new details of Loretta Lynch’s dealings with Hillary campaign

–47jh.,B43

It looks like we might be getting more information on the Loretta Lynch/Hillary Clinton campaign conspiracy after all.

Zero Hedge asked on Thursday evening, “If the DNC is in possession of actual tangible evidence that could prove once and for all that Russians hacked their servers and attempted to undermine the campaign of Hillary Clinton, why not share that evidence with investigators and enjoy the blissful vindication that its public release would provide?”

Tyelr Durden then wrote in a post on Friday, “We concluded by wondering whether the stonewalling from the DNC just might have something to do with this “purely coincidental’ meeting between Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton on a tarmac in Phoenix and/or Loretta Lynch’s ‘assurances’ to members of the Clinton campaign that the FBI’s investigation (or, “matter” if you prefer) of Hillary Clinton “wouldn’t go too far“?  Afterall, if evidence of “Russian hacking” were on that server, so to would there be evidence of Lynch’s transgressions…if they existed, of course.”

“But we’re not the only ones wondering whether there’s more to the Lynch story.,” he added.  “According to an article in the New York Postsome testimony that Lynch offered under oath before the Senate Judiciary Committee last year could come back to haunt her.  In that testimony, Lynch said that she had ‘not spoken to anyone on either the campaign or transition or any staff members affiliated with them.'”

Then there was the infamous tarmac meeting between Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch in 2016, and we’ve been told that the NSA will not release the tapes of that meeting claiming “national security,” even though the two said they only talked grandkids and golf.

We also have the issue of James Comey’s testimony in which he said that when he was investigating Hillary’s email crimes that Lynch told him to refer to the investigation as a “matter,” a term that was being put out by the Clinton campaign at the time.

Donald Trump has said that Lynch gave Clinton a free pass and protection concerning the matter, and it seems that a report from the Washington Post confirms that.

When former Attorney General Loretta Lynch testified last year about her decision not to prosecute Hillary Clinton for mishandling classified information, she swore she never talked to “anyone” on the Clinton campaign. That categorical denial, though made in response to a series of questions about whether she spoke with Clintonworld about remaining attorney general if Hillary won the election, could come back to haunt her.

The Senate Judiciary Committee, which has launched a bipartisan investigation into Lynch for possible obstruction of justice, recently learned of the existence of a document indicating Lynch assured the political director of Clinton’s campaign she wouldn’t let FBI agents “go too far” in probing the former secretary of state.

Lynch’s lawyer says she is cooperating with committee investigators, who are seeking answers to several questions, as well as relevant documents. Among other things, they want to know if she or any of her Justice Department staff “ever communicated with Amanda Renteria,” who headed Clinton’s political operations during the campaign. Renteria, who has been identified in the document as the senior Clinton campaign aide with whom Lynch privately communicated, has also been asked to testify.

Whoa! Lynch wouldn’t let FBI agents “go too far”?  She was definitely covering for Crooked Hillary, there can be no doubt.  That’s because, as we have pointed out before, Lynch is just as crooked as she is.

However, Trump promised the American people to have his attorney general appoint a special investigator, something that has not yet occurred.  So, I must ask, is the Trump administration going to give her another free pass and protection just like the Obama DOJ?

All of this led Durden to draw final conclusion in the matter.

“After all the drama around the Clinton email investigation, which included multiple people being offered immunity and the revelation of what appeared to be numerous federal crimes committed by several people on Clinton’s staff, wouldn’t it be ironic if Obama’s Attorney General were the only one to take the fall?” he wrote.  “Scandal free administration indeed…”

source–freedom outpost, tim brown, tyler durden, zero hedge, amanda renteria

former obama national intelligence director refutes hillary ridiculous russian Interference claims: “it wasn’t 17”

-47JH.,B43

Former Director of National Intelligence for Barack Hussein Obama Soetoro Sobarkah, James Clapper, appeared on CNN’s “The Situation Room” and called into question a talking point that was made by Hillary Clinton during last year’s election cycle.  Instead of 17 intelligence agencies agreeing on Russian interference, Clapper said it was only three or four.

If you recall, former FBI Director James Comey claims there is no doubt that the Russians interfered in the elections.  He was basically claiming the same thing as former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

Situation Room host Jim Sciutto asked, “First on the big picture, In a foreign country next to a foreign leader the day before he meets Russia, the president of Russia, did he just throw the U.S. intelligence community under the bus?”

“Well, it is hard not to reach that conclusion that, exactly so,” he said.  “First of all, on the number of components in the international community, yes, there are 17; the 16 components by law plus the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.”

Clapper went on to expound, “When then president-elect Trump was briefed on this on the 6th of January, there were four of us — meaning the directors of NSA, FBI and CIA and myself. That’s all. And we explained who did the report.  So how this narrative got out there about 17 components being involved, I don’t know. But the report itself makes it clear that it was the three agencies plus the Office of the Director of National Intelligence that put this intelligence community assessment together.”

“As far as others doing this, boy, that’s news to me,” he added.  “We saw no evidence whatsoever there was other — there was anyone involved in this other than the Russians.”

Clapper then seems to imply that the intelligence community dropped the ball on weapons of mass destruction in Iraq fifteen years ago and have taken steps to ensure that they never do it again.

“As far as the infamous weapons of mass destruction, the national intelligence assessment that was done in October of 2002, I remember it because my fingerprints were on it,” he affirmed.  “It was 15 years ago. The intelligence community has done a lot of things to make sure that never happens again.”

While in Warsaw, Poland for the G-20 summit, President Trump echoed Clapper’s comments saying, “It turned out to be three or four. It wasn’t 17.”

“I heard it was 17 agencies,” said Trump.  “I said, ‘Boy, that’s a lot. Do we even have that many intelligence agencies, right? Let’s check it.’ And we did some very heavy research. It turned out to be three or four. It wasn’t 17. And many of your compatriots had to change their reporting or they had to apologize or they had to correct.”

The Daily Caller reports:

The 17 intelligence agencies claim stems from a misunderstanding of what the intelligence community is and two separate reports by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence in October 2016 and January 2017. The October 2016 statement codified the U.S. intelligence community’s “confidence” that the Russian government was behind the hacking of the Democratic National Committee and likely distribution of emails to Wikileaks. The January 2017 unclassified report also definitively assessed that:

“Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election. Russia’s goals were to undermine public faith in the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency.”

Clinton and supporters extrapolated use of the word “intelligence community” in both reports to claim that all 17 U.S. intelligence agencies concurred. The number essentially asserts that agencies like the Department of Energy, the Drug Enforcement Agency, and Coast Guard Intelligence were somehow involved in the process.

Why? Well one guess is that to a general electorate, 17 sounds a lot more substantial than three.

Sadly, even after the intelligence community has corrected the Clinton narrative, media correspondents and media reporters continue to promote the lie about the 17 agencies confirming the matter.

Both the AP, who was recently caught up in a CNN-style fake news report, admitted it ran reports on June 2, June 26 and June 29 saying “all 17 U.S. intelligence agencies have agreed that Russia tried to influence the 2016 election to benefit Donald Trump.”

They have lost all credibility with those lies.

The New York Times did the same thing, but later retracted the story and admitted, “the assessment was not approved by all 17 organizations in the American intelligence community.”

It actually means less than twenty-five percent of the intelligence community is even in agreement that Russia was involved.  Politifact gets a Pants-on-Fire rating.

It’s becoming painfully clear that Donald Trump is continuing to expose the fake news of the mainstream media, and it’s a wonderful thing to see.

source-freedom outpost, tim brown, soetoro sobarkah, jim sciutto, the daily caller, ap, nyt.

 

john kerry’s daughter

The Kerry’s are about as bad as the Clinton’s….now I got this:

Initially, the Peace Corps awarded Dr. Vanessa Kerry’s group — now called Seed Global Health — with a three-year contract
worth $2 million of State Department money on Sept. 10, 2012, documents show. Her father was then the chairman of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, which oversees both the Department of State and the Peace Corps.

Seed secured a four-year extension in September 2015, again without competition. This time, the Peace Corps gave the nonprofit $6.4 million provided by the Department of State while John Kerry was secretary of state.

 

Nothing surprises me anymore….but sometimes they explain other things. 

Who’s married to John Kerry’s daughter ..

Who knew, Surprise –   Surprise!

Nothing ever from the news media on this!

In 2009 the daughter of Secretary of State John Kerry
(Dr. Vanessa Bradford Kerry), married an
Iranian physician named Dr. Brian Vale Nahed.

No mainstream media reported this.

Guess who was the best man at the wedding?
Mohammad Javad Zarif.

So who is Mr. Zarif?,  He’s just the current
Minister of Foreign Affairs for Iran.

He was Kerry’s chief counterpart in the nuclear deal negotiations that recently concluded …..

meaning Kerry was dealing with his daughter’s
father-in-law.
Cozy ‘eh what?

State Department Gave Millions To Foundation Led By John Kerry’s Daughter

September 13, 2016 By Bre Payton

Hillary Clinton isn’t the only secretary of State under the Obama administration to have familial connections to a private, non-profit foundation that has received millions in tax dollars.

Throughout Secretary of State John Kerry’s tenure in public office, his daughter’s private, non-profit organization received more than $9 million in taxpayer funds from government entities he oversaw, The Daily Caller News Foundation’s Ethan Barton reports.

The money trail begins in 2012, when the Peace Corps awarded a $2 million contract to an organization now called Seed Global Health (SGH) launching a partnership with the Peace Corps and the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), which provides 42 health educators to 13 sites in Malawi, Tanzania, and Uganda.

Then-senator John Kerry — whose daughter, Dr. Vanessa Kerry, is the president of SGH — was serving as chairman on the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, which oversees State Department and Peace Corps spending when the contract was approved in 2012.

Internal memos reveal bureaucrats worked with Vanessa Kerry to ensure she would get the contract without having to compete for it and assured her of such in a 2011 meeting — a year before the partnership was approved. Peace Corps directors Buck Buckingham and Sarah Morgenthau and U.S. Ambassador Eric Goosby, who oversaw the State Department funding the contract, assured Vanessa Kerry her organization would get the contract by using a special grant mechanism fast-tracking the approval process.

Minutes from the 2011 meeting state: “Buck obtained clarity of the mechanism by which federal money will be provided to (SGH). . . The process can be fast tracked and non-competed through a specific grant mechanism.”

While John Kerry was serving as secretary of State, the State Department granted a four-year contract extension to SGH worth $6.4 million without competition in 2015. The extension seems to violate the Peace Corps’s own contracting policies, which typically limits non-competitive funding to five years.

The money trail raises questions about the integrity of the State Department. Its collusion with SGH is reminiscent of Hillary Clinton’s involvement with the Clinton Foundation.

While serving as secretary, Hillary Clinton seemed to be influenced by those who wrote large checks to her family’s private charitable organization. Of the private individuals she met with, Clinton spent a majority of her time with Clinton Foundation donors. She also rearranged her schedule in order to accommodate Clinton Foundation bigwigs’ requests for meetings and favors.

Although John Kerry’s level of involvement in the deal remains unclear, at the very least his connections to the people who hold the purse strings certainly didn’t hurt his daughter’s endeavors to snag taxpayer funding for her project.

Bre Payton is a staff writer at The Federalist. Follow her on Twitter.

 

 

USPS broke law by letting employees do clinton campaign work

–47JH.,b43

The Postal Service is in violation of The Hatch Act for allowing employees to do work for Hillary Clinton and other Democratic candidates during leave from the Service, the Office of Special Counsel said, Fox News reported.

The Hatch Act is a federal law that puts limitations on federal employees’ political activities.

Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., brought complaints by a constituent to the Office of Special Counsel in October, Fox News reported.

That constituent was a Postal Service employee, who said the agency “incurred unnecessary overtime costs” when it allowed members of the National Association of Letter Carriers (NALC) to have “union official” leave so they could participate in the political campaigns.

The work included manning phone banks, going door to door, and other efforts to get out the vote in 2016 battleground states, mainly Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, the report said.

Adam Miles, OSC acting special counsel, said the Hatch Act prohibits the Postal Service “facilitating and directing carrier releases for the union’s political activity.”

NALC endorsed Clinton for president in the 2016 election.

The Senate Homeland Security Committee is holding a hearing Wednesday on the case.

In Miles’ prepared statement to the committee, he said the practice is “long-standing, going back many election cycles, and perhaps started in the 1990s,” the Fox News report said.

“As a federal entity, the USPS must remain politically neutral,” Miles said in his remarks, Fox News reported.

“In many localities, the Postal Service is a citizen’s primary point of contact with the federal government, reinforcing the need for strict adherence to the letter and the spirit of the Hatch Act,” Miles said in the remarks, Fox News reported.

source-newsmax, joe crowe, nalc, fox, adam miles,

 

 

Hillary Clinton sided with russia on sanctions as bill made $500G on moscow speech–

47JH.,b43

Hypocrisy lines Clinton-Russia money trail

The Russian lawyer who landed a meeting with Donald Trump Jr. during last year’s presidential campaign with the promise of dirt on Hillary Clinton had one big thing in common with the Democratic candidate: Both had opposed Russia sanctions targeting human-rights abusers.

Further, former Secretary of State Clinton’s initial opposition coincided with a $500,000 speech her husband gave in Moscow – a link her 2016 campaign fought to downplay in the press, according to WikiLeaks-released documents.

Trump White House officials now are trying to draw attention to that speech and the Clintons’ ties to Russia in a bid to counter criticism over Trump Jr.’s now-infamous meeting.

“If you want to talk about having relationships with Russia, I’d look no further than the Clintons,” Deputy Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said at a briefing last week. “Bill Clinton was paid half a million dollars to give a speech to a Russian bank, personally thanked by President Putin.”

“With the help of the research team, we killed a Bloomberg story trying to link HRC’s opposition to the Magnitsky bill a $500,000 speech that WJC gave in Moscow.”

– May, 2015 email from Clinton campaign staffer

The former president indeed had received a personal call from then-Prime Minister Vladimir Putin expressing his appreciation for the speech. According to Mrs. Clinton’s ethics disclosure form filed while she was secretary of State, Bill Clinton was paid $500,000 by the Russia-based finance company Renaissance Capital for his June 29, 2010, speech in Moscow to its employees and guests attending the company’s annual conference. 

The speech is now coming back to haunt the Clintons, considering the company that cut the check was allegedly tied to the scandal that spurred the Global Magnitsky Act, a bill that imposed sanctions on Russians designated as human-rights abusers and eventually would become law in 2012.

Former President Bill Clinton with his wife, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton  (AP)

This was the same law Russian attorney Natalia Veselnitskaya was lobbying against during her sit-down with Trump Jr. last year. And back in 2010, it would have put the Clintons on her side. 

Shortly before Bill Clinton’s speech in 2010, when members of Congress pushing the sanctions bill had asked Hillary Clinton to refuse visas to Russian officials implicated under the policy, the State Department denied the request. The Obama administration initially was opposed to the Magnitsky Act because then-President Barack Obama was seeking a “reset” with Russia and did not want to deepen the divide between the two countries.

Former President Bill Clinton’s speech to Renaissance just weeks later was all the more curious, considering Renaissance’s Russian investment bank executives would have been banned from the U.S. under the law.

Fast-forward to 2015, and the timeline apparently had caught the attention of Bloomberg News.

Portrait of lawyer Sergei Magnitsky held by his mother Nataliya Magnitskaya during 2009 press conference in Moscow.

According to a memo from Clinton’s presidential campaign team later published by WikiLeaks, however, the Clinton campaign was able to stop the presses.

“With the help of the research team, we killed a Bloomberg story trying to link HRC’s opposition to the Magnitsky bill a $500,000 speech that WJC gave in Moscow,” Jesse Lehrich, on the Rapid Response Communications team for Hillary For America, boasted on May 21, 2015.

The Global Magnitsky Act was named for 36-year-old tax attorney Sergei Magnitsky, who died in the custody of the Russian government after accusing the government and organized crime of stealing hundreds of millions of dollars from a foreign company, Hermitage Capital Management. Magnitsky, hired by foreign investor and Hermitage owner William Browder, had tracked what turned out to be hundreds of millions of dollars in tax fraud. He reported the fraud to the Russian authorities, but instead of pursuing charges against the alleged offender, Russian authorities jailed Magnitsky.

After Magnitsky died in November 2009, Browder said Magnitsky proved Renaissance officials were among those orchestrating the scheme. 

The State Department finally reversed its position in 2011 and refused visas to some Russians purportedly involved in the financial fraud seeking to enter the country.

The Magnitsky Act passed with bipartisan support in 2012.

Russia retaliated against the U.S., ending any possibility for Americans to adopt Russian orphans and also banning 18 U.S. officials from entering their country.

source-ap, sarah huckabee sanders, wikileaks, bloomberg, sergei magnitsky, jesse lehrich, william browder, malia zimmerman.

Tom Fitton questions media’s role in hiding clinton-russia connection

–47jH., b43

Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said Tuesday one must wonder how many donations were made by Russian connections to Hillary Clinton, basing his comments on a leaked email from her campaign concerning a story that was killed on the matter.

“[There were] connections between all this Russian-connected money, $145 million generally, $500,000 specifically to Bill Clinton from a Russian-connected firm that was pushing Uranium One,” Fitton told Fox News’ “Fox & Friends” program.

“Evidently, someone in the media not only connected it to Uranium One, but saw other Russian interests being advanced by Mrs. Clinton, such as this really hard-core opposition to any new sanctions against Russia over its alleged murder of a human rights-related lawyer. ”

The international mining company, whose headquarters are in Canada, had U.S. mines that produced about 11 percent of the country’s uranium production in 2014, Politifact reports, quoting figures from Oilprice.com

Fox News’ Brian Kilmeade commented that the leaked email, sent by a Clinton spokesperson, said that “with the help of the research team, we killed a Bloomberg story trying to link Hillary Rodham Clinton to a $500,000 speech that Bill Clinton gave in Moscow.”

Kilmeade alleged that it was a series of examples of how Clinton and former Secretary of State John Kerry were trying to end the Magnitsky Act, a set of sanctions stemming from the death of Russian lawyer Sergei Magnitsky, who was killed after testifying against Russian interests in a fraud case.

The bill’s name came up over the last month following revelations about Donald Trump Jr.’s meetings with Russian attorney Natalia Veselnitskaya, who represents clients fighting back against the sanctions.

“Hillary Clinton and Vladimir Putin were on the same side,” Kilmeade insisted. “But if this was linked to a $500,000 speech, how would that look to Hillary Clinton’s candidacy?”

“You have to wonder how many other donations were made by Russian connection entities we don’t know about,” he said. “You may recall the Clinton Foundation had to fix its [reports] to expose or highlight contributions that it had promise to publicize, but it hadn’t publicized.”

Fitton continued he could not “overemphasize the nature” of the conflict of interest with Clinton, “her husband getting a half a million dollars directly from the Russians while she was secretary of state.”

“We were astonished when we saw that the State Department, we got the document, approved this ethics process that allowed this speech,” said Fitton. “Why would the Clinton State Department allow Hillary Clinton’s husband to get a half a million dollars from the Russian-connected entity?

And that official, he continued, was Clinton, who was “advocating on behalf of Russian interests not only on Uranium One, which saw the Russians get 20 percent of our uranium operations, but then pushed hard for the Russians against the sanctions.”

Politifact and other sources have largely disputed the Uranium One claims, however, noting that in 2010, Clinton was one of nine federal agency heads signing off on the purchase of a controlling stake in Uranium One, which has operations in several states, and President Barack Obama had the final say in the matter.

However, even though it controls Uranium One, Russia can’t export uranium from the United States, and is more likely interested in the company’s assets in Kazakhstan, which produces the bulk of the world’s uranium, Politifact reports.

Politifact also discounted the claims on Bill Clinton’s speech, noting that Renaissance Capital paid him $500,000 to deliver it in 2010, at a time when his speech fees were normally that amount or higher.

It also reports that other world leaders are often invited to speak at Renaissance Capital events, such as former British Prime Minister Tony Blair and ex-Secretary of State Colin Powell.

source– By Sandy Fitzgerald, judical watch, fox, brian kilmeade, politifact, magnitsky act, natalia veselnitskaya,newsmax

another Soros trojan horse in the making.–

-1GH.,b61

‘He IS on his way and He IS “working the groups” in Michigan & New York and being groomed at this very minute’

PRESIDENT ABDUL EL-SAYED?

Etch this man’s face and name in your mind. You will be seing more of him. Much more.

His name is Abdul El-Sayed.

After years of being groomed by George Soros. He has been hand-picked by the Left to be their next “champion” of Hope and Change.

He is 32 years old,  born in the USA, and is an extremely well educated Muslim Doctor in Dearborn Michigan. (education funded by George Soros)

He is handsome, articulate, charismatic and smart.

He is  sympathetic of the Muslim  Brotherhood, and is running for Governor of Michigan,

Which is Step 1 in his preparation to run For President Of the United States.

He has the potential & on track to be Obama #2, but far more openly Muslim.

In 2020 he will be eligible to run for President!

Democrats’ mouths are watering in anticipation and raising money. “Pocahontas” Warren is already campaigning for him.

Al Jazeera, which is widely read by Michigan’s large Muslim population, is doing it’s best to help Soros make him our president in 2020.

Egyptian American doctor Abdul El-Sayed could become the first-ever Muslim governor in the United States in 2018.

El-Sayed, 32, was appointed as the chief of the health department of Michigan’s city of Detroit in 2015, and – after making a serious turn to politics – is now running to be the next governor of the state.

He would inherit major water and economic crises in Detroit and Flint, which are the two poorest cities in the US.

Although Michigan has one of the largest supplies of fresh water in the country, tens of thousands of Detroit residents lost access to water in the homes after major hikes in prices left them unable to afford the basic need.

Furthermore, nearby Flint faced a lead-poisoning water crisis that affected most of its 100,000 residents and prompted a state of emergency.

Michigan’s Governor Rick Snyder has received the bulk of the blame for the water crises for his part in privatising many key state institutions, including the water department, and for allegedly ignoring crises that have hit the underprivileged most.

El-Sayed is also running at a time when hate crimes have been at an all-time high in the country, seen by many as being inspired by Donald Trump‘s presidency.

El-Sayed talked to Al Jazeera about what inspired him to run and why he believes he is the right candidate for the job.

He also talks about how being an Arab and Muslim plays into the election, especially in a state that voted for Trump in the 2016 presidential election.

Al Jazeera: What inspired you to run for governor?

Abdul El-Sayed: I was appointed health director for the city of Detroit in 2015 and my job was to rebuild the health department after the 185-year old department had been privatised during the municipal bankruptcy, when the state came in and appointed an emergency manager.

We were facing one of the greatest public health crises in the country. So we got to work on everything from providing every child a pair of glasses in Detroit who needed one, building programmes to fight asthma, and standing up to corporations that had spent decades polluting the city’s air. Our goal was to really focus on the health and well-being of the most vulnerable people in our community.

Meanwhile, I watched as Governor Snyder and his team of accountants were cutting costs and cutting corners. Their inattention to communities ultimately poisoned thousands of children – and those children were the very ones that I was serving at the helm of the health department.

source-ryan rifai, al-jazzeera