17:39 GMT +330 March 2017
Live
    Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton speaks during the third and final 2016 presidential campaign debate with Republican U.S. presidential nominee Donald Trump (not pictured) at UNLV in Las Vegas, Nevada, US, October 19, 2016.

    Flynn's RT Case: What About Hillary Clinton Taking Fees From Foreign Gov'ts?

    © REUTERS/ Carlos Barria
    Politics
    Get short URL
    235979744

    Retired Lt.-Gen. Michael Flynn has come under attack by the US left-leaning mainstream media over receiving money for a speech at RT's 2015 conference. Speaking to Radio Sputnik, Wall Street analyst Charles Ortel asked why Hillary Clinton's numerous paid speeches and alleged charity fraud are not getting the same amount of ink in US press.

    Retired US Army Lieutenant General Michael Flynn, who was the first national security advisor appointed by President Donald Trump, has once again come under fierce criticism from Democrats.

    This time they accused Flynn of receiving more than $45,386 from Russia's broadcaster RT for a speech delivered at a conference in Moscow back in December 2015.

    Michael Isikoff of Yahoo News presented a leaked paycheck that indicated that Flynn was contracted through Leading Authorities, America's bureau for keynote speakers, to deliver his speech at the RT conference.

    While there is nothing new about the fact that American politicians are used to deliver paid speeches, the leak has again sparked a firestorm of criticism in the US mainstream media against Flynn and President Trump.

    Congressional Democrats argues that Flynn violated the Emoluments Clause of the Constitution since he received payment from the government-funded Russian broadcaster.

    Michael Flynn, ex-director of the US Defense Intelligence Agency (2012-2014) at the RT conference Information, messages, politics: the shape-shifting powers of today's world.
    © Sputnik/ Mikhail Voskresenskiy
    Michael Flynn, ex-director of the US Defense Intelligence Agency (2012-2014) at the RT conference "Information, messages, politics: the shape-shifting powers of today's world."

    Flynn appears to "violate Pentagon rules that subject retired military officers to the 'emoluments clause' in the US Constitution, prohibiting them from accepting any 'consulting fees, gifts, travel expenses, honoraria or salary' from a foreign government," Isikoff elaborated.

    However, the US mainstream media obsession with the Flynn case raises questions.

    "I think that mainstream press, particularly in the United States, leans heavily leftward, heavily in favor of the Democratic party which is still really in shock over the elections in November," Charles Ortel, an investigative journalist and Wall Street analyst told Radio Sputnik.

    "[US media] applied double-standard to their reporting which is beyond stupid," he stressed.

    Ortel highlighted that Flynn is a Democrat who has done a great service to his country.

    His only mistake, according to the analyst, is in not disclosing fully the nature of his business arrangements to the Trump campaign.

    While pointing the finger of blame at Flynn for delivering paid speeches in Russia, the US mainstream media remain silent about huge sums of money the Clinton family — former President Bill Clinton and ex-Secretary State and twice Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton — received from foreign governments.

    "Let's think a little bit here about how much money the Clinton family… from governments around the world in speaking fees," he stressed.

    At first glance it seems that Flynn's $45,000 for one appearance is huge.

    "But what about Hillary Clinton's making $225,000 a speech, speech after speech after speech — $20 million over the course of eighteen months just after she was Secretary of State and just before she ran for president. Why isn't that the subject of intense focus? And the money Bill Clinton took and the money that Chelsea Clinton, in smaller amount, is now taking — why isn't that getting the same amount of ink?" he asked rhetorically.

    The answer is that the mainstream media has become part of the problem, instead of being part of the solution, the Wall Street analyst believes.

    "The media stars… are not doing the work, they are not going and looking at the hard facts… The mainstream media has let itself down. It is very much part of this celebrity culture and they've lost their inquiring minds," Ortel noted.   

    While Democrats are fretting and fuming over Flynn's allegedly violating the Emoluments Clause, the truth of the matter is that they continue to target the Trump administration through their recent media campaign.

    According to Ortel, Democrats "are going to throw everything they can" at the Trump administration to upset the President's efforts to "drain the swamp."

    But how likely is it that Hillary Clinton will be prosecuted under the same clause?

    Ortel says that when it comes to Hillary Clinton it would take a lot of effort to prove the "pay-for-play" allegations and the emoluments clause violation.

    "What is easier to prove is [the Clintons'] charity fraud," he pointed out, highlighting that charity fraud is a special area in US law.

    "The penalties under the US state and federal law for charity fraud, particularly involving disaster relief, are incredibly stiff," he explained.

    Ortel, who exposed General Electric's fraud before its stock crashed in 2008, is investigating the Clinton Foundation's alleged frauds committed in the US and across the world.

    "There have been reports in our press that there have been multiple investigations underway [into the Clintons' charity alleged fraud] led by FBI officers, that there is an IRS investigation… and there are rumors of investigations in Canada, in Australia," he said.

    "There should be an investigation in France; France is the biggest donor, believe it or not, to the Clinton Foundation," he said, adding that Norway, Ireland and many other donors have long funded the charity.

    If the fraud is proven, all of them would be very much upset, Ortel noted, because they will face major penalties for having given money to the charity that wasn't properly organized and operated. 

    Have you heard the news? Sign up to our Telegram channel and we'll keep you up to speed!

    Related:

    Kaspersky Lab Paid Flynn in 2015 for Taking Part in Cybersecurity Forum in US
    RT to Investigate Situation Over Leaked Papers, Paycheck to Flynn
    Pence: Flynn's Ties to Turkey 'Affirm' Trump's Call for His Resignation
    Flynn's Firm Carried Out Research on Gulen for Gov't-Linked Turkish Client
    US Watchdog Sues CIA, Justice Dept, Treasury Dept Over Flynn-Russia Ties Probe
    Tags:
    Democrats, Republicans, fraud, charity, 2016 US Presidential election, The Clinton Foundation, U.S. Department of State, Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, Hillary Clinton, Chelsea Clinton, Bill Clinton, Australia, Canada, United States, Russia, Ireland, Norway, France
    Community standardsDiscussion
    Comment via FacebookComment via Sputnik
    • Сomment

    All comments

    • avatar
      giorgoskaz11
      Left leaning main stream media? As far as I know the main stream media in USA belong to big corporations. Stop calling democrats left, this is not correct. Democrats are simply sponsored by different big businesses. Therefore democrats are supporting the same capitalist system. The same capitalist system supported by Putin. You are all the same but serve different elites. Hello Mr Babitch
    • John Twining
      I fully understand the other restrictions placed on retired military officers, but are speech fees explicitly prohibited? If so, why?

      I wonder how long before the Left's increasingly hysterical witch hunts turn on the owners of Rolls Royce, Bentley and Aston Martin cars because Chinese and Russians buy them.

      "A Russian bought one of yours cars, therefore you're obviously out to kill Obama and kill Clinton, you evil subversives are a threat to the world, and you're killing our babies!"

      Oh Dear God Almighty.
    • avatar
      jas
      Not just the speeches, but it was suspicious when her "global initiative" closed down a couple of months after she lost the election and after a drastic reduction in revenue.
      www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jan/16/clinton-global-initiative-lays-off-22-as-donations

      Clinton was apparently trading classified information for money. She also spent Clinton Foundation money on personal expenses and reportedly her daughter's wedding.

      But I do not expect the criminal progressive media to do anything but lie, cheat and steal, and be ruthless and cruel. So the more they ignore an obvious criminal like Clinton, the deeper they all sink.
    • avatar
      jas
      I personally don't think any of these public figures should charge much more than expenses and for a little time. That is public service. If I had what I needed for my life, I would be glad to speak for people who wanted to hear me. Nobody would have to pay me some ridiculous amount of $20,000 for a few hours of my time. I think anything else is greed.
    • avatar
      vot tak
      ""I think that mainstream press, particularly in the United States, leans heavily leftward, heavily in favor of the Democratic party which is still really in shock over the elections in November,"

      Pure nonsense. The us msm is rightwing and mostly fascist and extremely Russophobic. It is also 100% zionist. They are the opposite of leftwing ideals and practice and far more in line with the "philosophy" of a certain Herr goebbells.

      Claiming the democrats are leftwing is also dishonest. That is as ludicrous as claiming hillary clinton is a leftwing peacenik.
    • avatar
      jas
      And nobody in the lame globalist media mentions Whitewater or Clinton's ridiculous and suspicious $100,000 profit on her first and last commodities trade on the market.
      www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/whitewater/stories/wwtr940527.htm
    • avatar
      jasin reply tovot tak(Show commentHide comment)
      vot tak, In reality, foreign intervention, one government world and violence to achieve this is certainly left wing. Nothing about Clinton is right wing. Big government, big taxes, anti-Christian, anti-heterosexual, globalism, foreign coups, are all of the leftist ideals.

      It is the Democrats who claim to be anti-war for election purposes. But the political ideal of peace and small government is Libertarian. We also get into the real definition of liberal. A classic liberal is on the right, maybe farther right than most. Anarchy is on the right. Personal freedom is on the right, with smaller government and the emphasis on local and state government.

      The media conspiracy changes the meaning of words as a way of weaponizing the words to describe their enemies. Neocons have a documented history on the left and that's where e Clinton fits. But she is really more criminal than of any particular political principle. The media says that every bad moment of history is of the political right, but they "forget" about Truman, Johnson, and Obama. Obama was a violent POTUS.
    • avatar
      PaleRider
      Does Shillery provide instructions on lying and how to be totally incompetent. I can't think of any other informative advice she might offer. OH! Maybe how to screw your Democratic opponents presidential bid or how to implement traitorous subversion of her Country's current Administration. Wow, maybe she does have something to offer. . . .not!
    • avatar
      Mitach2002
      Just by ole leather face Clinton never having been charged proves how broken America is.
    • avatar
      michael
      miss piggy in the flesh! :0
    • avatar
      jas
      And the Clinton book "sale" scam was another money laundering operation. Chelsea is stuck with a bunch of books she can't "sell" because her mother lost the election.
    • avatar
      newdays
      Another country besides US will need to take Hillary down.
    • avatar
      Lickie Weeks
      The difference is that Hillary Clinton took money from Saudi Arabia,
      a country that gives cheap oil to the US. While General Michael Flynn
      took money from Russia, which constantly threatens the US with
      Global Thermo-Nuclear War [total annihilation]; if they don't follow
      Russia's orders all the time and learn how to obey them properly.
    • avatar
      Ceus
    • avatar
      Darrell R
      Although any of these paid speeches by politicians is ethnically questionable, this is small compared to the double standards the media follow when it fits their agenda based reporting.

      One big example of this is the fit they have been throwing over the last couple weeks over the controversial Tweet that Trump made about Obama. Right away they started crying, he has no proof. That's fine, but half a year has passed since Clinton made the Trump Russia collusion claim with no evidence.

      Even after the FBI has repeatedly stated that there is no evidence of this, they keep right on pushing this like he is under some kind of big investigation, they even mention the idea of a special prosecutor. All to push their political agenda as opposed to objective journalism.
    • avatar
      usatim
      all hell queen hillary
    • sapper
      Indeed, what about Hillary. Isn't it about time she got some unwelcome attention in the MSM ??
    • avatar
      PaleRider
      People that constantly say "Well what about. . ." Or "But, but, but. . ." Are going to get their butts handed to them in US politics. You are either as brutal as your enemy or you are dead. There is no more "mister nice guy". The Republicans still have not figured this out, and neither have Nationalists. This is the Leftist Elites Globalist playbook strategy. So folks genuinely concerned about their Countries identity and longevity better wake up very quickly.
    Show new comments (0)