*VIDEOS* FBI Director Comey: Hillary Email Scandal Hearing – Most Remarkable Moments

PART 1

.
PART 2

.
PART 3

.
PART 4

.

.

How A Biased Press Tried To Ignore The Hitlery Email Scandal

Clinton Email Scandal: How A Biased Press Tried To Ignore It – Investor’s Business Daily

.

.
Media Bias: The Washington Post led its Monday paper with a story titled “How Clinton’s Email Scandal Took Root.” What it revealed was that, left to the mainstream press, the story might never have hit the ground.

No one reading the Post’s 5,000-word account can come away thinking that the Clinton email scandal is unimportant.

The FBI now has 147 agents chasing down leads. A key person involved in the scandal has been granted immunity. Hillary Clinton – who has already been caught in several lies – might be questioned by federal agents. There are fairly obvious violations of the law, even if it’s just those governing record-keeping. And there were, and continue to be, concerns that national security secrets were compromised, or at least casually disregarded.

The story details, for example, the many high-level security concerns that officials had about her use of a private BlackBerry to do her emailing, to say nothing of her homebrew email server.

Clinton got a warning from a State Department security official in March 2009 that “any unclassified BlackBerry is highly vulnerable in any setting to remotely and covertly monitoring conversations, retrieving emails, and exploiting calendars.”

Clinton responded that she “gets it,” but as the Post reports, she “kept using her private BlackBerry – and the basement server.”

The Post deserves credit for devoting so much space to summing the entire saga up. And for exposing something the reporter and his editors probably never intended: The media’s negligence as the scandal unfolded.

While the New York Times was the first national media outlet to write about Clinton’s use of a private email account last March, the Post summation makes clear that the mainstream press had almost nothing to do with uncovering the truth or advancing the story.

* The Post notes that it was a nonprofit group called CREW that first cracked the story open, when the State Department responded to its FOIA request for Clinton’s State Department email addresses by saying “no records responsive to your request.”

* The much-ballyhooed House Select Committee on Benghazi discovered her use of a private email account after demanding copies of her email traffic around the time of the attack on the embassy.

* Private cybersecurity firm Venafi discovered how Clinton’s email server had been unencrypted for months. The company “took it upon itself,” the Post notes, to publish its findings on its own website.

* The public release of all Clinton’s State Department emails resulted not from pressure from NBC News, CNN or the New York Times, but from a FOIA request by a startup online news site called Vice News.

* Judicial Watch, a conservative legal group, has been more aggressive than any media outlet in going after Clinton’s records, and as a result uncovered several damning emails, including a chain of emails showing how her staff was “taking steps that would help her circumvent” Clinton’s own promise of openness and transparency.

* And where has the “telling truth to power” press been during all this time? Sure, they’ve been passively sharing information when it came out – although often grudgingly and dismissively. But there are few elements of it that reporters themselves were responsible for breaking.

Normally, with a scandal this juicy and involving a would-be president, reporters would be falling over themselves to “advance the story.” But “normal” never seems to apply when a scandal involves a Democrat.

The FBI has 147 investigators focused on the Clinton email case. One wonders how many investigative reporters the New York Times, the Post, and all the other big media outlets have.

.

.

Mark Steyn Told Us Everything We Needed To Know About The Mizzou “Race Scandal”… Before It Ever Happened!

From July 8, 2015:

.
————————————————————————————————–
.

Related articles:

.
What This Missouri Protestor Is Holding Has The Media Erupting With Outrage – Independent Journal Review

.
…………….

.
Amid Monday’s resignation of University of Missouri president Tim Wolfe, students formed a human blockade to keep out reporters.

Students protesting on the Columbia, Missouri, campus embraced efforts to establish a “safe space,” free of the media attempting to exercise its First Amendment right to cover a public event.

In addition to the “safe space” sign to warn reporters from doing their jobs, students also linked arms to form a human blockade against the press:

.
…………….

.
The move by students to keep out members of the press came as a shock to many, but left many others confused.

————————————————————————————————–
Benjamin Hochman
@hochman

————————————————————————————————–

————————————————————————————————–
Hayes Brown
@HayesBrown

…I’m sick today, but I don’t think that’s why this has me confused https://twitter.com/hochman/status/663760271781924864

11:53 AM – 9 Nov 2015
————————————————————————————————–

————————————————————————————————–
Adam Stuffingbaugh
@adamsteinbaugh

A good way to (1) deter media from quoting one idiot to mischaracterize group; (2) completely undermining that goal. https://twitter.com/hochman/status/663760271781924864

12:05 PM – 9 Nov 2015
————————————————————————————————–

————————————————————————————————–
John Branch
@JohnBranchNYT

Should make for interesting discussions at the esteemed Missouri j-school. https://twitter.com/hochman/status/663760271781924864

12:04 PM – 9 Nov 2015
————————————————————————————————–

————————————————————————————————–
Noah Rothman
@NoahCRothman

If you were wondering where Occupy went, we found it. https://twitter.com/hochman/status/663760271781924864

11:58 AM – 9 Nov 2015
————————————————————————————————–

————————————————————————————————–
Oliver Darcy
@oliverdarcy

“Safe space.” https://twitter.com/hochman/status/663760271781924864

12:16 PM – 9 Nov 2015
————————————————————————————————–

————————————————————————————————–
Christopher Ingraham
@_cingraham

This is insane. https://twitter.com/hochman/status/663760271781924864

12:19 PM – 9 Nov 2015
————————————————————————————————–

————————————————————————————————–
CCwriter
@ccwriter

This is a big, big problem. Hey @newseum, what do you have to say about this? #Missouri #FreeSpeech https://twitter.com/hochman/status/663760271781924864

11:58 AM – 9 Nov 2015
————————————————————————————————–

————————————————————————————————–
Tom Gara
@tomgara

Safe space. https://twitter.com/hochman/status/663760271781924864

12:06 PM – 9 Nov 2015
————————————————————————————————–

————————————————————————————————–
Tom Martin
@4TomMartin

“But please, press, next time we need a message to gain traction, come back!” https://twitter.com/hochman/status/663760271781924864

11:51 AM – 9 Nov 2015
————————————————————————————————–

————————————————————————————————–
Nick Vlahos
@VlahosNick

What utter crap. https://twitter.com/hochman/status/663760271781924864

11:50 AM – 9 Nov 2015
————————————————————————————————–

————————————————————————————————–
Henry Brean
@RefriedBrean

At the home of one of finest journalism schools in the world, folks. What are we doing wrong? https://twitter.com/hochman/status/663760271781924864

12:09 PM – 9 Nov 2015
————————————————————————————————–

It’s disappointing to see this response from college students, especially ones at a school with a highly regarded journalism program.

America has always prized the freedom of the press to report the news in the fairest way possible, and when students prevent that from occurring, they threaten the democratic process.

.
————————————————————————————————–

.
Mizzou President Resigns – Right Scoop

In the wake of a supposed racial controversy, the President of the University of Missouri has resigned.

The entire controversy began when a student, Jonathan Butler, began a hunger strike over alleged racial incidents. This weekend, Missouri football players decided to kind of sorta join the strike a bit. This morning, cowed faculty meekly walked out. Now the President has resigned.

The Daily Caller lays out Butler’s beef:
.

In a letter to school officials posted on his Facebook page, Butler indicated that he began his hunger strike because someone in a pickup truck allegedly shouted a racist insult at a black student government member, because state law prevents Planned Parenthood from performing on-campus abortions and because someone drew a swastika with human feces in a dormitory bathroom.

Some observers have suggested that the bathroom swastika may be a hoax. Why, law professor blogger Ann Althouse has asked, for example, would any dedicated racial supremacist create a swastika out of human feces?

Butler admits in the letter that none of the incidents he cites are Wolfe’s fault. Nevertheless, Butler has concluded, “as a collection of incidents at the university, they are his responsibility to address.”

This summer, prior to Butler’s decision to go on a hunger strike because of racism allegations, the graduate student’s substantially different agenda focused on a change in University of Missouri policy which ended subsidized health insurance for graduate students. To Butler’s chagrin, school officials also stopped offering certain grad student tuition waivers and tore down some graduate student housing.

.
At RedState, Leon Wolf takes the protesting football players to pieces in a blistering list of why they are complete posers. You should read all four points, but the conclusion is perfect.
.

At the end of the day, this isn’t a courageous strike against racism. It’s a lazy strike against practicing for a bad football team. The fact that the media isn’t reporting it this way is evidence of the media’s own laziness.

.
Nevertheless, under the pressure, the President has stepped down.

.
————————————————————————————————–

.
Here’s The List Of Demands From Mizzou’s Protesting Athletes, Students – Saturday Down South

The Legion of Black Collegians and others (including football players) associated with the boycott at Missouri stemming from racial tension on Saturday published a list of demands they want met before things return to somewhat normalcy.

Here’s the list in its entirety:

1. We demand that University of Missouri System President, Tim Wolfe, writes a hand-written apology to Concerned Student 1-9-5-0 demonstrators and holds a press conference in the Mizzou Student Center reading the letter. In the letter and at the press conference, Tim Wolfe must acknowledge his white privilege, recognize that systems of oppression exits, and provide a verbal commitment to fulfilling Concerned Student 1-9-5-0 demands. We want Tim Wolfe to admits his gross negligence, allowing his driver to hit one of the demonstrators, consenting to the physical violence of bystanders, and lastly refusing to intervene when Columbia Police Department used excessive force with demonstrators.

2. We demand the immediate removal of Tim Wolfe as UM system president. After his removal, a new amendment to thd UM system policies must be established to have all future UM system president and Chancellor positions be selected by a collective of students, staff, and faculty of diverse backgrounds.

3. We demand that the University of Missouri meets the Legion of Black Collegians’ demands that were presented in the 1969 for the betterment of the black community.

4. We demand that the University of Missouri creates and enforces comprehensive racial awareness and inclusion curriculum throughout all campus departments and units, mandatory for all students, faculty, staff and administration. This curriculum must be vetted, maintained, and overseen by a board comprised of students, staff and faculty of color.

5. We demand that by the academic year 2017-18, the University of Missouri increases the percentage of black faculty and staff members campus-wide by 10 percent.

6. We demand that the University of Missouri composes a strategic 10-year plan on May, 1 2016 that will increase retention rates for marginalized students, sustain diversity curriculum and training, and promote a more safe and inclusive campus.

7. We demand that the University of Missouri increases funding and resources for the University of Missouri Counseling Center for the purpose of hiring additional mental health professionals, particularly those of color, boosting mental health outreach and programming across campus, increasing campus-wide awareness and visibility of the counseling center, and reducing lengthy wait times for prospective clients.

8. We demand that the University of Missouri increases funding, resources and personnel for the social justice centers on campus for the purpose of hiring additional professionals, particularly those of color, boosting outreach and programming across campus and increasing campus-wide awareness and visibility.

.

.

Global Warming Nutbag Caught In ‘Largest Science Scandal In U.S. History’

Climate Alarmist Caught In ‘Largest Science Scandal In U.S. History’ – Big Government

.

.
The plan by climate alarmists to have other scientists imprisoned for their ‘global warming’ skepticism is backfiring horribly, and the chief alarmist is now facing a House investigation into what has been called “the largest science scandal in US history.”

Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX), Chairman of the House Committee on Space, Science and Technology, has written to Professor Jagadish Shukla of George Mason University, in Virginia, requesting that he release all relevant documents pertaining to his activities as head of a non-profit organization called the Institute of Global Environment And Society.

Smith has two main areas of concern.

First, the apparent engagement by the institute in “partisan political activity” – which, as a non-profit, it is forbidden by law from doing.

Second, what precisely has the IGES institute done with the $63 million in taxpayer grants which it has received since 2001 and which appears to have resulted in remarkably little published research?

For example, as Watts Up With That? notes, a $4.2 million grant from the National Science Foundation to one of the institute’s offshoots appears to have resulted in just one published paper.

But the amount which has gone into the pockets of Shukla and his cronies runs into the many hundreds of thousands of dollars. In 2013 and 2014, for example, Shukla and his wife enjoyed a combined income in excess of $800,000 a year.

Steve McIntyre, the investigator who shattered Michael Mann’s global-warming ‘Hockey Stick’ claim, has done a detailed breakdown of the sums involved. He calls it Shukla’s Gold.
.

In 2001, the earliest year thus far publicly available, in 2001, in addition to his university salary (not yet available, but presumably about $125,000), Shukla and his wife received a further $214,496 in compensation from IGES (Shukla – $128,796; Anne Shukla – $85,700). Their combined compensation from IGES doubled over the next two years to approximately $400,000 (additional to Shukla’s university salary of say $130,000), for combined compensation of about $530,000 by 2004.

Shukla’s university salary increased dramatically over the decade reaching $250,866 by 2013 and $314,000 by 2014. (In this latter year, Shukla was paid much more than Ed Wegman, a George Mason professor of similar seniority). Meanwhile, despite the apparent transition of IGES to George Mason, the income of the Shuklas from IGES continued to increase, reaching $547,000 by 2013. Combined with Shukla’s university salary, the total compensation of Shukla and his wife exceeded $800,000 in both 2013 and 2014. In addition, as noted above, Shukla’s daughter continued to be employed by IGES in 2014; IGES also distributed $100,000 from its climate grant revenue to support an educational charity in India which Shukla had founded.

.
The story began last month when, as we reported at Breitbart, twenty alarmist scientists – led by Shukla – wrote a letter to President Obama urging him to use RICO laws to crush climate skeptics.

Shukla’s second big mistake was to send the letter not from his university address but from his non-profit, the IGES.

But his first, far bigger mistake, was his hubris in organizing the letter in the first place. It drew the attention of Shukla’s critics to something which, presumably, he would have preferred to keep secret: that for nearly 14 years, he, his family and his friends have been gorging themselves on taxpayers’ money at IGES; and that this money comes on top of the very generous salary he receives for doing much the same work at George Mason University (GMU).

It’s the latter detail which has led former Virginia State Climatologist Pat Michaels – one of the skeptics who might have been affected by Shukla’s proposed RICO prosecutions – to describe this as “the largest science scandal in US history.”

Under federal law, state employees may not be remunerated for doing work which falls under their state employee remit. As a Professor at GMU, Shukla is definitely an employee of the state. And the work for which he has most lavishly been rewarding himself at IGES appears to be remarkably similar to the work he does at GMU as professor of climate dynamics.

If GMU was aware of these extra-curricular payments, then it was in breach of its own policy on “financial conflicts of interest in federally funded research.”

If it wasn’t aware of them, then, Shukla legally may be required to send half of that $63 million in federal grants to his employer, GMU.

For many readers, though, perhaps the biggest take-home message of this extraordinary story is: Who do these climate alarmists think they are?

Perhaps $63 million in federal grants is just peanuts if you’re gorging on the climate-change smorgasbord, but for most of the rest of us, that constitutes a serious sum of money. Especially when we know it is being taken from us in the form of taxes.

Do they really feel under no obligation to spend it well?

Do they actually feel so sanctified by the rightness of their cause that they deserve to be immune from scrutiny or criticism?

.

.

There’s A Whole Arsenal Of Smoking Guns In The Clinton E-mail Scandal (Jonah Goldberg)

There’s A Whole Arsenal Of Smoking Guns In The Clinton E-mail Scandal – Jonah Goldberg

.

.
Every time the State Department pulls out a new fistful of Hillary Clinton e-mails like Richard Dreyfuss yanking a license plate out of a shark’s belly in Jaws, someone declares that there’s “no smoking gun!”

I’ve written before about how shouting “There’s no smoking gun!” is a non-denial denial. Ask a cop. When a murder suspect immediately exclaims, “You have no indisputable evidence I murdered my boss!” instead of, “I didn’t do it!” it’s a good sign that the suspect thinks he covered his tracks, not that he’s innocent.

Fellas, if your wife asks if you’re having an affair, respond by saying, “You have no proof!” See if she takes that for a denial.

But here’s the thing. There is a smoking gun. In fact, there’s a whole smoking arsenal. The problem is that the standards for what counts as a smoking gun keep changing.

Nearly everything Clinton has said in her defense regarding her secret server has been a lie. Among the minor lies: her claim that she set up the server so she could use a single device. (She had two.) Her claim that the State Department was saving her e-mails to staff. (It wasn’t until 2010.) Her claim that she erased tens of thousands of e-mails because they included, among other things, her e-mail correspondence with her husband. (Bill Clinton doesn’t use e-mail.)

Hillary Clinton said she never solicited e-mail from her lugubrious political hatchet man, Sidney Blumenthal. The latest e-mails show that she was in near-constant contact with him, encouraging him to keep his various reports coming. Blumenthal was barred from getting a job at the White House, so Clinton set him up at her charity-cum-super PAC, the Clinton Foundation.

The more important lie: She said she never received or sent classified information. “I did not e-mail any classified material to anyone on my e-mail. There is no classified material.”

Note: This was not an off-the-cuff statement. She said this while reading from notes, after consulting with her campaign team and her lawyers, in a ballyhooed press conference in March at the United Nations.

And it was a lie. When the inspectors general of the State Department and the Intelligence Community confirmed in July that she had sent classified material, Clinton “clarified” her carefully prepared lie by saying that what she meant was none of the e-mails she sent or received were marked classified at the time.

This left out the fact that the whole point of the secret server was that it was hidden from the officials whose job is to designate documents as classified (and to keep it all hidden from Freedom of Information Act requests and congressional oversight). It’s like setting up an illegal still and then claiming none of the moonshine you sold was marked “illegal.”

But the deceit goes deeper. Most people can be forgiven for not understanding the difference between classified documents and classified information. A classified document is marked “Top Secret” or some such. But people who work in government understand that lots of information is classified simply by virtue of the kind of information it is.

My National Review colleague Andrew McCarthy, a former federal prosecutor, has been setting his head on fire trying to get the mainstream media to take note of this fact. He points out that according to an executive order issued by President Obama, all “foreign government information is presumed to cause damage to the national security” and is therefore presumed classified. Clinton routinely ignored this rule. That’s not just my opinion. A study by Reuters found that “Clinton and her senior staff routinely” ignored these rules.

“Here’s my personal e-mail,” Clinton told Middle East envoy George Mitchell, who then proceeded to convey numerous private conversations he had with foreign leaders.

The Washington Times reports that Clinton’s unsecured e-mails contained spy-satellite information about North Korea’s movement of its nuclear assets. This sort of information is universally recognized as top secret and is normally subjected to draconian safeguards. There is no way Clinton didn’t know this.

All of these – and many other – facts would have counted as “smoking guns” if they had been divulged immediately after Clinton’s U.N. press conference. But Clinton, with the help of her praetorian defenders in the media, keeps moving the goalposts.

Still, all of this ignores the biggest smoking gun of them all: her illicit server. It’s sitting in plain view, its smoke visible to anyone with eyes to see.

.

.

*VIDEO* Hitlery’s Email Scandal In Two And A Half Minutes


.
H/T Universal Free Press

.

.

11 Atlanta Educators (And Likely Obama Supporters) Convicted In Test Cheating Scandal On RICO Charges

11 Atlanta Educators Convicted In Test Cheating Scandal On RICO Charges – Universal Free Press

.

.
In one of the biggest cheating scandals of its kind in the U.S., 11 former Atlanta public school educators were convicted Wednesday of racketeering for their role in a scheme to inflate students’ scores on standardized exams.

The defendants – including teachers, a principal and other administrators – were accused of falsifying test results to collect bonuses or keep their jobs in the 50,000-student Atlanta school system. The educators fed answers to students or erased and changed the answers on tests after they were turned in to secure promotions or up to $5,000 each in bonuses, the court was told.

However the person accused of benefiting the most from the conspiracy, Superintendent Beverly Hall – who is thought to have received up to $500,000 in bonus payouts – died of breast cancer over the course of the trial. A 12th defendant, a teacher, was acquitted of all charges by the jury this week. The 11 will all be sentenced on April 8 and could face up to 20 years in prison for the racketeering charges.

They were all found guilty under the the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, or RICO, which is typically reserved for major mobsters and organized crime bosses.

.

.

.

.
‘This is a huge story and absolutely the biggest development in American education law since forever,’ said University of Georgia law professor Ron Carlson. ‘It has to send a message to educators here and broadly across the nation. Playing with student test scores is very, very dangerous business.’

The case stems from an investigation carried out in 2011, which uncovered evidence that the educators gave answers to students or changed answers on tests after they were turned in. Evidence of cheating was found in 44 schools, with nearly 180 educators involved, and investigators found teachers who tried to report it faced retaliation.

.

.