The Clintons Continue To Clinton

What a mess. Every week, seemingly every other day, there is a new shady revelation about Bill and Hillary Clinton that manages to top the last one. For them there seems to be no bottom; for their supporters, there seems to be no self-respect.

The hundreds of millions of dollars from corrupt governments, billionaires with agendas and God knows who else. The server wiped so thoroughly – and no, not with a cloth – you can tell someone learned the importance of cleanliness from the blue dress. And now we learn Bill, the former president, with more money than he possibly could spend in his lifetime, sought approval to take even more from some of the worst human garbage ever to walk upright. (More on this later.)

It’s enough to make the sane wonder what the hell is wrong with these people.

But Clinton lovers are not sane. They are not rational. Hillary could give a press conference and explicitly call her supporters the dumbest people on the planet while Bill stood behind her throwing puppies and kittens into a wood-chipper, and she’d still have a base of support.

A new Quinnipiac Poll found the top three words Americans associated with her were: 1. Liar; 2. Dishonest; 3. Untrustworthy. The first positive word people associated with her was “experience,” which was given by less than half the number of respondents who answered “liar.”

That is awful, yet she is the best the Democratic Party has to offer.

As “the best,” Hillary Clinton is now so weak that Joe Biden – JOE FREAKING BIDEN – is now seriously considered a possible savior for the party’s chances.

It’s because the Clintons are known by those three words – dishonest, untrustworthy liars.

How else to explain Bill Clinton, a former president and even then a potential future first husband, asking for (and not getting) State Department permission to deliver a paid speech in the Democratic Republic of the Congo?

Women are terrorized in the Congo, routinely raped and worse. Why on Earth would anyone, let alone a former president, wish to speak there and, as part of the package, have a photo-op with the country’s leaders?

Via: Townhall

Continue Reading.....

Email Scandal Deepens: Surprise: State Department Can't Find BlackBerrys of Clinton's Closest Aides, Say They Were Probably Destroyed

Do old phone models get turned in, replaced and ultimately destroyed? Yes. Does it make a bad situation surrounding Hillary Clinton's wiped out personal email server look worse? Absolutely. 

According to a report published in The Hill late yesterday, BlackBerry devices belonging to Clinton's closest aides were likely destroyed. 

State Department BlackBerry devices issued to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's aides Cheryl Mills and Huma Abedin have likely been destroyed or sold off, the department said in a court filing on Wednesday.

Mills and Abedin “were each issued BlackBerry devices,” department Executive Secretary Joseph Macmanus wrote in the filing.

The department, however, “has not located any such device,” and believes that they would have been destroyed or removed from the department's control.

“Because the devices issues to Ms. Mills and Ms. Abedin would have been outdated models, in accordance with standard operating procedures those devices would have been destroyed or excessed,” Macmanus added.

State Department spokesman John Kirby confirmed later on Wednesday afternoon that the two former officials’ devices were returned to the department after they left office.

“They belong to the United States government, and when you leave an agency you just turn it in,” Kirby said. “So yes, they were turned in. Where they are now I couldn’t begin to tell you.

“It’s also likely, because this was a while ago, that those devices may have been destroyed,” he added. “I don’t have the records of it because they were old and outmoded and often times we purchase new devices” in those circumstances.

And here's this little nugget:

In the same court filing, the State Department confirmed its previous claim that Clinton used a personal BlackBerry during her time in office that was not issued by the federal government. 

You know what that means? That Clinton was using an unsecure device, which contained top secret classified information, with an unsecure personal email system and server.

Last week we learned the personal server Hillary Clinton was forced to turn over the the FBI was wiped clean of data beforehand. The good news is, the FBI can recover at least some of what was erased.

Meanwhile, Clinton Press Secretary Brian Fallon is trying to argue that any classified information the former Secretary of State was in possession of was given to her as a "passive recipient of unwitting information."

Via: Townhall

Continue Reading....

Clinton Double Standard? Meet the Marine Being Punished For Sharing Classified Information To Warn Against An Attack

As the situation surrounding Hillary Clinton's possession of top secret, classified information on her personal email server continues to get worse, comparisons between the former Secretary of State and those prosecuted for improper handling of classified information are being made. Of course, the case of General David Petraeus has come up, but there are others in the military who have been prosecuted or severely punished for doing far less to damage national security in comparison to the Democrat presidential candidate.

Take for example Marine Reserves Major Jason Brezler, who exposed classified information in 2012 in order to warn fellow Marines about corrupt and violent Afghan Police Chief Asadullah Sherzad. Eventually, Sherzad instructed one of his minor officers to carry out an insider attack by killing three Marines who were working out and unarmed in their gym. ... .

Brezler is facing a dishonorable discharge from the Marine Corps for providing requested information to Congressman Peter King that was deemed classified.

Via: Townhall

Continue Reading.....

Grassley: Clinton's Attorney Doesn't Have Proper Security Clearance to Handle Her Top Secret Emails

By now you know former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had not one, not two, buthundreds of emails containing classified information passing through her unsecure, personal email server. Since the revelations of Clinton's use of a personal server came to light earlier this year, her attorney David Kendall and the law firm he works for have often been consulted by Congress to produce requested email documentation. In fact, Kendall has been in charge of a number of thumb drives containing Clinton's emails, some of which are classified as top secret. 

By now you know former Secretary of State 

Hillary Clinton had not one, not two, but hundreds of emails containing classified information passing through her unsecure, personal email server. Since the revelations of Clinton's use of a personal server came to light earlier this year, her attorney David Kendall and the law firm he works for have often been consulted by Congress to produce requested email documentation. In fact, Kendall has been in charge of a number of thumb drives containing Clinton's emails, some of which are classified as top secret. 

Now that we know Clinton had hundreds of classified documents on her server, Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee Chuck Grassley is pointing out Kendall, and the attorneys he works with on Clinton's behalf, don't have the proper high level security clearance needed to handle top secret, classified information. 

"Recent news reports indicate that as Secretary Clinton’s attorney you had a security clearance that was used to possess her official emails. In fact, according to a Washington Post report, the Department of State allegedly instructed you on “appropriate measures for physically securing” her classified emails.[1] However, since that report, the Intelligence Community Inspector General (IC IG) notified the Judiciary Committee that at least two emails on Secretary Clinton’s server were – and are – classified at the Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information (TS/SCI) level. Importantly, according to the IC IG and Department of State Inspector General, the emails were classified at that level when created," Grassley wrote in a letter to Kendall Monday (bolding is mine). "In light of that particular classification, which generally requires advanced protocols such as a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF) and other similar arrangements to possess and view, it appears the FBI has determined that your clearance is not sufficient to allow you to maintain custody of the emails. Consistent with that determination, the FBI is now in custody of not only the thumb drives previously in your possession that allegedly contain all of Secretary Clinton’s emails, but also Secretary Clinton’s personal server that was used to maintain the top secret emails outside of a government facility.

"Further reporting indicates that Secretary Clinton may have provided you copies of her emails in December 2014 and that government officials realized that the emails contained classified information in May 2015 yet the Department of State did not deliver a safe to store the thumb drives until July 2015.[3] Thus, since at least May 2015 and possibly December 2014, it appears that in addition to not having an adequate security clearance, you did not have the appropriate tools in place to secure the thumb drives. Even with the safe, there are questions as to whether it was an adequate mechanism to secure TS/SCI material.[4] Given the importance of securing and protecting classified information, especially TS/SCI material, it is imperative to confirm when, how, and why you, and any of your associates, received a security clearance in connection with your representation of Ms. Clinton and whether it was active while you had custody of Secretary Clinton’s emails," Grassley continued.

Because Clinton's possession of classified information on her personal server has prompted a criminal FBI investigation, Grassley also asked Kendall whether the former Secretary's security clearance has been suspended until the inquiry is over. 

Meanwhile, we learned over the weekend that the same prosecutor who built a case against General David Petraeus for improper handling of classified information, is looking at the Clinton case. 

Via: Townhall

Continue Reading....

[VIDEO] Hillary Dodges Keystone Question at NH Town Hall: I’ll Let You Know Later

At a New Hampshire town hall Tuesday morning, prohibitive Democratic front runner Hillary Clinton was asked, “yes or no,” whether she would approve the Keystone Pipeline project as president. She took the question out to dinner and drinks and told it she’d call it in a couple days.

“This is President Obama’s decision, and I am not going to second guess him,” Clinton responded. “I want to wait and see what he and Secretary [John] Kerry decide. If it’s undecided when I become president, I will answer your question.”

Via: Mediaite

Continue Reading....

Concealed Carry Permits For Women Up 270 Percent Since 2007

Leah wrote about some great news over the weekend regarding concealed carry permits. The Crime Prevention Center reported that the number of permits has increased since 2007–and the murder rate has dropped. The main reason is that President Obama has possibly become the greatest gun salesmen of all time (I may be exaggerating).

“The researchers found that the change in trends with regard to permits and gun sales is directly related to Barack Obama’s presidency. Simply put, the greater the push for gun control in the wake of several mass shootings, the more Americans head to the gun shop,” wrote Leah.

Before Noah Rothman went to Hot Air–he’s now with Commentary–he was atMediaite where he reported on a 2014 Applied Economics Letters’ study that showed between 1980-2009, “the results of the present study suggest that states with restrictions on the carrying of concealed weapons had higher gun-related murder rates than other states. It was also found that assault weapons bans did not significantly affect murder rates at the state level.”

Of course, liberals disagree, but regarding women and firearms the Crime Prevention Center noted another interesting find: women obtaining concealed carry permits rose 270 percent since 2007. Additionally, some findings found that minorities lining up for their concealed carry permit is increasing twice the rate of whites.

• The number of concealed handgun permits is increasing at an ever- increasing rate. Over the past year, 1.7 million additional new permits have been issued – a 15.4% increase in just one single year. This is the largest ever single-year increase in the number of concealed handgun permits.
• 5.2% of the total adult population has a permit.
• Five states now have more than 10% of their adult population withconcealed handgun permits.
• In ten states, a permit is no longer required to carry in all or virtually all of the state. This is a major reason why legal carrying handguns is growing somuch faster than the number of permits.
• Since 2007, permits for women has increased by 270% and for men by 156%.
• Some evidence suggests that permit holding by minorities is increasing more than twice as fast as for whites.
• Between 2007 and 2014, murder rates have fallen from 5.6 to 4.2 (preliminary estimates) per 100,000. This represents a 25% drop in the murder rate at the same time that the percentage of the adult population with permits soared by 178%. Overall violent crime also fell by 25 percent over that period of time.

It’s confirmation of what’s been reported already; that women are lining up across the country for their concealed carry permits­–and now we have a percentage of that increase. They’re the next frontier in the gun industry, and even liberals are noticing that these ladies exercising their constitutional right to bear arms often “defy stereotypes.” Fancy that.

Via: Townhall

Continue Reading....

Minnesota Schools Close So Teachers Can Play With Dolls, Learn About Teaching Islam

Each year, Minnesota government schools close for two days (just before the weekend, of course) so teachers’ union members can gather at a conference organized by their union.

It’s meant to “inspire teachers,” EAGnews.org reported, and the conference includes a session titled, “Using Persona Dolls to Promote Social Emotional Intelligence and Acceptance of Diversity.”

The union describes it this way: “Used around the world, persona dolls are lifelike dolls with personalities and stories you create. The dolls become members of your classroom community and children learn by empathizing with the dolls and giving them heartfelt advice on the same kinds of situations they struggle with daily in the classroom and on the playground.”

That’s weird. Teachers are taking time away from the classroom to learn how to play with dolls?

The conference also includes a workshop on how to teach about Islam. The union says about the session:

“An expert panel will present information on teaching about Islam in the context of social studies and world religion. They will share perspectives on how educators can help improve intercultural communication and well-being for immigrant and refugee students and families from Muslim countries.”

That sounds nice. Who’s betting they won’t hear anything about the September 11, 2001 hijackers’ jihad or suicide bombers blowing up American soldiers or Israeli children? And why the focus on only one religion?

And of course no teachers union conference would be complete without a session about the importance of the upcoming presidential election (it will become an Obama rally), and a discussion about how education reform efforts are misguided and dangerous.

Couldn’t the union hold this session during the summer, or on a weekend, when there are no classes to interrupt? They have to annually take time out of the school calendar to hold their union pep rally and play with dolls?

Is it any wonder American students are trailing behind their counterparts in South Korea, Estonia and Luxembourg? Is it too much for union teachers to remain in in the classroom and focus on the basics, instead of cancelling classes to talk about their ideas of “social justice” and promote their union’s political agenda?

Via: Townhall

Continue Reading...

Ouch: 6 Million Uninsured Americans Will Pay 'Obamatax'

Months out from the Supreme Court's ruling on the Affordable Care Act, and Americans bombarded by mile-a-minute election coverage, it's easy to forget that ACA implementation is creeping up on us. But today, in a great reminder of the real struggles that we'll still face after November 6th, the Congressional Budget Office released a new estimate of how many will be paying taxes for going without insurance. And, fitting the holding pattern, the number is higher than previously expected.

Overall, 6 million Americans will pay "Obamatax," as some have called it. These are middle class individuals, without insurance because their employer may dropped it owing to expenses, and they're unable to afford it themselves. Furthermore, they're just a sliver of the 30 million Americans who will still have zero health insurance to speak of, affordable or otherwise. The remainder of the uninsured, to whom the tax doesn't apply, either are illegal aliens (so the ACA doesn't apply to them), or they don't make enough to pay income taxes.

The agency said the government will collect about $7 billion from the tax in 2016, and $8 billion a year thereafter.

The projections apply to 2016, the point at which most of President Obama’s health care law will be implemented and the penalty for failing to buy coverage will have risen to its full amount of $695 per person or 2.5 percent of household income, whichever is greater.

The agency gave several reasons for revising its projections. For one thing, Congress has passed legislation requiring Americans to pay back more health insurance subsidies if they’re overpaid, making buying coverage less attractive.

And some low-income Americans may have less access to expanded Medicaid programs than originally expected. Several states are expected to opt out of expanding Medicaid, after the Supreme Court ruled in June that the government can’t respond by stripping away all their funding for the program.

The economy is also improving more slowly than expected, leading to lower wages and salaries that could make it harder to buy coverage.

Since 10% of the country still won't be insured, and a number of those people will be paying the government billions a year in taxes -- thereby costing them more money they don't have -- it's safe to say this law hasn't actually made "care" any more affordable. (Scare quotes employed because, of course, the law's premise was widely flawed in conflating "care" with the very different concept of "insurance," the issue it actually addresses.) It's just another broken promise, which does almost nothing to fix the country's still-broken healthcare system.

Via: TownHall

Continue Reading...