Indict Hillary Clinton

By Wouldlike Change
Global Research, June 01, 2016
Change.org
Region: USA
Theme: Law and Justice
In-depth Report: U.S. Elections

Hillary-RamboHillary Clinton should be immediately indicted for:

1. Obstruction of justice. If any average citizen lied to investigative officials, failed to turn over evidence, provided only selective evidence, they would be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. If any average military personnel with even the lightest of Security Clearance was in breach as Clinton clearly was, they would be prosecuted. Why are our officials not held accountable for their actions?

2. Spoliation of evidence. If any average citizen wiped the hard drive after requests from authorities to turn it over, they would be prosecuted. Why are our officials not held accountable for their actions?

3. Violaton of Federal Records Act (perhaps willful). Our officials agree to be accountable when they hold office. They also agree to comply with the Federal Records Act. Why are our officials not held accountable for their actions?

4. Violation of Espionage Act (perhaps willful). Our officials with Security Clearances agree to hold sensitive information vital to our country’s security with strict restrictions. Ignoring these restrictions should be prosecuted in full, and not doing so is treason against every American. Why are our officials not held accountable for their actions?

The Clinton Foundation ties to weapons deals should also be thoroughly investigated.

To sign petition click https://www.change.org/p/doj-indict-hillary-clinton

FBI Director Comey rebuffs Clinton claim FBI only conducting ‘security inquiry’ on emails

State Department Clinton aide Abedin interviewed by FBI in email investigation

Iraq, Trustworthiness, and the FBI Investigation Make Bernie Sanders More Qualified Than Hillary Clinton

PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA - APRIL 07: Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders (D-VT) speaks during the AFL-CIO Convention at the Downtown Sheraton Philadelphia on April 7, 2016 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. The Pennsylvania primaries will be held on April 26. (Photo by William Thomas Cain/Getty Images)

PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA – APRIL 07: Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders (D-VT) speaks during the AFL-CIO Convention at the Downtown Sheraton Philadelphia on April 7, 2016 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. The Pennsylvania primaries will be held on April 26. (Photo by William Thomas Cain/Getty Images)

imagesizer

Bernie is going to the Vatican to give a speech 4 days prior to the most important primary so far, NY. Bernie is not receiving $225,000 for his speech and a transcript will be available.

04/08/2016 09:40 am ET | Updated Apr 08, 2016

Before addressing the differences in their Iraq votes and favorability ratings, Democrats should take a trip down memory lane and revisit the 2008 Democratic Primary. Now that Bill Clinton has displayed his true feelings towards Black Lives Matter, months after Southern states helped Hillary take an early lead, it’s important to remember that the Clintons utilized racism against Obama. In 2008, Bob Herbert wrote a New York Times piece titled Of Hope and Politics documenting Hillary Clinton’s use of race and Islamophobia:

I could also sense how hard the Clinton camp was working to undermine Senator Obama’s main theme, that a campaign based on hope and healing could unify, rather than further polarize, the country.

So there was the former president chastising the press for the way it was covering the Obama campaign and saying of Mr. Obama’s effort: “The whole thing is the biggest fairy tale I’ve ever seen.”

And there was Mrs. Clinton telling the country we don’t need “false hopes,” and taking cheap shots at, of all people, the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

We’d already seen Clinton surrogates trying to implant the false idea that Mr. Obama might be a Muslim, and perhaps a drug dealer to boot.

…He was drawing young people into the process and exciting people across party lines.
The big deal was that Senator Obama, defying every stereotype, was making it easier for people, frustrated by the status quo, to dare to hope and believe in the country again.

…Pride, the nuns told me in grammar school, goeth before a fall. It may not be fair that the Clintons seem to be forgiven every sin while Mr. Obama’s margin of error is tiny at best.

Indeed, Bernie’s “margin of error” this year is tiny, while Hillary Clinton expects to win the White House alongside a year-long FBI investigation.

Not long ago, as Mr. Herbert pointed out, Clinton even took “cheap shots” at Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr; another forgotten fact of her 2008 campaign. The former New York Senator did everything possible to portray Barack Obama as unrealistic, a closet Muslim (utilizing Fox News Islamophobia), and undermine Obama’s theme of hope and change.

Sound familiar?

Who’s drawing young people this election, offering hope and change, and appealing to the ideals of the average American?

It’s certainly not the person under FBI investigation. I explain in the following appearance on CNN New Day with Victor Blackwell that Hillary Clinton is able to get away with this style of politics, in part because of white privilege.

In terms of trying to crush hopes, dreams, and any genuine attempt at altering the status quo, Hillary Clinton is doing to Bernie Sanders what she and Bill tried to do against Barack Obama. The same complaints about tone (CNN reported “Bill Clinton complains about Obama’s attacks”) and attempts at vilifying Obama in 2008 are today being witnessed by Bernie Sanders. Ultimately, aside from the racism and Islamophobia, Hillary Clinton has used the same playbook against Bernie Sanders in 2016.

Hillary Clinton has always tried to embody pragmatism, despite the fact most Americans (67% of Americans, 30% of Democrats, 74% of Independents, and 64% of women according to Quinnipiac) find her “not honest and trustworthy.”

Hillary Clinton has negative favorability ratings nationally, with negative ratings in every major national poll, and this is before potential indictments from the Department of Justice.

In contrast, Quinnipiac writes “Sanders has the highest favorability rating of any candidate and the highest scores for honesty and integrity, for caring about voters’ needs and problems and for sharing voters’ values.”

Bernie’s interview with Cenk Uygur of The Young Turks highlights exactly why Sanders has the highest scores for honesty and integrity in 2016.

Experience, without trust, is worthless.

A resume, listing an ongoing FBI investigation, wouldn’t get you a job at McDonalds.

In terms of Iraq, Bernie Sanders voted against the Iraq War, using the same intelligence that Hillary Clinton used to vote for the tragic invasion. Also, her view of Iraq in 2004 speaks volumes. A CNN piece in 2004 titled Hillary Clinton: No regret on Iraq vote highlights her thoughts of Saddam and weapons of mass destruction:

WASHINGTON (CNN) — Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton said she is not sorry she voted for a resolution authorizing President Bush to take military action in Iraq despite the recent problems there…

“Obviously, I’ve thought about that a lot in the months since,” she said. “No, I don’t regret giving the president authority because at the time it was in the context of weapons of mass destruction, grave threats to the United States, and clearly, Saddam Hussein had been a real problem for the international community for more than a decade.”

“The consensus was the same, from the Clinton administration to the Bush administration,” she said. “It was the same intelligence belief that our allies and friends around the world shared.

Interestingly, Bernie Sanders vehemently opposed the Iraq War, even though “the consensus was the same, from the Clinton administration to the Bush administration.”

To all the revisionists who’d vote for Clinton, knowing that Bush’s neoconservatives might advise her if she wins, Clinton stated “No, I don’t regret giving the president authority because at the time it was in the context of weapons of mass destruction.”

Clinton, like Dick Cheney, utilized the weapons of mass destruction defense.

In fact, Hillary Clinton used the same myths perpetuated by the Bush administration to justify her vote. A 2007 New York Times piece titled Hillary’s War explains how Clinton helped perpetuate the myth of Saddam Hussein being linked to Al Qaeda:

…Clinton continued, accusing Iraq’s leader of giving ‘’aid, comfort and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members.’’ This statement fit squarely within the ominous warning she issued the day after Sept. 11.

Clinton’s linking of Iraq’s leader and Al Qaeda, however, was unsupported by the conclusions of the N.I.E. and other secret intelligence reports that were available to senators before the vote…

Nevertheless, on the sensitive issue of collaboration between Al Qaeda and Iraq, Senator Clinton found herself adopting the same argument that was being aggressively pushed by the administration…

Yes, Hillary Clinton adopted Bush’s talking point and continued to perpetuate this myth.

As stated in the 2007 New York Times piece, “Senator Clinton found herself adopting the same argument that was being aggressively pushed by the administration.”

Bernie Sanders, on the other hand, voted against the Iraq War, and possessed enough wisdom and foreign policy knowledge to foreshadow every deadly consequence of the invasion.

Experience must correlate to wisdom and good judgement, if qualifications warrant becoming the most powerful person on the planet.

Wisdom and judgement certainly aren’t the hallmarks of Hillary Clinton’s email controversy. The ongoing FBI investigation is highlight by The Hill in a piece titled Report: FBI moves to interview Clinton over emails :

Hillary Clinton and her top aides might be questioned by FBI officials about her private email server within the next few days, according to a new report from Al Jazeera America.

The news outlet reported that the FBI has concluded its examination of Clinton’s email server and is in a “critical stage” of its investigation into concerns that the former secretary of State or her top aides mishandled classified information.

Since when was it ever a good idea to vote for a candidate being interviewed by the FBI?

I explain in this appearance on CNN International that Hillary Clinton faces the risk of indictment by the FBI. Also, I highlight in this YouTube segment why basic logic dictates Clinton “knowingly” sent and received classified intelligence from her private server. Thus, Bernie Sanders is infinitely more qualified to become president than Hillary Clinton, primarily because he voted against Iraq and isn’t linked to any FBI investigations. Most importantly, the American people trust Bernie Sanders, and he’s earned this trust while his opponent relies solely on the aura of political power to justify her candidacy.

Remember, Bernie Sanders beats Trump by a much wider margin than Clinton, and that’s all that counts in 2016.

Follow H. A. Goodman on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/HAGOODMANAUTHOR

Posted by Ainhoa Aristizabal — Unruly Hearts editor

Anonymous: Message to Hillary Clinton

Published on Apr 9, 2016

Anonymous – Message to Hillary Clinton
JOIN US: https://www.facebook.com/AnonymousDirect
– Connect with Anonymous –
Subscribe ● http://www.youtube.com/subscription_c…
Anonymous Google+ ● https://google.com/+AnonymousWorldvoce
Anonymous Facebook ● http://facebook.com/anonymousdirect
Anonymous Twitter ● http://twitter.com/anonymousOfcl
Anonymous T-Shirts ● http://anonymousofficial.spreadshirt.com
Anonymous Website ● http://anonofficial.com
Anonymous Mask (Modern) ● http://amzn.to/1U9q8oI
Anonymous Mask (White) ● http://amzn.to/1TrNree
Anonymous Mask (Black & Gold) ● http://amzn.to/1U9qc83

Message to Hillary Clinton.

We are anonymous.
We are legion.
We do not forgive.
We do not forget.
Expect us.

Share this:

Endless War is on the Drawing Board: Hillary Clinton Throws Women “Under Bus” for Corporate Cronies

By Robert Barsocchini
Global Research, April 16, 2016
Washington’s Blog 15 April 2016

This is, as Professor Deepa Kumar illustrates, “colonial feminism”: pretending to care about women’s rights, human rights, etc., when it serves the purposes of imperio-terrorism.

indexHillary wants us to ignore the dream of MLK and judge her not by the content of her character, but by her gender. These are some of the reasons why:

In the 1990s, with Hillary Clinton as First Lady and “partner in power” of Bill Clinton, the US supported the efforts of oil company Unocal to cooperate with the Taliban to build a natural gas pipeline through Afghanistan. Meetings were being held for that purpose up to September 11, 2001. There was also a telephone company interested in Afghanistan.

Unocal’s pipeline project would have brought natural gas from Turkmenistan to Pakistan by crossing through Afghanistan.

Unocal CEO John Imle estimated that the company spent between $15 and $20 million on its Central Asia gas pipeline (CentGas) project, including on efforts to lobby the Taliban.

Unocal also equipped the Taliban with advanced technologies, such as satellite phones.

“…Unocal –– had very close relations with the Taliban. They took their leaders on junkets to their home bases, they gave them substantial help in the form of office equipment, and they gave medical treatment to many of their leaders. Unocal set up a training school for the Taliban in Kandahar.”

“[W]hen a Clinton official was reminded that the Taliban persecuted women, he said, “We can live with that.”

A “strong campaign [was] waged by rights activists in America, particularly the Feminist Majority led by Eleanor Smeal and Mavis Leno, which lobbied Hillary Clinton and Madeleine Albright very fiercely to stop the Unocal project and come out against the Taliban’s repression of women. [But] the Clinton administration viewed the Taliban’s rise favorably… [because, in addition to other strategic reasons] the U.S. wanted to build this pipeline. There was a lot of support from the Pentagon and the State Department for the Unocal effort.”

The result of the campaign? Silence from Hillary Clinton as her oligarch cronies courted, supported, and coordinated with the Taliban.

Mysteriously,

“…as it became clearer that Taliban policy-makers were beginning to lean toward Bridas [a non-US oil company] by late 1997, the Clinton administration responded by suddenly paying heed to human rights/women’s rights groups who had been protesting Taliban conduct for the past two years.”

This is, as Professor Deepa Kumar illustrates, “colonial feminism”: pretending to care about women’s rights, human rights, etc., when it serves the purposes of imperio-terrorism.

“In November 1997, after years of relative quiet, Clinton’s Secretary of State Madeleine Albright publicly condemned the Taliban’s treatment of women… [but] it was only when absolute [US] control of that oil was challenged that the Taliban regime was openly discredited…” (ibid.)

“[In] August 1998, … the US embassy bombings in East Africa (attributed to Usama bin Laden) prompted [Bill] Clinton to… call for the Taliban to expel Bin Laden. Interestingly, the latter’s presence in Afghanistan since 1996 had not stalled the courtship of the previous years” (ibid).

The US had also been sanctioning Pakistan, but Bill removed the sanctions to befriend Pakistan so the planned pipeline could run through its territory to the coast. (ibid)

In 2001, Hillary finally criticized one US citizen for “supporting” the Taliban: John Walker Lindh, a former US soldier who was tortured in US custody (see here). Clinton made this statement long before his trial, itself a major ethical violation (also committed, for example, by Obama against Chelsea Manning). Research indicates that this poor soldier is the only person Hillary the elitist has condemned as a “traitor” for association with the Taliban. She not only does not condemn, but goes out of her way to support, US government officials and corporate executives who, on record and openly under her husband’s regime, supported and worked with the Taliban, and in fact she made efforts to do so herself.

Afghanistan had been stable in the late 1970s and had featured strong women’s rights, until the US, as it did in Nicaragua and many other places, assembled a proxy army to conquer the country. After intentionally contributing towards the deaths of about two million people (a high US official, Brzezinski, said the US wanted to give the USSR, which was backing the stable Afghan government, “its Vietnam”) and helping to bring the Taliban to power, including through printing propaganda, and then, when the Taliban was uncooperative, pushing it out of power and killing thousands, the US got an agreement from the newly US-installed Karzai dictatorship to build gas pipelines running from Turkmenistan, through Afghanistan, to Pakistan’s coast. More info here.

For this next phase of the pipeline endeavor, Hillary Clinton, now secretary of state, offered her personal guarantee of US government backing to Chevron to increase Chevron’s credibility in pursuing the Afghanistan gas pipeline project, while she publicly advocated for a massive increase in the US invasion of Afghanistan. During her tenure, the US increased its presence from 30,000 to 100,000 militants or more, killing thousands in the process.

“…both Chevron and Exxon-Mobil … expressed interest in TAPI [the pipeline from Turkmenistan through Afghanistan].” However, Turkmenistan wanted a firm signal that the US government was committed. That signal came from Hillary Clinton. The president of Turkmenistan received “a letter backing Chevron’s project from then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.”(Wall Street Journal)

After Clinton guaranteed US government backing for Chevron to build the pipeline, Obama sent his own personal letter to the president of Turkmenistan, backing Chevron and “emphasizing a common interest in helping develop Afghanistan and expressing [his] support for TAPI [pipeline] and his desire for a major U.S. firm to construct it.” (WSJ)

The Taliban later came back to prominence, and Hillary Clinton again tried to work with them to push through the pipeline deal.

Considering her record of plutocratic terrorism against Afghanistan and identical record against Libya (which is revealed in leaked emails) and numerous other countries, is it any wonder that Hillary has always supported US genocide against Iraqis, who live in one of the most oil-rich countries in the world?

Robert Barsocchini is an internationally published author who focuses on force dynamics, national and global, and also writes professionally for the film industry. Updates on Twitter. Author’sessay ‘The Agility of Tyranny: Historical Roots of Black Lives Matter’.

The original source of this article is Washington’s Blog