[h=1]Court says Hillary Clinton emails broke ‘government policy’[/h]
A federal judge said Thursday that former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton’s unique email arrangement violated government policy and prodded the department to talk with the FBI to determine what documents can be recovered from the computer server and flash drives used to store her emails.
Judge Emmet G. Sullivan was surprised that the State Department hadn’t made that request and poked at the administration’s claim that the FBI needed to be left alone to conduct its investigation. He gave the agencies 30 days to figure out whether emails can be recovered.
A federal judge said Thursday that former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton’s unique email arrangement violated government policy and prodded the department to talk with the FBI to determine what documents can be recovered from the computer server and flash drives used to store her emails.
Judge Emmet G. Sullivan was surprised that the State Department hadn’t made that request and poked at the administration’s claim that the FBI needed to be left alone to conduct its investigation. He gave the agencies 30 days to figure out whether emails can be recovered.
Beginning of the end
Dozens of Clinton emails were classified from the start, U.S. rules suggest
NEW YORK (Reuters) - For months, the U.S. State Department has stood behind its former boss Hillary Clinton as she has repeatedly said she did not send or receive classified information on her unsecured, private email account, a practice the government forbids.
While the department is now stamping a few dozen of the publicly released emails as "Classified," it stresses this is not evidence of rule-breaking. Those stamps are new, it says, and do not mean the information was classified when Clinton, the Democratic frontrunner in the 2016 presidential election, first sent or received it.
But the details included in those "Classified" stamps — which include a string of dates, letters and numbers describing the nature of the classification — appear to undermine this account, a Reuters examination of the emails and the relevant regulations has found.
The new stamps indicate that some of Clinton's emails from her time as the nation's most senior diplomat are filled with a type of information the U.S. government and the department's own regulations automatically deems classified from the get-go — regardless of whether it is already marked that way or not.
In the small fraction of emails made public so far, Reuters has found at least 30 email threads from 2009, representing scores of individual emails, that include what the State Department's own "Classified" stamps now identify as so-called 'foreign government information.' The U.S. government defines this as any information, written or spoken, provided in confidence to U.S. officials by their foreign counterparts.
Dozens of Clinton emails were classified from the start, U.S. rules suggest
NEW YORK (Reuters) - For months, the U.S. State Department has stood behind its former boss Hillary Clinton as she has repeatedly said she did not send or receive classified information on her unsecured, private email account, a practice the government forbids.
While the department is now stamping a few dozen of the publicly released emails as "Classified," it stresses this is not evidence of rule-breaking. Those stamps are new, it says, and do not mean the information was classified when Clinton, the Democratic frontrunner in the 2016 presidential election, first sent or received it.
But the details included in those "Classified" stamps — which include a string of dates, letters and numbers describing the nature of the classification — appear to undermine this account, a Reuters examination of the emails and the relevant regulations has found.
The new stamps indicate that some of Clinton's emails from her time as the nation's most senior diplomat are filled with a type of information the U.S. government and the department's own regulations automatically deems classified from the get-go — regardless of whether it is already marked that way or not.
In the small fraction of emails made public so far, Reuters has found at least 30 email threads from 2009, representing scores of individual emails, that include what the State Department's own "Classified" stamps now identify as so-called 'foreign government information.' The U.S. government defines this as any information, written or spoken, provided in confidence to U.S. officials by their foreign counterparts.
[h=1]Hillary Clinton's fifteen biggest scandals[/h]
By SARAH WESTWOOD
Hillary Clinton is set to launch her presidential campaign for the second time Saturday in New York amid a barrage of criticism that has marred her first weeks on the trail.
The Clintons have been no stranger to scandals, some dating back to when Bill Clinton was governor of Arkansas. But there are many scandals that originated in Hillary Clinton's tenure as secretary of state.
The following 15 scandals are just a few to keep in mind as she launches her presidential campaign.
Boeing bucks
MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
[h=2]Watchdog: VA employees waste time goofing off on social media[/h]By Pete Kasperowicz
Have You Tried All 6 Flavors of Mtn Dew #Kickstart?
Looking to kick things up a notch? Crack open a MTN DEW Kickstart and get charged up with an energizing blast of DEW, juice and coconut water.
PROMOTED BY MOUNTAIN DEW
Boeing gave generously to the Clinton Foundation after Hillary Clinton personally intervened on its behalf to secure a lucrative contract with the Russian government.
The secretary of state made what she called a "shameless pitch" to the state-owned Russian carrier Rosavia in October 2009.
Russia struck a multi-billion dollar deal with Boeing in June 2010, after which the aerospace conglomerate cut a $900,000 check to the Clinton Foundation.
Speaker fees
Bill Clinton doubled the amount of money he earned from speaking engagements funded by foreign entities while his wife served as secretary of state.
ALSO FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
[h=2]Cyberexpert says OPM hack affected hundreds of millions[/h]By Rudy Takala
The spike in foreign groups that became interested in hosting the former president raised questions as to whether their invitations were made in an effort to curry favor with the secretary of state.
For example, Bill Clinton earned $2.2 million from just six international speeches in 2014, but reportedly made $4.8 million from 13 speeches in foreign countries in 2010
Uranium One
Hillary Clinton's role in approving a contentious uranium contractemerged in Peter Schweizer's May book Clinton Cash.
In the deal, a state-owned Russian energy agency took over a Canadian company, Uranium One, that controlled such a large stake in America's uranium deposits that the transaction required approval from Hillary Clinton and other cabinet-level officials.
ALSO FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
[h=2]State Dept., intelligence community battle over Hillary's emails[/h]By Sarah Westwood
Frank Giustra, a top Clinton Foundation donor and close friend of the former president, served as a financial adviser to Uranium One as the deal unfolded.
The charity failed to disclose other significant donations from individuals and entities involved in the transaction, including the $2.35 million Uranium One chair Ian Telfer funneled to the charity through another foundation under his control.
Airbrushing IG reports
The State Department's acting inspector general, Harold Geisel, appears to have removed damaging passages from a report before publishing it in February 2013.
References to specific cases in which high-level State officials halted internal investigations and descriptions of the extent and frequency of those interventions appear in several early drafts but were later eliminated, the Washington Examiner reported Tuesday.
The unexplained gaps between the reports call into question Geisel's independence as an interim inspector general.
Among the passages removed was an allegation that diplomatic security staff had covered up the solicitation of prostitutes by Hillary Clinton's security team on official travel and that higher-ups had shielded an official with an alleged history of sexual assault from being investigated for attacking embassy staff.
Blumenthal's back
Hillary Clinton's reliance on an informal adviser whom she called an "old friend" sparked controversy when her published emails revealed him to be her main source of intelligence in the run-up to Benghazi.
Sidney Blumenthal's brutal campaign against then-Sen. Barack Obama in the 2008 Democratic primary made him an enemy of the administration even after Hillary Clinton was selected to join Obama's cabinet. Her attempts to hire Blumenthal were reportedly nixed by Obama's staff.
Blumenthal's ties to a group of businessmen who were attempting to drum up contracts in the Libya — with the help of the State Department — raise questions about the motives behind theintelligence memos he sent Hillary Clinton.
Boko Haram
The State Department has ignored a lawsuit over its failure to comply with a FOIA request for records pertaining to a Nigerian businessman.
Gilbert Chagoury, who gave between $1 million and $5 million to the Clinton Foundation, was indicted in the Halliburton bribery scandal in 2010 alongside his brother. Chagoury is reportedly a close friend of Bill Clinton who spent time traveling with the former president through Europe.
Citizens United, a conservative nonprofit, sued the State Department after the agency stonewalled its request for records that would determine whether Hillary Clinton's refusal to place Boko Haram on the terrorist watch list had anything to do with Chagoury's support
Ambassadors investigated
Patrick Kennedy, the State Department's undersecretary for management, allegedly stopped investigators from looking into whether an ambassador accused of soliciting "sexual favors" from "minor children" had committed a crime on Hillary Clinton's watch, the Washington Examiner reported Thursday.
An inspector general report published late last year concluded the Belgian ambassador had been summoned to Washington for a meeting with Kennedy, where the undersecretary permitted him to return to his post after the ambassador simply denied the charges in an interview.
Kennedy told the inspector general he didn't open a criminal investigation because "solicitation of a prostitute ... was not a crime in the host country."
However, in testimony at the trial of Chelsea Manning more than a year earlier, Kennedy had told defense attorneys that their suggestion of his role in a cover-up of the Belgian ambassador scandal was "entirely false."
Security struggles
An internal inspector general memo revealed allegations that at least five members of Hillary Clinton's security detail solicited prostitutes in a number of countries while on official travel, including on trips to Russia and Colombia.
A diplomatic security guard was allowed to continue his oversight of Clinton's hotel security operations after allegedly soliciting prostitutes in Moscow "despite obvious counterintelligence questions," the memo said.
According to the document, a top official in the bureau of diplomatic security "reportedly told [an investigator] to shut down the four investigations" into the accused security guards, three of whom received suspensions that lasted just one day.
Hidden Iran waivers
The State Department has denied the existence of waivers granted to certain companies that would allow them to conduct business in Iran despite international sanctions against doing so.
But the waivers have surfaced in a number of reports, including Schweizer's book and an article earlier this month by the Washington Times.
Agency officials claimed they had searched 11 different offices within the State Department and had failed to turn up any documents related to the Iran waivers.
Sweden was among the countries working to convince Hillary Clinton not to impose harsh sanctions against Iran ahead of high-stakes nuclear negotiations.
Meanwhile, Bill Clinton established a separate arm of the Clinton Foundation in Sweden just as his wife was shoring up support for sanctions against Iran, the Times reported.
When the U.S. government released the sanctions list in 2011 and 2012, it included no Swedish companies.
Norway's new embassy
The government of Norway donated between $10 million and $25 million to the Clinton Foundation and was seemingly rewarded when the State Department shelled out $177.9 million for a new embassy in Oslo in 2011.
The agency forged ahead with plans to build the complex over the objections of diplomatic officials in Norway, who suggested the money be spent to strengthen embassies and consulates in countries that faced a higher terror risk.
A leaked diplomatic cable sent to Hillary Clinton in July 2009 shows plans for the embassy project, which were developed before she arrived at the agency, had been pushed from 2011 to 2020 to free up funding.
The cable mentions Patrick Kennedy, State's undersecretary for management, as a major force in pushing the embassy project forward.
Huma's side gigs
Huma Abedin, a longtime aide and present campaign staffer for Hillary Clinton, somehow managed to secure a rare designation as a special government employee in 2012, which allowed her to collect paychecks from Teneo Strategies and the Clinton Foundation, even as she received the $135,000 salary she drew from taxpayers as Hillary's deputy chief of staff.
Teneo Strategies is a controversial consulting firm founded by a close personal friend of Bill Clinton's. The former president served as a paid adviser to the company.
Abedin reportedly housed her communications on the same private server that shielded Hillary Clinton's records from the public during that same time period.
The State Department inspector general launched an investigation into Abedin's employment status in April.
Charity, Clinton-style
A charity watchdog claimed the Clinton Foundation tried to "strong-arm" its employees after the group placed the foundation on a watch list for philanthropies with potential problems.
The watchdog group claimed Hillary Clinton's family charity had an "atypical business model" that required further review. The Clinton Foundation will stay on the list for a minimum of six months.
The group said staffers at the Clinton Foundation attempted to receive special treatment when they learned the massive philanthropy was about to be placed on the list.
Filling up at Chevron
Chevron Corporation had been embroiled in a legal battle over allegations that it polluted a stretch of Ecuador's rainforest with toxic waste for years before Hillary Clinton joined the State Department.
But the oil conglomerate, which stood to lose billions of dollars from the lawsuit, funneled generous donations to the Clinton Foundation and a political pet project of Hillary Clinton's while it lobbied the State Department to intervene in the case on its behalf.
Chevron executives have participated in Clinton Global Initiative events that placed them on the stage with Clinton insiders such as George Stephanopoulos.
Chevron's CEO even made a personal appeal to Hillary Clinton at a State Department dinner in 2012.
The company's chief executive "took the opportunity to express our concerns about developments in the Chevron Ecuador litigation" to Hillary Clinton at the banquet, emails obtained through the Freedom of Information Act show.
While a Chevron spokesperson denied a link between the donations and the environmental lawsuit, the corporation scored a major victory in the case last year when a Clinton-appointed judge in New York blocked the enforcement of a multi-billion dollar ruling against the oil company in the U.S.
Congo cash
As a New York senator, Hillary Clinton championed a law that would have cracked down on the illicit mineral trade in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. However, as secretary of state, Hillary Clinton seemingly flouted that law in favor of foundation donors that had financial stakes in the mineral industry.
The head of a Canadian company with an enormous interest in the Congo's mining and oil sector, Lukas Lundin of Lundin Mining, announced a $100 million donation to the Clinton Foundation on the heels of Clinton's first presidential campaign, according to Schweizer.
After the Congolese government attempted to regain control of its own mines, the State Department intervened on behalf of Lundin Mining and another mining company, Freeport, that also happened to be a foundation donor.
A round of talks in 2010, thought to be aided by the Clinton State Department, concluded with the pair of well-connected companies retaining their stakes in the mines and with the Congolese government being shut out of its own resources.
Pulling a Belfast one
Hillary Clinton's final official trip as secretary of state highlighted conflicts of interest between her diplomatic post, the Clinton Foundation and Teneo Strategies.
The former secretary of state traveled to Belfast to claim an award from a major foundation donor at an event that was promoted by Teneo, the Washington Examiner reported last month.
Bill Clinton once served as a paid adviser to Teneo, which was co-founded by one of his top former aides.
The trip raised questions about whether Abedin, as the aide in charge of arranging the secretary's schedule, steered Hillary Clinton to the event in a move that would have undoubtedly benefited her other employer, Teneo.
By SARAH WESTWOOD
•
6/13/15 12:01 AM
[h=1]Share[/h]
[h=1]Tweet[/h]
[h=1]Reddit[/h]
[h=1]Digg[/h]
[h=1]Mail[/h]
[h=1]Print[/h]
[h=1]More[/h]Hillary Clinton is set to launch her presidential campaign for the second time Saturday in New York amid a barrage of criticism that has marred her first weeks on the trail.
The Clintons have been no stranger to scandals, some dating back to when Bill Clinton was governor of Arkansas. But there are many scandals that originated in Hillary Clinton's tenure as secretary of state.
The following 15 scandals are just a few to keep in mind as she launches her presidential campaign.
Boeing bucks
MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
[h=2]Watchdog: VA employees waste time goofing off on social media[/h]By Pete Kasperowicz
•
08/20/15 2:57 PM
Looking to kick things up a notch? Crack open a MTN DEW Kickstart and get charged up with an energizing blast of DEW, juice and coconut water.
PROMOTED BY MOUNTAIN DEW
The secretary of state made what she called a "shameless pitch" to the state-owned Russian carrier Rosavia in October 2009.
Russia struck a multi-billion dollar deal with Boeing in June 2010, after which the aerospace conglomerate cut a $900,000 check to the Clinton Foundation.
Speaker fees
Bill Clinton doubled the amount of money he earned from speaking engagements funded by foreign entities while his wife served as secretary of state.
ALSO FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
[h=2]Cyberexpert says OPM hack affected hundreds of millions[/h]By Rudy Takala
•
08/20/15 2:53 PM
For example, Bill Clinton earned $2.2 million from just six international speeches in 2014, but reportedly made $4.8 million from 13 speeches in foreign countries in 2010
Uranium One
Hillary Clinton's role in approving a contentious uranium contractemerged in Peter Schweizer's May book Clinton Cash.
In the deal, a state-owned Russian energy agency took over a Canadian company, Uranium One, that controlled such a large stake in America's uranium deposits that the transaction required approval from Hillary Clinton and other cabinet-level officials.
ALSO FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
[h=2]State Dept., intelligence community battle over Hillary's emails[/h]By Sarah Westwood
•
08/20/15 12:01 AM
The charity failed to disclose other significant donations from individuals and entities involved in the transaction, including the $2.35 million Uranium One chair Ian Telfer funneled to the charity through another foundation under his control.
Airbrushing IG reports
The State Department's acting inspector general, Harold Geisel, appears to have removed damaging passages from a report before publishing it in February 2013.
References to specific cases in which high-level State officials halted internal investigations and descriptions of the extent and frequency of those interventions appear in several early drafts but were later eliminated, the Washington Examiner reported Tuesday.
The unexplained gaps between the reports call into question Geisel's independence as an interim inspector general.
Among the passages removed was an allegation that diplomatic security staff had covered up the solicitation of prostitutes by Hillary Clinton's security team on official travel and that higher-ups had shielded an official with an alleged history of sexual assault from being investigated for attacking embassy staff.
Blumenthal's back
Hillary Clinton's reliance on an informal adviser whom she called an "old friend" sparked controversy when her published emails revealed him to be her main source of intelligence in the run-up to Benghazi.
Sidney Blumenthal's brutal campaign against then-Sen. Barack Obama in the 2008 Democratic primary made him an enemy of the administration even after Hillary Clinton was selected to join Obama's cabinet. Her attempts to hire Blumenthal were reportedly nixed by Obama's staff.
Blumenthal's ties to a group of businessmen who were attempting to drum up contracts in the Libya — with the help of the State Department — raise questions about the motives behind theintelligence memos he sent Hillary Clinton.
Boko Haram
The State Department has ignored a lawsuit over its failure to comply with a FOIA request for records pertaining to a Nigerian businessman.
Gilbert Chagoury, who gave between $1 million and $5 million to the Clinton Foundation, was indicted in the Halliburton bribery scandal in 2010 alongside his brother. Chagoury is reportedly a close friend of Bill Clinton who spent time traveling with the former president through Europe.
Citizens United, a conservative nonprofit, sued the State Department after the agency stonewalled its request for records that would determine whether Hillary Clinton's refusal to place Boko Haram on the terrorist watch list had anything to do with Chagoury's support
Ambassadors investigated
Patrick Kennedy, the State Department's undersecretary for management, allegedly stopped investigators from looking into whether an ambassador accused of soliciting "sexual favors" from "minor children" had committed a crime on Hillary Clinton's watch, the Washington Examiner reported Thursday.
An inspector general report published late last year concluded the Belgian ambassador had been summoned to Washington for a meeting with Kennedy, where the undersecretary permitted him to return to his post after the ambassador simply denied the charges in an interview.
Kennedy told the inspector general he didn't open a criminal investigation because "solicitation of a prostitute ... was not a crime in the host country."
However, in testimony at the trial of Chelsea Manning more than a year earlier, Kennedy had told defense attorneys that their suggestion of his role in a cover-up of the Belgian ambassador scandal was "entirely false."
Security struggles
An internal inspector general memo revealed allegations that at least five members of Hillary Clinton's security detail solicited prostitutes in a number of countries while on official travel, including on trips to Russia and Colombia.
A diplomatic security guard was allowed to continue his oversight of Clinton's hotel security operations after allegedly soliciting prostitutes in Moscow "despite obvious counterintelligence questions," the memo said.
According to the document, a top official in the bureau of diplomatic security "reportedly told [an investigator] to shut down the four investigations" into the accused security guards, three of whom received suspensions that lasted just one day.
Hidden Iran waivers
The State Department has denied the existence of waivers granted to certain companies that would allow them to conduct business in Iran despite international sanctions against doing so.
But the waivers have surfaced in a number of reports, including Schweizer's book and an article earlier this month by the Washington Times.
Agency officials claimed they had searched 11 different offices within the State Department and had failed to turn up any documents related to the Iran waivers.
Sweden was among the countries working to convince Hillary Clinton not to impose harsh sanctions against Iran ahead of high-stakes nuclear negotiations.
Meanwhile, Bill Clinton established a separate arm of the Clinton Foundation in Sweden just as his wife was shoring up support for sanctions against Iran, the Times reported.
When the U.S. government released the sanctions list in 2011 and 2012, it included no Swedish companies.
Norway's new embassy
The government of Norway donated between $10 million and $25 million to the Clinton Foundation and was seemingly rewarded when the State Department shelled out $177.9 million for a new embassy in Oslo in 2011.
The agency forged ahead with plans to build the complex over the objections of diplomatic officials in Norway, who suggested the money be spent to strengthen embassies and consulates in countries that faced a higher terror risk.
A leaked diplomatic cable sent to Hillary Clinton in July 2009 shows plans for the embassy project, which were developed before she arrived at the agency, had been pushed from 2011 to 2020 to free up funding.
The cable mentions Patrick Kennedy, State's undersecretary for management, as a major force in pushing the embassy project forward.
Huma's side gigs
Huma Abedin, a longtime aide and present campaign staffer for Hillary Clinton, somehow managed to secure a rare designation as a special government employee in 2012, which allowed her to collect paychecks from Teneo Strategies and the Clinton Foundation, even as she received the $135,000 salary she drew from taxpayers as Hillary's deputy chief of staff.
Teneo Strategies is a controversial consulting firm founded by a close personal friend of Bill Clinton's. The former president served as a paid adviser to the company.
Abedin reportedly housed her communications on the same private server that shielded Hillary Clinton's records from the public during that same time period.
The State Department inspector general launched an investigation into Abedin's employment status in April.
Charity, Clinton-style
A charity watchdog claimed the Clinton Foundation tried to "strong-arm" its employees after the group placed the foundation on a watch list for philanthropies with potential problems.
The watchdog group claimed Hillary Clinton's family charity had an "atypical business model" that required further review. The Clinton Foundation will stay on the list for a minimum of six months.
The group said staffers at the Clinton Foundation attempted to receive special treatment when they learned the massive philanthropy was about to be placed on the list.
Filling up at Chevron
Chevron Corporation had been embroiled in a legal battle over allegations that it polluted a stretch of Ecuador's rainforest with toxic waste for years before Hillary Clinton joined the State Department.
But the oil conglomerate, which stood to lose billions of dollars from the lawsuit, funneled generous donations to the Clinton Foundation and a political pet project of Hillary Clinton's while it lobbied the State Department to intervene in the case on its behalf.
Chevron executives have participated in Clinton Global Initiative events that placed them on the stage with Clinton insiders such as George Stephanopoulos.
Chevron's CEO even made a personal appeal to Hillary Clinton at a State Department dinner in 2012.
The company's chief executive "took the opportunity to express our concerns about developments in the Chevron Ecuador litigation" to Hillary Clinton at the banquet, emails obtained through the Freedom of Information Act show.
While a Chevron spokesperson denied a link between the donations and the environmental lawsuit, the corporation scored a major victory in the case last year when a Clinton-appointed judge in New York blocked the enforcement of a multi-billion dollar ruling against the oil company in the U.S.
Congo cash
As a New York senator, Hillary Clinton championed a law that would have cracked down on the illicit mineral trade in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. However, as secretary of state, Hillary Clinton seemingly flouted that law in favor of foundation donors that had financial stakes in the mineral industry.
The head of a Canadian company with an enormous interest in the Congo's mining and oil sector, Lukas Lundin of Lundin Mining, announced a $100 million donation to the Clinton Foundation on the heels of Clinton's first presidential campaign, according to Schweizer.
After the Congolese government attempted to regain control of its own mines, the State Department intervened on behalf of Lundin Mining and another mining company, Freeport, that also happened to be a foundation donor.
A round of talks in 2010, thought to be aided by the Clinton State Department, concluded with the pair of well-connected companies retaining their stakes in the mines and with the Congolese government being shut out of its own resources.
Pulling a Belfast one
Hillary Clinton's final official trip as secretary of state highlighted conflicts of interest between her diplomatic post, the Clinton Foundation and Teneo Strategies.
The former secretary of state traveled to Belfast to claim an award from a major foundation donor at an event that was promoted by Teneo, the Washington Examiner reported last month.
Bill Clinton once served as a paid adviser to Teneo, which was co-founded by one of his top former aides.
The trip raised questions about whether Abedin, as the aide in charge of arranging the secretary's schedule, steered Hillary Clinton to the event in a move that would have undoubtedly benefited her other employer, Teneo.
[h=1]Hillary actually warned us about Clinton Foundation scandals[/h]By Betsy McCaughey
April 26, 2015 | 6:40pm
Modal Trigger
At Hillary Clinton's 2009 confirmation hearing, Clinton Foundation memorandum promised to disclose foreign fundraising.Photo: Reuters
Contrary to what is widely reported, the Clinton Foundation never agreed to stop raising money from foreign governments while Hillary Clinton was secretary of state. Such funding should have been off limits — because it risks the appearance that US foreign policy is up for sale.
But even after Republican and Democratic senators pressed her in 2009 to accept limits, she refused. That should have red-flagged the Clintons’ intentions.
Now, reports about a possible link between Clinton Foundation funding and State Department approval of the sale of US uranium interests to Russia should trigger demands that Hillary and Bill forswear foreign funds or end their bid to regain the White House.
At Hillary’s Jan. 13, 2009, confirmation hearing, members of the Foreign Relations Committee expressed their concerns. But Hillary stonewalled them.
She’d already worked out an agreement with President-elect Barack Obama’s transition team, and she refused to change it in any way. The agreement imposed no limits on who could give — including foreign governments — or how much.
If the State Department or the White House had concerns about a proposed gift, the foundation would listen, the agreement said. But the Clinton Foundation, not the White House or State Department ethics officers, would have the final say.
This agreement wasn’t worth the paper it was printed on. It protected the foundation from government meddling, but it didn’t protect the nation.
The senators could see that, and made dire predictions during the hearing. Those predictions may be coming true. If so, the senators are to blame, not just Hillary. Despite their fears, they fawned over her that day and rubber-stamped her 16-1. Only Sen. David Vitter of Louisiana voted “nay.”
Presidents generally get their way on cabinet picks. Only two nominees have been turned down since World War II. But the senators who confirmed Hillary, without extracting any meaningful limits on fundraising from foreign countries and donors, failed us.
At the hearing, Sen. Richard Lugar methodically questioned Hillary about her loophole-ridden “memorandum of understanding,” signed by Valerie Jarrett and a foundation representative. Lugar hammered that “the Clinton Foundation exists as a temptation for any foreign entity or government that believes it could curry favor through a donation.”
He requested that Hillary tighten up the agreement: “I believe that contributions from foreign companies and individuals have the potential to raise appearances of conflicts of interest that are as serious as those raised by contributions from foreign governments.”
Hillary responded: “The agreement as written already goes far beyond what any spouse of a cabinet official has ever done.”
Well, duh! No other cabinet nominee in American history was the wife of a former president, elected to the Senate, a presidential candidate herself, a nominee for secretary of state — and with a high-profile, big-family foundation looking for funds.
Lugar asked if the agreement could be amended to disclose the timing of gifts, the amounts and future pledges, not just donors’ names. Hillary flatly refused: “The agreement already goes far beyond what any spouse of a cabinet official has ever done.”
Shockingly, she made it clear that if any concerns were raised by the Obama White House or the State Department about foundation fundraising, the foundation would be the arbiter of what’s “appropriate,” not the US government.
“In many, if not most cases, it is likely that the foundation or President [Bill] Clinton will not pursue an opportunity that presents a conflict.”
Translation: It will depend on the amount of money being dangled in front of the ex-president. If the amount is large enough, national interest be damned.
Vitter took a turn at questioning Hillary, raising concerns about foreign individuals and companies — not just countries — donating to the foundation. He cited one foundation donor who was tangled in a web of connections with Iranian terrorism. One partner of the donor had been named by the Treasury two days earlier as “a terrorist entity” and another partner, Bank Melli, “had long been thought to be a procurement front for the Iranian nuclear program.”
Clinton regurgitated the stock answer: “Well again, this is an agreement that has been worked out between all of the parties, and the fact is that the concerns that were raised in the discussions between the foundation and the president-elect’s team were thoroughly discussed.”
Now we learn that there may have been a quid pro quo between the sale of US uranium interests to Russia, which required State Department sign-off, and cash to the Clintons and their foundation.
The United States cannot risk even the appearance of such influence-buying. The Democratic Party should demand from its candidate what the Senate failed to get from her: an air-tight agreement that the Clintons will stop collecting foreign cash.
April 26, 2015 | 6:40pm
Modal Trigger
Contrary to what is widely reported, the Clinton Foundation never agreed to stop raising money from foreign governments while Hillary Clinton was secretary of state. Such funding should have been off limits — because it risks the appearance that US foreign policy is up for sale.
But even after Republican and Democratic senators pressed her in 2009 to accept limits, she refused. That should have red-flagged the Clintons’ intentions.
Now, reports about a possible link between Clinton Foundation funding and State Department approval of the sale of US uranium interests to Russia should trigger demands that Hillary and Bill forswear foreign funds or end their bid to regain the White House.
At Hillary’s Jan. 13, 2009, confirmation hearing, members of the Foreign Relations Committee expressed their concerns. But Hillary stonewalled them.
She’d already worked out an agreement with President-elect Barack Obama’s transition team, and she refused to change it in any way. The agreement imposed no limits on who could give — including foreign governments — or how much.
If the State Department or the White House had concerns about a proposed gift, the foundation would listen, the agreement said. But the Clinton Foundation, not the White House or State Department ethics officers, would have the final say.
This agreement wasn’t worth the paper it was printed on. It protected the foundation from government meddling, but it didn’t protect the nation.
The senators could see that, and made dire predictions during the hearing. Those predictions may be coming true. If so, the senators are to blame, not just Hillary. Despite their fears, they fawned over her that day and rubber-stamped her 16-1. Only Sen. David Vitter of Louisiana voted “nay.”
Presidents generally get their way on cabinet picks. Only two nominees have been turned down since World War II. But the senators who confirmed Hillary, without extracting any meaningful limits on fundraising from foreign countries and donors, failed us.
At the hearing, Sen. Richard Lugar methodically questioned Hillary about her loophole-ridden “memorandum of understanding,” signed by Valerie Jarrett and a foundation representative. Lugar hammered that “the Clinton Foundation exists as a temptation for any foreign entity or government that believes it could curry favor through a donation.”
He requested that Hillary tighten up the agreement: “I believe that contributions from foreign companies and individuals have the potential to raise appearances of conflicts of interest that are as serious as those raised by contributions from foreign governments.”
Hillary responded: “The agreement as written already goes far beyond what any spouse of a cabinet official has ever done.”
Well, duh! No other cabinet nominee in American history was the wife of a former president, elected to the Senate, a presidential candidate herself, a nominee for secretary of state — and with a high-profile, big-family foundation looking for funds.
Lugar asked if the agreement could be amended to disclose the timing of gifts, the amounts and future pledges, not just donors’ names. Hillary flatly refused: “The agreement already goes far beyond what any spouse of a cabinet official has ever done.”
Shockingly, she made it clear that if any concerns were raised by the Obama White House or the State Department about foundation fundraising, the foundation would be the arbiter of what’s “appropriate,” not the US government.
“In many, if not most cases, it is likely that the foundation or President [Bill] Clinton will not pursue an opportunity that presents a conflict.”
Translation: It will depend on the amount of money being dangled in front of the ex-president. If the amount is large enough, national interest be damned.
Vitter took a turn at questioning Hillary, raising concerns about foreign individuals and companies — not just countries — donating to the foundation. He cited one foundation donor who was tangled in a web of connections with Iranian terrorism. One partner of the donor had been named by the Treasury two days earlier as “a terrorist entity” and another partner, Bank Melli, “had long been thought to be a procurement front for the Iranian nuclear program.”
Clinton regurgitated the stock answer: “Well again, this is an agreement that has been worked out between all of the parties, and the fact is that the concerns that were raised in the discussions between the foundation and the president-elect’s team were thoroughly discussed.”
Now we learn that there may have been a quid pro quo between the sale of US uranium interests to Russia, which required State Department sign-off, and cash to the Clintons and their foundation.
The United States cannot risk even the appearance of such influence-buying. The Democratic Party should demand from its candidate what the Senate failed to get from her: an air-tight agreement that the Clintons will stop collecting foreign cash.
[h=1]Are Democrats turning against Hillary Clinton?[/h]
Democratic presidential candidate and former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton answers questions from members of the media following a campaign stop at Dr. William U. Pearson Community Center on August 18, 2015 in North Las Vegas, Nevada
ISAAC BREKKEN, GETTY IMAGES
With the specter of Vice President Joe Biden jumping into the 2016 race for the White House, some prominent figures in the Democratic party seem less sure of Hillary Clinton's chances at clinching the party's nomination.
Notable Democrat California Gov. Jerry Brown weighed in Sunday on the possibility of Biden's run, saying if he were in the vice president's position, he would give "very serious consideration" to the 2016 contest.
"All I can say is, if I were Hillary, I would say [to Biden], 'Don't jump in,'" Brown told NBC News. "If I were Joe Biden, I'd probably give it very serious consideration."
Joe Biden's political star has risen in recent weeks, with his national poll numbers climbing despite his unofficial status as a potential candidate. In a move that could signal more earnest consideration of a run, Biden this weekend met privately with Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, a progressive policy leader of the Democratic party.
Play VIDEO
[h=3]Game changer: Joe Biden meets with Elizabeth Warren[/h]
Brown, who once made a bid for the Oval Office in 1992 against Bill Clinton, added that his own personal experience has shown him presidential politics are "uncertain."
When asked if he expects Hillary Clinton to win the Democratic nomination, Brown responded, "I don't make these expectations. I've been around politics long enough to know things are uncertain. I don't know. I think she's a good person. She's got a lot of experience, but the vagaries of politics are such, I think expectations are worth about that."
The two-time California governor also expressed concern for how Clinton's brewing email controversy could impact her run, calling the issue a "vampire" haunting her campaign.
"This email thing -- it has kind of a mystique to it," Brown said. "It's almost like a vampire. She has to find a stake and put it right through the heart of these emails in some way."
Still, the California Democrat warned that "it's still very early" to be predicting doom and gloom for the Clinton campaign.
"I hope she can get beyond this because I think as a matter of fact and laws and policy and ethics, these emails are not what the pundits are apparently thinking they are," Brown said.
Play VIDEO
[h=3]Chris Christie: "Hillary Clinton won't answer any questions"[/h]
Former Democratic National Committee chair Howard Dean also joined NBC News to speculate about Clinton's chances in the primary and the potential effect her private email server could have on her campaign.
Play VIDEO
[h=3]Hillary Clinton remains surrounded by email controversy[/h]
Dean, who also ran for president in 2004, maintained that "she did not break any rules, she did not break any policy." And even if she "may have sent stuff that was classified that wasn't labeled classified" at the time, Dean added that Clinton "can't be blamed for this."
Still, Dean questioned the way the former secretary of state has handled the controversy.
"As I was watching that tape, I was thinking to myself, this is a lawyerly answer," Dean said, seemingly in reference to Clinton's responses when asked by the press about classified information. "And one of the problems is that Hillary Clinton is an incredibly smart lawyer."
A Clinton opponent for the Democratic nomination, former Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley, said Sunday that while he's eager to debate the issues, he considers the GOP's questions about Clinton's email server to be "legitimate."
"So long as our Democratic party is not talking about the issues that matter most around the kitchen table, the only question that will be asked every day, and it's a legitimate question, by media people like yourself, or by the Republicans, are questions about Hillary Clinton's emails," O'Malley said in an interview with ABC News. "Those are questions that I will leave to her and to her lawyers to answer."
"Until we start having debates, and offering those ideas that move our country forward, we're going to be bogged down in questions of, what did Hillary Clinton know and when did she know it?" O'Malley added.
ISAAC BREKKEN, GETTY IMAGES
- 21 Comments
- Shares
- 63 Tweets
- Stumble
- More +
With the specter of Vice President Joe Biden jumping into the 2016 race for the White House, some prominent figures in the Democratic party seem less sure of Hillary Clinton's chances at clinching the party's nomination.
Notable Democrat California Gov. Jerry Brown weighed in Sunday on the possibility of Biden's run, saying if he were in the vice president's position, he would give "very serious consideration" to the 2016 contest.
"All I can say is, if I were Hillary, I would say [to Biden], 'Don't jump in,'" Brown told NBC News. "If I were Joe Biden, I'd probably give it very serious consideration."
Joe Biden's political star has risen in recent weeks, with his national poll numbers climbing despite his unofficial status as a potential candidate. In a move that could signal more earnest consideration of a run, Biden this weekend met privately with Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, a progressive policy leader of the Democratic party.
Play VIDEO[h=3]Game changer: Joe Biden meets with Elizabeth Warren[/h]
Brown, who once made a bid for the Oval Office in 1992 against Bill Clinton, added that his own personal experience has shown him presidential politics are "uncertain."
When asked if he expects Hillary Clinton to win the Democratic nomination, Brown responded, "I don't make these expectations. I've been around politics long enough to know things are uncertain. I don't know. I think she's a good person. She's got a lot of experience, but the vagaries of politics are such, I think expectations are worth about that."
The two-time California governor also expressed concern for how Clinton's brewing email controversy could impact her run, calling the issue a "vampire" haunting her campaign.
"This email thing -- it has kind of a mystique to it," Brown said. "It's almost like a vampire. She has to find a stake and put it right through the heart of these emails in some way."
Still, the California Democrat warned that "it's still very early" to be predicting doom and gloom for the Clinton campaign.
"I hope she can get beyond this because I think as a matter of fact and laws and policy and ethics, these emails are not what the pundits are apparently thinking they are," Brown said.
Play VIDEO[h=3]Chris Christie: "Hillary Clinton won't answer any questions"[/h]
Former Democratic National Committee chair Howard Dean also joined NBC News to speculate about Clinton's chances in the primary and the potential effect her private email server could have on her campaign.
Play VIDEO[h=3]Hillary Clinton remains surrounded by email controversy[/h]
Dean, who also ran for president in 2004, maintained that "she did not break any rules, she did not break any policy." And even if she "may have sent stuff that was classified that wasn't labeled classified" at the time, Dean added that Clinton "can't be blamed for this."
Still, Dean questioned the way the former secretary of state has handled the controversy.
"As I was watching that tape, I was thinking to myself, this is a lawyerly answer," Dean said, seemingly in reference to Clinton's responses when asked by the press about classified information. "And one of the problems is that Hillary Clinton is an incredibly smart lawyer."
A Clinton opponent for the Democratic nomination, former Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley, said Sunday that while he's eager to debate the issues, he considers the GOP's questions about Clinton's email server to be "legitimate."
"So long as our Democratic party is not talking about the issues that matter most around the kitchen table, the only question that will be asked every day, and it's a legitimate question, by media people like yourself, or by the Republicans, are questions about Hillary Clinton's emails," O'Malley said in an interview with ABC News. "Those are questions that I will leave to her and to her lawyers to answer."
"Until we start having debates, and offering those ideas that move our country forward, we're going to be bogged down in questions of, what did Hillary Clinton know and when did she know it?" O'Malley added.
[h=2]Scarborough: ‘Shameful,’ ‘Pathetic’ State Department Not Telling the Truth About Clinton[/h]SHARE
TWEET
EMAIL
BY: David Rutz
August 24, 2015 7:32 am
MSNBC host Joe Scarborough railed against John Kerry’s State Department Monday, calling it “shameful” and “pathetic” for stonewalling on various questions surrounding former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server.
Scarborough specifically called out Kerry’s remarks in a CBS interview earlier this month where he said it was “very possible“ that Chinese and Russian hackers had read his emails, saying it was clearly trying to soften the blow if and when it was revealed that Clinton’s email had been hacked as well.
“I’ve got to say what’s pathetic as well is the State Department, who’s basically not answering questions about documents, whether she signed them or not, trying to cover up for her,” Scarborough said. “When John Kerry comes out and says a couple weeks ago, well, I’m sure my e-mails were hacked by the Chinese and the Russians as well, because he knows what’s coming … John Kerry knows that we’re going to probably find out that Hillary Clinton’s emails on her home brew server were hacked. So, now the whole administration seems so desperate to elect her that they’re putting that consideration, I’ll say it, ahead of protecting classified secrets, and there is going to be a reckoning.”
Scarborough said its de facto political conduct in answering questions about Clinton was “shameful.”
“They need to be transparent,” he said. “Just tell us the truth. That’s all we want, State Department. Stop covering for Hillary Clinton. Just tell us the truth. Maybe you can exonerate her, but just tell us the truth … Right now the State Department feels like their responsibility is not getting the truth out and being transparent about what went on with classified documentation. Their responsibility is to protect the former secretary of state, and it’s really sad.”
TWEET
BY: David Rutz
August 24, 2015 7:32 am
MSNBC host Joe Scarborough railed against John Kerry’s State Department Monday, calling it “shameful” and “pathetic” for stonewalling on various questions surrounding former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server.
Scarborough specifically called out Kerry’s remarks in a CBS interview earlier this month where he said it was “very possible“ that Chinese and Russian hackers had read his emails, saying it was clearly trying to soften the blow if and when it was revealed that Clinton’s email had been hacked as well.
“I’ve got to say what’s pathetic as well is the State Department, who’s basically not answering questions about documents, whether she signed them or not, trying to cover up for her,” Scarborough said. “When John Kerry comes out and says a couple weeks ago, well, I’m sure my e-mails were hacked by the Chinese and the Russians as well, because he knows what’s coming … John Kerry knows that we’re going to probably find out that Hillary Clinton’s emails on her home brew server were hacked. So, now the whole administration seems so desperate to elect her that they’re putting that consideration, I’ll say it, ahead of protecting classified secrets, and there is going to be a reckoning.”
Scarborough said its de facto political conduct in answering questions about Clinton was “shameful.”
“They need to be transparent,” he said. “Just tell us the truth. That’s all we want, State Department. Stop covering for Hillary Clinton. Just tell us the truth. Maybe you can exonerate her, but just tell us the truth … Right now the State Department feels like their responsibility is not getting the truth out and being transparent about what went on with classified documentation. Their responsibility is to protect the former secretary of state, and it’s really sad.”
[h=2]Mika: Clinton’s Email Defense Strategy ‘Dependent on People Not Being Smart’[/h]SHARE
TWEET
EMAIL
BY: Blake Seitz
August 24, 2015 7:06 am
MSNBC’s Morning Joe panel piled on Hillary Clinton Monday for her “dismissive” and “condescending” response to the unfolding scandal surrounding her use of a private email server while secretary of state.
“This is a strategy that is basically dependent on people not being smart, which I think is really condescending,” MSNBC co-host Mika Brzezinski said.
“Let’s back up to whether or not having your own server at your home and then based out of the bathroom in Colorado was policy. Was it? Can anyone here at the table tell me that she followed policy? Look me in the eye and tell me that she followed policy and didn’t break rules,” Brzezinski challenged.
Clinton addressed the swelling controversy at a press conference that she abruptly cut short last week.
The Democratic presidential candidate said she was the target of a partisan smear campaign and joked about wiping her email server—just as she did days before by mentioning her love of Snapchat, a social media platform whose messages delete themselves.
“I was struck by how the approach seems to be dismissive of this or make jokes about it or make light of it, but this is a serious issue in an age where China every day is trying to hack government employees,” MSNBC co-host Willie Geist said. “We’ve seen stories time after time going after that this is deadly serious. If they don’t treat it that way, they’re going to be in a lot of trouble because it’s not going away.”
Reuters reported last week that many of Clinton’s emails were classified by the State Department at the time they were sent and received, a revelation that contradicts the campaign’s adamant denials that Clinton sent or received classified information that was considered to have that designation at the time.
TWEET
BY: Blake Seitz
August 24, 2015 7:06 am
MSNBC’s Morning Joe panel piled on Hillary Clinton Monday for her “dismissive” and “condescending” response to the unfolding scandal surrounding her use of a private email server while secretary of state.
“This is a strategy that is basically dependent on people not being smart, which I think is really condescending,” MSNBC co-host Mika Brzezinski said.
“Let’s back up to whether or not having your own server at your home and then based out of the bathroom in Colorado was policy. Was it? Can anyone here at the table tell me that she followed policy? Look me in the eye and tell me that she followed policy and didn’t break rules,” Brzezinski challenged.
Clinton addressed the swelling controversy at a press conference that she abruptly cut short last week.
The Democratic presidential candidate said she was the target of a partisan smear campaign and joked about wiping her email server—just as she did days before by mentioning her love of Snapchat, a social media platform whose messages delete themselves.
“I was struck by how the approach seems to be dismissive of this or make jokes about it or make light of it, but this is a serious issue in an age where China every day is trying to hack government employees,” MSNBC co-host Willie Geist said. “We’ve seen stories time after time going after that this is deadly serious. If they don’t treat it that way, they’re going to be in a lot of trouble because it’s not going away.”
Reuters reported last week that many of Clinton’s emails were classified by the State Department at the time they were sent and received, a revelation that contradicts the campaign’s adamant denials that Clinton sent or received classified information that was considered to have that designation at the time.
[h=1]Editorial: Clinton email probe needs special prosecutor[/h]
With Hillary Clinton running for president, it is hard to keep separate legitimate questions about whether her unorthodox email practices while secretary of state compromised national security from the partisan mud-slinging that comes with a political campaign.
Likewise, as the likely Democratic standard-bearer and former cabinet officer in the Obama administration, it is a stretch to assume the Justice Department will do a vigorous and impartial investigation into the email controversy and be entirely forthcoming with the results.
For the sake of everyone's credibility, a special prosecutor should be appointed with the tools to quickly answer the questions before the presidential primaries begin.
With Hillary Clinton running for president, it is hard to keep separate legitimate questions about whether her unorthodox email practices while secretary of state compromised national security from the partisan mud-slinging that comes with a political campaign.
Likewise, as the likely Democratic standard-bearer and former cabinet officer in the Obama administration, it is a stretch to assume the Justice Department will do a vigorous and impartial investigation into the email controversy and be entirely forthcoming with the results.
For the sake of everyone's credibility, a special prosecutor should be appointed with the tools to quickly answer the questions before the presidential primaries begin.
BUSINESS INSIDER: HILLARY CLINTON’S ‘BEST ARGUMENT’ IN EMAIL SCANDAL ‘DESTROYED’
by BREITBART NEWS23 Aug 2015408
A Reuters story on Hillary Clinton’s email scandal, previously reported on by Breitbart, quoted national security experts who said that information shared on her private server was “born classified” even if it was not marked so.
Business Insider, hardly a right-wing publication, takes the Reuters story a step farther and posts a headline saying that this revelation “destroyed” what would have been her “best argument” against criminal investigators.
Read More Stories About:
Big Government, National Security, Hillary Clinton, Private Email Server, Business Insider, Classified Information
Comment count on this article reflects comments made on Breitbart.com and Facebook. Visit Breitbart's Facebook Page.
BREITBART VIDEO PICKS
[*=left][C
[h=1]Joe Biden Is Leaning Toward a 2016 Run[/h]
Democrats are increasingly insecure about Mrs. Clinton’s candidacy, given her dipping approval ratings and continuing questions about her use of a private email server while secretary of state.
Democrats are increasingly insecure about Mrs. Clinton’s candidacy, given her dipping approval ratings and continuing questions about her use of a private email server while secretary of state.
