By Douglas J. Hagmann

Forty years ago this week, our country experienced a monumental constitutional crisis that led to the first and only resignation of a sitting president in our nation’s history. Richard M. Nixon resigned from the U.S. Presidency forty years ago this Friday, August 8, 1974 consequential to three Articles of Impeachment that were adopted by the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives on July 27th, 29th and 30th, 1974.

Article One addressed Nixon’s obstruction of justice, Article Two his abuse of power, and Article Three his contempt of Congress. Concluding each article, the following terminology was used to describe the actions of the President:

[The President] “…acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and subversive of constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States. Wherefore Richard M. Nixon, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office.”

I ask every reader to set aside personal bias and carefully consider those words of the House Judiciary Committee in the context of today’s standards after reading the Articles of Impeachment here. Also consider… that was “then.”

History books tell us that Nixon’s impeachment was the culmination of the investigation of the June 17, 1972 break-in at the Democratic National Committee (DNC) headquarters at the Watergate office complex in Washington, D.C., and the his administration’s conspiracy to cover-up its involvement. The investigation led to the discovery of an array of numerous other abuses of power, including but not limited to the use of the IRS, the FBI and the CIA to harass political opponents (and others), obstructing official investigations into such activities, and in general, subverting the U.S. Constitution as detailed above.

In total, 43 other individuals, many who were top officials in Nixon’s administration, were indicted, tried, convicted and jailed for their roles in the conspiracy that was actively subverting the U.S. Constitution—our rule of law. We had, at least, a partially functioning Judicial Branch of our government. That was then.

A world without the Internet

In the days long before the internet, the corporate media played an integral role in keeping pressure on elected officials to investigate Richard M. Nixon and members of his administration. We had a competitive, rather than a “captured” media. We had an independent media of diverse ownership. Admittedly, it was still biased and operated under certain agendas, but there still existed tireless journalists searching for truth and unafraid of harassment. That was then.

Those of us old enough will recall how we were riveted to our televisions for the hours of hearings from May through August, 1973. Many businessmen and women could be seen standing opportunistically in front of the bulky store televisions watching reports during their lunch hours. Most of us actually cared about the state and direction of our country instead of possessing a feeling of despair and hopelessness. That was before the mantra that “you cannot fight city hall” was ingrained into our collective psyche by the very people who don’t want you to fight, because they know that we can win on the numbers. That was then.

The print media, meanwhile, mostly led by The Washington Post and The New York Times, contained article upon article of the growing scandal, the result of leaks from anonymous sources. Journalists Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein of The Washington Post took the point on the leaks from a then-unidentified source referenced only as “Deep Throat,” later identified as Mark Felt, a long-time FBI agent who briefly served as the Associate Director during the Nixon administration. Anonymous sources, or sources known only to journalists, were once considered sacred to those who were “known and trusted.” Their anonymity was closely guarded from prying, spying eyes of “big brother” for the sake of truth, much to the ire of those under the microscope of investigation. That was the time of wearing out shoe leather as intrepid reporters pushed out from behind their desks and actually chased leads and sources.  Journalists were willing to fight for the scoop and were not intimidated by the tactics of an increasingly oppressive government. Of course, that was then.

Yes, that was then. It was the spring and summer of 1974, when Americans seemed to have had enough of the lawlessness of and within the executive branch. Even without the internet, they had seen, heard and read enough to demand accountability—demand that the checks and balances built into our constitution be activated. It may be reasonably argued that our constitutional system of government worked, and the weight of the Articles of Impeachment was too great for Nixon to overcome.  Arguably, our nation’s chief executive did not want to put our country through the turmoil that further legislative and judicial action would likely cause. As such, he did the “honorable” thing and resigned. It was before the orchestrated “Balkanization” of America took over completely, before all morality was completely stripped out of every aspect of the halls of power, and America was still considered somewhat of a sovereign nation.

Obviously, politics and politicians were different in some respects at that time; lawlessness was much less overt, except for the occasional embarrassing scandal that reared its ugly head from time to time.

Who can forget the powerful democratic U.S. Congressman Wilbur Mills, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee and his very public meeting with destiny later that same year? And by “destiny,” I mean Annabelle Battistella, an exotic dancer known by her trade name of Fanne Foxe. It was on October 9, 1974, when Mills was stopped by the Park Police for a traffic incident.  Mills was obviously intoxicated and appeared to have suffered a trashing by the fingernails of the dancer. Apparently afraid, Foxe leapt from Mills’ car and unceremoniously took a header into the nation’s Tidal Basin in an attempt to escape. Although Mills was reelected in November, he at least had the momentary lapse of integrity to step down from his position of Congressional chairmanship and sought help for his alcoholism.

Unbridled lawlessness unleashed

That was then, before the unbridled arrogance shown by the finger wagging William Jefferson Clinton to every American, asserting that he “did not have sex with that woman.” Indeed, that was then, before “CSI: White House” was a prime-time special and the stained blue dress of shame became a monument to presidential hubris. It was really never about sex, though, not even “then.” It was about respect for the office. More importantly, it was about respect for the rule of law— the U.S. Constitution.

It was out of respect for the U.S. Constitution that on December 19, 1998, the House of Representatives passed two Articles of Impeachment against President William Jefferson Clinton. Contrary to what young people might believe today, the Clinton impeachment proceedings were not about sex, but about the very serious charges of perjury and obstruction of justice by the highest elected official in the U.S. The impeachment led nowhere, for the Senate refused to remove Clinton from office, a decision decided largely along party lines. As the morality of our nation changed, so too did the direction of our country.

Today, four decades later post-Watergate and 15 years after the impeachment of William Jefferson Clinton, the current occupant of the Oval Office is appropriately referred to by the United States Secret Service by his codename “Renegade.” As I’ve previously pointed out, the term renegade is synonymous with the nature of being lawless and traitorous, so I have therefore dubbed him the “Renegade-in-Chief.”

Based on our this brief historical overview, it is easy to see how far our nation has devolved into an abyss of immorality and even more aggressive “finger wagging” at the citizens of our country. Our capture is nearly complete.

For what we have witnessed since the selection of Barack Hussein Obama, a/k/a Barry Soetoro, a “chief executive” lacking authenticated proof of constitutional eligibility has been one scandal after another, each exponentially dwarfing the collection of conspiracies known as Watergate, Mills, and Clinton combined.

Along with the Renegade-in-Chief and his band of traitorous associates, the legislative branch of the United States has become seditious in their own right by failing to represent their constituents or uphold the rule of law. Perhaps it is the result of well over forty years of infiltration by socialist-leaning and communist-adoring Progressives, combined with the giant leftward leap of whatever remains of the entire political spectrum that has brought us where we are today.

Today, instead of acting as journalists, the captured corporate media serve as lapdogs to an unclothed emperor. They have proclaimed Barry Soetoro, a/k/a Barack Hussein Obama—their messiah who is untouchable by scandal or crime. Those who complain about Obama do so within prescribed limits, never touching the all-important third rails such as his eligibility, his background and his allegiance. Their silence is deafening as chaos reigns supreme with our open borders, wholesale spying on Americans, and a Judiciary unwilling to enforce the rule of law.

Many Americans, at least those who know something is amiss, have been nearly lobotomized by the constant assertion that we “cannot fight city hall.” Forty years ago, there were still those of us who believed we could fight city hall—and win. We still can win today, but it’s going to take all of us who are awake to recognize that we endured the last offense to our Constitution.

Unless you’re a fool, you know that there is trouble heading our way. Our way of life is about to take a radical change as the U.S. Dollar is about to be killed in an orchestrated collapse. We are being forced into a virtual North American Union by the intentional erasure of our southern border without our consent. We are being forced into class warfare. We are being lied to everyday by the most powerful who are facilitated by the media, who are perpetuating the lies.

Four decades ago, there was an impeachment that resulted in a resignation of a sitting president and the incarceration of almost four dozen top administration officials. Fifteen years ago, there was an impeachment but without consequence to the man and people behind obstruction and lies. Today, there is virtual silence as we rapidly descend into tyranny. Forty years ago, our objections were heard and acted upon. Fifteen years ago, our objections were acknowledged. Today, those in power are laughing at us.

By Douglas J. Hagmann

Until we demand accountability and forsake all else for the truth without fear of marginalization, without fear of retaining our lifestyles and living standards, and with the personal honesty and integrity expected of us by our Creator, we will continue to be deceived unto our deaths.

Doug Hagmann

It was on a hot and humid Washington afternoon exactly 21 years ago today that the lifeless body of Vincent W. Foster, deputy White House counsel and personal attorney to both President William Jefferson Clinton and his wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton, was found in Fort Marcy Park, located on the outskirts of Washington, DC. The cause of death was a single gunshot wound to his head fired from a small caliber weapon.

The cause of his death was officially ruled as a suicide, and except for a small number of truth-seeking investigators, the case has long been closed. This, despite the forensic evidence that is indicative of homicide, and the proven fact that individuals tampered with not only the crime scene, but the office and personal effects of Mr. Foster.

Considering the seriousness of the news headlines of today, it is reasonable to ask why valuable print space should be given to an apparent tragic incident that happened over two decades ago, and recalled only by people now reaching “middle age.” The reason, I contend, is that the American people were sold—and readily bought into—a lie with regard to the death of Mr. Foster.

Of critical importance, it was a lie perpetrated by many of the very same people who still hold the reins of power and influence inside and outside of the DC Beltway. It is an incident, one of many, that is reflective of a continuing course of criminal conduct by our elected leaders and appointed officials. It is an illustration of the ineffectiveness of a so-called free press, or worse, its collusion with leadership to hold the government accountable on behalf of the American people they are supposed to serve. It is an example of how we, as Americans, possess short attention spans. It is an illustration of how the majority of Americans so readily accept absurd explanations to avoid the embarrassment of being labeled a member of the “conspiracy fringe.” It is an illustration of how many political pundits with large audiences have squandered, or perhaps more accurately abused their platforms by deliberately being misleading or even being AWOL in holding those in power accountable for their lawlessness.

The blatant lies surrounding the death of Vince Foster

The blatant lies surrounding the death of Vince Foster over two decades ago, left unchecked by the corporate controlled media, partisan pundits on both sides of the political spectrum, and the “average” American’s acceptance of those lies, however readily or reluctant, have collectively emboldened the criminal cabal within our government to continue their malevolent agenda. We see the results of this in today’s headlines.

Today, some Americans are finally voicing their outrage over the lawlessness of the IRS, the attack in Benghazi, Libya, that exposed the largest weapons running operation in history in direct violation of U.S. and international criminal law under the Clinton State Department, and other headlines of horror. Yet, these very same people, whether they occupy positions behind a podium, a microphone, or a keyboard, remained silent about the glaring inconsistencies associated with the death of a high ranking White House official.

Why, then, should we expect anything different from this same clique of criminals and their fact-challenged facilitators today?

These are the same people who have readily embraced the forgery of the Renegade-in-Chief’s bona fides of constitutional eligibility, calling us “birthers,” racists and bigots for merely demanding the truth amid a sea of lies. From the Foster murder to the Obama eligibility issue and every criminal activity between and beyond, many pseudo-conservatives have chosen the path of least resistance for the sake of their careers and the futures promised to them, selecting silence over exposure, misdirection over truth. Their search of the truth, if at all, has been placating and gratuitous.

At least the push from the Progressives has been more transparent in its deceptiveness. The Progressives, or those closest to the Renegade-in-Chief and his assembly of anarchists, and those who have made him their messiah, shamelessly lie with impunity. Without even the slightest objection from a captured and castrated press, they look into the cameras and tell Americans that our borders are secure, the economy is recovering, and the planet has never been as peaceful as it is today. Much like the forensics relating to the murder of Vince Foster, their assertions remain unchallenged.

The situation would be almost laughable if it were not so serious. It would be the subject of mockery if our future, and the future of our children and grandchildren, did not hang in the balance.

When an individual or group is given the ability to kill with impunity and manipulate the media through collusion or coercion, while permitted by the people to remain in positions of power, we should not be surprised by our descent into tyranny. In many ways, our descent is with our consent, either by commission or omission.

Until we demand accountability and forsake all else for the truth without fear of marginalization, without fear of retaining our lifestyles and living standards, and with the personal honesty and integrity expected of us by our Creator, we will continue to be deceived unto our deaths.

It’s been 21 years since the murder of Vincent Foster, yet we have never been told the truth about his death. Obviously, the liars and their lies existed for decades previous and in the decades since. By not demanding the truth then, before, or after, the purveyors of perjury have only accelerated their perversion of truth.

We must stop “fostering” the lies.

By Douglas J. Hagmann

“Veni, Vidi, Vici.” Those who endured years of Latin in our education immediately associate and attribute that phrase to Julius Caesar, a reference to his battle with Pharnaces II of Pontus in 47 BC. Caesar reportedly wrote that sentence, which means “I came, I saw, I conquered,” to his friend Amantius after the battle.

Those who managed to escape classes in classical Latin, or perhaps partied through them, might instead associate a convolution of that phrase with the 1984 movie Ghostbusters, in which Bill Murray, portraying Dr. Peter Venkman, used it to describe a battle against a particularly ornery ethereal enemy.

Now, we have a current-day allusion to that phrase used by U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton immediately upon hearing of the murder of Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi. Upon being told of his murder, Clinton joked with news reporters between interviews, laughing as she said, “we came, we saw, he died.” Regardless of Qaddafi’s status as a dictator, such demeanor of a U.S. Secretary of State should be alarming to everyone, but especially to those in the media.

In an earlier, seemingly simpler time in U.S. politics, for example, during the pre-millennium election cycles, people might recall that the liberal left and their media co-conspirators embraced another Latin word: gravitas. Ironically used in context to describe the statesmanship conduct of Bill Clinton, the term means to act in a dignified, solemn, and otherwise appropriate manner. Anyone watching the mainstream media heard pundits and anchors waxing on the gravitas attribute of William Jefferson Clinton over all others. The term survived well into the Bush and post 9/11 years, where the media at times accused George W. Bush of not only lacking gravitas but, in later years as metaphorically “spiking the football,” such as with his ill-advised but non-offensive “mission accomplished” speech aboard an aircraft carrier.

By the utterance of one sentence amid cameras and the press, we bear witness not only to the complete absence of gravitas, but we also watch Hillary Clinton “spiking the football” while laughing about a murder that will have an extremely significant impact on the power structure in North Africa and the Middle East.  The only thing missing from the setting in which Hillary Clinton had made her statement was a “mission accomplished” banner across the back of the room.

There can be no doubt that the media is facilitating the progressive agenda as many in the U.S. are stuck in the pop culture context of Ghostbusters while we are instead witnessing a Julius Caesar moment. Meanwhile, Obama is playing Caesar and changing the world dynamic to fit a larger and much more nefarious agenda in plain view of the entire world.

Where are our conservative leaders? Where’s the outrage? Do people not understand the significance of what is taking place at the hand of the Obama?

Unless people begin to understand that what is being done in the name of freedom and democracy has nothing to do with either and do it soon, we are headed for some very dark times.

By Douglas J. Hagmann

As we have seen with the disgraced and disgraceful Anthony Weiner, sex sells and dominates the media anytime a salacious story breaks. You didn’t have to be a detective to have turned to your wife, husband, or to anyone in the room during any one of the televised media interviews with this twisted twittering congressman as he evaded direct questions about the purveyance of his private parts to say “he did it and now is trying to cover it up.”

He even became surly with reports’ questions about his extra digit in this digital age. Apparently, he learned nothing from history. From Wilbur Mills’ dalliance with Fannie Fox in 1974 to the “Monkey Business” of Gary Hart two decades later, and the Condit affair with the murdered Chandra Levy that dominated headlines in the summer of 2001, Weiner all but dared the media to further expose his digital digressions. And they did. And Weiner cried.

The process is not new to police and investigators. The tears that follow digressions and denials are usually those of remorse of being exposed – pun intended – and not due to the act itself.

For the next extended news cycle, expect the media to converge on digital images of the lawmaker’s lewdness, analyzing the zeroes and ones that makeup today’s images as if they were scrutinizing the former Soviet launch codes. Like sharks to chum in the water, the media will pursue Weiner’s tweets as well as his denials steeped in narcissistic hubris until the story reaches its natural climax.

Like Mills, Hart, and Condit, Weiner will become another entry in Washington’s growing list of sexually scandalous debauchery. Despite its salaciousness, it will eventually be relegated to a mere footnote in American history. It will be of no historical significance except in the lonely and narcissistic existence of Anthony Weiner.

Nonetheless, you can bet that the collective corporate media will relentlessly pursue this story, turning over every distasteful digital fig leaf. Although they should not give a pass to this depraved digital denizen of DC, their interest in an act that has yet to suggest criminal behavior speaks volumes about the state of the media in America today.

Sex v. Everything Else

Followers of the American media certainly like their share of salacious stories. Just look at the statistics of all internet news articles involving shameful behavior versus those of more historical significance. Side by side, a story that details the sad exploits of an obnoxious Weiner will receive more interest than an article that explains our current foreign policy with Israel and the Middle East or the economic dangers we presently face. That does not dismiss the proper placement of the former in the scheme of legitimate news, but illustrates how easily the media can exploit the attention of the majority of Americans at will.

Our current focus on the salacious versus the historically important results from a generation of illiteracy at the hands of a progressive media. Many within this generation receive their news from the intellectually deficient or the deliberately deceptive, from the likes of Jon Stewart to Stephen Colbert and beyond. Such venues exist as pseudo-news, and current event shows for the often factually and morally impaired and frequently invite equally deficient or deceptive shills as guests to subtly mock issues of substance while pushing matters less taxing to one’s grey matter, all to the cackling delight of an enthusiastic studio audience.

Beyond those popular venues vacant of factual information, we have the actual cable and network news shows engaged in their methods of deception through their biased depiction or omission. What is reported in these venues is agenda-driven as well. So too, is what is not reported, decided at office levels far above the broadcast studios.

As over a half-century of television news has shown, one thing is sure. Sex scandals make for good ratings. As I write this, another thing is equally sure. Like finely tuned symphonies conducted by a single conductor, each network is “all in” on getting the goods on Weiner or whatever is not yet left to the public’s imagination. Generations of intentional conditioning or “dumbing down” the masses have created this fertile environment of intellectual bankruptcy.

It is for these reasons that most young Americans today believe the impeachment of former President William Jefferson Clinton was a direct result of having sex with “that woman.” That fable is still perpetuated by the aforementioned pseudo-news personalities who trivialize everything important in America while attacking our morality and ethics. The truth that Clinton was impeached for lying under oath is even marginalized by the fact that the lies were related to his sexual exploits, including by some in the corporate media.

It should come as no surprise that already, the media has spent more air time and print space on the digital transmissions of a congressman than on the digital manipulation of a federal document by the highest office in America.

It should come as no surprise that the media has intentionally shamefully ignored the continuing questions of Barack Hussein Obama’s possible complicity in producing a forged federal document. Instead, the Weiner scandal, of virtually no historical significance, will carry the day over the more historically significant. Obviously, I am referring to the Certificate of Birth produced by the White House and having the imprimatur of Barack Hussein Obama II himself.

The journalistic process, or what is left of it, should be busy analyzing the digital manipulation of the Obama document rather than the Weiner digit.

Soon, however, the elephant in the room will just be too big and malodorous to ignore, even for the corporate media shilling for Obama. More importantly, it will not be because of the media but in spite of it. It will be a matter too big for Jesse C. Lee to control, despite his taxpayer-funded White House position as a modern-day head of a combination “Ministry of Truth”  and Nixonian “plumber’s unit.”

As an investigator, I, for one, seek to make that happen. Around, over, under, or through Jesse C. Lee.

Follow Hagmann P.I.

Copyright © 2023 | All Rights Reserved.