The Disastrous Clinton Post-Presidency

crew-2231Comment by Jim Campbell, Citizen Journalist, Oath Keeper and Patriot.


As we begin to learn more and more about what a flop the Clinton Global Initiative is it add more rule to the questions about why either of them should ever set foot in 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

Bill and Hillary Clinton’s post terms in office have been as big of disasters as they are as individuals and the made for politics couple they want us to believe they are.


Ozzie and Harriet they are not and will never be. Bill-Gates-Failure-Quote They never learn from their failures, and failure is not an option for the future.




New York Magazine

April 24, 2015
Former U.S. President Bill Clinton listens to the speech of U.S. President Barack Obama during the seventh annual meeting of the Clinton Global Initiative (CGI) at the Sheraton New York Hotel on September 21, 2011 in New York City. Photo: Daniel Berehulak/Getty Images

The qualities of an effective presidency do not seem to transfer onto a post-presidency. Jimmy Carter was an ineffective president who became an exemplary post-president. Bill Clinton appears to be the reverse.

All sorts of unproven worst-case-scenario questions float around the web of connections between Bill’s private work, 20-Clinton-Foundation.w529.h352.2xHillary Clinton’s public role as secretary of State, the Clinton’s’ quasi-public charity, and Hillary’s noncompliant email system. But the best-case scenario is bad enough: The Clintons have been disorganized and greedy.

The news today about the Clinton’s all fleshes out, in one way or another, their lack of interest in policing serious conflict-of-interest problems that arise in their overlapping roles:

  • The New York Times has a report about the State Department’s decision to approve the sale of Uranium mines to a Russian company that donated $2.35 million to the Clinton Global Initiative, and that a Russian investment bank promoting the deal paid Bill $500,000 for a speech in Moscow.
  • The Washington Post reports that Bill Clinton has received $26 million in speaking fees from entities that also donated to the Clinton Global Initiative.
  • The Washington Examiner reports, “Twenty-two of the 37 corporations nominated for a prestigious State Department award — and six of the eight ultimate winners — while Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State were also donors to the Clinton family foundation.”
  • And Reuters reports, “Hillary Clinton’s family’s charities are refiling at least five annual tax returns after a Reuters review found errors in how they reported donations from governments, and said they may audit other Clinton Foundation returns in case of other errors.”

The Clinton campaign is batting down the darkest and most conspiratorial interpretation of these stories, and where this all leads remains to be seen. But the most positive interpretation is not exactly good.

Entire article below.

Continue reading

U.S. Military ‘Hostile’ To Christians Under Obama; Morale, Retention Devastated

crew-2231Comments by Jim Campbell, Citizen Journalist, Oath Keeper, Patriot and Infidel


All this in the name of an alleged homosexual commander-in-chief and his impotent members of the 6a00d8341c90b153ef01675f29c8b3970b-pioh so politically correct members of the pencil pushing Joint Chiefs of staff who would rather pander to “Their Leader,” than do the right thing.

First, Obama got rid of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell signed into law by Bill Clinton, now still in the pandering to the LGBT community  taxpayers are forced to pay for sex change surgeries among the confused individual who may fail to see this as their life style choice.

Of course it would be difficult for those in Washington to contemplate that some of these folks would join the military for a free surgery.


 Soldiers pray at military base; Cruz, Lee Fight for Religious Freedom for
Military Service Members

April 16, 2015

The Washington Times:


Soon there may only be atheists in the foxholes.

Christians are leaving the U.S. military or are discouraged from joining in the first place because of a “hostile work environment” that doesn’t let them express their beliefs openly, religious freedom advocates say.


Michael Berry, senior counsel at the Liberty Institute, a Texas-based legal organization dedicated to defending religious liberty in America, said recent high-profile cases of military chaplains facing punishment for private counseling sessions that reflected the teachings of their religion could cause devout Americans who are qualified for military service to think twice about joining the military.

In December, a chaplain for a Ranger training battalion received an administrative letter of concern after a soldier complained that he advocated Christianity and used the Bible during a mandatory unit suicide-prevention training session. The Military Association of Atheists and Freethinkers said the chaplain “used his official position to force his personal religious beliefs on a captive military audience” in an article the group posted on its website.

And, last month, a Navy chaplain was removed from his post and may lose his career after some sailors complained about his private counseling, in which he reportedly advocated against homosexuality and sex outside of marriage.

“People of faith are going to stay away from the military,” said Mr. Berry in an interview with The Washington Times.

“I can’t tell you how many moms and dads I’ve spoken to who say, ‘My son or daughter wants to join the military, [but] in light of what you’ve described, I’m not sure I want to let them join the military anymore,’ and I don’t blame them. I would have serious reservations about my own kids joining,” Mr. Berry said.

This reporter is not ready to make the intellectual leap, that a program set in place allegedly,  will ever amount to anything.  This is the exact type of conspiracy theory material Alex Jones at Infowars finds himself making predictions, all be it never to happen.
17th-psyops-battalion-distinctive-unit-insignia-pairMy old unit long since decommissioned and renamed.
This is classic Psychological Warfare.  Psy/Ops used on the unknowing.
Entire article below.

Continue reading

Chelsea Clinton: Hillary will make the ‘right decision’ about running for president

crew-2231Comment by Jim Campbell, Citizen Journalist, Oath Keeper and Patriot.


Could Chelsea Clinton be more disingenuous than in the video below? 

Is she opening the door allowing Hillary room to weasel her way out of an election Hillary and her party know she will not win?




Remember, she is nothing more than a “Trust Fund Baby,” the result of the “Clinton Global Initiative,” a money laundering machine providing shelter for the Clinton’s ill-gotten gain.

Never forget, she is a Clinton and the Clinton legacy will go down in history as one filled with lies, deceit and corruption.



By Alicia Menendez


Chelsea Clinton won’t spill the beans on when or if her mother might officially enter the 2016 campaign for president.




“You know, I’m so grateful my mom is my mom and I’m her daughter,” Chelsea told Fusion’s Alicia Menendez on Saturday, during the annual meeting of the Clinton Global Initiative University in Miami. “And I know she’s always made the right decisions for herself in our family and in our country. And I don’t know what she’s going to decide. But whatever it is, it will be the right decision for her and for all of us.”

The meeting of the Clinton Global Initiative comes at a time when the family’s foundation is under scrutiny for accepting millions of dollars in foreign donations while Hillary Clinton served as secretary of state. The situation has created some turbulence around what observers consider a likely presidential bid. Clinton has also faced criticism this week about her use of a private email address while she was secretary of state.

But on Saturday Chelsea Clinton defended her mother and her family’s foundation, which she says has always “addressed and answered” all concerns over conflicts of interest.

“I believe that historically, all of those possible conflicts have been addressed and answered,” the youngest member of the Clinton family said. “And we will have to continue to do that in the future to ensure that we are able to do the work that we are called to do and with the right partners along the way.”

She pointed to “No Ceilings: The Full Participation Project,” a partnership with Melinda Gates that Clinton said would aggregate “the most data ever around the status of women and girls across the world.”

Late last month, news emerged that the Clinton Foundation received foreign donations while Hillary served as secretary of state. In one instance, the foundation acknowledged, it may have violated an ethics agreement with the Obama administration by failing to report an “unsolicited” $500,000 donation from the government of Algeria following the 2010 earthquake in Haiti.

Continue reading

Big Media Blacks Out the Clinton Foundation Foreign-Money Story Even Though It’s A Crime

crew-2231Comment by Jim Campbell, Citizen Journalist, Oath Keeper and Patriot.


Seriously, if foreign countries and entities want Hillary Clinton to be the next U.S. President shouldn’t that be the final nail in the coffin of the chronic liar and serial perjurer?  Hillary is bringing an entire new meaning to the phrase, “Know your Enemies.”

It makes perfect sense when one considers the knowledge level of those voting in United States Elections.



Trie-Chung-HuangRemember,  Johnny Chung: contributor and colleague; many visits to Clinton White House and Oval Office with mainland Chinese associates; several illegal campaign contributions, money laundering, tax fraud, and bank fraud guilty pleas (“Democrat Fund-Raiser Pleads Guilty” March 17, 1998).

Chung, has told federal investigators that the chief of China’s military intelligence funneled $300,000 through him to back President Clinton’s 1996 campaign



Among the many, many reasons why Americans hate and distrust the mainstream media, we’ve got the amazing spectacle of a major story directly impacting a likely presidential candidate — Hillary Clinton — completely blacked out in favor of obsessive coverage for llamas on the loose.

To mix animal metaphors, many liberal-media critics smell a rat every time the airwaves are filled with obsession over a frivolous story.  NewsBusters clocked six minutes on the story of llamas running loose in Arizona, but only 32 seconds of coverage on one of the major networks (CBS) for the incredible tale of Hillary Clinton’s foundation raking in foreign and corporate cash both during and after her tenure as Secretary of State.


This is the same media that squeezed a solid week of shrieking, hysterical news coverage out of Rudy Giuliani, who isn’t even running for anything, expressing doubts about the depth of Barack Obama’s love for America.  Even the casual news consumer realized the intensity of this coverage had little to do with its news-worthiness.  

It was, in part, a cynical attempt to use Giuliani’s remarks as a hydraulic piston to hammer the Republicans who probably are running for president, beginning with — but by no means limited to — Governor Scott Walker of Wisconsin, but mostly it was a sustained wail of anguish and outrage from media elites, who identify so strongly with their beloved Barack Obama that they took Giuliani’s s remarks as a personal slight against them.

There’s no question about the depth of Hillary Clinton’s love for money.  As the Clinton Foundation story gets deeper, it’s increasingly difficult for the mainstream press to justify ignoring it.  They’ll be even more reluctant to ask her about it, the way hordes of them followed Walker around and interrogated him about what he thinks Barack Obama is thinking.  Hillary Clinton doesn’t get asked about anything.

The media allows her to remain invisible for as long as she likes, and since her public appearances tend to become gaffe avalanches, she stays invisible quite a bit.  It would be a certain sign that the media favoritism her nascent candidacy depends on was evaporating if they actually asked her about the Clinton Foundation stories.

The story we’ve been hearing so little about from the press came in two stages.  First, the Wall Street Journal dished on the Clinton Foundation quietly dropping its “self-imposed ban on collecting funds from foreign governments” and collecting a rapidly increasing amount of foreign money.  Second, the Washington Post discovered that “self-imposed ban” wasn’t exactly imposed with rigorous discipline to begin with:

The Clinton Foundation accepted millions of dollars from seven foreign governments during Hillary Rodham Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state, including one donation that violated its ethics agreement with the Obama administration, foundation officials disclosed Wednesday.

Most of the contributions were possible because of exceptions written into the foundation’s 2008 agreement, which included limits on foreign-government donations.

The agreement, reached before Clinton’s nomination amid concerns that countries could use foundation donations to gain favor with a Clinton-led State Department, allowed governments that had previously donated money to continue making contributions at similar levels.

The new disclosures, provided in response to questions from The Washington Post, make clear that the 2008 agreement did not prohibit foreign countries with interests before the U.S. government from giving money to the charity closely linked to the secretary of state.

In one instance, foundation officials acknowledged they should have sought approval in 2010 from the State Department ethics office, as required by the agreement for new government donors, before accepting a $500,000 donation from the Algerian government.

The money was given to assist with earthquake relief in Haiti, the foundation said. At the time, Algeria, which has sought a closer relationship with Washington, was spending heavily to lobby the State Department on human rights issues.

See entire fiasco below.

Continue reading

Obama believes he is helping Debbie Wasserman Shultz, both share the same delusion

crew-2231Comment by Jim Campbell, Citizen Journalist, Oath Keeper and Patriot.


It’s highly probable they both share the same delusion.  The vast majority of Democrats want nothing to do with Obama.

Perhaps they are attempting to gain approval from the progressive wing of the Democrat party, as Wasserman-Shultz is more likely a stray Pit Bull with Aids.

Florida Democrats must show must show they finally understand how Shultz is bring their party down and fire her in 2016.



You are about to see a woman so clearly out of touch with reality that she’s absolutely clueless that her progressive mantra is dead.

Wassmerman Shultz is clearly ignorant enough to be a member of the Congressional Black Caucus.

Just think, as taxpayers we are obligated to pay her outrageous salary, and her overblown retirement program.  Let her eat cake!

The Blaze

As Democrats from around the country convene in Washington, Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz is fending off a potential scandal. But in front of a partisan crowd, she received a nod from the actual leader of the party, President Barack Obama.

Wasserman Schultz, already a polarizing figure, allegedly offered to change her position on medical marijuana if a top Florida donor – John Morgan – would take back his scathing criticism of her, Politico reported. She denied the allegation to a Florida newspaper Friday.



At the DNC’s winter meeting Friday, Obama gave her a public vote of confidence at the start of his speech.

“I want to thank Debbie Wasserman Schultz for being an outstanding chair of our party,” Obama said. “She is a great partner.”

The dustup is making waves in Florida, where state Democratic Party Chairwoman Allison Tant told reporters, “I’m just disappointed.”

John Morgan, a Democratic attorney, helped bankroll a failed ballot initiative in 2014 to amend Florida’s Constitution to allow for medical marijuana. After Wasserman Schultz, a potential U.S. Senate candidate for 2016, expressed opposition, Morgan let it be known how he felt about her, calling her “disliked,” “despised” and “an irritant.”

Afterward, according to emails obtained by Politico, Wasserman Schultz offered to change her position on medial marijuana if Morgan would take back what he said.

Morgan refused, accusing the chairwoman of being in a “tizzy,” and saying, “No. She is a bully. I beat bullies up for a living.”

In a Friday interview with the South Florida Sun-Sentinel, Wasserman Schultz denied offering to switch her position.

“I wouldn’t change my position in exchange for support under any circumstances – ever. I stand on principle. I’m always very proud to stand in front of my constituents and explain when I have a difference of opinion with them,” she said.

House votes to repeal, replace Obamacare

crew-2231Comment by Jim Campbell, Citizen Journalist, Oath Keeper and Patriot.


Obama appears to think this is funny with his comment below;” “I don’t know whether it’s the 55th or the 60th time that they are taking this vote,” Mr. Obama said of the House.


Neither will Obama!

“But I’ve asked this question before: Why is it that this would be at the top of their agenda, making sure that folks who don’t have health care aren’t able to get it?”


It’s simple Toby, your health care rationing and denial program is neither affordable and it is indeed far to expensive.

The answer is clear we have a 5 ton gorilla sitting in the White House and a real gorilla would be far smarter.

This is of course dependent upon the Senate following suit, with eventual jumping ship of house and senate members facing election in 2016.

As soon as the gorilla is gone the party’s over for Obama’s must stunning failure.


The Washington Time

By Tom Howell Jr.

February 4, 2015


congress-rdpjpeg-07872_c0-490-3500-2530_s561x327(AP Photo/Molly Riley)

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. addresses the media with from left, Sen. Roger Wicker, R-Miss., Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., and Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn of Texas in the U.S. Capitol in Washington, Tuesday, February 3, 2015.

Republicans newly in charge of Congress challenged President Barack Obama at both ends of the Capitol on Tuesday, lining up in the House to repeal the health care program he signed into law and struggling in the Senate to roll back the immigration policies he issued on his own.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. addresses the media with from left, Sen. Roger Wicker, R-Miss., Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., and Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn of Texas in the U.S. Capitol in Washington, Tuesday.


The House voted largely along party lines Tuesday to repeal and replace Obamacare, with Republicans vowing to satisfy midterm voters who demanded a new path forward while Democrats taunted their rivals as oblivious to the plight of the uninsured.

The 239-186 vote marked the Republican-majority Congress’ first swipe at the entire health law, cuing up a likely filibuster from Senate Democrats before President Obama can wield his veto pen.

Here’s the ugly truth about blood pressure medication your doctor will never tell you.
Unique Method Regrows Lost Hair (Do This Daily)
Shocking! Important Information That Could Be Affecting Our Food Supply

While no Democrats defected from the party line, three Republicans voted against repeal — freshmen Reps. John Katko of New York and Bruce Poliquin of Maine, and Rep. Robert Dold of Illinois, who regained his seat after losing it in 2012.

While it will not become law, the measure was designed to let new Republicans to record their opposition to Obamacare and make good on the GOP’s campaign promise to go after the law and replace it.

“We are doing it because the American people have said, ‘We are tired of this.’ It is damaging health care,” Rep. Marsha Blackburn, Tennessee Republican, said.

Entire article below.

Continue reading

America’s First Navy SEAL Congressman Puts Obama Foreign Policy on Full Blast Over Islamic Terror

crew-2231Comment by Jim Campbell, Citizen Journalist, Oath Keeper and Patriot.

We must laud the former member of SEAL TEAM VI’s words.  They would have had extra punch if he said what was obviously on his mind.


We would not be going back to Iraq or fighting Isis if it had not been for Obama’s failed leadership for his entire term of office in anything that could reasonably called a “Foreign Policy.”

The only thing foreign about it is that Obama never understood  it because he never viewed it as an American.

The only fitting ending to Obama’s career would for him to be hung high for the treasonous acts he has committed.

Image credit: United States Navy Rep. Ryan Zinke

Freshman U.S. Representative Ryan Zinke (R-MT) served our country for over 20 years with the Navy and as a member of the elite SEAL Team 6. When he got to Washington, it didn’t take him long to see the glaring problem facing western nations.

Zinke told The Washington Free Beacon that the Obama administration’s mishandling of terrorist threats is putting our security at risk.

“This administration’s inaction and lack of commitment and resolve in fighting ISIS provides fuel for terrorism. It gives them hope that they can win and it has ramifications worldwide.”

The congressman cited the Paris Charlie Hebdo attack as evidence that terrorists are getting bolder in challenging the west. He says the Obama administration’s failure to view these attacks as “asymmetrical warfare” could ease the path for terrorists to encroach into Western Civilization.

“There’s a reason why we’re in retreat everywhere across the globe. This administration has consistently acted from a viewpoint that you can negotiate with terrorism.

You cannot negotiate with organizations that are based on an ideology whose core is to destroy the West and America,” Zinke said. “To me there is no doubt, inaction abroad emboldens actions on the home front. They are related.”

Sanctions and air campaigns won’t send a strong enough message to the likes of ISIS, Zinke insisted.

“This is the reality of asymmetrical warfare. When the enemy is willing to behead children, crucify entire villages, and with box cutters put commercial aircraft into buildings, there’s nothing this evil won’t do in pursuit of goal,” he said. “I think we’re at risk.”

Zinke recommends military embeds in Kurdish forces and friendly Sunni tribes to put ISIS on defense. Boots on ground may be a necessity for driving back ISIS’ influence.

At the core of it, you can’t be on the defensive. That offense has to be conducted overseas. We need to act with resolve against ISIS and Obama needs to act now,” he said. “It’s going to take troops on the ground: logistics, ammunition, good intelligence gathering. Wars can’t be fought with rhetoric. That doesn’t mean we need frontline ground troops, but they need significant logistics support.”

Congress may have just begun for this freshman, but when it comes to national security, his words shouldn’t be taken lightly.


Continue reading

When the Marines Tried to Recruit 73-Year-Old President Ronald Reagan, His Response Was Classic

crew-2231Comment by Jim Campbell, Citizen Journalist, Oath Keeper and Patriot.


Just when the reader thinks they have heard all of President Ronald Reagan’s quotes and quips along comes another the reader may have missed.


It’s classic Reagan!

As much as Ronald Reagan is remembered for his love of country, he is also remembered for his dry sense of humor. His response to a recruitment letter from the Marine Corps – received while he was president – was classic Reagan.

In May of 1984, after the 73-year-old president received the letter, he replied in quintessential Reaganesque style:

Dear General Kelly,

I regret that I must decline the attached invitation to enlist in the United States Marine Corps.

As proud as I am of the inference concerning my physical fitness, it might be better to continue as the Commander-in-Chief.

Besides, at the present time it would be rather difficult to spend ten weeks at Parris Island.

The recruiter notes that “had (I) joined six months ago, I would have a whole new life now.” There is no doubt about that. As much as the other political party would appreciate the notion, Nancy is happy with the house and I am totally satisfied with my job.

As for the immediate future, I have the kind of tenacity the Corps is famous for in my resolve to stay here for the next four years. Would you consider a deferment until 1989?

On a more serious note, P. X., I’m sure my invitation came as the result of a lance corporal’s overactive imagination.

Nevertheless, please let him know that he honored me in believing that I have what it takes to become a United States Marine.

Semper Fidelis,

Ronald Reagan

President Reagan may not have had what it takes to be a U.S. Marine at the age of 73, but I’m sure he got a few laughs out of the Corps with this response.

Continue reading

%d bloggers like this: