Posts Tagged ‘Clinton Foundation’

A ‘Threat Against Clinton’? Seriously??? The Neverending Bias and Hypocrisy Of The Media

August 10, 2016

If Donald Trump were to say “Good morning,” the media would ignite a giant scandal, suggesting he said those words on a cloudy day – and worse yet said it with a hateful tone – and even worse still, clearly was implying that only white males deserved to actually have a good morning.

So it shouldn’t be any surprise that Donald Trump is in the hot seat again.  He will continue to be in that hot seat for another 3 months.  Because virtually every single “journalist” in America is a love child of Joseph Goebbels.

NBC covers the latest story this way:

Trump ‘Second Amendment’ Comment Seen as Veiled Threat Against Clinton
by Andrew Rafferty

Donald Trump’s comments Tuesday suggesting that “2nd Amendment people” could stop Hillary Clinton from making judicial nominations sparked outrage from opponents — but the campaign defended the remarks by arguing that Trump was referring to the group’s considerable political power.

“Hillary wants to abolish, essentially abolish the Second Amendment,” Trump said during a rally in North Carolina on Tuesday.

“By the way, and if she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks. Although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don’t know.”

The Clinton campaign and other Trump opponents rejected Trump campaign’s explanation and blamed the GOP nominee for suggesting violence as a possible means of preventing Clinton from appointing judges if she is elected president.
“This is simple — what Trump is saying is dangerous. A person seeking to be the President of the United States should not suggest violence in any way,” Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook said in a statement.
And Sen. Chris Murphy, D-CT, responded on Twitter: “Don’t treat this as a political misstep. It’s an assassination threat, seriously upping the possibility of a national tragedy & crisis.”
And Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., took to social media to say: “@realDonaldTrump makes death threats because he’s a pathetic coward who can’t handle the fact that he’s losing to a girl.”
She added, “Your reckless comments sound like a two-bit dictator.”
One of the strongest voices condemning Trump was that of Gabby Giffords, who as a congresswoman from Arizona was shot in the head during a public event in January 2011.
“Donald Trump might astound Americans on a routine basis, but we must draw a bright red line between political speech and suggestions of violence,” Giffords said in a joint statement with her husband, astronaut Mark Kelly. “What political leaders say matters to their followers.”
But Trump’s campaign denied that he was suggesting violence, instead saying the real estate mogul was referencing the power gun rights advocates have at the voting booth.
“It’s called the power of unification — 2nd Amendment people have amazing spirit and are tremendously unified, which gives them great political power,” Trump campaign spokesman Jason Miller said in a statement. “And this year, they will be voting in record numbers, and it won’t be for Hillary Clinton, it will be for Donald Trump.”
And Trump running mate, Mike Pence, told reporters Tuesday afternoon that Trump “is clearly saying is that people who cherish that right, who believe that firearms in the hands of law-abiding citizens makes our communities more safe, not less safe, should be involved in the political process and let their voice be heard.”
Asked whether Trump was suggesting violence, Pence said, “of course not, no. Donald Trump is urging people around this country to act in a manner consistent with their convictions in the course of this election, and people who cherish the Second Amendment have a very clear choice in this election.”
Clinton obviously has Secret Service protection, and Cathy Milhoan, director of communication for the agency said they were “aware of the comments” but had no further statement.
It’s not the first time suggestions of violence have become part of the campaign. Last month, the Secret Service said it was investigating New Hampshire State Sen. Al Baldasaro, who serves as an adviser for Trump’s campaign on veteran’s issues, after he called for Clinton to be executed for “treason” related to her use of a private email server.
A Trump spokesperson said the candidate did not agree with those statements. Still, Baldasaro received a shout-out from the candidate at a campaign event last weekend.

Ooh, it’s so, so terrible.  Donald Trump is trying to arrange for Hillary’s assassination.  And neither Hillary nor any of her supporters have said one single thing suggesting a dark and terrible and terrifying future if Donald Trump were to be elected president, such that a crazed Democrat – Democrats and Democrat race-identifying groups being responsible for more than ninety percent of all violent crime in America – might actually assassinate Donald Trump.

As an example, consider what Hillary Clinton supporter Will Smith just suggested:

Actor Will Smith thinks Donald Trump’s presidential candidacy is a good thing for America — because now the country can “cleanse” itself of the Republican nominee and his supporters.

At a press event in Dubai to promote his latest film Suicide Squad, the 47-year-old actor said he believes it is important to “speak out about the insanity” of the 2016 presidential race.

“As painful as it is to hear Donald Trump talk and as embarrassing as it is as an American to hear him talk, I think it’s good,” Smith said, according to the Associated Press. “We get to know who people are and now we get to cleanse it out of our country.”

But so what?  That’s different.

EVERY SINGLE TIME IN HISTORY THAT WORD “CLEANSE” HAS BEEN USED IN ANY SIMILAR CONTEXT, IT WAS A EUPHEMISM FOR THE EXTERMINATION OF A GROUP OF PEOPLE FOR EITHER POLITICAL OR RACIST REASONS.  EVERY SINGLE TIME.  Hitler used it that way; Stalin used it that way; Chairman Mao used it that way; Pol Pot used it that way.  And one more than one hundred million human beings are DEAD because of words just like the words that Hillary supporter Will Smith just used.

And of course, you’ve just got to hand it to Hollywood liberals who make millions of dollars marketing themselves as gun-toting heroes and then campaigning to make everybody else poor as they disarm them.

How many Democrats will never again go to see a Will Smith movie because the man just morally disqualified himself from ever receiving so much as one penny from any American ever again?  Not ONE.

More important, how many mainstream media “journalists” will tie Will Smith directly to Hillary Clinton and associate his incredibly vile remarks to her???  Not ONE.

Another act of savage hypocrisy comes out in this story:

Imagine if Trump were ahead in the polls and one of his leading elected senatorial spokespeople mocked Hillary Clinton, personally attacking her for cowardice and then ending with by mocking that Hillary “can’t handle the fact that she’s losing to a man.”

It is a terrible, unforgivable thing to be a misogynist; but there aint nothing wrong in our culture with a woman openly being a misandrist (a hater of men).  And so the same media that rabidly froths at the mouth every single time Donald Trump or one of his supporters says something that smacks of male chauvinism merely yawns every single time Hillary Clinton or one of her supporters says something anti-male.

But the fact that if you are a journalist, you are a two-faced dishonest hypocrite guarantees that double-standards don’t need to be mentioned.

So Obama CIA-Director Michael Hayden continues with the demonstration of how “facts” work when he said this of Donald Trump:

The former head of the CIA, retired Gen. Michael Hayden, told CNN’s Jake Tapper: “If someone else had said that said outside the hall, he’d be in the back of a police wagon now with the Secret Service questioning him.”
US Secret Service communications director Cathy Milhoan told CNN the agency “is aware of Mr. Trump’s comments.”
Hayden added: “You’re not just responsible for what you say. You are responsible for what people hear.”

Let’s just categorically first state for the record that if “someone else had illegally installed an unauthorized and unsecured secret personal server in a bathroom closet and placed thousands of top secret emails on it so our worst enemies could easily hack the system and steal our most vital secrets, she’d be in GITMO getting WATERBOARDED.

But I guess we’re going to apply a different standard now.

Just as Hayden says, “You’re not just responsible for what you say.  You are responsible for what people hear.”

You know, unless you’re Hillary Clinton, in which case you get to brazenly violate our national security laws and then get away with it on the grounds that you had no idea you were actually doing what you were in fact caught doing.

Here’s a final one: in another so-far-over-the-top-remark it is beyond UNREAL, Hayden called Trump “a clear and present danger”:

MICHAEL HAYDEN: Look, we gotta call balls and strikes the way we see them, alright? We all felt strongly enough about what we believe to be a clear and present danger, that we felt compelled to say what we said…

JAKE TAPPER: You just called Donald Trump a clear and present danger.

You look at the parlance of what that phrase means: If somebody is declared “a clear and present danger,” it literally becomes the duty of every soldier to eliminate that threat by any means necessary.  So in other words, Michael Hayden just called for the assassination of Donald Trump.

But as blatant as all this crap is, we still don’t get to the REAL hypocrisy until we get to Barack Obama’s words:

Obama: ‘If They Bring a Knife to the Fight, We Bring a Gun’
By WSJ Staff
Jun 14, 2008 1:29 pm ET

[Editor’s note: This blog post was published in 2008. In the wake of Saturday’s shooting rampage in Tucson, Ariz., a number of lawmakers and others have called for toning down the political rhetoric and President Barack Obama led a moment of silence this morning for the victims. Click here and here for more. Also, check back with Washington Wire for updates.]

Amy Chozick reports on the presidential race from Philadelphia.

Mobster wisdom tells us never to bring a knife to a gun fight. But what does political wisdom say about bringing a gun to a knife fight?

That’s exactly what Barack Obama said he would do to counter Republican attacks “If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun,” Obama said at a Philadelphia fundraiser Friday night. “Because from what I understand folks in Philly like a good brawl. I’ve seen Eagles fans.”

For what it’s worth, that “Saturday’s shooting rampage in Tucson, Arizona” was the very one that ended with Gabby Giffords – who is now all of a sudden “one of the strongest voices condemning Trump” – being shot.

She has never ONCE called out the wicked Barack Hussein Obama for his terrorist threat to use GUNS against Republicans.

Obama also infamously told Latinos on a racist basis “to punish your enemies.”

And to put those words into perspective, Donald Trump didn’t threaten with “guns” the way Obama did; he threatened with the “2nd Amendment.”  Which apparently is even more dangerous than guns.

If Donald Trump meant his threat, than Barack Obama meant his more direct threat.

The fact that Barack Obama said something he shouldn’t have said and got elected means that we have to elect Donald Trump for saying something he shouldn’t have said, just to be fair.

Hey, let’s go back to Hillary Clinton, 2008, explaining why she should remain in the race:

“My husband did not wrap up the nomination in 1992 until he won the California primary somewhere in the middle of June, right?” Clinton said. “We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California. I don’t understand it.”

Oh, oh.  Hillary Clinton suggested to her followers that it wasn’t too late yet to assassinate her political rival.

The media jumped all over her for that and Hillary was forced to apologize for her “assassination remark.”  But that was ONLY because the mainstream media was totally in the tank for Obama and treated Hillary like a Republican.

Just as now they’re all totally in the tank for Hillary and are treating Trump like an alien species of Nazi cockroach.

But did Trump use the word “gun” the way Obama did?  Nope.  Did Trump use the word “assassinated” the way Hillary Clinton did?  Nope.

Wouldn’t it be nice if the media actually gave you that history when they breathlessly reported on this story of Donald Trump going beyond the pale that only Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have ever gone beyond before?  Wouldn’t facts in context change the meaning of the story???  Which is why they’re not doing it.

If the media wanted to lambast Trump in a fair way, they could title their story thus: “Trump joins Hillary Clinton in suggesting the assassination of a political rival.”  But it appears that they don’t remember what Hillary did.  And they don’t want anyone else too, either.

The entire project of the mainstream media right now is to make Donald Trump absolutely unelectable by depicting him as an unhinged man.  If the American people understood that Barack Obama threatened to kill his opponents “the Chicago Way” and Hillary Clinton threatened to have her opponent assassinated, you’d have a very different view of Donald Trump’s supposedly “beyond the pale” remark.

Hillary Clinton just came out and said this regarding the “2nd Amendment” as “threat” remark:

“Words matter, my friends.”

You mean, except for every single word in every single one of the 33,000 emails you destroyed so the American people couldn’t see how much YOUR words would have mattered given that they would have put you in prison for the remainder of your natural life???

Mainstream media “journalists” will NEVER be fair.  You can understand that the media has driven in their aiming stakes so that the field of fire will always be directed at Donald Trump.

The only thing we can hope here – given the sheer number of Americans who believe in their 2nd Amendment right to protect themselves in a world that Obama and Clinton have allowed to careen wildly out of control – is the fact that people will rightly view this as proof that Hillary Clinton (who wants to allow any victim of any incident involving a firearm to sue the gun manufacturer thereby putting gun makers out of business and thereby taking away our guns by fiat) truly DOES want to take away our 2nd Amendment and the guns that keep our families safe in our own homes.  All we can do is hope that in their biased frenzy to demonize Trump, the media goes too far and inadvertently strikes a nerve in the American psyche.

Let’s consider what the media is “forgetting” to cover while they hyperventilate over Donald Trump allegedly calling for the assassination of Hillary Clinton…

As we speak, Hillary Clinton just got caught featuring the father of the terrorist mass-murderer at a gay Orlando nightclub proudly supporting the presidential candidate who is by far and away the most pro-terrorist and the most anti-American:

Hillary Terrorist Supporter

Hey kids, that’s “Seddique Mateen, whose son Omar killed 49 people at Pulse nightclub on June 12, was seen grinning as he watched the Democratic presidential nominee speak from the area behind the podium usually reserved for VIPs.”

Usually reserved for VIPs and ALWAYS carefully VETTED.

For the official record, the murderous son, Omar, was ALSO a registered Democrat.

If you’re a terrorist, there is absolutely zero question whom YOU’RE voting for.

Just as if you’re a cop-assassinating criminal, there is zero question whom you’re voting for.

The Democrat Party – especially the Democrat Party that will exist if Hillary Clinton is elected president – is an utterly vile, demonic entity.

But hey, we journalists are Joseph Goebbel’s love children; let’s refuse to talk about ACTUAL TERRORISTS WHO MASS-MURDERED AMERICANS and instead talk about some crap Donald Trump said that we could savagely attack him for.

As we speak, Hillary Clinton is being busted all over the place for quid pro quo deals in which she sold out America to enrich herself at the American people’s expense.  Even the leftist Huffington Post is openly asking, “Has Hillary Clinton won the email battle only to lose the corruption war?”  Even BEFORE this latest slamming indictment proving yet ANOTHER Hillary Clinton act of corruption came out, HuffPo was saying:

Hillary Corrupt Huffpo

You HAVE to click on that to read it: “The evidence showing clear-cut, stupid proof, quid-pro quo between Bill and Hillary Clinton donors and candidate Hillary Clinton is getting too obvious to ignore.”

Unless you are a mainstream media “journalist” love-child of Joseph Goebbels, that is.  Then you can easily ignore it by alleging that whatever quip Donald Trump said today rises to a level that forces us to give ZERO air-time to the documented treasonous criminal that Hillary Clinton is.

We are finding what are textbook examples of “quid-pro quo,” in which access, influence and favors were bought and sold.  In one stunning example, Huma Abedin, Clinton’s top aide – in spite of her now-provably false testimony that Hillary Clinton burned her schedules for security – is caught having an email exchange in which she’s asked for Hillary’s schedule (you know, so people who paid to play can “just happen” to show up where Hillary is) emails back basically saying, “I just happened to leave it on my bed in my hotel room and the door just happens to be unlocked and I just happen not to be there to physically see if you’re looking at it.”

Aside from the obvious sale of that schedule, who ELSE could have seen that schedule?  hen you see this blatantly cavalier attitude toward security when it comes to Hillary Clinton enriching herself, how is it NOT a surprise that the Russians and probably all our other enemies hacked Hillary’s unsecured server that was installed totally for Hillary’s a) convenience and b) ability to break the law and purge the evidence???

Why was Huma Abedin on both payrolls for the Clinton Foundation AND the State Department???  How is that not the very embodiment of “conflict of interest”???  Why did Hillary Clinton personally sign off on such an obvious blatantly dishonest and corrupt double-dip???  Despite signing a pledge that she would never ever EVER conflate State Department business with Clinton Foundation business????

Why did Bill Clinton’s value as a speaker-for-hire suddenly skyrocket so massively after Hillary Clinton became Secretary of State when every other president’s value rapidly declines after leaving office???  Nine years after leaving office, why does Bill Clinton’s value as a speaker suddenly soar from $100,000 a speech to $500,000 a speech???  Other than paying to play for Hillary’s influence as Secretary of State???  Why did the Hillary Clinton State Department approve of so many obvious conflicts of interests involving entities with business or policy interests with the U.S. State Department???

It is WRONG to say that none of this indicts Hillary; ALL of it indicts her.  She signed off on ALL of it.  She is literally the one who set up the entire criminal enterprise.

Donors pushed the Clinton State Department for access, favors, even JOBS.  And of course “jobs” as “favors.”  Pay-to-play.  Quid-pro quo.

Here is just one of MANY textbook dictionary definitions of quid-pro quo “pay-to-play”.

And by the way, NONE of these emails were in those that Hillary turned over to the State Department despite her swearing under oath that she turned over ALL emails involving the State Department to the State Department.

The fact that these emails even exist in and of themselves proves that Hillary Clinton is a criminal.

Most conservatives, myself included, have been pointing out all along that Hillary Clinton did not have a secret unauthorized private server installed to post national security secrets for our enemies to hack and view; rather, she did it as a criminal conspiracy to prevent the transparency that the law requires of our public servants and maintain the ability to destroy evidence – which she did to the tune of some 33,000 purged emails.  The legal theory of the spoliation of evidence inference holds that when a party destroys evidence, it is justifiable to infer that the party had “consciousness of guilt” or other motivation to avoid the evidence.  The destruction of evidence is itself evidence.

In any legitimate system of justice, a court would find Hillary Clinton guilty and respond to her protests by saying, “Well, then, it’s just too damn bad you destroyed all the evidence of your innocence, isn’t it”?

We all understand what Habitat for Humanity does.  What does the Clinton Foundation do?  It was ALWAYS murky.  And now we know with crystal clarity: the Clinton Foundation was a conduit for influencing federal officials at the State Department for the purpose of rewarding Clinton donors with jobs, with favors, with influence on a quid-pro quo basis.

Will the media report the facts?  Will the mainstream media create the drumbeat of saying to Obama and Hillary and all the tools who speak in their stead, “YOU DID WRONG!!!  AND WE ARE GOING TO HOLD YOU ACCOUNTABLE!!!”

NO.  Don’t hold your breath.

Instead, it’s like Trump says “It’s my duty to…” and the entire mainstream media is like, “Trump said ‘doody’!!!”

Realize whether we’re talking about ANY of the ENTIRE Hillary Clinton email scandal, the mainstream media has been WORTHLESS in reporting.  Do you know who forced this story open?  Judicial Watch and the Republican House.  Because the mainstream media that will crawl up Donald Trump’s rectum with a magnifying glass WILL NOT DO ITS JOB OR BE FAIR OR HONEST IN ITS COVERAGE.

No entity on earth is more evil than a biased media that distorts the facts and shapes their narratives.

You might see such a statement and think, “Wait a minute!  ISIS is worse than the mainstream media!”  And my contention is no it isn’t; because if the mainstream media had just done it’s damn JOB rather than spend the last eight years whitewashing for Barack Obama, Obama would NEVER have been allowed to get away with doing NOTHING while that terrorist army exploded into existence and created a caliphate.  The only way an Islamic State can get away with such disgusting and vicious evil is when a dishonest media refuses to report the truth and allows people to believe lies.  Just as the only reason Hillary Clinton is free to run for president rather than already having been convicted and serving a long sentence in PRISON is because the same corrupt, dishonest media will not hold Barack Obama responsible the way they would have had a Republican president tried to exonerate an obviously guilty successor.  Had the Democrats not been allowed to nominate such a terrible and yes, CRIMINAL candidate, the Republicans would not have angrily responded by nominating Donald Trump.  If history proves anything, it is that if you distort or warp history, you allow the most evil things to happen as lies triumph.  The media again and again has allowed the worst outcomes to become reality by playing political games with reality.  People cannot even POSSIBLY do the right thing if they don’t know the truth; and the mainstream media exists today to prevent people from knowing the truth.  And it is for that reason that I believe that journalists will one day scream as they burn in a lower level of hell than the Nazis.

 

 

Obama Poisoning The Water For Trump Overseas: Barack Obama Is A Demonic Slanderer Even By His OWN Demonic Standard

August 2, 2016

I want you to first read about something that Bush said once – in an incredibly oblique reference that may not have even intended Obama and CERTAINLY did not name him – and the Obama campaign’s and the Democrat Party’s reaction to that incredibly oblique reference.  And then I want to contrast that with the vile demonization that Barack Obama is using to poison the world against D0nald Trump and THE ENTIRE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IF IT ELECTS TRUMP as he takes his campaign of hate overseas.

On May 16, 2008 the New York Times – hardly a partial, objective source friendly to Bush or to Republicans – printed this article:

Bush Speech Criticized as Attack on Obama
By SHERYL GAY STOLBERGMAY 16, 2008

JERUSALEM — President Bush used a speech to the Israeli Parliament on Thursday to denounce those who would negotiate with “terrorists and radicals” — a remark that was widely interpreted as a rebuke to Senator Barack Obama, the Democratic presidential contender, who has argued that the United States should talk directly with countries like Iran and Syria.

Mr. Bush did not mention Mr. Obama by name, and the White House said his remarks were not aimed at the senator, though they created a political firestorm in Washington nonetheless.

In a lengthy speech intended to promote the strong alliance between the United States and Israel, the president invoked the emotionally volatile imagery of World War II to make the case that talking to extremists was no different than appeasing Hitler and the Nazis.

“Some seem to believe that we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along,” Mr. Bush said. “We have heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: “Lord, if I could only have talked to Hitler, all this might have been avoided.” We have an obligation to call this what it is — the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history.”

The president was alluding to Senator William E. Borah, an Idaho Republican noted for his powers of oratory and his isolationist views. In 1938, when Hitler was gobbling up parts of Europe, Borah expressed admiration for him, and in 1939 he did indeed lament that he had not been able to talk to Hitler before the Nazi invasion of Poland.

The Obama campaign issued an angry response to Mr. Bush’s statement. In an e-mail statement to reporters, the senator denounced Mr. Bush for using the 60th anniversary of Israel to “launch a false political attack,” adding, “George Bush knows that I have never supported engagement with terrorists, and the president’s extraordinary politicization of foreign policy and the politics of fear do nothing to secure the American people or our stalwart ally Israel.”

Other Democrats leapt to Mr. Obama’s defense, among them Representative Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, chairman of the House Democratic Caucus, who accused Mr. Bush of taking politics overseas.

“The tradition has always been that when a U.S. president is overseas, partisan politics stops at the water’s edge,” Mr. Emanuel said in a statement. “President Bush has now taken that principle and turned it on its head.”

The White House press secretary, Dana Perino, said the comment was not a reference to Mr. Obama and Mr. Bush was simply reiterating his own longstanding views.

“I understand when you’re running for office you sometimes think the world revolves around you — that is not always true and it is not true in this case,” Ms. Perino told reporters here.

[…]

I read through the entire article, and found no other reference that even Bush’s harshest critiques attributed to an attack against Obama on foreign soil that the Democrats claim would be evil beyond the pale and no president worthy of the office would engage in such behavior.

Now, while I would argue that “if the damn shoe fits, put it on your demon-clawed feet and WEAR them, but otherwise shut up” applies here.  Even the New York SLIMES admits that “Mr. Bush did not mention Mr. Obama by name.”  And it is such an oblique mention at best it is impossible for anyone to prove that Bush actually intended Obama.

Mind you, in spite of Obama’s outright lies to the contrary, history now proves that Obama actually DID negotiate with terrorists and radicals and do every damn thing he said there was no way he would do.

Obama has a longstanding tradition of being THE worst and most despicable HYPOCRITE who EVER lived.  So he has made quite a habit of doing what he and his campaign said was so vile.

So in any event, we have from the Democrat Party and from Obama an acknowledgement that any president who criticizes an opposition candidate for president while overseas is worse than a piece of roach poop.

So let us now see what our “Whatever-is-worse-than-roach-poop-in-Chief has said about Donald Trump:

  • May 26, 2016: Nothing stops politics this election season — not even the water’s edge.While traveling overseas on official business Thursday, President Obama couldn’t resist wading into political matters back home, sparking controversy by saying foreign leaders are “rattled” by the rise of presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump.Obama, saying leaders have “good reason” to feel that way, made the remarks on the sidelines of a Group of Seven economic summit in Japan.“They are rattled by it — and for good reason,” Obama said. “Because a lot of the proposals he has made display either ignorance of world affairs, or a cavalier attitude, or an interest in getting tweets and headlines.” […]

    Obama, meanwhile, was criticized for his remarks by other Republicans, with one calling them “incredibly irresponsible” given the context.

    “When the president of the United States goes overseas he’s representing the country,” Josh Holmes, former chief of staff to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, said on Fox News. “It is remarkably irresponsible and remarkably unpresidential for him to weigh in on a domestic political battle and effectively undermine one of the candidates who could replace him next January.”

    “In front of the world community and effectively in front of all the world leaders, saying someone is essentially unfit for office is an incredibly irresponsible move for the president of the United States,” Holmes said.

You can see how the same mainstream media that so demonically blasted Bush for his incredibly opaque-at-worst reference now takes pleasure in Obama slandering Trump overseas. It’s not like these people are unrelentingly biased or anything.

What Obama did was reckless and unpresidential.  It was wrong – and it was wrong by Obama’s very own words.  But not only did he not quit doing it, he ESCALATED his vicious and unpresidential behavior.  Witness what he just did today while standing right next to the Prime Minister of Singapore addressing a supposedly overseas and international agreement (TPP):

  • August 2, 2016: Singapore’s prime minister visited the White House today to pitch the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade deal and discuss other issues, but his appearance was overshadowed by Donald Trump.Prime Minister Lee and President Obama appeared before media as part of an official state visit to Washington, D.C. by the Singaporean leader. He cited economics, security, and political stability in the Asia-Pacific region all as reasons why the United States should pass TPP as soon as possible.Lee spoke specifically about the strategic interests that the United States maintains and indirectly referenced the balancing of power that America must maintain with China. He also expressed his neutral stance on the outcome of the U.S. presidential election.

    Obama also pitched the deal but did not stay neutral on the election.

    “The Republican nominee is unfit to serve as president,” Obama said, adding, “The notion that he would attack a Gold Star family that made such extraordinary sacrifices on behalf of our country, the fact that he doesn’t appear to have basic knowledge of critical issues in Europe, the Middle East, in Asia, means that he’s woefully unprepared to do this job.”

    Obama was referring to Trump’s ongoing feud with Khizr Khan, who spoke at the Democratic National Convention about his son, a muslim and a U.S. soldier who lost his life in combat. He may also have been referring to Trump’s recent confusion over the conflict between Russia and Ukraine.

    Many headlines coming out of the press conference focused on these comments, and not the TPP.

The ONLY individual who has now PROVEN he is “unfit to be the president” is the abject disgrace who is currently holding the damn job.

I want you to understand something, Democrat: if the American people elect Donald Trump for president, Barack Obama just personally flushed you and your entire country down the toilet.  This is slash-and-burn at its WORST.

Given the way our Traitor-in-Chief just characterized what may be President Donald Trump, how would Russia and China not be within their rights to attack the United States citing Obama’s own words that Trump is unstable and a direct threat to world peace???

Barack Obama just stated, “If Donald Trump is elected, I want America wiped out in World War III.”  Because that is how much that wicked fool truly despises this country.  He is all but calling for every other nation to do everything it can to exploit Donald Trump, to boycott him, to weaken him, to destroy him – and the nation that elected him and the people who live here in the process.

I think of the words from Darwinist Adolf Hitler, who had a similar view about destroying his own country if it didn’t pursue his warped vision of it:

“If the German Volk is not strong enough and is not sufficiently prepared to offer its own blood for its existence, it should cease to exist and be destroyed by a stronger power.”

That is EXACTLY the wicked spirit that Barack Obama is pursuing.  Let me paraphrase:

“If the American people are not decent enough and are not sufficiently intelligent to offer Hillary Clinton for its own existence, it should cease to exist and be destroyed by a stronger power.”

Barack Obama just invited the world to wipe America out if the American people choose Trump.

He is a wicked man.  And Hillary Clinton has promised to be even MORE wicked in trying to replace him.

Hillary attacked Donald Trump for his sarcastic reference regarding Russia and her more than thirty thousand illegally purged emails.  The claim is that Donald Trump is cozy with Russia and with Putin.  But the last I heard, It was HILLARY CLINTON and her vile criminal front otherwise known as the Clinton Foundation that sold America’s uranium (weakening our nuclear arsenal while strengthening Russia’s) to our enemy.

Hillary Clinton had an interview with Fox News correspondent Chris Wallace and as a result of her outright lies ABOUT her lies even the leftist Washington Post gave her FOUR PINNOCHIOS – the worst possible rating for untruthfulness.  Even uberliberal correspondent Ron Fornier, writing for the uberliberal Atlantic, is openly asking the question, “Why Can’t Hillary Stop Lying?”  And Obama was ostensibly responding to what Obama said about the Gold Star Muslim father of a slain American soldier and demonized Donald Trump: what does Obama have to say about the multiple Gold Star family members who have maintained for years that Hillary Clinton looked them right in the eyes and lied to their faces???  Just how in the hell and on what damn planet is Hillary Clinton not “unfit” to be president or even be allowed to freely walk the streets apart from an unrelenting double-standard and perversion of the law???

I know that if Donald Trump is elected president and ANY nation does ANYTHING, it will be because Barack Obama went out to “community organize” against him and against the American people and the nation that elected him because Obama is nothing more than a butthurt malignant narcissist failure.

Terrorism will skyrocket nearly 2,000 percent under Barack Obama’s failed watch.  Our economy is in shambles by any legitimate measure, including the worst labor participation rate in my lifetime and an economy that is doing so poorly we’re having the worst “wreckovery” going back to World War II and we’ve got less home ownership in American history (it is THE lowest in the 51-years they have even been keeping the damn statistic).  Meanwhile Barack Obama’s ObamaCare is an economy- and healthcare-shattering FIASCO.

And this ontological FOOL actually has the tiny little cockroach testicles to claim that somebody ELSE is “unfit” to be president.

Personally, for me, the best argument that Donald Trump will be a great president actually comes in the form of the fact that the very worst president in American history, who just proved he passionately hates this country and everyone who lives in it, says that Trump will be a bad president.  Because every single THING Barack Obama believes is profoundly WRONG.

 

 

 

The Hypocrite Chutzpah Of Hillary Clinton And Every Fascist Who Supports Her

April 21, 2016

Came across an article that just made me start laughing.  Here’s how it ends:

The speech in 2013 was one of three Clinton made on behalf of Goldman Sachs. According to public records, Clinton gave 92 speeches between 2013 and 2015. Her standard fee is $225,000, and she collected $21.6 million dollars in just under two years. Clinton made 8 speeches to big banks, netting $1.8 million, according to a CNN analysis.

There is nothing illegal or unethical about former Secretaries of State earning money on the speaking circuit. And according to sources in the industry, there is nothing unusual about someone with the name value of Hillary Clinton being able to charge so much.

The standard fee and her demands are outlined in a memo from the Harry Walker Agency in New York.

According to the memo, Clinton requires travel by private jet, and even specifies that she prefers a Gulfstream 450 or larger. Her staff requires first class and business class tickets. And two members of her staff require up to three days on site to prepare, with all local transportation and meals included.

The memo states Clinton should be booked into a presidential suite with up to three separate rooms attached.

Clinton also requires a flat fee of $1,000 to pay for an onsite stenographer to record everything she says. However, Clinton is not required to provide the host with a copy, according to the memo.

Costs associated with her demands are on top of her speaking fee.

The speeches have been shrouded in privacy. Her staff has limited photographs and at times even confiscated cell phones. Attendees of some Clinton speeches complained vocally on social media that they were told to turn their phones off — no photos, no live tweeting.

In the summer of 2013, Clinton spoke before a major convention of human resources executives. The group had previously hosted speeches of Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice, both former Secretaries of State. John Hollon, an editor for an online trade journal attended both, and tried to attend Clinton’s speech. He says he was kicked out due to Clinton’s request for no media.

“This is the only time in 10 or 11 years of going to to the annual event, which is the biggest human resource event of the year, the only time they have banned press from any speaker,” said Hollon.

There was no reason given, he says. The Society for Human Resource Management, the host of the event, told CNN: “All keynote speakers come with some requirements.”

—————————————————

There’s nothing on any of those transcripts that would ever get Hillary in any trouble.  As long as nobody who has a shred of integrity is never allowed to ever see them.

And strangely enough the same media that sent reporters to fly to Alaska to dig through Sarah Palin’s trash and published all of her emails and begged readers to help them find any dirt they could use to demonize her; the same media that has steadfastly refused to try to produce Obama’s college records that Obama for some reason spent $2 million to suppress (that prove he applied as a foreign exchange student) or the video of his evening celebrating terrorist Rashid Khalidi (that document Obama is a terrorist sympathizer); that same media somehow oh-so-strangely can’t find any trace of any of Hillary’s 92 speeches.

So 92 Shakespearean oratories for which she received about twenty-two million bucks and the mainstream media can tell you what Sarah Palin had for lunch because they have the contents of her garbage can to prove it.

They can’t find a single one of those speeches that would make Hillary Clinton unelectable when the same damn media INVENTED records when they needed to in order to falsely demonize George W. Bush.

You’re not going to know the truth about what this wicked liar said.  The media have already circled the wagons.

And for the record, even when it is a documented FACT that Hillary lied to the level of outright treason against the American people over a foreign policy scandal, the dishonest left couldn’t give less of a damn.  Truth only matters to a people capable of valuing the truth.  Which is why we’re in the mess we’re in today – and why that mess is going to get so much worse.

Okay, so let’s rephrase this in terms that liberals would instantly understand if they weren’t THE WORST HYPOCRITES WHO EVER ROACH-CRAWLED ACROSS PLANET EARTH:

She betrayed everything she publicly professes to believe in 92 times, which at least means she didn’t completely sell out a hundred times.  So you can’t say with complete accuracy that she’s a sell-out a hundred times over, unless you factor in all the OTHER damn ways she sold out, such as all the financial shenanigans of the Clinton Foundation (see here and here for example).  In which case she’s a sell-out fraud about a billion times over.  There was Haiti, where the Clinton Foundation fraud began practically from the moment the earthquake shook.  They exploited the sheer appalling incompetence of the United Nations that Chelsea described in an email in order to push THE MOST wasteful of projects to line their pockets and of course in order to line the pockets of their circle of crooks.  And let’s not even mention those absolutely and utterly detestable foreign governments that bribed the Clintons.  There’s nothing to say because there’s absolutely no possible defense other than shameless corrupt greed.

It’s just a FACT: Hillary Clinton is CORRUPT.  Hillary Clinton IS FOR SALE:

WASHINGTON — It’s not just Wall Street banks. Most companies and groups that paid Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton to speak between 2013 and 2015 have lobbied federal agencies in recent years, and more than one-third are government contractors, an Associated Press review has found. Their interests are sprawling and would follow Clinton to the White House should she win election this fall.

The AP’s review of federal records, regulatory filings and correspondence showed that almost all the 82 corporations, trade associations and other groups that paid for or sponsored Clinton’s speeches have actively sought to sway the government — lobbying, bidding for contracts, commenting on federal policy and in some cases contacting State Department officials or Clinton herself during her tenure as secretary of stat

Corporations are evil, liberals tell us.  Unless, of course, the corporation is something like Solyndra (and see also here).  Even as it takes half a billion dollars of Obama money and produces nothing and leaves us with nothing but even more giant debt for the people to repay as the executives fly off with Hillary in her Gulfstream and bribe her by paying for a “speech.”  Liberalism is crony capitalism, which is another term for “fascism.”  Liberalism is using the raw force of government to pick who wins and who loses, pure and simple.

Don’t expect anything but hate from a Democrat if you actually produce a damn product that people truly NEED.  I used to see people driving around in cars with idiotic slogans demonizing the oil that actually makes them go and I just wish I had a rocket launcher on me.  Now, of course, instead I see these self-righteous turds driving electric cars that require more than TWICE the carbon pollution to build than a gas car, run on energy that came from polluting sources, and end up contaminating dumps with toxic-chemical-oozing batteries.  And I STILL want that rocket launcher.

Hillary demands a private jet because she truly despises planet earth.  She demands a Gulfstream 450 or larger, because it will murder Mother Earth more quickly.  You simply need to understand: these fascists don’t give ONE FLYING DAMN about climate change, other than the fact that they can exploit it and demagogue it and make a lot of millions of dollars demonizing people who don’t spew one TRILLIONTH as much global warming gasses as these pompous pollution bags do.

And she needs all those millions of dollars explaining at secretive coven-gatherings how she’ll help the filthiest of the filthy-rich because that’s how she can afford to turn every light on and run every appliance at all of her giant palatial mansions.

Because little people need to live miserable, deprived lives so liberal elites can have everything and feel good about their service to the environment.  You know, the way Obama and Biden welched on charitable giving because they prefer to force OTHER people to have their incomes seized by taxes imposed by people who don’t give SQUAT of their own money.

It’s kind of funny: at his VERY BEST, Obama gave about HALF of what the hated George W. Bush gave as a percentage of income; AND THEN LO AND BEHOLD THAT MEASELY HALF WENT TO NEXT TO NOTHING AFTER OBAMA GOT RE-ELECTED.  But liberalism is all about the celebration over forcing other people to do, never in actually doing their damn selves.

So we reminisce on how Romney got savagely demonized for the effective tax rate that he paid; and the same people who demonized him don’t even bother to cover their mouths as they yawn at the fact that the tyrant king of all other-people’s-wealth-redistributionists pays a LOWER RATE THAN THE GUY THEY DEMONIZED.  Because being a liberal means “It’s NEVER fascist when WE do what we demonize YOU for doing!”

Moral Standards-Hypocrite

Hillary and her staff of lesbian Satanists receive presidential suite accommodations whenever they board their climate-killing private jets to sell-out to Wall Street greed merchants.  Because to flaming-hot-fiery HELL with this “we represent the little guy” crap, at least until we speak our platitudes to propagandists masquerading as “journalists” who will spread the lies to the unwashed, ignorant masses.  It’s actually kind of laughable to consider that four yeas ago Mitt Romney ran for president and his wealth was used against him like a baseball bat smashing his face by people who are completely lacking in honor or honesty or decency or sincerity or virtue or integrity whatsoever.  And the same kind of people voted out their hypocrisy.  And yeah, it’s always amazing how money somehow doesn’t matter when a John Kerry marries a billionaire heiress because it only matters when a John McCain marries a millionaire heiress.

Watch Hillary make Trump’s wealth a campaign issue in spite of her her multi-million dollar mansions in Georgetown and Chappaqua and her jet-setting lifestyle of the rich and shameless.  Because to be a Democrat is to live in the perpetual state of Orwellian Two Minutes Hate for whoever you’re told to hate.  And it doesn’t matter to you that the people you’re told to hate are frankly better than the people who tell you to hate them.

The speeches are shrouded in privacy.  Because Hillary Clinton is a worse fascist than Hitler was.  Her staff limits photographs.  Because a) Hillary Clinton is a worse fascist than Hitler was and b) it requires special techniques for vampires to appear on film.  Her staff confiscates cell phones.  Because a) Hillary Clinton is a worse fascist than Hitler and b) her unaltered voice murders puppies.

In order to hear a Hillary Clinton speech you must take the mark of the beast on your right hand or on your forehead.  Oh, and fork over $225,000 check payable to “Lucifer.”

And yeah, as often as Hillary tries to weasel out of providing the transcripts of her speeches [that she charged the filthy-rich Wall Street oppressors $225,000 a pop plus lavish expenses] under the pathetic excuse that lots of other Secretaries of State who HAVE NEVER RUN FOR PRESIDENT should first pose naked so the leftist propaganda can bait-and-switch change the subject to what somebody WHO HAS NEVER RUN FOR PRESIDENT SAID, this fact remains: Hillary Clinton is a demonstrably more paranoid, manipulative, secretive Nazi fascist than all of the other ex-officials who ever gave a speech COMBINED.

So please vote for Hellery. Because you need to do that to “upgrade” yourselves to a hotter place in hell.

Yeah, If You’re A Democrat, You’re A HYPOCRITE

May 29, 2015

I was a little surprised when I saw even the Los Angeles Times editorial condemn the rank hypocrisy of labor unions:

Editorial L.A. labor leaders’ hypocrisy on minimum wage hike
By The Times Editorial Board
▼ Los Angeles labor leaders fought for a minimum wage hike; now they want to be exempt from it
▼ L.A. County Federation of Labor is being hypocritical in its stance on raising the minimum wage
May 29, 2015, 5:00 AM

No, employers with a unionized workforce should not be allowed to pay less than Los Angeles’ proposed minimum wage. It’s stunning that after leading the fight for a $15 citywide minimum wage and vehemently opposing efforts to exempt restaurant workers, nonprofits and small businesses from the full wage hike, the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor is now lobbying for an exemption for employers with union contracts. That’s right — labor leaders are advocating that an employer should have the right to pay union members less than the minimum wage.

This is hypocrisy at its worst, and it plays into the cynical view that the federation is more interested in unionizing companies and boosting its rolls of dues-paying members than in helping poor workers. Such an exemption would create an incentive for companies to allow unions in — but rather than helping workers, it would undermine the purpose of the minimum wage ordinance, which is to set a new, higher pay floor in order to help lift the greatest number of low-wage Angelenos out of poverty.

Mind you, it was also rank hypocrisy at its WORST when the same damn cockroach labor unions fought like the rabid roaches that they are to get ObamaCare passed – and then demanded that they be exempted from the law they forced everybody else to bow down before and obey.

Because to be a Democrat is to be a fascist who says, “What is good for me to force on thee should not apply to me.”

And of course there has never been in all of human history a politician who exemplified that spirit of elitist liberal entitlement than Hillary Clinton.  Which is why hypocrite Democrats love her so much.

Here’s another one: Same newspaper, same day, revealing how liberals are HYPOCRITES without shame, without honor, without virtue, without decency, without integrity.  As you read the following LA Times article listen to my voice in your head screaming, “JUST HOW THE HELL IS IT THAT THESE LIBERAL DEMOCRAT HOLLYWOOD COCKROACHES WHO DEMAND HIGHER TAXES ON EVERYBODY ELSE ARE CHASING TAX BREAKS RIGHT OUT OF THE DAMN STATE???

Realize before I show the article below that Warner Bros. and pretty much all the other big Hollywood entities are LIBERALS who donated heavily to Obama:

Other media companies have contributed more significantly to Mr. Obama, including Time Warner, owner of CNN and the magazine publishing house Time Inc. The company, which is based in New York and also owns Warner Brothers and HBO, has contributed $191,834 to Mr. Obama in the 2012 election cycle, compared with $10,750 to Mr. Romney

Which is to say, having done the math, that Warner Bros. is 1,692.84 percent more Obama-liberal than it is Romney-Republican.  And virtually every single media outlet today is a whore of liberal ideology, pumping their propaganda into the mindless heads of pathologically depraved cows who gobble it up like pigs shoving their faces into their feeding trough.  I mean, when I was a child, I used to spit into fish ponds and watch in amazement as the goldfish swarmed to be the first to dine on my loogie.  But only now do I realize that I was receiving an object lesson in how liberals teach and how liberals learn.

Liberals are Nazis who say, “What is good for me to force on thee does not apply to me.

Now watch how real liberals act when it’s THEIR money rather than somebody else’s money:

Big movies in short supply in California, FilmL.A. says
By Richard Verrier
▼ Only two big-budget movies released in 2014 were filmed in California
▼ Few big movies have filmed in California because they were excluded from the state’s financial incentives
May 28, 2015, 5:59 PM

The big movie hitting theaters this weekend is “San Andreas,” depicting the destruction of California from a massive earthquake.

The Warner Bros. movie was filmed mainly in Australia, of course.

Such is the reality that California faces in an industry where tax credits and other financial inducements increasingly drive where movies are filmed around the world.

Fresh evidence of that emerged Thursday in a feature film study from FilmL.A. Inc., the nonprofit group that handles film permits for the city and county.

The second annual report found that only 22 of 106 films released by the major studios in 2014 were actually filmed in California. The rest of the movies were shot in New York, Britain, Canada, Georgia, Louisiana, Australia and a dozen other states and countries.

Only two films with budgets above $100 million were filmed primarily in California: Marvel’s “Captain America: The Winter Soldier” and Paramount’s “Interstellar.” Even those films spent considerable time and money in other locations that offer tax credits and rebates to lure filmmakers.

The exodus of big movies from California has been happening for years. When local film production peaked in 1997, 64% of the top 25 movies at the box office were filmed in California, compared with 16% last year.

“We’ve waited so long to truly get involved in the competition that we’ve allowed some major production centers to be created around the world,” said Paul Audley, president of FilmL.A.

The report notes that several high-profile movies set in California have filmed elsewhere, including Warner Bros.’ “Godzilla,” which was shot mainly in Vancouver, Canada; 20th Century Fox’s “Dawn of the Planet of the Apes,” which was filmed in Louisiana; and Disney’s “Million Dollar Arm,” which was shot mainly in Georgia.

As for “San Andreas,” the movie filmed some scenes in Los Angeles and San Francisco but most of the two-month shoot took place at Village Roadshow’s Studio on the Gold Coast in Queensland, Australia.

The $110-million movie, from Warner Bros.’ New Line Cinema unit, received a portion of a $20-million film fund specifically designed to attract foreign productions.

Warner’s decision was not surprising.

Few big movies have filmed in California because they were excluded from the state’s financial incentives.

That’s about to change. To stop the exodus of production, state lawmakers last year approved an expansion of the film and TV tax credit program. The new program triples annual funding to $330 million a year and for the first time allows big budget films to apply for the incentives.

Studios will apply for feature film tax credits under the new program in July.

“The new program should result in us getting several of the large features back in California,” Audley said.

While the same Democrats who are giving tax credits to hypocrite liberal moviemakers impose sky-high taxes on all the other businesses and people they’re crushing and oppressing right out of the state.

If you are not truly and astonishingly STUPID, you understand that low taxes are the key to healthy businesses.  The problem with these liberals isn’t that they’re dumb, it is that they are utterly depraved moral hypocrites who because they are the human equivalent of cockroaches are ONLY capable of caring about THEMSELVES and to hell with everybody else.

Now, elitist jet-setting liberals right out of The Who’s songEminence FrontDO understand that the overwhelming majority of Democrats are just rank-and-goose-stepping-Nazi-file STUPID as well as depraved.  They are little more than dumb farm-animal-cattle who are so easily lied to and manipulated and duped and led by the nose by lies that it is beyond amazing.  But yeah, stupid Democrat: “it’s an eminence front.”  And “it’s a put on.”  That’s what liberalism is, that’s what the Democrat Party represents: an eminence front, a bright-shining lie.

Let’s force ObamaCare.  And exempt ourselves.  Let’s force higher wages.  And exempt ourselves.  Let’s force higher taxes.  And exempt ourselves.  And anybody who thinks liberals give one flying DAMN about the poor are poor – in the sense of completely lacking in either rational or moral-capacity – deluded fools.

If you have any insight whatsoever into the shriveled cockroach psyche of Hillary Clinton, you shouldn’t be one bit surprised that this corruptocrat who wants to be empress got her parasitic little fangs into $100,000 of probably the biggest and worst scandal ever to hit the sports universe:

WASHINGTON — The embattled Clinton Foundation can add a new name to its long list of donors under scrutiny — the scandal-tarred world soccer federation.

FIFA donated as much as $100,000 to the charity headed by Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton, foundation records revealed, with no further details available.

On Wednesday, US authorities indicted 14 soccer officials.

FBI agents arrested the officials meeting in Switzerland, as the head of the Justice Department described a conspiracy of bribery and corruption in the selection of World Cup host countries and sponsors.

The Clinton Foundation, already under fire for accepting multimillion-dollar contributions from nations including Saudi Arabia, disclosed only the range of the contribution — from $50,001 to $100,000.

Meanwhile, as we speak, on this very day’s headlines, even the New York Times is calling what the Clintons did “distasteful”:

An Award for Bill Clinton Came With $500,000 for His Foundation
By DEBORAH SONTAGMAY 29, 2015

To commemorate the 10th anniversary of the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami, Petra Nemcova, a Czech model who survived the disaster by clinging to a palm tree, decided to pull out all the stops for the annual fund-raiser of her school-building charity, the Happy Hearts Fund.

She booked Cipriani 42nd Street, which greeted guests with Bellini cocktails on silver trays. She flew in Sheryl Crow with her band and crew for a 20-minute set. She special-ordered heart-shaped floral centerpieces, heart-shaped chocolate parfaits, heart-shaped tiramisù and, because orange is the charity’s color, an orange carpet rather than a red one. She imported a Swiss auctioneer and handed out orange rulers to serve as auction paddles, playfully threatening to use hers to spank the highest bidder for an Ibiza vacation.

The gala cost $363,413. But the real splurge? Bill Clinton.

The former president of the United States agreed to accept a lifetime achievement award at the June 2014 event after Ms. Nemcova offered a $500,000 contribution to the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation. The donation, made late last year after the foundation sent the charity an invoice, amounted to almost a quarter of the evening’s net proceeds — enough to build 10 preschools in Indonesia.

Model Invites Bill Clinton to Her Gala

In this August 2013 letter, the model Petra Nemcova rewrote an earlier invitation asking Bill Clinton to accept a lifetime achievement award from Ms. Nemcova’s Happy Hearts Fund charity.

OPEN Document: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/05/30/us/politics/model-invites-bill-clinton-to-her-gala.html

Happy Hearts’ former executive director believes the transaction was a “quid pro quo,” which rerouted donations intended for a small charity with the concrete mission of rebuilding schools after natural disasters to a large foundation with a broader agenda and a budget 100 times bigger.

“The Clinton Foundation had rejected the Happy Hearts Fund invitation more than once, until there was a thinly veiled solicitation and then the offer of an honorarium,” said the former executive director, Sue Veres Royal, who held that position at the time of the gala and was dismissed a few weeks later amid conflicts over the gala and other issues.

Press officers for Ms. Nemcova and for the Clinton Foundation said on Thursday that the foundation had not solicited the donation and that the money would be used for projects in Haiti, as yet undetermined.

The Happy Hearts Fund and the Clinton Foundation “have a shared goal of providing meaningful help to Haiti,” the school charity’s spokeswoman said. “We believe that we can create the most impactful change by working together.”

Never publicly disclosed, the episode provides a window into the way the Clinton Foundation relies on the Clintons’ prestige to amass donors large and small, offering the prospect, as described in the foundation’s annual report, of lucrative global connections and participation in a worldwide mission to “unlock human potential” through “the power of creative collaboration.”

Similarly, Ms. Nemcova, like other celebrity philanthropists, uses her fame to promote her charity — which has financed more than 110 schools, mostly kindergartens — just as she uses Happy Hearts to position herself as a model-humanitarian.

“This is primarily a small but telling example of the way the Clintons operate,” said Doug White, who directs the master’s program in fund-raising management at Columbia University. “The model has responsibility; she paid a high price for a feel-good moment with Bill Clinton. But he was riding the back of this small charity for what? A half-million bucks? I find it — what would be the word? — distasteful.”

In her letter of invitation to Mr. Clinton, Ms. Nemcova, then chairwoman of her charity’s board, said she wanted to show her appreciation for his “inspirational leadership” after disasters.

“My gratitude to you is so strong that should you accept, we will schedule our event commemorating the 10th anniversary around your schedule,” she wrote, speaking of their shared dedication to the survivors of both the tsunami and the 2010 earthquake in Haiti.

When the tsunami struck in December 2004, Ms. Nemcova, who had been featured on the cover of the Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue the previous year, was vacationing in Thailand with her boyfriend, a fashion photographer named Simon Atlee. They were swept from their beach cottage and separated in the turbulent waters; Mr. Atlee died.

Ms. Nemcova, her pelvis shattered, held fast to a tree for hours until she was rescued, listening impotently to the cries of children, she has said, which later motivated her to found her child-centric charity.

Happy Hearts rebuilt two schools in Thailand while Mr. Clinton was the United Nations’ envoy for tsunami relief and reconstruction. Most of the charity’s rebuilding has been in Indonesia after the earthquakes of 2006 and 2009.

After the 2010 earthquake in Haiti, Ms. Nemcova turned her attention to that small island nation, where both Mr. Clinton and Hillary Rodham Clinton, as secretary of state, played outsize roles in the earthquake relief effort and the more problem-filled reconstruction. The country had attracted other celebrity benefactors, too, notably the actor Sean Penn, an ex-boyfriend of Ms. Nemcova’s who had created his own relief organization and forged a relationship with Mr. Clinton.

In the fall of 2011, many players in Haiti’s rebuilding effort, including Ms. Nemcova, attended the Clinton Global Initiative’s membership meeting in Manhattan. Members, who must be invited, pay $20,000 in annual dues, largely for the yearly gatherings, where charity founders and entrepreneurs get to network with world leaders, corporate executives and wealthy donors.

Clinton Foundation Bills Small Charity for Big Donation

Six months after Bill Clinton accepted a lifetime achievement award at the Happy Hearts Fund gala in June 2014, the Clinton Foundation sent this invoice to the charity, run by the model Petra Nemcova. It sought to collect a $500,000 donation.

OPEN Document: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/05/30/us/politics/clinton-foundation-bills-small-charity-for-big-donation.html

At the meeting, Ms. Nemcova signed a memorandum of understanding with the president of the Inter-American Development Bank to finance schools in Haiti. The development bank has also donated to the Clinton Foundation — just over $1 million — and it partnered with Mrs. Clinton’s State Department after the earthquake to create an industrial park in northern Haiti.

Almost four years after Happy Hearts and the development bank made their commitment, they have yet to complete a single school, partly because of problems finding suitable land. Five schools are under construction.

Happy Hearts collaborated more expeditiously in Haiti with the Digicel Foundation, whose founder, the Irish billionaire Denis O’Brien, is a multimillion-dollar supporter of the Clinton Foundation and whose parent telecommunications company benefited from grants from Mrs. Clinton’s State Department.

Digicel also made a commitment at the 2011 meeting to build schools; the commitment was a formality, though, as Digicel had already taken the lead in Haiti in that realm. It has built 150 schools there over the last seven years; Happy Heart has built seven, six of them joint or side-by-side ventures with Digicel.

One of those schools, operated by the Haitian group Prodev, was featured in the Clinton Foundation’s most recent annual report as “built through a Clinton Global Initiative Commitment to Action.” The Clinton Foundation’s sole direct contribution to the school was a grant for an Earth Day celebration and tree-planting activity.

In late 2011, Ms. Nemcova dedicated her charity’s annual fund-raiser to Haiti, awarding the lifetime achievement honor to Mr. Penn, whom the Haitian government had named an ambassador at large, and giving a speaking platform to Laurent Lamothe, Haiti’s foreign minister.

The next year, Ms. Nemcova, too, became an ambassador at large for Haiti. And by 2013, she was practically living there, having become romantically involved with Mr. Lamothe, by then prime minister. (Mr. Lamothe, no longer prime minister, is now a presidential candidate in Haiti, and the couple have split up.)

Through the years, Ms. Nemcova, 35, has blended her personal and philanthropic lives; her sister replaced Ms. Veres Royal as executive director of Happy Hearts. She has also mingled her celebrity and charity work, both in ways that benefited the charity and in ways that benefited her personally.

In 2011, when she appeared as a contestant on ABC’s “Dancing With the Stars,” her survival story and charity received ample, positive attention. She brought on Clinique and Chopard as sponsors of the charity, but also accepted personal fees to model their products.

“Ms. Nemcova has a long career as a model in fashion industry for 16 years and has longstanding relationships with many brands,” her charity’s spokeswoman said. “Happy Hearts Fund is grateful for Chopard’s and Clinique’s support.”

At the 2014 gala, Chopard, a Swiss jeweler that was dedicating partial proceeds from a heart-shaped bracelet to the charity, set up lighted showcases in the cocktail area, Ms. Veres Royal said.

“They were peddling exorbitant jewelry at a gala that was supposed to focus on children who have lost their belongings, homes, and often friends and family members,” she said. “It was inappropriate and tacky. Too many people at that event were looking after their own interests first.”

Happy Hearts Fund first asked Mr. Clinton to be its honoree in 2011. Trying again in 2013, Ms. Nemcova sent her first formal letter of invitation in July, asking Mr. Clinton to be the primary award recipient at a Happy Hearts gala on Nov. 4, 2013, celebrating Indonesia.

Mr. Clinton’s scheduler replied with a cordial rejection — “Regrettably, he is committed to another event out of town that same evening” — in an email copied to Frank Giustra, the Canadian mining financier who is one of the Clinton Foundation’s largest donors and also a supporter of Ms. Nemcova.

Haitians protested outside the Happy Hearts Fund gala, which Mr. Clinton attended after Ms. Nemcova pledged $500,000 to the Clinton Foundation. Her charity has worked with the Clinton Foundation on projects in Haiti. Credit Tony Savino/Corbis

Ms. Nemcova subsequently met with officers at the Clinton Foundation, Ms. Veres Royal said. Afterward, she said, “Petra called me and said we have to include an honorarium for him — that they don’t look at these things unless money is offered, and it has to be $500,000.”

The invitation letter was revised and sent again at the end of August. It moved the gala to 2014, offered to work around Mr. Clinton’s availability, dropped the focus on Indonesia and shifted it to Haiti, and proposed the donation.

“Understanding the need and commitment to ‘rebuilding better,’ Happy Hearts Fund would like to also share the proceeds of the event with the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation, committing at least $500,000 in partnership on a joint educational project in Haiti, of your selection,” Ms. Nemcova wrote, ending with her customary signoff, “Lots of Love, Light and Laughter.”

When charities select an honoree for their fund-raising events, they generally expect that the award recipient will help them raise money by attracting new donors. But the Happy Hearts Fund raised less money at the gala featuring Mr. Clinton than it did at its previous one.

Further, it is extremely rare for honorees, or their foundations, to be paid from a gala’s proceeds, charity experts said — as it is for the proceeds to be diverted to a different cause.

And while the original invitation letter spoke of a joint educational project, the Clinton Foundation said Thursday that Happy Hearts had agreed that the money could be “split 50/50” between the foundation’s education programs and its economic development and agriculture programs in Haiti.

In the charity gala world, it is considered unacceptable to spend more than a third of gross proceeds on costs, and better to spend considerably less. If the donation to the Clinton Foundation were counted as a cost, Happy Hearts would have spent 34 percent of its announced $2.5 million in proceeds on its gala.

Its actual expenses — while they might seem extravagant to outsiders, with the total cost of the Cipriani facility alone at almost $300 a head — were in line with what other charities spend on such events.

In the end, the Happy Hearts Fund’s gala was a star-studded event, with celebrities including Naomi Watts and John Legend and the models Karlie Kloss and Coco Rocha in attendance. The Haitian president, Michel Martelly, a former musician who was Ms. Nemcova’s boyfriend’s boss at the time, was a second honoree, and he performed a couple of numbers with Wyclef Jean.

At the start of the evening, school bells rang and, as the master program dictated, “Petra dressed as schoolteacher” appeared, wearing glasses.

“Good evening, class,” said the message on the screen behind her. She later changed into a sheer red lace gown donated by the designer Naeem Khan, with diamond and ruby jewelry by Chopard.

A video by the Happy Hearts Fund framed the moment she presented the award to Mr. Clinton like this: “Ten years ago, two people were deeply impacted by the 2004 tsunami. They met this year again to inspire …”

“Petra did not have to devote 10 years of her life to building these schools,” Mr. Clinton told the crowd. “But what she has done is a symbol of what I think we all have to do.”

Outside Cipriani, about 100 protesters, mostly Haitian-Americans expressing frustration with the earthquake reconstruction effort, stood behind barricades holding protest signs.

“Clinton, where is the money?” they chanted. “In whose pockets?”

Bill Clinton’s speaking fee would have built ten pre-schools in disaster-torn Indonesia.  Not that Slick Willy gives a damn about poor kids.

Here’s another story, fresh just today, detailing the PATTERN of Hillary Clinton using the State Department as her own personal money-machine:

State Department spending followed foreign Clinton Foundation donors
By Sarah Westwood  | May 29, 2015 | 12:01 am

Countries and companies that donated to the Clinton Foundation or paid Bill Clinton heavy fees for speeches saw an increase in State Department activity while Hillary Clinton served as secretary of state.

The presidential candidate’s supporters have dismissed as conspiracy theories allegations that she and her husband traded political favors for contributions to their foundation or for lucrative speaking engagements.

A Washington Examiner analysis of Clinton Foundation donors suggests the State Department ramped up its diplomatic activity, foreign assistance and/or investment in countries that gave to the Clinton Foundation and hosted Bill Clinton for high-profile speeches.

For example, months after Bill Clinton delivered a speech in Riyadh for a price of $300,000, State Department funding for projects and activities in Saudi Arabia spiked.

The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has also donated between $10 million and $25 million to the Clinton Foundation, donor records show.

State Department funding for its diplomatic operations and projects in the country jumped from more than $18 million in 2011 to $67.75 million in 2012, the year after Bill Clinton delivered his speech at the Saudi Investment Authority, according to USASpending.gov.

Much of that appears to have gone toward the construction of new State Department buildings in the country.

The agency poured $177.9 million into building a new embassy in Norway in 2011 over the apparent objections of diplomatic officials in Oslo.

Norway’s government has donated between $10 million and $25 million to the Clinton Foundation.

A leaked diplomatic cable sent to Clinton in July 2009 shows plans for the embassy project, which predated Clinton’s tenure as secretary, had been pushed from 2011 to 2020 to free up funding for embassies in key countries.

“We understand the arguments for first building NEC’s [new embassy complexes] where terrorist threats are higher,” the cable said of the delayed embassy plans in Norway.

The cable mentions “Pat Kennedy,” the undersecretary for management and a close Clinton aide, among the State Department officials who had helped to further the project.

Kennedy’s name also surfaced in Benghazi-related emails published by the State Department last week.

Despite the misgivings by agency officials in 2009, the State Department awarded the contract for the Norwegian embassy to Walsh Construction Group on September 27, 2011. It was the construction company’s first overseas embassy project.

Norway teamed up with an arm of the Clinton Foundation in September 2012 for an ambitious health care project funded by the U.S. Agency for International Development, which is part of the State Department.

USAID, the Clinton Health Access Initiative, the Children’s Investment Fund, the U.K. and Sweden supported the development of a type of contraceptive produced by Bayer that was widely distributed in poor nations.

All but Sweden and USAID itself were Clinton Foundation donors.

“The US Agency for International Development (USAID) is proud to have funded the development of this life-saving product,” then-USAID Administrator Rajiv Shah said at the time.

The same year USAID announced its plan to purchase 27 million contraceptive devices from Bayer, which donated between $20,000 and $50,000 to the Clinton Foundation, the pharmaceutical company hired lobbyists with DLA Piper (itself a foundation donor) to lobby the State Department on “federal procurement issues,” according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

Bayer did not return a request for comment.

USAID and the State Department appear to have tapped Clinton-connected companies regularly for well intentioned projects around the world.

One month before Hillary Clinton left office, her agency launched an effort to expand the electronic banking sector in Afghanistan.

Citi, the Ford Foundation, Visa, Omidyar Network, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation were each involved in the USAID-backed initiative. All five donated heavily to the Clinton Foundation.

Hillary Clinton kicked off a taxpayer-funded effort to bring health information to pregnant women around the world through their phones in 2011 with the help of two foundation donors — Johnson & Johnson and the United Nations Foundation.

The “Mobile Alliance for Maternal Action” initiative won an award for its innovation in 2012 after being judged by an independent panel that included additional donors to the Clinton Foundation.

The Clinton Health Access Initiative was brought into a State Department health project called the President’s Malaria Initiative alongside two of its major donors.

While the malaria initiative began in the Bush administration, it consumed millions while Hillary Clinton was at the State Department.

Irish Aid, Ireland’s development agency, and the British version of USAID — both foundation donors of between $1 million and $5 million — also shared in the U.S.-backed project in Uganda.

Ireland saw a substantial increase in the money USAID and the State Department spent on operations and projects there while Hillary Clinton was in office.

She even made Ireland the site of her final official trip as secretary of state when she traveled there to receive an award from one of her family foundation’s top donors.

The State Department increased its spending in Ireland from $1.65 million in 2009 to $2.96 million in 2010 and $7.48 million in 2011.

USAID also upped its support of Ireland, taking its funding from nothing in 2008 — the oldest year for which data is available — to $29.87 million the year Clinton came into office.

After the Kingdom of Bahrain donated heavily to the Clinton Foundation, the State Department stepped up its activities in the Middle Eastern nation.

The agency’s contracts, grants, loans and investments in Bahrain climbed from $6.8 million the year before Clinton came to the State Department, to $7.1 million in 2009, to $8.9 million in 2011 and peaked at $11 million during Clinton’s final year in office.

Bahrain also enjoyed nearly $2 million from USAID in 2010, bringing its total State Department funding that year to more than $10 million.

To put that figure in perspective, the State Department spent just $1.9 million on its operations in Trinidad & Tobago, the country whose GDP was closest to Bahrain’s, in 2010. The agency spent just $1.3 million on its operations in Mauritius, the country whose population was closest to Bahrain’s, that same year.

United Arab Emirates and Jamaica, two other countries whose governments donated directly to the Clinton Foundation, also saw the State Department’s funding rise during Clinton’s tenure.

USAID’s support of its operations and other projects in Jamaica crept from $2.8 million the year before Clinton took office to $15.8 million in 2011.

State Department spending in the United Arab Emirates rose from $11.57 million in 2008 to $16.79 million in 2012, peaking in 2010 at $21.18 million.

The Clinton Foundation did not return a request for comment about the nature of its direct work with the State Department while Clinton ran the agency.

The Clintons are so damn cynical it is beyond unreal.  They are the posters of official government corruption on planet earth today.  And Obama tolerated it for the simple reason that it is the heart and soul of the Democrat Party to be corrupt and to cynically exploit the giant government they keep making more giant to enrich themselves and their cronies who support their ideology and their own palm-greasing.

Here’s another story fresh off the headlines of today appearing on Yahoo News’ feed today:

The latest Clinton shoe: Bill’s shell corporation
By Post Editorial Board
May 27, 2015 | 8:22pm

Just two days after President Obama confirmed that Hillary Clinton would be his secretary of state, Bill Clinton set up a shell corporation to “channel” his payments for unspecified consulting work.

Another day, another revelation about the Clintons’ tangled financial web. (Kudos to Robert Wargas of Pajamas Media for pinning down the date Bill set up his dodge.)

With WJC LLC set up as a limited-liability company with no assets and no employees, there was no need to report any of the cash that passed through it — not on Hillary’s personal disclosure statements then, not on her campaign forms now.

This perfectly legal mechanism provides certain tax advantages — notwithstanding the Clintons’ repeated claims that the rich “aren’t paying their fair share of taxes.”

But we’d guess it was the non-disclosure feature that appealed most.

No doubt the Clintons giggled all the way to the bank about their no-funny-business promises to President Obama and his team.

And now Hillary preaches the virtues of “transparency.”

Like everything else about the once “dirt poor” Clintons (now comfortable in the ranks of the 1 percent) the LLC raises huge questions. Questions like those Democrats raised in 2012 about Mitt Romney’s finances.

As the Associated Press (which first reported the existence of the LLC) notes, almost nothing about the exact nature and financial worth of Bill Clinton’s business interests, other than his ultra-lucrative speechmaking, is a matter of public record.

The Clinton camp insists it’s all nothing to worry about, that everything has been disclosed. Then again, that’s what they said before ’fessing up to $26 million in foreign donations they’d “overlooked.”

Hillary Clinton cites Eleanor Roosevelt as her inspiration. Sure seems her real idol is Imelda Marcos — because there’s always another shoe waiting to drop.

There are so many examples of Clinton “Pay-to-Play” that it is absolutely unreal.  The level of crony-capitalist dishonesty is rabid.  But being a Democrat means either being so depraved and hypocritical you don’t care are so pathologically stupid and ignorant you don’t know.

No one – NO ONE – who is not a rank, abject hypocrite without so much as a scintilla of honesty or integrity or even shame would EVER vote for this crony-capitalist political whore.

The problem is that to be a Democrat is to be a hypocrite.  So no problem.

Why Hillary Clinton Installed A Private Server And Purged Half Her Emails

May 20, 2015

This line from CNN’s coverage of Obama being “funny” says a lot:

“Think about how things have changed since 2008. Back then, I was the young tech-savvy candidate of the future,” Obama said. “Now I’m yesterday’s news and Hillary has got a server in her house.”

“I didn’t even know you could have one of those in your house,” he continued. “I am so far behind. Did you know that? I would have gotten one.”

As Obama’s joke rather crystal-clearly demonstrates, it’s not NORMAL to have a private server in your home.  It’s way, WAY, WAY beyond abnormal.  It takes world-class chutzpah to do something like this when you’re masquerading as a senor-level “public servant” (which under Obama means another way to say “lord and master”).

Hillary Clinton isn’t “tech-savvy.”  She’s just an old pathologically dishonest and corrupt political shrew with a multi-multiMULTI-million dollar slush fund to buy tech-savvy people to pull this crap for her so she can wheel and deal with your money using the very latest in criminal thug technology.

Of course, what this also proves is that as corrupt and as dishonest as Barack Obama has proven himself to be, even our current resident Liar-in-Chief is just no Slick Willy.  As giant of a liar and cheat as Barack Obama’s cancerous presidency has been, even HE can only dream of attaining the level of corruption that the Clinton’s have degenerated into in their forty-plus years as political whores.

You can’t blame Obama for not ever thinking of installing a private server to hide your internet tracks.  I mean, How many of us ever thought of that?  Because in the entire history of the republic, NO public official has EVER had their own email server in his/her home before.  Rather, previous Secretary’s of State have used private email accounts such as provided by Yahoo or AOL.  Which of course had control over and preserved all emails.  Simply far too much transparency for a pathologically dishonest shrew like Hillary Clinton.

The Democrat Party are to dishonesty, deceit, corruption, and crony-capitalist fascist quid pro quos what the Wright Brothers are to flying.  I mean, maybe they didn’t invent political corruption in the same manner that the Wright Brothers didn’t really invent the first airplane, but they sure somehow ended up owning all the rights to political corruption on a level that no human being has ever seen before.

A recent article shows us why Hillary installed her very own personal email server and then purged a massive percentage of her emails and ONLY released the rest after YEARS of vetting by her handpicked staff of priestesses.  The following article ran in the print edition of the California Section of the Los Angeles Times under the title, “Emails tie Sony, Ridley-Thomas” (for the official record, Ridley-Thomas is a career Democrat).  Hillary Clinton set up her own private server and purged tens of thousands of her emails so she wouldn’t open the newspaper to see this sort of story about HER criminality:

LACMA expansion, Ridley-Thomas, ‘super PAC’ intersect in email trail
By Robert Faturechi and Jack Dolan  contact the reporters
▼ LACMA Director Michael Govan needed Mark Ridley-Thomas’ support for LACMA expansion
▼ Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas sought help from Sony Chairman Michael Lynton for a PAC
May 20, 2015, 3:00 AM

When Michael Lynton, chairman and chief executive of Sony Pictures Entertainment, sat down for lunch last July with L.A. County Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas, each wanted something.

Lynton is a trustee of the Los Angeles County Museum of Art, which needed Ridley-Thomas’ support to secure $125 million in county funding for a major expansion.

Ridley-Thomas wanted Sony to donate to a “super PAC” he had founded, which was supporting an aide’s campaign for a seat on the Los Angeles school board.

In September, Sony wrote a check to the PAC for $25,000. Two months later, Ridley-Thomas joined in a unanimous vote by the county supervisors to fund the LACMA expansion.

The lunch meeting, the PAC donation and discussions surrounding them are described in internal Sony emails, which were stolen by hackers and recently posted online by WikiLeaks. The Times reviewed the emails in collaboration with ProPublica, the nonprofit investigative newsroom.

The messages show how LACMA’s leadership courted Ridley-Thomas and how Sony, concerned about appearances, delayed the PAC contribution until a few weeks after the school board election.

A Sony official, Ridley-Thomas’ top aide and LACMA Director Michael Govan all said there was no connection between the contribution and the vote on county funding.

“We would never conduct ourselves in such a manner,” said Keith Weaver, Sony’s executive vice president for worldwide government affairs.

At the time, the museum was lobbying county officials for $125 million to help pay for a $600-million renovation and expansion of its Mid-Wilshire campus.

Govan, in an interview, recalled that in the months before the vote, he was confident he had the support of one county supervisor, Zev Yaroslavsky, but said he was “nervous” about the other four.

Among those, Ridley-Thomas was considered critical, Govan said. Other supervisors could be expected to defer to him because the new building would jut into his district.

Lynton also had a role to play in promoting the museum project. Sony’s studio complex in Culver City is in Ridley-Thomas’ district, and Lynton is “the only person on my board who had regular dealings with the supervisor,” Govan said.

According to the emails, Lynton held a meeting on May 21, 2014, with Weaver and Govan. The subject was Ridley-Thomas; the emails provide no further detail on the meeting.

Weeks later, Sony gave $5,000 to the PAC founded by the supervisor, campaign records show. Sony had made five previous contributions in the same amount since 2007.

In July, Lynton, Ridley-Thomas and two of their aides scheduled a lunch.

When Govan learned of the lunch, he sent two emails to Sony urging Lynton to press the LACMA matter.

The first message, sent to Weaver on July 16, the day before the lunch, and forwarded to Lynton, listed points to be made in support of the museum expansion and said that “this won’t happen if the Supervisor doesn’t support it.”

In the second message, Govan said the timing of the lunch was “perfect and critical.”

In separate emails to Lynton, Weaver noted that the Ridley-Thomas-founded PAC was spending heavily in support of the supervisor’s education advisor, Alex Johnson, in the Los Angeles school board race.

The PAC — the African American Voter Registration, Education and Participation Project — spent nearly $600,000 in support of Johnson’s campaign, according to state records. Johnson was seeking to represent District 1 on the L.A. Unified School District board.

There are no dollar limits on contributions to super PACs as there are for direct donations to candidates.

Vincent Harris, Ridley-Thomas’ chief deputy, said in an interview that the supervisor asked Lynton for a PAC contribution during the July 17 lunch. Harris said the LACMA funding was not discussed, adding that Ridley-Thomas knows better than to “mix fundraising with any public policy-related work.”

Weaver said he wasn’t sure if the group discussed the museum expansion.

After the lunch, Lynton had reservations about making another contribution to the PAC. According to emails between Lynton and Weaver, the Sony chief executive worried that a donation might create the appearance of a conflict because his wife, Jamie Alter Lynton, is executive editor of LA School Report, a news website that covers L.A. Unified.

Weaver wrote that he had talked with Ridley-Thomas’ office and asked for “options” for addressing Lynton’s concern. A few hours later, Weaver wrote Lynton outlining how to make “a direct contribution in a way that helps the effort, but avoids the perception/conflict issues.”

“You could contribute $25k AFTER the election,” he wrote in a message dated July 31.

That’s what Sony did, writing a $25,000 check that landed in the PAC’s coffers on Sept. 10, nearly a month after a school board runoff, which Johnson lost.

Campaign finance experts said that promising to make a donation and then timing it to delay public disclosure until after an election could be illegal, if there was an enforceable agreement between the two sides.

Stephen Kaufman, an attorney for the PAC, said that there was no such agreement, and that the PAC did not increase its spending during the school board race in anticipation of receiving a donation from Sony later.

Jim Sutton, a San Francisco-based attorney who has represented a number of prominent California politicians, said that even if the contribution doesn’t violate the letter of the law, it appears to violate the spirit of state statutes. “The purpose of the law is giving voters information about supporters before the election,” Sutton said.

Weaver declined to comment on the timing of the donation.

Asked why Sony gave the PAC more money than usual last fall, Weaver said: “There’s always a push for a year-over-year increase. This year we felt inclined to do so.”

Govan said he doesn’t believe there was any connection between the contribution and the supervisor’s support: “I know I’m being romantic, but I believe in politicians.”

In November, two days before the county supervisors were scheduled to vote on the LACMA project, Govan emailed Lynton with some good news.

“Just got an email from MRT,” he wrote, referring to Ridley-Thomas. “I think we’re good! Thank you Michael.”

jack.dolan@latimes.com

Twitter: @jackdolanLAT

This article was prepared in collaboration with ProPublica, where Faturechi is a reporter. Dolan is a Los Angeles Times staff writer

You see, Hillary avoided the mistake of Sony.  She 1) installed her own personal server in her home; 2) purged all the emails that would have criminally convicted her; 3) had THE most dishonest and secretive and frankly thuggish administration in history run constant interference for her wrongdoing.  I mean, there’s “not a shred of evidence” if all the actual evidence has been shredded.  Which is EXACTLY what Hillary Clinton did with HER incriminating emails that she set up to have complete control over in spite of every rule of government accountability and oversight and appearance of wrongdoing and appearance of conflict of interests to the contrary.

We just had four cancer charities that are easily documented to be abject scams.  James T. Reynolds II, the leader of one of these along with his scumbag dad, issued the following statement that really reminds of the Clinton excuse:

[…]

While the organization, its officers and directors have not been found guilty of any allegations of wrong doing, and the government has not proven otherwise, our Board of Directors has decided that it does not help those who we seek to serve, and those who remain in need, for us to engage in a highly publicized, expensive, and distracting legal battle around our fundraising practices.

The silver lining in all of this is that the organization has the ability to continue operating our most valued and popular program, the Hope Supply. Our Board will work tirelessly to maintain the Hope Supply program services that have benefitted our many patients for years – initially under the TBCS banner as it transitions under a different organization – all with the goal of seamlessly providing services to you. I take solace in the fact that this wonderful program has the chance to continue operating.

I have loved leading TBCS and being part of a team that engaged heart and soul in helping to serve the mission of the charity selflessly, tirelessly, and honorably.

On behalf of TBCS, I want to thank you for allowing us to be a part of your lives. It is my hope that you will continue to find the resources and assistance you need through the soon-to-be revamped Hope Supply Program.

Giving back to the community is a mission that drives me. You will forever and always been in our hearts.

This from a guy who from all accounts only gave 2.7% of the millions he took in to the actual cancer patients.  The rest went to himself, his family, his friends, and those he paid off to keep playing his games.

Excuse me while I fill the toilet bowl up to the rim with puke.

The Clinton, Inc. denials are about as hollow.

Here are some facts about the Clinton Foundation as a “charity” that Hillary Clinton was full-time pimping while simultaneously falsely serving America as Secretary of State:

Charity watchdog: Clinton Foundation a ‘slush fund’
By Isabel Vincent
April 26, 2015 | 7:47am

The Clinton Foundation’s finances are so messy that the nation’s most influential charity watchdog put it on its “watch list” of problematic nonprofits last month.

The Clinton family’s mega-charity took in more than $140 million in grants and pledges in 2013 but spent just $9 million on direct aid.

The group spent the bulk of its windfall on administration, travel, and salaries and bonuses, with the fattest payouts going to family friends.

On its 2013 tax forms, the most recent available, the foundation claimed it spent $30 million on payroll and employee benefits; $8.7 million in rent and office expenses; $9.2 million on “conferences, conventions and meetings”; $8 million on fundraising; and nearly $8.5 million on travel. None of the Clintons is on the payroll, but they do enjoy first-class flights paid for by the foundation.

In all, the group reported $84.6 million in “functional expenses” on its 2013 tax return and had more than $64 million left over — money the organization has said represents pledges rather than actual cash on hand.

Some of the tens of millions in administrative costs finance more than 2,000 employees, including aid workers and health professionals around the world.

But that’s still far below the 75 percent rate of spending that nonprofit experts say a good charity should spend on its mission.

Charity Navigator, which rates nonprofits, recently refused to rate the Clinton Foundation because its “atypical business model . . . doesn’t meet our criteria.”

Charity Navigator put the foundation on its “watch list,” which warns potential donors about investing in problematic charities. The 23 charities on the list include the Rev. Al Sharpton’s troubled National Action Network, which is cited for failing to pay payroll taxes for several years.

Other nonprofit experts are asking hard questions about the Clinton Foundation’s tax filings in the wake of recent reports that the Clintons traded influence for donations.

“It seems like the Clinton Foundation operates as a slush fund for the Clintons,” said Bill Allison, a senior fellow at the Sunlight Foundation, a government watchdog group where progressive Democrat and Fordham Law professor Zephyr Teachout was once an organizing director.

Gosh, the Clinton Foundation is exactly the same as the above cancer “charities.”  The Clinton Foundation exists to benefit the Clintons, their family members (example, their daughter Chelsea and Hillary’s low-life brother), their friends (such as long-term Clinton crony Sidney Blumenthal), and those they paid off in exchange for more influence.

Well over a thousand foreign donors weren’t even LISTED as having given to this slush fund that, among other things, sold America’s uranium to our historically worst enemy in exchange for $500,000 for a Bill Clinton speech (paid directly to the Clintons) and a $2.35 million “donation” (read “kickback”) to the Clinton Foundation Slush Fund that was never disclosed by the Clintons in spite of their agreement with the Obama Administration when Hillary took her job as Secretary of Swindle.

And there are literally DOZENS of corrupt deals like this that Hillary purged the details of from her private server.

We are just now learning that Hillary Clinton failed to report $26 MILLION is speaking fees that came from banks and foreign governments and leftist universities (you know, the kind of “free-thinking institutions” that purge all conservative speakers or shout them down if they’re invited).

At best, this woman wants to be president and run the economy of the nation and the planet and she’s clearly not even competent to run a damn foundation.  That if she’s NOT an outright criminal – which she sure is – who belongs in THE BIG HOUSE rather than the White House for her crimes.

It took Hillary Clinton TWO YEARS after leaving as Secretary of State to comply with ANY release of her emails from her private server.  Because it took that long for her acolytes to purge all the thousands of criminal emails.  If there’s not a shred of evidence, it is ONLY because she SHREDDED all the evidence.

And all the while, as she was serving as Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton’s Temple Priestesses kept a fascistically Nazi-tight reign over public documents that should have been required to be released by law.

While we now learn that the Clinton Foundation has played fast and loose with the law and concealed foreign donations to the tune of MILLIONS that they are now having to acknowledge by amending previous tax returns.

Hillary Clinton has been exposed as a liar for her pathetic “reason” why she elected to go with a private server-grounded private email account so she would only need to use one device (she regularly used at least four).

She’s been caught lying about the fact that she actually used AT LEAST TWO private email accounts rather than what she first claimed through her liars I mean lawyers.

But what can we do?  Our national media is dominated by obvious propagandist hacks like George Stephanopoulos, incredibly a.k.a. ABC News’ chief political anchor when it was beyond obvious twenty freaking years ago that this guy was a biased turd rather than any kind of legitimate journalist.  As one example all the media are falling all over themselves like a dozen puppies all trying to get to the food bowl at once whether Republicans would have still gone to war in Iraq “knowing what we know now.”  How about asking every Democrat, “Would you still have cut-and-ran from Iraq and abandoned everything our troops sacrificed so much to win the way Obama did “knowing what you know now” about Islamic State now OWNING what we surrendered to them???

Maybe James T. Reynolds, Sr. or his corrupt kid should run for president and vice president on the Democrat ticket, given the Democrats love of fascist crooks.

Here’s the thing: just because Obama is keeping the American people from seeing what kind of a crook his successor-thug is doesn’t mean that foreign governments won’t be able to blackmail a President Hillary Clinton.  The fact of the matter is that foreign governments – including all of our very most dangerous enemies – were able to easily penetrate Hillary Clinton’s private server upon which she stored so many vital American national secrets, says the CIA.  And says the Defense Intelligence Agency.  And they’ve got the dirty laundry on Hillary that Obama and his lawthugs like Eric Holder have been doing their best to keep from the American people.

So if you vote for Hillary in 2016 and later wonder why your Traitor-in-Chief betrayed you for the obvious interests of a foreign government, well, you just should have known, fool.