Many dominoes are collapsing in on Hillary Clinton, now judicial watch has released a new email release on Hillary and Human Abedin which reveals the Clinton foundation’s pay to play scheme.
First, the FBI is investigating 15,000 new emails on Hillary Clinton. The existence of the emails proves that Hillary committed perjury when she testified that she had given the FBI all of her emails.
The FBI is also investigating the Clinton Foundation and it’s several lucrative deals to foreign donors in exchange for political favors.
Now, Hillary’s top aide Huma Abedin’s emails have revealed the bribery that took place at the State Department.
Judicial Watch released 20 new Clinton email exchanges that were not turned over to the State Department by Hillary Clinton.
The recent release shows that Huma Abdein served as a conduit between the Clinton Foundation and Hillary’s State Department.
In more than a dozen email exchanges between Abedin and Clinton Foundation top executive Doug Band, Abedin expedited direct access to Clinton for donors who contributed between $25,000 and $10 million to the Clinton Foundation. This system of bribery forced the Crown Prince Salman of Bahrain to go through the Clinton Foundation for an appointment with Hillary Clinton.
Abedin also advised Band that when she went through the “normal channels” at the State department, Clinton declined to meet. After Band intervened, however, the meeting was set up within forty-eight hours.
From: Doug Band
To: Huma Abedin
Sent: Tue Jun 23 1:29:42 2009
Cp of Bahrain in tomorrow to Friday
Asking to see her
Good friend of ours
From: Huma Abedin
To: Doug Band
Sent: Tue Jun 23 4:12:46 2009
He asked to see hrc thurs and fri thru normal channels. I asked and she said she doesn’t want to commit to anything for thurs or fri until she knows how she will feel. Also she says that she may want to go to ny and doesn’t want to be committed to stuff in ny…
From: Huma Abedin [Huma@clintonemail.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2009 10:35:15 AM
To: Doug Band
Offering Bahrain cp 10 tomorrow for meeting woith [sic] hrc
If u see him, let him know
We have reached out thru official channels
Additional email exchanges where the Clinton Foundation intervened with the state department include the following:
On Friday, June 26, 2009, Clinton confidant Kevin O’Keefe wrote to Clinton saying that “Kevin Conlon is trying to set up a meeting with you and a major client.” Clinton wrote to Abedin, “Can you help deliver these for Kevin?” Abedin responded, “I’ll look into it asap” Kevin O’Keefe donated between $10,000 and $25,000 to the Clinton Foundation. Kevin Conlon is a Clinton presidential campaign “Hillblazer” who has raised more than $100,000 for the candidate.
On Tuesday, June 16, 2009, Ben Ringel wrote to Abedin, “I’m on shuttle w Avigdor Liberman. I called u back yesterday. I want to stop by to see hrc tonite for 10 mins.” Ringel donated between $10,000 and $25,000 to the Clinton Foundation.
On Monday, July 6, 2009, Maureen White wrote to Abedin, “I am going to be in DC on Thursday. Would she have any time to spare?” Abedin responded, “Yes I’ll make it work.” White donated $75,000 to the Clinton Foundation.
In June 2009, prominent St. Louis political power broker Joyce Aboussie exchanged a series of insistent emails with Abedin concerning Aboussie’s efforts to set up a meeting between Clinton and Peabody Energy VP Cartan Sumner. Aboussie wrote, “Huma, I need your help now to intervene please. We need this meeting with Secretary Clinton, who has been there now for nearly six months. This is, by the way, my first request. I really would appreciate your help on this. It should go without saying that the Peabody folks came to Dick [Gephardt] and I because of our relationship with the Clinton’s.” After further notes from Aboussie, Abedin responded, “We are working on it and I hope we can make something work… we have to work through the beauracracy [sic] here.” Aboussie donated between $100,000 and $250,000 to the Clinton Foundation.
On Saturday, May 16, 2009, mobile communications executive and political activist Jill Iscol wrote to Clinton, “Please advise to whom I should forward Jacqueline Novogratz’s request [for a meeting with the secretary of state]. I know you know her, but honestly, she is so far ahead of the curve and brilliant I believe she could be enormously helpful to your work.” Clinton subsequently sent an email to Abedin saying, “Pls print.” Jill and husband Ken Iscol donated between $500,000 and $1 million to the Clinton Foundation. Clinton subsequently appointed Novogratz to the State Department’s Foreign Affairs Policy Board.
This release shows that Hillary Clinton only met with foreign leaders once there was money in her pocket. This is bribery, this is unethical and this is criminal beyond a shadow of a doubt.
In addition to the email exchanges between Abedin and Douglas Band, newly released emails show a memorandum sent to Cheryl Mills from State Department White House liaison Laura Pena revealing that Rajiv Fernando, who donated $1 million to the Clinton Foundation and was appointed to the International Security Advisory Board without any experience, was fingered for the appointment as far back as June 2009.
“These new emails confirm that Hillary Clinton abused her office by selling favors to Clinton Foundation donors There needs to be a serious, independent investigation to determine whether Clinton and others broke the law.”
~Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said.
Hillary Clinton failed to report several hacking attempts, grew afraid of opening emails
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s use of a secret email to conduct official business broke a number of department policies, an inspector general concluded in a report sent to Capitol Hill Wednesday that also suggests she used the account to try to hide her communications from the public.
The 83-page report, obtained by The Washington Times, is devastating in its evaluation of Mrs. Clinton’s behavior, saying it can find no record of her getting approval from either security or legal staffers for her unique arrangement. The report also undercuts many of her campaign’s explanations for her use of the system, dismisses comparisons to her predecessors’ email use, and points to repeated hacking attempts that she failed to report.
After one of the 2011 hack attempts Mrs. Clinton’s tech staffer shut the server down for a few minutes, hoping that would solve the situation, but quickly warned top aides not to send Mrs. Clinton “anything sensitive” after the attempted breach, according to the report, which was obtained by The Washington Times.
After another suspicious attempt Mrs. Clinton said she was scared to open email — but failed to report the matter.
“Notification is required when a user suspects compromise of, among other things, a personally owned device containing personally identifiable information,” the investigators said. “However, OIG found no evidence that the Secretary or her staff reported these incidents to computer security personnel or anyone else within the Department.”
At one point in 2010, Mrs. Clinton’s emails were ending up in subordinates’ spam filters because they were coming from a non-state.govaccount. One of her top aides urged her to sign up for an official account or letting everyone in the department know of her address so she could be added as a verified account, but she refused, saying she didn’t “want any risk of the personal being accessible.”
In 2011, technology staffers proposed giving her an official department Blackberry to replace her personal device, which was malfunctioning — but warned it would make her messages subject to open-records requests. Her top personal aide, Huma Abedin, rejected the suggestion, saying it “doesn’t make a whole lot of sense.”
Mrs. Clinton, in a striking move, refused to cooperate with the probe. All of her colleagues did: current Secretary John Kerry and former Secretaries Colin Powell, Condoleezza Rice and Madeleine Albright.
Mrs. Clinton’s staff was also reluctant, the investigators said. Her chief of staff, deputy chiefs of staff and her technology gurus all refused to cooperate with the probe.
The emails have proved damaging to Mrs. Clinton, the frontrunner for the Democratic presidential nomination.
Her campaign didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment Wednesday morning, but she has said her use of the secret email account was not a good choice.
Still, she’s insisted she did not break any laws and did not risk secure information.
The new report lays out many of the details of Mrs. Clinton’s server. The domain name clintonemail.com was registered on Jan. 13, while she was still serving in the Senate and before she was confirmed to be secretary on Jan. 21.
State Department staffers were repeatedly asked to help solve problems with Mrs. Clinton’s server and her devices, such as her Blackberry — particularly in trying to communicate between her secret address and the state.gov accounts used by most of her subordinates.
But the inspector general was unable to discover who gave the final approval for Mrs. Clinton to use the odd arrangement. The department’s legal office said it was not asked to review or approve the setup, and was unaware of anyone else approving it — though some of them did email Mrs. Clinton on her secret account.
Democrats have pointed to Mr. Powell, who also used a personal email account while at the department, as precedent for Mrs. Clinton’s actions.
“The Inspector General confirmed what we have known all along — that Secretary Clinton followed the practice of her predecessor when she used a personal email account,” said Rep. Elijah E. Cummings, ranking Democrat on the House Oversight Committee. “While Secretary Clinton preserved and returned tens of thousands of pages of her emails to the Department for public release, Secretary Powell returned none. Republicans need to stop wasting taxpayer dollars singling out SecretaryClinton just because she is running for President.”
But the inspector general said the IT environment was fluid during Mr. Powell’s time in office, and had firmed up substantially by the time Mrs. Clinton took office.
During her tenure, the department specifically warned employees not to send information deemed “sensitive but unclassified” outside of the internal network, and said if they needed to do so, they should speak with tech staffers to work out a solution. Mrs. Clinton never
“OIG found no evidence that Secretary Clinton ever contacted IRM to request such a solution, despite the fact that emails exchanged on her personal account regularly contained information marked as SBU,” the investigators said.
READ MORE: http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/may/25/hillary-clinton-failed-report-several-hacking-atte/
HELP GIVE Luke a Trip To Germany -JOIN-
Sign up become a patron and Show your support for alternative news
for Just 1$ a month you can help Grow We are change
We use Bitcoin Too !
Visit The Gear Store Wearechange.org/gear
Thomas Kean: “aftershocks” from planes caused collapse of WTC Building 7
On September 13th, 2011, Thomas Kean, Chair of the 9/11 Commission and Former Governor of N.J., gave a lecture for the The Drew Forum, a series of public lectures at Drew University located in Madison, New jersey. We Are Change was tipped off to the event by http://www.youtube.com/FreedumbFighter28 and attended. After the lecture, a question and answer session was opened up to the audience. When We Are Change asked Thomas Kean to address the collapse of WTC Building 7, which was not hit by a plane, and was not mentioned once in the 9/11 Commission Report, his answer was simply shocking.
Kean claims the Bureau of Standards Final Report on the collapse WTC Building 7 found that “aftershocks”
from the planes hitting the twin towers caused the foundation of Building 7 to weaken and collapse. First, it is important to note that the National Bureau of Standards changed its name back in 1988 to the National Institute of Standards and Technology, or NIST. Second, no where in NIST’s Final Report does it say that aftershocks from the impact of the planes into the Twin Towers caused or even had a factor in the collapse of Building 7. In fact, NIST claims Building 7 was brought down by fire.
However, NIST’s Final Report has come under harsh criticism from highly reputable sources. A recent documentary released by Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth, which you can watch for free right now (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lw-jzCfa4eQ), details meticulously the flaws and illogical conclusions brought forward by NIST.
How is it that the Chair of the most important criminal investigation of our lives doesn’t even know the official government story behind the collapse of Building 7? Furthermore, why does he make up a theory that is more illogical and more preposterous than the official version released by NIST, essentially baking a layer cake of lies? I think it’s time for a REAL 9/11 investigation.
SUPPORT THE RESISTANCE http://www.wearechange.org/?page_id=9453
Read The Entire Article Here Please Comment,
Part About WeAreChange:
It’s what historians of 9/11 – which is what the activists and investigators essentially are – value most: the paper trail. Documents, statements, memos. This is the grist of history. And if some of the 9/11 activists can tend, sometimes, towards the obsessive, it’s generally an obsession with data. And to have that data withheld? It’s murder.
So when, at the tail end of LibertyFest, longtime 9/11 activist Luke Rudkowski tells me of the 2.5 terabytes of data from the Able Dangerterror investigations that were deleted, it’s with genuine pain in his eyes. It’s a Ming vase that’s smashed on the floor. It’s Wayne Rooney looking at a squashed banana. It’s a tragedy.
I asked Rudkowski what the “Truthers” were planning for the day. “This year, we’re all about paying our respects to the dead. We’re sending out a solemn message: we don’t know what happened on 9/11, yes we have questions, but on the day we’re not asking them. We’re going to stand in respectful silence.”
Luke Rudkowski Photograph: Charlie Skelton
But on the night before, Rudkowski is happy to ask. Why, from the 78 security cameras that surround the Pentagon, have we been shown just a few blurry frames? Why has the FBI classified its official investigation into the fact that some of the hijackers were trained at US military bases…?
And what would he say to those who’d scoff at asking such questions? “I’d say, look at the evidence and make up your own mind. And remember, 9/11 is a gigantic event that’s going to affect us all for the next hundred years, but it’s an event a lot of people know very little about.”
And with that, I slid away from the party, and bought some toothpaste from a late night store. I’m not going to mark the tenth anniversary of 9/11 with dirty teeth. I’m glad that the New York Truthers aren’t planning anything big and brash for the anniversary. The living will still have their questions, documents will need to be declassified, evidence sifted and lies challenged, but the anniversary of 9/11 is about the dead. The truth can take the day off.