Because ONE Prime Minister is calling you out for Corruption.
During the campaign, Hillary spoke of solidarity among female leaders. Just because someone pees sitting down, they should support her.
But did she feel any such solidarity toward OTHER powerful women? Or did she bully them into helping fund her charity?
Just when everyone is talking about FBI investigations and foreign governments, the Bangladesh Prime Minster, Sheikh Hasina is making some serious accusations against Hillary Clinton.
She claims, for example, that the PM’s American son would be subject to an IRS audit if Hasina did not do as Hillary’s aides had asked. And what did they require?
Hillary Clinton’s Department of State aides allegedly threatened a South Asian prime minister’s son with an IRS audit in an attempt to stop a Bangladesh government investigation of a close friend and donor of Clinton’s, The Daily Caller News Foundation’s Investigative Group learned.
A Bangladesh government commission was investigating multiple charges of financial mismanagement at Grameen Bank, beginning in May 2012. Muhammad Yunus, a major Clinton Foundation donor, served as managing director of the bank.
Sajeeb Wazed Joy, son of Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina and permanent U.S. resident, recalled the account of the threatened IRS audit to TheDCNF. The allegations mark the first known instance in the U.S. that Clinton’s Department of State used IRS power to intimidate a close relative of a friendly nation’s head of state on behalf of a Clinton Foundation donor. —Daily Caller
The Office of Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina confirmed to Circa that Mrs. Clinton called her office in March 2011 to demand that Dr. Muhammed Yunus, a 2006 Nobel Peace prize winner, be restored to his role as chairman of the country’s most famous microcredit bank, Grameen Bank. The bank’s nonprofit Grameen America, which Yunus chairs, has given between $100,000 and $250,000 to the Clinton Global Initiative. Grameen Research, which is chaired by Yunus, has donated between $25,000 and $50,000, according to the Clinton Foundation website.
“Former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton telephoned Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina in March 2011 insisting her not to remove Dr. Muhammad Yunus from the post of Managing Director of Grameen Bank,” Deputy Press Secretary Md Nazrul Islam told Circa in an email.–Circa
Wazed told TheDCNF it was “astounding and mind boggling” that senior State Department officials between 2010 and 2012 repeatedly pressured him to influence his mother to drop the commission investigation.
…The commission report was released in early 2013.
“They threatened me with the possibility of an audit by the Internal Revenue Service,” he said. “I have been here legally for 17 years and never had a problem. But they said, ‘well, you know, you might get audited.’”
“They would say over and over again, ‘Yunus has powerful friends’ and we all knew they were talking of Secretary Clinton. Everybody knew it was Mrs. Clinton,” Wazed told TheDCNF.
…“Hillary Clinton phoned me and exerted the same pressure. Even the U.S. State Department summoned my son Joy three times and told him that we would face trouble,” Hasina added.
Hasina said State Department officials told Joy that Clinton would not take the matter lightly. —DailyCaller
Let’s see if we’ve got this straight.
A significant Hillary donor was working in Bangladesh banks 10 years past their mandatory retirement age and — therefore, strictly speaking — illegally receiving payment for doing so.
Hillary ‘asks’ the Prime Minister of Bangledesh to waive the rules on behalf of her friend, the donor.
At some point in the conversation, one of Hillary’s aides threatens the Bangladeshi Prime Minister’s son — living in USA — with an IRS audit if they do not do this ‘favor’ for Hillary.
And there are still people NOT chanting ‘lock her up’?
Is the IRS so easily manipulated to do Hillary’s bidding? Is it STILL actually weaponized? And is such a threat a violation — with evidence of financial self-interst by the one who threatens — a violation of any US law? Does that not qualify as extortion? And if not, WHY not?
Doesn’t this put an even GREATER cloud of suspicion on the Clinton Foundation?
Do REAL charities require threats to secure contributions?
What is the REAL nature of this charity, and is there any trugth to the allegations that it’s their own personal slush fund?