Accuracy in Media

New revelations regarding Hillary Clinton’s conflicts of interest just keep on coming, regardless of the Democratic candidate’s attempt to stem the flow. Yet Mrs. Clinton lied to Fox News’ Chris Wallace in a recent interview, saying that “there is absolutely no connection between anything that I did as secretary of state and the Clinton Foundation.”

In fact, there are a number of obvious connections between the Clinton Foundation, Clinton Foundation officials, and her State Department. In 2009 Clinton Foundation official and co-founder of Teneo Holdings Doug Band pushed for an associate to get a job with the State Department. “The subject line on the email read ‘A favor…’” reports Breitbart. Band also communicated with Clinton’s aides via email to put Gilbert Chagoury, a Lebanese-Nigerian businessman, in touch with the State Department’s “substance” person in Lebanon.

The response from the Clinton campaign is that these emails don’t “involve the Secretary or relate to the Foundation’s work. They are communications between her aides and the President’s [Bill Clinton] personal aide…” This is typical obfuscation by the Clintons, not supported by the facts.

Chagoury, according to Judicial Watch, has pledged $1 billion to the Clinton Global Initiative, and donated between $1 million and $5 million to the Clinton Foundation. He was found guilty in Switzerland of money laundering, and placed on the federal terrorist no-fly list. One wonders about the magnitude of State Department favors that Chagoury was receiving in exchange for his sizeable donations.

It’s clear that a favor for Clinton Foundation donors was an investment in a future Clinton presidency. As Noah Rothman, writing for Commentary put it, “The implication in these email communications is that those with close connections to the Clinton Foundation had easy access to the Secretary of State’s office, and received quick and unusual assistance in their queries—some of which appear to be employment-related. If proven, that would be a clear violation of an ethics agreement signed by Clinton Foundation chairman (then CEO) Bruce Lindsey and senior advisor to President Barack Obama, Valerie Jarrett, in 2009 as a precondition for Clinton’s appointment to serve as Secretary of State.”

The conflicts of interest get bigger, much bigger. Hillary’s State Department chief of staff Cheryl Mills discussed with IT professional Bryan Pagliano the danger of Guccifer’s hack of Sidney Blumenthal’s email account, and whether this would extend to Mrs. Clinton. Such a cyber breach could be used to blackmail the secretary of state, given that she claims her deleted emails discuss only personal items such as yoga. Pagliano, who set up Mrs. Clinton’s controversial private email server, agreed to an immunity deal with the FBI. But when he was deposed by Judicial Watch, he pleaded the Fifth Amendment approximately 125 times.

A recent Government Accountability Institute (GAI) report exposed additional Clinton Foundation and State Department cooperation and pay-for-play during the Russian reset.

In the Skolkovo debacle, 17 of the 28 participating companies from around the globe had either donated to the Clinton Foundation or sponsored Bill Clinton’s speeches. Skolkovo is a Russian foundation and technology park, intended to be a Russian version of Silicon Valley. While Mrs. Clinton’s State Department pushed for the Skolkovo initiative, her own foundation was being funded by both the Russians and Americans tied to the project. The report estimates that the foundation gained between $6.5 million and $23.5 million, because the Clinton Foundation only reports donations in ranges.

The ties between Mrs. Clinton, her associates, and the Russians are blatant, but the mainstream media are more content to report on Donald Trump’s Russian contacts than those of the Clintons.

Time Magazine recently featured an article titled “Donald Trump’s Many, Many, Many, Many Ties to Russia.”

“So, yes, it’s true that Trump has failed to land a business venture inside Russia,” writes Jeff Nesbit for Time. “But the real truth is that…the Trump organization was forced to seek financing from non-traditional institutions. Several had direct ties to Russian financial interests in ways that have raised eyebrows. What’s more, several of Trump’s senior advisors have business ties to Russia or its satellite politicians” (emphasis in original).

Accuracy in Media has reported on Trump’s troubling ties to Russia. But what about Hillary Clinton’s many ties to that country as the visible proponent of the Russian reset? The mainstream media don’t appear to have much interest in those connections.

“The truth is that Russia surged in global influence from the day Barack Obama assumed the presidency and appointed Hillary Clinton as secretary of State,” writes former chairman of the House Intelligence Committee Pete Hoekstra for USA Today. “Their strategy of ‘leading from behind’ enabled the Russian bear to forcefully assert itself in the Middle East and Eastern Europe.”

“Putin most certainly would hope for a Clinton presidency and the extension of Obama’s policies, giving him another four years of nearly unrestrained aggression,” adds Hoekstra, an advisory member of the Citizens’ Commission on Benghazi.

Meanwhile, the press continues to overlook the fact that former Secretary of State Clinton’s actions while in office endangered national security. Reports on Skolkovo have largely been limited to the conservative media and Peter Schweizer, the author of Clinton Cash, who is also the president of GAI.

According to the GAI report, in 2011 Secretary Clinton praised Skolkovo, saying it “will act as another bridge connecting American and Russian high tech companies, investors, and scientific research institutions.”

“The State Department played an active role early on by setting up meetings for Russian officials with U.S. technology companies,” states the GAI report.

Yet by 2014 the FBI had issued “an extraordinary warning,” according to the report, that Russian members of Skolkovo were seeking to “gain access to classified, sensitive, and emerging technology from the companies.” These dual-use technologies could, and have, been used to bolster the capabilities of the Russian military. In other words, Hillary Clinton’s Russian reset helped to further strengthen our adversary abroad.

There’s more. Former Obama advisor John Podesta, who currently serves as Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman, failed to inform the Obama administration that he sat on the board of a small energy company called Joule Unlimited. “Two months after Podesta joined the board, Vladimir Putin’s Rusnano announced that it would invest up to one billion rubles into Joule Unlimited, which amounts to $35 million,” states the report.

“Among the New York Times, CNN, NBC, CBS, Washington PostLA Times, POLITICO—not a single one has covered the bombshell revelation or reported asking Podesta for a comment on his involvement in Joule Unlimited,” reports Breitbart. (Breitbart’s Stephen K. Bannon is the Executive Chairman of both Breitbart and GAI.) “It’s obvious that these mainstream media firms—namely, CNNNYT, and POLITICO—have no problem covering Trump-Putin stories. They’ve done so, repeatedly, over several news cycles.”

In the article “Russia Continues to Shadow Trump,” CNN’s Nicole Gaouette cites Trump’s “sympathy for Putin,” and says his attitudes toward Russia are a problem for him in this election. When will the media decry Hillary Clinton’s Russian ties?

The mainstream press has sought to marginalize voices such as Schweizer’s in preparation for a Hillary presidency. However, as he notes in his Clinton Cash documentary, Salida Capital, a subsidiary of the Russian Rosatom, funneled cash to the Clinton Foundation in 2010 prior to the Uranium One deal. “A major listed beneficiary of [Skolkovo’s nuclear] research is Rosatom, the Russian State Nuclear Agency, which manages the country’s nuclear arsenal,” states the GAI report.

“Rosatom, through its subsidiary ARMZ, purchased a Canadian uranium company called Uranium One in 2010 which held assets in the United States and therefore required State Department approval,” the report continues. “Nine Uranium One shareholders donated more than $145 million to the Clinton Foundation.”

No matter where you look there is evidence of pay-for-play in Clinton circles. The news media’s double standard prevents them from taking an equal and fair look at the two candidates’ Russian ties. We know the media have chosen sides in this election, but they still have an obligation to report on such blatant conflicts of interest, even when they involve Hillary Clinton.

Ready to fight back against media bias?
Join us by donating to AIM today.


  • Mitch Hedges

    Accuracy in Media: First to bust Russia, until it comes to partisan politics, then they are first in the pocket projecting the conservative candidate’s unacceptable Russian ties onto the liberal candidate. Posting these stupid hacked emails that will have no consequence and are the product of a foreign intelligence operation only highlights the hypocrisy of AIM. Enabling a Russian operation! Congrats Roger!

    I think this story is better: DNC Staffer is murdered. Wikileaks offers reward, while Assange claims Seth Rich gave them the files from DNC.

    Assange is basically considered Russian agent in intelligence community (eg in the Russa-friendly Ecquadorian embassy, put Snowden in Russia, requested FSB protection in Equadorian embassy), and WikiLeaks an effective tool now too of Russia widely accepted (only posts things damaging to West now apparently). The implication by Assange is that Hillary Clinton / USA had DNC staffer murdered.

    Forensic evidence from well before this murder points almost certainly to Russian intelligence. Only conclusion to be drawn is that the DNC staffer murder implication is to reinforce the Killary/Crooked Hillary (eg Vince Foster) allegations in a disinformation campaign and throw story off of Russia.

    But considering the forensic evidence, and the motives, we can only wonder if

    A. he died and Russia coincidentally concocted this story (seems unlikely given other intentional acts),

    B. he was in fact their source and Russia killed him to make the narrative (seems unlikely given the forensic evidence),

    C. the US did kill him because of him being a Russian intelligence source to send a message to Russia (plausible but perhaps unlikely given the hacking conclusions of cyber security professionals),

    D. Russia selected him as a target and murdered him outright to create the ideal cover story and simultaneous disinformation campaign (seems most likely, followed by A).

    Great work on the cover up!

  • Jack Parsons

    it appears that the Chairman of Hillary Clinton’s 2016 Presidential campaign, John Podesta, sat on a board of an energy company alongside Russian officials who received $35 million from a Putin-connected Russian government fund [Breitbart,Jerome Hudson, 8/1/16].

    While her Excellency, Hillary, was Sec. State, Podesta joined the board of a honey trap Russian hi-tech company, “Joule Biotechnologies”. This company was part of her initiative to help Putin develop a comparable Silicon Valley called,Skolkovo.

  • Kathy

    Hillary just keeps proving over and over that she is highly incompetent. If not, then she was complicit in the emails! Either way, she is not suitable for the highest office in the land!

  • IronChefSandwiches

    Accuracy in Media is the most misnamed website in existence. Aronoff and his boss are propagandists. Nothing more. And they aren’t even very good at it. No one reads this site.

  • Mitch Hedges

    It was this article that was honestly ahead of its time which introduced me to the site and had me thinking it might be legit — ; this comes true, but because of their right bias they cannot help but still attack Hillary clearly when for all their National Security bluster, these guys just blow cocks.

  • Mitch Hedges

    It is nice they let us bomb the comments. I like the lack of censorship. I do applaud their lack of troll accounts. Go First Amendment!

  • mioahu

    you just replied to a troll, sandwich boy above, he’s a paid troll for the libs who makes stupid, unnecessary and uninformed comments on all articles.I wonder why he bothers to read and comment on all articles since nobody reads this site LOL

  • Mitch Hedges

    Paid libs trolls are so beyond me, I’m still stuck on the Iranian / Russian troll paradigm

  • terry1956

    Well AIM does have some spin towards an Un American foreign policy but you, Hillary , the DNC, the GOP establishment, at least 90% of media are worse.
    Trump also has some spin favoring an Un American foreign policy with some worse than AIM ( such as Russia) and others better than AIM but like AIM Trump also is to far in favor of Un American foreign policies.
    Now the one political party that I know about which has a pro American foreign policy is the Constitution Party and its federal tax and foreign trade platform shows Trumps and the GOP platform to be seriously UnAmerican.
    A media outlet that tends to have a pro American foreign policy to a very high degree is the
    New American
    which is part of the John Birch Society
    now the New American and the JBS does sometimes get into unsupportive conspiracy theories but of course they are human.
    The LP also is better on Foreign Policy than the DNC,GOP and Green Party although unlike the Constitution Party the LP buys into the free trade nonsense although most of its members agree with Ron Paul that the trade deals don’t have a thing to do with free trade but Gary Johnson and his VP pick being neoliberal Un American globalist are for the trade deals and the NWO.