There’s an important article over at Consortium News by longtime CIA analyst Ray McGovern, who prepared Presidential Daily Briefings for presidents Nixon, Ford and Reagan, and which highlights an interesting point I hadn’t come across before.
Namely, that Hillary’s use of an insecure personal email server — that was almost certainly hacked by America’s enemies — could very well have exposed Ambassador Steven’s lack of security in his Benghazi compound, thereby leading directly to the terror attack that killed four Americans.
One very important, though as yet unmentioned, question is whether security lapses involving Clinton and her emails contributed to what Clinton has deemed her worst moment as Secretary of State, the killing of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other U.S. personnel at the lightly guarded U.S. “mission” (a very small, idiosyncratic, consulate-type complex not performing any consular affairs) in Benghazi, Libya, on Sept. 11, 2012.
Somehow the terrorists who mounted the assault were aware of the absence of meaningful security at the facility, though obviously there were other means for them to have made that determination, including the State Department’s reliance on unreliable local militias who might well have shared that inside information with the attackers.
However, if there is any indication that Clinton’s belatedly classified emails contained information about internal State Department discussions regarding the consulate’s security shortcomings, questions may be raised about whether that information was somehow compromised by a foreign intelligence agency and shared with the attackers.
We know that State Department bureaucrats under Secretary Clinton overruled repeated requests for additional security in Benghazi. We also know that Clinton disregarded NSA’s repeated warnings against the use of unencrypted communications…
One can only pray that the FBI exposes this crime family once and for all and terminates their political aspirations with extreme prejudice. (For more from the author of “FORMER CIA ANALYST: Hillary Clinton’s Unencrypted Personal Email Server May Have Led to Benghazi Attack” please click HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/Hillary_Clinton_Testimony_to_House_Select_Committee_on_Benghazi-2.png485797Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2016-05-07 23:07:252016-05-07 23:16:50FORMER CIA ANALYST: Hillary Clinton’s Unencrypted Personal Email Server May Have Led to Benghazi Attack
Ben Carson, whose outsider candidacy for the Republican presidential nomination flared briefly in 2015 before limping to a conclusion this spring, will play a role in selecting presumptive GOP-nominee Donald Trump’s vice president.
Trump told the New York Times on Wednesday that he does not plan to pick a running mate until July and will have in place a collaborative process to select the right person. Trump also noted he would be looking for a vice president with a political background to “get things done” in Washington.
“I’ll set up a committee, and that I will do soon,” Trump said. “I think on the committee I’ll have Dr. Ben Carson and some other folks” . . .
Carson said the Trump campaign can win over African-American voters . . .
He also said the challenge of defeating likely Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton will unite Republicans.
“You would have thought that after 2012 we would have learned the lesson, but we didn’t,” Carson said. “But now we just have some bigger wounds that have to be healed, but I think that the healing balm — the sap, the ointment — will be Hillary Clinton. When people begin to think about her and what she represents and the progressive ideology and how it’s going to destroy our financial underpinnings and our position in the world and empower our enemies.” (Read more from “Trump Makes Announcement About Ben Carson” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/16040661834_228f417246_b.jpg6831024Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2016-05-07 23:06:022016-05-07 23:14:47Trump Makes Announcement About Ben Carson
Not a single member of the White House press corps is a registered Republican, according to survey results recently published by Politico.
Those results are buried in a story this week on President Barack Obama’s relationship with the press. An infographic posted in the story reveals that not a single one of the 72 members of the White House press corps surveyed by the Virginia-based trade publication identifies with the GOP.
Of the journalists surveyed, more than a quarter are registered Democrats and 13 percent are not members of any political party. Sixty percent are not registered to vote, but 72 percent of those polled said they think reporters should vote in elections they cover.
Twelve survey respondents said they plan to vote for Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton. Three said they support her rival Bernie Sanders. Two plan to vote for Sen. Ted Cruz (R., Tex.) and one supports Republican frontrunner Donald Trump.
Nearly 9 in 10 respondents said they expect Hillary Clinton to be the nation’s next president. (Read more from “Something Was Just Revealed About Every Single Reporter Covering the White House” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/White_house_1994_event.jpg13332000Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2016-05-07 23:05:312016-05-07 23:20:39Something Was Just Revealed About Every Single Reporter Covering the White House
If you want to know how Democrats will go about trying to destroy Donald Trump if he is the Republican presidential nominee, look no further than a campaign ad recently released by Conor Eldridge, a former U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Arkansas running as a Democrat against Republican Senator John Boozman.
One suspects that we will see a flurry of such campaign commercials in districts across the country in races up and down ballots during the 2016 general election if Trump is to triumph in the GOP primary.
As President Barack Obama did with Mitt Romney, Hillary Clinton and a media that has to this point enabled Donald Trump’s rise with $2 billion in free messaging will seek to define Trump so damningly that Clinton will look comparatively angelic — which is saying something — ensuring his fall.
The Donald will be cast as a bigoted, misogynistic, unscrupulous oligarch with no principles except a lust for power. When Trump comes out swinging directly at Hillary, she will become just another one of Trump’s victims.
To his discredit, the New York businessman has provided the Democrats and the media (but I repeat myself) with a target-rich environment for making this case over his decades in the public eye. And best of all for Democrats, their attacks will not only be powerful, but have the benefit in some instances of being true.
One suspects that the opposition research file will be rich with examples of, among other things:
Individuals burned by Trump’s business dealings
Duped Trump University students
Disgruntled ex-Trump employees
Homeowners squelched by Trump’s use of eminent domain for personal gain
Trump supporters who have partaken in acts of violence, threatened journalists and others and/or exhibited an animating ideology of neo-Nazism and white supremacism
The worst or most ill-conceived of Trump’s words, a la the Eldridge ad, but also with respect to Hispanics and others, which can be easily juxtaposed with the words of sympathetic women, Hispanics and others
The ads write themselves.
And as with Sen. John McCain in 2008, a media that to this point has served effectively as a friend, thanks to its hours of free airtime, will instantly become a foe. Recall that Sen. McCain was labeled a “maverick” by mainstream media outlets, and embraced by Democrats for his willingness to take Leftist positions against his party. The day he won the Republican presidential nomination, the formerly fawning press turned their guns on him unmercifully.
While the media has certainly proven more hostile to Trump than McCain during this election cycle, mainly in response to his rhetoric and lack of decorum (note: less so his “heterodox” ideology), its efforts to date have had the effect of providing Trump with a reliable enemy to rail against which resonates with his supporters, all while constantly keeping him in the news cycle.
The media in fact has had good reason not to seek to destroy Trump outright to date. First, Trump is good for ratings, which means he is good for business. Second, by enabling Trump’s rise, the media has created a candidate that they believe is incredibly weak given his unfavorable ratings and the aforementioned devastating charges that can be leveled against him. While the media may have underestimated Trump’s political acumen, and the mood of the American electorate to date, nevertheless they know that a concerted effort can be used to break him down just as they built him up. If Mitt Romney, a decent man and moderate Republican with a stellar business record, could have his image utterly sullied, imagine what the media can do with The Donald. Third, especially as more Establishment Republicans signal their approval, even if tacit, of Trump, he will be used as the representative of the party generally and conservatism in particular. The goal? To toxify those with an “R” next to their name in a bid to take back Congress. Trump may very well have the blood on his hands of real conservatives, few though they may be in Washington.
“Electability” is hard to evaluate, especially given Trump’s unpredictability and the Teflon nature of his candidacy to date. But what is undeniable is that negative and devastating Trump ads will be ubiquitous and likely highly effective come the general election season if Trump is the nominee, as reflected in the aforementioned ad already being run in Arkansas. (For more from the author of “This Is How Democrats Will Absolutely Destroy Donald Trump If He’s the Nominee” please click HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/maxresdefault-118.jpg7201280Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2016-05-07 23:03:592016-05-07 23:22:36This Is How Democrats Will Absolutely Destroy Donald Trump If He’s the Nominee
Chicago Public Schools announced on Monday that students and staff must be granted unfettered access to intimate school facilities based on their chosen gender identity.
Put concretely, boys now have the “right” to undress in the girls’ locker room before gym class so long as they say they would feel more comfortable doing so. Kids and teens have many things to worry about as they grow into adulthood and get an education. But having to deal with people of the opposite sex in their bathrooms and showers shouldn’t be one of them.
This latest front in the bathroom wars proves that same-sex marriage was merely the start, not end, of the left’s LGBT agenda. As demonstrated by enforcement actions by the Department of Justice, private lawsuits, and court decisions, the radical left is using government power to coerce children into pledging allegiance to a radical new gender ideology over and above their right to privacy, safety, and religious freedom.
Here’s how it works. First, the left tried to elevate sexual orientation and gender identity to special protected status in law but failed repeatedly using the democratic process. Undaunted, the administration turned to lawmaking-by-rulemaking. Specifically, President Barack Obama’s Departments of Justice and Education issued diktats reinterpreting Title IX’s ban on sex discrimination in federally funded education programs to mean “gender identity discrimination.”
Of course, when Title IX was passed in 1972, “sex” referred then to what it still refers to now: the basic biological reality of being male or female. Nevertheless, having made their discovery to the contrary (over 40 years after the law was passed), the administration went around the country threatening schools with revocation of millions in educational funds if they did not allow kids unfettered access to the locker room of their choice.
Following this lead, Chicago Public Schools cites Title IX and sexual harassment policies to justify its new policies.
A law from the 70s designed mostly to protect girls and women from sexism and harassment in schools is now being used to grant boys the right to undress in the girls’ locker room (and vice versa), all in the name of psychological comfort and acceptance.
In a weak acknowledgement of the uproar this will cause, Chicago Public Schools says students that are not gender confused “should” be allowed access to alternative facilities. So, for example, if there are 50 girls who object to a boy undressing in front of them, it is the 50 girls, not the boy, who must go change in “single stall restrooms” elsewhere. Of course, the odds are high that school officials on the lookout for any sign of “bullying” will take careful note of which students leave the locker rooms, presuming they are allowed to leave at all.
To add to the confusion, the definition of gender identity changes about every three months, so the rules we are supposed to live by are constantly moving. But the latest definition, according to Chicago Public Schools, is that sex is merely “a label a person is assigned at birth” and that the reality lies in one’s internal “psychological knowledge” of their own gender “regardless of the[ir] biological sex.”
This includes “male/man/boy, female/woman/girl, trans/transgender, gender variant, gender nonconforming, agender, gender non-binary, or any combination of these terms.” Whatever bureaucrat or committee wrote this definition felt compelled to add that gender nonconforming also covers “gender expansive, gender variant, or gender creative,” apparently to cover all the bases, except they may have missed some because the latest count, according to the left and some corporations, is 60 possible gender identities.
Under this definition, the only possible way we can know a person’s gender identity is by asking them, and if they consistently answer the same thing, bingo, that’s their gender identity. If Chicago Public Schools or the Department of Justice simply required separate private facilities for the minuscule number of students who are not comfortable changing in front of people of their own sex, there would not be a national debate over bathrooms.
Except they require that if a boy says he is a girl, he must be treated exactly like a girl in every respect, otherwise it is psychologically traumatic and illegal discrimination. This means that portions of sex education classes reserved just for girls (so they can speak with less trepidation about sensitive topics, like menstruation) must include every boy that feels like a girl.
And therein lies the biggest affront from these new policies. Not only must government employees play along with a gender confused child’s every subjective wish, so must every other student. In fact, Chicago Public Schools specifies that students must address a gender confused child by whatever pronoun they wish, be it “they, their, ze, he and she.” Failure to do so “will result in appropriate consequences for offending staff and students,” in other words, discipline up to and including expulsion from school.
But many people of good will and faith conviction simply refuse to put aside their legitimate privacy, modesty, and safety concerns. Many children of good will resist being forced to say “she” when speaking of a boy they have known for years just as they would resist being forced to say “5” when asked “What does 2+2 equal?”
The left for years claimed that all it wanted was for LGBT persons to be left alone, but this was a lie. It is now clear that liberals and their enablers will not leave anyone alone and will use the full force of courts, lawsuits, and government to ensure any resistance to their new gender ideology “will result in appropriate consequences.” (For more from the author of “New Chicago Schools Bathroom Policy Proves Liberals’ Extreme Agenda” please click HERE)
Is the strongest and most powerful nation on the planet headed for an apocalypse which will bring it to its knees? We live in a world that is becoming increasingly unstable, and apocalyptic themes have become very common in books, movies, television shows and video games. It is almost as if there is an unconscious understanding on a societal level that something very big and very bad is coming, even if the vast majority of the population cannot specifically identify what that is going to be. Last week, the Global Challenges Foundation released a new report entitled “Global Catastrophic Risks 2016” in which they discussed various apocalyptic events that they believe could wipe out more than 10 percent of the population of our planet, and they warned that these types of events “are more likely than we intuitively think”…
Sebastian Farquhar, director at the Global Priorities Project, told the Press Association: “There are some things that are on the horizon, things that probably won’t happen in any one year but could happen, which could completely reshape our world and do so in a really devastating and disastrous way.
“History teaches us that many of these things are more likely than we intuitively think. Many of these risks are changing and growing as technologies change and grow and reshape our world. But there are also things we can do about the risks.”
According to this new report, we are five times more likely to die from the various apocalyptic catastrophes that they analyzed than we are from a car accident.
In this article, I want to discuss some of the most important threats that they analyzed, in addition to adding some of my own to the list. But first I want to mention that I do not believe that the Global Challenges Foundation is correct to identify climate change as one of the most significant catastrophic threats that humanity is facing. Our climate has always been changing, and I do believe that we will see wild climate shifts in the years ahead. However, human activity plays an exceedingly small role in all of this, and there is not very much that we can do to prevent what is going to happen either. Most of the climate change that we are going to see in our future is going to be as a result of other catastrophes in this list, so I have not included it as a separate item.
With that being said, let’s quickly examine some of the potential threats identified by the Global Challenges Foundation…
Supervolcanoes
In various locations around the globe, there are gigantic supervolcanoes which could dramatically change the course of human history in a single moment by erupting. In the United States, the Yellowstone supervolcano is becoming increasingly active, and a full-blown eruption could potentially be up to 2,000 times more powerful than the eruption of Mount St. Helens back in 1980. As I mentioned the other day, major metropolitan areas such as Salt Lake City and Denver would be essentially destroyed, food production in this country would be virtually wiped out, and a “volcanic winter” would cool global temperatures by up to 20 degrees for up to several years.
Asteroids And Comets
This is something that the Obama administration is actually quite concerned about. During his tenure, NASA has established a “Planetary Defense Coordination Office” that is in charge of tracking giant space rocks, and NASA is working to develop a method to destroy incoming asteroids using nuclear weapons.
Scientists admit that they only know about a small fraction of the near-Earth objects that are actually out there, and we get hit “by surprise” all the time. If we were to get hit at just the right place by a very large object, like say just off the east coast of the United States, the consequences would almost be too horrible for words.
Today, 39 percent of all Americans live in counties that directly border a shoreline, and most of those people are along the east coast. According to the University of California at Santa Cruz website, if a huge asteroid did slam into the Atlantic Ocean, it could potentially produce a 400 foot high tsunami that would sweep inland for many, many miles and kill millions upon millions of Americans in the process.
Natural Pandemics
The flu pandemic of 1918 killed approximately 50,000,000 people worldwide, and scientists assure us that it will happen again one day.
Yes, we have come a long way in fighting disease, but as we learned during the recent Ebola outbreak, a really nasty virus can grip the entire world with fear in a very short period of time.
Engineered Pandemics
This is probably even a bigger threat than natural pandemics, because now we have the technology to genetically alter naturally occurring diseases and make them even stronger.
Whether it is on purpose or by accident, it is only a matter of time before a genetically-modified superbug gets released into the general population, and when that day arrives it may make all previous pandemics look like a Sunday picnic.
Artificial Intelligence
Could someday entities that we have created turn on us and start killing us?
Some might refer to this as “the Terminator scenario”, and it is becoming more realistic with each passing day as our technological capabilities continue to increase at an exponential rate.
Geoengineering
The human race now has the capability to purposely modify the weather, and this means that we also have the capability to do a tremendous amount of damage.
Have you ever looked up and noticed long white trails criss-crossing the sky? This is being done on purpose, and when they spray chemicals into our atmosphere it could have some very severe long-term consequences that the authorities may not be anticipating.
Nuclear War
Back during the Cold War, most Americans would have probably named this as the number one catastrophic threat facing America, but these days most people tend to believe that “the Cold War” is over.
So nobody has really objected while the U.S. strategic nuclear arsenal has been reduced by about 95 percent, and Barack Obama insists that he would like to reduce it even further.
Meanwhile, both the Russians and the Chinese are rapidly modernizing their nuclear forces, and they both have developed hypersonic glide vehicles that can defeat any missile defense system that the U.S. can put up.
Our relationship with Russia has already gone down the tubes, and our relationship with China is rapidly deteriorating. In fact, China just rejected a request for the USS John C. Stennis to make a routine port call at Hong Kong. Most Americans assume that a war with either one of them is impossible, but the truth is that we may find ourselves in a conflict with both of them at the same time eventually.
The catastrophic threats above were ones that were mentioned in the report from the Global Challenges Foundation. Below are some additional items that I would like to add to the list…
Islamic Terror
It isn’t just ISIS that we need to be concerned about. Islamic terror is exploding all over the planet, and according to Wikipedia there have already been 95 such attacks globally so far in 2016.
Up until now, they have been killing us with guns and bombs, but what happens when they inevitably get their hands on chemical, biological or nuclear weapons?
Terror attacks using weapons of mass destruction could literally turn our society completely upside down virtually overnight, and it is only a matter of time until this starts happening.
Power Grid Failure
Someday you may wake up and discover that the power grid has totally failed. Just try to imagine a world without any lights, cell phones, computers, televisions, ATMs, heating and cooling systems, credit card readers, gas pumps, cash registers, refrigerators or hospital equipment. A massive electromagnetic pulse, either from the sun or as the result of a nuclear blast, could instantly plunge society back into the 1800s.
The EMP Commission spent years studying this, and they told Congress back in 20o8 that up to 90 percent of the U.S. population could be dead within one year of such an event due to starvation, disease and the breakdown of society. So this is a threat that people better start taking seriously.
Cyberwar
World War III will not be fought like previous wars, and the Internet is one area where we are particularly vulnerable. The Chinese, the Russians and the North Koreans have all been working very hard to develop their cyberwarfare capabilities, and I was recently told by someone that has deep connections inside the U.S. intelligence community that our power grid could be taken down with just the push of a button. That is how easy it would be.
With each passing year, we are all becoming more and more dependent on the Internet. So what would our lives be like if it was suddenly gone?
That is something to think about.
Economic Collapse
If you want to watch society melt down right in front of your eyes, just take away all of the goodies. On The Economic Collapse Blog I have written more than a million words about the coming economic problems in this country. We got a very small taste of what is approaching in 2008 and 2009, and yet most people do not seem to have taken that warning seriously. Since that time, our long-term economic and financial problems have grown far more dire, and now the early chapters of a new economic crisis are unfolding right in front of our eyes, and yet still most people don’t seem to be alarmed.
If you want to see how devastating an economic collapse can be on a nation, just pick up a history book and start reading about the Great Depression of the 1930s. Unfortunately, what we are heading for is going to be a whole lot worse than that.
Civil Unrest & Martial Law
As the economy collapses and other things on this list start happening, people are going to be absolutely freaking out. A whole host of polls and surveys have shown that anger and frustration have been building up to unprecedented levels in this country, and at some point there is going to be a huge explosion.
Desperate people do desperate things, and we got small previews of what is coming in Ferguson and in Baltimore. Violent crime rates are already rising in our major cities, and many among the elite are getting out while the getting is good. In fact, 3,000 millionaires left the city of Chicago last year alone.
Of course whenever civil unrest erupts, the government responds by trying to regain control, and eventually things are going to get so bad in this nation that we will start to see martial law imposed in various areas. We saw a little bit of this in Ferguson and in Baltimore, but that was nothing compared to what we will eventually experience.
Catastrophic Earthquakes
A historic earthquake along the New Madrid fault seismic zone, the Cascadia Subduction zone or any of the major faults in California could affect millions of lives, cause hundreds of billions of dollars in damage, and literally change the geography of our continent.
Personally, I believe that those of us that are fortunate enough to live long enough will witness historic earthquakes in all of those areas, and scientists assure us that all three zones are way overdue for major seismic events.
Even if just one of the catastrophic events that I have discussed above were to take place, it would completely change society.
Unfortunately, I believe that we are entering an era of history in which a “perfect storm” that consists of a confluence of these catastrophic events will shake this nation to the core.
So what do you think?
Do you agree or disagree? (For more from the author of “The End of America? 13 Catastrophic Events Which Could Soon Lead to an American Apocalypse” please click HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/maxresdefault-114.jpg9001600Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2016-05-07 23:01:562016-05-07 23:26:10The End of America? 13 Catastrophic Events Which Could Soon Lead to an American Apocalypse
Judicial Watch today released new State Department emails (one batch of 103 pages, the second of 138 pages) that again appear to contradict statements by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that, “as far as she knew,” all of her government emails were turned over to the State Department and that she did not use her clintonemail.com system until March 18, 2009.
Judicial Watch recently released Clinton State Department emails dating from February 2009 that also call into question her statements about her emails.
The documents were obtained by Judicial Watch in response a court order in a May 5,2015, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed against the State Department, after it failed to respond to a March 18 FOIA request (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:15-cv-00684)). The lawsuit seeks:
Emails of official State Department business received or sent by former Deputy Chief of Staff Huma Abedin from January 1, 2009 through February 1, 2013 using a non-“state.gov” email address.
Many of the documents predate March 18, 2009, go back as far as January, and were not turned over by Clinton to the State Department from her non-government server. The emails cover topics such as: her schedule and travel plans; criticisms of Clinton by Richard Gere; Afghanistan; U.S. financial aid and security concerns for several Pacific Islands; the recommendation for a health care system overhaul; and food security.
Other previously unreleased emails are dated March 18, 2009, despite suggestions by Clinton that she had turned over emails with that date. These emails refer to, among other things, her “friends at Planned Parenthood” and a call to Bill Clinton’s former National Security Adviser, the late Sandy Berger, who was convicted of illegally removing classified documents from the National Archives.
On October 16, 2011, Clinton sent a “confidential” backgrounder from former Ambassador to Malta Doug Kmiec (sent from his apparently unsecure server) to aides Abedin and Cheryl Mills. The email has since been redacted due to its classified nature. Specifically, Kmiec discusses sensitive persons and organizations working in the US Embassy in Malta – the U.S. Maritime training program with the “AFM” (Armed Forces of Malta).
The Abedin emails included an exchange with Clinton’s former Deputy Chief of Staff Jacob Sullivan, in which Abedin suggests Clinton would often complain of being “exhausted”:
From: Abedin, Huma
To: Sullivan, Jacob J.
Sent: Thursday, April 16 18:54:22 2009
Subject:
I have to go to the dinner with her [state dinner in Santa Domingo, Dominican Republic]
I just got the I’m exhausted thing from her and Eugene [likely Eugene Bae, Clinton’s advance official] isn’t going to be able to tell Oscar de la Renta to shut up.
A March 31, 2011, email from State Department official Michael Hammer to Abedin and others shows yet another non-State.gov email address of HumaMAbedin[Redacted], which differs from the known [email protected] and [email protected].
“These emails further undermine Hillary Clinton’s statement, under penalty of perjury, suggesting she turned over all of her government emails to the State Department,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “How many more Hillary Clinton emails is the Obama State Department hiding?”
Hillary Clinton has repeatedly stated that the 55,000 pages of documents she turned over to the State Department in December 2014 included all of her work-related emails. In response to a court order in other Judicial Watch litigation, she declared under penalty of perjury that she had “directed that all my emails on clintonemail.com in my custody that were or are potentially federal records be provided to the Department of State, and on information and belief, this has been done.” This new email find is also at odds with her official campaign statement:
On December 5, 2014, 30,490 copies of work or potentially work-related emails sent and received by Clinton from March 18, 2009, to February 1, 2013, were provided to the State Department. This totaled roughly 55,000 pages. More than 90% of her work or potentially work-related emails provided to the Department were already in the State Department’s record-keeping system because those e-mails were sent to or received by “state.gov” accounts.
Early in her term, Clinton continued using an att.blackberry.net account that she had used during her Senate service. Given her practice from the beginning of emailing State Department officials on their state.gov accounts, her work-related emails during these initial weeks would have been captured and preserved in the State Department’s record-keeping system. She, however, no longer had access to these emails once she transitioned from this account.
The Associated Press previously reported that the State Department received from the Department of Defense emails between Clinton and General David Petraeus that also predate March 2009. Those emails have not been released to the public.
On August 10, 2015, Judicial Watch announced that the State Department submitted to the court a sworn declaration from Clinton regarding federal records on her controversial email system. The declaration states:
I, Hillary Rodham Clinton, declare under penalty of perjury that the following is true and correct:
1. While I do not know what information may be “responsive” for purposes of this law suit, I have directed that all my e-mails on clintonemail.com in my custody that were or potentially were federal records to be provided to the Department of State, and on information and belief, this has been done.
2. As a result of my directive, approximately 55,000 pages of these emails were produced to the Department on December 5, 2014.
3. Cheryl Mills did not have an account on clintonemail.com. Huma Abedin did have such an account which was used at times for government business.
The document is signed by “Hillary Rodham Clinton.” The State Department was ordered by US District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan on July 31 to request that Clinton and her top aides confirm, under penalty of perjury, that they have produced all government records in their possession and to return any other government records immediately. (For more from the author of “OH, MY: More Hillary Emails That Were Hidden From State Department Probe Uncovered” please click HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/25353612023_60f047ce8c_b.jpg6831024Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2016-05-07 23:00:542016-05-07 23:24:52OH, MY: More Hillary Emails That Were Hidden From State Department Probe Uncovered
Embedded photographers, in the eyes of some, are the unsung heroes when historic events occur. Reflecting on the achievements of war photographers, one may not soon forget the photo taken as the U.S. flag was being raised over Iwo Jima by soldiers after the tiny South Pacific island was taken from the hands of the Japanese. And during the Obama presidency, no single photograph taken by a photographer may be as important as the one taken by Pete Souza when the president’s staff was in the situation room as Osama bin Laden’s compound was being infiltrated by U.S. personnel.
After all, it had been nearly 10 years since bin Laden claimed responsibility for attacking the World Trade Center and the Pentagon using hijacked commercial airliners as flying missiles. Bin Laden’s whereabouts had been the question on the minds of many, including the military, which was engaged in a manhunt of the FBI’s most wanted man.
But the famous photo almost didn’t get released, according to a new book written by Josh King titled Off Script. According to the Washington Examiner, King wrote that Souza knew he had a winner when he shot the photo that showed Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Defense Secretary Robert Gates and other military and administration officials apparently watching attentively as live video feeds of the assault were broadcast directly to the situation room on May 2, 2011, the day bin Laden was killed in the raid, which involved a stealth helicopter insertion of two dozen Navy Seals. . .The problem with the photo arose when it was realized a classified document was on the desk in front of Clinton, the details of which were also captured by the photo. (Read more from “Why the Obama Administration’s Most Notable Photograph Was Almost Nixed” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/1280px-US_Cabinet_official_group_photo_July_26_2012.jpg8511280Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2016-05-07 22:59:102016-05-07 23:27:26Why the Obama Administration’s Most Notable Photograph Was Almost Nixed
After the Clinton campaign staff attempted to use the City of Logan Fire Department facilities for the Clinton upcoming visitations to the area, fire department officials contacted the Mayor of Logan about the situation. Logan officials then took matters into their own hands and sent an e-mail sent to Mike Browning, a representative for Senator Joe Manchin.
The e-mail states the following:
Mike,
While we appreciate all that you and Senator Manchin’s office have done for the City Of Logan over the years we must make the following statement:
Bill and Hillary Clinton are simply not welcome in our town. Mrs. Clinton’s anti-coal messages are the last thing our suffering town needs at this point. The policies that have been championed by people like Mrs. Clinton have all but devastated our fair town, and honestly, enough is enough. We wish them the best in their campaign, however we again state they are not welcome on our city properties. We hope that you will respectfully consider NOT visiting our community. Please don’t hesitate to contact me if you have any questions, 304-xxx-xxxx. I am writing this on behalf of the City Of Logan.
(Read more from “Logan Officials Message to Clinton Campaign” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/maxresdefault-112.jpg5741022Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2016-05-07 22:58:432016-05-07 23:28:20Logan Officials Message to Clinton Campaign
Bush-era war authorizations do not give President Obama authority to fight the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS), an Army officer argued in a lawsuit filed Wednesday against Obama.
The lawsuit was filed in U.S. district court by an intelligence officer stationed in Kuwait who says he supports the fight against ISIS but believes it is being carried out illegally because Congress hasn’t specifically authorized it.
“How could I honor my oath when I am fighting a war, even a good war, that the Constitution does not allow, or Congress has not approved?” Capt. Nathan Michael Smith wrote. “To honor my oath, I am asking the court to tell the president that he must get proper authority from Congress, under the War Powers Resolution, to wage the war against ISIS in Iraq and Syria.”
Obama has sought an authorization for use of military force (AUMF) from Congress. But Congress has been hesitant to take it up, with Republicans worried it would be too restrictive and some Democrats worried it wouldn’t be restrictive enough.
In the absence of a new AUMF, Obama has said he has the authority to fight ISIS from the 2001 authorization to fight al Qaeda, from which ISIS originated. (Read more from “An Army Captain Is Suing Obama for This Major Reason” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/maxresdefault-1.jpg10021516Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2016-05-07 22:56:262016-05-07 23:29:51An Army Captain Is Suing Obama for This Major Reason
