Internet Articles (2015)
It's important for the American people to understand WHY Colonial America rebelled against King George III and fought the Revolutionary War—aside from the fact that the king suffered from prophyria, which causes long and severe bouts of madness. (In 1969, a mother and son psychiatric team first hypothesized that King George III suffered from prophyria: a defect in the blood that causes insanity). The diagnosis stuck for a couple of decades before medical doctors poophahed the diagnosis because the king's medical records indicated that, on occasion, he peed red and blue-tinged blood. That is, until Martin Warren, a biochemist at Queen Mary College in London did a forensic examination on a two inch square of King George's hair and learned that not only did he have prophyria, he supposed that Old King George died of arsenic poisoning. In 2005, the Lancet did their own forensic examination and said the arsenic had been administered over a long period of time, suggesting that, from as early as 1756, [King George III died on Jan. 29, 1820] he was administered small doses of arsenic to fight the prophyria.) Just a smidgeon of trivia in case your find yourself on Jeopardy or some other quiz show.
When you look at the Bill of Rights attached to the end of the Constitution you have an idea why the colonial citizens of England went to war. First and foremost, America went to war because, under English rule, they lived in a world based on imperial edict that changed on the whims of whatever tyrant or despot sat on the throne. His edicts became law. The history we read in books tells us that America went to war with England over taxation (without representation). While revisionists tell us that the Confederacy seceded over the fear that Abraham Lincoln would free the slaves the minute he got into office on March 4, 1861 (although South Carolina seceded on Dec. 20, 1860—74 days before Lincoln, a rich railroad lawyer, became the 16th President of the United States). Socialist historic revisionists erased the reality of why the South seceded, taking the high ground for themselves. But those who studied Lincoln's ethnic peccadilloes, knew that Lincoln never intended to free anyone.
While America doesn't know this about "the man who freed the slaves," (that act that was actually initiated and accomplished by Lincoln's successor, Andrew Johnson) even though Lincoln wrote and, on Jan. 1, 1863, issued the Emancipation Proclamation). Lincoln was a racist who many times told his political and military advisers that he would free the slaves only if they agreed to leave the United States and relocate to Liberia, Africa. Just one more piece of political trivia. But this one will never be on Jeopardy because the socialist revisionists spent 150 years creating fiction out of wholecloth and, like Hillary Clinton, they aren't about to start telling the truth now, because in the words of that famous, duplicitous politician, what difference does it make? Being a socialist Clinton, like Barack Obama, knows if you can appoint enough justices in the federal courts, if you own the Justice Dept, the FBI, the US Marshals' Service, and control both Houses of Congress, you are completely immune from impeachment, removable from office and arrest and prosecution for malfeasance or treason..
The Declaration of Independence, an affidavit of abuse at the hands of England against the United Colonies of America, was submitted by those People to the world's courts, advising them that when any government becomes destructive of the rights of the People to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness according to God's words, those Peoples have the right to alter or abolish that government. (Note that in neither the Declaration of Independence nor the Constitution of the United States, is authority given to the office holder of the presidency nor to a complicit, crooked Congress [nor to the princes of industry and the barons of banking who, today, have bribed Washington, DC and most State politicians into willful submission] to alter the constitutional charter which guarantees the People, as an inherent right from God, life, liberty and governance under the rule of law where all men are equal and where cultural, economic, ethnic or racial minorities are neither super-equal nor unequal.)
Social justice, which violates the rule of law, didn't come along until the communists got a toehold in America during the presidential reigns of Teddy Roosevelt [1901-09] and his cousin, Franklin Roosevelt [1933-1945]. Teddy Roosevelt was the first president to steal the land of the American people by converting it into national parks in order to prevent oil, coal, natural gas, timber, gold, silver and other natural resources from being mined or harvested, holding those lands in perpetuity for the families of America's princes of industry. (It should be noted that when the liberal environmentalist Sierra Club and Standard Oil which had been trying since 1953, convinced President Jimmy Carter to create the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge [ANWR] to block all oil drilling in the largest known oil reserve in the world. Eisenhower's Secretary of the Interior, Fred Seaton, under pressure from environmentalists, issued a Secretarial Order which transformed the land on the North Slope (which constitutionally belonged to the People) into a federally-protected area—which meant two things. First, applicants for drilling rights went through much more scrutiny when applying for a drilling permit; and second, only drilling companies tied to the Seven Sisters received permit. Once again, there is nothing "equal" under the laws of the social progressives. While Teddy stole only land, Franklin stole the rule of law and inserted an unelected fourth branch of government that would become the fall guy for the "I didn't do that" second branch of government—the Legislative Branch. You see, up until the point that Franklin Roosevelt created the bureaucracy (which began writing the actual legal language of the laws that many times did the opposite the name of the law pimpled), Congressmen and Senators and their staffers and researchers actually wrote the verbiage which was signed into law simply because the social progressives wanted the American people to possess less freedom, not more.
For the first two years of FDR's first term every bill signed into law was written by what was known as the "Roosevelt Brain Trust." Most of those laws were unconstitutional and were repealed by the Supreme Court until Roosevelt, who was elected four times, politicized the Supreme Court by appointing enough "New Dealers" (all members of his inner circle) to the bench. They went back and reviewed previous New Deal laws which had been found to be unconstitutional and decided they were constitutional after all.
Hillary Clinton, like Obama, believes she—like King George III—has the right to rule the American People with the omnipotent authority of a god. Like Obama and those of their social progressive stripe, Hillary Clinton is arrogant enough to believe that the rule of law pertains to the utterances spoken by her, not those created by the People and the States for the equal benefit of all.
The presidency was created subservient to the States through the US Senate. Very rich and powerful industrialists and bankers found it easy to change the Constitution by using their financial muscle to threaten to destroy the careers of both federal and State legislators in 1908 if they didn't [a] propose and then [b] ratify the 17th Amendment in order to take the election of the Senate away from the States who controlled the economy of this nation by tightly regulating the banks. The 17th Amendment, which was illegally ratified, changed precisely how US Senators were elected, taking that power from the States and giving that right to the people whom money manipulates most easily.
Constitutionally, the President of the United States is not the leader of the country, he is the agent of the 50 sovereign States whose role it was, in 1787, to represent the 13 sovereign States before the courts of the world. Sadly, because of the millions of dollars in graft paid by the princes of industry and the barons of banking to greedy State and federal legislators, or well heeded threats from the money mafia to end the careers of career politicians living on the dole who failed to toe-the-line, the States no longer have the power to regulate their Senators or influence what legislation will be debated on the Senate floor, or voted into law.
Because the People of the United States blindly allowed corrupt and greedy industrialists and bankers to subornate corrupt and greedy politicians with bribes described as "campaign contributions" by enacting legislation which legalized graft with quid pro quos that enrich the donor a hundredfold at the expense of the taxpayers who have been forced to foot the bill for the political flim-flam. This is not the government the Founding Fathers established.
After a handful of political writers began to target politicians (but not the princes of industry and barons of banking who owned them), detailing the political corruption from as far back as the 1870s [the Credit Mobilier Scandal] up to Bill, Hillary and Al Gore's Chinagate during the Clinton years and beyond, to the graft Sen. Hillary Clinton laundered through the William Jefferson Clinton Foundation from 2001 until she was appointed Secretary of State. In the 2nd most powerful job in the Executive Branch, being Secretary of State capsulated Hillary's greed and illegal audacity as a tsunami of cash flowed into the coffers of the, then, Bill & Hillary Clinton Foundation. (Hillary wanted to be sure she had "dipping" rights.)
But, you can't blame the Clintons for originating this form of treason. The traceable practice began in 1983 when the People's Republic of China decided they had to get rid of America's 40th President, Ronald Reagan (who was coming up for election in 1984). The Republicans won control of the US Senate in 1982, giving Reagan the anti-communist political appointees he wanted through confirmation by a friendly, conservative Senate, and his friendship with liberal House Speaker Thomas "Tip" O'Neall [D-MA] who bought into Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative [SDI] in March, 1983 (which would utilize ground and sea-launched guided missiles deployed by orbital platforms) anywhere in the world. The system, dubbed "Star Wars" by the liberal media, guaranteed that if China or the Soviet Union launched a nuclear first strike against the United States, we would be able to retaliate and destroy that enemy even if we were decimated, by deploying enough missiles from outer space that would destroy whomever was behind that first strike.
Since before the start of the Vietnam War, it has been illegal for political candidates to accept campaign contributions from foreign entities and, moreso, for US politicians to accept contributions from foreign governments. The law, however, expends more verbiage on preventing American companies from bribing foreign governments than it does in outlawing foreign governments from bribing American politicians. Nevertheless, it's illegal. And its illegality was affirmed in Bluman v Federal Election Commission based on 2 USC § 441e, Public Law 89-481, 80 Stat 224, (The Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1966) in a unanimous 9-0 decision by the US Supreme Court on Jan. 9, 2012. (In 1976, Congress expanded the definition to include any and all foreign nationals regardless where they lived as an amendment to the Federal Election Campaign Act, recodified as 2 USC § 441e.)
In 1983, according to a former Bill Clinton aide I've known for almost two decades and have received only factual information from, US Senator Alan Cranston [D-CA], the Senate Whip, became the covert disbursement agent for Chinese money to liberal Senators facing tough re-election bids and to liberals challenging Republican senators who were thought to be vulnerable in 1984. Former Arkansas Gov. Bill Clinton, whose re-election bid was stymied in 1980, and who was making a comeback in 1984, was also the recipient of Chinese money that year. His "campaign funds" came through the benevolence of Indonesian banker Mochtar Riady, who would funnel millions of dollars in Chinese yuan to the Clintons in 1993-94 and 1996. Since 1976 everyone knew taking money from foreign corporations and foreign governments was illegal.
World War II brought about the rise of the multinational corporation and, for the first time in history the nations of the world, and their slowly awakening Peoples, finally met their deadliest enemy—the MNC. Why? Because of the agenda of the multinational corporations. To succeed in their attempt to overthrow the economies of all of the nations on Earth by erasing the trade barriers and tariffs that protected small nations from large ones, the princes of industry needed only to bribe enough members of the governments of those nations into submission by lining the pockets of the elected bureaucrats with enough money to make it financially worth their while to surrender the sovereignty of their nations to the princes of industry. First, by the ratification of the European League of Nations on Jan. 19, 1920—and second, two and a half decades later on October 24, 1945, the failed League was camouflaged with the American flag and renamed the United Nations.
At the top of the MNC's bucket list is influence-buying in the domestic policy-making process of the nations with whom they do business, or want to do business by bribing the policymakers and legislators in those nations. As noted above, the practice became so prevalent in the United States that Congress added an amendment to the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1976 to outlaw the practice. The amendment was recodified as 2 USC § 441e. President Gerald Ford argued at the time that foreign campaign contributions undermine the objectives of a government of the people, by the people by subverting democracy. Of course, he had to say that because his predecessor was caught taking foreign money.
Sadly, the minute Congress transferred the ban on foreign donations from the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act to the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1976 they created a loophole large enough to sail a jumbo Chinese cargo ship through it. Based on the language of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act [FCPA], that law did nothing to stem the funneling of foreign money to US lawmakers and, instead, it prohibited US corporations from donating money to candidates in foreign elections. It did nothing to stem the flow of illicit bribes from foreign entities or governments to American politicians although that prohibition was part of the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1966 which made it a felony for a foreign entity to donate money to a political campaign in the United States.
It's important to keep in mind that Congress never created a law to reign in their ability to collect campaign money which did not have a backdoor that gave them an exemption from the law. The language still allowed foreign citizens (not foreign corporations or government institutions) to donate directly to a US political candidate. During the Watergate hearings in 1973, the Sam Ervin Senate Watergate Committee hearings discovered that President Richard Nixon had availed himself of that backdoor during the election of 1972.
Sen. Lloyd Bentson [D-TX] proposed an amendment to bar all foreign entities, foreign nationals, individuals, or governments from donating money to any US political campaigns or political parties, noting his fear that allowing such represented a potential threat to the sovereignty of the United States. Bentson said, "I don't think foreign nationals have any business in our political campaigns. They can't vote in our elections, so why should we allow them to finance them? Their loyalties lie elsewhere. They lie with their own countries, and their own governments." The Bentson Amendment is now the substance of 2 USC § 441e.
It makes you wonder why Barack Obama spent more time campaigning in Europe and to interests in the Mideast than he did campaigning for donations and votes in the United States. And, that, of course, explains the CBS News report on Oct. 8, 2008 that the names of Obama donors looked "...like they were written by a mouse running across a keyboard." They were simply random letters that very tired, very bored clerks keystroked because they simply didn't know any more real names to enter without re-entering names already entered.
Two of the donors CBS tried to trace, Dahsudhdu Hdusahfd of Dhff, Hawaii and Uadhshgu Hduadh from Dhff, Florida both purported to work for Dasada/safasf. Dasada/safasf must be one of those new Fortune 500 companies with offices from Florida to Hawaii. Hdusahfd and Hduadh seemed to have each donated more than is allowed by law. Hduadh theoretically gave $14,200. Hdusahfd gave $7,500.00. The law allows citizen donors to give $4,200 between the primary race and the general election. When these names were revealed by CBS, the Obama Campaign said that "...out of an abundance of caution," all of the random letter named donations were returned (as other donations from people like John and Mary Smith replaced them). Richard Nixon had nothing over Obama. In total, Obama farmed $450 million in illegal donations which ABC and NBC praised as Obama's astute understanding of how to mine donations through social media. Nixon was fishing in a more impoverished pool.
But Obama is a piker compared to Clinton. Hillary Rodham Clinton (who believes she is entitled to the office of President simply because she connived for the job since 1993), William Jefferson Clinton and Al Gore, Jr. should all have been incarcerated in a federal penitentiary. The only reason Bill Clinton never faced a jury of his peers (the United States Senate) was that any Senate Democrats from 1984 to 1991 who received campaign contributions from Alan Cranston's PAC very likely were recipients of Chinese largess. If those Senators knew, or only suspected they had unknowingly taken illicit donations, they wanted the Clinton Affair to go down in history as just that—an affair. With Monica Lewinsky. It did.
The House of Representatives under Newt Gingrich buried the crime—malfeasance and quite possibly, treason, for the taking of what is estimated to be at least $650 million from Chinese intelligence and for supplying top secret access to several Chinese nationals, among whom was John Huang who was not only given a senior post in the Commerce Department (where many of our industrial secrets are protected), he was given top secret clearance to peruse those secrets at will.
Whether we are talking about Bill or Hillary Clinton (since both have destroyed the evidence of their wrongdoing) both are likely guilty of violating USC Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 101, Section 2071, paragraphs "a" and "b," which says: "Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates or destroys or attempts to do so, or takes or carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper or document or other thing filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court in the United States, or in any public office or with any judicial or public official of the United States shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for three years, or both. Whoever, having custody of such record, proceeding, book, document or other thing willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, multilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this Title or imprisoned for three years, or both, and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office in the United States."
When the rats were fleeing the sinking ship after then Judicial Watch head Larry Klayman broke Charlie Trie (who spilled the beans on the infiltration of Chinese intelligence into the Clinton Administration) and who was the star witness at the Select Committee on National Security and Military Commercial Concerns headed by Congressman Chris Cox [R-CA], Huang was among the first to vanish. Huang's top secret clearance was, according to the Clinton Administration, cancelled on Jan. 25, 1996 (which was the date Huang left the Commerce Dept to become a Clinton bundler. Insiders insist that Huang's top secret security clearance was not cancelled at that time, but that it simply expired when George W. Bush took over the White House at noon on Jan. 20, 2001. On Oct. 28, 1999, Huang was questioned by the FBI and, according to the New York Times at the time, admitted that he raised over $700 thousand in illicit funds for Bill Clinton's first run for the White House in 1992. The money, a House Committee chairman said, came from an illegal conduit scheme involving tainted foreign money.
In the Cox Report, Congressman Cox noted that "...real harm has been caused by the policies governing Chinese access to US technology embraced by Mr. Clinton." In 1999, Frank Gaffney of the Center for Security Policy made it clear that this matter cannot be considered "resolved" until the US Senate has a full-fledged trial to determine if Mr. Clinton committed high crimes and misdemeanors, and determine just how much damage to this country was done by Bill and Hillary Clinton and Al Gore, Jr. Keep in mind that treason, like murder, has no statute of limitations.
The Clintons, who perfected the practice of taking illegal money from foreign governments for political favors, mastered the feat by building the biggest washing machine in history to launder the political graft collected by both US Senator and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton—received for favors done by her office for the donor country or multi-national corporate entity. That washing machine and dryer was originally called the William J. Clinton Foundation. With each ensuing name change, more transparency vanished until, today, Clinton transparency is about as opaque as Barack Obama's Indonesian elementary school records, which were sealed in perpetuity.
While Hillary was still Senator Clinton, she and two greedy cohorts, Senators Chuck Schumer [D-NY] and John Kerry [D-MA] were instrumental in forming the US Senate India Caucus so foreign nationals bearing gifts could lobby them for American service industry jobs. (You know the jobs: the people you speak with when you call your credit card company in the middle of the night because you lost your credit card at some honky tonk; or your Internet service goes on the fritz and the technician who answers the phone on the other end of the world has a Pakistani or Indian accent and can't understand you, or you, him. Or, your favorite American retail chain outsourced their customer service to India where their employees barely speak or understand English.) On the House side, Hillary's accomplices in 2005 were House Speaker Nancy Pelosi [D-CA] and Rep. Joe Crowley [D-NY]. Hillary was the co-chairman of the Caucus.
In February, 2005 when minority GOP Senators teamed up with communist Sen. Bernie Sanders [I-VT]who was trying to kill the outsourcing of US jobs to India, Indonesia and Pakistan, Hillary and her top India donor, Sant Singh Chatwal went to India to assure her constituents in the New York suburbs of Punjab, India that outsourcing was a safe investment for them; and that the US government was not going to save the jobs being outsourced to India. The Clinton washing machine laundered not only the quid pro quo money from India, but from scores of other countries in the underbelly of the world. There is no telling how much money Hillary & Co. was paid to steal low-wage customer service jobs from American workers to benefit workers in the third world. Unless they were legal donations from native-born or naturalized American citizens, the money she was paid was likely sent directly to the William J. Clinton washing machine. In 2007, for example, Chatwal pledged to raise $5 million for Hillary's White House bid. When Hillary withdrew the money from the washing machine, it smelled just like any other American greenback—Fabreze clean and ready to spend.
Hillary's seven years in the Senate proved to be good practice for finding new ways to accept illicit donations from questionable donors—like a half million dollar donation from the Algerian government in 2010 (which required Clinton to get approval from the State Dept. Ethics Commission. Hillary deemed it not necessary to ask.) The money was theoretically donated to assist humanitarian relief in earthquake devastated Haiti. It appears from media reports that the Clinton Foundation received $35 million towards Haitian relief from Muslim nations. During that same period, the Clintons accepted millions of dollars from seven foreign governments. Among them are Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates. Saudi Arabia donated $25 million to the not so transparent Clinton Foundation. An Ethiopian billionaire businessman, Mohammad Al-Amoudi donated $10 million. (Over 40% of the donations over $1 million being made to what has now evolved into the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation came from Muslim nations. Charles Ortel, a Wall Street investor and financial writer reported, on April 30, 2015, that "...a penetrating analysis of the Clinton Foundation's receipts and expenditures is impossible to accurately ascertain since its legally-mandated filings do not add up, are frequently incorrect and they are materially misleading. In numerous cases, the Clinton Foundation appears to have followed inconsistent policies adding in appropriate portions of the various activities it pursued around the world to create 'consolidated' financial statements...artificially enhancing purported financial results...Meanwhile the foundation solicits donations even though its informational filings are not in compliance with applicable law. Regulators at federal, State, local and international levels are not doing what they should to protect the public." A crook is always a crook—even when the bribes they take makes them "respectable" billionaires.
In the end, Hillary Clinton's greed will never allow her to fit through the "eye of the needle" because she will never give up her ill-gotten wealth—although she still insists that she and Bill were "dead broke" and in debt when they left the White House. (I wonder if that's why they petulantly stole the "W" keys off all the computers in the West Wing?)
In it's 10 year analysis of donor giving to the Clinton Foundation (under any of the three names it's held), McClatchyDC reported on Feb. 18, 2015 that 71 of the 168 donors contributing over $1 million in 2014 to the Clinton family foundation came from foreign governments, foreign individuals, foreign businesses and foreign charities. The millions of dollars from foreign countries, corporations and individuals, McClatchy noted, should lead to conflict-of-interest questions for Hillary Clinton. When the Obama-Clinton Agreement which restricted much of Hillary's fundraising in foreign countries expired in 2013 with her resignation as Secretary of State, the spigots were opened wide in the Clinton Foundation laundry. The Washington Post reported that since 2001 when it was formed to launder the graft received by Hillary, the Clinton Foundation has received over $2 billion. The Wall Street Journal reported that since Hillary resigned as Secretary of State so she could build her presidential nest egg with illegal foreign dollars and have them laundered squeaky-clean by the Clinton Foundation washing machine several new foreign governments—including China—have been laundering their illicit donations in Hillary's Maytag.
In my view, Hillary's conflict-of-interest questions should be centered around how many millions does it take to finance a political campaign verses how many millions are needed to steal an election which Hillary Clinton, one of the most diabolical women in the world, will never win honestly?