The Illicit Scheme to Clear Hillary Clinton and Frame Donald Trump
The world trembled at the sound of the 2016 Presidential Elections.
Hillary Clinton was defeated, and framed Donald J. Trump of colluding with the Russians, and accused him of being a collaborator.
What led to this?
Let’s dig up the mystery and see what was going on behind the curtains.
Who Should Read “The Russia Hoax”? And Why?
Let’s take an apolitical stance here, and for argument’s sake, try not to take sides in a political sense.
The Russian Hoax is mainly a revelation related to the whole mainstream narrative tilted against the current president of the United States.
As such, we encourage everyone with the slightest interest in US politics, to give it a read.
About Gregg Jarrett
Gregg Jarrett is an American news anchor, author, and an attorney who joined Fox News in 2002.
He voiced concern over the alleged crimes and violations committed by Trump’s administration during the Elections.
Gregg called out Hillary for her email controversy and compared the FBI to the KGB (Former Intelligence Gathering and Counter-Espionage Organization within the Soviet Union).
“The Russia Hoax PDF Summary”
You must have been living under a rock unless you’ve heard the rumor spreading like wildfire, that Donald Trump mingled with the Russians to defeat Hillary in the 2016 Presidential Elections.
It all started with Hillary’s private server and email scandal.
Many wonder, why Hillary Clinton wanted to keep her communications as a secretary of state on a private server?
Probably because that way, she could avoid applying the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) in its full extent. Before taking office, she made a pledge of sustaining full transparency and vowed to embrace and fulfill all acts from the FOIA.
A sequence of events arouse suspicion, and the FBI launched an investigation to see whether passing classified documents was handled carelessly.
They came to a startling discovery when they realized that Obama has been acting negligently as well. Exposing Hillary would have probably brought Obama’s egregious violation of privacy and security to light, as well.
Hillary continued to act irresponsibly and would often breach security protocols, but no one dared to oppose her.
Even the State Department security personnel had to intervene because Hillary had a habit of keeping her BlackBerry in an area where hackers could easily penetrate and gather valuable intel on US policies.
In 2014, the House Benghazi Committee demanded that Hillary Clinton gave access to her emails which she reluctantly accepted.
It was later discovered that Hillary withheld more than 30k emails, that she claimed were of more personal nature.
Many of the shared ones, were classified but that didn’t prevent her from using an insecure server.
There’s no doubt that Hillary was aware of breaking the federal law and neglecting the State regulations.
After being scolded and pinned down, Hillary decided to delete more than thirty thousand of her emails, even though she received a congressional subpoena to preserve them.
This is by many regarded as a clear obstruction of a federal investigation and a violation of the Federal Records Act.
Many believe; among them is former independent counsel Joseph diGenova that Hillary didn’t want to abide by the rules.
Despite holding a Juris Doctor from Yale Law School, she acted in direct confrontation with the law and should have been charged with embezzling government documents.
A sufficient amount of evidence shows that Clinton felt invulnerable and above the regulations.
Despite breaking multiple federal laws, Hillary defended the utility of the personal server as a tool for convenience.
On July 5th, 2016, James Comey held a conference to unravel the violations of federal law committed by “someone.”
The entire country believed that Hillary’s political career is about to receive a hard blow.
But that’s not what happened.
After dismissing Hillary’s notion that she didn’t know which files are classified, and exposing the threat to National Security, James Comey refused to proceed with the prosecution and said the following:
Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.
When the evidence laid out showcases violations of security protocols, it should be regarded as a basis for the Department of Justice to step in.
James Comey had no grounds whatsoever to make such statements and give preferential treatment to Hillary.
The American public might also remember the prosecutions of Berger, Petraeus, Deutch, Nishimura, and Saucier whose crimes and transgressions resembled the Clinton case.
But none of these individuals who had access to classified and top-secret documents served time behind bars.
For their negligence, they were denied other privileges.
Much of the information behind FBI director James Comey’s decision was concealed, and criminal charges were not pressed against former Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton.
Some even argue that the FBI (some people in it) were directly linked to the exoneration of Hillary despite the meticulous case laid out against her.
Despite the irrefutable evidence that strongly upheld the claim that Hillary’s misdemeanor threatened the country’s security, she was let off the hook.
The American public, especially those leaning to the right of the political spectrum, were kept in the dark.
Some FBI agents and lawyers bent over backward to conceal as much as possible regarding the damage she has caused and kept her away from testifying to Congress.
According to Gregg, the word “truth” is, by all means, a distant concept to Hillary and always has been.
Back in 2010, under Obama’s administration, the Russian Federation tried to obtain uranium assets and have them shipped to Moscow. The FBI was keenly aware of the strategies used by the Russians which involved bribery, racketeering, extortion, but decided to keep their mouths shut.
The evidence was considerable, and there was no doubt that venal individuals had a role in facilitating the transaction.
It was not until William Douglas Campbell exposed the means by which the Russians planned to seize American uranium, that the whole case came to a clearing.
Campbell also discovered that Russia was assisting Iran in its attempt to obtain Nuclear warheads.
In light of this new evidence, the American Public and Congress became curious regarding the involvement of Clintons in the whole deal-making process.
Apparently, Hillary Clinton used its position to confer special privileges to the Russian Federation in exchange for millions of dollars in donations to her foundation.
After the loss in 2016, she realized that foreign companies wouldn’t be too keen in proceeding with the donations, which is what she was fearful of.
As it turns out, Hillary Clinton put the blame on Trump for colluding with the Russians.
With no substantial evidence to back it up, the FBI launched an investigation.
It was clearly a hoax contrived by corrupt officials within the FBI and the Department of Justice.
As Gregg puts it – perhaps they were motivated by the Stalinist way of judgment: Show me the man, and I’ll find you the crime.
The method of disparaging a presidential candidate was nothing new in modern-day warfare, and it was driven by the political dislike of American institutions.
The ICA report found no evidence whatsoever that Russia had successfully influenced US elections by discrediting Hillary and elevating Trump.
When Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, a Democrat from Nevada sent a letter to James Comey, claiming that evidence confirming Trump’s alleged collusion continues to pile up, all hell broke loose. This was the most bizarre and fraudulent case ever brought up in recent American Politics.
Donald Trump was basically accused of being a Russian agent, working against American interests.
Congresswoman Maxine Waters, renowned in the political sphere for her intemperate attitude, promised that she would unwrap Trump’s agenda that might undermine the pillars of US democracy.
What followed was silence as she offered nothing to support her statements.
The Intelligence Services once pressed to the wall, had to admit that there was no proof of collusion, despite the narrative continuously pushed forward by the mainstream media.
What was the fuss all about?
Apparently, Trump talked to the Russians, as if it is a crime to talk to someone.
More than one thousand US businesses currently operate in Russia, and the Government itself has signed trade deals on a bilateral basis.
A throwback to 2008, when Barack Obama paid a visit to Germany before the Presidential Elections, no one said that he was conspiring with the Germans.
But, that didn’t stop anyone from fabricating a dossier to be used against Donald Trump.
And yet the FBI decided to criminalize and prosecute protected speech, while at the same time, they saw nothing wrong in conferring benefits to foreign legal bodies (including governments) in exchange for money.
John Brennan, former head of the CIA, decided not to take a critical view of the dossier nor vouch for its authenticity. As a person wielding a lot of power and influence, his job was to dive deep into the alleged offenses, according to which Donald J. Trump had the upper hand in the Presidental Elections.
That’s not what he opted to do, instead, he leaned on untrustworthy sources which were not credible in the least.
When turned upside down, the “dossier” was literally a collection of rumors, agendas, plots, conspiracies, suspicion, speculation but no evidence. The false statements gained momentum with the help of the mainstream media, but they lacked validity.
Upon reading the content, Brennan surely must have known that it’s by no means trustworthy.
Due to the nature of his job, he was supposed to be an apolitical voice, but instead, he chose a more biased approach.
Let’s look at it this way.
In order to search a house, you need a warrant issued by a judge. The same applies when the government wants to keep an eye on someone and penetrate its personal life. You need to provide reliable information that is obtained from credible sources before you receive the go-ahead.
But that surely wasn’t the case with the Clintons.
Hillary partnered with the DNC, and through their lawyer, Elias solicited negative research on Trump and his campaign. The goal was to set the stage for other accusations while claiming that it’s only opposition research.
What followed was probably the biggest turnaround in American Politics, when Donald Trump became the 45th President of the US.
Special Counsel investigation that commenced in 2017, also known as the Mueller probe found no evidence whatsoever regarding the Russian interference in US elections.
The Witch Hunt was brought to a halt.
Key Lessons from “The Russia Hoax”
1. Focus on trust, not on deceit
2. Lay out your program
3. Accept the outcome
Focus on trust, not on deceit
The political game is not for those with the faint of heart.
However, living by the rule – ends justify the means, will do you no good on the long run; which is what happened to the Democrats.
Lay out your program
When you want people to vote for you, your whole narrative must be built around your Party’s plans, not someone else’s inclinations.
Perhaps, the next Democratic candidate should keep that in mind.
Accept the outcome
Prior to the big event, Hillary said on numerous occasions that Donald Trump must accept the results of the elections.
And yet, it was the Democrats who failed to do so.
Try to keep your word, and you’ll improve your ratings among the people.
Like this summary? We’d Like to invite you to download our free 12 min app, for more amazing summaries and audiobooks.
“The Russia Hoax Quotes”On its face, the dossier was a preposterous collection of rumors, innuendos, supposition, and wild speculation. Click To Tweet As mentioned earlier, officials in the Hillary Clinton campaign also met with Kislyak, according to a Kremlin spokesman. However, almost no one accused Clinton of colluding with Russia. Click To Tweet The unverified dossier was leaked to the press and, by the time Trump was sworn in as president, the mainstream media had its “collusion” tale. It was off to the races as journalists propagated their nonstop narrative that Trump was… Click To Tweet During his visit to Moscow, Bill met with Russian president Vladimir Putin. No one called this collusion. Click To Tweet There was not a whiff of credible evidence to legally justify the probe. So, in a deception worthy of a solid street hustle, Comey labeled it a counterintelligence matter. Click To Tweet
Our Critical Review
Well, it would be for the best if everyone waited for evidence before making any rash judgments.
These days, we kind of have abandoned the core principle of democracy – the presumption of innocence and turned to a more authoritarian way of looking at the world.
That must change, and we must embrace “Innocent until proven Guilty” because if we do not, tyranny might take over.
Just a regular guy with a knack for writing, and digital marketing.
Emir is the Head of Content and SEO at 12Min. In his spare time, he loves to meditate and play soccer.