ABC’s Stephanopoulos Challenges Clinton Cash Author: “Is There a Smoking Gun?”….

The Media Won’t Discuss The Nine CFIUS Signatories – Why Not? 

Clinton Cash author Peter Schweizer appeared on This Week and faced a very skeptical George Stephanopoulos, who argued that his accusations that Hillary Clinton exchanged favorable treatment from the U.S. State Department for multimillion dollar donations to the Clinton Foundation were unsubstantiated.

However, what ABC doesn’t tell YOU is that Stephanopoulos has a SEVERE conflict of interest about this story as it relates to its 2005 origin and his former Boss Bill Clinton.

It’s interesting that Stephanopoulos weighs his Clintonian defense so heavily on “CFIUS“, The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, and the “nine signatories” required for approval of the lucrative and coincidental Russian uranium deal.

(New York Times) […]  Such is the power of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States. The committee 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. (link)

The Secretary of Treasury is the CHAIR OF CFIUS –  During the time period in question (2009 and 2010):

  • Timothy Geithner was Secretary of the Treasury. (Chair of CFIUS)
  • Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State.
  • Eric Holder was Attorney General.
  • Gary Locke was Secretary of Commerce.
  • Robert Gates/Leon Panetta was Secretary of Defense.
  • Janet Napolitano was Homeland Security Secretary.
  • Stephen Chu was Secretary of Energy.

Does anyone actually believe that President Obama’s own cabinet would not support a deal beneficial to their political ideology?  According to internal CFIUS explanations of their objectives:

[…]  The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) is comprised of nine members, two ex officio members, and other members as appointed by the President representing major departments and agencies within the federal executive branch.  (link – pdf)

So we know seven:  Clinton, Geithner, Holder, Locke, Gates, Napolitano, Chu.  But who are the two “ex officio” members ?

….. and do those “ex officio” members have email?

Light Bulb

This entry was posted in Big Government, Big Stupid Government, Clinton(s), Conspiracy ?, Dem Hypocrisy, Dept Of Justice, Desperately Seeking Hillary, Election 2016, energy, Environmentalism, media bias, Notorious Liars, Professional Idiots, propaganda, Secretary of State, Typical Prog Behavior, Uncategorized, White House Coverup. Bookmark the permalink.

41 Responses to ABC’s Stephanopoulos Challenges Clinton Cash Author: “Is There a Smoking Gun?”….

  1. sundance says:

    Clinton Foundation admits to hiding funds of donors by combining those donor funds in general reports.

    […] “Like every contributor to the Foundation, the Clinton Giustra Enterprise Partnership (Canada) is publicly listed as a donor on our website. But as it is a distinct Canadian organization, separate from the Clinton Foundation, its individual donors are not listed on the site. This is hardly an effort on our part to avoid transparency – unlike in the U.S., under Canadian law; all charities are prohibited from disclosing individual donors without prior permission from each donor.

    I also want to address questions regarding our 990 tax forms. We have said that after a voluntary external review is completed we will likely refile forms for some years. While some have suggested that this indicates a failure to accurately report our total revenue, that is not the case. Our total revenue was accurately reported on each year’s form – our error was that [foreign] government grants were mistakenly combined with other donations. Those same grants have always been properly listed and broken out and available for anyone to see on our audited financial statements, posted on our website”….

    Liked by 5 people

  2. MaryfromMarin says:

    Breitbart had a good article:

    Stephanopouos Floored as Gingrich, Bloomberg Editors Detail Seriousness of ‘Clinton Cash’

    Liked by 6 people

  3. BobNoxious says:

    On Friday Dana Perino predicted that the Clintonistas will adopt the tried and true tactic of blaming Bill for the missteps of the Clinton Foundation, thus turning Hillary into a victim of Bill’s greed and willingness to bend the rules.

    Based on the “apology” the Foundation put out today and some of the things said by Clintonistas on the Sunday shows I fear Perino is spot on.

    Liked by 2 people

  4. rashomon says:

    George needs to get out of this fight. I seldom watch the Sunday morning bashes as they simply raise my blood pressure and increase my interest in finding a small island.

    However, Mr. Schweizer is much like the investigative reporter I remember from the days of old, so I wanted to see the battle that finally took place the last minute of the take. It was worth it — every single second of watching George dissolve into a puddle. The Wicked Wizard is not dead, but it’s going to take a while for his cape to dry.

    Liked by 2 people

  5. franker01 says:

    Why, when George questioned Schweizer’s objectivity by saying that he used to work for President Bush, didn’t Schweizer remind George that he used to work for the President Clinton?

    (Still does, actually)

    Liked by 5 people

    • rashomon says:

      I agree with you. That was a lost opportunity, but I think there’s a certain backstage agreement regarding “getting nasty or you’re never invited back.” Schweizer needs to develop a better repartee to these media ghouls who rule the airways.

      Liked by 1 person

  6. Barb Meier says:

    Unless the Treasury webpage was subsequently changed, it looks like the question is: Who was The Director of National Intelligence and the Secretary of Labor during the time in question? states as follows:

    “Composition of CFIUS

    The Secretary of the Treasury is the Chairperson of CFIUS, and notices to CFIUS are received, processed, and coordinated at the staff level by the Staff Chairperson of CFIUS, who is the Director of the Office of Investment Security in the Department of the Treasury.

    The members of CFIUS include the heads of the following departments and offices:

    Department of the Treasury (chair)
    Department of Justice
    Department of Homeland Security
    Department of Commerce
    Department of Defense
    Department of State
    Department of Energy
    Office of the U.S. Trade Representative
    Office of Science & Technology Policy
    The following offices also observe and, as appropriate, participate in CFIUS’s activities:
    Office of Management & Budget
    Council of Economic Advisors
    National Security Council
    National Economic Council
    Homeland Security Council
    The Director of National Intelligence and the Secretary of Labor are non-voting, ex-officio members of CFIUS with roles as defined by statute and regulation.”

    Liked by 1 person

  7. TexasRanger says:

    Clinton Foundation Gets Millions In Exchange For Uranium Deal – News Brief


  8. bob e says:

    syphilis-anopoulos is one nasty piece .. eh

    Liked by 1 person

  9. Les says:

    Permanent members of CFIUS (by statute)
    What is CFIUS?
    • Treasury Department (chair)
    • State Department
    • Commerce Department
    • Department of Defense
    • Department of Justice
    • Department of Homeland Security
    • Department of Energy, and
    • Department of Labor (ex officio)
    • Director of National Intelligence (ex officio)
    • White House, by Executive Order, added:
    • US Trade Representative and Office of Science and Technology Policy, as
    members; and
    • National Security Council, Council of Economic Advisors, Office of
    Management & Budget, and others, as non-voting participants
    • Other agencies participate as relevant to particular cases



  10. wolfmoon1776 says:

    This is getting good.

    Clintonopoulos. What a maroon. He’s a bit of a poker player, but when he gets uppity, you know he’s scared. Hillary is not in danger of losing the nomination, but she is in danger of losing the election.


  11. TexasRanger says:

    Here’s The Clinton’s Business Partner Again – Same Guy As The Uranium Deal – Frank Giustra….

    Clinton Foundation Received Donations From Colombia During The Height of The Oil Strike – Report….


  12. RJ says:

    Will all of this “bad press” have an impact on the voters who will pull the lever for a presidential candidate some months down the road? I doubt it, sadly.

    What is needed is an unrelenting confrontation with Bill and Hillary by reporters who truly remember what his/her job description really is. I haven’t seen any nor have I seen any who may have wanted to be such a type of reporter get close enough to these trailer trash grifters to ever ask such questions.

    The “Obama model” of press inquiries has now become the standard…except for those not in the democratic party where it is all out war!

    Sad times. Where are our soldiers for the truth?

    Liked by 1 person

    • lilbirdee'12 says:

      Their job titles should be changed to ‘stenographers’…all they do is record whatever the dimocrats speak. Their pay should be reduced to stenos pay in the 90’s when they first fell in love with Bill.


    • bitterlyclinging says:

      Gone! The Commies took over the universities in the 60’s, especially the journalism schools.
      The relationship between today’s journalists and the Liberal/Progressive movement is roughly equivalent to the relationship between Stanley Anne Dunham and Frank Marshall Davis.


  13. TexasRanger says:

    Clinton Foundation Donations – Where Were All Those Millions Going.?

    Liked by 1 person

  14. TexasRanger says:

    Haiti Earthquake Contracts Ran Through The Clinton Foundation – Clinton Cash – 4/24/15

    And Jan-2015 Protest….

    Clinton Foundation HQ Protested For “Missing Money” In Haiti Recovery

    Liked by 1 person

  15. doodahdaze says:

    Even better is Lanny Davis. His defense if the old “Rooster Crows” defense. He actually said it is the same as asking if the Rooster Crows because the Sun rises, or the Sun rises because the Rooster Crows.

    Liked by 1 person

  16. John Galt says:

    Nothing new here, Clintons running “I didn’t have sex with that woman” defensive formation.


    • bitterlyclinging says:

      To which Maureen Dowd wrote an entire NYT column describing how Bill winked during the deposition, letting everyone in the know watching that he was lying, but it was only a little lie he was telling, not meant to hurt anyone. Mo then went on relate how she felt when the Evil Inquisitor began his questioning of Mr Clinton she wanted to run right up to ‘Slick’ hug him and smother him with kisses.


  17. dean says:

    Please read this s l o w l y–so even people as uninformed as you are can understand this. UNDERSECRETARIES sat on this committee AND the State Dept undersecretary was a fellow named Jose Fernandez. He has categorically attested to the fact that he NEVER communicated to Hillary Clinton re this Uranium deal. In addition, the deal would have had to be approved by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission–an INDEPENDENT agency–are you saying that Hillary bribed THEM TOO???

    In addition Mr Guistra SOLD his stake in the company 3 years PRIOR to the deal and thus had no financial gain to be made.

    The other “blockbuster” revelation in this trashbag book is ALSO bogus. For it contends that Hillary Clinton supported the Columbian free trade deal as a condition of the donation to the Clinton Foundation. BUT Hillary came out PUBLICALLY (well after the donation was made) AGAINST the deal–as did Barack Obama. It was only after the deal was modified that support for the deal became the official position of the Obama administration–thus Hillary’s support.

    So, the two major components of this trashy book have been discredited.

    You can file this under information you won’t see on Fox News (fair and balanced).

    Sundance. you do and have done a great job on the BGI, the bogus Zimmerman charges and the Ferguson case–stick with what you know.


  18. mimbler says:

    You know you are on target when the ad hominem attacks start 🙂

    Liked by 2 people

    • Les says:

      And when they try to separate seemingly innocuous threads to present from the fabric of deceit and wrong-doing. It was a dirty deal and much profit was made by all concerned parties. Well, except for the American public.

      The added arrogance is the truly amusing part, at least to me. Especially the reminder to “stick with what you know.” hahaha

      Liked by 3 people

  19. starfcker says:

    Love the lightbulb. This won’t be hard, if they get serious.


  20. John Galt says:

    Clintons may have generated substantial ill will by acting against the interest of foreign donors: , State Dept. involved in anti-Russian subversive activities in Ukraine, Russian sanctioned, Saudi enemy Iran gets nuclear weapons. Not too hard for Russians or Saudis to drop a dime on Hillary.


  21. QuadGMoto says:

    Good grief. I can’t stand Stephanopoulos’ militant ignorance style of argument. “She has not been convicted (yet), therefore she is actually innocent. You don’t have a signed confession from her, therefore you have nothing at all.”

    Police get warrants for further investigation based on “probable cause,” evidence that some criminal activity is or has been carried out. In this case, the “probable cause” evidence is overwhelming. Yet these leftist idiots (but I repeat myself) are pretending that “probable cause” evidence must be ignored because it is somehow not actually evidence.

    By that standard, a large chunk of the sciences and legal system would have to be discarded completely. For example…

    Cosmologist “We think there is a planet circling star X.”

    Skeptic “Do you have photographs of this planet?”

    C “Well no, but there is a periodic dimming of light from that star consistent with an orbiting planet and a slight wobble consistent with the gravitational pull of an orbiting planet.”

    S “So then you’re saying that you have no direct evidence, therefore you have no evidence and there is not a planet circling that star.”

    C “Were you born that stupid, or did you have to get special training and a lot of practice to refine your stupid to epic levels?”


  22. BigMamaTEA says:

    puts a whole new definition to that “Russian reset button”


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s