Bombshell FBI Report: Crooked Hillary’s Uranium Deal with Russia Netted Clintons Millions

Lock her up.

The mainstream media pulled out all stops on Tuesday to make this story go away.

New York Post

It turns out the Obama administration knew the Russians were engaged in bribery, kickbacks and extortion in order to gain control of US atomic resources — yet still OK’d that 2010 deal to give Moscow control of one-fifth of America’s uranium. This reeks.

Peter Schweizer got onto part of the scandal in his 2015 book, “Clinton Cash”: the gifts of $145 million to the Clinton Foundation, and the $500,000 fee to Bill for a single speech, by individuals involved in a deal that required Hillary Clinton’s approval.

The New York Times confirmed and followed up on Schweizer’s reporting — all of it denounced by Hillary as a partisan hit job.

But now The Hill reports that the FBI in 2009 had collected substantial evidence — eyewitnesses backed by documents — of money-laundering, blackmail and bribery by Russian nuclear officials, all aimed at growing “Vladimir Putin’s atomic-energy business inside the United States” in violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.

The bureau even flagged the routing of millions from Russian nuclear officials to cutouts and on to Clinton, Inc.

Hillary Clinton, again, sat on a key government body that had to approve the deal — though she now claims she had no role in a deal with profound national-security implications, and during the campaign called the payments a coincidence.

The Obama administration — anxious to “reset” US-Russian relations — kept it all under wraps, refusing to tell even top congressional intelligence figures.

And when the Obamaites in 2014 filed low-level criminal charges against a single individual over what the FBI found, they did so with little public fanfare.

“The Russians were compromising American contractors in the nuclear industry with kickbacks and extortion threats, all of which raised legitimate national-security concerns,” one veteran of the case told The Hill.

Yet the administration let Moscow move ahead — publicly insisting that there were no national-security worries — and no evidence of Russian interference, despite many lawmakers’ concern at the time.

There’s more: Until September 2013, the FBI director was Robert Mueller — who’s now the special counsel probing Russian meddling in the 2016 election. It’s hard to see how he can be trusted in that job unless he explains what he knew about this Obama-era coverup.

The Hill offers the full, detailed story, explaining why Hillary reeks of corruption.

One more thing. You might have seen the news that Hillary Clinton broke her toe and cancelled her interviews.

Did she really?

There were hints that something big was breaking on Tuesday. Could she be faking a broken toe in order to give herself an excuse for hiding out from the questions that would be forthcoming about her collusion with the (((Russian mafia?)))

Sean Hannity made this story his lead Tuesday night:

“Uranium One will be one of the biggest scandals this country has ever seen,” he said.

“Hillary Clinton and her husband sold out America to the Russians as [money] flowed to the Clinton Foundation,” he added.

He said that, for the “liberal ideologues” who are “screaming Russia” and looking for collusion, “we’ve got it for them.”

Hannity said Congress and special counsel Robert Mueller should “stop wasting time” with Trump and turn their attention to the Uranium One deal.

Inspirational Quote of the Day: One by President Bill Clinton on Immigration

We were naive then. We believed him.

What are we eating? An Absurd List of Ingredients–The Wolfe Pit Digs in to Popeye’s Fried Chicken Dinner (Video)

I watch almost all of Larry’s videos, which come out three days a week, I believe. They’re pretty funny. This one comes in at eleven and a half minutes. The Wolfe Pit shows what a white guy in a wheelchair can do to remain financially independent.

This video is here because Larry shows that something as simple as fried chicken and mashed potatoes from a fast food joint has a long list of absurd ingredients.

I’m not a health food person nor a conspiracy theorist about American food, but the list of things in Popeye’s fried chicken is crazy.

By the way, Popeye’s started in Arabi, Louisiana, right next door to where I grew up in Chalmette, and just outside New Orleans. It’s real Cajun country down there, although the area was ruined when it flooded during Hurricane Katrina and George W. Bush subsequently put a thousand or two blacks into the parish, which had been 95 percent white.

Senator John McCain Turns Ugly When Confronted by Fox News Reporter with Legit Question (Video)

Thirty-five seconds of McStain’s famous rudeness on display.

Spread the word among Arizona voters. Ask them to sign the recall petition at change.org.

Nonwhite Judge Blocks Trump’s Latest Travel Ban

JUDGE DERRICK WATSON. BLOCKED EARLIER TRAVEL BAN TOO.

Wikipedia tells us that Judge Derrick Watson, who is determined to prevent any travel ban at all from ever taking place for any reason, is an Obama appointee. He is a Native Hawaiian.

He’s also not surprisingly allegedly received threats for his unconcern with public safety.

So, back goes the Attorney General’s office to the Supreme Court, which really needs to excoriate this little Hawaiian worn.

ABC News

A federal judge in Hawaii blocked most of President Donald Trump’s latest travel ban Tuesday, just hours before it was set to take effect, saying the revised order “suffers from precisely the same maladies as its predecessor.”

It was the third set of travel restrictions issued by the president to be thwarted, in whole or in part, by the courts.

U.S. District Judge Derrick Watson issued the ruling after the ban on a set of mostly Muslim countries was challenged by the state of Hawaii, which warned that the restrictions would separate families and undermine the recruiting of diverse college students.

White House spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders called the ruling “dangerously flawed” and said it “undercuts the president’s efforts to keep the American people safe.” The Justice Department said it will quickly appeal.

At issue was a ban, announced in September and set to go into effect early Wednesday, on travelers from Chad, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Somalia, Syria and Yemen, along with some Venezuelan government officials and their families.

The Trump administration said the ban was based on an assessment of each country’s security situation and willingness to share information with the U.S.

Watson, appointed to the bench by President Barack Obama, said the new restrictions ignore a federal appeals court ruling against Trump’s previous ban.

The latest version “plainly discriminates based on nationality in the manner that the 9th Circuit has found antithetical to … the founding principles of this nation,” Watson wrote.

The judge’s ruling applies only to the six Muslim-majority countries on the list. It does not affect the restrictions against North Korea or Venezuela, because Hawaii did not ask for that.

“This is the third time Hawaii has gone to court to stop President Trump from issuing a travel ban that discriminates against people based on their nation of origin or religion,” Hawaii Attorney General Doug Chin said in a statement. “Today is another victory for the rule of law.”

Hawaii argued the updated ban was a continuation of Trump’s campaign call for a ban on Muslims, despite the addition of two countries without a Muslim majority.

Watson noted that Hawaii had argued Trump did not back down from that call, listing in the ruling a series of June tweets “in which (Trump) complained about how the Justice Department had submitted a ‘watered down, politically correct version’ to the Supreme Court.”

Other courts that weighed the travel ban have cited Trump’s comments about banning Muslims, including the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Virginia and a federal judge in Maryland. Watson also referred to a Trump campaign statement in his previous ruling.

His Tuesday ruling said the new ban, like its predecessor, fails to show that nationality alone makes a person a greater security risk to the U.S.

“The categorical restrictions on entire populations of men, women and children, based upon nationality, are a poor fit for the issues regarding the sharing of ‘public-safety and terrorism-related information’ that the president identifies,” Watson wrote.

He said the ban is inconsistent in the way some countries are included or left out. For example, Iraq failed to meet the security benchmark but was omitted from the ban. Somalia met the information-sharing benchmark but was included.

Watson found fault with what sorts of visitors are barred. For instance, all tourists and business travelers from Libya are excluded from the U.S., but student visitors were allowed.

The judge said he would set an expedited hearing to determine whether the temporary restraining order blocking the ban should be extended. It comes as other courts weigh challenges to the ban.

In Maryland, the American Civil Liberties Union and other groups are seeking to block the visa and entry restrictions. Washington state, Massachusetts, California, Oregon, New York and Maryland are challenging the order in front of the same federal judge in Seattle who struck down Trump’s initial ban in January.

That ban — aimed mostly at Muslim-majority countries — led to chaos and confusion at airports nationwide and triggered several lawsuits, including one from Hawaii.

When Trump revised the ban, Hawaii challenged that version, too, and Watson agreed it discriminated on the basis of nationality and religion. A subsequent U.S. Supreme Court ruling allowed the administration to partially reinstate restrictions against Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen and against all refugees.

Hawaii then successfully challenged the government’s definition of which relatives of people already living in the U.S. would be allowed into the country, and Watson ordered the list expanded.

Nonwhites shouldn’t be judges except for their own peoples. This one wants to create chaos, justifying it with that liberal catchall, “inclusion.”

Lawyer Disbarred for Criticizing Faggots is Asking for Law License Back, Still Must Pay $3.5 Million Judgement

ANDREW SHERVILL. DESTROYED BY LEGAL SYSTEM FOR CRITICIZING GAYS.

This is one of the most incredible stories you’re ever likely to read.

It proves that there is no rule of law in America. The court system is populated by (((Communists))) who will destroy you if you give them a chance.

An anti-gay blogger who thought he had First Amendment rights has been utterly reduced to nothing. He had been a successful attorney, but he didn’t count on how the law is what an evil cabal of filth says it is.

Mlive

ANN ARBOR, MI – A former state assistant attorney general known for his anti-gay writing about a former University of Michigan student body president is appealing the Michigan Attorney Discipline Board’s decision to revoke his law license.

Andrew Shirvell, whose disbarment was ordered by the board in March, has a hearing for a petition for review on Wednesday, Oct. 18, before the Michigan Attorney Discipline Board.

In October 2016, the Michigan Attorney Discipline Board said the former state assistant attorney general committed misconduct when he harassed Christopher Armstrong, the university’s first openly gay student body president. Shirvell was fired in 2010.

Shirvell believes the panel responsible for revoking his law license back in March was biased against him.

“Given that my case is one of the most politically-charged to have ever come before a Hearing Panel … I cannot imagine a more biased panel of attorneys who sat in judgment of me,” Shirvell said in a news release. “With Donald Trump now in the White House, conservative Christians like me will no longer tolerate
being railroaded by the liberal elite. It is time for the Michigan Attorney Discipline Board to overturn the Hearing Panel’s biased determinations and restore my law license.”

In 2012, a jury found Shirvell had stalked, defamed and invaded Armstrong’s privacy and Shirvell was ordered to pay $4.5 million.

The U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the judgment against Shirvell in February 2015.

The court of appeal’s decision came with a dismissal of damages awarded for false light invasion of privacy, but he still owed Armstrong $3.5 million stemming from the 2012 jury verdict.

In January 2015, the state of appeals court denied Shirvell’s request for unemployment benefits, saying his firing by then-attorney general Mike Cox was justified because Shirvell’s Facebook posts and gay-bashing blog negatively impacted the agency’s credibility.

At the time, Cox said Shirvell was not fired for exercising his First Amendment rights, but for lying to investigators during a disciplinary hearing and for posting attacks online during work hours.

Shirvell expressed his views as a private citizen, but the court said the First Amendment did not protect him because the state provided evidence that his conduct affected government services.

The background on this travesty of justice can be read in this 2010 CNN article. It shows that Shervill did nothing that any decent person wouldn’t do.

My mind is still reeling over this case. It deserves much more attention than its gotten from the alt-right and conservative Christians.

Judge Declares Mistrial in Horrific Burning Murder of Jessica Chambers After Jury of Seven Blacks and Five Whites Deadlocks

QUENTIN TELLIS. THE JURY DISAGREED.

I’ve pulled two sources in for this post.

NBC News describes the jury’s confusion relating to what it means to agree on a verdict. The NBC report suggests that blacks are too amazingly stupid to serve on juries.

The Daily Mail describes how the black defendant, Quentin Tellis, probably got away with the murder of his mudshark girlfriend.

JESSICA CHAMBERS.

JESSICA WAS BURNED UP AS BAD AS HER CAR.

Excerpt from NBC News

The jury in the tense murder trial of a Mississippi man charged with setting a 19-year-old friend on fire and leaving her to die handed a bailiff a note: They have reached a verdict.

What followed was confusion.

Before the decision was read, Judge Gerald Chatham asked if the 12-person panel had unanimously agreed on a verdict. A male juror spoke the shocking words: “We didn’t all agree.”

After the verdict disagreement, the judge asked the panel to continue deliberating. Shortly afterward, a court clerk read what was believed to be the final verdict: Not guilty.

Then, the judge polled the jury. Seven for guilty, five for not guilty.

Spectators looked at each other in dismay. How could the verdict be not guilty, if seven people said guilty?

The jury had been instructed by the judge that, under the capital murder charge, all 12 of them must agree on a guilty verdict. But the instruction did not say that the entire panel of seven blacks and five whites also must unanimously agree on a not guilty verdict.

With corrected instructions in hand, it didn’t take long for the jury to tell the judge that it was hopelessly deadlocked. A mistrial was declared.

TELLIS “FAMBLY” MEMBERS.

Wow! That’s some level of stupid. How can blacks be allowed to serve on juries with that level of dumbness prevailing.

The Daily Mail story on the mistrial ignores the stupidity angle that NBC thought significant in order to focus on the testimony and evidence during the trial.

Tellis, in my opinion, got away with murder. Here is an excerpt:

Tellis did not take the stand in his own defense during the trial that began last Monday.

Prosecutor John Champion said during the trial that Tellis thought he suffocated Chambers while they were having sex before he drove her car to a back road.

Champion said that Tellis ran to his sister’s house nearby, jumped in his sisters’ car, stopped to pick up gasoline from a shed at his house and torched Chambers’ car and her.

Firefighters testified that Chambers told them someone named ‘Eric’ or ‘Derek’ set her on fire.

Champion said Chambers’ throat was damaged and she could not pronounce the letter T. He said she could have been trying to say ‘Tellis.’

Investigators said they questioned about 10 to 15 people named Eric or Derek, and all were cleared.

The horrific circumstances surrounding Chambers’ death garnered national attention amid concerns about violent crime in rural communities.

The trial was emotional, with witnesses breaking down and spectators crying as jurors were shown graphic photos of Chambers’ burned stomach and face.

A burn doctor testified Chambers had so much damage to her mouth, throat and chest that she would be unable to properly say and pronounce words while she was speaking to firefighters.

Agents studied more than 20,000 cellphone numbers and interviewed more than 100 people during their investigation.

Prosecutors used cellphone location data and video surveillance footage from a store across the street from Tellis’ home in an attempt to prove he was with Chambers the night she was burned.

During early interviews with law enforcement agents, Tellis said he only saw Chambers on the morning of the day she died.

After being confronted with more evidence during another interrogation more than two years later, Tellis acknowledged that Chambers picked him up in her car at about 5.30pm that night, and said they spent about 1 ½ hours together, according to videotaped interviews played for the jury Friday.