Judicial Watch: New Clinton Emails Reveal Classified Docs, Clinton Foundation Connections

Judicial Watch today released 281 pages of newly uncovered emails of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton from the U.S. Department of State sent and received over her unsecure, non-“state.gov” email system. The emails, dated 2010 through 2013, contain classified information and detail collusion between the Clinton State Department and the Clinton Foundation.

Ten emails contain classified information redacted “in the interest of national defense or foreign policy,” including confidential sources, and concern Israel and the Middle East. Most of the emails include exchanges with former British Prime Minister Tony Blair. The emails show Hillary Clinton conducted classified and sensitive negotiations about the Israel-Arab conflict on her unsecure, non-governmental server.

A November 2012 email chain discusses the “Mid East” and includes then-Deputy Chief of Staff Jake Sullivan, Blair as “aclb” and Clinton.

Another November 2012 email chain discusses the “Mid East” and includes Sullivan, Clinton’s office manager Claire Coleman, Blair and Clinton.

A November 2012 email chain fully redacted is titled “Mid East Peace” and includes Blair, Clinton, Obama’s Special Envoy to the Middle East David Hale as “haledm2@state.gov,” Sullivan and Blair’s Chief of Staff and former Downing Street aide Catherine Rimmer.

In an April 2011 email exchange between Blair, Clinton and Sullivan concerning “Israel,” Blair says he “had another long session with BB [Netanyahu].”

A May 2011 exchange concerns “Israel” and includes Blair, Clinton and Sullivan.

A May 2011 email concerns “Palestinians” and includes Blair, Clinton and Sullivan. Blair says, “I’ve also sent you a paper.”

A June 2011 email regarding “Israel” includes Blair, Sullivan and Clinton. Blair says, “Saw Israeli PM. Put the concept of a Q statement. He was receptive. Palestinians interested too. I know there are discussions also you guys are having. And the French initiative….”

In a July 2011 email – with several national security redactions – written by Blair to Clinton and Sullivan, Blair says, “I saw BB….. Molcho [chief negotiator in the Israeli negotiating team with the Palestinians] will speak to David Hale. I can see Cameron and Sarkozy with David…. I saw Egyptians….”

A September 2010 email exchange is titled “Info for you,” and includes Sullivan, Blair and Clinton. Blair writes that he just spent three hours with Netanyahu, and Sullivan, using his Sprint BlackBerry, he writes “We have pitched this to [redacted].”

These new classified and other emails appear to be among those that Clinton had attempted to delete or had otherwise failed to disclose. The documents are part of the November 2017 accelerated schedule of production ordered by U.S. District Court Judge James E. Boasberg. The State Department must now complete processing the remaining documents by September 28, 2018. There were 72,000 pages recovered by the FBI in its investigation into Hillary Clinton’s illicit email server. The State Department’s original production rate would have put the completion date into 2020.

The newly obtained documents came in response to a Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed on May 6, 2015, after the State Department failed to respond to a March 4, 2015, FOIA request (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:15-cv-00687)) seeking:

All emails sent or received by former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton in her official capacity as Secretary of State, as well as all emails by other State Department employees to Secretary Clinton regarding her non-“state.gov” email address.

Many of the emails involve Abedin, who joined the State Department as deputy chief of staff in 2009. From June 2012-February 2013, she was granted status as a “special government employee,” allowing her to work as a consultant to clients like Teneo and served as a paid consultant to the Clinton Foundation.

Several of the emails demonstrate the commingling of Clinton State Department and Clinton family foundation business:

In a November 2010 email with subject line, “How do I get through to Bill Clinton,” Rafael Anchia, a lawyer with Haynes Boone, asks Clinton campaign official Ed Meier if he could get to the “gatekeepers” to get Bill Clinton to give a speech in Spain, noting that “a large bank is willing to pay for it.”

Meier forwarded the email to former State Department Deputy Chief of Staff Jake Sullivan who forwarded it to former Deputy Chief of Staff Huma Abedin. Abedin sent it to Bill Clinton’s scheduler at the Clinton Foundation, Terry Krinvic, who provided Clinton’s contact information, to which Sullivan responded, “Awesome.”

In September 2011, Abedin sent Sullivan an email concerning the Clinton Global Initiative (CGI) with “Potential questions for Closing Plenary conversation between Secretary Clinton and Chelsea Clinton” in which Abedin included some “proposed questions” to put to Hillary and Chelsea Clinton. Four days later, Sullivan forwards a revised list of questions (completely redacted as interagency deliberative process) to Abedin and Clinton’s Chief of Staff, Cheryl Mills, saying, “Here are my proposed questions.”

In a September 2010 email containing subject line, “President Banda’s MOU [Memorandum of Understanding] with Clinton Global Initiative,” U.S. Ambassador Jeanine Jackson writes to Clinton Development Initiative official Walker Morris, (cc’d to Clinton Foundation official Amitabh Desai) discussing State Department spending in the country of Malawi. In the email, Jackson says, “we will be anxious to collaborate once you have an idea of the MOU’s intent.” Morris responds that “we are very excited about CDI’s [Clinton Development Initiative] future work in Malawi and certainly see great opportunity to collaborate.”

The Clinton Foundation work in Malawi involved a Clinton Foundation owned “for-profit agribusinesses including Tukula Farming Company which operates 7200 acres of commercial farms” in the impoverished country.

Other emails show that Bill Clinton appears to conduct State Department and Clinton Foundation business simultaneously:

In a September 2012 email with subject line “Burma,” Desai briefs Jake Sullivan on Bill Clinton’s discussions in Burma. Desai reports, in part: “WJC mentioned work of CF [Clinton Foundation] and offered to help in any way. TS [Than Shwe, president of Burma] said he already had asked HRC about WJC foundation and wanted to invite WJC foundation to work in myanmar in collaboration with gov agencies and other ngos … TS invited WJC to open offices in Rangoon and Mandelay.” That same day, Abedin writes Desai (cc’s Mills, Sullivan, Fuchs and three other persons whose email address are redacted) with subject line “Re: He had v good meeting with Libya and Burma:” “hrc looking forward to hearing about Burma. We meet at 545. I believe you have downloaded to jake?”

In a September 2012 email with subject line “Columbia / President Santos,” Desai and Toiv discuss a request by Colombian president, Manuel Santos, that Bill Clinton say some positive words about Santos’ initiative reaching out to the FARC terrorist group. Santos provided the Clinton Foundation with suggested language. Toiv said that she would “check” and also mentioned that she was working on a “visa issue.”

According to a report in the New York Post, the Santos request came not long after Clinton “jetted in for a Pacific Rubiales golf tournament at the Bogota Country Club… Accompanied by Giustra, he played a few holes with Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos.” The event reportedly raised one million dollars for the Clinton Foundation.

“It is shameful that Hillary Clinton attempted to delete or hide classified information and that Obama appointees James Comey and Loretta Lynch refused to prosecute her,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “It is clear that the Clintons were using the State Department to run an extensive influence peddling scheme. Americans should be concerned that while untold resources are devoted to the abusive Mueller special counsel investigation of President Trump, this Justice Department seems uninterested in prosecuting the Clintons.”

From CNBC.com, July 7, 2016...

A House panel grilled FBI Director James Comey two days after he recommended against prosecuting former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for an email server scandal. In the hearing, South Carolina Rep. Trey Gowdy questioned Comey on the definition of intent and how Clinton could possibly evade punishment. ..."

Here’s a full transcript of the exchange:
_____________________________________________

Gowdy: Good morning, Director Comey.
Secretary Clinton said she never sent or received any classified information over her private e-mail, was that true?

Comey: Our investigation found that there was classified information sent.

Gowdy: It was not true?

Comey: That’s what I said.

Gowdy: OK. Well, I’m looking for a shorter answer so you and I are not here quite as long. Secretary Clinton said there was nothing marked classified on her e-mails sent or received. Was that true?

Comey: That’s not true. There were a small number of portion markings on I think three of the documents.

Gowdy: Secretary Clinton said “I did not e-mail any classified information to anyone on my e-mail there was no classified material.” That is true?

Comey: There was classified information emailed.

Gowdy: Secretary Clinton used one device, was that true?

Comey: She used multiple devices during the four years of her term as Secretary of State.

Gowdy: Secretary Clinton said all work related emails were returned to the State Department. Was that true?

Comey: No. We found work related email, thousands, that were not returned.

Gowdy: Secretary Clinton said neither she or anyone else deleted work related emails from her personal account.

Comey: That’s a harder one to answer. We found traces of work related emails in — on devices or in space. Whether they were deleted or when a server was changed out something happened to them, there’s no doubt that the work related emails that were removed electronically from the email system.

Gowdy: Secretary Clinton said her lawyers read every one of the emails and were overly inclusive. Did her lawyers read the email content individually?

Comey: No.

Gowdy: Well, in the interest of time and because I have a plane to catch tomorrow afternoon, I’m not going to go through any more of the false statements but I am going to ask you to put on your old hat. Faults exculpatory statements are used for what?

Comey: Well, either for a substantive prosecution or evidence of intent in a criminal prosecution.

Gowdy: Exactly. Intent and consciousness of guilt, right?

Comey: That is right[]

Gowdy: Consciousness of guilt and intent?

In your old job you would prove intent as you referenced by showing the jury evidence of a complex scheme that was designed for the very purpose of concealing the public record and you would be arguing in addition to concealment the destruction that you and i just talked about or certainly the failure to preserve.

You would argue all of that under the heading of content. You would also — intent. You would also be arguing the pervasiveness of the scheme when it started, when it ended and the number of emails whether

They were originally classified or of classified under the heading of intent. You would also, probably, under common scheme or plan, argue the burn bags of daily calendar entries or the missing daily calendar entries as a common scheme or plan to conceal.

Two days ago, Director, you said a reasonable person in her position should have known a private email was no place to send and receive classified information. You’re right. An average person does know not to do that.

This is no average person. This is a former First Lady, a former United States senator, and a former Secretary of State that the president now contends is the most competent, qualified person to be president since Jefferson. He didn’t say that in ‘08 but says it now.

She affirmatively rejected efforts to give her a state.gov account, kept the private emails for almost two years and only turned them over to Congress because we found out she had a private email account.

So you have a rogue email system set up before she took the oath of office, thousands of what we now know to be classified emails, some of which were classified at the time. One of her more frequent email comrades was hacked and you don’t know whether or not she was.

And this scheme took place over a long period of time and resulted in the destruction of public records and yet you say there is insufficient evidence of intent. You say she was extremely careless, but not intentionally so.

You and I both know intent is really difficult to prove. Very rarely do defendants announce ‘On this date I intend to break this criminal code section. Just to put everyone on notice, I am going to break the law on this date.’

It never happens that way. You have to do it with circumstantial evidence or if you’re Congress and you realize how difficult it is prove, specific intent, you will form lathe a statute that allows for gross negligence.

My time is out but this is really important. You mentioned there’s no precedent for criminal prosecution. My fear is there still isn’t. There’s nothing to keep a future Secretary of State or President from this exact same email scheme or their staff.

And my real fear is this, what the chairman touched upon, this double track justice system that is rightly or wrongly perceived in this country. That if you are a private in the Army and email yourself classified information you will be kicked out.

But if you are Hillary Clinton, and you seek a promotion to Commander in Chief, you will not be. So what I hope you can do today is help the average person, the reasonable person you made reference to, the reasonable person understand why she appears to be treated differently than the rest of us would be. With that I would yield back.

(the source of this transcript is closed captioning)

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/07/07/rep-trey-gowdy-rips-into-fbi-director-james-comey-on-hillary-clintons-intent.html

Backup link:

https://web.archive.org/save/https://www.cnbc.com/2016/07/07/rep-trey-gowdy-rips-into-fbi-director-james-comey-on-hillary-clintons-intent.html

____________________________________

Image result for fbi comey clinton

Every aspect of the Bill Clinton presidency must be examined for wrongdoing. Recent news reports say the notoriously greedy Clintons used their tax-exempt Clinton Foundation charity to setup a Romney-like money-making private equity fund in the corrupt country of Colombia.

Why Colombia?

WIKI REFERENCE---In 2000, the Clinton administration committed $1.3 billion in foreign aid to the corrupt country of Colombia...... and up to five hundred military personnel to train local forces. An additional three hundred civilian personnel were allowed to assist in the eradication of coca.

The Clinton deal was an addition to $330 million of previously approved US aid to Colombia. $818 million was earmarked for 2000, with $256 million for 2001.

The Clinton-era appropriations for his Colombia Plan made Colombia the third largest recipient of foreign aid from the United States at the time.

--SNIP--

As of 2008, the U.S. has provided nearly $1.3 billion to Colombia through Clinton Plan Colombia nonmilitary aid programs:

<><> Alternative Development (2000-2008 cost: $500 million)

<><> Internally Displaced Persons (2000-2008 cost: $247 million)

<><> Demobilization and Reintegration (2000-2008 cost: $44 million)

<><> Democracy and Human Rights (2000-2008 cost: $158 million)

<><> Promote the Rule of Law (2000-2008 cost: $238 million)

LONG READ--REST AT https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plan_Colombia

==============================

04/16/2008----Former President Bill Clinton has earned hundreds of thousands of dollars speaking on behalf of a Colombia-based group pushing the trade pact, and representatives of that organization tell The Huffington Post that the former president shared their sentiment.

In June 2005, Clinton was paid $800,000 by the Colombia-based Gold Service International to give four speeches throughout Latin America. The organization is, ostensibly, a development group tasked with bringing investment to the country and educating world leaders about the Colombia’s business opportunities.

The group’s chief operating officer, Andres Franco, said in an interview that the group supports the congressional ratification of the free trade agreement and that, when Clinton was on his speaking tour, he expressed similar opinions. “He was supportive of the trade agreement at the time that he came, but that was several years ago.

In the present context, I don’t know what his position would be. It is not only about union trade rights. It is about what benefit or damage it can do to the US economy,” said Franco. “Events with the Clinton campaign [concerning Mark Penn] are not good at all for the trade agreement... Right now it became a campaign issues and that is sad, because it needs to go through.”

The comments were supported by a June 23, 2005 article from the news portal Terra (uncovered by Ben Smith at Politico) in which Clinton offered unambiguous support for the free trade agreement with Colombia.

They appear to be the first public indication that Clinton has, at least in the past, supported the trade deal. But evidence that the former president has been sympathetic to Colombia’s position is widely known. In 2007, Clinton met personally with and accepted an award from Colombia’s controversial president, Alvaro Uribe, during a time when the country was attempting to improve its image within the United States.

Subsequently, Clinton urged Congress to view the country in a more favorable light.

Moreover, Clinton has helped Frank Giustra, one of the biggest donors to the Clinton Global Initiative, score meetings with high-ranking Colombian officials. Giustra has several business interests in the country, and both he and Clinton have collaborated on an effort to (cough) "fight poverty in developing world by partnering up with mining companies in Colombia and elsewhere." http://nypost.com/2008/12/19/bubba-sheik-ing-the-money-tree/

==============================================

UT OH---Obama requested billions for Columbia---to (cough) curb the drug trade.

Observer: Sidney Blumenthal ‘Was Reading Above-Top-Secret NSA Reports Hours After They Appeared’

SOURCE http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2016/09/06/sidney-blumenthal-reading-top-secret-nsa-reports/ ^

FR posted by blam / September 6, 2016

Former NSA officer John Schindler reports on a devastating fact NOT mentioned in the FBI’s investigation of Hillary Clinton conducting State Department business on an unsecure homebrew email server. From the Observer:

[Sidney] Blumenthal’s email read exactly like classified NSA reporting, as anybody acquainted with our SIGINT would immediately recognize. As one veteran agency official told me back in January, Blumenthal’s email was NSA information with “at least 90 percent confidence.”

Which was no coincidence, since an NSA investigation subsequently determined that Blumenthal’s Sudan assessment was derived from their reporting—in some cases verbatim. As I reported in March, NSA concluded that Blumenthal’s Sudan report came from four different agency SIGINT reports, all classified Top Secret/SCI. Then it got worse:

At least one of those reports was issued under the GAMMA compartment, which is an NSA handling caveat that is applied to extraordinarily sensitive information (for instance, decrypted conversations between top foreign leadership, as this was). GAMMA is properly viewed as a SIGINT Special Access Program, or SAP, several of which Clinton compromised in another series of her “unclassified” emails.

NSA had no doubt that Blumenthal somehow got his hands on some of their “crown jewels” information. “It’s word-for-word, verbatim copying,” an agency official of them explained. “In one case, an entire paragraph was lifted from an NSA report” that was classified Top Secret/SCI. To add to the mystery, Sid emailed Hillary his “personal” assessment on Sudan only hours after some of those classified NSA reports were issued. (snip)

(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.