posted August 20, 2016 05:02 PM            

As a presidential candidate, the amount of foreign cash the Clintons have amassed from the Persian Gulf states is “simply unprecedented,” says national security analyst Patrick Poole.

“These regimes are buying access. You’ve got the Saudis. You’ve got the Kuwaitis, Oman, Qatar and the UAE. There are massive conflicts of interest. It’s beyond comprehension,” Poole told TheDCNF in an interview.

Overall, the Clinton Foundation has received upwards of $85 million in donations from five Persian Gulf states and their monarchs, according to the foundation’s website.

Activist groups have charged the five states — Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, Oman and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) — committed numerous human rights abuses.

For years, the accusations have centered on the Persian Gulf practice of importing hundreds of thousands of poor foreign laborers who work for low wages, including hundreds of thousands of female “domestic workers” who have no labor rights and often face exploitation and sexual abuse.

The ongoing Clinton financial relationship with despotic Persian Gulf states could hurt Hillary as a supporter of labor rights and tarnish her image as a vigorous supporter of women.

Yet as secretary of state, Clinton consciously and actively sought to legitimize the sheikdoms through many new Department of State programs.

It’s unclear what kind of promises or concessions the Clintons may have given the monarchs in return for their lavish financial support over the years, but last month the candidate reversed her long-standing support for fracking.

Hillary’s new position, unveiled last month at a CNN presidential debate with Democratic opponent Sen. Bernie Sanders, put her in alignment with the Gulf State policy that opposes North American oil and gas fracking.

The FBI has reportedly launched a second investigation of the former secretary in addition to its probe of her private email server. This investigation is looking into “political corruption” and is seeking evidence where former Secretary Clinton may have offered official government favors to foundation donors.

Most troubling for Hillary, however, could be Bill’s personal, five-year business partnership with Dubai’s authoritarian ruler, Sheikh Mohammed bin-Rashid al-Maktoum and his overall friendship with the rulers of the United Arab Emirates — a confederation of states that includes Dubai.
When Bill personally wooed bin-Rashid to join him as a business partner through his Dubai Investment Group, the sheikh was the crown prince of Dubai.

During Bill’s partnership with bin-Rashid, his stature rose. He now is the undisputed ruler of Dubai and the prime minister of the UAE.

The former president and bin-Rashid did their private financial deals with a California-based private equity fund called Yucaipa Partners, which is owned by billionaire and Democratic funder Ron Burkle. The three became business partners and sought to create an offshore sovereign wealth fund for Yucaipa.

Clinton ended his partnership with the investment firm five years later, but not before pocketing at least $15 million in “guaranteed payments” from the company, according to his personal tax returns from 2003 to 2008. The former president allegedly received another $20 million of “walking away money” to leave the partnership, according to The Daily Beast.

Today, Bill is a regular visitor to Dubai. His friend bin-Rashid runs Dubai as an absolute monarchy where there are no elections. Human rights groups deplore the labor practices of both Dubai and the UAE for the exploitation of at least 250,000 foreign laborers.

The International Labor Organization (ILO), founded by Samuel Gompers of the American Federation of Labor after World War I and now organized labor’s main international labor body, has continued to criticize labor conditions in the Persian Gulf states.

Its 2016 “World Employment and Social Outlook” report stated the governments in the Persian Gulf use “forced labour, modern slavery, human trafficking and the worst forms of child labour”

“Given the heavy reliance on migrant workers, the risk of forced labour or trafficking in the Arab States cannot be ignored,” the ILO concluded.

A 2014 Human Rights Watch report also focused on the 146,000 female migrant workers who work in the United Arab Emirates. The human rights group charged the women “suffered abuses that amounted to forced labor and trafficking.”

Migrant workers are excluded from the country’s labor laws. “Domestic workers have virtually no legal safeguards governing their employment,” the activist group reported.

The Clinton Foundation’s ties go beyond support from governments. Four billionaire Saudis, along with groups the Dubai Foundation and Friends of Saudi Arabia, contributed another $30 million to the Clinton Foundation, according to the foundation’s website.

Bill’s Dubai links run deeper than just his dealings with sheikhs. Between 2011 and 2014, he received $5.6 million from the Dubai-based company GEMS Education for serving as the “honorary chairman.”

The American University of Dubai has a William Jefferson Clinton Scholars program and the former president has been a frequent guest of the university.

When she was secretary of state, Hillary also strengthened the Clinton-UAE relationship. The State Department approved Bill’s speaking engagements to the UAE, which delivered $1.1 million to him in speaking fees.

In 2005, Bill personally advised Dubai on the controversial deal where the emirate would own six U.S. ports. The deal was vigorously opposed by intelligence officials who viewed the port as vulnerable to terrorist infiltration. Facing ferocious opposition in Congress, Dubai withdrew its effort to purchase the U.S. ports.

Arab reformers have harshly criticized Clinton’s State Department programs designed to bolster the image of the UAE and legitimize the fortunes of many monarchies in the gulf.

“The fruit of Clinton’s own policy basically empowered the old regimes,” charges Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, president of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy and co-founder of the Muslim Reform movement.

Looking back at her four years as secretary of state, Jasser told TheDCNF, “I could not see anywhere where she empowered reformers.” He said Bill and Hillary are part of the “global establishment” that seeks the status quo.

“The ‘global establishment’ has suffocated the peoples of these countries for generations,” he told TheDCNF. “And Hillary Clinton is part of the global establishment of monarchs, autocrats and dictators.”

Hillary launched major initiatives that were welcomed by the UAE. In September 2012, she personally hosted at the State Department a conference attended by executives from 90 American companies, called the Global Infrastructure Conference. It was attended by eight top UAE leaders.

The former secretary also heavily promoted and spoke before a December 2012 State Department program called the “Third Global Entrepreneurship Summit with Entrepreneurial Ventures of Arabia,” which was held in the UAE. The Persian Gulf nation called the State Department’s conference, “UAE’s flagship platform for innovation.”

Her effort helped legitimize the UAE’s poor global image. A 2015 Freedom House report flatly ranked UAE as “not free.” On a scale where one was “best” and a seven “worst,” Freedom House ranked the UAE a six for civil liberties, political rights and overall freedom.

During Hillary’s term, the U.S. consulate in the UAE also organized with senior UAE officials a trade mission that traveled across the United States seeking U.S. investment.

In December 2011, Hillary personally led a U.S. delegation to the UAE and met bin-Rashid at his Zabeel Palace with UAE Foreign Minister and de facto leader Sheikh Abdullah Bin Zayed Al Nahyan. The Zayed family gave between $1 million to $5 million to the Clinton Foundation, according to the foundation’s web site.

The Clinton Foundation seems to have tolerated extremist Islamists in their Middle East offices. An Egyptian court sentenced a former top Clinton Foundation employee, Gehed el-Haddad, to life imprisonment in April 2015 for “inciting violence” and supporting an Islamist protest against the military-led ousting of former Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi.

From 2007 to 2012 el-Haddad was a Cairo city director of the Clinton Foundation in Egypt and ran its in-country office as well as directed communications.

El-Haddad had a well-known reputation for promoting radical Islam. He formally joined Morsi’s Freedom and Justice Party in May 2011 as a senior adviser for foreign affairs, overlapping for more than a year during his tenure with the Clinton Foundation, according to his Linked-In social media page.

Clinton also could be doing the bidding for the Gulf States on domestic issues. As previously stated, she recently reversed her support for fracking and announced her opposition to it.

Hydraulic fracturing of shale has turned the United States from an importer of oil and gas to an exporter, which threatens oil producing states, but particularly oil producers such as Saudi Arabia and the gulf states.

A 2014 left-wing Mother Jones Magazine article lashed out at Clinton’s aggressive promotion of fracking overseas. “Under her leadership, the State Department worked closely with energy companies to spread fracking around the globe,” it charged.

It was particularly critical of her convening a State Department shale oil conference in August 2010 that was closed to the press. “The media was barred from attending, and officials refused to reveal basic information, including which countries took part,” Mother Jones reported.

In a March 6 CNN debate, however, Clinton reversed her fracking position and laid out many conditions she would impose as president on the continuation of fracking.

“By the time we get through all of my conditions, I do not think there will be many places in America where fracking will continue to take place,” she told the audience.

Richard Rahn of the Institute for Global Economic Growth said he believes Hillary changed her tune on fracking in part to appease the sheikhs in the gulf.

“The Clinton’s always do everything in a calculated manner. ‘Ok, I go after fracking, why not go ahead and make my environmental friends happy, but at the same time reap the benefits from foreign source income by making my Sheikh’s happy,’” he told The DCNF.

Dr. Steven J. Allen, vice president of the Capital Research Center, which monitors dark money flows to advocacy groups, agreed.

“Why would she take a position on fracking that would alienate people in places like Pennsylvania after it’s not plausible that Bernie could get the nomination,” Allen asked.

“The oil states in the Middle East would be interested in our not attaining energy independence. So fracking would be something they would be against and would be quite happy with her reversal,” he said.

MSNBC host Rachel Maddow asked Clinton in March if she should shut down the Clinton Foundation. “Is there a case to be made, an ethical case to be made that the Clinton Foundation and the global initiative should essentially be wound down as a family foundation while you run for president,” she asked the Democratic candidate. “I think it is not unreasonable to suspect that people may give donations to The Clinton Foundation hoping that they will favorably influence your opinion toward them, as a presidential candidate, or eventually as president if you’re elected.”

Clinton sidestepped the question.

The Clinton campaign did not reply to an email request for comment from The DCNF on its relationship with Persian Gulf leaders.

posted September 14, 2016 09:56 AM            

September 14, 2016
Chaffetz Committee uncovers yet another apparent crime related to Hillary’s email; server
Thomas Lifson

How does one keep track of all the ways in which negligence has compromised national security in the course of Hillary Clinton’s private email server follies? Not that anything she did would pass James Comey’s muster for “criminal intent,” even though negligence specified in the statute is a crime that does not require intent.

So blasé have the media become that no special notice accompanied a revelation yesterday that yet another serious violation of the law took place when Hillary Clinton’s email server passed into the hands of a low ranking technician at Platte River Networks, a man who had no security clearance of any sort. Streiff explains at RedState:

The real news, in my opinion, comes from the testimony of a guy named Justin Cooper. Cooper was paid by both the Clinton Foundation and the Clinton family to assist a State Department employee, Brian Pagliano, in managing Clinton's server. Why no one has focused on the blatant illegality of using a federal employee for personal chores is one of those decisions that I really don't understand. But up until July I was always under the misapprehension that failing to safeguard Top Secret documents was a punishable offense.

In this clip, Cooper makes some startling admissions.

First, he admits he does not have a security clearance. Of any kind. Whatsoever. Second, he had unfettered access to Hillary Clinton's email. This email included a lot of classified information because virtually all of her official communications would be classified at least at the lowest levels. This is demonstrated by the amount of redacted and declassified information that has been released. He was also responsible for destroying Hillary Clinton's discarded cell phones. We know that there was no accounting for those cell phones, no evidence that they were actually destroyed and not simply resold, and we also know those phones contained classified information.

Low level staff are typical targets of espionage. But rarely do they have the unfettered access to secrets that Cooper had. If a Republican presidntial nominee had committed negligent crimes of this nature, he or she would be on every front page in the nation today.
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/20 16/09/chaffetz_committee_uncovers_yet_another_apparent_crime_related_to_hillarys_email_server.html

Hahaha, and the other 2 witnesses before the Chaffetz Committee invoked the 5th Amendment to protect themselves against making incriminating statements which could be used against them in a criminal prosecution.
Another subpoenaed witness refused to appear before the committee at all.

posted September 19, 2016 11:41 AM            

This is the same guy who sought a way to eliminate Hillary's email address from a particular email. He sought advice from the programming community.

Hillary The Corrupt is going to extraordinary lengths to hide information she says is no big deal and that all former Sec States have done the exact same thing. An obvious lie..or another lie in the continuing stream of lies coming out of Hillary The Corrupt.

Discovery – 2014 Reddit Archive: Platte River Network’s Paul Combetta (“Oh **** ” Guy) Requesting Tech Help To Strip “VIP’s Emails”…
September 19, 2016
sundance

A rather stunning discovery has been made by a researcher named Katica who uncovered a July 24th 2014 Reddit thread started by Platte River Network executive Paul Combetta who -at the time- was requesting technical advice on how to strip a “VIP (VERY VIP)” email address from archives stored on a server he has “full access to“.

BACKSTORY – Last week Paul Combetta plead the fifth and refused to answer questions before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. According to Committee chairman Jason Chaffetz, the following email exchange occurred between Combetta and another undisclosed Platte River Network staff member back on 8/19/15:

“Wondering how we can sneak an email in now, after the fact, asking them [the Clinton camp] when they told us to cut the backups and have them confirm it for our records. Starting to think this whole thing is really covering up some shady s**t. I just think if we have it in writing that they told us to cut the backups then we can go public with our statement saying we’ve had the backup since day one when we were told to trim to 30 days would make us look a whole lot better.”

Platte River Network used BleachBit to remove all traces of Secretary Hillary Clinton’s deleted emails. As mentioned Paul Combetta refused to answer any questions from the committee.

However, today a rather remarkable discovery adds additional intrique to this historical series of events. A researcher named Katica, discovered the Reddit identity of Paul Combetta as “stonetear“.

The connection between Paul Combetta and his username “stonetear” was made from an earlier administrator who thanked Paul Combetta for some previous technical assistance hosting some zip files and providing his contact email address as “stonetear@gmail”:

That led to a discovery that “stonetear” as a Reddit user had an archive thread requesting technical advice for the following:

[July 24, 2014] Hello all- I may be facing a very interesting situation where I need to strip out a VIP’s (VERY VIP) email address from a bunch of archived email that I have both in a live Exchange mailbox, as well as a PST file. Basically, they don’t want the VIP’s email address exposed to anyone, and want to be able to either strip out or replace the email address in the to/from fields in all of the emails we want to send out.

I am not sure if something like this is possible with PowerShell, or exporting all of the emails to MSG and doing find/replaces with a batch processing program of some sort.

Does anyone have experience with something like this, and/or suggestions on how this might be accomplished?

In a short series of replies to his inquiry and follow-up suggestions, Paul Combetta provided the following responses:

Reply – Is there no way to access and edb manually?

Combetta (“stonetear”): I have full access to the server – what are you suggesting with the EDB file?

Reply – There is no supported way to do what you’re asking. You can only delete emails after they’re stored in the database. You can’t change them. If there was a feature in Exchange that allowed this, it could result in major legal issues. There may be ways to hack a solution, but I am not aware of any.

Combetta (“stonetear”): As a PST file or exported MSG files, this could be done though, yes?

The issue is that these emails involve the private email address of someone you’d recognize, and we’re trying to replace it with a placeholder address as to not expose it.

Combetta (“stonetear”): I think maybe I wasn’t clear enough in the original post. I have these emails available in a PST file. Can I rewrite them in the PST? I could also export to MSG and do some sort of batch find/replace. Anyone know of tools that might help with this?

Again, the date on this archived request and exchange is July 24th 2014. We now know the VIP mentioned by Combetta was Secretary Hillary Clinton.

The request reflects an obvious “intent” to hide the Clinton email address; an intent that FBI Director James Comey stated he was unable to discover during their investigation, leading to his recommendation that no charges be filed against Secretary Clinton.

If James Comey needed intent. It looks like some web slueths have just located the smoking gun the FBI was unable to locate on their own.

posted September 20, 2016 05:24 PM            

Rajiv Fernando donated millions to the Clinton Foundation and thousands when she was running for president the first time. He was given a position he wasn't qualified for and top secret security clearance all to be stripped from the position days after media asked for his resume.

posted September 21, 2016 06:48 PM            

Hillary Clinton Calls For Border Walls And Deportations…In 2006.

During Clinton's 2006 Senate re-election campaign she was recorded saying that Mexico was an important problem.

quote:

---

“The Mexican government’s policies are pushing migration north. There isn’t any sensible approach except to do what we need to do simultaneously.”

---

quote:

---

“You know, secure our borders with technology, personnel, physical barriers if necessary in some places, and we need to have tougher employer sanctions and we kind of need to incentivize Mexico to do more."

---

posted September 22, 2016 08:52 AM            

Obstruction of Justice is a criminal act.

Day #4 – The “stonetear” Investigation – Chairman Jason Chaffetz Sends Preservation Notice To Reddit…
September 22, 2016
sundance

Day #1 – Katica discovers Paul Combetta has on-line alias “stonetear” and full backstory.

Day #2 – Paul Combetta scrubs his user information, and deletes his July 24th 2014 posting history. The Stonetear Reddit inquiry and the Timeline for Hillary Clinton’s email cover up.

Day #3 – House Science Committee Chairman Lamar Smith demands answers from Platte River Network, and interview scheduled with Combetta by tomorrow.

Day #4 – House Oversight Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz sends preservation notice to Reddit.

Summary Backstory – On Sunday September 18th, researcher Katica discovered Hillary Clinton’s email custodian, Paul Combetta, had an alias “stonetear” used on a 2014 Reddit forum asking for assistance in altering archived server records for Hillary Clinton. We published the archive and discovery at 4:30am Monday Sept 19th. Within hours Combetta scrubs his prior posting and attempts to delete his web-footprint. However, the information is viral as the internet shares the story.

Tuesday night Sept 20th, Chairman Lamar Smith becomes aware of the issue and sends formal letter to Platte River Network legal team, demanding an interview with Combetta.

Yesterday, Wednesday Sept 21st, House Oversight Chairman Jason Chaffetz sent a preservation notification to Reddit to ensure the archived posting of Combetta/stonetear is retained:

(Via The Hill) The House Oversight Committee has ordered Reddit to preserve deleted posts believed to be written by an IT technician the committee suspects may have deleted Hillary Clinton emails that were under subpoena.

Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) confirmed that the committee has issued a preservation order and that Reddit is “cooperating.”

The order “has the weight of law, you can’t destroy things and hope things magically get erased,” he told The Hill Wednesday.

At issue is whether an employee of the Denver, Colo.-based tech firm that managed Clinton’s server sought advice on how to digitally alter the address lines of emails thought to be from the former secretary of State — the day after the State Department had agreed to provide certain Clinton emails to the Benghazi Committee.

The allegations “fit the pattern of what we think was happening,” Chaffetz said. (more)

The larger issues are jaw-droppingly significant. Prior to the discovery of “stonetear” the claims from the Hillary Clinton campaign, Paul Combetta and Platte River Network were that Combetta was operating alone without any instructions from Secretary Clinton or her key aides and attorneys.

[…] “As the F.B.I.’s report notes,” Mr. Fallon said, “neither Hillary Clinton nor her attorneys had knowledge of the Platte River Network employee’s actions. It appears he acted on his own and against guidance given by both Clinton’s and Platte River’s attorneys to retain all data in compliance with a congressional preservation request.” (link)

The July 24th, 2014 postings by Combetta, under the username “stonetear“, not only show a goal of changing a federal record – they also prove an intent to fulfill a request made by agents or representatives of the Secretary’s office with whom he was under contract:

“Basically, they don’t want the VIP’s email address exposed to anyone”…

bleach-bit-2

The stonetear discovery removes the “he acted on his own” aspect. In addition, the intent behind the action also provides the missing element FBI Director James Comey stated the FBI was unable to discover. “They” intended to hide Hillary Clinton’s email address prior to compliance with federal records retention laws.

Mr. Combetta attempting to delete the history of his activity, on the very day the stonetear discovery was made public, is also a reflection of “consciousness of guilt“.

Paul Combetta was/is under an immunity agreement (details unknown) with the FBI. If the FBI was aware of this 2014 actionable intent there would be no reason to delete it – unless the FBI is also part of the larger Clinton cover-up. As thethompsontimeline asks:

[…] Looking at Combetta’s Reddit post detailed above, there are only two possibilities. One is that Combetta failed to disclose crucial information to the FBI, despite his immunity deal. The second is that he did, but the FBI didn’t mention it in its final report. Either way, it’s already clear that the FBI has failed to present the full story of Combetta’s actions to the public. (link)

Several readers have made inquiry into why would Secretary Clinton and her team want to remove the email address in the first place. The answer to that is quite simple.

In July of 2014 they were only just beginning to send the State Department records as part of their legal obligations. The Benghazi committee was requesting from State, not Clinton directly. Few people actually knew of the Clinton-owned email server set up. The New York Times didn’t report on the server until March 2nd 2015.

Combetta appears to have been looking for a way to remove the email address prior to sending the archive to Cheryl Mills and Clinton’s legal team. Those entities would then filter through the content and print out the ones they determined the State Dept., would receive. Congressional committees were waiting to receive from State Dept.

No-one, except Combetta and those involved in Clinton’s handling, knows if Combetta was successful in his goal to strip the address. However, a key point often overlooked is Clinton provided paper copies of the emails she did choose to turn over.

Anyone on the .gov side of the email exchange would have the same email, and Clinton email address. While it might be intensely time consuming, has anyone looked to see if the email address on any of the paper copies (turned over by Clinton) is different from the recipient copy of the same email?

Lastly, the media is going to attempt to distract or dilute the significance of the stonetear discovery by using the issue of ‘verification’ that Paul Combetta is actually “stonetear“. However, the evidence to prove/support that Combetta is Stonetear is simply overwhelming (HERE and HERE) and lots of internal links HERE.

posted October 05, 2016 11:57 AM            

The 2015 Clinton tax return is a case study on how the D.C. political elites make money by trading on their political offices, past and present, such as writing books, consulting, and giving speeches. They serve on boards of corporations, such as Bill did with Laureate. They make money because they held public office and may hold public office again. They do not produce anything. They make money because of who they are, because of their public offices.

Bill reported income of $5,250,000 from "speaking." He deducted $445,000 for "travel expenses" and $25,000 for "supplies." Lots of pencils and paper for Bubba to write speeches. This means Bubba stayed in the best hotels and ate at the finest restaurants, and the taxpayers subsidized his lifestyle because he deducted a ton of money to lower his taxable income.

Bill reported $1,660,575 from "consulting." Consulting for what? Maybe advising on the meaning of the words "is" and "alone"?

Bill reported over $1,098,000 from Laureate Education and $562,500 from the Gems Foundation. What did Bill do for this? Teach?

Hillary reported income of $1,475,000 from "speaking" and deducted $231,500 for "travel expenses" and $25,945 for "supplies." Must have used lots of pencils and paper to write those speeches.

Hillary reported $3,000,000 as an "author."

The Clintons reported a capital loss carryover of about $700,000, which means they lost money in the stock market at some point. Evidently, Hillary did not keep up reading the WSJ, which was apparently how she made $100,000 in cattle futures.

The Clintons took a "charity deduction" of over $1,000,000 by contributing $1,000,000 to the Clinton Family Foundation. So they contribute to an organization they control, where they can deduct "expenses" and employ friends and family. It lowers their taxable income.

Bubba also reported over $203,700,000 (this has to be a mistake) as a pension income, which must be his presidential pension, and $22,500 as a public employee (attorney general and governor) of Arkansas. One would think that, making over $10,000,000, Bubba would send the $200,000 back to the U.S. Treasury and the $22,000 back to Arkansas.

These facts show that the Clintons made lots of money as speakers and consultants because the countries and corporations that paid them are covering their bets that Hillary may be president. Further, the author income comes from the Clintons recounting their time in public office. True, most politicians make money this way, but it is wrong to make money describing your time on the public payroll.

Also, Hillary and the MSM have criticized Donald Trump for taking a loss on his business and questioned how he could have a loss. How could the smartest woman in the word lose over $700,000 in the stock market?

Trump has made and lost money by running a real business. He builds and operates hotels and casinos and has run a TV show. He employs many employees and subcontractors. The Clintons, like most politicians who play the author-speaker-consultant game, do not build anything, do not operate anything, and do not employ anyone except lawyers to defend them on their numerous scandals and accountants to take all the allowable tax deductions.

The bottom line is that the Clintons used their public offices to set themselves for speaking gigs, book deals, consulting jobs, and anything else to capitalize on the contacts and experience obtained while public employees. This is how the D.C. political class makes money, and the Clintons are masters at it.

posted October 06, 2016 12:17 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by jwhop:
"Hillary Clinton Calls For Border Walls And Deportations…In 2006."

I didn't this before etherealsaturn. Shocking isn't it?

---

Shocking? Here are the immigration rates from Mexico to the US for the last decade. Things have changed since 2006...

The number of Mexican migrants apprehended at U.S. borders in fiscal 2015 dropped to the lowest levels in nearly 50 years, according to U.S. Border Patrol data. This change comes after a period in which net migration of Mexicans to the U.S. had fallen to lows not seen since the 1940s.

This decline in apprehensions coincides with recently released estimates by Mexico’s top statistical agency, which show that the rate at which Mexicans migrated to the U.S. and other countries – including both legal and unauthorized immigrants – has held steady for the past five years, after a dramatic drop during the Great Recession.

The drop in Mexican emigration to the U.S. during and since the Great Recession has at least three main causes. First, there was a decrease in the number of jobs available in the U.S. to Mexican immigrants, particularly in construction. Second, since the mid-2000s there has been stricter enforcement of immigration laws at the U.S.-Mexico border (with the number of Border Patrol agents now above 17,000) and an increase in the number of deportations of Mexican immigrants. Third, there are demographic changes underway in Mexico that could be affecting would-be immigrants. Today, a declining share of the population in Mexico is made up of people ages 15 to 29 (24.9% in 2014 versus 29.4% in 1990) – and immigrants are more likely to migrate at younger ages, particularly between the ages of 20 and 30 years old. This reflects the decline of the fertility rate in Mexico since the 1970s, which has led to a decades-long process of population aging in Mexico.

As Pew Research Center reported last fall in an analysis of Mexican and U.S. data, migration flows from Mexico had recently reversed for the first time since the 1940s. Between 2009 and 2014, some 870,000 Mexican immigrants arrived in the U.S. while about 1 million left. This change followed on a five-year period of net-zero migration from Mexico after several decades of large inflows of Mexican immigrants into the U.S.

posted October 06, 2016 07:03 AM            

How corrupt is she?

So corrupt that the Dept of Justice had to drop a criminal prosecution against an arms dealer to prevent her corruption and bungling incompetence from being exposed before the November elections.

October 5, 2016
Did DoJ drop charges against arms dealer who could sink Clinton?
Rick Moran

The Department of Justice is dropping charges against an arms dealer who says he can expose Hillary Clinton's role in illegally arming terrorists in Libya.

American Marc Turi had been charged with selling weapons to Libyan rebels at a time when it was illegal to do so. An associate of Turi claims that the DoJ was dropping the charges because the revelations about Clinton's Libya policies would sink her campaign.

Politico:

The deal averts a trial that threatened to cast additional scrutiny on Hillary Clinton’s private emails as Secretary of State, and to expose reported Central Intelligence Agency attempts to arm rebels fighting Libyan leader Moammar Qadhafi.

Government lawyers were facing a Wednesday deadline to produce documents to Turi’s legal team, and the trial was officially set to begin on Election Day, although it likely would have been delayed by protracted disputes about classified information in the case.

A Turi associate asserted that the government dropped the case because the proceedings could have embarrassed Clinton and President Barack Obama by calling attention to the reported role of their administration in supplying weapons that fell into the hands of Islamic extremist militants.

“They don’t want this stuff to come out because it will look really bad for Obama and Clinton just before the election,” said the associate.

In the dismissal motion, prosecutors say “discovery rulings” from U.S. District Court Judge David Campbell contributed to the decision to drop the case. The joint motion asks the judge to accept a confidential agreement to resolve the case through a civil settlement between the State Department and the arms broker.

Why a "confidential agreement"? Especially since the case is being resolved through a civil settlement? This stinks to high heaven as another cover-up by the Obama administration to protect Hillary Clinton.

Turi adviser Robert Stryk of the government relations and consulting firm SPG accused the government of trying to scapegoat Turi to cover up Clinton’s mishandling of Libya.

“The U.S. government spent millions of dollars, went all over the world to bankrupt him, and destroyed his life — all to protect Hillary Clinton’s crimes,” he said, alluding to the deadly Sept. 11, 2012 terrorist attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya.

Republicans hold Clinton responsible for mishandling the circumstances around that attack. And Stryk said that Turi was now weighing book and movie deals to tell his story, and to weigh in on the Benghazi attack.

Representatives of the Justice Department, the White House and Clinton’s presidential campaign either declined to comment or did not respond to requests for comment on the case or the settlement.

Turi was indicted in 2014 on four felony counts: two of arms dealing in violation of the Arms Export Control Act and two of lying to the State Department in official applications. The charges accused Turi of claiming that the weapons involved were destined for Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, when the arms were actually intended to reach Libya.

Turi’s lawyers argued that the shipments were part of a U.S. government-authorized effort to arm Libyan rebels.

It’s unclear if any of the weapons made it to Libya, and there’s no evidence linking weapons provided by the U.S. government to the Benghazi attacks.

“The proposal did not result in an actual transfer of defense articles to Libya,” the State Department official told POLITICO on Tuesday.

How about evidence of weapons ending up in the hands of terrorists? Whether the weapons were used by those who attacked our consulate and the CIA annex or not, any weapons that were sold to or appropriated by terrorists constitute at the very least a gross error in judgment that, by all rights, should sink the Clinton campaign.

Wikileaks founder Julian Assange has been threatening to release damaging information on Hillary Clinton for weeks. But on Tuesday, at an event in Berlin celebrating the 10th anniversary of the hacker group, all Assange would say via video link was that he would release the documents before the November election.

Could some of that information relate to illegal arms sales by the Obama administration to terrorists?

Turi told Fox News back in July about the U.S. illegally supplying Libyan rebels with arms and that the administration knew that not all of them were going to arm rebels:

"When this equipment landed in Libya, half went one way, and the half went the other way," Turi said, emphasizing that poor oversight, allowed individuals hostile to the United States to get arms. "The half that went the other way is the half that ended up in Syria."

Turi believed he was involved in a covert operation to sell arms to Qatar and the UAE, who would then fly the weapons to Libya. But once it became clear he could expose Hillary Clinton's and President Obama's illegal activities, DoJ pursued the criminal case against him.

It won't be easy finding evidence against Clinton. No doubt DoJ has buried it all. But Turi makes a convincing case that the cover-up is ongoing. The administration will apparently go to great lengths to hide the truth and save the Clinton candidacy.