Wednesday, May 10, 2017 by JD Heyes
During then-Republican presidential nominee Donald J. Trump’s campaign, his Democratic rival, Hillary Clinton, was the subject of an ongoing criminal investigation by the FBI for her use of a private, unsecured email server to exchange classified information. At a number of his rallies, Trump led chants of, “Lock her up!” – many of his supporters believing, as FBI Director James Comey appeared to as well, that she was indeed guilty of violating laws governing the handling of classified materials.
Trump himself even said he would appoint a special prosecutor to investigate Clinton at a campaign rally in Panama City in October, before the election. However, that pledge appears to be on hold, at least for the moment.
But should it be? Not if you take into account recent revelations from WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, whose site recently released another trove of emails and documents showing Clinton may be criminally culpable for her handling of Libya. (RELATED: The Only Thing Hillary Clinton Has Done For Military Veterans Is Get Some Of Them Killed)
As reported by The Free Thought Project, Assange has fought against criticism and threats of legal action from U.S. politicians on both sides of the aisle, with Democrats and Republicans blaming him, and not guilty U.S. intelligence agencies or their own oversight shortcomings, for releasing information showing malfeasance on the part of the U.S. government. As such, he frequently points out the hypocrisy of Congress and U.S. government officials condemning him while still claiming to support the constitutionally enshrined right to freedom of the press.
Clinton, in particular, has an ax to grind with Assange, for it was WikiLeaks that exposed her precious Democratic National Committee and beloved close advisor, John Podesta, as crooked and politically motivated to skew the nomination in her favor and against her chief primary opponent, Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt. For the record, Clinton and her allies are upset at the release of the data; no one has ever claimed the information leaked was false.
In any event, in a recent interview with RT, which is admittedly is a Russian government-controlled media outlet, Assange labeled Clinton the “butcher of Libya” after she called his organization “Russian WikiLeaks.”
During a recent appearance where Clinton discussed her election loss, she claimed that she takes “absolute personal responsibility” – right before she goes on to blame “Russian WikiLeaks” and Comey for her loss. The combination of WikiLeaks damning revelations (again, none of which Clinton has refuted) and Comey’s late-October notification to Congress his agency was examining new email evidence discovered after the case was closed over the summer “raised doubts in the minds of people inclined to vote for me, but got scared off.”
In other words, she lost because of WikiLeaks and Comey, not because she was a terrible candidate who got beaten by a much better candidate.
In a tweet, Assange noted: “Two lies in one screenshot: the butcher of Libya – Hillary Clinton – blames “Russian WikiLeaks” while sitting in front of #SheBringsPeace sign.”
— Julian Assange (@JulianAssange) May 3, 2017
The truth is this: Clinton’s foreign policy throughout the Middle East was an unmitigated, amateurish disaster, claims of her being ‘the smartest woman ever’ notwithstanding. Every Middle Eastern nation, save Egypt, collapsed in anarchy and war after her policies were enacted, and now there are a number of failed Middle East states – Libya, Syria and Yemen, to name three – as a result.
As for Libya, that was all Clinton. Prior to the “Day of Rage” there Feb. 17, 2011, the country had a budget surplus of 8.7 percent of GDP the year before, and oil production of 1.8 million barrels per day, set to reach its goal of 3 million bpd. (RELATED: Goodbye, Obama, you “sleeper cell” traitor and enemy of America… (you won’t be missed)
Before Clinton’s intervention and success in getting Obama to support the rebels with air power, the country was stable, secular and invaluable in terms of providing intelligence on post-9/11 terrorist activities. After the rebels destroyed the government and all functional vestiges of it, GDP plunged nearly 42 percent, oil production by 80 percent, and generated a national deficit of 17.1 percent of the economy – all in 2011 alone, The National Interest reported.
Before the Benghazi disaster, which Clinton and Obama lied about afterward, there were a number of opportunities to pursue valid ceasefire agreements to prevent further bloodshed. But Clinton intervened and pursued a policy of revolution instead, one backed by her boss. Today, four factions are competing to lead the country.
Without a doubt, Clinton should be investigated and, if the evidence proves, put on trial. Let a jury decide her innocence, not Barack Obama and Loretta Lynch.
Learn more at Clinton.news.
J.D. Heyes is a senior writer for NaturalNews.com and NewsTarget.com, as well as editor of The National Sentinel.