Tag Archives: Clintons

It’s Time America Got Some Answers About Huma Abedin

Updated: 8:00 AM ET June 14, 2016

http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2016/06/13/roger-stone-its-time-america-got-some-answers-about-huma-abedin/

By Roger Stone

Chic gal pal? Mild mannered politician’s wife? Harmless clotheshorse? Saudi plant? Innocent aide? Handler?

Huma Abedin is Vice Chair of Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign. But Huma is more, much more than that. She is the person closest to the most powerful woman in American politics and perhaps the next President. Huma has been described variously as Hillary’s “body woman,” a sort of glorified go-to personal maid, gentle confidant, and by others as an Islamic spy. She may be all of these things, because as we shall see, Huma Abedin has an interesting and complex career history.

Abedin was deeply involved with the establishment of Hillary’s private email server, which was used for all of her work as Secretary of State. Now, since we know Hillary had hundreds of classified or top-secret documents on her vulnerable server (despite her early lies saying she did not), any faith in Huma’s judgment — at the very least — has been demolished. You will soon ask yourself, “how did this woman get a security clearance?”

She was born Huma Mahmood Abedin in 1976 in Kalamazoo, Michigan. Her father, Syed Zainul Abedin, was Indian and born in New Delhi. In the early 1970s, he was affiliated with the Muslim Students Association at Western Michigan University. The Muslim Students Association or MSA was started in 1963 by Saudi Arabia’s biggest charity, the Muslim World League, a group formed and funded by the Kingdom to spread Islam throughout the world.

Her mother, Saleha Mahmood Abedin, was born in Pakistan. Saleha received her Ph.D. in Sociology from the University of Pennsylvania in 1977.

Two years after Huma was born, the family moved to Jeddah, Saudi Arabia and with the patronage of Abdullah Omar Naseef of the Muslim World League, founded the Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs with offices in Saudi Arabia and London, England. In the 1980’s Syed Abedin was a counselor of the Muslim World League. After his death in 1993, his wife Saleha took over and serves as director of the IMMA (Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs) and as the editor of that organization’s academic magazine, the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs. More recently she still edits the Journal and is also a part of the administration of Dar Al-Hekma Women’s College.

Naseef’s connections to the entire Abedin family are significant — and, for reasons you’ll see in a moment, very troubling. As Vanity Fair wrote, during “his early years as the patron of the Abedins’ journal, Nasseef was the secretary-general of the Muslim World League” and gives more shocking details about the Abedins:

It turns out the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs is an Abedin family business. Huma was an assistant editor there between 1996 and 2008. Her brother, Hassan, 45, is a book-review editor at the Journal and was a fellow at the Oxford Center for Islamic Studies, where Nasseef is chairman of the board of trustees. Huma’s sister, Heba, 26, is an assistant editor at the Journal.

That’s what all the fuss is about. Since 1962, the Muslim World League has been funded by the Saudi government to the tune of more than $1.3 billion.

Naseef, the Muslim World League, and the government of Pakistan created the Rabita Trust in 1988. Naseef was a sponsor and financial supporter of Syed Abedin’s IMMA.

Just a month after the 9/11 jihadist attack left thousands dead and brought down the World Trade Center, President George W. Bush’s Executive Order designated the Rabita Trust as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist Entity and the Treasury Department froze its assets on October 12, 2001.

Naseef founded the Rabita Trust and remains involved with it to this day. A Treasury Department press release issued when Rabita Trust’s assets were frozen indicated that Rabita Trust is headed by Wa’el Hamza Jalaidan, one of the founders of al-Qaida with bin Laden. He was the logistics chief of bin Laden’s organization and fought on bin Laden’s side in Afghanistan. Jalaidan himself was branded a Specially Designated Global Terrorist Entity by the United States Treasury Department, and his assets have been frozen, as well.

But the connections between the Abedin’s Saudi benefactor, the Muslim World League, and al-Qaeda don’t end there.

In 1984, foreign mujahidin fighters were streaming in from all over the world to an office in Peshawar, Pakistan known as Maktab al-Khidamat or MAK.

MAK had been created by two Muslims to recruit and raise money: a radical cleric named Abdullah Azzam and Azzam’s protege, the infamous leader behind 9/11, the Saudi Arabian named Osama bin Laden. Before and after his creation of MAK, Azzam subsisted on money provided by the Muslim World League:

Azzam, now determined to move to Pakistan, obtained a teaching position at the newly established International Islamic University of Islamabad, whose foreign faculty were paid directly by the Muslim World League. Thus, from his arrival in Pakistan in December 1981 until his permanent move to Peshawar in 1986, the leader of the Arab Afghans subsisted on a Muslim World League salary.

Donations to MAK came from a number of “Islamic charities” such as the Saudi Red Crescent, as well as some Saudi Arabian princes and mosques.

The office that bin Laden and the other MAK founders were based out of 1984 in Peshawar was the office of the Muslim World League and the Muslim Brotherhood. The Muslim World League was also a principal funder of MAK, bringing in Saudi funds that would eventually go to jihad against the West.

The head of the Muslim World League when their offices in Pakistan were used by Bin Laden, Zawahiri and Azzam in 1984 was none other than the Abedin’s benefactor, Abdullah Omar Naseef.

Naseef’s Rabita Trust, a subsidiary of the Muslim World League, is also connected to a U.S.-based group, called the SAAR Network, through two officers — Dr. Abdullah Omar Naseef and Abdullah al-Obaid. The SAAR Network was the focus of a March 2002 raid led by United States authorities for the network’s alleged ties to al Qaeda.

This brings us back to Huma Abedin. She lived in Saudi Arabia until she was 17, while her family worked closely with Naseef. Back in the U.S., she studied at George Washington University. Two years later she, along with Monica Lewinsky, became interns at the White House under Bill and Hillary Clinton. Monica served as Bill’s intern – until their sexual relationship got out of hand and onto her blue dress – and Huma served as Hillary’s intern. In 1998, as the Lewinsky sex scandal was raging, she along with other staff girls formed a sort of shield around the humiliated First Lady.

While she worked at the White House, Abedin was an editor at the family business—the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs.

When Clinton ran for the Senate in 2000, Huma moved up the ladder to become her aide and personal adviser.

When the towers fell in 2001, Hillary Clinton was the Senator from New York. When the assets of the Rabita Trust were frozen and the group declared a terror funder, there was no point where Sen. Clinton’s assistant Huma Abedin stepped forward to shed light on her family’s benefactor Abdullah Omar Naseef, the Muslim World League, or the Rabita Trust.

Sen. Clinton and Huma Abedin betrayed every New Yorker and every America with their silence.

Also worth noting: from April 2005 to March 2006, Huma was paid a total of $27,999.92, yet on September 18, 2006, she bought an apartment in Washington D.C. costing $649,000.

The question here is, on an annual salary of no more than $28,000, where did the money come from? We’ve caught of the greatest spies due to their spending well beyond their salaries.

At the least, what to make of someone who has lived for 17 years in Saudi Arabia, with parents who have close, long-standing ties with people connected to terrorist organizations, and then comes to the U.S. and within two years gets a job as the First Lady’s assistant?

By 2008, she was Hillary’s traveling chief of staff and was always at Hillary’s side. In 2009, she was appointed Deputy Chief of Staff to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. At this time, Huma had her name removed from the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs masthead.

In 2010, Huma married Congressman Anthony Weiner. In 2011, her husband was caught sexting — sending pictures of his erection to several women. He resigned from Congress that same year.

Huma’s luck seemed to know no end when Hillary Clinton personally signed off on a controversial deal in 2012 that allowed Huma to simultaneously work for the State Department and a private New York firm with deep ties to the Clinton family foundation. Mrs. Clinton personally signed a title change form that approved of the transition from being her Deputy Chief of Staff, to an SGE (special government employee), the equivalent of a contractor with special privileges. This allowed Huma to work for both the State department and for the Teneo Group. Some of you might remember the Teneo Group as a top consulting firm run by Bill Clinton gatekeeper Doug Band. Bill Clinton was also on the payroll of Teneo. From June 2012 to February 2013, she held four jobs. She was Hillary’s State Department aide, a consultant at Teneo Group, she worked and was paid a salary at the Clinton Foundation, and she worked as Hillary’s private personal assistant. Huma was triple-dipping.

There were several issues being investigated both internally by the State Department and Sen. Charles Grassley of the Senate Judiciary Committee for conflicts of interest and embezzlement. She filed inaccurate time sheets overpaying herself $10,000. Mr. Grassley has also questioned whether the deal with Abedin really met the requirements for a special government employee status. One of those requirements is that someone’s work as a contractor be different enough from the original job to warrant giving the person contractor status. Documents acquired by the Washington Times show that she told State officials that she planned to do the same kind of work as an SGE that she did as Deputy Chief of Staff.

She became part of Hillary’s transition team in 2013, helping her to return to private life. She continued her work at the Clinton Foundation and set up her own consulting firm, Zain Endeavors LLC.

On October 16, 2015, Abedin testified in a closed session before the House Select Committee on Benghazi, in a session that was expected to focus on the 2012 Benghazi attack during which Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans were killed. She said, “I came here today to be as helpful as I could be to the committee. I wanted to honor the service of those lost and injured in the Benghazi attacks,” adding she was “honored” to work for Clinton at State and “proud” of her service there. Representative Lynn Westmoreland, a Republican panel member, said Abedin frequently answered questions with responses of “‘I don’t remember’ and ‘I don’t recollect.’”

There is no doubt that she and Hillary have an extremely close relationship. She has been loyal and faithful to Hillary for twenty years. “I have one daughter. But if I had a second daughter, it would be Huma.” So spoke Hillary in 2010. She even visited with Huma’s mother Saleha in Saudi Arabia in 2011, telling her that Huma’s position was “very important and sensitive.” Saleha is reportedly an outspoken advocate for genital mutilation for girls in the Islamic world.

So how has the media dealt with Huma Abedin? In short, they haven’t. The family’s critics have been attacked and labeled as conspiracy theorists.

One exception to this was the February 2016 issue of Vanity Fair. Author William D Cohen’s story, titled “Is Huma Abedin Hillary Clinton’s Secret Weapon or Her Next Big Problem?” tackled some of the issues I have gone over in this piece. It was well written, informative, and controversial. The backlash was immediate.

Media Matters for America, Hillary Clinton’s private propaganda machine, went into overdrive, putting out a response to Cohen’s article that attacked his credibility and just about every fact he had raised in his piece. According to Lee Stranahan writing in Breitbart, the Media Matters article was filled with false information and smears to protect the Clinton campaign.

This isn’t some minor aide. Huma Abedin has been at Clinton’s side for decades, and it’s time America got some answers.

Listen to Roger Stone discuss Abedin and Clinton on Breitbart News Daily, airing weekdays from 6 AM to 9 AM EST on SiriusXM Patriot 125:

– See more at: http://stonezone.com/article.php?id=752#sthash.F1gkof6A.dpuf

TiLTNews Network

Bill Clinton and the Selling of US Security

Updated: 8:00 AM ET July 8, 2016

For the Clinton crime family, selling out US national security is a family business

This may be the greatest scandal in 50 years of American history.

It makes Watergate look like a jay walking charge. It makes the Iran Contra affair look like a small time operation. This is what House Republicans should have Impeached Bill Clinton for instead of lying about a White House Intern giving him head in the Oval Office. It’s called treason.

PART ONE: RUSSIA

Bill Clinton is at the center of the greatest foreign policy deceit ever perpetrated on the American people. He used the power of his office to allow the selling and delivery of high tech missile defense components to governments of countries that are listed as threats to this country and the stability of the world. Russia was one of the benefactors of deals Clinton made without proper authorization from Congress. Ignoring CIA and Pentagon reports that showed how Russia was continuing a major and secretive modernization program for its strategic nuclear missile systems, Clinton allocated over $1 billion to “help” the Soviets “dismantle” their nuclear weapons. In 1995 the General Accounting Office (GAO) wrote that Moscow refuses to permit American audits of the $1.25 billion disarmament aid. This is an important issue because it allowed the Russians to use American taxpayer’s money to build new offensive nuclear weapons that directly threaten the United States.

Under U.S. law, no money could be spent in Russia until the Clinton administration certified that Moscow is not engaged in any military modernization program that exceeds legitimate defense requirements. The Clinton administration along with U.S. Air Force General Eugene Habiger, the commander of U.S. Nuclear forces signed off on the Russian aid package after returning from an exploratory trip to Russia to investigate construction of a huge secret underground base in the Ural mountains. True, the base is as big as the entire area of Washington D.C. and is defensive in purpose. In addition to the base, the Russians built two cities to house the more than 30,000 workers involved in the project. By 1996 authorities had barred defense attaches from going into the facility.

Known as Yamantau Mountain (translates to ‘evil mountain’), the facility is being constructed to offer a safe place to retaliate in the event of an American nuclear attack. To me, this represents a direct conflict of interest. Clinton gives the Russians over one billion dollars to help them take down their nuclear weapons but instead they use that money to build a huge bunker where they can wage nuclear war on the U.S.

Not only that, the Russian Strategic Rocket Forces issued a statement suggesting that nuclear missiles can be secretly deployed at the base as part of what is being called the “dead-hand doomsday system” where nuclear missiles can still be fired automatically by a command program. This means even after Russian leadership is destroyed, and no one is there to push the ‘button’, missiles will be fired automatically against the perpetrators allowing for complete destruction on a world wide scale. By April 1996, reports confirmed the automatic nuclear attack system listing it as being in the final stages of operation.

It’s more than a coincidence that 1996 saw a massive Russian military build up including major improvements to the Tu-95 and Tu-160 strategic nuclear bombers as well as the long range cruise missiles they carry. Money had also made it possible to design and construct a new class of nuclear submarines called “the Borei-class strategic missile boat.” At least part of Russia’s miraculous financial bonanza is the direct result of United States money. As usual, all the public knows is that the U.S. is helping Russia to “dismantle” some of its nuclear programs.

Bill Clinton wants Americans to know that he has worked very hard to show that Russia and the United States are together in making the world a safer place. In a speech to Moscow University students, he said; “Look what our partnership has already produced. We reversed the dangerous build up of nuclear weapons. We’re two years ahead of schedule in cutting nuclear arsenals under START 1 ( Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty). START 2, which still awaits ratification in the Duma, will reduce our nuclear forces by two-thirds from Cold War levels. President Yeltsin and I already have agreed on a framework for START 3 to cut our nuclear arsenal even further.”

Clinton also announced that the two super powers agreed to share warning information on worldwide launches of ballistic missiles and space launchers. Clinton referred to an agreement by which Russia and America would no longer target each others missiles. Yet in a secret CIA report to Congress, “detargeting” is purely symbolic and does nothing to affect the targeting of strategic nuclear missiles. Placing nuclear missiles in a non target status is like putting your DVD player on pause. When you’re ready to launch, just hit the retarget button and bombs away. What’s more, there is no way of verifying if Russian missiles are in detargeted mode or not.

President Clinton went to great lengths to satisfy political debts. Of this there is no doubt. As Governor of Arkansas he saw to it that cash donors to his political campaign were given special consideration and awarded with lucrative contracts, and that same pattern stayed with him throughout his entire political career and beyond.

In 1998, CIA Director George Tenet testified that the radical Muslim regime in Iran was getting a great deal of technical assistance and materials from Russia. The year before he had testified that along with Russia, North Korea was providing technology to Iran and that it wouldn’t be more than a year before Iran would have their own medium range nuclear missiles. In 1999 Tenet once again told the Senate that the flow of missile technology had not stopped and in the last six months Russian expertise and material was flowing to Iran’s missile construction allowing them to develop more sophisticated weapons and longer range missiles. Before sanctions could be brought against various Russian companies, Iran conducted the first test flight of its new medium-range missile. This act of aggression clearly showed that Iran was now capable of destroying any threat in the Middle East as well as most of Central Europe with chemical and biological weapons.

In no uncertain terms, Clinton had helped Russia modernize her weapons systems to the tune of billions of dollars, while at the same time and behind our backs, Russia continued a secret campaign to weaponize Iran. Clinton, for all his attempts at marginalizing the seriousness of Russia’s nuclear weapons programs had failed to properly assess the Russian threat.

That Russia was involved in nuclear proliferation to our enemies was a national security failure of monstrous proportions. That a United States President would willfully and knowingly sell, trade, or supply nuclear weapons technology to our oldest adversary is one of the greatest crimes committed against the people he is sworn to protect. It gets worse. Clinton was aware that Russia had been supplying highly sensitive technology and materials to our enemy, the Iranians.

In a closed door meeting held at the Kremlin, in May of 1998, White House National Security Adviser Samuel Berger told Russian Security Council Secretary Andrei Kokoshin: “One and a half years after President Yeltsin told President Clinton that ballistic missile technology transfers to Iran would stop, it still continues… Now time is running out; the stakes are great… Unless this problem is solved we see a potential trainwreck in our relations.” Why was it up to Yeltsin to end the transfers? Why was Clinton allowing Russia to give defense secrets to Iran? Did Clinton have something to gain from allowing this? The answer can be found in a shocking conversation. On March 13, 1996, Clinton and Yeltsin met in Egypt. The minutes of this meeting were recorded in a classified document called “a memorandum of conversation.”

The document was obtained by Bill Gertz of the Washington Times and discloses President Yeltsin saying to Clinton that because of his global stature he should “support Russia and that means supporting Yeltsin.” Clinton responds by raising an issue: Russia’s refusal to allow imports of American chicken. At the time Russia was importing about 40% of America’s chickens. The major supplier of chickens in the U.S. comes from Tyson Foods of Arkansas. Owner Don Tyson, just so happens to be one of Bill Clinton’s biggest financial donors. The Russian ban on chicken imports was not without reason: the U.S. had been flooding Russia with poor quality chicken. With the ban in effect, Tyson’s profits were suffering and he needed Clinton to do something about it. Clinton, according to the classified document, assured Yeltsin that the situation was being handled. Yeltsin agreed to resume imports for continued support from Clinton. Within one week, the chicken dispute was settled and Tyson was back in business.

It was less than 50 years ago that two American citizens were tried, convicted and executed for passing information about the atomic bomb to the Russians. Their names were Julius and Ethel Rosenberg. A co-conspirator, Harry Gold was sentenced to 15 years for being the courier. They were convicted under Section 2 of the Espionage Act of 1917, 50 U.S. Code 32 (now 18 U.S. Code 794) which prohibits transmitting or attempting to transmit to a foreign government information “relating to the national defense.” In my opinion, Bill Clinton violated the same statute and should suffer the same consequences.

PART TWO: CHINA

In 1996 President Bill Clinton, at a fund raising dinner in New York City said this: “There are no more nuclear missiles pointed at any children in the United States. I’m proud of that.” But by 1998, the CIA’s National Intelligence Daily stated that “thirteen of China’s 18 long-range intercontinental ballistic missiles are targeted on the United States.” How could such a discrepancy occur? When did Clinton know and what did he do to prevent this dangerous situation? These are valid questions and in light of Clinton’s involvement in Russia’s nuclear weapons advancements, I shudder to think that this too was a result of Clinton’s business dealings.

CNN reported how China has been stealing our most sensitive nuclear secrets in an article dated May 25, 1999 and posted on their website. The article was called: China stole U.S. nuke secrets to ‘fulfill international agenda.’ The article reveals that China has been stealing the most sensitive nuclear secrets for several decades and despite high-level knowledge of the thefts, security at U.S. nuclear labs still “does not meet even minimal standards.” The CNN article goes on to state that President Clinton had known since 1995 and yet little was done about it. In April 1998 Congressman Dana Rohrabacher (R-California) disclosed detailed information that U.S. aerospace companies had helped China improve its strategic nuclear missiles as part of a major ICBM modernization effort. The named companies were listed as Loral Space & Communications Ltd., Hughes Electronics, and Motorola as supplying the Chinese with space launch technology which China used to improve its nuclear missiles.

Congressman Rohrabacher went on to say: “There is ample evidence that American technology was transferred to this hostile potential enemy of the United States… (providing) the Communist Chinese the guidance needed to upgrade and perfect highly sophisticated weapons systems, increasing the reliability and capability of Communist Chinese rockets… This has given, what anyone has to admit is at least a potential enemy of the United States, a better ability to deliver nuclear warheads to our country, to American cities, to incinerate millions of our people.” Was there a connection between Bill Clinton and any of the three corporations named as supplying China with materials that improved the lethality of their missiles? I’m glad I asked that question.

The chairman of Loral Space &Communications was a heavy financial donor to Bill Clinton and the Democratic Party in general. His name is Bernard Schwartz and in a six year period between 1992 and 1998 he donated over $1.1 million to Clinton and the party. To show his appreciation, President Clinton allowed Schwartz to travel to China with U.S. Commerce Secretary Ron Brown. Clinton loosened export controls which enabled Schwartz to purchase Chinese booster rockets for use in launching Loral’s satellites. The relaxing of controls was a two way street and gave the Chinese an avenue with which to import hi tech materials from Loral and other U.S. corporations that dealt in sophisticated electronics.

Hughes Electronics was also named in Rohrabacher’s report. Its CEO, C. Michael Armstrong lobbied Clinton to relax the export controls of sensitive technology. An internal White House memo dated December 8, 1993 and originating from the National Security Council, detailed how Armstrong pressured the administration into easing the trade restrictions with China. Armstrong had threatened to launch a major publicity campaign against the administrations sanctions if the controls were not relaxed. In 1996, a Chinese rocket (missile) carrying a $200 million Loral satellite exploded on its launch pad. Loral and Hughes put together a team of scientists to investigate the problem. The problem(s) were identified and the information was given to the Chinese consortium Great Wall Industry, a subsidiary of China Aerospace Corporation. Armed with the information supplied by Hughes and Loral, the Chinese were able to upgrade their nuclear ICBM’s.

Why did President Clinton allow this? Well it was determined that the Chinese were secretly funneling large donations to the Clinton campaign. Federal investigators found that China Aerospace Corporation had given $300,000 to Democratic fundraiser Johnny Chung for Clinton’s election. In 1993, it was discoverer that China was selling missile technology to Pakistan. Under tremendous pressure from Congress, Clinton banned U.S. space industry from using Chinese rockets to launch their satellites. The ban didn’t last long and in October 1994, Clinton lifted the ban. Despite reports that China had continued to sell nuclear technology to Pakistan and missiles to Iran, Clinton signed waivers for four U.S. satellites to be launched by Chinese rockets. Clinton did this over strong objections from the State and Defense Departments. Johnny Chung and Loral’s Schwartz donated another $100,000 each to Clinton. The fact that Clinton personally issued the waivers to allow shipments of U.S. technology that greatly improved the accuracy and reliability of Communist China’s missiles is grounds for impeachment, regardless of whether or not there was any quid pro quo for those decisions.

President Bill Clinton did more to damage U.S. national security than anyone else in American history. He is a traitor to our interests and he is guilty of espionage. He should have been arrested, impeached and convicted. The question is, how did this story escape mass media attention?


I would like to credit these sources from which I have acquired information.

Stone books

ORDER YOUR COPY TODAY

THE CLINTONS’ WAR ON WOMEN: AmazonBarnes & NobleIndiebound.org

CLINTON CASH: AmazonBarnes & NobleIndiebound.org

– See more at: http://stonezone.com/article.php?id=753#sthash.CeTJ48oI.dpuf

TiLTNews Network

SECRET SERVICE OFFICER SET FOR TV INTERVIEWS; BROADCAST NETWORKS BLACKLIST

SECRET SERVICE OFFICER SET FOR TV INTERVIEWS; BROADCAST NETWORKS BLACKLISTMON JUNE 20 2016 19:47:25 ET**Exclusive** Team Hillary is working overtime to block former Secret Service officer Gary Byrne from appearing on ANY broadcast network, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned. Byrne is set to reveal what he observed inside the White House while protecting the First Family in the 1990s. ‘What I saw sickened me,’ Byrne explains. ‘I want you to hear my story.’ Byrne paints a picture of Hillary as a deranged madwoman running interference on Bill’s sexploits. The book ‘CRISIS OF CHARACTER’ is finally set for release next Monday. It has already became the top seller at AMAZON for the month of June.And now Clinton’s circle is preparing to hit back hard! POLITICO plans an early morning attack on Byrne’s credibility, sources claim, despite his having served in federal law enforcement for nearly thirty years. Meanwhile, Hillary’s campaign has won assurances that he will not be invited to spread ‘lies’ on any of the nation’s broadcast networks. ‘It’s trash for cash,’ a campaign official warned one producer. FOXNEWS ‘HANNITY’ will have the first exclusive for cable news, DRUDGE has learned. Developing…

Source: SECRET SERVICE OFFICER SET FOR TV INTERVIEWS; BROADCAST NETWORKS BLACKLIST

TiLTNews Network

#TraitorHillary Saudi’s Illegally Supporting Her To Influence Our Elections

SAUDI ARABIA HAS FUNDED 20% OF HILLARY’S PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN, SAUDI CROWN PRINCE CLAIMS

Saudi Arabia Has Funded 20% Of Hillary's Presidential Campaign, Saudi Crown Prince Claims
It is illegal in the United States for foreign countries to try to influence the outcome of elections by funding candidates.
Zero Hedge – JUNE 14, 2016 331 Comments
Saudi Arabia Has Funded 20% Of Hillary’s Presidential Campaign, Saudi Crown Prince Claims
2.3K2266

In what may be the pinnacle of hypocrisy, moments ago Hillary Clinton, while speaking live on national security and addressing the Orlando shooting took some time from her constant bashing of the Second Amendment and calling for a ban on assault rifles, to say some less than kind words about Saudi Arabia whom it accused of supporting radical organizations. This is what she said:

The third area that demands attention is preventing radicalization and countering efforts by ISIS and other international terrorist networks to recruit in the United States and Europe. For starters, it is long past time for the Saudis, the Qataris and the Kuwaitis and others to stop their citizens from funding extremist organizations. And they should stop supporting radical schools and mosques around the world that have set too many young people on a path towards extremism. We also have to use all our capabilities to counter jihadist propaganda online. This is something that I spend a lot of time on at the State Department.

There is nothing wrong with that statement, as it is the whole truth – Saudi Arabia’s involvement in supporting terrorism stretches from Sept 11 all the way through to ISIS – however, where there is a big, and potentially law-breaking, problem is what Jordan’s official news agency, Petra News Agency, reported on Sunday citing the Saudi crown price, namely that Saudi Arabia is a major funder of Hillary Clinton’s campaign to become the next president of the United States.

As MEE notes, the Petra News Agency published on Sunday what it described as exclusive comments from Saudi Deputy Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman which included a claim that Riyadh has provided 20 percent of the total funding to the prospective Democratic candidate’s campaign.
The report was later deleted and the news agency has not responded to requests for comment from Middle East Eye. However, the deletion took place too late, as the Washington-based Institute for Gulf Affairs managed to capture the report and has re-published the original Arabic Petra report, which quoted Prince Mohammed as having said Saudi Arabia had provided with “full enthusiasm” an undisclosed amount of money to Clinton.
The pdf of the report is shown below:

Below is a screenshot of the English report published, and then quickly deleted, by the Petra News Agency:

As a reminder, It is illegal in the United States for foreign countries to try to influence the outcome of elections by funding candidates. That appears not to have stopped the Saudis, however.
“Saudi Arabia always has sponsored both Republican and Democratic Party of America and in America current election also provide with full enthusiasm 20 percent of the cost of Hillary Clinton’s election even though some events in the country don’t have a positive look to support the king of a woman (sic) for presidency,” the report quoted Prince Mohammed as having said.
According to the US Federal Election commission, over the past two years Clinton has raised a little more than $211.8 million. 20% of this sum is $42.4 million.
The report was published (and then mysteriously deleted) on the eve of Prince Mohammed making an official visit to the United States. The Saudi Press Agency reported on Monday that the senior royal was due to fly to Washington where he will meet officials to discuss US-Saudi ties.
He will remain in the American capital until 16 June, when he will travel to New York for meetings with financial companies, the Saudi Gazette reported.
Prince Mohammed will discuss regional issues with American officials, and he will hold talks with the financial companies about his vision for diversifying Saudi Arabia’s economy away from oil dependency.
Links between Saudi Arabia and the Clinton family, including with Hillary’s campaign, are well reported. In 2008, it was revealed that the Gulf kingdom had donated between $10m and $25m to the Clinton Foundation, a charity set up by Hillary’s husband and former US President Bill Clinton.
Last year the Centre for Studies and Media Affairs at the Saudi Royal Court paid public relations firm the Podesta Group $200,000 for a month-long project to provide “public relations services”.
The Podesta Group was founded in 1988 by brothers John and Tony Podesta. John Podesta is the chair of Hillary Clinton’s campaign to become the next US president.
Finally, in connection to the Orlando shooting, the WSJ reported that according to a spokesman for Saudi Arabia’s interior ministry, the Orlando shooter, Omar Mateen visited the kingdom twice on pilgrimage.
Mateen visited Saudi Arabia in 2011 and again in 2012 to perform umrah, a religious pilgrimage to the holy city of Mecca. The trips lasted eight and 10 days each.
U.S. and Saudi officials aren’t sure yet who Mr. Mateen met with during his visits or whether the trips were connected to the shooting.

Hillary Clinton’s campaign did not respond to MEE’s request for comment at the time of publication. Considering Hillary hasn’t given a full press interview in over 7 months, we doubt this will change.

TiLTNews Network

Seymour Hersh Says Hillary Approved Sending Libya’s Sarin to Syrian Rebels

Seymour Hersh Says Hillary Approved Sending Libya’s Sarin to Syrian Rebels

ERIC ZUESSE | 28.04.2016 | WORLD

The great investigative journalist Seymour Hersh, in two previous articles in the London Review of Books («Whose Sarin?» and «The Red Line and the Rat Line») has reported that the Obama Administration falsely blamed the government of Syria’s Bashar al-Assad for the sarin gas attack that Obama was trying to use as an excuse to invade Syria; and Hersh pointed to a report from British intelligence saying that the sarin that was used didn’t come from Assad’s stockpiles. Hersh also said that a secret agreement in 2012 was reached between the Obama Administration and the leaders of Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar, to set up a sarin gas attack and blame it on Assad so that the US could invade and overthrow Assad. «By the terms of the agreement, funding came from Turkey, as well as Saudi Arabia and Qatar; the CIA, with the support of MI6, was responsible for getting arms from Gaddafi’s arsenals into Syria». Hersh didn’t say whether these «arms» included the precursor chemicals for making sarin which were stockpiled in Libya, but there have been multiple independent reports that Libya’s Gaddafi possessed such stockpiles, and also that the US Consulate in Benghazi Libya was operating a «rat line» for Gaddafi’s captured weapons into Syria through Turkey. So, Hersh isn’t the only reporter who has been covering this. Indeed, the investigative journalist Christoph Lehmann headlined on 7 October 2013, «Top US and Saudi Officials responsible for Chemical Weapons in Syria» and reported, on the basis of very different sources than Hersh used, that «Evidence leads directly to the White House, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Martin Dempsey, CIA Director John Brennan, Saudi Intelligence Chief Prince Bandar, and Saudi Arabia´s Interior Ministry». And, as if that weren’t enough, even the definitive analysis of the evidence that was performed by two leading US analysts, the Lloyd-Postal report, concluded that, «The US Government’s Interpretation of the Technical Intelligence It Gathered Prior to and After the August 21 Attack CANNOT POSSIBLY BE CORRECT». Obama has clearly been lying.

However, now, for the first time, Hersh has implicated Hillary Clinton directly in this «rat line». In an interview with Alternet.org, Hersh was asked about the then-US-Secretary-of-State’s role in the Benghazi Libya US consulate’s operation to collect weapons from Libyan stockpiles and send them through Turkey into Syria for a set-up sarin-gas attack, to be blamed on Assad in order to ‘justify’ the US invading Syria, as the US had invaded Libya to eliminate Gaddafi. Hersh said: «That ambassador who was killed, he was known as a guy, from what I understand, as somebody, who would not get in the way of the CIA. As I wrote, on the day of the mission he was meeting with the CIA base chief and the shipping company. He was certainly involved, aware and witting of everything that was going on. And there’s no way somebody in that sensitive of a position is not talking to the boss, by some channel».

This was, in fact, the Syrian part of the State Department’s Libyan operation, Obama’s operation to set up an excuse for the US doing in Syria what they had already done in Libya.

The interviewer then asked: «In the book [Hersh’s The Killing of Osama bin Laden, just out] you quote a former intelligence official as saying that the White House rejected 35 target sets [for the planned US invasion of Syria] provided by the Joint Chiefs as being insufficiently painful to the Assad regime. (You note that the original targets included military sites only – nothing by way of civilian infrastructure.) Later the White House proposed a target list that included civilian infrastructure. What would the toll to civilians have been if the White House’s proposed strike had been carried out?»

Hersh responded by saying that the US tradition in that regard has long been to ignore civilian casualties; i.e., collateral damage of US attacks is okay or even desired (so as to terrorize the population into surrender) – not an ‘issue’, except, perhaps, for the PR people.

The interviewer asked why Obama is so obsessed to replace Assad in Syria, since «The power vacuum that would ensue would open Syria up to all kinds of jihadi groups»; and Hersh replied that not only he, but the Joint Chiefs of Staff, «nobody could figure out why». He said, «Our policy has always been against him [Assad]. Period». This has actually been the case not only since the Party that Assad leads, the Ba’ath Party, was the subject of a shelved CIA coup-plot in 1957 to overthrow and replace it; but, actually, the CIA’s first coup had been not just planned but was carried out in 1949 in Syria, overthrowing there a democratically elected leader, in order to enable a pipeline for the Sauds’ oil to become built through Syria into the largest oil market, Europe; and, construction of the pipeline started the following year. But, there were then a succession of Syrian coups (domestic instead of by foreign powers – 1954, 1963, 1966, and, finally, in 1970), concluding in the accession to power of Hafez al-Assad during the 1970 coup. And, the Sauds’ long-planned Trans-Arabia Pipeline has still not been built. The Saudi royal family, who own the world’s largest oil company, Aramco, don’t want to wait any longer. Obama is the first US President to have seriously tried to carry out their long-desired «regime change» in Syria, so as to enable not only the Sauds’ Trans-Arabian Pipeline to be built, but also to build through Syria the Qatar-Turkey Gas Pipeline that the Thani royal family (friends of the Sauds) who own Qatar want also to be built there. The US is allied with the Saud family (and with their friends, the royal families of Qatar, Kuwait, UAE, Bahrain, and Oman). Russia is allied with the leaders of Syria – as Russia had earlier been allied with Mossadegh in Iran, Arbenz in Guatemala, Allende in Chile, Hussein in Iraq, Gaddafi in Libya, and Yanukovych in Ukraine (all of whom except Syria’s Ba’ath Party, the US has successfully overthrown).

Hersh was wrong to say that «nobody could figure out why» Obama is obsessed with overthrowing Assad and his Ba’ath Party, even if nobody that he spoke with was willing to say why. They have all been hired to do a job, which didn’t change even when the Soviet Union ended and the Warsaw Pact was disbanded; and, anyone who has been at this job for as long as those people have, can pretty well figure out what the job actually is – even if Hersh can’t.

Hersh then said that Obama wanted to fill Syria with foreign jihadists to serve as the necessary ground forces for his planned aerial bombardment there, and, «if you wanted to go there and fight there in 2011-2013, ‘Go, go, go… overthrow Bashar!’ So, they actually pushed a lot of people [jihadists] to go. I don’t think they were paying for them but they certainly gave visas».

However, it’s not actually part of America’s deal with its allies the fundamentalist-Sunni Arabic royal families and the fundamentalist Sunni Erdogan of Turkey, for the US to supply the salaries (to be «paying for them», as Hersh put it there) to those fundamentalist Sunni jihadists – that’s instead the function of the Sauds and of their friends, the other Arab royals, and their friends, to do. (Those are the people who finance the terrorists to perpetrate attacks in the US, Europe, Russia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, India, Nigeria, etc. – i.e., anywhere except in their own countries.) And, Erdogan in Turkey mainly gives their jihadists just safe passage into Syria, and he takes part of the proceeds from the jihadists’ sales of stolen Syrian and Iraqi oil. But, they all work together as a team (with the jihadists sometimes killing each other in the process – that’s even part of the plan) – though each national leader has PR problems at home in order to fool his respective public into thinking that they’re against terrorists, and that only the ‘enemy’ is to blame. (Meanwhile, the aristocrats who supply the «salaries» of the jihadists, walk off with all the money.)

This way, US oil and gas companies will refine, and pipeline into Europe, the Sauds’ oil and the Thanis’ gas, and not only will Russia’s major oil-and-gas market become squeezed away by that, but Obama’s economic sanctions against Russia, plus the yet-further isolation of Russia (as well as of China and the rest of the BRICS countries) by excluding them from Obama’s three mega-trade-deals (TTIP, TPP & TISA), will place the US aristocracy firmly in control of the world, to dominate the 21st Century, as it has dominated ever since the end of WW II.

Then, came this question from Hersh: «Why does America do what it does? Why do we not say to the Russians, Let’s work together?» His interviewer immediately seconded that by repeating it, «So why don’t we work closer with Russia? It seems so rational». Hersh replied simply: «I don’t know». He didn’t venture so much as a guess – not even an educated one. But, when journalists who are as knowledgeable as he, don’t present some credible explanation, to challenge the obvious lies (which make no sense that accords with the blatantly contrary evidence those journalists know of against those lies) that come from people such as Barack Obama, aren’t they thereby – though passively – participating in the fraud, instead of contradicting and challenging it? Or, is the underlying assumption, there: The general public is going to be as deeply immersed in the background information here as I am, so that they don’t need me to bring it all together for them into a coherent (and fully documented) whole, which does make sense? Is that the underlying assumption? Because: if it is, it’s false.

Hersh’s journalism is among the best (after all: he went so far as to say, of Christopher Stephens, regarding Hillary Clinton, «there’s no way somebody in that sensitive of a position is not talking to the boss, by some channel»), but it’s certainly not good enough. However, it’s too good to be published any longer in places like the New Yorker. And the reporting by Christof Lehmann was better, and it was issued even earlier than Hersh’s; and it is good enough, because it named names, and it explained motivations, in an honest and forthright way, which is why Lehmann’s piece was published only on a Montenegrin site, and only online, not in a Western print medium, such as the New Yorker. The sites that are owned by members of the Western aristocracy don’t issue reports like that – journalism that’s good enough. They won’t inform the public when a US Secretary of State, and her boss the US President, are the persons actually behind a sarin gas attack they’re blaming on a foreign leader the US aristocrats and their allied foreign aristocrats are determined to topple and replace.

Is this really a democracy?

TiLTNews Network

Senator Investigating Clinton Emails Says FBI Could Possibly Leak Info

Photo of Chuck Ross

CHUCK ROSS Reporter 7:54 PM 04/22/2016

Leaks would spring from the FBI if officials believed that the bureau took it easy on Hillary Clinton for political reasons, Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Chuck Grassley said Friday.

Speaking at a breakfast meeting in Des Moines, the Iowa Republican said that while he would not want the FBI to leak information about its investigation into Clinton’s private email server, information would likely seep out if it was perceived that the bureau decided not to issue indictments because of politics.

“Is there going to be political interference? If there’s enough evidence to prosecute, will there be political interference?” Grassley asked aloud during his remarks at the meeting, the Des Moines Register reported.

“And if there’s political interference, then I assume that somebody in the FBI is going to leak these reports and it’s either going to have an effect politically or it’s going to lead to prosecution if there’s enough evidence.”

A member of the audience had asked Grassley about the numerous probes into Clinton’s emails and into the Benghazi attacks. Grassley’s committee is also investigating the Clinton email setup, including whether the former secretary of state used her private email system to avoid Freedom of Information Act requests while at the State Department.

According to the Register, a reporter followed up with Grassley to ask him if he believed that the FBI should leak information about its investigation.

“I wouldn’t be encouraging it because if it’s a violation of law, I can’t be encouraging a violation of law,” he said. “This is kind of my own opinion, this is something I’ve heard.”

The FBI is reportedly close to wrapping up its investigation, which centers on whether classified information was mishandled on Clinton’s server. Several Clinton aides — and Clinton herself — will reportedly be interviewed at some point in the near future.

FBI director James Comey has insisted that the investigation will not be politicized.

Follow Chuck on Twitter

Tags: Hillary Clinton

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2016/04/22/senator-investigating-clinton-emails-says-fbi-could-possibly-leak-info/#ixzz46nOFf1CZ

TiLTNews Network

Who’s Hillary Trying To Kid?

3/30/2016

Picture

By Chris Rossini
Presidential campaign seasons are a free-for-all. Candidates can say whatever they want to get votes. Nothing that is said is binding. Nothing promised ever has to be implemented. Candidates don’t know who votes for them. Voters can’t say: “But you promised…” Actually, they can say it, but it doesn’t matter. They’ll still vote the next time. Election campaigns are the ultimate swindle.
Here’s a quick 34 second YouTube clip of Hillary Clinton making a very common and deeply flawed statement. She tells a complete lie, but lies are just as valuable as the truth to politicians. They can both be used to get votes.
Hillary says:

“There is no evidence that the minimum wage being raised costs jobs.”

Common statement. Totally untrue. Gets votes.
So if the minimum wage is $10/hr, it means that all individuals without the skills or productivity to earn $10/hr are forced into unemployment. They cannot get a job (by law) even if they are ready and willing to work for less.
If government raises the minimum to $15/hr, the squeeze is put on even more. Now, even if you really want to work, but only have the skills to earn $10, or $9, or $8/hr, you’re out of luck. Even if employers would have gladly paid you, government had different plans for you … unemployment.
That’s really all the minimum wage does – it creates unemployment for individuals of a certain skill and productivity level. The minimum wage doesn’t create anything. It only destroys.
If, as Hillary states, “there is no evidence” that raising the minimum wage costs jobs, why be so stingy? Why not raise the minimum wage to $50/hr? If it won’t cost jobs, what’s the holdup?
If the minimum wage was raised to $50/hr, a vast majority of the people reading this would be instantly thrown out of work. If your skills and productivity can only fetch $20 or $25/hr, why would someone pay you $50? Because the government says so?
Ha!
Government has no problem throwing the lowest skilled people out of work, which is why they move so slowly in raising the minimum wage. They don’t care about the poor and low-skilled. Instead of working, those people can just go on the government dole. They can become loyal dependents who will then vote to keep the their welfare coming in the next election.
The minimum wage (any minimum wage) is strictly and exclusively a job killer.
The only determination is which jobs will be killed. If you’re poor, low-skilled, a teenager, or not very productive, Hillary is coming for you.
​Get your unemployment forms ready.

http://www.ronpaullibertyreport.com/archives/whos-hillary-trying-to-kid

TiLTNews Network