Posted on 08/11/2016 6:21:43 AM PDT by Kaslin
Because the Republicans have decided to nominate a misinformed, unqualified, and unstable candidate it is now virtually guaranteed that Hillary Clinton will be our next president. Our efforts now are not to be directed toward getting Trump in office based on some pipe dream that he will somehow save the Supreme Court. Our efforts need to be focused on keeping a Republican House and Senate. The reason is simple: We have a case for impeaching Hillary Clinton beginning in January of 2017.
Clinton is guilty of more serious crimes than those of her husband prior to his impeachment. Next year she will have been placed in office by accepting a series of bribes – some of which have been funneled through her private “charitable” foundation and illegally used to fund her campaign for the presidency. If that is not an impeachable offense then no offense is impeachable.
None of this should come as a surprise. The Clintons began accepting bribes from corporations long before Bill even got out of office. In May of 1999, bankruptcy attorney William Brandt gave $1 million to the Clinton Presidential Library. Three months later, the Clinton Justice Department dropped charges against him for lying under oath about illegal lobbying of federal officials. The same year Anheuser-Busch kicked in $1 million after the Clinton administration dropped a bid to regulate beer advertisements aimed at minors.
It only got worse the following year when Denise Rich paid three bribes to the Clintons in exchange for the pardon of her husband Marc Rich. One bribe was $100,000 to Hillary’s 2000 Senate campaign. Another was $450,000 to the Clinton presidential library. A final bribe was for $1 million to the Democratic Party. Rich was pardoned on Clinton’s last day in office.
Things have only gotten worse since Hillary became the Secretary of State. The Clinton Foundation has been collecting money from foreign-owned businesses without getting approval from the Obama administration. The foundation has also failed to disclose millions of dollars of gifts (bribes) from foreign entities seeking Hillary’s help to approve of transactions with serious national security implications.
Speaking of serious national security implications, it is interesting to observe the change in policy toward India since Bill left office in 2001. India had never signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and was hit with sanctions for refusing to do so. India attempted to have those sanctions lifted by having Indian entities with a direct financial interest in lifting the sanctions pay Bill Clinton large speaking fees. Indians who could legally do so also made donations to Hillary’s senate and presidential campaigns. Additionally, millions were poured directly into the Clinton Foundation. After the bribes were deposited, Bill and Hillary went to work lifting the sanctions that Bill had imposed as president.
The activities of the Clinton Foundation deserve heightened scrutiny because foreign governments cannot contribute to American political campaigns. But they can donate to a “charity” like the foundation. They are also allowed to pay exorbitant fees for speeches. Americans of all political persuasions should be troubled by the fact that corporations benefiting from State Department actions while Hillary was Secretary of State have funded Clinton speeches. Notably, affiliates of companies funding Clinton speeches have been the direct recipients of tens of millions of taxpayer dollars. Predictably, the Clintons never disclosed any of the obvious conflicts of interests.
After the initial years following Bill Clinton’s presidency, his income from speeches started to dwindle. Then, when Hillary became Secretary of State in 2009 his high-paying overseas speeches suddenly started to increase in frequency. Of the thirteen speeches Bill Clinton has given for over half a million dollars, eleven occurred when his wife was Secretary of State.
Nigeria, which is one of the most corrupt nations on the planet, has been one of the biggest moneymakers for Bill Clinton. In his first eight years out of office, Bill never spoke in Nigeria. After Hillary became Secretary of State, Bill pulled in two of his top three speeches ever ($700,000 each) speaking in Nigeria.
Despite its record of corruption, Hillary granted Nigeria a waiver so it could continue to receive US assistance. This is despite the fact that in 2006 $1 million from a poverty alleviation fund was funneled into an organization run by Nduka Obaigbena in order to bring Beyonce to Nigeria. Obaigbena is also the alleged underwriter of Bill Clinton’s $700,000 speeches.
Clinton benefactor Gilbert Chagoury has been implicated in numerous bribery and corruption schemes in Nigeria. He has built a financial empire with the help of Sani Abacha, a Nigerian dictator whose time in office was known for brutality, bribery, and corruption. Abacha is also tied to Mark Rich who helped obtain oil assets in Nigeria and sell them for the benefit of General Abacha. During the same time frame, Abacha funneled hundreds of millions of dollars in foreign assistance into European bank accounts.
Chagoury also funneled money into the 1996 Clinton reelection campaign and to the Democratic National Committee. He donated nearly half a million dollars to a voter registration group tied to the DNC. Even the Washington Post had the good sense to recognize that it was done to curry favor with the Clinton administration on behalf of the Abacha dictatorship.
In 2000, Chagoury was convicted in Switzerland of money laundering and of “aiding a criminal organization in connection with billions of dollars stolen from Nigeria.” Since his conviction he has donated millions to the Clinton Foundation. In 2009, after Hillary became Secretary of State, he pledged a whopping billion dollars to the Clintons.
In December of 2009, Hillary Clinton gave a speech as a part of “International Anti-Corruption Day,” in which she praised the work of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) in combatting bribery. In fact, she would go on to chair the group two years later. This is the same woman who began her political career with a controversy over turning a $1000 investment in cattle futures into $100,000. Throughout her career, the biggest payments into her coffers have not come from countries like England and Germany. They have flowed from nations rife with corruption and bribery.
Nonetheless, in 2012 Hillary stated that fighting corruption is an “integral part of national security” adding that “our credibility depends on practicing what we preach.” She even said that bribery is “morally wrong – and far too common.”
Indeed. Screwing your country with bribes is far more serious than screwing your intern with cigars. Let the proceedings begin.
Author’s Note: The main source for this column was "Clinton Cash" by Peter Schweizer.
The reason why I chose to hang my fortunes upon Donald Trump was because I recognized him as the ultimate game-changer. He is exactly the leader we need at this moment in time. No other pubbie would suffice and truly no dhimmicrat is capable of the sort of leadership we require.
Dr. Scott outlines a framework approach that is predicated upon our failure. Why would we even want to accept such a premise? Even at that, our fellow FReepers demonstrate that they have a better grasp of the obvious than Dr. Scott if he thinks that anyone will gain any (read: zero) traction in any impeachment proceedings.
It.Won’t.Happen.
No, I’m all-in on winning. Don’t take your eyes off the prize!
Two Clinton presidencies and two impeachments. Could be if we had a decent speaker instead of Ryan.
Yeah, I don’t understand why it was necessary for him to bash Trump to make his point about HIllary. I get it. Some folks don’t like Trump’s brash personality and think he’s unqualified, but seriously, could he possibly do worse than Clinton-Bush-Obama-Clinton? The answer to that, btw, is a resounding, “NO!”
Is he talking about the US Congress led by Mitch "0bama's Bitch" McConnell and big boy Paul Ryno taking action???
Where has it been the last 7+ years???
No one, especially if we don’t keep the Senate and most importantly to 67 or at least 60 Senate votes. We must also keep the House and preferable increase our majority there. Without it Hillary Rotten Clinton will not be impeached and Donald Trump won’t be able to keep his promises.
Adams is delusional on this one; he really ought to stop watching TV and listening to the Establishment “pundits”....and Trump may surprise him by winning.
So, lose the Super Bowl but hope to get them next time??? Look, I am not thrilled with Trump but he did great with the Pence pick and his speeches lately are a lot better. If we lose, we don’t come back from this. Obama could have been much worse but he lacked drive. He just signed what was in front of him and read what was on the TelePrompTer. She won’t rest until she has destroyed us. Sure, she looks to be in bad health but she will get more down in a day then he got done Ina year
I couldn’t get past the second sentence. Too much Chicken Little BS.
Me neither!!! I’m a VOTER and I know Trump is not stupid nor unqualified and I refuse to be insulted:-)
This op-ed by Dr Adams requires careful reading and he is exactly right
So, you agree with the author's opening statement?
Boy you’re a real dick aint you:-)
Pipe dream?
Exactly. Throw a little child tantrum since “the republicans wahh wahh wahh”.
Election isn’t for 3 months.
Trump could easily destroy Clinton in that time.
really, foolish pipe dream
'Woo woo woo"
What the hell, Kaslin.
You working for the other side now?
Adams isn’t “RIGHT”. He’s full of horse sh!t, and his defeatist attitude is poison.
Go throw it on Salon or some other lefty site.
The point Dr Adams is making that we must not just concentrate on the presidential election but also on the congressional elections. If we lose the House you can bet the rats will not impeach Hillary Rotten Clinton should she be elected and the republican Senate will not remove her unless they will increase their seats from the current 54 seats to at least 60 seats if not more. Notice 2/3 votes are needed for a removal of her should she be impeached
Why do you call him “Dr”? He has a phd in sociology.
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.