Naturally, since everything, including the weather, is a Republican conspiracy. But I don't think it'll play out that way with most people over the long term. A pardon would sink Hill even deeper into the hole she's going to be flung into after the election.

quote:

Originally posted by olfuzzy:
What a surprise.

FBI files linking Hillary Clinton to the 'suicide' of White House counsel Vince Foster have vanished from the National Archives


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...tional-Archives.html

No worries: Sandy Berger must have dropped by for a casual visit. This is not the first time stuff like this has happened,and it benefits a Clinton.

http://www.washingtontimes.com...050404-084700-5791r/

Martha Stewart went to jail for lying to federal investigators. But for lying after stealing highly classified documents from the National Archives — in an apparent attempt to alter the historical record on terrorism, no less — former Clinton national security adviser and Kerry campaign adviser Sandy Berger will get a small fine and slap on the wrist. He will pay $10,000 and get no jail time. His security clearance will be suspended until around the end of the Bush administration — meaningless for a career Democrat like Mr. Berger. It makes us wonder who at the Department of Justice is responsible for letting such a serious offense go virtually unpunished.

On Friday Mr. Berger pleaded guilty to misdemeanor charges for stealing five copies of one of the nation’s most highly classified terrorism documents. The document, an “after-action” memo on the millennium 2000 terror plot authored by terrorism expert Richard Clarke, is so highly classified that any person removing it from secure rooms must do so in a case handcuffed to his or her wrist. Mr. Berger stuffed the five copies in his coat jacket and secreted them out of the archives. He proceeded to cut three of them to pieces with scissors at his downtown offices. Archive officials observed Mr. Berger stealing the documents and reported it to their superiors.

When confronted, Mr. Berger lied. He told investigators he had mistakenly taken the documents and then disposed of them inadvertently afterward. In public statements on the matter he called the theft “an honest mistake.” He declared his only intent had been to collect materials for testimony about the Clinton administration’s counterterrorism policies for the September 11 Commission. At the time, Bill Clinton dismissed the matter with a chuckle. “The innocent explanation is the most likely one,” Mr. Clinton told reporters in Colorado. “We were all laughing about it on the way over here.”

But it wasn’t innocent, and it wasn’t a laughing matter. As Mr. Berger admitted last week, the account he initially gave federal investigators was wrong. The plea agreement he reached with the Department of Justice details that, in fact, he deliberately removed the documents from the National Archives and that far from disposing of them mistakenly, he cut them to pieces with scissors. None of this was inadvertent, a Berger associate acknowledged last week to the Washington Post.

What was Mr. Berger doing with the documents? And why did he destroy only three? The likeliest answer is that he sought to conceal comments he or other Clinton administration officials wrote on them when they were circulating in January 2000. He couldn’t have been trying to erase the document itself from the record, since copies besides the five exist elsewhere. What’s likelier is that jottings in the margins of the three copies he destroyed bore telling indications of the Clinton administration’s approach to terrorism. Mr. Clarke’s document reportedly criticizes the Clinton administration’s handling of the millennial plots and mostly attributes the apprehension of a would-be bomber headed for Los Angeles International Airport to luck and an alert official.

If that turns out to be the case, Mr. Berger erased part of the historical record on terrorism. The Clinton administration’s cavalier attitude toward terrorism is by now well-established; it’s likely to be evident in the archival records and will crop up in official communications. An after-action report like Mr. Clarke’s, written nearly two years before the September 11 terrorist attacks, is as good a candidate as any for the telling aside in the margin.

Sponsored Content

Recommended by

Mr. Berger committed an egregious violation of the rules that govern the handling of sensitive national-security documents. His offense would cost most any government employee his job, security clearance and future in government. Quite possibly it would cost him his freedom. On top of his crime, Mr. Berger lied about it to federal investigators. But Mr. Berger won’t likely suffer any of the consequences. For those who suspect that different rules apply at the top, a case like this is reason for cynicism. Meanwhile, his associates from the Clinton years are silent, perhaps hoping the scandal will blow over so Mr. Berger can remain a don of the Democratic foreign-policy establishment.

We can only speculate as to why the Department of Justice would agree to such lenient terms for the offense. Perhaps career employees or holdovers with ties to Democrats are responsible. Perhaps the Bush administration went soft. Whatever the reason, we can be reasonably sure it wasn’t done for reasons of national security, justice or truth.

History repeats itself....

flashguy

quote:

No worries: Sandy Berger must have dropped by for a casual visit. This is not the first time stuff like this has happened,and it benefits a Clinton.

He's dead and he's still stealing stuff? Ye gods.

quote:

Originally posted by Il Cattivo:

quote:

No worries: Sandy Berger must have dropped by for a casual visit. This is not the first time stuff like this has happened,and it benefits a Clinton.

He's dead and he's still stealing stuff? Ye gods.

He is dead? Why is he still voting?

Claudio Osorio - donor to the Clinton Foundation and also host of a fund raiser for Clinton in the 2008 election

Claudio Osorio - gets 10 million from State Dept in 2010 to build homes in Haiti

“U.S. persons of political influence that are able to assist in advancing the company’s plans.”

the homes in Haiti were never built.

The project never broke ground and Osorio used the money to finance his lavish lifestyle and fund his illicit business ventures.

Osorio is now serving a 12-year prison sentence after scamming the government out of millions and cheating his investors.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/a...inton-corruption.php

one example of many

Apparently the NY Times didn't think the AP story on the Clinton Foundation Slush Fund was worthy of printing...

http://www.foxnews.com/politic...-unfit-to-print.html

If you look hard enough, you find there's usually a reason for everything -- even at The New York Times.

But whatever the reason -- maybe it was the story about a parasite jeopardizing fly fishing in Montana, or those Russian hackers who attacked the Gray Lady's Moscow bureau -- the latest Clinton Foundation bombshell couldn't be found among "All the News That's Fit to Print."

The Associated Press scoop Tuesday found that at least 85 of 154 people who got an audience with Hillary Clinton while she led the State Department had donated to her family charity. Combined, the 85 donors contributed as much as $156 million and included private citizens with business before the government. It’s as close to a “pay to play” smoking gun as has emerged to date.

“The meetings between the Democratic presidential nominee and foundation donors do not appear to violate legal agreements Clinton and former president Bill Clinton signed before she joined the State Department in 2009,” the AP wrote. “But the frequency of the overlaps shows the intermingling of access and donations, and fuels perceptions that giving the foundation money was a price of admission for face time with Clinton.”

Yet, the investigative report appeared nowhere in Wednesday’s 46-page print edition. Coming weeks after a front-page story basically saying journalists feel free to be subjective in the current race because Trump is such a threat to the Republic, critics of the “paper of record” say it smells like fish wrap.

Despite the paper's famed "Fit to Print" motto, "The truth is that only news that fits the party line gets printed,” said Michael Goodwin, a New York Post columnist and Fox News contributor who worked at the Times for 10 years.

It is unlikely publication of the story was affected by a Tuesday hack the U.S. officials believe was launched by groups working for the Russian government. While other media outlets speculated that the newspaper cyberattack could be new evidence of a dastardly alliance between Trump and Moscow, The Times reported "there is no evidence that the hackers, believed to be Russian, were successful."

It’s possible the Times, which like most news outlets subscribes to The Associated Press and freely publishes its content, preferred to ignore the explosive report while it trained its own crack investigative team on the story. If so, readers may soon see an exhaustive report building on the solid work of the AP.

But surely there was room, even for a truncated version, somewhere on page A-13, amid the “Election 2016” coverage. The page was led by a story declaring polls point toward a Clinton landslide, even though recent surveys show the race has tightened to a dead heat.

And, there was room for a lengthy story at the bottom of the page featuring Cher at a Massachusetts fund-raiser calling Trump a “racist” and “idiot,” whom she likened to Adolf Hitler. Times scribe Jonathan Martin pronounced the '70s icon’s description a “succinct and salty assessment.” Martin noted four times that the adoring crowd registered its approval, twice with “roars.”

The story about a parasite prompting Montana wildlife officials to close a section of the Yellowstone River to fly fishing appeared on A-11.

The Fed stonewalled the AP report for 3 years....

http://www.nationalreview.com/...ent-associated-press


It was a long wait.

Today’s blockbuster report from the Associated Press about Hillary Clinton’s meetings with Clinton Foundation donors during her time as Secretary of State contained the following nugget: “The AP sought Clinton’s calendar and schedules three years ago, but delays led the AP to sue the State Department last year in federal court for those materials and other records.”

The long wait was in keeping with a practice of slow-walking such requests for information. In April, the State Department explained the fact that Clinton ignored 237 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests by saying that she was sitting Secretary of State at the time the requests were filed.

According to the Washington Free Beacon, Clinton received 240 FOIA requests from 2009 to 2013 but only responded to three of them within the legally required timeframe. Among the organizations that filed unanswered requests were the AP, Gawker, Judicial Watch, Citizens United, and Vice News. Some of these groups subsequently sued the State Department for failing to respond to their requests for information from Clinton’s records.

The State Department attempted to justify its delays by claiming that the number and complexity of records requests continued to increase until it was impossible to process them. Of course, the effect of the slow processing was to make it impossible for the A.P. to do the report that rocked the political world this afternoon.

I'd like to take out a life insurance policy on this guy.

Hillary Clinton’s national finance director has emerged in newly released emails as what one watchdog called the “middle” man between her State Department and family foundation, sharing donor information with a top Clinton confidante when he was working at the foundation.

Dennis Cheng, before joining the campaign, worked for over three years as the foundation’s director of development and before that as deputy chief of protocol in Clinton’s State Department.

He has managed to stay below the radar for years, but emails obtained by Citizens United in a Freedom of Information Act request show him working closely with Clinton aide Huma Abedin – particularly after leaving the department for the foundation.

In one 2012 exchange, Cheng sent a nine-page email to Abedin to prepare Clinton for a briefing on the 67 VIP’s attending a foundation dinner. The guests ranged from major real estate and business executives to former politicians and aid organization representatives.

The email, sent while Cheng was working at the foundation, shows how seamlessly Clinton’s aides moved between government service and the foundation, staying in contact with one another and sharing details about VIP's connected to the group. Based on the emails, Clinton was getting information about the foundation dinner in preparation for a briefing on who was attending – while at the department.

The emails come amid a slew of recent reports showing the Clinton State Department’s frequent interaction with foundation donors, fueling critics’ claims that donations bought access. The campaign has rejected these allegations.

Cheng was an effective fundraiser at the foundation, before coming on board the Clinton presidential campaign. During his three-and-half years working at the Clinton Foundation, published reports credit Cheng, now 36, with building a donor base in excess of $246 million.

In another November email from 2012, Cheng offered Abedin a ride on a private plane to Little Rock. He wrote: “Are u coming to LR? We have donors flying privately on Friday if u want a ride.”

Abedin sent her full name and date of birth for the passenger manifest, apparently accepting the offer. Abedin herself has been criticized for collecting paychecks from the Clinton Foundation and another Clinton-aligned group, Teneo, while a government employee.

Fox News asked the director of the nonprofit Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust (FACT) to review the emails and Cheng's role.

"He could be best described as the bag man. He's the one that raised the money and also kept the donors happy," said Matthew Whitaker, a former U.S. attorney.

"You would expect and I always expected that Mr. Cheng would be right in the middle of some of these transactions that were going on between the Clinton Foundation and their donors and those that wanted access to the State Department and Secretary Clinton."

Whitaker also said he found it odd that in the more than 50,000 Clinton emails released to date, so few included Cheng, and he suspected some of his communications may be among the more than 14,900 records recovered by the FBI from Clinton’s servers but not yet released.

"I was surprised his name was not mentioned in [the] first email dump,” Whitaker said. “I expect to see his name pop up a lot more. He stays below the radar, making sure those that give are taken care of with access."

State Department spokesman Mark Toner, asked about Cheng’s overlap with the foundation, said, "There was no impropriety. ... There was nothing precluding State Department officials from having contact, in this respect, with Clinton Foundation staff."


http://www.foxnews.com/politic...oundation-state.html

quote:

I'd like to take out a life insurance policy on this guy.

I'd recommend doing it sooner vice later......heck it may be too late now.

I sincerely hope that Assange follows through with this and that there is some truly damaging info. I hope his timing is good too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEL1fTf0vcI

quote:

Originally posted by Sigmanic:
I sincerely hope that Assange follows through with this and that there is some truly damaging info. I hope his timing is good too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEL1fTf0vcI

http://www.towleroad.com/2016/...leaks-outed-gay-men/
Looks like the DNC has started the attacks on him too. Fascinating seeing the same reaction to anyone that crosses Hillary. They become media targets very quickly.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/...n-reynolds/89205512/

Back in July, Democratic presidential nominee and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said,

" there is absolutely no connection between anything that I did as secretary of state and the Clinton Foundation .”

and

Huma Abedin stepped down from her post as deputy chief of staff at the State Department and Hillary Clinton's ever-present personal assistant on June 3, 2012.

Abedin was immediately rehired as a "special government employee." She also took paying jobs with the Clinton Foundation and Teneo Holdings, a consulting firm with international clients that was co-founded by a foundation official who also was Bill Clinton's long-time personal aide.

Abedin's arrangement as a "special government employee" has been challenged since 2013 by Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa, who has questioned whether she was overpaid and wrote her that "you allegedly sent or received approximately 7,300 emails on your official Department of State address that involved Mr. Douglas Band," the Bill Clinton aide and Clinton Foundation official who co-founded Teneo.


http://www.myajc.com/news/news...ocus-clinton-/nsGdz/

Memo undercuts Hillary story on controversial Russian uranium deal, Clinton foundation
by Raphael Williams

When Hillary Clinton was questioned about a deal that gave Russia increased sway over uranium markets, the former secretary of state and now Democratic presidential nominee said she had no reason to intervene in the decision and didn't even know her husband's foundation was being enriched by its beneficiaries.
"I was not personally involved because that wasn't something the secretary of state did," Clinton told WMUR a New Hampshire TV station in June 2015, the lone time she has addressed the controversy that first surfaced a year ago.

In fact, there was a reason to be concerned, according to diplomatic dispatches left sitting in public on the WikiLeaks site that have not garnered much media attention.

State Department officials in fall 2009 - a year before the U.S. approved the deal - had obtained an internal strategy document from Russia's main nuclear energy firm, Rosatom, that provided a warning about Moscow's intentions as it "flexes muscles" in uranium markets.

In one cable sent to Clinton, U.S. officials in Brussels warned Russia was about to strongarm U.S. ally Ukraine into a deal for "long-term supply of nuclear fuel" that could "shut" the U.S. company Westinghouse out of the market and extend Moscow's influence over Europe.

"The strategy paper... is consistent with Russia's efforts to dominate the gas supply market in Europe,"
"The strategy paper reflects concerns raised by industry reps and Ukrainian diplomats the past few months and is consistent with Russia's efforts to dominate the gas supply market in Europe," the cable from U.S. representatives in the European Union's capital city warned.

Uranium is used to produce energy in nuclear power plants and can be used in nuclear weapons. Control over nuclear power plants in European markets could make them more reliant on natural gas exports at the heart of Russia's economy, the career diplomats worried.

And if Rosatom succeeded, the American nuclear company Westinghouse, might not be able to expand as it hoped in eastern Europe, they added. At issue is the 2010 sale of Uranium One to Rosatom. Due to Uranium One controlling a fifth of the U.S.'s uranium, the deal had to be approved by the Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States, CFIUS, which is made up of nine voting members, including the Secretary of State.

While the review process was taking place Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY) sounded alarms that the deal "would give the Russian government control over a sizable portion of America's uranium production capacity." So did five Republican members of Congress led by Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., who wrote that the deal "would pose great potential harm to the national security of the United States."

Despite the warning from her own diplomats and the lawmakers, Clinton did not use her position on the CFISUS to stop the deal.

In a presidential race where classified cables and private emails have dominated so much discussion, the two-page non-classified memo has hardly caused a stir in public. But it lays out a clear precept from career U.S. officials why expanding Russia's control of uranium markets was bad for the United States and for its allies in Europe. Intelligence analysts differ on how important the cable should have been to then-Secretary Clinton.

Fred Fleitz a former CIA analyst who is with the conservative Center for Security Policy, told Circa that the cable showed , "an effort by Russia to increase its influence over Ukraine." Adding, that he had, "never seen a diplomatic cable that had as stark a description of one energy company trying to cheat."

Brain Fairchild, a former CIA clandestine service officer, told Circa that, "This is an unclassified informational cable of a kind that is routinely sent by our diplomats. At the unclassified level, the cable is nothing special." "I have never seen a diplomatic cable that had as stark a description of one energy company trying to cheat." — Fred Fleitz

But a former U.S. ambassador to the European Union, C. Boyden Gray, told Circa that Clinton and the entire Obama administration should have been more vigilant in keeping Russia from getting any more leverage over uranium and energy markets.

She had a statutory obligation to act, and she acts through inaction and Russia wins," Gray said in an interview. "What they've given Russia is a foothold, a big entrée into cornering the uranium markets and tipping the entire balance of the energy world."

Gray said right now with low gas prices, control of uranium isn't important to everyday Americans but over time the energy landscape will likely change and Russia's increased leverage over the gas and nuclear markets will hurt American interests.

"The Russians should be back on their hind legs and instead they continue to take advantage of us," he said.

Former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine John Herbst echoed Gray telling Circa, "It is not in Ukraine's interest to be beholden to Russia for nuclear energy Speaking about American interest it is very much in our interest that Ukraine be able to pursue an independent policy."

"So for the US to help Ukraine to help free itself from dependence on Russia in the nuclear field is a no brainer. " Further suspicions of a quid pro quo also have surfaced because while the CFIUS deliberations were taking place, people who stood to profit from Uranium One sale donated more than $2.6 million to the Clinton Foundation and an investment bank with connections to the Russian government paid former president Bill Clinton $500,000 to deliver a speechmore than his usual fee. Even before the sale was under consideration the Clinton Foundation received $31.3 million in donations from one person, Frank Giustra, who stood to benefit from the sale. Some of the donations were not properly disclosed at the time.

Bill Clinton also helped Guistra, who was once owned a company that merged with Uranium One, secure valuable uranium mining rights in Kazakhstan.

Uranium One is one of the five largest uranium producers in the world. Gray, who also served as chief White House counsel during the first Bush administration, said Hillary Clinton should either have fulfilled her statutory duty or recused herself from a decision because her husband's financial interests created a personal conflict of interest.

Gray said, "I think it is a smoking gun. By not acting, she helped. And the only way she could have avoided criminal liability was to recuse herself, which she did not. I think it is a clear violation of ethics statutes."

http://circa.com/politics/elec...re-bad-for-us-europe

It's encouraging that such stories are appearing in mainstream rags like USA Today. Once the media decide they can no longer protect Clinton, they will turn on her in the name of "journalism".

I think that dispite the poker face, they know deep down who the next President of The Unitied States is going to be...Donald J. Trump. Theyre starting to play their cards so they can still sit at thier silly little table.

It's amazing there's this much corruption visible from the surface- If any journalist wanted to dig deep there's probably a story here.

This may have been discussed already but didn't see it...I did a short Google search looking for some charitable work that the Clinton foundation has accomplished...I didn't find very much other than what I could find below...and this was accomplished on a budget of $143,000,000.00 in 2013. The Clinton Foundation has over 2,000 employees.

◾Clinton Development Initiative staff in Africa train rural farmers and help them get access to seeds, equipment and markets for their crops.
◾Clinton Climate Initiative staff help governments in Africa and the Caribbean region with reforestation efforts, and in island nations to help develop renewable energy projects.
◾Staff at the Clinton Health Access Initiative, an independent, affiliated entity, work in dozens of nations to lower the cost of HIV/AIDS medicine, scale up pediatric AIDS treatment and promote treatment of diarrhea through life-saving Zinc/ORS treatment.
◾Clinton Health Matters staff work with local governments and businesses in the United States to develop wellness and physical activity plans.

http://www.factcheck.org/2015/...foundation-money-go/

Per the front page of today's Wall Street Journal, the Clinton Health Initiative is expected to keep taking donations without restrictions. Bill Clinton will be stepping away from the charities, but Chelsea Clinton still needs a paycheck so she'll be staying on.

Habitual, serial liar pretty much embodies Hillary. Good on Gowdy for calling this out. Wasn't aware of the bleachbit component until now.

http://video.foxnews.com/v/509...liar/?#sp=show-clips