnson said to Bill Clinton:
“Calm down and listen…We are all in this together…I’m not here to threaten you [Bill]. But there have been mistakes. Bill, you are Mr. Casey’s fair-haired boy. But you do have competition for the job you seek [the US Presidency]. We would never put all eggs in one basket. You and your state have been our greatest asset…Mr. Casey wanted me to pass on to you that unless you fuck up and do something stupid, you’re No. 1 on the short list for a shot at the job you’ve always wanted.
“That’s pretty heady stuff, Bill. So why don’t you help us keep a lid on this [CIA weapons-manufacturing] and we’ll all be promoted together. You and guys like us are the fathers of the new government. Hell, we are the new covenant.”
By this account, Bill Clinton was the CIA’s boy back in 1986, long before he launched himself into his first Presidential campaign.
He was their boy, and they protected him, despite the fact that he had wandered off the reservation.
But now, it’s happening again. It appears Bill and his wife have taken their massive Foundation to new heights of careless, reckless, devil-may-care criminality.
Well, the Clintons are that way, aren’t they? They don’t just push the boundaries of what is legal and moral, they drive a huge tank through the boundaries and shout WHO CARES as they hurtle off to commit new and slimier deeds.
The question is, will the CIA still give this duo cover? Or will Agency insiders throw in the towel and leave them out in the cold?
Has that decision to abandon them already been made? Is that why the CIA Mockingbird press is starting to turn on Hillary?
Have she and Bill gone too far?
Is John Kerry lurching into his polished loafers and getting ready to step into the breach as the Democratic nominee for President?