” Hillary Clinton’s family’s charities are refiling at least five annual tax returns after a Reuters review found errors in how they reported donations from governments, and said they may audit other Clinton Foundation returns in case of other errors.
The foundation and its list of donors have been under intense scrutiny in recent weeks. Republican critics say the foundation makes Clinton, who is seeking the Democratic presidential nomination in 2016, vulnerable to undue influence. Her campaign team calls these claims “absurd conspiracy theories.”
The charities’ errors generally take the form of under-reporting or over-reporting, by millions of dollars, donations from foreign governments, or in other instances omitting to break out government donations entirely when reporting revenue, the charities confirmed to Reuters.
The errors, which have not been previously reported, appear on the form 990s that all non-profit organizations must file annually with the Internal Revenue Service to maintain their tax-exempt status. A charity must show copies of the forms to anyone who wants to see them to understand how the charity raises and spends money.”
If you were discovered to have wrongly reported income o your tax returns would the IRS be so kind as to give you a do-over ?
” Cindy Archer, one of the lead architects of Wisconsin’s Act 10 — also called the “Wisconsin Budget Repair Bill,” it limited public-employee benefits and altered collective-bargaining rules for public-employee unions — was jolted awake by yelling, loud pounding at the door, and her dogs’ frantic barking. The entire house — the windows and walls — was shaking.
She looked outside to see up to a dozen police officers, yelling to open the door. They were carrying a battering ram.
She wasn’t dressed, but she started to run toward the door, her body in full view of the police. Some yelled at her to grab some clothes, others yelled for her to open the door.
“ I was so afraid,” she says. “I did not know what to do.” She grabbed some clothes, opened the door, and dressed right in front of the police. The dogs were still frantic.
“ I begged and begged, ‘Please don’t shoot my dogs, please don’t shoot my dogs, just don’t shoot my dogs.’ I couldn’t get them to stop barking, and I couldn’t get them outside quick enough. I saw a gun and barking dogs. I was scared and knew this was a bad mix.”
She got the dogs safely out of the house, just as multiple armed agents rushed inside. Some even barged into the bathroom, where her partner was in the shower. The officer or agent in charge demanded that Cindy sit on the couch, but she wanted to get up and get a cup of coffee.
“ I told him this was my house and I could do what I wanted.” Wrong thing to say. “This made the agent in charge furious. He towered over me with his finger in my face and yelled like a drill sergeant that I either do it his way or he would handcuff me.” “
Cindy Archer and her family are not alone …
” It was indeed a home invasion, but the people who were pouring in were Wisconsin law-enforcement officers. Armed, uniformed police swarmed into the house. Plainclothes investigators cornered her and her newly awakened family. Soon, state officials were seizing the family’s personal property, including each person’s computer and smartphone, filled with the most intimate family information.
Why were the police at Anne’s home? She had no answers. The police were treating them the way they’d seen police treat drug dealers on television.
In fact, TV or movies were their only points of reference, because they weren’t criminals. They were law-abiding. They didn’t buy or sell drugs. They weren’t violent. They weren’t a danger to anyone. Yet there were cops — surrounding their house on the outside, swarming the house on the inside. They even taunted the family as if they were mere “perps.”
As if the home invasion, the appropriation of private property, and the verbal abuse weren’t enough, next came ominous warnings.
Don’t call your lawyer.
Don’t tell anyone about this raid. Not even your mother, your father, or your closest friends.”
National Review has more on these Gestapo-like tactics in America’s heartland
” Over at Breitbart News, John Nolte distills Hillary Rodham Clinton’s autobiography into a single headline:
Dead Broke Hillary Dodged Sniper Fire With Her Immigrant Parents In Tuzla
This is in reference to the latest revision to the Clinton story – her claim that all of her grandparents came to America as immigrants. In fact (if Hillary will forgive the word), two of her grandparents were born in Illinois, one in Pennsylvania, and the fourth, brought here as a child, is the only immigrant. As so often with Hillary, one is struck by the sheer strangeness of the lie: What’s the point of it? Is she try to qualify for amnesty under the DREAM act? Is the first-female-president thing going nowhere so she’s shooting for the first Undocumented President? Even as pandering, it’s hard to see the logic of it: granted that the overwhelming majority of Illegal-Americans going to the polls will be voting Democrat, it surely can’t be that high a percentage that it’s worth White-Outting the family birth certificates and replacing “State of Illinois” with “República de Colombia”, is it?
Oh, don’t worry about it:
” Her grandparents always spoke about the immigrant experience and, as a result she has always thought of them as immigrants,” a Clinton spokesman told BuzzFeed News.
Could happen to anyone. Just like Chelsea’s little girl – when she’s running for President in 2040 – will remember her grandmother always speaking about the sniper experience and as a result always thought of Gran’ma Hill as a sniper.
Ah, well. All this week we’ve been revisiting some Hillary favorites from the Steyn archives, mostly from the turn of the century. But here from her last presidential campaign is my syndicated column of March 29th 2008, with some reflections on the Clintons’ relationship with the truth: “
” Hillary tried to pull a fast one on Iowa voters but was caught in the act. She was pictured sitting down and having a discussion with 3 “ordinary Iowans.” Only thing is, they weren’t so ordinary:
The meeting in a coffee shop in LeClaire, Iowa (Sound familiar? That’s the home of American Pickers) was supposed to be a chance meeting between Hillary Clinton and three ordinary Iowan citizens. The three “ordinary” Iowans turned out to be Austin Bird, a former Clinton campaign intern, Carter Bell, University of Iowa College Democrats president, and Planned Parenthood of the Heartland staffer Sara Sedlacek.
It wasn’t an accident either. Hillary campaign staffer, Troy Price arranged the entire thing. He called Bird and arranged for the three to meet him at the Village Inn in Davenport, Iowa.”
Published on Apr 11, 2015
” On the eve of Hillary’s announcement that she is running for president, Judge Jeanine reminds us all just how vile her character really is, playing a tape of Hillary laughing about getting her client only 2 months incarceration for the brutal rape of a 6th-grader.”
” An abscess of anger seems to gnaw at Hillary Clinton, but the reasons for her resentments remain unclear. The world’s oldest party, which governed the nation during two world wars and is the primary architect of America’s regulatory and redistributive state, is eager to give her its presidential nomination, in recognition of . . . what?
The party, adrift in identity politics, clings, as shipwrecked sailors do to floating debris, to this odd feminist heroine. Wafted into the upper reaches of American politics by stolid participation in her eventful marriage to a serial philanderer, her performance in governance has been defined by three failures.
Her husband, having assured the 1992 electorate that voting for him meant getting “two for the price of one,” entrusted to her the project that he, in a harbinger of the next Democratic president’s mistake, made his immediate priority — health-care reform. Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan urged him to begin with welfare reform, just as wise Democrats wanted President Obama to devote 2009 to economic recovery rather than health care, perhaps sparing the nation six years and counting of economic sluggishness.”
As companion pieces to Mr Will’s article we recommend these more complete lists of the shady dealings of Hillary and Bill :
” Many on the right and the left would concede that America’s immigration system is broken, but few acknowledge that it is also hopelessly corrupt. There should be little doubt about the immorality at the heart of the immigration and naturalization process following an inspector general report released on Tuesday that alleges at least one ranking Department of Homeland Security official showed “an appearance of favoritism” and granted “special access” to those seeking green cards and visas for immigrants associated with Democrat-linked wealthy investors.
“ The No. 2 official at the Homeland Security Department meddled in three high-profile immigration cases, giving special treatment to applications from wealthy and well-connected immigrants after calls from major Democrats despite the objections of career employees, the department’s inspector general concluded in a report Tuesday,” The Washington Times reported on Tuesday.
Alejandro Mayorkas, who was elevated from head of the department’s legal immigration agency to be deputy secretary while the investigation was ongoing, also angered many of his colleagues by getting involved in the cases, and “created an appearance of favoritism and special access” for the wealthy immigrants, the inspector general concluded.
Inspector General John Roth said the cases involved major Democrats: former Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell, Sen. Harry Reid, Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe and Anthony Rodham, brother of former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton.
In each case, pressure from those individuals helped earn favorable treatment, Mr. Roth said.”
The McLaughlin interview starts at the 42:00 mark
” President Obama’s role during the Israeli elections was larger than reported, according to a pollster for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Likud party.
” What was not well reported in the American media is that President Obama and his allies were playing in the election to defeat Prime Minister Netanyahu,” John McLaughlin, a Republican strategist, said in an interview on John Catsimatidis’s “The Cats Roundtable” radio show broadcast Sunday on AM 970 in New York.
” There was money moving that included taxpayer U.S. dollars, through non-profit organizations. And there were various liberal groups in the United States that were raising millions to fund a campaign called V15 against Prime Minister Netanyahu,” McLaughlin said.
He noted an effort to oust Netanyahu was guided by former Obama political operative Jeremy Bird and that V15, or Victory 15, ads hurt Netanyahu in the polls. McLaughlin said the Israeli leader rebounded after delivering a speech to Congress early this month, prompting more critical ads.”
” Rep. Steve King wants to know how American Jews continue to identify as Democrats.
The Iowa congressman questioned how American Jews can be “Democrats first and Jewish second,” while supporting President Obama’s foreign policy toward Israel.
” Well, there were some 50 or so Democrats that decided they would boycott the president’s speech. One thing that’s happened is — just look at the polling, that means — here is one thing that I don’t understand, I don’t understand how Jews in America can be Democrats first and Jewish second and support Israel along the line of just following their president,” he said on Boston Herald radio Friday when asked about the Democratic members of Congress who skipped out on attending Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s address to Congress some two weeks ago.”
” Bibi’s win is another in a long string of Middle East failures by President Obama and will add to the belief by both our friends and our enemies in the region that the costs of being Obama’s friend can outweigh the costs of his enmity. Egypt’s President Mubarak thought he was Obama’s friend; so did his successor President Morsi. The Syrian moderate rebels expected their friend in the White House to back them. The Zionist Union thought that promising to work more closely with Obama was the ticket to an electoral win in Israel. Meanwhile, as Bibi can now testify, those who defy this White House don’t seem to pay much of a price: just ask Syria’s Assad or, for that matter, his patrons in Iran. ISIS has more visibility and power in the Middle East than al-Qaeda ever did, while the Sunni Arab tribes of Iraq who saved America’s bacon during the surge and who counted on American influence to protect their interests in postwar Iraq are being overrun by Shi’a militias.”
While we would argue that for the past six years the present administration has done everything in it’s power to destroy the above referenced US-Israeli relationship and that the “two state solution” is a non-starter , we’ll set that aside and let the esteemed Walter Russell Mead continue …
” It is said that Rome was not built in a day, but only because Chuck Norris was too busy at the time helping God create the Heavens and the Earth. I guess the Lord was busy because now Chuck Norris has done an ad for Bibi Netanyahu’s campaign. Hopefully the power of the Chuck will work —after all everyone knows that on the 8th day God created Chuck Norris.”
Courtesy of Yid With A Lid
Nixon erased 18 1/2 minutes of tape while Hillary deleted 30,000 emails . Who’s the crook now ?
” “Ignore the noise – Clinton will win in 2016,” we are assured by a columnist in Hillary’s journalistic namesakeThe Hill. “The email flap will be gone soon enough.”
That’s probably the way to bet. Rightie pundits are going on about government-issue Blackberries, insecure servers, federal record-keeping, the law, national security, peripheral stuff like that. Leftie pundits are saying: yawn, nobody cares, it’s never gonna catch fire, give it up. Everyone implicitly agrees that Hillary did something she shouldn’t and that her justification for doing so is ridiculous. The only disagreement is whether it makes any difference. The Hill‘s Fernando Espuelas says no:
Clinton has a built-in advantage — her gender… Some percentage of Americans, likely a large one, would like to cast a historic vote. When polling points to Americans wanting “change,” what bigger change than a woman as president?
A change to a competent citizen-executive whose administration spends within its means, ceases obstructing economic growth and middle-class prosperity, and restores American influence in the world?
Oh, well. One takes his point: Most other citizens of developed and not-so-developed societies cast those “historic votes” long ago – Britain, Canada, New Zealand, Australia, Ceylon, India, Dominica, Jamaica, Guyana, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Israel, Turkey, Portugal, Germany, Norway, Finland, Iceland, Denmark, Slovakia, Slovenia, Transnistria… At the time of those “historic votes” on a good half of that list, “gender” was not “a built-in advantage” but a built-in disadvantage that skilled and nimble female candidates had to be exceptional to overcome. If I follow Mr Espuelas correctly, he’s saying that America is getting round to its “historic vote” so late that “gender” is now such an advantage that any old female candidate can be dragged across the finish line, no matter how shopworn, wooden, charmless, tin-eared and corrupt.
Maybe. But, even so, Hillary Clinton is still a severe test of that thesis. Charles Krauthammer detects “Early-Onset Clinton Fatigue“. Whether that is yet afflicting the electorate, it certainly seems to have gripped the candidate. At that press conference, Hillary seemed to be going through the motions. Flush with Saudi cash and a well-oiled shakedown Rolodex, Clinton Worldwide Inc has no reason not to run for president, but apparently no compelling reason to run. When the candidate runs into trouble, grizzled drooling attack dogs from the Nineties – Lanny Davis, James Carville – are loosed from their chains and limp dutifully from the Old Pooch Home to bare their remaining fang for their mistress. Is there anyone new, young, talented willing to defend Hillary? I mean, other than Huma, the only woman in America whose marriage rivals the exhibitionist creepiness of the Clintons in their heyday.”
So the electorate is yearning to cast a “historic” vote ? We’ve already seen how well voting with that criteria in mind works out . God help us if the masses fall for that again .
” Plummeting from a great height to be sure, Philip Bump acknowledges, but definitely going in the wrong direction — fast. The initial read off of yesterday’s Gallup poll shows Hillary Clinton in good shape against the rest of the field, albeit a field with low name recognition. Most of her Republican competition has lots of upside in their numbers, but Hillary has reached almost total name recognition saturation … not exactly surprising for someone who has spent the last 22 years in Washington. Accordingly, her favorability/unfavorability gap plus her name recognition puts her almost literally in a class of her own in this survey:”
Hillary looks unassailable at the moment — but this is just a moment, Bump reminds us. What happens when we look across almost a quarter of a century of Gallup data on Hillary Clinton? Bump charted the data on Hillary’s favorability since early 1992:” (see above)
” You can say this about the Clintons; they fill our desire for drama in the annual breaks between episodes of TV serials. “Downton Abbey” ends for the season and Clinton Follies is on tap again as the New York Times reports as old news, something known for at least two years: Hillary never used the Department of State’s official email account
If you’ve been busy leading a full and rich life and missed this week’s excitement here it is in a nutshell: on the day of her confirmation hearing for the position of secretary of state, Hillary Clinton set up an internet server in her home (purchased under an apparent pseudonym “Eric Hoteham”). Perhaps the domain was even run out of two commercial web hosting firms, instead of the home server:
For her entire term at the department she exclusively used this unprotected email server, utilizing at last count about 9 different email addresses for all her Internet communications. These entire addresses end in clintonemail@com, which signaled to anyone reading the message that this was not, sent on a government server.
This tactic allowed her to avoid disclosure of her correspondence to Freedom of Information Act and other document production requests, including Congressional inquiries.
Can she claim she didn’t know this violated Federal laws and regulations requiring this correspondence be kept where it can be archived and, if required, disclosed? Hardly. All officials are routinely warned about such things. In fact, she ordered our ambassador to Kenya fired for failing to use a government server for his communications.
In connection with Congressional hearings the department was asked to provide her email correspondence and, so the story goes, they had none, so Hillary had her staff go through her records and late last year provided 50,000 emails, and claimed others might be found in the recipients’ files.
There is also little doubt, given this functional definition, that e-mail has been covered by the Federal Records Act since its adoption by the federal government during the Clinton administration. As Ian Tuttle correctly notes, the State Department’s own manual has plainly provided, since 1995, that e-mail records must be preserved under the Federal Records Act.”
” In 2013, The Washington Post‘s Chris Cillizza posed a question: “If not Hillary Clinton in 2016, then who?”
That’s a question that Democrats may have to begrudgingly ask themselves in the coming weeks, as a New York Times story about Clinton’s email use during her time as secretary of state—compounded with earlier reporting on the Clinton Foundation—roil Clintonland.
Clinton’s allies are already insisting the email story—that Clinton exclusively used her personal email address while at the State Department—is a nothing-burger. It isn’t news. It will blow over after conservatives have had their 48 hours of outrage. After all, it’s unclear whether Clinton actually violated any rules! Move along, nothing to see here.
But the story doesn’t make the Democrats’ only current hope look good. The news fits perfectly into the narrative that Clinton’s opponents are already trying to create: that she and her husband are secretive, less-than-scrupulous career politicians who are more interested in preserving their own power than being held accountable to American voters. In other words, that they are a real-life Frank and Claire Underwood.”
” Unless Congress takes action, the U.S. will hit its debt limit on Mar. 16, but would begin taking “extraordinary measures” to finance the government on a temporary basis, according to the U.S. Treasury.
In a Friday morning letter to House Speaker John Boehner and other House and Senate leaders, Treasury Secretary Jack Lew said that his office will be forced to suspend the issuance of State and Local Government Series securities on Mar. 13 unless the debt limit is raised.”
” ” Accordingly, I respectfully ask Congress to raise the debt limit as soon as possible,” Lew wrote in his letter.
The Treasury secretary emphasized that “increasing the debt limit does not authorize new spending commitments,” but rather “simply allows the government to pay for expenditures Congress has already approved.”
Congress passed the Temporary Debt Limit Extension Act in February 2014, which suspended the statutory debt limit through Mar. 15 of this year.”
Read more , to what end we don’t know as it’s a foregone conclusion that with the spineless leadership presently in control of the “fiscally responsible” party nothing will change …
Debt , debt and more debt as far as our children and theirs can see . A changing of the “guard” with the new republican control of both legislative branches amounts to nothing but more of the status quo .
” Tea Party Republicans contemplating a bid to oust Rep. John Boehner (R-Ohio) shouldn’t count on Democrats to help them unseat the Speaker.
And without their support, there is no chance to topple Boehner in this Congress.
A number of right-wing Republicans, long wary of Boehner’s commitment to GOP efforts attacking President Obama’s policy priorities, have openly considered a coup in an attempt to transfer the gavel into more conservative hands.
But Democrats from across an ideological spectrum say they’d rather see Boehner remain atop the House than replace him with a more conservative Speaker who would almost certainly be less willing to reach across the aisle in search of compromise. Replacing him with a Tea Party Speaker, they say, would only bring the legislative process — already limping along — to a screeching halt.”
Who exactly does this ***hole represent ? Not the republican party that’s for sure … not when his “opponents” promise to watch his six . The fact that Pelosi and co. would prefer to work with Boehner should tell you all you need to know about where that man’s loyalties lie … Read on at the Hill
” An internal 2011 State Department cable, obtained by Fox News, shows that then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s office told employees not to use personal email for security reasons — while at the same time, Clinton conducted all government business on a private account.
Sent to diplomatic and consular staff in June 2011, the unclassified cable, bearing Clinton’s electronic signature, made clear to employees they were expected to “avoid conducting official Department business from your personal e-mail accounts.” The message also said employees should not “auto-forward Department email to personal email accounts which is prohibited by Department policy.” “
Not only did Hillary send out a warning to staff against using private email accounts for State Department business but in 2012 the US ambassador to Kenya , Scott Gration , was fired for doing exactly that :
” The following year, Scott Gration, then U.S. ambassador to Kenya, was forced out of office. One of the offenses cited was his continued use of a private email account in violation of State Department policy as set forth in Clinton’s cable, according to The Daily Caller. “
” Although rightfully excoriated for his comments comparing public unions to ISIS, Gov. Scott Walker’s (R-Wis.) treatment by the media continues to highlight the gross disparity in the way with which conservative candidates are analyzed and represented, when compared to their liberal counterparts. Whereas Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Hillary Clinton are all hailed for their various policy proposals, as well as their personal and professional achievements, individuals like Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), Gov. Chris Christie (R-N.J.) and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) are ruthlessly assailed for every quip or comment, be they contextual or otherwise.
This was patently evident in 2008 as well as 2012, and will most assuredly be applicable once again in 2016. From tales of Mitt Romney’s elementary school bullying, to reports about Paul’s “Aqua Buddha” college days, the depths to which modern media apparatuses will dredge in order to invalidate a Republican’s candidacy, surpasses even those explored by the Trieste. This is highly problematic, as it only takes an anonymous comment, erroneous claim, or an unverified accusation, in order to destroy the legitimacy of a right leaning contender. This same approach however, would be understandable if it were equally applied to both sides of the political aisle, but seldom is that ever the case.”
The Hill , not exactly a bastion of neutrality itself , discovers mainstream media bias … Watch your heads for falling porcine poo .
” A House committee investigating the Benghazi, Libya, attacks issued subpoenas Wednesday for the emails of Hillary Rodham Clinton, who used a private account exclusively for official business when she was secretary of state — and also used a computer email server now traced back to her family’s New York home.
The subpoenas from the Republican-led Select Committee on Benghazi demanded additional material from Clinton and others related to Libya, spokesman Jamal D. Ware said. The panel also instructed technology companies it did not identify to preserve any relevant documents in their possession.
The development on Capitol Hill came the same day The Associated Press reported the existence of a personal email server traced back to the Chappaqua, New York, home of Clinton. The unusual practice of a Cabinet-level official running her own email server would have given Clinton — who is expected to run for president in the 2016 campaign — significant control over limiting access to her message archives.
The practice also would complicate the State Department’s legal responsibilities in finding and turning over official emails in response to any investigations, lawsuits or public records requests. The department would be in the position of accepting Clinton’s assurances she was surrendering everything required that was in her control.”
The mystery deepens with the revelation of exactly who was in charge of Sec. Clinton’s private server , one Eric Hoteham , a man with a long Clintonian association :
” The Hoteham registration is also associated with a separate email server, presidentclinton.com, and a nonfunctioning website, wjcoffice.com, all linked to the same residential Internet account as Mrs. Clinton’s email server. The former president’s full name is William Jefferson Clinton.
Hothem, the former Clinton aide, surfaced in at least two Clinton administration controversies. A congressional report in 2002 investigating pardons said a Citibank account linked to Hothem wired $15,000 to President Clinton’s brother, Roger, in March 2001, while investigators were trying to compel Roger Clinton to testify about his role in several pardon cases. The president’s lawyer told investigators the money came from a personal account of the Clintons and was intended for Clinton’s brother to hire a lawyer.”
Associated Press has much more on the latest developments in Hillary’s blatant attempt to hide her “official doings” from the public eye .