I bucked all advice from my friends (and resisted my conservative bias) and decided to fully trust the Times journalists.
As they left my home they asked that I not talk to any other outlets and I insisted then and repeatedly over the following weeks that I would keep my word and only share this story with them.
But then the weeks dragged on. They kept coming back to us saying the editors needed more. I needed to go on the record (okay). We need more screenshots (okay). I met every bench mark they set, eager to provide more sources or evidence as needed.
After the story went up I began to ask them … wait, where are the stories from the other women? Where are their accusations of sexual assault? Why am I the focus? Why are there 11 paragraphs dedicated to detailing my work history (more than has been published about Graham’s by far)?
Why does it say “nobody could corroborate” when I offered them sources that COULD corroborate?
Why did they include an out of context quote from a friend joking “do not call Graham” after I called off my wedding? (Because she knew I would never).
Where were the screenshots they’d said they would use? Or the mention that I’d supported local democrats and that most of my family (and husband) are liberal?
The editors said it was too much, they explained.
The Times also failed to include any mention that I DID confide in multiple friends through the years that Graham had been abusive — long before he was running for office. Those friends confirm they told the Times so.
It dawned on me that this really was a set up all along. The journalists I trusted who convinced me to share a story I never wanted to tell methodically delayed and twisted this into a gift to the Platner campaign. Violating the trust of his victims. Shattering the trust I placed in them with the most vulnerable story of my life.
And at the end of my call with them I reluctantly accepted their insistence that this was still a powerful story and that I had done a brave thing. And I thanked them for all the hard work they had put into it.
Still fawning after all these years.
@marklevinshow Not that I really expect them to do anything (ie. the right thing), but where is the UN? Shouldn't they have stepped in long ago to stop this terrorist regime and state?
@GovernorVA SCOTUS did not such thing as you allege. They refused to hear or issue a ruling on a case that is strictly a state, not a federal, case. Stop trying to gin up animosity.
The floodgates are opening.
Senator Chuck Grassley has released a letter to the DOJ and FBI along with internal FBI records related to the Clinton Foundation and the Uranium One deal.
Here’s what it shows.
The documents confirm that the FBI opened a formal preliminary investigation in January 2016 into the Clinton Foundation. The concern was whether foreign governments and business figures used donations, speaking fees, or financial relationships to gain influence over U.S. government decisions while Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State.
Possible criminal violations based on the allegations and facts established to date, include the following:
• 18 USC §201 (Bribery of Public Officials)
• 18 USC §207 (Restrictions on former officers, employees, and elected officials of the Executive and Legislative branches)
• 18 USC §208 (Acts Affecting a Personal Financial Interest)
• 18 USC §1956 (Laundering of monetary instruments)
The investigation focused on a pattern: money flowing to the Clinton Foundation or related individuals, followed by favorable policy decisions, access, or business outcomes.
A bribery-related violation can occur even if no official action is ultimately taken, as long as a payment was made with the intent to influence a public official.
Some of the examples included:
• Donations from individuals tied to Uranium One during the time a Russian state company was seeking control of U.S. uranium assets
• A mining-related donation followed by U.S. diplomatic pressure that benefited that company
• Business deals in Colombia and elsewhere involving major donors who later received government approvals or concessions
• Payments for speeches or roles followed by policy or regulatory decisions (including Boeing and a UAE airport project)
The Uranium One deal was a central focus. This involved U.S. uranium assets being transferred to Russia’s state nuclear company, Rosatom, with approval from a U.S. government body that included the State Department. Investigators looked at whether donations tied to people involved in that deal were connected to the approval process.
The records show the FBI gathered reports, intelligence summaries, and conducted interviews. They also identified additional witnesses and evidence they still needed to pursue.
Key figures also ensnared in the investigation:
• Cheryl Mills
• Huma Abedin
• Anthony Weiner
• Frank Giustra
• Doug Band
At one point, investigators noted they had found no evidence “to date” of direct influence over the Uranium One approval, but that was a preliminary assessment, not a final conclusion.
What stands out is that the investigation appears to have never been fully completed. Internal records from 2018–2020 show:
• Key interviews still hadn’t been done
• Additional evidence was still being reviewed
��� Several investigative requests were still pending
Grassley’s position is that the investigation uncovered serious patterns consistent with a potential pay-to-play scheme, but was left unresolved without a clear final outcome.
He is now demanding the DOJ and FBI turn over all records, including financial reports, interview transcripts, and unredacted documents, to determine what the government ultimately found.
This was a real federal investigation into potential pay-for-play involving the Clinton Foundation, it developed substantial leads and evidence, and according to this letter, it was never clearly finished or publicly resolved.
This may all change under FBI Director Kash Patel.
@joeykaufman@rollerCD NIL and the transfer portal have ruined college football (all sports). After 40+ years as an OSU football season ticket holder, I am canceling my season ticket renewal. I will no longer fund the madness.
@TheBuckeyeNut Develop a better short-to-intermediate passing game including more screens and use of the tight ends - something to counter blitzing and aggressive pass rushes.
@TheBuckeyeNut They should play with more space and tempo. Be more aggressive, score more and play more players to prevent injuries and fatigue. Also gets more players involved, builds depth and slows players from entering the portal.
@kadmitriev What an idiot (and the people who voted for him). Yeah, let's reject what built America - the greatest nation in the world. What is the over/under on his utter failure?
@TrumpsHurricane I usually fast-forward through her tired diatribe of how unpopular and "under water" Donald Trump is. She never acknowledges he's under water because of the constant, drumbeat negative press he receives from the 90% (or more) left-leaning media.
@theblaze I notice that Walz, Ellison, Omar or anyone in MN government has apologized for their massive screw up. They should be ashamed and embarrassed. Instead they are deflecting and casting blame on the people who exposed the fraud.