reSee.it - Related Video Feed

We've stopped the $8,000,000 in taxpayer subsidies for Politico subscriptions. The team is working to cancel the payments immediately. Large organizations inevitably miss things. Claims of widespread waste and abuse haven't been substantiated with evidence. We haven't seen proof of the alleged misuse of funds.

I just signed a $200,000,000 drawdown from the Department of Defense for Ukraine. It will be coming quickly. Thank you.

We propose providing secure and efficient digital payment access to all citizens, ensuring their freedom to pay.

Speaker 0: An early 2014 email from Hillary Clinton to her campaign manager, John Podesta, states that ISIL ISIS is funded by the governments of Saudi Arabia and Qatar. This email is described as the most significant in the collection. Speaker 1: The discussion notes that Saudi and Qatari money is spread widely, including to many media institutions. While some analysts and even the US government have mentioned that some Saudi figures have supported or funded ISIS, the typical explanation has been that it’s rogue princes using oil money with the government disapproving. The email, however, asserts that the governments of Saudi Arabia and Qatar have been funding ISIS. Speaker 1: It is claimed that Saudis, Qataris, Moroccans, Bahrainis—particularly the Saudis and the Qataris—are giving money to the Clinton Foundation while Hillary Clinton is secretary of state, and the State Department is approving massive arms sales to Saudi Arabia. Speaker 0: Hillary Clinton says, “I’m Hillary Clinton,” and emails reveal a significant discussion about it. The email asserts that the largest ever arms deal in the world was made with Saudi Arabia, more than $80,000,000,000. It states that during her tenure as secretary of state, total arms exports from the United States in terms of the dollar value doubled. Speaker 1: The consequence noted is that the notorious terrorist jihadist group ISIL or ISIS is created largely with money from the very people who are giving money to the Clinton Foundation. The implication highlighted is that this is extraordinary.

In an early 2014 email, Hillary Clinton informed her campaign manager that ISIS is funded by the governments of Saudi Arabia and Qatar. This revelation is significant as it contradicts the belief that only rogue individuals were supporting ISIS. The Clinton Foundation received donations from Saudi Arabia and Qatar while Clinton was Secretary of State, coinciding with massive arms sales to Saudi Arabia. This led to a doubling of total arms exports during her tenure, with some of that money potentially funding ISIS.

Our financial systems are antiquated. We're unable to track trillions of dollars in transactions. Information sharing is severely limited by outdated and incompatible technological systems.

In an email from Hillary Clinton to her campaign manager, it is stated that Saudi Arabia and Qatar, the governments themselves, have been funding ISIS. This is significant because Saudi and Qatari money is spread across various media institutions. While Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State, the Saudis and Qataris were giving money to the Clinton Foundation, while the State Department approved massive arms sales, particularly to Saudi Arabia. The largest arms deal in the world, worth over $80 billion, was made with Saudi Arabia during Clinton's tenure. As a result, the terrorist group ISIS was largely funded by the same people who donated to the Clinton Foundation.

ActBlue changed its donation process in September to require CVV numbers to prevent foreign donations. However, there hasn't been a noticeable drop-off in donations since this change. The information provided by ActBlue was misleading; they only require CVV numbers for new accounts opened after the change. This means that hundreds of thousands of existing donors are still not subject to this requirement, which was not clearly communicated.

I am the finance director for Donald Trump in Mississippi. Some wealthy individuals are afraid to donate to Trump because they fear the FBI will investigate them. They believe that making a legitimate campaign contribution to the Republican nominee could lead to the FBI showing up at their door. This is a reality in the United States of America.

As the CFO of Hillary's campaign, we needed to hire Stripe as our payment system processor for handling donations.

As secretary of state, I was deeply involved in getting rid of a prosecutor in Ukraine. The entire administration, including Obama, the vice president, and myself, worked towards this goal. We knew that for Ukraine to succeed and win the revolution, they had to remove the prosecutor. I made it clear to them that if the prosecutor wasn't fired, they wouldn't receive $1,000,000,000 in funding. Eventually, the prosecutor was fired, and Ukraine achieved their objective.

Speaker 0 questions Speaker 1, who was the CFO of Hillary Clinton's campaign, about facilitating payment for the Steele Dossier. Speaker 1 denies any knowledge of it. Speaker 0 brings up John Podesta's involvement and accuses Speaker 1 of being aware of the campaign's payment for the dossier. Speaker 1 maintains that they were not aware. Speaker 0 criticizes Speaker 1 for not holding themselves to the same standard as private sector CFOs. Speaker 1 clarifies that the SEC's focus is on financial accuracy, not campaign payments. The conversation ends with Speaker 0 asking if Speaker 1 accurately paid for the dossier.

I sold security systems door to door, which helped finance this.

We can't track $2.3 trillion in transactions. That's two trillion, three hundred billion dollars.

In 2010, after the Haiti earthquake, the Clinton Foundation received $1 billion but less than 2% went to Haiti. The Haitian community asks Trump to request Hillary Clinton to disclose the audit of the funds taken from Haiti. They believe in Trump's support and ask for transparency. Thank you.

The discussion centers on the main payments system, referred to as PAM, described as the “payments computer” and commonly called PAM by everyone. PAM is responsible for almost $5,000,000,000,000 in payments per year, which equates to roughly a billion dollars every hour. The speakers indicate that, upon their arrival, they observed what they describe as a severe lack of payment metadata: payments could be processed with no payment categorization code and no description, effectively creating payments that were “untraceable blank checks.” The speakers contrast this situation with how such conduct would be viewed in the private sector, stating that if this were a public company, the company would be immediately delisted and the executive team would be thrown in prison. They emphasize that, in the context they are discussing, this kind of exposure is considered normal within the government. The overall point is that the payments system operates with extremely little traceability or descriptive data attached to transactions, creating a scenario they characterize as highly problematic and unacceptable in the private sector but commonplace in the government.

She offered to deliver 5,000 votes for Biden for $55,000 upfront. She emphasized the need for payment, stating she won't work for free. The cost per vote was estimated to be between 5 to 8 dollars.

The speaker recounts creating the first Stripe prototype in Buenos Aires. Instead of sightseeing, they spent the time coding in cafes. About a week after arriving in Buenos Aires, they had their first production user. They called a friend at a payment processing company to ask if they could send a couple of accounts. They built an API and interface for setting up accounts. Clicking "create account" didn't actually create an account in the financial infrastructure; instead, they called their friend. This approach scaled to at least a couple of users.

I don't require money, campaign contributions, lobbyists, or special interests. All I need is to do what's right for the country.

Speaker 0 questions Speaker 1, who was the CFO of Hillary Clinton's campaign, about facilitating payment for the Steele Dossier. Speaker 1 denies knowledge of it. Speaker 0 brings up John Podesta's involvement and accuses Speaker 1 of being aware of the campaign's payment for the dossier. Speaker 1 maintains that they were not aware. Speaker 0 criticizes Speaker 1 for not holding themselves to the same standard as private sector CFOs. Speaker 1 clarifies that the SEC's focus is on financial accuracy, not campaign payments. The conversation ends with Speaker 0 asking if Speaker 1 accurately paid for the dossier.

Last year, I was authorized to withhold $1 billion until the chief prosecutor was fired. I made it clear that if he wasn't fired within 6 hours, they wouldn't receive the money. Eventually, they replaced him with someone reliable.

I am the finance director for Donald Trump in Mississippi. Some wealthy individuals are afraid to donate to Trump because they fear the FBI will investigate them. They believe that making a legitimate campaign contribution to the Republican nominee could lead to a visit from the FBI. This is a reality in the United States of America.

In 2010, after the Haiti earthquake, the Clinton Foundation received billions in donations from American taxpayers and the world. However, less than 2% of that money actually went to Haiti. We are asking Mr. Trump to publicly request Hillary Clinton to disclose a full audit of all the funds they allegedly stole from Haiti after the earthquake. Haiti is a poor country in desperate need of defenders. We welcome your support and are ready to collaborate with you. Please, during your next debate with Hillary Clinton, ask her to publish the audit of all the money that was taken from Haiti. Thank you.

One participant observes that the matter is sophisticated and implies a coordinated effort beyond a single email, noting that it involves a multi-hundred-million-dollar transaction processed through complex steps and asking how the money can be traced. The other participant explains what is known: the NSA identified senior Ukrainian government officials who were having the conversation and reportedly have some of their emails. The intercepts do not name USAID workers directly; they only mention that they are “working for USAID in Kev.” Because of that, tracing who was in contact with those officials about a clean energy grant during a war with Russia should be possible by narrowing down who was connected to those USAID-related emails. They indicate progress has been made since the story was published the previous week, suggesting early movement in identifying the involved parties. They describe the NSA intercepts as a summary of intercepts noting that the operation was designed to be so complicated that it would be hard to figure out after the fact, with money laundered multiple times until it was eventually diverted and sent to the DNC and Joe Biden. At the time this was happening, a famous person was leading USAID: Samantha Power, who is described as very close to Obama, Clinton, and Biden. The statement emphasizes that, while this does not imply involvement, it suggests examining USAID from the top down to determine who knew what and when. In summary, the discussion frames the situation as a highly sophisticated, large-scale financial operation with a chain of communication involving senior Ukrainian officials and USAID personnel. The NSA’s intercepts point to a deliberate design to obscure the trail, with potential implications involving political figures connected to USAID’s leadership. The speakers highlight ongoing progress in identifying who was in touch with the Ukrainian officials and stress the importance of tracing the funding flow, including hints about laundering patterns and the ultimate destination of funds.

Did you serve as CFO for Hillary Clinton's campaign? Yes, in 2016. Did you facilitate the payment for the Steele dossier? That was not something I was aware of. Yes or no? It was not something I was aware of. I yield back the rest of my time.