http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/05/05/national-journal-clinton-campaign-declares-war-on-clinton-cash/
Schweizer: Clinton Reversed Course on India Policy After Donations
by 8
“Clinton
Cash” author Peter Schweizer said that Hillary Clinton reversed course on
the export of US nuclear technology to India after “a number of Indian interests,
including an Indian politician that admits now that his donation to the Clinton
Foundation wasn’t even his money” on Tuesday’s “Morning Joe” on MSNBC.
Schweizer said he had found “a pattern of
behavior…the proof is, you look at a series of actions in which money flows to
the Clintons, either through speaking fees or Clinton Foundation donors.
Hillary Clinton takes a course of action that benefits those donors, in many
cases, I think, outlined in the book, she is reversing course on policy
prescriptions.”
He explained, “so, you had in 1998 the
Indian government conducted nuclear tests, Bill Clinton imposed restrictions on
the export of US nuclear technology, because this violated the nonproliferation
treaty, Hillary Clinton supported that position. In 2005, the Indian government
wanted those restrictions lifted. Hillary Clinton at that time supported a
killer amendment to stop that from happening. After 2005, a number of Indian
interests, including an Indian politician that admits now that his donation to
the Clinton Foundation wasn’t even his money, those donations flowed. In 2008,
she reverses course, and supports the export of US nuclear technology. And by
the way, her her top aides Bob Einhorn, and others, her top advisers on
nonproliferation, were still opposed to that agreement.”
Schweizer added another example, “Hillary
Clinton’s State Department did the review on the Keystone Pipeline. Bill
Clinton had never given a speech before for TD Bank in Canada. As this review
is going on, he does $2 million worth of speeches for TD Bank. Four months
after he gets paid for the last speech, the State Department comes out with
environmental impact supporting the Keystone Pipeline. Why does this matter? TD
Bank is the largest shareholder in the Keystone Pipeline. These patterns get
repeated again and again and again, and I think they deserve further
investigation.”
When asked if there was anything
“indictable” that he had uncovered, Schweizer responded, “I’m not a lawyer, and
I say that clearly in the book. I’m not a lawyer, I’m an author. I don’t have
subpoena power. I can’t look into Hillary Clinton’s mind. I certainly can’t
look at her emails. I don’t have any of those capabilities. But I would compare
it to like insider trading, when they prosecute people for insider trading,
lots of times they don’t have a smoking gun, but they see a series of
well-timed trades.”
Mike Barncile then asked Schweizer about
telecommunications company Ericsson, “April 2011, Ericsson’s named in a
State Department report for supplying telecom equipment for the oppressive
regime in Belarus. Further on down now, on November 12th, 2011, Bill appeared
at a telecom conference in Hong Kong, paid for — he was paid by Ericsson
$750,000, and talked in general terms about the role the that telecom plays in
our lives. One week later, on November 19th, the State Department unveiled its
new sanctions list for Iran, telecom was not on the list. Now are you implying
that the State Department sprung into action in seven days?”
Schweizer answered, “I’m not, no. I’m not
implying that. What I’m saying there, and I show numerous examples. Ericsson,
for example, had never paid Bill Clinton to give a speech before. His average
speaking fee before Hillary became Secretary of State is about $190,000. Suddenly,
out of the blue, while they are named in State Department reports, and there’s
several examples, not just the one you cited involving Ericsson and the State
Department, they suddenly in the midst of all that decide to pay him $750,000.
Is there evidence of a quid pro quo in that case? No, I’m not saying that, but
it should be troubling for us that the day of January 2009, Bill Clinton’s
speaking fees from foreign overseas interests, governments and corporations,
triples, triples. Did he become more eloquent all of a sudden? I doubt it…I
think it’s because his wife became Secretary of State and they were glad to
take the money.”
Schweizer, when asked what his “end game”
is, stated that he simply wants more investigation by other people. He added
“what I would point out, though, is the standard that there’s no quid pro quo.
If you look at the former Governor of Virginia, who was prosecuted, if you look
at Senator Menendez, there’s no quid pro quo, and yet they were prosecuted
because there were contributions or payments or gifts given to public officials
with the perception, or the belief that there was going to be given something
in exchange.”
Host Mika Brzezinski then wondered about
the State Department’s “understanding” regarding Bill Clinton’s activities, Schweizer
said “Bill Clinton’s speeches were supposed to go under review or vetting by
the State Department. I’ve looked at those letters. They came out via FOIA, and
what you find is that they never rejected a single speech by Bill Clinton.”
Brzezinski then asked, “so, the State
Department allowed it?” Schweizer agreed, “yes, the State Department
allowed it, but it was –” before he let Brzezinski finish the question she
had started asking, “you say, of even greater concern, this is the setup for
the whole book, is that foreign policy players giving money to the Clintons
include foreign governments in countries like Russia, India, and United Arab
Emirates, where there are major foreign policy issues at stake. There is
nothing clearly illegal about these payments, but their source, size and timing
raise serious questions. Your book is questions. I just wonder how does that
not be interpreted as clearly political? There’s nothing here that’s evidence
of illegality.”
Schweizer argued back, “I don’t think the
standard at NBC News, or any news organization would be that we only report
things when we have evidence of illegality. I think, if you see a pattern of
behavior –” to which Brzezinski responded, “I can question the timing
of your book. She just announced a run for president.” Schweizer responded,
“this book has been in the works more than a year. So, I did not, certainly,
coordinate this with her launch of her campaign.” Brzezinski wondered, “did you
go after the State Department?”
Fellow host Joe Scarborough then jumped in,
“I don’t get this. I’ll be really honest. I’m looking around here, and I don’t
get this. I’m certainly — I mean, if Peter’s been reckless, go ahead and say
he’s been reckless. But I worked with guys in Congress that went golfing like
one or two times in Ireland, and then six months later, put a bill on the floor
of the House, and they went to jail, and we’re sitting here going, ‘wait a
second, wait, no, maybe he just got paid three times the amount. Maybe Belarus
or telecom companies, or maybe this.’ Come on, we’re not naive babes in the
woods. And I know you’re playing this game of ‘I’m going to be a tough
professional journalist,’ and that’s really awesome. But Mika, Bob McDonnell,
let’s look [at] what Bob McDonnell did, what Bob McDonnell did pales in
comparison to what’s in this book. And what Bob Menendez did pales in
comparison to this book. The Clintons have made $150 million over the past
decade because of contacts they made during public service. I will now sit back
and let you go ahead and ask those tough questions. I’m just curious, though,
why are the Clintons held to a standard that Bob McDonnell’s not held to, that
Bob Menendez is not held to, that all of these congressmen that get thrown into
jail for going on a — going to a Redskins game or going on a golf trip,
compared to $150 million.”
Brzezinski then asked Scarborough, “the
golfing trips, your friends in Congress, who called them out on that, and who
held them accountable?” Scarborough answered, “what do you mean? The Justice
Department did.” She then said, “it wasn’t Peter Schweizer, it was the Justice
Department.”
Scarborough replied, “are you saying that
news — that newspapers and reporters shouldn’t — shouldn’t go out and report on
this? Because I’ll tell you, when Peter Schweizer was talking about Congress
insider trading we had him on the set, ‘great job, way to go, you’re great,
you’ve called this out.’ ’60 Minutes’ had him on there, ‘great job.’ But it’s
the Clintons and suddenly, ‘oh, my God, let’s bow down before Bill and Hillary
because if we ask the same questions of them that we ask of every other
politician, then oh, my God, we have crossed a line.’ It’s like that — part in
‘Indiana Jones’ where you cross the line and the rock comes after you, and
you’ve got to run fast because you dare crossed the Clintons’ line, who made,
may I add, $150 million. While dudes get thrown in jail for going on a golf
trip in Ireland, and the weather probably even sucked. So, I don’t really
understand the shock and awe here.”
Brzezinski then responded, “I am
questioning what you have based this book on because I think it helps hash out
the questions that are in the book. But I’m also pushing you a little bit
because you know what, no one has found anything that is proof of illegality. I
think there is perhaps rules that have been bent. I’m curious as to why they
are bent for the Secretary of State and her spouse and not other people in the
State Department. I want to know if you questioned the Obama administration
about this. I would like to hear the answers to those questions.”
Schweizer told her that,, “we contacted a
lot of people for comment and input on this….and really no responses
whatsoever, from any of the investors, from the Clintons, and others, etc. The
bottom line is that the Clintons signed a memorandum of understanding with
Valerie Jarrett and with President Obama’s transition team, that they were
going to correspond with a certain number of agreements, including the
disclosure of all contributions,” which he added did not happen and that he had
proof of it. Brzezinski did concede “that’s important.”
Schweizer concluded by saying that if he
could ask the Clintons one question, he would “did you consider the e-mails
related to the Clinton Foundation the private ones that were deleted? There’s a
lot of transactional behavior in the book, and it relates to far flung corners
of the world, that I would love to see e-mails, or information related to any
correspondence they had, related to major Clinton Foundation supporters, people
sponsoring speeches, and official actions that were taken.”
Follow Ian Hanchett on Twitter @IanHanchett
HILLARY CLINTON: A
dedicated disciple of OBAMANOMICS – Why else would his banksters invest so much
in her???
“That her candidacy is announced without calling for
any particular policies underscores the fact that the election is not about the
American people deciding the course of policy, but rather the vetting of
candidates to serve the interest of the financial oligarchy.”
“There is, of course, no acknowledgment that Clinton was part
of an administration that oversaw and continues to oversee the greatest
transfer of wealth from the bottom to “those at the top” in US history.”
“Schweizer: Clinton Donors, Relatives Got Rich Off Haiti
Contracts, US Taxpayers”
“Clinton Cash” author
Peter Schweizer reported on the US taxpayer money and contracts in Haiti
profited Clinton Foundation donors and Clinton relatives.”
Clinton Foundation Put On Watch List Of Suspicious
‘Charities’
“This
decision wasn’t made because of the Clinton Foundation’s remarkably lucrative
sideline as a uranium superstore for Russian strongmen, but because its
finances are opaque and dishonest, and because such a tiny amount of the money
it rakes in actually goes to charitable endeavors. “The Clinton family’s
mega-charity took in more than $140 million in grants and pledges in 2013 but
spent just $9 million on direct aid,” notes the New York Post. “The
group spent the bulk of its windfall on administration, travel, and salaries
and bonuses, WITH THE FATTEST PAYOUTS GOING TO FAMILY FRIENDS.”
Hillary Clinton bellies with the 9-11 invading Saudi
dictatorship like Obama. She’s collected her bribes for pushing the Bush-Saudi
wars against Iraq and Obama smells the dirty Saudis loot coming for his
presidential libaray!
Schweizer said he had found “a pattern of behavior…the
proof is, you look at a series of actions in which money flows to the Clintons,
either through speaking fees or Clinton Foundation donors. Hillary Clinton
takes a course of action that benefits those donors, in many cases, I think,
outlined in the book, she is reversing course on policy prescriptions.”
IMF PREDICTS THAT OBAMANOMICS and the GLOBAL LOOTING BY
OBAMA’S CRIMINAL CRONY BANKSTERS WILL SOON DESTROY THE AMERICAN ECONOMY.
The International Monetary Fund
warned Wednesday that the world economy would remain locked in a pattern of
slow growth, high unemployment and high debt for a prolonged period. The
forecast, contained in the organization’s updated World Economic Outlook (WEO),
marks a shift from previous economic projections in acknowledging that there is
little prospect of a return to the growth levels that prevailed prior to the
2008 Wall Street crash.
The document’s grim analysis
amounts to a tacit acknowledgement that the crisis ushered in nearly seven
years ago by the financial meltdown is of a historical and fundamental
character, and that the underlying problems in the global capitalist system
have not been resolved.
THE ASSAULT on the
AMERICAN MIDDLE-CLASS by the DEMOCRAT PARTY:
“By large margins, even in opinion
polls conducted by the corporate-controlled media, the American people support
sharp increases in taxes on the wealthy to fund social programs and provide
jobs for the unemployed; they oppose cuts in Social Security and Medicare and
view education, health care and other public services as basic rights; they
oppose government spying on the telephone and Internet usage of ordinary
Americans, as well as other police-state measures; and they oppose overseas
military interventions in the Middle East, Africa and Asia. The Democratic and Republican presidential candidates stand on the other
side of the barricades on all these issues.”
THE LOOTING OF AMERICA: BARACK OBAMA AND HIS CRONY
BANKSTERS set themselves on America’s pensions next!
The new aristocrats,
like the lords of old, are not bound by the laws that apply to the lower
orders. Voluminous reports have been issued by Congress and government panels
documenting systematic fraud and law breaking carried out by the biggest banks
both before and after the Wall Street crash of 2008.
Goldman
Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America and every other major US bank have been
implicated in a web of scandals, including the sale of toxic mortgage
securities on false pretenses, the rigging of international interest rates and
global foreign exchange markets, the laundering of Mexican drug money,
accounting fraud and lying to bank regulators, illegally foreclosing on the
homes of delinquent borrowers, credit card fraud, illegal debt-collection
practices, rigging of energy markets, and complicity in the Bernie Madoff Ponzi
scheme.
MUCH, MUCH MORE ON
OBAMA’S ECONOMIC CRIMES PERPETRATED ON BEHALF OF HIS CRONIES ON THE AMERICAN
MIDDLE-CLASS
One
government-organized settlement has followed another, utilizing “deferred
prosecution” deals and other gimmicks to allow Wall Street CEOs to get off
scot-free. All the banks have had to do is pay largely fictitious fines, much
of the nominal amount written off as tax credits.
Hillary Clinton on
rape victim: it’s just another laugh and buck in her pocket
Hillary
Clinton’s promise to illegals: 49 more
Mexifornias.
The
staggering cost of Mexico’s looting of America
RASMUSSEN
POLL: Hillary Clinton is a bad clone of Barack Obama owned by the same bankster
paymasters as Obama
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2014/09/rasmussen-obama-and-hillary-friends-or.html