Five seperate FBI field offices investigating Clinton Foundation

Point me to someone with a spouse with a top level government position that comes with the ability to peddle influence and she sets up an illegal server to hide her government related e-mail.

 

This is one of the truest general statements I have ever seen...especially in regards to this bbs.

 

OF course we're all still waiting on the evidence that the foundation is a fraud... certainly evidence that could trump or contradict the mountains of evidence showing that it is extremely effective, and transparent.

 

You wouldn't have to wait if Lynch wasn't trying to intefere with the investigation .

Speaking of interfering...
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...1/02/peter-kadzik-podesta-wikileaks/93202266/
WASHINGTON — A Justice Department official offered Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta a "heads-up'' last year to a pending congressional hearing where a Justice colleague was likely to be questioned about Hillary Clinton's email use as secretary of State, according to hacked communications released Wednesday by WikiLeaks.

In the exchange, Assistant Attorney General Peter Kadzik, writing on a personal email account, appears to alert Podesta to a House Judiciary Committee hearing later that day where the Justice Department's Civil Division chief was slated to testify.

"Likely to get questions on State Department emails,'' Kadzik wrote May 19. The message goes on to inform Podesta of an update in a Freedom of Information Act request for State Department communications that "indicates it will be awhile (2016) before the State Department posts the emails.''

Attached to the Kadzik communication was a message that appears to be forwarded by Podesta to various Clinton staffers, stating: "Additional chances for mischief.''

Kadzik also was the author of a letter earlier this week providing the Justice Department's response to questions posed by House and Senate leaders about the FBI's new review of recently discovered emails that could have a bearing on the previously closed investigation into Clinton's handling of classified information at the State Department.



"We assure you that the department will continue to work closely with the FBI and together, dedicate all necessary resources and take appropriate steps as expeditiously as possible,'' Kadzik wrote.

Attorney General Loretta Lynch had opposed FBI Director James Comey's decision last week to formally notify Congress of the email discovery, a move that rocked the presidential race in the last days of the general election.

The Justice Department did not immediately comment Wednesday on the WikiLeaks release.

Asked Wednesday about the relationship between Podesta and Kadzik, Clinton campaign spokeswoman Jennifer Palmieri characterized the communications as "stolen emails that haven’t been authenticated.”

She said the information was "leaked for the purpose of damaging our campaign.''

 

I don't think there was criminal intent, and I'm not all-in in the previous efforts to indict her for the security breach, but I am alarmed by the poor judgement she showed by ignoring the foggy bottom IT people and federal policy. That to me is the real issue, and both the legal witch hunt and the gymnastics of excuse-making by all politically motivated parties deliberately ignores that.

UT Austin, which is not exactly the CIA, has strict rules about security, particularly about mandating VPN for services off site, encrypting email, bringing laptops, etc to certain nations, and violating them can get you fired. It's not at all out of line to raise an eyebrow at a Secretary of State doing something a state university faculty or senior staff member would be nailed for.

I also am dismissive about previous administrations doing it or tolerating it -- security for things like portable devices and email in the early oughts wasn't even close to the security threat that existed in the last eight years and without that increased threat, most organizations didn't have the security policies to address them.

 

Clutchfans Loser leaves town match? LMFAO!!!!

Oh Sammy boy. You're such a hoot!

http://whatculture.com/wwe/10-most-famous-loser-leaves-town-retirement-matches

 

The FBI has been investigating many things, including Donald Trump and interests affiliated with his campaign.

So what does that really mean? Not much.

Further, the FBI director has admitted that he hasn't seen the e-mails and doesn't even know what is in them. So it really isn't even news other than the fact we are a week before the election.

The 800 pound gorilla suspected to exist against Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation has not materialized; despite being under extreme scrutiny for 30 years. NOTHING

You can say that there is "new evidence" rolling in exposing the Clinton Foundation, but again, it hasn't materialized...... which isn't a shocker. Do you really think that Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton would be that foolish knowing they have been investigated and closely followed for 30 years, and that Hillary Clinton would be odds on favorite to be the next President of the United States? Hillary Clinton didn't make the decision to run for President on a whim, she has been preparing and been vetted for a decade.

As for the Clinton Foundation, it has been one of the most successful and efficient charities in the entire world. It has given an enormous amount to charities and given a voice to groups that do not otherwise get a voice. The Foundation has received very high reviews from non-partisan groups and is viewed as a gold standard by many in the industry.

 

Pretty dumb to argue about it - even for a "lack of self-esteem" person (sic) like myself, but anyhow, your counteroffer doesn't make any sense - when do I get to kick you off the board due to lack of indictment? 8 years? .

Basically when do we get to officially call bullsh-t on your ULTIMATE TRUTH? I'm suspecting the answer is never. Remember, internets is serious business, so a response would be appreciated.

 

The offer is open to you too, dear friend - if Hillary is indicted in (set time period) - I'll leave these hallowed fora. If not, same to you.

Do you care to test your ULTIMATE TRUTH against my boring old reality?

 

I wouldn't have thought Clinton would have been foolish enough to have put her government e-mail on a server and delete emails after she was asked not to. I wouldn't have thought she'd would have been foolish enough to take questions from Donna Brazile or to appoint DWS to a position in her campaign after being ousted from her position with the DNC for being dishonest. There are people within her campaign that are worried about the foundation. Try reading the Wikileaks e-mails.

 

If the investigation turns into anything, I'll be the first to condemn it. So far the investigation has turned up Bill Clinton being a bit of clueless sleaze regarding business, but nothing criminal or fraudulent about the foundation. Perhaps you could post the exact parts of the investigation that you believe to show it to be a fraud.

 

Sammy, did you google counter-offer? I'm proud of you. My offer remains the same. Let's see what the FBI comes back with and how far reaching it is. The more people involved especially at a high level. the more time it might take.. We can set a time period once we know what the FBI recommendation is.

 

^LOL, so Trump supporter is so sure HRC is going to be indicted, he wants to wait and see if a prosecution proceeds, to bet on whether a prosecution will proceed.

This was bad, even by anonymous internet male dissembling standards.

 

Let's make it a No disqualification Lumberjack Ladder Match Loser Leaves Town with guest referee Shawn Michaels and Ric Flair.

WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

 

Bob Woodward regarding The Clinton Foundation: "It's corrupt."

Apologies if this has already been posted.

 

And yet no one can find any evidence of corruption. weird

 

Direct evidence? Perhaps not so much. Still, Mr. Woodward has far more credibility in these kinds of things than any other poster here on this distinguished BBS.

 

#1 Of course there are people within the Clinton campaign worried about the Foundation, that is their job. From their perspective nothing positive can come out of the Foundation because their goal is for her to get elected, and for all of them to get employment in the administration. Show me where there is a single statement where anyone in the campaign said the Clinton Foundation broke the law. You won't find one, because based on what we know it doesn't exist. The Clinton campaign adviser team is by nature risk adverse, their job is to analyze any possible shot or allegations against their candidate; that is there job.

Again, being worried that someone is going to attempt to label something as a liability for a candidate is not the same as believing or knowing that something illegal or wrong happened. It is risk analysis and it is doing their job.

#2 Foolish enough to take questions from Donna Brazile? Do you honestly believe that there has been a Presidential nominee in the last 50 years that would turn down knowledge leaked of the questions that will be asked at a Presidential debate?

#3 As far as using a private server or non governmental e-mail, it is extremely stupid and I agree with Deji on this point (and have said so before). Honestly, all of them were stupid; from Powell to Obama to Clinton.

 

If Carter's wife was running for elected office, I'd hope the FBI was on their asses for conflicts of interests too.

They put their name above the principles for honoring the spirit of the law. I have no sympathy for their current blowback even if nothing "scandalous" shows up.

 

It doesn't matter - once you possess ULTIMATE TRUTH - the lack of evidence is because Obama, corrupt, rigged system blah blah blah.