Posted on 01/13/2018 10:28:24 AM PST by COUNTrecount
You've heard of Benghazi and Uranium One. But more than a year after Hillary Clintons resounding loss to President Trump, she must now grapple with a new scandal: An ongoing Federal Election Commission investigation into an alleged $84 million money laundering scheme orchestrated by the Hillary Victory Fund the $500 million joint fundraising committee between the Clinton campaign, the Democratic National Committee, and Democratic state parties.
Based on former DNC Chairwoman Donna Braziles public comments, a memo by former Clinton campaign manager Robbie Mook, and months of reviewing FEC reports, the Committee to Defend the President has filed an FEC complaint accusing the Democratic establishment of using state chapters as straw men to circumvent campaign donation limits and launder money to Clintons campaign. The Hillary Victory Fund solicited six-figure donations from major donors, including Calvin Klein and Family Guy creator Seth MacFarlane, papered them through state parties en route to DNC and then the Clinton campaign.
In reality, the fund either never transferred $84 million to state parties, sending the funds straight to the DNC, or it made the transfers without state parties having actual control of the money. In either case, the fund violated campaign finance laws in precisely the way the Supreme Court deemed illegal in its 2014 McCutcheon v. FEC ruling. And thats only the tip of allegations in this particular iceberg.
If and when the allegations are confirmed by the FEC, Clintons $84 million money laundering scheme will go down as the single largest campaign finance scandal in U.S. history.
Of course, the New York Times has not devoted a single drop of ink to the $84 million scandal. While MSNBCs lack of coverage is hardly surprising, CNNs radio silence is deafening and once again contradicts the networks self-described nonpartisanship.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
The OIG’s report and what the DOJ is investigation are about to prove your nattering negativity totally wrong.
https://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3622169/posts
" Janell Ross, a political reporter for the Washington Post, was found to have participated in a highly secretive, big dollar fundraising and strategy conference for the Democrats.
To be clear, Ross was not there reporting on the conference as part of her job.
She wrote no articles about it and the WaPo said they didnt even know that she had gone.
She was a participant in the event, even sitting in on one of their panels."
Maybe the press is actively involved in DemoRATic fund raising ?
Or WaPo doesn't want to have their impartiality questioned ?(../s)
Could these incidents be related ?
So many CRIMES....so little time left!
I’m in. Meet you back here the day it happens.
Yardbirds? Rope, rope can be reused and cheap Waste not a penny on these treacherous folks which is a much better solution than calling them yardbirds.
The Clinton’s have done many more things as bad if not worse than Benghazi.
MANY more...
As I recall George Webb was all over this one.This is the one where Hillary demanded complete control over everything the DNC did during the election and other stuff,its good.
That would seem to be counter-intuitive, since, when it comes credibility, socialism always fails, and people know bullshit when they hear it and experience it. Socialism is pure crap, and journalists with good education and good historical understanding would know that to be true.IMHO you have the causality backward. Journalists have the motive of wanting to be, as Adam Smith put it, our leaders and directors by virtue of being believed. And journalists have the motive to be socialist because socialism sells.
Socialism is every bit the disaster you paint it as - but it has always been that, and yet it still sells.Why does socialism sell? Because socialism is best defined as cynicism towards society and concomitant naiveté towards government. Cynicism can, I submit, be defined as the conceit that negativity is objectivity. Journalism is profitable because it follows rules which clearly boil down to precisely that conceit. If it bleeds, it leads tells journalists to be negative towards society. Man Bites Dog not Dog Bites Man doubles down by telling journalists that the best story is one in which a person or organization which society trusts and depends on betrays societys trust. Journalism is negative, and journalists know it. How then justify the claim that journalism is objective? That can only be true if negativity is objectivity. And that conceit is nothing other than cynicism.
Journalisms cynicism towards society maps directly to naiveté towards government for the simple reason that, in a very real sense, society and government are opposites. This is the burden of the first two paragraphs of Thomas Paines Common Sense. Every reason for cynicism towards the people is an argument for trusting the government instead. The upshot is that what sells newspapers tends to promote big government and denigrate freedom.
In that sense, as I said, socialism sells.
BUMP!
just can’t get me enough of that gif!
Judge Jenean: Clinton about to face a real investigation
http://video.foxnews.com/v/5704185340001/?playlist_id=937116552001
things are moving so fast I had to open a notepad doc to save the links to look at!
Also more damaging to National Security.
When were sitting here a year from now and there are a bunch of cronies wearing orange jumpsuits you can tell me how wrong I was. Im confident that a year from now, well just be sitting here. Like we have for the last 25 years.
I caught the irony of the nattering (nabob) of negativity remark. Uttered by Spiro Agnew, the highest level public official ever convicted due to corruption.
That socialism sells does not invalidate the points I made about how democrats have always been about taking over every bit of what makes for a democracy, and then undoing that democracy by using their advantages that they worked so hard to attain. Deep state is a result of many of their efforts, socialism/communism cannot be attained without the many carefully executed steps that democrats undertook.
He was not convicted. Spiro plead nolo contendre on one count and thereby introduced that legal term to the general public.
Amen, Grampa.
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.