Affidavit Of Successor Washington State: Fill & Download for Free

“Why is there a lack of information on America attacking the Falklands in 1831, and how come we never talk about it?”It’s a well known series of events reflecting response to the characteristic misbehaviour of the proto-argentines — known to historians, but not widely known to the usual […] . The argentines at the time were regarded as essentially pirates, a legacy they would endeavor to continue. And regarded so not just by the US. But the US took these pirates to task. The elimination of this piracy allowed the UK to re-establish its sovereignty and establish a civilised colony on the islands, which eventually became the self-governing territory that we know today.“The Falklands Expedition occurred in late 1831 when the United States Navy warship USS Lexington was dispatched to investigate the seizure of three whalers at the small Argentine settlement of Puerto Luis. Founded in the ruins of the former Spanish penal colony of Puerto Soledad by Luis Vernet, the settlement sought to control sealing in the islands. Finding one of the ships being outfitted with guns, Captain Duncan seized six of the senior officers in the settlement on charges of piracy. The damage done to the settlement is disputed. Duncan reports spiking the guns of the settlement and a powder store. Vernet was to later claim his settlement was ransacked.“The settlers complained of the conditions they were living in and asserted that Vernet had misled them. Duncan offered passage to the mainland and the majority of settlers chose to leave, leaving behind a small party. In late 1832, Argentine warships challenged American sealers in the area again, prompting the US consul to consider a second punitive expedition with orders to sink the Argentine ship ARA Sarandi. This prompted the British to reassert sovereignty over the islands. Historically, the Argentine government has disputed the rights to the islands with the United Kingdom and it culminated in the Falklands War of 1982.”Falklands Expedition - WikipediaAlternative description, perhaps not entirely accurate::“In 1820 The United Provinces of the Rio de la Plata (the Argentinian proto-state) sent a Frigate under Colonel Daniel Jewitt to assert its sovereignty. He found various foreign, mostly US, ships there who met his assertion with scepticism, and then rejected it outright when Jewitt was arrested by the Portuguese for Piracy.“In 1828 a German named Louis Vernet living in Buenos Aires was given a large part of the Islands on condition he established a colony which he proceeded to establish the following year. Having ignored Jewitts earlier claim the British consul now protested Vernet’s colonization It has been asserted that in 1820 Britain did not recognise the United Provinces of Rio de la Plata at all so a protest was superfluous. Ironically many of his colonists were British, including his second in command Matthew Brisbane. In 1831 Vernet arrested three US ships for seal hunting.“Since the United Provinces refused to avow that Vernet was their officer and take responsibility for the seizures the USS Lexington declared this to be piracy, sailed into Puerto Soledad and raised [sic] it to the ground.“At this point the US took the position that Spain had no right to the Falklands and by extension neither did Argentina, thus US citizens had a perfect right to seal hunting in the absence of the British.“The Lexington took Vernet’s colonists with it when it left, with only a couple who had fled at its approach remaining. Argentina responded by sending 50 soldiers under Major Juan Esteban Mestivier to establish a penal colony.“This failed because in December 1832 his soldiers mutinied and killed him.“In 1833 the British Sloop Clio arrived to reassert their claim. Mestivier’s successor refused to take down the Argentine flag so the British took it down for him, the British action amounted to nothing more hostile than that.“Most Argentine accounts claim the Clio expelled the Argentine colony while glossing over the combined effect of the US attack and the mutiny having practically left no colony to expel. Indeed British sources claim the exact opposite, the captain of the Clio, Onslow, expended considerable energy in persuading the Argentine survivors of Vernets colony to stay but was ultimately successful. The Clio left William Dickson, one of Vernet’s original colonists in charge. “Transcription of US navy records, believed to be in US navy archives, possibly prepared about the year 1900Report by Silas DuncanCommander U.S.S. Lexingtonsent to Navy Secretary Levi Woodburyon 4 April 1832U.S.S. LexingtonOff Monte VideoRiver PlateFeb 3rd 1832⁠SirI arrived here yesterday from the Falklands Islands and have now the honor to enclose duplicates of my communication to the Department of the 2nd Dec. 1831 - in Relation to the Capture of some of our fishing Vessels at and about those Islands.-In conformity to my intentions I proceeded to Berkeley Sounds, East Falklands, in order to ascertain the facts in connexion with these proceedings and for the purpose of affording the proper protection to our Citizens and Commerce, and particularly to protect the American Fisheries in the Southern Ocean.-Upon my arrival in Berkeley Sound East Falkland, - I investigated the matters in question and finding them to be of the most inquisitous and illegal character, - I determined to break up and disperse this band of pirates, many of whom had been sent from the prisons of Buenos Ayres and Monte Video, and were thus let lose to prey upon a peaceable and industrious part of our community under the direction of Louis Vernet and Mathew Brisbane.-I have confined the individuals engaged in these transactions, who could be identified, and have besides brought off the whole of the population consisting of about forty persons, with the exception of some Gou chors or Horsemen who were encamped in the interior, and are employed killing cattle.-But in taking this step I have consulted their own wishes, and they have embarked on board the Lexington by general consent; they say they have been deceived by Vernet and others, who have kept many of them upon the Island contrary to their inclinations and appeared greatly Rejoiced at the opportunity thus presented of Removing with their families from a desolate Region where the climate is always cold and cheerless and the soil extremely unproductive.-These individuals some of whom have families, come from Buenos Ayres and Monte Video, also, and are principally Germans; they appear to be industrious and well disposed persons.-I have landed a part of them at Monte Video and intend sending the remainder to Buenos Ayres by the first Conveyance.-I have now on board as prisoners seven individuals who are charged with illegally capturing and plundering the Schooner Harriet, as will appear by the affidavits of Captain(page 2)G.R. Davison late master of the Harriet - Marked No.3. - These men will be detained on board the Lexington until some orders shall have been given with Respect to them from the Navy Department or the Senior officer of the Brazil Station.-I found a Schooner lying in Berkeley Sound (East Falklands) intended there is no doubt to have been fitted out to suppress our fisheries in the Southern Ocean. - She had been sent from the U. States for Sale but the purchase not having been completed. I put on board of her Gilbert R. Davison late Master of the Schooner Harriet and two additional Seamen and directed her (with concurrence of the Master) to proceed to the Island of Staten land for the relief of Seven American Seamen who had been left there without the means of subsistance, in consequence of the Captain of their vessel, the Schooner Superior, by Vernet.-I found some guns lying near to the beach which I suppose were intended to have been put on board the Schooner as these men have declared it to be their intention to fit out a vessel for the purpose of putting a stop to the American Whale and Sealing Fisheries in these Seas. The guns have been rendered useless - for any hostile purposes.-I also found a small Schooner on the coast of East Falkland, navigated by a part of the Crew of the American Schooner Belville, wreck'd on the coast of Patagonia. - These men had built this Small Vessel or Shallop of 20 or 30 Tons after the loss of their vessel and were seized and made prisoners by Vernet and his associates and compelled to enter into their Service. - I supplied them with Such Articles as they were in want of, and after repairing and fitting out their vessel, directed them to relieve their companions who had been left fishing about the rocks and small Islands and then proceed to the Coast of Brazil or the U. States as they would not be allowed to navigate the high Seas without the necessary documents from some Competent Authority. - See No.5.-I have communicated directly with the Department for the reason that I have been separated from the Senior Officer of the Brazil Squadron, and have deem'd it proper to give the Department the earliest information on these proceedings.-The documents herewith enclosed and marked and numbered as follows.-No. 1 - Duplicate copies of the dispatches dated Dec. 2nd 1831 - No. 2 - Circular issued at the Falkland Islands to the inhabitants and others. - No. 3 - Copies of the affidavits made by Gilbert H. Davison late master of the American Schooner Harriet No. 4 - Copy of an instrument in writing purporting to be an agreement between Louis Vernet and the Crew of the Schooner Belville wreck'd on the coast of Patagonia.-(page 3)No. 5 - Copy of a Sea letter given to a Small Schooner built by the Crew of the American Schooner Belville, wreck'd on the Coast of Patagonia, which Crew had been compelled by Vernet and others to enter into their employ.No. 6 - Copy of a Certificate given by some of the inhabitants at the Falkland Islands.-No. 7 - A list of Articles taken from the Schooner Harriet by Louis Vernet and Mathew Brisbane and others.-No. 8 - Copy of a letter to Geo W. Slacum, U.S. Consul Buenos Ayres dated Feb 2nd 1832.-⁠I intend leaving this place for Rio de Janeiro in about a week.⁠Answered 3d April.I have the Honorto be with great respectYr Ob. ServtHon: Levi WoodburyAnsd 4 April 1832Secretary of the NavyS. DuncanWashingtonCommng U.S.S. Lexington[…][…]Source:Argie material:—————————I’ve got some more stuff buried away in musty old trunks that smell of penguins and cordite, but I’m in the midst of translating a book on the history of the region and research for others may have to wait.

Had Lee Harvey Oswald survived and gone to court, I believe his trial would have given us a very different view of the facts surrounding the assassination of Pres. John F. Kennedy. With the entire machinery of the U.S. Government invested in prosecuting Oswald, and the high temper of the time, winning his acquittal likely would have been quite difficult. But Attorney Mark Lane showed very early on that a competent attorney with full powers of discovery could have succeeded. And the facts that have come out ever since raise a real question as to whether a judge or grand jury would even have allowed Oswald's prosecution to go to trial. That's because, thanks to the determined efforts of certain dogged researchers, and the advent of the Internet, which allows investigators far more easily to compare research notes, the evidence that has surfaced in the 53 years since the assassination points more and more to Oswald’s innocence and the existence of a wider conspiracy reaching deep into the government, designed to install Vice President Lyndon B. Johnson in the presidency.Whether Oswald's testimony would have incited Americans to go to war -- well, it's amusing to see other comments pooh-poohing the idea, but that was, after all, the argument that Kennedy's successor, Lyndon B. Johnson, repeatedly made. Claiming the incident could lead to World War III, LBJ appealed so strongly to Supreme Court Chief Justice Earl Warren's sense of patriotism that it reportedly brought Warren to tears, causing him to swallow his misgivings and to lead what became the Warren Commission. More about that in a moment, because it's a key to understanding the cruel hoax played on history and the American people. Sadly, if the true facts of the case were to incite the American people to war, it would likely be to a civil war, which may explain why remaining evidence in the case--so much has been destroyed--remains under seal at the National Archives, ostensibly due to reasons of national security.Let's first make a cursory examination of the case against Oswald. Lee Oswald had no apparent motive for killing Kennedy. It made no sense that he should first try to assassinate someone on the political right (Gen. Edwin Walker) and then on the political left (Pres. John F. Kennedy). If Oswald was the mean-spirited doctrinaire Marxist the FBI made him out to be, and with the whole world hanging on his every word, then why didn't he crow over the assassination? Instead, he assured his wife, brother, the head of the Dallas Bar Association, and the police of his innocence, and proclaimed to the world he was just a patsy.It does appear that Oswald had some prior knowledge of the plot. But then, so did Elizabeth Cole, Christian David, Richard Case Nagell, Gary Underwood, Rose Cheramie, Gerry Patrick Hemming, Joseph Milteer, Felipe Vidal Santiago, PFC Eugene B. Dinkin, Wayne January, and Anton Erdinger, among others. Not to mention Vice President Johnson, already ducking low in his car seat just after the motorcade turned onto Elm Street, a printed copy of the Oath of Office in his pocket.More sad than amusing is how so many of the commenters here still cling to the long-discredited Warren Report. At the risk of sounding patronizing, it's as though they simply accepted the Report as holy writ handed down from on high, and they're still trying to defend its orthodoxy.As Pennsylvania Senator Richard Schweiker, the co-chairman of the Church Committee report titled “The Investigation of the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy: Performance of the Intelligence Agencies,” summarized his views of the Warren Commission report many years ago:“I think that the report, to those who have studied it closely, has collapsed like a house of cards, and I think the people who read it in the long-run future will see that. I frankly believe that we have shown that the [investigation of the] John F. Kennedy assassination was snuffed out before it even began, and that the fatal mistake the Warren Commission made was not to use its own investigators, but instead to rely on the CIA and FBI personnel, which played directly into the hands of senior intelligence officials who directed the cover-up.”Schweiker, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, stated that senior U.S. intelligence officials directed a cover-up in the assassination. Let that sink in for a moment. What were they hiding -- foreign intelligence involvement or their own agencies' involvement? Schweiker also famously said that the handprint of intelligence was all over Oswald's record.The FBI had tracked Oswald’s movements since at least 1960, when FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover warned the State Department that someone seemed to be impersonating Oswald, then in the Soviet Union aa part of a CIA phony defector program. A gung-ho Marine who enlisted at age 17, Oswald was obsessed with the idea of becoming a double agent. He worked as a radar operator at Atsugi Naval Air Station in Japan, which had responsibility for CIA’s U-2 overflights of the Soviet Union — and, we now know, the People’s Republic of China. The government trained him in Russian and gave him an honorable discharge. Just three days later he departed for St. Petersburg. The hope was that the KGB would recruit Oswald to spy for it in the United States. When the KGB didn’t take the bait, Oswald returned to the United States, at State Department expense, and walked into a job at a graphic arts company that processed highly classified photography from Cuban overflights for the USG. The FBI paid him $200/month to pretend to be a Communist sympathizer in order to help it identify potentially pro-Castro Cubans, reporting to FBI Agent Guy Bannister. Oswald also became part of a plot led by American Cancer Society President Dr. Alton Ochsner to develop a cancer virus for the USG’s use in assassinating Cuban dictator Fidel Castro. Oswald’s former Civil Air Patrol instructor David Ferrie and several others were involved in the plot, as was Judyth Vary Baker, a brilliant young cancer researcher recruited by Ochsner straight out of high school.Baker worked out of Ferrie’s kitchen, where her job was to use lab rats to create the most virulent cancer virus possible. An anti-Castro agent was supposed to inject Castro with the virus, designed to work even more effectively once Castro’s immune system was damaged by x-rays. If Oswald traveled to Mexico City in October 1963 at all, it appears to have been for the purpose of handing off the virus to a Cuban contact, a contact who never showed. Ochsner removed Baker from the program and cut short her young career when she objected in writing to his use of Angola State Penitentiary inmates as guinea pigs in testing the virus. After Baker and Oswald became lovers, Oswald confided to Baker that he was trying to foil an assassination plot against Kennedy.Oswald stated repeatedly that he admired Kennedy and his family. He may have been the FBI informant, named "Lee," who Secret Service Agent Abraham Bouldin said had tipped off the government to the plot against Kennedy's life in Chicago two weeks before Dallas. A note from “A. Hidell,” an Oswald alias, reportedly had warned Dallas Police Department of a plot against the president but disappeared after the FBI conducted a post-assassination sweep of Dallas PD offices. The “threat note” said to have been received from Oswald by FBI Agent James Hosty likely warned of a threat against the president. If it had threatened the FBI to stay away from Oswald’s wife, as Hosty claimed, then why is it that Hosty destroyed the note on his supervisor’s orders? He likely did so because the note tended to exonerate Oswald at a time when FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover was determined to portray Oswald as the lone gunman.Not only did Oswald have no motive, but he didn’t have the means. No reliable evidence connected him to the Mannlicher-Carcano, including the doctored backyard photos and the shipment to a post office box belonging to one "A. Hidell," on the basis of a money order that was never even deposited. Never deposited! A Dallas PD paraffin test indicated he hadn't fired a rifle that day. The 14-year old witness in the Edwin Walker shooting saw two men fleeing, and neither looked like Oswald. The caliber of the bullet found in Walker’s wall did not match that from the Mannlicher-Carcano. The pistol he allegedly used to kill Officer Tippett couldn’t even fire due to a bent firing pin. Some witnesses to Tippett’s slaying saw two men.Oswald also didn’t have the opportunity. Reliable eyewitness testimony showed he wasn't on the Sixth Floor of the Texas School Book Depository at the time of the assassination. Dallas PD Officer Marrion Baker found him drinking a Coke in the second floor lunchroom just 90 seconds after the shooting. Oswald’s prints were never found on the gun until after two FBI agents planted Oswald’s palm print on it during a visit to his cadaver in the funeral home.Johnson handpicked the Warren Commission in order to stave off a Congressional investigation and reassure the American people that no conspiracy was afoot, despite the testimony of witnesses who saw multiple gunmen. The Commission relied on the FBI, which cherrypicked the evidence and ignored, manipulated, discarded or otherwise suppressed anything that didn't fit the desired narrative of Oswald as the lone gunman. It was a Procrustean Bed, where the truth is stretched or cut away as much as editorial license requires in order to make the pieces of the government’s narrative fit, out of "patriotic duty." After all, what's a few white lies if they help to prevent World War III, as LBJ intimated? Like the FBI investigation, its true purpose was to deflect suspicion from the one man with the greatest means, motive and opprtunity to kill the president, which was Lyndon B. Johnson.Johnson and the Kennedy Brothers hated each other. Johnson had blackmailed his way onto Kennedy’s ticket in 1960, using a dossier on Kennedy provided him by his close friend and next-door neighbor of 17 years, J. Edgar Hoover. Kennedy had to retract his offer of the vice presidency to Missouri Senator Stuart Symington. With the help of his campaign manager John Connally, Johnson had cheated his way into the Senate by stuffing the ballot box in Precinct 13. He was profoundly corrupt, taking a slice of every major government defense contract that came before him, and, as Senate Majority Leader, he ensured that all such contracts would continue to move through him by taking the unprecedented step of having himself appointed Chairman of a Senate Armed Services subcommittee. With the help of his personal hitman Malcolm Wallace, Johnson plotted numerous political murders in order to cover up his corruption. But all was coming to an end for Johnson in November 1963. Kennedy was just beginning to campaign for re-election. He planned to replace Johnson in 1964 with Terry Sanford of North Carolina. Life Magazine, fed dirt on Johnson by Robert Kennedy’s Justice Department, was about to publish an exposé of Johnson’s ties to the Bobby Baker scandal in its December 1 edition, At the time of the assassination, Johnson was just one step away from political humiliation and criminal charges.Anti-Soviet military hawks seeking war in Vietnam, Texas oil tycoons fearful of losing the oil depletion allowance, CIA officials fired by Kennedy over the Bay of Pigs debacle, mafiosi angered by Kennedy’s war on crime, Secret Service agents scandalized by Kennedy’s private behavior, jealous husbands cuckolded by Kennedy, etc. — Johnson knew Kennedy’s many enemies in and outside the government and presented himself as their champion.Working with the Mafia, and with the complicity of certain members of the military and the Secret Service, elements of CIA murdered Kennedy. Hoover then led the FBI in framing Oswald for the crime. The Warren Commission relied wholly on the FBI investigation for its own conclusions. The CIA strategy designed to defend the Warren Report, and laid out in Document 1035-960, seeks to discredit skeptics as “conspiracy theorists.” Thanks to the penetration of our media by the CIA, via Operation Mockingbird, and the CIA's penetration and discrediting of the Jim Garrison investigation, this strategy succeeded to such a degree the Kennedy Assassination is now regarded as the Third Rail of American journalism.Attorney General Robert Kennedy and First Lady Jackie Kennedy were the first conspiracy theorists. Bobby immediately (and correctly) suspected the involvement in his brother’s murder of Operation Mongoose members involved in anti-Castro plotting. Jackie immediately suspected LBJ and Secret Service collusion because she had witnessed how Secret Service Agent William Greer had stopped the limo until the fatal shot and only then sped away. French Intelligence concluded LBJ was behind the murder, as did the Kremlin. Several members of the Warren Commission itself made private statements disavowing its conclusions. And Lyndon Johnson was recorded at least twice as saying he suspected a conspiracy. Those who dismiss the evidence of conspiracy in JFK’s assassination seem to ignore the fact that LBJ himself was a tinfoil hat type, and that the very people in the best position to know all believed in the existence of a conspiracy.Oswald could not have been fairly convicted. He had no motive, means or opportunity. He was denied minimum standards of due process. He had asked a dozen times to be represented by Attorney John Abt of New York. He did tell Dallas Bar Association President H. Louis Nichols that he might accept his offer to find a different attorney, but he first wanted to see if Abt would take his case. He was never allowed to contact him. His police line-up was a farce. The single prison phone call to which he was entitled--he tried to call a retired Army intelligence officer--was deliberately prevented by the government from being connected. His interrogations went unrecorded. Lots of red flags there.But Oswald's murder by Jack Ruby was surely our first strong indication of conspiracy. Of course, what looked like a gangland hit to silence a potentially problematic witness was quickly explained away as the misguided but well-meaning act of another Lone Nut. Never mind the dozen different witnesses who said Oswald knew Ruby. They must have "been mistaken," including the dancer who said Ruby had introduced Oswald to her as “my friend Lee, from the CIA.”Silvia Odio claimed she'd met Oswald with two anti-Castro Cubans some weeks before, but she, too, must have "been mistaken," even though she never sought publicity, her sister confirmed the visit, and she'd written to her father of the meeting shortly afterward.Strange how the government never mentioned that Ruby was a gun runner to Cuba, helped spring Mob boss Santos Trafficante from a Cuban prison, and was once hired to work on the staff of then-Congressman Richard Nixon, as a favor to -- get this --then-Senator Lyndon Johnson! LBJ had wanted to exempt "Jacob Rubenstein" from having to testify before the House Un-American Activities Committee. Americans know all about the latest Kardashian drama, but I guess the U.S. media just didn't find that little tidbit newsworthy enough to report.Ruby didn't receive a hero's treatment or a presidential pardon. Instead, he was sentenced to death. That's when he began to hint broadly in prison that Johnson was behind the assassination. Said he to reporters:“Everything pertaining to what’s happening has never come to the surface. The world will never know the true facts, of what occurred, my motives. The people had... that had so much to gain and had such an ulterior motive for putting me in the position I’m in, will never let the true facts come above board to the world.”Asked by a reporter, “Are these people in very high positions, Jack?” Ruby replied, “Yes.”Ruby didn't stop there. He also told a gathering of reporters: "Gentlemen, I want to tell the truth, but I cannot tell it here. If you want a fair shake out of me, you have to take me to Washington." When a reporter asked him to expand on that statement, Ruby replied: “When I mentioned about Adlai Stevenson, if he was vice president – there would never have been an assassination of our beloved President Kennedy.” When the reporter persisted, Ruby responded: “Well, the answer is the man in office now.”Of course, the “man in office now,” was then Lyndon B. Johnson.After a jail cell injection, Ruby publicly charged that the USG had just given him cancer. People said Ruby was just paranoid, but, sure enough, within just a few weeks he was dead from a previously-undiagnosed and particularly virulent form of cancer.The case against George H.W. Bush is stronger than the case against Lee Oswald. Poppy Bush was in Dallas Nov. 22, 1963. He had been recruited to CIA directly out of Yale and been heavily involved in the logistical planning for the Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba. Bush was CIA liaison to the Cuban-American community, and many of the hitmen recruited for Dealey Plaza were Cuban-Americans with a grudge against JFK. Dallas PD temporarily detained Bush and mafioso James Braden as persons of interest after they were identified as "suspicious" at the Dal-Tex Building immediately after the assassination. Bush can be seen in a photo of the scene just after the assassination. The second floor of the Dal-Tex Building, where a CIA front company was renting offices, was a very likely sniper site. Its low trajectory and field of vision were almost ideal. Bush has given conflicting accounts of his actions and whereabouts that day. Despite the solemnity of the event, he couldn't help a wide, momentary grin during his eulogy for Pres. Gerald Ford as he recounted how the crime committed in Dallas was by a “lone, deranged gunman." Trained interrogators would recognize Bush's grin as a "micro-expression" betraying his true inner feelings. Bush also once cryptically remarked “if the American people knew what we’d done, they’d chase us down the street and lynch us.” Maybe it's time Americans take him at his word.We now know the Zapruder Film was altered, and we even know how, by whom, where, and when. A government-led conspiracy is implicit in the altering of the film. Consequently, this so-called "time-clock" of the assassination isn't reliable. First of all, Zapruder insisted he filmed the motorcade at 24 frames per second. The FBI claims it was filmed at only 18 frames per second, giving the government the opportunity to excise a quarter of the frames from the beginning. The fact that police emergency lights in the film flash erratically, instead of at a set periodicity, proves frames were excised. Superhuman movements, magically disappearing and reappearing motorcycle escorts, a completely immobile crowd of spectators in the foreground, splice marks, and other anomalies also prove the film was altered. Eyewitness testimony -- including of those who claim to have seen a different, longer version -- would suggest that what was excised were the overly wide limo turn, LBJ ducking low in his car, the limo's pause behind the Stemmons Freeway sign, Agent Greer's stopping of the limo in the kill zone demarcated by two yellow hash marks painted on the curb, and the nature of the mortal head shot. Why would the government need to alter the film at all, except to mask evidence of a conspiracy?In fact, the film gives additional proof of conspiracy, because it shows the mortal shot as driving JFK back and to the left. Not just that, but looking carefully at the margins of the film, we find that beginning at Frame 232, we can actually see the reflection of a sniper firing on the motorcade from atop the County Records Building. The shot that ricocheted off the pavement and struck James Tague in the cheek left a bullet mark aligning, not with the TBSD, but with the County Records Building, which might explain why the mark was quickly cemented over. With millions of pot holes still lining our roads, why the rush to re-pave this artifact of the assassination except to destroy evidence, and why would the government destroy evidence unless it was to hide a conspiracy?The monumental dereliction of the Secret Service and its immediate destruction of evidence certainly smacked of foreknowledge and conspiracy. Set aside how the night before many of the agents were out carousing at a strip bar until nearly daylight and a dozen other lapses. We've now seen how agents were waved off of the bumper of the presidential limo just before the last turn onto Elm Street. Even in the altered version of the Zapruder Film, we've seen how Agent Greer slowed down the limo. We have the photographic and expert eyewitness testimony about the bullet hole in the limo's windshield, from the front, despite the efforts of the Secret Service to destroy the evidence immediately by sending the car to Ford Motor Company for a complete makeover. What about the Secret Service's removal of the president’s body, by force, to Washington, preventing Texas authorities from conducting the investigation, as required by Texas law?And even the Warren Report noted the presence, in the vicinity of the Grassy Knoll and TBSD, of mysterious men flashing Secret Service credentials, even though the Secret Service said it had no other agents in the area. Isn't that an indication of a conspiracy? One of LBJ's personal attorneys, Barr McClellan, relates in his book, “Blood, Money & Power: How L.B.J. Killed JFK,” how he became convinced that the head of his law firm, Edward Clark, was a key organizer of the conspiracy to kill Kennedy. Clark's firm represented LBJ's business interests. McClellan claims a law partner, Martin Harris, was told by Clark that during a visit to Johnson Ranch, LBJ had given him instructions and an envelope containing the full outline of Kennedy’s personal security Secret Service policy manual. Convicted killer James Files, who eventually confessed to being a Grassy Knoll gunman, claims he witnessed Jack Ruby pass Secret Service credentials to mafia gunman Johnny Roselli at a Dallas pancake house the day before the assassination. Later called to testify about the assassination to the Congress, Roselli disappeared, his dismembered body later recovered from a metal drum floating in Florida's Inland Waterway.The forensics evidence indicates JFK was killed by a shot from the front, possibly the South Grassy Knoll, not from the direction of Oswald and the Texas School Book Depository Building. We've all heard of the Magic Bullet Theory and seen computer simulations and other demonstrations purporting to prove it, but they're sleight of hand to hide the fact that the trajectories never really align. A key exhibit is the photo of Warren Commission staffer Arlen Specter supposedly demonstrating with a stick how the shot lined up, but a closer look at the suit jacket of the agent portraying Kennedy will show the stick several inches away from the circled bullet wound. The jacketed bullet supposedly passed through bone and tissue yet emerged virtually "pristine." More bullet fragments were removed from Gov. Connally's wrist alone than was missing from the Magic Bullet. And, unlike that Bullet, the shot that blew out JFK's brains was frangible.Then, of course, there's the medical evidence. A small wound in JFK's throat, identified by doctors at Parkland Hospital as having come from the front, was used by them to start a small incision for a tracheotomy. But by the time the body was examined and photographed for autopsy, the wound had taken the ragged appearance of an exit wound. The shot in JFK's back, earlier probed by two FBI agents who found it was shallow, instead was presented by CDR Hume at the Bethesda Navy Hospital autopsy as the entry wound for the "exit" wound in the throat, even though he never probed it. The angle didn't line up with the Sixth Floor of the TBSD, so artists weren't allowed to see the body; they were TOLD what to depict in their inaccurate autopsy drawings, just as Commission staff misrepresented the location of the wounds in order to expound the Magic Bullet theory. The small entry hole near JFK's hairline was sutured before the autopsy. The large hole in the back of JFK's head, attested to by everyone/everyone at Parkland, simply disappeared. Hume burned his autopsy records.Why were multiple sets of x-rays taken, except to help CDR Hume locate, and remove, bullet evidence? A peer-reviewed article by Dr. David Mantik explained how stereoscopic examination of the cranial x-rays, using optical density measurements, showed that an artifact was used to give the appearance that the back of the cranium was still intact. Mantik's study also revealed that a 6.5 mm bullet fragment that had mysteriously appeared in JFK's skull x-rays -- apparently to implicate Oswald and "his" Mannlicher-Carcano -- was a forgery. It had been created by means of using photographic double exposure to superimpose the fake bullet onto Kennedy's x-ray, probably by Dr. John Ebersole, the Assistant Chief Radiologist at Bethesda. Many of the x-rays that were taken are now missing. The duty log page concerning the taking of the x-rays was burned, on the order of Ebersole.Dr. Mantik's results were replicated by other researchers. This is science, not conjecture. Isn't tampering with evidence an indication of possible conspiracy? Oswald couldn’t have done it. Oswald was dead.At Bethesda Naval Hospital, one of those with his own film of the autopsy was LCDR William Bruce Pitzer. Just as he was retiring from the Navy to accept a job offer with CBS Television, he was found dead in the hospital by a gunshot wound. A pistol lay by his side. Suicide was the ruling. His family didn’t believe it but was pressured by the Office of Naval Intelligence to say nothing. Years later, a conscience-stricken Lt. Col. Daniel Marvin informed Pitzer's widow how, as a Green Beret those many years before, he’d turned down a pitch by CIA to assassinate her husband before he could “pass secrets to the enemy.”Who was this enemy? The American people, apparently. Why else is it that 53 years after the assassination, so much of the evidence in the JFK assassination remains under seal at the National Archives for reasons of national security? Is the USG really still protecting its “sources and methods,” or does it simply not want the American people to know the truth behind the assassination?It’s a matter of record that various people impersonated Oswald in Mexico City. How is the impersonation of Oswald in Mexico City proof of anything if not a conspiracy? It could only have been organized by people with knowledge of the CIA’s surveillance of the Soviet and Cuban diplomatic compounds — in other words: the Soviet regime, the Cuban regime, the Mexican government, or the U.S. government. The CIA station in Mexico City transmitted to the FBI the evidence tending to incriminate Oswald and destroyed its recordings of the impersonator shortly afterward, when, in fact, it had been advised by CIA headquarters on October 10 that the impersonator didn't match Oswald's description. That destruction of evidence and transmission of false evidence wasn't by the Soviets, Cubans or Mexicans. It could only have been achieved inside the CIA station in Mexico City. How is it that the USG has no photos of Oswald entering the Soviet and Cuban embassies when CIA had both under 24/7 camera coverage?The phone system in Washington, DC, went down at virtually the exact time as the assassination. Coincidence? We're told it was system overload. Was it just coincidence that most of the Cabinet was on the other side of the world and that a brigade of the 82nd Airborne was en route to the United States? Was it coincidence that rightwing arch-reactionary and Kennedy-hater Air Force Lieutenant General Curtis LeMay just happened to be away on a hunting trip to Canada and that someone called a news service that very morning to ask about a report his plane had crashed? Once the news of the successful assassination was relayed to him, LeMay rushed back to Washington in time to smoke a (celebratory?) cigar while watching the president's autopsy. An awful lot of coincidences, but it’s hard to imagine it was just coincidence that the nuclear codes were absent from all B-52 crews patrolling our skies that day. Oswald couldn't have accomplished that. Nor could the Mafia, the Cubans, the Soviets or anyone other than elements very high within the U.S. Government.The Sunday London Times hired an actuary to test the likelihood that 17 material witnesses had died of unnatural causes in the first three years following the assassination. It concluded the odds against it at 100,000 trillion to one. And that was before the congressional investigation brought a new wave of such deaths, such as Roselli's and several others. Coincidence!One needn't give full credence to the views of LBJ's mistress of over 20 years, or to Billie Sol Estes' sworn affidavit, or to E. Howard Hunt's confession, or to Marita Lorenz' open court testimony, or to LBJ's personal attorney's allegations, or to the identification of Malcolm Wallace’s fingerprint at the TBSD snipers nest, or to James Files’ confession, to conclude that LBJ was behind, or in the least acquiesced to, the assassination. So much circumstantial evidence suggests it, such as the ducking in his car and carrying the Oath of Office. The photo of the century might be the one they never show you, where immediately after taking the oath next to Kennedy's shocked widow, Johnson shared a wink and smile with his protégé and alleged criminal accomplice Texas Cong. Albert Thomas.Although he supposedly feared a Cuban or Soviet conspiracy, it's telling that Johnson didn't raise the military alert level. Neither did the Joint Chiefs, although the U.S. Commander in the Pacific did, on his own authority. It's also telling that the Joint Chiefs had completely reversed Kennedy's Vietnam policy by the end of the very first business day after his assassination.Only a high-level USG conspiracy can explain the cover-up of Oswald's intelligence record, the multiple gunmen, the surreptitious pre-autopsy surgery, the doctoring of the Zapruder Film, the falsification of the autopsy record, the withholding of the nuclear codes, etc. The Cubans couldn't have done it, nor the Soviets, nor the Mob. Only the USG, but then, its highest offices were now in the hands of the conspirators. That conspiracy continues, perpetuated by bureaucratic inertia, institutional self-protection, and enabled by the compartmentalization of information, but also by the fact that some of the conspirators went on to exercise great power and influence, which persist to this day.Still don’t believe me? Then ponder this for a moment. Murder and treason have no statute of limitations, Castro is dead, the USSR collapsed 27 years ago, diplomatic relations with Cuba are fully normalized, and yet following up on the murder of the POTUS by an alleged Castro sympathizer isn't even on the bilateral agenda. The murder of a POTUS by a potential Cuban agent, no diplomatic relations with Havana all these years, and yet when the USG finally gets its first chance to follow up on investigative leads in the killing of the POTUS, it doesn't bother? Anyone who's ever worked for the USG should find that telling, very telling indeed.Oswald had no motive for killing Kennedy, but Johnson certainly did, and so did the Military-Industrial Complex of which Pres. Dwight Eisenhower had warned in his Farewell Address. Eisenhower was not a paranoid. Indeed, history is already proving that on Nov. 22, 1963, the MIC became what today is termed the “Deep State.” The Deep State has secretly ruled Amerika ever since. But that secret is finally coming out. I invite all patriotic Americans to research my assertions, correct any inaccuracies, but, most of all, take a fresh look at the new evidence and draw your own conclusions.

More people investigating the facts stopped trusting Hilary. Some of her actions were short sighted and put national security at risk, other actions of convenience put innocent victims at risk, others actions were dishonest, other statement were proven to be lies and some management decisions were wrong, derelict. Yet she was never brought to trial or public oversight because of the Clinton Power. No one likes a person who thinks and acts like it’s above the law. Here are six illustrations to conceal, destroy, secrete, submerge facts [the Clinton Power]:lying and signing "clearly false" affidavitsIn a combative exchange at a hearing Friday in Washington, D.C., a federal judge unabashedly accused career State Department officials of lying and signing "clearly false" affidavits to derail a series of lawsuits seeking information about former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's private email server and her handling of the 2012 terrorist attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya. [Clinton Power]U.S. District Court Judge Royce Lamberth said he was "shocked" and "dumbfounded" when he learned that FBI had granted immunity to former Clinton chief of staff Cheryl Mills during its investigation into the use of Clinton's server, according to a court transcript of his remarks. [Clinton Power]"I had myself found that Cheryl Mills had committed perjury and lied under oath in a published opinion I had issued in a Judicial Watch case where I found her unworthy of belief, and I was quite shocked to find out she had been given immunity in — by the Justice Department in the Hillary Clinton email case," Lamberth said during Friday's hearing. [Clinton Power]The Department of Justice's Inspector General (IG), Michael Horowitz, noted in a bombshell reporting June that it was "inconsistent with typical investigative strategy" for the FBI to allow Mills to sit in during the agency's interview of Clinton during the email probe, given that classified information traveled through Mills' personal email account. "[T]here are serious potential ramifications when one witness attends another witness' interview," the IG wrote. [Clinton Power]Mills was wrongly allowed to act as if she were Hillary Clinton's lawyer."It was clear to me that at the time that I ruled initially, that false statements were made to me by career State Department officials, and it became more clear through discovery that the information that I was provided was clearly false regarding the adequacy of the search and this – what we now know turned out to be the Secretary’s email system," Lamberth said Friday.Of course it was. And there have been no consequences.Mills was at best, a material witness, and at worst, a co-conspirator. She was not Hillary's attorney while at State, and was not even employed as an attorney. She was employed as a staff advisor and was therefore a witness. Consequently, she could not be permitted to claim Attorney-client privilege during her time at State and could not serve as Hillary's attorney during an investigation into their collective actions at State and thereafter.Even if Mills had been a State Department attorney, her "client" would have been the Executive Branch, not the Secretary in her personal or legal capacity.This is Legal Ethics 101. It's not even a close call. [Clinton Power]That the Obama FBI and Obama DOJ ignored these principles and also agreed to destroy Mills' laptop is clear evidence of the fix and cover-up.12 years old Raped, Clinton gets rapist offThe Daily Beast ran an interview with a woman who had been raped and beaten into a coma when she was 12 years old. The incident left her unable to have children.The man who did it was set free by Hillary Clinton, an incident that she recounted with sociopathic glee while laughing about her client failing a lie detector test.The woman, raped once by her attackers and again by Hillary Clinton's manipulation of the justice system, was angry at Hillary, not only because Hillary Clinton had saved the man who raped her from prison, but because Hillary Clinton had called her a liar who sought ought attention from older men who often made up stories.Hillary Clinton was the one who was actually lying, as millions of Americans have since found out. “Hillary Clinton took me through Hell,” the victim said. “You are supposed to be for women? You call that [being] for women, what you done to me? And I hear you on tape laughing.” “How many other lies has she told to get where she’s at today? If she becomes president, is she gonna be telling the world the truth? No.”June 20, 2014 Daniel Greenfieldflip-flops stances on IsraelSimply put, we never know how she feels about this topic. Hillary Clinton was against Israel before she was for Israel before she was against Israel. And now she’s for Israel again. Uniquely, Hillary Clinton has so many flip-flops that you need a flow chart to get a handle on her positions as First Lady, Senator, Presidential Candidate I, Secretary of State and Presidential Candidate II. John Kerry had a shelf of flip-flops. Hillary Clinton has an entire closet full of flip-flops in different shades of stomach-turning fevered fuchsia, power pink and oligarch orange.At AIPAC [The American Israel Public Affairs Committee], Hillary Clinton delivered a very nice speech that someone else wrote for her. That’s usually what AIPAC is for. It’s where any politician can read off a pro-Israel speech from a teleprompter without believing a word of it. And no one is better at blankly reading things they don’t believe than Hillary.After having claimed to be Obama’s “designated yeller” at Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, she told the crowd at AIPAC, “One of the first things I’ll do in office is invite the Israeli prime minister to visit the White House.” I’m sure Netanyahu can’t wait for that and for his next dental checkup.Hillary Clinton mentioned the murder of Taylor Force, an Iraq War veteran in Israel, and her speechwriter quite correctly noted that, “Palestinian leaders need to stop inciting violence, stop celebrating terrorists as martyrs and stop paying rewards to their families.” If only Hillary Clinton had been Secretary of State. She might have been able to do something about it.March 22, 2016 Daniel GreenfieldPrivate Email Server deleted, 2,079 were classifiedNever in American history has anyone as unfit and undeserving as Hillary Clinton run for U.S. President. While she stands on the threshold of being elected to the White House, she quite literally belongs in a prison cell. This article lays out the case against her, chapter and verse.Throughout her entire four-year tenure as secretary of state, Mrs. Clinton never acquired or used a government email account. Instead, she transmitted — in violation of government regulations — all of her official correspondences via a private email address that traced back to a secret, private, unsecured server that was housed at her New York residence. And immediately after those emails were subpoenaed by Congress, Clinton instructed a team of her advisers to unilaterally delete, with no oversight, almost 32,000 of the roughly 60,000 emails in question.Clinton claimed that her reason for having used only a personal email account, rather than both a personal and a government account, was that she found it “easier,” “better,” “simpler” and more convenient to “carry just one device for my work and for my personal emails instead of two.” It was eventually learned, however, that Mrs. Clinton in fact had used no fewer than 13 mobile devices to access emails on her private server, but the FBI was unable to obtain any of those devices in its investigation, in some cases because Clinton aides had been instructed to smash them with a hammer.Clinton originally assured Americans that “not even one piece of classified material had ever been transmitted via her unsecured, secret, personal server.” But now it is known that at least 2,079 emails that she sent or received via that server, contained classified material. As the eminent broadcaster and legal scholar Mark Levin has made plain, each of those 2,079 offenses constituted a felonious violation of Section 793 of the Espionage Act.6. And each violation was punishable by a prison sentence of up to ten years. In January 2016, former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said “the odds are pretty high” that Russia, China, and Iran had compromised Clinton's unsecured email server. [Clinton Power]October 14, 2016 John PerazzoThe Clinton Foundation ScandalsIn an effort to prevent foreign governments, organizations, and individuals from influencing the policy decisions of American national leaders, campaign-finance laws prohibit U.S. political figures from accepting money from foreign sources. But as the Washington Post noted in February 2015, the Bill, Hillary, & Chelsea Clinton Foundation “has given donors a way to potentially gain favor with the Clintons outside the traditional political [donation] limits.”.As of February 2015, foreign sources accounted for about one-third of all donors who had given the Clinton Foundation more than $1 million, and over half of those who had contributed more than $5 million.10 Foreign donors that gave money to the Foundation included: Hezbollah supporter Issam Fares, who once served as deputy prime minister of Lebanon; the Dubai Foundation, which also gave money to the families of Palestinian terrorists killed in action; the royal family of the United Arab Emirates; a Dubai-based company that promotes Sharia Law; a privately-held Chinese construction and trade conglomerate headed by a delegate of the Chinese parliament; and the governments of Saudi Arabia, Brunei, the United Arab Emirates, and Qatar.Even during Clinton's tenure (2009-13) as secretary of state, the Clinton Foundation received millions of dollars in donations from seven foreign governments.Bill Clinton earned a total of $48 million from foreign sources for his appearance and speaking fees during his wife’s term as secretary.DonationsIn August 2016, the Associated Press reported that 85 of Hillary Clinton's 154 scheduled meetings and phone calls with non-governmental personnel during her time at the State Department were with donors who gave $156 million to the Clinton Foundation. The AP report also revealed that the Clinton Foundation had received $170 million in donations from at least 16 foreign governments whose representatives met personally with Mrs. Clinton.In May 2015, the International Business Times reported that the Clinton State Department had approved billions of dollars in arms deals with governments that donated to the Clinton Foundation, including governments that were infamous for their appalling human-rights records.But the Clinton Foundation certainly does many wonderful things for needy people around the world, doesn't it? Well, according to a review of IRS documents by The Federalist, between 2009-12 the Clinton Foundation raised over $500 million in total. A mere 15% of that went towards programmatic grants. The other $425 Million went to travel expenses, employee salaries and benefits, and “other expenses.” In 2013, the Clinton Foundation allocated only 6% of its revenues to direct charitable aid.Clinton's Support for the Iran Nuclear DealVowing that Mrs. Clinton will “preven[t] Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon,” the Clinton presidential campaign website assures Americans that “Hillary will vigorously enforce the nuclear agreement with Iran.” Is this a good thing? Consider that the agreement's key provisions were as follows:Iran was permitted to keep more than 5,000 centrifuges for nuclear efforts.Iran received $150 billion in sanctions relief.Sanctions would be lifted on critical parts of Iran’s military.Russia and China were permitted to supply Iran with weapons.Iran was given the discretion to block international inspectors from its military installations, and was promised that it would receive 14 days’ notice for any request to visit a given site.Iran's intercontinental ballistic missile program would remain intact.Iran was not required to release American prisoners whom it was holding on trumped-up charges.Only inspectors from countries that had diplomatic relations with Iran would be given access to Iranian nuclear sites; thus there would be no American inspectors.An embargo on the sale of weapons to Iran would be officially lifted in 5 years.The U.S. pledged that it would provide technical assistance to help Iran develop its nuclear program and protect its nuclear facilities, supposedly for peaceful domestic purposes.As a result of this nuclear deal that Mrs. Clinton so enthusiastically supports, Iran is guaranteed of having a near-zero breakout time to a nuclear bomb approximately a decade down the road.(The Congressional Research Service (the nonpartisan analytic arm of Congress) reviewed this cash transfer in a 2018 report. It gave a total of $1.7 billion. That was the amount that U.S. and Iranian negotiators settled on to resolve an arms contract between the United States and Iran that predated the Iranian revolution in 1979. Iran had paid for military equipment, and it was never delivered. As of 1990, there were $400 million in that account. Negotiators agreed that accrued interest would add $1.3 billion to the amount, which is a lot of money — but 25 years is a long time for interest to build up the balance. )The $1.8 billion is reasonably accurate. The official amount is $1.7 billion. However, there’s no evidence that barrels and boxes were involved.Clinton Helps Russia Gain Control of 20% of All U.S. UraniumIn 2007-08, a Canadian named Ian Telfer, chairman of a South African uranium-mining company called Uranium One, funneled millions of dollars in donations to the Clinton Foundation. In June 2010, the Russian government made an extremely generous offer to Uranium One's shareholders. If the offer were to be accepted, Russia would gain a 51% controlling stake in the company.But because Uranium One controlled one-fifth of all U.S. uranium reserves — and uranium, a key component in both nuclear energy and nuclear weaponry, is considered a strategic asset with implications for American national security — the deal with Russia could not be permitted without the approval of the American government. Specifically, that approval could be granted only by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), which is composed of several of the most powerful members of the cabinet — the Attorney General as well as the Secretaries of Defense, Commerce, Treasury, Homeland Security, Energy, and State. (The latter, of course, was Hillary Clinton.)Without the approval of these seven Obama administration officials, Russia's acquisition of Uranium One could not have taken place. All seven, including Hillary Clinton, gave their go-ahead for the deal. As a result, the Russian government took control of fully 20% of all uranium production capacity in the United States.In June 2010 — the very month in which the Russian acquisition of Uranium One was approved by the CFIUS — Bill Clinton was invited to speak in Moscow for the astronomical sum of $500,000. Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin personally thanked Mr. Clinton for speaking. And Mr. Clinton's speaking fee was paid by Renaissance Capital, a Russian investment bank with ties to the Kremlin.But hey, who cares? At least Hillary Clinton never engaged in crude, private trash talk that was recorded on tape. And all of her disparaging, condescending, hate-soaked, fiction-laced denunciations of her political rivals are delivered in measured, solemn, well-rehearsed tones. And she deeply respects women, including the countless millions whose safety has been placed in jeopardy by permitting American uranium to be gobbled up by a hostile, fascist Russia.The Radical Islamist Affiliations of Clinton's Closest AideHillary Clinton's closest aide for many years has been Huma Abedin, whose late father, Syed Abedin, was affiliated with the Muslim Students Association (MSA). The MSA grew out of the jihadist Muslim Brotherhood, which Islam expert Robert Spencer has described as “the parent organization of Hamas and al Qaeda.”Huma's mother, Saleha Mahmood Abedin, is a prominent member of the Muslim Sisterhood — the Muslim Brotherhood's division for women. She is also a board member of the International Islamic Council for Dawa and Relief, a pro-Hamas entity that is part of the “Union of Good,” which the U.S. government has formally designated as an international terrorist organization. Saleha once wrote an article blaming America for having provoked the Islamic “anger and hostility” that led to the 9/11 attacks.35From 1996-2008, Huma Abedin was employed by the Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs (IMMA), a Saudi-based Islamic think tank founded by Abdullah Omar Naseef, a major Muslim Brotherhood figure who once served as secretary-general of the Muslim World League, a vehicle by which the Muslim Brotherhood promotes the ideology of Islamic supremacism. Naseef also had ties to Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda, with whom he communicated.36 Abedin was the assistant editor of IMMA's in-house publication, the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs (JMMA). At least the first seven of those years overlapped with Abdullah Omar Naseef's active presence in the IMMA.It is vital to note that the IMMA's “Muslim Minority Affairs” agenda was, and remains to this day, a calculated foreign policy of the Saudi Ministry of Religious Affairs. It is designed, as former federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy explains, “to grow an unassimilated, aggressive population of Islamic supremacists who will gradually but dramatically alter the character of the West.”But hey, who cares? At least Mrs. Clinton never engaged in crude, private trash talk that was recorded on tape. And all of her disparaging, condescending, hate-soaked, fiction-laced denunciations of her political rivals are delivered in measured, solemn, well-rehearsed tones. And she respects women, including the hundreds of millions of women in Muslim nations who are oppressed by the very same Sharia Law that is promoted by the organization to which Huma Abedin devoted 12 years of her life.The Deadly Consequences of Clinton's Absurd Fictions About Islam & TerrorismFunny thing...there are no Baptist Bombers or Transententalist Terrorists. Only islam produces believers withIn 2011 the Obama administration, in which Mrs. Clinton was obviously a major player, decided to purge, from the training materials and curricula of all federal intelligence and criminal investigators, every single item suggesting that “jihad” or “Islam” were in any way related to terrorism. Instead, the new objective would be “countering violent extremism,” improving “cultural competency training across the United States Government,” and promoting “cultural awareness.” All told, the FBI removed more than 1,000 presentations and curriculum items that were deemed “offensive” or “Islamophobic.”The FBI's decision to change its training materials and interrogation methods went on to have deadly serious, real-world consequences. A particularly noteworthy case involved jihadist Omar Mateen, who in June 2016 entered a gay nightclub in Orlando, Florida and murdered 49 people while wounding 53 others. The FBI had investigated Mateen extensively for 10 months in 2013 because he had family connections to Al Qaeda, he was a member of a Shi’a terrorist organization, and he had issued terroristic threats on a number of occasions. But eventually, the FBI canceled that investigation because, in accordance with the tenets of its revised training materials, it concluded that Mateen posed no threat to anyone; that his biggest problem was the psychic pain he was suffering as a result of “being marginalized because of his Muslim faith.” As a result of this absurd line of reasoning, 49 innocent people from Orlando are now lying in their graves.Hillary Clinton agrees completely with the notion that it is both counterproductive and morally unjustified to suggest any connection between Islam and terrorism — the same delusional, preposterous mentality that enabled the Orlando mass murder to take place.But hey, who cares? At least Mrs. Clinton never engaged in crude, private trash talk that was recorded on tape. And all of her disparaging, condescending, hate-soaked, fiction-laced denunciations of her political rivals are delivered in measured, solemn, well-rehearsed tones. And she deeply respects women and homosexuals, including the 49 people who were slaughtered in the Orlando nightclub.Clinton's Role in the Rise of ISISISIS, which evolved out of Al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI), grew into the most powerful, well-funded horde of bloodthirsty barbarians in world history, right under Mrs. Clinton's nose, and precisely during her watch as secretary of state. While ISIS launched its campaign of mass rapes, beheadings, slaughters, and tortures of unimaginable brutality — and gained control over enormous portions of Iraq and Syria — Clinton and President Obama did absolutely nothing to thwart it.Moreover, the rise of ISIS coincided with the expansion of terrorism to unprecedented levels all over the world. According to the Global Terrorism Index, fatalities caused by terrorism increased from 3,361 in 2000, to 11,133 in 2012, to 18,111 in 2013, to 32,658 in 2014. More than half of the 2014 killings were carried out by ISIS and Boko Haram, the latter of which has pledged allegiance to ISIS.44 In other words, worldwide terrorism has spiraled out of control under Obama, Clinton, and Clinton's successor, John Kerry.But hey, who cares? At least Mrs. Clinton never engaged in crude, private trash talk that was recorded on tape. And all of her disparaging, condescending, hate-soaked, fiction-laced denunciations of her political rivals are delivered in measured, solemn, well-rehearsed tones. And she deeply respects women everywhere, including the many thousands who are killed by terrorists across the globe each year.Clinton's Empty Talk Regarding Russia and ChinaHillary Clinton's presidential campaign website boasts that in 2010 Clinton “worked to ensure ratification of the New START treaty, which will make the world safer by reducing U.S. and Russian nuclear arsenals to their smallest size in 50 years.”The New START agreement with Russia limited each country's long-range nuclear weapons stockpile to 1,500. But while both the U.S. and Russia agreed to these limits, only America promised to freeze its technology. As the late constitutional scholar Phyllis Schlafley wrote of the treaty:“It reads like it was written by the Russians and has nothing good in it for the United States.... The treaty allows Russia to build new and modern weapons to reach New START limits, whereas the United States is locked into reducing its current number. That means Russia will have new and tested weapons, but the U.S. will be stuck with its current, out-of-date, untested warheads.... This treaty gives Russia a veto over all U.S. defenses against incoming missiles.... Russia explained that ... it will stick with New START 'only if the (U.S.) refrains from developing its missile defense capabilities quantitatively or qualitatively.'”Immigration: Clinton Explicitly Favors Amnesty, Sanctuary Cities, and “Open BordersEntering your neighbors house un-invited is wrong, impolite and can get you shot as a trespasser in some states. Entering a country that you are not a citizen of is criminal whether you sneak across the boarder on-a bus, a plane or on foot.“Hillary will introduce comprehensive immigration reform with a pathway to full and equal citizenship within her first 100 days in office,” says the Clinton presidential campaign website. Mrs. Clinton pledges that if she is elected president, she will extend President Obama's two major executive orders on immigration, which protected millions of illegal aliens from deportation. She vows to do this despite the fact that Obama himself, prior to issuing his executive orders, frequently acknowledged that such actions went far beyond the proper limits of presidential authority. Speaking to a group of illegal immigrant high-school students in 2015, Clinton said: “I want to do everything we can to defend the president's executive orders ... As president I would do everything possible under the law to go even further.”Moreover, Mrs. Clinton unequivocally supports the “sanctuary” policies that bar police and other public-sector employees in some 340 U.S. cities from notifying the federal government about the presence of illegal aliens residing in their communities. As such, these policies defy the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act that Congress passed twenty years ago to require that local governments cooperate with U.S. Immigration & Customs Enforcement (ICE).Sanctuary policies have turned hundreds of U.S. cities into very dangerous places. Of the 9,295 deportable aliens who were released after their arrest in sanctuary jurisdictions during the first eight months of 2014 alone, some 2,320 were subsequently re-arrested, on new criminal charges, soon thereafter. And before their initial release, 58% of those 9,295 aliens already had felony charges or convictions on their records, while another 37% had serious prior misdemeanor charges.But Mrs. Clinton's commitment to sanctuary policies is unshakable. As Xochitl Hinojosa, the Clinton presidential campaign's director of coalitions press, said in 2015: “Hillary Clinton believes that sanctuary cities can help further public safety, and she has defended those policies going back years.”In a speech she delivered at Banco Itau, a Brazilian bank, on May 16, 2013, Mrs. Clinton stated: “My dream is a hemispheric common market, with open trade and open borders....”Rejecting School Vouchers for Failing Urban SchoolsTry being a poor parent, living in a poor area, with terrible schools. You want your kids to get a better education so you opt for vouchers as a reach for an better life for your kids. Anyone against vouchers in this situation is a social malefactor.Professing to have spent her entire adult life “fighting for children,” Hillary Clinton dogmatically opposes the implementation of school voucher programs which would enable the parents of low-income, mostly-minority children who attend failing, inner-city public schools, to send their youngsters instead to private schools where they might actually have a chance of succeeding academically. Why would anyone reject such programs, if he or she actually cared about poor minority kids?As always, if you want to find out what motivates Mrs. Clinton, you have to follow the money. Together, the two largest teachers' unions in the United States — the National Education Association (NEA) and the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) — have given tens of millions of dollars in campaign contributions to political candidates since the early 1990s, and more than 95% of that money has gone to Democrats. If we also count the massive expenditures that teachers' unions make on politically oriented initiatives like television ads and get-out-the-vote efforts, the numbers become almost unfathomable. From 2007-12, the NEA and AFT together spent more than $330 million to influence elections in favor of Democrats.The leading objective of both the NEA and AFT is to maximize employment opportunities for dues-paying members of their unions. This is highly significant because mandatory dues constitute the very lifeblood of those unions. And voucher programs, which would siphon students as well as money away from the public schools, don't promote union membership or union dues.So Hillary Clinton rejects voucher programs because her union benefactors oppose them. But hey, who cares? At least she never engaged in crude, private trash talk that was recorded on tape. And all of her disparaging, condescending, hate-soaked, fiction-laced denunciations of her political rivals are delivered in measured, solemn, well-rehearsed tones. And she deeply respects women — even impoverished, inner-city minority women who have no choice but to send their children to public schools that are beset by academic failure and violence of monumental proportions.Fighting Voter ID Laws As “Racist”At an August 2013 meeting of the American Bar Association, Mrs. Clinton lamented that “more than 80 bills restricting voting rights” had been “introduced in 31 states” during the first eight months of that year. These were generally bills that sought to institute Voter ID requirements at polling places, shorten early-voting periods, eliminate same-day voter registration, prevent the arbitrary extension of voting hours, and carefully regulate the use of absentee voting. All of these proposed measures were designed to reduce the likelihood of voter fraud, but Mrs. Clinton called them “voter suppression” efforts that were part of a racist scheme to “disproportionately [disenfranchise] African-Americans, Latino[s] and young voters.”110 On another occasion, Clinton said that Voter ID laws are emblematic of a racist form of “fear-mongering about a phantom epidemic of election fraud.”Is Mrs. Clinton correct? Look at the evidence and decide for yourself:A 2012 report by the Pew Center on the States found that 24 million voter registrations — one-eighth of all registrations nationwide — were either invalid or inaccurate, including more than 1.8 million dead people who were still registered.A 2014 study found that two years earlier, some 155,692 registered voters in North Carolina alone had first and last names, birth dates, and final-four Social Security Number digits that matched those of voters who were registered in other states.The same study also found that 35,570 people who had actually voted in North Carolina, had first names, last names, and birth dates that matched those of voters who had cast ballots in other states.In 2008, Democrat Al Franken won a highly controversial U.S. Senate race in Minnesota by just 312 votes. It was later discovered that 1,099 felons — all legally ineligible to vote — had cast ballots in the election, almost exclusively for Franken.Clinton's Affiliation with Al Sharpton & Black Lives MatterAl Sharpton has been called a Race Hustler. In April 2007, Mrs. Clinton spoke at an event held by Al Sharpton's National Action Network, where she stated that her own presidential bid was possible only because of the dedicated work of longtime civil-rights leaders who, like Sharpton, had fought on behalf of those traditionally excluded from power positions in American life. “I have enjoyed a long and positive relationship with Reverend Al Sharpton and National Action Network,” said Clinton, “and I don't ever remember saying 'no' to them, and I intend to remain their partner in civil rights as I clean the dirt from under the carpet in the Oval Office when I am elected President.”And nothing whatsoever has changed in Mrs. Clinton's estimation of Sharpton, perhaps the most repugnant racial arsonist in contemporary America, in the years since then. In April 2016, for instance, Clinton again spoke at a National Action Network event where she lauded Sharpton and his organization for steadfastly working “on the frontlines of our nation’s continuing struggle for civil rights,” and “in a million ways lift[ing] up voices that too often go unheard.”Speaking of repugnant racial arsonists, in August 2015 Mrs. Clinton held an impromptu, videotaped conversation with three Black Lives Matter (BLM) activists who were complaining about the “mass incarceration” of African Americans. In response to them, Clinton said: “This country has still not recovered from its original sin [slavery] ... Your analysis is totally fair. It's historically fair, it's psychologically fair, it's economically fair.... All I'm suggesting is, even for us sinners [white people], find some common ground on agendas that can make a difference right here and now in people's lives.”Clinton's Personal Persecution of a Young Rape VictimWhile the Clinton presidential campaign website touts “Hillary’s plan to end campus sexual assault,” it laments that “many who choose to report sexual assault in the criminal justice system fear that their voices will be dismissed instead of heard.”130 But Mrs. Clinton herself took part in one of the most repulsive exhibitions of cruelty to a rape victim ever seen in an American courtroom.The year was 1975, and attorney Hillary Clinton was defending Thomas Alfred Taylor, a 41-year-old man accused of raping and beating a 12-year-old girl named Kathy Shelton. So brutal was Taylor's assault, that the victim spent five days in a coma immediately afterward; then several months recovering from the physical thrashing that accompanied the rape; plus, more than 10 years in psychotherapy.Mrs. Clinton knew for certain that Taylor was guilty of this crime, as she made clear years later when she discussed the case in a 1980s interview with Arkansas journalist Roy Reed. “He [Taylor] took a lie detector test!” Mrs. Clinton recalled. “I had him take a polygraph test, which he passed, which forever destroyed my faith in polygraphs.”Notwithstanding her certitude regarding the man's guilt, Clinton negotiated a plea bargain for Taylor by taking advantage of a prosecutorial error — the prosecutors had cut out and examined the blood-covered section of Taylor's underwear that proved his guilt, but then discarded the fabric, making it impossible for the defense to examine it. Because of this misstep, Clinton, confident that the prosecution would be unable to prove Taylor's guilt, pushed for a plea bargain.In the aforementioned 1980s interview, Mrs. Clinton laughed as she recounted how the polygraph results were clearly erroneous, and how a forensic scientist from New York was prepared to testify that Taylor could not be convicted if the underwear fabric was no longer available. When Reed asked Clinton about the outcome of the case, she replied, nonchalantly, “Oh he plea bargained. Got him off with time served in the county jail, he’d been in the county jail about two months.”Subsequent to the Taylor trial, a Newsday examination of court files and investigative files revealed that Mrs. Clinton had also attacked the young victim's character during the trial by calling into question her motives, her honesty, her temperament, and her ability to perceive reality — even though she knew with 100% certainty that her client was guilty.But hey, who cares? At least Mrs. Clinton, a great actress, never engaged in crude, private trash talk that was recorded on tape. And all of her disparaging, condescending, hate-soaked, fiction-laced denunciations of her political rivals are delivered in measured, solemn, well-rehearsed tones. And she deeply respects women, including the scores of millions of women in the U.S., Israel, and elsewhere, whose very lives have been placed in irreversible peril as a result of this pass by law enforcement. She is a phony that some people, the folks that look and read and understand, can see. She represented the swamp.