THIS WOMAN COULD BE HILLARY CLINTON'S CHIEF OF STAFF IF CLINTON IS ELECTED!!
ASK YOURSELF AND YOUR FRIENDS .. ....WHO IS MORE DANGEROUS.. AN ISLAMIC MOLE LIKE ABEDIN.. OR TRUMP'S CAMPAIGN CEO STEVE BANNON? C'MON.. REALLY!! THE LEFTY MEDIA IS PLAYING YOU FOR A FOOL!
Huma Abedin -- wife of Anthony Weiner and deputy chief of staff to
Hillary Clinton -- is a Muslim Mole... her mother was a member of
the Muslim Brotherhood! That is a fact.
Huma Abedin is to Hillary Clinton what Valerie Jarret is to Obama. Hillary is already being given security briefings and Huma is undoubtedly passing this information on to her Islamic Controllers. If the Islamic Enemy knew our secrets when Hillary was Secretary of State... just imagine the disaster it will be if Huma Abedin has access to National Security information any time she is asked to provide it!
The lefty Western media purposely hid what has been revealed in
several Arab newspapers and left it an open secret in American government circles, particularly in the State Department where the Islamic Influence has completely taken over all sense of requirement of National Security of the United States.
Al-Liwa Al-Arabi (translated here) claims to have leaked
an extensive list, partially published by Al-Jazeera and several other
major Arab newspapers, that includes Huma’s mother, Saleha Abedin, in
the Brotherhood’s secret women's division -- known as the Muslim
Sisterhood or International Women's Organization (IWO).
Information about the IWO can readily be found at the Muslim
Brotherhood's official website. An excerpt from its goal, translated
from the Arabic, states:
The Women Organization's goal, in
accordance with the Muslim Brotherhood rules, is to gain and acquire a
unified global perception in every nation in the world regarding the
position of women, and the necessity of advocacy work at all levels in
accordance with the message of the Brotherhood, as written in Women in
Muslim Society, and the rearing of women throughout the different stages
of life [emphasis added].
The Egyptian paper Al-Dostor
revealed that the Sisterhood includes 63 international members across 16
different countries -- a claim confirmed by the Arab Center for
Studies, headed by researcher Abdul Rahim Ali.
Neither Huma nor any major Western media outlets even mention this bit of common knowledge in the Arab world.
But there is more. Also confirmed by Arab sources is that Huma Abedin
has a brother who works at Oxford University named Hassan Abedin.
Oxford, which has long been infiltrated by Islamists who founded the
Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies (OCIS), has Huma's brother listed as a
fellow and partner with a number of Muslim Brotherhood members on the
Board -- including al-Qaeda associate Omar Naseef and the notorious
Muslim Brotherhood leader Sheikh Yusuf Qaradawi. Both have been listed
as OCIS trustees. Naseef continues to serve as Board chairman.
In 2009, Qaradawi's role within Oxford and the Muslim Brotherhood was
championed by the notorious Sheikh Rached Ghannouchi of Al-Nahda – a
Muslim Brotherhood affiliate now active in Tunisia. OCIS has even
presented an award for great scholarly achievement to Brotherhood member
Shaykh Abd Al-Fattah Abu Gudda, whose personal history goes back to the
Brotherhood's founder, Hasan al-Banna.
Even the Sunday Times
acknowledges that the cradle of Islamic jihad -- Al-Azhar University --
actively attempts to establish links with OCIS, where Huma's brother
serves.
Was Huma unaware of all this as she accompanied Hillary
Clinton to the Dar El-Hekma women's college in Saudi Arabia? Huma's
mother is co-founder and vice dean at the college and an active
missionary on issues regarding Muslim women.
Another member
listed as belonging to the Sisterhood mentioned by Al-Jazeera is Suheir
Qureshi. Alongside Huma's mother, Saleha Abedin, as well as Secretary of
State Hillary Clinton, who was brought in due to her connection with
Huma, Qureshi spoke on issues of women in Muslim society. An Arabic news
report of what happened during Hillary's visit stated that:
Suheir Qureshi spoke of how elated she was of Hillary's historic
visit.... Saleha Abedin spoke after Suheir Qureshi and beamed in the
presence of Secretary Clinton. Saleha's speech preceded the former first
lady's. Then Hillary stood. She donned a broad smile as she approached
the podium....Clinton started with a strong word and she spent a long
time complimenting Dr. Saleha Abedin regarding her daughter. Hillary
explained that Huma holds an important and sensitive position in her
office. She ended her speech by speaking of Saleha Abedin's daughter
(Huma), that a person must be happy if mentioned in a positive light but
there is no happiness that equals the compliment given to children in
front of a parent [emphasis added].
It is sacrilege in Islam
for Huma's mother to accept the reality that her daughter is married to a
Jew. Yet neither Saleha nor Huma's brother Hassan denounces her
marriage to Weiner, especially when it was considered null and void by
some of the highest authorities on Islamic Sharia rulings.
Following a New York Post article, which released new and revealing snippets from the pages of the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs,
a 2012 controversy about the nature of Huma Abedin’s associations, has
again kicked into high gear. While some in the media have attempted to
defend Abedin, and the journal, they’ve played fast and loose with the facts.
At the heart of the matter is Abedin’s involvement with an
organization founded by a man named Abdullah Omar Naseef, a Saudi
official who spent decades involved with organizations which would go on
to be designated for engaging in terror finance. Here’s what you need to know:
1. Huma Abedin and terror-funder Abdullah Omar Naseef are directly connected.
This isn’t six degrees of Kevin Bacon. Huma Abedin served as the
associate editor of the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs for 12 years
from 1996-2008, and appeared on the masthead of the organization’s
journal right up until the time she began to work at the State
Department for Hillary Clinton. This included the time she was working
as an intern for Hillary Clinton at the White House. Nassef held the
position of Chairman of the Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs. Huma
Abedin and Naseef overlapped at IMMA for a period of seven years. As former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy noted, “the journal was the IMMA’s raison d’etre.”
2. TheJournal of Muslim Minority Affairs was the Abedin family business.
Syed Abedin, Huma’s father, founded the Institute of Muslim Minority
Affairs with Abdullah Omar Naseef in the 1970s. The Abedin patriarch was the editor,
until passing away after which time Huma’s mother, Saleha Abedin took
over the journal and held the same position, and still does to this day.
Abedin’s brother and sister have also all held positions with the IMMA.
3. The Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs promotes views on Sharia, Islam and a Muslim’s role in the West popularized by the Muslim Brotherhood.
Editions of the journal openly endorsed the positions
of known Muslim Brotherhood theoreticians, including Sayyid Qutb, and
called for the imposition of sharia law among Muslim minorities residing
in the West. “Muslim minority affairs” primarily refers to questions of
the Fiqh (jurisprudence) of Minorities,
the area of Sharia law jurisprudence concerned with the role and status
of Muslims who have immigrated to non-Muslim states, popularized by
Muslim Brotherhood thinker Yusuf Al Qaradawi. Qaradawi is best known for
his fatwas supporting Hamas suicide bombing and attacks on Americans in
Iraq during the 2003 Iraq War.
4. The Journal’s benefactor, Abdullah Omar Naseef, served as Secretary General of the World Muslim League.
The controversy about Naseef stems from his role with the Muslim
World League. Naseef held the position of Secretary General of MWL for a
decade, from 1983-1993.
The purpose of the Muslim World was to support efforts to proselytize
Islam in the West. The organization combined Saudi funds with the
intellectual efforts of Muslim Brotherhood thinkers including Said Ramadan and Taha Jaber Alwani who served as founding members.
5. The Muslim World League was specifically mentioned as a funding source by Osama Bin Laden.
The Muslim World League was specifically mentioned by Osama bin Laden as a source of funding and after 9/11 the Muslim World League offices in Herdon, VA were raided by law enforcement.
A Muslim World League subsidiary, the International Islamic Relief
Organization (IIRO), would have two of its branches named as specially
designated global terrorist entities.
6. Abdullah Omar Naseef created another organization, the Rabita Trust, which was also shut down for terrorism.
Another WML subsidiary founded by Nassef, the Rabita Trust, is also a specially designated global terrorist entity according to the U.S. Treasury Department. Nassef also appointed Rabita Trust Director General Wael Hamza Julaidan, a close associate
of Osama Bin Laden. The U.S. Treasury department would eventually
designate Julaidan as a specially designated global terrorist.
7. In addition to Al Qaeda finance connections, Naseef also worked for a group of Hamas financiers. So did Huma’s mom.
8. Huma’s mom ran a women’s organization dedicated to supporting Sharia law in place of women’s rights.
Saleha Abedin’s position at the International Islamic Council for
Daw’a and Relief was to run the International Islamic Committee for
Woman and Child (IICWC). The IICWC is a group which advocates for sharia law provisions
of family law and seeks the repeal of Egypt’s Mubarak-era prohibitions
on female genital mutilation, child marriage, and marital rape. For the
IICWC’s positions on matters of sharia jurisprudence the Committee
turned to Hamas supporting Muslim Brotherhood cleric Yusuf Al Qaradawi.
HILLARY CLINTON...WILL WEAR A SECRET HEARING DEVICE DURING DEBATE...
JUST LIKE HUSSEIN OBAMA DID DURING THE 2012 DEBATES.
SHE WILL HAVE HER EARS COVERED BY HER HAIR SO NO ONE WILL SEE IT!
UPDATE September 18 2016 The Media Lackeys are running scared that the Hillary Plan has been busted.
Fecesbook (Facebook) Just Blocked Joe Biggs for putting up a FARCE on Facebook on the Earpiece Story!
Update: September 9 2016 TOLD YOU SO!!
MORE EVIDENCE! Wikileaks Email Shows Huma Abedin In Charge of Hillary’s Earpiece
‘Crooked’ Hillary Clinton was seen wearing an ear piece in Wednesday night’s Commander in Chief Forum hosted by NBC and MSNBC. This was the first event where both Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton were invited to attend together. Each candidate received a short period with host Matt Lauer. It was expected that both candidates would provide unaided answers to the questions asked but it appears Hillary did not. POTUS TRUMP (not the real Donald Trump account) tweeted after the
event their disdain for candidate Clinton using the ear piece which
provided her a boost in answering questions.
Now this… Wikileaks released a Hillary Clinton email discussing Hillary’s earpiece.
Apparently, Huma had earpiece duty.
Actor James Woods tweeted this yesterday.
She has used them in the past.. see pictures below.. she is not picking her ear!!
The Trump Campaign should use a scrambling device that send distorted signals into her ear sending Hillary Clinton into an epileptic fit on stage. WONT THAT BE SOME FUNNY SHIT!!
THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF A HEARING DEVICE USED BY STUDENTS TO CHEAT ON EXAMS
ITS NOT SECRET THAT THIS TECHNOLOGY IS AVAILABLE!!
Teenagers may be using James Bond-style hidden earpieces to cheat in
their exams, according to the Government's testing watchdog.
The
Qualifications and Curriculum Authority is investigating concerns that
students could be using the devices linked to mobile phones or MP3
players.
A Canadian company is openly promoting the invisible,
wireless "micro spy earphone" to exam candidates around the world, The
Times Educational Supplement reported.
The Toronto-based company, Examear, uses the advertising slogan: "Helping students succeed. Worldwide!"
It’s not a secret that Obama uses ear pieces, because there are
numerous photos that show him wearing one at various functions, as you
see in the photos below: Obama adjusts ear piece in photos above “Gate” posted this close-up photo of Obama (see below) which clearly shows him wearing a clear-colored ear device (a Bluetooth® or higher-end Kleer® wireless earbud?).
However, this photo could not be from the third (or second or first)
debate because Obama has jet-black hair in the photo, whereas his hair
has grey in it during the three debates:
Pic posted by “Gate”
So I took screen shots from the videos posted on YouTube of the third and first debates, so we can see for ourselves. Here’s a screen shot from the first debate, followed by a close-up of Obama’s left ear from this screen shot:
Here’s a screen shot I took from a video of the third presidential debate, followed by a closeup of Obama’s left ear from that screen shot:
I painted two red arrows onto the above closeup, pointing to two features that are missing from Obama’s left ear in the first debate:
The left red arrow points to a strange flesh-colored vertical line that extends from the inner top rim to the lower lobe of Obama’s ear.
The right red arrow points to a crescent shape in his ear that’s a light flesh-pink color.
I found the same two features in other screenshots of Obama which I took from the video of the third debate. Here are the closeups of the two ears (left from the 1st debate;
right from the 3rd debate) placed side by side so you can better compare
them. I’ve painted red dots on that strange flesh-colored vertical line
in the picture of his ear from the 3rd debate: Here are the first pic posted by “Gate” showing clearly a
clear-colored ear device in Obama ear (left), side by side with the
closeup of his ear from the third debate (right). Do you see how the
pink crescent shape is EXACTLY the same U shape as the clear ear device?
Now watch this video of the third presidential debate. Notice, for
example beginning at the 0:02:40 mark, how when Romney’s talking, Obama
is very still and just stares at Romney, as if he’s intently listening to someone talking into his ear:
This is what Mark McGrew wrote in an email to me: “I’m sure there are clear ear pieces. But in a clandestine
application they would be flesh colored and used with makeup to blend in
which is what Obama’s ear looked like in the 3rd debate. Blue Phone:
This is a technique used by sales managers to train new salespeople,
who know little about sales methods or their written script (sales
pitch). A manager listens in to a call between a salesman and his
customer. The customer can not hear the manager. The call is recorded so
that the salesman can listen to it later, over and over again, until he
understands what to do when he is on his own. The salesman’s only
purpose in life, is to watch and listen to every word and every
inflection of the manager and the salesman has to duplicate, like an
actor, every thing the manager says, in the same tone of voice, the same
inflections and the same body motions. The salesman becomes like a
Disneyland robot, completely mimicking the manager in every way. In
reality, the manger is negotiating with the customer, but using the
salesman’s body to do so. The salesman is ‘possessed’. If done properly,
the manager at some point can say, ‘I shot John Kennedy and raped your
daughter’ and that is exactly what the salesman will tell the customer,
and not even know he said it. After the call, the manager can tell the
salesman what he said, but the salesman will not believe it until he
hears the recording of the call. The salesman is hypnotized during the
blue phoning. The manager has complete control over his robot. This
technique is used in complicated sales, with many questions coming from
the customer, such as securities and investments. If the manager stops
the blue phone and walks off, the salesman will not have the faintest
idea where he is in the sales call and will take several seconds to
‘come out of trance’ and try desperately to get back in the sales call,
usually failing to do so. It is like you dropped a salesman off a 30
story building and he doesn’t realize it until just before he hits the
sidewalk. I personally have blue phoned hundreds of sales calls and know
exactly what a blue phoned person looks like: As if in an intense
trance. And they are in an intense trance. I am an expert in Blue
Phoning and I know what a Blue Phoned person looks like, the expression
on his face, the eyeball movements, the stress level, the body
movements…..everything. In debate #2 and debate # 3, Obama was Blue Phoned. Whether it
was an ear piece, a teleprompter or a brain implant, I do not know. I
only know that he was Blue Phoned.”
Update (Nov. 5, 2012):
Jim McElwee of ItMakesSenseBlog posted these pics of Obama’s right ear taken from the 3rd debate (h/t Sally!): Here’s a comment from a reader of ItMakesSenseBlog:
I am a retired Licensed Optician (40 year experience) with a
PhD…. I have also fit hearing aids for many years.. I knew he had a
device in his ear..( I Told my husband & our Friends what to look
for) because when ever Mr. Romney was talking, “Obama” turned his head
slightly to pick up on a second person talking in his ear to coach him
;I am sure of this…The last 2 debates he had a ” Prompter Ear Device for
help~~”.. (Look how REALLY MISERABLY HE DID IN THE FIRST BEBATE WITH NO
HELP!!) I wonder how “CLOSE BY” Mr. Bill Clinton or someone” FAR more
knowlegable and SAVAY” (MUCH MORE THAN OBAMA” )was available to feed him
INFO.. He is’nt that “SMART” because He still didn’t do that well even
with the “HELP HE SO OBVIOUSLY RECEIVED!..
In order for the 88 percent claim to be even remotely close to the
truth, the words “directly” and “life-changing” have to mean something
other than “directly” and “life-changing.” For example, the Clinton
Foundation spent nearly $8.5 million–10 percent of all 2013
expenditures–on travel. Do plane tickets and hotel accommodations
directly change lives? Nearly $4.8 million–5.6 percent of all
expenditures–was spent on office supplies. Are ink cartridges and
staplers “life-changing” commodities?
Those two categories alone comprise over 15 percent of all Clinton
Foundation expenses in 2013, and we haven’t even examined other spending
categories like employee fringe benefits ($3.7 million), IT costs ($2.1
million), rent ($4 million) or conferences and conventions ($9.2
million). Yet, the tax-exempt organization claimed in its tweet that no
more than 12 percent of its expenditures went to these overhead
expenses.
How can both claims be true? Easy: they’re not. The claim from the
Clinton Foundation that 88 percent of all expenditures go directly to
life-changing work is demonstrably false. Office chairs do not directly
save lives. The internet connection for the group’s headquarters does
not directly change lives.
But what if those employees and those IT costs and those travel
expenses indirectly save lives, you might ask. Sure, it’s overhead, but
what if it’s overhead in the service of a larger mission? Fair question.
Even using the broadest definition of “program expenses” possible,
however, the 88 percent claim is still false. How do we know? Because the IRS 990 forms submitted by the Clinton Foundation
include a specific and detailed accounting of these programmatic
expenses. And even using extremely broad definitions–definitions that
allow office supply, rent, travel, and IT costs to be counted as
programmatic costs–the Clinton Foundation fails its own test.
According to 2013 tax forms filed by the Clinton Foundation,
a mere 80 percent of the organization’s expenditures were characterized
as functional programmatic expenses. That’s a far cry from the 88
percent claimed by the organization just last week.
If you take a narrower, and more realistic, view of the tax-exempt
group’s expenditures by excluding obvious overhead expenses and focusing
on direct grants to charities and governments, the numbers look much
worse. In 2013, for example, only 10 percent of the Clinton Foundation’s
expenditures were for direct charitable grants. The amount it spent on
charitable grants–$8.8 million–was dwarfed by the $17.2 million it
cumulatively spent on travel, rent, and office supplies. Between 2011
and 2013, the organization spent only 9.9 percent of the $252 million it
collected on direct charitable grants.
While some may claim that the Clinton Foundation does its charity by itself,
rather than outsourcing to other organizations in the form of grants,
there appears to be little evidence of that activity in 2013. In 2008,
for example, the Clinton Foundation spent nearly $100 million
purchasing and distributing medicine and working with its care partners.
In 2009, the organization spent $126 million on pharmaceutical and care partner expenses. By 2011,
those activities were virtually non-existent. The group spent nothing
on pharmaceutical expenses and only $1.2 million on care partner
expenses. In 2012 and 2013,
the Clinton Foundation spent $0. In just a few short years, the
Clinton’s primary philanthropic project transitioned from a massive
player in global pharmaceutical distribution to a bloated travel agency
and conference organizing business that just happened to be tax-exempt.
The Clinton Foundation announced last week that it would be refiling its tax returns for the last five years
because it had improperly failed to disclose millions of dollars in
donations from foreign sources while Hillary Clinton was serving as
Secretary of State.
CHARITY NAVIGATOR DOES NOT EVEN RATE THE FOUNDATION.. Too Crooked!! Click Here : https://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.profile&ein=311580204 The Clinton Foundation’s
finances are so messy that the nation’s most influential charity
watchdog put it on its “watch list” of problematic nonprofits last
month. The Clinton family’s mega-charity took in more than $140 million in
grants and pledges in 2013 but spent just $9 million on direct aid. The group spent the bulk of its windfall on administration, travel,
and salaries and bonuses, with the fattest payouts going to family
friends. On its 2013 tax forms, the most recent available, the foundation
claimed it spent $30 million on payroll and employee benefits; $8.7
million in rent and office expenses; $9.2 million on “conferences,
conventions and meetings”; $8 million on fundraising; and nearly $8.5
million on travel. None of the Clintons is on the payroll, but they do
enjoy first-class flights paid for by the foundation. In all, the group reported $84.6 million in “functional expenses” on
its 2013 tax return and had more than $64 million left over — money the
organization has said represents pledges rather than actual cash on
hand. Some of the tens of millions in administrative costs finance more
than 2,000 employees, including aid workers and health professionals
around the world. But that’s still far below the 75 percent rate of spending that
nonprofit experts say a good charity should spend on its mission. Charity Navigator,
which rates nonprofits, recently refused to rate the Clinton Foundation
because its “atypical business model . . . doesn’t meet our criteria.” Charity Navigator put the foundation on its “watch list,” which warns
potential donors about investing in problematic charities. The 23
charities on the list include the Rev. Al Sharpton’s troubled National Action Network, which is cited for failing to pay payroll taxes for several years. Other nonprofit experts are asking hard questions about the Clinton
Foundation’s tax filings in the wake of recent reports that the Clintons
traded influence for donations. “It seems like the Clinton Foundation operates as a slush fund for
the Clintons,” said Bill Allison, a senior fellow at the Sunlight
Foundation, a government watchdog group where progressive Democrat and
Fordham Law professor Zephyr Teachout was once an organizing director. In July 2013, Eric Braverman, a friend of Chelsea Clinton
from when they both worked at McKinsey & Co., took over as CEO of
the Clinton Foundation. He took home nearly $275,000 in salary, benefits
and a housing allowance from the nonprofit for just five months’ work
in 2013, tax filings show. Less than a year later, his salary increased
to $395,000, according to a report in Politico. Braverman abruptly left the foundation earlier this year, after a
falling-out with the old Clinton guard over reforms he wanted to impose
at the charity, Politico reported. Last month, Donna Shalala, a former
secretary of health and human services under President Clinton, was hired to replace Braverman. Nine other executives received salaries over $100,000 in 2013, tax filings show. The nonprofit came under fire last week following reports that Hillary Clinton,
while she was secretary of state, signed off on a deal that allowed a
Russian government enterprise to control one-fifth of all uranium
producing capacity in the United States. Rosatom, the Russian company,
acquired a Canadian firm controlled by Frank Giustra, a friend of Bill
Clinton’s and member of the foundation board, who has pledged over $130
million to the Clinton family charity. The group also failed to disclose millions of dollars it received in
foreign donations from 2010 to 2012 and is hurriedly refiling five
years’ worth of tax returns after reporters raised questions about the
discrepancies in its filings last week.
The Clinton Foundation Enriched Itself By Ripping Off Haiti After 2010 Earthquake
It filtered money through Haiti and back to itself.
In January 2015 a group of Haitians surrounded the New York offices
of the Clinton Foundation. They chanted slogans, accusing Bill and
Hillary Clinton of having robbed them of “billions of dollars.” Two
months later, the Haitians were at it again, accusing the Clintons of
duplicity, malfeasance, and theft. And in May 2015, they were back, this
time outside New York’s Cipriani, where Bill Clinton received an award
and collected a $500,000 check for his foundation. “Clinton, where’s the
money?” the Haitian signs read. “In whose pockets?” Said Dhoud Andre of
the Commission Against Dictatorship, “We are telling the world of the
crimes that Bill and Hillary Clinton are responsible for in Haiti.”
Haitians like Andre may sound a bit strident, but he and the protesters
had good reason to be disgruntled. They had suffered a heavy blow from
Mother Nature, and now it appeared that they were being battered again —
this time by the Clintons. Their story goes back to 2010, when a
massive 7.0 earthquake devastated the island, killing more than 200,000
people, leveling 100,000 homes, and leaving 1.5 million people
destitute.
The devastating effect of the earthquake on a very poor nation provoked
worldwide concern and inspired an outpouring of aid money intended to
rebuild Haiti. Countries around the world, as well as private and
philanthropic groups such as the Red Cross and the Salvation Army,
provided some $10.5 billion in aid, with $3.9 billion of it coming from
the United States.
Haitians such as Andre, however, noticed that very little of this aid
money actually got to poor people in Haiti. Some projects championed by
the Clintons, such as the building of industrial parks and posh hotels,
cost a great deal of money and offered scarce benefits to the truly
needy. Port-au-Prince was supposed to be rebuilt; it was never rebuilt.
Projects aimed at creating jobs proved to be bitter disappointments.
Haitian unemployment remained high, largely undented by the funds that
were supposed to pour into the country. Famine and illness continued to
devastate the island nation.
The Haitians were initially sympathetic to the Clintons. One may say
they believed in the message of “hope and change.” With his customary
overstatement, Bill told the media, “Wouldn’t it be great if they become
the first wireless nation in the world? They could, I’m telling you,
they really could.”
I don’t blame the Haitians for falling for it; Bill is one of the
world’s greatest story-tellers. He has fooled people far more
sophisticated than the poor Haitians. Over time, however, the Haitians
wised up. Whatever their initial expectations, many saw that much of the
aid money seems never to have reached its destination; rather, it
disappeared along the way.
Where did it go? It did not escape the attention of the Haitians that
Bill Clinton was the designated UN representative for aid to Haiti.
Following the earthquake, Bill Clinton had with media fanfare
established the Haiti Reconstruction Fund. Meanwhile, his wife Hillary
was the United States secretary of state. She was in charge of U.S. aid
allocated to Haiti. Together the Clintons were the two most powerful
people who controlled the flow of funds to Haiti from around the world.
Haitian deals appeared to be a quid pro quo for filling the coffers
of the Clintons.
The Haitian protesters noticed an interesting pattern involving the
Clintons and the designation of how aid funds were used. They observed
that a number of companies that received contracts in Haiti happened to
be entities that made large donations to the Clinton Foundation.
The
Haitian contracts appeared less tailored to the needs of Haiti than to
the needs of the companies that were performing the services. In sum,
Haitian deals appeared to be a quid pro quo for filling the coffers of
the Clintons.
For example, the Clinton Foundation selected Clayton Homes, a
construction company owned by Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway, to
build temporary shelters in Haiti. Buffett is an active member of the
Clinton Global Initiative who has donated generously to the Clintons as
well as the Clinton Foundation. The contract was supposed to be given
through the normal United Nations bidding process, with the deal going
to the lowest bidder who met the project’s standards. UN officials said,
however, that the contract was never competitively bid for.
Clayton offered to build “hurricane-proof trailers” but what they
actually delivered turned out to be a disaster. The trailers were
structurally unsafe, with high levels of formaldehyde and insulation
coming out of the walls. There were problems with mold and fumes. The
stifling heat inside made Haitians sick and many of them abandoned the
trailers because they were ill-constructed and unusable.
The Clintons also funneled $10 million in federal loans to a firm called
InnoVida, headed by Clinton donor Claudio Osorio. Osorio had loaded its
board with Clinton cronies, including longtime Clinton ally General
Wesley Clark; Hillary’s 2008 finance director Jonathan Mantz; and
Democratic fundraiser Chris Korge who has helped raise millions for the
Clintons.
Normally the loan approval process takes months or even years. But in
this case, a government official wrote, “Former President Bill Clinton
is personally in contact with the company to organize its logistical and
support needs. And as Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton has made
available State Department resources to assist with logistical
arrangements.”
InnoVida had not even provided an independently audited financial report
that is normally a requirement for such applications. This requirement,
however, was waived. On the basis of the Clinton connection, InnoVida’s
application was fast-tracked and approved in two weeks.
The company, however, defaulted on the loan and never built any houses.
An investigation revealed that Osorio had diverted company funds to pay
for his Miami Beach mansion, his Maserati, and his Colorado ski chalet.
He pleaded guilty to wire fraud and money laundering in 2013, and is
currently serving a twelve-year prison term on fraud charges related to
the loan.
Several Clinton cronies showed up with Bill to a 2011 Housing Expo that
cost more than $2 million to stage. Bill Clinton said it would be a
model for the construction of thousands of homes in Haiti. In reality,
no homes have been built. A few dozen model units were constructed but
even they have not been sold. Rather, they are now abandoned and have
been taken over by squatters.
The Schools They Never Built
USAID contracts to remove debris in Port-au-Prince went to a
Washington-based company named CHF International. The company’s CEO
David Weiss, a campaign contributor to Hillary in 2008, was deputy U.S.
trade representative for North American Affairs during the Clinton
administration. The corporate secretary of the board, Lauri Fitz-Pegado,
served in a number of posts in the Clinton administration, including
assistant secretary of commerce.The Clintons claim to have built schools
in Haiti. But the New York Times discovered that when it comes to the
Clintons, “built” is a term with a very loose interpretation.
For
example, the newspaper located a school featured in the Clinton
Foundation annual report as “built through a Clinton Global Initiative
Commitment to Action.” In reality, “The Clinton Foundation’s sole direct
contribution to the school was a grant for an Earth Day celebration and
tree-building activity.”
The Clintons claim to have built schools in Haiti. But the New York
Times discovered that when it comes to the Clintons, ‘built’ is a term
with a very loose interpretation.
USAID contracts also went to consulting firms such as New York–based
Dalberg Global Development Advisors, which received a $1.5 million
contract to identify relocation sites for Haitians. This company is an
active participant and financial supporter of the Clinton Global
Initiative.
A later review by USAID’s inspector general found that
Dalberg did a terrible job, naming uninhabitable mountains with steep
ravines as possible sites for Haitian rebuilding.
Foreign governments and foreign companies got Haitian deals in exchange
for bankrolling the Clinton Foundation. The Clinton Foundation lists the
Brazilian construction firm OAS and the InterAmerican Development Bank
(IDB) as donors that have given it between $1 billion and $5 billion.
The IDB receives funding from the State Department, and some of this
funding was diverted to OAS for Haitian road-building contracts. Yet an
IDB auditor, Mariela Antiga, complained that the contracts were padded
with “excessive costs” to build roads “no one needed.” Antiga also
alleged that IDB funds were going to a construction project on private
land owned by former Haitian president Rene Preval — a Clinton buddy —
and several of his cronies. For her efforts to expose corruption, Antiga
was promptly instructed by the IDB to pack her bags and leave Haiti.
In 2011, the Clinton Foundation brokered a deal with Digicel, a
cell-phone-service provider seeking to gain access to the Haitian
market.
The Clintons arranged to have Digicel receive millions in U.S.
taxpayer money to provide mobile phones. The USAID Food for Peace
program, which the State Department administered through Hillary aide
Cheryl Mills, distributed Digicel phones free to Haitians.
Digicel didn’t just make money off the U.S. taxpayer; it also made money
off the Haitians. When Haitians used the phones, either to make calls
or transfer money, they paid Digicel for the service. Haitians using
Digicel’s phones also became automatically enrolled in Digicel’s mobile
program.
By 2012, Digicel had taken over three-quarters of the
cell-phone market in Haiti.
Digicel is owned by Denis O’Brien, a close friend of the Clintons.
O’Brien secured three speaking engagements in his native Ireland that
paid $200,000 apiece. These engagements occurred right at the time that
Digicel was making its deal with the U.S. State Department. O’Brien has
also donated lavishly to the Clinton Foundation, giving between $1
million and $5 million sometime in 2010–2011.
Coincidentally the United States government paid Digicel $45 million to
open a hotel in Port-au-Prince. Now perhaps it could be argued that
Haitians could use a high-priced hotel to attract foreign investors and
provide jobs for locals. Thus far, however, this particular hotel seems
to employ only a few dozen locals, which hardly justifies the sizable
investment that went into building it. Moreover, there are virtually no
foreign investors; the rooms are mostly unoccupied; the ones that are
taken seem mainly for the benefit of Digicel’s visiting teams.
In addition, the Clintons got their cronies to build Caracol Industrial
Park, a 600-acre garment factory that was supposed to make clothes for
export to the United States and create — according to Bill Clinton —
100,000 new jobs in Haiti.
The project was funded by the U.S. government
and cost hundreds of millions in taxpayer money, the largest single
allocation of U.S. relief aid.
Yet Caracol has proven a massive failure. First, the industrial park was
built on farmland and the farmers had to be moved off their property.
Many of them feel they were pushed out and inadequately compensated.
Some of them lost their livelihoods. Second, Caracol was supposed to
include 25,000 homes for Haitian employees; in the end, the Government
Accountability Office reports that only around 6,000 homes were built.
Third, Caracol has created 5,000 jobs, less than 10 percent of the jobs
promised. Fourth, Caracol is exporting very few products and most of the
facility is abandoned. People stand outside every day looking for work,
but there is no work to be had, as Haiti’s unemployment rate hovers
around 40 percent.
The Clintons say Caracol can still be salvaged.
But former Haitian prime
minister Jean Bellerive says, “I believe the momentum to attract people
there in a massive way is past. Today, it has failed.” Still,
Bellerive’s standard of success may not be the same one used by the
Clintons. After all, the companies that built Caracol with U.S. taxpayer
money have done fine — even if poor Haitians have seen few of the
benefits.
Then there is the strange and somehow predictable involvement of Hillary
Clinton’s brother Hugh Rodham. Rodham put in an application for $22
million from the Clinton Foundation to build homes on ten thousand acres
of land that he said a “guy in Haiti” had “donated” to him.
“I deal through the Clinton Foundation,” Rodham told the New York Times.
“I hound my brother-in-law because it’s his fund that we’re going to
get our money from.” Rodham said he expected to net $1 million
personally on the deal.
Unfortunately, his application didn’t go
through.
Rodham had better luck, however, on a second Haitian deal. He
mysteriously found himself on the advisory board of a U.S. mining
company called VCS. This by itself is odd because Rodham’s resume lists
no mining experience; rather, Rodham is a former private detective and
prison guard.
The mining company, however, seems to have recognized Rodham’s value.
They brought him on board in October 2013 to help secure a valuable gold
mining permit in Haiti. Rodham was promised a “finder’s fee” if he
could land the contract. Sure enough, he did. For the first time in 50
years, Haiti awarded two new gold mining permits and one of them went to
the company that had hired Hillary’s brother.
I wouldn’t go so far as to say the Clintons don’t care about Haiti.
Yet it seems clear that Haitian welfare is not their priority.
The deal provoked outrage in the Haitian Senate. “Neither Bill Clinton
nor the brother of Hillary Clinton are individuals who share the
interest of the Haitian people,” said Haitian mining representative
Samuel Nesner. “They are part of the elite class who are operating to
exploit the Haitian people.”
Is this too harsh a verdict? I wouldn’t go so far as to say the Clintons
don’t care about Haiti.
Yet it seems clear that Haitian welfare is not
their priority. Their priority is, well, themselves. The Clintons seem
to believe in Haitian reconstruction and Haitian investment as long as
these projects match their own private economic interests. They have
steered the rebuilding of Haiti in a way that provides maximum benefit
to themselves.
No wonder the Clintons refused to meet with the Haitian protesters.
Each
time the protesters showed up, the Clintons were nowhere to be seen.
They have never directly addressed the Haitians’ claims. Strangely
enough, they have never been required to do so. The progressive media
scarcely covered the Haitian protest. Somehow the idea of Haitian black
people calling out the Clintons as aid money thieves did not appeal to
the grand pooh-bahs at CBS News, the New York Times, and NPR.
For most Democrats, the topic is both touchy and distasteful. It’s one
thing to rob from the rich but quite another to rob from the poorest of
the poor. Some of the Democratic primary support for Bernie Sanders was
undoubtedly due to Democrats’ distaste over the financial shenanigans of
the Clintons. Probably these Democrats considered the Clintons to be
unduly grasping and opportunistic, an embarrassment to the great
traditions of the Democratic party.
Read more at:
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/437883/hillarys-america-secret-history-democratic-party-dinesh-dsouza-clinton-foundation
As reported earlier by Joe Hoft— In recent bizarre events on the campaign trail a strange man was noticed at Hillary Clinton’s side.
Via Mike Cernovich:
The man is dressed like a secret service agent but his actions prove otherwise.
In a recent campaign stop in a Union Hall in front of a sparse crowd,
at about the time when some liberal protesters began to protest,
Hillary Clinton suddenly froze. She looked dazed and lost. Seeing this,
a group of men rushed to assist the candidate on the stage. One man
however gently pats the candidate’s back and then says, “Keep Talking.”
An expert on Secret Service tactics told TGP Secret Service agents
would not touch a candidate in the manner that this individual did and
especially Hillary Clinton. It has been widely reported
on Hillary’s disdain for the agents who work to protect her. The man
who touches Hillary may be a member of Hillary’s close staff – but he is
NOT a Secret Service agent.
Now this…
Mike Cernovich pointed out that Hillary’s handler carries a Diazepam pen.
** Diazepam auto-injector pens are used for for Acute Repetitive Seizures.
Diazepam is prescribed for patients who experience recurrent seizures!
HILLARY CLINTON IS TERMINALLY ILL. DEMAND TO SEE HER MEDICAL RECORDS!
CHECK OUT HILLARY'S HANDLERS WHO PROP HER UP... PS WHO IS THE BIG FAT BALD GUY??
Michael
Jackson, Prince, and Elvis would travel with a personal doctor who
could administer needed life-saving drugs and attention during a
crisis. Remember when you thought famous people like Michael Jackson and
Elvis had good medical care? What’s Clinton on?
Hillary appears to travel with her own Michael Jackson/Elvis style doctor. Who is the big fat bald dude??
We saw this first “doctor” or handler during Hillary’s recent freeze-up.
You can see Hillary’s handler, who at first glance would not be
considered the alpha male of the group, reassure Hillary, speak to her
using hypnotic language, and then move the Secret Service Agents out of
the way. This handler is not an ordinary SS agent.
Reactions to the first video were similar. This is a weird situation, and clearly the handler is not ordinary Secret Service.
@Cernovich the way she says "we're just going to keep talking…" just repeating back the command… fucked
Huma Abedin is the only person closer to Hillary than this man who handles her, picured on the left.
Here you see Hillary’s handler helping her walk up stairs.
Why can’t Hillary walk up a flight of steps?
What is going on here?
Hillary looks “out of it” again. You can see her handler whispering into her ear.
Something very clearly is wrong with Hillary.
Hillary tries playing off the seizure by acting as if she had a
“brain freeze.” As my medical experts explained to me, patients who
suffer seizures become experts at playing it off.
Watch the full video of Hillary’s seizures here:
Hillary has suffered a brain injury during a fall. She either had a
stroke, causing her to fall, or the fall caused her stroke. (Doctors
were unsure whether the fall was the cause or effect of the stroke.)
The media is covering up Hillary’s obvious health problems.
Hillary’s health problems date back several years. Here you can see
Hillary struggle to board an airplane, and then she falls down at the
very end of the video.
Here you can see Hillary clearly fall down. Poor balance is associated with strokes/head injuries.
Hillary has frequent coughing fits, a side effect of her anti-seizure medication.
‘Crooked’ Hillary Clinton was seen wearing an ear piece in Wednesday night’s Commander in Chief Forum hosted by NBC and MSNBC. This was the first event where both Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton were invited to attend together. Each candidate received a short period with host Matt Lauer. It was expected that both candidates would provide unaided answers to the questions asked but it appears Hillary did not.
Pic posted by “Gate”
I painted two red arrows onto the above closeup, pointing to two features that are missing from Obama’s left ear in the first debate:
