Uranium One informant says Moscow paid millions in bid to influence Clinton

An FBI informant involved in the controversial Uranium One deal has told congressional committees that Moscow paid millions to a U.S. lobbying firm in a bid to influence then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton by helping former President Bill Clinton’s charities during the Obama administration.

The Hill first reported late Wednesday that informant Douglas Campbell gave a 10-page statement to the Senate Judiciary Committee, House Intelligence Committee and House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, and was interviewed for several hours behind closed doors by committee staff.

In the statement, obtained by Fox News, Campbell said Russian executives told him that Moscow was hiring APCO Worldwide in an effort to influence the Obama administration and Hillary Clinton.

Campbell said Russian nuclear officials “told me at various times that they expected APCO to apply a portion of the $3 million annual lobbying fee it was receiving from the Russians to provide in-kind support for the Clinton’s Global Initiative.”

“The contract called for four payments of $750,000 over twelve months,” Campbell said in the statement. “APCO was expected to give assistance free of charge to the Clinton Global Initiative as part of their effort to create a favorable environment to ensure the Obama administration made affirmative decisions on everything from Uranium One to the US-Russia Civilian Nuclear Cooperation agreement.”

In a statement to Fox News, though, APCO called Campbell’s assertion “false and unfounded.”

“APCO Worldwide undertook client work on behalf of Tenex in 2010 and 2011. It undertook work for the Clinton Global Initiative from 2008-2016,” APCO told Fox News. “These projects were totally separate and unconnected in any way. All APCO’s actions on these two unconnected activities were publicly documented from the outset, legally proper and entirely ethical. Any assertion otherwise is false and unfounded.”

Uranium One is a Canadian mining company whose sale to a Russian firm was approved in 2010. The U.S. government was involved because the sale gave the Russians control of part of the U.S. uranium supply. The transaction has faced renewed scrutiny after The Hill reported last year that the FBI had evidence as early as 2009 that Russian operatives used bribes, kickbacks and other dirty tactics to expand Moscow’s atomic energy footprint in the U.S., related to a subsidiary of the same Russian firm.

Republican lawmakers on Capitol Hill want to know how the deal was approved the following year by an inter-agency committee.

The Campbell statement also described an earlier meeting with Russian officials outside Washington where they “boasted about how weak the U.S. government was in giving away uranium business,” and referred to then-President Barack Obama “with racial epithets.”

Campbell’s attorney Victoria Toensing said her client has reported a “strategic plan” by Russian President Vladimir Putin to “take over the uranium industry.”

“[The Russians] were so confident that they told Mr. Campbell with the Clinton’s help, it was a shoo-in to get CFIUS [The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States] approval,” Toensing said on “Hannity.” “They were so confident in that that they even had him open up the new office because they were planning on the kind of business they were going to do as soon as CFIUS approved it.”

Former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton at the 2014 Meeting of Clinton Global Initiative University at Arizona State University in Tempe March 22, 2014.

An FBI informant alleged that Moscow paid millions in an effort to influence then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.  (Reuters)

Toensing told Fox News that Campbell was told by the FBI that Obama was aware of the information.

“He was told that President Obama had it in his daily briefing twice,” Toensing said.

Congressional Republicans have called for further investigation into Uranium One. Attorney General Jeff Sessions last year directed senior federal prosecutors to evaluate “certain issues” requested by Republicans, including Uranium One and alleged dealings related to the Clinton Foundation, leaving the door open for the appointment of another special counsel.

But this week, Democrats have charged that Campbell’s statements and the Republican interest in them is a tactic to distract from the larger Russia probe clouding the Trump administration.

Democrats have accused Republicans of making “wild claims” against Clinton.

“Republicans have been talking directly to this individual while refusing to grant Democratic members access, despite multiple requests,” Ranking Members of the House oversight and intelligence committees, Elijah Cummings, D-Md., and Adam Schiff, D-Calif., said in a statement. “During this same time period, Republicans have been making wild and unsubstantiated allegations against Secretary Clinton on national television based on this individual’s information.”

Cummings and Schiff said that the Justice Department provided them with a “detailed briefing” that “directly contradicts these Republican allegations.”

Cummings and Schiff said Campbell never provided any evidence or made allegations regarding Clinton or the Clinton Foundation in any of their interactions with him.

The ranking members claimed that the Justice Department stated that “at no point did [the individual] provide any allegation of corruption, illegality, or impropriety on Clinton, the Clinton Foundation, President Clinton, the Uranium One deal, or CFIUS,” and said there were “no allegations of impropriety or illegality” regarding Clinton in the documents they reviewed.

The Justice Department told Fox News they would not confirm whether the Schiff-Cummings characterization was accurate.

Toensing disputed the Democrats’ claims, calling Schiff “disingenuous.”

The Clinton Global Initiative did not immediately respond to Fox News’ request for comment.

Hillary Clinton spokesman Nick Merrill panned the informant claims, likening them to the controversial “Nunes memo” on alleged surveillance abuse released last week and newly released text messages between anti-Trump FBI officials.

Just this week the committee made clear that this secret informant charade was just that, a charade. Along with the widely debunked text-message-gate and Nunes’ embarrassing memo episode, we have a trifecta of GOP-manufactured scandals designed to distract from their own President’s problems and the threat to democracy he poses,” he said in a statement.

Fox News’ Griff Jenkins contributed to this report.

Brooke Singman is a Politics Reporter for Fox News. Follow her on Twitter at @brookefoxnews.

Courtesy: Fox News

6 tortured arguments Republicans are making about the Nunes memo

 February 5 at 11:33 AM 
 2:09
Lawmakers react to release of GOP memo

Lawmakers from both parties weighed in on the Feb. 2 release of a disputed GOP memo alleging surveillance abuses by the FBI. 

If your case is only as strong as your weakest argument, then the Nunes memo is as big a flop as its critics allege.

Whatever you think about the memo or the issues that underlie it, its most ardent proponents — including Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) himself — have spent the three days since its release making some rather strained, counterfactual and even historically inaccurate arguments.

Below are a few of them that jumped out.

1. Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) to Fox News on Friday night: “I would say that this is far bigger than Russia or Donald Trump, or even the Mueller probe. This is the first time in American history that politics has weaponized the FBI.”

In defense of Gaetz, who is 35 years old, he did not live through any part of J. Edgar Hoover’s nearly five decades in charge of the FBI and its predecessor.

But even before Hoover, what was then called the Bureau of Investigation was founded by President Theodore Roosevelt in 1908 to assist in Roosevelt’s trust-busting efforts. As the FBI’s own website says today, the bureau “was not yet strong enough to withstand the sometimes corrupting influence of patronage politics on hiring, promotions, and transfers.” By the 1920s, the FBI’s website recalls, it “had a growing reputation for politicized investigations. In 1923, in the midst of the Teapot Dome scandal that rocked the Harding Administration, the nation learned that Department of Justice officials had sent Bureau agents to spy on members of Congress who had opposed its policies.”

Hoover took over the bureau in 1924 on the promise to reform it. That … didn’t exactly happen. And for anybody who needs a refresher, read up on what the Church Committee found in the 1970s.

2. House Intelligence Committee Chairman Nunes to “Fox and Friends” on Monday: “As far as we can tell, Papadopoulos never even knew who — never even had met with the president.”

There is a photo of then-Trump adviser George Papadopoulos at a March 2016 meeting with Trump. It was put out by Trump’s own Twitter account. And according to a New York Times report, Trump even asked Papadopoulos questions.

Trump also told The Washington Post’s editorial board in an interview that Papadopoulos was an “excellent guy.”

 1:19
Trump on Papadopoulos: ‘He’s an excellent guy’

When President Trump met with The Washington Post editorial board he listed the members of his foreign policy team, calling Papadopoulos “an excellent guy.” 

3. Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-S.C.): “Finally, there needs to be a discussion as to whether the Mueller investigation is truly needed, seeing that the main premise that launched the investigation turned out to not be credible and was both directed and funded by political opponents.”

Finally, there needs to be a discussion as to whether the Mueller investigation is truly needed, seeing that the main premise that launched the investigation turned out to not be credible and was both directed and funded by political opponents.

This argument is directly contradicted by the Nunes memo itself. As The Post’s Karen Tumulty and Rosalind S. Helderman detailed Friday, the memo says, “The Papadopoulos information triggered the opening of an FBI counterintelligence investigation in late July 2016 by FBI agent Pete Strzok.” This refers to Papadopoulos telling an Australian diplomat in London that Russia had dirt on Hillary Clinton — a conversation that was later reported to American authorities — and it happened three months before the FISA application to monitor Carter Page.

In other words, the memo confirms the investigation was launched months before the thing Duncan alleges was the “main premise” for its launch.

4. Nunes to Fox News on Friday: “I don’t believe that somebody like Mr. Page should be a target of the FBI, especially using salacious information paid for by a political campaign like this dossier. …”

To say that the FISA application to monitor Page was faulty and didn’t disclose enough is one thing; to argue that Page didn’t merit being monitored is quite another.

In 2013, for example, the FBI interviewed Page after Russian spies had attempted to recruit him. What’s more, two days after Nunes said this, Time magazine reported that Page had boasted in a 2013 letter that he had served as an informal adviser to the Kremlin.

The dossier included a number of unverified claims, including about Page, but there was plenty of other information out there that clearly made him of-interest to the FBI and U.S. intelligence. He had been on their radar for years, in fact. Nunes seems to be arguing rather strangely that Page is just a guy who was railroaded for no reason, but that ignores lots of publicly known evidence.

5. More Gaetz: “We do know what Andrew McCabe said, and he’s no, you know, talking head for the Republican Party. And Andrew McCabe said, but for this dossier, there never would’ve been a FISA memo. … That is a verifiable fact.”

This may be a verifiable fact, but it hasn’t been verified yet — not hardly. As I wrote Saturday, McCabe’s exact comments to the House Intelligence Committee in December are disputed by Democrats, and the memo didn’t provide a direct quote.

There have been plenty of calls for an exact transcript of what McCabe, who was then the deputy FBI director, said to the committee. Until we see that, though, we’re relying on a partisan document that for some reason opted not to quote him.

6. Nunes on “Fox and Friends”: “If Papadopoulos was such a major figure, why didn’t you get a warrant on him? … Being drunk in London and talking to other diplomats saying you didn’t like Hillary Clinton, I think it’s kinda scary that our intelligence agencies would take that and use that against an American citizen.”

Yet again, Nunes seems to be not just raising concerns about the FISA application, but suggesting a key player — in this case, Papadopoulos — is being railroaded.

subscribe
The story must be told.
Your subscription supports journalism that matters.

Unfortunately, his summary of events is woefully slanted. Papadopoulos’s comments didn’t raise red flags with the Australian diplomat because he said he “didn’t like Hillary Clinton;” they raised red flags because he claimed to have knowledge that the Russians had dirt on Clinton.

That would later be revealed to be more than just idle chatter and the ramblings of an inebriated adviser. Dirt on Clinton was also promised in exchange for Donald Trump Jr. setting up that June 2016 meeting at Trump Tower with Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya, after all.

Amber Phillips contributed to this report.

Hillary Clinton backer paid $500G to fund women accusing Trump of sexual misconduct before Election Day, report says

One of Hillary Clinton’s wealthy pals paid $500,000 in an unsuccessful effort to fund women willing to accuse President Trump of sexual misconduct before the 2016 election, The New York Times reported Sunday.

Susie Tompkins Buell, the founder of Esprit Clothing and a major Clinton campaign donor for many years, gave the money to celebrity lawyer Lisa Bloom who was working with a number of Trump accusers at the time, according to the paper’s bombshell report.

Bloom solicited donors by saying she was working with women who might “find the courage to speak out” against Trump if the donors would provide funds for security, relocation and possibly a “safe house,” the paper reported.

Former Clinton nemesis turned Clinton operative David Brock also donated $200,000 to the effort through a nonprofit group he founded, the paper reported in an article entitled, “Partisans, Wielding Money, Begin Seeking to Exploit Harassment Claims.”

Bloom told the Times that the effort was unproductive. One woman requested $2 million then decided not to come forward. Nor did any other women.

Bloom said she refunded most of the cash, keeping only some funds for out-of-pocket expenses accrued while working to vet and prepare cases.

The lawyer told the paper she did not communicate with Clinton or her campaign “on any of this.”

She also maintained that she represented only clients whose stories she had corroborated and disputed the premise that she offered money to coax clients to come forward, the paper reported.

Insight from Daniel Halper, contributing editor with the Washington Free Beacon and author of 'Clinton Inc.'

“It doesn’t cost anything to publicly air allegations,” Bloom said. “Security and relocation are expensive and were sorely needed in a case of this magnitude, in a country filled with so much anger, hate and violence.”

The Times article said it learned of Buell and Brock’s connection to Bloom from two Democrats familiar with the financial arrangements who also said Bloom’s law firm kept the money from Brock’s nonprofit group but refunded the $500,000 that Buell contributed.

Brock declined comment, according to the paper.

Clinton campaign representatives said they were unaware of his work with Bloom.

Buell would not comment on the financial arrangement, according to the Times.

Still, she claimed she was frustrated that Trump had escaped the repercussions that have befallen many other powerful men accused of similar misconduct.

The Times article expanded on a report in The Hill two weeks ago that said Bloom worked with campaign donors and tabloid media outlets during the final months of the presidential election to arrange compensation for the alleged Trump victims and a commission for herself, offering to sell their stories.

In one case Bloom reportedly arranged for a donor to pay off one Trump accuser’s mortgage and attempted to score a six-figure payout for another woman.

The woman with the mortgage ultimately declined to come forward after being offiered $750,000, The Hill reported.

The paper reported reviewing one email exchange between one woman and Bloom that suggested political action committees supporting Hillary Clinton were solicited, without naming which ones.

Bloom, who is the daughter of famous attorney Gloria Allred and, like her mother, specializes in representing women in sexual harassment cases, worked for four women who were considering accusing Trump. Two went public, and two declined.

Courtesy: Fox News

McCain blasts Clinton’s post-election memoir: ‘You’ve got to move on’

Sen. John McCain is blasting Hillary Clinton for penning a memoir so soon after her stunning defeat in the 2016 presidential election while also noting that her problem is “she doesn’t have anything to do.”

“What’s the f—— point? Keep the fight up?” McCain, R-Ariz., says in suggesting in an interview with Esquire published Monday that Clinton erred in writing “What Happened” when she did and then going on a media blitz to promote it.

“History will judge that campaign, and it’s always a period of time before they do,” the senator told writer David Usborne. “You’ve got to move on. This is Hillary’s problem right now: She doesn’t have anything to do.”

McCain, 81, who is being treated for brain cancer, told the magazine that he resisted the temptation to immediately set the record straight about his 2008 loss to Barrack Obama.

“You’ve got to understand that you can’t rewrite history,” he said. “One of the almost irresistible impulses you have when you lose is to somehow justify why you lost and how you were mistreated: ‘I did the right thing! I did!’ The hardest thing to do is to just shut up.”

Clinton published her tell-all in September.

In it, she holds herself partly responsible for her upset loss to Donald Trump.

“I go back over my own shortcomings and the mistakes we made,” she wrote. “I take responsibility for all of them. You can blame the data, blame the message, blame anything you want — but I was the candidate. It was my campaign. Those were my decisions.”

But she also casts blame on her Democratic rival Bernie Sanders for his attacks on her during the primary, former FBI Director James Comey for his handling of the investigation into her private emails and Russian President Vladimir Putin for the hacking of her campaign manager’s emails.

Courtesy: Fox News

Newt Gingrich: Hillary Clinton’s been getting away with unethical, illegal behavior for 40 years

The never-ending saga of Clinton corruption continues to unfold, with the latest chapter being written by former Democratic National Committee Chair Donna Brazile.

In an excerpt from her new book, Brazile finally begins to reveal to the American people what actually happened behind closed doors during the 2016 Clinton presidential campaign and uncovers new details about even more collusive activity.

Brazile describes how the Clintons covertly took over operations at the Democratic National Committee four months after Hillary announced her presidential candidacy, nearly a year before she became the party’s 2016 nominee.

According to Brazile, Hillary exploited the cash-strapped party. She agreed to pay off financial debts left by Obama’s 2012 campaign, but the cash came with a catch.

Brazile wrote that a fundraising agreement signed in August 2015 dictated that “in exchange for raising money and investing in the DNC, Hillary would control the party’s finances, strategy, and all the money raised. Her campaign had the right of refusal of who would be the party communications director, and it would make final decisions on all the other staff. The DNC also was required to consult with the campaign about all other staffing, budgeting, data, analytics, and mailings.”

House Speaker Paul Ryan weighed in on the significance of this latest Clinton scandal on Fox News Sunday, remarking, “We’ve all said that the Clintons thought they lived above the rules, but this takes the cake. I mean, this is pretty amazing. For them to basically be running the DNC in a primary – to see such a deck stacked is really pretty jaw-dropping to me. No wonder the Democrats are ticked off, I would be too.”

Of course, Speaker Ryan is correct that this degree of clear corruption on behalf of the Clintons is ethically wrong and always on the edge of breaking the law. However, having watched the Clintons for nearly their entire political careers, the Brazile revelations did not surprise me. Hillary Clinton has been getting away with unethical, and often illegal, behavior since she first entered public life.

I was a freshman member of Congress when Hillary began her career of breaking the rules for personal enrichment and power. When the Clintons ran for President in 1992 all this began to come out.

Hillary Clinton’s first major act of corruption dates back almost 40 years, when she miraculously turned $1,000 into nearly $100,000 in 10 months during her first attempt at trading commodities – mainly cattle futures.

A month before Bill Clinton was elected governor of Arkansas in November 1978, Hillary Clinton decided to try her hand at commodities trading, which is an incredibly volatile market. As a total novice, on October 11, 1978, she opened an account with $1,000, made a short sale of 10 live-cattle contracts, then bought them back the next day – pocketing an extra $5,300.

Throughout her stint as an untrained commodities trading savant, a slew of regulatory rules were apparently ignored (or violated) on her behalf. She made a “mockery of the profession” and cashed in after earning a net profit of nearly 10,000 percent in less than a year.

This level of success is nearly unheard of, even for expert commodities traders. Typically, 80 to 95 percent of commodities traders lose money. In fact, in 1994, the Journal of Economics and Finance published a study by economists from Auburn University and the University of North Florida which concluded the odds for Hillary’s level of success during the period she was trading “were – at best – 1 in 31 trillion.”

Let’s be blunt – there’s no way Hillary could have achieved that level of success in commodities trading without breaking the law. But she got away with it – like the Clintons always do.

The history of this corrupt, illegal behavior explains a lot of Hillary’s contempt for free enterprise. When she invested, it was a rigged game she was guaranteed to win. She equates her corrupt behavior with all free enterprise.

Of course, cattle futures were just the beginning. Getting away with one act of corruption led to many more: the Whitewater land deal, Benghazi, Hillary’s illegal private email server, the Uranium One sale, and now the DNC-Clinton collusion scandal.

So, the next time a Clinton scandal breaks (and there will be a next time), we should certainly be outraged, but we shouldn’t be surprised. We should also demand that the Congress and the Justice Department hold them accountable.

Newt Gingrich is a Fox News contributor. A Republican, he was speaker of the United States House of Representatives from 1995 to 1999. Follow him on Twitter @NewtGingrich. His latest book is “Understanding Trump.”

Courtesy: Fox News

DNC gave Clinton control over campaign well before it was supposed to: docs

The 2015 deal between Hillary Clinton and the Democratic National Committee in which the group effectively ceded immediate control to the Clinton campaign was supposed to take effect only if Clinton won the primary process – but in effect, they gave her control well before that, according to a copy of the agreement published this weekend.

The publishing of the agreement this weekend follows former DNC interim Chairwoman Donna Brazile’s bombshell accusation Thursday that the party’s 2016 presidential primary contest between Clinton and Sen. Bernie Sanders was rigged by the DNC to hand the nomination to Clinton.

Brazile, also a onetime Clinton confidante and CNN commentator, made the claims in an  article in Politico while touting a new book.

The agreement, in the form of a memo obtained by NBC News, shows the DNC gave the Clinton campaign input on hiring and spending decisions in exchange for money to help the cash-strapped group, including an initial $1.2 million payment.

Hillary for America “personnel will be consulted and have joint authority over strategic decisions over the staffing, budget, expenditures, and general election related communications, data, technology, analytics, and research,” the Aug. 26, 2015, memorandum from campaign manager Robby Mook to DNC chief executive Amy Dacey states in part. “This does not include any communications related to primary debates — which will exclusively be controlled by the DNC.”

Clinton didn’t effectively secure the party nomination until July 2016, after an unexpectedly strong challenge from Sanders, an Independent who temporarily joined the Democratic Party to run for the White House.

The memorandum also attempts to argue that nothing in the joint-fundraising agreement “shall be construed to violate the DNC’s obligation of impartiality and neutrality through the nominating process” and acknowledges the group “may enter into similar agreements with other candidates.”

President Trump and other Republicans immediately seized on the book excerpts to validate their belief that Clinton had stolen the election from Sanders. In addition, Trump has suggested the FBI and Justice Department look into the matter.

“I know Donald Trump and Republicans would like to use Hillary Clinton as a whipping boy,” Liz Smith, who was a spokeswoman for Martin O’Malley, another 2016 Democratic presidential candidate, on Saturday told Fox News’ “America’s News Headquarters.” But she’s in our past. We are moving beyond her.”

Smith also said new DNC Chairman Tom Perez has acknowledged problems with the 2016 campaign and has vowed to fix them.

Trump tweeted Friday: “The real story on Collusion is in Donna B’s new book. Crooked Hillary bought the DNC & then stole the Democratic Primary from Crazy Bernie!,” “I always felt I would be running and winning against Bernie Sanders, not Crooked H, without cheating, I was right.”

Brazile fired back on Twitter.

“Today’s lesson: Being quoted by Donald Trump means being MIS-quoted by Donald Trump. Stop trolling me,” she tweeted with the hashtag #NeverSaidHillaryRiggedElection:

She also tweeted: “Mr President, please — go back to attacking me. It’s better than having my own words scrambled and spewed out by you.”

The Washington Post reported Saturday that Brazile also says in her upcoming book that she considered replacing Clinton with then-Vice President Joe Biden when Clinton fainted during a 9/11 memorial service in New York City.

Courtesy: Fox News

Trump: DOJ must do ‘what is right and proper’ and investigate Hillary Clinton

President Trump opened up on Democrats with both Twitter barrels from high in the sky Friday, exploiting fractures in the rival party after top operative Donna Brazile revealed insiders plotted to steal last year’s presidential primary from Bernie Sanders.

“Bernie Sanders supporters have every right to be apoplectic of the complete theft of the Dem primary by Crooked Hillary!” Trump tweeted from Air Force One, as he headed off on a 13-day tour of Asian nations.

It was part of a mid-morning Twitter barrage in which Trump called for his own Justice Department to probe a range of scandals involving the Democratic Party and his vanquished 2016 presidential rival, Hillary Clinton.

“Everybody is asking why the Justice Department (and FBI) isn’t looking into all of the dishonesty going on with Crooked Hillary & the Dems,” Trump tweeted early Friday. “New Donna B book says she paid for and stole the Dem Primary. What about the deleted E-mails, Uranium, Podesta, the Server, plus, plus…”

In excerpts released Thursday from an upcoming book, Brazile, a longtime party stalwart and Clinton confidante, confirmed longstanding suspicions that the Democratic National Committee she once headed worked with Clinton to ensure she won the party’s presidential primary over Sanders, the Vermont senator who built a huge following with his blend of Democrat politics and socialism.

“I always felt I would be running and winning against Bernie Sanders, not Crooked H, without cheating, I was right,” Trump tweeted.

Brazile’s explosive charge has sent shockwaves through the party.

“I had promised Bernie when I took the helm of the Democratic National Committee after the convention that I would get to the bottom of whether Hillary Clinton’s team had rigged the nomination process, as a cache of emails stolen by Russian hackers and posted online had suggested,” Brazile wrote in a book excerpt first published in Politico Magazine. “By Sept. 7, the day I called Bernie, I had found my proof and it broke my heart.”

The proof, according to Brazile, was a joint fundraising agreement document between the DNC, the Hillary Victory Fund and Hillary for America. It had been signed in August 2015, four months after Clinton announced her candidacy and a year before she officially secured the nomination over Sanders.

“The agreement –signed by Amy Dacey, the former CEO of the DNC and Robby Mook, with a copy to Marc Elias—specified that in exchange for raising money and investing in the DNC, Hillary would control the party’s finances, strategy, and all the money raised,” Brazile wrote. “Her campaign had the right of refusal of who would be the party communications director, and it would make final decision on all the other staff.”

DONNA BRAZILE: I FOUND ‘PROOF’ THE DNC RIGGED THE NOMINATION FOR HILLARY CLINTON

Even before Friday morning’s tweetstorm, Trump reacted to the allegations against Clinton on Thursday night on “The Ingraham Angle.”

“It’s illegal, number one, and it’s really unfair to Bernie Sanders,” Trump said. “I’m not a Bernie Sanders fan, although I must say I got a lot of his votes when he was thrown out. Many of those people voted for me because of trade because I agreed with him on trade…But that was, I thought that was terrible.”

“Pocahontas just stated that the Democrats, lead by the legendary Crooked Hillary Clinton, rigged the Primaries! Lets go FBI & Justice Dept.,” Trump tweeted again. ‘Pocahontas,’ when used by the president, is typically in reference to Sen. Elizabeth Warren.

In an interview with Jake Tapper on CNN Thursday, Warren, D-Mass., was asked whether she believed the DNC was rigged, to which the senator simply responded, “Yes.”

But on Friday, Trump took the opportunity to add the Brazile bombshell to a list of allegations and situations that he wants his Justice Department to investigate, including her “deleted E-mails” and “the Server,” pointing back to the months-long Clinton email investigation.

Trump also referred to “Uranium,” alluding to the controversial Obama-era Uranium One deal. The 2010 deal concerns the sale of Canadian mining company Uranium One to Russia’s Rosatom nuclear company. The U.S. was involved because the sale gave the Russians control of part of the uranium supply in the U.S. Clinton, at the time, was secretary of state.

TRUMP CALLS DNC PRIMARY-RIGGING ‘ILLEGAL,’ SLAMS ‘FAKE’ DOSSIER IN FOX NEWS INTERVIEW

Trump also referred to “Podesta,” though it is unclear if he was referring to Democratic lobbyist Tony Podesta, or his brother, Clinton’s longtime confidante and 2016 campaign manager John Podesta.

This week, Tony Podesta stepped down from his lobbying firm, which was co-founded with his brother John, in the wake of special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe expanding to question Podesta’s Foreign Agent Registration (FARA) filings, and whether he was in violation of that law.

A spokesperson for Podesta told Fox News that they were compliant with their FARA filings and were “fully” cooperating with Mueller’s team.

The president tweeted again, moments later, underscoring the need for a federal probe.

“….People are angry. At some point the Justice Department, and the FBI, must do what is right and proper. The American public deserves it!” Trump tweeted.

Brooke Singman is a Politics Reporter for Fox News. Follow her on Twitter at @brookefoxnews.

Courtesy: Fox News

%d bloggers like this: