HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON’S INTEREST IN THE U.S. PRESIDENCY IS MOTIVATED BY CRASS SELFISHNESS, NOT LOVE FOR AND SERVICE TO COUNTRY
HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON: THE CANDIDATE OF CHOICE OF THE SECRETIVE, POWERFUL, INCREDIBLY WEALTHY INTERNATIONALIST ROTHSCHILD FAMILY
PART ONE OF TWO PARTS
“Rory knew all about this Invisible Government which decided the destinies of nations, their survival or their obliteration, for his father had told him. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
‘They are all bastards,’ Joseph had told his son. ‘They are without doubt, the wickedest men on earth, though I am sure they would be astonished to hear they were wicked. They might even be outraged. . . . The world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes!’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
They were a criminal conspiracy, but they did not consider themselves either criminal or conspirators. They were businessmen, realists. What gave them power was, in their eyes, virtuous and righteous and reasonable, for who was more worthy than themselves to control and manipulate the world of men. Someone had to rule, and who better than men of intellect, money, strength, and unemotional judgment.” Part 2, Chapter 3, pages 475 through 479, passim, Captains and the Kings, by Taylor Caldwell
There are ignoble, dishonorable influences and forces at work in the world today. These forces and influences have been at work in the world for some time. They are not benign. They are not kind. They are not benevolent, compassionate, or forgiving. They are terrible, immoral, dispassionate, corrupting, and evil. They act deliberately, calculatingly, and coldly. They are well-organized and ruthlessly efficient. They have introduced and continue to promote chaos into Western Civilization, generally, and into our own Nation, particularly, as they work toward their singular goal: the breakup of the ‘Independent, Sovereign Nation State’ and, further, rendering the very concept, incoherent.
And, what is a ‘Sovereign Nation State’? It is one operating under its own supreme Constitution, beholding to no other Nation and subordinate to no other Nation, organization, person or persons, or entity of any kind. A Sovereign Nation State is one whose first interests and concerns are those that pertain to and adhere to the well-being of the Nation and to the well-being of the Nation’s citizenry, and not to that of any other Nation, or people, or to the world at large. A Sovereign Nation State is one whose policies, foreign and domestic, are framed to benefit the Nation and its citizenry first. A Sovereign Nation State is one that embraces a unique heritage, identity, culture, common currency, and common language. A Sovereign Nation State is one whose laws are never subordinated to or abrogated to those of any other Nation or group of Nations or to a political or economic entity or interest of any kind. A Sovereign Nation State is one that could not even conceptually allow for a treaty or pact with another Nation or group of Nations or geopolitical or corporate interest group to subvert or subordinate the Sovereign Nation’s system of laws and jurisprudence to the dictates of any treaty or pact that the Nation’s Government might enter into.
Today, though, the idea of adherence to the importance of the notion of, ‘Sovereign Nation State,’ is considered antiquated, xenophobic, even obsolete. So it is, the dismemberment of our Sovereign Nation marches forward to end, possibly, finally, in a whimper, not a bang—nary a word of protest; not a shot fired in her defense—the results of a quiet, insidious, invidious coup d’etat—the end result being not a change of government for this Nation but the very destruction of the Nation as an independent, Sovereign State.
The end of our Nation as an independent, Sovereign Nation State is the goal of those who propose a New Order for the Western Nations of this World. There exist supremely powerful, well-organized, extraordinarily wealthy interests who wish for this—indeed, who have been and who are presently actively working for it. But they do so always in the shadows, forever in the shadows. These shameful, depraved influences and forces seek to create a new political and economic and legal paradigm for Western Nation States. This new paradigm would consist of a federation of global financial and mega-corporate interests that operate in every sphere of life, dictating domestic and foreign policy for all Western Countries under their control. They would rewrite laws and draft new codes of conduct. Such rights and liberties that exist would be those they deign to bestow or withhold, at their pleasure, on individuals—subjects, essentially indentured servants, and not citizens, in this new polity. The EU is a manifestation of the early stages of a dramatic shift in the political contours of Countries—of what it means for a Country to exist as a Country. Is that in store for our Country as well? The answer is, “yes.” If the U.S. completes the TransPacific Partnership (“TPP”) and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (“TTIP”), the U.S. will have moved one step closer to the fulfillment of the agenda of those sinister influences and forces that seek to dismantle the U.S. as an independent Sovereign Nation State.
You don’t hear of these sinister influences and forces very often, or directly. They quietly machinate and conspire and contrive behind the scenes. You hear of them, at best, infrequently and, then, only obliquely—through a casual comment here or there in the newspapers or on the airwaves. Yet these sinister influences and forces control the destiny of nations.
The dire effects of the powers they wield and exert are manifested through the puppets in Government they own and control.
In the United States, they have been operating through the U.S. President, Barack Obama. They have, these past several months, been priming and grooming his replacement, Hillary Rodham Clinton, whom they have promised as Obama’s heir apparent.
The most notorious of the puppet masters is the Rothschild clan. The Rothschild family has spread its tentacles throughout the world, not least of all in this Country. The artifice of privatized central banking is the basic mechanism through which they hold entire Nations hostage.
Is there a connection or link between the Rothschild family and Hillary Clinton? Consider: the New York Times—in a September 3, 2016 article titled, “Where has Hillary Clinton Been? Ask the Ultrarich”— reports that “Lady Lynn Forester de Rothschild, a backer of Democrats and a friend of the Clintons’, made sure attendees did not grill Mrs. Clinton at the $100,000-per-couple lamb dinner Mrs. Forester de Rothschild hosted under a tent on the lawn of her oceanfront Martha’s Vineyard mansion. “‘I [Mrs. Forester de Rothschild] said, Let’s make it a nice night for her [Hillary Clinton] and show her our love,’ Mrs. Forester de Rothschild said.”
Is it not singularly odd that the NY Times, a fervent supporter of Hillary Rodham Clinton, would wish to explicitly report a link between Clinton and the so-called “elites” in society and is it not especially odd that the NY Times would bother to report the saccharine sweet sentiment of Lady Lynn Forester de Rothschild at the dinner Rothschild hosted for Clinton?
Does not that NY Times article undercut the notion her campaign incessantly trumpets that Hillary Clinton cares about the welfare of the masses? Does not that NY Times article simply, candidly, and, in fact, glaringly illustrate that Clinton cares for no one but those whom she may personally profit from; those from whom she has received and continues to receive an overabundance of personal wealth; those for whom she owes all the fawning praise she has ever received and the trappings of power she could ever hope to obtain; those whom, alone, are capable of fulfilling every lustful ambition her insatiable soul craves?
Didn’t the also-ran candidate, Bernie Sanders allude to these very points, during the Democratic Party U.S. Presidential debates, berating Clinton for the inconstancy of her message, the inconsistency of her remarks, the hypocrisy of her words in relation to her actions? Did Sanders not make the point that a person who rakes in tens or even hundreds of millions of dollars from donors can’t reasonably, rationally serve the interests of both the extraordinarily wealthy—those who dwell in the most rarified aethers, who have promoted her, paid her way, bought her the station in life she holds—and everyone else, who toils and drudges in the muck below? Would Clinton dare betray her benefactors? Of course not. But it isn’t the monies of the wealthiest few among us who will be assisting the laziest and least deserving among us, including the illegal aliens who shouldn’t be here at all. Whom do you think that task will, ultimately, fall upon?
Hasn’t Donald Trump perceptively pointed out that, when one person gives another person money—especially, considerable sums of money, or some other thing of great monetary value—the giver expects the taker to give something in return? Is that not the foundation of all dealings, whether in business or government—the quid pro quo—“I give you something; you give me something in return?” If so, how can one realistically believe that Clinton would—or reasonably could, even if she wanted to, and she most certainly doesn’t—give everyone “a fair shake?” That is incongruous, mind-boggling.
But, then, it is mind-boggling to consider that any average, rational American citizen would actually wish to raise a person to the status of President of the United States on the drivel Hillary Clinton spouts. Even more mind-boggling is the thought that some Americans would seriously consider positing a person, such as Hillary Clinton, in the White House, when clear, substantial and substantive evidence supports a finding that Hillary Rodham Clinton has violated federal law—multiple federal laws, and multiple counts of law-breaking under each of those laws—and all of them extremely serious breaches of conduct. The Arbalest Quarrel discusses this matter at length in a series of recent articles posted on this site.
But, why would a major newspaper, such as the New York Times support a candidate for the U.S. Presidency whose respect for our Constitution and our laws is non-existent; who breaks our laws cavalierly; and who dismisses, out-of-hand, any suggestion that her actions require close scrutiny? And, why would a major newspaper such as the New York Times draw the public’s attention to Clinton’s obvious connection with the notorious, international Rothschild family of bankers, in the first place? We discuss this in Part 2 of this Article.
HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON: AN INDIVIDUAL WILLING TO LAY WASTE A COUNTRY, ITS PEOPLE, ITS CONSTITUTION
PART TWO OF TWO PARTS
“From nowhere came the memory of what he had been taught in random religious lessons concerning the Revelations of St. John, who had prophesied these men and had written that one day they would rule the world entirely, and that none could buy or sell without their permission, ‘both small and great, rich and poor, free or bond.’ Was it the mark of the Beast that men would have to wear on their foreheads? Rory could not remember, and his smile became more respectful and even a little tender. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
To obtain what they had plotted for so long, from grandfather to father to son, they must first throw the world into chaos, dismantle governments, incite violence and fury among the mindless masses, cause enfeebling wars which would weaken any nation ready to contest with them, raise up tyrants who would subdue the people, destroy the validity of nations’ currencies. Then, in the general catastrophe they could exert their unbelievable power and assume command.” Part 2, Chapter 3, pages 480 through 481, passim, Captains and the Kings, By Taylor Caldwell
One may reasonably infer the NY Times, a media giant though it be, is, as with Hillary Clinton herself, but a lackey of the secretive, immensely powerful, and fabulously wealthy Rothschild family and that, as a lackey of the Rothschild family, the NY Times would not publish anything that might alert the American people to the truth. And the truth is that the people of the United States no longer control their Government—that they have not controlled their Government for some time; and that the international Rothschild family of bankers is prepared, soon, to throw off the illusion that there exists at all a Government of the United States that belongs to the people of the United States.
The publishers of the New York Times certainly would not dare suggest that the federal Government does not take its orders from the American people. To even suggest that would require explicit permission from the Rothschild family.
The Rothschild family controls the federal Government, and therefore, holds dominion over the American people. The matter of ending the charade that this Government does not take orders from the international Rothschild banking cartel is at hand.
If Hillary Rodham Clinton actually wins the coming U.S. Presidential election, the NY Times and other major mainstream newspapers will likely slowly begin informing the American people that the Sovereignty of the United States and the sanctity and inviolability of the U.S. Constitution and the supremacy of our Nation’s system of laws are all rapidly drawing to a close. The American people will then know, clearly and categorically, and without any doubt, that powerful, evil, insatiable interests do in fact exert rapacious control over the vast machinery of global finance and global trade, of which our Nation, the United States, is one component—an important component to be sure—but one component, nonetheless. The American people will learn from the mainstream media of plans of the Rothschild family and its underlings to remake our Country, consistent with the aims and desires of the international banking class.
Our Country has been weakened by incessant, unwinnable wars. The rights and liberties codified in the Nation’s Bill of Rights are faltering. The Fourth Amendment’s unreasonable searches and seizures clause is blatantly ignored. The Second Amendment right of the people to keep and bear arms is on shaky ground, supported essentially by the U.S. Supreme Court’s Heller and McDonald decisions—case law that will—not may—be overturned if Hillary Clinton is elected President of the United States and her nomination to the Supreme Court is confirmed.
The First Amendment’s freedom of speech clause is held hostage by those invoking the standard of political correctness—a dubious notion at best and one that has no basis in our law, in our jurisprudence, or in our traditions, and is a thing altogether antithetical to the right of free speech guaranteed in the First Amendment.
The lazy among us claim a right, defined nowhere in our Constitution or our laws, to be fed, clothed, and housed through the labor and taxes of others. And, the illegal aliens among us claim a right to remain here when, under our Constitution and our laws they have no such right to be here at all. Yet they claim the problem rests with our laws, not with them; and the media heralds their irreverent, audacious call—the emptiness of that call which is exposed by the absence of any supporting statute, by the absence of case law precedent, by the absence of cohesive logical argument, and by the absence of any coherent ethical standard.
Perhaps the Rothschild family, through the NY Times, is testing the waters. The Rothschilds seek to ascertain just how gullible the American people truly are and how willing they may be to accept the most outrageous ideas and policies as tolerable, even exemplary.
Apparently, all too many Americans are extraordinarily gullible—ready to hug to their bosoms the most bizarre ideas and the most outlandish Government policies with alacrity. If so, then the Rothschild family is correct in their assessment. If so, then the Rothschild family’s goal for dissembling the United States, as an independent Sovereign Nation, through the eager assistance of their puppet, Hillary Rodham Clinton, along with her husband, Bill, can continue, according to plan. Psychological conditioning of the masses has obviously progressed by leaps and bounds to a point never before believed possible.
And so it is, we are witnessing, at an increasingly rapid and rabid pace, the destruction of the political, economic, social, cultural, historical, and ethical fabric of our society.
We are beholding the systematic, methodical, and inexorable destruction of our Country. We are seeing this take place on an unprecedented scale as strange, alien ideas, and practices, and policies—ideas, and practices, and policies that are antithetical to this Nation’s history, to this Nation’s culture, to this Nation’s morality, to this Nation’s educational and religious traditions and underpinnings, to this Nation’s laws and jurisprudence, and to this Nation’s very Constitution—take hold and begin to break apart the foundation of our Nation, like a jackhammer breaking apart concrete.
This, the Rothschild clan and their ilk seek to do and need do if the Sovereignty of the United States is to be undone, and they have a candidate to do their bidding, Hillary Rodham Clinton, waiting eagerly, even lasciviously, in the wings for just the opportunity to show her love for Lady Lynn de Francesca Rothschild, in return for Lady Lynn de Francesca Rothschild’s espoused love for Clinton, as reported in the NY Times—as the Rothschild clan does its part to sit Hillary Rodham Clinton in the White House.
We see clearly how this Country begins to lose its footing. Americans are nudged and prodded to accept bizarre and foreign ideas, and philosophies, and paradigms that go under the names of multiculturalism, globalization, free trade, neoliberalism, open borders, global communities, political niceties and correctness, moral relativity, new age Enlightenment, commonsense gun laws, and utilitarian consequentialism—the last of which is an ethical system that looks solely at the consequences of an action, not on the actions and intentions of the agent, in determining whether an in action is to be deemed morally good or evil. Utilitarian consequentialism, as an ethical system, is inconsistent with the rights and liberties expressed in our Bill of Rights.
We see the Judeo-Christian belief system fractured, as a faction of Islam, radicalized—extolling bloodshed and terror and murder as a virtue—takes hold around the world—and slowly, insidiously, creeps—is, in fact, allowed to creep—into our Nation’s venues and consciousness. For more on the dangers posed by radical Islam, as seen through the eyes of a Muslim, check out Raheel Raza’s website.
We see our educational system torn asunder as new, uniform curricula are introduced nation-wide, dictated by Washington’s leaders—the puppets of the Rothschild clan and their ilk.
We are now seeing, too, the seemingly immateriality of our Nation’s laws and of our Constitution—the very foundation of our Republic. For, how is it pragmatically and ethically possible that an individual who has been under investigation by the F.B.I. for several months—who has been under investigation by the F.B.I. for having committed serious criminal misconduct—can blithely run for the highest Office of the Land? How is it within the realm of empirical possibility that a person under a cloud of criminal wrongdoing—on such a massive scale—can rationally, realistically one day occupy the Office of President of the United States? It is as if the perceptions of the American people have been vacuumed up and deposited into the mind of a psychotic—a mind where rationality, logical reasoning, and moral considerations are no more than vapors, and the irrationality of the psychotic mind is the only “real” reality.
The American people must wake up from their stupor.
The Arbalest Quarrel has previously discussed the factual evidence supporting Hillary Clinton’s violation of federal laws and the application of law to those facts: directed to one, Hillary Clinton’s intentional or grossly negligent mishandling of classified Government information during her tenure as a Cabinet Level Official in the Obama Administration; two, the matter of and practice of Hillary Clinton’s habitual lying to federal law enforcement officers during the course of their official criminal investigation into her criminal wrongdoing and during the course of their official criminal investigation into the criminal wrongdoing of her flunkies; and, three, bribery and corruption permeating and underlying the Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation.
Did Hillary Rodham Clinton break any other federal laws? Did she commit the most heinous crime of law: treason? And, what kind of character does this character truly have when one considers a person’s fitness to hold the highest Office in the Land? We explore these matters in the next several articles, as Election Day rapidly approaches.Copyright © 2016 Roger J Katz (Towne Criour), Stephen L. D’Andrilli (Publius) All Rights Reserved.