@travelerxxx

From the article:

The final court case also made no mention of any connection to the influence peddling conversations the FBI undercover informant witnessed about the Russian nuclear officials trying to ingratiate themselves with the Clintons even though agents had gathered documents showing the transmission of millions of dollars from Russia’s nuclear industry to an American entity that had provided assistance to Bill Clinton’s foundation, sources confirmed to The Hill.

Nah, nothing to see here. Move along, move along...

@travelerxxx @travelerxxx

Well, Putin evidently knew that he was dealing with a enormously corrupt government and that bribes were required to get the uranium he needed. Had the public officials been honest, purchasing an ear and a chance to purchase uranium would not have been a required 'getting business done in this country' step. Businessmen used to have the same problem in Mexico, I've heard. Psychopaths and the pathologically greedy must be kept out of government...

I know it's WaPo, but this article really should be read in full at source.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/foreign-governments-gave-million...

Foreign governments gave millions to foundation while Clinton was at State Dept.

By Rosalind S. Helderman and Tom Hamburger February 25, 2015

The Clinton Foundation accepted millions of dollars from seven foreign governments during Hillary Rodham Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state, including one donation that violated its ethics agreement with the Obama administration, foundation officials disclosed Wednesday.

Most of the contributions were possible because of exceptions written into the foundation’s 2008 agreement, which included limits on foreign-government donations.

The agreement, reached before Clinton’s nomination amid concerns that countries could use foundation donations to gain favor with a Clinton-led State Department, allowed governments that had previously donated money to continue making contributions at similar levels.

The new disclosures, provided in response to questions from The Washington Post, make clear that the 2008 agreement did not prohibit foreign countries with interests before the U.S. government from giving money to the charity closely linked to the secretary of state. ...

...Some of the donations came from countries with complicated diplomatic, military and financial relationships with the U.S. government, including Kuwait, Qatar and Oman.

Other nations that donated included Australia, Norway and the Dominican Republic.

The foundation presents a unique political challenge for Clinton, and one that has already become a cause of concern among Democrats as she prepares to launch an almost-certain second bid for the presidency.

Rarely, if ever, has a potential commander in chief been so closely associated with an organization that has solicited financial support from foreign governments. Clinton formally joined the foundation in 2013 after leaving the State Department, and the organization was renamed the Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation. ...

...The Post found that the foundation, begun by former president Bill Clinton, has raised nearly $2 billion since its creation in 2001.

Foreign governments and individuals are prohibited from giving money to U.S. political candidates, to prevent outside influence over national leaders. But the foundation has given donors a way to potentially gain favor with the Clintons outside the traditional political limits. ...

...The Wall Street Journal reported last week that the foundation had accepted new foreign-government money now that the 2008 agreement has lapsed.

A review of foundation disclosures shows that at least two foreign governments — Germany and the United Arab Emirates — began giving in 2013 after the funding restrictions lapsed when Clinton left the Obama administration. ...

...Foundation officials said last week that if Clinton runs, they will consider taking steps to address concerns over the role of foreign donors. ...

Yet it's apparently only the fact that it's Russia!!! in one of multiple pay-to-play instances - in a situation imposed by the Clinton's pathological greed and power-tripping - that there's a problem, because it can be used in the propaganda fomenting an excuse for a military attack in yet another targeted country among so many. Because Secretary of State Clinton apparently made it known that she could be hard to get hold of without a bribe laundered into Her Fundation.

Need to find an article about a Prince/Sheik? Secretary of State Hillary wouldn't see until after he donated to Her Fundation, something suggested he try after he spoke with someone at Her Fundation after not being able to get through to Her - and which worked. Too tired to see straight and can't find it - does anyone remember anything about this? I believe it was part of a larger story, but that bit stood out to me at the time, however vaguely I can recall it right now.

Crawling off to bed...

Edit: just got up and am adding this in, in the just-continued search for the above story, as a probably unnecessary reminder of just how obvious the corruption was, as the more telling stories seem (surprise!) difficult to find... all emphasis mine.

(Needs to be read in full at source, but these bits make the requisite points beautifully. Please note that after a 3-year-delay and a lawsuit to get things moving, the AP had, at time of writing, only had the State Department release official calenders and planning calenders from about half of the four years she headed the State Department, and we know from the emails that a hell of a lot went on 'unofficially' and carefully kept away from oversight and public knowledge. So, I'm guessing that there's a lot more and nastier behind-the-scenes proof of criminality to be frantically concealed which has yet to come out - possibly involving some of those missing trillions from the Pentagon)

http://www.businessinsider.com/hillary-clinton-met-with-influential-clin...

More than half of private interests who met with Clinton at State department made donations

Stephen Braun and Eileen Sullivan, Associated Press

Aug. 24, 2016

...At least 85 of 154 people from private interests who met or had phone conversations scheduled with Clinton while she led the State Department donated to her family charity or pledged commitments to its international programs, according to a review of State Department calendars released so far to The Associated Press. Combined, the 85 donors contributed as much as $156 million. At least 40 donated more than $100,000 each, and 20 gave more than $1 million. ...

...The meetings between the Democratic presidential nominee and foundation donors do not appear to violate legal agreements Clinton and former president Bill Clinton signed before she joined the State Department in 2009. But the frequency of the overlaps shows the intermingling of access and donations, and fuels perceptions that giving the foundation money was a price of admission for face time with Clinton. Her calendars and emails released as recently as this week describe scores of contacts she and her top aides had with foundation donors....

...The 154 did not include U.S. federal employees or foreign government representatives. Clinton met with representatives of at least 16 foreign governments that donated as much as $170 million to the Clinton charity, but they were not included in AP's calculations because such meetings would presumably have been part of her diplomatic duties.

Last week, the Clinton Foundation moved to head off ethics concerns about future donations by announcing changes planned if Clinton is elected.

On Monday, Bill Clinton said in a statement that if his wife were to win, he would step down from the foundation's board and stop all fundraising for it. The foundation would also accept donations only from U.S. citizens and what it described as independent philanthropies, while no longer taking gifts from foreign groups, U.S. companies or corporate charities. Clinton said the foundation would no longer hold annual meetings of its international aid program, the Clinton Global Initiative, and it would spin off its foreign-based programs to other charities.

Those planned changes would not affect more than 6,000 donors who have already provided the Clinton charity with more than $2 billion in funding since its creation in 2000. ...

...Some of Clinton's most influential visitors donated millions to the Clinton Foundation and to her and her husband's political coffers. They are among scores of Clinton visitors and phone contacts in her official calendar turned over by the State Department to AP last year and in more-detailed planning schedules that so far have covered about half her four-year tenure. The AP sought Clinton's calendar and schedules three years ago, but delays led the AP to sue the State Department last year in federal court for those materials and other records.

S. Daniel Abraham, whose name also was included in emails released by the State Department as part of another lawsuit, is a Clinton fundraising bundler who was listed in Clinton's planners for eight meetings with her at various times. A billionaire behind the Slim-Fast diet and founder of the Center for Middle East Peace, Abraham told the AP last year his talks with Clinton concerned Mideast issues. ...

...In another case, Clinton was host at a September 2009 breakfast meeting at the New York Stock Exchange that listed Blackstone Group chairman Stephen Schwarzman as one of the attendees. Schwarzman's firm is a major Clinton Foundation donor, but he personally donates heavily to GOP candidates and causes. One day after the breakfast, according to Clinton emails, the State Department was working on a visa issue at Schwarzman's request. In December that same year, Schwarzman's wife, Christine, sat at Clinton's table during the Kennedy Center Honors. Clinton also introduced Schwarzman, then chairman of the Kennedy Center, before he spoke.

Blackstone donated between $250,000 and $500,000 to the Clinton Foundation. Eight Blackstone executives also gave between $375,000 and $800,000 to the foundation. And Blackstone's charitable arm has pledged millions of dollars in commitments to three Clinton Global aid projects ranging from the U.S. to the Mideast. Blackstone officials did not make Schwarzman available for comment....

And 22,000 secret Swiss bank accounts were requested, but many of the relative few turned over, in a deal worked out by Sec. of State Clinton, had already been depleted, as I recall.

And I must also admit to a certain curiosity as to how personal Her interest in this matter was.

(Emphasis mine)

http://nypost.com/2015/07/30/ubs-increased-donations-to-clinton-foundati...

Business
UBS increased donations to Clinton Foundation after Hillary’s help with IRS

By Post Staff Report

July 30, 2015

AP

In early 2009 after Hillary Clinton was sworn in as secretary of state, she met with the Swiss foreign minister in Geneva to discuss the impact of an Internal Revenue Service suit against UBS AG to get the identities of Americans with secret bank accounts, according to a Wall Street Journal report.

The Swiss minister stated that if the IRS case proceeded, Switzerland’s largest bank could face prosecution on both sides of the Atlantic either by violating Swiss bank secrecy laws by giving the names to US tax authorities, or refusing and facing criminal charges in US federal court.

A few months after the meeting, Clinton had hammered out a tentative settlement; these types of negotiations are not usually handled by the State Department, the Journal said.

As part of the deal, UBS gave up information on 4,450 accounts, or roughly 8.5 percent of the accounts sought by the IRS. ...

...Total donations by UBS to the Clinton Foundation grew from less than $60,000 through 2008 to a cumulative total of about $600,000 by the end of 2014, according to foundation and bank records. ...

(Emphasis mine)

https://www.taxconnections.com/taxblog/united-states-client-of-credit-su...

11 Mar 2014

United States Client of Credit Suisse? Last Chance To File A Voluntary Disclosure!

Written by Ronald Marini | Posted in OVDP • Tax Fraud/Evasion/Crimes

Thousands of Credit Suisse Group AG’s United States clients still don’t know whether tax authorities will learn their identities as prosecutors work to conclude a three-year probe of how the bank helped them evade taxes. ...

...The report alleged that Credit Suisse Group AG helped thousands of U.S. taxpayers hide billions in assets offshore. The report shows that Credit Suisse opened Swiss accounts for more than 22,000 U.S. customers that, at their peak, totaled between $10 billion and $22 billion. The “vast majority” of these accounts were hidden from the U.S. and despite years of investigations by the Justice Department, the bank has turned over just 238 names to U.S. authorities. ...

...Senator Levin urged Cole to draw lessons from the case five years ago against UBS. The U.S. asked a court in 2008 for authority to serve a John Doe summons seeking the identities of UBS account holders. A day after the deferred- prosecution agreement, the IRS filed a lawsuit to enforce the summons while also seeking the names of 52,000 UBS clients. Within days, the U.S. and Swiss governments and UBS began settlement talks. The US judge’s order spurred those negotiations, said Stuart Gibson, then the Justice Department attorney litigating the case. After Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stepped in, UBS and the Swiss agreed to hand over data on 4,450 accounts.

The Swiss disclosure program will lead to 106 banks’ producing information short of client names. We posted on January 28, 2014, Offshore Swiss Bank Account? This May Be Your Last Chance To File A Voluntary Disclosure! where we discussed that the United States Justice Department has received 106 requests from Swiss entities to participate in a settlement program aimed at ending a long-running probe of tax-dodging by Americans using Swiss bank accounts according to a senior US official. That post also discussed that Credit Suisse, Switzerland’s second largest bank, is close to reaching its own settlement with the US DOJ. Credit Suisse is one of the 13 banks excluded from the US DOJ amnesty because it was already being investigated when he program was announced, but it is still free to negotiate its own non-prosecution deal.

Credit Suisse will have to disclose a great deal of information about its American clients, even including some of their names. ...

...Thus US taxpayers who have used a Swiss bank accounts may now want to consider applying for the US Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Program (OVDP), which sets a limit to the penalties imposed on them by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) for failing to declare foreign assets and earnings.

However, once the Swiss banks disclosed an account holder’s name to the IRS, OVDP election is no longer available to that account holder. ...

http://world.time.com/2013/12/20/swiss-banks-tell-american-expats-to-emp...

switzerland
Swiss Banks Tell American Expats to Empty Their Accounts

“My U.S. passport has been such a liability,” complains one Zurich resident, as Swiss banks crack down on U.S.-owned accounts following new, strict American legislation coming into effect next year
By Helena Bachmann / Geneva Dec. 20, 2013

Collected the above yesterday, looking for some of the explanatory articles I'd found previously without success, then got side-tracked onto a related topic, so I'm posting this anyway, just in case anyone ever sees it. Just got up today, lol, and in any event, this thread has probably fallen way off the page.

NYT ad (and notice of surrender as a propaganda sheet) just seen on the internet:

Subscribe to debate, not division.

Get 50% off one year of The New York Times.

Anyway, this all sounds like reframing, redirection of the scandal from the Clintons and corrupt industry; the OP article quote fails to mention the fact that tons of money flowed from those financially involved in the approval of this deal by the State department, if little of it previously claimed to be from any 'Russian-government-connected' participants involved in this particular State-Department-and-other-approved sale of 20% of America's already inadequate uranium supplies so lucrative for the Clinton Foundation - beyond Bill's usual pay-off of a hefty speaking fee, if one even larger than usual.

The internet is dead - this NYT article - once massively revealing of appalling corruption (and previously partially 'corrected' but still telling as hell) - bearing a different URL than the title but apparently the same date, appears to have been, this time massively, again rewritten, to place emphasis and blame on the Russians did it!!! (who did give Bill Clinton the mandatory massive speaking fee of half a million) and off Bill Clinton, for using his influence at home and abroad to enrich those who would also enrich himself, the corruption of then Sec of State Hillary Clinton and the State Department under her, and off of the Canadian mining financier Frank Giustra and other financial interests who made a freaking fortune off the sale and massive donations of what I seem to recall as totaling a profit of somewhere around or over a hundred million to the Clinton's Foundation, with 35 million from Guistra alone and a hundred million more promised.

And I believe that these are the 'Russian millions' being presented as forced on poor, helpless Hillary.

So now, with regard to massive Clinton corruption via the prostitution of public office and of resultant influence and ability to push agendas and grant favours in the gaining of hundreds of millions personally and billions for a Foundation where the great bulk of the money seems to have been absorbed in 'administration costs' and the like rather than to benefit those it claims to, the Devil Russians made them do it!

Although some portions of the article remain the same or similar, the problem with Sec of State Clinton not reporting, as required, very large donations to her Foundation is down played, as are the amounts received from the once integral but now (barely-mentioned with regard to this uranium deal) billionaire Giustra and associated others. Now, as in virtually all propaganda, it's all RUSSIA!!! everywhere, doing everything of any evil, all of the time, as the nuclear war-drums beat.

Even the URL is changed, although the name and date seem to me to remain the same, and the corrections posted do not include an almost total rewrite. Unless, somewhere in the internet, the original article floats in space.

Emphasis mine.

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-...

Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal

By JO BECKER and MIKE McINTIREAPRIL 23, 2015

...The path to a Russian acquisition of American uranium deposits began in 2005 in Kazakhstan, where the Canadian mining financier Frank Giustra orchestrated his first big uranium deal, with Mr. Clinton at his side.

The two men had flown aboard Mr. Giustra’s private jet to Almaty, Kazakhstan, where they dined with the authoritarian president, Nursultan A. Nazarbayev. Mr. Clinton handed the Kazakh president a propaganda coup when he expressed support for Mr. Nazarbayev’s bid to head an international elections monitoring group, undercutting American foreign policy and criticism of Kazakhstan’s poor human rights record by, among others, his wife, then a senator.

Within days of the visit, Mr. Giustra’s fledgling company, UrAsia Energy Ltd., signed a preliminary deal giving it stakes in three uranium mines controlled by the state-run uranium agency Kazatomprom. ...

...Though the 2008 article quoted the former head of Kazatomprom, Moukhtar Dzhakishev, as saying that the deal required government approval and was discussed at a dinner with the president, Mr. Giustra insisted that it was a private transaction, with no need for Mr. Clinton’s influence with Kazakh officials. He described his relationship with Mr. Clinton as motivated solely by a shared interest in philanthropy. ...

...the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States ... comprises some of the most powerful members of the cabinet, including the attorney general, the secretaries of the Treasury, Defense, Homeland Security, Commerce and Energy, and the secretary of state. They are charged with reviewing any deal that could result in foreign control of an American business or asset deemed important to national security.

The national security issue at stake in the Uranium One deal was not primarily about nuclear weapons proliferation; the United States and Russia had for years cooperated on that front, with Russia sending enriched fuel from decommissioned warheads to be used in American nuclear power plants in return for raw uranium.

Instead, it concerned American dependence on foreign uranium sources. While the United States gets one-fifth of its electrical power from nuclear plants, it produces only around 20 percent of the uranium it needs, and most plants have only 18 to 36 months of reserves, according to Marin Katusa, author of “The Colder War: How the Global Energy Trade Slipped From America’s Grasp.” ...

However, it does link to this following, which makes me wonder how long it'll be before Bill (to be placed in charge if the economy under President Hillary) is fished from under the bus, where he's still breathing the fumes of the corruption of both Clintons. So, best to read this in full at source, while you still can.

'Business as usual' for foreign countries (at least those not yet entirely controlled by US military/economic threats) with the States involves bribing the hell out of an ex-President and his spouse, a wanna-be-Coronated President. And, as with 'inconvenient' primary ballots, facts are being whited out before our very eyes at an amazing rate.

(All emphasis mine.)

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/31/us/politics/31donor.html

After Mining Deal, Financier Donated to Clinton

By JO BECKER and DON VAN NATTA Jr.JAN. 31, 2008

DONATING MILLIONS Former President Bill Clinton with Sir Tom Hunter, left, and Frank Giustra, major donors to Mr. Clinton’s charitable foundation. Credit Evelyn Hockstein for The New York Times

Late on Sept. 6, 2005, a private plane carrying the Canadian mining financier Frank Giustra touched down in Almaty, a ruggedly picturesque city in southeast Kazakhstan. Several hundred miles to the west a fortune awaited: highly coveted deposits of uranium that could fuel nuclear reactors around the world. And Mr. Giustra was in hot pursuit of an exclusive deal to tap them.

Unlike more established competitors, Mr. Giustra was a newcomer to uranium mining in Kazakhstan, a former Soviet republic. But what his fledgling company lacked in experience, it made up for in connections. Accompanying Mr. Giustra on his luxuriously appointed MD-87 jet that day was a former president of the United States, Bill Clinton.

Upon landing on the first stop of a three-country philanthropic tour, the two men were whisked off to share a sumptuous midnight banquet with Kazakhstan’s president, Nursultan A. Nazarbayev, whose 19-year stranglehold on the country has all but quashed political dissent. ...

...Within two days, corporate records show that Mr. Giustra also came up a winner when his company signed preliminary agreements giving it the right to buy into three uranium projects controlled by Kazakhstan’s state-owned uranium agency, Kazatomprom.

The monster deal stunned the mining industry, turning an unknown shell company into one of the world’s largest uranium producers in a transaction ultimately worth tens of millions of dollars to Mr. Giustra, analysts said.

Just months after the Kazakh pact was finalized, Mr. Clinton’s charitable foundation received its own windfall: a $31.3 million donation from Mr. Giustra that had remained a secret until he acknowledged it last month. The gift, combined with Mr. Giustra’s more recent and public pledge to give the William J. Clinton Foundation an additional $100 million, secured Mr. Giustra a place in Mr. Clinton’s inner circle, an exclusive club of wealthy entrepreneurs in which friendship with the former president has its privileges.

Mr. Giustra was invited to accompany the former president to Almaty just as the financier was trying to seal a deal he had been negotiating for months. ...

...As Mrs. Clinton’s presidential campaign has intensified, Mr. Clinton has begun severing financial ties with Ronald W. Burkle, the supermarket magnate, and Vinod Gupta, the chairman of InfoUSA, to avoid any conflicts of interest. Those two men have harnessed the former president’s clout to expand their businesses while making the Clintons rich through partnership and consulting arrangements.

Mr. Clinton has vowed to continue raising money for his foundation if Mrs. Clinton is elected president, maintaining his connections with a wide network of philanthropic partners.

Mr. Giustra said that while his friendship with the former president “may have elevated my profile in the news media, it has not directly affected any of my business transactions.”

Mining colleagues and analysts agree it has not hurt. Neil MacDonald, the chief executive of a Canadian merchant bank that specializes in mining deals, said Mr. Giustra’s financial success was partly due to a “fantastic network” crowned by Mr. Clinton. “That’s a very solid relationship for him,” Mr. MacDonald said. “I’m sure it’s very much a two-way relationship because that’s the way Frank operates.”

Foreseeing Opportunities

Mr. Giustra made his fortune in mining ventures as a broker on the Vancouver Stock Exchange, raising billions of dollars and developing a loyal following of investors. Just as the mining sector collapsed, Mr. Giustra, a lifelong film buff, founded the Lion’s Gate Entertainment Corporation in 1997. But he sold the studio in 2003 and returned to mining.

Mr. Giustra foresaw a bull market in gold and began investing in mines in Argentina, Australia and Mexico. He turned a $20 million shell company into a powerhouse that, after a $2.4 billion merger with Goldcorp Inc., became Canada’s second-largest gold company.

With a net worth estimated in the hundreds of millions of dollars, Mr. Giustra began looking for ways to put his wealth to good use. Meeting Mr. Clinton, and learning about the work his foundation was doing on issues like AIDS treatment in poor countries, “changed my life,” Mr. Giustra told The Vancouver Sun. ...

...Exploding demand for energy had helped revitalize the nuclear power industry, and uranium, the raw material for reactor fuel, was about to become a hot commodity. In late 2004, Mr. Giustra began talking to investors, and put together a company that would eventually be called UrAsia Energy Ltd.

Kazakhstan, which has about one-fifth of the world’s uranium reserves, was the place to be. But with plenty of suitors, Kazatomprom could be picky about its partners.

“Everyone was asking Kazatomprom to the dance,” said Fadi Shadid, a senior stock analyst covering the uranium industry for Friedman Billings Ramsey, an investment bank. “A second-tier junior player like UrAsia — you’d need all the help you could get.” ...

...“Timing was everything,” said Sergey Kurzin, a Russian-born businessman whose London-based company was brought into the deal by UrAsia because of his connections in Kazakhstan. Even with those connections, Mr. Kurzin said, it took four months to arrange a meeting with Kazatomprom.

In August 2005, records show, the company sent an engineering consultant to Kazakhstan to assess the uranium properties. Less than four weeks later, Mr. Giustra arrived with Mr. Clinton. ...

...Mr. Clinton’s Kazakhstan visit, the only one of his post-presidency, appears to have been arranged hastily. The United States Embassy got last-minute notice that the president would be making “a private visit,” said a State Department official, who said he was not authorized to speak on the record.

The publicly stated reason for the visit was to announce a Clinton Foundation agreement that enabled the government to buy discounted AIDS drugs. But during a news conference, Mr. Clinton wandered into delicate territory by commending Mr. Nazarbayev for “opening up the social and political life of your country.”

In a statement Kazakhstan would highlight in news releases, Mr. Clinton declared that he hoped it would achieve a top objective: leading the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, which would confer legitimacy on Mr. Nazarbayev’s government.

“I think it’s time for that to happen, it’s an important step, and I’m glad you’re willing to undertake it,” Mr. Clinton said.

A Speedy Process

Mr. Clinton’s praise was odd, given that the United States did not support Mr. Nazarbayev’s bid. (Late last year, Kazakhstan finally won the chance to lead the security organization for one year, despite concerns raised by the Bush administration.) ...

...Within 48 hours of Mr. Clinton’s departure from Almaty on Sept. 7, Mr. Giustra got his deal. UrAsia signed two memorandums of understanding that paved the way for the company to become partners with Kazatomprom in three mines. ...

...Longtime market watchers were confounded. Kazatomprom’s choice of UrAsia was a “mystery,” said Gene Clark, the chief executive of Trade Tech, a uranium industry newsletter.

“UrAsia was able to jump-start the whole process somehow,” Mr. Clark said. The company became a “major uranium producer when it didn’t even exist before.”

A Profitable Sale

Records show that Mr. Giustra donated the $31.3 million to the Clinton Foundation in the months that followed in 2006, but neither he nor a spokesman for Mr. Clinton would say exactly when.

In September 2006, Mr. Giustra co-produced a gala 60th birthday for Mr. Clinton that featured stars like Jon Bon Jovi and raised about $21 million for the Clinton Foundation.

In February 2007, a company called Uranium One agreed to pay $3.1 billion to acquire UrAsia. Mr. Giustra, a director and major shareholder in UrAsia, would be paid $7.05 per share for a company that just two years earlier was trading at 10 cents per share.

That same month, Mr. Dzhakishev, the Kazatomprom chief, said he traveled to Chappaqua, N.Y., to meet with Mr. Clinton at his home. Mr. Dzhakishev said Mr. Giustra arranged the three-hour meeting. Mr. Dzhakishev said he wanted to discuss Kazakhstan’s intention — not publicly known at the time — to buy a 10 percent stake in Westinghouse, a United States supplier of nuclear technology. ...

...Mr. Dzhakishev said he was worried the proposed Westinghouse investment could face similar objections. Mr. Clinton told him that he would not lobby for him, but Mr. Dzhakishev came away pleased by the chance to promote his nation’s proposal to a former president.

Mr. Clinton “said this was very important for America,” said Mr. Dzhakishev, who added that Mr. Giustra was present at Mr. Clinton’s home.

Both Mr. Clinton and Mr. Giustra at first denied that any such meeting occurred. Mr. Giustra also denied ever arranging for Kazakh officials to meet with Mr. Clinton. Wednesday, after The Times told them that others said a meeting, in Mr. Clinton’s home, had in fact taken place, both men acknowledged it.

“You are correct that I asked the president to meet with the head of Kazatomprom,” Mr. Giustra said. “Mr. Dzhakishev asked me in February 2007 to set up a meeting with former President Clinton to discuss the future of the nuclear energy industry.” Mr. Giustra said the meeting “escaped my memory until you raised it.” ...

So, why were - and are - the Clinton's still running the nation for self-enrichment and further self-empowerment by abusing not only currently-held and evidently-promised future public positions? I suppose we'd have to ask the powerful paymasters running them, of we only could, and if we could hope for a straight answer. Even before internet censorship reached this stage...

Also would like to point out, regarding the 'discounted' AIDS drugs pushed by the Clinton's Foundation, that they were both toxic and ineffective, although feeling rather doubtful that anything illustrative remains accessible on the internet.

https://www.naturalnews.com/055445_Clinton_Foundation_AIDS_drugs_corrupt...

Clinton Foundation caught giving watered down AIDS drugs to third world countries

Tuesday, September 27, 2016 by: J. D. Heyes
Tags: Clinton Foundation, AIDS drugs, corruption

...Under a program begun by former President Bill Clinton, the Clinton Health Access Initiative, officials distributed "watered-down" HIV/AIDS drugs to sick patients in sub-Saharan Africa, which "likely increased" their risk of dying, according to a draft congressional report The Daily Caller News Foundation obtained.

Titled, "The Clinton Foundation and the India Success Story," the congressional report was initiated by Rep. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., who is vice chairperson of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. The CHAI program to assist AIDS victims has been considered to be a fundamental force for good within the Clinton Foundation and is very probably the organization's most notable initiative.

The congressional reported centered on Clinton's 10-plus-year relationship with a controversial India-based drug maker called Ranbaxy. CHAI used the company as one of its main distributors of HIV/AIDS medications to poor countries.

Undermining the integrity of approval process

The report also focused on the work of Dinesh Thakur, a former Ranbaxy employee who became a big-time whistleblower when he provided information to the U.S. government, which led to a landmark lawsuit against the Indian pharmaceutical company. Because the company also sold generic drugs in the United States, it was subject to U.S. regulations and prosecution for violations.

Ultimately, in 2013 the company pleaded guilty to seven criminal counts with intent to defraud and to introducing adulterated medications into interstate commerce. "Adulterated" is when a drug "fails to conform to compendial standards of quality, strength or purity," according to the Food and Drug Administration.

In addition, the Department of Justice levied a fine against the company of $500 million, as well as forfeiture.

As noted by The Daily Caller, U.S. Attorney for the District of Maryland, Rod J. Rosenstein, said at the time of Ranbaxy's guilty plea the case represented "the largest false claims case ever prosecuted" in his district, as well as the "nation's largest financial penalty paid by a generic pharmaceutical company."

"When companies sell adulterated drugs, they undermine the integrity of the FDA's approval process and may cause patients to take drugs that are substandard, ineffective, or unsafe," added Stuart F. Delery, the acting assistant attorney general for the civil division of the Justice Department, after the U.S. government made its announcement regarding Ranbaxy's case.

In its final settlement, the Department of Justice stated that, "allegedly due to the company's diluted drugs, it 'subjected patients to increased risks of morbidity and mortality,'" the congressional report noted. ...

...In addition to findings of adulterated drug distribution, the report also shined a light on unseemly ties between Bill Clinton and a pair of highly controversial Indian-Americans who have fallen under investigation by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Perhaps what is most problematic for the Clinton charity is its enthusiastic promotion of Ranbaxy, even though the Indian pharmaceutical giant persistently distributes poor-quality drugs, and covers for their faulty products with fraudulent reporting to the FDA.

I'd say that the Clintons as representatives and propagators of endemic and often health/life threatening levels of corruption spreading globally from the utterly corrupted US government is problematic for the entire world.

And if searching under 'Frank Giustra corruption', some of the actual (and previously more easily internet-accessible) evidence against also the Clintons and the US government shows, although a salt shaker must still be kept handy, of course.

But even if the Trump Foundation (shriek!) 'wants us to know about this', many of us already do, and it regards indications of endemic corruption which have been documented and published before, just more telling when presented en mass.

And if the behaviours of the Clintons are to be essentially presented in propaganda as Russian puppets helplessly abusing the American people and political system for massive bribes even when not in public office, due to corrupt and compliant US government officials in office - what does that say about them and the state of what passes for political system in America, lol?

http://www.hangthebankers.com/clinton-corruption-10-facts-clinton-founda...

Clinton corruption: 10 facts about the Clinton Foundation

October 1, 2016

Just a few weeks back we introduced you to the work of Wall Street analyst Charles Ortel who spent the past year and a half digging into the Clinton Foundation and subsequently labeled it as a “Charity Fraud Of Epic Proportions” (see our full post on the findings here: ““Clinton Foundation Is Charity Fraud Of Epic Proportions”, Analyst Charges In Stunning Takedown“).

As many of our readers know, Ortel is the analyst that uncovered financial discrepancies at General Electric before its stock crashed in 2008, and was described by the Sunday Times of London as “one of the finest analysts of financial statements on the planet” in a 2009 story detailing the troubles at AIG.

After a year and a half of looking into the Clinton Foundation, Ortel summarized his findings as follows:
“An educated guess, based upon ongoing analysis of the public record begun in February 2015, is that the Clinton Foundation entities are part of a network that has defrauded donors and created illegal private gains of approximately $100 billion in combined magnitude, and possibly more, since 23 October 1997.”

With that, here’s 10 more things that the Trump campaign thinks you should know about the Clinton Foundation.

* * *

Here Are Ten Facts Everyone Should Know About The Massive Conflict Of Interest And Corruption Issues Facing The Clinton Foundation. ...

Right, the deflection/redirection strategy problem is Russia!!! - not the fact that the Clintons did pay-for-play patty-cakes, using the American people's public policy, politics and public property, with anyone having enough money for the bribes they expected in return...

http://www.hangthebankers.com/clinton-corruption-10-facts-clinton-founda...

...FACT FOUR – The Clinton Foundation Accepted Millions From Other Foreign Sources While Clinton Served As Secretary Of State:

“More Than 40 Percent Of The Top Donors To The Clinton Foundation Are Based In Foreign Countries.” “More than 40 percent of the top donors to the Clinton Foundation are based in foreign countries, according to an analysis by McClatchy.” (Anita Kumar, “Clinton Foundation Limits Foreign Donations,” McClatchy, 4/15/15)

According To The Wall Street Journal, While The Clinton Foundation “Swore Off Donations From Foreign Governments,” It Was Still Raising Millions From “Foreigners With Connections To Their Home Governments. “The Clinton Foundation swore off donations from foreign governments when Hillary Clinton was secretary of state. That didn’t stop the foundation from raising millions of dollars from foreigners with connections to their home governments, a review of foundation disclosures shows.” (James Grimaldi and Rebecca Ballhaus, “Clinton Charity Tapped Foreign Friends,” The Wall Street Journal, 3/19/15)

While Bill Clinton Promised The Obama Administration To Stop Accepting Money From Foreign Governments, The Agreement Did Not “Place Limits On Donations From Foreign Individuals Or Corporations.” “Former President Bill Clinton promised the Obama administration the foundation wouldn’t accept most foreign-government donations while his wife was secretary of state. The agreement didn’t place limits on donations from foreign individuals or corporations.” (James Grimaldi and Rebecca Ballhaus, “Clinton Charity Tapped Foreign Friends,” The Wall Street Journal, 3/19/15)

The Donors Have Personal, Familial, And Business Ties To Foreign Governments. “Some donors have direct ties to foreign governments. One is a member of the Saudi royal family. Another is a Ukrainian oligarch and former parliamentarian. Others are individuals with close connections to foreign governments that stem from their business activities. Their professed policy interests range from human rights to U.S.-Cuba relations.” (James Grimaldi and Rebecca Ballhaus, “Clinton Charity Tapped Foreign Friends,” The Wall Street Journal, 3/19/15)

During Clinton’s Tenure At The State Department, Foreign Donors And Their Organizations Accounted For Between $34 And $68 Million In Donations And $60 Million In Commitments To The Foundation. “All told, more than a dozen foreign individuals and their foundations and companies were large donors to the Clinton Foundation in the years after Mrs. Clinton became secretary of state in 2009, collectively giving between $34 million and $68 million, foundation records show. Some donors also provided funding directly to charitable projects sponsored by the foundation, valued by the organization at $60 million.” (James Grimaldi and Rebecca Ballhaus, “Clinton Charity Tapped Foreign Friends,” The Wall Street Journal, 3/19/15) ...

And it would have been far more than that during Hillary's position as Secretary of State, just from (Canadian) Frank Guistra's facilitated uranium deal with what was previously stated to involve from him alone (among other financial input from him and other beneficiaries) an (undeclared officially by SoS Hillary) lump sum donation of over $30 million, with $100 million more promised. But she has public/private finances, as well as intentions.

Also, please note, in the further quotes below, that the Canadian mining billionaire Frank Giustra, is in partnership with Bill Clinton, in one of the many Clinton 'charities' which will still be permitted to accept foreign money should still-evidently-campaigning-and-censoring-for-whitewashing-Herself Hillary become President. Both Clintons (through their Slush-Fundation) and Giustra having profited greatly from the very uranium transaction now labeled in propaganda as having been "the Russian's Fault!!!"

...FACT FIVE – Last Week The Clinton Foundation Announced They Wouldn’t Take Foreign Or Corporate Money If Clinton Is Elected, But Other Charities Still Will Be Allowed To:

Last Week Bill Clinton Said The Clinton Foundation “Would Only Accept Contributions From U.S. Citizens And Independent Charities” If Hillary Clinton Is Elected President. “The Clinton Foundation will no longer accept foreign and corporate donations if Hillary Clinton is elected president. … Bill Clinton said if Hillary Clinton wins the White House, the family’s foundation would only accept contributions from U.S. citizens and independent charities.” (Ken Thomas, “Clinton’s Foundation To Alter Donations Policy If Elected,” The Associated Press, 8/18/16)

Other Clinton Charities Will Continue To Take Foreign And Corporate Donations Should Clinton Become President. “Big chunks of the Clinton family’s charitable network would be exempt from a self-imposed ban on foreign and corporate donations if Hillary Clinton wins the presidency, loopholes that highlight the complexity of disentangling her from the former first family’s myriad potential conflicts of interest.” (Annie Linskey, “Not All Clinton Charities Bound By New Set Of Rules,” Boston Globe, 8/20/16)

These Charities Include The Clinton Health Access Initiative, The Alliance For A Healthier Generation And The Clinton Giustra Enterprise Partnership. “The most prominent of the exceptions applies to the Boston-based Clinton Health Access Initiative, which in 2014 accounted for 66 percent of spending by the Clinton network of charities. … They include the Alliance for a Healthier Generation, an entity cofounded by the American Heart Association and the Clinton Foundation, and the Clinton Giustra Enterprise Partnership, a joint venture between Bill Clinton and Canadian mining billionaire Frank Giustra.” (Annie Linskey, “Not All Clinton Charities Bound By New Set Of Rules,” Boston Globe, 8/20/16)

FACT SIX – The FBI Wanted To Open An Investigation Into The Clinton Foundation, But The Effort Was Scuttled By The Obama Administration: ...

This links to an absolute gotta-read, complete with Otrel's Executive Summary and conclusions:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-09-07/clinton-foundation-charity-frau...

"Clinton Foundation Is Charity Fraud Of Epic Proportions", Analyst Charges In Stunning Takedown

by Tyler Durden
Sep 8, 2016 5:07 AM

In early May, we introduced readers to Charles Ortel, a Wall Street analyst who uncovered financial discrepancies at General Electric before its stock crashed in 2008, and whom the Sunday Times of London described as "one of the finest analysts of financial statements on the planet" in a 2009 story detailing the troubles at AIG. Having moved on beyond simple corporate fraud, Ortel spent the past year and a half digging into something more relevant to the current US situation:"charities", and specifically the Clinton Foundation’s public records, federal and state-level tax filings, and donor disclosures.

Four months ago, Ortel began releasing his preliminary findings in the first of a series of up to 40 planned reports on his website. His allegation was simple: “this is a charity fraud.”

To learn more about the Clinton Foundation, Ortel decided to "take it apart and see how it worked" and he has been doing that ever since February 2015.

“I decided, as I did with GE, let’s pick one that’s complicated,” said Ortel. “The Clinton Foundation is complicated, but it’s really very small compared to GE.”

When Ortel tried to match up the Clinton Foundation’s tax filings with the disclosure reports from its major donors, he said he started to find problems. That includes records from the foundation’s many offshoots—including the Clinton Health Access Initiative and the Clinton Global Initiative—as well as its foreign subsidiaries.

"I decided it would be fun to cross-check what their donors thought they did when they donated to the Clinton Foundation, and that’s when I got really irritated,” he said. “There are massive discrepancies between what some of the major donors say they gave to the Clinton Foundation to do, and what the Clinton Foundation said what they got from the donors and what they did with it."

As previously reported, last year the Clinton Foundation was forced to issue corrected tax filings for several years to correct donation errors. But Ortel said many of the discrepancies remain. “I’m against charity fraud. I think people in both parties are against charity fraud, and this is a charity fraud,” he said.

To be sure, Ortel's efforts were to be commended: digging through the foundation's numbers can not have been easy, considering that the nation’s most influential charity watchdog put the Clinton Foundation on its “watch list” of problematic nonprofits in 2015. Furthermore, the Clinton family’s mega-charity took in more than $140 million in grants and pledges in 2013 but spent just $9 million on direct aid. That's because the organization spent the vast bulk of its windfall on "administration, travel, salaries and bonuses", with the fattest payouts going to family friends.

“It seems like the Clinton Foundation operates as a slush fund for the Clintons,” said Bill Allison, a senior fellow at the Sunlight Foundation, a government watchdog group where progressive Democrat and Fordham Law professor Zephyr Teachout was once an organizing director. ...

We need to get the facts out while it's still possible to do so.

Although I don't expect that anyone's going to see/read this and any typos or errors I've missed will just have to stand...

From the article:

The final court case also made no mention of any connection to the influence peddling conversations the FBI undercover informant witnessed about the Russian nuclear officials trying to ingratiate themselves with the Clintons even though agents had gathered documents showing the transmission of millions of dollars from Russia’s nuclear industry to an American entity that had provided assistance to Bill Clinton’s foundation, sources confirmed to The Hill.

Nah, nothing to see here. Move along, move along...

@SnappleBC

Who here is surprised that Hillary Clinton colluded with Russia over that Uranium deal and money went to both the foundation and Bill's speaking fees?

Who here did not suggest as much?

I mean that's one of the more popular knocks against her when talking about her significant neoliberal chops. I've been suspicious on that front since reading about the sale in the first place.

More so during and after the 2016 Election.

@SnappleBC

It's a top story in my progressive news feed. My "Establishment Views" feed isn't showing it.

We'll have to see where this goes. My guess is it's a short road to nowhere for this story.

Who here is surprised that Hillary Clinton colluded with Russia over that Uranium deal and money went to both the foundation and Bill's speaking fees? I know I'm not. Who here is going to be surprised when actual evidence gets swept under the rug by DKOS while they continue to run their hit pieces based on anonymous sources and heated whispers?

@SnappleBC Somewhere, Lee Atwater is smiling.

It's a top story in my progressive news feed. My "Establishment Views" feed isn't showing it.

We'll have to see where this goes. My guess is it's a short road to nowhere for this story.

Who here is surprised that Hillary Clinton colluded with Russia over that Uranium deal and money went to both the foundation and Bill's speaking fees? I know I'm not. Who here is going to be surprised when actual evidence gets swept under the rug by DKOS while they continue to run their hit pieces based on anonymous sources and heated whispers?

@MrWebster

she changed her position after receiving money from Wall Street? He should have said that she wouldn't have to change her position because she already agreed with them.

I read an article that said she lost because of her speeches to Wall Street. During a time when millions were barely surviving financially, the amount of money she got paid was basically a slap in the face to most people.

Did she have a right to get paid for her speeches? Yes. But not before she was running for a position that would have made her responsible for regulating them.
We see Obama getting almost a million for 2 speeches and we know that they are paybacks for his time in office and what he did for them.
You can't hide graft.

Clinton supporters excused the obvious pay-to-play scheme the Clintons had with the Foundation while she was Secretary of State by claiming there was no direct evidence. As if there were a secret tape between Bill (who played the role of pimp) and some Saudi saying "Bill Clinton, if I give you speech money and money to your foundation will Hillary approve of arms sales to my country?" Not the way corruption works.

The next excuse is that Hillary was above the influence of money. Apparently she was unique in the history of politics to the influence of money while raking in tens of millions of dollars. Even Glenn Greenwald had to a write a short essay spanking the democrats who complained about money in politics yet claimed that Hillary was above such petty things.

And now the FBI apparently is offering some level of proof the Clinton family corruption. You know, the organization that democrats absolutely believe all the time.

I suspect this story will be simply ignored by the major media outlets and will primarily be kept alive in alternative outlets both left and right. So far on Hillary's blame tour she has been smart enough set up appearances and interviews with people who will not challenge her.

In the short term this story will add to the general disgust with Hillary, but long term who knows. But if gop is smart, they will save this up for next year elections if democrats claim Russian collusion with the gop.

@MrWebster

which was already setup for Bill's work and his foundation.
Huma Abedin admitted that Chelsea had access to it. I think she had this so she could find where Hillary was going to be at next for one of her state department deals and send Bill there to give a speech before or after her business was finished.

She intervened for people, companies and foreign governments that had problems with our state department. After business was concluded, her foundation received the payoff for her helping them.
As this article shows, Obama knew what she and Bill were doing even though she had an agreement with him and congress not to do those things. Just Obama looking forward again

Clinton supporters excused the obvious pay-to-play scheme the Clintons had with the Foundation while she was Secretary of State by claiming there was no direct evidence. As if there were a secret tape between Bill (who played the role of pimp) and some Saudi saying "Bill Clinton, if I give you speech money and money to your foundation will Hillary approve of arms sales to my country?" Not the way corruption works.

The next excuse is that Hillary was above the influence of money. Apparently she was unique in the history of politics to the influence of money while raking in tens of millions of dollars. Even Glenn Greenwald had to a write a short essay spanking the democrats who complained about money in politics yet claimed that Hillary was above such petty things.

And now the FBI apparently is offering some level of proof the Clinton family corruption. You know, the organization that democrats absolutely believe all the time.

I suspect this story will be simply ignored by the major media outlets and will primarily be kept alive in alternative outlets both left and right. So far on Hillary's blame tour she has been smart enough set up appearances and interviews with people who will not challenge her.

In the short term this story will add to the general disgust with Hillary, but long term who knows. But if gop is smart, they will save this up for next year elections if democrats claim Russian collusion with the gop.

@native

Putin's privilged oligarchs, much like Clinton's or like Trump's, are primarily well-connected businessmen -- not political operatives

Russian Oligarchs operate exactly like American Oligarchs. They cooperate and manipulate the political system precisely the same way Jamie Dimon and the Koch brothers cooperate with and manipulate the political system. No difference.

with other oligarchs of any nationality, and most of them will use whatever influence they have (including bribery of officials) to get what they want -- which is usually just more money. These kinds of international transactions, though often very shady, are not normally motivated by nationalism or ideology of any kind, but rather by individual ambition and greed.

Putin's privilged oligarchs, much like Clinton's or like Trump's, are primarily well-connected businessmen -- not political operatives. Current US efforts to politicize what is really just ordinary corruption, makes for a sort of theater that is intended to groom the American public in preparation for a possible military confrontation. People should keep in mind that the US defense industry has an inordinate amount of control over both the msm and the Congress generally.

@crbngville

Lol, being chronically over-tired and groggy, I took one look at that excerpt, checked for propaganda in a search, and discovered tons of it, and not much else. (On Duck Duck Go.) And tackled it as a warning of such propaganda pouring out as a redirection of blame from still-campaigning-Hillary.

Not all of us are always very functional - but the censorship and propaganda I've encountered regarding this transaction over the past couple of days spent looking for articles I could no longer find (and getting side-tracked) shows that a lot of countering needs to be kept ready, while more factual links/articles are still possible to find.

this in this mornings open thread, and was told not to believe the propaganda. You'd think that person could have at least bothered to read the article.

@Deja Because that's the Lee Atwater/Karl Rove way of doing things. Tried and true. If you're guilty of something, accuse your enemy/opponent of doing that exact thing. Like George W. Bush accusing Kerry of being a dishonorable coward in war.

At first I was all AH HA! That's why she has such a case of the ass at Putin.

Then I wondered, why in the hell would she point a finger claw at Putin if her own feces can be found all over it? Any ideas? It kind of reminds me of the vindictive, estranged wife who cries infidelity while her Sancho is showering in the master bathroom.

Lastly, if Fox runs this, and they'd be the only ones to do it, the others will call it fake news.

@peachcreek

is that this time it's been uncovered that the FBI was conducting an investigation into the shady dealings. As there were no indictments, it appears that the FBI covered up for the Clintons yet again.

I've no time to read closely so I'm sure I missed a lot. Meeting tomorrow at work that I should be preparing for rather than reading here. But, didn't we know most of this already? What's new? Proven collusion that was only suspected before? I would never vote for her in part because of this.
What is new from this report of over two years ago?
My apologies for not having the time to read deeper tonight.
I suspect it's probably mostly capitalists being capitalists.
The differences between Putin the Clinton's and Trump, when you really look, are small.
Ok. back to work.

@peachcreek The magician is frantically waving the colored scarf of "Russia!" again so we don't notice his associate picking pockets. Take a look at the Bloomberg article:

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-10-18/russian-money-talks-a...

The subtitle is, "A rekindled nuclear scandal shows how Russia exports corruption to the West." In other words, everything was just fine in the exceptional City on the Hill until those evil russkies started offering kickbacks.

Now, I have no doubt that Mikerin was indeed offering kickbacks in the time-honored tradition of the kleptocracy, but they are very small potatoes indeed compared to the maneuvers of the original players. The Bloomberg article presents the Clintons' conflict of interest as being the possible benefit to the head of Uranium One, Ian Telfer, who at the time had donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to the Clinton Foundation (he's now up over 2.3 million). It does not mention that Telfer has been involved in various shell companies for international mining interests with Frank Giustra since 2001. Giustra's company, UrAsia, had acquired holdings in hugely productive uranium mines in Kazakhstan in 2005, around the time that Bill Clinton was negotiating a Foundation health initiative there (totally coincidental). Giustra then merged UrAsia with Telfer's Uranium One in 2007, the same year Uranium One acquired the American uranium interests.

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-...

And Giustra and a number of other Canadian minerals philanthropists have given hundreds of millions to the Clinton Foundations:

https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/bill-hillary-clinton...

And all of this information has been publicly available for years, but did not engage the attention of Atty Gen Holder nor Atty Gen Lynch. The current Atty Gen Sessions is preoccupied with reefer madness, and his deputy, Rod Rosenstein, was part of the original investigation that found "nothing to see here".

http://thehill.com/opinion/international/355882-obamas-doj-slow-walked-p...

So I must conclude that this corruption will be addressed about the same time we see justice for Seth Rich.

I've no time to read closely so I'm sure I missed a lot. Meeting tomorrow at work that I should be preparing for rather than reading here. But, didn't we know most of this already? What's new? Proven collusion that was only suspected before? I would never vote for her in part because of this.
What is new from this report of over two years ago?
My apologies for not having the time to read deeper tonight.
I suspect it's probably mostly capitalists being capitalists.
The differences between Putin the Clinton's and Trump, when you really look, are small.
Ok. back to work.