Bush/Clinton Corruption- Way Worse Than You Might Think

Spread the love

by Tim Shorrock
July 23, 2008


from Salon Website

Salon has uncovered new evidence of post-9/11 spying on Americans. Obtained documents point to a potential investigation of the White House that could rival Watergate.

Editor’s note: This article is part of a Salon investigative series on spying inside the United States by the Bush administration. Research support for the article was provided by the Nation Institute Investigative Fund.

The last several years have brought a parade of dark revelations about the George W. Bush administration, from the manipulation of intelligence to torture to extrajudicial spying inside the United States.

But there are growing indications that these known abuses of power may only be the tip of the iceberg. Now, in the twilight of the Bush presidency, a movement is stirring in Washington for a sweeping new inquiry into White House malfeasance that would be modeled after the famous Church Committee congressional investigation of the 1970s.

While reporting on domestic surveillance under Bush, Salon obtained a detailed memo proposing such an inquiry, and spoke with several sources involved in recent discussions around it on Capitol Hill. The memo was written by a former senior member of the original Church Committee; the discussions have included aides to top House Democrats, including Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Judiciary Committee chairman John Conyers, and until now have not been disclosed publicly.

Salon has also uncovered further indications of far-reaching and possibly illegal surveillance conducted by the National Security Agency inside the United States under President Bush. That includes the alleged use of a top-secret, sophisticated database system for monitoring people considered to be a threat to national security.

It also includes signs of the NSA‘s working closely with other U.S. government agencies to track financial transactions domestically as well as globally.

Salon composite / Reuters images

The proposal for a Church Committee-style investigation emerged from talks between civil liberties advocates and aides to Democratic leaders in Congress, according to sources involved. (Pelosi’s and Conyers’ offices both declined to comment.)

Looking forward to 2009, when both Congress and the White House may well be controlled by Democrats, the idea is to have Congress appoint an investigative body to discover the full extent of what the Bush White House did in the war on terror to undermine the Constitution and U.S. and international laws.

The goal would be to implement government reforms aimed at preventing future abuses – and perhaps to bring accountability for wrongdoing by Bush officials.

“If we know this much about torture, rendition, secret prisons and warrantless wiretapping despite the administration’s attempts to stonewall, then imagine what we don’t know,” says a senior Democratic congressional aide who is familiar with the proposal and has been involved in several high-profile congressional investigations.

“You have to go back to the McCarthy era to find this level of abuse,” says Barry Steinhardt, the director of the Program on Technology and Liberty for the American Civil Liberties Union.

“Because the Bush administration has been so opaque, we don’t know [the extent of] what laws have been violated.”

The parameters for an investigation were outlined in a seven-page memo, written after the former member of the Church Committee met for discussions with the ACLU, the Center for Democracy and Technology, Common Cause and other watchdog groups.

Key issues to investigate, those involved say, would include the National Security Agency’s domestic surveillance activities; the Central Intelligence Agency’s use of extraordinary rendition and torture against terrorist suspects; and the U.S. government’s extensive use of military assets – including satellites, Pentagon intelligence agencies and U2 surveillance planes – for a vast spying apparatus that could be used against the American people.

Specifically, the ACLU and other groups want to know how the NSA’s use of databases and data mining may have meshed with other domestic intelligence activities, such as the U.S. government’s extensive use of no-fly lists and the Treasury Department’s list of “specially designated global terrorists” to identify potential suspects.

As of mid-July, says Steinhardt, the no-fly list includes more than 1 million records corresponding to more than 400,000 names. If those people really represent terrorist threats, he says, “our cities would be ablaze.”

A deeper investigation into intelligence abuses should focus on how these lists feed on each other, Steinhardt says, as well as the government’s “inexorable trend towards treating everyone as a suspect.”

“It’s not just the ‘Terrorist Surveillance Program,'” agrees Gregory T. Nojeim from the Center for Democracy and Technology, referring to the Bush administration’s misleading name for the NSA’s warrantless wiretapping program. “We need a broad investigation on the way all the moving parts fit together. It seems like we’re always looking at little chunks and missing the big picture.”

A prime area of inquiry for a sweeping new investigation would be the Bush administration’s alleged use of a top-secret database to guide its domestic surveillance. Dating back to the 1980s and known to government insiders as “Main Core” (see below insert), the database reportedly collects and stores – without warrants or court orders – the names and detailed data of Americans considered to be threats to national security.


According to several former U.S. government officials with extensive knowledge of intelligence operations, Main Core in its current incarnation apparently contains a vast amount of personal data on Americans, including NSA intercepts of bank and credit card transactions and the results of surveillance efforts by the FBI, the CIA and other agencies.

One former intelligence official described Main Core as “an emergency internal security database system” designed for use by the military in the event of a national catastrophe, a suspension of the Constitution or the imposition of martial law.

Its name, he says, is derived from the fact that it contains,

“copies of the ‘main core’ or essence of each item of intelligence information on Americans produced by the FBI and the other agencies of the U.S. intelligence community.”

Some of the former U.S. officials interviewed, although they have no direct knowledge of the issue, said they believe that Main Core may have been used by the NSA to determine who to spy on in the immediate aftermath of 9/11. Moreover, the NSA’s use of the database, they say, may have triggered the now-famous March 2004 confrontation between the White House and the Justice Department that nearly led Attorney General John Ashcroft, FBI director William Mueller and other top Justice officials to resign en masse.

The Justice Department officials who objected to the legal basis for the surveillance program – former Deputy Attorney General James B. Comey and Jack Goldsmith, the former head of the Office of Legal Counsel – testified before Congress last year about the 2004 showdown with the White House.

Although they refused to discuss the highly classified details behind their concerns, the New York Times later reported that they were objecting to a program that,

“involved computer searches through massive electronic databases” containing “records of the phone calls and e-mail messages of millions of Americans.”

According to William Hamilton, a former NSA intelligence officer who left the agency in the 1970s, that description sounded a lot like Main Core, which he first heard about in detail in 1992.

Hamilton, who is the president of Inslaw Inc., a computer services firm with many clients in government and the private sector, says there are strong indications that the Bush administration’s domestic surveillance operations use Main Core.

Hamilton’s company Inslaw is widely respected in the law enforcement community for creating a program called the Prosecutors’ Management Information System, or PROMIS. It keeps track of criminal investigations through a powerful search engine that can quickly access all stored data components of a case, from the name of the initial investigators to the telephone numbers of key suspects.

PROMIS, also widely used in the insurance industry, can also sort through other databases fast, with results showing up almost instantly.

“It operates just like Google,” Hamilton told me in an interview in his Washington office in May.

Since the late 1980s, Inslaw has been involved in a legal dispute over its claim that Justice Department officials in the Reagan administration appropriated the PROMIS software. Hamilton claims that Reagan officials gave PROMIS to the NSA and the CIA, which then adapted the software – and its outstanding ability to search other databases – to manage intelligence operations and track financial transactions.

Over the years, Hamilton has employed prominent lawyers to pursue the case, including Elliot Richardson, the former attorney general and secretary of defense who died in 1999, and C. Boyden Gray, the former White House counsel to President George H.W. Bush. The dispute has never been settled. But based on the long-running case, Hamilton says he believes U.S. intelligence uses PROMIS as the primary software for searching the Main Core database.

Hamilton was first told about the connection between PROMIS and Main Core in the spring of 1992 by a U.S. intelligence official, and again in 1995 by a former NSA official. In July 2001, Hamilton says, he discussed his case with retired Adm. Dan Murphy, a former military advisor to Elliot Richardson who later served under President George H.W. Bush as deputy director of the CIA. Murphy, who died shortly after his meeting with Hamilton, did not specifically mention Main Core.

But he informed Hamilton that the NSA’s use of PROMIS involved something,

“so seriously wrong that money alone cannot cure the problem,” Hamilton told me. He added, “I believe in retrospect that Murphy was alluding to Main Core.”

Hamilton also provided copies of letters that Richardson and Gray sent to U.S. intelligence officials and the Justice Department on Inslaw’s behalf alleging that the NSA and the CIA had appropriated PROMIS for intelligence use.

Hamilton says James B. Comey’s congressional testimony in May 2007, in which he described a hospitalized John Ashcroft’s dramatic standoff with senior Bush officials Alberto Gonzales and Andrew Card, was another illuminating moment.

“It was then that we [at Inslaw] started hearing again about the Main Core derivative of PROMIS for spying on Americans,” he told me.

Through a former senior Justice Department official with more than 25 years of government experience, Salon has learned of a high-level former national security official who reportedly has firsthand knowledge of the U.S. government’s use of Main Core.

The official worked as a senior intelligence analyst for a large domestic law enforcement agency inside the Bush White House. He would not agree to an interview. But according to the former Justice Department official, the former intelligence analyst told her that while stationed at the White House after the 9/11 attacks, one day he accidentally walked into a restricted room and came across a computer system that was logged on to what he recognized to be the Main Core database.

When she mentioned the specific name of the top-secret system during their conversation, she recalled,

“he turned white as a sheet.”

An article in Radar magazine in May, citing three unnamed former government officials, reported that,

“8 million Americans are now listed in Main Core as potentially suspect” and, in the event of a national emergency, “could be subject to everything from heightened surveillance and tracking to direct questioning and even detention.”

The alleged use of Main Core by the Bush administration for surveillance, if confirmed to be true, would indicate a much deeper level of secretive government intrusion into Americans’ lives than has been previously known. With respect to civil liberties, says the ACLU’s Steinhardt, it would be “pretty frightening stuff.”

The Inslaw case also points to what may be an extensive role played by the NSA in financial spying inside the United States. According to reports over the years in the U.S. and foreign press, Inslaw’s PROMIS software was embedded surreptitiously in systems sold to foreign and global banks as a way to give the NSA secret “backdoor” access to the electronic flow of money around the world.

In May, I interviewed Norman Bailey, a private financial consultant with years of government intelligence experience dating from the George W. Bush administration back to the Reagan administration. According to Bailey – who from 2006 to 2007 headed a special unit within the Office of the Director of National Intelligence focused on financial intelligence on Cuba and Venezuela – the NSA has been using its vast powers with signals intelligence to track financial transactions around the world since the early 1980s.

From 1982 to 1984, Bailey ran a top-secret program for President Reagan’s National Security Council, called “Follow the Money,” that used NSA signals intelligence to track loans from Western banks to the Soviet Union and its allies. PROMIS, he told me, was “the principal software element” used by the NSA and the Treasury Department then in their electronic surveillance programs tracking financial flows to the Soviet bloc, organized crime and terrorist groups.

His admission is the first public acknowledgement by a former U.S. intelligence official that the NSA used the PROMIS software.

According to Bailey, the Reagan program marked a significant shift in resources from human spying to electronic surveillance, as a way to track money flows to suspected criminals and American enemies.

“That was the beginning of the whole process,” he said.

After 9/11, this capability was instantly seen within the U.S. government as a critical tool in the war on terror – and apparently was deployed by the Bush administration inside the United States, in cases involving alleged terrorist supporters. One such case was that of the Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation in Oregon, which was accused of having terrorist ties after the NSA, at the request of the Treasury Department, eavesdropped on the phone calls of Al-Haramain officials and their American lawyers.

The charges against Al-Haramain were based primarily on secret evidence that the Bush administration refused to disclose in legal proceedings; Al-Haramain’s lawyers argued in a lawsuit that was a violation of the defendants’ due process rights.

According to Bailey, the NSA also likely would have used its technological capabilities to track the charity’s financial activity.

“The vast majority of financial movements of any significance take place electronically, so intercepts have become an extremely important element” in intelligence, he explained.

“If the government suspects that a particular Muslim charitable organization is engaged in collecting funds to funnel to terrorists, the NSA would be asked to follow the money going into and out of the bank accounts of that charity.” (The now-defunct Al-Haramain Foundation, although affiliated with a Saudi Arabian-based global charity, was founded and based in Ashland, Ore.)

The use of a powerful database and extensive watch lists, Bailey said, would make the NSA’s job much easier.

“The biggest problems with intercepts, quite frankly, is that the volumes of data, daily or even by the hour, are gigantic,” he said. “Unless you have a very precise idea of what it is you’re looking for, the NSA people or their counterparts [overseas] will just throw up their hands and say ‘forget it.'”

Regarding domestic surveillance, Bailey said there’s a,

“whole gray area where the initiation of the transaction was in the United States and the final destination was outside, or vice versa. That’s something for the lawyers to figure out.”

Bailey’s information on the evolution of the Reagan intelligence program appears to corroborate and clarify an article published in March in the Wall Street Journal, which reported that the NSA was conducting domestic surveillance using,

“an ad-hoc collection of so-called ‘black programs’ whose existence is undisclosed.”

Some of these programs began “years before the 9/11 attacks but have since been given greater reach.” Among them, the article said, are a joint NSA-Treasury database on financial transactions that dates back “about 15 years” to 1993.

That’s not quite right, Bailey clarified:

“It started in the early ’80s, at least 10 years before.”

Main Core (see below video) may be the contemporary incarnation of a government watch list system that was part of a highly classified “Continuity of Government” program created by the Reagan administration to keep the U.S. government functioning in the event of a nuclear attack.

Main Core – Big Brother
by gfde08
July 29, 2008

from YouTube Website


Under a 1982 presidential directive, the outbreak of war could trigger the proclamation of martial law nationwide, giving the military the authority to use its domestic database to round up citizens and residents considered to be threats to national security.

The emergency measures for domestic security were to be carried out by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the Army.

In the late 1980s, reports about a domestic database linked to FEMA and the Continuity of Government program began to appear in the press. For example, in 1986 the Austin American-Statesman uncovered evidence of a large database that authorities were proposing to use to intern Latino dissidents and refugees during a national emergency that might follow a potential U.S. invasion of Nicaragua.

During the Iran-Contra congressional hearings in 1987, questions to Reagan aide Oliver North about the database were ruled out of order by the committee chairman, Democratic Sen. Daniel Inouye, because of the “highly sensitive and classified” nature of FEMA’s domestic security operations.

In September 2001, according to “The Rise of the Vulcans,” a 2004 book on Bush’s war cabinet by James Mann, a contemporary version of the Continuity of Government program was put into play in the hours after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, when Vice President Cheney and senior members of Congress were dispersed to “undisclosed locations” to maintain government functions.

It was during this emergency period, Hamilton and other former government officials believe, that President Bush may have authorized the NSA to begin actively using the Main Core database for domestic surveillance.

One indicator they cite is a statement by Bush in December 2005, after the New York Times had revealed the NSA’s warrantless wiretapping, in which he made a rare reference to the emergency program:

“The Justice Department’s legal reviews of the NSA activity, Bush said, were based on ‘fresh intelligence assessment of terrorist threats to the continuity of our government.'”

It is noteworthy that two key players on Bush’s national security team, Cheney and his chief of staff, David Addington, have been involved in the Continuity of Government program since its inception.

Along with Donald Rumsfeld, Bush’s first secretary of defense, both men took part in simulated drills for the program during the 1980s and early 1990s. Addington’s role was disclosed in “The Dark Side,” a book published this month about the Bush administration’s war on terror by New Yorker reporter Jane Mayer.

In the book, Mayer calls Addington “the father of the [NSA] eavesdropping program,” and reports that he was the key figure involved in the 2004 dispute between the White House and the Justice Department over the legality of the program. That would seem to make him a prime witness for a broader investigation.

Getting a full picture on Bush’s intelligence programs, however, will almost certainly require any sweeping new investigation to have a scope that would inoculate it against charges of partisanship.

During one recent discussion on Capitol Hill, according to a participant, a senior aide to Speaker Pelosi was asked for Pelosi’s views on a proposal to expand the investigation to past administrations, including those of Bill Clinton and George H.W. Bush.

“The question was, how far back in time would we have to go to make this credible?” the participant in the meeting recalled.

That question was answered in the seven-page memo.

“The rise of the ‘surveillance state’ driven by new technologies and the demands of counter-terrorism did not begin with this Administration,” the author wrote.

Even though he acknowledged in interviews with Salon that the scope of abuse under George W. Bush would likely be an order of magnitude greater than under preceding presidents, he recommended in the memo that any new investigation follow the precedent of the Church Committee and investigate the origins of Bush’s programs, going as far back as the Reagan administration.

The proposal has emerged in a political climate reminiscent of the Watergate era. The Church Committee was formed in 1975 in the wake of media reports about illegal spying against American antiwar activists and civil rights leaders, CIA assassination squads, and other dubious activities under Nixon and his predecessors. Chaired by Sen. Frank Church of Idaho, the committee interviewed more than 800 officials and held 21 public hearings.

As a result of its work, Congress in 1978 passed the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which required warrants and court supervision for domestic wiretaps, and created intelligence oversight committees in the House and Senate.

So far, no lawmaker has openly endorsed a proposal for a new Church Committee-style investigation. A spokesman for Pelosi declined to say whether Pelosi herself would be in favor of a broader probe into U.S. intelligence. On the Senate side, the most logical supporters for a broader probe would be Democratic senators such as Patrick Leahy of Vermont and Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, who led the failed fight against the recent Bush-backed changes to FISA. (Both Feingold and Leahy’s offices declined to comment on a broader intelligence inquiry.)

The Democrats’ reticence on such action ultimately may be rooted in congressional complicity with the Bush administration’s intelligence policies. Many of the war on terror programs, including the NSA’s warrantless surveillance and the use of “enhanced interrogation techniques,” were cleared with key congressional Democrats, including Pelosi, Senate Intelligence Committee chairman Rockefeller, and former House Intelligence chairwoman Jane Harman, among others.

The discussions about a broad investigation were jump-started among civil liberties advocates this spring, when it became clear that the Democrats didn’t have the votes to oppose the Bush-backed bill updating FISA.

The new legislation could prevent the full story of the NSA surveillance programs from ever being uncovered; it included retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies that may have violated FISA by collaborating with the NSA on warrantless wiretapping.

Opponents of Bush’s policies were further angered when Democratic leaders stripped from their competing FISA bill a provision that would have established a national commission to investigate post-9/11 surveillance programs.

The next president obviously would play a key role in any decision to investigate intelligence abuses.

Sen. John McCain, the Republican candidate, is running as a champion of Bush’s national security policies and would be unlikely to embrace an investigation that would, foremost, embarrass his own party. (Randy Scheunemann, McCain’s spokesman on national security, declined to comment.)

Some see a brighter prospect in Barack Obama, should he be elected.

The plus with Obama, says the former Church Committee staffer, is that as a proponent of open government, he could order the executive branch to be more cooperative with Congress, rolling back the obsessive secrecy and stonewalling of the Bush White House.

That could open the door to greater congressional scrutiny and oversight of the intelligence community, since the legislative branch lacked any real teeth under Bush. (Obama’s spokesman on national security, Ben Rhodes, did not reply to telephone calls and e-mails seeking comment.)

But even that may be a lofty hope.

“It may be the last thing a new president would want to do,” said a participant in the ongoing discussions. Unfortunately, he said, “some people see the Church Committee ideas as a substitute for prosecutions that should already have happened.”

by Stephen Lendman
June 21, 2016
GlobalResearch Website

Since Soviet Russia’s 1991 dissolution, successive US administrations governed increasingly lawlessly and recklessly,

…at war with multiple invented enemies throughout his tenure, from inaugural day to the present.

A neocon Hillary Clinton presidency succeeding him risks the unthinkable – possible WW III


  • rage for dominance
  • its wanting planet earth colonized
  • increasing belligerence toward Russia and China,

…points to eventual confrontation.

Unknown is to what extent, but when conflicts begin, they take on a life of their own. Starting them is easy, resolving them another matter entirely.

America has turned planet earth into a battleground. All US post-9/11 wars continue, resolution nowhere in sight. Peace and stability defeat America’s imperial agenda. Conflicts serve it.

Clinton’s public record as first lady, US senator and secretary of state shows,

  • her rage for war
  • her contempt for rule of law principles and democratic values

She’s for unlimited military spending, phony war on terror continued, likely escalated, use of banned weapons, and super-ones in conflicts she calls peacekeeping deterrents.

Before primary/caucus season began, she was chosen Democrat party nominee, Sanders going along for the ride, a political opportunist, a populist in name only leading a nonexistent political revolution.

Its illusion persists, to fade straightaway once a new administration takes power, Clinton its likely head, plotting pure evil before assuming office, likely aided by false flag deception.

Trump is in trouble, losing momentum, outrageous racist and other extremist comments making more enemies than friends. In late May, he fired his national political director, Rick Wiley, suggesting campaign disarray.

Now top aide Corey Lewandowski is gone. Dismissing him this late in the game indicates trouble. It gets worse.

On last Sunday’s Meet the Press, House Speaker Paul Ryan (R. WI) said Republicans are free to withhold support for Trump if they wish, stating:

“The last thing I would do is tell anybody to do something that’s contrary to their conscience (sic). This is a very strange situation. This is a very unique nominee.”

Trump responded, claiming he can win with or without party backing.

Its members,

“need to listen to the American people,” he said. “Let me run for president. I think I’m going to do very well.”

In May, his campaign raised only $3.1 million, compared to $28 million for Clinton.

He entered June with $1.3 million on hand, way short of Clinton’s $42 million.

His unorthodox style won millions of adherents during primary season, campaigning one-on-one against Clinton another matter entirely – backed by Wall Street, war-profiteers, most media scoundrels, and other powerful entrenched interests.

He’s at a distinct disadvantage, Clinton the establishment favorite, he an outsider, tolerated at best by GOP party bosses after going all-out to stop him.

America’s political system is notoriously corrupt, candidates for high office pre-selected, outcomes predetermined.

  • Will things be rigged to defeat Trump in November, Clinton chosen with electronic ease, voter role purges and other devious tactics assuring her selection?
  • Is the process over before it begins?

WW II followed Hitler becoming German chancellor, supported by Wall Street bankers and London.

  • Is world peace up for grabs under Clinton?
  • Is WW III preordained under her leadership?
  • Will humanity’s survival become a coin toss?

The possibility of her succeeding Obama should mobilize mass opposition to stop her


Coronation of Malevolence

–   Hillary Clinton as President   –
by Phil Butler
June 24, 2016

from Journal-Neo Website

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton is threatening.

Some critics worry a Clinton presidency will decimate the nation’s reputation and future. Still others suggest, that another Clinton in office will seal America’s fate.

Here’s a look at the potential catastrophe of Hillary in the White House.

“Take ‘

two Bushs‘ and ‘

two Clintons‘, and call the undertaker in the morning.”

The world cannot stomach any more of the New World Order cabal.

Another Clinton administration may well end America’s reign as a trusted nation among nations. The Middle East is a mess because of these people’s ties to big oil and big money. This is irrefutable.

The WikiLeaks compilation of Clinton emails proves complicity, if not downright collusion. Economies teeter on collapse, Europe is in tatters, and millions are more miserable for Clinton’s efforts. This too, is irrefutable.

While Donald Trump is a severe unknown commodity, Clinton is a damnable tyrant in the making.

If moderate America does not wake up before November, hell on Earth may arrive ahead of schedule.

Here’s proof.

Instigator of Instability

Hillary Clinton was instrumental in bringing about “Arab Spring”, and the chaos that followed.

30,000 emails from her now notorious private emails was compiled into searchable form by WikiLeaks. Since independent journalists began scouring them, more pieces of Clinton’s seedy détente appear daily. And the picture taking shape is a nasty one.

This declassified document tells us of the Obama administration‘s intention to overthrow Syria’s government from the start.

The document introduction is damning:

The best way to help Israel deal with Iran’s growing nuclear capability is to help the people of Syria overthrow the regime of Bashar Assad.”

There are hundreds of these mails, but the short take for every nation in Europe is, the Democrats caused Arab Spring, and sent millions of refugees to the shores of the EU.

There is no disputing this fact, and if the people of Europe ever fully grasp this, America’s reputation won’t be worth one-red-cent.

Not only is Clinton implicated in helping ignite the chaos that grips Europe now, her collaborators in France, Germany, Brussels, and London are revealed for their greed as well.

This Washington Post story speaks of Clinton, Obama, French President Sarkozy, and the pillaging of Libya once Muammar Gaddafi was killed. The piece is aptly titled “Hillary’s War”.

Clinton’s role makes her a conspirator…

This piece by Neil Clark at RT reveals Hillary Clinton as orchestrator in the Syria regime debacle as well. The reportage also shows Google and Al Jazeera in cahoots with Clinton and the Obama administration to foster still more misery on Syrians.

The WikiLeaks cables show Clinton communicating with Google executives over a new tool known as “Google Ideas“, which was to be used to encourage still more refugees to defect.

Clark cites Jared Cohen, President of Google Ideas, from July of 2012:

“Please keep close hold, but my team is planning to launch a tool on Sunday that will publicly track and map the defections in Syria and which parts of the government they are coming from,” Cohen wrote.

“Our logic behind this is that while many people are tracking the atrocities, nobody is visually representing and mapping the defections, which we believe are important in encouraging more to defect and giving confidence to the opposition,” he continued.

The evidence Clinton was behind creating refugees and weaponizing them is incontrovertible.

And remember, the White House later accused Vladmir Putin of making the downtrodden weapons. Make no mistake, the people in the Obama administration were “full on” into using every means to topple Assad. And I mean “every means”.

The email in question was sent to three top officials,

  • Deputy Secretary of State Bill Burns (a former Ambassador to Russia)
  • Alec Ross, a senior Clinton adviser on innovation
  • Clinton’s deputy chief of staff, Jake Sullivan

Sullivan forwarded the message to Hillary, with the unrepentant comment,

FYI(for your information) – this is a pretty cool idea.”

Cool and Callous Ideas for Humanity

“A pretty cool idea”, the tone is unmistakably wicked.

These advisers to advisers, and to future presidents, they wreak of careless abandon. Jake Sullivan must be, a poster child for zombie-like Millennials. Just looking at him repulses me, just to be clear.

Pencil neck, suck ups, the remora of Washington policy, they do more damage than even the think tank dinosaurs. And Sullivan is a genotype of everything wrong in America right now.

But there are thousands of these neocon urchins running amok, I only wish I had time to profile them all.

Google geeks, Facebook connectives, media collusion, ties with ousted Russian oligarchs, the Soros and Rockefeller connections, Goldman Sachs, and killing on a worldwide scale for the sake of profit – linking Clinton to the worst of humanity is fairly easy.

She is the real “connective” to Washington deceit and lies, and to more controversy than any American administration was ever involved in. Make no mistake about it, these people were raised up to feel superior, to install their belief systems onto society.

The danger of the Clintons, the Google execs, and the new liberals is, they actually believe their own fairy tales.

Washington today is a marriage of elitist ideas to utterly failed policies of the past. With a mission to perpetuate supra-capitalism and an American nightmare, the capital of the free world is a snake pit infested with opportunists.

It is symbolic that Jake Sullivan is married to Margaret Maggie Goodlander, who is a former speechwriter to Senator Joe Lieberman and senior policy advisor to Senator John McCain. Anyone with a mind for puzzles can piece together why Libya is linked to the Euromaidan events cheered on by the Arizona senator.

But the killing and chaos these people wrought is only the telltale sign something is horribly wrong. The money underneath is the cause of all this suffering.

The Clintons, and handlers like George Soros, win sacks full of money in the end. If Clinton supporters would only investigate objectively, any with a conscience would vote Trump in a heartbeat. The linkages and deals are so apparent, here again my argument is irrefutable.

I recall a moment of catastrophe, when Hillary Clinton’s presence of mind was on investing, rather than human suffering.

The Womanliness of Nero

When MH17 was blown out of the sky by as yet undisclosed perpetrators, Hillary Clinton met with Charlie Rose later in the same day. 

I covered the story for RT. Within a few hours, the White House had already established the Malaysian Airlines’ plane’s fate. But Hillary Clinton’s mindset on the way to Bloomberg TV studios in Manhattan was damnable, though few took notice.

Rose asked Clinton,

“What questions would you be asking?”

In her answers, as MH17’s victims’ bodies were still smoldering, the etched into my mind the true evil of this woman.

She assured the audience and Rose, that MH17 was “obviously” downed by an anti-aircraft missile. She goes on to proclaim “the equipment had to have come from Russia”, but it was her next comment that sticks in my mind.

She tells Rose that she was reading about the Russian stock market as she travelled to the studios.

The stock market plunging in Russia, why was Hillary focused on Russia stocks? I think the reader will know why. I  profile here, the reincarnation in female form of Nerō Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus, the man who fiddled as Rome burned. ​

Clinton fans will need more proof, of this I am sure.

At the basal level at which Hillary Clinton’s core support lives, dead babies in far off lands do not even register. A world on fire, with Clinton’s matchbox left in evidence, would be of no consequence to ultra-liberals bathing in their detestable form of freedom.

To the Clinton supporter, Hillary is the smiling, friendly, neighborhood dope dealer. Every junkie happily turns over his morality, for another fix.

But there’s enough proof, for those not yet hooked for life. The woman who would be president, she’s run by the elites for certain. Her opponent Bernie Sanders has told this, but America does not believe, or does not care one.

Not many readers will know how Obama, Clinton, George Soros, Lord Jacob Rothschild, and ousted Russian oligarch Mikhail Khodorvkosky are linked.

I will brief you.

Barack Obama had many talks with then Russian President Dmitry Medvedev about the former Yukos oil billionaire who was pilfering billions from the Russian people.

When Khodorovkosky got political, and showed his greedy teeth to Putin and Russian leadership, his misdeeds landed him in prison.

Obama and Clinton whaled and moaned over the Russian Mafioso who’s as much a killer as a tycoon. Yukos oil had Rothschild, Soros and Nixon Secretary of State

Henry Kissingeron its books, and Khodorovkosky was on the board of the infamous

Carlyle Group.

The linkages there lead to former Secretary of StateJames Baker III, and then to former President

George H.W. Bush.

Hillary’s husband’s administration also played a key role in almost destroying Russia, when Yeltsin’s administration gave these oligarchs enourmous powers.

Obama’s National Security Advisor, Condoleeza Rice, wrote about “Clintonistas” overlooking the “looting of Russia’s assets” by these Mafioso oligarchs.

And Mr. Putin is blamed by these same “Clintonistas” for jailing Khodorovkosky…?

Hillary Not Domesticated

The trail of blood and money leading to Hillary Clinton’s doorstep is thick and sticky.

But her lies to her constituents are even nastier.

This article on The Nation tells us how misleading she is. Michelle Alexander eviscerates Clinton’s domestic policy. 

“Why Hillary Clinton Doesn’t Deserve the Black Vote” stings.

An honest depiction of Clinton smoozing, a naïve black constituency, it puts Clinton in perspective. ​

The black vote, it’s crucial for Clinton, and Alexander frames the subterfuge with this:

“The love affair between black folks and the Clintons has been going on for a long time.

It began back in 1992, when Bill Clinton was running for president. He threw on some shades and played the saxophone on The Arsenio Hall Show. It seems silly in retrospect, but many of us fell for that.”

The article lives up to its claim,

“the Clintons decimated the black community”.

But still Clinton’s support mimics some kind of Pied Piper zombie apocalypse, black preachers still stand on the pulpit and laud Hillary as a savior.

Latinos in the Clinton plans mirror other minorities too.

This report via Latin Rebels tells us how Clinton misleads all her constituents. The author, Hector Luis Alamo pins Hillary and her husband to the firing squad wall over a Columbian program unprecedented in its cruelty.

Plan Columbia was characterized a success by Clinton, but Alamo remembers the time otherwise:

(It was).. a period of unbridled violence and human rights abuses committed by the U.S.-sponsored Colombian government and right-wing paramilitary groups.

The drastic increase of U.S. funding for Colombia’s security forces beginning in 2000 allowed an already repressive government to carry out even more atrocities.”

Clinton’s Asian American and Pacific Islander outreach director, Lisa Changadveja left the Clinton campaign in March.

And on women’s issues, Clinton is no less slippery and nebulous in her true intentions.

This Quartz piece hammers Clinton and her female supporters over the head – and hard. Hanna Kozlowska tells the story of a 25 year old “girl power” activist named Gemma Soldati.

The heroine of the story asks key questions of her parents, who are devout Hillary fans.

“So, why are you voting for Hillary Clinton?” being chief among them.

She wonders how come expediency has somehow come to outweigh morality, in talking to her “flower power” parents.

And it is in this we see the cold political truth materialize. Clinton, and all of her constituents, cares not a wit for ideals. I have good company in calling Hillary Clinton the biggest liar in Washington. Some would go so far as to crown her queen of the world of liars.

This story convicts here with page-on-page of evidence.

Patricia McCarthy, of the American Thinker says of Clinton:

“She has fooled, and made fools of, many, many people over the years. Those who think she would be a good president are worse than fools.” 

A Leader of Fools

Like I said earlier, blood, tears, and sweaty money lead like a yellow brick road to Hillary and Bill Clinton.

Maybe her worst contrivance is her unapologetic narcissistic way of bragging over toppling Gaddafi lights the corners of your mind? But my Hillary nightmare trends toward her defiling of her own countrymen, and her reckless abandon for women’s rights.

Kathleen Willey blows the whistle on Hillary with, “Hillary wrote the book on terrorizing women”.

Willey, one of the women caught in the crossfire of alleged sexual harassment by former President Bill Clinton, has been on the receiving end of the presidential hopefuls spite.

Speaking of Clinton’s comparisons of the Republicans to ISIS, she says:

This is a woman who is comparing the Republicans to terrorists?

Terrorists who behead women, who deface women, who burn women alive. And on and on and on and on. And I can tell you, knowing what I know, and reading what I’ve read, and having talked to people, other women, who have been in the same boat that I have been in, basically in the crosshairs of the Clintons.

The one difference between me and the poor women who are the victims of ISIS and all the other terrorist groups is that our heads are still attached.

That’s the difference.”

I’ll finish off with this.

The essence of Clinton as a person and a leader is in this statement.

From my perspective, having monitored her support in social media, the unholy meanness and/or stupidity of her constituents is universal too. The allegations against Bill and Hillary Clinton are monumental, epic, and never before heard of to most people.

From Bill Clinton supposedly taking a romantic jaunt in 2002 to convicted pedophile pal Jeffrey Epstein‘s “Orgy Island,” to the Clinton Foundation’s receiving billionaire blood money, no leaders in history have had more controversy.

If the Clintons are guilty of one tenth, both should be banished from American shores.

Hillary Clinton is the most dangerous threat to America’s future that exists today. The allegations and the evidence stacked against her is what I would call “grievously horrid”, she’s the most despicable leader I can imagine in the White House.

Barack Obama’s sellout lunacy will seem as child’s play, if the people behind Hillary get her in the White House.

The book Clinton Cash should stand up in court, as grounds for throwing Bill and Hillary in a federal prison. For if it were not all true, how could author Peter Schweizer escape condemnation?

It’s significant that there is no court case, the Clinton’s have not hired a Manhattan law firm to sue yet, and that other journalists have found still more duplicity in Clinton dealings.

The key revelation in the book was Hillary’s role in selling off key strategic uranium to Russian concerns. It is an allegation that would have brought a treason trial just a few years ago.

And this is the malevolent monarch Americans would choose.

God save us if she is…

Leave a Reply