Mediaboss Marketing

Casey, a three-term senator who has built such a moderate, mild-mannered reputation he has been compared to oatmeal, is in the crosshairs of national Republican leaders. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has identified Casey as one of his top targets in 2024, going so far as to rank his seat alongside those held by Senate Democrats in solidly red states such as West Virginia and Montana.

Republicans are desperately trying to lure former business executive David McCormick, who they see as the best possible challenger, into the race. The party establishment caught a break this week when MAGA firebrand state Sen. Doug Mastriano announced that he wouldnt run for the Senate at this time, potentially clearing the path to the nomination for McCormick.

But behind the scenes, GOP elected officials, strategists and donors are still not bullish about their chances against Casey. They are well aware that he has won all of his Senate elections by double digits or close to it. They know hes an institution in the state and the son of the late anti-abortion Gov. Robert Casey, Sr. And as working-class white voters have bolted from most Democrats, GOP insiders fear Casey still has a hold on many of them, partly due to his family name.

Bob Casey is political royalty in Pennsylvania. Hes an incumbent senator who is beloved, said Republican Carla Sands, an ambassador to Denmark under former President Donald Trump who ran unsuccessfully for the Senate in the state last year. I think hes tough to beat.

If Trump wins the presidential nomination, some Republicans worry it would make an already difficult situation all but impossible. They are concerned that Trump, who lost Pennsylvania to President Joe Biden in 2020, could be a drag on down-ballot candidates and force them to answer for his unpredictable comments. As he decides whether to run, McCormick himself is weighing the prospect of running alongside Trump, according to two Republicans close to him.

It definitely makes it tougher for a Republican to win the Senate race if Trump is on the ticket for sure. For a Republican to beat Casey, I think the GOP presidential nominee has to win Pennsylvania, said Josh Novotney, a Pennsylvania-based Republican strategist. Casey is more popular than Biden in Pennsylvania and will likely outperform him.

Though Republicans see Casey as a strong contender, the Senate map overall in 2024 heavily favors their party. Democrats are on defense in 23 states, several of them in battlegrounds and full-blown MAGA country. Republicans are facing reelection in just 11 states, with the best opportunities for Democrats lying in hostile territory like Florida and Texas. Republicans only need to flip two Senate seats or one if they win the White House to take back control of the upper chamber.

But the GOPs assessment of Casey underscores another dynamic in Senate races that complicates the picture next year. Democrats have several battle-tested senators on their roster in 2024 like Sherrod Brown, Jon Tester and potentially Joe Manchin who are widely seen as skilled opponents and have outperformed other candidates in their party.

During the blue wave of 2018, Casey carried the state by 13 percentage points, two years after Hillary Clinton lost Pennsylvania to Trump. In 2012, Casey won by 9 percentage points, compared to then-President Barack Obamas 5-point margin of victory.

Republicans said one challenge confronting them is that Casey is so bland that hes not hated by anyone, a similar dilemma they faced in 2020 with Biden. Another is Caseys constituent services.

His staffers who represent him are very effective, said Jackie Kulback, chair of the Cambria County Republican Party. Theyre helping with constituent issues, things like that. That helps you win elections.

Plus, she said, Honestly, I think theres a lot of people who still think that theyre voting for his dad.

The view of Casey within the GOP underscores why Republicans in both Pennsylvania and Washington, D.C. have aggressively wooed McCormick and dissuaded Mastriano from jumping into the race. Public and private polls have shown Casey leading McCormick, but that the race would be closer if McCormick is on the ticket.

Republicans said one challenge confronting them is that Casey is so bland that hes not hated by anyone, a similar dilemma they faced in 2020 with President Joe Biden. | Matt Slocum/AP Photo

After the Senate GOPs campaign arm took a hands-off approach to primaries last year to disappointing results, the National Republican Senatorial Committee is getting involved this time around in several states in hopes of nominating high-quality candidates. Republican officials believe McCormick, a combat veteran and former hedge fund CEO, can appeal to suburban voters and help finance what is expected to be a highly expensive campaign against Casey.

A tough GOP opponent who is well funded could give him a race, said Novotney.

Keith Rothfus, a former GOP congressman, is also eyeing the Senate contest. Sands, the former ambassador, recently declined to rule out a 2024 run.

Despite many Republicans less-than-optimistic attitude toward Casey, the Democrat is not without vulnerabilities. He has moved leftward in recent years one liberal Philadelphia columnist dubbed him Woke Bob Casey which could give an opening to Republicans to challenge his moderate image. Bidens approval ratings are dismal and could pull down Casey and other Democrats on the ballot. Casey has voted with Biden almost 99 percent of the time, according to politics data site FiveThirtyEight, a fact that the GOP is eager to highlight. And Casey has gotten lucky, running in good years for Democrats.

In a statement Thursday after Mastrianos announcement, McCormick signaled the lines of attack he would use on Casey were he to run.

I am seriously considering a run for the U.S. Senate because Bob Casey has consistently made life worse for Pennsylvania families over the past 18 years, and our state deserves better, he said. He is openly hostile to our states energy industry, endorses dangerous criminals walking freely on our streets, and is enabling open borders, leading to a terrifying rise in fentanyl deaths in Pennsylvania.

Caseys campaign manager, Tiernan Donohue, shot back: Bob Casey is a champion for Pennsylvania who has spent his life fighting against the ultra-wealthy and special interests that threaten Pennsylvanias hardworking people from countries like China that threaten our jobs, to big insurance companies that are raising our health care costs. Meanwhile, David McCormick is a Connecticut hedge fund executive who got rich outsourcing jobs, laying off workers, and cozying up to China.

Republicans also believe that recent headlines about Casey are another liability, and that they havent been litigated in TV ads before. Caseys brother registered to lobby last year and a March article by the New York Post found that Caseys campaign paid his sisters company for printing services. Caseys office has said his brother will not lobby him, in accordance with Senate ethics rules.

Some in the GOP even think that Trump sharing a ticket with McCormick would be a positive for the two men. They envision a repeat of 2016, when Trump and then-Sen. Pat Toomey both won Pennsylvania, but with different paths: Toomey performed better in suburban areas, while Trump was stronger in rural parts of the state.

To beat Bob Casey, you need to recreate the 2016 Toomey-Trump coalition, said a national GOP strategist granted anonymity to discuss party strategy. You blow it out in the rural areas and hold down Democrat numbers in the suburbs.

And, some Republicans said, the benefits of Caseys name might be finally beginning to fade.

I think what Bobby has always had going for him is his dads legacy, said Rep. Glenn GT Thompson (R-Pa.). But I will say that I think the majority of voters in Pennsylvania are at an age where they dont remember Bob Sr.

Ally Mutnick contributed to this article.

Continued here:
A well-liked incumbent stands in the way of Republicans retaking ... - POLITICO

Opinion

By Andrew C. McCarthy

May 19, 2023 | 5:57pm

When Andrew McCabe, former deputy director of the FBI, was fired in disgrace in 2018, it was commonly assumed it was because of the Russiagate investigation.

After all, he essentially ran that fiasco, which Special Counsel John Durham definitively noted this week was a baseless farce.

But no. McCabe was fired because he serially lied to investigators that he wasnt leaking investigative information to the media.

More telling was what he was lying about: an FBI investigation of foreign efforts to influence a presidential campaign.

Not Donald Trumps campaign. Hillary Clintons.

Its just part of the many ways the FBI went easy on Clinton, as Durham reveals the agency dropped at least four criminal investigations related to her.

The Clinton Foundation was understandably suspected by FBI agents in three different field offices Little Rock, Washington, and New York as a dodgy vehicle enabling donors, very much including foreign regimes and their operatives, to give goo-gobs of money to Hillary and Bill Clinton without appearing to violate the campaign finance laws.

But McCabe was infuriated, during the stretch run of the 2016 campaign, when the Wall Street Journal reported that he had tied the hands of investigators on the Clinton Foundation case.

Because McCabes wife, in her run for state office in Virginia, had received a hefty contribution from a fund tied to Clinton crony Terry McAuliffe, there was a strong suggestion of partisanship on McCabes part.

To push back against that, McCabe had his subordinates leak that the Obama Justice Department had pressured him to shutter the Clinton Foundation probe.

This was true. In fact, it is substantiated by Durham. He found that the bureau had meetings with top Obama DOJ officials who were hostile to the investigation.

One of them played down as de minimis evidence the FBIs New York office obtained from an informant about the amounts of money involved.

Without making any finding of criminality, Durham found that the transactions in question actually totaled hundreds of thousands of dollars.

The Obama DOJ, including its appointed U.S. attorneys in Manhattan and Brooklyn, made clear to the FBI that they had no interest in a Clinton Foundation case.

McCabe may not have been especially interested either, but it was a lot easier for him to direct his subordinates to stand down when he knew the prosecutors wouldnt touch it.

This was a pattern. As Durham found, even when there may have been evidence that foreign powers were trying to cultivate Clinton and possibly try to bring her under their influence, the same FBI that couldnt open a case on Trump fast enough became paralyzed.

Durham noted that in 2014 i.e., before Clinton even formally announced her candidacy the bureau got information about a foreign governments effort to have one of its operatives contribute to Clintons campaign.

But when agents in one of field office sought to conduct FISA counterintelligence surveillance, their request sat at FBI headquarters for months with no action taken.

One unidentified agent told Durham that the bureau was super more careful and scared with the big name [Clinton] involved.

FBI officials, a supervisor recalled, were pretty tippy-toeing around HRC because there was a chance she would be the next president.

They wanted to avoid any possibility that Clinton could be caught on tape after all, she was a presidential candidate!

The bureaus priority with Clinton was to protect her from malign foreign powers.

After 11 months of bureau handwringing, her aides were given a defensive briefing about the foreign approach, and the matter was quietly closed. Unlike in Russiagate, the FBI was unconcerned that by bringing the Clinton campaign into the loop, their investigation would be compromised.

In a second case of a foreign government seeking to donate to Clinton, the FBI warned one of its informants, who had made an illegal contribution, to cease and desist attending Clinton-related events.

The informants handling agent did even not document the illegal contribution in the bureaus files.

In late July 2016, the FBIs then-director, James Comey, was briefed that U.S. spy agencies had intercepted a Russian intelligence analysis that Clinton had approved a plan by her campaign to smear Trump as an asset of the Kremlin.

Durham provides no reason to believe the FBI investigated the Russian analysis; indeed, he finds that the bureau essentially ignored it.

Of course, regardless of whether the Russian analysis was authentic, we now know the Clinton campaign had exactly such a strategy, and that the campaign managed to get the FBI to do its bidding in framing Trump as Putins puppet.

Just days after being briefed on the Russian intelligence, the FBI opened Crossfire Hurricane on the basis of a sketchy hearsay kind of suggestion made in a London bar to Australian diplomats by young, unpaid Trump campaign aide George Papadopoulos, to the effect that Russia might have unflattering information on the Clintons that it could disclose to harm her campaign.

The Aussies thought little of the statement or of Papadopoulos, but the FBI rushed to open a full-field investigation of Trumps campaign without taking any of the usual preliminary steps and without interviewing a single witness.

Quite a contrast.

Andrew C. McCarthy is the author of Ball of Collusion: The Plot to Rig an Election and Destroy a Presidency.

Load more...

https://nypost.com/2023/05/19/how-obama-officials-fbi-squashed-any-investigation-into-hillary-clinton/?utm_source=url_sitebuttons&utm_medium=site%20buttons&utm_campaign=site%20buttons

View post:
How Obama officials and the FBI squashed any investigation into Hillary Clinton - New York Post

News

By Katherine Donlevy

May 18, 2023 | 10:34pm

The FBI had at least four open criminal investigations into Hillary and Bill Clinton that were suddenly dropped in the months before the 2016 presidential election, special counsel John Durhams recently released report shows.

The bombshell report released by Durham which concluded that the bureaus probe into former President Donald Trumps alleged collusion with Russia was seriously flawed also shed light on the quashed probes.

The feds had been looking into claims that foreign countries and other individuals were trying to influence the Clintons through donations to their namesake non-profit and Hillarys presidential campaign.

Three of the FBIs four investigations that were launched in early 2016 were looking into allegations that the Clinton Foundation has a hub of criminal activity.

Those federal probes originated from field offices in Little Rock, Arkansas, Washington, DC and New York all of which opened audits into the charity as Hillary was in the midst of her presidential run.

The Little Rock and New York offices were investigating a claim that an outside commercial industry likely engaged a federal public official in a flow of benefits scheme, namely, large monetary contributions were made to a non-profit, under both direct and indirect control of the federal public official, in exchange for favorable government action and/or influence, according to the Durham report.

The DC investigation was based on allegations that the Clintons accepted millions in donations from foreign governments as well as massive Russian corporations in an attempt to influence US foreign policy dating back to Hillarys days as Secretary of State, as outlined by political consultant Peter Schweizer in his book Clinton Cash.

The fourth investigation looked into allegations made by a well-placed source that Hillary continued accepting those illegal donations throughout her presidential campaign.

Beginning in late 2014, before Clinton formally declared her presidential candidacy, the FBI learned from a well-placed [source] that a foreign government was planning to send an individual to contribute toClintons anticipated presidential campaign, as a way to gain influence with Clinton should shewin the presidency, the report said.

The foreign individual reportedly made a $2,700 contribution ahead of a campaign event, which led to another contribution of a significant sum of money.

Hillarys campaign workers were okay with it and were fully aware from the start, the FBI informant reported.

An unnamed FBI special agent in charge working on the probe told Durham that everyone was super more careful' and scared with the big name [Clinton] involved.

They were pretty tippy-toeing around [Hillary] because there was a chance she would be the next President, the report said.

All four probes were dropped ahead of the 2016 election several of which at the direction of senior FBI officials who had close ties to the Clintons.

Durham concluded that the FBI dragged its feet and failed to pursue the Clintons alleged illegal donation scheme or document it properly.

The agency reportedly failed to get wiretapping warrants for their well-placed informant during their two-year inside relationship with the Clintons before eventually telling the person to cut ties with the couple.

A spokesperson for the Clinton Foundation denied the non-profit has ever been involved in any illegal activity in a statement to the Daily Mail.

The Durham report, the spokesperson said, emphasized whats been clear for many years theres never been any wrongdoing by the Clinton Foundation.

None of the Clintons have ever taken any money from the Clinton Foundation in fact, the Clintons themselves are major donors to the Clinton Foundation, the spokesperson added.

Load more...

https://nypost.com/2023/05/18/fbi-dropped-probes-into-claims-clinton-accepted-foreign-bribes/?utm_source=url_sitebuttons&utm_medium=site%20buttons&utm_campaign=site%20buttons

Read more:
FBI dropped 4 probes into Hillary Clinton, family's non-profit ahead of 2016 election: Durham report - New York Post

Startling revelations of corruption this week have shown Americans how deeply dishonest people in government and media have combined to form a danger to democracy, says Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley.

Americans should feel outraged outraged, that they were lied to for years by their own government. They were lied to by the media, Hawley said in an interview with The Heartlander Thursday.

Hawley was reacting to the release of the John Durham report that painstakingly details how Hillary Clintons disinformation campaign against 2016 presidential rival Donald Trump became the FBIs Russia collusion hoax and a sham multimillion-dollar Mueller probe built on a lie made out of whole cloth.

It was the Democrat Party that used the FBI to try to rig the 2016 presidential election, Hawley said. Thats the Durham report. Thats what we learned. Hillary Clinton used the FBI, and the FBI leadership gladly went along with it to lie to courts in order to get wiretaps on Trump associates; to try and spy on the Trump campaign; and then to create what we now know was a 100% false narrative, that Trump was somehow colluding with Russia.

Theres no basis for that, as Durham has found. There is no basis for that, as the Mueller report found. And yet, the Democrats and the FBI worked together to try to influence the election.

You talk about a danger to democracy. Thats a danger to democracy.

Hawley called the Durham report 306 pages of extremely alarming material showing that there was no basis to open up the investigation into Trump for Russia collusion none at all. That the Steele dossier was 100% fake. That FBI leadership knew or should have known it was fake, and they went along with it anyway. And that there was interference in an election.

What it shows is, the 2016 election was actively interfered with by the FBI and the Democrat Party working together. It really makes you wonder whos in charge of this country. Is it the voters and the people, or is it the FBI and other members of the Deep State in Washington?

Its a serious danger to the basic conduct of our democracy to have the FBI behaving like this, and theres got to be some accountability. And more than that, theres got to be reform. It just cant go on like this.

Records show then-FBI head James Comey was not only going along with the hoax but was eagerly prompting it, Hawley argues.

He was positively giddy at the idea of trying to tie Trump to Russia, even knowing that there was no basis for it. You had, of course, the deputy director at the time, and then those who were running the Trump collusion investigation who hated Trump and were rabid partisans. Their whole motive was to bring down Trump.

I mean, think about this: Their motive was to say, We dont think the people of this country should be able to elect this guy, so were going to make the decision for them. That is not a democracy. And the idea that the FBI leadership would think that thats OK somehow is out of control. These people are out of control.

How high does the Russia collusion hoax go? Did it reach the Obama White House?

Oh, probably, Hawley says, noting that Barack Obama and Joe Biden were both briefed on Hillary Clintons effort to create this fake Russian narrative. Hawley also points to Bidens national security advisor, Jake Sullivan, as someone else who was actively involved in the scheme.

Sullivan, says Hawley, worked with Hillary to create this this Russia hoax. He was in on it from the beginning, and now he is running the national security apparatus of the United States. So yeah, the corruption goes really high.

That bleak picture of a rogue federal government looked no better on Thursday, when several FBI agents testified to Congress that they were punished for speaking out against the politicization of the agency against conservatives including pro-lifers, Catholics and parents attending school board meetings to create an illusion of a domestic terrorism threat. One agent said the FBI ginned up prosecutions to persecute its political enemies.

Three agents said they were subjected to suspensions without pay and had their security clearances withdrawn in retaliation for their speaking out.

Does Hawley believe all that?

Yes, I do believe it, because weve seen the evidence for it, he told The Heartlander. We know that the FBI sent a SWAT team to the home of a pro-life demonstrator who was totally peaceful, who was acquitted later by a jury, and they did it to intimidate him, frankly, to terrorize him and his young family. Absolutely unconscionable.

We know that the FBI has been trying to spy on Catholics and their parishes probably lots of churches. I mean, if theyre doing it in Catholic parishes, youve got to believe theyre doing it everywhere.

So, I think this FBI is totally out of control. I think it is corrupt at its leadership. And I think that corruption has totally infected the Washington Bureau, the Washington leadership, at the very top of the FBI, and theyve got to go. The answer, here, is youve got to root out the corruption.

As for the whistleblowers, Hawley said retaliation against them isnt just wrong, its against the law.

Whistleblowers are protected by law. Listen, Ive worked with a lot of whistleblowers whove come to me from all over the government. They are protected in the law. And for Democrats now, and the FBI, to retaliate against them and punish them is frankly illegal.

So, theres got to be some major, major accountability here.

Hawley was explicit about what kind of accountability he sees as necessary in an appearance this week on Fox News Jesse Watters Primetime.

Im of the mind we need to end the FBI as we know it, Hawley told Watters. It needs to be broken up. Clearly it has become corrupt. The leadership is corrupt.

Is there a chance of that happening, even after all the stunning revelations of the past week?

Well, not with the Democrats in charge, because now theyre great lovers of institutional corruption, he tells The Heartlander.

Nor is Hawley expecting a mea culpa from the many left-leaning media outlets that unquestioningly perpetrated the Russia collusion hoax for years.

You know, I cant wait for the Washington Post and the New York Times and CNN and all of these spewers of disinformation who gave themselves Pulitzers for fake stories I cant wait for them to apologize and retract all the stories. But I dont hear anything from them.

I mean, its unbelievable to look at the corporate media and to realize how corrupt they are in this. They wont even admit they were wrong. They wont admit that they lied to the public over and over and over.

And then, of course, they did it again in 2020 with the Hunter Biden laptop stories. So, these are some deeply, deeply corrupt people who are in positions of power. And I think you cannot read the Durham report, and then look at the Hunter Biden stuff in 2020, and not conclude weve got some major problems in the U.S. government and weve got some deeply dishonest people in the corporate media.

Read more here:
New revelations show 'deeply dishonest people' in government ... - Heartlander News

The FBI had at least four criminal investigations into Hillary and Bill Clinton that were ultimately shut down months before the presidential election in 2016, a new Justice Department report reveals and Republicans want to reopen those probes.

Along-awaited report by Special Counsel John Durhamreleased on Monday shows the FBI began investigating claims in late 2014 from a 'well-placed' confidential source that two foreign governments were trying to make illegal donations to buy influence with Hillary during her presidential campaign.

Investigators were even offered documents of one alleged $2,700 illegal contribution that led to a 'substantial' further donation.

The bombshell report also reveals three different FBI field offices, in Washington, D.C., Little Rock, Arkansas, and New York, launched investigations into the Clinton Foundation in early 2016 for 'possible criminal activity.'

One of the investigations was partly based on statements made in journalist Peter Schweizer's 2015 book, Clinton Cash, claiming the Clintons' charity was taking millions in donations from foreign governments trying to change US foreign policy while Hillary was Secretary of State.

But despite making progress, all four criminal investigations were shut down by senior officials, Durham found.

The new revelations are prompting calls from current and former Republicans for a renewed investigation into the alleged criminal activity involving the Clintons.

One is Florida Republican representative Matt Gaetz, who sits on the House Judiciary Committee's 'Weaponization of the Federal Government' subcommittee which has been probing claims of political bias in the FBI.

'The Clintons had a team of people at the FBI running interference for them to avoid criminal culpability,' Gaetz claimed in a statement to DailyMail.com.

'These matters absolutely warrant additional exposure and review.'

Former Republican congressman and ex House Oversight Committee chair Jason Chaffetz expressed similar sentiments saying the FBI 'didn't complete the job' and probes into the Clintons should be reopened.

'They had the scent, they were on the trail, and they were shut down by the higher ups who had an obvious political desire to see Donald Trump lose and Hillary Clinton win,' he said.

'It's disgusting really. Absolutely these investigations should be revisited,' he added.

'There's no reason why Congress can't have a series of hearings with the field agents who were pursuing the Clinton Foundation, and public interviews with them as well.'

Bombshell new information about the FBI's Clinton probes was disclosed in the special counsel's 316-page report delivered to Attorney General Merrick Garland on May 12.

The report compared the FBI and Justice Department's voracious investigation of Trump's connections with Russia, to its allegedly lackluster approach to its Clinton probes 'tippy-toeing' around the former Secretary of State.

Durham reviewed a January 2016 report on the Clinton Foundation by the Little Rock Field Office which found possible evidence that 'large monetary contributions were made to a non-profit, under both direct and indirect control of [a] federal public official, in exchange for favorable government action and/or influence.'

Durham wrote that the New York and Little Rock Field Offices had 'source reporting that identified foreign governments that had made, or offered to make, contributions to the Foundation in exchange for favorable or preferential treatment from Clinton.'

And an agent in the Washington Field Office also opened a preliminary probe into the Clintons 'because the Case Agent wanted to determine if he could develop additional information to corroborate the allegations in a recently-published book, Clinton Cash by Peter Schweizer'.

Among the Clintons' murky foreign entanglements scrutinized in Schweizer's book was a 2010 deal that gave the Russian government control over huge swathes of US uranium production including 38,000 acres in four Western states.

A Russian state-controlled company built up a 51% controlling stake in previously Canadian firm Uranium One between 2009 and 2013, in a deal approved by a powerful US government committee on which Hillary sat as Secretary of State.

Over the same period, Uranium One's chairman Ian Telfer used his family foundation to make $2.35million in donations to the Clinton Foundation, according to Canadian tax records reported by the New York Times in 2015.

The gifts were not disclosed despite an agreement Hillary signed before joining the Obama administration to identify all donors.

In June 2010, the same month Russian energy firm Rosatom struck its deal to buy 51% of Uranium One, Bill Clinton was paid $500,000 to speak at an event in Moscow, the Times reported, after an investigation based on a preview copy of Schweizer's book.

The deal was one of several cases highlighted in Schweizer's book involving rich Clinton Foundation mega-donors and foreign governments with interests in Hillary's decisions as Secretary of State.

A Wall Street Journal report from February 2015 identified the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Australia, Germany, and a Canadian government agency promoting the Keystone XL pipeline as donors to the foundation's $250million endowment campaign though noted that Hillary stopped raising money from foreign governments after she became secretary.

At the time the Clintons issued strong denials of any impropriety.

'[No one] has ever produced a shred of evidence supporting the theory that Hillary Clinton ever took action as secretary of state to support the interests of donors to the Clinton Foundation,' their spokesman Brian Fallon told the Times in April 2015.

'To suggest the State Department, under then-Secretary Clinton, exerted undue influence in the U.S. government's review of the sale of Uranium One is utterly baseless.'

And on Thursday, a spokesperson for the Clinton Foundation pushed back against the claims of alleged wrongdoing requiring FBI investigation.

The spokesman said the Durham report 'emphasized what's been clear for many years there's never been any wrongdoing by the Clinton Foundation', adding that Durham referred to Schweizer's book as 'unvetted hearsay' in his report.

'Secretary Clinton was not involved in the State Department's review of the Uranium One deal,' the spokesman said.

'The largest Clinton Foundation donor cited in these claims sold his stake in Uranium One several years before the deal.

'None of the Clintons have ever taken any money from the Clinton Foundation in fact, the Clintons themselves are major donors to the Clinton Foundation.'

The spokesman said Schweizer's claims were 'baseless' and pointed to previous investigations by the Trump administration's Justice Department and House Republicans in 2018 which concluded with no evidence of wrongdoing.'

The first was a 2018 probe by the House Oversight Committee into allegations from financial analysts who claimed to have found evidence of financial crimes at the Clinton Foundation.

The second was a Justice Department inquiry launched in 2017, which was reported by the Washington Post to be winding down in 2020.

The Justice probe looked into allegations of alleged corruption at the Clinton Foundation and reportedly included a review of the FBI Little Rock Field Office's previous investigations into the charity, but did not result in any charges being filed.

The spokesman pointed to the charitable work done by the Clinton Foundation, including 'helping millions access lifesaving HIV/AIDS treatment' and bringing 'healthy food and exercise options to tens of millions of American kids', as well as extensive philanthropy abroad.

The Durham Report revealed that the FBI was also investigating evidence of two foreign governments attempting to influence Clinton with allegedly illegal campaign donations during the 2016 presidential run.

Agents had a 'well-placed' confidential source who told them in late 2014 that a particular foreign government, unidentified in Durham's report, was planning to make illegal donations to Clinton's campaign to influence her.

Durham wrote that the FBI gave a defensive briefing about it to Clinton and Trump.

The FBI then followed the informant into the midst of a second foreign influence attempt in 2015 which the informant claimed Clinton's campaign was aware of and even complicit in.

FBI reports reviewed by Durham said that in November 2015 their informant was asked to introduce to Hillary a person with 'foreign intelligence and criminal connections', on behalf of a second foreign government.

Durham wrote that the shady intelligence operative 'wanted to propose 'something' that [the FBI informant] understood to be campaign contributions on behalf of Foreign Government-3 in exchange for the protection of Foreign Government-3's interests should Clinton become President.'

The shady foreign operative was initially invited to a Clinton fundraising event in late November 2015, but was later disinvited 'because of the perceived negative attention a foreign national might attract', Durham's report said.

Though Durham did not identify the campaign event, regional newspaper The Tennessean reported a private Hillary fundraiser that month at the Nashville home of businessman Bill Freeman, which raised more than $500,000 for her presidential bid.

The FBI informant got permission from their Bureau handler to attend the fundraiser, but did not go, the Durham report said.

However the informant did attend another Clinton fundraiser in January 2016, where they made an alleged illegal donation on behalf of the foreign government, allegedly with the knowledge of Clinton's campaign.

'Without the knowledge or prior approval of the handling agent, CHS-A [the FBI informant] had made a $2700 campaign contribution (the maximum amount at the time for an individual contribution) prior to the event, which CHS-A indicated he/she 'made on [his/her] [credit] card' on behalf of Insider-1 [the foreign operative],' the report said.

'If true, the campaign contribution on behalf of a foreign national would violate Title 52 USC Section 30121 ('Contributions and donations by foreign nationals').'

The informant told the FBI Hillary's campaign 'were okay with it' and 'were fully aware from the start'.

The FBI also had evidence that the $2,700 donation 'allegedly was a precursor to the contribution of a significant sum of money by Insider-1 on behalf of Foreign Government-3'.

But Durham found the Bureau failed to pursue the alleged illegal donation scheme or document it properly, instead telling their informant to cut contact with the Clinton campaign.

Agents did not give a defensive briefing to Clinton or Trump regarding this second foreign government.

Durham wrote that one FBI field office tried to get wiretapping warrants based on some of the informant's information as early as 2014, but the Bureau HQ dragged their feet.

An unnamed FBI special agent in charge working on the probe told Durham 'everyone was super more careful' and 'scared with the big name involved' referring to Clinton.

'They were pretty 'tippy-toeing' around [Clinton] because there was a chance she would be the next President,' the agent said.

Although neither foreign government whose operatives allegedly approached the Clinton campaign were identified in the report, Schweizer told DailyMail.com that the United Arab Emirates was a potential candidate.

In 2022, convicted pedophile and American adviser to the Middle Eastern nation George Nader pleaded guilty to his role in helping funnel millions of dollars in illegal campaign contributions from the UAE to 2016 US presidential campaigns.

Prosecutors said $3.5million from the UAE government was given to Democratic political committees working to elect Clinton, via Nader.

Nader said he also met Trump's son Donald Trump Jr. several times in 2016, and was a frequent visitor to the White House during Trump's first year in office.

The Durham Report revealed that the three FBI field offices began coordinating their Clinton Foundation investigations and in February 2016 met with top FBI and Justice Department officials.

But Public Integrity Section Chief Ray Hulser, one senior DoJ official at the February 1 meeting, declined to take up the Clinton case.

According to Durham's report, Hulser said the FBI briefing was 'poorly presented' and that there was 'insufficient predication for at least one of the investigations due to its reliance on allegations contained in a book.'

An acting section chief from the FBI's Office of General Counsel who was also present at the meeting, kept anonymous by Durham, said that the Justice Department's reaction was 'hostile'.

The report detailed a second meeting three weeks later on February 22, chaired by then-FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, who 'initially directed the field offices to close their cases'.

McCabe himself had recent ties to the Clintons.

His wife Jill was recruited by Clinton aide and ally, Virginia governor Terry McAuliffe, to run for state senate in March 2015, while McCabe was director of the FBI DC field office.

Common Good VA PAC, which featured Hillary as a speaker at its fundraiser that year, gave $450,000 to Jill's campaign in October 2015.

McCabe was promoted to number 3 at the Bureau as associate deputy director in July 2015, the same month the FBI began investigating Hillary's use of a private email server for government business.

The FBI has said that McCabe did not have any 'oversight' over the email case as associate deputy director. He was promoted to deputy director in February 2016, when he began his Clinton probe oversight.

Then-Washington Field Office assistant director-in-charge Paul Abbate told Durham that McCabe was 'negative', 'annoyed' and 'angry' about the FBI's Clinton probes at the February 2016 meeting, asking 'why are we even doing this?' and telling attendees that the DoJ 'say there's nothing here'.

The New York office was also told to 'cease and desist' their Clinton investigation by executive assistant director Randy Coleman, delivering the message on behalf of then-FBI director James Comey, the report said.

Durham wrote that Coleman cited 'some undisclosed counterintelligence concern' as the reason for shutting down the probe, but the special prosecutor said he 'was not able to determine what the counterintelligence issue raised by Comey was.'

Despite the demands from bosses to close the investigation, the New York office continued to dig, and on August 1, 2016 agents were given permission to seek subpoenas from the US Attorneys' offices in the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York, Durham's report said.

But both prosecutors' offices declined to issue the subpoenas to the Clintons, effectively hamstringing the agents' work.

McCabe's lawyer Michael Bromwich said references to the ex-FBI deputy director's involvement 'couldn't be more wrong' and that 'the only things new in Mr. Durham's report are factual errors.'

Durham's report said that McCabe initially told his agents to shut down their investigation, but then agreed to further review. Bromwich said the probe was not closed until 'years later'.

'Mr. McCabe was recused from any role overseeing the still-open cases in the fall of 2016,' the lawyer wrote in an email.

'The cases were then reviewed and overseen by David Bowditch [another FBI deputy director] until their closure years later. Our understanding is that those investigations were closed as unworthy of being further pursued.'

Schweizer told DailyMail.com he was surprised to learn the FBI had launched three criminal probes prompted by his book.

'I was a little surprised that there was as much activity as there was. I had no idea that much paddling was going on underneath the surface of the water,' he said.

'I got a call from somebody from the New York FBI office after the book came out,' he added.

'There was a New York Times piece on Uranium One. It was kind of confirming what we had in the book. That's what I think triggered the interest.

'With the Clinton Foundation, you have the transfer of large sums of money, you had policy positions that were affected, and you had certifiable evidence.

'I'm not a lawyer, so I can't say what was illegal. But there was definitely a there there, with all the speeches, donations and policy effects, and nobody's ever really disputed that.'

Read more:
FBI shut down FOUR investigations into Hillary and Bill Clinton in 2016, Durham report reveals - Daily Mail