FBI’s Clinton probe expands to public corruption track


Catherine Herridge, Pamela Browne:

The FBI investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of private email as secretary of state has expanded to look at whether the possible “intersection” of Clinton Foundation work and State Department business may have violated public corruption laws, three intelligence sources not authorized to speak on the record told Fox News.

This new investigative track is in addition to the focus on classified material found on Clinton’s personal server.

“The agents are investigating the possible intersection of Clinton Foundation donations, the dispensation of State Department contracts and whether regular processes were followed,” one source said.

The development follows press reports over the past year about the potential overlap of State Department and Clinton Foundation work, and questions over whether donors benefited from their contacts inside the administration.

The Clinton Foundation is a public charity, known as a 501(c)(3). It had grants and contributions in excess of $144 million in 2013, the most current available data.

Inside the FBI, pressure is growing to pursue the case.

One intelligence source told Fox News that FBI agents would be “screaming” if a prosecution is not pursued because “many previous public corruption cases have been made and successfully prosecuted with much less evidence than what is emerging in this investigation.”

The FBI is particularly on edge in the wake of how the case of former CIA Director David Petraeus was handled.

One of the three sources said some FBI agents felt Petraeus was given a slap on the wrist for sharing highly classified information with his mistress and biographer Paula Broadwell, as well as lying to FBI agents about his actions. Petraeus pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor in March 2015 after a two-plus-year federal investigation in which Attorney General Eric Holder initially declined to prosecute.

In the Petraeus case, the exposure of classified information was assessed to be limited.

By contrast, in the Clinton case, the number of classified emails has risen to at least 1,340. A 2015 appeal by the State Department to challenge the “Top Secret” classification of at least two emails failed and, as Fox News first reported, is now considered a settled matter.

Read more

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

As I said earlier, as long as Hillary is leading in the polls, this corrupt administration will not hole the Democrat party below the water line and allow an indictment to go forth. However, if she falls behind and makes trouble, she will definitely see an indictment and, then, a pardon (unless Obama lets it drag out until the next administration, as is his habit with difficult problems).

Why don’t republicans focus on the accomplishments of their majority Congress or on the specific details of the republican front runners’ platforms, instead of furiously pedaling their tricycles around their three-ring scandal mongering circus?

Oh, right. There haven’t been any. And there aren’t any. We’re coming up on 7 years of negativity from these clowns, following a two-term republican presidency coinciding with 6 years of another republican-majority Congress that ended in an epic economic disaster. What are they actually offering?

They’re going to put a stop to Obama’s outrageous confiscation of firearms, deprive women of any choice about continuing an unwanted pregnancy, cut taxes for suffering corporations and the wealthiest taxpayers, eliminate the Affordable Care Act, wall off Mexico and send Mexico the bill, and possibly Do Something Different and Much Better in connection with ISIS, although they haven’t thus far been willing even to discuss the use of military force. (They’ve mainly faulted the President for doing it anyway, while insisting that all of his efforts have been utterly pointless.) They also seem have designs against much of the nation’s social safety net.



That is starting to sound a little panicky.

@Greg: you amaze me. Your support for this woman who broke federal laws makes me wonder about your values. Any other federal employee would have already been arrested, tried and placed in jail for treason. Yes treason.

Unfortunately you need evidence that an actual crime has been committed before you can convict a person of a crime. The evidence only seems to exists in the right’s imagination. Endlessly repeating accusations doesn’t add up to anything but scandal mongering.

If all of this totally obvious wrongdoing has gone on in so many different areas but nobody can prove it, the people trying to do so must be either incompetent or stupid beyond belief.


No amount of clamping your eyes shut, poking your pinkies in your ears and shrieking, “I-am-not-listening!-LA-LA-LA-LA-LA!” can defend the evidence that Hillary knowingly ordered a subordinate to remove security headings and send such data. Here is the quote from Hillary’s own words in the email that was released, Greg:

However, one email thread from June 2011 appears to include Clinton telling her top adviser Jake Sullivan to send secure information through insecure means.

In response to Clinton’s request for a set of since-redacted talking points, Sullivan writes, “They say they’ve had issues sending secure fax. They’re working on it.” Clinton responds “If they can’t, turn into nonpaper [with] no identifying heading and send nonsecure.”</

That is a FEDERAL CRIME, Greg. The evidence is right in front of you from Hillary’s released email. But in stereotypical leftist fashion, you willfully refuse to acknowledge clear criminal acts when the perp is one of your leftist demigods. Compounding your total dishonesty, you and your ilk will go on ranting the disproven propaganda that Bush “lied” about WMDs to get us into the Iraq war….the same WMDs that both Bill AND Hillary also said Iraq had. (Hmmm…perhaps you leftists, knowing the Bill and Hillary are such criminal liars, assumed that since Bill and Hillary said Iraq had WMDs – and you know that Bill and Hill are utterly untrustworthy – you automatically assumed that Bush had to be lying about WMDs….)

Yet you cannot understand why leftists (and to be fair RINOs as well) cannot ever be trusted on ANYTHING they say….obamacare…global warming…Keynesian economic insanity…

Where are the BLM supporters screaming about the racial disparity of the differenital treatment of the allegations against Cosby versus Clinton?

Why are the legal financial donations of the Koch brothers considered nefarious, while the very real (and very likely illegal) quid pro quo payments Slick Willie received for worthless speeches from nations and companies with issues being decided upon by then Sec State Hillary Clinton totes OK?

The Hildebeast is done for. The only question now is whether or not there are enough ignorant voters to support a socialist Sanders with an equally worthless leftist running mate like Fauxchahontas.

100 full time FBI agents and 50 back ups why such resources invested when all the hearings turned up not a single thing and now not just security issues but public corruption too? Seems the FBI wouldnt give a birds fart who was elected How do they have it in for poor innocent Hildabeast? Oh my did Blumenthal leave something uncovered a thread not tied up?


@Pete, #6:

“Appears,” in the sense you’re using it, means “seems,” or “gives the impression of being.” From there, we’re jumping directly to “That is a FEDERAL CRIME.” There’s a critical step in the middle that’s being left out all together, having to do with proof. Clinton’s accusers haven’t got any.

From one of the linked source articles:

EXCLUSIVE: The FBI investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of private email as secretary of state has expanded to look at whether the possible “intersection” of Clinton Foundation work and State Department business may have violated public corruption laws, three intelligence sources not authorized to speak on the record told Fox News.

“Three intelligence sources not authorized to speak on the record told Fox News…” Think about that for a moment. FOX is claiming their own sources—three of them—are divulging sensitive information that they know damn well they’re not supposed to divulge. What is this? The Comedy Channel? The whole private server affair revolves around the assertion that Clinton wasn’t handling sensitive material properly.

@Greg: You must toil each day to remain so dedicated to ignorance.

@kitt: It is the Kool-Aid. When they drink it they no longer have rational thought. (Some people never had any rational thought!)

@Randy: Some of the older houses had lead water supply lines, kinda thought maybe his mommy was very thirsty when pregnant and he grew up in the house along with eating paintchips.

They will give Hillary a clean bill of health. This will prevent any Republican investigation should they somehow win in November. The FBI has been an arm of the Democrats since the days of J. Edgar Hoover.

Remember the FBI files of Republican opponents discovered laying around the White House the last time that shrew lived and worked there?

Of course, Obama may just be mounting a threat against Hillary just to make her hand him personal control of some part of her administration.

Then again, he can have even more control if he can shoehorn Lizzie Warren into the race at the last minute.

Obama may despise Hillary but not enough for his “legacy” to be the guy that handed the Republicans the 2016 White House, Senate and House. He will do what he can to keep it from boiling over, but if she begins to falter in the primaries, he’ll wreck (or “schlong”) her. But, he will give her a pardon for all crimes past and present, like Ford did Nixon, so as to “heal” the nation (and now leave a permanent stain on the Democrats).

He would have to make it a blanket pardon for the more you look into Bill and Hill’s goings-on, the more impropriety is found.

@kitt, #9:

You must toil each day to remain so dedicated to ignorance.

I’m only pointing out that anything remotely resembling a journalistic standard is nonexistent on the Fox News Channel.

They claim they’re broadcasting information from three intelligence sources not authorized to speak on the record to Fox News, and you don’t even blink. The implications don’t register, let alone the irony. All you’re receptive to is the propaganda message of the moment, which is instantly taken in without question.

A large portion of the regular FOX audience—which consists primarily of conservative voters—seem to have lost the capacity for critical listening and critical thinking, if either was ever there in the first place. They don’t notice deceptive charts, they don’t hear deceptive language, and they don’t catch glaring inconsistencies. It doesn’t matter that endless repetition is used in place of evidence. Two plus two can equal three whenever it’s necessary, because nobody bothers to check the arithmetic. They sometimes cue their audience how to emotionally respond by responding in the appropriate fashion as they deliver the story. We share your anger, your pain, your outrage, your deep, deep concern. We—like you—are smarter, more righteous, and more patriotic than those other people.

@Greg: Did Fox News but classified information on Hillary’s secret, private, unsecured server? Did Fox News tell staffers to wipe out the headings and send sensitive information over unsecured channels?

I don’t think so.

It hasn’t been established that Hillary Clinton is guilty of anything.

It has been fairly well established that republicans have repeatedly abused their official powers of office in a prolonged effort to destroy their political enemies at the taxpayers’ expense, but have yet to prove a single accusation against Obama or Clinton as a result.

Meanwhile, their own proven corruption at the highest levels goes largely without comment on their own servile propaganda outlets. A former republican Speaker of the House, for example, has just plead guilty to a felony count—most likely in an effort to keep even more from bobbing to the surface:

January 12, 2016: Dennis Hastert goes from speaker to felon, but his dark past still a mystery

@Greg: The FBI will be the ones to answer that.


It hasn’t been established that Hillary Clinton is guilty of anything.

She’s guilty of everything. She gives garbage a bad name.