Hillary Clinton’s Emails Now Might Finally Take Her Down
- this could very well happen, there is already talk about Biden stepping in
Hillary Clinton’s Emails Now Might Finally Take Her Down
by Dan Metcalfe | 7:08 pm, May 29th, 2016
1042
This past week has been a milestone of sorts for those who closely follow the continuing saga of Hillary Clinton’s wrongful use of email systems during her tenure as Secretary of State. But the kind of milestone it was depends on where you stood when the week began.
For those of us who recognized from the outset that Ms. Clinton’s exclusive use of a personal email system for all her official business (not to mention her unprecedented use of a private server atop that) was a clear violation of the Federal Records Act (“FRA”), the finding of the State Department’s Inspector General (“IG”) to that effect in his May 25 report were no surprise. In fact, on the admitted facts of the case, no other conclusion was possible, and it was simply another “shoe waiting to be dropped.”
To us, knowing that there are no applicable penalties within the FRA(or in the FOIA, for that matter, which Ms. Clinton also blatantly circumvented), the primary significance of the IG report is that it so flatly and persuasively belies nearly every public “defense” that she has uttered on the matter, from her extraordinary news conference at the United Nations on March 10 of last year to even her initial stunned reactions to the IG report itself this past week.
No, her self-serving email set-up was not “allowed” under the State Department’s rules. No, she was not “permitted” to use a personal email system exclusively as she did. No, what she did was hardly just a matter of her “personal convenience.” No, there is no evidence that any State Department attorney (other than perhaps Secretary Clinton herself) ever gave “legal approval” to any part of her special email system. No, everything she did was not “fully above board” or in compliance with the “letter and spirit of the rules,” far from it. Yes, she was indeed required by the FRA to maintain all official e-mails in an official system for proper review, delineation, and retention upon her departure. Yes, her private server equipment was in fact the subject of multiple attempted intrusion attempts (i.e., hacks), including by foreign nations. The list goes on and on. (Note that this does not even include Ms. Clinton’s many serious “misstatements” about her handling of classified or potentially classified information.)
Now, even the general public is left with the unavoidable conclusion that Ms. Clinton either is ignorant of the law (which too many people know is not so) or else feels blithely untethered to reality in a way that necessarily serves her secretive interests regardless of any truth — the technical legal term for which is “pathological lying,” or perhaps merely “psychosis.” Not a pretty picture for a voter of any stripe at any stage of the electoral process.
So what is a voter to do? If you’re a supporter of Donald Trump, you rejoice at the IG report, rightfully thinking that no matter what other shoe drops for Ms. Clinton, at least this one heavily resounds in your candidate’s favor and can be used against her quite potently from now on. (Though you might also want to have your head examined for supporting such a cartoonish candidate in the first place.)
If you’re Bernie Sanders, you view the IG report with a tinge of regret (i.e., for having stretched so far to take the high road on the issue rather than drilling into it as much as the law and facts beckoned) and then embrace it as both a viable wedge with super delegates and a potential bludgeon to be used more broadly at the Democratic National Convention. Yes, it could conceivably be just enough to make the difference for you and your ardent supporters.
If you’re a do-or-die Clinton supporter on the other hand, you look at the IG report as a damning blow to your candidate, as you must, but you console yourself with the fact that it is in effect a “civil law indictment” of her, not a criminal law one. After all, only the Department of Justice can take that latter step and it is clear to you that Ms. Clinton had no intent to break any criminal law — so she’s still got that going for her, right?
But what if you’re a more mainstream member of the Democratic Party, one who views him- or herself as a “keeper of the flame” and cares above all else about a Democratic victory in November — both nationwide and locally, “up and down the ticket,” so to speak. You, my friend, are simply scared to death, terrified even, for reasons that are truly unprecedented.
First, you view Mr. Trump as probably the biggest electoral threat to our Nation’s stability ever (with most recent apologies to H. Ross Perot and Ralph Nader, the latter of whose neo-Bolshevism actually did change the outcome in 2000), one who, it has been shrilly opined,“might just nuke Europe.” Sure, you want to see a Democrat elected to the presidency, every four years if possible, but this year it is especially imperative, vitally so, that the presumptive Republican nominee loses.
Second, you fear Bernie Sanders as your party’s potential standard bearer. Why? Well, let’s start with the fact that he’s a 75-year-old (by Election Day) Socialist, the type of candidate who would have seemed inconceivable to you as a presidential one not so long ago. Is he infinitely more worthy of trust and respect than Ms. Clinton? Yes, you bet he is. Does he have enormous appeal? He sure does, just as candidates such as Howard Dean and (going back to the turbulent ‘60s) Eugene McCarthy did for long stretches of time. But do you fear that running him as a candidate against Donald Trump might be the rare circumstance that actually could allow the latter to prevail? Yes, you do, because you should.
More to the point, though, you fear that the most likely Democrat nominee, having just been seriously wounded by this week’s IG report, is manifestly vulnerable to a much greater wound in the form of a criminal indictment for misconduct that far transcends what the IG report dealt with. Specifically, as a sophisticated observer, you are aware that Former Secretary Clinton’s intent (known in criminal law as mens rea), or lack of same, is not what matters in this case. Rather, the applicable legal standard is a mere “gross negligence” one, as specified in the standard national security non-disclosure agreement that she signed and its underlying criminal statutes.
And when you marry that to the fact that (among other things) her admitted failure to use the State Department’s special classified email system for classified (or potentially classified) information constituted a clear violation of a criminal prohibition, you start worrying big-time. And this is especially so given that Ms. Clinton did not just violate such laws inadvertently or even only occasionally — she did sosystemically. In other words, her very email scheme itself appears to have been a walking violation of criminal law, one with the mens rea prosecution standard readily met.
It also is especially so given that the ongoing investigation of Ms. Clinton’s misconduct is being conducted by the FBI, under the leadership of FBI Director James Comey. Those of us who worked under him when he was the deputy attorney general during the George W. Bush Administration know him to be an exceptional man of utmost integrity, one who can be counted on to recommend a criminal prosecution when the facts and the law of a case warrant it, regardless of political circumstances. Given that the facts and law are so clear in Ms. Clinton’s case, it is difficult to imagine her not being indicted, unless Jim Comey’s expected recommendation for that is abruptly overruled at “Main Justice” (i.e., by Criminal Division Assistant Attorney General Leslie Caldwell, by Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, or by Attorney General Loretta Lynch) or at the White House by President Obama (who customarily does not intervene in such things and would do so here either secretly or at no small political peril).
So what you must contemplate, as a leader of the Democratic Party, is the very real possibility of your likely presidential candidate actually being indicted, on criminal charges, sometime between now and, say, (a) the time of the convention at the end of July; (b) the time of the general election in early November; or (c) Inauguration Day in January. Which possibility would you prefer?
Obviously, the answer might well be possibility (d): No indictment at all. But if that were not a realistic possibility, and remembering that your absolute imperative in this election cycle is to avoid at all costs ending up with a President Donald Trump, your preference is clear: You want a Democrat other than either Clinton or Sanders to go up against Trump in November, unorthodox as that might now sound.
In short, you want a Biden/Kerry ticket, a Kerry/Biden one (less likely), or a ticket with either one of them (preferably Vice President Biden) together with whomever Hillary Clinton picks as her running mate in July.
What? An already-chosen running mate? Yes, her running mate, chosen by her as the presidential nominee — because you want Clinton to be replaced as your nominee (i.e., after the convention), but not with Senator Sanders, for all the reasons stated above.
And you get that only one way: (1) Clinton gets indicted as she ought to, but not until shortly after the convention; (2) the evidence presented in the indictment (as well as that proffered to her and her attorney privately) overwhelmingly proves to her that she in fact has bigger concerns in the coming months than running for the presidency; (3) Clinton is thereby forced to step down as the nominee (a difficult prospect to conceive of, to be sure); (4) the Democratic Party (translation: President Obama, as its leader) declares an “unprecedented” emergency and asks everyone to rally around a replacement ticket; and (5) slyest of all, the Democratic Party asks Senator Sanders to please not fight this, which he could not so easily do anyway once his “clout” is dissipated upon the convention’s conclusion. (Do you remember the seemingly “odd” statements from both Jim Comey and Attorney General Lynch that their ongoing investigation would not necessarily be concluded by the time the convention is held? Not at all inconsistent with the above, are they?)
And as for putative nominee Hillary Clinton in this fanciful scenario, she would receive an absolutely irresistible benefit in exchange for her totally shocking agreement to withdraw: Either minimal prosecution, if at all (see, for example, what was done with a “nolo” plea in the case of then-Vice President Spiro T. Agnew in October 1973), or a presidential pardon, or both. Yes, it could happen, all because Ms. Clinton was unable to envision ever being held to account for her hubris-driven email chicanery. Just as no one could ever envision a possible scenario like this.
Dan Metcalfe is a registered Democrat who has long said that he will vote for Hillary Clinton in November “if she escapes indictment and manages to become the Democratic presidential nominee.” He served as Director of the Justice Department’s Office of Information and Privacy for more than 25 years, during which time he handled information-disclosure policy issues on the dozens of Clinton Administration scandals that arose within public view, as well as two that did not. Since retiring in 2007, he has taught secrecy law at American University’s Washington College of Law.
- this could very well happen, there is already talk about Biden stepping in
Hillary Clinton’s Emails Now Might Finally Take Her Down
by Dan Metcalfe | 7:08 pm, May 29th, 2016
1042
This past week has been a milestone of sorts for those who closely follow the continuing saga of Hillary Clinton’s wrongful use of email systems during her tenure as Secretary of State. But the kind of milestone it was depends on where you stood when the week began.
For those of us who recognized from the outset that Ms. Clinton’s exclusive use of a personal email system for all her official business (not to mention her unprecedented use of a private server atop that) was a clear violation of the Federal Records Act (“FRA”), the finding of the State Department’s Inspector General (“IG”) to that effect in his May 25 report were no surprise. In fact, on the admitted facts of the case, no other conclusion was possible, and it was simply another “shoe waiting to be dropped.”
To us, knowing that there are no applicable penalties within the FRA(or in the FOIA, for that matter, which Ms. Clinton also blatantly circumvented), the primary significance of the IG report is that it so flatly and persuasively belies nearly every public “defense” that she has uttered on the matter, from her extraordinary news conference at the United Nations on March 10 of last year to even her initial stunned reactions to the IG report itself this past week.
No, her self-serving email set-up was not “allowed” under the State Department’s rules. No, she was not “permitted” to use a personal email system exclusively as she did. No, what she did was hardly just a matter of her “personal convenience.” No, there is no evidence that any State Department attorney (other than perhaps Secretary Clinton herself) ever gave “legal approval” to any part of her special email system. No, everything she did was not “fully above board” or in compliance with the “letter and spirit of the rules,” far from it. Yes, she was indeed required by the FRA to maintain all official e-mails in an official system for proper review, delineation, and retention upon her departure. Yes, her private server equipment was in fact the subject of multiple attempted intrusion attempts (i.e., hacks), including by foreign nations. The list goes on and on. (Note that this does not even include Ms. Clinton’s many serious “misstatements” about her handling of classified or potentially classified information.)
Now, even the general public is left with the unavoidable conclusion that Ms. Clinton either is ignorant of the law (which too many people know is not so) or else feels blithely untethered to reality in a way that necessarily serves her secretive interests regardless of any truth — the technical legal term for which is “pathological lying,” or perhaps merely “psychosis.” Not a pretty picture for a voter of any stripe at any stage of the electoral process.
So what is a voter to do? If you’re a supporter of Donald Trump, you rejoice at the IG report, rightfully thinking that no matter what other shoe drops for Ms. Clinton, at least this one heavily resounds in your candidate’s favor and can be used against her quite potently from now on. (Though you might also want to have your head examined for supporting such a cartoonish candidate in the first place.)
If you’re Bernie Sanders, you view the IG report with a tinge of regret (i.e., for having stretched so far to take the high road on the issue rather than drilling into it as much as the law and facts beckoned) and then embrace it as both a viable wedge with super delegates and a potential bludgeon to be used more broadly at the Democratic National Convention. Yes, it could conceivably be just enough to make the difference for you and your ardent supporters.
If you’re a do-or-die Clinton supporter on the other hand, you look at the IG report as a damning blow to your candidate, as you must, but you console yourself with the fact that it is in effect a “civil law indictment” of her, not a criminal law one. After all, only the Department of Justice can take that latter step and it is clear to you that Ms. Clinton had no intent to break any criminal law — so she’s still got that going for her, right?
But what if you’re a more mainstream member of the Democratic Party, one who views him- or herself as a “keeper of the flame” and cares above all else about a Democratic victory in November — both nationwide and locally, “up and down the ticket,” so to speak. You, my friend, are simply scared to death, terrified even, for reasons that are truly unprecedented.
First, you view Mr. Trump as probably the biggest electoral threat to our Nation’s stability ever (with most recent apologies to H. Ross Perot and Ralph Nader, the latter of whose neo-Bolshevism actually did change the outcome in 2000), one who, it has been shrilly opined,“might just nuke Europe.” Sure, you want to see a Democrat elected to the presidency, every four years if possible, but this year it is especially imperative, vitally so, that the presumptive Republican nominee loses.
Second, you fear Bernie Sanders as your party’s potential standard bearer. Why? Well, let’s start with the fact that he’s a 75-year-old (by Election Day) Socialist, the type of candidate who would have seemed inconceivable to you as a presidential one not so long ago. Is he infinitely more worthy of trust and respect than Ms. Clinton? Yes, you bet he is. Does he have enormous appeal? He sure does, just as candidates such as Howard Dean and (going back to the turbulent ‘60s) Eugene McCarthy did for long stretches of time. But do you fear that running him as a candidate against Donald Trump might be the rare circumstance that actually could allow the latter to prevail? Yes, you do, because you should.
More to the point, though, you fear that the most likely Democrat nominee, having just been seriously wounded by this week’s IG report, is manifestly vulnerable to a much greater wound in the form of a criminal indictment for misconduct that far transcends what the IG report dealt with. Specifically, as a sophisticated observer, you are aware that Former Secretary Clinton’s intent (known in criminal law as mens rea), or lack of same, is not what matters in this case. Rather, the applicable legal standard is a mere “gross negligence” one, as specified in the standard national security non-disclosure agreement that she signed and its underlying criminal statutes.
And when you marry that to the fact that (among other things) her admitted failure to use the State Department’s special classified email system for classified (or potentially classified) information constituted a clear violation of a criminal prohibition, you start worrying big-time. And this is especially so given that Ms. Clinton did not just violate such laws inadvertently or even only occasionally — she did sosystemically. In other words, her very email scheme itself appears to have been a walking violation of criminal law, one with the mens rea prosecution standard readily met.
It also is especially so given that the ongoing investigation of Ms. Clinton’s misconduct is being conducted by the FBI, under the leadership of FBI Director James Comey. Those of us who worked under him when he was the deputy attorney general during the George W. Bush Administration know him to be an exceptional man of utmost integrity, one who can be counted on to recommend a criminal prosecution when the facts and the law of a case warrant it, regardless of political circumstances. Given that the facts and law are so clear in Ms. Clinton’s case, it is difficult to imagine her not being indicted, unless Jim Comey’s expected recommendation for that is abruptly overruled at “Main Justice” (i.e., by Criminal Division Assistant Attorney General Leslie Caldwell, by Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, or by Attorney General Loretta Lynch) or at the White House by President Obama (who customarily does not intervene in such things and would do so here either secretly or at no small political peril).
So what you must contemplate, as a leader of the Democratic Party, is the very real possibility of your likely presidential candidate actually being indicted, on criminal charges, sometime between now and, say, (a) the time of the convention at the end of July; (b) the time of the general election in early November; or (c) Inauguration Day in January. Which possibility would you prefer?
Obviously, the answer might well be possibility (d): No indictment at all. But if that were not a realistic possibility, and remembering that your absolute imperative in this election cycle is to avoid at all costs ending up with a President Donald Trump, your preference is clear: You want a Democrat other than either Clinton or Sanders to go up against Trump in November, unorthodox as that might now sound.
In short, you want a Biden/Kerry ticket, a Kerry/Biden one (less likely), or a ticket with either one of them (preferably Vice President Biden) together with whomever Hillary Clinton picks as her running mate in July.
What? An already-chosen running mate? Yes, her running mate, chosen by her as the presidential nominee — because you want Clinton to be replaced as your nominee (i.e., after the convention), but not with Senator Sanders, for all the reasons stated above.
And you get that only one way: (1) Clinton gets indicted as she ought to, but not until shortly after the convention; (2) the evidence presented in the indictment (as well as that proffered to her and her attorney privately) overwhelmingly proves to her that she in fact has bigger concerns in the coming months than running for the presidency; (3) Clinton is thereby forced to step down as the nominee (a difficult prospect to conceive of, to be sure); (4) the Democratic Party (translation: President Obama, as its leader) declares an “unprecedented” emergency and asks everyone to rally around a replacement ticket; and (5) slyest of all, the Democratic Party asks Senator Sanders to please not fight this, which he could not so easily do anyway once his “clout” is dissipated upon the convention’s conclusion. (Do you remember the seemingly “odd” statements from both Jim Comey and Attorney General Lynch that their ongoing investigation would not necessarily be concluded by the time the convention is held? Not at all inconsistent with the above, are they?)
And as for putative nominee Hillary Clinton in this fanciful scenario, she would receive an absolutely irresistible benefit in exchange for her totally shocking agreement to withdraw: Either minimal prosecution, if at all (see, for example, what was done with a “nolo” plea in the case of then-Vice President Spiro T. Agnew in October 1973), or a presidential pardon, or both. Yes, it could happen, all because Ms. Clinton was unable to envision ever being held to account for her hubris-driven email chicanery. Just as no one could ever envision a possible scenario like this.
Dan Metcalfe is a registered Democrat who has long said that he will vote for Hillary Clinton in November “if she escapes indictment and manages to become the Democratic presidential nominee.” He served as Director of the Justice Department’s Office of Information and Privacy for more than 25 years, during which time he handled information-disclosure policy issues on the dozens of Clinton Administration scandals that arose within public view, as well as two that did not. Since retiring in 2007, he has taught secrecy law at American University’s Washington College of Law.
Today at 8:08 am by Rocky
» MM&C 4/25/24 National Bank of Iraq goes live with Temenos core banking and payments
Today at 8:06 am by Rocky
» utube MM&C 4/26/24 Iraqi Dinar - US Treasury Exchange Rates- Focus - Banking Partnerships - Rate C
Today at 8:06 am by Rocky
» A banking official indicates a "danger" to Iraq by depriving more than half of its banks of dollars
Today at 7:55 am by Rocky
» With the participation of the Association of Private Banks, investment opportunities are on the tabl
Today at 7:45 am by Rocky
» Within a month... an Iranian border crossing recorded a noticeable increase in exports of goods to I
Today at 7:44 am by Rocky
» The Association of Private Banks appreciates the efforts of the government and the Central Bank to c
Today at 7:43 am by Rocky
» Al-Maliki's coalition presents a third candidate for the position of governor of Diyala
Today at 6:57 am by Rocky
» Arab gathering: The Kirkuk problem is getting complicated and the Sudanese must intervene
Today at 6:56 am by Rocky
» Next week.. a Kurdish delegation will visit Baghdad to meet with the Minister of Finance
Today at 6:54 am by Rocky
» Under the pretext of salaries... Al-Party refrains from handing over port revenues to Baghdad
Today at 6:53 am by Rocky
» Association of Banks: For the first time, we are witnessing a clear targeting of depriving half of t
Today at 6:51 am by Rocky
» Parliament does not know the reason for the delay in sending the 2024 budget schedules: Voting takes
Today at 6:49 am by Rocky
» Applicants for the 2024 Hajj are demanding that the Central Bank secure the dollar for them through
Today at 5:09 am by Rocky
» Governmental and private banks will showcase their services tomorrow during Financial Inclusion Week
Today at 5:08 am by Rocky
» Iraq's oil exports rise despite OPEC+ cuts
Today at 5:06 am by Rocky
» A study explodes a "surprise"... Iraq is among the countries that export oil to "Israel": How is the
Today at 5:04 am by Rocky
» Al-Araji emphasizes working to strengthen national identity
Today at 5:02 am by Rocky
» Al-Sudani visits Saudi Arabia to participate in the World Economic Forum in Riyadh
Today at 5:01 am by Rocky
» Iraq is talking about producing one million additional liters of gasoline
Today at 4:59 am by Rocky
» The Council of Ministers approves the implementation of the Baghdad Metro project
Today at 4:56 am by Rocky
» Minister of Commerce: We formed a joint economic committee with Türkiye
Today at 4:55 am by Rocky
» Resources: Government measures have contributed to improving the water situation in Iraq
Today at 4:53 am by Rocky
» Parliamentary Finance: Baghdad will continue to send salaries to the region’s employees until settle
Today at 4:51 am by Rocky
» A parliamentarian describes the corruption of Iraqi ports as “ghouls” and reveals the involvement of
Today at 4:49 am by Rocky
» Obelisk Hour: Basra is the subject of political conflict and ambiguity over the fate of the funds al
Today at 4:48 am by Rocky
» Turkmen leader: An agreement on the local government of Kirkuk is near
Today at 4:45 am by Rocky
» Anbar calls for the operation of its factories despite financial obstacles
Today at 4:44 am by Rocky
» Turki: The crisis of the Presidency of Parliament prompted the Sunnis to amend the Council’s interna
Today at 4:43 am by Rocky
» The Agriculture Committee confirms the existence of Iraqi-Turkish-Iranian discussions on water
Today at 4:42 am by Rocky
» Resources diagnose the challenges facing the water file in Iraq
Today at 4:38 am by Rocky
» Parliament pledges to the Interior Ministry: We will transfer money to buy weapons from citizens
Today at 4:33 am by Rocky
» Al-Issawi is the closest.. Parliament sets the date for deciding the choice of the new president
Today at 4:31 am by Rocky
» Deputy: Iraq's investments have risen and need a comprehensive review of previous years
Today at 4:30 am by Rocky
» Iraqis consume 7 billion eggs annually and import about $900 million
Today at 4:28 am by Rocky
» The Iranian role complicates attempts at open cooperation between Iraq and Turkey. Turkey is trying
Today at 4:26 am by Rocky
» Move in Iran to obtain $242 billion from Iraq in compensation for the eight-year war
Today at 4:25 am by Rocky
» 12 decisions from the Council of Ministers regarding the Baghdad Metro and Najaf-Karbala train proje
Today at 4:23 am by Rocky
» Sudanese Advisor: The path to development has begun... the Baka and the militias “we silence them wi
Today at 4:21 am by Rocky
» Not from Kurdistan.. How did Iraq become a source of oil for “Israeli tanks”?
Today at 4:19 am by Rocky
» Parliamentary Agriculture criticizes the Sudanese and Erdogan agreement: Türkiye will control water
Today at 4:16 am by Rocky
» The Iraqi government issues new decisions
Yesterday at 2:35 pm by Rocky
» The story of “reduced oil” to Jordan, from “compulsion” to mutual benefit.. Is there a loss?
Yesterday at 2:33 pm by Rocky
» The Council of Ministers takes 12 decisions for the Baghdad Metro and the Najaf-Karbala train
Yesterday at 2:32 pm by Rocky
» utube MM&C 4/23/24 Iraqi Dinar - IQD Update - Development Road Project - Saviour of Global Banking
Yesterday at 10:18 am by Rocky
» Kidney from pig transplanted into deathly ill New Jersey woman — and begins working almost immediat
Yesterday at 10:15 am by Bama Diva
» The most difficult option.. Warnings of the danger of floating the Iraqi dinar without achieving an
Yesterday at 9:48 am by Rocky
» Trade from the “Economic Committee” with Türkiye: It will overcome all obstacles facing the traders
Yesterday at 9:46 am by Rocky
» Washington's hope for stable relations with Baghdad clashes with Iraqi parties' rejection of the Ame
Yesterday at 9:41 am by Rocky
» Karim Badr: Development is America’s will to kill silk
Yesterday at 9:36 am by Rocky
» Oil: Opening of a new port for liquid gas for vehicles in Baghdad
Yesterday at 9:33 am by Rocky
» A media advisor warns of corruption in a draft law on the Parliament’s agenda
Yesterday at 9:21 am by Rocky
» Economist: There is serious work to lift US sanctions on Iraqi banks
Yesterday at 9:16 am by Rocky
» Will the agreements signed with the US Treasury reflect positively on the exchange rates?
Yesterday at 7:52 am by Rocky
» Iraq continues its quest to join the World Trade Organization
Yesterday at 7:51 am by Rocky
» Iraq completes the completion of the files for the initial offer of goods and services to join the W
Yesterday at 7:50 am by Rocky
» Economist: Travelers' dollars are leaking into the parallel market...and this is what the Central Ba
Yesterday at 7:32 am by Rocky
» President of the Federal Court: It is not permissible to force anyone to join any party, and the pol
Yesterday at 7:30 am by Rocky
» The Council of Ministers holds its session headed by Al-Sudani
Yesterday at 7:27 am by Rocky
» America weakens Baghdad...and increases Kurdistan's military capabilities
Yesterday at 7:26 am by Rocky
» The Iraqi government plans to build 10,000 schools throughout the country
Yesterday at 7:23 am by Rocky
» American threats close the Iraqi Stock Exchange at a loss
Yesterday at 7:21 am by Rocky
» Increase in external transfers at the Central Bank
Yesterday at 7:20 am by Rocky
» Al-Maliki calls on Britain to cancel restrictions on the entry of its companies into Iraq
Yesterday at 7:18 am by Rocky
» Planning and the European Union are discussing signing a number of agreements in the development, en
Yesterday at 7:16 am by Rocky
» Parliament talks about the mechanism for recovering smuggled funds and hints at the next stage
Yesterday at 7:13 am by Rocky
» Interior Ministry: The number of completed national cards reached 37 million cards
Yesterday at 7:06 am by Rocky
» Amnesty International: Violations of freedom and human rights continue in Iraq and the Kurdistan Reg
Yesterday at 7:04 am by Rocky
» Parliamentary Oil: The government is proceeding with the decision to raise the price of improved gas
Yesterday at 7:03 am by Rocky
» A parliamentary committee in Basra to investigate violations of the port company and the local gover
Yesterday at 7:00 am by Rocky
» Revealing the 10 most important American exports to Iraq
Yesterday at 5:31 am by Rocky
» A noticeable increase in the rate of Iraq's import of Chinese cooling devices
Yesterday at 5:30 am by Rocky
» Prime Minister: Working on projects without completing the infrastructure is a waste of money
Yesterday at 5:28 am by Rocky
» Iraq.. Extending the deadline for registration procedures on plots of land
Yesterday at 5:27 am by Rocky
» What is the main purpose of conducting the population census in Iraq?
Yesterday at 5:25 am by Rocky
» A plan to transform Iraq from a barren land to green with 5 million trees
Yesterday at 5:24 am by Rocky
» The Housing Fund announces the acceptance of more than 11 thousand loans through the Ur platform
Yesterday at 5:23 am by Rocky
» The Bank of Baghdad is moving to increase its capital to 400 billion dinars
Yesterday at 5:20 am by Rocky
» The electronic payment system will soon be adopted on Iraqi buses
Yesterday at 5:19 am by Rocky
» “It threatens our interests and destroys our economy.” An Iraqi project “irritates” the Kuwaiti stre
Yesterday at 5:18 am by Rocky
» Warning from the Central Bank about “misuse of electronic payment cards”
Yesterday at 5:17 am by Rocky
» Iraq and the Sultanate of Oman are discussing sending capacities through the Gulf countries
Yesterday at 5:16 am by Rocky
» The fact that a decision was issued to deport Syrian workers from Iraq
Yesterday at 5:14 am by Rocky
» Rice comes first... America exports 10 foodstuffs worth more than 350 million dollars to Iraq
Yesterday at 5:14 am by Rocky
» A sixth licensing round for gas exploration
Yesterday at 5:12 am by Rocky
» Baghdad is preparing to host the 50th session of the Arab Labor Conference
Yesterday at 5:11 am by Rocky
» Scientific symposium on the future vision of the tripartite budget
Yesterday at 5:09 am by Rocky
» Five conversion power stations enter service in Najaf
Yesterday at 5:08 am by Rocky
» Planning: Conduct a population census next November
Yesterday at 5:07 am by Rocky
» Experts: Spreading misleading information harms development and investment
Yesterday at 5:03 am by Rocky
» Economists call for tightening money laundering laws and port controls
Yesterday at 5:02 am by Rocky
» Today's newspapers are interested in Sudanese's visit to Anbar Governorate and preparations for cond
Yesterday at 5:00 am by Rocky
» Iraq and Russia discuss cooperation between the two countries in the field of information and artifi
Yesterday at 4:58 am by Rocky
» With international and Arab participation. Diyala University hosts the International Specialized Sci
Yesterday at 4:56 am by Rocky
» The Basra government discusses with a UN delegation support for owners of qualified companies to est
Yesterday at 4:49 am by Rocky
» Oil stabilizes amid signs of an economic slowdown in America
Yesterday at 4:48 am by Rocky
» More than 11 thousand loans announced by the Housing Fund via the Ur platform
Yesterday at 4:47 am by Rocky
» A parliamentarian talks about the "tsunami of multinational begging" and identifies their crossing p
Yesterday at 4:43 am by Rocky
» Iraq alone possesses 9% of the world's reserves...a magical material to stimulate agriculture and th
Yesterday at 4:40 am by Rocky