Category Archives: Clinton Fraud

The ‘Who’ Lobbying for the ObamaTrade Deal

Posted on by

Hillary cant play the middle on the Trans-Pacific Partnership talks and deal, as John Podesta left the White House to work for Hillary’s campaign and yet he is a paid lobbyist for advancing the deal.

Bipartisan Agreement: Foreign Governments Pay Former Senate Leaders to Sell TPP

In a scene all too typical in present day Washington, the culmination of Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations, along with the push for passage of related legislation such as Trade Promotion Authority (or Fast Track) have set off a lobbying frenzy.

While liberal organizations and members of Congress deride the TPP as the biggest boondoggle since NAFTA and President Obama defends it as “the most progressive trade treaty ever,” the influence peddlers who populate K Street see opportunity.

Policy makers aren’t simply facing a lobbying barrage from the typical slate of domestic interest groups. Foreign governments are running sophisticated operations to influence Congress and gather intelligence in Washington as the negotiations proceed.

This is now “par for the course,” according to Lydia Dennett, an investigator at the Project on Government Oversight [POGO], a nonprofit watchdog. “If a certain country wants trade legislation that will be beneficial to them they can hire an American lobbyist to get them the access the need.”

Leading the way among TPP nations seeking to sway American policy makers is Japan, which signed up former Democratic Leader Tom Daschle’s firm as well as well-connected public relations firm DCI.

We won’t know the full extent of Mr. Daschle or DCI’s work on behalf of Japan until their next series of Foreign Agent Registration Act [FARA] disclosure reports are filed with the Department of Justice in a few months.

One concern among good government advocates is that a lack of timely FARA reporting could obfuscate some of the lobbying going on at the behest of foreign clients. A 2014 report by POGO found that 46 percent of the reports were filed late. Enforcement is rare for these relatively minor infractions and the DOJ’s website states it “seeks to obtain voluntary compliance with the statute.” Ms. Dennett called on Congress to add civil penalties to the FARA Act that to encourage more aggressive enforcement of its statutes.

Common Cause, an open government advocacy organization, sounded similar alarms. “Our concern is in ensuring that the process is fully transparent and that the laws barring foreign nationals from contributing, donating or spending funds in connection with any federal, state, or local election in the United States, either directly or indirectly, are fully observed,” said Dale Eisman, the organization’s communications director.

While we don’t yet know the extent of Mr. Daschle or DCI’s work, filings from other firms working on behalf of Japan, paint a picture of the country’s efforts.

For much of their direct lobbying Japan relies on Akin, Gump, Strauss Hauer & Feld, whom they paid $388,000 during the most recent six-month reporting period. In that time the firm’s lobbyists contacted Congressional offices at least sixty times and engaged in at least eight exchanges with the United States Trade Representative’s office specifically focused on the TPP, TPA, and related issues. Seventeen of those contacts were with one particular staffer, Kaitlin Sighinolfi, a trade policy advisor for Republican Louisiana Congressman Charles Boustany.

Mr. Boustany’s office did not respond to a request for comment on these contacts, but they are likely related to the desire of Louisiana farmers to lower tariff barriers, enabling them to export more of goods to Japan.

Japan’s team also includes Hogan Lovells, which was paid $216,895.29 during the last six-month reporting period. The firm’s FARA filing states that the law firm “advises and represents the foreign principal [Japan] on general diplomatic representation, laws, regulations, policies, proposed congressional measures, treaties and other international agreements, and actions by the U.S. Congress, Executive Branch, U.S. Government agencies and certain state and local governments.”

Prior to recruiting Mr. Daschle, the highest profile lobbyist on Japan’s team was Tony Podesta, brother of Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman John Podesta. His firm, The Podesta Group, receives $15,000 per month to counsel Japan on U.S. policy.

Another TPP country, Vietnam, received more hands-on service from the Podesta Group—paying them $180,000 during the same six-month period. On Vietnam’s behalf, the firm made contact with government officials at least 90 times. They also engaged with media outlets ranging from The New York Times to the Food Network on behalf of Japan.

Working at the behest of foreign governments is a lucrative practice area for the Podesta Group which billed a total of $2,096,666.05 to more than nine overseas governments, including Azerbaijan, India, Iraq, Korea, Somalia, and Hong Kong during the last six month of 2014.

Japan’s aggressive lobbying efforts in Washington are part of an overall increase in foreign nations seeking to purchase influence in Washington. According to Frank Samolis, co-chair of the international trade group at DC behemoth Squire Patton Boggs, there has been a measurable “uptick [in business under the Foreign Agent Registration Act] due to TPA and related bills in Congress.”

Mr. Samolis is a veteran of Capitol Hill trade fights. He previously worked on behalf of Korea, Columbia, and Peru during their trade negotiations with the United States. He now represents Temasek, Singapore’s Sovereign Wealth Fund, which paid his firm $132,055.72 during the last six-month filing period, as the country engaged in TPP talks.

SPB represents multiple foreign principals with an interest in the TPP including, China, which paid the firm $392,014.17 over the same period.

Mr. Samolis explained that when working on behalf of foreign powers, lobbyists “need to find a confluence with [United States government] interests wherever possible.”

“US policy makers understand that a client is foreign, so they are aware and need to be convinced how [the clients] interest comports with [United States government] objectives,” Samolis told me. “For that, we need to make a strong legal and policy case, backed up by the facts.”

Insiders like Mr. Samolis play another critical role. “At least half of my time is devoted to providing intel on US developments and likely future actions,” he stated.

This points to the reason Japan and other countries are eager to hire former senior members of Congress and well-connected insiders. The ability to glean information from former colleagues and contacts is just as important as their skill at influencing legislative and administrative outcomes. This expertise is particularly crucial during complex foreign negotiations requiring approval of a finicky and partisan Congress.

Mr. Samolis’ firm has a platoon of ex-lawmakers including former Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott, a Republican, along with former Louisiana Sen. John Breaux, a Democrat. Pocketing money from foreign governments seems to one of the few things both parties agree on.

With numerous trade treaties on the horizon, Mr. Samolis and his colleagues’ workload is only likely to increase because ultimately foreign governments spend significant amounts of money on lobbying and relate activists for the same reason that domestic corporations and other interest groups do. They know in Washington, DC influence can be bought.

*** The Unions are against the bill.

WASHINGTON –  Union-backed Democrats launched a last-ditch effort Thursday to scuttle President Barack Obama’s trade agenda by sacrificing a favored program of their own that retrains workers displaced by international trade.

The retraining program is linked to the Democrats’ real target: legislation to help Obama advance multi-nation trade agreements. In hopes of bringing down the whole package, which they say imperils jobs at home, numerous House Democrats said they would vote Friday against the retraining measure.

There is bi-partisan legislators opposition on this authorization which is the first part of the vote. Read here to determine who stands where and why.

 

 

 

WH Ignoring Iran’s $6Billion for Syria Iraq Terror

Posted on by

John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, Susan Rice, Tony Blinken, Tom Donilon, Samantha Power, Valerie Jarrett and Barack Obama are but part of the team that knew and ignored the billions for years that Iran used to support Bashir al Assad’s terror in Syria and later Iraq. The Obama regime has been gifting Iran money by lifting sanctions for the sake of humanitarian purposes in Iran when the money was not used for that but rather to support the Assad tyrannical power in Syria. Sanction waivers under the Obama regime regarding Iran have been common since the Iranian nuclear talks began.

Now the question is will this White House and State Department come clean and walk away from the P5+1 Iranian nuclear talks? This betrayal is historic.

Iran Spends Billions to Prop Up Assad

By Eli Lake
Iran is spending billions of dollars a year to prop up the Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad, according to the U.N.’s envoy to Syria and other outside experts. These estimates are far higher than what the Barack Obama administration, busy negotiating a nuclear deal with the Tehran government, has implied Iran spends on its policy to destabilize the Middle East.

On Monday, a spokeswoman for the U.N. special envoy for Syria, Staffan de Mistura, told me that the envoy estimates Iran spends $6 billion annually on Assad’s government. Other experts I spoke to put the number even higher. Nadim Shehadi, the director of the Fares Center for Eastern Mediterranean Studies at Tufts University, said his research shows that Iran spent between $14 and $15 billion in military and economic aid to the Damascus regime in 2012 and 2013, even though Iran’s banks and businesses were cut off from the international financial system.

Such figures undermine recent claims from Obama and his top officials suggesting that Iran spends a relative pittance to challenge U.S. interests and allies in the region. While the administration has never disclosed its own estimates on how much Iran spends to back Syria and other allies in the Middle East, Obama himself has played down the financial dimension of the regime’s support.

“The great danger that the region has faced from Iran is not because they have so much money. Their budget — their military budget is $15 billion compared to $150 billion for the Gulf States,” he said in an interview last week with Israel’s Channel 2.

But experts see it another way. The Christian Science Monitor last month reported that de Mistura told a think tank in Washington that Iran was spending three times its official military budget–$35 billion annually–to support Assad in Syria. When asked about that earlier event, Jessy Chahine, the spokeswoman for de Mistura, e-mailed me: “The Special Envoy has estimated Iran spends $6 billion annually on supporting the Assad regime in Syria. So it’s $6 billion not $35 billion.”

Either way, that figure is significant. Many members of Congress and close U.S. regional allies have raised concerns that Iran will see a windfall of cash as a condition of any nuclear deal it signs this summer. Obama himself has said there is at least $150 billion worth of Iranian money being held in overseas banks as part of the crippling sanctions. If Iran spends billions of its limited resources today to support its proxies in the Middle East, it would follow that it will spend even more once sanctions are lifted.

The Obama administration disagrees. It says the amount Iran spends on mischief in the region is so low that any future sanctions relief will not make a difference in its behavior. Speaking at a conference this weekend sponsored by the Jerusalem Post, Treasury Secretary Jack Lew said that even as Iran’s economy has suffered from sanctions in recent years, it has been able to maintain its “small” level of assistance to terrorists and other proxies. “The unfortunate truth remains that the cost of this support is sufficiently small, that we will need to remain vigilant with or without a nuclear deal to use our other tools to deter the funding of terror and regional destabilization,” he said.

Shehadi and other experts acknowledged that their figures were estimates, because the Tehran regime does not publicize budgets for its Revolutionary Guard Corps or the full subsidies it provides to allies. Nonetheless, Shehadi says, Iranian support to Syria today is substantial, especially when factoring in the line of credit, oil subsidies and other kinds of economic assistance Iran provides the Syrian regime.

Steven Heydemann, who was the vice president for applied research on conflict at the U.S. Institute of Peace until last month, told me earlier this year that the value of Iranian oil transfers, lines of credit, military personnel costs and subsidies for weapons for the Syrian government was likely between $3.5 and $4 billion annually. He said that did not factor in how much Iran spent on supporting Hezbollah and other militias fighting Assad’s opponents in Syria. Heydamann said he estimated the total support from Iran for Assad would be between $15 and $20 billion annually.

A Pentagon report released last week was quite clear about what Iran hopes to achieve with its spending: “Iran has not substantively changed its national security and military strategies over the past year. However, Tehran has adjusted its approach to achieve its enduring objectives, by increasing its diplomatic outreach and decreasing its bellicose rhetoric.” The report says Iran’s strategy is intended to preserve its Islamic system of governance, protect it from outside threats, attain economic prosperity and “establish Iran as the dominant regional power.”

If Iran ends up accepting a deal on its nuclear program, it will see an infusion of cash to pursue that regional agenda. Shehadi said this fits a pattern for dictatorships in the Middle East: they preoccupy the international community with proliferation issues while, behind the scene, they continue to commit atrocities.

“In the early 1990s, Saddam Hussein was massacring his people and we were worried about the weapons inspectors,” Shehadi said. “Bashar al-Assad did that too. He kept us busy with chemical weapons when he massacred his people. Iran is keeping us busy with a nuclear deal and we are giving them carte blanche in Syria and the region.”

 

Hillary’s State Dept: Prostitution and Drug Ring

Posted on by

Shall we start with U.S. Ambassador to Belgium, Howard Gutman, who solicited minors and prostitutes?

And the cover-up? A detailed summary is here along with a 36 page report.

Hillary cant play stupid on this one…if she would even get close to media, some would perhaps ask her some epic questions. There is no spin on this, read on to learn why. There are two whistleblowers with the ‘goods’.

State Department Inspector General officials edited out passages of a high-profile report in 2013 that could have embarrassed Hillary Clinton just days before she quit President Obama’s Cabinet.

The officials excised details of a cover up of misconduct by Clinton’s security team.

The edits raise concerns that investigators were subjected to “undue influence” from agency officials.

The Washington Examiner obtained earlier drafts of the report which differ markedly from the final version. References to specific cases in which high-level State officials intervened and descriptions of the extent and frequency of those interventions appear in several early drafts but were later eliminated.

The unexplained gaps in the final version, and the removal of passages that would have damaged the State Department, call into question the independence of Harold Geisel, who was State’s temporary inspector general throughout Clinton’s four years at the head of the department. More detail here.

*** Yet in 2013, it was common knowledge around the agency and in the media.

The US state department failed to fully investigate allegations against its officials involving prostitution, a drug ring and assault, media report.

A leaked internal document obtained by CBS News said staff protecting ex-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton regularly solicited sex workers.

The reports also allege a drug ring may have provided narcotics to state department contractors in Iraq.

But it is suggested officials may have tried to cover up the misconduct.

According to CBS, a draft copy of a state department inspector general’s report alleges eight specific examples of improper behaviour by US officials.

‘Criminal behavior’

Some allegations were suppressed, according to CBS, such as an investigation into an unnamed ambassador who was said to be visiting prostitutes in a public park.

The document cites allegations that the envoy “routinely ditched his protective security detail in order to solicit sexual favors from both prostitutes and minor children”.

It went on to say that the ambassador’s security team and other colleagues “were well aware of the behavior”, according to the reports.

CBS reports that attempts to look into the allegations were stopped in their tracks.

According to the broadcaster, the copy of the draft report said: “Hindering such cases calls into question the integrity of the investigative process, can result in counterintelligence vulnerabilities and can allow criminal behavior to continue.”

CNN also reports that the inspector general found an attempt to investigate claims that a drug ring near the US embassy in Baghdad was supplying illegal substances to state department security contractors was stopped.

It was also alleged that a state department security official in Beirut “engaged in sexual assaults” against foreign nationals hired as embassy guards. The same person was accused of similar attacks during previous foreign postings, according to CNN.

Meanwhile, members of Mrs Clinton’s security detail solicited prostitutes on official trips, a problem the leaked report is said to have described as “endemic”.

Aurelia Fedenisn, who was an investigator with the state department’s inspector general, told CBS: “We also uncovered several allegations of criminal wrongdoing in cases, some of which never became cases.”

The inspector general’s office has reportedly asked external law enforcement experts to look at the way the state department handles complaints of serious misconduct by its senior staff.

Findings are expected later in the summer.

State department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said: “We take allegations of misconduct seriously and we investigate thoroughly.

“All cases mentioned in the CBS report were thoroughly investigated and under investigation, and the department continues to take action.”

*** Enter the real details of key Wikileaks cables. Hillary got the goods on everyone, including her own staff. Cheryl Mills, who actually has power of attorney for both Clintons likely has an interesting file stored on that pesky server.

What makes Clinton’s sleuthing unique is the paper trail that documents her spying-on-their-diplomats-with-our-diplomat orders, a paper trail that is now being splashed around the world on the Web and printed in top newspapers. No matter what sort of noises Clinton makes about how the disclosures are “an attack on America” and “the international community,” as she did today, she’s become the issue. She’ll never be an effective negotiator with diplomats who refuse to forgive her exuberances, and even foreign diplomats who do forgive her will still regard her as the symbol of an overreaching United States. Diplomacy is about face, and the only way for other nations to save face will be to give them Clinton’s scalp.

How embarrassing are the WikiLeaks leaks? A secret cable from April 2009 that went out under Clinton’s name instructed State Department officials to collect the “biometric data,” including “fingerprints, facial images, DNA, and iris scans,” of African leaders. Another secret cable directed American diplomats posted around the world, including the United Nations, to obtain passwords, personal encryption keys, credit card numbers, frequent flyer account numbers, and other data connected to diplomats. As the Guardian puts it, the cables “reveal how the US uses its embassies as part of a global espionage network.”

Additionally, Clinton’s State Department specifically targeted United Nations officials and diplomats posted to the United Nations. Among the targeted were Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and permanent security-council representatives from China, Russia, France, and the United Kingdom, as this secret cable from July 2009 lays out. The State Department also sought biometric information on North Korean diplomats, security-council permanent representatives, “key UN officials,” and other diplomats at the United Nations.

Of course, U.S. diplomats have always collected information, no matter where posted. And, as the New York Times reports today, the United States has routinely placed intelligence officers abroad under the diplomatic cover of a State Department posting. But the price of a diplomat (or undercover intelligence officer) overstepping to engage in what the host nation considers to be spying has always been expulsion or, as illustrated earlier this month in Norway, a demand that the U.S. ambassador explain the “spying.”

As the Times and other publications report, international treaties make the United Nations a spy-free zone—or at least they’re supposed to make it spy-free. “In one 2004 episode, a British official revealed that the United States and Britain eavesdropped on Secretary General Kofi Annan in the weeks before the invasion of Iraq in 2003,” the Times reports. Anne Applebaum writes in Slate today that nobody should be honestly horrified at the image of the United States spying in the United Nations. Nobody in the diplomatic community is. But that doesn’t mean that they’re not going to take advantage of the moment to demand retribution that will shame the high-and-mighty United States.

There is no way that the new WikiLeaks leaks don’t leave Hillary Clinton holding the smoking gun. The time for her departure may come next week or next month, but sooner or later, the weakened and humiliated secretary of state will have to pay.

******

Permanent disclosure: Slate is owned by the Washington Post Co.)

 

Meet Bernard Aronson and Venezuela Blackouts

Posted on by

Bernard Aronson, a Goldman Sachs insider with assignments in Latin America. It is especially cool that Barack Obama calls on Aronson to end the rebel fighting in Latin America. Or how about using Bernard to normalize Cuba with Hillary Clinton’s approval? John Kerry uses Aronson to handle matters with Columbia.

The intrigue begins. This is rather convoluted, so be patient as you read on.

Aronson has deep ties to Thomas Pritzker of Hyatt hotels fame same as Penny Pritzker who is Barack Obama’s Secretary of Commerce.

The Pritzker dynasty looks like this:

Family tree: Pritzker is the son of Jay Pritzker, founder of Hyatt Hotels Corporation.
Areas of interest:
nonprofits

College: Pritzker received a B.A. from Claremont Men’s College, and an MBA and J.D. from the University of Chicago.

Report: billionaires collect farm subsidies
Fifty billionaires were direct or indirect recipients of farm subsidies, according to a report by the nonprofit Environmental Working Group.
November 7, 2013
The Pritzker fortune and the Obama campaign
Tonight, President Obama will speak at a ceremony honoring this year’s winner of the Pritzker Architecture Prize, named for the family that built a fortune with the Hyatt Hotels chain.
Back to the intrigue and Bernard Aronson….

Bernard W. Aronson past relationships:

Jimmy Carter – speechwriter
Freedom House – trustee
Global Hyatt Corporation – director
Goldman Sachs Group Inc. – international adviser
Hyatt Hotels Corporation – director
Mariner Energy Inc. – director
Walter F. Mondale – speechwriter
U.S. Department of State – assistant secretary
Now Venezuela:
There were power black-outs in Venezuela? But why? Answer here.
Derwick Associates:
Defendants are U.S. residents who have amassed enormous fortunes through an illicit scheme to secure energy-industry contracts in Venezuela for their various U.S.-based companies, Derwick Associates USA LLC and Derwick Associates Corporation (together with these

companies’  predecessors, successors, assigns and affiliates, “Derwick  
Associates” ). Known in the press as the “ChavezKids, ” “BoliBoys,”
 and “the  mafiosi of the Fifth Republic ,”  Defendants Leopoldo Alejandro Betancourt Lopez (“Betancourt”),  Pedro Jose Trebbau Lopez (“Trebbau”),  and Francisco D’Agostino  Casado (“D’Agostino)
 have profited wildly from their ongoing illegal bribery scheme designed to exploit for their personal financial gain the corrupt and anti-democratic Chavez regime.
+++ 
By: Dan Rosenau
Venezuela/U.S. energy sector scandal involving J.P. Morgan, ProEnergy Services (partially-owned by Obama appointee), Derwick AssociatesThe U.S. Department of the Treasury’s FINCEN recently announced that Banco Privada d’Andorra was favored by criminal enterprises from Russia, China, and Venezuela. In the case of Venezuela, government officials reportedly deposited more than $4Bn into personal accounts—most of it siphoned off from PDVSA, the state-owned oil company of Venezuela.

I’m painfully aware of the embezzlement and overbilling involving Venezuela’s energy sector given that, until recently, I was employed at Sedalia, Missouri-based ProEnergy Services. ProEnergy was the contractor responsible for the construction of one dozen power plants in deals involving gross overbilling, multiple offshore transactions, and a murky association with Derwick Associates, a Venezuelan start-up with zero experience in power plant construction. I’m making available here more than 10GB of material directly from the company hard drive. The metadata on each document can be traced directly to Pro-Energy’s computers. My hope is that “crowdsourcing” the enclosed data will allow interested parties to assist in exposing a multi-billion dollar fraud.

From 2009-2012 ProEnergy billed to the tune of $2Bn almost all of it flowing from a single client: Derwick Associates. Our company sold more than $1Bn in turbines (most of them used or refurbished–but sold as new) to Derwick which then resold them hours later at a significant mark-up to the government of Venezuela through entities such as their electricity ministry, their Guyanese state enterprise CVG, their state-owned oil company PDVSA, and the SIDOR iron-ore producer.  In addition to turbine sales to Derwick, ProEnergy built the power plants that Derwick marketed as their own and for which both companies overbilled the Venezuelan government in the hundreds of millions of dollars.  According to the Wall Street Journal, Derwick is now under criminal investigation by federal authorities and by local authorities in New York. (This prompted Derwick to immediately hire Adam Kauffmann, former head of the Manhattan DA investigation division. Kauffmann is already representing several Venezuelan government officials who embezzled hundreds of millions).

Working in ProEnergy’s sales department, I learned our company had hit paydirt when a group of connected Venezuelans chose to ignore Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) such as Rolls Royce, Pratt & Whitney, and General Electric and instead used ProEnergy as a middleman. In other words, a middleman used a middleman.

Inexplicably, the IT department at ProEnergy had blocked access to internet sites when I googled  “Derwick” and “corruption.” This stirred my curiosity and so I explored the company’s shared computer drive for the term “Derwick.”  What I found there shocked me: dozens of proposals to Derwick for generators, for power plants, for upgrades to those power plants. It was odd given that ProEnergy has never built a power plant in the United States (ProEnergy fails to meet American standards and so has offices in places like Angola, Argentina, Pakistan, and Venezuela).  Shockingly, ProEnergy’s proposals reflected a mark-up ranging from 20-74%.  In my industry, profit margin usually hovers between 2 and 5%. At these prices someone was being ripped off.  ProEnergy was overbilling Derwick.

My sense of disbelief only grew the more I read. I discovered document drafts on Derwick letterhead. ProEnergy was writing the proposals and preparing the invoices that Derwick sent Venezuelan clients for the exact same equipment described in the proposals to Derwick from ProEnergy. This included actual invoices from Derwick to Venezuela’s state-owned enterprises like PDVSA. These invoices, the Microsoft Word documents indicated, were created on ProEnergy computers in Sedalia. On some of the Derwick invoices, the bank wiring instructions went to bank accounts belonging to ProEnergy. Some to offshore bank Davos International and others to JP Morgan in New York.

When I learned that the owners of Derwick were barely out of college and friendly with the son of the Electricity Minister of Venezuela I realized why ProEnergy had prepared the Derwick invoices: because our 20-something Venezuelan clients lacked the technical know-how. After all, how does a person draft an invoice for a product with no knowledge about the item in question?

Remarkably, these invoices prepared by ProEnergy and purportedly from Derwick also revealed mammoth markups over and above the prices that ProEnergy charged Derwick.  So, an item like a set of three FT8 Swift Pac turbines bought by ProEnergy from Pratt and Whitney for $67.5M were sold one day later for $78M to Derwick who then sold it two days after that to Venezuela for $97.5 million.  And so in four days an item with a retail cost of $67.5M had $30M added by ProEnergy and by Derwick Associates. In another instance three Rolls Royce Trent 60 turbines originally sourced for $66M from Rolls Royce were sold to Derwick for $79.3M, which in turn resold them hours later for $97.5M, adding another $31M profit to the bottom line of both Derwick and ProEnergy. Like these transactions there are scores of instances on every item imaginable—from spare parts to construction costs, from turbines to generators, from transformers to transportation costs and employee training.  I stopped counting the total on the invoices after two billion dollars.

One colleague told me that the FBI had visited ProEnergy on several occasions. I was tortured, week after week, knowing that ProEnergy was robbing a nation where poverty and crime are rampant.  I spent sleepless nights agonizing about what to do.  Company-wide layoffs solved my immediate dilemma. The truth is that with no more Venezuelan cash flow, ProEnergy suffered a long-standing cash crunch. So much so that Washington, D.C.’s Acon Investments, made a capital injection into ProEnergy.  Acon is run by Obama appointee to Latin America Bernard Aronson.

Months went by and I could not shake the disgust of what transpired.  I blew the whistle by sharing the information with celebrated Venezuelan investigative reporter Cesar Batiz who verified the material and allowed a blogger to post some of it on Scribd.

The sensational revelations about money-laundering activities of Venezuelan energy officials at the Andorran bank would explain why Venezuelan state officials agreed to overpay Derwick and ProEnergy. The men addressed in the letters (written by ProEnergy and) and sent by Derwick are accountholders exposed to criminal charges in Spain for amassing illegal fortunes in “consulting fees.”

It is disheartening that American energy executives would display such appalling greed and be so quick to partake in the looting of Venezuela.  My hope is that by going public with the 10GB of information more of my former colleagues will come forward and blow the whistle on one of the most troubling international scandals in Venezuelan (and Missouri) history. I’ve learned that Derwick Associates has persecuted numerous bloggers in Venezuela and abroad as well as mainstream journalists including having stories about their misdeeds “spiked” at the Wall Street Journal, Forbes, the Economist, Huffington Post, and the Miami Herald.

Then there is Davos and JP Morgan. Sheesh…ties that bind in covert actions.

Blumenthal Benghazi Testimony Date Set

Posted on by

Without media, behind closed doors…but under oath?

A Interim Benghazi investigation report dated May 2015 by the Congressional Benghazi committee is found here.

Hillary Clinton’s next appearance before the committee is delayed due to the State Department slow walking document request production.

“The State Department has told the Committee that it cannot certify that it has turned over all documents responsive to the Committee’s request regarding the former Secretary’s emails. Absent access to the server that housed the former Secretary’s private emails, the Committee has no way to verify the assertions: (1) the former Secretary has produced the full universe of emails related to Benghazi and Libya; and (2) the server has been wiped clean and is currently void of any data that may reflect any email sent or received during her tenure as Secretary of State, including during the relevant time frame….,” the report said.

Because the State Department has been slow rolling the release of the Hillary emails, a judge determined the exact dates for release for which the State Department must comply.

“It is difficult to conduct a fact-centric congressional investigation when the Administration impedes the Committee’s progress by repeatedly failing to answer the Committee’s requests or to provide information in a timely manner,” wrote the South Carolina Republican.

“The largest impediment to being able to write the final, definitive accounting of what happened before, during and after the terrorist attacks in Benghazi is the Executive Branch itself.”

But Gowdy, who also has asked Clinton to appear before his panel, credits his committee with uncovering thousands of new emails and documents related to the administration’s handling of the attack that left four Americans dead.

Gowdy also said the panel wants to interview at least 60 more current and former officials, including Clinton, Susan Rice, Patrick Kennedy and three of Clinton’s top aides during her tenure as secretary of State: Cheryl Mills, Jake Sullivan and Huma Abedin.

Clinton has indicated she is willing to appear before the panel, but only once. Gowdy and the committee have requested two sessions, and Gowdy has also insisted she turn over to a third party the personal email server she used to store emails while at State.

Democrats on the GOP-controlled committee again on Friday dismissed the probe as little more than an attempt to smear the former secretary of State amid her presidential campaign.

“At every turn, the Select Committee comes up with a new excuse to further delay its work and then blames its glacial pace on someone else,” said ranking member Elijah E. Cummings, D-Md., in a statement. “Like the investigation itself, this memo is short on substance, short on accomplishments, and short on a plan for how to get this investigation done.”

Ex-Clinton aide Sidney Blumenthal to testify in private on Benghazi

A former aide to Hillary Clinton has agreed to testify in private later this month before the House panel investigating the 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi.

Sidney Blumenthal, a long-time associate of the Clinton family, will appear for a closed-door witness deposition on June 16 at 10 a.m. The deposition with the House Select Committee on Benghazi will come just three days after Hillary Clinton launches her presidential campaign during a rally in New York.

The State Department made about 300 emails public last month that showed Clinton received about 25 memos from Blumenthal regarding Libya while she was secretary, including one that blamed the 2012 Benghazi attack on a “sacrilegious” Internet video depicting the prophet Mohammad. Blumenthal sent another memo the next day citing “sensitive sources” who believed it was an act of terrorism.

Blumenthal, who previously worked for former President Bill Clinton’s administration, most recently worked as an employee of the Clinton Foundation and served as an informal adviser to Hillary Clinton when she was in President Obama’s Cabinet. He also had business transactions with Libya’s transitional government.

The emails released to the public showed that Clinton forwarded some of Blumenthal’s missives to her senior staff at the State Department without identifying him as the source.

One exchange between Clinton aide Jake Sullivan and Ambassador Christopher Stevens, who died in the Benghazi attack, referred to Blumenthal as “HRC friend.”

The Benghazi panel, which is chaired by Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), has not yet announced when it will call Hillary Clinton to testify.

Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.), the Benghazi Committee’s top Democrat, has accused the GOP of tactics “straight out the partisan playbook of discredited Republican investigations” by leaking news of the subpoena before it was served and using two armed U.S. marshals to deliver it to Blumenthal.

Clinton downplayed Blumenthal’s influence on her tenure as Secretary of State when asked about the relationship last month.

“I have many, many old friends, and I always think that it’s important when you get into politics to have friends that you had before you were in politics and to understand what’s on their minds. He’s been a friend of mine for a long time — he sent me unsolicited emails, which I passed on in some instances, and I see that that’s just part of the give-and-take,” Clinton told reporters.

The Clinton Foundation paid Blumenthal about $10,000 a month while he worked for the organization, according to reports.