Vigilant News

Eternal Vigilance is the price of liberty.

Jim Jordan

Guess Who’s Back! Charitable Clintons Reopen Their Pay-to-Play “Global Initiative”

By ,

The Clinton machine has been oiled, primed, and is once again ready to start receiving funds, affecting global politics and business, and skimming off exorbitant “administration fees” to feed the beast.

The global exploits of both the Clinton Foundation and the Clinton Global Initiative are the stuff of legends. The murky history of the Clinton Foundation has been well documented in Peter Schweizer’s Clinton Cash,  the former first family’s Global Initiative has been described by longtime aide Doug Band as “a den of favor trading between Clinton Family members and corporate executives”.

The Clinton Global Initiative, according to disgruntled former aides, was created in 2005 as a way to harness the desire of wealthy execs and celebrities to get close to Clinton to “advance the aims of his foundation”.

CGI is not a traditional charity—unlike Clinton’s foundation, it does not dispense money of its own. Instead, it is a series of collaborations with corporations or individuals to solve global problems, anchored by an annual conference that costs $20,000 to attend. From 2005 -2013, CGI secured pledges worth $74 billion. (By comparison, the Gates Foundation has given away $28 billion since its inception in 1994.) According to Band, CGI was the perfect vehicle for Clinton. 

“It allowed him to train his intellect on wonky dilemmas—improving China’s power grid, bolstering Mali’s market for locally produced rice. And it placed him at the center of a matrix of the ultra-wealthy and the ultra-powerful, the kinds of people Clinton has always taken a special pleasure in surrounding himself with.”

According to attorneys during a 2007 plea negotiation on sex offense charges, it was determined that financier Jeffrey Epstein also formed “part of the original group that conceived the Clinton Global Initiative”, though his name was not mentioned in any of the organization’s founding documents. Worth a mention if only so we know what kind of upstanding moral characters are associated with the CGI founding.

In September 2016, it was announced that the Initiative would be winding down to be discontinued and that 74 employees would be let go at the end of the year, and the initiative sort of petered out from there.

Now, the Clinton machine is officially back in action and has restarted its global pay-to-play operation.

Former President Bill Clinton said on Friday:

Back in December of 2018, In December 2018, the House Oversight Subcommittee on Government Operations held a hearing on Capitol Hill on the Clinton Foundation.

The whistleblowers, Lawrence Doyle of DM Income Advisors and John Moynihan of JFM Associates, argued that according to their research, the Clinton Foundation was operating outside of its bounds as a 501c3 non-profit organization and instead operated exactly like the global fund in Geneva, Switzerland by brokering money and pharmaceuticals.

Mr. Moynihan also stated that 60% of the donations going to the Clinton Foundation were used for “administration fees” which is a stark difference from the industry norm of 10-15% for admin fees.

“The investigation clearly demonstrates that the [Clinton] Foundation was not a charitable organization per se, but in pointed fact was a closely held family partnership,” Mr. Doyle said.

Doyle continued, “As such, it was governed in a fashion in which is sought in large measure to advance the personal interests of its principles as detailed within the financial analysis…and further confirmed within the supporting documentation and evidence.”

Congressman Jim Jordan (R-OH) asked the whistleblowers to elaborate on their claims the Clinton Foundation was operating as an agent of a foreign government.

“They were brokering money and they were brokering pharmaceuticals — they were an agent of money through these donors, they would take a vig (fee), broker the money and then they negotiated these relationships with the pharmaceutical companies — by the same token they were brokering the pharmaceuticals and again taking the vig (fee),” 

Mr. Moynihan then explained to Congressman Jordan that the Clinton Foundation became a hybrid of a private foundation and a public charity which they were not approved to do.

In a shocking admission, Mr. Moynihan said, “Our analysis shows that this hybrid modeled the global fund in Geneva, Switzerland.”

The Clinton Foundation was doing all of this and not paying the same taxes as they would had they been operating as a partnership which means they potentially misled the IRS.

Calls Grow among Prominent Figures to Create a New ‘Church Committee’ to Probe FBI Abuses

By ,

Reposted from Just the News

A half century ago, Americans held grave concerns that J. Edgar Hoover’s FBI and other U.S. intelligence agencies had abused civil rights, improperly targeted enemies and illegally gathered evidence, so Congress set out on a great cleansing mission. It formed a special committee chaired by Idaho Sen. Frank Church that laid bare the wrongdoing, overhauled the bureau and created new guardrails to protect civil liberties.

A growing number of influential figures in Washington are arguing it’s time for another Church Committee after a tumultuous six years in which the FBI admitted it misled the FISA court while spying on Donald Trump’s campaign, had executives who lied, doctored evidence or usurped prosecutors’ authority, and employed agents who dropped the ball on a sexual abuse scandal involving Olympians and overcollected evidence in a raid of a former president’s home.

The revelation this week that the bureau secretly paid a Russian businessman as a confidential informant against Trump even though he was suspected of lying and having ties to the Kremlin’s intelligence agencies only accelerated support for a sweeping, independent probe of the FBI now under the control of Director Christopher Wray.

“I think, frankly, it would be great for the FBI,” Kevin Brock, the bureau’s first-ever intelligence chief, said of the notion of a new Church Committee. “They find themselves obviously in a very challenging situation, some of which they brought on themselves, others kind of imposed upon them.

“But they find themselves in a place right now where well over the half the country believes they’re working on behalf of one political party over another,” he said during a wide-ranging interview with the John Solomon Reports podcast this week. “And that can’t stand … the agency can’t survive if that persists.”

Brock, a former assistant director who helped write the rules the FBI currently uses for informants, is a widely respected voice inside the bureau. But many outside it echo his support for a 21st  century Church Committee or something like the 9/11 Commission that investigated the worst terror attacks in American history.

Former House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, who helped unravel the false Russia collusion narrative, said the highly partisan tensions in Washington these days make it hard for a traditional congressional committee to do the sort of oversight it needs, citing examples of how Democrats thwarted his effort to probe FBI failures in the Russia case. He said that reality makes a blue ribbon commission or select committee a better option to investigate and reform the FBI.

“You know, we weren’t really designed to run these types of investigations,” said Nunes, recalling his time on the House Intelligence Committee. “And for so long, the process actually worked. It was relatively bipartisan for the most part. But when you have corruption at that level, it becomes so hard to run these investigations right.

“You have to ultimately have Congress involved doing a real investigation, and I think it’s going to be very, very difficult if you use just the current committee structure that they have.”

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), the likely House Judiciary Committee chairman next year if the GOP wins control of Congress, supports the idea of a select committee like the one Church chaired, even if his panel does aggressive oversight on its own.

“I think that that exercise is definitely needed, whether it’s done in a special select kind of committee or a blue ribbon commission,” said Jordan, who himself has been contacted by five FBI whistleblowers in recent months alleging political manipulation of investigations and even crime data. “That’s even maybe with some members outside of Congress.”

“We need to seriously look at how this all has to change in a way that respects the liberties of the American people,” Jordan said, adding he has increasing concerns about the influence that politically “woke” intelligence analysts are having inside the bureau in shaping allegations and investigations.

The Church Committee ultimately assembled some of the biggest names in the Senate, including three members who ran for president. All brought intellectual and political heft from both sides of the aisles in the aftermath of the Watergate scandal and the end of the Hoover era. Figures like Walter Mondale, Howard Baker, Barry Goldwater, John Tower and Gary Hart were able to find consensus, issuing numerous volumes of reports that exposed intelligence death squads and civil liberty violations that included unlawful snooping and spying.

Ultimately, that committee’s greatest contribution was a series of legal reforms that reined in the FBI and governed two generations of agents to color inside the lines after a dark history of past abuses.

“They pointed out a lot of these abuses and from that gave birth the attorney general guidelines, which the FBI still operates under today,” recalled Brock, who joined the FBI in the aftermath of the Church Committee.

The new, post-Church guidelines “in stark terms stipulated how, and when an FBI agent can open up a case against a subject,” Brock explained. “And those were great bumper pads that were put in place. Now the bureau knew, ‘Okay, we can’t go beyond these boundaries. We’re safe as long as we stay inside these boundaries.’ And it worked wonderfully for years.”

Nunes said one reason outside forces are needed to press FBI reform is that its current leader, Wray, hasn’t been willing to make the sweeping changes the public needs to restore trust, even if he has put in place some new reforms of tactics involving, for example, FISA warrants.

“We cannot trust after all this time, that Wray has done one damn thing to clean up this agency,” Nunes said. “In fact, it’s gotten worse. The American people know it’s worse.”

Whatever solution the next Congress chooses, the status quo is not an option, said Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee.”We have to find out what is going on in the FBI,” she told the “Just the News, Not Noise” show earlier this week. “I know a lot of people that work with the FBI are good, hard-working people. But there is a political cabal inside the FBI that has to be dealt with. It’s inside the Department of Justice also.”

Is John Durham’s Next Target the FBI? John Solomon Makes Prediction as 14 Whistleblowers Come Forward

By ,

John Solomon, the founder of Just the News, recently spoke about John Durham’s probe into the Trump-Russia investigation and has made a prediction as to what he believes Durham’s next target might be.

Solomon believes that the Durham Probe is dealing with at least “two buckets”. In one “bucket,” there are indictments against officials connected to Hillary Clinton and their plan to feed the FBI false information about Trump-Russia conspiracies. The other “bucket” focuses on the FBI and agents who are alleged to have knowingly misled the FISA court to obtain warrants to spy on members of Trump’s 2016 campaign.

“A month after the CIA sends a warning to the FBI, this is something John Ratcliffe declassified, saying Hillary Clinton is trying to play a dirty trick on Donald Trump to tie him to Russia to get out of her e-mail thing. All through the fall, they keep a spreadsheet of what’s right and wrong with the Steele dossier. It’s all wrong. Can’t corroborate, they can’t collaborate the information. The FBI never should have started the investigation and I think that’s where John Durham’s investigation is focused right now,”.

This comes on the heels of GOP Rep. Jim Jordan telling Fox News that 14 whistleblowers from the FBI have come forward with concerns about the Department of Justice’s possible political bias following the raid on Mar-a-Lago last week.

“Fourteen FBI agents have come to our office as whistleblowers, and they are good people. There are lots of good people in the FBI. It’s the top that is the problem,” the Ohio Republican told the outlet. “Some of these good agents are coming to us, telling us … what’s going on… the political nature now of the Justice Department,”

Republican party leaders have condemned the raid as partisan, promising investigations should the GOP seize the majority in either chamber of Congress. House Minority leader Kevin McCarthy intimated that he’s “seen enough”. 

Despite McCarthy’s posturing, his post was flooded with doubtful comments.

Just before the raid, the FBI was faced with two separate whistleblowers attesting to political bias within both the Bureau and the Department of Justice. 

RELATED: Whistleblowers Claim FBI, DOJ are Downplaying Negative Hunter Biden Information

The last decade has had a decidedly negative impact on the FBI’s reputation. Since 2015 the FBI has propagated the Russia Collusion smear knowingly in an effort to hurt both candidate and president Donald Trump, they have been found to have manufactured the Whitmer kidnapping case, misclassified domestic extremism cases in favor of democrats, targeted parents who’ve spoken up at school board meetings, placed undercover agents in the crowds on January 6th,  assisted Biden’s presidential campaign by burying Hunter Biden’s illegal dealings with foreign countries and conveniently losing track of the laptop in the process.

It’s only speculation at this point, but if John Soloman’s prediction is correct, we could see a huge clash between the FBI and John Durham in the near future.