Wattree's picture

    The Clinton Email Scandal Timeline

    Beneath the Spin * Eric L. Wattree

    The Clinton Email Scandal Timeline
    by
    Paul Thompson (harlan2222 at yahoo.com), with illustration work by Katie Weddington and editing work by Jill Hacker

    Source: The Clinton Email Scandal Timeline ©2016 #ClintonEmailTimeline
    http://www.thompsontimeline.com/The_Clinton_Email_Scandal_Timeline
    .
    Why should you care about Hillary Clinton's email scandal enough to read detailed timelines about them? This essay is a good starting point: IS CLINTON'S EMAIL SCANDAL FOR REAL Also check out a two-hour interview of Paul Thompson by Mike Malloy and other news coverage of this timeline effort on the In The News page. Plus, we now have a page that contains just the Latest Timeline Entries. Also see a new forum to discuss the timeline. (Credit Left: Saul Loeb / Agence France Presse / Getty Images) (Center: Mandel Ngan / Agence France Presse) (Right: Kevin Lamarque / The Associated Press).
    .
    This is a complicated scandal, and there's no way it can be boiled down to a few thousand words. I first created the long timeline, which is now 80,000 words. But, realizing that's too long for many people, I created a 45,000 word medium version and a 25,000 word version. I think the short version is too short and I hope you'll at least try the medium version. Also, please don't miss The Clinton Foundation timeline, which is 15,000 words long and is almost entirely different content than any version of the main timeline.
    .
    This is an on-going project that will continually add and update all the timelines as new information is reported or discovered. The Main Timeline - Short Version Part 1 - 1993 to April 2013; Part 2 - April 2013 to today. The Main Timeline - Medium Version Part 1 - 1993 to March 2011; Part 2 - April 2011 to September 2014; Part 3 - September 2014 to September 2015; Part 4 - September 2015 to today. The Main Timeline - Long Version Part 1 - 1993 to July 2009; Part 2 - July 2009 to May 2012; Part 3 - May 2012 to February 2015; Part 4 - March 2015 to July 2015; Part 5 - July 2015 to October 2015; Part 6 - October 2015 to February 2016; Part 7 - March 2016 to April 2016; Part 8 - May 2016 to today. The Clinton Foundation Timeline Part 1 - 1993 to December 2009 Part; 2 - January 2010 to today.
    .
    WHY I MADE THIS WEBSITE
    .
    I'm a political liberal, and up until a few months ago, I would have gladly supported Hillary Clinton. I didn't pay much attention to Clinton's email scandal, and what I heard about it made me suspect that it was another Republican-led scandal that never amounted to much. However, I eventually heard enough concerning news stories about it to make me want to take a closer look. The more I learned, the more shocked and convinced I became that this was a very real and very serious scandal.
    .
    During the last Bush administration, I was concerned about Islamist terrorism and especially the US government's poor response to it, so I wrote a book called The Terror Timeline, published by Harper Collins in 2004. That book was a timeline covering 25 years of terrorist acts based on thousands of news stories from the mainstream media. I decided the Clinton email scandal could best be understood through a timeline as well.
    .
    This is a complicated story. Is Clinton guilty of anything that could send her to prison? Most legal cases rely on large amounts of evidence. Imagine you're on a jury trying to decide if Clinton is guilty of anything in this case - you'd need to look at a lot of evidence as well. So I've read thousands of news stories, picked the most important ones, and boiled them down to their most important points so that the reader doesn't have to spend thousands of hours to understand all this.
    .
    I'm trying my hardest to be objective and summarize the news in neutral language without any personal spin. I've set this website up as a wiki so that other people can join the effort and make corrections and additions to aspects I've missed. I also have links to the source articles so you the reader can check that everything in the timeline is accurate and dig deeper if you want to. I've also tried hard to avoid using blatantly right-wing sources, to make clear this isn't just right wing spin.
    .
    That said, my aim is to document what Clinton did wrong, not what she did right. This website is attempting to make the case that the email scandal is a real scandal where real crimes were committed. I believe the facts are so strong that simply laying them out in an organized manner makes the case without any spin or extra commentary. I don't have a legal background and you may not either, so this is not about making a legal case on specific charges, but instead making a general case that serious wrongdoing occurred.
    .
    Since different people have different levels of free time and interest, I've created short, medium, and long versions of the main timeline. But I'll warn you that even the short version is fairly long - about 20,000 words. I recommend you read at least the medium length version, because it's a complicated case and the more you learn, the more compelling the evidence is. Furthermore, there's a separate timeline just on the conflict of interest about The Clinton Foundation. I highly recommend you read that too. The content there is disturbing in and of itself, but it also helps explain why Clinton would have been motivated to keep all her emails totally private in the first place.
    .
    THE POLITICAL LOGIC OF THIS WEBSITE
    .
    I'm a political liberal and a registered Democratic voter. So I'm sure I'm going to get criticism from other Democrats for criticizing Hillary Clinton when she is leading the race for the 2016 presidential nomination. Furthermore, as a liberal, I'm very concerned about Donald Trump becoming president. That said, I believe facts are facts, and if the facts point to someone being guilty of serious crimes, we can't simply bury our heads in the sand because that person has certain political beliefs or popularity.
    .
    During the last Bush administration, I made timelines about terrorism that were very critical of the Republicans then in power, but they were also sometimes critical of the previous Clinton administration, as well as prior administrations, Democratic and Republican. (My timelines then went back to the 1970s). I believe we have to follow the truth wherever it goes, regardless of political party. Criminal behavior is criminal behavior, period, and nobody should be exempt from criticism or punishment because of political power or belief. In fact, those at the top should be held to an even higher standard, because the idea of democracy is that we should be led by the best and the brightest.
    .
    That said, I certainly don't want this timeline to help elect Trump. Clinton has her email scandal, but Trump have their big problems too. And the polls show it: Trump AND Clinton have the highest dislike numbers of any major presidential candidates since favorability numbers began to be polled in the 1970s. It's bizarre that the two most disliked politicians of the last forty years at least are the ones winning the primaries so far. If you're a Democrat like I am, and you've come to believe as I do that Clinton committed serious crimes in her email scandal, then this presidential election could be a disaster.
    .
    Luckily, there still are other options. It is unprecedented to have a major presidential candidate with an FBI indictment recommendation hanging over her head in the middle of election season. The Democratic National Convention isn't until the end of July 2016, and a lot could happen between now and then. It's been reported that the FBI investigation is winding down and they want to make their decision whether or not to recommend the indictment of Clinton and/or her aides by the middle of May. That could be delayed two months and still happen before the convention.
    .
    So between now and late July, Democrats are going to have to decide whether Clinton's scandal is serious enough to disqualify her to be the next president. If the evidence and the resulting political mood are strong enough, then either Clinton will have no choice but to drop out or the super delegates will switch their support to Bernie Sanders or someone else.
    .
    Consider John Edwards and his presidential run in 2008. During Democratic primary season, it came out that he'd impregnated another woman while his wife was sick with cancer. The story became public early in the primary season, and Edwards wasn't the front-runner. Still, it would have been crazy to simply pretend that scandal didn't exist and vote for him anyway. That's what many were saying for several weeks, because the scandal first came out in the National Enquirer and people didn't know what to believe. I think we're at a similar stage now, because the facts about the email scandal exist and can't be denied, but most people don't know them yet, and more revelations are bound to come out.
    .
    This website is to help voters, especially Democratic voters, look at the raw evidence and decide for themselves if Clinton's email scandal is "for real" or not. If it is, and enough people realize that, there's plenty of time for the Democratic party to nominate someone else. Personally, I support Bernie Sanders, but if Clinton were to drop out, her delegates could nominate Joe Biden or someone else. It is not written in stone that Clinton has to win the nomination.
    .
    If, despite the scandal, the Democratic convention goes ahead and nominates Clinton, then I may have to reassess what I want to do with this timeline in what I would consider a terrible, no-win situation. Besides, the Republican Party has vast resources far beyond what a few private citizens can do in their spare time (the Republican National Committee already has a fancy website about the email scandal), and they'll be pushing this scandal hard regardless, probably even if Clinton isn't the nominee. I'm trying to get the facts known before the general election, while it still would be far easier for the Democrats to switch to someone else.
    .
    In any case, the facts are the facts and Clinton's winning politically won't simply make them go away. This is likely to be a political issue for years to come as more evidence keeps coming out and more investigations, lawsuits, and legal processes keep moving forward. Any voter on the right or the left needs to understand this scandal in order to make an informed decision on whom to support and by how much.
    .
    APPEAL FOR HELP
    .
    I have done vast majority of the work on this timeline so far, but I hope it will become more of a collaborative project going forward. That's why I've made this website a wiki that uses the same software as Wikipedia. If you're interested in joining in to add or edit content, please contact me at the email address mentioned at the top of this page. I would especially appreciate people with the expertise to help analyze the legal ramifications, and also people who can help spread the word about the contents of these timelines to educate the general public. Any genuine help is appreciated, including help from people with different points of view interested in getting to the truth, but I also will attempt to weed out disruptors and saboteurs.
    .
    Source: The Clinton Email Scandal Timeline ©2016 #ClintonEmailTimeline
    http://www.thompsontimeline.com/The_Clinton_Email_Scandal_Timeline
    .
    Join the discussion at our public group on FacebookSource: The Clinton Email Scandal Timeline ©2016
    .
    Eric L. Wattree
    http://wattree.blogspot.com/
    [email protected]
    Citizens Against Reckless Middle-Class Abuse (CARMA)

    Religious bigotry: It's not that I hate everyone who doesn't look, think, and act like me - it's just that God does. 
     

    Comments

    Paul,
     
    I want to thank you so much for this brilliant, objective, and meticulously researched document. You should, and very well may, receive a Pulitzer Prize for it (to be perfectly frank, I'm sorta jealous).
    .
    I'm spending the weekend going over it with a fine tooth comb, and taking notes. This information needs to be digested, compiled and disseminated in a way that the people can easily understand it with little effort, because the public doesn't really get what all of this is about. They think that Hillary was simply reckless and made a mistake with a few emails, but that's not it at all. Hillary is a criminal, and she's definitely going to be indicted - and if the people begin to recognize that this is a democracy and not an oligarchy, she just may go to prison.
    .
    The problem that we have in this country is there are some things so horrific and unbelievable that the people just can't wrap their heads around it. They have that "It could never happen here" mentality. And it's that exact mentality that the social manipulators are using to cut our throats. This stuff is scary. Many people assume that I'm just some wild-eyed Bernie Sanders cultist upset over Bernie not winning the primary,  but that's not it at all - I'm just desperate to see to it that a person with Hillary’s flawed character NEVER becomes President of the United States. She's just as much of a threat to this country as Donald Trump. Trump is just a dumb bigot; Hillary is not only malevolent, but calculating, and she has a very dark side to her nature. People paid very little attention to the following piece that I wrote that is linked below, and it frustrated the hell out of me.  Why are people ignoring this stuff!!!?
     
    .
    DID HILLARY CLINTON TRY TO 'DOG-WHISTLE' BARACK OBAMA'S ASSASSINATION?

    .
     

    "The problem that we have in this country is there are some things so horrific and unbelievable that the people just can't wrap their heads around it. They have that "It could never happen here" mentality. And it's that exact mentality that the social manipulators are using to cut our throats. This stuff is scary. Many people assume that I'm just some wild-eyed Bernie Sanders cultist upset over Bernie not winning the primary,  but that's not it at all - I'm just desperate to see to it that a person with Hillary’s flawed character NEVER becomes President of the United States. She's just as much of a threat to this country as Donald Trump. Trump is just a dumb bigot; Hillary is not only malevolent, but calculating, and she has a very dark side to her nature. People paid very little attention to the following piece that I wrote that is linked below, and it frustrated the hell out of me.  Why are people ignoring this stuff!!!?"

    I ask myself this... and I think that we have been raised and conditioned to be sheep... and we are instinctively tribal.  It would SHOCK many Americans if they could see what we see them doing... acting just like Fox News viewers they have been frustrated with... and that 'shock' is a real thing.  One of my housemates can't handle hearing too much about politics because it's all so disturbing for her.  She can handle it in bits and pieces when I talk to her about it. We do not have television in our house by choice.  I am trying to have empathy for what it is like and the matrix movie 'plugged in/spoon fed' version of reality vs being uplugged where you're awake but now you're in the fight for humanity... not everyone can do it in the movie. Seifer asks to be put back in to the delusion. We are attached to our comfortable dream and afraid of the chaos change will bring. What I see is doing what your doing and in our various ways being leaders... we can try to assist people who are ready to unplug/wake up.

    ....... wake up......unplug your television...think...the status quo is unsustainable... 'incremental change' is new slang for 'trickle down economics'... wake up... we don't have time for that...

    Sometimes I ask, 'What would it look like if the rich and powerful completely took over our government, our media, and were able to corrupt our elections and manipulate almost every aspect of our lives?' just to suggest in an offhand way... THIS is what it looks like. 

    P.S. The CA vote counting continues and the difference has been reduced so far from 12.5% to 8.7%.  When you consider that there are SO MANY states where election fraud occurred and then the conspiring to 'make' Hilary the nominee(which we are filing a class action suit against the DNC for) I can't for one second pretend she 'won' anything...   People need to understand as much as Bernie's supporters love him(and we know he's not perfect) what matters most to us is that HE is Fighting For 'The People' and that is Extremely Rare among our 'elected' officials.  WE are NOT going to follow Bernie into this fantasy that anything will improve if we elect Hillary.  We are just reassessing as a community exactly HOW starting from where we are right now, we could end up with a President that fights for the people in the White House next year(ie Not Hillary or Trump). Especially when the attachment to the old paradigm is SO ingrained/Trained in the public that nothing else is 'possible'....


    I can wrap my head around anything. But I require evidence to do it. I once saw a picture of a grey haired JFK meeting with an alien. Turns out he survived the assassination attempt with their help and is now our liaison to them. I can wrap my head around that but I don't believe it.

    I watched a few of your videos. Some nobody ranting on a youtube video is not evidence. If you had some convincing evidence you'd post it. Most of us here would have no trouble wrapping our minds around it. The reality is most of us here took time out of our busy schedule and went out of our way to look at and evaluate your "evidence" and found it lacking.


    I can understand on the one hand that you see these people as 'nobodies' on the other hand with Corporate media and the establishment complicit, exactly what 'somebody' do you expect us to pay to tell you what you want to hear.   Think of this as messy and real and how difficult it then might be to satisfy someone like you.

    I don't apologize in the least!


    One of your youtube ranters claimed she had evidence that Hillary rigged the primaries against Sanders. She claimed she sent all that evidence to the Sanders campaign. She claimed she had connections to both the Ohio democratic apparatus to obtain the evidence as well as high ranking Sanders officials in his campaign to send the evidence to. They just blew her off she claimed.

    So apparently Sanders campaign helped rig the election against himself. Or perhaps even the Sanders campaign didn't find her "evidence" convincing.

    I don't care whether you apologize or not. I'm just trying to point out to you that calling us and everybody who doesn't agree with you stupid brainwashed instinctively tribal sheep isn't a very effective or convincing argument. Consider the possibility that there are intelligent well informed people who find your "evidence" unconvincing. And that some of them are sanders supporters.


    Perfectly stated, Syn.


    ONE FOR BOOMER

    Receding hairline, failing vision,

    hair now turning grey,
    an aging boomer in final protest,
    Father Time his foe this day.
     
    Donning his headband, tie-dyed jeans,
    and scorched draft card of protests past,
    he set out for one last battle,
    as in his youth that had quietly passed.
     
    Ode to an aging Boomer,
    a different kind of man;
    colleagues all now in the wind,
    as he makes his final stand.
     
    But he found no placards or the sound of Trane,
    no passionate speeches in the gentle rain,
    no pretty girls wearing mini skirts,
    and no solemn guards on pig alert.
     
    All he found was a new America,
    and more freedom across this land;
    the fruit of his struggle
    for women's equality,
    and the rights of his fellow man.
     
    He found Martin, Chavez, and Malcolm X,
    all standing by his side;
    He found Thomas Jefferson
    and all his forefathers
    beaming down with pride.
     
    He found minority children across this land
    whose reach now exceed their grasp;
    He found Jim Crow angrily cursing him,
    as he took his final gasp.
     
    He found pride as an aging boomer,
    more hero, than common man;
    He found a quirky old fart embraced by history,
    for having the courage to take a stand.
     
    Alone, an aging Boomer,
    fellow travelers now in the wind;
    but one last time he limps to his trench,

    to defend his fellow man.
    .
    Wattree


     

    Sorry, Eric but Bernie is no Boomer and he is not of My Generation just as he is no Socialist. He did dip his toe into Civil Rights and Socialism as it was an acceptable Liberal cause/ideology at that time.

    The picture you show of Trump with the Clintons may be one from his wedding when he rented HRC with a fat donation to their non-charity. I doubt we will see a picture of Sanders kneeling before the Red Queen but we will probably see him hugging the beast at the DNC pledging undying support to defeat the feared Trump.


    Okay, Peter,
     

    So Bernie was born one day after Pearl Harbor instead of after the war. I find a lot of profound significance in that. Wow!


    Don't get me wrong, Eric i think Bernie did some good in pushing Social Democratic ideas into the neoliberal bubble that limits thought and action under our regime but he also showed the very limits of what the liberal elite will accept or allow to be achieved. His capitulation will be a sad end for the multitudes who supported him because of those ideals.


    Wow!  Finally, somebody who can think instead of just feel.

    Peter,

    Bernie Sanders is thinking ahead.  He thinks that Hillary is going to be indicted and is going to have to pull out of the race.  So by saying "Yeah, I'm going to vote for her in November," he's trying to reset the tone, and  mullify the Clinton cultists.  He doesn't think she's going to be around in November. Bill and Hillary Clinton have been political criminals all of their careers, and establishment or no establishment, there are those in government who know that we can't afford to let them back into the White House.
    .
    Think about it.  EVERYTHING that Hillary has ever been intimately involved with in her ENTIRE career has been drenched in controversy, scandal, incompetence, and has turned out to be an absolute disaster. The only reason they claim that she's suppose to have all of this "experience" is because she's been around forever and she has name recognition. But what has she ever done that's been successful?  Let me tell you - absolutely nothing. After she lost to President Obama in 2008 he tried to throw her a bone by making her Secretary of State to try to reunify the party, and look what’s happen.  This woman is a monument to corruption, self-service, and incompetence. She's the only Secretary of State we've ever had who didn't understand the concept of security, and used her position to enrich herself, and may even be charged with espionage. 
    .
    All of the following is a part of the public record:

     


    Wow, finally somebody who shares my unhinged elitist view of the world. Let's chat and grouse around together, we could be pals.


    Nobody rational thinks Hillary is going to be indicted. I could toss in a few links here but that's been done by me and several others already. But there is one reason I'm sure Hillary won't be indicted. Obama has a top notch legal team in the West Wing that looked into this. He's an intelligent, thoughtful, and a very careful man. Too careful imo. I wish he was more of a risk taker. There is no way a man like Obama would ever have hinted clearly throughout the primary that he wanted Hillary to be his successor if he wasn't sure she wouldn't be indicted. There is no way he would have immediately endorsed her after the primaries ended. Biden desired the presidency like a teenager pines for his first love. There is no way Obama and Biden didn't discuss his desire to run. If there was any possibility that Hillary would be indicted Biden would have run and Obama would have hinted throughout the primary that he supported him not Hillary.

    The odds are near zero Hillary will be indicted.

    But perhaps I'm wrong. Perhaps Obama is careless and stupid and gave no thought at all whether Hillary would be indicted when he decided to support her.

    What do you think? Obama, intelligent, thoughtful, and careful or stupid and careless?


    Where's the beef?  Wattree, you're the master of supposition so I doubt you realize there is no smoking gun here.  It's a post from a guy who is looking into Hillary's email "scandal".  An invitation to help him put it all together.  Nothing more.

    Contrary to your headline, there is no timeline in this piece.

    And, by the way, there is no FBI indictment.

    .


    The hardcore Sanders supporters have gone off the rails. The bulk of Sanders supporters will be voting for Hillary. 

    Trump went to Scotland where, in the aftermath of the Brexit vote, he gave a 10 minute commercial for his golf course. Independents and even some Republicans will be voting for Hillary.


    Great points, Ramona, but I think any reference to the email "scandal" should be in quotes.  Seriously, I was offended more by Wattree's absurd, obnoxious, and unsubstantiated nasty statement about Hillary dog-whistling for Obama's assassination.  Besides the sickening and disgusting assumption there, we can legitimately ask:

    "If Hillary had everything all sewed up with the nefarious powers-that-be, why would she do that?  She had the popular vote.  If she was the crooked, in the bag for 'those who REALLY had the power' why didn't she just force the SuperDelegates to vote for her and not have to wait eight years?"

    None of the Bernie conspiracy theorists seem to have an answer for this, because it doesn't fit into the ridiculous and pathetic time line and BS that they need to stoke their hatred for Hillary.  If she had the nefarious power they accuse her of, she would have already been President, but they ignore this.  

    They expect everyone to accept the unlikeliness of certified Primary results (although what was truly unlikely was that Sanders did as well as he legitimately did!) but they can't believe that the Democrat got more votes than the non-Democrat.  So there must be fraud -- snore.


    You're so right, CVille.  I added quotes to "scandal".  Otherwise, I think I'm done here.


    Corruption Is Catching Up to the Clintons and Their Associates
    .
    Corruption Conviction of Clinton Crony Foreshadows Hillary Legal Struggles
    .
    Hillary Clinton superdelegate and longtime Democratic Congressman Chaka Fattah was convicted of 22 counts of corruption charges. After serving 11 terms in Congress, Fattah is now out on bail after an indictment was filed in July 2015 against him and four associates. Despite the conviction, Fattah is set to serve the remainder of his term in Congress until January 2017. He faces sentencing in October, and could potentially serve the rest of his life in prison.
    .
    Fattah formally endorsed Hillary Clinton for president in February, shortly before losing his primary bid for re-election in April. He has been a Clinton loyalist for decades, standing by the Clintons amid the Monica Lewinsky scandal in the 1990s, and even helping Bill Clinton coordinate DNC fundraising trips to Philadelphia shortly after he admitted to perjury. “He can be a public servant without being perfect,” Fattah told Philly.com in 1998.
    .
    Fattah isn’t the first Clinton superdelegate to be convicted under corruption charges. Former New York State Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, who was convicted of corruption in November 2015, had close ties to Hillary Clinton while she served as senator of New York. In 2008, Clinton called Silver, who played an important role in convincing Clinton to run for Senate in New York after Bill Clinton’s presidency ended, “a stalwart voice on behalf of the needs of New Yorkers.”
    .
    Silver formally resigned from serving as a superdelegate in March 2016, and Congressman Fattah should do the same. Both Fattah and Silver still maintain their innocence, a tactic perfected by Hillary Clinton over the years—to constantly deny wrongdoing despite the overwhelming evidence suggesting otherwise.
    .
    A number of Clinton’s close associates have been exposed for corruption. Several weeks ago, it was revealed that Clinton’s 2008 campaign manager, Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe, is currently under federal investigation over questionable contributions to his 2013 campaign for governor—including $120,000 from a wealthy Chinese businessman McAuliffe introduced to Hillary Clinton at a fundraiser in her home. Clinton’s 2008 campaign co-chair, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, has also been informally removed from her position as DNC chair, and faces losing her seat in Congress to primary challenger Tim Canova after the backlash that erupted over Wasserman Schultz’s overt favoritism for Clinton throughout the 2016 Democratic primaries.
    .
    Hillary Clinton herself will be subject to some form of indictment or conviction in the near future, regardless of whether she manages to become president. The State Department inspector general reported in May 2016 that Clinton never had authorization to use a private email server during her service as secretary of state, debunking the defense she and her supporters have been using for over a year to dismiss the issue.
    .
    The Clinton Foundation has also been linked to several cases of fraudulent activity. Clinton appointed Rajiv Fernando, a prominent Clinton Foundation donor, to an intelligence advisory board with the State Department despite the fact that Fernando had no experience or background qualifying him for the role. An IBTimes investigation in 2015 uncovered millions of dollars in donations given to the Clinton Foundation by foreign government dictatorships in exchange for favors from Clinton’s State Department.
    .
    Whistleblower Charles Ortel, who exposed General Electric’s financial discrepancies in 2008, has alleged the charity did not follow legal compliances when it was created, and that donations were collected and used for purposes differing from what donors were told. Ortel is currently pushing the Federal Trade Commission to open a formal investigation into the charity. Clinton Cash, a book by Peter Schweitzer, corroborated many of Ortel’s claims, laying out how the Clinton Foundation provided donor access to Clinton’s State Department.
    .
    The Democratic National Committee has completely disregarded the democratic process by colluding with the Clinton campaign to simultaneously raise funds for itself while helping Hillary Clinton secure the presidential nomination. The Party should be pushing to reform campaign finance law—not embracing policies that allow wealthy individuals and corporations to buy off elections. While a few members of Congress push to get big money out of politics—most notably Bernie Sanders—the Democratic leadership has only strengthened its ties to wealthy and corporate donors who have hijacked the party for their own interests over the progressive agenda held by voters identifying as Democrats.
    http://observer.com/2016/05/corruption-is-catching-up-to-the-clintons-an...
    .
    Hillary Clinton’s 2008 campaign chair, Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe, is currently under investigation by the FBI and Department of Justice over questionable contributions to his 2013 campaign. According to a recent CNN report, the investigation—which has been going on for at least a year—calls into question Mr. McAuliffe’s service as a board member to the Clinton Global Initiative, a subsidiary of the Clinton Foundation. A $120,000 donation from a Chinese businessman, Wang Wenliang, made through U.S.-based businesses, raised red flags with investigators—along with several other donations, like the $2 million he gave the Clinton Foundation.
    .
    Governor McAuliffe is just one of several close associates to the Clintons currently under investigation for corruption. Ms. Clinton’s 2008 campaign co-chair, DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz, is under immense pressure to resign thanks to her favoritism for Ms. Clinton throughout the Democratic primaries. Ms. Wasserman Schultz essentially tipped the scale against Senator Bernie Sanders, a violation of the impartiality her position at the DNC demands. Prominent Clinton supporter and New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio is also under review as part of an ongoing federal investigation into two businessmen with close ties to the mayor. The Podesta Group, implicated in the release of the Panama Papers, was founded by Tony Podesta and Hillary Clinton’s campaign chief, John Podesta. Several other prominent donors to the Clinton Foundation have also been linked to the Panama Papers, and the Clinton Foundation itself has been frequently cited as a source of money laundering and exchanging political favors for large donations.
    .
    It comes as no surprise that Hillary Clinton’s closest associates are involved in a litany of ethics violations as corruption has been the modus operandi of Ms. Clinton’s campaign for the entire duration of the primaries. Hillary Clinton has publicly vocalized support for campaign finance reform, yet owes much of her success in the primaries to the current corrupt system, which enables her to fundraise unethically, bending and possibly breaking current campaign finance laws. The Hillary Victory Fund, a joint fundraising committee between the Clinton campaign and the DNC, was recently revealed by Politico to be laundering money to the Clinton campaign to circumvent campaign finance laws. Mr. Sanders’ campaign has also highlighted additional
     violations and ethical breaches made by the Hillary Victory Fund.
    http://observer.com/2016/05/corruption-is-catching-up-to-the-clintons-an...
    .
    FBI formally confirms its investigation of Hillary Clinton’s email server
    .
    In a letter disclosed Monday in a federal court filing, the FBI confirms one of the world’s worst-kept secrets: It is looking into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server.
    .
    Why say this at all, since it was widely known to be true? Because in August in response to a judge’s direction, the State Department asked the FBI for information about what it was up to. Sorry, the FBI said at the time, we can neither confirm nor deny the existence of any investigation.
    .
    Now, in a letter dated February 2 and filed in court Monday, the FBI’s general counsel, James Baker, notes that in public statements and congressional testimony, the FBI “has acknowledged generally that it is working on matters related to former Secretary Clinton’s use of a private email server.”
    .
    Baker says the FBI has not, however, “publicly acknowledged the specific focus, scope or potential targets of any such proceedings.”
    .
    He ends the one-paragraph letter by saying that the FBI cannot say more “without adversely affecting on-going law enforcement efforts.”
    .
    The letter was filed in one of the Freedom of Information Act cases brought against the State Department over access to documents from Hillary Clinton’s time as secretary of state. This one was filed by Judicial Watch.
    http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/fbi-formally-confirms-its-investigation-hilla...
    .

    What we know about the FBI’s investigation into Hillary Clinton’s emails
    .

    Over the past couple of days, some Hillary Clinton critics have complained over the way her campaign has described the FBI’s probe into her private email server. Clinton and her campaign have called the probe a "security inquiry" regarding information stored on the server, as opposed to a criminal probe.
     
    .
    "I say what I have said now for many, many months: It's a security inquiry," she said on CBS May 8.
    .
    But on May 11, reporters met with FBI Director James Comey, and he said he is not familiar with the term "security inquiry." Instead, he said, "we're conducting an investigation. That's what we do."
    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2016/may/12/fbis-investi...
    .
    The FBI is reportedly expanding its investigation of Hillary Clinton's private email server

    The FBI is widening its investigation of Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton's use of a private email account while she was U.S. secretary of state to determine whether any public corruption laws were violated, Fox News reported on Monday.
    .
    The Federal Bureau of Investigation has been looking into whether classified material was mishandled during Clinton's tenure at the State Department from 2009-2013.
    .
    It will expand its probe by examining possible overlap of the Clinton Foundation charity with State Department business, Fox reported, citing three unidentified intelligence officials.
    .
    "The [FBI] agents are investigating the possible intersection of Clinton Foundation donations, the dispensation of State Department contracts and whether regular processes were followed," Fox quoted one of its unidentified sources as saying.
    .
    The FBI and the State Department had no immediate comment on the report. The Clinton campaign didn't immediately respond to a request for comment from Business Insider.
    .
    Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus issued a statement calling the Fox News report "a very troubling development."
    .
    The FBI last expanded its probe into the server in November to examine whether "materially false statements" were ever provided to agents throughout the course of the case.
    http://www.businessinsider.com/fbi-hillary-clinton-email-investigation-2...
    \
    .
    Donald Trump talked politics with Bill Clinton weeks before launching 2016 bid
     
    .
    “People with knowledge of the call in both camps said it was one of many that Clinton and Trump have had over the years, whether about golf or donations to the Clinton Foundation. But the call in May was considered especially sensitive, coming soon after Hillary Rodham Clinton had declared her own presidential run the month before.
    .
    “At the time, Trump was touting a “foolproof” but undisclosed plan to defeat Islamic State terrorists and ramping up his presence on the airwaves, including interviews where he was asked about his donations to the Clinton Foundation. He entered the race June 16.
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/bill-clinton-called-donald-trump...
     
    A no-lose situation for the 1%ers . . .  unless Hillary goes to jail. 
     

     

     

    Ya' better hurry . . .

     

    ~OGD~

    .


    You suppose?  Could be. . .  Might happen. . .  This guy says. . .  I wish, I wish, I wish!


    [Comment removed by admin]


    Wattree, if I were an admin dealing with both your attitude and your bullshit too-often debunked "facts", you would have been gone long ago. I respect the patience of the Dagblog team, but dont appreciate the shitty bossy way you address Ramona. That's all I have to say.


    Seconded.


    Add one more.


    I'm with you PP, and, of course, my friend, whom I admire and respect -- Ramona. (Mona)


    heartheartheart


    Facts?  Everything you present is innuendo, or a mention of a conversation that you then sensationalize based on what you want to believe was said (and what you then suppose it means).  Your "investigations"  are a repetitive conglomeration of conspiracy sites, and they have no gravity.  

    Just think about this:  The only Democrat in the Democratic primary won.  Bernie did surprisingly well, and good for him.  If he had won instead of the very competent candidate, Hillary Clinton, I would wonder about the results.  

    It is amazing that he did so well, and his supporters would be better off to see his 12,000,000 votes as a positive within the Democratic Party.  Rather than blow what they have gained by blasting the party and losing all credibility, they should fully join the party and push for their policies.  That is how it's done.  

    It is obvious that Bernie is hooked on his "power" and doesn't want his followers to do what I said above.  So follow the cult leader at your own risk.

     


    This extravaganza is getting more entertaining by the day as i detect more of the dem panic i noticed earlier. Even if only 10% of Sanders' supporters stand on their hind legs and reject the beast that could be enough to bring down the Clintons forever.

    I saw a video over at HP introducing Gary Johnson to their readers apparently to try to create a spoiler against Trump, i don't think they paid any attention to him when he ran before because he is a libertarian. With all these nastiest of right wingers joining the Clintonists people are getting a clearer view of what they are buying into voting for HRC with her new and old friends.


    One of Bernie's group's claims was that he could attract more of the disgruntled right in his famed "outpolling" Hillary. Now that Hillary is attracting Republicans worried about the wheels coming off the truck (both due to her messaging and Trump's comments), it's somehow a problem. Well, I always knew that Hillary had a chance of attracting the more moderate Republicans, as having dealt with the less palatable task of developing a real-world foreign policy rather than a flowers and kumbaya outlook. I can find a lot to disagree with in her foreign policy, but at least she has one, and no, it's not a completely interventionist military-will-cure-all like John McCain, much less Donald Trump. We're doing fine with a mature, well-rounded, serious candidate. The Republicans would kill to have our problems.


    I think you are hallucinating, again, PP, moderate republicans are about as rare as moderate rebels in Syria. The moderate mask you are trying to put on the likes of Koch, Kagan and now Will and many other extreme right wingers who are seeking shelter with HRC  because she best represents their agendas and motives. If you strip away the heated rhetoric about Muslims and Mexicans and concentrate on the real issues Trump is the moderate republican.


    Trump's racism cannot be excised. Trump is no moderate. Racism is an important issue.


    There are plenty of moderate Republicans. They have been shouted down and voted out by the TeaBaggers, who  dragged the unthinking onto their pile of ashes.  It's just that they are working away at getting by, and are not even thinking of running for office.  John McCain was at one time almost moderate.  He just lacked the integrity it would require to take a stand.  Even Nixon was a moderate.  Moderate Republicans want limited government -- not anarchy.  My bet is that they see Clinton as sane and Trump as. Dangerous fool.


    Because he is a libertarian is reason enough to pay him no attention.

    Libertarianism is its own special snowflake form of utopianism, and will never lead to a functioning state.

    Like other utopian forms, it makes no allowance for the human beings that will be the citizens of its utopian state.

    And like other utopias, it will fail, even if given significantly better than a fair shake.


    I saw Johnson interviewed on fox news and he fell right into the standard trap the media sets for libertarians. When he supported gay marriage he was asked if he supported polygamist multi partner marriage. When he supported that as well I knew he didn't have a chance.


    Of course Johnson doesn't have a chance that is why HP promoting him to siphon votes away from Trump is so transparent. He was a decent governor here for eight years with no scandals and he vetoed about three hundred wasteful dem spending bills and left the state in the green. We then were blessed with the  Crooked Clintonite Bill Richardson for eight years of corruption and waste leaving the state deep in the red.


    You never provide data, so we have nothing to support your argument about Johnson. There is evidence that the state debt rose under Johnson

    https://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=210816


    Because you have such a hard time understanding data, RM i don't bother adding to your confusion although your link certainly does.

    If my recollection is correct Johnson left office with the yearly state budget in the green while the state debt climbed for many and varied reasons but it was not added to by the spending bills he vetoed.

    I did not vote for Johnson or support his agenda but i enjoyed his stifling of the tax and spend dems and their lame reactions to his veto.

    I wouldn't dare to look at the state debt today with low oil revenues and the over one $Billion debt that Richardson's legacy train to nowhere saddled state taxpayers with.


    Peter, I don't care about your recollection. I don't care that you don't want to look at data. You only prove that you have no interest in facts. All you have are insults. You are elderly. Statistics support the idea that the world will end sooner for the elderly. Seeing the end approaching might be painful for those who did nothing in life and want everyone else to share in their hopelessness.


    You're always so insightful about what democrats are feeling. When I saw the polling that Hillary has a double digit lead over Trump I'll admit I had some anxiety. But when it turned out it was mostly due to Sanders supporters moving to Hillary much faster than Hillary supporters moved to Obama in 08 despite Sanders weak support for her I had a full blown panic attack. I know it's early and things can change but if I keep getting "bad" news like this I'll be a nervous wreck by election day. I guess you have to be on the outside looking in to really see what the democrats are feeling.


    I  not sure liberal dems have 'feelings' and i was reflecting on what they are saying and projecting. Most of Sanders' supporters seem to be liberal dems and many were probably Clinton operatives especially in the higher ranks so their defection was expected.

    The real story is the #Bernie or Bust contingent however large it may be and their pledge to never vote for the beast. The spinmeisters will try to disappear them from public view but they seem to be popping up here and at other sites spreading their heresies and panicking the faithful.


    Latest Comments