Jorge's False Church Enables Enemies of Christ the King and Souls Without A Thought of Offending God

As one who fought many Sisyphus-like battles within the structures of the counterfeit church of conciliarism before becoming part of the “resist while recognition” Gallicanism for about four years before repudiating this falsehood fifteen years ago this month, I can report with some fair degree of expertise that the battles fought by “conservatives” and semi-traditional Catholics within the false conciliar sect are, in general, a compete waste of time.

Oh, there were a few times when what appeared to be a “victory” had been won against what I thought to be the “bad” bishops who were undermining the “good” pope, Karol Josef Wojtyla/John Paul II. However, those “victories” were short-lived and, because of the false nature of the counterfeit church of conciliarism and its leaders’ belief in dogmatic evolutionism, no matter how packaged or labeled, thus subjected to being reversed at some later time.

For example, this stupid and rather dense man thought he was doing a good thing when writing to Silvio Cardinal Oddi in March of 1983 to save the pastorate of a true priest who was very devoted to Our Lady and whom I had known since entering Kindergarten at Saint Aloysius School in Great Neck, New York, in September of 1956. However, the priest, who never quite saw the argument about the true state of the Church Militant in this time of apostasy and betrayal until he told me over the telephone shortly before he died in 2015 at the age of eighty-four that he had come to recognize that almost everything I had said in lecture series in his parish fourteen years before had come true, was replaced in 2007 by a presbyter who was a complete creature of the conciliar revolution.

There was also the time when I, working with a “bishop” and several prominent, “conservative” priests in the conciliar structures in 1993 during my Wanderer years, helped to “win” a skirmish with the “bad” “bishops” about the “proper” process of translating the Latin editio typica of the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic Novus Ordo liturgical travesty that was but a pyrrhic “victory” as even the Latin edition typica of the Novus Ordo abomination is offensive to God, without any sacramental validity and thus of no use for the sanctification and salvation of immortal souls.

Oh, yes, there was also a “victory” of sorts when a commentary of mine, which had been published in The Wanderer and the Arlington Catholic Herald, about the fact that the University of Dayton, which is run by the Marianists founded by Father William Louis Chaminade, had extended an invitation to the then First Lady of the United States of American, Madame Defarge herself, Hillary Rodham Clinton, to speak at an event there. The thoroughly pro-abortion, pro-sodomite carpetbagger, who was born in Oak Lawn, Illinois, went to Wellesley College and the Yale University School of Law before cutting her political eye teeth as a political assassin on the Committee on the Judiciary of the United States House of Representatives, chaired at the time by United States Peter Rodino, a pro-abortion Catholic from New Jersey who was a member of the organized crime family of the false opposite of the naturalist “left,” who hated President Richard Milhous Nixon so much that she wanted to strip him of all due process rights during the committee’s impeachment hearings, something that United States Jerrold Nadler did not once but twice against former President Donald John Trump. Here is a reminder of what Madame Defarge tried to do against the pro-abortion, pro-population control Nixon in 1974 (See the Appendix below for details and documentation as extracted from an article posted around six years ago.)

Hillary Rodham Clinton later gained infamy for her involvement in Chinagate, Benghazigate and emailgate. She has remained militantly pro-abortion and has become one of the foremost advocates for the whole range of the homosexualist agenda of perverse debauchery.

This is long but I hope interesting way of explaining that my commentary, which was published in early March of 1994, was partially responsible for putting public pressure upon the University of Dayton to withdraw their invitation to Hillary Rodham Clinton before she had agreed to speak at the conference. Again, this was but a pyrrhic victory?


As always, you ask the most probing and relevant questions. Thank you for doing so.

This is relevant as the through pro-abortion, pro-sodomite, statist, environmentalist daughter of William Jefferson Blythe Clinton and Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton, Chelsea Victoria Clinton Mezvinsky, who is now forty-one years of age, will speak virtually as part of a conference on public “health” social control that has been organized by Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s band of theological racketeers that will be held from May 6-8, 2021, and also features the notoriously mercurial statist and lover of the public limelight, Dr. Anthony Fauci:

VATICAN CITY, April 15, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – The Vatican has announced its fifth International Health Conference on “Exploring the Mind, Body & Soul,” and will host scores of globalist and abortion-promoting speakers such as Chelsea Clinton, the CEOs of abortion-tainted vaccine companies Pfizer and Moderna, the director of the U.S. National Institutes of Health, and Dr. Anthony Fauci.  

The conference, entitled “Exploring the Mind, Body & Soul. How Innovation and Novel Delivery Systems Improve Human Health,” is due to take place May 6 through 8.  

An incredible 114 speakers are set to appear at the event, which is hosted by the Pontifical Council for Culture, the Cura Foundation, the Science and Faith Foundation (STOQ), and Stem For Life (SFLF). 

The speakers include prominent and diverse names such as the CEOs of Pfizer and Moderna, the former of which produces abortion pills; the Director of the National Institute of Health (NIH) Francis Collins, who advocates using fetal tissue in research projects; the head of Google Health, David Feinberg; and Dr. Anthony Fauci from the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, whose advice to government officials played a major role in shutting down American churches last year.  

NIH director Francis Collins has a long history of anti-life policies, and has previously acclaimed the “scientific benefits” which come from fetal tissue research, claiming that such work could be conducted “with an ethical framework.”  

He is joined at the Vatican conference by Salesforce CEO, Marc Benioff, who has firmly aligned himself with the globalist, liberal elite, by banning emails from Republicans and the Trump campaign in the wake of the January 6 Capitol protests, as well as prohibiting all clients from even questioning the 2020 U.S. election. Benioff has a history of promoting LGBT issues, and is described by Time as “one of the most outspoken executives,” for LGBT affairs. 

Also speaking at the conference will be United Nations representative and conservationist Jane Goodall, who supports population controlnew age activist Deepak Chopra; rock guitarist Joe Perry; Mormon Elder William K. Jackson; executive chair of the British Board of Scholars and Imams, Shaykh Dr. Asim Yusuf; pro-abortion model Cindy Crawford; and disgraced ex-prefect of the Secretariat for Communication, Monsignor Dario Viganò. 

Numerous other medical professionals, representatives of U.S. federal agencies, university lecturers, high-ranking company officials, and musicians also form the number of speakers. There are only two Catholic clergy listed amongst the 114 speakers.  

Taking place within Vatican City, the event is being promoted with the social media messaging of “#UniteToPrevent and #UniteToCure.” 

The image promoting the conference (featured at the top of this article) appears to be based on Michelangelo’s famous depiction of the Creation of Adam. In the new image two hands reach towards each other, with both hands covered by disposable gloves.  

Indeed, the logo for the conference is a circle of people linking hands, colored in the tones of the LGBT rainbow flag, and positioned next to the crossed keys and Papal tiara of the Pontiff. 

The event is hosted by Cardinal Gianfranco Ravasi, the president of the Pontifical Council for Culture, along with the General Secretary of the STOQ Monsignor Tomasz Trafny, and Robin L. Smith, who is the founder, president and chairman of Cura Foundation and Stem for Life, and vice-president and director of STOQ.  

However, the trio will not be moderating the event, as this role will fall to ten “world-renowned journalists,” such as the executive VP of Forbes Moira Forbes,, Katie Couric, and journalists from major left-wing media corporations such as CBS, CNN, MSNBC, and the Wall Street Journal.  

Will Vatican conference ignore God? 

Perhaps as a sign of the Vatican’s recent declaration of financial difficulties, the conference is supported by numerous large organizations such as Sanford Health, Akkad Holdings, John Templeton Foundation, vaccine company Moderna, and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. 

The first stated aim of the conference is to foster “open dialogue” and to nurture “an interdisciplinary approach to tackle major health care challenges around the globe.” 

Another goal is to “Examine the mind, body and soul interaction and discuss what it means to be human, and how transformative medical technologies are raising new challenges around human enhancement and the interpretation of the mind, body and soul.” 

Given the minute presence of Catholic clergy at the conference, and the moderation by secular journalists, it remains to be seen whether this goal will reference to Catholic teaching on the relation between man and God, and whether it will ignore Catholic theological and philosophical thought regarding the soul.  

Pope Francis’s recent environmental encyclical Laudato Si, is a guiding theme of the three-day conference.  

Quoting from the document, the conference aims to “facilitate a conversation…‘about how we are shaping the future of our planet (...) which includes everyone, since the environmental challenge we are undergoing, and its human roots, concern and affect us all’.” 

In the ten goals listed for the upcoming 2021 conference, the Pontifical Council for Culture made no reference to God or the Catholic Church.  

As part of the conference, a smaller roundtable event will also take place, entitled “Bridging Science and Faith,” and is directed at the “relationship of religion and spirituality to health and wellbeing, including the relationship between mind, body and soul.” 

Fauci to deliver conference’s opening address 

The opening day of the conference will be headed by an intervention from Dr. Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and President Joe Biden’s chief health advisor, who recently assured the World Health Organization of the Biden regime’s commitment to funding abortion, and last year suggested that sex with strangers was safer than receiving Holy Communion during COVID times.  

Fauci has spent more than a year stoking fear in the American public over the Wuhan coronavirus, despite it only having an infection fatality rate of 0.15%, and able to be effectively treated using Ivermectin, Hydroxychloroquine, vitamin D, and zinc. 

Topics for the conference range from “Are We What We Eat?” and “Human Enhancement,” to “Living Healthily to 120 and Beyond” and “Sustainable Health Care: Protecting Our Environment.” 

Only six of the topics are remotely connected to religion, and deal with themes such as “Religious Dietary Practices and Health” and “How Do You Define the Soul?” 

The conference will also address issues related to the current domination of global affairs by governmental responses to COVID-19. 

Aided by the presence of the CEOs of both Pfizer and Moderna, whose abortion-tainted vaccines are increasingly followed by deaths and serious injuries in the thousands, the conference will discuss the “revolutionising” of cell therapy, as well as “Comprehensive COVID-19 Solutions” and “A New Generation of Vaccines.” 

Pope Francis will close the event by giving the participants a private, virtual “audience.” 

With the first such conference taking place back in 2011, previous events have seen individuals such as pro-LGBT pop star Katy Perry addressing attendees on the subject of transcendental meditation. 

This year’s iteration of the event has the largest number of speakers by far, and with its advertised line up of speakers and topics, looks set to continue the irreligious and anti-Catholic themes of previous conferences. (Vatican to Host Covid-Jab Developers, Big Tech Leaders, Anthony Fauci, and Chelsea Clinton Mezvinsky.)

Putting aside the  conference’s aim to extol the “wonders” of the mRNA gene therapy whose goal is to create “transhumans” for the moment as the subject of the genetic engineering represented by the various vaccines supposedly to “immunize” people from a virus that kills about 0.15% of those it infects as this will be discussed thoroughly in part twelve of “Sin: More Deadly Than the Coronavirus,” the upcoming Vatican conference’s aims and list of speakers should be all proof one needs that the counterfeit church of conciliarism is not the Catholic Church.

Despite the incessant quotations of Protestant, Talmudic and even Mohammedan authors, some of whom are supposed Scripture “scholars” and alleged “theologians,” by the likes of Karol Josef Wojtyla/John Paul II, Joseph Alois Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, and Jorge Mario Bergoglio, the Catholic Church has nothing to learn from non-Catholics and she has no need of “listening” to the “other side” about matters appertaining to the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law that are not open for debate and discussion, modification or review.

The belief that the Catholic Church has anything to “learn” from non-Catholics who are open and completely unapologetic supporters of grave moral evils that offend God, send souls to hell and are thus injurious to the common temporal good, which must be pursued in light of man’s Last End, the possession of the glory of the Beatific Vision of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost for all eternity, implies that she, Holy Mother Church is imperfect in her Divine Constitution.

Then again, the conciliar revolutionaries have told us repeatedly that they belief Holy Mother Church has made errors in the “past” and that her Divine Constitution is in need of “improvement” or “change” because it is said to be “no longer working.”

This is what the now disgraced Oscar Maradiaga “Cardinal” Rodriguez said in 2013 as he called for a “new” constitution to govern what he thinks is the Catholic Church:

The cardinals, who were appointed in April by Pope Francis and will confer with him for the first time at the Vatican on Oct. 1-3, were briefed to revise the constitution, known as Pastor Bonus, drawn up in 1988 by Pope John Paul, in a bid to give a great voice to bishops around the world.

But Cardinal Oscar Rodríguez Maradiaga, the group’s leader, said as the meeting loomed they were planning to go much further that just changing “this and that.”

"No, that constitution is over," he said in a TV interview. "Now it is something different. We need to write something different,” he added.

“In the past the Vatican has just revised existing rules so this is a rupture after a century of increasing centralisation,” said Gerard O’Connell, a Vatican analyst at the Vatican Insider. (Francis the Apostle of Antichrist to 'rip up and rewrite' Vatican constitution.)

As I noted at the time in 2013, they had been doing something “different” for over fifty years, and that something “different” has included “papal” apologies to non-Catholic religious sects for how their ancestors in heresy had been “treated” in the past by the Catholic Church, something that Jorge Mario Bergoglio did in 2014 with Protestant “evangelicals” and to Waldensians in 2015.

Here is an excerpt of a commentary of mine about these two of many so many “apologies” for the “errors” of Holy Mother Church:

On this path we have very often done the same thing as Joseph’s brothers, when jealousy and envy have divided us. Those who arrived first wanted to kill their brother – Ruben succeeded in saving him – and then sold him. Our brother John also spoke of this sad story. That sad story in which the Gospel was lived by some as a truth who did not realize that behind this attitude there were ugly things, things that were not of the Lord, a terrible temptation of division. That sad story, in which the same thing was done that Joseph’s brothers did: denunciation, the laws of these people: “it goes against the purity of the race …” And these laws were sanctioned by the baptized! Some of those who made these laws and some of those who persecuted, denounced their Pentecostal brothers because they were “enthusiasts,” almost “madmen” who ruined the race, some were Catholics … I am the Pastor of Catholics: I ask forgiveness for this! I ask forgiveness or those Catholic brothers and sisters who did not understand and who were tempted by the devil and did the same thing that Joseph’s brothers did. I ask the Lord to He give us the grace to admit and forgive … Thank you! (Address to Pentecostal Community in Caserta.)


Tempted by the devil to be faithful to the teaching of Holy Mother Church? 

Yes, this is what Jorge Mario Bergoglio thinks of those who remained steadfast in defense of the Catholic Faith as the only true religion and who pointed out the errors of Pentecostalism, which was born right here in the land of religious indifferentism and Judeo-Masonic naturalism, individualism, egalitarianism and "religious liberty," the United States of America.

Here is what Bergoglio said to the Waldensians when he apologized to them for the fact the denuciation of Waldensianism at the Fourth Lateran Council, which happened to meet under the infallible protection and assistance of the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost, in 1215: 

The Catholic Church seeks forgiveness for past sins against Waldensians

“But the unity that is the fruit of the Holy Spirit,” the Pope said, “does not mean uniformity. Brothers have in common the same origin, but they are not identical among themselves.” Unfortunately, he continued, historically this diversity was not accepted and was a cause of violence and disputes “committed in the name of the faith itself.” This history, the Pope said, can only grieve us, who pray for the grace “to recognize that we are all sinners and to know to forgive one another.” He then asked for forgiveness for “the non-Christian attitudes and behaviour” of the Catholic Church against Waldensians.

Relations between Waldensians and Catholics now founded on mutual respect and fraternal charity

Pope Francis noted with satisfaction that today relations between Catholics and Waldensians are founded “on mutual respect and on fraternal charity,” as witnessed, for example, by the interconfessional translation of the Bible, pastoral arrangements for the celebration of mixed marriages, and the recent drafting of a joint appeal against violence against women, as well as other common initiatives.

Differences should not be an obstacle to collaboration in evangelization and in works

These steps, the Pope said, are an encouragement to continue this common journey. One of the primary areas that is open to the possibility of collaboration between Waldensians and Catholics, he said, is evangelization. Another is “that of service to humanity which suffers, to the poor, the sick, the migrants.” The differences that continue to exist between Catholics and Waldensians on important anthropological and ethical questions, the Pope said, should not prevent us from finding ways to collaborate in these and other fields: “If we journey together,” he said, “the Lord will help us to live that communion that precedes every contrast.”  (Jorge visits Waldensian temple in Turin.)

In other words, Jorge Mario Bergoglio apologized for the work of God the Holy Ghost at the Fourth Lateran Council. He believes that heretics profess the same “basic” faith as the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church founded by Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. They do not. Then again, birds of a heretical feather do flock together, do not they not?

In the present context of the upcoming misnamed “Exploring Mind, Body & Soul” conference, therefore, it should be borne in mind that the conciliar revolutionaries responsible for inviting those who support one grave evil after another simply do not possess the Catholic Faith nor do they have any intention of exhorting those steeped in serious errors to abjure them and to seek to do penance for their propagation of such grievous evils.

Then again, obviously, the conciliar revolutionaries themselves have been grievous errors about the immutable nature of God and His Divine Revelation, ecclesiology, eschatology, dogmatic and moral theology, pastoral theology, sacramental theology, Mariology, and philosophy for over sixty very long years. Those who are steeped in errors of their own thus feel quite at home in inviting others who are steeped in errors to address their conferences as it is hard to feel abhorrence the ways other offend God and harm souls when they themselves are doing the exact same thing without a thought of offending God at all, which leads one to consider whether that it is the point, namely, that the conciliar revolutionaries are actually de facto atheists who make of God whatever they want. Modernism is based in agnosticism, and agnosticism leads to the triumph of atheism over time.

It was only four years ago that the conciliar revolutionaries “distinguished” themselves by inviting the anti-life, anti-population Paul Ehrlich to speak at one of their conferences:

VATICAN CITY, January 12, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) — The Vatican has invited the undisputed father of the modern, pro-abortion population control movement to present a paper at an upcoming Vatican-run conference.

Dr. Paul Ehrlich, author of the 1968 bestseller The Population Bomb is scheduled to speak in Vatican City during the February 27-March 1 conference that will discuss “how to save the natural world.” The Stanford biologist champions sex-selective abortion as well as mass forced sterilization as legitimate methods to curb population growth.

In his 1968 book, Ehrlich went so far as to defend forced abortion, writing: “Indeed, it has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society.”

Titled Biological Extinction, the February conference will address what Vatican organizers call an unsustainable “imbalance” between the world’s population and what the earth is capable of producing. The event is jointly sponsored by the Pontifical Academy of Sciences and the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences.

Organizers of the Vatican-run conference predict that if effective steps are not taken to reverse so-called man-made “global climate change,” then up to 40 percent of “all biodiversity on Earth” will be destroyed “by the end of this century,” including a “majority” of species of plants.

“[T]here is no possibility of improving our situation without the widespread adoption of social justice, both as a matter of morality and as a matter of survival,” the event brochure put out by the Vatican states.

With the invitation of Ehrlich to address the conference, how the Pontifical Academies understand “social justice” takes on a sinister aspect.

In The Population Bomb, Ehrlich forecasted “an utter breakdown in the capacity of the planet to support humanity” that would result in starvation for hundreds of millions, predictions that have proved to be false while his theories have been debunked. The biologist predicted in 1968 that half of Americans would die by 1990. India and China would simply die out. By the year 2000, England would also cease to exist. Ehrlic mentioned in his book sex-selection abortion as a potentially effective tool for conserving the world’s resources by reducing population, a position he continues to defend.

In a 2011 interview with Mara Hvistendahl, Ehrlich defended sex-selection abortion, stating that “it would be a good idea to let people have their choice so that they could have fewer children and could have what they wanted,” adding that a sex-selection abortion and possibly even infanticide might be a better fate for females than what awaited them in an overpopulated world.

“You can be aborted as a conceptus, you can be killed at birth, or you can be sold into slavery and die in a slum someplace,” he said. “It would be interesting to know how many females you’re keeping out of hideous situations [when they are not] killed or infanticided.”

In the same interview, Ehrlich also defended the principle behind mass forced sterilization, a concept mentioned in a 1977 book he co-authored titled Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment, suggesting that mass sterilization working in tandem with sex-selection technology would be particularly effective for population control interests.

Steven Mosher, president of the Population Research Institute, criticized the Vatican’s choice of Ehrlich as a suitable speaker.

“Ehrlich’s opinions on biological extinction rates are just as exaggerated as his failed predictions of a human population explosion. Why the Vatican should be giving a platform to this secular prophet of doom is beyond me,” he told LifeSiteNews.

“There are plenty of credible Catholic scientists around whose fact-based opinions should be highlighted by their Church. What's next? Inviting Raúl Castro to speak on human rights?” he added.  (Pro-Abortion Population Bomb Author to Speak at Vatican Conference on Biological Extinction.)

Steven Mosher, who was denied his doctorate by Stanford University because he had discovered Red China's forced abortion policy, is the best-informed Catholic expert on the genuine population research, and his comment about Raul Castro being invited to speak on "human rights" at the Vatican is more of a possibility than he may think or want to accept.

The conciliar sect does not believe that in the God will provide for the temporal needs of His rational creatures. In other words, the conciliar revolutionaries do not believe in Providence of God. They are pagans, which is why all the consternation by "conservative" and "traditionally-minded" Catholics who are attached to the structures of the counterfeit church of conciliarism in the mistaken belief that they represent the Catholic Church is really a case of near-sightedness worthy of Mister Magoo himself. The conciliar revolutionaries have surrendered entirely to the Judeo-Masonic One World Order that worked mightily behind the scenes for decades to bring it into existence. 

Worse yet, it was just a few months after Ehrlich spoke inside the walls of the Occupied Vatican on the West Bank of the Tiber River in 2014 that allies of George Soros were appointed to Pontifical Academy on the Sciences and the “Pontifical” Academy for Life:

(Vatican Radio)  Pope Francis appointed Professor Joachim von Braun as the new President of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences on Wednesday.

Professor von Braun is Ordinary Professor of Economics and Technological Change, as well as Director of the Center for Development Research at the University of Bonn in Germany.

He told Vatican Radio's Mario Galgano his goal as head of the Academy will be to seek solutions for inequality and the destruction of the environment.

Professor von Braun said the Pontifical Academy of Sciences has a unique role to play in the world of science because it is a "global academy" and not linked to any specific nation.

He said the 80 members composing the Academy are from different countries and religious backgrounds and many hold Nobel Prizes for their contribution to science.

This, he said, means the Academy "has become a very influential body in the world of science".

Professor von Braun said the Academy focuses on "the big issues with which humanity is confronted". 

"I find it particularly important that we find solutions to the two major problems of inequality - lack of justice, hunger, and poverty - on the one hand and the destruction of the environment and nature."

He said that, because these two themes are interrelated, "academicians from diverse science backgrounds can view these problems in new ways and offer solutions to overcome them." (Jorge Appoints Fellow Pantheist to the "Pontifical" Academy of Science.)

Yes, are the really “big” issues with which “humanity” is concerned, not universal apostasy, moral relativism, the daily slaughter of the innocent preborn by chemical and surgical means and certainly not perverse acts in violation of the binding precepts of the Sixth and Ninth Commandment?

Joachim von Braun, you see, is a believer in “sustainable development,” which is handy euphemism for statist control of private property and for the depopulation of the earth of those inconvenient creatures known as human beings. Jorge Mario Bergoglio has been relentless in his support for the goals of “sustainable development,” which is one of the tools that George Soros has used to infiltrate the social agencies of the counterfeit church of conciliarism (the so-called Catholic Campaign for Human Development and Catholic Charities, which exist to implement Alinsky-style “community organizing” in the name of helping the poor), and he has told us of this support very clearly:

Pope Francis criticized the destruction of forests in order to plant soy in an interview with an Argentine radio station on Saturday, reinforcing his message that the environment should take precedence over financial gain.

"It hurts me in my soul when I see deforestation to plant soy," said the pope in an interview with two priests at Radio Parroquial Virgen del Carmen in Campo Gallo, a tiny parish radio station in the poor northern province of Santiago del Estero in his native Argentina.

"It will take thousands of years to recover. Look after the woods and water."

Argentina is the world's largest supplier of soymeal and soyoil, and much of its vast pampas that were once given over to cattle ranches now grow the plant, used for animal feed and in foodstuffs, with China the leading importer.

In neighboring Brazil, also a major soy supplier, environmentalists claim that its cultivation has led to the destruction of rainforest.

The head of the 1.2 billion member Catholic Church has caused controversy before by weighing into debates on the environment and condemning speculation in food commodities.

He visited South America last month and gave passionate speeches in which he censured capitalism, championed the rights of the poor, and warned of irreversible damage to the planet.

In an encyclical dedicated to the environment in June, Francis, the first pope from a developing nation, advocated a change of lifestyle in rich countries and demanded swift action to save the planet from environmental ruin. (Apostate laments destruction of forests to plant soy.)

Bergoglio continued this theme in an address he delivered on Wednesday, September 16, 2015, the Feast of Saints Cornelius and Cyprian and the Commemoration of Ember Wednesday in September and the Commemoration of Saints Euphemia, Lucy, and Gemianus, to European Union “environment ministers”:

Thank you very much for having called this meeting which gives me the opportunity to share with you, if only briefly, some thoughts also in view of important international events in the coming months: the adoption of the Sustainable Development Goals at the end of this month and the Cop 21 Summit in Paris.

I would like to focus on three principles. First of all, the principle of solidarity, a word that is sometimes forgotten and others abused in a sterile manner. We know that those who are most vulnerable to environmental degradation are the poor; they are the ones who suffer its most serious consequences. Thus, solidarity means the implementation of effective tools that are able to fight environmental degradation and poverty at the same time. There are many positive experiences in this regard. For example the development and transfer of appropriate technologies that are able to make the best possible use of the human, natural and socio-economic resources that are most readily available at a local level, in order to ensure their long-term sustainability.

Second, the principle of justice. In the "Laudato si’" encyclical I spoke of "ecological debt", especially between North and South connected to trade imbalances with consequences in the context of ecology, as well as the disproportionate use of natural resources historically exploited  by some countries. We must honor this debt. These nations are called upon to contribute to solving this debt by setting a good example: limiting in a big way  consumption of non-renewable energy; providing resources to countries in need for the promotion of policies and programmes for sustainable development; adopting appropriate systems for the management of forests, transportation, waste; seriously addressing the grave problem of food waste; favouring a circular model of economy; encouraging new attitudes and lifestyles.

Thirdly, the principle of participation, which requires the involvement of all stakeholders, even of those who often remain at the margins of decision-making. We live, in fact, in a very interesting historical time: on the one hand science and technology give us unprecedented power; on the other, a proper use of this power requires that we adopt a more integral and inclusive vision. This demands that we open the door to dialogue, a dialogue that is inspired by a vision which is rooted in that of integral ecology, the very subject of the “Laudato si’" encyclical.  This is obviously a big cultural, spiritual and educational challenge. Solidarity, justice and participation for the respect of our dignity and for respect of creation.

Dear Ministers, the Cop21 summit is fast approaching and there is still a long way to go to achieve a result that is capable of bringing together the many positive stimuli that have been offered as a contribution to this important process. I strongly encourage you to intensify your work, along with that of your colleagues, so that in Paris the desired result is achieved. On my part and on the part of Holy See there will be no lack of support for an adequate response to the cry of the Earth and to the cry of the poor. Thank you.  (Antipope urges EU Environment Ministers to work hard in view of SDGs.)

Jorge Mario Bergolio never urges anyone to work hard for the salvation of souls. Moreover, he has quite deliberately chosen people who are enemies of both the eternal and temporal good of men to key positions in the “pontifical” academies as they reflect his own Judeo-Masonic naturalism, which emphasizes a pantheistic worship of the environment and a Marxist-view of the world’s economy. Joachim von Braun is just such a person, which is why Bergoglio chose him to head the “Pontifical” Academy for the Sciences.

Indeed, one of the organizations von Braun once headed, the International Science Foundation, received its seed money directly from none other than George Soros:

MacArthur provides some $1.5 million annually in science-related grants for researchers working in the former Soviet Union, including support for their travel to scientific meetings abroad. MacArthur also makes grants to formerly Soviet scientific institutions for environmental projects. I cannot mention the Soviet Union without noting the International Science Foundation (ISF), endowed by financier George Soros. The ISF's principal aim is to preserve scientific excellence in the former Soviet states and in the Baltic countries. It has 10 offices throughout these regions. Soros pledged to contribute $100 million over a 2-year period to this effort. Although there was some initial criticism of the foundation's methods for making grants to individual scientists, the fact is that George Soros began the flow of grant money when other foundations and Western governments were still considering what to do. ISF has recently announced it will assist other organizations, at no charge, in making contributions to science and technology in the former Soviet Union and the Baltic states. Future ISF activities apparently depend considerably on whether Western governments and the governments of the former Soviet states are willing to provide matching funds. (NAP. Chapter 8.)

Joachim von Braun has longstanding ties to George Soros, something that was made clear eight years ago in a Newsmax article on how Soros was buying up agricultural land in order to have a major say in the world’s food supply:

Falling commodity prices aren't bringing prices for farmland down with them. Even as the price of grain goes down, the cost of the land it's grown on keeps going up, leading George Soros and other guru investors to bet big on agricultural land.

The fundamentals are easy to understand: Over the next 40 years the population of the world is projected to grow from 6 billion to 9 billion, hugely increasing the strain on arable farmland worldwide.

The spiking grain prices that caused food shortages and rioting in dozens of countries in spring of 2008 fell some 50 percent by December. Yet even after the correction, grain prices remain above their 20-year average, and food stocks around the world are still near 40-year lows.

Land is scarce and will become scarcer as the world has to double food output to satisfy increased demand by 2050," Joachim von Braun, director general at the International Food Policy Research Institute, told Fortune Magazine.

"With limited land and water resources, this will automatically lead to increased valuations of productive land. And it goes hand in hand with water. Water scarcity will probably increase even more than land."

"I'm convinced that farmland is going to be one of the best investments of our time," says commodities guru Jim Rogers.

Eventually, Rogers notes, food prices will rise enough that the market probably will be flooded with supply through development of new land or technology or both, and the bull market will end.

“But that's a long ways away yet," Rogers says. (Soros Buys Up Farmland)

Men such as Joachim von Braun do not believe that God’s Providence can provide enough food for feed the people on the face of the earth. Those who have endorsed the United Nations "Sustainable Development Goals 2030” completely support access to what is called “reproductive health.” Here is the proof:

Preventing unintended pregnancies and reducing adolescent childbearing through universal access to sexual and reproductive health care is crucial to the health and well-being of women, children and adolescents. In 2017, 78 per cent of women of reproductive age (15 to 49 years of age) worldwide who were married or in union had their need for family planning satisfied with modern methods, up from 75 per cent in 2000. Progress has been substantial in the least developed countries, with a rise of 18 percentage points from 2000 to 2017. (Sustainable Development Goals.)

Although Joachim von Braun has always been careful not to write anything about abortion, it is enough that he is a tool of George Soros to work with Jorge Mario Bergoglio and his band of Jacobin/Bolshevik conciliar revolutionaries to use a concern for the “planet” as the cover for propagating moral casuistry about the binding precepts of the Fifth, Sixth, and Ninth Commandments.

Thus it is that Joachim von Braun does not have to have to a “paper trail” on contraception and abortion. He is but a paid stooge of George Soros, who is but one of the chief instruments the adversary is using at this time to prepare the way for the coming of Antichrist, and this truly egregious funder of organized riots and supporter of every manner of statism and moral evil under the sun. And it is no accident that two confederates of Soros who believe in “palliative care” have been appointed to the “Pontifical” Academy for Life:

Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia, President of the Academy, commented on the appointments, saying that "with these appointments Pope Francis has formed a College of academics of the highest professional standing that will offer to the Catholic Church and to the whole world a deep and wise vision in the service of human life, especially life that is weakest and most defenseless. The Academicians named by the Holy Father come from 27 countries around the world and are outstanding in diverse fields of human knowledge. Among them are a number of non-Catholics, either belonging to other religions and non-believers, a sign that the protection and promotion of human life knows no divisions and can be assured only through common endeavor.” With respect to the appointment of Honorary Members, Archbishop Paglia noted that, "They represent the history of the Academy and a passion for human life for which we must all be grateful; it is thanks to the earlier work of so many illustrious men and women that today, with the appointment of new Academicians, our institution continues its service to life with renewed energy."

The Governing Council of the Academy, which will be appointed by the Holy See pursuant to the Statutes and the Regulations of the Academy, will appoint Corresponding Members and Young Researchers (a new membership category created in the Statutes promulgated by Pope Francis in 2016), and thus fill out the membership of the Academy.

The Ordinary Assembly of the Academy, scheduled for October 5-7 in the Vatican, will be opened by Pope Francis, and will constitute the official launch of the renewed Academy.

The following is the list of Ordinary and Honorary Members appointed by Pope Francis.

The Holy Father has appointed as Ordinary Members for a five-year term [a partial listing follows]:

● Professor Nigel BIGGAR, Regius Professor of Moral and Pastoral Theology, and Director of the McDonald Centre for Theology, Ethics, and Public Life, at the University of Oxford (Great Britain);

● Kathleen M. FOLEY, M.D., Neurologist, Director of the Department of Neurology at the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and the New York Hospital (United States);

●Professor Daniel SULMASY, Professor of Bioethics at Georgetown University, Washington, DC (United States); (Bergoglio Nominates One Pro-Abort and Two Soros Cronies to Serve in the "Pontifical" Academy for Life.)

It is instructive to look at these “ordinary members” appointed four years ago as one, Nigel Biggar supports the direct intentional taking of innocent human life in the womb, and the other two, support the dispatching of human beings when “medical professionals” deem that it is necessary to put them on a “path” to “ease” them on a path to death according to a “plan” designed by the “team” assigned to their cases, which, of course “consults” (pressures) family members to agree to do what is “best.”

First, consider the case of Nigel Biggar:

ROME, Italy, June 16, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) — The head of the Vatican’s Pontifical Academy for Life defended Pope Francis' appointment of a new Academy member who is pro-abortion and has expressed qualified support for euthanasia. Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia has, moreover, accused Catholic media of “sensationalism” for highlighting the pro-abortion pick.

When a Twitter user pointed out to Paglia that English Catholic media outlets were focusing on the pro-abortion appointee, he suggested Catholic media was falling victim to “sensationalism.” 

“[W]e pray that Catholics and Catholic media not fall victim to sensationalism,” he tweeted. “Love for life must mean love for each other.”

University of Oxford Professor Nigel Biggar, who was appointed to the Academy for a five-year term, stated in a 2011 dialogue with pro-infanticide ethicist Peter Singer that a preborn baby is “not … the same kind of thing as an adult or a mature human being” and therefore does not deserve “quite the same treatment.”

I would be inclined to draw the line for abortion at 18 weeks after conception, which is roughly about the earliest time when there is some evidence of brain activity, and therefore of consciousness,” he said as reported by Standpoint magazine.

Then, one year later, when he was the keynote speaker for an event at the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota, he said "it is not true that all abortion is equivalent to murder."

When LifeSiteNews asked Biggar if his appointment to the Academy indicated that the Church under Francis is shifting gears on abortion, he said that as someone who is not Roman Catholic, he did not think it appropriate to comment on the Church's position.

"I am very sorry to disappoint you, but the issue of abortion is one on which I have views, but it is not one that I have thought about for a very long time," he said. 

"I believe that the reason for my recent appointment lies in my sustained work on the issues of voluntary euthanasia and assisted suicide. On those issues, my conclusions are consonant with the Church's," he added.

But Biggar’s position on euthanasia is not, in fact, consonant with Catholic teaching. 

In a review of Biggar's 2004 book titled Aiming to Kill: The Ethics of Suicide and Euthanasia, reviewer David Jones wrote for the periodical New Blackfriars that Biggar would allow some people to be euthanized who were so damaged that they could be excluded from being called “human.”  

“If someone’s brain is irreparably damaged so that he or she cannot think, then according to Biggar we should conclude that he or she is no longer a human ‘person’ and no longer part of the human community. Biggar even describes such individuals as ‘irretrievably inaccessible to human care’ so that it means nothing to protect them from being killed nor therefore (and this is my deduction) to visit, clothe or feed them,” wrote Jones. 

Christopher Ferrara, author and head of the American Catholic Lawyer’s Association, said an appointment of a pro-abortion member to the Vatican’s highest pro-life institution means that Pope Francis, “as incredible as it may seem, is programmatically committed to accommodating … the toleration of abortion in the life of the Church.”

“[He has] demolished John Paul II’s Pontifical Academy for Life by sacking every one of its members and having its new president, the ‘pro-gay’ Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia (of obscene mural fame), draw up new statutes for the Academy,” he wrote, adding: “Bear in mind that Pope [Francis] has abolished the pro-life oath formerly taken by members of the Academy.”

Former Academy member Judie Brown, president of American Life League, said the Academy under Pope Francis’ leadership has lost its way. 

“Pope Francis has created a revised version of the sainted Pope John Paul II’s vision that is not only scary, but also in many ways ugly to behold,” she wrote.  

While there are many positive appointments to the Academy, such as Cardinal Willem Eijk, Georgetown ethicist John Keown, and Knights of Columbus Supreme Knight Carl Anderson, there are many former members, high-caliber pro-lifers, who were not invited back. Many of these were specifically chosen by Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI for their pro-life-and-family credentials as well as their fidelity to Catholic teaching. 

Some of those not invited back include Australian philosopher John Finnis, German philosopher Robert Spaemann, Professor Luke Gormally of England, and Austrian Professor Josef Maria Seifert. Many of those not invited back had previously been openly critical of the direction the Academy was being pushed in recent years. (Pro-Abort to Head "Pontifical" Academy for Life.)

What the well-intentioned, incredulous author of the report failed to understand four years ago is that everything about the counterfeit church of conciliarism is ugly, and that includes Karol Josef Wojtyla/John Paul II’s warfare against the nature of dogmatic truth and his incessant acts of obeisance to false religions, false places of worship and the idols and symbols of false religion. Those who do not see this are forever expressing “outrage” at what are simply the logical consequences of endorsing dogmatic evolutionism and of making a mockery of the First, Second, and Third Commandments.

It is really as simple as this: attacks the immutable nature of God and His Divine Revelation lead inevitably to attacks upon each of the Ten Commandments, including the Fifth, Sixth, and Ninth Commandments.

Thus, the upcoming “Exploring Mind, Body & Soul” conference sponsored by officials of the conciliar Vatican is just another proof that the counterfeit church of conciliarism is but the ape of the Catholic Church, she who is the spotless, virginal mystical bride of her Divine Founder, Invisible Head and Mystical Bridegroom, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

Mind you, this is not to minimize the scandal caused by inviting speakers such as those mentioned in the article near the beginning of this commentary. Not at all. However, it is to note that everything about the counterfeit church of conciliarism is scandalous, thus making it fully reasonable for them to become bold enablers of enemies of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, His Divine Revelation, His Holy Church and both the temporal and, more importantly, of course, the eternal good of the souls for whom He shed every single drop of His Most Precious Blood to redeem.

Consider the following prophecy of the Venerable Marie-Julie Jahenny about what we are witnessing that it is a on a website of a Catholic who does not understand that the prophecy refers to the counterfeit church of conciliarism which he or she believes to be the Catholic Church:

Our Lord “I see them embrace the religion of a merry heart, without thinking about Me, on the Church, of their baptism and all that is good for the Christian soul ... by manifesting these signs to My people (i.e., the warnings and chastisements), I want to bring back My people, before the punishment, because I love them. I see eagerly entering this guilty, sacrilegious, infamous, in a word, a similar (religion) to that of Mahomet (sp. Muhammad) (As found at: Prophecy of Marie Julie-Jahenny.)

This is pretty clear, at least it is to those, through absolutely no merits of their own, who have been sent the graces of Our Lady to see it for what it is.

How this end?

Well, we travel by Faith as we pray fervently to Our Lady through her Most Holy Rosary to remain steadfast in the truth no matter what it may cost us in human terms.

The sacrifices, including our voluntary acts of reparation and penance for own many sins, as the consecrated slaves of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary will plant the seeds for the restoration of a true pope on the Throne of Saint Peter and thus the fulfillment of Our Lady’s Fatima Request for the collegial consecration of Russia by a true pope and all the world’s true bishops.

We know the end of the story, do we not?

The Immaculate Heart of Mary will triumph in the end.

What are so afraid?

Why do we prefer to live in fear with Our Lady and her Most Chaste Spouse, our Good Saint Joseph, so near?

Appendix A

Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton and the Nixon Impeachment

(As Excerpted from a Commentary in 2015)

Here is an account of Madame Defarge’s efforts against Nixon that was written by an attorney, the late Jerome Zeifman, who had overall supervisory authority over the House Judiciary Committee’s kangaroo court against President Richard Milhous Nixon in 1974:

At the time of Watergate I had overall supervisory authority over the House Judiciary Committee's Impeachment Inquiry staff that included Hillary Rodham -- who was later to become First Lady in the Clinton White House. During that period I kept a private diary of the behind the scenes congressional activities. My original tape recordings of the diary and other materials related to the Nixon impeachment provided the basis for my prior book Without Honor and are now available for inspection in the George Washington University Library.

After President Nixon's resignation a young lawyer who shared an office with Hillary, confided in me that he was dismayed by her erroneous legal opinions and efforts to deny Nixon representation by counsel -- as well as an unwillingness to investigate Nixon. In my diary of August 12, 1974, I noted the following:

John Labovitz apologized to me for the fact that months ago he and Hillary had lied to me [to conceal rules changes and dilatory tactics.] Labovitz said. "That came from Yale." I said "You mean Burke Marshall [Senator Ted Kennedy's chief political strategist, with whom Hillary regularly consulted in violation of House rules.] Labovitz said, "Yes." His apology was significant to me, not because it was a revelation but because of his contrition.

At that time Hillary Rodham was 27 years old, She had obtained a position on our committee staff through the political patronage of her former Yale law school professor Burke Marshall and Senator Ted Kennedy. Eventually, because of a number of her unethical practices I decided that I could not recommend her for any subsequent position of public or private trust. 

Her patron, Burke Marshal, had previously been Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights under Robert Kennedy. During the Kennedy administration Washington insiders jokingly characterized him as the Chief counsel to the Irish Mafia. After becoming a Yale professor he also became Senator Ted Kennedy's lawyer at the time of Chappaquiddick -- as well as Kennedy's chief political strategist. As a result, some his colleagues often described him as the Attorney General in waiting of the Camelot government in exile.

In addition to getting Hillary a job on the Nixon impeachment inquiry staff, Kennedy and Marshall had also persuaded Rodino to place two other close friends of Marshall in top positions on our staff. One was John Doar; who had been Marshall's deputy in the Justice Department – whom Rodino appointed to head the impeachment inquiry staff. The other was Bernard Nussbaum, who had served as Assistant U.S. Attorney in New York – who was placed in charge of conducting the actual investigation of Nixon's malfeasance.  

Marshall, Doar, Nussbaum, and Rodham had two hidden objectives regarding the conduct of the impeachment proceedings. First, in order to enhance the prospect of Senator Kennedy or another liberal Democrat being elected president in 1976 they hoped to keep Nixon in office "twisting in the wind" for as long as possible. This would prevent then-Vice President Jerry Ford from becoming President and restoring moral authority to the Republican Party.

As was later quoted in the biography of Tip O'Neill (by John Farrell) a liberal Democrat would have become a "shoe in for the presidency in 1976" if had Nixon been kept in office until the end of his term. However, both Tip O'Neil and I -- as well as most Democrats regarded it to be in the national interest to replace Nixon with Ford as soon as possible. As a result. as described by O'Neill we coordinated our efforts to "keep Rodino's feet to the fire."

A second objective of the strategy of delay was to avoid a Senate Impeachment trial in which as a defense Nixon might disclose and assert that Kennedy had authorized far worse abuses of power than Nixon's effort to "cover up" the Watergate burglary (which Nixon had not authorized known about in advance. In short, the crimes of Kennedy included the use of the Mafia to attempt to assassinate Castro, as well as the successful assassinations of Diem in Vietnam and Lumumba in the Congo.

After hiring Hillary, Doar assigned her to confer with me regarding rules of procedure for the impeachment inquiry. At my first meeting with her I told her that Judiciary Committee Chairman Peter Rodino, House Speaker Carl Albert, Majority Leader "Tip" O'Neill, Parliamentarian Lou Deschler, and I had previously all agreed that we should rely only on the then existing House Rules, and not advocate any changes. I also quoted Tip O'Neill's statement that: "To try to change the rules now would be politically divisive. It would be like trying to change the traditional rules of baseball before a World Series."

Hillary assured me that she had not drafted, and would not advocate, any such rules changes. However, as documented in my personal diary I soon learned that she had lied. She had already drafted changes and continued to advocate them. In one written legal memorandum, she advocated denying President Nixon representation by counsel. In so doing she simply ignored the fact that in the committee's then-most-recent prior impeachment proceeding, the committee had afforded the right to counsel to Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas. 

I had also informed Hillary that the Douglas impeachment files were available for public inspection in the committee offices. She later removed the Douglas files without my permission and carried them to the offices of the impeachment inquiry staff -- where they were no longer accessible to the public.

Hillary had also made other flawed procedural recommendations, arguing that the Judiciary Committee should: not hold any hearings with – or take depositions of -- any live witnesses; not conduct any original investigation of Watergate, bribery, tax evasion, or any other possible impeachable offense of President Nixon; and should rely solely on documentary evidence compiled by other committees and by the Justice Department’s special Watergate prosecutor.

Only a few far left Democrats supported Hillary's recommendations. A majority of the committee agreed to allow President Nixon to be represented by counsel and to hold hearings with live witnesses. Hillary then advocated that the official rules of the House be amended to deny members of the committee the right to question witnesses. This recommendation was voted down by the full House. The committee also rejected her proposal that we leave the drafting of the articles of impeachment to her and her fellow impeachment inquiry staffers.

It was not until two months after Nixon's resignation that we first learned of still another questionable role of Hillary. On Sept. 26, 1974, Rep. Charles Wiggins, a Republican member of the committee, wrote to ask Chairman Rodino to look into "a troubling set of events." That spring, Wiggins and other committee members had asked "that research should be undertaken so as to furnish a standard against which to test the alleged abusive conduct of Richard Nixon." And, while "no such staff study was made available to the members at any time for their use," Wiggins had just learned that such a study had been conducted - at committee expense - by a team of professors who completed and filed their reports with the impeachment-inquiry staff well in advance of our public hearings.           

The report was kept secret from members of Congress. But after the impeachment-inquiry staff was disbanded, it was published commercially and sold in book stores. Wiggins wrote: "I am especially troubled by the possibility that information deemed essential by some of the members in their discharge of their responsibilities may have been intentionally suppressed by the staff during the course our investigation." He was also concerned that staff members may have unlawfully received royalties from the book's publisher. 

On Oct. 3, Rodino wrote back: "Hillary Rodham of the impeachment-inquiry staff coordinated the work. The staff did not think the manuscript was useful in its present form." No effort was ever made to ascertain whether or not Hillary or any other person on the committee staff received royalties.

Two decades later Bill Clinton became President. As was later described in the Wall Street Journal by Henry Ruth, the lead Watergate courtroom prosecutor, "The Clintons corrupted the soul of the Democratic Party."

Although I remained a Democrat, I was in complete agreement with Henry Ruth. I served as pro bono counsel and investigator for Congressman Bob Barr (R GA), who was one of the managers of the House Judiciary Committee in the Senate trial of Clinton's impeachment proceedings in the Senate trial. (Jerome Zeifman, Hillary as I knew her in 1974This particular site's transcription of a chapter from one of Mr. Zeifman's books has a number of spelling errors. I chose it to link to rather than the one from which the text above was copied as that other site was filled with grossly indecent advertising.)

Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton is a complete product of Modernity. She established her pattern of deceptive, obfuscation and stonewalling in her youth, enabled by men such as Burke Marshall and encouraged by her fellow feminists. She has always had a profound sense of entitlement. She took documents that she had no right to take back in 1974. She held secret meetings to plan HillaryCare in 1993 and 1994, which is one of the principal reasons that Democrats lost both control of houses of Congress in the national elections of Tuesday, November 8, 1994. What is happening now with her having stored classified information on her own personal computer server in full violation of the rules and procedures of the United States Department and State is nothing new whatsoever.

Although some journalists have written that the late Jerome Zeifman’s account is untrue, one of Zeifman’s contemporaries, Franklin Polk, a fellow Democrat who served with Zeifman as a counsel on the House Judiciary Committee during the impeachment proceedings against President Nixon, confirmed substantial parts of Zeifman’s account: 

Details of Hillary Clinton’s firing from the House Judiciary Committee staff for unethical behavior as she helped prepare articles of impeachment against Richard Nixon have been confirmed by the panel’s chief Republican counsel.

Franklin Polk backed up major claims by Jerry Zeifman, the general counsel and chief of staff of the House Judiciary Committee who supervised Clinton’s work on the Watergate investigation in 1974, reported columnist Dan Calabrese in a column republished by WND.

Zeifman, a lifelong Democrat, called Clinton a “liar” and “an unethical, dishonest lawyer.”

He contends Clinton was collaborating with allies of the Kennedys to block revelation of Kennedy-administration activities that made Watergate “look like a day at the beach.”

Her brief, Zeifman said, was so fraudulent and ridiculous, she would have been disbarred if she had submitted it to a judge.

Polk confirmed Clinton wrote a brief arguing Nixon should not be granted legal counsel due to a lack of precedent. But Clinton deliberately ignored the then-recent case of Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas, who was allowed to have a lawyer during the impeachment attempt against him in 1970.

Moreover, Zeifman claims Clinton bolstered her fraudulent brief by removing all of the Douglas files from public access and storing them at her office, enabling her to argue as if the case never existed.

Polk confirmed the Clinton memo ignored the Douglas case, but he could not confirm or dispel the claim that Hillary removed the files.

Looking back on the case amid Clinton’s fierce battle with Sen. Barack Obama for the Democratic presidential nomination, Calabrese sees a picture emerging “of a very ambitious young lawyer who was eager to please her political patrons, and was willing to mislead and undermine established committee staff and senior committee members in order to do so.”

The columnist, editor in chief of the North Star Writers Group, noted Zeifman has been “trying to tell his story for many years, and the mainstream media have ignored him.”

Zeifman said Clinton, then 27, was hired to work on the investigation at the behest of her former law professor, Burke Marshall, who also was Sen. Ted Kennedy’s chief counsel in the Chappaquiddick case.

When the Watergate probe concluded, Zeifman said, he fired Clinton from the committee staff and refused to give her a letter of recommendation. She was one of only three people who earned that dubious distinction in Zeifman’s 17-year career, Calabrese pointed out.

Zeifman told the columnist he fired Clinton because she was a liar.

“She was an unethical, dishonest lawyer,” Zeifman said. “She conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the committee and the rules of confidentiality.”

Zeifman said Clinton collaborated with several individuals, including Marshall, special counsel John Doar and senior associate special counsel Bernard Nussbaum, who later became counsel in the Clinton White House. Their aim, he said, was the seemingly implausible scheme to deny Nixon the right to counsel during the investigation.

The Kennedy allies, Zeifman said, feared putting Watergate break-in mastermind E. Howard Hunt on the stand to be cross-examined by the president’s counsel. Hunt, according to Zeifman, had evidence of nefarious activities by President John F. Kennedy’s administration, including purportedly using the mafia to attempt to assassinate Cuban dictator Fidel Castro.

Polk regarded Clinton’s memo as dishonest because it tried to pretend the Douglas precedent didn’t exist. But, unlike Zeifman, he considered it more stupid than sinister.

“Hillary should have mentioned [the Douglas case] and then tried to argue whether that was a change of policy or not instead of just ignoring it and taking the precedent out of the opinion,” Polk told Calabrese.

But Zeifman argues that if Clinton, Marshall, Nussbaum and Doar had succeeded, House Judiciary members also would have been denied the right to cross-examine witnesses and denied the opportunity to even participate in the drafting of articles of impeachment against Nixon.

Polk recalls Zeifman told him at the time he believed Clinton’s primary role was to alert Marshall if the investigation was taking a turn against the Kennedys’ liking.

“Jerry used to give the chapter and verse as to how Hillary was the mole into the committee works as to how things were going,” Polk said.

Polk remembered some Democrat committee members, as well as nearly all the Republicans, were upset at the attempt to deny counsel to Nixon.

Zeifman said top Democrats, including then-House Majority Leader Tip O’Neill, believed Nixon clearly had the right to counsel.

“Of course the Republicans went nuts,” Polk said. “But so did some of the Democrats – some of the most liberal Democrats. It was more like these guys – Doar and company – were trying to manage the members of Congress, and it was like, ‘Who’s in charge here?’ If you want to convict a president, you want to give him all the rights possible. If you’re going to give him a trial, for him to say, ‘My rights were denied,’ – it was a stupid effort by people who were just politically tone deaf. So this was a big deal to people in the proceedings on the committee, no question about it.”

Polk said Zeifman rightfully “went nuts,” as well, but “my reaction wasn’t so much that it was underhanded as it was just stupid.”

Calabrese concludes: “Disingenuously arguing a position? Vanishing documents? Selling out members of her own party to advance a personal agenda? Classic Hillary. Neither my first column on the subject nor this one were designed to show that Hillary is dishonest. I don’t really think that’s in dispute. Rather, they were designed to show that she has been this way for a very long time – a fact worth considering for anyone contemplating voting for her for president of the United States.”

The columnist noted Polk recalled something else that started long ago.

“She would go around saying, ‘I’m dating a person who will some day be president,’” Polk said. “It was like a Babe Ruth call. And because of that comment she made, I watched Bill Clinton’s political efforts as governor of Arkansas, and I never counted him out because she had made that forecast.” (Counsel Confirm's Hillary's Fraudulent Watergate Brief.)

Every claim made about Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton’s efforts to act above the laws of God and man is met with naysayers and defenders who just cannot believe what is apparent to anyone who has a modicum of common sense: Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton is an exemplar of American politics, which means that she is committed to the amoral pursuit of self-interest above everything else. Mrs. Clinton’s husband may have been unfaithful to her throughout the course of the time together, dating back to they lived together in sin before they got married on 1975. However, they share a single-minded pursuit of their own careers and “reputations,” being willing to destroy anyone and everyone who gets in their way or who dares to criticize them.

Bill Clinton becomes belligerent when questioned about them. Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton is a little more sophisticated, having learned, according to Dr. William Coulson at a regional Wanderer Forum in Albany, New York, in April of 1995, how to handle "reality" by means of the approach of the late Dr. Carl Ransom Rogers, a "humanistic" psychologist who taught people how to be "comfortable" with their perceptions of themselves and the world. Dr. Coulson, who was a disciple of the Rogerian method and, by his own admission in Latin Mass Magazine in the early-1990s, helped to destroy the Immaculate Heart of Mary Sisters by getting them to express their pent-up grievances against each other in "group sessions," said that one of Mrs. Clinton's answers in an interview about Whitewater was quintessentially Rogerian. Mrs. Clinton said that she was "very comfortable" with her actions in Whitewater (remember those billing records from her old Little Rock, Arkansas, law firm that wound up in the White House reading room?), which Dr. Coulson said was how someone conversation with Rogerian psychology deals with uncomfortable situations. You just make yourself comfortable, and one can be pretty assured that it will be a “comfortable with herself” Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton who appears before the House Select Committee on Events Surrounding the 2012 Terrorist Attack in Benghazi on October 22, 2015.