Bret Baier FNC: FBI Sources Believe Clinton Foundation Case Moving Towards "Likely an Indictment"

Here are the links without them being quoted. They still work for me so not sure what the malfunction is.


Published on Nov 2, 2016

My name is H. A. Goodman and I’m an author, columnist, and journalist www.hagoodman.com
Bret Baier: FBI Sources Believe Clinton Foundation Case Moving Towards "Likely an Indictment"
www.realclearpolitics.com...
MY NEW DAILY CALLER ARTICLE: dailycaller.com...
WIKILEAKS 26 IS OUT twitter.com...
TUESDAY NO SELLOUTS WITH TIM BLACK www.youtube.com...
“In total, the Clintons raised between $2 billion and $3 billion from all sources”
www.wsj.com...
DOJ DINNER twitter.com...
Clinton ally gave $500K to wife of FBI agent on email probe
nypost.com...
Now Five FBI Field Offices Are Probing Clinton Charity, Adding Fuel To The Fire
dailycaller.com...
500 Conflicts of Interest https://__._/podesta-emails/...
CNN: FBI discovered new emails weeks ago; stash includes classified emails "likely" deleted by Clinton twitter.com...
PHASE 3 THIS WEEK twitter.com...
Laptop in FBI's Weiner sexting case had 'state.gov,' Clinton-related emails, source says
www.foxnews.com...
FBI to review 650,000 emails on Weiner's laptop: report
thehill.com...
we need to clean this up - he has emails from her - they do not say state.gov
https://__._/podesta-emails/...
most likely criminal https://__._/podesta-emails/...
My first piece in The Daily Caller!! dailycaller.com...
WikiLeaks Tweet About H. A. Goodman’s #PodestaEmail Summaries
twitter.com...
For 3 months Hillary Clinton’s email access was unencrypted, vulnerable to spies
fortune.com...
Note: Sources include Western intelligence, US intelligence and sources in the region.
https://__._/podesta-emails/...
Firm Co-Founded By Hillary’s Campaign Chair Lobbies For Russia’s Uranium One
dailycaller.com...
New Wikileaks Email Suggests Possible Cozy Relationship Between Clinton Campaign and NY Times Reporter www.mediaite.com...

WikiLeaks: New York Times Propped Up Clinton, Subverted Sanders observer.com...
The Hillary Clinton Tapes www.youtube.com...
EXCLUSIVE: New Email Leak Reveals Clinton Campaign’s Cozy Press Relationship
theintercept.com...
Podesta on WikiLeaks Emails twitter.com...
WikiLeaks releases what appear to be Clinton's paid Wall Street speeches
www.theguardian.com...
FBI Says a Laptop That Held Clinton’s E-Mails Has Gone Missing
www.bloomberg.com...
Many donors to Clinton Foundation met with her at State
bigstory.ap.org...
H.A. Goodman Says Bernie Sanders Still Has a Chance
www.youtube.com...
H.A. Goodman Goes After Pro-Clinton Media Bias
www.youtube.com...
This segment correlates also to my appearances on CNN and MSNBC:
H. A. Goodman on MSNBC www.facebook.com...
H. A. Goodman on CNN International
www.snappytv.com...
www.snappytv.com...
H. A. Goodman on CNN New Day
www.facebook.com...

$10 says she pleads insanity and wins.

originally posted by: worldstarcountry
it has to be true, the Cubs won the world series. There may be hope for the world yet. All curses are hereby broken.

yep, this seems to be the year for miracles,so it`s very likely this is the year that the Clinton crime syndicate gets taken down.

a reply to: Xcathdra

I believe Obama has washed his hands of the Clinton mess. Knowing the NYPD has all the evidence since they were the agency that found it, the threats that came from the NYPD sexton chief about releasing the info publicly if its whitewashed, and the public's massive interest in whats going on, the probable disaster that would occur if he pardons her...

this is starting to look really good...getting some solidness to it. Maybe they're waiting and double checking to ensure the indictment is bulletproof....I haven't given up hope yet...

I hope everyone likes the sound of President Kaine.

I honestly think a huge chunk of the country would find it preferable (at this point anyway) to either of the main candidates we've been offered.

a reply to: Greggers


That "huge chunk" had better be more than Hillary would have received.

originally posted by: burgerbuddy
$10 says she pleads insanity and wins.

It would be the only time in her life when she would be telling the truth

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Greggers


That "huge chunk" had better be more than Hillary would have received.

Why?

a reply to: Greggers


Because Hillary will not receive enough votes to win.

This blockbuster is making the rounds...
canadafreepress.com...#

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Greggers


Because Hillary will not receive enough votes to win.

This blockbuster is making the rounds...
canadafreepress.com...#

Hillary has a 70% chance of being the next President per Nate Silver's comprehensive analysis. So, she certainly has more chance of winning than Trump.

My previous post assumed Hillary wins, and is then removed from office. At which point, Kaine becomes President.

That combination seems imminently more probable than Trump winning anything, and also preferable.

Aw looks like Faux News lived up to their reputation again, disseminating lies & propaganda.

“It was reported last night that the FBI is conducting a criminal investigation into Hillary Clinton’s pay-for-play corruption,” the Republican presidential nominee said today in Jacksonville, Florida, during his first rally of the day. “The investigation is described as a high priority. It’s far-reaching and has been going on for more than one year. It was reported that an avalanche of information is coming in. The FBI agents say their investigation is likely to yield an indictment.”

ABC News sources, however, indicated those statements — and the Fox News reports they’re based on — are inaccurate and without merit.

In February, FBI agents presented their findings to senior FBI officials and prosecutors in the Justice Department’s public integrity section, sources said. But the prosecutors and senior FBI officials agreed that there was no clear evidence of wrongdoing and that a criminal case tied to the Clinton Foundation could not be made, according to the sources.

abcnews.go.com...

ox News anchor Bret Baier admitted on Thursday that he had been wrong when he reported that Hillary Clinton would “likely” be indicted by federal authorities, a claim that sent conservative websites into a frenzy.

www.rawstory.com...

I see even after his retraction he's still trying to claim cause, what an idiot.

K~

originally posted by: aethertek
Aw looks like Faux News lived up to their reputation again, disseminating lies & propaganda.

“It was reported last night that the FBI is conducting a criminal investigation into Hillary Clinton’s pay-for-play corruption,” the Republican presidential nominee said today in Jacksonville, Florida, during his first rally of the day. “The investigation is described as a high priority. It’s far-reaching and has been going on for more than one year. It was reported that an avalanche of information is coming in. The FBI agents say their investigation is likely to yield an indictment.”

ABC News sources, however, indicated those statements — and the Fox News reports they’re based on — are inaccurate and without merit.

In February, FBI agents presented their findings to senior FBI officials and prosecutors in the Justice Department’s public integrity section, sources said. But the prosecutors and senior FBI officials agreed that there was no clear evidence of wrongdoing and that a criminal case tied to the Clinton Foundation could not be made, according to the sources.

abcnews.go.com...

ox News anchor Bret Baier admitted on Thursday that he had been wrong when he reported that Hillary Clinton would “likely” be indicted by federal authorities, a claim that sent conservative websites into a frenzy.

www.rawstory.com...

I see even after his retraction he's still trying to claim cause, what an idiot.

K~

Abcnews.go.com Seems legit...

a reply to: Throes

This is why we just laugh at you people.
The story was retracted by Bret Baier, but oh ABC.

K~

It was sarcastic.

BRET BAIER: I want to be clear -- I want to be clear about this, and this was -- came from a Q and A that I did with Brit Hume after my show and after we went through everything. He asked me if, after the election, if Hillary Clinton wins, will this investigation continue, and I said, “yes absolutely.” I pressed the sources again and again what would happen. I got to the end of that and said, “they have a lot of evidence that would, likely lead to an indictment.” But that’s not, that’s inartfully answered. That’s not the process. That’s not how you do it. You have to have a prosecutor. If they don't move forward with a prosecutor with the DOJ, there would be, I'm told, a very public call for an independent prosecutor to move forward. There is confidence in the evidence, but for me to phrase it like I did, of course that got picked up everywhere, but the process is different than that.

For those of us who prefer the actual words over spin.

originally posted by: JinMI

BRET BAIER: I want to be clear -- I want to be clear about this, and this was -- came from a Q and A that I did with Brit Hume after my show and after we went through everything. He asked me if, after the election, if Hillary Clinton wins, will this investigation continue, and I said, “yes absolutely.” I pressed the sources again and again what would happen. I got to the end of that and said, “they have a lot of evidence that would, likely lead to an indictment.” But that’s not, that’s inartfully answered. That’s not the process. That’s not how you do it. You have to have a prosecutor. If they don't move forward with a prosecutor with the DOJ, there would be, I'm told, a very public call for an independent prosecutor to move forward. There is confidence in the evidence, but for me to phrase it like I did, of course that got picked up everywhere, but the process is different than that.

For those of us who prefer the actual words over spin.

Basically, as long as they convince Lynch, who is in Hillarys pocket, to proceed the indictment will happen.

Good luck.

originally posted by: Throes

originally posted by: JinMI

BRET BAIER: I want to be clear -- I want to be clear about this, and this was -- came from a Q and A that I did with Brit Hume after my show and after we went through everything. He asked me if, after the election, if Hillary Clinton wins, will this investigation continue, and I said, “yes absolutely.” I pressed the sources again and again what would happen. I got to the end of that and said, “they have a lot of evidence that would, likely lead to an indictment.” But that’s not, that’s inartfully answered. That’s not the process. That’s not how you do it. You have to have a prosecutor. If they don't move forward with a prosecutor with the DOJ, there would be, I'm told, a very public call for an independent prosecutor to move forward. There is confidence in the evidence, but for me to phrase it like I did, of course that got picked up everywhere, but the process is different than that.

For those of us who prefer the actual words over spin.

Basically, as long as they convince Lynch, who is in Hillarys pocket, to proceed the indictment will happen.

Good luck.

Since Trump will be President next year, Loretta Lynch will be out of a job. But, she will collect her tarmac-promised pay-off from the Clintons and live very comfortably.

The sources acknowledged that the FBI began looking into the Clinton Foundation after the controversial book “Clinton Cash” was published last year. In particular, agents were trying to determine whether donations to the foundation may have been traded for access to Clinton while she was secretary of state. In February, FBI agents presented their findings to senior FBI officials and prosecutors in the Justice Department’s public integrity section, sources said. But the prosecutors and senior FBI officials agreed that there was no clear evidence of wrongdoing and that a criminal case tied to the Clinton Foundation could not be made, according to the sources. “It was not impressive,” one source said of the February presentation. “It was not something that [prosecutors] felt they could authorize additional steps for. They were not impressed with the presentation or the evidence — if you could even call it evidence to that point.” Investigators and higher-ups have continued to discuss the matter, but there has been no change in posture, sources said. Authorities still believe there is no evidence of wrongdoing, and they do not believe there is a sufficient reason to pursue charges, according to the sources.

abcnews.go.com...

Try reading it again.

A few agents got a bug up the bum after reading the BS book & decided to start an investigation just because they don't like Hilary.

Says right there they started looking after the book was released.
No evidence or suspicion of wrongdoing, no they just read a book & decided what the hell lets investigate her.

We don't need no stinking evidence.

No you people aren't upset that the FBI starts an investigation from hearsay BS just because they have a personal problem, no you're just mad that Hillary wasn't guilty.

Unreal.
K~

a reply to: Throes

Again with the spins? Get a grip. It means if the FBI feels their evidence in the case merits proceeding with presentation of that evidence to a prosecutor then they will do so. He also implies that the FBI would find a prosecutor independently if the justice department feels otherwise and knowing the risk of going around the justice department is worth their careers if they are wrong.

If the Feds dont have the ability to do their jobs then the states can step in and file their charges in relation to any state laws were violated, especially concerning the Clinton foundation.

The added bonus in that regard is a Presidential pardon cannot be used to get out of those charges since a Presidential pardon can only apply to Federal violations.

and for the record it was stated numerous times to hold back until we have confirmation from the FBI / DOJ.

With that said I believe there is more than enough to indict.

As I also have said a lack of prosecution does not mean lack of a crime. In this case politics have entered an arena they have no business being in. I would imagine if the Republicans keep control of the house and senate Clinton will still be held accountable for her crimes.

If Clinton didnt break any laws then there is absolutely no reason a special prosecutor should not have been assigned. If Clinton wins there should be no reason for her not to appoint an special prosecutor to close the story once ad for al.

However with all the song and dance about cooperating coupled with the obstruction and failure to cooperate... Lets just say actions speak louder than words.