John Fund: ‘FBI Investigation Goes on into the Clinton Foundation, Rather Than the Emails’

NEW YORK, NY - DECEMBER 15: Former U.S. Secretary of State and first lady Hillary Clinton
Andrew Burton/Getty Images/AFP

National Review columnist John Fund joined SiriusXM host Alex Marlow on Monday’s Breitbart News Daily to talk about his recent article, “If Hillary Wins, We’ll Have a Potential Blackmail Target in the White House.”

“Well, the FBI has certainly managed to muddle the waters,” Fund observed, responding to Sunday’s letter from FBI Director James Comey to Congress that the Bureau stood by its earlier decision not to recommend indictments against Hillary Clinton for mishandling classified information.

Fund noted that Comey’s letter was silent on the subject of whether top Clinton aides, such as Huma Abedin, could yet face prosecution.

“And, of course, we now know what we didn’t know a week ago: there is an ongoing, five-office FBI probe of the Clinton Foundation,” he added. “So I believe the FBI investigation goes on into the Clinton Foundation, rather than the emails.”

“Do you predict the media will try to make this seem as though the Clintons are completely exonerated from their corruption charges?” Marlow asked.

“I think you’ve already stated their conclusion,” Fund replied.

“We have never had a case in which a presidential candidate has so exposed national security secrets,” he said. “The FBI is apparently almost 99 percent convinced that Hillary Clinton’s private server was hacked into by one or more foreign powers. This is unprecedented, and as of today, WikiLeaks has reported all kinds of things about Hillary Clinton’s campaign – but I think with a single exception, there’s not been one email from Hillary Clinton in that batch of WikiLeaks, 50,000 emails. Well, what that means is, if someone hacked into her server, they have her emails. If they have her emails, they haven’t released them before the election, which means they’re going to have them after the election. That’s called leverage.”

“I think it’s very chilling because there’s an ominous parallel to this,” Fund continued. “In the 1990s, Bill Clinton had all kinds of –   shall we say? –  inappropriate conversations over insecure phone lines with Monica Lewinsky. Those were captured by Chinese, Russian, and Israeli, and British intelligence, and there is some evidence that at least one of those powers tried to blackmail Bill Clinton over the Monica Lewinsky affair. Remember, Bill Clinton went to extraordinary lengths to conceal that affair. It took nine months and a stained dress for him to actually tell the truth.”

Marlow noted that Fund commemorated the passing of former Attorney General Janet Reno at 78 on Monday morning, after a long battle with Parkinson’s disease, with a tweet that said, “She had her problems, but she was a paragon of virtue compared to Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch.”

“Janet Reno was a liberal attorney general and certainly pursued those causes,” Fund elaborated. “However, there was a statute in the 1990s that required her, when there was a clear conflict of interest, to appoint the special prosecutor. She appointed six or seven in the first term of the Clinton administration. She did her duty. Despite the fact the White House was very upset with her and didn’t want to appoint her to a second term, they had to because it would have looked as if it was almost obstruction of justice to remove the attorney general that was appointing all these special prosecutors.”

“Contrast that with the behavior of Eric Holder or Loretta Lynch,” he suggested, “Eric Holder, who literally was held in contempt by Congress for withholding documents in the Fast and Furious probe that Breitbart has certainly written a lot about, and Loretta Lynch, who had a secret 37-minute meeting on an airport tarmac in Arizona with Bill Clinton, who was the husband of the presidential candidate at the time, and was the target through the Clinton Foundation probe of an ongoing FBI investigation. It boggles the mind, the politicization. Janet Reno was a paragon of virtue compared to those two figures.”

Fund laid out his plans for election night, noting that “people want to know what’s happening early, so the polls that close earliest are the best for doing that.”

“Indiana is going to close very early. Watch the Senate race in Indiana,” he advised. “If Evan Bayh, the former Democratic senator, makes a comeback – and he’s had a lot of scandals in his campaign – then it’s going to be a very good night for the Democrats.”

“Then you move on to Kentucky. Watch those counties in eastern Kentucky, which are lower-middle-class white counties. See how big the turnout is there. That’ll be an indicator of how much of a ‘silent Trump vote’ might be forming,” he continued.

“Florida is very key. If Hillary Clinton takes Florida or North Carolina early on, I think the dirge music for Donald Trump will start playing early. If Trump carries North Carolina, which Romney carried in 2012, and carries Florida – which is an enormous 29 electoral votes – it’ll be a much longer night,” he predicted.

“If you take the average of all the polls, both state and national, it looks as if Hillary Clinton has a clear but slight lead,” Fund observed. “The polls have margins of error, and they certainly were wrong by about two points in 2012, so you don’t want to go to the bank on them. However, turnout is key. Early voting I think has clearly benefited the Democrats. They have an enormous machine designed to drive people to the polls.”

“I think the whole question of whether or not early voting is a good idea has been brought into sharp relief this time because of the FBI investigation announcement just two weeks before the election. I think we should vote on Election Day,” he declared. “It would be ironic indeed, and it may be probable, that Donald Trump wins on Election Day, but loses because of the Democratic turnout machine in early voting.”

Fund explained that much of the Democrat vote is concentrated in urban areas.

“Those are very high-density areas. It makes it very easy to use existing political machines in places like Chicago, and Philadelphia, and Detroit. You go to the local political organizations and say, ‘Here’s some street money. Here’s $250, $300. Your job is to produce a certain number of votes from your district, and if you get that, you’ll get a bonus. If you don’t, well, we may not hire you next time.’ So there’s an enormous incentive for people to literally go door-to-door. Starting at eight or nine o’clock in the morning, they knock on doors: ‘Have you voted? Have you voted?’ Then they come back at eleven: ‘Have you voted?’ At two o’clock, five o’clock,” he said.

“And then, of course, they organize buses to where certain people congregate to take them to the polls. There are some allegations in places that, well, maybe those buses visit more than one polling location, and maybe people are handed slips of paper saying, ‘Here’s the name you’re gonna use to vote at this polling place, as opposed to the last polling place,’” said Fund.

Breitbart News Daily airs on SiriusXM Patriot 125 weekdays from 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. Eastern.



Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.