Report: Hillary Clinton’s Campaign Mgr John Pedestal Sat on Board of Company that Bagged $35 Million from Putin-Connected Russian Govt Fund. Podestal also heads the Soros funded Center For American Progress (http://sorosfiles.com/soros/2011/10/john-podesta-the-center-for-american-progress-and-the-communist-friendly-modern-progressive-movement.html)

Report: Hillary Clinton’s Campaign Mgr John Podestal Sat on Board of Company that Bagged $35 Million from Putin-Connected Russian Govt Fund

Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman John Podesta sat on the board of a small energy company alongside Russian officials that received $35 million from a Putin-connected Russian government fund, a relationship Podesta failed to fully disclose on his federal financial disclosures as required by law.

That’s one of the many revelations from a 56-page report released late Sunday titled “From Russia with Money: Hillary Clinton, the Russian Reset, and Cronyism” by the non-partisan government watchdog group, the Government Accountability Institute (GAI). Breitbart Executive Chairman Stephen K. Bannon holds the same title in GAI and Breitbart News Senior Editor-at-Large Peter Schweizer serves as GAI’s president.

Both the New York Post and the Wall Street Journal ran stories on the newly released report late Sunday evening.

VIDEO: PODESTA: DNC HACK APPEARS TO COME FROM RUSSIAN UNITS

Play

Current Time0:22

/

Duration Time1:43

Loaded: 0%

Progress: 0%

0:22

Fullscreen

00:00

Mute

As part of her duties during the so-called Russian reset, then-Sec. of State Hillary Clinton led the way on U.S. involvement in a Russian government technology initiative that was intended to be the Russian equivalent of America’s Silicon Valley known as Skolkovo. The “innovation city,” located outside Moscow, has some 30,000 workers in state-of-the-art facilities under strict government control. As Slate described it in 2013, “In some ways, Skolkovo is eerily reminiscent of Soviet utopian city-building projects.”

According to the GAI report, Clinton’s State Dept. recruited U.S. tech giants like Google, http://sorosfiles.com/soros/2011/10/john-podesta-the-center-for-american-progress-and-the-communist-friendly-modern-progressive-movement.htmlhttp://sorosfiles.com/soros/2011/10/john-podesta-the-center-for-american-progress-and-the-communist-friendly-modern-progressive-movement.htmlCisco, Intel. Indeed, out of 28 U.S., European, and Russian companies that participated in Skolkovo, 17 of them were Clinton Foundation donors or paid for speeches by Bill Clinton.

However, as involvement in Skolkovo by Clinton cronies increased, so, too, did the danger for the technology coming out of the Russian tech mecca to be used for Russian military purposes.

In 2014, the FBI issued what it called “an extraordinary warning” to several technology companies involved with Skolkovo. “The [Skolkovo] foundation may be a means for the Russian government to access our nation’s sensitive or classified research development facilities and dual-use technologies with military and commercial application,” warned Lucia Ziobro, the assistant special agent at the FBI’s Boston office. She added: “The FBI believes the true motives of the Russian partners, who are often funded by the government, is to gain access to classified, sensitive, and emerging technology from the companies.”

Still, Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman John Podesta sat on the executive board of a small energy company called Joule Unlimited. Joule, too, received the FBI letter warning about Skolkovo. Other Joule board members included senior Russian officials. According to the GAI report: “Two months after Podesta joined the board, Vladimir Putin’s Rusnano announced that it would invest up to one billion rubles into Joule Unlimited, which amounts to $35 million. That represents one-fifth of the entire amount of investment dollars Joule collected from 2007 to 2013.”

Rusnano, which former Russian education and science minister and current science advisor to Vladmir Putin Andrei Fursenko describes as “Putin’s child,” was founded by Putin in 2007.

The GAI investigative report says it’s unclear how much, if any, money Podesta made. The reason: Podesta was on the board of three Joule entities, but only listed two on his disclosure; the most important entity, Joule Stichting, he did not list. “Podesta’s compensation by Joule cannot be fully determined,” reads the report. “In his 2014 federal government disclosure filing, Podesta lists that he divested stock options from Joule. However, the disclosure does not cover the years 2011-2012.”

Why Podesta failed to reveal, as required by law on his federal financial disclosures, his membership on the board of this offshore company is presently unknown.

“But the flows of funds from Russia during the ‘reset’ to Podesta-connected entities apparently didn’t end with Joule Energy,” the report states. According to the GAI report, Podesta’s far-left think tank, Center for American Progress (CAP), took in $5.25 million from the Sea Change Foundation between 2010-2013.

Who was funding Sea Change Foundation? According to tax records, Sea Change Foundation at the time was receiving a large infusion of funds from a mysterious Bermuda-based entity called ‘Klein, Ltd.’…Who owns Klein? It is impossible to say exactly, given corporate secrecy laws in Bermuda. But the registered agent and lawyers who set up the offshore entity are tied to a handful of Russian business entities including Troika Dialog, Ltd. Leadership includes Ruben Vardanyan, an ethnic Armenian who is a mega oligarch in Putin’s Russia. Vardanyan also served on the board of Joule Energy with John Podesta.

The FBI and U.S. Army sounded the alarm bells about Skolkovo being a threatening pathway for Russia to accelerate its military technological capabilities. Why Hillary Clinton’s State Dept and her campaign manager were tied up in this raises serious questions that demand answers and transparency.

Listen to Bannon and Schweizer discuss of this article on Breitbart News Daily on SiriusXM:

Hillary damaged America and enriched herself. And, her supporters have the nerve to say Trump will harm America when she has already done irreparable damage on just about every front.

The Clinton Foundation, State and Kremlin Connections

Why did Hillary’s State Department urge U.S. investors to fund Russian research for military uses? 

ENLARGE

Hillary Clinton and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in Geneva, 2009. PHOTO: AFP/GETTY IMAGES

By 

PETER SCHWEIZer

July 31, 2016 4:33 p.m. ET

S

Hillary Clinton touts her tenure as secretary of state as a time of hardheaded realism and “commercial diplomacy” that advanced American national and commercial interests. But her handling of a major technology transfer initiative at the heart of Washington’s effort to “reset” relations with Russia raises serious questions about her record. Far from enhancing American national interests, Mrs. Clinton’s efforts in this area may have substantially undermined U.S. national security. 

Consider Skolkovo, an “innovation city” of 30,000 people on the outskirts of Moscow, billed as Russia’s version of Silicon Valley—and a core piece of Mrs. Clinton’s quarterbacking of the Russian reset. 

Following his 2009 visit to Moscow, President Obama announced the creation of the U.S.-Russia Bilateral Presidential Commission. Mrs. Clinton as secretary of state directed the American side, and Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov represented the Russians. The stated goal at the time: “identifying areas of cooperation and pursuing joint projects and actions that strengthen strategic stability, international security, economic well-being, and the development of ties between the Russian and American people.”

The Kremlin committed $5 billion over three years to fund Skolkovo. Mrs. Clinton’s State Department worked aggressively to attract U.S. investment partners and helped the Russian State Investment Fund, Rusnano, identify American tech companies worthy of Russian investment. Rusnano, which a scientific adviser to President Vladimir Putin called “Putin’s child,” was created in 2007 and relies entirely on Russian state funding. 

What could possibly go wrong?

RELATED ARTICLES

• Hillary’s Strange Security Adviser
• The Clinton Business Model . . .
• Putin and Those Democratic Emails

Soon, dozens of U.S. tech firms, including top Clinton Foundation donors like Google, Intel and Cisco, made major financial contributions to Skolkovo, with Cisco committing a cool $1 billion. In May 2010, the State Department facilitated a Moscow visit by 22 of the biggest names in U.S. venture capital—and weeks later the first memorandums of understanding were signed by Skolkovo and American companies.

By 2012 the vice president of the Skolkovo Foundation, Conor Lenihan—who had previously partnered with the Clinton Foundation—recorded that Skolkovo had assembled 28 Russian, American and European “Key Partners.” Of the 28 “partners,” 17, or 60%, have made financial commitments to the Clinton Foundation, totaling tens of millions of dollars, or sponsored speeches by Bill Clinton.

Russians tied to Skolkovo also flowed funds to the Clinton Foundation. Andrey Vavilov, the chairman of SuperOx, which is part of Skolkovo’s nuclear-research cluster, donated between $10,000 and $25,000 (donations are reported in ranges, not exact amounts) to the Clinton’s family charity. Skolkovo Foundation chief and billionaire Putin confidant Viktor Vekselberg also gave to the Clinton Foundation through his company, Renova Group.

Amid all the sloshing of Russia rubles and American dollars, however, the state-of-the-art technological research coming out of Skolkovo raised alarms among U.S. military experts and federal law-enforcement officials. Research conducted in 2012 on Skolkovo by the U.S. Army Foreign Military Studies Program at Fort Leavenworth declared that the purpose of Skolkovo was to serve as a “vehicle for world-wide technology transfer to Russia in the areas of information technology, biomedicine, energy, satellite and space technology, and nuclear technology.” 

Moreover, the report said: “the Skolkovo Foundation has, in fact, been involved in defense-related activities since December 2011, when it approved the first weapons-related project—the development of a hypersonic cruise missile engine. . . . Not all of the center’s efforts are civilian in nature.”

Technology can have multiple uses—civilian and military. But in 2014 the Boston Business Journal ran an op-ed placed by the FBI, and noted that the agency had sent warnings to technology and other companies approached by Russian venture-capital firms. The op-ed—under the byline of Lucia Ziobro, an assistant special agent at the FBI’s Boston office—said that “The FBI believes the true motives of the Russian partners, who are often funded by their government, is to gain access to classified, sensitive, and emerging technology from the companies.”

Ms. Ziobro also wrote that “The [Skolkovo] foundation may be a means for the Russian government to access our nation’s sensitive or classified research development facilities and dual-use technologies with military and commercial application.” 

To anyone who was paying attention, the FBI’s warnings should have come as little surprise. A State Department cable sent to then-Secretary Clinton (and obtained via WikiLeaks) mentioned possible “dual use and export control concerns” related to research and development technology ventures with Moscow. And in its own promotional literature Skolkovo heralded the success of its development of the Atlant hybrid airship. 

“Particularly noteworthy is Atlant’s ability to deliver military cargoes,” boasts the Made in Skolkovo publication: “The introduction of this unique vehicle is fully consistent with the concept of creating a mobile army and opens up new possibilities for mobile use of the means of radar surveillance, air and missile defense, and delivery of airborne troops.”

Even if it could be proven that these tens of millions of dollars in Clinton Foundation donations by Skolkovo’s key partners played no role in the Clinton State Department’s missing or ignoring obvious red flags about the Russian enterprise, the perception would still be problematic. (Neither the Clinton campaign nor the Clinton Foundation responded to requests for comment.) What is known is that the State Department recruited and facilitated the commitment of billions of American dollars in the creation of a Russian “Silicon Valley” whose technological innovations include Russian hypersonic cruise-missile engines, radar surveillance equipment, and vehicles capable of delivering airborne Russian troops.

A Russian reset, indeed.

Mr. Schweizer is president of the Government Accountability Institute and the author of “Clinton Cash.” A larger report on the subject of this article is available at Cronyism.com.

Fearing reprisal from Muslims, French publisher reverses decision to publish book critical of Islam...this is the way the West dies. Violence seems to work well for Muslims!

Fearing reprisal from Muslims, French publisher reverses decision to publish book critical of Islam

JULY 31, 2016 1:07 PM BY ROBERT SPENCER

This is the way the West dies
This is the way the West dies
This is the way the West dies
Not with a bang but a whimper.

This is nothing new, however. Way back in 2002, a French edition of my book Islam Unveiled was canceled for fear of offending Muslims.

“Fearing Islamist reprisal, French publisher revises decision to publish book critical of Islam,” by Vijeta Uniyal, Legal Insurrection, July 28, 2016 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):

A Paris-based publishing house has revised its decision to publish a French version of the German bestseller “Der Islamische Faschismus” (The Islamic Fascism). Written by German-Egyptian author Hamed Abdel-Samad, the book was due to hit the French bookstores in September. Piranha Edition reportedly changed its mind after this month’s ISIS-inspired terror attack in Nice that killed 84 people and injured more than 300.

If the objective of Islamist violence in Europe had been to force the continent into submission, it is well on its way to achieving them.

Piranha Edition justified the decision of not going ahead with the publication by citing the threat of Radical Islam as well its desire of not wanting to strengthen the right-wing French groups critical of Islam. Interestingly, the head office of the Piranha Edition is just within a few minutes of walk from Bataclan, the theatre where 89 people were murdered by Islamic terrorists in November 2016.

Earlier this week, Hamed Abdel-Samad revealed the details of the failed book deal in a German-language blog Die Achse des Guten:

First the publisher changed the title from “The Islamic Fascism” to “Is Islam a form of Fascism?” — in order to avoid unnecessary polarisation. But after the attack in Nice, the publishing house decided not to publish the book at all, as it fearful of the consequence — as stated in [their] email — which could have been deadly. There could be another attack like the one at Charlie Hebdo.

Had the publisher ended the email just there, I could understand, as it is a matter of life and death, and I cannot ask everyone to take the risk that I take with my book.

But then came the second argument why the publication was not possible at this point. The book could benefit the right wing [parties]. [Author’s translation]

Whenever Islamic terrorism strikes somewhere in the West, media commentators and politicians always love to talk about the ‘moderate Muslims’ living among us. We are endlessly reminded of the “voices” of moderation, reason and peace within Islam. Hamed Abdel-Samad is just such one such genuine voice being stifled in the West. And he is not alone; Somali-born women’s rights advocate Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Pakistani writer Ibn Warraq, Bangladeshi novelist Taslima Nasrin are just some of the true Muslim voices of reason and sanity of our times.

These few, but brave women and men are not only forced to live like hunted fugitives in the West by Islamists determined to enforce Fatwa placed on their heads, but driven into silence by leftists enforcing accepted speech codes on college campuses and public arena.

Given the almost omnipresent threat of violence inside the Muslim majority countries, we can give up on our hopes of hearing any substantial criticism of Islamist theology from within the Muslim World. But what is happening to Muslim dissenters in the West is no less sinister. The violent campaign to shut down any opposition in the Muslim World is complimented in the West by the activism of the Left.

On the other hand, the mainstream media is more interested in talking to the representatives of Islam who are eager to talk about ‘Islamophobia’, or the Western guilt, but not about the theology behind the ongoing worldwide Jihad….

Priest assaulted by "asylum" seeker in Belgium

Belgian priest stabbed in his home after refusing to give cash to 'asylum seeker' 

Father Jod Vanderlee CREDIT: ARCHIEFKERKNETBE

•  James Rothwell 

1 AUGUST 2016 • 11:36AM

Apriest was reportedly stabbed in his own home when he refused to give money to a man claiming to be an asylum seeker who had asked to use his shower. 

Father Jos Vanderlee, a 65-year-old priest in the north east Belgian town of Lanaken, was rushed to hospital with hand and tendon injuries.  He is expected to make a full recovery. 

According to local newspaper Het Nieuwsblad, a man who said he was an asylum seeker knocked on the vicar's door  on Sunday and asked if he could use the shower.

Father Vanderlee agreed and let the man inside – but after showering he is said to have demanded money from the priest. 

When Father Vanderlee refused, the man allegedly stabbed him before fleeing the scene. 

We must stress that this incident can not be linked to terrorist acts at this stage of the investigationMarino Keulen, mayor of Lanaken

Belgian authorities said they are investigating but denied the incident had links to terrorism. 

Marino Keulen, mayor of Lanaken, said: "Despite the fact that we are shocked, we must stress that this incident can not be linked to terrorist acts at this stage of the investigation." 

Initial reports said the man was seeking asylum in the Netherlands but strayed into Lanaken, which rests on the border. 

It was also suggested that the man was merely pretending to be an asylum seeker so he could gain access to the priest's house in order to rob him. 

Normandy parish priest after church attack: 'It could have been me'Play!01:08

It comes just six days after an elderly priest had his throat cut by Isil terrorists in the rural French town of St-Etienne-du-Rouvray in Normandy. 

Adel Kermiche and Abdelmalik Petitjean, both 19, were shot dead by police as they fled the church in which they killed Catholic priest Jacques Hamel and took two nuns hostage. 

They reportedly forced Father Hamel to kneel at his own altar before cutting his throat with a knife.  

Syria: Are these the folks Obama/Hillary support? Do we need 500,000 of them in the US?

Body of Russian pilot is dragged through the dirt after helicopter is shot down by Syrian rebels - as mystery surrounds ID card found in wreckage showing blonde woman

Black Votes Matter (to Democrats), the rest not so much

If Black Lives Matter, perhaps blacks should stop voting for Democrats in such high percentages.

Do Black Lives Really Matter to Democrats?

Black lives matter.  We hear it all the time from the Democratic Party, so much so that it even made the themes of the Black Lives Matter movement a key component of its official party platform:  

Democrats will fight to end institutional and systemic racism in our society. We will challenge and dismantle the structures that define lasting racial, economic, political, and social inequity. Democrats will promote racial justice through fair, just, and equitable governing of all public-serving institutions and in the formation of public policy. Democrats support removing the Confederate battle flag from public properties, recognizing that it is a symbol of our nation's racist past that has no place in our present or our future. We will push for a societal transformation to make it clear that black lives matter and that there is no place for racism in our country. 

But do black lives really matter to Democrats? And have Democrats really been fighting to end institutional and systemic racism in society?

Or have they merely used the Black Lives Matter movement to provide them with cover after decades of utterly failing the black lives that they have governed almost without interruption for more than a half century?

The Black Lives Matter movement arose in 2014 in response to what it perceived as a spike in extrajudicial killings of unarmed African-American men by police officers.

An analysis of police killings of black men from January of 2013 through June of 2016, though, shows that the cities in which the vast majority of these killings occurred were in cities that the Democratic Party has controlled for generations.

According to data compiled by the Mapping Police Violence research collaborative, there are 67 city police departments whose officers have killed two or more black men since the beginning of 2013.  Just seven of those departments are in cities with a Republican mayor.  

60 are in cities with Democratic mayors, and most of those have had Democratic mayors for decades—indicating that those cities have been dominated by Democratic common councils or other legislative bodies as well.

The Chicago Police Department has by far the most officers who have killed black men since 2013—a whopping 37.  Chicago has not had a Republican mayor since 1931.  Since the Democratic Party has so thoroughly dominated mayoral races for 85 years, it may be safely assumed that Democrats have also dominated Chicago’s common council for nearly the past century—especially since the current common council has just one Republican and 49 Democrats.

Chicago was also the location of one of the most notorious police shootings in the past three years: The killing of Laquan McDonald on October 20th, 2014.

Jason Van Dyke, the Chicago Police officer who shot McDonald, was charged with first degree murder and official misconduct...but not until dashboard camera footage of the incident was released to the public 13 months afterwards.

A whistleblower revealed almost immediately after the shooting that there was video of it, but the Chicago Police Department steadfastly refused to release that video.  

Why?  Just three months after the shooting, Democratic Mayor Rahm Emanuel, the former White House Chief of Staff to President Obama, stood for re-election in a contentious primary.

Emails showed that Emanuel’s closest aides knew about how serious and criminal in nature the McDonald shooting was, but Emanuel downplayed it and placated black leaders in the city so well that they campaigned for him over his rival in the general election, Jesus “Chuy” Garcia.

Emanuel went on to win re-election in April of 2015 and, just days later, approved a $5 million settlement to the family of Laquan McDonald.  Still, the Police Department refused to release the video of the shooting until a court finally ordered it to that November.

Once the video was public, there were massive protests in Chicago that forced Emanuel to fire Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy and led to charges that Emanuel knew all along that the shooting of McDonald was a crime but didn’t want the video released because it would have cost him re-election.

Garcia certainly thought so, telling the Chicago Tribune that he would have won had the video been released before the election.

“That video would definitely have changed the political environment,” he said. “There's just some basic Chicago arithmetic in there. [Emanuel] wouldn't have received as much votes from the African-American community.  It isn't rocket science. It's arithmetic. And so yes, this tragic video would have had a profound impact.”

But it was kept hidden so it wouldn’t.

“And that’s the Chicago way,” Garcia said.

Of the 35 cities with the most killings of African-American men by police officers, just four have Republican mayors, and of the 31 that have Democratic mayors, just eight have had Republican mayors in the past 15 years.  This indicates that in the vast majority of cities that have seen the most police killings of black men, Democratic leaders control city councils and Democratic policies have been deeply entrenched for decades.

Houston, the city with the third-most police killings of African-Americans, hasn’t had a Republican mayor since 1982.  Baltimore, the city with the fourth-most, hasn’t had a Republican mayor since 1967.

Read more: http://newstalk1130.iheart.com/onair/common-sense-central-37717/do-black-lives-really-matter-to-14957499/#ixzz4G5NaLwrt

Read the rest here.