Category Archives: Pay to play politics

Rod Blagojevich commutation scenarios, Obama grants to silence him, Trump grants and gets Blagojevich to reveal Obama corruption, Blagojevich remains in prison and talks before silenced, Another mysterious death occurs

Rod Blagojevich commutation scenarios, Obama grants to silence him, Trump grants and gets Blagojevich to reveal Obama corruption, Blagojevich remains in prison and talks before silenced, Another mysterious death occurs

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

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

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

 

I sincerely hope that Rod Blagojevich does not die of another “mysterious death” (as so many involved with the Clintons and Obama have) before he can reveal the details of Obama’s involvement in Chicago and Illinois corruption.

There is much to tell.

We are left with these questions.

Will Obama grant Blagojevich the commutation he requested?

If not, will Trump grant the commutation with the stipulation that he rat on Obama?

If not, will Blagojevich squeal in prison?

From the AP December 25, 2016.

“One of the last chances for former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich to win early release from federal prison rests on a pending decision by the man whose Senate seat Blagojevich was convicted of trying to sell – President Barack Obama.

Blagojevich, 60, is in the fourth year of a 14-year prison term. He recently submitted a request to have his sentence on wide-ranging corruption convictions commuted, the U.S. Department of Justice has confirmed.

Obama has rarely mentioned his fellow Chicago Democrat since Blagojevich’s December 2008 arrest, a month after Obama won the presidency, so it’s hard to gauge if he’d give Blagojevich’s request for a reduced sentence serious thought.

A look at the commutation process and factors that could influence a decision:

WHAT IT IS

A commutation is a reduction of a sentence, while pardons amount to forgiveness of a crime that also removes restrictions on rights to run for office and vote. In federal cases, only presidents have the power to reduce a sentence.

If Obama doesn’t get around to deciding on Blagojevich’s application before his last day in office, he would leave it for someone else with a tie to the ex-governor to decide: President-elect Donald Trump.

Blagojevich was on Trump’s “Celebrity Apprentice” TV show in 2010. While Trump eventually “fired” Blagojevich as a contestant, he praised Blagojevich for how he fought his criminal case, telling him, “You have a hell of a lot of guts.”

Among the factors Obama can consider is whether Blagojevich’s punishment was disproportionate to the crime. His 14-year prison term was the longest for an Illinois politician for corruption and his lawyers argue it was too severe.”

“One connection between the politicians – an uncomfortable one for Obama – is that he and Blagojevich once shared the same fundraiser, Tony Rezko. Rezko was convicted in June 2008 of fraud, money laundering and bribery.”

Read more:

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_BLAGOJEVICH_COMMUTATION?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2016-12-23-20-19-33

Do you believe that Obama was less guilty than Blagojevich?

Remember, only 2 percent of the wiretaps were released during the Blagojevich trials.

And they were damning for Obama.

From Citizen Wells August 2, 2015.

Blagojevich attorney Len Goodman is requesting that the full court review the appeal that was just ruled on by 3 judges.

How does this fit in with the deal that I am certain was struck with Obama et al?

To protect Obama and keep Blagojevich from talking.

ObamaBlagoNov2008

I wrote this on July 19, 2011:

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

The prosecution and reporting of Rod Blagojevich has been so watered down that it barely resembles what actually happened.

Why?

To protect Obama.

For those of you blinded by the BS from the mainstream media or not familiar with this case, Blagojevich, not Obama was the presumptive presidential candidate in 2006. Within one year it was Obama.

The Blagojevich Administration came under investigation by late 2003 and Tony Rezko was at the center of much of the corruption.

Stuart Levine carried out the orders of Rezko and Obama was closely tied to both men.

Federal investigators soon knew of Obama’s ties to the corruption but for some reason focused more on Blagojevich and chose to wait until after the 2008 elections to arrest him.

Why?

“this guy is more Tony’d up than I am. …. they got the Chicago media to f…ing make me wear Rezko more. To f…ing dilute it from him.…Rod Blagojevich wiretap November 12, 2008

“BLAGOJEVICH: You know, Axelrod and Obama’s people, you know, clearly turned, you know, got the Chicago media to make Rezko all about me. And hardly about…

HARRIS: Yeah, in other words, they focus their,they focus their attention on you. They couldn’t make it go away so the bes-, next best strategy is deflect it.

BLAGOJEVICH: Right.

HARRIS: This is somewhere where it, it’ll satisfy the, the hunger of the beast, being the media.

BLAGOJEVICH: Right, right.

HARRIS: Yeah, it makes sense. It’s not a stretch. If I’m, if I’m his message advisor, media advisor or whatever, operative, yeah I’m gonna try to feed the beast by giving ‘em something else to eat on.”…Rod Blagojevich wiretap November 12, 2008

Here is some background on the complete story from Citizen Wells March 14, 2011.

“This is the first article in a series about corruption in the US Justice Department and specifically an operation I refer to as “Protecting Obama.” Many events smelled back in 2008, but with the passage of time, the stench is corroborated. Below is the Evidentiary Proffer, a summary and timeline of the bulk of evidence that reveals how Obama was protected in the investigation and prosecution of Tony Rezko, Rod Blagojevich, et al. The time is right to present my case. There are enough well documented events to make a strong case. As I have mentioned recently, I have contacted a prominent congressman about this issue and others and this is a way to get the facts in front of the congressman, his staff and the public. The Proffer will certainly be updated from time to time. I will next present an opening statement and then go on to present the case in more detail. However, anyone who has been paying careful attention or who reads this Proffer, will come to the obvious conclusion presented here  of collusion involving the US Justice Department, Patrick Fitzgerald, Barack Obama, and probably Rod Blagojevich and Tony Rezko.

Before reading the Proffer, here is a recap of how important Rezko is to the prosecution of Blagojevich and ultimately indicting Obama.
It is understandable why the Blagojevich defense team does not want Rezko on the stand. Judge Zagel’s comment about Rezko being a bad witness reeks of conspiracy. Convicted felons of all categories are regularly used as witnesses. Stuart Levine, the key witness in the Rezko trial was not only enmeshed in corruption but was a long time drug user.

Here are the approximate number of times that “Rezko” is mentioned in US Justice Department documents.

Indictment:  87 times.
Criminal complaint:  170 times.
Evidentiary Proffer:  288 times.

Even if a strong argument is made against using Rezko as a witness, and good luck with that argument, Stuart Levine was used extensively as a witness in the Rezko trial, and his name was mentioned approx. 146 times in the Blagojevich Criminal Complaint. And remember, Blagojevich’s name was mentioned at least 30 times on one day of the Rezko trial.

 

U.S. Citizens

V.

U.S. Justice Department,

Barack Hussein Obama

Evidentiary Proffer supporting charge of Collusion in protecting Obama during the course of investigating and prosecuting Tony Rezko and Rod Blagojevich.

Jan. – Aug. 2003:  Obama was Chairman of the IL Senate Health and Human Service Committee.
Feb. 20, 2003: Senate Bill 1332 “Illinois Health Facilities Planning Act” filed. Reduced members of IL Health Planning and Facilities Board from 15 to 9.

(Rezko Trial March 13, 2008; 3:09 p.m.)

“Almanaseer was appointed to the planning board in 2003 on Rezko’s recommendation. Prosecutors contend he became part of a five-member voting bloc on the board that followed Rezko’s wishes. Almanaseer said board Chairman Thomas Beck tried to steer his voting.

“He said, ‘If you just don’t know which way to vote, vote the way Mr. Levine votes because that’s the way Tony would want the vote to go,” Almanaseer recalled, referring to Stuart Levine.”

Spring 2003 – Nov 2003: (Rezko trial March 11, 2008; 10:58 a.m.)

“Jennifer Thomas, a former aide to Gov. Rod Blagojevich’s patronage chief Joe Cini, continued on the stand Tuesday morning and gave a few more insights into those regular Monday morning meetings she and Cini held in 2003 with Antoin “Tony” Rezko at his office.”

“Thomas said Rezko floated the names of several people to sit on the Illinois Health Facilities Planning Board, which the government claims Rezko corrupted with the help of board member Stuart Levine. And Thomas said Rezko at one point made it clear that he wanted to see Levine reappointed to the panel, which was being overhauled by the governor in 2003.”
May 21, 2003: Senate Bill 1332 passed by House and Senate.
June 27, 2003: Blagojevich made this the effective date of Senate Bill 1332.
June 2003: (Rezko trial March 10, 2008; 4:16 p.m.)

“Ziegelmueller asked Hayden about a 2003 e-mail exchange with Lichtenstein, then the governor’s top lawyer, in which Wilhelm made recommendations for the Illinois Health Facilities Planning Board.
The name of Barack Obama, the Democratic front-runner for the presidential nomination, also appears in the e-mail as a member of a strategic team reviewing hospital board matters with the governor’s staff when he was a state senator. The hospital board was scheduled to be revamped in the summer of 2003.
Obama was then chairman of the Senate Committee on Health & Human Services.”
June 30, 2003: Obama gets the following donations.

$5000 Ali Ata was appointed as Director at IFA
$6000 Alison Davis gets appointment on Investment Board
$15,000 Dr. Michael Malek gets appointment on Hospital Facility Board
$5000  Abdelhamid Chaib’s wife gets appointment on Employee Security Board
$10,000 Elie Maloof – Rezko used him as one of several strawmen to donate funds to certain politicians.
$1000  Phil Cacciatore (one of Auchi’s Riverside Park Investors) gets seat on Board
$1000  Velma Butler (one of Auchi’s Riverside Park Investors) was recommended for Board
$1000  Martello Pollack (Vegas Crystal Comm) received Iraqi Construction contracts
$1000 Jack Carriglio gets appointed to Board
$500  Anthony Abboud gets appointed to Board
$3000 Michael Winter, who helped Rezko in funneling kickbacks through investment firm
$1000 Talat Othman gets appointed to Board
$1000 David Gustman, $1000 from Gustman’s wife after he is appointed Board Chairman
Late 2003: Earliest documented awareness by FBI and Patrick Fitzgerald of corruption in Blagojevich admin. Pamela Meyer Davis agreed to secretly record conversations involving state health planning board with an FBI wire.
Oct. 29, 2003: Blagojevich interest in presidency (Blagojevich criminal complaint pg 14).

“During the conversation, Cari and ROD BLAGOJEVICH discussed Cari’s fundraising background and work as a national fundraiser. ROD BLAGOJEVICH discussed his interest in running for President of the United States.”
Dec 17, 2003: Former Governor George Ryan indicted.

http://www.justice.gov/usao/iln/indict/2003/warner_ryan.pdf
Dec 31, 2003: (NY Times)

“Mr. Fitzgerald announced that he was prosecuting former Gov. George Ryan, a Republican, in a scandal that had been swirling around long before Mr. Fitzgerald got here and that many people thought would never touch the most powerful politicians in Illinois. But there Mr. Fitzgerald was, a week before Christmas, ticking off the details of a 91-page indictment against Mr. Ryan, seemingly from memory.

That, even Mr. Fitzgerald’s former opponents in the courtroom say, is classic Fitzgerald: dogged, dispassionate and endlessly prepared.”
2004 – 2005: (February 10, 2008 Sun-Times)

“In the media, Obama always made it sound like he rarely saw Rezko, saying they met for breakfast or lunch once or twice a year. However, the FBI mole John Thomas helped investigators “build a record of repeat visits to the old offices of Rezko and former business partner Daniel Mahru’s Rezmar Corp., at 853 N. Elston, by Blagojevich and Obama during 2004 and 2005,“

During his March 14, 2008 interview, the Times told Obama, Thomas is an FBI mole and he “recently told us that he saw you coming and going from Rezko’s office a lot.”

“And three other sources told us that you and Rezko spoke on the phone daily.””
March – May 2004: (Rezko trial exhibits)

FBI chart presented to the jury on April 28, 2008, shows 257 calls from Rezko’s phones to Blagojevich’s chief of staff, Lon Monk, between March 2004 and May 2004 alone.

http://www.justice.gov/usao/iln/hot/us_v_rezko_exhibits/2008_04_28/phone_chart_07.pdf

April 3, 2004: (April 14, 2008; 12:57 p.m. Rezko trial transcripts)

“Stuart Levine, the prosecution’s star witness, said he and Obama were at a party Rezko threw at his Wilmette mansion on April 3, 2004, for Nadhmi Auchi, a controversial Iraqi-born billionaire who Rezko was trying to get to invest in a South Loop real-estate development.

Auchi, now a citizen of the United Kingdom, has faced criminal charges in Europe. He also figured in the revocation of Rezko’s bond early this year after attempting to wire him more than $3 million. Upon learning of that attempt, U.S. District Judge Amy St. Eve declared Rezko a flight risk and ordered him held in a federal jail in the Loop.

The Rezko party in 2004 was designed to induce Auchi to pour money into the South Loop investment. Obama’s presence at the party was not previously known. At the time, Obama was fresh off a surprise win in the Illinois Democratic primary for U.S. Senate and was riding a crest of national publicity.”
April 8 – May 21, 2004: (Rezko Trial March 12, 2008; 11:11 a.m.)

“FBI Special Agent Daniel Cain, the primary case agent on the investigation into Levine and Rezko, is on the stand now in testimony that is laying the foundation for entering the wiretaps into evidence.

Cain said the investigation, dubbed Operation Board Games by the federal agents, began in December 2003 and was prompted by information gleaned from an informant whom he did not identify. That witness, he said, took part in meetings with two other individuals who were in contact with Levine by phone at his home.

Cain said Levine had three phone lines in his North Shore home. Federal agents recorded conversations on those lines April 8-May 21, 2004. Those dates span the time when Levine, Rezko and others allegedly were working to rig the hospital board vote on a Mercy Health System hospital proposal for Crystal Lake and other kickback schemes prosecutors claim they were engaged in.”
April 21, 2004: (Rezko Trial March 11, 2008; 5:27 p.m.)

“The former lawyer for a state board that regulates hospital expansions took the stand late in the afternoon and said she told Stuart Levine of her concern after an odd vote on the Mercy Hospital project that included Levine whispering to other board members before the project was approved.

His response was no less troubling, she said.

“He shrugged his shoulders and said, ‘Sometimes you have to be a good soldier,’” said Anne Murphy, the former lawyer for the Illinois Health Facilities Planning Board.

Murphy said Levine’s remark followed a vote that saw the plan for a new hospital in Crystal Lake squeak by with the minimum of five votes in favor on the nine-member board.

With eight members present at the April 2004 meeting, Murphy said the vote was stalled with three members voting “yes,” two voting “no” and two abstentions when Chairman Thomas Beck was called to give his vote.

Beck said, “Where’re we at?” Murphy testified. He then went over to whisper with Levine off the record, she said. When that conversation ended, Murphy said, Levine got up and whispered to Imad Almanaseer.

Beck then voted yes, Murphy testified, and Almanaseer changed his vote to “yes,” giving the plan the necessary votes to pass.

“There was an audible, collective gasp across the room,” Murphy recalled of the April 2004 meeting.

Prosecutors contend the five members who voted for the hospital were a Levine-led bloc that Rezko had placed on the board and controlled. The two were charged with arranging to accept a kickback from the builder who was going to build the Mercy project in Crystal Lake.

The entire board was new as of the summer of 2003, Murphy said. She said she had given the new members memos on ethics, including conflicts of interest.”

May 18, 2004: (March 21, 2008; 12:10 p.m. Rezko trial transcripts)

“Another government wiretap has been played with Antoin “Tony” Rezko’s voice on it, and this one could prove damaging to his defense. On the tape, recorded May 18, 2004, Rezko can be heard giving orders to political fixer Stuart Levine about how he wanted to manipulate the vote of one of Levine’s fellow members on the Illinois Health Facilities Planning board, Danalynn Rice.

June 7, 2004: Stuart Levine, member of the Illinois Health Facilities Planning Board, abruptly resigns. This is the first indication that the Blagojevich administration is under federal criminal investigation.

July 2, 2004: Stuart Levine resigns from the state Teachers’ Retirement System board.
July 27, 2004: Obama Democratic Convention Speech.
May 9, 2005: Stuart Levine indicted on corruption charges. Federal subpoena issued to Tony Rezko.
June 15, 2005: Obama purchases home next door to Rezko for $1.65 million, $300,000 less than the asking price.
June 15, 2005: Rita Rezko, Tony’s wife purchased plot next door for $625,000 asking price.
Sept. 15, 2005: Joseph Cari, former lawyer for the state’s teacher’s pension board pleads guilty to extortion. A high ranking public official is described in court documents only as “Public official A.”
Oct. 25, 2005: The Chicago Tribune reports about a federal grand jury investigation into the alleged political hiring practices of the Blagojevich administration.
Late 2005 early 2006: From the Kenneth J. Conner complaint against Mutual Bank filed Oct. 16, 2008. The lawsuit is still active.

“11.  In late 2005 or early 2006, Conner performed an appraisal review of the Adams Appraisal (Exhibit C) per the directive of Richard Barth and James Murphy. Conner prepared a written Appraisal Review report (ARR) opining that the Adams Appraisal overvalued the Greenwood lot by a minimum of $ 125,000.00″

“18.  On October 23, 2007, eight days after Conner’s October 15, 2007 email to Schlabach attached as Exhibit J, Mutual Bank terminated Conner’s employment for pretextual reasons.”

Conner later told World Net daily when he initially was fired, that the bank and the Rezkos were engaged in “fraud, bribes or kickbacks, use whatever term you want,” to benefit the Obamas.

Soon after the Blagojevich arrest, Conner was interviewed by investigators from Fitzgerald’s office.
Jan. 2006: Rita Rezko sells the Obamas one-sixth of her lot for $104,500.
Feb. 4, 2006: (Chicago Sun-Times)

“Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich has always been rumored to be interested in higher office. A single entry in a campaign-finance report he filed this week could add fuel to the speculation.

Blagojevich paid $7,500 in December to one of the top Democratic political strategists in Iowa, where contacts are important for anyone with presidential aspirations.”
Feb. 19, 2006: Blagojevich began his 2006 re-election to IL Governor.
Aug. 5, 2006: The Chicago Tribune reports that Stuart Levine is cooperating with the federal investigation of state government.
Aug. 11-20 2006: Illinois State Fair. “We’ve got a governor in Rod Blagojevich who has delivered consistently on behalf of the people of Illinois,” Obama told the crowd.
Oct. 11, 2006: Tony Rezko is indicted on federal charges he sought millions of dollars in kickbacks and campaign donations from firms seeking state business.

Oct. 22, 2006: Obama publicly states he is considering a run for the Presidency.
Oct. 27, 2006: Stuart Levine pleads guilty in a scheme to squeeze millions of dollars from firms seeking state business. Court papers contain allegations that Rezko and  Christopher Kelly were using their influence for corrupt purposes.
Nov. 7, 2006 (Chicago SunTimes)

“The Rezko story broke last week, when Obama was wrapping up a national tour serving several purposes: promote his new book, The Audacity of Hope, raise money and stump for Democrats, and lay the groundwork for a possible 2008 White House bid.”
Jan. 16, 2007:  Obama announces his intention to run for president.

“I’ve navigated some fairly difficult territory in my political career and, you know, there are some folks in Springfield who are pretty wily.

And I’ve always been able to operate effectively, but also do so in a way that’s consistent with my values and ethics. I make no claims of perfection, but I think that generally my judgment and my assessments of people have been pretty good and that’s part of how I’ve stayed out of trouble in what can be a pretty hurly burly political environment. ….. I think that the way [voters should view the Rezko relationship] is that I made a mistake in not seeing the potential conflicts of interest or appearances of impropriety. But they should see somebody who was not engaged in any wrongdoing, who did not in any way betray the public trust, who has maintained consistently high ethical standards and who they can trust.”
Feb 10, 2008: (Chicago Sun-Times)

“Sources said Thomas helped investigators build a record of repeat visits to the old offices of Rezko and former business partner Daniel Mahru’s Rezmar Corp., at 853 N. Elston, by Blagojevich and Obama during 2004 and 2005.”
March 6, 2008: Rezko trial begins.
April 22, 2008: Ali Ata pleads guilty to obstruction of justice and agrees to cooperate.
May 2, 2008: Illinois Senate narrowly defeated a measure aimed at giving voters a chance to recall Gov. Rod Blagojevich.
June 4, 2008: Rezko convicted on 16 of 24 counts.
Count 1 contains ties to Blagojevich and Obama.

The following conviction counts are related to Mercy Hospital and the rigging of the Planning Board.

1, 11, 12, 14, 15

A large portion of the testimony in the Rezko Trial was about the rigging of the Planning Board.
Aug. 20, 2008: Rezko sentencing delayed.
Oct. 9, 2008: Rezko sentencing delayed.
Oct. 30, 2008: William Cellini indicted
Nov. 4, 2008: Washington Times report.

“A former Illinois real estate specialist says FBI agents have questioned him about a Chicago property that had been bought by convicted felon Tony Rezko’s wife and later sold to the couple’s next-door neighbor, Sen. Barack Obama.

The real estate specialist, Kenneth J. Conner, said bank officials replaced an appraisal review he prepared on the property and FBI agents were investigating in late 2007 whether the Rezko-Obama deal was proper.

“Agents and I talked about payoff, bribe, kickback for a long time, though it took them only a short number of minutes of talking with me while looking at the appraisal to acknowledge what they already seemed to know: The Rezko lot was grossly overvalued,” Mr. Conner told The Washington Times Monday.

“Rezko paid the asking price on the same day Obama paid $300,000 less than the asking price to the same seller for his adjacent mansion,” he said. “This begs the question of payoff, bribe, kickback.””

Dec. 7, 2008: Criminal complaint of Blagojevich. Nine individuals is important. Obama helped passed a bill to reduce the number from 15 to 9.

“b. Corruption of the Planning Board”
“At the relevant time period, the Planning Board consisted of nine individuals.”

“Planning Board” (IL Health Facilities Planning Board) is mentioned 31 times.

“Rezko” is mentioned 170 times.

“Hospital” in context of Mercy Hospital mentioned 8 times.
Dec. 9, 2008: Blagojevich arrested

“Fitzgerald said, “We make no allegations” that Obama was aware of any alleged scheming by Blagojevich.”
Jan. 9, 2009: IL House votes 114 to 1 to impeach Blagojevich.
Jan 29, 2009: IL Senate removes Blagojevich from office.
Feb 12, 2009: “US Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald, who brought criminal fraud charges against former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich, will stay on with the Obama administration, reports Pete Williams at NBC.”
APRIL 2, 2009: Press release, Superceding Indictment. There is no mention of nine board members.

“Planning Board” (IL Health Facilities Planning Board) is mentioned 7 times

“Rezko” is mentioned 100 times.

http://www.justice.gov/usao/iln/pr/chicago/2009/pr0402_01a.pdf
July 30,  2009: Patrick Fitzgerald, the top prosecutor in Illinois’ Northern District, has been named interim chairman of the Attorney General’s Advisory Committee of U.S. Attorneys (AGAC).
Feb. 4, 2010: Second superceding indictment. There is no mention of nine board members.

“Planning Board” (IL Health Facilities Planning Board) is mentioned 7 times

“Rezko” is mentioned 87 times.

“Hospital” in context of Mercy Hospital mentioned 1 time.

http://www.justice.gov/usao/iln/pr/chicago/2010/pr0204_02a.pdf
April 14, 2010: Evidentiary Proffer include 9 members statement.

“During the relevant time period, the Planning Board consisted of nine individuals.”

“Rezko was able to obtain significant influence over the affairs of the Planning Board by arranging for Blagojevich to appoint five of Rezko’s associates and/or friends, including Levine, as members of the Planning Board in 2003.”

“Rezko” is mentioned 288 times.

“Hospital” in context of Mercy Hospital mentioned 18 times.
April 22, 2010: Motion filed to subpoena Obama and redacted parts revealed.

“22. However, the defense has a good faith belief that Mr. Rezko, President Obama’s former friend, fund-raiser, and neighbor told the FBI and

the United States Attorneys

Redacted:

a different story about President Obama. In a recent in camera proceeding, the government tendered a three paragraph letter indicating that Rezko “has stated
in interviews with the government that he engaged in election law violations by personally contributing a large sum of cash to the campaign of a public official who is not Rod Blagojevich. … Further, the public official denies being aware of cash contributions to his campaign by Rezko or others and denies having conversations with Rezko related to cash contributions. … Rezko has also stated in interviews with the government that he believed he transmitted a quid pro quo offer from a lobbyist to the public official, whereby the lobbyist would hold a fundraiser for the official in exchange for favorable official action, but that the public official rejected the offer. The public official denies any such conversation. In addition, Rezko has stated to the government that he and the public official had certain conversations about gaming legislation and administration, which the public official denies having had.”10

10 The defense has a good faith belief that this public official is Barack Obama.”

June 29, 2010: Judge Zagel  said there was a word to describe witnesses like Rezko  who damage whatever side calls them to testify.

“generally explains why they’re not called.”

Aug. 17, 2010: Blagojevich convicted of 1 of 24 counts. Neither Rezko or Levine were called as witnesses. One juror held out from indicting on more counts. The trial was much shorter than predicted . Approx 2% of the wiretaps were presented.
Jan. 6, 2011: Rezko sentencing delayed indefinitely.
Jan. 28, 2011: Rezko sentencing set for October 21, 2011.
Feb. 24, 2011: Counts 1,2,4 in the Blagojevich Indictment are dropped. This represents approx. half of the indictment and includes numerous corruption ties to Blagojevich and Obama.

The only reference left to “Hospital” in context of Mercy Hospital was in count one.
March 9, 2011: Blagojevich files motion to be sentenced on one conviction charge.

https://citizenwells.com/2015/08/02/blagojevich-appeal-prosecution-delays-protect-obama-august-2-2015-truth-behind-blagojevich-obama-chicago-corruption-2-percent-of-wiretaps-reveal-much-is-their-deal-playing-out-or-will-blagojevich/

 

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

 

Advertisements

Hillary Clinton plan and sale of Commerce Department seats for political donations, Court documents and Nolanda Hill testimony, Judge Lamberth: “DOC…destruction of potentially responsive documents in the office of…Secretary Brown”, Hillary lied Ron Brown died

Hillary Clinton plan and sale of Commerce Department seats for political donations, Court documents and Nolanda Hill testimony, Judge Lamberth: “DOC…destruction of potentially responsive documents in the office of…Secretary Brown”, Hillary lied Ron Brown died

“After the elections of 1994, and the Democrats’ loss of Congress, I became aware, through my discussions with Ron, that the trade missions were being used as a fundraising tool for the upcoming Clinton-Gore presidential campaign and the Democratic Party. Specifically, Ron told me that domestic companies were being solicited to donate large sums of money in exchange for their selection to participate on trade missions of the Commerce Department. Ron expressed to me his displeasure that the purpose of the Commerce trade missions had been and were being perverted at the direction of The White House.”…Nolanda Hill Affidavit

“Hillary lied Americans died”…Citizen Wells

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

 

 

From Citizen Wells earlier today via the House Judiciary Committee Evidentiary Record of December 1998, we learn:

“In January 1998, Judicial Watch uncovered a witness, Nolanda Butler
Hill, a close confidante and business partner of late Commerce
Secretary Brown, with whom Secretary Brown had shared key details about
the campaign-contributions-for-seats-on-trade-missions scheme, as well
as the Clinton Administration’s efforts to stonewall Judicial Watch’s
lawsuit. Secretary Brown had even shown important documents to Ms. Hill
that detailed this unlawful sale of taxpayer-financed government
services. With Ms. Hill’s uncontroverted testimony providing the
capstone to its investigation, Judicial Watch has proven beyond all
reasonable doubt that not only was the Clinton Administration engaged
in an unlawful scheme to sell seats on Commerce Department trade
missions in exchange for campaign contributions, but that a criminal
cover-up was ordered by President Clinton’s top aides to thwart
Judicial Watch’s Court-ordered investigation and to hide the
culpability of the President, Mrs. Clinton, the Clinton Administration
and the DNC for their use of Commerce Department trade missions as a
political fundraising vehicle.

Ms. Hill testified that then White House Chief of Staff Leon
Panetta and Deputy Chief of Staff John Podesta ordered Commerce
Secretary Brown to defy Court orders and obstruct the Judicial Watch
suit until after the 1996 federal elections. Ms. Hill’s sworn testimony
implicated the President’s top staff members in obstruction of justice.
Ms. Hill also tied the sale of trade mission seats directly to
President Clinton. In both a sworn affidavit and Court testimony, Ms.
Hill explained that:

The First Lady conceived of the idea to sell the
trade mission seats in exchange for political contributions;
The President knew of and approved this scheme;
The Vice President participated in this scheme;
Commerce Secretary Ron Brown helped implement the
illegal fundraising operation out of the Clinton Commerce
Department;

Presidential White House aides Harold Ickes and (now
Labor Secretary) Alexis Herman helped orchestrate the sale of
the Commerce trade mission seats;

The President’s top fundraisers at the DNC and his
reselection campaign (Marvin Rosen and Terrence McAuliffe)
helped coordinate the selling of these taxpayer resources in
exchange for political contributions;

Presidential Chief of Staff Leon Panetta and Deputy
Chief of Staff John Podesta ordered the cover-up of these
activities; and

The President’s appointees at the Commerce
Department have committed perjury, destroyed and suppressed
evidence, and likely breached our nation’s security.”

https://citizenwells.com/2016/09/05/hillary-clinton-conceived-plan-to-sell-seats-on-commerce-dept-trade-missions-in-exchange-for-political-contributions-panetta-and-podesta-ordered-ron-brown-to-obstruct-justice-judicial-committee-evi/

From court documents related to the FOIA requests of Judicial Watch to the Commerce Department.

Nolanda Butler Hill affidavit.

“Affidavit of Nolanda Butler Hill

I, Nolanda Butler Hill, being duly sworn, deposes and says:

1. This affidavit is based on my own personal knowledge.

2. I have been a resident of Texas for all of my life and still reside there.

3. Up to the death of Ronald H. Brown, former Secretary of the U.S. Department of Commerce, I was a business partner and/or close personal confidant for over seven years. During this period, I spoke with Ron, as I used to call him, daily, and frequently several times per day. I was thus intimately knowledgeable about both his personal and professional activities. I also had contact with his family, including his son, Michael, and his daughter in law, Tamara, who worked for me for approximately five years.

4. During the course of my relationship with Ron, I was privy to his activities, and the activities of the people who worked or were in contact with him at Commerce, and elsewhere. Since Ron died on April 3, 1996, I have also been in contact and spoken with many persons who worked or were in contact with him at Commerce, and elsewhere.

5. After the elections of 1992, Ron became Secretary of Commerce. Shortly thereafter, Ron decided that he would focus the majority his activities at Commerce on trade missions.

6. In the fall of 1994, I became aware, through Ron and Jim Hackney, Ron’s Counselor at Commerce – with whom I was and remain close – that a group called Judicial Watch filed Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests to obtain information and documentation about the trade missions. Both Jim and I encouraged Ron at the time to give due consideration to the seriousness of these FOIA requests, as there were politically sensitive issues surrounding the trade missions.

7. After the elections of 1994, and the Democrats’ loss of Congress, I became aware, through my discussions with Ron, that the trade missions were being used as a fundraising tool for the upcoming Clinton-Gore presidential campaign and the Democratic Party. Specifically, Ron told me that domestic companies were being solicited to donate large sums of money in exchange for their selection to participate on trade missions of the Commerce Department. Ron expressed to me his displeasure that the purpose of the Commerce trade missions had been and were being perverted at the direction of The White House.

8. In the spring of 1995, when this Court ordered production of documents to Judicial Watch, Ron became very concerned and he thus began to discuss with me the strategy of handling the defense of the Judicial Watch lawsuit.

9. I further learned through discussions with Ron that The White House, through Leon Panetta and John Podesta, had instructed him to delay the case by withholding the production of documents prior to the 1996 elections, and to devise a way not to comply with court’s orders.

10. In late fall 1995, after several rulings or statements by this court, Ron himself became more involved in the defense of the case. Specifically, he told me that he had decided to personally review any documents that might be damaging to the Clinton Administration, or in any way be sensitive. Ron told me that he was very worried about the potential damage of the Judicial Watch case to the Clinton Administration.

11. In early 1996, Ron showed me a packet of documents, about 1 inch thick, which he removed from his ostrich skin portfolio. Ron told me that these documents had been provided to him from Commerce Department files as part of the collection efforts to produce documents to Judicial Watch in this case. I reviewed the top five or six documents, which were on Commerce Department letterhead under the signature of Melissa Moss of the Office of Business Liaison. What I reviewed comprised letters of Ms. Moss to trade mission participants, each of which specifically referenced a substantial financial contribution to the Democratic National Committee (DNC). My response was immediate and decisive. I told Ron he must instruct that production of these documents and all responsive documents be immediate and I advised him to mitigate his own damages by releasing Ms. Moss from her duties and admonishing her for using the offices of the Commerce Department for partisan political fundraising.

12. I then saw Ron call the Commerce Department and he spoke with Melissa Moss. He told her that he wanted to meet with her later. I do not know if the meeting ever took place and I had no further discussion with Ron, because of his untimely death, about the documents I had reviewed.

13. I have reviewed the deposition video of Melissa Moss and, based on my knowledge, she has not told the truth in response a number of questions concerning Commerce Department trade missions, as well as other representations she has made under oath.

14. I would like to come forward and tell this court everything I know about the failure to produce documents to Judicial Watch and this court. I am concerned, however, that if I do so, the Clinton Administration, and more particularly its Justice Department, will try to retaliate against me. As a result, I look to this court for guidance on how I can come forward and tell all I know in the interest of justice.

15. Because of a fear for my personal and my family’s well-being and safety, I ask that this affidavit be kept under seal and that a mechanism be set up by the court for me to come forward to tell all I know.

 

Sworn to under penalty of law.”http://www.judicialwatch.org/cases/4/132.asp

From the Judge Lamberth Memorandum Opinion.

“G. Nolanda Hill

The highest drama in this litigation was supplied by Nolanda
Hill, former business partner and confidante of Secretary Brown:

On January 28, 1998, Hill submitted under seal a sworn
declaration detailing her knowledge of the Department of
Commerce’s handling of Judicial Watch’s FOIA requests,
information that she allegedly obtained through her relationship
with Secretary Brown. Stating that she was concerned about
retaliatory actions by the government, Hill requested that the
Court provide mechanisms for her protection. Pursuant to that
request, the Court ordered that the affidavit be initially kept
under seal and saw to it that her attorney was made aware of the
situation and was willing to represent and protect her interests
in this matter. An evidentiary hearing was then scheduled for
March 23, 1998.

On March 14, 1998, Hill was indicted on criminal charges.
Although an investigation had been underway before Hill offered
to testify in this case, Judicial Watch claims that the
government had represented to Hill that charges would not be
filed, and that the March 14, 1998 indictment was in retaliation
for her cooperation with Judicial Watch.

On March 23, 1998, Hill appeared before this Court and gave
extensive testimony as to her knowledge, gained from
communications with Secretary Brown, relating to this action.6
Upon examination by Mr. Klayman, Hill testified that the
Secretary told her that White House officials had actually
instructed him to delay the production of documents responsive to
Judicial Watch’s requests and to come up with a way to avoid
compliance with this Court’s orders. See Transcript of March 23,
1998 Hearing at 85. Hill vividly recalled the Secretary’s
comment that Leon Panetta (then White House Chief of Staff) had
urged him to “slow pedal” the document search. See id. at 85-86.
According to Hill, this message was conveyed to Secretary Brown
by Panetta and by John Podesta (then White House Deputy Chief of
Staff) on several occasions. See id. at 85-88.

In her role as personal advisor and confidante to Secretary
Brown, Hill allegedly offered to review the most sensitive
documents responsive to Judicial Watch’s request, for the purpose
of finding out precisely what was involved and, according to
Hill, to encourage the Secretary to turn over all responsive
documents. See id. at 88. Hill never did review the material,
however, and she was unable to testify as to whether such a
collection of “the most sensitive” responsive documents was ever
assembled. See id. at 89-90.

Ms. Hill did testify to seeing several unproduced responsive
documents in the Secretary’s possession in 1996, shortly before
the Secretary’s death. According to Hill’s testimony, she met
with Secretary Brown at a hotel early in 1996, and on that
occasion the Secretary showed her a one-inch-thick packet of
documents that he produced from a personal portfolio-type
carrying case. See id. at 38-39. The Secretary told Hill that
the documents had been retrieved from DOC files during the
document search for Judicial Watch’s FOIA requests. See id. at
39. Hill reviewed the top five or six documents, confirming that
they were copies of letters from Melissa Moss to trade mission
participants specifically referencing their donations to the DNC,
clearly responsive to Judicial Watch’s requests. See id. at 40-
41. Needless to say, these documents had not been, and have not
since been, released to the plaintiff. Their current location is
unknown, perhaps unknowable, although Judicial Watch argues that
the evidence supports an inference that the documents were either
destroyed during the flurry of document shredding following the
Secretary’s death, or removed from his office during that same
time period. In any event, Hill’s uncontroverted testimony is
strong evidence that the DOC illegally withheld documents from
Judicial Watch in violation of the FOIA. It is also apparent
that the DOC was aware of this Court’s orders that all responsive
documents be produced, and willfully defied those orders,
according to Ms. Hill’s testimony. This conduct alone would seem
to justify entry of judgment against the DOC, and yet it
simultaneously precludes such judgment until the extent of the
DOC’s unlawful behavior is adequately explored.

Also relevant to this action is the testimony of Ms. Hill
that the deposition of Melissa Moss contained a number of
inaccuracies. See id. at 105 et seq. In addition, revelations
about Moss’s role in the orchestration of the trade missions
casts her deposition testimony in a new light, and also raises
doubts as to how the activities in which she participated could
have produced no documents responsive to Judicial Watch’s
requests. As a whole, the evidence supports an inference that
Moss played an important role in resisting Judicial Watch’s FOIA
requests, and the testimony of Nolanda Hill points in particular
to Moss as directly responsible for knowing violations of this
Court’s orders.7

On April 29, 1998, a superseding indictment was issued
against Ms. Hill. Judicial Watch claims that it was intended as
a further signal to keep quiet.”

“In conclusion, this somewhat tedious narration presents
numerous instances of likely violations of the Freedom of
Information Act and this Court’s orders. On many occasions, the
DOC appears to have engaged in the illegal withholding of
responsive documents, in the removal of such documents from the
DOC, and in the destruction of potentially responsive documents
in the office of the late Secretary Brown and elsewhere, as well
as a great deal of misconduct during the litigation which the
Court leaves for another day’s decision. Upon consideration of
this record, and of the legal issues discussed in Part II, the
Court finds that a new search alone is an insufficient remedy,
and thus the DOC’s motion will be denied, partial summary
judgment will be granted in favor of Judicial Watch ordering the
commencement of the search proposed in the motion, and further
discovery under the supervision of a Magistrate Judge will be
ordered.”

http://web.archive.org/web/20050323205903/http://www.dcd.uscourts.gov/95cv133.pdf

 

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

 

Hillary Clinton conceived plan to sell seats on Commerce Dept. trade missions in exchange for political contributions, Panetta and Podesta ordered Ron Brown to obstruct justice, Judicial Committee evidence, Hillary lied Ron Brown died

Hillary Clinton conceived plan to sell seats on Commerce Dept. trade missions in exchange for political contributions, Panetta and Podesta ordered Ron Brown to obstruct justice, Judicial Committee evidence, Hillary lied Ron Brown died

“This time, the Clintons use a reluctant Air Force and a nearly mutinous Armed Forces Institute of Pathology to bury Ron Brown as quickly as possible, literally and figuratively. They exploit Brown’s death for political advantage and leave the truth buried with him. Without an autopsy or a serious investigation, that is where it remains to this day.”…WND September 29, 2004

“Hillary lied Americans died”…Citizen Wells

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

 

 

The devil in the details in the White House

Hillary Clinton conceived the plan to sell seats on Commerce Dept. trade missions in exchange for political contributions as revealed by Judicial Watch and included in the House Judiciary Committee Evidentiary Record December 1998.

“IMPEACHMENT OF PRESIDENT
WILLIAM JEFFERSON CLINTON

__________

THE EVIDENTIARY RECORD
PURSUANT TO S. RES. 16
VOLUME VII

Transcript of October 5, 1998 presentations of David Schippers and Abbe
Lowell, and debate on H. Res. 581, beginning an impeachment inquiry.
Committee Print, Ser. No. 8, December 1998″

“Mr. Barr. Mr. Chairman, I also ask unanimous consent to
insert the Judicial Watch Interim Report dated September 28,
1998.
Mr. Hyde. Without objection.”
“Judicial Watch Interim Report on Crimes and Other Offenses Committed by
President Bill Clinton Warranting His Impeachment and Removal from
Elected Office”

“Through discovery in its civil lawsuit against the Clinton Commerce
Department, Judicial Watch also has found evidence that President
Clinton condoned and participated in a scheme, conceived by First Lady
Hillary Rodham Clinton and approved by the President, to sell seats on
U.S. Department of Commerce trade missions in exchange for political
contributions. Bribery is specifically highlighted in the U.S.
Constitution as an offense warranting impeachment.

In President Clinton’s push to sell taxpayer-financed government
services to raise money for his political operations, national security
likely was breached by his Commerce Department appointees and those
involved in his fundraising scheme, such as John Huang. While Judicial
Watch is at an interim stage of investigation in this sensitive area,
the breaches of national security uncovered at the Clinton Commerce
Department raise real questions of treasonous activities by the
President and members of his Administration.

To cover-up this illegal fundraising and likely national security
breaches, President Clinton’s top two staffers, then-Chief of Staff
Leon Panetta and Deputy Chief of Staff John Podesta, ordered late
Commerce Secretary Ron Brown to obstruct justice and defy federal Court
orders. The evidence also indicates that Secretary Brown personally
consulted with President Clinton in furtherance of this cover-up.

In addition to the illegal sale of taxpayer-financed services, such
as seats on government trade missions, for political contributions, the
President and Mrs. Clinton have illegally solicited and received monies
directly from private citizens and others. The creation and use of
legal defense funds is not only prohibited under federal law, but they
have proved to be a means whereby lobbyists, influence peddlers and
foreign powers have tried to influence the Administration, contrary to
U.S. national security interests.”

“After the elections of 1994, and the Democrats’ loss of
Congress, I became aware, through my discussions with [late
Commerce Secretary] Ron [Brown], that the trade missions were
being used as a fundraising tool for the upcoming Clinton-Gore
presidential campaign and the Democratic Party. Specifically,
Ron told me that domestic companies were being solicited to
donate large sums of money in exchange for their selection to
participate on trade missions of the Commerce Department. Ron
expressed to me his displeasure that the purpose of the
Commerce trade missions had been and were being perverted at
the direction of The White House.

Affidavit of Nolanda Butler Hill, January 17, 1998
(131)
* * * * *
Question: You are aware, however, that Alexis Herman would
set up briefing sessions for participants that went on trade
missions before they went overseas? You were aware of that?
Nolanda Hill: I was.
Question: And at those briefing sessions appeared the
President and Vice President.
Nolanda Hill: I was told that by Secretary Brown.
* * * * *
Question: You’ve mentioned, to some extent–I’ll let your
testimony speak for itself–Harold Ickes. Anybody else? . . .
Nolanda Hill: Ultimately, [Ron Brown] believed that the
President of the United States was, at least tangentially.
Question: Involved?
Nolanda Hill: Yes, sir. It was his re-election that was at
stake.
Question: Ron believed that the President of the United
States knew the trade missions were being sold and their
purpose being perverted?
Nolanda Hill: Yes, sir.
Nolanda Butler Hill Court Testimony, March 23, 1998
(132)

In the Fall of 1994, Judicial Watch first became aware of evidence
that the Clinton Commerce Department was illegally selling seats on its
international trade missions in exchange for political
contributions.(133) Reports in Business Week and The Wall
Street Journal showed that there was a high incidence of Democratic
Party contributors on these taxpayer-financed trade
missions.(134)

The fact that the President installed the former head of the
Democratic National Committee, Ronald H. Brown, as Commerce Secretary
also raised concerns about Clinton Commerce Department operations. When
Brown brought his entire DNC fundraising staff with him to Clinton
Commerce, these suspicions increased.

After Judicial Watch filed requests with the Clinton Commerce
Department for information regarding these trade missions under the
Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”), it was immediately stonewalled
and was forced to file a lawsuit in 1995 to obtain the requested
information.(135) Even after filing suit, the Clinton
Administration continued to stonewall.(136)

Over the next three (3) years, Judicial Watch, in its efforts to
uncover what the Clinton Commerce Department was hiding from the
American people, found substantial, compelling evidence that seats on
Clinton Commerce Department trade missions were indeed being sold in
exchange for campaign contributions, with the knowledge and complicity,
if not at the direction of, officials at the highest levels of the
Clinton White House, including the President, Hillary Rodham Clinton
and Vice President Al Gore. In addition, Judicial Watch’s attempts to
uncover the truth were obstructed through perjury, obstruction of
justice, intimidation and retaliation that has marred other recent
investigation of Clinton scandals, including the Paula Jones and Monica
Lewinsky matters. In short, the court process was obstructed by Clinton
appointees at his Commerce Department and elsewhere by:

Perjury;
Submission of false sworn declarations;
Destruction and shredding of evidence;
Improperly withholding documents contrary to Court
orders;
Threats and intimidation of witnesses and
investigators; and
Misconduct by Clinton Administration lawyers.

Nevertheless, Judicial Watch, through its investigations and the
legal discovery process, found “smoking gun” documents detailing the
sale the trade mission seats for campaign contributions in the files of
the Clinton White House, Clinton Commerce Department, and the DNC,
including:

Memos from the Clinton White House files of Harold
Ickes and Alexis Herman showing that the $100,000 DNC Managing
Trustee Program included the sale of the Clinton Commerce
Department trade mission seats (among other government-financed
perks) and was designed to net President Clinton’s DNC
political operation $40 million; (137)

A brochure by the Democratic National Committee
showing that “foreign trade mission” seats were available for
$100,000 contributions to the DNC; (138)

A list of DNC minority donors found in the files of
a key Clinton Commerce Department Official; (139)

A Clinton Commerce Department memo indicating that
the DNC donors were input into the Commerce Department
government database;(140) and

A DNC memo showing that the DNC provided the names
of donors to the Clinton Commerce Department for trade missions
to Russia and Belgium.(141)

In January 1998, Judicial Watch uncovered a witness, Nolanda Butler
Hill, a close confidante and business partner of late Commerce
Secretary Brown, with whom Secretary Brown had shared key details about
the campaign-contributions-for-seats-on-trade-missions scheme, as well
as the Clinton Administration’s efforts to stonewall Judicial Watch’s
lawsuit. Secretary Brown had even shown important documents to Ms. Hill
that detailed this unlawful sale of taxpayer-financed government
services. With Ms. Hill’s uncontroverted testimony providing the
capstone to its investigation, Judicial Watch has proven beyond all
reasonable doubt that not only was the Clinton Administration engaged
in an unlawful scheme to sell seats on Commerce Department trade
missions in exchange for campaign contributions, but that a criminal
cover-up was ordered by President Clinton’s top aides to thwart
Judicial Watch’s Court-ordered investigation and to hide the
culpability of the President, Mrs. Clinton, the Clinton Administration
and the DNC for their use of Commerce Department trade missions as a
political fundraising vehicle.

Ms. Hill testified that then White House Chief of Staff Leon
Panetta and Deputy Chief of Staff John Podesta ordered Commerce
Secretary Brown to defy Court orders and obstruct the Judicial Watch
suit until after the 1996 federal elections. Ms. Hill’s sworn testimony
implicated the President’s top staff members in obstruction of justice.
Ms. Hill also tied the sale of trade mission seats directly to
President Clinton. In both a sworn affidavit and Court testimony, Ms.
Hill explained that:

The First Lady conceived of the idea to sell the
trade mission seats in exchange for political contributions;
The President knew of and approved this scheme;
The Vice President participated in this scheme;
Commerce Secretary Ron Brown helped implement the
illegal fundraising operation out of the Clinton Commerce
Department;

Presidential White House aides Harold Ickes and (now
Labor Secretary) Alexis Herman helped orchestrate the sale of
the Commerce trade mission seats;

The President’s top fundraisers at the DNC and his
reselection campaign (Marvin Rosen and Terrence McAuliffe)
helped coordinate the selling of these taxpayer resources in
exchange for political contributions;

Presidential Chief of Staff Leon Panetta and Deputy
Chief of Staff John Podesta ordered the cover-up of these
activities; and

The President’s appointees at the Commerce
Department have committed perjury, destroyed and suppressed
evidence, and likely breached our nation’s security.”

Commercegate Chinagate illegal sale of US Department of Commerce Trade Mission Seats for campaign contributions, Judiciary Committee evidence, Judicial Watch interim report on crimes and other offenses committed by President Bill Clinton, December 1998

 

More Here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

Hillary Commercegate Chinagate role, First lady conceived scheme to sell seats on Dept of Commerce trade missions in exchange for political contributions, Compromised nation’s security, Theft of government resources for re-election bid

Hillary Commercegate Chinagate role, First lady conceived scheme to sell seats on Dept of Commerce trade missions in exchange for political contributions,  Compromised nation’s security, Theft of government resources for re-election bid

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

“My staff and I agreed that we needed to focus on the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), which appeared to be running out of control. By the time we came to the subject, investigations by the General Accounting Office (GAO) and congressional committees had already indicated that the White House used the INS to further its political agenda. A blatant politicization of the agency took place during the 1996 presidential campaign when the White House pressured the INS into expediting its “Citizenship USA” (CUSA) program to grant citizenship to thousands of aliens that the White House counted as likely Democratic voters.”…David Schippers

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

 

 

Hillary Clinton’s role in  Commercegate and Chinagate was revealed by Judicial Watch and included in the House Judiciary Committee Evidentiary Record December 1998.

“IMPEACHMENT OF PRESIDENT
WILLIAM JEFFERSON CLINTON

__________

THE EVIDENTIARY RECORD
PURSUANT TO S. RES. 16
VOLUME VII

Transcript of October 5, 1998 presentations of David Schippers and Abbe
Lowell, and debate on H. Res. 581, beginning an impeachment inquiry.
Committee Print, Ser. No. 8, December 1998″

“Mr. Barr. Mr. Chairman, I also ask unanimous consent to
insert the Judicial Watch Interim Report dated September 28,
1998.
Mr. Hyde. Without objection.”
“Judicial Watch Interim Report on Crimes and Other Offenses Committed by
President Bill Clinton Warranting His Impeachment and Removal from
Elected Office”

“Through discovery in its civil lawsuit against the Clinton Commerce
Department, Judicial Watch also has found evidence that President
Clinton condoned and participated in a scheme, conceived by First Lady
Hillary Rodham Clinton and approved by the President, to sell seats on
U.S. Department of Commerce trade missions in exchange for political
contributions. Bribery is specifically highlighted in the U.S.
Constitution as an offense warranting impeachment.
In President Clinton’s push to sell taxpayer-financed government
services to raise money for his political operations, national security
likely was breached by his Commerce Department appointees and those
involved in his fundraising scheme, such as John Huang. While Judicial
Watch is at an interim stage of investigation in this sensitive area,
the breaches of national security uncovered at the Clinton Commerce
Department raise real questions of treasonous activities by the
President and members of his Administration.
To cover-up this illegal fundraising and likely national security
breaches, President Clinton’s top two staffers, then-Chief of Staff
Leon Panetta and Deputy Chief of Staff John Podesta, ordered late
Commerce Secretary Ron Brown to obstruct justice and defy federal Court
orders. The evidence also indicates that Secretary Brown personally
consulted with President Clinton in furtherance of this cover-up.
In addition to the illegal sale of taxpayer-financed services, such
as seats on government trade missions, for political contributions, the
President and Mrs. Clinton have illegally solicited and received monies
directly from private citizens and others. The creation and use of
legal defense funds is not only prohibited under federal law, but they
have proved to be a means whereby lobbyists, influence peddlers and
foreign powers have tried to influence the Administration, contrary to
U.S. national security interests.”

“part iii
COMMERCEGATE/CHINAGATE
Crimes and Other Offenses Relating to the Illegal Sale of U.S.
Department of Commerce Trade Mission Seats for Campaign Contributions
that Warrant Impeachment and Removal from Office of President Bill
Clinton”

“In January 1998, Judicial Watch uncovered a witness, Nolanda Butler
Hill, a close confidante and business partner of late Commerce
Secretary Brown, with whom Secretary Brown had shared key details about
the campaign-contributions-for-seats-on-trade-missions scheme, as well
as the Clinton Administration’s efforts to stonewall Judicial Watch’s
lawsuit. Secretary Brown had even shown important documents to Ms. Hill
that detailed this unlawful sale of taxpayer-financed government
services. With Ms. Hill’s uncontroverted testimony providing the
capstone to its investigation, Judicial Watch has proven beyond all
reasonable doubt that not only was the Clinton Administration engaged
in an unlawful scheme to sell seats on Commerce Department trade
missions in exchange for campaign contributions, but that a criminal
cover-up was ordered by President Clinton’s top aides to thwart
Judicial Watch’s Court-ordered investigation and to hide the
culpability of the President, Mrs. Clinton, the Clinton Administration
and the DNC for their use of Commerce Department trade missions as a
political fundraising vehicle.
Ms. Hill testified that then White House Chief of Staff Leon
Panetta and Deputy Chief of Staff John Podesta ordered Commerce
Secretary Brown to defy Court orders and obstruct the Judicial Watch
suit until after the 1996 federal elections. Ms. Hill’s sworn testimony
implicated the President’s top staff members in obstruction of justice.
Ms. Hill also tied the sale of trade mission seats directly to
President Clinton. In both a sworn affidavit and Court testimony, Ms.
Hill explained that:

The First Lady conceived of the idea to sell the
trade mission seats in exchange for political contributions;
The President knew of and approved this scheme;
The Vice President participated in this scheme;
Commerce Secretary Ron Brown helped implement the
illegal fundraising operation out of the Clinton Commerce
Department;
Presidential White House aides Harold Ickes and (now
Labor Secretary) Alexis Herman helped orchestrate the sale of
the Commerce trade mission seats;
The President’s top fundraisers at the DNC and his
reselection campaign (Marvin Rosen and Terrence McAuliffe)
helped coordinate the selling of these taxpayer resources in
exchange for political contributions;
Presidential Chief of Staff Leon Panetta and Deputy
Chief of Staff John Podesta ordered the cover-up of these
activities; and
The President’s appointees at the Commerce
Department have committed perjury, destroyed and suppressed
evidence, and likely breached our nation’s security.”

“According to what Secretary Brown told Ms. Hill, the trade mission
seats were being sold in part because of “panic” by the President and
First Lady induced by their Democratic Party’s loss of Congress to the
Republicans in 1994:

[Ron Brown’s] discussion with me centered around the panic
of–or his perception of panic–with the President and First
Lady, after the loss of Congress to the Republicans, and that
that was going to–they were afraid they wouldn’t be able to
raise money, and they were really worried about
it.(149)

Ms. Hill testified that Secretary Brown told her that it was
Hillary Rodham Clinton who ordered that the trade mission seats be
sold:

Q: And did he not say to you that–and I am kind of
paraphrasing–Hillary believes that every thing is politics and
politics is driven by money; correct?
A: He did say those–close to those words, as I recall. . . .
Q: And he told that you that, in fact, it was Hillary’s idea
to use the trade missions to raise money; correct?
A: He initially believed that she was very instrumental, and
he gave her a lot of credit.(150)

Secretary Brown told Ms. Hill that he was “[j]ust doing my chores for
Hillary Rodham Clinton” and he complained, “I’m not a mother”–
expletive deleted–“king tour guide for Hillary
Clinton.”(151)
Importantly, Secretary Brown told Hill that the President himself
was involved in the sale of seats on Commerce Department trade
missions:

A: Ultimately he believed that the President of the United
States was, at least tangentially.
Q: Involved?
A: Yes sir. It was his re-election that was at stake.
Q: Ron believed that the President of the United States knew
the trade missions were being sold, and their purpose was being
perverted?
A: Yes, sir.(152)

In fact, Ms. Hill testified that Secretary Brown resented the Clinton’s
involvement in the misuse of the Commerce Department trade missions,
which he believed had become nothing more than a “street level
protection racket.” (153)
Ms. Hill also testified that, in addition to the President and Mrs.
Clinton, high level Clinton Administration officials were also directly
involved.”

“Documents uncovered by congressional investigators demonstrate the
nexus of money, access and China at the Clinton Commerce Department:

A key ally [of Trie’s], according to the documents, was Jude
Kearney, a deputy assistant secretary in the Commerce
Department’s International Trade Administration.

In October 1993, Trie helped shepherd Kearney, a fellow
Arkansan, around China.

“It was very helpful to have someone around who knew the
ropes,” Kearney wrote Trie after the trip.

In June 1994, Kearney joined Trie’s business associates and
guests at a table at a Democratic National Committee fund-
raising dinner while Trie sat at Clinton’s table. That fall,
according to the documents, Kearney supported a request by Trie
to host a party for the participants on a U.S. trade mission to
China. Kearney said last year he couldn’t recall whether Trie
actually ever hosted the party. In February 1995, Trie sat at
first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton’s table at another Democratic
fund-raiser.

The documents show that in September 1995, Kearney asked the
U.S. Embassy in Beijing to invite Trie to events with Mrs.
Clinton during her trip to China. Upon Trie’s return to the
United States, he attended a White House dinner with other
large Democratic givers, including postal union leader Moe
Biller, Miramax Films co-chairman Harvey Weinstein and oil
executive Roger Tamraz, who was raising money for Democrats
while being wanted in Lebanon on bank fraud charges.”

“A reasonable analysis of the documentary and testimonial evidence
unearthed by Judicial Watch would indicate that President Clinton and
First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton were heavily involved in the theft of
government resources to sell for contributions for President Clinton’s
re-election bid. This fundraising push, to the degree it involved
individuals such as Clinton-hire John Huang and policies such Clinton-
approved hi-tech transfers to China through Commerce, compromised our
nation’s security. The President’s two White House deputies, then-Chief
of Staff Leon Panetta and Deputy Chief of Staff John Podesta, ordered
the late Commerce Secretary Ron Brown to cover-up these crimes.
Clinton’s agents at Commerce and the Department of Justice did their
level best to accomplish this.
If it were not for Judicial Watch’s exposure of John Huang; if it
were not for Judicial Watch’s refusal to walk away with $2 million in
taxpayer dollars offered by Clinton’s agents; if it were not for
Judicial Watch’s investigations that have uncovered key documents and
witnesses such as Nolanda Hill, and if it were not for a diligent and
alert Court, then the President, his appointees, and agents might have
gotten away with this criminal enterprise.
The overwhelming evidence of President Clinton’s illegal activities
related to the Commerce trade mission sales are now before this
Congress. We respectfully request, in the context of expected
impeachment proceedings on other serious issues, that Congress consider
whether the actions of this President and his appointees in this matter
also warrant his impeachment and removal from office.(403)”

Commercegate Chinagate illegal sale of US Department of Commerce Trade Mission Seats for campaign contributions, Judiciary Committee evidence, Judicial Watch interim report on crimes and other offenses committed by President Bill Clinton, December 1998

Full Evidentiary Record:

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/GPO-CDOC-106sdoc3/html/GPO-CDOC-106sdoc3-7.htm

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

Rod Blagojevich resentencing August 9, 2016, Blagojevich apologizes for actions and weeps, Sentence upheld

Rod Blagojevich resentencing August 9, 2016, Blagojevich apologizes for actions and weeps, Sentence upheld

 

 

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

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

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

 

12:04 Closing arguments

12:15 Sentence upheld

 

From the Chicago Tribune.

“Blagojevich apologizes for actions, weeps at resentencing”

“Speaking without notes, Blagojevich said he had been too ambitious and recognized he erred by fighting too many battles in public.

“This can be a beginning to make amends for the past,” he said while looking directly into the camera.

The former governor said it pains him that his actions have hurt his family and blamed himself for putting his loved ones in that situation.

He said the last 4 1/2 years in prison “has put me closer to God.”

“I’m a very different person,” he said, concluding his remarks.

Moments earlier, Annie Blagojevich told U.S. District Judge James Zagel she talks every night with her father by phone. Blagojevich could be seen weeping during his daughter’s statement.”

Read more:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-rod-blagojevich-appeal-20160809-story.html

 

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:

http://www.g-a-i.org/u/2016/08/Report-Skolkvovo-08012016.pdf

 

 

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:

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/