Uh Oh: FBI's Hillary Probe Expands Again, Now Investigating Public Corruption, Sources Say
By Guy BensonAfter lying mostly dormant for weeks amid intensive media focus on the Republican presidential race, Hillary Clinton's scandals have exploded back into the headlines over the past four days. On Friday, the State Department released a 2011 email that appeared to show then-Secretary Clinton instructing a colleague to strip an identifying heading -- which includes classification notices -- off of a sensitive memo and send it "nonsecure." The episode may prove criminal mishandling of classified material, and at the very least underscores the Democratic frontrunner's reckless and cavalier approach to safeguarding national secrets. More than 1,300 emails that passed through Clinton's unsecure, improper private email server contained classified information, including top secret intelligence. With Clinton lamely and misleadingly defending herself on that front over the weekend, Fox News' Chief Intelligence Correspondent Catherine Herridge breaks this significant news today:
Three separate sources, who point to several indications of major escalation -- including the overlapping of two high-profile Clinton controversies:
Much to unpack. At some point in the course of its probe, the FBI expanded its inquiry from simply examining possible large-scale and unlawful handling of classified material to also looking into a potential obstruction of justice element of Mrs. Clinton's dodgy arrangement. Today's news suggests a third, very serious, prong to the investigation that may date back as far as last spring. If Herridge's sources are correct, federal agents are also scrutinizing whether Clinton's work as America's top diplomat was unethically influenced by her personal and financial interests vis-a-vis the Clinton Foundation -- which charity watchdogs and former employees have described as a "slush fund," and something quite different from a bona fide charitable organization. Various deep dives into the Clinton Foundation's books and history have turned up serious questions involving national security-compromising deals, pay-to-play access-peddling, crony favoritism, unseemly greed, undisclosed and unvetted foreign donations (in violation of signed transparency agreements), and egregiously inaccurate tax filings.
Which brings us to the final bolded portion of the excerpt above. One of the questions voters may have asked themselves throughout this email imbroglio is why Mrs. Clinton would go through the trouble and expense of setting up a rules-violating private server on which she intended to conduct all of her official business. Why not just use the secure State Department system, as required? Hillary's explanation is that she did so for "convenience," a ludicrous assertion on its face. Paying someone -- who has since pleaded the fifth, by the way -- to install and maintain an entire separate email scheme is the opposite of convenient. Furthermore, her follow-up claim that the primary goal of the server was to allow her to only use a single mobile device has been completely shot to pieces.
Critics argue that Mrs. Clinton proactively sought to wield complete control over the contents of her emails in order to insulate herself politically and limit the probative potency of future investigations. With absolute control over her discrete server, Hillary and her team could unilaterally pick and choose which messages ever saw the light of day. They could also permanently delete anything they determined to be legally or politically problematic. We already know that Hillary withheld or deleted a number of work-related emails, which she swore under penalty of perjury that she hadn't done. What else did she and her henchmen attempt to wipe ("like, with a cloth?") from the record? The FBI has reportedly managed to recover many of the files Team Clinton sought to destroy, which may help explain what prompted today's newly-revealed branch of the bureau's widening investigation. As they sifted through tens of thousands of deleted emails, might the feds have uncovered additional evidence of Mrs. Clinton effectively selling access to the highest rung of US statecraft? Phil Kerpen advances the argument that if the whole purpose of Hillary's email set-up was to enable other underhanded dealings without the risk of oversight, the entire shady enterprise represents a single scandal:
The other attention-grabbing passage in Fox's exclusive report is the apparent confirmation that many agents and officials will be livid if the Obama Justice Department refuses to pursue an indictment in this case. These sources say previous instances of official malfeasance have been successfully prosecuted with "much less evidence" than what has already been gathered in the Hillary probe. If politics prevails, expect to see an avalanche of ugly leaks and recriminations from whistle blowers. Which would Democrats prefer: An indicted nominee, or endless questions and accusations about banana republic-style political fixing, under which their nominee was spared an indictment for transparently partisan reasons? Unpleasant options, both.
===
One of these days I suspect we will learn how Hillarious enriched herself, as well as Bill, because she may have manipulated her position as Sec. of State. Why would she have allowed the sale of uranium to a Russian private company and yet block a pipeline from Canada? The former contributed to her foundation, Canada has not, that I know to date.
http://fullmeasure.news/news/
===
I recently posted a memo entitled: "Logic and Truth All Too Often Lay On The Cutting Floor!"
This is a video based on facts pertaining to America as the Gun and Murder Capital of the World.
Lo and behold, it turns out when you talk about facts versus Demwit hysterical rhetoric we learn some interesting information. I hope you will listen for yourself. NUMBER ONE WITH A BULLET - YouTube
If you have now done so, perhaps you might ask yourself, is the gun control issue simply another Obama divisive issue spun for political purposes since it seems to defy facts?
Facts, as I noted in my previous memo, are often embarrassing and tend to undercut hysterical claims that are designed to bring more heat than light, to obfuscate, to create false issues and the reasons for doing so become endless.
Obama is a master at lying in order to stir the masses. Once the masses are inflamed it is easier to divide and conquer.
I have told you in many previous memos about this technique that Obama learned from his radical friends and has fine tuned it not only to the presidency but also to the destruction of our nation.
Then I urge you look at this:
"SIR, I WILL NOT OBEY THAT ORDER:. https://youtu.be/1DS2wXSKF5k
|
===
These immigrants learn quickly how to work the system. (See 1 below.)
====
The Republican Brand - destroyed from within? You decide. (See 2 below.)
===
Stosell relies on bettors rather than polls: https://www.electionbettingodds.com/
====
Is Russia arming Hezbollah? (See 3 below.)
===
Clinton and her little secret about her attitude towards Israel. (See 4 and 4a below.)
===
Dick
=====================================================================
1)Somali “refugees” on lifetime welfare demand their free food adhere to Islamic Law
by Jason DeWitt
Whoever said “beggars can’t be choosers” never met Somali Muslim refugees in Minnesota .
These Muslim imports in Minneapolis are now demanding a tax-funded “halal” non-pork food shelf at a free food pantry for the poor.
As if it’s not bad enough that nearly all the “American” Muslims who have joined ISIS have been Somalis from Minneapolis, their relatives here are demanding that Americans adhere to the same Sharia Laws the Islamic State fighters are trying to impose throughout the Middle East .
A group of first-generation Somali Americans says they need help in developing a food shelf that specializes in healthy foods that do not contain pork or pork byproducts. “It’s about human rights also, basic human rights to get the proper food and also healthy food,” said Imam Hassan Mohamud.
“Human rights”? Seriously? Their arrogance and self-entitlement has to be unprecedented for a group on the public dole.
Tens of thousands of Somalis settled in Minneapolis/St. Paul after Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and later Barack Obama imported them and funded massive “refugee” centers there. Welfare, schools, hospitals and social services have been crushed by the burden of immigrants who lack the most basic skills to live in a modern society.
This is hardly the first demands Somalis have made on the good people of Minneapolis . When the influx of Somali thugs naturally resulted in a massive increase in crime a decade ago, Somalis demanded a $48 million Sharia-compliant “youth center” to keep Somali gangs “out of trouble.”We have read for several years now how Muslim cab drivers in Minneapolis and several airports have kicked out blind passengers with guide dogs (dogs are “unclean” in Islam), or customers transporting alcohol. They came here, taking advantage of American generosity and returned it by enforcing their own brand of Sharia Law upon us.
Liberals in Minnesota have bent over backwards for them, setting up foot-washing basins in their airport and even at a university, in response to their demands.
But as with most appeasement, these refugees keep making more demands. Now it is for “halal” products (meat slaughtered with Islamic prayers and a ban on pork).
The Imam leading this protest actually claimed that there were beans with pork in it and this was a “literacy” issue that required more government funding and special halal-compliant beans. But one commenter on the article from Minneapolis wrote:
As someone who made use of the foodshelf recently, I can tell you that most of the food doesn’t contain pork. I hear what they are saying about a literacy issue, but can’t the food shelf people just point out the cans of pork and beans? Besides, the food shelf is based on donations!
This is not about Muslims “making do” or getting help on what to eat. The Koran demands that Muslim make any country they live in adapt to them and Sharia Law. The last thing they plan to do is assimilate.
One blogger added:
How long until they demand separate entrances to the food pantry for men and women and separate entrances for Muslims who don’t want to see any Christmas or holiday food or decorations?
The state of Maine has also been crushed by Somalis that Obama has forced upon them. The Governor of Maine , Paul LePage has valiantly been trying to cut off cash aid to Somalis – nearly all of whom are on welfare – since Obama has purposely dumped thousands of them in Lewiston and Portland .
America got Black Hawk Down and 18 dead Americans. Somalis got 90,000+ “asylum” slots in America , free housing, Sharia-compliant facilities and a lifetime of welfare. How do you say “chumps” in Somali?
Each refugee already has access to the following: Temporary assistance for Needy Families
=====================================================================Medicaid Food StampsSupplemental "Security" IncomeSocial Security Disability InsuranceAdministrative Developmental Disabilities (ADD)Child Care and Development FundIndependent Living ProgramLow Income Housing Energy AssistancePostsecondary Education GrantsRefugee Assistance ProgramTitle IV Foster CareTitle XX Social Services Block Grant FundAnd from our lovely State Department...$2200 per month for every man, woman and child.
2) The GOP establishment has ruined the Republican brand
By Brent Bozell
In Politico Tuesday, Republican elites warned that if Donald Trump or Ted Cruz become the nominee it would ruin the Republican brand.
How's that for party unity and loyalty?
More to the point: What brand?
The GOP brand is already ruined. And they ruined it.
The GOP brand was one that championed limited government. The second largest expansion of the federal government came under the stewardship of President Bush 43 with the GOP in control of both the House and the Senate. Since 2008, the growth has exploded, with more debt added during the Obama administration than all others combined. And since 2010, the GOP leadership has approved every single spending measure.
So much for limited government.
The GOP brand championed family values. They have done virtually nothing to uphold the American family in the face of relentless attacks from anti-family leftwing radicals. It is now illegal to defend your religion. God is being expelled from the public square everywhere. Marriage as a sacred institution has been abandoned. We are being forced to fund the killing of babies. None of these things were imaginable a generation ago. The GOP leadership has stood down every time families begged them to rise up.
So much for family values.
The GOP brand championed a strong national defense. Our adversaries are dangerous, threatening and on the march everywhere. Islamic terrorism is sweeping the globe. This administration has responded by gutting the military – and the GOP has endorsed it. Just as worrisome, our military are being emasculated from within by a politically-correct deconstructionist agenda that is ruining morale. The GOP is doing nothing about it.
So much for the commitment to a strong national defense
For years the GOP elites, along with their high-priced consultants, have cynically manipulated the Republican base, constantly promising to deliver on one issue after another, in order to get elected, yet delivering on nothing because there was never the intention of doing so.
Time and again since 2010, the Republicans have pledged to defund Obamacare. They’ve had countless opportunities to do so with meaningful legislation. Every time the opportunity has arisen, they’ve headed for the tall grass.
Fail.
Fail.
Republicans ran tens of thousands of ads in 2014 promising to stop Obama’s executive amnesty overreach. The moment to opportunity presented itself – they funded it.. Fail.
The Republican leadership declared its intention to stop federal funding of Planned Parenthood for once and for all. No serious effort has been enacted. Fail.
These Republicans declare in all of their speeches that they intend to rein in spending and shrink government – yet haven’t once even tried seriously. Fail.
I’m sure I could think of more failures. But there’s something I can’t recall. Beyond welfare reform and the naming of two superb Supreme Court Justices, I can’t think of any GOP accomplishment advancing the GOP brand over the past quarter century.
The rise of Trump and Cruz (and Carson and Fiorina too) is a direct reaction to the establishment’s own criminal incompetence.
But the GOP honchos are so blind to reality they can’t see any of this, or too dishonest to admit it. From Politico:
In private conversations with several former aides, Mitt Romney, who in March will keynote the National Republican Congressional Committee’s annual fundraising dinner, has expressed rising frustration about Trump’s prolonged lead in polls and has argued that the real-estate mogul could inflict lasting damage on the party’s brand.
This from the Democrat-lite Republican who inexcusably couldn’t defeat the incumbent more vulnerable than even Jimmy Carter. His solution is to call for more of the same against Hillary Clinton.
Why does anyone bother listening to these men?
Consider these breathtakingly asinine comments from McConnell’s former chief of staff, Josh Holmes, in Politico:
At some point, we have to deal with the fact that there are at least two candidates who could utterly destroy the Republican bench for a generation if they became the nominee… We’d be hard-pressed to elect a Republican dogcatcher north of the Mason-Dixon or west of the Mississippi.
These men really don’t care enough about the disintegration of America to do anything about it. They really don’t care about the Republican party either.
For them—the incumbents, the consultants and the Chamber—it is always about power. Their power.
The establishment is frightened. They should be. Donald Trump and Ted Cruz don’t pose a threat to the GOP, they pose a threat to them. The current worry among Republican elites boils down to this, and this only: The GOP establishment is paralyzed by fear that it will be defeated by Trump or Cruz.
Brent Bozell is chairman of ForAmerica, the nation's largest active online conservative network with nearly 8 million supporters.
=================================================================================
3)
Russia Is Arming Hezbollah, Say Two of the Group’s Field Commanders
BEIRUT — Lebanese Hezbollah field commanders with troops fighting in Syria tell The Daily Beast they are receiving heavy weapons directly from Russia with no strings attached. The commanders say there is a relationship of complete coordination between the Assad regime in Damascus, Iran, Hezbollah, and Russia. At the same time they say the direct interdependence between Russia and Hezbollah is increasing.
The United States and the European Union have both listed Hezbollah as a terrorist organization with global reach and accuse it of serving Tehran’s interests. But there is more to it than that. Organized, trained, funded, and armed by Iran with Syrian help after the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982, it initially gained fame for suicide bombings hitting Israeli, French, and American targets there, including the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut where 241 American servicemen were killed in 1983.
Over the years Hezbollah grew to be a parallel army in Lebanon, stronger than the national military, and for years it was regarded in much of the Arab world as the avant-garde of the fight against Israeli occupation of Lebanese territory. It also developed into the most powerful political party in the fractured Lebanese parliamentary system. But its reputation as a nationalist force has been tarnished since it began fighting in Syria to defend the Assad regime, and as The Daily Beast reported in December, some of its soldiers have refused to go back.
The Daily Beast met the commanders on separate occasions at the end of December and the beginning of this year in Dahiya, a majority Shia working-class southern suburb of Beirut. They declined to use their real names because they are not authorized to speak to the media, but both say Hezbollah is directly receiving long-range tactical missiles, laser guided rockets, and anti-tank weapons from Russia.
“We are strategic allies in the Middle East right now—the Russians are our allies and give us weapons,” said one of the Hezbollah officers who chose to call himself Commander Bakr. He is in charge of five units in Syria, around 200 troops. (He chuckled when he said his nom de guerre, mocking Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the self-appointed “caliph” of the so-called Islamic State.)
As someone who has led units fighting from Latakia to Idlib province, around Damascus, and in the Qalamon Mountains that border Lebanon, Commander Bakr says that the Russian airstrikes have changed the course of the ground war, where Hezbollah, supported by Iran, has taken the lead.
“Around Latakia was very difficult for us,” he said, but when Moscow’s bombing campaign started in September, “the intervention of the Russians made it much easier.” Bakr said that the Russians rely on Hezbollah for intelligence and target selection. “Without their air force we can’t advance and they couldn’t give us air support without our information from the ground,” he said with evident pride. The Russians had also put Special Forces on the ground in the Latakia district, he said, especially around the airport used by Russian planes.
Russian officials did not respond to The Daily Beast’s requests for comment about having troops on the ground in Syria or their relationship with Hezbollah. The organization’s main office refused to comment.
Bakr said that Russia has been increasing its support for his armed movement since 2012. Russia’s deputy foreign minister, Mikhail Bogdanov, met with Hezbollah’s leader Hassan Nasrallah in Beirut in 2014 to discuss regional developments. Last November, Bogdanov issued a statement making clear that Russia does not consider the organization a terrorist group.
“We maintain contacts and relations with them because we do not consider them a terrorist organization,” Bogdanov said at the time, according to the Interfax news agency.
“Assir,” a Hezbollah recruiter and trainer in Lebanon who also commands a Special Forces unit that fights across Syria, says the Russians are increasingly impressed with Hezbollah and rely on it, rather than the Syrian military, to guard Russian arms depots inside Syria. And to hear Assir tell the story, Hezbollah has extensive access to what’s inside those depots.
“Hezbollah is teaching the Syrian army how to use many of these new weapons,” says Assir. He maintains that Moscow hasn’t placed any restriction on how Hezbollah can use the Russian arms in its possession, including against Israel if the organization deems it necessary. “When it comes to Israel, Hezbollah doesn’t take directions from anyone,” he says emphatically. But it is not clear that he is in a senior enough position to know what secret agreements have been made.
“When it comes to Israel, Hezbollah doesn’t take directions from anyone.”
Both commanders joined Hezbollah during Israel’s occupation of southern Lebanon, which lasted until 2000, and rose through the ranks as the armed wing of the Party of God transformed from a local resistance force to a regional military actor. Now they say that the group born in the chaos of Lebanon’s civil war has become the most effective force helping Assad cling to power. They say the organization, whose original raison d’être was to represent the Shia community in Lebanon, is using its heavy support from Iran to expand its involvement into sectarian conflicts across the region, from Yemen to Iraq.
Bakr says he was personally involved in a Hezbollah training mission in Iraq with one of the local Shia militias, Kata’ib Hezbollah, in 2014, and with the Houthis in Yemen in 2015. Assir says there have been Hezbollah training programs in Lebanon for elite Syrian forces, the Houthis, and Iraqi Shia forces.
Despite this expansion of involvement in regional conflicts and the flow of high-powered Russian weapons, Bakr and Assir insist that Hezbollah doesn’t actually need to use Russian weapons if conflict breaks out with Israel. They say they are fully prepared to withstand an invasion on the southern border with the Iranian arms in their arsenal.
Still, tensions are increasing as Israeli assassinations of Hezbollah commanders in Syria are met with retaliatory attacks on Israeli soldiers stationed on the border with Lebanon. In January 2015 Hezbollah responded to an Israeli strike that killed six of its fighters in Syria with a rocket attack that killed two Israeli soldiers in the Shebaa Farms area, a sliver of disputed territory between Syria, Israel, and Lebanon which Hezbollah claims is Lebanese.
Last Tuesday the same pattern was repeated as Hezbollah detonated an IED in response to Israel’s evident assassination of its high-profile recovered prisoner turned commander, Samir Kuntar.
Both retaliatory attacks were met with a day of localized shelling and although Israel and Hezbollah currently maintain a practice of what happens in Shebaa stays in Shebaa, the situation can easily spin out of control. That was seen during Israel’s 2014 war in Gaza, where a cycle of rapid escalation with Palestinian fighters led by Hamas quickly turned into a drawn-out war. It also happened in Lebanon in 2006.
And if such a war began again? The Russian “alliance” might well be put to the test.
====================================================
4) REVEALED: Disturbing ‘Handbook’ About Israel Hillary Gave To Staff Tells You All You Need To Know
By Jack Davis
While serving as secretary of state, Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton shared with her staff articles that would later be published in a work described as the “I Hate Israel Handbook,” according to some of the thousands of emails revealed Thursday by the State Department.
The reference was included in 2010 emails between Clinton and adviser Sidney Blumenthal regarding Israel. Blumenthal promoted the work of his son, Max Blumenthal. The elder Blumenthal forwarded articles that would later emerge as part of Max Blumentahl’s book, Goliath. The book — highly critical of Israeli policies — was published in 2013.
The Forward’s J.J. Goldberg described it as “an unpleasant book.” The Forward headlined its review by calling it “The Anti-Israel Book That Makes Even Anti-Zionists Blush“.
The Nation called it the “I Hate Israel Handbook.” A review of the book noted that it contained “seventy-three short chapters, each one devoted to some shortcoming of Israeli society and/or moral outrage that the Jewish state has perpetrated against the Palestinians,” it read. “Some are titled to imply an equivalence between Israel and Nazi Germany.”
According to The Nation’s media editor Eric Alterman, the younger Blumenthal’s “case against the Jewish state is so carelessly constructed, it will likely alienate anyone but the most fanatical anti-Zionist extremists, and hence do nothing to advance the interests of the occupation’s victims.”
Blumenthal also sent Clinton the writings of leftist Israeli Uri Avnery, who criticized Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Clinton asked Blumenthal how that material could be used. No reply was found in the trove of released emails.
In 2012, Blumenthal sent his son’s article in al-Akhbar, “The Bibi Connection,” to Clinton, who then forwarded it along. The article emphasized Netanyahu’s intent to campaign against Obama in 2012, arguing that “Netanyahu’s shadow campaign is intended to be a factor in defeating Obama and electing a Republican in his place.”
4a) Hillary’s Pandering Lie! Writes Op-Ed On Jewish Site Claiming She Is Friend of Israel
By Jeff Dunetz
If there is anything worse than pandering, its pandering that is a blatant lie. That is the case with Hillary Clinton’s op-ed published today in the on-line site The Jewish Journal. In the piece the former secretary of state falsely claims she is a friend of Israel.
For me, this is more than policy – it’s personal. I was born just a few months before Israel declared independence. My generation came of age admiring the talent and tenacity of the Israeli people, who coaxed a dream into reality out of the harsh desert soil. We watched a small nation fight fearlessly for its right to exist and build a thriving, raucous democracy. And, through it all, Israel’s pursuit of peace was as inspiring as its prowess in war. That’s why, like many Americans, I feel a deep emotional connection with Israel. We are two nations woven together, lands built by immigrants and exiles seeking to live and worship in freedom, given life by democratic principles and sustained by the service and sacrifice of generations of patriots.
If one looks at Hillary Clinton’s public history one finds a lifetime of anti-Israel positions. But wait some might say, Hillary was a big supporter of Israel when she was in the U.S. Senate. Indeed, she was. With the possible exception of the time from her first campaign New York’s Senate seat in 2000 to her resignation from the Senate to become Secretary of State in January 2009– except for the time she needed New York’s Jewish voting bloc, Hillary Clinton has never been pro-Israel. Some might even claim that she is also anti-Semitic. clintonsvisitarafat1
Even before her marriage to Bill, Hillary Clinton was anti-Israel and promoting the forces of terrorism. In his book American Evita on page 49, Christopher Anderson writes.
At a time when elements of the American Left embraced the Palestinian cause and condemned Israel, Hillary was telling friends that she was “sympathetic” to the terrorist organization and admired its flamboyant leader, Yasser Arafat. When Arafat made his famous appearance before the UN General Assembly in November 1974 wearing his revolutionary uniform and his holster on his hip, Bill “was outraged like everybody else,” said a Yale Law School classmate. But not Hillary, who tried to convince Bill that Arafat was a “freedom fighter” trying to free his people from their Israeli “oppressors.”
On page 50 of the same book, the author relates a 1973 anti-Semitic incident where she Hillary refused to enter a home that a menorah on its door.
It was during this trip to his home state that Bill took Hillary to meet a politically well-connected friend. When they drove up to the house, Bill and Hillary noticed that a menorah-the seven branched Hebrew candelabrum (not to be confused with the more common and subtler mezuzah)-has been affixed to the front door.
“My daddy was half Jewish,” explained Bill’s friend. “One day when he came to visit, my daddy placed the menorah on my door because he wanted me to be proud that we were part Jewish. And I wasn’t about to say no to my daddy.”
To his astonishment, as soon as Hillary saw the menorah, she refused to get out of the car. “Bill walked up to me and said that she was hot and tired, but later he explained the real reason.” According to the friend and another eyewitness, Bill said, “I’m sorry, but Hillary’s really tight with the people in the PLO in New York. They’re friends of hers, and she just doesn’t feel right about the menorah.”
Hillary’s attitude did not change when she became first lady. In May 1998 Ms. Clinton became the first person attached to any presidential administration ever to call for a Palestinian State. Think about that for a moment, nobody in the Carter administration made that demand neither did anyone in the Reagan adminstration. Heck even in the Bush 41 presidency whose secretary of state James Baker once advised, “F**k the Jews they won’t vote for us anyway,” even in that adminstration no one ever called for a Palestinian state. It took Hillary Clinton to “break the ice.” She told a youth conference on Middle East peace in Switzerland, that she supports the eventual creation of an independent Palestinian state. Her spokesperson, Marsha Berry told reporters: “These remarks are her own personal view.”
In November 1999, while first lady, she went on a purported state visit to the Middle East. Hillary was at a public appearance with Yasser Arafat’s wife Suha, and listened to Mrs. Arafat made a slanderous allegation:
“Our [Palestinian] people have been submitted to the daily and intensive use of poisonous gas by the Israeli forces, which has led to an increase in cancer cases among women and children.” Suha also accused Israel of contaminating much of the water sources used by Palestinians with “chemical materials” and poisoning Palestinian women and children with toxic gases.”
Mrs. Clinton sat by silently listening to a real-time translation, and then gave the terrorist’s a wife hug and kiss when she finished speaking.
Later, many hours after the event, and only after a media furor put her on the spot for what many view as a bit more than a mere political “boo boo Mrs. Clinton called on all sides to refrain from “inflammatory rhetoric and baseless accusations.” She included Israel even though her leaders made no such accusations.
Glossing over this repugnant affair, Hillary Clinton has yet to specifically contradict and denounce the monstrous lies uttered by Yasser Arafat’s wife in her presence. Years later she did attempt to make feeble attempt at an excuse—the translator screwed up.
In July 2015 she did the same thing. While taking questions during a campaign appearance at the Brookland Baptist Church, Columbia SC South Carolina, a woman asked three questions at once. The first query was about solving poverty, the second was about the three-strike law, and the third:
My third question is about Israel, we spend too much money, $6 billion dollars to Israel funding apartheid! There is not the shared values that we are supposed to share with Israel!
Ms. Clinton was silent about question number three, once again she had the opportunity to show that she was a friend of the Jewish State and correct a slander and once again she was silent. This time however she couldn’t blame the translator.
Before her tenure in the State Department, Bill and Hillary Clinton made mega dollars from their extensive involvement with Dubai. Besides being a leader in the movement to boycott Israel, Dubai is the “Hong Kong” of the terrorist world. I learned about Dubai last year when the daughter of a friend of our family got married there. We checked after we received the invitation and learned that anyone with a passport that displayed they once traveled to Israel would not be allowed into the country. Bill and Hilary are major friends of Dubai, to the point where the Clinton Foundation have established Dubai Study departments in universities in the US and London. They worked hard at granting legitimacy to this Jew-hating, terrorist supporting nation.
The Clintons also had a connection to what was back then, the world’s biggest exporter of terrorism, Saudi Arabia. The Saudi Royal Family donated $10,000,000 to the Clinton Library.
According to a 1993 New York Times article, Prince Turki bin Feisal was a college classmate of Bill’s at Georgetown University and (at the time of the article’s writing) was the head of the Saudi Arabian intelligence service. While he was still governor of Arkansas, it looks like Bill Clinton cashed in on that relationship, “work[ing] hard to secure a multimillion-dollar Saudi donation to a Middle Eastern studies program at the University of Arkansas.” Due to the intervention of the Gulf War, the first installment of $3.5 million didn’t arrive until 1992, with another $20 million arriving after Bill Clinton’s first inauguration.
During her Senate years Ms. Clinton became a vocal supporter of Israel because she needed the Jewish vote. But one of her first actions after leaving the Senate and becoming Secretary of State was to ignore a previous deal with Israel and call for the end of the construction of new homes in existing settlement neighborhoods.
Clinton’s demand for a building freeze in existing settlement communities broke a US/Israel agreement made during the Bush administration. While she said there was never an agreement between Israel and the US about natural expansion of existing settlements, Elliot Abrams who negotiated the agreement for the United States said Ms. Clinton’s contention is simply not true.
As Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton first demanded the “settlement” freeze in 2009 and was quickly backed up by Obama. What she perceived as a minor concession (a “settlement” freeze including no new housing units in existing communities) was for Israel a grave sacrifice. For all intents and purposes Clinton was telling Israeli parents their married children could no longer live in their neighborhoods
This was a major error by the Clinton State Department and it was compounded by the inclusion of Jerusalem in the mix and the constant public berating of the Jewish State by Clinton and Obama that as we know, continued even after she left the administration.
Immediately the Palestinians seized upon the Hillary-created settlement issue. Seeing an opportunity to avoid talking, they used the administration’s demands, to make a “settlement” freeze a precondition to further talks even though there were negotiations and construction going on simultaneously before Hilary Clinton became Secretary of State.
In August 2009 Prime Minister Netanyahu announced a ten-month “settlement” freeze. It was approved by the cabinet and implemented on November 25, 2009 and was to run till September 25, 2010. Despite pressure from the United States, the Palestinians refused to join any talks the first 9+ months of the freeze; they did not come to the negotiation table till September 2010, three weeks before the freeze ended.
As the end of the construction halt approached, the US began to negotiate with the Israel to extend the freeze. Based on their experience with Clinton denying the deal negotiated by Elliot Abrams during the Bush Administration, Israel demanded that any proposal be presented in writing, as any oral deal with Clinton and the Obama administration was worth the paper on which is was printed on.
The written offer never came because Clinton, the Secretary of State wasn’t negotiating in good faith. Instead Ms. Clinton was playing “Bait and Switch.” As Israel waited for a letter clarifying America’s guarantees in exchange for a proposed building ban for Jewish residents of Judea and Samaria, a diplomatic source finally came forward saying that no such letter is on its way. Hillary Clinton misled Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The source, a senior diplomat with inside knowledge of Netanyahu’s recent meetings in Washington, said Clinton made commitments when talking to
Netanyahu, but later slipped out of her commitments by claiming that she had not been speaking on behalf of U.S. President Obama, did not the end, did not give his approval.
In 2011 speaking at the at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy part of the liberal Brookings Institute, Clinton trashed Israel by expressing concern for Jewish State’s social climate in the wake of limitations regarding female singing in the IDF and gender segregation on public transportation. Both were accommodations made to the Orthodox communities in Israel and Hillary’s complaints were based on false information.
Clinton referred to the decision of some IDF soldiers to leave an event where female soldiers were singing; she said it reminded her of the situation in Iran. It did? Wow! In Iran the women would have been lashed or executed. In Israel they were allowed to sing, and the people who felt it was against their religious beliefs were allowed to walk out. That’s it! Most senior officers in the IDF supported the women’s right to sing. That’s called religious freedom.
Clinton also spoke of her shock that some Jerusalem buses had assigned separate seating areas for women. “It’s reminiscent of Rosa Parks,” she said, taking the typical progressive position that faith should not matter outside a place of worship. Clinton’s statement was part of the continued attempt by the Obama administration/Clinton State Department to de-legitimize the Israeli democracy and destroy one of the reasons for American support of Israel, the fact it is the only democracy in the Middle East.
And then there was her book “Hard Choices” which included some anti-Israel passages:
When we left the city and visited Jericho, in the West Bank, I got my first glimpse of life under occupation for Palestinians, who were denied the dignity and self-determination that Americans take for granted” (pg 302).
She says nothing about terrorism, such as blowing up buses with school children, nothing about the fact that during he presidency of her husband Yassir Arafat turned down a deal that would have given him about 98% of what he wanted (at least that’s what Bill Clinton said).
“The sticking point would be Jerusalem. East Jerusalem had been captured along with the West bank in 1967, and Palestinians dreamed of one day establishing the capital of their future state there.” (pg 317).
Hillary’s statement is totally biased. Israel didn’t capture Jerusalem; Jordan did in 1948. Jews were the majority of the Jerusalem Population from 1844 through the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948 when they were kicked out by Jordan. In fact, Muslims were the third largest religion in the city until about 1890. The Palestinian’s want East Jerusalem as their capital because they don’t want Israel to have it.
Even after the Bar Kochba revolt in 135 CE when the Romans punished the Jews for revolting by changing the name of their country from Judea to Palestinia (after the Philistines the ancient enemy of the Jewish people who no longer existed) and the name of the holy city from Jerusalem to Aelia Capitolina (literally Capitoline Hill of the House of Aelius) , most of the world recognized the Holy Land and Jerusalem as Jewish. The truth of the matter is that even ancient Muslim writings recognized Jerusalem as a Jewish City.
“There has been nearly a decade of terror, arising from the second intifada, which started in September 2000. About a thousand Israelis were killed and eight thousand wounded in terrorist attacks from September 2000 to February 2005. Three times as many Palestinians were killed and thousands more were injured in the same period.” (pg 308).
Like many who are anti-Israel Hillary Clinton draws a false equivalency between the terrorist attacks on Israel and Israel’s attempts to defend herself. To maintain her ridiculous logic, the US should be chastised because more al Qaeda terrorists died than Americans were killed on 9/11/01.
The second intifada was a horrible period of Palestinian terrorism against Israeli civilians, bus loads of children blown up, pizza places bombed, even a hotel where families were celebrating the Passover Seder in peace. There is no equivalence between the attacks and Israel’s attempts to defend herself.
“Because of higher birth rates among Palestinians and lower birth rates among Israelis, we were approaching the day when Palestinians would make up a majority of the combined population of Israel and the Palestinian territories, and most of those Palestinians would be relegated to second-class citizenship and unable to vote.” (pg 312)
The page 312 quote was reminiscent of John Kerry’s apartheid remark (which he backed away from). What Israel’s deputy defense minister Danny Danon said about Kerry’s remark applies here also.
To suggest that the Jewish people would ever establish an apartheid regime was particularly hurtful.
Equally hurtful was the implied double standard. Although the administration has from time to time chided the Palestinians for “unhelpful” steps, those comments have not come close to the pointed criticism that has been leveled at our government. This policy of sharing the blame for the collapse of the peace talks, which from the outset was deemed by most independent experts as a long-shot attempt at best, has created the illusion of parity between the two sides. The secretary’s comments make it seem that Israel’s decisions to issue housing tenders, or to exhaustively debate whether to release convicted murders who would have very likely received the death penalty in U.S. courts, were just as damaging to the peace process as the “unity” pact that Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas has now signed with Hamas, a virulently anti-Semitic terrorist organization.
And then there are the Clinton emails. While most of the media coverage of the emails from her close friend Sidney Blumenthal are about his recommendations about Libya. Blumenthal sent many emails about Israel. Some of then consisted of forwarding articles from his anti-Semitic son, writer Max Blumenthal. But others were recommendations of policy, generally one sided describing Israel as the oppressor. As reported by NRO:
Blumenthal sent dozens of e-mails advising Clinton on Israel in 2010. Before her March speech at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), Blumenthal sent Clinton a breathless article from left-wing Israeli writer Uri Avnery accusing the Netanyahu government of “starting a rebellion” against the United States and defending interests that diverge from America’s. “I have to speak to AIPAC tomorrow,” Clinton responded. “How — and should I — use this [sic]?” Blumenthal promised to send another memo the next day.
In that memo, he instructed Clinton to “hold Bibi [Netanyahu]’s feet to the fire” on the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. “Perhaps most controversial,” he continued, would be for Clinton to “remind [AIPAC] in as subtle but also direct a way as you can that it does not have a monopoly over American Jewish opinion. Bibi is stage managing US Jewish organizations (and neocons, and the religious right, and whomever else he can muster) against the administration. AIPAC itself has become an organ of the Israeli right, specifically Likud.”
By the way, if you asked Likud, they would claim that AIPAC favors Israel’s leftist parties.
On May 17, Blumenthal forwarded Clinton an article on the Israeli government’s decision to deny professor and Palestinian activist Noam Chomsky access to the West Bank. “Barring him for his political opinions has created a needless PR disaster,” he wrote. “The US should not be a passive onlooker. . . . The US effort on his behalf to gain entry should be part of the story.” Clinton forwarded the memo to staff with instructions to “pls print 3 copies.”
Chomsky has been fierce in his opposition to Israel’s right to defend herself from terrorism (some even say he is an anti-Semite), and had been officially banned from the country since 2010
In an e-mail from May 31 entitled “Several observations on the Israeli raid,” Blumenthal blames Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu’s family inferiority complex for his decision to launch a raid on the so-called “Gaza Flotilla,” a group of ships seeking to break the Israeli blockade of Gaza. “Bibi desperately seeks his father’s approbation and can never equal his dead brother,” Blumenthal wrote. He then hinted that the raid was deliberately orchestrated to kill the peace process and humiliate President Obama before his scheduled visit with the prime minister. Clinton forwarded the message to Jake Sullivan, her deputy chief of staff at the State Department. “FYI and I told you so,” she wrote
Now Hillary Clinton is running for President. And she is campaigning on the basis that she is a friend of Israel, just as she did in the Senate, just as Obama did twice. As Secretary of State she was the architect of the policy of the most anti-Israel president since the rebirth of Israel in 1948. It was a policy which reflected views she has held her entire life. A belief she put into action exception of the nine-year period where she ran for and held the office of U.S. Senator from New York State. Let’s hope the Republican who gets the nod will not let the former Secretary of State get away with hiding her true past.
========================================================================
No comments:
Post a Comment