Nemazee Fall Guy for Clintons & Obama; Banks taken over

I read in Yahoo news a few minutes ago an article written by Larry Neumeister for the AP, entitled, "Fraud Gets Ex-Obama, Clinton fundraiser 12 Years [in prison]" and these are my comments to it:
1) is the nation supposed to believe that Hillary Clinton and William J Clinton [Bill] had no knowledge of corrupt fund-raising? If you believe that, then you are a fool.
2) Is the nation supposed to believe that Obama whose standard of living includes a vacation every three months to the tune of $10 Million each vacation, did not expect huge income from his fundraiser?
3) Is the nation supposed to believe that the William J Clinton fake foundation that is nothing but a money-laundering endeavour knew nothing about how their money was raised? Did they not do background checks or what?
4) Is the nation supposed to believe that an Iranian is the only fundraiser that the Clintons or Obama could find in the entire nation?
5) IS the nation supposed to believe that by forfeiting meager amounts of funds [come on, what is $11,000 in a multi-billion dollar scam?] the Clintons are absolved from guilt?
6) IS the nation supposed to believe that even as the Nemazee ponzi scheme advanced the Clintons and Obama were ignorant of it? If you believe that, then you know NOTHING about investments. I don't know much about investments but I know they require disclosure enough to cause an astute person to ask some questions when things don't match up.
7) Is the nation supposed to wink-wink and look the other way at the fraud of the Clintons and Obama?
8) Is the nation supposed to pretend that their goverrnment run by Obama-Clinton is honest?
9) Is the effort by the Judge to make the Clintons pay up a paltry sum of money supposed to somehow make H Clinton acceptable in her job as buying influence around the world, and in B Clinton's fake ambassadorship to Haiti, a huge perq with much power and influence in the position as tolerable to a nation that has endured fraud and corruption on a scale not seen since the first meltdown of securities when the SEC was created?
And my last questions are, is the so-called reform of the banking industry that shifts the fees from the bank's to the consumers supposed to fool anybody? And since the SEC was such a failure is the new 'consumer' protection of the fake reform bill any better? Wasn't the intent of the SEC to protect consumer investors?
Gloria Poole; at my home in Missouri; 4:42 Pm, 15-July-2010
Update 17-July-2010 at my home in Missouri after reading morning news and after having gotten the result of the Obama-shift-money-from-citizens-pockets-to-his-plan-as-being-in-banker-family:
I got a statement from one of my bank accounts yesterday listing the new fees that go into effect as a result of Obama tampering with the banking system,and apparently the only thing that bank is not charging for now, is walking in their door. And they'd charge for that too if they were not ashamed to do that. Wait til you get your list of fees from your bank(s) and then politically lynch Obama. His plan has made banks a form of retailer selling services like so many products, and has shifted huge fees onto consumers, and probably in the long run totally destroyed banks. Banks are not really necessary now as there are other solutions to the services that they provide and a whole lot cheaper.
Remember that Obama's grandmother who died suddenly after he realized she knew enough,to send him to prison, was a banker, who gave him insider knowledge, and that he totally manipulated the banking industry. He did that to create the panic that he then used to ride into office knowing that those ignorant of how banks and computers work [banks' money is electronically transferred in every transaction] work.But Obama is the voodoo expert on computers, hacking and theft from citizens.
Gloria Poole; at my home in Missouri; 7:55 AM, 17-July-2010