Rob: Welcome to the Rob Kall Bottom Up Radio Show WNJC 1360 AM out of Washington Township, reaching Metro Philly and South Jersey. Sponsored by Opednews.com Shows are available on iTunes and on Stitcher using my name Rob Kall K-A-L-L. My guest tonight is Ken Silverstein. He's a Washington, D.C. writer, he's contributing editor for Vice Magazine, and does the column Washington Babylon for the New York Observer. He is the author of several books including The Secret World of Oil. He just wrote an article for Harper's titled "Shaky Foundations: The Clintons' so-called charitable enterprise has served as a vehicle to launder money and to enrich family friends. Welcome to the show.

KS: Thank you.

Rob: So this is pretty serious accusations that the Clintons have used their foundation for crass profiteering and influence peddling.

KS: And as I was writing it I realized that people would go, this is extreme, this is right-wing propaganda. But I am total confident in what I wrote and I think the Clintons love to portray all of their enemies as right-wing nuts and you know, so I'm happy to say that I'm a Libertarian, lefty for the most part. But not part of the right-wing attack machine and anybody who reads my work can see that I attack all sides equally. But it's serious allegations, but well documented. If you actually go through the Clinton Foundation financial filings their IRS filings as a non-profit and their audits, you can see that they are taking in a lot of money, millions, tens of millions of dollars, hundreds of millions of dollars and they spend a lot less for true charitable causes. They promote themselves, they pay their friends very very lavishly. And when Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State, major donors to the Clinton foundation, not only got her attention, but she took actions. I can't prove that she said to herself, they donate to the family foundation and I, she was a trustee at one point, and hence legally liable for any wrong doing like her husband and Chelsea who are currently trustees and board members. I can't say that she sat there and said to herself, this is a major donor to the foundation and I will take actions that benefit that donor in places, as I describe in my story, like Kazakhstan and Columbia. But I know that she did take actions as Secretary of State that made huge profits for donors to the Clinton Foundation. And that's a massive conflict of interest. And they just, the reason, my story was timed to come out right after on Monday, the Clinton Foundation under duress from outside parties, critics had to submit four years of, re-submit four years of IRS tax filings and a new audit because they admitted there had been some unfortunate mistakes. If you go through these preposterous filings that they submitted yesterday and I talked to a number of people who are very familiar with the accounting world and nonprofits. It's a sham, it's not a charity. It is a vehicle to promote the Clinton family and to make money for the Clinton Family and their cronies. Exactly as I stated quite rightly and accurately in my story.

Rob: Wow, it's a sham, huh? Okay so you say in your article, "If the Justice Department and law enforcement agencies do their jobs, the foundation will be closed and its current and past trustees, who include Bill, Hillary, and Chelsea Clinton, will be indicted. That's because their so-called charitable enterprise has served as a vehicle to launder money and to enrich Clinton family friends." And you say, "It's beyond dispute."

KS: It's beyond dispute, there's no question about it. First off let me just say that the new filings were submitted by PricewaterhouseCoopers which is a big accounting firm which I think is going to find themselves in a lot of trouble because they submitted financial statements that they know are false. The prior accountant for the Clinton Foundation was a Little Rock firm called BKD, which is very, it's been accused, not accused, it's been documented to have violated Securities and exchange commission rules, it's been sanctioned by the SEC. And you wonder why does that huge huge foundation like the Clinton Foundation use a Little Rock accounting firm all these years up until under pressure they got PricewaterhouseCoopers? I mean that's what Bernie Madoff did or Madoff, I never remember how to pronounce his name. He had a really small firm that he could pressure to submit phony statements to support his Ponzi scheme. And the Clintons did something very very familiar. They used an unknown Little Rock firm that they could influence and that's why they had to re-submit all of these filings. Now, the main focus of my story, and you can look at so many different aspects of the Clinton Foundation and realize that it's a fraud but the thing I focused on is a Canadian Entity, which is allegedly a non-profit too, called the Clinton Giustra Enterprise Partnership. Now in Canada, donors to charities, alleged charities, don't have to be disclosed. In the United States you don't have to disclose them publicly but you have to disclose them to the IRS. In Canada there is enhanced privacy for donors. So what happened and what I focused on is that, this entity, and I'll get to the Giustra part of it in a moment, this is a close friend of Bill Clintons and somebody he made rich in business deals in Kazakhstan and Colombia, but this entity took in a lot of money. And it doesn't have to disclose its' donors, it then funneled money, like a money laundering outfit, which it is, to the United States.

Rob: In your article you make it clear that because of Canadian Law, they don't have to disclose donors like it's required in the US.

KS: Exactly, so it takes in all this money, and I'll get to who some of the donors are, my understanding, I know who some of the donors are, I shouldn't say my understanding. They won't deny this. But they receive a lot of money, from un-named anonymous donors, and then they sent at least 25 million dollars to the Clinton Foundation. I'm told the real number is more in the mid 30s or higher than that. But they acknowledge sending 25 million to the Clinton Foundation but all the money donated is listed as coming from this Canadian entity, the Clinton Giustra Enterprise Partnership. So it's like, you know if I am a non-profit and I collect money from Al Capone and John Dillinger, and then I send it to another charity under my name, it looks like, hey if I look like I'm clean, and I'm not a crook like Frank Giustra who is a crook, the you know partner with Bill Clinton in this Canadian entity, it looks like it's clean money, you know. After all it's just coming from Ken Silverstein and I have a good reputation. It doesn't come from John Dillinger and Al Capone. But that's what, this is the way it works. The Clinton Foundation is taking dirty money, it's from the Middle East, from members of the royal family and the dictatorship of Equatorial Guinea and Africa, family members and the former government Jacob Zuma in South Africa, so this Canadian Entity takes dirty money and then cleans it, allegedly, and sends it on to the Clinton Foundation in New York. They should be indicted. Chelsea and Bill are trustees. They are legally responsible for the bad actions of the Clinton Foundation. Hillary used to be a trustee. They all should be indicted and imprisoned. And they should be investigated, not investigated, they should be brought to justice for tax evasion, money laundering and other criminal misconduct, which I believe. Unfortunately you know you have the Obama justice administration and various Obama, you know, the IRS there's a lot of political protection because after all, it is Obama's former Secretary of State. And after all Bill Clinton, I'm sorry, Barack Obama is a huge, he donated his Nobel Peace Prize winnings to the Clinton Foundation. So I'm not sure he's dying for his Justice Department to investigate this. And by the way if you go to my story, at Harper's, all the links are there so you can see, this all put together in a way that is irrefutable. The Clinton Foundation did not comment, this is my third story they have not commented on despite my saying, I'm making very serious allegations of criminal misconduct, you have nothing to say? And guess what, they have nothing to say. So I would urge your listeners to read the story at Harper's. I did a previous story at the New York Observer where I have a column called Washington Babylon about Sidney Blumenthal, one of the many Clinton cronies who's gotten paid by the foundation. And then I also did a story for Byline which is, where I raise money for my investigative reporting, because the state of investigative reporting in this country is so crummy that I have to raise money through social media so if you go to Byline, if anyone wants to google my name and Byline you can find my page at this crowdsourcing site for journalists where I raise money to support this work I do.

Rob: And I'm talking to Ken Silverstein who is an investigative journalist, contributing editor for Vice Magazine and he does the column Washington Babylon for the New York Observer. He's got a new article out called, published by Harper's about the Clintons and their laundering money and enriching family friends. So tell us a little bit about this other article that you did please.

KS: Well Sidney Blumenthal, I expect some of your listeners may be familiar with him, he is a former journalist, actually, before he decided to go to the dark side. He used to write for the Washington Post, the New Yorker, he actually got fired from the New Yorker quietly because he was so closed to the Clintons. That's actually the original reason he was hired, was because he was close to the Clintons, and then they realize he was so close to the Clintons that nothing he said could be trusted. There's a famous quote, I think it's, Mary McCarthy said it about Lillian Hellman that every word she writes, including is and the, is a lie. And that's what I would say about Sidney Blumenthal. He is a totally immoral unethical liar who will say anything and do anything for the Clinton family. He also would not comment for my story, despite my telling him I'm going to write that you're criminally, your conduct in criminal. He actually could be indicted, he's been testifying before the, under duress, before the Benghazi committee. He's basically, he's been a hatchet man for the family since the first Clinton administration which he served in if that's the right term. He's a smear artist, he will put out any lie, for any enemy of the Clinton family, he will say anything and do anything, even if he knows it is completely false, because he doesn't understand truth or lies, he understands political victory and he sponsors the Clintons. He's served them very faithfully, again if that's the right word.

Rob: What's the article about? You said a bunch of horrible stuff about this guy, what's the article about?

KS: You're right, you're right, and again let me just urge your listeners to go to the story at the New York Observer, but it's about his history and lying. One claim in particular, there was a Wall Street Journal editorial writer named John Fund, and Blumenthal was accused of wife beating. I say in my story that was a false accusation. But he became obsessed with finding out who had spread this rumor about him which is really ironic because that's his profession to spread lies and rumors and falsehood. So he went out and he determined somehow, I have no idea how, that it was John Fund, who was a big, you know he was a Wall Street Journal Editorial writer so he was an enemy of the Clintons. Somehow Blumenthal became obsessed with, oh it was John Fund. So he went out and he obtained some accurate information, which is that John Fund had two affairs with a mother and then her daughter, and it's really unattractive behavior, and when I talk to Fund he said yeah, I screwed up and I opened myself up to black mail. He didn't apologize for his behavior, he explained it and he took responsibility for it. But Blumenthal went out and spread, like made the story, you know it doesn't make Fund look good but he spread information that was even worse. He went out to, the daughter that Fund had an affair with is mentally unstable, even her mother acknowledged that, the woman Morgan Pillsbury, the daughter, acknowledged, I mean she sued Fund and then she dropped the lawsuit. She acknowledged she was a pathological liar and mentally unhinged and that, she said in a sworn deposition before dropping the lawsuit, she was asked how many lies have you told in the past, and she said, I'm paraphrasing but she said, too many to count. So you know she talked about how Fund had beaten her up, and had this sorted affair. You know the truth is I don't know, you know Fund denies that he beat her up. He was investigated by the district attorney's office in New York and they never pressed charges. I report all this in my story. I'm like, I don't know whether he beat her up or not. Morgan Pillsbury's mother, said she thinks, basically she said he thinks he did that she saw her daughter five minutes after Fund had been with her, and she was battered and you know there were photographs of her daughter. Look I don't know, I say in my story I don't know whether this is true or false.

Rob: What's the mother's name?

KS: As we talk I'm going to have to find that because I honestly, I wrote this story a month ago and I've written a lot since then so let me find that for you.

Rob: I ask because I think I've had contact with her.

KS: Well it's, I'll find it. Let me just point out one thing though as we're talking. Blumenthal, according to the mother, he offered her daughter, to get her a free lawyer to bring a case against John Fund. And then he reneged on the offer. So, basically, what I accuse him of, and which he hasn't commented on, is taking advantage of a mentally unstable women and putting her into the public realm and encouraging her to bring a lawsuit that would he thought destroy a political enemy of his. So I mean how much lower can you sink then that? I mean honestly to take advantage of a young unstable woman for your own political purposes, whatever the purpose was. Let me just, I feel like I have to say this. You know I really detest the Clintons, but I have equal scorn and condemn for the Bush family, so I'm not taking political sides here. I'm not voting for anyone for president. They're all, the system is so broken. It's beyond taking lesser of two evils. The choices are so bad that I'm not going to dignify any of them by voting for them. But the woman, I found her name, it's Melinda Pillsbury Foster, who is a former vice chairwoman, or chairman of the libertarian party of Southern California. And she's president of the Arthur C Pillsbury Foundation. She's the woman who had an affair with John Fund in the late 1970's and then later her daughter...

Rob: Melinda had submitted numerous articles to OpEd News, the site I publish, and she had written a bit about some of this and I was kind of suspicious about it. And then I met John Fund when I covered the CPAC conference one year, not much of a meeting he was kind of a hoity and didn't really respond to me but, this is an interesting tying together of all the pieces here. Very interesting.

KS: It's a really interesting tie-in.

Rob: But again what was the article, what was the theme, what was the title of the article? What was the theme?

KS: Oh good point, good question. The title of the article was "Just Who is Sidney Blumenthal, The Clinton's Closest Advisor?" And the sub title was "Will Hillary's Hatchet Man be up for White House Job if She Wins?" Because, you know, she wanted to hire him when she was Secretary of State. And it got shutdown allegedly by Rahm Emanuel whose another, I don't want to say anything good about him. But I think because he's like Blumenthal, he'll say or do anything for political victory. He recognized that hiring Blumenthal, and they're political rivals by the way, so it was partly I think Emanuel recognized that Blumenthal opened up the Obama Administration to criticize him because he's such a sleaze bag, but also he doesn't like Blumenthal. They were both, he was going to be the Chief of Staff and he didn't want for Obama and, Hillary was going to be Secretary of State, so he didn't want one of his rivals getting a high ranking position. In any event, that speculation why Rahm Emanuel shot down, or allegedly shot down, Blumenthal, he was going to be an aid to Hillary. But you know as I write in this article, Blumenthal, like he's too tainted, congress even to Democrats recognize that he's complete dirt. So they would never, he could never be confirmed for any position that requires congressional approves, there's no way. But Hillary could pick him to, you know there are 2,000 White House jobs, very senior positions that don't require, roughly 2,000 jobs, that don't require congressional confirmation so if Hillary Clinton won you could have, basically as I describe him in my piece, the most a-moral political hatchet man of modern times be appointed to a senior White House position. That's a scary thought. There are other candidates who have skeletons in their closet, but Sidney Blumenthal's like, you know, Charles Manson, I mean this is a serial killer that could get a senior White House position under Hillary, and that may sound extreme, but again read my stories and see what you think. Everything, you know I link to published accounts and I quote people on the record and a few off the record and all I can tell you is Blumenthal won't deny anything I wrote nor will the Clinton family.

Rob: So you're going to send me a link to that article so it'll be in the notes for the interview here. I want to get back to Hillary and Bill's foundation and the money laundering. You write, "One money-laundering expert and former intelligence officer based in the Middle East who had access to the foundation's confidential banking information told me that members of royal families in Middle Eastern countries, including Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates, have donated money to the CGEP and that has then been sluiced through to the Clinton Foundation." Now, what is terrible about that? What's wrong with that?

KS: Well, I mean if you don't think money laundering, there's anything wrong with money laundering. Look I mean, if"

Rob: What are the implications, that's what I mean. What are the implications, what are they doing, why are they giving them the money, what are the implications?

KS: Well the implications, look if you want secrecy, I mean you know if members of the royal family of Kuwait or United Arab Emirates want to give money to the Clinton Foundation, that's fine, but they should do it openly and publicly. The Saudi Arabian government, you know which, wonderful government there, they openly give money. This is the thing, the Clinton Foundation acknowledges receiving money from a bunch of Dictatorial Governments, a lot of business people who have been accused, and you know, of criminal misconduct. Think about if they openly take money from people like that and governments like that, who are they hiding? I mean, why if you're a donor, if you want to give money to the Clinton Foundation, why do you give it to a Canadian Entity, which assures you of privacy, why not just give it to the Clinton Foundation and let them post it on their website? And by the way, it was founded, the Clinton Foundation was founded by Bill right after his term ended. I was against his impeachment and still am because I don't think you should be impeached for sexual misconduct. It's just bad behavior but it's not an impeachable offense. But right after he leaves office and admits that he lie, you know, what is a problem is when you lie under oath about the Monica Lewinsky affair and when your, you know if you or I do that we face consequences, Bill skated. Even though he's admitted, he's admitted the truth, but he chose not to. I mean think about that as a standard of public conduct. I chose to tell a lie under oath. So he had to surrender his law license, because of that, but he didn't face criminal prosecutions. But he starts his foundation in 2001 and they don't start revealing any donors until 2008. And now they're like, oh we are so transparent and wonderful, but it was seven years under pressure from outside parties before they even admitted or you know publicly disclosed their donors. This is a foundation that has a long record of opaqueness and dishonesty, and now they're claiming, oh we just submitted years of returns because there were some mistakes and we're expected to believe them? I mean, you know there, Donna Shalala is the, there are all these Clinton Cronies who are making money, being paid by the Clinton Foundation and you know we're just supposed to take them at their word? I mean please. I believe they're going to be held accountable ultimately for the foundation. The conduct is so outrageous.

Rob: Let me just do this a little bit more now you say for example that, "Equatorial Guinea, one of the most brutal and crooked dictatorships in the world, doesn't give to the Clinton Foundation in New York because it's too embarrassing, they give the money anonymously in Canada and that buys them political protection in the United States." What kind of protection?

KS: Well look, this is one of the worst dictatorships ever, I shouldn't say ever, I mean that's a hard thing to say, but currently it's one of the worst. if you look at human rights reports by human rights watcher Amnesty International, or if you look at press accounts or every year, I haven't seen it for a while but Parade Magazine that's still inserted into Sunday newspapers I think, comes out with a list of the worst dictators and they're always like on the top ten list, or typically on the top ten list. I've been there so I know what I'm talking about. And American Oil companies have invested there and have made this rogue regime very rich and there's no dispute, I've written about this as well for Harper's and many other publications, that the ruling family has gotten obscenely wealthy while the majority, the great majority, like 95 or 98 % of the population is miserable. It's really disgusting. I've been there and it's, you know you see these, a few mansions and then most people living without plumbing or you know, shanty towns the sort of classic pictures you see, you know of kids with distended bellies. But the Bush administration they discovered, this was a backwater until I think it was the mid 2000's when Bush was president and they discovered Exon discovered a ton of oil and started pumping oil and the Bush administration covered up for them too, there's a pretty famous picture if you follow this sort of thing of the president, the dictator of the country, you know with Condoleezza Rice. Which, you know, he shows his citizen's back home, see they love me in Washington. That's valuable to the dictator. So you know like Clinton, I'm sorry the Bush administration, George W Bush and then the Obama administration will periodically say, oh you, you know they wag a finger and say this is terrible, but they allow that government. Instead of just saying look, this is a rotten government that we shouldn't be dealing with and American Oil companies should probably not even be pumping oil there no matter how much money they're making. And no matter, in theory, how that's good for the United States because it's the reason we justify being in bed with dictatorships. You know, you , instead of just saying, look this is an outlaw regime that we should have no part of, they wag their finger and you know when the president, the quote president wins re-election with 99 or 98 percent of the vote, you know he's so stupid. You know if he just won with 94 percent it would look better, but his American lobbyist you know he won't even listen to them. Like Mr. President please you're paying us a lot of money listen to our advice just take 94 or 93 percent. But he always wins with like 99.3 or 98.9 or whatever. So you know and then the state department will say, oh, that's terrible we really disapprove, and then the next day, you know because it's not like a country that anybody pays attention to, so they can get away with apologizing for this rogue regime. And you know basically what helps the Bush and Clinton, I'm sorry Obama administrations are in bed with this regime, they just pretend otherwise so.

Rob: So are you saying that Hillary used her position as Secretary of State?

KS: Well she certainly did in some cases, with Equatorial Guinea she just ignored it. But it some cases she was more active, like one of the shocking things, and this I got cut from my Harper's piece but I post it on Byline today, I did a short story at Byline you can find that includes this information. There are a couple of things I would point to. Bill Clinton gets paid enormous amounts of money to give speeches around the world, okay? You know he will give like a 30 minute speech and make a few hundred grand. I mean I'm not sure where that money's going? Into his pocket or who knows where that money ends up going. But if you match up Hillary's travel records as Secretary of State with Bill Clinton's speaking appearances you find stunning coincidences, stunning coincidences. So for example, in 2010, Bill Clinton was with Frank Giustra his Canadian businessman who he made very rich. Again I don't want to go into all the details here, but your listeners can by reading my articles see how he made him rich. They were in Colombia, in South America, where there's a right-wing dictatorship, oh actually it's not a dictatorship, technically they have elections, but it's like different factions of the ruling party win. And where there's a history of death squads and narco trafficking and the US has apologized because they're big investors there, US investors. And one of them is Clinton's good friend Frank Giustra. So in June of 2010 they're down there together, they're inaugurating Clinton Foundation activities, and Giustra has big investments in Colombia, and Bill is getting paid for his speaking appearance. And low and behold the next day, I think it was June 2010, Hillary turns up in Colombia, and she gives a joint press conference with the, you know, president of Colombia. And you know despite the atrocities committed by this guy, Alvaro Uribe, and the horrible human rights record, Hillary goes down there and shills for the Colombian government, when her husband is down there. And then she has the nerve to write in her memoir, which I really love it's called "Hard Choices" yeah, very hard choices to stay with your husband or not? Or to like forgive human rights abuses because your husband's friend has investments in Colombia? I'm just suspecting that might be one of the reason I can't say that flat out, who knows what was going on in Hillary's head. But in her own memoir she says, this was a happy coincidence where my husband and I were in the same place at the same time. Really was it a happy coincidence or was it, let me use government travel, to fly to places where my husband's going to be or around the same time, and sometimes literally at the same time, like in this instance. And our activities INAUDIBLE 32:10

Rob: How many examples of this have you been able to identify?

KS: You'd have to, there are a few others, I say in my piece, if you're the Benghazi committee or if you're the Justice Department or the Internal Revenue Service, you have the power of subpoena, I don't. I don't have all day, I don't have all week even because I'm writing a lot to support myself and my family, I say in the piece, look you government agencies and congress have subpoena power, get the records and piece it together. But there are other examples, that is the most egregious where you just go, oh was it really a coincidence. I mean please. But I would, basically my article is an attempt to, and this sounds like delusions of grandeur but as a journalist, I feel like you know, you write in hopes of causing action and you hope that other people, you know because there have been other stories about the Clinton Foundation and the outrageous conduct of the Clinton family, you hope that people who actually have power in the government will say, enough is enough let's clean this up. Let's at least, let's subpoena the relevant records and let's see if they broke the law. And that's what my modest hope is for my story is that it focuses attention on people who actually have the authority to pull the records and maybe, I'm wrong. I would have though the Clinton Foundation would have denied it and Sidney Blumenthal. And you know, if I'm wrong, I'm wrong. I think my story's speak for themselves.

Rob: Okay so he just accidentally got disconnected. This is where I keep talking while he hopefully calls back in. So what he writes in the article that is really kind of astonishing is that it's not tens of millions or hundreds of millions of dollars that come in it's over a billion dollars that has come in to the Clinton Foundation. They have some projects that channel money for medications and for healthcare that it's over a billion dollars. So, we'll ask about that. He also writes in the article about how this Canadian organization says it "has never received funding from any members of any royal family or any countries around the world, it doesn't take money from foreign governments." But he explains, or reports, that it has been explained to him is that in countries like Equatorial Guinea and Kuwait, basically the government and private money gets switched around, it's very loose and so it's easy for government money to go through private hands and then it can end up in this foundation and the Canadian organization could be telling the truth and yet the government is going to get the benefits of it.

Rob: So your article refers to the fact that the Clinton Foundation has received over a billion dollars, you have any idea how much it's received, is there any record of that?

KS: There's no real way to know for sure, I mean the problem is that they've been so dishonest in the past that there's really no, you can't trust their numbers. I mean I quote a guy

Rob: Okay so we're almost out of time so I want to keep the answers short, so bottom line is that they're laundering money, what is your worst concern that Hillary Clinton has done with laundered money?

KS: I think it's beyond dispute what she's done as Secretary of State, she allowed the money donated to the Clinton Foundation to impact her decisions as a public citizen. She, I don't think there's any question that the donors got her attention and favors from Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State. You know it's one thing I believe our political system is so hopelessly corrupt, it's bad enough that donors can buy access to the president and to members of congress, but at least the donors are in theory public. But she allowed people to remain anonymous who are so dirty that they can't even show their face in public, and then as Secretary of State, you know in charge of US foreign policy she allowed corrupt foreign officials to influence American public policy. That's pretty bad. That to me is really again, as low as you can sink as a public official to allow corrupt, not just foreigners because you know we have corrupt Americans who have influence. I mean some of them every once in a while go to jail. Some of the crooks at Goldman Sachs I don't know if any of them actually went to jail for their tanking the US economy and putting millions of people out of work and you know not just Goldman Sachs but a variety of Wall Street firms. You know, I mean she allowed corrupt foreign interests to influence her thinking as Secretary of State. That's pretty bad.

Rob: What kind of response have you had from this article so far?

KS: Well it's hard to say I've had tremendous response to the last few articles I wrote because I can count the Facebook shares and Twitter shares. Harper's is, for reasons good or bad, is not, they don't allow you to see that. I know I've gotten a lot of phone calls and I know a lot of people have posted about it. But it's, you know in this day and age the only way to really measure impact is when you get people's attention, you hear, after my Blumenthal piece I did hear that the congressional investigators had seen it and you know and said, wow this is not, we hadn't quite looked at the facts this way before, this is a powerful argument which is very flattering. It's harder to measure this, but based on my read it's having a good impact and I think over the next few weeks and months maybe we'll see some action where you can tell that the scrutiny of the foundation is really not getting the attention of the public and especially conservatives, because liberals don't want to look at this but people in law enforcement. I think we're going to see some good things come out of, not just my work obviously but a lot journalists are scrutinizing the Clinton Foundation and I think good things will happen, I hope so.

Rob: And why haven't charges been brought against the Clintons?

KS: Well I think, you know the Obama administration. Look I mean, you know, nobody in this town, like the republicans don't really want to go up to the democrats too hard and vice versa because everybody knows that, I mean, when you're in power, I mean we have a political system, I'm sure a lot of your listeners are familiar with the term gerrymander where you have districts where basically the republicans and democrats have divided up the country into safe congressional seats, so that if you win as a republican in the primary, you're almost guaranteed to win the general election. And the democrats have done the same in their, you know it's like 50/50. So everybody's feeding the troth. They're all happy. You're not happy when you lose, you're almost guaranteed to win reelection so once you get the camel's nose under the tent you can pretty much stay in congress, I mean often, for many years, and sometimes the rest of your life if there are no term limits. So nobody wants to be too hard on the other side. But I think that the democrats, even some democrats are, you know they've been holding their nose so long.

The more public attention, the more media attention and the more the democrats, not just the republicans, say this is unacceptable, the harder it is for the Obama administration, in its waning days, to say we're not going to do anything about it. I mean I know for a fact that the IRS, the Treasury Department more broadly, the IRS, the FBI, and Canadian tax authorities know about the misconduct, the criminal misconduct that I believe criminal misconduct that I write about, and they have chosen to do nothing. I mean well, I believe they're investigating but they haven't been more aggressive because there's not enough public outrage. But if people get mad, and you know whatever write articles in my case or phone your member of congress, and especially democrats and say this stinks, like I don't, you're my elected official and even, it's a democratic administration and Bill Clinton a former democratic president, this is too much for me to stomach, you know the more people speak up, the harder it is for the Obama administration to do nothing, and even you know whoever wins the next election. Hopefully, action is taken before then but, you know it's enough impunity for our elected officials, they've gotten away with murder for a long time and it's time we speak up let them know that there's only so much bullshit we're gonna take.

Rob: Alright you're given me a lot more than the time I've asked for, I really appreciate it. Thank-you so much.

KS: Thank-you.