Thursday, April 23, 2015

Hillary and Bill Scandal Takes Another Turn

How Did the Russians Get Our Uranium?

Image result for julius and ethel rosenberg                       
Julius and Ethel Rosenberg 

Image result for bill and hillary clinton
Bill and Hillary Clinton

The Clinton scandal of selling our government policies for contributions to the Clinton Foundation and huge speaking fees for Bill has just gotten even more serious.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton signed off on this along with Eric Holder and 5 other cabinet secretaries. And $31 million paid by this Canadian businessman to the Clinton Foundation with a  promise of $100 million more to come?

Corruption, influence peddling, selling off our national security, you name it. Bill and Hillary Clinton have got to be the two biggest crooks to ever come down the pike.



Anonymous said...

Speaking of scandals, would love to hear your take on the DEA sex parties and the ouster of Administrator Leonhart.

Gary Fouse said...


Squid said...

Sex, Schmex! It is the sale of our Uranium to the Russians that is the massive issue. The one-fifth of our Uranium going to the enemy, to massively fund the Clinton's cash cow, is huge. Worse, is that the Uranium could go to Iran. So much for a Nuke deal.

This sounds like a Brad Thor thriller.


Siarlys Jenkins said...

Comparing the Rosenbergs to the Clintons is an insult to Julius and Ethel.

elwood p suggins said...

Siarlys--I have a little discourse that I occasionally go through relative to perjury by Bill Clinton and Mark Fuhrman. I always say in advance that I am reluctant to compare Clinton to Fuhrman, and then apologize out front to Fuhrman for doing so.

Siarlys Jenkins said...

elwood, I have advocated since the time of the live OJ trial that OJ, detective Furman, and Goldberg pere, should all be sentenced to share a small efficiency apartment for the rest of their lives. I wouldn't mind adding BOTH Clintons to the mix, with available media limited to Monica Lewinsky's Twitter account.

(Footnote: Why Goldberg pere? A little matter of advocating for conviction by non-unanimous juries, not only a very dangerous notion, but one that would NOT have changed the OJ verdict, since for better or worse, he was unanimously acquitted.)

elwood p suggins said...

Siarlys--did you mean Goldman?? Thanks, I missed his little deal with juries.

While I admittedly have not researched it exhaustively (as I usually do), I believe that non-unanimous juries, sometimes less than 12-person ones, are operable in some states in I believe at least some civil cases, and possibly certain misdemeanor criminal cases as well. Correct me if I am wrong.

I could go with that for fines/damages, etc., and maybe even for BRIEF incarceration, but we are in agreement that unanimity is the standard for anything at all serious.