A Panoply Of Clinton Lies, Erased Emails, Pay For Play, what next Murder?

By Pat Buchanan

HIllary Crooked Clinton
If Hillary Clinton wins, within a year of her inauguration, she will be under investigation by a special prosecutor on charges of political corruption…
Pat Buchanan
Patrick J .Buchanan

USA –  -(Ammoland.com)- Prediction: If Hillary Clinton wins, within a year of her inauguration, she will be under investigation by a special prosecutor on charges of political corruption, thereby continuing a family tradition.

For consider what the Associated Press reported this week:

The surest way for a person with private interests to get a meeting with Secretary of State Clinton, or a phone call returned by her, it seems, was to dump a bundle of cash into the Clinton Foundation.

Of 154 outsiders whom Clinton phoned or met with in her first two years at State, 85 had made contributions to the Clinton Foundation, and their contributions, taken together, totaled $156 million.

Conclusion: Access to Secretary of State Clinton could be bought, but it was not cheap. Forty of the 85 donors gave $100,000 or more. Twenty of those whom Clinton met with or phoned dumped in $1 million or more.

To get to the seventh floor of the Clinton State Department for a hearing for one's plea, the cover charge was high.

Among those who got face time with Hillary Clinton were a Ukrainian oligarch and steel magnate who shipped oil pipe to Iran in violation of U.S. sanctions and a Bangladeshi economist who was under investigation by his government and was eventually pressured to leave his own bank.

The stench is familiar, and all too Clintonian in character.

Recall. On his last day in office, Jan. 20, 2001, Bill Clinton issued a presidential pardon to financier-crook and fugitive from justice Marc Rich, whose wife, Denise, had contributed $450,000 to the Clinton Library.

The Clintons appear belatedly to have recognized their political peril.

Bill has promised that, if Hillary is elected, he will end his big dog days at the foundation and stop taking checks from foreign regimes and entities, and corporate donors. Cash contributions from wealthy Americans will still be gratefully accepted.

One wonders: Will Bill be writing thank-you notes for the millions that will roll in to the family foundation — on White House stationery?

By his actions, Bill is all but conceding that there is a serious conflict of interest between his foundation raking in millions that enhance the family's prestige and sustain its travel and lifestyle, while providing its big donors with privileged access to the secretary of state.

Yet if Hillary Clinton becomes president, the scheme is unsustainable. Even the Obama-Clinton media might not be able to stomach this.

And even Clinton seems to be conceding the game is up. “I know there's a lot of smoke, and there's no fire,” she said in self-defense this week.

She is certainly right about the smoke.

And if, as Democratic apparatchik Steve McMahon assures us that there is “no smoking gun,” no quid-pro-quo, no open-and-shut case of Secretary Clinton taking official action in gratitude to a donor of the family foundation, how can we predict a special prosecutor?

Answer: We are not at the end of this scandal. We are at what Churchill called the “end of the beginning.”

Missing emails are being unearthed at State, through Freedom of Information Act requests, that are filling out the picture Clinton thought had been blotted out when her 33,000 “private” emails were erased by her lawyers.

Someone out there, Julian Assange, Russia, or the rogue websites doing all this hacking, are believed to have many more explosive emails they are preparing to drop before Election Day.

And why is Clinton is keeping her State Department calendar secret from the AP, if it does not contain meetings or calls she does not want to defend? She has defied requests and the AP had to sue to get the schedule of her first two years at State.

Moreover, the AP story on the State Department-Clinton Foundation links was so stunning it is sure to trigger follow-up by investigative journalists who can smell a Pulitzer.

Then there are the contacts between Huma Abedin, her closest aide at State, and Doug Band at the Clinton Foundation, the go-betweens for the donor-Clinton meetings, which has opened a new avenue for investigators.

These were unearthed by Judicial Watch, which is not going away.

The number of persons of interest involved in this suppurating scandal, which has gone from an illicit server, to a panoply of Clinton lies to the public that disgusted the FBI director, to erased emails, to “pay for play,” and now deep into the Clinton Foundation continues to grow.

All that is needed now, to bring us to an independent counsel, is calls for the FBI to reopen and broaden its investigation in light of all that has been revealed since Director Comey said there was not evidence enough to recommend an indictment.

If Clinton controls the Justice Department, calls for a special prosecutor will be resisted, but only until public demand becomes too great.

For there were independent counsels called in Watergate, Iran-Contra and the scandals that led to the impeachment of Bill Clinton.

Hillary Clinton says there is no fire. But something is causing all that smoke.

 

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of the new book “The Greatest Comeback: How Richard Nixon Rose From Defeat to Create the New Majority.

  • 18 thoughts on “A Panoply Of Clinton Lies, Erased Emails, Pay For Play, what next Murder?

    1. It happened because on one side none of the democrates would run against hillary except for bernie (who never had a chance) and on the other side too many republicans that had similar ideas and qualifications ran against each other thus spitting the traditional conservative vote between them. This left it wide open for trump to come in and take over the primary by having the largest small slice of the republican vote purely through name recognition, charisma, entertainment, and dominating the headlines over and over again which did not allow anyone else to gain traction. Meanwhile most of the others were tearing each other down thinking that trump would slowly fade away…and voila…. there you have it in a nutshell.

      Now, are either of them a very good candidate??? No. If both sides got a do over in the primaries would different candidates have been picked?? Probably. Could either side have come up with much better choices?? Oh hell yes!! Unfortunately we pretty much have a two party system and it is likely to stay that way for a while unless something were to drastically change the dynamic. EX: If both parties get split roughly down the middle idealogically at the same time and then become four separate parties that would create a kind of political free for all. Or if either party gets significantly transformed from within that would also mix things up.

      At this point I can only suggest that you vote for the one that can actually win the election and who you feel will: make better economic policies, be more fiscally responsible, appoint justices that will actually adhere to the constitution, make better trade deals, be more friendly to our allies, make our enemies think twice before messing with us or our interests, protect the second amendment , and who is more likely to follow the law. So, even though I’m not particularly fond of my choices here, for me the candidate most likely to fit that criteria is Trump. Was he my first pick? Not at all…in fact he was nearly my last, but now that it is either him or her, and there is no question in my mind who is better. Is he a brash, self centered, egotistical, B.S.ing jerk? Yes. Could he end up doing more harm than good? Possibly, but when compaired to hillary I think that he is more likely to do good than harm where as she will almost certainly irreparably damage this country beyond salvage. In the end I would rather have an A55-hole-in-chief who will stick up for America than a corrupt and negligent liar-in-chief who would sell America’s soul to the devil if he promised her more power and influence.

    2. Ron Brown died along with 39 other people when the T-43 (a converted 737 used by the Air Force) carrying the group on a trip to Bosnia crashed while approaching the Dubrovnik airport. On the verge of being indicted and having stated publicly his willingness to make a deal with prosecutors, Ron Brown’s death brought to an end his ability to testify. The very next day, Ron Brown’s personal lawyer was murdered in a drive-by shooting. A few days later, the Air Traffic Controller who had been in charge during the aircraft crash was found dead and declared a suicide.
      WASHINGTON (March 23) — A former business partner of the late Commerce Secretary Ron Brown testified in U.S. District Court Monday that Brown had told her President and Mrs. Clinton supported a White House plan to sell seats on international trade missions to raise campaign contributions.

      Nolanda Hill, who is under federal indictment for fraudulent business practices, claimed Brown was angered when White House political operatives forced him to provide seats on trade missions as a fund-raising device.

      Hill painted a picture of her friend Brown as furious with the White House, and especially first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton, for instigating the plan. “I’m not a [mother-expletive deleted] tour guide for Hillary,” Brown complained privately to Hill, according to her account.

      Brown’s business associate also testified that toward the end of his life the Commerce secretary had said he was just “doing my chores for Hillary Rodham Clinton.” Hill further said Brown resented the first lady and the “Arkansas crowd” of insiders for perverting the trade missions, with the apparent blessing of the president himself.

      Hill said of Brown: “Ultimately, he believed the president of the United States was at least tangentially involved.”

      Brown was killed when the government plane carrying one of his international trade missions crashed into a mountainside in Croatia in 1996.

      Hill portrayed Brown as fearing he was an outsider in the Clinton Administration, despite his ties to the president while serving as head of the Democratic National Committee.

      “He never felt he had that strong a position and he was always worried,” Hill said. Hill claimed Brown had privately complained that he was also racially “demeaned by that Arkansas crowd.”

      Hill said Brown once showed her a stack of documents on Commerce Department letterhead suggesting to contributors their gifts could help win trade mission seats. She said Brown was furious that one his aides had written the letters. “He knew it was not right,” Hill testified. She said she urged Brown not to destroy the documents because an independent counsel was investigating and it would be seen as obstruction of justice. “I told him it was a great risk because surely they existed someplace else,” she said.

      Hill testified, often grudgingly, under prodding by staunch administration critic Larry Klayman. The head of a group named Judicial Watch, Klayman called Hill to testify in his lawsuit to force the Commerce Department to release documents which he claims will confirm the sale of the trade mission seats for campaign gifts of $50,000 or more.

      Hill said the principal contact at the White House was the office of Alexis Herman, now Clinton’s Labor secretary. Hill also named an assistant to Herman as the contact with Melissa Moss, the Commerce official who wrote the contribution letters which angered Brown.

      Hill admitted she had once described what the White House had done to Brown’s missions as “turning his baby into a street-level protection racket.”

      Summing up the morning session Klayman asked Hill, “Ron Brown believed the president knew the trade mission seats were for sale, and the mission was being perverted?”

      “Yes,” Hill replied.

      U.S. District Court Judge Royce Lamberth, who presided over the proceedings, rejected efforts by Hill to have the session closed to the press and public. Lamberth also rejected her request not to testify because the testimony could adversely affect her defense against pending federal charges.

    3. It is hard to believe that with all the evidence of ,at best,incompetence in her ,Mrs Clinton,actions as well as the probability,at worst, of criminal activities that her popularity remains intact and that she will probably be “elected” as our next president. The whole situation seems like a very, very bad dream.
      At six decades plus , I have never felt so hopeless,helpless and fearful, not for myself, but for my children and their babies. I Pray for them.

    4. Murder,MURDER!!!! I’ve already read ATLEAST 35 BODY’S, 35!!!!! HAVE ALREADY BEEN TIED TO THAT F-IN MAN & WOMEN!!!. BUT SINCE THEY HAVE THIS FREE”””GET OUTTA JAIL CARD”””!!!!.
      NOBDY GOT THE “”” BALLS!!!””” TO CHARGE THEM & MAKE IT STICK. EVERYTIME, EVERYTIME, SHE OPENS HER MOUTH IS NOTHING BUT LIES!!!!! BOTH(BILL & HER) . !!!!& THAT HUMA PERSON ( KILERYS NO.1 CARPETMUCHER) NEED TO B SENT TO “”” GITMO”””!!!!. DO NOT PASS GO, DO NOT COLLECT $200.00 DOLLARS, AND THEM ROT!!! THERE. W/ THOSE 2 IT’S GREED,GREED, & MORE GREED!!!!!. HAVEN HELP US IF!!!! SHE GETS IN THE HOUSE. { I can’t say WHITE HOUSE anymore).
      Sidebar: I’m a V.N.vet. & reading more,& more, VETS R fed up W/ the way we’re being treated. By the system that’s just tossing us to the CURB, & 95% R GONNA vote for TRUMP!!!!!!!. That’s a whole lot of VOTES going for him. GOD BLESS THIS COUNTRY, CAUSE WE NEED HELP BIG TIME
      MAYBE OUR FOREFATHERS WILL RISE UP & HELP US GET OUTTA THIS MESS WE’RE IN.

    5. The USA doesn’t need a politician. It need’s a pragmatist (look the definition up!) and that is exactly what TRUMP is. This is the reason the politicians don’t want him. He isn’t one of them.

      1. If hiLIARY is elected, how will a special prosecutor be appointed? The president controls DOJ. DOJ appoints or refuses to appoint the special prosecutor. That is what kept Oblabla in office.

        1. @Wild Bill, I am not disputing what you say but my understanding is that the House of Representatives are responsible for enacting the special prosecutor and the special prosecutor has powers over and above the DOJ and FBI. I think there is a bill in congress to authorize this but no one seems to have the gonads to do it.

          1. @tomcat, The Attorney General appoints the Special Prosecutor. Once appointed, the DOJ, and subordinate entities of the DOJ, have no power or authority to curtail or abridge the SP’s investigation.

    6. I get so sick of hearing people say they don’t like TRUMP because the is a billionare or he is so outsopken. Is that really a reason to consider voting for Hillary. Everybody knows she lies about everything, she is truley a racist, a thief, that only wants power over everybody. She is a dictator. She and Bill crime lords going back to when bill was States Attorney in AR. Do some research, it is not hard to find. So many lives ruined or dead. How can anyone consider voting for her?

      1. Those people who vote for hiLIARy are the people that want something for free. The Democrat party continues the unspoken promise to give you something for free.

    7. I consider myself a middle class red blooded American that love my country and willing to defend this land with my life. I am troubled with both candidates to the point of loosing sleep over something that is lacking from both parties. Seems America is suddenly placed on the auction block and up for sale to the highest bid. I know America is filled with talent we are the strongest power on the planet and if unleashed will kick butt over the globe. What bothers me is given all our strength I am forced to vote for the lesser evil I know we have better, how did this ever happen. I feel both parties wish to do harm to my dear America, neither one do I trust. It really hurt and have shaken my soul. I wish to know if any other readers share my concerns.

      1. It happened because on one side none of the democrates would run against hillary except for bernie (who never had a chance) and on the other side too many republicans that had similar ideas and qualifications ran against each other thus spitting the traditional conservative vote between them. This left it wide open for trump to come in and take over the primary by having the largest small slice of the republican vote purely through name recognition, charisma, entertainment, and dominating the headlines over and over again which did not allow anyone else to gain traction. Meanwhile most of the others were tearing each other down thinking that trump would slowly fade away…and voila…. there you have it in a nutshell.

        Now, are either of them a very good candidate??? No. If both sides got a do over in the primaries would different candidates have been picked?? Probably. Could either side have come up with much better choices?? Oh hell yes!! Unfortunately we pretty much have a two party system and it is likely to stay that way for a while unless something were to drastically change the dynamic. EX: If both parties get split roughly down the middle idealogically at the same time and then become four separate parties that would create a kind of political free for all. Or if either party gets significantly transformed from within that would also mix things up.

        At this point I can only suggest that you vote for the one that can actually win the election and who you feel will: make better economic policies, be more fiscally responsible, appoint justices that will actually adhere to the constitution, make better trade deals, be more friendly to our allies, make our enemies think twice before messing with us or our interests, protect the second amendment , and who is more likely to follow the law. So, even though I’m not particularly fond of my choices here, for me the candidate most likely to fit that criteria is Trump. Was he my first pick? Not at all…in fact he was nearly my last, but now that it is either him or her, and there is no question in my mind who is better. Is he a brash, self centered, egotistical, B.S.ing jerk? Yes. Could he end up doing more harm than good? Possibly, but when compaired to hillary I think that he is more likely to do good than harm where as she will almost certainly irreparably damage this country beyond salvage. In the end I would rather have an A55-hole-in-chief who will stick up for America than a corrupt and negligent liar-in-chief who would sell America’s soul to the devil if he promised her more power and influence.

    8. For all the extra work and extra time required to hide the truth about clinton, do members of the clinton BS machine get paid overtime? Maybe much of that overtime is to protect their own rear ends? Isn’t it amazing, that people would actually vote for such a person who would leave behind / desert people put in harm’s way, or recklessly endanger the country’s national security for a few million dollars!

    9. Murder is already there. Premeditated 1st degree cold blooded murder over the Benghazi loss of 4 lives. Her and Obama received emails 9 months beforehand that there was no security. Calls started going out for help 2 days before the attack started. Reason to be put on DEATH ROW for both of them.

    Leave a Comment 18 Comments