[cryptome] Re: Klayman v Clintons: Alleged Criminal Conspiracy and Racketeering

  • From: Michael Shelton <iao.ms88@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: cryptome@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2015 03:58:28 -0700

Hi a wonderful and eloquent statement.
I find the interchange here stimulating
and enlightening,although I rarely
On 3 Apr 2015 04:54, "Douglas Rankine" <douglasrankine2001@xxxxxxxxxxx>

Dear Colleagues,

For those of you who are interested in such things as co-incidences...or
conspiracies... J. It is to be noted that, during the recent election
campaign in Israel, Mr. Netanyahu made a statement accusing American and
other foreign business of interfering in the election by supplying money,
facilities and other resources to the opposition camps, and to undermine
Likud and his campaign for the leadership; and used the observation that
the Israeli Arabs were mobilising to defeat Likud. You can see below a
similar charge coming from Mr. Klayman against the Clintons and their

Of course people communicate with one another all over the world, and
there is nothing at all wrong with it...And...even here in the UK it has
been known for certain philanthropic organisations, in the name of faith,
hope, charity and education to fund various organisations which may be able
to influence the outcome of elections. The United States Heritage
Foundation is one that comes to mind, and there are various powerful
national and international lobbies who target politicians whom, it is
considered work against their interests. Certain UK established
organisations and agencies have also (I hate to use the word interfered)
contributed in many different sorts of ways to other countries during times
of stress, or change or war. It is all part of the right of free speech,
freedom of international action, policing and developing friendships and
trade. Of course the particular charity, philanthropic or educational
foundation has to comply with the applicable charities law, be registered
with the Charities Commission, have a properly constituted executive and
management system, keep proper public accounts and only use its funds for
purposes within its constitution and for which the money was donated and
which also comply with the law of the countries concerned. I don’t know
if the position of “not for profit” organisations in the US is the same...

In today’s world, communications take place even more so, due to the
instantaneous world-wide coverage of events on the world wide web and the
ability, through emails and social media in various forms to communicate
and transfer not only money, but ownership and knowledge. Elections today
are an international event. The one in the UK takes place on May 7th.

See url:

You will notice that I haven’t said anything about it yet...that is
because it is so boring...and I can’t even watch television or listen to
the radio because they are full of such electoral rubbish and
propaganda...which is continually repeated and circulated that it drives
one to play golf or visit a National Trust estate... J. One is forced
to listen to such things as history and law or poetry and music, or prose
and intellectual gossip on cryptome... J.



*To:* cryptome@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
*Subject:* [cryptome] Re: Klayman v Clintons: Alleged Criminal Conspiracy
and Racketeering

Dear Colleagues,

“Curiosity killed the cat...Satisfaction brought its life back again...”

My curiosity having got the better of me...I have read further into this
case. To give you a small flavour of the case; here is a small excerpt from
the charges laid by Klayman. As you can see they are quite serious and, if
proved, could have huge ramifications for the USA and its Foreign policy,
and for the Clinton’s themselves. I think I shall be reading some more of
this case and following it through to its conclusion... J.





Defendants Hillary Clinton and Bill Clintons have personal, financial,
political, professional, and partisan motivations for setting up a private
email server.


Since leaving The White House in 2001, the Bill and Hillary Clinton
household has amassed a personal fortune (outside of The Clinton
Foundation) of over $105 Million USD, consisting mainly of speaking fees
paid to Bill Clinton from many nations, organizations, leaders, and
business interests hostile to the United States and U.S. foreign policy and
especially hostile to Israel, but flush with cash from oil revenue or from
sources doing business with oil-rich, Middle Eastern and Arab countries.


While Defendant Hillary Clinton served in the U.S. Senate from 2001
through 2009 and as Secretary of State from 2009 through 2013, foreign
governments, foreign business interests, and wealthy businessmen and women
around the world whose interests are influenced or affected by U.S.
Government policies and actions have funneled billions of dollars in
donations to The Clinton Foundation.


While Defendant Hillary Clinton served in the U.S. Senate from 2001
through 2009 and as Secretary of State from 2009 through 2013, foreign
governments, foreign business interests, and wealthy businessmen and women
around the world whose interests are influenced or affected by U.S.
Government policies and actions have funneled tens of millions of dollars
in speaking fees to her husband Defendant Bill

Clinton and herself.


State, under Defendant Hillary Clinton’s leadership and control, approved
of and facilitated her husband Defendant Bill Clinton’s receipt of millions
of dollars from foreign interests including anti-Israel interests by
approving Defendant Bill Clinton’s activities in a conflict of interest
process. Upon information and belief, State, at the direction of Defendant
Hillary Clinton, funneled millions to organizations and interests in

an attempt to defeat Prime Minister Netanyahu and his Likud Party in the
March 2015 parliamentary elections.


Furthermore, upon information and belief, Defendant Hillary Clinton and
the other Defendants transferred State funds to a U.S. non-profit called
The PeaceWorks Network Foundation and to “One Voice,” run by a Democrat
campaign leader, Jeremy Bird, in an effort to defeat Israeli Prime Minister
Netanyahu and his Lukid Party. This action, and the appropriation of State
and U.S. taxpayer funds to finance this criminal enterprise, was obviously
a quid pro quo for contributions by Arab and Palestinian interests to The
Clinton Foundation as well as the payment of large speaking fees to
Defendants Bill and Hillary Clinton, as well as other illegal gratuities.


Indeed, these illegal organizations used U.S. taxpayer funds to bus
Israeli Arabs to the polls on March 17, 2015 to vote against Prime Minister
Netanyahu, as he opposes a Palestinian State on the West Bank and other
Arab/Iranian designs to destroy Israel.


Furthermore, the State Department expedited visas for Arab political
leaders organizing campaigns in Israel 11 against Benjamin Netanyahu to
come to the U.S. and receive political campaign training for their efforts
to defeat Netanyahu.


Defendant Hillary Clinton’s key aid Huma Abedin has relationships and
connections with the Muslim Brotherhood which facilitated access to the
wealth of oil-

rich countries and the sale of government actions hostile to Israel and
helpful to Israel’s

enemies in return for donations to The Clinton Foundation.


As an IRS 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organization, Defendant the Clinton
Foundation is forbidden from engaging in foreign or domestic political
campaign activities.>>>>

End of Quote...


*From:* cryptome-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [
mailto:cryptome-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <cryptome-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>] *On
Behalf Of *Douglas Rankine
*Sent:* 02 April 2015 12:06
*To:* cryptome@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
*Subject:* [cryptome] Klayman v Clintons: Alleged Criminal Conspiracy and


This is a case about the Clintons hiding behind a charity they own, whose
computers were allegedly used as servers to send state emails, so as to
avoid scrutiny under the Freedom of the Information Act. Accusations are
being made under the RICO or racketeering act. The case is, some may say,
conveniently surfacing not long before the US Presidential elections. One
could surmise that its aim is to discredit Hilary Clinton, to the point
where she does not stand, or does not win the nomination for the Democratic
Party, or does not win the Presidential election. I dare say that there
will be one coming along soon on Zeb Bush, who is also rumoured to be
standing for President, on behalf of the Republican Party.

After briefly looking at this case. I wondered who Larry Klayman was, so
I looked him up on Goggle.

Here is what I found see url: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Klayman

Now, do I waste my time trawling through the case or do I forget it...Will
I gain a valuable insight on the Clintons, their levels of security
awareness, and their attempts to hide what they have been up to? According
to many of the entries, the man appears to be somewhat of a publicity
seeker...he has lost many cases and even been barred from conducting cases
in some courts. He also has political views of an extreme kind; and an
outlook on tea parties with which I do not concur, having suffered the
indirect consequences of the one that was held all those years
ago...something to do with “No taxation without representation”.... and led
to the diminishment of the British Colonial Empire.

However, on the benefit side, he has drawn considerable attention not only
to himself, and not always in the best of lights, or for the right reasons,
but which have also revealed stuff which was either not known or at least
widely known...and court cases can be so interesting for what they reveal
and often lead one to explore different associations, links and
routes....Decisions, decisions, decisions....

We already know of course that Hilary Clinton as US Foreign Secretary
wanted all of the freedom fighters, liberationists, revolutionaries, and
dissidents of the world to use certain free specialist software designed,
manufactured, and distributed by various agencies and departments and
companies contracted to the US government, so that they could subvert their
own and those governments which the US did not like, with security, safety
and anonymity....The question is though, whether Hilary knew that the
antidote to the same software was being sold to the intelligence services
of those very states abroad by the same agencies, departments and companies
for profit...is another matter.



P.S. I do remember that when Richard Nixon was standing for election as
President way back whenever it was a campaign slogan which popped up its
ugly head was...” You can’t lick our Dick”...only to be withdrawn when
someone important discovered that it had other meanings and
connotations...C’est la vie...

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2015.0.5863 / Virus Database: 4321/9435 - Release Date: 04/02/15

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2015.0.5863 / Virus Database: 4321/9435 - Release Date: 04/02/15

Other related posts: