Posted tagged ‘Bill Clinton’

The Russian Collusion Story: The Acme of Fake News

July 16, 2017

The Russian Collusion Story: The Acme of Fake News, American ThinkerClarice Feldman, July 16, 2017

Richard Fernandez is one of the most brilliant authors on the Internet. This week he wrote:

Conventional wisdom posits the chief challenges facing the post-Cold War World are Global Warming and the decline of international institutions. But maybe that assurance is a species of Fake News. Suppose the most pressing problems in the next decade is finding new energy supplies to 1) keep the price of oil low enough to contain Russia (and Islamism); and 2) adapting to a disruptive information revolution no one can seem to control. Who will hand you that unconventional wisdom unless you come to it yourself.

He’s right, as I explain, but the significance of his observation is this: which of the two candidates — Hillary or Trump — was more likely to tap into America’s huge energy resources to contain both Russia and the Islamists? And when you answer that as you must — Trump — you can dismiss all the folderol about Donald J. Trump Jr’s, 15 minute meeting in Trump Tower with a Russian lawyer as evidence of “collusion” with Russia.  As I further explain, the non-stop media promotion of some nefarious scheme between Russia and Trump does not pass even the most cursory forensic examination, proving once again in the age of fake news, you cannot remain a passive consumer of news. You have to bring to each story the good sense and diligence with which you handle your most important personal affairs.

A. Russia and Environmental Groups

As Fernandez explained:

The oil crash collapsed the ruble and forced a 27% reduction in the Kremlin’s military budget in 2016.  With oil prices set to stay flat the Russians have to keep drilling and investing simply to stay level as the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies notes.  The Kremlin doesn’t make any real spending money until world oil price gets above levels before the great oil crash of 2014, which may not happen any time soon.[snip] You would think this a Eureka moment: to contain oil prices is to contain Russia (and Islamism). But cheap fossil fuels are not everyone’s cup of tea.  “Drill, baby, drill” is not popular on the left.  Even though liberals understand the power of cheap energy — one of Hillary’s supposedly hacked emails even alleged anti-fracking and environmental causes were a Russian plot to depress oil production — to advocate it is bad progressive politics. This probably led the Saudis to Hillary’s camp in 2016. “According to Bob McNally, president of consulting firm Rapidan Group, countries in the oil-producing Middle East, including Saudi Arabia, are hoping for Hillary Clinton to become president.”

If you’re looking for collusion with Russia, it is not to be found in the Trump Tower meeting.  Paul Mirengoff of Powerline details the Russian efforts through environmental groups — at best Stalin’s “useful idiots” — to tamp down US energy production.

 Lamar Smith, chairman of the House Science Committee, tells James Freeman of the Wall Street Journal:

If you connect the dots, it is clear that Russia is funding U.S. environmental groups in an effort to suppress our domestic oil and gas industry, specifically hydraulic fracking. They have established an elaborate scheme that funnels money through shell companies in Bermuda. This scheme may violate federal law and certainly distorts the U.S. energy market. The American people deserve to know the truth and I am confident Secretary Mnuchin will investigate the allegations.

To help Sec. Mnuchin conduct such an investigation, Rep. Smith, along with Energy Subcommittee Chairman Randy Weber, sent him a letter. They noted:

According to the former Secretary General of NATO, “Russia, as part of their sophisticated information and disinformation operations, engaged actively with so-called nongovernmental organizations – environmental organizations working against shale gas – to maintain dependence on imported Russian gas.” Other officials have indicated the same scheme is unfolding in the U.S.

Reps. Smith and Weber add that, according to public sources including a 2014 report from Republican staff on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, “entities connected to the Russian government are using a shell company registered in Bermuda, Klein Ltd. (Klein), to funnel tens of millions of dollars to a U.S.-based 501(c)(3) private foundation,” which supports various environmental groups. Klein denies this allegation.

Regardless of the conduit for the money, the allegation of funneling appears to be substantial. Indeed, says Freeman, it appears to have been noted by none other than Hillary Clinton:

If a document posted last year on WikiLeaks is to be believed, Clinton campaign staff summarized in an email attachment Hillary Clinton’s remarks on the subject during a private speech:

Clinton Talked About “Phony Environmental Groups” Funded By The Russians To Stand Against Pipelines And Fracking. “We were up against Russia pushing oligarchs and others to buy media. We were even up against phony environmental groups, and I’m a big environmentalist, but these were funded by the Russians to stand against any effort, oh that pipeline, that fracking, that whatever will be a problem for you, and a lot of the money supporting that message was coming from Russia.” [Remarks at tinePublic, 6/18/14]

Freeman suggests that Mnuchin commence his investigation by speaking with Mrs. Clinton, who “obviously knows the terrain.” He also thinks John Podesta would be a useful source.

Podesta is invested in and acts for a “green energy company backed by the Russian government.”

B. The Media Has lost all Credibility, Serving as the semi-official newsroom for the Democratic Party

Just as Fernandez detailed the rise of Samizdat in Russia as the official press was uniformly distrusted, the growth on alternate media in the U.S. is disrupting the old news models .

Our trust hierarchies have collapsed. As with Soviet Russia, the “official” media sources are now distrusted as purveyors “fake news”.  To fill the gap a peer-to-peer grapevine, similar to the “friends and family”, a samizdat is emerging to pick up the slack. Sonya Mann at Inc uses a startup to illustrate the growing division of society into trust groups. “Pax Dickinson wants to fund the revolution. Not a blood-in-the-streets revolution, but one where hardcore right-wingers can economically secede from the parts of society they vehemently dislike. “We need parallel everything. I do not want to ever have to spend a single dollar at a non-movement business.

Nothing so illustrates why the media has  deservedly lost all credibility than it’s unending, overdone effort to fit any action on the part of the President or those around him into a narrative of Russia somehow colluding with him to defeat Hillary. This week’s take was the short meeting his son held with a Russian lawyer in Trump Tower last summer.

The clearest summary of the facts surrounding the meeting with Trump’s son last summer is to be found in The American Spectator.  Scott McKay writes:

[Natalia] Veselnitskaya’s  [The Russian lawyer’s] presence in the United States alone ought to be the source of suspicion that not only is the Trump-Russian collusion narrative suspect in this case but that the real inquiry ought to be into whether the encounter was a small part of a larger attempt to trap the Trump campaign.

The Russian lawyer wasn’t even supposed to be here. She had been denied a visa for entry into the United States in late 2015, but given a rather extraordinary “parole” by the federal government to assist preparation for a client subject to asset forfeiture by the Justice Department. That was in January. The client was Prevezon Holdings, a Russian company suspected of having been paid some portion of $230 million stolen by Russian mobsters. When Sergey Magnitsky a Russian lawyer representing a company that had been the victim of the theft, reported it to authorities in Moscow he was promptly jailed and beaten to death. The American response to this atrocity was the 2012 Magnitsky Act, which sanctioned several individuals connected to human rights abuses. The Russian government retaliated by preventing American adoptions of Russian children.

But in June, she was permitted to fly back to the U.S., have the meeting with Trump Junior  —  at Trump Tower, no less  —  and then end up in the front row for a congressional hearing involving testimony from a former U.S. ambassador to Russia, then turning up at a D.C. showing of a documentary film on the negative effects of the Magnitsky Act, and later appearing at a dinner involving Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) and former Rep. Ron Dellums (D-CA) who is now a lobbyist for the Russians. The repeal of that legislation is a priority item for the Russians and a personal project of Veselnitskaya’s; it, rather than any Clinton dirt, was reportedly the primary subject brought forth at the meeting with Donald Trump Jr.

All of this without a visa! Not to mention Veselnitskaya didn’t file a FARA (Foreign Agents Registration Act) document before acting as a lobbyist for a foreign entity, as required by law. Neither, apparently, did Dellums. Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) wrote a fascinating letterTuesday to Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson asking them to please find out what in the hell Veselnitskaya was doing in this country last June.

And further, it turns out Veselnitskaya was connected to Fusion GPS, the Democrat opposition research firm which employed a former British spy who used Russian contacts to produce the infamous and debunked Pee Pee Dossier smearing Trump. Veselnitskaya hired Fusion GPS head Glenn Simpson to work on behalf of Prevezon, the company she was allowed into the country to represent, in its efforts to repeal the Magnitsky Act. Fusion then hired Christopher Steele, the British spy who drew on Russian sources to produce that dossier, and made him available for private briefings on the dossier with left-leaning media sources such as Mother Jones, the New York Times, the Washington Post, Yahoo! News, the New Yorkerand CNN in September.

Naturally, John McCain is involved  —  if that fact should produce his resignation, all of this will have been worth it.

By the way, there is Veselnitskaya’s social media account, which is decidedly more aligned with the Fusion GPS side of this equation than the Trump side.

And the meeting came about largely due to hyped-up promises made by a publicist for a Russian pop star who was connected to the Trump family from the Miss Universe pageant having been held in Moscow in 2013  —  promises which don’t appear to have been fulfilled. If this whole thing doesn’t look like an old-fashioned dangle to you, then you haven’t watched enough spy movies.

If timelines are interesting to you, there is this  —  reportedly, the Obama administration sought permission to electronically monitor Trump Tower in early June, and the FISA court would not grant it. But in October, that warrant was given. [snip]

And once that meeting  —  which on its surface was a waste of everyone’s time  —  was had, the Obama administration now had something to sell to the FISA court to get that warrant  —  from which they snagged Mike Flynn and gave the Democrat party and the media a mechanism to shroud the Trump administration in what can best be described as a rather dubious scandal. Remember how Hillary Clinton was accusing Trump of being a Putin’s puppet at the October 19 debate?

C. Donald J Trump’s son had every reason to believe that there was evidence of Hillary’s collusion with Russia

If this seems farfetched, consider this Veselnitskaya  was barred from entry to the US until Loretta Lynch granted her an excedptional “immigration parole” to appear in a judicial proceeding; a federal judge considered — but we can find no ruling — her motion  on January 6, 2016,to extend her stay by a week, and then  with no explanation of how this occurred, she was back in the US on June of that year  where she met with Donald J Trump Jr and attended as a front row guest a Congressional hearing on the Magnitsky act which imposed sanctions on Russia.

To add a dash of extra color to the story the media reported that with the lawyer was a “former Russian counter intelligence officer”, Rinat Akhmetshin.  He denies this.

“I am an American citizen since 2009 who pays taxes, earned his citizenship after living here since 1994, and swore an oath of loyalty to the United States of America,”

Kayleigh McEnany in The Hill characterized this as a “conspiracy theory desperately in earch of evidence”.

Bill Clinton had given a $500,000 speech in Russia.  Clinton had given her approval in handing one-fifth of U.S. uranium to Russia, after which her foundation received $2.35 million from the Russian-controlled company.  Suspiciously, Clinton did not disclose the transaction.

Likewise, Clinton campaign chief John Podesta sat on the board of a company that received $35 million from the Russian government alongside fellow board members Anatoly Chubais, a senior Russian official, and Ruben Vardanyan, an oligarch.

Given this context, why wouldn’t Trump Jr. be open to taking a meeting that offered evidence of incriminating Clinton dealings with Russia, particularly when most of the media refused to look into Clinton’s question-raising actions?[snip] We likewise know that several foreign countries known for their human rights violations  —  like Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Kuwait, Oman, Brunei, and Algeria  —  donated millions to the Clinton foundation, and yet few publications construed their “support” in a negative way.

Taken together, the micro story of Donald Trump Jr. seeking opposition research  —  much like Clinton allies did in their dealings with the Ukrainian government  —  does nothing in the way of proving the macro allegation that the Trump campaign coordinated with Russia in hacking the DNC and releasing Clinton’s illegally obtained emails.

The American people see through this leftist-purveyed Russia conspiracy theory.  That’s why a full 56 percent want Congress and the media to focus on real issues, not Russia.  If the left continues to concoct Russian collusion evidence, they can fully expect for the 2018 congressional elections to look a lot like the special elections in Kansas, Montana, South Carolina, and Georgia  —  Republican victory.  Voters dismiss the salacious in favor of solutions, and as of now, the left have nothing besides an evidence-free smear campaign.

In any event, isn’t it curious that those who claim to consider a meeting to listen to opposition research, bought hook line and sinker the ridiculous-on-its-face Dossier concted by GPS against Trump, a far more likely piece of Russian intel disinformation? Or why they ignore DNC officials meeting with Ukrainian government officials for dirt on then Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort.

Politico detailed the many ways the Ukrainians worked to help Hillary beat Trump.  As you might guess, they indicated these efforts were “far less concerted or centrally directed than Russia’s alleged hacking and dissemination of Democratic emails.” Covering with the word “alleged” a smear without any evidence but for the mutterings of Crowdstrike, a private outfit which was the only investigation the DNC allowed , a misstep by the Comey FBI which let this pass.

In any event, Legal commentators on both sides of the aisle have confirmed there was nothing illegal about the meeting.   I suppose we can’t expect much more of a press corps so stupid it mistakes the Star Spangled Banner for France’s La Marseillaise, and Bastille Day for the 100th Anniversary of the U.S. entry in WW I.

You’ll just have to work harder in the face of such ignorance and bias to find out what you need to know.

Wikileaks: Top Clinton Aides Details “Expensive Gifts” and Unethical Deals By Clintons Through Their Foundation

October 21, 2016

Wikileaks: Top Clinton Aides Details “Expensive Gifts” and Unethical Deals By Clintons Through Their Foundation, Jonathan Turley’s Blog, Jonathan Turley,October 21, 2016


Wikileaks has issued new and troubling emails from its hacking of Democratic accounts. Top Clinton aide Doug Band sent emails that raised objections to the use of the Foundation by Bill Clinton that raised troubling conflicts of interest. He specifically mentions the giving of “expensive gifts” and other conduct from sponsors. At the same time, top Hillary Clinton aide, Huma Abedin, is found complaining about a “mess” created by Hillary Clinton in securing a massive contribution from the King of Morocco of $12 million in exchange for a meeting with her as part of an event for the Clinton Global Initiative May 2015.

The Bond disclosure concerns the Clinton Global Initiative and a new business started by top Clinton aide Doug Band called Teneo Holdings. Both Band and Clinton’s held dual positions with Teneo and CGI. Bond wrote a November 17th email to John Podesta, Chairman of the 2016 Hillary Clinton presidential campaign and long-time Clinton confidant. He objected to Pedestal that “I signed a conflict of interest policy as a board member of cgi . . . Oddly, [Bill Clinton] does not have to sign such a document even though he is personally paid by 3 cgi sponsors, gets many expensive gifts from them, some that are at home etc. . . I could add 500 different examples of things like this.” Bond was on the Clinton Foundation payroll through 2011, but, in June 2011, he and co-founder Declan Kelly, a former economic envoy for Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, started Teneo in June 2011. They then made Bill Clinton a paid adviser. Chelsea Clinton was then appointed to the CGI board. Teneo then accepted money from groups like MF Global, a controversial brokerage firm that reportedly lost $600 million of investors’ money and had business deals that could be benefited by an association with the Secretary of State.

At the time of the emails, the Clinton staff were worried that there were questions being asked between CGI and Teneo. Band comes across as defensive and accusatory. He indicated that he knew of far worse conflicts by Bill Clinton and demanded “How then do we go through an exercise like this and [Bill Clinton] doesn’t as he is far more conflicted every single day in what he does?” Band later raised a Hillary Clinton with even worse “issues.”

In the meantime, Abedin (who is generally viewed as Hillary Clinton’s closest aide) authored a startling email that suggested a type of quid pro quo by Hillary Clinton in a foundation trade-off with Morocco for $12 million commitment to meet with the King of Morocco. The critical memo came in January 2015 with two top advisers Podesta and Robby Mook. It appeared that after cutting the deal for the money, Clinton had gotten cold feet due to the election. Abedin wrote that “this was HRC’s idea” and “she created this mess and she knows it.” It was decided that Hillary Clinton who go to campaign in Nevada and California while they had Bill and Chelsea meet with the Moroccans. Morocco at the time was under great pressure for what the U.S. government denounced as “arbitrary arrests and corruption.”

The last presidential debate with moderator Chris Wallace was the first to seriously probe allegations of a “pay to play” scheme associated with the Foundation. Clinton did not respond directly to the allegations but these emails are likely to magnify the concerns in the final weeks of the campaign.

Bill Clinton bashes Obamacare as ‘crazy system’ on campaign trail

October 4, 2016

Bill Clinton bashes Obamacare as ‘crazy system’ on campaign trail, Washington TimesDouglas Ernst, October 3, 2016

clintonobamacare“You’ve got this crazy system where all of a sudden 25 million more people have health care and then the people are out there busting it, sometimes 60 hours a week, wind up with their premiums doubled and their coverage …

Former President Bill Clinton stumped for his wife’s campaign on Monday in Michigan by deeming the Affordable Care Act a “crazy system.”

President Obama’s signature piece of legislation was framed as nonsensical public policy that punishes middle-class Americans by doubling their health-insurance premiums, according to video footage of the event.

“You’ve got this crazy system where all of a sudden 25 million more people have health care and then the people are out there busting it, sometimes 60 hours a week, wind up with their premiums doubled and their coverage cut in half,” Mr. Clinton told voters. “It’s the craziest thing in the world.”

The footage was immediately posted on the internet by the Republican Party, which has made similar critics of the industry overhaul since its inception. Not a single Republican in the House or Senate voted in favor of the Affordable Care Act when it was passed in 2010.

“The people that are getting killed in this deal are small businesspeople and individuals who make just a little too much to get any of these subsidies,” the former president added.

Mr. Clinton’s comment are reminiscent of remarks he made before a Spokane, Washington, audience in March.

The former commander in chief said Americans should vote for his wife as a way to “put the awful legacy of the last eight years behind us and the seven years before that when we were practicing trickle-down economics and no regulation in Washington, which is what caused the crash.”

Angel Urena, a spokesman for Mr. Clinton, issued a statement to USA Today shortly afterward saying the comments were meant as a critique against Republicans.

“When Republicans controlled the White House, their trickle-down approach drove our economy to the brink of a collapse. After President Obama was elected, Republicans made it their number one goal to block him at every turn,” Mr. Urena told the newspaper March 22.

Eric Trump questions Clintons’ enormous wealth: ‘What product were they selling?’

September 2, 2016

Eric Trump questions Clintons’ enormous wealth: ‘What product were they selling?’ Washington TimesS.A. Miller, September 2, 2016

Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump’s son Eric Trump questioned Friday how Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton and former President Bill Clinton became enormously wealthy running a charity, which has become the focus of the campaign’s allegation of pay-to-play corruption while she was secretary of state.

“The question I always ask is, what product were they selling? If we make a buck, we sold a bottle of wine or an apartment, or we sold a hotel room. What product were they selling to make $150 million,” Mr. Trump said on Fox News’ “Fox & Friends.”

Host Ainsley Earhardt suggested: “Favors? The government?”

“Of course,” responded Mr. Trump, who works on the campaign for his billionaire businessman father.

“This is the leadership we have in this country. Somebody sets up a foundation. They pocket hundreds of millions of dollars. They say they come out of the White House ‘dead broke.’ Now they are worth $150 million,” he said.

Mrs. Clinton famously claimed that they were “dead broke” when they left the White House in 2001.

Mr. Trump was citing a high estimation of the Clinton’s wealth. Other estimates peg their net worth at a combined $111 million, with Mr. Clinton worth approximately $80 million and Mrs. Clinton worth just over $30 million.

“It’s just so so sad,” Mr. Trump said. “People in this country work so hard and sometimes they are not able to achieve because of the policies that these politicians put in place and look what they do.”

The Clinton Foundation has become a focus of questions about potential conflicts of interest while Mrs. Clinton served as secretary of state. The charity accepted donations from foreign entities with interests in State Department policy.

The lines between Mrs. Clinton’s agency staff and the work of the Clinton Foundation also were sometimes blurred.

Some of Clintons’ wealth came from generous speaking fees paid to Mr. Clinton by foreign entities while his wife was secretary of state. His usual fee of $150,000 climbed higher while his wife was in office, including a $500,000 fee paid by a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin and a $550,000 fee paid by a Chinese business group for a speech in Shanghai.

After she left the State Department in 2013, Mrs. Clinton started collecting $200,000 speaking fees, mostly from trade groups and Wall Street banks, according to an analysis by the Associated Press.

Financial disclosures showed that the post-State Department speeches earned Mrs. Clinton nearly $22 million.

As secretary of state, she earned $186,600 a year. In her prior role as a U.S. senator from New York, her annual salary started as $145,100 in 2001 and rose to $169,300 in her final year in 2008.

EXCLUSIVE: Bill Clinton Got Millions From World’s Biggest Sharia Law Education Firm

August 4, 2016

EXCLUSIVE: Bill Clinton Got Millions From World’s Biggest Sharia Law Education Firm, Daily Caller. Richard Pollock, August 3, 2016

Former President Bill Clinton collected $5.6 million in fees from GEMS Education, a Dubai-based company that teaches Sharia Law through its network of more than 100 schools in the Middle East, Asia and Africa, according to a Daily Caller News Foundation investigation.

The company’s finances strictly adhere to “Sharia Finance,” which includes giving “zakat,” a religious tax of which one-eighth of the proceeds is dedicated to funding Islamic jihad.

The company also contributed millions of dollars to the Clinton Foundation.

The former president served as honorary chairman for GEMS Education from 2011 to 2014, according to federal tax returns he filed with his wife, 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton.

His biggest paycheck from the closely-held company — which is incorporated in the Cayman Islands — was in 2014 when he pocketed $2.1 million. It is unclear if Bill received income from the Middle Eastern firm in 2015, since Hillary has not yet released her tax return for that year.

Sharia law is the Islamic religious legal system that many in the West see as intolerant of human rights and other religions, as well as violating the rights of women and gays. Sharia law is considered by Muslims to be superior to all secular authorities. Islamic jihadis regularly call for the imposition of Sharia law and want to impose it on the West.

GEMS boasted in a 2013 bond prospectus that it is the “only foreign group approved for educational services in Saudi Arabia.” The GEMS facilities in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, taught 1,600 students in 2013.

Saudi Arabia is where Wahabism, the strictest form of Sharia, is observed. The Middle Eastern kingdom bars women from driving cars, requires women to wear the strictest form of the hijab, which covers everything but the eyes and hands. Gay men and women are persecuted in Saudi Arabia.

GEMS distributed a job notice in 2014 for a director of “Islamic and Cultural Studies” for its campuses in the Saudi Kingdom. The skills for the position included proficiency in Sharia to help develop a curriculum. The company also acts as an educational consultant in Egypt, Jordan, and Libya.

Clinton’s relationship with the Sharia-oriented education firm drew critical reviews from anti-terrorism experts.

“Why would Bill Clinton be participating in programs that teach Sharia in foreign countries where that is the specific objective of the Muslim Brotherhood, ISIS and al-Qaeda,” asked counter-terror analyst Stephen Coughlin in an interview with TheDCNF.

GEMS is one of the most dominant educational programs in the Middle East, with 51 separate schools operating in the region. Globally, the for-profit company claims that 250,000 students are learning under its program in 170 countries.

Outside of the Middle East and North Africa, GEMS operates schools in Kenya, Uganda, Southeast Asia, and the United Kingdom.

GEMS even has two “international” schools in Chicago.

At the GEMS Jumeirah Primary School in Abu Dhabi, the website promotes Islam as a central tenet of its curriculum. “Our aim is teach all Muslim students the pillars of Islam, Islamic faith and morals, enabling them to efficiently apply them to their lives. To increase the knowledge of Islam we share with the children, the stories of prophets, manners of living a Muslim’s life, the five pillars of Islam.”

The Dubai firm has donated between $1 million and $5 million to the Clinton Foundation, according to the foundation website. GEMS was an official sponsor of the 2013 and 2014 Clinton Global Initiative. Its Indian-born CEO Sunny Varkey attended both years.

And the Varkey Foundation, named after the CEO, contributed $250,000 to $500,000 to the foundation.

Varkey publicly claimed Bill was the “honorary chairman” of his foundation. But Bill and Hillary report in their joint federal tax returns the annual payments came from the for-profit GEMS Education company.

The company has raised funds through bonds and has openly broadcast its commitment to Sharia finance. In 2013, the company issued a $200 million bond prospectus and assured potential investors it relied on “Fatwa and Sharia” advisers to assure it was “compliant” with Sharia finance.

Coughlin said Sharia law on finance also includes money for “zakat,” a religious tax. “And if you read the law of zakat, one-eighth of that money goes to fund Jihad,” he says. “There are eight categories of zakat you must pay every year. And one of them is Jihad.”

Two of the banks — Emirates NB and Noor Bank — provided critical loans to GEMS in August, 2015, and were also accused of conducting illicit banking deals with Iran.

In a June 9, 2009, diplomatic cable made public by WikiLeaks, U.S. Ambassador to the United Arab Emirates Richard G. Olson slammed one of the lenders, Emirates NB Bank.

Olson told the Department of State that Under Secretary of the Treasury for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence Stuart Levey “pointed out that Dubai-based Emirates NBD appears to remain out-of-step with other major international financial with respect to its sizable Iranian exposure.”

Olson reported the Emirates NBD Chairman “Ahmed al Tayer erratically dismissed Under Secretary Levey’s concerns about doing business for Iran with a mix of hostility, remorse and assurances of submission.”

Noor Bank, another bank which provided GEMS with financing, helped Iran process foreign currency receipts. MarketWatch reported that in 2012 “Dubai’s Noor Islamic Bank had been a primary conduit for returning foreign-currency oil receipts to Iran.”

GEMS is owned exclusively by billionaire Varkey and his family. Four of the five directors are Varkey family members.

The Varkey Group Ltd, the parent company of GEMS, and its shares are held “in a trust by a private trust company for the benefit of the members of the Varkey family,” according to the 2013 bond prospectus. Varkey’s net worth is estimated at $2.1 billion.

All of the Varkey group’s activities appear to be transacted by MaplesFS, the largest law firm in the Cayman Islands.

As stated by GEMS in its prospectus, “Under existing Cayman Islands laws will not be subject to taxation in the Cayman Islands.” It also tells potential investors, “The Cayman Islands currently have no income, corporation or capital gains tax and no estate duty, inheritance or gift tax.”

Bill has been a frequent visitor to the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and the trips often deal with money. As previously reported by TheDCNF, shortly after leaving the White House, Bill pocketed $15 million in an investment deal with the Dubai Investment Group that included as his business partner, the country’s authoritarian ruler, Sheikh Mohammed bin-Rashid al-Marktoum.

Bill also collected $500,000 for a single speech he delivered in Abu Dhabi in 2011. He was paid by the UAE’s royal family. The United Arab Emirates is a monarchy where no elections are held and human rights abuses, especially of foreign laborers, are rampant.

TheDCNF contacted the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation about the GEMS Education relationship, but received no response.

TheDCNF also reached out to GEMS in Dubai but there was no reply by press time.


The Marketing of the Democratic Candidate

August 1, 2016

The Marketing of the Democratic Candidate, Front Page MagazineBruce Thornton, August 1, 2016

happy face

The Democrats’ convention ended after striving mightily to persuade most of America that Hillary Clinton is somehow more human, likable, caring, and accomplished than the public record of her scandals and behavior would suggest. Unfortunately for the Dems, not Bill, not Obama, not Hillary herself can transform Hillary. There is no political alchemy that can turn that base metal into gold.

For years, armies of political consultants, publicists, and marketing geniuses have not been able to make people like Hillary. We’re on at least the fifth version of Hillary, and all the oxymoronic advice like “act naturally” or “be likable” has not been effective. She’s still inauthentic and unlikable, and 56% of voters disapprove of her. She’s like New Coke or Betamax, a bad product no amount of advertising could sell in the real world of market accountability. Yet the mainstream media have labored like Trojans on this project, downplaying her crimes and failures, believing her lies, and rationalizing her faults.

We had a representative example recently in Scott Pelley’s interview with Hillary on 60 Minutes. After she whined and whined about the invidious “Hillary Standard” –– the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy version 2.0––Pelley gently asked in therapeutic Oprah tones, “Why do you put yourself through it?” In other words, he accepted the ridiculous premise that her negative image is the consequence not of her actions, but of “Unfounded, inaccurate, mean-spirited attacks with no basis in truth, reality,” as she put it. A real journalist would have challenged her by asking about the long catalogue of financial improprieties from the Whitewater scandal to the Clinton Foundation, or the self-serving lies from “landing under sniper fire” in Bosnia to telling the grieving parents of the four Americans murdered in Benghazi that an obscure Internet video was responsible. But skilled courtiers know that royalty can’t stand too much reality.

This year’s Democratic Convention speakers didn’t do much better, when they could be heard above the Berniacs’ booing and jeering. Their catalogue of lies about Hillary’s résumé––her alleged achievements on Middle East peace, “climate change,” getting Iran to negotiate over its nuclear weapons program––smacks of desperation, given how many light-years from the truth they are. The Middle East has descended into a Darwinian jungle in which ISIS, Russia, and Iran are the alpha predators. Even if Anthropogenic Global Warming is true, all the much touted international agreements from Kyoto to Paris have done and will do nothing to cool the planet. As for Iran, it takes remarkable shamelessness to tout this disaster, given the mounting evidence that the world’s worst state sponsor of terrorism has been serially cheating and is likely to obtain nuclear armaments within a couple of decades.

Bill Clinton, the fading Big Dog of the party, gave a tedious convention speech that spent a lot of time trying to “humanize” Hillary by talking about their courtship and marriage and other random acts of compassion and caring. Apart from the preposterous premise that they have had a happy and loving marriage (see Crisis of Character), humanizing Hillary is a fruitless task. She obviously lacks her husband’s political brilliance and powers of empathy. Of course, his empathy is phony, but like Truman Capote’s Holly Golightly, Bill is a real phony. He believes all this crap he believes. Hillary has been in the public eye for 25 years, and in all that time she has consistently appeared mean, entitled, insincere, vindictive, petty, elitist, money-grubbing, and insatiable for power.

Then came the big gun, Barack Obama, who in between mentioning himself 119 times said the following with a straight face: “I can say with confidence there has never been a man or a woman––not me, not Bill, nobody––more qualified than Hillary Clinton to serve as president of the United States of America.” And just what are those qualifications? In her eight years in the Senate, the only successful legislation she sponsored was renaming a courthouse for Thurgood Marshall. Eleven other bills were passed in the Senate, most of them small beer. Four of them proposed renaming post offices, one proposed to commemorate the 75th anniversary of the Purple Heart, and another the 275th anniversary of the American Revolution. The rest weren’t much better, and none were passed by the House.

How about her tenure as Secretary of State? Let’s see, there’s the groveling “reset” with Russia, which for all its appeasement of Putin failed miserably. There’s the ill-conceived overthrow of Muamar Ghaddafi, which left Libya a playground for ISIS and other jihadist outfits, and swamped the region with weaponry looted from Ghaddafi’s arsenals. There’s the debacle of Benghazi, when repeated requests for security by the consular outpost were ignored, four Americans were left to die, and Hillary responded with blatant lies and political spin about the cause of the terror attack. Don’t forget the private server, through which classified material was passed and likely ended up being read by hackers. And the biggest failure was already mentioned, the deal with Iran that will spark nuclear proliferation in a region already riven with violence and disorder.

Obama was correct about one thing, though––she is more qualified than he was in 2008, an embarrassingly low bar. But more qualified than George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and Abraham Lincoln? Only if you define “qualified” as possession of a résumé filled with the occupation of government offices she never used to accomplish anything meaningful.

Finally came the Grande Dame herself to tell us that only she can fix the problems that Obama says don’t exist in the sunny uplands of America, and that only she can be an agent of change who will govern exactly like Obama.

There were Mr. Rogers bromides about “we will fix it together” and “it takes a village.” Oprah bumper stickers like “love trumps hate.” Smug references to her years of “public service,” a euphemism for holding offices without really doing anything. Maudlin family history and anecdotes about sick children. A revisionist history of the Obama era that leaves out the inconvenient truths that his tenure has seen the worst recovery from a recession since World War II, and a retreat of America that has left a vacuum filled by our rivals, enemies, and terrorists.

Then came the chum for progressives. Evil corporations and income inequality. Attacks on the same Wall Street that has given her foundation and campaign millions and millions of dollars. “Comprehensive immigration reform,” the code word for amnesty and minting new Democrat voters. Job-killing minimum wage increases. The same “investment in new, good-paying jobs” that Obama spent nearly a trillion dollars on, only to discover that “shovel-ready jobs were not so shovel ready,” as the president laughed. Gun control, though it’s been repeatedly proven to have little impact on crime or terrorism. The threat that “Wall Street, corporations, and the super-rich are going to start paying their fair share of taxes,” even though the top 1% already pay 38% of income taxes, and those making at least $250,000 pay more than half. As for corporations, their tax rate is already one of the highest among advanced economies. And of course, “the precise and strategic application of power” in order to deal with ISIS––which in practice means continuing Obama’s habit of doing the least possible tactically in order to avoid the political blow-back from risky strategic action.

So after a three-day advertisement of her achievements, policy chops, qualifications, compassion, and experience, her speech was a catalogue of sentimental blather and stale progressive clichés, delivered to a crowd as easy to please as drunks at a comedy show.

In the end, after these mendacious speeches, all that’s left to justify a Hillary presidency is the specious argument that nominating a rich, white, Ivy-League-credentialed woman from an affluent family will correct a cosmic injustice akin to slavery, a “milestone in the fight for equity in postwar America,” as the Wall Street Journal wrote. Given the huge gains made by women over the last several decades, it was inevitable that a woman would be nominated for president. But as theJournal continued, women’s “progress has become so widespread that some women voters appear indifferent to another glass ceiling shattered. More women graduate from college than men. They are the main breadwinners in four of 10 U.S. households. They run General Motors, Co., PepsiCo Inc. and IBM Corp.”  Nearly half the enrollees in law and medical schools are women, and they are projected to surpass males in a decade. Women are Senators, members of the House, and Cabinet members in historically unprecedented numbers.

Moreover, it would be a more believable ground-breaking achievement if it were a woman whose climb to prominence hadn’t depended on marrying the right man and then publicly sacrificing her feminist dignity when he serially humiliated her with his sordid philandering, a scenario straight out of Mad Men. Perhaps that’s why Donald Trump gets more support than Hillary among white women between the ages of 35 and 64. “I think we have gotten away from the historic nature of this campaign because Hillary Clinton has become an exceptionally polarizing candidate,” admitted Democratic pollster Peter Hart.

Nor can Clinton count on progressive millennials who flocked to Bernie to get excited about her supposed historic achievement. Writing for The Weekly Standard, Alice B. Lloyd surveys an anti-Clinton collection of essays by leftist feminists who see her as a “token” of the rigged establishment rather than a ground-breaker for leftist change. They resent her reliance on “corrupting corporate intervention” and her habit of “favoring the politically and diplomatically expedient ‘imperial feminism.’”  According to one contributor, “What we need is not a woman for president; what we need is a movement.” As Lloyd writes, “Progressive feminists say they see right through this manipulative messaging, and aren’t falling for it.”

Many women, in short, don’t buy her “outsider” rhetoric and claims to victim status based merely on the accident of her double x chromosomes. And for all her pandering to Black Lives Matter, Hispanics, and the party’s loony left, Hillary’s choice of a bland, middle-aged, straight white male with a record of political opportunism merely confirms that she is an entrenched insider comfortable with Wall Street and the party establishment. Playing the “woman card” cannot compensate for her personal flaws and slight record of achievement. Perhaps that’s why only a fifth of voters are enthusiastic about the possibility of electing the first woman president.

So what has Hillary got instead of charisma, character, achievements, and even the thrill of first woman president? Voters who favor big government, increased entitlement spending, higher taxes on the “rich,” and continuing American retreat abroad. Voters who belong to public employee unions and are confident Hillary will bail out their states when publicly funded pension plans bankrupt state treasuries. Rent-seekers who benefit from green energy boondoggles based on global warming hysteria. Diversicrats who leverage identity politics into social and political capital. Battalions of economic ignoramuses who think you really can get something for nothing and socialism is cool. Bicoastal elites who compensate for their privilege by espousing federal policies and programs the cost of which they never, ever have to pay.

In other words, all those factions that want their “passions and interests” served rather than the security and interests of the country. The only question is, are there 65 million of them?

A Career Sexual Predator Makes the Case for Hillary at the DNC

July 27, 2016

A Career Sexual Predator Makes the Case for Hillary at the DNC, Front Page Magazine, Daniel Greenfield, July 27, 2016

sex perv

“Hillary Clinton took me through Hell.”

Those were the words of a woman who was raped and beaten into a coma when she was twelve years old. Instead of helping that twelve year old girl, Hillary Clinton aided her rapist. She falsely accused the abused child who would never be able to have a family of her own after the assault of “a tendency to seek out older men”. Then Hillary Clinton was recorded on tape laughing at how her client had failed a lie detector test while relishing describing how she had gotten him off.

Tonight’s Democratic National Convention theme was “A Lifetime of Fighting for Children and Families”. But this was how Hillary Clinton’s “fight” for children and families really began. And Tuesday’s highlight was an address by a career sexual predator whom she covered up for and whose victims she smeared.

That sexual predator was her husband, Bill Clinton.

Bill Clinton put even more women through hell than Hillary did. And he isn’t done just yet. Amid the freakshow of the Carter mummy phoning in, the mothers of criminals, random mildly famous celebrities, the Sandernista walkout and Howard Dean doing the scream that ended his career one more time, the other Clinton took the stage.

In an evening featuring discussions about sex trafficking, the highlight was a sexual predator. In an evening that featured 9/11 victims, the highlight was the man who left America vulnerable to 9/11 and refused to take out Osama bin Laden.

And Bill being Bill, the lying didn’t take too long to get started.

Bill Clinton told the hooting and yapping DNC audience that Hillary Clinton wanted to help child abuse victims. But a child rape victim back home knows the truth and we know the truth.  He got up on stage and lied again about the Children’s Health Insurance Program, one of those things which, like bringing peace to Northern Ireland and landing under fire in Bosnia, Hillary Clinton can’t stop lying about.

In Bill Clinton’s new version, Ted Kennedy and Orrin Hatch didn’t exist and Hillary Clinton got it all done.

But the Clintons always have a thousand new versions of every lie that they tell. And Bill’s entire speech was one big lie. The version of Hillary Clinton that he describes, an obsessive crusader for children who is also a devoted wife and mother has only one tiny problem with it. It’s an expert work of fiction.

The real Hillary Clinton hit up the Boys and Girls Club for $200K to speak for them. The real Hillary saw every non-profit organization working for education, children and any combination of the two as a piggy bank to loot for her greedy husband and herself. The real Hillary, the one revealed by the emails, is incapable of doing basic tasks and requires a horde of assistants to do anything for her.

The image of Hillary Clinton on her “hands and knees” putting liner paper in Chelsea’s dorm drawers is as real as Bill Clinton’s family values. The real Hillary Clinton requires people to pose before she steps into the picture so they don’t waste her time. The real Hillary Clinton laughed at the thought of a rapist beating a child into a coma and then getting off. The real Hillary Clinton has never met a charity she didn’t steal from. The real Hillary Clinton dislikes people and has her assistant elbow them out of the way.

Bill Clinton claimed that they never intended for Hillary to run for office in New York until New York Democrats “urged Hillary to run”. Then they offered to sell her the Brooklyn Bridge at a discount.

The Clintons didn’t move to New York for their health. They did it as part of a long term plan to get back into the White House. Tonight was a major step in the fulfillment of that plan.

Bill’s version of the Clintons, who moved to New York without ever giving thought to a political career plan, are as real as the “loving and caring” Hillary who just couldn’t stop trying to help children. When she wasn’t ripping off their charities or aiding their rapists.

It’s an insulting lie that treats the DNC audience like chumps. And it’s not the only one.

Bill claimed that Hillary “worked for farmers, for winemakers, for small businesses and manufacturers”. Hillary’s idea of a small business is a major bank or a multinational corporation. Hillary wouldn’t use a small business to clean between her toes. Not unless it could pony up a six figure check for her use.

He reeled off the usual lies about her foreign policy experience. The Iran sanctions. The worthless deal with Russia. And the even more worthless cease fire with Hamas in which the firing did not cease.

But we are told that she “put climate change at the center of our foreign policy”. That would explain why we’re losing the War on Terror.

The truth is that the Clintons are liars. That Hillary’s only qualifications for her current nomination are that she was Bill Clinton’s wife. And her only qualification to be his wife was her willingness to cover for his crimes.

Everything else is a lie.

Bill Clinton spoke one truth in his entire speech as he had Hillary suggest that “nobody would ever vote for me”. That much is true. Hillary Clinton doesn’t win votes. She wins rigged elections.

And that’s what this was.

Even in a night in which Chuck Schumer and Jimmy Carter did their best to put the DNC audience to sleep, they are still more charismatic and better speakers than Hillary Clinton.

The walkout during Hillary Clinton’s nomination left hundreds of empty seats aptly symbolizing her appeal. It doesn’t exist. It never did. America loves Hillary Clinton as much as Bill ever did.

Not even other Democrats like her.

Hillary Clinton has ruthlessly clawed her way to power. She has supporters, but no friends. After decades of victimizing women on behalf of a career sexual predator, she brought that predator up on stage to tell the world how much she loves families and children.

The best thing that can be said about the convention is that, like the rest of the Clinton campaign, it’s unremarkable. It’s bland and it’s boring. It’s full of the expected politicians and celebrities saying all the expected things about Hillary. But that’s what alibis look like. And that’s what this convention is. An alibi.

The Clintons are criminals who pretend to be activists. They’re greedy thieves who claim to want to make things better. They maintain a thin façade of normalcy as an alibi. It fooled some people a few decades ago. But it’s fooling fewer and fewer people. Even fewer and fewer Democrats.

Tonight was about making Democrats feel better about the unlikable candidate that they’re stuck with. And it didn’t work. No amount of lies about how much Hillary loves children and 9/11 victims will fix that. No amount of celebrities taking cheap shots at Trump will do it either.

Hillary barely eked out a win in a rigged election. Now she’s about to face a real one.

Halperin: Lynch Won’t Recuse Herself or Apologize for Meeting With Clinton

July 1, 2016

Halperin: Lynch Won’t Recuse Herself or Apologize for Meeting With Clinton, Washington Free Beacon, July 1, 2016

Bloomberg’s Mark Halperin reported Friday that Loretta Lynch will not recuse herself from the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email server and reserves the right to overrule the guidance of prosecutors and FBI investigators.

Lynch set off a political firestorm this week when it was revealed she met privately with former president Bill Clinton on her plane in Phoenix, Arizona. She insisted repeatedly their conversation was innocent, but both sides of the aisle decried the appearances of their discussion. The New York Times reported Friday that she would accept recommendations by the FBI and career prosecutors over whether to file charges against Clinton, but Halperin’s revelation elaborates on that story:

Attorney General Loretta Lynch is reserving the right to overrule prosecutors and FBI investigators on whether to bring charges after their probe into Hillary Clinton’s personal e-mail server, but she is strongly inclined to follow their recommendation, a Justice Department official said.

The attorney general will discuss the inquiry during an appearance at the Aspen Ideas Festival in Colorado on Friday, according to the official, who asked not to be identified in advance of Lynch’s comments that are aimed at reaffirming that she will follow usual Justice Department practices. News of a private meeting between the attorney general and former President Bill Clinton sparked rebukes from Republicans and concern among some Democrats about perceptions of impropriety.

Because Lynch will stop short of recusing herself, debate may continue over whether she will exert influence over the case as an appointee of President Barack Obama, who has endorsed Hillary Clinton’s presidential bid. The New York Times reported earlier that Lynch would accept whatever recommendation career prosecutors and the FBI director made, and a Justice Department official confirmed the gist of that report to Bloomberg News but later clarified Lynch’s intentions.

In a clip flagged by Breitbart on Morning Joe, Halperin said the DOJ official was “playing down that this is anything new” and that Lynch wouldn’t apologize for her meeting.

“Quote, she’s not recusing herself, she’s not stepping aside, and does not expect that the Attorney General today will say it was a mistake to meet with Bill Clinton for 20 or 30 minutes privately,” Halperin said.

He said the logic was “confusing” for her to be in a half-way position of being in the chain while still saying she would likely accept recommendations.

“She’s turned this over to [James] Comey now, and again, that’s just not good news for the Clintons on any front,” MSNBC host Joe Scarborough said.

Donald Trump vs. CNN: Score One for Donald

June 30, 2016

Donald Trump vs. CNN: Score One for Donald, Town HallEmmett Tyrrel, June 30, 2016

Trump and CNN

WASHINGTON — I see that CNN is calling upon the good offices of Mr. Potato Head to refute Donald Trump’s evisceration of Hillary Clinton in his speech last Wednesday. Mr. Potato Head is very indignant that Peter Schweizer has written a book, “Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich,” demonstrating that a pattern of corruption exists in the relationship between The Clinton Foundation and the Clinton State Department. He says that pattern of corruption does not establish the Clintons’ guilt. Well, an author can only do so much. Schweizer has written a convincing book about the Clintons’ corruption. The rest is left to the courts, which have yet to get the Clintons’ case, but my guess is they will have at the Clintons soon enough.

You might recall that Mr. Potato Head, as he was called some 20 years ago by The American Spectator, is David Gergen. Two decades ago he was employed by the Clinton White House, and he apparently still works for them at least part-time. On CNN this past week Gergen looked even more like Mr. Potato Head than he did when he worked in the White House. I remember him calling me some time in the early 1990s and complaining that we did not give him a “heads-up” on our Troopergate stories. He asked me if I would do so in the future. I generously offered to send him subscription information but offered no special rate — not even our student rate. The government of the United States could pay for its subscription to The American Spectator, as it paid for Bill Clinton’s subscriptions to “Playboy” and “Hustler.” Perhaps it could’ve paid for two subscriptions!

Mr. Potato Head was in high dudgeon last week over Schweizer’s “Clinton Cash,” claiming the book had been “discredited.” Well, it was used as a source by The New York Times and the Washington Post. They relied on it heavily for stories about the Clintons’ corruption, and it has sold quite well.

Mr. Potato Head was working with CNN’s posse comitatus to bring down Trump for his revelations about Crooked Hillary, but it is they — the so-called fact-checkers at CNN — who were brought down.

The CNN fact-checkers deemed Trump in error for claiming that the continuing bloodshed in Syria was due to Clinton’s support of regime change. But Trump never made that claim. All he charged was that her support for regime change began Syria’s descent into a bloody civil war. He did not say that she had a hand in the ongoing bloodshed. There is a significant difference. And, she actually bragged about what she did. “Yes, when I was secretary of state,” she boasted, “I did urge along with the Department of Defense and the CIA that we seek out, vet and train and arm Syrian opposition figures so that they could defend themselves against Assad.” That quote was actually broadcast during the CNN Democratic presidential debate in April. The Syrian death toll is now well over 250,000.

The CNN fact-checkers assailed Trump again for claiming the U.S. trade deficit with China soared by 40 percent while Clinton was secretary of state. This, the fact-checkers said, is “exaggerated.” Unfortunately for them we have at our disposal the U.S. Census Bureau, which in its report “Trade In Goods With China” asseverated that from 2009 to 2012 the trade deficit with China increased by almost $89 billion, or 39 percent. So Trump’s exaggeration was off by one percentage point.

Finally, CNN’s crack team of fact-checkers rated Trump in error for saying that Clinton’s State Department refused all requests for additional security in Benghazi. He said the State Department received “hundreds and hundreds of requests for security. … Hillary Clinton’s State Department refused them all.” Well, there were few security personnel on the ground when Ambassador Stevens was murdered in Benghazi. In the felicitously titled Washington Post column “Fact Checker,” Glenn Kessler claims that 581 documents have been found that deal with the security situation at Benghazi. The number is likely to climb higher if classified documents are taken into account. I have found six other open-source accounts of lax security in Benghazi, among them one from January 15, 2014 titled “Democrats Join GOP To Blame State In Benghazi.” It reported: “Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans were killed in the Sept. 11, 2012, attacks after having made requests for more security to the State Department. State has acknowledged that security was not adequate.”

After last week’s speech, it appears that Donald Trump’s charges against Hillary Clinton are absolutely copper-bottomed. CNN’s “fact-checkers” should be retired. Like all politicians, Trump may occasionally exaggerate a trivial matter. But Clinton lies repeatedly on things that matter.

The Persistence of Mendacity (2)

June 12, 2016

The Persistence of Mendacity (2), Power LineScott Johnson, June 12, 2016

(Have we sunk so far that often repeated lies morph into truth, or simply don’t matter? — DM)

When the Monica Lewinsky scandal broke, Dick Morris polled possible responses for Bill Clinton. Morris determined that truth was not an option if Clinton wanted to remain in office. “Well, we just have to win then,” Clinton concluded. Thus Clinton’s finger-wagging denial of what proved to be the facts of the case.

When Clinton was finally questioned under oath by one of the lawyers working in the office of the independent counsel operating under Kenneth Starr, Starr’s office had obtained and tested Monica’s blue dress. The lying was over, but Clinton nevertheless prevailed in the court of public opinion.

Clinton’s lying bought him the time he needed to survive. With the time public opinion came around to the new line he had adopted about the whole thing being a private matter. Clinton succeeded in lowering public opinion to meet his gargantuan needs.

The missus was instrumental in helping Clinton buy the time he needed to sway public opinion. In her infamous interview on the Today show after the scandal broke (transcript here), Hillary decried the “vast right-wing conspiracy” that she asserted was the real story of the scandal. That helped, of course, but the key point she asserted twice in the course of the interview was this. The charges against the Big Dog would not be “proven true.”

The missus took a similar tack in her FOX News Special Report interview with Bret Baier last week. Clinton persisted in the falsehoods and evasions have reflected the order of the day in the matter of her private server for official State Department business (video below at about 4:15).

Clinton’s response offered no subtlety. It did not depend on the meaning of “is.” The lying was rampant and obvious. It is the verbal equivalent of brute force.

“You said you sent or received nothing that was marked classified,” Baier notes, but she had signed a non-disclosure agreement providing that markings don’t matter. Classification inheres in the information, not the marking.

She purports not to recall that, but “the fact is, nothing that I sent or received was marked classified and nothing has been demonstrated to contradict that.”

Where have we heard that before? Ah, history!

We have seen every assertion of fact Clinton has made about the use of her private server fall by the way. As Catherine Herridge and Pamela Browne now report, this one is no exception. Austin Bay has more here.

Does it make a difference at this point? As always in the scandals of Bill and Hillary, time allows us to accommodate ourselves to their lies. The best defense is the persistence of mendacity.

Today the editors of the New York Post take a look back at the week that was in Clinton emails. They have plenty of developments to review without even getting to the latest report from Herridge and Browne. The editors declare: “Hillary’s final email defense: Mass amnesia.” The Post editors ask whether anyone will hold the lady to account and provide this answer: “We strongly doubt the Obama Justice Department will indict the woman the president just endorsed to be his successor. Any ‘law enforcement’ action is up to the voters.”

I’ll take that as a “no.”