Wednesday, October 12, 2016

A Contrast of Justice: Sheriff Joe won’t get the Hillary Treatment
American Thinker ^ | October 12, 2016 | James Longstreet 

The Department of Justice is taking Sheriff Joe Arpaio to court.  He will be asked to provide computers and hard drives.  He will be accused of breaking the law for attempting to enforce a law, a federal law.

He is going to court because he was instructed by authorities to not enforce or attempt to enforce federal law.  From

“Federal prosecutors said Tuesday they will pursue a criminal-contempt charge against Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio for defying orders to halt the immigration-enforcement operations ….” “Arpaio’s charge stems from a December 2011 federal-court order that barred his agency from enforcing federal immigration law.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Donald Trump Has No Alternative but to Run Against Washington — All of It! ^ | 12 October 2016 | Joel B. Pollak 

Speaker of the House Paul Ryan may have inadvertently done Donald Trump a favor on Monday, when he held a conference call with House Republicans to inform them he would not be campaigning for the party’s nominee. Ryan irritated pro-Trump Republicans while renewing a bad news cycle that Trump’s strong debate performance on Sunday might have otherwise ended, probably to the benefit of nervous down-ticket candidates.

But Ryan also gave Trump something new: clarity.

Trump is now free to run against Washington as a whole, which is likely what he meant by tweeting Tuesday morning that “the shackles have been taken off me.”

Trump won the primary by attacking both Democrats and Republicans — which is precisely how much of the electorate feels. As he moved closer to the nomination, he had to tone down some of his attacks.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Right Now, There Are Only Two Kinds of Conservatives ^ | October 12, 2016 | Mark Davis 

The subdivisions of conservatism contain many corridors for channeling a love of liberty, smaller government and rule of law. Fiscal, social, constitutional, national security and immigration passions provide a useful scorecard for assessing the breadth of those seeking to be called conservative.
That discussion is for another day. From right now until the polls close November 8, there are only two kinds of conservatives: those willing to join the fight to protect America from a Hillary Clinton presidency, and those who, for whatever tortured reason they have fashioned, are unwilling.
The posturings of establishment squishes and NeverTrumpers now threaten to derail the task that should unite every conservative from this moment on. The nation must be protected from the ruin of another Clinton presidency, which, more to the point, is another Obama presidency. The contortions of many otherwise smart people have become a spectacle that threatens our nation, our future, our children. Silence is complicity.
The challenge to unity and clarity, of course, stems from the nominee the voters have chosen as Republican standard-bearer. Donald Trump freaks a lot of people out. So much so, that many steadfast conservatives spent some time in a fog, hatching narratives that he might in fact be as bad, if not worse, than she is.
Most have emerged from that haze, realizing that the prospects of a Hillary nightmare are far more real than the sloppy screenplays they had cobbled together in their heads.
The concoctions have been something to behold: He is an authoritarian who will sidestep Congress; he is a Trojan horse bent on sneaking concealed liberal agendas into the Oval Office; and, of course, he is an execrable racist.
Such slander from the left is to be expected. But to see these gems extracted from various orifices on the right is to witness the level of discomfort real change can generate. I took some time before leveling the charge that these people genuinely prefer a Hillary presidency. But how many Jonah Goldberg columns, Jennifer Rubin blogs and Bill Kristol tweets do I need to slog through before taking them at their word? They are willing to subject America to Hillary. For some unfathomable reason, the Obama agenda items they have spent years decrying have suddenly become acceptable, and all because the Republican nominee has put their drawers in such a knot.
There is plenty of fair criticism of Trump on the right. Some of his conservatism seems recently cultivated, and he has only fitful fluency in its language. Doubt is not unreasonable. And some of his pronouncements, from trade policies to the minimum wage, are soundly unconservative.
But his priority list offers a shot at conservative results more satisfying than we might have seen from perhaps half the field he defeated. Immigration, Obamacare repeal, a serious war against global jihad, a Reaganesque tax plan, job creation—if he bats only .500 on these, we will see a far better America than under her malicious stewardship.
And that’s before we get to the issue that will give the next president an imprint on America lasting until the grandchildren are grown: the Supreme Court. It is an unpardonable disconnect for any constitutional conservative to show nonchalance or outright approval as Hillary Clinton plots a savaging of the Bill of Rights.
So Trump is coarse. So he has said some offensive things. So he won’t mix well at George Will’s patrician cocktail parties. So he causes the elites to clutch their pearls and get the vapors. So what? We have a country to save.
And there are two kinds of conservatives right now: those who will take up the fight to save this nation from Hillary Clinton, and those who won’t. From the halls of Congress to the cubicles of punditry, many will be judged for years to come by their choices in the coming days.
And let’s be clear. Taking up the fight means taking up the fight. It does not include mere restraint from savaging the nominee. It does not mean playing Paul Ryan head games containing tepid good wishes wrapped in a refusal to endorse.
Taking up the fight means making it abundantly clear to all who listen that every voter should pull the lever for Donald Trump. Anything less leaves America’s door unlocked for the home invasion that will accompany the Hillary Clinton inauguration.
This call comes at a time of particular challenge, amid those stupid Billy Bush bus tapes from eleven years ago. John McCain, whom I eternally revere for his service to our nation, seems unable to navigate a path to clarity for fear that he cannot save the nation without wounding the women in his life.
I hold my wife and daughter in no lesser regard. The difference between Senator McCain and me is that I will be spending every day acting and speaking to protect my wife and daughter from the scourge of a Hillary presidency. I will be joined by countless conservatives who have pivoted from other candidates (I was a Cruz guy), sharing a common mission: to make sure that Bill and Hillary Clinton slink off to Chappaqua where they can never screw up our country again.
That’s one of the two current behaviors of conservatism. The other type will be weaving additional venomous tales of a Trump presidency that they say will be worse. Or maybe they don’t even believe that. Maybe they just hate him so deeply that it will be a notch on their belt to say they stood between him and the Oval Office.
I did not know sufficient engines of hysteria and self-absorption existed to devour the reasoning of so many people I had spent so many years respecting. If they wind up chilled by the sight of President Hillary Clinton attacking the foundations of their beliefs and their nation, I wonder if they will be sufficiently warmed by the embers of their torched reputations.
If that dark day of the third Obama term dawns, those of us who gave the last full measure to prevent it will have the satisfaction of having done the right thing. I do not wish this, but there will be poetic justice as some of the smart kids look around and wish they had focused on our nation and not their Trumpophobic fantasies.
So here’s a crazy idea: Let’s prevent that. After months of condescending cajoling, it is time for some tough love. It is time to give one last chance to the laggards to wake up and join the only ranks of conservatism that can save America from the concept that once united us: the horrors of a Hillary presidency.
Donald Trump did not divide us. He has not created a crisis that threatens the party, or more ludicrously suggested, conservatism itself. He just won the nomination, fair and square, because voters wanted him. The ones focused on rescuing the nation still do.
So it is a time for every conservative to look in the mirror and ask: Where will I stand? Whom will I vote for? What will I permit to happen? Will I allow conservative goals to be savaged by a Hillary presidency because Donald Trump gives me the willies? Or will I wake up, grow up and join the fight?
Because there are only two kinds of conservatives now. Those who will rise up to save us from her, and those willing to see us fall.

The danger ahead if Hillary wins is profound

Mainstream Media reactions to Trump | 12 October 2016 | Mene Mene Tekel Upharsin 

As all of this develops, it is becoming clear that the conservatives and those who hold to Judeo-Christian values are in extreme danger. Sadly, many do not realize the extent of what is about to happen.
A politically savvy friend told me months ago that the media would turn on Trump and do ANYTHING to stop him. He was correct. In spite of his faults, Trump does realize that we have some severe problems in this nation which have to be addressed for us to even survive. He is promising to work toward fixing them, but, he wouldn't be able to even if elected.
The nation has turned so far away from God and those who are Godless have permeated society to the highest levels of government. The corruption goes all the way to the top. High level government officials have been compromised (either blackmail or bribery or both) and will not make correct decisions to turn the nation around. When we see "Republicans" who did little or nothing when faced with the extreme immorality and irresponsibility of Democrats which ruined reputations and cost lives, and then they claim that they will not support Trump over inappropriate comments about women, one can only stand there with one's jaw dropping wide open.
It is the same as having nothing to say about muslims here slaughtering Americans in cold blood in MANY incidents, but going ape crazy when one demented kid who does NOT represent us goes crazy and shoots some black people in a church and is seen in a photo with a rebel flag. Suddenly, all Americans would do the same thing and especially those with rebel flags laying around anywhere. It is the same as the vulgar locker room talk I heard when dealing with athletes at the college level in a job years ago being swept under the rug because they were big name athletes, but when as a teacher I made a comment about girls not dressing modestly because they were showing too much and being fired for that. I have come to a realization that after dealing with Trump, they are coming for conservatives and anyone who is in a Bible-based faith.
The vengeful, hateful, Godless and their muslim co-conspirators are going to come after all of us who don't subscribe to their demonic way of life after they get through with Trump. Watch what happens next. Hillary actually revealed the mindset with the "deplorables" slip of the tongue and especially with the "irredeemable" comment. Even Christians believe that the opposition (ones I just described above) are redeemable per God's law even though many of us see it as unlikely due to a complete lack of repentance. However, we have no right to say they can't turn around and be saved...God condemns that attitude.
Her very comments betray what she and her party have in mind for us and it's not pretty. Yes, they're going for the guns no matter what it costs them now, because they can't have rebellion with everything else they have planned for us. They're going after the churches because the few people trying to follow God who are left are a threat to them because those places teach values they simply can not tolerate. They're going after ANYONE at work who says something that doesn't fit their agenda. We are going to be invited to convert to their way of thinking or forced to leave the country...or, die. Just recently, a church got tagged with the phrase, "islam or die!"

Voting is a duty to preserve God’s gift of Liberty

The Coach's Team ^ | 10/12/16 | Karen Lees 

“Choosing not to vote isn’t rebellion. It’s surrender.” – Author unknown
In the election of November 2012, over 90 million eligible voters did not vote. It is estimated that up to 50 million of those were Christians. Sadly, many of them had not even registered. This is not only disgraceful, but Christians are accountable to God for neglecting the responsibility of maintaining His precious gift of liberty.
After the November 2012 election, Rev. Franklin Graham said, “If Christians are upset, they need to be upset at themselves… If Christians would just vote, then elections in this country would be much different.”
“Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a reproach to any people.” -Proverbs 14:34 This verse affirms what has been proven by the fallen nations throughout history: What makes a nation great is measured by a people who do what is right by God’s standards, not what seems right in their own eyes. Our founders secured and protected these standards in our founding documents and referred to them as “natural rights.” They designed our government upon the foundation that all of our laws should conform to these natural right standards. Candidates who stand first for this standard of truth certainly will not get into office unless God’s people vote for them. If we have corrupt and lawless rulers we are doubly responsible since we, unlike many other nations in history, have the freedom to vote.
It is irresponsible to be an uninformed voter. Research the candidates to know if they align with natural rights on important issues. Do they uphold the natural and fundamental rights to life, liberty, and property? Instead of relying on deceptive political ads, read the party platform of each candidate to see what that candidate has agreed to...
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Hillary’s progressive critics treat Trump’s defeat as a foregone conclusion at their own risk!

The New Republic ^ | October 11, 2016 | Brian Beutler 

Hillary Clinton’s progressive critics treat Donald Trump’s defeat as a foregone conclusion at their own risk. Trump’s collapse in the polls, and the ensuing disarray in Republican ranks, has emboldened Clinton’s progressive critics, who believe the window to pressure her into being a more progressive president will close once she’s elected next month.
“If there is ever a time for you to put principle in front of party and start criticizing the Democratic candidate, to start pressuring them to actually become a meaningful alternative, this is it,” wrote the progressive critic Freddie DeBoer. “You get to decide in the next couple weeks: you can stand for a party or you can stand for principles.”
The latest disclosure of leaked Democratic Party emails—hacked, according to multiple federal intelligence agencies, by Russian intelligence operatives seeking to influence the outcome of the coming election—has provided abundant source material to critics who see things the same way DeBoer does.
There’s plenty of interesting information to be gleaned from the leaks, and presumably more interesting information to be gleaned from future ones, which can be pieced together to create a fuller, clearer picture of the fairly full, clear picture we have of Clinton. But if you’re going to take an instrumentalist approach to writing about Clinton, it’s worth asking whether this particular approach—vehement criticism at the height of the campaign—is an effective strategy for shaping governance, as DeBoer suggests.
For instance, criticizing Clinton as a form of progressive advocacy could nudge her issue positions slightly left, or affect staff-hiring considerations, but it could also narrow her victory margin enough to preserve Republican control of the Senate or House, which would be horribly contrary to the goal of moving federal policy in a more progressive direction.
This is obviously distinct from the question of how campaign journalists who cover Clinton should approach the leaks (accurately, proportionately, without fear or favor); or how people who want to undermine Clinton will interpret them (as ungenerously as possible). But progressive Clinton critics who support her reluctantly, or who don’t support her but hope for the progressive-most outcome in November, are likely working against interest if they treat the election as a foregone conclusion and go to town.

Rohrabacher Blasts Paul Ryan, GOP Leaders as ‘Cowardly’

Breitbart ^ | 10.11.16 | Joel Pollack 

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) said Monday that Speaker of the House Paul Ryan was “cowardly” for announcing that he would not defend Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump, and would not campaign for his election. Ryan made his announcement on a conference call with fellow members of the Republican caucus on Monday morning, just hours after Trump had turned in a strong debate performance against Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton in St. Louis on Sunday night.
“Leaders are supposed to stand firm and solid in moments of crisis,” Rohrabacher told the Orange County Register. “Instead, he’s in a panic. It’s not good leadership. … I think the Republicans who are backing away are gutless. We don’t have to just be concerned about saving House seats. We have to be concerned about saving the United States of America.” Other Republican congressmen from Orange County have been critical of Trump’s comments but none has withdrawn their political support.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...


USA Politics Now ^ | 10/11/2016 

With all of this talk about the Donald Trump video that was released, it would have been best if Hillary Clinton had just stayed out of it. You know, since her husband was (is?) a serial philanderer with several non-consensual sexual encounters under his belt (READ: rape).
But of course, she felt the need to chime in, which angered a lot of people who realize that she is throwing rather large stones from a rather delicate glass house. This was made clear at an Ohio State University rally, when a group of protesters showed up just to remind her of her husband’s past (and illegal) indiscretions.
While colleges and Universities are the epicenters of liberal indoctrination, there are some students who have managed to keep a shred of sanity, like Trey Odell, who refuses to vote for Hillary Clinton simply because she’s a woman.
Wherever there are controversial politicians, there are sure to be protesters. Hillary is one professional politician that people just love to hate, and the truth is that she just makes it so easy.
Protesters at the OSU rally gathered and carried “Bill Clinton is a Rapist” signs, wore “Hillary For Prison” shirts and waved a flag saying “Come And Take It.”
They began a rousing chant of “Bill Clinton Is A Rapist,” which you can see below (VIDEO).
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

The GOP Civil War Is Finally Here. And Donald Trump Is Winning! ^ | 4 hours ago | Jake Novak | @jakejakeny 

Democracy can be ugly. And what Republicans like McCain and Ryan have had so much trouble accepting is that the voters in the primaries flocked to Trump. . It doesn't matter who had the best chances to win the general election.
Even if Trump is a long shot to win the election, (and he probably won't be for long; look for the polls to steady themselves in another week or so), he can now present himself as the true man of the people no Republican presidential candidate has been able to be or even look like since Ronald Reagan.
The Paul Ryans and John McCains of this world don't get it. When it comes to winning an election, the only person who needs to look self-assured and like a winner is the candidate. Trump still looks like he wants to fight and fight hard. The Republicans in Congress look like they want to run and hide. Because that's what losers do.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

"We Love Working Here," But NBC Poll Showing Clinton +14 "Couldn't Have Been Cooked More"

Real Clear Politics ^ | October 11, 2016 | Tim Hains 

'Morning Joe' host Joe Scarborough notes that the latest NBC/WSJ poll showing Clinton 7 points higher than she was last week, for a total of 14 points ahead of Donald Trump "couldn't have been more cooked."
"It could not have been cooked more to get the result they got," he asserted.
He added: "So last week, we were saying why didn’t anybody take polls after debates, right? And they didn’t for a long time. This NBC-Wall Street Journal poll — we work here and we love working here, we love this place — they take the poll the second the crisis starts… and they stop it right before the debate. It could not have been cooked more to get the result they got."
"I don’t think it was cooked, I think no one was thinking," Brzeinski said....
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Paul Ryan: Profiles In Cowardice, Has Already Lost More Than He Can Possibly Lose at the Polls

Esquire Magazine ^ | OCT 11, 2016 439 | BY CHARLES P. PIERCE 

Another day, another rewrite of Sunset Boulevard by Paul Ryan, the zombie-eyed granny starver from the state of Wisconsin. Not content with Monday's fan dance of gilded pusillanimity, "sources close" to Speaker Paul Ryan—and very likely simultaneously wearing his socks and underwear—have taken to deliver Act II of Hamlet On The Banks Of The Rock River. And it's pretty much what you expected, if you happen to be a middle-school drama teacher.

In fact, Ryan has personally been on the edge of pulling the plug but has held out because his decision is about more than just his personal feelings: It's about saving his massive 60-seat majority. The Wisconsin Republican is in an excruciating spot: He feels torn between his own conscience and his obligations as the top Republican in the country, according to multiple sources in leadership familiar with the internal discussions.
Oh, my dear god in heaven, just step up to the bar and have this nice steaming cup of STFU.
He senses, with the animal instinct politicians at his level possess, that even his speakership has been tossed into the hazard. He knows that a portion of his caucus consider him a backsliding RINO, which is kind compared to what the Trump thinks of him at this point. But instead of doing what any average statesman would do, he continues to take his besieged and delicate conscience out for public walks with the usual gang of sympathetic sycophants.
Many of his closest allies say left to his own devices, he'd dump Trump. But Ryan, who's seen as a potential presidential candidate in 2020, has held on, despite some possible long-term political upside of abandoning Trump. The immediate calculation is this: If Ryan pulls his endorsement, the base could revolt or stay home on Election Day, damaging GOP House candidates. Plus, in some of the deep red districts around the country, constituents want House Republicans to rally around Trump no matter what. See, here's the thing. He is left to his own devices.
He's Speaker of the House of Representatives, third in line to the presidency. He represents as safe a congressional district as there is in Wisconsin and, even if he didn't, the Republican legislature would take care of him. Whatever risk there is should be balanced out by some semblance of statesmanship and/or concern for the republic. In this dark, haunted political season, he's already lost more than he can possibly lose at the polls.

Why Paul Ryan’s Gambit on Donald Trump Is Backfiring (House GOP caucus is furious)

Christian Science Monitor ^ | October 11, 2016 | Linda Feldman 

House Speaker Paul Ryan appeared to take a principled stand when he distanced himself from Donald Trump. But he has infuriated Mr. Trump and his supporters, and that could hurt other GOP candidates.
WASHINGTON — When House Speaker Paul Ryan told fellow House Republicans that he would no longer campaign with or defend GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump, he may have felt it was the obvious, principled position to take.
Speaker Ryan is a straight-shooting family man and devout Roman Catholic, and after the release of a lewd 2005 video showing Mr. Trump bragging about sexually aggressive treatment of women, Ryan said he was “disgusted.”
Ryan’s goal in distancing himself from Trump, he told House GOP lawmakers on a conference call Monday, was to focus on saving the GOP majority in the House, potentially imperiled by Trump’s decline in polls. But Ryan’s new posture may already have backfired. Some fellow GOP House members are furious. And national party chairman Reince Priebus pointedly has not abandoned Trump, pledging to keep spending party money on the nominee’s campaign.
Ryan appears only to have empowered Trump. The voluble billionaire, after all, clawed his way to the nomination by bucking the party establishment – and Ryan, as speaker, is as establishment as it gets. Now Trump boasts of feeling liberated.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Clueless in the GOP

Canada Free Press ^ | 10/11/16 | Mike Ford 

Clearly, the example of Eric Cantor didn't send a clear message. It's time to send a stronger one, and not just to Paul Ryan.

Many among the Republican Establishment are not getting the message.
POLITICO reporters Jake Sherman and John Bresnahan wrote, in an article entitled “Ryan Abandons Trump,” that:

“Ryan stopped short of formally rescinding his endorsement of Trump – but just short. His move carries immense risk and Ryan faced blowback from all sides: Trump and his surrogates preemptively warned Republican leaders they would pay a price for breaking from the nominee.”

Paul Ryan Deserves No Sympathy for His Donald Trump Dilemma

US News and World Report ^ | Oct. 11, 2016, at 1:05 p.m. | By Robert Schlesinger | Managing Editor 

So to sum up: Ryan finds Trump indefensible and won't actively support him ... but still wants him to be president. Ryan is affording himself the worst of both worlds: Trumpkins brand him a traitor while never-Trumpers won’t move past the fact that he refuses to actually pull his support from Trump.
But overall it underscores the fact that Ryan has held full weasel status for months now. Once Trump had secured the GOP nomination, Ryan went out of his way to say he wasn't ready to endorse the former reality TV star, saying that he first wanted Trump to unify the party and – wait for it – run a campaign that would allow Americans to "have something that they're proud to support and proud to be a part of." A month later, the speaker bent the knee to his party nominee, Trump having given precisely no indication that he was going to be a unifier or a source of national pride.
Ryan has stuck by Trump since, periodically issuing hollow condemnations when Trump did something egregious, such as picking a fight with a gold star family, but steadfastly refusing to walk back his endorsement.
Not that any of this has ameliorated Trump, who briefly refused to endorse Ryan in his August primary before finally doing so. And, of course, with Monday's kinda-sorta distancing, Trump has unloaded on the speaker as only he can:
Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani warned that Team Trump "will remember" those who were disloyal, while campaign spokeswoman Katrina Pierson asserted that Trump supporters "all over the country" are preparing to vote for the former real estate developer but not the traitorous down-ballot GOPers.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

The major Hillary failures for America

Blog articles and comments via ^ | 10/9/16 

How did the Clintons get so WEALTHY on government salaries? This is the question you must answer before you vote in November. Hillary states that she is the candidate of the common person, the one standing against Wall Street. But what is the truth? Notice in the chart above that the rise in Clinton wealth is coincident with Hillary's term as Secretary of State. The documentary Clinton Cash documents exactly HOW this occurred....
Was Bill Clinton's Economy Good OR Is He Responsible for the Mortgage Meltdown? Time Magazine states: "President Clinton's tenure was characterized by economic prosperity and financial deregulation, which in many ways set the stage for the excesses of recent years. Among his biggest strokes of free-wheeling capitalism was the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, which repealed the Glass-Steagall Act, a cornerstone of Depression-era regulation. He also signed the Commodity Futures Modernization Act, which exempted credit-default swaps from regulation. In 1995 Clinton loosened housing rules by rewriting the Community Reinvestment Act, which put added pressure on banks to lend in low-income neighborhoods. It is the subject of heated political and scholarly debate whether any of these moves are to blame for our troubles, but they certainly played a role in creating a permissive lending environment." Under Clinton banks were forced to lend low-rate FHA loans to people with credit so poor even sub-prime lenders wouldn't touch them at 20% down. This created a huge buying demand, driving up prices of housing artificially with buyers who could not afford them or were not responsible with credit, creating what is known as "The Housing Bubble". At that same time, credit was eased to the extreme and, as the above chart demonstrates, consumer debt spiked during his administration. The Bush years began with a near economic collapse on 9/11, when several Wall Street firms were wiped out, ceased to exist, as the Twin Towers collapsed. Credit was allowed to extend but the oversight was under 3 committees chaired by Democratic Senators Chris Todd, Chuck Schummer, and Barney Franks, the latter's boyfriend chaired Fannie Mae. These chairman failed in their oversight. Why? Jon Corzine, was the CEO of Goldman Sachs and later the Democratic Governor of New Jersey. Goldman Sachs developed the "mortgage derivative", packaging these worthless mortgages as "government backed securities" because they were FHA, and acted as the "market maker" controlling their trading. Meanwhile, credit card debt-laden consumers found they had huge equity in their homes they could refinance at extremely low mortgage rates and get a tax write-off. This freed up even more credit borrowing for more consumer spending. All the while, Todd, Schumer, and Franks were complicit amid Bush protests. To finalize the picture, Hillary Clinton has received huge contributions and speaking fees from Goldman Sachs. Her being in Wall Street's pocket is why she has resisted releasing her speech transcripts. Hillary received $675,000 for 3 speeches to Goldman Sachs. Exposed recent emails from Hillary state that she has "both a public and a private position about Wall Street." Obama said "Hillary took more money from Wall Street than any other candidate!" Bernie Sanders says you have to reverse Clinton policy to stop Big Banks. A vote for Hillary is a vote for what is wrong with our economy...
The Obama-Hillary Mideast debacles As Secretary of State, Hillary had responsibility for Obama's policy that led to the fiasco in Syria and the rise of ISIS. If you recall, Obama called ISIS a "junior league" entity at the time. Hillary also sought to topple Ghaddafi in Libya, although Ghaddafi had been nothing but helpful to the USA since he turned over his WMDs to Bush when Bush took strong military action. In that void and chaos arose ISIS. THEN, Hillary chose to sell arms to ISIS as a counter-measure against the governments of Libya and Syria. THIS was the covert issue at hand in Benghazi and why Hillary refused to beef up security while other countries were closing their embassies and getting out. It was a CIA cover for arming ISIS. They could not afford to send in military rescue as it would breach those covert activities and betray the lie Obama told to get re-elected, "We are one drone strike away from annihilating AlQaeda". But the most disturbing aspects of Hillary's Secretary of State tenure are her Muslim Brotherhood connections. Indeed, both she and Obama's right-hand aids are radical persons of Iranian decent. Huma Abedin has a seriously radical Islamic past. Hillary's Clinton Foundation has received huge donations and she has received huge speaking fees from Islamic nations, some of whom are associated with the 9/11 and other terrorist attacks (See Clinton Cash).

Experience and Background


The "eyes" have it!


So what?










Debate Souvenir


His legacy