Showing posts with label Evidence. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Evidence. Show all posts

Monday, July 6, 2015

Visual evidence of Hillary"s "secret war"

NEW YORK – The allegation that Hillary Clinton’s State Department secretly provided arms to jihadists in Libya has been further bolstered by videos and photographs provided to WND by Libyan expatriates, including a video showing the chief spokesman for the Moammar Gadhafi regime displaying to reporters a cache of weapons and ammunition seized from a ship from Qatar.

The images support the conclusion reached by the Citizen’s Commission on Benghazi that the Obama White House and the State Department under the management of Hillary Clinton “changed sides in the War on Terror” in 2011 by implementing a policy of facilitating the delivery of weapons to the al Qaida-dominated rebel militias attempting to overthrow Gadhafi.

In addition, FoxNews.com reported in May that emails released by the State Department show Hillary Clinton’s interest in arming Libyan opposition groups before the fall of Gadhafi in 2011, even though the United States and United Nations prohibited arming without following strict guidelines and oversight.

Find out what really happened, in Aaron Klein’s “The REAL Benghazi Story.”

Last week, Fox News legal analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano claimed in an opinion piece published by the Washington Times that Clinton, as secretary of state, lied to Congress about providing arms to jihadists.

Napolitano explained that Mark Turi, a licensed American arms dealer, sold hundreds of millions of dollars of U.S. arms to the government of Qatar, which then – at the request of the American government – was sold, bartered or given to rebel groups in Libya and Syria, including to groups that were on the U.S. terror list at the time.

Also, the New York Times reported March 25, 2013, American intelligence officers helped Arab governments “shop for weapons” for Syrian rebels and vetted rebel commanders and groups to determine who should receive the weapons. In March 2011, Reuters reported Obama had signed a secret order authorizing covert U.S. government support for the rebel forces in Libya seeking to oust Gaddafi, quoting U.S. government officials. Also that month, the London Independent reported the U.S. asked Saudi Arabia if it could supply weapons to the rebels in Benghazi.

Interception

One video provided to WND shows Moussa Ibrahim, Gadhafi’s information minister and official spokesman, displaying to reporters in 2011 a cache of weapons and ammunition seized from a ship from Qatar intercepted by the Libyan Coast Guard off Libya’s coast.

The video matches a report of Qatari military equipment seized in mid-April 2011. Anthony Bell and David Witter of the Institute for the Study of War, in their October 2011 publication “The Libyan Revolution: Stalemate & Siege, Part 3,” said the shipments “consisting of bulletproof vests, helmets, and ammunition were bound for the rebels besieged in Misrata.”

“Though his shipment was unannounced, Qatari Prime Minister al-Thani alluded to arming the rebels just days before the crates appeared,” they wrote.

In the first meeting of the Libya Contact Group – an international collective formed to support the overthrow of Gadhafi and a transition government – al-Thani stated that assistance to the rebels could include “all other needs, including defense equipment.”

“It is time to help the Libyan people defend themselves and to defend the Libyan people,’” the Qatari leader said April 13, 2011.

Bell and Witter wrote that “NATO and rebel officials, as well as Sheikh al-Thani himself also claimed Qatar had shipped heavier weapons, including shoulder-fired Milan anti-tank weapons, to the rebels.”

On April 13, 2011, Ashish Kumar Sen, writing in the Washington Times, reported that the Libyan Contact Group meeting for the first time demanded that Gadhafi stand down.

qatar-weapons-1

The Gadhafi regime displayed a cache of weapons seized in April 2011.

Sen noted that while U.N. Security Council Resolution 1973 imposed a no-fly zone and an arms embargo on Libya, it also permitted member states to take all means necessary to protect civilians.

The Washington Times story noted that Clinton and Defense Secretary Robert Gates “have indicated that the resolution leaves open the possibility of arming the rebels.”

Photographic evidence

One video obtained by WND shows Gadhafi’s spokesman complaining that weapons intercepted from Qatar were “outside the mandate of the Security Council.”

“When it comes to supplying weapons to the rebels, everyone is keen,” Ibrahim said, explaining that the two boats captured with the weapons were on a mission with the Qatari Army in conjunction with NATO forces.

The second video and the various still photographic evidence obtained by WND show a wide assortment of captured weapons that were being transported in crates clearly marked “State of Qatar, Qatar Armed Forces, Doha, Qatar.”

See the video of weapons and ammunition:

‘Switching sides’

The Citizen’s Commission on Benghazi’s interim report in April 2014 alleges “the U.S. was fully aware of and facilitating the delivery of weapons to the Al Qaeda-dominated rebel militias throughout the 2011 rebellion.”

Several members of the Citizens Commission, speaking for themselves, gave WND background to the interim report’s conclusion.

Clare Lopez, a former career operations officer with the CIA and current vice president for research at the Washington-based Center for Security Policy, noted that in early 2011, before Gadhafi was deposed, U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens came to Benghazi in a cargo ship with the title of “envoy to the Libyan rebels.”

Lopez observed that basically meant Stevens, who was killed in the Sept. 11, 2012, attack in Benghazi, was “America’s very first envoy to al-Qaida.”

qatar-weapons-3

Weapons shipped from Qatar seized by the Gadhafi regime.

“At that time, Stevens was facilitating the delivery of weapons to the al-Qaida-related militia in Libya,” Lopez said.

She said the weapons, financed by the United Arab Emirates, were produced at factories in Eastern Europe and sent to a logistics hub in Qatar.

Most were sent by ship and some possibly by airplane to Benghazi.

The weapons were small arms, including Kalashnikovs, rocket-propelled grenades, or RPGs, accompanied by “lots of ammunition,” she said.

Lopez further explained that when Stevens was facilitating the delivery of weapons to the al-Qaida-affiliated militia in Libya, he was living in the facility in Benghazi that was later designated the Special Mission Compound.

“This was about weapons going into Libya, and Stevens is coordinating with Abdelhakim Belhadj, the leader of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, other al-Qaida-affiliated militia leaders and leaders of the Libyan Muslim Brotherhood that directed the rebellion against Gadhafi as an offshoot of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood,” she said.

Lopez pointed out that individual members of the al-Qaida-related militias, including the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group and the groups that would later become Ansar Al-Sharia, originally were Muslim Brotherhood members.

‘Secret war’

Napolitano explained that that “same State and Treasury Departments that licensed the sales also prohibited them.”

“Many of the rebels Mrs. Clinton armed, using the weapons lawfully sold to Qatar by Mr. Turi and others, were terrorist groups who are our sworn enemies,” he wrote.

Napolitano recalled that at a public hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee on Jan. 23, 2013, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky, asked Clinton whether she knew of any U.S. role in shipping arms through Benghazi.

qatar-weapons-2

Weapons seized by Libya from Qatar.

While he concedes it is unclear whether Clinton was under oath at the time, he contends it is legally irrelevant.

“The obligation to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth to Congress pertains to all witnesses who testify before congressional committees, whether an oath has been administered or not,” he wrote.

Clinton’s relevant testimony is as follows:

Sen. Paul: My question is: Is the U.S. involved with any procuring of weapons, transfer of weapons buying, selling anyhow transferring weapons to Turkey out of Libya?

Mrs. Clinton: To Turkey? … I will have to take that question for the record. Nobody’s ever raised that with me. I, I …

Mr. Paul: It’s been in news reports that ships have been leaving from Libya and that they may have weapons, and what I’d like to know is the [Benghazi] annex that was close by. Were they involved with procuring, buying, selling, obtaining weapons, and were any of these weapons transferred to other countries any countries, Turkey included?

Mrs. Clinton: Senator, you will have to direct that question to the agency that ran the annex. And I will see what information is available and …

Sen. Paul. Are you saying you don’t know?

Mrs. Clinton: I do not know. I don’t have any information on that.

Napolitano noted that while Clinton “denied knowledge of the arms shipments, she and her State Department designee, Andrew Shapiro, had authorized thousands of shipments of billions of dollars’ worth of arms to U.S. enemies to fight her secret war.”

“Among the casualties of her war were U.S. Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens and three colleagues, who were assassinated at the American consulate in Benghazi, by rebels Mrs. Clinton armed with American military hardware in violation of American Law.”

Napolitano concluded: “Hillary Clinton lied to Congress, gave arms to terrorists and destroyed her emails.”

He asked: “How much longer can she hide the truth? How much longer can her lawlessness go unchallenged and unprosecuted? Does she really think the American voters will overlook her criminal behavior and put her in the White House where she can pardon herself?”


WND » World
Visual evidence of Hillary"s "secret war"

Friday, July 3, 2015

Air Clinton RICO evidence in court, watchdog demands

Clinton

A well-known Washington watchdog who has sued the Clinton Foundation and Bill and Hillary Clinton under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act for allegedly running a criminal enterprise is telling a federal court it would be wrong to dismiss the case without even looking at the evidence.

Larry Klayman of Freedom Watch brought the complaint and now has filed an opposition to the defendants’ motion to dismiss.

A federal court in Florida already has scheduled a trial for early next year.

“This is a classic RICO lawsuit,” Klayman argues in his newest filing, “Indeed … few people – if any – can even attempt to refute the hard evidence that Bill and Hillary Clinton and their foundation have over a 10-year history of actually selling government access and influence in exchange for hard cash to fill their coffers and the coffers of their foundation, which not coincidentally, as pled, does not operate as a 501(c)3 nonprofit organization but instead operates as defendants Bill and Hillary Clinton’s own alter-ego in furthering their criminal enterprise.”

He said the case is about much more than access to hidden documents, which he is seeking.

“The production of documents at issue is relevant because they evidence a criminal enterprise under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act … created and further by each of the defendants, Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton and the Clinton Foundation, acting in concert as part of a conspiracy, to extort hundreds of millions of dollars in money – that is, bribes – from individuals, entities and persons upon which the defendants have bestowed favors and gratuities, principally in the form of granting waivers to do business with Iran. ”

The allegations, he explained, set “forth all of the operative facts to plead a valid RCIO claim.”

You don’t have to wonder about Hillary Clinton any longer, read her words for yourself, in “Hillary Unhinged.”

He said the case “must proceed expeditiously” because of a discovery deadline of Sept. 28 and the trial date of Jan. 25, 2016.

“Defendants’ attempts to delay discovery are as transparent as their non-meritorious motions to dismiss. Needless to say, the court should not accept defendants’ lack of reasoned analysis of the factual content of” the complaint,” he wrote.

“It is simply too early to dismiss any portion of plaintiff’s claims where so much information is alleged to provide both notice and a likelihood that more material and predicate acts will be learned through discovery.”

The case brought by Klayman pleads “multiple acts of racketeering activity by travel in interstate or international travel for the purpose of bribery, money laundering and obstruction of justice.”

“These actions were done with the specific purpose of defrauding plaintiff and others out of hundreds of millions of dollars in donations.”

He alleges, for example, that Hillary Clinton “granted a waiver to Victor Pinchuk and his company Interpipe Group as an exemption from U.S. congressional sanctions against doing business with Iran.”

He alleges that was “as a quid pro quo for bribes disguised as donations made to The Clinton Foundation.”

He said the company “then, using the wires and mails and other illegal means fraudulently, donated $ 2.35 million to The Clinton Foundation.”

WND reported Klayman was urging the court to take physical custody of Hillary Clinton’s infamous private email server, because of the evidence it could contain.

In a supplement motion, Klayman said there was new relevant information to bolster his case.

Klayman submitted copies of a Washington Times report that the Clintons’ foundation “set up a fundraising arm in Sweden that collected $ 26 million in donations at the same time that country was lobbying Hillary Rodham Clinton’s State Department to forgo sanctions that threatened its thriving business with Iran.”

Further, another article submitted by Klayman, from the Miami Herald, reported banks were paying huge fees to Bill Clinton for speeches at a delicate time.

“Many of the speeches and donations were made at times when the host banks were under Justice Department scrutiny. … All told, the same 11 banks have paid more than $ 81 billion – yes, that’s with a B – over the last six years to resolve federal investigations into alleged corruption,” the report said.

The case charges the Clintons schemed “to reap hundreds of millions of dollars personally and for their foundation by selling government access and influence.”

Klayman, for years a Washington watchdog, engaged Bill Clinton in court battles during his presidency. Klayman also has taken on terror interests and foreign influences in the United States. Recently, he won a federal court judgment against the National Security Agency’s spy-on-Americans program and brought a case against Obama over his amnesty-by-executive-memo strategy.

WND’s attempts to obtain a comment from the New York office for Bill Clinton or the foundation have not been successful.

The order setting the case for trial comes from Judge Donald M. Middlebrooks, U.S. district judge for the Southern District of Florida in West Palm Beach.

When the Clintons left the White House in 2000, they were “broke,” Hillary Clinton has claimed.

But estimates are that since that time, they have been paid well over $ 100 million, oftentimes in $ 250,000 and $ 500,000 increments for speaking. Speaking fees for Bill Clinton have been as high as $ 750,000.

The Clintons’ foundation also has been embroiled in scandal recently, with foreign governments making donations to the Clinton-controlled organization during Hillary Clinton’s tenure as a senior government official.

 


WND » World
Air Clinton RICO evidence in court, watchdog demands