Like Us On Facebook

Sunday, May 31, 2015

Speaking Ill Of The Dead

Beau Biden

We've all heard the saying, "Don't speak ill of the dead." I challenge that. Why are we not supposed to speak ill of the dead? Because they can no longer defend themselves? Okay, but if that person was corrupt and they only ever lied their way out of any situation, then you can rest assured that if they were still with us, they would continue said lies. If Obama ever bites it, you can bet that I will STILL speak ill about the man. Just because someone dies, doesn't mean that their actions while living suddenly stop affecting people. Hitler has been dead for a long time yet the lives of those Jews who survived have been forever changed. Screw Hitler. Speaking ill of the dead.

As far as Beau Biden goes, he was no angel. In fact, the rotten apples never fall to far from the rotten trees. Do you recall the name Larry Sinclair? Refresh yourself here. Obama is gay and Larry Sinclair called him out on it. He even wrote a book called  

It's about 10 bucks but worth the time to read. Sinclair, who currently resides in Duluth, Minnesota, alleges that he had sex with and snorted cocaine with Barack Obama in Chicago on two occasions, November 6th and 7th of 1999.  To be fair, Sinclair is no angel himself. As far back as 1986, he has been in trouble with the law and had been in and out of prison. He is an openly gay man who had his share of drinking, drugs and casual sex. I hold no respect for Sinclair. But neither do I for Obama. Only the truth holds my attention.

In 2004, Sinclair was living in Mexico and was watching the Democratic National Convention when Obama came on to give a speech. Sinclair recognized his "butty". (I did not misspell "buddy") Here is the story from Sinclair:

He is in the Chicago area, and he wants to have a good time. He hires a limo driver working for a company called Five Star limousine service, and he directs the driver to take him to hot spots for action. The driver takes Sinclair around town, eventually dropping him off at or close to a gay bar. Knowing that Sinclair is hot for action, the limo driver contacts someone. That someone is Senator Barack Obama (but not a senator at the time of course). Once introduced--and Obama used his actual name according to Sinclair--Obama and Sinclair engaged in little more than routine small talk. All Sinclair remembers about Obama was that he was in local "public service," and Sinclair pursued it no further.
Sinclair asked Obama if he could get him drugs, and he said yes. Obama made a phone call on his cell phone, and the limo driver took them to an unspecified location, presumably so that Obama could pick up the drugs. Sinclair gave Obama $200. Obama exited the vehicle, was gone for a short while, and then returned. Obama had acquired cocaine for Sinclair, of which he snorted a few lines in the limo, while Obama pulled a pipe out of his pocket and smoked crack cocaine. While the drug activity was going on Sinclair gave Obama oral sex. This all happened on the night of Nov. 6.
After finishing the limo driver took Sinclair back to his hotel and dropped him off. The next day or evening--the time is unclear according to Sinclair's story--Obama unexpectedly showed up at Sinclair's hotel room. Whether or not they did drugs together again I am not sure. But Sinclair does claim that he once again gave Obama oral sex.
Even still, Sinclair didn't think much of seeing Obama on TV. It wasn't until 2007 when Obama was running for President that Sinclair decided to talk. See, Obama had claimed in his two autobiographies as well as through the media, that while he had experimented with drugs in his youth, that drug use had ended when he was in college. Sinclair knew this was a lie. Obama was passing himself off as the savior to the world. He was going to slow the rise of the ocean and heal the planet for goodness sake! Obama talked a really good game but Sinclair knew he was not being truthful. Here's the thing: Many of us knew Obama was a lying waste of a skin sack, and we didn't need to blow him or coke to know it. Just sayin'. Regardless, Sinclair set out to set the record straight.

In the latter part of 2007, Sinclair began contacting the Obama campaign to ask them to publicly correct Senator Obama's claim concerning his drug use. He was hopeful that Obama would acknowledge that his drug use ended later than he claimed in Audacity of Hope. (Keep in mind that this is the mindset of those who got Obama elected. Not the brightest by far). Unsurprisingly, there were never any acknowledgments from the Obama camp. At some point, however, Sinclair began receiving texts and calls to his cell phone from someone calling himself "Mr. Young". At first, Sinclair thought Mr. Young was someone from Obama's campaign. But then Mr. Young asked if Sinclair had said anything about the sexual encounters with Obama. This raised red flags for Sinclair because in his communication with the Obama campaign, he had never mentioned a single word about having sex with Obama, only ever asking for clarification concerning the drug use.

Long part of the story short, Mr. Young was not with the Obama campaign. He was another gay male who claimed to have had sex with Obama as well. The last communication Sinclair had with Young consisted of Young telling him that Obama would make no acknowledgment or correction concerning Sinclair's claim of drug use and that he (Young) was being used to milk Sinclair for information, specifically who else Sinclair might have told about his sexual encounters with Obama.

On December 24th, 2007, Donald Young was murdered execution style in his apartment. The connection to Obama? Reverend Wright, the inflammatory black preacher that Obama listened to for more than 20 years. Sinclair provided a sworn statement to the Chicago PD regarding his conversations with Young. The murder remains unsolved. Young and another black male who was also killed execution style were also members of that same church. As a side note, there have been many others killed as a result of Obama's deception. Read about those here.

From here, Sinclair took to YouTube and spoke of his encounters with Obama. A little later a website known as headed by Don Parisi, offered Sinclair $10,000 to take a polygraph and $100,000 if he passed it. The thing is, was a former porn site that had recently gotten into political commentary. After taking the polygraph and collecting his 10k, Sinclair was informed that the "expert" hired to administer and interpret the polygraph, one Ed Gelb, found that he (Sinclair) was "deceptive" on the questions concerning the drug use and sex with Obama. The problem? Gelb had a phony Ph.D and the results of the polygraph were never made available to other experts as had been promised.

Sinclair had been taken for a paltry 10 grand. Not long after, rumors began to swirl that someone from the Obama campaign had paid Gelb $750,000 to say Sinclair had lied. What is truth? Who knows at this point but one thing is clear. The "failed" lie detector has stuck to Sinclair like glue.

Shortly after this fiasco, Sinclair was arrested on a fugitive warrant from the State of Delaware after completing a press conference in D.C. This warrant came from a sealed grand jury indictment orchestrated by the attorney general of Delaware, Beau Biden, the son of Obama's pick for V.P. In late August of 2008, all charges against Sinclair were dropped, but the message had been sent.

The younger Biden, Hunter, is not exempt from the rotteness. These characters are all entwined. Obama, Jarrett, Rezco, Blogovich....on and on the chorus goes. Obama was elected because of a well oiled and well maintained machine of deception. Chicago politics. 

My advice to my fellow Patriots? Either drink the tea and pay the tax or throw it in the damned harbor and make a stand. Your forefathers would have already begun the revolution and had it wrapped up by now.

Wednesday, May 27, 2015

New push to seize Hillary's email server

Hillary-2 600x300

A filing in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida is asking the judiciary to take control of Hillary Clinton’s email server, because there could be “material evidence that is in imminent danger of being lost.”

In the motion, Larry Klayman of Freedom Watch alleges the evidence could “document the predicate acts and major crimes.”

Klayman brought the case against Bill and Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act alleging the Clintons ran a criminal enterprise “with the objective of enriching themselves by trading U.S. government action, decisions, policy changes, influential statements, and favors in return for donations from persons, companies, and countries who benefit.”

“The plaintiff files this motion respectfully requesting that the court order the preservation of that information contained on a private computer file server (‘server’) that then Secretary of State Defendant Hillary Clinton (‘Secretary Clinton) used to conceal the U.S. government records off-site, rather than at a U.S. Department of State facility,” he wrote.

WND reported earlier when the case originally was brought by Klayman, who for years has been a Washington watchdog, having engaged Bill Clinton in court battles during his presidency. He’s also taken on terror interests and foreign influences in the United States, and just over the last year or so has won a federal court judgment against the National Security Agency’s spy-on-Americans program as well as bringing a case against Barack Obama over his amnesty-by-executive-memo strategy.

His RICO case alleges that over the last decade or so, the Clintons have participated in “acts” that constitute a “criminal enterprise” that was designed to enrich them.
According to Klayman, the Clintons, through mail and wire fraud and false statements, misappropriated documents that he was entitled to receive and possess under the Freedom of Information Act regarding Hillary Clinton’s actions, including her involvement in releasing Israeli war and cyber-warfare plans and practices.

Get your copy of Clinton Cash today. 

Hillary Clinton orchestrated this release to harm and thwart Israeli plans to pre-emptively attack Iranian nuclear sites to stop the Islamic nation’s march to producing atomic weapons, according to Klayman.

The claim also explains Klayman used the nation’s FOIA to try to get details from the State Department regarding waivers to do business with Iran – “acts [that are] alleged to be the result of the defendants selling government influence in exchange for bribes from interests which have donated to The Clinton Foundation, paid huge speaking fees to the Clintons and other means.”

WND was unable to get a response from the combined New York office for Bill Clinton and the foundation.

The current scandal over Hillary Clinton’s emails as secretary of state – she set up a private server in her home, avoiding government paths that are archived and then reportedly destroyed tens of thousands of emails without any oversight – “is alleged to cover up” evidence of crimes, Klayman explained.

News reports say she printed out thousands of pages of emails from the server that she thought belonged to the government and gave those to the State Department. Then she had the drive wiped.

There are, however, technical processes that might be able to recover whatever was on the drive.

In the new motion, Klayman “respectfully moves the court for an order of immediate seizure of property or attachment pursuant to Rule 64 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, an expedited entry and production of tangible things pursuant to FRCP Rule 34(a)(1)(B).”

“Plaintiff asks that a neutral forensic expert be ordered here, as the court’s expert, to take custody and control of the private email server and reconstruct and preserve the official U.S. government records relating to the conduct of U.S. foreign policy during Defendant Secretary Clinton’s term,” he wrote.

“The private computer file server is an instrumentality used to facilitate unlawful activity,” the motion continues. “Like the ‘Special Purpose Entities’ set up by ENRON to hide transactions and liabilities off the books from auditors and shareholders, the Defendants Hillary and Bill Clinton set up their own unusual, independent, private computer email system in their personal mansion. The purpose of the private email server system was to facilitate secretive horse-trading of government actions and favors, negotiations for the sale of U.S. government services, actions, and assets to the highest bidder, and the implementation arraignments of deals struck.”

The motion charges Hillary Clinton’s “private file server would have been used to discuss, negotiate, and arrange … Hillary Clinton’s granting waivers of sanctions on companies doing business with Iran in return for donations to Defendant The Clinton Foundation and disclosing Israeli military plans against Iran in return for donations from enemies of Israel and.or friends or business partners of Iran.”

The motion claims there are 32,000 emails that Hillary Clinton declared “private.”
Those “will show, if they can still be recovered, the predicate acts of the illegal RICO enterprise,” the motion states.

Congress also has expressed a desire to learn the contents of the Clinton emails, which, Klayman alleges, should have been included in searches for pertinent information to several of his Freedom of Information Act requests.

Klayman also filed a request to amend his complaint, with the new document attached.
He explained that it adds “factual allegations” based on “new evidence that has become available since the first complaint was filed.”

Klayman’s complaint explains, “Plaintiff has filed many Freedom of Information Act requests for public records created or held by the U.S. Department of State … which records are of the public interest and importance to the citizens of the United States. … As it has now been revealed, a primary reason that the plaintiff did not receive the records to which the plaintiff is entitled by law is that Defendant Hillary Clinton – upon information and belief together with Cheryl Mills and Defendant Bill Clinton and other

Clinton ‘loyalists’ – set up a private computer file server operating a private, stand-alone electronic mail system.”

It alleges Clinton’s “off the books” plan “concealed from the plaintiff public records to which the plaintiff was entitled to under the FOIA.”

It continues, “Using those concealed communications held on the private email server, upon information and belief, the defendants negotiated, arranged and implemented the sale of influence and access to U.S. government officials and decision-makers and official acts by State and other instrumentalities of the U.S. government in return for gratuitous and illegal payments – bribes – disguised as donations to defendant The Clinton Foundation and extraordinarily high speaking fees paid to Defendant Bill Clinton and Defendant Hillary Clinton.”

It has been reported many times the millions of dollars that have been paid to the Clintons for speaking fees, and Klayman’s case estimates the Clintons have “amassed a personal fortune (outside of The Clinton Foundation) of over $105 million” from those fees.

The case charges, “defendants have misappropriated – that is, stolen – the documents which are U.S. government property under relevant records management and archive laws governing U.S. government officials.”

Klayman pointed out that Hillary Clinton “lied to the lower court” in affirming that there were “no responsive documents” to his information requests, because the private email server was not searched.

“The concealment of approximately 62,490 emails to and from the secretary of state directly harmed the plaintiff in the availability of the most relevant and the most important records of State,” Klayman wrote, adding, “Hillary Clinton destroyed the email records after many congressional subpoenas and a flurry of FOIA requests from various requesters, including plaintiff, had already been issued.”

The case seeks orders for production of records and other RICO penalties, including $5 million compensatory and $200 million punitive damages.

New push to seize Hillary's email server
Bob Unruh
Thu, 28 May 2015 00:26:56 GMT

'An ignorant people cannot be a free people'

Noah Webster
Noah Webster

The earliest human records appeared about 3,000 or 4,000 B.C. – Sumerian cuneiform on clay tablets in the Mesopotamian Valley. This was followed by Egyptian hieroglyphics on papyrus, and Chinese characters on bamboo books.

Writing was first an accounting method for scribes to keep track of all the king owned. Then it was used to keep record the the king’s decrees, genealogies and astronomy. Only kings, elites and scribes could read.

The thousands of cuneiform and hieroglyphic characters were not only difficult to learn, commoners and slaves were not allowed to learn them. It was a form of control, as kings wanted people who would blindly obey them, not think for themselves.

America experienced something similar to this prior to the Civil War when southern Democrat states made it a crime to teach slaves to read. Anthropologist Claude Levi Strauss wrote: “Ancient writing’s main function was to facilitate the enslavement of other human beings.”

Kings ruled by honoring and rewarding those who obeyed them and by dishonoring and striking the fear of death into those who did not.

The first well-recorded instance in history of an entire nation ruling itself without a king began when Israel broke away from Egypt’s pharaoh around 1,500 B.C.

When Moses came down Mount Sinai, he not only brought the law, he brought the law in a 22-character alphabet that was so easy to learn the entire nation was able to read the law. Israel is, perhaps, the first instance in history of an entirely literate population.

E.C. Wines wrote in “The Hebrew Republic” (Philadelphia: c1853): “A fundamental principle of the Hebrew government was education; the education of the whole body of the people. … An ignorant people cannot be a free people. Intelligence is essential to liberty. No nation is capable of self-government, which is not educated to understand and appreciate its responsibilities. … Upon this principle Moses proceeded in the framing of his commonwealth. … There is reason to believe, that the ability to read and write was an accomplishment, more generally possessed by the Hebrews, than by any other people of antiquity.”

Discover more of Bill Federer’s eye-opening books and videos in the WND Superstore!

Wherever there is a king, friends of the king are “more equal,” those not friends with the king are “less equal” and those who are enemies of the king are dead – it is called “treason.”

For Israel’s first four centuries it did not have a king, being ruled instead by the law. The law declared there was no respect of persons in judgment; rich and poor were to be treated the same; male and female made in the image of the Creator; even the stranger living among them was under the same law that they were under.

This was the beginning of the concept of “equality,” as there was no royal family to seek favors from, no superior or inferior class, no caste system. Not only was Israel free, they could maintain their freedom because all could read the law.

Their experiment in self-government was dependent on one thing – the priests teaching the people to read the law. When the priests neglected doing this, everyone did what was right in their own eyes and the country fell into moral chaos. In response, Israel got a totalitarian ruler, King Saul, who a short time later killed most of the priests, with the notable exception of the priest Abiathar escaping to David.

The pattern was clear – for a country to maintain order without a king, there needs to be an educated and moral citizenry.
This was understood during America’s colonial era, where education and morals were a high priority. After independence, large numbers of immigrants arrived in America. The response was to create “common” schools for them.

The “father of American scholarship and education” was Noah Webster, who died May 28, 1843. Noah Webster attended Yale, founded as a Puritan Congregational school, but when the Revolutionary War started, he left for four years to fight. After graduation, Noah Webster became a lawyer and taught in New York.

Dissatisfied with children’s spelling books, he wrote the famous “Blue-Backed Speller,” which sold over one hundred million copies. Early editions had a “Moral Catechism” with rules from the Scriptures.

For generations, American school children learned letters, morality and patriotism from Webster’s spellers, catechisms, history books and his Webster’s Dictionary.
Noah Webster served nine terms in Connecticut’s Legislature and three terms in Massachusetts’ Legislature where he lobbied for funding of public education, arguing the government should: “Discipline our youth in early life in sound maxims of moral, political, and religious duties.”

Noah Webster stated: “Society requires that the education of youth should be watched with the most scrupulous attention. Education, in a great measure, forms the moral characters of men, and morals are the basis of government. Education should therefore be the first care of a legislature … for it is much easier to introduce and establish an effectual system for preserving morals, than to correct by penal statutes the ill effects of a bad system. …”

Webster continued: “The goodness of a heart is of infinitely more consequence to society than an elegance of manners; nor will any superficial accomplishments repair the want of principle in the mind. … The education of youth … lays the foundation on which both law and gospel rest for success.”

Noah Webster stated: “To give children a good education in manners, arts and science, is important; to give them a religious education is indispensable; and an immense responsibility rests on parents and guardians who neglect these duties.”

Noah Webster wrote: “Practical truths in religion, in morals, and in all civil and social concerns, ought to be among the first and most prominent objects of instruction. … Without religious and moral principles deeply impressed on the mind, and controlling the whole conduct, science and literature will not make men what the laws of God require them to be; and without both kinds of knowledge, citizens can not enjoy the blessings which they seek.”

Noah Webster wrote in “On the Education of Youth in America,” printed in Webster’s American Magazine, 1788: “In some countries the common people are not permitted to read the Bible at all. In ours, it is as common as a newspaper and in schools is read with nearly the same degree of respect. … Select passages of Scripture … may be read in schools, to great advantage. … My wish is not to see the Bible excluded from schools but to see it used as a system of religion and morality.”

In “Advice to the Young,” included in his “History of the United States,” 1832, Noah Webster wrote: “The brief exposition of the Constitution of the United States, will unfold to young persons the principles of republican government … that the genuine source of correct republican principles is the Bible, particularly the New Testament or the Christian religion. … Republican government loses half of its value, where the moral and social duties are imperfectly understood, or negligently practiced…”

Noah Webster added: “To exterminate our popular vices is a work of far more importance to the character and happiness of our citizens than any other improvements in our system of education.”

Noah Webster wrote in “The History of the United States,” 1832: “All the miseries and evils which men suffer from vice, crime, ambition, injustice, oppression, slavery and war, proceed from their despising or neglecting the precepts contained in the Bible.”
Noah Webster wrote: “Moral evils constitute or produce most of the miseries of mankind and these may be prevented or avoided. Be it remembered then that disobedience to God’s law, or sin is the procuring cause of almost all the sufferings of mankind. God has so formed the moral system of this world, that a conformity to His will by men produces peace, prosperity and happiness; and disobedience to His will or laws inevitably produces misery. If men are wretched, it is because they reject the government of God, and seek temporary good in that which certainly produces evil.”

Noah Webster published his translation of the Holy Bible in 1833, stating: “The Bible is the chief moral cause of all that is ‘good’, and the best corrector of all that is ‘evil,’ in human society; the ‘best’ book for regulating the temporal concerns of men, and the ‘only book’ that can serve as an infallible guide to future felicity.”

In “Letters to a Young Gentleman Commencing His Education” (New Haven, 1823), Noah Webster wrote: “It is alleged by men of loose principles … that religion and morality are not necessary or important qualifications for political stations. But the Scriptures teach a different doctrine. They direct that rulers should be men who rule in the fear of God, able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness. … And it is to the neglect of this rule of conduct in our citizens, that we must ascribe the multiplied frauds, breeches of trust, peculations and embezzlements of public property which astonish even ourselves; which tarnish the character of our country; which disgrace a republican government; and which will tend to reconcile men to monarchs in other countries and even our own.”

Noah Webster wrote: “Men may devise and adopt new forms of government; they may amend old forms, repair breaches, and punish violators of the constitution; but there is, there can be, no effectual remedy, but obedience to the divine law.”

In his 1834 work titled “Value of the Bible and Excellence of the Christian Religion,” Noah Webster wrote: “The Bible must be considered as the great source of all the truths by which men are to be guided in government, as well as in all social transactions. … The Bible (is) the instrument of all reformation in morals and religion.”

In the preface of his “American Dictionary of the English Language,” republished 1841, Noah Webster wrote: “If the language can be improved in regularity, so as to be more easily acquired by our own citizens and by foreigners, and thus be rendered a more useful instrument for the propagation of science, arts, civilization and Christianity.”

Brought to you by

'An ignorant people cannot be a free people'
Bill Federer
Thu, 28 May 2015 00:47:04 GMT

Declassified docs: Hillary aided rise of ISIS

Hillary Clinton testifying on the Benghazi attack
Hillary Clinton testifying on the Benghazi attack

NEW YORK – More than 100 pages of previously classified Department of Defense and Department of State documents implicate the Obama administration in a cover-up to obscure the role Hillary Clinton and the State Department played in the rise of ISIS.
The documents were obtained in a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed by the Washington watchdog Judicial Watch.

They confirm WND reporting over the past three years of evidence that U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens was involved in shipping weapons from Benghazi to support the al-Qaida-affiliated militias fighting the Bashar al-Assad regime in Syria, effectively arming the Sunni jihadists who morphed into ISIS.

The documents further confirm WND reporting that the goal of the terrorists behind the Benghazi attack that killed Stevens was to force the release of Omar Abdul Rahman, the “blind sheik” in U.S. prison serving a life sentence for his involvement in the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, and to avenge death of a prominent Libyan al-Qaida leader killed by a U.S. drone strike in Pakistan.

“These documents are jaw-dropping,” said Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton. “No wonder we had to file more FOIA lawsuits and wait over two years for them.”
Fitton referenced in particular a Defense Department document from the Defense Intelligence Agency, DIA, dated Sept. 12, 2012. It documents that the attack on the Benghazi compound had been carefully planned by the al-Qaida and Muslim Brotherhood-linked Brigades of the Captive Omar Abdul Rahman, BOCAR, which aimed “to kill as many Americans as possible.”

The document, dated the day after the Benghazi attack, was sent to then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, then-Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Obama White House National Security Council.
The free WND special report “ISIS Rising,” by Middle East expert and former Department of Defense analyst Michael Maloof, will answer your questions about the jihadist army threatening the West.

“If the American people had known the truth – that Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and other top administration officials knew that the Benghazi attack was an al-Qaida terrorist attack from the get-go – and yet lied and covered this fact up – Mitt Romney might very well be president,” Fitton observed.

“These documents also point to connection between the collapse in Libya and the ISIS war – and confirm that the U.S. knew remarkable details about the transfer of arms from Benghazi to Syrian jihadists,” Fitton stated.
He said the documents “show that the Benghazi cover-up has continued for years and is only unraveling through our independent lawsuits.”

“The Benghazi scandal just got a whole lot worse for Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton,” Fitton said.

Plan to release the blind sheik

The heavily redacted Defense Department “information report” provides additional evidence for a WND article Jan. 27 reporting that James “Ace” Lyons – a former four-star admiral who served as the commander-in-chief of the U.S. Pacific Fleet and a founding member of the Citizens’ Commission on Benghazi – proposed that the attack was an Obama administration-orchestrated kidnapping attempt that went “terribly wrong.”

Lyons speculated that the Obama administration wanted to give the al-Qaida-affiliated rebels operating in conjunction with the Libyan Muslim Brotherhood an opportunity to kidnap Stevens and exchange him for the blind Sheik. The purpose of the plan, Lyons says, may have been to furnish the Obama administration with a pretext to justify to the American public the release of the blind sheik to then-Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi, complying with a request Morsi made in his 2012 acceptance speech on becoming president of Egypt.

The Department of Defense documents released by Judicial Watch further reveals that a-Qaida chief Ayman al-Zawahiri sent BCOAR leader Abdul Baset, AZUZ, into Libya to seek revenge “for the U.S. killing of Aboyahiye (ALALIBY) in Pakistan.”
The documents provide additional evidence for a 2013 WND story reporting the Benghazi attack was in response to Zawahiri’s request to avenge the U.S. drone killing of Libyan al-Qaida leader Abu Yahya al-Libi in Pakistan’s Waziristan tribal area June 4, 2012.

CIA ‘not well organized’ narrative disputed

The newly released DOD and State Department documents also differ from the account of the Benghazi attack Michael Morell, the recently retired CIA deputy director, gives in his current book, “The Great War of Our Time.” On page 206 he argues that viewing a CIA video of the Benghazi attack made in “real time” caused him to conclude that “with little or no advance planning, extremists in Benghazi made some phone calls, gathered a group of like-minded individuals to go to the TMF.”

In Morell’s narrative, the 9/11 Benghazi attack “was not well organized” but “seemed to be more of a mob that had come to the TMF with the intent of breaching the compound and seeing what damage they could do.”

“When you assess the information from the video, there are few signs of a well-thought-out plan, few signs of command and control, few signs of organization, few signs of even the most basic military tactics in the attack on the TMF,” Morrell said.
“Some of the attackers were armed with small arms; many were not armed at all. No heavy weapons were seen on the videotape,” Morell continued. “Many of the attackers, after entering through the front gate, ran past buildings to the other end of the compound, behaving as if they were thrilled just to have overrun the compound. They did not appear to be looking for Americans to harm. They appeared intent on looting and conducting vandalism.”

Morell stressed that the Obama administration, despite his objections to the contrary, has refused to make available for public viewing the yet classified CIA “real time” video of the Benghazi attack.

Weapons shipped to Syria

Judicial Watch also noted the DOD documents released this week contain the first official documentation that the Obama administration knew that weapons were being shipped from the Port of Benghazi to rebel troops in Syria.
An October 2012 DOD report confirmed:
Weapons from the former Libya military stockpiles were shipped from the port of Benghazi, Libya to the Port of Banias and the Port of Borj Islam, Syria. The weapons shipped during late-August 2012 were Sniper rifles, RPG’s, and 125 mm and 155mm howitzers missiles.
During the immediate aftermath of, and following the uncertainty caused by, the downfall of the (Qaddafi) regime in October 2011 and up until early September of 2012, weapons from the former Libya military stockpiles located in Benghazi, Libya were shipped from the port of Benghazi, Libya to the ports of Banias and the Port of Borj Islam, Syria. The Syrian ports were chosen due to the small amount of cargo traffic transiting these two ports. The ships used to transport the weapons were medium-sized and able to hold 10 or less shipping containers of cargo.
A DIA document further detailed:
The weapons shipped from Syria during late-August 2012 were Sniper rifles, RPG’s and 125mm and 155mm howitzers missiles. The numbers for each weapon were estimated to be: 500 Sniper rifles, 100 RPG launchers with 300 total rounds, and approximately 400 howitzers missiles [200ea – 125mm and 200ea – 155 mm.]
The heavily redacted document does not disclose who was shipping the weapons.
Another Defense Intelligence Agency report, written in August 2012, the same time period the U.S. was monitoring weapons flows from Libya to Syria, said that the opposition in Syria was driven by al-Qaida and other extremist Muslim groups: “the Salafist, the Muslim Brotherhood, and AQI are the major forces driving the insurgency in Syria.”
Judicial Watch noted the sectarian direction of the war in Syria was predicted to have dire consequences for Iraq, which included the “grave danger” of the rise of ISIS.
The DIA document noted the following:
This creates the ideal atmosphere for AQI [al Qaeda Iraq] to return to its old pockets in Mosul and Ramadi, and will provide a renewed momentum under the presumption of unifying the jihad among Sunni Iraq and Syria, and the rest of the Sunnis in the Arab world against what it considers one enemy, the dissenters. ISI could also declare an Islamic state through its union with other terrorist organizations in Iraq and Syria, which will create grave danger in regards to unifying Iraq and the protection of its territory.
Judicial Watch commented that some of the “dire consequences” are blacked out but the DIA presciently warned one such consequence would be the “renewing facilitation of terrorist elements from all over the Arab world entering into Iraqi Arena.”
On Feb. 26, Judicial Watch has reported on State Department documents obtained by the Washington-based watchdog organization in a separate FOIA lawsuit that revealed aides for then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, including her then-chief of staff Cheryl Mills, knew from the outset that the Benghazi mission compound was under attack by armed assailants tied to a terrorist group.

Declassified docs: Hillary aided rise of ISIS
Jerome R. Corsi
Wed, 27 May 2015 23:14:51 GMT

Sunday, May 24, 2015

Progressive educator's original goal? Abolish Christianity



One man’s hatred of God and Christianity is a significant part of the reason that America’s education system now is faltering, according to an international journalist and education expert.

“It’s amazing how clear [John Dewey] was on his real agenda,” said Alex Newman in a recent radio interview with “Freedom Friday With Carl Gallups.” “First of all, he wanted to get God out of the schools. He wanted to destroy the faith of the American people and abolish Christianity.”

Dewey was an early 20th century progressive education reformer. His ideas were influential in forming the modern American school system. But Newman, coauthor of “Crimes of the Educators,” views him as the chief villain in a decades-long plot to dumb down the American population, paving the way for socialism.

“[Dewey] wanted to move the United States away from what he considered to be an individualistic, constitutional republic where people are free to do as they like and worship God – the Christian nation that we had – and he wanted to move us more to kind of a Soviet-type system,” Newman said.

Newman pointed out Dewey was one of the signers of the first Humanist Manifesto in 1933. The first plank of the manifesto states humanists “regard the universe as self-existing and not created,” which stands in direct conflict with the Christian belief that “in the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.”

Dewey’s unbelief, his wish to dumb down American children and his desire for socialism were all closely related, according to Newman.

“He knew that the Christian underpinnings of this society and the widespread literacy and intelligence and just the power of this nation that had been so blessed would make it impossible to take over the United States as other nations had fallen, with armed force,” Newman said. “So he said, ‘You know what? We’ll hollow out the foundations. We’ll dumb down the students very slowly.’”

Before Dewey’s time, American education was highly effective, Newman claimed, and it helped reinforce Christianity.

In fact, the Bible was considered a school textbook in many locations.

“Education in the United States had always been about reading the Bible and understanding the Bible and understanding Scripture, and this is clear even if you go back to the colonies and look at the earliest education laws we had,” Newman said.

He pointed to the Old Deluder Satan Act, passed in the Massachusetts Bay Colony in 1647, which ordered every town with a certain number of households to set up a public schoolhouse to teach the children to read and write. The goal was to protect the residents from “that old deluder, Satan” whose goal was “to keep men from the knowledge of the Scriptures.”

That was then. Now, according to Newman, high literacy is not a major priority of the education establishment. A 1993 study from the National Center for Education Statistics found 46 to 51 percent of American adults were barely literate.

The show host, Gallups, reasoned that the large proportion of Americans who can’t read well probably don’t like to read and, therefore, don’t read much. That doesn’t bode well for society, he said.

“If you can create a culture like that, then you’ll create a society that won’t or can’t read, or cannot deductively reason and understand documents like the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, the Word of God, the things that our nation is structured upon and founded upon; and in that way, then, the elite can do what they want with the useful idiots,” said Gallups, author of “Final Warning: Understanding the Trumpet Days of Revelation.”

Newman agreed, adding that Dewey wanted to downplay the importance of literacy and focus on turning children into social animals that would work for the common good. The effects, said the author, have been catastrophic.

“The kids cannot read their founding documents anymore,” Newman said. “They can’t read the Word of God. They can’t think critically, and they rely almost exclusively on the government schools and the mainstream media for their information, and the fruits of this are obvious now. Our society’s falling apart all around us.”

But the dumbing-down agenda is not limited to the United States, according to Newman. The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) has created a “World Core Curriculum” that downplays the importance of literacy and focuses on making children “happy, fulfilled, universal human beings,” according to curriculum author Robert Muller.

“This is a global agenda,” Newman said. “It’s extremely sinister. They want to dumb down the American people and all of humanity for the purpose of attacking the word of God and building kind of a global society, they like to call it, and this is going to be an absolute nightmare.”

Newman warned parents they had better wake up and resist this agenda by pulling their kids out of public schools. He recommends either homeschooling or finding a good Christian school. If neither of those options are available, Newman says parents must at least opt their children out of Common Core testing.

“The government schools are destroying the children,” Newman warned. “Common Core is going to accelerate this, and the agenda is unimaginably sinister, and so people need to take action.”

Progressive educator's original goal? Abolish Christianity
Sun, 24 May 2015 05:00:08 GMT

Tuesday, May 19, 2015

'Slavery is over': Hired Ferguson protesters demand pay


Protests turned violent after Officer Darren Wilson was not indicted in the shooting death of Michael Brown.

Protests turned violent after Officer Darren Wilson was not indicted in the shooting death of Michael Brown.

“Black Lives Matter” protesters who were apparently hired to cause a ruckus in Ferguson, Missouri, are angry because, they say, they haven’t been paid for their hard work.

So they’ve launched a #CutTheCheck hashtag on Twitter and held a sit-in at the offices of Missourians Organizing for Reform and Empowerment, or MORE – the successor group to the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or ACORN, in Missouri.

The protesters have received as much as $5,000 a month to generate civil unrest in the troubled suburb of St. Louis, according to FrontPage Mag’s Matthew Vadum.

“MORE is the re-branded Missouri branch of ACORN, which filed for bankruptcy in late 2010,” Vadum reported. “MORE and other groups supporting the Black Lives Matter movement have received millions of dollars from billionaire financier George Soros.”



The angry agitators held a sit-in outside MORE’s offices on May 14 to demand their money, Weasel Zippers reported. The site posted a video of several black individuals shouting at a white man, who Weasel Zippers identifies as Jeff Ordower, founder of MORE and a longtime leftist activist who previously worked as a union organizer for SEIU in Texas and former Midwest director of ACORN.

Ordower had not responded to a WND request for comment at the time of this report.


MORE_adMORE’s website,, posted a memo on March 30 that announces a “support fund” offering “travel funding for individuals and grassroots groups that are working to advocate for police accountability and Black lives.”

“A fixed sum of $20,000 has been set aside for this initiative,” the memo states. “… Travel funding is available for Individuals ($300), Groups of 3+ ppl ($1000), and Large Collaborations of 6+ ($2000) to take trips that directly help attendees advocate for police accountability and Black lives.”

Upon returning from their trip to Ferguson, MORE says, protesters are required to share their experiences in one of two ways:

  • “Complete a written report explaining the event/trip, experiences, and gains which will be posted online and share [sic] with the broader community.”
  • “Schedule a public report back session to [sic] feedback on the trip and answer questions.”


A group called Millennial Activists United posted a letter insisting MORE should “cut the checks” to the protesters.

“Early in the movement, non-profit organization MORE, formerly known as the St. Louis chapter of ACORN, and local St. Louis organization Organization for Black Struggle created a joint account in which national donors from all over the world have donated over $150,000 to sustain the movement,” the letter states. “Since then, the poor black [sic] of this movement who served as cash generators to bring money into St. Louis have seen little to none of that money.

“Questions have been raised as to how the movement is to sustain when white non-profits are hoarding monies collected of off [sic] black bodies? When we will [sic] hold the industry of black suffering accountable? The people of the community are fed up and the accountability begins here and now.

The statement continued, “We NEED to be thinking about justice for black people. This means white people must renounce their loyalty to the social normalcy that maintains white power and control. If black lives really matter, justice and self-determination for black people would mean the black community would control [its] own political and economic resources. Moving forward, we are building a board of accountability within this movement. We must funnel economic [sic] into this movement through the hands of black people who are fighting with and for black life. More on this board will be discussed as we develop.”

Other online reactions to the protesters’ demands for payment include:

  • “So these really were pro agitators. Some movement. “We shall overcome. After we get paid.”
  • “I’d rather see [people] protesting something they are passionate about (even if their behavior is way off base) than #CutTheCheck=Disgusting.”
  • “Lots of folks doing work & acting on conscience. It’s not fair that a group of 20 get [sic] $50,000 for throwing a tantrum.”

MORE reportedly released the following list of who had been paid from September 2014 through April 22, 2015, amounts and purpose of the payments.

Some payments were listed for the following purposes:

  • Gas
  • Video services for Ferguson
  • Debt repayment for Ferguson
  • Red light camera charges
  • “Supplies for non-indictment”
  • Training supplies
  • Food
  • Bullhorns
  • Catering
  • Art supplies
  • Permits
  • Walkie-talkies
  • T-shirts
  • Van rentals
  • Youth stipends
  • Cell phones for Ferguson
  • Emergency support, and others.




'Slavery is over': Hired Ferguson protesters demand pay
Tue, 19 May 2015 20:23:24 GMT

Monday, May 18, 2015

Like I Said 2 years ago...Benghazi Gun Running

Re-posted from April 28, 2013

If you don't think there is ice running through her veins, think again. Hillary Rodham Clinton will do whatever it takes to preserve herself. WHATEVER it takes. In the 90's, when Bill Clinton was President, a documentary came out called The Clinton Chronicles. It was loaded with facts about the Clinton's and their dealings within the drug industry, money laundering, and murder of those who saw or knew too much. The video is below. Although it is long, I highly suggest watching.

Hillary Clinton has always been the one behind Bill pulling the strings. She is an expert puppet master and make no mistake, she will do whatever she has to do to remain on top. However, she also realizes that her own personality would have never catapulted her to the top. Here is where Bill becomes very useful to her. 

During her time as Secretary of State for the 0bama Administration, there were also a number of people who were killed under suspicious circumstances. Andrew Breitbart being only one. The entire Benghazi incident reads like a story straight from the old Clinton days of laundering drug money. My theory is that Ambassador Stevens was running guns to Syria. The 0bama Administration made a deal with the Syrians to release the blind sheik. 

In order for this to happen, the Syrian rebels were supposed to kidnap Stevens and in return, have the blind sheik released. This is why the order to stand down came about when the embassy was under attack. However, 2 very brave Navy Seals refused to follow the order to stand down. They went in and fought, killing several of the rebels before being killed themselves.

The Syrians, feeling as though the 0bama Administration had betrayed them and broke the deal, then dragged Ambassador Stevens through the street, raped him and then killed him. The Administration then scrambled to find a reason to blame the attack on. They settled on a YouTube video making fun of the prophet Muhammad. They stuck with this story for 3 weeks, which bought them time to come up with another strategy.

Now there is a lot of information coming out about Benghazi. We know for a fact that Hillary lied. But, remember that Hillary is about self preservation. She will not go down alone, if she goes down at all. She will throw 0bama under the bus so fast that he won't know what hit him until ALL the wheels have run him over. She is ruthless and she does nothing without having her ass covered at every angle.

She has everything she needs to bury 0bama. Now, when she is the one on the line, she will give him up in a heartbeat. Pressure needs to be put on her. If that pressure is strong enough and consistent enough, 0bama won't stand a chance. He is an idiot on his own. He needs someone behind him pulling the strings. His entire Administration seems to be starting to crumble now that Hillary girl has left. Make no mistake, she was one of his top puppet masters as well.

Jay Z, Beyonce bail out Baltimore rioters



Jay Z and Beyonce

Rap star Jay Z has quietly sent thousands of dollars to help bail out protesters from Baltimore’s jail system, a writer who worked with him on his 2010 memoir said.

Dream Hampton, who helped Jay Z author “Decoded,” revealed the rapper’s cash infusions via Twitter. The messages were shortly after deleted but not before the hip-hop magazine Complex picked them up and reported them, Agence France-Presse said.

Among the tweets: “When we needed money for bail for Baltimore protesters, I … hit Jay up, as I had for Ferguson [and he] wired tens of thousands [of dollars].”

Get the hottest, most important news stories on the Internet – delivered FREE to your inbox as soon as they break! Take just 30 seconds and sign up for WND’s Email News Alerts!

She also tweeted Jay Z and his wife, Beyonce, sent a “huge check” to support the “Black Lives Matter” movement that surged through America after the Ferguson police shooting of 18-year-old Michael Brown.

Baltimore was the site of much violence after protesters took to the streets to denounce the death of Freddie Gray, a black man who died a few days after being taken into police custody. Six officers have been charged for the incident.

Hampton explained in a written message she deleted the tweets because she thought Jay Z “would be pissed to see I was offering evidence” of his cash donations. The tweets, however, seemed defensive in tone and aimed at explaining to critics that Jay Z and Beyonce, who are worth an estimated $1 billion, were indeed helping the black community.

AFP reported actor Harry Belafonte had previously criticized modern-day stars for turning “their back on social responsibility,” naming Jay Z and Beyonce specifically.

Jay Z, Beyonce bail out Baltimore rioters
Cheryl Chumley
Mon, 18 May 2015 10:43:31 GMT

Sharpton's suing daughter outed as not-so-hurt



Dominque Sharpton with her father, Rev. Al Sharpton

Rev. Al Sharpton’s daughter, Dominique Sharpton – who’s suing the city of New York for $5 million for a sprained-ankle claim – may not be as injured as purported.

She’s been outed by Instagram and social media photographs with a seemingly healthy ankle, climbing a mountain in Bali, Indonesia. The photographs come as her suit alleges “she still suffers” from massive ankle pain from a twisting she received from a street crack in Soho a year ago, the New York Post reported.

In “Scam: How the Black Leadership Exploits Black America,” Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson – a true black leader whom many affectionately call “the other Jesse” – shows how the civil rights establishment has made a lucrative career out of keeping racial strife alive in America.

Sharpton posted the photos herself May 16 along with a description: “We hiked UP the mountain, over the clouds … into the SUNRISE.”

And she went on, the New York Post found: “One of the most beautiful sites ever. and YES I ALMOST DIED GETTING UP THERE LOL #Balidays we made it, WHEW.”

Get the hottest, most important news stories on the Internet – delivered FREE to your inbox as soon as they break! Take just 30 seconds and sign up for WND’s Email News Alerts!

Legal experts were quick to pounce.

“It is starting to look like Tawana Brawley is orchestrating the Sharpton trial strategy,” said CNN legal analyst Paul Callan. “It graphically demonstrates bad judgment and good feet. It all adds up to no case.”

Sharpton, 28, said she sprained her ankle at a crosswalk in the city Oct. 2, 2014, the New York Post reported.

Her court documents say: “She still suffers and will continue to suffer for some time physical pain and bodily injuries.”

Fox News also showed a photo of Sharpton at a recent event wearing red high heels.

Sharpton's suing daughter outed as not-so-hurt
Cheryl Chumley
Mon, 18 May 2015 11:00:53 GMT

Obama restricts military-style gear for cops



Police wearing militarized gear approach a man in Ferguson, Missouri.

President Obama on Monday is traveling to Camden, New Jersey, to announce new federal rules for police – including bans on certain types of military equipment.

The president’s announcement comes on the heels of the White House creation of a task force to look at policing around the nation and determine recommendations for agencies to better, and more safely, serve their communities.

Obama announced the task force after the unrest in Ferguson, Missouri, that began over the police shooting of 18-year-old Michael Brown and then spread around the nation via a “Black Lives Matter” and “hands up, don’t shoot” campaign.

In Camden, Obama will first visit with police at their headquarters and then head to a community center to speak with youth and deliver formal remarks, the New York Times reported.

“I’ll highlight steps all cities can take to maintain trust between the brave law enforcement officers who put their lives on the line and the communities they’re sworn to serve and protect,” Obama said in a weekly address over the weekend, the Huffington Post reported.

“Police State USA: How Orwell’s Nightmare Is Becoming Our Reality” chronicles how America has arrived at the point of being a de facto police state, and what led to an out-of-control government that increasingly ignores the Constitution. Order today!

Among the equipment police will no longer get from the federal government are armored vehicles, weaponized aircraft, firearms and ammunition of .50 caliber or higher, grenade launchers, bayonets and camouflage uniforms.

The feds are also reportedly looking at ways to recall such equipment that already has been distributed among police.

The federal government will further restrict the use of Humvees, certain types of manned aircraft, drones, some types of firearms and explosives, battering rams, helmets and shields. Beginning this fall, police will need special permission from the city or county governing authorities to obtain this equipment.

Get the hottest, most important news stories on the Internet – delivered FREE to your inbox as soon as they break! Take just 30 seconds and sign up for WND’s Email News Alerts!

The full task force’s report is due to be released Monday. Members of the panel said they came up with the list of banned equipment because “the substantial risk of misusing or overusing these items, which are seen as militaristic in nature, could significantly undermine community trust and may encourage tactics and behaviors that are inconsistent with the premise of civilian law enforcement,” the Associated Press reported.

Another report from the 21st Century Policing task force includes a list of recommendations for police to incorporate to improve relations with community members. The White House said 21 police agencies around the country, including Camden’s, have already agreed to collect certain never-before reported data on police interactions with citizens.

Among the upcoming data collections: The number of stops police enact on citizens, and the number of officer shootings that occur in a given time frame.

“We are without a doubt sitting at a defining moment for American policing,” said Ron Davis, director of the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services at the Department of Justice, AP reported.

“We have a unique opportunity to redefine our policing in our democracy, to ensure that public safety becomes more than the absence of crime, that it must also include the presence of justice.”

Obama restricts military-style gear for cops
Cheryl Chumley
Mon, 18 May 2015 12:56:32 GMT

Sunday, May 17, 2015

How did $17 million disappear from Clinton Foundation?


Hillary Clinton

Hillary Clinton

NEW YORK – Before Hillary Clinton completed her first year as President Obama’s secretary of state, Wall Street analyst and investor Charles Ortel calculates $17 million went missing from Clinton Foundation financial reports.

“The Clinton Foundation and the Obama Administration presented to the public a false narrative, namely that when Hillary became Secretary of State, the Clinton Foundation had to guard against conflicts of interest,” Ortel explained in a second report he made available to WND exclusively before publication.

Ortel says the public record appears to confirm that the Clinton Foundation’s various components were reported as one consolidated entity to the IRS, despite the foundation’s claim that appropriate changes were made when Hillary Clinton became secretary of state.

The Clinton Foundation explained that when Hillary joined the Obama Cabinet, the foundation closed the Clinton Health Access Initiative Inc., known also as CHAI, which had been operating as a program of the Clinton Health Foundation. CHAI was then re-opened it as a separate organization responsible for filing its own IRS tax Form 990, which discloses financial information to the public.

The reorganization, Ortel says, was an opportunity for the Clintons to transition from the financial statements of what he calls “Old CHAI,” ending Dec. 31, 2009, into the financials of the ‘New CHAI,’ beginning Jan. 1, 2010.

Analyzing all available financial statements for the Clinton Foundation and CHAI in the transition, including cash flow statements, Ortel has determined that approximately $17 million disappeared from CHAI.

WND reported Thursday Ortel has concluded that while Hillary Clinton was appointed to the board of directors of the Clinton Foundation in 2013, after she had resigned as secretary of state, she is complicit in what he has described as systematic financial fraud warranting a criminal investigation. WND reported Wednesday that Ortel found the Clinton Foundation’s explanation for why it was divided into three, legally separate tax-exempt organizations to be “misleading and false.” As WND reported Tuesday, based on Ortel’s findings, a prominent lawyer and a top government watchdog in the nation’s capital are calling for the Clinton Foundation to be shut down. In his first report, Ortel found what he characterizes as an elaborate system devised by the Clintons to enrich themselves through schemes such as skimming tens of millions of dollars from U.N. levies imposed on airline travelers.

Peter Schweizer’s “Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich” is available at the WND Superstore!

Ortel’s detective work required him to examine financial statements not just for the Clinton Foundation and CHAI at the beginning and end of the relevant years, 2009 and 2010, but also to evaluate cash flow statements that document the financial position of the Clinton Foundation and CHAI during each year.

In reality, Ortel alleges, Old CHAI had never been validly constituted as a tax-exempt organization, “even though it was used for years as a leaky conduit where foreign governments, major donors, and the general public directed hundreds of millions towards seemingly worthwhile causes, that instead were diverted and fraudulently mismanaged.”

Ortel further alleges that from July 2002, when the Clinton Foundation formed Old CHAI through March 2010 when New CHAI was formally authorized by the IRS as a tax-exempt organization, “large sums of money went missing – facts that emerge from close review of publicly available filings made by the Clinton Foundation, and theoretically overseen by executives and directors.”

Disappearing funds

Ortel points out that state and federal law put the burden of proof on the Clintons to prove the $17 million was not diverted in a fraud designed to financially benefit the Clintons and their close associates.

In this regard, Ortel’s investigation differs from the Peter Schweizer’s investigation of the Clinton Foundation, reported in his bestselling book “Clinton Cash.” The crime of bribery that Schweizer alleges places the legal burden of proof on the accuser, not on the Clintons. If the Clintons should face a charge of bribery in a criminal proceeding, they would be presumed innocent until proven guilty.

In numerous interviews, Schweizer has admitted that without access to documentation of the Clintons’ thinking and actions related to various foreign contributions to the Clinton Foundation and its subgroups, such as Hillary Clinton’s State Department emails, he lacks proof of a quid pro quo.

Instead of bribery, Ortel is accusing the Clintons of “inurement,” an offense that is defined at law as using a charity for personal financial benefit or for the material financial benefit of close associates, including those managing the charity, working at the charity, or affiliated with the charity in some other way, such as being a member of the charity’s board of directors.

When it comes to inurement allegations, the burden of proof shifts.

State and federal law requires regulators to shut down the organization and typically fire the board of directors. The charity is thrown into receivership once accusers demonstrate a pattern of financial mismanagement that suggests it is being fraudulently operated to commit the crime of inurement.

The financial mismanagement may be as simple as missing important dates for financial information to be officially filed with government authorities or irregularities in audit information.

The disappearance of $17 million, Ortel argues, is reason enough for regulators to shut a foundation down and to throw it into receivership.

He states in his report: “On the specific date between December 31, 2009 and January 1, 2010, approximately $17 million appears to have been diverted out of Old CHAI at a time when New CHAI allegedly had not yet opened a bank account and before New CHAI received its state and federal authorization to operate as a tax-exempt entity, a event that appears to have occurred in March 2010, when New CHAI appears to have received an IRS tax-exempt authorization letter.”

Ortel said it’s only one of the “several instances where I believe we can document that substantial sums of money, measured in the millions and tens of millions of dollars, were diverted.”

“The crime,” he said, “is an untold number of donors in the United States and around the world, typically giving relatively small sums, placed the money they gifted to the Clinton Foundation into the fiduciary care of the Clintons, only to have their charitable donations be diverted from the charitable purpose for which the funds were given.”

He said the pattern in the $17 million that went missing in the transition from the Old CHAI to the New CHAI “seems consistent with the assumption the Clintons were operating the Clinton Foundation and its subgroups in a fraudulent manner in order to mask inurement, the diversion of the funds to the personal benefit of themselves and their associates.”

The IRS defines “inurement” in strict terms: “A section 501(c)(3) organization must not be organized or operated for the benefit of private interests, such as the creator or the creator’s family, shareholders of the organization, other designated individuals, or persons controlled directly or indirectly by such private interests. No part of the net earnings of a section 501(c)(3) organization may inure to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual. A private shareholder or individual is a person having a personal and private interest in the activities of the organization.”

“[IRS] Regulation 1.501(c)(3)-1(d)(1)(ii) states that an organization is not organized or operated exclusively for exempt purposes unless it serves a public rather than a private interest,” reads an IRS memorandum titled “Overview of Inurement/Private Benefit Issues in IRC 501(c)3.”

“The regulation places the burden of proof on the organization to demonstrate that it is not organized or operated for the benefit of private interests such as designated individuals, the creator or his family, shareholders of the organization, or persons controlled directly or indirectly by such private interests,” the IRS memo continues. “The statement that an organization must serve a public rather than a private purpose is a basic tenet of the law of charity.”

As WND reported, 2010 was a key year in the history of the Clinton Foundation, as the Clinton Health Access Initiative Inc., the largest single part of the Clinton Foundation, was separated into a new entity when Hillary Clinton was appointed secretary of state.

For purposes of analysis, Ortel termed “Old CHAI” the corporate structure of the Clinton Health Access Initiative, Inc., prior to 2010, and “New CHAI” to refer to the Clinton Health Access Initiative Inc. in the period 2010 through 2013.

Ortel noted that by Aug. 31, 2011, the accounting firm BKD prepared financial statements for New CHAI for 2010 that have been portrayed as independently audited financial information, free from material misstatements and not omitting material facts.

Yet, Ortel noted, the Statement of Financial Position for New CHAI as of Dec. 31, 2010 deliberately omits presentation of the opening Statement of Financial Position as of Jan. 1, 2010.

Ortel further noted that although BKD omitted to create an opening balance sheet for New CHAI, BKD did provide a balance sheet for Dec. 31, 2010, a statement of activities for 2010, and a cash flow statement for 2010. From these available pubic documents, Ortel was able to derive an opening balance sheet for New CHAI as of Jan. 1, 2010.


Ortel concludes, “We were also able to discern that $16.9 million in cash within Old CHAI was removed from its balance sheet as of 31 December 2009, before the opening balance sheet for new CHAI was struck as of 1 January 2010.”

An elaborate criminal scheme?

Focusing on the transition from Old CHAI to New CHAI, Ortel alleges the officers and board of directors ran the Clinton Foundation as “an elaborate criminal scheme” aimed at enriching the Clintons and their close associates, accomplished by failing to file independently audited financial reports as required, filing instead inaccurate, incomplete and intentionally deceptive financial statements.

“Unlike individual taxpayers who stand a small chance of being audited by the IRS after they volunteer information concerning their income and expenses on relevant tax forms, all public charities of the size the Clinton Foundation has been since its original authorization as a tax-exempt organization must procure an independent audit of their financial statements by a competent and empowered firm of accounting professionals who have access to all relevant supporting details and independently confirm material amounts directly with third parties,” Ortel argues in his second report on the Clinton Foundation.

“After this extensive confirmatory work is completed in all relevant domestic and foreign jurisdictions, an independent audit must be attached to the tax-exempt organization’s IRS filing, as elements of the IRS Form 990 and supporting schedules call for reconciliation of numerous financial figures with information contained in the independent audit, prepared by certified accounting professionals,” he stresses.

Ortel based his second report on the Clinton Foundation on the understanding that directors, executives and employees for any kind of enterprise bear a public responsibility to ensure in delivering financial reports that reliable control systems are in place and functioning effectively. Otherwise, there is no reasonable assurance reported financial statements are accurate or that the reported measures supposedly used in audits designed to assess performance are valid.

“For activities such as the Clinton Foundation, including the Clinton Global Initiative and the Clinton Health Access Initiative, Inc., having effective internal financial controls in place should have been a top priority, to the board of directors as well as the Clintons themselves,” Ortel wrote.

Instead, his analysis “reveals that the crucial control function required for responsible financial management was neutered, perhaps by devious design.”

Ortel further argued that without effective financial controls in place and responsible operations, the revenues reported by the Clinton Foundation as a whole, as well as its various components, such as CGI and CHAI, are likely to be recorded incorrectly, missed or diverted.

‘Scheme to mask inurement’

In his second report on the financial management of the Clinton Foundation Report, Ortel argued the Clintons used the organization of the Clinton Foundation and its various subcomponent “initiatives” to manipulate financial statements in “audit reviews” to cover up a criminal inurement scheme aimed at adding tens of millions of dollars Bill’s and Hillary’s net worth after they left the White House.

Ortel charges the irregularities, inconsistencies, errors, and other omissions he has documented in operational management and financial reporting of the Clinton Foundations in general and the Clinton Health Access Initiative, Inc., CHAI, in particular, uncovers how the Clintons played “an elaborate shell game,” manipulating the largest constituent element of the Clinton Foundation for personal gain.

Ortel buttressed his conclusion with a detailed analysis of the Clinton Foundation financial regulatory reporting in the years 2009-2011, as Old CHAI morphed into New CHAI.

“Absent effective controls, it should not be surprising the Clinton administration’s financial reporting of direct and indirect program expenditures, fund-raising charges, and overheads have been repeatedly misallocated, misstated, and misreported since inception,” Ortel reports.

He warns law enforcement authorities and the charitable-giving public in the United States and worldwide that the Clintons’ pattern of mismanaging and improperly reporting the Clinton Foundation was conducted since inception “most likely with fraudulent intent, designed almost certainly to result in a systematic pattern of inurement to the personal benefit of the Clintons and their close associates in direct contravention of the core state and federal laws upon which the theory of tax-exempt charitable giving depends.”

Clinton Foundation financial reporting: 2009

In the Clinton Foundation Annual Report for 2009 on page 50, a financial summary shows the Clinton Health Access Initiative, CHAI, was the single largest portion of the charity. Its stated program service expenses of $173.4 million constituted 73.5 percent of total expenses, stated as $235.8 million. The next largest program was the Clinton Global Initiative, with just $13.2 million in stated expenses, or 5.6 percent of total expenses.

Reconstructing combined statements from the information about the Clinton Foundation for 2009 found on the New York State Charities Bureau website, Ortel confirmed that CHAI in 2009 was the single largest program operated by the Clinton Foundation that year.


Yet, the financial statements Clinton Foundation created for 2009 apparently did not fully consolidate all entities involved in its activities worldwide.

“Rather than provide a clear and thorough understanding to the public of its financial performance, the Clinton Foundation presented and still presents a muddled view of its financial results during 2009 that never was independently vetted by professional accountants and outside experts,” Ortel wrote.

“Meanwhile, the Clinton Foundation passes off the deceptive work of BKD LLP, a Little Rock-based accounting firm, that itself is ill-equipped to serve its required function, as a legally mandated independent auditor of the Clinton Foundation’s entire, far-flung operations.”

While the 2009 Clinton Foundation financial statements were reviewed by BKD, Ortel argues it is unclear whether the Clinton Foundation officers and board of directors limited BKD’s mandate to performing a review. Nor is it clear how intensively auditors from BKD may have attempted to inform themselves concerning the nature and extent of the Clinton Foundation.

“The BKD audits on the Clinton Foundation website appear to be ‘audit reviews,’ limited to examining financial records provided to BKD by the foundation’s officers and directors,” Ortel explained to WND.

“There is no indication the Clinton Foundation hired an independent auditor to go back to original receipt and expense records and validate the financial statements the officers and the board of directors presented to the charitable-giving public in the United States and around the world as a accurate and complete record of the foundation’s financial record.”

Furthermore, Ortel notes, the Combining Statement of Activities for 2009 and the Combining Statement of Financial Position at 31 December 2009 are referenced in the table of contents to the Financial Report for 2009. But both are omitted from the package of financial information included in the report that the Clinton Foundation website purports to be the complete financial report for the foundation.

“This omission is material, and the question of whether the omission is deliberate deserves close scrutiny by legal authorities and by the general public,” Ortel argues.

Ortel, a frequent guest on television and radio and a contributor to publications such as the Washington Times, began his Wall Street career in 1980 with Dillon, Read, & Co., followed by the Bridgeford Group and the Chart Group.

How did $17 million disappear from Clinton Foundation?
Jerome R. Corsi
Sun, 17 May 2015 18:48:33 GMT

Saturday, May 16, 2015

White mercenaries have Boko Haram on run



They’re Nigeria’s unlikely saviors – most being white, in their 50s and 60s and combat veterans of the former South African apartheid regime.

But, tainted resumes notwithstanding, they’ve been getting the job done in northern Nigeria, hitting the Islamist terror group Boko Haram hard enough to send the jihadists into retreat, liberating dozens of villages and freeing hundreds of women and girls held as slaves and “bush wives” during a six-year-long reign of terror, reported the London Telegraph.

Boko Haram recently pledged allegiance to the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, or ISIS. In recent years, Boko Haram has slaughtered entire villages, burned countless churches and targeted Christians and moderate Muslims for death. It received global attention last year for abducting nearly 300 Nigerian schoolgirls.

The squad of mostly-white bush-warfare experts is employed by Specialized Tasks, Training, Equipment and Protection, a private army run by Colonel Eeben Barlow, a former commander in the South African Defense Force, where he defended the regime against insurrection and fought border wars 30 years ago in neighboring Angola and Namibia.

Barlow’s firm was hired by Nigeria outgoing President Goodluck Jonathan in January, as the failure of his administration to stop Boko Haram or free the kidnapped schoolgirls became major campaign issues ahead of the March election.

As WND has reported, despite first lady Michelle Obama’s much-publicized Twitter campaign to #BringBackOurGirls, President Obama withheld weapons and intelligence support from Nigeria in its fight against the Islamists because Jonathan’s administration stood by the nation’s laws criminalizing homosexual acts and strictly forbidding same-sex marriage.

Jonathan was defeated in the March election by retired Gen. Muhammadu Buhari, who ruled as dictator there from 1983 until 1985, when he was removed through a coup. Buhari’s campaign was run by the political firm founded by key Obama strategist David Axelrod.

Buhari previously vowed to institute Shariah law in the Muslim-dominated parts of the country if elected.

“There are laws on the books of Nigeria, adopted by a sovereign nation through its normal processes, that they consider to be untoward, unacceptable, homophobic, whatever you want to call it, toward people who are lesbians, gays, transgenders, bisexuals and so on,” said Security Policy President Frank Gaffney.

According to the Jonathan campaign, Buhari made a secret agreement with Washington to repeal those laws if he was elected.

Get the hottest, most important news stories on the Internet – delivered FREE to your inbox as soon as they break! Take just 30 seconds and sign up for WND’s Email News Alerts!

But even as his Muslim opponent was bringing in outside help from Washington to win the election, Jonathan was bringing in Barlow’s STTEP team to turn the tide on Boko Haram.

“The campaign gathered good momentum and wrested much of the initiative from the enemy,” Barlow, 62, told a seminar last week at the Royal Danish Defense College. “It was not uncommon for the strike force to be met by thousands of cheering locals once the enemy had been driven from an area.”

He added: “Yes, many of us are no longer 20-year-olds. But with our age has come a knowledge of conflicts and wars in Africa that our younger generation employees have yet to learn, and a steady hand when things get rough.”

“Another Man’s War”: A gun-toting preacher, a rebel army led by a madman ― and entire villages slaughtered just because they were in the way.

It is believed Barlow brought 100 fighters into Nigeria, including black troops who have served in elite South African units and some who once fought against him as communist guerrillas.

Initially Barlow planned only to train a team in Nigeria to free the kidnapped schoolgirls, but ongoing massacres by Boko Haram changed the mission to one of training Nigeria’s army in “unconventional mobile warfare.”

Barlow introduced “relentless pursuit,” a tactic that mimicked Boko Haram’s hit-and-run strikes. Employing jungle trackers to determine the likely escape routes of the terrorists, Barlow helicoptered his strike force to intercept the enemy and cut them off, eventually exhausting them.

“Good trackers can tell the age of a track as well as indicate if the enemy is carrying heavy loads, the types of weapons he has, if the enemy is moving hurriedly, what he is eating, and so forth,” said Barlow said.

Barlow disputes the Nigerian government’s claim that his men have served only as “technical advisers,” noting he had been “given ‘kill blocks’ to the front and flanks of the strike force and could conduct missions in those areas.”

So, why do so many South Africans go to Nigeria to fight, especially given the fact they face prosecution in their home country for doing so?

“Very often it’s a money issue – they haven’t done well and they need to make some,” Jakkie Cilliers, executive director of the Institute for Security Studies in Pretoria, told the London Guardian last month. “It’s not ideological, and it’s not the gung-ho image one has from the film ‘Blood Diamond.’ This is the only skill these guys have. Most of them are in their late 50s or early 60s and trying to make a late bit of income before they’re past it. In five years’ time it won’t be an issue.”

Cilliers described the feedback he heard on a recent Afrikaans radio program during which three or four mercenaries phoned in. “They said things like: ‘I’m trying to help my kids. My lifestyle is quite crappy. I’m trying to put the grandkids through school.’”

Tom Wolmarans, an apartheid-era policeman, said: “There’s no work for white people in South Africa. Are they going up for money? Yes, it has a role to play because they must make a living. That’s all they can do; they are trained to do it. Some of them were laid off to early retirement. People with a hell of a lot of experience. Good soldiers.”

Pilot Crause Steyl, 50, flew mercenaries into war zones decades ago. “The South African mercenaries are giving Boko Haram a hiding,” he said. “These guys are in their 50s, but for a pilot or tank driver it doesn’t really matter. There’s going to be no Boko Haram. It boggles the mind that Britain and America promised to help Nigeria but never did.

“But the South African government doesn’t want them to exist. They wish them off the planet. When they come back from Nigeria, it will try to prosecute them and put them in jail. Because the color of these men is white, it makes laws that stop them earning money off shore. How wrong can you be? There is now reverse racism and it’s difficult for white people to get a job.”

White mercenaries have Boko Haram on run
Thu, 14 May 2015 02:14:59 GMT