Please click on the link to read the entire article   Nancy  

  

Ex-Trump adviser breaks silence on Russia probe, says Iran deal played role in false allegations

justthenews.com/accountability/russia-and-ukraine-scandals/ex-trump-adviser-breaks-silence-russia-probe-says-iran?utm_source=daily-newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter

 

EXCERPT FROM THIS ARTICLE:

He suspects a dossier of misinformation was created and shared with investigators to ensnare him and others. In the interview, he categorically denied ever taking money from Egypt to set up meetings or secretly gain influence inside the Trump world, calling it “outright fiction.”

“Why would I take money to set up meetings? I’ve set up meetings for the last twenty years with with U.S. leaders and foreign leaders and … every meeting I conduct is on my social media, is on my Facebook,” he said.

Phares said Russia had its own interest in preserving the Iran deal, noting Moscow sold Iran an S-300 missile defense system over the objections of the U.S. government after the sanctions were eased in 2016 by Obama.

The Obama deal “allowed an open market in Iran. Here we’re talking trillions of dollars. So Russia and the Chinese, many interests even in the United States and in Europe were to move in and make huge amounts of money,” he said………

In the meantime, Phares said, he believes history will look back at the Russia collusion activities when all is exposed and see an Obama administration that was unwilling to cede the reins of power and trying instead to hamper the incoming Trump administration from succeeding in its foreign policy goals.

Phares said the early leaks and allegations made against Trump and his team sought to scandalize activities that are routine during a campaign and transition, such as the president-elect and advisers meeting and consulting with world leaders, like Michael Flynn did with the Russians. The scandalizing hampered Trump’s early foreign policy efforts, he said.

“You know, as an American citizen seeing those exchanges, it kind of shocks me,” he said. “We live in a liberal democracy. But it elevates my suspicion that there is something at a higher level that was happening, because to stop a president, I mean, this is something that in our American history we haven’t seen before.”

 

 

The clear differences between the Left and the Right

New revelations show Hillary Clinton ‘profited’ off ‘Pardongate’: Book

Bill Clinton was the tightest president since Thomas Jefferson when it came to granting convicts pardons and prison sentence commutations. But all that changed when his wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton, decided to run for the Senate in 2000 and needed all the help she could get.

According to new details about the Clinton-era “Pardongate,” the last of several scandals that plagued the administration and further sullied the former president’s reputation as he left office, the Democrat pushed for so many pardons to help his wife and cronies that lawyers running the eleventh-hour operation resorted to internet searches to determine the “fitness” of applicants.

“None profited more than Hillary Rodham Clinton,” said Sinclair Broadcast investigative reporter Mark Hyman in his upcoming book, Pardongate: How Bill & Hillary Clinton and Their Brothers Profited from Pardons.

He told Secrets that 50 of Clinton’s eventual 457 clemency approvals directly aided allies of Hillary Clinton, including many that helped in her 2000 New York Senate victory that paved the way for her two failed presidential campaigns.

“It was Hillary Rodham Clinton who was the key influence behind the worst of the worst pardons and commutations that disgraced the office of the president, undermined the legal system and demonstrated that justice could be sold,” Hyman wrote in his Post Hill Press book, out later this month.

(more…)

EXCERPT FROM THIS ARTICLE: In late czarist Russia, some political parties and other groups—the Social Democrats, the anarchists, the Marxists—explicitly endorsed terrorism. “The liberal party—the Constitutional Democrats, they called themselves—did not condone terrorism,” Mr. Morson says. “But they refused to condemn it. And indeed they called for the release from prison of all terrorists, who were pledged to continue terrorism right away. . . . A famous line from one of the liberal leaders put it this way: ‘Condemn terrorism? That would be the moral death of the party.’ ”

The similarities between this week’s riots and the Los Angeles riots of 1992 are obvious. Both were occasioned by appalling video images, and both divided the nation along partisan and ideological lines. The differences between the two events, however, are more revealing. The violence in 1992 came after a court verdict; the beating and arrest of Rodney King had happened more than a year before. This year’s riots came within days of George Floyd’s killing by Minneapolis officers. The riots of 1992 were mostly confined to poor and working-class areas of Los Angeles. This week saw mayhem all over America, and in Los Angeles, New York and elsewhere the rioters targeted wealthy streets and neighborhoods.

Democratic mayors and governors seem unable to stop the destruction of their own cities.