Magnitsky act...where have we heard about this before...

You want emails? How about internal Clinton campaign emails bragging about killing a story linking massive payouts to Clinton Foundation in exchange for influencing US policy for Kremlin as Sec of State. That is actually a crime, and a very big one if true.

If you follow the bouncing ball on Trump Jr, it's unseemly at worst. There is no criminal activity even in the worst scenario.

quote:

---

How about internal Clinton campaign emails bragging about killing a story linking massive payouts to Clinton Foundation in exchange for influencing US policy for Kremlin as Sec of State.

---

While it wouldn't surprise me if the Clintons did that, the person who wrote seemed to believe the story was false.

Specifically, she mentioned the help of the research team, so I interpreted that possibly meaning they provide reseach to counter the story. Although a research team could be used for nefarious purposes.

She also said "trying" to link, as if the link wasn't truth but the story was trying to make it so.

Again. It at least seemed like the email's author didn't believe the story, whether it was true or not.

quote:

---

This Breitbart story will get blasted far and wide tomorrow

---

The story was already posted here in the afternoon. If it was going to get "blasted" it's off to a slow start.

I mean whether the link was true or not, people already thought she was corrupt. There a major reason she's not the president. She's living the rest of her life in obscurity and that makes her less newsworthy.

quote:

---

The facts are the facts, Clinton lobbied heavily against Magnitsky and accepted huge sums of money from Kremlin tied entities. Draw or don't draw whatever conclusions you wish.

---

And I suspect that Bloomberg or someone would have published a story that solidifies the link if the facts are there. That would have been a Pullitzer type of story.

quote:

---

Of course the author of the email was trying to push back on the story and provided alternate motives. That's her job.

---

Sure, but we are looking at candid email conversations, so she wouldn't need to use a word like "trying" since she didn't know the public would he reading them. Maybe "trying" meant nothing, but it wasn't a necessary addition.

Regardless, the Breitbart story isn't going to take over the news. Now if they used that as a starting point and actually did some investigative journalism to establish the link, then that would be newsworthy.

Unfortunately, they have devolved into a publication comprised of clickbait, histrionics, conspiracies, and even outright lies. I don't know what Andrew envisioned, but I suspect it was something better than its current incarnation.

quote:

---

And I suspect that Bloomberg or someone would have published a story that solidifies the link if the facts are there. That would have been a Pullitzer type of story.

---

To be clear, are you denying the absolute fact that Clinton's State Dept fought tooth and nail over the Magnitsky act? Or the absolute fact that the Clintons received massive amounts of money from Russian entities while Hillary was Sec of State?