You have to admit, it’s a pretty rare attribute in this administration.
[Update a while later]
There are five separate FBI investigations into the Clinton corruption?
I’m sure there are more than five instances of it, but you’d think they could combine them somehow. And of course, that’s just the ones we know about. There could easily be more.
Update a while later]
The Marc Rich pardon returns. As noted, the timing is interesting, but it’s certainly a useful reminder of the long-time corruption of the Clintons (not to mention Eric Holder, who should never have been confirmed as Attorney General). We may finally be seeing the leaks and drips that I expected earlier if Comey refused to recommend prosecution. I think we’re seeing a civil war both within the FBI and between FBI and the Department of Injustice. And it remains unclear which side Comey is on, other than his own.
If I were investigating some of the most powerful people on the planet, I’d keep my operations as compartmentalized as possible.
the Clinton private email server which was there to let Hillary turn high office into a cash cow
The Hillary Clinton business plan:
1. Install email server
2. ???
3. Profit!
Jim you haven’t been paying attention (what’s new):
2. Allow deal making and quid pro quo and pay as you go communications without being subject to FOIA requests. In other words keep it secret.
Otherwise the Clinton Crime Family could not rake in the dough.
One really has to wonder:
are you that ignorant or do you just refuse to allow yourself to think?
are you that ignorant or do you just refuse to allow yourself to think?
There’s still the possibility that he’s a false flag plant for the Republicans. I haven’t ruled that out.
Sure thing, fella … mystery how that server could help peddle influence.
Profit!
Well, they did make $230 million after being dead broke after Bill left office. And that’s just the money they made directly, not what their “foundation” made which paid for most of their travel
and vacation.Indeed, they (mostly Bill) made tens of millions of dollars giving speeches from 2001 to 2009, before Hillary was Secretary of State. You can read all about it in the tax returns they released for all of those years. And to think it was all thanks to that tireless little email server….
Geez….hasn’t dawned upon you that that is not the period of time we are discussing with regard to the Clinton’s influence peddling and money laundering.
Wow..must be hard to purposefully NOT follow the conversation yet try to craft a reply exonerating the Clintons.
hasn’t dawned upon you that that is not the period of time we are discussing
Consider the possibility that I chose the time period specifically to make a point. The Clintons were rolling in money before Hillary Clinton was SoS, and it had nothing to do with their email practices. There’s an extremely lucrative market for speeches by popular ex-presidents and ex-first ladies.
“Consider the possibility that I chose the time period specifically to make a point.”
Yes it’s called “Changing the Subject”. You do that all the time – I not only considered it I expected it….
“The Clintons were rolling in money before Hillary Clinton was SoS, ”
Which has absolutely positively nothing whatsoever to do with the topic YOU started which is how the private server is an aid to profit. Keep digging…..
” There’s an extremely lucrative market for speeches by popular ex-presidents and ex-first ladies.”
But we are not talking about speeches only. We are talking about how a clandestine, illegal, private server aids in peddling influence, getting kickbacks and the myriad of other Racketeering the Clinton Crime Family has been and continues to be involved in.
3 attempts to change the topic. 3 failures.
We are talking about how a clandestine, illegal, private server aids in peddling influence, getting kickbacks and the myriad of other Racketeering the Clinton Crime Family has been and continues to be involved in.
You want to talk about an imagined criminal conspiracy that lacks a persuasive motive.
The Clintons did not need to peddle influence, or get kickbacks, or anything else to become very rich. They made hundreds of millions simply by giving speeches. They had no need to break the law, much send incriminating emails about their law breaking through a private server.
“The Clintons did not need to peddle influence, or get kickbacks, or anything else to become very rich. ”
HAHAHAHA you most certainly do not know the Clintons.
Every post from you gets lamer and lamer.
You mean when Hillary was a Senator with plans to run for President? Why would anyone think any bribery was taking place?
I dunno, Bill’s price per speech went up after she lost the Presidency. Why would people pay more to here from a guy 8 years removed from power? What’s he have to offer?
It’s a big mystery 😉
“here”? Bah! Who wants him here or to hear him.
It’s almost sad watching your whole political ideology crumbling around you, isn’t it Baghdad Jim? Even as the FBI tanks are plainly visible behind you across the river…
I’ll help you with number 2 Jim. 2. Sell access to the Secretary of State’s office and hide the details in your private email server. Then there is 2-b where you erase all evidence of such things on your private email server that is under your complete control. That help?
No idea what the author is talking about. If they had stood up for what is right, they would have done so publicly. Instead, Comey headed them off (if they are really there) and took a step that hurts Clinton a little but will never produce any results till after the election.
If there are such FBI agents, they let their country down.
I tend to agree, but there is another aspect. One concept, that even Rand eluded to in the past, was that agents should resign. I’ve read articles about such resignations piling up. But to what end would resigning, especially silently, provide? We don’t need moral outrage right now. We need investigators in the position to do the job of finding the evidence, preserving it, and bringing it forward for judgment in the public domain. Resigning won’t help.
So at the moment, I don’t know if their are heroes in the FBI standing up for the rule of law. And I don’t expect to know until they’ve succeeded or truly exhausted all avenues of investigation. We didn’t know Mark Felt until decades later. I detest Felt for violations by the rights of the accused by leaking damaging information which could not be cross examined. But I also understand why he did it, and he played it right and to his advantage. Somewhere, I suspect their is another Mark Felt in the FBI that can’t find a Woodward and Bernstein, or prefers to do it the right way.
The democrats know they can never get the majority on their side nor do they have to. They just need to apply pressure at the right points. Now we see the new email scandal will be under the control of their guy.
It’s not so much that they are above the law. They are the law.
Tyranny has no better example.
we are over here:
Kate Bush – Cloudbusting
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pllRW9wETzw
I can see Russia from Tony Podesta’s house!
I need a reality check and some educating. Please explain why the following scenario could not have happened.
FBI has a solid case against Hillary. In private and for the good of the country Hillary is given the option to step out of the race and avoid indictment. Per he deal Comey drops his end and then Hillary stays in catching Comey off guard. He realizes that his attempt to save the country a headache that would throw half the population into a tizzy has seriously backfired. Knowing that he has already screwed his career and reputation he takes the one action that might put he egg back together.
This takes a huge amount of disbeleif,,, but I’m there already with this whole thing. So what am I missing with this notion?
Comey ought to be smart enough (and I suspect that he is) to know that the Clinton’s are totally capable of that sort of act – their word means nothing.
So he would have had to have a response ready. Would he have warned the Clintons that he had such a response? He should have, though maybe not describe what it would be.
I suppose Comey could not now come out and tell about the deal since it would look pretty bad.
It’s plausible. But as of this moment I wouldn’t bet the house on it. We’ll keep it in mind though.
Further, the idea of Hillary voluntarily bowing out is laugh-out-loud funny, and completely un-credible.
“The Hillary Clinton business plan:
1. Install email server
2. ???
3. Profit!
”
Tell us Jim were you utterly unaware that a private server shields Clinton from FOIA requests and that it allows them total 100% control over what is kept and what is deleted, regardless of the law?
It was mentioned dozens of times in many articles as well as this blog for the last year.
Or were you aware of the concept but refused to acknowledge it in your own mind?
Either way the fact that you could write this is nothing short of astonishing.
Tell us Jim were you utterly unaware that a private server shields Clinton from FOIA requests and that it allows them total 100% control over what is kept and what is deleted, regardless of the law?
Any non-government email account (such as those used by many federal government employees including Hillary Clinton, Colin Powell, and the Bush White House) puts the onus on the owner to make documents available for FOIA and record retention purposes. Clinton belatedly did so; Powell did not.
Clinton belatedly did so
Clinton had 30,000+ emails destroyed beyond recovery.
Unless someone kept a copy elsewhere as a life insurance policy.
Do we know if Huma had access to Hillary’s email? I can’t remember if she emailed from Hillary’s account.
Powell had all of his emails destroyed beyond recovery. The Bush White House “lost” 22 million emails from a private system, only to have some fraction rediscovered years later (I don’t know that any have been released under FOIA).
So?
Jim’s an amazingly slow learner.
His entire ideology depends on him not learning.
Ok the answer is in: refused to acknowledge.
Quit bringing up the Powell talking point. You have been scolded on this many times. Powell was not part of the new procedures. Shame on you.
Jon,
Bringing up discredited excuses for the Clinton’s racketeering is all he really has. That plus purposefully not following the thread of the conversation.
Jim doesn’t have any shame.
To leftists “the only morality they recognize is what will further their cause, meaning they reserve unto themselves the right to commit any crime, to lie, to cheat, in order to attain that”, as a great man once said.
Quit bringing up the Powell talking point. … Powell was not part of the new procedures.
Gregg points out that “a private server shields Clinton from FOIA requests and that it allows them total 100% control over what is kept and what is deleted, regardless of the law”. But new procedures or not, the exact same thing is true of Powell’s use of a private account, and the Bush White House’s use of private accounts. You can’t have it both ways: if Clinton’s use of a non-gov account proves that she was out to dodge FOIA, then Powell, Rove, et al’s use of private accounts also proves that they were out to dodge FOIA.
No, there were no procedures when Powell took over. Sheesh. What a terrible fudge.
No, there were no procedures when Powell took over
Powell’s work emails, and the work emails of Bush’s staff, were federal records and subject to FOIA. This isn’t a new thing.
It is funny that you think it was so vital for Congress and the public to see a Secretary of State’s emails in 2009, but not the emails of the White House staff in 2008. That one year seems to make all the difference.
I don’t think Powell would have hidden emails if asked to provide them. This is a ridiculous change of topic.
Comparing 2008 to 2009 is as absurd as saying there’s no difference between 1940 and 1941 with US/German relations. I smell desperation…
Yes, it is funny. I am laughing, laughing out loud.
Were Powell’s emails under subpoena? Did Powell send any classified information? No and No.
Before you respond about Powell’s emails being classified at a later date, let’ts keep in mind that they were only made classified by a partisan State Department to give Hillary a talking point. Their classification at a later date was part of Hillary’s corruption of the State Department.
“Powell’s work emails, and the work emails of Bush’s staff, were federal records and subject to FOIA. ”
Has anyone requested them?
Has the request been denied?
Any emails destroyed before archival?
This is just more of your obfuscation and attempts to cover up the fact that YOU started a topic of conversation and when your post was destroyed you now struggle to deflect.
Transparent.
Gregg, the Bush White House actually tried to recover the emails. Compare that to the Obama IRS. There is no comparison to Hillary destroying her devices with hammers to make sure no emails were recovered (though she forgot about Huma).
I don’t think Powell would have hidden emails if asked to provide them.
He was asked in 2015. Of course by then they were long gone.
Comparing 2008 to 2009 is as absurd as saying there’s no difference between 1940 and 1941 with US/German relations.
The U.S. declared war on Germany between the end of 1940 and the end of 1941. What happened between January 19 and March 1 of 2009 that turned federal email retention from no big deal to a criminal matter?
Were Powell’s emails under subpoena?
No, and neither were Clinton’s personal emails when she told her lawyers to delete them.
Any emails destroyed before archival?
Powell destroyed all of his emails before archival. The Bush White House destroyed some fraction of their emails.
Did Powell send any classified information?
Yes, the same process that retroactively classified some of Clinton’s emails also classified some of Powell’s (that were recovered from other senders/recipients). Which is exactly what you would expect. The Clinton emails that were later classified were from conversations involving hundreds of career State Department staffers. Those staffers were used to sending arguably sensitive information by unclassified email under Powell and Rice, and they kept on doing so under Clinton. You can blame Clinton for not changing the email culture that greeted her at Foggy Bottom, but you can’t blame her for creating it.
Did they do anything to actually dodge a FOIA request? Got any examples?
Powell deleted his AOL account. The only work emails of his that have ever been found were other people’s copies. I’m sure plenty of historians would love to read the emails he wrote in the run up to the Iraq War, but they’re out of luck.
Clinton wiped the server and deleted emails, denied, lied and stonewalled. If Powell did any of that then present the proof.
Clinton had lawyers go through her emails and turn over the work-related ones to State. Powell made no such effort.
You do not know Powell’s motivations.
And just as I can’t be sure that Powell’s motivation was to avoid FOIA, you can’t be sure that Clinton’s motivation was to avoid FOIA.
No [the emails were not under subpoena], and neither were Clinton’s personal emails when she told her lawyers to delete them.
So let’s try to figure out Jim here.
Clinton had emails on her private server. Emails she managed to create. She decides, “ya know, I don’t want these anymore and nobody cares what is there”, so instead of going to her IT guy and saying, “I hit my head and my thinking is not so good; would you do me a favor and make sure my emails are deleted”; according to Jim, Hillary went to her lawyers, because?
Oh yeah, Jim is an idiot.
Were Powell’s emails under subpoena?
Jim replies:
No, and neither were Clinton’s personal emails when she told her lawyers to delete them.
You lie. Why do you lie?
Here’s the timeline:
ONE:
Nine days after the attack, on Sept. 20, 2012, the House Subcommittee on National Security, Homeland Defense, and Foreign Operations, which is part of the larger Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, sent a document request to Clinton, who was still Secretary of State. It was a broad request, intended to cover anything written or recorded in any way that might have something to do with Benghazi. It without question covered emails. The State Department produced some material in response, but never any emails from Clinton.
TWO:
Several months later, on Aug. 1, 2013, the Oversight Committee issued a subpoena covering the documents asked for, but not received, after the Sept. 20, 2012 request.
Ok Jim – Aug. 1, 2013 and the supoena now in force…….and remains in force for the rest of this:
THREE:
[The State Department] sent a formal request to former Secretaries of State on October 28, 2014, asking them to produce e-mails related to their government work.
FOUR:
…on December 5, 2014, Williams & Connolly [Kendall’s firm] provided approximately 55,000 pages of e-mails to State in response to State’s request for Clinton to produce all e-mail in her possession that constituted a federal record from her tenure as Secretary of State.
NOTE WELL – 55,000 emails release which is supposed to reflect “her tenure as Secretary of State”. Pathetic. We all knew she was holding back……
FIVE:
In December 2014 — after the emails were sent to the State Department — Mills ordered people whose identity was not revealed by the FBI to delete Clinton email archives from their computers.
This is the key Jim – we now know that all of the emails were not turned over and Mills ordered them deleted…..
SIX:
Also in December 2014, according to what Mills told the FBI, “Clinton decided she no longer needed access to any of her e-mails older than 60 days.” Mills then ordered an unidentified tech staffer to “modify the e-mail retention policy on Clinton’s clintonemail.com e-mail account to reflect this change.”
So that was it: the Clinton team produced what it said were all her work-related emails to the State Department and then ordered its tech people to destroy everything, and then put a new policy in place in which no emails would be saved for more than 60 days.
How nice…her emails which are the property of the People were deleted after 60 days.
But the best is yet to come:
Then everything changed.
On March 2, 2015, the New York Times reported the existence of the secret Clinton email system. The next day, Gowdy’s Benghazi Committee sent a letter to Kendall’s law firm “requesting the preservation and production of all documents and media” relating to Clinton’s emails. The day after that, March 4, the full Benghazi Committee issued a subpoena ordering Clinton to “produce all records in unredacted form”
SEVEN – Ok so now you have a supoena and…..
EIGHT:
[The Clinton staffer….]sometime between March 25-31, 2015 deleted the Clinton archive mailbox.” The staffer used the now-notorious BleachBit to do the work, and manually deleted a backup as well.
Result:
August 1, 2013 – supoena issued
sometime between March 25-31, 2015 deleted the Clinton archive mailbox.”
How nice…her emails which are the property of the People were deleted after 60 days.
Clinton’s personal emails were not the property of the people, or under subpoena, when her staff ordered their deletion in December, 2014.
Powell’s work emails were the property of the people when he told AOL to delete them in 2005.
Jim, she destroyed work emails, had classified info on an insecure network, gave classified info to people without clearance, and obstructed justice.
Everything she has said has been a lie, everything.
The worst part is the corruption of the state department that abused Powell by frivolously “classifying” his emails at the direction of Hillary so that she could use Powell as a scapegoat.
She belongs in jail and deserves to be barred from holding public office. But Obama has corrupted the DOJ to USSR levels of cronyism.
Thanks for bringing Fascism to the USA.
“You can’t have it both ways: if Clinton’s use of a non-gov account proves that she was out to dodge FOIA, then Powell, Rove, et al’s use of private accounts also proves that they were out to dodge FOIA.”
Did they do anything to actually dodge a FOIA request? Got any examples?
Very weak attempt Jim – even for you.
Clinton wiped the server and deleted emails, denied, lied and stonewalled. If Powell did any of that then present the proof.
You do not know Powell’s motivations. As he did not do what Clinton has done you cannot conclude he had a server for avoiding FOIA requests.
(From the new Broadway hit musical, “Hillary grabs your guns”)
Anything Bush can do, Hil’ can do better!
Attack Iraq?
You were for it . . .
No I wasn’t . . .
Yes you were . . .
Not after it went “south”, I wasn’t!
Anything Bush can do, Hil’ can do better!
Turns out the use of secret non government emails accounts to conduct illegal business is a common practice in the Obama administration. The EPA and IRS are just a couple of the agencies that used this tactic to engage in illegal behavior and avoid accountability.
puts the onus on the owner to make documents available for FOIA
The problem is that people who are already breaking the law can’t be trusted to then turn over incriminating evidence.
Pretty laughable:
Ji snarkily brings up what he considers a point – that there’s no connection between the secret, illegal server Clinton had and making profit.
When that concept is utterly demolished and he’s shown precisely how they ARE connected – how the secret server allows influence peddling , graft, scams, etc. all for money and power, he switches to his hoary old “Well Powell did it”
On top of that he also tried to deflect with a “point” (hardly rises to a point) that the Clintons made money before the server existed.
The irrelevance of that – the irrelevance of that statement to the i=original issue Jim HIMSELF brings up – is so astonishing that it’s hard to believe Jim thinks they are connected in some way.
So after having his original issue humiliatingly demolished what’s a Jim to do?
Deflect – just like Obama and the Clinton’s
Blame others – just like Obama and the Clintons
Claim it’s not such a big deal – just like Obama and the Clintons.
It is to no avail Jim – you’re as transparent as a large sheet of glass.
Besides, Bret Baier reported last night that the Foundation scam has been under intense investigation for months and that an inside FBI source indicated indictments will appear soon.
The Clinton edifice is beginning to crumble. Not a moment too soon.
What’s Powell making in speeches?
how the secret server allows influence peddling
Do you really believe this? Why would a private email server be better than Gmail? Better than the telephone? Better than in-person conversations?
he also tried to deflect with a “point” (hardly rises to a point) that the Clintons made money before the server existed
You’re the one insisting that they needed the server to make big money. The fact that they made big money without it completely undermines your thesis.
and that an inside FBI source indicated indictments will appear soon
How many Obama administration indictments have Fox’s anonymous sources predicted over the last eight years? And how many have actually transpired? Lucy promises to not pull the football away this time….
A gmail account leaves control of what gets wiped (like with a cloth) to a company that has to answer court orders. A private server allows the user complete control over what gets permanently deleted. Of course you knew that already.
A gmail account leaves control of what gets wiped (like with a cloth) to a company that has to answer court orders. A private server allows the user complete control over what gets permanently deleted.
A distinction that doesn’t make much of a practical difference. If you permanently delete your emails in Gmail, they are inaccessible to even a court order within a few weeks. While in Clinton’s case, her staff told the IT guy to delete old emails in December, 2014, and it didn’t actually happen until March, 2015.
It’s about control. You can delete an email in gmail and hope it disappears before a court order is filled, or you can delete it on your own server and know it’s gone (unless someone hacks your server) forever. To pretend that isn’t a difference is just plain stupid.
The Clintons’ choices — e.g. outsourcing server management to a forgetful IT contractor — show that they didn’t care much about having any more control than they would have had if they’d used Gmail, or Yahoo!, or whatever.
Comments by PRN employees show they thought it was shady af and willingly engaged in illegal activities anyway.
One can be corrupt and hire an incompetent person. Happens all the time. Hillary hired Huma and she never deleted her emails.
“You’re the one insisting that they needed the server to make big money. The fact that they made big money without it completely undermines your thesis.”
Please Jim that is the sort of thinking you do… wildly incorrect conclusions off of a statement made. Why you persist in ascribing precisely the wrong conclusion to what is actually being said is beyond me except as a way to deflect yourself – and the conversation – from the truth.
Nobody made the thesis that it was NEEDED to make big money.
The thesis is that it was USED to make big money…as the emails prove.
The position was used to make big money: all the computers n the world don’t mean a thing if it wasn’t for their position. The emails/computer was a communications and deal making mechanism. It also happens to be the mechanism that will create their downfall.
You don’t understand the Clintons. It’s about money, prestige, power, control, people coming to them (this is a biggie) and the Clintons extracting a price. This has been going on for more than 30 years.
If you can’t see it – or won’t see it – I suggest you take a firehose to your brain and start over again. You are either in denial or laughably naive.
Nobody made the thesis that it was NEEDED to make big money.
Look back at my first comment in this thread, a response to the claim that “the Clinton private email server which was there to let Hillary turn high office into a cash cow”. That statement, which you endorsed, says that Clinton couldn’t “turn high office into a cash cow” until the private email server was there to “let” her. But the Clintons had already used the lecture circuit to turn Bill’s experience in high office into a totally legal cash cow long before Clinton was Secretary of State.
Um, they could do both? Is that so hard to figure out Jim?
Bill Gates couldn’t be making money off of Microsoft Office, because he was rich from Windows!
Bill Gates couldn’t be making money off of Microsoft Office, because he was rich from Windows!
Bill Gates made a lot of money selling software, and then made even more money selling more software. He didn’t decide “Hey, I want even more money than I am making legally, and I want it so badly that I’ll risk imprisonment by doing some insider trading.”
Bill Gates isn’t Bill and Hillary Clinton. He made his fortune by creating value in the marketplace, not peddling influence.
He made his fortune by creating value in the marketplace
The Clintons, too, made their money by creating value in the marketplace. This is a world in which people will pay Donald Trump millions for the right to put his name on their hotels, or pay Justin Bieber $1 million to sing at a teenager’s birthday party, so it should not surprise you that there are also people who will pay $300,000 to have Bill Clinton give a speech.
I missed the part were I defended Donald Trump.
The Clintons, too, made their money by creating value in the marketplace.
Jim finally comes around to admitting the Clintons are engaged in quid pro quo corruption.
Hillary isn’t Justin Beiber. She isn’t an entertainer. Her product is influence over government actions. The emails show this time and time again and so does the pattern of donations and favorable treatment from the State Department and Clinton Foundation.
She even rigged your own primary. You never even had a choice of who to vote for. Your whole party is corrupt from coast to coast at all levels of government and even the unelected militant activist base.
The way Democrats conduct paramilitary raids of non-Democrats in WI or control businesses is straight up fascism.
Please admit its possible to make money off of speeches and off her office position. If you don’t, you look like a fool.
Jim finally comes around to admitting the Clintons are engaged in quid pro quo corruption.
No, I didn’t. They engaged in “You’ll give me money, I’ll give a speech, and you’ll get to brag that you heard me speak to you.”
Hillary isn’t Justin Beiber. She isn’t an entertainer.
Neither is Tony Blair or Rudy Guiliani or Alan Greenspan. Yet they all get big bucks for giving speeches.
favorable treatment from the State Department and Clinton Foundation
The only favorable treatment from the State Department for a foundation donor than anyone’s been able to nail down was a better seating assignment at a dinner.
She even rigged your own primary. You never even had a choice of who to vote for.
Of course I had a choice — and millions of people did vote for Sanders (including a majority of primary voters in my state). Just not as many as voted for Clinton.
Bret Baier reported last night that the Foundation scam has been under intense investigation for months and that an inside FBI source indicated indictments will appear soon
And now Baier is apologizing for his mistaken reporting.
Pretty obvious there will be no indictments coming from Obama’s DOJ. Under Democrat rule, the law doesn’t apply to anyone except non-Democrats.
“You’re the one insisting that they needed the server to make big money. The fact that they made big money without it completely undermines your thesis.”
Can we quote you on that, that the Clintons “made big money” through the Clinton Foundation without relying on the private server?
That is, of course, the point Paul. Don’t expect Jim to agree to what he actually said.
His position, outlook, and memory are malleable except for the rock-bottom adoration of Hillary.
Can we quote you on that, that the Clintons “made big money” through the Clinton Foundation without relying on the private server?
No, they made big money by giving speeches. The Clinton’s didn’t make money through the Clinton Foundation; they donated over $20 million of their earnings to a variety of charities, including the Clinton Foundation.
I’m no accountant, but according to their tax return, their revenues were 148 million dollars. That means 20 million is only 14%.
You see, this is how Jim distorts the truth. Over 20 million in donations!!!! He forgets the part about the revenues.
As I said, I’m no accountant, but I trust the people over at the Federalist. They say the Clinton Foundation only spent 10 percent on charitable grants, while the Clintons claim they spent 88 percent.
http://thefederalist.com/2015/04/27/in-2013-the-clinton-foundation-only-spent-10-percent-of-its-budget-on-charitable-grants/
The organization’s own tax forms show them to be liars.
http://www.guidestar.org/FinDocuments/2013/311/580/2013-311580204-0b0083da-9.pdf
Ah this is fun:
“Hillary Clinton deleted a 2009 email in which she forwarded classified information to her daughter, Chelsea.
The email was released on Friday by the State Department. It is one of thousands of emails recovered by the FBI from Clinton’s private email server.
The email, which is redacted because it contains information classified as “Confidential,” was sent to Jake Sullivan, Clinton’s foreign policy adivser at the State Department, and several Obama aides. Sullivan sent it to Hillary Clinton who then forwarded it to Chelsea, who emailed under the pseudonym “Diane Reynolds.”
But perhaps the most significant part of the email is that Clinton forwarded classified information to her daughter, who is and was a private citizen with no government role and no apparent security clearances.
It is unclear when or why Clinton deleted the email. She gave the State Department around 30,000 emails she claimed were related to her State Department work. She deleted a similar number claiming they were personal and dealt with yoga routines, food recipes and Chelsea’s wedding.
FBI director James Comey said in July that investigators recovered several thousand work-related emails from Clinton’s server. The batch of emails released Friday are from that recovered trove.”
So now Chelsea is privy to State Secrets. Nice. Was her email ever hacked? Wouldn’t surprise me
“State Department spokesman John Kirby stressed that the classification—an ‘upgrade’ in State parlance—did not address the issue of whether the information in the message should have been treated as classified when it was sent.”
“Such information is routinely handled outside classified channels at State”
A) Kirby and the State Department have lied on Hillary’s behalf all along. They even participated in destroying emails and coordinated with Hillary in attacking Powell.
B) Hillary shouldn’t be mixing classified and unclassified communications.
C) Hillary’s business communications are classified by their very nature.
Imagine this crap happening in WWII. It wouldn’t because our politicians weren’t so incompetent that they would broadcast top level administration communications to the world.
Hillary should be in jail, instead Democrats are rewarding a lady who armed, trained, and funded jihadists that went on to engage in genocide and sex slavery.
She cares about children, just not the ones being used as sex slaves or murdered in industrial mixing machines because of her illegal foreign policy decisions.
Hillary’s business communications are classified by their very nature.
Nope. Not everything the Secretary of State does for work is classified. The State department has released tens of thousands of Clinton’s unclassified work emails.
After a process to determine whether or not they should be released. That means they all start out as classified.
Hillary exposed all of her communications to every hacker and foreign government regardless of whether they were classified or unclassified at a later date. She also destroyed work emails that were supposed to be retained and emailed classified information contrary to her repeated claims.
Her policies are responsible for human suffering unprecedented in American history. The debacle of the unilateral undeclared war in Libya is the root cause of the rise of ISIS, genocide, sex slavery, displacement of tens of millions, destabilization of the EU and every country in the ME, fracturing NATO, and starting a regional war that includes all of the world’s powers through proxies.
She is corrupt and a massive failure. It is absolutely insane that Democrats claim to be anti-war and support Hillary.
After a process to determine whether or not they should be released. That means they all start out as classified.
No, that’s not how this works.
Hillary exposed all of her communications to every hacker and foreign government regardless of whether they were classified or unclassified at a later date.
Every State Department employee that uses a state.gov email address exposes those communications to possible compromise by hackers and foreign governments.
Her policies are responsible for human suffering unprecedented in American history.
You should read more American history.
The debacle of the unilateral undeclared war in Libya is the root cause of the rise of ISIS
Nope.
Clinton’s personal emails were not the property of the people, or under subpoena, when her staff ordered their deletion in December, 2014.
Except now we know thanks to Wiener that her personal emails were not personal, but work emails.
You believed her when she said they were personal emails and you touted that as gospel to all of us. It turns out she was lying and you still tout it as gospel.
Please do not say that the deleted emails were personal. They were not.
She had lawyers go through all of her emails and separate out the work-related ones to hand over to State. Maybe they missed some — it would be hard to quickly categorize tens of thousands of messages without making a single mistake. But the FBI reported that they found no evidence of any attempt to keep work emails from investigators.
Lawyers without clearance. Having her staff cull the emails is a conflict of interest.
But the FBI reported that they found no evidence of any attempt to keep work emails from investigators.
Obama’s FBI? The ones that literally found that work emails were kept from investigators?
Lawyers without clearance.
Why would they need clearance? Clinton believed all of her emails to be unclassified.
Oh, now you’re saying, “Maybe they missed some.”
Pffft. Caught in a lie.
He didn’t decide “Hey, I want even more money than I am making legally, and I want it so badly that I’ll risk imprisonment by doing some insider trading.”
You obviously don’t understand corruption. Enough is never enough. You should know that with your promotion of theft from the middle class.
Hillary does it for the same reason Bill abuses women, because they can.
So today’s news is that vandals are damaging FBI buildings/property. This didn’t happen when the FBI went outside its role to say prosecutors wouldn’t take the case. It seems to only be happening when the FBI decided to… investigate.
Additional news that’s been happening for some time now; protestors are attacking Trump supporters and offices. Sure, some Democrats thought fire bombing was a bit too far (not the LGBT community which felt too much money was given to fix the damage); yet more assaults and damage continue.
All this happens while we keep hearing how the Right is violent. That’s not merely a lie. It’s establishing the ground work for an excuse for more violence. If Trump wins; expect mass violence.
OT…but quite believable:
“Emails released by WikiLeaks reveal that the Hillary Clinton campaign had an “agreement” with the Bernie Sanders campaign to prevent Sanders from criticizing Clinton. The nature of the Clinton-Sanders “agreement” becomes clear in a May 2015 email chain, which occurred at just the time that Sanders was announcing his candidacy. The email chain makes clear that Clinton and Sanders had a no-punching agreement right from the get-go. “
And the hits just keep on coming:
” While Clinton apologists call the foundation a font of beneficence, its 2014 IRS filings show that it spent a whopping 5.76 percent of its funds on actual charitable activities — far below the 65 percent that the Better Business Bureau calls kosher. That paltry figure also mocks Hillary’s Las Vegas lie, uttered at the final presidential debate on October 19: “We at the Clinton Foundation spend 90 percent — 90 percent of all the money that is donated on behalf of programs of people around the world and in our own country.” The Clinton Slush Fund . . . uh . . . Foundation seems to be mainly a travel and full-employment program for Hillary’s government in waiting. It’s also a bribe pump that sucks in money and spews out favors. ”
Deroy Murdock
“Expenses: Grants and similar amounts paid” on a form 990 lists the total amount granted from the reporting organization to other charitable organizations. That is expected to be high in foundations which don’t do any chartable work of their own, but will be low or non-existent for hands-on organizations (like the CF) which do their own work.
The charity I’ve worked with most (mainly through extensive volunteering, but also with donations) does all of their work themselves and doesn’t transfer a single dime to other organizations to do their work for them and thus reports $0 “Expenses: Grants and similar amounts paid”. They also don’t pay any of their administrative staff or officers or directors any salary at all, unlike the Clinton Foundation which pays their CEO, CFO, etc. six-figure salaries. (Though the Clintons themselves don’t receive any salary from the foundation.) Still, while such salaries may disgust those running small, hardscrabble charities, they are standard for the really big organizations. That’s why I encourage giving to (and especially volunteering with) small, local charities, but the Clinton Foundation’s financials are rated higher than average for organizations of its size.
When I see ridiculous straw men like this, or gross misinterpretations (such as suggesting that a 16:30 email to Mr. Podesta saying that he should call Ms. Clinton and “sober her up” about a subject means that she was drunk in the afternoon and not the obvious interpretation that he should encourage her to “take a more realistic view” of the subject at hand (seriously, how do you literally sober up a drunkard by telephone?), or outright fabrications (take your pick), my first reaction is to assume that they are made by a Clinton shill, trying to mischaracterize her opposition.
The problems with the Clinton Foundation isn’t a five or six percent “Expenses: Grants and similar amounts paid”, it’s the appearance of access peddling. Stick on script and stop working for your opponent.