Posted on 08/14/2015 8:46:18 AM PDT by wildwoodla
I can't recall if there are any Clintons on the Clinton body count. If there aren't any, I have a few suggestions.
Who says that's not being talked about?
You say blackmail, I say bribing,
You say influence peddling, I say quid pro quo,
Pay for play, mutually beneficial situation, potato, potata,
Let’s throw them all in jail.
Right now the entire US government is blackmailable because the chinese got the records on every employee of the US government including their security clearances.
She has already proven that. Ask Vince Foster, er nevermind.
No, I’m referring to all the people who met an untimely demise who were in the Clinton’s way. Its a long list. I’m sure its just coincidence though.
That's if the Clinton Foundation survives. Remember, Swiss authorities are still investigating whether bribe money to and from FIFA officials in Zurich were laundered through the Clinton Foundation....
Yes. That is the nature of politics......that Machiavelli was correct. The way to “power” is always brutal and unethical.......and those who are ethical-—and can’t be bought or controlled, are extremely rare in history.
Virtue is essential in political office. But, since Nixon-—that quality has been jettisoned and Virtue (which is habituated and learned in childhood) is intentionally destroyed in our children, and removed from the term “Justice” (Queen of Virtue)— by the Marxist Lens and Worldview which inserts lies and misinformation to children, so they are devoid of Truth/God/Virtue.
Christian Ethics are demonized 24/7-—the only ethical system based on Individual Natural Rights from God which is being erased in children, so they are only capable of group “think” (tribal mindset where paganism and atheism is “good”, along with killing people (useless eaters) and slavery is normalized with the buying and selling of children by sodomites to normalize unnatural, irrationality in children for the NWO where Up is Down and Slavery is Freedom and Vice is Virtue.
Maybe he/she/they don’t want her cooperation.
Maybe she has become to much of a liability.
Maybe her husband is in love with the cookie baker and doesn’t want to split the assets in a divorce.
Maybe her husband and others don’t want closer scrutiny on the Clinton Foundation that another Presidency would bring.
Maybe her Benghazi screw up drone videos, possibly on that server would ruin her husband’s legacy.
With this circus of losers it could be most any damn thing.
Why would Bill bring home a server he used while POTUS when he said he doesn’t even use emails? I suppose it means what the meaning of “use” is.
How do we know it contained US Govt info? And why would the US government let him take it without first examining it?
It’s obvious why they’re still married - they are two of a kind. 2 truly disgusting and dangerous people - although I think Obama is worse.
“Just another teaser title with no substance.”
Sorry, that is the title of the article. Maybe I should have included something more descriptive after, but I got dinged by a mod once for that. Not my intent to teaser title.
Thanks!
This post was one of the first I’ve seen on this subject, but am seeing more. Here is another posted on FR from American Thinker
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3324631/posts
[How do we know it contained US Govt info?]
Because he WAS the ‘government’ at that time and I doubt he was using it for mentoring young gir...uh...never mind.
“I’m not too familiar with this site.”
Glen Reynolds blog, law professor at the U of TN. He writes articles for USA Today quite often, and other sites. It’s similar to FR... posts articles from other websites. Really enjoy reading the comments, but here lately they are plagued by a “report abuse” troll.
It’s my 2nd go to after FR to find the latest without going to a bunch of news websites.
Yeah, the anonymous is a flag. Also she would potentially in the pocket of foreign donators to the Clinton Foundation as well.
He is on record as saying that he would have done anything to keep knowledge of the Lewinsky affair from becoming public.
To me, that statement raises a very serious question: What if, instead of sending her recorded Lewinsky conversations to Ken Starr, Linda Tripp had instead secretly offered them for sale, say, to the Chinese government? Or to the Russians? Or even to agents of Saddam?
What kind of blackmail leverage would those tapes have provided to a foreign government in dealing with America on sensitive trade, security or military issues? One of the few things Clinton ever said that I believe is that he would have done anything to keep the Lewinsky affair secret. Given his demonstrated track record of selling out American interests for personal or political gain (and there are more examples that I could have cited here), how far would he have gone in compromising America’s real interests in order to protect his own neck when threatened with blackmail?
Pretty far, I believe. Equally distressing is the prospect Clinton might, in fact, have succumbed to foreign black mail on other occasions in order to hide different sexual episodes that ultimately did not become public. There is no way to know, of course, but I prefer presidents for whom such a scenario is not a plausible possibility.
Maybe all those favors he did for the Chinese were driven by blackmail in addition to the incentives of the money they offered.
It is well documented that Clinton and the Democrats took illegal campaign money from groups and individuals tied directly to the Chinese People’s Republican Army. It is therefore not surprising that In January 1998 Clinton went against the advice of then-Secretary of State Warren Christopher and Pentagon experts by lifting long-standing restrictions against the export of American satellites to China for launch on Chinese rockets. Not only did he move control over such decisions from the more security-focused State Department to the Commerce Department, but he intervened in a Justice Department investigation of Loral Space & Communications, retroactively enabling Loral to sell critical missile technology to the Chinese. Interestingly enough, Clinton’s decision was made at the request of Loral CEO Bernard Schwartz, whose earlier $1.3 million campaign donation made him the single biggest contributor to the Democratic election effort.
The result, as stated eloquently by syndicated columnist Linda Bowles, was that “the Democrats got money from satellite companies and from Chinese communists; China got supercomputors, advanced production equipment and missile technology; Loral got its satellites launched at bargain basement prices . . . and the transfer of sensitive missile technology gave China [for the first time] the capability of depositing bombs on American cities.” Incidentally, Loral ultimately failed to benefit from this permanent injury to America’s security interests: in July 2003, the company filed for bankruptcy protection, and in order to raise cash was forced to sell its most profitable business – a fleet of communications satellites orbiting over North America.
Obama is already being blackmailed. So is Hillary. Why do you think six billion dollars came up “missing” from the State Department when Hillary was the Secretary of State? Why do you think that weapons, armored vehicles and night vision equipment was shipped to Libya and left unguarded so it could be “stolen”? Anybody see a court martial for letting that stuff get taken? Hasn’t been one. Won’t be one.
Our enemies found out that Hillary and Obama hit Libya and Qadaffi to steal Qadaffi’s fortune. They hit us back at Benghazi and got the Ambassador’s cell phone with Hillary’s private number on it. They called her to blackmail. She hesitated. They killed the Ambassador. Hillary called Obama and they agreed to pay the blackmail with US taxpayer money.
Our girl Hillary has done some very bad things.
They increase their influence by doing both -- threatening her with blackmail if she doesn't do their bidding, and rewarding her with money if she does. It's a very powerful strategy that worked for the American mafia for 50 years.
I believe that's what they did with her husband during his presidency. See my reply #38, below.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.