Certain names keep popping up in the news with at least some connection to potentially nefarious activities during the last campaign. Given that Hillary Clinton was a candidate, people can be forgiven for assuming the worst. After all, she is not the person to turn to when looking for help in establishing ethical standards for those in government.
We are now about eight months since the presidential election was concluded, and debates continue regarding the alleged interference by the Russians, political maneuvers by the former director of the FBI and attorney general, as well as a bevy of internet-related and hacking allegations. Investigations are ongoing and some may actually produce results, although those results might not be what some were expecting.
John Podesta, Hillary’s campaign manager, has managed to remain in the public spotlight, although it’s not entirely certain that he wishes to. Perhaps he would just like to go back to doing whatever managers of failed presidential campaigns do. That’s not likely to happen in his case as it turns out that it might by Mr. Podesta who had connections to Russian interests and engaged in considerable financial transactions with them. With all the attention the media and Democrats have focused on President Trump, so far to no avail, this could be huge.
The New York Post reports:
“Lawmakers failed to seize on an alarming development in the Russia collusion story last week, one that should spark serious and immediate congressional inquiry.
“But it didn’t involve President Trump or his administration.
“During a heated Fox Business interview with Maria Bartiromo, Hillary Clinton’s former campaign chief John Podesta made a series of misleading statements when questioned about his involvement in a company that received $35 million from the Russian government while Hillary served as secretary of state…
“On Jan. 18, 2011, a small green-energy company named Joule Unlimited announced Podesta’s appointment to its board. Months later, Rusnano, a Kremlin-backed investment fund founded by Vladimir Putin, pumped $35 million into Joule. Serving alongside Podesta on Joule’s board were senior Russian official Anatoly Chubais and oligarch Ruben Vardanyan, who has been appointed by Putin to a Russian economic-modernization council.”
That’s more than just a casual connection to Russian businesses, power-brokers, money, and politicians. Perhaps Mr. Podesta hopes that the word “Russia” just drops out of American vocabulary for a while.
In any event, the following excerpt from this interview will bring into crisp focus the reason he was selected by Hillary has her campaign manager: They both have mastered the art of massaging the facts by making statements that, while technically true, are deliberately misleading.
“Bartiromo asked Podesta why he failed to disclose his role in Joule as required by law when he entered the White House in January 2014 to serve as counselor to President Barack Obama.
“‘Maria, that’s not true. I fully disclosed and was completely compliant,’ Podesta shot back.
“But according to his own financial disclosure form, Podesta only listed two of the three entities that made up Joule Unlimited, failing to disclose his presence on the board of the Dutch-registered Stichting Joule Global Foundation.
“When Bartiromo pressed Podesta on the whereabouts of his 75,000 shares of Joule stock, Podesta resorted to Clintonesque semantics: ‘I didn’t have any stock in any Russian company!’
“Notice the rhetorical sleight of tongue there: Joule is based in Massachusetts, not Russia, making Podesta’s statement technically true. Podesta added: ‘And by the way, I divested before I went into the White House.'”
This gets a whole lot more tangled than we can ever cover here, so let’s get to the bottom line.
“In short, Clinton’s top campaign chief and a senior counselor to Obama sat on Joule’s board alongside top Russian officials as Putin’s Kremlin-backed investment fund funneled $35 million into Joule. No one looking at the Podesta fact pattern can claim to care about rooting out Russian collusion and not rigorously investigate the tangle of relationships.”
So, to the Democrats and others on the left we ask, do you really want a complete, honest, independent, and thorough investigation into anyone and any influences American that might have touched on Russia in the past election? Or would you prefer just to conduct a witch hunt against President Trump?