Documents reveal Hillary Clinton’s extensive ties with U.S. mainstream media

October 14, 2016 by Randall Wilkens Leave a Comment

Another high profile hack from the individual known only as Guccifer 2.0 has released emails that show just how close the Clinton campaign has become with members of the mainstream media. While the leak shows that US media has been doing their best to present Hillary Clinton in the best possible light, it also suggests that news stories have been planted to further her cause. Guccifer 2.0’s other hacks included a recent incident which resulted in four top officials of the Democratic National Convention resigning their positions, including the chairperson Debbie Wasserman Schultz, when a sizable amount of emails surfaced showing their involvement in trying to sabotage the campaign of then political rival Bernie Sanders.

The most recent release of emails revealed that a former Politico contributor by the name of Maggie Haberman was a “friendly journalist” who had “never disappointed” in the past when it came to stories she had “teed up” for the Clinton campaign. Haberman is also now conveniently covering the current presidential circus for the New York Times. Specifically, this memo was authored by Nick Merrill, the Clinton campaign’s press secretary.

One month after Merrill penned this letter, Haberman published two articles essentially praising Hillary Clinton without sacrificing the sophistication necessary to appear credible. The articles were successful in their endeavor to paint Mrs. Clinton as being highly critical in how she vetted not only herself but those she chose to fill her top campaign roles. Given the opportunity to comment on the validity of the released documents, both Merrill and Haberman chose to remain mum on the issue at hand.

Other information released in the most recent trove of emails reveals a list of “media surrogates”, whose images would at first appear to be politically objective but were in fact paid representatives of the Clinton campaign. These surrogates would often appear on cable news shows, with zero disclosure regarding their compensation, stumping for Clinton.

Further information from the memos reveals that Clinton also frequently hosted off-the-record cocktail parties designed to bring top campaign aides together with leading new media notables. One such event preceded the announcement of her candidacy with one of the outlined goals being to “Give reporters their first thoughts from team HRC in advance of the announcement.”

While it isn’t that surprising that a presidential candidate would go to such lengths to preserve their status in the race to be Commander In Chief, this is not the first time Mrs. Clinton has used her influence to stay afloat. What is more nerve-wracking for some is just how much that influence will increase should Clinton be successful in her quest for the presidency.

Sources:

TheDailySheeple.com

TheIntercept.com

NewsTarget.com/TheHillaryFiles/

Obama admin drops charges against Libyan arms dealer set to expose Hillary Clinton

October 12, 2016 by JD Heyes Leave a Comment

While there is much to be desired about both major political parties in America, there is little question that, in the age of Barack Obama, the Democratic Party has essentially become a criminal enterprise.

That’s the only way to explain the lengths the Obama administration goes to in order to protect the president’s heir-apparent, Hillary Clinton.

While the lamestream establishment media and politicians express faux outrage over comments about women that GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump made in private 11 years ago, Politico was reporting that the administration has dropped its charges against a Libyan arms dealer who was set to expose Clinton if the case had gone to trial.

The political news site reported that a deal struck between the administration and the suspect – an American named Marc Turi – averts a trial that would have put additional scrutiny on Clinton’s private emails as secretary of state, as well as exposing reported CIA attempts to arm rebels battling the late Libyan leader Moammar Qadhafi.

The trial was officially set to begin on Election Day, though Politico says it likely would have been delayed by protracted arguments over classified information in the case.

But an associate of Turi’s claimed that the Justice Department dropped the case because the proceedings would have revealed embarrassing information regarding Obama and Clinton by putting new scrutiny on their reported role in supplying weapons that wound up in the hands of Islamic militants.

“They don’t want this stuff to come out because it will look really bad for Obama and Clinton just before the election,” the associated told Politico.

In the motion to dismiss, prosecutors said “discovery rulings” from U.S. District Court Judge David Campbell contributed to the administration’s decision to drop the case. The joint filing asks the court to accept a confidential agreement to settle the case through civil means (out of court, where the final settlement can be kept confidential).

Robert Stryk, an advisor to Turi from the government relations and consulting firm SPG, accused the administration of attempting to scapegoat his client so Obama could cover up Clinton’s mishandling of the situation in Libya.

He said the U.S. government spent millions of dollars and “went all over the world” to bankrupt Turi and destroy his life, “all to protect Hillary Clinton’s crimes,” alluding to the Sept. 11, 2012 terrorist attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, in which four Americans – including U.S. Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens – were killed.

Of course not. Wouldn’t want our public servants to be held accountable for criminal conduct, would we?

No. Better to focus on what a successful businessman who has never held public office said during a private conversation instead.

Sources:

Politico.com

NYTimes.com

FBI’s investigation of Hillary Clinton so dirty agents are ready to revolt

October 12, 2016 by JD Heyes Leave a Comment

As expected, there is no shortage of FBI agents who are upset about the way their boss handled the bureau’s year-long probe into Hillary Clinton’s compromise of top secret materials via her private email server.

In a word, many are angry that Director James Comey not only let her off the hook, but altered the conditions and parameters of the investigation in such a way there was never going to be a serious examination of all the facts. And, hence, no recommendation for prosecution.

As noted by veteran investigative reporter Paul Sperry, writing at the New York Post, agents in general are “ready to revolt” following the pseudo-probe. He notes that veteran agents are blaming Comey for permanently damaging the FBI’s once-established reputation as a non-partisan law enforcement entity that rarely compromised investigations, especially over politics.

In response to congressional critics, Comey said last week that the case was handled by career FBI agents, adding, “If I blew it, they blew it too.” But agents past and present are telling a different story – namely, they’re not letting Comey lay his “cowardly” whitewash on them.

For one thing, agents say Comey tied their hands by agreeing to unprecedented ground rules and other outlandish demands made by lawyers for Clinton and her aides that severely hampered agents.

Dennis V. Hughes, the first head of the FBI’s computer investigations unit, told Sperry, “In my 25 years with the bureau, I never had any ground rules in my interviews.”

In addition, Comey did not to go to Justice Department prosecutors or insist in convening a grand jury that could compel testimony and authorize the seizing of evidence. Rather, he granted immunity to several key witnesses, including some potential targets.

And those immunity deals came with ridiculous side deals, including one that prevented agents from searching for any documents on a Dell laptop owned by former Clinton chief of staff and longtime loyalist Cheryl Mills that were generated after Jan. 31, 2015, when she had back-and-forth conversations with the server administration who destroyed emails that had been subpoenaed.

In addition, Comey even agreed to allow Mills to destroy the laptop after the very restricted search, meaning he may have been an accessory to the destruction of evidence.

“The FBI has politicized itself, and its reputation will suffer for a long time,” Hughes said. “I hold Director Comey responsible.”

Other retired and current agents agreed, with some even suggesting that Congress subpoena the agents who actually conducted the investigation to answer questions about how Comey – who had them all sign non-disclosure agreements – ordered them to investigate.

Sources:

NYPost.com

Freedom.news

ALERT: NBC, WSJ polls showing Trump down manipulated by Clinton operative – TRUMP MAY BE WINNING!

October 11, 2016 by JD Heyes Leave a Comment

You may have suspected it for some time, but now we can accurately report it as truth: Many of those supposedly “unbiased” polls from the mainstream media are in fact nothing more than propaganda aimed at manipulating public opinion to make it seem as though each slip of the tongue by GOP presidential nominee Donald J. Trump is the next (and perhaps final) nail in the coffin of his candidacy.

The Conservative Treehouse did some digging and background checking, following the release of a poll from NBC News and The Wall Street Journal that purports to show Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton up by 11 points — after The Washington Post published an 11-year-old audio recording of Trump discussing pretty women he was interested in.

Upon further examination, CTH found some rather large discrepancies that would certainly account for such a major jump in Clinton’s polling numbers.

For instance, the web site’s researchers found that the vast majority of the very small sample of people polled (500), were “Strong Democrat,” “Not Very Strong Democrat” and “Independent/Lean Democrat” (43 percent). Of that small sample, just 36 percent identified as Republicans or leaning Republican, while 12 percent claimed to be Independents.

But that’s not the biggest part of the story, as abominable as it is. No, the major revelation here is that the polling firms are “Hart Research Associates/Public Opinion Strategies.”

Hart Research is headed up by Peter D. Hart (founder) and Geoff Garin (president). One of the positions that Garin currently holds is as the pollster and strategic advisor to Priorities USA, the super PAC that supported President Obama’s reelection and is currently supporting Clinton’s election. You can read it right here (and do so quickly before the site is changed).

But believe it or not, there’s more.

There’s also a recent financial connection. CTH found that during the month of September alone, $220,500 was paid by Hillary Clinton’s Priorities USA Super-PAC to Hart Research Associates.

So let’s recap:

— The poll used a very small sample

— Most of those “polled” identified as Democrats or Democrat-leaning

— The polling firm that conducted the survey is headed up by a guy who works for a Super PAC dedicated to helping Clinton win in November

— The polling “data” was provided the very next day after Trump’s second debate with Clinton, one in which the vast majority of opinion holds that he won.

This is what constitutes political “polling” in America today: A preconceived narrative supported by “evidence” that the narrative is true. It’s nothing but propaganda.

Bottom line: You simply cannot trust the establishment media this election cycle. They will do whatever it takes to support Hillary Clinton.

Sources:

TheConservativeTreehouse.com

WashingtonPost.com

HartResearch.com

**Click here to download the Hillary Files now from NewsTarget.com

The paper contains 312 cited references and provides an overwhelming mountain of evidence that Hillary Clinton is not just dangerous to America’s liberties and economy, but also dangerous to America’s environment, health freedoms and organic industry.

This paper is a call for both conservatives and progressives to reject Hillary Clinton on election day.

DNC ‘pay to play’ scheme: the higher the donation, the higher your office

October 3, 2016 by JD Heyes Leave a Comment

In recent weeks WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange hinted to the world that he had incriminating information that could likely further damage Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton‘s chances at winning the White House.

Earlier leaks — allegedly by a hacker with the handle Guccifer 2.0 — of emails from the Democratic National Committee proved damaging enough to cost former DNC head Debbie Wasserman Schultz her job, though she remains a Florida Congresswoman, and a key player on the Clinton campaign team. The DNC has yet to recover from the embarrassment caused by the leaks, and has laid the blame on the Russians.

But, as Anonymous is reporting, the source of the leaks was all but confirmed by WikiLeaks to have been DNC insider Seth Rich, who was later shot and killed in a crime that many believe was politically motivated payback because even though police said robbery was the motive, nothing of value was taken. The murder of a Wikileaks’ lawyer also followed a few days later.

The damage to the DNC may be about to get worse. A new trove of DNC files has been released by WikiLeaks’ Guccifer 2.0 that indicates big donors to the party were rewarded with ambassadorships and other high-ranking federal positions by President Obama, in return for said donations (meaning Hillary isn’t the only pay-for-play Democrat at the highest echelon of power these days).

In one example, Associate Attorney General Tony West handed over $1 million on the same day he was hired. In another, Julius Genachowski gave $3.5 million and was later rewarded with the position of FCC Chairman from 2009 to 2013.

As The Observer further notes, the leaks reveal more evidence of overt corruption within the Democratic Party. “One email dated May 18, 2016, from Jacquelyn Lopez, an attorney with the law firm Perkins Coie, asked DNC staff if they could set up a brief call ‘to go over our process for handling donations from donors who have given us pay to play letters,’” The Observer reported.

[If you’ve not read or heard about these latest emails, you can thank the hopelessly ideologically compromised “mainstream” media for failing to inform you – again.]

A 2013 article by the reliably left-wing Guardian newspaper (which is ironic to say the least) substantiates the emails. It notes that real diplomats were “crying foul” over Obama’s blatant appointments of political benefactors in what can only be described as naked politics at its worst.

“The practice is hardly a new feature of U.S. politics, but career diplomats in Washington are increasingly alarmed at how it has grown. One former ambassador described it as the selling of public office,” The Guardian reported.

Sources:

RAPE IS OKAY …if you’re a leading Democrat

October 3, 2016 by JD Heyes Leave a Comment

It must have been difficult for former President Bill Clinton and daughter Chelsea to watch Republican presidential nominee Donald J. Trump lay into Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton during the pair’s first debate that occurred on September 26. But that’s the nature of the political beast: If you can’t stand the heat, don’t jump into the fire.

That helps explain why Chelsea would want to lash out at Trump for his mention of her father’s sexual trysts (which are legion), which he did again recently and has done for months on the campaign trail.

In a post-debate interview with ABC News, Trump said he didn’t want to mention Bill’s sexual “transgressions” during the debate because Chelsea was in the audience. “I didn’t want to say what I was going to say with Chelsea in the room,” Trump said.

That didn’t sit well with Chelsea, who told Cosmopolitan magazine after the debate:

It’s a distraction from his inability to talk about what’s actually at stake in this election and to offer concrete, comprehensive proposals about the economy, or our public school system, or debt-free college, or keeping our country safe and Americans safe here at home and around the world.

Chelsea went on to say that she can’t remember a time when her parents weren’t being attacked, so Trump’s statements appeared to be part of that “tradition.”

Well, that didn’t sit well with one of Bill’s most vocal accusers: Juanita Broaddrick, who has publicly claimed for years that he raped her in a hotel room 38 years ago – charges that have not been legally addressed by the Clinton’s, in the form of a defamation lawsuit against Broaddrick, for instance.

As reported by WorldNetDaily, Broaddrick dropped some Twitter bombs on Chelsea, saying, in part:

— The reason why her parents are always under attack is because “they’re not good people;” and

— As to her father, he “was, and probably still is, a sexual predator.”

She also tweeted this: “I say again ‘I was 35 when Bill Clinton raped me and Hillary tried to silence me. I am now 73. It never goes away.’”

Broaddrick has regularly accused Hillary Clinton of helping to cover up her husband’s extramarital sexual affairs and alleged crimes, ostensibly to protect his and her political viability as they each continually sought higher office.

In addition, as WND has also reported, Broaddrick’s claims were substantiated by a nurse who treated her after the incident.

“She was crying. And the thing I think I remember most is that her mouth was all swollen up. It was cut. … Her pantyhose were all ripped,” the nurse, Normal Rogers, said.

Again, for what it’s worth, none of Broaddrick’s claims or, those made by other women who were allegedly attacked or assaulted by Bill Clinton, including Kathleen Wiley and Paula Jones, have ever been countered in a court of law by the Clinton’s, which is highly unusual if such claims are indeed bogus. Charges that are that explosive and which are being leveled in the public domain would be extremely libelous if they were in fact untrue, leaving the accuser wide open for a lawsuit and charges of making false claims.

None of these women have been brought to court on such charges, it is important to note. And Jones won $850,000 from Clinton in 1998 to settle her lawsuit, which charged Clinton with sexual harassment.

Sources:

Mediaite.com

Cosmopolitan.com

WND.com

Proof FBI head James Comey is a Clinton operative, let Hillary get away with crimes

September 30, 2016 by JD Heyes Leave a Comment

At one point FBI Director James Comey had a reputation as a straight-shooter – a Washington insider who was considered to be above the political fray.

Not anymore.

In recent days the FBI’s own data dump to the public – the release of documents related to the supposed “investigation” into Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton’s highly improper use of a private email server during her tenure as President Obama’s secretary of state – prove that the probe was a sham from the outset. Clinton was never going to be held responsible for her very illegal handling of classified intelligence over her unsecured private server.

John R. Schindler, a former NSA intelligence analyst and counterintelligence officer, Naval War College professor and espionage specialist, wrote in The Observer that from the moment “Emailgate” became a scandal, it was obvious that the FBI, highly politicized under Obama, had no stomach for prosecuting Clinton and her pals – or, really, any high-ranking Democrat.

The most recent document dump, Schindler notes, makes it clear that:

Clinton either repeatedly and purposefully lied to the FBI (a crime in and of itself) and to Congress about her email habits, or she is far too stupid to be commander-in-chief;

The FBI “completely ignored” that fact that there was highly classified signals intelligence in Clinton’s email, including information that was taken verbatim from Top Secret NSA briefings in 2011. (For some reason, Schindler says, no one at the FBI bothered to ask Team Clinton about these emails.);

The bureau granted immunity to so many key players during its investigation – including Hillary’s lawyer Heather Samuelson, State Department IT boss John Bental, and by far the most consequential figure, Cheryl Mills, that there was no way agents were ever going to get enough traction to recommend prosecution.

Even Congress was stunned about the granting of immunity to Mills, who has long ties to Hillary and served as the State Department’s chief of staff and counselor throughout her tenure. Schindler says granting her immunity, “given her deep involvement” in the scandal – including the destruction of tens of thousands of emails – is curious, especially considering the fact that she also sat in on Clinton’s July chat with the FBI over Emailgate.

“The whole thing stinks,” explained a retired FBI senior official who was obviously upset and confused by the current state of his former employer. “This was impossible in my time, unthinkable.”

Schindler adds that Mills’ immunity deal now needs further investigation, and Congress may do it. But so what? What are lawmakers prepared to do if they find out everything about the deal stinks?

Given Congress’ track record of impotence, maybe it’s just better to save the taxpayers money and hope to hold the next president – and his/her appointees – accountable.

Of course, that won’t happen if Hillary wins in November.

Sources:

RedState.com

Observer.com

TownHall.com

20 Things more trustworthy than Hillary Clinton

September 29, 2016 by JD Heyes Leave a Comment

In some quarters – and in both major political parties – there are those who believe that Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton won the first debate with her Republican opponent, billionaire Donald J. Trump.

On the surface, Clinton certainly appeared to be the more polished, well-rehearsed of the two candidates. Trump seemed to be on the defense all night long, and others have observed that he appeared to browbeat Clinton at times.

Then again, Clinton is a life-long politician and always sounds rehearsed and scripted. After all, that’s how politicians interact with the public – talking points, narratives and well-scripted responses. Trump, for all of his perceived debate flaws, at least spoke from the heart.

And there is this: No matter what Clinton says or how she says it, the fact is that the woman simply is not trustworthy. Poll after poll, survey after survey, have shown that the vast majority of the American people simply don’t believe much of anything she says. A recent poll from the month of July found her untrustworthy rating skyrocketing to 67 percent.

So, just how untrustworthy is she? We assembled a list of 20 things we think are more trustworthy than Hillary Clinton. In no particular order they are:

• A wolverine with a ‘pet me’ sign
• A mixed drink made by Bill Cosby
• A straight edge shave from Jodi Arias
• An elevator ride with Ray Rice
• A night out with Aaron Hernandez
• Brian Williams memory
• Mexican tap water
• Pinocchio
• The Boy who cried Wolf
• A Nigerian inheritance email
• Harry Reid’s exercise equipment
• An IM from Anthony Weiner
• Anything Nancy Pelosi has ever uttered
• A factory packed parachute
• An Afghan wearing a backpack
• Whatever Bill Clinton’s definition of “is” is
• If you like your healthcare plan, you can keep your healthcare plan
• A North Korean trial
• A BIC pen that doesn’t leak
• A tuna fish sandwich left on a city bus for three days

Sources:

First Presidential Debate: Actual Reason for our Staggering National Debt Ignored

September 28, 2016 by Kurt Nimmo Leave a Comment

During the debate on Monday rivals Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump offered more of the same in the way of proposed economic solutions for America.

Trump declared he will prevent corporations from leaving the country. He said his proposed tax reductions will put an end to the flood or companies leaving. “That’s going to be a job creator like we haven’t seen since [Ronald] Reagan,” he said.

Clinton responded by saying she will jack up taxes on the wealthy and close down corporate loopholes. She mocked Trump’s plan as “Trumped up, trickle down.”

Trump criticized NAFTA and other globalist trade deals and noted the legislation was ushered in by Hillary’s husband.

Clinton said she wants to renegotiate trade deals and make them more favorable to the United States. She deflected previous criticism by saying “let’s not assume trade is the only challenge we have in the economy.”

Both candidates proposed spending a fortune on fixing the crumbling US infrastructure, although how they would pay for it was not addressed.

Clinton touched on the national debt, but only to attack Trump’s tax proposals.

“Independent experts have looked at what I’ve proposed and looked at what Donald’s proposed, and basically they’ve said this, that if his tax plan, which would blow up the debt by over $5 trillion and would in some instances disadvantage middle-class families compared to the wealthy, were to go into effect, we would lose 3.5 million jobs and maybe have another recession,” she said.

Trump responded, noting Obama has raised to the debt to an astronomical level.

“The Obama administration, from the time they’ve come in, is over 230 years’ worth of debt, and he’s topped it. He’s doubled it in a course of almost eight years, seven-and-a-half years, to be semi- exact,” he said.

Trump is correct. Obama has nearly doubled the national debt. When he entered the White House the debt stood at 10.6 trillion dollars. It is now 19.5 trillion dollars, according to figures compiled by the Treasury Department.

“Obama still has several months to go until the end of his second term,” notes Michael Snyder of The Economic Collapse. “That means that an average of more than 1.1 trillion dollars a year will be added to the national debt during his presidency. We are stealing a tremendous amount of consumption from the future to make the economy look much, much better than it otherwise would be, and we are systematically destroying the future in the process.” He added an additional 1.36 trillion dollars to the national debt during the fiscal year that is now coming to an end.

How did we get here?

The national debt is directly attributable to the Federal Reserve. In 1971, under President Nixon, the United States moved away from the gold standard and the Fed was allowed to print money out of thin air. This opened the floodgates for unrestrained government borrowing, spending, and an exponentially rising “public debt.”

The Fed keeps the scheme going by holding interest rates artificially low. Since whatever the government owes is inherited by the people, it’s the people who ultimately get stuck with the bill. If the interest was allowed to return to market rates, it would help prevent the government from borrowing beyond its means.

Unfortunately, the obvious solution—ending the Fed and instituting a sane monetary policy—was not addressed on Monday night.

Sources

MarketWatch

The Washington Post

Treasury Department

The Economic Collapse

Is Google using subliminal messaging to get votes for Hillary?

September 26, 2016 by JD Heyes Leave a Comment

It’s no secret that Google’s executives are in the tank for the Democratic Party and its presidential nominee, Hillary Clinton. After all, Google executives and officials are such frequent visitors to the Barack Obama’s White House they average one per week. The former CEO of Google and now the head of Google’s parent company, Alphabet, has also pledged his support to Clinton.

So it is reasonable to expect that the company would go out of its way, even subliminally, to ensure that more Americans are also in the tank for Clinton, which could help explain the Internet search giant’s Google Doodle on the day of the much-anticipated first debate between Clinton and her GOP nominee rival, Donald J. Trump.

In what is seemingly an innocent reminder for people to register to vote in the November elections, it is obvious that Google’s doodle designers put some time into the design – much more so than, say, Memorial Day or Veteran’s Day in the U.S., which are often only symbolized by a small yellow ribbon.

But is it really innocent? These facts, coupled with those above, make you wonder:

Trump has been rising in the polls in recent weeks, wiping out what initially looked like a cakewalk election for Clinton;
Clinton’s health has become a major issue after several incidents involving falls, inability to climb stairs and questionable mental conduct;
Some reliable sources that have been spot-on in the past predicting presidential outcomes are openly stating that Trump will be victorious Nov. 8.
Democratic voter registration is declining, though liberal media outlets are cherry-picking data to make it seem like things are better than they really are.

There is also this: Technology giants in Silicon Valley are so concerned with a Trump victory they are going all in (and all out) to invest in organizations and strategies that will help ensure a defeat. Tech blog Tech Crunch writer Kate Conger notes that Google – as well as other companies are launching voter registration efforts with less than 42 days left before the election and most voter registration deadlines coming in October.

“New tech-backed voting initiatives seem to be popping up every day, and, although most claim to be nonpartisan, it’s clear that Donald Trump’s unusual campaign has ignited investors and pushed them to act,” she wrote. “It’s clear that Silicon Valley is ready to spend on this election, whether by making big-dollar donations or by backing voter-registration initiatives. But it’s not certain how much impact competing VC-funded registration apps and initiatives will have on getting their (typically millennial) target audiences.”

For a media giant that is so in the tank for a particular party and its candidate, reminding more Americans to register to vote would certainly be of some benefit to the Democratic Party and Clinton. It’s just another way Google is trying to keep the country on its self-destructive course so it and the other uber-elitists can lead the revolution and install themselves as the ultimate power brokers.

Sources: