BENGHAZI DOCUMENTS Found in Deleted Hillary Clinton Email …


Hillary Crimes & Idiots still vote for her

Thanks largely to Judicial Watch, some Benghazi Documents that were a part of Crooked Hillary’s erased emails have been located by the State Department. Crooked Hillary exposed as a liar yet AGAIN!

 

JRH 8/27/16 (Hat Tip: G+ Conservative Union)

Please Support NCCR

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

BREAKING: BENGHAZI DOCUMENTS Found in Deleted Hillary Clinton Email Files: State Dept

 

By Kristinn Taylor

Aug 25th, 2016 6:04 pm

GATEWAY PUNDIT

 

Benghazi BurningBenghazi Burning

 

The State Department revealed Benghazi related material was found in searches of the approximately 14,900 deleted Hillary Clinton emails recovered by the FBI that were sent to State as potentially work-related.

 

In March 2015 Hillary Clinton said she chose to delete only her personal emails:

 

“E-mails about planning Chelsea’s wedding or my mother’s funeral arrangements, condolence notes to friends, as well as yoga routines, family vacations, the other things you typically find in inboxes. No one wants their personal e-mails made public, and I think most people understand that and respect that privacy.”

 

VIDEO of Crooked Hillary Lying About Deleted Emails
https://www.mrctv.org/embed/133797
But that was not true.

 

The news that Benghazi docs are in the deleted Clinton emails was contained in an August 23 court filing in a Freedom of Information Act case about the 2012 Benghazi terror attack filed by Judicial Watch.

 

Defendant Department of State (“State”) submits this status report to (1) update the Court on its search for records potentially responsive to FOIA Request 1 among information transferred from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”) to State, and (2) propose a production schedule for the non-exempt portions of responsive documents subject to FOIA.

 

  1. FOIA Request 1 seeks “[a]ny and all emails of former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton concerning, regarding, or relating to the September 11, 2012 attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya.” Complaint ¶ 5 (ECF No. 1). To date, State has produced to Plaintiff, via its FOIA web site and via email, a total of 343 documents responsive to FOIA Request 1, with redactions as appropriate

 

  1. State is currently working to determine whether any of the documents that satisfied the search terms are agency records responsive to Plaintiff’s FOIA request. It must then review those documents to determine what, if any, exempt information must be withheld from the responsive documents. Accordingly, State proposes a rolling production schedule, under which State would make its first production of any non-exempt responsive records subject to FOIA on September 30, 2016, and complete production no later than October 31, 2016.”

 

Judicial Watch issued a press release on several orders in its FOIA cases regarding Clinton’s secret email server.

 

Court Orders New Clinton Email Production by September 13

 

State Admits Benghazi Material in New Cache of Emails Clinton Failed to Produce

 

(Washington DC) – Judicial Watch today announced that a federal court has ordered the State Department to review newly found Clinton emails and turn over responsive records by September 13. And, in two other Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuits, the State Department is scheduled to release additional emails from former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s non-state.gov email system beginning September 30. In a court filing this week, the State Department admitted it had found Benghazi-related documents among the 14,900 Clinton emails and attachments uncovered by the FBI that Mrs. Clinton deleted and withheld from the State Department.

 

The first batch of new emails comes in response to a court order issued today in a November 13, 2015, Judicial Watch FOIA lawsuit filed against the Department of State seeking all communications between former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the Obama White House from the day of the terrorist attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi and throughout the following week. The lawsuit was filed on behalf of Dr. Larry Kawa of Boca Raton, Florida, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, West Palm Beach Division (Larry Kawa v. U.S. Department of State (No. 9:15-cv-81560)). Today’s order requiring the production of the emails from the 14,900 new Clinton emails as well as any other communications or emails from the other materials recently delivered to the State Department by the FBI was issued by U.S. District Court Judge William P. Dimitrouleas. The court ruled:

 

The State Department shall search the material, determine whether any responsive records exist, and complete its first production of non-exempt records, to the extent any exist, by September 13, 2016.

 

In a separate case, Judicial Watch has been seeking Clinton’s communications about the attack on the American diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, during which U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and Foreign Service Officer Sean Smith were killed. A second assault targeted a nearby compound, killing two government contractors Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty. (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:15-cv-00692)).

 

After admitting in an August 23 court filing that it found documents that “satisfied the [Benghazi related] search terms” of the new Clinton emails, the State Department proposed a rolling production schedule, “under which State would make its first production of any non-exempt responsive records subject to FOIA on September 30, 2016, and complete production no later than October 31, 2016.” Judicial Watch then asked the court that State make known the volume of documents remaining to be reviewed before it accepts whether the production schedule is reasonable. Today, U.S. District Court Judge Amit P. Mehta informed the attorneys the Court wants to schedule a hearing on this issue for Tuesday, August 30.

 

Judicial Watch is also scheduled to receive documents from the State Department in a case arising out of FOIA lawsuit before Judge Emmet G. Sullivan that seeks records about the controversial employment status of Huma Abedin, former Deputy Chief of Staff to Clinton. The lawsuit was reopened because of revelations about the clintonemail.com system. (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:13-cv-01363)). Judge Sullivan has now issued a court order stating:

 

[T]he State Department shall release all remaining documents responsive to Judicial Watch’s Freedom of Information Act request by no later than September 30, 2016.

 

The 14,900 new Clinton emails were uncovered as a result of separate Judicial Watch litigation seeking all of Mrs. Clinton’s work related emails. At a status hearing this week, U.S. District Court Judge James E. Boasberg ordered the State Department to report to the Court the volume of documents reviewed and be prepared to commit to a production schedule at a further status hearing on September 23, 2016.

 

“It is astonishing that Hillary Clinton tried to delete and hide Benghazi emails and documents. No wonder federal courts in Florida and DC are ordering the State Department to stop stalling and begin releasing the 14,900 new Clinton emails,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.”

 

_________________

2016 theGatewayPundit.com. All rights reserved.

 

About The Gateway Pundit


In late 2004 I started The Gateway Pundit blog after the presidential election. At that time I had my twin brother Joe and my buddy Chris as regular readers. A lot has changed since then.

 

Today The Gateway Pundit is a leading right-of-center news website. The Gateway Pundit has 6-7 million visits (Stat Counter – Google Analytics). It is consistently ranked as one of the top political blogs in the nation. TGP has been cited by Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, The Drudge Report, The Blaze, Mark Levin, FOX Nation and by several international news organizations.

 

Jim Hoft was awarded the Reed Irvine Accuracy in Media Award in 2013. Jim Hoft received the Breitbart Award for Excellence in Online Journalism from the Americans for Prosperity Foundation in May 2015.

 

Not everyone appreciates our success.

 

Jim Hoft is active in the Tea Party and was the associate producer of Hating Breitbart. He has a devotion to growing democracy and freedom movements everywhere, from READ THE REST

 

 

Documentary & Book Hillary Doesn’t Want YOU to Read


Hillary's America Exposed

John R. Houk

© July 24, 2016

 

The Democratic Party has had a long dark history from slavery to enslaving African-Americans to the Welfare State. The Dems have lied to American voters for years. Just look the seven and a half years of Obama lies. The Dems current nominee for President in Crooked Hillary Clinton has had some serious practice in lying to the public from her earliest scandal for being a liar in the investigation of Watergate (she was fired by the Dems), through gubernatorial years of her husband Slick Willie, through the POTUS years of Slick Willie and on through Hillary’s years as Secretary of State.

 

Dinesh D’Souza has released a Hillary/Dem Party exposé demonstrating a nefarious agenda: “Hillary’s America: THE SECRET HISTORY OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY“. And now there is also a D’Souza book of the same name.

 

VIDEO: “Hillary’s America” Trailer | Official Teaser Trailer HD

 

 

Posted by Dinesh D’Souza

Published on Mar 5, 2016

 

“Hillary’s America” opens nationwide July 22! Get your tickets now: http://www.hillarysamericathemovie.com.

 

This Documentary was shown to the public at the 2016 Republican National Convention to a huuugge line of GOP supporters.

 

I recently discovered from a WND email alert that the WND Superstore is offering the hardcover version of “Hillary’s America”.

 

Hillary worse than liar and crook, says D’Souza

 

Sent 7/23/18 3:55 PM

WND

 

FBI Director James Comey essentially called Hillary Clinton a liar and lawbreaker but declined to indict her.

Is that the end?

No.

Do you know all you need to know about the Democratic presidential candidate?

No.

“She is more than just a liar,” No. 1 New York Times bestselling author Dinesh D’Souza says at the beginning of his new book “Hillary’s America: The Secret History of the Democratic Party.”

Hot off the presses, the book, being accompanied by a dramatic documentary film opening nationwide July 22 that follows in the tradition of D’Souza’s record-breaking box-office successes “2016: Obama’s America” and “America: Imagine the World Without Her” now available on DVD along with all of D’Souza’s heroic work – for which he paid a big price with a selective prosecution by Barack Obama’s ultra-politicized Justice Department.

In “Hillary’s America,” D’Souza expertly excavates the past to show that the election of Hillary Clinton would be the terrifying culmination of a two-century-long plot by the Democratic Party to steal America for the politically favored few.

To understand Hillary’s political gangsterism — and how a Hillary Clinton presidency threatens to utterly transform America — D’Souza traces the secret, sordid history of the whole Democratic Party: how it deliberately transitioned from pro-slavery to pro-enslavement; how it reduced citizens to serfs; how it has managed to turn Democratically controlled cities into hotbeds of crime and corruption; and how Democrats have made a practice of buying and selling political influence — even when it puts the nation at risk.

 

JRH 7/24/16

Please Support NCCR

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

HILLARY’S AMERICA: THE SECRET HISTORY OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY (HARDCOVER)

 

WND✤SUPERSTORE

 

Hillary's America bk jk Hillary’s America book jacket

 

DETAILS

 

Pre-order your copy now before the July 18, 2016 release date!

 

by Dinesh D’Souza

Product Description

 

Dinesh D’Souza, author of the #1 New York Times bestseller America: Imagine a World Without Her, has a warning: We are on the brink of losing our country forever. After eight years of Obama, four years—or possibly eight years—of Hillary Clinton as president of the United States would so utterly transform America as to make it unrecognizable.

 

No more will America be a land of opportunity. Instead, it will be a land of rapacious crony capitalism, run solely for the benefit of friends of the Obamas and the Clintons and the Democratic Party. It will, in fact, be the fulfillment of a dream the Democratic Party has had from the beginning…a dream of stealing America for the politically favored few.

 

In Hillary’s America, D’Souza reveals the sordid truth about Hillary and the secret history of the Democratic Party, including: how Democrats transitioned from pro-slavery to pro-enslavement; the long-standing Democratic political war against women; how Hillary Clinton’s political mentor was, literally, a cold-blooded gangster; how the Clintons and other Democrats see foreign policy not in terms of national interest, but in terms of personal profit; how Democratically controlled cities have turned into hotbeds of crime and corruption; and much, much more.

 

Author Bio

 

Dinesh D’Souza is the author of the New York Times bestsellers America: Imagine a World Without Her, Obama’s America, and The Roots of Obama’s Rage. He is also a former White House domestic policy analyst and research scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. His other best-selling books include What’s So Great About Christianity and Life After Death.

 

Product Details

 

  • Hardcover:256 pages

 

  • Publisher:Regnery

 

  • Publication Date:July 25, 2016

 

  • ISBN-13: 978-1621573470

 

  • Dimensions:6 x 9 inches

 

________________

Blog Editor: At the last moment I decided to use this 2014 Documentary NOI from Dinesh D’Souza but just as unflattering in exposing the truth of Crooked Hillary (if not even more so unflattering). This video is a few seconds over 90 minutes long. Kevin Canada posted the video but did not make the video. I mention this because as you read the portion of the description I excerpted, that Mr. Canada subscribes to many Conspiracy Theories in which I am not in complete agreement.

 

VIDEO: Hillary Clinton Exposed, Movie She Banned From Theaters Full Movie

 

 

Posted by Kevin Canada

Published on May 21, 2014

 

MUST READ!! COLIN POWELL LETTER
http://www.fourwinds10.net/siterun_data/environment/humans/chemtrails/news.php?q=1216155860

 

LEAVE A COMMENT IF YOU THINK MY VIDEOS SHOW POLICE HARASSMENT, GANG STALKING OR MIND CONTROL. READ COLIN POWELL LETTER BELOW, HOW WE GOT A BLACK PRESIDENT. CLICK ON LINKS BELOW TO READ MY STORY. COLIN POWELL IS A DANGEROUS CRIMINAL INVOLVED IN 9/11 IN MY OPINION, HIS SON MICHAEL POWELL RAN THE FCC JUST PRIOR TO 9/11 AND MANY YEARS AFTER TO COVER UP THE MASS CRIME AND INSTITUTE NWO CIA FASCIST CONTROLS OVER OUR MEDIA, DIGITAL, BROADBAND, ELECTRO MAGNETIC AND MICROWAVE SHIT BEING USED AGAINST US. HIM AND CHENEY LIVE IN McCLEAN,VA, THE ONLY OTHER THING IN McCLEAN, VA IS THE CIA. I BELIEVE HE IS INVOLVED IN CIA MIND CONTROL, MASS SHOOTINGS AND EXPERIMENTATION, NWO MASONIC AGENDA 21 HE’S SATANIC JUST LIKE THE REST OF THESE ILLUMINATI NEO CONS PSYCHOPATHS DESTROYING THE WORLD. HE AND BUSH PUT A BLACK CIA PRESIDENT IN POWER. I MAY HAVE BEEN MICRO CHIPPED BY THESE PEOPLE, I’M TRACKED EVERYWHERE. I’M A FORMER ARMY CAPTAIN WHO WALKED AWAY FROM THESE PSYCHO SPECIAL FORCES. HIM, BUSH AND CHENEY AND THE RIGHT WING CIA RELIGIOUS ILLUMINATI NWO FREAKS HAD ME TARGETED, NOW THEY ARE HAARPING THE WORLD. THEY ARE USING THEIR SICK MIND CONTROL TO TARGET INNOCENT AMERICANS. THEY ARE READ THE REST

____________________

Documentary & Book Doesn’t Want YOU to Read

John R. Houk

© July 24, 2016

___________________

HILLARY’S AMERICA: THE SECRET HISTORY OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY (HARDCOVER)

 

WND✤SUPERSTORE MAIN PAGE

 

ABOUT WND SUPERSTORE

 

Unique Products for Discerning Minds

 

 

The mission of the WND Superstore is to help equip you to analyze, understand, and act on the challenges we face in the world around us. We seek to be a reliable provider of information products that have practical and transcendent value to you.

 

 

Our store is an extension of our news and information service, providing products that enlighten and empower you in your personal quest to protect your family, engage the culture, speak out against injustice, and fight for what is right.

 

 

Each product in our store meets strict standards and is thoroughly examined by our review board before being added to the WND Superstore. Consider it your personal library consultant. History, theology, philosophy, political science, education, natural science, society, and family are just some of the areas in which we specialize. Providing you, our customer, with the great works of the finest modern and ancient minds is our goal.

 

 

WND is credible, fearless, independent, and FREE. Our loyal customers know their purchases help fund the hard-hitting investigative reporting of government waste, fraud and abuse for which WND has become known throughout the world. You are making a difference with your dollars when you shop at the WND Superstore.

 

Analysis of FBI Directors Hearing with Congress


FBI says Hillary not crook toon

FBI Director James Comey says Hillary was careless but did not rise to the level of criminality … Say what?

 

JRH 7/7/16

Please Support NCCR

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

“Analysis of FBI Directors Hearing with Congress”

 

Sent by Tony Newbill

Sent: 7/7/2016 12:11 PM

 

The FBI Director said [the FBI would] have to prove Criminal Intent along with the Misdemeanor Statute so the Intent would be when Hilary Installed the Unauthorized Private Server to divert Information that she would “CLEARLY KNOW” some would be Classified Information due to the Signing of the Oath of Office.   And Congressman Cummings made a Comparison of General Petraeus first Lying to the FBI then later admitting to the charge regarding divulging Classified Information, and we have the Testimony to Congressman Jordan under oath by Hilary saying she did not send or receive Classified Information on her Private server, but then said to the FBI she did [use her private server]. And the FBI Director did not Ask Congress for this Information from Congress to review the Hearing. Hold the Line Congressman and Good Job standing up for We the People –  a Nation of Laws, we cannot allow a Clinton Monarchy to Form within the USA!!!!!     http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/07/07/perjury-hillary-clinton-chaffetz-comey/

 

Chaffetz: We Will Refer Hillary Clinton to the FBI for Perjury

Jason Chaffetz 

By JOEL B. POLLAK

July 7, 2016

Breitbart

 

Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT), chair of the House Committee on Government Oversight and Reform, told FBI director James Comey during his testimony on Thursday morning that the committee would refer former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for investigation for perjury, given that she lied under oath before the House Select Committee on Benghazi in October.

 

“You’ll have one,” Chaffetz said, within “a few hours,” after Comey testified that the FBI would need a referral for Congress before investigating.

 

As Breitbart News detailed earlier this week, Clinton lied under oath to Congress in at least three ways: first, by stating that she had turned over “all my work related emails” from her private email server to the government; second, by insisting there was “nothing marked classified on my e-mails”; and third, by telling the committee that her attorneys “went through every single e-mail.” FBI director James Comey’s statement Tuesday suggested that none of those sworn statements were true.

 

Chaffetz asked Comey whether he had reviewed Clinton’s testimony before the Benghazi committee as part of his inquiry. He said that he had not, but that he was aware of it. Chaffetz also asked Comey whether Clinton had lied to the FBI, and he said he did not have reason to believe she had done so.

 

In addition to misleading Congress in October, Clinton may have committed perjury when she signed a sworn declaration in 2015 stating that she had turned over all work-related emails: “While I do not know what information may be ‘responsive’ for purposes of this law suit, I have directed that all my e-mails on clintonemail.com in my custody that were or potentially were federal records be provided to the Department of State, and on information and belief, this has been done”

 

Earlier, there were suspicions that Clinton might have committed perjury if and when she had signed the standard exit form, OF-109, which all State Department employees must sign, indicating they have turned over all materials, classified and otherwise, to the government. Later, the State Department admitted that it had no record of her signed OF-109 form.

 

_____________________

Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. His new book, See No Evil: 19 Hard Truths the Left Can’t Handle, will be published by Regnery on July 25 and is available for pre-order through Amazon. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.

 

Copyright © 2016 Breitbart

 

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

Hillary the Liar & the KKK


Will Quig - CA KKK

John R. Houk

© April 27, 2016

 

American Action News has found a video that may or not be from the Ku Klux Klan endorsing, wait for it … crooked Hillary Clinton for President.

 

Vocative claims the spokesman in the video is Will Quig, Grand Dragon of the California KKK.

 

I have no doubts the Clinton campaign will refute any acceptance of a KKK endorsement; nonetheless there are some half-truths in the video.

 

The age old political party of KKK choice is the Democratic Party:

 

 

History reveals that the Republican Party was formed in 1854 to abolish slavery and challenge other racist legislative acts initiated by the Democratic Party.

 

Some called it the Civil War, others called it the War Between the States, but to the African Americans at that time, it was the War Between the Democrats and the Republicans over slavery. The Democrats gave their lives to expand it, Republican gave their lives to ban it.

 

 

History reveals that Democrats lynched, burned, mutilated and murdered thousands of blacks and completely destroyed entire towns and communities occupied by middle class Blacks, including Rosewood, Florida, the Greenwood District in Tulsa Oklahoma, and Wilmington, North Carolina to name a few.

 

After the Civil War, Democrats murdered several hundred black elected officials (in the South) to regain control of the southern government. …

 

 

Congressional records show that Democrats were opposed to passing the following laws that were introduced by Republicans to achieve civil rights for African Americans:

 

** Civil Rights Act 1866

 

** Reconstruction Act of 1867

 

** Freedman Bureau Extension Act of 1866

 

** Enforcement Act of 1870

 

** Force Act of 1871

 

** Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871

 

** Civil Rights Act of 1875

** Civil Rights Act of 1957

 

** Civil Rights Act of 1960

 

** And during the 60’s many Democrats fought hard to defeat the 1964 Civil Rights Act

 

** 1965 Voting Rights Acts

 

** 1972 Equal Employment Opportunity Act [Bold text and bullets by the Blog Editor]

 

… It was also the racist Jim Crow practices initiated by Democrats that brought about the two landmark cases of Plessy v Ferguson and Brown v. The Board of Education.

 

At the turn of the century (1900), Southern Democrats continued to oppress African Americans by placing thousands in hard-core prison labor camps. According to most historians, the prison camps were far worst than slavery. The prisoners were required to work from 10-14 hours a day, six to seven days a week in temperatures that exceeded 100 degrees and in temperatures that fell well below zero. …

 

History reveals that it was three white persons that opposed the Democrat’s racist practices who started the NAACP. Dr. Martin Luther King, several Civil Rights leaders and many historians reported that during the first two years of his administration, President John F. Kennedy ignored Dr. King’s request for Civil Rights. The chronicles of history reveal that it was only after television coverage of riots and several demonstrations did President Kennedy feel a need to introduce the 1963 Civil Rights Act. At that time, experts believe the nation was headed toward a major race war.

 

History reveals that it was Democratic Attorney General, Robert Kennedy that approved the secret wire taps on Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., and it was Democratic President Lyndon Johnson that referred to Dr. King as ” that nigger preacher.”

 

… You get the Dem Party picture – READ ENTIRETY (The Racist History of the Democratic Party; By Wayne Perryman; History News Network; 2/14/04)

 

California KKK spokesman Quig claims Hillary’s views that disagree with KKK ideology is simply political hype to get votes to be elected. In other words, Hillary is lying for political gain. Hillary is a proven liar!

 

….

 

Hillary Clinton has a long history of tall tales.  Some designed to make her appear brave, such as her lie about coming under sniper fire during a trip to Bosnia in 1996.  Others connectED her to someone famous, such as her claim to be named after Sir Edmund Hillary.  Except that Sir Edmund, at the time of Hillary Clinton’s birth, was simply Ed, an obscure New Zealand beekeeper.

 

 

Mrs. Clinton lied about a video causing the Benghazi terror attack and is now doubling down, denying she lied to the victims’ families about the video, blaming her fabrication on the “fog of war.”  There’s also her emails, which she lied about to Congress and the American people.  These aren’t the inconsequential fabrications about whom she was named after, but serious false statements involving loss of American life and compromised U.S. foreign policy and national security.

 

 

But lying is not a recent phenomenon for Mrs. Clinton.  William Safire, of the NY Times, wrote in 1996 that Hillary “is a congenital liar.”  He noted a string of deception beginning in Arkansas and following her to the White House – cattle futures, Travelgate, Whitewater, lost billing records, and missing FBI files, to name some of her most prominent deceptions and cover-ups.

 

Going even farther back in history to the 1970s, Hillary Clinton was fired from her staff position on the Watergate House Judiciary Committee over “lies and unethical behavior.”

 

Is a pattern of compulsive lying by a presidential candidate a legitimate concern?  Are Mrs. Clinton’s lies about Benghazi and emails part of a longstanding pattern?  Are they READ ENTIRETY (Is Hillary Clinton a compulsive liar? By Brian C Joondeph; American Thinker; 1/26/16)

 

More articles documenting crooked Hillary, the liar:

 

Hillary Clinton’s million little lies; By Michael Walsh; New York Post; 11/26/15 2:26pm

Liar, Liar, Pantsuit on Fire: 27 Hillary Fibs, Obfuscations, and Lies; By

BEN SHAPIRO; Breitbart; 10/14/15)

The truth (and lies) behind why Hillary is unfit to be president; By LISA BOOTHE; Washington Examiner; 3/23/16 1201 AM

Top 50 Hillary Clinton Benghazi Lies; By Peter Andrew; ConservativeAmerica.org; 9/16/14

The Hillary Clinton Lies List; By David Kraemer; ConservativeAmerica.org; 8/17/14

 

If you did a little looking yourself, I am confident a treasure trove of Hillary can be discovered by you too.

 

JRH 4/27/16

Please Support NCCR

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

How the KKK is Helping Hillary

 

American Action News

Source: Vocativ

Vocative Date: Apr 25, 2016 at 6:11 PM ET

 

VIDEO: KKK Claims $20K In Clinton Donations

 

 

Posted by Vocativ

Published on Apr 25, 2016

 

A Grand Dragon of the California Klan claims to have raised about $20K for her campaign.

 

_________________________

Hillary the Liar & the KKK

John R. Houk

© April 27, 2016

________________________

How the KKK is Helping Hillary

American Action News

203 S. Union St., Suite 300

Alexandria, VA 22314

(571) 293-0941

Hillary Clinton for Prison


Hillary for Prison Inmate 2016

Hillary is a crook so crooked that she makes Richard Nixon look like an amateur. Justin Smith pointed these thoughts out to me in a submission intro of the post below:

 

How can any self-respecting American cast a vote for such a wretched human as Hillary, especially for the Office of the President of the United States?

I don’t know if Justin meant for to share that above quote, but I think that it is a great intro on Hillary’s crooked nature in this exposé opinion piece.

 

JRH 4/23/16

Please Support NCCR

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

Hillary Clinton for Prison

 

By Justin O. Smith

Sent: 4/23/2016 1:41 PM

 

Beyond sad and heartbreaking, many millions of patriotic Americans watch in dismay and anger, as millions of other citizens of our nation cast votes to make Hillary Clinton the next U.S. President, even though she is the consummate Machiavellian liar and takes to anti-American agendas, corruption and treason like a bear to a honey pot. But FBI scrutiny intensified in March, and according to statements made by U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch, former U.S. Attorney Joseph DiGenova and former U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey, Hillary’s lies have paved the path towards a criminal prosecution. And, the surfacing truth concerning many of Clinton’s past and present activities suggests Hillary must be given a prison cell, rather than handed the most powerful position in the world.

 

Although Obama is trying to minimize the serious national security implications and ramifications of Hillary Clinton keeping top secret information on her personal phone, BlackBerry and server, making light of the “top secret” classification, the beginning of her end, if it comes around, may be found in this reply to a July 2014 Freedom of Information Act request from the House Select Committee on Benghazi: “no records responsive to your request were located.”

 

Last month, the Los Angeles Times, the Washington Post and the New York Times reported that FBI immunity was granted to Bryan Pagliano, former Hillary staffer, who implemented her illegal national security breaching email scheme. It is also highly likely, given the circumstances, that Department of Justice prosecutors have already convened a grand jury, as the FBI prepares to interview top senior Clinton aides.

 

During her tenure as Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton used her private server in Chappaqua, NY exclusively, in a self-serving act motivated by her desire to hide questionable and illegal acts, like the approximate $3 million in kickbacks the Clinton Foundation received after Secretary Clinton signed off on a deal between Uranium One, Rosatom and the Russians. She established this entire system to avoid the law, and she might have succeeded, if not for the efforts of groups like Judicial Watch and Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington and their numerous unanswered FOIA requests that opened suspicion of official misconduct and criminal activity by Secretary Clinton.

 

Hillary’s first known BlackBerry communication through her basement server was a January 28th, 2009 exchange with Gen. David Petraeus, then Chief of U.S. Central Command, and yet, she falsely testified before Congress under oath that she didn’t use “clintonemail.com” prior to March 18th, 2009. She did not want Americans to know that she had been warned on February 13th, 2009, her BlackBerry and email were not secure.

 

Assistant Secretary for Diplomatic Security Eric Boswell had explained to Hillary and Cheryl Mills, Clinton’s Chief of Staff, on several occasions that her BlackBerry and private server were vulnerable to security breaches. State Department security officials, including Clinton, were also aware of a February 24th, 2009 speech by Joel Brenner, Chief Counter-Intelligence Officer at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, that explained a BlackBerry can be easily tagged, tracked, monitored and exploited as one moves about in public; Brenner also observed the technological fact that this malware can migrate to one’s home server.

 

On March 10th, 2015 at a news conference, Hillary, in flat denial, stated “There is no classified material” [on her server]. Cheryl Mills audaciously filed a letter with the State Department and U.S. District Judge Emmett Sullivan (overseeing Judicial Watch lawsuit) that states, in part, “On matters pertaining to the conduct of government business, it was her practice to use the officials’ government email accounts.” Both statements have proven to be false, and along with numerous other false statements from Clinton and Huma Abedin and Mills, her co-conspirators, they are felonies under 18 United States Code Section 1001.

 

Twenty-two Clinton emails were so highly classified that they were withheld in their entirety from public release and elicited this response from Rep. Chris Stewart (R-UT), a member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, who told The Post, “… sensitive and obviously classified. This information should have been maintained in the most secure, classified, top secret servers.”

 

Hillary’s assertion that these 22 emails were not “marked top secret” is dishonest, and the State Department clarified and certified on April 15th that they were in fact marked “top secret”, having been sent to or received from Pres. Obama. Marked top secret or not, the oath Hillary took on January 22nd, 2009, charges her under the law to recognize state secrets when she sees them by assessing an email’s potential to harm the government’s national security mission.

 

On March 4th, 2015, CBS News reported that Clinton’s private email was reconfigured two on two separate occasions in 2012 and 2013, to provide a backup server, in case her server failed. However, using this system at MX Logic, her emails were open to being read, tapped or forwarded to anyone across the globe without anyone knowing, since MX decrypted them to check for viruses before reencrypting them and sending them on.

 

The transmission and removal of information relating to the national defense from its proper place of custody is a criminal offense under the Espionage Act. So too is the abstraction and willful destruction of such information. See also 18 U.S. Code 2071 — prohibiting destruction of records.

 

Time and again, Hillary Clinton flouted U.S. law through her blatant refusal to follow the guidelines of the Federal Records Act and her impediments to numerous FOIA requests; and, she and her co-conspirators, Abedin, Mills and others, violated the Espionage Act, as they removed all Clinton email records from the State Department from the beginning. Clinton’s willful and arbitrary destruction of thousands of other emails compounds her crimes, since they more than likely contained incriminating evidence that pertained to the Benghazi investigation.

 

Lt. Col. Ralph Peters bluntly and boldly told Fox News, “Hillary Clinton is a criminal.”

 

Hillary Clinton’s numerous devil-may-care violations of the Espionage Act are criminal acts and an arrogant abuse of power, which warrant the appointment of a Special Counsel and Hillary’s prosecution, if only Americans will generate a public outcry and a demand for her indictment. Obama’s administration saw fit to prosecute nine lesser cases involving state secrets, so certainly Hillary should not be allowed to escape prosecution simply by virtue of her popularity with those citizens, who do not value honor and integrity and who do not care about national security and that her gross negligence and Muslim appeasement policy at the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi resulted in the murders of four brave Americans, or that a conspiracy in the Obama administration sought to hide the truth afterwards. Rather than chant “Hillary Clinton for President”, many Americans are now chanting “Hillary Clinton for Prison.”

 

By Justin O. Smith

________________

Edited by John R. Houk

Source links are by the Editor.

 

© Justin O. Smith

JW Weekly Update: A New Clinton Computer Scandal?


Hillary Clinton is a liar. She uses the old Nazi Joseph Goebbels adage:

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.”

When it comes to the FBI probe of criminality in relation to classified material on her unsecured email server, Hillary sticks to the line I did nothing wrong because anything marked classified was done retroactively. Only an idiot or a Democrat would believe that lie. (Begin about 2:33 mark)

VIDEO: Hillary Clinton 100% Confident Nothing Will Come From FBI Email Investigation – Special Report

Posted by Tech News | IT World

Published on Feb 6, 2016

Hillary Clinton defiantly claimed at Thursday’s Democratic presidential debate that she is “100 percent confident” nothing will come of the FBI’s investigation of her email practices and has no concerns about the controversy’s impact on her chances in the race.

“I have absolutely no concerns about it whatsoever,” the former secretary of state said at the MSNBC-hosted debate in New Hampshire.

If wasn’t for Judicial Watch the Hillary lie about classified material would undoubtedly disappear into history for historians to tell the truth when the Clinton/Obama cabal of transforming America into something our Founding Fathers would not have recognized. Below is an email I received from Judicial Watch yesterday that highlights the obvious. Hillary is hiding something. What she is hiding has nothing to do with National Security. Rather her hiding and erasing has more to do with covering her butt so the Teflon keeps letting crimes slip away.

JRH 2/6/16

Please Support NCCR

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

Weekly Update: A New Clinton Computer Scandal?

Sent by Tim Fitton

Sent: 2/5/2016 4:51 PM

Email from: Judicial Watch

JW Uncovers another Hillary Clinton Computer Scandal

This is unbelievable. We have just received records from the Department of State disclosing plans by senior State Department officials to set up a “stand-alone PC” so that Clinton could check her emails in an office “across the hall” through a separate, non-State Department computer network system. Referencing the special Clinton computer system, Under Secretary for Management Patrick F. Kennedy, writes Clinton Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills, “The stand-alone separate network PC is a great idea.” The emails are from January 23-24, 2009, a few days after Clinton was sworn in as Secretary of State.

The new emails were obtained by Judicial Watch in response to a court order in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit for State Department records about Hillary Clinton’s separate email system.

In the email chain, Lewis Lukens, former deputy assistant secretary of state and executive director of the secretariat, responds to a request from Mills by informing her, top Clinton aide Huma Abedin, and Kennedy that the new personal computer “in the secretary’s office” would be “connected to the internet (but not through our system).” Abedin responds, “We are hoping for that if possible.”

The email exchange discussing plans to provide Clinton a separate computer to skirt the internal State Department computer network begins with a message from Mills to Lukens in which she requests Clinton being able to access her emails through “a non-DOS computer.” The email discusses how the stand-alone computer can be set up and why it is “a great idea’ and “the best solution”:

From: Cheryl Mills
Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 6:45 AM
To: Lukens, Lewis A
Subject: Re: Series of questions

Lew – who can I talk to about:

1.Can our email be accessed remotely through the web using a non-DOS computer like my laptop?

2.I am traveling to the M-E – will my DOS bb work there and is there a cell phone attached?

3.Spoke to Dan [Daniel B. Smith, former DOS executive secretary] re: bb for HRC (and reports that POTUS is able to use a super encrypted one)

4.Spoke to Dan re: setting up Counselor office for HRC so she can go across hall regularly to check her email

From: Lukens, Lewis A
To: cmills [REDACTED]
Cc: Habedin [REDACTED]; Kennedy, Patrick F; Smith, Daniel B
Sent: Saturday, Jan. 24, 19:10:33 2009
Subject: Re: series of questions

We have already started checking into the NSA bb. Will set up the office across the hall as requested. Also, I think we should go ahead (but will await your green light) and set up a stand-alone PC in the Secretary’s office, connect to the internet (but not through our system) to enable her to check her emails from her desk. Lew.

From: Kennedy, Patrick F KennedyPF
To: Lukens, Lewis A <LukensLA>; Cheryl Mills
Cc: Huma Abedin; Smith, Daniel B <SmithD2>
Sent: Sat, Jan 24 19:48:25 2009
Subject: Re: Series of questions

Cheryl
The stand-alone separate network PC is [a] great idea
Regards
Pat

From: Huma Abedin
To: Kennedy, Patrick F; Lukens, Lewis A; Cheryl Mills
Cc: Huma Abedin; Smith, Daniel B
Sent: Sat Jan 24 19:48:27 2009
Subject: Re: Series of questions

Yes we were hoping for that if possible so she can check her email in her office.

***

From: Lukens, Lewis A
Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2009 8:26 PM
To: Kennedy, Patrick F
Subject: Re: Series of questions

I talked to Cheryl about this. She says a problem is hrc does not know how to use a computer to do email – only bb [Blackberry]. But, I said would not take much training to get her up to speed.

In separate litigation, the State Department told Judicial Watch and federal courts that Hillary Clinton was never issued secure State Department computing devices.

These emails are shocking. They show the Obama State Department’s plan to set up non-government computers and a computer network for Hillary Clinton to bypass the State Department network. The fact that these records were withheld from the American people until now is scandalous and shows the criminal probe of Hillary Clinton’s email system should include current and former officials of the Obama administration.

Our legal team filed these new emails with U.S. District Court Judge Emmett Sullivan, who is now considering whether to grant discovery in a lawsuit seeking information on the “special government employee” status of Abedin. In our filing, we state:

[Judicial Watch] just recently received additional evidence that demonstrates that senior management at the State Department was well aware that Mrs. Clinton was using a “non-state.gov” system to conduct official government business. This evidence also shows that the senior management at the State Department knowingly aided Mrs. Clinton in establishing and using a “non-state.gov” system.

[T]his newly discovered email demonstrates that there is at least a “reasonable suspicion” that the State Department and Mrs. Clinton deliberately thwarted FOIA by creating, using, and concealing the “clintonemail.com” record system for six years.

The media took up this story (which was reported first by Fox News.) The Obama gang responded with careful word parsing. The State Department spokesman John Kirby told CBS News:

“I will say, a computer was not set up for Secretary Clinton,” he said in an email to CBS News State Department Correspondent Margaret Brennan.

Because “these matters are under review generally,” Kirby declined to comment further.

Was a computer set up for Cheryl Mills (who evidently had the Counselor’s office across the hall)? It will take another lawsuit or court-ordered discovery to get past this obfuscation.

We will continue our investigation – we hope with the support of the courts. In the meantime, you can see that email isn’t the only Clinton computer scandal.

Hillary Clinton Discussed Prosecuting Republicans for Classification Violations

There are a lot of twists and turns in this one, but pay close attention to what a Hillary Clinton confidant advised her to do in response to some of the actions by congressional Republicans. When you have Sidney Blumenthal, Hillary Clinton, Eric Cantor and David Petraeus mentioned in one government document, it’s time to pay close attention.

Back on January 7, 2016, we obtained a new batch of documents from the Department of State, including a “Confidential” memo from Clinton advisor Sidney Blumenthal to the former secretary of state suggesting that a grand jury and the Senate Judiciary Committee should investigate whether former Rep. Eric Cantor or his staff violated the Espionage Act by disclosing classified information related to the FBI investigation of former CIA Director David Petraeus.

According to the Blumenthal-to-Clinton email, if classified information was discussed by Cantor, his staff, or anyone “inside or outside the bureau,” it “is a felony” in violation of the Espionage Act. Blumenthal’s fantasy prosecution of Cantor aside, it is for sure true that if Clinton kept classified information on her non-state.gov server, that also may be a criminal violation of the Espionage Act. (And, of course, Petraeus eventually was forced to plead guilty in a slap-on-the-wrist plea deal.)

The documents also contain an email to Clinton in which Blumenthal sent a copy of a “Confidential” memo to top Obama 2012 presidential debate advisor Ron Klain warning that GOP candidate Mitt Romney would “falsify, distort, and mangle facts” in the final campaign debate. The Blumenthal memo was sent to Klain and copied to Clinton just four days before the final debate.

The documents include an email sent after the Benghazi attack in which Blumenthal informs Clinton of his “Latest Libya intel” regarding the turmoil in that country. Though barred by the Obama administration from being an official State Department advisor to Clinton, Blumenthal – who at the time was also employed by the Clinton Foundation – claimed to have “a very sensitive source” providing him “internal govt discussions high level” concerning Libyan internal security.

The new emails, also available on the State Department website, were obtained by Judicial Watch in response to a court order. The Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed on May 6, 2015, asked for the following:

• Communications between officials, officers, or employees of the Department of State and members of Congress, Congressional staff members, or Congressional members or staff members of the U.S. House of Representatives Select Committee on Benghazi concerning the use of non-“state.gov” email addresses by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

• Emails of former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton regarding the September 11, 2012, attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya. The timeframe for this request is September 11, 2012, to January 31, 2013.

The State Department’s records include the November 13, 2012, email from Blumenthal to Clinton in which he speculates about former Rep. Eric Cantor’s dealings with then-FBI Director Robert Mueller concerning the agency’s investigation of former CIA Director David Petraeus. In the email, Blumenthal raises the possible need for both a grand jury and a Senate Judiciary Committee investigation of possible violations of the Espionage Act by Cantor and his staff if classified information was made public:

From: Sidney Blumenthal
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2012 9:13 AM
Subject: More questions. Sid

Who else in the Congress besides congressmen Reichert and Cantor knew of the Petraeus investigation before it became public? How many congressional staffers were informed? What roles did they play in deciding who to inform about it? What were their communications among themselves and with others outside their offices if any? Did any of them discuss the matter with anyone in the Romney-Ryan campaign?

Why was Cantor intent on informing FBI Director Mueller of the existence of an FBI investigation that was already resolved?…

What were the internal discussions between Cantor and his staff on his referral to Mueller?…

Was the supposedly rogue FBI agent, described in the Washington Post as motivated by his “worldview,” acting alone? Did he discuss the investigation with any individual either inside or outside the bureau before he went to Reichert and Cantor?

Disclosure of an espionage investigation is a felony. Will a grand jury be empaneled by the Justice Department?

When will Senator Patrick Leahy, chair of the Judiciary Committee and a former FBI agent, begin an investigation of this matter?

Clinton, the United States Secretary of State, responded not with a “you are crazy, why are you writing this to me” but with a request for more info:

What was his “worldview” and why would he think hurting P furthered it? Why would Cantor want to hurt P (beloved by Rs)?

The other major find is an another unhinged October 19, 2012, email from Blumenthal to Clinton in which he sends a copy of a lengthy “Confidential” memo to Klain expounding upon how to defeat Mitt Romney in the third and final 2012 presidential debate:

From: Sidney Blumenthal
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2012 10:32 AM
To: H
Subject: H: fyi, see especially point about bush. Sid

1.Romney will inevitably falsify, distort and mangle facts on a range of subjects from Libya to the defense budget. But why is this debate different from all other debates? In the dedicated foreign policy debate, the stakes are higher-America’s role in the world. That makes Romney’s errors even more consequential and potentially threatening. And that must be an essential predicate of Obama’s point when he exposes Romney’s falsehoods. When Romney lies on domestic policy it’s shameful, but when he lies on foreign policy it’s dangerous.

3.Romney’s attack line on Libya is not only false, as exposed in the last debate. (Obama here can joke that Romney apparently wants to rerun the last debate but this time without Candy Crowley present to call him out. Romney will become angry and nonplussed.) His attack line is a reheated leftover of the Bush era attacks on Democrats designed by Karl Rove as weak on terrorism, which were themselves repackaged old Republican attacks from the Cold War. It’s all nostalgia….

Then, really stick in the shiv by having Obama say that he was somewhat surprised that Romney in the last debate did not give President George W. Bush credit where credit is due-for example, breaking with the neoconservatives around Vice President Cheney by adopting the surge in Iraq led by current CIA director David Petraeus that prepared the groundwork for Obama’s own policy in Iraq.

An email from Blumenthal to Clinton contains a lengthy “Confidential” memo in which he provides his “latest Libya intel” from “internal govt discussions high level.” The memo, later forwarded by Clinton to then-Deputy Chief of Staff Jake Sullivan, reveals that more than a year after the Obama/Clinton assisted overthrow of Qaddafi, ostensibly intended to bring about a peaceful transition, the country remained at the mercy of the same terrorist groups that attacked the Benghazi consulate. Claiming that his information comes from a “very sensitive source,” Blumenthal informed Clinton of the following:

From: Sidney Blumenthal
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2013 11:20 AM
To: H
Subject: H: latest Libya intel; internal govt discussions high level. Sid

1. On the morning of January 15, 2013 Libyan Prime Minister Ali Zidan was informed by Interior Minister Ashour Shuwail and Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation Mohamed Abdulaziz that Italy plan to close its consulate in Benghazi and reduce the size of its embassy in Tripoli following attacks on the consulate itself and the Italian consul general. Shuwail reported that the attacks were carried out by Eastern militia forces associated with Ansar al Islam, which, although put under pressure by the National Libyan Army (NLA) following the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi in September 2012, continues to operate in and around that city.

***

6. According to a very sensitive source, General Hassi disagrees with the NLA analysis that the Sabha attack was not aimed at Magariaf specifically, noting that there were five prior assassination attempts against Magariaf in 2012, and that he is a target for a diverse collection of enemies, including former Qaddafi forces, groups like Ansar al Sharia, and even his political adversaries in the GNC. Accordingly, Hassi intends to establish new programs to train a detachment of presidential bodyguards, and his own anti-terrorism personnel.

It is beyond ironic that Hillary Clinton and Sidney Blumenthal, her secret Clinton Foundation adviser at the State Department, discuss criminal prosecutions of Republicans for the handling of classified information over the Petraeus scandal. And it is disturbing that then-Secretary of State Clinton was involved in advising the Obama reelection campaign on how to continue lying about the Benghazi attack. No wonder Hillary Clinton tried to hide these email records rather than disclose them years ago as required by law.

Federal Judge Orders State Department Answers on New Clinton Documents

The Obama administration continues to provide cover for Hillary Clinton, but some in the judiciary are running out of patience with the gamesmanship. We are pleased to report to you this week that Judge Rudolph Contreras ordered the State Department to explain how and when new records from the office of Hillary Clinton were located and why they were not identified previously.

The court order comes in a Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit seeking records about the State Department vetting of then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s potential conflicts of interest. The explanation was initially due on Monday, but Judge Contreras granted the State Department an extension to Friday, February 5, 2015, due to the federal government shutdown because of the recent blizzard. (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:15-cv-00688)).

Last month, we learned that the Obama State Department recently found “thousands” of new records from Hillary Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State. According to information provided to Judicial Watch by various Justice Department attorneys, the new documents appear be “working” records in electronic format located on both “shared” and “individual” drives accessible to or used by persons identified as being relevant to our various FOIA lawsuits on the Benghazi scandal and controversies from Clinton’s term at State. The State Department admitted to Judge Contreras on January 14 that the new records include the files of two of Clinton’s top aides:

The newly identified files that need to be searched in this case consist of office files that were available to employees within the Office of the Secretary during former Secretary Clinton’s tenure as well as individual files belonging to Jake Sullivan and Cheryl Mills.

Judge Contreras responded with a January 15 order that states:

Defendant [State Department] shall complete its additional search and file a status report (1) disclosing the volume of potentially responsive documents that must be reviewed, (2) containing a detailed description of how and when these files were located and why they had not been previously identified, and (3) proposing a revised schedule for the production of the non-exempt portions of responsive documents subject to the Freedom of Information Act.

At a July 9, 2015, hearing the judge was “concerned” about the preservation of Clinton’s records and warned that the State Department will “have to answer for” any destruction of Hillary Clinton email records.

The lawsuit stems from a Judicial Watch FOIA request on March 17, 2015, and a subsequent lawsuit filed on May 6, 2015, seeking:

• Records that identify the policies and/or procedures in place to ensure that former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton’s personal or charitable financial relationships with foreign leaders, foreign governments, and business entities posed no conflict of interest to her role as Secretary of State; and

• Records concerning the State Department’s review of donations to the Clinton Foundation for potential conflicts of interest with former Secretary Clinton’s role as Secretary of State.

The State Department is protecting Hillary Clinton and has a history of illegally hiding documents from the courts and the public about her record. These newly found Hillary Clinton records show the State Department needs special policing from the courts, federal investigators, and Congress.

A separate and ongoing Judicial Watch lawsuit, one of nearly 23 active Judicial Watch lawsuits in which the Clinton email system is at issue, forced the disclosure last year of documents that provided a road map for over 200 conflict-of-interest rulings that led to $48 million for the Clinton Foundation and other Clinton-connected entities during Hillary Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state. Previously disclosed documents in this lawsuit, for example, raise questions about funds Clinton accepted from entities linked to Saudi Arabia, China and Iran, among others.

I wish I could tell you the State Department’s explanation has arrived, but it has not. I expect it will come after hours in order to keep the new scandal out of the news. But we will spread the details far and wide, so be sure to check back here next week.

Until next week…

Tom Fitton
President

_____________________

JudicialWatch.org
425 3rd St, SW Suite 800
Washington, D.C. 20024

About Judicial Watch

Judicial Watch, Inc., a conservative, non-partisan educational foundation, promotes transparency, accountability and integrity in government, politics and the law. Through its educational endeavors, Judicial Watch advocates high standards of ethics and morality in our nation’s public life and seeks to ensure that political and judicial officials do not abuse the powers entrusted to them by the American people. Judicial Watch fulfills its educational mission through litigation, investigations, and public outreach.

The motto of Judicial Watch is “Because no one is above the law”. To this end, Judicial Watch uses the open records or freedom of information laws and other tools to investigate and uncover misconduct by government officials and litigation to hold to account politicians and public officials who engage in corrupt activities.

Litigation and the civil discovery process not only uncover information for the education of the American people on anti-corruption issues, but can also provide a basis for civil authorities to criminally prosecute corrupt officials. Judicial Watch seeks to ensure high ethical standards in the judiciary through monitoring activities and the use of the judicial ethics process to hold judges to account.

Judicial Watch’s investigation, legal, and judicial activities provide the basis for strong educational outreach to the American people. Judicial Watch’s public education programs include READ THE REST

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

What Kind of Idiots Vote for Hillary?


Hillary Clinton

John R. Houk

© April 15, 2015

 

Former Secretary of State and Dem candidate for President in the November 2016 election has repeatedly (along with her acolytes) justified her use of private email servers with: “… Because past State Department Secretaries used private servers ergo she did nothing wrong in doing so.” (A rough from memory paraphrased quote of Hillary and  

 

The reason this is important is due to a host of past scandals up to and including Clinton’s days as First Lady, her thoughts on the Benghazi massacre on September 11, 2012 and high probability of using her private servers for State Department sensitive work – some of which may have been classified.

 

Hillary’s Past Scandals

 

Both Slick Willie and Hillary have their scandal demons from the past. This post is not about Uncle Bill’s scandals though numerous with only one proven legally in which he skated away largely because Dem Party Senators refused to convict him after the House impeached him.

 

Hillary’s early scandals in which she has a direct link are often intertwined with her husband the former President. Nonetheless, even without the tarnish of any criminal convictions, Hillary undoubtedly had direct culpability with her husband Bill. Hillary and Bill have led a criminal Teflon life largely because evidence against has mysteriously disappeared, witnesses mysteriously changed testimony or just plain died under mysterious circumstances. The lack of convictions apparently is no ethical problem for Dems of either the Party elite or Party rack-and-file. Even with scandals both the President and Hillary have received favorable election results. In Hillary’s case she won a New York state Senate seat and finished behind Obama in the 2008 Dem nomination for President. In a side thought, voter favoritism is a demonstration of a lack ethics and intelligence especially among Dems but one has to include the large amount of gullible independent voters that join Dems.

 

Do you recall the slime that was Whitewater, in which the Clintons dissembled and lied while their former business partners went to jail?  Do you remember Mrs. Clinton earning $100,000 in profit in 1979 on a $1,000 investment over the course of only 9 months in volatile cattle futures, about which she knew nothing, thanks to help from a highly placed Tyson Foods connection?  Tyson profited handsomely in Arkansas, with state loans and appointments.  We are to believe that Clinton studied the Wall Street Journal to achieve a feat against which the odds were one in 250 million.  Do you recall the Rose Law Firm billing records that magically appeared in Mrs. Clinton’s White House office, years after they had been subpoenaed?  Or the death of Vince Foster under rather extraordinary and inexplicable circumstances, and the lies and cover-up that followed?  Do you recall that while testifying before congressional investigators as first lady, she answered “I don’t know” or “I don’t remember” 250 times?

 

Do you recall Travelgate, in which the Clintons destroyed reputations and careers to reward campaign donors?  What about the endless parade of women, long known to Mrs. Clinton and laughably passed off by her as “ministering” to a troubled young woman in the matter of Miss Lewinsky?  Nevertheless, when the truth came out, she was entirely happy to exploit the illusion of victimhood for her own martyrdom in the cause of political advancement.

 

Wherever Mrs. Clinton goes, destruction follows.  Of course, like the current president, nothing is ever her fault.  She knows nothing.  She is the innocent victim of all around her, endlessly bemoaning her fate as the victim of a vast right-wing conspiracy that somehow has directed the events of her life even before there was a vast right-wing conspiracy. (Hillary Clinton’s Legacy of Scandal; By Jeffrey T. Brown; American Thinker; 6/15/13)

 

Other sources: THE HILLARY CLINTON SCANDALS: VOLUME 1 and Reports: Clinton email practices violated clear State Dept. rules, Clinton’s own directives

 

Hillary Clinton’s Part in Benghazi Scandal

 

“Americans are divided down the middle, in a foul mood and think the country’s going to hell in a handbasket. Hillary’s greatest strength is her experience, but every one of her opponents will try to use that experience against her,” said Mr. Varoga. “The candidate who eventually wins in November 2016 will be the one who does the best job of showing that he or she has the experience to be steady and strong, but also has the temperament to take the country in a new direction.”

 

Indeed, many of the questions swirling around Mrs. Clinton arose from her four years as American’s top diplomat under President Obama.

 

She remains a key figure in the probe by the House Select Committee on Benghazi, which is investigating the 2012 terrorist attacks on a U.S. diplomatic compound in Libya that killed U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans.

 

The attacks, and the Obama administration’s response to them — including initially blaming them on a spontaneous riot over an anti-Islam YouTube video — left an indelible black mark on Mrs. Clinton’s record as secretary of state. She could be called to publicly testify before the Benghazi committee in the middle of the campaign and answer questions about her role in the episode, as well as her secretive handling of emails. (Clinton to face tough questions on Benghazi, email scandal with 2016 bid; By S.A. Miller; Washington Times; 4/12/15)

 

Hillary’s Private Email Server a Threat to National Security

 

Investor’s Business Daily published a long article on Tuesday night, collecting the opinions of current and former intelligence officials about the national security threat posed by Hillary Clinton’s private email server.

 

It feels like a floodgate bursting open.  These experts are absolutely beside themselves over Clinton’s irresponsible conduct as Secretary of State.  Former NSA officer John Schindler called it “a counterintelligence disaster of truly epic proportions.”

 

“She may have deleted 30,000 emails before turning her files over to the State Department,” observed former U.S. National Counterintelligence Executive Michelle Van Cleave, “but that doesn’t mean that the Russians and the Chinese don’t have them.”

 

 

“It’s a disaster for U.S. policy.  It’s a huge boon for the former KGB and the Iranians,” said a veteran intelligence officer who spoke to IBD anonymously.  The officer found Clinton’s claims that she never handled classified information through her private server laughable — “how the hell could she do her job without it?” (INTEL EXPERTS: HILLARY CLINTON’S EMAIL SERVER ‘A COUNTERINTELLIGENCE DISASTER OF TRULY EPIC PROPORTIONS’; By JOHN HAYWARD; Breitbart.com; 4/8/15)

 

Focusing on the Hillary email cover-up, does anyone realize that she broke government rules and thus against the law? In an investigation by Rep. Darrel Issa examining the Obama Administration usage of “personal email.” In that examination Rep. Issa sent a letter officially asking the Secretary of State Hillary asking if she conducted official business with a personal email account:

 

“Have you or any senior agency official ever used a personal email account to conduct official business?” Mr. Issa wrote to Mrs. Clinton. “If so, please identify the account used.”  (Hillary Clinton Was Asked About Email 2 Years Ago; By MICHAEL S. SCHMIDT; NY Times; 4/14/15)

 

That Issa letter was sent circa December 2012. Ironically this is around three months after the Benghazi massacre. The NY Times reports that Secretary of Hillary Clinton did not even respond to the official Issa letter! Hillary ended her position as Secretary of State on February 1, 2013. On March 27, 2013 the State Department responded to the official Issa query:

 

‘…all he got was a description of the department’s email policies. According to the letter, any employee using a personal account “should make it clear that his or her personal email is not being used for official business.”’ (Ibid.)

 

Can you say cover-up? Hot Air uses Politico data to demonstrate that Secretary Clinton was fully aware that using a private email server was a violation way back in 2005:

 

… Hillary Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state that appears to be at odds with her reliance on a private email for agency business, POLITICO has learned.

 

The policy, detailed in a manual for agency employees, adds clarity to an issue at the center of a growing controversy over Clinton’s reliance on a private email account. Aides to Clinton, as well as State Department officials, have suggested that she did nothing inappropriate because of fuzzy guidelines and lack of specific rules on when and how official documents had to be preserved during her years as secretary.

 

But the 2005 policy was described as one of several “clear cut” directives the agency’s own inspector general relied on to criticize the conduct of a U.S. ambassador who in 2012 was faulted for using email outside of the department’s official system.

 

“It is the Department’s general policy that normal day-to-day operations be conducted on an authorized [Automated Information System], which has the proper level of security control to provide nonrepudiation, authentication and encryption, to ensure confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the resident information,” the Department’s Foreign Affairs Manual states.

 

The Clintonista line, when it hasn’t been the utterly preposterous notion that Clinton is being extra-special transparent by hiding her e-mails in a private account, has relied on the idea that there was technically no prohibition on conducting business on an outside email account. This is almost equally preposterous, for reasons I laid out last night, but new reports from both Politico and Fox’s Catherine Herridge demolish it. Clinton herself told personnel to avoid personal email in 2011. You know, right before she canned an ambassador for doing it.

 

Fox News has exclusively obtained an internal 2011 State Department cable that shows Secretary of State Clinton’s office told employees not to use personal email for security reasons, while at the same time, HRC conducted all government business on a private account. Sent to Diplomatic and Consular Staff in June 2011, the unclassified cable, with Clinton’s electronic signature, makes clear to “avoid conducting official Department from your personal e-mail accounts” and … READ ENTIRETY (Reports: Clinton email practices violated clear State Dept. rules, Clinton’s own directives; By MARY KATHARINE HAM; Hot Air; 3/5/15)

 

I wonder how stupid America’s voters are if Hillary even wins a Democrat Party Primary?

 

JRH 4/15/15

Please Support SlantRight 2.0

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

Hillary Clinton Was Asked About Email 2 Years Ago

 

By MICHAEL S. SCHMIDT

APRIL 14, 2015

New York Times

 

WASHINGTON — Hillary Rodham Clinton was directly asked by congressional investigators in a December 2012 letter whether she had used a private email account while serving as secretary of state, according to letters obtained by The New York Times.

 

But Mrs. Clinton did not reply to the letter. And when the State Department answered in March 2013, nearly two months after she left office, it ignored the question and provided no response.

 

The query was posed to Mrs. Clinton in a Dec. 13, 2012, letter from Representative Darrell Issa, the Republican chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. Mr. Issa was leading an investigation into how the Obama administration handled its officials’ use of personal email.

 

“Have you or any senior agency official ever used a personal email account to conduct official business?” Mr. Issa wrote to Mrs. Clinton. “If so, please identify the account used.”

 

Mr. Issa also asked Mrs. Clinton, “Does the agency require employees to certify on a periodic basis or at the end of their employment with the agency they have turned over any communications involving official business that they have sent or received using nonofficial accounts?”

 

Mr. Issa’s letter also sought written documentation of the department’s policies for the use of personal email for government business. Mrs. Clinton left the State Department on Feb. 1, 2013, seven weeks after the letter was sent to her.

 

When Mr. Issa received a response from the State Department on March 27, all he got was a description of the department’s email policies. According to the letter, any employee using a personal account “should make it clear that his or her personal email is not being used for official business.”

 

Mrs. Clinton acknowledged last month that she had exclusively used a personal email account, which was housed on a server that had been specially set up for her, when she was secretary of state. She said that she used the private account for convenience purposes because she did not want to carry more than one electronic device. By using the private account, many of her emails were shielded from inquiries by Congress, the news media and government watchdogs.

 

The revelation has set off the first major test of her early presidential campaign, as she seeks to assure the public and the news media that she was not seeking to hide her correspondence.

 

A congressional official provided The Times with a copy of Mr. Issa’s letter and the response from the State Department on the condition of anonymity because the official did not want to jeopardize his access to such information.

 

A spokesman for the State Department declined on Tuesday to answer questions about why it had not addressed Mr. Issa’s question about whether Mrs. Clinton or senior officials used personal email accounts.

 

“The department responds to thousands of congressional inquiries and requests for information each year,” said the spokesman, Alec Gerlach. “In its March 2013 letter, the department responded to the House Oversight Committee’s inquiry into the department’s ‘policies and practices regarding the use of personal email and other forms of electronic communications’ with a letter that described those policies in detail.”

 

An aide to Mrs. Clinton said in a statement Tuesday that “her usage was widely known to the over 100 department and U.S. government colleagues she emailed, as her address was visible on every email she sent.”

 

Mr. Issa had sent letters to the State Department and other executive agencies after it was discovered that some administration and Environment Protection Agency officials had used private accounts to conduct government business.

 

In the State Department’s letter back to Mr. Issa, Thomas B. Gibbons, the acting assistant secretary for legislative affairs, described the department’s records management policies and guidelines.

 

He said “employees may use personal email on personal time for matters not directly related to official business, and any employee using personal email ‘should make it clear that his or her personal email is not being used for official business.’ ”

 

The State Department offered training on its record management programs to its employees, he said.

___________________________

What Kind of Idiots Vote for Hillary?

John R. Houk

© April 15, 2015

___________________________

Hillary Clinton Was Asked About Email 2 Years Ago

 

A version of this article appears in print on April 15, 2015, on page A15 of the New York edition with the headline: Mrs. Clinton Was Asked About Email 2 Years Ago. Order Reprints | Today’s Paper | Subscribe

 

© 2015 The New York Times Company

Benghazi: The Cover-up of the Cover-up


Benghazi-Cover-Up-Exposed2

Mark Alexander had a fairly analysis of the results of the Judicial Watch exposed White House Memo on Benghazi talking points pertaining to the Islamic terrorist attack that killed four Americans:

 

1)     Ambassador Chris Stevens

 

2)    Sean Smith

 

3)     Tyrone Woods

 

4)     Glen Doherty

 

JRH 5/3/14

Please Support NCCR

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

Benghazi: The Cover-up of the Cover-up

Obama and Clinton Lied, Americans Died

 

By Mark Alexander

Apr. 30, 2014

The Patriot Post

 

It is of great importance to set a resolution, not to be shaken, never to tell an untruth. There is no vice so mean, so pitiful, so contemptible; and he who permits himself to tell a lie once, finds it much easier to do it a second and a third time, till at length it becomes habitual; he tells lies without attending to it, and truths without the world’s believing him. This falsehood of the tongue leads to that of the heart, and in time depraves all its good disposition.” –Thomas Jefferson (1785)

 

One year ago, The Patriot Post published an investigative piece identifying the key players who altered the Benghazi talking points. It was a brazen charade to provide Barack Hussein Obama political cover just ahead of the 2012 presidential election.

 

A foundational pillar of Obama’s re-election campaign was promoting the myth that he was a great statesman, having killed Osama bin Laden and having made the nation and world safe from Islamic terror groups like al-Qa’ida.

 

However, on September 11, 2012, just eight weeks before the presidential election, a highly organized terrorist attack claimed the lives of U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans: Sean Smith, Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty. This brazen attack threatened to derail Obama’s muscular foreign policy façade, so his White House spin machine – funded by taxpayers and not campaign donations – set about to alter the Benghazi talking points. In doing so, they hoped to provide Obama with vital political cover, thereby ensuring that the debacle didn’t tip the balance in a very tight presidential race.

 

We wrote then, “State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland warned that the original CIA talking points ‘could be abused by members [of Congress] to beat up the State Department for not paying attention to warnings, so why would we want to feed that?’ We believe that Nuland and Ben Rhodes, who is Assistant to the President and Deputy National Security Advisor for Strategic Communications and Speechwriting, were the key conspirators in the talking point alterations, though the Rhodes alterations were certainly signed off by someone much further up the White House chain of command. If sufficient evidence is ever uncovered to implicate Rhodes and Nuland, they will likely become Obama’s ‘cutouts,’ who will be encouraged to ‘fall on their swords’ in order to provide Obama plausible deniability.”

 

We also wrote, “The primary CIA architect of the politically motivated alteration of the Benghazi narrative was undoubtedly then-CIA Deputy Director, Michael J. Morell, who has deep ties to former Secretary of State Hilary Clinton and is vying for a key post in her administration if she is victorious in 2016. Morell claims that the talking points were sent to the White House for informational purposes only, and nothing was ‘produced with any political agenda in mind.’ But it is clear from our sources, that Morell, Nuland and Rhodes all had a hand in altering the talking points with the specific objective of providing political cover for Obama and Clinton.”

 

This week, the assertions in our analysis last year have been vindicated.

On Tuesday, as a result of a lawsuit filed by Judicial Watch, Obama White House staff released a briefing email, which exposes the conspiracy to alter the Benghazi talking points ahead of scheduled media appearances by Obama’s UN Ambassador Susan Rice, during which she asserted that “protests over an Internet video” resulted in the deaths of Ambassador Stevens and his security personnel – that it was not a highly organized act of Islamist terrorism.

 

On September 14, 2012, three days after the Benghazi attack (despite the fact that CIA operatives on the ground said the attack had nothing to do with an Internet video, a claim that was clear to all concerned), Ben Rhodes drafted and sent a key talking points memo on Benghazi to top White House officials including Press Secretary Jay Carney, Deputy Press Secretary Joshua Earnest, then-White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer, then-White House Deputy Communications Director Jennifer Palmieri, then-National Security Council Director of Communications Erin Pelton, Special Assistant to the Press Secretary Howli Ledbetter, and then-White House Senior Advisor and political strategist Davie Plouffe.

 

That email was entitled “PREP CALL with Susan,” as in Susan Rice.

 

The memo noted the “Goal” was to “underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure of policy,” and instructs the recipients to portray Obama as “steady and statesmanlike” and to “reinforce the President and Administration’s strength and steadiness in dealing with difficult challenges.”

 

Though she clearly knew this was not the truth, Rice repeated this assertion in five TV news interviews in one day: “What happened this week in Benghazi was a result, a direct result, of a heinous and offensive video….”

 

There are two key questions this White House fabrication raises.

 

First, who provided and signed off on Ben Rhodes’ Benghazi talking point lies to protect Obama’s re-election campaign?

 

Second, who authorized the cover-up of Rhodes’ cover-up by redacting the emails sent to congressional investigators in order to conceal the fact that the Benghazi lies originated in the White House?

 

Comment | Share

 

In retrospect, for more context of the gravity of this cover-up, let’s review what has been said to advance the Obama administration cover-up.

 

Three days after the attack, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stood in front of the flag-draped caskets of four dead Americans and asserted, “We’ve seen rage and violence directed at American embassies over an awful Internet video that we had nothing to do with. It is hard for the American people to make sense of that, because it is senseless and totally unacceptable.” Clinton shamelessly assured Charles Woods, the father of slain former Navy SEAL Tyrone Woods, “We will make sure the person who made that film is arrested and prosecuted.”

 

Two weeks after the Benghazi attack, Obama himself told the UN General Assembly, “That is what we saw play out in the last two weeks, as a crude and disgusting video sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world.”

 

In November 2012, just before the election, and seven weeks after receiving Rhodes’ talking points, Jay Carney declared, “It has been repeatedly said by some of the critics on this issue that the White House provided talking points and that has been categorically refuted not just by us but by the intelligence community and yet it is still periodically said on the air, um, and it’s just wrong. The White House involvement and any changes made to the so-called talking points was extremely minimal and non-substantive.”

 

Carney also insisted, “The unrest around the region has been in response to this video. We were not aware of any actionable intelligence indicating that an attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi was planned or imminent.”

 

In January 2013, responding to Senate Foreign Relations Committee questions about the altered talking points, Clinton rebutted in anger, “What difference, at this point, does it make?”

 

The difference, of course, is that we know she and Obama were lying.

 

In May 2013, Obama said, “The whole issue of this, uh, of talking points frankly throughout this process has been a sideshow.”

 

That month, Carney insisted again, “The only edits made here at the White House were stylistic and non-substantive. They corrected the description of the building, or the facility in Benghazi, from consulate to diplomatic facility and the like.”

 

Hillary Clinton’s replacement as Secretary of State, John Kerry, who as you recall launched Obama into the national limelight by featuring him as the keynote speaker at the 2004 Democrat Convention, lamented, “I hate to see it turned into a pure, prolonged, political process that really doesn’t tell us anything new about the facts.”

 

Clearly it is Obama who fabricated this lie and turned it “into a pure, prolonged, political process.”

 

As late as February of this year, Susan Rice insisted, “that information, uh, turned out in some respects not to be 100% correct, but the notion that somehow I, or anyone else in the administration, misled the American people, is patently false and I think that’s been amply demonstrated.”

 

Clearly it was not “100% correct” but, rather, 100% fabricated.

 

Let me now pose a third question about this White House fabrication: Does anyone believe that Barack Obama was not fully aware of the first cover-up, and then the cover-up of that cover-up?

 

Obama mastered the “Art of the BIG Lie” long before he had presidential aspirations, but the Benghazi cover-up, and the subsequent cover-up of that cover-up, is a terrible affront to the memory of four dead Americans and a grievous insult to their friends and families.

 

Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton notes, “Now we know the Obama White House’s chief concern about the Benghazi attack was making sure that President Obama looked good.”

 

According to Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Rhodes’ email is “a smoking gun proving beyond any doubt that the story told by the administration about Benghazi was politically motivated and fabricated.” That assessment is now echoed by other Republicans.

 

So, is there enough journalistic integrity remaining in the Leftmedia to call Obama out on this conspiracy and follow the chain of command to the top? Probably not – I suspect they will just yawn and move on. The MSM has substituted style for substance, and most of their consumers have swallowed the bait.

 

Comment | Share

 

For the record, in 1972, Richard Nixon did not know about the politically-motivated plan to break into DNC headquarters at the Watergate. However, once the burglary plan pointed toward White House staff, Nixon DID know about White House staff efforts to fabricate political cover so it would not undermine Nixon’s 1972 re-election campaign. Notably, that political cover did not involve the murder of a U.S. Ambassador and three other Americans. The question now, as Sen. Howard Baker famously asked during the Senate Watergate investigation two years after the break-in: “What did the President know and when did he know it?” When that question was answered, Nixon had the decency to resign rather than put the nation through an impeachment trial.

 

Investigative journalists with The Washington Post played a key role in exposing that White House cover-up to protect Nixon in advance of his re-election campaign. Where are they today?

 

And finally, a couple of footnotes.

 

First, The Washington Post, in a profile on Ben Rhodes, described him as a “straight shooter.”

 

In that profile, Rhodes told the Post, “I very much wanted to be a fiction writer.”

Apparently, he became just that.

 

Rhodes is the author of Obama’s opening apology tour speeches in Berlin and to the Muslim world in Cairo. He also wrote Obama’s Afghanistan retreat speech and his acceptance speech for that utterly unearned Nobel Peace Prize.

 

And second, a month before the 2012 election and amid the presidential candidate debates, we sent our “Grassroots Memo to Mitt Romney” to his campaign communications director in order to provide critical grassroots perspective on the issues WE needed Romney to address.

 

Key among the issues we insisted he should address in the last debate, we wrote, “Some of the 24-hour news recyclers are asking question about the Benghazi, Libya attack, but have yet to ask the right questions. … Obama and his key administrators insisted that protests over a web video led to attack in Libya, knowing full well that it was actually a well-executed terrorist assault. This obfuscation clearly was, and remains, a political calculation in advance of his re-election, to sustain the façade that Obama is a ‘statesman’ and wise Commander in Chief.”

 

We know Romney’s communications director received our memo, and she and her staff summarily ignored it – and the rest, as they say, is history.

 

Pro Deo et Constitutione – Libertas aut Mors
Semper Fortis Vigilate Paratus et Fidelis

____________________________

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 © 2014 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 (www.patriotpost.us/subscribe/)”