Connect with us


Hillary Clinton for prison



Hillary Clinton. Historic first? Be careful what you wish for. And stay out of Hillary’s handbasket, if you can. Contrast her with Donald Trump.

That’s right. Hillary Clinton needs to go to prison, or at least pay a confiscatory fine, for her crimes. For if she does not, America will see a moral example worthy of a banana republic. Donald J. Trump, as President, must not sacrifice justice to “unity of the country.”

What Hillary Clinton has done

We cannot know whether Julian Assange took Hillary Clinton down. Hillary Clinton did not lose this election. Donald J. Trump won it. Dick Morris said so this afternoon, on video. Nor did Trump have as difficult a selling job as the Mainstream Media said. After all, Clinton represented a party, and administration, that promised gold for everyone and delivered iron pyrite instead. In that circumstance, Trump needed only to point to his business record and “pitch” his vision to the people. Enough of them, in every demographic, believed he could do better than she.

Nevertheless, Hillary Clinton has manifestly committed many crimes for years, even decades. Even after giving Trump his due, Dick Morris reminds us of how she has acted.

The Clinton Foundation

The Clinton Foundation has, for years, served as a family racket for Bill and Hillary Clinton. Peter Schweitzer, author of Clinton Cash, called it a “model of self-enrichment.” Anyone who read his book, or watched the One America News Network special of that name, knows this. Absolutely anyone could sway government policy in key areas. All they need do was make handsome gifts to the Clinton Foundation, one way or another.

The Keystone XL Pipeline project presents a prize example. Hillary Clinton campaigned specifically on a platform of fighting “climate change.” Why, then, would she sign off on a project to bring more fossil fuels out of the ground? Because the pipeline’s builders suddenly invited Bill Clinton to speak at some functions. And they paid him stratospheric honoraria.1

Schweitzer, yesterday, laid it on the line. The Clinton Foundation investigation must go on. If it stops, other politicians will know they can do the same thing and get away with it.

Certain tax and other filings already show the Clinton Foundation is less than charitable. It has a ten percent efficiency in spending on true acts of charity. Many of those acts have turned out to be worthless.

Charitable inefficiency

And what does the Clinton Foundation spend money on? Chelsea Clinton’s wedding, for one thing. And many other lavish luxuries for the Clintons. The government normally shuts down charities who spend their money on their own executives. But the Clinton Foundation remains—though maybe not for long. The Daily Caller, the day after the election, said the Clinton Foundation might not survive. Once Donald Trump takes over as President, he can investigate. Experts in law enforcement and charity regulation expect him to. (In fact, the FBI are already investigating. The Director might not want this investigation. But his field agents are in mutiny and are investigating without his say-so.)

Political murder

Suspicions of the murder of inconvenient former associates and other witnesses have dogged the Clintons since Bill Clinton was President.

One hundred fourteen potential witnesses, according to one account, have died under suspicious circumstances before they could testify against the Clintons. This might include at least one FBI agent.

One could lay that aside, on the theory that one cannot prosecute serial murder without definite proof in at least one or two cases. But clear and convincing evidence suggests Hillary Clinton gave Bellerophontic orders to a United States Ambassador. J. Christopher Stevens was doing a private job for the Clintons in Benghazi. (This job might have involved running guns to ISIS.) Terrorists attacked the consular annex and killed Stevens and three who tried to protect him. Hillary Clinton, by the most reliable accounts, gave every would-be rescuer an order to stand down.

Slander and worse in foreign policy

In foreign policy, Hillary Clinton has played her most dangerous game. She openly accused the government of the Russian Federation of “cracking” her private server—which she should never have had. Julian Assange, head of Wikileaks, denied his material came from any Russian source. But even before then, Vladimir Putin, Russia’s current “strong man,” seemed to put his country on a high nuclear-war alert. Tales came out of his canceling a trip to France, running civil-defense drills, and having bunkers enough to shelter the entire population of Moscow.

Three days before he election, Assange gave another electrifying interview. According to him, Hillary Clinton has taken money from Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Morocco, and other places. Assange cited an e-mail, from her account, saying the Islamic State gets its money from the Saudis and Qataris. And so does the Clinton Foundation, to a great extent.

Other things

Rumors abound about other things Hillary Clinton has done or taken part in. CNAV cannot confirm any of them. In any case, repeating them would make CNAV NSFW. As bad as these alleged offenses are, the offenses CNAV has listed above are worse. These offenses affect the policy of the Government of the United States. Many of them are tantamount to treason.2

What Trump should do

Ann Coulter, half in jest, suggested Donald Trump should concern himself, for 100 days, with one project. “Build the wall,” she says. All joking aside, Donald Trump himself has hinted at many ambitious things, from repealing Obamacare to reopening the 9/11 investigation.

But he must follow through on the pledge (some say threat) he made, at the second debate, to “look into your situation.” And not merely because this was his Citizen Kane moment. But because Hillary Clinton remains a threat to the freedom and security of Americans as long as she stays a free agent.

Trump can do many things once he becomes President and has the law-enforcement professionals at his orders. First he should send word, with his ambassador to Ecuador, to Julian Assange: Come at once to the United States. He is a material witness against Hillary Clinton. The material he has can probably vindicate him of any charge of causing the deaths of American agents. (Hillary Clinton is far more likely than he to be responsible for that.)

Assange might ask for a grant of immunity from prosecution. If he’s smart, he’ll ask for political asylum, so the Swedes can’t touch him either.3 Trump could make a good deal by granting both.

A special prosecutor

Then Donald Trump can do exactly as he said he would do: appoint a special prosecutor.4 That person should have a brief to investigate anything and everything having to do with Hillary Clinton or anyone connected to her.

The object here is not “to see her do the ‘perp walk.’” The object is a public trial, to examine the evidence and to determine who is responsible and culpable. Only then will America become, once again, a country of laws, which no one stands above.

Judgment in the case of Hillary Clinton should include, at least:

  • Expulsion from the United States Senate.
  • Forbidding her ever again to hold office of honor, trust or profit under the United States or any of them.
  • Forfeiture of her assets, and those of the Clinton Foundation. Perhaps the ostensible intended objects of its charity can make better use of the money than can she.

This will divest her of her power. Trump must see to this, to protect himself and the rest of us from this known, and provable, criminal.


1 This also shows that Hillary Clinton often promised but could not deliver even to her donors. Barack Obama killed the Keystone XL Pipeline deal after Hillary Clinton signed off on it. Did he act because the global warming alarmists bent his ear? Or did he act to please Warren Buffet? Buffet owns the railroads that carry most of the oil the pipeline would have carried. In any event, Hillary Clinton promised the moon to a high roller. And she could not deliver. Or maybe never intended to.

2 Why hasn’t Julian Assange said anything about Donald Trump, Gary Johnson, Jill Stein, or Evan McMullin? Because he had nothing on them. He said so, the day of the election.

3 They want to charge him with a sexual offense. The history and reach of the Clintons gives one reason to doubt that charge and suspect the Clintons of trumping it up. A John Podesta e-mail showed Hillary Clinton suborned a woman to accuse Donald Trump of statutory rape against her. Why should we not believe they made Julian Assange a target of a similar libel?

4 WorldNetDaily has a petition asking Trump to do just that. Trump also will need another director of the FBI. CNAV would like to nominate Joseph Arpaio, formerly Sheriff of Maricopa County, Arizona.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Editor-in-chief at | + posts

Terry A. Hurlbut has been a student of politics, philosophy, and science for more than 35 years. He is a graduate of Yale College and has served as a physician-level laboratory administrator in a 250-bed community hospital. He also is a serious student of the Bible, is conversant in its two primary original languages, and has followed the creation-science movement closely since 1993.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Notify of

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Wanda Stewart

Wanda Stewart liked this on Facebook.

Christi Thompson

Christi Thompson liked this on Facebook.

Matthew Farag

Matthew Farag liked this on Facebook.

Robert Hurt

Robert Hurt liked this on Facebook.

Cathy Maida

Cathy Maida liked this on Facebook.

Tim Schmitt

lock her up

[…] Hillary Clinton would already be serving time for her financial and other chicanery. Donald Trump had his Citizen Kane moment in the second […]


Would love your thoughts, please comment.x