Connecting the dots on Hillary Clinton

[roadreeler57]

Donald Trump Republic 2016 posted about ‪#‎TrumpTrain‬.



No, Hillary Clinton is not the first woman to be nominated by a political party for president. Victoria Woodhull was, and she didn't even have the right to vote, nor did her running mate, Frederick Douglass. Her story is a hell of a lot more inspiring than Hillary Clinton's, Victoria Woodhull wasn't part of a political machine, she was a champion of women's suffrage at a time when such a notion was extraordinarily unpopular.

 

[roadreeler57]

Donald Trump For President

The Internet is grand isn't it?




Look what we found Hillary saying about Mexicans
Redstate News
REDSTATEWATCHER.COM

 

[superbeets]

 

[superbeets]

 

[russ1945]

 

[superbeets]

Donald J. TrumpVerified account‏@realDonaldTrump
​

Crooked Hillary Clinton will be a disaster on jobs, the economy, trade, healthcare, the military, guns and just about all else. Obama plus!

 

[superbeets]

52% of The American people who participated in CBS NEWS POLL, have a unfavourable opinion of HRC.


That is the highest negative impression of anyone ever nominated by the Democratic party since CBS started asking that question in 1984.

 

[russ1945]

52% of The American people who participated in CBS NEWS POLL, have a unfavourable opinion of HRC.


That is the highest negative impression of anyone ever nominated by the Democratic party since CBS started asking that question in 1984.

Good post - very interesting to say the least - the liberal press will be all over that.....right.....lol

 

[russ1945]

​

​

11 Explosive Clinton Cash Facts Mainstream Media Confirm are Accurate

22266​

328​

AP Photo/Mark Lennihan

by BREITBART NEWS26 Apr 20155,705

SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER

​

Perhaps the most surprising thing about the forthcoming book rocking Washington right now is the number of stunning facts liberal media outlets have already confirmed and verified are accurate.
Here, then, are 11 facts that mainstream media say are true, verified, and facts from the upcoming blockbuster, Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich.
CONFIRMED: Hillary’s Foundation Hid a $2.35 Million Foreign Donation from the Head of the Russian Govt’s Uranium Company that Had Business Before Hillary Clinton’s State Dept.—a Clear Violation of the Memorandum of Understanding with the Obama Administration
The New York Times has confirmed that Hillary Clinton violated the Memorandum of Understanding she signed with the Obama administration promising to disclose all foreign donations during her tenure as Sec. of State.
As Clinton Cash reveals, Ian Telfer, the foreign head of the Russian-owned uranium company, Uranium One, which Hillary Clinton approved to acquire U.S. uranium, made four individual hidden donations to the Clinton Foundation totaling $2.35 million, none of which appear in Clinton Foundation disclosures.
CONFIRMED: Bill Clinton Bagged $500,000 for a Speech in Moscow Paid for by a Kremlin-linked Bank
The New Yorker confirms that, as Clinton Cash claims, Bill Clinton made $500,000 for a Moscow speech that was paid for by “a Russian investment bank that had ties to the Kremlin” at the time of the Uranium One deal.
“Why was Bill Clinton taking any money from a bank linked to the Kremlin while his wife was Secretary of State?” asks the liberal publication.
CONFIRMED: Hillary’s Brother Sits on the Board of a Mining Company that Scored an Extremely Rare “Gold Exploitation Permit” in Haiti as Hillary and Bill Clinton Disbursed Billions of U.S. Taxpayer Dollars in Haiti
The Washington Post confirms the accuracy of Clinton Cash’s revelation that Hillary Clinton’s brother, Tony Rodham, serves on the board of a mining company that scored a coveted and lucrative “gold exploitation permit” in Haiti as then-Sec. of State Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton were doling out billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars in the wake of the Haiti earthquake.
According to the Post, Rodham’s mining company “won one of the first two gold-mining permits the Haitian government had issued in more than 50 years,” just as Clinton Cashreveals.
CONFIRMED: Hillary’s Foundation Hid a Foreign Donation of 2 Million Shares of Stock by a Mining Executive with Business Before Hillary’s State Dept.—a Clear Violation of the Memorandum of Understanding with the Obama Administration
The Wall Street Journal confirms the book’s revelation that another foreign donation, one by Canadian mining executive Stephen Dattels, made a hidden donation of two million shares in Polo Resources that the Clinton Foundation chose not to disclose in violation of the Memorandum of Understanding the Clintons signed with the Obama administration.
“About two months later, the U.S. ambassador to Bangladesh pushed the energy adviser to that nation’s prime minister to allow ‘open pit mining,’ including in Phulbari Mines, where Polo Resources has a stake,” reports the Journal.
CONFIRMED: Hillary’s Approval of the Russian Takeover of Uranium One Transferred 20% of All U.S. Uranium to the Russian Govt.
The New York Times confirms, “The sale gave the Russians control of one-fifth of all uranium production capacity in the United States.”
The Times also verifies the book’s reporting that Hillary’s uranium transfer to Russia represented, at the time, a projected 50% of all U.S. uranium output.
CONFIRMED: Bill Clinton was Paid by a For-Profit Education Company Laureate While the Company Benefitted from an Increase in Funding from Hillary’s State Dept.
Bloomberg has confirmed that, as reported in Clinton Cash, Bill Clinton was paid by “Laureate International Universities, part of Laureate Education, Inc,” a position he abruptly resigned from on Friday.
Bloomberg’s examination confirms that “in 2009, the year before Bill Clinton joined Laureate, the nonprofit received 11 grants worth $9 million from the State Department or the affiliated USAID. In 2010, the group received 14 grants worth $15.1 million. In 2011, 13 grants added up to $14.6 million. The following year, those numbers jumped: IYF received 21 grants worth $25.5 million, including a direct grant from the State Department.”
The company nor the Clintons will release the exact amounts Bill received for working for the controversial for-profit education company.
CONFIRMED: The Clinton Foundation has Been Forced to Refile at Least 5 Years of Annual Tax Returns and May Audit Other Clinton Foundation Returns
Reuters has confirmed that “Hillary Clinton’s family’s charities are refiling at least five annual tax returns” as “the foundation and its list of donors have been under intense scrutiny.”
CONFIRMED: At Least $26 Million of the Clintons’ Wealth Comes from Speaking Fees by Companies and Organizations that are Also Major Clinton Foundation Donors
The Washington Post has confirmed in an article based on Clinton Cash that, according to the Post’s independent analysis, “Bill Clinton was paid more than $100 million for speeches between 2001 and 2013, according to federal financial disclosure forms filed by Hillary Clinton during her years as a senator and as secretary of state.”
Of that, reports the Post, “Bill Clinton was paid at least $26 million in speaking fees by companies and organizations that are also major donors to the foundation he created after leaving the White House, according to a Washington Post analysis of public records and foundation date.”
CONFIRMED: Clinton Cash author, Peter Schweizer, is Currently Conducting a Deep Dive Investigative Report on Republican Presidential Candidate Jeb Bush’s Financial Dealings
CBS News has confirmed that author Peter Schweizer is working on a similar investigation into GOP presidential candidate Jeb Bush’s financial records and relationships.
“The wide-ranging examination will appraise the possible 2016 contender’s involvement in Florida real estate deals, an airport deal that involved state funds while Bush was Florida’s chief executive, and Chinese investments in Bush’s private equity funds,” reports CBS News.
CONFIRMED: Bill Clinton Delivered Numerous Speeches Paid for By Individuals and Corporations with Pending Business Before Hillary’s State Dept.
ABC News has confirmed Clinton Cash’s reporting that myriad businesses and individuals paid Bill Clinton to deliver speeches even as their companies had business on Sec. of State Hillary Clinton’s desk.
“Records supported the premise that former President Clinton accepted speaking fees from numerous companies and individuals with interests pending before the State Department,” reported ABC News.
ABC News noted it found “an instance where paid and unpaid speaking appearances were conflated,” but that Clinton Cash’s essential “premise” is “supported by records” ABC News independently analyzed.
CONFIRMED: Bill Clinton Lied about Hosting a Meeting with Frank Giustra and Kazakh Nuclear Officials at Clinton’s Home in Chappaqua, New York
New York Times Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative reporter Jo Becker confirmed in a one-hour Fox News television special on Clinton Cash that Bill Clinton lied when questioned about whether Clinton, Giustra, and executives from the Kazakh-owned nuclear company Kazatomprom ever met in Clintons’ home.
“When I first contacted both the Clinton Foundation—Mr. Clinton’s spokesman—and Mr. Giustra, they denied any such meeting ever took place,” said Becker.
“And then when we told them, ‘Well we already talked to the head of Kazatomprom, who not only told us all about the meeting, but actually has a picture of him and Bill at the home in Chappaqua, and that he proudly displayed it on his office wall.’ They then acknowledged that yes, the meeting had taken place.”
The Hillary Clinton campaign continues to struggle in its efforts to spin and distract from the growing pile of Clinton Cash facts mainstream media outlets have already confirmed and verified are correct.
As Politico concludes, “Hillary’s Clinton Cash dismissal is dead in the water.”
The book drops May 5th.

 

[ScottL]

This toon is Bottom of the 9th down 0-3 GrandSlam Great!

 

[russ1945]

[FONT=&quot][h=1]From Whitewater to Benghazi: A Clinton-Scandal Primer[/h][FONT=&quot]A new report from the State Department’s inspector general reportedly blasts Clinton’s use of private email—the latest headache for the Democratic front-runner.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Esam Al-Fetori / Brian Snyder / Gary Cameron / Jim Young / Reuters / Brennan Linsley / Susan Walsh / AP / razihusin / Shutterstock[/FONT][FONT=&quot]Zak Bickel / The Atlantic[/FONT]

• [FONT=&quot]24k[/FONT]​
• [FONT=&quot][/FONT]​

[FONT=&quot]TEXT SIZE[/FONT]​

• DAVID A. GRAHAM
• MAY 25, 2016
• POLITICS

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Subscribe to The Edge, a daily roundup of ideas and events in American politics.

A State Department inspector general’s report will reportedly blast Hillary Clinton for her handling of her email while secretary of state.
Rather than use the State Department’s system, Clinton set up her own email system, for herself and top aides, using a server at her home in New York. The revelation of that system has prompted several inquiries. An investigation by the FBI and the Justice Department has received the most attention, in large part because it could theoretically result in Clinton being indicted. The IG’s report does not carry the same threat of sanction. The report has not been published, but several outlets—beginning with Politico—have obtained copies, and those reports paint a damning picture.
The IG finds that Clinton did not seek appropriate approval for her email workaround at the start of her tenure, and that had she done so, she would have been denied because of security concerns. Later, in 2010, Clinton’s team was warned about misgivings about whether the system would preserve public records. That warning was dismissed by a Clinton aide who cited a legal review that had cleared its use, but the IG could not find any evidence of that review,according to The Washington Post.

​

Clinton’s failures did not end with her departure from Foggy Bottom. In order to comply with public-records laws, Clinton should have either saved and printed all of her emails or else turned them all over when she left the department in 2013. Instead, she only handed them nearly two years later. Politico quotes the report:

Therefore, Secretary Clinton should have preserved any Federal records she created and received on her personal account by printing and filing those records with the related files in the Office of the Secretary. At a minimum, Secretary Clinton should have surrendered all emails dealing with Department business before leaving government service and, because she did not do so, she did not comply with the Department’s policies that were implemented in accordance with the Federal Records Act.
​

In one exchange captured by the IG, Clinton’s right-hand woman Huma Abedin pointed out that the private email system was causing problems with the State Department’s own email system, which was apparently sending the secretary’s messages to spam. Abedin suggested moving Clinton to the official system, but Clinton objected citing concerns about the privacy of her personal emails—a problem that she, of course, had created by establishing the private system in the first place.
Clinton was hardly the only offender, the IG noted: Colin Powell was also delinquent in his compliance with public-records laws, using a personal laptop to send messages. Other secretaries, both at State and in other Cabinet-level positions, have also reportedly used private email. That points to a broader problem in the government, but it’s hardly exculpatory for Clinton, who also happens to be the only former secretary who is running for president.
Clinton and her aides did not cooperate with the IG’s inquiry, though she has said they will cooperate with the FBI and Department of Justice, and some aides have already spoken with investigators. It’s unclear when that inquiry might conclude. Clinton and her team insist she did not break any laws, and the most recent reports suggest that so far the investigation has not turned up any evidence of malicious wrongdoing that might lead to an indictment. The prospect of Clinton facing prosecution as the general election ramps up is a nightmare scenario for Democrats, who are already rattled by Donald Trump’s prowess in polling against her.

​

The emails have become a classic Clinton scandal. Even though investigations have found no wrongdoing on her part with respect to the Benghazi attacks themselves, Clinton’s private-email use and concerns about whether she sent classified information have become huge stories unto themselves. This is a pattern with the Clinton family, which has been in the public spotlight since Bill Clinton’s first run for office, in 1974: Something that appears potentially scandalous on its face turns out to be innocuous, but an investigation into it reveals different questionable behavior. The canonical case is Whitewater, a failed real-estate investment Bill and Hillary Clinton made in 1978. Although no inquiry ever produced evidence of wrongdoing, investigations ultimately led to President Clinton’s impeachment for perjury and obstruction of justice.
With Hillary Clinton leading the field for the Democratic nomination for president, every Clinton scandal—from Whitewater to the State Department emails—will be under the microscope. (No other American politicians—even ones as corrupt as Richard Nixon, or as hated by partisans as George W. Bush—have fostered the creation of a permanent multimillion-dollar cottage industry devoted to attacking them.) Keeping track of each controversy, where it came from, and how serious it is, is no small task, so here’s a primer. We’ll update it as new information emerges.

---

[FONT=&quot]Clinton’s State Department Emails[/FONT]

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton checks her phone on board a plane from Malta to Tripoli, Libya. (Kevin Lamarque / Reuters / Zak Bickel / The Atlantic)[FONT=&quot]What?[/FONT] Setting aside the question of the Clintons’ private email server, what’s actually in the emails that Clinton did turn over to State? While some of the emails related to Benghazi have been released, there are plenty of others covered by public-records laws that haven’t.
[FONT=&quot]When?[/FONT] 2009-2013
[FONT=&quot]How serious is it?[/FONT] Serious. Initially, it seemed that the interest in the emails would stem from damaging things that Clinton or other aides had said: cover-ups, misrepresentations, who knows? But so far, other than some cringeworthy moments of sucking up and some eye-rolly emails from contacts like Sidney Blumenthal, the emails have been remarkably boring. The main focus now is on classification. Sixty-five emails contain information that is now classified. The question is whether any of it, and how much of it, was classified at the time it was sent. Clinton has said she didn’t knowingly send or receive classified material on the account. The State Department and Intelligence Community have disagreed about that. In addition, the Intelligence Community’s inspector general wrote in a January letter that Clinton’s server contained information marked “special access program,” a further restricted type of information. Some emails that Clinton didn’t turn over have also since surfaced. A May report from the State Department inspector general is harshly critical of Clinton’s email approach.

---

[FONT=&quot]Benghazi[/FONT]

A man celebrates as the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi burns on September 11, 2012. (Esam Al-Fetori / Reuters / Zak Bickel / The Atlantic)[FONT=&quot]What?[/FONT] On September 11, 2012, attackers overran a U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, killing Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans. Since then, Republicans have charged that Hillary Clinton failed to adequately protect U.S. installations or that she attempted to spin the attacks as spontaneous when she knew they were planned terrorist operations. She testifies for the first time on October 22.

​

[FONT=&quot]When?[/FONT] September 11, 2012-present
[FONT=&quot]How serious is it?[/FONT] Benghazi has gradually turned into a classic “it’s not the crime, it’s the coverup” scenario. Only the fringes argue, at this point, that Clinton deliberately withheld aid. A House committee continues to investigate the killings and aftermath, but Clinton’s marathon appearance before the committee in October was widely considered a win for her. However, it was through the Benghazi investigations that Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server became public—a controversy that remains potent.

---

[FONT=&quot]Conflicts of Interest in Foggy Bottom[/FONT]

Kevin Lamarque / Reuters / Zak Bickel / The Atlantic[FONT=&quot]What? [/FONT]Before becoming Clinton’s chief of staff, Cheryl Mills worked for Clinton on an unpaid basis for four month while also working for New York University, in which capacity she negotiated on the school’s behalf with the government of Abu Dhabi, where it was building a campus. In June 2012, Deputy Chief of Staff Huma Abedin’s status at State changed to “special government employee,”allowing her to also work for Teneo, a consulting firm run by Bill Clinton’s former right-hand man. She also earned money from the Clinton Foundation and was paid directly by Hillary Clinton.
[FONT=&quot]Who?[/FONT] Both Cheryl Mills and Huma Abedin are among Clinton’s longest-serving and closest aides. Abedin remains involved in her campaign (and she’s also married to Anthony Weiner).
[FONT=&quot]When?[/FONT] January 2009-February 2013
[FONT=&quot]How serious is it? [/FONT]This is arcane stuff, to be sure. There are questions about conflict of interest—such as whether Teneo clients might have benefited from special treatment by the State Department while Abedin worked for both. To a great extent, this is just an extension of the tangle of conflicts presented by theClinton Foundation and the many overlapping roles of Bill and Hillary Clinton.

---

[FONT=&quot]The Clintons’ Private Email Server[/FONT]

Jim Young / Reuters / Zak Bickel / The Atlantic[FONT=&quot]What?[/FONT] During the course of the Benghazi investigation, New York Times reporter Michael Schmidt learned Clinton had used a personal email account while secretary of state. It turned out she had also been using a private server, located at a house in New York. The result was that Clinton and her staff decided which emails to turn over to the State Department as public records and which to withhold; they say they then destroyed the ones they had designated as personal.

​

[FONT=&quot]When?[/FONT] 2009-2013, during Clinton’s term as secretary.
[FONT=&quot]Who?[/FONT] Hillary Clinton; Bill Clinton; top aides including Huma Abedin
[FONT=&quot]How serious is it? [/FONT]The biggest question right now appears to be whether the server was hacked, which could have exposed classified or otherwise sensitive information. Even if not, there’s the question of whether using the serve was appropriate. The rules governing use of personal emails are murky, and Clinton aides insist she followed the rules. There’s no dispositive evidence otherwise so far. Politically, there are questions about how she selected the emails she turned over and what was in the ones she deleted. The FBI has reportedly managed to recover some of the deleted correspondence.

---

[FONT=&quot]Sidney Blumenthal[/FONT]

Blumenthal takes a lunch break while being deposed in private session of the House Select Committee on Benghazi. (Jonathan Ernst / Reuters / Zak Bickel / The Atlantic)[FONT=&quot]What?[/FONT] A former journalist, Blumenthal was a top aide in the second term of the Bill Clinton administration and helped on messaging during the bad old days. He served as an adviser to Hillary Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign, and when she took over the State Department, she sought to hire Blumenthal. Obama aides, apparently still smarting over his role in attacks on candidate Obama, refused the request, so Clinton just sought out his counsel informally. At the same time, Blumenthal was drawing a check from the Clinton Foundation.
[FONT=&quot]When? [/FONT]2009-2013
[FONT=&quot]How serious is it?[/FONT] Some of the damage is already done. Blumenthal was apparently the source of the idea that the Benghazi attacks were spontaneous, a notion that proved incorrect and provided a political bludgeon against Clinton and Obama. He also advised the secretary on a wide range of other issues, from Northern Ireland to China, and passed along analysis from his son Max, a staunch critic of the Israeli government (and conservative bête noire). But emails released so far show even Clinton’s top foreign-policy guru, Jake Sullivan, rejecting Blumenthal’s analysis, raising questions about her judgment in trusting him.

---

[FONT=&quot]The Speeches[/FONT]

Keith Bedford / Reuters / Zak Bickel / The Atlantic[FONT=&quot]What? [/FONT]Since Bill Clinton left the White House in 2001, both Clintons have made millions of dollars for giving speeches.

​

[FONT=&quot]When?[/FONT] 2001-present
[FONT=&quot]Who?[/FONT] Hillary Clinton; Bill Clinton; Chelsea Clinton
[FONT=&quot]How serious is it? [/FONT]Intermittently dangerous. It has a tendency to flare up, then die down. Senator Bernie Sanders made it a useful attack against her in early 2016, suggesting that by speaking to banks like Goldman Sachs, she was compromised. There have been calls for Clinton to release the transcripts of her speeches, which she was declined to do, saying if every other candidate does, she will too. For the Clintons, who left the White House up to their ears in legal debt, lucrative speeches—mostly by the former president—proved to be an effective way of rebuilding wealth. They have also been an effective magnet for prying questions. Where did Bill, Hillary, and Chelsea Clinton speak? How did they decide how much to charge? What did they say? How did they decide which speeches would be given on behalf of the Clinton Foundation, with fees going to the charity, and which would be treated as personal income? Are there cases of conflicts of interest or quid pro quos—for example, speaking gigs for Bill Clintonon behalf of clients who had business before the State Department?

---

[FONT=&quot]The Clinton Foundation[/FONT]

A brooch for sale at the Clinton Museum Store in Little Rock, Arkansas (Lucy Nicholson / Reuters / Zak Bickel / The Atlantic)[FONT=&quot]What?[/FONT] Bill Clinton’s foundation was actually established in 1997, but after leaving the White House it became his primary vehicle for … well, everything. With projects ranging from public health to elephant-poaching protection and small-business assistance to child development, the foundation is a huge global player with several prominent offshoots. In 2013, following Hillary Clinton’s departure as secretary of State, it was renamed the Bill, Hillary, and Chelsea Clinton Foundation.
[FONT=&quot]When?[/FONT] 1997-present
[FONT=&quot]Who?[/FONT] Bill Clinton; Hillary Clinton; Chelsea Clinton, etc.
[FONT=&quot]How serious is it?[/FONT] If the Clinton Foundation’s strength is President Clinton’s endless intellectual omnivorousness, its weakness is the distractibility and lack of interest in detail that sometimes come with it. On a philanthropic level, the foundation gets decent ratings from outside review groups, though critics charge that it’s too diffuse to do much good, that the money has not always achieved what it was intended to, and that in some cases the money doesn’t seem to have achieved its intended purpose. The foundation made errors in its tax returns it has to correct. Overall, however, the essential questions about the Clinton Foundation come down to two, related issues. The first is the seemingly unavoidable conflicts of interest: How did the Clintons’ charitable work intersect with their for-profit speeches? How did their speeches intersect with Hillary Clinton’s work at the State Department? Were there quid-pro-quos involving U.S. policy? Did the foundation steer money improperly to for-profit companies owned by friends? The second, connected question is about disclosure. When Clinton became secretary, she agreed that the foundation would make certain disclosures, which it’s now clear it didn’t always do. And the looming questions about Clinton’s State Department emails make it harder to answer those questions.

---

[FONT=&quot]The Bad Old Days[/FONT]

Supporter Dick Furinash holds up cardboard cut-outs of Bill and Hillary Clinton. (Jim Young / Reuters / Zak Bickel / The Atlantic)[FONT=&quot]What is it?[/FONT] Since the Clintons have a long history of controversies, there are any number of past scandals that continue to float around, especially in conservative media: Whitewater. Troopergate. Paula Jones. Monica Lewinsky. Travelgate.Vince Foster’s suicide. Juanita Broaddrick.
[FONT=&quot]When?[/FONT] 1975-2001
[FONT=&quot]Who?[/FONT] Bill Clinton; Hillary Clinton; a brigade of supporting characters
[FONT=&quot]How serious is it?[/FONT] The conventional wisdom is that they’re not terribly dangerous. Some are wholly spurious (Foster). Others (Lewinsky, Whitewater) have been so exhaustively investigated it’s hard to imagine them doing much further damage to Hillary Clinton’s standing. In fact, the Lewinsky scandal famously boosted her public approval ratings. But the January 2016 resurfacing of Juanita Broaddrick’s rape allegations offers a test case to see whether the conventional wisdom is truly wise—or just conventional. On May 23, Donald Trump released a video prominently highlighting Broaddrick’s accusation.
[/FONT]

 

[Dave007inVegas]

Russ, that’s quite a resume. But you do know it‘s all just a vast right wing conspiracy. Right?

 

[SheriffJoe]

WH Denies Endorsement Will Intimidate FBI Investigators

Obama meets privately with Loretta Lynch.
3:07 PM, JUN 09, 2016 | By DANIEL HALPER

White House press secretary Josh Earnest insisted that President Obama's endorsement of Hillary Clinton will not "sway" the ongoing FBI investigation into Clinton.

The statement came after Obama released a video endorsing Clinton for president of the United States.

Later this afternoon, according to the White House, Obama is meeting with the attorney general. The meeting is "closed press."

3:25PM THE PRESIDENT meets with Attorney General Lynch

Oval Office

Closed Press

The topic of Obama's closed door meeting with Lynch has not been made public.

Earnest made the statement in response to questioning from Fox News' James Rosen.

 

[Dave007inVegas]

WH Denies Endorsement Will Intimidate FBI Investigators

Obama meets privately with Loretta Lynch.
3:07 PM, JUN 09, 2016 | By DANIEL HALPER

White House press secretary Josh Earnest insisted that President Obama's endorsement of Hillary Clinton will not "sway" the ongoing FBI investigation into Clinton.

The statement came after Obama released a video endorsing Clinton for president of the United States.

Later this afternoon, according to the White House, Obama is meeting with the attorney general. The meeting is "closed press."

3:25PM THE PRESIDENT meets with Attorney General Lynch

Oval Office

Closed Press

The topic of Obama's closed door meeting with Lynch has not been made public.

Earnest made the statement in response to questioning from Fox News' James Rosen.

We’ll find out soon enough if Comey has the balls everyone says he has.

 

[russ1945]

[h=1]10 Serious Questions for Hillary Clinton[/h]POLITICS BY TRUTHFEEDNEWS MAY 17, 2016
Posted By Nancy MacDonald Kosicek

​

(1). “When you left the White House after your husband’s last term as president, why did you steal $200,000.00 worth of furniture, china, and artwork? And why did you tell the public that you ‘returned it’ when you only brought back $27,000 of it?
(2). Mrs. Clinton, when you were Secretary of State, why did you solicit contributions from foreign governments, (muslim princes donated multi-millions and got favors in return) for the Clinton Foundation after you promised President Obama you would not?
(3). Mrs. Clinton, why do you and your husband claim to contribute millions of dollars to charity for a tax write off
when it goes directly into your Clinton Foundation which only gives out 10% of the funds to charitable purposes and you pocket the balance to support yourself tax free? What does your daughter Chelsea do there for her 3 million dollar yearly salary?
(4). Mrs. Clinton, why are you unable to account for 6 billion dollars of State department funds that seem to have disappeared while you were Secretary of State?
(5). Mrs. Clinton why did you say you were broke when you left the White House, but purchased a 5 million home, built an addition for the secret service, and charge the tax payers of the United States $15,000.00 a month for their rent, an amount that pays your the entire mortgage?
(6). Mrs. Clinton why did you lie to the American people about the terrorist attack in Benghazi, but managed to tell the truth to your daughter that same night it happened?
(7). Mrs Clinton were you and your husband disbarred from practicing law? Answer: In 1996, Landmark Legal Foundation filed a complaint asking the court to disbar Hillary Clinton for violating the Arkansas code of conduct, (which requires lawyers to act with honesty and integrity) for her actions in the Whitewater scandal cover up. Hillary’s law license was suspended in 2002 for failing to complete her continuing legal education requirements. Bill Clinton was convicted by a grand jury for perjury and obstruction of justice to which he was impeached by the House of Representatives and disbarred from practicing as an attorney. He has been accused by a dozens of women for rape, sexual assault and sexual harassment. He settled out of court for $850.000 in one case. Hillary has him out on her campaign trail championing for her theme of feminism and “women’s rights”. What a blasphemy. Neither one has enough integrity to hold onto a law license.
(8). Mrs Clinton, why did you say, “I do not recall,” “I have no recollection,” and “I don’t know” 56 times while testifying under oath during the Starr investigations.
•(9). Mrs Clinton, what Really happened to Ron Brown when he was about to testify against you and your husband?
(10). Mrs. Clinton what really happened to law partner Vince Foster? No way he committed suicide.
CNBC, NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN, New York Times, Los Angeles Times, I know that the answers to any of these questions don’t matter to you, you would support her regardless of whether she was guilty of murder, embezzlement, money laundering, and I could go on and on. The Democrat’s and liberal’s motto is, “DON’T CONFUSE ME WITH THE FACTS – MY MIND IS MADE UP.”
Do you really want someone like this running this country? God help us if you do.

 

[vitterd]

We’ll find out soon enough if Comey has the balls everyone says he has.

if he decides there is nothing there and no indictment......he has no balls and is a fraud

if he decides there is enough for indictment ....then he's the hero of you nitwits


by the way.....where is Trey Gowdy....has he been released from the hospital yet?

 

[The Guesser]

I'm sure somewhere in this 120+ pages of BS, there's a dot that Obama would never endorse Hillary, and would throw her over the cliff because he hates her guts.

 

[vitterd]

I'm sure somewhere in this 120+ pages of BS, there's a dot that Obama would never endorse Hillary, and would throw her over the cliff because he hates her guts.

Don't forget Russ's Obama dot connecting. Russ connected so many dots that it made him predict once Obama term is over, lots of people involved in his administration will be writing books.

Great call!!! The Bush admin only has 2,000 different books written after his term

 

[russ1945]

White House calls FBI probe into Clinton's classified emails a 'criminal investigation' – to glee of Republicans – on the same day Obama endorses her

• Within an hour of Barack Obama's endorsement of Hillary Clinton, his spokesman acknowledged that she faces a 'criminal investigation'
• The misstep sent Republicans cackling to reporters
• Clinton faces the possibility of prosecution for housing classified documents on a private email server
• She used the homebrew setup for all her emails – including sensitive government matters – when she was secretary of state
• White House press secretary Josh Earnest insisted that the endorsement wouldn't be interpreted inside the FBI as a signal to let her off the hook

By DAVID MARTOSKO, US POLITICAL EDITOR FOR DAILYMAIL.COM
PUBLISHED: 16:22 EST, 9 June 2016 | UPDATED: 16:30 EST, 9 June 2016
2.6kshares

315View comments​

Barack Obama's spokesman described the FBI's probe into Hillary Clinton's classified email scandal as a 'criminal investigation' on Thursday, less than an hour after the president endorsed his embattled former secretary of state to succeed him.
Josh Earnest told reporters during a White House press briefing that Obama was committed to keeping his hands off the investigation, trusting career investigators and prosecutors to follow evidence wherever it leads.
'That's what their responsibility is,' Earnest said. 'And that's why the president, when discussing this issue in each stage, has reiterated his commitment to this principle that any criminal investigation should be conducted independent of any sort of political interference.'

+2


OOPS: White House press secretary Josh Earnest said Thursday that President Obama won't interfere with 'any criminal investigation' like the one Hillary Clinton faces over classified documents in her private emails

+2



HE SAID WHAT? Clinton has referred to the FBI probe as a routine 'security inquiry,' resisting the idea that she could face criminal charges as she makes her run for the White House

A search Thursday through White House briefing transcripts for similar acknowledgements turned up none.
Republican National Committee spokesman Michael Short crowed to reporters that 'the White House’s admission that the FBI is investigating Hillary Clinton’s email server as a "criminal" matter shreds her dishonest claim that it is a routine "security inquiry".'
'This is another reminder of her reckless conduct as Obama’s secretary of state, where her attempt to skirt government transparency laws exposed highly classified information and put our national security at risk.'
Obama gave Clinton his official nod Thursday in a video message, saying: 'I know how hard this job can be. That's why I know Hillary will be so good at it. In fact, I don't think there's ever been someone so qualified to hold this office.'
In the press briefing that followed, a Fox News Channel reporter challenged Earnest on the question of whether civil servants in the U.S. Department of Justice might see the presidential endorsement as a signal that it was time to wrap up their investigations.
Clinton has been dogged for more than a year by charges that she exposed state secrets to hackers and foreign governments by keeping all her email correspondence on a private homebrew server while she was secretary of state from 2009 to 2013.
Depending on evidentiary nuances, that could violate the U.S. Espionage Act and subject Clinton to 10 years in prison, even if she put classified documents in an 'unsecured' location through simple negligence.
Clinton said Wednesday that she 'absolutely' will not face a criminal indictment.






More than 2,000 such documents have been identified in State Department reviews of emails that Clinton turned over in late 2014 – nearly two years after she was supposed to. She also deleted more than 32,000 messages, unilaterally deeming them 'personal' in nature.
Earnest insisted that 'the reason that the president feels confident that he can go out and make this endorsement and record a video in which he describes his strong support for Secretary Clinton's campaign is that he knows the people who are conducting the investigation aren't going to be swayed by any sort of political interference.'
'They aren't going to be swayed by political forces. They know that their investigation should be guided by the facts and that they should follow the evidence where it leads. The President has complete confidence that that's exactly what they'll do,' he said.
The reporter asked Earnest whether or not Obama had ever discussed the FBI investigation with Clinton, who is now the Democratic Party's presumptive nominee.
'He has not,' the president's spokesman answered.



Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ans-day-Obama-endorses-her.html#ixzz4B8UHI4e0
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

 

[superbeets]