Apparently Bob is misinformed. The Clinton Foundation IS being investigated for criminal activity by he FBI.
On Sunday, October 30, 2016 at 9:08:00 AM UTC-4, MJ wrote: > > > > Oct 24, 2016 7:25 AM > > *Watergate's Bob Woodward: "Clinton Foundation Is Corrupt, It's A Scandal" > *by Tyler Durden > > It's one thing for the right-wing press to accuse the Clinton foundation > of cronyism, corruption, and scandal ( especially if the facts > <http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-09-07/clinton-foundation-charity-fraud-epic-proportions-analyst-charges-stunning-takedown>, > > and internal admissions by affiliated employees, confirm as much > <http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-22/meet-man-who-can-expose-real-hillary-clinton-scandal>) > > - it tends to be generally ignored by the broader, if left-leaning, media. > But when the Watergate scandal's Bob Woodward, associate editor at the > liberal Washington Post, says very much the same, Hillary Clinton's > campaign has no choice but to notice. This is precisely what happened today > when journalist Bob Woodward told a Fox News Sunday panel > > *that the Clinton Foundation is "corrupt" and that Hillary Clinton has not > answered for it. *Here, courtesy of RealClearPolitics, is the transcript > of today's exchange: > > CHRIS WALLACE, FOX NEWS SUNDAY: Then there are the allegations about the > Clinton Foundation and pay to play,which I asked Secretary Clinton about in > the debate, and she turned into an attack on the Trump Foundation. But, > Bob, I want to go back to the conversation I was having with Robby Mook > before. When -- when you see what seems to be clear evidence that Clinton > Foundation donors were being treated differently than non-donors in terms > of access, when you see this new -- new revelations about the $12 million > deal between Hillary Clinton, the foundation, and the king of Morocco, are > voters right to be troubled by this? x BOB WOODWARD, THE WASHINGTON > POST: I -- yes, it's a -- it’s corrupt. It's -- it’s a scandal. And she > didn't answer your question at all. And she turned to embrace the good work > that the Clinton Foundation has done. And she has a case there. But the > mixing of speech fees, the Clinton Foundation, and actions by the State > Department, which she ran, are all intertwined and it's corrupt. You know, > I mean, you can't just say it's unsavory. But there's no formal > investigation going on now, and there are outs that they have. But the > election isn't going to be decided on that. I mean Karl was making the > point about this, I'm not going to observe the result of the election. I > mean that's -- that’s absurd. I mean it has no consequence. If Trump loses, > they're not going to let him in the White House. He’s not going to have a > transition team. And -- and to focus on that, I think, is wrong. I think > the issue is, what's going to be the aftermath of this campaign. > > So it's corrupt, it's a scandal, and... it will have no consequences at > all. It's time to look up the latest definition of Banana republic again. > > > > > > http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/10/23/bob_woodward_on_clinton_foundation_it_is_corrupt_she_didnt_answer_the_question.html > > > http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-23/watergates-bob-woodward-clinton-foundation-corrupt-its-scandal > > -- -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
