Tag Archives: Bill Clinton

Uranium One: FBI Refuses To Release Three-Dozen Secret Memos Involving Clintons, Russia And Obama, by Tyler Durden

Sitting towards the bottom of the Clinton/Obama compost heap, waiting to be uncovered, is the Uranium One scandal. From Tyler Durden at zerohedge.com:

The FBI has refused to declassify 37 pages of materials related to the Uranium One deal, citing national security and the privacy issues, reports The Hill‘s John Solomon. The documents are thought to contain information regarding then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s involvement, as well as the Obama administration’s knowledge of the controversial deal.

Continue reading

Advertisements

Trump is using the Bill Clinton playbook and it just might work, by Joseph Moreno

Slick Donny? From Joseph Moreno at thehill.com:

The parallels are remarkable. Twenty years ago this month, a special prosecutor investigating the president was weeks away from releasing a report accusing the chief executive of illegal conduct unrelated to his official duties. Three months later, Bill Clinton was impeached by the House of Representatives on charges of lying and obstructing justice to hide a extramarital affair from his wife and the country. While this may have meant he lost a battle, there is no question that Clinton ultimately won the war against independent counsel Ken Starr by not only surviving but continuing on to complete an otherwise successful presidency.

Today, President Trump is not only following Clinton’s playbook to a tee, he stands a good chance of winning his war of words against an opponent who remains unable to fight back. Just as we are seeing with the ongoing Russia probe, Starr’s original investigation started specific and broadened over time. In Starr’s case, his 1994 appointment was to investigate potential violations of criminal law relating to Bill and Hillary Clinton’s involvement in the “Whitewater” land deal. Four years and $50 million later, Starr’s most impactful findings involved Clinton’s affair with a White House intern and his lying about it under oath.

Robert Mueller’s original mandate was also narrow. He was appointed to find evidence of “any links” or “coordination” between the Russian government and individuals associated with the Trump campaign. Fifteen months and more than $16 million later, it is impossible to know when and how the probe will conclude. However, the conviction of former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafortand the guilty plea of former Trump attorney Michael Cohen on grounds entirely unrelated to Russia mirror how Starr’s investigation also morphed into altogether new areas.

What is also being mirrored is how Trump is taking the fight with Mueller in the court of public opinion. At some point, Clinton decided that rather than wait until Starr completed his investigation, he would step up and fight on his own terms. Lacking the benefit of a Twitter account, Clinton used surrogates who repeatedly attacked Starr as a highly partisan Republican operative obsessed with bringing down Clinton. Starr was accused of being fixated on sex, and being a runaway Inspector Javert who spent years and millions of dollars on a wasted effort. In the reported words of a Clinton White House official, the attacks were “part of our continuing strategy to destroy Ken Starr.”

To continue reading: Trump is using the Bill Clinton playbook and it just might work

State Department approved 215 Bill Clinton speeches, controversial consulting deal, worth $48m; Hillary Clinton’s COS copied on all decisions, by Micah Morrison and Luke Rosa

The State Department approved Bill Clinton speeches and deals worth $48 million while his wife was Secretary of State. Only a hard-bitten cynic would suggest Bill’s paydays were meant to influence his wife. From Micah Morrison and Luke Rosiak:

A joint investigation by the Washington Examiner and the nonprofit watchdog group Judicial Watch found that former President Clinton gave 215 speeches and earned $48 million while his wife presided over U.S. foreign policy, raising questions about whether the Clintons fulfilled ethics agreements related to the Clinton Foundation during Hillary Clinton‘s tenure as secretary of state.

According to documents obtained by Judicial Watch and released Wednesday in an ongoing Freedom of Information Act case, State Department officials charged with reviewing Bill Clinton’s proposed speeches did not object to a single one.

Some of the speeches were delivered in global hotspots and were paid for by entities with business or policy interests in the U.S.

The documents also show that in June 2011, the State Department approved a consulting agreement between Bill Clinton and a controversial Clinton Foundation adviser, Doug Band.

The consultancy with Band’s Teneo Strategy ended eight months later following an uproar over Teneo’s ties to the failed investment firm MF Global.

State Department legal advisers, serving as “designated agency ethics officials,” approved Bill Clinton’s speeches in China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, Panama,Turkey, Taiwan, India, the Cayman Islands and other countries.

The memos approving Mr. Clinton’s speeches were routinely copied to Cheryl Mills, Hillary Clinton’s senior counsel and chief of staff.

Mills is a longtime Clinton troubleshooter who defended the president during his impeachment. In the Benghazi affair, Mills reportedly berated a high-ranking official at the U.S. embassy in Libya for talking to a Republican congressman.

Under State Department protocols, a “designated agency ethics official” is assigned to advise the secretary of state about “potential or actual conflicts of interest.”

In a December 2008 memorandum of understanding, the protocols were expanded to Bill Clinton, the Clinton Foundation and related initiatives — specifically, to reviewing Bill Clinton’s proposed speeches and consulting deals.

In an accompanying letter to the State Department legal adviser, Clinton lawyer David Kendall noted that Bill Clinton would disclose proposed consulting deals and, for speeches, provide “the identities of the host(s) (the entity that pay the speaker’s fee)” so that the State Department “in consultation with the White House as appropriate, may conduct a review for any real or apparent conflicts of interest with the duties of the Secretary of State.”

To continue reading: State Department approved 215 Bill Clinton speeches, controversial consulting deal, worth $48m; Hillary Clinton’s COS copied on all decisions

Bill’s Belated #MeToo Moment, by Maureen Dowd

The #MeToo movement is finally examining the transgressions of sexual predator in chief Bill Clinton. From Maureen Down at nytimes.com:

Bill Clinton at a campaign event last year for a New Jersey candidate.CreditLucas Jackson/Reuters

Book tours can be brutal.

It took 20 years for Bill Clinton to be properly publicly shamed for the ugly bargain at the heart of the Clinton operation.

As a politician, the former president was gifted. James Carville liked to say: “People are confused. They don’t know which one they like more, the peace or the prosperity.”

Even Barack Obama, another talented pol, was forced to turn to his former nemesis to help sell his agenda for his second term, christening Bill the “Secretary of Explaining Stuff.” And if Hillary had listened to Bill’s urgent warnings about addressing the alienation of white men in flyover country in 2016, she’d be president.

Bill Clinton was so popular that, during his cascading scandals with women, some political analysts on the left suggested that Americans should look at a commander in chief in terms of private character and public character, disregarding personal peccadilloes and giving weight only to policy decisions.

But with the Clintons, the public and private were always intertwined in an inextricable and unappetizing way.

The desire among his supporters for a liberal agenda was held hostage to Bill Clinton’s libertine appetites. Let Bill be regressive and transgressive with women he was attracted to, and he would be progressive for all women.

You want enlightened policies for women and a record number of women in exalted posts? Then you must endure — and cover up for — “Saturday Night Bill,” as the dark side of the president was dubbed.

His wife and other prominent feminists backed Bill back then, and he and Hillary always had henchmen who were willing to smear Bill’s girlfriends and victims as trailer trash, cash-for-trash, nutty and slutty. (Think of how the Clinton war room would have Giuliani-ed a Stormy Daniels in those days.)

To continue reading: Bill’s Belated #MeToo Moment

Harvey Weinstein and the Clinton Protection Racket, by Ann Coulter

Anybody reading this who thinks Harvey Weinstein’s crimes would have been prosecuted and the #MeToo movement inaugurated if Hillary Clinton had been elected is nowhere near cynical enough to be on this site and should find a nice pabulum mainstream media site for their reading pleasure. From Ann Coulter at anncoulter.com:

Harvey Weinstein’s recent perp walk reminds me of another great thing about Trump winning the election: Hillary Clinton isn’t president.

A New York Times article on Weinstein’s court appearance noted how the “ground shifted” last year, finally ending the “code of silence” surrounding powerful men. Why “last year,” if this has been going on for decades?

The article explained that Weinstein’s power was enormous, his connections extensive and his willingness to play dirty without bounds. Did Harvey lose his money and connections “last year”?

Nope. But “last year” was the first year of Trump’s presidency, or as I like to think of it, the first year of Hillary not being president. Ever.

The liberal protection racket for sexual predators was always intimately intertwined with the Clintons. The template used to defend Bill Clinton became a model for all left-wing sexual predators. They all hired the same lawyers and detectives and counted on the same cultural elites to mete out punishment to anyone who stood in the way of their Caligula lifestyles. It was Total War against the original #MeToo movement.

Even Teddy Kennedy never plotted revenge on reporters or smeared his sexual conquests as bimbos, trailer park trash and stalkers. That was the Clinton model.

Showing how incestuous it was, in 2000 — two years after Clinton’s impeachment — Weinstein used his publishing company, Talk/Miramax, overseen by Tina Brown, to take revenge on anyone involved in Clinton’s impeachment.

The publishing house commissioned a book by John Connolly to dig into the private sex lives of the people who had helped expose Bill Clinton, e.g., the lawyers behind Paula Jones’ lawsuit, Ken Starr’s staff, Linda Tripp lawyer Jim Moody, Matt Drudge, reporter Michael Isikoff and so on.

Concise summary of the book: All of us were gay, except me, because I was having an affair with Geraldo Rivera.

To continue reading: Harvey Weinstein and the Clinton Protection Racket

The True Origins Of The US-Chinese Trade War, by Andrew Korybko

The US tried to bring China into the US fold, but China had other ideas. Who knew? FRom Andrew Korybko at orientalreview.org:

China responded to Trump’s tariffs with economic restrictions of its own, though its market has always been notoriously difficult to enter due to Beijing’s own ironically “protectionist” policies designed to safeguard its domestic producers, but the government has been easing its prior regulations in recent years in order to facilitate the country’s One Belt One Road (OBOR) global vision of New Silk Road connectivity. The developing trade war between the US and China threatens to formalize the long-running economic competition between these two Great Powers as they vie with one another over control of the world order, with Washington wanting to retain its erstwhile but fading unipolar dominance while Beijing wants to pioneer the emergence of a multipolar system marked by a diversity of theoretically equal stakeholders.

The friction between these contradictory forces is the basis of the ongoing New Cold War, though there’s a bit more of a backstory to this global struggle than just that.

The US thought that “winning back Beijing” through its late Cold War-era alliance with China against the USSR would allow Washington to do as it pleases to what its decision makers had convinced themselves was their largest proxy state to date, but the US’ betrayal of China through the failed Tiananmen Square Color Revolution attempt of 1989 forever changed how the East Asian country’s communist leaders viewed America. Nevertheless, the naïve liberal-globalists of the Clinton era thought that they could bribe China to remain “loyal” to the US-led global world order that emerged after the Cold War by relying on “win-win” investments that would enrich the American elite while helping China rapidly modernize.

Suffice to say, this presumption proved to be totally false.

The so-called “Washington Consensus” and attendant “rules of the game” are rigged in order to benefit the US and indefinitely perpetuate its global hegemony, which is why China continuously broke the rules to its advantage but was allowed to get away with it for so long because of the aforementioned relationship that it had with naïve liberal-globalist American elites who profited from this system at the expense of average Americans. The Obama Administration tried to preemptively “balance” the inevitable geopolitical consequences of this trend by proposing the so-called “Group of Two” or “Chimerica” global partnership with China, but Beijing rejected this outreach.

To continue reading: The True Origins Of The US-Chinese Trade War

They “Said” That? 1/18/18

No real quote tonight, just two pictures that speak volumes. Donald Trump and Bill Clinton are both 71.

Trump has never drank or smoked, and just got a clean bill of health. Heaven only knows how badly Bill Clinton has debauched himself. It catches up with you.