JUNE 14, 2018


NEWS AND VIEWS


I HAD ALWAYS UNDERSTOOD THAT CRYSTALS ARE FORMED AS MAGMA COOLS INSIDE THE EARTH, BUT MAYBE NOT .... I AM PUTTING THIS ARTICLE AT THE TOP TODAY BECAUSE, WHILE POLITICS IS MORE IMPORTANT, GEM-LIKE GREEN CRYSTALS ARE MORE BEAUTIFUL. THIS REPORT BY EXPRESS.CO.UK IS THE BEST AND MOST CLEARLY STATED EXPLANATION OF WHY THERE ARE CRYSTALS AMONG THE STILL MELTED MINERALS IN A VOLCANO. OLIVINE CRYSTALIZES AT A HIGHER TEMPERATURE THAN MOST OTHER MINERALS. NEAT. HANDFULS OF LITTLE GREEN CRYSTALS EVERYWHERE! BETTER THAN THE REFRIGERATOR SIZED BOULDERS THAT THE VOLCANO WAS EMITTING A FEW DAYS AGO.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5cmMSw0Ot0
Hawaii's Volcano Is Literally Erupting with Gems

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/973800/hawaii-volcano-eruption-update-why-kilauea-shooting-green-crystals-olivine-latest-pictures
Hawaii volcano eruption: Why is Kilauea volcano shooting green crystals into the air?
By KATE WHITFIELD
16:59, Wed, Jun 13, 2018 | UPDATED: 19:42, Wed, Jun 13, 2018

HAWAII’S Mount Kilauea is entering its seventh week of eruptions, bombarding residents of Big Island with a host of terrifying hazards to watch out for. However, one less sinister side effect of the volcano has been observed - so why is Kilauea shooting green crystals into the air?

Since Hawaii’s Kilauea began erupting on May 3, the list of threats has seemed endless.

Residents have battled lava tides, volcanic smog, lava haze, lava fountains, shards of glass in the wind, ash clouds, and a geothermal plant inundated with lava.

Now, however, residents are noticing something a little more pleasant from the eruption: green crystals.

The minerals, called Olivine, have been raining down on homes near the eruption and popping up near the lava flows.

RELATED ARTICLES
Hawaii volcano latest: Why Kilaeua can't stop triggering earthquakes?
Hawaii volcano eruption latest MAP: Lava and hot ash flow

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) scientist Wendy Stovall said the phenomenon is to be expected.

She said: "It's pretty common. There’s often olivine in rocks all over Hawaii."

What is Olivine?
Olivine is one of the most common minerals on earth.

It is a rock-forming mineral, typically found in igneous rocks (formed when molten rock, or lava, solidifies).

Fissure and rockUSGS / Getty

Olivine is a rock-forming mineral, typically found in igneous rocks

Most Olivine found at the Earth’s surface is within the rocks at divergent tectonic plate boundaries and hot spots - just like Hawaii.

Olivine crystallises [sic] at a very high temperature, meaning it is one of the first minerals to crystallise from magma.

This is why the little green gems can be seen raining down near lava flows, as they would have been sitting within the volcano already.

Ms Stovall said: "It really is one of the first things to form.”

TweetTwitter / Erin Jordan

People have taken to Twitter to share pictures of the Olivine
TweetTwitter / GEOetc

Olivine is one of the most common minerals on earth.

The ones being spotted in people’s gardens would have “just kind of fallen out” of the lava as it spews from the active fissures.

Olivine is very easily weathered, so it is most commonly seen at the earth’s surface in the form of sand - resulting in Hawaii’s green beaches.

What is happening in Hawaii?

Since the eruption began, the volcano has destroyed approximately 600 homes and forced thousands into temporary shelters.

Power and telephone lines have been damaged, and huge swathes of land and roads have been wiped out. The damage to the geothermal plant is still unknown.

Hawaii volcano eruption aerial pictures: Huge fissures open near Kilauea crater
Wed, June 13, 2018

Hawaii volcano eruption aerial pictures show huge fissures open near Kilauea crater – see the latest pictures.


PLAY SLIDESHOW

Lava fountains at fissure 8 during ongoing eruptions of the Kilauea Volcano in Hawaii, June 11 REUTERS1 of 17
Huge fissures open near Kilauea crater
The slow pace of the lava flow has created a raised channel, increasing the potential for breaches as seen in the photo
Lava flows across a highway on the outskirts of Pahoa
Lava destroys homes in the Kapoho area, east of Pahoa on June 5
Aerial pictures show Lava flowing on the outskirts of Pahoa during ongoing eruptions of the Kilauea Volcano in Hawaii
No one has been killed by this period of activity, but one man was seriously injured when he was hit in the leg by a lava bomb.

Kilauea has been in a constant cycle of activity since 1983, turning eruptive after a magnitude 6.9 earthquake struck the area in late April.

This is being cited as an unprecedented event, as there are two eruptions occurring simultaneously.

The first is the eruption at Kilauea’s summit crater, and the second along a six-mile string of 25 fissures down its east flank, known as the East Rift Zone.

RELATED ARTICLES
Hawaii volcano update: INCREDIBLE aerial pictures show magnitude of...
Hawaii volcano aerial update: Eruption satellite pictures show lava
Hawaii volcano eruption: WATCH l



THIS IS THE FIRST TIME I’VE SEEN ANYTHING ABOUT A THREAT TO BERNIE SANDERS LIFE, BUT OF COURSE IT’S BOUND TO HAPPEN. THIS IS A TEENAGER, 19 TO BE EXACT, AND HE HAS BEEN APPREHENDED. FINALLY. HE IS DEFINITELY CONSIDERING HURTING PEOPLE (WHOEVER, PROBABLY) ESPECIALLY “LEFTIES.” SEE HIS WORDS:

“MY HEART IS MESSED UP AND EVIL, AND PART OF ME WANTS TO SEE PEOPLE SUFFER, GOD DAMMIT.” I DON’T UNDERSTAND WHY HE WAS NOT ALREADY UNDER ARREST, THOUGH, BECAUSE HIS THREATS TO HARRIS AND SANDERS CAME ON MARCH 24, HIS ARREST FOR ARMED ROBBERY WITH A KNIFE CAME “IN APRIL,” AND ONLY ON JUNE 14 WHEN HE MADE A FULL CONFESSION AT A MENTAL HOSPITAL WAS HE CHARGED WITH A CRIME. NOW, IF THEY DON’T TURN HIM LOOSE UNTIL HE IS RETURNED TO A STATE OF SANITY, IF HE EVER WAS SANE, WE WILL BE A LITTLE SAFER.

https://nypost.com/2018/06/14/teen-charged-with-threatening-to-kill-bernie-sanders-kamala-harris/
Teen charged with threatening to kill Bernie Sanders, Kamala Harris
BY Lia Eustachewich
June 14, 2018

PHOTOGRAPH – Nicholas Bukowski, Anne Arundel County Detention Center

A Maryland man threatened to murder Sen. Bernie Sanders, Sen. Kamala Harris and March for Our Lives protesters because he was frustrated with liberals and wanted to see “people suffer,” according to disturbing new court filings.

Nicholas Bukoski of Anne Arundel County was indicted on federal charges related to disturbing Instagram messages he allegedly sent to Sanders’ and Harris’ offices March 24.

“Senator, I would watch your back as you’re out today… You wouldn’t want to be caught off guard when I use my second amendment protected firearm to rid the world of you, you stupid, crazy old fool…,” Bukoski allegedly wrote to Sanders, the filings show.

“You f–ing b–h, I am going to make sure you and your radical lefty friends never get back in power you will never run for president, because you won’t make it to see that day,” it said.

Bukoski also texted the Metropolitan Police Department tip line, writing, “I am intending to send the message that gun control, bomb control, or any other kind of weapons control will not stop attacks, it is an issue of the heart. My heart is messed up and evil, and part of me wants to see people suffer, god dammit. Anyway, good luck and Godspeed finding my presents. This will be my only message.”

The MPD believed Bukoski was targeting the pro-gun control March for Our Lives rally that took place in Washington, DC, the same day he sent the threats.

In yet another message, he targeted former Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords — who survived an assassination attempt in 2011 — telling her, “Mam, I would kindly ask you to stop your radical, left wing, gun-grabbing ways, for your own safety…. It would be a shame to see you get hurt.”

Bukoski was arrested June 8 and, while in custody at a mental health facility, admitted sending the threats. He also said he knew he crossed the line from free speech to hate speech, prosecutors wrote in a memorandum.

When asked about the “presents,” Bukoski told officials there weren’t any and that he was “not as smart as the Boston bombers or the guy in Austin.”

Bukoski was indicted on five felony counts April 11 but the charging papers were only unsealed after his arrest, according to court records.

Bukoski was held without bail following a court hearing Wednesday, a spokesman for the US Attorney’s Office in Washington said.

Prosecutors said he is unemployed and “spends most of his day watching Fox News or on the internet.”

Bukoski has been in trouble before. In April, he was busted for an armed robbery of a 7-Eleven with a knife in Anne Arundel County three months before, according to court papers. During his arrest, he also confessed to several arsons. Those cases are still pending.

MORE ON:
BERNIE SANDERS

Bannon: Sanders should have gone after Clinton on the campaign trail
The GOP’s ‘primary problem,’ Haspel divides the Resistance and other comments
Bernie supporters push for registration overhaul to vote in state primary
Bernie’s jobs-for-all plan can’t possibly work
Two minutes later, the 19-year-old sent similar threats to Harris.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_for_Our_Lives
March for Our Lives
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

March for Our Lives (sometimes MFOL)[4] was a student-led demonstration in support of tighter gun control that took place on March 24, 2018, in Washington, D.C., with over 800 sibling events throughout the United States and around the world.[5][6][7][8][9] Student organizers from Never Again MSD planned the march in collaboration with the nonprofit organization Everytown for Gun Safety.[10] The event followed the Stoneman Douglas High School shooting, which was described by many media outlets as a possible tipping point for gun control legislation.[11][12][13]

Protesters urged for universal background checks on all gun sales, raising the federal age of gun ownership and possession to 21,[14] closing of the gun show loophole, a restoration of the 1994 Federal Assault Weapons Ban, and a ban on the sale of high-capacity magazines in the United States and a ban on bump stocks.[15] Turnout was estimated to be between 1.2 to 2 million people in the United States,[16][17][18] making it one of the largest protests in American history.[2]


“THE SLEAZY NEW YORK DEMOCRATS” ARE SUING TRUMP FOR HIS ILLEGAL, AND APPARENTLY ELEGANT, ACTIVITIES.

https://mic.com/articles/189820/new-york-attorney-general-sues-trump-foundation-for-persistent-illegal-conduct#.OxZl8H4mB
New York attorney general sues Trump Foundation for “pattern of persistent illegal conduct”
By Emily C. Singer | 48m ago June 14, 2108

On Thursday, New York Attorney General Barbara Underwood filed a lawsuit against President Donald Trump’s charity, which bears his name, alleging that the foundation engaged in “unlawful political coordination with the Trump presidential campaign” and illegal “self-dealing transactions to benefit Mr. Trump’s personal and business interests.”

The lawsuit is seeking $2.8 million in damages, and seeks to ban Trump from serving as a director of a nonprofit in New York for 10 years. It also seeks to institute a one-year ban on serving as a nonprofit director to his adult children, the other Trump Foundation board members: Donald Trump Jr., Ivanka Trump and Eric Trump.

“Mr. Trump used the Trump Foundation’s charitable assets to pay off his legal obligations, to promote Trump hotels and other businesses and to purchase personal items,” the New York Attorney General said in a news release. “In addition, at Mr. Trump’s behest, the Trump Foundation illegally provided extensive support to his 2016 presidential campaign by using the Trump Foundation’s name and funds it raised from the public to promote his campaign for presidency, including in the days before the Iowa nominating caucuses.”


New York Attorney General
✔
@NewYorkStateAG
1h
We are suing the Donald J. Trump Foundation and its directors @realDonaldTrump, Donald J. Trump Jr., Ivanka Trump, and Eric Trump for extensive and persistent violations of state and federal law. https://on.ny.gov/2JGcVag pic.twitter.com/geSMA3fx2x


New York Attorney General
✔
@NewYorkStateAG
Our investigation found that the Trump Foundation raised in excess of $2.8 million in a manner designed to influence the 2016 presidential election at the direction and under the control of senior leadership of the Trump presidential campaign.

10:44 AM - Jun 14, 2018
5,623
3,278 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy

The lawsuit points to Trump’s decision to refuse to participate in a Republican primary debate in Iowa in January 2016, and instead host a fundraiser to benefit veterans. The suit says that the fundraiser was actually a political event, and therefore violated the rules that govern charities.

“The Iowa fundraiser was planned, organized, financed and directed by the campaign, with administrative assistance from the foundation,” according to the suit.

It was the Trump campaign, the lawsuit adds, and not the Trump Foundation, that “played the lead role in determining the disposition of the fundraiser proceeds,” and the campaign that handed out the Trump Foundation proceeds “at campaign rallies for the political benefit of Mr. Trump.”

“Mr. Trump’s wrongful use of the foundation to benefit his campaign was willful and knowing,” the lawsuit alleges, further alleging that Trump perjured himself when he “repeatedly” declared in tax documents that “the foundation did not carry out political activity.”

Also alleged in the lawsuit is that the foundation illegally gave money to the re-election campaign of Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi.

Trump tweeted a repsonse [sic] to the announcement of the lawsuit quickly on Thursday morning, denouncing the New York Democrats and former New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, who stepped down in May after of being accused of physical abuse by former romantic partners.

“The sleazy New York Democrats, and their now disgraced (and run out of town) A.G. Eric Schneiderman, are doing everything they can to sue me on a foundation that took in $18,800,000 and gave out to charity more money than it took in, $19,200,000. I won’t settle this case!” the president tweeted.

“....Schneiderman, who ran the Clinton campaign in New York, never had the guts to bring this ridiculous case, which lingered in their office for almost 2 years. Now he resigned his office in disgrace, and his disciples brought it when we would not settle,” he wrote in a subsequent tweet.


Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump
The sleazy New York Democrats, and their now disgraced (and run out of town) A.G. Eric Schneiderman, are doing everything they can to sue me on a foundation that took in $18,800,000 and gave out to charity more money than it took in, $19,200,000. I won’t settle this case!...

11:09 AM - Jun 14, 2018
25.9K
13.9K people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy

Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump
....Schneiderman, who ran the Clinton campaign in New York, never had the guts to bring this ridiculous case, which lingered in their office for almost 2 years. Now he resigned his office in disgrace, and his disciples brought it when we would not settle.

11:09 AM - Jun 14, 2018
19.2K
10.4K people are talking about this


TIME.COM COMMENTS ON TODAY’S IG REPORT ON JAMES COMEY AND HILLARY CLINTON, FOLLOWED BY THAT OF CBS AS WELL.

http://time.com/5312394/inspector-general-james-comey-michael-horowitz/
The Inspector General's Report Criticizes James Comey. Here's What You Need to Know
By ABBY VESOULIS and ABIGAIL SIMON
Updated: June 14, 2018 6:34 PM ET

A Department of Justice report found that former FBI Director James Comey and other top officials did not follow standard procedures in their handling of the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s email server, but did not find any evidence of political bias.

The report, which was released Thursday afternoon, concludes that Comey hurt the agency’s reputation for impartiality, though it says he did not do so out of political bias.

The report finds fault with multiple decisions by Comey and individual agents, determining that former Attorney General Loretta Lynch’s decision to meet with former President Bill Clinton on an Arizona airport tarmac in 2016 was an error in judgement.

The report by the Justice Department’s inspector general is the latest bombshell in the seemingly never-ending fight over the 2016 election. President Donald Trump previously tweeted he was eagerly awaiting it, and both Democrats and Republicans are watching to see how it will affect public opinion.

FBI Director Christopher Wray told reporters Thursday evening that the FBI was already taking steps to address the “errors of judgement” identified in the report, which included the implementation training processes to emphasize objectivity.

“We need to hold ourselves accountable for the choices we make and the work we do,” Wray said. “We’re going to adhere to the appropriate disciplinary process, and once that process is complete we won’t hesitate to hold people accountable for their actions.”

Here’s what you need to know.

What does the inspector general do?
The Office of Inspectors General is responsible for examining allegations of wrongdoing, fraud or misconduct within various federal agencies. The Inspector General of the Department of Justice, Michael Horowitz, currently leads a nationwide team of more than 450 agents, attorneys, auditors and other such employees who all work together to conduct these investigations. Often called the “watchdog” of the federal government, inspectors general work to hold government officials accountable to an honorable standard of behavior, promoting efficiency and integrity.

Who is Inspector General Michael Horowitz?
Michael Horowitz is a Harvard Law School graduate and former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York. Prior to practicing law for a private firm from 2002-2012, Horowitz worked in the Department of Justice Criminal Division between 1999 and 2002, where he was the Deputy Assistant Attorney General and then the Chief of Staff.

Former President Barack Obama nominated Horowitz as inspector general of the Department of Justice in July of 2011. In 2012, he was confirmed by the Senate without objection and sworn into office that spring.

Read More: Read the 191 Arguments President Trump Has Made Against the Mueller Investigation

What is the Inspector General’s report about?
Horowitz announced in January 2017 that the Department of Justice would examine how the FBI handled the probe into Hillary Clinton’s private email server under Comey.

It will review a number of Comey’s controversial acts, including his choice not to prosecute Clinton for sending classified information over her private email server and his decision to publicly resume the Clinton investigation in October of 2017.

The report was welcomed both by Democrats, who thought Comey’s reopening of Clinton’s email server investigation just days before the election cost her the race, and by Republicans, who felt Clinton deserved criminal charges for using a private server to send emails related to her work as Secretary of State.

The report has nothing to do with Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election, but since Trump fired Comey in May of 2017, it has taken on added relevance. Trump’s official reason for firing Comey was his mistreatment of Clinton, although he argued at other times that the FBI director was actually too nice to her.


Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump
FBI Director Comey was the best thing that ever happened to Hillary Clinton in that he gave her a free pass for many bad deeds! The phony...

10:51 PM - May 2, 2017
76.5K
42.9K people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy
What happened during the Clinton email investigation?
In March of 2015, the New York Times published a front-page article indicating Clinton exclusively used a private email server and personal email address to send work-related emails and that the use of the account “may have violated federal requirements” that she retain all officials’ correspondence.

Breaking the tradition of not discussing FBI investigations with the public, Comey held a press conference in July of 2016 saying that though the FBI did not find evidence Clinton and her colleagues intended to violate laws regarding careful email practice, they were “extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.”

On Oct. 28, 2016, Comey sent a letter to Congress suggesting more emails had been discovered that appeared to be pertinent to the investigation of Clinton’s email server.

Finally, on Nov. 6, 2016, just two days before the 2016 election, Comey told Congress the additional emails the bureau analyzed would not change the FBI’s conclusion Clinton would not be prosecuted.

What does the report say about James Comey?
The report states Comey departed “clearly and dramatically from FBI and department norms,” though not on account of political bias on Comey’s part.

“The decisions negatively impacted the perception of the FBI and the department as fair administrators of justice,” Inspector General Michael Horowitz said in the report’s conclusions.

Former Attorney General Loretta Lynch also faces under scrutiny in the report. During the initial email probe, Lynch privately met with former President Bill Clinton on an airplane tarmac in Arizona. Though it is not clear what Bill Clinton and Lynch discussed on the plane in the midst of the email investigation, she expressed regret: “I certainly wouldn’t do it again.”

What about his emails?
The report reveals that Clinton was not the only person at fault for using a private email account — on “numerous instances,” Comey also used his personal Gmail account to “conduct FBI business.” These occasions are listed and described in the report; in all of them, Comey is forwarding attachments or email drafts to or from his FBI account. The report then states that, in an interview, Comey said “I did not have an unclass[ified] FBI connection at home that worked… for unclassified work, I would use my personal laptop for word processing and then send it to the FBI.” When asked if he thought this adhered to FBI regulations, Comey stated “I don’t know. … I had the sense that it was okay.”

Clinton took in this news with a cheeky tweet.


Hillary Clinton
✔
@HillaryClinton
But my emails.

Kyle Cheney
✔
@kyledcheney
IG found that on numerous occasions, COMEY used a personal GMail account to conduct official FBI business, according to source briefed on the report.

5:36 PM - Jun 14, 2018
261K
113K people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy
How did Comey react?
In a New York Times op-ed published this afternoon, Comey expressed his respect for the inspector general’s report and upheld the validity of the investigation, even though he disagreed with some of its findings. “I do not agree with all of the inspector general’s conclusions, but I respect the work of his office and salute its professionalism,” he wrote.

He commends the report for concluding that the FBI was not affected by bias and that there was no legal case against Clinton. However, he also writes about the difficulty of two decisions he made in 2016: to make an announcement without Attorney General Lynch’s input and to publicly reopen the investigation. In hindsight, he stands by the choices he made, believing that they were the “most consistent with institutional values.” Although the inspector general’s office disagreed, “that’s O.K.,” he said.

He hopes that the report will preserve the facts of 2016 and guide future FBI leaders. He wrote, the “detailed report should serve to both protect and build the reservoir of trust and credibility necessary for the Department of Justice and the FBI to remain strong and independent and to continue their good work for our country.”

How did Republicans respond to the report?
Earlier today, three Trump-supporting Republicans drafted a letter expressing concern about the final version of the report. Reps. Andy Biggs, Ron DeSantis, and Matt Gaetz wrote to Horowitz asking him to release the report’s initial drafts along with the final published form due to concerns that the report may have been weakened over time and editing. Although they commend the report for being “thorough and accurate,” they write that “people may have changed the report in a way that obfuscates your findings.” They expressed worries that members of the DOJ and FBI may have changed the draft over the past month.

Republican Rep. Trey Gowdy of South Carolina also reacted negatively to the report on Thursday. “I am alarmed, angry and disappointed by the Attorney General’s findings of numerous failures by DOJ and FBI in investigating potential Espionage Act violations by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton,” he said in a statement. “The FBI’s actions and those of former Director Comey severely damaged the credibility of the investigation, the public’s ability to rely on the results of the investigation, and the very institutions he claims to revere.”

Horowitz, in a letter to Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley accepted an invitation to speak before the committee on Monday. “The American people have waited a long time for answers on whether Justice Department and FBI leadership treated Secretary Clinton with kid gloves instead of impartially investigating. I look forward to reviewing the report and hearing directly from the Inspector General on Monday,” Grassley said in response.

How did Democrats respond to the report?
For many Democrats, the report vindicated their view that James Comey mishandled his examination into Hillary Clinton’s private email server by publicly reopening the investigation in the days before the November election. In a statement released earlier this afternoon, Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) said, “this report makes clear that FBI Director Comey and FBI personnel failed to follow the rules, and in doing so, hurt Hillary Clinton’s campaign and helped Donald Trump’s.”

The report also concludes that the FBI investigations were not impacted by political bias, contradicting past statements by President Trump. Durbin addressed that in his statement, stating that the report discredits Trump’s claims of FBI conspiracy against his campaign and administration.

What has Trump said about the inspector general’s report?
Trump eagerly anticipated the release of the Inspector General’s report. He has openly criticized how long it took the report to be published, by tweeting, “Numerous delays. Hope Report is not being changed and made weaker!”

Trump hasn’t spoken publicly about the report since its release, but White House spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders said Thursday that it “reaffirmed the president’s suspicions about Comey’s conduct and the political bias among some of the members of the FBI.” Sanders said specifically that the text messages between FBI staffers Peter Strzok and Lisa Page “[cause] a great deal of concern” and “[point] out the political bias” that the Administration has “ found to be a huge problem.”

Earlier, she had said that the president wanted the report to be transparent but also “expedited and completed quickly.”

“I think the President would like to see this process move faster,” she said at a press briefing in early June. “They’ve been obsessed with a number of other issues in which they’ve spent a great deal of time on. I think he’d like to see some of that spread out and some time spent on that.”

He has also expressed desires for the report to validate his decision to fire James Comey by providing evidence of Comey’s incompetence. He recently tweeted “When will people start saying, ‘thank you, Mr. President, for firing James Comey?” and later commented to the press that the June 14 report may turn out to be “a nice birthday president.”


Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump
What is taking so long with the Inspector General’s Report on Crooked Hillary and Slippery James Comey. Numerous delays. Hope Report is not being changed and made weaker! There are so many horrible things to tell, the public has the right to know. Transparency!

6:38 AM - Jun 5, 2018
84.8K
42.7K people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy

Trump is expected to use any negative findings about Comey to attempt to further undermine his credibility, since Comey has also testified under oath that the president asked him to drop an investigation into former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn and sought to secure his personal loyalty, claims that the president denies vehemently.

What does the report say about Peter Strzok and Lisa Page?
The report includes discussion of text messages between Peter Strzok, a former FBI counterintelligence official, and Lisa Page, a former lawyer for the FBI on their FBI-issued cell phones. Among the 40,000 plus texts reviewed include: “God trump is a loathsome human,” sent from Page, and “Just went to a southern Virginia Walmart. I could SMELL the Trump support….,” sent from Strzok’s device.

Though Horowitz suggests these texts, among one that says, “We’ll stop [Trump from becoming president],” are indicative of bias and “a willingness to take official action to impact a presidential candidate’s electoral prospects,” his conclusion is that their views did not affect the investigation.

“We did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that improper considerations, including political bias, directly affected the specific investigative actions we reviewed,” the report reads.

Strzok’s lawyer released statements regarding the report, calling it “critically flawed” for saying that it could not rule out, with confidence, that Strzok’s potential biases “may have been a cause of the FBI’s failure.”

Strzok and Page have recently been under media scrutiny for their anti-Trump texts, some of which have already been released to the public. Strzok was removed from Mueller’s Russia investigation and demoted to the FBI’s Human Resource Bureau in December, and Page resigned from her position in May.

Trump has previously raised concerns about these two FBI employees, questioning their integrity and credibility in earlier tweets. He has claimed that they exchanged incriminating text messages, and that they were involved in alleged illicit and defamatory spying activity into the Trump campaign. On June 5, 2018, he wrote “Wow, Strzok-Page, the incompetent & corrupt FBI lovers, have texts referring to a counter-intelligence operation into the Trump campaign dating back to December, 2015. SPYGATE is in full force!”


Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump
Wow, Strzok-Page, the incompetent & corrupt FBI lovers, have texts referring to a counter-intelligence operation into the Trump Campaign dating way back to December, 2015. SPYGATE is in full force! Is the Mainstream Media interested yet? Big stuff!

8:37 PM - Jun 5, 2018
87.8K
44.4K people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy

What does the report say about Lynch’s meeting with Bill Clinton?
In the summer of 2016 — one week before Comey’s press conference about Clinton’s email server — former President Bill Clinton met with then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch on an airport tarmac in Arizona.

The meeting had not been planned, and although both parties insisted that nothing was discussed about the investigation, questions still persisted about the timing, given Lynch’s responsibilities in overseeing the FBI. Lynch did not comply with the calls, which were mainly from Republican lawmakers, to recuse herself, and instead accepted Comey’s July 5 recommendation.

In the inspector general’s report, Lynch said she became increasingly concerned as her meeting with Clinton continued, but did not step aside because she did want [sic] to give an impression they had discussed something inappropriate. The IG report did not find evidence contradicting Lynch’s initial statements, but concluded it was an error in judgment for her not to cut the meeting short, and she did not appropriately address subsequent concerns about her role in the investigation.

Lynch also said that, overall, she was rarely briefed on the investigation; it was not discussed at her daily morning meetings and she was not involved in the daily decision-making process.



https://www.cbsnews.com/live-news/inspector-general-report-clinton-email-investigation-2018-06-14-live-updates/
CBS NEWS June 14, 2018, 7:17 PM
Highlights of DOJ Inspector General report on handling of Clinton email probe — live updates

NEWS VIDEO – JAMES COMEY INSUBORDINATE IN CLINTON EMAIL PROBE 3:21

The long-awaited Department of Justice Inspector General report on the handling of the Clinton email investigation by the Justice Department and FBI has been released.

The report, more than 500 pages long, focuses on former FBI chief James Comey and the decisions he made during the course of the Clinton investigation. It describes Comey as "insubordinate" while also criticizing then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch for weak leadership. It also criticizes FBI official Peter Strzok for his priorities and communications in the Clinton email probe.

However, the report found that political bias did not affect the investigation and it gave support to the decision not to prosecute Clinton.

Conservative Republicans in particular have been calling for the report to be released, and President Trump has long blasted the Justice Department and FBI, demanding answers and information. "What is taking so long with the Inspector General's Report on Crooked Hillary and Slippery James Comey," Mr. Trump tweeted earlier this month. "Numerous delays. Hope Report is not being changed and made weaker! There are so many horrible things to tell, the public has the right to know."

Follow along below for live updates:
How the Loretta Lynch-Bill Clinton tarmac meeting went down
The tarmac meeting between then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch and former President Bill Clinton in 2016 has been highly criticized, given that the Clinton email probe was ongoing at the time.

According to the report, here is how that meeting went down:

Lynch and Clinton's meeting on the tarmac resulted in Lynch's stepping back from the investigation. Clinton, who was doing campaign events, says he happened to see that she was at the same airport. He thought he would just "go shake hands with her," and told the OIG he didn't think his meeting with her would impact the investigation into his wife's email server. Bill Clinton said he may have been dismissive because he never thought the investigation "amounted to much, frankly."

Lynch invited him onto her plane to talk about their grandkids. Her staff said they had "zero knowledge" Clinton would be there, until he was approaching the plane. Clinton's security detail had apparently reached out to Lynch' security, but staff said they were never told. Both denied having any conversation about Clinton's upcoming FBI review.

Bill Clinton was surprised by the later criticism of the meeting, saying of the media, "I thought you know, I don't know whether I'm more offended that they think I'm crooked or that they think I'm stupid. I've got an idea, I'll do all these things they accuse me of doing in broad daylight in an airport in Phoenix when the whole world can see it in front of an Air Force One crew and I believe one of her security guards. It was an interesting proposition, but no we did not."

For her part, Lynch seemed to think there was no harm in saying a brief hello, but Clinton just kept talking, and talking.

Hillary Clinton responds to Comey's use of personal email: "But my emails"
Clinton had a simple response to the OIG's finding that Comey used his personal email account to conduct FBI business: "But my emails."


Hillary Clinton
✔
@HillaryClinton
But my emails.

Kyle Cheney
✔
@kyledcheney
IG found that on numerous occasions, COMEY used a personal GMail account to conduct official FBI business, according to source briefed on the report.

5:36 PM - Jun 14, 2018
277K
119K people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy

There is one distinction between Clinton's use of a private email server and Comey's use of a private email account. Clinton was found to have conveyed classified information on her private server, while the OIG did not indicate Comey had conveyed classified information.

FBI Director Christopher Wray says report "disappointed" him
"The FBI's mission is to protect the American people and uphold the Constitution," Wray said, saying because of that and the FBI's authority, they are subject to oversight.

"And that's how it should be," he said, adding oversight makes the organization "stronger."

"I take this report very seriously, and we accept its findings and recommendations," Wray said.

Wry said there have already been referrals in the matter. Additionally, all senior employees around the globe will be trained, in light of the report, and the FBI will make all employees aware of past doings, he said. Wray said "drilling home" the importance of objectivity will be key.

Asked to summarize his response to the OIG report, Wray had a word -- "disappointed."

Why was "extremely careless" and not "grossly negligent" used?
The FBI has already been criticized by some for the decision to describe Clinton's use of her email server as "extremely careless" instead of "grossly negligent," as was originally suggested.

The OIG report says Lisa Page did have some issue with the phrase "grossly negligent," suggesting it had legal connotations.

"'I was concerned that it would be confusing if we used a...term that has a legal definition...if we say she's grossly negligent, that despite the fact that we, we and the department had a good reason to not charge her with gross negligence, given the fact that they thought it was unconstitutionally vague, and it had never been done, and, you know, sort of all of the concomitant defenses that would also follow from, from her conduct, that it would just be overly confusing," Page stated.

The report further added, "According to Comey, they tried to capture the sense that her use of the private server was 'really sloppy, but it doesn't rise to the level of prosecution.'"

Schiff responds to report

Rep. Adam Schiff, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, emphasized the OIG found "no evidence" that Comey or other DOJ or FBI officials acted on the basis of political bias.

"The IG found no evidence that former FBI Director James Comey and other FBI and DOJ officials acted on the basis of political bias or other improper considerations. Instead, their decisions were made on the basis of the facts and the law."

"Although the inspector general found no evidence that political bias affected decision-making in the Clinton email investigation, it nevertheless criticized many of the actions and judgments of former Director Comey and others," Schiff added later. "The consequence of these serious errors of judgment, however, is now clear: the actions of the FBI and DOJ in the run up to the 2016 election benefited Donald Trump's candidacy and harmed that of Hillary Clinton."

Sarah Sanders says IG report reafirms Trump's suspicions
White House press secretary Sarah Sanders, in the daily press briefing, said the DOJ IG report reaffirmed what Mr. Trump already believed regarding political bias at the FBI.

Strzok texts, "we'll stop" Trump

In one of the more revelatory sections of the report, on Aug. 8, 2016, two months out from the election, FBI agent Lisa Page said, "[Trump's] not ever going to become president, right? Right?!"

Fellow FBI agent Peter Strzok responded, "No. No he's not. We'll stop it."

The section gives ammunition to the claim from conservatives that Strzok and others in the FBI were working against Mr. Trump.

The OIG found Strzok's texts were inappropriate. But the IG still did not think the Clinton probe was swayed for political reasons, as Strzok was not the sole decision-maker.

"As we describe in this chapter, we found that Strzok was not the sole decision-maker for any of the specific investigative decisions examined in this chapter," the report said. "We further found evidence that in some instances Strzok and Page advocated for more aggressive investigative measures than did others on the Midyear team, such as the use of grand jury subpoenas and search warrants to obtain evidence."

Comey sometimes used personal email to conduct FBI business, report finds

Even as he led the investigation into Clinton's use of a private email server and private email to conduct State Department business, Comey himself was using a personal email account to conduct FBI business, the report found.

"We identified numerous instances in which Comey used a personal email account (a Gmail account) to conduct FBI business," the report found. "We cite five examples of such use in this section and include information provided by Comey and Rybicki about Comey's use of a personal email account."

The OIG found that to be "inconsistent with the FBI policy statement," even though Comey said he thought his behavior was OK.

Comey responds in NYT op-ed

Comey responded to the report almost immediately in a New York Times op-ed, saying he disagrees with some of the watchdog's assertions, but respects its review.

"The report concludes that I was wrong to announce the F.B.I.'s completion of the investigation without coordinating with the attorney general and that I was wrong to inform Congress in late October that we had reopened the investigation," Comey wrote.

"In both situations, the inspector general's team concludes, I should have adhered to established norms, which they see as mandating both deference to the attorney general on the public announcement and silence about an investigation so close to an election. I do not agree with all of the inspector general's conclusions, but I respect the work of his office and salute its professionalism. All of our leaders need to understand that accountability and transparency are essential to the functioning of our democracy, even when it involves criticism. This is how the process is supposed to work."

Comey also tweeted a brief response expressing similar sentiments.


James Comey
✔
@Comey
I respect the DOJ IG office, which is why I urged them to do this review. The conclusions are reasonable, even though I disagree with some. People of good faith can see an unprecedented situation differently. I pray no Director faces it again. Thanks to IG’s people for hard work.

2:28 PM - Jun 14, 2018
31.4K
11K people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy
Strzok's attorney responds
Aitan Goelman, a partner at Zuckerman Spaeder LLP who represents Strzok, issued the following statement about the report:"

"As the report notes, Special Agent Strzok in particular was consistently thorough and aggressive, sometimes to the point that put him at odds with senior officials at the Department of Justice."

"But the report is critically flawed in its bizarre conclusion that the IG cannot rule out 'with confidence' the possibility that Special Agent Strzok's political 'bias' may have been a cause of the FBI's failure, between September 29 and October 25, 2016, to seek a second search warrant for the Anthony Weiner laptop. In fact, all facts contained in the report lead to the conclusion that the delay was caused by a variety of factors and miscommunications that had nothing to do with Special Agent Strzok's political views. The report itself provides indisputable evidence that, when informed that Weiner's laptop contained Clinton emails, Strzok immediately had the matter pursued by two of his most qualified and aggressive investigators."

OIG: Peter Strzok may have intentionally prioritized Russia probe over Clinton email investigation follow-up
FBI official Peter Strzok had a leadership role in both the Clinton email probe and the earlier phase of the Russia investigation -- the OIG suggests that Strzok may have intentionally prioritized the Russia probe over following up on the Clinton investigation when new emails were recovered on Anthony Weiner's laptop.

FBI headquarters were notified on September 28, 2016, that additional emails relevant to the Clinton email probe had been discovered on a laptop belonging to Anthony Weiner. Nothing was done about this for three weeks. The inspector general honed in on the fact that during this period, Strzok and several other investigators who had worked on the Clinton probe were assigned to the Russia probe, "which was extremely active" during this September/October time frame, per the OIG report.

"We did not have confidence that Strzok's decision to prioritize the Russia investigation over following up on the midyear-related investigative lead discovered on the Weiner laptop was free from bias," the report said.

Watchdog finds no evidence of political bias
The DOJ IG said it found no evidence of political bias in its review of how the Clinton email probe was handled.

The report says, "we did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that improper considerations, including political bias, directly affected the specific investigative decisions" made by prosecutors or investigators involved in the Clinton email probe.

Report summary obtained by CBS News
Here is part of the executive summary of what the DOJ IG found, according to a copy obtained by CBS News:

"During the course of the review, the OIG discovered text messages and instant messages between some FBI employees on the investigative team, conducted using FBI mobile devices and computers, that expressed statements of hostility toward then-candidate Donald Trump and statements of support for then-candidate Clinton. We also identified messages that expressed opinions that were critical of the conduct and quality of the investigation. We included in our review an assessment of these messages and actions by the FBI employees."


Gowdy "alarmed, angered, and deeply disappointed" by findings
Rep. Trey Gowdy, the chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Committee, made a statement ahead of the report's release, calling the findings "deeply disappointing."

Here is the bulk of his statement:

"I am alarmed, angered, and deeply disappointed by the Inspector General's finding of numerous failures by DOJ and FBI in investigating potential Espionage Act violations by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

This report confirms investigative decisions made by the FBI during the pendency of this investigation were unprecedented and deviated from traditional investigative procedures in favor of a much more permissive and voluntary approach. This is not the way normal investigations are run.

The investigation was mishandled. The investigatory conclusions were reached before the end of the witness interviews. The July 5th press conference marked a serious violation of policy and process. And the letters to Congress in the fall of 2016 were both delayed in substance and unnecessary in form.

Moreover, the treatment afforded to former Secretary Clinton and other potential subjects and targets was starkly different from the FBI's investigation into Trump campaign officials. Voluntariness and consent in the former were replaced with search warrants, subpoenas, and other compulsory processes in the latter. Many of the investigators and supervisors were the same in both investigations but the investigatory tactics were not.

Former Director Comey violated department policy in several significant ways. The FBI's actions and those of former Director Comey severely damaged the credibility of the investigation, the public's ability to rely on the results of the investigation, and the very institutions he claims to revere."

What is the IG's investigation about?
In July 2016, Comey made the controversial decision to announce that he was recommending that no charges be filed over the investigation into her emails. Then, days before the election, Comey announced in a letter to Congress that new emails had surfaced in the case. Clinton herself has blamed Comey in part for her election loss to Mr. Trump. Then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch too has been criticized for meeting briefly with former President Bill Clinton on a tarmac while the investigation was ongoing.

In January 2017, the same month Mr. Trump took office, DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz launched a review of the DOJ's and FBI's conduct regarding the case.

Mr. Trump fired Comey in May 2017, initially pointing to an assessment of his handling of the Clinton investigation by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. Rosenstein had written that Comey had badly mishandled the conclusion of the Clinton investigation, calling it a "textbook example of what federal prosecutors and agents are taught not to do."

The president asserted he fired Comey over his handling of the Clinton email investigation, although that claim has been brought into question since, as Mr. Trump casts doubt on the legitimacy of the Russia investigation. In the same NBC interview with Lester Holt in which he blamed Comey's handling of the Clinton email probe, Mr. Trump said he thought of this "Russia thing" when he decided to fire Comey.

What was the Clinton email investigation about again?
The Clinton email probe centered around Clinton's use of a private email server to conduct business while she was secretary of state. The investigation looked into whether those emails were classified, as well as Clinton's deletion of roughly 30,000 emails after she and other former secretaries of state were told in 2014 to preserve their emails.

Here's what you may have forgotten about the Clinton email investigation
The nonprofit Project on Government Oversight urged that Horowitz' findings, the first nonpartisan, full review of the FBI's conduct regarding the Clinton case, be taken seriously.

"The report represents the crucial role that Inspectors General play in conducting credible oversight to bring accountability to our government," said Danielle Brian, executive director at POGO. "Independent--and public--analysis of Hillary Clinton's actions, of James Comey's actions, and any and all other relevant parties, will go a long way toward giving the public truth and understanding about how their government, and its officials, have served them."



THE FOLLOWING TRUMP CLAIM THAT SAUDI ARABIA GAVE HILLARY CLINTON SOME 25 MILLION DOLLARS IN HER FOUNDATION IS DISPUTED BY POLITIFACT. THE INFORMATION IN THEIR ANSWER IS VERY INTERESTING.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2016/jul/07/fact-checking-donations-clinton-foundation/
Fact-checking donations to the Clinton Foundation
By Jon Greenberg on Thursday, July 7th, 2016 at 11:02 a.m.

PHOTOGRAPH -- The Clinton family wraps up a Clinton Foundation event in 2014. The foundation's donor list has drawn scrutiny on the campaign trail. (Barbara Kinney / Clinton Global Initiative)

For Republicans, the Clinton Foundation offers endless opportunities to cast Hillary Clinton as too cozy with the world’s elites. The multimillion-dollar charity has ties to governments and the ultra-wealthy around the globe.

Case in point: In the wake of the Orlando shootings, when Clinton called on several Persian Gulf states to crack down on wealthy citizens who were funding Muslim extremists, presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump posted this response on Facebook.

"Crooked Hillary says we must call on Saudi Arabia and other countries to stop funding hate," Trump wrote on June 13, 2016. "I am calling on her to immediately return the $25 million plus she got from them for the Clinton Foundation!"

About 300,000 people responded to that post, and it was shared more than 56,000 times. We wanted to know if Trump’s $25 million figure was correct.

We soon found that independently confirming information about the Clinton foundation is challenging at best.

Nonprofits, such as the Clinton Foundation, have nearly no obligation to publicly reveal who gives them money. They might need to tell a government agency, but the details remain confidential.

We asked the Trump campaign for proof and they didn’t get back to us. The only thing we found from the campaign was a list that included broad-range figures of the Saudi donations to the foundation, along with donations from an unnamed group of "Friends of Saudi Arabia."

Trump can’t prove that he’s right. But by the same token, it’s just about as difficult to prove conclusively that he’s wrong.

The fact that we know anything about the Saudi donations stems largely from the unique politics surrounding the foundation and Clinton.

John Wonderlich, head of the Sunlight Foundation, a group that advocates for greater transparency in government, told PolitiFact, "The Clinton Foundation’s work, by its nature, blurs the lines between charity, business, politics, and public service, making it very difficult to evaluate in a traditional way."

The public file

From the very moment Hillary Clinton was put forward to be Barack Obama’s secretary of state in 2008, the potential for conflicts of interest tied to the Clinton Foundation was front and center. The international health and development project was the brainchild of Bill Clinton, and foreign governments were giving millions. Until 2013, Hillary Clinton had no formal role, but the possibility that donations to the foundation might influence foreign policy decisions would never pass the smell test so long as Clinton was running the State Department.

To allay those concerns, the foundation signed a memorandum of understanding with Obama’s presidential transition team in December 2008. Under the terms of that agreement, the foundation promised to report its donors in order to avoid the appearance of conflict of interest. It would say who gave, but it wouldn’t say precisely how much. Instead, donors were revealed in broad dollar ranges. The agreement was signed for the foundation by Bruce Lindsey, a longtime Clinton adviser and the foundation’s CEO, and by Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett for the presidential transition team.

It’s now possible to look up donation amounts on the Clinton Foundation’s website. Using Trump’s Saudi Arabia example, Saudi Arabia shows up as having given between $10 million and $25 million since the foundation started. When it began in 1997, the foundation’s main goal was to build the Clinton presidential library, although it left open the option to "engage in any and all other charitable, educational and scientific activities" that nonprofits are allowed to do under federal law.

The Washington Post reported that Saudi Arabia gave about $10 million to build the library. (According to the Post, the Saudis gave a similar amount to the George H.W. Bush library.) After the library donation, the Saudis gave very little and stopped giving entirely during the time Clinton was secretary of state. She stepped down in early February 2013.

Saudi Arabia gave again in 2014, but it was a small fraction of what the Gulf State kingdom had given before. These details come from news reports, and when we brought the numbers to the foundation staff, they said they were accurate.

However, thanks to the laws protecting donor identities, we can’t confirm these amounts independently. Everyone has to work with the level of disclosure that the foundation agreed to in that memorandum of understanding, and the memorandum doesn’t include any mechanism to check or enforce disclosure other than the foundation’s own willing compliance.

The foundation first revealed Saudi giving in December 2008. The total was in the $10 million to $25 million range then, and it hasn’t changed since.

We don’t know what "friends of Saudi Arabia" the Trump campaign had in mind, but we did see that Saudi billionaire Sheikh Mohammed H. Al-Amoudi has given between $5 million and $10 million over the years.

Murky rules on government dollars

Those who look at the foundation and smell a rat have argued that it should spell out individual donations from any government, foreign or domestic. The support for that position is iffy, but there is at least some basis for thinking that some disclosure might be required.

Until 2015, the Internal Revenue Service asked nonprofits to report government grants, but it didn’t specify that they should be individually listed. Nonprofits filing in New York State also have a line on the state form to report government grants. The Clinton Foundation is registered in New York.

In a recent article, the right-leaning website ZeroHedge.com said that based on those state filings, in 2010, foreign governments gave the foundation $7.8 million. Between 2011, 2012 and 2013, the New York filings showed nearly $10 million in foreign government donations.

Lumping all foreign grants together raises the hackles of the foundation’s critics, but Matt Mittenthal, press secretary for the New York Attorney General’s Office, told us that other foundations with international donors do it, too. In fact, some organizations itemize and others don’t, as we found when we searched the New York charities website.

For example, the Carter Center (the project of President Jimmy Carter) lumps foreign donations together, while the Save the Children Federation, in 2011 at least, itemized its donors.

Mittenthal told us the state asks for that information not out of concern with foreign influence, but to head off state-level graft. The main worry is with public officials steering state dollars to a favored charity. Mittenthal told us the Attorney General’s Office is working on clarifying how much detail nonprofits need to disclose.

As things stand, the Clinton Foundation is in step with federal and New York reporting standards. Unless government agencies change the rules or their interpretation of the rules, we are still wholly reliant on what the foundation has chosen to reveal.

Summing up

Working backward from the numbers we have in hand, it seems fairly certain that Saudi Arabia gave about $10 million in the early 2000s, well before Clinton became secretary. That number would grow in 2014, but it didn’t double. That would be a 100 percent increase, and the foundation said the 2014 amount was a small fraction of the total.

So we are left with the Saudis giving less than $25 million.

Now we can ask, did Clinton get that money for the foundation, as Trump said?

Josh Schwerin, spokesman for the Clinton campaign told us, "Hillary Clinton did not solicit these funds."

As a legal matter, Clinton was not a member of the foundation’s board until 2013, after she left the administration. She was a board member in 2014 when the Saudis gave again, but that amount would be much less than $10 million.

There were no Saudi donations while she was secretary.

But if she ever attended an event with her husband -- official or unofficial -- and Saudi representatives were in the room, questions could arise.

An example of how money, charity and foreign agendas can overlap emerged after Clinton joined the foundation. In 2014, a Canadian agency gave about $500,000 to a job training program in Cartagena, Colombia.

The foundation announced that the money would give new opportunities to 20,000 teens from some of Cartagena’s poorest neighborhoods.

The potential benefits were clear, but less obvious were the interests of the Canadian agency, the Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development. That department backed the Keystone XL pipeline, a project that would have sent oil from Alberta’s tar sands down to Gulf Coast refineries. While President Barack Obama ultimately rejected the pipeline, at the time, U.S. approval hung in the balance.

As Kirk Hanson, director of the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics at Santa Clara University in California, told the Wall Street Journal, the "potential exists for foreign governments to curry favor with (Clinton) as a potential president of the United States."

Getting back to Saudi Arabia, working with them would necessarily be a part of any president’s job. Its donations might not make a difference, but there is no question that the foundation’s work creates a tangle of relationships.

That does not, however, prove Trump’s point.



MADDOW TONIGHT
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show


THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW 6/14/18
DoJ IG report lesson: Republican bulling of law enforcement works
Rachel Maddow reports on the findings of the Department of Justice inspector general report on the FBI's handling of the Hillary Clinton e-mail investigation and notes that the unequal treatment James Comey gave to Clinton was the result of Republican attacks on law enforcement that made Comey more concerned about giving the impression of favoring Clinton. Duration: 20:40


THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW 6/14/18
GOP keeps pressure on DoJ in effort to sink Trump Russia probe
Rep. Adam Schiff talks with Rachel Maddow about the DoJ IG report and the Republican strategy of hectoring the Department of Justice in order to get special treatment and more favorable outcomes. Duration: 5:29


THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW 6/14/18
Corrupt 'foundation' catches up with Trump in new NYAG lawsuit
Rachel Maddow reminds viewers of Donald Trump's shady and opaque "Trump Foundation" charity and reports on a new lawsuit from the attorney general of New York who argues that the Trump Foundation wasn't just sketchy, it was illegal. Duration: 6:43


Embed
HELP THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW 6/14/18
Warren: Trump shameless even about illegality
Senator Elizabeth Warren talks with Rachel Maddow about the extent to which Donald Trump's shameless corruption has infected other parts of the federal government. Duration: 7:54


THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW 6/14/18
Warren: Even partial Democratic 2018 win can 'stop of the bleed'
Senator Elizabeth Warren talks with Rachel Maddow about the importance of Democrats taking back part of the government in 2018, and what they can do to check Donald Trump. Duration: 5:11