OUR SELECTED REVIEWS, VIDEOS:
Photo of Lester Holt, Hillary Clinton, and Donald Trump at the first debate: AP Images
1st Debate: Clinton-Holt Tag Team vs. Trump
BY WILLIAM F. JASPER
SEE: http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/24157-1st-debate-clinton-holt-tag-team-vs-trump; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
The “Debate of the Century,” the first face-to-face match up between presidential contenders Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, quickly turned into a three-way affair, with NBC “moderator” Lester Holt (shown at left) repeatedly taking sides with Clinton and badgering Trump. The hour-and-a-half debate, broadcast live Monday night on all the major networks from the Hofstra University campus in Hempstead, New York, was expected to attract 100 million viewers, a new record for a political event, and second only to the Super Bowl. From tabulations now available, it appears the final viewer count may come close to those predicted numbers. Another even more important prediction also proved to be accurate: that debate moderator Lester Holt would follow the familiar path of liberal media moderators in previous debates and throw support to the liberal-left Democrat.
At the start of the event, Holt announced that the planned six 15-minute segments would be directed at exploring three topic areas: "Achieving Prosperity," "America's Direction" and "Securing America." The debate, he explained, was being sponsored by the Commission on Presidential Debates, a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization. The commission had drafted the debate's format, and the rules had been agreed to by the campaigns.
“The questions are mine and have not been shared with the commission or the campaigns,” Holt said. “The audience here in the room has agreed to remain silent so that we can focus on what the candidates are saying.”
Going into the debate there was ample cause for questioning the NBC anchor’s ability to be genuinely impartial. Like virtually all of his colleagues in the establishment media,
Lester Holt tilts to the Left. Holt took over as anchor of NBC Nightly News last year, after Brian Williams was fired for misrepresenting his Iraq War reporting experiences. Following the September 2 announcement that Holt had been selected as the first debate moderator, the Media Research Center compiled an archive of video segments showing his bias regarding Clinton and Trump, as well as statements showing his bias on issues ranging from Obama Care to Syrian refugees to “Climate refugees” to illegal alien amnesty, etc.
Lester Holt tilts to the Left. Holt took over as anchor of NBC Nightly News last year, after Brian Williams was fired for misrepresenting his Iraq War reporting experiences. Following the September 2 announcement that Holt had been selected as the first debate moderator, the Media Research Center compiled an archive of video segments showing his bias regarding Clinton and Trump, as well as statements showing his bias on issues ranging from Obama Care to Syrian refugees to “Climate refugees” to illegal alien amnesty, etc.
The question in the minds of many critics was whether Holt’s partiality would result in a reprise of the infamous episode of the 2012 presidential debate cycle, in which CNN’s Candy Crowley stepped out of her official moderator role to help President Obama against his debate opponent, Governor Mitt Romney, on the issue of Benghazi and terrorism.
Lester Holt comes across as a much cooler, calmer, less jarringly partisan moderator than Candy Crowley, which lends an air of legitimacy to claims that he is objective and fair. However, after viewing the debate and reviewing the transcript, it is clear that Holt favored Clinton and leaned on Trump. He stepped over the line into the Clinton camp to challenge Trump on releasing his income taxes, on the issue of stop-and-frisk policing, on race relations, on his opposition to the Iraq War, and on Barack Obama’s birth certificate.
He did not show any similar interest in asking Hillary Clinton about any of the many issues that are important to millions of American voters: her colossal Benghazi failure and cover up; the millions of dollars, scandalous deals, and conflicts of interest involved with the Clinton Foundation; the national security perils from her “lost” e-mails; her bailouts and sellout to Wall Street; her role (with husband Bill) in selling off America’s uranium to Russia; the cover-up of her medical problems; and much more. Holt’s adversarial probing of Trump would have been legitimate if he had shown a balanced inclination to do the same with Clinton. As it was, his one-sided hammering seemed to throw Trump off balance and help Hillary keep him on the defensive.
Many commentators and even many Trump supporters who were interviewed expressed the perception that Trump “failed to control the fight” and was always responding with counter punches to a more aggressive, in-control Clinton.
Clinton undoubtedly surprised a great many viewers (including this one) by not only lasting the full 90 minutes, but doing so without any major faux pas or meltdown. For weeks her health had become a major issue — and it still is. But, barring another collapsing/fainting, major-coughing attack, or neurological head bobbing incident, her performance on the stage last night will probably help to take the edge off that concern to some degree.
Who Won?
A CNBC online poll of nearly one million respondents (960,300) found 67 percent saying Trump won vs. 33 percent for Clinton. A TIME Internet poll with 1.6 million respondents came out at 55 percent for Trump, 45 percent for Clinton. In fact, except for CNN — which is often called the Clinton News Network, due to obvious bias — most snap polls taken after the debate came out with Trump handily on top. The CNN poll, a survey of 521 registered voters — which CNN admits was top-heavy with Democrats — came out with Clinton winning the debate 62 percent to 27 percent.
A CNBC online poll of nearly one million respondents (960,300) found 67 percent saying Trump won vs. 33 percent for Clinton. A TIME Internet poll with 1.6 million respondents came out at 55 percent for Trump, 45 percent for Clinton. In fact, except for CNN — which is often called the Clinton News Network, due to obvious bias — most snap polls taken after the debate came out with Trump handily on top. The CNN poll, a survey of 521 registered voters — which CNN admits was top-heavy with Democrats — came out with Clinton winning the debate 62 percent to 27 percent.
The next debate, to be held at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri on October 9, will be co-hosted by CNN's Anderson Cooper and ABC's Martha Raddatz, both of whom are at least as liberal-left and pro-Clinton as Lester Holt. Judging from the just-concluded debate, as well as the history of recent political debates, we can expect that the next match up will be a three-against-one tag team affair.
Related articles:
________________________________________________________
HILLARY THE POLITICIAN Vs. TRUMP THE PRESIDENT
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
By Kelleigh NelsonSeptember 28, 2016 NewsWithViews.com
The debate was structurally biased and Holt biased it. He repeatedly argued with Trump about the facts. Despite the ban on fact-checking, Holt attempted to debate Trump on the Iraq War and on the birth certificate. It was a disgraceful and a biased performance. It is a reminder that the structure of the debates must be changed to prevent mainstream media from dominating it. Every question was shaped to frame a left-wing agenda. Holt hurled numerous attacks at Trump. He only passingly offered Hillary a chance to address her emails when Trump had already brought it up. —Daniel GreenfieldThe Biased DebateI don’t like to watch debates, I never have, and having watched Hillary debate in high school and use tactics that were less than honorable, watching her lie through her teeth during this first debate, was enough to make me wretch. The above quote from Daniel Greenfield is so absolutely true. Lester Holt wanted to debate Trump himself! His bias was obvious as were his softball questions to Hillary. I thought as I watched it, that every time Hillary can’t really answer a question in one sentence or two, she rambles on, and you can tell she’s lying, she’s lying, she’s lying. Fifteen personal questions to Trump and only two to Hillary.Democratic Socialist ModeratorsI’ve mentioned in several articles that I’ve wondered why we cannot have someone like Lou Dobbs, Steve Malzberg, Laura Ingraham, Neil Cavuto or Sean Hannity as moderators instead of these Democratic socialists all the time. Unfortunately, Roger Stone told me that once a candidate signs on with the Debate Commission, they have no say as to moderators. We need to get this changed…it’s time our side actually gave some zingers to the candidates from Marxist hell. Sure wish Mr. Trump had been able to use “The Art of the Deal,” to get this changed prior to the debates.Hillary Promotes Her Socialist BeliefsHillary did remain standing, and she didn’t cough or lose concentration. However, if you listened carefully, you heard her strong socialist beliefs come through. She wants to grab the guns, federalize law enforcement, steal from the "rich," with higher taxes, (sending them and their companies and monies to other nations), play nice with illegals and Muslim refugees, and give away a lot of free stuff with our tax dollars. Anything ring a bell with the audience? Probably not, because the goals of Marxism are no longer taught in American/government schools.Obvious Lester Holt BiasClinton came across as smug, pompous, robotic and rehearsed to the point of memorization. Did anyone besides Devvy Kidd and me notice her drugged out look? The MSM of course saw Hillary as winning the debate, but she is losing ground with voters in swing states according to the Charlotte Observer.Lester Holt shilled for Hillary Clinton. Obviously, he didn’t want the backlash he saw Matt Lauer receive when he moderated the Commander-in-Chief forum and actually allowed questions from the audience which put Hillary in a very uncomfortable state.Rudy Giuliani asserted that Holt was “extremely unfair” and that his “fact checking” every time Hillary said the word “fact,” or the one time she mentioned, “fact check,” showed Holt’s obvious bias, especially over the “stop and frisk” issue which was completely inaccurate. Rudy should know, as he was the Mayor of New York when it was used.The Daily Caller analysis said that Mr. Trump was interrupted 41 times by Lester Holt whereas he only interrupted Hillary seven times.Holt really wanted to debate Trump, and challenged him six times on his answers, but Hillary was asked no follow up questions throughout the entire debate.The Washington Times, agreed with me that Trump was forced to debate Lester Holt as well as Hillary.The bottom line is that Holt was much harsher on Trump than Hillary, and anyone who watched could see the obvious bias. Holt only mentioned Hillary’s email scandal when he asked Hillary to respond to Trump rather than crafting a tough question himself.The Donald needed to bring up Benghazi, the Clinton Foundation, and the entire Hillary email debacle, but wasn’t really given an opportunity.Neil Cavuto exposed the bias of Lester Holt in this video where he shows that Donald Trump never supported the war in Iraq, an issue Trump had to defend against Holt.Hillary Lies
Hillary Clinton’s litany of lies throughout the first presidential debate had me screaming at the television. Another reason my husband refuses to even watch them, they’re so scripted! Let’s just look at a few.The TPP Trade Deal - When confronted by Trump about her former strong support for the Trans-Pacific Partnership, Clinton claimed that she “hoped it would be good deal.” The truth of course is that she called it the “gold standard” of trade deals, just as Trump stated. As Secretary of State, Hillary championed TPP 24 times.Hillary Clinton defended NAFTA, which her husband signed into law, and the accompanying unemployment as a good trade deal, in the face of attacks by Donald Trump. He said, “NAFTA is the worst trade deal maybe ever signed anywhere but certainly ever signed in this country, and now you want to approve Trans-Pacific Partnership.” Trump also cited the 30-50 percent reduction in manufacturing in key states as being more than just an opinion.Equal Pay for Women - In her opening statement, Hillary asserted that the nation needs to “finally guarantee equal pay for equal work” for women. The notion that women on average do not receive the same pay as men — the 77 cents to a dollar myth — has been proven false repeatedly. Women seldom work as long as men, and the statistic is a false one since it is already illegal to pay women less than men for the same position.Tax the Wealthy – Really interesting Hillary, especially since while Secretary of State, you have colluded with foreign dignitaries to help them out if they make large donations to the Clinton Foundation. Hillary advocates raising taxes on the wealthy because she doesn’t believe they pay enough. “I think it’s time to suggest that the wealthy pay their fair share,” she said.The truth is that America has the most progressive tax system in the world — the top 10 percent contribute over half of all income tax revenue…and the top 10% are the ones who use their money to create businesses and jobs, but jobs aren’t really important to Hillary.Slashing Taxes – Hillary Clinton claimed that "slashing taxes on the wealthy hasn't worked." Her comment implied that slashing taxes on the wealthy is why the economy is in such poor shape currently. What a strange statement considering Obama has been in office for the better part of eight years and has increased taxes, and never thought of slashing them.Anyone remember what Democrat President John F. Kennedy said about lowering taxes?
Kennedy proposed in 1963 to cut income taxes from a range of 20-91% to 14-65% He also proposed a cut in the corporate tax rate from 52% to 47%. Those figures for the early 60s are astronomical. Economic growth expanded in 1963, and Republicans and conservative Democrats in Congress insisted that reducing taxes without corresponding spending cuts was unacceptable. Kennedy disagreed, arguing that “a rising tide lifts all boats” and that strong economic growth would not continue without lower taxes. He was right.Lowering Corporate Tax Rates - Hillary said: "We've looked at your tax proposals. I don't see changes in the corporate tax rates … you're referring to that would cause the repatriation." Well, Hill, you didn’t look closely enough now did you… Trump's plan to lower corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 15 is written quite clearly on the economic plan posted on his website.The Rotten Iran Deal – Ms. Hillary also claimed that in being party to the Iran deal she helped "put the lid on Iran's nuclear program." But sources claim the deal guarantees no such thing. Indeed, it rests entirely on Iran's acting in good faith and upholding their end of the bargain. Are the American people ready to trust the Iranian Ayatollah who has stated time and again, “Death to America?” I’m certainly not, and giving away billions of dollars to this country who funds terrorist Islamic regimes, is beyond insane. Read General Michael Flynn’s book, The First in Fight.Hillary’s Emails – Hillary said, “I made a mistake using a private email.” But she didn’t use a private email, she used multiple private email servers. She implied that she didn’t know she’d done anything wrong, but she was trained for two hours by the FBI before taking over the job of Secretary of State!The word “mistake” implies Clinton didn't know she was doing anything wrong, a claim belied entirely by the fact that so many of her aides and associates pleaded the Fifth or were granted immunity by the FBI — not to mention the fact that many of them engaged in the destruction of evidence and that she herself made false exculpatory statements. (Remember the 13 cell phones and five IPADS destroyed by hammers).Vladimir PutinClinton also claimed that "Donald publicly invited Putin to hack into Americans." The truth, as is obvious from the context of his words, is that Trump was calling on the Russians to release Clinton's missing emails in the event that they already had them. He has never said he personally likes Putin, a lie put out by the MSM and Hillary. He has said that he believes he could work with Putin, and that there would be mutual respect because they are both strong leaders with spines of steel, unlike what we have in our White House now. Trump strongly believes that the two of them could have mutual respect, but that’s a lot different than honoring the former KGB man as Hillary insinuates.ConclusionTrump covered all the important messages asked in the debate, and he should have brushed aside the nitpicking and ignored it because the entire hour was spent attacking Trump.Hillary may have looked as though she held her own against Donald J. Trump, but the reality of this debate is that she proved her complete disregard for truth and she lied through her teeth to the American people. Did she have the questions in advance? Who knows…a few websites believe she did.Look people, the day of the first debate, the powers that be shut down Michael Savage’s affiliates when he started to speak about Hillary’s illnesses. We are living in a censoring tyrannical government like that of Communist Mikhail Gorbachev, the Baathist Saddam Hussein government, Nicolae Ceausescu in Romania, or the Peoples’ Republic of China. We should be shouting at the top of our lungs…The First Amendment of the Constitution is a God given unalienable right…the right to speak the truth as you see it.CNN, (Clinton News Network) said that Hillary won the debate, but bottom line, all the polls say Trump won, (see today's JB William's article for all the Poll Results) despite the purposeful setup for destruction by the socialists in cahoots with Hillary. Trump has actually gained votes in the swing states.
[P.S. In order to wake up the population, we need to reach more people. Please use this material, and call into talk radio programs (like Sean Hannity, Michael Savage, Rush Limbaugh etc.) and mention NewsWithViews.com on the air while discussing the content of this article, write letters to newspaper editors, and speak to your friends. Spread the word, and in doing so, we have a chance to save America.]______________________________________________________HILLARY BELIEVES THE PRESIDENCY IS OWED TO HERrepublished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:By Chip McLeanSeptember 28, 2016
NewsWithViews.com“Why aren’t I up 50 points,” exclaimed an angry Hillary Clinton. The bizarre outburst came this week after nearly all polls showed the race to be basically even, with some swinging slightly in favor of Donald Trump.The Hildebeast has reverted to total shrill mode – a shrewish side of her that former Clinton staffers have alluded to on numerous occasions but is almost universally ignored by the sycophantic MSM.
Hillary is angry because she believes it’s “her turn” to be president but Donald Trump and his supporters keep getting in her way. Of course, she also believed that it was “her turn” in 2008, when (in her view), she was robbed after Democrats decided that the “black card” – pardon the expression – “trumped” the “woman card”.So Hillary instead became the most horrific Secretary of State in the nation’s history…During her tenure, she compromised our national security with her illegal private email server. That would of course be the same server on which the emails were subsequently deleted with BleachBit - right after those emails were subpoenaed. FBI Director James Comey, in choosing not to charge her with a crime, was nonetheless forced to admit that almost anyone else would have been prosecuted for the sort of gross mishandling of classified material that occurred under Hillary Clinton.Below is a great video that demonstrates the vast difference between what Hillary Clinton claimed, and what the FBI investigation actually found.But as we all know, the Clintons have always viewed rules as being for “other people”.Then of course there is the Benghazi scandal itself. Hillary’s meddling in Libya not only left diplomat Chris Stevens and three others dead, but it also paved the way for radical Islamists (a term she steadfastly – like Obama – refuses to use) to take over the region.As Yogi Berra would have said, “it’s déjà vu all over again.” Didn’t we learn from our experience in Iraq that taking out dictators always leaves a vacuum – something that nature abhors? In the Middle East, that vacuum always seems to be filled by charming, peaceful, humanitarian organizations such as ISIS.Hillary also favors open borders along with a 550% increase in Syrian refugees on top of what Obama has already imported into our country. Everyone knows that these “refugees” are virtually impossible to vet. In fact State Department spokesman John Kirby admitted just this week that Islamic State terrorists are trying to mingle with refugee populations overseas in the hopes of making it to the U.S. posing as refugees. Hillary and Obama’s policies have made the entire world – including America – far less safe from terrorism.We also know that Hillary used her office as a conduit for the money laundering, supposedly “charitable” Clinton Foundation to enrich Bill, Chelsea and herself. Perhaps Bill Clinton would try to parse the definition of “charity”, but what sort of “charity” only sees 6% of the contributions going to bona-fide recipients? Even notoriously inefficient government agencies have a far better track record of benefiting those in need.Of course, I suppose rich foreign interests have “needs” as well – important things like obtaining the rights to nearly a quarter of our uranium is certainly a great Russian “need”. The Clinton Foundation has certainly assisted many such “donors” in “need”, thanks to much help from Hillary gal pal Huma Abedin. Huma’s “job” evidently consisted of arranging meetings between said “donors” and the then Secretary of State.In fact, over half of Mrs. Clinton’s “meetings” with non-government personnel were with Clinton Family donors. Perhaps she was discussing renting out the Lincoln Bedroom if she’s elected, just like in the good ‘ol days when hubby Slick Willie was in charge of the White House.Hillary’s obvious health issues represent just the latest in a forty year series of lies and cover-ups on the part of the Clintons. The Hillary campaign has been less than forthcoming on this, despite the fact that a number of respected medical practitioners have raised concerns. Hillary has tried to simply make this go away by snidely dismissing all questions about her health. But then, obfuscation has always been a part of the Clinton modus operandi, whether it’s about Whitewater, Filegate, Travelgate, Chinagate, cattle futures, Vince Foster, missing Rose Law Firm records, not to mention what the meaning of “is”, is.In addition, there’s the “war on women” where Hillary sends out the attack dogs to besmirch and threaten all of the women that Bill has harassed (or worse). This fine, family tradition has carried straight on through the twenty first century.It’s a Clinton thing, lying. The Clintons would rather tell a lie than the truth even if the truth would benefit them. They just can’t seem to help it – it’s pathological. The Clintons have spent many years perfecting the art of lying. The problem for Hillary is that although she lies just as much as Bill, she is nowhere near as convincing. The chief reason is that she possesses all the charisma of a rotted tree stump.And therein lays her problem - Hillary Rodham Clinton is not only one of the most corrupt politicians in American history, she is perhaps also the most singularly unlikable one as well. When she’s not busy referring to half the country as being a “basket of deplorables”, she’s using terrorism to once again push for more gun control. Disarming law-abiding American citizens in the face of the increased danger from Islamic terrorists is not only antithetical to the second amendment, it also flies in the face of logic. The fact is she seems to go out of her way to insult the intelligence of everyday, working Americans. She seems to have a special antipathy for coal miners.So Hillary, believing once again that it is “her turn”, indignantly poses the question, “Why aren’t I up 50 points?”. What is sad that she actually believes she is entitled to a 50 point lead in the polls – that somehow the voters owe her. What she is truly owed is a 50 year stretch in prison.______________________________________________________
BIG BANKS OWN THE CLINTONS
SEE: http://newswithviews.com/Stone/roger103.htm; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
By Roger Stone
September 27, 2016
NewsWithViews.com
September 27, 2016
NewsWithViews.com
Prior to the financial crisis, banks were not a subject of political or public ire or focus. They were just companies. The biggest banks were east-coast and west-coast behemoths. When they lobbied, it was largely in coordination with the
nation’s smaller community banks. While the smaller community banks have historically represented the political spectrum of the communities they serve, the Too-Big-To-Fail (TBTF) banks were aligned with Democrats, being headquartered in the “bluer” states of New York and California. As a result, the Democrats, and especially the Clintons, have always relied on the big banks to support their agenda, and in turn, they have enthusiastically supported the big bank’s agenda.
nation’s smaller community banks. While the smaller community banks have historically represented the political spectrum of the communities they serve, the Too-Big-To-Fail (TBTF) banks were aligned with Democrats, being headquartered in the “bluer” states of New York and California. As a result, the Democrats, and especially the Clintons, have always relied on the big banks to support their agenda, and in turn, they have enthusiastically supported the big bank’s agenda.
Unlike community banks, which serve local communities, know their economies and are committed to their neighbors, TBTF big banks don’t know their customers, serve themselves and could care less about their neighbors.
When the great financial crisis came, TBTF banks were largely responsible. The nation wanted justice. But it was time for payback, and the TBTF banks used their capture of the Democrats to extort protection.
Since the crisis, Hillary and her pals have helped to make sure that no real harm comes the TBTF banks. In fact, since the crisis – TBTF banks banks have dramatically increased in size, stifling the ability of smaller banks to compete.
(NOTE: The banks deemed too big by the Obama Administration when it pushed for enactment of Dodd Frank are more than 30% bigger than before the Act was passed in 2010, and 80% bigger than before the banking crisis of 2008. The six largest US financial institutions now have assets of some $10 trillion, amounting to almost 60% of GDP; and they control nearly 50% of all bank deposits. Even some well-heeled clients are being rejected. In an October 19, 2015 article titled “Big Banks to America’s Firms: We Don’t Want Your Cash,” the Wall Street Journal reported that some Wall Street banks are now telling big depositors to take their money elsewhere or be charged a deposit fee.
Municipal governments are also being rejected as customers. Bank of America just announced that it no longer wants the business of some smaller cities, which have been given 90 days to find somewhere else to put their money. Hundreds of local BofA branches are also disappearing.
Hardest hit, however, are the community banks. Today there are 1,524 fewer banks with assets under $1 billion than there were in June 2010, before the Dodd-Frank regulations were signed into law.)
Who loses? Communities, borrowers, competition and local economies.
To follow:
• The Clinton Foundation is Used to Benefit Big Banks
• Big Banks, in Turn, Bankroll the Clintons
I. The Clinton Foundation Is Used to Benefit Big Banks
The Clinton Foundation appears more like a mafia bag-man operation than a reputable non-profit. It claims to be a voice for women and the oppressed, even while it takes billions of dollars from donors who are sexual predators, misogynists and tied to oppressive regimes that reduce the status of women. Only a small percentage of the money raised actually funds real assistance programs; most of the money goes to salaries, speakers and to the Clintons personal expenses.
If you look at the entire list of donors to the Clinton Foundation, you’ll see there are lots of individuals under indictment, lots of individuals and institutions currently embroiled in the Mossack Fonseca scandal, and lots of foreign officials who have been found to be corrupt. And the big banks are at the center of it all.
Among largest donors to the Clinton Foundation:
Among largest donors to the Clinton Foundation:
• Barclays Capital
• Citi Foundation
• Standard Chartered
• Goldman Sachs
• Bank of America Foundation
• Citigroup
• HSBC
• Itau Unibanco
• UBS Wealth Management
• Banco Santander Brasil
• Deutsche Bank AG
• Deutsche Bank Americas
• Goldman Sachs Philanthropy Fund
• Morgan Stanley Smith Barney Global Impact Funding Trust, Inc
• Bank of America Corporation
• BMCE Bank
• JPMorgan Chase & Co.
• Merrill Lynch & Company Foundation, Inc.
• Morgan Stanley
• The Monte dei Paschi di Siena
• Wells Fargo Foundation
Examples of how the Clinton Foundation Helps Big Banks to Cash in on “Philanthropy”
CGI Sets up Big Banks to Cash in on Retrofitting Buildings Worldwide
ABN AMRO, Citi(bank), Deutsche Bank, JPMorgan Chase, and UBS have committed to arrange $1 billion each to finance cities and private building owners to undertake these retrofits at no net cost, doubling the global market for energy retrofit in buildings.
(HRC Senior Economic Advisor Gene Sperling pushed these initiatives while head of Obama’s National Economic Council. He is now a paid advisor to Renovate America Co. They would benefit from these programs as would the big banks who receive securitization and lending opportunities See ( Link )
CGI Helps Standard Chartered (Serial Violator of Iran Sanctions) with “Microfinance Finance Facility”
At the CGI Annual Meeting in 2006, Standard Chartered Bank (SCB) made a commitment to provide development organizations and fund managers with $500 million worth of credit and financial instruments that they could use to finance microfinance institutions (MFIs) in Africa and Asia, benefiting 4 million people over the commitment’s five-year implementation.
As a result, the Bank has formed 48 microfinance partnerships in 15 different countries across these regions. The Bank’s portfolio has grown to $180 million, with investments of $280 million (including provision of credit and financial instruments).
“Renewable & Clean Energy Financing in Asia, Latin America, and the Middle East” Commitment to Action by Standard Chartered Bank in 2007
At the CGI Annual Meeting in 2007, Standard Chartered Bank (SCB) committed to take a leading role in the financing of new renewable and clean energy projects by arranging debt, advising on finance, or acting as an equity investor in wind, hydro, solar, geothermal, and other areas with a total project value of $8-10 billion over five years. [Link]
II. Big Banks Are Bankrolling the Clintons
Financial institutions and their employees were Clinton’s biggest donors when she was in the Senate from 2001 to 2008. The top four banks were Citi(bank), Goldman Sachs, J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., and Morgan Stanley.
For 24 years the Clintons have orchestrated a conjugal relationship with Wall Street, to the immense financial benefit of both parties. They have accepted from the New York banks $68.72 million in campaign contributions for their six political races, and $8.85 million more in speaking fees. The banks have earned hundreds of billions of dollars in practices that were once prohibited—until the Clinton Administration legalized them.
Perhaps sensing the need to assure (Bill) Clinton’s re-election, Wall Street saw fit nearly to triple its campaign contributions—from $11.17 million in 1992 to $28.37 million in 1996. Here’s what the Big Banks got:
• Repeal of Glass-Steagall
• President Clinton signed the Commodity Futures Modernization Act. This law ended the regulation of derivatives, freeing Wall Street to manufacture mortgage-backed securities and sell them without restriction; these complex derivatives would power the “subprime” swindle soon to commence.
• Clinton’s Justice Department a deputy Attorney General named Eric Holder in 1999 authored a memo entitled “Bringing Criminal Charges Against Corporations.” It became the Holder Doctrine, and after the financial crisis of 2008 it would be of incalculable value to the Wall Street banks. On leaving the Administration Mr. Holder joined Covington Burling, the largest law firm in Washington, D.C.. Among its clients were Morgan Stanley, Citigroup, JP Morgan Chase, UBS, Bank of New York Mellon, Deutsche Bank, Wells Fargo, and Bank of America.
• Sixteen days after leaving the White House, Mr. Clinton delivered a speech to the Wall Street firm of Morgan Stanley, for which he was paid $125,000. That was the first of many speeches he presented to Wall Street banks in following years. By May of 2015, Mr. Clinton had earned $1,550,000 from Goldman Sachs, $1,690,000 from UBS, $1,075,000 from Bank of America, $770,000 from Deutsche Bank,, and $700,000 from Citigroup. In total, $5,910,000.
• The Wall Street banks underwrote Ms. Clinton’s Senatorial ambition, contributing $2.13 million to her campaign. Among the congenial banks were Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, UBS, JP Morgan Chase, CIBC, and Credit Suisse.
• Wall Street was impressed with both candidates. Goldman Sachs contributed $1,034,615 to Mr. Obama’s campaign; JP Morgan Chase $847,855; Citigroup $755,057; UBS $534,166; and Morgan Stanley $528,182. $3.7 million in total. But Wall Street was more impressed with Ms. Clinton: her take from the banks was $14.6 million.
• A few weeks after her swearing in, Secretary of State Clinton was called to Switzerland by the Swiss Foreign Minister. They discussed a lawsuit brought by the U.S. Internal Revenue Service against UBS, the Swiss banking international colossus (761 locations in the U.S.). Back in Washington Secretary Clinton interceded. The impact of the suit was reduced by 90%.
• In subsequent years UBS paid Bill Clinton $1.5 million in speaking fees, for eleven separate appearances. Hillary Clinton earned $225,000 for another one. Also in subsequent years UBS contributed $540,000 to the Clinton Foundation. [Link]
One of Clinton’s earliest votes in her Senate career provoked the ire of Elizabeth Warren, who was then a Harvard law professor.
Clinton voted with the big banks on a massive overhaul to the country’s bankruptcy laws, picking the financial services industry over consumers. Link
Elizabeth Warren — at the time a Harvard law professor — recounted for Bill Moyers how, in the 1990s, she wrote an editorial opposing a proposed piece of legislation tightening bankruptcy laws. Warren explained that it would disproportionately hurt single mothers. Hillary Clinton, at the time the first lady, read the editorial, and asked for a meeting with Warren. The meeting went well; Warren said she “never had a smarter student.” Afterward, Clinton returned to Washington and, according to her biography, persuaded Bill Clinton to veto the legislation.
But when Hillary Clinton was elected to the Senate and another version of the same bill came to the floor, she did an about face:
ELIZABETH WARREN: She voted in favor of it.
BILL MOYERS: Why?
ELIZABETH WARREN: As Senator Clinton, the pressures are very different. It’s a well-financed industry. You know a lot of people don’t realize that the industry that gave the most money to Washington over the past few years was not the oil industry, was not pharmaceuticals. It was consumer credit products. Those are the people. The credit card companies have been giving money, and they have influence.
BILL MOYERS: And Mrs. Clinton was one of them as senator.
ELIZABETH WARREN: She has taken money from the groups, and more to the point, she worries about them as a constituency.
BILL MOYERS: But what does this mean though to these people, these millions of people out there whom the politicians cavort in front of as favoring the middle class, and then are beholden to the powerful interests that undermine the middle class? What does this say about politics today?
ELIZABETH WARREN: You know this is the scary part about democracy today. It’s… We’re talking again about the impact of money. The credit industry on this bankruptcy bill has spent tens of millions of dollars lobbying, and as their profits grow, they just throw more into lobbying for how they can get laws that will make it easier and easier and easier to drain money out of the pockets of middle class families. [Link]
Hillary Helps a Bank—and Then It Funnels Millions to the Clintons
Mrs. Clinton announced a tentative legal settlement—an unusual intervention by the top U.S. diplomat. UBS ultimately turned over information on 4,450 accounts, a fraction of the 52,000 sought by the IRS.” [Link]
Mrs. Clinton announced a tentative legal settlement—an unusual intervention by the top U.S. diplomat. UBS ultimately turned over information on 4,450 accounts, a fraction of the 52,000 sought by the IRS.” [Link]
Hillary Group Partnered With Company That Laundered $250 Billion For Iran And Violated Sanctions
On July 29, 2009, at a news conference in New Delhi, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton proudly announced that “Vital Voices Global Partnership,” an NGO that she said she had “founded”, had partnered with Standard Chartered Bank to promote women’s causes throughout Asia.
Unfortunately, Standard Chartered, which also donated generously to the Clinton Foundation Global Initiative, was charged by federal and New York State prosecutors of laundering over $250 billion for Iran and “deliberately” helping Iran circumvent sanctions imposed to cripple its nuclear program. In August and December, 2012 — Standard Chartered paid a total $667 million in fines to settle the cases and admitted its criminal activity.
First, the New York State Department of Financial Services fined Standard Chartered $340 million and, several months later, the Department of Justice negotiated a fine of $327 million in December of last year. Jaspal Bindra, the CEO of Asia Standard Bank, serves on the board of Vital Voices.
According to the New York State Department of Financial Services the ten years of illegal activity by Standard Chartered “left the US financial system vulnerable to terrorists, weapons dealers, drug kingpins, and corrupt regimes and deprived law enforcement investigators of crucial information used to track all manner of criminal activity.”
And all the while, Standard Chartered was funding programs related to the Clintons. The ties among former President Bill Clinton, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the Clinton Global Initiative and Standard Chartered run long and deep. [Link]
The Clinton Global Initiative Helps Big Banks with “Cover”
In August of 2010, the Justice Department announced Barclays would pay nearly $300 million in fines for breaking sanctions against Iran, Cuba, Sudan and others. The next month, it was — for the first time — a “strategic partner” for that year’s annual Clinton Global Initiative event.
In 2012, the CGI annual event featured three major banking partners that were also facing penalties and investigations for breaking Iran sanctions:
Standard Chartered paid a total $667 million, when all was said and done, to various regulators to settle allegations it violated Iran sanctions. The first half of that fine was levied by the New York State Department of Financial Services in August 2012, and the next month Standard Chartered appeared as a “meeting sponsor” of the CGI’s annual meeting.
A late August 2012 New York Times report revealed Deutsche Bank was also under investigation for potential Iran sanctions violations. Days later, Reuters reported Credit Agricole was conducting an internal review of payments involving countries that may have been subject to U.S. sanctions, at the urging of the Manhattan District Attorney and other “American governmental authorities.” Deutsche Bank was a meeting sponsor and Credit Agricole was a partner at that year’s CGI meeting.
In December 2012, the Department of Justice and U.S. Treasury HSBC would pay $1.92 billion to settle allegations that the bank allowed drug cartels to launder billions of dollars and that the bank violated U.S. sanctions by illegally conducting transactions on behalf of customers in Iran, Libya, Cuba, Sudan and Burma.
It’s unclear whether HSBC or any of its subsidiaries gave to the foundation that year or prior, but records on the Foundation’s website that were recently updated indicate the bank contributed anywhere from $500,000 to $1,000,000 in 2014, when it was listed as a convening sponsor for that year’s CGI meeting, the highest level of support possible. [Link]
Hillary Bashes HSBC; Doesn’t Mention $81 Million Sent To Clinton Foundation From Secret HSBC Swiss Accounts; Doesn’t Return $2 Million In Fees And Donations To Clintons
By Eileen Mcgann On July 20, 2015
Hillary Clinton is shocked by the misconduct of many big banks and singled out HSBC for especially harsh criticism in her economic speech. She’s horrified about bank misconduct.
HSBC recently agreed to pay Swiss authorities $28 million for laundering money for sanctioned countries and drug cartels, as well as for helping wealthy clients conceal millions of dollars while advising them how to avoid taxes.
In December, 2012, HSBC paid a record $1.9 billion fine after a U.s. Department of Justice found the bank “violated federal laws by laundering money from Mexican drug trafficking and processing banned transactions on behalf of Iran, Libya, Sudan and Burma.”
So Hillary’s outrage is understandable. What’s not understandable is that the Clinton Foundation accepted a $500,000 contribution in 2014 – AFTER the settlement. And the money was never returned. Nor was the $1.5 million that the bank paid to Bill Clinton for speeches.
And Hillary never mentioned the $81 million in contributions that were routed through HSBC’s secret Swiss bank to the Clinton Foundation. [Link]
_______________________________________________________
Jason Chaffetz We Hold Hillary Clinton's Server Administrator In Contempt Of Court
Published on Sep 22, 2016
Jason Chaffetz Wants Bryan Pagliano Held In Contempt Of Court
The COKE Brothers! Bush & Clinton Linked Together in Drug Trade
Published on Sep 22, 2016
There is compelling evidence that suggests George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton were once part of the largest drug smuggling operation in American history. Darrin McBreen and David Knight talk about the Bush and Clinton Crime Family connections with the CIA, Barry Seal, Oliver North and the Iran Contra Scandal.
Drug Trafficking And The Clinton Crime Family
Published on Sep 22, 2016
Why is the life and death of Baton Rouge, Louisiana born drug smuggler Barry Seal still relevant today? The revelations surrounding Seal’s involvement with the Vice Presidency of George H. Bush, the Arkansas Governorship of Bill Clinton, The DEA secret money laundering dealings and CIA Director William J. Casey shadow government of the United States paints a clear picture of the evolution of the current corruption that infests the highest of levels of government today.
News Channel 8 Reporter Theresa Dickie stumbled on what would become a goldmine of investigative journalism when she innocently went to report on what appeared to be a new initiative to bring good jobs to the people of Arkansas. To her surprise Theresa Dickie gradually uncovered a massive shadow government operation replete with illegal cargo plane modifications for drug running and money laundering that would have huge ties to the DEA. And in the center of that deliberate and illegal operation was Barry Seal a fearless drug smuggler and gunrunner for the DEA and the CIA.
After the Iran-Contra hearings detailed Oliver North’s diversion of funds to the Contras and all of the failed indictments to bring anyone to justice. President Bill Clinton denied any involvement in the clandestine Mena Operations. Regardless of the fact that it was Bill Clinton’s time as Arkansas’ Governor that oversaw the blocking of any funding or cooperation in an investigation into one of the largest drug and gun running and money laundering schemes America has ever witnessed. To this day the banks continue to launder the billion dollar drug cartel industry’s money. And when they are caught, they pay a fine and no one goes to prison. Corruption that has been normalized.
News Channel 8 Reporter Theresa Dickie stumbled on what would become a goldmine of investigative journalism when she innocently went to report on what appeared to be a new initiative to bring good jobs to the people of Arkansas. To her surprise Theresa Dickie gradually uncovered a massive shadow government operation replete with illegal cargo plane modifications for drug running and money laundering that would have huge ties to the DEA. And in the center of that deliberate and illegal operation was Barry Seal a fearless drug smuggler and gunrunner for the DEA and the CIA.
After the Iran-Contra hearings detailed Oliver North’s diversion of funds to the Contras and all of the failed indictments to bring anyone to justice. President Bill Clinton denied any involvement in the clandestine Mena Operations. Regardless of the fact that it was Bill Clinton’s time as Arkansas’ Governor that oversaw the blocking of any funding or cooperation in an investigation into one of the largest drug and gun running and money laundering schemes America has ever witnessed. To this day the banks continue to launder the billion dollar drug cartel industry’s money. And when they are caught, they pay a fine and no one goes to prison. Corruption that has been normalized.
Trey Gowdy Finds Out Department Of Justice Has Been Covering Up Hillary Clinton's Lies
Published on Sep 25, 2016
New FBI Docs Show that the department of justice have been covering up Hillary Clinton's lies all along.
Hillary Funded By Saudi Arabia While Claiming She's Tough On Terrorism: Debate Highlights
Hillary Admits She Wants To Confiscate American's Guns With No Due Process
Published on Sep 26, 2016
Hillary Clinton admits she wants to take guns from people with no jury or no trial.
Crowd Applauds As Trump Calls Out Hillary On Deleted Emails: Debate Highlight
Published on Sep 26, 2016
Donald Trump is unrelenting, hitting Hillary Clinton on her scandals over and over, this time on her 33,000 deleted emails.
