Tag Archives: Hillary Clinton

Hillary Clinton Fired From Watergate Committee For Fraud, Ethics Violations

11 May

Hillary Clinton Fired From Watergate Committee For Fraud, Ethics Violations – Fire Andrea Mitchell

.

Did you know Hillary Clinton was a member of the impeachment inquiry staff in Washington, D.C.? Clinton was advising the House Committee on the Judiciary during the Watergate scandal back in 1974. I didn’t either until I read her Wikipedia entry. I also discovered another rather interesting story. Back in 2008 when Clinton was running against Obama in the Democrat primary the Digital Journal ran a revealing story. The story says Hillary Clinton was fired from the committee staff. Jerry Zeifman, supervised Hillary Clinton during the Watergate impeachment inquiry. He refused to give her a letter of recommendation because of her lies and unethical behavior. Clinton obtained a position on the committee staff through her political patronage of her former Yale law school professor Burke Marshall and Chappaquiddick Senator Ted Kennedy. Jerry Zeifman says Hillary Clinton was unethical and a liar (as if we didn’t already know that.) He also described Hillary Clinton as a dishonest lawyer. Finally, Zeifman says Hillary Clinton conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the committee and the rules of confidentiality. Sound familiar? Like Benghazi maybe? Zeifman had this reaction after Hillary Clinton’s phony tears at a campaign rally in 2008:

My own reaction was of regret that, when I terminated her employment on the Nixon impeachment staff, I had not reported her unethical practices to the appropriate bar associations.

Digital Journal also had this on Hillary Clinton:

engaged in a seemingly implausible scheme to deny Richard Nixon the right to counsel during the investigation by stealing Judiciary Committee files on the only precedent case that could have stonewalled their plot and drafting a legal brief that, according to Mr. Ziefman, “was so fraudulent and ridiculous Hillary would have been disbarred if she had submitted it to a judge.”

Isn’t it amazing and ironic? Hillary Clinton who is involved in the worst government cover-up since Watergate was on the Watergate investigation panel as a young pup back in ’74. I guess history does repeat itself.

.
Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

The Left reveals it’s Benghazi defense strategy

9 May

A strongly worded letter? No Instead, they are just going to close their eyes tighter and chant “How dare you”

Robert Stacy McCain @rsmccain

“This has been a difficult week for the State Department and for our country. We’ve seen the heavy assault on our post in Benghazi that took the lives of those brave men. We’ve seen rage and violence directed at American embassies over an awful internet video that we had nothing do to with. It’s hard for the American people to make sense of that, because it is senseless, and it is totally unacceptable.”
– Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Sept. 14, 2012, while standing over the caskets of the four Americans killed at the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya

Jeff Goldstein cites the important testimony that “a State Department official emailed the Libyan government on September 12 that the consulate attack was in fact a terrorist operation — specifically identifying Ansar al-Sharia in the email.” But why bother with facts? What difference, at this point, does it make?

Quite obviously, it makes a very important difference to Democrats and the media (but I repeat myself) in their tireless efforts to convince Americans that Obama’s foreign policy is working, and especially to persuade us that the fine public servants at the top levels of the State Department did nothing wrong in the Benghazi affair.

When you point out the obvious facts — that the “Arab Spring” was a bad idea, that everybody in the administration lied through their teeth about Benghazi, and that the major media are enthusiastic volunteers in a partisan P.R. effort to assist in the cover-up — liberals go into fake indignation mode: How dare you?

The pathetic nature of the Democratic Party is astounding, but, they are what they are. Morality? Patriotism? Justice? Putting country first and finding out the truth? How dare we expect such upright principles from the Democrats!

 

Hillary Clinton Sought End-Run Around Counterterrorism Bureau On Night Of Benghazi Attack

7 May

Clinton Sought End-Run Around Counterterrorism Bureau On Night Of Benghazi Attack, Witness Will Say – Fox News

On the night of Sept. 11, as the Obama administration scrambled to respond to the Benghazi terror attacks, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and a key aide effectively tried to cut the department’s own counterterrorism bureau out of the chain of reporting and decision-making, according to a “whistle-blower” witness from that bureau who will soon testify to the charge before Congress, Fox News has learned.

.

That witness is Mark I. Thompson, a former Marine and now the deputy coordinator for operations in the agency’s counterterrorism bureau. Sources tell Fox News Thompson will level the allegation against Clinton during testimony on Wednesday before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, chaired by Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif.

Fox News has also learned that another official from the counterterrorism bureau – independently of Thompson – voiced the same complaint about Clinton and Under Secretary for Management Patrick Kennedy to trusted national security colleagues back in October.

Extremists linked to Al Qaeda stormed the U.S. Consulate and a nearby annex on Sept. 11, in a heavily armed and well-coordinated eight-hour assault that killed the U.S. ambassador to Libya, Chris Stevens, and three other Americans.

Thompson considers himself a whistle-blower whose account was suppressed by the official investigative panel that Clinton convened to review the episode, the Accountability Review Board (ARB). Thompson’s lawyer, Joseph diGenova, a former U.S. attorney, has further alleged that his client has been subjected to threats and intimidation by as-yet-unnamed superiors at State, in advance of his cooperation with Congress.

Sources close to the congressional investigation who have been briefed on what Thompson will testify tell Fox News the veteran counterterrorism official concluded on Sept. 11 that Clinton and Kennedy tried to cut the counterterrorism bureau out of the loop as they and other Obama administration officials weighed how to respond to – and characterize – the Benghazi attacks.

“You should have seen what (Clinton) tried to do to us that night,” the second official in State’s counterterrorism bureau told colleagues back in October. Those comments would appear to be corroborated by Thompson’s forthcoming testimony.

State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki called the counterterrorism officials’ allegation “100 percent false.” A spokesman for Clinton said tersely that the charge is not true.

Daniel Benjamin, who ran the department’s Counterterrorism Bureau at the time, also put out a statement Monday morning strongly denying the charges.

“I ran the bureau then, and I can say now with certainty, as the former Coordinator for Counterterrorism, that this charge is simply untrue,” he said. “Though I was out of the country on official travel at the time of the attack, I was in frequent contact with the Department. At no time did I feel that the Bureau was in any way being left out of deliberations that it should have been part of.”

He went on to call his bureau a “central participant in the interagency discussion about the longer-term response to Benghazi.” He said “at no time was the Bureau sidelined or otherwise kept from carrying out its tasks.”

Thompson’s attorney, diGenova, would not comment for this article.

Documents from the State Department, the Central Intelligence Agency and the National Security Council, first published in the May 13 edition of “The Weekly Standard,” showed that senior officials from those agencies decided within days of the attacks to delete all references to Al Qaeda’s known involvement in them from “talking points” being prepared for those administration officers being sent out to discuss the attacks publicly.

Those talking points – and indeed, the statements of all senior Obama administration officials who commented publicly on Benghazi during the early days after the attacks – sought instead to depict the Americans’ deaths as the result of a spontaneous protest that went awry. The administration later acknowledged that there had been no such protest, as evidence mounted that Al Qaeda-linked terrorists had participated in the attacks. The latter conclusion had figured prominently in the earliest CIA drafts of the talking points, but was stricken by an ad hoc group of senior officials controlling the drafting process. Among those involved in prodding the deletions, the documents published by “The Weekly Standard” show, was State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland, who wrote at one point that the revisions were not sufficient to satisfy “my building’s leadership.”

The allegations of the two counterterrorism officials stand to return the former secretary of state to the center of the Benghazi story. Widely regarded as a leading potential candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2016, Clinton has insisted she was not privy to decisions made by underlings about the inadequate security for the U.S. installations in Benghazi that were made in the run-up to the attacks. And she has portrayed her role – once the attacks became known in Washington – as that of a determined fact-finder who worked with colleagues to fashion the best possible response to the crisis.

Clinton testified about Benghazi for the first and only time in January of this year, shortly before leaving office. She had long delayed her testimony, at first because she cited the need for the ARB to complete its report, and then because she suffered a series of untimely health problems that included a stomach virus, a concussion sustained during a fall at home, and a blood clot near her brain, from which she has since recovered. However, Clinton was never interviewed by the ARB she convened.

Fox News disclosed last week that the conduct of the ARB is itself now under review by the State Department’s Office of Inspector General. A department spokesman said the OIG probe is examining all prior ARBs, not just the one established after Benghazi.

The two U.S. officials – former Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Mike Mullen and former Ambassador Tom Pickering – who oversaw the internal review of the attacks defended their report.

“From the beginning of the ARB process, we had unfettered access to everyone and everything including all the documentation we needed. Our marching orders were to get to the bottom of what happened, and that’s what we did,” they said in a statement Monday.

The counterterrorism officials, however, concluded that Clinton and Kennedy were immediately wary of the attacks being portrayed as acts of terrorism, and accordingly worked to prevent the counterterrorism bureau from having a role in the department’s early decision-making relating to them.

Also appearing before the oversight committee on Wednesday will be Gregory N. Hicks, the deputy chief of mission at the U.S. Embassy in Libya at the time of the Benghazi terrorist attacks. Like Thompson, Hicks is a career State Department official who considers himself a Benghazi whistle-blower. His attorney, Victoria Toensing, a former chief counsel to the Senate Intelligence Committee, has charged that Hicks, too, has faced threats of reprisal from unnamed superiors at State. (Toensing and diGenova, who are representing their respective clients pro bono, are married.)

Portions of the forthcoming testimony of Hicks – who was one of the last people to speak to Stevens, and who upon the ambassador’s death became the senior U.S. diplomat in Libya — were made public by Rep. Issa during an appearance on the CBS News program “Face the Nation” on Sunday.

Hicks told the committee that he and his colleagues on the ground in Libya that night knew instantly that Benghazi was a terrorist attack, and that he was astonished that no one drafting the administration’s talking points consulted with him before finalizing them, or before U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice delivered them on the Sunday talk shows of Sept. 16.

Hicks was interviewed by the ARB but Thompson was not, sources close to the committee’s investigation tell Fox News.

.
Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

Just call him President AWOL

7 Feb

Simply unfathomable

More from Mark Levin

That says it all, nothing I can add. This is shameful

*VIDEO* Rush Limbaugh: Hillary Clinton’s Benghazi Testimony Was “Flat Out Bullshit”

24 Jan


.

*VIDEOS* Republican Lawmakers Grill Secretary Of State Clinton During Benghazi Hearing

24 Jan


Senator Bob Corker
.

.
Representative Mo Brooks
.

.
Representative Tom Marino
.
s
.
Representative Michael McCaul
.

.
Representative Adam Kinzinger
.

.
Representative Steve Chabot
.
s

.

*VIDEO* Congressman Duncan Lays Into Secretary Of State Clinton During Benghazi Hearing

24 Jan


Representative Jeff Duncan – “Madam Secretary, you let the consulate become a deathtrap, and that’s national security malpractice.”
.

.

*VIDEOS* Senators Paul And McCain Slam Secretary Of State Clinton During Benghazi Hearing

23 Jan


Senator John McCain – “People don’t bring RPGs and mortars to a spontaneous demonstration.”
.

.
Senator Rand Paul – “Had I been president at the time, and I found that you did not read the cables from Benghazi, you did not read the cables from Ambassador Stevens, I would have relieved you of your post.”
.

.

H/T Washington Free Beacon

.
——————————————————————————————————————–

.
Related videos:

.
FLASHBACK: Representative Trey Gowdy – “I want to know why we were lied to!” (November 14, 2012)
.

.
Benghazi-gate: Obama’s Lying Cronies


.
Benghazi: Lies, Damned Lies And Dead Americans

.

Hillary to testify on Benghazi

3 Jan

Zip of Weasel Zippers fame assumes, correctly I would think, that she does not want the issue hanging over the soon coming Hillary 2016 campaign. So, she will get the lying and denying over with now

Via Daily Mail:

Hillary Clinton will testify in front of Congress about the terrorist attack on the American consulate in Benghazi, Libya – despite receiving a concussion and being hospitalized for a blood clot, it was revealed on Thursday.

The Secretary of State cancelled appearances before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the House Foreign Affairs Committee after she fainted and hit her head on December 9.

She sent two aides to testify in her place.

Some conservatives initially claimed she was using the health issue to dodge testifying on the contentious issue.

The Washington Post reports that Clinton ‘remains committed’ to appearing in front of the Congressional committees, though no date has been set.

Of course, perhaps this is just a tactic to stall, hoping the issue goes away. 

 

Breaking News! Hillary Clinton admitted to hospital with blood clot

30 Dec

Via Gateway Pundit

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton admitted to hospital with blood clot following a concussion she suffered earlier this month.
FOX News reported:

Hillary Clinton’s Head Fake

18 Dec

Hillary Clinton’s Head Fake – New York Post

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was set to face a grilling from Congress this week over the terrorist attacks in Benghazi when she started channeling the late poet Shel Silverstein.

“I have the measles and the mumps / A gash, a rash and purple bumps,” said Clinton, in effect, informing the House and Senate (with regrets!) that she was suffering too many maladies to testify as expected about the Sept. 11 attack in Libya.

America’s top diplomat was to provide her first public answers regarding the murder of US Ambassador Chris Stevens.

Now that won’t happen.

Clinton’s story beggars belief: While traveling in Europe, she contracted a stomach virus . . . which made her dehydrated . . . which made her faint at home . . . which caused her to fall and hit her head . . . which gave her a nasty concussion.

So Clinton’s deputies will appear in her stead before the House Foreign Affairs Committee and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Thursday to explain the State Department’s failures.

That is not nearly enough.

We’ve chided the Obama administration in the past for its lack of transparency – but this looks like one of the most transparent dodges in the history of diplomacy.

And if Congress allows the secretary of state to wriggle free from scrutiny in the last days of her tenure (she may be gone from Foggy Bottom before the next round of congressional hearings in 2013), it will be a shame on that body as well.

So it’s clear that Clinton needs to testify.

And the Republicans, at least, seem to realize it.

“We still don’t have information from the Obama administration on what went so tragically wrong in Benghazi that resulted in the deaths of four patriotic Americans,” said Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, who chairs the Foreign Affairs Committee, when Clinton reported her noggin-bump. “This requires a public appearance by the secretary of state herself.”

Thursday’s hearing covers the State Department’s Accountability Review Board, the squad of DC luminaries who’ve been investigating the attack since October and who delivered their findings to Clinton yesterday.

The report may shed some light on the attack, but it behooves Clinton to explain why the administration spent weeks misleading the public by pinning blame for the strike on an obscure YouTube video.

No, she owes the public true accountability – not a paper press release from some former bureaucrats.

And that requires her to testify before Congress, before the public.

Nothing else will suffice.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

Hillary Clinton Praises Palestinian Terrorists; Blasts Israel

1 Dec

Hillary Praises PA; Blasts Israel – American Spectator

During a press conference in Washington yesterday, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton praised the Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and Prime Minister Salam Fayyad for “their real achievements on the ground” citing the safe streets of the West Bank, the overhaul of government institutions and helping to enhance Israel’s security.

Clinton then berated Israel for announcing new settlement construction stating such activities “set back the cause of a negotiated peace.” I suppose Hillary thinks Palestinian unilateral declarations of independence are just fine and dandy.

Well, last I checked Palestinians were throwing stones at PA buildings because of high prices, low wages and government corruption.

The PA will never achieve anything tangible until it stops naming its schools after suicide bombers, refrains from using its official newspaper to print cartoons insinuating that Israel poisoned Yasser Arafat, and using its state run TV to air music videos calling Israel “the enemy” and a “snake”.

There was, of course, a time when Hillary Clinton spoke out against the “hateful rhetoric” of the Palestinians. But alas that time has long since passed.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

*VIDEO* Benghazi-gate: Obama’s Lying Cronies

25 Oct



.

*VIDEO* The Lost Democrat Party Primary Debate Of 2008

14 Aug

How Team Obama screwed the pooch and threw Egypt to the wolves

23 Jul

Ah Liberals, always so trusting of dictators, Islamists, and, or course Communists. You might think they would learn after getting screwed over so often.  But, the Left never seems to get it

After angry Egyptians pelted her motorcade with shoes, chanting “Leave!,” Secretary of State Clinton insisted the U.S. wasn’t there to take sides. Too late.

‘I want to be clear that the United States is not in the business, in Egypt, of choosing winners and losers, even if we could, which of course we cannot,” Hillary Clinton intoned earlier this week.

Of course, the administration could, and it did, picking and even colluding with the Muslim Brotherhood. And one of its hard-liners, Mohammed Morsi, now sits in the presidential palace, where he refused to shake unveiled Clinton’s hand.

This administration favored Islamists over secularists and helped them overthrow Hosni Mubarak, the reliable U.S. ally who had outlawed the terrorist Brotherhood and honored the peace pact with Israel for three decades. The Brotherhood, in contrast, has backed Hamas and called for the destruction of Israel.

Now the administration is dealing with the consequences of its misguided king-making. Officials fear the new regime could invite al-Qaida, now run by an Egyptian exile, back into Egypt and open up a front with Israel along the Sinai. Result: more terrorists and higher gas prices.

In fact, it was Hillary’s own department that helped train Brotherhood leaders for the Egyptian elections. Behind the scenes, she and the White House made a calculated decision, and took step-by-step actions, to effectively sell out Israel and U.S. interests in the Mideast to the Islamists.

Or, maybe they DO get it? Maybe this was deliberate? I hate feeling like that is even a viable option here. But, given the radical things Team Obama has done, and done, and done that question must be asked. And make sure you read the timeline at the link, there really is little room to think anything but the worst here. This administration has been, and is way to cozy with the Muslim Brotherhood. That ought to scare all of us, and is yet another glaring reason to vote Romney in November. As bad as Obama has been on economic issues, his foreign policy is as bad, maybe even worse.

You know, if that Stacy McCain is not careful…..

9 May

Someone might call him “insensitive” which would mean, of course, that he is right!

What is pathetic, as I say, is that everybody knows Obama could not have won even the Iowa caucus in 2008 if he had been campaigning as openly pro-gay-marriage — that is to say, clearly to the left of Hillary Clinton on this issue.

In order to enhance his “viability,” the media bit their tongues and looked the other way while Obama engaged in a flimflam charade of moderation. He would have carried on that dishonest scam as long as necessary to win the general election, except that his big-money gay donors threatened to cut him off. And what his media idolators now will celebrate as another “gutsy call” never would have happened otherwise!

Say, Wanna See Pictures Of Secretary Of State Hillary Clinton Getting Trashed In Colombia?

16 Apr


NOTE: This last photo may be of Hillary getting trashed in a completely different country – The DALEY GATOR has yet to determine exactly when and where it was taken

H/T London Telegraph, Lucianne and Noticias24

Hillary Clinton Pushes To Make Criticism Of Islam A Crime In The U.S.

19 Dec

Hillary Clinton Pushes To Make Criticism Of Islam A Crime In The U.S. – SodaHead

Are Hillary and Barack in a race to see which one can destroy this Country first? May God protect the United States of America from these two Marxist thugs!

One of the fundamental laws of Islam deals with “slander,” which is defined in shariah as saying “anything concerning a person [a Muslim] that he would dislike.” At the OIC’s Third Extraordinary Session, held in Mecca, Saudi Arabia in December 2005, the organization adopted a “Ten-Year Programme of Action to Meet the Challenges Facing the Muslim Ummah in the 21st Century.” A key agenda item of that meeting was “the need to counter Islamophobia” by seeking to have the UN “…adopt an international resolution to counter
Islamophobia, and call upon all States to enact laws to counter it, including deterrent punishments.” The word “Islamophobia” is a completely invented word, coined by the International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT), a Muslim Brotherhood (Ikhwan) front group. OIC adoption of the term reflects the close operational relationship between the OIC and the Ikhwan.

Six years later, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is due to host OIC Secretary General Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu in Washington, DC in mid-December 2011 to discuss how the United States can implement the OIC agenda to criminalize criticism of Islam. Cloaked in the sanctimonious language of “Resolution 16/18,” that was adopted by the UN Human Rights Council in April 2011, the WDC three-day experts meeting is billed as a working session to discuss legal mechanisms to combat religious discrimination (but the only religion the Human Rights Council has ever mentioned in any previous resolution is Islam). The UN Human Rights Council, which includes such bastions of human rights as China, Cuba, Libya, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia, introduced Resolution 16/18 to the UN General Assembly (UNGA), where it was passed in March 2011.

The Resolution was presented to the UNGA by Pakistan (where women get the death penalty for being raped and “blasphemy” against Islam is punished by death). Ostensibly about “combating intolerance, negative stereotyping and…incitement to violence against persons based on religion or belief,” the only partnership mentioned in the text is the one with the OIC. The U.S., whose official envoy to the OIC, Rashad Hussain, helped write Obama’s Cairo speech, actively collaborated in the drafting of Resolution 16/18.

Now, the OIC’s Ihsanoglu will come to Washington, DC, the capital of one of the only countries in the world with a Constitution that guarantees freedom of speech and a judicial
system that consistently defends it, with a publicized agenda to criminalize criticism of Islam. His agenda, and, apparently that of his host, the U.S. Department of State, seek to bring the U.S. into full compliance with Islamic law on slander, as noted above.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

6 Socialist Reps Ask Hillary Clinton To Help Protect Far-left Jew-Haters On Audacity Of Hope Boat

28 Jun

6 Socialist Reps Ask Hillary Clinton To Help Protect Far-left Jew-Haters On Audacity Of Hope Boat – Gateway Pundit

Last year Barack Obama’s good friend Rashid Khalidi raised cash for a ship named “The Audacity of Hope” to smash through Israel’s Gaza Blockade. After months of fundraising his group finally raised enough cash for the mission. The Obama-inspired ship set out to join this year’s Gaza-bound “Freedom Flotilla 2″ earlier this year.


Dozens of American leftists are sailing in the Gaza Flotilla II. They will sail on the Obama-inspired “Audacity of Hope” ship. (UStoGaza)

Six top socialist democrat representatives asked Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to protect the passengers of the Audacity of Hope.

The Jerusalem Post reported:

Six members of the United States Congress wrote to US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton last week, asking her to “do everything in [her] power” to help “ensure the safety of all American citizens on board The Audacity of Hope.”

The Audacity of Hope is a US flagged ship bearing 36 American passengers intending to participate in this week’s flotilla to challenge Israel’s naval blockade of Gaza. Its passengers include Pulitzer Prize-winning writer Alice Walker, former US ambassador to Ecuador Samuel Hart, and activist Hedy Epstein.

15 ships are expected to participate in the flotilla.

The six members of Congress to sign the letter regarding the American presence are Ohio Representative Dennis Kucinich, Missouri Representative William Lacy Clay, California Representatives Sam Farr, Bob Filner and Barbara Lee, and District of Columbia Representative Eleanor Holmes Norton. Kucinich initiated the letter.

“We request that you do everything in your power to work with the Israeli government to ensure the safety of the US citizens on board,” the letter reads, saying that the signatories “urge all parties to practice maximum restraint and avoid violence.”

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

Daily Benefactor News – Republican Congressman Wants WikiLeaks Listed As Terrorist Group

29 Nov

…………

————————— CLICK HERE TO VISIT THE DAILY BENEFACTOR —————————

————————————————————- TOP STORY ————————————————————-

Republican Congressman Wants WikiLeaks Listed As Terrorist Group – Cnet News

The incoming chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee says WikiLeaks should be officially designated as a terrorist organization.

Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.), the panel’s next head, asked the Obama administration today to “determine whether WikiLeaks could be designated a foreign terrorist organization,” putting the group in the same company as Al Qaeda and Aum Shinrikyo, the Japanese cult that released deadly sarin gas on the Tokyo subway.

“WikiLeaks appears to meet the legal criteria” of a U.S.-designated terrorist organization, King wrote in a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton reviewed by CNET. He added: “WikiLeaks presents a clear and present danger to the national security of the United States.”

King’s letter was prompted by a massive document dump totaling more than 250,000 State Department diplomatic cables, which WikiLeaks gave in advance to news organizations, including Germany’s Der Spiegel and Spain’s El Pais, that began appearing on the Internet this morning. The White House has condemned the release, which Der Spiegel called “nothing short of a political meltdown for U.S. foreign policy.”

King also wrote separately to Attorney General Eric Holder, asking him to “criminally charge WikiLeaks activist Julian Assange under the Espionage Act” for conspiracy to disclose classified information. The Espionage Act makes it illegal to disclose “information relating to the national defense” if that information could be used “to the injury of the United States.”

If the State Department adds WikiLeaks to the terror list, one effect would be to prohibit U.S. banks from processing payments to the group. WikiLeaks currently takes donations through PayPal, bank transfers, and Visa and Mastercard payments.

Another would be to trigger the punitive measures included in the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, which made it a federal felony to provide “material support or resources” to a terrorist organization. That would likely dry up support from U.S.-based volunteers for WikiLeaks – one volunteer has been detained and released at the border already – and curb the group’s options for Web hosting services. (Both Wikileaks.org and Cablegate.WikLleaks.org are currently hosted, in part, on Amazon.com servers in the United States.)

— Click HERE for a recorded statement by Representative Peter King —

The news organizations have released a small subset of the cables. WikiLeaks itself says it has published only 220 of 251,287 of them and promises to post the rest “in stages over the next few months.”

That has, perhaps unintentionally, given critics in Washington’s national security establishment a strong incentive to find a way to pull the plug on the document-leaking Web site as soon as possible, one way or another.

Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman, chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee and a senior member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said in a statement today: “I also urge the Obama administration – both on its own and in cooperation with other responsible governments around the world – to use all legal means necessary to shut down WikiLeaks before it can do more damage by releasing additional cables. WikiLeaks’ activities represent a shared threat to collective international security.”

Australia said today it’s investigating whether today’s release violated its laws (Wikileaks editor Julian Assange has an Australian passport). And Sweden has issued an international warrant for Assange’s arrest on sexual assault charges, which has been upheld by an appeals court. Assange denies the allegations.

WikiLeaks has already been the target of often-strident denunciations from Washington officialdom after releasing confidential military dispatches from Afghanistan and Iraq. The Washington Times and a former Bush administration official suggested WikiLeaks as the first public target for a U.S. government cyberattack, and a Republican senator has proposed a law targeting WikiLeaks.

The Patriot Act increased the maximum penalties for violating what has become known as the “material support” law to 15 years in federal prison. In a 6-3 ruling this year, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld that law as constitutional, saying the Draconian legal sanctions are reasonable “even if the supporters meant to promote only the groups’ nonviolent ends.”

If Wikileaks is added to the State Department list, one problem for its supporters might be the relative vagueness of the term “material support.” In a law review article, former UCLA chancellor Norman Abrams wrote that “the janitor or the pizza delivery person or a taxi driver, or anyone who provides the most mundane ‘services,’ would seem to be at risk of prosecution” if they could be said to know they’re dealing with a designated terrorist group.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

————————————————————————————————————————————————

—————————————————– NOTE TO READERS ——————————————————

THE DAILY BENEFACTOR now provides you with a large selection of NEWS WIDGETS containing RSS feeds from the most comprehensive news sources on the internet, such as THE DRUDGE REPORT, GATEWAY PUNDIT, THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER, WORLDNETDAILY, POLITICO, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, CNS, MICHELLE MALKIN, BREITBART, and THE JERUSALEM POST. Check them out!

————————————————————————————————————————————————

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,345 other followers