Category Archives: Hillary Clinton

US media ALL IN for Hillary Clinton, lies and coverups

Posted on by

hillary-clinton-pointingProven by the recent releases via Wikileaks (and these are just a few):

ASSANGE DRONES HILLARY...
Releases Another 1,000 Emails From Podesta...
How Saudi Arabia And Qatar ARE Funding ISIS...
MEDIA LOVEFEST...
UNIVISION chief urged Clinton to hit harder...
CNBC John Harwood Advises Campaign [And he was debate moderator?!]...
NYT Gave Hillary Veto Power On Quotes!
BOSTON GLOBE coordinated to max her 'presence' in paper...
SHE WAS TOLD WHEN TO SMILE?
BRAZILE BUSTED: DNC Chief Shared CNN Town Hall Questions...
Used Benghazi as distraction from email scandal...
CAMPAIGN DISCUSSIONS WITH DOJ!
State Dept Coordinated Email Release...
WHITE HOUSE: NO COMMENT ON CORRUPTION...

Click on any one of those and you’ll find the Obama White House, the media, the State Department, all complicit in doing anything and everything to get Hillary Clinton elected.

As revealed by Wikileaks, not only does she need written cues when to smile in a speech,  is backed by Hungarian billionaire George Soros (who does not believe in nation-states), but also does in fact have two positions for many things, one public and one private.

It’s therefore rather clear that her public positions trump her private thoughts, as she hates corporatists and Wall Street but loves their cash (her son-in-law is a Wall Street hedge fund manager living with Chelsea in what is described as a “$10-million dollar fortress“).

Hillary Clinton also wants to purposely import 65,000 more Syrian “refugees” into the United States (you know, those loving Muslim persons who gang-rape disabled females) with the eventual goal of one million “refugees.” Yet, via Wikileaks, she acknowledges that adequately vetting “refugees” is, in her words, “impossible.” So why? Votes votes votes. But for the wrong reasons. Muslims will initially vote for Demorats not for issues, but because they realize Demorats are dupes for Islam.

Cheat, lie, cover, confuse, hide — the AMM is pulling out all the stops.

Finally, just like the American Media Maggots, Hillary truly dislikes “everyday Americans.” Something she is far, far from, and to which she and they cannot relate.

BZ

 

 Share

Hillary can’t even appear on TV without cheating

Posted on by

hillary-clinton-eyeballs-wideProven by TheHill.com:

Leaked memo shows Clinton was provided questions ahead of interview

by Joe Concha

Hillary Clinton was provided the exact questions she would be asked by daytime talk show host Steve Harvey, according to a report. 

The Washington Free Beacon reports that according to a leaked memo it obtained, the program sent the Clinton campaign all questions one week before the interview between Clinton and Harvey on Feb. 17. 

“Steve is known to be a host who goes out of his way to make his guests feel comfortable,” two of Clinton’s aides wrote Clinton one week before the taping. “We coordinated closely with the show’s producers on the script and format of the show.”

You’ll like this, though:

Questions included were about Clinton’s granddaughter, the former secretary of State’s pizza preferences — thin crust versus deep dish — and her support for gun control policies. 

“Please note that the tone of the show is generally light so even on policy questions, Steve won’t go too deep into details,” the memo read. 

Translated: “Steve is going to throw fluffy snowballs to you and also provide a huge, overly-padded catcher’s mitt.” Even then, Hillary Clinton demanded everything be scripted.

Has there yet been a more plastic, inflexible, unextemporaneous, unlikable, wooden and haughty presidential candidate in recent memory? Oh wait, Kim Jong Il. But he’s dead. No wonder.

BZ

 

 Share

FBI DESTROYS EVIDENCE

Posted on by

fbi-director-james-comey-weaselTit for tat, pay to play, time to make sure we do in fact cover the arses of DC politicians who just “happen” to be of the Demorat stripe.

Right on the heels of FBI Director James Comey providing a line-item list of reasons to recommend a criminal indictment for Hillary Clinton then — declines to recommend same.

From FoxNews.com:

FBI agreed to destroy laptops of Clinton aides with immunity deal, lawmaker says

by Catherine Herridge and Adam Shaw

Immunity deals for two top Hillary Clinton aides included a side arrangement obliging the FBI to destroy their laptops after reviewing the devices, House Judiciary Committee sources told Fox News on Monday.

Sources said the arrangement with former Clinton chief of staff Cheryl Mills and ex-campaign staffer Heather Samuelson also limited the search to no later than Jan. 31, 2015. This meant investigators could not review documents for the period after the email server became public — in turn preventing the bureau from discovering if there was any evidence of obstruction of justice, sources said.

The Republican chairman of the House Judiciary Committee fired off a letter Monday to Attorney General Loretta Lynch asking why the DOJ and FBI agreed to the restrictive terms, including that the FBI would destroy the laptops after finishing the search.

“Like many things about this case, these new materials raise more questions than answers,” Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., wrote in the letter obtained by Fox News.

Precisely correct. Because if you “do deals,” then you are — unless you’re a complete dunsel — expecting something in return.

“Doesn’t the willingness of Ms. Mills and Ms. Samuelson to have their laptops destroyed by the FBI contradict their claim that the laptops could have been withheld because they contained non-relevant, privileged information? If so, doesn’t that undermine the claim that the side agreements were necessary?” Goodlatte asks.

Why yes, it does. Read that paragraph over very carefully, because of the reveal. IF the laptops were not important to the case, then why would they require destruction?

Surely, destruction of the laptops was not an issue brought to the table by the FBI. It would have been an issue brought to the table specifically by Mills and Samuelson.

Wait. Isn’t that called a clue?

Immunity was provided and EVIDENCE DESTROYED because of said immunity deal.

When the government provides immunity — and only government entities can do so — it is invariably because prosecution is focusing not on the level of those provided immunity but on levels above. In other words, immunity is provided in order to catch the so-called “bigger fish.”

So I ask: what “bigger fish” were caught by providing immunity to Mills and Samuelson and, further, why did this immunity include destruction of the hard drives from their laptops?

Please read the entire article.

What did the citizens of the United States receive for this stated immunity?

Nothing that I can see.

Hillary is still wearing $12,000 jackets.

BZ

 

 Share

Assange/Wikileaks & Hillary’s email: it’s on

Posted on by

julian-assange-hillary-clintonFirst it was off.

Now, apparently, it’s on.

From the UKDailyMail.com:

Can Assange turn it around for Trump? Wikileaks boss WILL release ‘damaging information’ about Hillary tomorrow after initially cancelling ‘October Surprise’ speech from embassy balcony

by Darren Boyle and Khaleda Rahman

 

  • Julian Assange had originally planned to address the world from the balcony of the Ecuadorian embassy in London on Monday
  • He was due to speak at the tenth anniversary of the founding of WikiLeaks 
  • Assange will instead speak video link to an event in Berlin on Tuesday
  • The organisation earlier released information hacked from the Democrats 
  • It came as a new report claimed Clinton had proposed a drone strike to take out Assange in 2010 

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange cancelled a planned appearance to mark the 10th anniversary of his organization from the balcony of the Ecuadorian embassy in London over security fears on Monday.

He had been planning to give a speech – amid claims he was about to release damaging information about Clinton which some claimed could be an ‘October Surprise’ which would swing the presidential election.

However, Assange, who is wanted by Swedish authorities for questioning in connection with an alleged rape, will make an announcement via video link to an event in Berlin on Tuesday morning.

In August this year, Assange told Fox News that he was holding information on Clinton which yielded ‘some quite unexpected angles, that are quite interesting, some even entertaining’.

He said he would release the information before the November 8 election.

Interesting timing in terms of the overall 2016 presidential campaign, as well as the Tuesday vice-presidential debate between Mike Pence and Tim Kaine.

Also: I wonder if Hillary Clinton considering a drone strike on Julian Assange in 2010, when she was Secretary of State, was a factor in the Wikileaks release?

My. What will be the content within?

BZ

 

 Share

Will or will not Julian Assange unload on Hillary?

Posted on by

julian-assange-wikileaksI’m hearing yes he will.

I’m hearing no he won’t.

YES has been in the news for the past two months.

From HeatStreet.com:

‘October Surprise’ Thwarted? Wikileaks Cancels Highly Anticipated Tuesday Announcement Due to ‘Security Concerns’

by HeatStreet Staff

Wikileaks has abruptly canceled a much-anticipated announcement on Tuesday, according to NBC News. The announcement had been expected to be founder Julian Assange’s long-promised document dump on Hillary Clinton.

NBC’s Jesse Rodriguez reported that the Tuesday announcement — which was to come from the balcony of London’s Ecuadorian Embassy, where Assange has sought sanctuary for years – was canceled due to “security concerns”.

So: who “got” to Julian Assange either with cash or explosives or blackmail?

Assange appeared on Fox News last month, repeating his assertion that Wikileaks has damaging documents on Clinton and suggested WikiLeaks may soon release “teasers”. More than three weeks later, that release has yet to take place.

Assange himself has also recently hinted publicly that low-level DNC staffer Seth Rich, who was murdered this summer in Washington DC, had been the source for Wikileaks’ document dump on the DNC. And that Rich’s alleged role in the leaks was linked to his death.

Why pull back now? “Security concerns” had not been much of a concern earlier. Why are they now?

BZ

 

 Share