Katie Couric Sued for $12 Million for Defamation in Anti-Gun Documentary

Film producer Katie Couric and her director Stephanie Soechtig edited their anti-gun documentary Under the Gun in order to make a gun rights group in Virginia look as if they couldn’t answer a simple question.

They’re now facing a $12 million defamation lawsuit, according to documents provided to Bearing Arms.

Second Amendment rights advocacy organization the Virginia Citizens Defense League (VCDL), along with two of its members, today filed a $12 million defamation lawsuit against Katie Couric, director Stephanie Soechtig, Atlas Films, and Studio 3 Partners LLC d/b/a Epix for false and defamatory footage featured in the 2016 documentary film Under the Gun. The film portrays a fictional exchange in which members of the VCDL appear silent, stumped, and avoiding eye contact for nearly nine seconds after Katie Couric asks a question about background checks. An unedited audio recording of the interview reveals that—contrary to the portrayal in the film—the VCDL members had immediately begun responding to Couric’s question.

In the filing, the VCDL, Daniel L. Hawes, Esq., and Patricia Webb allege that the filmmakers knowingly and maliciously manufactured the fictional exchange by splicing in footage that the filmmakers took surreptitiously after telling the interviewees to be silent for ten seconds so that recording equipment could be calibrated. The filing also contains side-by-side screenshots of the film’s footage of the VCDL members and anti-gun advocates, alleging that the filmmakers manipulated lighting to cast shadows on the VCDL members and to make them appear sinister and untrustworthy. “We were horrified to see how Couric and her team manipulated us and the video footage to make us look like fools who didn’t stand up for the Second Amendment,” said Mr. Philip Van Cleave, President of the VCDL. “We want to set the record straight and hold them accountable for what they’ve done. You shouldn’t intentionally misrepresent someone’s views just because you disagree with them.”

The lawsuit, filed in federal court (United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia– Richmond Division), seeks $12 million in compensatory damages, plus punitive damages. The VCDL, Mr. Hawes, and Ms. Webb are represented by Tom Clare, Libby Locke, and Megan Meier of Clare Locke LLP, a boutique law firm specializing in defamation litigation.

(Read more from “Katie Couric Sued for $12 Million for Defamation in Anti-Gun Documentary” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Alaska Republican Party Chairman Calls For “Honorable” Conduct, Implies Senator Lisa Murkowski Dishonorable and Selfish

Late last week, Alaska Republican Party Chairman Tuckerman Babcock sent out a memo to members of the State Central Committee urging those who intend to support Joe Miller for US Senate to resign.

At issue is the following party rule: “No appointed or elected Republican party officers shall promote or be engaged in any activity that promotes the candidacy of any person for partisan political office other than a Republican running on a Republican ticket.”

Babcock made his point no less than four times, stating in clear and unambiguous terms, “the honorable course is to resign your party office.”

At first glance, it all seems straightforward, but when one looks at the facts of the case it becomes more difficult.

Lisa Murkowski lost the 2010 Republican primary to Joe Miller, then proceeded to run against Republican nominee Joe Miller, all the while maintaining her seat on the Republican State Central Committee. She was never disciplined, never censured, and never vacated her seat.

Chairman Babcock went on to suggest that those who don’t voluntarily step down are not only dishonorable, but also selfish.

If this is the case, then apparently the party Chairman is suggesting Lisa Murkowski is both dishonorable and selfish, and to top it all off her record in the United States Senate stands in stark contrast to the Alaska Republican Party platform whose stated mission is “to elect and appoint to public office Alaskans with integrity committed to enacting solutions consistent with these [Republican Party] principles.”

In essence, the Chairman is advocating that an obscure party rule be used to subvert the party’s stated mission in the promotion of a candidate who has systematically disregard party rules and undermined party principles.

So are we to conclude that the Alaska Republican Party Chairman would have party officers exhibit honor by supporting dishonor?

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

How Ted Cruz’s Internet Offensive Could Change Spending Strategy in the House

Sen. Ted Cruz’s latest showdown with the Obama administration over the White House plan to give up control of the internet could help bring wayward conservatives back to Republican leadership’s heel on a stopgap spending measure.

Arguments about internet freedom and federal spending have become intertwined on Capitol Hill, affecting how some House conservatives say they’ll vote on a short-term continuing resolution to fund the government after the fiscal year ends Sept. 30.

On Oct. 1, the Obama administration plans to relinquish control of ICANN—the global, nonprofit organization that functions as the phonebook of the internet by curating website domain names.

That’s the same day that the federal government’s spending authority ends.

Multiple members of the House Freedom Caucus told The Daily Signal that a policy rider stopping the internet handoff could sweeten a short-term continuing resolution that, so far, they’ve been loath to swallow.

Conservatives have sparred with members of the House Appropriations Committee for weeks over the length of a stopgap spending measure.

Appropriators want a three-month continuing resolution that would put government spending on autopilot until December. Conservatives balk at that option because it allows outgoing lawmakers to legislate during the lame-duck session, the period after the election but before the next Congress convenes.

Members of the Freedom Caucus have pushed for a longer, six-month continuing resolution. But if they secure policy guarantees from leadership, that could change.

A founding Freedom Caucus member, Rep. Mark Meadows, R-N.C., said conservatives are open to supporting a short continuing resolution if two provisions are added: one pausing immigration from Syria and another “stopping the transfer of ICANN to an international entity.”

Cruz is spearheading the effort to craft the policy rider on internet control in the Senate’s version of the short-term budget measure.

The Texas senator has launched a website blasting President Barack Obama for “giving away the internet.” And he has scheduled a Senate Judiciary subcommittee hearing Wednesday to push Republicans to make good on their promise not to allow the Obama administration to surrender control of ICANN.

“In 22 short days, if Congress fails to act, the Obama administration intends to give away the internet to an international body akin to the United Nations,” Cruz said during a Sept. 8 floor speech. “I rise today to discuss the significant, irreparable damage this proposed internet giveaway could wreak, not only on our nation but on free speech across the world.”

Support for a policy rider to halt the transfer has been building among Senate leadership. Commerce Committee Chairman John Thune, R-S.D., told Politico that he’d back the effort to add an internet policy rider to a short-term measure to fund the government.

Opposition to the transfer has been widespread in the past. In April 2014, 34 Senate Republicans, including then-Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, called on the White House to keep ICANN out of the hands of the United Nations or any other international agency.

When asked if McConnell, now majority leader, would support Cruz’s proposal, an aide to the Kentucky Republican declined to comment.

In the House, Rep. Sean Duffy, R-Wis., is quarterbacking a coordinating effort. A GOP aide told The Daily Signal that the Cruz counterpart “has been in talks with the speaker’s office and is optimistic.”

House Speaker Paul Ryan’s office declined to comment on ongoing negotiations. But members of the Freedom Caucus already were warming to that idea Tuesday afternoon.

“It’s popular with the American people to maintain sovereignty over our own country and some control over the internet,” said Rep. Warren Davidson, R-Ohio, who supports adding the measure to a three-month continuing resolution.

The Freedom Caucus has not taken a formal position, although several members are interested. Rep. Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo., told The Daily Signal that adding a policy rider on internet control “would be most helpful” in persuading conservatives to rethink their opposition to a short-term budget measure.

For Freedom Caucus members who have been fighting with GOP leadership over spending levels all year. Stopping the transfer of ICANN could be a good consolation prize, Rep. Dave Brat, R-Va., told The Daily Signal.

“If you’re locked into a bad [budget] package,” Brat said, “we will try to get what we can out of it.”

At least one key member of the powerful House Appropriations Committee is already on board.

Rep. John Culberson, R-Texas, chairman of the Appropriations subcommittee that oversees internet issues, told The Daily Signal he will use “every legislative tool available” to make sure the internet remains under U.S control.

“I’ll push for language in the [continuing resolution] that would prevent the Obama administration from moving forward with this irresponsible internet giveaway,” Culberson said.

But this isn’t the first time Republicans have tried this strategy to block Obama from making the transfer.

“There has been a longstanding appropriation rider to prevent funds from being used to hand over the internet that the administration is ignoring,” a Cruz aide told The Daily Signal.

“The senator thinks that language should be strengthened. He is hopeful that before the Sept. 30 deadline Congress will show leadership and protect freedom on the internet.”

Asked about Cruz’s latest effort, White House press secretary Josh Earnest projected confidence Monday that the president’s ICANN transition would go as planned.

The administration sees the handoff as “the right thing for the long-term security and well being of the internet,” Earnest told reporters.

“So that’s the approach that we’re intending to pursue,” he said. “We’ll see what kind of tricks Sen. Cruz has up his sleeve.” (For more from the author of “How Ted Cruz’s Internet Offensive Could Change Spending Strategy in the House” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Why This Female Veteran Is Against Women in the Draft

Although the United States has not issued a draft since the Vietnam War in 1973, Congress is in the final negotiating stages for a measure that could require women over the age of 18 to register for the draft. While some members say requiring women to register in the Selective Service is another step toward removing gender-based barriers against women in the military, others, such as Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Neb., view it as an “unnecessary and divisive culture war.”

Jude Eden, a Marine Corps veteran who served from 2004 to 2008 and overseas in Iraq, shared her personal take about why she believes forcing women into the draft poses a danger for the country’s national defense. Watch the video to find out more.

(For more from the author of “Why This Female Veteran Is Against Women in the Draft” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

The Clinton Diagnosis — Chronic Secrecy and Dishonesty

With the Clintons, mistrust always pays.

A couple of weeks ago, Hillary was yukking it up with Jimmy Kimmel over the absurdity of rumors that she was hiding something about her health. Look, she can open a pickle jar! That feels so long ago now that her campaign has admitted that she was indeed hiding something about her health — a pneumonia diagnosis late last week.

Some of the diagnoses from afar of Hillary’s purported illnesses have been elaborate fantasies, and she might have really been fit as a fiddle when she opened the famous pickle jar. But through her secretive handling of her pneumonia, she has, once again, shown how it never pays to trust a Clinton.

Bill and Hillary have a way of treating the credibility of their allies as a disposable commodity, in this case including the credibility of a protective media.

The press had worked itself into a lather in recent weeks about the illegitimacy of inquiries into Hillary’s health. They were repaid by Clinton leaving reporters behind without notice at the Sept. 11 memorial; nearly collapsing when she was out of their view (the incident was captured on video by a bystander); giving them a wave and a misleading “feeling great” outside of Chelsea Clinton’s apartment, where she had gone to recover; and leaving them behind yet again to go to her home in Chappaqua and see a doctor. (Read more from “The Clinton Diagnosis — Chronic Secrecy and Dishonesty” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Two Cheers for PolitiFact Exposing Planned Parenthood’s Abortion Lie

Rep. Joe Heck (R-NV) is in a tight race for Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid’s seat, and the Super PAC for America’s largest abortion company, Planned Parenthood Votes (PPV), wants Nevada voters to believe that he voted to send women to jail for having abortions.

He hasn’t, and even left-leaning Politifact called them on it.

Heck holds a slight lead over former Nevada Attorney General Cortez Masto, a liberal and pro-abortion Democrat. While Heck’s overall record is centrist, he has voted for pro-life legislation such as a ban on abortions performed after 20 weeks’ gestation and a bill to defund Planned Parenthood.

In its ad (below), PPV claimed that “Joe Heck voted to criminalize abortion for rape victims.” Complete with a woman’s voice and the faces of several women, the ad strongly insinuates that Heck wants to throw women in jail for having abortions.

Thanks to PolitiFact, however, we know this isn’t true. Once again, Planned Parenthood is parsing words in order to fool the public. The 2012 bill referenced by PPV — and quoted by PolitiFact — literally says women cannot be prosecuted for getting an illegal abortion.

Bar To Prosecution.—A woman upon whom an abortion in violation of subsection (a) is performed or attempted may not be prosecuted under, or for a conspiracy to violate, subsection (a), or for an offense under section 2, 3, or 4 based on such a violation.

As PolitiFact noted, “[T]he Planned Parenthood ad fuzzes the difference between prosecuting the abortion provider and prosecuting the woman receiving the abortion.” Politifact analyzed PPV’s careful blending of ambiguous wording and misleading pictures:

The use of “for” in the sentence “Joe Heck voted to criminalize abortion for rape victims” could be interpreted to mean that rape victims would bear the legal consequences, even though the law makes clear that they would not.

In fact, the ad visually reinforces the notion that women would be left open to criminal penalties by featuring a succession of young women, none of whom wear the tools of the medical profession, such as a lab coat or a stethoscope.

PPV, which did not respond to my request for comment, defended its dishonest ad to PolitiFact:

“Joe Heck voted to criminalize abortion,” said Erica Sackin, communications director for Planned Parenthood Votes. “Whether the law sends women to jail or doctors to jail, the end result is the same: Women would have been left with nowhere to turn to for safe, legal abortion.”

I’ve long been a critic of PolitiFact’s left-leaning bias, including its own parsing of words on the issue of abortion. And while its “Half-True” ranking of the ad is too kind to PPV, PolitiFact deserves two cheers for effectively shredding the ad’s multiple levels of dishonesty, even if the final ranking leaves much to be desired. (For more from the author of “Two Cheers for PolitiFact Exposing Planned Parenthood’s Abortion Lie” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

$9 Million. That’s How Much John Kerry’s State Department Gave His Daughter’s Nonprofit

Here we go again, folks. It looks like Hillary Clinton was not the only secretary of state in the Obama administration to use the State Department for personal gain or special favors.

According to an exclusive report from the Daily Caller, “more than $9 million of Department of State money has been funneled through the Peace Corps to a nonprofit foundation started and run by Secretary of State John Kerry’s daughter.”

Specifically, a Peace Corps program called the Global Health Service Partnership (GHSP) received the funds from the Department of State. The program, which “sends volunteer physicians and nurses to medical and nursing schools in Malawi, Tanzania” was created by Dr. Vanessa Kerry. The Peace Corps then “awarded the money without competition to a nonprofit Kerry created for the program”:

Initially, the Peace Corps awarded Kerry’s group — now called Seed Global Health — with a three-year contract worth $2 million of State Department money on Sept. 10, 2012, documents show. Her father was then the chairman of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, which oversees both the Department of State and the Peace Corps.

Seed secured a four-year extension in September 2015, again without competition. This time, the Peace Corps gave the nonprofit $6.4 million provided by the Department of State while John Kerry was secretary of state.

Seed also received almost $1 million from a modification to the first award, as well as from Department of State funds the group secured outside the Peace Corps.

Memos obtained by the Daily Caller indicate that Dr. Kerry worked with government officials to ensure these funds would be “fast tracked and non-completed” to her organization without competition.

Peace corps officials, State Department officials, and a spokesman for Dr. Kerry’s organization all denied any conflicts of interest or other untoward behavior. So John Kerry’s State Department helped secure $9 million for his daughter’s non-profit, and that was just coincidence?

Does anyone really believe that? (For more from the author of “$9 Million. That’s How Much John Kerry’s State Department Gave His Daughter’s Nonprofit” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Obama and Hillary’s Deplorable Sanctuary Nation Policies Endangering Our Security, sovereignty

If you want to know what it means to put the citizenry first in immigration policy and why it’s so absurd to focus on “what to do with peaceful illegals already living here,” given our nation’s current state of affairs, consider the following stories just from this past week:

Oscar Delgado-Perez, an MS-13 gang member, was charged with stabbing a teenager 40 times in a Montgomery County, MD park several months ago. Thank God the local police finally caught him last week, but this individual was already deported twice to El Salvador in just the past two years. How did he reenter and who is to say he won’t be let out again? Remember, when the open-border crowd talks about “unaccompanied minors” crossing the border, it includes people like Delgado-Perez who originally crossed over as a minor. The illegal who killed Sarah Root earlier this year also fit this description.

A serial rapist was arrested in the Austin area and was found to have been deported five separate times!

A Brazilian national was arrested in New Bedford, Massachusetts for killing his own daughter. He had previously been deported twice, on one occasion for attempting to murder his wife.

Last week, ICE apprehended a Guatemalan illegal alien who had been convicted on two counts of indecent exposure to minors, but was released by local police outside of Philadelphia. Being a sanctuary jurisdiction, the local police declined to honor the ICE detainer. Thankfully, this is one of the few instances in which the individual was later successfully tracked down by ICE.

Francisco Javier Rosas-Molina, an illegal alien from Mexico, served 11 years in prison for killing a border patrol agent in 2003, yet he was let go and deported. It didn’t take long for him to re-enter the country. Thankfully, he was apprehended last week by the Tucson Sector Border Patrol.

Last week, Fox News did an expose on rampant fraud in U Visas, whereby illegal alien women stalk American men and allege abuse at their hands in order to obtain eligibility for a visa under the guise of an abused partner. The number of U visa applications rose from 24,768 applicants in 2012 to over 58,000 this year. Unless there has been a rash epidemic of domestic violence, it seems an awful lot of scam artists will remain in the country.

Why are so many criminal aliens in this country and how are they allowed to commit multiple crimes, get released, and re-offend? Who is prioritizing the interests of the citizenry and why is Congress not doing everything in its power to make the election about this violation of our security and sovereignty? And if our border is more secure than ever, as Democrats suggest, how is it that so many violent criminal aliens are able to return almost immediately and re-offend?

The point is immigration is an elective policy. While we invariably have to deal with violence among our own citizenry, due to the collapse of family values, we don’t have to tolerate criminal aliens for a minute, even if they are here legally. Yet, there are so many criminal aliens, fraudsters, murderers, and rapists running lose or re-entering the country after being deported. And these are the people who are eventually caught and deported. Most concerning, the Obama administration and immigration judges are ensuring that many deportations are overturned and that these people are released into our communities with their whereabouts unknown.

Take Massachusetts, for example. Last week, the Boston Herald reported that “Massachusetts last year deported the lowest percentage of illegal aliens of any state in the nation — and had the third highest rate of granting asylum.” Who is the culprit for this policy? Liberal immigration judges working for the DOJ’s Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR). As the Herald reports, the Bay State’s immigration court “deported just 26.9 percent of illegals who came before it, the country’s lowest average rate — and well below the national average of 46.4 percent.” Just 10 years ago, they were deporting 80 percent of the illegal aliens in the state.

And remember, national deportation rates have plummeted. According to recent data from the Syracuse University’s Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC), nearly six in ten illegal aliens during the first ten months of FY 2016 were set free by immigration judges. At this pace, over 100,000 illegal aliens will be allowed to remain in the country because of immigration judges.

Keep in mind, it’s pretty hard to get apprehended these days, given sanctuary city policies and sanctuary nation policies put in place by Obama’s PEP (Priority Enforcement Program), which replaced the effective Secure Communities detainers. Thus, those appearing in immigration court are often similar to those criminals mentioned above. And most of them are being released and are committing more crimes! Of those released last year, there were “10,731 convictions for assault; 890 for sexual assault, including rape; 473 for homicide-related offenses; and 375 for kidnapping.” ICE estimates that there are 1.2 million criminal aliens at large in this country, and that is a conservative estimate.

Meanwhile, as deportations plummet, border crossings continue to climb back to the levels we saw in 2014 at the height of the surge from Central America, according to new data from the border patrol. And that doesn’t even begin to factor in the hundreds of thousands who overstay their visas and the countless number of Mexicans who overstay their Border Crossing Cards (BCCs). Over one million BCCs were issued to Mexican nationals in 2014 alone, making it an easy way for them to enter our front-door and disappear into the population.

It is simply astounding that this issue has become so partisan. Why should any American politician of any ideological persuasion not prioritize the security and sovereignty of the American citizenry in light of the criminal alien crisis in this country? This is why it’s downright reprehensible –—“deplorable,” to quote Hillary Clinton — that liberals in both parties would hold interior enforcement and border security hostage for amnesty.

Sadly, it is also deplorable that Republicans are about to give Obama everything he wants on a government-funding bill without addressing their most sacred responsibility as federal legislators. (For more from the author of “Obama and Hillary’s Deplorable Sanctuary Nation Policies Endangering Our Security, sovereignty” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

McConnell’s Feckless ‘Leadership’ May Cost the GOP the Senate

This week, Senate Republicans are preparing to wrap up their work and head back on the campaign trail — a full two weeks before they were scheduled to leave. Since returning from a seven-week August recess, the Senate has put in a grand total of three weeks of work. Now, Republicans plan to bust out of Washington to protect their Senate majority.

In their wake, they leave a year of pandering to K Street, funding Planned Parenthood, and largely failing to fight on any conservative priority. But this is primarily the fault of one man: Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. (F, 42%).

As conservatives, we are repeatedly bashed over the head with the idea that we must sit down and shut up to “protect the Senate majority.” But what has this majority — led by Senator McConnell — won for conservatives?

The answer is a big, fat nothing.

McConnell’s legacy of leadership for conservatives is marked by combativeness, deception, and brute force — all in the name of “party unity.”

Just consider the major accomplishments of this Republican Senate. McConnell crows about passing the Keystone pipeline, a major transportation bill stuffed with earmarks, and a tax bill with blatant handouts to special interests. How about that $500 billion Medicare bailout? None of these are victories for conservatives. Not even close.

What happened to their priorities?

Well, let’s see. McConnell refused to fight President Obama’s executive amnesty. McConnell caved on conservative calls to end the Export-Import Bank. He negotiated away the biggest conservative spending accomplishment in decades, set up Republican amendment votes so that they would fail, considered ending the Senate filibuster, and, even worse, excoriated his own members for trying to have meaningful votes to repeal Obamacare.

Just last week, McConnell flat out ignored pleas from conservatives in the House and Senate to introduce a spending bill that will keep the government running into early 2017 — thereby avoiding passing significant and controversial legislation during the most unaccountable period of government.

As if to stick it to conservatives on the way out the door, McConnell dropped the fight to prevent federal Zika funds from going to Planned Parenthood clinics — a position that even Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, R-Wisc. (F, 53%) has declared he cannot support.

Aside from barely standing for anything remotely Republican, it is clear that Mitch McConnell doesn’t care about conservatives.

Over the last year, conservatives have been told their ideas are too divisive and too controversial to be given any air time — much less an opportunity for a vote. All this, despite the fact that in the Senate every Senator has equal authority, and thus equal opportunity, to have their concerns heard. Instead of focusing on representing all factions of his party, McConnell has made it his special mission to shut down conservatives, relegating them to the back bench of “unfavorables” where they (not to mention their constituents) linger in obscurity.

When pressed, McConnell’s office stammers defensively, “but… but… we have a Democratic president, we could never pass their ideas! We have a Democratic minority that will block us!”

Somehow, the threat of disagreement from Democrats has become an acceptable excuse for not fighting at all.

So as the Senate hightails it out of town to “protect the majority” — pushing all their major work into the lame duck — it seems worth asking: what’s the point of having a majority if it refuses to fight for its principles?

It seems that conservatives aren’t the only ones asking this question. In a recent national poll conducted by Morning Consult, McConnell ranked dead last, with over half of the respondents responding negatively. That poll seems coincide with his Conservative Review score, a pathetic 42%.

It seems that it’s not just conservatives who are upset with McConnell’s failure to lead the Senate toward anything resembling a transparent process that draws a principled line in the sand against his Democratic counterpart. Voters are tired of not being able to distinguish between the parties. They’re tired of having politicians promise to repeal Obamacare root and branch, and then try to back out of it because it’s too hard.

McConnell’s fecklessness may indeed cost the Republicans its Senate majority. Sadly, the question must be percolating on the minds of most conservatives: What the point of having a Senate majority if it’s subject to the whims of only one man? A man who is nothing more than an aristocrat who silences conservatives within his own party; or too inept in his own obligations to fight on principle?

While the outcome of this election is uncertain, one thing is clear. Conservatives deserve far better than Mitch McConnell. (For more from the author of “McConnell’s Feckless ‘Leadership’ May Cost the GOP the Senate” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

SHOCK: Clinton Email Tech Assistant Had No Security Clearance

The aide who set up former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s private servers and email apparently had no security clearance, according to the findings of a congressional committee Tuesday.

Clinton aide Justin Cooper turned heads concerning the Department of State records preservation practices during a hearing before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. Cooper is the same aide who also sometimes destroyed Clinton’s BlackBerry phones, “breaking them in half or hitting them with a hammer,” the FBI investigative summary report said.

Cooper was a longtime aide of former president Bill Clinton when he helped install Hillary Clinton’s system in 2008 during her first bid for the presidency. (Read more from “SHOCK: Clinton Email Tech Assistant Had No Security Clearance” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.