Hillary aide paid by private firm to stage event with Bill Clinton while at State


Ethics experts question arrangement, see conflicts of interest

Huma Abedin, long-time aide of former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, was paid by a private firm to help stage an event with former President Bill Clinton. (Associated Press) /

/ Huma Abedin, long-time aide of former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, was paid by a private firm to help stage an event with former President Bill Clinton. (Associated Press) more >

By John Solomon and Kelly Riddell - The Washington Times - Tuesday, September 29, 2015

While still working at the State Department , Hillary Rodham Clinton confidante Huma Abedin was paid by the private consulting firm Teneo Holdings to help stage a star-studded reception that included her boss' husband, Bill Clinton, along with George W. Bush and former British Prime Minister Tony Blair as speakers just days after the Benghazi tragedy, The Washington Times has learned.

Ms. Abedin 's work on the Sept. 20, 2012, event at the glamorous Essex House in New York City , helped entertain potential Teneo clients, wowing them with access to three former world leaders on a single stage.

It was one of the specific projects she worked on with Teneo during a seven-month period in which she earned a $15,000-a-month consulting fee from the firm while simultaneously receiving pay as a "special government employee" advising Mrs. Clinton at the State Department , according to interviews and documents.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

*SEE ALSO: Hillary Clinton personally signed deal that let top aide collect two salaries *

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ms. Abedin , the wife of former Rep. Anthony D. Weiner of New York , worked as a full-time government employee and deputy chief of staff to Secretary of State Clinton from 2009 through mid-2012. She then moved to New York and transitioned to a part-time employee at State after giving birth to her first child and seeing her husband resign his congressional seat because of a sexting scandal.

The special government employee status at the State Department allowed Ms. Abedin to simultaneously take on other consulting work, as with Teneo and the Clinton Foundation , where she assessed the charity's ongoing programs to pave the way for Mrs. Clinton 's return there after she left the State Department in early 2013.

In all, Ms. Abedin was paid about $105,000 over seven months to advise Teneo in New York from summer 2012 to early 2013, according to a person familiar with the arrangement. During the same time, she collected $126,239.80 in pay as a special government employee at the State Department , according to internal department records identifying her pay and leave that were obtained by The Times.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

*SEE ALSO: The Huma Files: Feds investigated top Hillary Clinton aide for embezzlement *

------------------------------------------------------------------------

The specific nature of Ms. Abedin 's duties at Teneo has been shrouded in mystery and has become the subject of State Department and congressional inquiries looking into whether the work arrangements were proper or created any conflicts of interest.

Several sources agreed to describe Ms. Abedin 's work for Teneo on the New York event and her subsequent work at the State Department for a Teneo -connected event in Ireland four months later in December, solely on the condition of anonymity because of the ongoing investigations.

"Huma 's role for the New York event was on behalf of Teneo , while her work for the Ireland event was clearly on behalf of the State Department . But the firm, the Clintons and Huma were intertwined, and that makes it hard to separate when looking back in hindsight," one person directly familiar with the circumstances said.

Added another source: "Teneo didn't need Huma to get Bill Clinton or the other luminaries to the event, but she was hired to help make the event successful in terms of who attended and what they experienced."

Teneo officials did not respond to calls seeking comment. Teneo , based in New York , employed Mr. Clinton as a consultant for about a year when it started, along with several other people from the Clinton circle. Mr. Clinton , who commands up to $700,000 per speech, did not charge Teneo for his appearance at the New York event, according to financial disclosure statements released by his wife.

Ms. Abedin 's attorney, Miguel Rodriguez, declined to comment publicly for this article. But he has steadfastly insisted that Ms. Abedin did nothing wrong in working for Teneo , the State Department and the Clinton Foundation at the same time, noting that government officials formally approved the arrangement.

*Ethics questions*

Ethics analysts see it differently. They say the State Department put Ms. Abedin in a position to collect money from an outside firm that had interests and political connections inside the department where she still worked, creating at least the appearance of a conflict of interest.

"The guidelines for becoming a special government employee make it quite clear it's a unique position offered to someone as long as there is no conflict of interest," said Craig Holman, the government affairs lobbyist for the Public Citizen ethics watchdog. "With Huma , she was in such a powerful position, conflicts were inevitable.

"Huma never should have been provided special government employee status. She should've either remained a full-time employee at State or else become a full-time employee in the private sector," he said. "To merge the two does raise a serious conflict of interest."

Added Scott Amey, general counsel for the Project on Government Oversight: "It would have been more appropriate to avoid any potential conflicts and not work inside the State Department and at the same time work for an entity that had matters before the agency. Even if this is legal or received a waiver, it certainly doesn't mean that it should have been allowed."

Internal State Department emails show the line dividing official government business, Teneo 's private business and the Clintons' own financial interests at times became blurred as Ms. Abedin and other top State officials dealt with requests that had little to do with their government jobs.

The New York event, which Ms. Abedin helped support for Teneo , was held just nine days after the horrific terrorist attack on a U.S. compound in Benghazi, Libya, that killed U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans.

In fact, Mrs. Clinton was on Capitol Hill briefing lawmakers in private about the tragedy just a few short hours before her husband entertained the Teneo event at the Essex House overlooking South Central Park, her official schedule shows. Ms. Abedin joined Mr. Clinton at the event while Mrs. Clinton remained in Washington, according to interviews.

*'Urgent' matter*

The next morning, State Department officials were scrambling to address a potential crisis. But it was far from Libya and had nothing to do with federal business.

In their official government emails, top aides to Mrs. Clinton , including Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills and National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan, were discussing a private fundraising charity that would allow the Clintons to raise money on an upcoming trip to Ireland that had deep connections to Teneo 's clients and one of the firm's founders, Declan Kelly.

Doug Band, a founding partner at Teneo and a longtime confidant to Mr. Clinton , was also included on the State Department email chain, which clearly had nothing to do with official business.

"Stella O'Leary called to say she saw HRC this week and that HRC 'firmly instructed' her to urgently form a [501(c)(3) nonprofit organization] called Friends of the Clinton Centre," said an email from Amitabh Desai, the Clinton Foundation 's foreign policy director, dated Sept. 21, 2012.

The email was addressed to Ms. Mills, Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Band and Ms. Abedin , among others. "I also asked if the new org could be flexible so that any funding raised could be used in whatever manner WJC [initials of Mr. Clinton ] and HRC [Mrs. Clinton 's initials] wish in Ireland and Northern Ireland, and not restricted to support only the current iteration of the Clinton Centre in Enniskillen."

Ms. O'Leary is an active Democratic donor who founded the Irish American Democrats to support Mr. Clinton 's re-election in 1996 and has since been a top Clinton donor.

Ms. Abedin weighed in on the idea of setting up the fund, suggesting that Mr. Sullivan had witnessed the conversation. "Jake was in the meeting so he can verify," Ms. Abedin wrote the following day, adding the qualifier, "but HRC had said she made no commitments to her."

*Irish program*

The tax-exempt fundraising arm was indeed established in 2013 and raised about $55,000 for an international summer school program to bring children from the Balkans and other conflict zones to Northern Ireland, Ms. O'Leary told CNN last month.

Mrs. Clinton 's spokesman, Nick Merrill, did not return an email message Tuesday seeking comment.

Eventually, Ms. Abedin would play a critical role in setting up the Ireland trip, a sort of farewell tour for Mrs. Clinton in a country where she and her husband were beloved. Teneo 's involvement in the trip was extensive.

The host, the World Ireland Fund, was connected to Teneo executives, and a Teneo representative was listed as a contact for the event honoring Mrs. Clinton . During her speech at the event, Mrs. Clinton went out of her way to acknowledge Teneo co-founder Declan Kelly, who worked as a special envoy at the State Department before starting the firm.

"And I, too, will acknowledge and thank our former economic envoy, Declan Kelly, who has done so much to help bring more investors to the region, and I thank you for your contributions, Declan," Mrs. Clinton declared to applause from the crowd.

Behind the scenes, Ms. Abedin , on her official State Department email account, worked to set up a private dinner with Mrs. Clinton and top Teneo officials, bringing together figures from two of her employers.

"Hi everyone - I know we've all be exchanging emails about HRC's trip to Dublin and Belfast next week so I'm sending you details for the visit and if you have any questions, please let me know," Ms. Abedin wrote. "Hillary is excited many of you are coming and hopes to see as much of you as possible."

Later in the week, she followed up: "Hi everyone - wanted to follow up on plans for drinks/dinner on the 6th in Dublin. Thanks to John and Declan, we have a reservation at Restaurant 41 at the Residence Club. ... See you Thursday!"

The "John" mentioned is hotel magnate John Fitzpatrick, founder of Fitzpatrick Hotel Group and longtime Clinton supporter.

*'De-loop me'*

A month earlier, Ms. Abedin took an entirely different tack, asking to step aside from another matter that had arisen inside the State Department that involved Teneo .

"You should de-loop me from these exchanges," she wrote, using lowercase letters. "... Now that teneo is involved, I feel I have a conflict so best not to be a part of this. It makes me uncomfortable."

Friends of Ms. Abedin , who spoke only on the condition of anonymity, declined to speculate why she agreed to work on one matter involving Teneo in Ireland and recused herself from another.

But they said the special government employee arrangement and temporary job at Teneo were designed more to help her transition to private life after an intense three years as a top deputy to Mrs. Clinton , followed by the birth of her first child and the embarrassment of her husband's scandal.

"Teneo had plenty of connections inside State already with heavy hitters like Doug Band and Declan Kelly, and they didn't need Huma to make things happen there," one friend said. "But Huma needed to sort out what she was going to do next with a new child, a new home in New York , a husband who lost his job in Congress and her longtime boss stepping down. And this arrangement helped."

Ms. Abedin 's email workload seemed to reflect that transition. As deputy chief of staff, she averaged sending 2,193 emails a month through her official State account, but only 1,103 a month after she became a special government employee in 2012, according to an analysis conducted by Sate Department investigators.

*Transition phase*

Joe Birkenstock, a partner with Sandler Reiff Lamb in Washington, said special government employee status is given frequently to help government employees as they are leaving their jobs.

"Honestly, nothing about this status has made me stop and question it. This is why the SGE status exists, so that employees can continue on in this multiple-role capacity so they can finish up whatever it is on their way out," Mr. Birkenstock said. "The concern is whether anybody in that position would use it to advance their own personal financial interest, and it doesn't look like Huma was in a position to do that."

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, Iowa Republican, sees it differently, saying Ms. Abedin 's varying roles blurred the lines between government business and private business.

"Multiple employers often mean competing or overlapping interests," the senator told The Times. "Managing and preventing conflicts of interest are extremely important. In this case, the lack of transparency and the difficulty in determining when a government official is actually working for the government or a private entity make it difficult to determine whether conflicts of interest were avoided appropriately. That's why the exemption for special government employees should be limited to cases where there is a truly exceptional government need for specialized knowledge or skills that can't be found any other way. The goal behind asking these questions is to make sure government programs and laws, as well as government officials, are working as intended to serve the public, not other employers."

*Questions of propriety*

The questions about blurred lines are taking on new significance as both the State Department inspector general and Mr. Grassley's committee investigate whether Ms. Abedin 's special government employee contract was properly executed and accounted for and whether she engaged in any conflicts of interest.

David Bossie, a former congressional investigator and founder of the conservative group Citizens United, which sued to win access to Ms. Abedin 's emails, said the messages "pull back the curtain on how the Clintons do business."

"The Clintons and their cronies know no shame and will do anything to enrich themselves or their friends and allies," Mr. Bossie said. "Using the foundation , using a private corporation and using the assets of the State Department all for the enrichment of their friends [are] all part of their normal business."

In a letter addressed to the State Department about her consulting work, Ms. Abedin insisted she never intervened in State Department matters on behalf of Teneo clients and simply provided "strategic advice and consulting services to the firm's management team" while helping "organize a major annual firm event."

"I was not asked, nor did I undertake, any work on Teneo 's behalf before the Department," Ms. Abedin wrote in the letter dated July 5, 2013, that Mr. Grassley released.

Investigators determined that Ms. Abedin charged more hours to her special government employee contract than was allowed by law, according to documents obtained by The Times. That alone, however, would not be enough to void the special protections against indirect conflicts of interest that the status afforded her, according to Office of Government Ethics rules. But a finding of a direct conflict of interest could lead to some form of action, officials said.

In New York , the Essex House event attracted a high-power guest list including Harvey Weinstein, Eli Broad, Blackstone co-founders Stephen Schwarzman and Peter Peterson, Silicon Valley impresario Sean Parker, Billie Jean King, George E. Pataki, and New York Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly, along with CEOs and top executives from companies such as Dow Chemical, Coca-Cola, BP and Bank of America, according to a report by the New Republic.

The three former heads of state, Mr. Clinton , Mr. Bush and Mr. Blair , were slated to take the stage at 7 p.m. to give their speeches, but they were delayed backstage - by a long sales pitch made by a Teneo co-founder, the magazine reported.

"Instead of introducing his distinguished guests, he launched into a long-winded sales pitch," the New Republic reports. "Teneo was the next big thing in executive consulting, he informed the audience. He played a promotional video about the firm. He introduced the heads of Teneo 's divisions, describing their resumes and asking each to stand in turn. Meanwhile, the onetime guardians of the [U.S.-British] special relationship were left loitering awkwardly in the wings. 'It was unnecessarily inappropriate,' said one guest. 'It was flagrant.' "



21 most consequential Clinton scandals, ranked from most important


I HAVE NEVER BEEN SO CLOSE TO MELANIA
                                      (ummm tight fit)

By THE WASHINGTON TIMES - - Monday, October 12, 2015

1. Monica Lewinsky : Led to only the second president in American history to be impeached.

2. Benghazi: Four Americans killed, an entire system of weak diplomatic security uncloaked, and the credibility of a president and his secretary of state damaged.

3. Asia fundraising scandal: More than four dozen convicted in a scandal that made the Lincoln bedroom, White House donor coffees and Buddhist monks infamous.

4. Hillary's private emails: Hundreds of national secrets already leaked through private email and the specter of a criminal probe looming large.

5. Whitewater: A large S&L failed and several people went to prison.

6. Travelgate: The firing of the career travel office was the very first crony capitalism scandal of the Clinton era.

7. Humagate: An aide's sweetheart job arrangement.

8. Pardongate: The first time donations were ever connected as possible motives for presidential pardons.

9. Foundation favors: Revealing evidence that the Clinton Foundation was a pay-to-play back door to the State Department, and an open checkbook for foreigners to curry favor.

10. Mysterious files: The disappearance and re-discovery of Hillary's Rose Law Firm records.

11. Filegate: The Clinton use of FBI files to dig for dirt on their enemies.

12. Hubble trouble: The resignation and imprisonment of Hillary law partner Web Hubbell.

13. The Waco tragedy: One of the most lethal exercises of police power in American history.

14. The Clinton's Swedish slush fund: $26 million collected overseas with little accountability and lots of questions about whether contributors got a pass on Iran sanctions.

15. Troopergate: From the good old days, did Arkansas state troopers facilitate Bill Clinton's philandering?

16. Gennifer Flowers: The tale that catapulted a supermarket tabloid into the big time.

17. Bill's Golden Tongue: His and her speech fees shocked the American public.

18. Boeing Bucks: Boeing contributed big-time to Bill; Hillary helped the company obtain a profitable Russian contract.

19. Larry Lawrence: How did a fat cat donor get buried in Arlington National Cemetery without war experience?

20. The cattle futures: Hillary as commodity trader extraordinaire.

21. Chinagate: Nuclear secrets go to China on her husband's watch.



How Hillary Clinton's and Bernie Sanders' DOMA Revisionism Harms LGBT Rights


Posted: 10/26/2015 9:46 am EDT Updated: 10/26/2015 12:59 pm EDT HILLARY CLINTON Bloomberg via Getty Images

Over the weekend Bernie Sanders hit Hillary Clinton hard in a speech at the influential Jefferson-Jackson Dinner in Iowa, in what some are saying is an example of his going negative when he said he wouldn't . Whatever your take is on that (his campaign says he's getting "more pointed," not negative ), what Sanders exposed is a simple truth: Clinton,in an interview on Rachel Maddow last week, revised the history of her husband and the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Hillary claimed that Bill signed DOMA as a "defensive action" to keep back a possible constitutional amendment:

On Defense of Marriage, I think what my husband believed -- and there was certainly evidence to support it -- is that there was enough political momentum to amend the Constitution of the United States of America, and that there had to be some way to stop that...And so, in -- in a lot of ways, DOMA was a line that was drawn that was to prevent going further.

It's a version of a story her campaign put forth in 2008 -- and which didn't really erupt at the time, as it did over the weekend, perhaps because no other candidate challenged it -- and it's similar to how Bill Clinton has revised his own historyover a period beginning in 2009 until his 2013 call to overturn DOMA . But as I explained at the time , it's just not true. There was no talk , among activists, antigay forces or politicians, of a constitution amendment in 1996 when Clinton signed DOMA and then touted his signing of DOMA in radio ads in the South during the presidendial race against Republican Bob Dole, positioning himself as a defender of "religious freedom."

''That's complete nonsense," Evan Wolfson of Freedom to Marry told Chris Geidner in /Metro Weekly/ in 2011. "There was no conversation about something 'worse' until eight years later. There was no talk of a constitutional amendment, and no one even thought it was possible -- and, of course, it turned out it wasn't really possible to happen... That was never an argument made in the '90s.''

And over the weekend, this was backed up by none other than long-time Clinton friend, Democratic strategist and lesbian activist Hilary Rosen, tweeting that Hillary Clinton should just "stop."

The former president of the Human Rights Campaign, Elizabeth Birch, who worked for the group at the time DOMA was passed and signed -- and who is also a supporter of Hillary Clinton -- took Bill Clinton to task in 2013, clearly refuting this "defensive action" claim, and pointed to the radio ads . Now really, if DOMA was a "defensive action" taken for our own good, why was Clinton using it for/his own good/ in radio ads in the South? At the time he signed DOMA, Clinton did call the bill "gay-baiting" and didn't believe it was necessary. But he said heagreed with the substance of it: "I have long opposed governmental recognition of same-gender marriages, and this legislation is consistent with that position."

I believe Bill Clinton could have refused to sign DOMA if he truly thought it was wrong. Dole was way down in the polls, and was not going to beat him by any stretch; Clinton, in my opinion, simply wanted a blowout win.

But, whatever. We can agree to disagree on that. It's now a different time, and everyone's evolved and understands what the cultural and political reality was then, right? So why is it so difficult for Hillary Clinton to simply say this: "Yes, after the fact, years later, some Democrats used DOMA to forestall a constitutional amendment when it came up -- saying that we don't need an amendment because we have DOMA -- but no, a possible amendment was not something that was a rationale for signing DOMA in 1996. My husband did think DOMA was the result of GOP gay-baiting and unnecessary. But he agreed on the substance of it, as did the majority of Americans and the vast majority of Democrats. And we were all wrong. We evolved, as has our current president and the American public. And I'm glad to see DOMA gone."

Though she was slow to embrace marriage equality and got criticism for not speaking about the continued discrimination affecting LGBT Americans earlier in this campaign -- includingfrom me in recent months -- Clinton has spoken out more strongly on the issues of LGBT inclusion more recently, promisedto push for an all-ecompansing anti-discrimination bill, and even talked of LGBT discriminationin her opening statements at the Democratic debate in Las Vegas. She's grown and responded to critics, and it just wasn't necessary to revise history to somehow make herself -- and her husband -- seem more consistently pro-LGBT. (I suspect it's more so an issue of Bill's pride -- and guilt -- but that's another piece entirely.)

By doing so now she opened herself up to the attack by Sanders and now to criticism by even some of her staunchest supporters who are having to correct the historical record. Other supporters, however, have been defending her on social media, saying the issue isn't relevant, that the DOMA era was a terrible time and that political realities forced Bill Clinton to sign DOMA. Again, whatever you may think about it, that is not the point. The point is he didn't sign it to push back a possible amendment. Whether or not it's relevant to the presidential race now, it is definitely relevant to history. And it cannot go unchallenged.

But while we're at it, Bernie Sanders is engaging in own window dressing too. Yes, he voted against DOMA -- one of only 67 brave House members to do so -- and for that he gets a gold star, and it's certainly something he should be touting (and I'veurged him to do so). But as Mark Joseph Sternpointed out recently, Sanders actually didn't support marriage equality at the time -- though he's glossing over that fact now,implying he did support it -- and said he voted against DOMA because he thought the states should not be intruded upon by the federal government. His chief of staff insisted he wasn't "legislating values." In 2006, two years after Massachusetts became the first state with marriage equality, Sandersidentified himself as "a supporter civil unions," and was still saying "marriage is a state issue."

Sanders' sins of omission are perhaps not as egregious as Clinton's revisionism, but they still need to be corrected. I understand the passions of those who support each of these or other candidates -- or none of them -- and the impulse to paper over difficult issues from the past. But if we don't get LGBT history right, including how our own friends dealt with the issue as well -- and learn from it-- we risk failing to get full equality moving forward.



Why Hillary Clinton says the Marine Corps turned her away


Why Hillary Clinton says the Marine Corps turned her away

Presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton said she considered becoming a Marine, but a recruiter turned her away over her age, gender and poor eyesight.

Why Hillary Clinton says the Marine Corps turned her away Presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton said she considered becoming a Marine, but a recruiter turned her away over her age, gender and poor eyesight. Check out this story on Marinecorpstimes.com: http://militari.ly/1NO1Ga6 CancelSend

Join the Conversation

To find out more about Facebook commenting please read the Conversation Guidelines and FAQs

Enjoy a limited number of articles over the next 30 days

Why Hillary Clinton says the Marine Corps turned her away

By Oriana Pawlyk, Staff writer 3:46 p.m. EST November 12, 2015

On the campaign trail this week, Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Rodham Clinton repeated the story that she went to a recruiter's office in the 1970s to inquire about joining the Marine Corps, but was turned down. Here, the former secretary of state meets with Marines at the U.S. Embassy in Kazakhstan in 2010.(Photo: State Department)

Presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton said at an event this week that she once considered becoming a Marine, but a recruiter turned her away over her age, gender and poor eyesight.

Presidential candidates often face questions about their military record - or lack thereof. But Clinton told constituents at a breakfast in New Hampshire on Tuesday that she had considered becoming one of the few and the proud, until a Marine recruiter discouraged it.

"He looks at me and goes, 'Um, how old are you?' And I said, 'Well I am 26, I will be 27,'" Clinton said. "And he goes, 'Well, that is kind of old for us.'"

"And then he says to me, and this is what gets me, 'maybe the dogs will take you,' meaning the Army," she continued, possibly referring to "dogfaces," which is the Army's slang for soldiers.

The exchange can be seen at the 1:35 minute mark in this video .

It wasn't the first time Clinton has shared the story about her visit with the Marine recruiter. In 1994, Clinton told a panel of female troops about the exchange with the Marine.

She told them that she walked into the Arkansas recruiting center in 1975, the Associated Press reported. But it wasn't a very encouraging conversation, she said, after the 21-year-old recruiter gave Clinton - who was wearing thick glasses at the time - a once over.

"You're too old, you can't see and you're a woman," Clinton said in 1994.

Then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton poses for a

Then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton poses for a group photo on Aug. 30, 2012, with U.S. Marines stationed on Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Miramar, Calif. (Photo: Cpl. Jamean Berry/Marine Corps)

A spokesman for the former secretary of state did not immediately respond to questions about Clinton's claims, but over the years her story has remained consistent. The Washington Post, which also tried to confirm Clinton's story , reported that a Marine spokesman responded to then-first lady Clinton's remarks in 1994.

"We won't attempt to dispute the first lady's recollection," a Marine Corps spokesperson said then. "But if she was ill-treated by a Marine recruiter in 1975, it certainly is unfortunate, unprofessional and a mistake we regret."

The New York Times also tried to confirm Clinton's remarks in 1994, raising questions about why an up-and-coming attorney - who in 1974 served as an adviser to the impeachment inquiry staff during the Watergate scandal in Washington - would be interested in joining the military.

She had just moved to Fayetteville, Arkansas, as Bill Clinton pursued his rise to Arkansas attorney general. She also didn't have a track record as a steadfast military supporter: While at Wellesley College, she protested the Vietnam War and worked on anti-war presidential campaigns at Yale, The New York Times noted.

Neal Lattimore, Clinton's spokesman in the 1990s, said she may have been interested in becoming a staff judge advocate.

Clinton's old friend and then-University of Arkansas professor Ann Henry has another possible explanation. Henry told the Washington Post recently she and female faculty members, including Clinton, "went out to conduct 'tests' of access to various careers seemingly closed to women."

But the Corps not only was open to women, it was desperate for lawyers during that period, according to several recruiters quoted by the Post.

/Editor's note: Were you the Marine recruiter who spoke with Hillary Clinton in the 1970s? We want to hear from you. Email Oriana Pawlyk at: opawlyk@militarytimes.com ./



Hillary Office Sought Concussion Advice from NFL Commissioner


04:33 PM, Nov 30, 2015 | By SHOSHANA WEISSMANN

In a newly released email between Hillary Clinton and Philippe Reines, Reines notes he sought NFL commissioner Roger Goodell's advice, with regard to Clinton's concussion. Reines later clarifies he didn't mean with regard to her health, but instead, with regard to rumors about her deteriorating health.

"Sorry, didn't mean medically. Wouldn't ever do that. I meant I enlisted their help in my ongoing efforts to undermine the John Boltons and Laura Ingraham's of the world who are belittling your health...."

Clinton thanked him for defending her.

Story continues below

Following her 2012 fall and concussion, some suggested her fall was more damaging to her health than she said.







New E-mail: Hillary Clinton 'Often Confused' as Secretary...

by Brendan Bordelon November 16, 2015 1:40 PM @brendanbordelon

A newly revealed e-mail sent by top Hillary Clinton aide Huma Abedin in January 2013 shows that the then-outgoing secretary of state was "often confused" and had to have her schedule explained to her by staff.

Released to conservative watchdog Judicial Watch as part of a Freedom of Information Act request, the January 26, 2013 e-mail shows Abedin instructing Monica Hanley, another State Department aide, to remind Clinton of important calls scheduled with world leaders.

"She knows singh [sic] is at 8?" Abedin asks Hanley, referring to a scheduled 8 AM phone call with Indian's then-prime minister, Manmohan Singh.

"She was in bed for a nap by the time I heard she had an 8am call," Hanley replied. "Will go over with her."

"Very imp[ortant] to do that," Abedin replied. "She's often confused."

Clinton suffered a slew of health problems at the end of 2012, including a potentially life-threatening blood clot and a fall that caused a serious concussion. She spent weeks recovering in a hospital before returning to work on January 7, when State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said she was "fully recovered. "

In May 2014, Bill Clinton claimed his wife took six months to "get over" the concussion and its after-effects. That same month political strategist Karl Rove suggested Clinton may have suffered a traumatic brain injury that could make her ineligible for the office of the presidency.

If Clinton's White House bid is successful, she'll be 69 years old when she walks into the Oval Office in January 2017. That's the same age as Ronald Reagan was in 1981, when his first term in the White House began. Reagan's opponents made an issue of his old age and health concerns during the 1980 campaign.

/- Brendan Bordelon is a political reporter for /National Review/./ by Brendan Bordelon September 1, 2015 2:15 AM @brendanbordelon

New Hillary Clinton e-mails released in a late-night document dump Monday reveal how the former secretary of state's use of a private e-mail account sowed confusion in the State Department, with government IT professionals unaware that she was using a private - and apparently buggy - computer server to conduct official business.

On February 27, 2010, State Department computer technician Christopher Butzgy sent an e-mail titled "E-mail test" to Clinton's private e-mail account. "I work as a help desk analyst and it has come to my attention that one of our customers has been receiving permanent fatal errors from this address, can you please confirm if you receive this message," he wrote.

Clinton did not confirm, instead forwarding the e-mail to top aide Huma Abedin. "Do you know what this is?" she asked.

"Ur email must be back up!!" Abedin replied. "What happened is judith sent you an email. It bounced back. She called the email help desk at state (I guess assuming u had state email) and told them that."

"They had no idea it was YOU, just some random address so they emailed," Abedin continued. "Sorry about that. But regardless, means ur email must be back! R u getting other messages?"

"I've gotten some messages from yesterday - how about you?" Clinton said. "Nothing," Abedin replied.

It's not the first time Clinton's e-mail server apparently stopped working. In October 2012, Abedin complained to Clinton that her e-mail account "has been down since last night."

Hillary's New Twitter Avatar Has a Small Problem . . .

Newly Released E-mails Show that Clinton Staff Was Concerned about Benghazi Portrayal

With State Department technicians apparently unaware of its existence, it's impossible to determine who fixed Clinton's faulty e-mail system. In June, David Bossie, head of conservative group Citizens United, raised questions about the server collapse and its national-security implications. "Huma is talking about her e-mail being down, about the server being down," he said on Fox News in June. "Who services the server? Does the geek squad show up and just fix it in Chappaqua? I don't think so."

/- Brendan Bordelon is a political reporter for/ National Review Online.

View Comments

Huma Abedin Flouted Financial-Disclosure Requirements Before Starting Consultant Work

Brendan Bordelon October 16, 2015

New Huma Abedin E-mails Give Real-Time Account of Clinton Travel Plans

Joel Gehrke September 21, 2015

Will Huma Abedin Survive the Clinton Scandal Vortex?

Brendan Bordelon August 13, 2015



Hillary told FBI 'could not recall' due to concussion


I HAVE NEVER BEEN SO CLOSE TO MELANIA
                                      (ummm tight fit)

Released email documents show Clinton either unaware of or unconcerned with State policies

Published: 09/02/2016 at 4:10 PM

Bob Unruh About | Email | Archive Bob Unruh joined WND in 2006 after nearly three decades with the Associated Press, as well as several Upper Midwest newspapers, where he covered everything from legislative battles and sports to tornadoes and homicidal survivalists. He is also a photographer whose scenic work has been used commercially. rss feed Subscribe to feed

On the eve of the holiday weekend, the FBI released documents related to its investigation of Hillary Clinton's private email server showing her State Department staff were either unaware of or unconcerned with agency policies on email use.

The 58 pages of notes about her interview with the FBI concerning her use of a private email account for State Department business reveal the FBI wasn't able to track down all of the digital devices she used for email, making it impossible for agents to answer their questions definitively, including whether or not her email was hacked.

"The FBI's investigation and forensic analysis did not find evidence confirming that Clinton's e-mail accounts or mobile devices were compromised by cyber means," the FBI report said. "However, investigative limitations, including the FBI's inability to obtain all mobile devices and various computer components associated with Clinton's personal e-mail systems, prevented the FBI from conclusively determining whether the classified information transmitted and stored on Clinton's personal server systems was compromised via cyber intrusion or other means."

FBI Director James Comey did not recommend criminal charges against Clinton, even though he described her handling of classified information as "extremely careless."

/Hillary for prosecution, not president! Join the sizzling campaign to put Mrs. Clinton where she really belongs /

The release of the FBI's report, according to CNN, "is likely to give a new burst of political life to the controversy over Clinton's private server."

"The episode plays directly into Republican claims that Clinton is dishonest, abhors transparency and lacks the ethical standards required of someone who sits in the Oval Office. It also allows Trump's campaign to suggest to voters that they will be setting up a repeat of the cycle of scandals, controversy, and investigations that dragged on through the entire presidency of Bill Clinton and which tainted Hillary Clinton at the same time," CNN said.

Donald Trump campaign spokesman Jason Miller said in a statement following the report's release that Clinton's "reckless conduct and dishonest attempts to avoid accountability show she cannot be trusted with the presidency and its chief obligation as commander-in-chief of the U.S. armed forces."

The report showed Clinton repeatedly said she didn't remember or couldn't recall key details and events.

For example, she "could not recall any briefing or training by State related to the retention of federal records or handling classified information," the report said.

The damaging revelations come as her lead over Trump has been cut in half in recent weeks.

/*What do YOU think? Is Hillary fading? Sound off in today's WND poll.* /

CNN said much of the report repeated Comey's earlier statements, "including that more than six dozen email chains contained classified information at the time they were sent and that there appeared to have been hacking attempts on her server, though there is no evidence they were successful."

The FBI said in a statement that the release was to for the purpose of transparency and to respond to numerous Freedom of Information Act requests.

Redactions were made for "classified information or other material exempt from disclosure."

The report showed Clinton's mobile phones "frequently" were lost.

Old phones, rather than being preserved, were destroyed by "breaking them in half or hitting them with a hammer," the FBI said.

Comey confirmed in July that Clinton sent and received emails that were marked classified on her unsecure system, even though federal law doesn't allow the unauthorized "transfer, storage, or destruction of classified information."

Breitbart News said , "Presumably, if Clinton's old smartphones were lost, the information in her emails would be accessible to whoever had found them or obtained them by other means."

The report said Clinton used 11 smartphones while secretary of state and two after leaving office. Investigators wanted all 13, but two had been destroyed and none of the others could be found.

The Washington Examiner said Clinton, at one point, "thought the classified 'C' markings on emails recovered ... were just a way to put paragraphs in alphabetical order."

Politico's analysis of the information was the most damaging.

"By her own admission, she had little ability to discern whether a document included sensitive information. And when she did handle sensitive materials, she relied on her subordinates to ensure that nothing important was compromised," the report said.

"Her responses to questions from FBI investigators reveal a high-level government executive who apparently had little grasp of the nuances and complexities around the nation's classification system --- a blind spot that helped allow classified communications to pass through her private email servicer."

Further, Reuters reported that she confirmed "she did not recall all the briefing she received on handling government records while U.S. secretary of state because of a concussion suffered in 2012."

Trump's spokesman Miller said Clinton "is applying for a job that begins each day with a Top Secret intelligence briefing, and the notes from her FBI interview reinforce her tremendously bad judgment and dishonesty."

"Clinton's secret email server was an end run around government transparency laws that wound up jeopardizing our national security and sensitive diplomatic efforts," he said. "On more than 2,000 occasions classified material was exposed on her private server, including highly sensitive Top Secret information and intelligence. All of this was done to conceal what we are once again seeing in the latest email productions from the State Department: rampant conflicts of interest and a pay-to-play culture that rewarded Clinton Foundation donors with access and favors."

/Hillary for prosecution, not president! Join the sizzling campaign to put Mrs. Clinton where she really belongs /



Clintons Began Taking White House Property a Year Ago


February 10, 2001 |From the Washington Post

WASHINGTON - President Clinton and his wife started shipping White House furniture to the Clintons' newly purchased home in New York more than a year ago, despite questions at the time by the White House chief usher about whether they were entitled to remove the items.

The day before the items were shipped out, chief usher Gary Walters said he questioned whether the Clintons should be taking the furnishings because he believed they were government property donated as part of a White House redecoration project in 1993, during Clinton's first year in office.

But Walters was told by the White House counsel's office that the items he asked about--which included an iron-and-glass coffee table, a painted TV armoire, a custom wood gaming table and a wicker table with wood top--were "personal gifts received by the Clintons prior to President Clinton assuming office."

Personal property brought to the White House by an incoming president does not have to be disclosed on financial reports. As a result of the counsel's determination, the furnishings were sent on to the Clinton's new home in Chappaqua, N.Y.

However, government records show that the gifts that concerned Walters did not arrive at the White House until after the Clintons moved in. At least one of these items, a Ficks-Reed wicker table, was logged in at the White House on Feb. 8, 1993. The widow of the manufacturer, Joy Ficks, said last week that it was meant for the White House, not the Clintons.

This week, the Clintons returned the four items to the White House, along with other furnishings, after questions were raised about whether they actually belonged to the Clintons. All the furnishings had been designated official White House property by the Park Service in 1993.

Julia Payne, a spokeswoman for the former president, said the Clintons wanted to be "over cautious" in light of the concerns that had been raised. Despite the questions posed by Walters, Payne said the Clintons or their interior decorator acquired the four items in Little Rock, Ark., before they came to Washington.

Kaki Hockersmith, the interior decorator, did not return repeated calls this week seeking comment.

The Clintons came under strong criticism after disclosing that they were taking with them $190,000 in gifts received over the last eight years. GOP lawmakers and others criticized Hillary Rodham Clinton in particular for accepting many presents just before she joined the Senate and became covered by strict ethics rules that prohibit accepting gifts worth more than $50.

Bowing to such criticism, the Clintons decided Feb. 2 to pay for $86,000 worth of gifts given them in 2000. This week, they agreed to return another set of gifts, including the four items questioned by Walters, and $28,500 more in furnishings identified by the Washington Post this week as having been legally designated as White House property by the National Park Service.

Walters said he accepted the determination of the counsel's office that the gifts were personal Clinton property without a fuss. "I'm not a lawyer. I didn't feel I was in a position to argue with the counsel's office." He said he'd been troubled all along by the lack of donor letters.

Payne said, "No item, nothing, was removed without the approval of the usher's and curator's office."

Walters blamed himself for not raising questions when the rest of the furnishings were taken from the White House last month. He said an aide to Sen. Clinton had told him these too were "the Clintons' personal property."

"I should have asked for more specifics on these items," he said. "I shoulder the blame for not saying, 'Hey, wait a minute.' "



Hillary Clinton campaign writes post comparing her to Spanish grandmothers, sparking critical #NotMiAbuela campaign


BY Jason Silverstein NEW YORK DAILY NEWS Updated: Wednesday, December 23, 2015, 10:11 PM

No bueno, Senora Clinton.

In an effort to use the news that Hillary Clinton will become a grandma a second time to expand her voting base, the Democratic presidential front-runner's campaign tried to associate her with Hispanic grandmothers.

But theonline article posted Monday, called "7 ways Hillary Clinton is just like your abuela" - Spanish for grandmother - drew allegations of "Hispandering," with critics starting the hashtags NotMiAbuela and NotMyAbuela.

The Clinton campaign's post began: "It's no secret that Hillary is loving her role as grandma," before listing all the abuela-like traits Clinton has, such as:

"She worries about the children everywhere ..."

"She knows what's best ..."

The post, initially titled "7 ways Hillary Clinton is just like your abuela," tried to find the common ground between Hillary Clinton and Spanish grandmothers. hillaryclinton.com

The post, initially titled "7 ways Hillary Clinton is just like your abuela," tried to find the common ground between Hillary Clinton and Spanish grandmothers.

"She reads to you before bedtime ..."

It also makes four uses of the word "respeto," Spanish for respect, and ends with a photo of Clinton and singer Marc Anthony.

The list, which came out on the same day Clinton learned her daughter Chelsea was pregnant again, was later renamed "7 things Hillary Clinton has in common with your abuela."

The indignation was swift and severe.

"My Abuela came to this country with a 6th grade education and worked in factories for 50 something cents to a Man's dollar," Twitter user Eliel Cruz wrote.

"Hilary is#NotMiAbuela #NotMyAbuela because I was separated by mine by many miles, and a militarized border," user Marisol Ramos wrote.

Cynthia Rios, 30, of the South Bronx, called Clinton's outreach "a cheap way to reel in Latin voters."

"Some of the things mentioned are done by all grandmas of all nationalities. I don't know why she singled out just the Latin community," Rios (inset), a fund-raiser at the Manhattan Theater Club, told the Daily News.

"Find a better way to appeal to Latino voters," she said.

"It doesn't offend me, but it makes me think Hillary knows better. It seems desperate on her part."

But others didn't see why the campaign's connection between Grandma Hillary and Hispanic grandmothers caused so much outrage.

"Honestly, it's OK," said Rita Almanzar of Bushwick, Brooklyn.

"The way that she thinks and the way she acts is like the Spanish community. She thinks about us. The Republican people only think about themselves. (Hillary) wants everybody to benefit," said Almanzar, 35, who works at a discount store in East Harlem.

The grandmother post, credited to Clinton staffer Paola Luisi, remained online Wednesday.

Lorella Praeli, the Latino outreach lead for the Clinton campaign, said in a statement to NBC News:

"As a Latina who recently became a citizen, I know firsthand the challenges that many in this country face, including fear of deportation, and Hillary is committed to fighting against Republican attacks to tear families like mine apart," the statement said.

This isn't the first time the Clinton campaign grasped for abuela cred.

A campaign post from October written entirely in Spanish, also credited to Luisi, told readers "6 cosas que no sabĂ­as sobre Hillary Clinton" - or "6 things you didn't know about Hillary Clinton."

Number two on the list: "Es abuela."

The post ends with the same Marc Anthony photo.

With Chauncey Alcorn

jsilverstein@nydailynews.com



No Reporters Allowed At Hillary's Wall Street Speeches
      

Richard Pollock Reporter 12:31 AM 01/26/2016

TOP U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton speaks at the Rochester Opera House campaign town hall meeting in Rochester, New Hampshire January 22, 2016. REUTERS/Faith Ninivaggi U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton speaks at the Rochester Opera House campaign town hall meeting in Rochester, New Hampshire January 22, 2016. REUTERS/Faith Ninivaggi 4873079

Reporters were routinely prohibited from covering former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's speeches before some of the nation's most exclusive Wall Street financial investment firms, according to a Daily Caller News Foundation investigation.

The list of Wall Street firms that barred reporters from covering her speeches reads like Who's Who of the country's largest and most prestigious wealth management companies. Those confirmed by TheDCNF to have excluded reporters include: the Goldman Sachs Group, UBS Wealth Management, Kohlberg, Kravis, Roberts and Company, the Carlyle Group, Apollo Management Holdings, Fidelity Investments, Morgan Stanley and Golden Tree Asset Management.

Combined, the companies represent $10.5 trillion of assets under management.

These off-the-record speeches were delivered after Clinton left the Department of State as the nation's chief diplomat in early 2013, but before she announced her second bid for the White House in April 2015, according to TheDCNF investigation.

Clinton laughed off a request Friday at a campaign stop in Manchester, N.H. to release transcripts of speeches she delivered before the Goldman Sachs Group, one of Wall Street's best known investments firms.

Goldman Sachs paid $675,000 for three Clinton speeches in 2013, yet journalists were barred from these speeches.

Is Hillary Clinton In Bed With Goldman Sachs?

Yes No

Sen. Bernie Sanders, Clinton's chief opponent for the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination, has publicly mocked Hillary's six-figure fees on the campaign trail. She received on average $225,000 for each speech before financial institutions, according to federal tax returns examined by TheDCNF.

Sanders, who represents Vermont as an independent and self-avowed Socialist and caucuses with Democrats in the U.S. Senate, has a standard applause line in his campaign speeches about Clinton's ample speaking fees, "You got to be really, really, really good to get $250,000 for a speech. "

But now, the secrecy surrounding the $250,000 remarks before exclusive financial firms could emerge as another problem for Clinton.

Hillary and her husband former President Bill Clinton, raised more than $25 million together in speaking engagements from 2014 until the middle of last year, according to mandatory financial disclosure documents released under federal election rules.

The income did not include some speeches Bill Clinton delivered under the auspicious of the Clinton Foundation.

Clinton's booking agent, the Harry Walker Agency, included clauses in her speaking contracts during that period that required her remarks remain closed to the press.

A copy of her contract for one firm stated, "speaker's participation at the event, including the speech and reception, will be closed to the press, unless otherwise agreed in writing. "

The contract also ruled out recordings of her remarks, and stated "it is understood and agreed that recording the speaker's remarks for any purpose, including the sponsor, is not permitted."

Closing the events to reporters could raise questions about promises or commitments Clinton may have made to Wall Street special interests.

"Were people paying for promises?" asked Tom Fitton, president of the non-profit government watchdog group Judicial Watch.

Fitton told TheDCNF given the Clinton's history of "trading public favors and using her public office to advance the interest of her supporters, one can suppose that, what was going on was inappropriate."

The Clinton campaign did not reply to an inquiry by TheDCNF.



'Hookers for Hillary' in Clinton's corner ahead of Nevada caucuses


Published February 16, 2016 FoxNews.com Facebook <#>15885 Twitter <#>0 livefyre <#>Email <#> Print <#> Shown here are Hillary Clinton supporters at Moonlite Bunny Ranch, in Carson City, Nev. (Photo Courtesy Of www.BunnyRanch.com)

Shown here are Hillary Clinton supporters at Moonlite Bunny Ranch, in Carson City, Nev. (Photo Courtesy Of www.BunnyRanch.com)

The woman seeking America's top job is getting a boost from the world's oldest profession.

Ahead of the Nevada Democratic caucuses this weekend, a group of sex workers operating under the name Hookers for Hillary is going all in for Hillary Clinton's campaign --- touting her positions on health care and other issues.

According to The Guardian, brothel owner Dennis Hof and the girls at the Moonlite Bunny Ranch launched the pro-Clinton project shortly after she entered the race.

In interviews with the newspaper, they described their support as an endorsement of Clinton's efforts to combat domestic violence as well. And one simply described it as a case of women helping women.

"We're helping Hillary and we're helping ourselves. Women should help other women, right?" Entice Love, a 26-year-old sex worker, told The Guardian .

The group, on its website , offers a four-point rationale for supporting Clinton: her defense of ObamaCare; her foreign policy experience; her support for agencies "that protect the public's health"; and even her opposition to "supply side economics."

On the latter point, the group says husband Bill Clinton presided over the "most prosperous time in Bunny Ranch history, which coincided with a tax increase" on wealthy Americans.

"A return to relying on the disproven theory of trickle-down economics would only serve to exclude the vast majority of hard-working Bunny Ranch clients from having the discretionary income to enjoy with their favorite Bunny," the group says.

The endorsement and efforts on behalf of the Clinton campaign are a departure from 2008 and 2012 when the clique was backing the libertarian Ron Paul.

But Love said, "When I'm looking at who I want to pick for the presidency, I look at what are they doing that I can relate to that will be of benefit for me."



It looks like Hillary is losing her Nevada bet


February 16, 2016

By Ned Barnett

Nevada's Democrat caucus is scheduled for this coming Saturday, ahead of the South Carolina primary. Because of the state's diversity ---15 percent black and more than 25 percent Hispanic ---Nevada was, as Team Clinton told Buzzfeed.com , supposed to be a firewall, one that would put Hillary Clinton back on the road to the nomination. With such a high minority vote, Nevada was seen as providing her a decisive win ---one with a high enough margin to wash away the bad taste that New Hampshire's drubbing left.

As recently as December, a prominent poll had her nearly 25 points ahead of Bernie Sanders, as she was quick to tell everyone who would listen.

That was then. Today, the story is so radically different that, to quote prominent local political analyst Jon Ralston:

Team Clinton is now repeating the ridiculous and false mantra that Nevada is not so different than Iowa and New Hampshire, two of the whitest states in the union.

That's ... a fairy tale, spun by a campaign that gave away its panic as the New Hampshire results became clear. From the top on down, they pushed the false narrative that Nevada had an 80 percent white voter population. This is so far from true[.] ... Nevada's electorate was at least 30 percent minority in 2008 and it is projected to be closer to 40 percent this cycle. Nevada's Hispanic population is 27 percent[.] ...

This is not the behavior of a campaign with an insurmountable lead.

Team Hillary's false narrative has also had the effect of annoying the state's most powerful Democrat. Nevada was moved toward the top of the list for primary and caucus states back in 2007 because Harry Reid successfully persuaded the Democratic National Committee that Nevada is a significantly diverse state, one that reflects America's changing demographics. By putting out the defensive canard that Nevada is white-bread ---ironically making Harry Reid look like a liar among other Democratic Party leaders ---Team Clinton has earned thats prominent former Clinton supporter's ire.

But Harry Reid's pique is hardly Hillary's biggest problem in Nevada.

Right before Iowa, she bragged about being 25 points ahead of Bernie Sanders in Nevada polls. However, last weekend, a national survey with a plus-or-minus 3-point spread called the election a dead heat: 45 to 45. In two months, Clinton's take-Nevada-for-granted lead has evaporated...if it ever existed.

Nevada is a caucus state; oddly, the two parties caucus on different days, and this year, the Democrats come first. February 20 makes this the first state after New Hampshire. It was supposed to be a "sure thing" firewall state for Hillary, in part because of the state's heavy Hispanic voting bloc. Hispanic voters might account for up to 40 percent of the total voters.

Taking minorities for granted is a long-established Clinton trait, even after the drubbing Obama gave her eight years ago. Clearly, she and her team counted on Nevada to stop the hemorrhaging and rebuild momentum before the South Carolina voting, but instead of her security blanket, Nevada is shaping up to be a wet blanket.

Evidencing her concern, Clinton canceled a Florida campaign trip to book another day of campaigning in Nevada, which is shaping up to be either a saving grace or a big disaster.

Sanders is also aggressively campaigning in Nevada, and if he's not already in the lead, he seems poised to at least tie Clinton, as he did in Iowa.

In the face of the apparent wholesale abandonment by women, young voters, and Hispanics, as well as the non-endorsement from the largest union in Nevada, Team Clinton is scrambling to re-establish a bond with voters. The campaign is also struggling to come up with creative excuses ---such as a "too white" electorate in Nevada ---to explain why her sure-thing victory is evaporating before her eyes.

Perhaps she should also be asking herself, as Jon Ralston put it:

/Why does Hillary Clinton not like white people? Or why don't white people like Hillary Clinton/?

/*Ned Barnett owns Las Vegas-based Barnett Marketing Communications, serving a variety of conservative causes, as well as start-up, high-tech, and health care clients. He is the author of a dozen books on professional communications and has taught communications and strategy at UNLV, the College of Southern Nevada, and a university in Tennessee. He is currently working on a new book, a practical guide on how to win elections.*/

Nevada's Democrat caucus is scheduled for this coming Saturday, ahead of the South Carolina primary. Because of the state's diversity ---15 percent black and more than 25 percent Hispanic ---Nevada was, as Team Clinton told Buzzfeed.com , supposed to be a firewall, one that would put Hillary Clinton back on the road to the nomination. With such a high minority vote, Nevada was seen as providing her a decisive win ---one with a high enough margin to wash away the bad taste that New Hampshire's drubbing left.

As recently as December, a prominent poll had her nearly 25 points ahead of Bernie Sanders, as she was quick to tell everyone who would listen.

That was then. Today, the story is so radically different that, to quote prominent local political analyst Jon Ralston:

Team Clinton is now repeating the ridiculous and false mantra that Nevada is not so different than Iowa and New Hampshire, two of the whitest states in the union.

That's ... a fairy tale, spun by a campaign that gave away its panic as the New Hampshire results became clear. From the top on down, they pushed the false narrative that Nevada had an 80 percent white voter population. This is so far from true[.] ... Nevada's electorate was at least 30 percent minority in 2008 and it is projected to be closer to 40 percent this cycle. Nevada's Hispanic population is 27 percent[.] ...

This is not the behavior of a campaign with an insurmountable lead.

Team Hillary's false narrative has also had the effect of annoying the state's most powerful Democrat. Nevada was moved toward the top of the list for primary and caucus states back in 2007 because Harry Reid successfully persuaded the Democratic National Committee that Nevada is a significantly diverse state, one that reflects America's changing demographics. By putting out the defensive canard that Nevada is white-bread ---ironically making Harry Reid look like a liar among other Democratic Party leaders ---Team Clinton has earned thats prominent former Clinton supporter's ire.

But Harry Reid's pique is hardly Hillary's biggest problem in Nevada.

Right before Iowa, she bragged about being 25 points ahead of Bernie Sanders in Nevada polls. However, last weekend, a national survey with a plus-or-minus 3-point spread called the election a dead heat: 45 to 45. In two months, Clinton's take-Nevada-for-granted lead has evaporated...if it ever existed.

Nevada is a caucus state; oddly, the two parties caucus on different days, and this year, the Democrats come first. February 20 makes this the first state after New Hampshire. It was supposed to be a "sure thing" firewall state for Hillary, in part because of the state's heavy Hispanic voting bloc. Hispanic voters might account for up to 40 percent of the total voters.

Taking minorities for granted is a long-established Clinton trait, even after the drubbing Obama gave her eight years ago. Clearly, she and her team counted on Nevada to stop the hemorrhaging and rebuild momentum before the South Carolina voting, but instead of her security blanket, Nevada is shaping up to be a wet blanket.

Evidencing her concern, Clinton canceled a Florida campaign trip to book another day of campaigning in Nevada, which is shaping up to be either a saving grace or a big disaster.

Sanders is also aggressively campaigning in Nevada, and if he's not already in the lead, he seems poised to at least tie Clinton, as he did in Iowa.

In the face of the apparent wholesale abandonment by women, young voters, and Hispanics, as well as the non-endorsement from the largest union in Nevada, Team Clinton is scrambling to re-establish a bond with voters. The campaign is also struggling to come up with creative excuses ---such as a "too white" electorate in Nevada ---to explain why her sure-thing victory is evaporating before her eyes.

Perhaps she should also be asking herself, as Jon Ralston put it:

/Why does Hillary Clinton not like white people? Or why don't white people like Hillary Clinton/?

/* Ned Barnett owns Las Vegas-based Barnett Marketing Communications, serving a variety of conservative causes, as well as start-up, high-tech, and health care clients. He is the author of a dozen books on professional communications and has taught communications and strategy at UNLV, the College of Southern Nevada, and a university in Tennessee. He is currently working on a new book, a practical guide on how to win elections.*/



Hillary Refuses To Directly Say If She Has Ever Lied To The American People


Hillary Clinton refuses to definitively say whether or not she has ever lied to the American people.

During a Thursday interview with CBS's Scott Pelley, Clinton said, "I don't believe I ever have" lied to voters.

Pelley began by asking Clinton, "You know in '76, Jimmy Carter famously said, 'I will not lie to you.'"

"Well, I will tell you, I have tried in every way I know how, literally from my years as a young lawyer, all the way through my time as secretary of state to level with the American people," Clinton claimed.

Pelley replied, "You talk about leveling with the American people. Have you always told the truth?"

"I've have always tried to, always, always," Clinton suggested.

"Some people are going to call that wiggle room that you just gave yourself 'always, always tried to,'" Pelley said. "I mean, Jimmy Carter said, I will never lie to you."

Disagreeing with Pelley's claim, Clinton replied, "You know, you're asking me to say, 'Have I ever?' I don't believe I ever have... I don't believe I ever will. I'm going to do the best I can to level with the American people."

According to the latest Quinnipiac University poll, voters say Clinton is not honest and trustworthy by a two to one ratio.





Estrangement From the Truth Is a Problem for Hillary


by Jonah Goldberg July 10, 2015 12:00 AM @JonahNRO

Hillary Clinton lies.

This is a widely acknowledged fact among people who pay attention and aren't on her payroll. Nearly 20 years ago, /New York Times/ columnist William Safire wrote, "Americans of all political persuasions are coming to the sad realization that our first lady - a woman of undoubted talents who was a role model for many in her generation --- is a congenital liar."

Younger folks probably have little to no memory of the lies Safirehad in mind, though some might have heard about Hillary Clinton's infamously implausible explanation for how she managed to make a 10,000 percent profit in cattle futures simply by reading the/Wall Street Journal/.

Suffice it to say that she's been honing her craft for decades. And that's turning into a problem for her, perhaps her biggest problem.

After ducking the press for months, Clinton sat down for an interview with CNN's Brianna Keilar. It was a savvy choice. Keilar covers the Clinton campaign and has every incentive not to offend her famously vindictive sources 16 months before the election.

*RELATED: 'I Never Had a Subpoena' and Other Hillary Fables *

The most discussed deception came in an exchange about her e-mails. Clinton declared emphatically that, "You know, you're starting with so many assumptions that are --- I've never had a subpoena. . . . Let's take a deep breath here."

Representative Trey Gowdy (R., S.C.), chair of the committee investigating the Obama administration's response to the Benghazi attack, promptly produced a copy of the subpoena.

Team Clinton says she was responding to a specific allegation that she deleted e-mails that were under subpoena. It's a legalistically plausible defense given Keilar's muddled question and Stakhanovite effort to avoid asking meaningful follow-ups.

*RELATED: Hillary's E-mails Indict the Self-Regarding Culture of Washington *

Still, it was a classically Clintonian way of lying: Make a sweeping, definitive-sounding statement, and then when called on it, release a fog of technicalities.

Of course, the greatest example of this tactic was her husband's parsing of the word "is" when called out for saying things like "there is no improper relationship" with a White House intern. Only under oath did he explain that it was technically true if you understand "is" to be a statement about the present moment, unlike "was."

/More/ /Hillary Clinton/

Trump Relishes Wrecking Republicans



Black Voters Reject Sanders as Clinton's Nevada Firewall Holds



Who Will Win the Electability Vote?



The rest of the CNN interview was a farrago of misleading statements, blame-shifting, and deceptions. Hillary insisted she had only used "one device" for e-mail, when we now know that's not true. Perhaps under oath she would clarify that she meant "one device at a time."

She proclaimed that she broke no rules by using a personal server and other e-mail chicanery. The /Washington Post/'s Fact Checker column gave her "three Pinocchios" (out of a possible four) on those claims.

Clinton even flatly denied that voters distrust her when polls clearly show Americans do, and - as usual - blamed all her problems on right-wing conspirators.

Reacting to the interview, Carl Bernstein, of Woodward and Bernstein fame, offered an odd analysis of Clinton's deceptions, conceding on CNN that Clinton has a "difficult relationship with the truth."

Get Free Exclusive NR Content

"We have to look at what politicians do generally in terms of fudging," Bernstein added. "It's endemic in the profession. She's become a kind of specialist at it."

He went on to explain that Clinton had to become a specialist because she's a victim of her husband's peccadilloes - what Bernstein called the "peculiarity of the Clinton situation." Because Bill catted around, "She's been in a difficult position."

At a time when the Democratic base craves authenticity, Clinton seems utterly fabricated. ------------------------------------------------------------------------

It was a strangely forgiving argument from a reporter who made his career by exposing presidential deceit. And while it's certainly true Bill put Hillary in some awkward predicaments, his philandering doesn't explain why she lied on issues ranging from her cattle futures windfall to her stealth server.

But Bernstein is right about one thing: Hillary is a specialist at lying. And that's a problem for her. Her husband was - and is - a prodigy at deceit, a renaissance man of lying. If football were a game of lies, he could play every position on offense and defense.

Mrs. Clinton, alas, is more like a veteran coach - she's adept at telling others how to lie on her behalf. But she's not a natural liar herself, and it shows. At a time when the Democratic base craves authenticity (hence the mobs at Bernie Sanders rallies), Clinton seems utterly fabricated (hence her inability to get a capacity crowd at her announcement speech last month in New York City). Her best hope now would be to stop pandering to Sanders's fans and instead explain where she and Sanders differ on policy. But that would require a level of political authenticity she's forgotten how to fake convincingly.

/- Jonah Goldberg is a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and a senior editor of /National Review/./



LYING DEFINES THE CLINTONS, JONAH GOLDBERG WRITES:


LYING DEFINES THE CLINTONS, JONAH GOLDBERG WRITES:

Submitted by IWB, on February 22nd, 2016

When my dog caught a rabbit at Hillsdale College a couple years ago, I was horrified. I'm no hunter and I don't like seeing cute things kill other cute things. But when I yelled at my Carolina swamp dog, she looked at me with a single clear conviction she wanted to impart: You don't understand - /this is what I am about./

Lying is what the Clintons are about.

And, no, I'm not talking about Bill Clinton lying about his "relationship" with Monica Lewinsky, or the numerous credible accusations that he was a sexual predator. Bill earned the name "Slick Willie" long before he questioned the meaning of "is" or claimed that while Lewinsky had made sexual contact with him, he had not had sexual contact with her.

Bill lied with half-truths, whole lies, whole truths wrapped in deceptive contexts. He was like the air-traffic controller in /Airplane!/ when handed a weather bulletin just off the wire. Lloyd Bridges asks, "What do you make of this, Johnny?"

Johnny replied, "I can make a hat! I can make a broche! I can make a pterodactyl . . ."

Well, like the replicator in /Star Trek/ that just moves molecules around to make you any meal you want, Bill Clinton can pluck nouns and verbs from the air and serve them as if they were hot steamy piles of truth.

* * * * * * *

Now I am being a bit unfair to Hillary Clinton. She is not a born liar the way Bill is. Bill is the Michael Jordan of lying. Lots of people can score baskets. But Jordan was in a class by himself both for his skill and his ability to make it look fun.

With the possible exception of barking like a dog, Hillary Clinton doesn't make anything - /anything/ - look fun. She even makes being married to a fun guy seem unfun. (I should say, he's probably more to blame for that.) Hillary lies as much as Bill, but she's more like Larry Bird; she gets the job done, but no one would call it graceful. (Caveat: Sports analogies are not my forte so my apologies if this misses the mark like a volleyball falling short of the goalposts.)

There's no doubt the Clintons have made a career of it, but how much of their lying to advance both their own careers and the Democrat agenda of the moment unique to the Clintons, or systemic to "Progressivism" itself --- or 21st century power politics in general? As Victor Davis Hanson has written, "Obama is the most impressive sophist of his age," and as Jonah goes on to write, Donald Trump is the "F6 Tornado" of maximum chaos, but the Clintons' tenure in Washington paved the way for both men.



August 27, 2015 - Quinnipiac University Poll


August 27, 2015 - Quinnipiac University Poll

16. What is the first word that comes to mind when you think of Hillary Clinton? (Numbers are not percentages. Figures show the number of times each response was given. This table reports only words that were mentioned at least five times.)

liar 178
dishonest 123
untrustworthy 93
experience 82
strong 59
Bill 56
woman 47
smart 31
crook 21
untruthful 19
criminal 18
deceitful 18
Democrat 16
intelligent 15
email 14
politician 13
Benghazi 12
corrupt 12
crooked 11
capable 10
determined 10
good 10
leader 9
murder 9
qualified 9
trustworthy 9
bitch 8
competent 8
phony 8
president 8
cheat 7
deceptive 7
honest 7
scandal 7
sneaky 7
ambitious 6
arrogant 6
brilliant 6
dependable 6
fair 6
sec-of-state 6
thief 6
confident 5
corporate 5
dedicated 5
devious 5
first-lady 5
lady 5
liberal 5
unqualified 5




*Bill Clinton can't get Hillary on phone*


*New York Post, by Richard Johnson*

Original Article

10:30:56 AM

The former president has not only clashed over policy Bill Clinton is upset his wife's campaign team doesn't follow his advice - and because he often can't even get Hillary on the phone."Those snotty-nosed kids over there are blowing this thing because nobody is listening to me," Bill told campaign chairman John Podesta, according to OrbMagazine.with Hillary's closest adviser, Huma Abedin, he's also said to be furious he can't phone his wife without going through Abedin, who carries Hillary's cellphone and screens all her calls. "When Mrs. Clinton and Ms. Abedin are traveling, they always share a suite, which they

Comments: Juicy gossip. Huma and her husband,Hillary stay in the same suite together, and lock the Secret Service out.



Post Reply

------------------------------------------------------------------------ Reply 1 - Posted by: *MOAB* , 3/29/2016 10:45:36 AM (No. 10725456)

For the first time ever I feel sorry for Bill on this one. Who would ever want to sleep that that PIG Hillary?

1 person like this.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply 2 - Posted by: *kahlerbob* , 3/29/2016 10:45:54 AM (No. 10725458)

Maybe, BJ, they just don't want to be disturbed.

41 persons like this.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply 3 - Posted by: *Mushroom* , 3/29/2016 10:54:44 AM (No. 10725467)

Look Bill, she's just not that into you. You have no value to her now...and the shoe is on the other foot.

9 persons like this.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply 4 - Posted by: *jalo1951* , 3/29/2016 10:58:51 AM (No. 10725483)

Seeing hillary slipping into bed in her baby doll pajamas is not something I would ever want to deal with. Bill has been kicked to the curb.

8 persons like this.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply 5 - Posted by: *caddyjak* , 3/29/2016 10:58:57 AM (No. 10725484)

Hill & Humma are a couple and will never tolerate being "dichotomized'!! Just saying...

8 persons like this.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply 6 - Posted by: *Hybernicus* , 3/29/2016 11:19:05 AM (No. 10725524)

More evidence of Hillary's lesbianism.

Or Huma is around to take care of Hillary, who is still incapable still her drunken injury.

56 persons like this.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply 7 - Posted by: *lakerman1* , 3/29/2016 11:28:42 AM (No. 10725545)

Hillary and Huma are cunning linguists. There should be no surprise that they lock their door from the inside.

13 persons like this.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply 8 - Posted by: *snowoutlaw* , 3/29/2016 11:30:48 AM (No. 10725550)

If even true I would guess Hillary is trying not to dis Obama into letting her be indicted. After what Bill said last week it may now be too late.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply 9 - Posted by: *Rumblehog* , 3/29/2016 11:42:52 AM (No. 10725573)

There's a basis for a good Country Western song in there somewhere.

7 persons like this.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply 10 - Posted by: *californiadude* , 3/29/2016 11:43:54 AM (No. 10725577)

According to the current Los Angeles Times thinking, Hillary would be the husband and Abedin would be the wife.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply 11 - Posted by: *Italiano* , 3/29/2016 11:48:53 AM (No. 10725594)

Already done, #9.

Beer For My Horses.

6 persons like this.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply 12 - Posted by: *CaptainLibra* , 3/29/2016 11:51:52 AM (No. 10725600)

#10. Or the other way around. What difference does it make at this point?

3 persons like this.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply 13 - Posted by: *The Advocate* , 3/29/2016 12:04:09 PM (No. 10725624)

Huma is affiliated with Muslim Brotherhood- a terrorist organization. Hilary /Huma relationship is by definition a threat to National Security. Who are they talking to? Do they both have security clearances after the email treachery? Why?

155 persons like this.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply 14 - Posted by: *john56* , 3/29/2016 12:20:49 PM (No. 10725644)

If I'm Bill, this isn't a bad thing.

17 persons like this.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply 15 - Posted by: *Pepper Tree* , 3/29/2016 12:49:43 PM (No. 10725683)

Someone tell me again how brilliant Bill Clinton is.

He has access to a LOT of money and he's currently married to the nastiest screeching fishwife in public memory.

If he had any real sense he'd start divorce proceedings this morning and start looking for an oceanview house on a golf course this afternoon.

1 person like this.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply 16 - Posted by: *Whamdbambam* , 3/29/2016 12:51:41 PM (No. 10725685)

I'm certain the Hillary!/Huma bedroom scene is something straight out of Dante's "Inferno."

1 person like this.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply 17 - Posted by: *Calvinesq* , 3/29/2016 1:15:16 PM (No. 10725727)

Don't feel bad, Bill.

Ambassador Stevens couldn't get her on the phone either.

36 persons like this.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply 18 - Posted by: *PAdiva* , 3/29/2016 2:26:38 PM (No. 10725806)

#12 Good call #4 Oh My! That's a heart-stopping visual!



Hillary aide paid by private firm to stage event with Bill Clinton while at State


New York Post

How corporate America bought Hillary Clinton for $21M

By Michael Walsh

May 22, 2016 | 2:38pm

"Follow the money." That telling phrase, which has come to summarize the Watergate scandal, has been a part of the lexicon since 1976. It's shorthand for political corruption: At what point do "contributions" become bribes, "constituent services" turn into quid pro quos and "charities" become slush funds?

Ronald Reagan was severely criticized in 1989 when, after he left office, he was paid $2 million for a couple of speeches in Japan. "The founding fathers would have been stunned that an occupant of the highest office in this land turned it into bucks," sniffed a Columbia professor.

Bill and Hillary Clinton collected more than $48 million in speaking fees in the past few years.

So what would Washington and Jefferson make of Hillary Rodham Clinton? Mandatory financial disclosures released this month show that, in just the two years from April 2013 to March 2015, the former first lady, senator and secretary of state collected $21,667,000 in "speaking fees," not to mention the cool $5 mil she corralled as an advance for her 2014 flop book, "Hard Choices."

Throw in the additional $26,630,000 her ex-president husband hoovered up in personal-appearance "honoraria," and the nation can breathe a collective sigh of relief that the former first couple - who, according to Hillary, were "dead broke" when they left the White House in 2001 with some of the furniture in tow - can finally make ends meet.

No wonder Donald Trump calls her "crooked Hillary."

A look at Mrs. Clinton's speaking venues and the whopping sums she's received since she left State gives us an indication who's desperate for a place at the trough - and whom another Clinton administration might favor.

First off, there's Wall Street and the financial-services industry. Democratic champions of the Little Guy are always in bed with the Street - they don't call Barack Obama "President Goldman Sachs" for nothing, but Mrs. Clinton has room for Bob and Carol and Ted and Alice and their 10 best friends. Multiple trips to Goldman Sachs. Morgan Stanley. Deutsche Bank. Kohlberg Kravis Roberts. UBS Wealth Management.

As the character of Che Guevara sings in "Evita": "And the money kept rolling in." And all at the bargain price of $225,000 a pop . . . to say what? We don't know, because Hillary won't release the transcripts.

One has to wonder what corporations are getting for their money when Hillary Clinton shows up to speak.

Big Pharma and health-care companies also make the list; they want to keep on the good side of the woman who tried to force HillaryCare down our throats in 1993 and who's sure to morph ObamaCare into the "single-payer" socialized-medicine model so beloved of "progressives." So say hello to the National Association of Chain Drug Stores ($225,000) and the Healthcare Information and Management Systems Society ($225,500).

The entertainment industry has an enormous effect on the popular culture, so no surprise seeing the A&E Networks on the list. American Jews donate lustily to the Democratic Party, so throw in the Beth El Synagogue in Minneapolis and the Jewish United Fund of Chicago.

The United Fresh Produce Association. The National Automobile Dealers Association ponied up $325,000. Even eBay forked over protection money, er, an honorarium. Because taking care of constituents is what the Clintons do - as long as the constituents take care of them.

As "Clinton Cash," a new documentary based on Peter Schweizer's 2015 book, shows in excruciating, irrefutable detail, it's always "pay to play" with the Clintons , whether personally or via their family racket, the Clinton Foundation (which includes the Clinton Global Initiative). They've sucked up vast sums of "contributions" from some of the most unsavory folks on the planet, including Nigerian dictators and Kazakhstani despots.

But it's their parlaying of "public service" by two career "civil servants" into personal enrichment that's shameless.

Bill Clinton's speaking fees skyrocketed just days after Hillary's nomination as secretary of state in 2009. Corporations, such as TD Bank, that had never paid a dime to hear him speak suddenly bellied up to the bar, waving fistfuls of cash. Coincidentally, TD Bank was the largest investor in the Keystone XL pipeline, which needed approval from the new secretary of state. Hillary dodged and weaved and Obama later nixed it - but the Clintons kept the cash. It makes sense to make friends with the woman who might just be the next president. But what does that say about what the office has become?

As Obama has shown, there's now essentially no limit on the president's power: He can dictate overtime wages (via executive decree), the forcible integration of the suburbs (via HUD) and even sexually integrate bathrooms (under Title IX). No wonder private companies want to cozy up to the White House. Your business is now the president's business, if he or she wants it to be.

But, should Hillary attain the White House, you ain't seen nothing yet. For the Clintons, who once rented out the Lincoln Bedroom, too much doesn't even approach being enough.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here's how much Hillary Clinton was paid for her 2013-2015 speeches:

* 4/18/2013, Morgan Stanley, Washington, DC: *$225,000*
* 4/24/2013, Deutsche Bank, Washington, DC: *$225,000*
* 4/24/2013, National Multi Housing Council, Dallas, Texas: *$225,000*
* 4/30/2013, Fidelity Investments, Naples, Fla.: *$225,000*
* 5/8/2013, Gap Inc., San Francisco, Calif.: *$225,000*
* 5/14/2013, Apollo Management Holdings LP, New York, NY: *$225,000*
* 5/16/2013, Itau BBA USA Securities, New York, NY: *$225,000*
* 5/21/2013, Vexizon Communications Inc., Washington, DC: *$225,000*
* 5/29/2013, Sanford C. Bernstein and Co. LLC, New York, NY: *$225,000*
* 6/4/2013, The Goldman Sachs Group, Palmetto Bluffs, SC: *$225,000*
* 6/6/2013, Spencer Stuart, New York, NY:*$225,000*
* 6/16/2013, Society for Human Resource Management, Chicago, Ill.:
*$285,000*
* 6/17/2013, Economic Club of Grand Rapids, Grand Rapids, Mich.:
*$225,000*
* 6/20/2013, Boston Consulting Group Inc., Boston, Mass.: *$225,000*
* 6/20/2013, Let's Talk Entertainment Inc., Toronto, Canada: *$250,000*
* 6/24/2013, American Jewish University, Universal City, Calif.:
*$225,000*
* 6/24/2013, Kohlberg Kravis Roberts and Company LP, Palos Verdes,
Calif.: *$225,000*
* 7/11/2013, UBS Wealth Management, New York, NY: *$225,000*
* 8/7/2013, Global Business Travel Association, San Diego, Calif.:
*$225,000*
* 8/12/2013, National Association of Chain Drug Stores, Las Vegas,
Nev.: *$225,000*
* 9/18/2013, American Society for Clinical Pathology, Chicago,
Ill.:*$225,000*
* 9/19/2013, American Society of Travel Agents Inc., Miami, Fla.:
*$225,000*
* 10/4/2013, Long Island Association, Long Island, NY: *$225,000*
* 10/15/2013, National Association of Convenience Stores, Atlanta,
Ga.:*$265,000*
* 10/23/2013, SAP Global Marketing Inc., New York, NY: *$225,000*
* 10/24/2013, Accenture, New York, NY: *$225,000*
* 10/24/2013, The Goldman Sachs Group, New York, NY: *$225,000*
* 10/27/2013, Beth El Synagogue, Minneapolis, Minn.: *$225,000*
* 10/28/2013, Jewish United Fund/Jewish Federation of Metropolitan
Chicago, Chicago, Ill.:*$400,000*
* 10/29/2013, The Goldman Sachs Group, Tuscon, Ariz.: *$225,000*
* 11/4/2013, Mase Productions Inc., Orlando, Fla.: *$225,000*
* 11/4/2013, London Drugs Ltd., Mississauga, Canada: *$225,000*
* 11/6/2013, Beaumont Health System, Troy, Mich.: *$305,000*
* 11/7/2013, Golden Tree Asset Management, New York, NY: *$275,000*
* 11/9/2013, National Association of Realtors, San Francisco,
Calif.: *$225,000*
* 11/13/2013, Mediacorp Canada Inc., Toronto, Canada:*$225,000*
* 11/13/2013, Bank of America, Bluffton, SC:*$225,000*
* 11/14/2013, CB Richard Ellis Inc., New York, NY: *$250,000*
* 11/18/2013, CIIE Group, Naples, Fla.: *$225,000*
* 11/18/2013, Press Ganey, Orlando, Fla.: *$225,000*
* 11/21/2013, U.S. Green Building Council, Philadelphia, Pa.: *$225,000*
* 01/06/2014, GE, Boca Raton, Fla.: *$225,500*
* 01/27/2014, National Automobile Dealers Association, New Orleans,
La.: *$325,500*
* 01/27/2014, Premier Health Alliance, Miami, Fla.:*$225,500*
* 02/06/2014, Salesforce.com, Las Vegas, Nev.:*$225,500*
* 02/17/2014, Novo Nordisk A/S, Mexico City, Mexico:*$125,000*
* 02/26/2014, Healthcare Information and Management Systems Society,
Orlando, Fla.: *$225,500*
* 02/27/2014, A&E Television Networks, New York, NY: *$280,000*
* 03/04/2014, Association of Corporate Counsel --- Southern California,
Los Angeles, Calif.:*$225,500*
* 03/05/2014, The Vancouver Board of Trade, Vancouver, Canada: *$275,500*
* 03/06/2014, tinePublic Inc., Calgary, Canada: *$225,500*
* 03/13/2014, Pharmaceutical Care Management Association, Orlando,
Fla.:*$225,500*
* 03/13/2014, Drug Chemical and Associated Technologies, New York, NY:
*$250,000*
* 03/18/2014, Xerox Corporation, New York, NY: *$225,000*
* 03/18/2014, Board of Trade of Metropolitan Montreal, Montreal,
Canada: *$275,000*
* 03/24/2014, Academic Partnerships, Dallas, Texas: *$225,500*
* 04/08/2014, Market° Inc., San Francisco, Calif.: *$225,500*
* 04/08/2014, World Affairs Council, Portland, Ore.:*$250,500*
* 04/10/2014, Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries Inc., Las Vegas,
Nev.: *$225,500*
* 04/10/2014, Lees Talk Entertainment, San Jose, Calif.:*$265,000*
* 04/11/2014, California Medical Association (via satellite), San
Diego, Calif.: *$100,000*
* 05/06/2014, National Council for Behavioral Healthcare, Washington,
DC:*$225,500*
* 06/02/2014, International Deli-Dairy-Bakery Association, Denver,
Colo.: *$225,500*
* 06/02/2014, Lees Talk Entertainment, Denver, Colo.:*$265,000*
* 06/10/2014, United Fresh Produce Association, Chicago, Ill.: *$225,000*
* 06/16/2014, tinePublic Inc., Toronto, Canada: *$150,000*
* 06/18/2014, tinePublic Inc., Edmonton, Canada: *$100,000*
* 06/20/2014, Innovation Arts and Entertainment, Austin, Texas: *$150,000*
* 06/25/2014, Biotechnology Industry Organization, San Diego, Calif.:
*$335,000*
* 06/25/2014, Innovation Arts and Entertainment, San Francisco,
Calif.: *$150,000*
* 06/26/2014, GTCR, Chicago, Ill.: *$280,000*
* 07/22/2014, Knewton Inc., San Francisco, Calif.: *$225,500*
* 07/26/2014, Ameriprise, Boston, Mass.: *$225,500*
* 07/29/2014, Coming Inc., Coming, NY: *$225,500*
* 08/28/2014, Nexenta Systems Inc., San Francisco, Calif.:*$300,000*
* 08/28/2014, Cisco, Las Vegas, Nev.: *$325,000*
* 09/04/2014, Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP, San Diego,
Calif.:*$225,500*
* 09/15/2014, Caridovascular Research Foundation, Washington,
DC:*$275,000*
* 10/02/2014, Commercial Real Estate Women Network, Miami Beach, Fla.:
*$225,500*
* 10/06/2014, Canada 2020, Ottawa, Canada: *$215,500*
* 10/07/2014, Deutsche Bank AG, New York, NY: *$280,000*
* 10/08/2014, Advanced Medical Technology Association (AdvaMed),
Chicago, Ill.:*$265,000*
* 10/13/2014, Council of Insurance Agents and Brokers, Colorado
Springs, Colo.: *$225,500*
* 10/14/2014, Salesforce.com, San Francisco, Calif.: *$225,500*
* 10/14/2014, Qualcomm Incorporated, San Diego, Calif.: *$335,000*
* 12/04/2014, Massachusetts Conference for Women, Boston, Mass.:
*$205,500*
* 01/21/2015, tinePublic Inc., Winnipeg, Canada: *$262,000*
* 01/21/2015, tinePublic Inc., Saskatoon, Canada: *$262,500*
* 01/22/2015, Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, Whistler, Canada:
*$150,000*
* 02/24/2015, Watermark Silicon Valley Conference for Women, Santa
Clara, Calif.:*$225,500*
* 03/11/2015, eBay Inc., San Jose, Calif.: *$315,000*
* 03/19/2015, American Camping Association, Atlantic City, NJ: *$260,000*

*Total: $21,667,000*



The State Department inspector general report specifically dings Clinton for her exclusive use of private email.


I HAVE NEVER BEEN SO CLOSE TO MELANIA
                                      (ummm tight fit)

The State Department inspector general report specifically dings Clinton for her exclusive use of private email.

State Dept. watchdog: Clinton violated email rules

The inspector general report is the latest headache for Clinton in the scandal over her exclusive use of private email for State business.

By Rachael Bade , Josh Gerstein and Nick Gass

05/25/16 09:46 AM EDT

A State Department watchdog**concluded that Hillary Clinton failed to comply with the agency's policies on records while**using a personal email server that was not - and, officials say, would never have been - approved by agency officials, **according to a report released to lawmakers on Wednesday.

The long-awaited findings from the State Department**inspector general, which also revealed Clinton expressing reluctance about using an official email account, were shared with Capitol Hill Wednesday, a copy of which was obtained by POLITICO. The report detailed how some employees who questioned the wisdom of the homegrown setup were told to stop asking questions, and the audit confirmed apparent hacking attempts on the private server.

Story Continued Below

It's the latest turn in the headache-inducing saga that has dogged Clinton's campaign. While the report concludes that the agency suffers from "longstanding, systemic weaknesses" with records that "go well beyond the tenure of any one Secretary of State," it specifically dings Clinton for her exclusive use of private email during her four years at the agency.

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

The report also notes that she had an "obligation to discuss using her personal email account" but did not get permission from the people who would have needed to approve the technology, who said they would not have done so, if they had been asked.

Trump dredges up sordid Clinton accusations

By Nick Gass

"According to the current [chief information officer] and assistant secretary for diplomatic security, Secretary Clinton had an obligation to discuss using her personal email account to conduct official business with their offices, who in turn would have attempted to provide her with approved and secured means that met her business needs," the report reads. "However, according to these officials, [the relevant people] did not - and would not - approve her exclusive reliance on a personal email." ** The watchdog also "found no evidence that the Secretary requested or obtained guidance or approval to conduct official business via a personal email account on her private server."

The watchdog's findings could exact further damage to Clinton's campaign, and they provide fresh fodder for Donald Trump, who has already said he will go after Clinton for the email scandal "bigly." And it could reinforce another problem for the Democratic frontrunner: her persistently high unfavorability ratings, driven by a swath of voters who say they don't trust her.

The report represents the latest pushback - in this case by a nonpartisan government entity - against her campaign's claim that she did not break any rules and that her use of a private server was completely allowed.

Clinton Campaign spokesman Brian Fallon in a statement predicted that "political opponents of Hillary Clinton are sure to misrepresent this report for their own partisan purposes," but argued that "in reality, the Inspector General documents just how consistent her email practices were with those of other Secretaries and senior officials at the State Department who also used personal email."

"The report shows that problems with the State Department's electronic recordkeeping systems were longstanding and that there was no precedent of someone in her position having a State Department email account until after the arrival of her successor," Fallon continued. "Contrary to the false theories advanced for some time now, the report notes that her use of personal email was known to officials within the Department during her tenure, and that there is no evidence of any successful breach of the Secretary's server."

Investigators also concluded that former Secretary of State Colin Powell, who used a personal email as well, likewise did not follow record keeping laws. However, the report notes significant difference in their circumstances: During Powell's tenure, State's capacity to email people outside the department was limited. He said he needed it to reach people who didn't work at State. The IG also noted that he used email less frequently than Clinton and top technology officials were aware of his personal email use.

State Department officials who briefed journalists about the report would not say directly whether they agreed with the inspector general's finding that Clinton's use of email violated State policies.

"The policies on email evolved over time and our guidance to officials on how to comply with them evolved and improved over time," said one senior State official, who spoke on condition of anonymity. "There was no absolute prohibition [on use of person email] during this or any other tenure - administration."

"It may have been difficult" to get approval of a set-up like Clinton's, the official acknowledged, while emphasizing that the report and the National Archives have found that Clinton "mitigated" the impact of her use of a private system by turning over some of her emails to the department in late 2014.

"It's clear from the report that the Department could have done a better job preserving emails and records of secretaries of state," another senior state department official. "The department is much better situated today....This has high-level attention."

Clinton and her top staff did not cooperate with the investigation, which was requested by current Secretary of State John Kerry. She, her former chief of staff Cheryl Mills and top deputies Jake Sullivan and Huma Abedin are among those who declined interviews. Kerry and his predecessors Powell, Madeleine Albright, and Condoleezza Rice, however, did answer questions.

According to the report, some State Department technology staff said they were instructed to not talk of Clinton's email set-up after they raised concerns about the unusual arrangement. One employee told investigators that he or she "raised concerns that information sent and received on Secretary Clinton's account could contain Federal records that needed to be preserved in order to satisfy Federal recordkeeping requirements," the document states.

By Burgess Everett

But they were**told to drop it: "According to the staff member, the Director stated that the Secretary's personal system had been reviewed and approved by Department legal staff and that the matter was not to be discussed any further. As previously noted, OIG found no evidence that staff in the Office of the Legal Adviser reviewed or approved Secretary Clinton's personal system."

A 2012 directory lists John Bentel as the director of the office that handles information technology for the Office of the Secretary. Bentel no longer works for State and has refused to answer Congressional investigators' questions on this matte r.

Another staff member from office handling information technology recounted the hushed nature of the email arrangement, the report says: "According to the other [IT] staff member who raised concerns about the server, the Director stated that the mission of S/ES-IRM is to support the Secretary and instructed the staff never to speak of the Secretary's personal email system again."

While Clinton has often said she used a personal email out of "sheer convenience," one email in the report suggests she was also worried about her privacy.** In the revealing November 2011 exchange, Clinton's right-hand staffer Huma Abedin discussed with her the possibility of putting her on a State Department email because her messages were not being received by State staff.

"We should talk about putting you on [S]tate email or releasing your email address to the department so you are not going to spam," she wrote. ** Clinton responded: "Let's get separate address or device but I don't want any risk of the personal being accessible."

The report details numerous laws and regulations that govern government communications and security of emails, assessing how each administration lived up to those standards. The bulk of the report, however, centered on Clinton.

According to the report a non-State adviser to Bill Clinton, who was the original user of the server later taken over by Hillary Clinton, shut down the server in early 2011 because of hacking concerns. While unnamed in the report, previous news reports have identified longtime Clinton staffer and Teneo employee Justin Cooper as the man who registered Clinton's email address. According to the report, the individual who registered the address was the same person who reported the hacking.

Cooper, according to the report, reached out to Huma Abedin on Jan. 9, 2011 to notify her of the hacking problem, an occurrence that happened twice that day. He said he "had to shut down the server because he believed 'someone was trying to hack us and while they did not get in i didnt [sic] want to let them have the chance to,'" the report says.

"Later that day, the advisor again wrote to the Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations, 'We were attacked again so I shut [the server] down for a few min,'" the report reads.

That matter should have been reported, the IG report says, but was not.

"Notification is required when a user suspects compromise of, among other things, a personally owned device containing personally identifiable information," it says. "However, OIG found no evidence that the Secretary or her staff reported these incidents to computer security personnel or anyone else within the Department."

Clinton pokes Trump: 'How can anybody lose money running a casino?'

By Nick Gass

State has deemed more than 2,000 of Clinton's messages as classified, including**22 that were upgraded to the most sensitive national security classification, "top secret." And the FBI is still probing whether any laws were broken laws by putting classified information at risk - or whether her staff improperly sent sensitive information knowing it wasn't on a classified system.

At the very least, State's inspector general says Clinton didn't do what she was supposed to, though it also notes widespread email issues across the tenures of five secretaries of state, not just Clinton. The report found top staffers frequently used personal emails too. ** "OIG recognizes that technology and Department policy have evolved considerably since Secretary Albright's tenure began in 1997. Nevertheless, the Department generally and the Office of the Secretary in particular have been slow to recognize and to manage effectively the legal requirements and cybersecurity risks associated with electronic data communications, particularly as those risks pertain to its most senior leadership," the report concluded. "OIG expects that its recommendations will move the Department steps closer to meaningfully addressing these risks."

Clinton and her allies have contended she did nothing illegal by choosing to set up a private email server and account at her Chappaqua, New York, home, and that she was not trying to evade public records requests. Instead, Clinton has said she was motivated by the desire for convenience, though she has conceded it was not the best choice.

Clinton says is cooperating with the FBI investigations. In late 2014, they turned over 30,000 of her emails, and while there were no apparent bombshells in the content of the messages, the number of emails later deemed classified has raised questions about the security of the set-up. ** Clinton has also faced scrutiny for instructing her staff to delete about 32,000 messages deemed personal by her team. It's unclear how many of those emails the FBI may have been able to recover from her server - which was turned over to authorities last August - or whether those messages will eventually be made public.

The report gives more details of the under-the-radar work of Clinton's top technology staffer, Bryan Pagliano, whom she paid to maintain her private email server. State's chief information officer and deputy chief information officers, Pagliano's direct bosses, told investigators that he never informed them of his side duties. They "believed that Pagliano's job functions were limited to supporting mobile computing issues across the entire Department." ** "They told OIG that while they were aware that the Senior Advisor had provided IT support to the Clinton Presidential campaign, they did not know he was providing ongoing support to the Secretary's email system during working hours," the report reads. ** The top technology officers also told investigators they "questioned whether he could support a private client during work hours, given his capacity as a full-time government employee." ** Pagliano invoked his right to avoid self-incrimination and refused to answer questions on the matter before Congress but received immunity from the FBI to talk about the email arrangement. Lawmakers on Capitol Hill have been eager to question him on whether Clinton intentionally used private email because she didn't want anyone getting access to her messages.



Hillary University: Bill Clinton Bagged $16.46 Million from For-Profit College as State Dept. Funneled $55 Million Back


by Stephen K. Bannon 2 Jun 2016

With her campaign sinking in the polls, Hillary Clinton has launched a desperate attack against Trump University to deflect attention away from her deep involvement with a controversial for-profit college that made the Clintons millions, even as the school faced serious legal scrutiny and criminal investigations.

In April 2015, Bill Clinton was forced to abruptly resign from his lucrative perch as honorary chancellor of Laureate Education, a for-profit college company. The reason for Clinton's immediate departure: /Clinton Cash/ revealed , and Bloomberg confirmed , that Laureate funneled Bill Clinton $16.46 million over five years while Hillary Clinton's State Dept. pumped at least $55 million to a group run by Laureate's founder and chairman, Douglas Becker, a man with strong ties to the Clinton Global Initiative. Laureate has donated between $1 million and $5 million (donations are reported in ranges, not exact amounts) to the Clinton Foundation . Progressive billionaire George Soros is also a Laureate financial backer.

As the /Washington Post/ reports, "Laureate has stirred controversy throughout Latin America, where it derives two-thirds of its revenue." During Bill Clinton's tenure as Laureate's chancellor, the school spent over $200 million a year on aggressive telemarketing, flashy Internet banner ads, and billboards designed to lure often unprepared students from impoverished countries to enroll in its for-profit classes. The goal: get as many students, regardless of skill level, signed up and paying tuition.

"I meet people all the time who transfer here when they flunk out elsewhere," agronomy student Arturo Bisono, 25, told the /Post/. "This has become the place you go when no one else will accept you."

Others, like Rio state legislator Robson Leite who led a probe into Bill Clinton's embattled for-profit education scheme, say the company is all about extracting cash, not educating students. "They have turned education into a commodity that focuses more on profit than knowledge," said Leite.

Progressives have long excoriated for-profit education companies for placing profits over quality pedagogy. Still, for five years, Bill Clinton allowed his face and name to be plastered all over Laureate's marketing materials. As /Clinton Cash/ reported, pictures of Bill Clinton even lined the walkways at campuses like Laureate's Bilgi University in Istanbul, Turkey. That Laureate has campuses in Turkey is odd, given that for-profit colleges are illegal there, as well as in Mexico and Chile where Laureate also operates.

Shortly after Bill Clinton's lucrative 2010 Laureate appointment, Hillary Clinton's State Dept. began pumping millions of its USAID dollars to a sister nonprofit, International Youth Foundation (IYF), which is run by Laureate's founder and chairman, Douglas Becker. Indeed, State Dept. funding skyrocketed once Bill Clinton got on the Laureate payroll, according to Bloomberg :

A Bloomberg examination of IYF's public filings show that in 2009, the year before Bill Clinton joined Laureate, the nonprofit received 11 grants worth $9 million from the State Department or the affiliated USAID. In 2010, the group received 14 grants worth $15.1 million. In 2011, 13 grants added up to $14.6 million. The following year, those numbers jumped: IYF received 21 grants worth $25.5 million, including a direct grant from the State Department.

Throughout ten Democratic Party debates, Establishment Media have not asked Hillary Clinton a single question about she and her husband's for-profit education scam.



Clinton donor received top spot on State Department intel board

By Sarah Jorgensen, Tom LoBianco , David Fitzpatrick, Nicole Gaouette and Laura Koran , CNN

Updated 11:37 PM ET, Fri June 10, 2016

Story highlights

* Rajiv Fernando has donated $9,400 to Clinton's two White House bids * In July 2011, Fernando was appointed to a seat on the International Security Advisory Board

Washington (CNN)A major political donor to the Clintons and other top Democrats was selected by then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to serve on a key State Department intelligence board in 2011, despite having no clear background in the area, according to emails released this week.

Rajiv Fernando has donated $9,400 to Clinton's two White House bids -- first her 2008 run and again this year -- and has been a generous donor to Democrats running for the House and Senate and to President Barack Obama.

Fernando, a Chicago securities trader, has also been a prolific donor to the Clinton Foundation, giving at least $1 million to the organization, according to its website.

In July 2011, Fernando was appointed to a seat on the International Security Advisory Board (ISAB), a panel filled with top-level foreign policy advisers and security experts.

Former Democratic presidential candidate Gary Hart chairs the current panel, which includes retired generals, the former chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and other high-ranking national security experts.

As a member of the top-level group, Fernando was granted a Top Secret security clearance and given access to highly sensitive information.

Read More Fernando, professional State Department staff noted, seemed an awkward selection for the group and spurred concern when an ABC News reporter inquired about him in 2011.

"We must protect the secretary's and under secretary's name, as well as the integrity of the board.

I think it's important to get down to the bottom of this before there's any response," Jamie Mannina, a State Department official, wrote in an August 15, 2011, email obtained by the conservative group Citizens United and released to CNN.

An aide, Wade Boese, replied that night that Clinton chief of staff Cheryl Mills had added Fernando's name to the list of appointees approved by Clinton.

"The true answer is that S staff (Cheryl Mills) added him.

The board's membership preceded me.

Raj was not on the list sent to S; he was added at their insistence," Boese wrote.

"S" refers to Clinton, ABC News reported.

ABC News first reported
go.

com/Politics/clinton-donor-sensitive-intelligence-board/story?id=39710624>about the revelations Friday, which were included in emails obtained by Citizens United.

It was Citizen United's challenge regarding the creation of an anti-Clinton documentary which ultimately paved the way for the creation of super PACs.

Messages left with Fernando were not immediately returned.

Nick Merrill, Clinton's traveling press secretary, issued a statement.

"This was an unpaid, volunteer advisory board, and one of several foreign policy-focused organizations that he was involved with.

As the State Department itself has said, the ISAB charter calls for a diverse set of experiences for its members.

That's all there is to it." The emails provided to Citizens United detail State Department staffers scrambling behind the scenes to explain why Fernando won a seat on the influential security advisory board after an ABC News reporter asked about his selection in August 2011.

Just two days after the ABC reporter sent his questions, Fernando resigned from the board.

Fernando blamed his resignation on the "unique, unexpected, and excessive volatility in the international market these last few weeks" in a letter sent to Clinton on August 17, 2011.

A former administration official familiar with the selection called the ABC report accurate and said State officials were probably "embarrassed" by the attention.

The administration source, however, praised Fernando, saying he was "one of the hardest-working members, he was doing all the reading, he was studying, he was asking questions.

I think he would have ended up being a good member of the board." But at least one member of the board said they did not remember seeing Fernando or his involvement.

"I don't remember the guy at all," said David Kay, a former United Nations chief nuclear weapons inspector whose service on the ISAB coincided with Fernando's brief stint.

"The International Security Advisory Board was established to provide the State Department with independent insight and advice on a broad range of international security matters.

The ISAB's charter stipulates that the board should reflect a balance of backgrounds and points of view.

Generally speaking, it's not unusual for the State Department chief of staff to be involved in personnel matters," State Department spokesman Mark Toner said in a statement to CNN.

"Members of the International Security Advisory Board are required to have security clearances.

But, as is standard, the department does not comment on individuals' security clearance status." The revelations quickly spiraled onto the campaign trail, where questions about Clinton's emails have proved a consistent problem for her.

"He was a donor, a recent donor to Hillary Clinton's campaign and also gave as much as $250,000 to his foundation," presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump said Friday.

"They all looked, they said 'Where did this guy come from?' He made a contribution of $250,000 all of a sudden he's on this very important, vital board.

This position dealt with tactical nuclear weapons and had Top Secret clearance and he knew nothing about it."