Tuesday, December 6, 2016

Email Scandal

by -
assange

Over the past three weeks, Julian Assange has had his Internet cut, feared dead and recorded an interview to answer the questions, “Is Russia His Source?”

The founder of WikiLeaks has been living in the Ecuadorian embassy in London for over four years as he directs the actions of his whistleblowing site.

Recent leaks have caused the DNC chief to resign and exposed tactics that may have stolen the election from Bernie Sanders.

WikiLeaks also put Hillary’s campaign head, John Podesta’s emails out for everyone to read.

Hillary and her team of media surrogates have pushed the narrative that Russia is to blame for all of the hacks, but Assange is setting the record strait.

In a 25-minute interview with John Pilger from RT that airs Saturday, Julian Assange tells the world that Russia is not to blame.

“The Clinton camp has been able to project a neo-McCarthyist hysteria that Russia is responsible for everything. Hillary Clinton has stated multiple times, falsely; that 17 US intelligence agencies had assessed that Russia was the source of our publications. That’s false – we can say that the Russian government is not the source.”

In a teaser released for the interview, Julian says that he feels bad for Hillary and we see a different side of Julian Assange.

The revelation that Russia is not behind the WikiLeaks would be a big one, but in all fairness it needs to be verified.

Hopefully, Assange will be able to give us more details to where the leaks came from, to fully vindicate the Russians.

If it turns out that Russia isn’t to blame, Hillary will look bad. A presidential candidate has been blaming the wrong country for crimes they may have not committed.

Make sure you tune in on Saturday to catch the Interview or check back with us as we update this ongoing groundbreaking story.

Do you think the Russians gave WikiLeaks emails? Let us know in the comments below.

by -
clinton

Bill Clinton got a lot of help in the 1992 elections when George Bush’s Defense Secretary was indicted on the Iran Contra scandal.

A video has resurfaced of news broadcasts from 1992 that proves the FBI reopening the email investigation is not “unprecedented” like Hillary claims.

Back in 1992, Bill Clinton had a good lead according to the polls, but George Bush was surging down the home stretch.

That was until an indictment came down to one of Bush’s top cabinet members, his Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger.

Corruption was linked to the White House and Bill Clinton seized on some opportunities to drive home the message of corruption.

See the video for yourself.

It is funny that the video shows Bill talking about “corruption” and Al Gore talking about “trust” when 24-years later, Hillary’s campaign is facing the same issues.

Hillary clearly came out in her speech and said that this move by the FBI to reopen case at this time is “unprecedented”.

See the full Hillary Clinton press conference on Friday below.

Note that the entire press conference lasted only four minutes. It was her first press conference in almost a year and she only took three questions.

She was pretty quiet over the weekend, but there is only eight days until the election and this could really hurt Hillary at the polls next week.

Maybe it won’t sway voters, but it may discourage some of her former fans form going out to vote.

Her campaign was clearly shocked when the news hit on Friday and looks to find new footing after a disastrous week. She won’t win people over by having four-minute press conferences and lying about the “unique” nature of the FBI’s investigation.

Is the FBI reopening Hillary’s email scandal so close to the election “unprecedented”? Let us know in the comments below.

by -
tax returns

One of the things the left keeps using against Trump is the fact he hasn’t released his tax returns, but he fought back in epic fashion.

Donald Trump may be relatively new to debates, but he is not new to television.

At the debate on Monday night, his theatrics were on full display and he stuck it to Hillary when Lester Holt kept pushing about the release of Donald’s taxes.

Watch the video to see Trump’s response and his epic challenge to Hillary.

Donald makes a good point. Why does Trump have to release his tax returns when Hillary can’t even give the State Department 30,000 plus emails she deleted?

The emails are the property of the government and she deleted them.

Hillary spelled out some of the reasons that Trump might not release the tax returns, but it seems like only the liberals that hate Trump are worried about seeing his financial statements.

Even though the left want to see the returns, now that Trump said he will show them when Hillary provides her emails, there is a good chance we will never see those returns.

Do you think Trump should release his tax returns? Let us know in the comments below.

by -
Special Prosecuter

It’s a time-honored tactic – when attacked, change the subject. For generations, politicians of all stripes and parties have tried to change the topic of public discussion whenever their foibles and failings become the target of media attention. And, so it goes with Hillary Clinton.

The beleaguered Democratic presidential nominee has clumsily attempted one verbal sleight of hand after another, in an effort to avoid being held accountable for the highly questionable – if not unlawful — shenanigans between the Department of State during her tenure as Secretary and her family’s cash cow, the Clinton Foundation. Hillary’s efforts should not be permitted to shield her from answering to a Special Prosecutor.

The most recent – but probably not the final – factor that has caused Mrs. Clinton to sweat, is the revelation that the 15,000 e-mails discovered by the FBI not to have been previously turned over to the State Department as Clinton claimed, raise questions anew about whether donations to the Clinton Foundation were tied to contacts those donors had with the State Department.

At the juncture where Mrs. Clinton now finds herself, there are two very distinct choices open to her. Most public officials and candidates, when facing damaging but false allegations of wrongdoing, understand that taking the high road and demanding, or at least “welcoming,” an open and objective investigation, puts them in the strongest political posture to survive the attacks.

The other path – more often taken by those being hounded by damaging charges that probably are not false, hunker down, bluster, and change the subject. Here is where we find Hillary Clinton — hurling mud at the GOP standard bearer, Donald Trump.

In a feat of impressive imagination, Clinton responded to the latest evidence of wrongdoing that has surfaced against her, by charging her opponent with every false invective she could conjure, including racism, bigotry and misogyny. At the end of the day, however, when the dust of her ridiculous claims settled, questions about her integrity and truthfulness were what remained.

The evidence of an improper relationship between then-Secretary of State Clinton and the cash inflow into the Clinton Foundation, is today stronger than ever. The latest revelation, courtesy of the Associated Press, shows that at least 85 of the 154 people from private interests who met or had phone calls scheduled with then-Secretary Hillary Clinton, had donated or pledged money to the Clinton Foundation. And the sums are hardly de minimus. Those donors alone dropped as much as $156 million combined into the Foundation; potentially taking pay-to-play to a whole new level.

Despite assertions by some pundits that the best place to resolve those questions is the political arena, the appointment of a Special Prosecutor affords the only effective vehicle with which to drill down and get to the bottom of the mess candidate Clinton has left in her wake.

There is an urgency to initiating such an impartial investigation. Americans are slightly more than two months away from going to the polls to select a new president. They are entitled to have far more facts about Mrs. Clinton before making their choice than either the candidate or the current Administration has been willing to provide. And, despite the fact that a Special Prosecutor appointed now would very likely not conclude his or her investigation into this matter by November 8th, simply appointing such a person would give the voters the assurance that an impartial investigation will take place and ultimately result in the truth coming out.

In a sense, directing the Attorney General to appoint a Special Prosecutor would be a win for President Obama as well. Such a move would afford him a legacy he does not now appear destined to enjoy – that he is a President who cares more about impartial justice than protecting a political ally. The added benefit to Obama would be that he would then have washed his hands of the mess, and could no longer be pressed to discuss it since it would be in the hands of an independent, Special Prosecutor.

Allowing this scandal to fester will only further damage the credibility of our legal and political system. Just last week, a new word entered American’s vernacular: “Bleachbit,” meaning a service that prevents recovery of computer files. With trust in our Political Class at an all-time low, can we really afford further dissolution of the bond of trust between citizens and public officials that is essential to the proper functioning of our representative democracy?

Hillary may or may not stand to gain from a Special Prosecutor investigation, but America most definitely will.

by -
FBI

The FBI announced on Monday that they discovered another 15,000 of Hillary’s work related emails and she’s in trouble.

When the FBI started investigating Hillary’s home server back in 2014, Clinton turned over 30,000 emails that she said were work related.

Hillary deleted the emails she said were personal and turned over the rest, but now we know that to be a proven lie.

The FBI director Comey said they found an additional 7000 emails during the original investigation, but just yesterday they found 15,000 more.

To say that Hillary lied when she said all work related emails were turned over is an understatement. From what we know now, she only turned over about half and there could be more.

The FBI has an ongoing investigation into the Clinton Campaign and now investigating her time at State Department.

The agency just discovered the emails and we don’t even know what is inside them yet, but we know she lied.

Donald Trump did not waste anytime using attacking Hillary for her newly discovered emails.

In the past two weeks, we have seen a more calm and composed Donald Trump. He has made a dramatic pivot and continues to campaign at multiple stops everyday but Sunday.

Trump is hitting the trail hard while Hillary is taking three days off a week and constantly being proven a liar with her email scandals. Her foundation is under investigation and she is in real trouble.

If Trump can continue to campaign and speak like he has done the past two weeks and Hillary keeps messing up, then Donald could win this thing and win big.

Do you think these new email will hurt Hillary’s chances to become president? Let us know in the comments below.

by -
scandal

Hillary has lied again and her latest scandal is now in full swing after this scandal started when she blamed Colin Powell for the last scandal. It is all confusing.

Hillary tried to get out of her email issues with the State Department by saying that Colin Powell told her to do it.

Colin admitted at first that he sent a memo describing how using his own AOL email for unclassified items sped up efficiency at the State Department.

A statement that he still stands by, but now he is tired of being blamed for her mistakes and lets us know when he sent the memo to Hillary.

“The truth is, she was using it (home email server) for a year before I sent her a memo telling her what I did. Her people have been trying to pin it on me.”

Powell admits he sent the memo, but it was after a year of her using her own home server.

Clinton also sent and received classified documents through her personal email, and that is something the Colin Powell did not do.

When asked why Hillary would lie about what Colin said and when he said it, he replied, “Why do you think? It doesn’t bother me. But it’s okay; I’m free.”

It might have to do with the presidential election, that’s our guess.

Hillary needs someone to blame when she does interviews for CNN and MSNBC so her followers will have something to believe.

It is obvious that she is lying again. She really has a problem with lying.

If Hillary is willing to lie her way to this point, what makes you think she will stop now?

by -
WikiLeaks

Bernie couldn’t take down Hillary, the FBI couldn’t take down Hillary, but WikiLeaks says it has the goods on Hillary and she will be indicted.

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange spoke to CNN in an interview just days after this website leaked almost 20,000 emails that implicated the DNC in conspiring to defeat Bernie Sanders.

Assange said, “a lot more material” is coming that involves the US election. Does he really have more to release?

Even the DNC is hedging their bets that more info is going to come out with some staffers saying that it is likely.

Just over a week ago, Assange said that he was going to release information that would cause the FBI to be forced to indict. So far the information he has provided was great at getting Debbie Wasserman-Schultz out of the DNC and into Hillary’s campaign, but it didn’t hurt Hillary too much and she isn’t going to be indicted.

But Assange urges there is more. Will WikiLeaks release emails on the Clinton Foundation or possible emails from her home server? We’ll find out in the next batch of emails and it will probably happen soon.

During the interview with CNN, Assange was asked if Russia was involved and for the most part he talked about the importance of privacy, but did offer this gem.

Assange said, “Perhaps one day the source or sources will step forward and that might be an interesting moment some people may have egg on their faces. But to exclude certain actors is to make it easier to find out who our sources are.”

It seems that Assange is hinting to the fact that Russia had nothing to do with release. In fact, Russia has also denied any involvement and mocked America by calling the claims from the Hillary camp the “usual fun and games”.

The question still remains of where the information came from, but whoever is providing the information, they could do what Bernie and the FBI couldn’t do, bring down the Clinton machine.

Do you think more emails will come out that will sink Hillary’s chances to win or even land her in prison? Let us know in the comments below.

by -
FBI Decision

When FBI Director James Comey let Hillary Clinton off the hook for her “careless” email server last week, many Americas were upset.

In a ABC/Washington Post poll, they discovered that 56% of Americans disapprove of the “FBI’s decision not to charge Clinton”.

Only 35% of Americans approved of the decision.

Despite majority disapproving the decision, most people now say that the email scandal will not influence their vote.

Hillary was found to have lied about every aspect of the email investigation, but Director Comey did not indict her because there was no intent.

We want to know what you think.

How do you feel about the FBI’s decision not to charge Clinton?

by -
FBI

Illustrating that FBI Director James Comey is a liar and a fraud, his agency helped convict a Navy reservist last summer of the same crime that he just cleared Hillary Clinton of committing. In that case the reservist from northern California got criminally charged—as per FBI recommendation—for having classified material on personal electronic devices that weren’t authorized by the government to contain such information. The FBI investigation didn’t reveal evidence that the reservist intended to distribute classified information to unauthorized personnel, so he was just being “extremely careless” like Clinton and her top aides.

Similar offenses, vastly different outcome. The key factor, of course, is that one subject is a regular Joe without Clinton-like political connections. His name is Bryan H. Nishimura and last July he pleaded guilty to unauthorized removal and retention of classified materials after the FBI found such materials were copied and stored in at least one “unauthorized and unclassified system.”

Clinton had droves of classified and top secret materials in an “unauthorized and unclassified system.” Nishimura had been deployed to Afghanistan as a regional engineer for the U.S. military and had access to classified briefings and digital records that could only be retained and viewed on authorized government computers, according to the FBI announcement, which defines the reservist’s crime in the following manner; “handled classified materials inappropriately.” So did Clinton on a much larger scale.

Last July Nishimura pleaded guilty to “unauthorized removal and retention of classified materials” and was sentenced to two years of probation, a $7,500 fine and forfeiture of personal media containing classified materials. He was further ordered to permanently surrender all government security clearance. Hillary Clinton could soon have the highest security clearance available if she gets elected president making Comey’s inconceivable recommendation that “no charges are appropriate in this case” all the more outrageous. Incredibly, during his 15-minute press conference this week Comey provided details of how Clinton violated the law by exchanging dozens of email chains containing classified and top secret information and how she mishandled national defense information on her outlaw email server.

The FBI director even outlined how Clinton compromised the country’s national defense to “hostile actors” yet he asserts Clinton and her cohorts didn’t intend to break the law. “Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information,” Comey said, “there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.” Enough to be criminally charged like the Navy reservist from northern California.

When Comey, the federal prosecutor in the Martha Stewart case, put the television celebrity in jail for participating in an insider trading scheme, he acknowledged the importance of not granting special treatment to a rich and famous person. Stewart went to prison for obstructing justice and lying to investigators about a sudden stock sale that helped her avoid losing thousands of dollars.

In an interview with his college newspaper a few years after Stewart’s conviction Comey, then U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, said that if Stewart were Jane Doe she would have been prosecuted. “I thought of my hesitation about the case due to someone being rich and famous, and how it shouldn’t be that way,” Comey said. “I decided we had to do it.”

by -
email scandal

On the same day the FBI announced they are not going to recommend charges against Hillary, Donald Trump released a damning new video claiming the system is rigged.

Donald Trump didn’t wait long until he started firing shots at Hillary and using the FBI announcement against her.

She should be relieved because the FBI said it is not going to recommend indictment to the DOJ regarding Hillary’s emails scandal.

Instead, Hilary getting off the hook makes people think that the system is rigged political maneuvering got Hillary out of trouble. Of course, Donald Trump was there to fan that fire with his tweets.

The tweets about a “rigged system” fuel the narrative about Hillary and the establishment being corrupt.

This video–produced to make sure that people were not missing the point that Hillary lied this whole time about the email scandal–is also going to be damaging.

The video was first released Tuesday night on Facebook.

At the end of the day, Hillary is not going to have to go to prison for having her own email server, but that doesn’t mean she is in the clear.

Donald Trump and the right will use the “rigged system” angle for as long as it works. After all, that angle put Bernie Sanders in striking distance of Hillary during the primaries, and maybe the same strategy will push Trump over the edge in November. We’ll see.

Do you think Trump is attacking Hillary hard enough on the email results or should he back off? Let us know in the comments below.

TRENDING STORIES

Tragedy hit Ohio State University on Monday and today we are learning about the attacker and possible terrorist influence. Abdul Razak Ali Artan is the...