Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.

Connect with us

Crime

BREAKING: Authorities Tried To Hide Who Was In The Room Directly Above Vegas Shooter – Here’s Why

Wow!

Published

on

It looks like it’s 9/11 all over again!

As we reach the two-week mark in the Las Vegas shooting mystery. Americans find themselves still asking, even more, questions as to what happened on that tragic night where 58 people lost their lives and over 500 were injured. In the midst of a range of theories and conspiracies, this week multiple internet sleuths noted the proximity between a United States ally’s government during both this terrorist attack and the 9/11 attacks. Saudi Arabia!

For who knows what reason Saudi Arabia is still being considered a close United States ally and friend. Although they are notorious for their human rights violations and hatred towards the west.

But this is where the story gets even more interesting, in 2007 Saudi’s Kingdom Holding Company actually bought 45 percent of the stock in the Four Seasons Hotels and Resorts which owns the Mandalay Bay Casino and Resorts. And to add to the mystery, 45 percent of additional stock is owned by Cascade Investment Management. Which is a company controlled by none other than the extreme far leftist, Bill Gates. And interestingly enough both these companies teamed up in 2010 to work together in order to make the Four Seasons a privately held company.

The Free Thought Project reported:

In Las Vegas, the top six floors of the Mandalay Bay Hotel are owned by the Four Seasons. This hotel became the subject of a deadly terror attack when suspect Stephen Paddock reportedly opened fire out of the windows of his suite on the 32nd floor, sending a spree of bullets down to a crowd of around 22,000 people at a music festival across the street.

While it may have been pure coincidence that a man intent on carrying out a massacre, happened to rent a hotel room near a floor owned by the Saudi Royal Family, there is one important factor: When the Saudi Air Force visited Las Vegas recently, they did not stay at Mandalay Bay—the hotel in which they own 45 percent of the top six floors.

The Las Vegas Review-Journal reported that a “Middle East Air Force” booked the entire W Las Vegas hotel for the month of August, and sources noted that it was the Royal Saudi Air Force. This raises the question of why the members did not stay at the Four Seasons at Mandalay Bay, when half of the stock is owned by the kingdom, and it is typically their location of choice.

The question of whether Saudi Arabia could be involved stems from President Trump’s leniency towards the U.S. ally, and from the questions of Saudi Kingdom involvement that arose after 9/11.

As The Free Thought Project reported, in July, a federal judge in Miami reversed her decision to push for the release of crucial documents revealing information on the funding of the 9/11 attacks. The information, which stemmed from a 2002 FBI report, is said to have included evidence of “many connections” between the Saudi family and “individuals associated with the terrorist attacks on 9/11/2001.”

It was also revealed last year, after the infamous 28-pages were declassified, that the Saudi government aided the 9/11 terrorists.

Couple all this with the fact that two weeks later the mystery of this shooting is nowhere near being explained this whole episode starts to reak of a conspiracy. What is even more concerning is how Saudi Arabia always seems to be in the middle of messes like this, just like in 9/11 where that nation trained and partially funded the 9/11 hijackers while the official word from the “Kindom” was that they had nothing whatsoever to do with it. Maybe we should have invaded Saudi Arabia instead of Iraq!

Here’s more on Saudi Arabia and the nation’s ties to terror.

The Foreign Policy Initiative reports:

FPI BULLETIN: SAUDI ARABIA AND TERROR FINANCING

This month, Saudi Arabia launched massive military exercises that underscore its recent offer to send ground forces to fight against ISIS as part of a U.S.-led coalition. While Riyadh and Washington share the objective of destroying ISIS, our counterterrorism priorities are not always aligned. Therefore, Riyadh’s recent moves justify a re-examination of whether and when the Saudis can serve as reliable partners in combating violent Islamic extremism. Despite allegations that the monarchy has directly supported violent extremists such as al-Qaeda, there is no public evidence supporting this charge. However, Saudi Arabia’s mixed record on combating terrorist financing over the past 15 years reveals that Riyadh is more concerned with its domestic security and regional feuds than it is focused on combating global terrorism.

U.S.-Saudi Mistrust After 9/11

After it was revealed that 15 of the 19 hijackers on September 11, 2001 were Saudis, the Saudi government and royal family were the targets of multiple lawsuits by employers and families of the victims. Prominent U.S. lawmakers also indicated concerns about Saudi Arabia. Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY) observed that the United States “in some ways, have had a good relationship with [the Saudis] over the years, and in other ways, it appears as if they’re funding our enemies.” Amid legislative proposals to compel Saudi cooperation, Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) criticized Riyadh for a “well-documented history of suborning terrorist financing and ignoring the evidence when it comes to investigating terrorist attacks on Americans.” A December 2002 report by the House and Senate intelligence committees investigated these issues, but 28 still-classified pages related to Saudi Arabia resulted in controversy over whether Washington protectedSaudi government figures.

Despite such controversy, the 9/11 Commission Report “found no evidence that the Saudi government as an institution or senior Saudi officials individually funded [al Qaeda].” However, the Commission also noted that “Saudi Arabia has been a problematic ally in combating Islamic extremism. At the level of high policy, Saudi Arabia’s leaders cooperated with American initiatives aimed at the Taliban or Pakistan before 9/11. At the same time, Saudi Arabia’s society was a place where al Qaeda raised money directly from individuals and through charities.” The Report states that although it did not find evidence to incriminate Riyadh, “This conclusion does not exclude the likelihood that charities with significant Saudi government sponsorship diverted funds to al Qaeda.”

Before the 9/11 attacks, the Saudi royal family had long shied away from cracking down on private donors and foundations linked to terrorist financing, primarily to avoid confrontation with the powerful ultra-conservative clerics in the kingdom and their followers. After 9/11, Riyadh remained reluctant to help the U.S. Treasury Department dismantle international terror funding networks with links to donors and foundations in Saudi Arabia.

Saudi Arabia Steps Up After New Terror Threats in the Kingdom

Saudi Arabia’s complacency was rocked in 2003-2006 after a series of significant attacks within the kingdom claimed dozens of lives and demonstrated to Saudi citizens and rulers that al Qaeda posed a direct threat to Saudi Arabia’s stability. This development propelled Riyadh to dramatically strengthen its policies and enforcement to stop terrorist financing stemming from within the kingdom. Testifying before the Senate in 2005, U.S. Treasury Deputy Assistant Secretary Daniel L. Glaser stated, “Today, Saudi Arabia is actively countering the threat of terrorism. This is a key success, unfortunately catalyzed by the May 2003 terrorist attacks in Riyadh, which alerted the kingdom that terrorism was not only a theoretical global problem, but very much a local one.”

With aggressive arrests and widespread crackdowns on financing and operating of terrorist cells, as well as efforts to better train police and monitor mosques as part of a wide-ranging counterterrorism program, the Saudi government subdued the internal threat from al Qaeda. Riyadh also began to cooperate with efforts by the U.S Treasury Department to sanction charitable foundations that were financing al Qaeda and the Taliban. The Saudi government also instituted new financial restrictions on charities, such as limits on cash transactions, foreign transactions, and multiple accounts.

Today, Saudi Arabia likely sees the battle against al Qaeda within the kingdom to be past its violent peak, but not yet over, argues The Washington Institute for Near East Policy’s Lori Plotkin Boghardt. Since 2008, a special Saudi terrorism court has prosecuted thousands of suspects charged with playing a role in the al Qaeda attacks of 2003-2006. In January 2016, the Saudis executed 43 men charged with supporting al Qaeda plots from a decade ago. (Regrettably, the court has also tried Saudi human rights activists, including female drivers, whose activities the kingdom has defined as terrorism.) The individual most responsible for the kingdom’s aggressive approach to terrorism in recent years is the recently anointed crown prince, Muhammad bin Nayef, who built his reputation by leading the kingdom’s campaign against al Qaeda and surviving a 2009 attack on his person. The efforts of the crown prince and others demonstrate a new seriousness of purpose, although loopholes remain as Saudi Arabia turns its attention to the threat posed by the Islamic State (also known as ISIS, ISIL, or Daesh).

Funding Loopholes Remain

Saudi Arabia’s position on ISIS parallels the kingdom’s hostility towards al Qaeda. ISIS leader Abu Bakr- al-Baghdadi has branded Saudi royalty as apostates. His calls for attacks on the kingdom have resulted in a wave of suicide bombings and other attacks. In 2014, the Saudis designated the Islamic State as a terrorist organization, which rendered any financial support illegal. Saudi Arabia has also arrested ISIS cells in the kingdom. Nonetheless, Saudi citizens who support the Islamic State and other extremists in Syria are finding ways to provide those groups with funding.

”There is no credible evidence that the Saudi government is financially supporting ISIS,” writes Lori Plotkin Boghardt, since “Riyadh views [ISIS] as a terrorist organization that poses a direct threat to the kingdom’s security.” Yet she notes, “Riyadh could do much more to limit private funding,” especially via other Gulf States that offer more permissive financial networks.

Senior U.S. officials have publically stated their concerns about terror-financing contributions routed through third parties. Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, in a 2012 speech about combating ISIS, said, “the Saudis, the Qataris, and others need to stop their citizens from directly funding extremist organizations, as well as the schools and mosques around the world that have set too many young people on a path to radicalization.” Speaking in March 2014, Treasury Under-Secretary David Cohen revealed, “A number of fundraisers operating in more permissive jurisdictions – particularly in Kuwait and Qatar – are soliciting donations to fund extremist insurgents, not to meet legitimate humanitarian needs.” He explains, “Fundraisers aggressively solicit donations online from supporters in other countries, notably Saudi Arabia, which have banned unauthorized fundraising campaigns for Syria.”  The recipients of these funds include al Qaeda’s Syrian affiliate, Jabhat al-Nusra, as well as ISIS, Cohen said.

David Weinberg of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies laments that “Saudi authorities have also declined to take punitive measures against local preachers … [who] advised donors to circumvent local restrictions by sending their donations to accounts in Qatar and Kuwait.” Social media and crowd funding technologies have particularly made it easier for smaller donations to circumvent Riyadh’s policing of the formal financial sector. Cash transfers across state borders also easily escape detection. Boghardt concludes that “a combination of politics, logistics, and limited capabilities have impeded more effective Saudi efforts to counter terrorism financing.”

Incentivizing Saudi Cooperation

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry admitted in January 2015, “We all know that massive private funding goes to the extremist groups,” and governments must step up their programs to stop this. But it may be difficult to compel Saudi Arabia to more comprehensively combat the outflow of money to extremists abroad, since this goes beyond Saudi Arabia’s own concerns of domestic stability, which have been its key incentive to combat terrorism over the past decade. Moreover, many Saudis view Sunni extremists abroad as a bulwark against the influence of the kingdom’s rival, Iran. So as long as Saudi Arabia senses that the United States is seeking rapprochement with Tehran, it may resist pressure to more aggressively assist with Washington’s global counterterrorism efforts. While maintaining pressure on Riyadh to fight terrorist financing, the United States can also work to reassure Saudi Arabia that we will not ignore Iran’s regional aggression. Steps for doing so would include firm responses to such Iranian provocations as ballistic missile launches, as well as renewing Washington’s faltering commitment to the ouster of Bashar al-Assad, Tehran’s most important client in the region.

Please share if you agree we need to get to the bottom of this mess as soon as possible….

FOLLOW us on Facebook at Freedom Daily!

Al ran for the California State Assembly in his home district in 2010 and garnered more votes than any other Republican since 1984. He's worked on multiple political campaigns and was communications director for the Ron Nehring for California Lt. Governor campaign during the primaries in 2014. He has also held multiple positions within his local Republican Central Committee including Secretary, and Vice President of his local California Republican Assembly chapter. While also being an ongoing delegate to the California Republican Party for almost a decade.

Join the conversation

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.

Crime

Corrupt Dem Congresswoman Just Busted Stealing Money From Children – What She Did With Money Will Make You SICK!

This will piss you off!

Published

on

And once again we have a Democrat congressperson excelling at what they do best, lying, cheating and stealing!

She partied with the Obama, Pelosi and Reid, traveled on Air Force one next to President Obama, and cast her superdelegate vote for Crooked Hillary Clinton although they delegates should have gone for Socialist Bernie Sanders. But today Corrine Brown is in federal court for stealing scholarship money from school children. Yes, you read that correctly, “the woman of the people,” stole money. FROM CHILDREN!

The disgraced congresswoman must now defend herself against allegations that she funneled hundreds of thousands of dollars from a non-profit charity, One Door for Education, into her own filthy pocket. If convicted on all 24 counts, she faces 357 years in prison and $4.8 million in fines. Only a Democrat being a Democrat!

From the very beginning, Brown has been shrouded in deep controversy. Right after winning her election in 1992, the Federal Election Commission accused Brown of violating numerous campaign finance laws. And that was even before the campaign finance laws became strick under the McCain/Feingold law that forced the creation of so-called “Super Pacs.” Most notably, she accepted donations from foreign citizens and even failed to report the use of a corporate plane which she managed to get her greasy paws on. And investigators are saying that’s just the tip of the ethical iceberg.

First Coast News:

Corrine Brown pleads for mercy, prosecutors ask for prison time

Former Jacksonville area Congresswoman Corrine Brown took the stand Thursday afternoon, pleading for mercy from federal judge Timothy Corrigan.

“I am sorry you have to be here today to see me in this situation,” Brown said in her statement to the court. “I never imagined I would one day be in court asking people to speak on my behalf – never. In hindsight, I wished I had been more diligent in overseeing my personal and professional life The idea that some people could believe these charges hurt me because it runs contrary to everything I’ve ever believed and done in my life. I hope and pray these proceedings to don’t make them [ordinary people] lose faith in the system. I humbly ask for mercy and compassion.”

Brown was convicted on 18 counts of fraud and corruption in May.

The lead prosecutor in the sentencing hearing argued Thursday that the former congresswoman should be sentenced to about 7.5 to 9 years in federal prison. Her defense attorney is seeking probation and community service.

Prsecutor Tysen Duva told the court based on her actions during the investigation and in the trial, she should receive the most prison time out of the three co-conspirators.

Brown wore a magenta suit to the courthouse Thursday and briefly appeared in the overflow courtroom prior to the sentencing hearing.

Brown’s defense attorney James Smith objected to various aspects of the sentencing recommendations, including how much money Brown should be culpable for.
Prosecutor Duva asked the court, “What accountability does the law require?” during his presentation.

Duva said Brown was accustomed to receiving money she should not have received.
She also lied about donations to colleges, churches and other entities.

He also argued that Brown has made ludicrous comments during the investigation, including a comment where she essentially said that had investigators not been looking into her case, the Pulse shooting in Orlando would never have happened. She also referred to the charges as “bogus” and “racist,” implying that she was targeted for her race in the case.

Duva objected to that notion by saying, “She was targeted because she committed fraud, not because she was black or white.”

She attacked numerous agencies during the investigation, which Duva states shows her character as a person.

“Why do you support someone who says this nonsense?” Duva questioned the court Thursday, referring to the upcoming character witnesses set to speak.

We’re in our first break for #Corrine Brown’s sentencing hearing. U.S. attorney A. Tysen Duva just completed the government’s presentation. He passionately described her as a trailblazer politician who morphed into a liar and a fraud. @FCN2go pic.twitter.com/a1Irg2QEmr— Julia Jenaé (@JuliaJenaeFCN) November 16, 2017
Duva claims Brown “failed miserably” at being transparent during her time in office as a congresswoman.

“This is systemic and this is who she became,” said Duva, arguing the character witnesses cannot overshadow the conduct she performed in the criminal case.

“It’s not something that should be present in American democracy,” he said.

Duva said the judge has to make a difficult decision in this case.

Corrine Brown and her attorney James Smith speak outside the federal courthouse Monday. PHOTO: First Coast News

Brown has previously asked for delays in her sentencing due to storm damage to her home and mental and physical welfare checks, but all those motions were denied.

On Wednesday, prosecutors recommended reduced prison time sentences for Brown’s co-conspirators, former of chief of staff Ronnie Simmons and fake charity founder Carla Wiley. Judge Time Corrigan accepted this recommendation for a reduced prison time range of 21-27 months for Wiley and 33-41 months of Simmons. More on that hearing can be read here.

Brown, Simmons and Wiley will not receive their final sentencing until Dec. 4, according to recent court documents.

Corrine Brown Character Witness Testimony: Nov. 16, 2017

Corrine Brown had several witnesses come forward Thursday in support of her through witness testimony during the sentencing hearing.

Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee provided a glowing character witness of Corrine Brown during her sentencing hearing Thursday.

Jackson Lee described via telephone testimony it as her “privilege” to characterize Corrine Brown as a “loving person.”

She said Brown has had a “pointed and direct effort [in] helping others, not herself.”

The veterans’ community loved Congresswoman Brown, Jackson Lee said, stating that Brown has helped those with PTSD and other issues following fighting overseas. She also stated Brown helped tremendously with relief efforts during Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans.

“That shows a character of giving to others unselfishly,” Jackson Lee said.

A bishop from the Orlando area stated that Brown would help their community when other politicians couldn’t make things happen. He said she was “driven by wanting to support … and bless others.”

One woman who went to school with Brown’s daughter got emotional during her testimony in support of Brown. She said Brown taught her valuable lessons that helped her thrive in her military career and how to treat her soldiers.

“She’s been my champion .. my mentor,” the woman said.

Dr. Oliver Hunter of Houston recommended that Brown receive community service instead of incarceration time.

Another witness came forward and said Brown should be out helping others instead of in jail because “the people trust her.”

Melissa Alexander came forward to speak on behalf of Brown, describing her as a “blunt and passionate” woman. She cited that she’s been supportive of other people even up to the sentencing hearing.

Marissa Alexander, character witness for #CorrineBrown responded to the prosecutor’s criticism of Brown’s vocal personality. “She’s a largely blunt & passionate, persistent & formidable person. There’s a difference between transactional leadership & transformative leadership.

One man came forward and said Brown has helped other garner jobs through projects she’s worked on in Jacksonville and other areas. He beseeched the judge to “embrace her through your mercy” and not give her any prison time.

Roselyn, a life-long friend from Brooklyn, New York, came forward to provide her insight into who Brown is as a person. She said Brown is a passionate and hard-working woman who has long been a beacon of support for those in need of help.

After lunch, political consultant David Muller shared testimony on Brown, implying that she’s a genuine, caring person.

“It’s never about her,” he said. “She is the most tenacious fighter for people.”

He also discussed a time where Brown called him up and asked for help getting a train, so that she could get supplies to Haiti following an earthquake. She had 18 tractor trailers full of supplies and moved them via a cruise ship to Haiti, Muller said.

“It’s never about her. It’s about helping other people,” he said. “She is a wonderful, compassionate person.”

Many in the court clapped following Muller’s testimony about Brown.

Corrine Brown issues a statement during sentencing hearing

Former Congresswoman Corrine Brown issued a statement during the sentencing hearing Thursday, apologizing to the court, her family, friends and supporters.

“First and foremost, I want to thank my family friends and supporters for their continued prayers and support.”

“I have always strived to protect my name and my reputation”

She said the charges against her are not who she is.

“It runs contrary to everything I am and everything I’ve ever done in my life.” Brown said in her statement. “Public service is an honor and a privilege.”

“I ask that you take into consideration all that I’ve done in my life, and I humbly ask for mercy and compassion. Thank you very much.”

Additional arguments by defense attorney

The defense attorney belabored the point that they are against the notion that Brown abused a position of trust, which is established by the evidence presented in the trial.

Smith explained the definition of obstruction of justice, which Brown is accused of doing while taking the stand by the prosecutor, stating that it is the “intention or deliberate effort while on the stand to make material falsehoods.”

The judge wasn’t so sure and asked the defense attorney to elaborate.

Smith appeared to get emotional after posing two questions: “What type of sentence does justice require in this case?” and “How do you sentence someone who is a legend?”

He attributes some of her actions to the progress our country has made in terms of relations for black people.

Smith said he met with an Orlando attorney who was from Jacksonville and said the attorney described Brown as “our Martin Luther King” for black Jacksonville natives.

“None of those people had to push the boulder up the mountain like she did,” said Smith, referring to others in Congress. “She truly is a legend.”

Smith said “extensive rigorous community service” would be much more appropriate for Brown than going off to federal prison for five years. Restitution is also not conducive to prison time, Smith argued.

The judge will also be accepting additional letters in support of Brown.

Court recessed at about 2:40 p.m. Thursday. The final sentencing will take place on Monday, Dec. 4 at 10 a.m.

Following the recess, Smith briefly spoke with media regarding the atmosphere in the courtroom, confirming that it was at some points emotional for him because he’s gotten a chance to know Brown over the year-plus they’ve been working together. He stated some of the emotions just show that he’s only human.

The Initial Trial

There are a lot of moving parts in the case against Corrine Brown and her co-conspirators.

Carla Wiley first became involved in the fraud scheme when she started dating Ronnie Simmons.

Carla Wiley, President of the now-defunct fake charity One Door for Education. She pleaded guilty last March to wire fraud, and agreed to testify against Brown.

She was president of a charity called One Door for Education, which was never actually registered as a 501(c)(3).

The fake charity received more than $800,000 in four years, with about only $1,200 of it actually going to scholarships for students. That money is now gone.

Simmons was dating Wiley when he told her he needed a nonprofit to financially back a reception for congresswoman Brown in 2012. Wiley offered One Door for Education as an option for that reception.

The charity claimed to give scholarships to poor and underprivileged children seeking the become teachers.

Ronnie Simmons is being indicted along with former Congresswoman Corrine Brown. They are accused of using a fake charity to raise funds for their personal expenses. Photo: Florida Times-Union

During the initial trial earlier this year, Brown’s defense attorney, James Smith, described her as a hardworking congresswoman who was dedicated to her constituents.

Lead prosecutor A. Tysen Duva argued during the trial that Ronnie Simmons worked under Brown and did her bidding by taking out $800 a day from the One Door for Education bank account and depositing it into Brown’s personal bank account. He did this numerous times, according to Duva and evidence released earlier this month.

The fake charity was essentially used as a slush fund for Corrine Brown’s travels, expenses and shopping, according to the prosecutors.

She used the money put in her bank account to go to Nassau, Bahamas with her daughter, fly to Beverly Hills and shop along Rodeo Drive, and attend a Beyoncé concert, according to court documents and previous reports by First Coast News.

The prosecutors also argued that Brown committed wire fraud, mail fraud and stole money from the government after she lied on tax documents.

Brown had friends in high places, such as former CSX CEO Mike Ward. She would ask them for donation to Open Door for Education and many of them gladly donated, according to previous reports and prosecutor testimony.

Ward, for instance, contributed $35,000 to One Door for Education after learning that the money would go toward providing students with iPads for learning.

Prosecutors also argued that Brown lied about and inflated what she gave in tithes to various churches. The churches came forward in the trial and said the donations claimed to be given by Brown did not match their records, to which Brown said she sometimes gave anonymous donations.

Other legitimate scholarship organizations came forward and said they had never received funds from Brown’s charity.

Meanwhile, Brown’s tax returns claimed she contributed as much as $30,000 – 20 percent to a third of her income, to various charities.

Prosecutors also claimed that without the cash deposits that Ronnie Simmons made to her bank account, she would have overdrawn her account numerous times during 2012 to 2015.

When Brown took the stand, she denied any wrongdoing on her part and said she trusted the wrong people and said they were behind the unlawful acts.

She cried multiple times on the stand and said she was not to blame for what had happened, according to previous reports.

Overall, the prosecution argued that $330,000 of the money garnered through One Door for Education was used for events receptions surrounding the congresswoman. Meanwhile, $70,000 of that money went to cash in the congresswoman’s pocket. Carla Wiley pocked more than $100,000, while Simmons is accused of pocketing thousands of thousands of dollars for himself.

The worst part about this whole mess is the fact that everyone knew this woman was crooked but still had no issue palling around with her. She has had issues since the moment she won her election and the Democrat Party has stood by her without question. Yet they are the party who claims to be for the people. Yeah, unless those people are underprivileged children who want to get an education that is.

Please share if you want to see this congresswoman behind bars….

Continue Reading

Crime

Horrific Video Catches What 3 Racist Black Nurses Did To Dying WWII Vet As They Laughed

This is the most horrific thing, Ever!

Published

on

Thanks to the former president Barack Hussein Obama and his manufactured race war, racial tensions in our country are now at an all-time high.

But now the so-called “race wars” have reached a new all-time low after a video popped up online which appears to show a horrible act of racism in a nursing home. It’s unbelievable what a group of 3 black nurses did to a dying white World War II veteran who was screaming in agony from the confines of his nursing home bed.

Eighty-nine-year-old highly-decorated WW II veteran James Dempsey served his country honorably, and probably never fathomed that the worst experience of his life would come at the very end and at the hands of a nasty staff of racist nurses. After suddenly being unable to breathe, he pushed the call button in his room six times, frantically telling staff over the intercom that he needed immediate help. Help which never came. Instead, he was laughed at hysterically.

Via mPolitical:

During questioning, Nuckles simply passed off the entire incident as an honest mistake” after being caught red handed in a lie after being confronted with the video footage.“I was just basing everything on what I normally do.”

Doing what you “normally do?” Is laughing while World War II veterans die what you “normally do,” Wanda Nuckles?

“Not only did she lie about the chest compressions, the staff did not call 911 until an hour later. When nurses had difficulty getting Dempsey’s oxygen machine operational during attempts to fix the issue, you can hear Nuckles and others laughing,” Popular Military reported.

Retired nursing professional Elaine Harris reviewed the footage and still cannot get over the horror of what she witnessed.

In 43 years in nursing, I have never seen such disregard for human life in a healthcare setting, is what I witnessed,” Harris said.

Harris went on to criticise the nursing staff, “claiming that the nurses failed to respond, assess and act- not to mention the failure to continuously perform CPR,” Popular Military went on.

That is absolutely inappropriate. You never stop compressions,” said concluded.

What’s even more startling is that the Atlanta nursing home tried to bury the story from being leaked to the public, but due to the incredible perseverance of the local news outlet 11Alive, these women will forever be shamed. “Attorneys representing the Atlanta nursing home tried to prevent 11Alive from obtaining the video. They asked a DeKalb County judge to keep the video sealed and then attempted to appeal to the Georgia State Supreme Court. The judge ruled in favor of 11Alive and the nursing home eventually dropped its appeal to the state’s highest court,” 11 Alive reported.

Investigator Steven Haffley pointed out that criminal charges need to be immediately pressed against these 3 individuals and that it’s ridiculous that the only punishment they’ve received is simply losing their jobs as nurses. On top of that, how these nurses acted wasn’t even normal human behavior. Haffley stated:

“On a human level, how could you possibly do that?” Steven began. “I might not like some of the protesters, but if I saw someone dying on the street, suffering in pain, calling out for help, I’d help them. It’s just apart of being human…But somehow these nurses don’t even have that compassion for a World War II veteran, who’s dying in pain. How did they get to be nurses?

“James Dempsey died at the age of 89. He was a decorated World War II veteran from Woodstock, Georgia. He served his country with honor in the time of its greatest need. God bless his soul. I’m so sorry you were treated this way,” Steven concluded.

11Alive reports that Dempsey’s family have reached a settlement agreement with Sava Senior Care, who fired 10 of the nurses involved after the video was brought to their attention. Horrifyingly, this isn’t the first time that Northeast Atlanta Health and Rehabilitation has abused patients, as they continue to have a history of abuse after Dempsey’s death due to health and safety violations. They’ve been given a one-star rating from Medicare, and have also be smacked with $813,113 in fines since 2015.

These savage scumbag nurses called this sick incident where a man died an “honest mistake?” Are you freaking kidding? A man died desperately gasping for air and they laughed hysterically? How is this considered an “honest mistake?” This has to be the sickest display of racism I have ever witnessed in my lifetime.

Nurses take an oath to do good and help people. These 3 characters decided to ignore a man who was a WW2 hero because they are a bunch of racists who hate white people, plain and simple. These sorts of acts were unheard of before the presidency of Barack Hussein Obama, who won only because white liberals in this country suffer from an acute condition of white guilt.

Please share in hopes justice will be served in this awful case….

Continue Reading

Crime

This Is The SHOCKING Identity Of Uranium One Informant And Video Of What’s Hidden In His Briefcase Will Bring Hillary Down

Hillary is Not happy about this!

Published

on

The infamous FBI confidential informant who went undercover to look into Crooked Hillary Clinton’s role the now widely known Obama administration-era uranium deal has now been identified.

William Campbell, who is a Russian lobbyist is, in fact, the informant, according to the Reuters news organization. Campbell will be testifying before a congressional committee about the 2010 sale of Uranium One. The deal where a Russian supported company bought a uranium firm with mines in the U.S. and is responsible for 20% off all the Uranium we have in the United States. Campbell gave information to the FBI about what he saw while undercover as an informant.

All clues point to the fact that Campbell, who was undercover for roughly five years, worked to get information on Russia’s efforts to grow its atomic energy business in the U.S.

Reuters Reports:

Exclusive: Secret witness in Senate Clinton probe is ex-lobbyist for Russian firm

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Senate Republicans say their investigation of Hillary Clinton’s role in approving a deal to sell U.S. uranium mines to a Russian company hinges in part on the testimony of a secret informant in a bribery and extortion scheme inside the same company.

The Senate committee searching for Clinton’s alleged wrongdoing is keeping their witness’s name cloaked. However, William D. Campbell, a lobbyist, confirmed to Reuters he is the informant who will testify and provide documents to Congress about the Obama Administration’s 2010 approval of the sale of Uranium One, a Canadian company with uranium mines in the United States, to Russia’s Rosatom.

At the time of the sale, Campbell was a confidential source for the FBI in a Maryland bribery and kickback investigation of the head of a U.S. unit of Rosatom, the Russian state-owned nuclear power company. Campbell was identified as an FBI informant by prosecutors in open court and by himself in a publicly available lawsuit he filed last year.

In a telephone interview, Campbell said he wanted to testify because of his concerns about Russia’s activities in the United States, but declined to comment further.

Campbell’s lawyer, Victoria Toensing, who has not previously identified her client, said despite Campbell telling the government ”how corrupt the company was,” Rosatom still got permission to buy Uranium One. She did not say what Campbell would reveal regarding any alleged wrongdoing by Clinton.

Clinton has said the Senate probe is an attempt to shift attention away from special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russia’s alleged role in Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign. As the heat from Mueller’s investigation has intensified, Trump has repeatedly called for an inquiry into Clinton and the Russian uranium deal.

“This latest iteration is simply more of the Right doing Trump’s bidding for him to distract from his own Russia problems,” said Nick Merrill, a Clinton spokesman.

Some people who know Campbell are skeptical that he can shed much light on Uranium One. Two law enforcement officials with direct involvement in the Rosatom bribery case in which Campbell was an informant said they had no recollection or record of him mentioning the deal during their repeated interviews with him.

Also, although both Uranium One and the bribery cases involved Rosatom, the two cases involved different business units, executives and allegations, with little other apparent overlap, Reuters found in a review of the court records of the bribery case.

Campbell countered those who dismiss his knowledge of the Uranium One deal. “I have worked with the Justice Department undercover for several years, and documentation relating to Uranium One and political influence does exist and I have it,” Campbell said. He declined to give details of those documents.

Reuters was unable to learn when the closed-door testimony has been scheduled.

Trump asked that a Justice Department gag order on Campbell stemming from the bribery case be lifted so that he can testify to congressional investigators, White House officials said.

The Justice Department has partially lifted that gag order.

CAMPBELL TESTIMONY ‘CRITICAL’

Campbell potentially now has a larger starring role in the Washington drama after the Justice Department said in a letter to Congress on Monday that it was considering appointing a special prosecutor to launch an investigation into Republican allegations of wrongdoing by Clinton, Trump’s former political rival, in the deal.

Under Clinton, the State Department was part of a nine-agency government Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States that approved the purchase of Uranium One. Her critics, including Trump, allege large donations by people connected to the Uranium One deal made to her family’s foundation influenced the State Department’s decision to approve it.

Reuters has no evidence that Clinton orchestrated the approval of Uranium One.

In an email, Rosatom said the company had made no donations to the Clinton Foundation and had not asked others to do so. The foundation stressed the State Department was only one member of the committee that approved the deal and said Clinton had no personal involvement in the decision.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles Grassley said in a letter to Toensing, Campbell’s lawyer, that her client appears to have information “critical to the Committee’s oversight of the Justice Department and its ongoing inquiry into the manner in which” the Uranium One sale was approved.

BRIBERY SCHEME

Campbell worked as an informant for federal authorities investigating Vadim Mikerin, a Russian official in charge of U.S. operations for Tenex, a unit of Rosatom. Authorities later accused Mikerin of taking bribes from a shipping company in exchange for contracts to transport Russian uranium into the United States. He pleaded guilty in federal court in Maryland and was sentenced to prison for four years.

The Justice Department had also initially charged Mikerin with extorting kickbacks from Campbell after hiring him as a $50,000-a-month lobbyist.

Prosecutors alleged Mikerin had demanded Campbell pay between one-third and half of that money back to him each month under threat of losing the contract and veiled warnings of violence from the Russians. The demand prompted Campbell to turn to the FBI in 2010, which gave its blessing for him to remain part of the scheme.

Federal prosecutors were ready to use Campbell as a star witness against Mikerin, but they backed away after defense attorneys raised questions about Campbell’s credibility and whether he was a victim or had “entered into a business arrangement with eyes wide open,” according to court records.

Before it was taken down last year, the website of Campbell’s company, Sigma Transnational, did not suggest his firm was a lobbying powerhouse. The website listed four other employees and advisers, although one had died years earlier. A second employee listed said in a court document that she never worked for the company but had agreed in 2014 to pay Campbell to list her as an employee and allow her to use the Sigma name in a business deal. Campbell declined to comment on the staffing or his lobbying contract with Tenex.

Prosecutors dropped the extortion charges against Mikerin and never mentioned Campbell again in any charging documents. A Justice Department spokeswoman declined to comment on the case. Campbell also declined to comment on the issue.

Reuters has been unable to learn why Tenex chose Campbell as its lobbyist. He acknowledged in lawsuit he filed in 2016 that he was hired despite the fact he “had no experience with nuclear fuel sales.”

In a telephone interview this past week Campbell confirmed he was eager to testify because he has deep concerns about the Kremlin’s activities in the United States. Campbell’s lawyer, Victoria Toensing also confirmed that despite Campbell telling the government ”how corrupt the company was.” Interestingly enough, Rosatom still managed to get permission to buy Uranium One. She did not say what Campbell would reveal regarding any allegations of wrongdoing by the Obama Administration or then-Secretary of State, Crooked Hillary Clinton.

In typical Democrat Party playbook fashion, Crooked Killary Clinton of course deflected by saying that the Senate probe is a weak attempt to shift attention away from special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russia’s alleged role in Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign and election. As the heat from Mueller’s investigation has intensified, Trump has repeatedly called for an inquiry into Clinton and the Russian uranium deal. Wonder how long it will be until washed up Killary Clinton starts calling out “Vast Right Wing Conspiracy” again? 

Please share if you want to get to the bottom of this mess….

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Trending