By Jiri Valenta with Leni Friedman Valenta

                              Unafraid, Bi-partisan, Uphold U.S. and Freedom

FBI Director James Comey’s dramatic, deus ex machina before the 2016 election clarifies we are again facing a constitutional crisis as during Watergate. Then, FBI Deputy Director Mark Felt secretly revolted against President Richard Nixon, becoming reporter Bob Woodward’s “Deep Throat,” and eventually helping to bring down a lawless presidency

At his July press conference, Comey presented enough evidence to indict Hillary for gross negligence in handling national security classified material and many expected that would happen. However, Comey, an honorable man like Felt earlier, learned that our popular president, Barack Obama, a passionate advocate of Hillary as his successor, had communicated with her 18 times on her insecure, illegal server and lied about it! Even more than during Watergate, there developed an ongoing battle between the FBI and the Justice Department, whose political appointees seek to protect Hillary and without whom there can be no indictment.

Also of importance is that this is the second indictment seriously considered against Hillary. In the late 1990’s, as former First Lady she was involved in a crooked Whitewater real estate deal with two former Rose Law Firm partners and facing charges. One of her partners, Webb Hubbel, Associate Attorney General in Clinton’s administration, was indicted and went to jail. The other, Vince Foster, facing testimony over Whitewater files in his charge at Clinton’s White House, ended up dead in a Washington Park. It was declared suicide, but many still wonder why no other motivation was considered.

Yet, another factor in this case was significant pressure from Comey’s patriotic and irate agents, flooding his desk with a growing pile of resignations.Thus, nine days before the general election, when opportunity belatedly knocked, Comey bravely reopened the investigation. The chance came as his people were investigating the Clinton Foundation and an unrelated affair concerning Arthur Wiener, the husband of Hillary’s principle aide, Huma Abedin. Searching for evidence about Wiener’s sexting a minor, they came across a windfall -- thousands of State Department e-mails downloaded by Abedin on her husband’s computer.

Comey also faced complaints from Hillary’s DNC and campaign manager, John Podesta, that Donald Trump, had presumed ties with Russia and was a national security risk. The available evidence suggests that Russia’s foreign intelligence, with its cybernetic department, facilitated the hacking of the Wiki-leaks by sponsoring the key actor in this process; one Julain Assange.. A mysterious, Australian-born hacker, Assange is still holed up in the Ecuador Embassy of London to escape extradition for a presumed sexual offense. Repeatedly, Hillary has cited 17 U.S. intelligence agencies who believe the Russians were behind the Wiki-leaks. Yet, so far there is no proof whatsoever of any Trump ties with the Kremlin.   

Below we seek to answer key questions nobody has raised or answered. If Russia has furnished hacked e-mails to Assange, why has Hillary Clinton been chosen as the cybernetic target of Putin’s foreign intelligence? And what should be the response of the U.S. Government and of course, the American people? How should they vote on November 8th?

Benghazi-gate Bigger than Watergate:

 First, be aware that Benghazi-gate, where a surprise attack on the U.S. Mission and adjacent CIA annex in Benghazi took the lives of four Americans, isn’t over.They died because Hillary, despite many requests from one of the dead, Ambassador Chris Stevens, failed to adequately secure the consulate. Then, during the attack, Obama and Hillary declined to rescue those who died. Concerns about the impact of the attack on the upcoming 2012 election were put before their lives.

President Obama and Hillary then engaged in a variety of deceptions to cover up what really happened at Benghazi, including the famous, anti-Muslim video tale. But that’s only the iceberg’s misleading tip. The “consulate” and its adjacent CIA annex were really part of a U.S. secret mission whose objective has not been officially clarified until now.

Hillary’s War in Libya

 Let’s begin with Hillary’s 2011 war in Libya. If not for Hillary’s Wiki-leaked e-mails, historians would have had to accept at least some of Hillary’s memoir account that this war and the demise of Libyan dictator, Moammar Gaddafi, came about because of Gaddafi’s plans to massacre his own people. Hillary’s principle aides, U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice, and National Security aide Samantha Powers, passionately argued, “We had a responsibility to protect civilians…”

What massacre? There was civil war, yes, but no massacre. That was the sales pitch used, above all, to get the Russians to abstain on a NATO intervention at the U.N. Security Council. It was delivered to them by Rice along with Hillary adviser, Sid Blumenthal’s artful tale that Gaddafi was distributing viagra to his troops for mass rape.

The true U.S. and French motives, exposed by Hillary’s leaked e-mails and other sources, however were of an economic nature-- Libya’s oil, and Gaddafi’s huge reserves of gold and silver. But for Hillary it was the opportunity for making money, partly by pay for play with Middle East governments seeking influential connections, but also by arming the Libyan insurgents. Thus she entered into secret dealings with arms dealers in Qatar, Saudi Arabia and other countries as well as with Clinton allies in western firms with the object of arming the anti-Gaddafi rebels and killing Gaddafi.

 “We came, we saw, he died,” chuckled  Hillary with a reporter.

 Mention of humanitarian concerns, however, was absent both in the Wiki-leaks and in Hillary's TV presentation as the news came Gaddafi has been killed. “We came, we saw, he died,” she chuckled with a reporter. Never mind that many of the Libyan rebels she armed, were,or became, as Gaddafi had warned, committed jihadists. Recall that Hillary was formerly one of the most enthusiastic Democratic senators supporting the Iraq war. Small wonder that she basically repeated in Libya, George W. Bush’s and Condi Rice’s nation building mistake in Iraq. A better policy would have been to seek national reconciliation as long as that option existed. And it did. It was proposed by Dr. Kilari Anand Paul, a prominent Indian diplomat, who found Gaddafi wholly amenable to a peace deal.

 But Hillary was not moved by reports that Gaddafi had given up his research for WMD and was working with the U.S. to fight Islamic terrorism. As we learned, she was furious at him for supporting Barack Obama instead of her in the 2008 U.S. election. Then the Libyan strong man refused to donate to the Clinton Foundation as requested by her proxies. Thus he had to die.   

 With the well advertised killing of Gaddafi, as Paul pointed out, Hillary had taught Middle East rulers an important Maffia lesson. You pay for play with the Godmother, so make sure you pay your tribute to the Clinton Foundation. Of course, with Gaddafi dead, Hillary did not play Godmother. While visiting Benghazi she exulted, “I am proud to stand here on the soil of a free Libya ..." whose opportunity now was, "... to stand as a model for democracy and freedom” [in the Middle East.]

 But in Libya, as in Iraq earlier, with no legacy of Western democratic political culture, all hell exploded. Many Hillary-backed rebels-turned jihadists, under the cover of a Western intervention, tortured and massacred Gaddafi loyalists and foreign workers. The huge Muslim exodus to Italy ensued. There is nothing to suggest that Hillary had given thought to the consequences of either Saddam’s or Gaddafi’s deaths. Some democracy and freedom!

  Convinced they were Tricked in Libya, Russians Decide to Defend Assad 

Hillary wasn’t finished. Now she turned America’s foreign policy apparatus towards Syria. CIA Director General David Petraeus was ordered to design and implement a plan for arms transfer from Libya to “our” rebels in Syria. But some insiders justifiably wondered who “our” rebels really were.

Petraeus developed a working relationship with Ambassador Chris Stevens, also working on the arms transfer. A man with extensive experience in Libya, he had spent months with the Libyan resistance in Benghazi. Was Hillary asked this question during the closed Congressional hearings, “Isn’t it true that a partly damaged document found in the U.S. consulate showed that the last person Ambassador Stevens met this day in the city was the Turkish consul -- a military intelligence operator with whom he discussed an arms  shipment?

Meanwhile, something dramatic changed in the Kremlin. Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates recalled it well. “...as the list of [NATO] bombing targets steadily grew, it became very clear … that NATO was not on any "humanitarian" mission, but intent on getting rid of Qaddafi. Convinced they had been tricked, the Russians would subsequently block any such future resolutions, including against President Bashar al-Assad in Syria.” [Emphasis added]   .

Are you surprised that the Kremlin was not going to make the same mistake in Syria that befell Iraq and Libya?Why would they, when they had developed supporting naval facilities at the Port of Tartus and the backing for a planned development of oil pipelines from Iran through Syria to Russia’s European markets?.

Did we Almost Get Into Open War With Syria Based Perhaps on False Intelligence?

 Nor were conventional arms all that was being supplied to the anti-Assad rebels. Pulitzer prize-winning reporter Seymour Hersh, in reports largely banned in the U.S, concluded there was a great likelihood that the 8/21/13 use of sarin gas against civilians, was not by Assad’s army, but by the Islamist rebels with the help of Turkish intelligence. The sarin tested as being from Libya. Curiously too, the attack happened while U.N. inspectors were visiting Damascus. As pointed out by a prominent Russian specialist we know, this was surely not a good time for Assad’s army to launch a sarin gas attack. The evidence points to the rebels, who had the objective of inducing an Obama military intervention to reinforce the Red Line he had established earlier.

Resulting military conflict between NATO and Syria almost happened. At the last minute, Obama, may have well have decided against a Syria intervention because U.S. military intelligence seriously questioned the origins of the sarin. Here we would like to appeal to the next president to establish a reputable, bi-partisan commission on America and wars in Libya and Syria to uncover the truth.

For sure we know that with Gaddafi’s death the Russians lost economic and military contracts in Libya and the country fell to chaos and the Islamists. Thus originated Putin’s mounting a defense of Russian military and economic investment in Syria, while building a logistic supply line between Syria and the Russian main naval base, Sevastopol, in the Crimea.

 Hillary’s debacles in Libya and Syria and Obama’s doctrines of leading from behind and strategic patience, became incentives for Putin to use military force both in the Crimea, 2014 and Syria, 2015 as we wrote in “Why Putin Wants Syria,”The Middle East Quarterly and “Divining Putin’s Intentions, Why We Must Lose ‘Strategic Patience,’” Aspen Review.

“All the Perfumes of Arabia Will Not Sweeten This Little Hand”

  Both of the U.S. intervenions in Libya and Syria, as well as in Iraq, were of choice, not necessity, disregarding our vital national interests. Here we must mention the enormous suffering and loss of lives in these countries. But there is no reference to these and other humanitarian concerns in Hillary’s e-mails hacked by Wiki-leaks. What stands out above all is Hillary’s boast about her victory in Libya and its consequences. Thus we recall Shakespeare’s most famous female villain, Lady Macbeth. “Here’s the smell of blood still. All the perfumes of Arabia will not sweeten this little hand.”

 While reading her hacked emails Putin, as well as the leaders of a few other nations with cybernetic capabilities, must have realized the western chief motivations were primarily to further French economic interests in Francophone Africa; and U.S. economic interests in Libya, a country rich in oil and minerals. However, one must not forget the personal interests of the Clintons; to fill their Clinton Foundation coffers with arms dealing and other business profits, with the final objective of amassing resources for Hillary’s glorious, 2016 return to the White House

.Will American voters be able to understand that both her military interventions in Libya and Syria conditioned the 2015 Russian intervention in Syria and the continuous humanitarian catastrophe in that country, best symbolized by the destruction of the city of Aleppo, Syria’s Stalingrad?

While Richard Nixon had some redemptive Quaker conscience, and “W” a southern Baptist one, Hillary fits the role of Shakespeare’s Lady Macbeth, the harsh, calculating wife who subordinates everything to the path of power. This is the woman who said, “What difference does it make?” (how four Americans died in Benghazi.) It is also the woman who in 2011, furious with Assange and his Wiki-leaks, suggested to her State Planning Council, “Can’t we just drone him?” The initial laughter died as they realized she meant it !

 This is not to exalt Vladimir Putin as any great humanist. To us, Putin has been Russia’s Christian autocrat, much able to use force in a limited way both at home and abroad. Trump should not be naive. The Kremlin leader is siding with Donald not because the Wiki-leaks help Trump’s drive for the presidency or the cause of freedom.

 Do you blame Putin for simply trying to stymie Hillary, a corrupt and hawkish candidate whom he has rightfully come to see as the primary cause of two Middle East wars and making the whole region into Dante’s inferno. Hillary’s greed and desire to return to the White House helped to create the Islamists rise in both Libya and Syria and has the strong potential to impact on Russia Muslim regions in the northern Caucasus.

Hillary’s Domestic Politics

 However, in our judgment, besides her catastrophic failures in foreign policy making, there are also powerful domestic reasons why Hillary should not be elected president of the United States.

The Supreme Court: Hillary would appoint judges to the high court that would support her radical agenda on immigration, sanctuary cities, Obamacare and would be hostile to the second amendment in which many Americans believe.

Immigration: Hillary’s immigration policies are deeply injurious to both our vital national interests at home and abroad. Unlike Trump she does not favor securing our borders. As she revealed to Brazilian magnates, she supports an unlimited open space clear through to South America. This means thousands of illegals streaming over our borders from around the world. All this increases the threats of narcotics, crime and narco-terrorism.

 Hillary is also planning to dramatically increase immigration from Syria over what has been allowed under Obama, while Trump wants to limit such immigration because some jihadists will likely be included. We suspect Hillary supports accepting illegals in the belief they will vote Democratic and thereby will further already existing demographic changes that will eventually turn some of the red (GOP) states purple.

Hillarycare- turned Obamcare: Unlike Trump, Hillary seeks to continue expanding social programs at a time of our huge indebtedness. Americans must reject Obamacare, the outgrowth of Hillarycare, a similar but failed effort of hers in 1993-94. She is personally committed to Obamacare without taking into account the recent 25% increase in premiums as well as deductions. Obamacare is an unwieldy program hastily conceived and sold through the president’s prevarications to Congress and the American people. One of the programs’s intellectual fathers, Dr. Jonathan Gruber, is on record as saying it only became law because “Americans are stupid.”

 Hillary’s colleague, Bradford Delong, Democrat and former Deputy Assistant to the Treasury Secretary in 1993, explained why Hillarycare didn’t work. “Heading up health-care reform was the only major administrative job she ever tried to do and she was a complete flop at it. She had neither the grasp of policy substance, the managerial skills, nor the political smarts to do the job she was then given.”

The Donald Alternative

Most importantly the Donald has significant executive experience in business. Above all he appreciates the dire fiscal conditions of our republic, that make it necessary to end costly military interventions in the Middle East. In the same spirit of cost cutting, he seeks to replace Obamacare with a truly affordable medical program. The building of the wall at our southern borders is a revolutionary change motivated by his instincts and executive experience that uncontrolled immigration poses an untennable challenge to our already shaken security systems.

 Nixonian Dirty Tricks: In temperament, Hillary is a Nixon disciple -- without his statecraft brilliance and Quaker conscience. Like him she embraces dirty tricks to deal with domestic opponents. Let’s mention some: As revealed by the Wiki-leaks, her DNC officials used anti-Semitic innuendos to undermine Bernie Sanders with Christians in Kentucky and West Virginia.

Most significantly, she created a sort of analogue to Nixon’s “plumbers” -- units designed to fight domestic opponents. This brings us to one Robert Creamer, a veteran Democratic Party, Chicago activist, consultant and convicted felon. Creamer has had a relationship with the White House since 2008 and has visited it some 340 times. Last March he successfully arranged the disrupting of Trump rallies in Chicago and elsewhere, secretly recorded by one James O’Keefs, of Project Veritas Action a conservative, not-for-profit group.

The film recorded Trump “supporters” punching people to incite violence. Eventually Scottt Foval, co-founder of Democracy Partners, acknowledged that mentally ill people were paid $1500 a day to create a climate of chaos around Trump.

Clinton's dirty tactics are also evident in the DNC’s collusion with the pro-Clinton media. The best example is prominent Democratic official Donna Brazile, who replaced Wasserman-Shultz as DNC Chairwoman. Now we know that Brazile engaged in illegal activities, obtaining debate questions for Hillary in advance of her faceoff with Bernie Sanders in the spring. Brazile was fired by CNN, but there are many others journalists and media personalities who openly or clandestinely work for Hillary Clinton.

 Finally, Hillary has questionable ties with various organizations that are undermining the foundation of our democracy. One of these is Black Lives Matters, the group that publicly chants in favor of killing police. The mothers of some Black hoodlums who were killed have joined to create an anti-Hillary atmosphere in the FBI. Hillary would thus be the a divisive president and her unpopularity with, and dislike of the FBI will only deepen and poison our law enforcement ties with the future White House.

  Coming Constitutional Crisis if Hillary is Elected

 Hillary’s former supporter, Democrat and patriot Doug Schoen is correct. As he posited, if she is elected, despite all evidence that she is not qualified for the office, her victory would lead to a constitutional crisis. With a a Milhouse inferno in the White House, Congressional gridlock and public turmoil, there will be a call for the appointment of a chief prosecutor to investigate her misdeeds. She could be indicted and impeached. All that will lead to our geopolitical retreat as it did during 1973 Watergate. 

 So why not say it? This old anti-Soviet and anti-communist cold warrior and his partner bless the Wicki-leaks for helping us to uncover the real reasons for our war in Libya. We bless them for exposing a woman whose long history of scandals has now evolved into raketeering and corruption with her husband on an almost unthinkable international level. We give Assange kudos for exposing the monstrous Clinton cartel, composed of her private “hedge fund,” the Clinton Foundation, her corrupt, U.S. State Department acolytes, U.S. fat cats, and her unsavory, anti-woman, network of Middle East supporters and rulers who pay to gain influence and access to our national decision-making.

 Donald Trump, is surely an imperfect figure with lack of any practical experience in the U.S. government.We have repeatedly  criticized him for his gaffes, public insults and offensive remarks.   Trump, imperfect as he is, nevertheless is a true patriot, and an uncommon man with unique experience in business and reality TV shows. In spite of his lack of experience in U.S. government, and maybe because of it, he has become our nation’s agent of change from two terms of Obama and a virtual third Obama term under Hillary. Nevertheless not only to Putin, but to us Americans he is a better choice for the presidency than his opponent with all her baggage at home and abroad. The struggle was best dramatized in Donald’s rally in Miami a few weeks ago.Trump appeared amidst the music of Les Miserables, a film featuring the French people fighting the royal nomenclature.

  “Hillary: An Abyssmal President”

 Again recall the words of Secretary Bradford Delong: “Hillary Rodham Clinton has already flopped as a senior administrative official of the executive branch-- the equivalent of an under-secretary …” As we saw, she also flopped as Secretary of State. All that she has accomplished in that role was the most extensive ever, worldwide global travel. But what she brought upon us were the disastrous wars in Libya and Syria and tragic Benghazi-gate. In the words of Edward Klein, “Hillary seeks power because she has unrealistically high self esteem. With Hillary, we are dealing with a woman whose needs for dominance is far more pathological than Nixons. As he prophetically put it in 1993, “… there is no reason to think that she would be anything but an abysmal president.”