Mrs. Clinton’s Convoluted Clean Crony Cookware Cooked up at State with Her Friends and Her Family Foundation Now Costing U.S. Taxpayers Hundreds of Millions of Dollars

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton with Former President Bill Clinton
at the 2010 Clinton Global Initiative (via the Clinton Foundation)
announcing the Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves
(PHOTO BY  still4hill.com)

UPDATED April 9: Additional coverage of this story is highlighted at the bottom of this post...

A compelling piece from the Heritage Foundation caught my attention last month. That's because David Kreutzer was reporting that a particular "green energy goal is condemning many to prolonged poverty."

Needless to say, this is not just any "green" goal: It is the D.C.-based worldwide mission of the Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves (AKA "the Alliance"), which is described this way:

The Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves is a public-private partnership hosted by the UN Foundation to save lives, improve livelihoods, empower women, and protect the environment by creating a thriving global market for clean and efficient household cooking solutions. The Alliance’s 100 by ‘20 goal calls for 100 million households to adopt clean and efficient cookstoves and fuels by 2020. We are working with a strong network of public, private and non-profit partners to accelerate the production, deployment, and use of clean cookstoves in developing countries.

Keep in mind too, that the Alliance is also promoting this initiative as a means "to save lives, improve livelihoods, empower women, and combat climate change." 

But what's key is that this is the "global green crony deal" of the Democratic U.S. presidential candidate, Hillary Rodham Clinton, who happens to be the Honorary Chair of the Alliance Leadership Council –– a deal by the way, that was not only launched at her family foundation in 2010, but at this point, has already costs American taxpayers $114 million with $225 million additional support anticipated through 2020. 

However, Mrs. Clinton, whose tenure as President Obama's secretary of state started on January 21, 2009 and lasted all the way until February 1, 2013, and her leadership role at the Alliance [pictured left] is only the beginning of this story.

The following bullet points will be addressed in today's Green Corruption File:

1. A week or so before Secretary of State Clinton's speech at the Clinton Global Initiative (CGI) on September 21, 2010, she, via email correspondences, conspired on behalf of the Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves
2. September 21, 2010: Secretary Clinton launched the Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves at the Annual Meeting of the CGI, which is being run by the United Nations (UN) Foundation that is directly tied the United Nations and carries close connections to the Clinton Foundation. Plus more...
3. September 21, 2010: Hillary Clinton's State Department, along with Lisa Jackson's Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), fired up and financed the Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves, obligating over $50 million of American taxpayer money "to the clean cooking sector and the Alliance." However, $50 million was just the beginning... 
4. The "Alliance Partners" are worldwide, but as early as its 2010 launch date, its "Strategic Partnerships and Alliances" included the Clinton Foundation
5. From that September 21, 2010 launch date, Secretary Clinton went on a clean cookstove crusade, which has lasted beyond her time at State 

 ==================

Considering that I found this global green mission a while back, which didn't pass the smell test, it was highlighted during the course of my May 2015 Green Corruption File. 

This not only warrants an investigation, but makes you wonder what other taxpayer-funded green energy programs, initiatives, and the like that Hillary cooked up while secretary of state that favored her foundation and her friends.

Stay tuned... 

However, after further digging and meeting with my cohort in exposing the massive amount of green corruption coming out of the Obama White House, Marita Noon (energy columnist and radio host), it became clear that this little story was a big deal.

Our special meeting in the desert was followed by various correspondents with those familiar with Clinton's special cookware. We then unearthed more dirt surrounding this "clean energy deal," which is a convoluted case of cronyism that, at its worst, is illegal –– and at best, it is highly unethical.

Let's begin with the fact that Hillary is given credit for the birth of the Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves ("the Alliance" or GACC), which has its home in Washington D.C., however, it is unclear as to the exact creator and the date of its founding.

While spending weeks looking into this, I uncovered some interesting information on how India has been on a "cookstove mission" for decades –– even anticipating their own cookstove program in 2009 (the National Biomass Cookstoves Initiative), which "made headlines around the world in the summer of 2010."

Due to the fact that Mrs. Clinton's cookstove deal was launched around that same time, there was "a sense that the GACC had stolen some thunder." This and more was documented by the author of the lengthy piece that was published in April 2015 at The Caravan Magazine entitled, "Up in Smoke: Why India is still looking for a perfect cookstove." 

While the Alliance's formation date found in multiple places is listed as September 21, 2010, it is highly unlikely that Hillary or one of her pals woke up one day in September 2010 with an amazing "clean cookstove" idea that would "save woman all over the world" and then decided to launch it at the Clinton Global Initiative (CGI) annual conference, which is a Clinton Foundation Initiative that also happens to be a "Strategic Partner" of the Alliance.  

Nevertheless, what is clear is that Secretary Clinton launched this worldwide clean cookstove program at her family foundation on September 21, 2010. In addition, we can confirm that Mrs. Clinton, along with Lisa Jackson, who was the head of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) at that time, yet has been a Clinton Foundation board member since 2013, not only fired up the Alliance, but sometime before September 21, 2010, she also decided to finance them with American taxpayer money. This included commitments from the U.S. State Department, the EPA and several other U.S. government agencies. 

Photo by Micael Benanav from Dean's Corner praising the
Global Alliance or Clean Cookstoves 

At that time, the Alliance announced that they were "aiming to save millions of lives," while heralding Mrs. Clinton's part: 

Clinton said the initial U.S. financial commitment to the Alliance is $50.82 million over the next five years. "Our partners have already contributed an additional $10 million, and we're working to raise more every day with the goal of reaching at least $250 million over 10 years," Clinton said.

She framed U.S. participation as part of the Obama administration's "new strategy for international development, which has elevated development alongside diplomacy and defense as the core pillars of American foreign policy."

Hold that thought: These "global clean cookstoves" are part of the "Obama Foreign Policy?" But then again the Obama administration claims that global warming is worse than ISIS.   

At any rate, we have State emails that prove that Secretary Clinton used her position of power to solicit partners and money for the Alliance prior to the launch date and thereafter –– thus we can conclude that the Alliance had been put into place long before September 21, 2010. Therefore, the monies obligated by the U.S. government had been planned and approved prior to this announcement.

Adding to the collusion, the current EPA head Gina McCarthy, whom in 2014, along with our current Secretary of State John Kerry and others, increased the U.S. funding of the Alliance, is currently on the Alliance leadership council, where Hillary currently holds a role as well.


What difference does it make, you ask?

Well, this becomes problematic for Mrs. Clinton in the sense that the Code of Federal Regulations (5 CFR 2635.702) states the following:

An employee shall not use his public office for his own private gain, for the endorsement of any product, service or enterprise, or for the private gain of friends, relatives, or persons with whom the employee is affiliated in a nongovernmental capacity, including nonprofit organizations of which the employee is an officer or member, and persons with whom the employee has or seeks employment or business relations.

5 CFR 2635.702(c) states:

Endorsements. An employee shall not use or permit the use of his Government position or title or any authority associated with his public office to endorse any product, service or enterprise except:
(1) In furtherance of statutory authority to promote products, services or enterprises; or
(2) As a result of documentation of compliance with agency requirements or standards or as the result of recognition for achievement given under an agency program of recognition for accomplishment in support of the agency's mission.

Now if this public-private partnership with the Alliance was an "Obama Foreign Policy" move to help the Alliance "save millions of lives and protect the Earth from impending global warming" –– a statutory authority, if you will, that is defined as "a body set up by law which is authorized to enforce legislation on behalf of the relevant country or state" –– then Hilary's promotion of the Alliance may have been within in the law.

At any rate, I'm not sure which one of these is worse: that Hillary may have broken federal regulations or these "global green cookstoves" were a priority set under the umbrella of Obama's foreign policy.

However, neither scenario passes the smell test. 

So then, we can assume that the financing by many U.S. federal agencies was part of this so-called "green global legislation," of which according the State Department, it was "an unprecedented and coordinated effort by the United States and our partners to address this challenge..."

But who coordinated and approved this kind of deal making?

And, who at State authorized the initial $50 million of American taxpayer money to help launch the Alliance?

Endorsing this enterprise is another area of concern, because Secretary Clinton was actively soliciting members, money and nations on behalf of the Alliance –– both prior to and after its launch. Nations like Norway that also happened to be a Clinton Foundation donor.

Additionally, plenty of wheeling and dealing occurred with Secretary Clinton, the Clinton Foundation and the others  –– even shaping U.S. policy and steering U.S. funds to their favored projects.

This too doesn't pass the smell test.

Enter in the United Nations (UN) Foundation that we can confirm is leading the Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves.

Keep in mind that UN Foundation, which has offices in New York as well as Washington DC, also happens to be a Clinton Foundation donor and a frequent participant at the Clinton Global Initiative Annual Meetings (2010, 2013, and 2015 for starters).

So why was Hilary allowed to fire up the Alliance at her family foundation, along with many of the Alliance partners that are also Clinton Foundation donors (pals), especially Ted Turner's UN Foundation? What about the fact that the Turner Broadcasting is also a Clinton Foundation donor? 

Would this require special Obama approval?

In case you are unaware, the UN Foundation that was "created in 1998 as a U.S. public charity by entrepreneur and philanthropist Ted Turner," which claims it "connects people, ideas, and resources to help the UN solve global problems."

Yep, the UN Foundation connects us with the "useless" United Nations that "was established to foster global peace, prosperity and justice..."

Moreover, the UN Foundation "links the UN’s work with others around the world, mobilizing the energy and expertise of business and non-governmental organizations to help the UN tackle issues including climate change, global health, peace and security, women's empowerment, poverty eradication, energy access, and U.S.-UN relations."

While the United Nations has its own set of looming corruption issues, the UN Foundation, like the Clinton Foundation, is highly suspect in its endeavors as a so-called humanitarian organization.

And, as if we don't give enough U.S. cash to the United Nations. But I digress...

Keep in mind that Hillary's "global green stove deal" was pushed through "to accelerate the production, deployment, and use of clean cookstoves in developing countries....and to combat climate change." But the dirty secret is that the Obama administration already spends billions of dollars each year "helping developing countries cope with climate change."

In fact, this month, Mr. Obama handed $500 million of American taxpayer money the United Nations global warming fund, which is known as the Green Climate Fund (GCL) –– more accurately the UN Climate Racket.

Yep, according to the Washington Examiner, "The $500 million is part of a $3 billion commitment to the fund by the U.S. to help poorer countries cope with the effects of climate change," yet those paying attention describe it as a "Slush Fund for Dictators."

More on the United Nations, Ted Turner and the UN Foundation later.  

Considering that it is illegal for a government official to "use his [or her] public office for his [or her] own private gain...or for the private gain of friends, relatives, or persons with whom the employee is affiliated in a nongovernmental capacity...," it is important to analyze this case and ask this question: Who benefits here?

One might say that "poor women across the globe" do. Others will demand that it helps stop global warming.

Not so fast –– as there are many reports that say otherwise, two of which are found here and here.

As usual, it is the rich, powerful and politically connected that gain from the myriad of "green" programs, initiatives, rules, regulations, and cash coming out of the Obama White House.

And, as usual, there is always three elements that operate inside these green corruption stories: Cronies, Collusion and Cash (taxpayer money that is).

Obviously, Hillary's friends and her family foundation benefit here. For starters the Clinton Foundation can add another green crony deal to their money laundering scheme.

Last but not least, since Mrs. Clinton "made bank" off her book Hard Choices memoir, where she spent some time bragging about her part in the Global Alliance for Clean Cookstove, she currently (since 2013) has a leadership job at the Alliance.

I just wonder if she does it out of the kindness of her heart or if she gets paid. Either way: this position raises her expensive profile, but I doubt that the Alliance would give her the kind of cash she and her husband rake in for their speaking fees ($153 million) at Goldman Sachs or other Wall Street pals. 

And while it may seem like an admirable ECO-Mission that all began in 2010, it is a convoluted dirty deal that at some point prior to September 21, 2010, there was plenty of planning and plotting going on behind the scenes, of which I am sure goes way beyond State Department emails concerning Norway, France and Finland.

That is where we will get into the weeds of this journey...

=============

"Clinton's Crooked Clean Cookstoves Campaign"

2010 "cookstove" email

PART ONE: The Clinton cookstove emails

First, it's important to point to a September 2015 bombshell report by the Washington Times, which revealed that Secretary State Hillary Clinton's "emails show that the Clinton Foundation shaped policy" –– an accusation that had already been hurled at Hillary via the blockbuster, New York Times bestseller by Peter Schweizer that was released May 5, 2015: "Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich."




Still, this email evidence only emerged after Mrs. Clinton was busted not only operating a private email account to conduct government business as secretary of state, but had her very own "home-grown" private server.

In fact, it was the New York Times that broke open "Hillary's Email Scandal" in March 2015 –– of which many have been labeling worse than Watergate. It has continued to dog Mrs. Clinton political ambitions, despite the fact that she is the front-runner (out of two candidates) for the Democrats’ 2016 presidential nomination.

In August 2015, Slate.com summarized a key point:

After a specific request from the State Department—that came nearly two years after she had left office—Clinton turned over 30,490 messages to the agency that she and her team deemed to be possibly work-related. Clinton and her staff, though, say they also destroyed 31,830 messages that they decided were personal. The private server was then subsequently wiped clean.

Despite the fact that there has been many subsequent stories, hearings, probes, investigations and email dumps about the matter, we will never know the damage she caused –– whether it be to national security, mixed diplomacy, money in politics, or even crony deals that she made with her friends and that of her family foundation, such as this "global green deal."

This is because Clinton and her team deleted more than 30,000 emails and then she had her server wiped.

In getting back to the "cookstove story," the Washington Times opened with this:

Former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton’s emails reveal how prominently the Clinton Foundation factored into her thinking as America’s top diplomat, raising questions about where she drew the line between official business and aiding the family charity run by her husband and daughter.

After giving a few examples of Secretary Clinton conspiring on behalf of her family foundation, there was one in particular that the Washington Times divulged, which is extremely relevant to this story. 

Here is the excerpt, coupled with the actual emails found at Wikileaks (Hillary Clinton Email Archive) that are marked in red:

As secretary, Mrs. Clinton also had to make special arrangements for how to handle business from the Clinton Foundation, which had interests in many of the same international projects the State Department did.

One of those was the Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves. Mrs. Clinton announced the public-private partnership in a speech at the Clinton Global Initiative in 2010.


A week or so before the speech, she sent an email to Kris M. Balderston, who served as the secretary’s special representative for global partnerships and managed the departments’ Global Partnership Initiative, instructing him to pursue contribution from Norway.

(NOTE: Actually, the "Original Message From: H <HDR22@clintonemail.com > To: Balderston, Kris M; Fuchs, Michael H" was "Sent: Sun Sep 12 07:48:57 2010 with the "Subject: Cookstoves) 

“The Norwegian FM told me Norway would join the Alliance and we should coordinate w his UN Rep. Will you pls follow up? Thx.,” wrote Mrs. Clinton.

Mr. Balderston responded to the email three days later: “We spoke to the Norway’s Ambassador to the UN and they are joining the Alliance for Clean Cookstoves for $600,000 the first year. They noted that this is a down payment and would contribute a ‘substantial amount for this endeavor’ in the future. They wanted to move quickly for the CGI announcement and to see a business plan before they commit more.”


“Thnx for making this important call. Other countries including France and Finland were waiting for the Norway signal,” added Mr. Balderston.

The Alliance — a program that replaces wood-fired cookstoves in developing countries with cleaner and more efficient alternatives — is run by the U.N. Foundation, which has donated between $250,000 and $500,000 to the Clinton Foundation.

The government of Norway also is a major donor to the Clinton Foundation, contributing between $10 million and $25 million, according to the foundation.

Kathleen Clark, a law professor at Washington University in St. Louis and an expert on ethics in government, said that having Mrs. Clinton make the announcement at CGI was enough to raise red flags.

“It needs some ethical vetting,” she said. “There are restrictions on government officials. You are not supposed to use governmental power to endorse a specific organization.”

She pointed to federal regulations that spell out potential conflicts of interest that government officials are required to avoid: “An employee shall not use his public office for his own private gain, for the endorsement of any product, service or enterprise, or for the private gain of friends, relatives or persons with whom the employee is affiliated in a nongovernmental capacity, including nonprofit organizations of which the employee is an officer or a member.”

The State Department did not respond to inquiries about whether Mrs. Clinton’s 2010 speech at CGI was vetted by ethics watchdogs.

Below are the actual emails regarding the "cookstoves" that transpired prior to Secretary Clinton launching the Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves at her family foundation on September 21, 2010:

*Sunday, September 12, 2010 just before 7:49 AM email sent from Secretary of State Hillary Clinton

Original Message From: H <HDR22@clintonemail.com > To: Balderston, Kris M; Fuchs, Michael H Sent: Sun Sep 12 07:48:57 2010 Subject: Cookstoves

The Norwegian FM told me Norway would join the Alliance and we should coordinate w his UN Rep. Will you pls follow up? Thx.

*Sunday, September 12, 2010 11:55 AM email sent from Balderston 

 From: Balderston, Kris M <BalderstonKM@state.gov > Sent: Sunday, September 12, 2010 11:55 AM To: H; Fuchs, Michael H Subject: Re: Cookstoves

Great news.

Thanks for doing the call. We will get in touch to nail down their participation. It has not been announced yet but we also learned that Shell Company is coming in as a founding member at $6M over three years.

*Wednesday, September 15, 2010 7:09 PM email sent from Balderston

From: Balderston, Kris M <BalderstonKM@state.gov> Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2010 7:09 PM To: H; Fuchs, Michael H Cc: Abedin, Huma Subject: RE: Cookstoves

We spoke to the Norway's Ambassador to the UN and they are joining the Alliance for Clean Cookstoves for $600,000 the first year. They noted that this is a down payment and would contribute a "substantial amount for this endeavor" in the future. They wanted to move quickly for the CGI announcement and ant to see a business plan before they commit more.

Thnx for making this important call. Other countries including France and Finland were waiting for the Norway signal.

PART TWO: The Clinton cookstove launch

On September 21, 2010, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton appeared at the Annual Clinton Global Initiative (CGI) to launch an exciting State Department "global green program," which was described as "a major new cookstove initiative that could change the lives of millions of people, particularly women and children." 

During the course of the plenary session on "Empowering Girls and Women," where Mrs. Clinton was surrounded by her friends as well as her husband, the former-President Bill Clinton, she appeared to discuss the Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves.

In fact, the video here is where she announced this deal and the State Department described it as a "new public-private initiative to create a thriving global market for clean and efficient household cooking solutions that will save lives, improve livelihoods, empower women, and combat climate change."

The CGI Press Release added that it was "a new commitment made by the U.S. State Department, the U.N. Foundation, the World Food Program, Royal Dutch Shell, the World Health Organization, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and other public and private partners. Together, they committed to help 100 million households adopt clean and efficient cookstoves and fuels by 2020."

Moreover, as mentioned at the beginning of this post, the Alliance led with this headline: "Global Clean Cookstoves Alliance Aims to Save Millions of Lives." In describing the excitement surrounding this deal, Mrs. Clinton "framed U.S. participation as part of the Obama administration's "new strategy for international development, which has elevated development alongside diplomacy and defense as the core pillars of American foreign policy."

While there were a few more U.S. government officials on hand touting the event, such as the head of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Lisa Jackson (now a Clinton Foundation Board member), and the Energy Secretary Steven Chu, former President Bill Clinton had this to add:

If you've ever been in a home where cooking was being done with an unsafe cookstove and you've choked up yourself, I don't have to tell you what a big deal this is.

Meanwhile, Jackson chimed in, telling the CGI audience that "this is a very personal issue for me. It's about poverty, the ultimate environmental justice issue."

But we'll leave Jackson's "radical environmental justice mantra" alone for now, because we have bigger fish to fry.

Keep in mind that the Alliance is "an initiative hosted by the UN Foundation," while the Clinton Global Initiative is one of Alliance's twelve "Strategic Partnerships and Alliances" that includes a few  more familiar organization.

Even though there much to be said about these two these shady organizations –– the Clinton Foundation as well as Ted Turner’s UN Foundation –– they do carry a tight relationship on may fronts as well as the fact that the UN Foundation is also a Clinton Foundation donor, contributing between $250,000 and $500,000.

Meanwhile, it is important to note that billionaire Ted of Turner Enterprises, Inc., a champion "in saving Planet Earth" through the Turner Foundation, is not only the founder, but also the Chairman of UN Foundation, where he is listed as the top board member.

While Mr. Turner, who has been known as a a "major funder of leftist causes and politicians," –– even donating to high-profile Democrats in the past, including Bill Clinton –– we can confirm that Turner Broadcasting, the parent company of CNN, is also a Clinton Foundation donor (between $10,000-$25,000).

And who are the UN Foundation Corporate Partners? 

Quite a few big Democrat donors such as Bank of America, Goldman Sachs and Google.

1. (RED)
2. Bank of America
3. CEMEX
4. Deutsche Bank Global Social Finance Group
5. Dow Corning Corporation
6. ExxonMobil
7. GAVI Alliance
8. Global Language Solutions®
9. Goldman Sachs
10. Google Foundation
11. IEEE
12. International Copper Association
13. John Deere
14. Johnson & Johnson
15. MLS W.O.R.K.S.
16. NBA Cares
17. Nike Foundation
18. Orkin
19. Shell
20. Sports Illustrated
21. Time, Inc. Home Entertainment
22. WNBA Cares
23. Project Perpetual

Another interesting tidbit is that the UN Foundation is a major pusher of catastrophic climate change. They have even developed "Sustainable Energy for All," which is another one of the Alliance's twelve "Strategic Partnerships and Alliances."

According to their website, it is "an initiative launched by UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and co-led by World Bank President Jim Kim," of which it apparently balances three global objectives for 2030:

• Ensuring universal access to modern energy services.
• Doubling the rate of improvement in energy efficiency.
• Doubling the share of renewable energy in the global energy mix. 

Moreover, the UN Foundation makes this claim:

Climate change is the greatest challenge of our time. Unchecked, it will put not only development but all of humanity at risk. Sustainable Energy for All provides a framework for addressing climate change through increased use of renewable energy and energy efficiency within a framework of sustainable development...

Remember that part of the UN Foundation strategy is to connect us with the "useless" United Nations that "was established to foster global peace, prosperity and justice..."

As mentioned, the UN Foundation "links the UN’s work with others around the world, mobilizing the energy and expertise of business and non-governmental organizations to help the UN tackle issues including climate change, global health, peace and security, women's empowerment, poverty eradication, energy access, and U.S.-UN relations."

While I'll dissect the U.S. cash –– $114 million with $225 million additional support anticipated –– that is being funneled to the Alliance in Part Three, it is important to remember that the U.S. already doles out big bucks (American taxpayer money) to the U.N.

According to a 2015 Fox News report, "the United States gives approximately $8 billion in mandatory payments and voluntary contributions to the United Nations and its affiliated organizations," which "is far more than anyone else pays.

Remember too, there is the U.N. Climate Racket, of which President Obama, despite objections coupled with Republican leadership capitulation, just cut the first check under the climate deal that was hatched in Paris late last year at the 21st Conference of Parties (COP21) –– and without Congressional approval.

Yep, this month, Mr. Obama handed $500 million of American taxpayer money the United Nations global warming fund, which is known as the Green Climate Fund (GCL).

According to the Washington Examiner, "The $500 million is part of a $3 billion commitment to the fund by the U.S. to help poorer countries cope with the effects of climate change," yet those paying attention describe it as a "Slush Fund for Dictators."


PART THREE: The Clinton cookstoves cash

According to their website, "The Alliance relies on grants and investments from governments, corporations, foundations, civil society, investors, and individuals." 

Photo from PrWeb.com: December 2010 at the
Martha Stewart  Show. Martha, EPA head
Lisa Jackson and UN Foundation Aaron Sherinian 

However, we know that Hillary's State Department, along with Lisa Jackson's Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), not only helped fire up the Alliance, they also financed them–– and it was done so prior to the September 21, 2010 launch at Hillary's family foundation.


In 2010, the State Department recognized that, as part of that launch, "six U.S. federal agencies committed to cumulatively invest roughly $50 million over the following five years to help build this sector."

Adding to the collusion is the fact that Jackson has been a Clinton Foundation board member since 2013, the current EPA head Gina McCarthy is currently on the Alliance leadership council, where Hillary holds a role as well.


In 2014, McCarthy, along with the current Secretary of State John Kerry (our "Climate Change Fearmonger in Chief") and U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) Administrator Rajiv Shah, expanded this global green deal, which included and increase in U.S funding for the Alliance.

At that time they made this claim:

These actions will help improve health, reduce environmental degradation, mitigate climate change, and generate economic empowerment and opportunity for women and girls.

Sounds terrific, however, we the taxpayers are footing the bill.

Remember it all began with a measly $50 million of American taxpayer money and six U.S federal agencies involved. "The initial U.S. financial commitment to the Alliance is $50.82 million over the next 5 years," noted the State Department on September 21, 2010.
However, each Alliance anniversary, the State Department decides to dish out more –– even noting  
the following: "These contributions build on the United States’ initial five-year commitment from 2011-2015 and bring the cumulative ten-year U.S. contribution to the clean cooking sector and the Alliance up to a possible $325 million.

In a September 2015 update, we find the State Department celebrating the Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves fifth anniversary, bragging that the United States has "vastly exceeded" their five year commitment:

The U.S. investment over these five years ultimately spanned eleven federal agencies, and totaled over $114 million – well over double the original 5-year commitment. This investment includes roughly $76 million in research and efforts to develop the evidence base for clean cooking interventions, $31 million in field implementation activities, and $7 million in financing for the clean cooking sector.

Below you will find the latest U.S. Government Funding for the Alliance, which now flows through eleven U.S. government agencies that totals $114 million with $225 million additional support anticipated through 2020. This means that for now, Mrs. Clinton's convoluted clean crony cookware could cost American taxpayer over $339 million. But we'll need to check back each anniversary of the Alliance to know for sure.


#1. Department of State – up to $2.5 million

State Department Funding:

• Original Five-Year Commitment in 2010: $0.37 million
• Actual Five-Year Investment: $6.17 million
• Additional Support Anticipated Through 2020: not applicable

#2. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) – $21.6 million

EPA Funding:

• Original Five-Year Commitment in 2010: $6.0 million
• Actual Five-Year Investment: $16.54 million
• Additional Support Anticipated Through 2020: $ 15 million

#3. U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) – up to $135 million

USAID Funding:

• Original Five-Year Commitment in 2010: $9.0 million
• Actual Five-Year Investment: $29.85 million
• Additional Support Anticipated Through 2020: mobilize up to $125 million in new private financing

#4-6. Department of Health and Human Services via the NIH and CDC

National Institutes of Health (NIH) – $34.4 million

NIH Funding:

• Original Five-Year Commitment in 2010: $24.7 million
• Actual Five-Year Investment: $36.6 million
• Additional Support Anticipated Through 2020: $30 million

Centers for Disease Control (CDC) – $6.5 million

CDC Funding:

• Original Five-Year Commitment in 2010: $1 million
• Actual Five-Year Investment: $5.43 million
• Additional Support Anticipated Through 2020: $5 million

#6. The Department of Energy (U.S. DOE) is spurring development of low emission, high efficiency cookstoves through research in areas such as combustion, heat transfer, and materials development.
U.S. DOE Funding:

• Original Five-Year Commitment in 2010: $12.5 million
• Actual Five-Year Investment: $10.6 million
• Additional Support Anticipated Through 2020: not applicable

#7. The Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) will provide up to $50 million in debt financing or insurance that meet their credit and lending standards over five years to support projects that provide clean, consistent, and affordable access to energy and energy savings through the manufacture, sale, and purchase of cookstoves.
OPIC Funding:

• Original Five-Year Commitment in 2011: up to $50 million
• Actual Five-Year Investment: $7 million
• Additional Support Anticipated Through 2020: renewing commitment of up to $50 million

#8. The National Science Foundation (NSF) is supporting research related to the climate, air quality and health benefits of the adoption of clean cookstoves.
NSF Funding:

• Original Five-Year Commitment in 2010: [not applicable]
• Actual Five-Year Investment: $1.75 million
• Additional Support Anticipated Through 2020: not applicable

#9-11. According to the State Department, additional federal agencies providing support for The Alliance include the Peace Corps, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration as well as the Department of Agriculture.



PART FOUR: The Clinton cookstoves cronies

The Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves "Alliance Partners" are worldwide as declared on their website:

The Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves has recognized national alliance affiliates in Bangladesh, China, Ghana, Guatemala, Kenya, Nepal, Nigeria, and Uganda, and is in the process of formalizing relationships with existing and nascent alliances in other countries and regions.

Moreover, as brought to light many times in this post, the Alliance's "Strategic Partnerships and Alliances" (listed below) includes Hillary's family foundation via the Clinton Global Initiative (CGI), which is "an initiative of the Clinton Foundation" –– a role they took on at its inception in September 2010, when Secretary Clinton launched the Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves at the CGI annual gathering, where they "convene global leaders to create and implement innovative solutions to the world's most pressing challenges." 

The Alliance touts their power around the world and then lists its "partners" : 

The Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves’ public-private model builds on the strengths and expertise of a wide range of partners and stakeholders across the clean cooking sector including national governments and policy-makers, the private sector, UN and multilateral institutions, research organizations, professional and women’s associations, civil society, and investors. By leveraging our strategic, advocacy, outreach, and programmatic role with the work of our partners around the globe, the Alliance is able to mobilize a diverse and powerful international constituency to achieve our mission.
To tap the power of cross-cutting public-private partnerships, the Alliance is proud to work in collaboration with the following strategic partnership and global initiatives:

• Climate and Clean Air Coalition
• Clinton Global Initiative
• Cooking for Life
• Energy for All
• Every Woman Every Child
• Global Bioenergy Partnership
• Global LPG Partnership
• Roundtable on Sustainable Biomaterials
• Safe Access to Fuel and Energy
• Sustainable Energy for All
• World Access to Modern Energy – Milan Expo 2015
• World LPG Association

While they have "nationally and internationally-renowned individuals from the culinary, film, philanthropic, and sport fields who work closely with the Alliance Secretariat and its partner (champions and ambassadors), we also find that the Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves has individual donors as well as "Foundation and Civil Society Donors" filling their coffers, they also have the following given them cash:

Bilateral and Multilateral Donors

• Canada
• Climate and Clean Air Coalition
• Denmark
• Finland
• Germany
• Malta
• The Netherlands

• Norway
• Spain
• Sweden
• United Kingdom
• United States (monies documented above)
• World Bank

Corporate Donors

• Aetna
• Baker & McKenzie
• Bosch Siemens
• CEMEX
• Delher
• Deutsche Bank

• Dow Corning Corporation
• Fuji Television Networks
• Infosys
• Johnson & Johnson
• Morgan Stanley
• Shell

PART FIVE: The Clinton cookstoves crusade 

From the time that Secretary Clinton launched the Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves at the 2010 Annual Meeting of the Clinton Global Initiative (CGI), she toured the globe and recruited more Alliance partners.

And, on May 4, 2012, during her visit to China, Clinton puts "Clean Cookstoves on top of her Agenda" and an ECO-Partnership is born: "China agrees to join the Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves..." 

Meanwhile on May 28, 2012, we find more of Secretary Clinton's emails that show her collaboration at the State Department to gather more "commitments" for the Alliance.

Here is a sample [graphic right]: 

From: Balderston, Kris M <BalderstonKM@state.gov> Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 6:06 PM To: Subject: Norway

Madame Secretary

Our office has forwarded to your specials some cookstove talking points to include in your briefing materials for your upcoming trip to Norway, but I wanted to emphasize the importance of this opportunity. Norway is the biggest opportunity to put the cookstove alliance into overdrive. In your conversation with FM Store nearly two years ago, he noted that their initial $500k commitment was to be a "down payment" once the Alliance had a strategy in place. We now have that. The Alliance has been seeking a major commitment from Norway - on the scale of a five years, $50M commitment. Your mention of the progress the Alliance has made in your meetings w PM Stoltenberg and FM Store could prove crucial in making these commitments happen. This is the Alliance's highest priority request of you this year. Norway would be second only to the US in commitments. Radha Muthiah, the Exec Director of the Alliance and I would be happy to go to Norway and give them the details of our long term strategy.

Thank you very much for your support on this effort. Kris

Around September 26, 2013, Mrs. Clinton was announced as Chair of the Alliance's Leadership Council, where she still serves along with the current head of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Gina McCarthy.

During the course of the Alliance's three-year anniversary celebration (September 26, 2013), the Chief Executive Officer Radha Muthiah, while praising Mrs. Clinton, gives her credit for the birth of the Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves. 

Then at the "Inaugural Cookstoves Future Summit," which was an event of the Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves that took place on November 20-21, 2014, where "more than 400 world leaders and global influencers convened," raising "a total of $413 million in grant and investment funding," Mrs. Clinton was one of the honored Co-Hosts, and is quoted here:

“We have to redouble our efforts to get more clean and efficient products in the hands and homes of families everywhere....We can rededicate ourselves to doing everything we can to help more people in more places to breathe more easily, work more safely and live healthier lives.”

In her "memoir" Hard Choices, that was released on April 28, 2015, Mrs. Clinton pens her recollection and brags about her part in the Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves

Yep, Mrs. Clinton wrote the following:

  I asked Kris Balderston, my Special Representative for Global Partnerships, to lead an effort to tackle this under-the-radar but deeply troubling and consequential challenge. And in September 2010, at the annual meeting of the Clinton Global Initiative, I launched the Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves with...

Later she wrote this:

On behalf of the U.S. government, I announced the pledge of $50 million to the effort going..."

And, Hillary also made this statement:

I was delighted by the speed and scope of the progress we made around the world.

However, in October 2015, Marc Gunther of the Washington Post took Hillary's "green stoves" to task in his piece entitled, "These cheap, clean stoves were supposed to save millions of lives. What happened?

Also, as pointed out in my opening, recently, The Daily Signal warned that this particular "green energy goal is condemning many to Prolonged Poverty." In fact, David Kreutzer, the senior research fellow in energy economics and climate change at The Heritage Foundation's Center for Data Analysis, had this to say:

...renewable energy projects provide less energy per dollar than could be provided from conventional energy sources, even when these conventional sources are equipped with modern pollution abating technology. Researchers have concluded that for every person lifted from energy poverty with renewables, the same money would have lifted four people had the money been spent on conventional power sources. 

Mr. Kreutzer also chimed in on Hillary's "green stove" delusion:

It seems the goal is not to raise the poor’s standard of living to levels enjoyed in the West, but simply to have them burn fewer sticks and less dung inside their houses. Alas, even the benefit of swapping in these more efficient dung-burners appears to be an illusion.

Nevertheless, this not only warrants another investigation into Hillary Clinton's never-ending shenanigans while at State, such as her criminal use of a private server; her egregious Benghazi lies as well as her crony deals with the Clinton Foundation; and so on, but makes you wonder what other taxpayer-funded green energy programs, initiatives and the like that Hillary cooked up while secretary of state that favored her foundation and her friends –– especially since, as president of the United States, she "wants more wind, more solar, more advanced biofuels, more energy efficiency..."

Stay tuned...

Obama's Green Legacy: "Wasting Hundreds Of Billions In Taxpayer Funds"

Nevertheless, if "Clinton's Crooked Cookstove Campaign" was really part of "Obama's Foreign Policy" aimed at helping the poor overcome climate change," then this is another notch to add to "Obama's Green Legacy of wasting hundreds of billions in taxpayer funds" –– all the way from the 2009-trillion-dollar stimulus package, where over $100 billion was earmarked for renewable energy,  to these global green stoves.

In fact President Obama's green energy tab (clean, alternative or renewable), which long ago exceeded $250 billion of U.S. taxpayer money, has in reality funded the largest, most expensive and deceptive case of crony capitalism in American history.  

And while the president recently proposed additional billions in green energy spending just for the Department of Energy (DOE) inside his 2017 budget, Team Obama and their minions are seeking to control every aspect of our lives in order to "save the planet." 

It is astounding that the "Protect the Earth" movement is not only surrounded by ECO-Cronies, ECO-Hypocrites and ECO-Nuts, it is fueled by a "Colossal Climate Change Fear Mongering Campaign."

There's also a big propaganda apparatus that is in cahoots with the media, while we now have a Department of Justice that is entertaining the outrageous idea of taking legal action against so-called "climate deniers."

This despite the fact that the "global warming" (what happened to the impending Ice Age?) –– man-made or otherwise –– science has yet to be settled. Case in point can be found in a 2014 piece at the Wall Street Journal: "The Myth of the Climate Change '97%'":

Last week Secretary of State John Kerry warned graduating students at Boston College of the "crippling consequences" of climate change. "Ninety-seven percent of the world's scientists," he added, "tell us this is urgent."

Where did Mr. Kerry get the 97% figure? Perhaps from his boss, President Obama, who tweeted on May 16 that "Ninety-seven percent of scientists agree: #climate change is real, man-made and dangerous." Or maybe from NASA, which posted (in more measured language) on its website, "Ninety-seven percent of climate scientists agree that climate-warming trends over the past century are very likely due to human activities."

Yet the assertion that 97% of scientists believe that climate change is a man-made, urgent problem is a fiction. The so-called consensus comes from a handful of surveys and abstract-counting exercises that have been contradicted by more reliable research. 

Still, most Americans are clueless to the fact that despite a massive national debt fast approaching $20 trillion, not only has the Obama administration flushed tens of billions of our tax dollars down the ECO-toilet (remember Solyndra?), but many of these "green" projects are NOT so green, clean, cheap, safe, or even environmentally friendly.

In fact, most are expensive, unreliable and even deadly. Even as Solyndra was the first to go kaput, most don't know about the other big green losers such as the following seven (out of 32) failures and up to 59 if you factor in those were bailed out and those teetering on the edge of extinction, which were documented two years ago.

1. Solyndra: $570.4 million 
2. Beacon Power: $67.4 million  
3. Abound Solar: $494.3 million 
4. Vehicle Production Group (VPG): $50 million 
5. Fisker Automotive: $160 million 
6. A123 Systems: $390.1 million 
7. Amonix: $29.6 million

In addition, there are a few new Obama-backed green energy debacles are on the horizon: the Spanish Conglomerate Abengoa that bagged over $3 billion, is now imploding; the Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System that scored over $2 billion, may be forced to shut down because it has failed to produce the expected power; and SunEdison that got tons of free cash, is “mounting financial woes." 

One of the most egregious parts of Obama's "green waist" is that our hard-earned tax dollars are being funneled to foreign firms in order to fund their green energy scam. This includes, but is not limited to, the Department of Energy Loan Program (over $30 billion and counting), the 1603 Stimulus Grant Program (as of December 2015, $24.9 billion), and the U. S. Crony Export-Import Bank (as of 2014, the "green assistance" was at $19 billion).

And, as mentioned earlier, we have the U.N. Climate Racket, where President Obama just handed $500 million of American taxpayer money the them –– you know the Green Climate Fund (GCL), which just a "Slush Fund for Dictators."

This despite the fact that the U.S. already spends hundreds of millions of taxpayer money annually on so-called "climate change mitigation efforts" for other nations.

In fact, in January 2014, CNSNews.com reported a much higher figure: "American taxpayers spent $7.45 billion to help developing countries cope with climate change in fiscal years 2010 through 2012."

Not to mention that a January 2014 CNSNews.com reported the following: "American taxpayers spent $7.45 billion to help developing countries cope with climate change in fiscal years 2010 through 2012."

Keep in mind that under Team Obama, "Federal Climate Change Expenditures," which funds numerous (if not all) federal government agencies, over the past few years has spent $19.8 billion in 2012, $22.6 billion in 2013, and $21.4 billion in 2014.

Now, it is unclear how much of these funds overlap with Obama's "$250 Billion Save the Planet Slush Fund," but it does include "International Climate Change Assistance," of which its "2014 proposed budget authority" is listed at $893 million.


So, why would we need a special initiative to fund a worldwide clean cookstove movement? 

Maybe it is because President Obama and the Clintons not only share the same global warming agenda, but also the same "wealthy green cronies," which was well-documented in my May 2015 Green Corruption File, "Back to the Future: A sneak peek into Hillary Clinton’s climate change cronies."

And now we can see many of the same cronies that have been funding her family foundation are slowly backing Hillary for the 2016 presidential race.

Now, this convoluted clean-energy deal, which is costing American taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars that is supposed to help the poor around the world, yet it "is condemning many to prolonged poverty," may not rise to the level of Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton's part in the deadly Benghazi calamity where we lost four Americans to terrorist (not a video).

However, this story certainly adds to the pattern of how Hillary struggles with the truth and The Clintons think that they are above the law.


Signed your favorite Investigative Citizen Journalist,

-c 

UPDATED:






Marita Noon followed this blog post with her take on "Clinton's Crooked Clean Cookstoves Campaign."

March 29, 2016 Brietbart News: The Dirty Story Behind Hillary Clinton’s ‘Clean Cookstoves’ as well as the following:

• Oilpro
• RedState
• monoblogue
• Canada Free Press
• Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT)
• Energy Makes America Great!
• Political Truth Serum
• The American Spectator
• The Heartland Institute
• The Strident Conservative
• Townhall.com

Then on "America's Voice for Energy"


03/31/16 TOPIC: The developing world wants natural gas and electricity — Hillary Clinton sends cookstoves

GUESTS:

• Christine Lakatos: The Green Corruption File—Hillary Clinton’s convoluted clean cookstove campaign
• Paul Driessen: Author Eco-Imperialism, Green Power, Black Death—the Greens always want to help the Third World, but just not too much
• Ray Smith: EnterGas LLC—Personal experience with propane cookstoves
• David Kreutzer: Sr. Research Fellow in Energy Economics and Climate Change at The Heritage Foundation-- The Green Energy Goal That Is Condemning Many to Prolonged Poverty.

Transparency Alert: Obama political appointees across many agencies using 'secret' email accounts to conduct govt business; DOE included

President Barack Obama's –– who promised to have, and claims to be, the most transparent administration in history –– “political appointees are using secret government email accounts to conduct official business,” The Associated Press found. This ranges across several government agencies, including the Health and Human Services Department (HHS), the Labor Department (DOL) as well as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

Just after the release of this information, Kathleen Sebelius came under fire about her emails, of which the AP published as KGS2@hhs.gov with her public email address of Kathleen.Sebelius@hhs.gov. When confronted by Fox News about the report, Sebelius denied any secrecy, “There is no secret email account, there’s a public email and a private email, and they’re all FOIABle, they’re all available.”

As the denials pile up, the White House shifts the blame, citing it as a practice used by previous administrations. However, the scale and scope across the government and this administration remains a mystery, because transparency is nil: “Most federal agencies have failed to turn over lists of political appointees' email addresses, which the AP sought under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) more than three months ago,” noted Fox News.

According to the AP report last week, they are waiting for at least ten agencies to respond, including the Environmental Protection Agency and the departments of Defense, Veterans Affairs, Transportation, Treasury, Justice, Housing and Urban Development, Homeland Security, Commerce and Agriculture, of which "all have said they are working on a response to the AP.”


Former EPA Head Lisa Jackson’s Alter Ego, the Fictitious “Richard Windsor,” Wins Awards

This is just the latest in a slew of government officials that we can confirm who have been using suspect email practices, which adds to the lack of transparency within the Obama White House. As you may recall Lisa Jackson, the former head of the EPA –– chosen by Obama in 2009 –– used an “alter ego” as her email account to conduct government business.

In the fall of 2012 the name “Richard Windsor” triggered an environmental alarm –– what POLITICO called “an inadvertent ruckus for an agency already under fire from conservatives.” It “spawned a host of accusatory news reports and questions from lawmakers, all of them implying that Jackson was trying to dodge congressional oversight and public records laws by using a private email account under a fake name.”

A fake person, whom by the way, the White House knew about since at least February 2010, and now we learn "he" won several EPA awards.  The National Review divulged, "Documents released by the agency in response to a Freedom of Information Act request reveal that, for three years, the EPA certified Windsor as a "scholar of ethical behavior." The agency also documented the nonexistent Windsor’s completion of training courses in the management of e-mail records, cyber-security awareness, and what appears to be a counter-terror initiative that urges federal employees to report suspicious activity."

Needless to say, refutation is the usual response by the Obama administration in any wrongdoing (whether alleged or factual), and in some cases selective amnesia is their method of deflection. In this case, the EPA claimed that Jackson’s public account, jackson.lisap@epa.gov, was inundated with “1.5 million emails in fiscal year 2012.” Adding to their justification, “EPA administrators have been assigned two official, government-issued email accounts: a public account and an internal account,” EPA said in a statement to POLITICO back in November 2012. “The email address for the public account is posted on EPA's website and is used by hundreds of thousands of Americans to send messages to the administrator. The internal account is an everyday, working email account of the administrator to communicate with staff and other government officials.”

In the midst of this heated environment, Ms. Jackson resigned in December 2012 (and now works for Apple), and by January it became clear that the EPA email scandal was worse than most had originally thought. Brietbart.com put it best, "We’re not talking about some alias to be used for personal correspondence but a totally false identity in whose name official business was allegedly conducted created specifically to avoid federal record-keeping and disclosure requirements. And none of this would ever have been uncovered were it not for the courage of a still anonymous whistleblower and the Competitive Enterprise Institute’s (CEI) Christopher Horner, an attorney with the legal smarts and experience needed to unravel it all."

As early as April 2012, the EPA Intel came to light by Mr. Horner, who is also the author of The Liberal War on Transparency, "research for which uncovered a climate of deceit and obstruction at EPA." Eventually it sparked congressional inquiries, an inspector general investigation as well as a federal court order for the EPA to turn over “the first installment of some 12,000 secret, previously undisclosed emails.”

In January 2013, the EPA provided emails all right, but none that included Jackson’s alias. The next two batches released in February and March of this year were no better, as one set was “heavily redacted” and the other turned out to be a partial document dump. NOTE: a very incriminating timeline regarding EPA's "Richard Windsor" Email Scandal can be found at CEI, yet here we are over a year later, and we're no more closer to the truth.

Jackson, a "friend" of former Green Jobs Czar Van Jones (both far-left radical environmentalists), promised “environmental justice” and referred to this government agency as “Obama’s EPA” –– an agency whereas the president gave the largest budget in EPA history at the tune of $10.5 billion taxpayer-dollars, as well as a tremendous amount of "ECO power," of which the EPA has abused.

Nevertheless, what’s key here is that Jackson's fictitious email wasn’t used for recipe swapping or recycling tips. From what I gather, "Richard Windsor was used to conduct official business with environmental pressure groups, other special interests, and top staffers." The Daily Caller News Foundation also reported, "the Windsor account had also been used to correspond with Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack — who was using a secret account of his own — and outside environmental groups." Additionally, there was another EPA official who used a private email account to correspond with environmental groups in an attempt to "shield communications with environmental activists from public disclosure," documented The Daily Caller in January.

 

Evidence also emerged and was reported by Human Events in December 2012 which stated, “the existence of 12,000 emails (those court order ones) had either addressed to or authored by “'Richard Windsor'” included one of four key words submitted by Horner for a search –– coal, climate, endanger and MACT, a mercury rule expected to have a devastating impact on the coal industry and coal-fired electricity plants and raise rates for consumers."

Jackson was also in charge of other important issues like how to control so-called greenhouses gases, setting fuel standards for automobiles and approving an ethanol-based fuel. We also know that Jackson and the power allotted the EPA, (oops Obama's EPA), who is strongly aligned with President Obama's expensive and ongoing left-wing "climate change" agenda, was used to circumvent Congressional approval. For example, in 2009, the Obama administration was “unable to sell cap-and-trade as a job creator,” knowing that Americans see it as a job killer and a costly energy tax. So in December 2009, the Obama administration decided to go through the EPA to move their climate agenda via the Clean Air Act, ruling that “greenhouse gases threaten public health and the environment” and six key greenhouse gases were listed, including carbon dioxide (C02), opening the “regulation door” to carbon emissions from automobiles, power plants, and other sources.

EPA: Out with the “Richard Windsor” and in with "Obama's Green Quarterback," Holding the "Lack of Transparency" Football 

“Richard Windsor” may be off the team –– awards and all –– but as of late, Chris Horner has gone after EPA senior official, Gina McCarthy, who runs the EPA’s clean air division and in March was nominated by the president to replace outgoing chief Lisa Jackson. 

The charge: CEI filed a lawsuit that “alleges EPA has not provided the records or a substantive response to a late April Freedom of Information Act request, which covers dates McCarthy testified between 2009 and 2012.”

The Hill reported on this story at the end of May, of which the CEI alleged, “McCarthy regularly used text messaging as an alternative to email for work-related communications.” Not to mention McCarthy was apparently warned by a senior EPA official to “cease using that function on her PDA, due to concerns about the propriety of her texting about Members of Congress specifically on days when she testified before either the House or Senate.”

However, McCarthy, in April 2013 told Sen. David Vitter (R-La.), the top Republican on the Environment and Public Works Committee who was vetting her nomination, “I do not conduct business through personal email.” McCarthy is also on the record as stating that she doesn’t conduct business over instant messaging, either: “One good thing about being 58 is I don’t know how to use them,” McCarthy said. “I have never used an IM. I don’t know how.”

Widely known as Obama’s “green quarterback,” McCarthy hit some roadblocks on her way to head the EPA, including a boycott by senate Republican members of the Committee on Environment and Public Works, because she had refused to answer their questions about transparency in the agency. Needless to say, a week later (May 16) McCarthy was approved by the Senate committee, and as reported by the Washington Post, this was "after what Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) described as significant steps forward on transparency issues important to the GOP."

Is there confusion on texting vs. instant messages? Or maybe McCarthy has since learned how to IM. I don't know, but we'll keep tabs on this part of the EPA scandal, because as of this month, McCarthy's path forward to heading the EPA remains murky, as does the transparency within this agency and many others.

July 2012 House Oversight Hearing Revealed Shady Email Practices by Former DOE Loan Advisor Jonathan Silver

I'd love to compare notes with Chris Horner on the Green Corruption scandal, because according to Human Events, Horner also acknowledged that fourteen separate private email accounts helped solidify the Solyndra green energy deal that costs taxpayers over $500 million. The Solyndra Saga was just the beginning of President Obama's clean-energy failures (billions wasted) and crony capitalism run amok, of which I've been tracking for some time. I recently tallied 25 taxpayer-backed green energy firms that have gone bankrupt, and with an equal amount troubled.

Last summer I was one of the few that took issue with the fact that the former Department of Energy (DOE) Loan Advisor, Jonathan Silver, during his time at the DOE, participated in extremely shady email practices that included helping his “friends” get DOE loans, of which I discovered when viewing the July 18th Oversight hearing as well as chronicling the green corruption suspects since 2010.

A scandal that also comprises of internal DOE email correspondences (some from whistleblowers) going as far back as the passing of President Obama's 2009 trillion-dollar stimulus package, of which last fall we busted open the Energy Department's "Den of Deception," proving coercion, corruption, cronyism, and cover ups.

What astonished me was that Silver used his personal email account to “handle” DOE business, where he would forward emails from his DOE account to his personal email, and then respond from his personal email account. Now, Mr. Silver reasoned that it was out of “convenience,” however; this practice clearly violates the Federal Records Act of 1950 (at least the spirit of the law). Worse, these particular Obama appointees don't have an issue with lying to Congress while under oath, and have gone unpunished –– as is the case of Mr. Silver.

When questioned by Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) at the July 18th hearing on how pervasive this practice was; Silver responded with, “Not terribly,” then followed, “I received tens of thousands of emails while I was in the program.” Congressman Gowdy then inquired about the percentage. Silver stated, “I don’t know the answer to that…”

During his testimony, Silver asserted that he had turned over all of his DOE correspondences (government documents), but as usual, it was only after the House Oversight Committee demanded them. During this hearing we also discover that the Obama administration had attempted to block their "legitimate discovery" in this particular case (as they stonewalled on most of the DOE inquiries led by the House Oversight). In fact the DOE specifically tried to prevent them from getting these documents, of which Oversight Chairman Darrell Issa's (R-CA) explained, "asking Mr. Silver’s attorney –– ordering him effectively –– to deliver the documents to them so they could limit and redact them, so they could decide what Congress was entitled to."

Obviously, the DOE was obstructing transparency, but still, this left me with many critical questions. Why did Silver handle DOE business in this fashion –– convenience or concealment? Is g-mail better than DOE e-mail? Did he forget his DOE password? I don’t know.

But what we do know is that this flies in the face of an administration that promised and promotes “unprecedented levels of transparency” and openness...

A day after the July 18th hearing, Chairman Issa appeared on Fox News, and summed up a few key points that he had sternly addressed during the hearing. When asked about Abound (another taxpayer-funded failure accompanied by its share of cronyism and corruption), here is what Issa had to say, “Thanks for covering yet another failed solar project –– one that again went outside the bounds and the rules for making the loan, and the American people are paying for it.”

Issa went on, “I think the most important thing that we saw was the discovery of Jonathan Silver and his various other Department of Energy employees deliberately producing an outside web of private emails in which they exchanged documents, strategized on how to get these loans approved, and so on…”

What do you think they are doing? Issa was asked

Issa’s answer, “I say it was pretty transparent, they’re being opaque…by circumventing these systems, they’re taking things out of what is statutorily required to be there…”


In closing...

Yep, the Obama administration is circumventing not only our Constitution, but evading government systems that were put into place to protect the American people against tyranny and enforce transparency while ensuring we have the proper mechanisms to keep our government accountable, which encompasses our elected officials, political appointees and their staff.

It's alarming the number of scandals plaguing the Obama White House, from Fast and Furious to Green Corruption (the DOE, DOI and EPA) to top officials engaging in shady email practices. Eventually we were faced with the Benghazi cover-up, the IRS political profiling, and the DOJ's chilling media meddling.

The most current and unprecedented controversy impacts every American, no matter what side of the political isle you're on, and our right to privacy. I'm referring the secret court order that allows the NSA to collect the metadata of Americans' phone calls for months at a time as well as operation PRISM –– justified by, yet goes beyond national security –– which began under President Bush in the wake of 9/11 and continued with the Obama administration.

However, Glenn Greenwald, a reporter for the British newspaper The Guardian and the one who broke "the biggest intelligence leak in the NSA's history," firmly warned that the Obama administration "has taken a warped and distorted view of the PATRIOT Act [now on steroids]," which I find horrifying, only to surmise that instead of a "war on terror," it has morphed into a "war on freedom."

While some of these scandals are deadly and disgraceful, others shed light on the political favoritism that runs across many government agencies, and now we search and find that many of these same agencies and others conduct government business in secret.

Worse, if it wasn't for watchdog groups like Chris Horner's, whistleblowers, a handful of media doing their job, Congressional oversight, and citizens speaking out, we wouldn't know about this raging "secret" email scandal running wild within the Obama administration. In fact we'd be in the dark about most of what our government is up to, which is a sad indictment of where we are as Country: a government that is too big, too expensive, and too intrusive, and as of late, has become too corrupt, abusive and secretive.

Even those on the Left had to cede, including President Obama's former campaign advisor, David Axelrod, whereas in an attempt to shield Obama from the IRS scandal had this to say, "How could Obama know what his underlings were doing when the government’s so big?"

While this statement makes the case for smaller government even bigger, more insightful words came out of Becky Gerritson's testimony before the House Ways and Means Committee, whose Tea Party group was one of those targeted by the IRS abuse, "...And I’m telling my government that you’ve forgotten your place...”

In fact our government has it all backwards: instead of punishing government officials and employees for their proven misdeeds, abuses, and crimes, they crucify brave whistleblowers. No matter what side is in power, "we the people" should raise up along side the Becky's of our nation, and remind our government that America was founded and formed "with a government of the people, by the people, for the people."

We must stand firm, and demand punishment for those that abuse their power, and ensure that unwarranted and illegal secrecy STOPS, because there is a reason people do things in secret –– they usually have something to hide, and you never know, tyranny may be "lurking just around the corner"...