Replies

THE SIX MONTH LATE BLIND TRUST
One of the requirements imposed on the Presidency is that the personal wealth of the first family be placed in a blind trust for the term of office.

The reasons for this step should be obvious. The first family, with access to inside information, is in a position to personally profit from that information. There's a name for that. It's called "insider trading" and its a crime.

The reason that the trust is "blind", with the first family unaware of just exactly how their funds are invested, is to prevent awareness of personal welfare from influencing matters of National Policy.

Since its inception, each President has had the blind trust completed and in the hands of a trustee at inauguration time., as required.

With one exception.

The trust declarations for Bill Clinton's assets were not delivered to the trustee's office on Inauguration Day. Or the day after. Or the day after that, or the next week, or the week after that, or the next month, or the month after that!

On July 20th, 1993, six months to the day after Bill Clinton vowed to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution, the trust declarations still languished, unfinished, on the desk of the man tasked to complete them, White House Deputy Council Vincent W. Foster.

It is a minor but salient point that the blind trust is considered the President's personal business, to be completed with his own lawyer prior to assuming office. As Vincent Foster was part of the White House staff, and paid for by the taxpayer, it was inappropriate for him to be working on Clinton's personal business. Admittedly a technical matter, but germaine.

But, appropriate or not, Foster had the job of completing the six month late trust declarations.

What is a trust declaration? A trust declaration is a list. A list of assets. A house. A condo. These bank accounts. Those stocks. The Clintons do not claim to be exceptionally wealthy compared to other presidents. Indeed, the Clinton's public posture is of relative poverty. Why then would a simple listing of their assets drag on for six months?

Vincent Foster, the man tasked with making up that list of assets and submitting them, delayed completion for 6 months. Why?

There is only one way that a list of assets can have a problem, and that's if the list is incomplete, or fraudulent. As the preparer, had Vincent Foster submitted trust declarations he knew to be incomplete or fraudulent, he would face criminal prosecution were the fraud uncovered.

That the trust does not include all the Clinton assets was revealed by Carolyn Huber's testimony regarding a file cabinet in the private residence with (among other items) paperwork on the Clinton's "condo", an asset which should be under the care of the trustees.

What assets would not be in the trust, and why?

Assets whoes origins don't bear close scrutiny, for one. With recent revelations of highly questionable donations from Lippo Group, money laundering through a California Buhddist Temple, and four dead 1992 Clinton Campaign fundraisers, the reports of cash flowing from the CIA's gun and drug operation at Mena airport gain credability. It's certain that such tainted assets would not look good on the trust declarations. That Clinton took cash from at least two drug criminals is now proven fact.

The Clintons, in particular Hillary, have a prior history of highly questionable stock and commodities trading practices, of which "Cattle-gate" is the most famous. A lesser well known fact is that during the abortive health care reform, Hillary Clinton made a small profit by short-selling pharmaceutical stocks. That's insider trading, its illegal, and its the very activity the blind trust (still incomplete at the time) was intended to prevent.

Knowing that the trust is fraudlent, and knowing that Foster was in a position to know of the fraud, his obvious reluctance to complete the declarations becomes understandable. Were the fraud ever revealed, Foster himself would face jailtime. Resignation would be preferable.

That Foster's resignation would have been a problem is clear. It would have brought even more attention to the already late blind trust and what it contained, or to be more accurate, what it didn't contain.

In the days before Foster's murder, both Webster Hubbell and Marsha Scott had long private meetings with Vincent Foster. Marsha admitted to the press that Vincent was struggling with a decision. What that decision was is never explained, as her entire FBI interview was redacted on the grounds of "National Security".

Had Foster resigned, and the trust declarations been submitted anyway on the paperwork he had worked on, the same self-preservation that led him to resign would have forced him to speak out.

Had that happened, and an investigation into the blind trust resulted, the money trail through the Clintons to ADFA, and back to Mena, would have been laid bare.

But what actually occured is that on the day before his scheduled meeting with Bill Clinton, Vincent Foster's body was found in Fort Marcy Park.

The official explanation is that Foster inserted a .38 revolver into his mouth and pulled the trigger, without getting any of his fingerprints or his blood on the gun, or bullet fragments or powder from that gun in his wounds. A dubious claim, to say the least.

Three days after Vincent Foster's murder, the much delayed trust declarations were delivered to the trustee's office. The paperwork carried Vincent Foster's signature. Whoever completed those papers remains a mystery, but one thing is clear. The paperwork and records for the blind trust had to have been among the boxes of records looted from Vincent's office prior to its being sealed by the investigating officers.

That proves that the blind trust documents were of paramount importance to whoever directed the looting of Vincent Foster's office!

Which connects it to the murder.