FBI Docs: Hillary Clinton Removed Furniture from State Department to Furnish D.C. Home

Image result for hillary clinton steals furnitureAn unnamed State Department staffer disclosed to the FBI that Hillary Clinton and her staff took lamps and furniture from the State Department to furnish Clinton’s D.C. residence, according to FBI documents.

The FBI document of this exchange is part of “The Vault,” which is a collection of documents providing evidence for federal investigators looking into Clinton’s private email server.

Most of the documents are testimonies provided to federal investigators in interviews the agents conducted with witnesses.

In one of the documents, an unnamed State Department official tells the FBI that “early in Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State, she and her staff were observed removing lamps and furniture from the State Department, which were transported to her residence in Washington, D.C.”

The staffer did not know “whether these items were ever returned to the government upon Clinton’s departure from the State Department."

read more:

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/10/17/clinton-removed-...

Views: 454

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

One would think she could afford to do better than government furniture unless that Chippendale sofa she's sitting on happens to be something she "borrowed".  God awful upholstery.  What is that, bear paw prints? 

If she goes down, it'll be someone close to her that twists the knife.

With all of their stolen and no doubt some of it taxpayer $$$ she has the nerve to take stuff from OUR State dept. She is morally corrupt and evil.

Why wouldn't hilserbeast steal. hilderbeast, in her own words, was "dead broke" and was having mucho trouble making mortgage payments.
Why wouldn't hilserbeast steal. hilderbeast, in her own words, was "dead broke" and was having mucho trouble making mortgage payments.
Why wouldn't hilserbeast steal. hilderbeast, in her own words, was "dead broke" and was having mucho trouble making mortgage payments.

The removal of federal property for personal use is a crime... one doesn't convert government property to private use.. it is criminal and should be prosecuted.

While in the US Army I witnessed soldiers given non-judicial punishment for taking military ink pens home for personal use. Taking government office furniture or supplies for personal use would have resulted in courts martial.. a federal felony if convicted.

My Mother witnessed someone being fired for taking money out of the coffee fund at Customs in Chicago.

Why are they afraid to say the word "stole"?

Why on earth would you bother tell the FBI anything? They are complicit in it! For crying out loud, it was the FBI agents that were doing the "backwork" carrying out the furniture. Talk about spinning your wheels!

We recall that the same thing happened when they left the White House before George Bush

took office.    

Yes, the vandalism that these mental-midgets left behind, particularly on computer keyboards by removing the "W" keys from computer keyboards, in addition to the theft by the Klintons. This is the mental sickness of wild-eyed, foaming at the mouth liberals.

RSS

LIGHTER SIDE

 

Political Cartoons by AF Branco

Political Cartoons by AF Branco

ALERT ALERT

Horrible: Democrats Set The Constitution On Fire With Fraudulent Impeachment

House Democrats unveiled two articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump on Tuesday morning after an investigation that violated fundamental provisions of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

The investigation of the president began with the complaint of a so-called “whistleblower” who turned out to be a rogue Central Intelligence Agency employee, protected by a lawyer who had called for a “coup” against Trump in early 2017.

Democrats first demanded that the “whistleblower” be allowed to testify. But after House Intelligence Committee chair Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) was found to have lied about his committee’s contact with the “whistleblower,” and after details of the “whistleblower’s” bias began to leak, Democrats reversed course. In violation of the President Trump’s Sixth Amendment right to confront his accuser, Democrats refused to allow the “whistleblower” to testify. They argue the president’s procedural rights, even if they existed, would not apply until he was tried in the Senate — but they also invented a fraudulent “right to anonymity” that, they hope, might conceal the whistleblower even then.

Schiff began the “impeachment inquiry” in secret, behind the closed doors of the Sensitive Compartmentalized Information Facility (SCIF) in the basement of the U.S. Capitol, even though none of the testimony was deemed classified. Few members of Congress were allowed access. Schiff allowed selective bits of testimony to leak to friendly media, while withholding transcripts of testimony.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), having allowed the secret process to unfold, legitimized it with a party-line vote authorizing the inquiry. The House resolution denied President Trump the procedural rights enjoyed by Presidents Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton, and denied the minority party the traditional right to object to witnesses called by the majority.

Rather than the House Judiciary Committee, which traditionally handles impeachment, Pelosi also deputized the House Intelligence Committee to conduct fact-finding; the Judiciary Committee was turned into a rubber stamp. Schiff held a few public hearings, but often failed to release transcripts containing exculpatory evidence until after they had passed.

In the course of the Intelligence Committee’s investigation, Schiff quietly spied on the telephone records of his Republican counterpart, Ranking Member Devin Nunes (R-CA). He also snooped on the phone records of a journalist, John Solomon; and on the phone records of former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, acting as President Trump’s personal lawyer.

Schiff’s eavesdropping violated both the First Amendment right to press freedom and the Sixth Amendment right to counsel. Yet he proceeded undeterred by constitutional rights, publishing the phone logs in his committee’s report without warning, confirmation, or explanation, alleging that Nunes and the others were part of a conspiracy to assist the president’s allegedly impeachable conduct. When Republicans on the Judiciary Committee asked the Intelligence Committee’s majority counsel, Daniel Goldman, to explain the phone logs, he refused to answer,

Ironically, Schiff had done exactly what Democrats accuse Trump of doing: abused his power to dig up dirt on political opponents, then obstructed a congressional investigation into his party’s and his committee’s misconduct.

Democrats’ articles of impeachment include one for the dubious charge of “abuse of power,” which is not mentioned in the Constitution; and one for “obstruction of Congress,” which in this case is an abuse of power in itself.

Alexander Hamilton, writing about impeachment in Federalist 65, warned that “there will always be the greatest danger that the decision will be regulated more by the comparative strength of parties, than by the real demonstrations of innocence or guilt.” Democrats have fulfilled Hamilton’s worst fears.

The Trump impeachment will soon replace the 1868 impeachment of President Andrew Johnson — which the House Judiciary Committee staff actually cited as a positive precedent — as the worst in American history.

In service of their “coup,” Democrats have trampled the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The Republic has never been in greater danger.

You don't get to interrupt me

© 2019   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service