HOW DO WE KNOW IF SHE IS GUILTY? => TARGET HILLARY CLINTON

Clinton testifying before the House Select Committee on Benghazi on October 22, 2015 (from here)
Clinton testifying before the House Select Committee on Benghazi on October 22, 2015 (from here)

H. Clinton’s Public Record: What Has She Accomplished?

Is the picture above an unfair picture? Not according to the source.

The hearing included many heated exchanges between committee members and Clinton, and between the committee members themselves. Clinton was widely seen as emerging largely unscathed from the hearing, because of what the media perceived as a calm and unfazed demeanor, and a lengthy, meandering, repetitive line of questioning from the committee. The committee issued competing final reports in June 2016 that broke along partisan lines, with the Republican report offering some new details about the attack but no new evidence of culpability by Clinton. (from here)

Why would the public be unfazed by the killing of four Americans and then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s apparent indifference to the safety of her subordinates? Well, that is a different subject, but what the Clinton family has gotten away with is phenomenal.  Since this is only a blog, not a book, we will only touch the surface, some stuff related to Hillary Clinton’s duties as the Secretary of State.

Here is what H. Clinton’s bio says about the four years she served as Secretary of State.

After eight years of Bush foreign policy, Hillary was instrumental in the effort to restore America’s standing in the world. Even former Republican Secretary of State Henry Kissinger said she “ran the State Department in the most effective way that I’ve ever seen.”

She built a coalition for tough new sanctions against Iran that brought them to the negotiating table and she brokered a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas that ended a war and protected Israel’s security. She was a forceful champion for human rights, internet freedom, and rights and opportunities for women and girls, LGBT people, and young people all around the globe. (from here)

The quote from Kissinger goes back to a USA Today article, Kissinger: What U.S. must do to battle Islamic State, written in 2014. It is not exactly an endorsement for president; it was simply enough polite praise for someone who had praised his book.).

The other stuff? Did our position with respect to Iran actually improve? No, and the credit for setting Hamas back on its heels belongs to Israel. Shortly after Clinton last day as Secretary of State (February 1, 2013), the Israelis had  to use military force with that bunch (see 2014 Israel–Gaza conflict), and the conflict is still on-going (see IDF uncovers Gaza ‘terror tunnel’ dug into Israeli territory). The other stuff in the excerpt above is just posturing.

So what did Clinton accomplish? Let’s consider some blog posts that speak to Clinton’s accomplishments.

  • Reciprocity — reblogged is a reblog of Reciprocity by Necessary and Proper. That post deals with Clinton’s email server issues and the Democrats’ seeming indifference. Since Clinton so clearly did something she should not have done, that’s why the subject is the Democrats’ seeming indifference.  ‘s post predates the FBI’s decision against prosecuting Clinton (See Statement by FBI Director James B. Comey on the Investigation of Secretary Hillary Clinton’s Use of a Personal E-Mail System (www.fbi.gov)). Apparently, Comey thinks that even though Clinton’s email server was an extremely serious security infraction, no prosecutor would take her to court. Instead, we might elect her to be our president.
  • In LET THE MAKEOVER BEGIN!, I wrote briefly about Clinton’s involvement in the Benghazi coverup.  It is old news, but it is still part of Clinton’s record. Did Clinton abandon Americans to die? Did she try to blame some unknown video? It sure looks like it, and yet we might elect her to be our president.

So what is Clinton’s big issue? Well, it doesn’t seem to be a big issue for some Americans, but it sure is a big issue for her. It is the Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation. GuideStar (not a charity rating organization) provides more information here. What do the charity rating organizations think about that foundation?

Why are the rating organizations split? We can only guess, but the Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation is an odd bird. The FBI is apparently investigating the Clinton Foundation (see EXCLUSIVE: Joint FBI-US Attorney Probe Of Clinton Foundation Is Underway). This is after the DOJ declined requests from three FBI field offices to investigate the foundation (see First on CNN: Inside the debate over probing the Clinton Foundation and Justice Dept. denied FBI requests to investigate Clinton Foundation).

What’s the problem? It looks like the Clinton’s are using their foundation to launder their ill-gotten gains.

I could go on, but there is simply too much material. Even though the news media has little interest in the subject, there is still too much material, too much evidence of corruption.

Is some of the material dubious? Yes. The conspiracy theorists have their theories. The most popular relate to the suspicious deaths of numerous people related in some way to the Clinton’s. Christ Centered Teaching, who apparently thinks there is something to the theory, left theses links.

Because these stories are so speculative and no one wants to be associated with a conspiracy theory, the news media generally avoids them. So I was sort of surprised when Rush Limbaugh brought the subject up on his show (see Julian Assange Suggests Murdered DNC Staffer Could Be WikiLeaks Source).

And I have a story here today from Townhall.com, and I could swear… I could swear I saw these stories back in 1992, back in 1993, ’94.  Can I share with you the headline?  Here it is: “Clinton Body Count or Left-Wing Conspiracy? Three with Ties to DNC Mysteriously Die.”  I can remember reading magazines back in 1992 that cataloged all the people the Clintons knew who had died, and the inherent conspiracies that were associated with this.  And, lo and behold, here we go again. (from here)

Are the Clinton’s guilty of multiple murders? Who knows, but something weird is going on. Here is how Limbaugh ended that segment.

Look, the point here is it’s a Townhall story, and as I said last hour, it’s fascinating to watch these cycles repeat, because here you have now Rachel Alexander writing for Townhall asking the question a lot of people were asking back in 1992, “How many people do you know that have been murdered? How many people do you know in your life who have been killed?  How many people do you know who have died, in violence, under suspicious circumstances?”  Most every one of us the answer is gonna be zero.  Some people, depending, maybe one, maybe two.  I don’t think I know anybody.

But when you ask that question of the Clintons, the number is double digits.  It’s just an interesting observation.  No allegation being made here, ladies and gentlemen.  I’m simply doing what I do here, chronicling what else is out there being said by others and how fascinating it is that, with the Clintons, it seems to never stop.  It seems to never go away. (from here)

For all we know, some foreign intelligence service is protecting the Clinton’s. After all, who is benefiting the most from the Clinton’s screwy ideas, the people of the United States?

Why is it we cannot get rid of hated immigration policies that threaten to divide us into a nation that speaks multiple languages? Why is it we cannot get rid of trade policies that allow foreign nations to take entire industries from us?Why do we keep giving away military secrets, technologies, and materials to our enemies?  Why?

Why are our own leaders betraying us? We elect people because they buy our votes with government-run social programs. We call these programs health, education, and welfare programs. The big ones are Social Security and Medicare and they are blatantly unconstitutional, that is, the people who instituted them broke their oaths to obey the Constitution.

When we elect people who are willing to bribe us, they will sell themselves to the highest bidder, and they will do their best to hide they shady deeds. With smug smirks shared among themselves, they will be perfectly happy to let us think our own thievery from the next generation or two is innocent.

To be continued.

Other Views

National Web Sites

From Blogs

Advertisements

16 thoughts on “HOW DO WE KNOW IF SHE IS GUILTY? => TARGET HILLARY CLINTON

      1. It’s almost irrelevant to how the election will be decided. We will once again be treated to a nearly 50/50 split and told who our winner was. The system is rigged and has been for decades

        Liked by 1 person

  1. Excellent post Tom, lots of good but maddening info and I appreciate the shout out. I agree with KIA though that it just won’t matter. The media cannot and will not allow a Trump presidency, (have to add I can’t blame them for that) and I have little hope they will start to actually do their jobs in regards to properly vetting HRC. Ain’t gonna happen,

    Liked by 1 person

    1. @Tricia

      In a war with the news media, we have the advantage of numbers. If we can convince enough people to believe that their family, friends and neighbors are worth fighting for, we can win. If we give up, we cannot.

      Is Trump a flaw candidate? Could he prove to be a disappointment? Yes, and he probably will be. Even if his intentions are entirely honorable, he is still human. That is why we must pray and wait on the Lord. We must do what we can, but we must never forget we are all part of His story. The tale we see unfolding He devised; we just get to choose our parts. Will we choose to be on God’s side or our own?

      Liked by 2 people

      1. So very true Tom, thanks the remibder. The Bible does talk a fair amount about submitting to political authorities. That has been a tough pill to swallow these last 7 1/2 years, not sure I can handle much more! 😉

        Liked by 1 person

  2. Very comprehensive report, Someone at your blog agency spent a lot of time and effort?

    What puzzles me most is what the Clinton Foundation is actually doing that qualifies it tax wise as a charitable foundation. Also why foreign donors would so willingly be inclined to donate millions of dollars into it, especially if 66 percent is used in America?.

    When you read Politifact, I wonder how a tax investigator would figure out is how the money is being allocated as an expense instead of passed on to another charity?

    http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/apr/29/rush-limbaugh/rush-limbaugh-says-clinton-foundation-spends-just-/

    Regards and goodwiil blogging.

    Like

    1. @scatterwisdom

      Blog agency? That’s who that fellow sitting in my basement must be.
      😆

      Thanks for the link to that article. Even though PolitiFact has a distinct bias for Democrats, sometimes we can learn something reading between the lines, particularly if they link to the source they are trying to refute.

      Like

  3. Comey’s (the FBI Director) testimony was damning!

    What was worse, it became clear that Hilary Clinton is above what was once the law in the American Republic.

    And the Benghazi debacle not only wrote the book on foreign policy failure, but it revealed that Hillary’s policies were a construct of homicidal lies.

    Consequently, Hillary Clinton is heart, sole and genius of THE Donald’s ground game to get out the vote.

    Hillary Clinton can only win if millions of GOP voters stay home.

    And demoralizing voters so they stay home is a huge part of Hillary’s ground game…

    …that and cheating.

    I say, THE Donald wins by a landslide.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. @silenceofmind

      If Trump can restrain himself, focus on what he wants to do, and calmly review H. Clinton’s record, he can win. The press doesn’t want him to win, his supporters can win votes by word of mouth. We too just have to keep our cool and be resolute.

      Liked by 2 people

  4. tsalmon

    I always thought George Orwell a brilliant oracle for the possible dangers of futuristic dystopias. Now I’m beginning to think Orwell lacked imagination.

    A man who has made his living marketing bombastic and morally corrupt petty dictators and tyrants around the world is now running the campaign of a bombastic and morally corrupt would-be petty dictator and tyrant who is the nominee of one of our two major parties. But none of his ardent supporters sees that as strange.

    Orwell’s vision was of the all-controlling state conforming every individual thought to the will of the collective hive. In Orwell’s Room 101, reality was what the state says it is. But it appears that that is not how democracies will actually end in the Trumpian “Reality TV” century.

    While we have all been guarding against some Orwellian Big Brother who would physically crush all desent, the truth that engenders democracy may really drown under a deluge of Trumpian conspiracy theories and the gut pleasing falsities that Stephen Colbert termed “Truthiness”. The “cult of personality” is replaced with good “branding”. And under the Trump brand, facts have no currency anymore. The biggest lie of all, Donald Trump himself, disguises itself under so many other big lies that truth ghosts away into conflated hype as his supposed “art” of some fabulous supper bigly deal. He can’t tell you how it will work, but it will be “yuge”. He can’t factually tell you why but, if he doesn’t win, then the system is rigged and crooked.

    Orwell imagined that the truth would be twisted away through state tortured coercion, but it appears that truth will be instead buried under the guise of a multitude of attractive sparkles and conflated fears. The real Room 101 resides in all our flat screens. In that place, Trump presents the middle finger to our most sacred American values. He tells you that he is holding up two fingers and you not only believe him – you actually start to see two fingers. God help us.

    Like

    1. @Tony

      Orwell. Yeah. You may wish to actually study some of his books. Did he oppose the kind of government you are voting for? Did he support the kind of government we use to have?

      Like

      1. Tony

        “Orwell. Yeah. You may wish to actually study some of his books. Did he oppose the kind of government you are voting for? Did he support the kind of government we use to have?”

        You assume I haven’t and so you miss the point entirely. Typical.

        Like

  5. Pingback: AN INVITATION TO HATE: HILLARY CLINTON’S WEB SITE – Citizen Tom

Comments are closed.