Category: Corruption

‘Too Valuable’

Posted on Comments

Eric Schneiderman (right) poses with other sleazy Democrats.

Another “progressive” Democrat is exposed as a vile scumbag:

New York State attorney general Eric Schneiderman has resigned, just hours after it was reported that he had been accused of violent assaults on women he had dated. These allegations, which include threats that Schneiderman made to stalk and kill the women if they told on him, came as a shock — except to anyone who has followed his career in politics. Schneiderman’s louche ethics have been well known. You didn’t need an “in” at Albany watering holes; just reading the newspapers would have told you plenty.
In 2010, when Schneiderman first ran for statewide office, he was involved in a hit-and-run accident. Then a state senator, he claimed to have been a passenger in his own car when his 22-year-old staffer Rachel Kagan — niece of Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan — smashed into a parked car and drove away, after causing $3,000 worth of damage. A passerby witnessed the crash and wrote down Schneiderman’s license plate. Schneiderman later told the owner of the parked car that he “disciplined the staffer,” and offered to pay for the damage, though his office insisted that it was “outrageous” to call the incident a hit-and-run.
Schneiderman later had a brush with trouble regarding his close relations with prominent Hasidic businessman Moshe Stern, the federal government’s chief informant in a major 2013 corruption case involving former state senate president Malcolm Smith. . . .
In 2014, when Schneiderman ran for reelection, Randy Credico, a comedian and New York City gadfly who perennially runs for local office on the issue of drug legalization, alleged that he had sniffed cocaine with Schneiderman, then a state senator, in the back of a bar. Schneiderman denied it, admitting to having used marijuana and cocaine up until 1998, but Credico insisted that Schneiderman was doing “bumps” of white powder with him and a group of others. Given the reports from women he dated and beat that Schneiderman was a raging alcoholic who would routinely bring a bottle of scotch to bed, Credico’s story sounds more credible.
Plenty of hints existed, then, that Schneiderman’s public image was not the whole story. And there were rumors about his private life, too, as suggested by President Trump’s 2013 tweet, “Weiner is gone, Spitzer is gone—next will be lightweight A.G. Eric Schneiderman. Is he a crook? Wait and see, worse than Spitzer or Weiner.”
But Schneiderman was such an exemplar of a progressive-activist hero — suing Exxon, working in concert with Robert Mueller to obtain pardon-proof convictions against Trump associates, speaking at the Women’s March — that people who probably knew better looked away from evidence of his wrongdoing. Even the closest friends of one of Schneiderman’s victims encouraged her not to speak out, “arguing that Schneiderman was too valuable a politician for the Democrats to lose.”

(Hat-tip: Instapundit on Twitter.)

 

McCabe Targeted Sessions in ‘Coup’ Conspiracy by Obama-Era DOJ Officials

Posted on

 

Fired FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe launched an investigation against Attorney General Jeff Sessions last year as part of a “coup” organized by Obama-era holdovers in the Department of Justice.

“We already know Andrew McCabe was one of the primary conspirators in the plot to illegally spy on, manufacture evidence against, and then impeach a duly elected president using Illegitimate criminally obtained FISA warrants as pseudo legal cover,” according to an analysis of the revelation that McCabe targeted Sessions in a “covertly launched a criminal case.” By taking out Sessions, the analyst alleges, McCabe hoped to replace the attorney general with fellow conspirator Sally Yates, who was acting attorney general before Trump fired her in January 2017.

In a 35-message analysis on Twitter, @NameRedacted7 explains that McCabe — along with former FBI director James Comey, rogue FBI agents Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, former associate deputy attorney general Bruce Ohr, former assistant attorney general Peter Kadzik, and other Democrats in the Justice Department — were complicit in “spying on Team Trump” through illegally obtained FISA warrants. (“8 top DOJ and FBI officials under a cloud over roles in Clinton, Trump investigations.”) The conspirators then launched an effort to “frame” Sessions, which was part of a “staggering” attempt to “decapitate” the executive branch in “show trials,” according to @NameRedacted7.

McCabe was accused of mishandling the investigation of Hillary Clinton for her use of a illegal private email server to conduct official State Department business. “McCabe opened his politically motivated case” against Sessions in response to a letter from Democrat Sens. Patrick Leahy and Al Franken, who had attempted during confirmation hearings “to falsely paint [Sessions] as a Russian agent,” the analysis notes.

DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s investigation is likely to lead to the prosecution of McCabe and perhaps others, the analysis suggests. It has been reported that Horowitz will accuse McCabe of improper leaking to the press and deliberately misleading investigators.

The connection between McCabe and the phony “Russiagate” smear against Sessions shows how Democrat Party loyalists in the Justice Department used what Page and Strzok called an “insurance policy” in their attempt to sabotage the Trump administration.



 

No, Russia’s ‘Rinky-Dink Troll Operation’ Did Not Change the 2016 Election Result

Posted on

The simple fact behind last week’s indictment of 13 employees of a Russian outfit is that, if this is the sinister “collusion” that the liberal media have been warning us about, there’s no way such a miniscule effort could have cheated Hillary Clinton out of the presidency.

Ace calls it a “rinky-dink troll operation” and Da Tech Guy asks, “Where’s the beef?” Honestly, it’s laughable. Adrian Chen, the reporter who first called attention to the Russian firm behind the online effort, dismisses it as “ineffective” and derides as “paranoia” the fear-mongering portrayal of the operation as an “immense propaganda machine.” Rick Moran reminds us that “the total expenditure from both parties (campaigns, SuperPACs, etc) in 2016 was well over $2 billion dollars,” so that a handful of Twitter and Facebook accounts could not have made a significant impact. We must therefore ask, why have the media and the Democrats spent more than a year shrieking about the alleged “collusion” (of which we have seen exactly zero evidence so far) between Russia and the Trump campaign? Daniel Flynn has some thoughts:

An administration siccing the surveillance state on the opposition party’s presidential candidate based on dubious reports compiled by the favored presidential candidate’s campaign ranks as a terribly reckless strategy risking the future freedom of its architects for their future power, no?
“Not if you think you will win the election and no one will ever find out,” an animated Joseph diGenova tells The American Spectator. “That’s why they did it. They thought she would win and no one would ever find out.”
Alas, Hillary Clinton did not, as so many expected, win the presidency. So, the incoming administration, investigated by dubious means, got to see what the Clinton campaign, the Democratic National Committee, and various Justice Department officials believed it would never see. . . .
Specifically, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence memo’s finding that the Justice Department knew that the information justifying its application for a FISA warrant to obtain electronic surveillance came from a Hillary Clinton campaign opposition research operation, i.e., Christopher Steele’s “dossier,” yet withheld that information, possibly constitutes a legal problem for James Comey, Andrew McCabe, and others involved in applications to the court. Beyond this, reports that the Justice Department relied on a second dossier compiled by Cody Shearer, a political hatchet man without the pretense of credibility that Steele, a longtime British intelligence agent, provided for his “dossier,” further complicates legal matters for government employees involved in what increasingly looks like partisan work done on the federal government’s dime.

Now, hold that thought — the Obama administration illegally obtaining warrants to spy on Trump’s campaign, based on bogus information provided by Fusion GPS and Cody Shearer — while you consider this: In March 2017, Professor Glenn Reynolds intuited exactly why Democrats started pushing the “collusion” narrative after the election:

The spying-on-Trump thing is worse than we even imagine, and once it was clear Hillary had lost and it would inevitably come out, the Trump/Russia collusion talking point was created as a distraction.

What this means, of course, is that President Trump is absolutely right in calling the media’s “collusion” narrative “fake news.” But what it also means is that the Mueller investigation is actually part of an ongoing attempt to cover-up wrongdoing by the Obama administration!



 

Hiroshima for the DNC: @DonnaBrazile Devastates Democrat Corruption

Posted on Comments

 

Democrats don’t just deceive, cheat and swindle the voters and taxpayers, they also deceive, cheat and swindle each other:

My predecessor [as chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee], Florida Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, had not been the most active chair in fundraising at a time when President Barack Obama’s neglect had left the party in significant debt. As Hillary’s campaign gained momentum, she resolved the party’s debt and put it on a starvation diet. It had become dependent on her campaign for survival, for which she expected to wield control of its operations.
Debbie was not a good manager. She hadn’t been very interested in controlling the party — she let Clinton’s headquarters in Brooklyn do as it desired so she didn’t have to inform the party officers how bad the situation was. . . .
The Saturday morning after the convention in July, I called Gary Gensler, the chief financial officer of Hillary’s campaign. He wasted no words. He told me the Democratic Party was broke and $2 million in debt. . . .
Officials from Hillary’s campaign had taken a look at the DNC’s books. Obama left the party $24 million in debt — $15 million in bank debt and more than $8 million owed to vendors after the 2012 campaign — and had been paying that off very slowly. Obama’s campaign was not scheduled to pay it off until 2016. Hillary for America (the campaign) and the Hillary Victory Fund (its joint fundraising vehicle with the DNC) had taken care of 80 percent of the remaining debt in 2016, about $10 million, and had placed the party on an allowance. . . .

There’s a lot more where that came from. This is devastating beyond words. Everybody’s talking about how Brazile has confirmed the suspicion of Bernie Sanders that the Democrat primary process was basically rigged for Hillary, but the larger revelations are even worse:

  1. Democrats have been squandering their donors’ money in much the same way they routinely squander taxpayers’ money;
  2. The triumph of Obama’s two-term presidency, which should have yielded a fund-raising windfall for the DNC, instead left the party more than $20 million in debt;
    and
  3. The DNC’s indebtedness was exploited by the Clinton campaign to defraud Democrat primary voters.

It was this perception of a rigged nomination process that made Trump’s “Crooked Hillary” charge resonate with working-class voters in states like Pennsylvania and Michigan. And so the corruption of the Democrat Party — profligate spending, irresponsible management and insider favoritism at DNC headquarters — was a major cause of their devastating defeat last year. These revelations confirm the suspicions that a lot of grassroots Democrats have had all along, and will make the party’s recovery a very difficult prospect. If an appealing left-wing third-party candidate emerges before 2020, that might be R.I.P. for Democrats.



 

SHOCKING: TRUMP SURGES IN POLL; HILLARY DOOMED BY F.B.I. PROBE?

Posted on Comments

 

Bad news today for “Crooked Hillary”:

Donald Trump has surged to within 1 point of Hillary Clinton in a national poll released Sunday morning.
Clinton leads Trump, 46 to 45 percent, in a four-way race including Libertarian nominee Gary Johnson and the Green Party’s Jill Stein in the latest ABC News/Washington Post tracking poll. Johnson has 4 percent support while Stein has 2 percent.
Clinton led Trump by 12 points in that poll, 50 to 38 percent, early last week.

(Hat-tip: Steve Bartin at News Alert.) The headline stack this morning at the Drudge Report looks very bad for the Democrat:

HILLARY AT WAR WITH FBI…
Attack Strategy Has Risks…
PAPER: Dems should ask her to step aside…
LYNCH MOVED TO SPIKE COMEY…
HUMALIATED: Clinton aide doesn’t know how emails ended up on computer…
WEINER’S TALE OF SELF-DESTRUCTION…
GOODWIN: HILLARY ONLY HAS HERSELF TO BLAME…
Huma Swore Under Oath She Gave Up ‘All Devices’…
Vowed she was not retaining copies of emails…

Readers will recall — and perhaps never forgive — that I pronounced the election over three weeks ago. There was no way, I concluded, that Donald Trump could win after the sudden torrent of revelations about his past sexual misbehavior. What I did not consider, however, was that no matter how much damage Trump suffered, Hillary might still lose, simply because of the sordid doings (and sordid people) of Team Clinton:

In the summer of 2013, Hillary Clinton had just left the State Department and returned to New York. She planned a quiet year, basking in sky-high approval ratings and enjoying a respite from the media spotlight as she laid the groundwork for a second presidential run.
Then Carlos Danger happened.
Anthony D. Weiner, the husband of Mrs. Clinton’s closest aide, Huma Abedin, was running for mayor of New York when news broke that he had continued to exchange lewd messages with women online after the practice cost him his congressional seat. This time, he used the embarrassing Spanish-inspired moniker.
The tawdry story line and Ms. Abedin’s closeness to Mrs. Clinton made the events explode far beyond New York, dragging Mrs. Clinton’s name into messy headlines about penis pictures, Mr. Weiner’s descriptions of his sexual appetites and his online paramour named Sydney Leathers.
Now, with Mrs. Clinton seemingly on the cusp of winning the White House, Mr. Weiner, who once described himself as “a perpetually horny middle-aged man,” has pulled her into another drama. Federal investigators looking into his sexual messaging with an underage girl stumbled upon thousands of emails potentially pertinent to the F.B.I. inquiry into Mrs. Clinton’s private email server.

Yeah, creepy sex and lying under oath — this is the Democrat Party that everyone over 30 remembers so well from the 1990s, when Hillary’s husband was the Perpetrator-in-Chief. Millennials who did not live through that era, or who were mere toddlers when Bill Clinton wagged his finger in America’s face and said he did not have sex with “that woman, Ms. Lewinsky,” might want to catch up on the history of deceit and corruption that is likely to repeat itself if Hillary is elected.

 

Thug Squad: O’Keefe Video Exposes Democrats Using Chicago Tactics

Posted on Comments

Robert Creamer, a Democrat operative and husband of Illinois Rep. Jan Schakowsky, has visited the White House more than 300 times since President Obama took office. Creamer announced Tuesday his is “stepping back from my responsibilities working with the [Hillary Clinton] campaign” after he was caught on video discussing how Democrats “hired people to attend Donald Trump’s campaign rallies and incite violence.”

Video by James O’Keefe produced further revelations:

An activist who bragged about disrupting multiple Donald Trump campaign events in a recent Project Veritas video was on Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton’s campaign payroll, a search of Federal Election Commission (FEC) records reveals.
In a Veritas video released Monday, filmmaker and provocateur James O’Keefe recounts meeting activist Zulema Rodriguez at the Republican National Convention in Cleveland. In the video, Rodriguez takes credit for violent protests in Chicago that forced Trump to cancel a March rally. . . .
Rodriguez also takes credit for an Arizona protest, also in March, that shut down a major highway outside a Trump event.
Notably, a search of FEC records reveals that Rodriguez was paid by the Clinton campaign shortly before she disrupted the Chicago rally. The campaign paid her $1,610.34 as a “payroll” expense, and also gave her a $30 payment that is described only as “phone.”

(Via Memeorandum.) More at Red State, The Washington Times, IJR, Townhall, Pamela Geller, and Gateway Pundit.

 

Report: Hillary Clinton Is Funding Her Campaign by Stealing From the Poor

Posted on Comments

 

Your latest “Crooked Hillary” update:

Hillary Clinton’s campaign is stealing from her poorest supporters by purposefully and repeatedly overcharging them after they make what’s supposed to be a one-time small donation through her official campaign website, multiple sources tell the Observer.
The overcharges are occurring so often that the fraud department at one of the nation’s biggest banks receives up to 100 phone calls a day from Clinton’s small donors asking for refunds for unauthorized charges to their bankcards made by Clinton’s campaign. One elderly Clinton donor, who has been a victim of this fraud scheme, has filed a complaint with her state’s attorney general and a representative from the office told her that they had forwarded her case to the Federal Election Commission.
“We get up to a hundred calls a day from Hillary’s low-income supporters complaining about multiple unauthorized charges,” a source, who asked to remain anonymous for fear of job security, from the Wells Fargo fraud department told the Observer. The source claims that the Clinton campaign has been pulling this stunt since Spring of this year. The Hillary for America campaign will overcharge small donors by repeatedly charging small amounts such as $20 to the bankcards of donors who made a one-time donation. . . .
“We don’t investigate fraudulent charges unless they are over $100,” the fraud specialist explained. “The Clinton campaign knows this, that’s why we don’t see any charges over the $100 amount, they’ll stop the charges just below $100. We’ll see her campaign overcharge donors by $20, $40 or $60 but never more than $100.”

Is anyone surprised that Hillary’s poll numbers are collapsing?

(Via Memeorandum.)

 

Evidence Shows Hillary Clinton Is Corrupt

Posted on Comments

 

Today’s headlines via Memeorandum:

Emails Raise New Questions
About Clinton Foundation Ties to State Dept.
— Eric Lichtblau, New York Times

NYT: State gave Foundation donor
access to Hillary in exchange for
a private jet ride for Bill
— Ed Morrissey, Hot Air

Top Hillary Clinton Aide Accepted
Request From Foundation Official
for Diplomatic Passport
— Natalie Johnson, Free Beacon

New Batch of Hillary Clinton Emails Show
Blurred Lines With Foundation Contacts
— Byron Tau and Peter Nicholas, Wall Street Journal

Haven’t we seen enough evidence, ladies and gentlemen? Is there any room for reasonable doubt as to Hillary Clinton’s corruption?

These emails do not merely “raise new questions,” but rather provide new answers — conclusive proof that the Clinton Foundation raised money by providing donors with influence at the State Department.

UPDATE: Welcome, Instapundit readers! The good news is, (a) Hillary’s poll numbers are slipping again, and (b) Democrats are beginning to worry about her strategy. Let the panic begin!