Fifteen years ago this month, on Jan. 20, 2001, his last day in office, Bill Clinton issued a pardon for international fugitive Marc Rich. It would become perhaps the most condemned official act of Clinton’s political career. A New York Times editorial called it “a shocking abuse of presidential power.” The usually Clinton-friendly New Republic noted it “is often mentioned as Exhibit A of Clintonian sliminess.”
Marc Rich was wanted for a list of charges going back decades. He had traded illegally with America’s enemies including Ayatollah Khomeini’s Iran, where he bought about $200 million worth of oil while revolutionaries allied with Khomeini held 53 American hostages in 1979.
Rich made a large part of his wealth, approximately $2 billion between 1979 and 1994, selling oil to the apartheid regime in South Africa when it faced a UN embargo. He did deals with Khadafy’s Libya, Milosevic’s Yugoslavia, Kim Il Sung’s North Korea, Communist dictatorships in Cuba and the Soviet Union itself. Little surprise that he was on the FBI’s Ten Most Wanted List.
Facing prosecution by Rudy Giuliani in 1983, Rich fled to Switzerland and lived in exile.
What bothered so many was that Clinton’s clemency to Rich reeked of payoff. In the run-up to the presidential pardon, the financier’s ex-wife Denise had donated $450,000 to the fledgling Clinton Library and “over $1 million to Democratic campaigns in the Clinton era.”
Judge Abner Mikva, a counsel in the Clinton White House and mentor to President Obama, noted that even Obama “was very, very dismayed by the Marc Rich pardon and the basis on which it appears to have been granted.”
But does the story end there? Is it possible the payoffs continued after he left office?
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com …
Is this the face of a person who just won several primaries?
Politico asks “What’s wrong with Hillary?”
So what exactly is going on here? Why won’t Bernie Sanders go away? And why does Hillary Clinton’s Bernie problem pose a danger not only to her but to the Democratic Party—even if she does (as it seems highly likely) secure her party’s nomination?
They then proceed to provide some explanation:
A look at Clinton’s political career provides a tougher explanation. Those younger voters who doubt her trustworthiness likely have no memory, or even casual acquaintance with, a 25-year history that includes cattle-futures trading, law firm billing records, muddled sniper fire recollections and the countless other charges of widely varying credibility aimed at her. They may even have suspended judgment about whether her e-mail use was a matter of bad judgment or worse.
But when you look at the positions she has taken on some of the most significant public policy questions of her time, you cannot escape noticing one key pattern: She has always embraced the politically popular stand—indeed, she has gone out of her way to reinforce that stand—and she has shifted her ground in a way that perfectly correlates with the shifts in public opinion.
Yes, she’s a hypocrite, but there’s more wrong with Hillary. She’s an inherently nasty and dishonest person. And perhaps brain damaged as I suggested previously
Clinton asserted that no US lives were lost in Libya:
Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton argued late Monday that U.S. involvement in deposing Libya leader Moammar Gadhafi had not cost any American lives.
Family Security Matters
by SHER ZIEVE
James Comey was one of the Albatrosses and land mines Obama had left for President Trump. Former FBI Director Comey appears to have become unstable in his position, as he began to usurp more and more power for himself; even to the point of making decisions for Obama AG Lorretta Lynch. Most recently, he seemed to be attempting to even commandeer the power of the United States presidency. President Trump promised to drain the D.C. swamp and one of its chief creatures has now been given his walking papers.
Members of the Democrat Party who had previously indicated-both before and after the November 2016 election–that they would like to tar and feather Comey and ride him out of town on a rail, are now beside themselves (a dangerous place for anyone to be) with rage that he was fired for his misdeeds by President Trump. Any sensible human might ask “Why?” Comey had divulged that the discovered emails of the Democrat Party’s (then) patron Saint Hillary had committed acts that would be criminal for anyone but a leftist Democrat…and/or any Clinton. However, he had done it in a way-Comey’s now infamous ‘Hillary’s-guilty-but-I’m-letting-her-go-free’ speech to the nation-that flew in the face of FBI protocol and, likely, the law of the land. Listening to Senator Schumer (the Dem Party’s titular head) at the time of Hillary’s Emailgate, one would have thought it should have been Comey-not Hillary-who was to blame for Hillary’s sending classified information hither and yon. So…why is this same Schumer-who had actually and previously called for Comey’s firing–now speaking of Comey as if he’s a fallen hero for the Luciferian Left’s cause? To We-the-People who have never chosen to live under rocks-the answer is obvious. It was solely because President Trump fired him…and members of the Democrat Party leadership teams hate Trump tenfold more than they do Comey.
The lunacy of this is that only the President could have-under the US Constitution-fired him. Comey served at the pleasure of the President. And, President Trump was no longer pleased.
SECURE FREEDOM MINUTE
It’s bad enough that the investigation into alleged Russian involvement in U.S. internal affairs has been upended by top Obama advisor Susan Rice’s evident abuse of intelligence resources for political warfare against Team Trump. Now, the FBI is entrusting oversight of a beefed up investigative unit focused on those allegations to a man deeply implicated in such warfare: Deputy Director Andrew McCabe.
What could possibly go wrong?
While McCabe was overseeing an investigation into Hillary Clinton’s email scandal, his wife – a Virginia Democratic state senate candidate – took large campaign contributions from Hillary fundraisers. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley has expressed concern about McCabe’s involvement with the author of a phony dossier designed to smear Trump. Reportedly, McCabe also has inveighed repeatedly against Trump with top FBI managers.
Far from getting additional, politically charged responsibilities, Andrew McCabe should get fired.
Image via truthfeed.com
BREITBART NEWS, JOEL B. POLLAK
Radio host Mark Levin used his Thursday evening show to outline the known steps taken by President Barack Obama’s administration in its last months to undermine Donald Trump’s presidential campaign and, later, his new administration.
Levin called Obama’s effort “police state” tactics, and suggested that Obama’s actions, rather than conspiracy theories about alleged Russian interference in the presidential election to help Trump, should be the target of congressional investigation.
Drawing on sources including the New York Times and the Washington Post, Levin described the case against Obama so far, based on what is already publicly known. The following is an expanded version of that case, including events that Levin did not mention specifically but are important to the overall timeline.
1. June 2016: FISA request. The Obama administration files a request with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA) to monitor communications involving Donald Trump and several advisers. The request, uncharacteristically, is denied.
2. July: Russia joke. Wikileaks releases emails from the Democratic National Committee that show an effort to prevent Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) from winning the presidential nomination. In a press conference, Donald Trump refers to Hillary Clinton’s own missing emails, joking: “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 e-mails that are missing.” That remark becomes the basis for accusations by Clinton and the media that Trump invited further hacking.
3. October: Podesta emails. In October, Wikileaks releases the emails of Clinton campaign chair John Podesta, rolling out batches every day until the election, creating new mini-scandals. The Clinton campaign blames Trump and the Russians.
4. October: FISA request. The Obama administration submits a new, narrow request to the FISA court, now focused on a computer server in Trump Tower suspected of links to Russian banks. No evidence is found – but the wiretaps continue, ostensibly for national security reasons, Andrew McCarthy at National Review later notes. The Obama administration is now monitoring an opposing presidential campaign using the high-tech surveillance powers of the federal intelligence services.
5. January 2017: Buzzfeed/CNN dossier. Buzzfeed releases, and CNN reports, a supposed intelligence “dossier” compiled by a foreign former spy. It purports to show continuous contact between Russia and the Trump campaign, and says that the Russians have compromising information about Trump. None of the allegations can be verified and some are proven false. Several media outlets claim that they had been aware of the dossier for months and that it had been circulating in Washington.
6. January: Obama expands NSA sharing. As Michael Walsh later notes, and as the New York Times reports, the outgoing Obama administration “expanded the power of the National Security Agency to share globally intercepted personal communications with the government’s 16 other intelligence agencies before applying privacy protections.” The new powers, and reduced protections, could make it easier for intelligence on private citizens to be circulated improperly or leaked.
7. January: Times report. The New York Times reports, on the eve of Inauguration Day, that several agencies – the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the National Security Agency (NSA) and the Treasury Department are monitoring several associates of the Trump campaign suspected of Russian ties. Other news outlets also report the exisentence of “a multiagency working group to coordinate investigations across the government,” though it is unclear how they found out, since the investigations would have been secret and involved classified information.
FINISH – CLICK HERE
Image via richards-watch.org
The Washington Free Beacon
Senior Iranian officials are warning the Trump administration about disclosing secret deals related to the nuclear deal that have long been hidden from the public by the Obama administration, according to recent comments that prompted pushback from senior sources on Capitol Hill.
Iran’s warning comes on the heels of a Washington Free Beacon report disclosing that former national security adviser Michael Flynn had been pushed out of office partly due to his intention to release these sensitive documents to the American public.
Leading lawmakers in Congress launched multiple investigations last year into the Obama administration’s efforts to keep these documents secret and out of public view. Sources who spoke to the Free Beacon about the matter said that the Trump White House is working on ways to publicize this information despite warnings from Iran.
Secret side deals related to the nuclear agreement remain unclassified but have been stashed in a secure location on Capitol Hill, making it difficult for staffers and lawmakers to view them. Individuals seeking to view these documents must have security clearance and are barred from taking notes or speaking about what they see.