Tag Archives: rule of law

Hillary LIES AGAIN: 15K MORE emails found

Posted on by

Hillary Clinton LIESYes yes, fine, go ahead, be like me.

Shake your head and wonder just where this nation is going — when a politician such as Hillary Rodham Clinton can lie to the American people, violate laws, and the Director of the FBI, James Comey, prefers no charges whatsoever.

Hillary lies about lying.  She lied to Patricia Smith, the mother of a Benghazi victim.  Then she lies about former Secretary of State Colin Powell.

For a refresher:

Judicial Watch released 44 additional Hillary email chains on August 10th:

Then this, from the WashingtonPost.com:

FBI uncovers 14,900 more documents in Clinton email probe

by Spencer S. Hsu

The FBI’s year-long investigation of Hillary Clinton’s private email server uncovered 14,900 emails and documents from her time as secretary of state that had not been disclosed by her attorneys, and a federal judge on Monday pressed the State Department to begin releasing emails sooner than mid-October as it planned.

Justice Department lawyers said last week that the State Department would review and turn over Clinton’s work-related emails to a conservative legal group. The records are among “tens of thousands” of documents found by the FBI in its probe and turned over to the State Department, Justice Department attorney Lisa Ann Olson said Monday in court.

The 14,900 Clinton documents are nearly 50 percent more than the roughly 30,000 emails that Clinton’s lawyers deemed work-related and returned to the department in December 2014.

Read that again: “The 14,900 Clinton documents are nearly 50 percent more than the roughly 30,000 emails that Clinton’s lawyers deemed work-related and returned to the department in December 2014.”

This might be a good time to go back above and play that first video from Hillary Clinton again.  I could have sworn she said she turned everything in.

I probably just misheard her misspeak.

Note to Spencer Hsu: check the lug-nuts on your car every day, buddy.  Buying a mirror on a pole in order to look under your vehicle probably wouldn’t be a bad idea either, my friend.

BZ

 

 Share

Exposed: gag order on FBI agents in re Hillary

Posted on by

Hillary Clinton FBI InvestigatedFrom FoxNews.com:

‘Gag’ order: FBI confirms special secrecy agreements for agents in Clinton email probe

by Catherine Herridge & Pamela K. Browne

The FBI has confirmed to a senior Republican senator that agents were sworn to secrecy — and subject to lie detector tests — in the Hillary Clinton email probe, an extensive measure one former agent said could have a “chilling effect.”

A July 1 letter sent by a senior deputy to FBI Director James Comey to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, detailed the restrictions on agents. The letter, reviewed by Fox News, confirmed agents signed a “Case Briefing Acknowledgement” which says the disclosure of information is “strictly prohibited” without prior approval, and those who sign are subject to lie detector tests.

“The purpose of this form is to maintain an official record of persons knowledgeable of a highly sensitive Federal Bureau of Investigation counterintelligence investigation,” the agreement attached to the Grassley letter reads, “….I (FBI agent) also understand that, due to the nature and sensitivity of this investigation, compliance with these restrictions may be subject to verification by polygraph examination.”

In other words: the true nature of what was revealed shall never come out, agents.

A “chilling effect” is being kind.  It is a “suppression of freedom” effect.

When something like this occurs, there is always a reason.  What, at your greatest reach, do you possible suppose might be one reason for this?

A gold star for those of you who said “because Hillary and the FBI via the DOJ via Loretta Lynch via Barack Hussein Obama have cut a deal to ensure that the truth is not revealed regarding the investigation of Hillary Clinton’s emails.”  Plain and simple.

It doesn’t take a rocket surgeon to suss that one out.  THE.  FIX.  WAS.  IN.

Hillary Clinton LawsDemorats, Leftists and the like all bleat “this is much ado about nothing.”  I say: REVERSE THE ROLES.  A Republican did the same things Hillary did.  “Off with their head” would be the rallying cry from the American Media Maggots and everyone on the Left as well as Demorats.  There would be no time limit and no minimization.

“Silly wabbit.  Rules are for Proles, Groundlings, Serfs and Commoners.”

BZ

P.S.

Thanks for Spokes for the h/t.

 Share

We’ve lost the border, we’ve lost our sovereignty, we’ve lost the Rule of Law

Posted on by

Mexican LEOs at the BorderMexican law enforcement officers on the Mexican side of the border, April of 2014, photo taken from the American side.  Why are they hiding their faces?  See below.

When you lose your borders, you lose control over who enters your country, when, and for what reason.  You lose control over your right to determine your country’s future.  In essence, you lose your sovereignty.

And when you have a president and a DC administration that eschews laws already extant regarding your borders, for political reasons, you lose the Rule of Law.  When DC can pick and choose which of its laws to hold, you lose the Rule of Law.

Holding to law then becomes easier to eschew and disregard.

Why and how is our border porous, beyond the obvious means?  Please read this, from the WashingtonTimes.com:

Feds: Armed Mexican troops, police regularly jump border to cross into U.S.

by Stephen Dinan

More than 500 armed Mexican troops or police have strayed across the border into the U.S. over the past decade, according to numbers the Homeland Security Department provided to Congress on Tuesday that shed new light on how often the international boundary is violated by official agents.

The information comes even as the U.S. is trying to earn the release of Marine Sgt. Andrew Tahmooressi, who has been held by Mexican authorities since the beginning of April, when he drove through an official port of entry into Mexico while carrying firearms.

“Strayed.”

You read it here.  Mexican Federales and military units regularly cross the border into the United States from Mexico — to the point where there are meetings to negotiate and defuse the situations.  To wit:

Gil Kerlikowske, commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, said in a letter to Rep. Duncan Hunter that such instanced, known as “incursions” are “infrequent” but happen often enough that Mexico and the U.S. have created special liaison units to help negotiate the situations.

Mr. Kerlikowske said there have been about 152 instances, involving a total of 525 armed Mexican military or law enforcement, who have been documented encroaching on the U.S. side of the border since Jan. 1, 2004.

At the point when we should be getting more serious about our borders, we are allowing them to leak like sieves and — further — we are corralling up those youngsters who are now entering illegally, putting them on conveyances and then dispersing them many miles AWAY from the US/Mexico border so that they may never be tracked and never be found, with the brain-glazingly ridiculous command to “go back from whence you came.”

Oh yes.  I’m sure they’ll get right on that.  Self-deportation.  That works so well.

Just one question: why are those persons bused further AWAY from the border itself?

This is absolute insanity.  I repeat: insanity.

If I were a USBP officer or an ICE officer with even ONE ounce of courage or fidelity or integrity, I would cringe at wearing the uniform.  I would feel guilty for drawing a paycheck.  I would hate to go to work knowing that, ultimately, I am responsible for the diminishment of my country and the corruption of our Rule of Law.

I would ask: should I even wear this uniform at all?

And: what does the oath I took actually mean, when I originally swore in?

Cowardice asks the question: is it safe?  Expediency asks the question: is it politic?  Vanity asks the question: is it popular?  But an actual conscience asks the question: is it right?

BZ

 

 Share

Jeb Bush gets stupid with his “act of love”

Posted on by

Jeb Bush Act of LoveSome Republicans won’t like this but I couldn’t less: we don’t need another Bush as president.  And we certainly don’t need someone as blatantly stupid as Jeb Bush.

From the WashingtonPost.com:

Jeb Bush: Many illegal immigrants come out of an ‘act of love’

Former Florida governor Jeb Bush said Sunday that many who illegally come to the United States do so out of an “act of love” for their families and should be treated differently than people who illegally cross U.S. borders or overstay visas.

Right.  An “act of love.”  But wait; it gets better.  Or should I say: more idiotic.

Asked about immigration, Bush started by saying that a bipartisan bill passed by the Senate last year made “a good effort” at proposing ways to ensure that people overstaying visas leave the country.

“A great country ought to know where those folks are and politely ask them to leave,” he said, adding later that properly targeting people who overstay visas “would restore people’s confidence” in the nation’s immigration system.

So: wait.  Am I the only one seeing this?  Jeb Bush wants to kick people out who have “overstayed their visas,” but wants to continue to allow those who entered completely illegally to remain?

How starkly insane is this?  Is Jeb Bush completely ignorant of the statistics across the nation and, specifically, in highly-populated Fornicalia?

People who have visas are generally here for education.  To try to contribute something.  People who are illegal have little to contribute except low skills and potential disease.

Is Jeb Bush completely ignorant of the fact that, on any given day, the Los Angeles County Jail’s population consists of roughly 40% to 50% illegal Mexican immigrants arrested for physical crimes against the lawful citizens of the state of Fornicalia and residents of the United States?

Is he aware that, prior to the current rough economic times, LA County and Orange County and other SoCal jails were populated by up to 70% illegal Mexicans?

Is he ignorant of the fact that Fornicalia Mexican gangs have striated themselves into, at base, Nortenos and Surenos (north and south) and a myriad of gangs in between?  And that they rule local jails and state prisons?  Because they are illegals from Mexico?

Surenos believe in the Mexican Mafia or La Eme.  They hold to the color blue.  They outnumber Nortenos demographically in the state.

Nortenos hold the color red and align with the NF, or the Nuestra Familia.  Their “territory” is north of Bakersfield but even that isn’t enough to hold “their line.”  MS-13 generally aligns with Surenos because of their geographic origin.  MS-13 has, at minimum, 60,000 members.

Is the phrase “demography is prophecy” yet ringing true with anyone?  Bueller?

Is Bush ignorant of the fact that, in Fornicalia, because of AB 109, Mexican gangs consisting of illegal immigrants are now major players in gang politics and power and deaths and are now aligning with the ultra-violet MS-13 and — because my county has sucked at the national DC tit — federal “detainees” now have more rights and perks and benefits than American citizens in our county jails?  How many have EBT cards?  How many are on SSI?  How many are on Worker’s Comp?  How many are pumping the “system” for all they can?

Yes.  Most of them.

The days of Juan Valdez picking coffee beans are done.  Juan now drives a 2001 Lexus and has more discretionary spending money than you do.  He shops at your local store and buys steaks and beer.  On the EBT card that you purchased for him.

Charles Krauthammer weighed in on Jeb Bush.  He thought the comment was bizarre, indicating he believed Bush was sincere but leading with his chin.  There are other people in the world waiting patiently in line and are not violating laws.  Realistically, the situation involves not just one family but 11 million.  Sovereignty means something.  We should control who actually comes into the country.  But apparently Jeb Bush believes this is inconsequential.

And that was one of my quite precise points.  Thank you, Charles.

Further: just when did we conclude as a nation that a certain segment of society can decide, at will, to ignore our laws?  And when did we, as a nation, decide that this ignorance of our laws was to be tacitly condoned and then, further, promoted in public?

My final two sentences for this post: Jeb Bush, you are a moron.  An uninformed and unrealistic moron.  Sir.

Was “sir” the third sentence?

BZ

P.S.
Thanks to Michael Patrick Tracy for the graphic at the top of this post.

 

 Share