Connect with us

Politics

PRISON TIME: Loretta Lynch’s Emails Prove What Was Intentionally Hidden Before Trump Won Election

‘Lynch issued a statement saying…’

Published

on

Earlier today ABC News was handed a rough draft of a report that reveals that the disgraced former FBI Director James Comey went rogue and actively defied authority while he was at the FBI. And to make matters even worse for the Obama Administration that wasn’t the only leak today. A second leak also confirmed that Obama’s Attorney General Loretta “Airport Tarmac” Lynch also wanted to hide the Hillary Clinton crimes by hiding the emails found on Anthony “Carlos Danger” Weiner’s laptop before the 2016 election so Hillary could win.

ABC News reported:

Trending: First Video of Latest Trump Star Vandal Swinging Pickaxe Shows What Happened – Spread Like Wildfire

“The draft of Horowitz’s wide-ranging report specifically called out Comey for ignoring objections from the Justice Department when he disclosed in a letter to Congress just days before the 2016 presidential election that FBI agents had reopened the Clinton probe, according to sources. Clinton has said that letter doomed her campaign.

Before Comey sent the letter to Congress, at least one senior Justice Department official told the FBI that publicizing the bombshell move so close to an election would violate longstanding department policy, and it would ignore federal guidelines prohibiting the disclosure of information related to an ongoing investigation, ABC News was told.

In an interview in April, ABC News Chief Anchor George Stephanopoulos asked Comey: “If Attorney General Lynch had ordered you not to send the letter, would you have sent it?”

“No,” Comey responded. “I believe in the chain of command.”

But in backing Trump’s ultimate decision to fire Comey last year, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein slammed Comey’s letter to Congress and said it “was wrong” for Comey “to usurp the Attorney General’s authority” when he announced in July 2016 that the FBI would not be filing charges against Clinton or her aides.

“It is not the function of the Director to make such an announcement,” Rosenstein said in a letter to Trump recommending Comey be fired. “At most, the Director should have said the FBI had completed its investigation and presented its findings to federal prosecutors.”

Horowitz’s draft report cited Comey for failing to consult with Lynch and other senior Justice Department officials before making his announcement on national TV. While saying there was no “clear evidence” that Clinton “intended to violate” the law, Comey insisted the former secretary of state was “extremely careless” in her “handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.”

“I have not coordinated or reviewed this statement in any way with the Department of Justice or any other part of the government. They do not know what I am about to say,” Comey said before cameras on July 5, 2016.

By then, Lynch had taken the unusual step of publicly declaring she would accept the FBI’s recommendations in the case, after an impromptu meeting with former president Bill Clinton sparked questions about her impartiality.

Comey has defended his decisions as director, insisting he was trying to protect the FBI from even further criticism and “didn’t see that I had a choice.”

“The honest answer is I screwed up a couple of things, but … I think given what I knew at the time, these were the decisions that were best calculated to preserve the values of the institutions,” Comey told ABC News. “I still think it was the right thing to do.”

More than a year ago, as lawmakers increasingly voiced concern over how the FBI and Justice Department handled matters surrounding the 2016 election, the inspector general’s office announced that it had launched an investigation into an array of allegations, including an allegation “that Department or FBI policies or procedures were not followed in connection with, or in actions leading up to or related to, the FBI Director’s public announcement on July 5, 2016.”

A week before the announcement, while the investigation into Hillary Clinton was still underway, a political firestorm erupted in Washington after Lynch happened to run into Bill Clinton in Arizona and briefly met with him inside a plane sitting on a tarmac there. Days later, with questions swirling over whether Bill Clinton tried to improperly influence the investigation into his wife, Lynch haphazardly announced that she would not recuse herself from the matter but would “fully expect to accept” whatever recommendation the FBI made.

Comey later called it a “tortured half-out, half-in approach.” And after such a “strange” announcement, “I decided I have to step away from her and show the American people the FBI’s work separately,” Comey told ABC News.

The inspector general’s office seemed to similarly view Lynch’s announcement as strange, with the draft report criticizing her for how she handled the impromptu tarmac meeting and its aftermath, according to sources familiar with the findings.

In April, when Comey was promoting his new book “A Higher Loyalty,” Lynch issued a statement saying that during the Clinton email investigation she “trusted” the “non-partisan career prosecutors” handling the case “to assess the facts and make a recommendation — one that I ultimately accepted because I thought the evidence and law warranted it.”

It seems the mystery of the Arizona airport tarmac meeting between Lynch and former President Bill Clinton may now be coming to light. Although they both claimed that they met to discuss their “grandchildren,” there is still speculation of other reasons why they might have met.

What should happen next? What is your opinion of this? Write your answers below and share this with someone who would be interested!

Join the conversation

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.

News

Dem Candidate Pushing ‘Irresponsible Breeder’ Tax On Certain Parents Because Of ‘Privilege’

Published

on

Scott Wallace is a multimillionaire running in Pennsylvania’s 1st Congressional District against current incumbent Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (PA-R). Considered an elite, even amongst the wealthy, he boasts a net worth of between $127 million and $309 million, according to his financial disclosure statement. This would make him the third-richest member of Congress if he were elected to the House today.

From a hardline leftist pedigree, his grandfather was Henry Wallace, the “New Deal visionary” and one-time vice president under former President Franklin D. Roosevelt. His wealth is inherited, stemming from a seed company his grandfather founded that was purchased by DuPont for $10 billion in the 1990s, along with a large number of stocks with the largest being DowDuPont.

His campaign is largely self funded with Wallace claiming he is “putting a significant amount of my own assets into this because this is the most important thing I can imagine doing for America at this point in my life — this is a very expensive district to run in, but it is crucial in the Democrats’ efforts to retake the House.”

But just why this is so incredibly important to Wallace goes beyond the typical party lines of Republican and Democrat. Receiving endorsements from both Planned Parenthood and the National Organization for Women (NOW), Wallace is a population control zealot who believes families who choose to have more than two children are “irresponsible breeders” and should be taxed. Wallace has donated nearly $7 million dollars to various population control groups over the past 20 years, with the majority going through his own Wallace Global Fund.  In addition to its efforts towards population control, the foundation has also reportedly donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to anti-Israel groups that support a boycott of the Jewish State.

Fox News reports:

“Zero Population Growth (ZPG) was among the organizations that received the money from the fund. According to public records, it received $420,000 between 1997 and 2003.

The group, shortly after being founded in 1968, released a brochure advocating abortion to stabilize population growth and claimed that “no responsible family should have more than two children.” To deal with larger families, it also called for families to be “taxed to the hilt” for “irresponsible breeding.”

It also blamed the overpopulation on the ‘white middle-class’ that ‘use up more than their share of resources and do more than their share of polluting‘ and urged them to ‘voluntarily limit their families to two children.’

Paul Ehrlich, who co-founded the ZPG, once called abortion “a highly effective weapon in the armory of population control.” The goal of the organization, which changed its name to Population Connection in 2002, has remained the same since its inception, arguing that the world needs to contain population growth with particular emphasis on American families.

The organization’s political arm, Population Connection Action Fund, publicly endorsed Wallace for Congress, saying his support for their cause is “exactly the kind of dedication we need in Congress.”

Wallace’s fund also gave $20,000 in 2010 to the Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy (CASSE), a group that sees the economic growth as undesirable and instead supports an economy with ‘stable or mildly fluctuating levels’ and a society where birth rates equal death rates.

The organization openly supports zero population growth and its executive board member, Herman Daly, advocated issuing reproduction licenses, allowing women to have only two children unless they buy the license for more children from other women. Daly called it the ‘best plan yet offered’ to limit population growth.”

The group advocates strongly for abortion and along with taxing families “to the hilt” for having more than two children, as noted in a Yale Law School publication about the “voices that shaped the abortion debate before the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court’s ruling.”

The group advocates that –

  1. That no responsible family should have more than two children. Any family wanting to care for more than two children should adopt further children. Adopting children does not increase the population.
  2. All methods of birth control, including legalized abortion, should be freely available—and at no cost in poverty cases.
  3. Irresponsible people who have more than two children should be taxed to the hilt for the privilege of irresponsible breeding.

Fox News continued:

Zoe Wilson-Meyer, communications director for Wallace’s campaign, didn’t answer Fox News’ questions on whether Wallace still supports the ideas expressed by the groups.

“The Wallace Global Fund has for decades been a leader in helping women gain access to family planning. Former Co-Chair Scott Wallace is proud of the work of grantees like Planned Parenthood in empowering women and protecting reproductive rights and will stand up for Pennsylvania women,” she said in an email.

“In Washington, Brian Fitzpatrick voted to defund Planned Parenthood and supports Donald Trump’s effort to take away a woman’s right to choose,” she added.

Largely reminiscent of Nazi Germany who exercised eugenics to its full and most horrific potential, this policy of so-called “irresponsible breeders” also resembles the one-child policy from China that saw forced abortions or other forced invasive birth control procedures. Yet eugenics practices had their roots in America as well. American newspapers frequently offered praise for eugenics just prior to WWII and The Holocaust …. that is until Adolf Hitler revealed the true horrors of what eugenics really looked like. They avoided the subject for decades thereafter.

Nine out of ten eugenicists in the 20th Century were also Progressives or Socialists, and the most central component to the eugenic creed is the desire to engineer and centrally plan human reproduction, weeding out the unwanted or undesirable, according to a report on eugenics by PBS.

Yet where does that end? Who determines who is undesirable? Is it the unborn child conceived at an inconvenient time? The elderly mother? The child with cerebral palsy? Those with PTSD? Autism? Blue eyes? White skin? You cannot get to genocide without first visiting identity politics and they say the propagandist’s job is to effectively make the people forget his “enemy” is, in fact, a human being just as he is. It seems we never really do learn from history, do we?

Continue Reading

News

Elected Democrat Official Who Viciously Attacked Veteran Just Learned Her Fate

This heated exchange just got personal!

Published

on

Earlier this week it was reported that Patricia Edmonson, who is the vice chair of the Palm Beach Soil and Water Conservation District, has now had to resign after she came under fire for her vulgar comments on Facebook against a combat veteran over his support for President Donald Trump. The resignation came after the chairman of the Republican Party of Palm Beach County demanded Edmonson’s resignation over the comments.

Palm Beach Post reported:

“The vice chair of a little-known environmental panel resigned Wednesday after she came under fire for cursing at a U.S. Army veteran, calling him a traitor and speaking ill of fallen veterans in a Facebook chat earlier this month.

Patricia “Pat” Edmonson, who until Wednesday afternoon served on the Palm Beach Soil and Water Conservation District, and U.S. Army veteran James Plowman, who lives in North Carolina, didn’t know each other before they met in cyberspace through a discussion on Facebook on July 16.

But their conversation turned extremely ugly — and has gone viral.

The two sparred over a Facebook post by another user regarding President Donald Trump’s meeting with Vladimir Putin. After Plowman mentioned the years he spent in combat, Edmonson, wrote using an expletive, “—— you, traitor.”

Edmonson then launched into a vitriolic tirade of posts. “Do your dead brothers ever visit your dreams and ask you why you’ve turned your back on them?” she wrote. She also asked:“Do you smell the rotting flesh of those you’ve betrayed?”

Reached on Wednesday, Plowman said he isn’t concerned about being called a traitor. That’s comical to him, he said. But the comments she made about soldiers killed in battle “just can’t be forgiven,” Plowman said.

“That’s just something I’m not going to even look at forgiving. It’s just not a place she should have ever went,” he said.

The posts have not gone unnoticed and have circulated through Palm Beach County and beyond.

Michael Barnett, the chair of the Palm Beach County GOP, publicly called for Edmonson, a Democrat, to resign from the conservation district’s governing board. Rob Long, who sat on the board with Edmonson, also called for her resignation. Long said her seat will either be filled through an appointment or a special election.

On Plowman’s Facebook page, Edmonson wrote that she appreciated Plowman’s service to the country and apologized for “the inappropriate choice of language” by calling him a “traitor.”

“My words were spoken as a private citizen, not in any professional or public capacity and should be treated accordingly,” she wrote. She also added her role in the exchange wasn’t “her finest hour” and she “let my Trump hate get the best of me and said some truly hurtful things.”

In an email to The Post, Edmonson said: “Given the enormity of the reaction to my indefensible Facebook comments to CSM Plowman, I am submitting my resignation as Vice Chair of the PB Soil & Water Conservation District. It has been an honor to serve with my colleagues on the District and to serve the people of Palm Beach County. However, I cannot allow collateral damage from my actions to harm the District, its employees, or the outstanding work done by the District.”

I have personally apologized to CSM Plowman for my highly offensive remarks. I have no defense for the comments made to one person on a social media platform at a specific point in time. My comments have been globalized to assert that they represent my feelings towards veterans and the military; which they do not. My comments have been politicized by others to further their own agendas. Do my foolish and highly regrettable comments rise to the level of receiving death threats, does the punishment fit the crime? I will leave that question to wiser minds than mine. I made a terrible mistake; I apologized to the person I wronged.”

Edmonson was elected to the Palm Beach Soil and Water Conservation District in 2016 and won a new term in June when she ran again but unopposed.

The Palm Beach Soil & Water Conservation District, based in Royal Palm Beach, is a state government division. It does not have taxing authority, nor does it levy bonds or enforce land use laws. Its mission is to work with “local businesses and agencies to provide conservation services throughout Palm Beach County.” It’s governed by an elected, five-member board of supervisors that serve without pay.

The district addressed Edmonson’s comments on its Facebook page Tuesday saying views expressed by members of the governing board in “ABSOLUTELY NO WAY” reflect that of the rest of the board or the employees.

But the fallout continued.

A consulting company that lists Edmonson as an officer has received $39,000 from Jim Bonfiglio’s Democratic campaign for state House District 89, according to Florida Division of Elections reports. Bonfiglio took to Facebook on Tuesday to announce that his campaign has severed ties with Edmondson.

“Ms. Edmonson’s words do not reflect my views or the views of my campaign. She exhibited a severe lapse in judgment, to say the least. Although I count her as a friend, Pat is no longer associated with my campaign in any way,” he wrote.”

Edmonson had also been working on the campaign of Jim Bonfiglio, who is, of course, a Democratic candidate for the Florida House of Representatives, but he swiftly kicked her off his campaign.

Her vacant seat will now be filled through appointment or a special election.

Let’s be honest here. This woman may regret that she lost her temper and was caught. She let her true feelings out and because of this has possibly lost whatever career in politics she had aspired to have. But no need to worry, I am sure she can still salvage her political career by moving to Southern California and getting a job with Maxine Waters. I’m sure she would be considered a superstar there and would go far.

Continue Reading

Like Us on Facebook

Recent

Trending

No trending posts found at this time.