Category Archives: Hillary Clinton email

Hillary and the Russian Uranium Scandal

Posted on by

Don’t you wonder why Debbie Wasserman Schultz has not challenged Hillary on this? Exactly what do those Hillary supporters know and ignore?

Judicial Watch Sues Treasury for Records on Hillary Clinton-Russian Uranium Scandal

Update: The Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) responded today that it allegedly had no records.

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia seeking communications between the U.S. Department of the Treasury and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of the Treasury (No. 1:15-cv-01776)).

The goal of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit is to gain access to documents involving a uranium deal approved by then-Secretary of State Clinton that is tied to major Clinton Foundation donor Frank Giustra and Russian-state issues.

The lawsuit was filed after the Treasury Department ignored a FOIA request sent on May 29, 2015.  Judicial Watch’s request seeks emails between key Treasury agencies and Hillary Clinton non-governmental email accounts:

  • All records of email communications between the Office of Foreign Assets Control and any “clintonemail.com” address, including but not limited to [email protected] and [email protected];
  • All records of email communications between the Committee on Foreign Investment in the U.S. and any “clintonemail.com” address, including but not limited to [email protected] and [email protected]; and
  • All records of email communications between the Office of the Secretary of the Treasury and any “clintonemail.com” address, including but not limited to [email protected] and [email protected].

Judicial Watch is investigating a controversial 2010 deal involving Uranium One, the Canadian company currently at the center of the Clinton Foundation donor scandals and ARMZ, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Rosatom, the Russian atomic energy agency, which recently took a 51 percent controlling interest in Uranium One.  The lawsuit seeks information about the approval of this deal and whether the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) ignored the mandatory 75-day review approval process, approving the deal in just 52 days.  Mrs. Clinton, as Secretary of State, was a member of CFIUS.

Peter Scheweizer’s book Clinton Cash first raised questions about the Uranium One deal, which benefited many donors to the Clinton Foundation, including Giustra, who, among other dealings, helped set up a Clinton Foundation entity in Canada that had the effect of hiding donations from foreign governments and others from public disclosure, despite promises of disclosure by Hillary Clinton and the Foundation.

As the New York Times reported on April 23, the Clinton Foundation hid many of the beneficiaries of the deal approved by Mrs. Clinton and CFIUS:

As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors. Other people with ties to the company made donations as well.

And shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock.

At the time, both Rosatom and the United States government made promises intended to ease concerns about ceding control of the company’s assets to the Russians. Those promises have been repeatedly broken, records show.

The documents from Treasury should shed light on the apparent conflict of interest between then-Secretary of State Clinton and the Clinton Foundation regarding the expedited approval process.  Under United States law, uranium is considered a strategic asset; therefore, any such deal must be approved by a committee of U.S. government officials. The CFIUS board, which is tasked with reviewing all foreign acquisitions of American national security assets, consists of seven cabinet members, including the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Treasury. In 2010, Jose W. Fernandez represented the State Department on the CFIUS board, and the documents sought by Judicial Watch lawsuit should clarify whether Clinton failed to disclose to Fernandez that several executives at Uranium One made millions of dollars in contributions to the Clinton Foundation immediately before and after CFIUS reviewed and approved the ARMZ-Uranium One deal.

Separate Judicial Watch FOIA litigation forced the disclosure last year of documents that provided a road map for over 200 conflicts-of-interest rulings that led to $48 million for the Clinton Foundation and other Clinton-connected entities during Hillary Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state.  Previously disclosed documents in this lawsuit, for example, raise questions about funds Clinton accepted from entities linked to Saudi Arabia, China and Iran, among others.  The August 13, 2014, investigative report that first disclosed the Clinton financial dealings, “State Department approved 215 Bill Clinton speeches, controversial consulting deal, worth $48m; Hillary Clinton’s Chief of Staff copied on all decisions,” is available here.

The approval of this deal made millions of dollars for the Clinton Foundation, gave the Russians control of one-fifth of all uranium production in the U.S., and made Rosatom one of the world’s largest uranium producers.

“Hillary Clinton’s cash and secrecy on this Russian uranium deal looks corrupt and criminal,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “And now that his Treasury Department violated FOIA to cover up yet another Clinton scandal, there is no daylight between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton on this scandal that placed our nation’s security at risk.”

Newest Emails Released, Hillary Told She Rocked

Posted on by

Some samples of the recent released emails are here. Additional summaries are here.

An exchange with Sid-vicious Blumenthal, in the emails where it is suggested that investigative author Bob Woodward is an FBI asset?

 

Embedded image permalink

Embedded image permalink

 

FNC: As the number of classified Hillary Clinton emails grew to nearly 1,000, they also reveal how freely she and her staff shared information on the Benghazi attacks, including confirming the death of Ambassador Chris Stevens – and even celebrating her controversial hearing appearance where she asked, “What difference, at this point, does it make” what led to the attacks.

The emails were part of the largest release yet of Clinton documents from the State Department.

The batch contained 328 emails deemed to have classified information. According to the State Department, that brings the total number with classified information to 999.

That alone drew outrage from Republicans, with the RNC saying the sheer number of emails with classified material “underscores the degree to which Hillary Clinton jeopardized our national security and has tried to mislead the American people.”

But the document dump also potentially creates more problems for Clinton in her attempt to move past the fallout from the Benghazi attacks.

Notably, the emails show her aides congratulating her after her initial January 2013 testimony on the attacks before Congress. During that hearing, she got into a dispute with Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., over the conflicting narratives about the motivation for the attack and what preceded it – the State Department had come under fire for initially pointing to a protest over an anti-Islam film. Clinton told Johnson, expressively, “what difference, at this point, does it make?”

During and after the hearing, aides forwarded Clinton congratulatory messages.

“I’m being flooded with emails about how you rocked,” deputy chief of staff Huma Abedin wrote. “And you looked fabulous.” One supporter wrote a message with the subject line: “twitterverse abuzz with Hillary-kvelling,” using the Yiddish word for gushing praise.

Later, though, political consultant Mark Penn sent an email to Clinton gently suggesting that perhaps it wasn’t wise to lose her temper in the hearing. Penn suggested Republicans could use that moment as evidence that they had rattled her.

Aide Philippe Reines leaped to Clinton’s defense, writing:

“Give Me A Break. You did not look rattled. You looked real. There’s a difference. A big one.”

The emails from September 2012 also show her and her staff scrambling to respond the night of the attacks and later calibrating their public response.

On the night of the attacks, the communications show Clinton notifying top advisers of confirmation from the Libyans that then-Ambassador Stevens had died.

Early the next morning, Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills tells Clinton they “recovered both bodies” and were looking to get out a statement; Sean Smith, information management officer, was the other State Department employee killed that night.

After a controversy erupted over claims the attack was “spontaneous,” aide Jake Sullivan wrote to Clinton to assure her, “You never said spontaneous or characterized the motives. In fact you were careful in your first statement to say we were assessing motive and method. The way you treated the video in the Libya context was to say that some sought to *justify* the attack on that basis.”

Further, the emails show that shortly before 9 p.m. on Sept. 11, 2012, Clinton sent an email asking her daughter to call her at her office about the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya. The email was addressed to an account under the name “Diane Reynolds,” an alias Chelsea Clinton used for personal messages.

“Two of our officers were killed in Benghazi by an al-Qaida-like group: The Ambassador, whom I handpicked, and a young communications officer on temporary duty w(ith) a wife and two young children,” Hillary Clinton later wrote to her daughter. “Very hard day and I fear more of the same tomorrow.”

In October, that email was trumpeted by Republicans on the House Benghazi committee as evidence that Clinton knew very quickly the attack on the consulate was the work of Islamic terrorists, not a spontaneous street protest triggered by the release of a video considered an insult to the Prophet Mohammed.

Another exchange from early 2013 shows retired diplomat James Jeffrey appearing to do damage control over a Washington Post piece from him titled, “How to Prevent the Next Benghazi.”

Jeffrey starts the conversation by warning Mills he’d been contacted by the Post regarding his views and reluctantly agreed to comply. He warns it would be posted and “you may see this piece as critical of expeditionary diplomacy. It’s not; I’ve risked my life practicing it. But having lost over 100 personnel KIA and WIA (and two ARBs judging me) in my time in Iraq (and a son going back to Afghanistan on Department assignment this summer) I feel very strongly that we have to be prudent. If the media ask me if there is any daylight between me and you all I will cite the Pickering Mullen ARB and the Secretary’s testimony and say absolutely not.”

Forwarding the article, he adds, “(Title is not what I gave them and stupid as I state explicitly at the end that being in Benghazi was the right policy call).”

What About that Hillary Office Created at State?

Posted on by

As Hillary’s emails are released and investigated, as those emails are analyzed for perspective and as the FOIA requests filed by the media are processed and fulfilled, a new condition and picture is emerging on what Hillary was really doing in her role as Secretary of State with the cooperation of her agency and inner circle. In summary, it was more crony business missions versus global diplomatic achievements.

Clinton Opened State Department Office to Dozens of Corporate Donors, Dem Fundraisers

By Stephen Braun
November 30, 2015

WASHINGTON (AP) — As secretary of state, Hillary Clinton opened her office to dozens of influential Democratic party fundraisers, former Clinton administration and campaign loyalists, and corporate donors to her family’s global charity, according to State Department calendars obtained by The Associated Press.

The woman who would become a 2016 presidential candidate met or spoke by phone with nearly 100 corporate executives, Clinton charity donors and political supporters during her four years at the State Department between 2009 and 2013, records show. Many of those meetings and calls, formally scheduled by her aides, involved heads of companies and organizations that were pursuing business or private interests with the Obama administration at the time, including with the State Department while Clinton was in charge.

In addition, at least 60 of those who met with Clinton have donated or pledged program commitments to the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation. A dozen have been among Hillary Clinton’s most reliable political fundraisers, bundling more than $100,000 in donations during her failed 2008 presidential campaign or providing larger amounts to Clinton-allied super political action committees this time. And at least six entities represented in the meetings paid former President Bill Clinton lucrative fees for speeches.


The AP found no evidence of legal or ethical conflicts in Clinton’s meetings, in its examination of 1,294 pages from the calendars. Her sit-downs with business leaders were not unique among recent secretaries of state, who sometimes called on corporate executives to aid in international affairs, according to archived documents.

But the difference with Clinton’s meetings was that she was a 2008 presidential contender who was widely expected to try again in 2016. Her availability to luminaries from politics, business and charity shows the extent to which her office became a sounding board for their interests. And her ties with so many familiar faces from those intersecting worlds were complicated by their lucrative financial largess and political support over the years — even during her State Department tenure — for her campaigns and her husband’s, and for her family’s foundation.

Among those she met with or spoke with by phone were chief executives such as General Electric Co.’s Jeff Immelt, PepsiCo Inc.’s Indra Nooyi, FedEx Corp.’s Fred Smith, former Morgan Stanley chairman John Mack and former Citigroup Inc. chairman Sanford Weill. There were also billionaires: investors George Soros and Warren Buffett and diet pioneer S. Daniel Abraham. Major Democratic Party fundraisers included entertainment magnate Haim Saban, real estate developer Stephen J. Cloobeck and American Federation of Teachers president Randi Weingarten.

In its response to detailed questions from the AP, the Clinton campaign did not address the issue of the candidate’s frequent meetings with corporate and political supporters during her State Department tenure. Instead, campaign spokesman Nick Merrill said “Secretary Clinton turned over all of her work emails, 55,000 pages of them, and asked that they be released to the public. Some of that will include her schedules. We look forward to the rest of her emails being released so people can have a greater window into her work at the department.”

The State Department turned the Clinton calendars over to the AP earlier this month, documents the AP sought for two years under the Freedom of Information Act. The department censored many meeting entries for privacy reasons or to protect internal deliberations, making it impossible to discern all the identities of those who met Clinton. A State Department spokesman declined to comment on the agency’s redactions of the calendars or the arrangements for Secretary of State John Kerry’s daily schedules.

The AP has also sought detailed planning schedules that aides sent Clinton before each day’s events, but the State Department has declined to search through the files of some of Clinton’s close aides at the time. The State Department’s release of Clinton emails has so far turned up at least 155 planning schedules, called “minischedules,” but they account for only a tiny percentage of Clinton’s four-year stint — 7 percent of the 1,159 days covered by those email releases.

Merrill said Clinton was not sent the planning “minischedules” every day or when she traveled, “which would account for why you see some on some days and not on others.”

The AP also found at least a dozen differences between Clinton’s planners and calendars involving visits by donors and longtime loyalists. In one example, a June 2010 Clinton planning schedule that the State Department released uncensored shows a 3 p.m. meeting between Clinton and her longtime private lawyer, David Kendall. But Clinton’s formal calendar lists the 20-minute session only as “private meeting — secretary’s office,” omitting Kendall’s name.

The Clinton campaign could not explain those discrepancies but said the candidate had made a good faith effort to be transparent by giving her work-related emails to the State Department for public release.

The calendars offer hour-by-hour depictions of Clinton’s hectic diplomatic schedule in Washington and her foreign tours crammed with meetings with dignitaries. Even so, she found time to meet CEOs, loyalists and donors.

“It shows Hillary Clinton marrying her political interests with the business and policy interests of powerful people,” said Lawrence Jacobs, director of the Center for the Study of Politics and Governance at the University of Minnesota. “These are the people you cultivate to lay the groundwork for running for president.”

Clinton favored a select group of visitors — at least two dozen — for repeated meetings. Abraham, the billionaire behind SlimFast diet products and chairman of the S. Daniel Abraham Center for Middle East Peace, met with Clinton at least three times and was slated to meet her three other times, according to her calendars and schedules. Clinton’s calendars showed they met at her office in May 2009 and October 2010. Clinton also spoke at an Abraham Center event in April 2010.

Abraham has given $5 million to $10 million to the Clinton Foundation and donated $1.2 million in 2012 to Priorities USA Action, a super PAC supporting Clinton in 2016. Abraham told the AP that he assumed that he and Clinton discussed Mideast policy during their contacts.

Teachers’ union chief Weingarten met Clinton three times, in 2009, 2010 and 2012. Emails released by the State Department show that Weingarten’s policy aide, Tina Flournoy, messaged Clinton at her private account in mid-September 2009 saying that “Randi and would like to visit you re: child labor issues — if that’s possible, whom should I contact to schedule?”

Clinton responded: “I would love to see you and Randi. I’m copying Lona (Clinton’s scheduling aide) to see how soon we can schedule. Hope you’re well.”

Less than three weeks later, Weingarten and Flournoy — now chief of staff to Bill Clinton — met Hillary Clinton for a half hour, according to the calendars. That year, the union spent nearly $1 million lobbying the government on issues that included child labor in Uzbekistan. The union also spent at least $1 million in both 2010 and 2012, the other years Weingarten met with Clinton.

“We discussed a range of issues with Secretary Clinton — including the growing refugee crisis, expanding access to education globally and curbing child labor practices,” said Kate Childs Graham, speaking for the union.

Weingarten’s union endorsed Clinton’s 2016 presidential bid in July, and Weingarten is on the board of Priorities USA Action. The union has also given $1 million to $5 million to the Clinton Foundation and committed, along with two banking partners, to launch a $100 million loan fund to expand classrooms for young children under the auspices of the charity’s Clinton Global Initiative.

PepsiCo CEO Nooyi also had at least three scheduled contacts with Clinton. In February 2010, Nooyi and GE’s Immelt met Clinton as part of the State Department’s efforts to secure corporate money for an American pavilion in China’s Shanghai Expo in May of that year.

PepsiCo spent $6.8 million in 2010 on government lobbying. Nooyi talked twice with Clinton by phone in 2012, a year when PepsiCo spent $3.3 million on lobbying Congress and federal agencies, including State Department officials, on issues such as trade pacts and Russia legislation.

PepsiCo spokesman Jon Banner declined to discuss conversations or meetings the firm’s senior leaders may have had. A top executive with PepsiCo’s main rival, Coca-Cola, which donated $5 million to $10 million to the Clinton Foundation, also discussed the Shanghai event with Clinton in a 2009 conference call along with executives from PepsiCo and several other firms.

Nooyi is not a prominent Clinton political supporter, but PepsiCo has been active with the Clinton Foundation. PepsiCo’s foundation pledged in 2008 to provide $7.6 million in grants to two water firms as a commitment to the Clinton Global Initiative. The Clinton charity also listed a PepsiCo Foundation donation of more than $100,000 in 2014, the same year the soda company’s foundation announced a partnership under the charity to spur economic and social development in emerging nations.

A dozen other executives and political supporters met or were in phone contact with Clinton at least twice during her State Department tenure — among them Immelt, Saban, Soros and Clinton intimate and now-Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe, according to the calendars.

Another was Alfonso Fanjul, one of four brothers who run a Florida-based sugar and real estate conglomerate and are politically active in the state’s Cuban-American community.

Fanjul, whose family subsidiaries include Domino Sugar and Florida Crystals, was a Florida co-chairman for Bill Clinton’s first presidential campaign in 1992, supported Hillary Clinton’s 2008 run and has donated between $100,000 and $250,000 to the Clinton Foundation. Florida Crystals spent $1 million lobbying the Obama administration in 2011 and nearly that amount in 2009, 2010 and 2012 on issues related to sugar and its use as a biofuel.

Fanjul met Hillary Clinton for a half hour in October 2009. Gaston Cantens, a spokesman for the firm, said Fanjul sought the 2009 meeting because he was having “customs issues coming in and out of the country and wanted help.” Cantens said Fanjul’s entry and exit problems eased.

Clinton met Fanjul again at a 10-minute “pull-aside” during a Brookings Institution luncheon in June 2012. The event honored Saban and his wife, Cheryl, who both bundled donations to Hillary Clinton’s 2008 campaign and whose family foundation has donated between $5 million and $10 million to the Clinton Foundation.

The calendar doesn’t say what they discussed, but the event came two months after Fanjul returned from a trip to Cuba with a Brookings delegation. Fanjul, a Brookings trustee who had been a longtime foe of U.S. trade with Cuba, has publicly reversed course on the issue and is now open to investments there.

Cantens said Fanjul and Clinton discussed topics “related to Brookings,” but added: “I’m not saying Cuba didn’t come up.”

AG Lynch, Law Prevents Gitmo Detainees in U.S.

Posted on by

Yippee Skippee…..Loretta Lynch got one right it testimony.

Attorney general: Law ‘does not allow’ Gitmo detainees in the US
The Hill:  The Obama administration is legally prohibited from bringing detainees from the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to the U.S., Attorney General Loretta Lynch acknowledged on Tuesday, even as the White House searches for ways to close the facility.

“With respect to individuals being transferred to the United States, the law currently does not allow that,” Lynch told the House Judiciary Committee. “That is not, as I am aware of, going to be contemplated, given the legal prescriptions.

“Certainly it is the position of the Department of Justice that we would follow the law of the land in regard on that issue.”
The attorney general noted that President Obama has said he will sign a new defense policy bill that includes additional restrictions on Guantanamo Bay, including new limits on where men at the detention camp can be sent abroad.

Still, Lynch maintained that closing the 13-year-old detention facility “is something that is a part of the administration’s policy.”

“The Department of Justice is committed to fully following that, and the closure of Guantanamo Bay is being carried out in compliance with that law,” she added.

Despite Lynch’s comments, the Obama administration is actively looking for places in Colorado and other states to relocate dozens of detainees from the facility, as part of its broader effort to close the detention facility. Of the 107 men detained at Guantanamo Bay, 48 have been cleared for release to other countries and the administration hopes they will be placed abroad.

This weekend, five Yemeni detainees at the facility were transferred to the United Arab Emirates.

The remaining detainees would need to be placed somewhere in the U.S. The list of possible facilities includes a maximum-security federal prison in Colorado, as well as Fort Leavenworth, Kan., and the Naval Consolidated Brig in Charleston, S.C.

The president is believed to be releasing a formal plan to close Guantanamo Bay in coming weeks. It is sure to be met with vigorous opposition from Republicans, who worry that it would both entail releasing dozens of dangerous terrorists as well as endanger the communities surrounding the prisons of those who are reincarcerated.

“We would expect that to come relatively soon,” White House press secretary Josh Earnest said on Friday.

On Tuesday, Lynch told the House panel that no one had ever escaped out of a super-maximum security prison, which Democrats have used as evidence to support the president’s plan.

“I do not believe anyone has escaped from Supermax,” she said.

Rep. Randy Forbes (R-Va.), however, worried that the locations could nonetheless be placed on terrorists’ hit lists.

“If you brought terrorists from Guantanamo Bay and located them in a particular city in the United States, would it not be reasonable to conclude that that would enhance the likelihood that that city could be placed on one of these lists?” Forbes asked.

Further, Lynch was asked questions on refugees and email servers.

UPI: Lynch was asked about other issues during the hearing — such as police-related deaths, radical terrorism, the IRS investigation and Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server when she was chief of the U.S. Department of State.

Lynch also discussed a recent plan by the administration to admit a number of Syrian refugees into the United States to aid in the European migrant crisis.

“Not only the Department of Justice but all of our agencies will make every effort to vet every refugee coming into this country,” she said. “Certainly there are challenges to that process.

“We do have the benefit of having that significant and robust screening process in place — a process that Europe has not been able to set up, which renders them much more vulnerable.”

The question and answer session followed a speech delivered by Lynch, which outlined Justice Department achievements and priorities.

“Our highest priority must always be the security of our homeland, and we are acting aggressively to defuse threats as they emerge,” she said. “We remain focused on the threat posed by domestic extremists.”

Gotta Love Those Clintons and Hired Criminals

Posted on by

Clinton Foundation Donor to Pay $95.5 Million Settlement to Justice Department

For-profit education company with ties to Goldman Sachs
FreeBeacon:

A for-profit educational corporation that has donated to the Clinton Foundation agreed to pay $95.5 million to the Obama administration as a settlement for a government lawsuit alleging that it was using illegal tactics to lure in prospective students.

The Education Management Corporation was sued by the Department of Justice in 2011 for multiple recruitment violations, including paying its recruiters based on the number of students it enrolled, and exaggerating the career opportunities that were available to graduates. The lawsuit argued that the violations made the corporation ineligible for the $11 billion in state and federal financial aid it has received since 2003.

On top of the $95.5 million settlement, the group also agreed to forgive more than $100 million in loans it made to former students, according to the Associated Press.

The Education Management Corporation contributed between $5,000 and $10,000 to the Clinton Foundation through Brown Mackie College, one of the largest of the group’s four divisions. Goldman Sachs, which owned a 43 percent stake until it sold off much of the company to creditors last summer, has also donated millions to the Clinton Foundation.

The lawsuit was filed based on information brought forth by whistle-blowers. It claimed that the corporation operated a “boiler-room style” sales team that was taught to “exploit applicants’ psychological vulnerabilities to convince them to enroll.

Among the applicants targeted by recruiters were individuals “who were unable to write coherently, who appeared to be under the influence of drugs, or who sought to enroll in an online program but had no computer,” according to the suit.

Attorney General Loretta Lynch praised whistle-blowers for revealing the group’s “deceptive practices.”

“This case not only highlights the abuses in the [Education Management Corporation’s] EDMC’s recruitment system; it also highlights the brave actions of EDMC employees who refused to go along with the institution’s deceptive practices,”said Lynch at a Monday news conference.

The lawsuit alleged that the group’s aggressive recruitment practices were geared toward raking in as much government aid as possible.

Although the group agreed to the settlement, it admitted no wrongdoing and said it agreed to pay the penalty based on a desire to put “these matters behind us” and focus on educating its students.

The Clinton Foundation did not respond to a request for comment on the settlement, but its ties to the for-profit education industry go beyond the Education Management Corporation.

The Laureate International Universities, a group of for-profit schools partially owned by the liberal billionaire George Soros, has also contributed millions to the Clinton Foundation. Bill Clinton is paid an undisclosed salary to be “honorary chancellor” of the schools, and has been described as the “face” of the massive university group.

Also contributing to the Clinton Foundation is the Apollo Group, which operates the University of Phoenix, and has been criticized for aggressively targeting veterans with G.I. Bill money to spend on education. The University of Phoenix received more than $1 billion through the G.I. Bill between 2009 and 2014, but only 16 percent of its students graduate within six years.

Kaplan, which paid a $1.3 million settlement to the Justice Department in 2014 for using unqualified instructors, also contributes to the Clinton Foundation. It was specifically targeting “African-American women who were raising two children by themselves” in the hope that they would drop out after the federal funding based on their enrollment had already been received.

Despite the Clintons’ extensive ties, Hillary Clinton has spoken out against the for-profit industry on the campaign trail for targeting “service members, veterans, and their families with false promises and deceptive marketing.”

The Clinton campaign also did not return a request for comment. *** Don’t go away yet, there is more….more criminals.

FreeBeacon is still on the case….

Numerous former board members and trustees of a charity group cofounded by Bill Clinton have been accused of or convicted of insider trading, campaign finance violations, and other illegal schemes.

The American India Foundation is one of several nonprofit groups in Bill Clinton’s charitable orbit, although it has received less attention than the Clinton Foundation and its spin-offs.

The group was founded in 2001 “at the initiative of President Bill Clinton following a request from Prime Minister Vajpayee” in order to help with the recovery efforts after the Gujarat earthquake. It is currently run by CEO Ravi Kumar.

AIF was co-founded by Clinton and former Goldman Sachs director Rajat Gupta in 2001. Clinton continues to serve as honorary chairman of the council of trustees, according to the website.

Gupta, a Clinton donor, was convicted of passing illegal trading tips to another former AIF trustee—Raj Rajarantam—in the highly-publicized 2011 case that took down the Galleon hedge fund. Gupta is currently serving out a two-year prison term and was last listed as co-chairman of the AIF board in 2010.

Gupta’s legal team highlighted his work with AIF and Bill Clinton during his sentencing.

“Rajat worked with former U.S. President Bill Clinton and Victor Menezes, former Senior Vice Chair of Citigroup, to found the American India Foundation (AIF),” said his attorneys in a sentencing memo. “Under their leadership, within its first year AIF raised millions of dollars to support earthquake relief efforts.”

However, Gupta is just one of many current or former members of AIF leadership who have been embroiled in headline-grabbing legal controversies over the years.

Rajarantam, the former head of Galleon and also an early member of AIF leadership, was sentenced to 11 years in prison—the longest sentence ever handed down in an insider trading case—in 2011 for allegedly using illegal stock tips to amass a $63 million fortune.

Former AIF trustee and hotelier Sant Chatwal, pled guilty in 2014 to a conspiracy to violate campaign finance laws. He was accused of illegally funneling $180,000 through straw donors to political candidates, including Hillary Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign.

Federal investigators reportedly recorded Chatwal talking to an informant about using contributions to influence politicians.

“Without that nobody will even talk to you. When they are in need of money…the money you give then they are always for you,” he said. “That’s the only way to buy them, get into the system. … What, what else is there? That’s the only thing.”

The Hampshire Hotels president was sentenced to three years probation and ordered to pay a $500,000 fine, according to his attorney. He is still listed as a New York trustee on the AIF website.

Chatwal’s son, Manhattan socialite Vikram Chatwal, has also been an AIF trustee. He was charged with felony drug trafficking in 2013 after police say he tried to board a plane carrying heroin, cocaine and illegal prescription pills. The charges were dismissed after he completed a yearlong rehab program.

Natel Engineering, a company owned by former AIF trustee Sudesh Arora, pleaded guilty to contract fraud in 1993. The company was ordered to pay a $1 million fine for neglecting to test computer parts in military equipment it sold to the U.S. military.

InfoUSA founder Vinod Gupta, a former early AIF board member, was charged by the Securities and Exchange Commission with misappropriating company funds in 2010. According to a lawsuit filed by InfoUSA shareholders in 2006, Gupta spent company money on private flights for the Clintons. Bill Clinton also reportedly earned over $2 million working as a consultant for Gupta’s company.

Gupta stepped down from InfoUSA and agreed to pay a $7.4 million settlement in 2010.

Tech entrepreneur Naveen Jain, a former AIF trustee, was found to have violated insider trading laws in a civil suit in 2003 and ousted as CEO of InfoSpace.

A current AIF trustee, CEO of Fairfax Financial Holdings Prem Watsa, is reportedly under a civil investigation in Canada for insider trading, along with others at the company. Fairfax said it is cooperating with the probe and denied any wrongdoing.

The foundation has also honored Ramalinga Raju, the head of the now-defunct Satyam Computer Services, a company that has been dubbed “India’s Enron.” Raju was sentenced to seven years in prison in April after he was convicted of carrying out one of the largest corporate frauds in India’s history. His sentence was suspended in May pending appeal.

AIF did not respond to an emailed request for comment. A spokesperson for Bill Clinton was reached and did not comment.

Attorneys for Vikram Chatwal, Arora, and Rajaratnam could not be reached. Sant Chatwal’s attorney confirmed the details of his sentencing; the others did not return requests for comment.

AIF brought in $6.9 million in 2013, and spent just over $7 million, according to tax records. It currently has a two out of four star rating from Charity Navigator.

The charity supports education initiatives, anti-poverty programs, and disaster relief efforts in India and says it has “chang[ed] the lives of more than 2.3 million of India’s less fortunate.”

Through its high-profile fundraising events, AIF has provided a networking platform for business leaders, Hollywood stars, and political figures.

Earlier this month, the group honored Center for American Progress president Neera Tanden, a former Clinton aide, at a fundraising gala in Washington, D.C.