Breaking – LA – FBI executing warrants for possible public CORRUPTION charges Los Angeles Department of Water and Power and City Hall on Monday.

July 22, 2019
LA – FBI executing warrants for possible PUBLIC corruption charges Los Angeles Department of Water and Power and City Hall on Monday.





LOS ANGELES (KABC) — FBI agents served search warrants at Los Angeles Department of Water and Power and City Hall on Monday.

The search started at approximately 10 a.m. and no arrests are planned, FBI officials said.

The L.A. City Attorney’s Office said the search warrants served on its staff relate to the class action litigation and settlement surrounding the DWP billing system.

The statement from the office said: “The FBI served search warrants for documents on several City employees at both CHE and DWP offices, including some of our staff members. The warrants served on our staff relate to issues that have arisen over the class action litigation and settlement surrounding the DWP billing system, and the City’s lawsuit against PwC. We have and will continue to cooperate fully with the expectation that the investigation will be completed expeditiously.”

The FBI and the DWP did not confirm the above information and said the search warrants have been sealed by the court.

Agents were spotted going into the DWP building and to the offices of L.A. City Attorney Mike Feuer.

An FBI expert who spoke to Eyewitness News said that by the looks of it, this could be a public corruption investigation. He said getting search warrants to go into offices at City Hall are not easy.

“It’s going to require a lot of approvals within the FBI here in Los Angeles and also back in Washington, D.C. at headquarters, but if you have the information, if you have the probable cause, if you have verifiable and substantial documentary information that shows that you need to go into certain offices at City Hall or some of these other locations, then yes, you can get the search warrant. A judge will approve it if the information is there.”

The following statement was released by L.A. Mayor Eric Garcetti:

“We were notified earlier this morning that federal search warrants were being executed today. The Mayor believes that any criminal wrongdoing should be investigated and prosecuted. His expectation is that any City employee asked to cooperate will do so fully and immediately.”



Ukrainian’s Lutsenko to open an investigation in to Ukrainian interference in US elections. Claims US AMBASSADOR gave him “UNTOUCHABLES” list

May 20, 2019

See the two articles below –

Senior Ukrainian official says he’s opened probe into US election interference


Ukrainian Prosecutor General Yuriy Lutsenko told Hill.TV’s John Solomon in an interview aired on Wednesday that he has opened a probe into alleged attempts by Ukrainians to interfere in the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

“Today we will launch a criminal investigation about this and we will give legal assessment of this information,” Lutsenko said last week.


Lutsenko is probing a claim from a member of the Ukrainian parliament that the director of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU), Artem Sytnyk, attempted to influence the 2016 vote to the benefit of Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton.

A State Department spokesman told Hill.TV that officials are aware of news reports regarding Sytnyk.

“We have always emphasized the need for deep, comprehensive, and timely reforms that respond to the demands the Ukrainian people made during the Revolution of Dignity: an end to systemic corruption, faster economic growth, and a European future for all Ukrainians,” a State spokesperson told Hill.TV.

“We have consistently said that Ukraine’s long-term success and resilience depends on its commitment to reform, in particular the fight to address corruption. To succeed, Ukraine needs committed government officials and strong anti-corruption institutions. The United States is committed to engaging with our partners in Ukraine, including on efforts to roll back the persistent corruption that continues to threaten Ukraine’s national security, prosperity, and democratic development.”

NABU issued a statement on Friday, calling Lutsenko’s comments “not true and is an absurd effort to discredit an independent anti-corruption agency.”

Hill.TV has also reached out to the U.S. Embassy in Ukraine and Clinton’s spokesperson for comment.

“According to the member of parliament of Ukraine, he got the court decision that the NABU official conducted an illegal intrusion into the American election campaign,” Lutsenko said.

“It means that we think Mr. Sytnyk, the NABU director, officially talked about criminal investigation with Mr. [Paul] Manafort, and at the same time, Mr. Sytnyk stressed that in such a way, he wanted to assist the campaign of Ms. Clinton,” he continued.

Solomon asked Lutsenko about reports that a member of Ukraine’s parliament obtained a tape of the current head of the NABU saying that he was attempting to help Clinton win the 2016 presidential election, as well as connections that helped release the black-ledger files that exposed Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort’s wrongdoing in Ukraine.

“This member of parliament even attached the audio tape where several men, one of which had a voice similar to the voice of Mr. Sytnyk, discussed the matter.”

— Hill.TV Staff




Lutsenko claims US ambassador gave him ‘untouchables list,’ US embassy denies it

Prosecutor General of Ukraine Yuriy Lutsenko gives a press conference in Kyiv on March 7, 2019. Two weeks later, Lutsenko accused US ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch of giving him a list of people who should be exempt from legal prosecution in Ukraine.
Photo by Volodymyr Petrov

An extraordinary row has broken out between Ukraine’s Prosecutor General Yuriy Lutsenko and the U.S. embassy in Ukraine, with Lutsenko claiming the embassy gave him a list of people not to prosecute, and the embassy accusing Lutsenko of making the whole story up.

Lutsenko made the claim during an interview with the Washington D.C. newspaper The Hill published on March 20.

“Unfortunately, at my first meeting with U.S. ambassador (Marie Yovanovitch), she gave me a list of people whom we should not prosecute,” Lutsenko said. He said he had found this unacceptable.

But according to The Hill, the State Department called Lutsenko’s claim that he had been given such a list “an outright fabrication.”

Lutsenko said that he assumed that the Prosecutor General’s Office hasn’t received promised aid from the United States because of his rejection of the list.

“A portion of the funds, namely $4.4 million, were designated and were foreseen for the recipient, the Prosecutor General’s Office. But we never received it,” he said. “Actually, we got a letter from the U.S. embassy, from the ambassador, that the money that we are speaking about (was) under the full control of the U.S. embassy.”

The embassy itself in an official response to Ukraine’s 1+1 channel stated that “in the case of there being an absence of political will, for example, in the Prosecutor General’s Office, we will meet our responsibilities to U.S. taxpayers and transfer funds to where they can produce a positive outcome.”

Lutsenko’s allegations came a couple of weeks after Yovanovitch in a public statement said that the discredited Anti-Corruption Prosecutor Nazar Kholodnytsky should be dismissed.

Anti-corruption activists have been pressuring the authorities to sack Kholodnytsky for almost a year, after the National Anti-Corruption Bureau or NABU in April 2018 released audio recordings of Kholodnytsky allegedly giving suspects secret details about their cases, while pressuring judges and prosecutors to drop prosecutions. Listening devices had been placed in a fish tank in Kholodnytsky’s office.

Kholodnytsky later confirmed that the tapes were authentic, but said his words had been taken out of context.

The Hill published a letter provided by Lutsenko to demonstrate that the U.S. embassy interferes in the work of his office.

In the letter, sent to the Prosecutor General’s Office of Ukraine in April 2016, the embassy expressed concerns about the prosecution of prominent activist Vitaliy Shabunin’s Anti-Corruption Action Center for alleged misappropriation of funds that the organization received as grant support from the U.S. embassy. The embassy said they have are satisfied with how the aid was spent and were concerned that the case could be an attempt to put pressure on anti-corruption activists.

Lutsenko told the Hill the letter was connected to his refusal to accept Yovanovitch’s alleged “list of untouchables.” However, when the letter was sent in April 2016, Lutsenko wasn’t yet prosecutor general, having been appointed a month later. Yovanovitch arrived in Ukraine even later that year.

War on NABU

Lutsenko’s comments came as the conflict between the NABU and the Prosecutor General’s Office is escalating. Lutsenko’s office has had a tense relationship with NABU ever since the bureau made allegations of corruption in the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office back in April 2018.

The most recent scandal arose in late February, when a journalistic investigation revealed that law enforcement agencies, including members of the Prosecutor General’s Office and the NABU covered up for corruption in state-owned defense enterprise UkrObronProm, for years.

The state law enforcement agencies promptly turned on each other.

Kholodnytsky claimed that the NABU was the one blocking investigation into one suspect, Oleh Hladkovskiy, the former deputy head of Ukraine’s National Security and Defense Council, who was fired on March 4.

Speaking at a meeting of parliament’s defense committee on March 13, Kholodnytsky claimed that 87 sheets of correspondence had disappeared from the case’s files. Artem Sytnyk, the head of the NABU, responded that his organization had never received such correspondence.

Lutsenko during the interview with The Hill said that his office would open a probe into independent Ukrainian lawmaker Boryslav Rozenblat’s claim that Sytnyk meddled in the 2016 U.S. presidential elections to help Democratic Party candidate Hillary Clinton.

Donald J. Trump


“John Solomon: As Russia Collusion fades, Ukrainian plot to help Clinton emerges.” @seanhannity @FoxNews

45,4 тыс. человек(а) говорят об этом

Rozenblat, formerly belonging to the 138-member Bloc of Petro Poroshenko faction in parliament, was himself charged with corruption and the illegal extraction of amber by the NABU after the bureau taped his phone.

He denied all of the accusations, with Kyiv City Court stating that the NABU’s wiretap of his phone had been illegal.

In the meantime, foreign donors and multiple not-for-profit anticorruption organizations say there is a lack of progress in reforms and battling corruption in Ukraine.

“The United States is not currently providing any assistance to the Prosecutor General’s Office, but did previously attempt to support fundamental justice sector reform,” an unspecified State Department spokesperson told The Hill. “When the political will for genuine reform by successive Prosecutors General proved lacking, we exercised our fiduciary responsibility to the U.S. taxpayer and redirected assistance to more productive projects.”

“In a passionate desire to topple Sytnyk and take revenge on U.S. Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch, (Lutsenko) is pulling Ukraine rapidly down to rock bottom,” wrote Daria Kaleniuk, senior executive of Anti-Corruption Action Centre, on Facebook.

Independent lawmaker Mustafa Nayyem cited that the prosecutor general is going beyond his authority.

“The only body that can conduct such an investigation into the disclosure of state secrets is the State Bureau of Investigations,” Nayyem said on Facebook on March 21.

Nayyem added that he sent Lutsenko an official inquiry asking to provide the “untouchables list” allegedly given to Lutsenko by the U.S. ambassador. He also asks Lutsenko why, if the ambassador indeed demanded immunity for someone, Lutsenko didn’t disclose this alleged illegal behavior at the time.

Political expert Volodymyr Fesenko wrote on Facebook that the interview was meant to discredit Yovanovitch, prior to the Ukrainian presidential election set to take place on March 31, which many fear Poroshenko may try to rig in his favor, while also appeasing the U.S. President Donald Trump.

Fesenko said that this move reminded him of the time Poroshenko publicly supported Hillary Clinton for U.S. presidency in 2016.

“Yuriy Lutsenko repeated Poroshenko’s mistake of three years ago. He decided to intervene in American domestic politics in favor of one of the conflicting parties. And this is absolutely wrong to do,” wrote Fesenko.

In a recent conversation with the Kyiv Post, a member of a European anti-corruption initiative in Ukraine acknowledged that Ukraine’s Prosecutor General’s Office had stopped receiving funds from European donors due to a lack of progress in battling corruption, while saying that projects with the NABU remain funded.

Lutsenko didn’t respond to allegations prior to publication.

Hunter Biden – and the Ukraine issue and the China issue? – Updated!

May 2, 2019


Not Just Ukraine; Biden May Have A Serious China Problem As Schweizer Exposes Hunter’s $1bn Deal



Two years of investigations by journalist Peter Schweizer has revealed that Joe Biden may now have a serious China problem. And just like his Ukraine scandal, it involves actions which helped his son Hunter, who was making hand over fist in both countries.

Schweizer, the author of Clinton Cash and now Secret Empires discovered that in 2013, then-Vice President Biden and his son Hunter flew together to China on Air Force Two – and two weeks later, Hunter’s firm inked a private equity deal for $1 billion with a subsidiary of the Chinese government’s Bank of China, which expanded to $1.5 billion, according to an article by Schweizer’s in the New York Post.

If it sounds shocking that a vice president would shape US-China policy as his son — who has scant experience in private equity — clinched a coveted billion-dollar deal with an arm of the Chinese government, that’s because it is” –Peter Schweizer

Perhaps this is why Joe Biden – now on the 2020 campaign trail – said last week that China wasn’t a threat.



Secretary of State Mike Pompeo took a shot at Biden’s comment during a speech at the Claremont Institute’s 40th anniversary gala, saying “Look how both parties now are on guard against the threat that China presents to America — maybe except Joe Biden.”



Back to Hunter… 

Schweizer connects the dots, writing that “without the aid of subpoena power, here’s what we know:”

  • Hunter Biden and his partners created several LLCs involved in multibillion-dollar private equity deals with Chinese government-owned entities.
  • The primary operation was Rosemont Seneca Partners – an investment firm founded in 2009 and controlled by Hunter Biden, John Kerry’s stepson Chris Heinz, and Heniz’s longtime associate Devon Archer. The trio began making deals “through a series of overlapping entities” under Rosemont.
  • In less than a year, Hunter Biden and Archer met with top Chinese officials in China, and partnered with the Thornton Group – a Massachusetts-based consultancy headed by James Bulger – son of famed mob hitman James “Whitey” Bulger.
  • According to the Thornton Group’s Chinese-language website, Chinese executives “extended their warm welcome” to the “Thornton Group, with its US partner Rosemont Seneca chairman Hunter Biden (second son of the now Vice President Joe Biden.”
  • Officially, the China meets were to “explore the possibility of commercial cooperation and opportunity,” however details of the meeting were not published to the English-language version of the website.
  • “The timing of this meeting was also notable. It occurred just hours before Hunter Biden’s father, the vice president, met with Chinese President Hu Jintao in Washington as part of the Nuclear Security Summit,” according to Schweizer.
  • Perhaps most damning in terms of timing and optics, just twelve days after Hunter and Joe Biden flew on Air Force Two to Beijing, Hunter’s company signed a “historic deal with the Bank of China,” described by Schweizer as “the state-owned financial behemoth often used as a tool of the Chinese government.” To accommodate the deal, the Bank of China created a unique type of investment fund called Bohai Harvest RST (BHR). According to BHR, Rosemont Seneca Partners is a founding partner.

It was an unprecedented arrangement: the government of one of America’s fiercest competitors going into business with the son of one of America’s most powerful decision makers.

Chris Heinz claims neither he nor Rosemont Seneca Partners, the firm he had part ownership of, had any role in the deal with Bohai Harvest. Nonetheless, Biden, Archer and the Rosemont name became increasingly involved with China. Archer became the vice chairman of Bohai Harvest, helping oversee some of the fund’s investments. –New York Post

National Security implications

As Schweizer also notes, BHR became an “anchor investor” in the IPO of China General Nuclear Power Corp (CGN) in December 2014. The state-owned energy company is involved with the construction of nuclear reactors.

In April 2016, CGN was charged by the US Justice Department with stealing nuclear secrets from the United Stateswhich prosecutors warned could cause “significant damage to our national security.” CNG was interested in sensitive, American-made nuclear components that resembled those used on US nuclear submarines, according to experts.

More China dealings

It doesn’t stop there. While Hunter Biden had “no experience in China, and little in private equity,” the Chinese government for some reason thought it would be a great idea to give his firm business opportunities instead of established global banks such as Morgan Stanley or Goldman Sachs.

Also in December 2014, a Chinese state-backed conglomerate called Gemini Investments Limited was negotiating and sealing deals with Hunter Biden’s Rosemont on several fronts. That month, it made a $34 million investment into a fund managed by Rosemont.

The following August, Rosemont Realty, another sister company of Rosemont Seneca, announced that Gemini Investments was buying a 75 percent stake in the company. The terms of the deal included a $3 billion commitment from the Chinese, who were eager to purchase new US properties. Shortly after the sale, Rosemont Realty was rechristened Gemini Rosemont.

Chinese executives lauded the deal. –New York Post

“Rosemont, with its comprehensive real-estate platform and superior performance history, was precisely the investment opportunity Gemini Investments was looking for in order to invest in the US real estate market,” said Li Ming, chairman of Sino-Ocean Land Holdings Limited and Gemini Investments. “We look forward to a strong and successful partnership.”

That partnership planned to use Chinese money to scoop up US properties.

“We see great opportunities to continue acquiring high-quality real estate in the US market,” said one company executive, who added: “The possibilities for this venture are tremendous.”

Then, in 2015, BHR partnered with a subsidiary of Chinese state-owned military aviation contractor Aviation Industry Corporation of China (AVIC) in order to purchase American precision-parts maker Henniges – a transaction which required approval from the Committee of Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), the same rubber-stamp committee that approved the Uranium One deal.

Tying it back to Ukraine

While we have previously reported on the Bidens’ adventures in Ukraine, Schweizer connects the dots rather well here

Consider the facts. On April 16, 2014, White House records show that Devon Archer, Hunter Biden’s business partner in the Rosemont Seneca deals, made a private visit to the White House for a meeting with Vice President Biden. Five days later, on April 21, Joe Biden landed in Kiev for a series of high-level meetings with Ukrainian officials. The vice president was bringing with him highly welcomed terms of a United States Agency for International Development program to assist the Ukrainian natural-gas industry and promises of more US financial assistance and loans. Soon the United States and the International Monetary Fund would be pumping more than $1 billion into the Ukrainian economy.

The next day, there was a public announcement that Archer had been asked to join the board of Burisma, a Ukrainian natural-gas company. Three weeks after that, on May 13, it was announced that Hunter Biden would join, too. Neither Biden nor Archer had any background or experience in the energy sector. –New York Post

Hunter was paid as much as $50,000 per month while Burisma was under investigation by officials in both Ukraine and elsewhere.

Then Joe Biden threatened to withhold $1 billion in US loanguarantees to Ukraine unless President Petro Poroshenko fired his head prosecutor, General Viktor Shokin, who was leading a wide-ranging corruption investigation into natural gas firm Burisma Holdings.


—-me —->Image result for Burisma Holdings.




Biden bragged about the threat last year, telling an audience at the Council on Foreign Relations: “I said, ‘You’re not getting the billion.’ I’m going to be leaving here in, I think it was about six hours. I looked at them and said: ‘I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money,’” bragged Biden, recalling the conversation with Poroshenko.

Well, son of a bitch, he got fired. And they put in place someone who was solid at the time.”

Joe Biden says that he had no idea Hunter was on the board of Burisma (for two years after he joined), and that the two never spoke about the Burisma investigation. The former VP claims that Shokin’s removal was required due to his mishandling of several cases in Ukraine.

As we head into the 2020 elections, it will be interesting to see how Joe Biden dances around his son’s lucrative – and very potentially daddy-assisted deals around the world.



Hunter Biden at a campaign event in 2008. He sits on the board of one of Ukraine’s largest natural gas companies.CreditOzier Muhammad/The New York Times
Hunter Biden at a campaign event in 2008. He sits on the board of one of Ukraine’s largest natural gas companies.CreditCreditOzier Muhammad/The New York Times
By James Risen

WASHINGTON — When Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. traveled to Kiev , Ukraine, on Sunday for a series of meetings with the country’s leaders, one of the issues on his agenda was to encourage a more aggressive fight against Ukraine’s rampant corruption and stronger efforts to rein in the power of its oligarchs.

But the credibility of the vice president’s anticorruption message may have been undermined by the association of his son, Hunter Biden, with one of Ukraine’s largest natural gas companies, Burisma Holdings, and with its owner, Mykola Zlochevsky, who was Ukraine’s ecology minister under former President Viktor F. Yanukovych before he was forced into exile.

Hunter Biden, 45, a former Washington lobbyist, joined the Burisma board in April 2014. That month, as part of an investigation into money laundering, British officials froze London bank accounts containing $23 million that allegedly belonged to Mr. Zlochevsky.

Britain’s Serious Fraud Office, an independent government agency, specifically forbade Mr. Zlochevksy, as well as Burisma Holdings, the company’s chief legal officer and another company owned by Mr. Zlochevsky, to have any access to the accounts

But after Ukrainian prosecutors refused to provide documents needed in the investigation, a British court in January ordered the Serious Fraud Office to unfreeze the assets. The refusal by the Ukrainian prosecutor general’s office to cooperate was the target of a stinging attack by the American ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey R. Pyatt, who called out Burisma’s owner by name in a speech in September.

“In the case of former Ecology Minister Mykola Zlochevsky, the U.K. authorities had seized $23 million in illicit assets that belonged to the Ukrainian people,” Mr. Pyatt said. Officials at the prosecutor general’s office, he added, were asked by the United Kingdom “to send documents supporting the seizure. Instead they sent letters to Zlochevsky’s attorneys attesting that there was no case against him. As a result, the money was freed by the U.K. court, and shortly thereafter the money was moved to Cyprus.”

Mr. Pyatt went on to call for an investigation into “the misconduct” of the prosecutors who wrote the letters. In his speech, the ambassador did not mention Hunter Biden’s connection to Burisma.

But Edward C. Chow, who follows Ukrainian policy at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said the involvement of the vice president’s son with Mr. Zlochevsky’s firm undermined the Obama administration’s anticorruption message in Ukraine.

“Now you look at the Hunter Biden situation, and on the one hand you can credit the father for sending the anticorruption message,” Mr. Chow said. “But I think unfortunately it sends the message that a lot of foreign countries want to believe about America, that we are hypocritical about these issues.”


Kate Bedingfield, a spokeswoman for the vice president, said Hunter Biden’s business dealings had no impact on his father’s policy positions in connection with Ukraine.

1:42Biden Urges Ukraine to Fight Corruption
Speaking during a visit to Ukraine, Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. urged the country to weed corruption out of its system.CreditCreditMikhail Palinchak/Ukrainian Presidential Press Service

“Hunter Biden is a private citizen and a lawyer,” she said. “The vice president does not endorse any particular company and has no involvement with this company. The vice president has pushed aggressively for years, both publicly with groups like the U.S.-Ukraine Business Forum and privately in meetings with Ukrainian leaders, for Ukraine to make every effort to investigate and prosecute corruption in accordance with the rule of law. It will once again be a key focus during his trip this week.”

Ryan F. Toohey, a Burisma spokesman, said that Hunter Biden would not comment for this article.

It is not known how Mr. Biden came to the attention of the company. Announcing his appointment to the board, Alan Apter, a former Morgan Stanley investment banker who is chairman of Burisma, said, “The company’s strategy is aimed at the strongest concentration of professional staff and the introduction of best corporate practices, and we’re delighted that Mr. Biden is joining us to help us achieve these goals.”

Joining the board at the same time was one of Mr. Biden’s American business partners, Devon Archer. Both are involved with Rosemont Seneca Partners, an American investment firm with offices in Washington.

Mr. Biden is the younger of the vice president’s two sons. His brother, Beau, died of brain cancer in May. In the past, Hunter Biden attracted an unusual level of scrutiny and even controversy. In 2014, he was discharged from the Navy Reserve after testing positive for cocaine use. He received a commission as an ensign in 2013, and he served as a public affairs officer.

Before his father was vice president, Mr. Biden also briefly served as president of a hedge fund group, Paradigm Companies, in which he was involved with one of his uncles, James Biden, the vice president’s brother. That deal went sour amid lawsuits in 2007 and 2008 involving the Bidens and an erstwhile business partner. Mr. Biden, a graduate of Georgetown University and Yale Law School, also worked as a lobbyist before his father became vice president.


Burisma does not disclose the compensation of its board members because it is a privately held company, Mr. Toohey said Monday, but he added that the amount was “not out of the ordinary” for similar corporate board positions.

Asked about the British investigation, which is continuing, Mr. Toohey said, “Not only was the case dismissed and the company vindicated by the outcome, but it speaks volumes that all his legal costs were recouped.”

In response to Mr. Pyatt’s criticism of the Ukrainian handling of Mr. Zlochevsky’s case, Mr. Toohey said that “strong corporate governance and transparency are priorities shared both by the United States and the leadership of Burisma. Burisma is working to bring the energy sector into the modern era, which is critical for a free and strong Ukraine.”

Vice President Biden has played a leading role in American policy toward Ukraine as Washington seeks to counter Russian intervention in Eastern Ukraine. This week’s visit was his fifth trip to Ukraine as vice president.

Ms. Bedingfield said Hunter Biden had never traveled to Ukraine with his father. She also said that Ukrainian officials had never mentioned Hunter Biden’s role with Burisma to the vice president during any of his visits.

“I’ve got to believe that somebody in the vice president’s office has done some due diligence on this,” said Steven Pifer, who was the American ambassador to Ukraine from 1998 to 2000. “I should say that I hope that has happened. I would hope that they have done some kind of check, because I think the vice president has done a very good job of sending the anticorruption message in Ukraine, and you would hate to see something like this undercut that message.”

Follow the New York Times’s politics and Washington coverage on Facebook and Twitter, and sign up for the First Draft politics newsletter.

Biden’s Ukraine issues – but note that there are more issues with Iran

April 3, 2019

Biden has issues in Ukraine but he’s not limited there.  He’s been taking money from Iran and many more.  This is going on through his son.  Others use there foundations.  It seems to be an open secret in their circles.


Iranian and Chinese funds support Obama, Biden, Clinton and Kerry – Hassan Nemazee is an “investment banker” and Norman Hsu is a democratic fund raiser. The Democrats are on the take from our enemies. This is Treason! via @wordpressdotcom



Investigative Journalist Uncovers Stunning Biden Docs… In Ukraine


Simply put: Joe Biden has problems. Like, a lot of them. And some of them don’t even involve women who are creeped out by Biden’s handsiness. In fact, some of them aren’t even in America at all.

I’m not sure if you’re familiar with John Solomon, but you should be. The investigative reporter has forgotten about more political corruption investigations than most other journalists have taken part in.

He’s also been one of the most consistently reliable reporters on the Russia “collusion” story and the attendant corruption and swampiness surrounding that debacle. So, of course, most of the mainstream media didn’t really pay it much mind.

His attention, most recently, has been on Joe Biden and some thorny issues in Ukraine — issues that could yet again throw some shade on Biden’s probable 2020 run for the presidency.

Biden, you may perhaps remember, was given the role as the Obama administration’s point man on Ukraine after the 2014 revolution that ousted the pro-Moscow president at the time, one Viktor Yanukovych.


The then-vice president certainly made some waves in the former Soviet republic. In a 2018 speech before the Council on Foreign Relations, he used some inadvisable bluster to discuss how he threatened Ukraine President Petro Poroshenko with the possibility of quashing $1 billion in loan guarantees from the United States if the country’s Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin wasn’t canned.

“I said, ‘You’re not getting the billion.’ I’m going to be leaving here in, I think it was about six hours. I looked at them and said: ‘I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money,’” Biden recalled of the March 2016 meeting, according to a Solomon piece published Monday by The Hill.

“Well, son of a bitch, he got fired. And they put in place someone who was solid at the time,” Biden said.

Shokin was indeed an unpopular man with both the United States and the Ukrainians for not bringing enough anti-corruption cases, sources told Solomon.


However, Solomon reported, they said Biden’s narrative misrepresents two important facts.

First, according to Solomon, the pressure was applied from late 2015 up to Shokin’s firing, indicating that this was a significant priority for Biden. Second, while Shokin’s unpopularity may have stemmed from the fact that he wasn’t investigating enough corruption, the vice president neglected to mention one anti-corruption probe Shokin actually was undertaking at the time of his firing: A probe of natural gas corporation Burisma Holdings, a company that sported Hunter Biden — the then-veep’s son — as a board member.

“U.S. banking records show Hunter Biden’s American-based firm, Rosemont Seneca Partners LLC, received regular transfers into one of its accounts — usually more than $166,000 a month — from Burisma from spring 2014 through fall 2015, during a period when Vice President Biden was the main U.S. official dealing with Ukraine and its tense relations with Russia,” Solomon noted in the Monday report.

“The general prosecutor’s official file for the Burisma probe — shared with me by senior Ukrainian officials — shows prosecutors identified Hunter Biden, business partner Devon Archer and their firm, Rosemont Seneca, as potential recipients of money.”

The new prosecutor general noted that board members can legally pay themselves for work done under Ukrainian law, but only if that work is beneficial to the company. Prosecutors never determined whether that was the case in the Bursima-Rosemont Seneca arrangement because, well, the prosecutor who was looking into it was fired.

Ukraine officials said Biden was undoubtedly aware of Shokin’s investigation because, as Solomon notes (among other things) “The U.S. embassy in Kiev that coordinated Biden’s work in the country repeatedly and publicly discussed the general prosecutor’s case against Burisma” and that “Biden’s office was quoted, on the record, acknowledging Hunter Biden’s role in Burisma in a New York Times article about the general prosecutor’s Burisma case that appeared four months before Biden forced the firing of Shokin. The vice president’s office suggested in that article that Hunter Biden was a lawyer free to pursue his own private business deals.”

As for the probe being conducted by Shokin, he told Solomon that before his firing, he had “specific plans” that “included interrogations and other crime-investigation procedures into all members of the executive board, including Hunter Biden.”

“I would like to emphasize the fact that presumption of innocence is a principle in Ukraine,” he told Solomon, declining to elaborate on what evidence he had.

“Most of the general prosecutor’s investigative work on Burisma focused on three separate cases and most stopped abruptly once Shokin was fired. The most prominent of the Burisma cases was transferred to a different Ukrainian agency, closely aligned with the U.S. embassy in Kiev, known as the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU), according to the case file and current General Prosecutor Yuriy Lutsenko,” Solomon wrote.

“NABU closed that case, and a second case involving alleged improper money transfers in London was dropped when Ukrainian officials failed to file the necessary documents by the required deadline. The general prosecutor’s office successfully secured a multimillion-dollar judgment in a tax evasion case, Lutsenko said. He did not say who was the actual defendant in that case.”

Unfortunately for Biden, Lutsenko — that “solid” prosecutor that Biden took credit for installing — has reopened the case just in time for the 2020 election, Solomon reported.

As he was reviewing the files of the case, the prosecutor general told Solomon, he discovered documents that say “members of the Board obtained funds as well as another U.S.-based legal entity, Rosemont Seneca Partners LLC, for consulting services.”

And part of his investigation includes Biden’s interference in the matter, as well, Solomon reported.

“Unfortunately, Mr. Biden had correlated and connected this aid with some of the HR (personnel) issues and changes in the prosecutor’s office,” Lutsenko told Solomon.

However, Solomon reported, the lead anti-corruption prosecutor under Lutsenko said that “(w)e don’t see any result from this case one year after the reopening because of some external influence,” declining to offer specifics.

So first off, is it “collusion” with a foreign government if you get a prosecutor who is investigating your son fired using American loan guarantees as a carrot and (mostly) stick? Asking for a friend.

That’s the great irony here. When it comes to that amorphous word “collusion” and how it relates to that troublesome area of the world, we can certainly prove plenty of it happened on the other side of the aisle.

Yes, I understand that the government in Ukraine isn’t an enemy of the United States the way that Putin’s Kremlin is, obviously. But if we want to talk about that, what about “colluding” with sketchy Russian intelligence officials to assemble a noisome dossier whose claims have turned out to be mere bunkum, all with money from the Democratic National Committee and the campaign of the 2016 Democrat nominee’s campaign?

Beyond that, it’s probably time to stop referring to Joe Biden as the unqualified favorite for the Democrat nomination. No major polls have been taken, after all, since Lucy Flores, a former Nevada Democratic candidate for lieutenant governor, published a New York magazine piece last week charging the former vice president with inappropriate behavior which, depending on your interpretation of it, may or may not have been sexual but was decidedly creepy.

And then there was the slow-motion disaster that was the idea of Biden’s offering the vice presidential spot to failed Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams, a clear sop to liberal voters not entirely convinced an old white man with a spotty record on intersectional issues is the proper choice for the party going forward.

The media might ignore the Ukraine investigation at first. After all, CNN and MSNBC devoted zero minutes of coverage to Flores’ charge on the day it was levied, and Solomon’s report is likely to meet the same fate for now.

However, it’s not something his adversaries in the Democrat field are going to ignore, which means even the liberal media will have to address it at some point.

And it’s yet another sign that the nomination process is going to be anything but smooth sailing for the former vice president.

We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.



Scrubbed Interview: Corsi Will File Criminal Charges Against White House – 5/22/11

May 25, 2011

Clear Channel radio station scrubs interview from audio archives
Paul Joseph Watson
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
Jerome Corsi has told a Cincinnati radio station that he is preparing to file criminal charges against the White House for producing a fraudulent birth certificate, as the controversial author of Where’s the Birth Certificate? closes in on the people within Obama’s inner circle he claims were behind the hoax.

Vodpod videos no longer available.

Scrubbed Interview: Corsi Will File Criminal Ch…, posted with vodpod

“We believe the birth records released by Barack Obama on April 27th, the so called long form birth certificate, is fraudulent,” Corsi told radio host Bill Cunningham.
“I’m working on filing criminal charges on the White House, I think there will be criminal charges filed very soon for having fraudulently produced a birth certificate,” said Corsi, adding that he would seek an FBI investigation.
Corsi re-affirmed the fact that he was close to identifying the individual who played a key role in forging the birth certificate, as well as the source document which the White House used to create the composite fake.
According to The Birther Report, the Clear Channel radio station on which Corsi appeared, 700 WLW later scrubbed the interview from their audio archives, a claim that was also carried by World Net Daily. The You Tube video above was made by a listener.
Clear Channel was also behind the removal of a billboard that was part of a World Net Daily campaign to bring attention to the birther issue in November 2009.
As we reported yesterday, Corsi is closing in on the people within Obama’s inner circle who were responsible for creating the fraudulent document that was released by the White House in electronic format and contains a plethora of errors and clear evidence of manipulation.
“I’m pretty well on the trail of linking the characteristics of this document to someone who’s going to have a lot of explaining to do,” said Corsi, adding that he was “hot on the trail” of one individual who “may have had a hand in this,” and that his identity would be released this week.

In a new development, WND reports that Obama’s Social Security number was issued in Connecticut, a state in which he never lived.
“The first three digits of Obama’s SSN are 042. That code of 042 falls within the range of numbers for Connecticut, which according to the Social Security Administration has been 040 through 049,” states the report.
“There is obviously a case of fraud going on here,” says Ohio licensed private investigator Susan Daniels. “In 15 years of having a private investigator’s license in Ohio, I’ve never seen the Social Security Administration make a mistake of issuing a Connecticut Social Security number to a person who lived in Hawaii. There is no family connection that would appear to explain the anomaly.”
Daniels said that Obama decided to hide his identity in the 80′s by taking a Social Security Number he couldn’t possibly have acquired without breaking the law.
Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Prison He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a regular fill-in host for The Alex Jones Show.

Trump lied – OBAMA’s new BC (Birth Certificate) is a blatant forgery

May 21, 2011

Dr. Corsi on the Alex Jones radio program:

Vodpod videos no longer available.
Corsi Will Reveal Details On Media Person Who H…, posted with vodpod

Here’s another interview with Dr. Corsi:

Vodpod videos no longer available.
Jerome Corsi Smacks Down Liberal Radio Host Ove…, posted with vodpod

New Obama Birth Certificate is a Forgery

Kurt Nimmo
April 28, 2011

Our investigation of the purported Obama birth certificate released by Hawaiian authorities today reveals the document is a shoddily contrived hoax. computer specialists dismissed the document as a fraud soon after examining it.

Check out the document released by for yourself.

New Obama Birth Certificate is a Forgery  obamabreakout
Upon first inspection, the document appears to be a photocopy taken from state records and printed on official green paper. However, when the government released PDF is taken into the image editing program Adobe Illustrator, we discover a number of separate elements that reveal the document is not a single scan on paper, as one might surmise. Elements are place in layers or editing boxes over the scan and green textured paper, which is to say the least unusual.

When sections of the document are enlarged significantly, we discover glaring inconsistencies. For instance, it appears the date stamped on the document has been altered. Moreover, the document contains text, numbers, and lines with suspicious white borders indicating these items were pasted from the original scan and dropped over a background image of green paper.

VIDEO: Alex Jones gives proof that Obama’s purported birth certificate is fraud.

Let’s assume the state of Hawaii scanned the original document and placed it on the green textured background. This does not explain the broken out or separate elements. There is no logical reason for this to be done unless the government planned to modify the document and make it appear to be something other than it is.

There are two elements of interest, as shown in the image to the above – both entries for the date accepted by the local registry. This appears to have been modified in an image editing program.

The media was quick to dispel the fact the document was modified. “Our analysis of the latest controversy: The original birth certificate was probably in a ‘negative’ form, and someone at the White House took it upon themselves to doctor it up so the form can be readable,” writesJoe Brooks for Wireupdate.

Nathan Goulding, writing for the National Review, tells us anybody can open the White House released PDF in Illustrator and it will break out into layers. “I’ve confirmed that scanning an image, converting it to a PDF, optimizing that PDF, and then opening it up in Illustrator, does in fact create layers similar to what is seen in the birth certificate PDF. You can try it yourself at home,” he writes.

Indeed, but this does not answer the question why in the Obama birth certificate PDF the layers or elements contain dates – which appear to be modified – and the signature of the state registrar. If the document was acquired from state records in whole, why was in necessary to add elements? Goulding and Brooks do not address this issue.

These layers are also revealed by the White House issued PDF’s hex file in freeware hex editor. Within its code are listed 8 image masks, which if changed from value “true” to “false” turn off and on to reveal the layers as demonstrated in the video and in Illustrator. Whether these represent compression artifacts or other digitizing processes, or whether these masks represent deliberate manipulation remains to be conclusively shown.

<< /Length 17 0 R /Type /XObject /Subtype /Image /Width 123 /Height 228 /ImageMask
true /BitsPerComponent 1 /Filter /FlateDecode >>

<< /Length 13 0 R /Type /XObject /Subtype /Image /Width 199 /Height 778 /ImageMask
true /BitsPerComponent 1 /Filter /FlateDecode >>

<< /Length 19 0 R /Type /XObject /Subtype /Image /Width 47 /Height 216 /ImageMask
true /BitsPerComponent 1 /Filter /FlateDecode >>

<< /Length 15 0 R /Type /XObject /Subtype /Image /Width 42 /Height 274 /ImageMask
true /BitsPerComponent 1 /Filter /FlateDecode >>

<< /Length 10 0 R /Type /XObject /Subtype /Image /Width 1454 /Height 1819
/ImageMask true /BitsPerComponent 1 /Filter /FlateDecode >>

<< /Length 25 0 R /Type /XObject /Subtype /Image /Width 132 /Height 142 /ImageMask
true /BitsPerComponent 1 /Filter /FlateDecode >>

<< /Length 23 0 R /Type /XObject /Subtype /Image /Width 243 /Height 217 /ImageMask
true /BitsPerComponent 1 /Filter /FlateDecode >>

<< /Length 21 0 R /Type /XObject /Subtype /Image /Width 34 /Height 70 /ImageMask
true /BitsPerComponent 1 /Filter /FlateDecode >>

As points out, it may prove to be significant that two of the boxes appear over both of the “date accepted” boxes, as well as the “Mother’s occupation box.” Was there a need to tamper with the dates on the document or other areas? The recent stamp date and issuing signature of the state registrar also contain an edited layer.

Questions have also been raised about the number at the top of the document issued by the Department of Health, number 61 10641, as one part of the number is in a separate layer when viewed in Illustrator, as demonstrated in the video above. This may prove to be significant. A long form birth certificate obtained by the Honolulu Star in 2009 from a female born one day after Obama and whose form was accepted three days after Obama’s document contains a Dept. of Health number that is lower, 61 10637. There are others subtle differences, such as the use of “Aug.” for the date rather than “August,” and the use of “Honolulu, Oahu” rather than “Honolulu, Hawaii” (seen also in the 1962 certificate below) which may or may not be significant.

More to the point, this certificate and others, like the one posted below it, have visible seals. No issuing seal can be seen on the document released today by Obama.

Negative of long form birth certificate for Aug. 5, 1961 birth in Honolulu, released in 1966 with seal and dated signatures.Published by Honolulu Star and World Net Daily in 2009.

New Obama Birth Certificate is a Forgery  090728birthcert

Photo of physical copy of long form birth certificate for June 15, 1962 birth in Honolulu, also with visible seal.

New Obama Birth Certificate is a Forgery  13

Infowars will continue to analyze this issue as more information comes in. It is significant that the Obama Administration was pressured into responding to this controversy, whatever the final analysis of this document. However, the administration still needs to release his other records which have been sealed at great expense. Is there an issue with his being naturalized in Indonesia? Why are his college records at Columbia and Occidental sealed, and what do they contain? Did Obama travel to Pakistan on a foreign passport? These questions and many others have not been properly answered.

Aaron Dykes contributed to this report.

Obama should not be president – Israel is thrown under the bus by POTUS, AND the US is also case asunder by proxy

May 21, 2011
Vodpod videos no longer available.
Jonathan Schanzer: Hamas & Fatah, posted with vodpod

Jonathan Schanzer of the Jewish Policy Institute addressed the Center for Security Policy’s National Security Group on Capitol Hill. He is the author of Hamas vs. Fatah.

Obama’s Abandonment of America

Posted by Caroline Glick on May 20th, 2011 and filed under Daily MailerFrontPage.

Reprinted from

I was out sick yesterday so I was unable to write today’s column for theJerusalem Post. I did manage to watch President Obama’s speech on the Middle East yesterday evening. And I didn’t want to wait until next week to discuss it. After all, who knows what he’ll do by Tuesday?

Before we get into what the speech means for Israel, it is important to consider what it means for America.

Quite simply, Obama’s speech represents the effective renunciation of the US’s right to have and to pursue national interests. Consequently, his speech imperils the real interests that the US has in the region – first and foremost, the US’s interest in securing its national security.

Obama’s renunciation of the US national interests unfolded as follows:

First, Obama mentioned a number of core US interests in the region. In his view these are: “Countering terrorism and stopping the spread of nuclear weapons; securing the free flow of commerce, and safe-guarding the security of the region; standing up for Israel’s security and pursuing Arab-Israeli peace.”

Then he said, “Yet we must acknowledge that a strategy based solely upon the narrow pursuit of these interests will not fill an empty stomach or allow someone to speak their mind.”

While this is true enough, Obama went on to say that the Arabs have good reason to hate the US and that it is up to the US to put its national interests aside in the interest of making them like America. As he put it, “a failure to change our approach threatens a deepening spiral of division between the United States and Muslim communities.”

And you know what that means. If the US doesn’t end the “spiral of division,” (sounds sort of like “spiral of violence” doesn’t it?), then the Muslims will come after America. So the US better straighten up and fly right.

And how does it do that? Well, by courting the Muslim Brotherhood which spawned Al Qaeda, Hamas, Jamma Islamiya and a number of other terror groups and is allies with Hezbollah.

How do we know this is Obama’s plan? Because right after he said that the US needs to end the “spiral of division,” he recalled his speech in Egypt in June 2009 when he spoke at the Brotherhood controlled Al Azhar University and made sure that Brotherhood members were in the audience in a direct diplomatic assault on US ally Hosni Mubarak.

And of course, intimations of Obama’s plan to woo and appease the jihadists appear throughout the speech. For instance:

“There will be times when our short term interests do not align perfectly with our long term vision of the region.”

So US short term interests, like for instance preventing terrorist attacks against itself or its interests, will have to be sacrificed for the greater good of bringing the Muslim Brotherhood to power in democratic elections.

And he also said that the US will “support the governments that will be elected later this year” in Egypt and Tunisia. But why would the US support governments controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood? They are poised to control the elected government in Egypt and are the ticket to beat in Tunisia as well.

Then there is the way Obama abandoned US allies Yemen and Bahrain in order to show the US’s lack of hypocrisy. As he presented it, the US will not demand from its enemies Syria and Iran that which it doesn’t demand from its friends.

While this sounds fair, it is anything but fair. The fact is that if you don’t distinguish between your allies and your enemies then you betray your allies and side with your enemies. Bahrain and Yemen need US support to survive. Iran and Syria do not. So when he removes US support from the former, his action redounds to the direct benefit of the latter.

P Photo/US Navy, Kurt Eischen The USS New Orleans makes its way down the Mississippi River on March 5, 2007. The U.S. Navy's 5th Fleet says two of its vessels -- a submarine, the USS Hartford and an amphibious ship, the USS New Orleans -- collided in the Strait of Hormuz between Iran and the Arabian peninsula early Friday.

Beyond his abandonment of Bahrain and Yemen, in claiming that the US mustn’t distinguish between its allies and its foes, Obama made clear that he has renounced the US’s right to have and pursue national interests. If you can’t favor your allies against your enemies then you cannot defend your national interests. And if you cannot defend your national interests then you renounce your right to have them.

As for Iran, in his speech, Obama effectively abandoned the pursuit of the US’s core interest of preventing nuclear proliferation. All he had to say about Iran’s openly genocidal nuclear program is, “Our opposition to Iran’s intolerance – as well as its illicit nuclear program, and its sponsorship of terror – is well known.”

Well so is my opposition to all of that, and so is yours. But unlike us, Obama is supposed to do something about it. And by putting the gravest threat the US presently faces from the Middle East in the passive voice, he made clear that actually, the US isn’t going to do anything about it.

May 11, 2011

Palestinian State in September? Hamas Says No Way


Palestinian Hamas leader Mahmoud Zahar walks on an Israeli flag while taking part in a rally to mark the upcoming 23rd anniversary since the group's foundation, in Gaza city, Thursday, Dec. 9, 2010. The arabic text reads: "For sure will be destroyed. Israel". AP Photo.

Gaza rulers say September most likely too soon to declare Palestinian independence, as too many questions pertaining to state’s viability remain unanswered

Senior Hamas official Mahmoud al-Zahar said Wednesday that the Islamist movement was somewhat skeptical as to the viability of Fatah’s September-bound bid for statehood.

Speaking with the Palestinian Ma’an News Agency, al-Zahar said that “all the talk of a Palestinian state is… an attempt to pacify us.”

He further wondered as to the nature of the Palestinian state, should it be declared in several months’ time: “Where is the land for this state? Are those living in the West Bank and Gaza to be its citizens? What will be the fate of the five million Palestinians in the diaspora? Are we to give up the right of return?”

He also said that anyone who thinks that a Palestinian state would be accepted by the international community without it recognizing Israel first, “does not understand the (political) landscape.”

Hamas, he said, is willing to accept a Palestinian state based on the 1967 borders, but will maintain its refusal to recognize Israel, since a formal recognition of Israel would “cancel the right of the next generations to liberate the lands.”

Read more at YNet.

Palestinians never miss an opportunity.

In short, every American who is concerned about the security of the United States should be livid. The US President just abandoned his responsibility to defend the country and its interests in the interest of coddling the US’s worst enemies.

AS FOR ISRAEL, in a way, Obama did Israel a favor by giving this speech. By abandoning even a semblance of friendliness, he has told us that we have nothing whatsoever to gain by trying to make him like us. Obama didn’t even say that he would oppose the Palestinians’ plan to get the UN Security Council to pass a resolution in support for Palestinian independence. All he said was that it is a dumb idea.

Obama sided with Hamas against Israel by acting as though its partnership with Fatah is just a little problem that has to be sorted out to reassure the paranoid Jews. Or as he put it, “the recent announcement of an agreement between Fatah and Hamas raises profound and legitimate questions for Israel.”

Hamas is a jihadist movement dedicated to the annihilation of the Jewish people, and the establishment of a global caliphate. It’s in their charter. And all Obama said of the movement that has now taken over the Palestinian Authority was, “Palestinian leaders will not achieve peace or prosperity if Hamas insists on a path of terror and rejection.”

Irrelevant and untrue.

It is irrelevant because obviously the Palestinians don’t want peace. That’s why they just formed a government dedicated to Israel’s destruction.

As for being untrue, Obama’s speech makes clear that they have no reason to fear a loss of prosperity. After all, by failing to mention that US law bars the US government from funding an entity which includes Hamas, he made clear that the US will continue to bankroll the Hamas-controlled Palestinian Authority. So too, the EU will continue to join the US in giving them billions for bombs and patronage jobs. The Palestinians have nothing to worry about. They will continue to be rewarded regardless of what they do.

Then of course there are all the hostile, hateful details of the speech:

He said Israel has to concede its right to defensible borders as a precondition for negotiations;

He didn’t say he opposes the Palestinian demand for open immigration of millions of foreign Arabs into Israel;

He again ignored Bush’s 2004 letter to Sharon opposing a return to the 1949 armistice lines, supporting the large settlements, defensible borders and opposing mass Arab immigration into Israel;

He said he was leaving Jerusalem out but actually brought it in by calling for an Israeli retreat to the 1949 lines;

He called for Israel to be cut in two when he called for the Palestinians state to be contiguous;

He called for Israel to withdraw from the Jordan Valley – without which it is powerless against invasion – by saying that the Palestinian State will have an international border with Jordan.

Conceptually and substantively, Obama abandoned the US alliance with Israel. The rest of his words – security arrangements, demilitarized Palestinian state and the rest of it – were nothing more than filler to please empty-headed liberal Jews in America so they can feel comfortable signing checks for him again.

Indeed, even his seemingly pro-Israel call for security arrangements in a final peace deal involved sticking it to Israel. Obama said, “The full and phased withdrawal of Israeli military forces should be coordinated with the assumption of Palestinian security responsibility in a sovereign, non-militarized state.”

What does that mean “with the assumption of Palestinian security responsibility?”

It means we have to assume everything will be terrific.

All of this means is that if Prime Minister Netanyahu was planning to be nice to Obama, and pretend that everything is terrific with the administration, he should just forget about it. He needn’t attack Obama. Let the Republicans do that.

But both in his speech to AIPAC and his address to Congress, he should very forthrightly tell the truth about the nature of the populist movements in the Middle East, the danger of a nuclear Iran, the Palestinians’ commitment to Israel’s destruction; the lie of the so-called peace process; the importance of standing by allies; and the critical importance of a strong Israel to US national security.

He has nothing to gain and everything to lose by playing by the rules that Obama is trying to set for him.

%d bloggers like this: