Thursday, June 9, 2016
Wednesday, June 8, 2016
State Dept Defends Claim It Will Take 75 Years to Process Clinton Emails
Townhall.com ^ | June 8, 2016 | Leah Barkoukis
State Department spokesman Mark Toner defended its estimate that it would take 75 years to release the emails from Hillary Clinton’s top aides during her time as secretary of state on Tuesday. He noted that the RNC’s court filing contained an “enormous amount of FOIA requests” that are “very complex.”
“It’s a very broad range involving a number of people over a period of four years,” he said. “It’s not an outlandish estimation believe it or not.”
In March, the RNC filed a pair of lawsuits seeking the emails after having failed to receive the documents from State in requests filed last October and December.
“The Obama administration has failed to comply with records requests in a timely manner as required by law,” Chairman Reince Priebus said in a statement at the time.
The RNC's FOIA request is seeking emails from three of Clinton's former aides: Cheryl Mills, Jacob Sullivan and Patrick Kennedy.
"Given the Department's current [Freedom of Information Act] workload and the complexity of these documents, it can process about 500 pages a month, meaning it would take approximately 16-and-2/3 years to complete the review of the Mills documents, 33-and-1/3 years to finish the review of the Sullivan documents, and 25 years to wrap up the review of the Kennedy documents — or 75 years in total," the State Department argued in the filing.
State Department spokesman Mark Toner defended its estimate that it would take 75 years to release the emails from Hillary Clinton’s top aides during her time as secretary of state on Tuesday. He noted that the RNC’s court filing contained an “enormous amount of FOIA requests” that are “very complex.”
“It’s a very broad range involving a number of people over a period of four years,” he said. “It’s not an outlandish estimation believe it or not.”
In March, the RNC filed a pair of lawsuits seeking the emails after having failed to receive the documents from State in requests filed last October and December.
“The Obama administration has failed to comply with records requests in a timely manner as required by law,” Chairman Reince Priebus said in a statement at the time.
The RNC's FOIA request is seeking emails from three of Clinton's former aides: Cheryl Mills, Jacob Sullivan and Patrick Kennedy.
"Given the Department's current [Freedom of Information Act] workload and the complexity of these documents, it can process about 500 pages a month, meaning it would take approximately 16-and-2/3 years to complete the review of the Mills documents, 33-and-1/3 years to finish the review of the Sullivan documents, and 25 years to wrap up the review of the Kennedy documents — or 75 years in total," the State Department argued in the filing.
The Trump Attack on Political Correctness
Canada Free Press ^ | 06/08/16 | Timothy Birdnow
Trump is destroying the leprosy of Political Correctness, created to shut the mouths of the silent majority and to intimidate Republicans. It has reigned far too long. I say, call out the fake Indians and Mexican judges! It's time
Donald Trump is in the soup again. Mr. Trump has liberal race hustlers sputtering a rain of spittle, and has the GOP Establishment jelly legged, knees knocking and lower lips quivering. With two recent comments Mr. Trump has Republicans running for the tall grass, and even Newt Gingrich - a tepid but agreeable supporter - has demanded Trump apologize.
What did Trump say that has everyone turning purple? Well, he started out by calling Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth “Lizzy” Warren Pocahontas, then refusing to apologize for this vile slur.
Trump is destroying the leprosy of Political Correctness, created to shut the mouths of the silent majority and to intimidate Republicans. It has reigned far too long. I say, call out the fake Indians and Mexican judges! It's time
Donald Trump is in the soup again. Mr. Trump has liberal race hustlers sputtering a rain of spittle, and has the GOP Establishment jelly legged, knees knocking and lower lips quivering. With two recent comments Mr. Trump has Republicans running for the tall grass, and even Newt Gingrich - a tepid but agreeable supporter - has demanded Trump apologize.
What did Trump say that has everyone turning purple? Well, he started out by calling Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth “Lizzy” Warren Pocahontas, then refusing to apologize for this vile slur.
What Happens If Hillary Clinton Is Indicted? Bernie Sanders Might Not Benefit
Bustle ^ | June 7, 2016 | Joseph D. Lyons
With the Associated Press calling the Democratic presidential race for Clinton, and the polls for the last primaries in her favor, you might think that there's nothing that could derail her campaign. But there is. It may be a long shot, but it's definitely something Sanders supporters have been praying for as a last-minute Hail Mary: an indictment from the FBI over the private email server Clinton used while secretary of state. The FBI is currently investigating the matter, and if they find evidence that she broke the Espionage Act, they could prosecute. So what happens if Hillary Clinton is indicted?
At this point, only a few diehard Sanders supporters — and some on the right — see this as a possibility. H. A. Goodman, a Huffington Post columnist and Sanders supporter, laid out his case for Clinton's indictment Monday, arguing that she inadvertently broke the law by transferring 22 top-secret emails to her private server, even though they were not marked classified when they were first sent back in 2008. He argues that "'gross negligence' is enough to prosecute," especially in light of the State Department's report that Clinton did not have approval for the private server and was in conflict with new rules put in place in 2009, when she took office.
That would thrill some Sanders-or-bust supporters. The New York Times ran a piece on them, noting that some would even vote for Trump over Clinton. Others promised to vote for a third-party candidate. What they had in common was a hope that an FBI indictment would hand Sanders the nomination. But it's not that simple. Even if Clinton is indicted, that doesn't mean Sanders would become the Democratic nominee....
With the Associated Press calling the Democratic presidential race for Clinton, and the polls for the last primaries in her favor, you might think that there's nothing that could derail her campaign. But there is. It may be a long shot, but it's definitely something Sanders supporters have been praying for as a last-minute Hail Mary: an indictment from the FBI over the private email server Clinton used while secretary of state. The FBI is currently investigating the matter, and if they find evidence that she broke the Espionage Act, they could prosecute. So what happens if Hillary Clinton is indicted?
At this point, only a few diehard Sanders supporters — and some on the right — see this as a possibility. H. A. Goodman, a Huffington Post columnist and Sanders supporter, laid out his case for Clinton's indictment Monday, arguing that she inadvertently broke the law by transferring 22 top-secret emails to her private server, even though they were not marked classified when they were first sent back in 2008. He argues that "'gross negligence' is enough to prosecute," especially in light of the State Department's report that Clinton did not have approval for the private server and was in conflict with new rules put in place in 2009, when she took office.
That would thrill some Sanders-or-bust supporters. The New York Times ran a piece on them, noting that some would even vote for Trump over Clinton. Others promised to vote for a third-party candidate. What they had in common was a hope that an FBI indictment would hand Sanders the nomination. But it's not that simple. Even if Clinton is indicted, that doesn't mean Sanders would become the Democratic nominee....
(Excerpt) Read more at bustle.com ...
Tuesday, June 7, 2016
A Harvard MBA Guy Is Out to Bring Down the Clintons
Politics Breaking ^ | May 26, 2016 | Staff
In a 9-page letter dated yesterday and posted to his blog, Ortel calls the Clintons’ charity the “largest unprosecuted charity fraud ever attempted,” adding for good measure that the Clinton Foundation is part of an “international charity fraud network whose entire cumulative scale (counting inflows and outflows) approaches and may even exceed $100 billion, measured from 1997 forward.” Ortel lists 40 potential areas of fraud or wrongdoing that he plans to expose over the coming days.
In a 9-page letter dated yesterday and posted to his blog, Ortel calls the Clintons’ charity the “largest unprosecuted charity fraud ever attempted,” adding for good measure that the Clinton Foundation is part of an “international charity fraud network whose entire cumulative scale (counting inflows and outflows) approaches and may even exceed $100 billion, measured from 1997 forward.” Ortel lists 40 potential areas of fraud or wrongdoing that he plans to expose over the coming days.
(Excerpt) Read more at politicsbreaking.com ...
GOP aghast as Trump doubles down (hand-wringing "leaders")
thehill.com ^ | 6/6/16 | Alexander Bolton
“If somebody in Washington is holding their breath, waiting to give their endorsement on an apology, they’re going to be waiting a long time,” he said. “There are so many people in this country who are just sick and tired of our elected officials being apologetic for everything.”
When Trump spoke to the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference last month, it sparked hope among Washington Republicans of a long-awaited pivot to the general election and a more presidential demeanor.
Those hopes, however, were dashed by Trump’s assertion last week that U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel, who is presiding over civil suits against Trump University, has “an inherent conflict of interest” because of Trump’s plan to build a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border. Curiel was born in Indiana to Mexican immigrants.
“I don’t think anyone is working on a strategy of how to engage Latino voters, and from what I see there is no serious analysis or assessment of the impact Mr. Trump’s comments are having on the Latino electorate,” Alfonso Aguilar, president of the Latino Partnership for Conservative Principles, said of his “limited contact” with Trump’s advisers.
“This is not rocket science. Just not talking is not that difficult, but he doubles down and triples down on these comments,” he said.
“If somebody in Washington is holding their breath, waiting to give their endorsement on an apology, they’re going to be waiting a long time,” he said. “There are so many people in this country who are just sick and tired of our elected officials being apologetic for everything.”
When Trump spoke to the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference last month, it sparked hope among Washington Republicans of a long-awaited pivot to the general election and a more presidential demeanor.
Those hopes, however, were dashed by Trump’s assertion last week that U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel, who is presiding over civil suits against Trump University, has “an inherent conflict of interest” because of Trump’s plan to build a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border. Curiel was born in Indiana to Mexican immigrants.
“I don’t think anyone is working on a strategy of how to engage Latino voters, and from what I see there is no serious analysis or assessment of the impact Mr. Trump’s comments are having on the Latino electorate,” Alfonso Aguilar, president of the Latino Partnership for Conservative Principles, said of his “limited contact” with Trump’s advisers.
“This is not rocket science. Just not talking is not that difficult, but he doubles down and triples down on these comments,” he said.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
The False Comparison Of Trump To Hillary
Frontpagemag.com ^ | June 7, 2016 | Bruce Thornton
A lot of Republicans still upset over Donald Trump winning the nomination resort to a false equivalence between Trump and Clinton in order to justify sitting the election out or even voting for Hillary.
Take a recent example by the National Review’s Ramesh Ponnuru. First he lists Hillary’s manifold sins that Trump is innocent of: lying to the parents of the Benghazi victims, promising to nominate hard-left jurists to the Supreme Court, and supporting Obamas’ high-tax economics and unconstitutional amnesty of illegal aliens.
A lot of Republicans still upset over Donald Trump winning the nomination resort to a false equivalence between Trump and Clinton in order to justify sitting the election out or even voting for Hillary.
Take a recent example by the National Review’s Ramesh Ponnuru. First he lists Hillary’s manifold sins that Trump is innocent of: lying to the parents of the Benghazi victims, promising to nominate hard-left jurists to the Supreme Court, and supporting Obamas’ high-tax economics and unconstitutional amnesty of illegal aliens.
(Excerpt) Read more at frontpagemag.com ...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
-
Army Times ^ | May 7, 2017 | Todd South After carrying the M16 or one of its cousins across the globe for more than half a century, sol...
