miércoles, octubre 19, 2016

State Departament. Accused Of Quid Pro Quo With FBI To Cover-Up Hillary’s Email Scadaln . Former U.S. Ambassador John Bolton : Attempted Bribery Is Just As Much A Crime As Actual Bribery

Bolton: Attempted Bribery Is Just As Much A Crime As Actual Bribery



Published on Oct 18, 2016

Former U.S. Ambassador John Bolton said that attempted bribery by State Department Undersecretary Patrick Kennedy is just as much a crime as actual bribery.

John Bolton:
“Well I think it’s extraordinarily serious. And the fact that the trade wasn’t made doesn’t detract from that. Attempted bribery is just as much a crime as actual bribery. Let’s take two things on this. Remember Rod Blagojevich, the Governor of Illinois, who given the vacancy in an Illinois senate seat when Barack Obama was elected president said, I’ve got something golden here I’m going to trade. And for that, Blagojevich went to jail. What Patrick Kennedy was trading here was slots for the FBI in American embassies overseas. It might not sound like much, but in the bureaucracy that was golden too. So, in a way, Patrick Kennedy is the Rod Blagojevich of Hillary Clinton’s State Department.

Number two, he was an Undersecretary of State. I was once myself. There are only six of them in the State Department. He’s not some Munchkin. And I think he’s really the circuit breaker between the State Department bureaucracy and Hillary Clinton. Under Kennedy are diplomatic security, information technology, overseas buildings, human resources, administration - this is where it all comes together. And I think he was communicating with Hillary Clinton or with her staff. I think they knew what was going on and if they didn’t, they were asleep at the switch.”

Ambassador Bolton said that Kennedy was involved in exonerating Hillary Clinton from any wrong-doing in connection with the attack on the American Embassy in Benghazi.

John Bolton
“Remember, another aspect of Patrick Kennedy - he was deeply involved in Benghazi. He is the person who appointed the Accountability Review Board that exonerated Hillary Clinton of any wrong-doing in connection with Benghazi and any incompetence without even bothering to interview her. And the emails in question that he was trying to trade on were Benghazi related emails. This cries out for the State Department not going into a defensive crouch but opening this up. Because the conduct is unacceptable.”

*****
State Dept. Accused Of Quid Pro Quo With FBI To Cover-Up Hillary’s Email Scandal



Published on Oct 18, 2016

Video Transcript:
In newly released FBI review documents, a State Department official asked the FBI to change classified markings of emails in exchange for favors
AINSLEY EARHARDT: The agent, his name's not there, advised that in exchange for marking the email unclassified, STATE would reciprocate by allowing the FBI to place more agents in countries where they are presently forbidden.

State Department spokesman John Kirby argued the quid pro quo never happened.

KIRBY: We looked into this, the FBI looked into this and it's just not true. There was no quid pro quo even suggested or any kind of bargain laid on the table. If that in fact had happened - yeah, you're right.

EARHARDT: So, you're saying that didn't happen? What was that email then?

KIRBY: Let me finish now. The individual who said that wasn't one of the two individuals involved in the conversation. Pat Kennedy and the other FBI official was not the person who gave this interview.

EARHARDT: So, you do this for us, you change it, you declassify that secret email, and we’ll put more FBI agents in the Middle East for you guys. If that’s not quid pro quo, I don’t know what is.

Charles Krauthammer argued it's hard to deny the allegations when "quid pro quo" is in the documents.

KRAUTHAMMER: There are so many ironies here. The first is that this is probably normal procedure inside any administration, inside a bureaucracy - trading off favors, trading off probably shady maneuvers. But the problem is this: the charge that Republicans, Trump in particular, are making against Hillary Clinton is precisely that she represents business as usual. You can defend Clinton and say, "Well, this goes on all the time," but that's the point. They are trying to wipe away this kind of culture of corruption. It is hard to deny that there is a quid pro quo, or at least one was proposed, when the phrase "quid pro quo" is used to describe the transaction in the documents. This is the camera in the sausage factory. I don't think that we should be shocked that this happens in any bureaucracy, but once you see it in black in white, and you hear the charge that Clinton represents business as usual — and it's a corrupt business as usual — that, I think, accentuates the charge and makes it a very serious one.

Etiquetas: , , , , , , , ,

posted by PPAC @ 10/19/2016 08:02:00 a. m.   0 comments