Saturday, October 22, 2016


by -

When Comey, the director of the FBI decided not to charge Hillary Clinton, it looks like it had more to do with money than motive.

Director James Comey told the American people that Hillary did have classified information; she did delete state property and didn’t turn over all work emails.

Despite the apparent laws Hillary Clinton broke by having a home server for conducting federal business, the director of the FBI cleared her by saying she had no intent on breaking the law.

He called her reckless and that was the end of the email scandal. Well, until now.

A source close to the workings of the FBI and the Clinton Foundation has released his findings to the press.

It has come out that James Comey accepted positions and financial compensation for working as a general counsel for Lockheed Martin.

Comey worked for Lockheed and in one year, the first year Lockheed would become a major Clinton Foundation donor, Comey was paid $6 million in 2010.

The same year, Lockheed Martin won 17 private contracts from the State Department. Guess who ran the State Department in 2010? Hillary Clinton.

Lockheed Martin also joined the American Chamber of Commerce in Egypt and the group paid Bill Clinton $250,000 for a speech in the year, 2010.

To take it a step further, James allegedly made sure his brother got in the loop too.

Peter Comey, the brother of the FBI director works as Senior Director of Real Estate Operations for the Americas for a company named DLA Piper.

DLA Piper is the company that performed the “audit” on the Clinton Foundation in November.

The employees of DLA Piper as a whole have donated a very large amount to elect Hillary Clinton.

In fact, DLA Piper ranks number five on the Hillary Clinton’s all-time “Top Contributors” list. DLA Piper comes in right above Goldman Sachs.

Ironically or coincidentally James Comey owns a mortgage on his brother’s house as a Private Party lender.

When looking at the way the FBI ran the investigation into Hillary, it is clear that someone was covering for her. The lead agent on the case resigned in the middle of the investigation and many think it was because he wasn’t allowed to do his job properly.

Agents were blocked from interrogating witnesses, blocked from serving search warrants for key evidence and even allowed the pay-for-play scandal involving the Clinton Foundation to be swept under the rug.

We are finding out that the investigation was a mess from the beginning and now we are learning why.

Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation helped make James Comey and his brother rich! Why would he want that gravy train to stop?

Let us know your thoughts on the FBI director being involved in the corruption that surrounds Hillary Clinton in the comments below.

by -

The scandal over Hillary’s email server is expanding to a private contractor who deleted emails, but did Hillary’s lawyers demand it?

When Hillary decided to use her home server it opened a huge can of worms that is exploding on her campaign right now.

New evidence now points to a private contractor who deleted thousands of emails for the Clinton campaign, but were they pressured by Clinton’s lawyers?

There are serious allegations of obstruction of justice and this timeline might help you understand.

3/2/2015 – The New York Times breaks the story that Hillary Clinton used her own private and unsecure email server when Secretary of State.

3/4/2015 – Congress issued a subpoena and preservation order for all of the email documents and by law Hillary must preserve everything on her server.

3/9/2015 – IT firm that was managing Clinton’s server is told to retain all the emails from Hillary’s server.

3/25/2015 – Clinton’s lawyers and legal team conducts a conference call with the IT firm.

3/31/2015 – Less than a week after the call with the lawyers and three weeks after being told to preserve all the data, the IT firm deletes the Clinton email archive.

They didn’t just delete the archive, they used a sophisticated program that scrubs all evidence and deletes any record permanently.

It is clear that the IT firm listened to Hillary’s team and not the government and they could be in big trouble.

Hillary’s legal team could be in big trouble too if they pressured or paid the IT firm to delete the files.

There is a real case of obstruction of justice here and most likely somebody is going to go down for this crime. There will be a fall guy or gal because we know for sure Hillary will weasel her way out of this like the FBI investigation.

Do you think that Hillary should be charged with obstruction of justice? Let us know in the comments below.

by -

This election year has been one for the history books but it’s not over as the FBI gave an unprecedented warning to both political campaigns.

The FBI warned both the Trump and Hillary teams that they could be the targets of foreign spies.

The warning was issued Wednesday during two different security briefings in Washington D.C.

Both candidates are getting their firsts security briefings, but this is different. The FBI tried to make it look routine, but the warning is not.

In this election we have heard a lot about email scandals, email hacks and vulnerable computer systems, but this warning is for something different.

The FBI is warning that agents working for foreign spy agencies could be trying to gain positions in the campaigns.

One campaign source said that the meeting was “not precipitated by any particular threat”, but the ideas should make the campaigns a little nervous.

Not only do they have to worry about attacking each other, but now spies could be trying to infiltrate their campaigns.

This week the FBI also announced that Russian hackers stole voter information form the Illinois voter system and another investigation is going on regarding another Russian hacker attacking the Arizona election system.

The warnings also come while the FBI is still investigating the DNC hack, which lead to many top ranking DNC officials to step down.

We are seeing an unprecedented amount of threats to this year’s election, but lets be honest, after the primary we witnessed, anything is possible.

Let us know your thoughts about the foreign threats below in the comments.

by -
Special Prosecuter

It’s a time-honored tactic – when attacked, change the subject. For generations, politicians of all stripes and parties have tried to change the topic of public discussion whenever their foibles and failings become the target of media attention. And, so it goes with Hillary Clinton.

The beleaguered Democratic presidential nominee has clumsily attempted one verbal sleight of hand after another, in an effort to avoid being held accountable for the highly questionable – if not unlawful — shenanigans between the Department of State during her tenure as Secretary and her family’s cash cow, the Clinton Foundation. Hillary’s efforts should not be permitted to shield her from answering to a Special Prosecutor.

The most recent – but probably not the final – factor that has caused Mrs. Clinton to sweat, is the revelation that the 15,000 e-mails discovered by the FBI not to have been previously turned over to the State Department as Clinton claimed, raise questions anew about whether donations to the Clinton Foundation were tied to contacts those donors had with the State Department.

At the juncture where Mrs. Clinton now finds herself, there are two very distinct choices open to her. Most public officials and candidates, when facing damaging but false allegations of wrongdoing, understand that taking the high road and demanding, or at least “welcoming,” an open and objective investigation, puts them in the strongest political posture to survive the attacks.

The other path – more often taken by those being hounded by damaging charges that probably are not false, hunker down, bluster, and change the subject. Here is where we find Hillary Clinton — hurling mud at the GOP standard bearer, Donald Trump.

In a feat of impressive imagination, Clinton responded to the latest evidence of wrongdoing that has surfaced against her, by charging her opponent with every false invective she could conjure, including racism, bigotry and misogyny. At the end of the day, however, when the dust of her ridiculous claims settled, questions about her integrity and truthfulness were what remained.

The evidence of an improper relationship between then-Secretary of State Clinton and the cash inflow into the Clinton Foundation, is today stronger than ever. The latest revelation, courtesy of the Associated Press, shows that at least 85 of the 154 people from private interests who met or had phone calls scheduled with then-Secretary Hillary Clinton, had donated or pledged money to the Clinton Foundation. And the sums are hardly de minimus. Those donors alone dropped as much as $156 million combined into the Foundation; potentially taking pay-to-play to a whole new level.

Despite assertions by some pundits that the best place to resolve those questions is the political arena, the appointment of a Special Prosecutor affords the only effective vehicle with which to drill down and get to the bottom of the mess candidate Clinton has left in her wake.

There is an urgency to initiating such an impartial investigation. Americans are slightly more than two months away from going to the polls to select a new president. They are entitled to have far more facts about Mrs. Clinton before making their choice than either the candidate or the current Administration has been willing to provide. And, despite the fact that a Special Prosecutor appointed now would very likely not conclude his or her investigation into this matter by November 8th, simply appointing such a person would give the voters the assurance that an impartial investigation will take place and ultimately result in the truth coming out.

In a sense, directing the Attorney General to appoint a Special Prosecutor would be a win for President Obama as well. Such a move would afford him a legacy he does not now appear destined to enjoy – that he is a President who cares more about impartial justice than protecting a political ally. The added benefit to Obama would be that he would then have washed his hands of the mess, and could no longer be pressed to discuss it since it would be in the hands of an independent, Special Prosecutor.

Allowing this scandal to fester will only further damage the credibility of our legal and political system. Just last week, a new word entered American’s vernacular: “Bleachbit,” meaning a service that prevents recovery of computer files. With trust in our Political Class at an all-time low, can we really afford further dissolution of the bond of trust between citizens and public officials that is essential to the proper functioning of our representative democracy?

Hillary may or may not stand to gain from a Special Prosecutor investigation, but America most definitely will.

by -

The FBI is investigating another hack and before anyone knows the facts, the liberal media is already blaming Russia.

Somebody hacked into the email accounts of reporters at the New York Times and possibly other news organizations.

Within an hour of reports coming out of the hack Tuesday afternoon, CNN broke the news that it had reports that the Russians were to blame.

When the DNC was hacked last month just before their convention, Hillary and the other party leaders blamed Russia immediately as well.

There is no definitive proof that the hack even took place and CNN is already blaming Russia.

The New York Times didn’t confirm the attack and the FBI hasn’t made an official comment yet.

Despite the FBI and New York Times not speaking on the hack yet, CNN somehow already knows Russia is at fault.

Blaming Russia without evidence is something that Democrats are doing more and more often and that could be very bad for America. Especially if WikiLeaks’ founder Julian Assange is correct in his accusations that murdered DNC staffer Seth Rich was the one that leaked the DNC emails.

It is too early to blame Russia or anyone else for the hack, but by playing the blame game we are distracted that many journalists were hacked and who knows what information could be out there now.

What do you think of CNN blaming the Russians before there is any evidence?

by -

The FBI announced on Monday that they discovered another 15,000 of Hillary’s work related emails and she’s in trouble.

When the FBI started investigating Hillary’s home server back in 2014, Clinton turned over 30,000 emails that she said were work related.

Hillary deleted the emails she said were personal and turned over the rest, but now we know that to be a proven lie.

The FBI director Comey said they found an additional 7000 emails during the original investigation, but just yesterday they found 15,000 more.

To say that Hillary lied when she said all work related emails were turned over is an understatement. From what we know now, she only turned over about half and there could be more.

The FBI has an ongoing investigation into the Clinton Campaign and now investigating her time at State Department.

The agency just discovered the emails and we don’t even know what is inside them yet, but we know she lied.

Donald Trump did not waste anytime using attacking Hillary for her newly discovered emails.

In the past two weeks, we have seen a more calm and composed Donald Trump. He has made a dramatic pivot and continues to campaign at multiple stops everyday but Sunday.

Trump is hitting the trail hard while Hillary is taking three days off a week and constantly being proven a liar with her email scandals. Her foundation is under investigation and she is in real trouble.

If Trump can continue to campaign and speak like he has done the past two weeks and Hillary keeps messing up, then Donald could win this thing and win big.

Do you think these new email will hurt Hillary’s chances to become president? Let us know in the comments below.

by -
Vince Foster

In 1993 Vince Foster died from an apparent suicide, but the FBI report that says Hillary’s merciless scolding days earlier pushed him over the edge has now disappeared.

Vince Foster was a long-time friend of the Clintons and even worked as counsel in the White House until he killed himself in a park one afternoon.

The death of Foster sparked immediate conspiracy theories that the Clintons were more involved in the death than the media was reporting.

It was concluded that Vince Foster shot himself, but the reason why was discovered by FBI agents in the report that has gone missing.

The agents concluded that just days before the death, there was a big disagreement in the White House between Hillary and Foster.

The First Lady ridiculed him and viciously put him down in front of all his co-workers in a big meeting.

“You have failed us,” Hillary was reported saying to their long-time friend.

A few days later he killeed himself.

The FBI outlined their findings in a report that was attached to the case and stored at the National Archives.

When a FOIA request demanded the report, it could not be found. The report from FBI agents that connect Hillary Clinton to the death of Vince Foster has magically disappeared.

It would be informative to read that report, but lets be honest, this is the Clinton’s we are talking about and it is no surprise that the documents have gone missing.

What happened to the report that ties Clinton to the death of Foster? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below.

by -

It is without a doubt that this election is one of the most unique and historical elections in our nation’s history, and a new scandal has things making a turn for crazy.

Hillary is moving from one email scandal to another. This time, it was the DNC that was hacked and 20,000 emails released to the public through Wikileaks.

Gucifer 2.0, believed to be a Russian hacker, released stolen emails that outline how the Democratic National Committee conspired to make Hillary the nominee and their plans to end Bernie’s campaign.

Email that suggested they attack Bernie’s religion for a two point boost.

The emails released show a DNC that cheated one of their own candidates in favor for Hillary, but it gets worse.

Debbie Wasserman-Schultz was the head of the DNC but she was forced to resign on Sunday in the backlash of the released emails. She will not be able to attend the convention and is going to have a hard time finding a job, right? Nope!

Just hours after the corrupt and biased head of the DNC resigned, guess who hired her? That’s right, Hillary Clinton.

Hillary took the opportunity to hire Wasserman-Schultz as a top campaign official.

We can’t make this stuff up. If Bernie fans were mad before, they are furious now. Thousands of Bernie fans and Hillary protestors have descended on Philadelphia for the convention and they are already shouting, “Lock her up”.

When Hillary hires a corrupt official the same day they resign, it doesn’t help her in the eyes of America. Ironically a CNN poll was released on the same day that reported only 30% of Americans think that Hillary is “trustworthy”.

The Director of the FBI, Mr. James Comey, called Hillary “extremely careless”, and although no criminal charges where placed on Hillary after the FBI investigation, it is clear she was reckless and put our country in danger.

Bernie Sanders himself wasn’t shocked to hear of the DNC conspiracy to defeat Bernie, but disappointed. Apparently he is still endorsing Hillary.

Bernie’s fans on the other hand are a little more upset. Watch protestors in Philadelphia on Sunday talk about their “feelings” for Hillary.

It is unbelievable that Hillary would hire Debbie Wasserman-Schultz on the day she resigns for leading a corrupt Democratic Party and people are starting to see through lies.

Hillary took a hit in the polls during her FBI email scandal, and now her convention is marred in corruption. If she keeps making decisions like hiring embarrassed and corrupt party leaders then she is just going to hand Donald Trump the presidency. That is unless she cheats.

What do you think of Hillary’s decision to hire Debbie Wasserman-Schultz? Let us know in the comments below.

by -
FBI Decision

When FBI Director James Comey let Hillary Clinton off the hook for her “careless” email server last week, many Americas were upset.

In a ABC/Washington Post poll, they discovered that 56% of Americans disapprove of the “FBI’s decision not to charge Clinton”.

Only 35% of Americans approved of the decision.

Despite majority disapproving the decision, most people now say that the email scandal will not influence their vote.

Hillary was found to have lied about every aspect of the email investigation, but Director Comey did not indict her because there was no intent.

We want to know what you think.

How do you feel about the FBI’s decision not to charge Clinton?

by -

Illustrating that FBI Director James Comey is a liar and a fraud, his agency helped convict a Navy reservist last summer of the same crime that he just cleared Hillary Clinton of committing. In that case the reservist from northern California got criminally charged—as per FBI recommendation—for having classified material on personal electronic devices that weren’t authorized by the government to contain such information. The FBI investigation didn’t reveal evidence that the reservist intended to distribute classified information to unauthorized personnel, so he was just being “extremely careless” like Clinton and her top aides.

Similar offenses, vastly different outcome. The key factor, of course, is that one subject is a regular Joe without Clinton-like political connections. His name is Bryan H. Nishimura and last July he pleaded guilty to unauthorized removal and retention of classified materials after the FBI found such materials were copied and stored in at least one “unauthorized and unclassified system.”

Clinton had droves of classified and top secret materials in an “unauthorized and unclassified system.” Nishimura had been deployed to Afghanistan as a regional engineer for the U.S. military and had access to classified briefings and digital records that could only be retained and viewed on authorized government computers, according to the FBI announcement, which defines the reservist’s crime in the following manner; “handled classified materials inappropriately.” So did Clinton on a much larger scale.

Last July Nishimura pleaded guilty to “unauthorized removal and retention of classified materials” and was sentenced to two years of probation, a $7,500 fine and forfeiture of personal media containing classified materials. He was further ordered to permanently surrender all government security clearance. Hillary Clinton could soon have the highest security clearance available if she gets elected president making Comey’s inconceivable recommendation that “no charges are appropriate in this case” all the more outrageous. Incredibly, during his 15-minute press conference this week Comey provided details of how Clinton violated the law by exchanging dozens of email chains containing classified and top secret information and how she mishandled national defense information on her outlaw email server.

The FBI director even outlined how Clinton compromised the country’s national defense to “hostile actors” yet he asserts Clinton and her cohorts didn’t intend to break the law. “Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information,” Comey said, “there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.” Enough to be criminally charged like the Navy reservist from northern California.

When Comey, the federal prosecutor in the Martha Stewart case, put the television celebrity in jail for participating in an insider trading scheme, he acknowledged the importance of not granting special treatment to a rich and famous person. Stewart went to prison for obstructing justice and lying to investigators about a sudden stock sale that helped her avoid losing thousands of dollars.

In an interview with his college newspaper a few years after Stewart’s conviction Comey, then U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, said that if Stewart were Jane Doe she would have been prosecuted. “I thought of my hesitation about the case due to someone being rich and famous, and how it shouldn’t be that way,” Comey said. “I decided we had to do it.”



When Comey, the director of the FBI decided not to charge Hillary Clinton, it looks like it had more to do with money than...