Category Archives: corruption

Hillary Clinton lies obstruction of justice documented in legal documents and NY Times article, Senate whitewater report, Independent counsel Robert W. Ray statement June 22, 2000, NY Times January 8, 1996 Hillary blizzard of lies

Hillary Clinton lies obstruction of justice documented in legal documents and NY Times article, Senate whitewater report, Independent counsel Robert W. Ray statement June 22, 2000, NY Times January 8, 1996 Hillary blizzard of lies

“Viewed in the aggregate, then, these numerous instances of
White House interference with several ongoing law enforcement investigations
amounted to far more than just aggressive lawyering
or political naivete. Rather, the Special Committee concludes that
the actions of these senior White House officials constitute a highly
improper pattern of deliberate misconduct.
Mrs. Clinton was closely involved in the handling of documents in
Mr. Foster’s office following his death and directed that investigators
be denied ‘‘unfettered access’’ to his office”…Senate Whitewater report June 13, 1996

“By July 1993, the Clintons and their associates had established
a pattern of concealment with respect to the Clintons’ involvement
with Whitewater and the Madison S&L. Because of the complexity
of the allegations of misdeeds involving these institutions, documents
and files are critical to any inquiries into the matter. Yet,
at every important turn, crucial files and documents ‘‘disappeared’’
or were withheld from scrutiny whenever questions were raised.…Senate Whitewater report June 13, 1996

“the Democratic Party overlooked the ethical red flags and made a pact with Mr. Clinton that was the equivalent of a pact with the devil. And he delivered. With Mr. Clinton at the controls, the party won the White House twice. But in the process it lost its bearings and maybe even its soul.”…Bob Herbert, NY Times February 26, 2001

 

Hard core Hillary Clinton supporters may not be swayed by her ever changing, poll reactive and politically expedient positions.

However, there is much documented about Hillary, the Clintons and the staffs they supervised and worked closely with.

For your edification and utter amazement I am providing some of this legal documentation.

Hillary Clinton has a well documented history of lying and obstruction of justice, long before she became Secretary of State.

From the NY Times June 23, 2000.

“Statement on Travel Office Inquiry

WASHINGTON, June 22 — Following is the statement today by the independent counsel Robert W. Ray on his investigation of the firings at the White House travel office in 1993:

The office of the independent counsel has concluded an investigation commonly known as the travel office matter. This matter concerned allegations that David Watkins, former assistant to the president for management and administration, and First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton made false statements in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1001, committed perjury in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1621, or obstructed justice in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1503, in connection with their statements and testimony concerning the May 19, 1993, firing of seven employees of the White House travel office. Independent counsel has concluded that the evidence was insufficient to prove that Mr. Watkins or Mrs. Clinton made any knowingly false statements, committed perjury or obstructed justice in this matter.”

“In contrast to the cooperation received from the White House in the F.B.I. files investigation, concluded in March of this year, this office experienced substantial resistance in its efforts to obtain relevant evidence in the travel office matter.

For example, the White House asserted unfounded privileges that were later rejected in court.

White House officials also conducted inadequate searches for documents and failed to make timely production of documents, including relevant e-mails, in their possession.

Despite these and other obstacles that substantially delayed the receipt of relevant evidence by this office, the independent counsel has concluded that the investigation may now be closed.”

Read more:

http://partners.nytimes.com/library/politics/062300clinton-travel-txt.html

From the Senate Whitewater investigation report June 13, 1996.

“Because the testimony of witnesses before the Special Committee
was often contradictory, incomplete, or inaccurate as to important
events and actions, the Committee placed particular emphasis on
available documentary evidence. Unfortunately, throughout its in
quiry, the Committee was hindered by parties unduly delaying the
production of, or withholding outright, documents critical to its investigation.
Although the White House was most often and most
notably engaged in this course of action, the pattern of noncooperation
extended to other parties, as this Report lays out more fully
in the Washington Phase of the Special Committee’s inquiry.”

“CONCLUSIONS OF THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE”

“Against the backdrop of the death of a high-ranking U.S. official, this controversy has been fueled by a series of misguided actions taken by senior White House officials to shield the documents in Mr. Foster’s office from
independent career law enforcement investigators and to spirit the
documents to the White House Residence.
As Deputy Counsel to the President, Mr. Foster was the number
two lawyer in the White House. He worked on the most important
public issues faced by the new Clinton Administration. At the time
of his death, Mr. Foster also was one of the Clintons’ key advisors
on Whitewater and Travelgate.”

“After careful review of all the evidence, the Special Committee
concludes that senior White House officials, particularly members
of the Office of the White House Counsel, engaged in a pattern of
highly improper conduct in their handling of the documents in Mr.
Foster’s office following his death. These senior White House officials
deliberately prevented career law enforcement officers from
the Department of Justice and Park Police from fully investigating
the circumstances surrounding Mr. Foster’s death, including
whether he took his own life because of troubling matters involving
the President and Mrs. Clinton. At every turn, senior White House
officials prevented Justice Department and Park Police investigators
from examining the documents in Mr. Foster’s office, particularly
those relating to the Whitewater and Travelgate affairs then
under investigation.

This pattern of concealment and obstruction continues even to
the present day. The Special Committee concludes that senior
White House officials and other close Clinton associates were not
candid in their testimony before the Committee. Specifically, the
Committee concludes that Margaret Williams, Chief of Staff to the
First Lady, Susan Thomases, a New York attorney and close advisor
to Mrs. Clinton, Bernard Nussbaum, then-White House Counsel,
and Webster Hubbell, former Associate Attorney General and
now-convicted felon, all provided inaccurate and incomplete testimony
to the Committee in order to conceal Mrs. Clinton’s pivotal
role in the decisions surrounding the handling of Mr. Foster’s documents
following his death.
Finally, the Special Committee concludes that the misconduct
surrounding the handling of Mr. Foster’s documents is part of a
larger and more troubling pattern, that began in Arkansas in the
1980s and has continued in Washington during the Clinton Administration,
in which the Clintons and their associates have sought to
hinder, impede and control investigations into Madison Guaranty
S&L and the Whitewater real estate investment. Parts of this larger
pattern include (i) Mrs. Clinton’s decision in 1988—when federal
investigators were examining possible misconduct leading to Madison
Guaranty’s failure just two years before—to order the destruction
of records relating to her representation of this S&L; (ii) Mr.
Foster’s and Mr. Hubbell’s improper and unauthorized 1992 removal
of Rose Law Firm records and files relating to Mrs. Clinton’s
representation of this corrupt S&L; and (iii) and the improper communication
to White House officials during the fall of 1993 of confidential
information relating to ongoing criminal investigations of
Madison Guaranty and of Capital Management Services, Inc., a
small business investment company also central to the Whitewater
affair.
By the time of Vincent Foster’s death in July 1993, the Clintons had
established a pattern of concealing their involvement with
Whitewater and the McDougals’ Madison Guaranty S&L
The actions of senior White House officials and other close Clinton
associates in the days and weeks following Mr. Foster’s death
cannot be viewed in a vacuum. Their actions were but part of a
pattern that began in 1988 of concealing, controlling and even destroying
damaging information concerning the Whitewater real estate
investment and the Clintons’ ties to James and Susan
McDougal and the Madison S&L. Indeed, at the time of Mr. Foster’s
death, the Clintons and their associates were aware that the
Clintons’ involvement with Whitewater land deal, the McDougals,
and the Madison S&L might subject them to civil liability and even
criminal investigation.
In 1988, Mrs. Clinton ordered the destruction of records relating
to her representation of Mr. McDougal’s Madison S&L.11 This was
not a routine destruction of records. At the time, federal regulators
were investigating the operation and solvency of Madison in anticipation
of taking it over. These Rose Law Firm records, which after
Madison’s failure would have belonged to the Resolution Trust Corporation
(‘‘RTC’’),12 were directly relevant to that investigation.
By ordering their destruction, Mrs. Clinton eliminated pertinent
records and also exposed her firm to potential liability with respect
to her representation. Indeed, if such representation was proper, as
Mrs. Clinton has claimed, her document destruction deprived the
law firm of the records necessary to defend itself in a suit by federal
investigators. Moreover, in 1988, Seth Ward, a former associate
of Mr. McDougal and Webster Hubbell’s father-in-law, was actually
suing Madison Guaranty over a land deal that federal regulators
have described as a fraud.13 Mrs. Clinton had performed
work on the project, including having numerous telephones calls
and meetings with Mr. Ward, and the law firm record of her work
and the transactions surrounding this land deal certainly would
have been highly relevant to the conduct of that suit.
Accordingly, Mrs. Clinton’s destruction of documents could constitute
a breach of legal ethics and, possibly, a violation of law if
done with the knowledge that the documents are material to investigations
or ongoing litigation.14 Professor Stephen Gillers of New
York University, a noted ethics expert, has recently stated: ‘‘I don’t
know how it could be that these files were destroyed. . . . It makes
it stranger that they were destroyed, not only so soon after they
were created but also at a time when this lawsuit was about to go
to trial. . . . It certainly could lead to suspicion that she has something
to hide because one possible inference from the destruction
is that there was something in those files that she did not want
to have made public.’’ 15
The pattern further continued during the 1992 presidential campaign,
after questions arose about the Clintons’ investment with
the McDougals in Whitewater and Mrs. Clinton’s representation of
Madison Guaranty before a state agency. In an effort to respond to
inquiries from the press and charges from other candidates, Mrs.
Clinton’s then-law partner, Vincent Foster, collected all the information
he could on the Madison representation. At the conclusion
of the campaign, the Madison files, which were by now the property
of the RTC as conservator of Madison, as well as the files of
other Rose clients for whom Mrs. Clinton had performed legal services,
were secretly removed from the firm by another then-Rose
Law Firm partner, Webster Hubbell. Mr. Hubbell removed these
files, at times taking the firm’s only copies,16 without obtaining the
consent of the firm or client.17 Given that Mr. Hubbell was about
to assume a position of great public trust as Associate Attorney
General, his unauthorized decision to remove these files is especially
troubling.”

“After federal investigators began to look into matters relating to
Madison Guaranty and Whitewater, a number of subpoenas were
issued for these Rose Law Firm billing records. By then, however,
the records were nowhere to be found. Despite extensive searches
conducted by the law firm, neither the originals nor copies were
discovered.20 They were not in the firm computers, its client files,
or the firm’s storage facility.21
Apparently, at some point, someone removed these billing
records from the Rose Law Firm. In August 1995, Carolyn Huber,
an assistant to Mrs. Clinton, discovered them in the book room of
the White House Residence, next to Mrs. Clinton’s office.”

“By July 1993, the Clintons and their associates had established
a pattern of concealment with respect to the Clintons’ involvement
with Whitewater and the Madison S&L. Because of the complexity
of the allegations of misdeeds involving these institutions, documents
and files are critical to any inquiries into the matter. Yet,
at every important turn, crucial files and documents ‘‘disappeared’’
or were withheld from scrutiny whenever questions were raised.”

“It is with this knowledge that the Clintons and their advisers
came to Washington, taking with them the important documents
relating to Whitewater and Madison. The documents (including
documents improperly taken from the law firm) were entrusted
only to close associates of the Clintons, chiefly Messrs. Foster and
Hubbell.”

“White House officials engaged in highly improper conduct in handling
documents in Vincent Foster’s office following his death
The evidence before the Special Committee established that
White House officials engaged in a pattern of deliberate obstruction,
and interference with, efforts by law enforcement authorities
to conduct their several investigations into Mr. Foster’s death.”

“The pattern of obstruction continued with the White House dealings
with the Justice Department.”

“Beyond this, the Special Committee concludes that the ‘‘review’’
of documents in Mr. Foster’s office on July 22 was a sham. Law enforcement
authorities did not review any documents; Mr. Nussbaum
relied on their presence simply to ‘‘dress up’’ the review.”

“Viewed in the aggregate, then, these numerous instances of
White House interference with several ongoing law enforcement investigations
amounted to far more than just aggressive lawyering
or political naivete. Rather, the Special Committee concludes that
the actions of these senior White House officials constitute a highly
improper pattern of deliberate misconduct.
Mrs. Clinton was closely involved in the handling of documents in
Mr. Foster’s office following his death and directed that investigators
be denied ‘‘unfettered access’’ to his office.”

“The evidence leads to the inescapable conclusion that, early in
the morning of July 22, Mrs. Clinton, Susan Thomases and Margaret
Williams discussed the procedures for conducting the review
of documents in Mr. Foster’s office.”

“The Special Committee concludes that its effort to find the truth
about the events of July 20–27, 1993 was impeded by what appeared
to be a disturbing pattern of incomplete and inaccurate testimony
by senior White House officials and close Clinton associates.
Time and again, the testimony of career law enforcement officials
and others without a motive to lie, as well as documentary evidence,
told one consistent story, while senior White House officials
and close Clinton associates offered a contradictory version of the
facts.”

“As set forth below in the Findings of this Report, the Committee
concludes that four persons—Margaret Williams, Susan Thomases,
Bernard Nussbaum and Webster Hubbell—provided incomplete
and inaccurate testimony to the Committee in an apparent effort
to conceal the intimate involvement of Mrs. Clinton in the events
following Mr. Foster’s death.
The Office of the White House Counsel was misused to impede ongoing
investigations and to serve the purely personal legal interests
of the President, Mrs. Clinton and their associates
Every citizen is entitled to mount a defense to civil and criminal
charges. The President is no different. He is not entitled, however,
to use the power of his office to gain a defense of his private legal
affairs not available to other Americans. The White House Counsel’s
Office is supposed to serve the President in his official executive
capacity. These lawyer are paid by the taxpayers to serve the
public interest.
In the matter of Mr. Foster’s death, the Office of the White
House counsel served, in effect, as the Clintons’ personal defense
law firm. This service extended beyond Mr. Foster’s employment as
the Clinton’s personal attorney to the use of the White House
Counsel’s Office in the days following his death to interfere with
and hinder several ongoing federal investigations into Mr. Foster’s
death and the handling of documents in Mr. Foster’s office at the
time of his death. Instead of cooperating with law enforcement officials,
the Office of the White House Counsel impeded the investigations
of the Park Police and the Department of Justice. The White
House lawyers ignored and, in some cases, intentionally violated
established procedures that would have ensured the proper handling
of documents in Mr. Foster’s office.”

“The actions of the White House are especially serious because
the Special Committee has discovered that the files shielded from
the Department of Justice contained evidence relevant to two investigations
that touched on the Clintons’ personal interests: the
criminal referral into Madison S&L, and the anticipated investigation,
by Congress and others, into the Travel Office firings. As demonstrated
in this Report, the White House, including Mrs. Clinton,
were on notice that these investigations were either ongoing or imminent.
As it happens, both of these investigations were of sufficient
weight to be now under the jurisdiction of an Independent
Counsel.
Against this background, the actions of the White House during
the week after Mr. Foster’s death must be judged. These White
House actions were highly improper; they were deliberate; and they
adversely affected ongoing investigations by career law enforcement
officials. The American people will never be sure of the contents
of Vincent Foster’s office at the time of his death. Their uncertainty
and doubts, however, clearly are the direct result of the
wrongful action by the White House.”

I urge you to read more and share this information.

http://citizenwells.net/2015/04/29/senate-whitewater-report-104-280-june-13-1996-mrs-clinton-closely-involved-in-handling-of-documents-in-mr-fosters-office-directed-that-investigators-be-denied-access-white-house/

From the NY Times January 8, 1996.

“Essay;Blizzard of Lies”

“Americans of all political persuasions are coming to the sad realization that our First Lady — a woman of undoubted talents who was a role model for many in her generation — is a congenital liar.

Drip by drip, like Whitewater torture, the case is being made that she is compelled to mislead, and to ensnare her subordinates and friends in a web of deceit.”

“3. In the aftermath of the apparent suicide of her former partner and closest confidant, White House Deputy Counsel Vincent Foster, she ordered the overturn of an agreement to allow the Justice Department to examine the files in the dead man’s office. Her closest friends and aides, under oath, have been blatantly disremembering this likely obstruction of justice, and may have to pay for supporting Hillary’s lie with jail terms.

Again, the lying was not irrational. Investigators believe that damning records from the Rose Law Firm, wrongfully kept in Vincent Foster’s White House office, were spirited out in the dead of night and hidden from the law for two years — in Hillary’s closet, in Web Hubbell’s basement before his felony conviction, in the President’s secretary’s personal files — before some were forced out last week.

Why the White House concealment? For good reason: The records show Hillary Clinton was lying when she denied actively representing a criminal enterprise known as the Madison S.& L., and indicate she may have conspired with Web Hubbell’s father-in-law to make a sham land deal that cost taxpayers $3 million.

Why the belated release of some of the incriminating evidence? Not because it mysteriously turned up in offices previously searched. Certainly not because Hillary Clinton and her new hang-tough White House counsel want to respond fully to lawful subpoenas.

One reason for the Friday-night dribble of evidence from the White House is the discovery by the F.B.I. of copies of some of those records elsewhere. When Clinton witnesses are asked about specific items in “lost” records — which investigators have — the White House “finds” its copy and releases it. By concealing the Madison billing records two days beyond the statute of limitations, Hillary evaded a civil suit by bamboozled bank regulators.

Another reason for recent revelations is the imminent turning of former aides and partners of Hillary against her; they were willing to cover her lying when it advanced their careers, but are inclined to listen to their own lawyers when faced with perjury indictments.

Therefore, ask not “Why didn’t she just come clean at the beginning?” She had good reasons to lie; she is in the longtime habit of lying; and she has never been called to account for lying herself or in suborning lying in her aides and friends.”

Read more:

http://www.nytimes.com/1996/01/08/opinion/essay-blizzard-of-lies.html

 

 

Hillary Clinton lies and hypocrisy on marriage religion, Bill Clinton well documented sex exploits, Hillary knew he was cheating, Affair with Vince Foster, Open marriage? Marriage for political expediency

Hillary Clinton lies and hypocrisy on marriage religion, Bill Clinton well documented sex exploits, Hillary knew he was cheating, Affair with Vince Foster, Open marriage? Marriage for political expediency

“I believe that marriage is not just a bond but a sacred bond between a man and a woman. I have had occasion in my life to defend marriage, to stand up for marriage, to believe in the hard work and challenge of marriage. So I take umbrage at anyone who might suggest that those of us who worry about amending the Constitution are less committed to the sanctity of marriage, or to the fundamental bedrock principle that exists between a man and a woman, going back into the mists of history as one of the founding, foundational institutions of history and humanity and civilization, and that its primary, principal role during those millennia has been the raising and socializing of children for the society into which they are to become adults.”…Hillary Clinton 2004

“Bob Hartlein reports for The National Enquirer, Nov. 14, 2014, that in his sworn testimony, Officer L.D. Brown said he had eyewitnessed the wife-swapping of Bill, Hillary, and their respective lovers.”
“Brown said that Bill and Hillary Clinton are wild “swingers” – a bombshell disclosure 
that can ruin her chances of winning the White House in 2016″…DC ClothesLine November 22, 2014

“Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.”…Matthew 7:15

 

 

Even in the nineties, when internet reporting and researching was in its infancy, I knew enough to know that Bill Clinton was a womanizer many times over and that Hillary was aware of it.

One of my so called Christian associates in the nineties was constantly defending Bill Clinton and that it was not a big deal. The end justifies the means.

Another friend from a few years ago, somewhat liberal, but I believe a Christian, said she would never vote for or support Hillary Clinton because she tolerated Bill’s infidelity.

In searching for Hillary Clinton quotes on marriage I encountered the following.

From The Gospel Coalition April 24, 2015.

What is marriage? Back in 2004, Senator Hillary Clinton gave a pretty good definition. To be fair, the larger context was her speaking against the idea of a federal marriage amendment, but in the course of her speech she resolutely defended the notion that marriage is between a man and a woman.

I believe marriage is not just a bond but a sacred bond between a man and a woman. I have had occasion in my life to defend marriage, to stand up for marriage, to believe in the hard work and challenge of marriage. So I take umbrage at anyone who might suggest that those of us who worry about amending the Constitution are less committed to the sanctity of marriage, or to the fundamental bedrock principle that exists between a man and a woman, going back into the midst of history as one of the foundational institutions of history and humanity and civilization, and that its primary, principal role during those millennia has been the raising and socializing of children for the society into which they become adults.

She later sounded quite conservative in warning about the consequences of what we might call non-traditional family situations.

We could stand on this floor for hours talking about the importance of marriage, the significance of the role of marriage in not only bringing children into the world but enabling them to be successful citizens in the world. How many of us have struggled for years to deal with the consequences of illegitimacy, of out-of-wedlock births, of divorce, of the kinds of anomie and disassociation that too many children experienced because of that.

Mrs. Clinton even defended the rights of the states to define marriage as they see fit.

The States, which have always defined and enforced the laws of marriage, are taking action. Thirty-eight States–maybe it is up to 40 now–already have laws banning same-sex marriage. Voters in at least eight States are considering amendments to their constitutions reserving marriage to unions between a man and a woman. But the sponsors argue that we have to act with a Federal constitutional amendment because the full faith and credit clause of the Constitution will eventually force States, if there are any left, that do not wish to recognize same-sex marriages to do so. That is not the way I read the case law. With all due respect, the way I read the case law is that the full faith and credit clause has never been interpreted to mean that every State must recognize every marriage performed in every other State.”

“Three cheers for the Clintons–of 1993 and 2004! Are there any Democrats or Republicans or college presidents or members of the mainstream media who would dare to say the same things today?”

Read more:

http://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/kevindeyoung/2015/04/24/three-cheers-for-bill-and-hillary-clinton/

God I hope not.

Talk about drinking the koolaid.

Kevin DeYoung is senior pastor of University Reformed Church in East Lansing, Michigan.

Mr. DeYoung, you are taught as a Christian to beware of false prophets.

Did you really believe the Clintons?!!

From Joe the Plumber April 28, 2015.

“Hillary Takes Direct Aim at Changing Christian Beliefs: Media Silent”

“Clinton, the proud recipient of the Margaret Sanger award in 2009, the award from none other than the “mother of eugenics,” now wants to change your “deep seated…religious beliefs” among other aspects of your culture, so that abortions will be available without interference from principles that shouldn’t matter.

“Rights have to exist in practice — not just on paper,” Clinton argued. “Laws have to be backed up with resources and political will.” “And deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs and structural biases have to be changed,” Clinton added.”

“It was perhaps Clinton’s attempt to hammer the final nail into America’s proverbial coffin by lessening Christians’ religious, cultural, and familial beliefs. If achieved, the result will be that God, the Bible and the U.S. Constitution which was founded upon Christian principles, will take a back seat to other progressive agendas, at least in a Clinton presidency.”

“In an answer that Pelosi could be proud of, Clinton answered, “At the risk of appearing predictable, the Bible was and remains the biggest influence on my thinking.” She continued, “I was raised reading it, memorizing passages from it and being guided by it.” Clinton concluded, “I still find it a source of wisdom, comfort and encouragement.””

“I’m not buying it. Let us not forget how Clinton once “evolved” on her views toward gay marriage when she was first against it and then for it.

Undoubtedly, if true to Clinton form, look for her further evolution when it comes to changing Americans’ religious beliefs, family and culture should she be elected president.”

Read more:

http://joeforamerica.com/2015/04/hillary-clintons-speech-2015-womens-summit-beginning-another-evolution-geared-toward-transforming-christian-beliefs/#

From Citizen News April 28, 2015.

“Crossfire: Witness in the Clinton Investigation”

“L. D. Brown has been a witness to almost all of the alleged offenses circling around Bill Clinton in Arkansas: misuse of state funds for sexual liasons, Whitewater, illegal campaign fundraising and bribery, as well as cocaine use and cocaine smuggling. Through his cooperation with prosecutors and congressional investigators, Brown has learned the inside story on Robert Fiske’s and Kenneth Starr’s operations and on congressional hearings. But most of all, L. D. Brown can tell the story of the methods used by the Clinton White House to control potentially damaging witnesses. Most of what is written in this book has been told under the penalty of perjury to investigators for Congress and the Office of Independent Counsel.”

“He announced that the investigation into the death of Vincent Foster could not be properly concluded until someone INTERROGATED Hillary Rodham Clinton about her affair with Vince Foster. “You’ve heard the rumors and the denials, but I’m here to give first person evidence that it was real. I saw it and talked to them both about it. And she’s never even been interviewed!””

“From DC ClothesLine November 22, 2014.

“Arkansas State trooper: Bill and Hillary Clinton are swingers”

“On Nov. 10, 1997, Brown gave a deposition at the DoubleTree Hotel in Little Rock. The text of the deposition, published in full by The Washington Post on March 13, 1998, was released by Paula Jones’s lawyers, as part of their response to the Clinton legal team’s motion for summary judgement.”

“Now that Hillary Clinton, from all indications, has her eyes set on running for president in 2016The National Enquirer undertook a special investigation and succeeded in tracking down a testimony that L.D. Brown had made under oath during a government investigation into the mysterious 1993 suicide of the Clintons’ White House lawyer, Vince Foster. In his testimony, Brown said that Bill and Hillary Clinton are wild “swingers” – a bombshell disclosure 
that can ruin her chances of winning the White House in 2016.

Recall that it was the Enquirer — when other media refused to — that alone pursued and broke the scandalous story of then-Democratic vice-presidential candidate John Edwards’ adultery and “love child” with political groupie Rielle Hunter. (See “John Edwards, a cad to the end“)”

“Bob Hartlein reports for The National Enquirer, Nov. 14, 2014, that in his sworn testimony, Officer L.D. Brown said he had eyewitnessed the wife-swapping of Bill, Hillary, and their respective lovers.

Brown told independent counsel Kenneth Starr that he was guarding then-Arkansas Governor Clinton and his wife at a Little Rock restaurant while they dined in a private dining room with two other couples.

What happened was “a diagonal swap,” bolstered by booze. Officer Brown watched in astonishment as Hillary and Vince kissed and fondled each other, while Vince’s wife looked on. Bill sat just a few feet away, kissing and hugging the wife of the third couple, whom Brown described as a “beautiful, gleaming Kewpie doll with brains.”

When the couples left the restaurant, Brown said Hillary and Foster were “drunk, kissing passionately,” and Foster had “his hand on Hillary’s rear and is just squeezing it all to hell.”

Brown also said both Bill and Hillary had admitted to him that they had an “openmarriage.” Bill referred to the wife-swapping, saying: “We need to be happy, satisfied. Some people are satisfied in different ways!””

http://citizenwells.net/2015/04/28/l-d-brown-witness-in-the-clinton-investigation-bill-and-hillary-clinton-are-wild-swingers-wife-swapping-vince-foster-affair-hillary-lies-on-marriage-not-supported-by-her-actions/

VinceFosterClintons

 

 

 

Hillary Clinton must be stopped, Truth about Clintons, Because of Kenneth W. Starr’s complicity the most corrupt administration in the history of the country continues with no end in sight, Christopher Ruddy July 1, 1999

Hillary Clinton must be stopped, Truth about Clintons, Because of Kenneth W. Starr’s complicity the most corrupt administration in the history of the country continues with no end in sight, Christopher Ruddy July 1, 1999

“If the guilty and unrepentant get off easy, what type of
prosecution is this. It’s not time to blame the Independent
Counsel Law; blame the prosecutor who wouldn’t do his job.
Because of Kenneth W. Starr’s complicity, the most corrupt
administration in the history of the country continues with
no end in sight. God save us all.”…Christopher Ruddy, NewsMax July 1, 1999

“Hillary Clinton likewise displayed an obsession with Foster’s death, for reasons which have never been satisfactorily explained. The obstruction of any and all serious efforts to probe Foster’s death remained the highest priority of Hillary’s Shadow Team for years.”…Joseph Farah, WND, July 15, 2005

Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.”…George Orwell, “1984”

 

 

We will probably never find out the truth about how Vincent Foster died in the first year of the Clinton Administration in 1993.

But we can find and reveal much of the truth about the Clintons.

We can stop Hillary Clinton from taking the White House again.

From WND July 15, 2005.

“For years, major media had painted Starr as a ruthless Republican partisan, a Christian fanatic consumed with moral outrage against the Clintons. Why, then, would Starr tell an influential Democrat operative that he wanted to socialize with the Clintons? And what was he doing chumming around with Democrat operatives in the first place?

The story revealed a side of Starr which mass media had carefully concealed during the five years he served as independent counsel. It gave us a glimpse of the real Ken Starr.”

“Rodriguez blew the whistle on Ken Starr in March 1995. But no one listened.

Starr hired Rodriguez in September 1994 to lead the grand jury investigation of Vincent Foster’s death. A Harvard Law School graduate with a keen interest in civil-rights cases, Rodriguez was, as NewsMax.com founder Christopher Ruddy wrote in “The Strange Death of Vincent Foster,” “a bohemian among law enforcement types – the only federal prosecutor who wore a pony-tail.”

“He had no ideological investment in the matter,” writes British journalist Ambrose Evans-Pritchard in “The Secret Life of Bill Clinton.” “Indeed, when he arrived from California with his ponytail, his earring, and his leather jackets, there were comments among the hard-liners that Kenneth Starr had gone too far in his efforts to recruit Democrats, liberals and ethnic minorities to his team.”

The hard-liners were wrong. Rodriguez turned out to be an unusually honest and courageous public servant. He resigned in protest after less than six months on the job, calling the Foster probe a sham. Major media refused to run his story. His career stopped dead. Rodriguez returned to his old job of assistant U.S. attorney in Sacramento, where he remains to this day.”

“Ken Starr hired Miquel Rodriguez as lead prosecutor for the Vincent Foster investigation in September 1994. Soon after, Rodriguez was told that he was expected to back up the conclusion of the earlier Fiske report – that Foster had committed suicide. Rodriguez refused. He insisted on conducting a real investigation. But the harder he tried, the more resistance he got from Starr’s team.”

“I was told what the result [of the Starr investigation] was going to be from the get-go,” Rodriguez later said in a taped conversation, posted to the Internet. “This is all so much nonsense – I knew the result before the investigation began, that’s why I left. I don’t do investigations to justify a result.”

“On July 15, 1997, Ken Starr reached his inevitable conclusion. He issued a statement saying, “Mr. Foster committed suicide by gunshot in Fort Marcy Park, Va., on July 20, 1993.””

“Hillary Clinton likewise displayed an obsession with Foster’s death, for reasons which have never been satisfactorily explained. The obstruction of any and all serious efforts to probe Foster’s death remained the highest priority of Hillary’s Shadow Team for years.”

Read more:

http://www.wnd.com/2005/07/31315/

As you may know, I have been resurrecting articles by Christopher Ruddy of Newsmax about the Vince Foster death and investigations.

Here is another.

From NewsMax July 1, 1999 via Mail-Archive.com.

Kenneth Starr – The Clintons’ Accomplice

Christopher Ruddy
July 1, 1999
NewsMax.com

The Independent Counsel law lapsed last night at midnight.
And Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr said the law should not
be re-authorized.

Obviously, Starr believes that, because his own investigation
was a waste of tens of millions of dollars, the Independent
Counsel law should be trashed.

The truth is that the Independent Counsel law is a good law.
When corruption has been rooted out in places like France and
Italy, it has usually been the result of an independent
magistrate — their version of our Independent Counsel.

We also know that when Independent Counsels like Donald
Schmalz and Daniel Pearson did their jobs, the Clintons were
in a high state of panic and used every possible means to
stop them. We know that Bill Clinton has been fearful of
another Independent Counsel being assigned to investigate
Chinagate, allegations that he took Chinese campaign cash
and gave away nuclear secrets.

The law should stay. It’s Ken Starr who must go. A weak,
pathetic character, he has more responsibility than any other
man in American history for the woe the Clintons have, and
will wreak, on America.
The Hubbell Deal

Just how pitiful Starr’s “prosecution” has been was
demonstrated this week when Webster Hubbell admitted to
committing a felony by misleading federal investigators,
and a misdemeanor by failing to pay taxes.

Any normal citizen would have been jailed and fined for such
crimes. Not Webster Hubbell. Under Starr’s plea agreement,
Hubbell will be on parole and serve no jail time. He won’t
even pay any fine or restitution.

Worse, Webb Hubbell still doesn’t have to cooperate with
Starr in his investigation of the Clintons. Hubbell
continues to insist, “… I have no knowledge of any
wrongdoing on behalf of the president or Mrs. Clinton.”

Starr’s failure to seek Hubbell’s cooperation — a basic
condition of granting a plea agreement — violates the most
fundamental procedures followed by federal prosecutors.
But flouting procedure is nothing new for Starr.

In December of 1994, when Hubbell admitted to having bilked
his clients at the Rose Law Firm and evading taxes, Starr
purposefully botched the plea agreement by not demanding
Hubbell’s cooperation. Starr’s actions so infuriated Starr’s
own trial attorney, Russell Hardin, that Hardin resigned.

Hardin was incensed that Starr planned on signing a plea
agreement without debriefing Hubbell as to what he knew and
how he would cooperate — a mandatory procedure for any plea
bargain.

This time around, Starr simply made no pretense he would seek
Hubbell’s cooperation.

Just two weeks ago, the New York Times reported that Kenneth
Starr had decided not to seek indictments against Bill and
Hillary Clinton for crimes they had committed related to
Whitewater or related scandals. It’s hard to get indictments
if no one will talk. It’s nearly impossible to get people
to talk, if the prosecutor doesn’t pressure them.

As any honest prosecutor on Starr’s staff will admit, Starr
had long ago decided not to indict the Clintons, or for
that matter, any White House official. Some believe Starr
actually cut a deal with the Clintons soon after coming
aboard.
Pet Worm

Ken Starr is Bill Clinton’s pet worm. Starr has played out a
role in the greatest Mutt and Jeff, Good Cop/Bad Cop routine
ever perpetrated on the American public.

Even good folks, who realize how bad the Clintons are, have
fallen victim to Starr’s charade, taken in by the propaganda
that Starr is the “tough, mean prosecutor” out to get the
President, just like James Carville says.

That’s simply a mirage, cooked up by the White House spin
machine.
What Nolanda Hill Told Me

Is it really possible that Bible-toting Ken Starr — arch
Republican, shirt-sleeve Christian, and Monica prosecutor
— is on the Clintons’ side?

Let me answer by relating this story:

As the long-time lover and business partner of Clinton
confidant Ron Brown, Nolanda Hill had intimate knowledge
of the inner workings of the Clinton White House.

As a result of Congressional complaints, Janet Reno was
forced to appoint an Independent Counsel to investigate
Brown, his business dealings with Nolanda Hill, Brown’s
son Michael, and several other people.

The Independent Counsel in this case was Daniel Pearson from
Miami. Unlike Starr, Pearson and his deputy were no one’s
patsies. Instead of using Starr’s delaying tactics, Pearson
had, within months, built a strong case against Brown,
Brown’s son, and Hill. Nolanda Hill told me they were going
to be indicted.

Then Brown made a desperate bid to save himself. Just weeks
before his death on April 6, 1996 Brown met with Clinton at
the White House and made it clear he was not going to take
the fall for an administration rampant with corruption.
Brown wanted Clinton to handle Pearson the same way the
White House had handled Starr.

Handled Starr?

Hill explained. Starr was appointed Independent Counsel
in August of 1994, after the three-judge panel decided not
to appoint Robert Fiske. The Clinton White House publicly
expressed outrage that Starr, a “partisan” Republican, had
been selected as Independent Counsel.

That’s the way the Clintons wanted the world to see it.

In fact, Hill told me, “when Starr was appointed, they were
opening champagne bottles in the White House, they were
celebrating.” According to Hill, Starr has actually been
on Janet Reno’s short list for the post of Special Counsel
at the time she picked Robert Fiske.

“They would never had put him on the short list if they were
worried about him,” she said.

In his meeting with Clinton, Brown knew that Starr was under
the White House’s thumb. He pleaded with Clinton to do the
same with Pearson by having Reno interfere in Pearson’s
probe, and by ordering Justice Department attorneys on
Pearson’s staff to back off.

Brown also asked Clinton to have the FBI obstruct the Pearson
probe by withholding critical information. Brown, Hill said,
was well aware that FBI agents were not working for Ken Starr
in his Whitewater probe but for Reno and the White House,
giving the Clinton Administration de facto control over
the Starr investigations

According to Hill, Clinton told Brown not to worry.
“I’ll take care of it,” Clinton said.

Just weeks later, Brown’s plane mysteriously crashed into
the side of a mountain in Yugoslavia and the Pearson probe
was closed.
Starr Betrayed the Country

Starr’s inquiry has continued. This August will mark Starr’s
fifth anniversary as Independent Counsel. During his five
years on the job, the public has received more than enough
information to evaluate his performance.

There are dozens of examples of how Starr has betrayed the
American people and his oath as an independent counsel.
To cite a few:

— During the time Starr was investigating the Clintons,
Starr was working for a company wholly owned by China’s
Peoples Liberation Army and notorious arms dealer
Wang Jun.

— Starr hired Mark Tuohey as his Washington deputy. Tuohey
is a liberal Democrat close to the Clinton White House who
even threw a party at his home for Janet Reno. (It came
as no surprise that when Tuohey left Starr’s office, he
joined Vinson & Elkins, the law firm representing the
Rose Law Firm before Starr’s office.)

— Starr trashed a fundamental principle of American
jurisprudence: equality before the law. Starr created
a new and bizarre standard for deciding when to issue
indictments. Under Starr’s new formulation, ordinary
citizens and lower-level officials needed little evidence
of wrongdoing to warrant an indictment. But Starr raised
the bar absurdly high for White House officials. Thus
Starr’s office could indict a banker in Arkansas, but
Hillary Clinton would not be indicted for the exact same
offenses. This is nothing less than a grant of titles
and nobility for government officials, which is expressly
prohibited by the Constitution and a major reason why we
fought the Revolutionary War.

— Miquel Rodriguez, Starr’s lead prosecutor in the case of
Vincent Foster, resigned rather than be part of a
cover-up. Starr’s out-and-out cover-up of Vince Foster’s
death began with his wholehearted acceptance of the report
issued by Robert Fiske. Key witnesses, such as several
Arkansas troopers who said they knew of Foster’s death
hours before the White House did, were never put before
a grand jury.

— Starr’s prosecution of the Lewinsky case was a wild
goose chase. He had no original jurisdiction to
investigate this matter, and only did so at Janet Reno’s
request. Starr waited nearly eight months to sign a
plea agreement with Monica. In essence, she never really
cooperated against the Clintons at all, claiming to this
day that Clinton “never told me to lie; no one offered me
a job …”

Still, some Starr fanatics argue that Starr did pursue the
Lewinsky matter and seek Clinton’s impeachment. I ask:
So what?

When the Lewinsky scandal broke, I accurately illustrated,
in the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, what would happen. Starr
would delay his scathing report on Lewinsky, which would be
so damaging to Clinton that it might even call for his
impeachment.

And Starr’s report was delayed and issued at the end of the
year, pushing the impeachment vote until after the elections
and saving Clinton again. Throughout the Lewinsky matter
it became clear that Starr was creating a diversion for
Clinton’s real crimes; Clinton would never be removed from
office over a sex scandal.

Most egregious of all was Starr’s mishandling of key
Whitewater witnesses David Hale and Jim McDougal. Hale
spent some 18 months in prison and was punished with huge
restitution demands — even though he was the chief
cooperating witness.

McDougal, who also cooperated, was sent to federal prison and
was apparently murdered when prison officials purposefully
withheld life-sustaining medications.

But convicted criminals like Webb Hubbell and former Arkansas
Governor Jim Guy Tucker, who both stubbornly refused to
cooperate, got off easy. Tucker never served one day in
prison.

If the guilty and unrepentant get off easy, what type of
prosecution is this. It’s not time to blame the Independent
Counsel Law; blame the prosecutor who wouldn’t do his job.
Because of Kenneth W. Starr’s complicity, the most corrupt
administration in the history of the country continues with
no end in sight. God save us all.”

http://citizenwells.net/2015/04/19/kenneth-starr-the-clintons-accomplice-newsmax-article-july-1-1999-christopher-ruddy-because-of-kenneth-w-starrs-complicity-the-most-corrupt-administration-in-the-history-of-the-country-conti/

Mr. Ruddy, how do you go from making the last statement to lauding the Clintons and donating to their foundation?

Hillary Clinton Vince Foster murder/suicide coverup, 1993 limited data sources, Mainstream media Rush Limbaugh Sean Hannity, Never smelled right to me, Citizen Wells reopens case, New information to most people

Hillary Clinton Vince Foster murder/suicide coverup, 1993 limited data sources, Mainstream media Rush Limbaugh Sean Hannity, Never smelled right to me, Citizen Wells reopens case, New information to most people

“Don’t believe a word you hear. It was not suicide. It couldn’t have been.”…Assistant Attorney General Webster Hubbell, July 20, 1993

“The only question that remains today is whether or not Hillary Clinton gets away with another cover-up, like she did in the Vince Foster case, and runs for President in 2016, or will she finally be held accountable, and Americans learn the truth about the Benghazi terrorist attack?”…Canada Free Press December 18, 2012

Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.”…George Orwell, “1984”

 

 

From Canada Free Press December 18, 2012.

“It was on July 20, 1993 when Vince Foster, President Bill Clinton’s childhood friend and Hillary Clinton’s closest White House confidante, was found dead of an apparent self-inflicted gunshot wound in the head in Fort Marcy Park, Virginia. Before a preliminary investigation began, Americans were told by White House officials and President Clinton that Vince Foster committed suicide in Fort Marcy Park, nobody saw it coming, and it would remain a “mystery”—the cohesive strategy crafted in Hillary’s White House counsel’s office. Clinton Press Secretary Dee Dee Myers even stated: “the Park Service Police is the only agency that’s investigating [Vince Foster’s death], and that the objective of their search is simply to determine that it was a suicide.”

The fix was in. The objective of the investigation into Vince Foster’s death, the highest ranking government official’s death since President John Kennedy was assassinated, was “simply to determine that it was a suicide [emphasis mine].” The conclusion was predetermined. The cohesive strategy stuck as “truth” and they got away with it. Homicide, foul play, the possibility of blackmail, a potential risk to America’s national security, was never investigated. No need for the Clinton White House to cooperate with investigators or the media. They didn’t. Case closed. Move on….

And now Hillary Clinton and the Obama White House are following the same cover-up playbook in Benghazi.”

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/51811

1993 vs now.

What is the difference?

Even back then I wasn’t trusting reports from the mainstream media. And I was busy working and taking care of the necessities of life.

If I wanted the truth, the facts about a story I looked to Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and a few others.

Why?

First of all, I trust Rush and Hannity.

But something we depend upon heavily now, was barely being used by the public.

InternetGrowth

Sean Hannity did a good job of digging and reporting.

There is now so much more information about Foster’s death on the internet.

I have begun examining it and will provide a series of articles.

The whole mess smelled badly in 1993 and smells worse now.

Of course it is deja vu with Hillary obstructing justice with the Benghazi debacle and email crimes.

I never believed it was suicide and am more than ever convinced that Vince Foster was murdered.

From Citizen News April 15, 2015.

“Vince Foster Murder/Suicide coverup

Part 2

 

From What Really Happened.

“The first witness to find the body insisted that there had been no gun near the body. The memory in Foster’s pager had been erased. Critical evidence began to vanish. Many witnesses were harassed. Others were simply ignored. There were even suggestions that the body had been moved, and a Secret Service memo surfaced which reported that Foster’s body had been found in his car! The official reports were self-contradictory.

“Outside experts not connected the official investigation also had their doubts.

Vincent J. Scalise, a former NYC detective, Fred Santucci, a former forensic photographer for NYC, and Richard Saferstein, former head of the New Jersey State Crime Lab formed a team and did an investigation of the VWF case for the Western Journalism Center of Fair Oaks, Calif. They arrived at several conclusions:

(1) Homicide cannot and should not be ruled out.

(2) The position of the arms and legs of the corpse were drastically inconsistent with suicide.

(3) Neither of VWF’s hand was on the handgrip when it was fired. This is also inconsistent with suicide. The investigators noted that in their 50 years of combined experience they had “never seen a weapon or gun positioned in a suicide’s hand in such an orderly fashion.”

(4) VWF’s body was probably in contact with one or more carpets prior to his death. The team was amazed that the carpet in the trunk of VF’s care had not been studied to see whether he had been carried to the park in the trunk of his own car.

(5) The force of the gun’s discharge probably knocked VF’s glasses flying; however, it is “inconceivable” that they could have traveled 13 feet through foliage to the site where they were found; ergo, the scene probably was tampered with.

(6) The lack of blood and brain tissue at the site suggests VF was carried to the scene. The peculiar tracking pattern of the blood on his right cheek also suggests that he was moved.

Despite numerous official assurances that Vincent Foster really did commit suicide, more and more Americans, over 70% at the last count, no longer believe the official story. TV specials, most notably the one put out by A&E’s “Inside Investigations” with Bill Kurtis, have failed to answer the lingering questions, indeed have engaged in deliberate fraud to try to dismiss the evidence that points to a cover-up.”

Read more

Vincent Scalice, was used as a consultant for a project at PBS.

PBS

Richard Saferstein, is the author of Criminalisitics: An Introduction to Forensic Science.

Patrick Knowlton was the first witness at the Vince Foster crime scene. His testimony contradicts the report of investigator Kenneth Starr. His addendum was included as an appendix to the Starr report.

http://citizenwells.net/2015/04/15/hillary-clinton-vince-foster-murder-suicide-coverup-part-2-patrick-knowlton-addendum-to-kenneth-starr-investigation-knowlton-first-witness-fosters-honda-not-at-park-at-the-time-of-death-contradi/

 

Hillary Clinton Barack Obama proof to run as a Democrat requires being under investigation or enmeshed in criminal activity, Numerous deaths of associates, Cohesive strategy cover up tactics, Tell the big lie of Goebbels and Orwell

Hillary Clinton Barack Obama proof to run as a Democrat requires being under investigation or enmeshed in criminal activity, Numerous deaths of associates, Cohesive strategy cover up tactics, Tell the big lie of Goebbels and Orwell

“Regardless of your religious beliefs and who caused the deaths of people around them, evil surrounds the Clintons and Obamas”…Citizen Wells

“Don’t believe a word you hear. It was not suicide. It couldn’t have been.”…Assistant Attorney General Webster Hubbell, July 20, 1993

“And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed
–if all records told the same tale–then the lie passed into
history and became truth. “Who controls the past,” ran the
Party slogan, “controls the future: who controls the present
controls the past.”…George Orwell, “1984″

 

 

Forget presidential eligibility.

Natural Born Citizen status.

Patriotism.

Adherence to the US Constitution and rule of law.

If you are a Democrat, make sure you are under investigation or enmeshed in criminal activity.

Rod Blagojevich, one of the presumptive presidential candidates in early 2006 was enmeshed in Chicago pay to play corruption. So was Obama, but with the help of the media and Justice Dept. the focus was placed on Blagojevich and Obama took the White House.

Hillary Clinton has been tied to scandal after scandal, but these are not your regular run of the mill controversies. Lots of people died.

If you are paying attention you know that Hillary Clinton was involved in the Benghazi debacle.

You also know that she violated rules and the law in the manner in which she utilized work emails and then illegally deleted them.

From the  House Select Committee on Benghazi March 31, 2015.

“We continue to believe Secretary Clinton’s email arrangement with herself is highly unusual, if not unprecedented. The decision to delete these records during the pendency of a congressional investigation only exacerbates our need to better understand what the Secretary did, when she did it, and why she did it. While she has cited a variety of justifications for this arrangement, many questions and details about the arrangement remain unanswered. These questions relate to:

1. her decision to bypass an official government email account;

2. whether she affirmatively turned over any relevant records during the pendency of the Accountability Review Board investigation or at any time after Congress first began investigating the Benghazi attack until December 2014;

3. her decision to retain those records upon separation from the Department of State;

4. the methodology by which these emails were subsequently searched for evidence of official records; and

5. her decision to delete certain emails.”

http://citizenwells.net/2015/03/31/trey-gowdy-letter-to-hillary-clinton-march-31-2015-house-select-committee-on-benghazi-appear-before-committee-for-transcribed-interview-clinton-attorney-david-kendall-deleted-emails/

From Citizen News April 15, 2015.

“Vince Foster Murder/Suicide coverup

Part 1

Dick Morris role in Clinton Administration.

From National Review March 3, 2015.

After the 1994 Republican congressional victory, Hillary’s subterfuges grew more bizarre. When the Clintons brought in Dick Morris as a kind of shadow chief of staff, Hillary managed the move. Fearing a rebellion by staffers, Hillary instructed Morris to visit the White House only at night. No records of his activities were to be kept. If it became necessary to phone during the day, Morris was to identify himself as “Charlie.” Hillary moved to cover Morris’s tracks when staffers got suspicious. The result was the virtual existence of two White Houses – and more deep administrative confusion.

Read more

From “Rewriting History”, by Dick Morris, published in 2004.

“While I was working for the Clintons, I had firsthand experience with the tactics they used to distract, delay, and derail the work of special prosecutor Kenneth Starr.”

From Canada Free Press December 18, 2012.

“What you witnessed from the Obama-Clinton regime is called “cohesive strategy.” We have seen that cover-up tactic before. It was successfully used by the Clinton White House during the investigations of the Clinton era as documented inThe Whistleblower: How the Clinton White Stayed in Power to Reemerge in the Obama White House and on the World Stage. Additionally, it notably appears in my latest book, Following Orders: The Death of Vince Foster, Clinton White House Lawyer.Cohesive strategy is a smoke and mirrors public relations trick where the White House tells Americans and investigators what they want them to know as opposed to what really happened, and how their scripted version becomes the so-called truth, the ‘talking points,’ the narrative picked up by the media.

It was on July 20, 1993 when Vince Foster, President Bill Clinton’s childhood friend and Hillary Clinton’s closest White House confidante, was found dead of an apparent self-inflicted gunshot wound in the head in Fort Marcy Park, Virginia. Before a preliminary investigation began, Americans were told by White House officials and President Clinton that Vince Foster committed suicide in Fort Marcy Park, nobody saw it coming, and it would remain a “mystery”—the cohesive strategy crafted in Hillary’s White House counsel’s office. Clinton Press Secretary Dee Dee Myers even stated: “the Park Service Police is the only agency that’s investigating [Vince Foster’s death], and that the objective of their search is simply to determine that it was a suicide.”

The fix was in. The objective of the investigation into Vince Foster’s death, the highest ranking government official’s death since President John Kennedy was assassinated, was “simply to determine that it was a suicide [emphasis mine].” The conclusion was predetermined. The cohesive strategy stuck as “truth” and they got away with it. Homicide, foul play, the possibility of blackmail, a potential risk to America’s national security, was never investigated. No need for the Clinton White House to cooperate with investigators or the media. They didn’t. Case closed. Move on….

And now Hillary Clinton and the Obama White House are following the same cover-up playbook in Benghazi.

As any seasoned investigator or investigative journalist will confirm, evidence gathering at the time of the incident is critical to finding out the truth. Anything less can lead investigators to an incorrect, rationalized, and skewed conclusion that covers-up the truth.”

“During the Foster death investigations, like Benghazi, investigators were also thwarted, stonewalled, and unable to perform their jobs. Hillary denied them “unfettered” access to Foster’s office, and some evidence was contaminated or outright withheld (despite being subpoenaed). The initial investigation was at best—shoddy.

From Following Orders: The Death of Vince Foster, Clinton White House Lawyer,source: Kenneth W. Starr, Independent Counsel, Report on the Death of Vincent W. Foster, October 10, 1997, p. 14, Lee Report at 485.

“A perfect reconstruction [of Vince Foster’s death]…. was not possible…. The reasons include the lack of complete documentation of the original shooting scene; the lack of subsequent records and photographs of each item of physical evidence prior to examinations; the lack of documentation of the amount of blood, tissue, and bone fragments in the areas at the scene under and around Foster’s head; the lack of close-up photographs of any definite patterns and quantity of the blood stains on Foster’s clothing and body at the scene; and the unknown location of the fatal bullet, which makes complete reconstruction of the bullet trajectory difficult.”

Therefore the investigators had no choice but to draw a conclusion in the Foster case based on the “available evidence.” “Available evidence” does not always mean an accurate conclusion.”

Read more

“cohesive strategy.”

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.”…Joseph Goebbels

“And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed
–if all records told the same tale–then the lie passed into
history and became truth. “Who controls the past,” ran the
Party slogan, “controls the future: who controls the present
controls the past.”…George Orwell, “1984″

 

Chicago Tribune Why is Blago’s appeal dragging on and on?, Citizen Wells answer all about protecting Obama, Why was Blagojevich prosecution and adjudication delayed over years?, More pristine on Rezko

Chicago Tribune Why is Blago’s appeal dragging on and on?, Citizen Wells answer all about protecting Obama, Why was Blagojevich prosecution and adjudication delayed over years?, More pristine on Rezko

“An unusual court delay is keeping Rod Blagojevich’s appeal “out of sight, out of mind.””…Chicago Tribune April 10, 2015

“I believe I’m more pristine on Rezko than him.”…Rod Blagojevich

“Regardless of how this plays out, it benefits Obama. If there is no appeal or the appeal is denied, Blagojevich will be sequestered. If the appeal proceeds, it could drag out beyond impacting the 2012 election cycle. The intent is obvious.”…Citizen Wells, July 19, 2011

 

 

The Chicago Tribune asks:  Why is Blago’s appeal dragging on and on?

A much bigger and more important question is: Why was the Blagojevich prosecution and adjudication delayed over years?

Especially since his administration came under investigation by the feds at least by late 2003.

The answer is: It is all about protecting Obama.

Recently the National Enquirer reported:

“He’s constantly muttering to himself about Obama and blames the president for him being in prison and is sure he will be released within the year,”

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/celebrity/world-exclusive-blago-behind-bars-going-bonkers

From the Chicago Tribune April 10, 2015.

“Commentary: Why is Blago’s appeal dragging on and on?”

“It’s been three years since former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich started his 14-year prison sentence for political corruption, including trying to sell Barack Obama’s soon to be vacated U.S. Senate seat. If his appeal is unsuccessful, the earliest he could get out of prison would be around Christmas 2024.

But wait. He appealed his conviction before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit in Chicago on July 15, 2013. So, he still has a chance his conviction will be overturned and he’ll be released, resentenced or the appellate court may order a new trial on all the charges. There still is a glimmer of hope for the disgraced governor.

This appeal, however, is unique in the annals of appellate jurisprudence. The case was argued before a three-judge panel in December 2013. Normally, a decision is handed down within three to six months after oral argument before the court. In a very rare situation, the decision may not be rendered until nine months after the case was argued.

However, it’s been more than 15 months since the case was argued before the court and “taken under advisement,” more than double the normal time for deciding an appeal.
This extraordinary delay has generated extensive speculation by legal scholars and practitioners as to what is going on in the court’s deliberation over the appeal. Some say the court is really struggling with the central issue of so-called “honest services,” the fuzzy legal distinction between traditional political horse-trading and flat-out corrupt bribery. Others maintain the court is just being particularly careful in light of the national significance of the case. Still others suggest that a lengthy written majority opinion is likely, with an equally lengthy dissenting opinion, both of which likely require drafts and redrafts in an attempt to “get it right.”

Whatever the explanation, this appeal is proving to be out of the ordinary.”

Read more:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/commentary/ct-rod-blagojevich-prison-appeal-corruption-perspec-0413-jm-20150410-story.html

 

 

 

 

Blagojevich appeal status March 24, 2015, Sentence shortened or Obama pardon?, Obama cronies Rezko and Blagojevich know corruption details, Will Rod Blagojevich rat on Obama?

Blagojevich appeal status March 24, 2015, Sentence shortened or Obama pardon?, Obama cronies Rezko and Blagojevich know corruption details, Will Rod Blagojevich rat on Obama?

Why did Patrick Fitzgerald and the US Justice Department wait until December 2008 to arrest Rod Blagojevich?”…Citizen Wells

“I believe I’m more pristine on Rezko than him.”…Rod Blagojevich

“Regardless of how this plays out, it benefits Obama. If there is no appeal or the appeal is denied, Blagojevich will be sequestered. If the appeal proceeds, it could drag out beyond impacting the 2012 election cycle. The intent is obvious.”…Citizen Wells, July 19, 2011

 

 

You don’t suppose…

Two Obama cronies are languishing in prison.

Tony Rezko and Rod Blagojevich.

Tony Rezko has indicated that he would not rat out his buddy Obama.

Rod Blagojevich, in the approx. 3 percent of wiretaps released, inadvertently ratted out Obama.

You don’t suppose that Rezko, of Syrian birth, made a deal with Obama related to Syria?

I do suppose that Obama and Blagojevich have a deal. It probably involves others including former prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald.

Despite the lies told by Fitzgerald about the rapid arrest of Blagojevich, the prosecution and legal process of his trials and appeals has dragged out forever.

Remember, the feds knew about and began investigating the Blagojevich Administration by at least late 2003.

I stated some time ago that I believe that Blagojevich’s sentence would likely be reduced, that is, if Obama doesn’t pardon him first.

From Citizen Wells January 1, 2014.

“So far no one has ratted on Obama.

Tony Rezko said that he wouldn’t.

Some never had the chance.

Orlando Jones
Donald Young
Quarles Harris Jr.
Christopher Kelly
Bill Gwatney
Andrew Breitbart
Loretta Fuddy

I believe that Rod Blagojevich made a deal with Obama. Probably beginning in 2006.

I believe that Blagojevich, who was deeper under investigation than Obama, agreed to take the heat for a reduced or pardoned sentence.

ObamaBlagoNov2008

A lot of interesting things can happen in 2014.

We will know the results of the Blagojevich appeal ruling within a few weeks.

I believe that he will get a sentence reduction or a new trial.

This will determine what Obama does next. And of course Obama not being impeached or arrested will too.

If Obama does not lose senate control in 2014, I believe that he will pardon Blagojevich.

Of course the AL Supreme Court may rule that Obama is ineligible.

The Sheriff Joe Arpaio investigation may convince enough congressmen to investigate Obama.

Dead men don’t talk or do they?

There are plenty still alive who may talk. Even Tony Rezko.

The economy has been propped up by smoke and mirrors. That can only work so long.

Despite the best efforts of the media to talk of an economic recovery the economy on your street, not Wall St. has been heavily impacted.

Millions are unemployed, working part time, receiving food stamps and now being charged more for their healthcare insurance.

The media and Obama camp are trying to prop up the economy through the 2014 elections. They have to win.

By their own admission Obama could be impeached otherwise.

My hope for 2014 is that Obama is arrested and removed from office.

Survival of our nation depends on it.

http://citizenwells.com/2014/01/01/2014-obama-blagojevich-rezko-economy-collapse-arpaio-investigation-of-obama-fraud-al-supreme-court-ruling-fuddy-death-wall-st-vs-your-street-democrats-need-to-win-2014-elections-may-get-trumped/