Lying, Deceiving and Crooked Hillary


Crooked Hillary Lies

John R. Houk

© June 29, 2016

 

By now you have read that the Dem members of House Benghazi Committee has said to the effect: Nothing to see here. Move along. Obama and Hillary did a fantastic job with being upfront about the September 11, 2012 Islamic terrorist attack in which four Americans lost their lives – one of which was U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens. And do vote for Hillary since she always truthful and full of integrity.

 

Of course Dem voters will either believe the whole bag of horse-pucky or will not care because they are all in for the Leftist transformation of America. Why else would they vote a crook?

 

Here is lying through her teeth:

 

VIDEO: Hillary Clinton Makes Statement On Benghazi Report | MSNBC

 

Posted by MSNBC

Published on Jun 28, 2016

 

Hillary Clinton makes an official comment about the Benghazi report that was released by the House Republicans and the other investigations that have been conducted.
» Subscribe to MSNBC: http://on.msnbc.com/SubscribeTomsnbc

About: MSNBC is the … a Marxist propaganda machine for Obama, Hillary and Dems in general … err I mean READ THE REST

 

If you Google the media outlets on the Benghazi Committee Reports, you will note all the Left Wing ones and the pretend Mainstream Media claim that Hillary is exonerated with NO NEW INFO. I tell you what – The GOP members paint an entirely different story than Hillary and her Dem acolytes.

 

Did the GOP find a smoking gun? No, because the Obama Administration and the Obama regime State Department have done all they can to stall, withhold, and not cooperate with GOP investigators.

 

The GOP Benghazi Committee Members’ News Conference on June 28 makes it quite clear that Obama and Hillary screwed up for the PR purpose of ensuring Obama’s 2912 election victory and deceive voters that Hillary is an outstanding and experienced individual to run for POTUS in 2016.

 

VIDEO: Trey Gowdy Benghazi Report FULL Press Conference 6/28/16 – House Select Committee [57:42]

 

Posted by LesGrossman2015

Published on Jun 28, 2016

 

Trey Gowdy holds press conference on new benghazi report june 28 2016. House Select Committee on Benghazi Report Members of the House Select Committee on Benghazi held a news conference to release their report on the September 2012 on the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, in which four Americans died including Ambassador Christopher Stevens.

 

Benghazi Select Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy (R-SC) refused on Tuesday to accused former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton of lying about the 2012 attack on a U.S. diplomatic post in. After spending a reported $7 million dollars investigating the Benghazi attacks, House Republicans released their report this week, but it found no new evidence of wrongdoing by the former secretary of state.

 

At a press conference on Tuesday, reporters pointed out that Gowdy’s committee had fueled attacks on Clinton for months. “There are bumper stickers and T-shirts all over this country that say, ‘Hillary Clinton lied, people died,’” one reporter noted during Gowdy’s press conference. “Is that true?” “You don’t see that T-shirt on me and you’ve never seen that bumper sticker on any of my vehicles and you’ve never heard me comment on that,” Gowdy insisted. “I’m asking you to read [the report]. I’m not going to tell you what to be on the lookout for. I’m going to tell you there’s new information.” “And it fundamentally changes the way that I view what happened before, during and after,” he added. “I actually trust you to read the report for yourself and draw your own conclusions.” “But you are the expert,” another reporter interrupted. “What do you think? Do you think she lied?” “I’m not going to assign — that, that’s a word you couldn’t use in a courtroom,” Gowdy stuttered in response. “It’s just in [Clinton’s] public statements to us, there was less definitiveness. So, you’re going to have to decide for yourself.”

 

Trey Gowdy (R.- SC) and his committee members addressed the media about the 800-page findings. Although Chairman Gowdy and his fellow GOP members have repeatedly noted that this purpose of their investigation was not about the former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (Gowdy told MSNBC this morning, “We mention… Clinton’s name less times than the Democrats do” in their report), a reporter pressed the Chairman about a popular takeaway from the Benghazi events. “There are bumper stickers and tee-shirts all over this country that say ‘Hillary Clinton lied, people died’… is this true?” asked the reporter. “You don’t see that tee-shirt on me, and you don’t see that bumper sticker on any of my vehicles,” responded Gowdy succinctly. “And you’ve never heard me comment on that.”

 

As he had done throughout the press conference, Gowdy repeatedly urged not only the gathered members of the press but also the American public to read the 800-page report for themselves. “I’m not gonna tell you what to be on the lookout for. I’m gonna tell you there’s new information.” The panel found no new wrongdoing on the part of the former Secretary of State, who is the presumed nominee for the Democratic party in the 2016 Presidential race, though it slams the inadequate resources leading up to the 2012 attacks that left four Americans dead in Libya.

 

This morning on CNN’s New Day, committee member Jim Jordan (R. – Ohio) said, “The overall report, it’s about the facts, what happened… [but we] thought it was important to ask the questions. Why were we still in Benghazi when almost every other country had left? Why did we stay in Benghazi when the security situation was so terrible, so dangerous? And why did the administration mislead us?” [Blog Editor: I divided the description into arbitrary paragraphs.]

 

Wherever LesGrossman2015 got his description, there is the appearance of trying to be balanced; however, it still smacks of giving Hillary a pass.

 

The Republicans post with pdf links for the public to read their 800-page report. It is entitled “Select Committee on Benghazi Releases Proposed Report”.

 

Fox News has a very good analysis of news conference and the report: “House Benghazi report slams administration response to attacks”.

 

JRH 6/29/16

Please Support NCCR

’13 Hours,’ Outnumbered, Andrea Tantaros & Hillary Clinton


John R. Houk

© January 19, 2016

I’m 59 years old. I remember the days when the cost of a movie ticket was 35 cents until I was 12. Then the price of a ticket was 75 cents then inflation drove the price to – wait for it – $1.25.

I say all this memory land about the movies because there is a movie I’d really like to go see but will probably have to wait for the Twelve Bucks or more it will cost to watch “13 Hours”. Here’s a three-minute trailer courtesy of Zero Media:

VIDEO: 13 Hours The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi Official Trailer #1 (2016) Michael Bay Movie HD

 

Posted by Zero Media

Published on Jul 28, 2015

13 Hours The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi Trailer 1 (2016) Michael Bay Movie HD [Official Trailer]

Now to the reason I’m blogging about “13 Hours”.

I received an email update from BizPac Review about a segment in the Fox News show Outnumbered. The segment was about “13 Hours” and the theme of, if you have seen the movie and still vote for Hillary Clinton for President then you are an IDIOT.

BPR zeroes onto the passionate comments by Andrea Tantaros but the Outnumbered program is about discussions between four women and a random male guest which in this episode was former Senator Scott Brown from Massachusetts.

Here is the Youtube version of that “13 Hours” segment:

VIDEO: Tantaros: If you see ’13 Hours’ and vote for Clinton…

 

Posted by Fox News

Published on Jan 18, 2016

‘Outnumbered’ co-host blasts former secretary of state and Democratic presidential frontrunner’s handling of Benghazi.

I made sure to post the Youtube version because the three blogs I post to don’t always accept embedded videos from other places other than Youtube. In the BPR article cross posted below a link to the Fox News website portraying this Outnumbered segment is linked early. However, when you get to the end of the article it tells you to scroll “below” to watch Andrea Tantaros. Unfortunately, no such video existed at the time I read the article. So at the end I will embed the Fox News video version.

JRH 1/19/16

Please Support NCCR

***********************

Tantaros on ‘13 Hours’: I’ll take word of Benghazi survivors over ‘liar’ Hillary any day!

By Frieda Powers

January 19, 2016

BizPac Review

Andrea Tantaros minced no words in blasting Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton for her handling of Benghazi.

In discussing the new movie “13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi” on Monday, the co-host of Fox News Channel’s “Outnumbered” said anyone who sees the movie and still votes for Clinton is “a criminal.”

Clinton, who was secretary of state at the time of the Benghazi terror attack in 2012, has recently dismissed the film as a dramatization.

Tantaros noted that the movie would hurt Clinton’s campaign, “because this isn’t just not a movie that’s based on fiction when you can look at four gravestones, four tombstones, and know that this is real.”

As Clinton attempts to discredit the movie, Tantaros believes it has become a question of credibility: “If she wants to speak out now and try to discredit the film,” she said, “she is speaking out against the survivors who we’ve seen on this news channel and elsewhere, talk about how she stood and looked victims’ families in the eyes and lied.”

Tantaros said Clinton should be in prison for the part she played, and anyone who could not see that deserved the same. “If anyone sees this movie, and everyone should go see it,” she said, “and goes on to vote for Hillary Clinton they’re a criminal, in my estimation.”

With questions that still remain unanswered by Clinton and the administration, Tantaros said Clinton has “zero credibility.”

“A majority of Americans when polled, the number one word that they associate with Clinton is ‘liar,’” said Tantaros. “Frankly, I’ll take the word of the men who survived that attack at that embassy over her word any day.”

Watch the video below.

VIDEO: Tantaros: If you see ’13 Hours’ and vote for Clinton…

http://video.foxnews.com/v/embed.js?id=4710279006001&w=466&h=263Watch the latest video at video.foxnews.com

 

Jan. 18, 2016 – 4:59 – ‘Outnumbered’ co-host blasts former secretary of state and Democratic presidential frontrunner’s handling of Benghazi

__________________

‘13 Hours,’ Outnumbered, Andrea Tantaros & Hillary Clinton

John R. Houk

© January 19, 2016

_________________

Tantaros on ‘13 Hours’: I’ll take word of Benghazi survivors over ‘liar’ Hillary any day!

Copyright © 2016. All Rights Reserved. BizPacReview

About BPR

Conservative News You Can Trust

Based in Palm Beach County, BizPac Review is a privately held, for-profit news and opinion website covering news that matters to conservatives throughout Florida and the United States.

Our articles and posts are fact-checked and edited, and BizPac Review content is accepted by and listed with Google News.

BizPac Review is a major new conservative media outlet that provides an alternative to legacy media in Palm Beach County, Florida and the nation.

To inquire about READ THE REST

You Decide – Smoking Gun or No Smoking Gun


John R. Houk

© December 12, 2015

Much of the Conservative oriented media were using words like “smoking gun” in Judicial Watch’s discovery of an email from Jeremy Bash to the State Department informing them that Benghazi was under attack and the Defense Department is prepared act immediately. The email was sent a mere hours after the attack began. The attack began about 9:40 PM on September 11, 2015 with the last defenders dying in mortar fire shortly after 5:15 AM on September 12, 2015.

Considering the U.S. military had assets in Tripoli, in Rota Spain and Croatia. And since the Bash email demonstrates that this was NOT a spontaneous Muslim riot inspired by a badly acted anti-Mohammed movie trailer called the “Innocence of Muslims.” The Muslim terrorist attack was well organized AND the higher-ups in the Obama Administration KNEW it was an organized Muslim terrorist attack. The Jeremy Bash email is at least yet another chink in the chain showing we the American voters that Obama, his Cabinet and his staff are a bunch of liars.

As to the Bash email “smoking gun,” the Dem Party liars of the House Benghazi Committee have launched their spin counter-attack against the “smoking gun” accusation. Evidently the minority Dem Committee members released an unredacted version of the Bash email. The Dems think this shows there is no “smoking gun.” Here is a screen capture of Dem member Bash email:

Unredacted Bash Email

Below is the Judicial Watch redacted version:

From: Bash, Jeremy CIV SD [REDACTED]

Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2012 7:19 PM

To: Sullivan, Jacob J; Sherman, Wendy R; Nides, Thomas R

Cc: Miller, James HON OSD POLICY; Wienefeld, James A ADM JSC VCJCS; Kelly, John Lt Gen SD; martin, dempsey [REDACTED]

Subject: Libya

State colleagues:

I just tried you on the phone but you were all in with S [apparent reference to then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton].

After consulting with General Dempsey, General Ham and the Joint Staff, we have identified the forces that could move to Benghazi. They are spinning up as we speak. They include a [REDACTED].

Assuming Principals agree to deploy these elements, we will ask State to procure the approval from host nation. Please advise how you wish to convey that approval to us [REDACTED].

Jeremy

One glaring explanation the Dems fail to reveal that Judicial Watch does is the identity of “S”:

apparent reference to then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton

The unredacted version includes the recommended forces to send and where they are located:

… a SOF element that was in Croatia (which can fly to Suda Bay, Crete), and a Marine FAST team out of Roda, Spain.”

The other portion unredacted reveals names that follows “Please advise how you wish to convey that approval to us”:

Burns/Nides/Sherman to Miller/Winnefeld would by my recommended course.”

I am currently unfamiliar with what those people do that was special enough to be redacted. If someone has a revealing source on these people, let me know in the comment section.

Frankly I do not see anything in the unredacted portion that indicates the Dem Party spin propaganda that there is no “smoking gun.”

Consider what Bash told the State Department under then Sec. Hillary Clinton saying, “After consulting with General Dempsey, General Ham and the Joint Staff, we have identified the forces that could move to Benghazi. They are spinning up as we speak.”

What? He wrote “spinning as we speak”. The official line is that Naval were too far away to provide relief. BUT what about Air Fighter Assets check out this map:

Map: Aviano Air Force Base to Sigonella Naval Air Station to Benghazi

No check out this remarkably plausible scenario that still makes this a “smoking gun” and that there are probably groups of people involved in a lying cover-up:

The Obvious Solution – Pit-Stop Sigonella

Now that we have an understanding of the tactical constraints facing the DOD, there is a (hopefully) obvious solution that more alert readers probably picked up on.

o Hour 0-1. While the F-16s at Aviano are not on strip alert, given the genuine emergency it’s reasonable to expect that within an hour of the order being given a sober pilot or two could have been located, an aircraft fuelled and in the air with a minimal default loadout. In this scenario the aircraft may have had only ammunition for its 20mm cannon and pilot would be given a simple briefing on the way to the plane: Get to NAS Sigonella.

o Hour 1-2. Given that the distance from AFB Aviano to NAS Sigonella is only 610 miles, the pilot would be able to quickly attain altitude and cruise at above the standard cruising speed of 577 mph. The F-16 would be on the ground at NAS Sigonella within an hour of its departure from AFB Aviano. During this one hour flight two important things would happen:

1. Via radio the pilot receives a more detailed briefing. The plan – a quick refuelling at NAS Sigonella and an immediate departure for Benghazi to fly a close air support (CAS) mission.

2. NAS Sigonella is informed of the incoming F-16 and told to prepare for immediate refuelling of the aircraft upon its arrival.

o Hour 2-2.5. The F-16 arrives at NAS Sigonella and is immediately refuelled. While it’s possible to refuel an F-16 without even stopping the engines (hot-pit refuelling), it’s also possible that NAS Sigonella didn’t have a refuelling team available that was trained for this. Thus, let’s assume that the refuelling process takes a full 30 minutes before the F-16 is again airborne and enroute to Benghazi.

o Hour 2.5-3.5. Given it is only 468 miles from NAS Sigonella to Benghazi the F-16 is on station and providing close air support within 3.5 hours from the initial order.

And, of course, subsequent F-16s could follow the same route at intervals to ensure that continuous air coverage was provided from that time on.

What Difference Would This Have Made?

According to the people on the ground and knowledgable about such matters, the appearance of U.S. warplanes would have been a total game-changer (see their testimony in Appendix A). Basically, the consensus is that a single low altitude pass by an F-16 at full afterburner would have put the fear of God into the attackers – these men had all seen U.S. airpower in action during the Libyan campaign and would have tucked-tail and run as soon as air support showed up.

So, By What Time Could the F-16s Have Arrived in Benghazi?

Going back to our timeline of the attack (which started at 21:42), we can see that by 21:59 DOD had already redirected a surveillance drone to Benghazi. This quick response is important because is shows us how efficiently orders could get relayed through the DOD chain of command. By 23:00 it was clear to DOD that the attack involved U.S. casualties and was ongoing. In my mind, there is no reason not to have scrambled the F-16s at this point. After all, the worst case would be that the situation resolved and the F-16s would turn around and go home. There was simply no reason not to deploy the F-16s and, conversely, every reason to do so.

READ ENTIRETY (Benghazi – The Mystery of the Missing Air Support; By Greg; Passion for Liberty; 6/16/13)

The key to remember about the Democratic Party – they lie to stay in power.

See Also:

How will Media and American Left Spin Recent Email Exposé? SlantRight 2.0; 12/9/15

Facts and questions about what happened in BenghaziFox News; 1/22/13

Another Benghazi Smoking Gun – Judicial Watch; 12/11/15

JRH 12/12/15

Please Support NCCR

*******************************

U.S. Military was Prepared to Immediately Protect U.S. Diplomats in Benghazi, Email Records Show

Tom Fitton email

Sent: 12/11/2015 5:55 PM

Email sent by; Judicial Watch

Contrary to what the Obama administration has told the American people, the U.S. military was poised and ready to respond immediately and forcefully against terrorists in Benghazi, Libya.

That’s what we have learned from an email exchange from then-Department of Defense Chief of Staff Jeremy Bash to State Department leadership immediately offering “forces that could move to Benghazi” during the terrorist attack on the U.S. Special Mission Compound in Benghazi, Libya, on September 11, 2012. In an email sent to top Department of State officials, at 7:19 p.m. ET, only hours after the attack had begun, Bash says, “we have identified the forces that could move to Benghazi. They are spinning up as we speak.” The Obama administration redacted the details of the military forces available, oddly citing a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) exemption that allows the withholding of “deliberative process” information.

Bash’s email seems to directly contradict testimony given by then-Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta before the Senate Armed Services Committee in February 2013. Defending the Obama administration’s lack of military response to the nearly six-hour-long attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Panetta claimed that “time, distance, the lack of an adequate warning, events that moved very quickly on the ground prevented a more immediate response.”

This latest bombshell your Judicial Watch has released to the public has attracted considerable media attention. Here is how the Washington Examiner reported on these revelations:

While parts of the email were redacted, the message indicates the Pentagon was waiting for approval from the State Department to send the forces in. That help never arrived for the Americans under siege at the Benghazi compound. A spokesman for the House Select Committee on Benghazi said investigators had received the unredacted version of the email, which was obtained by Judicial Watch through the Freedom of Information Act and made public Tuesday, last year but had declined to make it public.

Now would be a good time to go back and review the Obama administration’s many prevarications on the Benghazi terrorist attacks. (A significant collection of our history-making work on the Benghazi scandal is available here.)

You may recall that the first assault occurred at the main compound at about 9:40 p.m. local time (3:40 p.m. ET in Washington, DC). The second attack on a CIA annex 1.2 miles away began three hours later, at about 12 a.m. local time the following morning (6 p.m. ET), and ended at approximately 5:15 a.m. local time (11:15 a.m. ET) with a mortar attack that killed security officers Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty.

The newly released email reads:

From: Bash, Jeremy CIV SD [REDACTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2012 7:19 PM
To: Sullivan, Jacob J; Sherman, Wendy R; Nides, Thomas R
Cc: Miller, James HON OSD POLICY; Wienefeld, James A ADM JSC VCJCS; Kelly, John LtGen SD; martin, dempsey [REDACTED]

Subject: Libya

State colleagues:

I just tried you on the phone but you were all in with S [apparent reference to then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton].

After consulting with General Dempsey, General Ham and the Joint Staff, we have identified the forces that could move to Benghazi. They are spinning up as we speak. They include a [REDACTED].

Assuming Principals agree to deploy these elements, we will ask State to procure the approval from host nation. Please advise how you wish to convey that approval to us [REDACTED].

Jeremy

Jacob Sullivan was Deputy Chief of Staff to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton at the time of the terrorist attack at Benghazi. Wendy Sherman was Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs, the fourth-ranking official in the U.S. Department of State. Thomas Nides was the Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources.

The timing of the Bash email is particularly significant based upon testimony given to members of Congress by Gregory Hicks, Deputy Chief of Mission of the U.S. embassy in Tripoli at the time of the Benghazi terrorist attack. According to Hicks’ 2013 testimony, a show of force by the U.S. military during the siege could have prevented much of the carnage. Said Hicks, “If we had been able to scramble a fighter or aircraft or two over Benghazi as quickly as possible after the attack commenced, I believe there would not have been a mortar attack on the annex in the morning because I believe the Libyans would have split. They would have been scared to death that we would have gotten a laser on them and killed them.”

Ultimately, Special Operations forces on their own initiative traveled from Tripoli to Benghazi to provide support during the attack. Other military assets were only used to recover the dead and wounded, and to evacuate U.S. personnel from Libya. In fact, other documents released in October by Judicial Watch show that only one U.S. plane was available to evacuate Americans from Benghazi to Tripoli and that raises questions about whether a delay of military support led to additional deaths in Benghazi.

As per usual, we only obtained this document after going to federal court. The new email came as a result of a Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed on September 4, 2014 seeking:

• Records related to notes, updates, or reports created in response to the September 11, 2012 attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya. This request includes, but is not limited to, notes taken by then Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton or employees of the Office of the Secretary of State during the attack and its immediate aftermath.

The Obama administration and Clinton officials hid this compelling Benghazi email for years. The email makes readily apparent that the military was prepared to launch immediate assistance that could have made a difference, at least at the CIA Annex. The fact that the Obama Administration withheld this email for so long only worsens the scandal of Benghazi.

The Washington Examiner puts it very well:

The newly disclosed email chain casts doubt on previous testimony from high-level officials, several of whom suggested there was never any kind of military unit that could have been in a position to mount a rescue mission during the hours-long attack on Benghazi.

It came out later that day that the House Select Committee on Benghazi had been withholding from the public an unredacted version of the email released by Judicial Watch. Almost immediately upon Judicial Watch’s release of the devastating email, a spokesman for the House Select Committee on Benghazi made a snide, sour-grapes announcement to The Daily Caller attempting to defend the Committee’s decision to keep the email secret for a year by implicitly criticizing Judicial Watch’s supposed “rush to release or comment on every document it uncovers.” Bad enough fighting the lawless secrecy of the Obama administration – so it is disappointing to have the unnecessary spitballs from presumed allies for transparency.

The Democrats on the Select Committee thought they helped their cause of defending the indefensible by releasing a complete version of the email. Hardly. The new details show that the military forces that weren’t deployed, specifically “a SOF [Special Operations Forces] element that was in Croatia (which can fly to Suda Bay, Crete), and a Marine FAST [Fleet Antiterrorism Security Team] team out of Rota, Spain.” The FAST Team arrived well after the attack and the Special Operations Forces never left Croatia. In addition to providing confirming details that forces were ready to go, the Democrats expose the Obama administration’s dishonesty in withholding the information in the first place.

All this goes to underscore the value of Judicial Watch’s independent watchdog activities and our leadership in forcing truth and accountability over the Benghazi scandal.
____________________

You Decide – Smoking Gun or No Smoking Gun

John R. Houk

© December 12, 2015

____________________

U.S. Military was Prepared to Immediately Protect U.S. Diplomats in Benghazi, Email Records Show

WWW.JUDICIALWATCH.ORG
425 3rd St, SW Suite 800
Washington, D.C. 20024

Contribute to Judicial Watch

How will Media and American Left Spin Recent Email Exposé?


John R. Houk

© December 9, 2015

Hillary Clinton’s email trail is finally painting a picture about how Obama and his Administration mishandled and screwed up whatever the still unconfirmed real agenda Ambassador Chris Stevens was sent to accomplish that ended in his death and three other deaths of others trying the final rescue of Stevens.

The most recent email reveals that the U.S. Military was indeed rushing to rescue the Benghazi Four – Chris Stevens, Sean Smith, Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty – but were held up by a GO signal from the State Department. Can you guess was in charge of the State Department on September 11, 2012?

Leftists have been hollering that previous testimony and reports indicated that a rescue was not possible in any time frame. Many Conservatives and Republicans bought into the veracity of said testimony and reports. This Hillary email shows that someone is lying. I’m hoping that some of the Generals that testified in agreement with the Administration were lied to and they just regurgitated what they heard and read.

What I want to know is where did the lies begin and how many people on any level of government and the Military knew it was a lie that the Benghazi Four could not have been saved.

Further, I am not satisfied with the Administration line on exactly what Ambassador Stevens was dispatched to accomplish with the CIA. Was there an illegal arms deal being negotiated between Libyan players who held Gaddafi’s armaments and the Syrian rebels of whom many were basically Islamofascist terrorists?

Who are the liars? What was the agenda in Libya?

WGN VIDEO: Emails: Obama Administration Alerted within Hours about Terrorist Attack in Benghazi

http://launch.newsinc.com/?type=VideoPlayer/Single&widgetId=1&trackingGroup=69016&siteSection=freebeacon_hom_non_non_dynamic&videoId=23856161

 

JRH 12/9/15

Please Support NCCR

************************

Disclosed: Email Shows Pentagon Offered ‘Forces that Could Move to Benghazi’ Immediately

By Adam Kredo

December 8, 2015 3:41 pm

Washington Free Beacon

Newly released emails show that a senior Defense Department official offered the State Department “forces that could move to Benghazi” immediately during the deadly 2012 attack there on the American consulate.

Jeremy Bash, the former Pentagon chief of staff, offered to provide forces at 7:19 p.m. on the evening of the attack, “only hours after they had begun,” according to Judicial Watch, which disclosed the email on Tuesday.

“We have identified the forces that could move to Benghazi. They are spinning up as we speak,” Bash wrote.

Portions of the email remain redacted by the Obama administration.

“The Obama administration redacted the details of the military forces available, oddly citing a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) exemption that allows the withholding of ‘deliberative process’ information,” according to Judicial Watch.

The newly disclosed email contradicts testimony to Congress by Obama administration officials who cited the inability to immediately provide forces in response to the attack.

“Bash’s email seems to directly contradict testimony given by then-Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta before the Senate Armed Services Committee in February 2013,” writes Judicial Watch.

“Defending the Obama administration’s lack of military response to the nearly six-hour-long attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Panetta claimed that ‘time, distance, the lack of an adequate warning, events that moved very quickly on the ground prevented a more immediate response,’” the group wrote in a press release.

Update 4:19 P.M.: Matt Wolking, press secretary for the House Select Committee on Benghazi, said that lawmakers have been aware of this piece of correspondence but did not release it publicly.

“The Select Committee has obtained and reviewed tens of thousands of documents in the course of its thorough, fact-centered investigation into the Benghazi terrorist attacks, and this information will be detailed in the final report the Committee hopes to release within the next few months,” Wolking told the Free Beacon.

“While the Committee does not rush to release or comment on every document it uncovers, I can confirm that we obtained the unredacted version of this email last year, in addition to Jake Sullivan’s response,” Wolking said. “This email chain helped inform the Committee’s interview of Sullivan in September and will help inform the Committee’s upcoming interviews with Thomas Nides and others.”

+++

Benghazi email: DOD rescuers were ready to move but ignored by Clinton State Dept.

By Jim Kouri CPP

December 9, 2015

Accuracy in Media

‘Hillary, why did you wipe your server clean? Did you delay so you could get rid of evidence? If you did, it’s called obstruction and tampering, and, by the way, I don’t know what took the FBI so long to try to get it. But Hillary, if that server has been scrubbed so clean, that even FBI experts cannot reconstruct your emails, that tells me you did everything you possibly could to prevent anyone from knowing what you were doing while you were our secretary of state. My verdict, based on the evidence, is guilty.’ – Former judge and prosecutor Jeanine Pirro

According to a group representing former special forces soldiers and sailors, Judicial Watch released a new Benghazi email from then-Department of Defense Chief of Staff Jeremy Bash to State Department leadership immediately offering “forces that could move to Benghazi” during the terrorist attack on the U.S. Special Mission Compound in Benghazi, Libya on September 11, 2012.

In an email sent to top Department of State officials, at 7:19 p.m. ET, only hours after the attack had begun, Bash says, “we have identified the forces that could move to Benghazi. They are spinning up as we speak.” The Obama administration redacted the details of the military forces available, oddly citing a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) exemption that allows the withholding of deliberative processinformation, according to Special Operations Speaks.

Bash’s email seems to directly contradict testimony given by then-Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta before the Senate Armed Services Committee in February 2013. Defending the Obama administration’s lack of military response to the nearly six-hour-long attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi,Panetta claimed that “time, distance, the lack of an adequate warning, events that moved very quickly on the ground prevented a more immediate response.”

The first assault occurred at the main compound at about 9:40 pm local time – 3:40 p.m. ET in Washington, DC. The second attack on a CIA annex 1.2 miles away began three hours later, at about 12 am local time the following morning – 6 p.m. ET.

The newly released email reads:

From: Bash, Jeremy CIV SD [REDACTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2012 7:19 PM
To: Sullivan, Jacob J; Sherman, Wendy R; Nides, Thomas R
Cc: Miller, James HON OSD POLICY; Wienefeld, James A ADM JSC VCJCS; Kelly, John Lt Gen SD; martin, dempsey [REDACTED]
Subject: Libya

State colleagues: I just tried you on the phone but you were all in with S [apparent reference to then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton]. After consulting with General Dempsey, General Ham and the Joint Staff, we have identified the forces that could move to Benghazi. They are spinning up as we speak. They include a [REDACTED].

Assuming Principals agree to deploy these elements, we will ask State to procure the approval from host nation. Please advise how you wish to convey that approval to us [REDACTED].

Jeremy

Jacob Sullivan was Deputy Chief of Staff to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton at the time of the terrorist attack at Benghazi. Wendy Sherman was Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs, the fourth-ranking official in the U.S. Department of State. Thomas Nides was the Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources, according to Special Operations Speaks.

The timing of the Bash email is particularly significant based upon testimony given to members of Congress by Gregory Hicks, Deputy Chief of Mission of the U.S. embassy in Tripoli at the time of the Benghazi terrorist attack. According to Hicks’ 2013 testimony, a show of force by the U.S. military during the siege could have prevented much of the carnage. Said Hicks, “If we had been able to scramble a fighter or aircraft or two over Benghazi as quickly as possible after the attack commenced, I believe there would not have been a mortar attack on the annex in the morning because I believe the Libyans would have split. They would have been scared to death that we would have gotten a laser on them and killed them.”

Ultimately, Special Operations forces on their own initiative traveled from Tripoli to Benghazi to provide support during the attack. Other military assets were only used to recover the dead and wounded, and to evacuate U.S. personnel from Libya. In fact, other documents released in October by Judicial Watch show that only one U.S. plane was available to evacuate Americans from Benghazi to Tripoli and raise questions about whether a delay of military support led to additional deaths in Benghazi.

The new email came as a result of a Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed on September 4, 2014, seeking:

  • Records related to notes, updates, or reports created in response to the September 11, 2012 attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya. This request includes, but is not limited to, notes taken by then Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton or employees of the Office of the Secretary of State during the attack and its immediate aftermath.

“The Obama administration and Clinton officials hid this compelling Benghazi email for years,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The email makes readily apparent that the military was prepared to launch immediate assistance that could have made a difference, at least at the CIA Annex. The fact that the Obama Administration withheld this email for so long only worsens the scandal of Benghazi.”

Much is owed the men who sacrificed their all at Benghazi. This is especially the case concerning uncovering the truth in getting to the answers to the critical questions of the families of “THE BENGHAZI FOUR”. It is our absolute intent to leave no stone unturned as we seek to uncover the TRUTH concerning the cover-ups and lies surrounding the national tragedy of Benghazi that occurred on Sept 11, 2012, or any other pertinent matter that affects U.S. national security and the well-being of our great nation.”

This column was originally published at Conservative Base.

Guest columns do not necessarily reflect the views of Accuracy in Media or its staff.

_________________________

How will Media and American Left Spin Recent Email Exposé?

John R. Houk

© December 9, 2015

________________________

Disclosed: Email Shows Pentagon Offered ‘Forces that Could Move to Benghazi’ Immediately

©2015 All Rights Reserved

Washington Free Beacon

___________________

Benghazi email: DOD rescuers were ready to move but ignored by Clinton State Dept.

Jim Kouri CPP
FSM Contributing Editor Jim Kouri, CPP is currently fifth vice-president of the National Association of Chiefs of Police and he’s a staff writer for the New Media Alliance (thenma.org). Kouri’s website is located at http://jimkouri.us

Copyright © 2015 Accuracy in Media

Clinton’s Infamous Legacy


If you listened to Hillary Clinton’s testimony before the House Benghazi Committee last week you may have come away thinking that a calm Hillary, the Committee Dem Party members and the Left oriented Press put to bed that Hillary had done anything wrong. The reality is if you look at Hillary’s assertions and obfuscations then compare them to what the public has gained access as the truth, YOU then know the former Secretary of State and Dem Party POTUS candidate lied through her teeth about Benghazi.

Justin Smith lays it out for you!

JRH 10/25/15

Please Support NCCR

**********************

Clinton’s Infamous Legacy

In the Wake of Benghazi

By Justin O. Smith

Sent: 10/24/2015 1:45 PM

“Hillary Clinton is a congenital liar.” – Michael Ingmire, Foreign Service Officer Sean Smith’s uncle (October 22nd 2015)

The Benghazi Committee hearing on October 22, 2015 spotlighted former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s continued predilection to prevaricate and obfuscate and obstruct the truth on anything, especially regarding the attacks on the U.S. Consulate at Benghazi. Between Clinton’s lies and Obama’s facilitation of the cover-up and top Democrats’ willingness to place their imprimatur on gross negligence, incompetence and treason, Americans are still far away from receiving the full, unadulterated truth on this horrible and despicable episode of the Obama/Clinton Middle East Doctrine; however, from all the available evidence, Hillary Clinton is damned and unfit for any public office, much less the Office of the President.

Three years after the attacks on our U.S. Consulate and hundreds of FOIA requests later, Chairman Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) has only just now (Oct 20th) received approximately 1400 pages of Ambassador Chris Stevens’ emails. These emails verify, among other things, Clinton knew for a fact and within minutes that a terror attack was unfolding, not a “spontaneous protest.” Also bearing witness against Clinton, over 600 emails from Ambassador Stevens requesting added security were ignored and supposedly never reached Clinton’s desk, according to Clinton’s own highly questionable testimony.

A good bit of acrimony arose during the hearing over the pertinence of Clinton’s email communications with Sydney Blumenthal, a longtime friend, employee and paid consultant for the Clinton Foundation, to which Rep. Trey Gowdy answered: “It’s relevant because our Ambassador [Stevens] was asked to read and respond to Sydney Blumenthal’s drivel. And yet, there was not a single response to Ambassador Stevens regarding his multiple requests for added security.”

However, when Huma Abedin emailed Clinton that the Libyan people were in dire need of food, milk, gasoline and diesel fuel, Clinton answered her within four minutes.

In incredibly ill-advised fashion, Clinton followed Blumenthal’s advice on Libya, even though he knew nothing about Libya. She did so for financial gain that Blumenthal suggested would arrive, if she helped retired Lt General Grange, the Osprey Group, a CIA agent and other partners gain entry into the Libyan economy; and, she did so in order to take credit for Blumenthal’s determination that the fall of Gaddafi would serve as a model for removing Middle Eastern dictators, blind to the bulwark that these Baathist dictators, like Sadam Hussein and Bashar Assad, provided secularists, Christians and other religious minorities against the islamofascists.

Even though Blumenthal had been refused a position at the State Department by Obama’s aides, his direct line to Hillary Clinton gave him an inordinate amount of influence that circumvented proper procedures for assessing “intelligence”, and this bled into President Obama’s policy decisions. Not only did Clinton strongly recommend military action in Libya to Obama, she also promoted regime change at NATO and played a key role in holding the entire coalition of Western nations together, according to one close advisor.

Significantly, it is apparent from emails sent to Clinton and three members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff on March 18, 2011 at 7:27 EST, that Saif Gaddafi, Muammar’s son, sought a face-to-face meeting or a Skype/teleconference in order to arrive at a peaceful solution. Clinton instructed Lt. Gen. Charles Jacoby, who was directing plans for the coalition and NATO, not to take any calls from Saif; the following day U.S. airstrikes began on Libya.

On March 11, 2011, the ‘Washington Post’ ran an op-ed by Clinton’s “old friend”, retired General Wesley Clark that warned against the Libyan intervention. Four days later, the ‘Ottawa Citizen‘ published [link] the Canadian report submitted to NATO that stated Gaddafi’s removal would create a long-term civil war, but Clinton ignored all warnings.

In the days that followed, Muammar Gaddafi was killed, and rather than a new democratic Libyan state led by “moderates”, a new Islamic hell-hole emerged. AFRICOM issued 4500 pages of intelligence between January 2012 and Sept 11, 2012 that described the increase in terrorist activity. A Defense Intelligence Agency report from August 2012 indicated that weapons from Libya’s military stockpile – rifles, RPGs, 125mm and 155mm howitzer ammo – were moving from the port of Benghazi to Banias and Borj Islam, Syria and into the hands of Salafists, the Muslim Brotherhood and AQI, the main forces behind the insurgency in Syria [Judicial Watch is a corroborating source of documentation].

In the District Court of Arizona on May 5th 2015, experienced CIA officer David Manners offered this sworn statement: “It was then, and remains now, my opinion that the United States did participate, directly or indirectly, in the supply of weapons to the Libyan Transitional National Council.” [Fox Business by Catherine Herridge]

Hillary Clinton’s State Dept. illegally armed the islamofascists of Libya and Syria (Fox News [Link and Link]), as shown in federal court documents from May 5th 2015, by awarding contracts approaching $300 million to defense contractors, like Marc Turi, in March 2011, for the purpose of arming the Libyan Transitional National Council and the Libyan rebels, who were not formally recognized at the time. This same action makes both Clinton and Pres. Obama culpable in the murders of Ambassador Chris Stevens, Sean Smith, Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty, since these same weapons were used by these same Libyan “rebels”/ islamofascists approximately eighteen months later: Both Clinton and Obama should be behind bars for treason.

Clinton stated this past Thursday – Oct. 22nd – that “there was no credible, actionable threat described to our compound and our diplomatic group”, which is inaccurate and simply false. On June 10th 2011, Clinton’s deputy chief of staff, Jake Sullivan, emailed information of a “credible threat … against the hotel that our [diplomatic] team is using.” Chris Stevens had also requested more security for this same hotel two months before the Sullivan communique.

Seven previous Congressional investigations have failed to interview a single person who was actually on the ground at Benghazi on September 11, 2012 — no Diplomatic Security Command Center personnel and no CIA agents or paid operatives. So, America has witnessed seven incomplete investigations, hindered by the Obama administration’s slow response to FOIA requests, which Chairman Gowdy hopes to rectify and complete through an additional twenty witnesses’ testimony.

“Ambassador Stevens, Foreign Service Officer Sean Smith, and former SEALs Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty served this country with honor. It is important to learn how these four men died … We owe them and ourselves the truth about Benghazi and Libya … There is no statute of limitations on the truth.” – Rep. Trey Gowdy

Questions linger, such as, what was happening in Libya that required a diplomatic presence despite the escalating violence?

Why were our military contractors and our diplomatic team left to defend themselves for approximately nine hours, when the 173rd Airborne Infantry was in Italy, only two hours away by C-130?

Obama and Hillary Clinton created the situation that has turned Libya and Syria into mass graves, claiming four of America’s finest early on. With characters devoid of honor and integrity, these two have left America with a memory of a despicable and treacherous act of terrorism, yet to see any retribution extracted. They leave a legacy of infamy and failure in the wake of Benghazi: A day of reckoning is certainly on its way for both, and Clinton’s reckoning should include prison, not the U.S. Presidency.

By Justin O. Smith

___________________________

Edited by John R. Houk

Text or links enclosed by brackets are by the Editor.

 

© Justin O. Smith

The Difference Between Lies and the Truth


Mark Alexander looks at the lies told by Hillary Clinton on the 10/13 CNN debate. Incidentally lies that Bernie Sanders says he is weary of listening to. Not because he has heard too many lies but implying Hillary’s lies are either the truth or not proven ergo irrelevant. Sanders was tired of hearing about those “damn” emails, as if the Hillary-email idiocy was a hoax. I guess if the Dems get away with this line reasoning, the Dem voters are as moronic as the Dem Party believes.

JRH 10/14/15

Please Support NCCR

********************

The Difference Between Lies and the Truth

By Mark Alexander

October 14, 2015

The Patriot Post

“[She] who permits [herself] to tell a lie once, finds it much easier to do it a second and a third time, till at length it becomes habitual; [she] tells lies without attending to it, and truths without the world’s believing [her]. This falsehood of the tongue leads to that of the heart, and in time depraves all its good disposition.” —Thomas Jefferson (1785)

Democrats Explained in Logos

Patriots, I am away this week with my hero — my father, who is critically ill. As always, our able editors remain on station!

Nate Jackson provided analysis of the few substantive remarks from the Demo-Debate Tuesday night, particularly assertions from Hillary Clinton regarding her email server subterfuge.

For more than a year, Clinton has endeavored to escape accountability for unlawfully maintaining all of her official communications outside of official networks when she was secretary of state. Clearly, this was an effort to protect her 2016 presidential bid from the plethora of nefarious activities reflected in those emails.

Unfortunately, careless remarks by House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy two weeks ago bolstered Clinton’s claims that the Benghazi investigation was just political. In fact, the business of that committee is deadly serious.

In the debate, Clinton claimed, “[The Benghazi] committee is basically an arm of the Republican National Committee. It is a partisan vehicle, as admitted by the House Republican majority leader, Mr. McCarthy, to drive down my poll numbers. Big surprise. And that’s what they have attempted to do.”

Further, regarding her electronic communication charade, Clinton insisted, “I’ve been as transparent as I know to be.” That vacuous remark is completely meaningless.

Her evasive efforts notwithstanding, there are two things that need to remain front and center about Clinton’s felonious email communications — and her subsequent cover-up efforts.

First, her emails show her complicity in formulating the political lie about the murder of our personnel in Benghazi — Christopher Stevens, his aide Sean Smith, and two diplomatic security officers, former Navy SEALs Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods. Her Benghazi lie was an effort by Clinton and others in the State Department to provide Obama political cover for his “al-Qa’ida on the run” campaign theme just weeks ahead of the 2012 presidential election.

So determined was Clinton to propagate this lie that she shamefully stood in front of those four flag-draped caskets and declared to the families of the dead, “We’ve seen rage and violence directed at American embassies over an awful Internet video that we had nothing to do with.”

Second, despite Clinton’s claims, “I did not email any classified material to anyone” and “There is no classified material,” it is now apparent that hundreds and perhaps thousands of her unsecured email communications contained significant classified content. Transmitting that content is a felony.

But not only was her arrogant “above the law” use of unsecured email illegal, it was deadly dangerous because it exposed policy directives and the names of covert operatives. And only the most naïve Clintonista would insist that Russia and China did not have access to all of her unsecured communication.

Last weekend, Barack Obama declared, “I can tell you that [Clinton’s unsecured email server] is not a situation in which America’s national security was endangered.” His minions are now walking back that absurd assertion.

Fact is, the greatest threat to America’s national security has been, and remains, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

In an address to the nation in 2010, Barack Obama declared, “The only people who don’t want to disclose the truth are people with something to hide.”

Obama and Clinton have avoided the truth as if their political lives depended on it — which of course, they do.

Share

Pro Deo et Constitutione — Libertas aut Mors
Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis

*PUBLIUS*

__________________________

The Patriot Post is protected speech pursuant to the “unalienable rights” of all men, and the First (and Second) Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America. In God we trust. Copyright © 2015 The Patriot Post. All Rights Reserved.

 

REPRINTING, FORWARDING AND POSTING: Subscribers may reprint, forward or post original content from The Patriot Post, in whole or part, in accordance with our Terms of Use, with the following citation: “The Patriot Post (http://patriotpost.us/subscribe/)”

 

Defend Liberty! – Support The Patriot Post

Podliska becomes lying tool for Dems & Hillary


Bradley Podliska

John R. Houk

© October 11, 2015

Have you noticed the Dems have been crying that the House Benghazi Committee is a political witch hunt ergo the Committee should be shut down? The Dems want to continue the cover-up that a few well-placed Clinton allies failed to investigate or the State Department and Obama Administration refused to release incriminating data to all the previous investigative Committees in Congress?

The Dems – especially Hillary – are exploiting a fired Benghazi Committee staffer – Bradley Podliska – who with sour grapes turned the firing into an accusation against the Republican members of the Committee:

WASHINGTON — A former staffer for the House Benghazi Committee said the investigation has turned into a political pursuit against Hillary Clinton rather than a fact-finding mission into the death of four Americans in Libya.

“This has become a partisan investigation,” Maj. Bradley Podliska, an intelligence officer in the Air Force Reserve, told CNN’s “State of the Union.”

“I do not know the reason for the hyper-focus on Hillary Clinton.”

Podliska, a self-described Republican, worked for the committee for nine months until being fired in June because, in part, he resisted the focus on Clinton, he said. The GOP-led committee has turned its attention on Clinton’s email server and pulled resources from other agencies involved in the Sept. 12, 2012, terrorist attack, he said. Podliska also alleges he was unlawfully terminated for taking leave from work for his military service obligations.

He intends to file a lawsuit against the committee. (Fired Benghazi staffer says probe ‘hyper-focused on Hillary’; By Marisa Schultz; New York Post; 10/11/15 11:05am)

Rep. Trey Goudy responds to the hypocritical sour grapes staffer:

Chairman Trey Gowdy, in his first public statement on the controversy, said committee investigator Bradley Podliska never mentioned any concern about Clinton or politics while fighting his dismissal from the committee staff this fall. In his formal complaints, Gowdy said …

“Until his Friday conversations with media, this staffer has never mentioned Secretary Clinton as a cause of his termination, and he did not cite Clinton’s name in a legally mandated mediation,” Gowdy said. “The record makes it clear he himself was focused on Clinton improperly and was instructed to stop, and that issues with his conduct were noted on the record as far back as April.”

According to interviews and documents reviewed by The Post, Podliska asked committee interns in June to help put together a PowerPoint presentation focused on the whereabouts and statements of Clinton and National Security Council members in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2012, attacks on a U.S. diplomatic mission and CIA annex in Benghazi. The attacks killed four Americans, including Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens

“What the record makes clear is he himself was focused on Clinton and was instructed to stop, and that issues with his conduct and performance were noted on the record as far back as April,” Gowdy said. “This individual was hired as a former intelligence staffer to focus on intelligence, not the politics of White House talking points.” (Head of Benghazi committee rejects claims by fired staffer; By Carol Leonnig; Washington Post; 10/11/15 11:22 AM)

A UPI version picked up by Breitbart adds more clarity to nefarious action by Bradley Podliska:

A former GOP staffer on the House Select Committee on Benghazi says he was fired because he didn’t go along with efforts by Republican panel members to politicize the process and steer the focus of the investigation onto former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Bradley Podliska, an Air Force Reserve major, told reporters he plans to file a federal lawsuit over his firing next month.

“My non-partisan investigative work conflicted with the interests of the Republican leadership, who focused their investigation primarily on Secretary Clinton and her aides,” Podliska said in a released statement.

The House committee vehemently denied the accusations, claiming in a statement released to the press that Podliska was in fact fired for his own attempts at politicization.

The panel said Podliska was fired for cause, for “repeated efforts, of his own volition, to develop and direct committee resources to a PowerPoint ‘hit piece’ on members of the Obama administration, including Secretary Clinton, that bore no relationship whatsoever to the committee’s current investigative tone, focus or investigative plan.”

“Thus, directly contrary to his brand-new assertion, the employee actually was terminated, in part, because he himself manifested improper partiality and animus in his investigative work,” committee members said in a statement. (FIRED GOP STAFFER: BENGHAZI PROBE POLITICIZED; By UPI; Breitbart.com; 10/10/15)

And Fox News on Podliska blackmail effort:

Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., chairman of the House Select Committee on Benghazi, said he never met with the staffer, investigator and Air Force Reserves officer Bradley F. Podliska, and that Podliska was, in fact, warned about his own efforts to discredit Clinton, who was secretary of state from 2009 to 2013.

“Because I do not know him, and cannot recall ever speaking to him, I can say for certain he was never instructed by me to focus on Clinton, nor would he be a credible person to speak on my behalf,” Gowdy said.

He also said Podliska has never mentioned Clinton — from when he was counseled about his “deficient performance” to when he was fired and through the entire legal mediation process.

Furthermore, Gowdy said, Podliska has “run to the press with his new salacious allegations” after failing to get money from the committee. (Gowdy: Fired Benghazi panel staffer decided to ‘run to the press’ after failed effort to get money; By FoxNews.com; 10/11/15)

Breitbart on the blackmail angle:

Actually, the committee says the staffer was fired in part because he would have undermined the committee’s factual investigation with a bizarre project attacking Clinton, and for other conduct violations. And now the committee is accusing the staffer of trying to blackmail them for money with falsehoods emanating from his “wild imagination.” (BENGHAZI COMMITTEE: SPURNED STAFFER LYING ABOUT WHY HE WAS FIRED, TRYING TO ‘BLACKMAIL’ US; By PATRICK HOWLEY; Breitbart.comBig Government; 10/10/15)

In light that the Dems and Hillary are lying and covering up some kind of nefarious activities related to the September 11, 2012 Islamic terrorist attack against the American Embassy Annex building in Benghazi I like the questions from Youtube pundit Wild Bill. Was Hillary just incompetent or were criminal activities going on under then Secretary Hillary Clinton aegis?

VIDEO: Benghazi Baloney

 

Published by Wild Bill’s America

Published on Oct 10, 2015

The Democrats are doubling down on stupid once again by sabotaging the Benghazi “murder investigation”.

JRH 10/11/15 (Hat Tip on video: NoisyRoom.net)

Please Support NCCR

Hillary Clinton’s Record of Malfeasance


Reputable journalist Mark Alexander exposes Hillary Clinton’s nefarious involvements that have a lot of smoke. Normally where there is smoke there is fire; however in Bill and Hillary’s smoke, the fire always seems to disappear. Indeed, Alexander ends quite a few paragraphs with the question, “Sound familiar?

JRH 8/27/15

Please Support NCCR

**************************

Hillary Clinton’s Record of Malfeasance

From Little Rock to Chappaqua — Will Any Scandal Stick?

By Mark Alexander

August 26, 2015

Email Alert Sent: 8/26/2015 1:21 PM

The Patriot Post

“[She] who permits [herself] to tell a lie once, finds it much easier to do it a second and a third time, till at length it becomes habitual; [she] tells lies without attending to it, and truths without the world’s believing [her]. This falsehood of the tongue leads to that of the heart, and in time depraves all its good disposition.” —Thomas Jefferson (1785)

Long before the Great Prevaricator Bill Clinton and his chief administrator Hillary duped their way to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, their tenure in Arkansas was defined by relationships with radicals, real-estate shenanigans, drug dealing associates, Ponzi schemes and “lucky investment returns” such as Hillary’s one-in-31-trillion cattle futures profits. However, none of that corruption stuck to the Teflon couple.

What follows is a concise record of Hillary and Bill Clinton’s deceptions, obfuscations and subterfuges, from Little Rock to Chappaqua. Given that Hillary is (for the moment) the national frontrunner for the 2016 Democrat presidential nomination, I’ve compiled some of the more ignoble examples of her abject corruption from the Clintons’ White House “co-presidency” years (recall that Bill promised “You get two for the price of one”) — and the years since. (For a complete chronological listing of our Clinton campaign coverage, check out the Clinton tags.) But don’t delay — the terminus of Hillary’s political aspirations may come sooner than she expected — if her email server lies results in felony indictments.

If I had to choose just one quote that best defines the Clintons’ philosophy on governing, it would be these recent words from Hillary: “I don’t believe you change hearts. I believe you change laws, you change allocation of resources, you change the way systems operate.” This is the re-warmed doctrine of Karl Marx and the mantra of today’s Democratic Party statists.

1993: After the suicide of Hillary’s longtime friend and White House counsel Vince Foster, files “disappear” from his office, impeding the investigation into his death — files that would most assuredly have shown the Clintons’ fingerprints to be on various nefarious enterprises. (Sound familiar?)

1993-94: The Clintons’ White House “security director,” Craig Livingstone, a former bar bouncer and Clinton political hack, is caught with more than 900 classified FBI background files that he’d requested on leading Republicans from the Reagan and Bush administrations. Hillary lied in her testimony about the files.

1993-96: Hillary convenes illegal secret panels to create a socialized health care plan, which was exposed by Republican House investigators and subsequently went down in flames. Her ClintonCare proposal was thus shelved until Barack Obama became president, but she is without question the grande dame of what eventually became ObamaCare.

1993-97: The Clintons turn the IRS into their personal attack dog, and the agency went after every major conservative group in the nation, including The Heritage Foundation, the National Rifle Association, Concerned Women of America, the National Center for Public Policy Research, the American Policy Center, American Cause, Citizens for Honest Government, Progress and Freedom Foundation, and Citizens Against Government Waste. Not even conservative publications such as National Review and American Spectator were spared. In 1996, The Washington Times researched the targeting of these organizations and could not identify a single liberal advocacy organization that had been audited during Bill’s first term. (Sound familiar?)

1994: Hillary’s Rose Law Firm billing records related to the 1980s Whitewater Development bankruptcy mysteriously disappear — but then inexplicably reappear a year later after having been “scrubbed” of any incriminating evidence linking Hillary with key partners in that fraud. (Sound familiar?)

1995: Bill Clinton signs legislation making it easier for minority constituents with bad credit to obtain mortgages. His Treasury Secretary, Robert Rubin, rewrote the lending rules for the ill-conceived Community Reinvestment Act (which had been signed into law by none other than Jimmy Carter), opening the floodgates of Fannie Mae (Federal National Mortgage Association) and Freddie Mac (Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation) subprime loans. Clinton’s legislation applied affirmative action to the lending industry, sowing the seeds for the massive deflation of home prices and for the near-total collapse of the American financial markets 10 years later. Bill Clinton admitted in 2008, “I think the responsibility that the Democrats have may rest more in resisting any efforts by Republicans in the Congress … to put some standards and tighten up a little on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.” Indeed.

Democrat Rep. Artur Davis was a bit more direct: “Like a lot of my Democratic colleagues, I was too slow to appreciate the recklessness of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. In retrospect I should have heeded the [Republican] concerns in 2004. Frankly I wish my Democratic colleagues would admit that, when it comes to Fannie and Freddie, we were wrong.”

1995-96: Hillary confidant John Huang is appointed to the DNC and raised large illegal donations from foreign sources. (Sound familiar?) Charlie Trie also raised major illegal donations from foreign sources. His $450,000 contribution to Clinton’s legal defense fund was a pass-through from Asian special interests. According to Judicial Watch founder Larry Klayman, those interests included the Red Chinese government.

1996: The Clintons trade Commerce Department positions and Lincoln Bedroom lodging for big campaign donations. Then-Vice President Al Gore repeatedly and infamously insisted, “There is no controlling legal authority,” after it was determined that the Clintons were operating a major fundraising call center in the White House.

1997: Six years into Bill Clinton’s tenure of national security malfeasance, one of Osama bin Laden’s well organized al-Qa’ida terrorist cells crafts a plan to settle into American suburbs and prepare a strike on our homeland. Four years had passed from the time of the first World Trade Center attack under Clinton’s watch until preparations began for the devastating attacks of September 11, 2001. In 1998, the Clinton administration refused an FBI field agent’s efforts to open a case file on Arab nationals who were, curiously, training to fly commercial aircraft, but not training for takeoffs or landings. The stated reason for the case file denial was to avoid the appearance of any presumption of an Islamic threat — precisely why, to this day, Democrats refuse to use the words “Islamic” and “terrorism” in the same context. During his eight years in office, Clinton had numerous opportunities to capture or kill bin Laden, but refused. Air Force Lt. Col. Robert Patterson, who carried the “nuclear football” codes for the Clinton administration, notes, “[W]e could have prevented the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole, we could have prevented 9/11 and we could have prevented the bombings of the embassies in Africa if President Clinton had taken one of these opportunities. … We had eight chances at least to either nab bin Laden or to kill him.” Michael Scheuer, former CIA chief of the team responsible for hunting bin Laden, confirmed that prior to 9/11 SpecOps had two opportunities when Osama was literally in their sights, but Clinton pulled the plug on both operations.

1998: Bill Clinton is impeached for perjury and obstruction of justice after falsely insisting he “did not have sexual relations” with a 22-year-old female White House intern. Hillary had established a long record of defending her husband against charges ranging from sexual impropriety to rape (in order to ensure her own political aspirations), including but not limited to charges brought by Juanita Broaddrick, Gennifer Flowers, Kathleen Willey and Paula Jones. Hillary perfected the practice of “blaming the victim,” and she insisted that the Monica Lewinsky sex scandal was fabricated by a “vast right-wing conspiracy that has been conspiring against my husband since the day he announced for president.”

Americans learned a lot about DNA evidence, and the Clintons should be credited with the popularity of all the cold case and forensic file TV shows that followed. We also learned that, unlike Richard Nixon, who had the decency to resign instead of putting the nation through an impeachment proceeding, the Clintons knew that Senate Democrats would never join with Republicans to achieve the two-thirds majority vote required to convict the Philanderer in Chief.

2000: Bill Clinton issues executive pardons to big donors and other convicted felons, some doing time related to Clinton scandals. Recall that among all those last-minute political pardons, one was for his former CIA director, John Deutch, who, it was discovered in 1996, stored classified documents on an unsecure laptop at his residence.

2001: According to Hillary, she and Bill depart the White House “dead broke” after vandalizing the executive residence before the Bush family arrived and loading up $190,000 in gifts and furnishings. However penniless (despite six-figure taxpayer-funded salaries and an $8 million book deal), they managed to buy a Chappaqua, New York, country house for $1.7 million in 1999 in order to establish residency for Hillary’s carpet-bagging Senate run in 2000. They also acquired a seven-bedroom house in DC for $2.85 million so Hillary would have a place to stay while the Senate was in session.

So, what are the two most notable lessons from the Clinton White House years?

First, never select an old establishment Republican like George Bush or Bob Dole to run against a young, charismatic narcissist. (Apparently Republicans forgot that lesson in both 2008 and 2012.)

Second, virtually nothing sticks to the Teflon Clintons. They have perfected the art of the BIG Lie and the basic tenets of obfuscation: Admit nothing, deny everything and make counter-allegations.

2001-2009: Bill and the then-junior senator from New York amass hundreds of millions of dollars in personal wealth from fees charged to those who were betting on Hillary’s political future. What she did not amass, however, is any record of accomplishment as a senator — no piece of legislation was advanced under her name.

2009: After Hillary’s unsuccessful 2008 presidential primary bid against Barack Obama, he hushes her up and keeps her close with an appointment as secretary of state, an office she held from 2009-2013. While Bill and their “family foundation” continued to amass millions in speaking fees and donations, Hillary compiled an even less impressive but much more lethal record as secretary of state than she had as a senator. She visited 112 countries, and, though she falsely claimed having been shot at by snipers in at least one of them, she can claim no treaty, no accord or even a meaningful summit success. Hillary does claim that she “restored America’s reputation,” but what she actually did was advance Obama’s failed foreign policies to the extent that America now suffers its weakest world standing since the Jimmy Carter era.

2012: Hillary crafts and propagates the Benghazi cover-up after the death of four Americans, including our ambassador to Libya. She lied about the attack, claiming it was inspired by an obscure Internet video rather than a well-planned and executed al-Qa’ida assault on the anniversary of 9/11. She did so to protect Obama’s 2012 election, thus ensuring her own 2016 ambitions. Recall that at that time Obama was continuously crowing about how al-Qa’ida was “on the run.” Given that his domestic economic and social policies had been an abject failure, all he had to frame his 2012 campaign upon were the patently false claims of victory in Iraq and the defeat of al-Qa’ida.

2014: While Hillary was secretary of state, the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation took in hundreds of millions of dollars from foreign governments, corporations and individuals, who were currying favor with Hillary as secretary of state and as a potential future president. Peter Schweizer’s book, “Clinton Cash,” provides a sobering outline of the abuse.

2015: In March, Hillary admits that she illegally maintained a “private email server” for official State Department communications — in violation of federal law, and had failed to acknowledge those records in congressional testimony regarding the Benghazi attack and cover-up. In April, Clinton officially announces her presidential candidacy. But Clinton’s self-spun web of lies about keeping her communications out of the public record may yet ensnare her, and end her 2016 presidential aspirations. It’s not likely that she’ll withdraw without a fight, but she is, clearly, in trouble. (Read our comprehensive account of Clinton’s email cover-up lies.)

Thus far, from Little Rock to Chappaqua, Hillary’s non-stick surface has proven effective at avoiding criminal charges. Indeed, she learned a lot from her slippery spouse. But she may have finally met her match in South Carolina Rep. Trey Gowdy, a former federal prosecutor who now heads the House Select Committee on Benghazi.

If he pins Clinton with felony charges related to her email server subterfuges, those charges will stick.

Indeed, it is now increasingly likely that Clinton, having deleted more than 30,000 emails from her communications server, will face criminal charges. Those charges range from perjury and felony possession and dissemination of classified documents to obstruction of justice. The latter could result in felony charges, as Clinton directed the erasure of all those emails even though she was fully aware that all documents pertaining to her tenure as secretary of state were subject to subpoena by the House Select Committee on Benghazi.

Though Clinton claimed, “I’ve never had a subpoena,” Rep. Gowdy corrected the record, noting, “[S]he was personally subpoenaed the moment the Benghazi Committee became aware of her exclusive use of personal email and a server, and that the State Department was not the custodian of her official record. For more than two years, Clinton never availed herself of the opportunity, even in response to a direct congressional inquiry, to inform the public of her unusual email arrangement designed to evade public transparency.”

In regard to felony possession and dissemination of classified documents, recall if you will the recent prosecution of Gen. David Petraeus, Obama’s former CIA director. Gen. Petraeus admitted to security violations after he inadvertently made classified material available to his biographer, with whom he was having an adulterous affair. Though that biographer, former Army Major Paula Broadwell, held security clearances and none of the classified material was compromised, it was still a serious breach of security protocols. Petraeus avoided a felony conviction by pleading guilty, and he was sentenced to two years’ probation and required to pay a $100,000 fine.

And regarding the statute pertaining to obstruction of justice, 18 U.S.C. § 1519, it specifies felony charges for anyone who “knowingly alters, destroys, mutilates, conceals, covers up, falsifies, or makes a false entry” in any official account or record “with the intent to impede, obstruct, or influence the investigation or proper administration of any matter.” Notably, it further specifies, “or in relation to or contemplation of any such matter or case,” which is precisely why Clinton maintained that private server.

That statute, part of the 2002 Sarbanes-Oxley Act, for which then-Senator Hillary Clinton voted “yes,” includes penalties of up to 20 years in prison.

Felony counts may be coming, despite her claims that “I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email,” and “There is no classified material,” now that another 300 emails have been recovered from “lost” State Department servers that appear to have classified content.

As for where the Benghazi investigation will lead, Clinton concludes, “We’ll see how this all plays out.”

Indeed we will… At present, the best evidence that felony charges will be filed is Obama’s pseudo-endorsement of Vice President Joe Biden’s presidential candidacy, by way of his spokesman Josh Earnest.

According to Earnest, “The president has indicated that his view that the decision that he made … to add Joe Biden to the ticket as his running mate was the smartest decision that he has ever made in politics. And I think that should give you some sense into the president’s view into the vice president’s aptitude for the top job.” Earnest added, “The vice president is somebody who has already run for president twice. So I think you could probably make the case that there is no one in American politics today who has a better understanding of exactly what is required to mount a successful national presidential campaign.”

While Earnest also expressed Obama’s “appreciation, respect and admiration” for Hillary Clinton, it’s hard to overestimate the importance of his statements on Biden in light of Hillary’s mounting troubles.

And that statement came a day after Biden met with Sen. Elizabeth “Honest Injun” Warren. No doubt that meeting was to reach an accord that he would serve one term with her as his veep, if she stayed out of the 2016 primary. Indeed, a Biden/Warren ticket would be far more competitive than either Clinton or Sanders at the top of a ticket.

Recall that in February, Biden advocated for an Obama third term: “I call it sticking with what works!” By “what works,” he must have meant duping voters in presidential campaigns, because in both the 2010 and 2014 midterm elections, Obama’s Democratic Party policies suffered resounding defeat. That notwithstanding, in July, Obama himself asserted: “I cannot run again. I actually think I’m a pretty good president. I think if I ran I could win. But I can’t.”

Make no mistake, a Biden/Warren ticket is a third Obama term!

And I noted that Bill Clinton was vacationing with the now-rich and famous Obamas at their exclusive Martha’s Vineyard in mid August. The White House press corps released photos of Bill and Barack golfing — which I’m sure Clinton hoped would be a subtle shot over Biden’s bow to keep clear of Hillary’s ‘16 campaign.

Or… perhaps he was cutting a deal for another executive pardon similar to the one he gave John Deutch in 2000, as noted above. However, in this case, it would be Hillary who was keeping classified documents on an unauthorized server in her home.

(For a complete chronological listing of our Clintons campaign coverage see the Clinton tags. For our comprehensive account of her email cover-up lies, click here.)

____________________

*PUBLIUS*

The Patriot Post is protected speech pursuant to the “unalienable rights” of all men, and the First (and Second) Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America. In God we trust. Copyright © 2015 The Patriot Post. All Rights Reserved.

REPRINTING, FORWARDING AND POSTING: Subscribers may reprint, forward or post original content from The Patriot Post, in whole or part, in accordance with our Terms of Use, with the following citation: “The Patriot Post

(http://patriotpost.us/subscribe/)”

The Patriot Post
PO Box 507
Chattanooga, TN 37401

 

Donate to The Patriot Post

This New Movie Should Have Hillary Scared to Death


Action movie Director Michael Bay is stepping into the controversial political subject in making the movie “13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi” based on the book with a similar name, “13 Hours: The Inside Account of What Really Happened in Benghazi”.

In the review I read, Bay does not go out of his way to expose the Big Dogs responsible for any cover-up but neither does he exonerate anyone. According to the review the movie lays out the facts according to what has become a part of public knowledge along the storyline of the book. It sounds as if the movie will be interesting and quite entertaining.

JRH 8/1/15

Please Support NCCR

**********************

This New Movie Should Have Hillary Scared to Death

By Steve Thompson

Email Sent: 7/31/2015 3:34 PM

Sent from: American Patriot Daily News Network

Continuing the recent streak of true-to-life battle thrillers, legendary Hollywood producer Michael Bay is taking on Benghazi in his new action-packed movie 13 Hours.

Even more exciting, is the trailer for the new movie was only just released, and it will hit the theaters before the 2016 elections…

…giving pundits and the GOP plenty of ammunition to fire as the bloated Hillary campaign lumbers forward.

Click Here to See Why This New Movie Should Have Hillary Scared to Death

Steve Thompson
Editor

+++

This New Movie Should Have Hillary Scared to Death

July 31, 2015

American Patriot Daily News Network

Continuing the recent streak of true-to-life battle thrillers, legendary Hollywood producer Michael Bay is taking on Benghazi in his new action-packed movie “13 Hours.”

Even more exciting, the trailer for the new movie was only just released, and it will be hit the theaters before the 2016 elections… giving pundits and the GOP plenty of ammunition to fire as the bloated Hillary campaign lumbers forward.

Now Michael Bay isn’t necessarily known for stepping into the political arena. He’s known better for his explosive and action packed movies like “Transformers” and “Armageddon.”

Most of his movies are nothing more than fanciful works of fiction, and “sticking to the facts isn’t really in his wheelhouse.

But “13 hours” is different. It will be replete with the exact details of what happened in Benghazi that fateful night.

You see, “13 hours” is based solely on the writing of Mitchell Zuckoff, who in turn wrote base off the narratives of five of the six CIA contractors who were involved in the thick of the battle.

That means what Americans will see is the horror that unfolded the night of Sept. 11, 2012. They’re not going to see a whitewashed, dumbed down version of the truth.

They’re going to be expose to the raw and heart-wrenching events Mrs. Clinton herself was directly responsible for.

Some conservatives might be disappointed that Bay doesn’t indict the administration directly, as the movie sticks close to the narrative provided in the book. However, Bay and his team are firm in saying the book doesn’t contain fabrications like many other popular movies in the same genre. So it’s grit and grime and nothing more.

What we’re left with is the story, the facts, and the horror of what happened to brave men who were abandoned by their government.

As The New York Post writes:

That story is that four Americans, including a US ambassador, died in an all-night terror attack, receiving no help from anyone in Washington. Then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton isn’t expected to be a character in the film — but just as she is heading into the first primaries of the 2016 campaign, the nation will be reminded that she was in charge, that the administration in which she served tried to deflect blame onto an offensive anti-Muslim video that supposedly angered the militants, and that during congressional inquiries into the matter, she angrily tried to dismiss the whole thing out of hand, shouting, “What difference, at this point, does it make?”

Truth is, all of this will give Republican opponents a better leg to stand on when they attack the character and competence of Mrs. Clinton in the months to come.

When Americans are confronted with the gripping and frightening truth…that Mrs. Clinton left good men out to dry, they might just take a look a long hard look at her and decide she’s not worth the vote.

VIDEO: 13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi – Official Trailer

Published by Paramount Pictures

Published on Jul 28, 2015

From Michael Bay comes 13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi. Watch the official trailer, in theaters January 15th. http://ThirteenHoursMovie.com

________________________________________________

Copyright © 2015 American Patriot Daily. All Rights Reserved.

 

About Us

 

We  are dedicated to the pursuit of Life, Liberty and Happiness.

 

We believe in one’s Right to Defend themselves

 

We are committed to defending your rights and standing up to the man.

 

We are AmericanPatriotDaily.com

Email Dumps Continue To Undermine Clinton Candidacy


More disconcerting lies are exposed on Hillary’s emails and Obama collusion in Benghazigate cover-up. AND yet the Mainstream Media Left leaners are still making excuses for Hillary and Obama.

JRH 7/7/15

Please Support NCCR

**************************

Email Dumps Continue To Undermine Clinton Candidacy

Posted by TMH

By Roger Aronoff

July 6, 2015 8:48 am

Originally: Accuracy in Media

NoisyRoom.net

Hillary Clinton’s reputation is taking repeated blows as the drip, drip, drip of email productions from her private email server draw attention to her many lies. The Obama administration has admitted that she did not, in fact, turn over all the necessary emails from her private mail server to the government. It also has released nearly 3,000 pages of emails implicating members of the Obama administration in their own lies.

As Vice President Joe Biden appears to be preparing to jump in the race for the Democratic nomination later this summer, questions are also emerging as to whether or not the Obama administration is throwing Hillary under the bus through these emails.

Each new batch of these emails expose additional lies made by the Obama administration and Mrs. Clinton, despite MSNBC, Newsweek, and other news organizations maintaining that there is little to be found. This is the same treatment that the Benghazi scandal has regularly received.

“…I hear it all the time from your previous guest and others, is that seven or eight previous congressional committees looked into Benghazi,” said chairman of the Select Committee on Benghazi Trey Gowdy (R-SC) on CBS’ Face the Nation on June 28. “Well, none of those other committees looked at a single one of her e-mails… So our committee has done things that none of those seven other committees were able to do.”

The Committee has also gained access to the documents from the Accountability Review Board investigation which failed to interview Secretary of State Clinton—documents which were not turned over to other members of Congress. It also recently received information related to Clinton aides Jake Sullivan and Cheryl Mills, as well as former United Nations Ambassador Susan Rice.

As Accuracy in Media (AIM) asked when the Clinton email scandal initially broke, the key question is what did President Obama and Secretary Clinton “know, and when did they know it?” A recent set of emails obtained by Judicial Watch confirms that the White House coordinated with the State Department on the night of the attack to make Mrs. Clinton’s statement blaming it on a YouTube video the official U.S. government line.

But for the media, it’s old news and hardly worth a mention. Their tactic is, whenever possible, to repeat assertions by various administration supporters that the Benghazi investigation is a partisan witch hunt.

When the first set of emails was produced, the media dismissed those emails as revealing no relationship between Mrs. Clinton and the security situation in Libya or an order to stand down. That’s not surprising, since reporters made similar claims before they actually saw the emails.

The excuses offered by the media are further attempts to throw sand in the eyes of the public. These emails were first stored on a private email server under Mrs. Clinton’s control, then vetted by her advisors, and then partially redacted by a State Department with a vested interest in ensuring that Mrs. Clinton’s reputation, and its own, are preserved.

In other words, the State Department emails were Hillary Clinton’s and the Obama administration’s attempt at self-exoneration.

The media now complain that the mission of the Select Committee on Benghazi has become overbroad, wasteful, and doesn’t focus on the attack. Yet many in the media focused on the cost of this investigation, and Democrat accusations that it is wasteful and duplicative, even when the Committee was narrowly focusing on the attack.

“She said that the public record was complete,” noted Rep. Gowdy on CBS. “You will remember in her single press conference she said that she had turned over everything related to work to the Department of State. We know that that is false.”

As for the emails from Sidney Blumenthal being unsolicited, “We know that that was false,” he said. “So, so far, she also said that she had a single device for convenience,” he continued.

“So every explanation she’s offered so far is demonstrably false.”

It’s even worse than that. As Kimberly Strassel reported for The Wall Street Journal, we now “know that the State Department has now upgraded at least 25 of Mrs. Clinton’s emails to ‘classified’ status. State is suggesting this is no big deal, noting that it is ‘routine’ to upgrade material during the public-disclosure process. But that’s beside the point. This isn’t about after-the-fact disclosure. It’s about security at the time—whether Mrs. Clinton was sending and storing sensitive government information on a hackable private email system. Turns out, she was. For the record, it is a federal crime to ‘knowingly’ house classified information at an ‘unauthorized location.’”

In addition, Strassel stated that “The real bombshell news was the State Department’s admission that, in at least six instances, the Clinton team altered the emails before handing them over. Sentences or entire paragraphs—which, by the way, were work-related—were removed. State was able to confirm this because it could double-check against Mr. Blumenthal’s documents.” Strassel wonders, “But how many more of the 30,000 emails Mrs. Clinton provided have also been edited?”

Apparently Blumenthal, long time hatchet man for the Clintons, was not prepared to withhold documents from the Select Committee, and risk a contempt citation. Instead he chose, in effect, to throw Mrs. Clinton under the bus.

The Obama administration has now asserted executive privilege to withhold a “small number” of documents from the Select Committee, reports Byron York. The plot thickens.

“He sent me unsolicited emails, which I passed on in some instances, and I see that that’s just part of the give-and-take,” Mrs. Clinton told the press in May.

“I’m going to Paris tomorrow night and will meet w TNC [Transitional National Council] leaders so this additional info useful,” wrote Clinton to Blumenthal on August 30, 2011. “Let me know if you receive this,” she writes.

“This strains credulity based on what I know,” writes Clinton in another email. “Any other info about it?”

That particular April 2012 email exchange, in which Blumenthal says he will “seek more intel,” does not appear in the State Department’s documents. But an exchange between close Clinton aide Jacob Sullivan and Christopher Stevens using that same Blumenthal information does. Sullivan forwarded Stevens’ response to Hillary Clinton within 15 minutes.

Stevens was appointed Ambassador to Libya in late May of 2012. On July 6, 2012 the State Department’s Charlene Lamb told Regional Security Officer at Embassy Tripoli Eric Nordstrom “NO, I do not [I repeat] not want them to ask for the MSD [security] team to stay!”

That same day, Blumenthal sent Clinton another memo regarding the Libyan election. “Greetings from Kabul! And thanks for keeping this stuff coming!” she replied the next morning, on July 7. Within a couple of hours her aide, Sullivan, had again sent the memo to Ambassador Stevens, and Stevens provided his impressions of Blumenthal’s information promptly. Sullivan again sent Stevens’ communication on to Mrs. Clinton in under 20 minutes.

If these lines of communication were open through her aides, how much did Mrs. Clinton actually know about the security situation in Libya, and when did she know it?

Blumenthal received $10,000 a month from the Clinton Foundation at the same time that he provided his assistance to the Secretary of State, also serving as “an on-and-off paid consultant for Media Matters.”

One of his 2011 emails released by the State Department warns that al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb might be inspired by the death of Osama bin Laden to conduct attacks on American and western targets using weapons they had diverted from the Libyan rebels.

Clinton forwarded the May 2, 2011 email from Blumenthal regarding al Qaeda to Sullivan with the words, “disturbing, if true.”

AQIM participated in the Benghazi attacks, according to the Senate. A Defense Intelligence Agency message dated September 12, 2012 indicates that the Benghazi attacks were planned ten or more days in advance by al Qaeda elements partially in revenge for a U.S. killing in Pakistan. As Secretary of State, Mrs. Clinton received that message, yet continued to blame the YouTube video, as did others in the Obama administration.

As we have repeatedly argued, America already knows enough to demonstrate that there is, and continues to be, a widespread cover-up of the many aspects of the Benghazi scandal.

“The public record has already established that President Obama, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, AFRICOM’s Carter Ham, and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Martin Dempsey were all told that the assault in Benghazi was a terrorist attack almost immediately after they began,” we reported in May. “Yet the President and his administration still continued to blame a YouTube video titled ‘The Innocence of Muslims.’”

Also, we reported, “the former Secretary of State’s aides became aware that this was a terrorist attack about a half an hour after the initial attack began on the Special Mission Compound…”

Any additional information the Select Committee finds on Benghazi, Blumenthal, or Clinton’s role in the scandal can only confirm the breadth and depth of the dereliction of duty that took place. Yet the media argue that this has somehow become a political circus because the Committee is exploring the background of someone informing Clinton’s Libya policy.

AIM’s articles, along with the Citizens’ Commission on Benghazi, have exposed how the administration blindly pushed for an intervention in Libya, switched sides in the War on Terror, and passed over an opportunity for a truce with Muammar Qaddafi. It defies reason to continue to report that broader administration actions had little to no influence on creating the climate and circumstances which led to the death of four Americans in Benghazi.

________________________

© 2015 NoisyRoom.net