Yet Another Sickening Planned Parenthood Video Released

The Latest Planned Parenthood Video: Utterly Appalling – Powerline

The Center for Medical Progress released another Planned Parenthood video today. It once again features Holly O’Donnell, a former technician for StemExpress, one of the buyers of baby parts from Planned Parenthood. The video consists mostly of Miss O’Donnell describing an incident in which a baby’s heart was still beating, and she was instructed to cut through the baby’s face so that his brain–the baby was a boy–could be removed for sale. It is utterly appalling.

There have been multiple hints in the CMP videos that some babies are born alive and then killed by Planned Parenthood. That appears to have been true in this case, and there is another such suggestion from a different witness. I would think that at a minimum, a criminal investigation is warranted.

Warning: this video is not for the faint of heart. I am not a sensitive guy, but I had to steel myself to watch it.

.

.
The liberal media are generally trying to ignore the CMP videos, hoping the controversy they have caused will go away. The New York Times is typical: it has not yet mentioned today’s video. It hasn’t covered the content of the videos, except to misrepresent them and to defend Planned Parenthood. For example, today’s Times includes a story on a Reuters poll that is headlined, “Americans back federal funds for Planned Parenthood health services: poll.” The poll asked about women’s health exams, prenatal services and contraception, not abortion. The Times story begins:

Americans broadly support providing federal funding for free women’s health exams, screenings and contraception services, a Reuters/Ipsos poll has found, suggesting risks for Republicans criticizing Planned Parenthood as part of the 2016 campaigns.

Notice how the reporter defaults straight to politics. Happily, not many Republicans take campaign advice from the Times.

The non-profit’s image has taken a hit, the poll found, after an anti-abortion group earlier this year began releasing videos purporting to show Planned Parenthood officials negotiating prices for aborted fetal tissue.

The Times tries to keep alive the fiction that there is some doubt about what the videos show. The videos do not “purport” to show PP officials negotiating prices for aborted babies’ body parts. They show PP officials negotiating prices for aborted babies’ body parts. They show a lot more than that, too.

You have to read to the very end of the Times story to be told that the Reuters poll is actually bad news for Planned Parenthood:

But 44 percent of respondents who saw the videos said they now have a more negative view of Planned Parenthood, compared with 34 percent who said their views were unchanged.

Those 34% must have had an awfully negative view of PP to begin with. This is the kicker:

After the videos were described to poll respondents, 39 percent said Planned Parenthood should not receive government funding and 34 percent said federal dollars should continue.

You can read the actual poll results here. To say that the videos were “described” is a stretch; here is the question that was asked, along with the results. Click to enlarge:

.

.
Imagine what the reaction would have been if respondents had been told that PP extracts brains from babies with beating hearts.

Maybe the most significant aspect of the Reuters poll is that 37% said they have seen at least one of the CMP videos. That number will inexorably continue to rise. So the left’s effort to suppress the news about what the videos show hasn’t been very successful.

.

.

Leftist Incompetence Update: UN To Allow Iran To Inspect Its Own Alleged Nuclear Facilities

UN To Let Iran Inspect Its Own Alleged Nuclear Facilities – Weasel Zippers

.

.
Heckuva deal, Johnny

Via AP:

Iran, in an unusual arrangement, will be allowed to use its own experts to inspect a site it allegedly used to develop nuclear arms under a secret agreement with the U.N. agency that normally carries out such work, according to a document seen by The Associated Press.

The revelation is sure to roil American and Israeli critics of the main Iran deal signed by the U.S., Iran and five world powers in July. Those critics have complained that the deal is built on trust of the Iranians, a claim the U.S. has denied.

Keep reading

.

.

Leftist Fraud Update: Turns Out #BlackLivesMatter Organizer Only Pretended To Be Biracial… Is Entirely White

Did Black Lives Matter Organizer Shaun King Mislead Oprah Winfrey By Pretending To Be Biracial? – Big Government

.

.
An investigative blogger has accused Shaun King, a key figure in the Black Lives Matter movement, of misleading media icon Oprah Winfrey by pretending to be biracial in order to qualify for an “Oprah scholarship” to historically black Morehouse College. The blogger says King is white and has been lying about his ethnicity for years.

King is a high-profile campaigner against “police brutality” and “justice correspondent” for the liberal Daily Kos website who told Rebel magazine in 2012 that he was biracial, with the magazine reporting that he is the “son of a Caucasian mother and an African-American father.” He has also described himself as “mixed with a black family” on Twitter.

King has been lionised by the press, praised as hero of civil rights and social activism. He has written extensively about a childhood in which he was terrorised by “decades old racial tensions.” He claims to have been “the focus of constant abuse of the resident rednecks of my school.”

Yet, in recent weeks, rumours have been circulating about his ethnicity. A 1995 police incident report lists Shaun King’s ethnicity as white. And blogger Vicki Pate, who has been assembling forensic accounts of Shaun King’s background and family tree on her blog, “Re-NewsIt!,” has published her findings.

.

.
She claims that King is entirely white and says a birth certificate, which Breitbart has since independently acquired from the Kentucky Office of Vital Statistics, names a white man as his father.

King’s case echoes that of Rachel Dolezal, a civil rights activist from Washington who claimed to be biracial while in fact being of caucasian origin. Dolezal continues to insist she “identifies as black,” despite her parents revealing that she is entirely white.

.

.
If Pate is right, Shaun King, who often uses black and white photographs of himself online rather than colour images, may have misled African-American hero Winfrey by applying for and accepting an Oprah Scholarship to the historically black Morehouse College. Oprah Scholarships are given exclusively to black men.

In his Daily Kos diary, King refers to himself as a “brother,” writing: “Oprah Winfrey paid my way through Morehouse. The leadership scholarship that I received from her is why I have a college degree today. Five hundred other brothers have the exact same story.”

Shaun King’s biography has attracted the attention of bloggers and journalists thanks to several bizarre inconsistencies in his public claims. He often struggles when asked to recall basic facts about his own life. For instance, in August 2014, King wrote on Twitter that he was father to three “black girls,” while, six months earlier, he claimed to be father to four.

It is of course possible that a family tragedy is responsible for the inconsistency, but the unexplained change in biographical details is not a one-off. In October 2009, King claimed to have endured four spinal surgeries. By February 2010, the number of surgeries had shrunk to three. There is also some confusion about when an alleged car crash may or may not have happened.

.

.
As it turns out, these explosive new racial allegations are just the latest in a string of controversies surrounding Shaun King: on July 21, a conservative blog reported that his account of a “brutal, racially-motivated beating” in 1995, which at least two reports have described as “Kentucky’s first hate crime,” did not match up with a police report from the case.

“King, 35, has related the story of the hate crime on his blogs and in his recent self-help book, seemingly to bolster his credibility as an activist and as a self-help guru,” wrote the Daily Caller‘s Chuck Ross. “While King has said that he was attacked by up to a dozen ‘racist’ and ‘redneck’ students, official records show that the altercation involved only one other student.”

“And while King has claimed that he suffered a ‘brutal’ beating that left him clinging to life, the police report characterized King’s injuries as ‘minor,’” Ross reported.

.

.
This month, more details have emerged from King’s account that do not match up with the police report or eyewitness accounts from journalists who noticed that King’s public claims did not square with reality.

Remarkably, King’s own publication the Daily Kos, at which he is listed as a staff writer, ran a provocatively titled blog post in July of this year: “Is there something fishy about Shaun King?” The post alleged that people had been asking questions about King for some time and linked to the earlier Daily Caller report.

“While I know that it’s in a right-wing publication, there was something that prevented me from instantly dismissing the article… I’ve seen a number of people on Daily Kos complain that Shaun plays fast and loose with the truth,” wrote contributor Burt Miles. “So I started to do some digging on the Internet and found a lot of information which, if true, makes me very concerned about Shaun, his motives, and how his actions could reflect badly on this site and be used to smear the Black Lives Matter movement.”

Miles continued: “Is there anything to all this, or is it some kind of organized smear campaign? And, if it is a smear campaign, how does it involve so many different sites, publications and individuals?”

.

.
It was around the same time that Breitbart contacted Vicki Pate, who has been investigating King’s claims for several years. Pate provided key documents that appear to show that King has two white parents and that he has been lying to the public about his race.

One of them is his birth certificate, listing his parents as Naomi Kay Fleming and Jeffery Wayne King and a birth date of September 17, 1979 in Versailles, Kentucky. King had already told journalists his mother was white. So all that remained for Pate to determine was whether his father was white too.

King has always claimed that his father is black. But King’s father, Jeffery, is white, says Pate. She points to a man born 11 November 1955 in Campbell, Kentucky who has been the subject of multiple arrests, including for motoring and drug offences. That birth date would make him 23 at the time of Shaun King’s birth, the same age given on Shaun’s birth certificate.

The Jeffery Wayne King whose name and date of birth concord with Shaun King’s birth certificate is pictured below, in a 2007 police mug shot. Various documents give his name as “Jeffery” and “Jeffrey” Wayne King, names which are common variants of one another, but King Snr’s date of birth and place of residence is the same in all records.

What’s more, Pate says she has definitively linked the man pictured in these mugshots to Shaun King via Shaun’s brother, Kentucky Air Guard Russ King, who is also clearly caucasian. Finally, public records show only one J Wayne King in the state.

.
…………
…………………………….Jeffery Wayne King in 2007

.
By 2015, Shaun King had finessed his account of growing up black and suffering discrimination. “I was raised in rural Kentucky,” he told the blog Generation Progress. “It was actually pretty rough. African Americans faced a lot of racism and discrimination growing up. I never really experienced overt racism myself until high school,” he claimed.

“I was put into a weird position when a huge group of students (who called themselves “rednecks”) hated me for no reason.”

————————————————————————————————————————–
…………

Jim Treacher
@jtLOL

We all know that people are the same wherever you go…

6:06 PM – 17 Aug 2015
————————————————————————————————————————–

King must have known while giving interviews as late as 2015 that Vicki Pate was tracking down his family history. But he continued to deliver craftily-worded answers to interview questions that gave the impression he was a person of color and that he had been the victim of hate crimes.

Neither is true, says Pate. She told Breitbart last night that King has never denied her accusations. “Shaun King has not denied the story to me, or anyone else, as far as I know,” she said. “Whenever it is mentioned on Twitter he simply blocks whoever is asking and reports them for ‘harassment.’ He did reply to one person but only to say, ‘Haters gonna hate.’ I myself have been suspended from Twitter just for posing the question.”

King did not return multiple requests for comment via email and social media. He has since blocked us, too.

.

.

Did Hitlery Sell Classified U.S. intelligence?

The Real Email Question: Did Hillary Clinton Sell US Secrets? – Red State

.

.
While the media is focusing your attention on the shiny object that is her email server, the real story is not being told. The circumstantial evidence indicates that Hillary Clinton, or members of her inner circle with her connivance, purloined highly classified US intelligence and either sold it, traded it, or used it for personal gain. This is not a conspiracy theory and it is not hyperbole. Stick with me for a moment.

The smokescreen

Via the AP:

On Monday, the inspector general for the 17 spy agencies that make up what is known as the intelligence community told Congress that two of 40 emails in a random sample of the 30,000 emails Clinton gave the State Department for review contained information deemed “Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information,” one of the government’s highest levels of classification.

The AP story, along with much of the rest of the media is trying to give two impressions:

First, the Clinton abstracted classifed information and included it in her emails, again AP

Clinton did not transmit the sensitive information herself, they said, and nothing in the emails she received makes clear reference to communications intercepts, confidential intelligence methods or any other form of sensitive sourcing.

Second, that there is all kinds of confusion about security classification

Nothing in the message is “lifted” from classified documents, the officials said, though they differed on where the information in it was sourced. Some said it improperly points back to highly classified material, while others countered that it was a classic case of what the government calls “parallel reporting” – different people knowing the same thing through different means.

We’ve all seen this behavior before with Clinton and her confederates in the media. Rose Law Firm records? Cattle futures? Whitewater? First it is “nothing to see here, move on.” Next it is “it is all so complicated, how could a somewhat addled old lady possibly keep it straight?”

According to the Intelligence Community IG this is what was found in the documents David Kendall turned over on the famous “thumb drive” :

.

.
Focus your attention on the last line. Now let’s see what this means let’s go to John Schindler of 20committee.com writing at The Daily Beast:

• TOP SECRET, as the name implies, is the highest official classification level in the U.S. government, defined as information whose unauthorized release “could cause exceptionally grave damage to national security or foreign relations.”

• SI refers to Special Intelligence, meaning it is information derived from intercepted communications, which is the business of the National Security Agency, America’s single biggest source of intelligence. They’re the guys who eavesdrop on phone calls, map who’s calling whom, and comb through emails. SI is a subset of what the intelligence community calls Sensitive Compartmented Information, or SCI. And these materials always require special handling and protection. They are to be kept in a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility, or SCIF, which is a special hardened room that is safe from both physical and electronic intrusion.

• TK refers to Talent Keyhole, which is an intelligence community caveat indicating that the classified material was obtained via satellite.

• NOFORN, as the name implies, means that the materials can only be shown to Americans, not to foreigners.

If you are interested in the permutations of security classifications at the TS level, this is a good primer.

The focus here is TK. This document the IC IG is talking about is satellite imagery. That is all it could have been. The Keyhole-series satellite is a recon satellite that produces imagery. It doesn’t produce anything else. What the IG found is not a passing reference to classified information or something State produced independently.

How did it get there?

The information we are talking about had to have originated on a highly secure network, one that was certified to handle SCIF-level information. (See page 43 for details) At some point it migrated from a SCIF to a highly secure network to Clinton’s email to her server. To get the document from the secure channel to the non-secure channel requires conscious effort. IT CANNOT HAPPEN BY ACCIDENT. This is evidenced by the fact that it appears someone stripped classifications from documents:

The claims come after the Clinton campaign stuck to the argument that the Democratic presidential candidate, while secretary of state, never dealt with emails that were “marked” classified at the time.

“Hillary only used her personal account for unclassified email. No information in her emails was marked classified at the time she sent or received them,” campaign Communications Director Jennifer Palmieri said in a statement to supporters Wednesday.

But a State Department official told Fox News that the intelligence community inspector general, who raised the most recent concerns about Clinton’s emails, made clear that at least one of those messages contained information that only could have come from the intelligence community.

“If so, they would have had to come in with all the appropriate classification markings,” the official said.

The official questioned whether someone, then, tampered with that message. “[S]omewhere between the point they came into the building and the time they reached HRC’s server, someone would have had to strip the classification markings from that information before it was transmitted to HRC’s personal email.”

This seems to be true because the Clinton campaign is pushing the “retroactive classification” story line and the IC IG implies that the images have been properly marked for their report which implies they were not properly marked when recovered.

Say what?

Now we have a situation where a person or persons downloaded highly classified images in a SCIF environment, or scanned hard copies of documents in a SCIF (cleared persons can bring electronic devices into a SCIF and there are dozens of scanner apps for smartphones and tablets. Clinton and her clique would undoubtedly be cleared.), ported those electronic files over to a non-secure computer and emailed them to someone using Hillary Clinton’s server. These particular images were emailed by or to Hillary Clinton.

If you want to stop now just remember this:

The information the IC IG is talking about a) could not have accidentally ended up in Clinton’s email, b) it was altered to remove security classifications, and c) there has to be a reason someone selected this information, from among the wealth of top secret information Clinton had access to, to steal.

Why would anyone do that?

Now that we’ve dismissed the idea that the classified material was classified post facto, or it was mentioned in passing and accidentally ended up in Hillary’s email, the question becomes one of a) why anyone would remove highly classified material from a secure environment, b) strip the security markings on highly classified satellite imagery and c) send it via un-secure email. These answers go to motive and state of mind. They wanted to sanitize the imagery as much as possible so no casual observer could tell it was classified (which asks another why? question which we will get to) and it was sent via un-secure email because the intended recipient did not have SCIF access.

What we know for certain is that Clinton could not have been contemplating saving this information for use in her memoirs because her memoirs would require State and Intelligence review and someone would have identified the imagery as TS//TK.

The beginning of a trail…

We know that Hillary Clinton relied to some degree on intelligence briefings sent to her by her loyalist and vicious attack poodle, Sid Blumenthal. This arrangement came to light when Blumethal’s AOL account (I am not making that up) was accessed by a Romanian hacker nicknamed ‘Guccifer.’ Via Politico:

Sidney Blumenthal did not write or know the source of any of the Libya intelligence he passed on to then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the top Clinton ally told investigators on the House Select Committee on Benghazi Tuesday in a closed-door deposition.

Blumenthal, subpoenaed by the committee, also did not verify any of the intelligence he forwarded to the nation’s top diplomat. Instead, Blumenthal was copying and pasting memos from Tyler Drumheller, a former CIA operative who was looking into a Libya-related business venture, and sending them to Clinton, two people familiar with his testimony told POLITICO.

“One of the folks providing her the largest volume of information was simply and merely a conduit of someone who… may have had business interest in Libya,” said panel Chairman Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) 80% (R-S.C.) at the end of a nearly nine-hour interview. “We have a CIA, so why would you not rely on your own vetted source intelligence agency? In this case, there was no vetting, no analysis of credibility whatsoever.”

And:

In her early months in office, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was in contact with unofficial adviser Sidney Blumenthal more often and on a wider range of topics than was previously known, a set of about 3,000 Clinton emails released Tuesday night by the State Department revealed.

While Blumenthal’s role as a provider of off-the-books intelligence reports on Libya has stirred controversy, the newly disclosed emails show he also acted as an intermediary with officials involved in the Northern Ireland peace process and shared advice with Clinton on issues from Iran to British politics to how to blame China for the breakdown of global climate talks.

Blumenthal claims he didn’t actually know anything, that he was only an intermediary passing information from a former CIA official, Iraq War critic (I know, those are redundant terms) and would-be political player named Tyler Drumheller.

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had access to the world’s top intelligence agencies and their resources, but at the most turbulent moment of her tenure as the nation’s top diplomat, she received a stream of intelligence on Libya and the Benghazi attack by a former CIA official working outside the government, sources said.

Since his retirement, Drumheller has also contributed to various Democratic politicians, according to records maintained by the Center for Responsive Politics. In 2005, he contributed a combined $800 to the Senate campaigns of former Sens. Mark Pryor and Mary Landrieu, and donated $500 to Rep. Bill Pascrell, D-New Jersey, in 2011, the Center for Responsive Politics said.

And…

We know at least two Clinton cronies followed her to State: Cheryl Mills (Chief of Staff) and sweet Huma Abedin (Deputy Chief of Staff). They also had Clinton foundation email addresses. Both Mills and Abedin held the status of ‘special employees’ which allowed them to hold other jobs while working at State. Mills was on the board of NYU’s Abu Dhabi campus, general counsel for NYU, and on the payroll of the Clinton Foundation. Abedin worked for an investment consultancy called Teneo Holdings and was also on the payroll of the Clinton Foundation. We don’t know their security access but it would be safe to say they saw everything Hillary did.

What happened to the imagery?

Either Clinton sent top secret material via her private email to herself to archive for grins or the Clinton server was only a way station on its way somewhere else. Simply keeping the images for some future use doesn’t make sense to me as it is a high risk-low payoff action. The more likely scenario is that something was done with the images, something that benefited one or more Clintons.

A logical route would be Clinton gets info from Blumenthal who gets info from Drumheller. Clinton sends info to Blumenthal who sends info to Drumheller.

But if Blumenthal, or someone like him, handled the outgoing classified information did they also act as a bag man, collecting money for the imagery?

What did Drumheller, or someone like him, get for his efforts if he received the imagery? Was he merely a bit player at the fringe of Democrat politics who was releasing his inner Walter Mitty by sending bulls*** intel analyses to Hillary? Maybe in hopes of become Director of Central Intelligence after her coronation? Did he get paid by Clinton? Or was the operation a quid pro quo where he received classified materials that he could sell to others and curry favor and impress others to gain access to other political players? Did someone in Abu Dhabi get the images? Or did they end up at Teneo Holdings to help bolster some investment decision? One of these answers is better than the others.

…or it could have been run of the mill Clinton corruption

Alternatively, once could ask were these images and other information used to sweeten the pot for various kleptocrats and dictators who paid extortionate amounts of money for speeches by Bill Clinton? Suppose a Third World dictator… let’s imagine in Central Asia… paid Bill Clinton… let’s just throw a number out there… $500,000 for a speech. Suppose as part of the deal that Clinton client also received satellite imagery or signal intercepts that increased their life expectancy. Is there any evidence of this? No. But neither is there any proof it didn’t happen. As we learned during the administration of GHW Bush, it is not the quality of the evidence that requires an investigation, rather it is the seriousness of the allegation.

Searching for a fall guy

Clinton’s story is “I didn’t know squat.” That is as plausible as Obama’s Justice Department wants to make it. But either someone gave her the images and she sent them or they had log in access to her email and sent them for her. Her only real defense, given her access to classified material and a Keyhole satellite image would have been instantly recognizable, is that someone used her email to send it.

But how did they get into Hillary’s email? Did Hillary handle the images? I don’t think she had the technical chops – and is way too smart – to scan/download satellite imagery, strip the security classification, and email them. Did Cheryl Mills, an attorney, do this? Lawyers do stupid stuff all the time but usually it has the patina of cleverness attached. That leaves Huma.

With no security classification, Sid Blumenthal has plausible deniablity. He can say he got the images (this is assuming that at some point he did receive them) but assumed they were unclassified.

This makes one logical fall guy Tyler Drumheller. Drumheller would instantly recognize the Keyhole imagery so stripping the security classification wouldn’t muddy the water much for him if it ever went to court. But anyone he gave/showed the imagery to would not necessarily know the source which could provide some degree of cover. Unfortunately, we will never know Mr. Drumheller’s true role in this as he visited Fort Marcy Park died of pancreatic cancer on August 2, 2015.

.

.

More Bad News For Hitlery

Potential Classified Clinton Emails Grow To More Than 300 – Daily Caller

.

.
The State Department is referring 305 of Hillary Clinton’s State Department emails to the intelligence community to review for classified information, the federal government reported in a court filing on Monday.

“Out of a sample of approximately 20% of the Clinton emails, the [Intelligence Community] reviewers have only recommended 305 documents – approximately 5.1% – for referral to their agencies for consultation,” State Department attorneys told U.S. District Court judge Emmet Sullivan, according to The Washington Times.

The State Department has reviewed about 6,000 of the approximately 30,000 emails Clinton handed over in December. If reviewers continue to find emails with secret information at the current rate, more than 1,500 of Clinton’s emails could potentially contain highly classified material.

The government’s revelation comes after the Intelligence Community inspector general, I. Charles McCullough, told Congress earlier this month that his agency had determined that two emails that traversed Clinton’s private email server contained information that was “top secret” – the highest classification level.

That finding prompted the FBI to intervene and gain control of the private email server Clinton used to maintain her personal email account during her tenure at State. The agency also commandeered thumb drives containing copies of Clinton’s emails that her attorney, David Kendall, had stored in a safe in his office.

The State Department has already redacted and released 60 Clinton emails which contain information that is classified as “confidential” – the lowest category. The agency insists that the information was not classified at the time it was sent and stored on Clinton’s server.

Some of those emails were sent by Clinton herself, including one she sent in Nov. 2009 to her longtime friend, Sidney Blumenthal, about former U.S. ambassador Joe Wilson.

.

.
Clinton has downplayed the entire email controversy as a right-wing conspiracy. At a campaign event in Iowa on Friday, she said she “won’t get down in the mud” with Republicans. But she has also walked back some of her most adamant claims about her handling of classified material.

In March, she said at a press conference that “there was no classified material” on her server. But as the investigation has progressed, she’s changed her tune. Last month she said: “I am confident that I never sent nor received any information that was classified at the time it was sent and received.”

After the McCullough’s finding of “top secret” information was revealed, Clinton and her team have turned to claiming that none of the emails were “marked” classified at the time they were sent or received.

Clinton has also attempted to portray herself as a willing participant in the email inquiry.

In a radio interview conducted over the weekend, she claimed that if it wasn’t for her, the emails never would have been made public.

“Because if I had not asked for my emails all to be made public, none of this would have been in the public arena,” she said.

The Republican operative group America’s Rising called that claim false, pointing out that Clinton handed over her emails only after the State Department sought them in response to the congressional investigation into the Benghazi attacks. Clinton had been out of office nearly two years when she finally provided the emails. The off-the-books email operation was only made public in a New York Times article in March. Clinton had also said that she would not turn over her private email server to a third-party. The hardware has also been scrubbed, her attorney has said.

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

Related articles:

.
ABC: “Highly Likely” A Backup Of Hillary’s Original Server Files Exists – Hot Air

Hillary Clinton visited the Iowa State Fair this weekend, trying to pass off the FBI and Inspectors General probe into her e-mail system as nothing more than partisan politics. She even joked about having a Snapchat account where messages disappear on their own. If this ABC News report is correct, though, Hillary won’t be laughing for long. Platte River Services, the company to which the Clintons entrusted the server after she left office, believes that a backup of her data is “highly likely” to exist. And if it does, the 31,000+ e-mails that Hillary and her team deleted may not be gone after all (via the Daily Caller):

.

.

JONATHAN KARL, ABC NEWS CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Out in Iowa this weekend, Hillary Clinton joked about the thousands of e-mails she deleted from her time as secretary of state.

HILLARY CLINTON (D), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I recently launched a Snapchat account. I love it. I love it. Those messages disappear all by themselves. (LAUGHTER)

KARL (voice-over): But her infamous private server is now in the hands of the FBI, which is intensifying its investigation into the handling of classified information in her e-mails. According to sources familiar with the investigation, it’s already been determined that at least two of the e-mails included information that’s top secret, some of it from so-called signals intelligence, among the most sensitive intelligence there is. Investigators are also trying to determine if the Chinese or Russians were able to get access to Clinton’s private e-mails.

COL. STEVE GANYARD, FORMER DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE: Anybody that works around this level of classification knows the sensitivity. It’s not something you can talk around and it’s always obvious.

KARL (voice-over): But in the most intriguing new development, Platte River Networks, the Colorado company that set up Clinton’s server, told ABC News it’s highly likely that a full backup of the server was made, meaning those thousands of e-mails she deleted may still exist.

It seems exceedingly odd to hear Hillary cracking jokes about disappearing messages. She’s trying to sell the idea that this is a partisan nothingburger, which is a strange tack to take when the investigation has been taken up by Barack Obama’s Department of Justice. Let’s also not forget that the intelligence community that has been outraged by this conduct hardly qualifies as a GOP-friendly outfit, as George Bush and Dick Cheney can attest. It’s like hearing Richard Nixon make jokes about wiretaps while the House prepared articles of impeachment, only Nixon was smart enough not to try that, at least in public. What’s the message supposed to be here – that voters should celebrate her impunity towards transparency and secure handling of classified materials? I guess that makes sense in the context of Hillary’s desire for a coronation, but don’t expect most Americans to be laughing along with her.

If the FBI finds a backup at Platte River Services of Hillary’s original e-mail database, the Snapchat jokes will dry up quickly. It seemed odd that such a firm wouldn’t have made backups, which would be another moment of incompetence for Hillary and her team in their attempt to clean up the e-mail stash. Once the FBI gets a backup copy, then the fun will truly begin. The House will want access to the complete set of data, and if they or the DoJ discover responsive materials within those that got trashed, then all sorts of new problems begin for Hillary Clinton – including a potential perjury charge. The State Department will be forced to comply with a number of FOIAs stalled by Hillary’s use of a secret e-mail server, and if there is any indication of influence peddling in connection to the Clinton Foundation or Bill Clinton’s speeches within her e-mails, Hillary may not be the only Clinton in legal trouble.

Perhaps Hillary should laugh while she can, but it’s either false bravado or irrational denial at this point.

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

.
Woodward On Clinton Emails: ‘Reminds Me Of The Nixon Tapes’ – Breitbart

.

.
Washington Post Associate Editor Bob Woodward said of Hillary Clinton’s emails, “It, in a way, reminds me of the Nixon tapes” on Monday’s broadcast of MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.”

Woodward stated that allowing Clinton and her lawyers to decide whether to turn over information was “unprecedented,” and “follow the trail here. You know, there are all these emails. Well, they were sent to someone, or someone sent them to her. So, if things have been erased here, there’s a way to go back to who originated these emails, or who received them from Hillary Clinton. So, you’ve got a massive amount of data. It, in a way, reminds me of the Nixon tapes. Thousands of hours of secretly recorded conversations that Nixon thought were exclusively hers – his, that he was not going to get them. Hillary Clinton initially took that position, I’m not turning this over. There’s going to be no cooperation. Now, they’re cooperating. But, this is – this has to go on a long, long time, and the answers are probably not going to be pretty.”

Earlier he said, “It’s extraordinary. And, again, it’s the volume. 60,000 emails, and Hillary Clinton has said 30,000 of them, half, were personal and they were deleted. Who decided that? What’s on those emails? I would love to have all 60,000, read them, it would be a character study about her personal life, and, also, what she did as secretary of state. And let’s step back for a moment, the big question about Hillary Clinton is, who is she? Is she this secretive, hidden person, or is she this valiant public servant? Look at those 60,000 emails, and you’re going to get some answers. And there’s a hydraulic pressure always in the system here. You’ve got the FBI, you’ve got the inspector generals, you’ve got lots of people in government who are furious, because they spent hours being trained, like the example of Madeleine Albright. You have to be careful about this. Hillary Clinton went in – I mean, what was the origin? Who knew about this idea of using a private server? I mean, when I first found about that, it’s unimaginable.”

Woodward added, “for Hillary Clinton to go out, as she did, in recent days, and say, [paraphrasing] ‘This is politics. This is dirty politics. They’re trying to smear me in an unfair way,’ that dog will not hunt, at all. You have got Barack Obama’s government now investigating her and looking at this. Now, at the same time, nothing’s been proven to be illegal and [Ed] Rendell there had a good point that, you know, kind of slow down. I think, in the media and political environment we’re in, where everything is driven by impatience and speed, that’s going to not be possible. But, they’re going to have to get some answers.”

Woodward concluded, in response to a question about the responsibilities of officials to ensure classified material doesn’t get out, “the first level of scrutiny is common sense. And, you know, in the world where Petraeus was dealing, either as a general or as CIA director, or Hillary Clinton was dealing [at the] State Department, almost everything is classified one way or another. And so you have to have some systems to protect it, and you have to use common sense.” He also stated that it’s “easier to describe the creation of the universe” than say how material becomes classified. And “the idea of the server, and this excuse, oh, it was all for convenience, isn’t going to work.”

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

Related video:

.

.

.

Your Daley Gator Hillary Clinton Crime Spree News Roundup

Hillary’s State Department Routinely Hid Emails On Purpose – Big Government

.

.
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s State Department routinely failed to preserve its own emails in order to intentionally hide them from official records.

Clinton-era email use at the State Department was fraught with widespread, intentional concealment, according to an October 2014-March 2015 semiannual report to Congress filed by the State Department’s office of inspector general (OIG).

Only a fraction of the messages sent by email were stored as “record emails,” according to the report.

“The review of the State Messaging and Archive Retrieval Toolset (SMART) and Record Email found that, out of the more than 1 billion emails sent in 2011, employees created just over 61,000 official emails; and they created even fewer – 41,000 – in 2013,” the inspector general found. “OIG recommended that the Department establish policies governing usage and that system designers engage with focus groups to enhance the system’s efficiency.” (p. vii)

Clinton’s administration did nothing to teach people how to store emails and oversaw the widespread cover-up of emails that should have been kept.

“A 2009 upgrade in the Department’s system facilitated the preservation of emails as official records. However, Department employees had not received adequate training or guidance on their responsibilities for using those systems to preserve ‘record emails,’” according to the OIG report.

“Record email usage varied widely across bureaus and missions. The Bureau of Administration needed to exercise central oversight of the use of the record email function. OIG found that some employees did not create record emails because they did not want to make the email available in searches or feared that this availability would inhibit debate about pending decisions.”

Former Secretary Clinton has turned over thumb drives and a private email server containing her emails from her tenure at the State Department. An inter-agency government task force led by the Department of Justice and the FBI is currently investigating how classified information ended up on Clinton’s server, and whether foreign agents were able to obtain any of the information on Clinton’s server.

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

Related articles:

.
CNN National Security Analyst Unloads On Hillary Over Email Scandal: ‘I Wonder Whether She Is Capable Of Being President’ – Daily Caller

.

……………………….Click on image above to watch video.

.
Hillary Clinton’s email scandal should disqualify her from the Oval Office.

At least so says former CIA operative and CNN national security analyst Bob Baer, who is not known for being a political partisan.

“If this was on her server and it got into her smart phone, there’s a big problem there,” Baer said during an appearance on CNN International Saturday, noting that the sensitivity of the information reportedly found on Clinton’s private server was likely more secret than what Edward Snowden pilfered.

“Seriously, if I had sent a document like this over the open Internet I’d get fired the same day, escorted to the door and gone for good – and probably charged with mishandling classified information,” Baer said.

“If this in fact were on her hand held [phone] – was sent to her or she forwarded it in any way – I wonder whether she is capable of being president,” he added.

Pressed by the host as to whether he really thought this situation was a “deal breaker” for Clinton’s presidential candidacy, Baer said, “As a national security employee, a former one, yes.”

“I can’t tell you how bad this is,” he went on. “A lot of things get talked about, a lot of gossip, but having documents like this sent across the Internet, it could be hacked very easily and probably were hacked, is a transgression that I don’t think the president of the United States should be allowed to, you know, have committed.”

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

.
Number Of Hillary Clinton’s Emails Flagged For Classified Data Grows To 60 As Review Continues – Washington Times

While media coverage has focused on a half-dozen of Hillary Rodham Clinton’s personal emails containing sensitive intelligence, the total number of her private emails identified by an ongoing State Department review as having contained classified data has ballooned to 60, officials told The Washington Times.

That figure is current through the end of July and is likely to grow as officials wade through a total of 30,000 work-related emails that passed through her personal email server, officials said. The process is expected to take months.

The 60 emails are among those that have been reviewed and cleared for release under the Freedom of Information Act as part of a open-records lawsuit. Some of the emails have multiple redactions for classified information.

Among the first 60 flagged emails, nearly all contained classified secrets at the lowest level of “confidential” and one contained information at the intermediate level of “secret,” officials told the Times.

Those 60 emails do not include two emails identified in recent days by Intelligence Community Inspector General I. Charles McCullough III as containing “top-secret” information possibly derived from Pentagon satellites, drones or intercepts, which is some of the nation’s most sensitive secrets.

State officials and the intelligence community are working to resolve questions about those and other emails with possible classified information, a process that isn’t likely to be completed until January.

That will be right around the time Mrs. Clinton is slated to face voters in the Iowa caucuses in her bid for the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination.

As the number of suspect emails grows and the classification review continues, it is clear that predictions contained in a notification Mr. McCullough sent Congress this summer is likely to hold true: Mrs. Clinton’s personal emails likely contained hundreds of disclosures of classified information.

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

.
How Did Hillary’s Lawyers Search A Server No Longer In Her Possession – Legal Insurrection

There is a time gap which may hold the key to Hillary’s hide-and-seek email game.

According to the Washington Post and other reporting, a Colorado server company obtained possession of Hillary’s server in 2013, transferred the data, leaving a blank server with no usable data at a storage facility in New Jersey.

Yet, in a letter filed on August 12, 2015 with the federal Court in the Judicial Watch FOIA litigation regarding Huma Abedin’s outside employment, Hillary’s lawyer, David Kendall. represented that Hillary did not ask counsel to review her emails until late 2014. [Full embed at bottom of post.] He also confirmed that the Colorado company has had possession of the original server since 2013.

.

.
* * *

.

.
David Kendall letter Clinton Emails 8-12-2015 excerpt 2

So how could Hillary’s lawyers review a server no longer in Hillary’s possession, and which had been wiped clean?

It’s worth noting that at her March 10, 2015, UN press conference, when a reporter noted that some people suggested an independent review of the server, Hillary did not say that she no longer had the original server or that it had been wiped clean.

Instead, she said “the server will remain private.”

The server contains personal communications from my husband and me, and I believe I have met all of my responsibilities and the server will remain private…

.

.
(transcript)

It is that original server that apparently has been turned over to the federal government. Plus a thumb drive, which purportedly only has work-related emails.

If the data was transferred to some other server, where is that one?

On Friday, August 14, 2015, the State Department is required to provide additional information to the Court.

Maybe that will shed some light.

But I’m not hopeful.

Judicial Watch Foia Case Huma Abedin – Defendant’s August 12, 2015 Status Report

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

.
Fox Poll: Two Percent Of Voters Think Hillary Told The Truth About E-mail Server, And Only Three Percent Of Democrats – Hot Air

Six months ago, Hillary Clinton insisted that her private e-mail system contained no sensitive material, and that the federal government had no need of her server. With federal investigators trying to track down all of the records from her private e-mail server and revelations about Top Secret/compartmented material on her unauthorized system, Hillary’s public statements look like lies to a majority of those polled in the latest Fox News survey. In a poll of 1,008 registered voters, 58% say Hillary lied about the e-mails, and 54% believe she damaged national security:

A Fox News poll released Friday finds a 58 percent majority thinks Clinton “knowingly lied” when she announced in a March press conference that no emails on her private server contained classified information. A third says there is “another explanation” for internal government investigators determining secret info was in fact on Clinton’s server (33 percent).

Moreover, by a 54-37 percent margin, voters feel Clinton put our national security at risk by using a private email server.

The poll gave three options: Clinton lied, There’s another explanation, and Clinton told the truth. Only 2% overall think Hillary told the truth, a staggeringly bad number, and only 33% overall think there’s another explanation than Hillary lying. On option 3, the internals on this poll are instructive. The highest that Clinton told the truth polls in the demographics is 5% among black voters, where 63% choose another explanation. Among Democrats, the number is a whopping three percent. And among younger voters – who are presumably very familiar with e-mail – the “Hillary’s honest” option didn’t get enough responses to register.

Frankly, this question is designed to let respondents get off the hook for deciding whether Hillary lied or not. The middle option of another explanation implies incompetency – not exactly a good look for a presidential candidate – or some milder form of dishonesty. And yet, not many voters took the middle option. Self-described liberal, Democrats, and black voters all had majorities choosing the less-bad option, but almost none of them chose told the truth.

Instead, majorities in almost all other demos believe Hillary lied, even when given a softer option. Younger voters under 35 years of age were especially harsh on this judgment at 63/30/0, but the next age demo (35-54) was almost as dismissive, 61/31/2. In a rare show of consensus, those with (59/34/1) and without (58/33/2) college degrees agree on Hillary’s dishonesty. Two-thirds of independents believe she flat-out lied (67/23/2), and even a majority of women agree (51/40/2).

The responses to the question of harm to national security fall into the same pattern. This was presented as a yes/no, and 54% overall chose yes. The key demos all have yes majorities:

* Independents – 54/36
* Women – 50/40
* College degree – 53/38
* No college degree – 55/37
* 18-35YOs – 61/34

In other words, she’s rapidly approaching Richard Nixon levels of trust in, say, August 1973 or so.

A couple of other notes in the poll will have an indirect impact on Hillary, who’s going to be a continuity candidate based on her participation in the Obama administration. A recent trend toward the positive in Barack Obama’s job approval reversed itself in this poll, the first taken since the Iran deal was announced. He slid from a 46/46 in the beginning of July to 42/51, his worst showing since March. Voters want Congress to reject the Iran deal 31/58, and substantially more of them believe Iran can’t be trusted, 18/75, which is actually a slight improvement from the historical trend. With that hanging in the air, Hillary would have had trouble gaining trust from voters anyway – but the e-mail server scandal all but moots the point now.

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

Related videos:

.

.

.

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

More August headlines:
.

Exclusive: Hillary’s IT Contractor Did Not Have Proper Security Clearance – Daily Caller


The Countless Crimes Of Hillary Clinton: Special Prosecutor Needed Now – Sidney Powell


Tech Company Which Maintained Hillary’s Secret Server Was Sued For ‘Illegally Accessing’ Database And ‘Stealing White House Military Advisers’ Phone Numbers’ – Daily Mail


Hillary Clinton Emails Contained Signal Intelligence From Spy Satellites – Washington Times


*VIDEO* Judge Andrew Napolitano Describes Hillary Clinton’s Crimes


FBI Investigation Of Hillary’s Emails Is ‘Criminal Probe’ – New York Post


Judge Orders Hillary Clinton To Answer For ‘Home-Brew’ Server – Gateway Pundit

.
.

.

*VIDEO* Judge Jeanine Pirro Explains In Detail How Hitlery Has Committed Multiple Crimes


.

.

Yet Another Reason Why Hitlery Should Be In Prison

Exclusive: Hillary’s IT Contractor Did Not Have Proper Security Clearance – Daily Caller

.
…………

.
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton entrusted her email server to an IT firm that was not cleared to handle classified materials, according to the chief spokesman for the Defense Security Service.

The DSS is an arm of the Defense Department and is the only federal agency authorized to approve private sector company access to sensitive or confidential material.

The agency reviews and approves private contractors to assure they have secure facilities and approves security clearances for employees to clear them for access to sensitive or classified materials.

Since 2013, Clinton used Platte River Networks, a small Denver-based company, to upgrade and maintain her private email server at her home in Chappaqua, New York.

About 13,000 companies have received FCL or facility-wide clearance. But Platte River is not one of them.

“Platte River is not cleared” to have access to classified material, stated Cindy McGovern, chief public affairs officer for DSS in a telephone interview with The Daily Caller News Foundation.

Sen. Ron Johnson, chairman of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, told the DCNF that the Platte River involvement “raises serious questions” about the security surrounding Secretary Clinton’s server over the last two years.

“The revelation that Secretary Clinton used a private company, Platte River Networks, to maintain her personal server raises questions about what steps the company took to preserve and secure sensitive information in Secretary Clinton’s email,” Johnson said.

The DSS provides clearances to 30 federal departments and agencies, including the State Department.

Alex McGeorge, the head of threat intelligence at the IT cybersecurity firm Immunity told TheDCNF that all facilities approved for access to classified materials need a “SCIF” – or Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility – also known as a hardened room.

“It’s a room that is resistant to eavesdropping and unauthorized entry limited to personnel with security clearances. That would be a room that where data coming in and out of the room is tightly controlled,” he said.

According to the Associated Press, the intelligence community inspector general reported to Congress Monday that Hillary’s emails contained at least two messages with information considered Top Secret.

For servers that contain Top Secret information, “you would have to have very compartmentalized clearance to see. Those standards are much higher,” McGeorge said.

The DSS current mission is carried out under the National Industrial Security Program (NISP), the rules of which were established by President Clinton in 1993 with Executive Order 12829.

Platte River has not responded to requests for comment from TheDCNF.

.

.

Traitor John Kerry Rewards Cuba For Remaining A Communist Dictatorship For Over Half A Century

John Kerry Reopens Embassy In Cuba, But Tensions Remain – CNN

.

.
Secretary of State John Kerry came to Cuba on Friday and raised the American flag above the U.S. Embassy for the first time in 54 years.

“Thank you for joining us at this truly historic moment as we prepare to raise the flag… symbolizing the restoration of diplomatic relations after 54 years,” Kerry said at the ceremony, addressing the crowd in both English and Spanish.

Kerry’s visit marks the symbolic end of one of the last vestiges of the Cold War. But signs of mistrust linger, and beyond the pomp and circumstance lies a long road back from more than half a century of diplomatic animosity.

On Thursday, Cuban state media put out an article in the name of Fidel Castro, writing on the occasion of his 89th birthday, in which he made no reference to the historic resumption of U.S.-Cuba relations but instead waxed on about the damage the American embargo has caused Cuba and the anniversary of the United States dropping an atomic bomb on Japan.

The rhetoric from the leader of the Cuban revolution, and the face of anti-U.S. resistance, is not unexpected. But it underscores the long-standing tensions at play as Washington and Havana work to thaw the decadeslong chill in relations.

Even Kerry’s brief visit reflects the complexities of opening a new chapter of engagement with the Cuban government.

He is accompanied by a number of U.S. lawmakers who have advocated normalizing diplomatic and economic relations with the island. Several Cuban-Americans also are part of the delegation.

Dissidents not invited to embassy opening

But anti-Castro dissidents won’t be at the U.S. Embassy ceremony marking the restoration of ties. Instead, Kerry will meet dissidents and human rights activists at another flag-raising, this one closed to press at the residence of the U.S. chief of mission, along with a broad cross section of Cuban entrepreneurs, journalists and artists.

Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, the son of Cuban immigrants, blasted the decision in a foreign policy speech delivered in New York Friday morning.

“As a symbol of just how backward this policy shift has turned out to be, no Cuban dissidents have been invited to today’s official flag-raising ceremony at the U.S. Embassy in Havana,” Rubio said. “Cuba’s dissidents have fought for decades for the very Democratic principles President Obama claims to be advancing through these concessions. Their exclusion from this event has ensured it will be little more than a propaganda rally for the Castro regime.”

Sen. Bob Menendez, a New Jersey Democrat and also the son of Cuban immigrants, said it was “shameful” that Cuba could bar dissidents from the ceremony and said the U.S. flag should not fly in a country that does not value freedom.

“A flag representing freedom and liberty will rise today in a country ruled by a repressive regime that denies its people democracy and basic human rights. This is the embodiment of a wrongheaded policy that rewards the Castro regime’s brutality at the expense of the Cuban people’s right to freedom of expression and independence,” Menendez said in a statement.

Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush called the opening of the embassy a “sad day” in an interview Friday with CNN en Espanol.

“It’s a sad day for me because we did not get anything, no freedom, the dissidents were not invited, not even a change in the regime, they have the economic control. The American flag up but no changes to the Cuban people, it’s a sad day for me,” Bush said, according to a CNN translation.

But Republican Sen. Jeff Flake of Arizona, who joined Kerry as part of the American delegation, welcomed the Embassy reopening.

“The United States will be able to do much more to protect and serve U.S. citizens in Cuba and encourage a better future for the Cuban people with an American flag flying over our embassy in Havana,” he said in a statement.

U.S. officials shrugged off the fact that dissidents were only invited to attend the second ceremony, chalking it up to “limited space” at the Embassy flag-raising, which they termed a “government-to-government movement.” But it reflected attention to the sensitivities of the regime.

When Cuban Foreign Minister Bruno Eduardo Rodriguez visited Washington to reopen the Cuban embassy, he underscored the differences that remain. Standing next to Kerry at the State Department last month, Rodriguez made clear the full normalization of ties between the United States and Cuba would be impossible as long as the blockade remains.

President Barack Obama has eased some travel and business restrictions, but only Congress can lift the 53-year-old embargo, something that is unlikely to happen with Republicans controlling both chambers through the end of his term.

“Where we go from here has to do with what (happens) in the next 16 months, while the President is in office, if he is able to consolidate what has already been done,” said Julia Sweig, a Latin America expert long at the forefront of Washington’s Cuba policy debate.

“That happens by using his executive authority to open up new opportunities for travel, trade and investment. And the Cuban government needs to do the same,” she said. “This could neutralize remaining opposition in Congress and make it impossible for the next president, if it is a Republican, to reverse it.”

There are other areas where the administration is already pushing the limits.

Take tourism. While only Congress can officially lift the “ban” on tourism, the Treasury Department has taken a liberal view of what “tourism” means when it provides licenses to travel to the island. The parent company of Carnival, Princess and several other cruise lines plan to launch “people-to-people” visits to the island by ship. Other tour companies are offering vacation packages to Cuba for Americans loosely labeled as “cultural experiences.”

Sweig said there are other business sectors that could benefit from the same treatment.

“The difference between yes and no on any sector is a political decision by the White House,” Sweig said. “They don’t’ have to wait for Congress.”

Senior administration officials said they are examining what more the President can do to support the Cuban people and Cuban entrepreneurs but said he would be cautious about going too far, too fast.

No plan to gut embargo

The officials said that the President’s calculus in carving out certain sectors – health, agriculture, telecom and information – was that they could be justified within the President’s executive authority as humanitarian in nature and opening Cuba to the outside world.

But Obama will not do an end run around Congress and gut the embargo, they said, something Republican lawmakers opposed to the new policy have accused him of.

“These are areas we think can help bring about improvements in the lives of average Cubans even if they bring some benefit to a government we disagree with,” one senior official said. “We are making exceptions to the embargo but still keeping the premise of it.

The official continued, “The question of whether you want basic manufacturing to sell to Cuba is a very different question that goes to the heart of a law which Congress passed.”

The United States is also looking for the Cuban government to take steps to improve the relationship. The administration hopes to convince the Cuban government to extradite some American criminals currently taking refuge on the island, such as Joanne Chesimard, better known as Assata Shakur, and William Guillermo Morales.

Castro granted Chesimard, a convicted murderer wanted by the FBI, political asylum in Cuba, where she has remained ever since escaping from a life sentence in 1979 from a New Jersey prison. Morales, a member of a militant Puerto Rican separatist movement, planted a bomb at a New York military installation and faced 89 years in prison when he escaped from police custody while in a hospital in New York.

Washington also wants to settle property disputes for Americans that were living in Cuba when the two countries cut off ties.

In addition, the U.S. wants to increase existing, albeit modest, cooperation between Washington and Havana on areas such as counternarcotics, migration, environment and global health. With American diplomats now free to travel across the island, officials hope they will get a better sense of the needs of the Cuban people and how the United States can help.

Perhaps the most important driver of warming ties between the two countries, however, will be the American and Cuban people. Officials say that the increase in Americans traveling to Cuba has been positive, with Cubans interacting with regular Americans for the first time in more than 50 years.

“They see we don’t have horns and a tail,” one official said. “And Americans are getting a more nuanced view of Cuba than cigars, mojitos and old cars.”

.

.

Leftist Incompetence Update: Russia And Iran ‘Already Violating’ Nuclear Deal

Royce: Russia And Iran ‘Already Violating’ Nuclear Deal – CNS

.

Qods Force chief Qassem Soleimani attends a meeting of Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps commanders in Tehran on September 17, 2013. (AP Photo/Office of the Iranian Supreme Leader, File)

.
The U.S. must call both Russia and Iran to account for “already violating” the nuclear agreement, House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Rep. Ed Royce (R-Calif.) said Thursday. He was responding to a reported trip to Moscow by Iran’s Qods force commander, who is subject to U.N. travel sanctions.

“[Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani] is the chief commander for Iranian foreign forces outside of Iran who carry out their assassinations and carry out their attacks,” Royce told CNN.

“And the fact that he would violate the sanctions prior to it being lifted upon him, by jumping the gun – this gives us the opportunity to call the Russians to account, and the Iranians to account, for already violating this agreement,” he said. “And we should do so.”

As a P5+1 partner, Russia – a U.N. Security Council permanent member – is supposed to help enforce the nuclear agreement which the six powers negotiated with Tehran.

Following reports that Soleimani traveled to Moscow last month and met with President Vladimir Putin and Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu, Iran deal critics are asking: If Russia gets away with hosting him, what does that say about its likely response to any future Iranian cheating on the nuclear agreement?

Although the Obama administration agreed as part of the nuclear deal that U.N. sanctions against Soleimani and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Qods Force will be lifted, it says that will only happen in “phase two” of the agreement’s implementation – in about eight years’ time.

Any travel abroad by him ahead of that point would be in violation of the U.N. travel ban, under which all member states are required to deny him entry.

In a letter to President Obama, Royce has requested “a determination of whether the travel of Soleimani took place, its purpose, and whether it was in violation of United Nations sanctions.”

“Since the Iran agreement was signed, senior administration officials have testified that there would be no relaxing of sanctions against Iran for terrorist activity,” he wrote. “The reported free travel of Qassem Soleimani and the continuing arming of Iranian proxies throughout the Middle East is a direct challenge to that commitment.”

State Department spokesman John Kirby told a press briefing Thursday that Secretary of State John Kerry in a phone conversation with Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov “raised concerns about the travel to Moscow by IRGC commander Qassem Soleimani.”

Later in the briefing, however, Kirby revised his wording, saying he could not independently confirm that the visit had indeed taken place, but that Kerry “has seen the reports of the travel and expressed his concerns [to Lavrov] about those reports.”

Fox News first reported on the alleged visit last week, citing unnamed Western intelligence sources.

Then Reuters reported that an “Iranian official, who declined to be identified,” confirmed that the trip had taken place, saying Soleimani had discussed “regional and bilateral issues and the delivery to Iran of S-300 surface-to-air missiles and other weapons.”

Russian state news agency RIA Novosti, however, quoted a Kremlin spokesman as denying the claim (although the report’s wording left open the possibility that the denial was specifically in relation to a Soleimani-Putin meeting, rather than about whether the visit took place at all.)

Soleimani’s name appears on a list of Iranian individuals and entities in line for sanctions relief, annexed to the nuclear agreement.

Hours after the deal was announced in Vienna on July 14, a senior administration official, briefing reporters on background, was asked about Soleimani’s inclusion.

“IRGC commander Qassem Soleimani will not be delisted at the United Nations at phase one; he will be delisted at the U.N. at phase two when the underlying designation authority terminates,” the official said.

That would only occur “after eight years into the deal, so sanctions are not being lifted early on Qassem Soleimani,” the official said.

Since then, Kerry has stressed that U.S. sanctions – as opposed to U.N. ones – against Soleimani will “never” be lifted.

Soleimani is accused of directing Shi’ite militias that carried out deadly attacks against U.S. troops in Iraq during the war there. According to the Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman nominee Gen. Joseph Dunford, he was responsible for the deaths of at least 500 U.S. soldiers and Marines in Iraq.

.

.

*VIDEO* Ben Carson Debunks Leftist Lie That He Did Research On Fetal Tissue


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

.
Via Dr. Carson’s facebook page

I wanted to use our time tonight to directly deal with an attack launched on me today by the left and the media. A couple questions came in on this subject, so I want to address it head on.

Today I was accused by the press as having done research on fetal tissue. It simply is not true. The study they distributed by an anonymous source was done in 1992. The study was about tumors. I won’t bore you with the science. There were four doctors’ names on the study. One was mine. I spent my life studying brain tumors and removing them. My only involvement in this study was supplying tumors that I had removed from my patients. Those tissue samples were compared to other tissue samples under a microscope. Pathologists do this work to gain clues about tumors.

I, nor any of the doctors involved with this study, had anything to do with abortion or what Planned Parenthood has been doing. Research hospitals across the country have microscope slides of all kinds of tissue to compare and contrast. The fetal tissue that was viewed in this study by others was not collected for this study.

I am sickened by the attack that I, after having spent my entire life caring for children, had something to do with aborting a child and harvesting organs. My medical specialty is the human brain and even I am amazed at what it is capable of doing. Please know these attacks are pathetic attempts to blunt our progress.

Now lets get to answering your questions.

Nancy in Arkansas wants to know how my mother is doing.

Nancy, you know my mother is the only reason I stand here today. I surely would have been lost if it were not for her. She is an amazing woman. If she were the Secretary of Treasury, I assure you we would have a surplus. My mother was very ill when I announced my candidacy. The family was called in by her doctors. We surrounded her and prayed as did millions of you. She began to eat again. She has her strength back. She is doing as well as we can expect. Thank you for asking.

The next question is from Bill. He wanted to know if it was true that I was offered a slot at West Point after high school.

Bill, that is true. I was the highest student ROTC member in Detroit and was thrilled to get an offer from West Point. But I knew medicine is what I wanted to do. So I applied to only one school. (it was all the money I had). I applied to Yale and thank God they accepted me. I often wonder what might have happened had they said no.

Last question as it is getting late. A young nurse in Ohio wants to know how many patients did I treat during my career.

I treated over 15,000 patients in some 57 countries. We lived in Australia for a while as well. One of the most gratifying moments of each day is when I run into a former patient like I did tonight. My patients were all quite ill. I love seeing them with their families living normal lives. I think it is more gratifying than serving in Congress.

Speaking of serving in Congress. I constantly get asked how could I possibly become President when I have no political experience. Here is what I say. The current Members of Congress have a combined 8,788 years of political experience. How is that working out? People forget that of our 56 founding fathers who risked it all to sign the Declaration of Independence, Five were Doctors.

Good night,

Ben

.

.

The Countless Crimes Of Hillary Clinton: Special Prosecutor Needed Now (Sidney Powell)

The Countless Crimes Of Hillary Clinton: Special Prosecutor Needed Now – Sidney Powell

.
…………

.
After years of holding herself above the law, telling lie after lie, and months of flat-out obstruction, HIllary Clinton has finally produced to the FBI her server and three thumb drives. Apparently, the server has been professionally wiped clean of any useable information, and the thumb drives contain only what she selectively culled. Myriad criminal offenses apply to this conduct.

Anyone with knowledge of government workings has known from inception that Hillary’s communications necessarily would contain classified and national security related information. Thanks to the Inspector General for the Intelligence Community, it is now beyond dispute that she had ultra-Top Secret information and more that should never have left the State Department.

Equal to Ms. Clinton’s outrageous misconduct is that of the entire federal law enforcement community. It has long chosen to be deliberately blind to these flagrant infractions of laws designed to protect national security – laws for which other people, even reporters, have endured atrocious investigations, prosecutions, and some served years in prison for comparatively minor infractions.

It’s high time for a special prosecutor to be named to conduct a full investigation into Ms. Clinton’s likely commission of multiple felonies, including a conspiracy with Huma Abedin, Cheryl Mills, and possibly others, to violate multiple laws.

While the FBI and Department of Justice have willfully ignored Hillary Clinton’s outrageous conduct, they didn’t hesitate a minute to investigate and prosecute former CIA Director and national hero, General Petraeus. He was just tarred, feathered and ridden out of the CIA on a rail for sharing some information (his own notebook) with his biographer who was both in the military and had a top secret clearance. Yet, Petraeus did not have a secret server set up to house his classified and top secret information or digital satellite imagery; he destroyed nothing; and, there was no “leak.” But that’s not all.

During the same years that Hillary was communicating about national security and world affairs off the grid, the Department of Justice has had no qualms threatening news reporters and prosecuting whistleblowers under the Espionage Act. To hell with the First Amendment and Supreme Court precedent, even the New York Times reported that this administration prosecuted more reporters and whistleblowers for “espionage” than all prior administrations put together.

Remember Fox news reporter James Rosen? The Holder Justice Department not only seized his emails immediately and without his knowledge, they suggested he was a criminal “co-conspirator” in a leak case – under the Espionage Act – which carries a ten-year term of imprisonment.

And they quickly indicted former House Speaker Dennis Hastert and Senator Menendez on extremely stretched or tortured views of vague criminal statutes and factual allegations of conduct that may well not be criminal. Senator Menendez can’t vacation with his best friend but Hillary Clinton and her “Foundation” can accept millions of dollars from foreign governments seeking to curry her favor.

Yet there’s been no criminal investigation of Ms. Clinton and her cabal? They couldn’t seize her server months ago while it contained all the emails? They couldn’t put a stop to it from the beginning?

Oh right, I forgot. As the Wall Street Journal reported, Ms. Clinton had declined to allow an Inspector General at the State Department during her entire tenure – so there was no internal oversight. And oh yes, her name is Clinton, and she has long deemed herself above the law. The rules only apply to everyone else.

But wait, there’s still more. The current Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice, Leslie Caldwell, and her Chief of the Corporate Fraud Section, Andrew Weissmann, destroyed Arthur Andersen and its 85,000 jobs on unfounded charges of obstruction of justice for destroying documents the Supreme Court said it had no legal obligation to keep. The laws governing Ms. Clinton’s obligations are clear. Nonetheless, they haven’t even convened a grand jury to look into Ms. Clinton’s longstanding assertion that she wiped her server clean – of documents she was legally required to keep?

On top of that, there can be little doubt that Eric Holder and other high-ranking FBI and DOJ officials themselves wrote Ms. Clinton at Clintonemail.com – not to mention countless communications with the President and “All His Muses” – Counter-terrrorism advisor Lisa Monaco, National Security Advisor Susan Rice, and then White House Counsel Kathryn Ruemmler (not to mention Valerie Jarrett) – about Benghazi and all other top secret and classified issues. The DOJ hasn’t subpoenaed the emails from any of the recipients – or the internet service providers? Or looked for them on the backup government servers of the accounts of all the recipients? And the State Department still today is making statements defending her?

Not only did Ms. Clinton deliberately demonstrate disdain for the Federal Records Act and nullify the protections of the Freedom of Information Act, she violated the Espionage Act by having information relating to the national defense on her server at all. And her deliberate disregard for national security made the job of all hackers that much easier.

As Andy McCarthy explained it in the National Review:

In fact, the espionage act – which regulates the handling of intelligence by government officials – does not refer to classified information; it refers to information relating to the national defense. Moreover, it does not prohibit solely the transmission of such information; it criminalizes the communication, delivery, or transmission of that information; causing communication, delivery, or transmission of that information; permitting the removal of that information from its proper place of custody through gross negligence; permitting that information to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed through gross negligence; or, failing to make a prompt report to superiors in the government when an official knows that the information has been removed from its proper place of custody, communicated to someone not authorized to have it, lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed. See also Title 18 United States Code Section 2071 (prohibiting destruction of records).

Aside from that, her knowledge and intent do not matter under some of these statutes and are indefensible under others. General Petraeus certainly had no criminal intent, and neither did any of the reporters.

Ms. Clinton, however, established her entire system to avoid the law and in violation of the Espionage Act – as she and her co-conspirators removed all records from the State Department from its inception. Compounding her crimes, she knowingly and willfully destroyed whatever she wanted to destroy – despite or more likely because of – the incriminating information it contained and in the face of the Benghazi investigation.

There’s still more. The countless false statements are crimes under 18 United States Code Section 1001 – both by Ms. Clinton to Congress (“no classified information”) and in writing by Cheryl Mills to the State Department and just filed with Judge Sullivan – in which she states: “On matters pertaining to the conduct of government business, it was her practice to use the officials’ government email accounts.” We already know that Ms. Clinton used her personal server exclusively.

Title 18 United States Code Section 1001 makes it a crime for anyone to “knowingly and willfully” falsify, conceal, or cover up “a material fact,” or make “any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or misrepresentation,” etc. Countless people are convicted felons under this statute – some for offenses that would never occur to anyone even to be a crime. And these are just a few of the possible statutes that it would appear to any federal prosecutor that she and her corrupt cabal violated.

As Lt. Col. Ralph Peters had the guts to say last night on FoxNews, “Hillary Clinton is a criminal.” Military heroes who have risked their lives for this country have gone to prison for less.

The Department of Justice’s selective prosecutions have been well-document. Its favoritism and targeting practices must end.

As discussed on NewsMaxTV’s Hardline last night, it’s time for a national outcry for the appointment of a special prosecutor to investigate and indict Ms. Clinton’s flagrant violations of some of our most important laws. Anyone else would have been arrested by now.

Until there is a massive change in this country, justice is a game.

.

.

Video Surfaces Of Hillary’s Minions Destroying Hard Copies Of Her Deleted Emails


.
H/T Moonbattery

.

.

Company That Maintained Hitlery’s Server Illegally Accessed Database, Stole Military Advisors’ Phone Numbers

Tech Company Which Maintained Hillary’s Secret Server Was Sued For ‘Illegally Accessing’ Database And ‘Stealing White House Military Advisers’ Phone Numbers’ – Daily Mail

The Internet company used by Hillary Clinton to maintain her private server was sued for stealing dozens of phone lines including some which were used by the White House.

Platte River Networks is said to have illegally accessed the master database for all US phone numbers.

It also seized 390 lines in a move that created chaos across the US government.

Among the phone numbers which the company took – which all suddenly stopped working – were lines for White House military support desks, the Department of Defense and the Department of Energy, a lawsuit claims.

Others were the main numbers for major financial institutions, hospitals and the help desk number for T2 Communications, the telecom firm which owned them.

A lawsuit filed on behalf of T2 claims that the mess took 11 days to fix and demands that Platte River pay up $360,000 in compensation.

.

TROUBLE IN CHAPPAQUA: Hillary Clinton faces new questions and new levels of outrage as messages on her private email server were found to contain top-secret signal intercepts and information from spy satellites

.

IN THE SPOTLIGHT: Platte River Systems was used by Hillary Clinton to maintain her server. Its website boasts that the Denver, Colorado firm, offers to ‘build better networks’

.

BOAST: The firm’s website describes it as having ‘connections in all the right places’.

.

National Intelligence Community Inspector General Charles McCullough told members of Congress in writing that two of Clinton’s emails were so sensitive that it would have been illegal to show them to any foreigner

.
The claims raise questions about the competence of Platte River, which is based in Denver, Colorado, to handle Mrs Clinton’s highly sensitive personal information while she was Secretary of State.

The Secretary of State’s emails would have been potentially a target for foreign espionage.

Mrs Clinton installed the system at her home in Chappaqua, upstate New York, and did not even have an official email address until the year she left office.

Earlier this week it emerged that she has handed over the server to the FBI which is investigating her and a number of her top aides.

Mrs Clinton acted after the Inspector General for the intelligence community said that he had found four emails that were stored on it were classified and two of those were Top Secret, the highest level of classification.

.

DOCUMENTED: The claim made against Platte River Networks and its co-contractors

.

KEY SECTION: The passage in the claim which makes clear that the White House’s military support desks and the Department of Defense had their phone numbers allegedly taken

.
Until now Mrs Clinton has insisted that none of the emails were classified at the time she sent or received them.

The lawsuit was filed by T2 in November last year and relates to a deal that went through in June.

By that time Mrs Clinton has left her post as Secretary of State; she was in office between 2009 and 2013.

T2 alleges that it had provided 16 phone lines to an insurance broker called Cambridge until they decided to switch providers and signed up with Windstream Communications, who worked with McLeod USA, a local exchange carrier owned by Windstream, and Platte River.

But instead of taking over the 16 lines, T2 claims that the companies asked for 390 more lines in what they called ‘intentional misappropriation’.

T2 alleges that they did this by illegally accessing the database for the Number Portability Administration Centre, the master agency which manages all US phone numbers.

The lawsuit states: ‘Under NPAC regulations, telecommunications providers are only allowed to access the NPAC data base for the exclusive purpose of routing, rating of calls, billing of calls, or performing maintenance in connection with the provision of telecommunications services.

‘Contrary to these NPAC regulations, Defendants accessed the NPAC database to find T2s 390 telephone lines as well as to obtain T2 and its customers’ proprietary network information for use in marketing T2’s lines to their existing and prospective customers.’

The lawsuit describes at length the chaos that resulted when the 390 numbers used by T2 customers suddenly stopped working.

.

SAFE FOR NOW? Clinton signed a statement under penalty of perjury, but there’s no indication when or whether her top staffers will follow suit

.

EYE IN THE SKY: The classification acronym ‘TK’ stands for ‘Talent Keyhole,’ a kind of taskable satellite that delivers high-resolution imagery like this from 200 miles or more above the earth

.
Among the lines which went dead was that for T2’s main number and its help desk, which meant customers were unable to contact the company at a time when they needed it the most.

.

THE AGENCY: The CIA’s headquarters campus in Langley, Virginia (shown) is likely buzzing over the former secretary of state’s apparent casual management of sensitive information

.
T2 employees’ numbers also stopped working as did lines for: ‘The Department of Defense, Department of Energy; multiple medical emergency facilities as numbers used for general, pre- and post-surgical contact, and obstetric or gynecological emergencies; Federal Contract Support Desks; White House Military Operations support desks, several financial institution’s main telephone numbers, multiple Denver-based Charter schools’ main and backdoor phone numbers, a US-Based telephone number for IBM China, multiple other information technology companies and their support and internal telephone numbers, as well as T2’s main telephone numbers’.

The lawsuit states that the lines were dead for at least 21 hours and that it took the company at least 10 days to ‘unwind’ the mess and get the numbers back.

Among the legal documents filed in the case is a third party complaint filed by Thomas W. Snyder, a lawyer, on behalf of Windstream and McLeod.

It goes into more detail about Platte River’s role in the deal and claims that the company worked as the sales agent for Windstream in connection with the Cambridge account.

It says that Platte River was responsible for ‘spotting any red flags’ and for ‘resolving any inaccuracies’ with the deal.

The document states: ‘Platte River acted negligently and breached this duty by failing to identify that the 390 additional lines were improper.’

The lawsuit adds a new twist to the row about Mrs Clinton’s email server that is refusing to go away amid intense pressure from Republicans.

Mrs Clinton has said that she exchanged about 60,000 emails over the four years in office on the system, of which half were personal and were deleted.

Mrs Clinton turned over the other half to the Department of State in December last year and they are being reviewed and slowly released to the public.

She has until now refused to hand over the server – which she has wiped clean – but changed her mind when it emerged that some of the emails were classified.

Mr Snyder declined to comment.

Daily Mail Online has reached out to Barbara Wells, a Denver lawyer who represents Platte River, Mrs Clinton’s campaign and T2’s lawyers for comment. We have not received any response.

.

.

*VIDEO* Guess What Happens When Jeb Bush Lets A Pack Of #BlackLivesMatter Racists Into His Town Hall Event


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

Related videos:

.

.

.

.

Obama Regime Intervenes In Landmark Legal Case, Attempts To Block Restitution For U.S. Victims Of Muslim Terror

Obama Admin Moves To Block Restitution For U.S. Terror Victims – Washington Free Beacon

.

.
The Obama administration has intervened in a landmark legal case brought by the American victims of Palestinian terrorists, urging the court to limit restitution for the victims out of fear that a sizable payout could collapse the Palestinian government, according to a copy of the court filing.

Deputy Secretary of State Tony Blinken argued in a filing to a New York City court that a hefty payout to the victims of Palestinian terror crimes could burden the Palestinian Authority (PA) and interfere in Obama administration efforts to foster peace in the region.

The victims are entitled to as much as $655 million from the PA following the conclusion of a decade-long lawsuit that exposed the Palestinian government’s role in supporting and paying for terror attacks in Israel.

The administration’s intervention in the case has drawn criticism from U.S. lawmakers and some of those affected by the decision.

While the administration supports the right of terror victims to sue in U.S. courts, it remains particularly concerned about the PA’s solvency.

“The United States respectfully urges the Court to carefully consider the impact of its decision on the continued viability of the PA in light of the evidence about its financial situation,” Blinken writes in his “statement of interest.” “An event that deprives the PA of a significant portion of its revenues would likely severely compromise the PA’s ability to operate as a governmental authority.”

Blinken goes on to warn that the case could impact U.S. security interests and its role in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process.

“A PA insolvency and collapse would harm current and future U.S.-led efforts to achieve a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict,” Blinken writes.

Representatives to the PA had been lobbying the Justice and State Departments to get involved in the case for some time. The PA maintains that it does not have enough funds to pay a bond requirement and has petitioned the judge in the case to drop it.

However, a lawyer representing the victims argues that if the Palestinian government can continue paying terrorists currently imprisoned in Israeli jails, it can pay the victims of these terror acts.

“We are gratified that the Department of Justice supports the rights of survivors of international terrorism to enforce their rights and collect the judgment, but disappointed that the State Department failed to take any stand against the PLO and PA’s policy of putting convicted terrorists on their payroll as soon as they are jailed,” lawyer Kent Yalowitz was quoted as saying in a statement. “If the PA has enough money to pay convicted terrorists, it has enough to pay the judgment in this case.”

Ron Gould, a plaintiff in the case, told the Washington Free Beacon in an interview that there was no reason for the Obama administration to intervene.

“There was really no reason for them to even get involved,” said Gould, whose daughter Shayna was shot in the chest and nearly killed by Palestinian terrorists. “For the Obama administration to stick their fingers where they don’t belong is unconscionable.”

The PA “still seems to have the money to pay the families of the terrorists on an ongoing basis,” Gould said. “They do have the money to pay the piper for losing the court case.”

Shayna Gould welcomed the administration’s filing in the case, saying it reaffirms the rights of terror victims to have a fair day in court.

However, she called the argument that the PA could be bankrupted as a result of the suit “ironic, considering they pay terrorists on a monthly basis.”

Shayna Gould said the PA had been hinting that the U.S. government would get involved for quite some time

“It was a fear. It was a huge fear,” she said, adding that the PA should be forced to finally pay up.

“They, with pride, give money and rank of the highest honor to terrorists and people who commit murder,” Gould said. “Does that sound like clipping coupons and saving pennies?”

“I have to deal with [the impact of their violence] in my life on a constant basis,” Gould added, explaining that she deals with physical pain on a daily basis since the attack. “There is no limit to our suffering.”

Jewish human rights group B’nai B’rith was also critical of the administration’s intervention.

“There needs to be a price paid for committing acts of terror and the means available to prosecute those responsible,” the group said in a release. “While the victims’ families cannot bring their loved ones back, they can go to the courts to achieve redress.”

.

.

*VIDEO* More Planned Parenthood Atrocities Exposed


.

.

Former Defense Intelligence Agency Director Claims Obama Allowed ISIS To Form So It Would Overthrow Syrian Government

Former DIA Director Gen Flynn Says Obama Created ISIS, Supposedly To Overthrow Syrian Government – Universal Free Press

.

.
Retired Army Lt. Gen Michael Flynn, the former director of the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency is accusing the Obama regime of lying about the rise of ISIS and the assertion that they were somehow caught off guard. He says that far from being surprised by ISIS, the Obama regime allowed them to form in a deliberate act intended to unite Sunni Muslims against the Bashar al-Assad government in Syria.

According to a report in WND, the circumstances surrounding the rise of ISIS are similar to those claimed by Iran and other Arab nations, which state that it was the United States government that created ISIS. They sponsored, which means at a minimum organized and funded and most probably trained as well, radical jihadists who later became the Jabhad al-Nusra and ISIS, supposedly as forces to be used in fighting the Syrian government.

Flynn also verified the authenticity of a 2012 DIA document that was recently obtained by Judicial Watch through a FOIA request which had previously been classified with no foreign access but was now declassified in a heavily redacted form. WND quoted that text as stating, “This is exactly what the supporting powers to the opposition want, in order to isolate the Syrian regime.”

Interviewed by Al Jazeera, Flynn left no room for doubt, stating, “It was a willful decision to do what they’re doing.”

In support of the General’s claims, Peter Vincent Pry, a former CIA analyst who is now the director of the Congressional Advisory Task Force on National and Homeland Security and the U.S. Nuclear Strategy Forum, describe Flynn, saying, “Gen. Michael Flynn is very honorable and honest, indeed, courageous; so I credit what he says.” In other words, he’s everything that Hussein Obama is not, so who are you going to believe?

“The Obama administration should not have been surprised by the rapid rise of ISIS, since it was anticipated by DIA.” Pry attributed whatever surprise may have existed as being the result of Obama’s Ego, arrogance, stubbornness, and possibly anti-Americanism, saying, “Incompetence and ideology probably account for why the administration was surprised. This will not be the first time the administration has ignored the advice of military and intelligence professionals.”

According to the WND article, the report actually detailed the anticipated actions of what would later be called ISIS in Iraq. It stated that ISIS, at the time called the opposition forces, “will try to use the Iraqi territory as a safe haven for its forces taking advantage of the sympathy of the Iraqi border population, meanwhile trying to recruit fighters and train them on the Iraqi side, in addition to harboring [Syrian] refugees.

It also stated, “If the situation unravels there is the possibility of establishing a declared or undeclared Salafist principality in Eastern Syria (Hasaka and Der Zor), and this is exactly what the supporting powers to the opposition want, in order to isolate the Syrian regime, which is considered the strategic depth of the Shia expansion (Iraq and Iran). Those supporting powers included and were most prominently the United States.”

It further predicted the development of ISIS, stating, “This creates the ideal atmosphere for AQI to return to its old pockets in Mosul and Ramadi, and will provide a renewed momentum under the presumption of unifying the jihad among Sunni Iraq and Syria, and the rest of the Sunnis in the Arab world against what it considers one enemy, the dissenters.

As if looking into a crystal ball, the document continued, “ISI could also declare an Islamic State through its union with other terrorist organizations in Iraq and Syria, which will create grave danger in regards to unifying Iraq and the protection of its territory.”

General Flynn’s version of events explains the public “confusion” and failure to recognize the threat posed by ISIS and to a large degree the unwillingness of the Obama regime to engage the terrorist organization in any meaningful way. It also explains how John McCain happened to end up mugging in photographs with known ISIS affiliated terrorists prior to the group self-identifying as the Islamic State. They could have been called McCain’s Army or Johnny’s jihadists.

Could this have been what Hussein Obama was talking about when he said, “We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.” The devil lies in knowing the details of just what those national security objectives were.

There’s no reason to believe that Obama would actively be attempting to destroy American in every other manner imaginable, as we have witnessed, but would work to enhance our national security in this one specific area. His national security objectives clearly must also be to weaken and destroy the United States. Creating ISIS and then importing them into the United States as Syrian refugees or across our now porous southern border would be a logical and efficient way of achieving that goal.

ISIS is becoming increasingly powerful, they’ve got Iraqi oil so they’re well-funded, and they’re well armed with American equipment that was supposedly abandoned by the Iraqi Army after the first shot was fired.

It would also help to explain why we deposed Saddam Hussein in spite of the fact that he had no weapons of mass destruction and nothing to do with 9/11. Chaos had to be fomented to create a terrorist breeding and training ground. Maybe Saddam had to go to make way for ISIS.

.

.

*VIDEO* Rep. Gowdy Explains Why Hitlery Is A Liar To Clinton Apologist On CNN


.

.