August 13, 2016

Corruption, Pay-to-Play and Flip-Flops: Hillary Reminds Everyone She’s A Deeply Flawed Candidate

"Hillary Clinton's week of scandals, from corruption to allegations of pay-to-play to flip-flops, reminded everyone just how flawed she is as a candidate and why the American people cannot afford four more years of Obama-Clinton rule. Whether it’s using government entities to personally and politically enrich herself, prioritizing donors over what's best for the American people, using her influence to shutter suspicious financial transactions with the Clinton Foundation and foreign entities, or the ability of Clinton to completely surrender and sell out American workers after promising a stop to the TPP, it’s clear that Crooked Hillary will do and say anything to get elected. 70% of American voters believe our country is going in the wrong direction, and only Donald Trump provides the vision and the energy to get us back on track." -Jason Miller, Senior Communications Advisor
DOUG BAND EMAILS

Former Bill Clinton Aide Doug Band Urgently Asked Clinton Aides Cheryl Mills And Huma Abedin To Set Up A Meeting With An Ambassador For A Major Clinton Foundation Donor.“In an April 2009 email to Clinton’s State Department aides Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills, President Clinton’s former body man, Doug Band, the founder of corporate consultant Teneo, urgently asked them to set up a meeting with an ambassador for a major donor to the Clinton Foundation.” (Daniel Halper, “New Emails Show Huma Scheming For Hillary,” The New York Post, 8/9/16)


  • Band Had Previously Served As An Aide To Bill Clinton And Has Performed “Multiple Duties For The Clinton Foundation.” “Band previously served as an aide to former President Bill Clinton and has performed multiple duties for the Clinton Foundation. He is also a founding partner and president of Teneo Holdings, the consulting firm.”(Julian Hattem, “In Email, State Asked To ‘Take Care Of’ Clinton Foundation Associate,” The Hill, 8/9/16)


The Meeting Was For Gilbert Chagoury Who Is A Lebanese-Nigerian Billionaire Who Has Given Between $1 And $5 Million To The Clinton Foundation. “‘We need Gilbert Chagoury to speak to the substance person re lebanon. As you know, he’s key guy there and to us and is loved in lebanon.’ Chagoury is a Lebanese-Nigerian billionaire and a Clinton Foundation donor, giving somewhere between $1 million and $5 million.” (Daniel Halper, “New Emails Show Huma Scheming For Hillary,” The New York Post, 8/9/16)

In Another Email From Doug Band, He Put The Subject Line As “A Favor…” Then Asked Them To “Take Care Of” An Associate. “‘Important to take care of’ the person, Douglas Band told Clinton aides Huma Abedin, Cheryl Mills and Nora Toiv in an April 22, 2009, email with the subject line ‘A favor…’. The name of the aide is redacted.” (Julian Hattem, “In Email, State Asked To ‘Take Care Of’ Clinton Foundation Associate,” The Hill, 8/9/16)


  • Clinton’s Senior Aides Were Pressed By A “Long Time Confidante With Deep Ties To The Clinton Foundation” To Give A Job To An “Unidentified Male.” “Shortly after Hillary Clinton took the reins as U.S. secretary of State in 2009, a longtime confidante with deep ties to the Clinton Foundation pressed her senior aides to give a job to an unidentified male associate.” (Julian Hattem, “In Email, State Asked To ‘Take Care Of’ Clinton Foundation Associate,” The Hill, 8/9/16)

Top Clinton Aide Huma Abedin Responded Saying “We Have All Had Him On Our Radar…”“‘We have all had him on our radar,’ Abedin responded. ‘Personnel has been sending him options.’” (Julian Hattem, “In Email, State Asked To ‘Take Care Of’ Clinton Foundation Associate,” The Hill, 8/9/16)

CHERYL MILLS AND CLINTON FOUNDATION

CNN Headline: “Top Clinton State Department Aide Helped Clinton Foundation” (Drew Griffin, “Top Clinton State Department Aide Helped Clinton Foundation,” CNN, 8/11/26)

This Week It Was Discovered That Clinton’s Chief Of Staff At The State Department Cheryl Mills Went To New York In 2012 To Interview Executives For A Top Position At The Clinton Foundation. “A CNN investigation found that Clinton aide Cheryl Mills was involved in the Clinton Foudnation while she was also employed as Chief of Staff to the Secretary of State. On a trip to New York in 2012, Mills interviewed two executives for a top position at the Clinton foundation. The State Department said she was on personal time. Mills' attorney says she was, doing ‘volunteer work for a charitable foundation. She was not paid.’” (Drew Griffin, Pamela Brown and Shimon Prokupecz, “Inside The Debate Over Probing The Clinton Foundation,” CNN, 8/11/16)

“The Fact That The Aide, Cheryl Mills, Was Taking Part In Such A High Level Task For The Clinton Foundation While Also Working As Chief Of Staff For The Secretary Of State Raises New Question About The Blurred Lines That Dogged The Clinton As Secretary Of State.” (Drew Griffin, Pamela Brown and Shimon Prokupecz, “Inside The Debate Over Probing The Clinton Foundation,” CNN, 8/11/16)

The State Department Has Been Stonewalling Congressional Investigators On This Matter. “The Senate Judiciary Committee, chaired by Republican Chuck Grassley of Iowa, has tried to get answers about Mills' New York trip as well. Grassley sent Secretary of State John Kerry a letter in January asking the purpose of Mills' trip. The State Department did not officially respond to the letter.” (Drew Griffin, Pamela Brown and Shimon Prokupecz, “Inside The Debate Over Probing The Clinton Foundation,” CNN, 8/11/16)

SCUTTLED FBI-REQUESTED INVESTIGATION

Several Months Ago, The FBI And Department Of Justice Met To Discuss Opening A Public Corruption Case Into The Clinton Foundation. “Officials from the FBI and Department of Justice met several months ago to discuss opening a public corruption case into the Clinton Foundation, according to a US official.” (Drew Griffin, Pamela Brown and Shimon Prokupecz, “Inside The Debate Over Probing The Clinton Foundation,” CNN, 8/11/16)

Three FBI Field Offices Wanted To Investigate If Suspicious Banking Activity From A Foreigner Was Involved A Criminal Conflict Of Interest With The State Department And The Clinton Foundation. “At the time, three field offices were in agreement an investigation should be launched after the FBI received notification from a bank of suspicious activity from a foreigner who had donated to the Clinton Foundation, according to the official. FBI officials wanted to investigate whether there was a criminal conflict of interest with the State Department and the Clinton Foundation during Clinton's tenure. The Department of Justice had looked into allegations surrounding the foundation a year earlier after the release of the controversial book ‘Clinton Cash,’ but found them to be unsubstantiated and there was insufficient evidence to open a case.” (Drew Griffin, Pamela Brown and Shimon Prokupecz, “Inside The Debate Over Probing The Clinton Foundation,” CNN, 8/11/16)

Obama’s Department Of Justice Pushed Back Against Opening A Case. “As a result, DOJ officials pushed back against opening a case during the meeting earlier this year. Some also expressed concern the request seemed more political than substantive, especially given the timing of it coinciding with the investigation into the private email server and Clinton's presidential campaign.”(Drew Griffin, Pamela Brown and Shimon Prokupecz, “Inside The Debate Over Probing The Clinton Foundation,” CNN, 8/11/16)


  • The FBI Field Offices Were “Waved Off” By The DOJ. “Accusations that Clinton has committed crimes, and gotten away with them, have colored Republican campaigns for decades. They've picked up since the FBI announced that it would take no further steps to investigate her ‘careless’ use of a private email server after a year-long probe; they've gained more steam after reports that three (of 56) FBI field offices wanted to probe the Bill, Hillary, and Chelsea Clinton Foundation over a foreign donation but were waved off by a DOJ that had come up empty in a similar probe.” (David Weigel, “‘Lock Her Up’ Sentiment Comes To A Congressional Campaign,” The Washington Post, 8/12/16)

MILLS INTERCEDING IN FOIA REQUEST ON CLINTON EMAILS

Politico Headline: “Email Shows Mills Was Told Of Key Clinton FOIA Request” (Josh Gerstein, “Emails Show Mills Was Told Of Key Clinton FOIA Request,” Politico, 8/10/16)

The Washington Examiner Headline: “Emails Show Top Clinton Aide Knew Of Blocked Email Inquiry” (Sarah Westwood, “Emails Show Top Clinton Aide Knew Of Blocked Email Inquiry,” The Washington Examiner,8/10/16)

A Newly Released Email Shows That Secretary Clinton’s Chief Of Staff Cheryl Mills Was “Alerted Within Days” When A Watchdog Group Requested Records Describing All Of Clinton’s Email Accounts. “A newly-released email message shows that Hillary Clinton's State Department Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills was alerted within days in December 2012 when a liberal watchdog group requested records describing all the email accounts used by Clinton.” (Josh Gerstein, “Emails Show Mills Was Told Of Key Clinton FOIA Request,” Politico, 8/10/16)

Six Months Later, The State Department Said That No Records Could Be Found Pertaining To The Request Regarding Clinton’s Email Accounts. “Six months later, State sent a letter to Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington saying no records could be found. A State Department inspector general report issued in January described the episode as part of a pattern of ‘inaccurate and incomplete responses’ to FOIA requests.” (Josh Gerstein, “Emails Show Mills Was Told Of Key Clinton FOIA Request,” Politico, 8/10/16)

If The State Department Had Been More Thorough, Clinton’s “Exclusive Use Of A Private Email Server As Secretary Of State Could Have Been Exposed Years Before It Became Public In March 2015.” “The incident is noteworthy because had State's response been more thorough, Clinton's exclusive use of a private email server as Secretary of State could have been exposed years before it became public in March 2015.” (Josh Gerstein, “Emails Show Mills Was Told Of Key Clinton FOIA Request,” Politico, 8/10/16)

STATE DEPARTMENT ATTEMPTING TO CONCEAL NEW WORK-RELATED CLINTON EMAILS

The New York Post Headline: “It’s Going To Be A While Before All Of Clinton’s Emails Are Released” (Daniel Halper, “It’s Going To Be A While Before All Of Clinton’s Emails Are Released,” The New York Post, 8/10/16)

The Hill Headline: “Deleted Clinton Emails Might Remain Secret Until After Election” (Julian Hattem, “Deleted Clinton Emails Might Remain Secret Until After Election,” The Hill, 8/10/16)

None Of The Work-Related Clinton Emails Deleted From Clinton’s Server That The FBI Discovered Have Been Released. “None of the work-related Hillary Clinton emails discovered by the FBI after being deleted from her private server have been released, raising questions about whether any will be seen in public before Election Day.” (Julian Hattem, “Deleted Clinton Emails Might Remain Secret Until After Election,” The Hill, 8/10/16)

“The FBI Found ‘Several Thousand’ Work-Related Emails Deleted By Clinton” But The State Department Has Not Committed To A Schedule For Their Release… “The FBI says it found ‘several thousand’ work-related emails deleted by Clinton, but the State Department has not committed to a schedule for their release, and it will be up to a federal judge to determine when they could be made public.” (Julian Hattem, “Deleted Clinton Emails Might Remain Secret Until After Election,” The Hill,8/10/16)

“The Ongoing Delay Complicates The Odds That Clinton’s Deleted Emails Are Made Public Before The Election In November.”(Julian Hattem, “Deleted Clinton Emails Might Remain Secret Until After Election,” The Hill, 8/10/16)

Clinton: “I Responded Right Away And Provided All My Emails  That Could Possibly Be Work-Related.” CLINTON: “Third, after I left office, the State Department  asked former  Secretaries of State for our assistance in providi ng copies of work-  related emails from our personal accounts. I respo nded right away and  provided all my emails that could possibly be work-related, which  totalled roughly 55,000 printed pages, even though  I knew that the State  Department already had the vast majority of them.  We went through a  thorough process to identify all of my work- related emails and deliver  them to the State Department.” (Hillary Clinton,Remarks At A Press Conference, New York, NY, 3/10/15)

IRAN $400 MILLION RANSOM PAYMENT OPPOSED BY HEAD OF DOJ NATIONAL SECURITY DIVISION

On Thursday August 4th, President Obama Dismissed Concerns About The Release Of American Hostages From Iran Coinciding With A $400 Million Payment As A Result Of “The Manufacturing Of Outrage.” “‘What we have is the manufacturing of outrage in a story that we disclosed in January,’ the president said when asked about the delivery, the result of a decades-old dispute over payment for military equipment.” (Louis Nelson, Obama Dismisses Idea That $400 Million For Iran Was Ransom Payment,” Politico, 8/4/16)

Hillary Clinton Also Dismissed The Payment As “Old News.” “Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, when asked about the payment by a local Denver, Colorado, television station, said it was "old news." “‘It was first reported about seven or eight months ago, as I recall,’ she told Denver's 9News. ‘And, so far as I know, it had nothing to do with any kind of hostage swap or any other tit-for-tat. It was something that was intended to, as I am told, pay back Iran for contracts that were canceled when the Shah fell.’” (Elise Labott, Nicole Gaouette and Kevin Liptak, “US Sent Plane With $400 Million In Cash To Iran,” CNN, 8/4/16)

However, The Wall Street Journal Reported That Senior Officials At The Justice Department Were Concerned That The Iranians Considered The Payment To Be A Ransom. “The timing and manner of the payment raised alarms at the Justice Department, according to those familiar with the discussions. ‘People knew what it was going to look like, and there was concern the Iranians probably did consider it a ransom payment,’ said one of the people.” (Devlin Barrett, “Justice Department Officials Raised Objections On U.S. Cash Payment To Iran,” The Wall Street Journal, 8/3/16)

And They Recently Reported That The Head Of The National Security Division At The Justice Department Was One Person Who Raised Concerns About The Optics Of The Iran Payment. “The head of the national security division at the Justice Department was among the agency’s senior officials who objected to paying Iran hundreds of millions of dollars in cash at the same time that Tehran was releasing American prisoners, according to people familiar with the discussions.” (Delvin Barret, “Senior Justice Official Raised Objections to Iran Cash Payment,” The Wall Street Journal, 8/12/16)


  • Regardless Of The Nature Of The Payment, Some At The Justice Department Feared That Iran Would Believe The Payment Was Ransom Money. “John Carlin, a Senate-confirmed administration appointee, raised concerns when the State Department notified Justice officials of its plan to deliver to Iran a planeful of cash, saying it would be viewed as a ransom payment, these people said. A number of other high-ranking Justice officials voiced similar concerns as the negotiations proceeded, they said.” (Delvin Barret, “Senior Justice Official Raised Objections to Iran Cash Payment,” The Wall Street Journal, 8/12/16)



The International Community Being Confused By The Optics Of The Agreement Could Put Americans In Danger. “The objection of senior Justice Department officials was that Iranian officials were likely to view the $400 million payment as ransom, thereby undercutting a longstanding U.S. policy that the government doesn’t pay ransom for American hostages, these people said. The policy is based on a concern that paying ransom could encourage more Americans to become targets for hostage-takers.” (Delvin Barret, “Senior Justice Official Raised Objections to Iran Cash Payment,” The Wall Street Journal, 8/12/16)

Justice Department Objections Were Ultimately Overruled By The Obama Administration’s State Department. “Senior Justice Department officials objected to sending a plane loaded with cash to Tehran at the same time that Iran released four imprisoned Americans, but their objections were overruled by the State Department, according to people familiar with the discussions.” (Devlin Barrett, “Justice Department Officials Raised Objections On U.S. Cash Payment To Iran,”The Wall Street Journal, 8/3/16)

Echoing Concerns Held By The Justice Department, Some In Iran Viewed The Payment As Ransom. “In contrast, Iranian hardliners have been saying since February that it was ransom payment for the release of American spies. Subsequently, they have also used the “ransom” as evidence to the Iranian public to justify more ‘espionage’ related arrests.” (Ellen R. Wald, “Iran Ransom 2016: A Bigger Deal Than Iran-Contra 1985,” Forbes, 8/4/16)

Iranian Brigadier General Mohammed Reza Neghdi Has Publicly Said The Payment Was Ransom. “According to entrenched powers in Iran, the February deal, was, in fact, ransom. Brig. General Mohammed Reza Neghdi, who runs the Iranian Basij (a domestic military-style organization), has been saying publically in Iran that the cash payment was ransom for “spies.” He cites this regularly as evidence that the United States is still working to infiltrate Iran and uses it to justify detaining and imprisoning more Americans in Iran. The more political Foreign Ministry denied the ransom claim in February, but the issue holds such political sway that it was debated live on television during Iran’s most recent parliamentary elections.”(Ellen R. Wald, “Iran Ransom 2016: A Bigger Deal Than Iran-Contra 1985,” Forbes, 8/4/16)

Lawmakers Contend That The Perception Of A Ransom Payment Exists Putting Americans In Danger. “The cash flown to Iran consisted of euros, Swiss francs, and other currencies because U.S. law forbids transacting American dollars with Iran. While the Obama administration denied the cash transfer was done to secure the release of the four Americans, GOP lawmakers said it was tantamount to ‘ransom.’ ‘Paying ransom to kidnappers puts Americans even more at risk,’ Sen. Mark Kirk, R-Ill., said in a statement. ‘While Americans were relieved by Iran’s overdue release of illegally imprisoned American hostages, the White House’s policy of appeasement has led Iran to illegally seize more American hostages.’” (“Lawmakers: ‘Ransom’ To Iran Puts Americans At Risk,” Fox News, 8/3/16)

CLINTON’S TRANSPARENT FLIP FLOPS ON TRADE

During Her Economic Speech On Thursday, Clinton “Forcefully Rejected The Notion” That She Would Support The TPP, Saying “I Oppose It Now, I’ll Oppose It After The Election, And I’ll Oppose It As President.” “Hillary Clinton on Thursday forcefully rejected the notion that she will support the Trans-Pacific Partnership if she’s elected in November, telling a blue-collar crowd in Michigan that ‘I oppose it now, I’ll oppose it after the election, and I’ll oppose it as president.’” (Nolan D. McCaskill, “Clinton Forcefully Disavows Obama’s Trade Deal,” Politico, 8/11/16)

Clinton Slammed Current U.S. Trade Deals And Has Said She “Will Stop Any Trade Deal That Kills Jobs Or Holds Down Wages, Including The Trans-Pacific Partnership.” “Well let’s start with this. It is true that too often past trade deals have been sold to the American people with rosy scenarios that did not pan out. Those promises now ring hollow in many communities across Michigan and our country that have seen factories close and jobs disappear. Too many companies lobbied for trade deals so they could sell products abroad. But then they instead moved abroad and sold back into the United States. It is also true that China and other countries have gamed the system for too long. Enforcement, particularly during the Bush administration has been too lax. Investments at home that would make us more competitive have been completely blocked in Congress. And American workers and communities have paid the price. But the answer is not to rant and rave or cut ourselves off from the world. That would end up killing even more jobs. The answer is to finally make trade work for us, not against us. So my message, my message to every worker in Michigan and across America is this. I will stop any trade deal that kills jobs or holds down wages, including The Trans-Pacific Partnership.” (Hillary Clinton, Remarks At A Campaign Event, Warren, MI, 8/11/16)

As Secretary Of State, Clinton Took “A Leading Part In Drafting The Trans-Pacific Partnership.” “She’s pressed the case for U.S. business in Cambodia, Singapore, Vietnam, Indonesia, and other countries in China’s shadow. She’s also taken a leading part in drafting the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a free trade pact that would give U.S. companies a leg up on their Chinese competitors.” (Elizabeth Dwoskin and Indira Laksmanan, “How Hillary Clinton Created A U.S. Business-Promotion Machine,” Bloomberg,1/10/13)

As “One Of The Leading Drivers Of The TPP When Secretary Of State,” Clinton Spoke In Favor Of TPP At Least 45 Times According To CNN. “But as members of the Obama administration can attest, Clinton was one of the leading drivers of the TPP when Secretary of State. Here are 45 instances when she approvingly invoked the trade bill about which she is now expressing concerns.” (Jake Tapper, “45 Times Secretary Clinton Pushed The Trade Bill She Now Opposes,” CNN, 6/15/15)

In November 2012, Clinton Said The “TPP Sets The Gold Standard In Trade Agreements” And Includes “Strong Protections For Workers And The Environment.” CLINTON: “So it's fair to say that our economies are entwined, and we need to keep upping our game both bilaterally and with partners across the region through agreements like the Trans-Pacific Partnership or TPP. Australia is a critical partner. This TPP sets the gold standard in trade agreements to open free, transparent, fair trade, the kind of environment that has the rule of law and a level playing field. And when negotiated, this agreement will cover 40 percent of the world's total trade and build in strong protections for workers and the environment.” (Hillary Clinton, Remarks At Techport Australia, Adelaide, South Australia, 11/15/12)

But In October 2015, Clinton Flip-Flopped On TPP, Saying The Deal Did Not “Meet The High Bar” She Has Set. PBS’S JUDY WOODRUFF: “So are you saying that as of today, this is not something you could support?” CLINTON: “What I know about it, as of today, I am not in favor of what I have learned about it. And there is one other element I want to make, because I think it’s important. Trade agreements don’t happen in a vacuum, and in order for us to have a competitive economy in the global marketplace, there are things we need to do here at home that help raise wages. And the Republicans have blocked everything President Obama tried to do on that front. So for the larger issues….and then what I know, and again, I don’t have the text, we don’t yet have all the details, I don’t believe it is going to meet the high bar I have set.” (PBS’s “News Hour,” 10/7/15)

Financial Times Editorial: TPP “Is Not The First Time Mrs. Clinton Has Spoken From One Side Of Her Mouth When In Office And From The Other Side When Out Of It” On Trade.“This is not the first time Mrs Clinton has spoken from one side of her mouth when in office and from the other side when out of it. When she was running against Mr Obama for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2008, she said that she would renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) ‘to take out the ability of foreign companies to sue us because of what we do to protect our workers’. After joining Mr Obama’s administration in 2009, she reversed course and supported similar “investor-state dispute settlement” provisions in the TPP.” (Editorial, “Hillary Clinton, The TPP And The Trust Problem,” Financial Times, 10/8/15)

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/press-r...s-everyone-why