Saturday, November 5, 2016

ASSANGE: CLINTON RESISTED FBI, AND NOW THEY’RE OUT FOR PAYBACK

RT News
November 5, 2016


“Hillary Clinton very conspicuously resisted the FBI's investigation. So, there is anger within the FBI because it made the FBI look weak.”



Hillary Clinton sparked an FBI backlash, which is now surfacing, when she stonewalled the Feds, who were trying to investigate her private server, Julian Assange said during the John Pilger Special, courtesy of Dartmouth Films, which is now available in full on RT.
“If you go to history of the FBI, it has become effectively America’s political police. And the FBI demonstrated with taking down the former head of the CIA [David Petraeus in 2012] over classified information given to his mistress that almost no one was untouchable. The FBI is always trying to demonstrate that. ‘No one can resist us,’” Assange told the Australian journalist during the 25-minute interview.
“But Hillary Clinton very conspicuously resisted the FBI’s investigation. So, there is anger within the FBI because it made the FBI look weak.”
FBI director James B. Comey threw a spanner into the presidential race that threatened to become a Clinton procession last week, when he claimed that the agency had potentially obtained new information pertaining to Clinton’s use of a personal email server, set up shortly after she became Secretary of State in 2009, when they obtained the laptop of Anthony Weiner, the ex-husband of close Clinton aide Huma Abedin. Weiner was being investigated for an unrelated sexting offense.
Clinton has categorically denied mishandling classified information by using a vulnerable personal email address for State Department business. Fox News has alleged that the FBI has obtained new evidence from Weiner’s computer that shows that Clinton was “very likely hacked.”
The right-wing network has also claimed that there is a “high priority” FBI investigation into whether favors were exchanged by Clinton for donations to her husband’s foundation, though other media have refuted these claims, saying that an earlier investigation into the Clinton Foundation, which cleared the power couple, remained closed.
Assange, whose WikiLeaks website has over the last ten months released three sizable batches of emails, relating to Clinton herself, the Democratic National Committee, and her campaign manager John Podesta, said the FBI has cause to investigate Clinton.
“There’s a thread that runs through all of these emails. There is quite a lot of “pay-to-play,” as they call it – taking… giving access in exchange for money for many individual states, individuals and corporations. Combined with the cover-up of Hillary Clinton’s emails while she was Secretary of State this has led to an environment where the pressure on the FBI [to investigate] increases,” Assange said.
Regardless of whether Clinton ever faces charges, Assange asserted that Clinton was beholden to corporate and political entities that have been hidden from the electorate during the race to the White House.
“She’s this centralizing cog, so that you’ve got a lot of different gears in operation from the big banks like Goldman Sachs, and major elements of Wall Street, and intelligence, and people in the State Department, and the Saudis, and so on. She’s is the, if you like, the centralizer that interconnects all these different cogs. She’s smooth central representation of all that, and all that is more or less what is in power now in the United States,” stated Assange, who said that the leaked emails presented a clear picture of this nexus of influences.
Assange also insisted that despite his image, projecting hope and change, President Barack Obama became “very close to banking interests” during his own initial White House campaign in 2008.
“In fact, one of the most significant Podesta emails that we released was about how the Obama cabinet was formed – and half the [first] Obama cabinet was basically nominated by a representative from Citibank. It is quite amazing,” Assange said.
‘Libya was Hillary’s war’
According to Assange, Clinton’s emails reveal a masterplan, hatched months before the West’s intervention in Libya in March 2011, to make it the signature conflict of her tenure as secretary of state, and a podium from which to realize her presidential dreams.
“Libya more than anyone else’s war was Hillary Clinton’s war. Barack Obama initially opposed it. Who was the person who was championing it? Hillary Clinton. That’s documented throughout her emails,” Assange said.
“There’s more than 1,700 emails out of the 33,000 of Hillary Clinton’s emails we published just about Libya. It’s not about that Libya has cheap oil. She perceived the removal of Gaddafi and the overthrow of the Libyan state something that she would use to run in the general election for president. So late 2011, there’s an internal document called the “Libya Tick Tock” that is produced for Hillary Clinton, and it’s all the… it’s a chronological description of how Hillary Clinton was the central figure in the destruction of the Libyan state.”
But the scheme not only failed on a personal level, after Clinton was largely blamed for allowing a jihadist ransacking of a US compound in Benghazi in 2012, but also continues to haunt the country, which remains in a state of civil war, and Europe.
“As a result, there [have been] around 40,000 deaths within Libya. Jihadists moved in, ISIS moved in. That led to the European refugee and migrant crisis, because not only did you have people fleeing Libya, people then fleeing Syria, destabilization of other African countries as a result of arms flows,” said Assange.
Over the course of the interview, Assange also expounded on his views on Donald Trump, the relationship between WikiLeaks and Russia, and his plan to leave the Ecuadorian embassy, where he has lived as a legal fugitive since 2012.
The full transcript of the interview is available here, and previous excerpts here, and here.

TRUMP’S TONE RESONATES IN STRONGMAN-WEARY AFRICA

The Hill
November 5, 2016

Republican nominee for president is enjoying a strong amount of popularity in Uganda and other African nations a week out from Election Day


KAMPALA, Uganda — Donald Trump’s presidential campaign has­­ had surprising resonance in parts of Africa where people are weary of the political establishment and see the real estate mogul as a global force for change.
Despite famously pushing an “America first” foreign policy and appearing to show little interest in events outside the U.S., the Republican nominee for president is enjoying a strong amount of popularity in Uganda and other African nations a week out from Election Day.
Trump is also up against Hillary Clinton, a woman known on the international stage for more than two decades, most recently as a globetrotting secretary of State, and whose family foundation has helped to save millions from malaria, HIV/AIDS and other diseases — including many Africans.
Yet for many in and around this capital city, scattered across hills in the jungle of East Africa, Trump’s candidacy represents a strike against political dynasties and the established order that has kept strongmen such as their own president in power for decades. Trump’s tough rhetoric and a fake viral quote have boosted his appeal to many looking for a change.

Thursday, November 3, 2016

State Dept. Emails: Clinton White House Data Stolen from National Archives

Lifezette
November 3, 2016


Emails recovered from Clinton's private server show massive data theft in 2009, possibly SSNs of every admin official


A newly released email from the State Department shows that Hillary Clinton was informed in April 2009 of a massive theft of data pertaining to former President Bill Clinton’s White House records.
On April 13, 2009, Clinton attorney Cheryl Mills informed newly sworn-in Secretary of State Hillary Clinton via email that the National Archives could not account for a two-terabyte hard drive.
A newly released email from the State Department shows that Hillary Clinton was informed in April 2009 of a massive theft of data pertaining to former President Bill Clinton’s White House records.
On April 13, 2009, Clinton attorney Cheryl Mills informed newly sworn-in Secretary of State Hillary Clinton via email that the National Archives could not account for a two-terabyte hard drive.


Monday, October 31, 2016

Video: 9/11 and the Global War on Terrorism: Michel Chossudovsky on GRTV

Global Research
October 31, 2016



As we reach the 15th anniversary of 9/11, the establishment is attempting to derail 9/11 truth with disinformation about Saudi Arabia.
But as Prof Michel Chossudovsky of Global Research  points out, if we ever hope to derail the never-ending war on terror, we must be absolutely clear that neither Al Qaeda nor Saudi Arabia could have pulled off the attacks of that day.

“The tragic events of September 11, 2001 constitute a fundamental landmark in American history,  a decisive watershed, a breaking point. 

Millions of people have been misled regarding the causes and consequences of 9/11. 

9/11 marks the onslaught of the “Global War on Terrorism” (GWOT), used as a pretext and a justification by the US and its NATO allies to carry out a “war without borders”, a global war of conquest.  

A far-reaching overhaul of US military doctrine was launched in the wake of 9/11. 

9/11 was also a stepping stone towards the relentless repeal of civil liberties, the militarization of law enforcement and the inauguration of “Police State USA”.

Michel Chossudovsky, 15 Years later, September 10, 2016
GRTV Video produced by James Corbett

Constitutional Law Expert: FBI Director Comey Did NOT Violate Law By Announcing Email Investigation

Washington's Blog
October 31, 2016



Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid alleges that FBI Director Comey has violated the law by announcing the re-opened investigation into Clinton emails so close to the presidential election.
Is he right?
According to one of the top constitutional law experts in the United States (and a liberal), Professor Jonathan Turley, the answer is no:
[Reid’s] allegation is in my view wildly misplaced. Reid is arguing that the actions of FBI Director James B. Comey violates the Hatch Act. I cannot see a plausible, let alone compelling, basis for such a charge against Comey.
In his letter to Comey, Reid raised the the Hatch Act, which prohibits partisan politicking by government employees.
5 U.S.C. § 7323(a)(1) prohibits a government employee from “us[ing] his official authority or influence for the purpose of interfering with or affecting the result of an election.”
 Reid argued:
“Your actions in recent months have demonstrated a disturbing double standard for the treatment of sensitive information, with what appears to be a clear intent to aid one political party over another. I am writing to inform you that my office has determined that these actions may violate the Hatch Act, which bars FBI officials from using their official authority to influence an election. Through your partisan actions, you may have broken the law.”
The reference to “months” is curious. Comey has kept Congress informed in compliance with oversight functions of the congressional committees but has been circumspect in the extent of such disclosures. It is troubling to see Democrats (who historically favor both transparency and checks on executive powers) argue against such disclosure and cooperation with oversight committees. More importantly, the Hatch Act is simply a dog that will not hunt.
Richard W. Painter, a law professor at the University of Minnesota and the chief ethics lawyer in the George W. Bush White House from 2005 to 2007, has filed a Hatch Act complaint against Comey with the federal Office of Special Counsel and Office of Government Ethics. He argues that “We cannot allow F.B.I. or Justice Department officials to unnecessarily publicize pending investigations concerning candidates of either party while an election is underway.”
However, Comey was between the horns of a dilemma. He could be accused of acts of commission in making the disclosure or omission in withholding the disclosure in an election year. Quite frankly, I found Painter’s justification for his filing remarkably speculative. He admits that he has no evidence to suggest that Comey wants to influence the election or favors either candidate. Intent is key under the Hatch investigations.  You can disagree with the timing of Comey’s disclosure, but that is not a matter for the Hatch Act or even an ethical charge in my view.
Congress passed the Hatch Act in response to scandals during the 1938 congressional elections and intended the Act to bar federal employees from using “[their] official authority or influence for the purpose of interfering with or affecting the result of an election.” Comey is not doing that in communicating with Congress on a matter of oversight.
Such violations under the Hatch Act, even if proven, are not criminal matters. The Office of Special Counsel -can investigate such matters and seek discipline — a matter than can ultimately go before the Merit Systems Protection Board.
CNN confirms:
violators aren’t going to jail: the Hatch Act is not a criminal statute. Instead, it is an administrative constraint on government employees. The law is enforced by a special independent federal agency — the Office of Special Counsel — which is charged with investigating complaint allegations and, where found to be meritorious, either pursuing a settlement with the offending employee or prosecuting their case before the federal agency that oversees internal employment disputes — the Merit Systems Protection Board. And for presidential appointees like Comey, the Office of Special Counsel submits a report of its findings along with the employee’s response to the President, who makes a decision on whether discipline is warranted.
***
The Hatch Act provision most commonly invoked in discussions of Comey’s letter is 5 U.S.C. § 7323(a)(1), which prohibits a government employee from “us[ing] his official authority or influence for the purpose of interfering with or affecting the result of an election.”
The key text is the emphasized phrase — which conditions a violation of the statute on whether the employee’s purpose was to interfere with or affect the result of an election. Thus, the Hatch Act does not focus on the effect of the employee’s conduct, but the intent. To that end, if Comey did not intend to interfere with or affect the upcoming election through his letter to Congress, then he did not violate the letter of the Hatch Act.

Sunday, October 30, 2016

Report: Clinton Emails May Have Led to Ambassador Steven's Death

SIC SEMPER TYRANNIS!!! News
Mark Matheny
October 30, 2016




Mark Matheny discusses newly released emails for Hillary Clinton that may have contributed to the murder of Ambassador Steven's and three soldiers on the night of the attack in Benghazi .

Report: Christian Genocide in the Middle East

SIC SEMPER TYRANNIS !!! News
Mark Matheny
October 29, 2016

Mark Matheny discusses the Genocide happening in the Middle East by ISIS, the failure of the Obama presidency to stop it, and Trump plan to end the Genocide and ISIS....




TERROR CAMPS:The Global Agenda

TERROR CAMPS:The Global Agenda
Watch Full Length Movie Here

Libyan Violence: Globalist Plan for the Domination of Eurasia

Left-Right Paradigm and the Coming Election

More White House Propaganda... "The Unemployment Rate is Only 8.25%!!!!"

Defense Cuts Harmful to Economy or National Security?

The Obama Catholic Connection

The Globalists Plan for a Coming World Currency

Four Mega Banks Dubbed "The Four Horsemen of U.S. Banking"

New World Order Rising-Documentary

New World Order Rising-Documentary
Watch Here

ObamaCrimes.com

ObamaCrimes.com
Find out Why Here...

My Other Passions

My Other Passions
Aikido and Iaido