The Remnant Newspaper – The Money Trail: Why Catholic Bishops Are Silent on Hillary

Written by  Elizabeth Yore


The silence about Hillary Clinton is deafening. One hears nothing but crickets from the U.S. Bishops and Cardinals about the democratic presidential candidate’s radical pro-abortion stance, but for the banished Cardinal Raymond Burke.

Why are they sitting mute on the sidelines? How could they be conflicted between an abortion laden democratic platform and the most prolife republican platform ever? Seems like an obvious choice for Catholics. After all, St. John Paul II described life as “the most basic and fundamental right and the condition for all other personal rights.” What’s going on?

When in doubt, follow the money. This ecclesial trail is flush with cash.

Could it be that the bishops don’t want to anger their federal piggy bank by squealing about that rabid abortion loving democratic candidate, Hillary Clinton?

Could it be that the USCCB enjoys and wants to continue to be awash in Obama cash?

Did the democratic Obama Administration buy the election silence of the Catholic episcopacy by bestowing millions of federal dollars into the coffers of Catholic institutions?

Do the Bishops believe that a President Hillary Clinton is preferred because she will continue to fund their plentiful federal grants for Muslim refugee resettlement?

Oh, the irony! This is the same Obama Administration that has forced lawsuits by the Little Sisters of the Poor, Catholic schools, Catholic businesses and Catholic lay organizations for mandating compliance with Obamacare rules in violation of Catholic doctrine.  Yet, the Bishops stand ready, willing, and able with their hand in the federal cookie jar to implement the Muslim refugee resettlement agenda.

While the Little Sisters of the Poor battled Uncle Sam, the U.S. Bishops and Cardinals were lining the Church coffers with blood money from Uncle Sam.

This isn’t about conscience, folks. It’s about their checkbook.

Take a look at the jaw dropping beneficence from the federal fairy godmother government deposited into the bank accounts of the Catholic hierarchal institutions. It’s all on display at

During the most anti-Catholic administration in the history of the U.S., the Catholic bishops have enjoyed enormous financial benefits carrying out the mission of the Obama administration.

Here’s the Church, here’s the steeple, open the doors and see all the federal dollars.

This is only a partial list of federal government grants to Catholic groups, but the USCCB, Catholic Charities, CRS and the International Catholic Migration Commission received jaw dropping grants to carry out the Obama agenda in FY16.

These grants cover fiscal year 2016 only:

United States Conference of Catholic Bishops

During FY16, the USCCB received federal grants totaling a whopping


According to the, the top programs carried out by the USCCB, on behalf of the Obama Administration were:

Program Name Funds   Awarded
1. U.S. Refugee Admissions Program             $53,405,755
2. Refugee and Entrant Assistance_Voluntary Agency Programs                                                                                        $21,714,000
3. Unaccompanied Alien Children Program                                                                                          $9,240,908
4. Cuban/Haitian Entrant Program                                                                                          $5,249,661
5. Refugee and Entrant Assistance_Discretionary Grants                                                                                          $1,366,158

Clearly, the U.S. Bishops are fully supportive of the Obama Administration mass refugee resettlement program. It’s been a very lucrative venture for the USCCB. Donald Trump seeks to suspend the Muslim Refugee migration program into the United States. Supporting a Donald Trump candidacy would halt all Syrian Muslim refugee migration into the U.S. His policy of suspending Muslim refugees would be quite costly for the Bishops and deplete their coffers. The present day Money Changers aren’t willing to relinquish their federal revenue flow.

Catholic Charities

And then there’s the Catholic Church’s golden calf of federal funds, Catholic Charities. According to, the federal government’s website of federal contracts and grants, the Catholic Bishops around the U.S. garnered some hefty contracts. Overall, for FY16 Catholic Charities collected:

$84,339,422 as Total Prime Recipient

$118,008,202 as a Total sub-award transaction

Total Award:
$202,247,624 FY16

But there’s More!

The Catholic Bishops landed even more federal goodies to carry out the massive refugee migration resettlement agenda of the Obama Administration. Mass migration of Syrian refugees provides a lucrative business model for the Catholic Church but they might want to ask the Catholics in the pews about this highly controversial policy of putting Muslim refugees in U.S. towns.

The International Catholic Migration Commission(ICMC)

The International Catholic Migration Commission(ICMC) headquartered in Boston also joined in on the federal refugee goodies. In FY 2016, according to the, the International Catholic Migration Commission was awarded:

$17,715,636 Total as Prime Recipient

The U.S. Department of State doled out $17+ million to ICMC grants. The sole purpose of the grants is stipulated for U.S. Refugee Resettlement.

Wake up, Catholics! The USCCB and its partners are quietly assisting the Obama administration in resettling into the United States, tens of thousands of Muslim Syrian refugees. Where are the photos? Why the secrecy? Curiously, only a tiny fraction of persecuted Middle Eastern Christians are included in the refugee population. Perish the thought that the Catholic Church would demand that Christian refugees be given priority over Muslims. That controversial stance might jeopardize their federal contracts.

There are thousands of other federal grants and contracts to the Catholic Church stored in the Obama administration piggy bank, but these 3 grant recipients demonstrate the ongoing fiscal relationship with the Democratic Obama Administration.

Following the lead of Pope Francis and his globalist agenda, the American Catholic hierarchy are relegating the prolife ministries to the doctrinal ash heap and committing funds and personnel to promote environmental and migration issues. Catholics are witnessing the bureaucratic deconstruction of the prolife movement in chanceries and the elevation of migration and immigration in its place. Catholic children are learning about the sin of littering, the importance of tree hugging and sexual hugging in the latest Vatican sex education curriculum.

Why? It’s simple: Follow the greenbacks in the environmental “green” movement. The global environmental and migration movements are overflowing with cash. For decades, the Catholic Church has been the odd man out, battling the United Nations and its abortion infused agenda under the guise of faux climate change. In previous papacies, the Catholic Church leaders were mocked as unenlightened dinosaurs and misogynists for fighting for the protection of the life of the unborn. Alleluia! The Church is no longer the outsider under the hip and relevant Francis papacy.

Along comes mega billionaire George Soros, as the global architect of an international mass migration policy that fills the Catholic Church coffers and floods Europe and America with Muslim refugees. Pope Francis and his minions now are welcomed and celebrated on the global stage as elite players. This unholy alliance is exposed in the leaked Soros Open Society documents and the embedded Vatican presence of Soros operatives, like Jeffrey Sachs and many others. 

As the DCLeaks Soros documents reveal, Soros fosters, foments and implements internal chaos and disruption through organizations which he funds. The Syrian refugee crisis is being funded by George Soros through left wing groups to generate support for Obama’s plan to surge thousands more Syrian refugees into American towns and cities.

George Soros accurately and cleverly identified the Francis Vatican as a sympathetic ally for the many Open Society initiatives. Together with President Obama, whose federal contracts and grants implement Soros’ reckless refugee policy, the unholy alliance emerged with the Catholic Church participating in the Soros global vision of a massive global refugee chaos.

With the upcoming election, Soros is taking nothing for granted. He has already poured $25 million into the Hillary Clinton campaign to ensure the continuation of the flood of refugee migration into Europe and the U.S. Shockingly, the Catholic Church facilitates the Soros vision and is paid handsomely by the Obama administration.

It’s no surprise that the Catholic Bishops remain silent about the abortion loving Hillary Clinton. They wouldn’t want to endanger their lavish federal contracts. After all, Hillary has promised to dramatically increase the number of Syrian refugees into the U.S., to the delight and insistence of her financial backer, George Soros.

It’s no surprise that New York Cardinal Timothy Dolan, criticized Trump by writing that, “Nativism is alive, well – and apparently popular!”

It’s no surprise that Bishop Kevin Farrell of Dallas, condemned what he called the “déjà vu of immigrant bashing” reminding his diocesan Catholics of Trump’s words.

It’s no surprise that LA Archbishop Jose Gomez opined that Trump’s stance on immigration “is not right.”

It’s no surprise that the Catholic Bishops, under Vatican orders are promulgating the migration of Muslim refugees into the United States. The Bishops have made a calculation that migration trumps (‘scuse the pun) the pro-life issue. Migration pays very well, pro-life pays nothing.

With millions of federal funds to support the Obama administration’s mass refugee resettlement program, it is expected that the Bishops will remain silent about Hillary Clinton, and criticize Donald Trump who seeks to halt Syrian refugee migration into the U.S., so that vetting for terrorism can be ensured. The Bishops’ silence comes at a big price…. hundreds of millions from Barack Obama.

We hear much about vote your conscience. Catholics, take note of the cozy blasphemous financial arrangement between the democratic abortion- promoting Obama administration and the Catholic hierarchal money changers as you inform your conscience.

It’s no wonder that the Bishops’ Conference won’t bite the hand that feeds it.

Photo Credit: Matt Foran

Source: The Remnant Newspaper – The Money Trail: Why Catholic Bishops Are Silent on Hillary

Hillary Clinton Gets Daily Bible Verses From This “Faith Whisperer,” But Still Supports Abortion |


MICAIAH BILGER   AUG 26, 2016   |   3:34PM    WASHINGTON, DC

Hillary Clinton Gets Daily Bible Verses From This “Faith Whisperer,” But Still Supports Abortion

A Southern Baptist from Mississippi, Strider told The Brody File that he and Clinton have exchanged emails almost every day for about 10 years. Strider was Clinton’s director of faith outreach during her first presidential bid in 2008.

“… we share reflections and devotions each day,” Strider said.

Strider said Clinton impresses him with her knowledge of the Bible, even calling him out at times if he wrongly cites the location of a verse.

When asked why Clinton’s faith does not appear to be reflected in her public policy, Strider replied that Clinton’s faith is much more apparent to people who know her.

SIGN THE PLEDGE! We Oppose Hillary Clinton!

Clinton’s radical positions on abortion, religious freedom and other ethical concerns have many questioning the sincerity of her religious beliefs. Strider recently faced scrutiny for ethical issues, too. A January Politico piece reported that Strider used his influence with Clinton to try to help a friend snare two multi-million dollar State Department contracts.

Clinton says she is a Christian and a United Methodist. The pro-abortion Democrat even wrote a column for the Deseret News in Utah a few weeks ago, claiming that she is an advocate for religious liberty.

Clinton supports repealing the Hyde Amendment and forcing taxpayers to fund abortions, a widely unpopular measure even among Democrats. She also said an unborn child just hours before birth has no Constitutional rights. In February, she defended the gruesome partial-birth abortion procedure.

In a speech last year, Clinton essentially said Christians must be forced to change their religious views to accommodate abortions.

“Far too many women are still denied critical access to reproductive health care and safe childbirth,” Clinton said, using the euphemism for abortion. “… And deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs and structural biases have to be changed.”

Source: Hillary Clinton Gets Daily Bible Verses From This “Faith Whisperer,” But Still Supports Abortion |

Missing:  FBI files linking Hillary Clinton to the ‘suicide’ of White House counsel Vince Foster have vanished from the National Archives | Daily Mail Online

  • Documents describing Hillary Clinton’s role in the death of White House counsel Vince Foster have vanished, Daily Mail Online has learned after an extensive investigation
  • Foster is believed to have shot himself with a .38 caliber revolver at Fort Marcy Park along the Potomac River on July 20, 1993
  • Two former FBI agents involved in the investigation tell Daily Mail Online they issued reports linking Hillary’s tirade to Foster’s suicide
  • Days before his death, then First Lady ridiculed him mercilessly in front of his peers, say former FBI agents and detailed it in their report
  • ‘You have failed us,’ Hillary told Foster, former FBI Jim Clemente told Daily Mail Online
  • Archived material related to the case, housed at National Archives in College Park, Md. were examined by the author to no avail
  • After filing a Freedom of Information request, it was determined that the agents’ reported have gone missing  

By RONALD KESSLER FOR DAILYMAIL.COMPUBLISHED: 07:44 EST, 23 August 2016 | UPDATED: 07:44 EST, 23 August 2016

Ronald Kessler, a former Washington Post and Wall Street Journal investigative reporter, is the New York Times bestselling author of The First Family Detail: Secret Service Agents Reveal the Hidden Lives of the Presidents and The Secrets of the FBI.

FBI agents’ reports of interviews documenting that Hillary Clinton’s stinging humiliation of her friend and mentor Vince Foster in front of White House aides triggered his suicide a week later are missing from the National Archives, Daily Mail Online has learned exclusively.

On two separate occasions, this author visited the National Archives and Records Service in College Park, Md., to review the reports generated by FBI agents assigned to investigate the 1993 death of Bill Clinton’s deputy White House counsel.

The FBI found that a week before Vince Foster’s suicide, Hillary held a meeting at the White House with Foster and other top aides during which she berated the lawyer

On the first visit, archivist David Paynter provided the box of records that he said contained the FBI reports of interviews conducted by FBI agents on Foster’s death.

On a second visit, archivist James Mathis provided what he said were those same documents.

While the box contained dozens of FBI reports concerning Foster’s death – including interviews with the medical examiner, U.S. Park Police officers, and White House aides about the contents of Foster’s office –  the reports on Hillary Clinton’s role in his death were absent.

After filing a Freedom of Information request with the National Archives, Martha Murphy, the archives’ public liaison, reported that she directed a senior archivist to conduct a more thorough review of the relevant FBI files, including those that had not been previously made public in response to FOIA requests.

‘He examined all eight boxes but found no interviews by any investigator that detail either a meeting between Hillary Clinton and Vince Foster or the effects of a meeting between Hillary Clinton and Vince Foster on Vince Foster’s state of mind,’ Murphy reported in an email.

‘We did not limit ourselves to interviews by the two individuals [FBI agents] you mention.’

This is not the first time documents related to the Clintons have vanished from the National Archive.

In March 2009, the archives found that an external hard drive from the Bill Clinton White House containing confidential documents was missing.

Read more here: Missing:  FBI files linking Hillary Clinton to the ‘suicide’ of White House counsel Vince Foster have vanished from the National Archives | Daily Mail Online

Dear Archbishop Chaput: Trump is Clearly Better than Hillary


Archbishop Charles Chaput of the Diocese of Philadelphia has written an eloquent column about the current presidential election. His article seems intended more to comfort than to prescribe, and serves mostly as a kindly exhortation to prayer and careful deliberation during a dark time. I recommend readers click through and read it here—it is full of very good advice.

But I respectfully disagree with one point the good archbishop makes: He writes that Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are both “so problematic” that “neither is clearly better than the other.”

In fact, the candidates differ immensely. Consider how they differ on just the issues of marriage, religious liberty, and abortion.

Marriage and Religious Liberty

Hillary Clinton:

Last year, in a speech to the Human Rights Campaign (the most moneyed and powerful LGBT lobbying group in the nation), Clinton proposed a “Lengthy Agenda for LGBT Equality,” according to the gay rights magazine The Advocate:

In her speech, Clinton promised that as president she will sign the Equality Act, which amends the 1964 Civil Rights Act and other parts of federal law to outlaw discrimination in housing, employment and everywhere in everyday life where LGBT people are still vulnerable.

Translation: The bill she promises to push through would be the last nail in the religious liberty coffin of Obergefell, criminalizing the rights of religious employers to, say, refuse to hire gay rights operatives as Catechism teachers.

Donald Trump:

While Hillary is promising to restrict religious liberty more, Trump has pledged to repeal one of the major restrictions that already exist: The Johnson Amendment. For an excellent analysis of the Johnson Amendment and what it would mean to repeal it, I recommend the article “Trump’s biggest religious freedom proposal is about 20 years late,” by Nate Madden at the Conservative Review.

“The Johnson Amendment is a change to the federal tax code in 1954 … that prohibits all nonprofit 501(c)(3) organizations from engaging in political campaigns or even endorsing candidates,” Madden explains. To many of us this sounds familiar and harmless, but since the Amendment was passed “the government has muzzled houses of worship and stands to ruin them financially if they step outside the state’s prescribed bounds.”

Given the fact that the government has lately shown itself capable of overt hostility to Christian morality, the repeal of the Amendment would be more than timely: it would be, as Madden argues, “late.”

The Unborn

Hillary Clinton:

The first speech Clinton delivered as the official Democratic Nominee was to a roomful of Planned Parenthood staffers and supporters. Abortion magnate Cecile Richards stood at the podium to introduce the presidential candidate, and praised Clinton as “our friend” and “our leader” in her opening remarks.

NPR later reported that the “love was mutual — Clinton addressed the organization as ‘family.’” As Lifesitenews’s Ben Johnson reports, Clinton even went so far as to say her campaign “belongs to” Planned Parenthood: “It belongs to the staff, the donors, and to the providers,” she said:

[Clinton] specifically mentioned Dr. Amna Dermish, an abortionist in Texas who was caught on video laughing as she said that removing a baby’s skull and brain intact is a goal she would “strive for.”

Finally, the platform of the party Hillary will represent is universally hailed (or decried) as more radically pro-abortion than ever, written in unblushing language which is echoed in the Washington Post’s horrifying recent puff-piece on Cecile Richards:

Gone is the vaguely conciliatory mantra of the past, the ideal of keeping abortion “safe, legal and rare” once advocated by Bill and Hillary Clinton. Today’s activists are bringing the passionately debated procedure into the light, encouraging women to talk openly about their abortions and giving the movement an unapologetic human face.

And they aren’t stopping there. Heading into a high-stakes presidential election, Planned Parenthood’s political arm and its supporters are rolling up their sleeves to help elect Hillary Clinton — who has done an about-face on the issue with a party platform that is pushing, for the first time, for full Medicaid funding for abortions. [Emphasis added]

Donald Trump:

In contrast, the Republican platform is arguably the most uncompromisingly pro-life it has ever been—as indeed it should be in the year following the Center for Medical Progress’s historic video exposé of the abortion industry’s gruesome side-business of baby parts trafficking. As for the candidate himself, Mr. Trump has promised to appoint pro-life judges to the Supreme Court if he wins the presidency.

Also reassuring is Trump’s hire of Kellyanne Conway as his campaign manager. During the Republican primary, Conway actually worked to defeat the shifty Trump and ensure the nomination of the solidly pro-life Texas Senator Ted Cruz.

Conway is a longtime friend of the pro-life movement. Of Trump’s simultaneous hire of Conway and Breitbart’s Steven Bannon, Pro-life leader and Susan B. Anthony List president Marjorie Dannenfelser remarked, “I have known and trusted Kellyanne Conway my entire professional life,” and “No two could be better positioned to help Donald Trump to take on and expose Hillary Clinton’s extremism in this general election.”

Even staunch “#NeverTrump” commentator Ben Shapiro, who has nothing but harsh words for the “sinister” Steven Bannon, seems impressed with the direction of the campaign in the last week, sharing several of Conway’s insights with his followers on social media. Washington Examiner’s Jim Antle went so far as to comment that, while everyone is “focused on Bannon,” the last two “Trump speeches feel more influenced by Kellyanne Conway.” Shapiro retweeted the remark.

Read more here: Dear Archbishop Chaput: Trump is Clearly Better than Hillary

Feds reject Clinton comparison in classified sub photos case – POLITICO

By JOSH GERSTEIN 08/16/16 11:42 AM EDT

Federal prosecutors are rejecting a Navy sailor’s effort to seek leniency by comparing his taking of classified photos on a nuclear submarine to Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server authorities say contained highly-classified information.

In a court filing late Monday night, prosecutors asked a federal judge to send Petty Officer First Class Kristian Saucier to prison for more than five years for keeping six cell-phone pictures taken inside classified spaces of the U.S.S. Alexandria in 2009.

“The defendant is grasping at highly imaginative and speculative straws in trying to…draw a comparison to the matter of Sec. Hilary Clinton based upon virtually no understanding and knowledge of the facts involved, the information at issue, not to mention any issues if [sic] intent and knowledge,” prosecutors wrote.

Saucier’s defense attorney argued in a submission last week that it would be unfair to impose a prison sentence on his client when Clinton’s email account was found to contain eight chains with “Top Secret” information and 36 with “Secret” information. Prosecutors and the FBI closed that investigation last month without filing charges against Clinton or anyone else.

The contrast is fueling longstanding complaints that senior officials accused of mishandling classified information often get little or no punishment, while more junior-ranking offenders can be hit with severe consequences.

Saucier’s defense is urging U.S. District Court Judge Stefan Underhill to give Saucier probation when he is sentenced on Friday in a Bridgeport, Conn. courtroom.

In addition to more celebrated cases, the defense notes that two of the sailor’s shipmates took similar photos in the same sub and received far more modest punishment, including a $560 docking of pay and—in one instance—a one-grade reduction in rank. One of those sailors is expected to be commissioned as an officer soon.

However, prosecutors say those episodes involved sailors who each took a single “selfie” in the engine room “while Saucier methodically documented the entire propulsion system of the nuclear submarine, including the design of its nuclear compartment and its nuclear reactor.”

“They are not the type of photographs that one would take to commemorate one’s service,” prosecutors said.

Prosecutors are vague about what Saucier’s purpose was in taking the photos, referring ominously in their filing to a trip Saucier took to Mexico and to an “African Dream” phone card found after apparently being hidden at his home.

The government has not explicitly alleged that any espionage was afoot, but says Saucier showed the photos to his ex-wife and woman he was later living with as well as two other sailors on the Alexandria. All said that Saucier “understood that he was not allowed to” take the photos.

After being confronted by investigators in 2012, Saucier compounded his problems by destroying a laptop, camera and memory card and throwing the laptop in the woods.

Clinton has said she believed her email account contained no classified information, although authorities later determined that it did. None of the messages were properly marked as classified, although three contained stray paragraph markings that signaled the presence of classified information. FBI Director James Comey has said, however, that someone in Clinton’s position should have realized that some of the subjects being discussed were not appropriate for an unclassified system.

The Navy, through Rear Admiral Charles Richard, Director of the Undersea Warfare Division for the Chief of Naval Operations, also submitted a “victim impact statement” Monday urging a tough sentence for Saucier.

“The information Mr. Saucier captured in his photographs is crucial information related to the design and operation of nuclear-powered submarines,” Richard wrote. “If this information were ever to be obtained by a foreign adversary, it would provide them with the opportunity to close the gap in capabilities, which would require an extraordinary effort and resources to restore it….Resources will now be needed to develop information and technologies to respond to information Mr. Saucier exposed.”

One challenge to winning a long sentence in the case is that the most sensitive photos Saucier took have been classified as “confidential,” which is the lowest tier of classified information, although they are also separately restricted as nuclear-related information.

While prosecutors say Saucier’s conduct risked “potentially grave damage” to national security and the Navy claims “a serious and lasting adverse impact” from the sailor’s actions, those kinds of phrases are more typically applied to information the government safeguards as “Secret,” corresponding to data whose disclosure is expected to cause “serious” damage to national security, or “Top Secret,” corresponding to “exceptionally grave” damage to national security.

It’s possible that logistical and practical reasons lead the Navy to deliberately treat some of the sub-related nuclear information at a lower classification level than it might otherwise qualify for. Designating it as “secret” or higher could impose tighter security clearance requirements and require greater vigilance against disclosure.

In March, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper urged agencies to consider the possibility of doing away with the “confidential” level of classification.

At three points, the government sentencing memo submitted Monday urges a 63-month sentence for Saucier. At one point, it proposes a sentence of 72 months—or six years —as appropriate “to serve both to deter future conduct and promote respect for the law.”

The Navy submission appears to advocate an even more severe sentence, urging that the judge sentence Saucier “at the high end of the applicable range under the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines,” which prosecutors have agreed runs from 63 to 78 months.

The 29-year old sailor, who is awaiting an “other than honorable” discharge from the Navy, faces a maximum possible sentence of 10 years and a fine of up to $250,000.
Read more:
Source: Feds reject Clinton comparison in classified sub photos case – POLITICO