Author Archives: citizenwells

David P. Schippers key to downfall of Hillary Clinton, From exposing rapegate to improper immigrant processing, Hillary “evil incarnate”, “White House used the INS to further its political agenda”, Schippers Democrat voted for Bill twice

David P. Schippers key to downfall of Hillary Clinton, From exposing rapegate to improper immigrant processing, Hillary “evil incarnate”, “White House used the INS to further its political agenda”, Schippers Democrat voted for Bill twice

“My staff and I agreed that we needed to focus on the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), which appeared to be running out of control. By the time we came to the subject, investigations by the General Accounting Office (GAO) and congressional committees had already indicated that the White House used the INS to further its political agenda. A blatant politicization of the agency took place during the 1996 presidential campaign when the White House pressured the INS into expediting its “Citizenship USA” (CUSA) program to grant citizenship to thousands of aliens that the White House counted as likely Democratic voters. To ensure maximum impact, the INS concentrated on aliens in key states — California, Florida, Illinois, New York, New Jersey, and Texas — that hold a combined 181 electoral votes, just 89 short of the total needed to win the election.”…David Schippers, “Sellout”

On Hillary Clinton: “evil incarnate.”…David Schippers

“The devil’s in that woman.”…Miss Emma, Clinton’s cook, governor’s mansion

 

 

The more I drill down into the role of David Schippers, former Chief Counsel for the House Judiciary Committee during the Bill Clinton Impeachment investigation, the more I am convinced that his findings and statements about the Clintons will be the downfall of Hillary in her attempt to take the White House.

David P. Schippers is a good man, a lifelong Democrat who voted for Bill Clinton twice. No right wing conspirator, who criticizes members of both parties.

From the Washington Post April 1, 1998.

“When David P. Schippers took his 10 children to the nation’s capital in 1976, he made sure they made it to the Jefferson Memorial. The founding father remains a hero of his, because he entered the political arena out of a sense of duty.

“He’s a man who never wanted to be in politics,” Schippers said yesterday. “He felt he owed it to the country to get involved in politics.”

At 68, Schippers is entering the nation’s political fray for the first time as the House Judiciary Committee’s chief investigator. The post itself is controversial: Democrats suspect that Schippers’s hire, which Judiciary Committee Chairman Henry J. Hyde (R-Ill.) announced late last week, marks the opening salvo in an impeachment crusade. Republicans say the Chicago lawyer will oversee the review of the Justice Department in connection with the agency’s first authorization in nearly two decades, but acknowledge privately that Schippers could also analyze any documents forwarded by independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr.

Like Jefferson, Schippers insists he is coming to the Hill reluctantly.

“I don’t seek this, I didn’t seek this, and it’s something that has to be done,” he said in his first interview since he was appointed.”

“The Cook County Democrat, who once ran, unsuccessfully, for Illinois Supreme Court, might seem like an unusual pick for Hyde, a Republican. They became friends when the two of them served on a panel investigating judicial corruption in Illinois. Schippers has no Hill or constitutional-law expertise, and established his reputation in the mid-1960s as chief of the Justice Department’s task force examining organized crime in Chicago.

That prosecutor/investigator experience apparently was key for Schippers, who will receive a $130,000 salary. “We’re all concerned about what papers are dropped on us by the independent counsel,” explained one GOP source. “He knows what’s relevant.”

A Chicago native, Schippers took on foes like alleged mob boss Sam Giancana after wading through a deluge of FBI forms. After assigning investigators to each respective vice, the strike force amassed a wealth of knowledge about the mob. “It was only after we had collected all this information, without knowing it, we were building a pyramid which got to the top,” he said, adding he always focused on “what is evidence — you don’t indict unless you’re willing to go to trial the next day.”

U.S. Court of Appeals Judge William Bauer, who has witnessed Schippers’s work from both the trial and the appellate bench, said his effectiveness as an advocate stems from his ability to determine what matters most. “He knows the wheat from the chaff,” Bauer said.

That kind of discretion could apply equally well to both Schippers’s immediate task — conducting a thorough review of an agency employing more than 100,000 people — and any potential referral from Starr.

No matter what his task, Schippers vowed, he can remain above political pressures. His other role model besides Jefferson is his grandfather, an Irishman who made a fortune in the sewer business until he turned down a monopoly on government contracts in exchange for a kickback to the political establishment. He lost his business and ended up working at a paint store.

“He died of lead poisoning,” he said. “But he wouldn’t give in.””

Read more:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/schippers040198.htm

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

Clinton immigration abuse, Blatant politicization of INS during 1996 presidential campaign, White House pressured INS into expediting its “Citizenship USA” (CUSA) program, Grant citizenship to thousands of aliens counted as likely Democratic voters, David Schippers Bill Clinton impeachment investigation

Clinton immigration abuse, Blatant politicization of INS during 1996 presidential campaign, White House pressured INS into expediting its “Citizenship USA” (CUSA) program, Grant citizenship to thousands of aliens counted as likely Democratic voters, David Schippers Bill Clinton impeachment investigation

“I am, you know, adamantly against illegal immigration.”…Hillary Clinton, WABC 2003

On Hillary Clinton: “evil incarnate.”…David Schippers

“The devil’s in that woman.”…Miss Emma, Clinton’s cook, governor’s mansion

 

 

Most Americans know little about The President Bill Clinton Impeachment.

Most Americans, if they know anything, believe that Clinton was impeached for fooling around with Monica Lewinsky in the White House.

Wrong!

Clinton was being investigated for a variety of indiscretions.

And this was no right wing conspiracy.

From Citizen Wells August 25, 2016.

“David Philip Schippers served as chief counsel to the United States House of Representatives managers for the impeachment trial of President Bill Clinton in the U.S. Senate from Jan. 1 through Feb. 28, 1999.”

“From 1963 to 1967, Schippers served as a member and later the chief of the Organized Crime and Racketeering Section of the U.S. Department of Justice at Chicago.”

“Unlike his counterpart, Abbe Lowell, who is serving as the chief investigative counsel for the Democrats, Schippers is no Washington insider. He also isn’t a screaming partisan. Indeed, though a lifelong Democrat, he was hired in the spring by a Republican, Rep. Henry Hyde of Chicago, the panel’s chairman. The two men have been friends for 30 years. Hyde asked him to review Justice Department operations but to be ready to shift gears if Starr sent an impeachment report.”

David Schippers exposed criminal activity of Bill and Hillary Clinton, No right wing conspiracy, Schippers life long Democrat, Chief investigative counsel for the US House of Representatives’ Committee on the Judiciary, Former chief of Organized Crime and Racketeering Section of US Dept. of Justice

From David Schippers book, “Sellout: The Inside Story of President Clinton’s Impeachment”.

“My staff and I agreed that we needed to focus on the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), which appeared to be running out of control. By the time we came to the subject, investigations by the General Accounting Office (GAO) and congressional committees had already indicated that the White House used the INS to further its political agenda. A blatant politicization of the agency took place during the 1996 presidential campaign when the White House pressured the INS into expediting its “Citizenship USA” (CUSA) program to grant citizenship to thousands of aliens that the White House counted as likely Democratic voters. To ensure maximum impact, the INS concentrated on aliens in key states — California, Florida, Illinois, New York, New Jersey, and Texas — that hold a combined 181 electoral votes, just 89 short of the total needed to win the election.

The program was placed under the direction of Vice President Al Gore. We received from the GAO a few e-mails indicating Vice President Gore’s role in the plan (which are included in Appendix A at the back of the book). He was responsible for keeping the pressure on, to make sure the aliens were pushed through by September 1, the last day to register for the presidential election.

In our investigation we uncovered a case study evidencing what is pejoratively known in political science circles as “Chicago Politics.”

Back in the early years of the twentieth century, “Hinky Dink” Kenna and “Bathouse” John Coughlin were recognized as the very models of the unsavory Chicago politician. The two once fixed an aldermanic election in Chicago’s First Ward. To do so, they imported thousands of ward heelers, friends, associates, and city workers and had them registered to vote from every building in the ward — from homes (of which there were few) to taverns and cribs (of which there were many). On Election Day the recent arrivals stopped at Hinky Dink’s tavern, picked up fifty cents, ate a free lunch, and went out to vote their consciences. Guess who won that election?

Essentially, the same tactics were used during President Clinton’s reelection in 1996. Only this time the Democrats weren’t handing out sandwiches. Instead, through CUSA, they were circumventing normal procedures for naturalizing aliens — procedures that check backgrounds and weed out criminals — and consequently they were handing out citizenship papers to questionable characters.”

“The White House wanted any applicant for citizenship to be naturalized in time to register for the November election, so the pressure on the INS was constant. On March 21 Elaine Kamarck in the Vice President’s office sent an e-mail to Farbrother saying: “THE PRESIDENT IS SICK OF THIS AND WANTS ACTION. IF NOTHING MOVES TODAY WE’LL HAVE TO TAKE SOME PRETTY DRASTIC MEASURES.” Farbrother responded, “I favor drastic measures.” If he couldn’t get what he wanted from the INS, he wrote, he would “call for heavy artillery.””

“Federal regulations require that, for an alien to obtain citizenship, his application for naturalization (citizenship) must be accompanied by a complete set of the alien’s fingerprints. The fingerprint cards are then sent to the FBI to determine if the applicant has a criminal or arrest record. The law provides that an application may be denied if the alien has a serious criminal record or if he falsely denies ever having been arrested, even if he was never convicted.

In the INS district offices, the alien applicant for naturalization cannot be scheduled for a personal interview until at least 60 days after the application is submitted. This delay is specifically intended to allow sufficient time for an FBI fingerprint check. If the check reveals an arrest record identification, the arrest report is inserted in the alien’s file prior to the interview. An arrest record does not automatically result in a denial of citizenship, but it alerts an examiner to spend additional time questioning the applicant and to request that he furnish further information.

If there is no criminal arrest record in the file prior to the interview, the examiner will assume that none exists. For that reason, the INS has always considered the FBI fingerprint check to be the only practical way of preventing violent felons, dope peddlers, and the like from obtaining citizenship. Any breakdown in the collecting, checking, and reporting of the fingerprints can cause a breakdown of the entire process.

In our investigation we developed sources inside the INS with specific knowledge of the facts who revealed that FBI arrest records that were being sent to the Chicago INS office simply were not being inserted into the aliens’ files. As a result, aliens with criminal records were being granted citizenship.

Our sources also disclosed that, just prior to the 1996 voter registration deadline, a box was discovered in the Chicago INS office containing nearly five thousand FBI arrest reports — reports that had arrived in time but had been ignored.

Later, when the office discovered that those reports had never been processed, the INS initially tried to blame the FBI, claiming that the Bureau had not provided the arrest records within the 60-day window. But the FBI had done its job in a timely manner. Then the INS tried to convince the public that the foul-up really hadn’t harmed the process much. The agency cited statistics showing that the rejection rate of 17 percent was just about what it had always been, so no harm, no foul. But the INS neglected to take into account the thousands of aliens with criminal arrest records who were not rejected, even though they would have been under the normal procedures. If the traditional process had been followed, the rejection rate in the summer of 1996 would have easily exceeded 30 percent and perhaps have been even higher.

The White House, the INS, and the Justice Department publicly denied any political motive in the CUSA program to expedite the citizenship procedure. What the United States got is undeniable:
More than 75,000 new citizens who had arrest records when they applied;

An additional 115,000 citizens whose fingerprints were unclassifiable for various technical reasons and were never resubmitted; and

Another 61,000 people who were given citizenship with no fingerprints submitted at all.
Those numbers were developed by the accounting firm of KPMG Peat Marwick as a result of an audit of the 1996 CUSA program.

What we had here was a perfect example of the Clinton-Gore administration’s overarching political philosophy: “The ends justify the means,” coupled with “win at any cost.” It was a philosophy of governance that, as our investigations into other areas proceeded, we would find repeated again and again.

When the results of the KPMG Peat Marwick audit were made public, the INS and Justice vowed to remedy the situation, root out the felons, and revoke erroneously awarded citizenship. Everyone congratulated the administration for acting so quickly — and then promptly forgot about it.”

“We received no cooperation from either the Justice Department or the INS. Instead we received nothing but complaints about not going through the proper channels, investigating old news, being partisan — if not racist — and so on. But we reasoned that if criminals were given citizenship in 1996, at least some of them had probably continued their criminal activity in the two years since. We asked the GAO — an investigative agency that works for Congress and is therefore not subject to White House or Justice Department pressures — to give us FBI arrest records related to the CUSA program. We were given unquestioned cooperation and boxes of FBI reports.

We reviewed every document in those boxes, pulling out about a hundred of the most violent or serious crimes committed by aliens prior to naturalization and documented by arrest records. I specifically excluded minor immigration crimes, tax offenses, or white-collar crimes such as driving under the influence. I asked the staff to search for drug trafficking and violent crimes such as rape and child abuse. Those are the types of crimes that are most often repeated. A child abuser tends to abuse again, and a rapist tends to rape again.

After a few days — and going through only a few of the 20 or so boxes — we had our basic 100 heinous crimes, including one criminal who was actually in jail at the time he was naturalized.

We asked the FBI if it had arrest records for crimes committed by the same aliens in this country since 1996 and sent them our one hundred profiles.

Less than a week later, the FBI sent the updated arrest records to the Justice Department. (Per an agreement between the FBI and the Justice Department, all materials requested from the Bureau must go through Justice.) But when we inquired about them, the department claimed that it hadn’t yet received the records. An hour later, however, Justice called back to say that the “misplaced” reports had been located.

Of those 100 arrest records updated by the Bureau, some 20 percent showed arrests for serious crimes after the subject was given citizenship. Based on these random results, we asked for updates on every arrest record in our 20 boxes. Our plan was to update every report, using only FBI numbers and with the FBI redacting all identifying information to address the issue of privacy concerns. If, as we anticipated, anywhere near 20 percent came back with subsequent crimes, we would then confront the Justice Department, demand the identity and address of these known criminals, and point out that they had been given citizenship illegally and were still engaged in criminal activity. Unfortunately, before we could go further, the referral from Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr arrived. Had we been given sufficient time to develop evidence and witnesses, the CUSA matter might have been included in the abuse of power impeachment article.

The 1996 arrest records are still available, and I am sure the FBI is still willing to update all of them. In the meantime, thousands of criminals are now citizens of the United States because it was assumed they would vote for Bill Clinton and Al Gore.”

Read more:

http://cis.org/BookReview-InsideStoryClintonImpeachment

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

 

David Schippers exposed criminal activity of Bill and Hillary Clinton, No right wing conspiracy, Schippers life long Democrat, Chief investigative counsel for the US House of Representatives’ Committee on the Judiciary, Former chief of Organized Crime and Racketeering Section of US Dept. of Justice

David Schippers exposed criminal activity of Bill and Hillary Clinton, No right wing conspiracy, Schippers life long Democrat, Chief investigative counsel for the US House of Representatives’ Committee on the Judiciary, Former chief of Organized Crime and Racketeering Section of US Dept. of Justice

“Schippers confirms a sickening new detail about Clinton’s attack on Broaddrick, making it clear for the first time why several congressmen were nauseated – and one left in tears – after reviewing secret evidence that remains hidden from the American people to this day.”…NewsMax August 22, 2000

“My staff and I agreed that we needed to focus on the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), which appeared to be running out of control. By the time we came to the subject, investigations by the General Accounting Office (GAO) and congressional committees had already indicated that the White House used the INS to further its political agenda. A blatant politicization of the agency took place during the 1996 presidential campaign when the White House pressured the INS into expediting its “Citizenship USA” (CUSA) program to grant citizenship to thousands of aliens that the White House counted as likely Democratic voters. To ensure maximum impact, the INS concentrated on aliens in key states — California, Florida, Illinois, New York, New Jersey, and Texas — that hold a combined 181 electoral votes, just 89 short of the total needed to win the election.”…David Schippers

“The amount of criminality I discovered, astounded me.”…David Schippers

 

 

Before I present any more information about the criminal and devious activity of Hillary Clinton before, during and after her tenure at the White House, I want to make one thing perfectly clear.

In what I am about to present soon, there is no “right wing conspiracy” involved or any new psycho babble term that Hillary’s unsecured email buddy Sydney Blumenthal might come up with.

David Schippers was chief investigative counsel for the United States House of Representatives’ Committee on the Judiciary and was charged with reviewing and reporting on the Referral of the Office of Independent Counsel concerning possible impeachment offenses committed by President Clinton.

David Schippers’ background.

From Ashland University.

“David Philip Schippers served as chief counsel to the United States House of Representatives managers for the impeachment trial of President Bill Clinton in the U.S. Senate from Jan. 1 through Feb. 28, 1999.

Schippers served as chief investigative counsel for the United States House of Representatives’ Committee on the Judiciary during 1998. From April to September he handled the investigative issues and investigations relating to the committee’s oversight investigation of the U.S. Department of Justice and all of its sub-agencies. From September to December 1998, he was charged with reviewing and reporting on the Referral of the Office of Independent Counsel concerning possible impeachment offenses committed by President Clinton. He was then responsible for conducting the impeachment inquiry authorized by the House of Representatives and reporting the results to the Committee on the Judiciary.

An attorney in private practice since 1967, Schippers is the senior partner in the Chicago law firm of Schippers & Bailey. The firm specializes in trust law, labor law, trials and appeals in the state and federal courts of Illinois and throughout the country.

From 1963 to 1967, Schippers served as a member and later the chief of the Organized Crime and Racketeering Section of the U.S. Department of Justice at Chicago. He prepared and tried many major criminal cases in the federal courts and was also involved in a great number of major grand jury investigations. He previously served in the U.S. Attorney’s Office as an assistant United States attorney, trying major criminal cases on behalf of the government and preparing and arguing appeals on behalf of the government.

Schippers earned both his undergraduate and J.D. degree from Loyola University in Chicago. He has served as a teacher of trial advocacy and advanced trial advocacy to senior law students at the Loyola University School of Law. He has also taught trial advocacy at the Williamette University School of Law in Salem, Oregon, and at the United States Air Force Air University in Montgomery, Alabama.

Schippers served as one of five members of the Illinois State Police Merit Board from 1987 to 1993. He is the recipient of the Loyola University Law Alumni Medal of Excellence, the Loyola University Alumni Association citation for distinguished service to the legal profession and the Award of Appreciation from the Federal Criminal Investigators Association.”

David Schippers

From USA Today.

 

“Unlike his counterpart, Abbe Lowell, who is serving as the chief investigative counsel for the Democrats, Schippers is no Washington insider. He also isn’t a screaming partisan. Indeed, though a lifelong Democrat, he was hired in the spring by a Republican, Rep. Henry Hyde of Chicago, the panel’s chairman. The two men have been friends for 30 years. Hyde asked him to review Justice Department operations but to be ready to shift gears if Starr sent an impeachment report.

Now 68, with his salt-and-pepper beard and stocky build, Schippers looks more like the grandfather he is than the hard-charging lawyer who has jailed mobsters, befriended cops and defended some highly unpopular clients. Friends say his easygoing manner masks a toughness and a focus that will enable him to make the right calls in the House inquiry. “Dave is not an SOB,” says James “Bags” Bailey, his partner in a small Chicago law firm. “He will try to be fair with everybody, and if Dave doesn’t think he can really prove his case, I don’t think it will go.” Bailey adds: “He is best on his feet, and he loves to do legal research and write.” “He will call it straight. I’ve never seen him equivocate,” adds Dennis Czurylo, a longtime friend and former criminal investigator for the Internal Revenue Service.

Another friend, Anton Valukas, a former U.S. attorney in Chicago, says Schippers will approach his task in a workmanlike manner. The Judiciary Committee can “count on Schippers to seek out the facts and present them in a fair and nonpartisan manner,” he says. What does Schippers have to say about the president’s conduct and whether it’s impeachable? Not much, at least at this early stage.

A devout Irish Catholic with 10 children and 25 grandchildren, Schippers grew up on Chicago’s northwest side. Family members worked in the Democratic Party. He took a job with the telephone company, worked his way through night school and got a law degree from Chicago’s Loyola University.

Prosecuting was Schippers’ love. He joined the Justice Department in the early 1960s, when Robert Kennedy was attorney general. Kennedy tapped him to head the organized crime strike force in Chicago. It was a heady time. The “Outfit,” as Schippers likes to call the mob, was making headlines every day. Schippers went head-to-head with the infamous crime boss, Sam “Momo” Giancana, and ended up outfoxing the old mobster. He employed what was then an unusual tactic, obtaining court-authorized blanket immunity from prosecution for Giancana. That meant the mobster had to testify before a grand jury. He refused, and a judge jailed him for a year.”

Read more:

http://laborers.org/USA_Schippers.html

 

 

 

Rosemary Jenks testimony before the Immigration and Claims Subcommittee US House of Representatives April 30, 1997, Clinton Gore Citizenship USA CUSA program granted citizenship to likely Democrat voters, 71557 FBI criminal records, Why was this scrubbed on December 9, 2004?

Rosemary Jenks testimony before the Immigration and Claims Subcommittee US House of Representatives April 30, 1997, Clinton Gore Citizenship USA CUSA program granted citizenship to likely Democrat voters, 71557 FBI criminal records, Why was this scrubbed on December 9, 2004?

“In October 1996, in one of the first public accounts of this matter, former Center Senior Fellow Rosemary Jenks testified before the Senate Subcommittee on Immigration about many of the abuses surrounding the Citizenship USA program. Ms. Jenks concluded that due to pressure from the White House, and in particular the Vice President’s office, the Immigration and Naturalization Service disregarded many of the requirements of the naturalization process that ensure that only qualified immigrants with no significant criminal history may become citizens. She subsequently testified before the House immigration subcommittee on the same matter, in April 1997. Her remarks before that committee may be found at http://www.house.gov/judiciary/666.htm.”…David Schippers October 2000

“Why did the US House of Representatives website scrub the April 30, 1997 testimony of Rosemary Jenks on December 9, 2004?”…Citizen Wells

“I am, you know, adamantly against illegal immigration.”…Hillary Clinton, WABC 2003

Statement of

Rosemary Jenks,

Senior Fellow,

Center for Immigration Studies,

Washington, DC

Before the

Immigration and Claims Subcommittee

of the

Committee on the Judiciary

of the

United States House of Representatives

April 30, 1997

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, I am Rosemary Jenks, a Senior Fellow at the Center for Immigration Studies, a non-profit, non-advocacy research institution. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you to discuss an issue that is central to our national identity, the bond that holds us united as one people: United States citizenship. United States citizenship is the most valuable and the most cherished privilege our nation can bestow upon an individual. It is a privilege that is sought by millions around the world. It carries with it the right to travel freely, to hold certain public offices and to petition for the immigration of family members. Most importantly, however, it carries with it the right, and the responsibility, to take part in shaping and securing the future of this country by voting for elected officials at all levels of government.

The requirements for naturalization are set out in the Immigration and Nationality Act. Among other things, applicants are required to submit an application form, the N-400, a copy of their alien registration card, the “green card,” fingerprints, photographs and a fee of $95 to the INS. In general, they must prove that they are at least 18 years of age; that they have resided in the United States as lawful permanent residents for a minimum of five years (unless they marry a U.S. citizen, in which case it is three years); that they are able to read, write, speak and understand English; that they have at least a minimal knowledge of U.S. history and government; that they are of good moral character; and that they do not have a serious criminal record. Upon receiving the N-400 and the accompanying paper work, INS enters the information into an INS database and forwards the fingerprints to the FBI for a criminal record check. As of November 29, 1996, INS policy is to wait for a definitive response from the FBI regarding the criminal record check before scheduling an interview with the applicant. During the interview, INS examiners (or District Adjudications Officers, DAOs) review the information on the N-400 and test the applicant’s knowledge of English, history and civics, unless he or she presents a certificate from one of the non-government testing entities. If all the requirements are met, the application is approved and the applicant is scheduled for a swearing in ceremony. Otherwise, the application is either denied or continued, depending on the nature of the problem.

Citizenship USA

At the start of FY 1994, when Commissioner Meissner took office, some 270,000 N-400 applications were pending (not including any that had been received, but not been entered into the computer). The number of N-400 applications received in FY 1994 (543,353) surpassed FY 1993 receipts (521,866) by only 21,487. At the beginning of FY 1995, however, the backlog of applications had grown to more than 314,000 and INS expected a surge in new applications because of a combination of factors, including the 2.7 million beneficiaries of the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) amnesty becoming eligible based on the five-years residence requirement, the passage of Proposition 187 in California in November 1994, and legislative proposals to bar noncitizens from certain means-tested welfare benefits.

To prepare for this expected surge, an INS working group conducted a survey in June 1994 of ways to streamline the naturalization process. Then, in April of 1995, Commissioner Meissner contracted a management consulting firm, PRC, to work with INS staff to overhaul the naturalization process. PRC and the INS staff conducted a four-week review of the process and produced a “radical redesign” of naturalization. The final report, issued in May 1995, is called Results in 30 Days: Re-Engineering the Naturalization Process. Among other things, it recommends that INS develop strong partnerships with “Service Providers”–community-based organizations (CBOs) and voluntary agencies (VOLAGS)–which would involve “total sharing of information, joint decision making, and aggressive coloration aimed at best meeting the needs of the applicant.” It recommends the introduction of high-tech, fully automated and integrated systems to facilitate data entry and criminal background checks, in addition to automatically triggering “pre-qualified ‘invitations’ to immigrants as they become legally eligible for citizenship.” It adds that “long-standing interpretations of eligibility laws and regulations will be reviewed to…[focus] upon meeting the demands of today’s eligible customers.” Finally, it concludes that processing time from submission “to approval will be reduced to ‘same day service’ for 80% of the applicants.”

In June, 1995, Commissioner Meissner submitted a request that the naturalization program be designated as a “Reinvention Lab” under the auspices of Vice President Gore’s National Performance Review (NPR). Her request letter and subsequent INS documentation make clear that the PRC report was to provide the basis for the “re-engineering” of the naturalization process.

In the meantime, N-400 applications were on the rise and examiners were being overwhelmed. District Offices lacked the equipment they needed to process N-400s efficiently. Many offices did not have access to the Naturalization Automated Case System (NACS) database, and those that did were experiencing problems with it.

Commissioner Meissner unveiled the “Citizenship USA” (CUSA) initiative on August 31, 1995. The stated objective of CUSA, at least initially, was “to become current” on N-400 applications, meaning that applications would be processed from start to citizenship within six months, by the end of FY 1996. INS designated five “CUSA cities,” including Los Angeles, San Francisco, New York, Miami and Chicago, which had the largest numbers of pending cases when the program started. Resources, including personnel, equipment and building space, were to be funneled into these five cities, which would serve as the “Reinvention Labs.”

The naturalization initiative was approved as an NPR Reinvention Lab on September 5, 1995. On September 11, Commissioner Meissner forwarded to all field offices the executive summary of the PRC report with a memo explaining its origin and asking for comments. She wrote that “wherever possible, we will use validated re-engineering techniques as outlined in the PRC report to attack the caseload.” She added that the report offers “a basic road map for change.”

In January 1996, INS implemented a “Direct Mail” initiative in all the CUSA cities except San Francisco. Under this system, N-400s are mailed directly to one of the four INS Service Centers (Vermont Service Center (VSC), Nebraska Service Center (NSC), Texas Service Center (TSC) and California Service Center (CSC)) instead of being submitted to District Offices. The Service Centers are supposed to enter the application data into NACS and pull the fingerprint cards and submit them daily to the FBI.

The implementation of the Direct Mail initiative resulted in almost immediate chaos. Neither Service Center staff nor District Offices fully understood the new procedures. INS offices around the country were being overwhelmed by the increase in N-400 applications–the largest group of aliens amnestied in 1986 had met the five-year residence requirement by December 1995. CUSA offices, in addition to being inundated with backlogged and new cases, were attempting to adopt the new “re-engineered” and streamlined adjudication process, thus compounding the confusion. Non-CUSA offices had been forced to detail some portion of their resources, mainly personnel, to the CUSA offices, so they, too, were falling behind. The number of N-400 applications pending on October 1, 1995 surpassed 800,000, and new applications were being received in record numbers.

On May 1, 1996, INS Associate Commissioner for Examinations Louis Crocetti announced in a memo to all field offices that the “new ideas and innovative procedures” that were tested at CUSA sites with “remarkable results,” were to be expanded Servicewide to all offices. As the nationwide expansion of these “Streamlining Initiatives” was predicated on the “remarkable results” of the pilots in the CUSA cities, a brief look at those results is warranted.

Adjudication Speed–The five CUSA cities managed to accelerate naturalization processing times from more than one year in many cases to six months. This allowed the INS to meet its goal of adjudicating more than one million naturalization applications in FY 1996, but only at great cost to the integrity of the system.

FBI Fingerprint Checks–A February 1994 report from the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) of the Justice Department identified three major problems with the INS policy on fingerprint checks: 1) the INS had no way to verify that the fingerprints submitted by an applicant actually belonged to that applicant since the INS was no longer taking the fingerprints itself; 2) some applications were wrongly approved because the FBI had not completed the criminal history check before the interview was scheduled or because the FBI “hit” had not been properly filed; and 3) INS often did not resubmit new fingerprint cards when the FBI rejected the original set as illegible. OIG found that 5.4 percent of aliens submitting applications for benefits had an arrest record. The top reasons for arrest were immigration violations/deportation proceedings (32%), assault/battery/rape (19%), theft/robbery/burglary (18%) and drug possession/distribution (10%). A December 1994 General Accounting Office (GAO) report identified the same problems with the INS fingerprint policy.

The “streamlined” naturalization process did not address any of these problems, but instead, exacerbated them. The INS still had no way to verify that the fingerprints an applicant submitted actually belonged to the applicant. In May 1995, the INS published a proposed rule to require that all applicants have their fingerprints taken by an INS-certified “designated fingerprint service” (DFS). Personnel at these DFSs would be properly trained to take fingerprints and fill out the necessary paperwork, and they would be required to ask for identification showing that the person named on the fingerprint card was the same person being fingerprinted. The final rule, however, was not published until June 1996, and final implementation was delayed from November 1, 1996 to March 1, 1997 to insure that INS had certified an adequate number of DFSs.

Fingerprint cards were supposed to be mailed by the Service Centers to the FBI on a daily basis to insure that the FBI had adequate time to run the criminal history check. In March 1996, however, the FBI did a sampling of receipts from 20 INS offices. Over 60 percent of the fingerprint cards received from Los Angeles had been at the Los Angeles office for more than 30 days before they were submitted. For the New York City office, 90 percent had been at the office for more than 30 days. At the same time the INS was dramatically increasing the workload of the FBI, it was, in practice, cutting the FBI’s response time.

The preliminary results of the INS internal review of naturalization applications approved during CUSA, as presented to the Subcommittee by Assistant Attorney General for Administration Stephen Colgate clearly show that the problems were severe. Of the 1,049,872 immigrants granted U.S. citizenship under CUSA:

71, 557 were found to have FBI criminal records, including INS administrative actions (e.g., deportation proceedings or other immigration violations), and misdemeanor and felony arrests and convictions;

Of these 71,557, 10,800 had at least one felony arrest, 25,500 had at least one misdemeanor arrest, but no felonies, and 34,700 had only administrative actions initiated against them;

113,126 had only name checks because their fingerprint cards were returned to the INS by the FBI because they were illegible;

66,398 did not have FBI criminal record checks because their fingerprint cards were never submitted to the FBI by the INS; and

2,573 were still being processed by the FBI.

As of late February 1997, 168 of these new citizens had been found to be “presumptively, statutorily ineligible” for naturalization based on their criminal record, and in another 2,800 cases, it could not be determined based on available information whether they were eligible or not.

It is important to note that none of the numbers given above indicates the degree to which applicants for naturalization lied on their applications, thereby committing perjury, which should make them ineligible for naturalization. They also do not indicate the number of applicants who may have submitted someone else’s fingerprints to avoid having their criminal record revealed. Finally, for the 180,000 applicants whose fingerprints were illegible or never submitted, the INS has no way to go back and check because it is not legally allowed to require citizens to resubmit their fingerprints. Thus, unless these new citizens volunteer to have their fingerprints taken, we will never know if they were actually eligible or not.

Personnel–Temporary workers comprised most of the additional personnel for CUSA. Some 900 temporary adjudicators and clerical workers were hired by INS to accomplish the goal of naturalizing over a million people in FY 1996. As of June 1996, the Inspector General was investigating the training standards for these temporary workers, along with those workers who were detailed from other agencies or offices. In August 1996, the INS conducted an evaluation of the CUSA training program and found two major deficiencies in the program: 1) personnel were poorly trained in doing the computer checks that, among other things, tell whether an applicant is in deportation proceedings or has had other administration actions taken against him or her; and 2) training in the procedures to deny an application were inadequate at best.

These results point to a larger problem that has since been confirmed by INS employees and by the recent KPMG Peat Marwick review of the implementation of the November 29, 1996 naturalization policy changes. A training program that teaches personnel good customer relations, but not how to do computer checks or deny applications sends an implicit message that it is more important to keep the applicant happy and approve the application than it is to maintain the integrity of the process and demand compliance with the regulations. This is precisely the message that many INS adjudicators received, not only from their training, but also from their supervisors. A number of INS employees testified, under oath, last fall that adjudicators feel pressured by their supervisors to “approve, approve, approve;” that good moral character standards are being ignored; that representatives of Community Based Organizations (CBOs) complain to supervisors about adjudicators who continue or deny applications, and that sometimes those adjudicators are removed from their duties; that adjudicators who go on outreach interviews have to provide copies of their tally sheets (showing approvals, denials and continueds) to the CBO representatives; that adjudicators have been told by their supervisors that they are not IRS agents and so shouldn’t concern themselves with possible tax fraud, even though it is inconsistent with the good moral character requirement.

Volunteer workers were also utilized by many INS offices. These volunteers included members of CBOs, family members of INS employees, and, in at least one case, legal permanent residents. These volunteers performed clerical duties, including filing, mailed naturalization certificates, and collected Alien Registration Cards and distributed naturalization certificates at citizenship ceremonies, among other things. According to INS employees, this practice continued even after INS Headquarters Counsel notified Regional Directors that it is a violation of Federal law for a government agency to use volunteers to perform duties that are normally performed by agency personnel, as it constitutes an unauthorized augmentation of the agency appropriation.

Testing Fraud

In addition to internal INS problems with the naturalization process, there is well-documented evidence of widespread fraud in the testing of naturalization applicants by outside (i.e., non-government) testing entities (OTEs). In 1991, the INS established criteria under which OTEs, including for-profit businesses, could be authorized to administer standardized tests to determine a naturalization applicant’s ability to read and write in English, along with his or her knowledge of history and civics. The INS criteria do not require that administrators of the tests be U.S. citizens or have criminal history checks in order to be approved.

The tests are comprised mainly of multiple choice questions, but applicants also have to write two simple sentences that are dictated to them. Five OTEs currently are authorized to administer these tests: Educational Testing Service (ETS), Comprehensive Adult Student Assessment System (CASAS), Southeast College, Marich Associates and American College Testing (ACT). (There was a sixth OTE, Naturalization Assistance Services (NAS), until earlier this year when its authorization was terminated after repeated instances of fraud.) These OTEs in turn may license community based organizations (CBOs) and other affiliates to administer the tests on their behalf. However, neither INS, nor the individual OTEs, are able to monitor all the affiliates to ensure that requirements relating to the security of the tests or the integrity of the testing are met.

Reports of testing fraud at affiliates of the OTEs, which first surfaced in 1992, began to increase dramatically in late 1994. INS examiners came across increasing numbers of naturalization applicants who, despite having an OTE test certificate, were unable to communicate in or understand English. Some affiliates were charging as much as $850 to prepare and test immigrants. Examples of documented fraud during the administration of the tests include test proctors pointing to the correct answers on the answer sheet, tests being given in the applicants’ native language instead of English, and the sentences being written on a blackboard so applicants simply have to copy them. Some affiliates guaranteed that, as long as applicants could sign their names in English, they would pass the test. Affiliates were using print media–often ethnic newspapers–radio and television ads to advertise their services. Some ads included false promises and/or blatant lies, but there were no regulations governing the ads’ contents.

In April 1996, INS Headquarters sent instructions to the field offices on procedures to follow to report and initiate investigations of complaints of testing fraud. In May 1996, after it was notified of an investigation into testing fraud by the television show “20/20,” INS Headquarters sent a memo to field offices with guidelines on conducting unannounced on-site inspections of testing sites. The guidelines required each District Office to visit one site per quarter.

During the past couple of months, I have been contacted by the directors of two separate testing affiliates operating in separate regions of the country. Both told me that fraud in the outside testing entities continues, with unauthorized groups administering tests and issuing counterfeit certificates, applicants cheating on the tests, tests being given in the applicants’ native language, and in one case, the director of an authorized affiliate simply filling out the answer forms for the applicants. They also told me about designated fingerprint services (DFSs) selling clean fingerprints to applicants, accepting inadequate identification, such as letters from family members or friends attesting to the person’s identity, and accepting blatantly false identification.

Like the criteria for OTEs, those for DFSs do not require that the person taking the fingerprints be a U.S. citizen or have a criminal record check done. While many of the DFSs are police departments, others raise questions about the judgement of the INS in the selection process. Some of the more interesting DFSs are: Harbor Liquors in Baltimore; Biscayne Haircutters in Miami; and Express Courier Service in Passaic, NJ. Hermandad Mexicana Nacional in Ontario, CA and Pookies Post and Parcel in Pasadena, CA had applications pending at the end of February 1997.

INS Responds

The National Security, International Affairs and Criminal Justice Subcommittee of the House Government Reform and Oversight Committee held the first hearing on the Citizenship USA program on September 24, 1996, after it had subpoenaed and sorted through thousands of pages of INS documents, memos and e-mails detailing most of the problems described herein. Despite the evidence, CUSA Project Director David Rosenberg testified at that hearing that, as a result of CUSA, the INS had “successfully reduced processing times for citizenship applications nationwide to traditional levels while maintaining the integrity of the citizenship process. We have initiated major improvements to naturalization procedures and operations.”

The Senate Immigration Subcommittee held a hearing on naturalization practices on October 9, 1996, in which the former Executive Associate Commissioner for Programs, Alexander Aleinikoff, testified that, as a result of CUSA, the INS had “reduced processing times for citizenship applications nationwide to traditional levels while maintaining the integrity of the citizenship process, and [had] initiated major improvements to naturalization procedures and operations.”

On October 18, 1996, in an official INS response to Senator Alan Simpson regarding testimony I presented at the October 9 Senate hearing, Commissioner Meissner wrote that, under CUSA, the INS had “made numerous improvements to the [naturalization] process, and [had] addressed this workload with efficiency and integrity.”

Sometime between late October and late November 1996, INS officials realized that the problems with the naturalization process could no longer be ignored. On November 29, 1996, Commissioner Meissner sent a memo to the field offices detailing new “Naturalization Quality Procedures.” The memo outlined seven “key enhancements” to the naturalization process, including: 1) standardization of work process; 2) fingerprint check integrity; 3) enhanced supervisory review; 4) instructions regarding the use of temporary files; 5) implementation of a quality assurance program; 6) guidance regarding revocation procedures; and 7) requirements for increased monitoring of OTEs. The new procedures were effective upon receipt.

In a joint hearing before this Subcommittee and the National Security Subcommittee on March 5, 1997, Commissioner Meissner testified that the new procedures “have eliminated the possibility of naturalization cases being completed without verification of an FBI fingerprint check.” She concluded by saying, “It is very important that Congress and the American people understand the validity of these corrections we have made to the naturalization process….We made mistakes in Citizenship USA…We have corrected those mistakes and have put into place a series of new measures to prevent them in the future.”

The recently-released KPMG Peat Marwick review of the implementation of these new measures brings into question the ability, and the willingness, of INS management to seriously address the problems with the naturalization procedures. The fact that three of the 23 offices surveyed did not even have the correct copy of the new procedures clearly points to a severe lack of communication between INS Headquarters and field offices. It is interesting to note here that, once a draft of the review was given to the INS, Commissioner Meissner called all the District Directors to Washington for a briefing and sent 200 naturalization personnel to a training course. Perhaps if those actions had been taken when the new policies were first implemented, the review would have found better results. Such actions also may have helped to communicate the sense of urgency the reviewers found lacking at the field level.

Despite the fact that field offices had been issued guidelines on monitoring outside testing entities in May 1996, as well as the “enhanced” monitoring procedures in the November 29 memo, the KPMG Peat Marwick review team was “frequently informed that INS Headquarters [not the field offices] was responsible for monitoring all outside testing agencies.”

That three of the service processing centers, along with three field offices, had the wrong FBI address is patently absurd. Most worrisome is the report’s conclusion that “the INS continues to have the most significant control problems with the fingerprint process and the identification of statutorily-barred applicants.”

Recommendations for Improvement

Congress and the American people were assured repeatedly by the INS over the last year that there were no major problems with the naturalization process under Citizenship USA. Then, we were assured that, if there were any problems, they had been fixed. Now, we know that these assurances were unfounded. The Justice Department is correct that the process needs a major overhaul from top to bottom. However, we must be somewhat cautious in our expectations of the re-engineering of the process by Coopers and Lybrand; after all, previous re-engineering efforts got us where we are today.

It is important to recognize that many of the problems with the naturalization process have existed for many years. It is equally important to recognize that any attempt to speed up the adjudication of applications without first addressing the underlying problems will only exacerbate them, as happened under the Citizenship USA program.

The INS was well aware at least as far back as 1993 that naturalization applications would rise dramatically in 1995 simply because the 2.7 million amnestied aliens would become eligible. And yet, all of a sudden in 1995, there was a frantic rush to hire new employees and accelerate an outdated system that had already reached its limits. Had the millions of dollars now being spent on re-engineering, reviewing and auditing the naturalization process been invested in computer equipment, electronic fingerprint scanners and personnel training, we likely would not be having this discussion.

The Coopers and Lybrand review of the process is expected to take 18 months to two years to complete. The naturalization process cannot wait that long. The INS expects 1.8 million new applications this year, and they must not be adjudicated under the conditions described in the KPMG Peat Marwick review. There are a number of areas that need immediate improvement:

In order to process these applications, the INS desperately needs an updated and integrated computer system, just as any business needs to process orders. Scanners, which now have accuracy rates of 90 percent or better, could be used to minimize the data entry workload. Eventually, the INS needs to integrate some of its numerous data bases to facilitate status checks and ensure that immigrants being deported by one branch of the INS are not naturalized by another. Paper files must become a thing of the past. One of the biggest problems throughout the INS is its inability to locate paper files on a timely basis.

The INS also needs to prioritize its electronic fingerprint pilot program. Police departments around the country use electronic fingerprint scanners to identify criminals in a matter of minutes, rather than waiting anywhere from two to six months as the INS does. Electronic scanners could reduce naturalization processing time to a matter of days.

Most importantly, the INS needs to train its personnel adequately. Each adjudicator must know how to use the computer system to check an applicant’s status, to ensure the applicant is not in deportation proceedings, and to update the applicant’s file. Adjudicators must be trained not only in customer relations, but also in the procedures used to deny an application. They should have a clear understanding of what they should be looking for during the interview. Standardized interview guidelines would be helpful. Finally, every adjudicator must understand that the integrity of the naturalization process is always more important than expediency. INS Headquarters should strongly discourage supervisors from rating employees based on the number of applications they process, instead of the way in which they process the applications. A short delay in the process is a much smaller problem for the INS than the granting of citizenship to a child molester.

Crimes that constitute a lack of good moral character, including perjury, should be standardized, rather than being left to the discretion of individual adjudicators.

Both Congress and the INS must recognize that the INS will always have less control over the integrity of those parts of the process that it farms out to other organizations, such as testing and fingerprinting.

– If the INS is going to continue to use OTEs for language, history and civics testing, it must require: 1) that all administrators of the tests be U.S. citizens and undergo criminal background checks; 2) that the OTEs register all testers and insist that they wear photo identification badges while administering tests; and 3) proof from the OTEs that every affiliate has passed at least one undercover inspection each year.

– If the INS is going to continue to use DFSs to take fingerprints, it should certify only law enforcement agencies. INS adjudicators can use the interview to check an applicants knowledge of English, but there is no secondary check if an applicant submits someone else’s fingerprints to avoid having a criminal record uncovered. This is too integral a part of the naturalization process to leave it to those who may have a vested interest, financial or otherwise, in allowing fraud.

I will be happy to answer any questions you may have.”

https://www.scribd.com/document/322152630/Rosemary-Jenks-testimony-before-the-Immigration-and-Claims-Subcommittee-of-the-Committee-on-the-Judiciary-of-the-U-S-House-of-Representatives-April-3

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/wp-admin/

 

 

Hillary Clinton, “The devil’s in that woman”, Part 2, Hillary role in Vince Foster death, FBI agents claim Hillary ‘triggered’ suicide of President Bill Clinton’s counsel Vince Foster when she attacked and humiliated him in front of White House staff one week before his death

Hillary Clinton, “The devil’s in that woman”, Part 2, Hillary role in Vince Foster death, FBI agents claim Hillary ‘triggered’ suicide of President Bill Clinton’s counsel Vince Foster when she attacked and humiliated him in front of White House staff one week before his death

“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

“I think that it was Hillary all the way. I think that she’s the mean-spirited one. She’s the ideologue, she’s the flaming left-wing socialist liberal. She’s a bad person with a criminal mind.”…Jerry Falwell

“The devil’s in that woman.”…Miss Emma, Clinton’s cook, governor’s mansion

 

 

Yesterday we learned that FBI files linking Hillary Clinton to the ‘suicide’ of White House counsel Vince Foster have vanished from the National Archives.

From the Daily Mail August 23, 2016.

“EXCLUSIVE: Missing: FBI files linking Hillary Clinton to the ‘suicide’ of White House counsel Vince Foster have vanished from the National Archives
Documents describing Hillary Clinton’s role in the death of White House counsel Vince Foster have vanished, Daily Mail Online has learned after an extensive investigation”

“FBI agents’ reports of interviews documenting that Hillary Clinton’s stinging humiliation of her friend and mentor Vince Foster in front of White House aides triggered his suicide a week later are missing from where they should be filed at the National Archives, Daily Mail Online has learned exclusively.

On two separate occasions, this author visited the National Archives and Records Service in College Park, Md., to review the reports generated by FBI agents assigned to investigate the 1993 death of Bill Clinton’s deputy White House counsel.

The FBI found that a week before Vince Foster’s suicide, Hillary held a meeting at the White House with Foster and other top aides during which she berated the lawyer

On the first visit, archivist David Paynter provided the box of records that he said contained the FBI reports of interviews conducted by FBI agents on Foster’s death.

On a second visit, archivist James Mathis provided what he said were those same documents.

While the box contained dozens of FBI reports concerning Foster’s death – including interviews with the medical examiner, U.S. Park Police officers, and White House aides about the contents of Foster’s office –  the reports on Hillary Clinton’s role in his death were absent.

After filing a Freedom of Information request with the National Archives, Martha Murphy, the archives’ public liaison, reported that she directed a senior archivist to conduct a more thorough review of the relevant FBI files, including those that had not been previously made public in response to FOIA requests.

‘He examined all eight boxes but found no interviews by any investigator that detail either a meeting between Hillary Clinton and Vince Foster or the effects of a meeting between Hillary Clinton and Vince Foster on Vince Foster’s state of mind,’ Murphy reported in an email.

‘We did not limit ourselves to interviews by the two individuals [FBI agents] you mention.’

While Murphy said the archives searched for ‘the records that would be responsive to your request’ and concluded that they could not be found, when asked for comment, John Valceanu, the archives’ director of communications and marketing, said, ‘We do not agree with your conclusion that the records you requested are missing from the National Archives simply because we were unable to locate any responsive records in response to your request.’

While confirming that the records could not be located, Valceanu held out the possibility that the FBI interviews were not filed where they should have been and were somewhere else in the more than 3,000 boxes of records amounting to 7.5 million pages generated by the Starr investigation.

This is not the first time documents related to the Clintons have apparently vanished from the National Archive.”

Read more:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3753013/Missing-FBI-files-linking-Hillary-Clinton-suicide-White-House-counsel-Vince-Foster-vanished-National-Archives.html#ixzz4ICd3gdRI

From the Daily Mail June 3,  2016.

“EXCLUSIVE: Hillary ‘triggered’ suicide of President Bill Clinton’s counsel Vince Foster when she attacked and humiliated him in front of White House staff one week before his death, FBI agents claim”

“In interviewing Clinton White House aides and Foster’s friends and family, the FBI found that a week before Foster’s death, Hillary held a meeting at the White House with Foster and other top aides to discuss her proposed health care legislation.

Hillary violently disagreed with a legal objection Foster raised at the meeting and ridiculed him in front of his peers, former FBI agent Coy Copeland and former FBI supervisory agent Jim Clemente told me.

Copeland was Starr’s senior investigator and read the reports of other agents working for Starr.

During the White House meeting, Hillary continued to humiliate Foster mercilessly, both former FBI agents say.

‘Hillary put him down really, really bad in a pretty good-size meeting,’ Copeland says. ‘She told him he didn’t get the picture, and he would always be a little hick town lawyer who was obviously not ready for the big time.’

Indeed, Hillary went so far as to blame Foster for all the Clintons’ problems and accuse him of failing them, according to Clemente, who was also assigned by the FBI to the Starr investigation and who probed the circumstances surrounding Foster’s suicide.

‘Foster was profoundly depressed, but Hillary lambasting him was the final straw because she publicly embarrassed him in front of others,’ says Clemente, speaking about the investigation for the first time.

‘Hillary blamed him for failed nominations, claimed he had not vetted them properly, and said in front of his White House colleagues, “You’re not protecting us” and “You have failed us,” Clemente says. ‘That was the final blow.’

After the meeting, Foster’s behavior changed dramatically, the FBI agents found. Those who knew him said his voice sounded strained, he became withdrawn and preoccupied, and his sense of humor vanished. At times, Foster teared up.

He talked of feeling trapped. On Tuesday, July 13, 1993, while having dinner with his wife Lisa, Foster broke down and began to cry. He said he was considering resigning. That weekend, Foster and his wife drove to the Eastern Shore of Maryland, where they saw their friends, Michael Cardoza and Webster Hubbell, and their wives.

‘They played tennis, they swam, and they said he sat in a lawn chair, just kind of sat there in the lawn chair,’ Copeland says. ‘They said that just was not Vince. He loved to play tennis, and he was always sociable, but he just sat over in the corner by himself and stared off into space, reading a book.

Two days later, Foster left the White House parking lot at 1.10 p.m. The precise time when he shot himself could not be pinpointed. After Park Police found his body, they notified the U.S. Secret Service at 8.30 p.m.

Based on what ‘dozens’ of others who had contact with Foster after that meeting told the agents, while Foster was already depressed, ‘the put-down that she gave him in that big meeting just pushed him over the edge,’ Copeland says. ‘It was the final straw that broke the camel’s back.’

No one can explain a suicide in rational terms. But the FBI investigation concluded that it was Hillary’s vilification of Foster in front of other White House aides, coming on top of his depression, that triggered his suicide about a week later, Copeland and Clemente both say.”

Read more:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3620742/Hillary-triggered-suicide-President-Bill-Clinton-s-counsel-Vince-Foster-attacked-humiliated-White-House-staff-one-week-death-FBI-agents-claim.html

Here is more information on Hillary Clinton and Vince Foster from older sources.

From NewsMax November 17, 1998 via Citizen News.

— Hubbell’s relationship with the Clintons goes back to the 1970s. In fact, Webster Hubbell’s father-in-law, Seth Ward (another mystery figure in the Whitewater saga) was one of the members of the Little Rock Airport Commission that hired Hillary as its lawyer in 1978 after dumping another attorney.

— In 1983, Hubbell, Hillary, and her purported lover Vince Foster joined in an investment scheme that named each other (rather than their spouses) as beneficiaries, according to Clinton biographer Roger Morris.

— In the mid-1980s Hubbell helped to draft the legislation that allowed the later notorious Arkansas Development Finance Authority to take over most of the best state bond business. The bonds, involving hundreds of millions of dollars, were personally approved by Clinton and his cronies with the details handled by the brokerage firm of subsequently jailed drug distributor and Roger Clinton drug debt underwriter Dan Lasater. AFDA became a political piggy bank for Clinton’s friends or, as we say these days, his golf buddies.

— According to Morris, Hubbell, Hillary, and Foster “staged a veritable coup to wrest control of the Rose Law firm in 1988.”

Hillary Clinton Webster Hubbell criminal ties, Newsmax “Hubbell knows where the bodies are buried”, November 17, 1998, Hillary and Hubbell Rose Law Firm, Webster Hubbell convictions and collaborations with Hillary

From Citizen News.

“L. D. Brown started his career in law enforcement as a guard at the notorious Tucker prison in Arkansas. In the Arkansas State Police he was assigned to the security detail of then-Governor Bill Clinton. Brown developed a close friendship with Clinton that would last for years. Clinton helped Brown gain admission to the Central Intelligence Agency where he witnessed cocaine smuggling that led to his breakup with Clinton. After leaving the C.I.A. and the Arkansas State Police, Brown earned a Ph.D. degree and now operates a consulting firm in Little Rock, Arkansas. A father of four and married in his fourteenth year to wife Becky, Brown is a fellow of the American Political Science Association and a member of the British Political Science Association.”

“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!””

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

From NewsMax December 16, 1998 via Citizen News.

“With his Dec. 14 deposition of key White House witness Linda Tripp, Judicial Watch Chairman Larry Klayman obtained the most important testimony to date about the collection of over 1000 confidential FBI files by White House aides D. Craig Livingstone and Anthony Marceca in 1993 and 1994.

Tripp’s bombshell revelations included an account of Livingstone’s firsthand admission that he was brought to the White House at the First Lady’s direction. “He told me Mrs. Clinton hired him,” Tripp recalled, dating Livingstone’s comment to “shortly after my arrival in the counsel’s office.” Tripp was a Bush administration holdover who worked in the Clinton White House from its onset.

Tripp’s sworn testimony also implicated Mrs. Clinton in potential Filegate illegality. The Judicial Watch witness recounted a conversation between Associate White House Counsel William Kennedy and Clinton damage controller Marsha Scott, where Scott briefed Kennedy on plans to upload information from the illegally obtained FBI files into the White House computer database. By Tripp’s account, the Scott-Kennedy conversation revealed that Mrs. Clinton herself inititated the plan.
In his November depositon to Judicial Watch, Kennedy admitted that he kept stacks of FBI files piled on his White House office desk. In a Tuesday interview with FOX News’ Hannity & Colmes, Judicial Watch Chairman Klayman said that Tripp told him one of the FBI files she saw in Kennedy’s office was labeled “Clinger”. Pennsylvania Rep. William Clinger chaired the House Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, which conducted extensive hearings into both the Filegate and Travelgate scandals in 1995 and 1996.

In 1994, Clinger also conducted his own independent review of Deputy White House Counsel Vincent Foster’s death. Though neither Klayman nor Tripp noted the date when Tripp saw the Clinger file on Kennedy’s desk, the chronology of Tripp and Kennedy’s White House work history suggests that it was the Foster matter, and not later investigations into the other two scandals, which would have prompted White House interest in William Clinger’s FBI file.

According to Klayman, White House Counsel Office secretary Betsy Pond confirmed to Tripp that the files she saw came from the FBI.

During her deposition, Tripp also recalled a visit to Vincent Foster’s office shortly after a gathering there, which included key Travelgate figures Harry Thomason, David Watkins, and Catherine Cornelius. Tripp said Mrs. Clinton’s chief of staff, Maggie Williams, was also present. In a memo written months after the Travelgate erupted, Watkins noted that if he and Foster had failed to implement Mrs. Clinton’s order to fire the Travel Office staff, there would be “hell to pay.””

Linda Tripp Blows Lid Off Filegate Cover-Up Tells of Lewinsky’s “Death List” Warning, NewsMax December 16, 1998, Deposition of key White House witness Linda Tripp, Sworn testimony implicated Mrs. Clinton in potential Filegate illegality, Trip saw FBI files at White House

From NewsMax November 4, 1999 via Citizen News.

“A new documentary film on the Waco massacre ties late Deputy White House Counsel Vince Foster, former Associate Attorney General Webster Hubbell and first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton to the April 19, 1993, conflagration that took the lives of more than 50 adults and two dozen children.”

“It’s long been known that Hubbell was the Justice Department’s point man on Waco. But the roles played by Foster and Mrs. Clinton have been overlooked until now.

For evidence of a Foster connection, McNulty sources Dennis Sculimbrene, a retired FBI agent formerly assigned to conduct background checks at the Clinton White House.

His partner, former FBI agent Gary Aldrich, left the bureau in 1996 after it sought to delay the publication of Aldrich’s bombshell White House tell-all Unlimited Access.

Both Aldrich and Sculimbrene worked closely with the White House counsel’s office and dealt with Foster frequently.

In the film, Sculimbrene says on camera:

“[Foster] had a lot of things on his plate, the firing of the travel office being one of them. But nobody was killed in that. What I really think was on his mind was Waco. To this day, I don’t understand what he meant by ‘the FBI lied.’”

Three months after Waco, Foster was found shot to death in a Virginia park. Investigators have ruled his death a suicide.

In a note officials say Foster wrote 10 days earlier, the fomer Rose firm lawyer complained, “The FBI lied to the AG [attorney general].” Though handwriting experts disagree on the authenticity of that note, those who believe Foster wrote it suggest it shows that he suspected Attorney General Janet Reno had been tricked into approving the deadly Waco raid.

FBI lab whistleblower Fredric Whitehurst, narrator ofWaco: A New Revelation, explains:

“In this FBI-302 report, Mrs. Foster indicates that her husband was troubled by the deaths of the children at Waco and believed that everything was his fault.””

““One of the interesting things that happens in an investigation is that you get anonymous phone calls. And we in fact received anonymous phone calls from Justice Department managers and attorneys who believe that pressure was placed on Janet Reno by Webb Hubbell, and pressure that came from the first lady of the United States.”

At a post-screening press conference, Bell explained that phone logs suggest Hillary, Foster and Hubbell worked on Waco together:

“Those phone logs were Webb Hubbell’s phone logs. There were calls from the first lady and Vince Foster to Webb Hubbell’s office” during the Waco crisis.

Bell said Mrs. Clinton grew more and more impatient as the Waco standoff came to dominate the headlines during the early months of the Clinton administration. It was she, Bell’s source claims, who pressured a reluctant Janet Reno to act.

As zero hour approached, Reno is said to have begged one top aide, “Give me a reason not to do this.””

New documentary links First Lady and Foster to Waco, Hillary Clinton pressured reluctant Janet Reno to act, Phone logs suggest Hillary Foster and Hubbell worked on Waco together, Newsmax November 4, 1999

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

FBI files linking Hillary Clinton to the ‘suicide’ of Vince Foster have vanished from the National Archives, Documents describing Hillary Clinton’s role in the death of White House counsel Vince Foster, First Lady ridiculed him mercilessly in front of his peers

FBI files linking Hillary Clinton to the ‘suicide’ of Vince Foster have vanished from the National Archives, Documents describing Hillary Clinton’s role in the death of White House counsel Vince Foster, First Lady ridiculed him mercilessly in front of his peers

“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

“I think that it was Hillary all the way. I think that she’s the mean-spirited one. She’s the ideologue, she’s the flaming left-wing socialist liberal. She’s a bad person with a criminal mind.”…Jerry Falwell

“The devil’s in that woman.”…Miss Emma, Clinton’s cook, governor’s mansion

 

 

From the Daily Mail August 23, 2016.

“EXCLUSIVE: Missing: FBI files linking Hillary Clinton to the ‘suicide’ of White House counsel Vince Foster have vanished from the National Archives
Documents describing Hillary Clinton’s role in the death of White House counsel Vince Foster have vanished, Daily Mail Online has learned after an extensive investigation”

“FBI agents’ reports of interviews documenting that Hillary Clinton’s stinging humiliation of her friend and mentor Vince Foster in front of White House aides triggered his suicide a week later are missing from where they should be filed at the National Archives, Daily Mail Online has learned exclusively.

On two separate occasions, this author visited the National Archives and Records Service in College Park, Md., to review the reports generated by FBI agents assigned to investigate the 1993 death of Bill Clinton’s deputy White House counsel.

The FBI found that a week before Vince Foster's suicide, Hillary held a meeting at the White House with Foster and other top aides during which she berated the lawyer

The FBI found that a week before Vince Foster’s suicide, Hillary held a meeting at the White House with Foster and other top aides during which she berated the lawyer

On the first visit, archivist David Paynter provided the box of records that he said contained the FBI reports of interviews conducted by FBI agents on Foster’s death.

On a second visit, archivist James Mathis provided what he said were those same documents.

While the box contained dozens of FBI reports concerning Foster’s death – including interviews with the medical examiner, U.S. Park Police officers, and White House aides about the contents of Foster’s office –  the reports on Hillary Clinton’s role in his death were absent.

After filing a Freedom of Information request with the National Archives, Martha Murphy, the archives’ public liaison, reported that she directed a senior archivist to conduct a more thorough review of the relevant FBI files, including those that had not been previously made public in response to FOIA requests.

‘He examined all eight boxes but found no interviews by any investigator that detail either a meeting between Hillary Clinton and Vince Foster or the effects of a meeting between Hillary Clinton and Vince Foster on Vince Foster’s state of mind,’ Murphy reported in an email.

‘We did not limit ourselves to interviews by the two individuals [FBI agents] you mention.’

While Murphy said the archives searched for ‘the records that would be responsive to your request’ and concluded that they could not be found, when asked for comment, John Valceanu, the archives’ director of communications and marketing, said, ‘We do not agree with your conclusion that the records you requested are missing from the National Archives simply because we were unable to locate any responsive records in response to your request.’

While confirming that the records could not be located, Valceanu held out the possibility that the FBI interviews were not filed where they should have been and were somewhere else in the more than 3,000 boxes of records amounting to 7.5 million pages generated by the Starr investigation.

This is not the first time documents related to the Clintons have apparently vanished from the National Archive.”

“For unknown reasons, Starr elected to conceal the FBI’s findings in his final report.

But in interviews for my book The First Family Detail: Secret Service Agents Reveal the Hidden Lives of the Presidents, the FBI agents revealed the truth about Foster’s death on July 20, 1993 when he shot himself at Fort Marcy Park along the Potomac River.

In interviewing Clinton White House aides and Foster’s friends and family, the FBI found that a week before Foster’s death, Hillary held a meeting at the White House with Foster and other top aides to discuss her proposed health care legislation.

Hillary angrily disagreed with a legal objection Foster raised at the meeting and ridiculed him in front of his peers, former FBI agent Coy Copeland and former FBI supervisory agent Jim Clemente told me. Copeland was Starr’s senior investigator and read the reports of other agents working for Starr.

During the White House meeting, Hillary continued to humiliate Foster mercilessly, according to both former FBI agents, who spoke about the investigation for the first time.

‘Hillary put him down really, really bad in a pretty good-size meeting,’ Copeland says. ‘She told him he didn’t get the picture, and he would always be a little hick town lawyer who was obviously not ready for the big time.’

Indeed, Hillary went so far as to blame Foster for all the Clintons’ problems and to accuse him of failing them, according to Clemente, who was also assigned by the FBI to the Starr investigation and who probed the circumstances surrounding Foster’s suicide.

‘Foster was profoundly depressed, but Hillary lambasting him was the final straw because she publicly embarrassed him in front of others,’ says Clemente.”

Read more:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3753013/Missing-FBI-files-linking-Hillary-Clinton-suicide-White-House-counsel-Vince-Foster-vanished-National-Archives.html#ixzz4ICd3gdRI

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

Hillary Clinton, “The devil’s in that woman”, Part 1, Hillary role in Clintons war on women, Broaddrick NBC interview: Hillary Clinton tried to silence her, NBC producer No no. We can’t go there, Broaddrick to Hillary: You are cold calculating and self-serving

Hillary Clinton, “The devil’s in that woman”, Part 1, Hillary role in Clintons war on women, Broaddrick NBC interview:  Hillary Clinton tried to silence her, NBC producer  No no. We can’t go there, Broaddrick to Hillary:  You are cold calculating and self-serving

“She enabled his behavior. It’s as simple as that. She looks the other way,” Willey told radio host Aaron Klein on Sunday. “She might throw a tantrum, but she enabled it to happen again and again and again and again. And then she chooses to go after the women that he hooks up with, to ruin them again and again and again and again. And that’s how it works.”…Kathleen Willey

“What did you mean, Hillary? Were you referring to my keeping quiet about the assault I had suffered at the hands of your husband only two weeks before? Were you warning me to continue to keep quiet? We both know the answer to that question. Yes, I can answer Brit Hume’s question. You are the same Hillary that you were twenty years ago. You are cold, calculating and self-serving. You cannot tolerate the thought that you will soon be without the power you have wielded for the last eight years. Your effort to stay in power will be at the expense of the state of New York. I only hope the voters of New York will wake up in time and realize that Hillary Clinton is not an honorable or an honest person.”…Juanita Broaddrick letter

“The devil’s in that woman.”…Miss Emma, Clinton’s cook, governor’s mansion

 

Many people who were adults during the Clinton Administration and probably most millennials do not understand how evil and corrupt Bill and Hillary Clinton are.

Many believe that Bill Clinton got into trouble and was prosecuted for fooling around in office with Monica Lewinsky.

These people must be informed that the immoral and illegal activities of Bill and Hillary Clinton have gone on for decades.

Bill Clinton impeachment timeline from CBS News.

“Oct. 8, 1998 – By a vote of 258-176 (with 31 Democrats voting yes) the House approves an open-ended impeachment inquiry of the president.”

“Nov. 13, 1998 – President Clinton settles the Paula Jones sexual harassment lawsuit, agreeing to pay Jones $850,000 while admitting nothing. The independent counsel sends Congress information relating to former White House aide Kathleen Willey’s allegations that the president made unwanted sexual advances.”

“Dec. 9, 1998 – House Judiciary Committee unveils articles of impeachment against President Clinton. Two articles allege that he lied in the Paula Jones sexual harassment case and in his testimony before Starr’s grand jury. The others allege that he abused the powers of his office and obstructed justice in the Monica Lewinsky affair.”

“Dec. 11, 1998 – House Judiciary Committee approves the first three articles of impeachment.”

“Dec. 12, 1998 – While in Jerusalem on a Middle East peace mission, President Clinton says he will not resign from office and again denies lying under oath. The House Judiciary Committee approves the fourth and final article of impeachment and dismisses censure as an option for punishment.”

“Dec. 19, 1998 – House of Representatives approves two articles of impeachment against the president.”

“Jan. 7, 1999 – The Senate trial of President Clinton opens.”

“Jan. 27, 1999 – The Senate rejects a motion to dismiss the two impeachment counts against the President.”

“Feb. 12, 1999 – Senate acquits president on impeachment charges. A total of 67 votes were necessary to convict. Voting was 55 against and 45 in favor of the perjury charge. Obstruction of justice charge failed 50-50.”

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/a-clinton-timeline/

Bill Clinton was impeached but not removed from office.

Lots of evidence was presented. I urge you to become more familiar with it.

However, much evidence was not. Especially how Bill and Hillary treated Bill’s sexual victims.

From Breitbart January 20, 2016.

“EXCLUSIVE–Juanita Broaddrick: NBC Removed Bombshell Charge That Hillary Tried to Silence Rape Victim

When Juanita Broaddrickoriginally broke her silence by speaking to NBC’s Dateline in 1999, Bill Clinton’s rape accuser says she told the network’s reporter, Lisa Myers, on camera that she believed Hillary Clinton tried to silence her.
Broaddrick recalled that during the pre-taped interview, she began to tell Myers about a personal meeting with Hillary Clinton three weeks after the alleged rape in 1978, in which, Broaddrick believes, the future First Lady strongly implied the alleged rape victim had to stay silent about her traumatic experience.

Now Broaddrick reveals to Breitbart News that an NBC staffer present for the 1999 filming rushed in front of the camera, interrupted the prerecorded session, and declared that the allegations against Hillary Clinton could not be included in the interview.

She charges that NBC went so far as to re-film that portion of the interview, with Myers asking the same question anew and Broaddrick sidestepping the Hillary meeting in the new response.

“We were sitting on my couch,” Broaddrick recalled of the interview. “All the cameras were behind me. She asked some question about whether I was intimidated or threatened by anyone, and I started right in with the meeting with Hillary while we were filming the interview.

“And almost as soon as I started to explain, one of the staffers, I believe he was a producer, came rushing in and said, ‘No, no. We can’t go there.’”

Broaddrick said Myers re-asked the question for the camera and the following exchange, which made the final cut, took place:

Lisa Myers: Did Bill Clinton or anyone near him ever threaten you, try to intimidate you, do anything to keep you silent?

Juanita Broaddrick: No.

Myers: This has been strictly your choice.

Broaddrick: Yes.

Broaddrick, inexperienced in media relations, explained to Breitbart News why she gave an altered answer the second time around.

“I didn’t do interviews before and I’m not a lawyer. I thought from the sound of what the NBC staffer was saying that there was some legal reason why we couldn’t talk about Hillary and that we just couldn’t go there for legal reasons.”

NBC News did not provide Breitbart News with a statement about Broaddrick’s accusations despite being given five business days to do so.”

“Hillary meeting

Speaking publicly for the first time in nearly a decade, Broaddrick in November told this reporter that Hillary approached her at a fundraising event three weeks after the alleged rape and implied Broaddrick should stay quiet about the incident.

Broaddrick says she was still in a state of shock and denial about what she says transpired between her and Bill Clinton weeks earlier. She said she attended a private Clinton fundraiser at the home of a local dentist, where she had an encounter with the Clintons and was directly approached by Hillary.

Broaddrick said a friend of hers who had driven the Clintons to the fundraiser from a local airport informed her that “the whole conversation was about you coming from the airport. Mostly from Mrs. Clinton.”

She recalled: “And so then about that time, I see them coming through the kitchen area. And some people there are pointing to me. He goes in one direction and she comes directly to me. Then panic sort of starting to set in with me. And I thought, ‘Oh my God, what do I do now?’”

Broaddrick said that Hillary approached her “and said, ‘It’s so nice to meet you’ and all of the niceties she was trying to say at the time.

“She said, ‘I just want you to know how much Bill and I appreciate the things you do for him.’ And I just stood there, Aaron. I was sort of, you might say, shell-shocked.

“And she said, ‘Do you understand? Everything you do.’

“She tried to take hold of my hand and I left. I told the girls I can’t take this. I’m leaving. So I immediately left.”

Broaddrick said, “What really went through my mind at that time is ‘She knows. She knew. She’s covering it up and she expects me to do the very same thing.’””

“In the interview with this reporter, Broaddrick recounted the aftermath of the incident, when her friend Rogers came back to the room after Broaddrick failed to show up at the convention.

“I was in a state of shock afterwards,” an emotional Broaddrick said, clearly still impacted by the event. “And I know my nurse came back to the room to check on me because she hadn’t heard from me… She came up and it was devastating to her and to me to find me in the condition that I was in.

“We really did not know what to do. We sat and talked and she got ice for my mouth… It was four times the size that it should be. And she got ice for me and we decided then I just wanted to go home. I just wanted to get out of there, which we did.”

The detail about Clinton allegedly biting her lip is instructive. One woman who would later say she had a consensual affair with Clinton, former Miss America pageant winner Elizabeth Ward Gracen, also revealed that Clinton bit her lip when a tryst became rough.”

Read more:

http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2016/01/20/exclusive-juanita-broaddrick-nbc-removed-bombshell-charge-that-hillary-tried-to-silence-rape/

Juanita Broaddrick NBC interview:

https://www.scribd.com/document/321618010/Juanita-Broaddrick-transcript-NBC-Dateline-report-conducted-January-20-1999-Bill-Clinton-rape

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/