Will he buttress the Hillary Clinton/Susan Rice insistence that the attack was the result of a poorly-produced video? Or will he substantiate that Hillary Clinton, Rice, and the rest of the then-Obama administration were all a pack of liars?
Benghazi attack organizer captured in Libya, now en route to US, officials tell AP
by Melissa Leon
U.S. Special Operations Forces have captured a top militant who was “instrumental” in the Benghazi attack in Libya in 2012 that killed U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens, an information management officer and two former Navy SEALs, according to a report by the Associated Press.
“The officials say U.S. commandos captured the unidentified man in Libya and are transporting him back to the U.S. The officials say the mission was approved by President Donald Trump and done in coordination with Libya’s internationally recognized government,” the AP reported, adding that the officials “weren’t authorized to speak” and “demanded anonymity.”
Do you suspect he will have a tale to tell? I believe so. And I think the Trump administration wants to hear that tale.
We already know that Hillary Clinton, then Secretary of State, lied nakedly to the families of the four Americans killed in the Benghazi attack. It was caught on video.
Family member of the four slain Americans — U.S. Ambassador to Libya, J. Christopher Stevens; U.S. Foreign Service Information Management Officer Sean Smith; and CIA contractors Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty, both former Navy SEALs — were not only lied to their faces by Hillary Clinton, they had their integrity questioned and ridiculed by Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Read the body language, the scorn, the arrogance, the utter contempt the positioning of Hillary Clinton illustrates. She believes this is so completely beneath her, that she answers to no one.
Hillary, as revealed by her emails to the Middle East and to her own daughter Chelsea, was fully cognizant that night of the fact that a video had nothing whatsoever to do with the Benghazi attack.
The 800-page report revealed that in the months leading up to the attack, there was worsening security in Libya, poor bureaucratic leadership and inadequate resources. The report showed Clinton and the State Department’s inadequacy to protect the Libyan diplomatic outpost. The report also revealed that the CIA missed the threat and wrote faulty intelligence after the attack.
Translated: Americans asked for more help but were rebuffed by Hillary and Obama because it failed to measure up to the meme of having “al Qaeda on the run.”
Clinton told a U.S. House committee that she was aware of the dangers in Libya but “there was no actionable intelligence” indicating a planned terrorist attack. The report showed that intelligence was available, but Clinton and her top aide, Patrick Kennedy, failed to realize the risk of a potential attack.
She then displayed this wretched contempt when under oath, as dismissive and insolent as a human can be. I utilize the word “human” rather loosely.
Hillary Clinton, the Demorats, Leftists and the American Media Maggots are oh-so-going to rue the day the decided to press the “Trump/Russia/collusion” meme. Bladed boomerang.
So yes, I will be quite very curious what the unnamed Muslim organizer of the Benghazi attack has to say. For all of those reasons and more.
More proof that the tick-like embedded Obama-Obedient Deep State Loyalistas continue to subvert, undermine, compromise, diminish, impair and sabotage the presidency of Donald Trump, who won his spot not by imperial fiat but by playing according to the rules.
Leftists at the Department of State hate that. They hate his policies. They’ve already said so. They want more “refugees,” not fewer.
Report: Trump Administration to Nearly Double Rate of Refugee Admissions for Balance of FY 2017
by Michael Patrick Leahy
The New York Timesis reporting that the State Department will nearly double the rate of refugee admissions to the United States for the balance of FY 2017, from the current rate of 830 per week to 1,500 per week.
Of course, that’s at the behest of President Trump, right?
“Despite repeated efforts by President Trump to curtail refugee resettlements, the State Department this week quietly lifted the department’s restriction on the number of refugees allowed to enter the United States,” the Timesreported on Friday.
The result could be a near doubling of refugees entering the country, from about 830 people a week in the first three weeks of this month to well over 1,500 people per week by next month, according to refugee advocates. Tens of thousands of refugees are waiting to come to the United States.
The State Department’s decision was conveyed in an email on Thursday to the private agencies in countries around the world that help refugees manage the nearly two-year application process needed to enter the United States.
In her email, Jennifer L. Smith, a department official, wrote that the refugee groups could begin bringing people to the United States “unconstrained by the weekly quotas that were in place.”
Uh-oh. Maybe not conducted on behalf of the President of the United States, one Donald John Trump.
It is unclear if the State Department made this upward adjustment with the knowledge and approval of President Trump. The Department of Justice, however, was apparently consulted.
Really? Just who within the DOJ? Was it from the top via Attorney General Jeff Sessions? No one seems yet to know.
“A State Department spokeswoman, speaking on the condition of anonymity because she was not authorized to discuss the issue publicly, said the department had consulted the Department of Justice about its refugee quotas and had decided to adjust them,” the Times reported.
Again: who was “consulted”? Did this alleged “consultation” go right into the office of the AG himself? Did it somehow wend its way into the White House? Shock of shocks, I suspect not.
As of May 24, 45,533 refugees have been admitted to the United States in FY 2017, which began on October 1, 2016. Earlier this week, Breitbart News estimated that if the refugee entry rate continued at the level of 817 per week (the rate of the four most recent weeks), the total number of refugees admitted to the United States in FY 2017 by September 30 would be 60,672.
Do we even know where our current bulk of refugees are or where they went? How many entered? How many visa overstays? Of course we don’t because the Obama administration didn’t care and, more pointedly, didn’t want to know.
Stop. Let’s look at the numbers. I’ll wager you had no idea this great a flood was occurring right under our very noses. That’s 45,000 “refugees” into the US before the end of the 2017 federal fiscal year.
What is a federal fiscal year? Every FFY starts on October 1st and runs to the last day of September. Translated: there’s still a lot of FY 2017 remaining.
You want stats? Costs? How about this, where Rep. Scott DesJarlais speaks to Department of Homeland Security and State Department officials over the dangers of allowing refugees from Syria into the United States without the ability to properly vet them, including their likely terror ties.
Let’s also consult further statistics. From PewResearch.org:
A total of 38,901 Muslim refugees entered the U.S. in fiscal year 2016, making up almost half (46%) of the nearly 85,000 refugees who entered the country in that period, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of data from the State Department’s Refugee Processing Center. That means the U.S. has admitted the highest number of Muslim refugees of any year since data on self-reported religious affiliations first became publicly available in 2002.
Your State Department wants more.
Opponents of the federal refugee resettlement program vigorously criticized the reported change in the Trump administration’s refugee admissions policy for FY 2017.
“Stunning news: Trump State Department opens the flood gates, refugee admissions will explode in coming weeks,” Ann Corcoran wrote at Refugee Resettlement Watch on Saturday.
“Betraying the voters who elected Donald Trump, the Department of State slipped the news to the contractors on Thursday who then slipped the news to the New York Times just as you were packing up for the beach or getting ready for a family barbecue using the federal government’s favorite holiday weekend trick to bury the news,” Corcoran added.
But wait. Muslims vs Christians? Sorry. Christians lose. Even Newsweek.com admits:
THE U.S. BARS CHRISTIAN, NOT MUSLIM, REFUGEES FROM SYRIA
by Elliott Abrams
The headline for this column—The U.S. Bars Christian, Not Muslim, Refugees From Syria—will strike many readers as ridiculous.
But the numbers tell a different story: The United States has accepted 10,801 Syrian refugees, of whom 56 are Christian. Not 56 percent; 56 total, out of 10,801. That is to say, one-half of 1 percent.
One half of one percent. Oddly enough, that corresponds to the number of transgender persons in the US, the likes for which we must turn our society upside-down.
We’ll go to bat for transgenders but Christians can go to hell in their minority numbers?
The Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration, the administrative part of the State Department that manages the inflow of refugees to the United States, continues to be run by holdovers from the Obama administration.
What a shock. I’m shocked. I’m sure you’re equally shocked. State Department underminers are still back at this:
Rigged primaries = FAILED;
Rigged debates = FAILED;
Rigged general = FAILED;
Rigged AMM = FAILED;
Rigged FBI = FAILED;
Rigged recount = FAILED;
Rigged “fake news” = FAILED;
Rigged “Russia hackers” = FAILED;
Rigged “Hamilton Electors” = FAILED.
What’s left? To undermine from the inside at the DOS. They have an agenda and they have made no bones about it.
Stunning news: Trump State Department opens the flood gates, refugee admissions will explode in coming weeks
Betraying the voters who elected Donald Trump, the Department of State slipped the news to the contractors on Thursday who then slipped the news to the New York Timesjust as you were packing up for the beach or getting ready for a family barbecue using the federal government’s favorite holiday weekend trick to bury the news.
Forget everything I said in my post yesterday about Trump’s “average” admissions. If they do as they are now saying they will, Donald Trump will be responsible for one of six highest resettlement years since 9/11.
U.S. Quietly Lifts Limit on Number of Refugees Allowed In
by Gardiner Harris
WASHINGTON — Despite repeated efforts by President Trump to curtail refugee resettlements, the State Department this week quietly lifted the department’s restriction on the number of refugees allowed to enter the United States.
The result could be a near doubling of refugees entering the country, from about 830 people a week in the first three weeks of this month to well over 1,500 people per week by next month, according to refugee advocates. Tens of thousands of refugees are waiting to come to the United States.
Tens of thousands. The bulk of whom are Muslim.
President Trump wanted a travel stay from primarily seven, then six Middle Eastern terror-oriented nations. He is getting the exact opposite, aided and abetted by black robed men and women nurturing and issuing their very own fake laws.
You can see how well that’s going for Europe. Do we really want that same state of affairs here in the United States? More deaths from persons who have no investment whatsoever in Western culture or civilization and, further, want not simply to be just indifferent but want to tear it down completely?
FBI agreed to destroy laptops of Clinton aides with immunity deal, lawmaker says
by Catherine Herridge and Adam Shaw
Immunity deals for two top Hillary Clinton aides included a side arrangement obliging the FBI to destroy their laptops after reviewing the devices, House Judiciary Committee sources told Fox News on Monday.
Sources said the arrangement with former Clinton chief of staff Cheryl Mills and ex-campaign staffer Heather Samuelson also limited the search to no later than Jan. 31, 2015. This meant investigators could not review documents for the period after the email server became public — in turn preventing the bureau from discovering if there was any evidence of obstruction of justice, sources said.
The Republican chairman of the House Judiciary Committee fired off a letter Monday to Attorney General Loretta Lynch asking why the DOJ and FBI agreed to the restrictive terms, including that the FBI would destroy the laptops after finishing the search.
“Like many things about this case, these new materials raise more questions than answers,” Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., wrote in the letter obtained by Fox News.
Precisely correct. Because if you “do deals,” then you are — unless you’re a complete dunsel — expecting something in return.
“Doesn’t the willingness of Ms. Mills and Ms. Samuelson to have their laptops destroyed by the FBI contradict their claim that the laptops could have been withheld because they contained non-relevant, privileged information? If so, doesn’t that undermine the claim that the side agreements were necessary?” Goodlatte asks.
Why yes, it does. Read that paragraph over very carefully, because of the reveal. IF the laptops were not important to the case, then why would they require destruction?
Surely, destruction of the laptops was not an issue brought to the table by the FBI. It would have been an issue brought to the table specifically by Mills and Samuelson.
Wait. Isn’t that called a clue?
Immunity was provided and EVIDENCE DESTROYED because of said immunity deal.
When the government provides immunity — and only government entities can do so — it is invariably because prosecution is focusing not on the level of those provided immunity but on levels above. In other words, immunity is provided in order to catch the so-called “bigger fish.”
So I ask: what “bigger fish” were caught by providing immunity to Mills and Samuelson and, further, why did this immunity include destruction of the hard drives from their laptops?
Hillary Clinton has still not gotten over the fact that she lost the 2008 presidential election to a black man who had not paid the dues that she perceived she has.
She may lose the first debate tomorrow, Monday.
By all accounts, Hillary believes she is simply “due” the office because of her water-carrying for the Demorats over the years and her seemingly-unflagging support of her serial-philandering husband, William Jefferson Clinton. You know, the man who has his “blond bimbo” over to the Clinton family Chappaqua compound when Hillary is gone with such frequency that the Secret Service calls her the “Energizer.”
It is Hillary Rodham Clinton’s “basket of deplorables.” It is her sense of entitlement to the White House. It is beneath HRC to have to remotely attempt to justify her bid for the White House. The air of entitlement is both thick and rich on many levels. Her victory is due her. “You don’t like me, therefore you are wrong and bad and worth destroying.”
Hillary Clinton cannot connect with independent voters, she fails to connect with younger voters for obvious reasons, she attempts to “re-introduce” herself on damned near a weekly basis. North Carolina, Ohio and Nevada have become “swing states.”
However, you can visibly perceive the unwellness in not only the body but the soul of Hillary Rodham Clinton. And just as she makes the speech above, two new articles emerge about her health — following her odd exhibition of strabismus during a recent speech in Philadelphia.
Though the immediate video below is amusing to a degree, its source material is not doctored and reveals an incredibly-serious and continuing health issue.
Following her fall as I documented here, a number of sources have weighed in with regard to health. Again. From TheHill.com:
Clinton’s eyes — a window into her health issues
by John R. Coppedge
In 2014 Conan O’Brien did a spoof of Hillary Clinton‘s interview with Diane Sawyer about her lack of lingering health issues following her 2012 concussion. In an obviously photoshopped version Clinton’s eyes are made to oscillate crazily.
It was a very funny piece. Now, it may not seem so funny.
Her eyes did not always move in the same direction at the same time. It appears that she has a problem with her left sixth cranial nerve. That nerve serves only one function and that is to make the lateral rectus muscle contract. That muscle turns the eye in the direction away from the midline.
Please allow me to step in at this point and allow that the author is John R. Coppedge, MD, FACS, a general surgeon from Texas. Not a pundit, not a political hack.
First: this is the Conan O’Brien video to which Coppedge refers:
Like all things medical, there is a long list of potential causes but in my opinion the most likely one, based on Clinton’s known medical history is an intermittent lateral rectus palsy caused by damage to or pressure on her sixth cranial nerve.
It is known that she suffered a traumatic brain injury in late 2012 when she fell and struck her head. What is also known is that she was diagnosed with a transverse sinus thrombosis — blood clot in the major vein at the base of the brain. Almost all patients with a transverse sinus thrombosis suffer swelling of the brain and increased intracranial pressure. Most have headaches, balance issues and visual disturbances — all of which Clinton was reported to have following that event.
Clinton’s physician reported that she was placed on Coumadin (a blood thinner) to dissolve the blood clot. Actually, that is incorrect, because Coumadin has no effect on an existing clot. It serves only to decrease the chance of further clotting occurring Clinton’s physician has also reported that on follow up exam, the clot had resolved. That is surprising since the majority of such clots do not dissolve. The way it was documented that the clot had resolved has not been reported.
Does Hillary Clinton play a part in her situation? Continue reading.
Critics will rightly point out that I have not examined Clinton. They will point out that I am not ophthalmologist or a neurologist. But I am a physician and the concepts discussed above are taught to every medical student early in their education. Her traumatic brain injury, transverse sinus thrombosis, subsequent symptoms, falling, passing out and now the obvious problem with eye movement are all fact, not speculation.
It would be very helpful if Clinton agreed to an independent exam and to have the questions raised here answered. It is too important not to get this right.
Has Hillary Clinton been controlling her own medical treatment, avoiding the obvious?
Hillary Clinton won’t be taking a neurocognitive test, and releasing the results to the public — telling a reporter “there’s no need for that,” even after collapsing as she was leaving a 9/11 memorial event last week in Manhattan.
Clinton made the comment, suggesting she will not be releasing any further medical information this presidential campaign, in an interview Wednesday with Florida’s WFTS ABC Action News.
Why am I focusing so closely on the “medical issues” of Hillary Rodham Clinton? Because the American Media Maggots would do precisely the same thing had the roles been reversed with regard to Donald Trump. Like a pit bull, they would have worn the issue down to the bone with Donald Trump. If it took weeks, if it took months, they would not have cared.
Desperate times for Hillary, requiring desperate measures — to include wearing an earpiece through which she could receive verbal prompts when placed in, say, “challenging situations” such as — wait for it — the debates with Donald Trump, the first of which occurs tomorrow, Monday the 26th.
But this is not simply my speculation. There is an email released by WikiLeaks in which Huma Abedin makes reference to Hillary’s “earpiece” in 2009.
Please note: one does not customarily refer to, say, hearing aids as an “earpiece,” should the Hillary defenders weigh in.
Further, once the issue came to light, a source whose work includes intelligence stated he saw her wearing a similar flesh-colored piece in her ear a number of years ago. Certainly nothing like the USSS wears for dignitary protection.
Was and is Hillary Clinton being fed information from an outside source, either by way of RF or Bluetooth technology and, moreover, will she be wearing a similar unit during the debates?
Hillary Rodham Clinton, I think you have a problem. Quite a number of them, in fact.
Astoundingly helpful, if one counts bribes and pressure and corruption. Please watch and, more importantly, listen carefully to the video, then read the story.
I am pushback and, as such, it is my job to present the facts, figures and representations that the American Media Maggot lapdogs avoid altogether, provide as half-truths or lie about. Now that you’ve seen the video, read the Saturday story from 100percentfedup.com:
BREAKING FLORIDA: FORMER HAITIAN Senate President Drops CLINTON BOMBSHELL Exposing Unbelievable Corruption At Trump Event
Former Senate President of Haiti, Bernard Sansaricq, shocked a large crowd at a Trump campaign event in Little Haiti, FL. Sansaricq exposes all of the dirty dealings of the Clinton’s in Haiti while he was still in office. Donald Trump to his credit, allowed him to speak his mind and expose to the world what kind of criminals are attempting to scratch and claw their way back into our White House.
Sansaricq also claims he begged the Clinton Administration not to invade Haiti. His request was followed up with a visit by an anonymous messenger from the White House who encouraged him to “side” with the Clinton Administration and he would “be the richest man in Haiti.”
The Haitians said following the US invasion of Haiti: “ ‘Lave men ou, siye li a te.’ It looks like you wash your hands and dry them in dirt.”
Let me summarize what happened to Haiti. The US invaded it twice, the first during WWI. The second time was during the Bill Clinton administration in 1994, where 20,000 troops were sent by Willie J to quell the “illegitimate regime” of General Raoul Cedras and his terrorist rabble of gangbangers/enforcers, known as FRAPH.
This invasion occurred on the heels of, if you recall, the 1993 Battle of Mogadishu in Somalia (Blackhawk Down).
Col. Mark Boyatt, the overall commander of Special Forces in Haiti, told his commandos to begin regarding FRAPH as Haiti’s “loyal opposition,” as if the terrorists, overnight, had become Haiti’s equivalent to the Republican Party, rehabilitated patriots eager to remake Haiti into a modern democratic nation.
Who gave that order? Sandy Berger and the White House. Thank you Willie J. Why did we go there in the first place, you buffoon? Today’s PlaySkool T-ball journalistas are not the least bit curious.
Clinton pulled our forces from Haiti in 1996, with many considering Haiti to be in worse shape than when we arrived. Some Haitians asked “why has America come to save us? Who will save us now?”
He also suggests that Hillary Clinton “disclose the audit of all money” related to the Haiti earthquake crisis, as he claims they scammed the poorest citizens of Haiti out of BILLIONS of dollars through the Clinton Foundation.
“Not even 2% of that money went back to Haiti. So Mr. Trump, we are asking you, begging you, the Haitian community will side with you if one day, you ask Hillary Clinton publicly to disclose the audit of all of the money they have stolen from Haiti in 2010 after the earthquake. Haiti is a very poor country. Haiti needs defenders. You said you would champion our cause. We welcome you sir and we will work with you. Ask Hillary Clinton publicly, during your next debate for an audit of all of the money they have stolen from Haiti.”
So, let me see if I have this correct: Haiti was made a Clinton Sandwich. One piece of corrupt bread was applied in 1994 by Bill, and the other piece of corrupt bread was applied by Hillary in 2010 following the earthquake, in the name of the Clinton Foundation.
Yet the Clintons want the vote of every Haitian in America.
It’s like asking the mentally defective (now, damned near 50% of the voters) to take a ball-peen hammer and smack themselves in the temple, then beg to do it again from the person who provided the hammer.
What will he say?
Tit for tat, pay to play, time to make sure we do in fact cover the arses of DC politicians who just “happen” to be of the Demorat stripe.
Please note: one does not customarily refer to, say, hearing aids as an “earpiece,” should the Hillary defenders weigh in.
Was and is Hillary Clinton being fed information from an outside source, either by way of RF or Bluetooth technology and, moreover, will she be wearing a similar unit during the debates?