Hacked emails are posted online as Democrats' convention nears
             

The inside track on Washington politics.

By Tom Hamburger and Karen Tumulty Politics July 22 at 9:00 PM

As Hillary Clinton prepares to accept her party's nomination for president, the anti-secrecy group WikiLeaks has released nearly 20,000 hacked emails that offer an embarrassing look inside the workings of the Democratic Party as it prepares for its convention in Philadelphia.

Some of the emails from the Democratic National Committee include discussions about how to undermine Clinton's chief rival for the presidential nomination, Sen. Bernie Sanders (D-Vt.); details of perks provided to party donors attending the convention; and email exchanges among party officials, journalists and others.

The emails were released Friday on Twitter by WikiLeaks, which linked readers to a Web page inviting them to search the DNC email database. A search box sits beneath a one-paragraph introduction:

"Today, Friday 22 July 2016 at 10:30am EDT, WikiLeaks releases 19,252 emails and 8,034 attachments from the top of the US Democratic National Committee - part one of our new Hillary Leaks series," the introduction says. "The leaks come from the accounts of seven key figures in the DNC," including Communications Director Luis Miranda (10770 emails), National Finance Director Jordon Kaplan (3797 emails), Finance Chief of Staff Scott Comer. . . ." and others. The newly released emails cover the period from January 2015 through May 25, 2016.

Friday's document dump follows a report last month by The Washington Post that Russian government hackers had penetrated the computer network of the Democratic National Committee, gaining access to an entire database of opposition research, among other material.

DNC and Clinton campaign officials did not respond to requests for comment Friday as reporters and unnerved campaign staff tried to assess the damage caused by the release, which comes just as the party holds a nominating convention in Philadelphia designed to project unity after a bitter primary season. Some of the emails could open some old wounds and impede that process.

One email written May 5 to Miranda from another party official suggests that the party could help Clinton by raising questions about Sanders's faith. The email seems to indicate a clear preference among DNC officials for a Clinton primary win.

"It might may [sic] no difference, but for KY and WVA can we get someone to ask his belief," the email from "marshall@dnc.org" says. "Does he believe in a God. He had skated on saying he has a Jewish heritage. I think I read he is an atheist. This could make several points difference with my peeps. My Southern Baptist peeps would draw a big difference between a Jew and an atheist."

Another, from a lawyer for the Clinton campaign, suggests a response the DNC should use to refute claims by Sanders that the Clinton campaign was improperly using a joint fundraising committee with the party to raise money that provided benefits to Clinton during the primary season. "The DNC should push back DIRECTLY at Sanders and say that what he is saying is false and harmful the the [sic] Democratic party," attorney Marc Elias wrote in a note to Miranda on May 3. Elias did not respond to a request for comment late Friday.

It was well known that there had been friction between the Sanders campaign and an ostensibly impartial party apparatus.

But the emails detail exactly how much bitterness enveloped that relationship as Sanders emerged as a real threat to Clinton.

One potential complication is that Sanders's supporters are crucial to Democratic hopes of retaining the White House in the fall. They bring to the contest both passion and a potentially vast donor base.

The cache of emails also includes communications with journalists and discussions of news organizations, and the emails provide a new perspective on the deference shown to major donors - and the efforts to carefully calibrate rewards based on a contributor's financial generosity.

In one exchange from May, Mid-Atlantic Finance Director Alexandra Shapiro and National Finance Director Jordan Kaplan argued over which big giver deserved to sit next to President Obama at a DNC event.

Kaplan directed Shapiro to put New York philanthropist Philip Munger in the prime spot, switching out Maryland ophthalmologist Sreedhar Potarazu. He noted that Munger was one of the largest donors to Organizing for America, a nonprofit that advocates for Obama's policies. "It would be nice to take care of him from the DNC side," Kaplan wrote.

Shapiro pushed back, noting that Munger had given only $100,600 to the party, while the Potarazu family had contributed $332,250.

In one email attachment from Erik Stowe, the finance director for Northern California, to Tammy Paster, a fundraising consultant, he lists the benefits given to different tiers of donors to the Democratic National Convention, which starts next week in Philadelphia. The tiers range from a direct donation of $66,800 to one of $467,600 to the DNC. The documents also show party officials discussing how to reward people who bundle between $250,000 to $1.25 million.

A document titled "2016 Convention Packages" shows that top-tier donors will be treated well in Philadelphia. They will receive priority booking at a premier hotel, free tickets to major convention events and six tickets to an "exclusive VIP party," according to the document.

Matea Gold, Ellen Nakashima, Anu Narayanswamy and Breanne Deppisch contributed to this report.

49 Comments

Tom Hamburger covers the intersection of money and politics for The Washington Post.

Karen Tumulty is a national political correspondent for The Washington Post.

The Republican National Convention is over. The Democratic National Convention begins on July 25 in Philadelphia. Stay caught up on the race. Quoted "To me, not signing a pledge is dishonorable. OK? It's dishonorable, but not a nice thing to do. And I talk this way, because we're all together. We created one of the most successful conventions in the history of conventions." Donald Trump, at a press conference Friday, criticizing Ted Cruz's decision not to endorse him during Cruz's speech at the RNC. Donald Trump just gave another absolutely epic press conference //



See all newsletters Campaign 2016 ✕ State of the 2016 race

The Post Recommends What the camera doesn't capture in those viral videos of police shootings But experts assembled by The Washington Post say a need for better training is apparent. Sen. Timothy M. Kaine of Virginia chosen as Hillary Clinton's VP In a year dominated by Donald Trump, her ticket prizes experience and traditional public service. We were promised a riot. In Cleveland, we got a block party instead. "It's all about love. This is what Cleveland is about. This is what the world should be about."

Recommended by 49 Show Comments Discussion Policy

49 Comments Mentioned in this story and want to comment? Learn more Thanks, your post has been submitted for review Please Sign In to Comment or signup

breagerey 7:23 PM PST

The question people should be asking is why was the DNC hacked and the results released and not the RNC. Assuming it was Russian hackers (I have no reason to think it's not and that they're Russian govt affilitated) what is their motivation for releasing the DNC's emails and not the RNC's? ...

Retired IT 7:25 PM PST

Trump and Putin are buddies. ...

mdaok 7:19 PM PST [Edited]

Do the emails explain how bill and Hillary made over $100,000,000..00 as public servants claiming to be warriors against income inequality....

RUreallyInclusive1 Glen Finn 7:19 PM PST

I think it's disgusting how people think Assange is a tower of virtue when he releases information about one party and then becomes a liar and sell out when he shows that their own gods have feet of mud. It has never been a secret that the DNC was solidly behind Clinton and would do anything to take out any competition. That's modern politics. The two parties are as corrupt as they accuse each other of being. ...

chaos15511 Retired IT 7:24 PM PST

Dems are only 50% corrupt. Repubs are 100%....

Rick1118 7:18 PM PST

When does Hillary deny the truth of those emails and blame it on the great right wing conspiracy? "Lock Her Up!...

BernieFife-2016 7:15 PM PST

The IRS released a statement tonight: Unfortunately, we stored Donald J. Trump's Tax Returns on the Hillary Clinton E-mail Server.

We regret the inconvenience.

Thank you...

Rick1118 and BernieFife-20162 Land Rover 7:13 PM PST

You'd think they could find a way to hack the Orange Buffoon's tax returns. Of course the Rooskies want Trump to win, ...

Rick1118 7:23 PM PST

You seem confused. No reason for them to support Trump. HRC has already given them everything they want....

jimk8mr 7:09 PM PST

Now how about the emails of the RNC? Their efforts to undermine Trump, of for that matter Ted Cruz, would be a lot juicier....

Bibi Bernat Hahn 7:14 PM PST

really? This is your answer to proof that the DNC showed preference for your queen? We Betnie supporters were already pretty disgusted but this on top of a republican-lite VP is just too much #demexit. #BetterGreenThanMean...

prostu1 7:08 PM PST

We know that Russian government hackers hacked the DNC computers. And it seems more than coincidence that Wikileaks suddenly comes up with all of these emails which would have been obtained during a Russian hack. Putin has taken sides and he prefers Trump. And based on Trump's statements about undermining NATO and abandoning our allies to an aggressive Russia, it is easy to understand why Putin favors Trump and would try to affect our presidential election. Republicans will unwittingly help Putin achieve what he cannot achieve on his own. The winner will be Putin but Trump will re-frame Putin's winning manipulation as "America First" and the Republican believers will continue to fall in line....

polymerman and jimk8mr2 Bibi Bernat Hahn 7:16 PM PST

And that's the end of it. What about the content of the emails? If this were a republican ya'all would have your republican-lite panties in a knot. FDR is rolling in his grave....

ArtPope 7:07 PM PST [Edited]

Get ready for the dirtiest political campaign in history. Republicans would sell the mothers, wives and children to regain the Presidency. Money can buy a lot of corruption. Trump has already proven that he will stoop to any level to get what he wants. Surprised that Wikileaks is allowing themselves to be drawn into partisan politics but...who knows. Maybe someone paid them off. I see that they accept donations....

Land Rover and ArtPope2 Rick1118 7:13 PM PST

You libs crack me up. The article is all about the Dems selling favors and somehow you convert it into the Republicans being the corrupt party. Typical liberal BS....

Bibi Bernat Hahn1 Land Rover 7:06 PM PST

Really isn't much there is there. ...

USAFprof-ret 7:06 PM PST

And this data comes courtesy of the Russian government. For Trump.

Quid quo pro.

For proposing to derail NATO.

Sad that both parties do this. I'd like to see the RNC party favors for donors.

But only one candidate, Clinton, opposes Citizens' United....

acepaperman and jimk8mr2 tacocat 7:06 PM PST

Maybe WikiLeaks can tell us whatever happened to Bowe Bergdahl - you know the one who served with distinction and honor according to Susan Rice. ...

tacocat1 Old CPA 7:01 PM PST

Just wait until September when they released the hacked e mails relating to Libya and national security issues. ...

Daniel SudsworthyBernieFife-2016Bibi Bernat Hahntacocat and Bill from Vegas5 KateSaunders 6:59 PM PST

Is that all you got? No news there....

acepaperman1 BernieFife-2016 7:00 PM PST

Kate...200,000 more e-mails are on the way.

Enjoy...

Bill from Vegastacocat and Bibi Bernat Hahn3 Daniel Sudsworthy 7:02 PM PST

Way down deep in her soul. Hillary despises you....

Bill from Vegas1 BernieFife-2016 7:03 PM PST

When did she get a soul?...

Bill from Vegas and tacocat2 Bibi Bernat Hahn 7:18 PM PST

The feeling is soooooooooo mutual...

Daniel Sudsworthy 6:59 PM PST

Voting for Hillary? Watch the movie 'Clinton Cash' first, then see if you still can vote for her without gagging....

Bill from Vegas and tacocat2 Land Rover 7:11 PM PST

Same old conservative BS. 30-years and counting. It may be believable if it wasn't the go-to tactic on everyone who opposes them.



DNC apologizes to Bernie Sanders for 'inexcusable remarks'


By Danika Fears

Published: July 25, 2016 6:24 p.m. ET

The Democratic National Committee apologized on Monday to Bernie Sanders for "inexcusable remarks" made about him in hacked emails.

"On behalf of everyone at the DNC, we want to offer a deep and sincere apology to Senator Sanders, his supporters, and the entire Democratic Party for the inexcusable remarks made over email," reads a statement released by the party late Monday afternoon.

*Read: * Does Hillary Clinton have a political death wish?

"These comments do not reflect the values of the DNC or our steadfast commitment to neutrality during the nominating process. The DNC does not - and will not - tolerate disrespectful language exhibited toward our candidates."

"Individual staffers have also rightfully apologized for their comments, and the DNC is taking appropriate action to ensure it never happens again," says the statement issued by interim DNC chair Donna Brazile and her board.

*Also read:* Hacking of DNC shows power (and value) of email

It didn't explain what those action is or if anyone has been disciplined as a result.

The chair of the DNC, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, announced Sunday that she would resign after the four-day convention.

This report originally appears on NYPost.com.



Here's A List Of The Most Egregious WikiLeaks DNC Emails


Posted Tuesday, July 26th 2016 @ 9am by Hannity.com Staff

This week's Democratic National Convention is in complete disarray after hackers released 20,000 emails from DNC officials, showing the committee's bias towards Hillary Clinton throughout the primary process.

Our friends at The Gateway Pundit have produced a list of some of the most egregious leaked emails which showed:

*·* Officials wanted to use Bernie Sanders' religion to scare off Southern voters

*·* DNC officials had moles working within the Sanders campaign

*·* The DNC sent interns out to anti-Trump rallies when their "allies" couldn't "deliver bodies in time" to the gatherings

*· *Politico reporter sends stories to DNC for approval before sending them to his editor

*·* High ranking DNC staffers make fun of an African American woman's name

---

---

Re: FW: DNC LGBT Event



From:zallen@tipahconsulting.com To: ComerS@dnc.org Date: 2016-05-06 16:04 Subject: Re: FW: DNC LGBT Event



LaQueenia is a NAME!

I'm sorry, boo. I hope you got a raise with this title.

On Friday, May 6, 2016, Comer, Scott > wrote: just kill me now.

From: Rob Smith - Chief Product Officer - NY [mailto:robs@haddad.com] Sent: Friday, May 06, 2016 2:01 PM To: Comer, Scott; Tobias, Andy; Andrew Sendall; rgrozier@gro-dev.com Cc: LaQueenia Gibson - Executive Assistant Subject: DNC LGBT Event

Gentlemen,

I'm encouraging a phone call next week. There has been some shift in leadership and I'd like for us to be aligned on next steps. After seeing a few emails, I'm not sure that we are all on the same page.

I'm going to have LaQueenia send out some options for next week. Hopefully we can all get on the phone and reenergize this event.

Rob

Rob Smith Chief Product Officer E-mail: robs@haddad.com Tel: 1 (212) 630-3107 Haddad Brands 100 West 33rd Street Suite 1115 New York, NY 10001

[HaddadLogo]

The information contained in this message is intended solely for the individual to whom it is specifically and originally addressed. This message and its contents may contain confidential or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure or distribution, or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information, is strictly prohibited.

-- Zachary Allen TIPAH Consulting 304 Park Avenue South, 8th Floor New York, NY 10010 (646) 470-8689 direct | (973) 618-5903 fax | ZAllen@TIPAHConsulting.com

---

---

*· * DNC staffers complaining to Morning Joe producers that he mentioned the "rigged system"

*·* DNC staffers using anti-gay slur

*·* DNC feeding CNN questions they'd like to be asked during an interview

The leaked emails forced chairwoman, Debbie Wasserman Schultz to resign and the DNC appointed Donna Brazile as interim chairperson (who-by the way-has also been implicated in this email debacle).

According to Brazile, more emails will be released...It's going to be a fun week in Philadelphia.



Why is it that Hillary Clinton just can't tell the truth...


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

What is it with Hillary Clinton? What is it about this brilliant and accomplished woman-described by Barack Obama as possibly "more qualified" to be president than anyone in history-that makes so many people certain she is an incurable liar? More than anything else about Clinton-her occasional tin ear for politics, her seeming inability to connect with large crowds, her ultracautiousness-it is the trust issue that could yet cost her a general election she should otherwise win, given her opponent's vulnerabilities.

Plainly put, Clinton herself has kept the issue alive over 25 years of public life, with long-winded, defensive, obfuscating answers to questions that-in politics, if not in law-cry out for a crisp yes-or-no reply.

Story Continued Below

Email-gate is only the latest step on this long, winding road. Consider just one brief, recent revelatory exchange with Charlie Rose, in which Rose noted (correctly) that FBI Director James Comey had called her "careless," and Clinton replied with a flurry of nonresponsive words: "Well, I would hope that you like many others would also look at what he said when he testified before Congress, because when he did, he clarified much of what he had said in his press conference."

"But he said it was sloppy," Rose persisted.

"No," Clinton insisted, "he did not."

Yes, he did, too. Asked to explain what he had intended by the word "careless," Comey explained that it was a common-sense term, meant to convey "real sloppiness." To pretend otherwise is to persist in the pattern that Clinton has followed from virtually the moment she became a national figure in her husband's first presidential campaign. Over the past quarter-century she has all too often offered up pained and partial answers to controversies, too often seeming to hide more than she is willing to reveal, only to find that, again and again, the issue blows up in her face.

The pattern is unmistakable, from the Whitewater inquiry (when she resisted disclosing documents about a failed Arkansas land deal) to her 10,000 percent profits in commodity trades (which she explained by saying she'd read The Wall Street Journal) to the Rose Law Firm billing records (which infamously and mysteriously turned up in the White House residence after she'd said they were missing) to the Monica Lewinsky affair and the State Department emails themselves.

Twenty years after //the/New York Times/ columnist William Safire first called Clinton "a congenital liar" in print, Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Preibus could still rouse his convention delegates in Cleveland with an unyielding refrain about the emails. "She lied," Priebus cried. "And she lied over and over and over. She lied! She lied!"

Clinton's penchant for dissembling in discussion of her personal and financial dealings is all the more puzzling because it stands in such sharp contrast to her willingness to articulate clear principles on the policy front, whether with her passionate speech on women's rights at the Beijing Women's Conference in 1995, her speech last year on Internet freedom, or, for that matter, her courageous, if politically unpopular, effort to pass health insurance reform two decades ago. (Her stances in this campaign on hot-button issues like trade have sometimes been more expedient.)

Moreover, dissembling is not always a bad trait in a president. Some of the greatest, most notably Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who enjoyed playing his aides off against each other by letting each think he'd sided with them on a given issue, have been masters of the art. Even Abraham Lincoln was not immune. "To develop public support or outflank opposition, he would sometimes conceal his hand or dissemble," wrote the historian LaWanda Cox. "And he kept his options open."

Still, Clinton has suffered for her willingness to be economical with the truth at times.

The latest New York Times/CBS News Poll found that nearly 7 in 10 voters don't believe Clinton is honest and trustworthy (more than 6 in 10 feel the same way about Donald Trump). A like number say she did "something wrong" with her email. Her trust deficit-fewer than 3 in 10 voters say she is honest and trustworthy-may be her single greatest weakness heading into the fall campaign. And if she wins, it is a reality that would seem to presage a presidency of unusual secretiveness.

Clinton bears an even greater burden than her husband in this regard. Bill Clinton was routinely distrusted by a majority of voters during his time in office, but when he ran for reelection in 1996, polls nevertheless showed that as many as 65 percent of voters believed he cared about them-an advantage of some 20 points over his rival Bob Dole. As I once wrote in the /New York Times/, the president's "job approval ratings seemed to rise with his legal bills."

Hillary Clinton enjoys no such benefit of the doubt: This year's polls have consistently shown majorities of voters saying she does not care about people like them (though Trump's ratings on that question tend to be even worse).

To make matters worse, it's not clear just what-if anything-Clinton can do about the problem, at least before November.

"I don't think she can do much to change her trust numbers in the campaign," says one veteran Democratic consultant who has known the Clintons since their earliest campaigns for the Arkansas governorship. "Her numbers may improve some, but only with voters who are going to vote for her, and quit responding negatively on the trust issue. Clinton voters may reconcile their support for her by moving to a positive on trust."

"As president, HRC could change the trust numbers," he adds, "but not in the campaign."

To be fair, Clinton has been the subject of more than two decades of sustained-and often unhinged attacks-from quarters as high-minded as the /Wall Street Journal/ and as vicious as the darkest corners of the Internet. Her introduction to the national media came in the unholy whirlwind of Whitewater, Gennifer Flowers and her husband's draft record that marked the 1992 campaign, and her disdain for the press is palpable, persistent and hard-won.

But to say that she is often her own worst enemy is to understate the case.

In February, CBS News anchor Scott Pelley asked Clinton, "Have you always told the truth?"

"I've always tried to," she replied. "Always. Always."

When Pelley noted that Jimmy Carter had famously promised, "I'll never lie to you," Clinton plunged ahead.

"Well, but you know," she said, "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."

All too often over the years, Clinton's best has turned out not to be good enough.

It is one thing for Gov. Chris Christie to put Clinton on mock trial at the Republican National Convention in Cleveland. Or for delegates at Quicken Loans Arena to take up a chant of "Lock her up!" in reply. It is quite another for a former attorney general of the United States to say-as Michael Mukasey did at the GOP convention-that Clinton would become "the first president in history to take the constitutional oath of office after already having violated it," by her handling of the email server and her shifting, inconsistent and ultimately inaccurate explanations of why she did so.

***

*Hillary Clinton is, by temperament and training, *a lawyer, and a perennially cautious one at that. She is a literal, linear thinker. That might explain her famous lawyerly assertion to Matt Lauer that the allegations that her husband had an affair with a former White House intern-and then lied about it-were not "going to be proven true." (After all, she had no inkling of the blue dress and DNA evidence that would prove her so devastatingly wrong.)

But a fuller explanation for the personality trait in Clinton that makes her shrink from full disclosure would seem to have some deeper source, whether in a reluctance to confess failure or error to a father who was perpetually demanding and judgmental, or in 40 years of living with a husband who often had more than his share of family secrets to keep. As first lady, she talked plaintively of wanting to protect a zone of privacy for herself and her family, an understandable desire but one difficult to achieve in an age of superheated media inquiry.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell was indulging in some oratorical hyperbole in Cleveland when he said of Clinton: "She lied about her emails. She lied about her server. She lied about Benghazi. She lied about sniper fire. She even lied about why her parents named her Hillary."

But he also had a point.

I was on an airport tarmac with Clinton and Sir Edmund Hillary in Katmandu, Nepal, in 1995 when she explained that her mother had read about the famous mountaineer in an article, and named her in his honor. The story seemed a bit strange at the time, if only because Clinton was born in 1947 and Hillary didn't climb Mount Everest until 1953. It wasn't until Clinton's 2006 Senate reelection campaign that her aides acknowledged that the naming tale was a bit of family fabulism, conjured up after the fact to inspire by Clinton's mother to inspire her to achievement.

In her 2008 presidential campaign, Clinton took to claiming that in 1996, when she was first lady, she and her entourage had landed in Bosnia "under sniper fire" and been forced to run for safety "with our heads down." Subsequent inquiry disclosed that the airport was safe and that Clinton had bent down only to kiss a smiling 8-year-old Muslim girl who read a poem in her honor. Clinton later amended her account to say that she had vivid memories of an airborne security briefing warning about the threat of sniper fire.

But the damage-of the same sort that derailed Brian Williams' career as anchor of "NBC Nightly News"-had already been done, and it lingers.

As first lady, Clinton more than once dispatched aides to disseminate information that turned out to be incomplete, misleading or plain wrong. In her perpetual determination never to be seen as having done anything wrong, she all too often left the unmistakable impression that she had. In a trivial but telling example of her resistance to scrutiny, it was Clinton who caused an uproar in the White House press corps at the beginning of her husband's administration when she ordered that reporters be barred from a corridor outside the press secretary's office, lest they bump into the president coming from the Oval Office just steps away.

In her first memoir, /Living History/, Clinton recounted bursting into angry tears and gasping for breath when her husband first confessed the Lewinsky affair. But many people who knew the president all too well were gasping for breath-in disbelief at his denials-on the day allegations of the affair first surfaced. With the rarest exceptions-her teary eyes in New Hampshire in the 2008 campaign when asked by a voter how she carried on-Clinton's most confessional moments have a sanitized air, as if she has carefully scrubbed them for public consumption.

"When people ask me how I kept going during such a wrenching time," she wrote of the impeachment period in /Living History/, "I tell them there is nothing remarkable about getting up and going to work every day, even when there is a family crisis at home. Every one of us has had to do it at some time in our lives, and the skills required to cope are the same for a first lady or a forklift operator. I just had to do it all in the public eye."

It wouldn't take an analyst to imagine that coping under such circumstances was far harder-and took a far heavier toll -than that passage implies. Clinton's resilience-her ability to slog on in the face of the worst possible reverses-is the trait that has helped her get within reach of the biggest prize of her life. The flip side is that her capacity for a level of defensiveness and denial that sometimes seems to border on magical thinking might yet keep the ultimate goal out of her grasp.

/Todd S. Purdum is senior writer at/ Politico /and contributing editor for/ Vanity Fair, /as well as author of /An Idea Whose Time Has Come: Two Presidents, Two Parties and the Battle for the Civil Rights Act of 1964/./



'Hillary Clinton Took Me Through Hell,'


Exclusive: 'Hillary Clinton Took Me Through Hell,' Rape Victim Says

The woman at the center of the scandal over Hillary Clinton's defense of an alleged child rapist speaks out in depth for the first time.

Hillary Clinton is known as a champion of women and girls, but one woman who says she was raped as a 12-year-old in Arkansas doesn't think Hillary deserves that honor. This woman says Hillary smeared her and used dishonest tactics to successfully get her attacker off with a light sentence-even though, she claims, Clinton knew he was guilty.

The victim in the 1975 sexual abuse case that became Clinton's first criminal defense case as a 27-year-old lawyer has only spoken to the media once since her attack, a contested, short interaction with a reporter in 2008, during Clinton's last presidential campaign run. Now 52, she wants to speak out after hearing Clinton talk about her case on newly discovered audio recordings from the 1980s, unearthed by the Washington Free Beacon//and made public this week.

In a long, emotional interview with The Daily Beast, she accused Clinton of intentionally lying about her in court documents, going to extraordinary lengths to discredit evidence of the rape, and later callously acknowledging and laughing about her attackers' guilt on the recordings.

"Hillary Clinton took me through Hell," the victim said. The Daily Beast agreed to withhold her name out of concern for her privacy as a victim of sexual assault.

The victim said if she saw Clinton today, she would call her out for what she sees as the hypocrisy of Clinton's current campaign to fight for women's rights compared to her actions regarding this rape case so long ago.

"I would say [to Clinton], 'You took a case of mine in '75, you lied on me... I realize the truth now, the heart of what you've done to me. And you are supposed to be for women? You call that [being] for women, what you done to me? And I hear you on tape laughing."

The victim's allegation that Clinton smeared her following her rape is based on a May 1975 court affidavit written by Clinton on behalf of Thomas Alfred Taylor, one of the two alleged attackers, whom Clinton agreed to defend after being asked by the prosecutor. Taylor had specifically requested a female attorney.

"I have been informed that the complainant is emotionally unstable with a tendency to seek out older men and engage in fantasizing," Clinton, then named Hillary D. Rodham, wrote in the affidavit. "I have also been informed that she has in the past made false accusations about persons, claiming they had attacked her body. Also that she exhibits an unusual stubbornness and temper when she does not get her way."

Clinton also wrote that a child psychologist told her that children in early adolescence "tend to exaggerate or romanticize sexual experiences," especially when they come from "disorganized families, such as the complainant."

ADVERTISING ADVERTISING inRead invented by Teads ADVERTISING inRead invented by Teads inRead invented by Teads ADVERTISING inRead invented by Teads

The victim vigorously denied Clinton's accusations and said there has never been any explanation of what Clinton was referring to in that affidavit. She claims she never accused anyone of attacking her before her rape.

"I've never said that about anyone. I don't know why she said that. I have never made false allegations. I know she was lying," she said. "I definitely didn't see older men. I don't know why Hillary put that in there and it makes me plumb mad."

The victim's second main grievance with Clinton stems from the newly revealed audio recordings, which were taped in a series of interviews of Clinton with Arkansas reporter Roy Reed, who was researching an article on the Clintons that was ultimately never published. The Free Beacon//found the tapes archived at the University of Arkansas in Fayetteville, amidst thousands of pieces of Clinton history that are being periodically released for public consumption.

On the tapes, Clinton, who speaks in a Southern drawl, appears to acknowledge that she was aware of her client's guilt, brags about successfully getting the only piece of physical evidence thrown out of court, and laughs about it all whimsically.

"He took a lie detector test. I had him take a polygraph, which he passed, which forever destroyed my faith in polygraphs," Clinton says on the recording, failing to hold back some chuckles.

She then describes how she discovered that investigators had cut out and lost a section of the suspect's underwear that they said contained the victim's blood. Clinton brought the remaining underwear segment to a Nobel Prize-winning blood expert in Brooklyn, NY, she explained, in order to convince him to lend his heavyweight reputation and influence to her defense case.

"And so the, sort of the story through the grapevine was, if you get him interested in the case, then you know you had the foremost expert in the world willing to testify so that it came out the way you wanted it to come out," Clinton said.

Clinton told the judge that the famous expert was willing to testify. Instead of the original charge of first-degree rape, the prosecutors let Taylor plead to a lesser charge: unlawful fondling of a child. According to the Free Beacon//, Taylor was sentenced to one year behind bars, with two months reduced for time served.**The second attacker was never charged.

"Oh, he plea bargained. Got him off with time served in the county jail, he'd been in the county jail about two months," Clinton said on the recording, apparently not remembering the sentence accurately.

For the victim, the tapes prove that while Clinton was arguing in the affidavit that the victim could have some culpability in her own attack, she actually believed that her client was guilty. Taylor's light sentence was a miscarriage of justice, the victim said.

"It's proven fact, with all the tapes [now revealed], she lied like a dog on me. I think she was trying to do whatever she could do to make herself look good at the time.... She wanted it to look good, she didn't care if those guys did it or not," she said. "Them two guys should have got a lot longer time. I do not think justice was served at all."

The office of Hillary Clinton did not respond to a request for comment. In a 2008 article in Newsday//written by Glenn Thrush, now at Politico, Clinton spokesperson Howard Wolfson defended her conduct in the case.

"As she wrote in her book, 'Living History,' Senator Clinton was appointed by the Circuit Court of Washington County, Arkansas to represent Mr. Taylor in this matter," he said. "As an attorney and an officer of the court, she had an ethical and legal obligation to defend him to the fullest extent of the law. To act otherwise would have constituted a breach of her professional responsibilities."

In that book, Clinton gave vague details about her actions in the case and said that shortly thereafter, she helped set up Arkansas's first rape hotline.

According to Thrush's article, the victim didn't fault Clinton for her defense of the attacker during their 2008 interview, which took place in the prison where the victim was serving time for drug-related offenses, in the presence of the warden. "I'm sure Hillary was just doing her job," he quoted the victim as saying. After all, everyone has a right to be defended in court. And 1975 was a lifetime ago.

But the victim now claims she was misquoted. She didn't even know Clinton was the lawyer who defended her attacker until Thrush showed her Clinton's book and she had no other information about what had happened behind closed doors in that courtroom when Thrush approached her, she said. Thrush declined to comment.

"If I had known that day what I know now I would have told him exactly what I'm telling y'all today," she said.

After she was released from prison in 2008, the victim read more about Clinton's involvement in her case, but she never planned to confront Clinton about it.

"I started seeing where I had really been stomped in the ground. I didn't really know what to do about it. I just figured life would have to go on and I would have to live with it," she said.

But after hearing the newly revealed tapes of Clinton boasting about the case, the victim said she couldn't hold her tongue any longer and wanted to tell her side of the story to the public.

"When I heard that tape I was pretty upset, I went back to the room and was talking to my two cousins and I cried a little bit. I ain't gonna lie, some of this has got me pretty down," she said. "But I thought to myself, 'I'm going to stand up to her. I'm going to stand up for what I've got to stand up for, you know?"

In her interview with The Daily Beast, she recounted the details of her attack in 1975 at age 12 and the consequences it had for both her childhood and adult life. A virgin before the assault, she spent five days afterwards in a coma, months recovering from the beating that accompanied the rape, and over 10 years in therapy. The doctors told her she would probably never be able to have children.

The victim was put through several forensic procedures, including a lie detector test. At first, she failed the lie detector test; she said that was because she didn't understand one of the specific sex-related questions. Once that question was explained to her, she passed, she said. The victim positively identified her two attackers through one-way glass and they were arrested. But that wasn't the end of her ordeal.

She described being afraid of men for years and dealing with anger issues well into her adulthood. At one point, she turned to drugs, a path that ultimately led her to prison. Now 52, she has never married or had children. She said she has been sober for several years and has achieved a level of stability, although she remains unemployed and living on disability assistance.

"I'm living life in Arkansas, I go to Church sometimes, and I'm doing good... Being on disability I don't get much income but I'm happy where I'm at. I'm doing really well," she said. "[Clinton] owes me a big apology, [but] I'll probably never get anything from her."

The victim doesn't remember ever meeting Clinton in 1975; she says her memories from that ordeal are spotty. But she does recall feeling exasperated by the law enforcement and legal proceedings to the point where she told her mother she just wanted it to be over so she could try to resume her childhood.

"I had been through so much stuff I finally told them to do whatever," she remembered. "They had scared me so bad that I was tired of being put through it all. I finally said I was done... I thought they had both gotten long-term sentences, I didn't realize they got off with hardly nothing."

Whether or not Clinton was just doing her duty as a defense lawyer, for the victim, Clinton's behavior speaks to her character, her ambition, and her suitability to be a role model for women or president of the United States.

"I think she wants to be a role model being who she is, to look good, but I don't think she's a role model at all... If she had have been, she would have helped me at the time, being a 12-year-old girl who was raped by two guys," she said. "She did that to look good and she told lies on that. How many other lies has she told to get where she's at today? If she becomes president, is she gonna be telling the world the truth? No. She's going to be telling lies out there, what the world wants to hear."

The victim is concerned that speaking out will make her a target for attacks, but she no longer feels she is able to stay silent.

"I'm a little scared of her... When this all comes about, I'm a little worried she might try to hurt me, I hope not," she said. "They can lie all they want, say all they want, I know what's true."



Dr. Drew: Hillary Clinton has BRAIN DAMAGE...
      

When Hillary's health became an issue and trending topic in social media, the liberals running the mainstream media dismissed it as nothing but a hoax and conspiracy theory. To them, it was some right-wing plot to devalue her as a candidate...and then the experts chimed in with things called facts and evidence. The media then did what the media does best when faced with the facts --- they /buried the story/.

However, more and more notable professionals are coming out and denouncing the claims that Clinton's health is nothing to worry about. One in particular is Dr. Drew Pinsky, a board-certified physician and addiction medicine specialist that co-hosts a podcast with Adam Carolla and also has a morning radio show in Los Angeles, on top of being an actual doctor every day.

Pinsky went on the "Midday Live" KABC radio show to discuss Hillary's failing mental health, citing that she's getting "1950s standards of care" and had telltale signs of brain damage, from head trauma and pre-existing conditions.

As it turned out, right after the show aired and the article was made available on KABC's website, it was taken down because /of course it was/.

This is what you get when you go to the page titled /Dr. Drew Speaks Out On Hillary's Health /. It's a notification saying "Whoops! Page Not Found."

404

...Right.

The mainstream media will stop at nothing to bury this story, but we've secured another recording of Dr. Drew's analysis of Hillary's health, and it is an absolute revelation and proof that she is not only unfit to lead, but unfit to run for /any/ office.

Donald Trump has released his up to date medical records. It's about damn time Hillary has done the same, to have experts weigh in on what diseases and ailments are making her act so erratically and irrationally.



2009 Emails Reveal Intersection of Clinton Family Interests
      

Photo //

Hillary Clinton boarded a charter plane in Des Moines on Wednesday. More emails have emerged that critics say show lapses in judgment by the candidate. Credit Sam Hodgson for The New York Times

WASHINGTON - Douglas J. Band, a longtime aide to Bill Clinton after he left the White House, sent an email to two of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton 's top aides with a "Very imp" message: The State Department needed to make one of its senior officials available for a conversation with a billionaire businessman - who also was a major donor to the Clinton Foundation.

The billionaire and donor, Gilbert Chagoury, wanted to speak to the State Department's top official on Lebanon, Mr. Band wrote in the April 2009 email to the two aides, Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills. Mr. Chagoury is a Nigerian-based hotel and real estate developer whose family is from Lebanon.

"As you know, he's key guy there and to us and is loved in Lebanon," Mr. Band wrote.

Ms. Abedin emailed back that the person Mr. Chagoury should speak with was Jeffrey Feltman, who had recently left his post as the United States ambassador to Lebanon. "I'm sure he knows him,'' Ms. Abedin said in her email to Mr. Band. "I'll talk to Jeff.''

The exchange of emails emerged this week as a result of a lawsuit over emails sent on the Clinton family's private server. They were immediately cited by conservative activists as more proof that Mrs. Clinton, while secretary of state, ignored an agreement to keep Clinton Foundation matters separate from her State Department duties .

"This is a violation of that agreement, on its face," said Tom Fitton, the president of Judicial Watch , the conservative group that sued to get the emails.

Continue reading the main story

<#story-continues-1>

But Mark Corallo, a Washington-based spokesman for Mr. Chagoury,said in a statement Wednesday that Mr. Chagoury had been seeking to contact someone in the State Department to offer his insight into the coming elections that June in 2009 in Lebanon, where he has deep ties and experience. He had not been seeking official action by the State Department.

"He was simply passing along his observations and insights about the dire political situation in Lebanon at the time," Mr. Corallo said.

Mr. Corallo said no conversations ever took place.

Mr. Chagoury, he said, "has had no personal contact with Secretary Clinton or any of her staff since 2006. He has never met or had any contact with Ambassador Feltman. He had no contact of any kind with anyone from the State Department regarding the subject matter of the emails between Mr. Band and Ms. Abedin."

Mr. Feltman, in an email exchange with The New York Times on Wednesday, confirmed that he never met with Mr. Chagoury or spoke to him.

Ms. Abedin, now serving as vice chairwoman of the Clinton campaign, did not respond to a request for comment made through a campaign spokesman.

Mr. Band, who declined on Wednesday to comment, had the credentials to get the State Department's attention.

After serving on Mr. Clinton's White House staff, Mr. Band became his chief adviser after he left office, helping him create the Clinton Global Initiative, a part of the Clinton Foundation and its global charitable efforts, which has gathered billions of dollars in donations and commitments from a sprawling collection of affluent donors and foundations.

National Polling Average

Aug 10, 2016, 10:59 AM ET

Hillary Clinton

46%

Donald J. Trump

39%

See more detail and swing state polling »

Mr. Chagoury was someone Mr. Band had reason to want to help out. A longtime donor, Mr. Chagoury contributed from $1 million to $5 million to the Clinton Foundation, and in 1996, donated $460,000 to a voter registration effort benefiting Democrats.

Continue reading the main story

<#story-continues-2>

Mr. Chagoury, according to Mr. Corallo, said that his contributions to the Clinton Foundation were based on the "good philanthropic work around the world - especially in Africa."

A follow-up email Mr. Band sent to the State Department in May 2009 suggests that the conversation he was trying to set up still had not taken place, even given Mr. Chagoury's clout. "You connect with Joseph re: Chagoury," Mr. Band, most likely referring to an aide to the businessman, wrote Ms. Abedin, who responded: "Left him a message. He hasn't called yet."

The controversy over the emails released this week comes in part because of earlier emails that have hinted that Mr. Clinton's staff or the Clinton Foundation had contacted the State Department while Mrs. Clinton was in charge, even if just to get approval for paid speeches that Mr. Clinton was about to give.

A cache of emails that the State Department released to the activist group Citizens United, for example, showed an invitation to Mr. Clinton to speak at a United States-China energy summit meeting in 2012 organized by Luca International Group, which was later fined $68 million by the Securities and Exchange Commission for defrauding investors .

Another email sought approval for Mr. Clinton to accept a $650,000 fee for speaking at a Forbes Emerging Markets conference in Brazzaville, Congo, in 2012. "This did not clear our internal vet, but WJC wants to know what state thinks of it if he took it 100% for the foundation," Amitabh Desai, the foundation's director of foreign policy, wrote, referring to the former president by his initials.

Mr. Fitton said that even if Mr. Chagoury was not seeking a favor from the State Department, the effort by Mr. Band to help a donor to the Clinton Foundation get high-level access to the United States government was improper.

"In the fund-raising community, you call this donor maintenance," Mr. Fitton said. "Whether or not they were able to get the final call, the explanation still does not pass a smell test given financial ties between Chagoury and the Clinton Foundation. Politicians who receive contributions from wealthy patrons and then do something on their behalf always say it is a just a matter of helping out a friend."

Mr. Fitton also pointed out that Mr. Chagoury was hardly the kind of businessman whom the Clinton family should be trying to assist.

Continue reading the main story

<#story-continues-3>

Mr. Chagoury was an associate of Sani Abacha , a powerful Nigerian general in the 1990s who was believed to havestolen large amounts of public funds .

In 2000, Mr. Chagoury was convicted of money laundering in Switzerland in connection with the Abacha family, court records show.The PBS program "Frontline" reported in 2010 that his record was expunged after he paid a fine.

Josh Schwerin, a spokesman for Mrs. Clinton's campaign, said Mr. Fitton was trying to create a conspiracy where none existed.

"The right-wing organization behind this lawsuit has been attacking the Clintons since the 1990s, and no matter how this group tries to mischaracterize these documents, the fact remains that Hillary Clinton never took action as secretary of state because of donations to the Clinton Foundation," he said.

Eric Lipton reported from Washington, and Steve Eder from New York. Jo Becker and Steven Lee Myers contributed reporting from New York.

/Follow The New York Times's politics and Washington coverage onFacebook andTwitter , and sign up for theFirst Draft politics newsletter ./

A version of this article appears in print on August 11, 2016, on page A12 of the New York edition with the headline: Explanation Given for Clinton Charity Donor's Seeking Out State Dept. Order Reprints | Today's Paper |Subscribe



Comey: Hillary Still Possibly Under FBI Investigation into Clinton Foundation


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

by Joel B. Pollak 7 Jul 20162,694

7 Jul, 2016 7 Jul, 2016

FBI director James Comey would not comment Thursday when asked directly by Congress, under oath, whether his department is still investigating Hillary Clinton in connection with possible corruption related to the Clinton Foundation.

Comey had announced Tuesday that he would not recommend prosecuting Hillary Clinton for mishandling classified information, despite the fact that her behavior was "extremely careless."
However, Comey did not say anything about investigation into the Clinton Foundation, which now still appears to be ongoing.

Video: Ryan Lochte, Jimmy Feigen indicted for false reporting of a crime

That investigation involves suspicions that the former Secretary of State abused her role to solicit donations for her family's private charity - including donations from some foreign governments.

Rep. Jason Chaffetz, chair of the House Committee on Government Oversight and Reform, asked: "Did you look at the Clinton Foundation?"

Comey responded: "I'm not going to comment on the existence or non-existince of any other investigations."

He also said he would not answer whether the Clinton Foundation was "tied into" the investigation of Clinton's email server.

It was nearly five hours into the hearing before Comey was asked about the bureau's investigation of the Clinton Foundation, which reportedly concerns how the foundation's interests, and the interests of its contributors, intersected with decisions made by Clinton during her 2009 to 2013 tenure as secretary of state.

In January, Fox News reported : "The FBI investigation into Hillary Clinton's use of private email as secretary of state has expanded to look at whether the possible "intersection" of Clinton Foundation work and State Department business may have violated public corruption laws, three intelligence sources not authorized to speak on the record told Fox News."

The charges relate to patterns of questionable behavior described by Breitbart editor Peter Schweizer in his bestselling book, /Clinton Cash/ .

For example, the Clinton Foundation hid a donation from the head of a Russian-owned uranium company that later acquired American uranium. The deal, which the State Department had helped approve, allows the Russian government effectively to control 20% of U.S. uranium. In addition, former President Bill Clinton earned large sums for giving speeches to "numerous companies and individuals with interests pending before the State Department." Examples of similar behavior abound .

The Clinton Foundation was established by President Bill Clinton in 2009 after he left the White House and as his wife was taking over Foggy Bottom.

In February, the /Washington Post/ reported that State Department investigators from the Office of the Inspector General subpoenaed records from the foundation in the fall of 2015 that were related to Clinton Foundation projects that would have required federal approvals to to proceed.

During her tenure as secretary, the IG's office was vacant.

Hillary Clinton resigned from the foundation's board of directors in 2013, but her daughter Chelsea and her husband remain on the board, as does Cheryl Mills, who has acted as an aide and attorney for the former first lady.

There is reason to believe Hillary Clinton set up her private email server in order to hide such transactions from Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests.

Whether, and when, an investigation into the Clinton Foundation will be concluded is unknown.

/Neil W. McCable contributed to this report./

/Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. His new book, /See No Evil: 19 Hard Truths the Left Can't Handle /, will be published by Regnery on July 25 and is available for pre-order through Amazon. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak ./



Clinton Foundation Donations Linked to State Dept. Favors


Coordination between Clinton Foundation and State Dept. revealed

Wayne Madsen | Infowars.com - August 18, 2016 495 Comments

Chart: Clinton Foundation Donations Linked to State Dept. Favors

// 0 // // // 67 // // <#> *The recent release of additional private emails from former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's private email servers based at her New York home provide a clearer picture of the "pay-to-play" connections between Clinton's State Department, her and her husband's and daughter's Clinton Foundation and Clinton Global Initiative, and the private investment consulting and investment firm of Teneo Holdings, Inc. in Manhattan.* *Donor* *Amount given to Clinton Foundation/Global Initiative (CGI) * *Received in return* Prince of Abu Dhabi and Foreign Minister of the United Arab Emirates Shaikh Abdullah bin Zayed al Nahayan and the Al Nahayan family of Abu Dhabi

<$5,000,000 Access to HRC at State Dept. and a $500,000 environmental speech by Bill Clinton given at the Emirates Palace Hotel in Abu Dhabi while HRC was meeting in Washington with Shaikh Abdullah. Algeria

$500,000 State clearance for U.S. arms sales to Algeria. Deal included biological and chemical agents. Australia, Commonwealth of

$75,000,000 Strong State Dept. for the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), which stands to be a boon for Australian multinational firms. Bahrain, Kingdom of

$250,000 Muted criticism by State of Bahrain's abysmal human rights practices. Boeing Corp.

$900,000 State Dept. clearance for $29 billion arms U.S. arms sale to Saudi Arabia, including Boeing's F-15 fighter. Brunei Darussalam, Sultanate of

$5,000,000 State Dept. clearance for U.S. weapons sales to Brunei. Cameroon, Republic of

<$100,000 Influence buying by the Cameroon government with the Clinton State Department. Canada

$500,000 State Dept. support for Canada's Keystone XL pipeline, eventually vetoed by Barack Obama. Chagoury Group <$5,000,000 in cash and a $1,000,000,000 pledge HRC delayed designating Nigeria's Boko Haram as a foreign terrorist organization because of Chagoury Group's investments and operations in Nigeria. Chagoury Group received the "Sustainable Development Award" from the CGI. Chagooury helped the family of Nigerian dictator Sani Abacha hide his wealth stolen from Nigeria's oil revenues. Confederation of Indian Industry

<$1,000,000 Access for Indian businesses to U.S. government officials. Corning, Inc.

$150,000 Clinton arranged for international access for the New York-based firm. Dahdaleh, Victor

<$5,000,000 Lobbyist for Bahrain state-owned aluminum company who sought a contract between the Bahraini firm and the U.S.-owned Alcoa World Alumina. Dominican Republic

<$25,000,000 Clinton Foundation board member Rolando Gonzalez's company InterEnergy received contracts from Dominican government for wind energy projects. The firm received Domican President's Gold Citizen Award in 2010. Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA)

<$100,000 State pressure on Justice Dept. to curtail criminal investigation of FIFA. Fernwood Foundation (Canadian foundation run by Canadian uranium mining mogul Ian Telfer

$2,600,000 Telfer's UrAsia and Uranium One Corporations, co-owned with Canadian mining magnate and "Friend of Bill" Frank Giustra receved favorable uranium mining deals with Kazakhstan and Russia's ROSATOM and Kazakhstan's KAZATOMPROM. Flanders, Government of

€780,000 ($872,000) High-level access to U.S. government officials by Flemish government officials and businesses. GEMS Education, Dubai

$5,600,000 Bill Clinton made "honorary chairman" of the Dubai company. Germany, Federal Republic of

$250,000 High-level access to U.S. government officials by German officials and businessmen. Giustra, Frank (Canadian mining magnate) (Clinton Giustra Enterprise Partnership/Radcliffe Foundation)

$31,300,000 State soft-peddled threat of the Islamic State because Lafarge had negotiated with the terrorists to maintain its operations in ISIL-controlled territory in Syria. arranged favorable deals with Kazakhstan and its president, Nursultan Nazarbayev. Hindustan Construction Corp. (India)

<$500,000 Access for corporate officials to U.S. government officials. Ireland, Republic of

<$158,300,000 Influence-buying by Irish government with the Clintons. Italy, Republic of

$100,000 Influence buying by the Italian government with the Clinton State Department. Jamaica $100,000 Digicel Group, owned by Irish billionaire and Friend of Bill, Denis O'Brien, received USAID grant for a telecommunications project in Jamaica. Digicel (Jamaica) paid Bill Clinton $225,000 for a speech in Kingston. That was in addition to the $100,000 kicked in by Jamaica to the Clinton Foundation. Kuwait, Emirate of

$10,000,000 State Dept. clearance for U.S. weapons sales to Kuwait. Lafarge Group <$100,000 State soft-peddled threat of Islamic State (ISIL) in Syria because Lafarge had an agreement with ISIL not to interfere in Lafarge activities in ISIL-controlled territory in Syria. HRC was a director of Lafarge between 1990 and 1992, at a time when the firm was selling strategic military materials to Saddam Hussein's Iraq. Lesotho, Kingdom of

<$100,000 Kickback from $11.2 million Irish grant to Clinton Foundation for HIV/AIDS abatement in Lesotho. Mittal, Lakshmi, owner of ArcelorMittal, a major steel company, and board member of Goldman Sachs

<$5,000,000 Favorable opportunities in Kazakhstan, where Mittal is a member of the Foreign Investment Council of Kazakhstan. Dovetails with Bill Clinton's uranium deals with Giustra and Nazarbayev. Sheikh Mohammed H. Al Amoudi (Ethiopian-Saudi billionaire)^1

<$10,000,000 Influence-buying within the Clinton State Dept. Monsanto

<$5,000,000 State advocated for Monsanto "Frankenfood" and "Frankenseeds" worldwide. Netherlands, Kingdom of the (Netherlands National Lottery)

$10,000,000 State helped open up investment opportunities for Dutch firms in Africa. New Zealand, Government of

$1,200,000 Influence-buying within the Clinton State Dept. Norway, Kingdom of

$89,600,000 Norwegian government split up donations to make them look smaller than they actually were. Norwegian firms received investment opportunities in the developing world, courtesy of the U.S. Millennium Goals Corporation. Oman, Sultanate of

<$5,000,000 State clearance for U.S. weapons sales to Oman. Papua New Guinea, Government of

<$100,000 Influence-buying within the Clinton State Dept. Qatar, Emirate of

<$5,000,000 State Dept. approval for U.S. arms sales to Qatar. State pressure on Justice Dept. to curtail investigation of bribery payments regarding FIFA and 2022 World Cup host, Qatar. Ras al Khaimah, Emirate of

$50,000 Influence-buying within the Clinton State Dept. Rwanda, Republic of

$200,000 Influence-buying with HRC's State Department. Saudi Arabia, Kingdom of

$25,000,000 State Dept. approval for U.S. arms sales to Saudi Arabia Suzlon Energy, Ltd. (Amsterdam)

<$5,000,000 State and CGI promoted wind turbine solutions in developing countries. Suzlon, owned by an Indian national, is a leading supplier of wind turbines. Swaziland, Kingdom of

<$100,000 Access to U.S. government officials for Swazi government/private business leaders. Sweden, Kingdom of

$7,200,000 Access to U.S. government officials for Swedish government/private business leaders. Switzerland, Confederation of

$325,000 Access to U.S. government officials for Swiss government/private business leaders. Tenerife Island, Government of

$50,000 High-level access to U.S. government officials by Flemish government officials and businesses. Taiwan

$10,000,000 State Dept. approval for U.S. weapons sales to Taiwan. United Arab Emirates

<$5,000,000 State Dept. approval for U.S. weapons sales to the UAE. United Kingdom

£50,000,000 ($78,000,000) Access for key UK officials and UK businesses to key U.S.government policymakers. Victor Pinchuk Foundation (Ukraine)

$8,600,000 Buy influence with Clinton at State to pressure Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych to free jailed former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko. Walmart, Inc.

<$5,000,000 HRC pressured Indian government to open up India to Walmart, an action opposed by India's small retailers.

In addition to these entities, there are separate Clinton family foundations that maintain their own revenue streams: the Clinton Health Access Initiative (CHAI), the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton (BHCC) Foundation, the Clinton Foundation Hong Kong, William J. Clinton Foundation Charitable Trust (Kenya), William J. Clinton Foundation Charitable Trust (UK), and the Clinton Foundation /Insalingsstiftelse/ (Sweden). All these entities maintain separate operations for the Clintons' pay-to-play global racketeering operations.

Wayne Madsen is an investigative journalist who consistently exposes cover-ups from deep within government. Want to be the first to learn the latest scandal? Click on the banner above and subscribe today!

The Clinton operations are massive in relation to the reported lobbying dealings that Donald Trump's campaign manager, Paul Manafort, maintained with the former Yanukovych government of Ukraine. The sudden appearance of "secret ledgers" containing Manafort's name and alleged cash payments to him by the puppet Ukrainian government of George Soros bear all the signs of another Soros/Cass Sunstein disinformation operation.

/*Wayne Madsen* is an investigative journalist who consistently exposes cover-ups from deep within the government.



Clinton's State Dept. calendar missing scores of entries


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

Published June 24, 2016 Associated Press

An Associated Press review of the official calendar Hillary Clinton kept as secretary of state identified at least 75 meetings with longtime political donors, loyalists, Clinton Foundation contributors and corporate and other outside interests that were not recorded or were listed without the names of those she met.

The missing entries raise new questions about how Clinton and her inner circle handled government records documenting her State Department tenure -- in this case, why the official chronology of her four-year term does not closely mirror other more detailed records of her daily meetings.

At a time when Clinton's private email system is under scrutiny by an FBI criminal investigation, the calendar omissions reinforce concerns that she sought to eliminate the "risk of the personal being accessible" -- as she wrote in an email exchange that she failed to turn over to the Obama administration but was subsequently uncovered in a top aide's inbox.

The AP found the calendar omissions by comparing the 1,500-page historical record of Clinton's daily activities as secretary of state with separate planning schedules often supplied to Clinton by aides in advance of each day's events. The AP obtained the planning schedules as part of its federal lawsuit against the State Department. At least 114 outsiders who met with Clinton were not listed in her calendar, the AP's review found.

No known federal laws were violated and some omissions could be blamed on Clinton's highly fluid schedule, which sometimes forced cancellations at the last minute. But only seven meetings found in Clinton's planning schedules were replaced by substitute events listed on her calendar. More than 60 other events listed in Clinton's planners were omitted entirely in her calendar, tersely noted or described only as "private meetings" -- all without naming those who met with her.

Clinton campaign spokesman Nick Merrill said Thursday night that the multiple discrepancies between her State Department calendar and her planning schedules "simply reflect a more detailed version in one version as compared to another, all maintained by her staff."

2016 Election Headquarters



The latest headlines on the 2016 elections from the biggest name in politics. See Latest Coverage →



Merrill said that Clinton "has always made an effort to be transparent since entering public life, whether it be the release of over 30 years of tax returns, years of financial disclosure forms, or asking that 55,000 pages of work emails from her time as secretary of state be turned over to the public.

Hillary Clinton's Email Controversy | Graphiq

Clinton's State Department calendar omitted the identities of a dozen top Wall Street and business leaders who met with her during a private breakfast at the New York Stock Exchange in September 2009, minutes before she appeared in public at the exchange to ring the market's ceremonial opening bell.

State Department planning schedules from the same day listed the names of all Clinton's breakfast guests -- most of whose firms had lobbied the government and donated to her family's global charity, the Clinton Foundation. The event was closed to the press and merited only a brief mention in her calendar, which omitted all the names -- among them Blackstone Group Chairman Steven Schwarzman, PepsiCo CEO Indra Nooyi and then-New York Bank of Mellon CEO Robert Kelly.

The missing or heavily edited entries in Clinton's calendar also omitted private dinners with political donors, policy sessions with groups of corporate leaders and "drop-bys" with old Clinton campaign hands. Among those whose names were omitted from her calendar were longtime adviser Sidney Blumenthal, lobbyist and former Clinton White House chief of staff Thomas "Mack" McLarty and Clinton campaign bundler Haim Saban.

The AP first sought Clinton's calendar and schedules from the State Department in August 2013, but the agency would not acknowledge even that it had the material. After nearly two years of delay, the AP sued the State Department in March 2015. The department agreed in a court filing last August to turn over Clinton's calendar, and provided the documents in November. After noticing discrepancies between Clinton's calendar and some schedules, the AP pressed in court for all of Clinton's planning material. The U.S. has released about one-third of those planners to the AP, so far.

The State Department censored both sets of documents for national security and other reasons, but those changes were made after the documents were turned over to the State Department at the end of Clinton's tenure.

The documents obtained by the AP do not show who logged entries in Clinton's calendar or who edited material. Clinton's emails and other records show that she and two close aides, deputy chief of staff Huma Abedin and scheduling assistant Lona J. Valmoro, held weekly meetings and emailed almost every day about Clinton's plans. According to the recent inspector general's audit and a court declaration made last December by the State Department's acting executive secretary, Clinton's aides had access to her calendar through a government Microsoft Outlook account. Both Abedin and Valmoro were political appointees at the State Department and are now aides in her presidential campaign.

Unlike Clinton's planning schedules, which were sent to Clinton each morning, her calendar was edited after each event, AP's review showed. Some calendar entries were accompanied by Valmoro emails -- indicating she may have added those entries. Every meeting entry also included both the planned time of the event and the actual time -- showing that Clinton's calendar was being used to document each meeting after it ended.

//

/ JWD2344commonsense2uElviskempBrewMagicJRBeeZigaroodh1234Maddog1632DipshipTheBipolarWookiewithaPhD

Lynx2016 // Jun 26, 2016

"Pressure Crooker" Hillary, LOL.

Actually, not funny.

jerseyrod // Jun 25, 2016

Those were the dates her dementia kicked in. To her, those days just didn't exist.

1Lynx2016

SwimTurtle // Jun 25, 2016

The missing entries have all been recovered. They must have just been lunch appointments as they were all labeled "Huma - Taco eating".

1Lynx2016

piyiyi // Jun 25, 2016

*A better headline would have been, "Clinton's Brain Missing Scores of Cells".*

1Lynx2016

blackbear2 // Jun 25, 2016

Private meetings while on-the-job as a public official? How odd; just what may have been the subject matter of these special contacts? Perhaps Hillary's Wall Street speeches can shed some light. Perhaps, too, foreign archives would enlighten. Some day most of this will be known. Based on her character I am going to guess that Hillary was naughty, bad and maybe even criminal.

3piyiyiGorrjaer

mccoy // Jun 25, 2016

Hill obviously has A LOT to hide. Not to mention, the enemies of America have ALREADY bought and paid for her.

3Gorhanghillaryrjaer

OldAFVet // Jun 25, 2016

If Nixon was this bad he would have died in prison!

3piyiyihanghillaryrjaer

ts400 // Jun 25, 2016

What? The AP actually engaged in genuine investigative journalism of Hillary Clinton? Somebody sure drew the short stick in the office that day.

3SulleyBearhanghillaryrjaer

mamandrell // Jun 25, 2016

We are to expect something different from a criminal?

3piyiyiGorrjaer

frunk // Jun 25, 2016

slick willie and the butcher of benghazi are SLIMY.

4piyiyiGorhanghillaryrjaer

lynnthinks // Jun 25, 2016

Sometimes when I put an activity in my Iphone calender, I just put in the initials of the club I'm going to. it's a reminder. And the State Dept kept a full record. And she met with some stock market people before opening the Exchange? A dozen people.? And she didn't stop and get the names ahead of time.

You all are really scraoing the barrel.

2hanghillaryrjaer

MingtheMerciless // Jun 25, 2016

will she wear the cuffs in front or in back

5piyiyiGorhanghillaryrjaer

jakerr // Jun 25, 2016

She'll need two sets if worn in back

Jiggywest // Jun 25, 2016

/"No known federal laws were violated and some omissions could be blamed on Clinton's highly fluid schedule...."/

So you're pretty much looking at the average record keeping of any government official...

big deal.

hanghillary // Jun 25, 2016

@Jiggywest And you think this kind of organization is presidential...

1jerseyrod

goatherderson // Jun 25, 2016

The most experienced, incompetent ,untrustworthy, person the Democrats could find

8RicksxfilejerseyrodGorhanghillary

MoreGovernmentEqualsLessFreedom // Jun 25, 2016

"Don't worry, Hillary.... I got your back!" -- Obama

4hanghillaryrjaerMingtheMercilessObamaJurkoff

ObamaJurkoff // Jun 25, 2016

Hillary makes Snowden look like a choir boy.

7Gorhanghillaryrjaerfrunk

ObamaJurkoff // Jun 25, 2016

To repeat Hillary's own words back to her, "what did Hillary know and when did she know it?"

7RicksxfileGorhanghillaryrjaer

MoreGovernmentEqualsLessFreedom // Jun 25, 2016

I wonder if Hillary becomes president if she'll store the nuclear launch codes on her Blackberry "for convenience..."

8RicksxfilejerseyrodpiyiyiGor

MoreGovernmentEqualsLessFreedom // Jun 25, 2016

WHAT DIFFERENCE, AT THIS POINT, DOES IT MAKE (how I put our nation's security at risk)???" -- Hillaryous

7piyiyiGorrjaerfrunk

FMB // Jun 25, 2016

If I read the law correctly, this is another incident of her not turning in all of her government related documents (not just her mails). This would be another charge of failure to comply with the records act and another charge of lying under oath that she turned in everything.

If I had done what Clinton has done while Secretary of State, I'd would have been indicted, tried, and convicted a very long time ago.

I know. I spent 21 years in the Marine Corps and I've supported government contracts as a corporate employee and an independent contractor since 1989. I've held a security clearance from secret to top secret with SIAC/SAP access since 1968.

While I was a platoon commander in Vietnam, it was a court martial offense to lose what was called a shackle sheet in combat. A shackle sheet was the code (on paper) for programming the PRC-88 encrypted radio. Think about it. How easy is it to lose a piece of paper in combat? Not only that, but how easy is it to lose it during the monsoon season where it rained continuously for weeks.

I worked in an Embassy in Latin America where during the first few days I was there I left an FOUS (For Official Use Only) unclassified (in the military but in the State Department it was considered classified Confidential) on my desk which was in a windowless room protected by two doors. The outer door was a bank vault type door with a combination lock that was 5-6 inches thick and the inner door was a heavy metal door with a cypher lock. But the Marine Security Guard for the Embassy has access to all offices and during their nightly inspection discovered my unclassified but classified document on my desk and they reported me to the Ambassador as having a security violation.

So Marines reported a Marine (which was the right thing to do) to the Ambassador who was a former Marine who served in the Korean War.

Did I get a break for such a trivial violate of which I was unaware? Well yes, sort of. The Ambassador called me into his office and he had a piece of paper in his hand. He said this is my order kicking you out of the country which will ruin your career. But after reviewing the facts, I see that the FOUO document was in a totally secure space and that you were the last to leave before the Marine Security Guard discovered the document. That means no one had access to it. For that reason, I going to put this order in my file but if you ever have another violation, you will be out of this country within hours. Am I clear?

Well I served two years supporting counter-insurgency operations in Latin America and was reassigned to United States Special Operations Command at MacDill AFB, Florida.

My point is that as a LtCol in the Marine Corps, I was threatened with being kicked out of country and destroying my career for a single FOUO document that was at the time considered unclassified but sensitive by every service and agency in the government except the State Department that considered it Confidential.

Clinton's transgressions with security are a thousand times more serious than my FOUO document. My how times have changed. Or not. The powerful still get a pass while the peons get punished. I think this is one of the things that is fueling the anti-establishment movement.

After all, Congress exempted itself from Obamacare.

People are tired of Congress and other elites exempting themselves from the laws and rules they pass that other must abide by.

Sorry for the long post, but I wanted to emphasize the hypocrisy of our political system. It has to stop.

7piyiyiGorrjaerObamaJurkoff

MoreGovernmentEqualsLessFreedom // Jun 25, 2016

@FMB Agreed. Thanks for your service.

4piyiyiGorrjaervodknockers

vodknockers // Jun 25, 2016

@FMB It WILL stop on November 8th when Trump takes over.

4piyiyiGorrjaerfrunk

frunk // Jun 25, 2016

@FMB amen.....thanks for serving!

3piyiyiGorrjaer

freethepeople // Jun 25, 2016

Smoking guns all over the place but Hillary has her people using air cleaners to scrub the smoke before it can be seen by outsiders.

5piyiyiGorrjaerfrunk

mrbigstuff // Jun 25, 2016

@freethepeople

To late for her Wikileaks has what she accidently deleted. lmao

1Gor

loxec // Jun 25, 2016

my mom in law got a fantastic green Lexus NX 200t SUV by working part time off of a home.see it here=====*J­­­­o­­­­b­­­­s­­­­B­­­­a­­­­y­­­­2­­­­4­­­­.­­­­c­­­­o­­­­m*llllllll



MoreGovernmentEqualsLessFreedom // Jun 25, 2016

@loxec Did she work for the Clinton Foundation?

2piyiyiGor

B00GAL00PH0NE2 // Jun 25, 2016

I read where Hillary made note of her reporting her tax returns. I wonder if Hillary's tax returns have ever been audited? Filing taxes and the auditing of those taxes filed are two different things. I highly doubt that she's ever been audited.

Shame on the IRS.. JAT

4piyiyirjaervodknockersmrbigstuff

ArmyBMET // Jun 25, 2016

This deserves another award, right liberals? LOL

6piyiyiGorrjaervodknockers

ReachReachport // Jun 25, 2016

So, when will Hillary be indicted ? Does anyone

think it will ever happen ?

Is there even one person who does not suspect

Obama is meddling to obstruct this investigation ?

Two peas in a pod: Obama and Hillary. Two evil

deceivers of the American People.

13piyiyirjaerfrunkvodknockers

This comment has been deleted

subjectofgov // Jun 25, 2016

Hillary is accustomed to being paid 200K+ for her speeches. So how much will all her speeches cost us if she makes President? Surely she will make sure she's "compensated" in some form or fashion.

4Gorrjaerfrunkneewah

FMB // Jun 25, 2016

@subjectofgov If you are not a Clinton supporter or insider, you will never get to hear any of the speeches for which she was bought and paid for.

2rjaervodknockers

rjaer // Jun 25, 2016

@subjectofgov Maybe she'll compensate herself by stealing hundreds of thousands of dollars' worth of Whitehouse artifacts and furnishings like she did when she was first "lady"----and then excuse it as mere "catalog errors".



10thANV // Jun 25, 2016

Magine that......



urbanlogic // Jun 25, 2016

HILLARY MUST REPORT TO PROSON NOW!!!! Avoid the delays and obstruction when its clear she will land in jail shortly...

8Gorrjaercnkivfrunk

foxkillinliberal666 // Jun 25, 2016

Calm down.

1hanghillary

steely49 // Jun 25, 2016

"some omissions could be blamed on Clinton's highly fluid schedule"

Can you say "Depends?"

7rjaerfrunkPhillip MooreMadChemist

FMB // Jun 25, 2016

@steely49 No, she has people specifically assigned to managing her calendar. They now need to be disposed under oath as to why they conveniently omitted 75 appointments. One or two, I can see. 75 not so much.

Besides, if she can't keep track of her appointments, how can she keep track of the country?

1rjaer

givemwat4 // Jun 25, 2016

HRC is either a Bimbo, does not know or realize what she is doing, or is a crook. If she is any of those things she should not ever become President.

10Gorrjaercnkivfrunk

dword26 // Jun 25, 2016

@givemwat4 Watch ethic-less Dems vote for her!

8rjaerfrunkvodknockersMoreGovernmentEqualsLessFreedom

hanghillary // Jun 25, 2016

@givemwat4 She is both. Don't forget the term garbage!!!!!

8Gorrjaerfrunkvodknockers

FoxAholic2014 // Jun 25, 2016

I'm sure Hillary will address this little omission in her next press conference......oops.

5Gorrjaervodknockersneewah

jacc // Jun 25, 2016

@FoxAholic2014 Sure. She'll address it with, "What difference does it make now!"

7GorrjaerfrunkPhillip Moore

Lorissa // Jun 25, 2016

Favorite weasel words left wing fascist reports used in their half baked unprofessional style: "Its Unclear" "Person of Interest" "Under investigation" "Its thought to have" "Un-named Sources" - If you have other pesky ones feel free to post here.

5rjaercnkivfrunkvodknockers

FMB // Jun 25, 2016

@Lorissa You left our right wing conspiracy.

2rjaerfrunk

MoreGovernmentEqualsLessFreedom // Jun 25, 2016

@Lorissa "I plead the 5th?"

3rjaerfrunkvodknockers

albertanormal // Jun 25, 2016

I placed a comment below as a reply to one "person." They made the comment that Trump has all his speeches written on a fifth grade level. As if conservatives are simpletons and knuckle draggers... My sister tried that one on me spouting out some of the catchy things she is told to say from her activist groups.... I want to repost my comment here as it got buried in the long list of comments...

The reality is, this is what all the newspapers do (have articles written on a fifth grade level). My daughter took a professional writing course and she was told that is the accepted norm for the general public. She now runs an Editors association blog... This is an industry standard.

When you use Microsoft word it has a feature that actually measures your document for readability. Telling you what level to write at for a broader influence or your target audience. I use word press for a website. It has the same feature and you are actually told to write your text at that level. Again to reach maximum exposure.

So in a general election yes indeed it's makes sense to do this.

Whoever is pointing that out about the speeches being at a low level either doesn't know this or is trying to fan up people into a general disgust towards one or another. In my opinion.

I hate being manipulated! :)

7frunkvodknockersMadChemistwick60

ybbad // Jun 25, 2016

@albertanormal How long have you hated 0bama?



albertanormal // Jun 25, 2016

@ybbad @albertanormal lol! don't even try.

1joymar

joymar // Jun 25, 2016

@ybbad @albertanormal Better not ask me , I might say !!



FMB // Jun 25, 2016

@ybbad @albertanormal Now that I know his entire history except for the records he's sealed--since the day he was born.

Actually, it's not hate, it's disbelief in anything that he says.



Why did Clinton omit meetings from State Department calendar?



Why did Clinton omit meetings from State Department calendar?


An Associated Press review reveals Hillary Clinton's official calendar doesn't include information about at least 75 meetings she had as Secretary of State.

By Max Lewontin, Staff<#> June 24, 2016

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton checks her mobile phone after her address to the Security Council at United Nations headquarters in March 2012. Mrs. Clinton's official State Department calendar omitted or scrubbed details from at least 75 meetings she had from 2009 to 2013, an Associated Press report reveals. Richard Drew/AP/File View Caption

As the United States moves toward the November presidential election, will voters be concerned about candidates' transparency?

That's a central question raised by an Associated Press review of Hillary Clinton's official State Department calendars. The AP found that at least 75 events were omitted or had identifying details scrubbed during her four-year tenure as Secretary of State from 2009 to 2013.

The omissions didn't violate any known federal laws, and some omissions could be the result of Mrs. Clinton's changing schedule, the AP reports. Previously, the wire service revealed in November that Clinton met or spoke by phone with nearly 100 corporate executives, donors to her charity --- the Clinton Foundation --- and political supporters while she was secretary of State.

Recommended:How much do you know about Hillary Rodham Clinton? Take our quiz.

But transparency around her ties to Wall Street has long been a delicate issue for the presidential candidate, one seized on frequently by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I) of Vermont during the presidential primary.

Test your knowledge How much do you know about Hillary Rodham Clinton? Take our quiz.

Photos of the Day Photos of the Day 8/24

A Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll in mid-May found that Republican rival Donald Trump outpaced her by 21 percentage points, in respondents' opinions, when it came to "dealing with Wall Street." Clinton, however, was ahead on "looking out for the middle class."

The missing calendar records could also point to a longer-running issue about distinctions between public and private records that ran through debates over Clinton's use of a private email server as Secretary of State.

"It's clear that any outside influence needs to be clearly identified in some way to at least guarantee transparency. That didn't happen," Danielle Brian, executive director of the Project on Government Oversight, a nonpartisan government reform group, told the AP. "These discrepancies are striking because of her possible interest at the time in running for the presidency."

The report isn't the first time government calendars have bedeviled a public official. Former Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner repeatedly met with officials from the bank Citigroup when he was head of the New York Federal Reserve in 2007 and 2008, an analysis by the Washington Post and ProPublica revealed in 2009 .

The meetings were frequent as Citigroup's finances deteriorated , while Mr. Geithner later helped develop the government bailout plans that gave Citigroup $45 billion in capital.

At the time, he defended the meetings as a "routine" part of his job. But whistleblowers later raised concerns about the close relationship between New York Fed officials and another bank, Goldman Sachs.

As Treasury secretary, Geithner's calendar also offered more unusual disclosures, such as an "off the record" meeting with Jon Stewart , then the host of "The Daily Show," in April 2010.

The Treasury Department now says it redacts information from the secretary's public calendar online about sensitive financial disclosures, "internal deliberative communications," and personal information, including calls to friends and family.

But for Clinton, the decision to scrub the meetings seems to point to a long-running approach. As Secretary of State, she wrote that she sought to eliminate "any risk of the personal being accessible " in an email to a top staffer.

That message was cited in a report last month by the State Department's Inspector General that harshly criticized Clinton's email practices.

The AP reveals that Clinton's official calendar listed meetings with 124 business leaders and political donors, but not with 114 others that were identified by reviewing the planning schedule kept by her staff, which featured more details.

Clinton spokesman Nick Merrill defended the decision to omit information from the calendar, telling the AP the information in her planning schedules "simply reflect a more detailed version in one version as compared to another, all maintained by her staff."

Steven Aftergood, a government records expert at the Federation of American Scientists, told the wire service the information "wasn't necessarily a sign of bad faith." But he added, "it's obviously more important to have a complete record than a scattershot one."



The missing entries raise new questions about how Clinton and her inner circle handled government records documenting her State Department tenure


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

WASHINGTON (AP) - An Associated Press review of the official calendar Hillary Clinton kept as secretary of state identified at least 75 meetings with longtime political donors, Clinton Foundation contributors and corporate and other outside interests that were not recorded or omitted the names of those she met.

The fuller details of those meetings were included in files the State Department turned over to the AP after it sued the government in federal court.

The missing entries raise new questions about how Clinton and her inner circle handled government records documenting her State Department tenure - in this case, why the official chronology of her four-year term does not closely mirror the other, more detailed records of her daily meetings.

At a time when Clinton's private email system is under scrutiny by an FBI criminal investigation, the calendar omissions reinforce concerns that she sought to eliminate the "risk of the personal being accessible" - as she wrote in an email exchange that she failed to turn over to the government but was subsequently uncovered in a top aide's inbox.

by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links More from AP Donald Trump rattles Republican consensus in Utah Undo Grassley: FBI improperly restricting access to Clinton docs Undo

The AP found the omissions by comparing the 1,500-page calendar with separate planning schedules supplied to Clinton by aides in advance of each day's events. The names of at least 114 outsiders who met with Clinton were missing from her calendar, the records show.

No known federal laws were violated and some omissions could be blamed on Clinton's highly fluid schedule, which sometimes forced late cancellations. But only seven meetings in Clinton's planning schedules were replaced by substitute events on her official calendar. More than 60 other events listed in Clinton's planners were omitted entirely in her calendar, tersely noted or described only as "private meetings" - all without naming those who met with her.

Clinton campaign spokesman Nick Merrill said Thursday night that the multiple discrepancies between her State Department calendar and her planning schedules "simply reflect a more detailed version in one version as compared to another, all maintained by her staff."

Merrill said that Clinton "has always made an effort to be transparent since entering public life, whether it be the release of over 30 years of tax returns, years of financial disclosure forms, or asking that 55,000 pages of work emails from her time of secretary of state be turned over to the public."

In one key omission, Clinton's State Department calendar dropped the identities of a dozen major Wall Street and business leaders who met with her during a private breakfast discussion at the New York Stock Exchange in September 2009, The meeting occurred minutes before Clinton appeared in public at the exchange to ring the market's ceremonial opening bell.

Despite the omission, Clinton's State Department planning schedules from the same day listed the names of all Clinton's breakfast guests - most of whose firms had lobbied the government and donated to her family's global charity. The event was closed to the press and merited only a brief mention in her calendar, which omitted all her guests' names - among them Blackstone Group Chairman Steven Schwarzman, PepsiCo CEO Indra Nooyi and then-New York Bank of Mellon CEO Robert Kelly.

Clinton's calendar also repeatedly omitted private dinners and meetings with political donors, policy sessions with groups of corporate leaders and "drop-bys" with old Clinton campaign hands and advisers. Among those whose names were omitted from her calendar were longtime adviser Sidney Blumenthal, consultant and former Clinton White House chief of staff Thomas "Mack" McLarty, former energy lobbyist Joseph Wilson and entertainment magnate and Clinton campaign bundler Haim Saban.

The AP first sought Clinton's calendar and schedules from the State Department in August 2013, but the agency would not acknowledge even that it had the material. After nearly two years of delay, the AP sued the State Department in March 2015. The department agreed in a court filing last August to turn over Clinton's calendar, and provided the documents in November. After noticing discrepancies between Clinton's calendar and some schedules, the AP pressed in court for all of Clinton's planning material. The U.S. has released about one-third of those planners to the AP, so far.

The State Department censored both sets of documents for national security and other reasons, but those changes were made after the documents were turned over to the State Department at the end of Clinton's tenure.

The documents obtained by the AP do not show who specifically logged entries in Clinton's calendar or who edited the material. Clinton's emails and other records show that she and two close aides, deputy chief of staff Huma Abedin and scheduling assistant Lona J. Valmoro, held weekly meetings and emailed almost every day about Clinton's plans. According to the recent inspector general's audit and a court declaration made last December by the State Department's acting executive secretary, Clinton's aides had access to her calendar through a government Microsoft Outlook account. Both Abedin and Valmoro were political appointees at the State Department and are now aides in her presidential campaign.

Unlike Clinton's planning schedules, which were sent to Clinton each morning, her calendar was edited after each event, the AP's review showed. Some calendar entries were accompanied by Valmoro emails - indicating she may have added those entries. Every meeting entry also included both the planned time of the event and the actual time - showing that Clinton's calendar was being used to document each meeting after it ended.

The State Department said Friday that "extensive records" from Clinton's calendars were preserved. Spokesman John Kirby said he couldn't speak in more detail about practices during Clinton's tenure because of the AP's ongoing lawsuit.

Kirby said the department was confident it was properly preserving Secretary John Kerry's calendars and other historic documents, but he noted that Kerry was not required to include details of private, non-work-related meetings. Kirby declined to specify the agency's definition of those private sessions, saying only that "there are obviously some moments of his life that have no bearing on his work as secretary of state."

Kirby would not comment on how Clinton and other former secretaries handled their calendars. Five former State Department logistics officials told the AP that some of Clinton's predecessors also omitted some private meetings from their calendars. The former officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to publicly discuss sensitive agency practices, said omitted meetings typically were for medical or other personal reasons as opposed to the meetings Clinton attended with political and charity donors and with corporate executives.

P.J. Crowley, a State Department spokesman for Clinton at the time, told the AP that Clinton's vision of "21st century statecraft" included exchanging views with corporate leaders and promoting public-private partnerships. "That was certainly reflected in her day-to-day schedule, her travel and her global outreach," Crowley said.

The former department officials as well as government records experts said that secretaries of state have wide latitude in keeping their schedules - despite federal laws and agency rules overseeing the archiving of calendars and warning against altering or deleting records. Omissions in Clinton's calendar could undermine the document's historical accuracy, particularly its depictions of Clinton's access to political, corporate and other influences, experts said.

"It's clear that any outside influence needs to be clearly identified in some way to at least guarantee transparency. That didn't happen," said Danielle Brian, executive director of the Project on Government Oversight, a nonpartisan government reform group. "These discrepancies are striking because of her possible interest at the time in running for the presidency."

Clinton's terse calendar entry on her 2009 private breakfast on Wall Street contains no details on what she and her 12 guests discussed.

Besides Schwarzman, Nooyi and Kelly, Clinton's other guests were Fabrizio Freda, CEO of the Estee Lauder Companies Inc.; Howard Schultz, CEO of Starbucks Corp.; Lewis Frankfort, chairman of Coach Inc.; Ellen Kullman, then-CEO of DuPont; David M. Cote, CEO of Honeywell International Inc.; James Tisch, president of Loews Corp.; John D. Wren, CEO of Omnicom Group; then-McGraw Hill Companies chairman Harold McGraw III; and James Taiclet, chairman of the American Tower Corp. Also attending was then-NYSE CEO Duncan Niederauer, who later accompanied Clinton when she rang the stock exchange bell.

Four of the attendees - Schwarzman, Nooyi, Cote and Kullman - headed companies that later donated to Clinton's pet diplomatic project of that period, the U.S. pavilion at the 2010 Shanghai Expo.

All the firms represented except Coach lobbied the government in 2009; Blackstone, Honeywell, Omnicom and DuPont lobbied the State Department that year. Schwarzman and Frankfort have personally donated to the Clinton Foundation, and the other firms - except for American Tower and New York Bank of Mellon - also contributed to the Clinton charity.

Associated Press writer Bradley Klapper contributed to this report.



Judicial Watch * Judicial Watch Submits Email Questions to Hillary Clinton --- Written Answers, Under Oath, Due September 29
      

AUGUST 30, 2016

*(Washington, DC)* --- Judicial Watch today announced it submitted questions to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton concerning her email practices. Clinton's answers, under oath, are due on September 29. On August 19, U.S. District Court Judge Emmet G. Sullivan granted Judicial Watch further discovery on the Clinton email matter and ordered Clinton to answer the questions "by no later than thirty days thereafter...." Under federal court rules, Judicial Watch is limited to twenty-five questions.

The questions are:

1. Describe the creation of the clintonemail.com system, including who decided to create the system, the date it was decided to create the system, why it was created, who set it up, and when it became operational.

2. Describe the creation of your clintonemail.com email account, including who decided to create it, when it was created, why it was created, and, if you did not set up the account yourself, who set it up for you.

3. When did you decide to use a clintonemail.com email account to conduct official State Department business and whom did you consult in making this decision?

4. Identify all communications in which you participated concerning or relating to your decision to use a clintonemail.com email account to conduct official State Department business and, for each communication, identify the time, date, place, manner (e.g., in person, in writing, by telephone, or by electronic or other means), persons present or participating, and content of the communication.

5. In a /60 Minutes/ interview aired on July 24, 2016, you stated that it was "recommended" you use a personal email account to conduct official State Department business. What recommendations were you given about using or not using a personal email account to conduct official State Department business, who made any such recommendations, and when were any such recommendations made?

6. Were you ever advised, cautioned, or warned, was it ever suggested, or did you ever participate in any communication, conversation, or meeting in which it was discussed that your use of a clintonemail.com email account to conduct official State Department business conflicted with or violated federal recordkeeping laws. For each instance in which you were so advised, cautioned or warned, in which such a suggestion was made, or in which such a discussion took place, identify the time, date, place, manner (e.g., in person, in writing, by telephone, or by electronic or other means), persons present or participating, and content of the advice, caution, warning, suggestion, or discussion.

7. Your campaign website states, "When Clinton got to the Department, she opted to use her personal email account as a matter of convenience." What factors other than convenience did you consider in deciding to use a personal email account to conduct official State Department business? Include in your answer whether you considered federal records management and preservation requirements and how email you used to conduct official State Department business would be searched in response to FOIA requests.

8. After President Obama nominated you to be Secretary of State and during your tenure as secretary, did you expect the State Department to receive FOIA requests for or concerning your email?

9. During your tenure as Secretary of State, did you understand that email you sent or received in the course of conducting official State Department business was subject to FOIA?

10. During your tenure as Secretary of State, how did you manage and preserve emails in your clintonemail.com email account sent or received in the course of conducting official State Department business, and what, if anything, did you do to make those emails available to the Department for conducting searches in response to FOIA requests?

11. During your tenure as Secretary of State, what, if any, effort did you make to inform the State Department's records management personnel (e.g., Clarence Finney or the Executive Secretariat's Office of Correspondence and Records) about your use of a clintonemail.com email account to conduct official State Department business?

12. During your tenure as Secretary of State, did State Department personnel ever request access to your clintonemail.com email account to search for email responsive to a FOIA request? If so, identify the date access to your account was requested, the person or persons requesting access, and whether access was granted or denied.

13. At the time you decided to use your clintonemail.com email account to conduct official State Department business, or at any time thereafter during your tenure as Secretary of State, did you consider how emails you sent to or received from persons who did not have State Department email accounts (i.e., "state.gov" accounts) would be maintained and preserved by the Department or searched by the Department in response to FOIA requests? If so, what was your understanding about how such emails would be maintained, preserved, or searched by the Department in response to FOIA requests?

14. On March 6, 2009, Assistant Secretary of State for Diplomatic Security Eric J. Boswell wrote in an Information Memo to your Chief of Staff, Cheryl Mills, that he "cannot stress too strongly, however, that any unclassified BlackBerry is highly vulnerable in any setting to remotely and covertly monitoring conversations, retrieving email, and exploiting calendars." A March 11, 2009 email states that, in a management meeting with the assistant secretaries, you approached Assistant Secretary Boswell and mentioned that you had read the "IM" and that you "get it." Did you review the March 6, 2009 Information Memo, and, if so, why did you continue using an unclassified BlackBerry to access your clintonemail.com email account to conduct official State Department business? Copies of the March 6, 2009 Information Memo and March 11, 2009 email are attached as Exhibit A for your review.

15. In a November 13, 2010 email exchange with Huma Abedin about problems with your clintonemail.com email account, you wrote to Ms. Abedin, in response to her suggestion that you use a State Department email account or release your email address to the Department, "Let's get a separate address or device." Why did you continue using your clintonemail.com email account to conduct official State Department business after agreeing on November 13, 2010 to "get a separate address or device?" Include in your answer whether by "address" you meant an official State Department email account (i.e., a "state.gov" account) and by "device" you meant a State Department-issued BlackBerry. A copy of the November 13, 2010 email exchange with Ms. Abedin is attached as Exhibit B for your review.

16. Email exchanges among your top aides and assistants in August 30, 2011 discuss providing you with a State Department-issued BlackBerry or State Department email address. In the course of these discussions, State Department Executive Secretary Stephen Mull wrote, "[W]e are working to provide the Secretary per her request a Department issued BlackBerry to replace her personal unit which is malfunctioning (possibly because of her personal email server is down). We will prepare two versions for her to use --- one with an operating State Department email account (which would mask her identity, but which would also be subject to FOIA requests)." Similarly, John Bentel, the Director of Information and Records Management in the Executive Secretariat, wrote, "You should be aware that any email would go through the Department's infrastructure and [be] subject to FOIA searches." Did you request a State Department issued Blackberry or a State Department email account in or around August 2011, and, if so, why did you continue using your personal device and clintonemail.com email account to conduct official State Department business instead of replacing your device and account with a State Department-issued BlackBerry or a State Department email account? Include in your answer whether the fact that a State Department-issued BlackBerry or a State Department email address would be subject to FOIA affected your decision. Copies of the email exchanges are attached as Exhibit C for your review.

17. In February 2011, Assistant Secretary Boswell sent you an Information Memo noting "a dramatic increase since January 2011 in attempts . . . to compromise the private home email accounts of senior Department officials." Assistant Secretary Boswell "urge[d] Department users to minimize the use of personal web-email for business." Did you review Assistant Secretary Boswell's Information Memo in or after February 2011, and, if so, why did you continue using your clintonemail.com email account to conduct official State Department business? Include in your answer any steps you took to minimize use of your clintonemail.com email account after reviewing the memo. A copy of Assistant Secretary Boswell's February 2011 Information Memo is attached as Exhibit D for your review.

18. On June 28, 2011, you sent a message to all State Department personnel about securing personal email accounts. In the message, you noted "recent targeting of personal email accounts by online adversaries" and directed all personnel to "[a]void conducting official Department business from your personal email accounts." Why did you continue using your clintonemail.com email account to conduct official State Department business after June 28, 2011, when you were advising all State Department Personnel to avoid doing so? A copy of the June 28, 2011 message is attached as Exhibit E for your review.

19. Were you ever advised, cautioned, or warned about hacking or attempted hacking of your clintonemail.com email account or the server that hosted your clintonemail.com account and, if so, what did you do in response to the advice, caution, or warning?

20. When you were preparing to leave office, did you consider allowing the State Department access to your clintonemail.com email account to manage and preserve the official emails in your account and to search those emails in response to FOIA requests? If you considered allowing access to your email account, why did you decide against it? If you did not consider allowing access to your email account, why not?

21. After you left office, did you believe you could alter, destroy, disclose, or use email you sent or received concerning official State Department business as you saw fit? If not, why not?

22. In late 2014, the State Department asked that you make available to the Department copies of any federal records of which you were aware, "such as an email sent or received on a personal email account while serving as Secretary of State." After you left office but before your attorneys reviewed the email in your clintonemail.com email account in response to the State Department's request, did you alter, destroy, disclose, or use any of the email in the account or authorize or instruct that any email in the account be altered, destroyed, disclosed, or used? If so, describe any email that was altered, destroyed, disclosed, or used, when the alteration, destruction, disclosure, or use took place, and the circumstances under which the email was altered, destroyed, disclosed, or used? A copy of a November 12, 2014 letter from Under Secretary of State for Management Patrick F. Kennedy regarding the State Department's request is attached as Exhibit F for your review.

23. After your lawyers completed their review of the emails in your clintonemail.com email account in late 2014, were the electronic versions of your emails preserved, deleted, or destroyed? If they were deleted or destroyed, what tool or software was used to delete or destroy them, who deleted or destroyed them, and was the deletion or destruction done at your direction?

24. During your October 22, 2015 appearance before the U.S. House of Representatives Select Committee on Benghazi, you testified that 90 to 95 percent of your emails "were in the State's system" and "if they wanted to see them, they would certainly have been able to do so." Identify the basis for this statement, including all facts on which you relied in support of the statement, how and when you became aware of these facts, and, if you were made aware of these facts by or through another person, identify the person who made you aware of these facts.

25. Identify all communications between you and Brian Pagliano concerning or relating to the management, preservation, deletion, or destruction of any emails in your clintonemail.com email account, including any instruction or direction to Mr. Pagliano about the management, preservation, deletion, or destruction of emails in your account when transferring the clintonemail.com email system to any alternate or replacement server. For each communication, identify the time, date, place, manner (e.g., in person, in writing, by telephone, or by electronic or other means), persons present or participating, and content of the communication.

"These are simple questions about her email system that we hope will finally result in straight-forward answers, under oath, from Hillary Clinton," stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.

In his opinion ordering Clinton to answer written questions under oath Judge Sullivan wrote:

The Court is persuaded that Secretary Clinton's testimony is necessary to enable her to explain on the record the purpose for the creation and operation of the clintonemail.com system for State Department business.

In its July 2016 request to depose Hillary Clinton, Judicial Watch argued:

Secretary Clinton's deposition is necessary to complete the record. Although certain information has become available through investigations by the Benghazi Select Committee, the FBI, and the State Department Inspector General, as well as through Plaintiff's narrowly tailored discovery to date, significant gaps in the evidence remain. Only Secretary Clinton can fill these gaps, and she does not argue otherwise.

***

To [Judicial Watch's] knowledge, Secretary Clinton has never testified under oath why she created and used the clintonemail.com system to conduct official government business. Her only public statements on the issue are unsworn.

Judge Sullivan also ordered that Judicial Watch may depose the former Director of Information Resource Management of the Executive Secretariat ("S/ES-IRM") John Bentel by October 31.

The questions and deposition arise in a Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit before Judge Sullivan first filed in September 2013 seeking records about the controversial employment status of Huma Abedin, former Deputy Chief of Staff to Clinton. The lawsuit was reopened because of revelations about the clintonemail.com system. (/Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State/ (No. 1:13-cv-01363)).

Judicial Watch has already taken the deposition testimony of seven Clinton aides and State Department officials.

Read more about hillary clinton email scan , Huma Employment



* Home o Blog --- Corruption Chronicles o The Weekly Update o The Docket o Investigative Bulletin o Open Records Resources o The International Program o Financial Disclosures o Document Archive * Press Room o Press Releases o Recommended News o Multimedia o RSS Feed * About Judicial Watch o Mission o Amicus Briefs o Board of Directors o Staff Directory o Legal Team o Careers * Stay Connected o Facebook o Twitter o YouTube o LinkedIn o Instagram o Snapchat

* Make a Contribution





WWW.JUDICIALWATCH.ORG



© 2016 Judicial Watch, Inc. | Privacy Policy | Terms and Conditions | User Agreement | Contact Information

Judicial Watch is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization. Contributions are received from individuals, foundations, and corporations and are tax-deductible to the extent allowed by law.

425 Third Street SW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20024 202-646-5172