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

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

Calls grow for probe of Clinton’s private server


Hillary Clinton: This is the gal that currently leads the Dems for the 2016 nomination for POTUS. How crazy is any portion of the American electorate to trust this woman with the security, safety and prosperity of the United States of America? If she actually wins the Dem nomination will American voters replace one Liar-in-Chief for another?

JRH 6/29/15

Please Support NCCR

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

Calls grow for probe of Clinton’s private server

By SARAH WESTWOOD

JUNE 27, 2015 | 12:01 AM

Washington Examiner

Calls for Hillary Clinton to allow a third party to examine her private server grew louder Friday following revelations that she had withheld more than a dozen Benghazi-related emails from the State Department.

“Secretary Clinton’s failure to turn over all Benghazi and Libya documents is the reason why we have been calling for an independent, third party review of her server,” Rep. Lynn Westmoreland, R-Ga., a member of the House Select Committee on Benghazi, told the Washington Examiner.

“Her unusual email arrangement with herself allowed for Secretary Clinton to pick and choose which emails she deemed work related, and now we know that she failed to be honest and forthcoming with those emails to both the Select Committee and the State Department that were subpoenaed,” Westmoreland added.

A State Department spokesman said Friday the agency had no plans to launch a probe of Clinton’s private server, on which she hosted both her personal and work-related emails.

But officials did acknowledge that they had no idea whether Clinton submitted all of her work-related emails, as she has claimed to have done.

“This confirms doubts about the completeness of Clinton’s self-selected public record and raises serious questions about her decision to erase her personal server — especially before it could be analyzed by an independent, neutral third party arbiter,” Rep. Trey Gowdy, chairman of the select committee, said Thursday evening.

Renewed scrutiny of Clinton’s private email use bubbled up this week after it became clear that Blumenthal had given Congress 60 emails that the State Department never provided.

The agency admitted Thursday it could not locate all or part of 15 of those messages.

“[Clinton] said she had ‘confidence’ that all relevant emails from her secret server were handed over,” Reince Priebus, chairman of the Republican National Committee, said Friday.

“But now there is proof that she wasn’t telling the truth. This is yet another reason she can’t be trusted,” Priebus said. “And it’s yet another reason that her server has to be turned about to an independent arbiter — to see if anything can be recovered after she wiped it.”

Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, said the only way to ensure the State Department has a complete record of Clinton’s emails is to locate and search the private server she used as secretary.

“This is something we’re raising now with the courts in a variety of cases,” Fitton said, noting that State has resisted calls to seek out the server.

Judicial Watch has filed more than 20 requests through the Freedom of Information Act for records related to the Clinton email scandal.

“There is nothing in the history of the Freedom of Information Act or in the history of the Federal Records Act to compare with Mrs. Clinton’s decision to use a secret account to conduct her government business, and have other agency officials use that as well,” Fitton said.

“There was a whole cadre of State Department officials who went dark and were conducting government business in such a way that made it immune to scrutiny,” he added.

Gowdy has blasted the State Department for what he perceives as its reluctance to comply with congressional requests for Benghazi-related documents.

State Department officials have countered that the select committee’s ever-widening requests have drained resources and resulted in the possibility of documents falling through the cracks.

“The State Department also turned over a new set of Clinton emails that were responsive to previous committee requests regarding Libya and Benghazi, but for some reason were not previously given to the committee under subpoena,” Gowdy noted Thursday.

A State Department spokesperson told the Examiner the “new set of Clinton emails” provided to the committee were all the records in their possession that matched those submitted by Blumenthal earlier this month.

“These revelations raise questions that the committee will now be considering carefully in the days ahead,” Gowdy said, suggesting the committee may take additional action to ensure it obtains all of Clinton’s Benghazi-related emails.

___________________

Sarah Westwood is a Watchdog Reporter for the Washington Examiner. She previously covered local governments for the Marietta (Ga.) Daily Journal. She received her bachelor’s degree in political science from George Washington University. She is a graduate of the fellowship program of the National Journalism Center.

 

Copyright 2015 Washington Examiner