Category Archives: Obama administration

Robert Creamer visited the White House 342 times since 2009, Engineered violence at Trump rallies and voter fraud, James O’Keefe Project Veritas videos feature Creamer, Met with Obama 47 times, Obama derides Trump for mentioning voter fraud

Robert Creamer visited the White House 342 times since 2009, Engineered violence at Trump rallies and voter fraud, James O’Keefe Project Veritas videos feature Creamer, Met with Obama 47 times, Obama derides Trump for mentioning voter fraud

“Concerns about high voter turnout and the inability of the precincts to adequately handle the number of participants and monitor the election process are rampant.   On the night of the caucus itself, the Clinton Campaign brought many instances of these irregularities to the attention of the State Party. The
campaign received in excess of 2,000 complaints of rules violations, indicating widespread violations of the Party’s rules”…Dr. Lynette Long, March 4, 2008, Texas Democratic Primary

“It doesn’t matter what the friggin legal and ethics people say, we need to win this motherf**cker”…Scott Foval, Project Veritas video

“We control life, Winston, at all its levels. You are imagining that there is something called human nature which will be outraged by what we do and will turn against us. But we create human nature. Men are infinitely malleable.”…George Orwell, “1984″

 

 

From The Daily Caller October 18, 2016.

“Dem Operative Who Oversaw Trump Rally Agitators Visited White House 342 Times

A key operative in a Democratic scheme to send agitators to cause unrest at Donald Trump’s rallies has visited the White House 342 times since 2009, White House records show.

Robert Creamer, who acted as a middle man between the Clinton campaign, the Democratic National Committee and “protesters” who tried — and succeeded — to provoke violence at Trump rallies met with President Obama 47 times, according to White House records. Creamer’s last visit was in June 2016.

Creamer, whose White House visits were first pointed out by conservative blog Weasel Zippers, is stepping back from his role within the Clinton campaign. (RELATED: Second O’Keefe Video Shows Dem Operative Boasting About Voter Fraud)

Hidden camera video from activist James O’Keefe showed Creamer bragging that his role within the Clinton campaign was to oversee the work of Americans United for Change, a non-profit organization that sent activists to Trump rallies. (RELATED: Activist Who Took Credit For Violent Chicago Protests Was On Hillary’s Payroll)

Scott Foval, the national field director for Americans United for Change, explained how the scheme works.

“The [Clinton] campaign pays DNC, DNC pays Democracy Partners, Democracy Partners pays the Foval Group, The Foval Group goes and executes the shit,” Foval told an undercover journalist.”

http://dailycaller.com/2016/10/18/exposed-dem-operative-who-oversaw-trump-rally-agitators-visited-white-house-342-times/

James O’Keefe Project Verita videos.

 

 

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

 

Trump nails Clintons in debate 2, Rape victims vindication, Bill Clinton was abusive to women, Hillary Clinton attacked those same women and attacked them viciously, Going to instruct my attorney general to get a special prosecutor, Because you’d be in jail.

Trump nails Clintons in debate 2, Rape victims vindication, Bill Clinton was abusive to women, Hillary Clinton attacked those same women and attacked them viciously, Going to instruct my attorney general to get a special prosecutor, Because you’d be in jail.

“Hi. I’m Juanita Broaddrick. And I’m here to support Donald Trump. I tweeted recently — and Mr. Trump retweeted it — that actions speak louder than words. Mr. Trump may have said some bad words, but Bill Clinton raped me and Hillary Clinton threatened me. I don’t think there’s any comparison.”…Juanita Broaddrick, rape victim

“Billy and Hillary Clinton continue to be lying, cheating, manipulative, scratching, clawing, ruthlessly aggressive, insatiably ambitious politicians who are giving public service a bad name – and nothing about them has changed in the past forty-plus years, except that they have deluded more and more people,”…Dolly Kyle Browning

“The Clintons’ “systematically abuse women and others – sexually, physically, and psychologically – in their scramble for power and wealth,” says the book’s press release.”…”The Clintons’ War on Women”

 

Donald Trump nailed the Clintons in debate 2 last night.

That’s Bill and Hillary Clinton.

Prior to the debate Trump had 4 Clinton rape victims before reporters.

“TRANSCRIPT: TRUMP WITH WOMEN ACCUSING BILL AND HILLARY CLINTON OF WRONGDOING

DONALD TRUMP: “Thank you very much for coming, and these four very courageous women have asked to be here and it was our honor to help them. And I think they’re each going to make just an individual short statement and then we will, we’re going to have a little meeting and then we’ll see you at the debate. Perhaps we’ll start with Paula.”

PAULA JONES: “I’m here to support Mr. Trump because he’s going to make America great again. And I think everybody else should vote for him. And I think they should all look at the fact that he’s a good person. He’s not what other people have been saying he’s been, like Hillary. So, think about that.”

TRUMP: “Kathy Shelton.”

KATHY SHELTON*: “So I’m also here to support Trump. I, at 12 years old, Hillary put me through something that you would never put a 12 year old through. And she says she’s for women and children. And she was asked last year on what happened and she says she’s supposed to defend whether they did it or not and now she’s laughing on tape saying she know they did it.”

TRUMP: “You went through a lot.”

SHELTON: “Yes, sir. I did.”

TRUMP: “OK”

JUANITA BROADDRICK: “Hi. I’m Juanita Broaddrick. And I’m here to support Donald Trump. I tweeted recently — and Mr. Trump retweeted it — that actions speak louder than words. Mr. Trump may have said some bad words, but Bill Clinton raped me and Hillary Clinton threatened me. I don’t think there’s any comparison.”

KATHLEEN WILLEY: “I’m Kathleen Willey and I am here to support Donald Trump. The reason for that is the first day that he announced for president he said I love this country and I want America to be great again. And I cried when he said that because I think that this is the greatest country in the world. I think that we can do anything. I think we can accomplish anything. I think we can bring peace to this world, and I think Donald Trump can lead us to that point.”

TRUMP: “Thank you very much. OK. Thank you all very much. We appreciate it.”

REPORTERS: “Mr. Trump you touched women without consent. Mr. Trump, why did you say you touched women without consent, Mr. Trump?”

PAULA JONES: “Why don’t you all ask Bill Clinton that? Why don’t you all go ask Bill Clinton that. Go ahead and ask Hillary, as well.”

*Hillary Clinton once represented a man charged with raping Shelton when she was 12. Clinton did not volunteer to take the case.”

trumprapevictimsdebate

Afterwards Kathy Shelton posted this on Twitter:

Thank you @RealDonaldTrump for standing up for me before my rapist’s defender Hillary Clinton.

The 4 rape victims were in attendance at the debate.

Slick Willy didn’t look too happy.

billclintonseconddebate

Here are some notable Trump statements.

“TRUMP: It was locker room talk, as I told you. That was locker room talk. I’m not proud of it. I am a person who has great respect for people, for my family, for the people of this country. And certainly, I’m not proud of it. But that was something that happened.

If you look at Bill Clinton, far worse. Mine are words, and his was action. His was what he’s done to women. There’s never been anybody in the history politics in this nation that’s been so abusive to women. So you can say any way you want to say it, but Bill Clinton was abusive to women.

Hillary Clinton attacked those same women and attacked them viciously. Four of them here tonight. One of the women, who is a wonderful woman, at 12 years old, was raped at 12. Her client she represented got him off, and she’s seen laughing on two separate occasions, laughing at the girl who was raped. Kathy Shelton, that young woman is here with us tonight.

So don’t tell me about words. I am absolutely — I apologize for those words. But it is things that people say. But what President Clinton did, he was impeached, he lost his license to practice law. He had to pay an $850,000 fine to one of the women. Paula Jones, who’s also here tonight.

And I will tell you that when Hillary brings up a point like that and she talks about words that I said 11 years ago, I think it’s disgraceful, and I think she should be ashamed of herself, if you want to know the truth.

(APPLAUSE)”

“TRUMP: Well, you owe the president an apology, because as you know very well, your campaign, Sidney Blumenthal — he’s another real winner that you have — and he’s the one that got this started, along with your campaign manager, and they were on television just two weeks ago, she was, saying exactly that. So you really owe him an apology. You’re the one that sent the pictures around your campaign, sent the pictures around with President Obama in a certain garb. That was long before I was ever involved, so you actually owe an apology.

Number two, Michelle Obama. I’ve gotten to see the commercials that they did on you. And I’ve gotten to see some of the most vicious commercials I’ve ever seen of Michelle Obama talking about you, Hillary.

So, you talk about friend? Go back and take a look at those commercials, a race where you lost fair and square, unlike the Bernie Sanders race, where you won, but not fair and square, in my opinion. And all you have to do is take a look at WikiLeaks and just see what they say about Bernie Sanders and see what Deborah Wasserman Schultz had in mind, because Bernie Sanders, between super-delegates and Deborah Wasserman Schultz, he never had a chance. And I was so surprised to see him sign on with the devil.

But when you talk about apology, I think the one that you should really be apologizing for and the thing that you should be apologizing for are the 33,000 e-mails that you deleted, and that you acid washed, and then the two boxes of e-mails and other things last week that were taken from an office and are now missing.

And I’ll tell you what. I didn’t think I’d say this, but I’m going to say it, and I hate to say it. But if I win, I am going to instruct my attorney general to get a special prosecutor to look into your situation, because there has never been so many lies, so much deception. There has never been anything like it, and we’re going to have a special prosecutor.

When I speak, I go out and speak, the people of this country are furious. In my opinion, the people that have been long-term workers at the FBI are furious. There has never been anything like this, where e-mails — and you get a subpoena, you get a subpoena, and after getting the subpoena, you delete 33,000 e-mails, and then you acid wash them or bleach them, as you would say, very expensive process.

So we’re going to get a special prosecutor, and we’re going to look into it, because you know what? People have been — their lives have been destroyed for doing one-fifth of what you’ve done. And it’s a disgrace. And honestly, you ought to be ashamed of yourself.”

“TRUMP: Because you’d be in jail.

(APPLAUSE)”

“TRUMP: And yet she didn’t know the word — the letter C on a document. Right? She didn’t even know what that word — what that letter meant.

You know, it’s amazing. I’m watching Hillary go over facts. And she’s going after fact after fact, and she’s lying again, because she said she — you know, what she did with the e-mail was fine. You think it was fine to delete 33,000 e-mails? I don’t think so.

She said the 33,000 e-mails had to do with her daughter’s wedding, number one, and a yoga class. Well, maybe we’ll give three or three or four or five or something. 33,000 e-mails deleted, and now she’s saying there wasn’t anything wrong.

And more importantly, that was after getting a subpoena. That wasn’t before. That was after. She got it from the United States Congress. And I’ll be honest, I am so disappointed in congressmen, including Republicans, for allowing this to happen.

Our Justice Department, where our husband goes on to the back of a airplane for 39 minutes, talks to the attorney general days before a ruling is going to be made on her case. But for you to say that there was nothing wrong with you deleting 39,000 e-mails, again, you should be ashamed of yourself. What you did — and this is after getting a subpoena from the United States Congress.”

“TRUMP: If you did that in the private sector, you’d be put in jail, let alone after getting a subpoena from the United States Congress.”

“TRUMP: I’d like to know, Anderson, why aren’t you bringing up the e-mails? I’d like to know. Why aren’t you bringing…”

“TRUMP: It is such a great question and it’s maybe the question I get almost more than anything else, outside of defense. Obamacare is a disaster. You know it. We all know it. It’s going up at numbers that nobody’s ever seen worldwide. Nobody’s ever seen numbers like this for health care.

It’s only getting worse. In ’17, it implodes by itself. Their method of fixing it is to go back and ask Congress for more money, more and more money. We have right now almost $20 trillion in debt.

Obamacare will never work. It’s very bad, very bad health insurance. Far too expensive. And not only expensive for the person that has it, unbelievably expensive for our country. It’s going to be one of the biggest line items very shortly.

We have to repeal it and replace it with something absolutely much less expensive and something that works, where your plan can actually be tailored. We have to get rid of the lines around the state, artificial lines, where we stop insurance companies from coming in and competing, because they want — and President Obama and whoever was working on it — they want to leave those lines, because that gives the insurance companies essentially monopolies. We want competition.

You will have the finest health care plan there is. She wants to go to a single-payer plan, which would be a disaster, somewhat similar to Canada. And if you haven’t noticed the Canadians, when they need a big operation, when something happens, they come into the United States in many cases because their system is so slow. It’s catastrophic in certain ways.

But she wants to go to single payer, which means the government basically rules everything. Hillary Clinton has been after this for years. Obamacare was the first step. Obamacare is a total disaster. And not only are your rates going up by numbers that nobody’s ever believed, but your deductibles are going up, so that unless you get hit by a truck, you’re never going to be able to use it.”

“TRUMP: President Obama — Anderson, excuse me. President Obama, by keeping those lines, the boundary lines around each state, it was almost gone until just very toward the end of the passage of Obamacare, which, by the way, was a fraud. You know that, because Jonathan Gruber, the architect of Obamacare, was said — he said it was a great lie, it was a big lie. President Obama said you keep your doctor, you keep your plan. The whole thing was a fraud, and it doesn’t work.

But when we get rid of those lines, you will have competition, and we will be able to keep pre-existing, we’ll also be able to help people that can’t get — don’t have money because we are going to have people protected.

And Republicans feel this way, believe it or not, and strongly this way. We’re going to block grant into the states. We’re going to block grant into Medicaid into the states…”

“TRUMP: Well, you’re right about Islamophobia, and that’s a shame. But one thing we have to do is we have to make sure that — because there is a problem. I mean, whether we like it or not, and we could be very politically correct, but whether we like it or not, there is a problem. And we have to be sure that Muslims come in and report when they see something going on. When they see hatred going on, they have to report it.

As an example, in San Bernardino, many people saw the bombs all over the apartment of the two people that killed 14 and wounded many, many people. Horribly wounded. They’ll never be the same. Muslims have to report the problems when they see them.

And, you know, there’s always a reason for everything. If they don’t do that, it’s a very difficult situation for our country, because you look at Orlando and you look at San Bernardino and you look at the World Trade Center. Go outside. Look at Paris. Look at that horrible — these are radical Islamic terrorists.

And she won’t even mention the word and nor will President Obama. He won’t use the term “radical Islamic terrorism.” Now, to solve a problem, you have to be able to state what the problem is or at least say the name. She won’t say the name and President Obama won’t say the name. But the name is there. It’s radical Islamic terror. And before you solve it, you have to say the name.”

“TRUMP: First of all, Captain Khan is an American hero, and if I were president at that time, he would be alive today, because unlike her, who voted for the war without knowing what she was doing, I would not have had our people in Iraq. Iraq was disaster. So he would have been alive today.”

“TRUMP: It’s called extreme vetting. We are going to areas like Syria where they’re coming in by the tens of thousands because of Barack Obama. And Hillary Clinton wants to allow a 550 percent increase over Obama. People are coming into our country like we have no idea who they are, where they are from, what their feelings about our country is, and she wants 550 percent more. This is going to be the great Trojan horse of all time.

We have enough problems in this country. I believe in building safe zones. I believe in having other people pay for them, as an example, the Gulf states, who are not carrying their weight, but they have nothing but money, and take care of people. But I don’t want to have, with all the problems this country has and all of the problems that you see going on, hundreds of thousands of people coming in from Syria when we know nothing about them. We know nothing about their values and we know nothing about their love for our country.”

“TRUMP: Hillary Clinton, in terms of having people come into our country, we have many criminal illegal aliens. When we want to send them back to their country, their country says we don’t want them. In some cases, they’re murderers, drug lords, drug problems. And they don’t want them.

And Hillary Clinton, when she was secretary of state, said that’s OK, we can’t force it into their country. Let me tell you, I’m going to force them right back into their country. They’re murderers and some very bad people.

And I will tell you very strongly, when Bernie Sanders said she had bad judgment, she has really bad judgment, because we are letting people into this country that are going to cause problems and crime like you’ve never seen. We’re also letting drugs pour through our southern border at a record clip. At a record clip. And it shouldn’t be allowed to happen.

ICE just endorsed me. They’ve never endorsed a presidential candidate. The Border Patrol agents, 16,500, just recently endorsed me, and they endorsed me because I understand the border. She doesn’t. She wants amnesty for everybody. Come right in. Come right over. It’s a horrible thing she’s doing. She’s got bad judgment, and honestly, so bad that she should never be president of the United States. That I can tell you.”

“TRUMP: Well, I think I should respond, because — so ridiculous. Look, now she’s blaming — she got caught in a total lie. Her papers went out to all her friends at the banks, Goldman Sachs and everybody else, and she said things — WikiLeaks that just came out. And she lied. Now she’s blaming the lie on the late, great Abraham Lincoln. That’s one that I haven’t…

(LAUGHTER)

OK, Honest Abe, Honest Abe never lied. That’s the good thing. That’s the big difference between Abraham Lincoln and you. That’s a big, big difference. We’re talking about some difference.

But as far as other elements of what she was saying, I don’t know Putin. I think it would be great if we got along with Russia because we could fight ISIS together, as an example. But I don’t know Putin.

But I notice, anytime anything wrong happens, they like to say the Russians are — she doesn’t know if it’s the Russians doing the hacking. Maybe there is no hacking. But they always blame Russia. And the reason they blame Russia because they think they’re trying to tarnish me with Russia. I know nothing about Russia. I know — I know about Russia, but I know nothing about the inner workings of Russia. I don’t deal there. I have no businesses there. I have no loans from Russia.

I have a very, very great balance sheet, so great that when I did the Old Post Office on Pennsylvania Avenue, the United States government, because of my balance sheet, which they actually know very well, chose me to do the Old Post Office, between the White House and Congress, chose me to do the Old Post Office. One of the primary area things, in fact, perhaps the primary thing was balance sheet. But I have no loans with Russia. You could go to the United States government, and they would probably tell you that, because they know my sheet very well in order to get that development I had to have.

Now, the taxes are a very simple thing. As soon as I have — first of all, I pay hundreds of millions of dollars in taxes. Many of her friends took bigger deductions. Warren Buffett took a massive deduction. Soros, who’s a friend of hers, took a massive deduction. Many of the people that are giving her all this money that she can do many more commercials than me gave her — took massive deductions.

I pay hundreds of millions of dollars in taxes. But — but as soon as my routine audit is finished, I’ll release my returns. I’ll be very proud to. They’re actually quite great.”

“And I will tell you, Hillary Clinton is raising your taxes, folks. You can look at me. She’s raising your taxes really high. And what that’s going to do is a disaster for the country. But she is raising your taxes and I’m lowering your taxes. That in itself is a big difference. We are going to be thriving again. We have no growth in this country. There’s no growth. If China has a GDP of 7 percent, it’s like a national catastrophe. We’re down at 1 percent. And that’s, like, no growth. And we’re going lower, in my opinion. And a lot of it has to do with the fact that our taxes are so high, just about the highest in the world. And I’m bringing them down to one of the lower in the world. And I think it’s so important — one of the most important things we can do. But she is raising everybody’s taxes massively.”

“TRUMP: And, again, Bernie Sanders, it’s really bad judgment. She has made bad judgment not only on taxes. She’s made bad judgments on Libya, on Syria, on Iraq. I mean, her and Obama, whether you like it or not, the way they got out of Iraq, the vacuum they’ve left, that’s why ISIS formed in the first place. They started from that little area, and now they’re in 32 different nations, Hillary. Congratulations. Great job.”

“TRUMP: You were in total contact with the White House, and perhaps, sadly, Obama probably still listened to you. I don’t think he would be listening to you very much anymore.

Obama draws the line in the sand. It was laughed at all over the world what happened.

Now, with that being said, she talks tough against Russia. But our nuclear program has fallen way behind, and they’ve gone wild with their nuclear program. Not good. Our government shouldn’t have allowed that to happen. Russia is new in terms of nuclear. We are old. We’re tired. We’re exhausted in terms of nuclear. A very bad thing.

Now, she talks tough, she talks really tough against Putin and against Assad. She talks in favor of the rebels. She doesn’t even know who the rebels are. You know, every time we take rebels, whether it’s in Iraq or anywhere else, we’re arming people. And you know what happens? They end up being worse than the people.

Look at what she did in Libya with Gadhafi. Gadhafi’s out. It’s a mess. And, by the way, ISIS has a good chunk of their oil. I’m sure you probably have heard that. It was a disaster. Because the fact is, almost everything she’s done in foreign policy has been a mistake and it’s been a disaster.

But if you look at Russia, just take a look at Russia, and look at what they did this week, where I agree, she wasn’t there, but possibly she’s consulted. We sign a peace treaty. Everyone’s all excited. Well, what Russia did with Assad and, by the way, with Iran, who you made very powerful with the dumbest deal perhaps I’ve ever seen in the history of deal-making, the Iran deal, with the $150 billion, with the $1.7 billion in cash, which is enough to fill up this room.

But look at that deal. Iran now and Russia are now against us. So she wants to fight. She wants to fight for rebels. There’s only one problem. You don’t even know who the rebels are. So what’s the purpose?”

“TRUMP: I think that it basically has fallen. OK? It basically has fallen. Let me tell you something. You take a look at Mosul. The biggest problem I have with the stupidity of our foreign policy, we have Mosul. They think a lot of the ISIS leaders are in Mosul. So we have announcements coming out of Washington and coming out of Iraq, we will be attacking Mosul in three weeks or four weeks.”

“TRUMP: Absolutely. I mean, she calls our people deplorable, a large group, and irredeemable. I will be a president for all of our people. And I’ll be a president that will turn our inner cities around and will give strength to people and will give economics to people and will bring jobs back.

Because NAFTA, signed by her husband, is perhaps the greatest disaster trade deal in the history of the world. Not in this country. It stripped us of manufacturing jobs. We lost our jobs. We lost our money. We lost our plants. It is a disaster. And now she wants to sign TPP, even though she says now she’s for it. She called it the gold standard. And by the way, at the last debate, she lied, because it turned out that she did say the gold standard and she said she didn’t say it. They actually said that she lied. OK? And she lied. But she’s lied about a lot of things.

TRUMP: I would be a president for all of the people, African- Americans, the inner cities. Devastating what’s happening to our inner cities. She’s been talking about it for years. As usual, she talks about it, nothing happens. She doesn’t get it done.

Same with the Latino Americans, the Hispanic Americans. The same exact thing. They talk, they don’t get it done. You go into the inner cities and — you see it’s 45 percent poverty. African- Americans now 45 percent poverty in the inner cities. The education is a disaster. Jobs are essentially nonexistent.

I mean, it’s — you know, and I’ve been saying at big speeches where I have 20,000 and 30,000 people, what do you have to lose? It can’t get any worse. And she’s been talking about the inner cities for 25 years. Nothing’s going to ever happen.

Let me tell you, if she’s president of the United States, nothing’s going to happen. It’s just going to be talk. And all of her friends, the taxes we were talking about, and I would just get it by osmosis. She’s not doing any me favors. But by doing all the others’ favors, she’s doing me favors.”

“TRUMP: We have a divided nation. We have a very divided nation. You look at Charlotte. You look at Baltimore. You look at the violence that’s taking place in the inner cities, Chicago, you take a look at Washington, D.C.

We have an increase in murder within our cities, the biggest in 45 years. We have a divided nation, because people like her — and believe me, she has tremendous hate in her heart. And when she said deplorables, she meant it. And when she said irredeemable, they’re irredeemable, you didn’t mention that, but when she said they’re irredeemable, to me that might have been even worse.”

“TRUMP: … 600 — wait a minute, Anderson, 600 times. Well, she said she was awake at 3 o’clock in the morning, and she also sent a tweet out at 3 o’clock in the morning, but I won’t even mention that. But she said she’ll be awake. Who’s going — the famous thing, we’re going to answer our call at 3 o’clock in the morning. Guess what happened? Ambassador Stevens — Ambassador Stevens sent 600 requests for help. And the only one she talked to was Sidney Blumenthal, who’s her friend and not a good guy, by the way. So, you know, she shouldn’t be talking about that.

Now, tweeting happens to be a modern day form of communication. I mean, you can like it or not like it. I have, between Facebook and Twitter, I have almost 25 million people. It’s a very effective way of communication. So you can put it down, but it is a very effective form of communication. I’m not un-proud of it, to be honest with you.”

“TRUMP: Justice Scalia, great judge, died recently. And we have a vacancy. I am looking to appoint judges very much in the mold of Justice Scalia. I’m looking for judges — and I’ve actually picked 20 of them so that people would see, highly respected, highly thought of, and actually very beautifully reviewed by just about everybody.

But people that will respect the Constitution of the United States. And I think that this is so important. Also, the Second Amendment, which is totally under siege by people like Hillary Clinton. They’ll respect the Second Amendment and what it stands for, what it represents. So important to me.

Now, Hillary mentioned something about contributions just so you understand. So I will have in my race more than $100 million put in — of my money, meaning I’m not taking all of this big money from all of these different corporations like she’s doing. What I ask is this.

So I’m putting in more than — by the time it’s finished, I’ll have more than $100 million invested. Pretty much self-funding money. We’re raising money for the Republican Party, and we’re doing tremendously on the small donations, $61 average or so.

I ask Hillary, why doesn’t — she made $250 million by being in office. She used the power of her office to make a lot of money. Why isn’t she funding, not for $100 million, but why don’t you put $10 million or $20 million or $25 million or $30 million into your own campaign?

It’s $30 million less for special interests that will tell you exactly what to do and it would really, I think, be a nice sign to the American public. Why aren’t you putting some money in? You have a lot of it. You’ve made a lot of it because of the fact that you’ve been in office. Made a lot of it while you were secretary of state, actually. So why aren’t you putting money into your own campaign? I’m just curious.”

The Clintons got their butts kicked.

So did Obama’s legacy Obamacare.

Step 1 of vindication for Clinton rape and intimidation victims.

Trump stood up to the Clintons.

They are not accustomed to this.

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

Trump debate point September 2016 jobs report, White employment decimated under Obama, Hillary promised NY 200k new jobs and they lost jobs, 10 million more whites not in labor force since 2007, No employment growth, Hispanic employment up 25 percent

Trump debate point September 2016 jobs report, White employment decimated under Obama, Hillary promised NY 200k new jobs and they lost jobs, 10 million more whites not in labor force since 2007, No employment growth, Hispanic employment up 25 percent

“In other words, more than half of the 156K jobs added in September went – once again – to minimum wage workers”…Zero Hedge October 7, 2016

“The number of persons employed part time for economic reasons (sometimes referred to as involuntary part-time workers) was little changed in September at 7.1 million. These individuals, who would have preferred full-time employment, were working part time because their hours had been cut back or because they were unable to find a full-time job.”…US Labor Dept. September 2014

“In December 2014 there were 18 million immigrants (legal and illegal) living in the country who had arrived since January 2000. But job growth over this period was just 9.3 million — half of new immigration.”…Center for Immigration Studies February 2015

 

 

Ok folks, this ain’t rocket science and the mainstream media has not been reporting it.

White employment has been decimated under Obama!

It will be no better under Hillary with her open floodgate immigration policy and history on job creation.

When she was running for senator in NY, she promised 200,000 new jobs and they actually lost jobs.

Why, her lips were moving, a sure sign she was lying.

Donald Trump, Pay attention!

Citizen Wells has been reporting this for years.

Why did I choose white American employment?

It is still approx. two thirds of the population.

It provides a simple apples to apples comparison.

And (drum roll) it highlights the impact of illegal aliens.

Straight from US Labor Dept. tables.

Since September 2007:

There are  10 million more whites not in the labor force ( do not be fooled by media lies about this being due to baby boomers – this has been extensively covered at Citizen Wells ).

There has been zero white American employment growth!

There has been 25 percent employment growth for Hispanics.!

Also, the mass influx of illegals along with Obamacare has impacted the types of jobs available and wages.

From Zero Hedge October 7, 2016.

“Where The September Jobs Were: Secretaries, Waiters, Retail And Social Workers

While we already noted that the headline quantitative print in jobs, which rose by a seasonally adjusted 156K in September, was far weaker when observed from a quality standpoint, as a result of the surge in part-time jobs, the dip in full-time jobs, and the jump in multiple jobholders to the highest since the financial crisis, another question is which industries were hiring, albeit mostly part-time workers.

Here is the answer:

  • The most actively hiring sector was the otherwise stable “Professional and business services” where employment rose by 67,000 in September and has risen by 582,000  over the year. However, a quick look within the number reveals that the most active sub category was that of administrative and support services, which account for more than half, or +35,000, of the increase. In other words, secretaries and clerical staff.
  • Obamacare may be crushing the middle class, but it continues to “create” jobs: Health care added 33,000 jobs in September. Also thank America’s aging population: ambulatory health care services, aka social workers, added 24,000 jobs. Over the past 12 months, health care has added  445,000 jobs.
  • There was the old faithful: waiters and bartenders, aka “Employment in food services and drinking places” which continued to trend up in September (+30,000) and has increased by 300,000 over the year. This group remains one of the strongest, minimum-wage contributors to the Obama “recovery.”
  • Finally, there was minimum wage retail trade workers, where employment continued to trend up over the month (+22,000). Within the industry, job gains occurred in clothing and clothing accessories stores (+14,000) and in gasoline stations (+8,000). Over the year, employment in retail trade has risen by 317,000.

In other words, more than half of the 156K jobs added in September went – once again – to minimum wage workers.”

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-07/where-september-jobs-were-secretaries-waiters-retail-and-social-workers

 

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

 

NY Times deal with devil, Times endorses Hillary Clinton, Bob Herbert 2001 Democratic Party … made a pact with Mr. Clinton that was the equivalent of a pact with the devil, Lost its bearings and maybe even its soul, “The devil’s in that woman.”

NY Times deal with devil, Times endorses Hillary Clinton, Bob Herbert 2001 Democratic Party … made a pact with Mr. Clinton that was the equivalent of a pact with the devil, Lost its bearings and maybe even its soul, “The devil’s in that woman.”

“Millions of cretinous and amoral Americans still admire Bill and Hillary Clinton, the two foulest amoral slimebags that have ever besmirched the White House. These two foulmouthed and lying psychopaths have been, and still are, blindly supported by masses of non-clinical morons, diehard Democrats, and whorish liberal journalists and their editors.

The Clintons’ habitual lies, gutter language, anti-Semitic outbursts, and anti-black slurs have been documented by reliable writers but have been — and still are — routinely suppressed by the so-called liberal media.”…Reinhold Aman, Ph.D.

“For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.”…Ephesians 6:12

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

 

The NY Times has made a deal with the devil and endorsed Hillary Clinton.

“Running down the other guy won’t suffice to make that argument. The best case for Hillary Clinton cannot be, and is not, that she isn’t Donald Trump.

The best case is, instead, about the challenges this country faces, and Mrs. Clinton’s capacity to rise to them.

The next president will take office with bigoted, tribalist movements and their leaders on the march. In the Middle East and across Asia, in Russia and Eastern Europe, even in Britain and the United States, war, terrorism and the pressures of globalization are eroding democratic values, fraying alliances and challenging the ideals of tolerance and charity.

The 2016 campaign has brought to the surface the despair and rage of poor and middle-class Americans who say their government has done little to ease the burdens that recession, technological change, foreign competition and war have heaped on their families.

Over 40 years in public life, Hillary Clinton has studied these forces and weighed responses to these problems. Our endorsement is rooted in respect for her intellect, experience, toughness and courage over a career of almost continuous public service, often as the first or only woman in the arena.

Mrs. Clinton’s work has been defined more by incremental successes than by moments of transformational change. As a candidate, she has struggled to step back from a pointillist collection of policy proposals to reveal the full pattern of her record. That is a weakness of her campaign, and a perplexing one, for the pattern is clear. It shows a determined leader intent on creating opportunity for struggling Americans at a time of economic upheaval and on ensuring that the United States remains a force for good in an often brutal world.

Similarly, Mrs. Clinton’s occasional missteps, combined with attacks on her trustworthiness, have distorted perceptions of her character. She is one of the most tenacious politicians of her generation, whose willingness to study and correct course is rare in an age of unyielding partisanship. As first lady, she rebounded from professional setbacks and personal trials with astounding resilience. Over eight years in the Senate and four as secretary of state, she built a reputation for grit and bipartisan collaboration. She displayed a command of policy and diplomatic nuance and an ability to listen to constituents and colleagues that are all too exceptional in Washington.

Mrs. Clinton’s record of service to children, women and families has spanned her adult life. One of her boldest acts as first lady was her 1995 speech in Beijing declaring that women’s rights are human rights. After a failed attempt to overhaul the nation’s health care system, she threw her support behind legislation to establish the Children’s Health Insurance Program, which now covers more than eight million lower-income young people. This year, she rallied mothers of gun-violence victims to join her in demanding comprehensive background checks for gun buyers and tighter reins on gun sales.”

“As secretary of state, Mrs. Clinton was charged with repairing American credibility after eight years of the Bush administration’s unilateralism. She bears a share of the responsibility for the Obama administration’s foreign-policy failings, notably in Libya. But her achievements are substantial. She led efforts to strengthen sanctions against Iran, which eventually pushed it to the table for talks over its nuclear program, and in 2012, she helped negotiate a cease-fire between Israel and Hamas.

Mrs. Clinton led efforts to renew diplomatic relations with Myanmar, persuading its junta to adopt political reforms. She helped promote the Trans-Pacific Partnership, an important trade counterweight to China and a key component of the Obama administration’s pivot to Asia. Her election-year reversal on that pact has confused some of her supporters, but her underlying commitment to bolstering trade along with workers’ rights is not in doubt. Mrs. Clinton’s attempt to reset relations with Russia, though far from successful, was a sensible effort to improve interactions with a rivalrous nuclear power.

Mrs. Clinton has shown herself to be a realist who believes America cannot simply withdraw behind oceans and walls, but must engage confidently in the world to protect its interests and be true to its values, which include helping others escape poverty and oppression.

Mrs. Clinton’s husband, Bill Clinton, governed during what now looks like an optimistic and even gentle era. The end of the Cold War and the advance of technology and trade appeared to be awakening the world’s possibilities rather than its demons. Many in the news media, and in the country, and in that administration, were distracted by the scandal du jour — Mr. Clinton’s impeachment — during the very period in which a terrorist threat was growing. We are now living in a world darkened by the realization of that threat and its many consequences.”

“Through war and recession, Americans born since 9/11 have had to grow up fast, and they deserve a grown-up president. A lifetime’s commitment to solving problems in the real world qualifies Hillary Clinton for this job, and the country should put her to work.”

Read more if you can stomach it.

“The devil’s in that woman.”

From NewsMax March 22, 2001 via Citizen News.

“Falwell said he thought ex-first lady Hillary Clinton was a prime mover behind much of the corruption that permeated the White House during her husband’s tenure.

“You know, Hillary – it’s amazing to me, she not only knew about all these things, Bill Clinton didn’t really have the time to do all those mean things because he would have interrupted his love affairs,” Falwell said.

“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.”

The former Moral Majority chief said it was his personal belief that Mrs. Clinton will stay married to her husband only as long as the relationship furthers her own political ambitions.”

http://citizenwells.net/2016/07/09/hillary-has-criminal-mind-clinton-scandals-need-probing-jerry-falwell-newsmax-march-22-2001-i-think-that-it-was-hillary-all-the-way-i-think-that-shes-the-mean-spirited-one-shes-the-ideolog/

From NewsMax February 26, 2001 via Citizen News.

“New York Times Left-Winger: Shun Corrupt Clinton

Bob Herbert, identified today by Fox News Channel as the most liberal columnist at the New York Times, is belatedly joining in on the anti-Clinton bandwagon. But his vehemence is making up for his tardiness.

Herbert writes today that the Democratic Party made “the equivalent of a pact with the devil” in supporting Clinton and “in the process it lost its bearings and maybe even its soul.”

“Now, with the stench of yet another scandal polluting the political atmosphere, some of Mr. Clinton’s closest associates and supporters are acknowledging what his enemies have argued for years – the man is so thoroughly corrupt it’s frightening.”

“The Clintons may or may not be led away in handcuffs someday. But whatever happens with the criminal investigations, it’s time for the Democratic Party to wise up. Ostracism would be a good first step. Bill Clinton should be cut completely loose.”

http://citizenwells.net/2015/04/19/democratic-party-made-the-equivalent-of-a-pact-with-the-devil-in-supporting-clinton-and-in-the-process-it-lost-its-bearings-and-maybe-even-its-soul-newsmax-article-february-26-2001-bob-herb/

Hillary’s accomplishments.

  1. Hillary enabled Bill in Rapegate which led to the White House and country’s distraction and arguably led to the 9/11 attacks.
  2. Hillary engineered the Commercegate selling of seats in exhange for campaign contributions. This also led to the death of Ron Brown.
  3. ISIS formed and grew under the Obama/Hillary watch.
  4. Benghazi.
  5. The further collapse and subsequent emigration in Syria happened on the Obama/Hillary watch.

The above are perhaps the top 5 Hillary “accomplishments.”

There are plenty more.

 

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

Jim Clifton recovering economy another lie, Unemployment rate lie, CEO Gallup, 25 million people whose economic lives have crashed, Invisible in reported 4.9% official U.S. unemployment rate, Devastated American remains counted as “full-time employed”

Jim Clifton recovering economy another lie, Unemployment rate lie, CEO Gallup, 25 million people whose economic lives have crashed, Invisible in reported 4.9% official U.S. unemployment rate, Devastated American remains counted as “full-time employed”

“The number of persons employed part time for economic reasons (sometimes referred to as involuntary part-time workers) was little changed in September at 7.1 million. These individuals, who would have preferred full-time employment, were working part time because their hours had been cut back or because they were unable to find a full-time job.”…US Labor Dept. September 2014

“11.4%: What the U.S. unemployment rate would be if labor force participation were back to January 2008 levels.” …James Pethokoukis, American Enterprise Institute, June 2013

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

 

From Gallup September 20, 2016.

“The Invisible American”

“I’ve been reading a lot about a “recovering” economy. It was even trumpeted on Page 1 of The New York Times and Financial Times last week.

I don’t think it’s true.

The percentage of Americans who say they are in the middle or upper-middle class has fallen 10 percentage points, from a 61% average between 2000 and 2008 to 51% today.

SocialClassSelfID_Chairmansblog_91916[1]-edit2

Ten percent of 250 million adults in the U.S. is 25 million people whose economic lives have crashed.

What the media is missing is that these 25 million people are invisible in the widely reported 4.9% official U.S. unemployment rate.

Let’s say someone has a good middle-class job that pays $65,000 a year. That job goes away in a changing, disrupted world, and his new full-time job pays $14 per hour — or about $28,000 per year. That devastated American remains counted as “full-time employed” because he still has full-time work — although with drastically reduced pay and benefits. He has fallen out of the middle class and is invisible in current reporting.

More disastrous is the emotional toll on the person — the sudden loss of household income can cause a crash of self-esteem and dignity, leading to an environment of desperation that we haven’t seen since the Great Depression.

Millions of Americans, even if they themselves are gainfully employed in good jobs, are just one degree away from someone who is experiencing either unemployment, underemployment or falling wages. We know them all.

There are three serious metrics that need to be turned around or we’ll lose the whole middle class.

  1. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, the percentage of the total U.S. adult population that has a full-time job has been hovering around 48% since 2010this is the lowest full-time employment level since 1983.
  2. The number of publicly listed companies trading on U.S. exchanges has been cut almost in half in the past 20 years — from about 7,300 to 3,700. Because firms can’t grow organically — that is, build more business from new and existing customers — they give up and pay high prices to acquire their competitors, thus drastically shrinking the number of U.S. public companies. This seriously contributes to the massive loss of U.S. middle-class jobs.
  3. New business startups are at historical lows. Americans have stopped starting businesses. And the businesses that do start aregrowing at historically slow rates.

Free enterprise is in free fall — but it is fixable. Small business can save America and restore the middle class.

Gallup finds that small businesses — startups plus “shootups,” those that grow big — are the engine of new economic energy. According to the U.S. Small Business Administration, 65% of all new jobs are created by small businesses, not large ones.

Here’s the crisis: The deaths of small businesses recently outnumbered the births of small businesses. The U.S. Census Bureau reports that the total number of business startups and business closures per year crossed for the first time in 2008. In the nearly 30 years before that, the U.S. consistently averaged a surplus of almost 120,000 more business births than deaths each year. But from 2008 to 2011, an average of 420,000 businesses were born annually, while an average of 450,000 per year were dying.”

Read more:

http://www.gallup.com/opinion/chairman/195680/invisible-american.aspx

From Citizen Wells February 3, 2015.

“Citizen Wells and others such as Rush Limbaugh have been warning and informing you about the real economy and jobs situation.

From Citizen Wells January 29, 2015.

“The plummet of the labor force participation rate in NC, other states and the US is big news and should be more widely reported.

The percentage of the population working is also important and in some ways more significant.

Since the big news today was the lowest so called initial claims number in 15 years let’s go back to January 2000 and compare the employment to population percent from then to now.

US

Jan 2000     64.6

Dec 2014      59.2

That’s a plummet of 5.4 percent!

NC

Jan 2000     65.1

Dec 2014      56.5

That’s a plummet of 8.6 percent !!!

So much for the improved economy and jobs situation.

I warned you we were in the age of Big Brother and “1984.””

From Gallup CEO Jim Clifton 

“The Big Lie: 5.6% Unemployment”

“Here’s something that many Americans — including some of the smartest and most educated among us — don’t know: The official unemployment rate, as reported by the U.S. Department of Labor, is extremely misleading.

Right now, we’re hearing much celebrating from the media, the White House and Wall Street about how unemployment is “down” to 5.6%. The cheerleading for this number is deafening. The media loves a comeback story, the White House wants to score political points and Wall Street would like you to stay in the market.

None of them will tell you this: If you, a family member or anyone is unemployed and has subsequently given up on finding a job — if you are so hopelessly out of work that you’ve stopped looking over the past four weeks — the Department of Labor doesn’t count you as unemployed. That’s right. While you are as unemployed as one can possibly be, and tragically may never find work again, you are not counted in the figure we see relentlessly in the news — currently 5.6%. Right now, as many as 30 million Americans are either out of work or severely underemployed. Trust me, the vast majority of them aren’t throwing parties to toast “falling” unemployment.

There’s another reason why the official rate is misleading. Say you’re an out-of-work engineer or healthcare worker or construction worker or retail manager: If you perform a minimum of one hour of work in a week and are paid at least $20 — maybe someone pays you to mow their lawn — you’re not officially counted as unemployed in the much-reported 5.6%. Few Americans know this.

Yet another figure of importance that doesn’t get much press: those working part time but wanting full-time work. If you have a degree in chemistry or math and are working 10 hours part time because it is all you can find — in other words, you are severely underemployed — the government doesn’t count you in the 5.6%. Few Americans know this.

There’s no other way to say this. The official unemployment rate, which cruelly overlooks the suffering of the long-term and often permanently unemployed as well as the depressingly underemployed, amounts to a Big Lie.

And it’s a lie that has consequences, because the great American dream is to have a good job, and in recent years, America has failed to deliver that dream more than it has at any time in recent memory. A good job is an individual’s primary identity, their very self-worth, their dignity — it establishes the relationship they have with their friends, community and country. When we fail to deliver a good job that fits a citizen’s talents, training and experience, we are failing the great American dream.”

5.6 percent unemployment rate big lie, Gallups Jim Clifton, White House Wall Street and media lies, 30 million Americans out of work or severely underemployed, Percent of population working plummets

 

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

NC obamacare rates skyrocket, Aetna slashes ACA exchange participation, Blue Cross Blue Shield raises premiums 34 percent lost more than $400 million, Aetna second quarter pre tax loss of $200 million

NC obamacare rates skyrocket, Aetna slashes ACA exchange participation, Blue Cross Blue Shield raises premiums 34 percent lost more than $400 million, Aetna second quarter pre tax loss of $200 million

“If you like your plan, you can keep it.”…Barack Obama

“millions of Americans are getting or are about to get cancellation letters for their health insurance under Obamacare, say experts, and the Obama administration has known that for at least three years.”…NBC News October 29, 2013

“We are being lied to on a scale unimaginable by George Orwell.”…Citizen Wells

 

Are you in NC and seriously considering voting for Hillary the lying sociopath?

Obama’s impact on NC has been catastrophic.

There is no reason to believe that Hillary’s will be less.

From Insurance Journal August 13, 2016.

“Blue Cross Seeks 34% Rate Hike in North Carolina for ACA Plans”

“North Carolina’s largest health insurer says higher-than-anticipated costs after two years of selling federally subsidized coverage has forced it to seek premium increases even greater than it thought would be necessary two months ago.

Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina said Aug. 6 that it now seeks an average 34.6 percent higher premium for insurance sold under President Barack Obama’s health insurance overhaul law. The company said in June that it wanted to raise rates by an average of almost 26 percent starting in January, compared with this year’s allowed 13.5 percent increase.

The move comes as dozens of health insurers across the country have proposed increasing premiums for individual policies well beyond 10 percent for 2016. However, many of those insurers face pushback from state and federal regulators, and experts say it’s still too soon to say how things will turn out.

Blue Cross vice president Patrick Getzen says the program has not met expectations that healthier customers would enroll in the second year and that costs would level out after people who avoided doctors for years got treatment.

“Based on our data, neither expectation is proving true. Our claims and expenses are higher than our premiums and we need to take steps now to protect the sustainability of plans for our customer over the long-term,” Getzen said.”

Read more:

http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/southeast/2015/08/13/378488.htm

From WRAL August 16, 2016.

“Insurer Aetna slashes ACA exchange participation, exits NC”

“Aetna has become the latest health insurer to retreat from the Affordable Care Act’s public exchanges by announcing a pullback that will further deplete customer choices in many pockets of the country.

The nation’s third largest insurer says it plans to leave nearly 70 percent of the counties in which it currently sells coverage as it trims exchange participation to four states in 2017, down from 15 this year. The move includes ending all Coventry Health Care of the Carolinas plans offered in North Carolina through HealthCare.gov.2

The insurer’s late Monday announcement comes after UnitedHealth and Humana detailed their own exchange pullbacks for 2017 and after more than a dozen nonprofit insurance co-ops have shut down in the past couple years.

Dwindling exchange participation from insurers is becoming a concern because competition is supposed to help control insurance price increases, and many carriers have already announced plans to seek price hikes of around 10 percent or more for 2017. Some states like Alaska and Oklahoma will be left with only one participant selling individual coverage in 2017.”

“The nation’s largest insurer, UnitedHealth Group Inc., had expanded rapidly into the public exchanges and sold coverage in 34 states this year, including North Carolina. But it only plans to offer policies in three states next year, Nevada, Virginia and New York.

The moves by Aetna and UnitedHealth leave Blue Cross Blue Shield of North Carolina as the only insurer to offer Affordable Care Act plans in North Carolina through the HealthCare.gov marketplace, although Cigna Corp. has said it would offer exchange plans in the Raleigh market in 2017.

Blue Cross has lost more than $400 million on exchange plans in the last two years and has considered dropping out as well, but company officials said in May they likely would continue offering exchange plans in 2017, depending on whether state regulators approve requested price increases.

Aetna has said it has been swamped with higher than expected costs, particularly from pricey specialty drugs. The nation’s third-largest insurer said a second-quarter pre-tax loss of $200 million from its individual insurance coverage helped it decide to limit exposure to the exchanges.”

Read more:

http://www.wral.com/insurer-aetna-slashes-aca-exchange-participation-to-4-states/15933839/

 

More here;

https://citizenwells.com/

 

 

Average 2017 Obamacare premium 24 percent increase, Insurance companies exit more states, Aetna to exit 11 of 15 more than two thirds of Obamacare state exchanges, Hillary lies will hurt you too

Average 2017 Obamacare premium 24 percent increase, Insurance companies exit more states, Aetna to exit 11 of 15 more than two thirds of Obamacare state exchanges, Hillary lies will hurt you too

“Nearly half of U.S. companies are reluctant to hire full-time employees because of the ACA. One in five firms indicates they are likely to hire fewer employees, and another one in 10 may lay off current employees in response to the law.

Other firms will shift toward part-time workers. More than 40 percent of CFOs say their companies will consider switching some jobs to less than 30 hours per week or targeting part-time workers for future employment.”…Duke University Fuqua School of Business December 11, 2013

“If you’ve got health insurance we’re going to work with you to lower your premiums by $2,500 per family per year. We will not wait 20 years from now to do it, or 10 years from now to do it. We will do it by the end of my first term as president.”…Barack Obama

“We are being lied to on a scale unimaginable by George Orwell.”…Citizen Wells

 

 

Obama lied about Obamacare and it is a disaster.

Hillary’s lies will hurt you too.

From Zero Hedge August 15, 2016.

“Obamacare Sticker Shock: Average 2017 Premium Surges 24%”

“The reference, of course, was to the state by state surge in proposed 2017 Obamacare premiums, contrasted with what the government contends is a modest 1.0% inflation rate.

Now, courtesy of a new study by independent analyst Charles Gaba – who has crunched the numbers for insurers participating in the ACA exchanges in all 50 states – we can also calculate what the average Obamacare premium increase across the entire US will be: using proposed and approved rate increase requests, the average Obamacare premium is expected to surge by a whopping 24% this year.

As Politico notes, Cigna and Humana recently revised their rate requests in Tennessee, and the new filings are dramatically higher. Cigna is now asking for a 46% average increase, up from 23%, and Humana is requesting a 44% increase, up from 29%, The Tennessean reported on Friday. Expect these numbers to rise even more as insurance companies exit even more states.

So far, the average approved rate increase is roughly 17% according to weighted averages across just five states, Mississippi, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island and Vermont, Gaba reports. “Combined, all [five states] only make up around 6.3 percent of the total population,” Gaba writes. “The numbers will no doubt jump around quite a bit as additional, larger states are plugged into the mix.”

Here is what Charles Gaba calculated:

[I] noted that since I originally crunched the numbers for some states as far back as April, the situation in some states has likely changed somewhat due to carriers dropping out, joining in or re-submitting their rate request filings.

 

There have been significant changes to the requested rate filings in at least four states: Arizona, Connecticut, Maryland and Tennessee. In all four cases, I’m afraid the statewide weighted average has increased, either due to resubmitted filings, a carrier dropping out or both.

 

As a result of these updates, the national average increase requested now stands at 23.9%, up from the previous average of 23.3%.”

Read more:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-08-15/obamacare-sticker-shock-average-2017-premium-surges-24

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

More Hillary Clinton pay to play with Russians, Russia reset relations, AID Russian technology and get PAID, Coordinated by Secretary Clinton and Minister Lavrov, Hillary provided access to our technology and now accuses them of hacking???

More Hillary Clinton pay to play with Russians, Russia reset relations, AID Russian technology and get PAID, Coordinated by Secretary Clinton and Minister Lavrov, Hillary provided access to our technology and now accuses them of hacking???

“Hillary Clinton, as Secretary of State, helped the Russians improve their technology and is now complaining they are hacking her emails.”…Citizen Wells

“Most importantly, Comey said the FBI found 110 emails on Clinton’s server that were classified at the time they were sent or received. That stands in direct contradiction to Clinton’s repeated insistence she never sent or received any classified emails. And, it even stands in contrast to her amended statement that she never knowingly sent or received any classified information.”…Washington Post July 5, 2016

“We are being lied to on a scale unimaginable by George Orwell.”…Citizen Wells

 

 

More Hillary Clinton pay to play with the Russians.

More crony capitalism

AID to get PAID.

Hillary helped the Russians with their technology and now complains that they are hacking her.

What???

From the Government Accountability Institute.

“FROM RUSSIA WITH MONEY

Hillary Clinton, the Russian Reset, and Cronyism”

Executive Summary

• A major technology transfer component of the Russian reset overseen by Hillary Clinton substantially enhanced the Russian military’s technological capabilities, according to both the FBI and the U.S. Army.

• Russian government officials and American corporations participated in the technology transfer project overseen by Hillary Clinton’s State Department that funnelled tens of millions of dollars to the Clinton Foundation.

• A Putin-connected Russian government fund transferred $35 million to a small company with Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman John Podesta on its executive board, which included senior Russian officials.

• John Podesta failed to reveal, as required by law on his federal financial disclosures, his membership on the board of this offshore company.

• Podesta also headed up a think tank which wrote favorably about the Russian reset while apparently receiving millions from Kremlin-linked Russian oligarchs via an offshore LLC.

Introduction

During her tenure as Secretary of State, one of Hillary Clinton’s major policy initiatives was the “reset” in relations with Russia. The idea was to begin the U.S.-Russia relationship anew, unburdened by recent Russian government actions or Bush Administration policies that had caused tensions between Moscow and Washington. The reset was one of President Obama’s “earliest new foreign policy initiatives,” according to the White House, and was based on the belief that relations with Russia had become unnecessarily mired in conflict over a handful of issues during the Bush Administration. In short, the Obama Administration wanted what it called “win-win outcomes.”1

As America’s chief diplomat, Secretary Clinton was the point person on the reset, handling a range of issues from arms control to technological cooperation.

Those matters she did not handle herself were managed by close aides under her direction. On July 6, 2009, President Barack Obama visited Moscow, and together with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, announced the creation of the U.S.-Russia Bilateral Presidential Commission. The Bilateral Commission would be the heart and soul of the Russia reset, with the goal to “improve communication and cooperation between the governments of Russia and the United States.” 2

In addition, the Commission would work at “identifying areas of cooperation and pursuing joint projects and actions that strengthen strategic stability, international security, economic well-being, and the development of ties between the Russian and American people….” 3 Specifically, as it related to technology transfer and investment, the Commission played a key role in everything from intellectual property sharing to export licensing to facilitating American investment in Russia and Russian investment in America.4

President Obama and Medvedev announced that the work of the Commission would be directed by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and her counterpart, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov. As President Obama put it, the effort would “be coordinated by Secretary Clinton and Minister Lavrov, and Secretary Clinton [would] travel to Russia [that] fall to carry [that] effort forward.” 5″

“According to leaked U.S. government cables, U.S. State Department officials beginning in 2009 played a substantial role in assisting Russian government entities in accessing U.S. capital and in seeking investments in U.S. high technology companies. Specifically, they worked to support the efforts of the Russian State Investment Fund, Rusnano, to seek investment opportunities in the United States by arranging meetings with U.S. tech firms. They also crafted and delivered joint statements with Russian officials on cooperation on technological matters.9”

The Reset Begins

“Hillary Clinton and the Obama Administration saw the opportunity for widespread technological cooperation between the U.S. and Russia. During her October 2009 visit to Russia, she noted the country’s strength in STEM (science, technology, engineering, mathematics): “[I]t’s just a treasure trove of potential for the Russian economy.”20 Vice President Joe Biden echoed that sentiment two years later during his visit to Russia: “Closer cooperation will allow American companies to benefit from greater access to Russia’s deep pool of talented engineers, mathematicians and computer scientists.”21 According to leaked State Department cables, Russian government officials were told that the Obama Administration saw “building the science and technology (S & T) relationship with Russia as an important pillar in strengthening overall bilateral relations….”22

Technological cooperation and investment deals seemed to be the sort of “win-win” deals President Obama said he sought. But as we will see, the Clintons and close aides appear to have personally benefitted from such deals. And these deals also raised serious questions from the FBI, the U.S. Army, and foreign governments that the Russian military was benefitting from them as well. ”

Skolkovo

A major part of this technological cooperation included Russian plans to create its own version of Silicon Valley.23 The research facility, on the outskirts Moscow, was dubbed “Skolkovo” and would be developed with the cooperation and investment of major U.S. tech firms.24 In 2010, Cisco pledged a cool $1 billion to Skolkovo, and Google and Intel also jumped on board.25 (All three happened to be major Clinton Foundation supporters as well—as we will see, a significant factor for dozens of companies who became involved with Skolkovo.) The idea was simple: match Russian brainpower with U.S. investment dollars and entrepreneurial know-how to spark technological breakthroughs in a wide variety of areas including energy, communications, sensors, and propulsion systems. Unlike the freewheeling, decentralized, and entrepreneurial culture in California, Skolkovo would have a distinctly different culture. It would be more centralized, and dominated by Russian government officials.26″

“The State Department played an active role early on by setting up meetings for Russian officials with U.S. technology companies. According to Hillary Clinton, she inspired then-Russian President Dimitry Medvedev to visit Silicon Valley to encourage participation in Skolkovo. As she reported in her memoirs, “At a long meeting I had with Medvedev outside Moscow in October 2009, he raised his plan to build a high-tech corridor in Russia modelled after our own Silicon Valley. When I suggested that he visit the original in California, he turned to his staff and told them to follow up.”31”

“The State Department actively and aggressively encouraged American firms to participate in Skolkovo. Indeed, many of the Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs) signed by U.S. companies to invest and cooperate in Skolkovo were signed under the auspices of Hillary Clinton’s State Department.40”

Money to the Clintons

“Many of the key figures in the Skolkovo process — on both the Russian and U.S. sides — had major financial ties to the Clintons. During the Russian reset, these figures and entities provided the Clintons with tens of millions of dollars, including contributions to the Clinton Foundation, paid for speeches by Bill Clinton, or investments in small start-up companies with deep Clinton ties.

In 2012 Skolkovo released its first annual report which identified the “key partner service”. Key Partners are entities who have made substantial commitments to develop the Skolkovo research facility.49 Conor Lenihan, vicepresident of the Skolkovo Foundation, who had previously partnered with the Clinton Foundation, released a PowerPoint presentation that included a list of 28 Russian, American, and European Key Partners.50 Of those 28, 17 of them, or 60 percent, have made financial commitments to the Clinton Foundation or sponsored speeches by Bill. The Clinton Foundation only discloses donations in ranges, so it is impossible to determine the precise amount of money the Skolkovo benefactors gave to the Clinton Foundation, but based on those disclosures, the money ranges from $6.5 to $23.5 million. However, keep in mind that the Clinton Foundation has admitted that it has failed to release the names of all of its contributors, so the amount could be substantially higher.”

“Another Russian figure deeply involved with Skolkovo who had financial ties to the Clintons is Andrey Vavilov. The former Russian government official is the Chairman of SuperOx, which is part of the Nuclear Cluster at Skolkovo.65 The Nuclear Cluster at Skolkovo is committed to enhancing the nuclear capabilities of the Russian state. A major listed beneficiary of this research is Rosatom, the Russian State Nuclear Agency, which manages the country’s nuclear arsenal.66 Vavilov has donated between $10,000 and $25,000 to the Clinton Foundation.67 Rosatom, through its subsidiary ARMZ, purchased a Canadian uranium company called Uranium One in 2010 which held assets in the United States and therefore required State Department approval. Nine Uranium One shareholders donated more than $145 million to the Clinton Foundation. Some of those donations, including those by Uranium One Chairman Ian Telfer, had not been disclosed by the Clinton Foundation.68”

National Security Implications

“The serious questions raised by Hillary Clinton’s pushing of technology transfer and investments as part of the Russian reset don’t end with the issues of self-dealing and cronyism. There are serious national security questions that have been raised about both Skolkovo and Rusnano, by the FBI, the U.S. Army, and cybersecurity experts. Specifically, these experts have argued that the activities of Skolkovo and Russian investment funds like Rusnano are ultimately serving the interests of the Russian military.”

“Cybersecurity experts also expressed deep reservations as early as 2010 that U.S. companies working at Skolkovo “may…inadvertently be harming global cybersecurity.”163 And indeed, Skolkovo happens to be the site of the Russian Security Service (FSB)’s security centers 16 and 18, which are in charge of information warfare for the Russian government. According to Newsweek, it is here that the Russian government runs information warfare operations against the Ukrainian government. As Vitaliy Naida, head of the Internal Security (SBU) department for the Ukrainian government told Newsweek, “It starts with the FSB’s security centres 16 and 18, operating out of Skolkovo, Russia. These centres are in charge of information warfare. They send out propaganda, false information via social media. Re-captioned images from Syria, war crimes from Serbia—they’re used to radicalize and then recruit Ukrainians.”164”

Read more:

Click to access Report-Skolkvovo-08012016.pdf

 

 

Russia controls 20 percent of US uranium with Clinton State Department approval, Hillary “I was not personally involved because that’s not something (the) secretary of state did”, Over 90% of uranium used here comes from Russia and other countries, NH Hampshire interview

Russia controls 20 percent of US uranium with Clinton State Department approval, Hillary “I was not personally involved because that’s not something (the) secretary of state did”, Over 90% of uranium used here comes from Russia and other countries, NH Hampshire interview

“Grave incompetence or brazen dishonesty?

Those are the only two conclusions one can reasonably come to after reviewing Hillary Clinton’s stunning Sunday interview on local New Hampshire TV.”…NY Post June 22, 2015

“For her to claim that somehow she was not involved in this decision strikes me as extremely odd,”
“If, in fact, she was not involved in this decision, it goes to the heart of leadership because the secretary of state should be the one to sign off on transferring 20 percent of U.S. uranium to the Russian government.”…Peter Schweizer, author “Clinton Cash”

“Allowing Russia to control 20 percent of US uranium.
Benghazi.
Careless treatment of classified emails.
Hillary Clinton is a clear and present danger to the US.”…Citizen Wells

 

Reported yesterday at Citizen Wells:

URANIUM FACTS

From the US Energy Information Administration July 11, 2011.

“Over 90% of uranium purchased by U.S. commercial nuclear reactors is from outside the U.S.”

“Owners and operators of U.S. commercial nuclear power reactors purchased nearly 47 million pounds of uranium from U.S. and foreign suppliers during 2010; 92% of this total was of foreign origin.

Historically, U.S. owners and operators have purchased the majority of their uranium from foreign sources. Russia, Canada, Australia, Kazakhstan, and Namibia represent the top five countries of origin for U.S. uranium, and together account for 85% of total U.S. uranium purchases in 2010. Owners and operators of U.S. commercial nuclear power plants purchased uranium from a total of 14 different countries in 2010.”

Read more:

http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=2150

From the US Energy Information Administration June 1, 2016.

“U.S. uranium production is near historic low as imports continue to fuel U.S. reactors”

“Most of the uranium loaded into U.S. nuclear power reactors is imported. During 2015, owners and operators of U.S. nuclear power reactors purchased 57 million pounds of uranium. Nearly half of these purchases originated from two countries, Canada and Kazakhstan, providing 17 million pounds and 11 million pounds of uranium, respectively.

U.S. uranium concentrate production, which started in 1949 and peaked in 1980, has recently been near historic lows. Uranium production was 0.63 million pounds of uranium (U3O8) in the first quarter 2016. At that rate, total 2016 production may be about 2.5 million pounds, only slightly higher than the low of 2.0 million pounds produced in 2003.”

Read more:

http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=26472

From the NY Times April 23, 2015.

“The headline on the website Pravda trumpeted President Vladimir V. Putin’s latest coup, its nationalistic fervor recalling an era when its precursor served as the official mouthpiece of the Kremlin: “Russian Nuclear Energy Conquers the World.”

The article, in January 2013, detailed how the Russian atomic energy agency, Rosatom, had taken over a Canadian company with uranium-mining stakes stretching from Central Asia to the American West. The deal made Rosatom one of the world’s largest uranium producers and brought Mr. Putin closer to his goal of controlling much of the global uranium supply chain.

But the untold story behind that story is one that involves not just the Russian president, but also a former American president and a woman who would like to be the next one.

At the heart of the tale are several men, leaders of the Canadian mining industry, who have been major donors to the charitable endeavors of former President Bill Clinton and his family. Members of that group built, financed and eventually sold off to the Russians a company that would become known as Uranium One.

Beyond mines in Kazakhstan that are among the most lucrative in the world, the sale gave the Russians control of one-fifth of all uranium production capacity in the United States. Since uranium is considered a strategic asset, with implications for national security, the deal had to be approved by a committee composed of representatives from a number of United States government agencies. Among the agencies that eventually signed off was the State Department, then headed by Mr. Clinton’s wife,Hillary Rodham Clinton.

As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors. Other people with ties to the company made donations as well.

And shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock.”
“The Power to Say No

When a company controlled by the Chinese government sought a 51 percent stake in a tiny Nevada gold mining operation in 2009, it set off a secretive review process in Washington, where officials raised concerns primarily about the mine’s proximity to a military installation, but also about the potential for minerals at the site, including uranium, to come under Chinese control. The officials killed the deal.

Such is the power of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States. The committee comprises some of the most powerful members of the cabinet, including the attorney general, the secretaries of the Treasury, Defense, Homeland Security, Commerce and Energy, and the secretary of state. They are charged with reviewing any deal that could result in foreign control of an American business or asset deemed important to national security.

The national security issue at stake in the Uranium One deal was not primarily about nuclear weapons proliferation; the United States and Russia had for years cooperated on that front, with Russia sending enriched fuel from decommissioned warheads to be used in American nuclear power plants in return for raw uranium.

Instead, it concerned American dependence on foreign uranium sources. While the United States gets one-fifth of its electrical power from nuclear plants, it produces only around 20 percent of the uranium it needs, and most plants have only 18 to 36 months of reserves, according to Marin Katusa, author of “The Colder War: How the Global Energy Trade Slipped From America’s Grasp.”

“The Russians are easily winning the uranium war, and nobody’s talking about it,” said Mr. Katusa, who explores the implications of the Uranium One deal in his book. “It’s not just a domestic issue but a foreign policy issue, too.”

When ARMZ, an arm of Rosatom, took its first 17 percent stake in Uranium One in 2009, the two parties signed an agreement, found in securities filings, to seek the foreign investment committee’s review. But it was the 2010 deal, giving the Russians a controlling 51 percent stake, that set off alarm bells. Four members of the House of Representatives signed a letter expressing concern. Two more began pushing legislation to kill the deal.

Senator John Barrasso, a Republican from Wyoming, where Uranium One’s largest American operation was, wrote to President Obama, saying the deal “would give the Russian government control over a sizable portion of America’s uranium production capacity.”
“Still, the ultimate authority to approve or reject the Russian acquisition rested with the cabinet officials on the foreign investment committee, including Mrs. Clinton — whose husband was collecting millions in donations from people associated with Uranium One.”

Read more:

From WMUR in New Hampshire June 23, 2015.

“Hillary Clinton facing questions over involvement in Uranium One sale”

“The question posed to Clinton during the interview with News 9 Political Director Josh McElveen focused on big money paid in the form of a $500,000 speaking fee to her husband, former President Bill Clinton, by a Kremlin bank, one of the players involved in the Uranium One deal.

Her answer is sparking major questions about her honesty and leadership.

“There’s no basis for any of that. The timing doesn’t work. It happened in terms of the work for the foundation before I was secretary of state,” Clinton said in the interview. “There were nine government agencies that that had to sign off on that deal. I was not personally involved because that’s not something (the) secretary of state did.”

“The question itself was born of allegations made by the conservative author of the best-selling but highly critical book, “Clinton Cash,” and on Tuesday, author Peter Schweizer blasted Clinton’s answers on CloseUP in an op-ed that has gone national, insisting his timelines are correct, and that at the time of the sale of Uranium One, Clinton was negotiating directly with the Russian government over civilian nuclear technology in the so-called Russian reset.

“For her to claim that somehow she was not involved in this decision strikes me as extremely odd,” said Schweizer. “If, in fact, she was not involved in this decision, it goes to the heart of leadership because the secretary of state should be the one to sign off on transferring 20 percent of U.S. uranium to the Russian government.””

Read more:

http://www.wmur.com/politics/hillary-clinton-facing-questions-over-involvement-in-uranium-one-sale/33737328

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

 

Hillary Clinton role in Russian uranium deal, Incompetence pay to play blackmail or all of the above, Over 90% of uranium purchased by US commercial nuclear reactors from outside America, Why did Hillary not stop sale to Russia?

Hillary Clinton role in Russian uranium deal, Incompetence pay to play blackmail or all of the above, Over 90% of uranium purchased by US commercial nuclear reactors from outside America, Why did Hillary not stop sale to Russia?

“Clinton Foundation quid-pro-quo worries are lingering, will be exploited in general”…DNC email, April 24, 2016 from Wikileaks

“Now, after Russia’s annexation of Crimea and aggression in Ukraine, the Moscow-Washington relationship is devolving toward Cold War levels, a point several experts made in evaluating a deal so beneficial to Mr. Putin, a man known to use energy resources to project power around the world.

“Should we be concerned? Absolutely,” said Michael McFaul, who served under Mrs. Clinton as the American ambassador to Russia but said he had been unaware of the Uranium One deal until asked about it. “Do we want Putin to have a monopoly on this? Of course we don’t. We don’t want to be dependent on Putin for anything in this climate.””…NY Times April 23, 2015

“While it is not clear precisely when Secretary Clinton decided to permanently delete all emails from her server, it appears she made the decision after October 28, 2014, when the Department of State for the first time asked the Secretary to return her public record to the Department,”… Rep. Trey Gowdy

 

URANIUM FACTS

From the US Energy Information Administration July 11, 2011.

“Over 90% of uranium purchased by U.S. commercial nuclear reactors is from outside the U.S.”

“Owners and operators of U.S. commercial nuclear power reactors purchased nearly 47 million pounds of uranium from U.S. and foreign suppliers during 2010; 92% of this total was of foreign origin.

Historically, U.S. owners and operators have purchased the majority of their uranium from foreign sources. Russia, Canada, Australia, Kazakhstan, and Namibia represent the top five countries of origin for U.S. uranium, and together account for 85% of total U.S. uranium purchases in 2010. Owners and operators of U.S. commercial nuclear power plants purchased uranium from a total of 14 different countries in 2010.”

Read more:

http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=2150

From the US Energy Information Administration June 1, 2016.

“U.S. uranium production is near historic low as imports continue to fuel U.S. reactors”

“Most of the uranium loaded into U.S. nuclear power reactors is imported. During 2015, owners and operators of U.S. nuclear power reactors purchased 57 million pounds of uranium. Nearly half of these purchases originated from two countries, Canada and Kazakhstan, providing 17 million pounds and 11 million pounds of uranium, respectively.

U.S. uranium concentrate production, which started in 1949 and peaked in 1980, has recently been near historic lows. Uranium production was 0.63 million pounds of uranium (U3O8) in the first quarter 2016. At that rate, total 2016 production may be about 2.5 million pounds, only slightly higher than the low of 2.0 million pounds produced in 2003.”

Read more:

http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=26472

So, why would Hillary Clinton, as Secretary of State, allow the sale of Uranium One and control of 20 percent of US uranium to the Russians?

Was it:

Incompetence?

Pay to Play involving the Clinton Foundation?

Blackmail by the Russians?

or

All of the above?

From Breitbart July 25, 2016.

“The Democrats’ newfound paranoia about Russian influence on American affairs was certainly nowhere to be found when Hillary Clinton was cheerfully selling them a huge chunk of America’s uranium stockpile, right after a Russian bank paid Bill Clinton $500,000 for a speech.

The Uranium One story is among the incidents detailed in Peter Schweizer’s Clinton Cash. A quick recap: Uranium One was originally a Canadian company, bought out by Russia’s state atomic energy agency, Rosatom.

Uranium One’s big shots were very, very generous donors to the Clinton Foundation, the “charity” through which so much foreign money flowed to Bill and Hillary Clinton. The New York Times reported in April 2015 about how those donations spiked as the deal for Rosatom to secure Uranium One and its holdings in the United States was brought to a successful conclusion, along with one of Bill Clinton’s biggest paydays ever:

As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors. Other people with ties to the company made donations as well.

And shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock.”

Read more:

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/07/25/flashback-clintons-loved-russia-enough-sell-uranium/

Was it incompetence?

FBI Director James Comey:

“Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.”

Whether or not the Russians hacked Hillary’s emails, it is now apparent that they have had access to her classified exchanges while Secretary of State.

Blackmail is a distinct possibility!

Did Hillary delete emails related to the Russian uranium deal?

From Politico July 6, 2016.

“The Strange Gaps in Hillary Clinton’s Email Traffic

An analysis of the released emails raises questions about whether Clinton deleted a number of work-related emails—and if she did, why.”

“But then there is an instance where the State Department cable traffic rises and there are few if any Clinton corresponding emails. It’s the case of Rosatom, the Russian State Nuclear Agency: Clinton and senior officials at the State Department received dozens of cables on the subject of Rosatom’s activities around the world, including a hair-raising cable about Russian efforts to dominate the uranium market. As secretary of state, Clinton was a central player in a variety of diplomatic initiatives involving Rosatom officials. But strangely, there is only one email that mentions Rosatom in Clinton’s entire collection, an innocuous email about Rosatom’s activities in Ecuador. To put that into perspective, there are more mentions of LeBron James, yoga and NBC’s Saturday Night Live than the Russian Nuclear Agency in Clinton’s emails deemed “official.”
What could explain this lack of emails on the Russian Nuclear Agency? Were Clinton’s aides negligent in passing along unimportant information while ignoring the far more troubling matters concerning Rosatom? Possibly. Or, were emails on this subject deleted as falling into the “personal” category? It is certainly odd that there’s virtually no email traffic on this subject in particular. Remember that a major deal involving Rosatom that was of vital concern to Clinton Foundation donors went down in 2009 and 2010. Rosatom bought a small Canadian uranium company owned by nine investors who were or became major Clinton Foundation donors, sending $145 million in contributions. The Rosatom deal required approval from several departments, including the State Department.”

Read more:

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/07/hillary-clinton-missing-emails-secretary-state-department-personal-server-investigation-fbi-214016

From the NY Times April 23, 2015.

 

“The national security issue at stake in the Uranium One deal was not primarily about nuclear weapons proliferation; the United States and Russia had for years cooperated on that front, with Russia sending enriched fuel from decommissioned warheads to be used in American nuclear power plants in return for raw uranium.

Instead, it concerned American dependence on foreign uranium sources. While the United States gets one-fifth of its electrical power from nuclear plants, it produces only around 20 percent of the uranium it needs, and most plants have only 18 to 36 months of reserves, according to Marin Katusa, author of “The Colder War: How the Global Energy Trade Slipped From America’s Grasp.”

“The Russians are easily winning the uranium war, and nobody’s talking about it,” said Mr. Katusa, who explores the implications of the Uranium One deal in his book. “It’s not just a domestic issue but a foreign policy issue, too.”

When ARMZ, an arm of Rosatom, took its first 17 percent stake in Uranium One in 2009, the two parties signed an agreement, found in securities filings, to seek the foreign investment committee’s review. But it was the 2010 deal, giving the Russians a controlling 51 percent stake, that set off alarm bells. Four members of the House of Representatives signed a letter expressing concern. Two more began pushing legislation to kill the deal.

Senator John Barrasso, a Republican from Wyoming, where Uranium One’s largest American operation was, wrote to President Obama, saying the deal “would give the Russian government control over a sizable portion of America’s uranium production capacity.”

“Equally alarming,” Mr. Barrasso added, “this sale gives ARMZ a significant stake in uranium mines in Kazakhstan.”

Uranium One’s shareholders were also alarmed, and were “afraid of Rosatom as a Russian state giant,” Sergei Novikov, a company spokesman, recalled in an interview. He said Rosatom’s chief, Mr. Kiriyenko, sought to reassure Uranium One investors, promising that Rosatom would not break up the company and would keep the same management, including Mr. Telfer, the chairman. Another Rosatom official said publicly that it did not intend to increase its investment beyond 51 percent, and that it envisioned keeping Uranium One a public company.”

“That renewed adversarial relationship has raised concerns about European dependency on Russian energy resources, including nuclear fuel. The unease reaches beyond diplomatic circles. In Wyoming, where Uranium One equipment is scattered across his 35,000-acre ranch, John Christensen is frustrated that repeated changes in corporate ownership over the years led to French, South African, Canadian and, finally, Russian control over mining rights on his property.

“I hate to see a foreign government own mining rights here in the United States,” he said. “I don’t think that should happen.”

Mr. Christensen, 65, noted that despite assurances by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission that uranium could not leave the country without Uranium One or ARMZ obtaining an export license — which they do not have — yellowcake from his property was routinely packed into drums and trucked off to a processing plant in Canada.

Asked about that, the commission confirmed that Uranium One has, in fact, shipped yellowcake to Canada even though it does not have an export license. Instead, the transport company doing the shipping, RSB Logistic Services, has the license. A commission spokesman said that “to the best of our knowledge” most of the uranium sent to Canada for processing was returned for use in the United States. A Uranium One spokeswoman, Donna Wichers, said 25 percent had gone to Western Europe and Japan. At the moment, with the uranium market in a downturn, nothing is being shipped from the Wyoming mines.

The “no export” assurance given at the time of the Rosatom deal is not the only one that turned out to be less than it seemed. Despite pledges to the contrary, Uranium One was delisted from the Toronto Stock Exchange and taken private. As of 2013, Rosatom’s subsidiary, ARMZ, owned 100 percent of it.”

Read more:

Incompetence?

Pay to Play involving the Clinton Foundation?

Blackmail by the Russians?

or

All of the above?

YOU DECIDE.

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/