A newly declassified FBI timeline sheds light on a significant investigation into the Clinton Foundation that remained largely under the radar. The FBI’s Los Angeles Field Office looked into 19 bank accounts linked to the Clinton Foundation for potential campaign finance fraud in 2016. However, the Justice Department ultimately shut the investigation down. Judicial Watch played a crucial role in revealing information about Hillary Clinton’s private email server, which she used during her tenure as Secretary of State. This server enabled her to conduct official business while allegedly sidestepping scrutiny regarding her connections to Clinton Foundation donors.
Further evidence from emails obtained by Judicial Watch indicates that Clinton exhibited favoritism toward those who contributed to the Foundation during her time in office. A particularly troubling directive emerged from then-Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, who reportedly ordered FBI agents to cease the investigation into the Clinton Foundation by stating, “Shut it down!” This direction effectively shielded the Clintons from further investigation during a politically charged election cycle.
The controversy deepened amid a parallel legal situation involving former President Trump, who faced indictment on 34 felony counts connected to an alleged campaign finance violation regarding payments made to silence a personal affair. Critics assert that this case stands in stark contrast to the halted investigation into the Clinton Foundation, suggesting a disparity in how investigations were pursued based on political affiliations.
Moreover, the uncovering of these details reveals a broader context: an investigation estimated that as many as 40 state Democratic parties might have engaged in a scheme to illegally funnel $84 million into Clinton’s presidential campaign. Attorney Dan Backer, who filed a lawsuit concerning this matter, highlighted that the donations were not genuine support for state parties but attempts to gain influence with Clinton.
The implications of these findings are significant. They raise questions about the integrity of federal investigations and whether political connections may have influenced the direction of justice. As more information comes to light, the American public is left to ponder the discrepancies between the treatment of high-profile figures and the standards applied to others.
"*" indicates required fields
