On a couple of occasions during this election season, I’ve written in detail about Hillary Clinton and the Whitewater/Castle Grande scandal. Although the events in question took place 25 years (or so) ago, they are relevant today because at the heart of that scandal, insofar as Hillary is concerned, was the theft and/or wrongful destruction of documents. Such conduct is also a central issue in Hillary’s current email scandal, although this matter also raises concerns that she compromised national security.
Now, the invaluable Judicial Watch has obtained and published an April 1998 memo by the Office of Independent Counsel, called “HRC Order of Proof.” It includes the names of 121 witnesses and a discussion of the evidence to be used at trial against the Whitewater/Castle Grande conspirators. The memo thus constitutes a road map to the Independent Counsel’s criminal case.
Ken Starr, the Independent Counsel, decided not to proceed against Hillary Clinton. He did so, it is said, because he believed his team could not win the complicated, largely circumstantial case against such a high-profile figure. It’s quite possible that, in addition, political calculation came into play.
In any event, the evidence against Clinton was substantial, as the newly released “HRC Order of Proof” confirms. Here are some of the items the memo shows the Independent Counsel had the testimony needed to establish:
New York federal prosecutor Loretta Lynch, the new nominee for attorney general, has a career filled with high profile cases — and she was a member of Bill Clinton’s defense team during the 1992 Whitewater corruption probe. As he made his announcement Saturday afternoon, Obama called the two-time U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York a “tough, fair and independent” lawyer. “It’s pretty hard to be more qualified for this job than Loretta Lynch,” Obama said. Indeed, the prosecutor has a long career built of some high profile cases but there is one case Lynch was involved in that few are talking about. Lynch was a part of Bill Clinton’s Whitewater probe defense team in 1992. In 1992, the Clintons came under fire for investing in a perennially failing Arkansas real estate company known as Whitewater Development, a venture heavily subsidized by Clinton friend Jim McDougal in an effort to soften the losses the Clintons were experiencing as investors. The probe was widened to look into the failure of the Madison Guaranty Savings and Loan to which it was connected. Eventually the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission won several convictions handing jail time to the McDougals as well as Arkansas Governor Jim Guy Tucker. The Clintons escaped any convictions in the probe
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com …
If ever there was a political ‘odd couple’, George H.W. ‘Felix’ Bush and Bill ‘Oscar’ Clinton fit the bill. Sure, living U.S. presidents share things in common no one else on earth shares but the relationship between the 41st and 42nd Presidents respectively, always seemed to smack of being suspiciously close. In 2006, I saw Bush 41 speak at the University of Mary Hardin-Baylor and he referred to this relationship as such; he acknowledged it without explaining it.
The subsequent and logical unanswered question “why?” asked by several people, silently in their own minds, hung in the air and was never answered.
The catalyst for this relationship being so close may have nothing to do with America’s Islamic problem but the consequences of the desire to keep the details of it secret is another matter.
In the 1994 book COMPROMISED: Clinton, Bush and the CIA – which is still doing very well on Amazon – former Air Force Intelligence operative and CIA Agent Terry Reed chronicles nefarious dealings between then-Arkansas Governor Clinton and former CIA Director Bush, who was Vice President at the time. According to Reed, Clinton allowed the CIA to set up shop in his state, manufacturing untraceable weapons for the Contras in Nicaragua and much more. From the inside flap of the book, which is over 500 pages and packed with documents and photos:
A banker ousted as Bill Clinton’s Deputy Treasury Secretary after lying to Congress to help his boss conceal an illegal real estate scheme is a top candidate to become President Obama’s next economic adviser.
Despite his scandalous past, Roger Altman is on a short list to be the next director of the president’s National Economic Council (NEC). Established nearly two decades ago, the NEC advises the commander-in-chief on all economic policy issues and the next director is expected to play a key role in stimulating the ailing economy.
Canada Free Press
“Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And…moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue!”—Barry Goldwater (1909-1998)
“No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President.”—The U.S. Constitution, Article 2, Section 1
Both Barack and Michelle Obama are lawyers barred from practicing law. This is a topic I’ll return to in a moment, but first I want to say a few words about the global “lawfare” that is, and has been, waged against freedom.
Most folks are aware of the communist roots of the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) and its “country cousin” the SPLC (Southern Poverty Law Center), and quite a few understand that many liberal lawyers become Progressive, or “activist,” judges. (Here and here.)
Many of us, however, have yet to grasp the extent, intensity, and duration, of the “lawfare ” that has been, and is being, waged against freedom around the world—especially in the Western cultures. We need to take note.
Let me hasten to say that there are a great number of conservative, patriotic lawyers and judges, who have waged a largely unheralded war against the unremitting pressure brought to bear by an army of Progressive lawyers. God bless them for their efforts to counter the myriad attempts to alter the Constitution (e.g. via con-con—a Constitution Convention, and the thousand other ways that the Progressives attempt to co-opt our legal system, and pervert the Constitution). There are also, of course, numerous decent lawyers working in other fields as well. (Here)
In no way am I making a “first we kill the lawyers” blanket condemnation. But there are, as everyone knows, a number of greedy, amoral lawyers, and a vast number of ideological practitioners of legal “lawfare.” (“Lawfare” being primarily, the practice of legally undermining the pillars of capitalism and freedom, and replacing them with a Nazi/Communist-style Progressive big-government agenda).
These are the lawyers who fought tort reform tooth and nail, and who have done their best to destroy our Constitution (e.g. replacing it with a “living” Constitution).
There are way too many of these traitorous lawyers (Harvard churns them out like a doll factory). Both Bill and Hillary Clinton are Harvard trained lawyers, as are both Barack and Michelle Obama. Which brings me back to my original statement.
Although Bill Clinton, and the Obama’s are all Harvard trained lawyers, none of them can legally practice law. That should give you pause, as the legal profession is not known for barring one of their own, for frivolous reasons.
I’m not saying that they’ve been disbarred, but they have, all three, “voluntarily surrendered” their licenses to practice law.
As Johnny Alamo notes, “A ‘Voluntary Surrender’ is not something where you decide ‘Gee, a license is not really something i need anymore, is it?’ and forget to renew your license. No, a ‘Voluntary Surrender’ is something you do when you’ve been accused of something, and you ‘voluntarily surrender’ your license about five seconds before the state suspends (or disbars) you.”
Michelle Obama “voluntarily surrendered” her license to practice law, three years after passing the bar. Which is akin to a doctor going through years of education, and racking up huge student loans, and then, just as it all finally starts to pay off, saying “I think I’ll just give up my license for no particular reason.” There’s a darn good reason, we just don’t know it.
The Supreme Court of Illinois ARDC (Attorney Registration & Disciplinary Commission) has this to say about Michelle Obama when her name is entered: “(Date Admitted)May 12, 1989, (City)N/A, (State)N/A, (Authorized to practice?) No” The website says her license is “on court ordered inactive status.” (Here and here)
Ex-President Bill Clinton “voluntarily surrendered” his license as the result of statements he made during the Whitewater hearings. Barack Obama, who passed his bar in 1991, “voluntarily surrendered” his license in 2008, for unknown reasons.
Why did Obama surrender his license? Citizen WELLs reports that it may have been because of charges that Obama lied on his bar application. As Al Martin notes, “they can’t punish someone who has resigned, which is why so many corrupt lawyers in Illinois resign before they are disbarred.”