Schumer now suddenly silent about Putin since he’s getting paid by lobbying firm tied to him


The following article contains editorial content which is the opinion of the author. 

WASHINGTON, DC- One thing you can count on from leftists…whatever they are accusing you of doing, they are doing themselves. We saw that with the so-called Russia collusion fiasco, where Hillary Clinton accused then-candidate Donald Trump of colluding with Russia.

As we later found out, it was the Clinton campaign, along with the Democratic National Committee and rogue members of the FBI who were in fact colluding to sway the 2016 election.

One of the bigger voices claiming Trump-Russia collusion is Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), who in 2018 issued the following warning:

“A single, ominous question now hangs over the White House: What could possibly cause President Trump to put the interests of Russia over those of the United States?”

Fast forward three years and now, according to journalist Daniel Greenfield  of FrontPageMag, and one needs to ask Schumer questions along the same line. In this case, why is Schumer putting Russia’s interests above America’s regarding his blocking of sanctions placed on the Nord Stream 2 pipeline into Eastern Europe by former President Trump?

The answer is actually pretty easy, according to Greenfield. Once again, all you need to do is follow the money. In this case, Schumer, along with other top Democrats has realized significant campaign donations from a top Democrat fundraiser Vincent Roberti.

The connection? Roberti’s lobbying firm was paid over $8.5 million by Nord Stream 2, ironically owned by Russia’s state-run Gazprom energy monopoly. How weird is that?

Aside from Schumer, California Rep. Eric Swalwell, who apparently loves himself some communists, also was a recipient of money from Roberti, who maxed out donations to Swalwell’s campaign. Swalwell, you might recall, had a sexual affair with a Chinese spy named Fang Fang.

Roberti, a former Democrat politician, also donated $171,000 to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee as part of over a half-million dollars donated to Democrats.

Roberti, according to Greenfield, engages in lobbying on “issues related to the U.S. position toward the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, including potential financial sanctions affecting the project.”

In a complete 180 from his criticisms of Trump, Schumer has had a come to Jesus moment and refuses to hold a floor vote on the Russia sanctions, unlike a few years ago when he demanded Senate Republicans vote on sanctions while accusing Trump and the GOP of coddling Putin.

“Millions of Americans will continue to wonder if the only possible explanation for this dangerous behavior is the possibility that President Putin holds damaging information over President Trump,” Schumer bellowed back then.

Why the sudden change of heart?

In 2018, Schumer slammed Trump, calling his failure to immediately put sanctions on Putin as “an extreme dereliction of duty by President Trump, who seems more intent on undermining the rule of law of this country than standing up to Putin.” Nowadays? Not so much.

Another screeching banshee at the time was Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), another Democrat who suffered from Trump Derangement Syndrome and who also accused Trump of being too close to Putin.

“With him, all roads lead to Putin,” Pelosi bellowed at the time. “I don’t know what the Russians have on the president, politically, personally or financially.”

Well apparently, Putin has something financial on someone, in this case Pelosi. Roberti dropped $46,100 into Pelosi’s Victory Fund, while also giving the maximum amount in campaign donations to Pelosi’s campaign and another $5,000 to her PAC to the Future.

Oh, and according to Greenfield, Pelosi proposed a toast to Roberti and his wife at their wedding, also attended by Rep. John Larson (D-CT), Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA) and Clinton pal Tony Podesta of the Podesta Group, Politico reported.

Another hypocrite (to nobody’s surprise who lives in CT) is Sen. Da Nang Dick Blumenthal (D-CT), who also was on the Trump-Russia collusion bandwagon.

“Trump denial of Russian collusion rotten at core and doomed to unravel,” Blumenthal tweeted in 2018. “Expect more serious convictions and indictments early in 2018 as the Special Counsel climbs the ladder of criminal culpability.”

As always, Blumenthal was wrong. But he did get a lot of money from Roberti, who also maxed out his donations to Blumenthal’s coffers.

Others who were beneficiaries of Roberti’s money were Sens. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), Patty Murray (D-WA), Maggie Hassan (D-NH) and Cory Booker (D-NJ). All had been sharp critics of Trump, with Cortez-Maston having accused him of risking national security. Murray called for a special prosecutor, as did Hassan. Booker said that Trump had “betrayed” his role while accusing him of being “weak and submissive” to Putin.

All the above received the maximum donation from Roberti with the exception of Booker, who only received $1,000.

All of that, of course pales in comparison to the intense lobbying to stop Nord Stream 2 sanctions from the Biden White House, with top Biden aides pressuring Senate Democrats to look the other way and let Putin have his pipeline. Ironically (or perhaps not) this came shortly after Biden shut down the Keystone XL pipeline in the central U.S.

When he decided to pull the sanctions from Nord Stream, Biden claimed that doing so was in “U.S. national interests.” He did not explain how, not that he was capable of doing so.

Biden and Roberti have long ties, with the latter bragging of having advised Biden on his failed 2008 presidential campaign, also flying Biden to his hometown during that presidential run.

Another interesting tie into Nord Stream is a man named Richard Burt, former U.S. ambassador to West Germany, who is also a member of a number of influential Washington, DC think-tanks. According to OpenSecrets, Burt lobbied for a number of foreign companies that had partnered on Nord Stream on “Russian sanctions issues’ and “natural gas as an element of European energy security.”

Burt donated $2,000 to Biden’s 2020 presidential campaign, and an additional $10,000 to pro-Biden super PAC Unite the Country while serving as a registered lobbyist for federal companies that were partnered with Nord Stream on the pipeline.

OpenSecrets reported that the Biden campaign had not refunded Burt’s money at the time of publication, despite Biden pledged to reject lobbyist donations. However Greenfield said that after getting embarrassed by the New York Post, the money was finally returned.

So while these Democrats railed against Trump for a “cozy” relationship with Putin, they ignore the ties Biden has to Russian assets, as well as themselves.

According to Secretary of State Antony Blinken, Biden’s refusal to sanction the pipeline is intended to “rebuild relationships with our allies and partners in Europe.” Quid pro quo? Didn’t someone get impeached for something like that?

As Greenfield notes, for someone who wouldn’t shut up about Putin for four years, Schumer is awfully quiet right now. Loading his campaign coffers with money from a lobbyist for a Swiss company owned by the Putin regime evidently makes a big difference.

Schumer—majority leader? Nah. Majority hypocrite.

Former police chief: Sen. Blumenthal helps CT Communist Party celebrate anniversary of Communist Party USA

In case you missed it, Law Enforcement Today recently reported on a significant drop in donations to the Clinton Foundation now that they are no longer relevant. For more on that, we invite you to:


Pretty much everyone knows the Clintons are dirty and now others are beginning to take notice, given the Clinton Foundation’s precipitous decline in receipt of donations since neither of them any longer carry political sway.

Some of those who have started to take notice are ethics watchdogs, alarmed by the decline and believing it shows signs of political corruption.

As John McClane said in “Die Hard,” “Welcome to the party, pal!”


The Daily Caller reports that financial disclosures indicate there has been a significant decline in donations to the Clinton Foundation following the couple’s fall from political power.

For example, last year the foundation received some $16.3 million in contributions according to their newly released Form 990.

That represented a decrease of 93.6% from 2009, when the foundation received nearly $250 million while Hillary Clinton was serving as Secretary of State. Coincidence? Not likely.

One such watchdog, the Project on Government Oversight (POGO) expressed reservations about the significant decline.

“For years, the Clinton Foundation raised ethical concerns and blurred lines between the foundation, private entities and the State Department,” said Scott Amey, General Counsel for the organization, a nonpartisan, independent government corruption watchdog organization.

“Money was pouring in when Hillary Clinton was a senior official and a candidate for president. The fact that foundation donors received special access to the Secretary of State isn’t surprising, nor is the fall in foundation funding after her 2016 election loss,” Amey said.

“Many people thought people were supporting the former president, but it really looks like they were cozying up to who they thought was going to be the future president—a situation that can’t be repeated.”

Amey then addressed other ethics concerns, this involving former Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin and Donald Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, noting it was time for Congress to do something and pass substantial ethics reform legislation.

“Now, with ethics concerns raised about Mnuchin and Kushner, as well as judges, it is vital that Congress put politics aside and pass an ethics reform package for all three branches of government.

Congress must eliminate conflicts of interest, restrict special access, prevent trading on insider knowledge, and stop public servants who cash in for personal or private gain. Recent surveys show that corruption is a major public concern, but with the foxes guarding the henhouse, I’m unsure who will step forward to fix the problem,” said Amey.

Meanwhile, Anna Massoglia, an investigative researcher at OpenSecrets, a non-profit transparency organization which tracks money in politics also weighted in on the decline in Clinton cash.

“We’ve been seeing a decline in the cash flow to the Clinton Foundation since the 2016 presidential election,” she said. She said the Clinton Foundation claims the downturn is “due to a lack of events due to the inability to have conferences,” a reference to the coronavirus, which Massoglia acknowledged made sense.

“During the presidential election, of course, Clinton had said they were going to step back from the foundation for the duration of the election, and if she came into office that they would wind things down.

However, because she was not elected, it was not expected that the foundation would get smaller for any other reason, at least externally,” Massoglia continued.

Massoglia and OpenSecrets in 2018 were the first to obtain the Clinton Foundation’s 990 form which showed a $38.4 intake of revenue, slightly higher than the previous year but way below the amount in years where the Clintons maintained some semblance of political influence.

Submitted in concert with the 2020 990 filing, Clinton Foundation CEO Keven Thurm wrote a letter in which he claimed “2020 was a difficult year for philanthropy” no doubt citing the coronavirus pandemic.

Despite those claims, Massoglia noted many other non-profits did well in 2020, including “non-profits in the left-leaning space who are aligned with either very liberal activists or politicians who did see growth last year.”

Continuing, she said:

“A number of left-leaning and liberal-leaning non-profits were positioning themselves within this non-profit space to push policies during the Biden administration. So you did see some non-profits on the left continue to grow pretty significantly in the lead up to the election, dither due to fundraising around the election or anticipation of pushing certain policies.”

Many voters are also concerned about corruption in the federal government, according to a POGO survey conducted among likely voters in 2022 in the battleground states of Michigan and Ohio, with over 70 percent of participants either “very” or “extremely” concerned about corruption.

In both states, 81 percent believe corruption is widespread throughout the federal government, while 90 percent think that federal government corruption costs taxpayers a significant sum of money.

The Clinton Foundation has been the source of significant scrutiny for unethical behavior over the past twenty years or so.

For example, a 2016 Associated Press report showed that at least 85 of 154 individuals representing private interests who met with Hillary Clinton while she served as Secretary of State donated to the Clinton Foundation and its global programs.

Those 85 donors contributed approximately $156 million to the Clinton Foundation.

While Clinton was serving as the lead diplomat, the foundation received tens of millions of dollars in donations from seven foreign governments, including Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Oman and Algeria, all of whom have questionable human rights records, the Washington Post reported.

When Clinton received her nomination as Secretary of State, it was done so under the condition that only foreign governments who donated to the foundation prior to 2008 could continue to do so.

Yet, the Clinton Foundation accepted a $500,000 donation from the Algerian government in 2010, a violation of the agreement with the State Department ethics office.

Moreover at that time, that nation was in the midst of lobbying the State Department while at the same time being the subject of a State report the country was involved in human rights violations.

In yet another questionable transaction, a 2015 New York Times expose of the January 2013 purchase of Canadian energy firm Uranium One by Russia’s atomic energy agency Rosatom showed several donations to the Clinton Foundation.

Between 2009 and 2013, as Russia assumed control of Uranium One and with it a significant piece of the global uranium supply, that company’s chairman donated $2.35 million to the foundation.

Those contributions and donations were not publicly disclosed by the Clinton Foundation, a violation of an agreement between Hillary Clinton and the Obama White House requiring all donors to be publicly named.

Moreover, Bill Clinton earned a $500,000 speaking fee for a speech at a Kremlin-linked Russian investment bank that promoted Uranium One stock, which came just after Russia announced their intent to purchase a majority stake in the company.

In her role as head of the State Department, Hillary Clinton sat on the committee which voted to approve the sale of Uranium One to the Russians.

A 2016 ABC News investigation obtained several State Department emails from 2010 between Hillary Clinton confidante Huma Abedin and Doug Band, a top Clinton Foundation official in which they were planning a lunch with then Chinese President Hu Jintao.

Three executives from UBS, the Rockefeller Foundation and Western Union, all of whom donated over $1 million to the foundation, were invited to join the lunch. Band asked Abedin if then-vice president Joe Biden could sit with the Rockefeller Foundation president, to which Abedin replied, “I’ll ask.”

Massoglia, who oversees OpenSecret’s dark money in politics data noted there “is really a very clear picture of the revenue continuing to stay high during the [Clinton Foundation’s] peak when foreign governments and other donors might have had an interest in swaying policy versus when the revenue started to drop after Clinton’s election loss.”

She continued to explain that whenever foreign interests donate money to non-profits closely allied with politicians such as the Clintons, it has “the potential to sway the policies that the non-profit may push as well as the politician.”

That could lead to influence peddling and also the ability to “buy influence but buy access to a politician and to others within that politico sphere,” she said.

Massoglia said that “in particular with the Clinton Foundation, there are examples of these events with high profile individuals in DC which can be a ripe environment for carrying influence.”

The Clintons? Dirty? Please say it isn’t so…

‘Enough already’: Sig Sauer announces major backing of national ‘re-fund the police’ campaign

Editor note: For those looking for a quick link to get in the fight and support the cause, click here.

NEWINGTON, NH – Law Enforcement Today is pleased to share that Sig Sauer, highly respected and immensely popular leader in the firearms industry, has joined us as a corporate sponsor in our campaign to “Re-Fund the Police.”

As a Law Enforcement Today reader, you know that we have put forth a campaign to back the blue and support re-funding efforts, while calling attention to both the adverse effects of defunding the police, and the positive effects that our dedicated protectors in law enforcement create every single day.

In this campaign, we put out a call for individual and corporate sponsors to join us in this mission.

Sig Sauer, with its honorable and lengthy history of supporting law enforcement, answered that call with a generous donation, standing with us and with our brothers and sisters in blue.

From its humble beginnings as a German gun company in 1751 and a Swiss wagon factory in 1853 who merged in 1875 to its current status as a firearms industry leader, Sig Sauer has remained synonymous with expert, state-of-the art craftsmanship and reliability. 

Sig Sauer has also cultivated a close working relationship with law enforcement over the decades of its existence, marrying its expertise with the needs of those who serve.

As the Sig Sauer website states:

“It is the largest member of a worldwide business group of firearms manufacturers that includes J.P. Sauer & Sohn and Blaser, Gmbh. in Germany.

This global network of companies gives SIG SAUER a world-class firearms knowledge base, unparalleled design expertise, and extensive manufacturing capacity, enabling the company to respond quickly and effectively to changing market conditions and the needs of its military, law enforcement, and commercial markets worldwide.”

Schumer now suddenly silent about Putin since he's getting paid by lobbying firm tied to him
Sig Sauer Academy. Photo courtesy of Sig Sauer.

In addition to state-of-the art equipment such as firearms, ammunition, optics, suppressors, and air guns, Sig also provides top-of-the line training for law enforcement officers and others.

Sig Sauer Academy, located in Epping, NH, offers firearms and tactics training to everyone from first-time gun owners to the most elite levels of law enforcement and military.  This facility “features state-of-the-art indoor and outdoor ranges, tactical training areas, urban environments, a shoot house, a maritime training area, and a force-on-force village.”

We recently sat down with Tom Taylor, Chief Marketing Officer and Executive VP of Commercial Sales, to learn more about Sig Sauer’s decision to back our campaign to “Re-fund the Police.”

Taylor told us:

“The minute we heard the concept, it resonated with us here at Sig Sauer, because it’s so disgusting to us, the whole “defund the police” mentality….

“The police were already shorthanded, there’s never enough training, there’s never enough equipment, there’s never enough people, there’s never enough resources.  

“And then you throw at them this ‘defund the police’ mess, to put it politely.” 

He added:

“It just disgusts us, when we see specific incidents of police agencies like Austin, who have gone so all-in to this concept of taking resources away from an operation that is already underfunded. 

“Who is going to help save lives when they’re needed?  It’s harder and harder to get police officers where they’re needed, on time, because of a lack of resources….

“You hear the 911 calls where people are calling in the middle of a riot in Atlanta, and they say, we’re really sorry but there are no police officers to send to your aid right now.  

“It’s disgusting.”

Taylor explained further that raising money is itself important, but the plans to raise awareness and share the truth with the public are equally significant.

He continued:

“I think it’s important to educate the public that there’s a problem….

“No matter how much money we raise in this effort, it’s also very important that we let the world know that the police need resources and they need money.”

Schumer now suddenly silent about Putin since he's getting paid by lobbying firm tied to him
Sig Sauer Academy. Photo courtesy of Sig Sauer.

Taylor added that a further advantage to educating the public would be to improve the reputation of law enforcement as a career.

He told us:

“We also need to try to re-engage young people to be police officers, because that used to be such a noble and admirable thing, and now it’s becoming so difficult to be a police officer, and to have young people aspire to be in law enforcement.

“We want to communicate to the world that it’s ok to be a cop.”

Taylor expanded further upon Sig Sauer’s ties with law enforcement, saying:

“It’s in our DNA…. We work closely [at Sig Sauer Academy] with military and law enforcement…. 

“It’s a big part of who our Academy personnel are; they are all current or former military and cops… and so they are such thought leaders for our company for both training and equipment and importantly, mindset. 

“When we are developing a new product, we go talk to them.”

He added:

“Our CEO [Ron Cohen] served in the Israeli military for five years, and our dedication to supporting law enforcement and military runs so deep in this company…. The moment I mentioned the ‘refunding the police’ concept to our CEO, he immediately wanted to support this cause.”

Taylor concluded:

“We absolutely want to let the world know how much we support the thousands of police agencies and hundreds of thousands of officers who carry our products, and those who don’t….

“It doesn’t matter what product they use, they need our support.

“We are doing this because we have so much respect for our police officers, and it is very disappointing that a part of our society allowed something called ‘defund the police’ to become part of our culture, truly sad.”

Schumer now suddenly silent about Putin since he's getting paid by lobbying firm tied to him
Sig Sauer Academy. Photo courtesy of Sig Sauer.

In addition to its generous financial support, Sig Sauer will also be throwing its own marketing efforts behind the “Re-Fund the Police” campaign, amplifying the message on their social networks.

To learn more about Sig Sauer products and training, visit Sig Sauer at their website,  

You can also follow Sig Sauer on their Facebook page, their Twitter feed, their Instagram account, and their LinkedIn account.

Law Enforcement Today is immensely grateful for Sig Sauer’s strong stand to support all those who protect and serve, and we look forward to working together with Sig to “Re-Fund Our Police” and expand public understanding of the the daily good deeds of our protectors in blue, as well as the adverse effects of defunding the police.

Want to make sure you never miss a story from Law Enforcement Today?  With so much “stuff” happening in the world on social media, it’s easy for things to get lost.  

Make sure you click “following” and then click “see first” so you don’t miss a thing!  (See image below.)  Thanks for being a part of the LET family!
Facebook Follow First
Submit a Correction
Related Posts