CS293 L2 FBI Vault SilverScript Aug 10 2017

CS293 L2 FBI Vault SilverScript Aug 10 2017

CS293 L2 Further Investigation into the FBI Vault Aug 10 2017

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uujn1ztGQEw livechat https://pastebin.com/rwyQPfqN

Charles Ortel joins us in studio with Jared and Elizabeth Beck on Skype to discuss the legal implications of Hillary Clinton's possible plea bargain.

 Transcript
0:25
okay good afternoon everybody we've got
0:29
some very special guests today charles
0:32
or tel here with us in the studio thanks
0:34
for having me on thanks for being here
0:35
at HQ in new york and of course Trish is
0:38
with us from Boston and we've got the
0:40
backs Jarod Elizabeth Beck coming to us
0:43
from Miami Jorge is traveling at the
0:46
moment but we wanted to have a little
0:48
bit of a conversation about this
0:51
possible plea bargain that's being
0:53
spoken about for Hillary Clinton with
0:56
regard to the email server and
0:59
specifically the legal implications with
1:02
regard to the fraud that you've been
1:03
following for so many years in the
1:05
Clinton Foundation sure so what happened
1:09
is that yesterday I believe a very
1:12
famous writer former head of the New
1:14
York Times Magazine Ed Klein I was done
1:17
a series of books based on his great
1:20
sourcing put out a story on Newsmax
1:24
suggesting that lawyers from the Justice
1:27
Department our US Justice Department had
1:28
offered some sort of a plea deal wherein
1:32
Hillary might be given the chance to
1:36
confess to some element of behavior
1:40
involving this secret server and the
1:42
emails and in exchange for whatever she
1:44
does in that agreement the Justice
1:47
Department would in theory according to
1:49
the reporting abandon any probes of the
1:52
Clinton Foundation and related issues I
1:55
saw that story and while I think Newsmax
1:58
has some interesting stuff from time to
2:00
time I right away thought that it was
2:02
rubbish because you know it just doesn't
2:04
really make sense i divided the two
2:07
broad areas the the Benghazi tragedy
2:10
which is a deplorable tragedy and the
2:12
question of sending private communicant
2:15
communications over unsecure private
2:17
servers that's one whole area of proper
2:20
inquiry but I told Peter Schweitzer two
2:23
years ago that the area of the Clinton
2:25
Foundation is a lot more interesting one
2:28
from a prosecutorial standpoint I say
2:30
all this just as somebody reads and
2:32
understands English not as a lawyer
2:33
right but it strikes me that the legal
2:37
standards that are applied when you go
2:38
after a chair
2:39
it's behaving illegally organized and
2:42
operating illegally soliciting illegally
2:44
getting involved with diverting private
2:47
diverting money to private persons to
2:49
insiders the down in Florida where the
2:53
Becks are there's a congressperson I
2:55
don't think from your district Corrine
2:56
brown who was just convicted over a much
3:00
smaller version of charity fraud slush
3:03
fund $800,000 slush fund operating over
3:06
four years she faces hundreds of years
3:08
in prison I saw that like three hundred
3:10
years yeah it was three hundred fifty
3:12
years but she was only convicted on a
3:14
high proportion of all of the 24 counts
3:17
so and that's a that's a very good
3:19
comparable in a sense because both
3:21
ladies are around the same age
3:23
here you have an African American
3:25
sitting Congress person running to serve
3:28
I think another term after serving
3:31
twelve previous terms and in John July
3:33
six last year our US Attorney Department
3:37
Justice decided to throw the book at
3:39
this woman in the middle of an election
3:40
campaign yet they let Hillary Clinton
3:43
off at the same day James Comey I
3:45
believe around the same day said and how
3:48
he was able to reach the conclusion that
3:50
they weren't gonna prosecute Hillary
3:53
Clinton over the the server issue so I
3:55
think it's a spot-on comparable and the
3:57
Clinton Foundation fraud is in economic
3:59
terms
4:00
many torrent times larger I believe that
4:03
then whatever Akron Brown had done and
4:06
it reminds me a little bit of you know
4:09
the sad fact that when it comes to
4:11
cocaine you know african-americans seem
4:14
to go get thrown away forever over crack
4:16
cocaine whereas white affluent Americans
4:20
when they get caught with the the other
4:22
form of cocaine frequently they skate so
4:25
I mean there's one-tenth the conviction
4:28
time yeah so I saw the story and it
4:31
appeared to me just on this spot that it
4:33
was rubbish and then today just moments
4:35
ago before we started this broadcast the
4:37
great tom Fitton of judicial watch the
4:40
great and indefatigable tom Fitton a
4:43
wonderful person i think we can all
4:45
agree he he has won yet another victory
4:49
in that the State Department now has to
4:51
go can
4:52
to do search a more exhaustive search
4:54
for these missing Benghazi emails so we
4:57
do without judicial watch a judicial
4:59
watch it yeah I mean they're doing the
5:01
work it would seem of the entire Justice
5:03
Department and of course the IRS is
5:05
completely captured but orange is doing
5:08
all the work of the FBI so I was doing
5:10
all the work at the DOJ and it is quite
5:13
a thing and the backs are you know doing
5:15
their part as well right well one of the
5:18
things though that brought up last night
5:22
when we had him on the broadcast was
5:26
that the statute of limitations has just
5:29
about run out on those emails for
5:31
Hillary and that the even if there were
5:34
a plea deal being discussed it wouldn't
5:38
be relevant and there is no ability to
5:41
follow through on an investigation at
5:44
this point
5:44
anyway well alone and that in fact he
5:47
talked about we talked about the IRS
5:50
audit you know notion around the private
5:53
foundations and holding them accountable
5:55
and the way you describe Charles that
5:58
the law requires and you know he seemed
6:01
to think that that made a lot of sense
6:04
because you don't have the statue of
6:06
statute of limitations
6:08
clock ticking on you so long as that
6:11
thing is in existence and you know the
6:15
idea that so many others are tied up
6:18
into the accountability of the Clinton
6:23
Foundation such as the Gates Foundation
6:26
who has contributed to it you know
6:30
that's an even more beautiful aspect of
6:32
that Ruth I think you know it's very
6:35
straightforward
6:48
yeah let me suggest another comparable
6:52
to go with Charles is comparable which
6:54
is that if indeed the there's a plea
6:59
agreement to plead to some aspect of the
7:03
emails and in exchange for not going
7:04
after the Clinton Foundation that's
7:06
basically you know pleading guilty to a
7:09
DUI so you don't get charged for murder
7:11
right right that's not serious right
7:16
well you know and it's even more
7:17
interesting in a way I think because
7:20
Trish is right on the statute of
7:22
limitations point the Clinton Foundation
7:24
the main Clinton Foundation operated
7:26
began operations officially from October
7:28
23rd 1997
7:29
to December 31st 1997 on their website
7:34
and in public records I have found no
7:36
evidence that they ever filed a tax
7:38
return for that important period October
7:40
23 1997 to December 31st 1997 the
7:44
statute of limitations does not up does
7:47
not limit you when you fail to file a
7:50
report so they are trouble with that
7:53
short period and they have done it with
7:55
several other I won't go into all the
7:57
minutiae unless you want me to but in
7:59
several other cases they have followed a
8:01
consistent practice of having
8:03
significant operations during a short
8:05
period but not filing the return so for
8:08
the Clinton Health Access Initiative
8:09
between September 29th 9 2009 and
8:13
December 31st 2009 though that entity
8:17
was very active and the record would
8:19
suggest it was very
8:21
active they did not file a return for
8:23
that short period and they did not file
8:25
a proper liquidation return of the
8:27
Clinton full of the Clinton Foundation
8:30
when they liquidated the predecessor
8:32
company after 2009 so there are multiple
8:36
omitted returns all of which gets them
8:38
in legal jeopardy and then they made the
8:41
huge mistake and I actually warned them
8:43
in 2015 the Clinton Foundation publicly
8:46
I said you've got to abandon your tax
8:49
returns and you gotta mint all of your
8:51
tax returns to get out of trouble and
8:53
instead of doing that or to try to get
8:55
out of trouble they thought to be really
8:57
cute and they just amended their tax
8:59
returns from 2010 to 2013 and filed a
9:04
new return a fresh return for 2014
9:07
consistent with the amended returns well
9:09
if they didn't amend 98 they didn't file
9:12
97 and they didn't amend 98 through 2009
9:15
so they actually compounded in my view
9:18
their problems because it's not as
9:20
simple as just getting the report right
9:23
there also soliciting they're down there
9:25
in Florida the becks will know that in
9:28
Florida if I register the bill Hillary
9:29
and Chelsea Clinton Foundation in
9:31
Florida I don't set up a new domestic
9:34
Florida corporation with a slightly
9:37
similar name called the William J
9:39
Clinton Foundation corporation on I
9:42
think it was June 2nd 2009 I when I when
9:47
that's a different entity from the
9:49
parent company you don't have to set up
9:51
a new to admit you just register the the
9:54
parent 1 which is an Arkansas
9:56
corporation as a foreign corporation
9:58
inside Florida and back in 2009 there
10:02
are a lot of shenanigans involving Haiti
10:03
right that I think we routed illegally
10:07
through this Florida corporation so the
10:09
the Clintons are are right now I
10:12
actually went on the site this morning
10:13
they're soliciting money because bills
10:16
humpty-dumpty birthday's coming up and
10:18
it one of them you the sign of birthday
10:19
card what you're soliciting while we're
10:21
on the on the broadcast
10:22
they haven't corrected any of this
10:23
paperwork and were they to go to a mr.
10:27
Beck's point to sign this plea agreement
10:28
they would have to finally disclose that
10:31
Hillary bill and Chelsea illegally took
10:33
control
10:34
converting this thing from a public
10:36
charity into an attempted private
10:38
foundation in 2013 to 2015 that they
10:43
attempted this illegal I mean they they
10:45
said they did it it is illegal to do
10:48
what they did I believe and then they
10:50
hid it from the electorate during the
10:51
primary season in the campaign and
10:53
they're only now correcting in certain
10:55
states this information sochi hillary
10:58
was in control of the clinton foundation
10:59
while she was running for president
11:02
without disclosing it to her political
11:05
donors to the campaign donors and then
11:08
it went down the whole campaign lost now
11:10
they're trying to correct it she was in
11:12
a position to control things so any any
11:14
settlement here which said that earlier
11:17
that she had engaged in illegal activity
11:20
is relevant to her charity filings and
11:22
would that failure to disclose itself
11:25
also be an illegal act oh I think so I
11:27
mean let the backs answer that question
11:29
but I think so what do you think guys
11:32
well my first thought is that I think
11:38
that the American people deserve a trial
11:41
and all these issues and I say that
11:46
because the Clinton Foundation and
11:51
foundations more broadly are the Nexus
11:56
by which corruption has crept into our
12:01
political system and become so virulent
12:04
they are the means by which various
12:11
interests control our government they go
12:14
through the Foundation's themselves and
12:16
so this all needs to come out in court
12:21
through a legal proceeding I think the
12:24
American people deserve a trial on all
12:26
these issues and I think that the issues
12:31
involving the Clinton Foundation are
12:33
just part of a broader story about the
12:36
corruption in our political system and
12:38
so we really need to start setting legal
12:40
precedents and the only way you do that
12:42
legally is by going to try you don't do
12:48
that in settlements and a plea agreement
12:50
is what a settlement is so you know the
12:53
very concept you know the even apart
12:56
from the issue that you know would be
12:58
pleading to a much lesser crime to avoid
13:01
getting prosecuted for an you know just
13:04
a much greater crime you know and just
13:06
oppose the concept of a plea agreement
13:11
for any of those issues well here's a
13:14
question I put to the whole panel I mean
13:17
do we think what's the implications of
13:19
all this is this plea agreement being
13:20
put forward just to confuse the American
13:22
people further and just move the ball
13:24
down the field a little bit longer and
13:26
then they'll do something else to cover
13:28
up the rest of these crimes yeah I think
13:30
I mean I'm not a political expert but I
13:33
think the clintons to understand the
13:35
clinton's behavior they look at
13:36
everything through a political lens
13:37
there's no such thing as right and wrong
13:40
there's only the only thing that matters
13:42
is keeping the Clintons and their people
13:44
in power and anything you do to keep
13:46
them in power is a good thing anything
13:48
you do to restrict their power or punish
13:50
them is a bad thing so that's why John
13:52
Podesta and I'll say this flat-out he is
13:54
a weasel of all weasels that's what
13:57
that's why last week he came out and he
14:01
tried on the gullible captured
14:04
mainstream media the idea that you know
14:06
it would it would violate decades of
14:09
political norms to prosecute somebody
14:12
who lost a presidential election I mean
14:14
a ridiculous argument and you know it's
14:18
but you know there's almost let's call
14:21
it 50 percent of the popular vote
14:22
roughly voted in favor of Hillary
14:25
Clinton so there are a lot of sore
14:26
losers out there and they can stir up
14:28
trouble many of them work in the
14:30
mainstream media at CNN New York Times
14:31
Washington Post so they can write
14:33
stories muddying the waters and that was
14:35
the first attempt to do this then the
14:37
second attempt is I think to say well
14:40
she was going to be reasonable she's
14:42
prepared to move forward so now she
14:43
wants to be a minister you know we could
14:46
talk about that one but she was I think
14:50
we could die baby I mean I mean that was
14:54
that
14:55
you know actually I never met what am I
14:59
to make yourself right by God right Yeah
15:02
right
15:03
I never repent very effectively right
15:15
that's right
15:17
repeal and repent that's right so you
15:24
you know one of the things we were
15:26
talking about the other day was that
15:27
there was in fact an IRS investigation
15:31
in Dallas and I wondered if you know
15:34
that got obstructed you know you knew a
15:36
whole lot more about that than me but I
15:38
also wondered you know when it comes to
15:41
those foundation IRS style prosecutions
15:46
of those kinds of crimes like is that
15:50
something you know if it were to begin
15:52
on a local level you know it seems to me
15:55
it would sort of tug at a thread that
15:57
really ties all of this together and if
16:00
you can sure find the right place to
16:02
start then you have you know you can be
16:06
strategic in how you move forward you
16:08
know so I wondered if you've had any
16:10
insight as to you know and you Charles
16:14
in the live excuse me jarrod and
16:15
Elizabeth about you know trying to move
16:20
forward in that kind of way or if it's
16:22
not coming all right do you want me to
16:25
start yeah so um basically what we know
16:28
because it came supposedly from the IRS
16:31
in response to a letter that the great
16:34
Marsha Blackburn congressperson from
16:36
Tennessee was who with her staff has
16:38
done amazing work on this whole issue of
16:41
trying to regulate rogue charities to
16:43
bring them not simply the Clinton
16:45
Foundation but all of them to heal she
16:48
says several letters and got this
16:50
ridiculous response last year that was a
16:53
shameful response from I believe the
16:55
acting current head of the tax-exempt
16:56
organization you know dear form letter
16:58
you know thanks for your letter and so
17:01
that didn't sit well and and she got a
17:04
response finally from the Dallas office
17:06
which is the correct office
17:08
saying that they did open investigation
17:10
last year before the election so we know
17:12
that an investigation was open we also
17:15
know that wasn't the first investigation
17:17
we know that going back and there's two
17:20
FBI vault file dumps FBI vault file is a
17:23
available to the public and there's one
17:26
for the William J Clinton Foundation
17:27
that's a two-part dump that has over 600
17:30
pages of information and shows you how
17:32
active the investigation may have been
17:34
starting around February 2001 on the
17:37
heels of the mark rich revelations
17:39
there's a whole raft of paperwork going
17:41
through 2005 and at the very end of dump
17:44
2 or section 2 of that dump there is
17:47
information suggesting there was another
17:50
investigation I think in New Orleans and
17:52
around 2008 2009 and there may have been
17:55
others so we know there has been a
17:56
pattern of Investigations what is
17:59
amazing to me I always I'm just a I'm
18:01
just a dude you know I'm just an
18:02
independent person a member of the
18:04
public with with a spare time and I
18:07
don't like fraud and I don't I think
18:10
most Americans don't like fraud or when
18:12
you see this type of epic fraud you know
18:14
I felt it was incumbent of me to try to
18:16
explain what I saw to the public which
18:18
is what I'm doing and to try to
18:20
encourage governments state federal and
18:23
foreign governments to bring to expose
18:25
this to prosecute these people and bring
18:28
them to justice so there was the the
18:31
first FBI fall file dump now there's a
18:34
second one that you have up on the
18:35
screen this relates to Hillary Clinton
18:37
and the server yeah so yes there's
18:39
another set of FBI investigations now
18:42
why might these be married as Jared was
18:46
saying and Elizabeth was saying
18:48
foundations and in Trisha Foundation's
18:51
have become one of the last unregulated
18:54
Arya's in the world particularly
18:56
international foundations are perfect in
18:59
quotes vehicles to launder money you can
19:02
set up foundation up and I think we have
19:05
evidence in the Clinton Foundation you
19:07
set a foundation up in Arkansas and then
19:10
you start setting up other foundations
19:12
they did it in Florida they did it in
19:13
multiple countries and in loose
19:16
countries like Papua New Guinea who in
19:18
Papua New Guinea is going to check
19:20
that your paperwork is right in Florida
19:23
and Arkansas in London or whatever we
19:25
have evidence I'll share it break a
19:26
little news this is all in the public
19:28
domain you go on to the UK charities
19:32
house Companies House website and look
19:36
up William Jay Clinton Foundation UK
19:38
that was organized between May 23rd 2007
19:42
in July 10 2007 look in section 3 of the
19:46
memorandum of Association where it
19:49
discusses the objects of that foundation
19:51
and what you'll find is that it says it
19:55
has powers that it doesn't actually have
19:57
under Arkansas law so these people the
20:00
william j clinton foundation if you're
20:04
pulling it up on the screen I can show
20:05
you so go I thought that it would you
20:11
need to search in the companies house
20:13
not-not-not go you know
20:17
UK yeah that's what that one find
20:20
company boy you're good William J
20:22
Clinton yep
20:31
there
20:34
bottom of the page when it sorry it goes
20:40
the top of the page were there sorry
20:42
filing history bottom of that page view
20:48
PDF the bottom 26 page PDF this one
20:51
right here yep can you guys see on your
20:55
own monitors Jared and Elizabeth no I
20:57
can't
20:58
I'm not I'm not seeing anything sorry
21:00
about that yeah well if the on the
21:04
playback you guys will be able to enjoy
21:06
this drama but anyway what you'll see
21:08
will pull it up now if you get this
21:11
second paragraph 3 so us up stop for a
21:14
second this was filled out by mark
21:16
Richard lacy who is a solicitor but when
21:19
you look him up it says that his main
21:20
occupation is playing the clarinet Wow
21:23
so a solicitor is a term for a lawyer
21:26
there's two types of lawyers there's a
21:28
solicitor what's the other kind Jared
21:31
barrister yeah yeah so so this is the
21:34
solicitor unclear how what sort of
21:37
training he had unclear how much he knew
21:39
about Arkansas law unclear you know what
21:42
was really going on here because when we
21:46
get it to the actual paragraph three
21:49
I'll read it out so Jared and Elizabeth
21:51
can hear it
21:53
this is a normal filing the way it works
21:56
in the UK is you create a company this
21:58
is a UK charity non-profit corporation
22:02
this is the filing for it and that is
22:05
you first you create it as a company and
22:07
then you register it as a charity so it
22:11
shows here that Andrew Kessel the CFO
22:13
and Bruce Lindsey the CEO of the Andrew
22:16
Barton Kessel and Bruce Lindsey who was
22:21
I think at the time the president of the
22:24
fender chief executive officer of the
22:25
foundation they set this subsidiary up
22:27
may 17 2007 which happens to be just at
22:34
the time that this unit ate the largest
22:36
entity contributor was parking tough
22:41
questions about do you have the
22:42
authority to do what you say you're
22:44
going to do for us fighting HIV
22:47
they set this subsidiary up and I
22:52
believe that either the lawyer here this
22:55
is called the memorandum Association
22:57
these are this is like the Articles of
22:59
Incorporation for a u.s. corporation
23:01
nonprofit corporation and you see in the
23:03
objects let's just slow slow down here
23:06
object under English law is the same as
23:08
purposes under US law so this sets state
23:11
sets forth the purposes of this UK thing
23:13
and it says the objects are purposes for
23:16
which the charities established are to
23:18
promote such purposes as shall be
23:20
charitable from time to time under
23:22
English law including but not limited to
23:25
such of the activities of the US
23:27
Foundation that being the parent as may
23:29
be charitable under English law relating
23:32
to and it lists out a whole bunch of
23:33
things
23:34
there's several problems with this I'm
23:37
told by lawyers that a US nonprofit must
23:40
have limited purposes you can't you
23:43
can't by creating a subsidiary expand
23:46
the purposes that were originally
23:48
authorized of the Clinton Foundation so
23:50
that's what they try to do here the
23:52
original Clinton Foundation was
23:54
authorized to comply with the
23:55
presidential libraries act of 1955 as it
23:59
was amended in 1986 to house
24:02
presidential records in a facility in
24:04
Little Rock Arkansas and to study them
24:07
in a related research facility and
24:09
that's it no other purposes
24:12
so this says no no what we're gonna do
24:15
here if we just go back up a little bit
24:17
in it in addition to what I just told
24:19
you this would appear to give the UK
24:22
foundation the right to to the promote
24:26
the advancement of health or the saving
24:28
of lives in general and also in
24:30
particular by the alleviation of
24:32
suffering suffering caused by the
24:33
pandemic of the AIDS virus and it goes
24:36
on and on and on this is plainly illegal
24:39
now here's the interesting thing that I
24:41
see Charles George is always talking
24:43
about modus operandi pattern and
24:45
practice and it's something that I've
24:47
observed with the Clintons as well and
24:49
what we see right here is a modus
24:51
operandi where they're engaged in
24:53
something that on the sir
24:55
this appears to be unimpeachable we're
24:56
trying to fight AIDS so ii someone like
24:59
you or i comes out and says hey wait a
25:01
minute they're breaking the law they
25:03
immediately turn around and say oh look
25:04
at these two guys trying to stop us from
25:06
fighting aids right that's the way they
25:08
do it they try to co-op the credibility
25:10
of some other person or some effort to
25:13
themselves absorb that credibility as is
25:17
the case with hiring Erik Braverman to
25:20
be the chief executive of their
25:22
foundation he's a very credible guy with
25:24
a great background and they can you know
25:26
blame it on him they can watch him
25:28
anything on anybody else what what do
25:32
you Jared and Elizabeth think it is what
25:34
let me you make this is my my first
25:36
reaction is you know also don't discount
25:41
or overlook the fact that this appears
25:47
to be creating a so this is a UK
25:50
subsidiary of the Clinton Foundation
25:53
right right okay so now by expanding the
25:57
scope of the of the foundation through
26:03
this subsidiary tactic
26:04
they're also subjecting themselves to
26:06
the law of the UK so this is you know
26:10
they're trying to get outside the
26:11
jurisdiction of the United States
26:14
well there's well there's one additional
26:17
fact I need to give you the notes very
26:19
complicated but in this time frame Tony
26:22
Blair had made the Prime Minister of
26:24
England had made a decision to leave to
26:26
step down and he stepped down when I
26:29
think by June or July 2007 also in this
26:33
time frame the UK decide was persuaded
26:36
to make a commitment a 20-year
26:38
commitment to unit eight to provide unit
26:41
eight a billion UK pounds all right call
26:45
that a billion and a half dollars over
26:47
20 years so a firm commitment to unit
26:50
eight in the early period 50% of all the
26:53
money that unit take gave to anybody
26:55
went to the Clinton Foundation so this
26:58
so this could have been you know Tony
27:01
was checking out you know he'd watched
27:03
how the bill Bill Clinton had checked
27:04
out of being president then he kept sets
27:06
up the Clint
27:07
Foundation the various fennec Blair
27:09
creates similar Blair foundations I
27:12
think at least to Blair starts giving
27:14
speeches Blair starts having a
27:16
consulting firm going around the world
27:18
so I think this is a case potentially of
27:20
Tony Blair looking at this providing
27:22
cover and saying okay you know I've got
27:25
you the commitment we've already
27:26
committed you can have committed by this
27:27
moment to unit eight monies that were
27:30
supposed to go to the Clinton Foundation
27:31
we got to get you regularized in the UK
27:34
I got this under control
27:35
nobody's gonna look and this this I
27:38
think was their workaround which then
27:41
brings Tony Blair into the mix and the
27:45
UK government and taxpayers into the mix
27:47
and it all together at unit eight I
27:49
believe they're 29 countries some very
27:52
small countries like Mauritius and of
27:54
all places knee chair knee chair
27:56
actually gave money to unit 8 which then
27:58
went to the Clinton Foundation illegally
28:00
so their bonus operating their pattern
28:01
and practice is to involve as many
28:03
people in the fraud as possible so that
28:06
you you will not expose it well this
28:08
goes to what we always talk about what
28:10
the compromised networks and you know it
28:13
says on the simplest level when you see
28:16
a gang initiation thing where you play
28:18
the knockout game or you have to kill
28:20
some innocent person to be initiated
28:21
into the gang they've got dirt on you so
28:24
you don't roll over on them now we got a
28:26
really interesting comment from one of
28:28
our members of the crowdsource community
28:30
here who goes by Iowa Russian agent says
28:33
that Theresa Mae's husband owns g4s I
28:38
don't know if that relates to elect
28:40
directly to what we're talking about but
28:41
the incestuous nature of the way in
28:44
which all of these organizations are
28:46
intertwined what's G for us g4s is
28:49
something that George refused refers to
28:51
as gangs for security that we've spoken
28:54
about many many times but it's just
28:56
interesting to see how you know Tony
28:59
Blair gets intertwined and Theresa May
29:02
gets intertwined and as you said
29:04
everybody gets implicated in some way so
29:06
that nobody will roll over part of what
29:09
we were discussing last night with
29:11
Thomas Paine
29:12
was that there are certain things that
29:14
just can't be revealed and this was also
29:17
I think in the Yahoo article that you
29:19
had sent me earlier Charles that foreign
29:21
governments don't want to reveal all
29:23
this stuff because it would basically
29:25
just a Sputnik or though
29:27
oh sorry was it oh right the Sputnik
29:29
article right well that was from the
29:31
other day but it would just basically
29:33
explode all governments everywhere and
29:36
destroy everybody's confidence in
29:38
government if they knew how corrupt
29:39
everything actually was well it's
29:42
certainly not gonna get better all by
29:44
itself that's right let me let me let me
29:49
this I just have an observation that
29:52
ties back into something Charles had
29:56
said a a while back that triggered a
29:59
thought in my mind and that was the
30:02
prosecutor well not prosecution but
30:05
there was an investigation opened in
30:06
Texas waiting to the IRS or I guess some
30:12
congresswoman had triggered an
30:13
investigation or had tried to trigger an
30:15
investigation and there was finally some
30:17
action out of the IRS office in Texas
30:20
sometimes or often times I should say
30:23
you know legal cases litigation comes
30:29
down to issues of jurisdiction and venue
30:31
in other words where what court the case
30:36
is ultimately brought in and in the
30:38
criminal domain and I'm not a criminal
30:40
attorney I'm the civil attorney but my
30:44
understanding from my criminal
30:47
colleagues criminal law colleagues is
30:50
that that you know this is true in the
30:55
in the criminal realm as well is that
30:57
where a grand jury starts an
31:00
investigation or you know an IRS agents
31:05
office or other agency office starts an
31:09
investigation is ultimately typically
31:13
where the case is tried for a jury
31:17
okay and so you know you know just to
31:22
sort of talk about you know what's going
31:24
on with the the the you know the the
31:29
Russia stuff that the Special Counsel
31:32
Mueller is supposed to supposedly
31:34
looking at right now you know there was
31:36
very interesting article by Alan
31:39
Dershowitz that appeared a couple days
31:41
ago which noted the fact that the
31:44
Special Counsel has opened
31:47
investigations grand jury investigations
31:51
into the supposed Russia collusion in
31:55
there's there's a grand jury
31:57
investigation in DC but there's also one
32:01
in Virginia in other words there are two
32:03
grand jury investigations pending into
32:06
the Russia allegations going on at the
32:08
same time and Dershowitz made the very
32:15
cogent observation that you know you you
32:19
would do this as a prosecutor to get a
32:22
strategic advantage you know depending
32:25
on where you want to try the case
32:26
because you have two investigations
32:29
going on the st. at the same time so you
32:31
can you know figure out which venue you
32:34
want because ultimately you know the
32:36
venue where you try the case is from
32:40
where your jury is selected from and so
32:42
a jury from DC is going to be a
32:45
different type of jury than you'll get
32:48
in Virginia and so decisions that are
32:50
made at the very beginning of a case you
32:54
know in the investigation stage often
32:57
determine you know who what jury members
33:00
are deciding the case so you know just
33:03
to kind of take it back to this UK stuff
33:06
with the Clinton Foundation you know I
33:09
hear you know that you know you know
33:12
some of this is you know no doubt coming
33:14
out of you know the the relationship
33:16
between the Clintons and Tony Blair but
33:19
you know this is don't we shouldn't lose
33:21
sight of the fact and I think this is
33:23
you know something that's already been
33:24
talked about but this is this is
33:27
corruption on a global scale
33:29
but from the strategic point of the
33:32
Clinton Foundation
33:33
you know if they you know if they feel
33:35
that you know you had certain
33:37
jurisdictions in the US are coming after
33:40
them and we were already heard about how
33:42
many you know grand jury investigations
33:45
you know have had were were apparently
33:50
pending during the primaries of course
33:53
the public wasn't told about that but
33:55
there was also an FBI investigation
33:57
there's an investigation in Texas so it
34:00
would be in their interest I would think
34:02
from their perspective of trying to
34:04
avoid prosecution to shift the locus of
34:08
the dispute to to a jurisdiction that
34:11
may be more favorable to them and they
34:13
may feel that you know as people are
34:16
closing in that you know the UK would be
34:21
a more favorable place to have the
34:23
issues tried if they ever came well so
34:25
here's where it gets very interesting
34:27
what one of the reasons I decided to get
34:29
into this was I puzzled it through
34:33
talking to some people some smart
34:34
lawyers and things and I realized that
34:36
this is unlike your typical fraud
34:38
investigation for not only we can talk a
34:41
little bit about the French
34:42
investigation which was opened in
34:43
December 2009 and and went through to
34:47
2011 that was in a body called the cord
34:50
to comb which is an unusual spelled Co
34:52
urs co MP tes it's an accounting court
34:56
accounting for public money and so that
34:59
that investigation is a matter of public
35:01
record that's over the unit 8 thing well
35:05
yeah so the French government was by far
35:07
and away the largest donor to unit 8 and
35:09
in the clinton foundation their first
35:12
revelaed they refused to say how much
35:14
money came from government donors they
35:17
refused to comply with the law they
35:18
still have not done it properly from 98
35:21
to 2007 no one actually knows how much
35:24
money that has come from from government
35:27
donors and the reason that's
35:29
particularly important in the beginning
35:30
people were saying that foundations can
35:33
be used for political corruption you
35:35
were talking about meddling in our
35:36
election foreign governments to curry
35:38
favor with Hillary Clinton as president
35:40
or Barack Obama's president
35:43
for whatever matter if you had a
35:44
foundation can make a donation to a
35:46
foundation that would you know better
35:48
the candidate but it wouldn't
35:51
necessarily be seen as a illegal
35:53
political contribution well you're not
35:55
allowed to do that it's a foreign
35:56
government so the check on that is that
35:58
foundation reporting has to particularly
36:00
for these type of foundations lay all
36:02
that stuff out when they finally
36:04
revealed December 19 2008 their
36:08
cumulative contributions which is not in
36:10
compliance with law it's one way of
36:12
doing it but it's not doesn't comply
36:14
with the law
36:14
they put unit 8 down as having provided
36:18
25 million or more to the Clinton
36:21
Foundation the real number was 300
36:24
million
36:24
the highest category selected was 25
36:28
million or more so the selection of the
36:30
categories I would argue was
36:31
intentionally misleading by December
36:34
31st 2009 unit 8 it turns out we learned
36:39
from this French government report that
36:41
was shared by the court and that
36:43
published in the equivalent of our House
36:44
of Representatives it's over 100 pages
36:46
long in French I think I provided it to
36:49
you Jason
36:50
you have both versions you could put it
36:51
up people could translate it and what it
36:55
shows so there's some interesting tables
36:56
one of them says that by December 31st
36:59
2009 Clinton Foundation had received
37:02
more than 450 million dollars from unit
37:06
aid not only the standard donations that
37:08
they were supposed to get but I don't
37:10
know if you've ever encountered this
37:11
with the charity where you know you're
37:13
running a charity and your donors you
37:15
don't run a campaign for 2019 in 2017
37:18
you run a campaign for this year and
37:20
maybe in a an endowment campaign the
37:23
Clinton Foundation was getting money in
37:27
advance for 2011 and 10 in 2009 so they
37:32
had received about 450 million dollars
37:35
or so according this reports up on the
37:37
screen it'll be up on your website and
37:39
there's a second report as well that
37:42
takes us a little bit further they had
37:44
received a lot of money and on December
37:47
31st 2009 in addition Bill Clinton's
37:51
name is on a request to our IRS when
37:54
Lois Lerner wasn't on top of the
37:55
department
37:57
trying to create a new charity to
37:59
inherit the activities of this entity
38:01
that had received 450 million dollars
38:03
from France and on the application
38:05
format they're asked for this new entity
38:07
are you a successor to any other
38:10
activity and they say no we're not a
38:12
successor when the predecessor activity
38:14
was by far and away the biggest
38:16
operation operating all over the world
38:18
with no controls no tracking of what
38:21
drugs were being bought and this
38:23
happened on the same day December 31st
38:25
2009 now this unit 8 problem it ties
38:28
into potentially Eric Bravermans
38:32
reasoning for leaving the foundation
38:33
because we've always pointed out how he
38:35
was an activist for gay rights and very
38:38
concerned with this alleged IRA
38:41
Magaziner plan to have these half
38:44
strength and quarter strength AIDS drugs
38:46
right and basically rip off these
38:48
foundations that we're buying them
38:50
well I'm you're absolutely right so so
38:53
bill and if you were to ask somebody
38:55
who's a partisan you know why they
38:58
support Bill and Hillary and their
39:00
foundation they would say well all of
39:02
the great work that the Clintons have
39:04
done fighting hiv/aids bringing the
39:06
price of AIDS drugs down that enabled
39:09
our aid dollars to go further they they
39:11
took our American taxpayer money and
39:13
they bought these generic drugs right
39:16
well what what is not disclosed which I
39:18
can reveal now is that on around October
39:20
27th 2003 the Clinton Foundation signed
39:24
an agreement with Ranbaxy to promote the
39:27
sale of their drugs now foundation is
39:29
not allowed to promote it's not allowed
39:31
to engage in private benefit activities
39:34
you can't do that suitable and if you're
39:36
gonna go and say that you know you're
39:38
bringing the price of hiv/aids drugs you
39:40
probably should point down you should
39:42
probably point out that you have a
39:43
business agreement with Ranbaxy we're in
39:46
Rome boxey's not providing these drugs
39:48
at a loss or a concession they're still
39:50
making money right so Boxey the Indians
39:54
were using in my view Bill Clinton and
39:57
the fact that Hillary was the sitting
39:58
u.s. senator to protect their market
40:01
position in the US because as it turns
40:03
out around 2003 or for fifty percent of
40:06
Ron Boxey sales were already to the US
40:08
was a big company
40:09
and we learned in two thousand four five
40:12
six timeframe that until August of 2004
40:15
none of ran backsies drugs manufactured
40:18
and sold throughout the world had ever
40:20
been tested they had they come up with
40:23
these fake tests oh and and so this is
40:26
this you can see in a Fortune magazine
40:28
story called dirty medicine it goes on
40:31
and on and on it culminates the I
40:34
believe the FBI and others raided run
40:36
boxey's American offices in Valentine's
40:39
Day 2006 and rod Rosenstein the Deputy
40:44
Attorney General was the Maryland US
40:46
Attorney he sat on top of the
40:48
investigation that for some reason took
40:49
seven years to bring rhombus boxy I
40:53
would argue to partial justice for the
40:55
despicable crime there's your article I
40:58
think despicable crime of you know
41:00
sending these adulterated suspect drugs
41:03
all over the world this is a fantastic
41:05
article by the way it's a very lengthy
41:07
well researched article and I guess it's
41:12
now up on your site you can read it read
41:13
it at your leisure so you have you have
41:18
that issue then the further issue is
41:20
that the person who introduced the firm
41:22
that introduced run Boxey to Bill
41:24
Clinton was McKinsey and the person who
41:27
was running McKinsey when that happened
41:29
was a guy called Rashad Gupta Rashad
41:31
Gupta was very famous because you know
41:34
when he was on the rocket ship ride
41:36
going up he was the first non you know
41:39
East Coast waspy head of this great
41:42
consulting firm this global firm and
41:44
during the late 1990s he was installed
41:48
in like 97 or thereabouts I forget
41:50
exactly maybe 95 on that rocket ship
41:54
right up into high tech land and
41:55
outsourcing land and tapping into India
41:58
and China McKenzie did really well he
42:01
was top of the world except he started
42:03
getting involved it seems in insider
42:05
trading so he was connected he connected
42:09
Bill and Hillary up to this run Boxey
42:11
thing possibly to another crooked
42:13
company called matrix which his part was
42:15
subsequent bot by Milan so yep the
42:20
epipen people so so there's this this
42:22
a fraud that has so it's like a La Brea
42:25
tar pit in California I mean it has so
42:27
many tentacles but when you go right to
42:31
its root the common pattern and practice
42:34
is the Clinton way they do things how do
42:37
they how do they roll very simple
42:39
approach they lie under oath former
42:41
president knighted States aspiring the
42:43
secretary our president states they are
42:45
fully prepared to look you right in the
42:47
eye and lyin lyin rose and then they
42:49
obstruct justice that's what they've
42:51
done through their entire political
42:52
careers Arkansas you know president etc
42:57
I would argue there's another element to
42:58
the pattern and practice that I've
43:00
observed they they control the Attorney
43:02
General
43:03
right and the prosecutor that's the
43:05
obstruction of justice part okay there
43:07
you go where they accuse their right
43:12
opponents of the crimes they committed
43:16
see that's a tactic that's a tactic so
43:20
I'm saying this strategy is is Anna
43:23
tactic they employ yeah it definitely is
43:25
gaslighting in and let's not forget you
43:27
know we can feel sorry for some of these
43:29
governments and and the taxpayers and
43:32
people of some of these foreign
43:32
countries but in truth many of these
43:35
people involved with the Clinton
43:36
Foundation have willingly been swindled
43:39
it's not it you know this isn't a case
43:41
where like in the Madoff case a lot of
43:44
the people who invested in Madoff
43:45
thought they were taking advantage of
43:47
Bernie Madoff not the reverse anyways
43:51
sorry I mean it's not I mean I think
43:55
we're dealing with more than just the
43:57
Clinton Foundation even but an attitude
44:00
question that has you know pervaded not
44:04
only our society but you know the global
44:07
society that we've created which is just
44:10
you know it's it's past the point it's
44:13
past the breaking point on corruption
44:15
and you know the Clinton Foundation is
44:18
you know only one you know gigantic head
44:21
of this of this monster you're right
44:24
you're right all I know is in criminal
44:28
law there's this concept called felony
44:30
murder and if three people are involved
44:34
but one person
44:35
the trigger the other two people
44:37
involved our prisons are filled with
44:41
people who are convicted based on felony
44:43
murder so we can feel sorry for these
44:46
governments that are acting in concert
44:48
with the Clinton Foundation
44:50
but it's good note for those fellows in
44:53
prison it's good enough for governments
44:57
it's so Elizabeth you mean because the
44:59
person is an accomplice to murder
45:00
they're as guilty as the person who
45:02
pulled the trigger right I mean it's
45:05
called felony murder and all they could
45:07
have done was driven the car like alpha
45:10
javo right some of those some of those
45:15
some of the people convicted under
45:17
felony murder it did the stories are
45:20
very sorry yeah let me let me yeah the
45:23
doctrine of felony murder and get them
45:24
off yes if somebody dies while you're
45:27
committing you know if you go into a
45:31
yeah yeah no I if you go into like a
45:35
convenience store and you know your
45:38
intention is to rob the convenience
45:42
store but somebody ends up dying in the
45:44
process then you can be on the hook even
45:48
if you were just one of the three people
45:50
that went into the convenience store and
45:52
you know your buddy just got nervous and
45:54
pulled the trigger
45:55
you're all on the hook for murder so
45:57
with guilt by association yeah you know
46:01
if you lie with pigs you know that's
46:03
sort of the the parable that sort of
46:06
felony murder gets that but well and the
46:09
other thing is that the idea that you
46:12
know you're making an example of someone
46:14
it's like no we did if you participate
46:19
in it then you should be accountable I
46:21
mean there's us I don't necessarily know
46:23
Tricia for making an example I think so
46:25
far we've made a great example of how
46:27
people get off right ready yeah no I
46:30
agree
46:31
yeah if you're making an example of
46:33
anything it's an example of people
46:34
getting off well I mean this this gets
46:36
back to you know the VFD eyeball which
46:40
showed that you know during the
46:44
the 2016 crime Ares there were these
46:52
grand jury investigations going on in to
46:55
you know the whole Clinton email stuff
46:59
and the public was never informed about
47:02
this and you know these were you know
47:05
material issues that should have been
47:09
disclosed to the public during an
47:12
election season and I just remember you
47:14
know at the time you know Elizabeth and
47:17
I you know this was before we filed the
47:20
DNC fraud lawsuit but we were very
47:22
active Bernie supporters and we were
47:25
having this debate you know with you
47:29
know other Democrats about you know well
47:33
we didn't know you know we didn't know
47:34
about these grand jury investigations
47:36
but we did know that there was you know
47:38
a pending FBI investigation and then you
47:41
know call me came out with that
47:44
ridiculous
47:46
video statement in which he claimed that
47:52
he couldn't prosecute her because
47:58
satisfied and you know as a lawyer that
48:02
was insulting absolutely insulting
48:06
because you know I actually wrote a
48:08
couple of articles at the time because I
48:10
was so outraged and I was really just
48:12
trying to get sort of you know this
48:15
basic perspective out into the debate
48:17
and of course none of it was being
48:18
presented in the in the media but you
48:22
know when you just took a very basic
48:25
reading of the statute at issue which
48:29
was the Espionage Act and you looked at
48:33
the you know the elements of a crime of
48:35
the crime it doesn't require intent
48:38
it requires gross negligence okay which
48:41
is a different legal standard and what
48:44
also has been totally obscured from the
48:47
public is that the the State Department
48:51
had actually conducted its own inspector
48:54
general
48:55
investigation of the email issue and had
49:00
published a rather lengthy report and I
49:02
wrote about this at the time but the
49:05
report made factual findings about
49:08
Hillary Clinton's email server so a need
49:11
you know an agency of the State
49:13
Department already looked into this made
49:14
factual findings and those factual
49:16
findings clearly showed at the very
49:19
least gross negligence by Hillary
49:22
Clinton so from my legal analysis at the
49:24
time I just couldn't see any reason how
49:27
you could read the statute and read the
49:29
factual findings that were already found
49:31
by the State Department and come to the
49:33
conclusion that she hadn't committed a
49:36
crime and then call me of course got on
49:41
in this very bizarre video of the live
49:48
stream press conference which is it was
49:50
very it's very very strange for the FBI
49:52
director to be the one talking about
49:56
whether or not a prosecution should be
49:59
undertaken I mean that's the the
50:01
Attorney General's job yeah that's a you
50:03
know different part of the Justice
50:04
Department and that's what the Attorney
50:07
General is the one that makes that
50:08
decision but here we had the FBI
50:10
director getting up on in front of the
50:13
cameras and engaging in this 20 minute
50:16
statement in which he essentially
50:18
justified the decision not to prosecute
50:22
Hillary Clinton for the email server and
50:25
he made all kinds of statements that are
50:28
just flat wrong under the law including
50:31
that the statute requires intent and
50:35
that no prosecutions have ever been done
50:37
on the site that's just not true as a
50:39
matter of case law is a complete lie but
50:41
it goes back to this concept that you
50:43
know at the time and and the Clinton
50:47
Foundation clearly had control of the
50:52
means of prosecution's in this in this
50:54
country there's just no other way to
50:56
read that outcome from
50:59
we go perspective you know Jared when I
51:01
heard James Comey say the he basically
51:05
lists the litany of crimes that Hillary
51:08
Clinton had engaged in but then goes on
51:10
to say that no sensible prosecutor would
51:13
bring charges I think if you really look
51:15
into what he's saying he's just saying
51:18
sensible prosecutors don't want to end
51:20
up six feet under yeah he said that
51:31
and you know I read that as saying sort
51:35
of maybe you know a little less
51:37
grotesquely than that but I'd rather as
51:40
saying that our system our our system of
51:43
justice is incapable of preventing crime
51:47
rather her not because at the same time
51:49
he made a finding that she had been
51:51
extremely careless in her conduct and
51:54
that was just so bizarre to me because
51:56
to me extremely careless and ropes
51:59
negligence sound like there's no same
52:03
thing he says in that very statement
52:05
that there are three different levels of
52:08
classification
52:09
there's classified there's top secret
52:11
and there's special access program
52:13
intelligence and if you have the
52:15
clearance level to possess special
52:17
access program intelligence and you
52:20
allow or cause to allow that material to
52:23
go onto an unsecured system whether it's
52:26
intentional or not it's a felony so in
52:28
his very own statement he's
52:29
contradicting himself it was quite
52:31
strange it's again it's the Jedi mind
52:33
trick where this is not the prosecution
52:35
you're looking for and they just smoke
52:37
and mirrors that it all goes away right
52:39
yeah well you well you know I'm in those
52:42
FBI Balt documents the dumps I think
52:44
among the two that Charles has spoken
52:47
about there were notes from the email
52:50
investigation I'll have to pull them up
52:52
and share them because in those notes
52:55
the FBI's own notes they say
52:58
they understood with certainty that
53:01
clinton's emails had been accessed by
53:05
hawks hostile actors by virtue of the
53:08
fact that they had gotten access to john
53:11
podesta and several other people with
53:13
whom she had been communicating and he
53:15
directly contradicted himself in that
53:19
statement and said that they did not
53:22
have any certainty as to whether or not
53:25
her emails had been accessed by hostile
53:28
actors I mean and it's right there in
53:31
their own notes in the FBI both yeah so
53:36
I want to ask if I may of the Becks who
53:38
were Bernie supporters you know I didn't
53:42
vote in 2016 and I would not have been a
53:45
Bernie supporter on his economic program
53:47
but pretty much yes that's that's how I
53:53
roll anyway but what what I found was
53:58
interesting now in hindsight when you
54:01
look at this the second the twelve part
54:03
FBI vault file particularly part 12
54:06
there we see that subpoenas were going
54:10
out in December of 2015
54:13
two grand juries and then in January and
54:16
February of 2016 now my kids were Bernie
54:20
supporters and so there that's why I
54:21
know there was a lot of enthusiasm for
54:24
but we all know for Bernie but it was
54:25
building it was building in this late
54:28
December early January February
54:30
timeframe had had the had the Democratic
54:35
people inclined to vote in the
54:37
Democratic party primaries known about
54:40
part 12 and the whole Hillary Clinton
54:42
now FBI ball file I humbly submit to you
54:45
that Bernie Sanders would not have said
54:48
in that debate you know nobody cares
54:50
about the emails right I mean it really
55:02
did sway the election right but but you
55:06
know
55:07
you know BNC fraud lawsuit and this is
55:10
one of the channels by which the fraud
55:11
was perpetrated the DNC rigged the
55:16
primaries and one of the ways they did
55:18
that was through their relationships
55:20
with the mainstream media and you know
55:24
you know I think it's become very clear
55:27
from all of the documents that are in
55:30
the public domain now thanks to
55:32
WikiLeaks and others that you know if
55:36
the EMC at that time and you know maybe
55:40
still today didn't want an issue
55:45
reported on then it wasn't reported on
55:47
they exerted I would say total control
55:52
over the mainstream media networks and
55:56
they blacked out issues that were in any
56:01
way harmful to the elevation of Hillary
56:04
Clinton to the nomination and this is
56:09
one of the channels by which they did it
56:10
so I want to even take a step further in
56:13
my own mind and suggest perhaps that
56:16
maybe the Clintons interfered in the
56:20
primary process of the Republicans as
56:22
well to try thinking that Donald Trump
56:25
would be the easiest to be oh yeah
56:28
there's have you seen the emails
56:33
discussing you know right oh sure sure
56:41
sure so I'm just saying I mean it would
56:43
not at all surprised me that that it was
56:46
a two-part approach the first approach
56:49
was to make sure that you know the
56:51
Bernie phenomenon played out and fizzled
56:53
out and that what had happened to
56:56
Hillary in 2008 were Barack Obama
56:58
outplayed her in the caucuses and
57:01
elsewhere was not going to happen to her
57:03
in 2016 so the whole Bernie thing was a
57:07
ruse you know the Democratic National
57:10
Committee was net was not giving Bernie
57:12
a fair shot which I you know I have to
57:15
say that I think that had Bernie been
57:17
the nominee Democrat nominee against
57:20
Trump he would
57:21
beaten I think Trump in my view well the
57:23
other thing is they thought Bernie
57:25
Sanders was so extreme that he would be
57:28
an easy win for her so that's I think
57:32
that was their thinking and then you
57:34
know they really wanted Donald Trump's
57:36
so they did this whole pipe piper
57:38
strategy with the Republicans to ensure
57:42
the Donald Trump got that nomination and
57:45
and the boy you know that's revenge is a
57:47
dish death bet a dish that's best served
57:51
cold that's right yeah you know Charles
57:53
a lot of people are asking if you feel
57:55
like there's any involvement with John
57:58
McCain and if you've invested
57:59
investigated the John McCain foundation
58:01
sure yeah so John McCain III couldn't
58:04
vote in 2008 either because I couldn't
58:06
vote for John McCain and I was I had
58:10
done my research on Barack Obama and I
58:12
just he was out there economically and
58:14
that we seems geopolitically but anyway
58:17
John McCain's record when you go back
58:19
into it you know all the way back there
58:23
are serious questions about exactly what
58:25
he was doing in Vietnam there are
58:27
serious questions about how he you know
58:30
returned our entered political life who
58:32
he associates with in Arkansas and then
58:35
going more closely in 2000 I want to say
58:38
14 are there abouts I was involved in
58:40
the stop Qatar now movement I was asked
58:43
to be one of the signatories with Allen
58:45
West and Tom McInerney people like that
58:46
I was honored to be given a chance to do
58:49
that because I've done I've spent a lot
58:52
of time traveling around the world and I
58:54
was aware of just how diabolical Qatar
58:57
is and what they're supporting in this
59:00
country and elsewhere and I learned
59:03
through that that the Qataris are also
59:07
potentially supporting John McCain and
59:09
when I saw if you remember Michele
59:12
Bachmann who has her issues when she was
59:14
trying to draw attention to amah billion
59:16
in 2012 who stood up in the set in the
59:19
Senate to defend uma Abedini John McCain
59:22
so so yeah John McCain there's a great
59:26
reporting out of the Daily Caller
59:27
Richard Pollack and Mark Tapscott have
59:30
for years been looking into John McCain
59:32
they have a recent pieces accorded me
59:34
and it
59:34
where they pulled the information on
59:36
McCain's small foundation and they like
59:38
the Clinton Foundation it's much smaller
59:40
but the papers don't make sense they've
59:43
been trying to hide the degree to which
59:45
the government of Saudi Arabia provided
59:46
a contribution to this stuff and there
59:50
are all sorts of problems with the
59:51
McCain Foundation paperwork and
59:52
disclosures and you know I admire
59:56
everybody you know not simply the the
59:58
the fighter pilots and the Admirals and
60:01
all kind of stuff but the people or cook
60:03
and keep the uniforms clean or whatever
60:06
in our fighting forces they all deserve
60:08
a lot of credit but after a certain
60:11
point in time if you're gonna be a
60:12
politician for as long as McCain has
60:14
been what have you done
60:16
McCain Feingold was a stupid law I think
60:19
and I mean what point does some serious
60:22
economist of this guy judge he got
60:24
decimated in 2008 right and and so
60:29
anyway III got some serious problems
60:31
with John McCain well and beyond the
60:32
question of what have you done I mean
60:34
let's put aside any questions about his
60:37
record in the Vietnam War or his
60:39
involvement with the disaster on the USS
60:42
Forrestal or any of that
60:44
if you are a war hero which I'm not
60:48
saying that he necessarily is that
60:50
doesn't absolve you of crimes in the
60:53
future or or doing any of these things I
60:55
mean we know from the WikiLeaks
60:57
documents the released emails that
60:59
Hillary Clinton herself says that Saudi
61:01
Arabia and Qatar are funding Isis so if
61:04
they're also funding John McCain as John
61:05
McCain is appearing in photographs with
61:07
the Free Syrian Army the so-called
61:10
moderate rebels I mean I really do
61:12
believe you're right he's got a lot of
61:14
explaining to do
61:15
well you know periodically and I think
61:17
it's a wonderful thing that it happens
61:19
you'll see the Medal of Honor winners
61:21
you know the president drapes the medal
61:23
a lot and then you know there's a great
61:24
one on YouTube there's a guy I think he
61:26
was of these from Miss Texas who was
61:29
abandoned by his parents and he gives a
61:33
speech when he's accepting the award but
61:36
the summer side is a very moving speech
61:38
with the so and substance of it is I'm
61:40
not a hero
61:41
I mean this guy was one heck of a hero
61:44
but you know the heroes are the people
61:46
who don't come home
61:47
and you know true war heroes you know
61:50
that tend to does always say that and
61:53
mean it you know they don't go around
61:54
taking credit they remember the people
61:57
who died or mangled who you know can't
61:59
speak or whatever and when I see it John
62:02
Kerry when I see a John McCain you know
62:05
basically making a political life and
62:07
fortune out of service in our military
62:10
rubs me the wrong way
62:11
and it's interesting that both of those
62:13
guys are basically hated and maligned by
62:16
the other veterans who were in their
62:17
companies and have stories about sort of
62:19
what really happened there yeah exactly
62:22
yeah well it's just just to build on
62:25
that if I just might give just a brief
62:27
thought please um you know my
62:30
you know experiences you know as a you
62:34
know a really committed Bernie supporter
62:37
and now as you know attorney for the
62:41
plaintiffs and the DNC fraud lawsuit has
62:44
led me to just view the the mainstream
62:48
media of this country in a whole
62:49
different light and so you know as well
62:52
you know when you discover that somebody
62:55
has defrauded you you know in a recent
62:59
transaction and you have a long-standing
63:01
relationship with that person then you
63:04
know the next thing you do is you think
63:06
well how would they defraud me before
63:08
you know I mean what how many this can't
63:11
be the first time right because you know
63:13
a fraudster is a fraud and so you want
63:16
to go back and think about your you know
63:18
history of relationships and
63:20
transactions with this person to see how
63:22
you know where where else have they
63:24
defrauded me and so now you know when I
63:25
think of John McCain I think of somebody
63:27
that was created by the media of this
63:29
country or pushed by the media of this
63:31
country from a very early start I mean
63:35
you know starting with his a period of
63:39
captivity in Vietnam you know that was
63:41
something that was very much you know
63:43
before my time but I've studied it and I
63:45
believe that was something that was sort
63:47
of very push very much pushed on this
63:50
country as part of a narrative connected
63:52
with Vietnam and so you know to the
63:55
extent that the media has been just
63:56
lying to the American people
63:58
continuously
64:00
throughout you know most of its
64:02
existence you know I think this is one
64:04
of those narratives that needs to be
64:06
seriously questioned and examined and to
64:09
the extent that this concept that John
64:11
McCain is a war hero is one of those
64:13
narratives you know it has all the
64:14
hallmarks of another fraud perpetrated
64:17
on the American people right and and you
64:20
know you you consider the fact that you
64:23
know the gulf of tonkin we now know
64:25
never happened and then in 2013 the NDAA
64:32
legalized propaganda by the US
64:35
government and you know they would not
64:37
have passed a piece of legislation like
64:41
that unless they fully intended to use
64:42
it right and then you know now we're
64:45
looking at you know a place like Syria
64:48
where you can point to situations where
64:52
CNN for example had a live interview on
64:59
foreign policy with a seven-year-old
65:02
girl named Vanna a Levin who doesn't
65:05
understand a word of English but who
65:09
recited words she had memorized in
65:11
response to the questions she was asked
65:15
and this was presented as legitimate
65:18
reporting it is on CNN standpoint that
65:21
right that's exactly the way they did
65:23
they so just to get to some of the
65:31
comments here guys the rabbit hole is
65:35
deep Elizabeth so Charlie yeah exactly
65:43
just to get into the comments for a
65:45
moment guys brainy blonde who everybody
65:47
knows is a frequent contributor she
65:49
wants to know if you can speak at all
65:50
about the IRS regulations relative to
65:53
the Clinton Foundation distributing
65:55
pharmaceuticals in the way they did we
65:56
touched on that right there we talked
65:57
about the IRS regulations for sure
66:00
so so I'll talk about the there's a
66:02
pharmaceutical piece but there's the
66:04
bigger piece which the most important
66:07
piece is that when you I don't know what
66:08
that sound is there but but when you um
66:12
I think sorry that's okay so when you
66:17
form a nonprofit corporation using of
66:19
course the becks is your lawyers you
66:23
then you then go ahead and file a you
66:27
are you are a Florida based let's say
66:29
non non-profit but you don't have
66:31
federal tax exemption yet you've got to
66:33
then to get that you've got a file form
66:35
10:23 with the IRS and that form isn't
66:38
is a very tough form that you have to
66:41
make exhaustive disclosures about your
66:43
background your qualifications your
66:45
intentions you've got to demonstrate
66:47
that your charity is a valid charity and
66:49
what should be approved and then once
66:52
you are federally approved that's just
66:54
the beginning of your trouble well all
66:56
you would then have would be the right
66:58
you'd have to file register inside
67:00
Florida complying with the consumer
67:02
registration law I think in Florida that
67:05
would just give you the right to solicit
67:07
donations in Florida if you want to
67:09
solicit donations in New York you've got
67:11
to go through a process in New York we
67:13
have high taxes in New York and we have
67:16
a lot of crooked charities have come
67:17
through here so the rules are very tough
67:19
rules are tough in California through it
67:21
and you don't get if you solicit across
67:24
state lines requesting money is in the
67:27
internet using a telephone using email
67:29
without doing this you are committing
67:31
felony crimes and they can be state they
67:35
can be federal and that's the the the
67:39
essence of the problem for the Clintons
67:41
is is that solicitation probe they did
67:43
not file properly federally or in any
67:47
state or in any foreign country yet they
67:49
solicited okay that's the big element of
67:51
their crime and they solicited in in in
67:54
in my view they solicited money for
67:57
disaster relief after September 11th
68:00
2001 the federal sentencing guidelines
68:02
were seriously tightened to raise the
68:07
penalties for if you're convicted for
68:09
charity fraud if it involves soliciting
68:12
for disaster relief so for Katrina which
68:14
they did for Haiti which they did for
68:15
the tsunami which they did for Gulf
68:17
Coast which they did and also bill for
68:19
India Gujarat which he did and the way
68:22
that the Sentencing Guidelines work
68:25
is the the the penalty start out for
68:27
each request not each receipt each
68:30
request Wow so you send out a million
68:33
emails you've got a million counts Wow
68:35
right it's a serious thing and then when
68:37
they the judge looks into the factory
68:40
looking at what I've seen in the Texas
68:42
cancer charity cases
68:43
other examples they then say well is
68:47
there a disparity between the power of
68:50
the person requesting money and the
68:52
education and the training and the
68:54
public that would be is a powerful
68:56
person who should know better
68:58
going after go Abul people in conning
69:01
them in a fraud and how can you come up
69:03
with a you know bigger disparity in
69:06
power the former president knighted
69:07
States aspiring president itíd States
69:09
soliciting over the Internet you know
69:11
suppose from all these these you know go
69:14
about people who don't check any of the
69:15
paperwork and tens of billions if you
69:18
took all the affiliates that's the big
69:20
brunt now what the brainy blonde is
69:24
talking about is that when you operate
69:26
an US charity internationally there's a
69:29
special set of rules and that these
69:32
include that you must control the
69:34
activities of the International the
69:36
International activities of the charity
69:38
from a domestic US base you can account
69:41
and by that it has to be rigorous
69:42
controls you have to have board meetings
69:44
you have to have risk control procedures
69:46
when you wire money you've got to check
69:48
that it actually went to the intended
69:50
recipient and you got a on the ground
69:52
people doing all this stuff they did
69:54
none of this and they got involved
69:56
fighting in theory hiv/aids but
69:59
distributing AIDS drugs that may have
70:02
been adulterated or even toxic Wow
70:06
not maintaining control over it not
70:08
necessarily testing the people properly
70:10
allowing some of these drugs to go to
70:12
children now if you think about this for
70:15
a second perhaps we all have children
70:17
you know it's it's less typical for
70:21
children these days and when the
70:24
Clintons started doing this to have
70:26
hiv/aids yes children are raped but you
70:29
know or the children of a nature well
70:32
but the medical progress has made it far
70:35
less likely that the mother of an
70:37
hiv-positive
70:39
who's hiv-positive would transmit it to
70:41
to the child Wow
70:44
but what brainy blonde is talking about
70:47
is that these drugs were you know not
70:50
tested properly not distributed properly
70:52
not administered properly not stored
70:54
properly not ship properly not taxed
70:57
properly and that the international
70:59
operations of the Clinton Foundation
71:01
weren't registered properly either in
71:03
the countries where they distributed the
71:05
drugs or in the nations where they
71:07
solicited funds so I looked at this you
71:10
know the BIA it's the story that needed
71:12
to be told people need to be exposed and
71:15
prosecuted but there could there could
71:17
be some good coming out of this that we
71:19
can look at this test case and say if
71:21
you want to know how not to run a
71:23
charity just follow the example of the
71:26
Clintons let's tell you what the rules
71:30
are then we'll show you what these
71:31
people did then we'll explain why it's a
71:34
problem now you're gonna sign a
71:36
statement saying you're never going to
71:37
come close to doing what the Clintons
71:39
actually did multiply right right but
71:54
there there are gonna be consequences I
71:56
mean so so this is you know we've been
71:58
working on this with a number of
72:00
different people for two years it takes
72:02
time the first thing that had to happen
72:04
was I mean going back to the Podesta
72:06
argument you know she lost we can't go
72:09
after let's just think about what would
72:11
have happened had she won do you think
72:14
you think you're right we we would all
72:18
be in Guam probably is where we owe Grom
72:22
or or what's that place in Cuba
72:23
Guantanamo I would just point out that
72:45
South Korea is prosecuting it's the most
72:49
recent
72:51
president right now for corruption so
72:53
you know this is this is what you know
72:57
you know funk the functional political
73:00
systems oh you know prosecute when
73:03
there's a crime no matter what the
73:04
political standing of the defendant is
73:08
well and let's think about that for a
73:09
second there's a guy called Jim Cole
73:11
James Cole who was I think Deputy
73:14
Attorney General under Clinton and he
73:19
was on 60 minutes the other a few weeks
73:21
ago in connection with the case
73:23
involving the disgraced Republican
73:25
governor of Virginia who was put in
73:28
prison and then his conviction was
73:30
overturned now there's a guy called Rob
73:31
Blagojevich I believe he's still in
73:34
prison I mean in Illinois I mean I
73:36
actually have met Bruce rauner and he's
73:38
a very nice and wealthy guy and in
73:41
knowing the track record in Illinois
73:42
where I think the last several governors
73:45
all then they left the whatever it is
73:47
the Statehouse and they went to the big
73:48
house haha I'm not sure why he'd want to
73:51
be governor of Illinois but you know
73:55
well to bring it all back around to the
73:58
top of the conversation because I was
74:00
watching an info Wars report this
74:02
morning with dr. Corsi good mutual
74:05
friend of ours who was very convinced
74:07
that Ed Klein's reporting was accurate
74:10
and this was going to happen all right
74:12
so I you know I'm not a lawyer but I I
74:16
think that there is no way to perfect a
74:20
settlement agreement here that would
74:23
allow that all the many Clinton
74:25
Foundation entities that are out there
74:27
and there's quite a few of them it's not
74:28
simply the Clinton Foundation you've got
74:30
Clinton Health Access Initiative there's
74:32
been a filing in March which reveals
74:34
that the Clinton Foundation for some
74:36
reason it controlled this Clinton Health
74:38
Access Initiative but they've decided to
74:40
surrender control they do that March of
74:44
2017 nonetheless that entity would have
74:46
issues Alliance for a healthier
74:48
generation is jointly controlled by the
74:51
Clinton Foundation and there are quite a
74:54
few other operations inside and outside
74:55
this country that would have to disclose
74:59
the terms of any settlement if they
75:02
wanted to keep fundraising
75:04
and in addition you know nothing that
75:06
they're talking about here is gonna stop
75:08
the IRS and the many state taxing
75:11
authorities that should want to go after
75:14
the Clinton Foundation and more
75:16
importantly want to go after the donors
75:18
to the Clinton Foundation so the way
75:19
this works of the law in 1969 was
75:22
tightened for private foundation donors
75:24
so the Gates Foundation's a private
75:26
foundation Rockefeller Foundation alpha
75:29
wood foundation children's investment
75:31
fund Bennett there many of these
75:32
American foundations that were required
75:35
to establish before they gave money that
75:38
the Clinton Foundation was indeed a
75:40
validly organized and operated
75:41
foundation and the law reads the
75:44
regulations read that if a private
75:46
foundation makes a donation and
75:48
discovers that the Clinton Foundation
75:51
was not validly organized and operated
75:52
they have a duty to get that donation to
75:55
try to get that donation back in the
75:57
year at which they made it and if they
76:00
fail to do that then the penalty can be
76:04
if the IRS says to mr. gates you know
76:07
thank you for putting this nice big pile
76:09
of money together inside a foundation
76:10
please wire it to this account because
76:13
you owe us you who is the IRS yeah
76:16
exactly because because you were a
76:26
corporation to its many different
76:29
branches starting in 2001 they gave it
76:31
to something called the International
76:33
AIDS trust in 2001 which I was a
76:36
complete fraud when it started that was
76:39
subsequently I don't know how they did
76:41
this taken over by USAID I think or in
76:44
some ways but it would I don't think it
76:46
ever got a tax authority and then in
76:48
2005 the Gates Foundation gave I think
76:51
$750,000 to Clinton Foundation hiv/aids
76:55
initiative Inc an entity that was
76:57
created on March 24th 2004 that was it
77:01
was created as a nonprofit corporation
77:03
filed in April 2004 form 10 23 but
77:07
there's no evidence it was ever
77:08
authorized as a charity and there's a
77:11
long story about that but Gates began
77:13
giving money to that and to the Clinton
77:15
the Gates Foundation and then they
77:17
escalated their donations over time and
77:20
they're just one of them there's quite
77:22
quite a few private foundations have
77:23
this issue and it's an opportunity you
77:26
know a lot of a lot of these places
77:27
these foundations you could say that
77:31
they in theory lessen the burdens of
77:33
government that's what they're supposed
77:34
to do but if in fact if they're enabling
77:37
criminal activity right they're not
77:39
lessening the burdens of government
77:41
they're setting a horrible example
77:42
they're a tax dodge if you give
77:44
appreciated stock to a charity you can
77:48
get a very high tax deduction against
77:50
your personal income taxes for that and
77:52
what have you really given up if you're
77:54
Bill Gates you know if you if you're
77:56
worth a hundred billion dollars and you
77:57
give away twenty billion you still got
77:59
eighty billion you know what you're
78:00
doing you know family who need
78:08
high-paying jobs like Chelsea was being
78:11
paid like six hundred thousand dollars
78:13
or something
78:15
no no no experience no they'll be
78:18
careful they're not no member of that of
78:20
the Clinton Foundation has been paid by
78:23
any Clinton Foundation entity as salary
78:26
but however however however what they
78:29
have done which is not legal is they
78:32
have sent Hillary and Bill around the
78:35
world at private aircraft staying
78:36
expensive hotels and there's a there's a
78:39
lot of rules when it comes to charities
78:41
but one of them is if you're a
78:42
comporting person in a charity and you
78:45
reimburse more than one thousand dollars
78:47
in a given year you have to make
78:49
detailed disclosures about all your
78:51
reimbursements which they've never done
78:52
so inside the charity event were not
78:54
paid but external one would argue Trish
78:57
I think to your point that because we
79:00
put Chelsea in into a public charity
79:03
it's not a family charity it's a public
79:04
charity you elevate her to a trustee at
79:07
a young age she goes around the world
79:09
taking credit for saving the world that
79:11
then gets her the directorships and the
79:14
high-paying jobs and that that is what
79:17
that's a murkier area but that's called
79:20
I would argue operating in charity for a
79:22
legal private gain and because she's a
79:24
trustee it's therefore in your mint
79:26
which
79:26
a crime Wow Wow well listen I'm really
79:30
glad that we could bring this panel
79:32
together because I think this is yet
79:34
another example of a crowdsource
79:36
opportunity where the synergy can really
79:39
be unbelievable and I hope that this is
79:41
the start of an ongoing communication
79:43
between all of us I want to thank
79:45
everybody for taking the time out of
79:47
their day I really appreciate I know
79:48
each of you guys are very busy I think
79:50
this has been a great conversation if
79:52
there's anything else anybody would like
79:53
to add I think the ladies have been even
79:56
busier right well I'm sure we could pick
80:01
this up again in the future at least I
80:03
hope we'll be able to and thanks again
80:05
everyone for joining us I want to thank
80:07
everyone out there who's been watching
80:08
we'll see you again very soon thanks
80:11
everybody thank you thank you