Clinton Foundation received subpoena from State Department Investigators

[dorkzilla]

Source: Washington Post

Investigators with the State Department issued a subpoena to the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation last fall seeking documents about the charity’s projects that may have required approval from the federal government during Hillary Clinton’s term as secretary of state, according to people familiar with the subpoena and written correspondence about it.

The subpoena also asked for records related to Huma Abedin, a longtime Clinton aide who for six months in 2012 was employed simultaneously by the State Department, the foundation, Clinton’s personal office, and a private consulting firm with ties to the Clintons.


Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/clinton-foundation-received-subpoena-from-state-department-investigators/2016/02/11/ca5125b2-cce4-11e5-88ff-e2d1b4289c2f_story.html

[morningfog]

1. More shoes.....

[dorkzilla]

4. The wheels on the bus fall off and off!!!

Even if this is a nothing burger, it shows how vulnerable she is to scandal. It will be hard enough to get anything done with the GOP assholes, but to have these ridiculous scandals pop up like a game of Whack-a-Mole is just unnecessary.

[mikehiggins]

2. WTF? Rahm delayed those tapes until after he won his recall.

Why does this story appear now? It can only help TrumpCo.

[hedda_foil]

50. Did you post this in the right place? It doesn't seem to relate to this thread.

[appal_jack]

55. "I wish she could do corruption as well as Rahm-bo," is NOT a ringing endorsement.

This story will do nothing for TrumpCo if Bernie is the Democratic nominee.

-app

[itcfish]

3. Keep Rejoicing With this Nonsense

You will see the GOP dancing in November.

[dorkzilla]

5. She hasn’t won the nomination so...

[jalan48]

8. I've come to the conclusion that the GOP will win if Hillary is the nominee.

[nichomachus]

13. Yeah, she's pretty much damaged goods at this point

And she and her minions are working overtime to alienate the very people they're going to need to back them and work for them in the Fall.

[SoapBox]

23. Between the damaged goods and 30+ years of excess baggage...

IF the DNC/DWS/Super Delagates/Entrenched Elite Establishment types, somehow end up rigging the vote/nominee process...she will lose in the GE.

And we will end up with some kind of PukeBagger in the WH...that GE vote, Little Debbie cannot ultimately control.

The majority, of those that bother to vote, will NEVER put her in the White House.

[glinda]

28. and the large amount of people who refuse to vote for her at all.....

and to be honest that scares me because I do not want ANY conservative to take office.

[PatrynXX]

17. came to that conclusion

looking at Des Moines Register endorsements. but if Donald gets it and it's against Hillary he'll win. Not entirely sure about Ted Cruz but it's possible.. what will happen is people will be voting against hillary not for anyone else

[dorkzilla]

18. You can take that to the bank

Apart from scandals and her lies being uncovered as quickly as she can spin them, independents - THE LARGEST VOTING GROUP IN THE COUNTRY - are NOT going to come out to vote for her.

[Dustlawyer]

44. I would like to see an investigation in the timing of political endorsements and Hillary's big

Donors. I suspect that there has been a quid pro quo like the one with Tweety's wife and his sudden intense support for Hillary. It has been unusual for so many politicians to endorse this early, add to that many early union endorsements where the membership didn't even get to vote. Now you have John Lewis coming out calling Bernie a liar, in affect, by saying he never met him in the civil rights struggle. He gives the IMPRESSION that Bernie was not involved.

This whole thing stinks!

[jillan]

88. Agreed 100%. Just look at her negatives. People do not like her & do not trust her.

[Wilms]

9. Keep ignoring Clinton nonsense.

You will see the GOP dancing in November.

[BP2]

31. It's like watching a train crash in slo-mo and not being able to do a thing about it. n/t

[Odin2005]

67. Bernie is far more electable than Hillary.

Independents like Bernie and loath Hillary.

[trillion]

83. Heard that by Hillary supporters when Barack was running the first time.

Were you one of them singing the same tune back then too?

[6chars]

6. issued a subpoena last fall = old news

call me when there is fire and not just smoke

[dorkzilla]

11. News = New Information

Therefore it is new NEWS, although perhaps old “information”.

[Kip Humphrey]

15. Old news that wasn't reported very widely. Old scandel, yes! Give us fresh!?#@$!?

[roguevalley]

32. it will come. this is a clinton we're talking about, the one who got 13% on the exit polls about

trustworthiness in NH after all

[Waltons_Mtn]

68. I thought it was only 5%.

http://graphics.wsj.com/elections/2016/new-hampshire-primaries-exit-polls/

Maybe I am reading the graphic wrong. (I don't know what the 34% of voters means.) But still, how do you run for any office when less than 15% of people think you are honest. Better question: How can anyone support such a candidate?

[roguevalley]

69. you're probably right on the 5%.

[NobodyHere]

71. What it means is

That of the people who listed honest and trustworthiness as their top candidate quality(which was 34%) only 5% of those voters voted for Clinton.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

7. This headline needs some word craft.

State Department endorses Clinton Subpoena.

?

[dorkzilla]

12. Snort!!

I was just eating lunch - tuna out of the nose is NOT a pleasant experience!

[840high]

27. Neither is coffee - lol

[WillyT]

46. ROFLMAO !!!

[trillion]

84. +10000

[LiberalArkie]

10. Geez Huma Abedin - Spouse: Anthony Weiner (Since 2010)

[Duval]

14. So many investigations going on is certainly not going to help Hillary. nt

[vkkv]

16. The Clintons are corrupt. ___ n/t

[pnwmom]

19. "There is no indication that the watchdog is looking at Clinton."

Much to the disappointment of many people here.

[spin]

29. I don't believe the FBI normally advertises the targets of an investigation until ...

the investigation is finished. The agency probably investigates a lot of people who never even know they are a target.

The reason is if the FBI admits they are investigating an individual or group of people it could do considerable damage to the reputation of those involved even if nothing incriminating was found.

It's beginning to look like this might be a major scandal that could reach historic proportions. If the most recent reports are true a number of people were given access to data so classified that it "can't be released in any form" despite the fact that they lacked the clearance to see it. If true, the scope of this investigation is enormous and will take a considerable amount of time to complete.

Time will tell.

[6chars]

30. yeah the article doesn't point to anything specific

[Kip Humphrey]

20. Drip.

[pinebox]

21. Jeez, Hillary is just damaged at this point.

Cue the Metallica.

[dorkzilla]

24. I’ve never seen anything like it

I really think this stuff is being leaked by people inside the Democratic Party. Think about it...you wouldn’t want to risk the chance of getting put on the Clinton’s “Enemies” list, but you know these are flawed people. You want to put a Dem in the White House but you know she won’t get elected. Bernie made a big splash this week, so the “inevitable” candidate is looking less likely. Carpe diem!

Also, I think the fear of being put on the Enemies List is also the reason the number of candidates for the Democratic nomination is so much smaller than normal.

[pinebox]

25. No kidding it's absolutely pathetic

And yet she is given a pass.
How about NO.

[Divernan]

49. Also prime reason for all the early endorsements

The Wrath of Klinton (should she be elected) is a legitimately frightening prospect.

[dorkzilla]

53. It’s becoming increasingly evident that she won’t

Even if the FBI investigation and the SS subpoenas ultimately end up no where, the number of lies she’s told and the way she and her surrogates try to malign Bernie will not sit well, and even if someone could force ALL the registered democrats to swear to vote for her, the Independents will NOT come out for her.

I think that will be clearer day by day by the rest of the “Establishment”.



ETA - Updated wrong post.

[FailureToCommunicate]

22. From the Post article: 'Last month, Clinton denied a Fox News report that...

Last edited Thu Feb 11, 2016, 05:18 PM - Edit history (1)

... the FBI had expanded its probe to include ties between the foundation and the State Department.

She called that report “an un-sourced, irresponsible” claim with “no basis.”

So, now that this subpoena is out, does it mean she was wrong and FOX was correct??

Hell is getting chilly.

[6chars]

54. she may not have known at that time

[winter is coming]

58. "Un-sourced" and "no basis" could mean that there was no publicly available

proof at the time. IMO, it's telling that the Fox News report wasn't criticized as being inaccurate or untrue, but merely unsourced.

[Jarqui]

26. Ask me if I'm surprised

Last edited Thu Feb 11, 2016, 03:59 PM - Edit history (1)

Republican lawmakers have alleged that foreign officials and other powerful interests with business before the U.S. government gave large donations to the Clinton Foundation to curry favor with a sitting secretary of state and a potential future president.
...
The potential consequences of the IG investigation are unclear. Unlike federal prosecutors, inspectors general have the authority to subpoena documents without seeking approval from a grand jury or a judge.

But their power is limited. They are able to obtain documents, but they cannot compel testimony. At times, IG inquiries result in criminal charges, but sometimes they lead to administrative review, civil penalties or reports that have no legal consequences.

I was doing a little spreadsheet of Clinton Foundation revenue
https://www.clintonfoundation.org/about/annual-financial-reports
(some years do not include consolidated numbers and some years do not reflect revenues that the Clinton Foundation missed and had to resubmit)

2000 6,349,658
2001 15,218,657
2002 25,524,637
2003 48,066,591
2004 89,586,726
2005 99,667,782
2006 141,724,462
2007 132,504,305
2008 234,830,000
2009 246,266,000
2010 313,645,000
2011 253,224,546
2012 257,314,783
2013 294,741,158
2014 242,482,293
2015 242,482,293 * Estimated using 2014
===============
Total $2,643,628,891 ($2.6 Billion)

The investigators might eventually wonder why four of the five best revenue years for the Clinton Foundation happened while Hillary was Secretary of State. The other top year, Hillary was Secretary of State for a month or so.

And those years of revenue for charity followed a horrific drop in the world economy in 2008.

Just circumstantial? Maybe.

Now, the FBI has copies of Hillary's 30,000 private emails she deleted. So that might help join the dots.

And we have all the stories in the media about potential quid pro quo with weapons companies, banks, aircraft manufacturer, etc that got deals connected with the State Department and happened to donate to the Clinton Foundation.

Now, I'm the first one to agree that all of the above could be absolutely nothing, innocent until proven guilty, etc.

The real problem is, will Darrel Issa agree with me and not haul Hillary, Bill and Chelsea into congressional hearings on this while she's running for president? I have a feeling he won't agree with me and the Republicans will not allow Hillary to set foot in the White House without clearing the air on this....

[JimDandy]

42. The 2014 and 2015 totals are the same. Correct or typo?

Very strange, if they are the same, unless the 2015 is an estimate.

[Jarqui]

47. It's an estimate nt

[trillion]

48. +10000

[6000eliot]

33. Haven't there been three fake scandals in the past week?

Why can't you Sanders people stick with one phoney story?

[Akicita]

37. So you have evidence that the WaPost storey is phoney and no supoena was issued?

What evidence is that? Hillary's denial?

[Dragonfli]

60. Hillary's denial alone is considered irrefutable evidence in court and for a very good reason

Very much like a Vulcan (if one is familiar with star trek facts) - Hillary is incapable of lying unless under the orders of a superior. It is therefore undeniable that she can only speak the truth.

[AlbertCat]

38. one phoney story

So it's "phoney" that the foundation received a subpoena last fall?

Seems pretty typical of an investigation to me, but not phony.

It mainly just doesn't look good.

[concreteblue]

39. "Fake scandal"?? "Phoney story"???

"Investigators with the State Department issued a subpoena to the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation last fall seeking documents about the charity’s projects that may have required approval from the federal government during Hillary Clinton’s term as secretary of state, according to people familiar with the subpoena and written correspondence about it. "
What is "Fake" and or "Phoney" about this? Please?

[6000eliot]

40. This is going exactly nowhere, just like all of the other fake stories

flogged constantly by Sanders supporters and the right-wing media. NOBODY ELSE CARES!

[concreteblue]

41. " just like all of the other fake stories"

Nice avoidance.
"going exactly nowhere" or not, can you answer the question?

[TipTok]

59. I notice a trend among the Hillary crowd...

... where they rarely deny that violations of the law occurred. It is more common that they just rant about how it's all a conspiracy and no one cares and we should all just move on.

[6000eliot]

61. I notice a trend among the Sanders crowd.

They keep posting these bogus attacks, even though they are changing NOBODY'S mind.

[TipTok]

63. The steady rise in the polls would suggest otherwise...

[6000eliot]

64. Sure it does.

Your efforts on this website have been TOTALLY worth it. Talk to me at the end of the primary season.

[TipTok]

65. Talk to me after Hillary wins the nomination...

... and is promptly indicted.

That'll be just peachy for everyone won't it?

[dorkzilla]

45. What fake scandals and phony stories are you referring to?

Why can’t you Hillary people give us some more detail about your allegations?

Jury: she called us “you Sanders people”.

[6000eliot]

62. This one and the three that fell apart last week.

[dorkzilla]

66. First, this isn’t “phoney"

And what are the other three stories that fell apart?

[Enthusiast]

34. I'm sure it's nothing.

[AlbertCat]

35. Well.... that doesn't look good....

appearances, y'know....

[fbc]

36. Clinton better watch the negative campaigning.

If she expects to get a pardon from the next president.

[Helen Borg]

43. Ouchy

[LovingA2andMI]

51. Bring It On...

It They Are Lying On Bernie and His Civil Rights Record, This is The Least The Boomerang Should Do!

[HooptieWagon]

52. Uh oh.

I have a feeling that once investigators start poking around the Foundation, what they'll find is much more serious than email.

[winter is coming]

56. I hope one of the things they learn is

what brand of energy drink Abedin was using in 2012.

[dorkzilla]

57. I definitely need to know that one! LOL nt

[restorefreedom]

70. the dripping is getting louder

the state dept might think they are helping her, but if there is something bad in there, it will come out eventually. and she will never be president, or in the exceedingly unlikely event she does, will be immediately impeached. meanwhile, states stonewalling will have prevented people from voting with full information and allow us to have a nominee that will not drag this country down or hand the election to the gop.

this is really starting to reek. if there is no there there, then for cripe sake, get it all out so we can move on with the primary process. and if there is a there there, then we need to rally around bernie and give him support to fight against the gop.

enough is enough. rip off the damn bandaid already

[dorkzilla]

73. agree 100%

It’s not helping anyone.

[karynnj]

76. this is the State Department IG which is an independent

Position as it should be.

The SD's job was to het the email out, redacting everything that should be, coordinating with all the sources of info included. This was given this giant mess slightly less than a year ago when it came out that they fought the Clinton people the year before and the Clinton people gave them 55000 pieces of paper. Clinton demanded they be put on line and a law suit by a journalist resulted in a timeline based on the election, not the pace the SD could do it.

The SD hired a retired career professional who had worked with FOIA to coordinate this and tried to get 50 people added to the 12 who were doing the FOIA requests. In fact, they have had trouble filling those positions with people with experience on this. No surprise as I can't imagine how it is not a lose lose job with long hours, tight deadlines, major risk of making a mistake missing something that should be redacted, with no up side.

[restorefreedom]

77. maybe so, but they gotta get a move on

if there is no issue, then we can try and move past it with the primaries. if there is, we need time to deal with it.

[karynnj]

78. completely agree

I assume they are working as hard as they can. Apparently the remaining emails need to be seen and redacted by various departments. While it would be great to get everything out, there is a need no to screw up.

Politically, this does not end when the SD gets the email out. In fact, that release has created a series of stories from the email. Those stories confuse the issue. The fact that she had no process to give the SD the email on a regular basis. Consider that in some cases it was 6 years between when they were sent and when the SD got them. That meant they were not available for any FOIA request that related to them. This prevented both Congressional oversight and access of journalists to information.

[restorefreedom]

79. sounds like a mess

i almost would rather see them just resolve it either with an indictment or an exoneration instead of prepping the emails for public view, but i know that has to happen too.

but its a damn election year grrrrr

[karynnj]

80. it is annoying and it was all so unnecessary

I don't think she will be indicted. It may be that, though it is terrible for transparency in govrrnment, there were no absolutely crystal clear law she violated.

So, unfortunately, I suspect we are going to be in this limbo for the foreseeable future. It may be some aides may be indicted and that it will definitely be an issue raised by Republicans if she is the nominee. It goes to judgement.

[restorefreedom]

82. agree. could make for an ugly ge. very ugly. nt

[TwilightGardener]

72. The State Dept., huh? Interesting.

[tomm2thumbs]

74. '...employed simultaneously by the State Dept, the foundation, Clinton’s personal office, pvt firm'

sounds like a complete clusterf*ck

"The subpoena also asked for records related to Huma Abedin, a longtime Clinton aide who for six months in 2012 was employed simultaneously by the State Department, the foundation, Clinton’s personal office, and a private consulting firm with ties to the Clintons."

[dorkzilla]

75. Sounds impossible! Nt

[TwilightGardener]

87. She wrangled about as much profit as one can from being a Clinton sidekick.

Hats off to you, Mrs. Danger.

[CoffeeCat]

81. I wondered about the Boeing deal

How in the hell could that be legal?

Boeing donates 900k to the Clinton Foundation.

Clinton approved a $60 billion-dollar fighter jet deal for a Boeing-led consortium of defense contractors. The fighter jets were to be sold to Saudi Arabia. Thus was a deal brokered by Hillary while she was Secretary of State.

I'm sure that Foundation is rife with quid-pro-quo examples of the Clintons using their foundation to trade favors and money with their corporate buddies.

May they crack it open and let in the sunshine.

You have to wonder what President Ovama thought of HRC doing these things. I get the feeling she did as she damn well pleased.

[grasswire]

85. I just want the Clintons to go away.

The level of apparent corruption is sickening.

How dare she present herself as the representative of the Democratic Party with all this shit piling up??

[olddad56]

86. why were there never any witch hunts for GWB, Cheney, Rumsfield, etc.

Why isn't Trump's serial infidelity a campaign issue?