Saturday, June 10, 2017
A new allegation has surfaced that there is more to the connection between former Attorney General Loretta Lynch and former FBI Director James Comey than has so far surfaced.
John Solomon, a reporter with Circa, appeared on Sean Hannity’s Fox News show Friday night and offered a prediction of more revelations to come concerning Comey and Lynch.
“I think there is probably more interest that should be focused on what happened between James Comey and Attorney General Loretta Lynch after what we heard (in Comey’s testimony),” Solomon said.
“And I am hearing tonight that Comey may have had other meetings with Lynch that are going to come to light in the next few weeks,” he added.
During his testimony Thursday before the Senate Intelligence Committee, Comey said Lynch gave him a “queasy feeling” when she instructed him which words to use in discussing the FBI investigation of Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server while she was secretary of state.
“At one point, the attorney general had directed me not to call it an investigation, but instead to call it a matter, which confused me and concerned me,” he said.
Lynch’s request “concerned me because that language tracked with how the campaign was talking about how the FBI was doing its work,” Comey said.
“I don’t know whether it was intentional or not, but it gave the impression that the attorney general was trying to align how we describe our work with the Clinton campaign,” he added. “That was one of the bricks in the load that led me to conclude, ‘I have to step away from the department if we’re to close this case credibly.'”
The final blow came when former President Bill Clinton had a surreptitious meeting with Lynch on the tarmac of the Phoenix airport, Comey said.
One analyst said Lynch’s actions represented a “huge mistake” and “a partisan intrusion that must be investigated.”
Lynch “probably changed history by making Comey more skeptical about her and the Clintons’ role,” said Jed Shugerman, a law professor at Fordham University.
“I inferred that it had an effect on Comey that may have changed how he handled the investigation later. She will face very tough questions,” Shugeman said. “And it validates the follow-up questions on the Clinton campaign on their handling the email.”
“We will hear a lot about this,” he added in an email. “It does not rise to obstruction, because it was wording/semantic, not the substance of investigation, but Comey was right to be troubled. Lynch and Bill Clinton should be called to testify and explain their behavior. What’s obstruction for the goose is obstruction for the gander.”
What do you think?
New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, who is already investigating the Eric Trump Foundation, is now reviewing published allegations that money ostensibly raised for St. Jude’s Children Research Hospital was paid out to several Trump Organization golf courses.
Forbes reported Tuesday that $100,000 in donations meant for St. Jude’s Children’s Research Hospital went to the Donald J. Trump Foundation.
The report claimed that according to IRS documents, the Eric Trump Foundation in 2012 spent $59,085 on its annual Golf Invitational fundraiser at the Trump National Golf Club in Westchester County, N.Y. Those expenses reached $230,080 in 2013 and to $242,294 in 2014, Forbes reported.
The IRS reports do not show how much money went to the Donald J. Trump Foundation or other Trump affiliates. Forbes reported that costs increased when the Trump Organization began charging for the use of its courses.
“I can confirm that our office is looking into issues at the Eric Trump Foundation raised by the Forbes report,” said Eric Soufer, the attorney general’s director of communications.
The Eric Trump Foundation issued a statement in response to the allegations.
“During the past decade, the Eric Trump Foundation has raised over $16.3 million for St. Jude Children’s Research hospital while maintaining an expense ratio of just 12.3 percent,” the statement said.
As reported by Western Journalism, the hospital issued a letter in January confirming the amount donated by Eric Trump’s foundation.
“The Eric Trump Foundation was also responsible for building a $20 million dollar ICU which treats the sickest children anywhere in the world suffering from the most catastrophic terminal illnesses,” the statement added.
“Contrary to recent reports, at no time did the Trump Organization profit in any way from the foundation or any of its activities. While people can disagree on political issues, to infer malicious intent on a charity that has changed so many lives is not only shameful, but is truly disgusting. At the end of the day, the only people who lose are the children of St. Jude and other incredibly worthy causes,” the statement said.
“The foundation intends to cooperate fully with the attorney general’s review, and looks forward to a productive and open dialogue with the attorney general’s office to address any questions it may have,” it added in a separate statement
Schneiderman, a critic of President Donald Trump, has launched a number of investigations into the activities of various Trump family foundations based in New York State. Late last year, Eric Trump said he would shutter his foundation, but Schneiderman said that could not be done until his office completed an investigation into its activities.
Eric Trump stopped all direct fundraising efforts of the charity in the wake of his father’s election.
A statement on the charity’s website stated that “the foundation is being restructured and renamed, and under new leadership, it will continue its mission to support St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital in the fight against pediatric cancer.”
What do you think about this investigation?
That’s precisely what Blair Imani wants. She’s an American activist who thinks it would be a good idea for the Australian government to fund such spaces. Not only that, she thinks it would be a good idea if such safe spaces were exported to America, as she explained on Tucker Carlson’s Fox News show Friday.
While noting that recent terror attacks in Europe may indicate Islamist terror is hazardous to one’s health, Carlson said that “in Australia, it is Muslims who are declaiming they’re the ones who need safe spaces.”
“A group called the Islamic Council of Victoria, which says it represents 200,000 Muslims in Australia, is calling on the government there to fund a series of safe spaces, where they say Muslims can safely express — this is a quote — ‘inflammatory views that would cause trouble if voiced publicly.'”
Imani, executive director of New York-based Equality for HER, told Carlson the United States should have such taxpayer-funded “safe spaces,” too. Except she tried to make it sound a little less “inflammatory.”
“I’m talking about safe spaces being somewhere where you can be who you are without fear of being surveilled, having violence committed against you or being harassed,” she said. “And I think it’s a good idea to have everywhere.”
Imani was then asked why she believed Muslims under suspicion by some governments. She didn’t skirt the obvious:
“There are acts of terror committed in the name of Allah,” she said.
Carlson said that keeping society safe from Islamist extremism shouldn’t be compromised just because activist groups want “safe spaces” to be paid for by the government.
“This is a real thing,” Carlson said. “And I don’t understand why groups like yours won’t acknowledge the reality of that, because it is there, it’s true.”
The fact that we’re even having this discussion — that extremists should have a “safe space” paid for by the government — indicates just how ridiculous things are in 2017. Let’s hope our government — and any government — refuses to pay for such a ridiculous plan.
Please like and share on Facebook and Twitter if you agree.
What are your thoughts on these "safe spaces"?