The Morphing of America

There’s no getting around the fact that America is not what she used to be. Depending on your worldview, which has more than a little to do with your age, that is either a good thing or the worst thing imaginable. Being a 76-year-old conservative, it should be no surprise that I believe it is the latter.

I don’t believe it is a coincidence that three of the most repulsive candidates in our nation’s history are presently duking it out, hoping to be the next president of the United States. What makes it truly mind-boggling is that I believe the person who is the rudest and crudest of the three is the last best hope America has of recouping some of the enormous losses here and abroad the nation has experienced under Barack Obama.

The reason I hate having to support Donald Trump is because I have no idea what his core beliefs are, or even if he has any. Ironically, it is those very doubts that make him preferable to Hillary Clinton. Whereas I know that Trump has taken more different positions on the issues than even the Kama Sutra would have thought possible, Hillary Clinton has been on the wrong side of every issue for the past quarter century.

Speaking of Mrs. Clinton, it appears that the Justice Department has decided not to seek the death penalty in the trial of Ahmed Abu Khattala, who apparently spearheaded the terrorist attack in Benghazi that left four Americans dead. The theory is that the administration feared that too many embarrassing facts would have come out in the course of a capital trial, thus harming Obama’s legacy and Mrs. Clinton’s candidacy.

Although the focus of attention has been on the possible rupture in the GOP because Trump not only triumphed over Ted Cruz, but over Jeb Bush, Mitt Romney and John McCain, things could get even bloodier over on the other side. The narrative making the rounds is that if the FBI investigation either leads to an indictment of Mrs. Clinton or forces Obama to deny justice by scotching the indictment, her shot at the nomination would be terminated, and Joe Biden would be slipped in as her replacement.

That might sound good to Obama and those 600 political hacks (aka super delegates) who presently support Clinton, but anyone who believes that Bernie Sanders and his millions of young, idiotic, supporters, would simply fall into line is so silly, it verges on the surrealistic.

For one thing, young people don’t really enjoy voting or doing anything else that gets in the way of their tweeting and texting. Sanders only managed to capture their attention and support by promising to provide every last item on their Christmas wish list. The idea that they, who despised Hillary for opposing Uncle Bernie, would suddenly change their allegiance to Hillary’s stand-in is so ludicrous that only a dunce like Debbie Wasserman-Schultz would ever suggest it and only a dummy like Juan Williams would ever believe it.

Sometimes, I look at Bill and Hillary Clinton and find myself wondering what their lives are like when they’re not on stage campaigning for one another. In my latest scenario, I saw them waking up in the morning. He leaned over and said to her “You know I never cheated on you, hon,” and Hillary replied, “I know that, sweetie.” And then his current squeeze, a zoftig blonde neighbor who, according to super reporter Ron Kessler, also resides in Chappaqua, NY, wakes up in between the two of them and tells Hillary: “You know you can count on my vote.”

I marvel at the fact that some people can actually earn a living writing books about economics and others can earn theirs either writing about the conflict between Israel and her Arab neighbors or working for the State Department and trying through diplomacy to bring the two sides together.

The reason I marvel at economists is that it seems to be as much a science as astrology or reading tea leaves, but less amusing. I mean, for decades, one group has argued for a free economy while the other side has waged battle on behalf of government control. On one side, capitalism; on the other, socialism.

Once you listen to them natter on, you begin to understand that the fight is equally important to both sides. Without a dispute that provides a livelihood for both, normal people would quickly realize that one side is obviously right and the other side is certifiably cuckoo.

Those who argue from the Left will insist that socialism is the better option because it provides a safety net for everyone, the smart and the not so smart, those who are ambitious and those who aren’t. One for all and all for one. Not only equal opportunity, but equal results. An end to greed. A little bit of Heaven right here on earth, as we all join hands and sing “Kumbaya.”

The problem is that like all pipedreams, it ignores the reality of human nature. Why should those who work the hardest or think the most creatively have to share equally with those who don’t work or think at all? We might want to share with those we have reason to love, but who wants to work on behalf of people they don’t even know? And if they knew them, chances are they wouldn’t like them. Isn’t that what most people think of as slavery?

Now in my case, I have rather simple tastes. I wouldn’t care to live in a mansion or own a private jet or have several homes scattered around the world. But that’s me. If someone else, say Donald Trump, wants all that stuff, what business is it of mine so long as he’s not a criminal and he only uses his own money?

So the basic problem with socialism isn’t that it inevitably morphs into totalitarian communism, which it does, but that it ignores human nature by denying the competitive spirit of people, and is therefore based in fantasy. Which, if you think about it, is why it inevitably morphs into totalitarianism. Because it is unnatural at its core, it requires force to make people comply.

When it comes to Israel, every American president going back as far as Harry Truman has felt obliged to deal with the conflict in the Middle East. In the early days, it was rather easy for people like Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy and Nixon, to be rather open about their preference for the Israelis. After all, on one side there was Israel, a tiny speck on the map that happened to be our ally and a democracy in a part of the world where dictatorships were the norm. On the opposing side were an uneducated rabble loyal only to their tribal religion.

But over the decades, the anti-Semitic drumbeat in the press and academia, and eventually on social media, eventually won the day. Suddenly, presidents like Clinton, Bush and Obama, felt that, at most, they had to appear neutral as they went about trying to negotiate a peace settlement between the side that actually wanted peace and the side that wanted the other side annihilated.

In the West, polite society generally restrains people from announcing themselves Jew-haters. Instead, they pretend they see a moral equivalence between terrorist acts targeting women and children and a defensive response to such attacks that they invariably deem disproportionate.

It can’t be easy for most westerners to admit they prefer the side of the Arabs and Muslims, considering it puts the lie to their alleged support of equal rights for women and gays, free speech, religious tolerance and democracy, all of which are opposed and suppressed by Israel’s existential enemies.

Finally, I once again received an email headlined Heaven and Hell. It’s been floating around the Internet for years, but it seemed particularly timely.

It tells the tale of a senator who dies and goes to Heaven. When he appears at the Pearly Gates, Saint Peter tells him that with public officials, the routine is to send them down to spend a day in Hell, then a day in Heaven, and let them decide where they’d prefer to spend eternity.

Although the senator is sure he’ll prefer Heaven, Peter escorts him to the elevator and sends him down.

The senator’s worst fears vanish when the elevator doors open. Not only is everyone happy, but he discovers all of his old associates are there to greet him. He spends the day golfing, and enjoys a dinner that consists of lobster, sirloin and champagne. He even meets Satan, who turns out to be, well, a hell of a guy.

The senator hates to leave, but it’s finally time to return to Heaven. He spends a pleasant, but boring, 24 hours with a group of contented souls. When St. Peter comes around, the senator says that Heaven has been delightful or as delightful as a place can be without golf, lobster and champagne, but he’s opting for Hell.

St. Peter escorts him back to the elevator and bids him adieu. This time, however, when the doors open, the vista is one of desolation. Everyone in sight is dressed in rags and weeping in agony. The senator spots Satan and rushes to his side, demanding an explanation.

“I don’t understand,” the senator says, “Yesterday, this was paradise. Today, it’s a wasteland full of garbage and swill and everyone is in torment. What happened?”

“Yesterday, we were campaigning,” the devil explained. “Today, you voted.”

Rules? What Rules?

“Rules are made to be broken” is a saying that has many variations, but perhaps no one has summed up Hillary Clinton’s attitude (and Bill’s, too) about rules more than the late science-fiction writer, Robert A. Heinlein, who said: “I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do.”

In its report on how Hillary Clinton handled her “private” emails while serving as secretary of state, the State Department’s inspector general (IG) has found that Hillary Clinton disregarded cyber security guidelines when she used a private computer server. She continues to deny she did anything wrong and falsely claims she turned over “all” of her emails to the State Department after she left office. In fact, she, or members of her team, deleted about 30,000 of them before an investigation of her practices began.

The IG’s report chides her, saying she should have “preserved any federal records she created and received on her personal account by printing and filing those records with the related files in the Office of the Secretary. At a minimum, Secretary Clinton should have surrendered all emails dealing with Department business before leaving government service and, because she did not do so, she did not comply with the Department’s policies that were implemented in accordance with the Federal Records Act.”

There are federal penalties for tampering with a smoke detector on an airplane and disobeying flight attendants that can include fines and even jail time. Isn’t what Hillary Clinton did far worse than that, if she potentially compromised U.S. secrets?

The IG also says she stonewalled requests by the government for access to her server, which was in her Chappaqua, N.Y., home, with another discovered at an unsecured location in a Denver bathroom closet. Marcel Lazar, the Romanian computer hacker calling himself “Guccifer,” claims to have hacked into Clinton’s servers. He pled guilty to the charge before a Virginia judge this week. Might there also be Chinese and Russian hackers out there who’ve also had a look at Clinton’s emails?

Hillary Clinton has claimed she only used private email for her daughter’s wedding and yoga classes. Who believes that, other than her partisan supporters and uninformed voters? High-ranking government officials are aware of the regulations governing their tenure while in office and their responsibilities for the handling of records once they leave it. Will Hillary Clinton’s failure to comply with the State Department’s policies on records necessarily lead to an indictment? That is what an FBI investigation is attempting to determine.

Hillary Clinton has invoked the “everybody has done it” defense, but again that’s not true. She often cites former Secretary of State Colin Powell, who also used a private email server, but as a Wall Street Journal editorial notes, Mr. Powell’s use of private email was limited, and he never set up an unsecure server in his home, not to mention a Denver bathroom.

Something else from the IG’s report that firmly rebuts Hillary Clinton’s defense: “Notification is required when a user suspects compromise of, among other things, a personally owned device containing personally identifiable information.” But the IG found “no evidence” that she or her aides complied.

For years the Clintons have skirted laws and practiced disinformation, rhetorical gymnastics (“It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is.”) obfuscation, changing the subject, non sequiturs and anything else that might block their enrichment or achievement of political goals.

This time, Hillary Clinton should not be allowed to get away with it, nor should she have her incidents of malfeasance rewarded by being elected president of the United States.

The FBI will “Blow the Whistle” if Hillary Clinton is not Indicted. “They’re Going Public”

The FBI will “Blow the Whistle” if Hillary Clinton is not Indicted. “They’re Going Public”

Bombshell Announcement by U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay

This is bombshell announcement! Former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-TX) just shared damning news for Hillary Clinton on The Steve Malzberg Show just now:

The FBI is ready to indict Hillary Clinton and if its recommendation isn’t followed by the U.S. attorney general, the agency’s investigators plan to blow the whistle and go public with their findings, former U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay tells Newsmax TV.

“I have friends that are in the FBI and they tell me they’re ready to indict,” DeLay said Monday on “The Steve Malzberg Show.”

“They’re ready to recommend an indictment and they also say that if the attorney general does not indict, they’re going public.”

Clinton is under FBI investigation for her use of a private server to conduct confidential government business while she was secretary of state. But some Republicans fear any FBI recommendation that hurts Clinton will be squashed by the Obama administration.

DeLay, a Texas Republican and Washington Times radio host, said:

“One way or another either she’s going to be indicted and that process begins, or we try her in the public eye with her campaign. One way or another she’s going to have to face these charges.”

Team Hillary is already admitting this will likely happen.

Amazingly, the Clinton campaign has been busy accusing Obama’s intelligence Inspector General, Charles McCullough, of coordinating releases of information to help Republicans. (!) McCullough’s investigations found Clinton was sharing documents which were “beyond top secret”… a crime that should not only disqualify Hillary Clinton from the White House, but should carry a lengthy prison sentence!

Here is Tom DeLay sharing the major news:

The original source of this article is The Political Insider

The Criminalization of Politics:

The Criminalization of Politics: Hillary Accused of Racketeering by the FBI, Will She be Dumped from the Presidential Race?

In a recent release, the FBI has indicated that it will be presenting a recommendation to Loretta Lynch, Attorney General of the Department of Justice:

“James Comey and The FBI will present a recommendation to Loretta Lynch, Attorney General of the Department of Justice, that includes a cogent argument that the Clinton Foundation is an ongoing criminal enterprise engaged in money laundering and soliciting bribes in exchange for political, policy and legislative favors to individuals, corporations and even governments both foreign and domestic.”  (quoted by Frank Huguenand, Global Research, May 30, 2016)

There are several possible scenarios which affect the outcome of the presidential campaign.

The fundamental question is whether this recommendation –which documents the criminal undertakings of the Clinton Foundation– will be carried out by the Attorney General.

Doubtful?

Loretta Lynch was appointed Attorney General by president Obama in 2010 during his first term. Of significance, Lynch also held the position of U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of New York under the Bill Clinton administration (1999-2001).

Moreover, as pointed out in a recent article by Jerome Corsi, Loretta Lynch is political crony of the Clintons:

But little known is the fact that Lynch was a litigation partner for eight years at a major Washington law firm that served the Clintons.

Lynch was with the Washington-headquartered international law firm Hogan & Hartson LLP from March 2002 through April 2010.

According to documents Hillary Clinton’s first presidential campaign made public in 2008, Hogan & Hartson’s New York-based partner Howard Topaz was the tax lawyer who filed income tax returns for Bill and Hillary Clinton beginning in 2004.

In addition, Hogan & Hartson in Virginia filed a patent trademark request on May 19, 2004, for Denver-based MX Logic Inc., the computer software firm that developed the email encryption system used to manage Clinton’s private email server beginning in July 2013. A tech expert has observed that employees of MX Logic could have had access to all the emails that went through her account.

The appointment of Attorney General Loretta Lynch, 2010

It is, therefore, highly unlikely that Lynch will follow the recommendation of James Comey and the FBI.

Nonetheless, even if the indictment is NOT carried out, inevitably Hillary Clinton’s “credibility” as a presidential candidate is in jeopardy.

Hillary: “Losing Horse”

The corporate media may attempt to cover up or distort the findings of the FBI and manipulate public opinion with a view to supporting Hillary’s candidacy.

A process of smearing the FBI is already ongoing. Will it  succeed? Hillary’s reputation has been tainted. A suspected criminal cannot become president of the USA, whether the legal procedure against her is carried out or not.

And the Donald Trump campaign will go into high gear to discredit Hillary Clinton.

Under these circumstances, the Democratic Party hierarchy (not to mention Hillary’s corporate sponsors) may decide to dump Hillary Clinton. Hillary’s Wall Street cronies will not bet their money on a “losing horse”.

Assuming Clinton falls out of the presidential race, what happens?

This scenario has already been contemplated and carefully rehearsed ahead of Hillary’s demise. 

Will the nomination go to Bernie Sanders or will Joe Biden formally enter the race as a “slip in” candidate:

If Clinton’s email-related problems get worse or other developments sink her popularity far below even Trump’s, causing her to step aside, Biden, as a more establishment figure than Sanders, would be the party’s likely choice as a “slip-in” candidate and an almost certain winner against Trump.Notwithstanding these various scenarios, Donald Trump is ahead in the presidential race. (Chicago Tribune, May 27, 2016)

.

The Criminalization of Politics

While Hillary, according to the FBI, is allegedly involved in money laundering and soliciting bribes, Donald Trump’s candidacy is also fragile, given his alleged links to organized crime as documented by David Cay Johnston:

But Trump was not clean as a whistle. Beginning three years earlier, he’d hired mobbed-up firms to erect Trump Tower and his Trump Plaza apartment building in Manhattan, including buying ostensibly overpriced concrete from a company controlled by mafia chieftains Anthony “Fat Tony” Salerno and Paul Castellano. That story eventually came out in a federal investigation, which also concluded that in a construction industry saturated with mob influence, the Trump Plaza apartment building most likely benefited from connections to racketeering. Trump also failed to disclose that he was under investigation by a grand jury directed by the U.S. attorney in Brooklyn, who wanted to learn how Trump obtained an option to buy the Penn Central railroad yards on the West Side of Manhattan.

Why did Trump get his casino license anyway? Why didn’t investigators look any harder? And how deep did his connections to criminals really go? (Politico, May 22, 2016)

Dirty politics. So much for Democracy and “We the People”.

The Criminalization of Politics in America: The leading presidential candidates, Hillary and Donald, have shaky records, with alleged links to criminal wrongdoings.

What choice is left? Revolution. Regime Change in the US…

The Clinton Crime Family. “Hillary is the Most Dangerous Presidential Aspirant in US History”

The Clinton Crime Family. “Hillary is the Most Dangerous Presidential Aspirant in US History”

Hillary Vulnerable to Indictment on Federal Racketeering Charges

The Bill and Hillary crime family long ago should have been held accountable for high crimes against peace and numerous others.

Hillary is the most recklessly dangerous presidential aspirant in US history, supporting endless imperial wars and state terror, once saying “(w)hat do we have NATO for if not to defend our way of life.”

She endorses first-strike nuclear weapons use, calling them peacekeeping deterrents, mindless of their power to destroy life on earth. 

She’s militantly anti-Russia, earlier compared the nation to Nazi Germany, Putin to Hitler, claiming “he doesn’t have a soul,” has revanchist aims, wanting Russian greatness restored – all of the above a perversion of truth, not to mention a pretext to wage war on Russia.

The so-called Clinton Foundation is a suspected criminal enterprise, masquerading as a charitable NGO.

It promotes Big Lies about “improving global health, increasing opportunity for women and girls, reducing childhood obesity and preventable diseases, (as well as) creating economic opportunity and growth…”

Film producer Frank Huguenard believes Hillary Clinton faces impending federal racketeering charges under the 1970 Racketeering Influence and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO).

Enacted to fight organized and white collar crime, racketeering is defined to include fraud, bribery, money laundering, embezzlement, drugs trafficking, murder, and various other offenses under the Federal criminal code (Title 18), even acts of terrorism.

According to Huguenard, Obama-appointed FBI chief James Comey will recommend Attorney General Loretta Lynch treat “the Clinton Foundation (as) an ongoing criminal enterprise engaged in money laundering and soliciting bribes in exchange for political, policy and legislative favors to individuals, corporations and even governments both foreign and domestic.”

Strong stuff if only partly true! Huguenard cites credible evidence, indicating the Clinton Foundation is largely a money laundering, influence peddling racket.

Less than 10% of “tens of millions of dollars donated” went for charitable purposes, the rest for self-enrichment.

“There is ample evidence already in the public record that the Clinton Foundation qualifies as a criminal enterprise and there’s no doubt that the FBI is privy to significantly more evidence than has already been made public,” said Huguenard.

If Comey recommends Attorney General Lynch indict Hillary Clinton, it’s unlikely she’ll prosecute a woman she’s had close ties to for years. Bill Clinton appointed her US Attorney for the Eastern District of New York – serving from 1999 – 2001.

From 2003 – 2005, she was a Wall Street controlled New York Federal Reserve Bank of New York board member – the mother bank most complicit with its member bank crooks.

From 2002 – 2010, she was a Washington-headquartered Hogan & Hartson (H & H) law firm partner. Its New York-based partner Howard Topaz filed income tax returns for Bill and Hillary Clinton, beginning in 2004.

In May 2004, H & H filed patent trademark documents for Denver-based MX Logic Inc., the computer software firm responsible for developing email encryption technology used to manage Hillary’s private email server, beginning in July 2013.

According to Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton, if H & H (now Hogan Lovells following a 2010 merger) “represented the Clintons on tax matters,” Lynch is responsible for disclosing any involvement she may have had, direct or indirect.

In April 2008 during Hillary’s first presidential campaign, The American Lawyer called H & H one of her largest legal industry supporters.

Partner Christine Varney was chief counsel to the Clinton/Gore 1992 campaign. The ties between H & H, Lynch and the Clintons are longstanding.

In November 2014, Obama announced her appointment as attorney general, succeeding Eric Holder, effective April 27, 2015 after Senate confirmation.

It’s hard imagining her biting a hand contributing greatly to her career advancement. Key for Clinton is how much more of her dark side becomes public knowledge besides what’s already known.

If enough despite Lynch declining to indict and supportive media scoundrels downplaying or whitewashing her offenses, the Democratic (sic) National Committee (DNC) might be forced to jettison her as damaged goods.

She’d be red meat for Trump to take full advantage of in the fall campaign. Would Bernie Sanders party bosses don’t want become Democrat standard bearer in July?

Or will Joe Biden or another high-profile party member perhaps be chosen as a late-stage establishment nominee, a brokered convention manipulating things?

America’s political system is too debauched to fix. Duopoly power eliminates governance of, by and for everyone equitably.

Republicans and Democrats are two sides of the same coin – special interests served exclusively, ordinary people betrayed, the same outcome every electoral cycle.

Whoever succeeds Obama, likely worse than ever governance will follow. The greatest concern is preventing possible WW III.

Clinton’s rage for endless wars, along with her Sino/Russian hostility makes the unthinkable possible. 

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.  

His new book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”

http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html

Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.