Why Hillary Clinton Must Not Become President
This week James delves into the shady history of Bill and Hillary and explains why Clinton must not be allowed back into the Oval Office. James also shares his picks for recommended reading, viewing and listening.
This content is restricted to site members. If you are an existing user, please log in. New users may register here.
Filed in: Newsletter
Subscribe
If you enjoyed this article, subscribe to receive more just like it.
Excellent stuff. (As a slight copy-editing nitpick, there are a couple of places where it says “the Clinton’s” instead of “the Clintons’.”)
Thank you for that correction. I could use a copy-editor! I believe I’ve cleaned up the offending apostrophes, but please do let me know if I’ve missed any.
Thanks James. I noticed what to me appears to be a more important error:
‘stretches the bonds of “coincidence.‒. I believe the correct word should be ‘bounds’. Maybe it was just a typo.
Regards and thanks for all you do.
John Fordham
Thanks for the contribution, John. However the phrase you refer to is a play on the common collocation “straining [or stretching] the bonds of credulity.” Trust me, I’m an old English major. 🙂
Appeal to Authority.
Just kidding James. I can’t believe I missed this article. This is great. Keep it up!!
Hi James, Thanks for these clear-eyed warnings re the Clintons… Now can we also get a heads-up on Jeb? beginning with his dad? I don’t know how much more info is needed on the bankrupt system of governance that is now running this country… I think I’ve finally completely internalized your message that we need to abandon it and take up something else. Here is the documentary “Economics of Happiness” now available for FREE! on YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y3tcnQnq4Zs&spfreload=10
It’s a straightforward and also somewhat light-hearted and in places inspiring message about localization. What is needed perhaps is to contemplate more deeply all the benefits that would accrue from abandoning DC and attending to the local scene and how we each of us in our different areas can organize and make local self-sustaining projects work over the long haul.
James, while the Clintons are indeed pathological and have an extensive criminal history, does it make any difference as to whether Hilary becomes president or some other chosen one? You have been consistent in denouncing the two party system as being members of the same team as well as the futility of voting and trying to change the system from within the matrix, hence I am confused as to why Hilary “must not become President.” She seems to be as pathologically qualified as any other. The pathological powers that be are going to put whomever they want in office, so I don’t really see the point of focusing on the Clintons or the Bushes or Obama when they all are controlled by and do the dark biddings of the deep state. It seems to me that the powers would want a very divisive, anger-producing presidential candidate such as Hilary to run against someone like Jeb or whomever the Republican chosen candidate it so as to keep the public’s eye off the real issues and the crimes being committed in real time by the neocons, NGOs, et al. To my way of thinking, focusing on the Clintons is a misplaced focus given the killing, maiming, pillaging, nation destroying, etc., that is happening right now. Can you clarify?
Perfectly valid question, gary. No sub for James intended, but for my money it’s about who’s the less likely to push geopolitical aggression to nuke exchange point with Russia. Jeb seems the more pragmatic of the two.
As Nato’s Breedlove mentality unfortunately isn’t remotely dismissible, while Hillary’s history possesses such odious seething in scorned resentments, darkest compromise in arguably murderous ambition with an olympic talent for unabashed lying, not to mention her own feminine brand of salaciousness, she seems thoroughly obligated and poised to work seamlessly with deep state/CFR neocons engaging her full-blush psychopathy pushing us to and, possibly over, the brink with Russia. A Hillary latent bitch-slap-down of Catherine the Great, (or some such historically grandiose upstage of Bill for posterity.)
So, I truly dread what this election cycle portends for our national psyche. Hillary represents the most grotesque product of ideological and moral distortion welded to unbridled ambition.
Some scary stuff. I’m aligned with James on that basis and a nagging intuition.
Read your first line and agreed automatically. She’s (and the Kagans(Nuland’s her…wife ugh) share the same kind of insane on the brink approach with Russia.
Yeah, for what it’s worth, that Jeb Bush surely is not a good guy. But the few times I’ve heard him speak I was shocked. He head a New England accent, not trying to be a fake cowboy like his brother and he was saying things like “You can’t provoke war with Pakistan they are part of the nuclear weapons posessing countries and doing that with any of them is unrealistic. Even antagonizing them the way Obama is, is dangerous.”
Now I’m not even American, but I’m able to analyze somebody just by their body behavior/language, and that’s why back in late 2000 I stayed up all night because I knew a Bush presidency would be an all-out catastrophe that would change everything forever.
I was close enough right? Gore also had a creepy really bad choice of a VP though…Joe Lieberman…uughh….shudders.
Very bad lady, no doubt, James. But will she be worse than Jeb…er, I mean George W. Bush II?
You, know who I mean…the guy who will bring back all our favorite neocons – the same ones who were architects and authors of 9-11, the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, the Patriot Act, NSA Spying, etc.
James Baker, George Shultz, Tom Ridge, Michael Chertoff, Michael Hayden, Porter Goss, Stephen Hadley, Paul Wolfowitz, Robert Zoellick, John Negroponte, John Hannah(Dick Cheney’s former national security adviser) have been already been named as his team of advisors.
And would it surprise you if he consulted daily with Poppy and Dick?
These are the same characters you’ve been pointing a finger at over the years in many of your podcasts.
So would it be worse if Hillary became President or if Jeb did? It will most certainly be one or the other. Please advise.
Thanks for the comment, Bennie’s Dad. Who do you think next week’s article will be about?
Gary and Bernie’s Pop ;
think of the S&M term “hard limits” and look seriously at Obama’s record. Whatever else he may be and do (fairly revolting I’d admit), he has a hard limit over starting WW3, and seems to be successfully resisting pressure to intervene directly in the Syria and Ukraine wars — currently the conflicts most likely to spark a nuclear war. On the other hand Hitlery is such an extreme psycho it’s got to be doubtful that she has any limits at all, if she thinks she can get away with it. She Devil v. Bush Satan isn’t really the only choice. If Hitlery crashes and burns this year the Dems have to find someone else ; Eliz Warren ? Dunno, don’t care, but probably (hopefully) most candidates outside the Bush and Clinton clans would share Obama’s aversion to thermonuclear holocaust. Maybe not the most wonderful way to separate aspirants for the west’s highest office, but I think a realistic one, that affects onlookers all round the globe
Warren is “great” as far as politicians go, but she has to adjust her external policy, which is also of asskissing israel at all times.
I’m of the school of thought which says, “Things must get worse before they can get better.” As an apolitical non-voter, I see POTUS candidates in terms of two factors:
1. How likely are they to jump the shark?
2. How entertaining are they; intentionally or more often, not?
Both Hillary and Jeb rate pretty well on those criteria, but I’d have to give the edge to Hillary. She’s utterly disconnected from earthly reality and therefore apt to speak and behave in the most ludicrous manner imaginable. She has a BODY COUNT, for Pete’s sake. That is one strong resume.
Every moment she’s before the public is an exercise in self-hypnotic cognitive dissonance, both on her part and the part of the brown-tongued media. How could it get any better?
As James well knows, the position of POTUS is merely a figurehead in any case, so I say, might as well go for the gusto!
“You underestimate the power of the Dark Side”
🙂
Good summary of those pescky Clintons and fair reminder that should she prove unworkable we would have another puppet wheeled in.
But there is one small bright spark PaddyPower have Eva Longoria @ 750/1.
Here is a link to the current odds for 2016 President.
http://www.paddypower.com/bet/politics/other-politics/us-politics?ev_oc_grp_ids=791149
I did not see James on it and he is quiet posibly more American than Barry O’Bomber.
I suppose there could be a lot worse ideas than Longoria 2016.
The information in this article on the death of Vincent Foster relies too heavily on disinformation promoted by journalist Christopher Ruddy. Ruddy was once the leading critic of the Foster investigations but in truth he was hiding the role of the FBI and he promoted the idea that the Clintons kept the FBI out of the initial investigation in favor of the USA Park Police. Ruddy was popular with right-wing Republicans for casting suspicion on the Clintons.
While the Clintons are guilty of ignoring all the evidence of the cover-up of Foster’s murder, there is no evidence the Clintons had Foster murdered or that they orchestrated the cover-up of the crime. The murder was covered-up by the American press, the FBI, associate independent counsels Brett Kavanaugh and John Bates, and independent counsel Kenneth Starr.
Anyone interested in the most up to date information on the Foster murder cover-up can read the just published article by David Martin, The Secret Goverment’s Made Men. http://www.dcdave.com/article5/150319.htm
The staging of the crime scene where Foster’s body was found may have had an FBI connection that has come full circle to our current security police state. There are plenty of interesting links in Martin’s article to the most current documents discovered at the archives and taped conversations of Miguel Rodriguez, the lead investigator into Foster’s death.
Ruddy is now of friend of Bill and publicizes the candidacy of Hillary.
I welcome the Hillary campaign because rarely do we have something as well documented as the Foster murder to bring into the light. Hillary will make the “old news” new again!
It should also be known that the official final report, The Report on the death of Deputy White House Counsel Vincent W. Foster contains 20 pages of evidence of the murder included at the end and these were ordered included by the court of appeals over Kenneth Starr’s objection. The final 20 pages of the official final report have been suppressed by the corrupt American press.
I appreciate your comment, turley2u, but I (and I imagine other readers) would appreciate it much more if you could point out which specific statements of fact in the article are incorrect, and what evidence contradicts them. That would be very useful for us all in helping to learn our way forward.
I would be happy to point your readers in the right direction but first I commend you for bringing forward as much truth as you have. It is especially significant that you have informed your readers about Patrick Knowlton, a key grand jury witness in the case who was at Fort Marcy Park the day of Foster’s murder. Knowlton saw that Foster’s car was NOT at the park and it should have been there if he drove there, as officially claimed. Knowlton’s FBI interview report was falsified and he was intimidated by the Independent Counsel office and FBI agents after he was subpoenaed to testify.
Knowlton and his attorney successfully added evidence of the cover-up to the official final report http://www.dcdave.com/article5/100414.htm
Some minor corrections to your recent article are that Foster’s body was found at Fort Marcy Park, not Fort Mercy. Foster’s correct job title was “deputy White House counsel†and not White House Deputy Council (sic).
Your links to Mike Rivero’s website “What Really Happened†are understandable as that website is good as far as it goes, but it does not go nearly far enough, especially in regard to the role of the American press. I recommend reading Americas Dreyfus Affair. http://www.dcdave.com/article1/961127.htm
Your link to the NY Times article concerning the “looting†of Foster’s office is disappointing because the focus on Foster’s office was used to keep attention away from the crime scene at Fort Marcy Park and that Foster did not drive there. The New York Times participated in the cover-up. The focus on Foster’s office was used to make the Clintons look suspicious which played into the left/right game to fool the public. In contrast, the NYT has never reported the additional evidence of murder included in the final report released by the US court of appeals. Starr’s deputy independent counsel Miguel Rodriguez blew the whistle on the cover-up to the NY Times reporter Steve Labaton. Nothing was reported. http://www.fbicover-up.com/Miquel/Miquel.htm
Another link you have concerns the US court of appeals for the DC Circuit preventing the WSJ from publishing a story. This is news to me and it comes from the dubious source, USA Today. The proper title of the court is the “Special Division of the US Court of Appeals,†which was responsible for appointing the independent counsel. The article stated, “after a change in the law about how investigations were to be handled.†The change in the law was the renewal of the Independent Counsel Statute. This transferred the investigation from regulatory independent counsel Robert B. Fiske, Jr., appointed by attorney general Janet Reno, to statutory independent counsel Kenneth Sarr, appointed by the three-judge panel of the court of appeals. The USA Today article incorrectly stated that Fiske’s final report on Foster was not released. Fiske’s report titled, “Report of the Independent Counsel In Re Vincent W. Foster, Jr.” was made public June 30, 1994, and it was discussed publicly during the Senate Whitewater hearings in July of 1994.
By focusing attention on the Clintons and Foster’s office we fail to notice the best evidence and the bigger players in the Foster cover-up like Michael Chertoff, who went on to head Homeland Security and Richard Ben-Veniste, who served on the 9/11 Commission. http://www.dcdave.com/article5/130717.htm Brett Kavanaugh and John Bates are now serving on the federal district court on Washington and on the DC Court of appeals.
The Clintons are guilty of not speaking up about the obvious cover-up of Foster’s murder by the media and FBI. Hillary needs to be asked about Patrick Knowlton, Miguel Rodriguez, the court ordered addendum to the final report on Foster’s death, and the role of the press in the cover-up. But, that would topple her run for the White House.
Thank you for the response, turley2u, and much obliged for the copy corrections, which have been applied. To clarify: is your position that no documents were removed from Foster’s office and the entire story is a fabrication? Or that the documents were removed but of little to no relevance? Also, why do you believe that Bill and especially Hillary have been so completely complicit in the cover up?
It is not my position that no documents were removed from Foster’s office. There is evidence in the official record that papers were removed, so I would not say the entire story is a fabrication. What was a fabrication was the December 20, 1993 story by Jerry Seper, in the Washington Times, that “Whitewater documents” were removed. This false story was referred to in the July 27, 1995, NY Times article that you link to, “It was the disclosure last December that files had been removed from Mr. Foster’s office that set off the furor that led to the appointment of an independent counsel on Whitewater.”
The importance of Jerry Seper’s article is covered in Part 6 of America’s Dreyfus Affair that I provided a link to earlier.
It also may be significant that Foster’s executive assistant, Deborah Gorham, testified in her deposition to the Senate Committee that NSA documents were in Foster’s safe. You will not find any mention of the NSA documents by the American press. This fact was reported in the London Sunday Telegraph and is mentioned on page 195 of “The Secret life of Bill Clinton” by Ambrose Evans-Pritchard.
If anyone should have been concerned with the truth about the death of Vincent Foster it should have been the Clintons. Hillary visited Foster at least six times in his office between June 19, 1993, and July 20, the day of Foster’s death according to the testimony of Tom Castleton an intern in Foster’s office. Are we to believe that Hillary never bothered to read the final official report on Foster’s death? On August 9, 1993 The New Yorker Magazine quoted Hillary saying, “Of a thousand people, of those who might commit suicide, I would never pick Vince.” I think the official records indicate Hillary was initially shocked by Foster’s death, but she quickly got on board with the official “suicide” story.
With all the evidence proving Foster was murdered and that the murder was covered-up by Kenneth Starr, the supposed “enemy of the Clintons,” why is Hillary silent? Her willful ignorance of the truth makes her complicit in my view.
She’s silent because she put the hit out on him. They covered it up to protect the Hillbillys, both their corruption and murder. Is this supposed to be hard to figure? And don’t bother saying Hitlery’s favorite response to the press, “There’s no evidence of that.” Of course there isn’t.
They call her Lady MacBeth, ya know.
Interesting article on RT: Ukraine oligarchs ‘top cash contributors’ to Clinton Foundation prior to Kiev crisis
http://rt.com/usa/243017-ukraine-clinton-foreign-donors/
Vince’s Last Weekend
Was it just a time for relaxing,
That trip to the Eastern Shore,
Or was it something a bit more taxing?
Ken Starr should have told us more.
Lisa said things did not go well;
Starr told us Foster cried.
A fuller accounting could very well tell
Us why Vince Foster died.
There were meetings at the Landow estate;
A detail that Starr left out.
Could they have sealed poor Vince’s fate?
Wonder what they were about.
Maybe an offer was made to Vince,
And he was naive and confused.
His rejection settled the matter since
It was one that could not be refused.
-David Martin
Perhaps the best reason for a Hillary Clinton presidency is that it exposes the completeness of the corruption in the United States. The final 20 pages of the 137-page official final report on the death of Vincent Foster exposes a provable lie. The existence and contents of those 20 pages has been totally suppressed.
1. Republicans and Democrats are participants in the ongoing murder cover-up
2. The entire American press on both the left and the right continue to suppress the existence of the final 20 pages of the official report. A copy of the document was hand delivered to Kyodo News in Tokyo, 17 years ago, and the Japanese puppet journalists also remain mute. Americans are perhaps the most uninformed people on the planet.
3. American academia, both secular and religious, are disinterested in truth.
4. The U.S. Justice department is corrupt to the core and complicit in the on-going cover-up of Vincent Foster’s murder.
Aquinas wrote, “Thus it is impossible that the common good of any state can be fittingly maintained in the absence of virtuous citizens, at the very least in the person of those citizens who play leadership roles within the state.”
Hillary Clinton is the leader that the American people deserve.
Magic Mirror on the Wall
The world is bound by rules
In which we’re not included.
That’s called “American exceptionalism.”
We’re exceptionally self-deluded.
-Davd Martin
I dunno about unstoppable. There seem to be a lot of scandals breaking about this dynamically repulsive duo just at the moment. Judging by the timing, maybe someone higher up doesn’t want them stealing more furniture from vat Vite Haus.
An interesting new article by William Engdahl ;
http://journal-neo.org/2015/03/20/hillary-the-new-york-times-will-never-tell-us-this/
I am googling like mad “Bill Clinton Rape”, hope it works James. I went to the link “The Clinton Body Count”in the Hilary Clinton story. it is just amazing the number of suicides or supposed suicides. The suicide rate for the USA is around .02% so it is just improbable that all of these Clinton associates all suicided, totally absurd. Good article James.
By calling the list the “Clinton body count” suspicion may be inappropriately cast on the Clintons. Professional magicians call this technique “putting the heat on” something so attention is misdirected away from the truth.
While a number of the deaths listed were people connected to the Clintons it may be a mistake to conclude the Clintons were directly involved. For example, there is no evidence in the official records to connect them to the murder of Vincent Foster and the records indicate they were taken by surprise by his death.
There are always suspicious murders and “suicides” in Washington even when the Clintons are not in power, John J. Kokal and Gus Weiss for example. Last year a senior CIA official committed “suicide” are anonymously. I’m not making this up.
http://freebeacon.com/national-security/cia-official-dies-in-apparent-suicide/
Of all the deaths listed on the Clinton body count one of the most disturbing is the murder of Mary Mahoney because an innocent man is in jail for the crime. The truth about this crime may expose far more than the public is permitted to know.
http://www.dcdave.com/article3/990831.html
Probably the best summary of the Clinton’s I’ve read. I can’t think of any important dirt you left out. Democracy is definitely a duopoly in the United States, and you would think the average American would find two Bushes and a possible two Clinton’s to be a little … stale? No doubt the sex-baiting will ensue and win the day for el-Presidentette. This would make Bill the first Pres to also be first Man, so the demotion would play double into the feminist mantra of ‘sisters doing it for themselves’. If she had a public fling with a female aide it would almost be a promotional that would bring her more support, and Bill could give his blessing publicly.
Oh, the fall of the Western world, how painful it is to watch (and embarrassing).
Hil’s charities are having to refile their taxes and make audits. Guess they haven’t been 100% on how much money has been coming from foreigners and gov’ts.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/04/23/us-usa-election-clinton-taxes-exclusive-idUSKBN0NE0CA20150423
James,
I mostly started looking at the Clintons due to your info on the subject. The most damning info I think that I’ve found out there is in the “Clinton Chronicles.” You have excepts of that movie in your “Meet the Clintons” video I think. When you google “Clinton Chronicles” the wiki info and other top hits mostly just write it off as unvalidated stuff. I was wondering if you had ever considered doing a full length video on the info in there specifically? If half of it is true, how in the world can both Clintons still be walking around untouched? I know the answer, but maybe you could shed some more needed light on this damning info? Thanks!
Thanks for the feedback. Yes, the Clinton Chronicles contains some important info. If/when Hillary gets the DNC nod you can bet there will be more reports coming.
Add another to the body count list…
Tyler Drumheller, Ex-C.I.A. Official Who Disputed Bush, Dies at 63
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/10/us/tyler-drumheller-ex-cia-official-who-disputed-bush-dies-at-63.html
One of the people who ties Libya and the email scandal together, right as things are heating up too…
First time I saw this scene, I immediately thought of the Clinton Body Count
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Eeddn4c28Q
Wasn’t sure where to put this, couldn’t find anything relating to the show house of cards.