Monthly Archives: January 2016

UPDATE ON EMAILS AND QUICKIE ON TRUMP

First, I found another article on the difficulty involved in getting classified material from classified systems to unclassified systems which makes it abundantly clear that both Hillary and her staff knew precisely what they were doing and intentionally violated the law.

http://thefederalist.com/2016/01/25/how-hillary-got-classified-information-onto-her-private-email/

[One interesting thing that you will learn if you read the article is that the genius that is Hillary flunked the DC Bar examine.]

Now just a quick nod to the Donald.  I think he would be a lousy president but certainly better than Cruz.  The one thing I wanted to say is that I like that Trump is not afraid to take the gloves off and fight.  Hillary calls him a sexist as she plays the gender card and he eviscerates her and her hubby for being hypocrites on the issue.  No one else would have except maybe Fiorina, and the result is that a lot of young women who didn’t know the sordid enabling past of Hillary are starting to question Hillary’s bona fides as a feminist, particularly with regards to issues of sexual abuse.

I believe that Republicans lost the last presidential election because Romney was unwilling to take it to Obama.  To win this time, it is important that whoever gets the nomination be willing to bring up all the unpleasantness, failures and lies that are Hillary and fight to win!  This is no time to worry about political correctness, too much is at stake.

HILLARY’S DISASTEROUS EMAIL SERVER AND THE BIG LIES SHE HAS TOLD ABOUT IT

It is looking increasingly likely that Hillary will not escape her criminal conduct towards our national security. It would appear from the latest revelations that it is extremely unlikely that the FBI would fail to refer charges to the Department of Justice, and that alone should be enough to derail the train wreck that is Hillary Clinton. Not to mention the fact that the FBI is also looking into the potential [read that as undoubtedly true] corruption involving quid pro quo transactions where she approved some activity or contract as Secretary of State (SOS) and then either the Clinton slush fund or Bill got money. More likely given their neediness, they got the money first and then she gave the approvals.

Let’s review the sequence of events briefly.

  1. On the day she is sworn in as SOS, she sets up a private server in her New York home on which she conducted all her official and private email business while in office.
  2. When it is discovered that she had done this, she states that at no time was there any classified material either sent or received on her private server.
  3. When it quickly became apparent that that was a lie, she changed her lie to state that no material “marked” classified was ever sent or received on her private server.
  4. Eventually, under pressure, she turns over her server to the FBI after deleting what she claims were her personal, private, non-governmental emails.
  5. We learn that she had more than a thousand classified emails on her server, several of which contain Top Secret, Special Access Program, information including one which involved info potentially identifying a human intelligence resource [read that as undercover spy] which is a potential life threatening situation.
  6. We learned early on that she wiped – and no not like with a cloth or something – some official emails before turning it over as Sidney Blumenthal provided the Benghazi Congressional Committee with several that were not on her server.
  7. We know that there were classes of material on her server that are born classified, for example Foreign Government Information. Thus marked or not she had to know that national security information was on her private server.
  8. Just this past week, we learned that she directed a staffer who was having problems faxing her a classified briefing paper to remover the headers etc. and send it through unsecure means. Gee I wonder why nothing on her server was “marked” classified.
  9. She claims that all the classified info on her server was classified after the fact and not while it was under her control and on her server. However, the intelligence agencies involved have all said that is false.
  10. Robert Gates has stated that it is extremely likely that Russia, Iran, China and potentially others hacked her unsecure server, which would mean that they have not only what she turned over but all the stuff she had wiped. You can bet that information contains plenty of blackmail fodder, particularly with respect to the potential criminal conflicts of interest between her job as SOS and her family slush fund.

 

There is no doubt that Hillary set up her private server from the get go to evade the requirements of the Freedom of Information Act and other federal record keeping requirement. She knew she was running for president in this election cycle and wanted to make sure there was no paper trail of her blunderful time at State. There is also no doubt that she knew that much classified info was on that server in violation of law.

Lest we forget, back before the scam came to light she bragged about all the super secret material she was privy too.

“Further, Mrs. Clinton’s own memoir, “Hard Choices” (2014), apparently written at a time when she wished to stress how delicate were the secrets she knew, and how carefully she handled them, reports that she “often received warnings from Department security officials to leave our [BlackBerrys], laptops—anything that communicated with the outside world—on the plane with their batteries removed to prevent foreign intelligence services from compromising them.

“Even in friendly settings we conducted business under strict security precautions, taking care where and how we read secret material and used our technology,” Mrs. Clinton tells readers. She even read classified material “inside an opaque tent in a hotel room. In less well-equipped settings, we were told to improvise by reading sensitive material with a blanket over our head.”

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/2016/01/22/clinton039s_emails_criminal_charges_are_justified_374496.html by Michael Mukasey.

Now all the sudden she thinks you can wipe a server with a cloth and she never dealt in classified material. Please!

And to top it all off, today we learned that she had her aides cut and paste material off of classified systems to non-classified systems without their classified markings in over 1300 instances. No wonder nothing was marked classified on her server.

“It takes a very conscious effort to move a classified email or cable from the classified systems over to the unsecured open system and then send it to Hillary Clinton’s personal email account,” said Raymond Fournier, a veteran Diplomatic Security Service special agent. “That’s no less than a two-conscious-step process.”

He says it’s clear from some of the classified emails made public that someone on Clinton’s staff essentially “cut and pasted” content from classified cables into the messages sent to her. The classified markings are gone, but the content is classified at the highest levels — and so sensitive in nature that “it would have been obvious to Clinton.” Most likely the information was, in turn, emailed to her via NIPRNet.

To work around the closed, classified systems, which are accessible only by secure desktop workstations whose hard drives must be removed and stored overnight in a safe, Clinton’s staff would have simply retyped classified information from the systems into the non-classified system or taken a screen shot of the classified document, Fournier said. “Either way, it’s totally illegal.”

FBI agents are zeroing in on three of Clinton’s top department aides. Most of the Clinton emails deemed classified by intelligence agency reviewers were sent to her by her chief of staff Cheryl Mills or deputy chiefs Huma Abedin and Jake Sullivan.”

http://nypost.com/2016/01/24/hillarys-team-copied-intel-off-top-secret-server-to-email/

I have had high hopes that the FBI would make a criminal referral of charges against Clinton and her aides to the Justice Department. Until today, I didn’t believe that Justice would go forward with indicting Hillary. I think a criminal referral would be enough to put an end to the disaster that is Hillary, but if what’s been reported today involving the cutting and pasting of classified material from classified systems to non-classified systems after removing the classification markings is determined to be true by the FBI, Obama’s Justice Department and Attorney General Loretta Lynch will have no choice but to indict. It would put the lie to everything she has said about her server and show a consciousness of wrongdoing by intentionally scamming the classification systems.

It also makes abundantly clear that Hillary considers herself above the law and that national security is an after-thought to the women who would be commander-in-chief.

Next up Hillary’s war on women.

ADD-ON TO LAST RANT

Apparently some people didn’t understand the point of my last rant.  So I want to make clear exactly what I was talking about.  There is a huge difference between campaigning and governing.  You can say anything you want to get elected, but once you do you have to recognize the realities of what’s involved in governing.  Obama to the contrary notwithstanding, this is not a kingdom or a dictatorship.  Elected officials have to work together to get anything done, and as long as we have a two party system, without enough votes to prevent a filibuster in the senate, Republicans can’t unilaterally dictate the outcomes  —  particularly when the president is a Democrat and his party has enough votes to sustain a veto as happened when the bill went up to Obama that would have repealed Obamacare and defunded planned parenthood.

That’s why it’s important to make sure we elect a Republican president this year.  With a Republican president and Republican majorities in both houses of Congress, you can dictate the agenda and undo the mess that Obama has done.  And that’s why I expect my Congressman to keep his eye on the prize – a Republican president – and not do anything stupid that could prevent that from happening, like shutting down the government to make an ideological point.  Anyone who would rather make a point than win total control of the agenda in November isn’t bright enough to be my Congressman because he obviously doesn’t understand the constitutional reality of our system of government.  You accomplish the things you can and you avoid doing things that would prevent attaining the prize.

Next 2 rants will be on Hillary’s disastrous campaign and on the problems with the left holy grail of multiculturalism and the mess its made of Europe.

 

WINDMILL TILTING

Just a short rant today before I continue on Hillary’s war against women.

Recently an individual who has read some of my postings brought to my attention a person running for Congress from this district.  I am not going to mention any names because it’s actually unnecessary.  This individual is apparently supporting the Republican challenger to the incumbent Republican Congressmen.  In point of fact the Clayton News recently ran a front page story detailing the two individuals and in particular the reason that the incumbent is being challenged  —  namely because he voted for the recent Omnibus budget bill and therefore is not sufficiently conservative.

People, we can all agree that that legislation leaves a lot to be desired.  However, that the incumbent voted for it is reason for me to vote for the incumbent.  I’ve had enough of quixotic actions by the likes of Ted Cruz and others which only hurt the cause.  You need to keep your eye on the prize and that’s the White House and both the Senate and the House at which time it will be possible to deconstruct Obama’s ‘legacy’.

Meaningless gestures aren’t governing.  After the budget passed, Ryan and McConnell put together and passed a law which would have repealed Obamacare and defunded Planned Parenthood.  It was of course vetoed, and the votes to override the veto aren’t there.  However, this was the intelligent, adult way to handle the issue.  Had they sent an omnibus budget bill up to the President that did that, it would also have been vetoed and another government shutdown would have in all likelihood occurred.  And you know who would be blamed for all the hardships that occur when government shuts down.

This is an important election year!  It’s time for the grownups to take charge and insure that nothing is done to impede a Republican from beating Hillary in November.  We don’t need petulant children, a la Ted Cruz, throwing non productive temper tantrums for self aggrandizement.  We need elected officials who understand what’s at stake, not people pushing their pet peeves.  The fact that someone would challenge the incumbent for acting responsibly tells me all I need to know about the challenger!!

HILLARY TO TURN BILL COSBY LOOSE TO CAMPAIGN FOR HER AND HER WAR ON WOMEN

Just kidding, the Bill C she is turning loose is Bill Clinton — but what’s the real difference.  Bill Clinton has been accused of sexual harassment and assault (including at least one allegation of rape) ten or more times.

The interesting thing to me at this point is that when Trump first brought up the issue of Bill’s war on women in response to Hillary calling him a sexist, the media immediately went into a big debate over whether Bill’s past peccadillos were a legitimate subject of discussion in Hillary’s campaign.  Of course they are when you’re campaigning as a champion of all things female, alleging that the other side is waging a war on women, and making your gender a central point in your campaign.  If she had in fact asked Bill Cosby to campaign for her, do you think anyone would say his alleged sexual assaults were off limits?  Hell no!!  So why should it be any different for the other Bill C?

[For an interesting insight into why Bill Clinton gets a pass, here’s a link to an article by Carrie Lukas giving a good explanation.  ” The Bill Clinton Effect, Why Liberals Treat Women Worse.  http://acculturated.com/bill-clinton-effect/]

But to me all that discussion missed what I think is the more important point.  Hillary enabled Bill’s activities.  She actively sought to denigrate and destroy the women who accused her husband of sexual assaults.  She was part and parcel of the attack machine against Lewinski, Flowers, Jones et al.

For the first couple of days, no one raised this point, and unfortunately, being the lazy SOB that I am, I didn’t run right to the computer to point it out and now others have written on the subject.

Katherine Timpf has an excellent piece on the subject with a couple of good quotes for your perusal:

“But here’s the thing: The real issue isn’t whether or not to attack Bill to indirectly attack Hillary — it’s about directly attacking Hillary for how she herself treated the women involved. Hillary Clinton claims to be pro-women, yet has actively worked to ruin lives of so many of them. She’s running on a “feminist platform” — she’s even dared to say that sexual-assault survivors have a “right to be believed” — despite the fact that what she did to the women who accused Bill went far beyond not believing them. She attacked them. When allegations of sexual misconduct emerged during Bill’s 1992 presidential run, she’s reported to have said “Who is going to find out? These women are trash. Nobody’s going to believe them.” Multiple people also report that she called the women “sluts” and “whores” — you know, for daring to be raped. A private investigator named Ivan Duda claims that, after Bill lost his second governor’s race, Hillary told him: “I want you to get rid of all these b****** he’s seeing . . . I want you to give me the names and addresses and phone numbers, and we can get them under control.” ”

  •  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

“Some people, thankfully, have begun to notice this hypocrisy. Last month, a reporter asked Hillary if her comment that all sexual assault survivors had a “right to be believed” meant that we should also believe Broaddrick, Willey and Paula Jones (who sued Bill for sexual harrassment in 1994). Hillary’s answer: “Everybody should be believed at first until they are disbelieved based on evidence.” Um. Just one problem: There is absolutely no evidence disproving the stories of Broaddrick, Willey or Jones, and you would think that “feminists” would stand with them and the others against Hillary — but it seems they’re too caught up in the hype of a potential female president to do anything but support her. But I’m not. I’m a woman; I support women — and that’s exactly why I could never support Hillary Clinton.”

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/429138/hillary-clinton-feminist-bill-clinton-sexual-assault.

And here’s more information on Hillary’s participation in slandering Bill’s accusers:

“Feminism died in 1998 when Hillary allowed henchlings and Democrats to demonize Monica (Lewinsky) as an unbalanced stalker, and when Gloria Steinem defended Mr. Clinton against Kathleen Willey and Paula Jones by saying he had merely made clumsy passes, then accepted rejection, so there was no sexual harassment involved. As to his dallying with an emotionally immature (22-year-old), Ms. Steinem noted, ‘Welcome sexual behavior is about as relevant to sexual harassment as borrowing a car is to stealing one.’ ”

Steinem must not have attended any human resources lectures lately. And accusations from Juanita Broaddrick are worse: Clinton persuaded her to have coffee with him in her hotel room during a conference of nursing home administrators in 1978. She alleges that he then forced her on to the bed, where he held her down, bit her lips and raped her. Broaddrick, too, was attacked by the Clinton camp, but as Alex Griswold wrote in Mediaite, “The media and Democrats alike elected not to believe a single accusation” against him, adding  that “Clinton’s own stalwart ally James Carville was just as blatant: ‘Drag a $100 bill through a trailer park, there’s no telling what you’ll find,’ he said.””

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2015/12/30/hillary-clinton-donald-trump-war-on-women-sexism-bill-clinton-column/78042704/

For another insight into just how much Hillary really cares about women check out the following link.

http://freebeacon.com/politics/hillary-clintons-long-history-of-targeting-women/

“Hillary’s aggressive attitude was not limited to those who accused her husband of sexual misconduct: other men received the benefit of the doubt from Hillary when she needed their support politically. When former Sen. Bob Packwood was accused of sexual harassment, Clinton told her friend Blair that she was “tired of all those whiney women,” and that she needed Packwood on health care.”

(In my defense for being lazy, I would point out that during the first Republican debate when Megyn Kelly pointed out some sexist and/or demeaning remarks made by Trump about women and asked how he would respond in a debate with Hillary if she brought that up, I said to friends that he should bring up her trailer park trash, sluts and bimbo comments about Bill’s sexual assault and harassment victims.  So this is not a new thought on my part.)

Furthermore, that Hillary is in fact part and parcel of the  “war on women” is further evidenced by her willingness to take money from some of the biggest abusers of women’s rights in the world.   As even the New York Times has reported:

“But the Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation has accepted tens of millions of dollars in donations from Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Algeria and Brunei — all of which the State Department has faulted over their records on sex discrimination and other human-rights issues.

The department’s 2011 human rights report on Saudi Arabia, the last such yearly review prepared during Mrs. Clinton’s tenure, tersely faulted the kingdom for “a lack of equal rights for women and children,” and said violence against women, human trafficking and gender discrimination, among other abuses, were all “common” there.

Saudi Arabia has been a particularly generous benefactor to the Clinton Foundation, giving at least $10 million since 2001, according to foundation disclosures. At least $1 million more was donated by Friends of Saudi Arabia, co-founded by a Saudi prince.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/09/us/politics/hillary-clinton-faces-test-of-record-aiding-women.html?_r=0

I suppose it would be fair to say in her defense on this point that the activities of the Bill and Hill slush fund have proven that they will take money from absolutely anyone including the devil himself if offered.

So please people, let’s put an end to all the nonsense about Hillary being a feminist and fighting for women.  Hillary is an egomaniacal, power crazed, money hungry, serial liar who would do or say anything to be the first female president of the U.S..  I have absolutely no problem with a women being president, just not this “looney tune”!

 

 

 

QUICK UPDATE

Just a quick update on global warming issues.  There are new peer reviewed studies out which indicate that only 36% of “scientists” believe that anthropogenic global warming is real.

“First is a peer-reviewed paper showing that only 36% of 1,077 geoscientists and engineers surveyed believe in the man-made global warming crisis as defined by the United Nations’ Kyoto model.

According to the paper, the Kyoto position expresses “the strong belief that climate change is happening, that it is not a normal cycle of nature, and humans are the main or central cause.”

Thirty-six percent is not insignificant. But it certainly is a long way from the oft-cited 97% “consensus” among scientists that man is causing temperatures to change.

Researchers behind “Science or Science Fiction? Professionals’ Discursive Construction of Climate Change,” which appeared in Organization Studies, also found “the proportion of papers” collected from a science database “that explicitly endorsed anthropogenic climate change has fallen from 75%” between 1993 and 2003 “to 45% from 2004 to 2008.”

The Heartland Institute’s James Taylor reminds us in Forbes that “survey results show geoscientists (also known as earth scientists) and engineers hold similar views as meteorologists. Two recent surveys of meteorologists revealed similar skepticism of alarmist global warming claims.””

Read More At Investor’s Business Daily: http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/123115-787676-more-global-warming-stories-media-refuse-to-report.htm#ixzz3w6FuuJ2E

It’s been exposed that the 97% figure was manufactured out of thin air and this is just one more stake in that coffin.  So the next time one of the climate alarmist nutcases spouts that 97% nonsense, just look him in the eye and say BULLSHIT!