This is getting tedious. Every day more evidence appears showing that Hillary Clinton lied or broke laws and every time we are told: “It can’t be proven.”
Perhaps, but some things need no proof. Clinton has admitted that she used a private server to handle her communications as secretary of state.
She kept, sent and received classified information on an unapproved device. She hired private companies that had no security clearance to manage the server.
Destroying public records is a crime and Clinton decided, entirely on her own, which public records would be preserved, and which would be destroyed.
Among the federal records she destroyed were documents under subpoena. Amazingly, her attorneys with no security clearance were complicit in the destruction of those records.
Former U.S. Secretary of State and first lady Hillary Clinton speaks at a press conference announcing a new initiative between the Clinton Foundation, United Nations Foundation and Bloomberg Philanthropies, titled Data 2x on December 15, 2014 in New York City. Data 2x aims to use data-driven analysis to close gender gaps throughout the world. (Photo by Andrew Burton/Getty Images)
One wonders if those officers of the court who destroyed records that had been subpoenaed are under ethics reviews by the Bar Association.
We now learn that at least 30 of those destroyed records were related to the attack in Benghazi that killed four Americans and that had been subpoenaed in 2012.
The law she broke does not require intent and during her interview with the FBI Clinton was not asked about intent. But the FBI chose not to bring all of this to a grand jury because they determined that she lacked intent.
That construct falls under the weight of Clinton’s own behavior. She used the file-clearing software, BleachBit, to ensure that the deleted emails could never be reconstructed. Her intent was obvious.
All of that, however, is just more evidence of Hillary Clinton abusing her office, lying about it and getting away with it.
There is no proof that she used her office for financial gain either. But thousands of people in the U.S. are in jail for having been convicted of crimes on circumstantial evidence.
In the case of Clinton, you be the judge.
When she became secretary of state, Hillary Clinton promised to establish a transparent review system to build a firewall between the activity of the Clinton Foundation and her work as secretary of state. The promise was not honored.
Crown Prince Salmon of Bahrain gave $32 million to the Clinton Global Initiative. He sought an appointment with Secretary Clinton through State Department channels and was denied the appointment.
Soon Doug Band of the Clinton Foundation emailed Clinton’s closest adviser, Huma Abedin, on behalf of the Prince. Band reminded Abedin that the prince was a friend of the foundation.
The meeting with Clinton was arranged. The State Department then approved $630 million worth of arms sales to Bahrain between 2010 and 2012.
That was a 187 percent increase from the period 2006 to 2008.
Was that just coincidence? Perhaps.
Irish billionaire Dennis O’Brien owns 94 percent of telecom company, Digicel. In September of 2010, just weeks after Digicel applied for millions of dollars in State Department grants, Bill Clinton gave a speech in Dublin for Digicel. Clinton was not paid, but O’Brien personally donated between $5 million and $10 million to the Clinton Foundation between 2010 and 2011.
A few weeks after the September 2010 speech in Ireland, Clinton was paid $225,000 for a Digicel-sponsored speech in Kingston, Jamaica. Two months later Digicel received its first installment of what ultimately was millions in USAID grant money.
Digicel was also granted by the USAID Food for Peace program, which was under the direct control of Hillary Clinton’s top aide Cheryl Mills, the lucrative cell phone concession for personal money transfers in Haiti.
Was that just coincidence? Perhaps.
The Swedish gov’t asked the State Department for relief from Iran sanctions on humanitarian grounds. They argued that their many Iranian expatriates wished to speak by cell phone to their relatives in Iran.
Ericsson, a Swedish telecom giant, installed cell towers in Iran.
Just weeks after the State Department gave a waiver of Iran sanctions, Ericsson hired Bill Clinton to give a speech for $750,000. They had not hired him for a speech before this and have not hired him since.
The Clinton Foundation opened up a branch in Sweden which was the recipient of $26 million.
Was that just coincidence? Perhaps.
Canadian Frank Giustra had his eye on uranium mines in Kazakhstan and Russia wanted access to U.S. uranium production. Former President Bill Clinton arranged some meetings.
Clinton got a $500,000 speaking gig in Russia, Giustra got the Kazakhstan uranium interests and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton signed off on allowing Russia to control 20 percent of the U.S. uranium production.
The Clinton Foundation then opened a Canadian branch which was the recipient of millions of dollars, most of which came from officers in Giustra’s companies.
Was that just coincidence? Perhaps.
The question before you is this: Do you think that there is enough circumstantial evidence to conclude that Ms. Clinton abused her office for financial gain?
Or was it just coincidence? Perhaps.
If you would like to be added to John Linder’s distribution list please send your email address to: linderje@yahoo.com or follow on Twitter: @linderje
–
TheBlaze contributor channel supports an open discourse on a range of views. The opinions expressed in this channel are solely those of each individual author.
