Wednesday, October 28, 2015

Hillary's 'Victory Lap' of Lies

Townhall.com ^ | October 28, 2015 | Brent Bozell 

To hear the media tell it, Hillary Clinton came to Capitol Hill as a bullfighter and easily killed the angry bulls of the House Benghazi committee. The "mainstream" media wondered why these crazy Republicans would "walk into the trap" of trying to scrutinize and question a media darling.
She was a "commanding, presidential presence," gushed the "objective" Associated Press.
It created "Hillary's Best Week Yet," oozed Politico. National Public Radio touted her "victory lap" at a Friday campaign event.
Never trust the liberal media to tell you who should run a "victory lap." After all, it's easy to remember that these same media outlets endlessly touted Al Gore's winning warmth and intelligence in 2000 and in 2004 insisted routinely that the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth hadn't laid a glove on John Kerry.
In fact, this same media concocted a massive victory for Clinton two years ago when she screamed "What difference at this point does it make?" on whether the violence was a terrorist attack or a protest. Republicans were accused by Chris Matthews of a "pissant performance" when they asked tough questions. But polls show voters still question Clinton's honesty.
Clinton's contempt for the Republicans -- the people she blithely compared to the Iranians on her list of enemies at the last debates -- came through every time she rested her face on her chin with a look of utter boredom on her face. Her arrogance came bursting forth as she put on her tremulous voice and claimed, "I've lost more sleep than all of you put together."
Has she lost more sleep than the families of the brave men who died in Benghazi who never had a chance of getting any help from their leaders in Washington?
The media elite awarded her an A for her performance, and she definitely kept calm and endured the questions. But these so-called watchdogs had almost no interest in the substance, and were allergic to the notion that Clinton has lied on Benghazi -- shamelessly, repeatedly, even in the faces of the families of the men who fell in the consulate attacks.
Congressman Jim Jordan caught a lot of attention on the substance when he noted that at 10:32 p.m. on the night of the attack, Hillary Clinton issued a statement that "some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet." But at 11:12 p.m., Hillary Clinton emailed her daughter Chelsea -- who she referred to by a pseudonym, "Diane Reynolds" -- saying "an Al Qaeda-like group" was responsible for the attack.
On the following day, Clinton again referred to the violence in a statement as "a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet." But on the very same day, Clinton had a telephone call with the Egyptian prime minister and assured him "We know that the attack in Libya had nothing to do with the film. It was a planned attack -- not a protest."
This is the "old news" that the networks tried to squash. ABC was the only one to refer to it on the night of the hearing, and only CBS noticed it the next morning. But it was lost in the "victory lap" coverage.
Stephen Hayes offered the obvious summation on Fox News: "I would say the lead from the day so far is Hillary Clinton repeatedly offers false or misleading testimony, and journalists yawn." For Clinton, journalists aren't interested in providing public scrutiny. They're interested in granting perpetual impunity.

Why Are Half Of All 25-Year-Olds Living With Their Parents? The Federal Reserve Answers

Zero Hedge ^ | 10/27/15 | Tyler Durden 

Back in 1999, a quarter of all 25-year-olds lived with their parents. By 2013 this number has doubled, and currently half of young adults live in their parents home.
While the troubling implications for the economy from this startling increase are self-evident, and have been extensively discussed both here and elsewhere (and are among the key factors pushing both the US and global economy into secular stagnation), a just as important question is why are increasingly more young adults still living at home.
Labor Market and Higher Education
One potential reason for the increase in young adults living with their parents is the labor market. The authors highlighted research showing that individuals at the beginning of their careers often need more time to transition into the labor market. This is reflected in the unemployment rates of those between 21 and 27, which are often higher than for other age groups.
Earning a college degree can help with labor market outcomes, as young adults with a college degree are more likely to live independently. However, additional research has shown that the underemployment rate for recent graduates was about 40 percent during the Great Recession. Canon and Gascon noted: “An implication is that a significant portion of recent graduates were earning lower wages than what they should have been, given their education.”
Also affecting many young adults is that they started their post-education careers during a recession. Canon and Gascon discussed a study noting that those entering the job market during a recession pay a price for about a decade. They wrote: “That’s because they start work for lower-paying employers and slowly work their way up toward better-paying jobs.”
(Excerpt) Read more at zerohedge.com ...

The problem...

xSjLKGq.jpg

Calm Down!

5zZGIF5.jpg

IF ONLY!

oALYY5Q.jpg

His Shirt

TE2wvqL.jpg

ENOUGH?

GP8vsRp.png

Useful

60UXWTJ.jpg

Winner?

PZtT653.jpg

Liberal Halloween

Vfxg4ZU.jpg

The Defense

meUtvs2.jpg

LIARS!

O5NMZdv.jpg

Housing our VETS!

7Z8hFVk.png

The smell!

OqXT4oG.jpg

Relieved

eqhthQp.png

Dumbass

Xj1ctEg.jpg

Deal with it!

rSOOX95.jpg

SPAM?

KmiSD7c.jpg

Happy Birthday

How the FBI Could Derail Hillary Clinton's Presidential Run

fiscal times ^ | 10-27-15 | Liz Peek 

James Comey – not Bernie Sanders -- is the biggest challenge to Hillary Clinton’s presidential ambitions, a prospect that should keep the former Secretary of State up at night. The fiercely independent head of the FBI is directing the investigation into Clinton’s use of a personal email server and attendant issues raised during the Benghazi inquiry, which could lead to indictments of the former Secretary of State or her various aides.
If the probe determines that Hillary or her aides mishandled classified information or obstructed justice, her campaign will likely collapse. (Hence, the rumored possibility that Joe Biden could still emerge as a “draft” candidate.)
Comey has shown a nettlesome tendency to stray off the Obama reservation. Most recently, he challenged White House orthodoxy by linking the rise of homicides around the country to stepped-up scrutiny of the police. In a speech at the University of Chicago Law School last week, Mr. Comey described the “YouTube” effect that has created a “chill wind blowing through American law enforcement over the last year.” Police, he suggested, are so concerned about starring in a video that goes viral that they are attacking their job more tentatively to the detriment of law and order. The New York Times reported that Comey’s remarks “caught officials by surprise at the Justice Department, where his views are not shared at the top levels.”
Comey has also parted ways with Obama on the ‘Black Lives Matter’ controversy. In his speech in Chicago, the FBI director declared that “all lives matter” three times; at the White House, Obama was simultaneously defending the Black Lives Matter mantra while participating in a panel on criminal justice reform. The president helpfully explained that the protesters use the phrase ‘black lives matter’ “not because they said they were suggesting nobody else’s lives matter; rather, what they were suggesting was there is a specific problem that is happening in the African American community that’s not happening in other communities. And that is a legitimate issue that we’ve got to address.”
Comey has a reputation for integrity, a quality lauded by President Obama when he nominated the former Deputy Attorney General for his current post. Obama told how Comey prevented an ill Attorney General Ashcroft from being hoodwinked into reauthorizing a warrantless eavesdropping program, in the process standing up to President George W. Bush and putting his career on the line.
"He was prepared to give up the job he loved, rather than be a part of something that he felt was fundamentally wrong," Obama said.
That dogged quest for justice and independence streak may come to haunt Hillary Clinton. Comey’s credibility expands when he warns Americans to be “deeply skeptical of government power,” as he did in a 60 Minutes interview. He cautioned, “You cannot trust people in power,” noting that the “founders knew that. That’s why they divided power among three branches, to set interest against interest.” Pressed to reassure the nation about the FBI’s surveillance activities, Comey confirmed “The promise I’ve tried to honor my entire career, that the rule of law and the design of the founders, right, the oversight of the courts and the oversight of Congress will be at the heart of what the FBI does.”
Comey appears fearless. As a kid, he was held hostage by a gunman during a home invasion; with his younger brother, he escaped twice, only to be caught again. This is the kind of straight arrow that Mrs. Clinton does not want on her case, and that Attorney General Loretta Lynch may not be able to corral. Asked by Scott Pelley during the 60 Minutes piece whether he didn’t have a duty to support President Bush on the eavesdropping matter, Comey answered, “No, my responsibility, I took an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
What could bring Hillary down? According to some who have followed the case closely, Mrs. Clinton could be charged with breaking several laws, including willfully transmitting or retaining Top Secret material using a private server, unauthorized removal of classified information from government control or storing such information in an unauthorized location, lying to Congress, destruction of government property (wiping the server), lying under oath to a judge about having given the government all her emails or obstruction of justice.
This last misdeed seems particularly dangerous for Clinton. On September 20, 2012, nine days after the attack in Benghazi that left four Americans dead, Jason Chaffetz, chair of the House Subcommittee on National Security, Homeland Defense and Foreign Operations (part of the committee on Oversight and Government Reform), requested from then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton all documents related to the Libya event. The broad request included all records, including emails. For a year, the State Department responded in dribs and drabs to the request; notably, no emails were handed over. A frustrated Oversight Committee finally (in August 2013) issued two subpoenas – one covering the initial documents request and another for the results of the internal investigation that exonerated Clinton.
It was not until August 2014 – nearly two years after the attacks and the first request for documents -- that the first Clinton emails appear, and that Congress becomes aware of the existence of her private server. Only in February 2015 is Congress alerted that Clinton has only made available some of her records. Shortly thereafter, The New York Times breaks the story that Hillary has turned over 55,000 pages of emails and more subpoenas follow. The obfuscation only worsens, as she claims to have destroyed some 30,000 “personal” emails, despite a Congressional “preservation letter” telling her to protect any records.
Justice Department investigators and the FBI are reviewing Clinton’s explanations and behavior. We will know in the next few months whether she or her aides will face charges. Republicans are skeptical that Obama’s Justice Department will prosecute any misdeeds discovered to have been perpetrated by his former Secretary of State and the likely Democratic nominee. With James Comey leading the investigation, and unlikely to participate in any cover-up, they should have faith in the system.