Leaked Email Reveals Potential Collusion Between State Department And Clinton Campaign

Tyler Durden's picture

One of the major email "leak" stories to emerge last week courtesy of the WSJ, was that the White House had intervened on at least one occasion to suppress the story surrounding Hillary's "Secret Server" scandal, through backdoor channels with the State Department. This is what we noted as per the original piece:

Ten days after the story broke, White House communications director Jennifer Palmieri emailed State Department spokeswoman Jennifer Psaki to ask, “between us on the shows…think we can get this done so he is not asked about email.” That apparently referred to Mr. Kerry, who appeared in an interview on CBS ’s “Face the Nation” three days later.

 

"Agree completely and working to crush on my end,” wrote back Ms. Psaki.

 

A day later, Ms. Psaki added, “Good to go on killing CBS idea.” She continued, “And we are going to hold on any other TV options just given the swirl of crap out there.” Mr. Kerry wasn’t asked on CBS about the email server, though it isn’t clear how Ms. Psaki could have guaranteed that.

 

Teased by Ms. Palmieri about her use of the phrase “swirl of crap,” Ms. Psaki wrote back: “Ha I mean—the challenging stories out there.”

While we are confident there were many other interactions between the White House and the State Department meant to boost the winning odds of the Clinton presidential campaign, this was sufficient evidence to confirm that on at least one occasion, the two entities had colluded.

Now, courtesy of the latest leak by Wikileaks, which earlier today released another 2,000 emails by Clinton campaign chairman, John Podesta, we may have stumbled on evidence of collusion between the State Department and the Clinton Campaign itself. In an email from close Hillary's confidant Heather Samuelson, also known as "the Clinton insider who screened Hillary's emails", we learn the intimate details leaked by Samuelson regarding a FOIA request submitted previously by Judicial Watch regarding Bill Clinton speeches, which shows that virtually entire process was being "translated" over to Hillary's campaign.

By way of reminder, here is a quick Politico primer on who Heather Samuelson is, from September 2015:

Hillary Clinton chose a former campaign staffer who followed her to the State Department to make the initial determination about which of her emails should be preserved as federal records, according to closed-door testimony by Clinton’s former chief of staff Cheryl Mills, a GOP source told POLITICO.

 

Heather Samuelson, a lawyer and 2008 Clinton campaign staffer, worked under Mills and Clinton’s attorney David Kendall to sift through her ex-boss’ messages. She helped separate those that were purely personal, which were not turned over to the State Department, from those that were work-related.

THe Daily Caller adds the following:

A longtime Clinton campaign staffer who worked for as White House liaison at Clinton’s State Department and, later, as her lawyer.

As a lawyer, Samuelson led up the 2014 review of Clinton’s emails to determine which ones were work-related and which were personal.

Most importantly, as we reported previously, Samuelson received DOJ immunity in exchange for turning over the laptop she used during the review of Clinton’s emails in 2014.

Finally, as the NRO wrote over the weekend, "The more information that drips out about the Clinton e-mail investigation, the more we learn that two key subjects, Hillary confidants Cheryl Mills and Heather Samuelson, got extraordinarily special treatment — concessions that would never be given to subjects in a normal investigation. The primary reason for this is that the Obama Justice Department was never going to charge Hillary Clinton and her accomplices with crimes.

The guise under which Mills and Samuelson got the kid-glove treatment was their status as lawyers. Crucially, this status was the Justice Department’s pretext for resolving that potentially incriminating evidence against them, and against their “client,” Mrs. Clinton, had to be shielded from investigators pursuant to the attorney-client privilege.

 

Except neither Mills nor Samuelson was eligible to represent Clinton in matters related to the e-mails, including the FBI’s criminal investigation. Moreover, even if they had arguably been eligible, attorney-client communications in furtherance of criminal schemes are not privileged.

 

* * *

 

Mills and Samuelson were given immunity in exchange for surrendering their laptops not because searching lawyers’ computers is complicated, but because the Justice Department had no intention of prosecuting them. That is also why Justice severely limited the FBI’s search of the laptops, just as it severely limited the FBI’s questioning of Mills. Mills and Samuelson were given immunity because Justice did not want to commence a grand-jury investigation, which would have empowered investigators to compel production of the laptops by simply issuing subpoenas. Justice did not want to use the grand jury because doing so would have signaled that the case was headed toward indictment. The Obama Justice Department was never going to indict Hillary Clinton, and was determined not to damage her presidential campaign by taking steps suggestive of a possible indictment.

Today, we may have stumbled on the real reason why Samuelson got immunity.

In the following email dated March 17, 2015 disclosed today by Wikileaks, we find troubling details of the internal State Department process, which somehow made its way to Samlueson with details so nuanced it may only have come as a result of direct communication between the State Department (or DOS as Samuelson calls it) as Hillary's young confidant, and which in turn she promptly conveyed to her team, regarding the FOIA request, in what appears to be a material breach of confidentiality. This is what she said :

DOS is soon releasing another round of documents and email traffic (not hers) in response to Judicial Watch’s FOIA request on DOS's process for reviewing WJC’s speaking engagements.   

 

It’s 116 pages with approx. 50 sponsor/subsponsor requests. No objections by DOS in this batch, but some lengthy internal discussions among DOS officials that I highlighted below.  

 

There is one request where speaking fee would have been paid by Turkish govt -- WJC's office declined this.   And one speaking engagement with fee from Canadian government, which he did do.  

 

Let me know if you have any questions.

We have one question, Heather: is this legal, and are emailed exchanges such as this one why you received DOJ immunity in exchange for "turning over your laptop"?

From the original email, bolding ours.

* * *

From: Heather Samuelson [mailto:hsamuelson@cdmillsGroup.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2015 10:53 AM
To: Maura Pally; Craig Minassian; Philippe Reines; Nick Merrill; Jennifer Palmier I
Cc: Cheryl Mills; Tina Flournoy
Subject: JW FOIA | WJC Speeches

 

All --  DOS is soon releasing another round of documents and email traffic (not hers) in response to Judicial Watch’s FOIA request on DOS's process for reviewing WJC’s speaking engagements.  

 

It’s 116 pages with approx. 50 sponsor/subsponsor requests.   No objections by DOS in this batch, but some lengthy internal discussions among DOS officials that I highlighted below. 

 

There is one request where speaking fee would have been paid by Turkish govt -- WJC's office declined this.   And one speaking engagement with fee from Canadian government, which he did do. 

 

Let me know if you have any questions.

 

[Jen -- happy to give you more background on prior releases since it's your first go around]

 

Thx

 

1) UNIQFEST/Turkey:  There are 20 pages of internal, heavily redacted email traffic among DOS officials on request for WJC to speak at UNIQFEST in 2009 -- a climate change conference sponsored by the Turkish government with Turkish officials as featured speakers.  According to the traffic, WJC would receive compensation from “government and non-government sources.”

 

  -- WJC’s office decided to decline the invitation.  There is no final determination in the materials by the Department.

 

--  Some of email traffic has subject line  “Clinton Foundation” and refers to this as request from “Clinton Foundation.”  I only flag as may be twisted to say DOS did not even understand what they were reviewing for, blurred lines between personal and BHCCF etc…

 

2)   Canadian National Exhibition:  Email traffic indicates WJC’s compensation for this speaking engagement would come from the Canadian government via their program to promote tourism, “Industry Canada.”  There is heavily redacted email traffic between DOS officials, including our Embassy in Canada, with several emails from WJC’s office asking for status update, at one point saying they only have “about more 30 minutes before we lose the offer.”  

 

--- Jim Thessin (Deputy Legal Advisor) responds: “I do not have a problem with this so long as President Clinton is not serving as a U.S. government at the time of his appearance and when he is paid an honorarium.   If not an employee, he may accept reimbursements of expenses and an honorarium for his speech/talk, but he may not receive any gifts from the Canadian government.”

 

--- HRC’s financial disclosure form indicates that WJC received $175,000 from Canadian National Exhibition for this speech on 8/29/09.

 

 

3)  CISCO:  Request is submitted for WJC to speak at CISCO two months before HRC awards CISCO the State Department’s Award for Corporate Excellence, holding a ceremony featuring the CISCO’s CEO.    According to HRC's financial disclosure form, WJC received $255,000 for this speech.

 

4)  Other notable requests:  

  1. Local foreign govt:  Terife Island Council (local government of largest island in Canary Islands)
  2. Private Equity Firms/Banks:   ICE Canyon LLC, VISTA Equity, Harris Private Bank, TD Bank Financial, Whitton Investment Groups (London)  
  3. Foreign Based Organizations:  Etisalat (UAE based telecomm co); Egyptian Junior Business Association; Friends of Cystic Fibrosis (Irish non-profit); Essex Regional Conservation Authority (Essex, Ontario); Wilbros Entertainment (Philippines, event to raise funds for Philippines charity); Miaor Entertainment Ltd (division of Grupo ABC based in Brazil); London Business Forum; Aditya Birla Management (Indian multinational conglomerate)
  4. Universities:  Southern Methodist, Tufts, American Jewish University

5)  GWB:   Two requests are for events with Deloitte and Radio City Music Hall that are a joint appearance between WJC and George W. Bush.  WJC did the event with Deloitte, but not Radio City.

In light of the ongoing speculation that there may have been collusion between the DOJ and Bill Clinton (and thus Hillary), following the infamous "tarmac encounter", where Bill and Loretta Lynch spoke for 40 minutes about "Bill's gold game and grandchildren", the discovery that there was collusion between the State Department and Hillary Clinton, who formerly headed it, seems like a potential conflict of interest to us.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
FX223's picture

#pussygrabbinglivesmatter

nyse's picture

Lookit that smug, pixilated bitch. 

Shemp 4 Victory's picture

Bill and Hillary both grabbed Heather's pussy.

Son of Loki's picture

"The most transparent administration ever!"

 

Corrupt to the core!

Richard Chesler's picture

Lock her up already.

Fucking Cunt!

CuttingEdge's picture

For maximum effect the Big Kahoona (if Assange isn't all coat and no knickers) will come out in time for the last debate - Trump seems to be the best medium in these debates because the format dictates they cannot shut him up for two minutes live across the nation - he used their Podesta#1 leak last night which Hillary was stupid enough to confirm existed immediately, before whatever confused grey matter she has left in working order kicked out of neutral. So he is obviously keeping a close eye on what comes out on the Wikileaks server for ammunition.

I am seriously hoping, given how the drip drip of acid revelations looks like they are starting to burn the bitch (in the eyes of a public becoming increasingly aware of the propaganda coming from the MSM as it becomes more ridiculous), Trump cuts Assange the slack if he makes it to the WH (especially if Julian arms him with a nuke at the final debate). He would owe Wiki bigtime for the damage inflicted on the Hildebeast, whether he is comfortable with that fact or not. Who knows, he may realise a government's integrity and transparency relates directly to how they deal with whistleblowers, the treatment of who under Obumfuck is well documented and not pretty.

Look for a big squirrel alert from the MSM (or a major false flag from our Al Nusra/Isis/Isil/Al Qaida/Langley allies) 2-3 days before the last match.

NoDebt's picture

Conspiracy and collusion are not crimes.... if you're a Clinton.

EscapeKey's picture

 

Not that this matters, because Clinton is above the law, but...

 

*For my question*, it's basically some variation of [not quite phrased right yet]: I know when I talk to my friends who are attorneys we are all struggling with what happened to the emails and aren't satisfied with answers to date. While we all know of the occasional use of personal email addresses for business, none of my friends circle can understand how it was viewed as ok/secure/appropriate to use a private server for secure documents AND why further Hillary took it upon herself to review them and delete documents without providing anyone outside her circle a chance to weigh in. It smacks of acting above the law and it smacks of the type of thing I've either gotten discovery sanctions for, fired people for, etc.

 

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/4099

Loftie's picture
Loftie (not verified) EscapeKey Oct 10, 2016 9:22 PM

Simply put, the Long Arm of Government. https://goo.gl/tiZwod

Antifaschistische's picture

Yes, why is this even an issue when we have recently found out that Trump likes kissing women...THAT should remain the top story and he should abandon his campaign immediately!!

venturen's picture

LOCK EM ALL UP....Obama, Clintons, and all the 5th pleading criminals!

38BWD22's picture

 

 

Hmm, let's see, I know I'll miss a bunch, but here are institutions we can longer trust.  Fear them yes, trust them no.

DOJ, FBI, IRS, State Dept., SEC, Homeland Security (esp. their TSA goons), EPA, HHS, any ObamaCare apparatus, NSA & CIA.....

Add to the list.  

Specific information on individuals (names & addresses, etc.) may get added to DuneCreature's interesting project when he is ready.

Big Corked Boots's picture

Let me simplify this for you Mr Bearing:

Don't trust government.

Erek's picture

Everything from ABC to XYZ.

SWRichmond's picture

Congress, Supreme Court, Administration, all departments and offices thereof.

All the way down to Dog Catcher.

All they want is everything you are, and everything you will ever have.  The legislative process is simply a bidding war for your stuff.

This thing ain't over, far from it.  Get your ass in shape.  I am increasing my training pack load from 30# to 40#.  That is probably all my knees will take.

"How far do you go?"

Not far enough.

Goldbugger's picture

Missed one US Treasury and lets not forget the FED but they aren't really part of goverment. Just controlled by the politicians and bankers.

LET THE GREAT RESET COMMENCE>>>>

Chupacabra-322's picture

A@ 38B,

The Criminal Fraud UNITED STATES, CORP. INC. & it's Agencies are Lawless / Criminal entities. What ever trust, loyalty & respect the American People had for the Institution of Corporate Govenment has been squandered.

And, the Criminal Globalist have no one tomblame but themselves.

RiverRoad's picture

First dibs on DC's foxhole.

Boris Badenov's picture

The Federal Reserve didn't make your list?

thesonandheir's picture

FSOC - smoking gun?

 

Yes – I flagged for her that her senior officials are on the Council -- but we have to be careful because it is an independent entity. And also, the relevant Dodd Frank provision is really about the Fed.


http://imgur.com/PbXDFzF

thesonandheir's picture

Hilary embarrassed someone at an AIDS gig:

 

 

 On Saturday, March 12, 2016, Keith Molter <kbmord@yahoo.com> wrote: >> Dear Mr Podesta, >> >> With all due respect, please consider: >> If Hillary was truly ignorant, it is shameful. If not and she said what she said regardless, WHY?! >> I've been positive for 31 years. There's over a half a million of us over 50 living with this virus. I personally work with the PTSD and issues of Longterm Survivors (theLifegroupIa.org) and even believe I sent you my story about Hillary at the quilt and what it meant; which makes it nearly if not impossible for her NOT to have known about AIDS silence with the Reagan's! >> I'm considering changing my vote and possibly party (Kasich) as a result of her statement. Own up quick. >> "Misspoke"?! >> Come on guys. What does THAT mean?! >> >> Devastated, disgusted, and absolutely heartbroken, >> >> Keith B Molter >> >> PS. She was one of my heroes.

 

 

Podesta replies:

 

On Mar 12, 2016, at 2:02 PM, John Podesta <john.podesta@gmail.com> wrote: > > Keith, > I can't explain this other than sheer exhaustion. I know it was deeply hurtful and we are trying to make it right. I also know as First Lady, Senator and Secretary she has always tried to do everything she could to eradicate the disease for good. So I ask you to consider that and balance that in judging what was a terrible mistake. > John

 

 

 

Just what on earth did she do/say?

 

 

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/3448

RiverDrifter's picture

I think she tried to ally herself with the late Ronald Reagan and Nancy at President Reagan's funeral by saying she and they brought AIDS into the national conversation back in the 80's and 90's.

Apparently, Reagan is hated to the extreme by LGBT because he essentially ignored the issue and didn't even say the word AIDS until late in his Presidency when many had already died and/or been infected.  He is evil to them, or was....and when Hillary tried to use the topic as a means to pander for votes as the nation mourned his passing, many familiar with the issue took great offense.  She said something to the effect that she and Ronald Reagan were who brought AIDS into the national conversation and all this other untrue stuff in a failed attempt to make herself look good.

It was just another lie but she told it to the wrong crowd about the wrong topic - in short, she didn't know shit about AIDS nor the fact that Reagan was late to the party in addressing it.  She basically got caught pandering for votes trying to claim credit for yet another thing she had absolutely nothing to do with.

dilligaff's picture

Isn't Jennifer Psaki the "canary dress" chick? Or is she the "cookie lady"? I can't keep these evil cunts straight...

OverTheHedge's picture

I believe the collective noun is "velociraptor"

BabaLooey's picture

Psaki Pspussy is a dwarf, freckled douchewalla double speak Twitter Twatter under Lurch Ketchup.

Take a look at the cunt in her pink labia Russian hat.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jen_Psaki

1980XLS's picture

That thing almost looks like Chelsea.

Bill mighta done more than just grabbed it.

ParkAveFlasher's picture

If Trump buried a hatchet into Hillary's thorax, suddenly, mid-debate question, would anyone mind that?  I wouldn't.

MANvsMACHINE's picture

The guy who cleans the podium would certainly care.

83_vf_1100_c's picture

  You'd want a team from the CDC to clean that up. The podium and surrounding flooring would of course have to be burned.

Dg4884's picture

I bet a fucking alien would pop out!

CuttingEdge's picture

+1

There are two great quotes at that link:

This is not a partisan post. Like or hate whoever you want- we are a nation of over 300 million people with very real issues with our economy, healthcare, and security. The entire debate has focused on one conversation. Clearly one private conversation over a decade ago is more important than the fate of our country. If you think this is a priority please go back to watching reality television – you are everything that is wrong with this country.

 

She cannot believe no one is there to save her right now. We are witnessing the first time in history that someone has called out the Clinton family for their crimes on live TV. All the accusations of racism, sexism, bigotry, homophobia, Islamophobia. All the castigating and instigating. All the hate-framing. All the media megaphones. All the news stations, university chancellors, corporate PR campaigns. All the Correct The Record paid mercenary civilians. All the social justice activists whose peace signs have been turned into pitchforks by this very apparatus.

And look how quiet ALL THAT NOISE got the minute someone was brave enough to stand up, risk it all, and say one true sentence in the face of all the blaring megaphones.

It took a madman. It took a simpleton. It took a child, to speak up and tell the world the emperor has no clothes.

 


dizzyfingers's picture

THOSE EXPRESSIONS (Chelsea: "She is guilty!", Bill: "OH SHIT!!!").  PRICELESS!

 

Oliver Klozoff's picture

Or maybe they were expecting her to have a seizure.

Watching her, it's easy to forget she is a sick woman.

Kirk2NCC1701's picture

What Bill & Hillary said of Heather's heather in Private:  SMOKIN'!

Their Public position was different.  It was a Non-Kama-Sutra 'position'.

AViewFromDublin's picture

OMG! This is unreal folks. On Hillary’s website embedded in the source code where programmers look to read code – there is an extraordinary statement that she is going to make the election a HACK-A-THON!

It links to a jobs page where she is recruiting IT professionals to help her achieve this.

To view this click onto her website below, right click and click onto ‘view page source’. It is on the top of the page in green font. I pasted it below for your convenience.

https://www.hillaryclinton.com/donate/

<!–
HHHHHH ??HHHH
HHHHHH ????HH
HHHHHH ???????
?????????????????????? Git out the vote!
???????????????????????? Join the only 18 month, nationally televised hackathon.
?????????????????????? https://boards.greenhouse.io/hillaryforamerica
HHHHHH ???????
HHHHHH ????HH
HHHHHH ??HHHH

Ralph Spoilsport's picture

I guess you're gonna post this big nothingburger on every thread. No ZH member of note will contribute to your fly-bait boss.

AViewFromDublin's picture

Openly calling for hacking and stealing the election is a nothingburger?? As a matter of fact |I got this from Jim Stones website.

 

http://82.221.129.208/basepagej9.html

vq1's picture

"Come to the first grassroots hackathon for Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign! 


The hackathon will take place at Impact Hub in San Francisco Fri, April 29th 7:30pm - Sat, April 30th 9pm. Top prize will be tickets to an event with Hillary Clinton and the opportunity to present work to the HFA tech team! "

 

lol an event with hillary and slaving on her "tech team" are considered rewards! 

Nekoti's picture

D.C. needs to burn.

Looney's picture

 

Wikileaks, new release: “I had a multi-email exchange with someone in the media this morning---a name you would know---who is telling me that there are people close to the Clintons who say WJC's [William Jefferson Clinton’s] sex life could be damaging to her,” a January 2016 email from blogger Brent Budowsky to Podesta reads. 

When Bill Clinton dies, he shouldn’t be buried in a cemetery, ‘cause he’ll try to rape or molest all female corpses nearby.   ;-)

Looney

Delphi_Addiction's picture

Shocked. Shocked, I tell you.

(When will these right wing conspiracies end?!?!)

CuttingEdge's picture

Would it be called necrophilia? Or paedonecro for child corpses? Him being dead and all?

Either way its the kind of thing that woulld bring him back to life for sure, given his track record with the ladies (and children).

PS: Loooney, you are sick, and I salute you.

Son of Loki's picture

How can any female support Hillary? She protects rapists including her husband and the thug who raped that young girl years ago and then she Brags about it!