Image 01 Image 03

Emails Reveal Clinton Foundation Donors Asked Favors From State Dept

Emails Reveal Clinton Foundation Donors Asked Favors From State Dept

Foundation donors asked Clinton to provide jobs for friends.

The latest batch of Hillary Clinton emails show that right after she became Secretary of State, top donors asked the State Department for favors for unidentified associates.

In April 2009, Clinton Foundation official Doug Band sent an email to Clinton’s top aides Cheryl Mills and Huma Abedin about a favor. He reminded them it is important to take care of [Redacted].” Officials blacked out the name, but Abedin said “Personel has been sending him options.”

This is not the only one, though.

In another email, Band asks the State Department for another favor for a top donor:

Included in the new document production is a 2009 email in which Band, directs Abedin and Mills to put Lebanese-Nigerian billionaire and Clinton Foundation donor Gilbert Chagoury in touch with the State Department’s “substance person” on Lebanon. Band notes that Chagoury is “key guy there [Lebanon] and to us,” and insists that Abedin call Amb. Jeffrey Feltman to connect him to Chagoury.

Chagoury is a close friend of former President Bill Clinton and a top donor to the Clinton Foundation. He has appeared near the top of the Foundation’s donor list as a $1 million to $5 million contributor, according to foundation documents. He also pledged $1 billion to the Clinton Global Initiative. According to a 2010 investigation by PBS Frontline, Chagoury was convicted in 2000 in Switzerland for laundering money from Nigeria, but agreed to a plea deal and repaid $66 million to the Nigerian government.

Other emails show that Stephen Roach, chairman of Morgan Stanley Asia, sent Clinton his “testimony before Congress in which he would condemn any U.S. efforts to criticize Chinese monetary policy or enact trade barriers.” She then asked to connect with him on a trip to Beijing. Morgan Stanley has long contributed to the Clintons.

Clinton fundraiser Lana Moresky asked Clinton to provide a job for someone. Clinton herself told Abedin “to follow up and ‘help’ the applicant and told Abedin to ‘let me know’ about the job issue.”

Other pages proved “that Clinton campaign adviser and pollster Mark Penn advised Clinton on NATO and piracy.” Clinton also asked a man named Justin “to set up her cell phone voicemail, rather than having State Department personnel handle it.” Judicial Watch presumed this Justin is Justin Cooper, an employee at the foundation.

Judicial Watch said these emails show Clinton violated an ethics agreement she took when she became Secretary of State:

“For the duration of my appointment as Secretary if I am confirmed, I will not participate personally and substantially in any particular matter involving specific parties in which The William J. Clinton Foundation (or the Clinton Global Initiative) is a party or represents a party….”

Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton accused Abedin and Clinton of ethics violations:

“No wonder Hillary Clinton and Huma Abedin hid emails from the American people, the courts and Congress,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “They show the Clinton Foundation, Clinton donors, and operatives worked with Hillary Clinton in potential violation of the law.”


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Wonder what Trump will say today to make sure the media doesn’t have time to spend on this.

    legacyrepublican in reply to Kondor77. | August 10, 2016 at 12:30 pm

    Doesn’t matter is he does or doesn’t. The MSM would find something anyway.

    Trump could just say, “Excuse me folks, I have to go to the bathroom.”

    And the headline would be …


Well sure they did: what’s the point in being a donor to the Clinton Foundation if you can’t cash in a favor or three? It’s not like the Foundation existed to do any charitable work.

And please note she didn’t turn over these emails to the State Department, despite the fact that she said she had turned over ALL work related emails

    Arminius in reply to Mercyneal. | August 10, 2016 at 5:09 pm

    Speaking of which, can anyone voxsplain me why nobody went here?

    “44 U.S. Code § 3106 – Unlawful removal, destruction of records”

    Everybody boresighted on the issue of classifed, but the “unlawful removal, defacing, alteration, corruption, deletion, erasure, or other destruction of records” is a felony just on its own. It’s a felony to do what Clinton did with federal records regardless of classification. And it’s clear Clinton committed this felony multiple times.


      DaveGinOly in reply to Arminius. | August 10, 2016 at 9:28 pm

      Considering we live in a “ham sandwich nation,” that’s a very good question. Everyone knows that when law enforcement investigates someone’s activity, they look at every angle and, if anything, overcharge with anything that remotely looks like it might stick, no matter how distant the offense may be from that which was originally being investigated. Why wasn’t that done here? The FBI was apparently wearing blinders. Were they self-imposed, or imposed from above?

    amwick in reply to Mercyneal. | August 11, 2016 at 7:11 am

    Why haven’t any of the legal eagles here called this for what it is??… Perjury… plain and simple. Perjury.

So Hillary Clinton is corrupt and dishonest and as SOS, she was selling favors from the State Dept. in exchange for big donations to the Clinton Crime Family Foundation.

And she set up a private e-mail server so that she could hide the e-mails that documented her corruption. Then she lied about having turned over the e-mails.

But Trump is the person we shouldn’t trust with the presidency.

what should be the story of the century is being buried by the need to know every angle of every thing Trump says. Where was this sense of inquisition in 2008?

If a scandal fell in the woods and the media refused to cover it…