by Ruby Henley
I think it is very interesting that John Podesta would bring up Pizzagate on Halloween night. Why would he do that, as it just brings Pizzagate back into the news?
Pizzagate crazies: you can keep it up but it’s 100% false. Watch your man Alex Jones grovel and then get a life t.co/9Nd5FxTcU6
— John Podesta (@johnpodesta) October 31, 2017
“Pizzagate crazies: you can keep it up but it’s 100% false. Watch your man Alex Jones grovel and then get a life.”
He, also listed the one Alex Jones video I will never forget.
I think he has finally lost his marbles. I had not thought about Pizzagate in awhile, but now he has gotten my attention again.
John Podesta is under a lot of pressure now. The Podesta Group did not register as a foreign agent when they agreed to represent Russia’s largest bank. It was once known as the KGB bank with close ties to Putin.
I would like to get my hands on some of the emails on Uranium One between that whole gang. So let’s go to Wikileaks.
In April 2015 the New York Times published a story about a company called “Uranium One” which was sold to Russian government-controlled interests, giving Russia effective control of one-fifth of all uranium production capacity in the United States. Since uranium is considered a strategic asset, with implications for the production of nuclear weapons, the deal had to be approved by a committee composed of representatives from a number of US government agencies. Among the agencies that eventually signed off the deal was the State Department, then headed by Secretary Clinton. The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) comprises, among others, the secretaries of the Treasury, Defense, Homeland Security, Commerce and Energy.
As Russian interests gradually took control of Uranium One millions of dollars were donated to the Clinton Foundation between 2009 and 2013 from individuals directly connected to the deal including the Chairman of Uranium One, Ian Telfer. Although Mrs Clinton had an agreement with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors to the Clinton Foundation, the contributions from the Chairman of Uranium One were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons.
When the New York Times article was published the Clinton campaign spokesman, Brian Fallon, strongly rejected the possibility that then-Secretary Clinton exerted any influence in the US goverment’s review of the sale of Uranium One, describing this possibility as “baseless”.
Mr Fallon promptly sent a memo to the New York Times with a rebuttal of the story (Podesta Email ID 1489).
To suggest the State Department, under then-Secretary Clinton, exerted
undue influence in the U.S. government’s review of the sale of Uranium One
is utterly baseless. It mischaracterizes the nature of the State
Department’s participation in such reviews, and also ignores the range of
other regulatory agencies that ultimately supported this sale. It is
impossible to view this allegation as anything other than just another in
the many partisan conspiracy theories advanced in the *Clinton Cash* book.
To begin with, the fact of Mr. Giustra’s contributions to the Clinton
Foundation is not new. In fact, the only reason his contributions are known
to the book’s author is because the Foundation goes above and beyond what
the law requires of nonprofit foundations in terms of disclosing its
donors. END OF QUOTE
In this memo, Mr Fallon argued: “Apart from the fact that the State Department was one of just nine agencies involved in CFIUS, it is also true that within the State Department, the CFIUS approval process historically does not trigger the personal involvement of the Secretary of State. The State Department’s principal representative to CFIUS was the Assistant Secretary of State for Economic, Energy and Business Affairs. During the time period in question, that position was held by Jose Fernandez. As you are aware, Mr Fernandez has personally attested that “Secretary Clinton never intervened with me on any CFIUS matter.”
What the Clinton campaign spokesman failed to disclose, however, was the fact that a few days before sending his rebuttal to the New York Times, Jose Fernandez wrote on the evening of the 17 April 2015 to John Podesta following a phone call from Mr Podesta (Email ID 2053): “John, It was good to talk to you this afternoon, and I appreciate your taking the time to call. As I mentioned, I would like to do all I can to support Secretary Clinton, and would welcome your advice and help in steering me to the right persons in the campaign”.
This email exposes the lie, which is just one of so many.
Five days after this email (22 April 2015), Clinton spokesman Brian Fallon wrote a memo to the New York Times, declaring that “Jose Fernandez has personally attested that ‘Secretary Clinton never intervened with me on any CFIUS matter’,” but Fallon failed to mention that Fernandez was hardly a neutral witness in this case, considering that he had agreed with John Podesta to play a role in the Clinton campaign.
The emails show that the contacts between John Podesta and Jose Fernandez go back to the time of internal Clinton campaign concern about the then-forthcoming book and movie “Clinton Cash” by Peter Schweizer on the financial dealings of the Clinton Foundation.
In an email dated 29 March 2015 (Email ID 2059), Jose Fernandez writes to Podesta: “Hi John, I trust you are getting a brief rest after a job well done. Thanks no doubt to your recommendation I have joined the CAP [Center for American Progress] board of trustees, which I’m finding extremely rewarding.”
Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman John Podesta’s membership on the executive board of an energy company, Joule Unlimited, which received millions from a Putin-connected Russian government fund, also included “75,000 common shares,” according to an email exchange uncovered by the Wikileaks hacks.
In the newly-uncovered email exchanged under the subject “Podesta Outstanding Docs for Joule,” Eryn Sepp, who was an assistant to Podesta at the Center for American Progress, forwarded a message to Podesta from Mark C. Solakian, who was Senior Vice President and General Counsel at Joule Unlimited Technologies, Inc.
“It is my understanding that John transferred the resulting 75,000 common shares from the option exercise to the Leonidio LLC.,” Slovakian wrote in a January 2014 email, referencing the Delaware-based holding company. “As such, we would need to edit the Transfer of Share Agreement to reflect the transfer of 75,000 common shares to the LLC.”
And, of course, Podesta’s holdings went to his daughter. What a crook! www.eastbaytimes.com/2016/10/21/dublin-school-board-member-linked-to-wikileaks/ QUOTE
A local school board member, whose father is head of Hillary Clinton’s campaign, has been connected to allegations sprung from WikiLeaks.
Megan Rouse, a Dublin school board member elected in 2014, was mentioned in the hacked email allegations that her father, John Podesta, at one time owned shares in a firm that had ties to Russia. Documents show that Podesta received 75,000 shares of Joule Unlimited Technologies. Podesta is Clinton’s campaign chair.
The hacked Jan. 3, 2014 document shows that Podesta transferred more than 25,000 of these shares to Leonidio Holdings LLC, which had an address listed as Rouse’s home in Dublin. Rouse operates Megan Rouse Financial Planning from that same address.
Besides the share transfer, WikiLeaks released another document showing that Rouse’s father asked big-time Washington lobbyist Jim Davidson in an email to contribute to his daughter’s 2014 school board campaign. Davidson’s clients include the likes of Disney and CBS.
“While you probably aren’t too vested in the outcome of local California school board races, we hope you can support her candidacy, even at a modest level, as she begins her career as an elected official. Good to get in on the ground floor,” Podesta wrote.
John Podesta is in a great deal of trouble, and he has shown all he has accused President Trump of, in fact, he is guilty of himself. President Trump is not an alleged pedophile, nor does he have the charge of treason on his shoulders.
As far as Hillary Clinton, she is delusional as she travels from place to place blaming everyone but herself for losing the 2016 campaign.
They are socially inept in the fact they cannot accept the loss of the 2016 Presidential election, which belongs to the American people. The American said no to these two scoundrels, and thank God they did.