JEWISH KING JESUS IS COMING AT THE RAPTURE FOR US IN THE CLOUDS-DON'T MISS IT FOR THE WORLD.THE BIBLE TAKEN LITERALLY- WHEN THE PLAIN SENSE MAKES GOOD SENSE-SEEK NO OTHER SENSE-LEST YOU END UP IN NONSENSE.GET SAVED NOW- CALL ON JESUS TODAY.THE ONLY SAVIOR OF THE WHOLE EARTH - NO OTHER. 1 COR 15:23-JESUS THE FIRST FRUITS-CHRISTIANS RAPTURED TO JESUS-FIRST FRUITS OF THE SPIRIT-23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ’s at his coming.ROMANS 8:23 And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.(THE PRE-TRIB RAPTURE)
INSTEAD OF THE WATERGATE TAPES.ITS THE BIDENS HUNTER AND CHINA JOE UKRAINE 5 MILLION DOLLAR TAPES.
WELL
IT SEEMS THERE HAPPENS TO BE 15 TAPES OF HUNTER BIDEN AND 2 TAPES OF
JOE BIDEN WHEELING DEALING FOR 5 MILLION DOLLARS FOR UKRAINE FAVOURS IN
WASHINGTON. NOW WE KNOW WHY BIDEN IS DESTROYING AMERICAS MILITARY TO
FEED LAP DOG ZELENSKI BILLION UPON BILLIONS OF CASH AND WEAPONS. ONLY
FOR THE UKRAINIAN PUPPETS OR SOLDIERS TO DIE AT THE HANDS OF RUSSIA. NOW
WE KNOW WHY THE WAR IS GOING ON SO LONG. UKRAINE HAS THE BLACK MAIL ON
BIDENS. AND IF CHINA JOE WOULD NOT SEND CASH AND WEAPONS TO UKRAINE.
OOPS THOSE TAPES WOULD BE LEAKED ANONAMOUSLY TO THE MEDIA.
SO
TRUMP GOES TO COURT AT 3PM IN MIAMI. INNOCENTLY CHARGED FOR DOING
NOTHING WRONG. WHILE OBAMA MAMA WHO FED IRAN A PLANE LOAD OF BILLIONS IN
CASH. AND BIDEN IS A PUPPET TO UKRAINE FOR THE BILLIONS HIM AND HUNTER
TOOK FOR GIVING UKRAINE FREE CASH AND WEAPONS UNDER THE GUISE OF HELPING
UKRAINE WIN THE WAR AGAINST THE UKRAINE. SO TRUMP GETS NAILED FOR DOING
NOTHING. WHILE OBAMA MAMA AND CHINA JOE AND HUNTER BIDEN GET AWAY WITH
REAL CRIMINAL ACTS RIGHT OUT IN THE OPEN SECRET. AMERICA IS A LIBERAL
DICTATORSHIP OF LIES AND CORRUPTION.
Donald Trump set to
appear in Miami court on charges he stole classified documents-The
former president has described the prosecution as politically motivated
and an attempt to stop him running for the White House again.Mark
Stone-US correspondent @Stone_SkyNews-Tuesday 13 June 2023 07:18, UK
Donald
Trump is set to appear in Miami court on charges he stole classified
documents and lied to block efforts to get them back.Donald Trump has
spent the night at his golf club in Doral just outside Miami ahead of
his historic federal court appearance.The former president will appear
at the Wilkie D. Ferguson Court House at 3pm (8pm UK time) on charges he
stole classified documents and lied to block efforts to get them
back.Trump touched down in his private plane on Monday afternoon.A small
group of supporters gathered outside the Trump National Doral Miami
golf resort, cheering as his motorcade drove past.He faces 37 felony
counts over documents found at Mar-a-Lago, his Florida home, as well as
claims he obstructed justice and made false statements.Pictures released
by the Department of Justice as part of its unsealed indictment showed
boxes of documents stacked inside his Mar-a-Lago estate, including in a
bathroom.Details on nuclear weapons programmes, potential
vulnerabilities of the US and its allies, and plans for retaliatory
military attacks were in some of the documents, according to
prosecutors.Roughly 13,000 documents were seized in raids on the
property nearly a year ago. One hundred of them were marked as
classified.Prosecutors say Trump's hoarding of papers from his time as
president jeopardised national security - and the Espionage Act charges
carry the prospect of up to 20 years in jail.Writing on his Truth Social
site before boarding his flight, he said: "I hope the entire country is
watching what the radical left are doing to America."However some of Mr
Trump's Republican challengers for the presidential nomination appear
to be shifting their tone.Speaking to Fox News, Nikki Haley said: "If
this indictment is true... President Trump was incredibly reckless with
our national security... This puts all of our military men and women in
danger."It is the first federal indictment of a former president, but Mr
Trump claims he is being persecuted in an attempt to stop him becoming
president again in 2024.Polls suggest his supporters overwhelmingly
believe the charges are politically motivated.In a weekend CBS News poll
of Republican voters, just 12% said their biggest concern about the
indictment was the fact that the documents posed a national security
risk.More than three-quarters (76%) said their biggest concern was that
the indictment is politically motivated.Protesters in Miami raised
allegations about President Biden's mishandling of classified documents,
which remain under investigation, and the Hilary Clinton email
scandal.But speaking to Sky News, a former federal prosecutor who almost
prosecuted Richard Nixon over Watergate, and declined to represent
Donald Trump last year said there were distinct differences between the
cases."The big difference is cooperation," Jon Sale said."When President
Trump was served a subpoena last spring, if he had told his lawyer,
'Look, I want to turn over everything; I want to comply with the
subpoena. Do a diligent search - everything we have, turn it over to the
grand jury', then you and I wouldn't be here today."Miami police's
chief said he was expecting up to 50,000 people on the streets for
today's hearing and that downtown roads could be closed if necessary.The
former president will be fingerprinted. He will have a mugshot taken
but it will not be released and there will be no cameras of any sort in
the courtroom itself. He will have the charges read out to him and enter
a plea. The case will then be adjourned.Mr Trump, who turns 77 this
week, is also due to go on trial next March over separate claims that he
falsified business records to conceal damaging information and unlawful
activity. And there's another case against him in Georgia for his
alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election.Scheduling for the three
trials could mean that this case is not completed before the November
2024 presidential election.
Did Joe Biden sell out America? 4
things to know about Democrats' claims-The FBI has been dragging its
feet on the investigation into Joe Biden and his family's possible
influence peddling. Here's what we're doing to get the facts-By Rep.
James Comer | Fox News
PROGRAMMING ALERT: Watch House Oversight
Committee Chairman James Comer discuss this topic and more on "The
Ingraham Angle" on Tuesday, June 13 at 10 pm ET.For the past year, the
House Oversight Committee, where I serve as chairman, has been
investigating the Biden family’s influence peddling schemes that
generated millions of dollars for the Biden family. We are following the
facts. We need to know whether these deals threaten national security
and if President Joe Biden is compromised.The Oversight Committee has
already obtained thousands of pages of financial records related to the
Biden family and has traced millions of dollars from China and Romania
to the Biden family and their associates. Americans are asking: What is
the Biden family business? They don’t sell anything, they don’t have
lucrative assets generating income, yet they receive millions from
around the globe. What are they selling? Influence and access.President
Biden has repeatedly lied to the American people about his family’s
business dealings. Now, Americans are left wondering if Joe Biden was
involved with them.EXCLUSIVE: PERSON ALLEGING BIDEN CRIMINAL BRIBERY
SCHEME IS 'HIGHLY CREDIBLE' FBI SOURCE USED SINCE OBAMA ADMIN: SOURCEA
highly credible whistleblower provided disclosures to Sen. Chuck
Grassley, R-Iowa, that the FBI has an unclassified, FBI-generated record
known as an FD-1023 form. The document memorializes a confidential
human source’s conversations with a foreign national who claimed to have
bribed then-Vice President Biden in exchange for certain actions.Last
month, Sen. Grassley and I demanded the FBI produce this unclassified
record and I issued a subpoena to obtain it. We need to know what, if
anything, the FBI did to verify the serious allegations contained within
this record. The American people need to know if President Biden sold
out the United States to make money for himself.-President Joe
Biden-President Joe Biden departs the White House on Jan. 19, 2023. (Win
McNamee/Getty Images)-Unfortunately, the premier agency that is
supposed to investigate crimes appears to have run defense for the
Bidens. FBI Director Christopher Wray refused for weeks to acknowledge
the existence of the FD-1023 form and failed to produce it. Once
Director Wray finally confirmed the record’s existence, the FBI still
failed to comply with a congressional subpoena. FBI WILLING TO ALLOW ALL
HOUSE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE MEMBERS TO VIEW BIDEN DOC ALLEGING CRIMINAL
SCHEME: SOURCE-We made it clear: If the FBI didn’t hand over this form,
the House Oversight Committee would begin contempt of Congress
proceedings. The FBI was finally forced to cooperate and is allowing all
members of the House Oversight Committee to review the record in person
and producing additional documents.Allowing all Oversight Committee
members to review this record is a big victory and an important step
toward conducting oversight of the FBI and holding it accountable to the
American people. Congress must investigate the allegations contained in
this record. REPUBLICAN SENATORS CALL FOR FBI DIRECTOR CHRISTOPHER
WRAY'S RESIGNATION-Here is what we know:The FBI confirmed multiple times
during our briefing that the information contained within the record is
currently being used in an ongoing investigation.The confidential human
source who provided information about then-Vice President Biden being
involved in a criminal bribery scheme is a trusted, highly credible
informant who has been used by the FBI for years and paid six
figures.The allegations contained within the record track closely with
the thousands of pages of financial records obtained by the Oversight
Committee. The Bidens have a pattern of using their network of over 20
limited liability companies and complicated financial transactions to
hide the sources of the money and evade detection.Disinformation from
the left reinforces the need for the FBI to produce this unclassified
FD-1023 record to the House Oversight Committee. Despite growing
evidence, the White House and Democrats are lying to the American people
about the allegations contained within this record and what was done
with it. Let me set the record straight:First, Democrats are peddling
conspiracy theories and alleging the FD-1023 record is based on
secondhand hearsay. The FD-1023 record was generated by a trusted
confidential source who was working with the FBI for over ten
years.Second, Democrats claim that the record is part of the documents
Rudy Giuliani provided the FBI in January 2020. That’s not true. The
FD-1023 document stands on its own and contains information from the
FBI’s confidential human source dating back to another FD-1023 generated
in 2017.Third, the FD-1023 was generated by the FBI in June 2020 based
on other FBI records dating back to 2017. The Department of Justice
conducted an assessment on separate material provided to the Department
in January 2020, and this assessment was closed in August 2020.
Democrats are claiming the DOJ investigated the FD-1023 and then took no
action, but the FBI has refused to answer what information was part of
their assessment. How could the DOJ have conducted a credible, thorough
investigation in four weeks? It’s not possible.And last, let’s be very
clear: The allegations in the record are not closed. FBI officials and
former Attorney General William Barr have refuted Democrats’ lies that
the Biden bribery investigation was closed. "On the contrary, it was
sent to Delaware for further investigation," former Attorney General
Barr said this week on the record.Republicans are going to follow the
facts and ensure accountability for the American people.Americans have
lost trust in the FBI’s ability to enforce the law impartially and
demand answers, transparency, and accountability.The Oversight Committee
will continue to follow the facts and ensure accountability for the
American people. Democrats’ lies and deterrents will not distract us
from this goal.Republican James Comer represents Kentucky's 1st
congressional district in the United States House of Representatives
where he is chairman of the Committee on Oversight and Reform.
Was
Obama’s $1.7 billion cash deal with Iran prohibited by U.S. law?
Analysis by Glenn Kessler-The Fact Checker-March 1, 2018 at 3:00 a.m.
EST
This will be an unusual fact check. Essentially, we are
fact-checking The Fact Checker.Like many things these days, it all
started with a tweet. President Trump tweeted about the $1.7 billion in
cash that the Obama administration sent to Iran and wondered why there
had not been an investigation.So we tweeted in response:Then Omri Ceren,
managing director of the Israel Project, tweeted that we were wrong:So
we asked for evidence of his tweet and said we would examine it. (He
sent this article.) The dust-up also merited an article in the Tablet,
suggesting The Fact Checker had fallen for Obama administration spin.We
went into this exercise with an open mind, and here’s what we
discovered.The Facts-Contrary to Trump’s tweet, this $1.7 billion
transaction was investigated by Congress. We reviewed transcripts of
congressional testimony, a Treasury inspector general’s report and
various letters between lawmakers and the Obama administration; we also
interviewed national-security lawyers and former Obama administration
officials.The situation certainly looks unusual on its face. On Jan. 17,
2016, the day after four American detainees, including The Washington
Post’s Jason Rezaian, were released, a jumbo jet carrying $400 million
in euros, Swiss francs and other currencies landed in Tehran. That money
purportedly was partial payment of an outstanding claim by Iran for
U.S. military equipment that was never delivered. Soon after, $1.3
billion in cash followed.The cash transaction was controversial even
within the administration. The Wall Street Journal reported that the
head of the Justice Department’s national-security division objected
that it would look like a ransom payment. State Department officials
insisted the negotiations over the claims and detainees were not
connected but came together at the same time, with the cash payment used
as “leverage” to ensure the release of detainees.Now to the substance
of our inquiry: Was it against the law to transfer the money to Iran
until accounts were settled regarding victims of terrorism? Before the
1979 revolution, Iran under the shah was reputedly the biggest buyer of
U.S. military equipment, depositing funds for potential deals in a
Defense Department account. When Iran seized U.S. Embassy staffers as
hostages, the military sales account was frozen. The issue — and other
outstanding claims — has been litigated ever since through a claims
tribunal established in The Hague. Some of the money in the account was
used to pay American companies whose contracts were canceled, but by
2000, about $400 million was left in what was known as the Foreign
Military Sales (FMS) Trust Fund account.That is when the families of
victims of Iranian-linked terrorism who had won court cases stepped in.
They were unable to force Iran to pay the judgments, but Stephen Flatow,
the father of a woman killed in a 1995 militant attack in Gaza,
discovered the FMS trust fund and sought payment from it.Congress passed
a law in 2000 under which the U.S. Treasury could pay compensatory
judgments (plus a portion of punitive damages) issued for claims against
Iran (as well as Cuba). All told, about $400 million was paid out in
relation to court judgments against Iran covered by the law and
subsequent legislation in 2002 — about the equivalent of what was in the
FMS trust fund. That is because the amount in the FMS trust fund
essentially provided a cap on what would be paid out to those judgment
holders who were eligible for compensation under the law. (The family of
Alisa Flatow, for instance, received $26 million, which was used to
establish a scholarship fund.)The law, Victims of Trafficking and
Violence Protection Act (VTVPA), said that upon payment, the claims of
those individual judgment holders were “subrogated” to the United
States. That means the claims of those individuals essentially became
the claims of the United States government vis-a-vis the foreign state —
in this case, Iran.This is the actual text, with the key portions
highlighted: “(c) SUBROGATION. — Upon payment under subsection (a) with
respect to payments in connection with a Foreign Military Sales Program
account, the United States shall be fully subrogated, to the extent of
the payments, to all rights of the person paid under that subsection
against the debtor foreign state. The President shall pursue these
subrogated rights as claims or offsets of the United States in
appropriate ways, including any negotiation process which precedes the
normalization of relations between the foreign state designated as a
state sponsor of terrorism and the United States, except that no funds
shall be paid to Iran, or released to Iran, from property blocked under
the International Emergency Economic Powers Act or from the Foreign
Military Sales Fund, until such subrogated claims have been dealt with
to the satisfaction of the United States.”When lawmakers quizzed State
Department lawyer Lisa Grosh in 2016, they were clearly puzzled by this
provision, and you can see the two sides talking past each
other.THEN-REP. MICK MULVANEY (R-S.C.): “At the end of that after the
subrogation, they are not Iran’s funds anymore; they are the United
States government’s funds, aren’t they?” GROSH: “No, the funds have
remained in the trust fund as Iranian moneys in the trust fund. The
United States Congress appropriated $400 million to be paid to these
individuals —”MULVANEY: “Instead of taking the money out of the FMS
trust fund, but by doing so we thus own the $400 million.”GROSH: “No,
that’s incorrect, I’m sorry.”Here’s the explanation: Just because there
are $400 million in subrogated claims, it does not mean that Iran
actually must return that money to the United States. The text of the
law provides for a lot of wiggle room: U.S. officials “shall pursue
these subrogated rights as claims or offsets of the United States in
appropriate ways, including any negotiation process … until such
subrogated claims have been dealt with to the satisfaction of the United
States.” Obama officials say that is what happened, with the final
amount of the settlement — $400 million plus $1.3 billion in interest —
taking into account the subrogated claims.John B. Bellinger, chief State
Department lawyer under Condoleezza Rice and before that legal adviser
to the National Security Council for President George W. Bush, reviewed
the law and the congressional exchange over the clause at our
request.“The VTVPA does not say that the USG could never release the FMS
funds to Iran; it says the funds could not be released to Iran ‘until
such subrogated claims have been dealt with to the satisfaction of the
United States,’” he said. “I assume that when the Obama administration
paid the FMS funds plus interest to Iran, they concluded that this VTVPA
provision was satisfied.”The Treasury inspector general (IG) examined
the payments and reported on Nov. 10, 2016 that it had received verbal
assurance from the Justice Department “that the settlement comports with
the VTVPA.” In its semiannual report to Congress in March 2017, the IG
said the payment was made “after receiving necessary information and
authorizations from the-Departments of Justice and State.”The Tablet
article raised questions about the size of the interest penalty — $1.3
billion — and called on Treasury to release all documents related to the
payment of the claim, such as the computation of the amount of interest
allegedly owed. (The Treasury IG report indicated that the State
Department relied on a calculation involving the annual prime lending
rate and simple interest method, which seems out of the ordinary.) We
made a request to Treasury for the information, but a Treasury spokesman
declined to provide it because of the ongoing litigation between the
United States and Iran.Obama administration officials had claimed that
without a deal with Iran, The Hague tribunal might have imposed an even
higher interest penalty on the United States.Bellinger agreed that that
was a concern. “There was a significant risk, based on its judgments in
recent years, the Iran-U.S. Claims Tribunal would have issued a decision
awarding a larger amount to Iran,” he said. “If the tribunal had done
that, and the U.S. government was then unwilling or unable to pay the
award, the U.S. would have violated its obligations under the Algiers
Accords.” He said “it was prudent to settle the claims, even if it
required the U.S. to take the highly unpalatable action of making a
payment to Iran.” (The Algiers Accords were agreements signed by the
United States and Iran in January 1981 to resolve the Iran hostage
crisis.)The State Department has noted that under The Hague process,
Iran has paid out more than $2.5 billion in awards to U.S. nationals and
companies. With a few exceptions, the major outstanding claims concern
Iran against the United States, heightening the sensitivity of U.S.
officials about discussing the issue. Much as Trump dislikes Obama’s
dealings with Iran, releasing the documents now might raise the cost to
U.S. taxpayers later.As for why the transfer was made in cash, given
that the previous claims reached through The Hague tribunal were paid
via wire, U.S. officials have cited the impact of increasingly tough
sanctions imposed on Iran. If time was of the essence, cash was the best
way to go.The Pinocchio Test-Regular readers know we have been willing
to award ourselves Pinocchios if we get something incorrect.