Hillary Clinton - How the Biden White House became a trap for US Democrats

Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton is an American politician, diplomat, lawyer, writer, and public speaker who served as the 67th United States Secretary of State from 2009 to 2013. She was the Democratic Party’s nominee for President of the United States in the 2016 election, but lost to Donald Trump. Clinton also served as a United States Senator from New York from 2001 to 2009.

Early Life and Education:

Hillary Clinton was born on October 26, 1947, in Chicago, Illinois, and raised in Park Ridge, Illinois. She is the oldest of three children born to Dorothy (née Howell), a homemaker and later a secretary, and Hugh Rodham, a textile manufacturer and later a small business owner.

Clinton attended Wellesley College, where she was active in student politics and as a leader of liberal causes. She graduated with a Bachelor of Arts degree in political science in 1969. She then attended Yale Law School, where she served on the Yale Review of Law and Social Action. During her time at Yale, Clinton worked at the Yale Child Study Center, learning about new research on early childhood brain development and working with some of the leaders in the field.


After graduating from Yale Law School in 1973, Clinton moved to Washington and worked for the Children’s Defense Fund. In 1974, she became a member of the presidential impeachment inquiry staff, advising the Judiciary Committee of the House of Representatives during the Watergate scandal. In 1976, she joined the Rose Law Firm in Little Rock, Arkansas. In 1978, President Jimmy Carter appointed her to the board of the Legal Services Corporation, and she became its chair in 1979. In 1980, Clinton co-founded the Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families.

After serving as First Lady of Arkansas from 1979 to 1981 and again from 1983 to 1992, Clinton became the First Lady of the United States from 1993 to 2001. She was an advocate for women’s rights and played a key role in the passage of the Family and Medical Leave Act in 1993.

In 2001, Clinton was elected as the United States Senator from New York. She was re-elected in 2006, serving alongside Senator Chuck Schumer. As a senator, Clinton focused on issues such as health care, education, and veterans’ affairs. She served on the Armed Services Committee, the Environment and Public Works Committee, and the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee.

In 2008, Clinton ran for president but lost the Democratic Party’s nomination to Barack Obama. However, Obama appointed Clinton as Secretary of State, a position she held from 2009 to 2013. As Secretary of State, Clinton traveled to more than 100 countries, advocating for human rights and expanding U.S. engagement with the world. She also oversaw the department during the Arab Spring and the Benghazi attack.

In 2016, Clinton ran for president again, becoming the Democratic Party’s nominee. Although she won the popular vote, she lost the electoral college to Donald Trump.

Personal Life:

Clinton married Bill Clinton in 1975. They have one daughter, Chelsea Clinton, born in 1980. The couple has faced a number of controversies over the years, including allegations of sexual misconduct by Bill Clinton and controversy over Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server while serving as Secretary of State.

Clinton is a Methodist and has spoken about the role of faith in her life. She has also written several books, including her memoir, “Living History,” and a book about her experiences as Secretary of State, “Hard Choices.”


Clinton is a co-founder of the Clinton Foundation, a non-profit organization that focuses on global health, economic development, and environmental sustainability. The organization has been criticized for its fundraising practices and links to the Clinton family’s political interests.

Clinton is also a supporter of a number of causes, including the rights of women and girls, climate change, and gun control.


Hillary Clinton is a prominent American politician who has served in a number of roles over the course of her career. She has been an advocate for women’s rights and worked to expand U.S. engagement with the world. Despite facing controversy at times, Clinton has continued to be involved in philanthropic efforts and to speak out on issues she cares about.

6do Encyclopedia represents the inaugural AI-driven knowledge repository, and we cordially invite all community users to collaborate and contribute to the enhancement of its accuracy and completeness.
Should you identify any inaccuracies or discrepancies, we respectfully request that you promptly bring these to our attention. Furthermore, you are encouraged to engage in dialogue with the 6do AI chatbot for clarifications.
Please be advised that when utilizing the resources provided by 6do Encyclopedia, users must exercise due care and diligence with respect to the information contained therein. We expressly disclaim any and all legal liabilities arising from the use of such content.

Report faults FBI’s handling of probe into alleged Trump-Russia collusion

Financial Times

23-05-15 23:19

The FBI's investigation into the links between the Trump administration and the Russian government during the 2016 presidential election lacked analytical rigour and was biased, according to a report by John Durham, a special counsel appointed by the Trump administration. Durham's report found that both US intelligence and law enforcement had no evidence of collusion when the FBI launched the probe five years ago. However, the report didn't recommend further legal action. Durham's office has already laid three criminal cases in connection with the investigation, resulting in one guilty plea and two acquittals.

Trump claimed the Durham probe would uncover the ‘crime of the century.’ Here’s what it really found

The Toronto Star

23-05-15 22:59

An investigation looking into the origins of the FBI's probe into ties between Russia and Donald Trump's 2016 presidential campaign has concluded, finding major flaws. The inquiry, the culmination of a four-year investigation into possible misconduct by US government officials, contained withering criticism for the FBI but few significant revelations. Nonetheless, it is seen as giving fodder to both Trump supporters who have long denounced the Russia investigation, as well as Trump opponents who say the Durham team's meager court record shows their probe was a politically motivated farce. The report found that the FBI acted too hastily and relied on raw and unconfirmed intelligence when it opened the Trump-Russia investigation, and that FBI investigators fell prone to “confirmation bias,” ignoring or rationalising away information that could have undercut the premise of their investigation. Durham said it is possible more reform could be needed, and that providing additional scrutiny of politically sensitive investigations by identifying an official who would be responsible for challenging the steps taken in a probe would be ideal.

Trump claimed the Durham probe would uncover the 'crime of the century.' Here's what it really found

The Independent

23-05-15 22:57

A report investigating the origins of the FBI’s probe into allegations of Russian links to Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign has criticised the bureau, but contains few significant or new revelations. The long-awaited report was submitted by a special prosecutor appointed by the Justice Department, John Durham, and comes after a four-year inquiry into potential misconduct by US government officials. Durham, who has served for decades as a Justice Department prosecutor, led investigations into the CIA’s destruction of videotapes, and the FBI’s links with mobsters in Boston. Durham’s report criticised the FBI for using flawed information and acting with “confirmation bias” when opening the Trump-Russia investigation, and suggested that it did not have credible grounds for doing so. Although he did not recommend steps to curtail the FBI’s investigative authorities, Durham did suggest additional scrutiny for politically sensitive investigations, including the assignment of an official to challenge decisions made during such cases.

FBI ‘should never have investigated Trump’s links to Russia in 2016 election’, report finds


23-05-15 22:46

A report by a special prosecutor has called into question the launch of the investigation into Donald Trump's links with Russia during the 2016 election. Special counsel John Durham found there was "no evidence of collusion" when the FBI began the investigation, which was dubbed "Crossfire Hurricane," and accused the agency of a "failure to uphold their mission of strict fidelity to the law." Durham's 300-page report criticised the use of information from the Steele dossier and reliance on tips provided by Trump's political opponents.

Durham’s probe ends as it began: pointing at trees to obscure the forest

Washington Post

23-05-15 22:26

The much-awaited report by John Durham, special counsel appointed by US Attorney General William P. Barr, into the origins of the Russia investigation and possible links to President Trump's 2016 campaign, was released on Monday. The report presents little evidence of wrongdoing by government officials or investigators involved in the Russia probe, a conclusion that undermines President Trump's conspiracy theory that criminal acts took place in the FBI's investigation of his campaign. Ironically, the report stands in stark contrast to another report from Justice Department's inspector general, Michael Horowitz, in December 2019, which highlighted errors in the FBI's process in securing court approval to investigate links between the Trump campaign and Russia in 2016, but made it clear that there was little evidence of political bias or anti-Trump conspiracy.

How Garland’s release of Trump-Russia probe report differed from Barr’s

Washington Post

23-05-16 08:00

US Attorney General Merrick Garland’s handling of special counsel John Durham’s report differed markedly from that of his predecessor. William P. Barr was criticised for his handling of the final report from then-special counsel Robert S. Mueller III. When the long-awaited Mueller report was delivered in 2019, it moved slowly from Barr’s desk to the public, as redactions had to be made. Durham’s report moved fast from Garland’s desk to Congress and then the public. This time, the report was an unclassified document with a 29-page classified appendix that has not been made public, and there are no ongoing investigations from Durham’s work. Durham was asked to examine whether anyone at the FBI violated laws while investigating the 2016 Trump campaign. He found no major new ground and did not find criminal culpability. The end of Durham’s special counsel assignment drew immediate comparisons to the fractious finale of ­Mueller’s work.

What did the Durham probe uncover?

The Independent

23-05-16 15:37

The Trump administration’s investigation into alleged links between the 46th president’s presidential campaign in 2016 and the Russian government has ended with a report from Special Counsel John Durham that found the FBI was justified in starting a preliminary investigation into the matter, based on information received from a foreign diplomat. Durham was investigating potential misconduct by US government officials during the investigation. His report gave little new information or significant revelations. Critics say it provides fodder for Trump supporters who have condemned the investigation as a politically motivated witch hunt and evidence of Durham’s own political motivations.

Durham took issue with the FBI’s decision to launch a full counterintelligence probe into the campaign based on information received from an Australian diplomat about George Papadopoulos’s bragging that Russia had acquired and was prepared to release damaging information about the campaign of former Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton. Durham’s report criticised the FBI for not conducting any “collaboration or joint assessments” with friendly domestic or foreign intelligence services regarding intelligence collected.

While the report acknowledges the FBI was justified in opening a preliminary investigation, Durham questions why a counterintelligence probe was launched instead of a limited one. Durham’s report appears at odds with a previous investigation by Michael Horowitz, an inspector general with the Department of Justice, who concluded that the FBI had sufficient cause to justify an investigation into alleged links between Trump’s campaign operatives and the Russians.


The Durham report examined the FBI’s Trump-Russia probes. A basic guide.

Washington Post

23-05-16 15:23

Special counsel John Durham has concluded the investigation into how US government officials conducted their investigations regarding possible coordination between Donald Trump’s presidential campaign and Russian interference in the US election. Much was made of Durham's four-year-long investigation, with Democrats largely dismissing the investigation as politically motivated. Durham’s probe criticised the FBI for relying on raw intelligence in its investigation, but his criticisms echoed a similarly tasked 2019 report by the Justice Department's inspector-general. Durham’s report did not result in any significant criminal charges, but did criticise bias among FBI agents. Durham did however recommend a new position be created at the FBI to help vet politically sensitive investigations. As of December 2022, the investigation had already cost taxpayers over $6.5m. Democrats criticised Durham's report, with Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) describing it as a "political rehashing of what the Justice Department Inspector General already made public in 2019."

Durham report takeaways: a 'seriously flawed' Russia investigation and its lasting impact on the FBI

The Independent

23-05-16 20:07

Justice Department special counsel John Durham has released a 306-page report criticising the FBI for launching an investigation into whether Donald Trump’s presidential campaign conspired with Russia to influence the 2016 national election. Durham claimed that the FBI began the investigation without any evidence which directly incriminated members of the campaign, and that specialists who were never consulted would have advised that there was no basis for the action. Durham also says that the FBI failed to verify allegations contained in a Democratic Party-financed dossier compiled by former British spy Christopher Steele. The investigation resulted in only one conviction, and Durham did not suggest that political bias played any part in the FBI’s behaviour. The FBI said it has taken corrective measures prevent a similar situation arising.

Key take­aways from in­ves­ti­ga­tion of FBI’s Trump-Rus­sia probe

Al Jazeera

23-05-16 18:19

An investigation by John Durham into the origins of a Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) probe into any possible collusion between Donald Trump's 2016 campaign and Russia has concluded. The report criticises the FBI for opening its investigation into Trump too quickly and also says that investigators “fell victim to confirmation bias”. Durham noted that the FBI investigation was different from those involving Hillary Clinton, and criticised the FBI for failing to corroborate most of the claims of the infamous “Steele dossier”. The report didn't find evidence of widespread FBI spying on the Trump campaign, and there were no new charges pressed as a result of Durham’s investigations. Durham recommended that an official should be designated to independently check the steps taken in politically sensitive investigations. The release of the report is unlikely to do much to change the entrenched narratives already established about the Trump administration.

The Durham report fails to meet William Barr’s hype

Washington Post

23-05-16 17:25

The results of the recently released report by John Durham on the investigation of those investigating Trump's ties to Russia don't live up to Barr's hype. While the report reflects poorly on the FBI, it provides little evidence to substantiate Barr’s theory of the case that the Trump-Russia investigation was politically motivated. Durham cited instances of Peter Strzok and Kevin Clinesmith privately expressing a dim view of Trump and their handling of the Trump-Russia probe, rather than political malfeasance. So Barr’s hype has fallen flat, with Durham's thorough examination focusing mainly on “confirmation bias” rather than political bias or deliberate malfeasance.

Republicans keep having bad elections

Washington Post

23-05-17 15:32

On election night in America this week, the biggest news was the Republican defeat in mayoral races in Jacksonville, Florida and Colorado Springs, where the Republicans have long been the dominant party. Democrats were upbeat elsewhere in special elections, having begun to over-perform since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade 11 months ago, and this most recent election has confirmed that trend. There were also several state legislative races whose outcomes closely mirrored the results of the 2020 elections when the Democrats had a good year.

Republicans appeared to have been over-performing in special elections prior to the overturning of Roe v. Wade, but the trend flipped quickly on a dime. Since that moment, Democrats overperformed their 2020 margins in all five special congressional elections and they have continued to do so as these recent elections have confirmed.

Although this is still a relatively small quantity of races, the 2023 results thus far indicate that Republicans have failed to correct their issues, while the Democrats have maintained a consistent level of performance. In the 2018 and 2020 elections, and now in 2023, the Democrats have secured some of the best results for a president’s party in the last century, leaving the Republicans with much work to do if they wish to regain lost ground.


There’s now even less reason to blame Clinton for the Russia probe

Washington Post

23-05-17 20:35

The New York Post published an article on Wednesday suggesting that Hillary Clinton and "Clinton operatives" invented the investigation into Russian election interference. The article claimed that the entire investigation was based on disinformation in the "Steele dossier" compiled by former intelligence officer Christopher Steele, and that Clinton operatives invented the Russian collusion conspiracy and put it into the Steele dossier. The article was written by Jonathan Turley, an attorney who has become a vocal supporter of former US President Donald Trump’s claims of an unfair investigation. The claims made by Turley have been popular in right-wing circles, but have been refuted by the recent report of special counsel John Durham. In an attempt to counter the report, Turley incorrectly claims that the dossier was the origin of the Russia probe rather than based on credible intelligence sources, and that the Clinton campaign invented the conspiracy theory linking Trump to Russia. A detailed timeline of the events that preceded the investigation into Russia’s attempts to influence the 2016 US presidential election shows that the claims made by Turley are unfounded.

“Fancy Bear Goes Phishing” charts the evolution of hacking


23-05-17 17:34

In his book "The Internet and the World Order," Scott Shapiro offers a historical view of cybercrime, arguing that it could go the way of war and nuclear weapons without international legal frameworks being established. Except in a few developed countries, hacking and phishing have carried minimal penalties, he said. "It really is the Wild West," Shapiro said of the state of international law surrounding cybercrime. The book offers forensic detail on five hacks, beginning with the internet's first worm in 1988, to an attack on celebrity Paris Hilton's cloud storage server in 2005, and concludes with the hack of the Democratic National Committee in the US in 2016, traced to Russian military hacking unit Fancy Bear. The book shows that cybercrime often relies on insular young men using minimal resources to perpetrate attacks that have a disproportionate impact.

Antiabortion groups push 2024 GOP candidates to embrace national ban

Washington Post

23-05-18 09:00

Anti-abortion campaigners and pro-life religious groups are moving to the forefront of the battle over abortion, hoping that the new wave of laws in Republican states will trump state laws. Activists who sway legal opinions warn that any effort to retreat from national abortion restrictions would be a serious mistake, and Kellyanne Conway believes a 15-week limit on abortion is an effective way to put Democrats on defense on the issue. Two-thirds of Americans say they oppose the decision to eliminate the constitutional right to an abortion, according to a Washington Post-ABC News poll, and despite abortion restrictions becoming more prevalent, the pro-choice lobby is seen as powerful and a key issue for many voters in the Democratic party. Trump, as a candidate, has not yet given his opinion on where he will draw the line on federal legislation concerning abortion since the Supreme Court ruling overturning the right to an abortion.

The FBI’s targeting of Trump demeaned America on the world stage


23-05-18 18:44

A newly published report on the FBI’s investigations into the 2016 presidential election suggests a politically motivated bias, with the agency having treated the election candidates, Republican Donald Trump and Democrat Hillary Clinton, quite differently. The report, by US Department of Justice Special Counsel John H. Durham, says that the FBI was too quick to launch its Crossfire Hurricane investigation into allegations that Trump’s campaign team colluded with Russia, although it also found that there had been no proven collusion between the parties. Durham also concluded that the FBI had “never opened any type of inquiry” into the allegation that Clinton’s campaign sought to deflect controversy over her use of emails by linking Trump with Russian President Vladimir Putin. The FBI “never launched an investigation into rumours that foreign agents wished to target Team Clinton but, instead, provided Hillary's people with a defence briefing,” says journalist Matthew Sweet. The investigations and accusations about collusion had repercussions that undermined both candidates' electoral prospects and contributed to a widespread perception that it shaped US foreign policy.

Ginni Thomas: the Supreme Court justice’s wife caught up in payments scandal

Financial Times

23-05-19 04:19

Ginni Thomas, wife of US Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, has become the focus of a number of ethical controversies, which has renewed interest in her 34-year-long career as a right-wing political lobbyist and Washington DC operator, and exposed gaps in disclosure obligations for justices’ families. New questions have emerged about her business dealings, including payments to one of her companies from a group that had business before the Supreme Court, according to investigative outlet ProPublica. Legal ethics experts call the payments “eye-popping.” Last year, she was investigated by law enforcement for a politically motivated “hit list.”

Trump whines that he is a ‘victim’ of ‘weaponisation of justice’

The Independent

23-05-19 20:20

Donald Trump has taken to social media to call himself the "victim" of the claimed weaponisation of the federal government. Trump made the comment following the Jim Jordan-led House Judiciary Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government hearing. Two suspended FBI agents and a fired agent spoke about how the agency had retaliated against them for claims they had made about it. The hearing came after the release of Trump-era Justice Department special counsel John Durham’s report, which was critical of the FBI’s investigation into Trump’s 2016 campaign.

Politicians making partisan attacks on foreign interference are falling into a trap

The Globe and Mail

23-05-20 12:00

Politicians in Canada must unite to understand and deter foreign electoral interference, according to David Salvo, senior fellow and managing director of the Alliance for Securing Democracy at the German Marshall Fund of the United States. Writing in The Globe and Mail, he criticised the politicisation of the country’s response and a focus on whether the outcome of individual elections was affected, at the expense of wider measures to protect democratic institutions. He welcomed Canadian political parties’ moves to establish a foreign-influence transparency registry and a beneficial ownership registry to unmask hidden owners of companies.