Richard Nixon was a crook, we all agree on that I think. But if Nixon can be called crooked, what can Hillary Clinton be called? Seriously, if Nixon crookedness was an ant hill, Hillary’s would be Mt. Everest, sitting on top of K2 Mt. Godwin Austen sitting on top of Mt. Kangchenjunga. Via A View From the Beach
FBI Says a Laptop That Held Clinton’s E-Mails Has Gone Missing. It’s not clear from the report whether it was lost in Clinton.com hands or FBI hands, although some reports seem to suggest it was in the FBI’s possession:
A personal laptop computer used to archive Hillary Clinton’s e-mails when she was secretary of state went missing after being put in the mail, according to the FBI’s report on its investigation into her use of a private e-mail system.
How often do you lose a computer in the mail?
Clinton, aides told FBI conflicting stories about email use
Hillary Clinton told FBI investigators last month that she did not have a personal computer inside the area within her home designed for viewing classified information known as a SCIF.
But three different witnesses told the FBI Clinton did indeed use personal computers inside the SCIFs at her Washington, D.C., and Chappaqua, N.Y., homes.
The contradiction in Clinton’s statements was just one of many that was exposed in the scathing 58 pages of notes released by the FBI Friday from its investigation of Clinton.
In another, Clinton told the FBI agents who interviewed her in July that State Department employees were well aware of her private email use because she contacted them frequently from her personal address.
“However, some State employees interviewed by the FBI explained that emails from Clinton only contained the letter ‘H’ in the sender field and did not display her email address,” the FBI wrote.
I wondered about that; most people don’t go to the trouble of clicking on the address to find out where it comes from unless they’re suspicious of the source.
Evidence Clinton Was Speared In Phishing Attack – FBI report details “multiple” attempts to breach accounts One is more amusing than the rest.
At one point, Clinton aide Huma Abedin wrote to an associate indicating that Clinton was concerned about someone “hacking into her email” since Clinton had received an e-mail from a “known…associate” containing “a link to a website with pornographic material.”
“Here, I think Anthony sent this to me by mistake!”
Go read it all folks, this is about as damning as it gets. But, as always with the Clinton’s there is more, like destroying cell phones with hammers
Yeah, REALLY! But please, move along, nothing to see here! Did I mention the
Clinton Foundation or should say the Lets Make the Clintons Filthy Rich Slush Fund?
The Clinton Foundation’s finances are so messy that the nation’s most influential charity watchdog put it on its “watch list” of problematic nonprofits last month.
The Clinton family’s mega-charity took in more than $140 million in grants and pledges in 2013 but spent just $9 million on direct aid.
The group spent the bulk of its windfall on administration, travel, and salaries and bonuses, with the fattest payouts going to family friends.
On its 2013 tax forms, the most recent available, the foundation claimed it spent $30 million on payroll and employee benefits; $8.7 million in rent and office expenses; $9.2 million on “conferences, conventions and meetings”; $8 million on fundraising; and nearly $8.5 million on travel. None of the Clintons is on the payroll, but they do enjoy first-class flights paid for by the foundation.
In all, the group reported $84.6 million in “functional expenses” on its 2013 tax return and had more than $64 million left over — money the organization has said represents pledges rather than actual cash on hand.
Some of the tens of millions in administrative costs finance more than 2,000 employees, including aid workers and health professionals around the world.
But that’s still far below the 75 percent rate of spending that nonprofit experts say a good charity should spend on its mission.
Charity Navigator, which rates nonprofits, recently refused to rate the Clinton Foundation because its “atypical business model . . . doesn’t meet our criteria.”
Charity Navigator put the foundation on its “watch list,” which warns potential donors about investing in problematic charities. The 23 charities on the list include the Rev. Al Sharpton’s troubled National Action Network, which is cited for failing to pay payroll taxes for several years.
But, again, please move along, nothing to see here. What? Pay for play? Nooooooo
Her defenders keep insisting that there was “no quid pro quo” in having Ms. Clinton, when she was secretary of state, meet privately with Clinton Foundation donors — many of them foreign donors — seeking the favors of Ms. Clinton and the American government.
The talking points were established early on by Clinton surrogate and interim Democratic Party Chair Donna Brazile on ABC, after the Associated Press broke its story about Clinton Foundation megabucks donors getting all that happy face time alone with Hillary.
Ms. Brazile said:
“So, you know, this notion that, somehow or another, someone who is a supporter, someone who is a donor, somebody who’s an activist, saying, I want access, I want to come into a room and I want to meet people, we often criminalize behavior that is normal. And it’s — I don’t — I don’t see what the smoke is.”
Only in Washington can it be considered normal, not criminal, for insiders to use our government to get rich.
And here it is boiled down to its simplest form
The corruption was in the selling of access to the highest reaches of the federal government.
Yep, but move along, just…………