Monday, October 31, 2016

Will The Reopening Of Hillary's Email Case Matter? ^ | October 31, 2016 | Mark Davis 

Make no mistake. I am enjoying the revival of FBI interest in Hillary Clinton’s email skullduggery as much as anyone eager to prevent her presidency. But as we move toward the final week of the election, I have to ask: how much is this really going to matter?
My hope is that it matters greatly. I hope a few million Hillary voters have reached the snapping point and simply cannot support her any longer. And if they have, please understand that many may have voted already. If we learn nothing else from this chapter, can we please recognize the insanity of early voting? She may actually win by a margin of votes cast for her already, because we have allowed ourselves to marinate in the absurdity that convenience and greater turnout are the most important thing in an election.
But to return to the matter at hand. FBI Director James Comey is on a political rotisserie spit, grilled by the left after weeks of torching by the flames of conservative indignation. But do not draw a false equivalency in those outcries. Clinton opponents were properly incensed when he detailed a strong case for indicting her in that infamous July statement, only to fail to recommend charges. Today, his re-opening of the case smacks of a decision to actually pay attention to facts and evidence.
Hillary supporters are on solid enough ground when they observe the curiosity of Comey’s revelation of a re-opened case without much of a shred of specificity as to why. Under normal circumstances, perhaps investigators would have perused the relevant messages sufficiently to reveal a detailed rationale for additional investigation.
But these are not normal circumstances. The FBI did not learn of these additional emails last week. The ticking clock grew louder, increasing the possibility of a bombshell revelation shaking loose as its subject was preparing to take the oath of office, or even after she had. That would not have been a positive development for an FBI whose director was already wounded by charges of corruption.
So Comey sprang forth faster than he otherwise might have, leaving us with a story that is damaging to the frontrunner and useful to the pursuer. But how much? How many votes actually move as a result of this October surprise?
Political damage should always be measured in terms of supporters driven away. Benghazi, for example, has never hurt Hillary Clinton in any appreciable manner, because only conservatives care about it. Few, if any, who hold those offenses against her had any intention of voting for her anyway. Similarly, most of the people who considered the Billy Bush tapes a nuclear bomb were Trump-haters already. The only way for a story to sink teeth into a candidate is if it changes voting behavior.
Poll numbers had been tightening in recent days because attention was peeling away from sideshows and gravitating toward actual issues suggestive of the differences between a Trump and Clinton administration. It has always been a foggy matter to assess how much Hillary Clinton’s stunning levels of corruption were actually damaging her. It certainly did not restrain her from rising to poll leads that made many conclude the race was all but over.
But it’s not. And now it’s really not. It will be mid-week before we have wide data on how much this new FBI probe has hurt her. It may not hurt that much at all. If Donald Trump wins this thing, it will be because he strung together a final-week push full of message discipline and sharply-defined policy differences. It will not be because James Comey rediscovered his duty to act based on what investigators find.
For the new email story to be a factor, it will have to pry a wedge into an already identifiable enthusiasm gap. Enthusiasm alone does not lead to the presidency; ask Bernie Sanders, or Ron Paul. But in a campaign between candidates with roughly equivalent voter appeal, a close race can be tipped if supporters on one side are on fire with motivation while the others are more tepid.
For evidence, return to the last election. 2012 was completely winnable for Mitt Romney, but due to some factors that were his fault and some that were not, millions of Republicans simply found him under-inspiring. Simultaneously, Barack Obama did not ride the wave of enthusiasm that lofted him in 2008, but there was enough left in that tank to fuel him past Romney for a second term.
Perhaps next Tuesday is the flip side of that coin. On paper, Hillary Clinton brings an impressive enough candidacy in terms of biography and fundraising. But a meager set of campaign skills and an underbelly of trust issues, even among Democrats, has kept her from closing the deal.
And perhaps the underestimated enthusiasm this time belongs to Trump. After a year of coverage of his massive rallies, it may seem odd to call his appeal underestimated, but it surely is, by all the smart kids in the enclaves of the elites. Those rallies mean nothing, they say; Hillary has a far better ground game, more money, more experience in the trenches.
All true. And maybe this year, irrelevant. In the model of the Brexit vote, there is surely a hidden sliver of Trump appeal, fashioned from voters who avoid pollsters and various other traditional channels of publicizing their preference. It is impossible to know whether that will amount to one or five percent from state to state, but even if it’s in the middle there somewhere, throw in the wet blanket effect of this new FBI story, and the result is his campaign prospects brightening while hers dim.
Enough to make the difference November 8? Predictions are as foolish eight days out as they were eight months out. But it may not be the smartest thing for the Clinton campaign to insult the FBI director they loved mere weeks ago. And as they call for these new emails to be released, they know full well how unlikely that is. Their ploy to give off one last whiff of transparency is colossally outweighed by their behavior from the beginning of this tawdry tale.
The air is thick with anticipation that the Clinton camp plans a November surprise to distract us from the October bomb that just detonated. But one wonders, even if they still have something up their tattered sleeve, if it will be as direct an indicator of what kind of presidency awaits.

No Prison Time for Hillary If… ^ | October 31, 2016 | Wayne Allyn Root 

This time it’s bad. The FBI has Hillary dead to rights. She’s been caught in a “Dikileaks scandal.” Weiner did her in. Who knew?
How bad is it? It’s so bad that the FBI Director made the decision to announce this investigation 11 days before a presidential election. It’s that bad. Even Carl Bernstein has come to the same conclusion- he says this could not have happened unless the FBI has uncovered a bombshell against Hillary.
How bad is it? A reporter for The Chicago Tribune just asked her to step down for the good of the nation.
How bad is it? Wikileaks promises a shocking bombshell this week that makes this scandal pale by comparison.
Remember John Gotti- the so-called ‘Teflon Don.” The government tried to nail him for years, with no success. They needed his best friend and partner in crime to turn on him to finally nail Gotti. When Sammy "the bull" Gravano testified against Gotti, it was over. Gotti went to prison for life.
Well Hillary has a Sammy "the Bull" Gravano in her life. It’s Huma Abedin. Huma is her chief of staff, girl Friday and BFF. If Huma turns, it’s all over for Hillary. Like Gotti, she could spend the rest of her life in prison- because the email violations are only the tip of the iceberg.
Huma knows all the dirt. Huma knows the secret machinations of The Clinton Foundation. She knows dates, times, bribe amounts, from whom and what the people who bribed the Clintons got in return. Huma knows everything.
And Huma is between a rock and a hard place- otherwise known as Anthony Weiner (excuse the pun). Because Huma is in divorce proceedings with Anthony Weiner. I'm betting that Huma had no idea Weiner was making copies of all of her and Hillary's emails- as leverage in the divorce proceedings.
When the FBI raided Weiner's home and grabbed his computer, they got it all. I'm betting Hillary and Huma were blind-sided.
Weiner is fighting for his life. What's his future? Who will ever hire him, for anything? How will he survive financially? So Weiner has no choice- he will turn against Huma and Hillary to save his own skin. He faces many years in prison for sex crimes against a minor. His only “get out of jail card” is to turn "states evidence" against Huma and Hillary.
Then Huma’s only choice is to turn against Hillary. Or face decades in prison.
So Hillary has only a couple of “outs” here…and she has to move fast. Or she will spend the rest of her life in prison (at worst), or fighting off investigations, trials and federal government RICO suits from now until the day she dies (at best).
Hillary out #1: Go to Obama and demand a pardon, or threaten to take Obama down with her.
Hillary option #2: Here’s the remarkable one- Hillary’s best friend and only "out" here may be…
Donald Trump.
What if Obama is angry? What if Obama turns Hillary’s pardon request down and wishes her good luck alone in the world. What if he orders every friend in government and the Democratic Party to stay away from Hillary? What if he orders every government agency to go after her with everything they’ve got?
Then Hillary has only one place to turn…only one hand to play. She can go to Donald and concede the election. Drop out today. Announce to voters she is no longer seeking the office of president of the United States. In return she gets a pardon from the new President Donald Trump.
That’s her hand at this point.
Let's see how Hillary plays it.

Immigration Officer: Border Deluge of Illegal Aliens ‘Is The Worst We’ve Ever Seen’ ^ | 10/30/2016 | Julia Hahn 

The flood of illegal aliens pouring across the southern border has become a “crisis situation” and is even worse than the record 2014 border surge, says an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officer from El Paso, Texas with more than ten years of service to the agency.

The ICE agency has no room to house the arriving surge, so many illegals are being released into American communities where they disappear “into the wind never to be seen by us again,” the agent said.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Orange pantsuit looks good on Hillary!

Toronto Sun ^ | Oct. 30, 2016 | Mike Strobel 

Hillary Clinton would look tres chic in an orange pantsuit!
Last week, I wrote Donald Trump needed a miracle to beat the cagey Ms. Clinton — and the FBI promptly obliged.

On Sunday, an ABC/Washington Post poll, among the first since feds reopened the Clinton e-mail scandal, shows Clinton and Trump in a dead heat with nine days to go, 46% to 45%.
Fully one-third of those polled say they are less likely to vote for Clinton because of the FBI probe.
That squealing you hear is the effete elites scrambling for the fire extinguishers. Liberal CNN trotted them out Sunday to wail and gnash at the awful unfairness of the past few days.
At one point, the network convened a panel on media bias — consisting entirely of Clinton campaigners. Good grief. (In fairness, anchors Jake Tapper and Wolf Blitzer usually go after both candidates with equanimity.)
But back to that orange pantsuit.
Does Hillary remind you of anybody? Other than your hectoring, busybody aunt, I mean.
Exactly. Martha Stewart.
The homemaker queen was jailed five months for shenanigans, obstructing justice and misleading the FBI. Ring a bell?
Martha’s shenanigans were about stocks, Hillary’s involve state secrets, but otherwise, if I were Clinton, I’d practise mopping floors and lining up for showers.
Orange pantsuit? She already has one in her closet. She has trotted it out before, including, believe it or not, at a 2015 press conference about her e-mails.
As every delinquent schoolboy knows, inmates wear orange suits to thwart escape.
If you spot an orange pantsuit strolling down the street, lock your doors and call police. Even if it’s not Hillary.
Luckily, Bill Clinton’s better half looks pretty good in orange.
Hillary wore a silky orange pantsuit at the 2008 Democratic National Convention. It looks far more glamorous than last year’s press conference number. Perhaps Hill can wear it to the prison Christmas gala.
The FBI’s new cache of e-mails involve fallen congressman/perv Anthony Weiner and his estranged wife Huma Abedin, who happens to be Hillary’s longtime confidante and campaign vice-chair.
Feds are not saying how Clinton is connected, but it can’t be good. Trickles of evidence quickly turn into a flood. You could ask Richard Nixon if he were alive.
If Hillary does follow Martha Stewart’s footsteps, she will have plenty of time to stare out through the bars and muse on what the hell happened
In a way, I feel sorry for her, like I felt sorry for Bonnie Parker. Bill and Hill may be the most corrupt couple since Bonnie and Clyde — but her timing sucks.
The White House is practically in Hillary’s clutches, so close she can taste it, the polls say she’s a shoo-in — when suddenly she is swept away like a pantsuited Marie Antoinette in a worldwide rebellion against the effete elite.
The British Brexit vote was part of that wave. So is the surge of Iceland’s anti-establishment and anti-corruption Pirate Party. And so is the rise of Trump, a billionaire boor railing against the media and other Washington elites.
The rebels’ motto, with middle finger raised, is: Effete THIS, elites! We’re tired of you entitled yobs telling us how to live our lives.
But it ain’t over ’til the pants lady sings. Millions of Americans have already voted at advance polls — before the FBI bombshell — and they could swing a close election. Plus, anything could happen in this wacky campaign’s last week before the election.
Plenty of time to run down to Hillary’s fave, Ralph Lauren. I hear there’s two-for-one on orange pantsuits.

History Repeats: A Nixonian Cover-up in the Home Stretch of the Campaign

National Review ^ | 10/30/16 | John Fund 

Someday, we might learn the truth, but not if Hillary can help it. Richard Nixon’s 1972 campaign for president involved trying to conceal the truth about Watergate until after voters went to the polls. “The early part of the Watergate cover-up was actually successful,” noted a report from the National Constitution Center. Running against a gaffe-ridden, disorganized challenger whom he was able to vastly outspend, Nixon pulled out a victory, but the cover-up unraveled and the country went through two years of turmoil. If Hillary wins, will her cover-up unravel and leave her a weakened president hounded by critics?
No one is suggesting that Hillary Clinton’s e-mail scandal is exactly like Watergate, but the parallels are certainly there. Indeed, Hillary began her public career as a House staffer on the committee that voted to impeach Nixon. Sam Tanenhaus, former editor of the New York Times Book Review, recently noted in Bloomberg:
If Hillary’s armor seems plated with Nixonian grievance, it is because, just like him, she feels outnumbered and defenseless. Nixon drew up lists of liberal “enemies,” Hillary closely tracks the “vast right-wing conspiracy.” . . . Hillary’s tasks for [the Watergate committee’s chief counsel] included drafting a memo on the inner workings of Nixon’s White House, its hidden grids of power and buried lines of authority, who reported to whom. The exercise gave Hillary “an intimate view of a president practicing the dark art of Washington politics, doing whatever necessary to maintain his grip on power,” Jeff Gerth and Don Van Natta Jr., wrote in Her Way, a biography published in June 2007, five months after Hillary announced her first try for the nomination.
The parallels between Nixon and Hillary continue. Nixon set up an elaborate system to capture the flow of daily communication through tape recordings. Hillary’s obsession with control led her to use a private server. Nixon was suspicious of the bureaucracy and tightly limited information to just a few zealous aides. Hillary bypassed the State Department’s IT specialists and also relied on a few loyalists.
Even Bob Woodward, one of two Washington Post reporters who were key in uncovering Watergate, last year compared Hillary Clinton’s e-mail scandal to Richard Nixon’s tapes, noting the same penchant for stonewalling.
During the 1972 campaign, Nixon launched an all-out effort to minimize Watergate. His press secretary, Ron Ziegler, dismissed the event as “a third-rate burglary attempt.” Nixon himself called it a “very bizarre incident.” Anyone who suggested that all of the facts weren’t known was dismissed by Nixon as partisan or delusional. But Nixon’s cover-up had limits. He never destroyed his audio tapes, a decision that eventually led to his downfall. Hillary has used BleachBit in an attempt to permanently destroy her e-mails. Apparently, some of them have been recovered by the FBI, and it’s possible others will be found in the cache of e-mails on the computer shared by Hillary aide Huma Abedin and her husband, Anthony Weiner.
What if the Hillary cover-up works, and she gains the presidency?
In a June 2015 Wall Street Journal op-ed titled “Hillary Milhous Clinton,” Evan Thomas, a former Newsweek editor and the author of a 2015 Nixon biography, wrote:
There is every reason to believe that President Hillary Clinton would spend her presidency lashing out at her enemies as she ducks small scandals and possibly large ones. She would be aggrieved and dodgy. That is not to say that she would wind up like Nixon — threatened with impeachment and driven from office — but it does suggest how she would deal with the inevitable rocky times ahead.
The country paid a stiff price for ignoring doubts about Nixon and reelecting him to the presidency in 1972. There was enough evidence for them to be deeply concerned about how he would continue to perform in office. There is certainly ample evidence for all of us to worry about what a return of the Clintons to the White House would mean for the country. As I noted in a recent Fox News column, U.S. intelligence officials believe it’s likely that Hillary Clinton’s private server was hacked by foreign entities, as the e-mail of her aides John Podesta and Sidney Blumenthal certainly were. I note that “we have to acknowledge the danger that Hillary Clinton could be the target of international blackmail in the White House.” After all, Bill Clinton’s X-rated telephone conversations with Monica Lewinsky were captured by the U.K., China, and Israel, and at least one blackmail attempt was reportedly made in 1998.
Hillary certainly shares Richard Nixon’s penchant for secrecy and dishonesty and an obsession with enemies, and the WikiLeaks revelations show that even her closest aides are appalled at her bad instincts and her habit of digging in her heels, blaming others, and refusing to course-correct until it’s essentially forced upon her. If Hillary is elected, will be have to go through another “long national nightmare,” the memorable phrase Nixon’s successor, Gerald Ford, used to describe the consequences of Nixon’s cover-up? — John Fund is NRO’s national-affairs correspondent.

The FBI’s Clinton Foundation Probe

National Review ^ | 10/30/16 | Rich Lowry 

This Wall Street Journal story is such a blockbuster in every way that arguably the most significant news comes in the 14th (!) paragraph:

New details show that senior law-enforcement officials repeatedly voiced skepticism of the strength of the evidence in a bureau investigation of the Clinton Foundation, sought to condense what was at times a sprawling cross-country effort, and, according to some people familiar with the matter, told agents to limit their pursuit of the case. The probe of the foundation began more than a year ago to determine whether financial crimes or influence peddling occurred related to the charity.

Some investigators grew frustrated, viewing FBI leadership as uninterested in probing the charity, these people said. Others involved disagreed sharply, defending FBI bosses and saying Mr. McCabe [a top FBI official whose wife got huge donations from Terry McAuliffe for a Virginia political race] in particular was caught between an increasingly acrimonious fight for control between the Justice Department and FBI agents pursuing the Clinton Foundation case.

It isn’t unusual for field agents to favor a more aggressive approach than supervisors and prosecutors think is merited. But the internal debates about the Clinton Foundation show the high stakes when such disagreements occur surrounding someone who is running for president.

Yes, you read that right: the FBI has been investigating the Clinton Foundation. The story goes on to detail how the investigation has been tearing the bureau apart and creating a rift between the FBI and DOJ:
In February, FBI officials made a presentation to the Justice Department, according to these people. By all accounts, the meeting didn’t go well.
Some said that is because the FBI didn’t present compelling evidence to justify more aggressive pursuit of the Clinton Foundation, and that the career anticorruption prosecutors in the room simply believed it wasn’t a very strong case. Others said that from the start, the Justice Department officials were stern, icy and dismissive of the case.

“That was one of the weirdest meetings I’ve ever been to,” one participant told others afterward, according to people familiar with the matter. Read the whole thing. Maybe twice.

Report: DOJ Tried Repeatedly To Kill FBI’s Clinton Foundation Investigation!

The Daily Caller ^ | 10/30/16 | Chuck Ross 

Senior-level Justice Department officials pushed back heavily on an ongoing FBI investigation of the Clinton Foundation, according to a bombshell report from The Wall Street Journal.

The newspaper laid out numerous examples, based on law enforcement sources, of senior DOJ officials intervening to quash the probe.
Prosecutors with the U.S. attorneys office in the Eastern District of New York — which Loretta Lynch led before taking over as attorney general last year — refused to allow FBI investigators probing the Clinton family charity to review emails found on devices turned over this year by two of Clinton’s lawyers during the separate investigation into the mishandling of classified information on Clinton’s private email system.
The rationale, according to The Journal, was that the devices were covered by partial immunity and limited-use agreements that the Clinton lawyers — Cheryl Mills and Heather Samuelson — agreed to with the DOJ. Information recovered from the laptops could only be used in the email investigation and not in others.
As part of the immunity agreement, the FBI and Justice Department agreed to destroy Mills’ and Samuelson’s devices, a revelation that sparked outrage from congressional Republicans when it was announced earlier this month.
The Journal’s report largely confirms reporting in August from The Daily Caller News Foundation’s Richard Pollock that the FBI and several U.S. attorneys offices were conducting an unorthodox, joint investigation into the Clinton Foundation. (RELATED: EXCLUSIVE: FBI-US Attorneys Conducting Joint Probe Of Clinton Foundation)
CNN reported at around the same time that a Clinton Foundation probe was tabled by the Justice Department. Pollock’s report and the new piece from The Journal undermine CNN’s reporting.
While the investigation has gone forward, the Justice Department has stymied the investigation at several turns, according to The Journal.
The DOJ refused to grant the FBI the power to issue subpoenas or conduct formal interviews. It also refused to convene a grand jury to weigh evidence in the case.
More pushback occurred in August, when a senior DOJ official contacted the FBI’s deputy director, Andrew McCabe, to voice his displeasure that New York field office agents were continuing the investigation even though the DOJ had declined to provide investigative support.
The official was “very pissed off” that the FBI was continuing its efforts, according to The Journal.
The call occurred on Aug. 12, a day after CNN reported details of FBI-DOJ discord over whether to investigate the Clinton Foundation. It was also a day after Pollock reported that an investigation was underway.
McCabe figures prominently in The Journal’s reporting and in the overlapping Clintonworld investigations.
It was revealed last week that McCabe’s wife, Jill, received nearly $470,000 in contributions to a Virginia state senate campaign last year from Gov. Terry McAuliffe’s super PAC.
McAuliffe is a close Clinton ally and is the subject of a separate FBI investigation.
According to The Journal, McCabe refocused the Clinton Foundation investigation a week after FBI director James Comey announced in early July that he would recommend to the Justice Department that charges not be filed against Clinton for mishandling classified information in her emails.
The charity probe would be led by the FBI’s New York office with help from the Little Rock office, according to The Journal. FBI field offices in Los Angeles and Washington were also involved in the Clinton Foundation investigation.
The Los Angeles office subpoenaed bank records related to the Clinton Foundation after obtaining information during a separate public corruption case. The office in Washington was investigating McAuliffe’s financial relationships from before he joined the Clinton Foundation as a board member.
After Comey’s announcement on the Clinton email investigation in July, McCabe decided that the Washington FBI office would focus on the separate McAuliffe matter. He recused himself from that investigation because of the donations his wife received from McAuliffe’s super PAC in 2015.
While the FBI has insisted that McCabe is not compromised in any of the investigations — the email probe, the Clinton Foundation, or the McAuliffe matter — The Journal reports that some agents believe he has issued “stand down” orders in the Clinton Foundation inquiry.
That claim came from FBI agents lower on the chain of command from senior-level officials. Still other sources denied that McCabe issued a “stand down” order. They asserted that McCabe ordered investigators to continue on their investigative path.
McCabe’s Aug. 12 phone conversation with the senior DOJ official would seem to suggest that he supported the investigation.
“Are you telling me that I need to shut down a validly predicated investigation?” McCabe asked the DOJ official, according to a Journal source who was familiar with the conversation.
“Of course not,” the official reportedly said, after a brief pause.
The new report also details a presentation that FBI officials made to the Justice Department in February to lay out the case against the Clinton Foundation.
Some of the Journal’s sources said that the DOJ’s career public integrity prosecutors did not believe that the case was strong.
“Others said that from the start, the Justice Department officials were stern, icy and dismissive of the case,” The Journal reported.
DOJ officials told the FBI at the meeting additional investigative tools — subpoenas, interviews or a grand jury — would not be authorized.

New York Times Dismissed Trump Claims of FBI Revolt As ‘Baseless’...until NOW! ^ | 30 Oct 2016 

A new report by the Wall Street Journal describes high tensions within the Federal Bureau of Investigation over investigations of Hillary Clinton — a claim the New York Times once described as “baseless.”
Now, however, evidence appears to be emerging to support Trump’s claim.
According to the Journal report, the number of emails the FBI wants to search on Anthony Weiner’s laptop computer is 650,000. It is not clear how many of the 650,000 emails involve Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton; how many of those e-mails are work-related; or how many of them may have contained classified information.
The FBI is apparently awaiting for a warrant to search the computer for emails relating to the Clinton investigation. Currently it only has a warrant to search for child pornography, the Journal reports.
The report also confirms that the FBI has been investigating the Clinton foundation — and internal disagreements about how to proceed.
Some of those disagreements, according to sources cited by the Journal, revolve around FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, whose wife, Dr. Jill McCabe, received nearly $500,000 in campaign funds from Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe, a close Clinton ally.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Hillary For Prison banner at World Series!

Fact-checking John Gregg: Planned Parenthood Does NOT Do Mammograms!

Indiana Right to Life ^ | October 26, 2016 | Indiana Right to Life 

It’s a tired lie. It’s been repeated by politicians, celebrities and admirers of the abortion giant, Planned Parenthood. The fact is, saying Planned Parenthood does mammograms does not make it so.

Last night at the Indiana Gubernatorial Debate, abortion came up (video here, question begins at 30:13). Democrat John Gregg defended his support for taxpayer funding to Planned Parenthood, citing mammograms as a reason they deserve our tax dollars.

Let’s be clear: Planned Parenthood does NOT do mammograms.

Even Planned Parenthood’s head, Cecile Richards, was forced to admit this fact at a Congressional hearing in 2015.

So, Planned Parenthood does no mammograms, but instead they do abortions. Lots of them. More than 320,000 abortions per year, in fact. That’s 320,000 individuals who will never vote, need a mammogram or get to take their first breath.

John Gregg, you need to set the record straight. Be forthright with Indiana voters. Tell them, Planned Parenthood does not do mammograms.

And for repeating this tired lie, we should add you to this montage: video on link

17 Counts of Illegal Coordination Exposed: Pro-Clinton Super PAC Implicated!

The Citizens Audit ^ | Oct 24, 2016 | Andrew Kerr 

Facts are facts. Look no further than the public record to uncover massive violations of Campaign Finance law by the Clinton Campaign and her Super PACs.

Be wary of any pro-Clinton comments you find on Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, Instagram, and elsewhere on the internet. The truth is that many of those comments are not authentic – the people behind those comments are being paid to make those posts.
The organization funding those comments is Correct the Record, a pro-Hillary Clinton Super PAC that has spent millions of dollars funding a digital task force to “push-back” and “correct” Hillary Clinton’s record on social media.
What’s worse is that, even though Correct the Record is a Super PAC, they openly coordinate with Hilary Clinton’s presidential campaign.
The Super PAC claims it can legally coordinate with Clinton due to loopholes in our Campaign Finance laws.
The only problem is that the loopholes they’re claiming are completely invalid.  Correct the Record has provided well over $6 million worth of illegal in-kind contributions to the Clinton Campaign.

For those who don’t know what an in-kind contribution is, we’ve explained the concept in full here.  Here’s a summary:
An in-kind contribution is when a Super PAC does something at the behest of a Political Candidate.
  • If a Political Candidate asks a Super PAC to complete a task,
  • And the Super PAC spends money accomplishing that task,
  • The money spent accomplishing that task is considered an in-kind contribution to the Political Candidate.
Super PACs are prohibited from providing in-kind contributions to Political Candidates.  To do so would constitute illegal coordination.

Funding a digital task force to “correct” dissenting voices is just a small portion of Correct the Record’s activities.
Campaign Legal Center recently submitted an exhaustive 52-page FEC complaint detailing the litany of publicly reported illegal in-kind contributions provided by the Super PAC.  All of the examples listed below were funded and executed by Correct the Record at the request or suggestion of the Clinton Campaign:
  1. Provided hundreds of thousands of dollars to fund “talking-point tutorials and media-training classes” for Clinton surrogates.
  2. Contracted with an expert “who specializes in coaching people for television interviews” to lead the on-camera media training.
  3. Paid“trackers” to “discreetly record the public events” of Clinton’s Democratic rivals, Bernie Sanders and Martin O’Malley.
  4. Paid staff to conduct “opposition research” and circulate research memos to reporters portraying Clinton’s primary opponent, Bernie Sanders, as “extreme”.
  5. Paid staff to produce and circulate memos to reporters “detailing Republicans’ stance on prescription drugs” on the same day Clinton announced her health care policy.
  6. Produced videos to portray Clinton in a positive light for the “Let’s Talk Hillary” project, in addition to costs associated with pitching the video interviews to reporters, and the costs to launch a website to promote the project.
  7. Staffed a “30-person war room” to defend Clinton during hearings before the House Select Committee on Benghazi, to blast reporters with “46 research-fueled press releases, fact-checks, reports, videos, and other multimedia releases during the hearing,” and to distribute a 140-page “opposition research book to a variety of media outlets that impugns the character of Republicans on the committee”.
  8. Commissioned a private polling firm to conduct polls that showed Clinton winning a Democratic Debate in December.
  9. Paid staff to contact reporters “by email and phone to offer ‘off the record’ story pitches”.
  10. Paid staff to produce and circulate “a campaign ad” and other materials to state reporters ahead of the Democratic caucus in Nevada.
  11. $1 million in expenditures to fund “Barrier Breakers 2016”, a “digital task force” to “engage in online messaging for Secretary Clinton”.
  12. Produced “a 40-minute video” highlighting Trump’s “struggles with the truth,” which was announced via a conference call with reporters.
  13. Produced “a weekly roundup highlighting Trump’s new lies, the false claims he has repeated, and the latest reports from The Washington Post and Politifactdebunking his statements”.
  14. Paid a consulting firm “to help oversee an aggressive surrogate booking program, connecting regional and national surrogates with radio and television news outlets across the country in support of Hillary Clinton”.
  15. Produced and distributed “an extensive prebuttal” memo to reporters in advance of a Trump speech, followed by “peppering reporters’ inboxes with emails at the rate of about one every four minutes during the time Trump was speaking”.
  16. Paid staff to “develop relationships with Republicans” and “sleuth out confidential information from the Trump campaign,” and to distribute that information to reporters.
  17. Paid for professional media production, travel expenses, and personnel time to create “a video testimonial series featuring women and men telling stories about those taken advantage of, offended by, or otherwise hurt by Donald Trump,” and to create a new website to house those videos.
Correct the Record has done all of this at the request or suggestion of the Clinton Campaign.  Over $6 Million worth of illegal in-kind contributions have influenced our public election process, without so much as a peep from the Media nor our Government.

Here’s the bottom line: facts are facts. The Wikileaks emails, the Project Veritas tapes, and the Public Record are all telling the same story – the Clinton Campaign is blatantly violating campaign finance law by illegally coordinating with her Super PACs. It’s practically undeniable at this point.
The validity of our Democracy is at risk when activities like this go ignored. How can anybody think it’s okay for a Super PAC to coordinate with a Political Campaign like this? When will enough be enough?

Congressman asks deputy FBI director for documents on wife's Virginia Senate campaign!

The Virginian-Pilot ^ | Oct 28, 2016 | Patrick Wilson 

The chairman of the U.S. House of Representatives Oversight committee is asking FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe to turn over documents.

 Terry McAuliffe funding (a slush fund) for Andrew, to assure sufficient lubricant for services of And's FBI sector’s wash of clan Clinton, as directed from afar, by Jim and indirectly, Loretta.

While Andrew had charge of the Washington field office, he and Terry met in March of 15 and Terry's people passed the cash. McCabes met with McAuliffe about the "Senate run", cash cover on March 7, 2015, five days after Clinton’s private email server spilled. The FBI opened it's investigation of Clinton’s email use late in July 2015, Andrew was promoted as Comey's deputy director on July 30, 2015.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

If Trump gave this speech tonight, it would guarantee him the presidency!

 by MagillaX

Speech to be given prime time, to a small audience somber tone important to not ad lib.

I would like to take this moment and talk very seriously with the American people. This election period we are faced with a very serious point in American history, as we make the decision on who will lead our country for the next four years. I ask the American people to consider carefully your selection for President.

Choosing a candidate under federal investigation for serious crimes and misdemeanors will place our country into a constitutional crisis and hinder the effectiveness of our government for the next several years. This choice for president is now become more important than who is chosen.

I hope I earned your trust to be your choice but if you still are not with me I ask you choose one of the other candidates who are not under investigation for criminal activity which will allow us to escape this constitutional crisis.

I also respectfully ask that President Obama avoid pardoning Secretary Clinton. Pardoning Secretary Clinton will de-legitimize our justice system in this country. It is imperative the American people have confidence in our rule of law.

I also call for an independent prosecutor be appointed to oversee the investigation of Secretary Clinton so the American people can be confident of political impartiality.

I would like to finish with these closing comments to the American people. I assure you I will always place the well being of our country ahead of mine and will work together with all political parties for the welfare and the integrity of our government and the health of our democracy will always be my foremost concern.

Thank you good night and may God bless this great country.

World's first bionic eye to give millions the chance of seeing again! ^ | Ben Spencer Medical Correspondent For The Daily Mail 

Scientists are on the brink of restoring sight to the blind by sending moving images directly to the brain.
In a world-first, surgeons have implanted a visual stimulator chip in the brain of a 30-year-old woman.
The patient, who has been totally blind for seven years, saw coloured flashes, lines and spots when signals were sent to her brain from a computer.
Her doctors are now planning to send footage from a tiny video camera to the brain, which could provide the world’s first bionic eye and restore sight to millions.
The technology bypasses the eyes, meaning it has the potential to restore sight even to those who have lost an eye or become blinded by cancer.
During six weeks of testing, the patient has consistently seen the exact signals the scientists sent to her visual cortex, the section of the brain which usually receives images from the optic nerve.
Doctors at the University of California Los Angeles are awaiting permission from US regulators to connect the system to a camera, worn in a pair of glasses, which they hope will send moving images directly to the brain.
Dr Nader Pouratian, who performed the operation, said: ‘The moment she saw colour for the first time was a very emotional experience. It touched us all very deeply as human beings. Based on these results, this system has the potential to restore sight to the blind.’
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

TOPICS: Culture/SocietyNews/Current Events

Federal authorities reportedly battled over direction of Clinton email investigation ^ 

For months, FBI field offices in Washington Los Angeles, Little Rock, Ark., and New York had been gathering information about the Clinton Foundation and other possible public corruption cases and one tied to McAuliffe. The Journal reported that a presentation of their finding to the Justice Department in February didn’t go well.

“That was one of the weirdest meetings I’ve ever been to,” one person in the meeting said.

Some said that the Justice Department immediately started off skeptical about the whole thing, while others believe the FBI didn’t present enough compelling information about the Clinton Foundation to justify an intensified investigation. FBI officials maintained that they were in their right to pursue more aggressive techniques, while Justice Department officials said they wouldn’t authorities such matters.
Further down the FBI chain of command, agents painted a darker image. They told the Journal they were ultimately told to “stand down” and weren’t allowed to take a more aggressive pursuit and they heard that the order was coming straight from McCabe himself.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Clinton loses popularity edge in tight race with Trump, new Post-ABC Tracking Poll finds!

Washington Post ^ | October 31 at 7:00 AM | By Scott Clement and Emily Guskin 

Registered voters see Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump in a nearly identical negative light, mirroring a persistently close split in overall vote preference in a new Washington Post-ABC News Tracking Poll.

Nearly 6 in 10 registered voters have an unfavorable impression of Clinton (59 percent), and an identical percentage see Trump negatively. Nearly half of registered voters, 47 percent, have a "strongly unfavorable" view of Clinton and Trump alike.

(please see link for full Article)
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

WHo's that?


A Milllion


I Voted!


Rate Hikes


...some gave all!


Mooshell speaks




Gun Free Zone


Socialist Professors


They are that stupid!


Her first Halloween


Bend Down!


Ignorant Voters


Leading the march!






Soros controlled




Look Alike






Clear to me now!




Sunday, October 30, 2016

Trump Campaign Manager: “We Can Never Get The Stench And The Stain Of The Clintons Off Of Us” ^ | Oct 30th, 2016 

Trump Campaign Manager Kellyanne Conway went on with Howard Kurtz on Media Buzz on Sunday morning to discuss the current state of the race.
Conway told Howie the stench of the Clintons will be with us for a long, long time.
Kellyanne Conway: What we are reminded of is this cloud of corruption that always follows Hillary Clinton. And we are having this entire conversation about a renewed FBI investigation because Hillary Clinton did what she always does, put Hillary first… We can never get the stench and the stain of the Clintons off of us it turns out.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

‘Tired of her crap’: Truckload of manure dumped outside DNC headquarters unleashes tirade!

BizPac Review ^ | October 30, 2016 | Samantha Chang 

Something stinks in Warren County, Ohio!

A massive truckload of manure was dumped outside the Democratic headquarters in Warren County, and office personnel are furious.
Bethe Goldenfield, chairperson of the Warren County Democratic Party, unleashed a volcanic tirade on Facebook, writing: “What reasonable person thinks this is OK???? I won’t be responding to anyone who thinks this is acceptable behavior. It is ILLEGAL!”
Security cameras recorded a truck dumping off a huge pile of manure outside the office at 12:03 a.m. on October 29. Police are investigating the incident, WLWT reported.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Obama told us he’s honorable — but he’s just another liar! ^ | Oct. 30, 2016 | Kyle Smith 

At least President Obama is honest. Or so goes the common perception. He tried, maybe he made mistakes, the other side was mean to him, but through it all, he didn’t lie.

That view got smithereened this week. It was always hard to believe the president’s repeated claim that he didn’t know his own secretary of state was using an off-the-books e-mail server to avoid public scrutiny, in the process virtually guaranteeing that she would commit multiple felonies by taking classified information into the open.

Now we know Obama was lying. His own aides said so, in e-mails uncovered by WikiLeaks and made public this week.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Anthony Weiner Gave FBI Permission To Search Devices, No Warrant Needed

Regated ^ | October 30, 2016 | Victor Smith 

Anthony Weiner is reported to have given the FBI permission to search his computers. No warrant necessary. Some speculate that Weiner may bring down the Clinton Campaign through a bargain deal.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Resignation letters piling up from disaffected FBI agents!

Daily Mail UK ^ | 2016-10-30 | Ed Klein 

James Comey's decision to revive the investigation of Hillary Clinton's email server and her handling of classified material came after he could no longer resist mounting pressure by mutinous agents in the FBI, including some of his top deputies, according to a source close to the embattled FBI director.

'The atmosphere at the FBI has been toxic ever since Jim announced last July that he wouldn't recommend an indictment against Hillary,' said the source, a close friend who has known Comey for nearly two decades, shares family outings with him, and accompanies him to Catholic mass every week.

'Some people, including department heads, stopped talking to Jim, and even ignored his greetings when they passed him in the hall,' said the source. 'They felt that he betrayed them and brought disgrace on the bureau by letting Hillary off with a slap on the wrist.'

According to the source, Comey fretted over the problem for months and discussed it at great length with his wife, Patrice.

He told his wife that he was depressed by the stack of resignation letters piling up on his desk from disaffected agents. The letters reminded him every day that morale in the FBI had hit rock bottom.


'The people he trusts the most have been the angriest at him,' the source continued. 'And that includes his wife, Pat. She kept urging him to admit that he had been wrong when he refused to press charges against the former secretary of state.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Lessons Learned After 4 Years of Marijuana Legalization ^ | October 2016 | SAM-Smart Approaches to Marijuana 

... Colorado now leads the country in past-month marijuana use by youth, with Washington not much further behind. Other states that have since legalized marijuana occupy 4th place (District of Columbia) and 5th place (Oregon). States with lax “medical marijuana” laws occupy 2nd and 3rd place (Vermont and Rhode Island, respectively).

Additionally, as explained in greater detail below, the laws have had significant negative impacts on public health and safety, such as:

* Rising rates of pot use by minors
* Increasing arrest rates of minors, especially black and Hispanic children
* Higher rates of traffic deaths from driving while high
* More marijuana-related poisonings and hospitalizations
* A persistent black market that may now involve increased Mexican cartel activity in Colorado
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

650,000 Emails Found On Anthony Weiner's Laptop: FBI Expects "Weeks Of Work Ahead"

Zero Hedge ^ | Tyler Durden 

Yesterday, we reported that the FBI has found "tens of thousands of emails" belonging to Huma Adein on Anthony Weiner's computer, raising questions how practical it is that any conclusive finding will be available or made by the FBI in the few days left before the elections
Now, according to the WSJ, it appears that Federal agents are preparing to scour roughly 650,000 emails that, as we reported moments ago were discovered weeks ago on the laptop of Anthony Weiner, to see how many relate to a prior probe of Hillary Clinton’s email use, as metadata on the device suggests there may be thousands sent to or from the private server that the Democratic nominee used while she was secretary of state, according to people familiar with the matter.
As the WSJ adds, the review will take weeks at a minimum to determine whether those messages are work-related emails between Huma Abedin, a close Clinton aide and the estranged wife of Mr. Weiner, and State Department officials; how many are duplicates of emails already reviewed by the Federal Bureau of Investigation; and whether they include either classified information or important new evidence in the Clinton email probe, which FBI officials call “Midyear.”
And, as we further reported earlier today, the FBI has had to await a court order to begin reviewing the emails, because they were uncovered in an unrelated probe of Mr. Weiner, and that order was delayed for reasons that remain unclear.
More stunning is just how many emails were found on Weiner's computer. And while one can only imagine
But wait it gets better.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Comey’s review of emails related to Clinton server triggered by NY agents

Fox News ^ | 10/30/16 | Catherine Herridge 

FBI Director James Comey’s decision to revisit the Hillary Clinton email-private server case was purportedly trigged by New York agents working on the unrelated case of former New York Democratic Rep. Anthony Weiner allegedly “sexting” an underage female.
A law enforcement source told Fox News on Sunday that the New York team told agents involved in the investigation into Clinton using a private server system while secretary of state: “We think we've come across some documents pertinent to your investigation."
Weiner is married to top Clinton aide Huma Abedin, and a laptop connected to the sexting case was purportedly shared by the couple.
Comey was further compelled to review the documents based on two factors: the volume of documents and his commitment under oath to Congress to review “any new and substantial information,” the source also said. Comey restarted the case Thursday after being briefed by agents. He subsequently told Congress, and Capitol Hill Republicans the next day boasted that the FBI had reopened its investigation into Clinton using a private Internet server system while secretary of state.
In July, Comey wrapped up the one-year investigation into Clinton using the private server, saying she was “extremely careless” and that some of the emails off the server included classified information. However, he said investigators had not found enough evidence that Clinton had mishandled classified information to recommend criminal charges.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Harry Reid: FBI Director’s ‘Partisan Actions’ May Violate Federal Law

Wall Street Journal ^ | 2016-10-30 | Michael Bender 

Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid said FBI Director James Comey may have violated a federal law when he disclosed, less than two weeks before the presidential election, that his office was pursuing potential new evidence related to Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server as secretary of state.

Mr. Reid was preparing to send a letter to Mr. Comey on Sunday saying he appears to be aiding one political party over another. He said that may violate the Hatch Act, which bars government officials from using their position to influence an election.

“I am writing to inform you that my office has determined that these actions may violate the Hatch Act,” the Senate minority leader wrote, according to a draft of the letter provided to The Wall Street Journal. “Through your partisan actions, you may have broken the law.”
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

FBI Obtains Warrant for Newly Discovered Emails in Clinton Probe

NBC News ^ 

The FBI obtained a warrant to search emails related to the Hillary Clinton private server probe that were discovered on ex-congressman Anthony Weiner's laptop, law enforcement officials confirmed Sunday.

The warrant came two days after FBI director James Comey revealed the existence of the emails, which law-enforcement sources said were linked to Weiner's estranged wife, top Clinton aide Huma Abedin.

The FBI already had a warrant to search Weiner's laptop, but that only applied to evidence of his allegedly illicit communications with an underage girl.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

The secret forces that could lead to a Trump victory

NY POST ^ | October 30, 2016 | Michael Walsh 

Driving across the country last week, it seemed hard to believe an American presidential election is happening a week from Tuesday. Few campaign signs sprout from urban lawns; partisan billboards along the highways are scarce. Away from the coasts, the talk on the radio is largely of football and Jesus, not politics. It takes a moment, hearing a spot in North Carolina for a US Senate candidate, to realize the voice belongs to President Obama, interrupting some country music.
Oh, there’s plenty of chatter about it in the raging echo chambers of talk radio and TV cable news, and in the cocksure journalists’ fun house known as Twitter, where in-the-tank reporters and dispossessed campaign consultants, smarting over their collective defeat in the primaries, smugly assure each other that Donald Trump will lose in a landslide.
But what if the widely swinging polls, turnout models and forecasting mechanisms are all wrong? What if the unique historical circumstances of this election — pitting the female half of a likely criminal family dynasty against a thin-skinned bull-in-a-china-shop businessman — have invalidated conventional wisdom? What if the ranks of shy voters storm the polls and, in the words of Michael Moore, deliver the biggest rebuke in history to the establishments of both parties?
What if, far from having a lock on 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. come January, Hillary Clinton’s margin-of-error lead — currently between 4 and 5 points in the RealClearPolitics average of multiple national polls — turns out to be a Potemkin village, dependent on high turnout among blacks and other minorities and on getting late deciders to turn her way?
(Excerpt) Read more at ...


Canada Free Press ^ | 10/30/16 | Jeffrey A. Friedberg 

Kabuki play just a plot of more magical mirrors and lies, to deflect your your attention away from the WikiLeaks e-mail revelations themselves? Is it just another diversion, maybe plotted by Obama, Comey, and Hillary?
We are told if Hillary Clinton wins the Presidency, she will “be indicted for her poisonous crimes”—but that Barack Hussein Obama will give her a Presidential Pardon. But we are also told if she instead loses to Donald Trump, Obama will still give her a Presidential Pardon anyway. We are told that during the course of these “legal” atrocities, many others will be crushed and destroyed in a general Government “war.”
But no harm will come to Hillary—again. And not to her running mate, Barack Hussein Obama—again. This could be seen as similar to the way Queen Mother Parysatis got away with murder and King Artaxerxes crushed his opponents and sent Parysatis, safely away into freedom.

Former FBI Asst. Director Calls Clintons A "Crime Family" (Says Comey Faced A Budding Mutiny at FBI)

FoxNews ^ 

Judge Jeanine: So he wouldn’t have come out unless he knew it was coming out?

James Kallstrom: Well, I think he couldn’t hold onto it any longer. OK. Because who knows? Maybe the locals (local FBI / US Attorney offices) would have stepped in on this.

Judge Jeanine: …I think he had to do it.
Staff at the FBI are furious (along with a good chunk of the rest of the country). Comey's hand was forced. He was (maybe still is) facing a mutiny.

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Chicago Tribune: Time For Democrats To Ask Clinton To Step Aside! ^ | 30 October 2016 

John Kass writes at the Chicago Tribune that in the face of the FBI reopening an investigation into the emails of Hillary Clinton while she was Secretary of State, it is time for her to “step down” as the Democratic Presidential nominee:
Has America become so numb by the decades of lies and cynicism oozing from Clinton Inc. that it could elect Hillary Clinton as president, even after Friday’s FBIannouncement that it had reopened an investigation of her emails while secretary of state?
We’ll find out soon enough.
It’s obvious the American political system is breaking down. It’s been crumbling for some time now, and the establishment elite know it and they’re properly frightened. Donald Trump, the vulgarian at their gates, is a symptom, not a cause. Hillary Clinton and husband Bill are both cause and effect.
FBI director James Comey‘s announcement about the renewed Clinton email investigation is the bombshell in the presidential campaign. That he announced this so close to Election Day should tell every thinking person that what the FBI is looking at is extremely serious.
This can’t be about pervert Anthony Weiner and his reported desire for a teenage girl. But it can be about the laptop of Weiner’s wife, Clinton aide Huma Abedin, and emails between her and Hillary. It comes after the FBI investigation in which Comey concluded Clinton had lied and been “reckless” with national secrets, but said he could not recommend prosecution.
So what should the Democrats do now?
If ruling Democrats hold themselves to the high moral standards they impose on the people they govern, they would follow a simple process:
They would demand that Mrs. Clinton step down, immediately, and let her vice presidential nominee, Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia, stand in
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Just a reminder: Democrats and their lousy candidate left Comey with no good options

Hot Air ^ | October 29,2015 | ALLAHPUNDIT 

If Comey chose to disclose up front that new material had been found on Huma Abedin’s and Anthony Weiner’s devices, he’d walk right into a buzzsaw of Democratic headlines that THE FBI IS MEDDLING AT THE LAST MINUTE TO COST HILLARY THE ELECTION. (Which of course is what happened.)

If he chose not to disclose it because he’s not sure yet that anything incriminating is on there and then the news leaked, he’d walk into a buzzsaw of Republican headlines that THE FBI COVERED UP INFORMATION THAT COULD HAVE COST HILLARY THE ELECTION.

Imagine the chaos if the news about Abedin and Weiner came out three days before the election, as late deciders were finally ready to make a choice. Imagine if it leaked three days after the election at a moment when Trump was already screaming about the election being “rigged.” This clusterf**k that now rules our political reality is thanks entirely to Democratic voters and the fact that, when push comes to shove, they don’t care what Hillary Clinton does or which laws she breaks so long as she remains their best shot at holding on to power. They bought the ticket. Enjoy the ride.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

LIAR, LIAR Pants on Fire

Weiner revelation Proves Comey Dropped the Ball on Hillary Probe

The NY Post ^ | October 28, 2016 | Paul Sperry 

It appears the FBI agents investigating Anthony Weiner for sexting an underaged girl have done the job that the FBI agents investigating Hillary Clinton for mishandling classified information didn’t or weren’t allowed to do.

Agents reportedly found thousands of State Department-related emails ostensibly containing classified information on the electronic devices belonging to Weiner and his wife and top Clinton aide Huma Abedin. The discovery has prompted FBI Director James Comey to, on the eve of the election, reopen the Clinton case he prematurely closed last July.

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

The Left's War on Women ^ | October 29, 2016 | Victoria Straub 

Hillary supporters are the world’s best (and worst) apologists. They’re loyal no matter what, but they defend the worst possible actions, crying “Bill’s the bad guy! Hillary’s innocent.” Okay, tell that to the countless women whose lives have been affected by her ruthlessness.
But Hillary isn’t alone.

As Dinesh D’Souza shows us in Hillary’s America: The Secret History of the Democratic Party, the use and abuse of women is a longstanding leftist tradition. Hillary is simply the next in line.

The sneaky leftist habit of abuse is perhaps best shown in the 1800s. Prominent Democratic politicians of the 19th century were some of the worst slave abusers of their time. The wife of South Carolina Senator James Chesnut writes in her biography that her husband extolled his virtues while abusing women. Does that sound familiar?

Chesnut’s contemporary Senator James Hammond emphatically praised slavery while using it to fulfill his sick desires, even going so far as to take a slave mother and her daughter as concubines.
In the twentieth century, we were treated to more of the same. Whether it was Robert, John, or Ted Kennedy cheating on, abusing, or leaving women to drown while fleeing the scene of an accident, Democrats were clearly fighting the War on Women before they coined the term to burn Republicans.

The sick sexism of the left is even propped up by the millennial’s darling Bernie Sanders. Though the liberal Mother Jones first revealed his disgusting 1972 essay, it has gone virtually untouched by the media. In it, Sanders says that a man’s “typical fantasy” is of a woman being abused, and that during consensual sexual activity, a woman fantasizes about being gang-raped.
Hideous double standards aside, Sanders is much like Hillary in the fact that the sexist history of the Democratic Party began long before they were born. What do the modern policies of Hillary have to do with atrocities committed before she entered public life, or before she was even born?
They show the apple doesn’t fall from the tree. Hillary’s Americamakes it painfully obvious that no matter how much Hillary tries to paint herself as the longsuffering “good wife,” she is all too aware of her position in American politics. She even flexes that muscle to serve her own interests, bringing down countless other women in the process.
Take, for example, a tweet sent out by Hillary in 2015 declared that every sexual survivor deserves to be believed and supported. This is among the most disgusting displays of anti-woman behavior D’Souza highlights in his book, simply because it comes from a woman claiming to defend other women who defended a young girl’s rapist and got him off on a technicality.
Not only that, this comes from a woman who, according to D’Souza, assembled committees to gather dirt on many of Bill’s victims to publicly drag them through the mud, threaten their families, shoot at their vehicles, and ransack their apartments.
If Democrats want Republicans to answer for their policies on birth control or abortion, how about Democrats answer for the seemingly never-ending string of women abusers in their ranks?

What we know about the FBI's new email review

The Hill ^ | October 29, 2016 | Harper Neidig 

FBI Director James Comey rocked the presidential race Friday by announcing the existence of new emails relating to Hillary Clinton’s private email server.
Comey's 3-paragraph letter revealing the emails touched off a firestorm of speculation, though more information has since emerged providing a few more details about the emails.
Abedin emails were discovered on Weiner's laptop
Federal officials quoted in a number of outlets have said that the new batch of emails were found on a laptop belonging to former Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.).
Prosecutors in Manhattan seized the device as part of an investigation into an illicit texting conversation involving an underage girl, according to The New York Times.
Weiner is the estranged husband of longtime Clinton aide Huma Abedin, and the emails on the laptop purportedly belonged to her, the Times reported.
Is the FBI probe back on?
"Case reopened," Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), the chairman of the House Oversight Committee, declared Friday on Twitter, breaking news of the new FBI review.
Officials have since clarified that the investigation into Clinton's email arrangement was never officially closed due to administrative matters.
Comey indicated the probe was completed in early July when he declined to recommend pursuing charges over the mishandling of classified information.
He wrote Friday to inform lawmakers that new emails were discovered that may be "pertinent" to the agency's investigation, saying his agency would "take appropriate steps to obtain and review them."
Comey felt obligated to update Congress
In a memo to FBI employees on Friday, Comey said that he was aware that sending the letter to lawmakers could open him up to criticism, but felt obligated to be transparent about the investigation.
“Of course, we don’t ordinarily tell Congress about ongoing investigations, but here I feel an obligation to do so given that I testified repeatedly in recent months that our investigation was completed,” reads the memo, which was obtained by The Washington Post.
“I also think it would be misleading to the American people were we not to supplement the record. At the same time, however, given that we don’t know the significance of this newly discovered collection of emails, I don’t want to create a misleading impression. In trying to strike that balance, in a brief letter and in the middle of an election season, there is significant risk of being misunderstood, but I wanted you to hear directly from me about it," he wrote.
Abedin testified that she never deleted old emails
According to the Associated Press, Abedin testified in a sworn deposition in June that she never deleted old emails.
"I didn't have a practice of managing my mailbox other than leaving what was in there sitting in there," she said, according to the AP. "I didn't go into my emails and delete emails. They just lived on my computer."
"That was my practice for all my email accounts," she said. "I didn't have a particular form of organizing them. I had a few folders, but they were not deleted. They all stayed in whatever device I was using at the time or whatever desktop I was on at the time."
Who wrote the emails and are they classified?
It's unclear what's in the newly discovered emails, and some have speculated that they could just be duplicates of emails already reviewed by officials.
The FBI's investigation centered on whether classified information had been mishandled, and it remains to be seen whether the emails did, in fact, contain classified information.
If the emails turn out to be new, those involved will be put in the uncomfortable spot of explaining why they weren't already handed over for archiving.
GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump speculated Saturday that the FBI was reviewing some of Clinton's "33,000 missing and deleted emails."
Clinton is furious with Comey
Clinton and a number of aides, as well as Democratic Party brass, have publicly called on the FBI director to be more forthcoming in order to avoid having her detractors take control of the story.
Clinton on Saturday blasted the FBI director for making an "unprecedented" announcement within two weeks of the election. Clinton spokesman Brian Fallon also knocked Comey, accusing him of pushing "innuendo."
"Director Comey is just unleashing a wildfire of innuendo, of anonymously sourced reports, of Republicans mischaracterizing what the letter says," Fallon, a former Justice Department spokesman, told CNN on Friday.
How will Comey respond?
Leaders of both parties are demanding more information about the review of new emails before the election, with Democrats itching to have more details released to the public within days.
Comey, who has prided himself on being an independent law enforcement official, will have to weigh providing additional updates on the review of newly discovered emails so close to the election.
Critics who knocked the FBI director in early July for breaking precedent to comment on the investigation and criticize Clinton's "extremely careless" behavior are now pushing him provide more details.

Chaffetz asks deputy FBI director for documents about wife’s political ties to Clinton

WaPo ^ | October 28, 2016 | David Weigel 

House Oversight Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), who told The Washington Post this week that Hillary Clinton would face “years” of potential probes if she won the presidency, has asked FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe to provide documents about his wife's 2015 campaign for Senate — a campaign that received financial support from Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe (D), a close Clinton ally. Chaffetz also tweeted Friday that the FBI would examine new emails related to the investigation into Clinton's use of a private server.

“There are outstanding questions . . . regarding a possible conflict of interest into this case,” Chaffetz said in the letter. To investigate the questions, Chaffetz requested documents related to “when you first became aware the State Department was pressuring the FBI to reverse its decision regarding the classification of one of Secretary Clinton's emails,” and “when you first became aware the FBI had opened an investigation into Secretary Clinton's email server,” with a deadline of Nov. 10, two days after the general election.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

There's wildly conflicting information about what the FBI has actually found in the Clinton probe

Business Insider ^ | October 29, 2016 | Jeremy Berke 

Complete Headline: There's wildly conflicting information about what the FBI has actually found in the renewed Clinton email probe
Wildly conflicting reports have emerged over the last 24 hours about what new information the FBI may have found, after the agency announced that it was revisiting the investigation into Hillary Clinton's private email server ...
There's no clear consensus as of yet whether the emails were sent by Clinton herself, to Clinton, whether they were from her private server, or even whether any of the emails were new.
Here's a breakdown of what has been reported thus far:

  • Los Angeles Times: "The emails were not to or from Clinton, and contained information that appeared to be more of what agents had already uncovered, the official said, but in an abundance of caution, they felt they needed to further scrutinize them."
  • The Washington Post: "The correspondence included emails between Abedin and Clinton, according to a law enforcement official."
  • CNN: "The emails in question were sent or received by Abedin, according to a law enforcement official."
  • The New York Times: "Senior law enforcement officials said that it was unclear if any of the emails were from Mrs. Clinton's private server."
  • ABC News: "These emails were not sent by Hillary Clinton, and the FBI has no evidence of wrongdoing by her, according to a source familiar with the investigation."
  • The Wall Street Journal: "Many of the emails were discovered on a laptop used by both Ms. Abedin and Mr. Weiner, according to people familiar with the matter. In searching the laptop, investigators found thousands of emails, and they determined earlier this week that some of the emails involved Ms. Abedin discussing work issues."

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Hillary To Be Arrested? ^ | 10/29/2016 | Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr. 

Writes Graham Dugas:
Comey has an insurrection on his hands beyond the ability of anyone to control. These mutinous senior FBI agents have enough dirt to toss Obama, Comey, Hillary and others in jail. They also loathe the idea of being subjected to Clinton in the future as they know they will be forced to perpetrate more cover-ups and stain the bureau even more. They presented Comey and Obama with a choice… “give us Hillary’s head on a platter and we will be silent on Obama’s complicity in federal crimes [effectively a Nixon type pardon by omission of pursuit] and we will allow Comey to quietly be succeeded by a person of our choosing on an incoming Trump Administration.” OR ELSE THEY WILL GO PUBLIC.

Comey could have been silent until after the election no matter what they found on Weiner’s laptop because they already have seen ALL the emails including the deleted ones. The fact that Comey is taking this action indicates that his hand is being forced and that he [and Obama] have accepted the terms offered by the insurrectionists in exchange for the face saving terms offered. This also dovetails with Assange saying his next batch [the FBI knows the contents of ALL of Podesta’s emails] will result in the arrest of Hillary. The FBI cannot weather another PR storm revealing them complicit in a cover-up. They also must be proactive and use Hillary’s arrest/indictment/forced withdrawal from the race as a lightning rod to quell a furious public by granting them their ‘pound of flesh’. No one likes Hillary, and don’t think that the Pentagon is going to silently sit still as one of their 4-Star generals get ramrodded for MUCH less than Hillary did. They are aligned with the insurrectionists at the FBI....
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Investigation Tightens Around Huma Abedin As Hillary Clinton Stays Close ^ | 29 Oct 2016 | Lee Stranahan 

Investigators are combing through critical testimony by Huma Abedin, Hillary Clinton’s top aide, during an April deposition by the Judicial Watch public-interest law firm.

The focus on Abedin come as FBI director James Comey announced Friday that the investigation over Hillary Clinton’s email scandal would continue despite his prior statements that it was completed. Comey revealed his decision in a letter to Congress after he’d gotten evidence that important emails were found on a laptop computer used by both Abedin and her estranged husband, Anthony Weiner.

The June deposition of Abedin was conducted by the watchdog group, Judicial Watch. During the questioning, their attorneys asked Abedin “How did you go about searching for what records you may have in your possession to be returned to the State Department?”
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Hillary sent 'marked classified' info to nonsecure Abedin account! ^ 

NEW YORK – WND’s reporting in late August of a marked classified email Hillary Clinton forwarded to aide Huma Abedin could cast light on FBI Director James Comey’s dramatic disclosure to members of Congress Friday that the bureau had reopened its investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server due to new information apparently discovered in the sexting probe of former Rep. Anthony Weiner, Abedin’s estranged husband. Read more at
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

WH Press Secretary: You Can Avoid Paying Penalties If You... ^ | October 29, 2019 | Matt Vespa

Obamacare premiums are going through the roof, which is one of the main problems plaguing President Obama’s heath care law. Donald Trump has taken a swipe at the deductibles from the plans offered under the bill, saying they’re so high that you’d need to get hit by a Komatsu tractor in order benefit from the law. With Obamacare falling apart, more Americans are opting to pay the penalty to remain uninsured since it’s more economical to take a risk than pay monthly premiums that are simply torpedoing home budgets. Health insurance companies weren’t expecting to cover this many claims and incur severe losses. As a result, they’re leaving—and health care is already a rather pricy part of one’s budget. ABC News listed all three as reasons for why premiums are spiking, which were entirely predictable; that, and the fact that Obamacare enrollment was off by 24 million, according to numbers crunched by the Congressional Budget Office. That’s less people in the pool, which means the ones who were driving up costs, the old people, weren’t being offset.
For those paying penalties to remain uninsured because this president’s law was so terrible have more bad news. It’s being increased to $700. White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest offered the solution to us simpletons: just sign up for Obamacare. Sign up for our egregiously unaffordable health care program that was sold to us by a series of well thought out lies and avoid the penalty. And this observation that the law is unaffordable is now becoming a bipartisan consensus. Minnesota Democratic Gov. Mark Dayton recently admitted that Obamacare is unaffordable. Yet, Earnest seems to think that we can still buy plans for $75 a month or less:

We want to make sure that people understand the facts about the opportunities that are available to them. And if people are discouraged about what opportunities are available to them, that might be understandable given the headlines, but it's not understandable given the opportunities that are available to the vast majority of Americans who sign up. Because more than seven in 10 Americans who sign up for the marketplace will be able to purchase a plan for $75 a month or less, after you factor in tax credits -- tax credits that exist because of the Affordable Care Act.
So that's why the President continues to be optimistic about the law and its impact on middle-class families across the country. And it's why the President continues to be energetic in making the case that this is a top priority.
And we want to encourage people -- it doesn’t cost anything to window-shop, and people can do that now by going to and taking a look at the options that are available to them in their community. That doesn’t cost anything. But what most people will find, particularly people who signed up last year, many people will find that there actually is a comparable plan that they can sign on to that could actually save them money, that would cost less. So we're encouraging people to shop around, whether they have health care or not. And that opportunity is available at today.
And finally, we know that the system, overall, benefits -- everybody's costs go down -- when more people sign up. So that's why we're making such an aggressive effort to include people all across the country, particularly young people, to encourage them to avail themselves of this opportunity.
All of this is particularly important when you consider that the penalty that is imposed for people who don’t sign up for health care is quite significant. This year it's about $700. And I think our argument is pretty simple, which is, why would you pay $700 to Uncle Sam when you don’t need to? You can avoid having to make that $700 payment if you go and sign up and for health care, which, of course, also affords you a variety of benefits that protect you and your family in the event of an illness.
For starters, what options is this guy talking about? More than 1,000 counties in 26 states are going to have only one health care insurer operating in those respective markets next year. That’s no choice—and the Associated Press noted that next year is when there will be the least amount of choice seen in the health care arena since this law was enacted. Third, young people have zero incentive to sign up for Obamacare; most of them are probably insured through their parents' plan and the Obama administration decided to extend dependent coverage until age 26. Also, young people don’t go to the doctor as often, nor are they sick as much as the elderly, thus negating the need for them to event think about health insurance. I’m betting that more young people don’t sign up for Obamacare, which is a focal point in the final months of this administration.
The law sucks. The plans suck. The premiums suck. But buy into Obamacare anyway even though the costs are unaffordable and if you don’t we’ll still get money out of you with a penalty (it’s really a tax) for being uninsured because we have an individual mandate to encourage participation. Our plan is that good. It’s so good; it’s mandatory. All of this seems to be the Obama White House’s position, which is nothing more than a tantrum. It’s actually a shakedown. You don’t want to get hit with this penalty, sign up. Either way the government gets a piece in this double-dipping scheme. We get screwed over, being squeezed at both ends by the state over a health care law that simply does not work.
Also, Earnest mentioned the $75 talking point before. The Washington Post fact-checkers annoyingly didn’t offer any Pinocchios, but mentioned that the White House should be clearer when referring to the exchanges. Maybe those $75 a month plans exists, but they’re only for folks who are eligible for the tax subsidies. They’re not for everyone [emphasis mine]:

Like many readers, we originally thought Earnest was speaking broadly, about all Americans. But seen in the context of his overall comments, it’s clearhe was talking about people who participate in the exchanges.
That is increasingly a self-selected group — people who qualify for tax credits and cost-sharing that helps keep costs low for people who have incomes not much above the official poverty line. But for people who do not qualify for subsidies, premiums and deductibles are significantly higher.
We can understand the confusion of our readers, as Earnest did not make clear that he was including the impact of the tax subsidies. (Similarly, critics of Obamacare frequently fail to include the impact of tax credits when they discuss premiums on the exchanges.) We are not going to award Pinocchios, but the White House should be clearer about why premiums are so reduced for people buying insurance on the exchanges.

Why the Left Is Having a Nervous Breakdown ^   | 6/24/18 | Roger L. Simon  The Left is having the worst flu season ever. Almost all of them have been infected by Trump D...