Visit Counter

Sunday, August 16, 2015

Hillary Clinton’s five email lies









‘I remember landing under sniper fire.”

“I actually started criticizing the war in Iraq before [Obama] did.”

“We came out of the White House not only dead broke, but in debt.”

Hillary Clinton’s relationship with the truth has always been one of disdain, as shown by her accounts of landing in Bosnia (she was actually greeted by a child on the tarmac), her policies (she voted for the war in Iraq and only criticized it later, after the winds shifted, and after Obama) and her finances (if owning two multi-million-dollar homes is “dead broke,” then sure).

But the Democratic front-runner has really outdone herself with her varying explanations for her home e-mail server. Here are her five fabrications in the shifting story of why she hid her correspondence from public records and compromised national security.

1. “I thought it would be easier to carry one device for my work.”

Truth: This was Clinton’s excuse on March 10 for why she used a personal e-mail address for official business as secretary of state — so that all her e-mails came to one device. “Looking back, it would have been probably, you know, smarter to have used two devices,” she said.

A couple weeks later, a freedom of information request by the AP discovered that Clinton used multiple electronic devices, including an iPad and a BlackBerry, to send e-mail.

2. “The server contains personal communications from my husband and me.”

Truth: If that’s true, it will come as a surprise to Bill Clinton. “The former president, who does regularly use Twitter, has sent a grand total of two e-mails during his life, both as president,” said his spokesman, Matt McKenna, in an interview published around the same time.






3. “I’ve never had a subpoena…Let’s take a deep breath here.”

Truth: Confronted by CNN’s Brianna Keilar on July 8 about why she had deleted 33,000 e-mails while under investigation, Clinton said it was common practice. Keilar pressed: Even if you’re under subpeona?

Clinton was under subpoena when the question was asked. After requesting Clinton’s e-mails in December 2014, Trey Gowdy (R-SC) got nowhere, so he sent her a subpoena in March. A Clinton lawyer, David Kendall, responded to the subpoena later that month, saying that Hillary Clinton was waiting for approval from the State Department before releasing the e-mails.

Clinton’s people argued she deleted the e-mails before she was under subpoena, so her answer was correct. Except they were deleted in December, when she already knew Congress was interested in them. Before the hard drive was erased, e-mails were handed over to the State Department — but only the ones Clinton’s staff deemed relevant. Since all the rest were deleted, no one else could check their work.

Like so many Clinton statements, while the line may be technically correct, it ignores the spirit of the complaint.

4. “I did not e-mail any classified material to anyone on my e-mail. I’m certainly well aware of the classification requirements and did not send classified material.”

Truth: Another claim made during that March 10 press conference that has fallen apart. After taking a random sample of 40 of Clinton’s e-mails, the inspector general for 17 spy agencies told Congress that two contained information deemed “Top Secret.”





Clinton’s camp put out a long technical defense saying that the information wasn’t classified when she received it and that different agencies disagreed over what should be classified. But it begged the question: Why take the risk at all?

After months of resisting, Clinton agreed to hand over her home server to the FBI, though it’s been wiped clean. Experts will try to recover what they can — and if even more surprises await.

5. “Everything I did was permitted. There was no law. There was no regulation. There was nothing that did not give me the full authority to decide how I was going to communicate.”

Truth: As The Washington Post points out, “In 2009, just eight months after Clinton became secretary of state, the US Code of federal regulations on handling electronic records was updated:

‘Agencies that allow employees to send and receive official electronic-mail messages using a system not operated by the agency must ensure that federal records sent or received on such systems are preserved in the appropriate agency record-keeping system.’ The responsibility for making and preserving the records is assigned to ‘the head of each federal agency.’”

“On top of that, when Clinton was secretary, a cable went out under her signature warning employees to ‘avoid conducting official department business from your personal e-mail accounts.’ ”

The State Department requires employees to preserve records, even saying explicitly that on the rare occasion a personal e-mail address is used, those e-mails should be forwarded to the work address for archiving. Clinton never did this.

The Washington Post concludes: “She appears to be arguing her case on narrow, technical grounds, but that’s not the same as actually complying with existing rules as virtually everyone else understood them.”

Can we expect any less of the spouse of the man who argued what “is” is? Columnist Charles Krauthammer said it best when he noted last week, “Nothing she says ever is true three weeks later.”


What will be revealed as a lie next? 




Bear in mind Abedin, a Muslim, is to Clinton, what Jarrett is to Barry.








Share/Bookmark

Saturday, August 15, 2015

Clinton dismisses controversies surrounding Benghazi, emails at event










----------------------------------------------------------




Hillary Clinton defended her handling of the 2012 Benghazi attacks and her use of a private email server as secretary of state, dismissing the controversies as “partisan games” in a speech in Iowa on Friday.

"They'll try to tell you it's about Benghazi, but it's not," Clinton said, pointing to Republican-led congressional inquiries that she said had "debunked all the conspiracy theories."

"It's not about emails or servers either. It's about politics," she said.

"I won't get down in the mud with them. I won't play politics with national security," Clinton said at the annual Wing Ding, a Democratic fundraiser in northern Iowa that attracted three other presidential candidates.

A little late for that.


What was actually in those 31,000 emails far outweighed how 'suspicious' it was going to look... so she had to delete them.

To put things in context when Monica was on her knees taking care of her husband didn't she say, "This is nothing more then a vast right wing conspiracy." In other words Bill gets a BJ and Republicans get the blame.



Clinton sought to take the scandals head on while presenting herself as combative, tough and prepared to fight Republicans in an effort to ultimately succeed President Barack Obama. Her appearance comes days after she agreed to turn over to the FBI the private serve she used a secretary of state. Republican lawmakers have said she was negligent in handling classified information.

Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders received loud cheers when he pointed to his opposition to the Keystone XL pipeline, which has been reviled by environmentalists and his vote against Iraq War in the Senate. Sanders’ campaign has gained steam with the growing Clinton controversy.

Sanders, whose recent appearance at a Seattle event was disrupted by activists with the Black Lives Matter movement, also took steps to emphasize his civil rights record.

"No one will fight harder to end racism in America," he said.

Clinton’s forceful defense started when she noted that the Supreme Court case Citizens United, started with a “hit-job film” about her.

“Now I’m in the crosshairs,” she said of Republicans.

Clinton said she would "do my part to provide transparency to Americans — that's why I'm insisting 55,000 pages of my emails be published as soon as possible" and turned over the server.

"I won't pretend that this is anything other than what it is: the same old partisan games we've seen so many times before," she said. "So I don't care how many super PACs and Republicans pile on. I've been fighting for families and underdogs my entire life and I'm not going to stop now."

Clinton also made light of the email probe on her Snapchat social media account. "I love it," she said. "Those messages disappear all by themselves."

Her speech included critiques of potential Republican rivals Scott Walker, Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio. But she saved her most pointed barbs for Donald Trump, saying the attention in the GOP race had centered on a "certain flamboyant front-runner." The country, she said, shouldn't be distracted. "Most of the other candidates are just Trump with the pizazz or the hair."

The candidates spoke before about 2,000 Democrats at the Surf Ballroom, the site of the last concert by rock pioneers Buddy Holly, Ritchie Valens and The Big Bopper before their fatal 1959 plane crash, later dubbed "The Day the Music Died."

Clinton and Sanders spoke first, prompting some activists to file out of the ballroom before former Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley and ex-Rhode Island Gov. Lincoln Chafee took the stage.

O'Malley pointed to a laundry list of progressive proposals he would pursue if elected president, saying his years as Baltimore mayor and Maryland's two-term governor were about "action, not words."

"In tougher times than these, Franklin Roosevelt told us not to be afraid. In changing times, John Kennedy told us to govern is to choose," O'Malley said. "I say to you, progress is a choice."

Chafee took aim at Bush's recent critique of Obama's handling of Iraq, telling activists, "What kind of neocon Kool-Aid is this man drinking?"

Clinton kicked off a weekend of campaigning in Dubuque on Friday by outlining proposals for more quality child care on college campuses and additional scholarships to help students who are parents. The Democratic front-runner also picked up two endorsements aimed at reinforcing her standing among liberals: former Iowa Sen. Tom Harkin, a party luminary who served three decades in the Senate, and the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, a union of nearly 600,000 members. Clinton was joining Harkin at the Iowa State Fair on Saturday morning.






Share/Bookmark

Friday, August 14, 2015

University of Texas to Move Jefferson Davis Statue





The Civil War along with slavery never happened. It's just a figment of our imagination.





There are literally hundreds of streets, highways, and avenues named after prominent Confederates. Are we going to change all those too? At what cost? Should any depiction of the founding fathers be removed? After all many of them had slaves.



-----------------------------------------------



The statue of Confederate President Jefferson Davis will be moved to an American history center on campus.

 




Photo: ERIC GRAY/ASSOCIATED PRESS
By
Ana Campoy Updated Aug. 13, 2015 6:59 p.m. ET




The University of Texas at Austin on Thursday said it is moving a statue of Confederate President Jefferson Davis from its main mall to an American history center on campus, amid a backlash against Confederate symbols in the country.

The decision follows a request from students to remove the statue, which depicts the Confederate leader in a long coat atop a towering pedestal, as well as a review by a special task force that weighed public opinion on the controversial piece.

“While every historical figure leaves a mixed legacy, I believe Jefferson Davis is in a separate category, and that it is not in the university’s best interest to continue commemorating him on our main mall,” university President Gregory Fenves said in a letter to students and faculty. Mr. Fenves said other sculptures on the mall depicting Confederacy figures, including Robert E. Leeand Confederate Gen. Albert Sidney Johnston, will stay where they are.

Officials across the U.S. are struggling to balance conflicting views about Confederate symbols after the killing of nine African-Americans in a Charleston, S.C., church earlier this year. The shooter had espoused racist views, according to family and friends, and was photographed with the Confederate flag.

The Jefferson Davis sculpture at UT-Austin has been vandalized several times since the beginning of the year. After it was marked with a “Black Lives Matter” tag in June, Mr. Fenves said he was convening a task force to explore the future of the statue and the others surrounding it, which were created between 1916 and 1933.

Polls conducted by the task force found that 33% of respondents were in favor of moving the Jefferson Davis statue, while another 33% were in favor of keeping all of the statues in their current position.

“Statutes are meant to celebrate and memorialize the people they depict and putting Jefferson Davis on a pedestal isn’t in line with the university’s core values,” said Rohit Mandalapu, vice president of the university’s student body.

And all it took was 82 years to come to this conclusion? If it wasn't for Charleston it would still be standing.

BTW...Meet Rohit Mandalapu:

We're going to allow this slob to dictate what true American values are?



Terry Ayers, a spokesman for the Descendants of Confederate Veterans, a Texas group that had opposed the removal of the statues, said the organization supports Mr. Fenves’s decision to keep all of them on campus.

“It is vitally important that the University of Texas at Austin preserve and understand its history and help its students and the public learn from it in meaningful ways,” he said in a statement.

Separately, a New Orleans city commission on Thursday recommended removing four monuments related to the Confederacy, including a prominent statue of Lee. The vote is part of a process initiated by Mayor Mitch Landrieuto replace Confederate symbols throughout the city. The city council could decide on the issue as early as September, a city spokesman said. 







Share/Bookmark

Killary's Cribs Shock Young People







Video 143










Share/Bookmark

Wednesday, August 12, 2015

Kerry says Tehran has not pursued nuke since 2003







See if I got this straight. According to John Kerry they haven't pursued a nuke since 2003. If that's the case what was the point of the Iran deal to begin with? I got it. To lift the sanctions so Iran gets over a hundred billion to spend on terrorism.







How do you explain this?

June 2012

Islamic world must have nuclear weapons, says Iran





-----------------------------------------------------------





Secretary of State John Kerry doubled down on the controversial Iran nuclear deal Tuesday, telling lawmakers that there was not a better deal available to negotiators and that since 2003 Iran has not pursued a nuclear bomb to the best of America's knowledge.

Speaking in a moderated discussion on the nuclear deal reached with Iran hosted by Thomson Reuters in New York, Kerry tried to counter Republican claims that a better deal can be reached.

Kerry told the forum that President George W. Bush tried in 2003 and 2008 to get a better deal, but there "is not a better deal to be gotten."

He went on to say that the argument for a better deal would entail the U.S. maintaining or increasing pressure on Iran by threatening foreign governments and businesses with penalties for doing business with Iran, an idea that Kerry slammed as far-fetched.

"Are you kidding?" he said.

Kerry asserted that European countries wouldn't cooperate with U.S. sanctions, and would walk away from separate U.S.-led penalties against Russia if Congress kills the deal.

He also claimed that the dollar would lose its status as the world's reserve currency, and allies wouldn't support U.S. military action against Iran.

Kerry told participants that there was clearly a period in which Iran was pursuing a nuclear weapon.

"We found them red-handed with facilities they should not have had, with materials they should not have had," Kerry said.

However, he said that since 2003, Iran has not pursued a weapon to the best knowledge of the U.S. and others.

"They have not pursued a weapon to our best judgment and to the judgment of all our allies, they haven't pursue a weapon, per se, since that period of time," Kerry said. 

In terms of the argument for a better deal, Kerry noted that while Iranian leaders issued a fatwah in 2003 that a nuclear weapon should not be pursued, Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) still wants one and has fought against the deal.

"They are opposed to the agreement if that doesn't tell you something," Kerry said.







Share/Bookmark