Jump to content
BeAChooser

The P B S Whitewash Of Clinton's Legacy

Recommended Posts

This definitely deserves to be added to Clinton’s legacy …


https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/09/how_bill_clinton_sent_manufacturing_jobs_to_china.html

 

Quote

 

How Bill Clinton Sent Manufacturing Jobs to China


By Michael Bargo, Jr.


On May 28, 1993 Bill Clinton signed Executive Order 12850. This improper EO changed the way the U.S. made trade deals with China and led to the loss of tens of millions of American manufacturing jobs. The story of how this was done not only proves that the Clintons are behind the loss of American jobs, but shows how Bill Clinton established a Democratic strategy for manipulating foreign policy that was copied by both Hillary while she was Secretary of State and Obama while he was president.


At the time, U.S.-China trade relations were conditioned upon China’s humanitarian treatment of its own citizens. Americans had seen protesters in Tiananmen Square crushed by Chinese tanks. The brutality of the Chinese toward unarmed protesters had shocked Americans so much that China was required to treat its citizens in a humanitarian way in order to maintain its MFN (Most Favored Nation) status,


China desperately needed to keep its MFN status for one reason: only with MFN status could it get a huge discount on tariffs it had to pay to the U.S. With MFN Chinese manufacturers only had to pay a 6% tariff. Without it they would have had to pay an unprofitable 40%. So without its MFN status China couldn’t as easily compete with American manufacturers. China’s MFN status was suspended during the Korean War, but conditionally reinstated in 1980 under the Jackson-Vanir freedom of emigration amendment to the Trade Act of 1974.


This is where Bill Clinton stepped in. With his 1993 Executive Order, he unconstitutionally seized control of the MFN conditions, removing it from the involvement of Congress, just as Obama seized treaty control away from the Senate with his Iranian nuke deal.


Clinton’s Executive Order was issued at a time when the U.S.-China trade deficit was only $18 billion a year. In 2015 the deficit was $367 billion.


It’s important to understand that at the time China’s MFN status was annually up for review by Congress. The effective law was passed in 1974. What Bill Clinton did, with an unconstitutional Executive Order, was to use “the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States” to rewrite a Congressionally approved treaty and change the terms. The way he changed it is eerily similar to the way Hillary practiced State Department decisions when she was Secretary of State from 2009 to 2012.


Bill Clinton intentionally, with great harm to jobs in the U.S., changed the terms of the law in this way: instead of requiring a vote of Congress to reaffirm China’s MFN status every year, Bill Clinton illegally shifted the decision-making role to the Secretary of State. This eliminated the power of Congress to approve the annual MFN status. President Clinton, in his 1993 statement, said this was necessary to avoid the “annual battles between Congress and the Executive” which was divisive. Of course it was divisive -- the Framers of the Constitution intended it to be so. Without the input of the elected members of Congress the people had no say.


Similarly, Hillary Clinton used her position as Sec. of State to personally approve/disapprove many agreements. President Obama was to emulate this shifting of foreign policy making to bureaucrats in 2015 with his so-called Iranian “deal.” An agreement with a foreign nation is a treaty, not a deal. This is because the authority of the U.S. government is used to both make the treaty and adhere to its terms. The Constitution properly gives the people, working through the Senate, the opportunity to have a voice in the terms of the treaty. Bill Clinton, Hillary, and Obama all stole this input from the voters and placed it under their control.


And just as the Clinton Foundation has been linked to relationships Hillary had to her speech payers and donors, Bill Clinton’s decision to send jobs to China by permanently controlling its MFN status has been linked to campaign donations. Boeing Company wanted the EO. Boeing was the parent company of the Loral Corporation, which donated $100,000 to the Democratic National Committee in June, 1994, according to a Washington Post report at the time. A nice reward to Clinton for his MFN status change.


The Loral Corporation is a major developer of missile flight control software and at the time they wanted to launch satellites from China. Boeing also owned McDonnell-Douglas which in 1994 made an agreement with China to open a parts factory in Beijing. If this all seems oddly similar to the deals Hillary made with foundation campaign donors, well, that’s because it is.


While Bill Clinton made this deal through an Executive Order, it’s important to note that there are other developments which have evolved from the EO. The Clinton Foundation is legally located in Canada, allowing the Clintons to hide the identities of their donors. They also used the foundation as a method of obtaining payment for delivering unprecedentedly expensive speeches. In return, it appears that Hillary allowed donors access to her office and granted State Department permission on numerous foreign trade deals. Since these agreements and deals were made through email the Clinton email scandal is seen as an effort to hide the pay for play evidence.


In 2001 Boeing got a $63 million dollar incentive “deal” from the Democratic mayor of Chicago to relocate its headquarters there. These incentives will likely be paid for, in typical Democratic Party style, by the middle-class and poor taxpayers who will have to make up that $63 million through their own family’s budgets. Boeing only brought 500 jobs to the city, costing taxpayers $126,000 per job. This, like the Chinese MFN Executive Order, promoted as a good investment for the city.


When all of these actions are thoroughly investigated, these deals will reveal that the Democratic Party’s globalization initiative is mostly a scheme to get rich by trading U.S. governmental authority, and American jobs, to enrich a tiny number of people. As the Clintons and Obama get richer the American people lose jobs and become poorer. Those are facts.


This is primarily done by shifting the authority of government. Bill Clinton bestowed the authority to reauthorize China’s MFN status to the Secretary of State. Hillary Clinton bestowed upon herself the authority to negotiate with companies with foreign interests and the foreign nations themselves. And Barack Obama seized the power of Federal agencies through his 32 czars, bypassing the restraints imposed by the Constitution. The basic strategy is to shift authority, then control that newly created authority, bypassing the role of Congress.  It’s only just begun. Voters can decide if they want to see more unrestrained power brokering by Hillary.

 


 

NEVER EVER FORGET WHAT THE CLINTONS DID TO THIS COUNTRY, FOLKS.


They truly deserve to rot in prison.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just think.   This ...

 

IMG_6732-585x600.jpg

 

... could have been our President.  

 

Best Election EVER!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-releases/judicial-watch-victory-court-grants-significant-new-discovery-in-clinton-email-case/

 

Quote

 

JUDICIAL WATCH VICTORY: COURT GRANTS SIGNIFICANT NEW DISCOVERY IN CLINTON EMAIL CASE


(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that a federal judge granted seven additional depositions, three interrogatories and four document requests related to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s use of a private, unauthorized email server. Hillary Clinton and her former top aide and current lawyer Cheryl Mills were given 30 days to oppose being deposed by Judicial Watch (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:14-cv-01242)).


The court rejected Justice and State Department arguments to protect Clinton and the agencies from additional discovery and ordered agency lawyers to respond to Judicial Watch’s questions about their knowledge of the Clinton email issue. The court granted all of Judicial Watch’s requested discovery but gave Clinton and Mills 30 days to file any opposition to the requests to question them in person under oath.


The new court-ordered discovery allows Judicial Watch to take testimony and gather evidence of Clinton’s handling of emails, specifically in an “after action memo” drafted by Heather Samuelson, Clinton’s senior advisor at State and White House liaison. The memo was created in December 2014 to memorialize the Clinton team’s processing of the Clinton emails. The discovery also asks for when Justice and State Department attorneys learned about Clinton’s private email use; and what senior records-keeping officials at the State Department knew about Clinton’s emails and when they knew it.


… snip …


On December 6, 2018, U.S. District Court Judge Lamberth ordered Obama administration senior State Department officials, lawyers and Clinton aides to be deposed or answer written questions under oath. The court ruled that the Clinton email system was “one of the gravest modern offenses to government transparency.”


The court ordered discovery into three specific areas: whether Secretary Clinton’s use of a private email server was intended to stymie FOIA; whether the State Department’s intent to settle this case in late 2014 and early 2015 amounted to bad faith; and whether the State Department has adequately searched for records responsive to Judicial Watch’s request.


Judicial Watch’s discovery over the last several months found many more details about the scope of the Clinton email scandal and cover-up:


    •    John Hackett, former Director of Information Programs and Services (IPS) testified under oath that he had raised concerns that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s staff may have “culled out 30,000” of the secretary’s “personal” emails without following strict National Archives standards. He also revealed that he believed there was interference with the formal FOIA review process related to the classification of Clinton’s Benghazi-related emails.


    •    Heather Samuelson, Clinton’s White House liaison at the State Department, and later Clinton’s personal lawyer, admitted under oath that she was granted immunity by the Department of Justice in June 2016.


    •    Justin Cooper, former aide to President Bill Clinton and Clinton Foundation employee who registered the domain name of the unsecure clintonemail.com server that Clinton used while serving as Secretary of State, testified he worked with Huma Abedin, Clinton’s deputy chief of staff, to create the non-government email system.


    •    In the interrogatory responses of E.W. (Bill) Priestap, assistant director of the FBI Counterintelligence Division, he stated that the agency found Clinton email records in the Obama White House, specifically, the Executive Office of the President.


    •    Jacob “Jake” Sullivan, Clinton’s senior advisor and deputy chief of staff when she was secretary of state, testified that both he and Clinton used her unsecure non-government email system to conduct official State Department business.


    •    Eric Boswell, former assistant secretary of state for diplomatic security during Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state, testified that Clinton was warned twice against using unsecure BlackBerrys and personal emails to transmit classified material.

 

 

noosetightens.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, BeAChooser said:

 

 

It's not though
With a five year statute of limitations, They're  all going to walk.

 

If they don't get a move on, all this Crossfire Hurricane stuff is going to expire too

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And you'll be happy when they get away with it, won't you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Chuck! said:

It's not though
With a five year statute of limitations, They're  all going to walk.

 

If they don't get a move on, all this Crossfire Hurricane stuff is going to expire too

 

I agree that Hillary has probably escaped (once again) punishment for many of the crimes for which she could have been charged the last 2 decades.   All I can say is damn Sessions, damn Rosenstein, damn the GOPe, damn all the rest of the Clinton/DNC lackeys in the DOJ and FBI, and damn the mainstream media.   Hopefully, they'll rot in hell some day.   But getting away with crime has always been the modus operandi of the Clinton mafia.   Which is why they made controlling the FBI, DOJ and the media top priorities, all the way from back when they first entered the Federal scene.   And they are very practiced at deny, deny, deny, obfuscate, obfuscate, obfuscate, and delay, delay, delay.  Experts at it, I'd say.

I can certainly point to many instances back in the 90s and last decade where their control over the FBI and DOJ allowed them to escape extremely serious charges over and over and over.   I have a whole thread on that topic, ... THIS THREAD ..., whose content the left on this forum avoid like the plague.   In this thread, I point out many specific examples where the FBI and DOJ protected the Clintons rather than doing their job.    And that behavior has only continued over the years.    But be that as it may,  there are some crimes where there is no statute of limitations ... and if Trump decided to apply those statutes, then Hillary AND Bill could both still see the inside of a jail cell.   I remain hopeful.

 

For example, there is no statute of limitations for murder or covering up a murder. I think all it would take is for Trump to order the exhumation and forensic examination of Ron Brown's body.  If, as I suspect based on all the reasons given in this thread, there were evidence of a bullet wound in Brown's head, the Clintons (and a bunch of other DemocRATS) would be in huge trouble.   Or Trump could order the release of the photos showing Vince Foster's wounds.   Again, if, as I suspect, they don't match the description in the official autopsy report, the Clintons would be in serious jeopardy.   It would appear that the Clintons used the FBI and DOJ to, at a minimum, to coverup those murders.   

Another crime with no statute of limitations is treason.   A case could arguably be made that the Clintons sold out America to the communist Chinese back in the 90s in exchange for campaign cash.   There is a ton of evidence pointing to that.   The only reason it didn't end up in court is that Clintons controlled the FBI and DOJ ... and the GOPe didn't want to rock the gravy train they were on.  But the evidence that we know of, as outlined in my legacy thread, certainly is enough to suggest they both committed treason with regards to an China.      

And there's the crime of fraud.   That has no statute of limitations either.   And there are many people who think the Clinton Foundation is nothing but a fraud designed to enrich the Clintons and their associations.   And the Clinton Foundation is still being investigated.   So the Clintons may still meet the long arm of the law there as well.    Time will tell.   All Trump needs to do in the coming years is gain enough control of the FBI and DOJ to make it happen.   And feel vindictive.   

 

Furthermore, more recently, Hillary appears to have engaged in both espionage (the email/server case) and seditious conspiracy ... the latter of which has no statute of limitations or a very long one.   The verdict about what's going to happen with those crimes is still out.    If Trump truly feels threatened, I wouldn't be surprised to see him begin to actually play those cards.    Even if he doesn't feel threatened, the time may still come in the next term when those things get reexamined.  I remain hopeful.

 

Now as to what you say about the Hillary's Email/Server case, it's true she left government service back in 2013 so at first glance, one might think the statute of limitations has already expired.   But one of her (and her staff's) crimes is retention of information.   There are two laws in regards to that.   One, 18 U.S. Code § 1924, forbids “unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or material.” It carries up to five years in prison, with a five-year statute of limitations.  But 18 U.S. Code § 793, which is part of the Espionage Act, restricts possession or retention of information “relating to the national defense" and carries a possible 10 years in prison, with a 10-year statute of limitations.   Much of the classified material in Hillary and her staff's possession certainly met the criteria of relation to national defense, in which case, the statute of limitations won't expire until well into Trump's second term or even after.

 

Also, one can argue that retention is a continuing offense ... that for every moment after Hillary and company left government where they didn't surrender all the classified information in their control, they committed the retention offense all over again, extending crime well beyond 2013.    In fact, recall that it was late March 2015 when Paul Combetta had is “oh crap” moment and deleted stored classified emails using the software BleachBit, after forgetting to do so months earlier.  Even by the 5 year clock, the statute of limitations has not expired.

 

Also, Clinton and her staff insisted that they needed to retain their security clearances long after 2013 and apparently did until quite recently.   Why would they need security clearances, if they weren't looking at materials that shouldn't have been in their possession at that point?   Hmmmmm?    Also, any lies that Hillary or her staff made regarding their handling of the materials after 2013 might be viewed as affirmative acts in furtherance of those original crimes.  That too might be deemed to start the statute of limitations clock running anew.    

 

So put all this together, Chuck, and I think a good prosecutor could make the case that Hillary and friends are still vulnerable to prosecution, and will be for many years to come.

 

Just saying ...

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, BeAChooser said:

So put all this together, Chuck, and I think a good prosecutor could make the case that Hillary and friends are still vulnerable to prosecution, and will be for many years to come.

 

I agree, a good prosecutor COULD make a case, but I'm afraid the truth is going to be that no one will.
 

If anything was going to happen, someone would have been in handcuffs by now

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Chuck! said:

I agree, a good prosecutor COULD make a case, but I'm afraid the truth is going to be that no one will.

 

But those are two separate things.   Sure, Barr and his DOJ may not do it but that does not exonerate Hillary and her crew.   What it does is prove Barr and the rest of the DOJ are corrupt to the core.  What it does is prove what I've said for months ... that the FBI, DOJ and judicial system is so broken that the military needs to be brought in to arrest, charge and try these criminals ... including the ones (like Barr) still revealing themselves.   I'm talking military tribunals, which the Supreme Court has already ruled can be used when the legal system is broken.   And whether that happens rests solely on Trump, as commander and chief of the armed forces.   If he want's a legacy that doesn't involve these vindictive leftists continuing to try to destroy him, his family, his friends, and America for the rest of his life, he needs to make those who broke laws accountable.    He has no other choice ... which is why I suspect he may just do it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/09/federal-judge-blasts-state-department-lawyers-in-hillary-email-case-warns-no-foia-exemption-for-political-expedience/

 

Quote

 

Federal Judge Blasts State Department Lawyers in Hillary Email Case – Warns ‘No FOIA Exemption For Political Expedience’


Conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch on Friday released transcript from their hearing on August 22 where Judge Royce Lamberth granted new discovery and witnesses on Hillary Clinton’s email case.


Judge Lamberth, a Reagan appointee blasted State Department lawyers defending Hillary Clinton who were working to cover up her email scandal.


‘There is no FOIA exemption for political expedience, nor is there one for bureaucratic incompetence,’ Judge Lamberth said warning the government lawyers.


Judge Lamberth also lambasted the State Department lawyers when they tried to stop Judicial Watch from gathering more evidence in Hillary’s case.


Via Judicial Watch:

 

Quote

 

Judge Lamberth also criticized the State Department’s handling and production of Clinton’s emails in this case stating, “There is no FOIA [Freedom of Information Act] exemption for political expedience, nor is there one for bureaucratic incompetence.”


In the beginning of their oral arguments, lawyers for the State Department wrongfully stated that Judicial Watch could no longer continue their discovery. The court stopped their arguments saying that Judicial Watch can continue to find more evidence in this case:


STATE DEPARTMENT: … it is, of course, Judicial Watch’s burden to explain to Your Honor why there has been good cause to reopen discovery now that discovery has closed in this case.


THE COURT: Well, I didn’t close discovery. So your premise is wrong.


STATE DEPARTMENT: Fair enough, Your Honor. Whether you want to call it closed or not, it is still —


THE COURT: I didn’t close it. I said I would have a status after they took this initial discovery, and that’s what I’m doing today. I didn’t close discovery.


STATE DEPARTMENT: That’s right, Your Honor, but it is still Judicial Watch’s —


THE COURT: So they don’t need any good cause —


STATE DEPARTMENT: Whether


THE COURT: — Today the good cause continues from whether or not State was acting in good faith, and I’ll tell you everything they’ve discovered in this period raises serious questions about what the hell the State Department’s doing here.

 


Judge Lamberth detailed how the State Department “spent three months from November 2014 trying to make this case disappear,” and that after discovering the State Department’s actions and omissions, “Now we know more, but we have even more questions than answers. So I won’t hold it against Judicial Watch for expanding their initial discovery request now.”


Judicial Watch was recently granted 7 additional depositions and three interrogatories related to Hillary’s email scandal.


Hillary Clinton and her aide-turned-lawyer Cheryl Mills were given 30 days to respond to Judicial Watch’s request for a deposition.


“Judicial Watch uncovered new information about the Clinton email scandal that a federal court agrees requires more answers. We share the court’s annoyance with DOJ lawyers who continue to defend the indefensible. It is beyond disturbing that the State and Justice Departments would continue to try to protect Hillary Clinton and cover up her email scandal. President Trump should order the agencies to cooperate in uncovering the truth,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.

 

 

Ouch.  Hillary sure left the State Department a dishonest mess.  Part of her legacy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...