John Bolton – pocketed $115,000 from Ukraine oligarch, Clinton Foundation donor

 

Bolton has been having his pockets filled by the usual suspects. Instead of Russia Russia Russia how about Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine? Oligarch Pinchuk first offer? More about him a bit later.

Bolton’s first appearance at a Pinchuk-backed gathering came last fall, when he participated in a discussion panel in Kiev with former House speaker Newt Gingrich (R), former Defense secretary Robert Gates and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman. Date of the post:June 12, 2018

Asked about Trump during the discussion, Bolton said “I didn’t support him” in the GOP primary, according to a video of the event. He added that Trump “doesn’t care as much about policy as other American presidents have. That doesn’t reflect my view, but it reflects his view.”

 

Former White House national security adviser John Bolton pocketed $115,000 from Ukrainian steel oligarch Viktor Pinchuk’s foundation shortly before entering President Donald Trump’s White House as national security adviser, a position first held in the Trump White House by General Michael Flynn.

Photo: pinchukfund.org

 

financial disclosure shows that Bolton accepted $115,000 from the Victor Pinchuk Foundation for a pair of speeches in September 2017 and February 2018

Bolton also reported $165,000 from Counter Extremism Project United, a nonprofit entity that seeks to combat extremist groups, and $747,000 from speaking fees.

The largest speaking fees came from a foundation run by Ukrainian steel magnate Viktor Pinchuk.

At the former speech in Kiev, Bolton sat on a panel and basically expressed that the national security establishment would not allow Trump to become unconventional on policy.

(But of course….Bolton and his team of Neo-Cons had no intention of allowing Trump to create his own foreign policy.)

As the Washington Post noted, Pinchuk has exceeded $10 million in donations to the Clinton Foundation.

National security adviser John Bolton was paid $115,000 in the past year to participate in two panel discussions sponsored by the foundation of an Ukrainian steel magnate — including one in Kiev last September, during which Bolton reassured the audience that President Trump would not radically change U.S. foreign policy.

“The notion that [Trump’s election] is going to represent a dramatic break in foreign policy is just wrong,” Bolton said, responding to a question from a British interviewer. “Calm down, for God’s sake,” he continued.

Bolton’s appearances at the Kiev event and at another event in Munich this February were paid for by the Victor Pinchuk Foundation, according a financial disclosure form released Monday by the White House.

Clinton Global Initiative Forum, Hong Kong
Victor Pinchuk, Founder and Chairman of The Victor Pinchuk Foundation

 

 

Pinchuk has donated more than $10 million to the family foundation of former president Bill Clinton and former ­secretary of state Hillary Clinton. In 2011, Pinchuk met with one of Clinton’s aides at the State Department to relay a message from Ukraine’s president at the time, Viktor Yanukovych. The meeting was described in Clinton emails later released by the State Department.

 

 

 

 

 

Bolton also reported $118,000 for speaking to large banks: Deutsche Bank paid him $72,000 for a speech in May 2017, and British bank HSBC paid him $46,000 for speeches in June and August 2017.

North Carolina Rep. Mark Meadows cut right through the machinations of the bipartisan Swamp Class Monday, throwing shade on Bolton’s unverified claim that President Trump wanted to withhold Ukraine’s military aid for some reason, possibly due to Ukraine’s well-documented interference in the 2016 election against Trump. Republicans continue to rally behind the president, except for Utah senator Mitt Romney, who is crafting mainstream media headlines with his pro-Bolton advocacy. 

Opsie: Romney’s adviser revealed as a Burisma board member

September 27, 2019

Mitt Romney’s national security advisor in his 2012 campaign — a career CIA spook who rose to its top levels — sits on the board of directors of Burisma, the Ukrainian gas company that formerly paid Hunter Biden $50k a month despite his complete lack of credentials or qualifications.

Oh, and about this little thing:

American journalist traced the connection between Biden, Clinton and the Ukrainian oligarch Pinchuk

March 4, 2019

Against the background of the last sensational investigations In relation to Joe Biden’s activities in Ukraine, American journalist Den Bongini has traced the connection between Biden, Hillary Clinton and Ukrainian oligarch Viktor Pinchuk.

“This is a shocking story, and the Russian intervention case is a crumb compared to how people who know each other have contributed to the well-being of each other,” the journalist wonders.

During the election campaign of 2016 in the United States, the journalists of The New York Times stated that the Clinton Foundation collaborated with Victor Pinchuk, who became a donor to the foundation, donating $ 25 million.

Victor Pinchuk is a Ukrainian billionaire and founder of Interpipe, a manufacturer of steel pipes. He also owns Credit-Dnepr Bank, several ferroalloy plants and a media empire. He is married to Elena Pinchuk, the daughter of ex-President of Ukraine Leonid Kuchma.

Between September 2011 and November 2012, Douglas E. Schoen, a former political consultant to Bill Clinton, organized about a dozen meetings with representatives of the State Department and Pinchuk to discuss the ongoing political crisis in Ukraine.

One day, a Ukrainian oligarch even provided his private plane for the Clintons and went to Los Angeles for 2011 to celebrate Bill Clinton’s 65 birthday.

In July, 2013, the Ministry of Commerce began investigating complaints that Ukraine (Pinchuk companies in particular) and 8 from other countries illegally collapsed steel pipe prices, selling them at a lower price.

The shadow of these charges could fall on Hillary, who was planning to take the presidency, so politicians began to distance themselves from the Ukrainian oligarch.

Against the background of studying Clinton’s ties with Pinchuk in 2014, the official representative of the Democratic candidate, Nick Merrill, said that Pinchuk had never met Clinton during that time. is he сказал The New York Times, that “from 21 January 2009 of the year to 1 February of 2013, the Ukrainian businessman“ never appeared in her schedule ”.

At the same time, Hillary Clinton’s emails stolen by hackers, issued via Wikileaks, showed the opposite and confirmed the constant contact between Pinchuk and the Clintons.

Read more

 

Hmmm. Next stop to load up the trunk with some goodies.

Tip of the Fedora and more at National File

Other than that, all is well in the swamp.

For the best in conservative news

Just say no to new ‘Refugees’ in your local Communities and States

 

States  and local government commissions will soon have the option to chose whether they want to receive refugees. Expect a battle royal as the VOLAGS who contract to handle the “refugees” stand to lose a boatload of cash.

Why in the world are we taking so many Muslims? Especially Syria and Somalia. This is the time for all of us to step up to our local and State government Reps and tell them NO MORE! It’s up to us!

 

The Islamic Center of America, the largest mosque in the United States, located in Dearborn, Michigan.

Up until this coming June, contractors can put refugees wherever they want (with some consultation with the State Department).

In June Trump’s new rules come into play. We get to chose.

States where Governors have told the President that they want MORE refugees for their state

On December 13, 2019, the State Department released the official list of states and localities that have consented to receive refugees in FY2020:

State and Local Consents Under Executive Order 13888

 

Let’s take a step back and look at just what and who we are importing and just how exorbitant the amount is being spent. Info is from: Refugee Resettlement Watch

Here (below) is a table done by Simpson compiled using USA Spending that includes the millions of dollars each of the nine contractors devoured in the last eleven years.

Know that the contractors do not just get money from the US State Department for placement of refugees per head, but also get myriad grants and contracts from other federal agencies, mostly the Office of Refugee Resettlement in Health and Human Services, but other agencies as well.

Note this is in MILLIONS!   Not sure on the acronyms? See list below (DFMS is the other name for Episcopal Migration Ministries.)

Don’t miss the steep jump in their income over Obama’s years in office. No wonder they are screaming bloody murder!

Refugee Resettlement Watch continues to argue that these nine contractors are the heart of America’s Open Borders movement and thus there can never be long-lasting reform of US immigration policy when these nine un-elected phony non-profits are paid by the taxpayers to work as community organizers pushing an open borders agenda.

The President has linked the acquisition of a portion of their annual payout from the US Treasury to consent letters from governors and county commissions to place refugees.

June is the deadline unless a lawsuit brought by three of the contractors stops the President).

Let’s take a look back and review how this has been working out for us.

From a previous post:

Many of our newly minted Syrian Refugees are questionable at best

The Breibart post has the following headline Unholy Alliance: Christian Charities Profit from $1 Billion Fed Program to Resettle Refugees, 40 Percent Muslim. ($1 Billion then).

The focus was on the big bucks various agencies were making off the import of all these refugees that Ryan, Clinton and Obama are determined to thrust upon us. Obama is proud he is on track to reach his 10,000 Syrians by September. Buried in the post were chilling details of just how many of these refugees have no interest in American values. This is what will get us and our neighbors killed. Here tis:

Of the 100,000 refugees resettled in the United States in 2014 under the Refugee Resettlement program, an estimated 40 percent were Muslims.

For instance, a recent Pew Research Poll indicated that approximately 14 percent of Muslims in 11 major Muslim majority countries sympathize with ISIS.

Another recent poll indicated that 13 percent of Syrian refugees coming to the United States “have a positive” or “positive to some extent” view of ISIS.

Since 1980, an estimated three million international refugees have entered the United States through this program, or approximately 100,000 per year for 35 years. Until 1990, very few Muslims were brought in. Since then, about 40 percent of refugees have been Muslim. In those 25 years, more than one million Muslims have been brought to the United States through this program.

Over the past five years, 680,000 green cards have been issued to Muslim immigrants (not all of whom came to the U.S. under the Refugee Resettlement program).

The national security concerns surrounding the Syrian refugees has not prompted these Christian non-profit VOLAGs to reconsider their refugee resettlement programs. Instead, as Refugee Resettlement Watch reported on Friday, they have just launched a massive public relations campaign to change the minds of the majority of Americans, whom three major polls show oppose letting any more Syrian refugees in the country.

As President Obama, backed by Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, has ramped up accepting refugees fleeing Syria and other war-torn nations.

Presidential candidate Hilary Clinton Says US should admit 65,000 Syrian refugees

 

 

More at Breitbart

Bonus:

U.S. takes on more Syrian refugees than all of the E.U. 8,000 vs 6,000

Despite promises of European Union member states to take in 160,000 refugees, a new report shows that they’ve accepted a fraction, 6,000, while the United States has embraced 8,000 of a planned 10,000 this year.

As President Obama, backed by Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, has ramped up accepting refugees fleeing Syria and other war-torn nations, the EU has put the brakes on hard, apparently bowing to public outrage.

Obama picks up Somali ‘Refugees’ from around the world

Just like Australia’s unwanted illegal aliens, why are South Africa’s illegal aliens our problem?

…Snip

Buffalo News story:

The father is from Somalia. He fled his country and made the risky journey to South Africa. That’s where he met his eventual wife and where his daughters were born, but where the family did not have permanent residency. [What! We thought everyone was welcome in SA?—ed]

So the United Nations sent them to us!

The City of Buffalo has taken in thousands of immigrants and refugees in recent years, and it’s reflected in many of its schools. More than 85 different languages are spoken throughout the district, but that number can change by the day.

Other than that, all is well in the swamp

 

 

Chelsea Clinton raking in the money just like mom Hillary

 

Recall how Hillary got her start in cattle futures? Well it looks like Chelsea is a chip off the old block. She sure gives Capitalism a bad name don’t you think? The best part is it has been reported that Chelsea has her eye on a House seat. What could possibly get in her way? Here tis”

Like mother, like daughter.

Chelsea Clinton has hauled in $9 million in compensation since 2011 as a board member of an internet investment company, according to Barron’s, the financial publication.

She has served on IAC/InterActiveCorp, a media and internet investment company owns a stake in 150 major brands, such as Vimeo, Tinder, Angie’s List and Home Advisor.

She gets an annual $50,000 retainer and $250,000 worth of restricted IAC stock units, Barron’s reports.

“She reported owning $8.95 million worth of IAC stock to the Securities and Exchange Commission at the end of December,” The Hill reported.

Barron’s notes that IAC’s stock has risen 89 percent, 50 percent and 36 percent in 2017, 2018 and 2019, respectively, a far steeper rise than the broader stock market.

Clinton’s public profile has proved a valuable commodity.

She earned an annual salary of $600,000 working as a special correspondent for NBC News in 2013 and part of 2014.

Clinton was named to the board of Expedia Group in March of 2017, a position that typically earned $250,000 in 2015, according to a report at the time by The Guardian.

Both IAC and Expedia are controlled by Barry Diller, the business and television mogul, who is a friend of Hillary Clinton.

Last May, the Daily Mail decided to take a look at the former first daughter’s income, and what they found was fascinating.

Chelsea Clinton, 39, took home just over $600,000 last year for her work as director on the boards of IAC and Expedia, according to records obtained by DailyMail.com.

The IAC board met just six times in 2018, while some members of the Expedia board were only obligated to attend two meetings last year.

Those two companies are both headed up by the family’s good friend Barry Diller, the billionaire businessman and longtime partner of designer Diane von Furstenberg, who is often spotted attending Broadway shows with Chelsea and her parents.

More

All is well in the swamp. Very well indeed.

For the best in conservative news

 

Why the smear campaign against Tuslsi Gabbard by Clinton?

 

 

Anyone else trying to figure out why the Clinton attack machine chose to put Tulsi Gabbard in the crosshair? It has clearly been an orchestrated campaign by her minions. Planned.

I recall a poll out by Drudge right after the debate with the question as to who won the debate. Gabbard won in a landslide. Of course it was a insignificant poll. Drudge still has predominately GOPers as followers. I would think though that no doubt it is changing with his perverse anti-Trump stories. The polls I had seen had her at the most at 2 percent.

Fox has had her several shows. Tucker Carlson especially a number of times. Was it her anti-war especially Syria stance? Gabbard appeared to be going no where until this.

A puzzle to me. What say you?

 

Still trying to figure this one out..

Top clip is dup… but the Clinton hypocrisy response below it has to be seen. Good laugh.

 

Here is a take by Max Blumenthal ..

 

H/T to News Alert

For the best in conservative news push the button below.

Trump rids major shipping port of Chinese control

 

 

Clinton started this nonsense with giving away control of our ports to China and many other things. Trump has been successful in reversing course and ends a 40 year lease giving control to a Chinese company. Chalk another win for our side.  First the background:

In the mid-1990s during Bill Clinton’s campaign for his second presidential term, the Clinton administration worked towards ensuring a Chinese shipping company with communist ties received a good deal on another Long Beach shipping terminal.

The bad China deals didn’t stop with Clinton, either. Under the Obama administration, US-China relations shifted, with Obama positioning the United States as a partner to China, rather than a competitor. As the US became less competitive with China in the name of “international cooperation”, the Obama administration gradually began to allow more and more Chinese conglomerates to buy out American properties and businesses. The Democrat-backed policies that gave China trade advantages are, in part, responsible for the development of the current state of affairs in which China has a disproportionately large influence on American commerce.

Read more

Under a long-term deal sealed by the Obama administration, a Chinese Communist company was set to control the second-busiest container port in the United States. In an unreported Trump administration victory, the Communists are out after a drawn-out national security review forced a unit of China-based COSCO Shipping Holdings Co. (Orient Overseas Container Line—OOCL) to sell the cherished container terminal business, which handles among the largest freight of imports into the U.S.

It all started with a 40-year container terminal lease between the Port of Long Beach in southern California and Hong Kong. The Obama administration proudly signed the agreement in 2012 giving China control of America’s second-largest container port behind the nearby Port of Los Angeles. One of the Trump administration’s first big moves was to get the Communists out of the Port of Long Beach. After a national security review and federal intervention, the Long Beach terminal business, which handles millions of containers annually, is finally being sold to an Australian company called Macquarie Infrastructure Partners. That essentially kills China’s decades-long contract with the Obama administration.

More at Judicial Watch here

How many Americans know about the deceit of the Clinton China connection as well as Obama and Biden deceit? You want to elect Biden? Biden loves China and as I reported previously

Joe Biden: ‘China not bad folks, not competition to us’

Former Vice President Joe Biden downplayed the Chinese threat to the American economy during a campaign event in Iowa City, Iowa on 5/1/19.

Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates did Vice President Joe Biden and his presidential ambitions no favors in offering a summary of the politician’s foreign policy instincts.

 

 

Bonus:

Of course let us not forget Biden in February before announcing his candidacy he did the bend over thing in Europe.

Joe Biden goes to Europe and blasts America – Calls the U.S. an ’embarrassment’

Speaking to European allies, Biden trashed America with an open hostility.

“The America I see values basic human decency, not snatching children from their parents or turning our back on refugees at our border. Americans know that’s not right,” Biden asserted.

“The American people understand plainly that this makes us an embarrassment. The American people know, overwhelmingly, that it is not right. That it is not who we are.”

Speak for yourself Joe

Other than that, all is well in the swamp.

Thanks Whatfinger for the link.

For the best in conservative news and so much better than Drudge click below

 

Strange suicides – Jeffrey Epstein just another Vince Foster?

 

If we want to know how and why Jeffrey Epstein ended up meeting his maker it makes sense to take a brief walk down memory lane. That lane takes us to Vince Foster, the fellow that knew way too much and ended up in Fort Marcy Park.

Just take a look at this one video. All I ask. I will leave you some breadcrumbs below the clip if I have caught your attention. Follow them if you so wish.

If you want primary documents this link gets you off to a good start: Source FBI Coverup

Look at it. Think about it. A couple of earlier posts with a couple of links.

This is the only time in history that

an Independent Counsel was ordered by the court to include

evidence of a cover-up by his own investigators in his own Report

After the lawsuit ended, documents were discovered in the National Archives that were written by Rodriguez, including a 31-page memorandum to his fellow prosecutors in the OIC dated December 9-29, 1994 on the subject of “November 29, 1994 Meeting Concerning Foster Death Matter And Supplemental Investigation Prior to Grand Jury.”  The memorandum explains why the evidence does not support a conclusion of suicide in the park and states in its first paragraph that Kavanaugh was at the meeting.

The full works which much of the above came from:

Paging SCOTUS Kavanaugh – Vince Foster is calling

Supreme candidate Kavanaugh, from the deep state, led murdered Vince Foster coverup

Adds important details to the above video.

For more intrigue check out

Jeffrey Epstein was an informant for Mueller’s FBI – Was that the basis of the sweetheart deal?

Think we will ever know the full truth about Epstein? Let’s keep our eye out for further suicides.

Here It Is… Complete List of Clinton Associates Who Allegedly Died Mysteriously or Committed Suicide Before Testimony, Including Jeffrey Epstein

Sunday Respites will return next week. I am including links to this week’s posts in case you missed them.

Flashback: Bill Maher Racist Attack on Herman Cain –  Only Thing Stopping ‘The Rise of the Apes’
California prefers ‘free range rats’ over humans. Proposed poison ban
Red Flag law turns deadly – Officer kills man
‘The Hunt’ movie ads pulled – ‘Elites’ hunt and gun down ‘deplorables’
Obama: 24 Mass Shootings. Trump: 4 Mass Shootings
What happened at the Democrat Socialist Party convention!

For the best aggregator in conservative news click below.

 

Obama: 24 Mass Shootings. Trump: 4 Mass Shootings

There have been eight mass shootings under Clinton, eight under Bush, and 24 under Obama.Ten Mass Shootings out of 24 since 1966 have happened under the Obama Administration. Four under Donald Trump.

One would never know the statistics with the pounding drum beat blaming  Donald Trump. Did anyone blame Obama for all of the mayhem under his watch? Johnson? Reagan, Bush, Obama?  Let’s step through the fog of mass shootings. Republicans are responsible for the violence?

Bonus information Democrat cities:

200th person Murdered in Baltimore this weekend.

7 killed this weekend in Chicago. 53 shot.

But I digress:

The first mass shooting in the collective American memory was the University of Texas at Austin shooting in August 1966. The shooter, armed with six weapons and ensconced at the top of the University of Texas Tower, killed 17 people, wounding more than 30 others.

Johnson’s first reaction sounds familiar to 21st-century ears. On August 2, 1966, the day after the shooting, White House press secretary Bill Moyers read a statement by the president that said, “What happened is not without a lesson: that we must press urgently for the legislation now pending in Congress to help prevent the wrong person from obtaining firearms.”

The statement added that “[t]he bill would not prevent all such tragedies. But it would help reduce the unrestricted sale of firearms to those who cannot be trusted in their use and possession.”

In July 1984, during Ronald Reagan’s first term as president, a gunman killed 21 people at a McDonald’s in San Ysidro, California.

Unlike Johnson, Reagan did not say anything publicly about the shooting. In fact, a search by the New York Times revealed that “[t]he Times did not report any comment from the administration of President Ronald Reagan. His public papers show no statements on the subject in the days following.”

When the Tylenol poisonings took place in Chicago in 1982, Reagan had also stood back, letting Johnson & Johnson take the lead in the response. Reagan appears to have been of the view that local tragedies should be handled at the local level, deferring to private-sector entities, when appropriate, to handle problems.

Reagan also appears to have remained quiet after the other two mass shootings during his presidency, one in Oklahoma and one in California. The 1986 Edmond, Oklahoma, shooting appears to be the first one in which a disgruntled post-office employee was the killer, the start of an unfortunate trend of about half a dozen of these shootings that would inspire the phrase “going postal.”

Similarly, Reagan’s successor and former vice president, George H. W. Bush, also generally avoided making statements about the four mass shootings during his administration.

The tradition of presidential silence in the wake of most mass shootings came to an end in the 1990s during the Clinton administration.

President Clinton did not weigh in on every one of the eight mass shootings during his tenure, but these events were now frequent enough to warrant presidential attention.

Eight under Clinton, eight under Bush, and 24 under Obama (see chart below).

Deadliest American Mass Shootings

Keep reading

Since Johnson, at the most the perception was that the President’s job was to console. Most remained uninvolved. Only one thing that has never happened before, they never were blamed for mass shootings. Why should Trump be blamed for it now?

A big tip of the hat goes to Drake’s Place for the lead.

Defending Faith And Freedom: Mass Shootings Under the Obama Administration:

Ten (10) Mass Shootings out of 24 since 1966 have happened under the Obama Administration

National AffairsPresidents and mass shootings.

Bonus: A previous post: Gun violence dropped significantly, gun ownership rises

Thanks to  Doug Ross  for the link and welcome readers as well as WhatfingerNews for the links. Thanks as well for the link at Maggies Farm

For the best in conservative news click below:

Clinton’s interference in Russian election – Putin’s payback

 

In 1996 the US government interfered in Russia’s election so blatantly that it was boasted on the cover of Time magazine. It never was about Trump, but rather the Clinton’s nefarious activities.

What many Russians, but few Americans, know is that 20 years before Russia tried to swing an American presidential election, America tried to swing a presidential election in Russia. The year was 1996. Boris Yeltsin was seeking a second term, and Bill Clinton desperately wanted to help. “I want this guy to win so bad,” he told Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott, “it hurts.”

So the Clinton administration sprang into action. It lobbied the International Monetary Fund to give Russia a $10 billion loan, some of which Yeltsin distributed to woo voters. Upon arriving in a given city, he often announced, “My pockets are full.”

Three American political consultants—including Richard Dresner, a veteran of Clinton’s campaigns in Arkansas—went to work on Yeltsin’s reelection bid. Every week, Dresner sent the White House the Yeltsin campaign’s internal polling. And before traveling to meet Yeltsin in April, Clinton asked Dresner what he should say in Moscow to boost his buddy’s campaign.

It worked. In a stunning turnaround, Yeltsin—who had begun the campaign in last place—defeated his communist rival in the election’s final round by 13 percentage points.

Read more

 

 

But the Clinton’s weren’t done with Putin. Not by a long shot, not Hillary:

In December 2011, Vladimir Putin came closer than he’s ever been to losing his hold on power. His decision that year to run for a third term as Russia’s President had inspired a massive protest movement against him. Demonstrations calling for him to resign were attracting hundreds of thousands of people across the country. Some of his closest allies had defected to the opposition, causing a split in the Kremlin elites, and Russian state media had begun to warn of a revolution in the making.

At a crisis meeting with his advisers on Dec. 8 of that year, the Russian leader chose to lay the blame on one meddling foreign diplomat: U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

“She set the tone for certain actors inside the country; she gave the signal,” Putin said of Clinton at the time, accusing her of ordering the opposition movement into action like some kind of revolutionary sleeper cell. “They heard this signal and, with the support of the U.S. State Department, started actively doing their work.”

Five years later, the U.S. presidential elections may have given Putin his chance for getting even. According to Clinton’s campaign staff and a number of cyber-security experts, Russian hackers in the service of the Kremlin were behind last week’s leak of emails from the Democratic National Committee. (Written July 16, 2016)

Read more

So now we come full circle with this who dun it. It wasn’t Trump that was of Russian interest, but Hillary. Hillary was in the Russian Bull’s Eye…Trump happened to get elected. Oh, there is a lot more to this tale…stay tuned.

Whatfingernews, so much better than Drudge. Click below.

Jeffrey Epstein was an informant for Mueller’s FBI – Was that the basis of the sweetheart deal?

Before we demand that Labor Secretary Alex Acosta to be fired and thrown under the bus for giving Epstein a “sweetheart deal,” it might be worth taking the time to review the history of what the FBI was up to with Epstein. Mueller was head of the FBI at the time.

Alexander Acosta

We may never know what for sure the FBI wanted out of him, but we do know he was an informant. Interesting that I read that Ken Starr was involved in the plea deal. Let’s hear from Acosta what the goods were and the deal.

UPDATE: Acosta Resigns.

Ward writes:

He’d cut the non-prosecution deal with one of Epstein’s attorneys because he had “been told” to back off, that Epstein was above his pay grade. “I was told Epstein ‘belonged to intelligence’ and to leave it alone,” he told his interviewers in the Trump transition, who evidently thought that was a sufficient answer and went ahead and hired Acosta. (The Labor Department had no comment when asked about this.)

Wait, what?

Read more

Back to the post:

First, going to my old stash:

Was Lolita Express Jeffrey Epstein an informant for Mueller’s FBI?

From the 5/24/18 FBI Vault release: “Epstein has also provided information to the FBI as agree upon.” Is that why he escaped serious charges for molesting over twenty girls?

Ed: At the time of the post, all pages of the FBI files were in black ink and mostly blank. It now lists 28 parts, but at the time of my posting there were only 8 listed below.

Perhaps Attorney General Barr could release these? Oh right, Barr has recused himself, pulling another Jeff Sessions. This of course leaves the SD of New York on its own. Surprise! Comey’s daughter will be one of the Prosecutors -Anyone want to bet her speciality will be to dig up any dirt on Trump?

Attorney General William Barr may have oversight over U.S. attorneys in New York, but he has announced that he is recusing himself from the Jeffrey Epstein case. (Believe his reason/excuse at our own peril.)

UPDATE: Earlier reports suggested that he would be recusing himself. But he’s only recusing himself from review of the 2008 plea because that involved Kirkland Ellis lawyers. (Which means we will never know how the FBI was involved, crimes and Acosta will be left out to dry. Better than nothing I guess.)

Via NY Post

After consulting Justice Department ethics officials, Attorney General William Barr will not recuse himself from overseeing the sex-trafficking case of billionaire Jeffrey Epstein in New York, according to reports.

This is what is called a FBI “heavily redacted” file on Epstein.

From the FBI file: Click on PDF of file. Page down a number of pages to get past the redacted pages.

File Jeffrey Epstein Part 01 of 08
File Jeffrey Epstein Part 02 of 08
File Jeffrey Epstein Part 03 of 08
File Jeffrey Epstein Part 04 of 08
File Jeffrey Epstein Part 05 of 08
File Jeffrey Epstein Part 06 of 08
File Jeffrey Epstein Part 07 of 08
File Jeffrey Epstein Part 08 of 08

Here is one theory of why he got the sweetheart deal:

Jeffrey Epstein Became a Government Informant as Part of Sweetheart Plea Deal so reads the Daily Beast back in November of 2018

In exchange for a sweetheart plea deal that buried dozens of allegations by underage girls of sexual abuse at his Palm Beach, Florida, mansion, disgraced hedge-fund manager Jeffrey Epstein provided federal investigators with “unspecified information,” according to records cited in a Tuesday (2018) report from the Miami Herald

…”But as part of that deal, according to records cited by the Herald, Epstein provided “valuable consideration”—in other words, critical information—to federal investigators. There’s no direct evidence of what that information was, but records show that at around the same time, Epstein was considered to be a crucial witness during the trial of two Bear Stearns executives who faced allegations of corporate securities fraud during the 2008 financial crisis.”

As part of my 2018 post I included:

Lolita Express: Clinton’s Secret Service agent threatens damaging info on former president: Former Agent Dan Bongino is a Fox regular.

So Dan…time to spill.

Other than that, all is well in the swamp.

Do check out a great news aggregator. Click on the link below.

The Clinton’s interference in Russian Elections – Payback can be hell

 

In 1996 the US government interfered in Russia’s election so blatantly that it was boasted on the cover of Time magazine. .  Oh what a tangled web this is. The outrage that Russia interfered in our election as reported by the Mueller report. The gnashing of teeth.

Let’s take a look at the dots. While this whole mess was laid at the feet of Trump I suggest it has been the Clinton’s – Bill and Hillary and their continued meddling in Russian politics that was the latest instigation to drive Putin to get even with them to the extent he did.

Bill Clinton meddled in Russian Election.

What many Russians, but few Americans, know is that 20 years before Russia tried to swing an American presidential election, America tried to swing a presidential election in Russia. The year was 1996. Boris Yeltsin was seeking a second term, and Bill Clinton desperately wanted to help. “I want this guy to win so bad,” he told Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott, “it hurts.”

So the Clinton administration sprang into action. It lobbied the International Monetary Fund to give Russia a $10 billion loan, some of which Yeltsin distributed to woo voters. Upon arriving in a given city, he often announced, “My pockets are full.”

Three American political consultants—including Richard Dresner, a veteran of Clinton’s campaigns in Arkansas—went to work on Yeltsin’s reelection bid. Every week, Dresner sent the White House the Yeltsin campaign’s internal polling. And before traveling to meet Yeltsin in April, Clinton asked Dresner what he should say in Moscow to boost his buddy’s campaign.

It worked. In a stunning turnaround, Yeltsin—who had begun the campaign in last place—defeated his communist rival in the election’s final round by 13 percentage points.

Read more

President Bill Clinton meddled in Russian affairs in the 1990s and helped Boris Yeltsin get elected to a second term, political analyst Dick Morris told Newsmax TV.

“I think that Putin resented that, hated it, thought that it was an inappropriate intervention by Bill Clinton and I think he’s determined to take his revenge out on Hillary Clinton.” Quote from Dick Morris.

 

 

 

But the Clinton’s weren’t done with Putin. Not by a long shot, not Hillary:

In December 2011, Vladimir Putin came closer than he’s ever been to losing his hold on power. His decision that year to run for a third term as Russia’s President had inspired a massive protest movement against him. Demonstrations calling for him to resign were attracting hundreds of thousands of people across the country. Some of his closest allies had defected to the opposition, causing a split in the Kremlin elites, and Russian state media had begun to warn of a revolution in the making.

At a crisis meeting with his advisers on Dec. 8 of that year, the Russian leader chose to lay the blame on one meddling foreign diplomat: U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

“She set the tone for certain actors inside the country; she gave the signal,” Putin said of Clinton at the time, accusing her of ordering the opposition movement into action like some kind of revolutionary sleeper cell. “They heard this signal and, with the support of the U.S. State Department, started actively doing their work.”

Five years later, the U.S. presidential elections may have given Putin his chance for getting even. According to Clinton’s campaign staff and a number of cyber-security experts, Russian hackers in the service of the Kremlin were behind last week’s leak of emails from the Democratic National Committee. (Written July 16, 2016)

Read more

So now we come full circle with this who dun it.  Hillary was in the Russian Bull’s Eye…Trump happened to get elected. Oh, there is a lot more to this tale…stay tuned. By the way,

Want more Russia Russia Russia?

If the progressives want to know what actual treason looks like, they should have consulted liberal lion Ted Kennedy, who not only allegedly sent secret messages to the Soviets in the midst of the cold war, he also begged them to intervene in a U.S. presidential election in order to unseat President Ronald Reagan.

 

 

That’s no exaggeration. According to Soviet documents unearthed in the early 1990’s, Kennedy literally asked the Soviets, avowed enemies of the U.S., to intervene on behalf of the Democratic party in the 1984 elections. Kennedy’s communist communique was so secret that it was not discovered until 1991, eight years after Kennedy had initiated his Soviet gambit:

Picking his way through the Soviet archives that Boris Yeltsin had just thrown open, in 1991 Tim Sebastian, a reporter for the London Times, came across an arresting memorandum. Composed in 1983 by Victor Chebrikov, the top man at the KGB, the memorandum was addressed to Yuri Andropov, the top man in the entire USSR.

The subject: Sen. Edward Kennedy.

Kennedy would make certain the networks gave Andropov air time–and that they rigged the arrangement to look like honest journalism.

According to Soviet documents unearthed in the early 1990’s, Kennedy literally asked the Soviets, avowed enemies of the U.S., to intervene on behalf of the Democratic party in the 1984 elections. Kennedy’s communist communique was so secret that it was not discovered until 1991, eight years after Kennedy had initiated his Soviet gambit:

 

“On 9-10 May of this year,” the May 14 memorandum explained, “Sen. Edward Kennedy’s close friend and trusted confidant [John] Tunney was in Moscow.” (Tunney was Kennedy’s law school roommate and a former Democratic senator from California.) “The senator charged Tunney to convey the following message, through confidential contacts, to the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, Y. Andropov.”

Kennedy’s message was simple. He proposed an unabashed quid pro quo. Kennedy would lend Andropov a hand in dealing with President Reagan. In return, the Soviet leader would lend the Democratic Party a hand in challenging Reagan in the 1984 presidential election. “The only real potential threats to Reagan are problems of war and peace and Soviet-American relations,” the memorandum stated. “These issues, according to the senator, will without a doubt become the most important of the election campaign.”

Kennedy made Andropov a couple of specific offers.

First he offered to visit Moscow. “The main purpose of the meeting, according to the senator, would be to arm Soviet officials with explanations regarding problems of nuclear disarmament so they may be better prepared and more convincing during appearances in the USA.” Kennedy would help the Soviets deal with Reagan by telling them how to brush up their propaganda.

Then he offered to make it possible for Andropov to sit down for a few interviews on American television. “A direct appeal … to the American people will, without a doubt, attract a great deal of attention and interest in the country. … If the proposal is recognized as worthy, then Kennedy and his friends will bring about suitable steps to have representatives of the largest television companies in the USA contact Y.V. Andropov for an invitation to Moscow for the interviews. … The senator underlined the importance that this initiative should be seen as coming from the American side.”

 

More The Federalist

%d bloggers like this: