Official BLINDSIDED After Hawley Exposes Deep-State Emails

[0:00] It is outrageous that you are continuing to mislead us, and it is outrageous you're going [0:04] to conferences and events funded by foreign billionaires using dark money to try to influence [0:09] our politics. [0:10] Oh, this gets worse, because Hawley has a timeline, and now he wants to know exactly [0:14] what she's been hiding. [0:15] When you were here last, I talked with you about the fact that more than 130 officials [0:20] in the Energy Department reported more than 2,700 trades of shares, bonds, and options [0:25] and companies that ethics officers said was directly related to the agency's work. [0:31] This is institutionalized corruption. [0:33] And I asked you point blank, do you own any individual stock? [0:38] And you told me, no. [0:40] Let's just look at it. [0:41] It was not a difficult question. [0:42] Do you own individual stocks, Madam Secretary? [0:45] You said no. [0:46] In fact, you repeated it three times to me, no, no, no. [0:51] Turns out that was false. [0:53] You did own multiple individual stocks. [0:56] And you neglected to report it to this committee for months afterwards. [0:59] Why did you mislead this committee? [1:01] Oh, my goodness. [1:02] Oh, my goodness. [1:04] That was exactly my response. [1:05] So why did you mislead this committee? [1:08] I believed that I had sold all individual stocks. [1:12] Oh, you believed it. [1:13] And I was incorrect. [1:15] So I came back and told- So you just don't know your portfolio? [1:19] Pretty much. [1:20] It's a big one, I guess, huh? [1:21] No. [1:22] It's extremely small. [1:23] Apparently not. [1:24] Someone manages it for you? [1:27] So I came back as soon as I found out that, in fact, I had not sold all individuals. [1:30] Wait, wait, wait, wait. [1:31] No, that's not true either. [1:32] Let's just look at the timeline. [1:33] Let's not- I just remind you, you're under oath. [1:35] Okay. [1:36] Hold on. [1:38] Madam Secretary, you testified you didn't own any individual stocks. [1:41] You didn't sell the stocks for a whole other month. [1:43] And after you sold the stocks, you waited another month before you informed this committee. [1:51] Why did you mislead us and what were you hiding? [1:54] Why did you wait so long? [1:55] Why did you hide this? [1:57] I did not hide it because I brought it forth to the committee when I realized that we had [2:01] made a mistake. [2:02] Really? [2:03] Much later? [2:04] What explains the delay? [2:05] Why did you wait for a full month to explain your actions to this committee, your false testimony? [2:10] That's less than a month. [2:12] And I sent a letter explaining what had happened- [2:13] May the 15th to June the 9th. [2:14] May the 15th to June the 9th, are we going to- [2:16] Because I owned a Ford stock that was- [2:18] You misled this committee and you wait- what were the stocks? [2:21] What were the stocks that you owned? [2:23] It was a Ford stock that my husband had owned since he was very young and I just was not aware [2:29] of it. [2:30] And what were the others? [2:31] You sold six stocks. [2:32] What were the other five? [2:33] I sold non-conflicting stocks. [2:36] What were they? [2:37] Honestly, I don't even know. [2:41] I do know the Ford won because that was a conflict. [2:43] You don't- [2:44] That's why I raised this. [2:45] You're here before this committee a year later after actively misleading us, after denying [2:50] and delaying and delaying, and now you won't tell us. [2:53] Was one of them Proterra? [2:54] No. [2:56] You sat on the board of directors at Proterra. [2:57] You made millions in reports and stock options at Proterra. [3:01] Then you promoted Proterra stock and Proterra products as energy secretary. [3:07] Was that one of the stocks that you sold? [3:09] This is so, I mean, really. [3:12] Was that one of the stocks? [3:13] Yes, really. [3:14] No, no. [3:15] You are presiding over institutionalized corruption in your energy department. [3:19] You have violated the stock act nine separate times. [3:23] You have been referred by the inspector general for violations of the Hatch Act. [3:27] Oh, dude. [3:28] It is institutionalized corruption that you are now the face of. [3:32] And here's what I'm trying to figure out. [3:33] I just want to know who really runs the energy department. [3:35] Let's go. [3:36] Is it you or is it the mega corporations whose stock that you own, that you're [3:40] making profits in? [3:41] Oh, my goodness. [3:42] Or maybe it's the foreign billionaires who fund your conferences. [3:44] Let's try something else. [3:45] Do you know the names of the foreign billionaires who fund the conferences you go to? [3:50] Since you don't know the stocks, do you know the names of the foreign billionaires? [3:53] This is unbelievable to me. [3:55] Is it? [3:56] Let me help you. [3:57] Mr. Chairman. [3:58] One of them is Hans-Org Weiss, a Swiss billionaire who has used various dark money front groups [4:03] I do not know what you are talking about. [4:05] To funnel various dark money front groups to funnel foreign money into American politics. [4:12] He has used the Burger Action Fund, $20 million that then sent money to the Fund for a Better [4:18] Future that then sent money to the Climate Power Group that has funded conferences you've [4:23] attended. [4:25] Do you know who this is? [4:26] I have no idea who that is. [4:27] Do you think it's a good idea to attend conferences funded by foreign billionaires? [4:30] I have no idea what you're talking about. [4:31] I have no idea what you're talking about. [4:32] You don't know the stocks. [4:33] You don't know the billionaires. [4:34] You would take no responsibility. [4:35] One Ford stock. [4:36] Meanwhile, your energy department, executives in your energy department, are trading stocks [4:41] in companies that they have direct oversight over and you were too. [4:45] That is incorrect. [4:46] It's a fact. [4:47] Nobody in the Department of Energy, and we have a strong ethics office, does not trade [4:52] stocks in anything that they have oversight over. [4:55] People may own individual stocks. [4:56] That is simply not true, Madam Secretary. [4:58] Sir, this is Senator. [4:59] The Wall Street Journal has reported on this extensively. [5:00] If I may. [5:01] Wall Street Journal. [5:02] I'm not sure if I may just ask the question. [5:04] Is it possible that maybe we can continue this at a later time, but if you had any questions [5:09] on the energy, direct energy policies. [5:11] Mr. Chairman, this is directly relevant to institutionalized corruption in the Department [5:15] of Energy. [5:16] Yeah, guys. [5:17] Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the deep state here. [5:18] I'm telling you. [5:19] You're, I think, about to say that the Wall Street Journal report's wrong. [5:22] Of course she was. [5:23] The Wall Street Journal report did not say that people over whom they were in areas where [5:26] they were directly overseeing head stocks. [5:28] They did not. [5:29] Our ethics office consults with all of our employees that need to be, that have a reporting requirement [5:37] about their stock holdings. [5:39] They do not own stocks in areas that they have any influence over, nor do I. [5:43] Madam Secretary, all I have to say is this record is just deplorable. [5:46] It is despicable. [5:48] It is outrageous that hundreds of officers in the Energy Department are trading shares. [5:52] It is outrageous that you misled us. [5:54] It is outrageous that you are continuing to mislead us. [5:58] And it is outrageous that you are going to conferences and events funded by foreign billionaires [6:02] using dark money to try to influence our politics. [6:05] This has got to change. [6:06] And frankly, you should go. [6:08] Up until right now, I was trying to understand exactly how we were going to kind of tie in, [6:11] specifically the Hatch Act. [6:13] So guys, up until right now, I've been trying to figure out exactly how we were going to tie in the idea of the Hatch Act into this scenario here. [6:21] The Hatch Act basically from 1939. [6:23] It basically says you cannot use kind of outside or like dark money for the most part to influence, you know, politicians into doing things that you want them to do here. [6:34] And specifically, if you are someone who's holding massive amounts of stock options here, or if you have gotten so high up in your company, [6:40] they have decided to give you the option of no longer, for the most part, receiving any pay, but just receiving stock options. [6:47] That's a way millionaires and billionaires have escaped taxes for a pretty long time here. [6:52] And basically how they're doing this here consistently, this is why it's so insidious here. [6:56] Not a financial channel, but understand this here. [6:58] So if you do have the ability to be paid in stock options, that's generally always what you technically want here. [7:03] Right? Specifically, if you know your company is doing very, very well here. [7:07] And the reason why you want to do this is so you can take a loan off of it. [7:10] So let's say, let's say this year, you have $100,000 sitting specifically in your brokerage account here. [7:15] Notice how she didn't also mention if someone else was managing it, but let's step back here. [7:20] You have $100,000, but your stock options from that company are yielding, say, 17 to 25% astronomical number here. [7:27] Okay. [7:28] And you want to then set up a draw. [7:30] Your draw would basically be how much you're paying yourself from the capital gains grown off of your principal investment. [7:38] Let's say this year. [7:39] So you can pay yourself in two separate ways here. [7:41] Either you're going to do a draw. [7:43] So generally two to 3% is smart here. [7:45] If you're going to draw off of the actual growth of your capital gate. [7:50] Or if you want to completely mitigate the taxes here, what they do is they take loans. [7:54] Because in the United States of America here, yes, your capital gains are growing. [7:58] Because generally you're not entering a taxable event until you specifically withdraw funds from your stocks, which they don't do. [8:04] What they do is they take loans off of it again. [8:06] So this loan is going to basically be, let's say 8% interest year. [8:10] And you're going to basically outlive that loan as long as you take a draw, let's say, or you get a loan that's of 2% to 3% of whatever your principal capital is, let's say. [8:21] And they never pay this loan back, basically. [8:23] They can kind of outrun the loan based off of what's being put back into it. [8:27] Eventually they'll have to pay it down. [8:29] But what they'll do is they'll just draw small amounts of money. [8:32] And that will be what the taxable event is and just pay the loan itself. [8:35] But so basically they can loan 50 or 60% based off of the asset, that asset known as their stock option. [8:41] All right. [8:42] It's interesting when I hear companies and like millionaires and billionaires talking about this, like we don't know exactly what you're doing. [8:47] But now specifically, if the government is saying, Hmm, you may be in violation of the Hatch Act here, because again, you have all of these stocks here. [8:54] Okay. [8:55] You're, you're doing everything humanly possible to not take any money to enter into a taxable event here. [8:59] You didn't answer the question. [9:00] If you're actually working with a brokerage, because that in itself would have basically told us all we needed to know. [9:05] That was a smart question from Holly. [9:06] But if you do have the ability to pay with dark money, okay. [9:12] Right. [9:13] Deep state type of money here to other people that forces them to do things that benefit your stock options for more money. [9:20] This is just straight corruption here. [9:22] This is absolutely one of the worst forms of corruption, but it happens every single day. [9:27] Guys, if you were inside trading, you wreck the whole system and you definitely deserve jail time, guys. [9:31] Large quantities of it banned permanently from ever dabbling within any type of brokerage going forward here, guys. [9:37] My opinion, obviously. [9:38] And I don't think that anyone in Congress should be allowed to own any type of individual stock. [9:43] There's a big difference of getting exposure to the NASDAQ or the S&P 500 and or any type of ETF in general here. [9:50] It's a big difference here because you don't really have much of a say internally in that system. [9:55] Right. [9:56] But if you start buying individual stocks here and you know specifically when to buy and when to sell, you deserve jail. [10:02] That's it here. [10:03] I don't trust anything Hatch Act oriented. [10:05] The Hatch Act is not thrown around. [10:06] That means they most likely have proof if they're saying this. [10:09] You guys all have an absolutely amazing day. [10:10] Enjoy your day thoroughly. [10:11] If you guys are new here, please like and subscribe. [10:12] And in the meantime, guys, I'll go and get you guys later. [10:14] I go and get you guys later. [10:15] Here. [10:16] Here. [10:17] Here. [10:18] Here. [10:19] Here. [10:20] here.