‘It Looks Like Bribery’: Mitt Romney Breaks Down Hillary’s Uranium Scandal

Appearing on radio host Hugh Hewitt’s program Thursday, 2012 Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney responded to growing criticism of Hillary Clinton and the financial dealings of the Clinton Foundation.

Romney cut to the chase, explaining that he was “stunned” by the accusations, adding that “it looks like bribery.”

He went on to highlight the most egregious examples of alleged wrongdoing, stating that “there is every appearance that Hillary Clinton was bribed to grease the sale of, what, 20 percent of America’s uranium production to Russia? And then it was covered up by lying about a meeting at her home with the principals – and by erasing emails.”

Such evasive action on her part, Romney explained, will make finding the truth all the more difficult.

“And you know,” he said, “I presume we might know for sure whether there was or was not bribery if she hadn’t wiped out thousands of emails.”

Furthermore, Romney countered the Clinton campaign’s assessment of mounting accusations as unsubstantiated.

“The story that came from the New York Times is pretty straightforward,” he said, “which is that millions upon millions of dollars were given to the Clinton Foundation at the same time by a group of people who had uranium assets; and shortly thereafter, these people came to the State Department for approval to be able to sell these assets to Russia for a huge price tag.”

If the donations and subsequent approval are determined to be connected, Romney assessed, “it’s a form of bribery.”

The scandal extends beyond a presidential campaign, he concluded.

“I mean this is a question about whether or not the United States secretary of state was bribed to grease the sale of strategic assets to Russia.”

Do you think Hillary Clinton is guilty of accepting bribes? Sound off in the comments section below.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

Could MSNBC Bite The Dust Because Of The Proposed Big-Money Mega-Merger That Just Collapsed?

With its ratings in a virtual death spiral and its position among cable news networks diminishing by the day, MSNBC could be facing a very bleak future, if not an outright existential crisis. That’s because its parent, Comcast, just pulled the plug on a proposed merger with Time Warner Cable. So says the digital managing editor for the Washington Free Beacon, Andrew Stiles, in his analysis of the proposed big-money media marriage that never made it to the altar.

In an editor’s blog entitled “MSNBC’s Future In Doubt After Failed Comcast Merger,” Stiles notes that “the network’s future was in doubt long before the merger fell apart.” However, now that the telecom giants have abandoned their expensive effort to grease the Washington skids to try to win official approval of their plan to combine forces, Comcast may be compelled to take a long, hard look at the viability of the far-left news net that viewers are abandoning in droves.

Politico reports that Time Warner Cable and Comcast — which not long ago bought a controlling interest in NBCUniversal from General Electric — pumped tens of millions of dollars, reportedly more than $32 million, into lobbying firms and other means of regulatory influence to persuade the powers that be to bless the $45 billion merger. It was, as Politico notes, a strategy that had worked in the past.

“Comcast and its Washington chief, David Cohen, followed the company’s tried-and-true playbook, hoping free-flowing campaign donations and a ground assault could quiet congressional critics and win over the Federal Communications Commission and Justice Department — much as it had in 2011, when it bought NBCUniversal. Instead, opponents are hailing Comcast’s failed strategy as a welcome sign that money can’t buy everything in Washington.”

Regarding that Comcast acquisition of control in NBCUniversal, Western Journalism published a post in December of last year detailing how Al Sharpton got his show on MSNBC after he helped to promote the deal among his political connections, including some in the White House. With virtually no professional TV broadcast experience, but with links to power and a no-holds-barred loyalty to Barack Obama and the Democrats, Sharpton was chosen to anchor Politics Nation. And despite a string of goofs and gaffes and controversies over his outside activism, Reverend Al survives in the anchor chair.

Now Politics Nation, as well as most other shows on the down-trending cable news network, could be facing a very uncertain future, given that Comcast’s political clout in Washington seems to be diminished. This harsh new reality leads one to reasonably wonder whether the company will decide that its political programming is less meaningful to DC movers and shakers and thus less valuable to the corporation.

In addition to the significant sagging in political relevance for its MSNBC unit, Comcast must also re-focus on the ratings disaster that continues to befall the network’s show lineup. In the coveted 25-54 audience demographic, Politics Nation, on a recent night typical of long-term trends, was very badly beaten in its time slot by both CNN and Fox News, which regularly trounces MSNBC overall.

Mediaite notes that one of the network’s weakest programs, All In with Chris Hayes, “was the lowest-rated show across all of cable news in primetime Wednesday night,” with only 77,000 viewers in the 25-54 demo.

Commenting on the collapse of the long-sought merger with Time Warner Cable, Comcast Chairman and CEO Brian Roberts said in a statement on Friday: “Today, we move on. Of course, we would have liked to bring our great products to new cities, but we structured this deal so that if the government didn’t agree, we could walk away.”

The question now concerning MSNBC’s future is whether Comcast will “walk away” from the floundering network and, like it just did with the merger, pull the plug on an operation that has long been on life support.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

Jeb And Hillary: The Worst Of Evils

Does anyone in the country want to see another Bush vs. Clinton presidential race? If they do, they have a death wish for America.

It is not uncommon these days to hear people refer to Jeb and Hillary as the “royals.” And, while I’m glad that a lot of people seem to have a natural revulsion to having another Bush or Clinton in the White House, the fact is, the Bushes and Clintons are not two “royals.” They are one CRIME FAMILY.

One of the greatest hoaxes of modern times was the façade that the Bush and Clinton families were political adversaries, when the truth is, they have all been “best buds” for most (if not all) of their political careers. For anyone who wants to research the veracity of what I am saying (with an honest and open mind), it will take almost no time to be convinced. The recent reports about foreign influence and money that have poured into the Clinton coffers are nothing new and are just the tip of the iceberg.

While there is no way that we can know the totality of all that this international Crime Family is guilty of, there is enough evidence and eyewitness testimony out there to convince even the most stubborn skeptic that these people are among the most despicable trolls in the world. If we had a semblance of a free and independent national news media, the Bushes and Clintons would have already been exposed as the miscreants they are and would be serving life sentences in prison–which is where they all belong. (Of course, that could be said for a bunch of those criminals in Washington, D.C.)

We hear much talk about the “lesser of two evils.” Well, folks, I’m here to tell you that Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton are the worst of evils. Both of these people are owned lock, stock, and barrel by the international elite who are hellbent on destroying capitalism, free enterprise, constitutional government, and yes, the sovereignty and independence of the United States. There is no substantial difference between them. They may have two different last names and claim to represent two different political parties and ideologies; but, again, they are members of the same cabal of international gangsters. And between the two, Jeb is probably more dangerous.

Despite the best attempts by the propaganda press to keep Hillary’s crimes under wraps, the skeletons are starting to fall out of the closet. It will be virtually impossible to keep them from developing into full-fledged scandals in forthcoming months. Hillary is damaged goods. In fact, Hillary is NOT even electable. I repeat: Hillary is NOT electable. The only way that Hillary will even obtain the Democratic nomination is if the power elite want to offer her up as a political sacrifice so Jeb (or another controlled Republican) can be the next President. The fact that New York newspapers are already breaking the foreign-cash scandal against Hillary is illustrative of what I’m saying. But if it looks like they cannot cram Jeb Bush down the throat of the Republican Party, and there is too much popular resistance to Bush, they might decide to let so many skeletons out of the closet that Hillary would not be able to even win the nomination.

As for Jeb Bush, he is the quintessential neocon: he loves Big Business, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and, especially, Big Banks and the Federal Reserve. He loves perpetual war; he loves the military-industrial complex; he loves open borders; he loves the DHS, the Patriot Act, and a domestic Police State. And Jeb Bush knows where the bodies are buried. He knows virtually every skeleton in every closet in Washington, D.C.–and in foreign capitals.

Jeb and his fellow globalist robot, Benjamin Netanyahu, are international gangsters of the highest (or lowest, depending on how one looks at it) order. With the two of them in power at the same time, WATCH OUT! The Warfare State and Police State would grow exponentially. War in the Middle East would become as hot as hot can be. Jeb and Bibi would take the world to the precipice of, or into, World War III.

Skull & Bones, the Rothschilds, Bohemian Grove, CFR, Trilateral Commission, Bilderbergs: Jeb is in the shadow of all of it. Jeb Bush is the Darth Vader of 2016. And with virtually unlimited money and a questionable voting system–not to mention the support of virtually the entire international banking system, military-industrial system, and corrupt foreign leaders in his pocket–he is going to be a most formidable candidate. The media is already skewing poll numbers to make it appear that Jeb Bush is popular with grassroots Republicans. Media manipulation of opinion in favor of Bush has only begun. It will proliferate tremendously in the months to come.

If Jeb Bush is elected President of the United States, he will make Barack Obama’s terms in office look downright benign by comparison.

However, the global elite do not always get their way. Jeb’s nomination is far from locked up. He is almost universally despised among grassroots conservatives. They know he is a Big Government neocon. His support for Obama’s executive amnesty for illegals, his support for Common Core, his support for Loretta Lynch, his infatuation with Lyndon Johnson, etc., have raised major red flags with genuine conservatives. It is yet to be seen if GOP grassroots conservatives can rise up against Bush in sufficient numbers to derail his candidacy–but they might.

Of course, the second scenario is that the power elite might use Bush as a smokescreen to pave the way for someone equally controlled. The field of GOP contenders is littered with neocons: Chris Christie, Marco Rubio, Scott Walker, Mike Huckabee, Lindsey Graham, Ben Carson, Carly Fiorina, John Kasich, Bobby Jindal, Bob Sasse, etc. (Forget about Mike Pence; he killed any presidential aspirations he may have had with his embarrassing flip flop over the religious freedom issue in his home State of Indiana.) If conservatives derail Jeb Bush in the primaries–and if the media keeps Hillary Clinton in the race–you can know that this second scenario is the one the elites are using.

Again, if the elites plan on a Democrat taking the White House next year, they will remove Hillary from the race. Otherwise, they plan to play the same old “throw-the-bums-out” game and replace a controlled establishment Democrat with a controlled establishment Republican in 2016. In like manner, they replaced a controlled establishment Republican with a controlled establishment Democrat in 2008. In that race, John McCain was the sacrificial lamb. If this is the same game plan for 2016, Hillary Clinton will be the sacrificial lamb. This two-party charade has been going on forever. One would think that, sooner or later, the American people would catch on; but they seem to never do.

Thus far, the only two Republican candidates who are outside the blessing of the global elite are Ted Cruz and Rand Paul. So, you can mark this down and take it to the bank: the Republican establishment and propaganda media will do everything in their power (which is substantial) to make sure that neither of these men obtain the nomination.

I have written preliminary reviews of both Ted Cruz and Rand Paul.

My review of Ted Cruz is here:

Ted Cruz: Pros And Cons

My review of Rand Paul is here:

Rand Paul: Pros And Cons

Without a doubt, New World Order globalists have been active in many presidential administrations, beginning with the man who started it all: Abraham Lincoln. Of course, some administrations have been worse than others: Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt, Lyndon Johnson, for example. But in the modern era, George H.W. Bush introduced America to the neocon agenda–complete with perpetual war and a burgeoning Police State. And every single presidential administration since Bush I (Clinton, Bush II, and Obama) has merely continued and escalated this agenda. For all intents and purposes, America has had only one continuous presidential administration since Bush I. And the globalists will do their very best to ensure that this agenda continues unabated into the next presidential administration, be it Republican or Democrat.

But Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton represent the very pinnacle of the ideal globalist-controlled candidate. If you value your liberties at all, you better pray to God that neither of these people is elected President next year. As I said, anyone who would want to see a Jeb Bush vs. Hillary Clinton presidential race in 2016 has a death wish for America.

© Chuck Baldwin

If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

Dana Loesch Blows Whistle On Violent Campaign Against Wisconsin Conservatives

While the world is focused on McDreamy becoming McRoadkill and a comic book character’s confused sexuality, American citizens are having their homes raided because they have a different opinion than the leftist political establishment in Wisconsin.

Dana Loesch interviewed National Review’s David French on his explosive article, “Wisconsin’s Shame: ‘I Thought It Was a Home Invasion’,” covering a part of the Wisconsin John Doe investigations that for whatever reason ::cough::itinvolvesconservatives::cough:: isn’t being talked about by the mainstream media. Namely, citizens who supported a piece of legislation (with which the left disagrees) are having their homes raided by armed law enforcement officers. French sums it up like this…

Yes, Wisconsin, the cradle of the progressive movement and home of the “Wisconsin idea” — the marriage of state governments and state universities to govern through technocratic reform — was giving birth to a new progressive idea, the use of law enforcement as a political instrument, as a weapon to attempt to undo election results, shame opponents, and ruin lives.

Watch the video and read the article. Just the lack of media coverage is absolutely sickening. What’s actually happening is even worse. People throw the word around flippantly, but this is as ANTI-AMERICAN as it gets.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

Exposed: The Whitehouse-White House Inquisition Against Global Warming ‘Deniers’

Senator Sheldon Whitehouse recently had a Huff-Po tantrum. The Rhode Island Democrat was miffed that people criticized him and equally liberal Senate colleagues Barbara Boxer (CA) and Ed Markey (MA) for attacking skeptics of dangerous manmade climate change like Spanish Inquisition tormentors.

He says the skeptic community’s “overheated” response mischaracterized their motives and muddled their important messages: Global warming is the most serious threat we face today.  Financial incentives can affect behavior, which is why the public and Congress need to know who funded the skeptics’ research. And companies that produce harmful products want to foment uncertainty about well-established health and safety risks: fossil fuel interests and climate chaos skeptics are just like the tobacco industry.

These senators are abusing their power of office to threaten and silence honest scientists, and destroy their funding, reputations, and careers. It’s pure Saul Alinsky, as practiced by Greenpeace, Harry Reid, and the other White House: “In a fight almost anything goes. Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” And the vilified scientists and their friends are just supposed to take it, the senators seem to think.

In reality, the only thing overheated is Mr. Whitehouse’s temper – and the increasingly preposterous rhetoric about an overheating planet. Climate change is altering our music. A 0.1 degree Celsius change in ocean temperatures has caused whales to migrate a month earlier than 30 years ago. Warming oceans will mean the end of fish and chips! Lord knows what other “disasters” await – all because of fossil fuels.

The absurdity of this fraudulent fear mongering and its total irrelevance to our daily lives explains why Americans consistently put climate change at the bottom of every list of concerns. The very idea that governments can decree an idyllic climate is equally crazy; that has happened only once in human history.

No wonder Mr. Obama is repackaging the climate issue under the equally false and ridiculous mantras of “ocean acidification” and “carbon pollution” causing allergies and asthma. Our oceans are not becoming acidic. It’s not “carbon” – it’s carbon dioxide, the miracle molecule that makes all life on Earth possible. And neither CO2 nor planetary warming has anything to do with allergies or asthma.

Climate science was supposed to examine the effects that humans might be having on Earth’s climate. But anti-fossil fuel activists turned it into the notion that only humans affect the climate – and that the powerful natural forces that caused countless, sometimes devastating climate fluctuations in the past no longer play a role. Climatology was also supposed to be about the scientific method:

Pose a hypothesis to explain how nature works. Test the hypothesis and its predictions against real-world evidence and observations. If the premise is valid, the evidence will back it up. If the data and evidence are out of synch with the carbon dioxide/greenhouse gas thesis, come up with another hypothesis.

By now, it’s obvious that the “dangerous manmade global warming” thesis, and computer models based on it, do not explain what is happening in the real world. The planet stopped warming 18 years ago, despite rising fossil fuel use and CO2 emissions. The models don’t work; their predictions are completely out of whack with reality. Instead of more hurricanes, no Category 3-5 has hit the USA since late 2005.

So the alarmists changed their mantra to “climate change” and “weather disruption.” But this is bogus: it tries to blame every change and event on fossil fuels. The thesis can never be proven or disproven, which means it’s a religious tract, not a scientific analysis. Alarmists don’t have a leg to stand on scientifically.

That’s why they refuse to debate the science and vilify climate crisis skeptics. It’s why Democrats became so frustrated with Dr. Judith Curry’s expert testimony at a recent House Science Committee hearing that they left the room. They couldn’t stand it when she said the “central issue” is the extent to which recent (and future) planetary warming or other climate changes are driven by manmade greenhouse gas emissions, “versus natural climate variability caused by variations from the sun, volcanic eruptions, and large-scale ocean circulations.” And they really couldn’t tolerate her noting that President Obama’s pledge to slash U.S. emissions by 28% will reduce warming by just 0.03 degrees Celsius by 2100.

Climate change and extreme weather risks are real, but carbon dioxide doesn’t cause them today any more than throughout history. Aside from Pleistocene-style ice ages, we can adapt or respond to events – including storms, droughts, heat waves, and extreme cold – if we have affordable, reliable energy, strong economies, and modern technologies. The real threats to jobs, health, welfare, and lives come from anti-fossil fuel policies imposed on the pretense that they will stabilize weather and climate. Forecasting future climate changes will be equally impossible if we remain fixated on carbon dioxide, and ignore the solar, ocean circulation, cosmic ray, and other powerful natural forces that actually affect Earth’s climate.

Senator Whitehouse’s suggestion that climate chaos skeptics should be tarred and feathered with tobacco industry apologists is despicable demagoguery. So are his comments about funding realist research.

The skeptics’ funding was never secret. It was always an open book, available to anyone who cared to look. But since he brought up the money issue, let’s look at a few aspects that he studiously ignores.

Alarmist research is all about carbon dioxide, greenhouse gases, and fossil fuels – precisely because financial incentives can and do affect behavior. Alarmists get a thousand times more money than skeptics. Climate Crisis, Inc. received hundreds of billions of dollars in government, industry, foundation, and other money during the past couple decades. The US government alone spent over $186 billion in tax dollars on climate, “clean energy,” and renewable energy projects from 2009 through 2014. Applicants know they won’t get grants if their theses and conclusions do not support climate alarmism and regulatory agendas.

Billions more went to government agencies that coordinate these programs and develop anti-hydrocarbon regulations. These bureaucrats don’t merely search health and scientific files to cherry-pick papers that support their agenda. They deliberately hunt only for supportive documents (many of which they pay for) and actively ignore, suppress, and vilify research that focuses on (or even just discusses) natural forces.

Then the EPA and other agencies pay the American Lung Association, scientific advisory committees, and other activists millions of dollars a year to rubberstamp their regulatory decisions. Even more destructive of our scientific method and political process, countless millions are also being funneled to climate chaos researchers and Big Green pressure groups via secretive foundations, laundered through front groups from Russian oil interests and employed to further enrich billionaires like Warren Buffett.

The scandalous system has turned hardcore environmentalism into a $13.4-billion-per-year operation and represents an unbelievable abuse of our hard-earned tax dollars and the tax-exempt status of numerous foundations and activist groups. Cooperate and get rich; resist, and get the Whitehouse inquisition.

As a result, instead of science, we get opinion, propaganda, spin, pseudo-science, and outright fraud – all designed to advance a anti-fossil fuel, pro-renewable energy agenda that kills jobs and economic growth, endangers human health and welfare, and puts radical regulators and pressure groups in control of our lives, livelihoods, and living standards. It also further corrupts our political system.

These Big Green companies, foundations, pressure groups, and government unions give our politicians millions of dollars in campaign cash and in-kind help, to keep them in office and the gravy train on track.

The League of Conservation Voters collected $90 million in foundation grants from 2000-2013; the LCV Education Fund pocketed $71 million more. The LCV, Sierra Club, NRDC, SEIU, AFSCME, Kleiner Perkins, and allied groups are all big Whitehouse (and Obama White House) campaign donors.

Do Senators Whitehouse, Boxer, and Markey plan to investigate those financial incentives and abuses?

Concerned citizens should ponder all of this the next time they vote.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth