NEW YORK – Documents made public by the Washington watchdog group Judicial Watch and separately by Wikileaks Julian Assange back up Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan’s assertion on Tuesday that U.S.-led coalition forces have given support to terror groups, including ISIS in Syria. In an interview with Democracy Now’s Juan González on July 25, Assange said the thousands of documents released by Wikileaks through its “Hillary Clinton Email Archive” contain some 1,700 emails that connect Clinton to al-Qaida and ISIS in both Libya and Syria, demonstrating Clinton supplied weapons to ISIS via Syria.
“So, those Hillary Clinton emails, they connect together with the cables that we have published of Hillary Clinton, creating a rich picture of how Hillary Clinton performs in office, but, more broadly, how the U.S. Department of State operates,” Assange said in the interview. “So, for example, the disastrous, absolutely disastrous intervention in Libya, the destruction of the Gadhafi government, which led to the occupation of ISIS of large segments of that country, weapons flows going over to Syria, being pushed by Hillary Clinton, into jihadists within Syria, including ISIS, that’s there in those emails.”
(Owebummer’s smart diplomacy) United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon condemned North Korea's latest nuclear test on Friday as a "brazen breach" of U.N. Security Council resolutions. Britain and Australia condemn the latest nuclear test by North Korea and say China should use its influence to persuade Pyongyang to end the detonations
Congressman Trey Gowdy utterly shamed the mainstream media (aka: OMG – Obama Media Group) in only three minutes in this press conference (Watch Video). He simply asks them, pointedly, in this press conference about the newly-formed House Benghazi Select Committee, a series of very specific questions, with the obvious implication that if the media doesn’t know the answer to these questions, they haven’t been doing their job because they remain unanswered 20 months after the terrorist attack. Gowdy begins his powerful statement by immediately quoting, word-for-word, Obama’s promise to the nation following the attacks: “We will not waiver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act in Benghazi. And make no mistake, justice will be done.” That was the President of the United States over a year ago. “We’re investigating exactly what happened, but my biggest priority now is bringing those folks to justice.” That was the President of the United States over a year ago. Gowdy points out that that both of Obama’s promises are broken as no one has been brought to justice, explaining that the Obama regime has prohibited witnesses from testifying about Benghazi. “No one has been brought to justice. We don’t even have access to witnesses,” Gowdy said. Gowdy then went into his classic questioning mode, telling them that while he’s not trying to tell the media how to do their job, if they don’t know the answers to these basic questions, in regards to Benghazi, then he would leave them to draw their own conclusions: I’m not telling you how to do your job, but I’m going to ask you some questions, and if you can’t answer these basic questions, then I’ll leave you to draw whatever conclusions you want to draw about whether the media has provided sufficient oversight:
Gowdy then concludes his brief statement by blasting the press for not doing their job, while getting a last jab in at Obama, Hillary Clinton and Jay Carney: In conclusion, Congress is supposed to provide oversight, the voters are supposed to provide oversight, and you were supposed to provide oversight. That’s why you have special liberties and that’s why you have special protections. I’m not surprised that the President of the United States called this a phony scandal. I’m not surprised that Secretary Clinton would ask what difference does it make. I’m not even surprised that Jay Carney said it happened a long time ago. I’m just surprised at how many people bought i
When Todd said Clinton had traveled more than any other secretary of state, Trump said she (Hillary) was merely "sitting on an airplane," but didn't accomplish anything in her travels. Trump reiterated his claim that "hundreds of thousands of people have been killed because of her faulty decisions." He pointed to Libya and the mass migration of Syrian refugees as proof.
Three members of the Libyan parliament representing tribes that were brutally attacked by Islamic militia both during and after the coup that ousted Moammar Gadhafi charge Hillary Clinton is the “Butcher of Libya.”
“Hillary is behind all the terrorist groups controlling Libya,” Shibani said. “Hillary is behind Ansar al-Sharia, behind the militia in Misurata who destroyed a great part of Libya and displaced 2 million people from their lands because they were accused of being loyal to Gadhafi. He said the Libyans remaining inside are displaced all over the country and not allowed to return to their homes, contrary to international human law. The lawmakers accused Clinton of international crimes, beginning with the failure of the State Department to intervene when Islamic militia allowed the tribes supporting Gadhafi to be dislodged from their traditional tribal homes. They expressed horror that Clinton’s State Department allowed the Islamic militia after ousting Gadhafi to engage in genocidal violence that was particularly brutal against the various black African tribes that supported the Libyan dictator. The jihadists buried their victims in mass graves, raping thousands of women and imprisoning thousands more along with their children, the parliament members said. The imprisoned women were tortured and thousands of young girls were turned into sex slaves, they said. “Even today, Hillary continues to work with the radical Islamic militia in an effort to control Tripoli and the oil fields, while disregarding the atrocities committed against the people,” Shibani said. She has done nothing to help women and children in Libya,” he responded. “Under Gadhafi women were free to be educated, women were not required to wear any special clothing and women were free to walk the streets.”
Now, he said there are “thousands of families destroyed by the radicals, with the women now living under Shariah law with no education, no good health, no schools, no good food, because of Hillary Clinton’s policies.”
The extreme brutality unleashed by the mercenaries and Islamic fighters who joined Libyan-based jihadists to oust leader Moammar Gadhafi with the backing of Hillary Clinton’s State Department and NATO is demonstrated in three videos released to WND. Toensing pointed out the Secure Embassy Construction and Counterterrorism Act of 1999, or Secca, was passed in response to the near-simultaneous bombings of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania on Aug. 7, 1998, in which thousands were injured and 220 people were killed, including 12 Americans. “Mrs. Clinton either personally waived these security provisions as required by law or she violated the law by delegating the waiver to someone else,” Toensing concluded. WND reported that as the allied bombing of Libya began in 2011, the Obama administration rejected an offer by Gadhafi to abdicate in a deal to be brokered by Rear Adm. Chuck Kubrick with AFRICOM in Stuttgart, Germany, in March 2011. WND also reported the Obama White House and the State Department under the management of Hillary Clinton “changed sides in the war on terror” in 2011 by implementing a policy of facilitating the delivery of weapons to the al-Qaida-dominated rebel militias in Libya attempting to oust Gadhafi from power, the Citizens Commission on Benghazi concluded in a report. The Obama administration also rebuffed the efforts of former Rep. Curt Weldon to negotiate with Moammar Gadhafi an offer to step down, WND reported. Weldon, who served as vice-chairman of the Armed Services Committee and the House Homeland Security Committee, told WND of his private trip to Tripoli in April 2011. “Was Gadhafi prepared to leave office?” Weldon asked rhetorically. “Absolutely, unequivocally, without any doubt in my mind, Gadhafi was ready to leave office. There were no other conditions except he wanted to leave Libya with what he called ‘dignity.’” WND published visual proof of Clinton’s State Department secretly provided weapons to radical Islamic jihadists in Libya in an effort to support the U.S.-backed NATO bombing in 2011. In one of the videos published by WND, Moussa Ibrahim, Gadhafi’s information minister and official spokesman, displayed to reporters in 2011 a cache of weapons and ammunition seized from a ship from Qatar intercepted by the Libyan Coast Guard off Libya’s coast. The report said other Middle Eastern nations after the fall of Gadhafi “rushed to make substantial donations to the Clinton Foundation, fearful that they would be the next victims of Hillary’s wrath.”
Wikileaks' Assange Slams Media For Defending “Demon” Clinton, Who Will ‘Put Nooses Around Everyone’s Necks’
Since Assange founded Wikileaks, with its state mission of exposing government secrecy, lies, and misbehavior, he has successfully angered some of the world’s most powerful people. In a story at True Pundit over the weekend, the world learned that Hillary Clinton once tried to “nominate” Assange for assassination! Clinton aide Ann-Marie Slaughter emailed Clinton and aides Cheryl Mills, Huma Abedin and Jake Sullivan with the subject, “RE an SP memo on possible legal and nonlegal strategies re Wikileaks.” The case is clear, folks. Once again Hillary Clinton has proven that she cannot be trusted with the reins of leadership. She is a loose cannon who answers her “problems” with violence, even when such action is likely illegal. Clinton cannot be trusted to defend our laws because she cannot be trusted to OBEY our laws.
James Comey told Congress that there was no case for criminal charges against Cheryl Mills. If that's the case, what did she need immunity for? And why would she want her laptop nuked? Perhaps it's because she improperly stored classified material on her personal computer, in violation of the law.
According to the Wall Street Journal, the FBI usually only “proffers” immunity deals in return for genuine information and requirements that the recipients cooperate with other investigating bodies, such as Congress. That said, in this specific case its unclear what the FBI received in return for their immunity deals other than what they could have otherwise taken with a subpoena. As Jim Jordan (R-OH) said, “if the FBI wanted any other Americans’ laptops, they would just go get them—they wouldn’t get an immunity deal.” But, of course, by offering immunity, the FBI exempted the laptops and their emails as potential evidence in a criminal case.
"The answer on cybersecurity is secure your own damn email, secretary of state, and he didn't do that.
One of the nation’s top legal minds, former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy, told WND the latest WIkileaks bombshell confirms his belief that Hillary Clinton wasn’t prosecuted for mishandling classified information because President Obama would have been implicated, too. Wikileaks released an email on Friday from March 4, 2015, sent by Clinton’s eventual presidential campaign manager, John Podesta, to her attorney Cheryl Mills, asking if they should decline to turn over emails between Clinton and President Obama sent over her private server. Podesta suggested invoking “executive privilege” to withhold the emails just one day after the House Benghazi Committee had told Clinton to provide all her emails. Mills did not answer Podesta’s email, but the emails between Obama and Clinton were never turned over to the Benghazi committee. Eighteen such emails were turned over the State Department, which has refused to release them. McCarthy told WND, “This confirms what I have said all along: President Obama was engaged in the same reckless conduct as then-Secretary Clinton: engaging in exchanges of highly sensitive information — information that is presumptively classified under the president’s own executive order — over a non-secure, non-government system.” He added, “That is why Huma Abedin was so stunned when she learned about it, asking as anyone with a security clearance would ask: ‘How is that not classified?’” He does not want to say ‘executive privilege’ because that sounds too much like Nixon.”
Richard Nixon had 18 missing minutes of audio. Barack Obama has 18 missing emails to Hillary Clinton on her server.
Now it turns out Hillary Clinton in 1974 argued that executive privilege could not shield a president from a Congressional subpoena. “Hillary Rodham drafted a rather authoritative legal memorandum shredding the notion that President Nixon could rightfully invoke the doctrine of executive privilege to shield himself from the subpoenas of the Watergate special prosecutors,” Donald Russo wrote in the Morning Call in 1998, recounting Hillary Clinton’s work on the Watergate scandal for the House Judiciary Committee and Special Prosecutor John Doar, arguing that executive privilege could not be used to block Congressional subpoenas. In the U.S. v. Nixon in 1974, the Supreme Court unanimously ended up agreeing with Clinton that executive privilege could not shield a President from a Congressional subpoena: “To read the Art. II powers of the President as providing an absolute privilege as against a subpoena essential to enforcement of criminal statutes on no more than a generalized claim of the public interest in confidentiality of nonmilitary and nondiplomatic discussions would upset the constitutional balance of “a workable government” and gravely impair the role of the courts under Art. III.” The court added, “the allowance of the privilege to withhold evidence that is demonstrably relevant in a criminal trial would cut deeply into the guarantee of due process of law and gravely impair the basic function of the courts… That is destruction of evidence under Congressional subpoena, which is illegal under 18 U.S. Code § 1519, entitled “Destruction, alteration, or falsification of records in Federal investigations and bankruptcy”. That statute says, “Whoever knowingly alters, destroys, mutilates, conceals, covers up, falsifies, or makes a false entry in any record, document, or tangible object with the intent to impede, obstruct, or influence the investigation or proper administration of any matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States or any case filed under title 11, or in relation to or contemplation of any such matter or case, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.”
The FBI recovered these new emails from those not turned over by Hillary Clinton. These emails are government documents and not personal emails, as Clinton claims in defending her decision to not turn over 30,000 emails sent or received by her as secretary of state. The emails also show she knew about the security issues of her BlackBerry use (and yet denied recalling anything about it or refused to answer questions). In the newly obtained email exchanges, Clinton also told Petraeus, “If there is ever anything you need or want me to know, pls use this personal email address” – email@example.com – when corresponding with her. Petraeus, at the time of the email from Clinton, was the Commander of the United States Central Command, overseeing U.S. military efforts in critical areas, stretching from Northeast Africa across the Middle East to Central and South Asia, and including Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Egypt. The new documents were among the nearly 15,000 Clinton emails discovered by the FBI, and obtained in response to a court order in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit for State Department records about Clinton’s separate email system (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:15-cv-00689)).
John Bentel, the former Director of Information Resource Management, invoked the Fifth 90 times after being ordered to testify under oath by a judge when his previous account was ruled inconsistent with the official “We need to clean this up – he [Obama] has emails from her – they do not say state.gov,” wrote Mills on March 7, 2015, five days after The New York Times reported that Clinton had a secret email server. Obama had said that he found out about the secret server in the papers. That’s apparently another lie in Hillary’s email saga.
Pat Caddell who was also on Justice with Judge Jeanine on Saturday night on Fox.
Pat Caddell, a former pollster for the Democrats and for Jimmy Carter. She said, "It just comes out, Pat, that the CIA operative on the ground asked for help three times. The New York Times doesn't cover it. A front page from yesterday, and a front page from today, and they don't even mention it, Pat." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bsz5iZX9Db4&feature=player_embedded
CADDELL: I am appalled right now. This White House, this president, this vice president, the secretary of state, all of them are willing apparently to dishonor themselves and this country for the cheap prospect of getting reelected, willing to cover up and lie, and the worst thing is, the very people who are supposed to protect the American people and the truth, the leading mainstream media, they have become a threat, a fundamental threat to American democracy and the enemies of the American people. What I saw with Ty Woods' father and family and the outrage I feel for my country and the shame that these people have no honor, and when will people finally say it? Cover-up is too nice a word, and the media is the one that it's worse on.
RUSH: Pat Caddell, talking about the media. They've become a threat, a fundamental threat to American democracy. They are the enemies of the American people. You shoulda seen him. He was practically crying, describing what he had seen with Tyrone Woods' father and family, the outrage he feels for his country. He wasn't finished.
CADDELL: This president didn't care enough to stay in the White House and, quote, "find out what was going on" the next day. Now I know why he didn't meet with his national security adviser. And why he got on a plane and went to a fundraiser, an act, if any president, Democrat or Republican, prior to this had done while the consulate was smoldering, would have been crucified.
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was clearly trying to "subvert the rules" when she asked aide Jake Sullivan in an email to turn a secure fax that wasn't transmitting into "nonpaper with no identifying information and send nonsecure," says The Washington Post's Bob Woodward. The recently released email making the request is important, Woodward said on Fox News Sunday, "Because you have here the secretary of state in 2011 saying, 'Let's subvert the rules.' … It's very clear from the earlier emails that this was a security issue."
(Big Democrap Media & Big Military Industrial Complex) In January, 1961, Dwight Eisenhower delivered his farewell address after serving two terms as U.S. president; the five-star general chose to warn Americans of this specific threat to democracy: “In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. Their most valuable instrument is the U.S. media, much of which reflexively reveres, serves, believes, and sides with hidden intelligence officials. Demanding that evidence-free, anonymous assertions be instantly venerated as Truth — despite emanating from the very precincts designed to propagandize and lie — is an assault on journalism, democracy, and basic human rationality. It is not hard to understand why the CIA preferred Clinton over Trump. Clinton (Hillary’s Libya war) was critical of Obama for restraining the CIA’s proxy war in Syria and was eager to expand that war, while Trump denounced it. Clinton clearly wanted a harder line than Obama took against the CIA’s long-standing foes in Moscow, while Trump wanted improved relations and greater cooperation. Back in October, a political operative and former employee of the British intelligence agency MI6 was being paid by Democrats to dig up dirt on Trump (before that, he was paid by anti-Trump Republicans). It’s almost impossible to imagine a scenario where it’s justifiable for a news outlet to publish a totally anonymous, unverified, unvetted document filled with scurrilous and inflammatory allegations about which its own editor-in-chief says there “is serious reason to doubt the allegations,” on the ground that they want to leave it to the public to decide whether to believe it. Almost immediately after it was published, the farcical nature of the “dossier” manifested. Not only was its author anonymous, but he was paid by Democrats (and, before that, by Trump’s GOP adversaries) to dig up dirt on Trump. Worse, he himself cited no evidence of any kind, but instead relied on a string of other anonymous people in Russia he claims told him these things. Worse still, the document was filled with amateur errors.
Bob Woodward blasted as "garbage" an unsubstantiated dossier released by U.S. intelligence agencies that alleges deep ties between President-elect Donald Trump and Moscow. In an interview on "Fox News Sunday," the celebrated Washington Post editor said he sided with Trump in his fight with intel agencies on the salacious document. "I’ve lived in this world for 45 years where you get things and people make allegations," he added. "That is a garbage document."
(Uncovering Democrat & Clinton Corruption & Criminal Activity)
Wikileaks itself has said it was not a hack, it was a leak from an insider who had legal access to the information, which is now being corroborated by a group of intelligence veterans led by former National Security Agency official and whistleblower William Binney. Binney’s group notes that “The various ways in which usually anonymous spokespeople for U.S. intelligence agencies are equivocating – saying things like ‘our best guess’ or ‘our opinion’ or ‘our estimate’ etc. – shows that the emails alleged to have been ‘hacked’ cannot be traced across the network. Given NSA’s extensive trace capability, we conclude that DNC and HRC servers alleged to have been hacked were, in fact, not hacked. The evidence that should be there is absent; otherwise, it would surely be brought forward, since this could be done without any danger to sources and methods. Thus, we conclude that the emails were leaked by an insider – as was the case with Edward Snowden and Chelsea Manning. Such an insider could be anyone in a government department or agency with access to NSA databases, or perhaps someone within the DNC.” In other words, if the link between Wikileaks and Russia could be made definitively, it would have been done by now. It hasn’t.
“It is a total embarrassment if our secretary of state can be bought or bribed or sold.”
For the "what difference does it make" crowd, you can no longer credibly claim that Bill Clinton half million-dollar honorarium (as reported in the New York Times) for a speech in Russia was not tied to the decision that followed shortly thereafter to allow many of the same Russian actors to gain control of 20 percent of the U.S. uranium reserves.
Meet convicted felon Claudio Osorio, the Miami man serving a 12-year prison sentence who scammed American taxpayers out of $10 million and Haiti earthquake victims out of 500 homes – all with the help of the Clintons. Osorio, 54, a pal of Bill and Hillary Clinton and President Obama, is a Clinton Foundation donor. He even hosted fundraisers for them at his waterfront home in Florida.
Then we discovered that the Clinton State Department oversaw some $6 billion in mismanagement, fraud and incompetence.
(Money talks) 40 Percent Of Hillary Clinton's Advisory Appointments At State Were To Foundation Donors
The Clinton Foundation has been under scrutiny during the presidential campaign for allegations that the Clintons have personal profited from the charity and that many prominent donors, particularly foreigners, have given millions of dollars with the expectation it would provide access to the secretary of state. Nigerian billionaire Gilbert Chagoury The Clinton Foundation donor conviction list headlines with Nigerian-Lebanese industrialist Gilbert Chagoury whose name turned up in an email exchange released by Judicial Watch in which Teneo head Doug Band pressed longtime Clinton aide Huma Abedin to put Chagoury in touch with the State Department’s “substance person” on Lebanon. Chagoury is also notorious for having been denied entry into the United States last year because of suspected terrorist ties as well as for having been placed on the TSA “no-fly” list in 2010. Chagoury’s name appears near the top in the 2008 list of more than 200,000 donors to the Clinton Foundation. He contributed between $1 million and $5 million in 2008 and again in 2009. He also pledged $1 billion to the Clinton Global Initiative in 2009. The Wall Street Journal reported in 2008 that Chagoury contributed to Bill Clinton’s 1996 presidential campaign and to Hillary’s 2004 presidential campaign, and paid “a lucrative speaking fee” to the former president. In 2000, according to a PBS Frontline report, Chagoury was convicted in Geneva, Switzerland, of laundering money and aiding a criminal organization with the billions stolen from Nigeria during the rule of the late dictator Sani Abachi. Chagoury’s criminal record was expunged after he paid a fine.
The Clinton Foundation should be shut down, it’s a criminal enterprise. It doesn’t matter if they do some good works, because even dictatorships and the mob sometimes do good things.
NEW YORK – The arrest of the head of global foreign exchange cash trading at HSBC bank may shed new light on suspicions the Clinton Foundation has been involved in illegal offshore money-laundering operations on a massive scale. After the HSBC currency traders were arrested, WND conducted an investigation of the bank’s connections to the Clinton Foundation, uncovering a massive offshore financial network involving tens of thousands of transactions that extend far beyond HSBC. The transactions surfaced in database searches of leaked offshore banking documents. On Feb. 10, 2015, the London Guardian reported $81 million from seven wealthy international donors flowed to the Clinton Foundation through controversial Swiss tax-free HSBC accounts maintained in Geneva, as revealed by leaked HSBC files obtained by French newspaper Le Monde. Breitbart reported in April that key Clinton financial partners, including Canadian mining executive Frank Giustra and the Chagoury family of Nigeria, made use of the controversial Panama-based law firm Mossack Fonseca to move assets around the world. Breitbart noted Giustra is one of the Clinton Foundation’s largest contributors, donating more than $25 million, while the Chagoury family in Nigeria has committed $1 billion to the Clinton Global Initiative. This led WND to begin an extensive investigation into the major leak of offshore banking documents, known as the “Panama Papers,” a giant leak of more than 11.5 million financial and legal records from the files of the Mossack Fonseca law firm that was archived by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists. The Panama Papers database contains information on some 214,000 offshore entities connected to people in more than 200 countries and territories. It reveals major financial institutions, including HSBC, involved in the creation of hard-to-trace companies in offshore havens that form a complex international network involved in tax evasion and money-laundering schemes.
The Associated Press in August 2015 broke the story that Bill Clinton had created and used a shell corporation, WJC LLC, and a shell bank account to hide an undisclosed amount of money from public reporting and accountability. WJC LLC is the type of company that gun-running and drug-dealing criminals involved in international money-laundering create and operate to avoid law-enforcement detection.
The alleged Russian money-laundering involving both Podesta and the Clinton Foundation appears to have occurred around two key decisions Secretary of State Clinton made in favor of Russia: The transfer of advanced U.S. technology to Russia, including both military technology and solar energy technology as part of Secretary Clinton’s “reset” program with Russia, in a move that greatly enhanced the Russian military’s capabilities, according to both the FBI and the U.S. army; and Secretary Clinton’s decision on the Committee for Foreign Investment in the United States, CFIUS, to approve the Russian government energy agency Rosatum buying majority control of Uranium One, a company Bill Clinton promoted along with Clinton Foundation donor Frank Giustra in Canada, that resulted in the transfer of approximately 20 percent of all U.S. uranium production to Uranium One.
Weak Democraps lead to war: But what the killings underscore is the Obama administration's consistently muddled -- and dangerous -- public attitude toward terrorism in recent years. It may be clear in Obama's mind, but that doesn't matter if it conveys confusion or weakness to terrorist adversaries. Recall that Bill Clinton's underwhelming reaction to terrorist attacks in the 1990's (Black Hawk Down, USS Cole..) caused Osama bin Laden to judge the U.S. weak and vacillating as he set in motion planning for 9/11. At various times -- for instance, the intense election year of 2012 -- Obama has sought to look ruthlessly determined to crush al Qaeda, one by one, to the point of aides leaking that he kept a list of terrorists destined for death by drone. The Democrat has boasted of the terror group's leadership being decimated, on the run and on the path to defeat. Which is fine, until its affiliates blossom in numerous other countries, including Libya where Obama led an allied coalition to oust Moammar Gadhafi, leaving a new, lawless latter-day Afghanistan for terrorists to plot and train. At other times Obama has appeared dangerously dismissive of terrorism. As he's denouncing the Paris killings and ISIS barbarism, he's releasing Guantanamo prisoners. Many return to battle. Although the Fort Hood shooter shouted the same Arabic slogan killing 13 Americans as Wednesday's Paris killers did killing 12, Obama's teams labeled that 2009 massacre "workplace violence." But violent events have intervened and now confusion reigns about Obama's intentions and commitment to thwart foreign dangers that could affect Americans. Such indecision and uncertainty are dangerous. In the late 1940's when the Truman administration was unclear about its interest in northeast Asia, North Korean communists took that as an invitation. They invaded the South, leading to the three-year Korean War, which still has no peace treaty. And some 30,000 U.S. troops still based there. One thing is quite clear though about the ongoing war or struggle or battle against terrorism. No matter how much Obama may want to end such conflicts, after the Paris attack and others to come, we have no indication terrorism will fade as long as it's winning.
Back when Hillary was co-running the White House and prosecutors were looking into Whitewater, Travelgate, Filegate and other scandals involving the first lady, a million subpoenaed emails were conveniently "lost" thanks to a "glitch" in a West Wing computer server. Contractors who found the massive archives hole testified they were threatened with jail if they disclosed the "lost" emails to the special prosecutor or Congress. The email deep-sixing scheme, known as "Project X," went from August 1996 to November 1998. At the same time, Republicans were subpoenaing Chinagate-related emails and Ken Starr was subpoenaing Lewinsky emails. White House staff and contractors found that someone close to the first lady had basically turned off the White House's automated email archiving system. Despite separate investigations and a federal lawsuit, high-level emails dealing with several scandals were never turned over. And the full scope of the Clintons' culpability in the parade of scandals was never known. All told, an estimated 1 million emails went missing. It turns out her top aides at State — Mills and Huma Abedin — also used personal email accounts. So any emails about the Benghazi cover-up wouldn't show up in government accounts. Hillary also denied that any private emails contained classified information, a felony for which former CIA Director Gen. David Petraeus is now being prosecuted. How do we know? Trust me, Hillary says. Subpoena Mills and Abedin.
A culture of non-transparency and corruption doesn't stop with Hillary Clinton, but in fact can be found in nearly every major federal government agency the Obama administration has turned into a political tool to unilaterally change policy over the past six years.The questions now are 1) Will anyone be held accountable for breaking federal records laws? 2) Will the culture change? The email scandal surrounding Hillary Clinton's time at the State Department is only getting worse, with new revelations she set up a "home brew" email server at her house and went around federal records laws by conducting all of her official State Department business through a personal email account. "The use of non-official e-mail accounts to conduct official business implicates federal records requirements. Use of a non-official e-mail account to conduct government business raises the prospect that records -- as defined by the Federal Records Act -- are not captured by official government e-mail archiving systems. It also creates difficulties in fulfilling the IRS' obligations under the Freedom of Information Act and other litigation requests. use of non-official e-mail account also frustrates congressional oversight obligations."
Had Richard Nixon burned his tapes, he would have survived Watergate. Sure, there would have been a major firestorm, but no smoking gun. Hillary Rodham was a young staffer on the House Judiciary Committee investigating Nixon. She saw. She learned. Today you don't burn tapes. You delete emails. Hillary Clinton deleted 30,000, dismissing their destruction with the brilliantly casual: "I didn't see any reason to keep them." William Safire wrote in 1996, "Americans of all political persuasions are coming to the sad realization that our first lady ... is a congenital liar" Her answers are farcical. Everyone knows she kept the email private for purposes of concealment and, above all, control. For other State Department employees, their emails belong to the government. The records officers decide to return to you what's personal. For Hillary Clinton, she decides. The point of regulations is to ensure government transparency. The point of owning the server is to ensure opacity. Because she holds the emails, all document requests by Congress, by subpoena, by Freedom of Information Act inquiries have ultimately to go through her lawyers, who will stonewall until the end of time — or Election Day 2016, whichever comes first. Moreover, around April 1, the Clinton apologists will begin dismissing the whole story as "old news." But even if nothing further is found, the damage is done. After all, what is Hillary running on? Her experience and record, say her supporters. What record? She's had three major jobs. Secretary of state: Can you name a single achievement in four years? (Benghazi, Russian reset?) U.S. senator: Can you name a single achievement in eight years? First lady: her one achievement in eight years? HillaryCare, a shipwreck. In reality, Hillary Clinton is running on two things: gender and name. What you're feeling now is Early Onset Clinton Fatigue.
It had been the policy of every president since 1979 that Islamist Iran must be sanctioned and contained. Obama, however, is betting instead on detente to tame Iran's aggressive behavior and nuclear ambitions. Obama has been rewarded with an Iran that has ramped up its aggressiveness in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Gaza and Yemen, and brazenly defied the world on uranium enrichment. He did the same with Russia. He offered Vladimir Putin a new detente. "Reset," he called it. Putin responded by decimating his domestic opposition, unleashing a vicious anti-American propaganda campaign, ravaging Ukraine and shaking the post-Cold War European order to its foundations. Like the Bourbons, however, Obama learns nothing. In about 10 years, the deal expires. Sanctions are lifted, and Iran is permitted unlimited uranium enrichment with an unlimited number of centrifuges of unlimited sophistication. As the Wall Street Journal's Bret Stephens points out, we don't even allow that for democratic South Korea. Obama's petulant response was: "The prime minister didn't offer any viable alternatives." But he just did: conditional sunset, smaller infrastructure. And if the Iranians walk away, then you ratchet up sanctions, as Congress is urging, which, with collapsed oil prices, would render the regime extremely vulnerable. And if that doesn't work? Hence Netanyahu's final point: Israel is prepared to stand alone, a declaration that was met with enthusiastic applause reflecting widespread popular support. In its near-70 year history, Israel has never once asked America to fight for it. Not in 1948, when 650,000 Jews faced 40 million Arabs. Not in 1967, when Israel was being encircled and strangled by three Arab armies. Not in 1973, when Israel was on the brink of destruction. Not in the three Gaza wars or the two Lebanon wars.
Barack Hussein Obama, has different concerns. He is obsessed with confiscating the guns of law-abiding Americans, yet seems unwilling to lift a finger to prevent Iran’s fanatical rulers from obtaining A-bombs. He reneged on America’s agreement with Poland to establish an anti-missile system there to reduce Iran’s ICBM threat to Europe and the U.S. Mr. Obama was eager to give F-15 jets to the Islamist Egyptian Brotherhood government that toppled our and Israel’s long-time ally Hosni Mubarak in Cairo, but withdrew this offer the instant pro-American, anti-Islamist Egyptian military leaders toppled ruling Brotherhood Islamist radicals. Mr. Obama has called Iranian nuclear weapons unacceptable, but he has never pledged to use “assertive disarmament” if Iran acquires such weapons. If he is serious, why is this not the declared, unchangeable American position in any negotiation with an Iran that claims to have no A-bomb ambitions? Mr. Obama, however, reportedly in 2014 quietly threatened the Netanyahu government, warning that our Persian Gulf fleet would destroy any Israeli aircraft that attempted to attack Iranian nuclear facilities. Obama has made little secret of his hatred for Mr. Netanyahu. Obama apparently fears that a strong, persuasive leader like Netanyahu might undermine his weak-kneed, submissive negotiations with Tehran. Did Mr. Obama’s Muslim father or Indonesian Muslim step-father teach him the Islamic religious doctrines of
al-Taqiyya, idtirar, kitman, or hiyal – all of which hold that lying is moral if done to protect Muslims or advance Islam? Surely he recognizes, therefore, that no treaty with Iran’s doomsday Islamists can be trusted. Or perhaps, given all his deceptions, President Obama secretly embraces al-Taqiyya far more than we know.
Obama is correct that we can compare two very different economic visions. One is called Reaganomics and the other is (Obummer-nomics) Obama's "middle class economics." To get the economy moving again, President Reagan cut taxes, simplified the tax code, reined in regulations, kept spending under control, and generally treated government as more of a problem than a solution to many of the country's troubles. Obama promised to set the country on a new and different course, and has been doing a bang-up job of it ever since. He boosted spending, raised taxes, vastly complicated the tax code, unleashed federal regulators and massively expanded the entitlement state with ObamaCare. And how did these two visions work out? In the first five years of the Reagan recovery, the economy grew 4.6% a year on average. Under Obama, it's been a paltry 2.2%. Employment had climbed more than 18% by this point in Reagan's recovery. Under Obama, it's a mere 7.2%.
Looked at another way, the growth gap between Obama's economic policies and Reagan's is now $2.4 trillion in lost GDP and a stunning 14.4 million in lost jobs. Obama hasn't just underperformed Reagan, he's underperformed every president since the Great Depression.
(Social Justice & Communism) I can’t say for certain that Rudy Giuliani read my book, which is titled The Communist: Frank Marshall Davis, The Untold Story of Barack Obama’s Mentor; but he has those facts absolutely right. If I may, I’d like to add some crucial detail: Frank Marshall Davis (1905-87) was a hardcore communist, an actual card-carrying member of Communist Party USA (CPUSA), who spent time with a young Barack Obama throughout the 1970s, right up until the moment Obama left Hawaii for Occidental College in 1979. Davis joined the Communist Party in Chicago in the early 1940s. CPUSA members swore an oath to “ensure the triumph of Soviet power in the United States.” They were dedicated to what CPUSA leader William Z. Foster had openly called “Soviet America.” Notably, Davis joined CPUSA after the Hitler-Stalin Pact, a time when many American communists (especially Jewish communists) had bolted the Party in disgust that their Soviet Union had allied with Hitler. As we know from Davis’ declassified 600-page FBI file (and other sources), his Party card number was 47544. He was very active. In 1946, he became the founding editor-in-chief of the Chicago Star, the Party-line newspaper for Chicago. There, Davis shared the op-ed page with the likes of Howard Fast, a “Stalin Prize” winner, and Senator Claude “Red” Pepper, who, at the time, sponsored the bill to nationalize healthcare in the United States. Davis left the Star in 1948 for Hawaii, where he would write for the Party-line organ there, the Honolulu Record. His politics remained so radical that the FBI had him under continued surveillance. The federal government actually placed Davis on the Security Index, meaning that in the event of a war between the United States and USSR, Barack Obama’s mentor could be placed under immediate arrest. Frank Marshall Davis’s targets were Democrats more than Republicans, given that it was Democrats like Harry Truman who held the White House and opposed Stalin’s Soviet expansion at the time. In December 1956, the Democrat-run Senate Judiciary Committee called Davis to Washington to testify on his activities. Davis pleaded the Fifth Amendment. No matter; the next year, the Democratic Senate published a report titled, “Scope of Soviet Activity in the United States,” where it listed Davis as “an identified member of the Communist Party.” So deep was Davis’ influence that Obama, in his huge bestselling memoir, Dreams from My Father, would cite him repeatedly over thousands of words and in each and every section (all three parts) of his memoirs—though he referred to him only as “Frank.” “Frank” is mentioned 22 times by name, and far more times via pronouns and other forms of reference.
The FBI has arrested one of the top Beijing-tied bagmen who funneled funny money to the Clinton administration. He was busted in New York with a suitcase full of cash. Some Chinese money-laundering for Hillary? Stay tuned. The defendant is a major Clinton fundraiser named Ng Lap Seng, aka "Mr. Wu." Recall that in her 2008 bid for the White House, Hillary had to return hundreds of thousands of dollars raised by another Chinese bagman, Norman Hsu, who happened to be a criminal fugitive. Hsu bundled $1 million for the Clinton campaign through straw donors. He was busted for laundering foreign cash. The pattern of corruption may be repeating with the re-emergence of Ng. In 1998, Ng was ID'd in a Senate report as the source of hundreds of thousands of dollars illegally funneled through Little Rock restaurant owner Trie. A top Clinton donor, Trie would later face charges in the Chinagate fundraising scandal for violating campaign finance laws. Ng has close ties to the Chinese communist government and is listed as a member of a senior advisory group, the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference.
Through Trie, Ng bought access to the White House ostensibly on behalf of Beijing, which the FBI said at the time was running an influence operation against the Clinton administration. At the time, Chinese missiles couldn't hit the side of a barn. But thanks to Clinton missile-technology transfers, Beijing can now hit any city in the U.S. (which they share w/ Iran etc..) And thanks to his opening up the nuclear weapons labs to Chinese scientists, Beijing "stole" the designs to every nuke in the U.S. arsenal. The Chicoms also sought a beachhead in our hemisphere and got it, when Clinton in 1997 allowed Chinese front companies to take over the Panama Canal, a strategic waterway linking the Pacific Ocean and Atlantic Ocean. Beijing now effectively controls key naval shipping lanes in our backyard. Beijing got a hell of a lot for their money under the treasonous Clinton administration. Now it seems they're back trying to get even more in a hoped-for second regime. Too bad the corrupt Clintons aren't joining the mysterious Mr. Wu behind bars.
(Clinton-another weak Democrap inviting aggression with his dereliction of duty risking our national security ignoring the hard work that should have been done which the stronger Republican Bush had to deal with cleaning up another Democraps’ mess.) In 2006, there was enough evidence publicly available for families of Khobar victims to win a U.S. civil suit holding Iran liable for hundreds of millions of dollars. Wayne White, a State Department intelligence officer from 1979 to 2005 who was investigating Khobar, told a diplomatic oral history project that intelligence on the attack "had been cut off by Sandy Berger," Clinton's national security adviser. Berger was later convicted in an attempt to smuggle classified documents regarding terrorism out of the National Archives. This tops off a long list of failures for Bill Clinton in combating terrorism. They include: • The 1993 World Trade Center bombing, killing six and injuring about 1,000, which brought jihadists' attention to the twin towers as targets, prefiguring the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. • The 1995 Riyadh, Saudi Arabia bombing of a U.S. military training center, killing five Americans and two Indians. • The 1998 al-Qaida bombings of the U.S. embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, killing 224 people and wounding about 5,000. • The failed U.S. bombing of sites in Afghanistan in an effort to kill Osama bin Laden, which many at the time suspected was merely an attempt to distract from Clinton's Monica Lewinsky sex scandal. • The 2000 USS Cole bombing in Yemen, killing 17 U.S. sailors and injuring 37 others. Richard Miniter, in his book "Losing Bin Laden," documents how, during the Clinton administration, then-Rep. Bill McCollum, a Florida Republican, founded and chaired the House of Representatives' Taskforce on Terrorism. He eventually gathered evidence from the Mujahideen who fought the Soviets in Afghanistan, and who knew bin Laden (OBL) when he fought with them. "They emphasized that he wanted to murder Americans," Miniter wrote, and that he was tied to assassinations and terror operations in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Yemen. And, they said, the wealthy Saudi terror master was becoming more powerful and well-connected. (* Clinton retreated from Mogadishu/Black Hawk Down, emboldening OBL..) "We knew that it was just a matter of time before we saw a major terrorist attack on America," McCollum said. But "McCollum couldn't believe that the Clinton administration would ignore such serious intelligence that he had developed about a real and present threat." It's fair to ask: How much different would a Hillary Clinton war on terror be?
Arguing the science has no effect on global warming alarmists. They are immune to facts and stick to models and fallacious arguments from biased, unscientific authorities. Climate models say temperatures should climb right along with the rise in CO2 emissions, yet emissions rose from the 1940s through the 1970s, when scientists were warning of a coming ice age. And for the past two decades, CO2 emissions have continued to rise while temperatures have been in a holding pattern for the past 18 years. Models say we should see more intense hurricanes, yet for nearly a decade the U.S. has experienced below-average hurricanes making landfall, and they have been no more powerful than previously experienced. Sea-level rise has slowed, polar bear numbers have increased, the Antarctic ice sheet has set new records for expansion month after month and even the Arctic is back to average ice levels for the decade. None of these trends is consistent with models' predictions, yet alarmists ignore the facts because controlling human lives is their underlying goal, and their failed models are the only thing that enables them to claim disaster is in the offing if humans don't change their ways. Arguing economics is equally ineffective. Multiple analyses show the best economic response to the challenges posed by global warming is to use fossil fuels to grow peoples' wealth globally and adapt to climate changes as they come — basically doing what humans have done throughout history. In "The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels," author Alex Epstein makes a key point: "Climate is no longer a major cause of deaths, thanks in large part to fossil fuels. ... People in countries using abundant fossil fuels live longer, have fewer infant deaths, are healthier, are more educated and are much wealthier on average than people who live without coal, oil and natural gas. This is not a mere coincidence, as wealth, health, education and other living conditions remained virtually stagnant for most of human history until our discovery of the ability to transform coal, oil and gas into fuels that powered the Industrial Revolution. In the West, fossil fuels light homes, making work and an active home life possible after dark without the use of dung, wood and tallow, thus preventing millions of unnecessary deaths from respiratory disease. Conversely, lack of fossil fuels condemns millions to early deaths from diseases like those that they experience in underdeveloped parts of Africa and Asia. Children die in Africa from malnutrition or starvation because they lack access to the quality and quantities of food made available to the West through fossil-fuel-dependent industrial agriculture and transportation. Lives are saved in modern hospitals thanks to fossil fuels, from the gasoline fueling emergency vehicles to the electricity keeping the lights, computers, climate controls and refrigeration on. Electricity runs incubators that save premature babies' lives and respirators that keep people breathing until they can breathe on their own. Electricity runs the machines sterilizing instruments and conducting MRIs, X-rays, CT scans, and all the other tests and technologies that allow medical professionals to predict, diagnose, and treat the countless diseases and injuries humans suffer each year. Electricity delivers safe drinking water and fossil fuels make the plastics that are used in hospital blood and medicine bags, tubes, wiring and even furniture. Would you want to be treated at a hospital without these lifesaving technologies? If not, why should the billions of poor people around the world live without these modern wonders so you can pursue some (unrealistic utopian) ideal vision of the perfect climate? How many people are climate alarmists willing to let die prematurely to satisfy their perverse desire to end the use of fossil fuels? (Why do they want to keep other people poor & starving?)
: http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials-on-the-right/123114-732785-cuba-ties-restored-but-not-freedom-for-castros-captives.htm#ixzz3O41p9Gx0 Normalization has not advanced democracy in China or Vietnam. Indeed, it hasn't done so in Cuba. Except for the U.S., Cuba has had normal relations with the rest of the world for decades. Tourists, trade, investment from Canada, France, Britain, Spain, everywhere. An avalanche of nylons — and not an inch of movement in Cuba toward freedom. In fact, one could argue this influx of Western money helped preserve the dictatorship, as just about all financial transactions go through the government, which takes for itself before any trickle-down crumbs are allowed to reach the regime-indentured masses. Cuba reportedly has agreed to reopen the Soviet-era Lourdes espionage facility, a massive listening post for intercepting communications. Havana and Moscow have also discussed the use of Cuban airfields for Russia's nuclear-capable long-range bombers. This in addition to Cuba's usual hemispheric mischief, such as training and equipping the security and repression apparatus in Venezuela. With the U.S. embargo already in place and the Castros hungry to have it lifted, why give them trade, investment, hard currency, prestige and worldwide legitimacy — for nothing in return? Obama brought back nothing on democratization, a staggering betrayal of Cuba's human rights crusaders. Not even the kind of 1975 Helsinki Final Act that we got from the Soviets as part of detente, granting structure and review to human rights promises. If Obama insisted on giving away the store, why not at least do it item by item? We relax part of the embargo in return for, say, Internet access. And tie further normalization to serial relaxations of police-state repression. Oh, what hypocrisy, say the Obama acolytes. Did we not normalize relations with China and get no human rights quid pro quo? True. But that was never a prospect. The entire purpose was geopolitical and the payoff was monumental: We walked away with the most significant anti-Soviet strategic realignment of the entire Cold War, formally breaking up the communist bloc and gaining China's neutrality, and occasional support, in our half-century struggle to dismantle the Soviet empire. From Cuba, Obama didn't even get a token gesture
The parts of American history that this president chooses to commemorate and what he says about them speaks volumes about his view of America and American history. Obama’s America is not only unexceptional, it is perpetually and deeply racist, an overbearing world bully with no right to lecture the world about morality, democracy or freedom. The bridge was named for Edmund Winston Pettus, a Confederate brigadier general, U.S. senator from Alabama and grand dragon of the Alabama Ku Klux Klan. He was a Democrat, as were the officeholders in the "solid South" of 1965. We tend to forget it was Democrats who unleashed the dogs and turned fire hoses against civil rights marchers. It was Democrats who stood in the schoolhouse door and are still there by opposing school choice and trapping minority children in failing schools. We forget that it was Democratic Sen. Robert Byrd of West Virginia, a former "grand kleagle" in the Ku Klux Klan, who led a 62-day filibuster against the Civil Rights Act of 1964. We forget that the act would never have been possible without Republican leadership, that legislation was not only a personal victory for Illinois Republican Sen. Everett Dirksen, then minority leader, but Republicans in both the House and Senate who supported the measure in far greater percentages than Democrats. Only six GOP senators voted against the act, compared with 21 Democrats. Speaking at the Selma ceremony, President Obama rightly noted that there "are places and moments in America where this nation's destiny has been decided" and that many "are sites of war — Concord and Lexington, Appomattox and Gettysburg." Except he never made it to the 150th anniversary of the Gettysburg Address, celebrated at a site just 65 miles from the White House built by slaves. It was an address by the first Republican president to commemorate the battle that saved the Union and ended slavery, at the very high cost of 51,112 men's lives. President Obama announced his presidential candidacy in 2007 near Lincoln's law office in Springfield, Ill. In 2009 and 2013, he took the oath of office using Lincoln's Bible. Yet he couldn't make it to Gettysburg, where the long and difficult struggle towards true racial justice and equality really began.
Gettysburg is where we as a nation apologized for slavery.