Hillary Clinton cares only about power, and she will do anything for power's sake. Most of America already knew that ugly fact, but now, perhaps, the leftists so in love with Bernie Sanders will begin to see this creepy crone as her true se...
Hillary Clinton cares only about power, and she will do anything for power's sake.
Hillary
Clinton cares only about power, and she will do anything for
power's sake. Most of America already knew that ugly
fact, but now, perhaps, the leftists so in love with Bernie Sanders will
begin to see this creepy crone as her true se...
February 9, 2016
What if Sanders supporters see a crooked Clinton?
Hillary Clinton cares only about power, and she will do anything for power's sake.
Most of America already knew that ugly fact, but now, perhaps, the
leftists so in love with Bernie Sanders will begin to see this creepy crone as her true self: an amoral monster.
The Clintons cheat. Sanders supporters seem to suspect that Clinton has cheated Sanders out of a victory in Iowa.
Two
stories of delegate fraud by Clinton supporters against Sanders have
emerged in Iowa Precinct 43 and then in Ames District 1-3. Six times,
coin tosses decided how deadlocked precincts would go, and – surprise! –
Hillary won all six of the coin tosses. Given the microscopic lead
Clinton had in the Iowa caucus of 49.9% for Clinton and 49.6% for
Sanders, any fraud could have cost Sanders a victory, for which his
supporters had campaigned so hard.
So
all those voters who drove long hours in Iowa winter nights to hear
Sanders speak might have been cheated by corrupt party hacks controlled by the Clinton machine.
What will happen if Sanders really feels that he was cheated out of victory? What
will happen if the enthusiastic supporters and volunteers for Sanders
begin to believe, and to tell Sanders directly, that the Clinton machine
is lying and cheating its way through the nomination battle?
Bernie
Sanders, so far, has scrupulously avoided challenging Hillary on her
honesty, but it is only his personal decision to maintain this position
that protects Clinton. Sanders, not actually a Democrat, has gone to
great lengths to remain loyal to that political party he caucuses with
in the Senate, although he clearly has no duty to act that way. Sanders
owes the Democratic Party nothing. If Sanders or his supporters begin
to directly attack the honesty and integrity of Hillary Clinton, then
she could face the convergence from three different directions of such attacks.
The
more the Republican nomination winnows out candidates, the more
Republicans will focus their attacks on Hillary as a venal and corrupt
politician who can be trusted with nothing. Candidates have already begun to shift fire from fellow Republicans to Hillary, who is anathema to conservatives.
The
field for these Republican attacks is vast. Remember: Hillary has
never run in a national campaign against Republicans before, and she has run only in very safe races in general, like as a senator from New York or in Democrat primaries. She has not even begun to feel the full fury of a Republican campaign in a general election.
What
if, for example, if a Republican candidate asked Hillary if she
believed Juanita Broaddrick? Wouldn't Hillary say something obviously
false – for example, that she had never heard the allegation that her
husband is a brutal rapist? What if family members of the Americans
slain in Benghazi begin to tell the nation in political ads that Hillary
lied to them?
People like Hillary (that is to say, sociopaths) lie all the time.
They compound their lies with more lies. Hillary and her husband, so
far, have gotten away with lies because they reflectively blame
Republicans or a "vast right wing conspiracy." That argument fails if
Sanders supporters also begin to tell America that Hillary is dishonest.
Worse
will follow if the Obama FBI recommends criminal indictments against
Hillary or Huma Abedin or other flacks regarding the use of private
email servers for highly secret government communications. Hillary's
lying about everything on that subject – a completely different matter
from enabling the nastiness of her husband – will be yet a third serious
attack on the honesty of Clinton, this time from Obama's Justice
Department.
These
will be completely separate stories on different subjects, with the
only common connection being that Hillary is a liar and a crook. If
Hillary responds, as she doubtless would, that the Obama FBI and the
socialist Senator Sanders are both toys of the RNC, then a fourth story
could arise: Hillary is lying to the American people about who is challenging her ethics.
The
fallout could be devastating. If Hillary hobbles to the nomination
despite the FBI's recommendation to prosecute her, then millions of
independent voters inclined to Hillary may stay home, and if Sanders's
supporters feel defrauded of the fruits of their labor for Sanders, then
millions of those voters may stay home, too. Not only would this cost
Hillary the White House, but it could produce just the sort of electoral
landslide in political races down the ballot that could lead to a true
conservative political revolution
Read more:
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/02/what_if_sanders_supporters_see_a_crooked_clinton.html#ixzz3zh7zSw95
Follow us:
@AmericanThinker on Twitter |
AmericanThinker on Facebook
JW Uncovers another Hillary Clinton Computer Scandal
This is unbelievable. We have just received records from the Department of State
disclosing plans by senior State Department officials to set up a
"stand-alone PC" so that Clinton could check her emails in an office
"across the hall" through a separate, non-State Department computer
network system. Referencing the special Clinton computer system, Under
Secretary for Management Patrick F. Kennedy,
writes Clinton Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills, "The stand-alone separate
network PC is a great idea." The emails are from January 23-24, 2009, a
few days after Clinton was sworn in as Secretary of State.
The new emails were obtained by Judicial Watch in response to a court order in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit for State Department records about Hillary Clinton's separate email system.
In the email chain, Lewis Lukens,
former deputy assistant secretary of state and executive director of
the secretariat, responds to a request from Mills by informing her, top
Clinton aide Huma Abedin, and Kennedy that the new personal computer "in
the secretary's office" would be "connected to the internet (but not
through our system)." Abedin responds, "We are hoping for that if
possible."
The email exchange discussing plans to provide Clinton
a separate computer to skirt the internal State Department computer
network begins with a message from Mills to Lukens in which she requests
Clinton being able to access her emails through "a non-DOS computer."
The email discusses how the stand-alone computer can be set up and why
it is "a great idea' and "the best solution":
From: Cheryl Mills
Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 6:45 AM
To: Lukens, Lewis A
Subject: Re: Series of questions
Lew - who can I talk to about:
1.Can our email be accessed remotely through the web using a non-DOS computer like my laptop?
2.I am traveling to the M-E - will my DOS bb work there and is there a cell phone attached?
3.Spoke
to Dan [Daniel B. Smith, former DOS executive secretary] re: bb for HRC
(and reports that POTUS is able to use a super encrypted one)
4.Spoke to Dan re: setting up Counselor office for HRC so she can go across hall regularly to check her email
From: Lukens, Lewis A
To: cmills [REDACTED]
Cc: Habedin [REDACTED]; Kennedy, Patrick F; Smith, Daniel B
Sent: Saturday, Jan. 24, 19:10:33 2009
Subject: Re: series of questions
We
have already started checking into the NSA bb. Will set up the office
across the hall as requested. Also, I think we should go ahead (but will
await your green light) and set up a stand-alone PC in the Secretary's
office, connect to the internet (but not through our system) to enable
her to check her emails from her desk. Lew.
From: Kennedy, Patrick F KennedyPF@state.gov
To: Lukens, Lewis A <LukensLA@state.gov>; Cheryl Mills
Cc: Huma Abedin; Smith, Daniel B <SmithD2@state.gov>
Sent: Sat, Jan 24 19:48:25 2009
Subject: Re: Series of questions
Cheryl
The stand-alone separate network PC is [a] great idea
Regards
Pat
From: Huma Abedin
To: Kennedy, Patrick F; Lukens, Lewis A; Cheryl Mills
Cc: Huma Abedin; Smith, Daniel B
Sent: Sat Jan 24 19:48:27 2009
Subject: Re: Series of questions
Yes we were hoping for that if possible so she can check her email in her office.
***
From: Lukens, Lewis A
Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2009 8:26 PM
To: Kennedy, Patrick F
Subject: Re: Series of questions
I
talked to Cheryl about this. She says a problem is hrc does not know
how to use a computer to do email - only bb [Blackberry]. But, I said
would not take much training to get her up to speed.
In separate litigation,
the State Department told Judicial Watch and federal courts that
Hillary Clinton was never issued secure State Department computing
devices.
These emails are shocking. They show the Obama State
Department's plan to set up non-government computers and a computer
network for Hillary Clinton to bypass the State Department network. The
fact that these records were withheld from the American people until now
is scandalous and shows the criminal probe of Hillary Clinton's email
system should include current and former officials of the Obama
administration.
Our legal team filed these new emails with U.S.
District Court Judge Emmett Sullivan, who is now considering whether to
grant discovery in a lawsuit seeking information on the "special government employee" status of Abedin. In our filing, we state:
[Judicial
Watch] just recently received additional evidence that demonstrates
that senior management at the State Department was well aware that Mrs.
Clinton was using a "non-state.gov" system to conduct official
government business. This evidence also shows that the senior management
at the State Department knowingly aided Mrs. Clinton in establishing
and using a "non-state.gov" system.
[T]his newly discovered email
demonstrates that there is at least a "reasonable suspicion" that the
State Department and Mrs. Clinton deliberately thwarted FOIA by
creating, using, and concealing the "clintonemail.com" record system for
six years.
The media took up this story (which was reported first by Fox News.) The Obama gang responded with careful word parsing. The State Department spokesman John Kirby told CBS News:
"I
will say, a computer was not set up for Secretary Clinton," he said in
an email to CBS News State Department Correspondent Margaret Brennan.
Because "these matters are under review generally," Kirby declined to comment further.
Was
a computer set up for Cheryl Mills (who evidently had the Counselor's
office across the hall)? It will take another lawsuit or court-ordered
discovery to get past this obfuscation.
We will continue our
investigation - we hope with the support of the courts. In the
meantime, you can see that email isn't the only Clinton computer
scandal.
Hillary Clinton Discussed Prosecuting Republicans for Classification Violations
There
are a lot of twists and turns in this one, but pay close attention to
what a Hillary Clinton confidant advised her to do in response to some
of the actions by congressional Republicans. When you have Sidney
Blumenthal, Hillary Clinton, Eric Cantor and David Petraeus mentioned in
one government document, it's time to pay close attention.
Back on January 7, 2016, we obtained a new batch of documents from the Department of State,
including a "Confidential" memo from Clinton advisor Sidney Blumenthal
to the former secretary of state suggesting that a grand jury and the
Senate Judiciary Committee should investigate whether former Rep. Eric
Cantor or his staff violated the Espionage Act by disclosing classified information related to the FBI investigation of former CIA Director David Petraeus.
According
to the Blumenthal-to-Clinton email, if classified information was
discussed by Cantor, his staff, or anyone "inside or outside the
bureau," it "is a felony" in violation of the Espionage Act.
Blumenthal's fantasy prosecution of Cantor aside, it is for sure true
that if Clinton kept classified information on her non-state.gov server,
that also may be a criminal violation of the Espionage Act. (And, of
course, Petraeus eventually was forced to plead guilty in a slap-on-the-wrist plea deal.)
The
documents also contain an email to Clinton in which Blumenthal sent a
copy of a "Confidential" memo to top Obama 2012 presidential debate advisor Ron Klain
warning that GOP candidate Mitt Romney would "falsify, distort, and
mangle facts" in the final campaign debate. The Blumenthal memo was
sent to Klain and copied to Clinton just four days before the final
debate.
The documents include an email sent after the Benghazi
attack in which Blumenthal informs Clinton of his "Latest Libya intel"
regarding the turmoil in that country. Though barred by the Obama administration
from being an official State Department advisor to Clinton, Blumenthal -
who at the time was also employed by the Clinton Foundation - claimed
to have "a very sensitive source" providing him "internal govt
discussions high level" concerning Libyan internal security.
The new emails, also available on the State Department website, were obtained by Judicial Watch in response to a court order. The Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed on May 6, 2015, asked for the following:
•
Communications between officials, officers, or employees of the
Department of State and members of Congress, Congressional staff
members, or Congressional members or staff members of the U.S. House of
Representatives Select Committee on Benghazi concerning the use of
non-"state.gov" email addresses by former Secretary of State Hillary
Clinton.
• Emails of former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham
Clinton regarding the September 11, 2012, attack on the U.S. Consulate
in Benghazi, Libya. The timeframe for this request is September 11,
2012, to January 31, 2013.
The State Department's records include the November 13, 2012, email
from Blumenthal to Clinton in which he speculates about former Rep.
Eric Cantor's dealings with then-FBI Director Robert Mueller concerning
the agency's investigation of former CIA Director David Petraeus. In the
email, Blumenthal raises the possible need for both a grand jury and a
Senate Judiciary Committee investigation of possible violations of the
Espionage Act by Cantor and his staff if classified information was made
public:
From: Sidney Blumenthal
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2012 9:13 AM
Subject: More questions. Sid
Who
else in the Congress besides congressmen Reichert and Cantor knew of
the Petraeus investigation before it became public? How many
congressional staffers were informed? What roles did they play in
deciding who to inform about it? What were their communications among
themselves and with others outside their offices if any? Did any of them
discuss the matter with anyone in the Romney-Ryan campaign?
Why was Cantor intent on informing FBI Director Mueller of the existence of an FBI investigation that was already resolved?...
What were the internal discussions between Cantor and his staff on his referral to Mueller?...
Was
the supposedly rogue FBI agent, described in the Washington Post as
motivated by his "worldview," acting alone? Did he discuss the
investigation with any individual either inside or outside the bureau
before he went to Reichert and Cantor?
Disclosure of an espionage investigation is a felony. Will a grand jury be empaneled by the Justice Department?
When will Senator Patrick Leahy, chair of the Judiciary Committee and a former FBI agent, begin an investigation of this matter?
Clinton,
the United States Secretary of State, responded not with a "you are
crazy, why are you writing this to me" but with a request for more info:
What was his "worldview" and why would he think hurting P furthered it? Why would Cantor want to hurt P (beloved by Rs)?
The other major find is an another unhinged October 19, 2012, email
from Blumenthal to Clinton in which he sends a copy of a lengthy
"Confidential" memo to Klain expounding upon how to defeat Mitt Romney
in the third and final 2012 presidential debate:
From: Sidney Blumenthal
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2012 10:32 AM
To: H
Subject: H: fyi, see especially point about bush. Sid
1.Romney
will inevitably falsify, distort and mangle facts on a range of
subjects from Libya to the defense budget. But why is this debate
different from all other debates? In the dedicated foreign policy
debate, the stakes are higher-America's role in the world. That makes
Romney's errors even more consequential and potentially threatening. And
that must be an essential predicate of Obama's point when he exposes
Romney's falsehoods. When Romney lies on domestic policy it's shameful,
but when he lies on foreign policy it's dangerous.
3.Romney's
attack line on Libya is not only false, as exposed in the last debate.
(Obama here can joke that Romney apparently wants to rerun the last
debate but this time without Candy Crowley present to call him out.
Romney will become angry and nonplussed.) His attack line is a reheated
leftover of the Bush era attacks on Democrats designed by Karl Rove as
weak on terrorism, which were themselves repackaged old Republican
attacks from the Cold War. It's all nostalgia....
Then, really
stick in the shiv by having Obama say that he was somewhat surprised
that Romney in the last debate did not give President George W. Bush
credit where credit is due-for example, breaking with the
neoconservatives around Vice President Cheney by adopting the surge in
Iraq led by current CIA director David Petraeus that prepared the
groundwork for Obama's own policy in Iraq.
An email from Blumenthal to Clinton contains a lengthy "Confidential" memo in which he provides his "latest Libya intel"
from "internal govt discussions high level." The memo, later forwarded
by Clinton to then-Deputy Chief of Staff Jake Sullivan, reveals that
more than a year after the Obama/Clinton assisted overthrow of Qaddafi,
ostensibly intended to bring about a peaceful transition, the country
remained at the mercy of the same terrorist groups that attacked the
Benghazi consulate. Claiming that his information comes from a "very
sensitive source," Blumenthal informed Clinton of the following:
From: Sidney Blumenthal
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2013 11:20 AM
To: H
Subject: H: latest Libya intel; internal govt discussions high level. Sid
1.
On the morning of January 15, 2013 Libyan Prime Minister Ali Zidan was
informed by Interior Minister Ashour Shuwail and Minister of Foreign
Affairs and International Cooperation Mohamed Abdulaziz that Italy plan
to close its consulate in Benghazi and reduce the size of its embassy in
Tripoli following attacks on the consulate itself and the Italian
consul general. Shuwail reported that the attacks were carried out by
Eastern militia forces associated with Ansar al Islam, which, although
put under pressure by the National Libyan Army (NLA) following the
attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi in September 2012, continues to
operate in and around that city.
***
6. According to a
very sensitive source, General Hassi disagrees with the NLA analysis
that the Sabha attack was not aimed at Magariaf specifically, noting
that there were five prior assassination attempts against Magariaf in
2012, and that he is a target for a diverse collection of enemies,
including former Qaddafi forces, groups like Ansar al Sharia, and even
his political adversaries in the GNC. Accordingly, Hassi intends to
establish new programs to train a detachment of presidential bodyguards,
and his own anti-terrorism personnel.
It is beyond
ironic that Hillary Clinton and Sidney Blumenthal, her secret Clinton
Foundation adviser at the State Department, discuss criminal
prosecutions of Republicans for the handling of classified information
over the Petraeus scandal. And it is disturbing that then-Secretary of
State Clinton was involved in advising the Obama reelection campaign on
how to continue lying about the Benghazi attack. No wonder Hillary
Clinton tried to hide these email records rather than disclose them
years ago as required by law.
Federal Judge Orders State Department Answers on New Clinton Documents
The
Obama administration continues to provide cover for Hillary Clinton,
but some in the judiciary are running out of patience with the
gamesmanship. We are pleased to report to you this week that Judge
Rudolph Contreras ordered
the State Department to explain how and when new records from the
office of Hillary Clinton were located and why they were not identified
previously.
The court order comes in a Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit
seeking records about the State Department vetting of then-Secretary of
State Hillary Clinton's potential conflicts of interest. The
explanation was initially due on Monday, but Judge Contreras granted the
State Department an extension to Friday, February 5, 2015, due to the
federal government shutdown because of the recent blizzard. (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:15-cv-00688)).
Last month,
we learned that the Obama State Department recently found "thousands"
of new records from Hillary Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State.
According to information provided to Judicial Watch by various Justice
Department attorneys, the new documents appear be "working" records in
electronic format located on both "shared" and "individual" drives
accessible to or used by persons identified as being relevant to our
various FOIA lawsuits on the Benghazi scandal and controversies from
Clinton's term at State. The State Department admitted to Judge Contreras on January 14 that the new records include the files of two of Clinton's top aides:
The
newly identified files that need to be searched in this case consist of
office files that were available to employees within the Office of the
Secretary during former Secretary Clinton's tenure as well as individual
files belonging to Jake Sullivan and Cheryl Mills.
Judge Contreras responded with a January 15 order that states:
Defendant
[State Department] shall complete its additional search and file a
status report (1) disclosing the volume of potentially responsive
documents that must be reviewed, (2) containing a detailed description
of how and when these files were located and why they had not been
previously identified, and (3) proposing a revised schedule for the
production of the non-exempt portions of responsive documents subject to
the Freedom of Information Act.
At a July 9, 2015,
hearing the judge was "concerned" about the preservation of Clinton's
records and warned that the State Department will "have to answer for"
any destruction of Hillary Clinton email records.
The lawsuit stems from a Judicial Watch FOIA request on March 17, 2015, and a subsequent lawsuit filed on May 6, 2015, seeking:
•
Records that identify the policies and/or procedures in place to ensure
that former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton's personal or
charitable financial relationships with foreign leaders, foreign
governments, and business entities posed no conflict of interest to her
role as Secretary of State; and
• Records concerning the State
Department's review of donations to the Clinton Foundation for potential
conflicts of interest with former Secretary Clinton's role as Secretary
of State.
The State Department is protecting
Hillary Clinton and has a history of illegally hiding documents from the
courts and the public about her record. These newly found Hillary
Clinton records show the State Department needs special policing from
the courts, federal investigators, and Congress.
A separate and ongoing Judicial Watch lawsuit,
one of nearly 23 active Judicial Watch lawsuits in which the Clinton
email system is at issue, forced the disclosure last year of documents
that provided a road map for over 200 conflict-of-interest rulings that
led to $48 million for the Clinton Foundation and other
Clinton-connected entities during Hillary Clinton's tenure as secretary
of state. Previously disclosed documents in this lawsuit, for example,
raise questions about funds Clinton accepted from entities linked to
Saudi Arabia, China and Iran, among others.
I wish I could tell
you the State Department's explanation has arrived, but it has not. I
expect it will come after hours in order to keep the new scandal out of
the news. But we will spread the details far and wide, so be sure to
check back here next week.
Until next week...
Tom Fitton
President
CAN WE REALLY AFFORD MORE OF OBAMA-CLINTONOMICS?
America’s Economic Freedom Has Rapidly Declined Under Obama
America’s declining score in the index is
closely related to rapidly rising government spending, subsidies, and
bailouts. (Photo: Kevin Lamarque/Reuters/Newscom)
No comments:
Post a Comment