Donald John Trump

Some entertainment at the expense of the poor Clintons, from Clinton Cash: A Graphic Novel, the #1 New York Times bestselling graphic novel.

 

Yes, Poppy, I am familiar with Acosta Deep, it's about 150-160 miles west of me.

A few things Trump got wrong or won't tell you...
- The Acosta Mine was going to open whether Trump or Clinton was President, you see the mine was planned well in advance of the Presidential election.
- This is a metallurgical coal mine. So, this coal will be going towards steel-making, not energy production. You know, all those coal mines that closed were for energy production.
- Job creation is only going to be 60-100 miners, not the 600 that Trump claimed.
- Coal-fired power plants are still closing at an increased rate...3 large ones since Trump took office, and about 22 expected to follow. Face facts, natural gas is cleaner and cheaper.
- The mine's expected operational life is about 15 years, maybe more. But, will likely close sooner, if metallurgical coal prices fall again.


Oh, yes. Ha, ha.

 

A book, adapted to a film, adapted to a graphic novel...All three funded by Steve Bannon.

Steve Bannon, now why does that name sound familiar?

 

And now try to prove that all three were funded by Steve Bannon.

For the uninitiated:

Based on the New York Times bestseller Clinton Cash by Peter Schweizer, this graphic novel retells in high-definition detail the tale of the Clintons' jaw-dropping auctioning of American power to foreign companies and Clinton Foundation donors.

Inside, readers will learn why Hillary Clinton approved the transfer of 20% of all U.S. uranium to Putin's Russia; why Bill Clinton's speaking fees soared during Hillary's tenure as Secretary of State; how the Clintons bilked Keystone Pipeline investors; how Hillary's brother scored a rare "gold exploitation permit" from the Haitian government; and so much more.

Stunningly illustrated, hilariously retold, and inspired by the blockbuster book that reshaped the contours of the presidential election, Clinton Cash: A Graphic Novel brings to life Hillary and Bill's brazen plot to fleece the planet for maximum profit.

"Thank goodness, then, for Peter Schweizer and his blockbuster exposé Clinton Cash." —New York Post

 

Statement by the Press Secretary on President Donald J. Trump’s Upcoming Foreign Travel

President Donald J. Trump accepted the invitation of the President of the Republic of Poland, Andrzej Duda, to visit Poland in advance of the G20 Summit in Hamburg, Germany. The visit will reaffirm America’s steadfast commitment to one of our closest European allies and emphasize the Administration’s priority of strengthening NATO’s collective defense. The leaders will discuss a range of bilateral and regional issues, deepening an alliance based on shared values and common interests. While in Poland, President Trump will deliver a major speech, and he will attend the Three Seas Initiative Summit to demonstrate our strong ties to Central Europe.

 

OK.

Who is you beloved Peter Schweizer? Editor-at-large for Breitbart, go figure, right, a Bannon crony. While he was writing "Clinton Cash", Schweizer was paid $778,000 from Steve Bannon's non-profit charity "Government Accountability Institute" between 2012-2015. Why was Schweizer paid $778,000 for a no-show job? Because he was writing "Clinton Cash."

"Clinton Cash", the film, was produced by Gilttering Steel and Bannon Film Industries. Bannon was a partial owner and the chair of Glittering Steel, and as for Bannon Film Industries...Well, nothing more needs to be said. Bannon was also one of the screen writers for the "Clinton Cash" film.

It is not hard to figure out that Bannon was also the power that got the graphic novel published.

 

This is what we call "Not News"...

Apparently, the Poles are under the misguided idea that the meeting has already taken place, and have called it a "huge success."
Poland hails upcoming Trump visit as a 'huge success'

Although the meeting between the two heads of state is not to take place until early July. Perhaps, the Poles are simply overjoyed that someone is paying them lip-service.

 

Of course, Peter Schweitzer and his book "Clinton Cash", have long since been discredited...The only one who has not gotten that message seems to be .wm.
For the uninitiated:
Peter Schweizer has never, ever, under any circumstances, provided evidence to back up his purported claims. None. Zilch. Zip. Nada.
He has admitted this several times when pressed on the issue.
Clinton Cash Crushed By Facts As Author Admits He Has No Evidence Of Clinton Crimes
Hallie Jackson: 'Clinton Cash' Author Admits 'No Evidence' To Prove Clinton Did Favors For Money - Breitbart
Why the Clintons Aren’t Going to Sweat Clinton Cash
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-bl...y?post_id=10153997914593717_10154020579068717
Fact-checking 'Clinton Cash' author on claim about Bill Clinton's speaking fees
Peter Schweizer, Author Of Controversial New Clinton Book, Admits That He Did Not Brief Democrats On Content | HuffPost
'Clinton Cash' publisher corrects '7 or 8' inaccurate passages
Clinton Cash Author Peter Schweizer's Long History Of Errors, Retractions, And Questionable Sourcing

 

Of course there are no evidence warranting a criminal investigation. But still enough to be safe from Clintonian vengeance, and a defamation suit.

The evidence is in the pattern of behaviour, and that's not enough for a criminal investigation. People conducting their affairs using only verbal, face to face, communication leave no traces, no evidence.

I would encourage everybody to read the graphic novel and judge for themselves, it's really lots of fun anyway.

 

For the last hundred years American presidents have visited Poland only eleven times. The very fact that the visit will happen is a huge success, and a huge prestige boost for the current government. The former liberal (and corrupted) government wouldn't be able to poll it off.

 

Bannon was one of the funders of the Institute, today he's not even on board of directors. So it's improper to say it's his institute - because it isn't.

The movie was produced, among others, by Bannon but of course not with his own money. So it's improper to say the movie or the "all three" were funded by Bannon.

It should be noted that The New York Times, The Washington Post and Fox News were granted exclusive agreements with the book's author to pursue the story lines found in the book - so it's not like it was all Hitler-like Bannon's doing.

 

Correction...In the past 45 years, 7 US Presidents have traveled to Poland 13 times - Nixon once, Ford once, Carter once, Bush I twice, Clinton twice, Bush II three times, and Obama three times.

Sorry, but it is not that major of an accomplishment...Especially since Trump is scrambling to find non-Arab heads of state who will give him the time of day.

 

This would be relevant if we were talking about today...Except, we are not are we. Bannon did not leave the GAI until August, 2016.
So, yes, it is indeed proper.

Regretfully, this too is in error...

And all three found nothing...Fox News eve got Peter to fess up that there was no evidence, and the whole thing was just smoke and mirrors. Not just once, but several times. The Times and Post were equally scathing once they found out that they had been duped.

 

As I said everybody should judge the book themselves, the mass smear campaign in the media against the author by the Clintons' supporters notwithstanding.

As Lawrence Lessig wrote in Washington Post:

In “Clinton Cash,” Schweizer charges Bill and Hillary Clinton with corruption. Not because there is evidence of any particular bribe. Instead, their corruption, Schweizer says, comes from a pattern of behavior: a constant (and, by the end of the book, practically grotesque) story of cash passing from people seeking the government’s favor to either Bill Clinton (and hence Hillary Clinton) or the Clinton Foundation.

Yet all this, the Clintons and their defenders insist, is not corruption because Schweizer has provided no smoking gun. He has offered “no evidence” of a quid pro quo trade.

Welcome to Wonderland: Were the alleged influencers the Koch brothers, with the same kind of pattern charged against them — their channeling support to Republican representatives, those representatives in turn acting in a way that reflected the desires of the Kochs — there would be no doubt that Democrats would rally to attack that influence as Exhibit No. 1 in the case against the corruption of Washington. But apparently now those loyal to the Democratic presidential front-runner will have to be more careful in their criticism. Apparently now the party line must be: Even if someone benefited personally, and enormously, and even if there is a repeated series of victories for those exercising their influence, there’s no corruption unless Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. would see it as corruption — meaning again, no corruption unless a quid pro quo. [...]

We all should agree that the economy of influence that Washington has become is corrupt, the Supreme Court notwithstanding, and all finally move on to the only important question: What can we do to fix it?

On any fair reading, the pattern of behavior that Schweizer has charged is corruption. If the Clintons are going to defend against it, they need to do more than to cite Chief Justice Roberts. And soon.

 

Feel free to post what ever evidence you have to support this conclusion...

By the same token, if we are only basing our accusations on smoke, mirrors, and the appearance of impropriety, Trump should have been thrown out on his keister some time ago.

It is truly funny how for wm., Trump improprieties require proof, but with the Clintons the mere supposition is better than the facts.

You forgot to add the billionaire crony & backer of Bannon, Robert Mercer and his family...

 

For me an opinion of Lawrence Lessig, the Roy L. Furman Professor of Law at Harvard Law School, is good enough - despite the fact he is a democrat.
More valuable than opinions of some non-name Clinton shills publishing in Huffington Post (which thankfully seems to be dying).

 

Really????

You would take the word of a Soros lackey?
Activist Who Served on George Soros-Financed Boards Behind Scheme to Take Trump’s Electoral College Votes

So, you would support Hillary Clinton as President? Doubt that...
The Constitution lets the electoral college choose the winner. They should choose Clinton. - The Washington Post

Of course, once a failure, always a failure...
Harvard's Larry Lessig Fails Again

Looks like your "good enough" just is not good enough...

Their opinions are equally as valuable as the opinions of the publishing no-name shills on the Bannon/Mercer payroll...Said opinion, plus $1.60 will get you a cup of coffee at any fine convenience store.

 

Hehehee...laughed.
Unsure who feels the regret.

 

wm.

While much of the funding did come from the Mercer family(A Republican equivalent of Soros), Bannon did contribute money time, and effort into the project, so the statement is correct.

Bannon had no regrets concerning his "smear" masterpiece, all went according to plan.

 

Regarding the influence of the rich on politics: Are the politicians bought by the rich, or do the rich support politicians who generally share their views?

Jesse (Big Daddy) Unruh - prominent California politician , Speaker of State Assembly 1961-69, State Treasurer 1975 until his death in 1987 said:

On lobbyists: "If you can't eat their food, drink their booze, screw their women, take their money and then vote against them you've got no business being up here."

We would be better off if more politicians, then and now, had that philosophy.