Posted tagged ‘Clinton e-mails’

FBI releases Clinton investigation documents

September 2, 2016

FBI releases Clinton investigation documents, Fox News, September 2, 2016

(The documents, in PDF format, may provide fruitful sources of information. — DM) (Update: Please see also Power Line

Hillary-FBI-copy

Thirteen of Hillary’s phones can’t be found. How “careless.” — DM)

The FBI on Friday released several dozen pages of documents from its investigation into Hillary Clinton’s personal email use while secretary of state.

The bureau released a summary of Clinton’s July 2 interview with the FBI, as well as a summary of the FBI investigation itself.

“We are making these materials available to the public in the interest of transparency and in response to numerous Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests,” the FBI said in a statement. “Appropriate redactions have been made for classified information or other material exempt from disclosure under FOIA.”

CLICK TO SEE THE DOCUMENTS

The FBI provided portions of the file to members of Congress last month, but faced pressure to make some of the documents public.

FBI Director James Comey announced in July that the bureau would not pursue criminal charges in the case, while calling Clinton’s actions as secretary of state “extremely careless.”

Before the announcement, the FBI interviewed Clinton for several hours.

Trump Spox: Clinton’s Newly Discovered Benghazi Emails Raise Additional Questions

August 30, 2016

Trump Spox: Clinton’s Newly Discovered Benghazi Emails Raise Additional Questions, BreitbartAlex Swoyer, August 30, 2016

(Sexist! Besides, she was just dreaming of having yoga lessons and getting her hair styled in Benghazi. — DM)

Donald Trump’s campaign is hitting Hillary Clinton over recent revelations that there were emails pertaining to Benghazi on her private email server.

“Today’s disclosure that 30 additional emails about Benghazi were discovered on Hillary Clinton’s private server raises additional questions about the more than 30,000 emails she deleted,” stated Trump’s senior communications advisor Jason Miller. “Hillary Clinton swore before a federal court and told the American people she handed over all of her work-related emails. If Clinton did not consider emails about something as important as Benghazi to be work-related, one has to wonder what is contained in the other emails she attempted to wipe from her server.”

Miller’s statement comes after the Washington Examiner reports, “State Department attorneys said Tuesday the agency had discovered 30 emails among the records recovered from Hillary Clinton’s private server that discussed Benghazi.”

According to the report, the 30 emails about Benghazi were within the 15,000 uncovered from Clinton’s private server by the FBI.

Will the Clinton Foundation Mark the Fall of Our Republic?

August 29, 2016

Will the Clinton Foundation Mark the Fall of Our Republic?, PJ MediaRoger L Simon, August 28, 2016

bill_hillary_clinton_roman_empire_banner_8-28-16-1.sized-770x415xc

No matter how extreme the future revelations of Julian Assange and others turn out to be, the truth about the Clinton Foundation is already clear. Whatever its original intentions, this supposed charity became a medium to leverage Hillary Clinton’s position as secretary of State for personal enrichment and global control by the Clintons and their allies.  We also now know—as the Wall Street Journal’s Kimberley Strassel made clear in her recent oped—why Hillary decided to hide all her emails on her “infamous server.”

To my knowledge, nothing like this has ever been done in the history of the United States government. It calls to mind, if anything, the United Nations’ scandalous Oil-for-Food program in which millions were siphoned off from a plan to feed Iraq’s children during the war.

It could even be worse, because of the national security implications. The Clinton Foundation and the State Department were commingled to such an extent we may never know the truth, certainly not before the election since that same State Department has refused to release Hillary’s official schedule before then.

This means, quite simply, that the United States of America has abandoned the rule of law. Maybe we did a while ago. In any case, we are now a banana republic—a rich and powerful one, at least temporarily, but still a banana republic.

The election of Hillary Clinton—our own Evita—will make the situation yet more grave. Consider something so basic as how you raise your children in a country where the president is most probably an indictable criminal and most certainly a serial liar of almost inexhaustible proportions. What do you tell them? What do their teachers tell them? A far cry from George Washington, isn’t it? What does this say about our basic morality and how does that affect all aspects of our culture? The fish, as they say, rots from the top.

Equally importantly, what does our government do as further actionable information emerges as it inevitably will? The Department of Justice, as we have seen, is already corrupt, unable to indict those in power, indeed colluding with them aboard airplanes. The same personnel will undoubtedly be in place. Can we rely on congressional oversight for justice and/or a potential impeachment? What if the Democrats control the Senate?

In the far less serious Watergate era, Republicans like Howard Baker stood up against Nixon. Democrats, however, cling to power the way they accuse Republicans of clinging to their guns and religion and will no doubt avert their eyes, pretending, with their friends in the media, that nothing out of the norm is happening. But plenty is and will. Look to Sweden for the future of America.   And with expanded entitlements and immigration, Syrian and otherwise, don’t look for a Republican revival in 2020. Those days will be long over.

“A republic, if you can keep it,” Benjamin Franklin reportedly said when emerging from the Constitutional Convention of 1787.  Yes, it may be apocryphal, but so are many important statements that are true in concept.

2016 is about to mark the year we lost that republic. It could well be an historical date like 1066, 1215 and 1776. Think about that one.

Which leads us to Donald Trump (as usual).

He is, like it or not, the last man standing to prevent this. He and all of us. And that includes you, NeverTrumpers. There is nothing, repeat NOTHING, that Trump has ever done that comes remotely within the proverbial spitting distance (even from a dragon) of the malfeasances of the Clinton Foundation. The big difference between Trump and Clinton is this: What distresses us about Donald is what he says. What distresses us about Hillary is what she does. Anyone with an IQ in the also proverbial triple digits knows which is worse.

It’s time for the NeverTrumpers to abandon what’s left of their crusade for the sake of the country.

Hillary’s Email Server Was Wiped Clean With Something Called ‘BleachBit’

August 27, 2016

Hillary’s Email Server Was Wiped Clean With Something Called ‘BleachBit’, PJ Media, Debra Heine, August 26, 2016

hildabeast

A Republican on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee who has read the FBI’s investigative file on Hillary Clinton told Fox News on Thursday that Clinton’s team used a software program called “BleachBit” to prevent the FBI from accessing her deleted emails.

The disclosure sheds new light on Clinton’s odd phrasing last year when she was asked about wiping her email server clean. “Like with a cloth or something?” she had joked. “BleachBit” does sound remarkably like disinfecting wipes. South Carolina Rep. Trey Gowdy said that Clinton’s use of the product had erased her emails so cleanly that “even God can’t read them.”

Clinton told reporters last year in a rare press conference that the more than 33,000 emails she ordered deleted concerned personal, non-work-related subjects like yoga sessions and the planning of her daughter Chelsea’s wedding.Gowdy suspected that Clinton considered all her emails related to the controversial Clinton Foundation to be personal messages, and got rid of them instead of handing them over to the State Department.

‘You don’t use BleachBit for yoga emails or for bridemaids emails,’ Gowdy charged. ‘When you’re using BleachBit, it is something you really do not want the world to see.’

Clinton has avoided for months answering questions about classified material in emails that the State Department recovered from her.

FBI Director James Comey said during his press conference last month that it was likely there were other work-related e-mails that were not turned over, but those are gone forever “because they deleted all e-mails they did not return to State, and the lawyers cleaned their devices in such a way as to preclude complete forensic recovery.” They sure did.

The FBI managed to recover 14,900 emails from Clinton’s server despite her team’s attempts to prevent their recovery, and now a federal judge has ruled that the State Department has until Sept. 13 to show which emails are government-related. Fox News reports:

The chief investigators for conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch, which is seeking the records in court, also told Fox News that records about Benghazi were among the deleted files.Gowdy, meanwhile, has questioned FBI Director James Comey’s claim to Congress and the public that a reason Clinton was not charged in connection with her private email use as secretary of state was because there was no evidence of criminal intent.

Based on the FBI investigative file, including notes from Clinton’s July interview, Gowdy said it doesn’t appear agents pressed Clinton on why she set up the server.

“I didn’t see any questions on that,” Gowdy said. “She said she did it for convenience, but I didn’t see the follow-up questions.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJnSTQieHr4

Application developer Andrew Ziem wrote in a BleachBit user forum that his website’s traffic spiked after Gowdy mentioned the product on Fox News.

Court orders State to hand over new Clinton emails by Sept. 13

August 26, 2016

Court orders State to hand over new Clinton emails by Sept. 13, Washington ExaminerAnna Giaritelli, August 25, 2016

A federal court has ordered the State Department to review and turn over emails from a new batch of communications that Hillary Clinton sent during her time as secretary of state by Sept. 13, but which she deleted, Judicial Watch announced Thursday afternoon

“The State Department shall search the material, determine whether any responsive records exist, and complete its first production of non-exempt records, to the extent any exist, by September 13, 2016,” the court ruled.

Judicial Watch said the department has admitted in a court filing that some of the emails that Clinton had deleted included some “Benghazi-related documents.”

That case involves emails between Clinton and the White House in the week after the 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi that killed four Americans.

Judicial Watch is also pursuing another case that involves a separate batch of Clinton emails. Those emails will start being delivered to the group on Sept. 30, and the court said Thursday that it would hold a hearing on Aug. 30 on whether State should make it known sooner how many documents are involved.

Tom Fitton discussing the bombshell release of Clinton emails by Team Judicial Watch

August 22, 2016

Tom Fitton discussing the bombshell release of Clinton emails by Team Judicial Watch, Judicial Watch via YouTube, August 22, 2016

 

Krauthammer’s Take: Improper Clinton Foundation E-mails ‘Could Destroy Her Candidacy’

August 11, 2016

Krauthammer’s Take: Improper Clinton Foundation E-mails ‘Could Destroy Her Candidacy’ Fox News and National Review via YouTube’, August 10, 2016

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e7RYVgV-xME

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.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8QZI4Igt9EA

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.

Did Clinton’s Email Negligence Lead to the Execution of an Iranian Defector? Front Page Magazine

August 8, 2016

Did Clinton’s Email Negligence Lead to the Execution of an Iranian Defector? Front Page Magazine,  Ari Lieberman, August 8, 2016

defector

But then came the Clinton email dump which may have spelt doom for Amiri.Two emails in particular, which were made public and which were undoubtedly read by the Iranians shed light on the voluntary nature of Amiri’s defection and attempts by the U.S. to address his concerns and facilitate his return to Iran.

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

In 2009, Shahram Amiri, an Iranian nuclear scientist, traveled to Saudi Arabia, ostensibly to visit Muslim holy sites located in the Kingdom. Once there, he disappeared only to reappear later in some peculiar online rants, claiming to be residing in Virginia and alternatively, in Arizona, and expressing a desire to return to Iran.

Amiri, who conducted nuclear research at the military affiliated Malek Ashtar University of Technology and worked for Iran’s Atomic Energy Organization, was said to possess a treasure trove of classified information on Iran’s illicit nuclear program. On his YouTube channel, he alleged that he was kidnapped by CIA and Saudi intelligence and was offered large sums of money in exchange for information on Iran’s nuclear program.

For reasons known only to Amiri, and which will undoubtedly be the subject of much speculation, Amiri arrived at the Iranian interest section of the Pakistani embassy in Washington and two weeks later, returned to Iran. Approximately one year had elapsed from the time of his defection until his return to Iran.

Some have speculated that he feared for his family’s well-being and returned to spare them harassment by the Iranian authorities or perhaps he was genuinely homesick and thought the Iranians would buy his story of a CIA orchestrated kidnapping. Whatever the case, On August 3, 2016 Amiri was executed by the Mullahs in their favorite method of execution – hanging.

Amiri undoubtedly provided the administration with vital intelligence on Iran’s rogue nuclear program and that clearly did not sit well with Iranian officials. Upon his return, Amiri repeated the allegation of being kidnapped in Saudi Arabia in a joint CIA/Saudi operation. While the Iranians initially welcomed him, likely for public consumption, he was soon transformed into a treasonous enemy of the state and imprisoned and almost certainly tortured while undergoing grueling interrogation.

The Iranians could not be 100 percent certain of Amiri’s story. Iran is a nation built upon conspiracy theories and fantasy and in their view, the possibility of a CIA/Saudi operation to kidnap a nuclear scientist didn’t seem far-fetched and in fact, could have been plausible.

But then came the Clinton email dump which may have spelt doom for Amiri. Two emails in particular, which were made public and which were undoubtedly read by the Iranians shed light on the voluntary nature of Amiri’s defection and attempts by the U.S. to address his concerns and facilitate his return to Iran.

The first email, sent to Clinton on July 5, 2010, and processed through her home-brewed bathroom server, was authored by Richard Morningstar, acting special envoy of the U.S. secretary for Eurasian energy. This email implied that Amiri needed a cover story to return to Iran and that the U.S. should make an effort to address his concerns. He writes, “Per the subject we discussed, we have a diplomatic, ‘psychological’ issue, not a legal issue,” and notes further that “Our friend has to be given a way out. We should recognize his concerns and frame it in terms of a misunderstanding with no malevolent intent and that we will make sure there is no recurrence. Our person won’t be able to do anything anyway. If he has to leave, so be it.”

The second email was sent to Clinton by her senior foreign policy adviser, Jake Sullivan. In the email, which was sent on July 12, 2010, Sullivan writes, “The gentleman you have talked to Bill Burns about has apparently gone to his country’s interests [sic] section because he is unhappy with how much time it has taken to facilitate his departure. This could lead to problematic news stories in the next 24 hours. Will keep you posted.”

Sullivan was referencing Amiri’s earlier contact with Iran’s interest section in the Pakistani embassy. It also implies that the U.S. was attempting to facilitate his return to Iran. If this was in fact a kidnapping as alleged by Amiri, why then would the U.S. facilitate his return to an enemy country? And why would it need to address his concerns? Kidnappers do not normally carry out their victim’s wishes when their victims ask to be returned. That would defeat the entire purpose of kidnapping.

The Iranians are no fools. They probably suspected that Amiri voluntarily defected all along and the kidnapping element was nothing but a cover story. But the emails confirmed their suspicions and Amiri then paid for his decision with his life. If that was indeed the case, Hillary Clinton, through gross negligence and dereliction of duty, may have sealed Amiri’s gruesome fate.

Hillary Clinton’s Private Emails About Israel

August 5, 2016

Hillary Clinton’s Private Emails About Israel, Breitbart,  Shmuley Boteach, August 5, 2016

November will see one of the consequential elections of our lifetime. With Israel and the world enduring another cycle of terrorism, and the Jewish State’s very existence threatened by the catastrophic Iran deal, the American election has a direct bearing on Israel’s future.

I’ve written in the past about the State Department’s email dump of Hillary Clinton’s communications from her private server. The former secretary of state received a veritable trove of advice and information about Israel from her closest advisers. Curiously, it was mostly negative and hostile to Israel. It behooves Hillary to explain the emails and why they are mostly of a negative nature.

Here are some examples.

Martin Indyk was advising Clinton during her time as Secretary of State. In 2007, Indyk’s Brookings Institution, a purportedly objective non-partisan government think tank, opened up a branch in Qatar, a country that is virulently anti-Israel and which currently serves as Hamas’ main financial backer. Seven years later it was revealed that Indyk’s relationship with Qatar had progressed to the point that Qatar had given $14.8 million dollars to Indyk’s institute. This phenomenon of foreign governments purchasing political influence via think tanks in Washington has been well attested to in the past.

Keep in mind that in the background of this concealed, blatant conflict of interest, Indyk was one of the top diplomats assigned to formulating policy and negotiating a two-state solution in Israel. The bombshell revelations of the Qatari donations compromised Indyk immensely and Netanyahu’s government responded by saying that Indyk could not be trusted. Nonetheless, during Clinton’s time as Secretary of State, Indyk had her ear when it came to Israeli-Palestinian negotiations. Indyk’s emails to Clinton show a Qatari-inspired anti-Israel bias. He talks about the need to look, not at Netanyahu’s politics, but his “psychology.” He writes to Clinton’s advisors of Netanyahu: “[A]t heart, he seems to lack a generosity of spirit.”

Indyk attacks Netanyahu over and over as having “inflated demands” and lacking the willingness to risk Israel’s security with a West Bank that would likely become yet another Hamastan. He writes nothing of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas’s continual incitement and his calls for the murder of Israelis or the need to outlaw terrorist groups.

Indyk also describes how world opinion can be used against Netanyahu, writing, “If Israel doesn’t make a serious move, it will further delegitimize its standing internationally.” He also describes how the US can use the fear of a potential nuclear Iran to force Israel to sign a deal with the Palestinians, because “Bibi needs President Obama in his corner to deal with the threat from Iran.”

Then there is Jake Sullivan, who currently serves as a top foreign policy advisor for Hillary’s campaign and who was Clinton’s deputy chief of staff while she was Secretary of State. Sullivan has also been revealed to harbor anti-Israel views. In one heavily redacted email to Clinton regarding talks with Netanyahu, Sullivan’s subject line reads “dealing with Netanyahu.” There is often a cavalier attitude in how many of Hillary’s subordinates refer to the Prime Minister of Israel. His name rarely comes with any titles reflecting his status as an elected leader. Rather, he’s usually just “Netanyahu.”

Then there is, of course, Sidney Blumenthal, of whom I have written much in the past, especially about his anti-Semitic son Max, who recently celebrated the death of, and defamed, Elie Wiesel, prompting Hillary Clinton to disavow him, something for which she deserves great credit.

Sidney Blumenthal sent Hillary an anti-Semitic article entitled, “The preemptive strike on Jodi Rudoren” that claims the Jewish lobby “sought to influence media coverage in a variety of sometimes heavy-handed ways” and says “the pressure from these groups is relentless.” This column was retweeted by Max Blumenthal. And Hillary found the article important enough to forward it to Sullivan and her deputy assistant Secretary of State Phillipe Reines. She writes to them, “Had you seen this?” Sullivan responds to the anti-Semitic article, “I hadn’t. Interesting.” Reines, on the other hand, seems to have been so disgusted by this intolerant article that he surprisingly shoots back to Hillary, “My people control the banks too.” It appears Reines was letting Hillary know that this article was deeply biased and on a par with other well known libels against the Jewish people.

Jake Sullivan has also shown himself to be a fan of Peter Beinart, whom I have debated several times and someone who justified terrorist attacks against Israelis and demanded that America punish Israel for electing Netanyahu. Beinart, in one of our debates, compared the world’s foremost Jewish philanthropist and the principal sponsor of Birthright, Sheldon Adelson, to the terrorist leaders of Iran.

Beinart’s writings are blatantly anti-Israel and he has become infamous in the Jewish community for his calls for a complete boycott of Judea and Samaria in the hopes of forcing Israel to withdraw and allow terrorist Hamas to fill the vacuum. The fact that Hamas or Islamic State would inevitably overthrow Abbas’s weak government, as happened in Gaza, does not weigh in Beinart’s demands that Israel be punished if it does not accede to his demands.

Unfortunately, it isn’t just Sullivan. It seems that Hillary Clinton herself is a fan of Peter Beinart.

After Sid Blumenthal sent Hillary an anti-Israel column by Beinart, Hillary forwarded it to Sullivan, writing, “Pls read so we can discuss.” In response, Sullivan writes “Fascinating.”

When Blumenthal sent Hillary an article by his son Max filled with his usual anti-Israel drivel, Clinton forwarded the article to Sullivan with the message, “Interesting reading.”

Sullivan responds, “This is really fascinating. Does Beinart get into all of this?” Hillaryresponds, “Yes.”

Sullivan’s response to another Israel-hating Max Blumenthal article is to call it “fascinating” and try and compare the ideas it contains with the writings of Israel critic Peter Beinart. Of course, it was Bill Clinton himself who wrote a wild endorsement of Beinart’s book The Crisis of Zionism, in which Beinart charges Israel with everything from racism to apartheid-like conditions.

I have every desire to treat Hillary Clinton fairly when it comes to Israel and, as I wrote above, she deserves credit for finally disavowing the demented anti-Semitism of Max Blumenthal, even though he is the son of her foremost advisor.

But it’s important to note that when former senior adviser to President Barack Obama Dennis Ross wrote his tell-all book Doomed to Succeed: The U.S.-Israel Relationship from Truman to Obama, he described a faction within the White House that saw Israel as “more of a problem” than a partner. Since Hillary describes herself as someone who was a great friend to Israel in the Obama administration, it is imperative that she publicly clarify her position on Israel vis-a-vis some of her advisors whose opinions on Israel are deeply hostile.