Category Archives: Investigations

Which Rotten Fruit Falls First? by Charles Hugh Smith

The question may be irrelevant, because once one rotten fruit falls, the tree is so full of such fruit that the rest will follow. From Charles Hugh Smith at oftwominds.com:

I predict the current investigations will widen and take a variety of twists and turns that surprise all those anticipating a tidy, narrowly focused denouement.
The theme this week is The Rot Within.

To those of us who understand the entire status quo is rotten and corrupt to its core, the confidence of each ideological camp that their side will emerge unscathed by investigation is a source of amusement. The fake-progressives (fake because these so-called “progressives” support Imperial over-reach and a status quo whose only possible output is soaring wealth and income inequality) are confident that a “smoking gun” of corruption will deliver their most fervent dream, the impeachment of President Trump, while Trump supporters are equally confident there is no “smoking gun.”
One camp is confident that the wily Clintons and their army of enablers, from former FBI Director Comey on down, will finally be brought to long-evaded justice for their various perfections of corruption and collusion: pay to play, and so on.
Clinton supporters are equally confident that there is no “smoking gun” that will bring down the House of Clinton, and by proxy, the organs of the Democratic Party.
The implicit historical model each camp is anticipating is of course Watergate, which unfolded with a dramatic inevitability that in retrospect almost seems scripted: a minor burglary led to the hubris of cover-up which led to the destruction of the Nixon presidency.
Often overlooked in this history is the key roles played by insider informants (such as Deep Throat) and the wider political demands for greater transparency the scandal triggered. The Church Committee ended up investigating the illegal campaigns of the FBI and CIA against the anti-war and civil rights movements (COINTELPRO etc.), and a small dent was made in the federal government’s decades-long reliance on official secrecy to cover up official corruption, collusion, malfeasance, lies, etc.– the ugly underbelly of agencies protecting the Empire from any inconvenient leaks of truth.
I submit that Watergate will not be the template for the multiple investigations being pursued in the present. It seems highly likely to me that who and what gets taken down by the investigations is much less predictable than in the Watergate template, which distilled down to an escalating campaign of cover-ups and stonewalling which simply compounded the crimes previously committed.
To continue reading: Which Rotten Fruit Falls First?
Advertisements

Judiciary Committee calls on former FBI informant to testify about Uranium One, by Sara A. Carter

If this FBI informant is allowed to testify, it could blow the Uranium One scandal wide open. From Sara A. Carter at circa.com:

Senate Judiciary Chairman Charles Grassley asked the attorney of a former FBI informant Wednesday to allow her client to testify before his committee regarding the FBI’s investigation regarding kickbacks and bribery by the Russian state controlled nuclear company that was approved to purchase twenty percent of United States uranium supply in 2010, Circa has learned.

In a formal letter, Grassley, an Iowa Republican, asked Victoria Toensing, the lawyer representing the former FBI informant, to allow her client, who says he worked as a voluntary informant for the FBI, to be allowed to testify about the “crucial” eyewitness testimony he provided to the FBI regarding members of the Russian subsidiary and other connected players from 2009 until the FBI’s prosecution of the defendants in 2014.

Toensing’s client was an American businessman who says he worked for four years undercover as an FBI confidential witness. Toensing said he was blocked by the Obama Justice Department, under then Attorney General Loretta Lynch, about testifying to Congress about his time as an informant for the FBI. He contends that he has pertinent information that the Russian’s were attempting to gain access to former President Bill Clinton and his wife, then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, to influence the Obama administration’s decision on the purchase of Uranium One, Toensing said.

“Reporting indicates that “the informant’s work was crucial to the government’s ability to crack a multimillion dollar racketeering scheme by Russian nuclear officials on U.S. soil” and that the scheme involved “bribery, kickbacks, money laundering, and extortion,” Grassley states in his letter. “Further, the reporting indicates that your client can testify that ‘FBI agents made comments to him suggesting political pressure was exerted during the Justice Department probe’ and ‘that there was specific evidence that could have scuttled approval of the Uranium One deal.’ It appears that your client possesses unique information about the Uranium One/Rosatom transaction and how the Justice Department handled the criminal investigation into the Russian criminal conspiracy.”

Grassley added that “such information is critical to the Committee’s oversight of the Justice Department and its ongoing inquiry into the manner in which CFIUS approved the transaction. Accordingly, the Committee requests to interview your client.”

Toensing, who formerly worked under the Reagan Justice Department and is the former chief counsel of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said told Circa Tuesday that she was attempting to get Congress to persuade the Trump Justice Department or the FBI to free her client of a non-disclosure agreement he signed with the FBI so that he can talk to lawmakers.

To continue reading: Judiciary Committee calls on former FBI informant to testify about Uranium One

 

 

Emails Reveal Bill Clinton Met With Vladimir Putin Just Before Uranium One Deal, by Tyler Durden

The Uranium One scandal is not going away. First, it’s simple. Nefarious Russians who were under investigation by the FBI gave the Clinton Foundation and Bill Clinton a lot of money while Hillary Clinton, as Secretary of State, was on a committee that okayed the sale of 20 percent of US uranium capacity to a Russian firm. Second, the Democrats and the press have been demonizing Russia for so long that they can’t turn around and say, “But the Russians are okay when Hillary and Bill take a lot of money from them.” Third, the Clintons have had an incredible run, since the 1990s, of scandals they’ve managed to sweep under the rug. Everybody’s luck runs out sooner or later, and the Clintons have been living on borrowed time. From Tyler Durden at zerohedge.com:

If President Trump or anyone even remotely close to his presidency, including his best friend from 2nd grade that he hadn’t seen in 40 years, sought to meet with key Russian nuclear officials, in Moscow, just months before the federal government approved a very controversial deal handing Vladimir Putin 20% of U.S. uranium reserves, despite an ongoing investigation into Russian fraud, bribery, extortion and money laundering, it would be the only story played on a 24 x 7 loop on CNN and MSNBC.

Ironically, that is exactly what new emails dug up by The Hill show that Bill Clinton did in June 2010, just months before the Uranium One deal was approved by a committee on which his wife, then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, sat.  Oh, and did we mention that Bill’s Clinton Foundation just happened to collect millions of dollars in bribes donations from Russian sources and Uranium One shareholders shortly after his Moscow meetings?

As you will recall, the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), approved the Uranium One transaction in October 2010.  According to new emails revealed by The Hill, just months before that approval, Bill Clinton sought permission from the State Department, run by his wife at the time, to meet Arkady Dvorkovich, a top aide to then-Russian President Dmitri Medvedev and one of the highest-ranking government officials to serve on Rosatom’s board of supervisors, the company which was ultimately approved to purchase Uranium One.

As he prepared to collect a $500,000 payday in Moscow in 2010, Bill Clinton sought clearance from the State Department to meet with a key board director of the Russian nuclear energy firm Rosatom — which at the time needed the Obama administration’s approval for a controversial uranium deal, government records show.

Arkady Dvorkovich, a top aide to then-Russian President Dmitri Medvedev and one of the highest-ranking government officials to serve on Rosatom’s board of supervisors, was listed on a May 14, 2010, email as one of 15 Russians the former president wanted to meet during a late June 2010 trip, the documents show.

“In the context of a possible trip to Russia at the end of June, WJC is being asked to see the business/government folks below. Would State have concerns about WJC seeing any of these folks,” Clinton Foundation foreign policy adviser Amitabh Desai wrote the State Department on May 14, 2010, using the former president’s initials and forwarding the list of names to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s team.

To continue reading: Emails Reveal Bill Clinton Met With Vladimir Putin Just Before Uranium One Deal

Trump: Russian Uranium Deal “Is The Biggest Story That Fake Media Doesn’t Want To Follow”, by Tyler Durden

By tweeting about the Russian uranium scandal, President Trump has just made it harder for the mainstream media to ignore. From Tyler Durden at zerohedge.com:

As we reported yesterday, as the media continues to lose their collective minds over $100,000 worth of Facebook ads allegedly purchased by Russians during the 2016 election, the Senate Judiciary Committee has finally decided they’re going to take a look into a shady Russian deal – first  profiled here last summer – that handed Putin 20% of America’s uranium reserves, was approved by the Obama administration during an ongoing FBI investigation into charges of bribery, extortion and money laundering by the Russian buyer and netted the Clintons millions of dollars in donations and ‘speaking fees.”

Recall that on Wednesday it was reported that the Senate Judiciary Committee launched a full-scale probe into a Russian nuclear bribery case, demanding several federal agencies disclose whether they knew the FBI had uncovered the corruption before the Obama administration in 2010 approved a controversial uranium deal with Moscow. Sen. Chuck Grassley, the committee chairman, gets his first chance to raise the issue in public on Wednesday when he questions Attorney General Jeff Sessions during an oversight hearing.

“It has recently come to the Committee’s attention that employees of Rosatom were involved in a criminal enterprise involving a conspiracy to commit extortion and money laundering during the time of the CFIUS transaction,” Grassley wrote in one such letter addressed to Sessions.

“The fact that Rosatom subsidiaries in the United States were under criminal investigation as a result of a U.S. intelligence operation apparently around the time CFIUS approved the Uranium One/Rosatom transaction raises questions about whether that information factored into CFIUS’ decision to approve the transaction,” the chairman added.

Fast forward to this week when thanks to newly released affidavits from a case that landed one of the Russian co-conspirators, Vadim Mikerin, in jail, we learned on Tuesday that not only was the Obama administration aware the Russians’ illegal acts in the U.S. but it may have also been fully aware that “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.”

To continue reading: Trump: Russian Uranium Deal “Is The Biggest Story That Fake Media Doesn’t Want To Follow”

FBI – With Robert Mueller As Head – Uncovered Russian Bribery Plot Benefiting Obama, the Clintons As Early As 2009, by Jon Hall

Robert Mueller, who’s investigating the fake Russian influence allegations, was head of the FBI when it investigated and sat on a real Russian influence story involving Obama and the Clintons. From Jon Hall at fmshooter.com:

According to government documents and interviews, before approving the controversial Uranium One deal with Russia, the Obama administration participated in bribery, kickbacks, extortion, and money laundering with Russian officials – all with the aim to expand Vladimir Putin’s atomic energy business inside the U.S.

This, and more, comes from a bombshell report from The Hill that details the corruption via eyewitness accounts and internal documents. As early as 2009, emails showed that Moscow compromised an American uranium trucking firm with bribes and kickbacks – which is in direct violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices act.

Eyewitness account, also backed by documents, indicated Russian nuclear officials had routed millions of dollars to the U.S. for former President Bill Clinton’s foundation during the time Hillary Clinton served as Secretary of State.

Notably, while Bill Clinton was routed millions from Russia, Secretary of State Clinton served on a government body that provided favorable decision to Moscow – a clear conflict of interest. In an affidavit years after the scheme, an FBI agent claimed the racketeering was conducted “with the consent of higher level officials” in Russia “who shared the proceeds” from the kickbacks. 

However, instead of bringing charges immediately after the scandal broke in 2010, Obama’s Department of Justice continued to investigate the matter for four years, enacting and performing a cover-up of massive proportions. On top of that, per The Hill, The DOJ:

…left 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.

The Uranium One deal was, of course, just one of those two decisions made to benefit Putin – giving control of more than 20 percent of American’s total uranium supply to Russian nuclear giant Rosatom. Trump, on the campaign trail last year, hit Hillary Clinton for being involved with the deal; however, her spokesman claimed Clinton wasn’t involved in the committee review and the State Department official who handled the transaction said Clinton “never intervened … on any [Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States] matter.”

The second decision made by the Obama admin that favorably benefited Putin was another deal for Rosatom:

In 2011, the administration gave approval for Rosatom’s Tenex subsidiary to sell commercial uranium to U.S. nuclear power plants in a partnership with the United States Enrichment Corp. Before then, Tenex had been limited to selling U.S. nuclear power plants reprocessed uranium

Documents from the FBI, Energy Department, and U.S. courts show the FBI had gathered evidence long before any of the wrongdoing – extortion, bribery, kickbacks – started in 2009. Eric Holder, infamous Obama-era Attorney General, was among the administration officials who joined Hillary Clinton on the Committee on Foreign Investment at the time the Uranium One deal was approved.

To continue reading: FBI – With Robert Mueller As Head – Uncovered Russian Bribery Plot Benefiting Obama, the Clintons As Early As 2009

“No Devilishly Effective Plot” – Clinton Chief Strategist Admits “You Can’t Buy The Presidency For $100,000”, by Mark Penn

Even the Democrats are admitting Russiagate is bunk. From Mark Penn (former chief strategist on Bill Clinton’s 1996 presidential campaign, Hillary Clinton’s 2000 Senate campaign, and Mrs. Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign), via The Wall Street Journal via zerohedge.com:

Russia didn’t win Trump the White House any more than China re-elected Bill Clinton in 1996.

The fake news about fake news is practically endless. Americans worried about Russia’s influence in the 2016 election have seized on a handful of Facebook ads—as though there weren’t also three 90-minute debates, two televised party conventions, and $2.4 billion spent on last year’s campaign. The danger is that bending facts to fit the Russia story line may nudge Washington into needlessly and recklessly regulating the internet and curtailing basic freedoms.

After an extensive review, Facebook has identified $100,000 of ads that came from accounts associated with Russia. Assume for the sake of argument that Vladimir Putin personally authorized this expenditure. Given its divisive nature, the campaign could be dubbed “From Russia, With Hate”—except it would make for a disappointing James Bond movie.

Analyzing the pattern of expenditures, and doing some back-of-the-envelope math, it’s clear this was no devilishly effective plot. Facebook says 56% of the ads ran after the election, reducing the tally that could have influenced the result to about $44,000. It also turns out the ads were not confined to swing states but also shown in places like New York, California and Texas. Supposing half the ads went to swing states brings the total down to $22,000.

Facebook also counted ads as early as June 2015. Assuming they were evenly spread and we want only those that ran the year of the election, that knocks it down to $13,000. Most of the ads did not solicit support for a candidate and carried messages on issues like racism, immigration and guns. The actual electioneering then amounts to about $6,500.

To continue reading: “No Devilishly Effective Plot” – Clinton Chief Strategist Admits “You Can’t Buy The Presidency For $100,000

6 Questions About the Vegas Massacre That Will Make You Wonder What They’re Hiding, from Daisy Luther

The articles poking holes in the Las Vegas storyline keep coming. From Daisy Luther at lewrockwell.com:

This Week in the News

You know, I tried to keep from going full-on tinfoil with the Las Vegas massacre, but they’re making that completely impossible.

Sure, there were questions from the very beginning. A lot of things didn’t quite add up, but there is an investigatory process in such events. But… how is it that every single thing has been upended? This story is unraveling like a frayed sweater in a basket with a litter of kittens.

Here are the 6 questions about the Vegas Massacre that make me wonder what on earth they’re trying to hide from us.

1.) Why do witnesses keep disappearing?

It is a proven fact that many people who go through something as horrific as this attack don’t remember things clearly. People with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder often experience deficits in accuracy and this event was nothing if not traumatic. Lots of people reported having no idea what was going on. They thought the noise was firecrackers at first. Confusion and fear colored their memories and their only focus was on surviving. We’ve all heard someone describe an event, saying, “It was all a blur.”

But there were a few witnesses who had a very clear recall of the event and they are telling very different stories. Stories of multiple shooters. Stories of shooters right in the crowd. Stories of early police reports that could have prevented the entire tragedy.

Jesus Campo was the security guard who was shot in the leg when he approached Paddock’s room. (One reporter found that Campo either was not in the employee database or had been removed.) He had scheduled interviews with the media and then didn’t show upOne reporter said there was a gag order on Campo and his family but this has not been verified. No one seems to know the whereabouts of Campo.

Another eyewitness was 28-year old Kymberley Suchomel, who had attended the music festival. She told a very detailed story of multiple shooters, actual fireworks as a distraction. She escaped unharmed only to die unexpectedly in her home a week later “of natural causes.”

These people aren’t alone in their stories that don’t match the official narrative. Read this article and watch this video for more eyewitness stories. And guys…be careful.

To continue reading: 6 Questions About the Vegas Massacre That Will Make You Wonder What They’re Hiding