FBI uncovered Russian bribery plot before Obama administration approved controversial nuclear deal with Moscow

The Hill

by

Before the Obama administration approved a controversial deal in 2010 giving Moscow control of a large swath of American uranium, the FBI had gathered substantial evidence that Russian nuclear industry officials were engaged in bribery, kickbacks, extortion and money laundering designed to grow Vladimir Putin’s atomic energy business inside the United States, according to government documents and interviews.

Federal agents used a confidential U.S. witness working inside the Russian nuclear industry to gather extensive financial records, make secret recordings and intercept emails as early as 2009 that showed Moscow had compromised an American uranium trucking firm with bribes and kickbacks in violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, FBI and court documents show.

They also obtained an eyewitness account — backed by documents — indicating Russian nuclear officials had routed millions of dollars to the U.S. designed to benefit former President Bill Clinton’s charitable foundation during the time Secretary of State Hillary Clinton served on a government body that provided a favorable decision to Moscow, sources told The Hill.

The racketeering scheme was conducted “with the consent of higher level officials” in Russia who “shared the proceeds” from the kickbacks, one agent declared in an affidavit years later.

Rather than bring immediate charges in 2010, however, the Department of Justice (DOJ) continued investigating the matter for nearly four more years, essentially leaving the American public and Congress in the dark about Russian nuclear corruption on U.S. soil during a period when the Obama administration made two major decisions benefiting Putin’s commercial nuclear ambitions.

Continue reading

“High Crimes and Misdemeanors”

 

Free Republic

High Crimes and Misdemeanors

The U.S. Constitution provides impeachment as the method for removing the president, vice president, federal judges, and other federal officials from office. The impeachment process begins in the House of Representatives and follows these steps: 1.The House Judiciary Committee holds hearings and, if necessary, prepares articles of impeachment. These are the charges against the official. 2.If a majority of the committee votes to approve the articles, the whole House debates and votes on them. 3.If a majority of the House votes to impeach the official on any article, then the official must then stand trial in the Senate. 4.For the official to be removed from office, two-thirds of the Senate must vote to convict the official. Upon conviction, the official is automatically removed from office and, if the Senate so decides, may be forbidden from holding governmental office again.

The impeachment process is political in nature, not criminal. Congress has no power to impose criminal penalties on impeached officials. But criminal courts may try and punish officials if they have committed crimes.

The Constitution sets specific grounds for impeachment. They are “treason, bribery, and other high crimes and misdemeanors.” To be impeached and removed from office, the House and Senate must find that the official committed one of these acts.

Continue reading

Sheriffs Won’t Tolerate Veiled DHS Threats Over Amnesty

Independent Sentinal

For the last six years, this administration has been using threats, extortion, bribery, and other unethical means to enforce its unconstitutional fiats. Their latest is aimed at sheriffs.

Sheriffs throughout the country received a memo from DHS chief Jeh Johnson that is being looked at as a threat.

Featured Image -- 19736

Photo via e-mail

Johnson warned sheriffs if the Congress doesn’t go along with amnesty and fully fund DHS, they will not receive the federal grants they are counting on.

This is why federal control over everything is a bad idea. They will eventually use force.

This is how the administration operated over the faux government shutdown.

They closed off all monuments and federal attractions and pretended it was because of a “Republican” shutdown of government. They held back military salaries and threatened the income of seniors though it was unnecessary.

In this instance, Johnson wants Sheriffs to pressure Congress to go along.

The memo that went out can be found on this link. It says in part:

Continue reading

Obama’s Allies are America’s Enemies

Image

Freedom Outpost

 

“A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within.”

– Marcus Tullius Cicero (106-43 B.C.) Roman statesman, philosopher and orator

“Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying War against them, or adhering to their enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.”

– Article III, Section 3, United States Constitution

Recently, former U.S. Marine Corps Lt. Col. Oliver North voiced his concerns in Washington, D.C., over Barack Hussein Obama’s presidency, calling it “Leadership Deficit Disorder.” He even stated, “Any other president would have been impeached.”

He went on to say, “In what we see happening in Ukraine, it’s evident in the failure of this Congress (the people’s representatives) to hold this administration culpable and accountable for the criminal activities in which they’ve been involved. … Why the dickens haven’t we convened a select committee to investigate Benghazi, the IRS enemies list, spying on Americans, threatening reporters?”

Another individual voicing his concerns stated that this president is “not simply posing a danger to the constitutional system. He’s becoming the very danger the Constitution was designed to avoid.”

Continue reading

Obama impeachment fire is burning brightly

Renew America

By Gina Miller

It doesn’t matter what naysayers think. It doesn’t matter what the leftist media declares or how aggressively it tries to suppress the message of it. It doesn’t matter what “establishment” politicians suppose. The fire of impeachment is nevertheless burning hot and spreading fast in the minds and hearts of the American people, the rightful guardians and intended masters of the Republic.

The reality is that we are now in a time that most of us never imagined we would see in the United States of America. We have an utterly lawless president and administration. We have unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats in federal agencies who are writing laws without Congress that impose onerous, destructive regulations on our nation’s businesses and citizens.

Despite the dark influences that obviously control him, the man behind all this lawlessness, Barack Obama (or whatever his name is), leads the way in illegally writing laws as he disregards Congress, the Judiciary, and the constitutional limits on his authority. While there have certainly been bad presidents in the past, America has never seen the despotic likes of Obama.

Continue reading

Say Good-bye to Your Favorite Light Bulbs

Moonbattery

The light bulb is the traditional symbol of human ingenuity. Nothing could be more emblematic of our corrupt and ideologically deranged ruling class than banning it:

Light bulb manufacturers will cease making traditional 40 and 60-watt light bulbs — the most popular in the country — at the start of 2014.

This comes after the controversial phasing out of incandescent 75 and 100-watt light bulbs at the beginning of 2013.

In their place, our rulers will permit us to use halogen bulbs, compact fluorescent bulbs, LED bulbs, and high-efficiency incandescents — all of which are substantially more expensive. Presumably that means higher profits. They are also more difficult to manufacture. That means less competition from small companies for crony capitalists like GE and Philips who, thanks to generous lobbying (i.e., bribery), have a seat at the table in Washington.

We have been told that using normal, affordable light bulbs makes it be too hot outside, discomforting the sacred polar bears. Anyone who believes this will be in the dark regardless of which products Washington allows us to use.

The rules were signed into law by President George W. Bush in 2007.

As the Big Government noose tightens around our throats, squeezing off the last remnants of free choice, it becomes ever more obvious that it is not enough to elect Republicans — we need to elect conservatives.

light bulb ban
The symbol of an era.

Ignorance of the Law is no excuse

Socialism is not the Answer

1 Dragon

Improper search and seizure…..

A number of court cases have been thrown out because of these few words but apparently Congress, TSA, judges across the country, Barry O and even some in talk radio (hosts)have no clue to its meaning. However, ask any inmate that is currently in custody at your local jail, they can tell you all about it.

So let me help, the TSA searches in airports  are unconstitutional. Go ahead, read it, tell me I’m wrong………. and please don’t use the old lines that what they do is for our own protection.

Amendment 4 – Search and Seizure. Ratified 12/15/1791.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.  (S0urce)

How about this one……….

Article II

Section 4

The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.  (Source)

Treason, Bribery, high crimes and misdemeanors………… this happens daily in Washington. Come on……… look at what has happened just in the last couple of years alone.  Despite a public outcry, not one member of Congress said one word against Obama being sworn into Office. To this day Obama has yet to prove who he says he is. The man no one remembers from college, grade school or where ever. The only ones that do remember him are people he use to smoke pot with. Now that’s reassuring.

Was this treason? Well, unlike Obama, I’ll be honest, I’m not a lawyer and I don’t play one on TV but for Congress to allow an unconstitutional man to hold the highest office and allow him to spend billions, to take over two of the largest auto makers, to bail out his union buddies, a Usurper in Chief. If it wasn’t, it comes pretty damn close, and just because the people elected Obama doesn’t make it right. Also, how many bribes have been made by the current administration in order to get Bills passed?

So, what’s Obama trying to hide? At this point in time you can make up your own story about that because the Ex Order he signed is still sealed. For all we know, Obama is a member of al Qaeda. Don’t laugh, didn’t he visit Pakistan in 1981 using whatever passport he had and upon return he started using the name Barack. Prior to that he went by Barry. Hey, he could have gotten in touch with his Muslim roots and been recruited.  Like I said, no one knows.

So can Congress use the excuse that they just didn’t know? Congress makes laws, although they may not read them and they may not understand what is in them but they still make laws and especially when it comes to Congress………Ignorance of the Law is no excuse.

Obama’s Grave Dereliction of Duty as an Impeachable Act

CFP

Many Americans believe a president must commit a serious illegality, ie “High Crime” to qualify for impeachment. Not true. In fact, dereliction of duty is also a qualifying reason. In fact, no greater argument exists for impeachment than utter failure to use common sense by a leader. For what could be more dangerous than an absolute inability to decide wisely? This article considers “Grave Dereliction of Duty” as a fundamental problem demanding impeachment and removal.

Can chronic poor decision-making really justify removal of democratically elected leaders? Why not? After all, what is a presidency made from—except decisions? Further, all must admit at a certain point, truly horrific decision-making must cause a leader to be ejected for the good of the whole state. There is no reason to view a disastrous presidency as a fatalistic necessity forced upon a democracy, despite legal recourse of removal.

Continue reading

House ethics panel legalizes bribery

Capitol Hill Blue
By Doug Thompson
Congressional “pay for play” program

The House Committee on Standards and Official Conduct ruled Friday that bribing a member of Congress is legal as long as that member can come up with another excuse for earmarking money for a campaign contributor.

The panel cleared seven lawmakers who added pork barrel earmarks to bills to spend hundred of millions of dollars of taxpayer funds on behalf of companies that poured huge campaign donations into their political warchests.

The 305-page whitewash of a report said it’s OK to accept campaign cash and reward the donor with contracts and earmarks as long as the lawmaker can claim the action was “criteria independent” of the payoff.

The ruling is a slap in the face to a few honest members of Congress who have tried to limit the growing use of earmarks to award those who pump large sums of money into the campaign coffers of elected officials who are willing to perform when paid for services.

With a recent Supreme Court ruling that allows corporations now to spend virtually unlimited amounts on behalf of candidates, the ethics committee ruling opens the door for even more widespread abuse.

“Simply because a member sponsors an earmark for an entity that also happens to be a campaign contributor does not, on these two facts alone, support a claim that a member’s actions are being influenced by campaign contributions,” said the report.

The report cleared Reps. Norm Dicks (D-Wash.), Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio), James P. Moran Jr. (D-Va.), Todd Tiahrt (R-Kan.), Peter J. Visclosky (D-Ind.), C.W. Bill Young (R-Fla.) and John P. Murtha (D-Pa), who died this month.

The seven were charged with steering $112 million worth of earmarks for clients of the PMA Group, a lobbying firm, after that firm raised more than $350,000 worth of campaign contributions for the members.

The Justice Department still has an open investigation on PMA and the bribes and the FBI raided the lobbying firm’s office and seized its records. PMA folded after the raid.

Source:

The new scandal?

Thomas Lifson

Jeffrey Lord of the American Spectator breaks a potentially important story, making the case that there is ample ground for a formal investigation of potential law-breaking by the Obama Administration.

The discovery that the White House has now been reported on two separate occasions in two different states to be deliberately committing a potential violation of federal law — in order to preserve the Democrats’ Senate majority — could prove explosive in this highly political year. The 60-seat majority slipped to 59 seats with the death of Senator Edward Kennedy, a Democrat, and the election of Republican Senator Scott Brown. Many political analysts are suggesting Democrats could lose enough seats to lose their majority altogether.
This is the stuff of congressional investigations and cable news alerts, as an array of questions will inevitably start being asked of the Obama White House.
The specific crime alleged is bribery:

“Whoever solicits or receives … any….thing of value, in consideration of the promise of support or use of influence in obtaining for any person any appointive office or place under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.” — 18 USC Sec. 211 — Bribery, Graft and Conflicts of Interest: Acceptance or solicitation to obtain appointive public office
Specifically:
For the second time in five months, the Obama White House is being accused — by Democrats — of offering high ranking government jobs in return for political favors. What no one is reporting is that this is a violation of federal law that can lead to prison time, a fine or both, according to Title 18, Chapter 11, Section 211 of the United States Code.
The jobs in question? Secretary of the Navy and a position within the U.S. Agency for International Development.
The favor requested in return? Withdrawal from Senate challenges to two sitting United States Senators, both Democrats supported by President Obama. The Senators are Arlen Specter in Pennsylvania and Michael Bennet in Colorado.
As Lord notes, this has the potential to impact the 2010 elections, if it becomes known, and pressure builds for a formal investigation. But of course, the mainstream media will avert its eyes, and dismiss this as normal politics.
Hat tip: Lucianne.com