Iowa Caucus Analysis: Winners, Losers, and Unbelievable Spin

ss-120102-iowa-01.660;660;7;70;0Alright. As Maureen McGovern sang, “There’s Got to Be a Morning After”.

Now that the dust has settled, what can we learn from the results of the First Event of the Primary Season, the Iowa Caucus, or, as it is called, the “Hawkeye Caucai”?

Edward J. Rollins is a former assistant to President Ronald Reagan, who managed Reagan’s 1984 reelection campaign. He is presently a senior presidential fellow at Hofstra University and a member of the Political Consultants Hall of Fame. He is Senior Advisor for Teneo Strategy.

Rollins, a Fox News Contributor, has submitted the following op ed, analyzing the results of yesterday’s Iowa Caucus on the Republican Side of the Aisle…

It is always interesting to watch democracy in action and Iowa is ground zero.

Many political pundits and media analysts complain about the attention Iowa receives from candidates and the media because it goes first. But it also is a state filled with people who are willing to pay attention, to go to small events and forums (more than 1,500 have been held) and to show up at a caucus on a cold, often snowy night to participate in a ritual few states duplicate.

Millions of dollars are spent on TV commercials (over 60,000) and organization that Monday night produced a record turnout.

Iowa doesn’t always produce the eventual winners but it does eliminate the losers. With 17 Republican candidates starting this process, there are really only three or four real candidates now with voter support and sufficient monies to go on to the remaining contests.

With a record voter turnout in Iowa, the winner, Ted Cruz goes on with his extraordinary organization and conservative supporters with a big upset.

Marco Rubio, the best debater, came on strong and gained real momentum. He came very close to coming in second. Certainly he has to be viewed as a very serious candidate and the best bet to become the establishment candidate.

Trump is Trump and his special appeal to new voters and the angry anti-Washington element will go on, too, but with unpredictable results. He also paid a price for missing the last debate and fighting Fox News.

Ben Carson held his 10 percent base, but his candidacy is short lived and beyond Iowa has minimal support.

The biggest losers are Bush, Christie and Huckabee. Bush spent the most money and dropped like a rock.

Christie’s bluster, unlike Trump’s, didn’t sell. He has no money and no future in this race.

And Huckabee, who won this race eight years, and thought he could be a serious challenger against Romney in 2012, was a bottom dweller getting less than 2 percent of the vote. He raised no money and has no appeal and barely has enough money left to buy a bus ticket back to Arkansas. He quickly waved the flag of surrender and wisely quit the race.

One more may make the cut after Iowa, but this is the field now and it will be fascinating to watch.

Monday night’s win is a giant victory for Cruz and his team. He won in spite of a greater turnout than in years past and benefited from the dramatic increase in new voters. And now on to New Hampshire!

So, the Grand Old Party’s cup runneth over, They are seemingly blessed with 3 strong contenders for this Presidential Candidate Nomination.

The problem, as history has shown, is the fact that the Iowa Caucus is not exactly a bellweather by which to determine what will happen in November.

The other problem for the Republican Establishment, is the fact that they absolutely cannot stand the candidates that came in first and second.

Rubio, in the past, has proven to be a useful ally.

Things promise to be interesting in the months leading up to the convention.

Meanwhile, over at Propaganda Central for the Democrat Party and the Clinton Machine, otherwise known as the New York Times, Nate Cohn tried to declare the Queen of Mean, the winner of a VIRTUAL TIE.

Bernie Sanders is right: The Iowa Democratic caucuses were a “virtual tie,” especially after you consider that the results aren’t even actual vote tallies, but state delegate equivalents subject to all kinds of messy rounding rules and potential geographic biases.

The official tally, for now, is Hillary Clinton at 49.9 percent, and Mr. Sanders at 49.6 percent with 97 percent of precincts reporting early Tuesday morning.

But in the end, a virtual tie in Iowa is an acceptable, if not ideal, result for Mrs. Clinton and an ominous one for Mr. Sanders. He failed to win a state tailor made to his strengths.

He fares best among white voters. The electorate was 91 percent white, per the entrance polls. He does well with less affluent voters. The caucus electorate was far less affluent than the national primary electorate in 2008. He’s heavily dependent on turnout from young voters, and he had months to build a robust field operation. As the primaries quickly unfold, he won’t have that luxury.

Iowa is not just a white state, but also a relatively liberal one — one of only a few of states where Barack Obama won white voters in the 2008 primary and in both general elections. It is also a caucus state, which tends to attract committed activists.

In the end, Mr. Sanders made good on all of those strengths. He excelled in college towns. He won an astonishing 84 percent of those aged 17 to 29 — even better than Mr. Obama in the 2008 caucus. He won voters making less than $50,000 a year, again outperforming Mr. Obama by a wide margin. He won “very liberal” voters comfortably, 58 to 39 percent.

But these strengths were neatly canceled by Mrs. Clinton’s strengths. She won older voters, more affluent voters, along with “somewhat liberal” and “moderate” Democrats.

This raises a straightforward challenge for Mr. Sanders. He has nearly no chance to do as well among nonwhite voters as Mr. Obama did in 2008. To win, Mr. Sanders will need to secure white voters by at least a modest margin and probably a large one. In the end, Mr. Sanders failed to score a clear win in a state where Mr. Obama easily defeated Mrs. Clinton among white voters.

Mr. Sanders’s strength wasn’t so great as to suggest that he’s positioned to improve upon national polls once the campaign heats up. National polls show him roughly tied with Mrs. Clinton among white voters, and it was the case here as well. It suggests that additional gains for Mr. Sanders in national polls will require him to do better than he did in Iowa, not that the close race in Iowa augurs a close one nationally.

Mr. Sanders will have another opportunity to gain momentum after the New Hampshire primary. He might not get as much credit for a victory there as he would have in Iowa, since New Hampshire borders his home state of Vermont. But it could nonetheless give him another opportunity to overcome his weaknesses among nonwhite voters.

As a general rule, though, momentum is overrated in primary politics. In 2008, for instance, momentum never really changed the contours of the race. Mr. Obama’s victory in Iowa allowed him to make huge gains among black voters, but not much more — the sort of exception that would seem to prove the rule. Mr. Obama couldn’t even put Mrs. Clinton away after winning a string of states in early February.

Continue reading the main story Write A Comment There’s an even longer list of candidates with fairly limited appeal, particularly Republicans like Rick Santorum, Pat Buchanan or Mike Huckabee, who failed to turn early-state victories into broader coalitions.

The polls this year offer additional reasons to doubt it. Mrs. Clinton holds more than 50 percent of the vote in national surveys; her share of the vote never declined in 2008. The polls say that her supporters are more likely to be firmly decided than Mr. Sanders’s voters.

Back-to-back wins in Iowa and New Hampshire by Mr. Sanders might have been enough to overcome that history. The no-decision in Iowa ensures we won’t find out.

Wow.

I haven’t seen a job of spinning like that since Rumpelstiltskin spun straw into gold. (look him up, kids.)

Mr. Cohn, as we say down here in Dixie,

That dog don’t hunt.

  1. While Sanders’ strength does rely with white voters ( which is funny, because you Democrats are supposed to cherish DIVERSITY, but, I digress…), his base of power lies in the New England States, home of his Millennial Minions and a bunch of those college towns, which you referred to.  And the last time I checked, New Hampshire is located in New England.
  2. Mrs. Clinton’s Voter Base have begun to distance themselves, en masse, from her. She carries more baggage than the image of the late Bob Crane (Greg Kinnear) and his buddy (Willem Dafoe), rolling through the airport, in the Biographical movie, “Auto Focus” …And, she’s just as sleazy.
  3. Momentum “never really changed the contours of the race in 2008”, because it was all on Obama’s side, from the get-go. When you have the ground troops of SEIU and their partner-in-crime, ACORN, going door-to-door for you around the nation, it provides you with an insurmountable lead in “the community”. Hillary does not have access to those ground troops.
  4. BIG QUESTION: What happens if Obama and the Democrat Elites decide that they don’t like what they are seeing, so Obama orders the DOJ to indict Hillary and Crazy Uncle Joe enters the Primaries to “save the day”?

Clinton, no matter what those “smarter than the rest of the country” in the Northeast Corridor may choose to believe, is neither trustworthy nor likable as the polls have shown, time and again. Her Political Accomplishments are all negative, bordering on the nonexistent.

Bill’s coattails can cover up only so much political stain (Ask Monica).

Somebody had better hide all of the sharp instruments at the New York Times. This could get ugly.

Get your popcorn ready.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

 

 

 
 
 

 

 

The Iowa Caucus: Bernie Sanders, Millennials, and the Empty Promise of “FREE STUFF!”

untitled (24)Today, the focus of America will be on the state of Iowa, as Presidential Candidate Hopefuls from both parties, vie to win their respective races.

On the Left Side of the Political Aisle, a 74-year old curmudgeon, from a tiny New England State, promising a whole lot of FREE STUFF, is in a virtual tie with the Queen of Mean, the “Inevitable Democrat Party Candidate” Hillary Rodham Clinton.

The Washington Post reports that

DES MOINES — In his final campaign rally before the Iowa caucuses, Democratic presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders on Sunday decried the nation’s “rigged economy” and pressed other now-familiar themes before an enthusiastic crowd estimated at 1,700 people.

“You want a radical idea? All right, here’s a radical idea,” the senator from Vermont told an audience packed into a gym at Grand View University. “Together, we’re going to create an economy that works for all of us, not just the 1 percent.”

Sanders’s appearance capped a full day of campaigning on the eve of the nation’s first presidential nominating contest, which could go a long way toward shaping the direction of the Democratic race against Hillary Clinton. Polls have shown the caucuses to be a dead heat.

Sanders made only passing references to Clinton during his 48-minute remarks, instead emphasizing the same issues that propelled him from being a fringe candidate when he launched his bid nine months ago to a surprisingly strong contender.

He called for a $15 minimum wage, pay equity for women, paid family leave for workers, a $1 trillion federal jobs program and an overhaul of the tax system to make large corporations to pay substantially more.

Sanders singled out Wal-Mart, saying it pays its workers so little that taxpayers subsidize the company’s owners by paying for Medicaid, food stamps and housing assistance for its employees.

“I say to the Walton family: Get off of welfare, pay your workers a living wage,” Sanders said, referring to the family that owns the company.

In an interview taped in Ames before the rally, Sanders told Matt Lauer of NBC’s “Today” show that his campaign is “in this until the end,” regardless of the outcome in Iowa.

“What we are doing is running a national campaign,” Sanders said. “We’re going to run until the convention.”

“I hope we win, but if we lose by two points, so what — we’re going to go to New Hampshire, then we’re going to go to South Carolina, then we’re going to go to Nevada,” he told Lauer. “We are in this to the end.”

Why is this self-proclaimed SOCIALIST still in the Race?

Sanders is riding the crest of a wave of popularity among the generation whom we call “Millennials”…those, whom  my late Daddy, who landed on the beaches of Normandy, France on D-Day, all those decades ago, in the biggest Fight Against Fascism that the world has ever known, and the rest of “The Greatest Generation”, would have called “useful idiots”, “dupes”, or “slackers” for their inability to recognize the con job and failed theory that is Marxism, when they see it.

The following is a post found on fee.org, the website of the Foundation for Economic Education. It explains this part of Marxist Theory and “Why Socialism Failed”.

Socialism is the Big Lie of the twentieth century. While it promised prosperity, equality, and security, it delivered poverty, misery, and tyranny. Equality was achieved only in the sense that everyone was equal in his or her misery.

In the same way that a Ponzi scheme or chain letter initially succeeds but eventually collapses, socialism may show early signs of success. But any accomplishments quickly fade as the fundamental deficiencies of central planning emerge. It is the initial illusion of success that gives government intervention its pernicious, seductive appeal. In the long run, socialism has always proven to be a formula for tyranny and misery.

A pyramid scheme is ultimately unsustainable because it is based on faulty principles. Likewise, collectivism is unsustainable in the long run because it is a flawed theory. Socialism does not work because it is not consistent with fundamental principles of human behavior. The failure of socialism in countries around the world can be traced to one critical defect: it is a system that ignores incentives.

In a capitalist economy, incentives are of the utmost importance. Market prices, the profit-and-loss system of accounting, and private property rights provide an efficient, interrelated system of incentives to guide and direct economic behavior. Capitalism is based on the theory that incentives matter!

Under socialism, incentives either play a minimal role or are ignored totally. A centrally planned economy without market prices or profits, where property is owned by the state, is a system without an effective incentive mechanism to direct economic activity. By failing to emphasize incentives, socialism is a theory inconsistent with human nature and is therefore doomed to fail. Socialism is based on the theory that incentives don’t matter!

In a radio debate several months ago with a Marxist professor from the University of Minnesota, I pointed out the obvious failures of socialism around the world in Cuba, Eastern Europe, and China. At the time of our debate, Haitian refugees were risking their lives trying to get to Florida in homemade boats. Why was it, I asked him, that people were fleeing Haiti and traveling almost 500 miles by ocean to get to the “evil capitalist empire” when they were only 50 miles from the “workers’ paradise” of Cuba?

The Marxist admitted that many “socialist” countries around the world were failing. However, according to him, the reason for failure is not that socialism is deficient, but that the socialist economies are not practicing “pure” socialism. The perfect version of socialism would work; it is just the imperfect socialism that doesn’t work. Marxists like to compare a theoretically perfect version of socialism with practical, imperfect capitalism which allows them to claim that socialism is superior to capitalism.

If perfection really were an available option, the choice of economic and political systems would be irrelevant. In a world with perfect beings and infinite abundance, any economic or political system–socialism, capitalism, fascism, or communism–would work perfectly.

However, the choice of economic and political institutions is crucial in an imperfect universe with imperfect beings and limited resources. In a world of scarcity it is essential for an economic system to be based on a clear incentive structure to promote economic efficiency. The real choice we face is between imperfect capitalism and imperfect socialism. Given that choice, the evidence of history overwhelmingly favors capitalism as the greatest wealth-producing economic system available.

The strength of capitalism can be attributed to an incentive structure based upon the three Ps: (1) prices determined by market forces, (2) a profit-and-loss system of accounting and (3) private property rights. The failure of socialism can be traced to its neglect of these three incentive-enhancing components.

Prices

The price system in a market economy guides economic activity so flawlessly that most people don’t appreciate its importance. Market prices transmit information about relative scarcity and then efficiently coordinate economic activity. The economic content of prices provides incentives that promote economic efficiency.

For example, when the OPEC cartel restricted the supply of oil in the 1970s, oil prices rose dramatically. The higher prices for oil and gasoline transmitted valuable information to both buyers and sellers. Consumers received a strong, clear message about the scarcity of oil by the higher prices at the pump and were forced to change their behavior dramatically. People reacted to the scarcity by driving less, carpooling more, taking public transportation, and buying smaller cars. Producers reacted to the higher price by increasing their efforts at exploration for more oil. In addition, higher oil prices gave producers an incentive to explore and develop alternative fuel and energy sources.

The information transmitted by higher oil prices provided the appropriate incentive structure to both buyers and sellers. Buyers increased their effort to conserve a now more precious resource and sellers increased their effort to find more of this now scarcer resource.

The only alternative to a market price is a controlled or fixed price which always transmits misleading information about relative scarcity. Inappropriate behavior results from a controlled price because false information has been transmitted by an artificial, non-market price.

Look at what happened during the 1970s when U.S. gas prices were controlled. Long lines developed at service stations all over the country because the price for gasoline was kept artificially low by government fiat. The full impact of scarcity was not accurately conveyed. As Milton Friedman pointed out at the time, we could have eliminated the lines at the pump in one day by allowing the price to rise to clear the market.

From our experience with price controls on gasoline and the long lines at the pump and general inconvenience, we get an insight into what happens under socialism where every price in the economy is controlled. The collapse of socialism is due in part to the chaos and inefficiency that result from artificial prices. The information content of a controlled price is always distorted. This in turn distorts the incentives mechanism of prices under socialism. Administered prices are always either too high or too low, which then creates constant shortages and surpluses. Market prices are the only way to transmit information that will create the incentives to ensure economic efficiency.

Profits and Losses

Socialism also collapsed because of its failure to operate under a competitive, profit-and-loss system of accounting. A profit system is an effective monitoring mechanism which continually evaluates the economic performance of every business enterprise. The firms that are the most efficient and most successful at serving the public interest are rewarded with profits. Firms that operate inefficiently and fail to serve the public interest are penalized with losses.

By rewarding success and penalizing failure, the profit system provides a strong disciplinary mechanism which continually redirects resources away from weak, failing, and inefficient firms toward those firms which are the most efficient and successful at serving the public. A competitive profit system ensures a constant reoptimization of resources and moves the economy toward greater levels of efficiency. Unsuccessful firms cannot escape the strong discipline of the marketplace under a profit/loss system. Competition forces companies to serve the public interest or suffer the consequences.

Under central planning, there is no profit-and-loss system of accounting to accurately measure the success or failure of various programs. Without profits, there is no way to discipline firms that fail to serve the public interest and no way to reward firms that do. There is no efficient way to determine which programs should be expanded and which ones should be contracted or terminated.

Without competition, centrally planned economies do not have an effective incentive structure to coordinate economic activity. Without incentives the results are a spiraling cycle of poverty and misery. Instead of continually reallocating resources towards greater efficiency, socialism falls into a vortex of inefficiency and failure.

Private Property Rights

A third fatal defect of socialism is its blatant disregard for the role of private property rights in creating incentives that foster economic growth and development. The failure of socialism around the world is a “tragedy of commons” on a global scale.

The “tragedy of the commons” refers to the British experience of the sixteenth century when certain grazing lands were communally owned by villages and were made available for public use. The land was quickly overgrazed and eventually became worthless as villagers exploited the communally owned resource.

When assets are publicly owned, there are no incentives in place to encourage wise stewardship. While private property creates incentives for conservation and the responsible use of property, public property encourages irresponsibility and waste. If everyone owns an asset, people act as if no one owns it. And when no one owns it, no one really takes care of it. Public ownership encourages neglect and mismanagement.

Since socialism, by definition, is a system marked by the “common ownership of the means of production,” the failure of socialism is a “tragedy of the commons” on a national scale. Much of the economic stagnation of socialism can be traced to the failure to establish and promote private property rights.

As Peruvian economist Hernando de Soto remarked, you can travel in rural communities around the world and you will hear dogs barking, because even dogs understand property rights. It is only statist governments that have failed to understand property rights. Socialist countries are just now starting to recognize the importance of private property as they privatize assets and property in Eastern Europe.

For the past 7 years, Barack Hussein Obama has been promising “Hope and change”, through his unceasing rhetoric of Class Warfare, Racial Animus, and “Sharing the Wealth”.

His promises have proven to be as empty as our pocketbooks.

Almost 94,000,000 Americans are now out of our workforce, having given up ever being able to find a job.

The Socialist Paradise, which Bernie Sanders is offering Millennials, is nothing new.

Ask the countries of Venezuela and Greece, as they burn to the ground, their hopes and dreams piled on top of a “Democratic Socialist” Pyre of their own making.

As we enter the first event of the Presidential Primary Season, the Iowa Caucus, tonight, it would be wise for those voters who want to “#FeelTheBern” to remember the words of a great World Leader, Sir Winston Churchill, who, as Prime Minister, lead Great Britain though the Fight Against Fascism, which I referenced before, World War II, when he said,

Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.  – Winston Churchill

Someone has to pay for all of the FREE STUFF that ol’ Bernie is promising, kids.

And, if he gets in office, that will be YOU.

Until He Comes.

KJ

 

Hillary’s E-mailgate Worsens. FBI Wants to Indict Both Hil and Huma.

Her-shadow-600-LI (2)The Talk of Capitol Hill is the meltdown-in-progress of the Party-in-Power’s Number One Presidential Hopeful, Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Her mistaken belief that the rules of our country, regarding Protocol and Top Secret Information, as regards her former position as Secretary of State, did not apply to her, is coming back to bite her in the hindquarters…and endanger our Sovereign Nation.

Foxnews.com reports that

EXCLUSIVE: The intelligence community has deemed some of Hillary Clinton’s emails “too damaging” to national security to release under any circumstances, according to a U.S. government official close to the ongoing review. A second source, who was not authorized to speak on the record, backed up the finding.  

The determination was first reported by Fox News, hours before the State Department formally announced Friday that seven email chains, found in 22 documents, will be withheld “in full” because they, in fact, contain “Top Secret” information.

The State Department, when first contacted by Fox News about withholding such emails Friday morning, did not dispute the reporting – but did not comment in detail. After a version of this report was first published, the Obama administration confirmed to the Associated Press that the seven email chains would be withheld. The department has since confirmed those details publicly.

The decision to withhold the documents in full, and not provide even a partial release with redactions, further undercuts claims by the State Department and the Clinton campaign that none of the intelligence in the emails was classified when it hit Clinton’s personal server.

Fox News is told the emails include intelligence from “special access programs,” or SAP, which is considered beyond “Top Secret.” A Jan. 14 letter, first reported by Fox News, from intelligence community Inspector General Charles McCullough III notified senior intelligence and foreign relations committee leaders that “several dozen emails containing classified information” were determined to be “at the CONFIDENTIAL, SECRET, AND TOP SECRET/SAP levels.” 

The State Department is trying to finish its review and public release of thousands of Clinton emails, as the Democratic presidential primary contests get underway in early February.  

Under the Freedom of Information Act, or FOIA, there is an exemption that allows for highly sensitive, and in this case classified, material to be withheld in full — which means nothing would be released in these cases, not even heavily redacted versions, which has been standard practice with the 1,340 such emails made public so far by the State Department.

According to the Justice Department FOIA website, exemption “B3” allows a carve-out for both the CIA and NSA to withhold “operational files.” Similar provisions also apply to other agencies. 

Fox News reported Friday that at least one Clinton email contained information identified as “HCS-O,” which is the code for intelligence from human spying. 

One source, not authorized to speak on the record, suggested the intelligence agencies are operating on the assumption there are more copies of the Clinton emails out there, and even releasing a partial email would provide enough clues to trace back to the original – which could allow the identification of “special access programs” intelligence.  

There was no comment to Fox News from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the Office of the Intelligence Community Inspector General, or the agency involved. Fox News has chosen not to identify the agency that provided sworn declarations that intelligence beyond Top Secret was found in the Clinton emails.

The State Department was scheduled to release more Clinton emails Friday, while asking a D.C. federal court for an extension. 

FBI investigators looking into the emails are focused on the criminal code pertaining to “gross negligence” in the handling and storage of classified information, and “public corruption.”

“The documents alone in and of themselves set forth a set of compelling, articulable facts that statutes relating to espionage have been violated,” a former senior federal law enforcement officer said. The source said the ongoing investigation along the corruption track “also stems from her tenure of secretary. These charges would be inseparable from the other charges in as much as there is potential for significant overlap and correlation.”

Based on federal regulations, once classified information is spilled onto a personal computer or device, as was the case with Clinton and her aides, the hardware is now considered classified at the highest classification level of the materials received.

While criticized by the Clinton campaign, McCullough, an Obama administration appointee, was relaying the conclusion of two intelligence agencies in his letter to Congress that the information was classified when it hit Clinton’s server — and not his own judgment.   

Joseph E. Schmitz, a former inspector general of the Department of Defense, called the attacks on McCullough a “shoot the watchdog” tactic by Clinton’s campaign.

The developments, taken together, show Clinton finding herself once again at the epicenter of a controversy over incomplete records.

During her time as the first female partner at the Rose Law firm in Arkansas during the mid-1980s, she was known as one of the “three amigos” and close with partners Webb Hubbell and Vince Foster. Hubbell ended up a convicted felon for his role in the failure of the corrupt Madison Guaranty, a savings and loan which cost taxpayers more than $65 million. Hubbell embezzled more than a half-million dollars from the firm. 

Foster killed himself in Washington, D.C., in July 1993. As Clinton’s partner in the Rose Law firm, he had followed the Clintons into the White House where he served as the Clintons’ personal lawyer and a White House deputy counsel.

Clinton’s missing Rose Law billing records for her work for Guaranty during the mid-1980s were the subject of three intense federal investigations over two years. Those records, in the form of a computerized printout of her work performed on behalf of Guaranty, were discovered under mysterious circumstances in the Book Room of the private White House living quarters.

The discovery of those records was announced during a  blizzard in January 1996 by attorney David Kendall, who still represents Hillary Clinton. After Clinton testified before a grand jury, prosecutors concluded there was insufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt she committed perjury or obstruction of justice.

Despite Clinton’s recent public statements about not knowing how the technology works, at least one email suggests she directed a subordinate to work around the rules. In a June 2011 email to aide Jake Sullivan, she instructed him to take what appeared to be classified talking points, and “turn into nonpaper w no identifying heading and send nonsecure.” 

A State Department spokesman could not say whether such a fax was sent. 

The was a Direct Report to Secretary of State Clinton, who never should have been given chosen for her position in the first place, given her “troubling Familial Affiliations”, who as Hillary’s “Right-Hand Woman”, received all of these unsecured e-mails, as well.

And, it appears that when the Hammer falls on Hillary, it will fall on her, as well.

The Washington Examiner reports that

MANCHESTER — California Congressman Darrell Issa, who previously led an investigation into Benghazi as former chairman of the House Oversight Committee, says the FBI “would like to indict both Huma [Abedin] and Hillary Clinton” for conducting sensitive government business on an unsecure, private email server.

“I think the FBI director would like to indict both Huma and Hillary as we speak,” the Republican heavyweight told the Washington Examiner Thursday, during a debate watch-party at Florida Sen. Marco Rubio’s New Hampshire campaign headquarters.

“I think he’s in a position where he’s being forced to triple-time make a case of what would otherwise be, what they call, a slam dunk,” Issa said, referring to FBI Director James Comey, who previously told the Senate Judiciary Committee he would conduct a “competent,” “honest” and “independent” probe into Clinton’s handling of classified information during her tenure as secretary of state.

Still, Issa suggested Clinton’s wrongdoing is obvious.

Let’s look a little closer at Ms. Abedin’s background, and her “troubling Familial Affiliations”, shall we?

According to discoverthenetworks.org,

Huma Abedin was born in 1976 in Kalamazoo, Michigan. Her father, Syed Abedin (1928-1993), was an Indian-born scholar who had worked as a visiting professor at Saudi Arabia’s King Abdulaziz University in the early Seventies.

[She is]

Daughter of Saleha Mahmood Abedin, a pro-Sharia sociologist with ties to numerous Islamist organizations including the Muslim Brotherhood
Longtime assistant to Hillary Clinton
Wife of former congressman Anthony Weiner
Longtime former employee of the Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs, which shares the Muslim Brotherhood’s goal of establishing Islamic supremacy and Sharia Law worldwide.
…From 1997 until sometime before early 1999, Abedin, while still interning at the White House, was an executive board member of George Washington University’s (GWU) Muslim Students Association (MSA), heading the organization’s “Social Committee.”

It is noteworthy that in 2001-02, soon after Abedin left that executive board, the chaplain and “spritual guide” of GWU’s MSA was Anwar al-Awlaki, the al Qaeda operative who ministered to some of the men who were among the 9/11 hijackers. Another chaplain at GWU’s MSA (from at least October 1999 through April 2002) was Mohamed Omeish, who headed the International Islamic Relief Organization, which has been tied to the funding of al Qaeda. Omeish’s brother, Esam, headed the Muslim American Society, the Muslim Brotherhood’s quasi-official branch in the United States. Both Omeish brothers were closely associated with Abdurahman Alamoudi, who would later be convicted and incarcerated on terrorism charges.

From 1996-2008, Abedin was employed by the Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs (IMMA) as the assistant editor of its in-house publication, the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs (JMMA). At least the first seven of those years overlapped with the al Qaeda-affiliated Abdullah Omar Naseef’s active presence at IMMA. Abedin’s last six years at the Institute (2002-2008) were spent as a JMMA editorial board member; for one of those years, 2003, Naseef and Abedin served together on that board.

Abedin went on maternity leave after giving birth to a baby boy in early December 2011. When she returned to work in June 2012, the State Department granted her an arrangement that allowed her to do outside consulting work as a “special government employee,” even as she remained a top advisor in the Department. Abedin did not disclose on her financial report either the arrangement or the$135,000 she earned from it, in violation of a law mandating that public officials disclose significant sources of income. Abedin’s outside clients included the U.S. State Department, Hillary Clinton, the William Jefferson Clinton Foundation, and Teneo (a firm co-founded by Doug Band, a former counselor for Bill Clinton). Good-government groups warned of the potential conflict-of-interest inherent in an arangement where a government employee maintains private clients.

In June 2012, five Republican lawmakers (most prominently, Michele Bachmann) sent letters to the inspectors general at the Departments of Homeland Security, Justice, and State, asking that they investigate whether the Muslim Brotherhood was gaining undue influence over U.S. government officials. One letter, noting that Huma Abedin’s position with Hillary Clinton “affords her routine access to the secretary [of state] and to policymaking,” expressed concern over the fact that Abedin “has three family members—her late father, mother and her brother—connected to Muslim Brotherhood operatives and/or organizations.” Some other prominent Republicans such as John McCain and John Boehner disavowed the concerns articulated in the letters.

On February 1, 2013—Hillary Clinton’s final day as Secretary of State—Abedinresigned her post as Mrs. Clinton’s deputy chief of staff. Yet she would continue to serve as a close aide to Clinton.

On March 1, 2013, Abedin was tapped to run Clinton’s post-State Department transition team, comprised of a six-person “transition office” located in Washington.

Huma Abedin’s brother, Hassan Abedin, has ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and is currently an associate editor with the JMMA. Hassan was once a fellow at the Oxford Center for Islamic Studies, at a time when the Center’s board included such Brotherhood-affiliated figures as Yusuf al-Qaradawi and Abdullah Omar Naseef.

Huma’s sister, Heba Abedin (formerly known as “Heba A. Khaled”), is an assistant editor with JMMA, where she served alongside Huma prior to the latter’s departure.

Speaking straight from the heart, as an American Citizen, I find it beyond the pale that, during the time of Hillary Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State, someone with direct ties to our sworn enemies, the Muslim Brotherhood, had access to the highest level of Top Secret Information contained in our State Department, being sent to her over Secretary Clinton’s own unsecured e-mail Server.

And, the thing is, she not only had access through her job as Assistant to Secretary of State Clinton, she also had access to government information through pillow talk with her husband, then-Congressman and “Professional Sexter” Anthony Weiner.

Being the “proud Muslim” that she has proclaimed herself to be, it is not beyond the realm of possibility that this information found its way to her “troubling Familial Affiliations”?

Which brings up another troubling question:

What if the Obama Administration and their minions are shouting down the voiced concerns of Republican Primary Candidate Donald J., Trump, the American People, and those in Congress, and dragging their feet on having the DOJ issue indictments, because they knew “what was going on” all along?

…and simply did not care?

Until He Comes,

KJ

A Saturday Morning Conversation With Bubba: About Hillary, Trump, and “Secret Weapons”

clintoncartoonWhy, hello, Mr. President.  It’s good to see you.  Please sit down.  Waitress, a glass of sweet tea and a Waffle House All-Star Breakfast with a Pecan Waffle for President Clinton, please.

Bubba, welcome back to the Mid-South.  Don’t worry, I won’t tell Hil about you breaking your diet.  It’s been some kind of Presidential Primary Campaign Season, huh?

You always said that you were a man of the people.   So, as a man of the people, I know you can appreciate what’s going on.

Your party, the Democrats, and their “friends across the aisle” the republicans are both in a tizzy over a “rank outsider”, who has the nerve to run for President of the United States.

You remember your old acquaintance, Donald J. Trump, don’t you?

Well, Bubba, you had better refresh your memory about “The Donald”, because, according to the Political Pundits, you are about to come to your blushing bride’s rescue, in her quest to make you the new “First Dude”.

According to The Wall Street Journal,

A new and more combative phase of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign opens next month when she sends her husband out to stump for her in important early states.

Waiting for him will be businessman Donald Trump, the Republican front-runner.

The former president has been a low-key figure since Mrs. Clinton entered the race for the Democratic nomination in April, offering private advice and helping her raise money at closed-door fundraisers. In January, the campaign intends to showcase him in public forums in Iowa and New Hampshire, two states where the front-runner is locked in a tight race against Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders.

Speaking to supporters recently, Mrs. Clinton described her husband as a “secret weapon.”

Throwing Mr. Clinton into the mix could further escalate the rhetoric between the Trump and Clinton campaigns. In the 2008 presidential race, the former president would bristle at criticism directed at his wife and got in hot water when he suggested Barack Obama’s victory in the South Carolina primary was less significant because of the large African-American vote.

This past week saw back-and-forth volleys over whether comments Mr. Trump made about Mrs. Clinton were sexist. He said Mr. Obama “schlonged” her in the 2008 race and said her brief absence from a recent Democratic debate stage, when she was reportedly using the restroom, was “disgusting.”

In an interview with the Des Moines Register, Mrs. Clinton said Mr. Trump has “demonstrated a penchant for sexism.” That drew a response from Mr. Trump on Twitter: “Hillary, when you complain about ‘a penchant for sexism,’ who are you referring to. I have great respect for women.’ ” In capital letters he then wrote, “BE CAREFUL!”

Asked what Mr. Trump meant, his campaign manager, Corey Lewandowski, said: “Mr. Trump speaks for Mr. Trump and his tweets speak for themselves. And he’s very clear about what those tweets say.”

Another Trump spokeswoman, Katrina Pierson, suggested in an interview with CNN that the Trump campaign intends to make Mr. Clinton’s behavior an issue should Mrs. Clinton pursue this point. Mr. Clinton, during his presidency, paid $850,000 to settle a sexual harassment case brought by Paula Jones stemming from an encounter when he was governor of Arkansas. His affair with then-White House intern Monica Lewinsky led to his impeachment by the U.S. House in 1998. He was acquitted by the Senate the following year.

“Hillary Clinton has some nerve to talk about the war on women and the bigotry toward women when she has a serious problem in her husband,” Ms. Pierson told CNN. Representatives for Mr. Clinton and the Clinton campaign declined to comment.

Mrs. Clinton holds a commanding lead among Democrats nationally, but polling shows the contests in Iowa and New Hampshire are up for grabs. Losses in both states could potentially alter the dynamics of a race she is dominating.In a conference call with supporters this past week, Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta said that Mrs. Clinton was in a “dog fight” in New Hampshire.

“Her greatest fear is she loses both,” said Douglas Schoen, a pollster and consultant who has advised Mr. Clinton. “Then, even though she is still on a path to win the nomination, there would be complete chaos.”

Mr. Schoen, a Clinton adviser during the Lewinsky scandal, said he wasn’t concerned about Mr. Trump, given how the former president emerged from that period with higher poll ratings than previously.

“It’s not a path of action that I think will necessarily help Donald Trump, nor do I think it will hurt Hillary Clinton,” he said.

Mr. Clinton is a revered figure in Democratic circles and was a key surrogate for Mr. Obama in his 2012 re-election bid. A survey conducted in part by The Wall Street Journal last year said he was by a margin of more than 2 to 1 the most admired president of the past quarter century.

Marc Lasry, a friend of Mr. Clinton’s and head of New York hedge fund firm Avenue Capital Group, said: “President Clinton campaigning for Hillary is a huge asset. People love seeing him and he’s able to explain things to people in a way that’s unique.”

(Friday, authorities in Hope, Ark., said a fire that caused minor damage to Mr. Clinton’s childhood home, now a National Historic Site, was apparently caused by arson, according to the Associated Press.)

Because of the spotlight he attracts, some analysts said the Clinton campaign would be wise to have the two campaign separately so that Mr. Clinton doesn’t overshadow the candidate.

“He’s a luminescent figure. That’s always an issue,” said David Axelrod, a senior adviser in both of Mr. Obama’s presidential campaigns. He added, “It’s important for people to see her out there on her own.”

As far as Mr. Trump is concerned, one person close to Mr. Clinton said he isn’t troubled by the Republican’s recent comments and isn’t taking them personally. Mr. Clinton doesn’t see Mr. Trump as likely to capture the GOP nomination, this person said.

I’m sure, just like the rest of your party and the Beltway Insiders, it hit you like the ’94 Elections.  The American people are torqued off.  Ever since your party took control of Congress in 2006, things have been going downhill like a skier on Mt. Everest.  What was supposed to be the most ethical Congress evah, turned out to be The Gang Who Couldn’t Shoot Straight.  By the way, have you talked to Charlie Rangel and Maxine Waters lately?

Anyway, as you well know, some unknown yahoo named Barack (don’t say his middle name) Obama came out of the cesspool known as Chicago Politics to grab the Democratic nomination away from your beloved Hil.  So, you and Hill made a deal with the powers-that-be for her to be his Secretary of State.  Man, whatever do you do with yourself while she’s on those long trips out of the country?  Oh….never mind.

So, in comes this guy, riding on the campaign promise of Hope and Change, and he gets himself elected by fooling 52% of the country into believing he’s a moderate, like you pretended to be after the ’94 Election.

Since his ascension to the throne along with his faithful sidekick, Plugs, he’s been in full-speed Alinsky mode, attempting to turn American into something it was never meant to be:  a full-blown Socialist Utopia.

Not that the Republicans have been blameless in this whole deal.  They started spending like there’s no tomorrow under Dubya and got way too comfy sitting on their reserved barstools at the Beltway Elite Country Club.

When the Regime ascended to the Throne and started implementing their plans for radical change, that stubborn ol’ streak that Americans possess, known as patriotism and individualism, started kicking in.  Y’see, Bubba, we really resented Scooter apologizing for us to our enemies.  You probably need to tell your wife that.  We weren’t very thrilled about that Porkulus bill that he had his buddies at the Apollo Foundation draw up for him, either.  Then, while spending our money to create the largest federal deficit in American history, Plugs said that paying more taxes was patriotic.

And now, New Speaker of the House, Paul Ryan, and the Beltway Republicans’ Club, just passed a Porkulus Bill of their own, the Omnibus Bill.

Are you kiddin’ me?

Back when the first Porkulus Bill was passed, Americans from all walks of life and every part of the country started getting together and formed something called The Tea Party Movement.  Your buddies in the Main Stream Media and the members of the Beltway Elite Country Club all had a big laugh at that one.

Then, “us peons” started getting into the faces of our elected representatives at Townhall Meetings and the unthinkable happened.  A Tea Party Rally in Washington, D.C. drew what looked to average Americans like a million people, all fed up with the people they elected working for nobody but themselves.

Meanwhile, your buddy Barry was holding hand-picked pep rallies, closed to the public, seemingly oblivious to the wishes of average Americans.  He exhibited an unparalleled tone-deafness that presented itself in a Captain Ahab-like quest to pass a National Healthcare bill that the majority of the American people wanted no part of.  After a 10 minute Christmas Eve Senate vote to approve this unwanted albatross, which followed a House vote of 220-215 on November 7th,  Congress passed Obamacare on March 21st, 2010.

Americans were left with the image of Speaker Pelosi, with a giant gavel, walking with her fellow Democrats through protesting Americans, grinning like a mule with a mouthful of yellowjackets.

While Beltway politicians have been trying to figure out new ways to spend our money, Americans have been struggling  just trying to pay their monthly bills, Bubba.

To this very day, we’re still being laid off, right and left, and some of us are so down, we’ve just given up on trying to find a job.  Folks are doing whatever they can, including clearing out their attics and getting a booth at the flea market.

That is why Donald J. Trump is kicking the Presidential Hopefuls’ elevated derrieres BOTH sides of the Political Aisle, including Hillary’s.

Trump has promised to make America GREAT again.

I’m betting that the Taliban will not ask the next deserter, like they did Bowe Bergdahl about Obama, if Trump is gay.

But, I digress…

Bubba, all the Establishment politicians, pundits, and so-called journalists on either side of the aisle have no right to be surprised by what’s going on.  They’ve severely underestimated the American people.  The pendulum has swung back to the Political Right for a reason:  it works.  Socialism never has.

The American People are not THEIR servants. They are OURS.

All the “smartest people in the room” had better figure this out quickly or they are going to be competing with you for gigs on the Professional Speakers’ Circuit.

By the way, have you heard from Monica lately?

Until He Comes,

KJ

Bernie Sanders Campaign Caught Accessing Clinton Campaign Data. The Politboro Would Be Proud.

Bernie-NRD-600Socialism only works in two places: Heaven where they don’t need it and hell where they already have it.- President Ronald Reagan 

The old white folks from the Northeast Corridor, whom the Democrat Party euphemistically refer to as “Potential Presidential Candidates” are not playing well with one another.

Foxnews.com reports that

Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders’ presidential campaign reportedly has been punished by the Democratic National Committee (DNC) for improperly accessing voter data compiled by Hillary Clinton’s campaign.

The Washington Post reported late Thursday that Sanders’ campaign manager had acknowledged that a low-level staffer had viewed the information and was fired as a result. The Post reported that the DNC has told the Sanders campaign that it will not have access to the party’s master list of likely Democratic voters until it provides an explanation and destroys any copies of Clinton campaign data that it posesses.

The DNC rents out the master list to national and state campaigns, which add their own information compiled by volunteers and field workers.

Being shut out of seeing the list for any length of time would be a major blow to Sanders, who is attempting to cut into Clinton’s sizable lead in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination.

A Fox News poll released Sunday shows Clinton with a 14-point lead over Sanders among likely Democratic caucusgoers in Iowa, while a poll of New Hampshire primary voters released Thursday shows the two in a statistical tie.

The software vendor that handles the DNC master list told the Post that the breach occurred Wednesday while a patch was being applied to the software. The process briefly disabled the firewall surrounding the Clinton campaign’s data.

Sanders campaign manager Jeff Weaver told the Post that the Clinton data was never downloaded or printed, and placed blame for the incident with the vendor, NGP VAN.

“Sadly, the DNC is relying on an incompetent vendor who on more than one occasion has dropped the firewall between the various Democratic candidates’ data,” Weaver said.

NGP VAN describes itself on its website as “the leading technology provider to Democratic and progressive campaigns.” Stu Trevelyan, the company’s CEO, told the Post the breach was an “isolated incident that was fairly short in duration … By lunchtime, it was resolved.”

The Post reported the DNC was likely to initiate an outside audit to determine what exactly happened and whether any additional information was improperly accessed. Criminal charges were unlikely to be filed.

Ol’ Bernie’s Campaign has not been going well, as of late.

According to variety.com,

The campaign of Bernie Sanders says that there’s been a “Bernie blackout” on broadcast network newscasts, claiming that they’ve ignored him compared to major presidential candidates.

The campaign issued a press release on Friday — “Why the Bernie Blackout on Corporate Network News?” — and cited figures from the Tyndall Report showing that he has gotten just a fraction of the attention Donald Trump has. Sanders has drawn 10 minutes of coverage to Trump’s 234 minutes.

The measurement was of time devoted to stories about the Sanders campaign specifically, so coverage of his performance in a debate is not included. So by that measure, Sanders has probably gotten more center-stage exposure on the broadcast networks’ late-night talk shows than on their evening newscasts. He has appeared on “The Late Show with Stephen Colbert,” “The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon” and “Jimmy Kimmel Live.”

Sanders’ campaign manager, Jeff Weaver, said that the “corporately owned media may not like Bernie’s anti-establishment views but for the sake of American democracy they must allow for a fair debate in this presidential campaign.”

Well, there are a couple of good reasons that the Main Stream Media is “ignoring” ol’ Bernie.

First, he doesn’t have a snowball-in-you-know-where’s chance of beating the Clinton Political Machine and winning the nomination.

Second, as we say down here in Dixie,

He’s crazier than a pet ‘coon.

As discoverthenetworks.org reports,

In May 2015, Sanders told CNBC interviewer John Harwood that he was in favor of dramatically raising the marginal tax rate on America’s highest earners. “[When] radical socialist Dwight D. Eisenhower was president,” Sanders said sarcastically, “I think the highest marginal tax rate was something like 90 percent.” When Harwood asked whether Sanders thought that was too high, the senator replied: “No. What I think is obscene, and what frightens me is, again, when you have the top one-tenth of one percent owning almost as much wealth as the bottom 90 [percent]. Does anybody think that is the kind of economy this country should have?”

In his first public speech as a presidential candidate in Burlington, Vermont, Sanders in May 2015 broadly laid out the major planks of his campaign’s agenda:

  • He declared that financial inequality “is immoral, it is bad economics, it is unsustainable.”
  • Vowing to send “a message to the billionaire class,” he said: “[Y]ou can’t have huge tax breaks [for the rich] while children in this country go hungry … while there are massive unmet needs on every corner…. Your greed has got to end…. You cannot take advantage of all the benefits of America if you refuse to accept your responsibilities.”
  • He pledged to enact “a tax system that is fair and progressive, which tells the wealthiest individuals and the largest corporations that they are going to begin to pay their fair share.”
  • Claiming that “the current federal [hourly] minimum wage of $7.25 is a starvation wage and must be raised … to $15.00 an hour.”
  • He described the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) as a “modest” step in the direction of rightfully forcing the U.S. to “join the rest of the industrialized world and guarantee health care to all as a right.”  “And we must do it through a Medicare-for-all, single payer health plan,” he explained.
  • He called for “pay equity for women workers,” and “paid sick leave and guaranteed vacation time for every worker in this country.”
  • Describing the rising costs of a college education as “insane,” he vowed to “fight to make tuition in public colleges and universities free, as well as substantially lower interest rates on student loans.”
  • He pledged to “expand Social Security benefits” and mandate “a universal pre-K system for all the children of this country.”
  • Asserting that “there is nothing more important” than fighting global warming, he said: “The debate is over. The scientific community has spoken in a virtually unanimous voice. Climate change is real, it is caused by human activity, and it is already causing devastating problems in our country and throughout the world.” He elaborated that in the absence of government intervention, America would inevitably see “more drought, more famine, more rising sea level, more floods, more ocean acidification, [and] more extreme weather disturbances,” he elaborated, in the absence of government intervention.
  • He called for the government to use taxpayer dollars to rebuild America’s “crumbling infrastructure” by repairing “our roads, our bridges, our water systems, our rail and airports.” Sanders added he would begin this process by working to advance, in the Senate, a five-year, $1 trillion bill that he himself had proposed, claiming that it “would create and maintain 13 million good paying jobs.”

In September 2015, Sanders’s presidential campaign received the support of the former Weather Underground terrorist Bill Ayers, who wrote: “I believe that among the Sanders supporters there are thousands who are dissatisfied, who are disgruntled, but who do not have a coherent left analysis, who therefore are open to our ideas as they weren’t before they got involved in the Sanders surge…. So, why don’t we joi[n] a Sanders local campaign or go to a mass rally?… We could have lists of places and projects where anarchists and others are working with people in projects that are using anarchist and community participatory ideas and vision. Places where Bernie supporters might get involved once they knew about them.”

Y’all remember Bomber Bill Ayers, don’t you?

He launched Barack Hussein Obama’s Illinos State Senate Campaign from his living room.

Of course, years later, aspiring Presidential Candidate Obama would refer to the Murderous Anarchist as,

Just another guy in the neighborhood.

But, I digress…

Bernie Sanders, “evangelist” of the failed political ideology of Marxism, member of the rapidly-tanking American Political Party known as “Democrats”, seems to basically appeal to the collegiate and “slacker” vote, the MTV Generation, still living in Mom’s Basement, who cling to the vision of “money for nothing and their chicks for free”.

What his collective hive-mind of group-thinking followers do not seem to grasp is the reality that Marxism has NEVER worked, anywhere that it has been tried.

Man’s own greed and corruption, as in the case of the old Russian Politboro, always gets in the way of their dream for a Socialist Utopia.

That is the reason that Marxism remains a THEORY…and a failed one, at that.

The news potentially isn’t all bad for ol’ Bernie, though.

Perhaps, they will make a remake of “Back to the Future”.

He’s a dead ringer for Doc Emmett Brown.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

 

Republican Debate Aftermath: It’s Time for the Party to Embrace “Bold Colors” and Dump “Pale Pastels”

conservative1The last Republican Presidential Primary Debate was held last night on CNN.,,and things got a little heated.

Foxnews.com reports that

The rivalry between Sens. Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio flared Tuesday at the final Republican primary debate of the year, as all the leading GOP candidates battled to show their tough-on-terror credentials.

Donald Trump, as in past debates, sparred sharply with his rivals on stage over his controversial proposals, notably his call to ban Muslims from entering the country. But the changing dynamics in the race appeared to drive frequent clashes between the senators from Texas and Florida – who are now battling to be the Trump alternative in the race as Ben Carson slides in the polls.

With the terror attacks in Paris and San Bernardino, Calif., refocusing the race squarely on security issues, Cruz from the outset tried to sound a tough message against radical Islam.

“We will utterly destroy ISIS,” Cruz vowed, later adding: “ISIS and radical Islamic terrorism will face no more determined foe than I will be.”

But he repeatedly was challenged by Rubio over his Senate positions – including for legislation reining in NSA metadata collection. Rubio accused Cruz of helping take away a “valuable tool” for security officials, while Cruz said: “Marco knows what he’s saying isn’t true.”

Rubio later cited a budget vote by Cruz to say: “You can’t carpet bomb ISIS if you don’t have planes and bombs to attack them with.”

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie used the arguing to contrast his own executive experience against the senators’ legislative history. He described their jobs as “endless debates about how many angels on the head of a pin from people who have never had to make a consequential decision.”

But Rubio and Cruz returned to the fray later on as they tried to cast each other as soft on illegal immigration. “I led the fight against [Rubio’s] legalization-amnesty bill,” Cruz charged.

Some analysts had expected the tensions Tuesday to flare between Trump and Cruz, as the Texas senator surpasses Trump in Iowa polls and is surging nationally. But Cruz avoided taking on Trump in favor of Rubio – he even jokingly backed Trump’s plan to build a border wall.

“We will build a wall that works, and I’ll get Donald Trump to pay for it,” Cruz said.

Later on, Trump backed off comments where he said Cruz acted in Congress like “a bit of a maniac.” Trump said Tuesday, “He’s just fine, don’t worry about it.”

Instead, Trump took heat mostly from former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, who slammed Trump’s plan to ban Muslims from entering the United States as “not a serious proposal.”  

“He’s a chaos candidate, and he’d be a chaos president,” Bush said.

Trump fired back that “Jeb doesn’t really believe I’m unhinged” and only went after him because he’s “failed in this campaign.”

The Trump-Bush acrimony simmered throughout the debate, with Bush later telling Trump he can’t “insult your way to the presidency,” and Trump once again reminding Bush that his poll numbers have plummeted while Trump is leading.

Whether Bush’s attacks will help the struggling candidate remains to be seen. Perhaps more consequential is whether Rubio or Cruz can present himself as more capable of taking on the country’s security challenges.

All the leading candidates, though, focused on the terror threat throughout the CNN-hosted primary debate Tuesday night in Las Vegas – an event held just hours after Los Angeles closed its school system over a terror threat.

Citing that closure, which is now thought to have been prompted by a hoax threat, Christie said children will be going back to school filled with anxiety. And he said the country’s overall security environment has been hurt by President Obama and Hillary Clinton’s policies.

“America has been betrayed,” he said.

Christie cited his experience as a federal prosecutor, and governor, in saying that under a Christie presidency, “America will be safe.”

Carson also dismissed “PC” concerns about some of his own plans for taking on the terror threat.

“We are at war … We need to be on a war footing,” Carson said, while later making an argument against toppling foreign dictators. He compared the situation to being on a plane, where passengers in an emergency are advised to use oxygen masks themselves before helping others.

“We need oxygen right Citing that closure, which is now thought to have been prompted by a hoax threat, Christie said children will be going back to school filled with anxiety. And he said the country’s overall security environment now,” Carson said, adding the government needs to think of the needs of the American people before solving everyone else’s problems.

Trump also sparred at times with other lower-polling candidates.

As before, Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul questioned Trump’s policy proposals, including to restrict the Internet to clamp down on ISIS’ social media use. “Do you believe in the Constitution?” Paul said of Trump supporters. Trump clarified he’s only talking about restricting the Internet in parts of Iraq and Syria.

And when Trump suggested that the money spent toppling Mideast dictators could have been better spent on building America’s roads and bridges, former HP CEO Carly Fiorina compared him to Obama.

“That’s exactly what President Obama has said. I’m amazed to hear that from a Republican presidential candidate,” she said.
Ohio Gov. John Kasich also took issue with suggestions from Cruz and Trump that the priority in Syria is not to remove Bashar Assad.

“We can’t back off of this,” Kasich said. “He must go.”

CNN also hosted a debate Tuesday for the second-tier GOP candidates — former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham and former New York Gov. George Pataki. Graham was particularly critical of Trump’s Muslim ban plan at that debate, accusing him of declaring war on Islam and delivering a “coup” for ISIS.

About the scourge known as “Political Correctness”…it definitely was one of the topics for discussion last night…

Candidates in the GOP presidential primary debate Tuesday said “political correctness” has contributed to the rise of attacks by Islamic extremists in the U.S. and other Western countries.

“Political correctness is killing people,” Texas Sen. Ted Cruz said.

He and several of the other candidates suggested in the CNN debate that fear of offending Muslims has resulted in the U.S. intelligence community failing to aggressively find the “radicalized” members who commit terror acts.

Cruz, surging in recent polls to challenge front-running Donald Trump, also criticized the Department of Homeland Security. He suggested the agency failed to vet social media well enough to learn that the female Muslim attacker in the deadly San Bernardino, Calif., shootings this month wanted to commit jihad.  

Trump, who after the Dec. 2 massacre proposed a temporary ban on Muslims coming into the United States, has said repeatedly that he will not hew to political correctness, especially on issues of national security.  

Candidate Rick Santorum, a former U.S. senator from Pennsylvania, in the earlier, second-tier debate said, “We’ve defunded and tied the hands behind the backs of our intelligence agencies because of political correctness.”

You will notice that Senator Ted Cruz and Billionaire Entrepreneur Donald J. Trump have backed off going after reach other…at least, for now.

They realize that now is not the time, politically speaking.

Now is the time to narrow the field.

The Republican Party needs to encourage some of the lower-tier candidates to ease on out of the Primary Race.

Especially the one whom they were backing…Jeb Bush.

They are not helping what, at this point, appears to be the inevitable fact that the next President of the United States will be a Republican.

The problem for the Republican Establishment, is that is will not be one of them.

The public wants new ideas. We are tired of dancing to the Washington Two-Step.

That is the reason for the popularity of Trump and Cruz. They have been saying the things that Americans have been wanting to hear for some time now.

That is the reason that they are the Leaders in the Republican Primary.

Contrast them to the candidates whom the Democrats are offering: old white folks from the Northeast Corridor, one who is as crooked as a dog’s hind leg and the other, a demented old socialist, who resembles Doc Emmett Brown from “Back to the Future”.

The “Vichy Republicans” as I refer to them, are looking a Gift Horse in the mouth.

They are positioned to sweep the nation, on the way to placing their candidate in the Oval Office, buoyed by a Grassroots Movement, the likes of has not been seen since the 1980 Presidential Election, which put into office the greatest president in my lifetime, Ronald Wilson Reagan.

All the Republicans have to do to be successful is something that they seem to have forgotten how to do, since they themselves were swept into Congressional Power in the 2010 and 2012 Mid-Term Elections.

They need to pay attention and actually listen to the voters who gave them their cushy jobs.

The need to stop backing the wrong “horse”.

As Ronald Reagan, himself, said, at CPAC in 1975,

It is time to raise a banner of BOLD COLORS! Not PALE PASTELS!

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

 

 

The Trump Backlash: Huma “The Proud Muslim” and Her “Troubling Familial Affiliations”

Huma-Abedin-and-Hillary-Clinton-620x436Well, for the last few days, the popular thing among “The Smartest People in the Room” has been to stand up to Republican Presidential Hopeful Donald J. Trump’s suggestion to pause all Muslim Immigration into the United States of America, until our government figures out how to ensure that ISIS will not embed themselves among innocent Muslims.

Hillary’s “Right-Hand Woman” and Gal-Pal Huma Abedin (Mrs. Anthony Weiner) recently decided to join the Peanut Gallery, as Fox News Reports…

Huma Abedin, the longtime confidant to Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton, took aim at Donald Trump’s proposal to ban Muslims from entering the United States in an email with the subject line: “I’m a proud Muslim.”

“Donald Trump is leading in every national poll to be the Republican nominee for president. And earlier today, he released his latest policy proposal: to ban all Muslims from entering our country,” wrote Ms. Abedin, in an email Monday evening to Mrs. Clinton’s supporters. “I’m a proud Muslim — but you don’t have to share my faith to share my disgust.”

Of course, that was a strictly political move.

Breitbart.com reports that

Democratic presidential frontrunner Hillary Clinton is seizing on Donald Trump’s proposal to ban all Muslim entry into the U.S. with a fundraising email featuring long-time aide Huma Abedin, who is Muslim.

The email reads, in part: “I’m a proud Muslim–but you don’t have to share my faith to share my disgust.” The email is noteworthy for two reasons: first, that it acknowledges Abedin’s faith at all; and second, that it features Abedin, who is not only under ethical criticism but also suspected of radical ties.

In 2008, then-Sen. Barack Obama was terrified of having his campaign associated with Islam, lest it trigger what his aides feared might be a Muslim backlash. In June 2008, Ben Smith (then of Politico) reported: “Two Muslim women at Barack Obama’s rally in Detroit on Monday were barred from sitting behind the podium by campaign volunteers seeking to prevent the women’s headscarves from appearing in photographs or on television with the candidate.” (The campaign later apologized to them.)

The Clinton campaign, in fact, even sought to capitalize on anti-Muslim sentiment by circulating a photograph of Obama wearing a headscarf on a visit to Kenya. (The candidate herself claimed not to “know anything about it.”)

Democrats have come a long way, from trying to appease anti-Muslim sentiment in their own party to using Muslims to fundraise from their supporters.

However, Huma Abedin is an odd choice. A “proud Muslim” would not marry a Jew–much less scandal-plagued former Rep. Anthony Weiner–given that Islamic law prevents women from marrying non-Muslims. Stranger still, Huma Abedin’s mother Saleha is reported to be part of the Muslim Brotherhood, which is not only “proud” but radical, and violent.

In addition, Huma Abedin was recently investigated for embezzlement, and has been accused of failing to provide complete financial disclosure to the State Department, as well as working for a private contractor on the side.

Not exactly a proud record–except in Clintonland.

Let’s look a little closer at Ms. Abedin’s background, and her “troubling Familial Affiliations”, shall we?

According to discoverthenetworks.org,

Huma Abedin was born in 1976 in Kalamazoo, Michigan. Her father, Syed Abedin (1928-1993), was an Indian-born scholar who had worked as a visiting professor at Saudi Arabia’s King Abdulaziz University in the early Seventies. 

[She is]

  • Daughter of Saleha Mahmood Abedin, a pro-Sharia sociologist with ties to numerous Islamist organizations including the Muslim Brotherhood
  • Longtime assistant to Hillary Clinton
    Wife of former congressman Anthony Weiner
  • Longtime former employee of the Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs, which shares the Muslim Brotherhood’s goal of establishing Islamic supremacy and Sharia Law worldwide.

…From 1997 until sometime before early 1999, Abedin, while still interning at the White House, was an executive board member of George Washington University’s (GWU) Muslim Students Association (MSA), heading the organization’s “Social Committee.”

It is noteworthy that in 2001-02, soon after Abedin left that executive board, the chaplain and “spritual guide” of GWU’s MSA was Anwar al-Awlaki, the al Qaeda operative who ministered to some of the men who were among the 9/11 hijackers. Another chaplain at GWU’s MSA (from at least October 1999 through April 2002) was Mohamed Omeish, who headed the International Islamic Relief Organization, which has been tied to the funding of al Qaeda. Omeish’s brother, Esam, headed the Muslim American Society, the Muslim Brotherhood’s quasi-official branch in the United States. Both Omeish brothers were closely associated with Abdurahman Alamoudi, who would later be convicted and incarcerated on terrorism charges.

From 1996-2008, Abedin was employed by the Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs (IMMA) as the assistant editor of its in-house publication, the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs (JMMA). At least the first seven of those years overlapped with the al Qaeda-affiliated Abdullah Omar Naseef’s active presence at IMMA. Abedin’s last six years at the Institute (2002-2008) were spent as a JMMA editorial board member; for one of those years, 2003, Naseef and Abedin served together on that board.

Abedin went on maternity leave after giving birth to a baby boy in early December 2011. When she returned to work in June 2012, the State Department granted her an arrangement that allowed her to do outside consulting work as a “special government employee,” even as she remained a top advisor in the Department. Abedin did not disclose on her financial report either the arrangement or the$135,000 she earned from it, in violation of a law mandating that public officials disclose significant sources of income. Abedin’s outside clients included the U.S. State Department, Hillary Clinton, the William Jefferson Clinton Foundation, and Teneo (a firm co-founded by Doug Band, a former counselor for Bill Clinton). Good-government groups warned of the potential conflict-of-interest inherent in an arangement where a government employee maintains private clients.

In June 2012, five Republican lawmakers (most prominently, Michele Bachmann) sent letters to the inspectors general at the Departments of Homeland Security, Justice, and State, asking that they investigate whether the Muslim Brotherhood was gaining undue influence over U.S. government officials. One letter, noting that Huma Abedin’s position with Hillary Clinton “affords her routine access to the secretary [of state] and to policymaking,” expressed concern over the fact that Abedin “has three family members—her late father, mother and her brother—connected to Muslim Brotherhood operatives and/or organizations.” Some other prominent Republicans such as John McCain and John Boehner disavowed the concerns articulated in the letters.

On February 1, 2013—Hillary Clinton’s final day as Secretary of State—Abedinresigned her post as Mrs. Clinton’s deputy chief of staff. Yet she would continue to serve as a close aide to Clinton. 

On March 1, 2013, Abedin was tapped to run Clinton’s post-State Department transition team, comprised of a six-person “transition office” located in Washington.

Huma Abedin’s brother, Hassan Abedin, has ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and is currently an associate editor with the JMMA. Hassan was once a fellow at the Oxford Center for Islamic Studies, at a time when the Center’s board included such Brotherhood-affiliated figures as Yusuf al-Qaradawi and Abdullah Omar Naseef.

Huma’s sister, Heba Abedin (formerly known as “Heba A. Khaled”), is an assistant editor with JMMA, where she served alongside Huma prior to the latter’s departure.

Speaking straight from the heart, as an American citizen, I remain offended, that during the time of Hillary Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State, that someone with direct ties to our sworn enemies, the Muslim Brotherhood, had access to the highest level of Top Secret Information contained in our State Department.

And, the thing is, she not only had access through her job as Assistant to Secretary of State Clinton, she also had access to government information through pillow talk with her husband, then-Congressman and “Professional Sexter” Anthony Weiner.

And, being the “proud Muslim” that she has proclaimed herself to be, it is a certainty that this information found its way to those “troubling Familial Affiliations”.

Which brings up a troubling question:

What if the Obama Administration and their minions are shouting down Donald J., Trump, because they knew “what was going on” all along

…and simply did not care?

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

The Benghazi Hearings: American Families Still Wait For The Truth About Their Sons’ Sacrifice

benghaziwhitehouseIt’s been a little over three years since you lost your child. Yes, you know that they were an adult, but they were still your child…and you loved them very much.

Yes, it’s been a little over three years, but in some ways it seems like yesterday that you received that call. That call that no parent should have to hear. A call telling you that your child had been murdered…in the service of his country. Murdered by Radical Muslims, on the other side of the world.

When you asked those who are supposed to know, what happened to your child, they hemmed and hawed, saying that it had something to do with a video on the Internet, that you had never even heard of, much less seen.

Your beloved child, murdered because of some stupid video? That doesn’t even seen possible.

As time went on, you came under siege by reporters and government officials alike. The reporters wanted to interview you, so that their ratings would go up. The authorities, while not overtly threatening you, or anything like that, basically gave you the cold shoulder, keeping their little game of hide and seek with the facts of your child’s death going on, as if you were not entitled to a clear picture of what actually happened.

Don’t they understand what you’re still going through? You lost your child…your son. A son you nursed through all the ups and downs of growing up, who you proudly watched as he decided that he wanted to be of service to his country.

And still, nobody will tell you the truth of what happened to him.

After what seemed like an eternity, a congressman named Darrel Issa reached out to you. He told you that he was holding Congressional Hearings to get to the bottom of this whole disgraceful business. So, you make the trip to Washington, DC, and patiently wait your turn to testify before Issa and the Congressional Committee.

Finally, after all those months, there you were. You took the stand after they called your name. As you were about to tell your story, all the Democratic Representatives in the room, except for two, excused themselves from the meeting, imperiously above listening to a commoner, an American Parent, still grieving over the loss of their child, so savagely murdered, tell their story.

You watched them as they walked out…

Carolyn Maloney

Danny Davis

Eleanor Holmes Norton

Gerald E. Connolly

Jim Cooper

John Tierney

Mark Pocan

Matt Cartwright

Michelle Lujan Grisham

Peter Welch

Stephen Lynch

Steven Horsford

Tammy Duckworth

Tony Cardenas

William Lacy Clay

Two of them actually stayed to hear your story, Ranking Member Elijah Cummings and Rep. Jackie Speier.

And, now, after watching the one in charge of the Benghazi Embassy, Former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, imperiously lie to the latest House Committee, under Trey Gowdy, you’re wondering if this reliving of your grief and anguish, was all worth it.

…as your grief becomes unbearable…again.

Foxnews.com has the story…

Michael Ingmire watched as Hillary Clinton was grilled for 11 hours Thursday about the 2012 attack in Benghazi that left his nephew and three other Americans dead and saw not a future president, but a “serial liar.”

As a congressional panel pressed the former Secretary of State over the attack on the consulate facility in the Libyan city, Ingmire, uncle of Sean Smith, and relatives of former Navy SEALs Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty watched from their homes, hoping Clinton’s testimony would yield answers about why additional security was not granted and why she initially blamed the attack on a YouTube video instead of a coordinated act of terrorism.

“The thing that was shocking – one of the pinnacle moments – was the revelation she told her family there was a terrorist attack while she told America something else,” Smith’s uncle, Michael Ingmire, told FoxNews.com. “Mrs. Clinton is a serial liar.”

Smith, an information officer, and Woods, a former Navy SEAL, died along with Doherty and U.S. ambassador Chris Stevens when Islamic militants stormed the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi and set it ablaze before attacking a nearby CIA compound with machine guns and rockets.

Stevens, the first U.S. Ambassador killed in the line of duty since 1979, had repeatedly asked the State Department for increased security at the consulate prior to the attack but his requests were not granted. 

In the hours following the attacks, the Obama administration learned they were carefully planned assaults by Al Qaeda-related militants but Clinton and others would go on to tell a different tale: an anti-Muslim YouTube video caused spontaneous protests and angry mobs were to blame for the attacks.

“So if there’s no evidence for a video-inspired protest, then where did the false narrative start?” Ohio Republican Rep. Jim Jordan asked Clinton during the hearing Thursday.

“It started with you, Madam Secretary,” he said. “You could live with a protest about a video, that won’t hurt you, but a terror attack would.”

Clinton rejected Jordan’s claim, describing the situation in the hours after the attack as “fluid” and the details unclear.

“I am sorry that it doesn’t fit your narrative congressman, I can only tell you what the facts are,” Clinton said.

During the marathon hours of questioning — which Democrats claim was a partisan attack on the Democratic presidential frontrunner — Clinton said Stevens understood the risks involved and that his requests for additional security never crossed her desk.

“Those requests for security were rightly reviewed by the security professionals,” Clinton told the committee. “I did not see them. I did not approve them. I did not deny them.”

Clinton also described Stevens as a friend, saying the 52-year-old ambassador “understood that most people in Libya or anywhere reject the extremists’ argument that violence can ever be a path to dignity or justice.”

“I knew and admired Chris Stevens,” she said in her opening remarks Thursday. “He was one of our nation’s most accomplished diplomats. Chris’ mother liked to say he had ‘sand in his shoes,’ because he was always moving, always working, especially in the Middle East that he came to know so well.”

But Clinton’s closeness to Stevens was called into question by Rep Susan Brooks, R-Ill., who asked: “Did you ever personally speak to him after you swore him in in May? Yes or no please.”

“Yes, I believe I did,” Clinton replied. “I don’t recall.”

Ingmire described Clinton’s choice of words about Stevens as jarring. 

“How could she say ‘Chris thought this’ and ‘Chris felt that’ when she basically had nothing to do with him?” Ingmire said. 

Tyrone Woods’ father, Charles, recalled meeting Clinton when his son’s body arrived at Andrews Air Force Base two days after the attacks. 

“I gave Hillary a hug and shook her hand and she said, ‘We are going to have the filmmaker arrested who was responsible for the death of your son,” Woods said, reading the account from his journal. 

“That was a complete bald-faced lie,” he told FoxNews.com Friday. “The day after the attack, she was talking to the Prime Minister of Egypt and she said the attack in Libya had nothing to do with the video.” 

Smith’s mother, Patricia, gave a similar account, saying she was told by the administration “it was a video when they knew it was not a video.”

“They told me lies,” she said Friday. “My son told me the night before that he has been asking for security and he hasn’t heard anything.” 

Over three years later, the truth as to why the Obama Administration sacrificed the lives of those four Brave Americans, for the sake of political expediency, on that horrible night in Benghazi, is still not known. Americans have their suspicions. Suspicions that were not allayed any by the Cackling hen appearing before, thanks to her fellow Democrats, what turned into a Dog and Pony Showb, last Thursday on Capitol Hill.

Remember the oft-quoted speech by President Obama at the UN General Assembly, in which he proclaimed that

…The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam?

Since that night in Benghazi, the Radical Muslim-fueled violence know as “Arab Spring” has proceeded “right on schedule”, with SRussia and America now on the brink of a war, with Syrian’s Muslim President Assad now in its cross-hairs. 

President Obama has made speeches in support of and sent advanced weaponry to the “Syrian Rebels”, whose majority are card-carrying members of the Muslim Terrorist Group, al Qaeda, perpetrators of the largest Terrorist Attack ever on American Soil, on 9/11/01, and the attack on the Benghazi Compound.

Fortunately, Americans refused to support Obama’s mission to aid these Terrorists.

Our memories of those two faithful days, 11 years apart, and average Americans’ wish for justice for those 3,000 and 4 Americans, savagely murdered by the “followers of the prophet”, take precedence over any trumped-up concern over any slander of his name.

…and, Hillary Clinton’s Political Future.

There are American Families who deserve the truth.

Until Christ Comes,

KJ

The Benghazi Hearings: E-mails Prove Clinton LIED As To How Four Brave Americans DIED.

Laughing-H-600-LIYesterday, Former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, appeared before the House Select Committee on Benghazi, chaired by the inestimable Trey Gowdy.

Yesterday morning, Hillary’s duplicitous nature was clearly revealed, for all the world to see.

Liar, liar. Pants suit on fire.

Breitbart.com reports that

Hillary Clinton sent an email to her daughter, Chelsea, on Sept. 11, 2012 in which she asserted that an al-Qaida-like group was responsible for the terrorist attacks in Benghazi, it was revealed on Thursday during the former secretary of state’s testimony to the House Select Committee on Benghazi.

The email, which was revealed by Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan, indicates that Clinton knew early on that the attacks which left four Americans dead was carried out by terrorists. But as Jordan pointed out, Clinton and others in the Obama administration had already begun crafting the narrative that the attack was spontaneous and that the attackers were motivated by a YouTube video many Muslims found offensive.

In the email cited by Jordan, Clinton responded to daughter Chelsea, who emailed under the pseudonym Diane Reynolds.

“Two of our officers were killed in Benghazi by an Al Queda-like [sic] group,” Clinton wrote.

But shortly before the email, after it was revealed that Ambassador Chris Stevens had been murdered in the onslaught, Clinton implied that the YouTube video had served as a motive.

“Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted to the Internet,” Clinton said in a statement shortly after Stevens’ death.

The Obama administration continued for days after the attack to claim that the YouTube video — entitled “Innocence of Muslims” — had sparked protests which turned violent. Critics of the administration’s handling of the response to the attack assert that the YouTube video was used as political cover to protect Obama ahead of his re-election bid. Obama had been on the campaign trail insisting that he had destroyed al-Qaida.

Jordan compared Clinton’s disparate positions, asserting that she “knew the truth” but insisted on casting some blame on the video.

“You tell the American people one thing, you tell your family an entirely different story,” Jordan said.

He also cited a call Clinton made the night of the attack to Mohammed Magariaf, who was then the president of Libya. According to a transcript of the call, Clinton acknowledged that the al-Qaida affiliated group Ansar al-Sharia was “claiming responsibility” for the attack.

And in a phone call with Egyptian Prime Minister Hisham Kandil the next day, Clinton said “we know the attack in Libya had nothing to do with the film. It was a planned attack, not a protest.”

The administration’s claim that the YouTube video played a part in the Benghazi attack reached its pinnacle on Sept. 16, 2012, when then-U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice asserted as much on several Sunday morning talk shows.

And emails show that Clinton’s aides at the State Department showed no disagreement with Rice’s statements, in which she called the video “very offensive.”

Clinton’s State Department aide, Jake Sullivan, sent his boss an email that same day indicating that Rice’s comments were in line with Clinton’s views.

“She did make clear our view that this started spontaneously and then evolved,” Sullivan wrote.

He backtracked off of that position the next week, however. In a Sept. 24, 2012 email, he assured Clinton: “You never said spontaneous or characterized the motives.”

“State Department experts knew the truth, you knew the truth, but that’s not what the American people got,” Jordan said Thursday, during his tense exchange with Clinton.

“There was a lot of conflicting information that we were trying to make sense of,” Clinton said, defending her conflicting positions.

That did not stop the lie from growing…exponentially.

On September 25, 2012, United States President, Barack Hussein Obama , spoke before the United Nations General Assembly, blaming that same un-watched youtube.com video, for the massacre of 4 brave Americans, on the night of September 11, 2012, at the Benghazi , Libya, U.S. Embassy Compound,

…In every culture, those who love freedom for themselves must ask themselves how much they’re willing to tolerate freedom for others. And that is what we saw play out in the last two weeks, where a crude and disgusting video sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world. Now, I have made it clear that the United States government had nothing to do with this video, and I believe its message must be rejected by all who respect our common humanity. It is an insult not only to Muslims, but to America as well.

For as the city outside these walls makes clear, we are a country that has welcomed people of every race and every faith. We are home to Muslims who worship across our country. We not only respect the freedom of religion, we have laws that protect individuals from being harmed because of how they look or what they believe.

We understand why people take offense to this video because millions of our citizens are among them. I know there are some who ask why don’t we just ban such a video. The answer is enshrined in our laws. Our Constitution protects the right to practice free speech.

Let’s spring forward a little bit to the 2012 Vice-Presidential Debate, where the folllowing statements were made by the one, the only Jar Jar Biden:

MS. RADDATZ: What were you first told about the attack? Why were people talking about protests? When people in the consulate first saw armed men attacking with guns, there were no protesters. Why did that go on for weeks?

VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: Because that’s exactly what we were told —

MS. RADDATZ: By who?

VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: — by the intelligence community. The intelligence community told us that. As they learned more facts about exactly what happened, they changed their assessment. That’s why there’s also an investigation headed by Tom Pickering, a leading diplomat in the — from the Reagan years, who is doing an investigation as to whether or not there were any lapses, what the lapses were, so that they will never happen again. But —

MS. RADDATZ: And they wanted more security there.

VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: Well, we weren’t told they wanted more security again. We did not know they wanted more security again. And by the way, at the time we were told exactly — we said exactly what the intelligence community told us that they knew. That was the assessment. And as the intelligence community changed their view, we made it clear they changed their view. That’s why I said, we will get to the bottom of this.

Biden lied, too.

What the Benghazi Hearings showed yesterday, was a pathological predilection for dishonesty, insincerity, and inappropriateness, not only on the part of Former Secretary of State, Hillary Rodham Clinton,  but the whole Obama Administration, as well, from the top on down.

They all knew that the cause of the attacks was not some stupid Youtube Video, but a full-blown Muslim Terrorist Attack.

However, for the sake of Political Expediency…and the re-election of President Barack Hussein Obama and the legacy of his rapidly-failing Foreign Policy, known as Smart Power!, they had to quickly come up with an excuse for their liability in the deaths of those four brave Americans.

And now, Hillary Rodham Clinton, with her Oscar-worthy Performance in front of the House Committee yesterday, which including circuitous answers to Yes or No Questions and inappropriate smirks, accompanied by cackling laughter, has proven completely true and accurate as to what I and my fellow Conservative Americans have said about her all along:

She is a sociopath, who envisions herself to be smarter than everybody else, above the law, and White House-bound, because, “it’s her turn”.

The only place that she should be bound, at least in this life, is jail.

Her final destination promises to be a more Southern Locale…and infinitely hotter.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Send in the Clowns: The First 2016 Democratic Presidential Candidate Debate

Clown-CarPer gallup.com, Liberalism is America’s least popular political ideology, with only 23% of Americans admitting that they follow its tenets.

Last night’s First Democratic Presidential Candidate Debate of this election season demonstrated very clearly the reasons why.

While over 94 million Americans are absent from our workforce and our Enemies are gathering their armies in a prelude to Armageddon in the Middle East, with the destruction of God’s Chosen People, the nation of Israel, as the appetizer, and the nuclear annihilation of the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave as the main course, a Far Left Confab, featuring a bunch of old white folks from the Northeast, proved that “diversity” is only a word to 2015’s Democratic Party and their Presidential Candidate Hopefuls.

Liberal cause de celebres, such as climate change, gun control, “Black Lives Matter”, “undocumented immigrants” (illegal aliens), and “helping the Middle Class” (straight into poverty) were embraced and repeated ad nauseum by all of the Geritol Gang, firmly entrenched in the shared ignorant bliss of the repetitious mantra of the Liberal Hive-Mind…as their chauffeurs waited for them outside of the venue in their stretch limousines.

To CNN’s credit, they presented the debate in a much better format than Fox News did. And, Anderson Cooper did not allow his previous affiliation with the Clinton Foundation impede his duties as a Moderator.

Of course, the fact that CNN panders to the Left in all of their programming helped the continuity of the broadcast tremendously.

The Democratic Party knows that they are presenting the weakest field of potential Presidential Candidates that America has seen in a very long time.

Inquistr.com summarized this three-ring circus…

The CNN Democratic Presidential Debate, hosted by Anderson Cooper, was held at the luxurious Wynn Las Vegas casino hotel yesterday evening. Topics such as fighting for working class families, gun control, and the economy were addressed by U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders, from Vermont; former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton; former Rhode Island Governor Lincoln Chafee; former U.S. Senator, from Virginia, Jim Webb; and former Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley.

During his two minute debate introduction, Bernie Sanders did not mince words.

Sanders described an “unprecedented crisis” in America with a “campaign finance system that is corrupt and is undermining American democracy.” Sanders spoke with conviction and also took issue with Super PACs and the taxation of the top one percent earners. Sanders then cited a “moral responsibility” to take action on climate change and to make a concerted effort to make a move away from a fossil fuel-based economy.

Hillary Clinton’s opening two minutes began with a long-winded introduction. Anderson Cooper seemed to momentarily prod Clinton for something a little more substantive. Clinton then talked about job creation, infrastructure investment, sustainable energy, accepting the challenge posed by climate change to spur the U.S. economy, raising wages, and “finding ways so that companies share profits with the workers who help to make them.” Clinton also expressed a belief that the “wealthy pay too little and the middle class pays too much. ” Clinton further pledged to work toward paid family leave for Americans each year, bringing the U.S. in line with other countries. Clinton also discussed inequality in America.

When asked if she was a progressive or moderate, Hillary Clinton responded “I’m a progressive, but I’m a progressive who likes to get things done.”

Bernie Sanders then fielded a question asking about his “democratic socialist” leanings.

Sanders emphatically explained that “it is immoral and wrong that the top tenth of one percent in this country own as much wealth as the bottom 90 percent.” Then Sanders spoke of living “in a rigged economy” and “that 57 percent of income is going to the top one percent.” Sanders spoke of Wall Street’s “greed and recklessness.”

“Save capitalism from itself,” Hillary Clinton stated. “So it doesn’t run amok.”

“Of course we have to support small- and medium-sized businesses,” Sanders agrees, “the backbone of our economy.”

Anderson Cooper asked Lincoln Chafee about his different political affiliations over the years. Chafee responded that on the issues, he is a “block of granite.” Chafee cited fiscal responsibility, environmental issues, woman’s choice rights, gay marriage, aversion to overseas “entanglements,” and helping the less fortunate as major issues he has sought change on. 

Martin O’Malley was questioned about his zero tolerance policies and the fact that some point to this causing civil unrest in Baltimore, the city where he was mayor. O’Malley responded that, at the time of the Baltimore riot, arrests in the city had fallen to a “32-year low.” He described a family being “firebombed” after calling the police about drug dealers on a Baltimore street corner.

“We saved lives and we gave our city a better future,” O’Malley stated with regard to Baltimore.

Anderson Cooper spoke of “100,000” arrests and the NAACP and American Civil Liberties Union suing the city. O’Malley spoke of bringing “peace” to Baltimore.

Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton then spoke to gun control. Sanders summarized his position, explaining that if a gun shop owner sold a gun to someone legally, and then the person went and committed a criminal act, he feels that the gun shop should not be held liable. Sanders then noted that, if gun shop owners are selling guns illegally, then, “of course” they should be prosecuted.

Debate moderator Anderson Cooper then asked Hillary Clinton if she agrees with Bernie Sanders. Clinton responded “No.”

Sanders reiterated that he believed in “instant” background checks and mental health checks among other measures to keep guns out of the hands of people who shouldn’t have them. O’Malley called for tougher gun controls.

O’Malley and Sanders traded jabs about what Sanders sees as a rural/urban U.S.-divide on gun control. Jim Webb stated that guns should be available for families to protect themselves. Lincoln Chafee described the “gun lobby” fear-mongering the U.S. Congress by stirring panic with talk of “they’re coming to take away your guns,” and attempting to find common ground with them.

Sanders referred to the U.S. invasion of Iraq as the “worst foreign policy” decision of all-time. Lincoln Chafee was then asked what he thinks of Hillary Clinton voting for the U.S. invasion, where he reiterated Sanders’ “worst foreign policy” remarks and that there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

Clinton spoke about how President Obama, knowing that Clinton had voted for Iraq, still appointed her Secretary of State.

“The American people are sick and tired of hearing about your damn e-mails,” Sanders said, sticking-up for Clinton on her ongoing e-mail scandal, as discussed by the Inquisitr, drawing applause from the debate audience.

“Do black lives matter or do all lives matter?” Bernie Sanders was asked. “Black lives matter,” Bernie Sanders answered. He responded that cases like Sandra Bland’s should never happen. O’Malley echoed Sanders’ thoughts, “we have a lot of work to do.”

“We cannot keep imprisoning” more people than any other country globally, Hillary Clinton stated.

Martin O’Malley spoke about reinstating Glass-Steagall legislation. Clinton and Sanders professed a belief that big banks need to be broken up.

“Fraud is a business model,” Sanders bellowed and cited his opposition to Wall Street deregulation.

“Quit foreclosing on homes, quit engaging in these these kinds of speculative behaviors,” Hillary Clinton stated were her words to Wall Street shortly before the 2008 financial meltdown.

“Break up these banks!” Sanders’ baritone echoed through the Las Vegas debate hall.

Free public college education, current student debt, the middle class paying for the TARP bailout, expanding social security and Medicare, undocumented immigrants, immigration reform, health care for children, differences with Republicans, the treatment of veterans, the Patriot Act and the NSA, Edward Snowden, war, woman’s rights, prescription drug costs, President Obama, political outsiders, and climate change were among many other topics in discussed in substantive debate.

“We are a nation of immigrants,” Martin O’Malley stated.

“The only way we really transform America and do the things that the middle class and working class desperately need is through a political revolution!” Bernie Sanders declared to applause from debate audience members.

Searches for “Bernie Sanders” more than doubled searches for “Hillary Clinton” during the democratic presidential debate.

The members of the Geritol Gang, that are the main players among the potential Democratic Presidential Candidates, are so weak, they make Pee Wee Herman look like Sylvester Stallone.

The wailing and gnashing of teeth by the Leaders of the Democrats is so apparent, that an extra podium was standing by, before the debate, just in case Crazy Uncle Joe Biden, answered their desperate pleas, throwing his hat into the ring, in order to “save” the election for the doomed Democratic Liberals.

Which makes a certain kind of warped sense. Because as divorced from reality as the Far Left Democratic Party of today is, what’s one more clown to stuff in the Circus Clown Car?

Until He Comes,

KJ