Posted tagged ‘Clinton Cash film’

‘Clinton Cash’ Author: Clinton Foundation Foreign Cash Ban ‘Too Little, Too Late’

August 19, 2016

‘Clinton Cash’ Author: Clinton Foundation Foreign Cash Ban ‘Too Little, Too Late’, BreitbartPeter Schweizer, August 18, 2016

Bill-Clinton-Hillary-Clinton-Clinton-Global-Initiative-Foundation-AP-640x480Greg Allen/Invision/AP

If it would be wrong for Hillary’s foundation to accept foreign cash as president, why wasn’t it wrong for Hillary’s foundation to accept foreign cash from oligarchs and countries who had business pending on her desk as Sec. of State?

*****************

In the wake of reports that the Clinton Foundation may have been hacked, Hillary Clinton’s embattled foundation announced on Thursday that, if Clinton is elected, her foundation will no longer accept the kinds of foreign and corporate donations at the heart of the Clinton Cash scandal.

The new pledge is a stunning tacit admission of wrongdoing, but it comes too little too late and raises the obvious question: If it would be wrong for Hillary’s foundation to accept foreign cash as president, why wasn’t it wrong for Hillary’s foundation to accept foreign cash from oligarchs and countries who had business pending on her desk as Sec. of State?

Moreover, if, as has been confirmed by numerous mainstream media organizations, Hillary Clinton violated her ethics pledge with the Obama administration to disclose all Clinton Foundation donations, why should the American people believe she would now honor a new pledge to forgo bagging cash from foreign oligarchs and countries?

After all, as both Bloomberg and the Washington Post have reported, Hillary’s foundation has still not revealed 1,100 foreign donations. And as Clinton Cash revealed, other hidden foreign donations include four totaling $2.35 million from Ian Telfer, the former head of one of the Russian government’s uranium companies, Uranium One. Let that sink in: the head of Russian’s uranium company was transferring funds to Hillary Clinton’s foundation.

Only now, with the fear of hacked emails being made public, has Hillary Clinton decided to entertain the idea of putting an end to the unprecedented practice of a sitting executive branch official with foreign policies pending on her desk accepting hundreds of millions of foreign dollars.

Indeed, for years, and as recently as this week, voices across the political spectrum have been appalled by the glaring conflict of interest and pleaded for the Clinton Foundation to reject foreign money in the hopes of reducing the threat of influence peddling and pay-to-play schemes. The New York Times, the Boston Globe, and even former Democratic National Committee Chairman Ed Rendell have all called on Hillary to stop. She refused. Only once it became clear that the Clinton Foundation may have been vulnerable to hacking, and the potential exposure of internal communications became a serious threat, did she decide to cut off the spigot of foreign funds into her foundation.

This week, Senate Judiciary Chairman Charles Grassley (R-IA) launched a probe to discover why the Obama Dept. of Justice blocked multiple FBI field office requests to investigate the Clinton Foundation. That’s a start. And the Clinton Cash documentary has now been viewed well over three million times.

But pressing broader questions remain, questions national mainstream media have heretofore been afraid to ask Hillary Clinton about the most glaring and vast series of conflicts of interest in modern American politics.

Hillary Clinton has not answered why her State Dept. approved the transfer of 20% of all U.S. uranium to Russia while not disclosing to the Obama administration that nine investors in that uranium deal funneled $145 million to the Clinton Foundation.

Hillary Clinton has not answered why her brother, Tony Rodham, sat on the board of a company that received a rare “gold exploitation permit” from the Haitian government while she was dispersing billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars in Haiti earthquake disaster relief.

Hillary Clinton has not answered why she hid $2.35 million in Clinton Foundation donations from the head of one of the Russian government’s uranium companies.

Hillary Clinton has not answered why she has yet to release the names of the 1,100 foreign Clinton Foundation donors that both Bloomberg and the Washington Post confirm remain secret.

Hillary Clinton has not answered why it was appropriate for Bill Clinton to deliver a $500,000 speech in Moscow paid for by a Kremlin-backed bank while she led the so-called Russian reset as Sec. of State—a Clinton Cash revelation so egregious, that even the progressive New Yorker magazine was left to ponder, “Why was Bill Clinton taking any money from a bank linked to the Kremlin while his wife was Secretary of State?”

Hillary Clinton has not answered why her current campaign chairman, John Podesta, sat on the board of a company alongside Russian officials that received $35 million from Rusnano, Vladimir Putin’s funding apparatus.

Hillary Clinton has not answered whether her husband will stop giving paid speeches.

Myriad questions have gone unasked and unanswered about the toxic brew of foreign cash and Hillary Clinton’s State Dept. decisions.

Perhaps now, with this stunning new tacit admission of unethical and inappropriate behavior by Hillary Clinton and her foundation, will the mainstream media find the spine to do the hard work of investigative reporting and the courage to demand serious answers.

Compromised: Justice Dept. Refused FBI Probe of Clinton Foundation

August 11, 2016

Compromised: Justice Dept. Refused FBI Probe of Clinton Foundation, Front Page MagazineMatthew Vadum, August 11, 2016

(Please see also, Report: Justice Department declined FBI request to investigate Clinton Foundation. — DM)

gty_ap_loretta_lynch_hillary_clinton_jt_150726_16x9_992

The highly politicized Department of Justice swatted down pesky FBI requests to investigate the Clinton Foundation earlier this year, CNN reported yesterday.

CNN buried the lede, as it frequently does on news stories that make Democrats look bad. The online version bears the innocuous-sounding headline, “Newly released Clinton emails shed light on relationship between State Dept. and Clinton Foundation.”

It is not until the 25th paragraph that the article states that an unidentified law enforcement official gave CNN a heads-up earlier this year. As the probe of Clinton’s private email servers was ramping up “several FBI field offices approached the Justice Department asking to open a case regarding the relationship between the State Department and the Clinton Foundation.”

At that time, the article continues, the Justice Department “declined because it had looked into allegations surrounding the Clinton Foundation around a year earlier and found there wasn’t sufficient evidence to open a case.”

Not even enough evidence to look into the foundation’s affairs?

Not more than a year after the publication of Peter Schweizer’s blockbuster book, Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich, opened the floodgates for investigative reporters to dig into the matter.

As I’ve written before, various lawyers have told me there is already a strong legal case against Mrs. Clinton. The fact that she destroyed email evidence — evidence subject to a congressional subpoena, no less — is already evidence in itself that she obstructed justice through spoliation of evidence. Spoliation means you can take as evidence the fact that evidence has been destroyed. Courts are entitled to draw spoliation inferences and convict an accused person on that basis alone.

The only reason FBI Director James Comey didn’t recommend she be prosecuted is because, well, he lacks a spine and he’s corrupt. He said there was no evidence of Clinton’s “efforts to obstruct justice,” a requirement that does not actually appear in the Espionage Act.

Evidence of corruption at the Clinton Foundation is everywhere, yet CNN and much of the mainstream media are still doing everything they can to ignore, misrepresent, or downplay the questionable things Democrat presidential nominee Hillary Clinton did through the foundation.

The congenitally corrupt Clintons created their private email system to frustrate Freedom of Information Act (FoIA) requesters, shield Hillary’s correspondence from congressional oversight, and steer money to their corrupt foundation, which, amazingly enough, still enjoys tax-exempt status.

These illegal, insecure private email servers Clinton used while at the State Department are at the heart of the scandal over her mishandling of an Islamic terrorist attack in militant-infested Benghazi, Libya on the 11th anniversary of 9/11 that left four Americans, including U.S. ambassador Chris Stevens, dead. Even now, four years after the assault, the Obama administration has failed to provide an autopsy report about Stevens who was initially reported to have been ritualistically sodomized before being murdered by Muslim terrorists.

Every few days Judicial Watch has been releasing emails obtained under FoIA that may ultimately lead to evidence of political interference at the highest levels that provided cover for the anticipatory presidential bribe processing vehicle known as the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation.

“No wonder Hillary Clinton and Huma Abedin hid emails from the American people, the courts and Congress,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “They show the Clinton Foundation, Clinton donors, and operatives worked with Hillary Clinton in potential violation of the law.”

On Tuesday the watchdog group published emails sent to Abedin, Clinton’s longtime aide with generational ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, seeking favors. Abedin now vice-chairs Clinton’s presidential campaign. She also worked at the State Department with Clinton and with her at the Clinton Foundation.

“The new documents reveal that in April 2009 controversial Clinton Foundation official Doug Band pushed for a job for an associate,” according to a Judicial Watch summary. “In the email Band tells Hillary Clinton’s former aides at the State Department Cheryl Mills and Huma Abedin that it is “important to take care of [Redacted]. Band is reassured by Abedin that “Personnel has been sending him options.” Band was co-founder of Teneo Strategy with Bill Clinton and a top official of the Clinton Foundation, including its Clinton Global Initiative.”

Emails also show Abedin left then-Secretary Clinton’s daily schedule, presumably a  sensitive document, on a bed in an unlocked hotel room.

“An email on April 18, 2009, during a conference in Trinidad and Tobago, from aide Melissa J. Lan to Huma Abedin asks for the Secretary’s “day book binders.” Abedin replies: “Yes. It’s on the bed in my room. U can take it. My door is open. I’m in the lobby. Thx.” Moreover, the emails show the annoyance of another Clinton aide that the schedule was sent to an authorized State Department email address and not to an unsecured non-state.gov account.”

Other emails show Clinton campaign adviser and pollster Mark Penn provided Clinton advice on NATO and piracy. Clinton fundraiser Lana Moresky asked Clinton to have the State Department hire someone. Clinton asked Abedin to follow up and “help” the applicant and asked Abedin to “let me know” about the job.

Meanwhile, the Left is trying to take the focus off the Clinton Foundation.

A high-profile watchdog group controlled by Hillary Clinton ally David Brock is demanding the IRS investigate Donald Trump’s personal foundation for allegedly aiding his presidential campaign.

The call by CREW, or Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, has to be the most obvious political hit job of this election cycle.

CREW is a member of what some in the conservative think tank community call the “Brocktopus,” that is, the network of groups the disgraced former journalist runs, which spends oodles of money defending all things Clinton. An admitted serial liar, Brock’s empire of sleaze also includes “conservative misinformation” watchdog Media Matters for America, pro-Hillary disaster-control spin site Correct the Record, and American Bridge 21st Century, a super PAC that promotes Hillary and attacks her critics.

CREW executive director Noah Bookbinder asked the IRS to investigate the Donald J. Trump Foundation, a tiny nonprofit founded by Trump decades ago to give away profits from his book, The Art of the Deal.

How the foundation, which ranked 4,347th in the FoundationSearch “Top Foundations by Assets for the state of New York” list would help the Trump campaign isn’t clear. “The Trump Foundation has no full-time staff, and gave away just $591,000 in 2014 — the last year for which records are available,” the Washington Post reports.

It’s possible the Trump Foundation has been helping the Trump campaign but the philanthropy is so anemic it is difficult to imagine it doing much to help its benefactor’s political career. Even if the IRS takes up this piddling little case not much is likely to come of it. It’s a political stunt by CREW, a nakedly partisan group under the boot of one of Hillary’s biggest backers.

It’s the wheeling and dealing Clinton Foundation with its involvement in billion-dollar transactions, its ties to shady figures, and the debt it owes to the unsavory governments of countries around the world that needs to be properly and thoroughly examined.

Blatant Cronyism in Newly Released Clinton Emails

August 10, 2016

Blatant Cronyism in Newly Released Clinton Emails, PJ MediaDebra Heine, August 10, 2016

hill talksKevin Lamarque/Pool Photo via AP, File

On Tuesday, Judicial Watch released 296 pages of Hillary Clinton’s email records as part of its lawsuit against the State Department. Within the release are 44 government email exchanges that had not previously been turned over to the State Department, falsifying Clinton’s oft-repeated claim that she had turned over all of her government emails.

The messages were found during a search of agency computer files of long-time Clinton aide Huma Abedin. They reveal that while in office — and in violation of ethics agreements she agreed to when she was appointed secretary of State — Hillary Clinton interacted with lobbyists, political and Clinton Foundation donors, and business interests:

The new documents reveal that in April 2009 controversial Clinton Foundation official Doug Band pushed for a job for an associate. In the email Band tells Hillary Clinton’s former aides at the State Department Cheryl Mills and Huma Abedin that it is “important to take care of [Redacted]. Band is reassured by Abedin that “Personnel has been sending him options.” Band was co-founder of Teneo Strategy with Bill Clinton and a top official of the Clinton Foundation, including its Clinton Global Initiative.Included in the new document production is a 2009 email in which Band directs Abedin and Mills to put Lebanese-Nigerian billionaire and Clinton Foundation donor Gilbert Chagoury in touch with the State Department’s “substance person” on Lebanon. Band notes that Chagoury is “key guy there [Lebanon] and to us,” and insists that Abedin call Amb. Jeffrey Feltman to connect him to Chagoury.

As a close friend of Bill’s and a top donor to the Clinton foundation, Chagoury was indeed a “key guy” to the Clintons:

He has appeared near the top of the Foundation’s donor list as a $1 million to $5 million contributor, according to foundation documents. He also pledged $1 billion to the Clinton Global Initiative. According to a 2010 investigation by PBS Frontline, Chagoury was convicted in 2000 in Switzerland for laundering money from Nigeria, but agreed to a plea deal and repaid $66 million to the Nigerian government.

These types of interactions with the Clinton Foundation appear to be in violation of the ethics agreements Hillary Clinton agreed to prior to being appointed and confirmed as secretary of State. On January 5, 2009, for example, Secretary of State-designate Hillary Clinton wrote in a letter to State Department Designated Agency Ethics Official James H. Thessin:

“For the duration of my appointment as Secretary if I am confirmed, I will not participate personally and substantially in any particular matter involving specific parties in which The William J. Clinton Foundation (or the Clinton Global Initiative) is a party or represents a party … ”

According to the Capital Research Center, while Clinton served as secretary of State, foreigndonors to the Clinton Foundation made up one-third of all donors giving more than $1 million, and made up more than half of donors who gave $5 million or more:

Before Obama even took office, the Clinton Foundation’s chairman of the board, Bruce Lindsey, signed a Memorandum of Understanding on Dec. 12, 2008 with Valerie Jarrett, then co-chair of President-elect Obama’s transition team. The document provided that “During any service by Senator Clinton as Secretary of State, the Foundation will publish annually the names of all new contributors.” We now know that the foundation cast aside its promise to make timely disclosure of donations it took in from foreign sources.And in recent days Reuters discovered that the Clinton Foundation filed incorrect Form 990 disclosures with the IRS. All nonprofits have to file the document once a year, after which it becomes publicly available. As a result of Reuters reporting, the Clinton Foundation admitted that its IRS filings from 2010 through 2012 and those of its Clinton Health Access Initiative (CHAI) from 2012 and 2013 are not accurate. The foundation does not rule out the possibility of revisiting its IRS filings going back 15 years.

According to Reuters, “[f]or three years in a row beginning in 2010, the Clinton Foundation reported to the IRS that it received zero in funds from foreign and U.S. governments, a dramatic fall-off from the tens of millions of dollars in foreign government contributions reported in preceding years.”

Rather than condemn Clinton’s egregious violation of her agreement with the Obama administration, President Obama has fulsomely endorsed her and campaigned on her behalf.

The blatant cronyism on display in the newly released emails helps explain why Clinton might want to keep them under wraps, as revealed in another email exchange.

In another email chain, then Sec. of State Clinton received advice from another large Clinton donor:

As preparation for Hillary’s upcoming visit to Asia, Stephen Roach, chairman of Morgan Stanley Asia, on Feb. 11, 2009, sends Hillary a copy of his upcoming testimonybefore Congress in which he would condemn any U.S. efforts to criticize Chinese monetary policy or enact trade barriers. Several days later, Hillary asked Abedin about Roach possibly “connecting” with her while she was in Beijing: “I forwarded you my email to him about connecting in Beijing. Can he come to the embassy or other event?” Morgan Stanley is a long-time financial supporter of the Clintons….

The emails reveal that Clinton campaign adviser and pollster Mark Penn advised Clinton on NATO and piracy. Another major Clinton fundraiser, Lana Moresky, also pushed Clinton to hire someone for a position at State. Clinton directed Abedin to follow up and “help” the applicant and told Abedin to “let me know” about the job issue.

The emails show that Hillary Clinton relied on someone named “Justin” (presumably Justin Cooper, a Bill Clinton and Clinton Foundation employee), to set up her cell phone voicemail, rather than having State Department personnel handle it. This was in a February 11, 2009, email from Clinton aide Lauren Jiloty to Clinton, using Clinton’shdr22@clintonmail.com address.

This is the ninth set of records produced for Judicial Watch by the State Department from the non-state.gov email accounts of Huma Abedin.

“No wonder Hillary Clinton and Huma Abedin hid emails from the American people, the courts and Congress,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “They show the Clinton Foundation, Clinton donors, and operatives worked with Hillary Clinton in potential violation of the law.”

Fitton appeared on Fox and Friends this morning to talk about the newly disclosed messages.

“The State Department got these emails last year, and they’ve shown repeatedly that we’re getting these batches of emails that include emails Mrs. Clinton never turned over to the State Department, despite her promises to Congress and despite telling a court under oath under penalty of perjury that as far as she knew, everything was turned over,” Fitton said. “Obviously that’s not the case.”

The film Clinton Cash, based on author Peter Schweizer’s book of the same name, exposes the suspicious patterns behind Bill Clinton’s astronomically high speaking fees and donations to the Clinton Foundation from foreign contributors while Hillary Clinton served as secretary of State. The entire movie can be watched here.

Hillary ‘Really Proud’ of Clinton Foundation — but Hid It Completely from DNC

August 1, 2016

Hillary ‘Really Proud’ of Clinton Foundation — but Hid It Completely from DNC, BreitbartEzra Dulis, July 31, 2016

Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton told Fox News’ Chris Wallace that she is “really proud” of her family’s charity the Clinton Foundation — after spending the past week hiding its existence from viewers of the Democratic National Convention.

The glaring contradiction prompted a video comparison, which you can watch above.

Wallace, in an exclusive sit-down interview, asked Clinton about allegations first made in Clinton Cash, the book and now film/graphic novel, that Clinton used the multi-billion-dollar charity for international “pay-to-play” deals while she served as Secretary of State. Author and Breitbart News Senior Editor-at-Large Peter Schweizer says that Clinton Foundation donors were on the receiving end of corrupt deals approved by Hillary’s State Department — including the sale of U.S. uranium to Russia and a rare, lucrative mining permit in Haiti.

Clinton retorted that she is “really proud of the Clinton Foundation,” yet not a single speaker at the DNC last week — not even Bill or Chelsea Clinton — mentioned the Foundation or its spinoffs such as the Clinton Global Initiative. A dramatic documentary clip on Hillary’s record of service, narrated by acclaimed actor Morgan Freeman, failed to mention the Clinton Foundation or its work around the world. The omission left the clip feeling oddly scant, as only two non-politicians appeared on camera with stories to praise Clinton’s record from over 40 years in political life.

This week, news broke that the IRS is investigating the Clinton Foundation. Earlier this month, FBI Director James Comey would not confirm or deny whether the bureau is investigating the Foundation during congressional testimony. Just days later, The Globe and Mail reported that “The Canadian affiliate of the Clinton Foundation is spending an astounding 78 percent of the money it raises on administrative costs.”

Read the transcript of Wallace and Clinton’s exchange:

WALLACE:  Let’s talk about the Clinton Foundation and allegations of pay-to-play, the argument, the allegation that foreign companies and foreign countries either donated big money to the foundation, or paid your husband for big money for speeches in order to influence your work as secretary of state.  In the first 12 years after he left the White House, President Clinton made 13 speeches for which he got $500,000 or more.  Eleven of those 13 were while you were secretary of state, and they were all paid for by foreign interests.

Are we to believe that’s just a coincidence?

CLINTON:  Well, there’s no truth to any of these allegations.

(CROSSTALK)

WALLACE:  Well, I mean, it is true that they gave — that they did make these speeches.  They are all (ph) by foreign interests, and he was getting much bigger speaking fees.

CLINTON:  He got — he gave speeches as soon as he left the White House all the way up until the last year, and he spoke all over the world, as well as throughout America, to all kinds of groups.

But let’s get to the nut of your question.  I’m really proud of the Clinton Foundation.  I am proud of the work that it does.  Thanks to the Clinton Foundation, 9 million more people in our world have access to HIV/AIDS drugs because they negotiated contracts that made them affordable.

And there is absolutely no connection between anything that I did as secretary of state and the Clinton Foundation.  So, people can say that, but I’m proud of our philanthropic work, our personal/family philanthropic work, the work of the Clinton Foundation.

I’d like to see Donald Trump’s tax returns to find out how much philanthropy he’s ever done.

How Hillary Helped U.S. Investors Fund Russian Research for Military Uses

August 1, 2016

How Hillary Helped U.S. Investors Fund Russian Research for Military Uses, Power LinePaul Mirengoff, August 1, 2016

Clinton is responsible for helping create a Russian “Silicon Valley” that has enabled the Kremlin to boost its military and surveillance capacity. And let’s not forget her role in enabling Russia to gain control of one-fifth of all uranium production capacity in the United States.

Russia has been well-served by Hillary Clinton’s cluelessness and greed.

******************************

Clinton is responsible for helping create a Russian “Silicon Valley” that has enabled the Kremlin to boost its military and surveillance capacity. And let’s not forget her role in enabling Russia to gain control of one-fifth of all uranium production capacity in the United States.

Russia has been well-served by Hillary Clinton’s cluelessness and greed.

Russia has become a major issue in this year’s presidential campaign. It should have been a major issue in the last one, but President Obama countered Mitt Romney’s attempt to inject Russia into the debate with his sophomoric quip that “the 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back.” Whether it’s ISIS (aka “the jayvee”) or Russia, Obama sure knows how to spot trouble.

This year, both parties agree that Russia poses a serious threat. In this respect, and perhaps only this respect, the 2016 campaign is an improvement over last time.

With attention now being paid, Peter Schweizer’s latest piece on the Clinton Foundation will perhaps make a mark. Writing in the Wall Street Journal, Schweizer shows that under Hillary Clinton’s leadership, “the State Department recruited and facilitated the commitment of billions of American dollars in the creation of a Russian ‘Silicon Valley’ whose technological innovations include Russian hypersonic cruise-missile engines, radar surveillance equipment, and vehicles capable of delivering airborne Russian troops.”

Here’s how it happened. As part of Hillary’s Russian reset, the Kremlin committed $5 billion over three years to fund Skolkovo, an “innovation city” on the outskirts of Moscow billed as Russia’s version of Silicon Valley. Clinton’s State Department worked aggressively to attract U.S. investment partners and helped the Russian State Investment Fund identify American tech companies worthy of Russian investment.

Dozens of U.S. tech firms, including top Clinton Foundation donors like Google, Intel, and Cisco, then made major financial contributions to Skolkovo. According to Schweizer, by 2012 Skolkovo had 28 Russian, American and European “Key Partners.” Of the 28 key partners, 17 have made financial commitments to the Clinton Foundation, totaling tens of millions of dollars, or sponsored speeches by Bill Clinton.

Russian money also flowed to the Clinton Foundation. Schweizer reports that Andrey Vavilov, the chairman of SuperOx, part of Skolkovo’s nuclear-research cluster, donated between $10,000 and $25,000. Skolkovo Foundation chief and billionaire Putin confidant Viktor Vekselberg also donated through his company.

As the Slolkovo project gained momentum, U.S. defense experts became alarmed. The U.S. Army Foreign Military Studies Program at Fort Leavenworth warned:

The Skolkovo Foundation has, in fact, been involved in defense-related activities since December 2011, when it approved the first weapons-related project—the development of a hypersonic cruise missile engine. . . . Not all of the center’s efforts are civilian in nature.

Similarly, Lucia Ziobro, an assistant special agent at the FBI’s Boston office, stated that “the FBI believes the true motives of the Russian partners, who are often funded by their government, is to gain access to classified, sensitive, and emerging technology. . .” Ziobro added, “The [Skolkovo] foundation may be a means for the Russian government to access our nation’s sensitive or classified research development facilities and dual-use technologies with military and commercial application.”

Hillary Clinton knew about the dual-use problem while she was Secretary of State. Schweizer notes that a State Department cable sent to then-Secretary Clinton (and obtained via WikiLeaks) mentioned possible “dual use and export control concerns” related to research and development technology ventures with Moscow.

Clinton ignored the problem. Was this due to the millions of dollars in Clinton Foundation donations by Skolkovo’s key partners?

Only Hillary knows for sure. But the burden should be on her to provide a more convincing explanation.

In any event, Clinton is responsible for helping create a Russian “Silicon Valley” that has enabled the Kremlin to boost its military and surveillance capacity. And let’s not forget her role in enabling Russia to gain control of one-fifth of all uranium production capacity in the United States.

Russia has been well-served by Hillary Clinton’s cluelessness and greed.

The dog that didn’t bark at the Democrats’ convention

July 29, 2016

The dog that didn’t bark at the Democrats’ convention, American ThinkerThomas Lifson, July 29, 2016

(The Clinton Cash video is available at Warsclerotic. It’s well worth watching.– DM)

If Sir Arthur Conan Doyle were covering the Democratic National Convention, he could title his account, “The Case of the Missing Claim.”  There was a conspicuous absence amidst all the praise heaped on Hillary Clinton.   Warner Todd Huston of Breitbart noticed:

After nearly three days of speeches and video propaganda one major part of Democrat Nominee Hillary Clinton’s life’s work has gone virtually unmentioned during the Democrat National Convention in Philadelphia. Even as speaker after speaker lauded Hillary’s career in public life, no mention of the Bill and Hillary Clinton Foundation has been uttered from the dais.

It is true that for years we have heard of the “wonderful work” the Clinton Foundation does… something about poor people, AIDS, and so forth. Best not to ask for any details, though. Haiti does not seem to have benefitted enormously from the billion dollars-plus said to have been raised for it.

Huston attributes the silence likely to: “the wild success of the documentary film Clinton Cash.”

Maybe that is the trigger. But this silence also indicates that the Dems realize that they have lost the argument on what used to be one of the biggest talking points of the Hillary-as-savior faction.

I think that the image of Clintons raising money ostensibly for poor people that ends up hiring private jets, luxury hotels, and paying political staff in the out years is fairly toxic for Hillary. She is so unlikable that people can actually believe that she might be a big phony when she claims to be devoted to helping the poor but just accidentally ends up fabulously rich and living the jet set high life.

The Democrats may have signaled their greatest vulnerability.