While I get used to hearing the name of Hillary Clinton mentioned just about everywhere I turn to as her political campaign for the 2016 presidential elections gets underway, I cannot help but reminisce on the trail of lies that she and husband Bill have left behind in their Machiavellian crusade to ‘making it’. Bill and Hillary’s legacy of deceitful politics and politically smeared crusades for prowess comes as a renewed version of our own 21st century Bonnie and Clyde parody of outlaws—a tad less colorful maybe, if yet as daringly wicked as the legendary banditti.
For these two outcasts [Bill and Hillary] to have found-their-way through a political maze, inclusive of, but not limited to a presidential impeachment proceeding, is, to say the least, unheard of, albeit we do need to give them both credit for their dexterity and mastery of dishonesty, double-dealing, deceitfulness, or otherwise their uncanny ability to get away with figurative murder, as happened in their legendary ‘Whitewater’ scandal—a real estate deal gone bad back in the 1990s, where, allegedly, the Clintons used their political clout to coerce someone in a failing Savings and Loan Association into making an illegal loan—a prelude of things to come.
Matter of fact, who knows? Maybe, just maybe, the fact that both Bill and wife Hillary sailed through Whitewater literally unharmed, while most everyone else involved in this incident were convicted and served time on more than 40 crimes, could have, in fact, been the raison d’étre for their insidious political careers in what was to follow. In fact, the one thing I am certain of, is that these two appear to be flagrantly convinced that they are above the law-of-the-land—an otherwise impervious assumption, when you consider the magnitude and scope of their crimes, exacerbating with every new scandal that comes along.
At the beginning of it all, you could probably chalk it up to trivial political climbing, therein their lies were somewhat inconsequential, frivolous maybe, such as was Bill’s claim of having smoked marijuana, but not inhaling it or Hillary’s claim on the 2008 presidential campaign trail to have been endangered by sniper fire while landing in Bosnia back in March 1996 on a goodwill trip to the Balkans. The repercussions then, just as trifling as their lies—is yet a telltale sign of things to come. But then, as their climb through the pecking order of greed grew larger, so did their new chapters of treachery—to where they both re-wrote, if you will, the book of lying—all in the name of self-indulgence, a ravenousness and an insatiable appetite for power and affluence; simply said, [the end], to both Clintons, justified the means, even if that [end] meant jeopardizing the nation’s national security.
Monica, Benghazi and Clinton Cash
Farther along in the timeline of these two impostors, I have to believe that Bill’s historical denial of having a relationship with White House intern Monica Lewinsky as he addressed the nation on a press conference on January 26th, 1998, followed by a nationally televised statement admitting his relationship was “not appropriate”, on August 17th of the same year, a meager 7 months after the denial drama, has to go down in the history books as one of [the], if not [the] most hypocritical defamation of the truth in the history of the presidency, bar none. Not to mention the arrogance of the clown during the denial period, as he was painstakingly swayed to believing he could get away with it all, regardless. Once again, the age-old Clinton presumption that most Americans are, by nature, naïve and gullible—a threatening vision, which both of them hold dearly to this day.
But what about Hillary’s role in the Lewinsky drama? Well, in retrospect, I venture to say that to many Americans, especially women, Hillary’s apparent stand-behind-her man stance, was a stoic deportment, heroic even, thus worthy of praise. For many others—worthy of their vote for whatever post she ran for, inclusive of the presidency. To Hillary, I bet, it would not surprise me if the infamous scandal was, in fact, a welcomed opportunity to furthering her unrelenting political career in becoming president of the U.S., as the scandal postured a fortuitous prospect to play her much cherished role as a victim and a champion of womanhood—a poetically idyllic setting paving the way for the ultimate appeal to the vote of American women—yes, a credit to the woman’s perverse ways and a true measure of her boundless ambitions.
But, what about the woman’s morally deprived conduct in the Benghazi embassy attack of September 11th, 2012? What about her flagrant stonewalling of her testimony regarding the events that transpired in Benghazi and her share of blame for it? For a change, once again, we find Hillary at center-stage of a really serious controversy which yielded the death of U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, Officer Sean Smith and security personnel Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods. The woman’s skillfully deceptive tactics had her, this time around, allegedly fabricating a medical condition such as was her presumptuous fainting and ensuing concussion as she got closer to testifying to Congress—a defiant act of non-compliance, which, as far as I am concerned, was nothing short of the historical disregard by these two for the law-of-the-land—a testament, if you will, to their contemptuous indifference for the edicts of our culture; one which has well-served our modern day Bonnie and Clyde.
And just as we thought we had seen it all, the last bombshell of them all, has these two castaways center-staging one of the most corrupt political Ponzi schemes ever in the history of the nation—one which should idyllically land both of these con-artists behind bars for the rest of their lives, albeit a feat which will never happen, considering the prevalent corruption impairing such likelihood. In lieu of such a desirous finale, however, we shall content ourselves then only by exposing their schemes and pray to God, such exposure will be sufficient to forestall any chances for this woman ever becoming the president of the United States of America.
I am referring, specifically, to the ignominious Clinton Foundation—the so-called philanthropic organization used by the Clintons as the ultimate disguise tool to shield their quid-pro-quo favors in return for millions of dollars, conveniently funneled through the latter to conceal their own personal gains. The ingeniously planned scheme exploits the political clout owned by both Bill and Hillary, inherent in their roles as ex-president and Secretary of State respectively, as [the] critical link for soliciting what, at first, appears to be compelling foreign contributions presumably ending up in philanthropic causes throughout the world in exchange for certain political favors—even when a major share of such contributions would be majestically divested to the Clintons for their own self-serving enrichment.
On April 23rd, 2015, Fox News’ Bret Baier hosted a documentary named ‘The Tangled Clinton Web’, based on Peter Schweizer’s book ‘The Clinton Cash’. In the book as well as in the documentary, Schweizer and Baier cite a revealing list of controversial quid-pro-quos, wherein both Bill and Hillary play leading roles in multiple, murky fund-raising interactions with major foreign donors and supporters of the Clinton Foundation throughout the world, while patrons allegedly were otherwise rewarded with all kinds of ‘political favors’, albeit even when such errands could end up jeopardizing our national security.
Now, I don’t care what Schweizer or anyone says. There is something about the Clintons’ finances which really does not add up. You figure it out. In an interview on June of 2014, Hillary makes an impoverished claim that the couple was $12 million dollars in debt when they left the White House in 2001. According to Schweizer, the Clintons today are now worth approximately $200 million dollars—a swift turnaround, I venture to say, and in a rather short period of time if you ask me. So, how did the Clintons, in fact, made all this money, considering their annual incomes, one as Secretary of State getting paid $186,000 dollars per year, and the other one as a public speaker at approximately $150,000 dollars per speech? Hello, you do the math, and soon you will come to terms with the unadulterated truth that there just had to be a sizable income, coming from elsewhere other than their presumed occupations. And…so it was: the Clinton Foundation.
According to Schweizer, the Foundation founded in 2001, has raised over 1 billion dollars over the years, and while it may be true that a lot of that money was indeed given to charitable causes, it is no less true also that, a lot of that money, as well, went to the Clintons personally. Matter of fact, no sooner had the Foundation scandal made headline news, on April 23rd, 2015 there was an announcement that the Foundation was refiling taxes for the last five years due to: “errors in reporting certain contributions”. Hello again. Let’s you and I try and tell the IRS the next time you are audited, that you made some innocent mistakes on your tax returns over the past five years, and I will tell you where you and I end-up. But…then again, it should be clear to all of us by now, that, corrupt politicians, nowadays, seem to be all but immune and shielded from any blameworthiness for crimes committed while in office, as day-in and day-out, we watch these impostors evade the system by using all kinds of phony alibis to excuse their wrongdoings, or, better yet, get away with it with everyone’s blessings.
According to Schweizer, Clinton speeches have taken in over 136 million dollars through 2012. Before Hillary became Secretary of State, the average compensation for a Clinton speech was approximately 150K thousand dollars per speech. After Hillary became Secretary of State, Bill speeches went up to 700K per appearance—a true testament to the couple’s unison in their unremitting crusade for wealth and power.
In any event, for a while there, I seriously debated whether or not to give you all the details behind the Foundation scandals, as for a moment, I thought it would be overbearing for many of you as to the scope of the material needed to be presented to make my case as thoroughly authentic as I possibly could. No sooner, though, had I made up my mind that my surmising the facts, could very well jeopardize your rationales of reaching a pragmatically accurate conclusion. As such, I opted to give you a complete and detailed account of the facts. To that end, then, and, exclusively to that end, following are some of the most incendiary schemes championed by these two frauds, given in the order of relevancy to the magnitude of the controversy, that is, as perceived by this author:
Uranium One
Let me preface the controversy of this story by saying that the events that transpired give ‘The Tangled Clinton Web’, the name given by Fox News News to their documentary regarding the scandals of the Clinton Foundation, it’s most earnest rendition yet. In the story, we find a complex web of the most ignoble quid-pro-quos imaginable, not to mention the fact that at center-stage of it all, therein was that matchlessly dangerous mineral known as uranium—one whose enriched version just happens to be a critical component in the production of nuclear weapons.
Our story begins on September 6th, 2005, when ex-president Bill Clinton travels to Kazakhstan, where multi-millionaire Frank Giustra, a Canadian investor, was trying to “get control to buy a couple of uranium mines” in that country. Giustra and Clinton strike a partnering relationship and emanate as cohorts working on philanthropic endeavors. At the same time, “Giustra was, conveniently and coincidentally, involved in helping to facilitate speaking engagements for Clinton in Kazakhstan.”
On April 23rd, 2015, New York Times’ reporter and Pulitzer Prize winner, Jo Becker, who spent months investigating the Kazakhstan deal before publishing her story said: Giustra and Clinton were both“whisked to the [palace] of Kazakhstan’ president, Nursultan Nazarbayev and it’s a fascinating story, because everybody walked away from the table that night with something.” Clinton, Becker said, “basically endorsed” the “progress” Kazakhstan had made on its democracy, though Nazarbayev was elected “with 90 percent-plus of the vote … in an election that was widely criticized as being rigged.” Soon thereafter Clinton also makes several public appearances praising president Nazarbayev for the progress made under his democracy and praises his records on human rights. Within days, Giustra gets uranium mining concessions in Kazakhstan worth hundreds of millions of dollars. Becker adds, Giustra’s company went from “a worthless shell company overnight—and became this …huge uranium mining deal.” In exchange for the favor, the Clinton Foundation received a contribution of $31 million dollars from Giustra, and a pledge for another 100 million dollars.
Giustra’s mining consortium, christened with the name Uranium One would soon become a mega-conglomerate. According to Peter Schweizer, “Uranium One became very active in acquiring uranium assets in the United States itself and by 2008, 2009, it had become a particularly attractive target for the Russian government.” On a public address made in January 2013 to the Russian Parliament, Sergey Kiryenko, head of Russia’s nuclear corporation Rosatom, announced Russia’s consolidated 100% acquisition of Uranium One and said: “I am pleased to inform you that today we [Russia] control 20 percent of uranium in the United States. If we need that uranium, we shall be able to use it any time. ” The Russian acquisition of U1, was projected to have control over what could amount to approximately 50% of the world’s uranium output by 2015 – symbolically speaking, a major share of the precious mineral and a real and present danger to the future of nuclear warfare given the fact that Russia would not falter in sending uranium to its client state, Iran.
Shortly after the Russians had announced their intentions to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock. As if the web was not sufficiently entangled when Hillary became Secretary of State, the Clinton Foundation had to sign a Memorandum of Understanding clarifying possible controversies and conflicts of interest with the State Department, such as the U-1 deal. Notwithstanding such contingency and in spite of the fact that as a Senator from N.Y., Hillary, had seriously pretended to be opposed to the “sale” of uranium to potential enemies of the U.S., pointing to the serious implications of the Russians getting uranium, she still ratified the Russian purchase, thus violating the provisions of the Memorandum—and, one more time, a clear showing of her abounding hypocrisy.
Haiti Controversies
Our next stop in the Clinton’s carousel of lies, takes place after the January 10th, 2010, earthquake that devastated the country of Haiti. Soon after the disaster, Hillary goes to Haiti to pledge full support from USA to the impoverished island. Meantime, the international community worked with the Haitian Government to establish an interim reconstruction commission, which was named the “HIRC”, which stands for ‘Haiti Interim Reconstruction Commission’—a body created to manage the disbursement of international aid to Haiti. Coincidentally, former president Bill Clinton, acting as United Nation’s Special Envoy to Haiti, co-led the Haitian Reconstruction Commission along with Haitian Prime Minister Jean Max Bellerive.
As would and could be expected, HIRC, led by Bill Clinton, totally disregarded projects of relief, and focused exclusively on projects where Clintons would receive donations. Matter of fact, back in the time, all deals came back to the Clintons. If you wanted to do business in Haiti, you had to have a relationship with the Clintons. Digicel—a tele-communications company owned by Irish billionaire Dennis O’Brien was given special treatment which awarded O’Brien’s company exclusive rights to transfer relief money to Haitians whereby the company made more than 50 million dollars in revenues, in exchange for Obrien’s contributions in the millions to the Clinton Foundation.
In yet another Haitian scandal, U.S. based VCS company was awarded sizable concessions for gold mining operations in Haiti, despite the fact that the company lacked the expertise for such an undertaking. The VCS company with little mining experience was awarded the rights for exploiting approximately 150 million dollars of mining minerals in Haiti. Again, coincidentally, Tony Rodham, Hillary’s brother just happened to have a seat on the Board of Directors of VCS. Then there was the Caracol Industrial Park scandal, which involved a mega-industrial park promoted by HIRC, Clinton, and Bellerive—the project promised to create 65,000 jobs whereas to this date, only 5,000 became a reality. In the end, all money that flowed in for Haiti’s earthquake relief was conveniently funneled through the IHRC, Bill Clinton and the Prime-Minister.
United Arab Emirate Controversy
Under the pressure of the Obama administration, sanctions placed on Iran’s importations of crude oil from the UAE, the foreign minister of UAE comes to the U.S., to discuss the Iran sanctions. The next day after his visit, the minister’s brother, the Crown Prince, gives Bill Clinton $500K to make a speech in Abu Dhabi.
Sweden Controversy
In 2009, the Swedish telecommunications giant Ericsson was selling telecom equipment to repressive countries around the world including Iran. Ericsson pays Bill Clinton 750K dollars for making a speech. Soon after Bill’s speech, Hillary broadens sanctions against Iran, but excludes Ericsson from the tougher sanctions.
Colombia / Uribe Controversy
In her role as Secretary of State, Hillary visits with Colombia’s president Alvaro Uribe on June 9th, 2010, to discuss a Free Trade Agreement with that country. The very same agreement she pleaded to delete while running for president back in 2008. At the same time Hillary is meeting with President Uribe, husband Bill flies to Colombia accompanied by none other than U-1, partner-in-crime, Frank Giustra. Soon after Hillary’s visit and her commitment to support the FTA, Giustra’s companies are, coincidentally, awarded some rich contracts in Colombia.
Africa Controversy
On May 14th, 2007, at Addis Ababa, Ethiopia – MIDROC, a multi-sector business company announced it would donate 20million dollars over a ten year period to the Clinton Foundation HIV/AIDS Initiative (CHAI) in Ethiopia to assist the Non-Government Organization [NGO]. In a statement issued, the company said the signing for the grant agreement was made in London between Sheik Mohammed H. Al Amoudi, owner and Chairman of MIDROC, and former US President Bill Clinton, founder of the foundation.
Following the signing ceremony, Sheik Mohammed Al Amoudi, presented the former US President Bill Clinton with a check for two million US dollars—part of the 20 million pledged over a ten year period. The statement made claim that the CHAI program was aimed at helping the government of Ethiopia in its efforts to increase care and treatment of persons living with HIV/AIDS and to improve the medical infrastructure of the country. “I see this contribution to CHAI as a part of my continuing effort to improve the welfare of the people of the country of my birth,” Sheik Mohammed was quoted as saying in the statement.
Sheik Al Almoudi’s philanthropic move was highly questioned by Ethiopian groups in the West due to an abounding concern of Ethiopia’s rulers repressive antics and the fact that Al Almoudi owned an empire of businesses in Ethiopia, thus looking upon the Sheik’s philanthropic meandering as nothing short of a twisted plot to further his clout in the oppressed nation. When Hillary becomes Secretary of State she needed to certify Ethiopia on Human Rights, instead she grants them a waiver which allowed them to continue to receive unquestionable assistance from the U.S.
The E-mail Disappearance
So, given all the mounting evidence against these two alleged swindlers, you would figure there would be more than sufficient probable cause to bring charges to both Clintons under the general conspiracy statute, 18 U.S.C. §371, which creates a criminal offense “if two or more persons conspire either to commit any offense against the United States, or to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose”. Voilà: the two Clintons behind bars.
The bottom line, however, is that the chances that there will ever be charges brought up against these two, are, like the old saying: “slim and none”. Ask why, and the foremost answer is…you guessed it! Yet, another swindle by the ‘teflon’ lady. As you may or may not know, on March 15th, of this year, the banner story making headline news all over the nation was Hillary’s commodious disappearance of approximately 30,000 emails, produced during her tenure as Secretary of State. Conspiracy of tampering with the evidence, maybe? Who cares? The bottom line is: no one will likely ever know what was deleted from Clinton’s server. Barring one of the 30,000 emails Clinton turned over to the State Department being deemed as “classified,” it is also unlikely she will ever be found to have violated the letter of the law. And the fact is that, for a couple that is now worth $200 million dollars and a Foundation that has brought in 1 billion dollars over the years, it would be somewhat ingenuous, naïve even, for the rest of us commoners to think that these two lack a cultured battery of legal eagles, standing-by just to make sure that nothing that could hurt them ever sticks—a guaranteed safe-passage, if you will, to the land of mitigated political white-collar crimes in America.
So…the point I am trying to make is, more than likely not, much of the hard evidence backing-up the conspiracy crimes of the Clintons and their Foundation, vanished along with 30,000 pieces of email, selectively chosen, I bet, thus, once again, just as Lois Lerner’s loss of her emails on the alleged IRS scandal targeting select conservative groups in America before her, the chances of ever convicting these two for the alleged conspiracies, like I said earlier, are just non-existent. All the while as we, the American people, graciously, sit by and watch as our legal and judicial systems are made a mockery of. Worse yet, as we take a pew at all that is wrong with our cadre of corrupt politicians, we choose to stand by ready to reward them for their dishonesty, including but not limited to letting someone as corrupt as Hillary Clinton run for the presidency of the country, let alone a chance of becoming our next president.
Summary and Conclusions
The bottom line, my fellow Americans, is that the Clinton story, some of which I have evoked here today, is just a part of a culture of corruption, dishonesty, treachery and deceit, now prevalent amongst a pervasively decadent government and its officials. And, while I understand that not everyone indulges in such venality, I also understand that for our system to work, there is no room for any of it, and those guilty of crimes such as those allegedly committed by the Clintons, should be brought to justice with the same resolve as we bring to justice all those that lack the resources, the economic and political prowess necessary to buy themselves their safe-passages within the corrupted system.
I am closing this dissertation today asking every one of you, my fellow Americans, to take a hard look at everything that is going on around you. We have choices, still, as well, as I think that the 2016 presidential elections, will make the difference as to what we want for our future and for the future of our children and their children. We can either have, ‘more-of-the-same’, by electing an alleged swindler out to self-serve her own interests, or we can have true ‘change’ in restoring the nation to its former glory; starting with the cleansing of political vultures, such as this Clinton pair, who, have no hesitation in continuing to feed on the carcass of a decaying government—all in the name of self-indulgence, albeit sheltered under auras of righteousness, such as is this Clinton Foundation.
I know for a fact that asking for justice to be brought about for these two, is an exercise in futility, at best. Within this realization, comes then, just one other wishful thought of things to come, as I plead with you that we all, as a nation, do away with the collective apathy that has brought us to where we are today; that we do away with the behavioral and fanatical disorders, which claim to make heroes and idols out of impostors and make champions of justice out of frauds, cheats and swindlers—respondent, exclusively, to charismatic veils of embroidered untruths.
My fellow Americans, whether you want to believe it or not, we have ran out of time. We are at the end of the road. We can either choose the path to damnation and destruction or we can, instead, choose the path to reclaiming the nation. It is in our hands, yours and mine, to make the choice—it’s a simple choice, unadulterated and pure, it’s as simple as one vote: yours. One vote it’s all it will take. One vote in the next presidential elections; one vote, that, might not do justice for all that Hillary Clinton, husband Bill and all other corrupt politicians have done wrong by us, but one vote, which shall assure us that this state of corruption will come to an end, once and for all – one vote in 2016 which can and will make the difference: your vote. May God bless you and may God bless America.
