HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » New emails highlight inte...

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 03:57 PM

 

New emails highlight interaction between State, Clinton Foundation

“Secretary of State Hillary Clinton worked hand in glove with the Clinton Foundation on fundraising and foreign policy,” said Tom Fitton, president of the conservative legal watchdog, in a statement.

“Despite the law and her promises to the contrary, Hillary Clinton turned the State Department into the D.C. office of the Clinton Foundation,” he added of the current Democratic presidential front-runner.

Judicial Watch on Tuesday said it had obtained 276 pages of documents from State as a result of a federal court order following a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit.

An August 2009 email chain shows Clinton’s staff at the department communicating with Clinton Foundation staff on how she could thank their supporters for “commitments” they made.

“It would be helpful to have [a] list of commitments during whole session so she can reference more than just those around her speech,” wrote Cheryl Mills, Clinton’s then-chief of staff at State, in a message to Amitabh Desai, then the Clinton Foundation’s director of foreign policy.

The State Department’s Office of Inspector General reportedly issued a subpoena to the Clinton Foundation last fall as part of an investigation into projects that may have required federal approval while she was secretary, according to The Washington Post.
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/273930-documents-show-coordination-between-state-clinton

68 replies, 4131 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 68 replies Author Time Post
Reply New emails highlight interaction between State, Clinton Foundation (Original post)
w4rma Mar 2016 OP
upaloopa Mar 2016 #1
pantsonfire Mar 2016 #5
upaloopa Mar 2016 #7
Kittycat Mar 2016 #11
upaloopa Mar 2016 #35
DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2016 #12
w4rma Mar 2016 #18
upaloopa Mar 2016 #36
snagglepuss Mar 2016 #55
840high Mar 2016 #24
Ned_Devine Mar 2016 #27
upaloopa Mar 2016 #37
Ned_Devine Mar 2016 #52
840high Mar 2016 #59
amborin Mar 2016 #63
revbones Mar 2016 #30
upaloopa Mar 2016 #38
revbones Mar 2016 #54
senz Mar 2016 #50
Politicalboi Mar 2016 #51
Motown_Johnny Mar 2016 #65
pnwmom Mar 2016 #58
DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2016 #9
eomer Mar 2016 #10
Autumn Mar 2016 #47
pantsonfire Mar 2016 #2
NWCorona Mar 2016 #3
upaloopa Mar 2016 #8
NWCorona Mar 2016 #13
upaloopa Mar 2016 #16
NWCorona Mar 2016 #19
upaloopa Mar 2016 #20
NWCorona Mar 2016 #22
upaloopa Mar 2016 #39
NWCorona Mar 2016 #43
840high Mar 2016 #60
highprincipleswork Mar 2016 #23
Wilms Mar 2016 #4
hrmjustin Mar 2016 #6
Kittycat Mar 2016 #14
hrmjustin Mar 2016 #17
Uncle Joe Mar 2016 #15
farleftlib Mar 2016 #21
leftofcool Mar 2016 #25
giftedgirl77 Mar 2016 #26
Lizzie Poppet Mar 2016 #28
840high Mar 2016 #61
John Poet Mar 2016 #66
Peace Patriot Mar 2016 #29
farleftlib Mar 2016 #32
AtomicKitten Mar 2016 #44
farleftlib Mar 2016 #46
AtomicKitten Mar 2016 #49
farleftlib Mar 2016 #53
WDIM Mar 2016 #33
Peace Patriot Mar 2016 #45
WDIM Mar 2016 #34
840high Mar 2016 #62
WDIM Mar 2016 #31
upaloopa Mar 2016 #40
amborin Mar 2016 #48
WDIM Mar 2016 #68
AzDar Mar 2016 #41
amborin Mar 2016 #42
Politicalboi Mar 2016 #56
Vattel Mar 2016 #57
Babel_17 Mar 2016 #64
Octafish Mar 2016 #67

Response to w4rma (Original post)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 03:58 PM

1. Does the right wing sourcing stop at some point?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upaloopa (Reply #1)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 04:01 PM

5. I get your point.

 

Though on another note, it's good to not be blind to what they're printing. On this issue, we should let the FBI and other agencies do their jobs, at this point it's all speculation. Unless you go through her emails via wikileaks and draw your own conclusions (still focusing on the campaign is more important).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pantsonfire (Reply #5)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 04:04 PM

7. Nobody gives a crap about emails and transcripts but those in opposition

to Hillary.

We should be about electing Dems in November not tearing them down!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upaloopa (Reply #7)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 04:10 PM

11. Actually, as a taxpayer - I do.

And you should as well. If you don't, that's on you. This is of great concern to me, and what happens should she get in office. Particularly in regards to the Clinton Foundation. Even more so now that it's come to light they have been receiving money from foreign countries that may have influenced her decision making while SoS (i.e. Saudi Arabia).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kittycat (Reply #11)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 08:05 PM

35. We are all tax payers. That doesn't give you the right to make up scandals about our candidates

because you disagree with their ideology.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upaloopa (Reply #7)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 04:11 PM

12. These people couldn't care less about electing more Democrats to office...

Their raison d'etre is to destroy our party even if they lack the courage or candor to say so explicitly.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upaloopa (Reply #7)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 04:16 PM

18. The State Department’s Office of Inspector General cares

 

The State Department’s Office of Inspector General reportedly issued a subpoena to the Clinton Foundation last fall as part of an investigation into projects that may have required federal approval while she was secretary, according to The Washington Post.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to w4rma (Reply #18)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 08:07 PM

36. The Clinton foundation is a charity that has done more good in the world than Bernie ever has!

Bill and Hillary and Chelsea have done more good for people than anyone you can name!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to upaloopa (Reply #7)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 05:23 PM

24. I do.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 840high (Reply #24)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 05:32 PM

27. This makes me think of all the HRC supporters' responses to this news

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ned_Devine (Reply #27)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 08:10 PM

37. You join all the other Hillary Clinton scandal mongers not good company

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upaloopa (Reply #37)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 08:58 PM

52. This issue is not going to go away no matter who brings it up

 

I was blind to the way the Clintons did business up until the 2008 election. it was then that I saw the racist, scorched earth, win at all costs campaign that they ran against Barack. I think the Clintons feel they are above the law and they can do whatever they want, but their flaws will either catch up with them now, or in the GE and it will be their downfall.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ned_Devine (Reply #52)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 09:56 PM

59. I supported her in '08. Took me

 

a while to wise up to her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ned_Devine (Reply #27)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 10:23 PM

63. you and everyone; appalling reactions to appalling behavior

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upaloopa (Reply #7)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 05:36 PM

30. Who cares if they're corrupted right? As long as they have that D. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to revbones (Reply #30)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 08:11 PM

38. Produce the evidence of corruption plerase.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upaloopa (Reply #38)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 09:02 PM

54. Of the many?

 

1. Emails showing linkage between Clinton Foundation and Mid East arms deals
2. Bankruptcy bill flip flop after receiving donations
3. Colombia Free Trade Agreement secret lobbying
4. Wall St speaking fees and donations without releasing transcripts

It goes on and on, but you'll just deflect and say "right wing smear" or "But [Insert Name] did it too!" or something like all that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upaloopa (Reply #7)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 08:53 PM

50. I like to know what our candidates have been doing.

 

After all one of them might become the president and we want a good one, not a crooked one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upaloopa (Reply #7)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 08:58 PM

51. Elect a possible ticking time bomb

 

This election is too important to bet she won't get indicted or impeached. You may want to make that bet, but we don't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upaloopa (Reply #7)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 09:53 AM

65. Only her hero worshiping devotees don't. The rest of us do.

 


If you honestly believe nobody cares about these, seek professional help.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pantsonfire (Reply #5)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 09:32 PM

58. Do you feel the same way about what the RW is saying about Bernie?

Isn't that equally important?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upaloopa (Reply #1)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 04:08 PM

9. Sadly, no..

It's all they got.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upaloopa (Reply #1)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 04:10 PM

10. The actual source is emails written by Clinton's staffers at State. (eom)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upaloopa (Reply #1)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 08:41 PM

47. The Hill is RW? Or the actual emails obtained from FOIAs released are RW?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to w4rma (Original post)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 03:58 PM

2. I wish...

 

Judicial Watch was an independent group, it only adds to the RW conspiracy theory.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to w4rma (Original post)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 03:59 PM

3. Get ready for the link bashing

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Reply #3)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 04:06 PM

8. Sorry I already did and it should be bashed!

The sign on the door says DEMOCRATIC underground

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upaloopa (Reply #8)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 04:11 PM

13. I really don't have a problem with the bashing

But if there is relative information it shouldn't be dismissed out right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Reply #13)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 04:14 PM

16. It isn't relative to anyone

It's right wing bull shit and taking advantage of it is not an honorable thing to do

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upaloopa (Reply #16)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 04:23 PM

19. You really can't say that when the actual emails are supplied

You can say what you want about the RW you'd probably be right but some of those emails aren't good.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Reply #19)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 04:29 PM

20. The emails have been supplied. There is no there there

There was nothing illegal done

There were no classified emails when sent or received

This is just another Hillary hit piece and to use it is not honorable.

Just as dragging out Benghazi and travelgate and Whitewater and Vince Foster

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upaloopa (Reply #20)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 04:39 PM

22. Actually that's not entirely true

I'm not going to say if she's guilty as I obviously can't say that but.

There are some emails that were in fact classified at the time sent. If you understand the coding when documents are first classified you'd see that some were born classified. I'm not going to go to deep into it but it's the Declassify date codes. Some are exactly 10 years after the date the emails are sent and those are the ones born classified. Others are scheduled to be declassified 10 years after the classification process and those are the truly retroactive emails.

Also you will never hear me talk bad about Hillary in regards to benghazi or the others you listed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Reply #22)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 08:13 PM

39. No there were not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upaloopa (Reply #39)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 08:16 PM

43. Sorry but if you want to be taken seriously

You need more than that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upaloopa (Reply #16)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 10:00 PM

60. It's not honorable to vote

 

for a possible law breaker.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upaloopa (Reply #8)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 05:09 PM

23. Democrats who work like this should be ashamed.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to w4rma (Original post)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 04:00 PM

4. The Clintons have boundry issues. n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to w4rma (Original post)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 04:03 PM

6. Don't get your hopes up. It's Judicial Watch.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hrmjustin (Reply #6)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 04:13 PM

14. Does it change where the emails came from?

JW, Wikileaks, NYT - it doesn't matter who reports it, if you are reading source material from her own emails. You can't excuse what she did, because you don't like who pointed the spotlight.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kittycat (Reply #14)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 04:15 PM

17. You will forgive me if I take this with a grain of salt.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to w4rma (Original post)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 04:13 PM

15. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, w4rma.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to w4rma (Original post)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 04:31 PM

21. Maybe Hillary wants to end the revolving door

 

between government and pro-corporate lobbying -- by just combining the two while still in office!!!

She truly is a progressive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to w4rma (Original post)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 05:27 PM

25. Ben Gawzi!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to w4rma (Original post)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 05:31 PM

26. Who gives a shit what some RW asshole says???

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to w4rma (Original post)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 05:33 PM

28. Didn't take Princess Weathervane's Ostrich Army long, did it?

 

"I don't buy that Hillary actually bit the head off that live kitten. It's probably some RW'er using CGI!"

"Um...you just saw it in person...we're at a rally."

"YOU MUST BE KARL ROVE!!!"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lizzie Poppet (Reply #28)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 10:05 PM

61. Hillary does it but of course

 

the RW is to blame. They made her do it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 840high (Reply #61)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 10:15 AM

66. "The Right Wing Is To Blame" because

 

Hillary IS Right-Wing!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to w4rma (Original post)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 05:33 PM

29. I don't think the FBI is merely looking at classification errors.

I don't think that is what this investigation is about. Although laws may have been broken on classification, I don't think they would have 150 FBI agents looking at just that. I think the MAIN issue is the Clinton Foundation pay-to-play set up--that is, what Clinton what using her private server FOR.

If they find classification errors or security issues, what they will likely do is go after Clinton's aides, to pressure them for more information on the main issue: using a high government office for personal gain, in the billions of dollars (and from some of the worst scumbags on earth, like the Saudis).

For those Clinton supporters who castigate others for a failure of loyalty to President Obama, consider this: Obama banned Clinton advocate Sydney Blumenthal from his administration. Told Clinton he didn't want Blumenthal in the State Department. The Clinton Foundation then hired Blumenthal (big salary)--a foundation that was getting billions of dollars from foreign sources--and Clinton communicated with Blumenthal on foreign policy matters using her private server. What kind of loyalty did this show to Obama? None at all. She was trying to deceive him.

I have some pretty solid reasons for believing that Obama is angry at Clinton, even apart from the above: mainly,

1) Her support of the fascist coup in Honduras (only 6 months into his first term, when he was preoccupied with global financial meltdown and 2 wars), which totally fucked up his goal of improving relations with Latin America. Latin American governments were universally furious about the Honduran coup, and blame the U.S. for it. Obama and Kerry are now trying to repair the damage Clinton did--with Obama's visit to Cuba and Obama/Kerry's support for the Colombia/FARC peace talks. Both issues--U.S. non-recognition of Cuba and U.S. fueling of the Colombia civil war and putting U.S. military bases in Colombia--are also very big issues in LatAm, though we don't hear much about it here; and

2) Destabilization of Libya and Syria. It is largely HER mess, resulting in the barbaric 'Islamic state' (much like Honduras is HER mess, resulting in rampant RW death squads who just murdered the winner of the Goldman Environmental Prize, Berta Caceres, an Indigenous woman and anti-coup activist, and have murdered, raped, beaten and imprisoned thousands of others, most often women and gays). Obama and Kerry have been working to overcome the damage Clinton is responsible for in the ME (as they are doing in Latin America).

It is VERY DIFFICULT to know what is really going on in our government. So I think it is also POSSIBLE that the FBI investigation is a means of protecting Clinton (and the Obama administration?) from the RW hound dogs who would drag her down over ANY issue and are smelling blood on this one. Obama supports TPP and that is a reason to believe he supports Clinton. But the weight of the above for the moment seems to tip the other way--Clinton caused no end of problems for Obama and he will not try to block an FBI indictment if the FBI thinks it is warranted. (He might find himself in a Watergate "Saturday Night Massacre" situation if he did try to block it, but it may well be that he wouldn't be inclined to block it.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Peace Patriot (Reply #29)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 05:42 PM

32. Brilliant post!

 

I have believed that for a long time too. He came out against the Honduran military coup and she supported it as if he had no say in the matter!

All your points are spot on. I believe she was running a rogue State Dept. with secret email to conduct business for her foundation without having to worry about pesky oversight or FOIA. But her disrespect of the prez was most unseemly to boot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to AtomicKitten (Reply #44)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 08:34 PM

46. I was appalled by her entire tenure as SoS

 

She is responsible for so much destruction - and more importantly - the spread of ISIS throughout Libya. She destroyed that country despite opposition from many at the Pentagon, and from cooler heads at State.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farleftlib (Reply #46)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 08:46 PM

49. I was discussing this with friends at dinner the other night.

 

All else before she was SOS aside, I absolutely agree her tenure as SOS was rife with cronyism, secrecy, and quid pro quo between the MIC (arms manufacturers) and dodgy countries on the human rights violator list with the Clinton Foundation the go-between receiving ungodly sums of money. She pushed Pres Obama to create a vacuum in Libya which has descended into chaos, and supports and would almost certainly order regime change in Syria if given the chance. On this point - foreign policy - I actively oppose her candidacy. I don't want her anywhere near the levers of government.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtomicKitten (Reply #49)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 09:01 PM

53. Agreed

 

She is not to be trusted. She is poster child for absolute power corrupting absolutely.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Peace Patriot (Reply #29)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 05:43 PM

33. The MIC and the foreign partys involved

with the pay to play are too influencial as is Clinton.
Their money has too long of a reach. The FBI will never indict on this corruption because of the people they will take down with Clinton.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WDIM (Reply #33)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 08:28 PM

45. Maybe. But FBI Director Comey was willing to buck the Bush junta on...

...warrantless spying, when they tried to force AG Ashcroft to sign off on it, on his hospital bed. Or that's the story we've been told, and I don't have any reason to disbelieve it. Showed some guts, showed some anger, even, at Bush junta's scumbag tactics--also determination to stop it (which he did).

Of course, he didn't go after Cheney on Halliburton. He should have. That was VERY corrupt. And so much more. ($1 Billion 'missing' in Iraq. Jeez.)

You may be right. But I think we make a mistake when we view the Establishment as a monolith. It has its serious rifts, even internal wars (CIA vs Rumsfeld's Pentagon/& Cheney, for instance). There are factions in every Imperium. Could be a whole lot of people don't like Clinton, and could be she isn't really in with the in crowd, but an aspirer, sucking up to all those billionaires and bad guys. Could be she's expendable if the strongest factions want Trump (or someone else they intend to throw it to). She strikes me as someone who is very unsure of her ground, kind of like Nixon.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Peace Patriot (Reply #29)


Response to Peace Patriot (Reply #29)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 10:07 PM

62. .^that x100+

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to w4rma (Original post)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 05:36 PM

31. Her record for political favors exchanged for donations

Is well documented beyond rw sources.

Boeing, the Saudi Royals and the list goes on.

The M$M and repugs ignore this because they too are bought by the Saudis and the MIC. They dont want to out their own corruption.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WDIM (Reply #31)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 08:14 PM

40. Post them !

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upaloopa (Reply #40)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 08:42 PM

48. they have been posted, repeatedly

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to amborin (Reply #48)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 12:54 PM

68. exactly and ignored repeatedly. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to w4rma (Original post)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 08:15 PM

41. Ack!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to w4rma (Original post)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 08:15 PM

42. knr

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to w4rma (Original post)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 09:11 PM

56. Drip Drip Drip

 

Now her supporters want to take credit for Cuba. It's in their bubble, so most of us can't comment. I guess John Kerry has been doing nothing since she left.

I hope the FBI hurry's this along.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to w4rma (Original post)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 09:11 PM

57. I am gonna need more evidence of corruption here.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to w4rma (Original post)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 09:52 AM

64. It's a conservative source but that's because they took the initiative

It's actually embarrassing how more liberal media dropped the ball on being our watchdogs on matters like this. But that's the trend, not spending money on investigative journalism. Partisans get those resources, but not objective journalists who are only funded well enough to comment from the sidelines.

This suits to a T those at the top of the media, as they answer to the owners, who are big corporations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to w4rma (Original post)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 10:20 AM

67. Explains the missing Inspector General.

The author helped put the S&L crooks behind bars in the 1990s as a regulator and forensic economist for the SEC. Black helped Iceland put its banksters behind bars, but for some reason, the Federal government failed to call on him for help in the great Bankster Bailout of 2008. He knows a bit about Inspector Generals and Control Fraud.


The Clintons Have Not Changed: The Clintonian War on the IGs

By William K. Black
February 23, 2016 Bloomington, MN

Secretary Hillary Clinton is asking Democratic voters to believe that she has experienced a “Road to Damascus” conversion from her roots as a leader of the “New Democrats” – the Wall Street wing of the Democratic Party. When exactly this conversion occurred is never stated, but an interesting fact has emerged that demonstrates it did not occur during her service as the Secretary of State. A Wall Street Journal story provides the key facts, but none of the analysis.

Newly released emails indicate that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and her top staff were involved in the selection process for the State Department’s internal watchdog, a position that ultimately went unfilled throughout her four-year tenure.


The WSJ’s angle is that such involvement in the selection of the Inspector General (IG) is a threat to the IG’s vital independence. True, and also true as the story notes that Hillary was far from rare as an agency or department head in seeking to select behind the scenes the supposedly independent IGs.

The function of the IG is to “speak truth to power.” Naturally, “power” hates IGs with a purple passion. Government leaders are most likely to hate having its abuses made public by IG when the government leader is secretly acting in concert with immensely powerful private leaders for their mutual benefit at the expense of the public.

What the WSJ missed is that the Clinton’s, for decades, have sought to destroy the independence and effectiveness of the IGs precisely because of the threat that they pose of blowing the whistle on these abuses. The Obama administration, of course, is famous for its prosecutions of those who blow the whistle on such abuses. The real story is not that Hillary attempted to select a lap dog as IG – the real story is that for her entire tenure as Secretary, four years, she left unfilled the leadership position of the only institution in the State Department dedicated to maintaining integrity and preventing the abuse of public power to aid cronies. That aid, of course, comes with the clear expectation that the cronies will make the head of the State Department wealthy as soon as she or he steps down. There is no possible defense for that, and it does not happen accidentally. The primary blame goes to President Obama, who made no nomination for the position for the entire four years. It wasn’t Republican intransigence that explains this scandal.

CONTINUED...

http://neweconomicperspectives.org/2016/03/clintons-not-changed-clintonian-war-igs.html#more-10101


Bill Black is one of "those" economists who won't play ball with the money crowd. Why? He. Has. Integrity.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread