As I was stepping out of the shower this morning, I made a mistake.
Ahem.
My wife looked over at me and said, “that’s nothing.”
She said, “you were in bed this morning and I could swear your fart said ‘Hi Hillary.’ Your ass said ‘Hi Hillary.’ ”
I’m not making this up.
BZ
Hillary Clinton and her minions insist that the issues of Benghazi and her servers and her email are nothing but distractions, smoke and mirrors attempting to obfuscate from the real issues of homosexuality, increasing the minimum wage, free upper education, more illegals, politically correct speech. You know, the real issues of the day.
True free-thinking individuals recognize Hillary for what she truly is: a political reptile, as charming as an eastern diamondback rattler and as trustworthy, whose arrogance and sense of entitlement is actually beginning to even stagger the Demorats — to the point where the clouds are parting and Joe Biden is being dusted off in the wings, a top hat clapped on his head.
These days it’s popular to say things matter. Bill Whittle makes an argument for something else mattering:
Yes, things matter. Honesty matters. Fidelity matters. Character matters. The truth matters.
And, all things considered, even the Demorats are beginning to realize that Hillary may be doing nothing more than reliving her previous crash in 2008.
Though Hugh Hewitt thought, once, Hillary Clinton was the proverbial “shoe-in,” it would appear that, possibly, no one yet fits Cinderella’s Demorat slipper.
But it’s early.
Why I continue to pound away.
BZ
The obvious, from Breitbart.com:
CNN, Politico, WaPo, NYT Bury Hillary Clinton Email Bombshell
by John Nolte
Tuesday night the bombshell news hit that Democrat presidential frontrunner Hillary Clinton turned over her rogue email server to authorities and that the Inspector General found that, despite Clinton saying the complete opposite was true just a few months ago, two highly classified documents were in fact found in her emails and therefore on an unsecured server located in her New York home.
It is crucial to note that those 2 are only part of a very small sample size of the thousands of emails Hillary turned over.
Let’s be truthful. There is only one reason Hillary wanted her own digital correspondence on a private server: control. Control of what she writes and what she thinks. Control of where it goes and who can access the information. She wanted to purposely avoid the FOIA and wanted to avoid having to answer to anyone. She is Hillary Clinton and owes no allegiance to anyone but herself. It really is that simple.
Control and avoidance and lack of answerability. She wanted to make all of her inner thoughts and writings accessible to no one. She wants to be responsible to no one. She is a Clinton and she is that arrogant.
It is arrogance at that level which put the security of the United States in jeopardy. And put sensitive information directly into the hands of the Russians, the Chinese and, by dint of that, the Iranians, the North Koreans and other countries in the Middle East — perhaps even ISIS.
The Demorats and Leftists have had and will continue to have their asses covered by the mainstream media, what I term the American Media Maggots. Bernard Goldberg knew that years and years ago.
Some factions in the GOP have decided that, instead of fighting, they’re simply going to be “Demorat Lite.”
That is completely unacceptable. For me and, primarily, for this nation. It is Leftists and Demorats who got us into our current situation. Demorats run our large cities and they are foundering, on the cusp of collapse from day to day.
The Demorats have taken down this nation quite a number of pegs, precisely as Mr Obama wished. When the GOP is Dem Lite and it is populated with way too many RINOs, I won’t stop.
I’m not going away and neither are the rest of the true Conservatives. The GOP is “enjoying” the run of Trump because Trump, as loud and brash and crashing and uninformed as he is, is appealing to those who truly want someone from the Republican side to show some umbrage, some anger, some backbone, and stand UP to the Leftists and the Demorats.
I’m not going away, in any case. The more that Leftists and their “causes” push, the more I shall push back.
Stand with me.
The government, ladies and gentlemen, is as efficient, trustworthy and competent as the EPA is with the Animas River.
BZ
And Hillary Rodham Clinton is smack dab in the middle of it.
This just out on Twitter, from John Schindler:
Is this the information that may push things in the proper direction and have actual consequences for the liar known as Hillary Rodham Clinton?
Click on the photo, enlarge, and read the letter.
Plus, from the Observer.com:
BREAKING: Cheryl Mills to Destroy Emails About Boss Hillary Clintonby Sidney Powell
UPDATE (5:23 pm, August 10, 2015): Friday evening, Judge Sullivan entered an order in response to Judicial Watch’s emergency filing. He instructed the State Department to ask Ms. Clinton, Ms. Abedin and Ms. Mills not to destroy any emails. Neither Ms. Abedin nor Ms. Mills provided a certification under penalty of perjury as the judge had requested in his order a week ago. Ms. Clinton has provided a carefully worded and hedged certification that can be read here. She claims she has provided all emails “in her custody” – or directed them to be produced. That refers to the 55,000 emails her staff already carefully culled. We know that “all records in her custody” does not mean all federal records she had received or created—because additional ones have already been produced by her confidant Sidney Blumenthal. Ms. Clinton also said that Ms. Mills did not have an address on her private server but that Ms. Abedin did. There is an unconfirmed report that Ms. Mills’ attorneys have advised that she will not destroy the emails she has in digital form.
In a letter sent to the U.S. State Department and just filed today with U.S. federal Judge Emmet G. Sullivan, the counsel for Cheryl Mills wrote: “Ms. Mills does not believe that she has paper copies of potential records in her possession. Following our production on August 10, 2015 [of the defense counsel’s version of the electronic records], we have instructed her to delete any and all electronic records in her possession.”
The FBI is investigating Hillary Clinton and, of course, this has primarily been glossed-over by the American Media Maggots as one would expect — though that may be changing.
Hillary Rodham Clinton may be in violation of the following:
1. Executive Order 13526
2. 18 USC § 793
3. 32 CFR 1236.22 of the 2009 National Archives and Records Administration
Casey Harper at TheDailyCaller wrote:
“‘By using a private email system, Secretary Clinton violated the Federal Records Act and the State Department’s Foreign Affairs Manual regarding records management, and worse, could have left classified and top secret documents vulnerable to cyber attack,’ Cause of Action Executive Director Dan Epstein said in an email to reporters.
‘This is an egregious violation of the law, and if it were anyone else, they could be facing fines and criminal prosecution.’”
Hillary was putting Top Secret information on her server. Of that I have no doubt whatsoever. She was a catastrophe at the Department of State and will be a dangerous train wreck as a president, as she has no concept of security or consideration for security issues that may (and have!) jeopardize the United States of America.
Because, after all of this, you can be guaranteed that the Russians have read Hillary’s emails as have the Chinese and, by dint of these two nations, so has Iran and North Korea and likely elements of ISIS and other Middle Eastern nations.
Right this very second, who has control of the server, the thumb drives and backups?
This is an issue over which other persons would customarily do federal prison time.
BZ
Hillary Clinton recently spoke to CNN this week about her e-mails, and said that she has never received a subpoena regarding those e-mails. At all. This is unequivocal.
Hillary Clinton: “I’ve never had a subpoena. Let’s take a deep breath here.”
Except that Hillary Clinton lied again.
On the Wednesday edition of the Hugh Hewitt Radio Show, former Representative John Campbell interviewed Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC), who is chairman of the House Select Committee on Benghazi. The conversation between Campbell and Gowdy, transcribed by Duane Patterson, producer of the HHRS, is as follows:
The Transcript:
JC: We have with us on the line now Congressman Trey Gowdy and chairman of the House Select Committee on Benghazi. Hey, Trey, great to have you on the show.
TG: Congressman, we miss you, and thank you for having me on.
JC: Well, thank you so much for coming on. Now I’m going to play for you, I’m sure you expected this, the clip from Hillary Clinton yesterday when she was being interviewed on CNN by Brianna Keilar. So please play that clip.
BK: Facing a subpoena, deleted emails from them?
HRC: You know, you’re starting with so many assumptions that are, I’ve never had a subpoena.
JC: I’ve never had a subpoena, her words. Congressman Trey Gowdy, did Hillary Clinton lie yesterday?
TG: Well, she certainly had a subpoena. You know, when you lie, a lie suggests an intent to deceive. I can’t imagine whatever intent she could possibly have. I try not to use the word lie. I can certainly tell you this. It is a fact that there was a subpoena issued to her in March of 2015. But Congressman, it’s also a fact that there was a subpoena in existence from another Congressional committee far before that one. So there are two subpoenas. There are letters from Congress. And there’s a statutory obligation to her to preserve public records. So whether it’s a subpoena in place or whether it’s a statute in place, or whether it’s a Congressional investigation in place, you can’t delete and wipe out public records.
JC: Now Chairman Gowdy, I have the subpoena that your committee sent out, I have a copy of it, sitting in front of me from March of 2015. But you’re now telling me that there was another one prior to that?
TG: Oh, yes, sir. There was, think back right after Benghazi, Jason Chaffetz wrote a letter to Secretary Clinton, in fact, saying Congress has the right and the authority to investigate these attacks. That is tantamount to a ‘do not destroy’ request. And also keep in mind, Congress wrote her directly when she was Secretary of State and asked her specifically, do you ever use personal email. She never answered that question. She never said yes, she never said no. All right, fast forward. The Oversight Committee is looking into Benghazi. They issued a subpoena to the State Department to bring certain documents over to Congress so we can inspect them. It is that subpoena that ultimately led the State Department to give us the first eight emails we got from her.
JC: And when was that?
TG: We got them in August of…
JC: No, but when was that subpoena?
TG: 2013.
JC: 2013?
TG: Yes, sir.
JC: So she, all right, so, because she had this subpoena in March, 2015, and then you’re saying she had another one in 2013.
TG: There was another one to the State Department. In August of 2013, there were two subpoenas sent to the State Department, which are requests for documents. But as a result of that subpoena to the State Department, the State Department then produced to us her emails. So there is no way to claim that there was not some legal process directing that those emails be retained and ultimately produced, because they were.
JC: Yeah, because I’ve read that her trying to weasel out of this is, out of the lie, and I’m going to use that term, and I’m going to get back to it in a minute, but is that well, I thought that the question was whether I was under any subpoenas when the emails were deleted. And so obviously, she had subpoenas. I mean, there is no way that she didn’t have subpoenas. That’s without question. I’ve got them sitting in front of me. But you’re saying that also, there were subpoenas that covered the deletion of those emails?
TG: There are, there were subpoenas in place well before our committee ever existed.
JC: Right.
TG: There were two, one related to ARB documents, and one related to what we call reading room documents. And they were sent to the Department of State asking that Congress be delivered these documents. Where that becomes important is it was as a result of that oversight subpoena that the Department of State first gave us any of her emails. So clearly, her emails were covered by that subpoena, or the Department of State never would have given them to us. Now her out is going to be this, or what she thinks is her out, well, the State Department didn’t have my emails, I did, which then moves us to the law, the statute, the regulation, which places on her an affirmative duty to protect and preserve public records. So whether there’s a subpoena in place or not, the law is and has been in place, you have to preserve public record. She decided on her own what was and was not public record. And John, what’s even worse than that, I mean, think when she left office. She left office in February of 2013, right?
JC: Right.
TG: She didn’t delete and wipe clean that server until the fall of 2014, 20 months later, after she left.
JC: Indicating to me an intent, and I’m not a lawyer, but an intent to deceive.
TG: Well, at a minimum, that timing is curious, isn’t it?
JC: Yeah.
TG: We’re to the point where the Benghazi Committee is up and running, and they’re putting pressure on the State Department. We want the rest of her emails. And next thing we know, she’s swapping letters with the State Department, not telling us about it, she wipes her server clean. Then the story breaks in 2015, hey, all she used is personal email and she had her own server. That’s when we sent the second subpoena. But that first subpoena was clearly sufficient to cover her emails or the State Department wouldn’t have given them to us.
JC: So Chairman Gowdy, what do you do now? If she destroyed evidence under subpoena, and if, and she is now deepening that lie, what are you going to do about it? What can you do about it?
TG: Well, my first, you know, I had another job before I got to Congress…
JC: Yes.
TG: And that one had certain powers, and different powers than the one I have now. My obligation now is to write the final definitive accounting of what happened in Benghazi, which is why I’m interested in her records. I could care less about yoga and bridesmaids dresses. I want the documents that relate to Benghazi. She claimed that she turned the full record over to the State Department, but we learned a week or so ago that there are at least 15 emails or portions thereof that she did not turn over.
JC: Right.
TG: So you know, at some point, the Speaker has a decision to make, or another committee of Congress has a decision to make. I don’t have the authority to subpoena her server. We have asked her to turn it over to a neutral third party so that person, an archivist, and expert in federal records, can make sure that everything that should be in the public domain is in the public domain. I do not care about her personal stuff. I do care about every document that the media, the public, and Congress is entitled to. And we’ll never know the answer to that question until somebody other than her lawyers looks at the server.
JC: Yeah, and I mean, you know, when she says oh, I turned over, I mean, that’s like in any case, the accused saying well, I made the decision about what evidence might be used or not. No, you don’t make that decision. All the evidence has to be presented, right?
TG: Well, look at the three explanations she’s come up with so far. First thing she said was I used a single device for convenience. Well, we know that’s not true. Then she said oh, those emails from Sidney Blumenthal were unsolicited. Well, we now know that’s not true. But the big thing she said is you don’t need to worry about my email arrangement, because I gave everything to the State Department. I erred on the side of inclusion. And next thing we know, we’re getting emails from Sidney Blumenthal that involve her that she never even turned over to the State Department. So we know what she turned over was not complete, just in the area of Libya. About other countries and other issues when she was the Secretary of State, it’s outside my committee’s lane, but I would think the public and the media and Congress would be interested in whether or not there’s a full record of her tenure as Secretary of State. We know it’s not. We just don’t know how deficient the record is.
JC: Chairman Gowdy, I know you’re reluctance to use the word lie. I had that same reluctance when I wore the Congressional pin. You know, oh, this is not true, it’s a falsehood, it’s blah, blah, blah, all that. There’s so much of this, and so much evidence from this woman now, and she was running for president, and the intent is clearly there that she doesn’t want people to know what she did, I think she is lying.
TG: Well, I typically use the phrase demonstrably false. It is false. I can prove that it’s false, and I can prove that you should have known it was false at the time. What I cannot do is climb into someone’s head. I just can’t do it. But for my purposes, it is enough that I know it was false, it was false at the time you said it, and I can make a pretty good circumstantial case that you should have known it was false.
JC: And there’s an awful lot of them there. Congressman Gowdy, Chairman Gowdy, good luck with whatever you can do and whatever you can do to bring to America the truth about Hillary Clinton, because you will never, ever, ever get it from her.
End of interview.
(Thanks to Duane Patterson and Hugh Hewitt.)
The back-and-forth between Gowdy and Clinton is, naturally, described in the stories of the American Media Maggots as much ado about nothing, conducted by biased persons who have no evidence. Salon magazine calls it an “anti-Hillary witch hunt.”
Why do Republicans and Conservatives and Gowdy continue on with Benghazi? Because four good Americans died at that consulate, the US deserves to know the truth, and too many people are refusing to speak about it or are outright lying about it.
This is why some people will not let Benghazi rest.
BZ