posted March 16, 2015 09:18 AM            

That's right all you irrational leftist twits. Drilling has lowered gas prices dramatically and the fact there's now a glut of crude oil in storage means the only way elitist a-holes can keep gas prices up to even their reduced level is to try to restrict further production or oil refining.

posted March 16, 2015 09:30 AM            

Clinton’s Cover-Up Team
John Fund
March 15, 2015

Cheryl Mills, among others, has been greasing the wheels of the Clintons’ secrecy machine for decades. Hillary Clinton explains her use of a private e-mail account and a secret server to conduct State Department business as a matter of “convenience.” But congressional investigators are almost as interested in the fact that two of her closest advisers, personal aide Huma Abedin and chief of staff Cheryl Mills, also had e-mail addresses on the secret server. Were they also interested in “convenience” or intent on shielding their work from public-record requests?

For many years, the two women have served as Hillary’s inner-palace guard. In turn, she has gone the extra mile to keep them close. In 2012, Abedin was granted status as a “special government employee,” allowing her to collect a State Department paycheck while skirting disclosure rules about her holding down lucrative private-sector jobs — among them work with the controversial Clinton-family foundation.

Cheryl Mills’s link with Mrs. Clinton goes back even further than Abedin’s. The 49-year-old Stanford Law graduate joined Team Clinton before Bill Clinton was even sworn in as president in 1993, serving as deputy general counsel for his transition team. She later became one of two deputy counsels to the president before becoming one of his top lawyers during his 1999 Senate impeachment trial.

At the time, a White House colleague, speaking to the Washington Post, praised Mills’s loyalty to the Clintons: “If something’s on the other side of a brick wall and the Clintons need it, she’ll find a way to get to it: over, around, or through.” The Post noted that Mills had “endeared herself to the Clintons with her never-back-down, share-nothing, don’t-give-an-inch approach,” the same style prevalent today in Hillary’s e-mail controversy. And that style is also prevalent in the way that various officials seem to have exerted efforts to ensure that the 2012 terrorist attack in Benghazi won’t embarrass Hillary.

Ray Maxwell, a former assistant secretary of state for North Africa, has told reporters that Mills was one of several Clinton aides who on a Sunday afternoon “separated” out Benghazi-related documents that might put Clinton or her team in a “bad light.” These documents were kept out of the pile that the State Department turned over to the Accountability Review Board that was investigating Benghazi.

When Maxwell stumbled upon the operation, which was taking place in a “basement operations-type center at State Department headquarters in Washington,” he questioned whether it was above-board. “Isn’t that unethical?” he asking the office director in charge of the weeding-out process. “Ray, those are our orders,” she answered.

A few minutes later, Mills entered the room and challenged Maxwell over his presence, asking him, “Who are you?” Mills was also eager to make sure that no one talked too much about Benghazi. E-mails obtained by Judicial Watch show that it was Mills who told Victoria Nuland, then a State Department spokeswoman, to stop answering key media questions about Benghazi.

Later, Gregory Hicks, the acting deputy chief of mission in Benghazi, testified before Congress in 2013 that after he spoke with congressional investigators, he received a furious phone call from Mills, who severely reprimanded him; State Department lawyers instructed Hicks that neither he nor his staff should allow themselves to be “personally interviewed” by members of Congress.

Shortly thereafter, Hicks told me, he was demoted to the job of desk officer and brought home to the States. A 2012 inspector-general report also found that Mills interfered in an investigation involving Brett McGurk, who had been appointed ambassador to Iraq but was accused of sharing sensitive government information with a reporter.

Earlier examples of the Mills Method of Scandal Concealment date all the way back to the 1990s. She was one of three White House lawyers who urged President Clinton to release private government records on Kathleen Willey, a Democratic campaign worker who had accused Clinton of assaulting her in the White House.

A federal court later found that the violation of privacy was “an unlawful action.” It was a clear effort to discredit Willey, who now says the pattern of behavior against her by Mrs. Clinton and her cronies represent “a real war on women.”

Mills was also involved in an earlier Clinton e-mail scandal. In 2000, the conservative law firm Judicial Watch found while pursuing public-record requests that the Clinton administration had withheld more than 1.8 million e-mails from Judicial Watch’s attorneys, federal investigators, and Congress. Betty Lambuth, a White House computer contractor, testified that White House officials told her to keep the existence of the e-mails a secret and threatened to fire her if she did not.

After Judicial Watch filed a lawsuit, Mills admitted she had known that the missing e-mails existed but “assumed” someone else would take care of the issue. When the case finally was resolved by U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth in 2008, he found no obstruction of justice but singled out Mills’s behavior as “loathsome.”

He found that she had made “the most critical error in this entire fiasco” and that her actions had been “totally inadequate.” An earlier document scandal also revealed Mills’s style. Sonya Gilliam, who in the 1990s was responsible for Freedom of Information requests at the Commerce Department, was appalled at how Mills and the White House handled requests for information about whether seats on Commerce Department trade missions had been tied to Clinton’s 1996 reelection fundraising.

In an interview with journalist Sharyl Attkisson in October 2014, she recalled that her superiors often told her the document production was delayed because it had to be “coordinated” with Cheryl Mills at the White House. “I was amazed and really just gobsmacked when I saw the White House involved to the level that it was,” she told Attkisson.

When she learned of Mills’s alleged involvement in concealing Benghazi documents, she recognized a pattern. “My stomach dropped,” she said. “Here we are, 14 or 15 years later, [and] Cheryl Mills is still in charge of ‘document production’ [for the Clintons] — I’ll use that term loosely.”

Mills may no longer be at the State Department, but her legacy of slippery evasion lives on. Last week, reporters asked State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf about a 2011 cable that Hillary Clinton’s office sent ordering employees not to use personal e-mail for government business, owing to security concerns. “Her name is at the bottom of the cable, as is practiced for cables coming from Washington,” Harf said, referring to Mrs. Clinton.

posted March 24, 2015 08:41 AM            

The O'Bomber administration is the most corrupt in US history. Even when their actions cause the deaths of American citizens, they don't give a rat's ass and the corruption continues.

March 24, 2015
Fast and Furious Cover-up Rewarded in Appointment of New ATF Director
Mary C. Michel

On Friday, March 20, 2015, B. Todd Jones, the Director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF,) announced his resignation. Mr. Jones's departure comes on the heels of the disastrous attempt by the ATF to ban a common rifle ammunition, yet another federal sub rosa effort at gun control through governmental constriction of the ammunition supply. The real news is Mr. Jones's replacement, although you would not know that from any mainstream reporting.

The announced new Acting Director is the current Deputy Director, Thomas Brandon, a man with an apparently secret history at the ATF. In news dispatches of March 20th, Mr. Brandon is described blandly by the AP, CNN and ABC as a 26-year veteran at the agency who was appointed Deputy Director in 2011. This gives the impression of an earnest, knowledgeable, hard working civil servant, does it not?

Perhaps all of the professional reporters are too pressed for time these days to perform a basic Google search. Or, perhaps not a single so-called journalist has the brain capacity to remember a shameful, deadly national disaster called Fast and Furious. In that government-operated illegal gun running scheme, thousands of guns were allowed to be straw purchased in the U.S. and transported to Mexico for sale to drug cartels so the Feds could track them. Rather than tracking the guns, however, the Feds lost them. That gross incompetence cost the lives of U.S. Border Agent Brian Terry, I.C.E. Agent Jaime Zapata and an untold number of Mexicans who were murdered with those unlawfully trafficked firearms.

For those of us who do not live in the memory hole that shields this administration from any accountability, here are some relevant facts about Acting Director Brandon and his involvement in the Fast and Furious cover-up.

According to outgoing Director Jones's sworn testimony of April 2, 2014 before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, Mr. Brandon was the person who determined disciplinary punishments for all of the ATF personnel involved in Fast and Furious. Brandon was "the ultimate decision maker." Director Jones confirmed that Thomas Brandon did not fire a single person for participation in Fast and Furious.

The 471 page Justice Department Inspector General Report by Michael E. Horowitz recommended disciplinary action be considered for 14 federal officials. Let's examine what happened to just a few key ATF players. Special Agent William Newell was the Agent in Charge of Fast and Furious. The IG Report specifically recommended his termination. Per an August 17, 2011 ATF press release, Mr. Newell was initially reassigned to the Office of Management "to assist with the OIG investigation and congressional inquiry."

Director Jones confirmed in his testimony on April 2nd that although the ATF Professional Review Board (PRB) also recommended Newell's firing, Mr. Brandon saw fit to impose a far lighter penalty. Mr. Newell was only demoted from Senior Executive Service to a GS 13 grade pursuant to a settlement. Director Jones also confirmed during testimony that the PRB recommended a 14-day suspension for Lead Case Agent Hope MacAllister. Deputy Director Brandon issued her only a letter of reprimand. David Voth was the Phoenix Group Supervisor during Fast and Furious. Per the August 17, 2011 ATF press release, Mr. Voth was transferred laterally to ATF Headquarters in 2011. The PRB recommended demotion to a non-supervisorial Special Agent status. In settlement, Mr. Brandon issued a simple demotion.

According to a March 28, 2014 letter to Director Jones from Senator Charles Grassley and Congressman Darrell Issa, it appeared that all three of these Fast and Furious alumni were still on the ATF payroll. Through Director Jones's testimony, we now know that Mr. Newell retired at some point and at his higher pay rate of the Senior Executive Service. As the Director did not dispute the congressional presumption that Agents MacAllister and Voth remained employed, we are left to assume that they are still working for the ATF.

This easily researched history reveals Brandon's key role in keeping the truth of Fast and Furious hidden from Congress and the public. Had heads rolled, angry ex-employees might have turned whistle-blower and implicated higher-ups at DOJ and even the White House. The game of mutual extortion; employee silence in exchange for job security, achieved its purpose.

Bear in mind that Brandon's efforts were only a part, albeit a critical one, of a larger information black-out strategy. The suppression of information was further assured by Obama's assertion in 2012 of executive privilege to shield from disclosure Fast and Furious documents Congress sought. Eric Holder's stonewalling and misrepresentations to Congress provided the third prong of the cover-up. For his role in information suppression, Mr. Holder received a civil contempt citation from the House.

Brandon's team player credentials, earned by keeping ATF silence, explain his continued value to the administration. Although out of the media spotlight, of course, the facts of Fast and Furious and the ensuing cover-up continue to be probed by a determined few.

Judicial Watch has multiple Freedom of Information Act suits pending against the DOJ and the ATF. Eric Holder's intention to resign was announced in striking proximity to a federal court ruling in one of those actions which compelled the DOJ to release certain information regarding Fast and Furious. For this victory, Judicial Watch was treated to an election eve document dump from DOJ on 11/04/14.

In addition to the Judicial Watch suits, the House filed a lawsuit for judicial enforcement of congressional subpoenas issued to and ignored by DOJ, during the Fast and Furious oversight investigation (Oversight Committee v. Holder.) So far, the Federal District Court Judge has compelled the obstructionist DOJ to prepare an "executive privilege log" of the documents it is withholding. The ruling is another significant step in forced extraction of information sequestered by administration fiat.

posted March 29, 2015 11:15 AM            

Remembrance of Clintons past
George F. Will
March 27

An abscess of anger seems to gnaw at Hillary Clinton, but the reasons for her resentments remain unclear. The world's oldest party, which governed the nation during two world wars and is the primary architect of America's regulatory and redistributive state, is eager to give her its presidential nomination, in recognition of . . . what?

The party, adrift in identity politics, clings, as shipwrecked sailors do to floating debris, to this odd feminist heroine. Wafted into the upper reaches of American politics by stolid participation in her eventful marriage to a serial philanderer, her performance in governance has been defined by three failures.

Her husband, having assured the 1992 electorate that voting for him meant getting two for the price of one, entrusted to her the project that he, in a harbinger of the next Democratic president's mistake, made his immediate priority, health-care reform. Then-Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D-N.Y.) urged him to begin with welfare reform, just as wise Democrats wanted President Obama to devote 2009 to economic recovery rather than health care, perhaps sparing the nation six years and counting of economic sluggishness.

Hillary Clinton enveloped her health-care deliberations in secrecy, assembling behind closed doors battalions of the best and the brightest, think of many Jonathan Grubers weaving complexities for the good of, but beyond the comprehension of, the public. When their handiwork was unveiled, it was so baroque that neither house of a Congress controlled by her party would even vote on it. This was one reason that in 1994 Democrats lost control of the House of Representatives for the first time in 40 years, a harbinger of 2010, when Obamacare helped end Nancy Pelosi's tenure as the first female speaker.

Clinton's Senate interlude was an uneventful prelude to her 2008 presidential quest, which earned her, as a consolation prize, the State Department. There her tenure was defined by the reset with Russia and by regime-change-by-bombers in Libya.

Russia has responded by violently dismembering a European nation. Libya was the object of humanitarian intervention, an echo of Bill Clinton's engagement in the Balkans that appealed to progressives because it was connected only tenuously, if at all, to U.S. national interests. Today, Libya is a humanitarian calamity, a failed state convulsed by civil war and exporting jihadists.

These episodes supposedly recommend a re-immersion in Clintonism, a phenomenon that in 2001 moved The Post to say, more in anger than in sorrow, that the Clintons defining characteristic is that they have no capacity for embarrassment. This judgment was rendered as two episodes were demonstrating that the Clintons in power were defined by their manner of leaving it.

Bill Clinton punctuated his presidency by pardoning the late Marc Rich, a fugitive who 17 years earlier had been indicted for tax evasion, fraud and racketeering. Rich also traded with Libya and South Africa in contravention of embargos and traded with Iran during the hostage crisis. His former wife reportedly contributed more than $1 million to assorted Democratic causes, $450,000 for Clinton's presidential library and $10,000 to the legal defense fund necessitated by Clinton's glandular life that led to the Supreme Court effectively disbarring him from practicing before it.

A year before the Clintons decamped from Washington to begin planning their return to it, they began trucking away from the White House $190,000 worth of furnishings. Perhaps exigencies dictated this; the couple was, Hillary Clinton says, dead broke. The furnishings became, as things often do with the Clintons, another occasion for an, it depends on what the meaning of the word is, is tiptoe along the ledge of illegality. The White House chief usher thought many of the items were government property donated in 1993 to a redecoration project. Several donors of items said they were told this. Although the Clintons said that all the removed furnishings were personal gifts, they returned $28,000 worth of them.

As Hillary Clinton begins her campaign to again reside with the White House furnishings, remember an episode perhaps pertinent to the family penchant for secrecy and to her personal e-mail server. Sandy Berger, who had been President Clinton's national security adviser, was his designated representative to the commission that investigated the 9/11 attacks that occurred less than nine months after Clinton left office. While representing Clinton, Berger frequented the National Archives. Later, he was fined $50,000 for surreptitiously taking highly classified documents from the Archives and destroying some of them.

posted March 31, 2015 09:48 AM            

I remember when Hillary hid her Rose Law firm billing records which were also under subpoena during the White Water Investigation.

The only difference is that this time Hillary didn't hide her State Dept emails, she wiped the server they were stored on clean of all information.

Even Nixon didn't DESTROY his records..tapes. Until Bill Clinton and now Barack Hussein O'Bomber, Richard Nixon was thought to be the most corrupt president in US history...and, Hillary wants to be president and extend the string of financial, political and institutional corruption.

Instead, Hillary needs to be indicted, tried, convicted and imprisoned for obstruction of justice.

Sharyl Attkisson: Hillary Must Be Hiding Something 'Very Bad'
Monday, 30 Mar 2015 06:42 PM
Cathy Burke

There must have been "very, very bad or embarrassing" things on Hillary Clinton's personal email server that was wiped clean – including information on the deadly 2012 attack on the U.S. outpost in Benghazi, Libya, says former CBC News investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson.

In an interview on "The Steve Malzberg Show" on Newsmax TV on Monday, Attkisson said it was just "common sense" that the deleted data was likely worse than the firestorm created by its deletion.

"In my experience, there must've been some very, very bad or embarrassing things on there, because it appears as if she'd rather take the heat for the actions erasing the server at a time when she knew it was being sought by Congress and under Freedom of Information Act request, and probably lawsuits … than turn over what was really in them," she said.

"To me, this all points to Benghazi," Attkisson added. "There are things she didn't want to turn over and did not turn over – communications regarding the story that the administration most wants to go away, most wants to controversialize and most wants to say is a non-story. That's what it says."

Attkisson said Clinton also put herself in a position of being "in a terrible amount of trouble if you know that the material you have is being sought under a lawsuit or subpoena and you don't preserve it."

"I've spoken to current and former high-ranking intelligence officials who are appalled by the fact that this happened, as well as her explanation," she said. "[A]t the very least, they consider [the decision] extremely naïve and would make that person totally unqualified to be in the position she served if she really believes the things she was saying about security."

posted April 01, 2015 10:32 AM            

Hillary Clinton’s latest misadventures are not just so typically Clintonian, but more to the point, they reveal a fatal flaw in the woman’s makeup -- she has absolutely no judgment! Now you can write off the three current scandals (her private email account use while serving as secretary of state; the foreign donations to the Clinton foundation while also serving in that capacity; and, most recently, her brother Tony and her campaign advisor Terry McAuliffe receiving preferential visa treatment for their friends or clients by the Department of Homeland Security) as just another manifestation of Clinton arrogance. But that would barely scratch the surface as to what it reveals about Hillary.

The woman knows that she is going to run for president in 2016; knows that she is carrying a ton of baggage from her first lady years in the White House that she would like to put behind her; knows that the Republicans (as inept as they are) are going to dig out all these skeletons in her closet; yet engages in this form of clearly inappropriate conduct that she has to know is going to come out in the course of her quest for her own stint in the White House. This is much more than Clintonian arrogance and/or duplicity; this puts in relief Hillary’s greatest failing – lack of judgment.

This pattern of incompetence and dishonesty has dogged her path at every step in her undistinguished career. The only action that Hillary has taken that might be regarded as a “positive accomplishment” was marrying Bill Clinton and riding his coattails to positions of prominence, where she not only failed to “accomplish” anything that might be regarded as positive, she consistently revealed her inability to lead, her willingness to lie with impunity, and to screw up with regularity.

These disturbing qualities became apparent upon her leaving Yale with her failure to pass the District of Columbia Bar examination, a feat rarely accomplished by a Yale Law School graduate. First, the D.C. Bar exam has never been regarded as one of the country’s more difficult bar exams, and second, 80% of graduates of first-tier law schools (and Yale is at the top of the heap) pass the bar exam -- any bar exam -- on their first effort. Hillary, with characteristic ("what-difference-does-it-make?") insouciance, brushed this failure off with the romantic notion that, since her heart was in Arkansas (with Bill and where she passed the bar exam), this was a message to her that she should follow her heart. She then went to work on the staff of the House Judiciary Committee, which was considering the impeachment of Richard Nixon at the time. She worked for the committee’s chief counsel, Jerry Zeifman, a lifelong Democrat and a former professor at the University of Santa Clara Law School, who found her work legally inadequate and ethically flawed. As a consequence, she was one of only three attorney-employees of the committee over the course of Zeifman’s tenure that he considered unworthy of a positive reference. Indeed, Hillary and the Clintons left such a sour taste in Zeifman’s mouth that, not only did he point out his displeasure with Hillary in his 1995 book about the Committee’s activities, Without Honor, he wrote a lengthy monograph some 10 years later excoriating Hillary Clinton’s scurrilous behavior (Hillary’s Pursuit of Power), in which he details many of Hillary’s indiscretions and displays of incompetence. Things did not improve from there; indeed, they only went downhill.

1) Arkansas -- She did little of note in her stay in Arkansas, either in her capacity of wife of its attorney general and then governor, nor in her work at the Rose Law firm. When the National Law Journal labeled her as one of the 100 most “influential” attorneys in the country (because of her relationship with the state’s attorney general and governor) she tried to pass this off as one of the country’s 100 best attorneys (for which she was taken to task by the National Law Journal). Arkansas is where she entered into the infamous Whitewater transaction which dogged her path to the White House. Also, you may recall the fraudulent futures transaction she entered into in which, thanks to her relationship with a Tyson Chicken attorney with the right market connections, she managed to turn $1,000 into $100,000. She explained this bit of stock market alchemy as the result of her having read the Wall Street Journal. (which market pundits said had about a million to one chance of being the case).

Two of her Rose Law firm cohorts, Vince Foster and Webster Hubbell, accompanied her to Washington -- Foster committed suicide and Hubbell went to prison (where he received a substantial “consulting” fee for not giving Hillary up -- how many imprisoned consultants do you know of who are so handsomely compensated?).

2) White House First Ladyship -- Her stay in the White House was marked by numerous scandals, and, with the exception of her husband’s reckless sexcapades, every one of them was due to some action engaged in by Hillary. There is no need to rehash this unpleasant period, but since the woman is running for president, it might be wise to remember Travelgate, Filegate, the Rose Law Firm billing records (that magically showed up in one of her rooms some two years after they had been subpoenaed), etc., etc. The list goes on an on, and, again, every nonsexual scandal could be laid at her doorstep. And even the sex scandals were a farce insofar as Hillary is concerned; she not only stood by her man (contrary to her having informed us that she was no Tammy Wynette), she savaged the women with whom he inappropriately behaved as shameless bimbos. How’s that for the behavior of a feminist “icon”?

However, in all fairness, she did accomplish one thing -- her imperious, arrogant, and incompetent handling of the one function her husband entrusted to her, HillaryCare, was instrumental in delivering to her husband the first Republican House in 40 years. The election of 1994 was a Republican rout, and Hillary played an instrumental role in producing it; no one energizes Republicans like Hillary Clinton. One of the key players who worked on HillaryCare, J. Bradford DeLong, an economics professor at U.C. Berkeley and a Democrat, said this about Hillary (with respect to her handling of HillaryCare):

My two cents’ worth -- and I think it is the two cents’ worth of everybody who worked for the Clinton Administration health care reform effort of 1993-1994 is that Hillary Rodham Clinton needs to be kept very far away from the White House for the rest of her life. Heading up health-care reform was the only administrative job she has ever tried to do. And she was a complete flop at it. She had neither the grasp of policy substance, the managerial skills, nor the political smarts to do the job she was then given.And she wasn’t smart enough to realize that she was in over her head and had to get out of the Health Care Czar role quickly.

How’s that for a ringing endorsement? This from a Democrat, and not just any Democrat, a U.C. Berkeley college professor, and you can’t get much more Democratic than Berkeley -- it is the heart of Democratic darkness in a completely Democratic region. In short, HillaryCare was her only management assignment, and she screwed that up so badly that it was one of the key causes of her husband’s getting the first Republican House in 40 years.

Finally, even on leaving the White House, Hillary couldn’t do so with dignity -- she took the government’s furniture with her. The Clintons were really a class act!

3) Senator From New York -- On being retired from the White House, she carpetbagged her way into a position as Senator from New York (things broke nicely for her here since, not only was Moynihan retiring, but Guiliani, who would have been a formidable opponent; was unable to run against her due to health problems. In her years in the Senate, she failed to do anything of note other than fairly meaningless actions such as bridge dedications, you will search in vain for a praiseworthy accomplishment.

4) Secretary of State -- This period can be quickly dismissed by noting that it began with her “Russian Reset” blunder (you would think some one in our State Department was smart enough to know the correct word and clue her in) and finished with the Benghazi fiasco (for which she took responsibility but was never held accountable -- what good is responsibility without accountability? In between these notable bookends, she traveled a million miles and watched the globe burn while she circled it. It is important to note that no one died in Watergate; four Americans died at Benghazi, thanks to Hillary’s failure of leadership (which, at the outset, she tried to paper over by blaming the entire fiasco on a video, for which she shamefully promised parents of the deceased the video producer would be punished). Nixon, on whose impeachment proceedings she worked, was pilloried for his Watergate behavior and ultimately driven out of office. Hillary fobbed the whole thing off in her Senate testimony with her brazen and shameless retort to Senator Ron Johnson’s query on the matter -- what difference at this point does it make? Unfortunately, Johnson was so taken aback by her shameless outburst that he neglected to point out that it made all the difference in the world to the people who were sitting behind her, i.e. the families of the men who died at Benghazi because Hillary failed to respond to the now deceased ambassador’s request for additional security for the Benghazi facility.

5) As A Campaigner: Dull, Plodding, Gaffe Prone, And Unlikeable -- Alright, we have looked at her scandal-plagued past, what does she look like now? The same, as far as character is concerned, but now we have to deal with the uninspiringly dull campaign speeches in which her lies are packaged. Also, not only is she dishonest, she is gaffe prone, tone deaf, and does not comfortably connect with an audience. For example her complaint that she and her husband were dead broke when they left the White House -- as a consequence, no doubt, of running up mortgage debt on the two million dollar homes they were purchasing for their post-presidential residences (one in D.C., the other in Chappaqua, New York, to establish residence there as a basis for her senatorial run). And even in the course of acquiring some of that debt, a minor scandal occurred in connection with Terry McAuliffe’s assistance in financing the project. Also, she and her husband have been taking in huge gobs of money for their book efforts and speeches.

Then she made the outrageously stupid statement that “businesses” don’t create jobs, suggesting that government does (no doubt a Freudian slip, reflecting the general job-creation approach of the Dems, i.e. if there is a problem, government is the solution -- in contrast to Reagan’s observation that government is the problem, not the solution). Finally, she comes across as angry and unlikable -- probably because she is angry and unlikable. When informed of this quality during her 2008 campaign, she seemed taken aback, shedding a few tears, thus reassuring her admiring public that she was indeed a feeling person.

posted April 01, 2015 12:00 PM            

I don't like Jesse Ventura but he is right when he says that if an honest, effective Prez are elected the people will be punished, as will that Prez...hey, kinda sounds like the spite that's been playing top bill in Washington and elsewhere the last 6+ years!

But Hillary will appoint judges the Dems prefer. Unlike the very large crop of incoherent bigots and idiots fluttering around the fundraisers.

posted April 02, 2015 09:49 AM            

Of course, most of us have known Hairy Reid is utterly corrupt for years. Not only is Reid corrupt, he's totally unrepentant about his corruption.

The real question is....are there any Socialist demoscat members of Congress who aren't utterly corrupt?

Jon Ralston: Editor Pulled Romney Column to Protect Harry Reid
Thursday, 02 Apr 2015
Drew MacKenzie

Top political commentator Jon Ralston has accused Las Vegas Sun Editor Brian Greenspun of killing a column he wrote in 2012 to protect his friend, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid.

On his Ralston Reports blog, Ralston vilified the Nevada Democrat for outright lying when he declared that 2012 Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney had not paid his taxes.

"Now that CNN's Dana Bash has found Harry Reid to be unrepentant about his Mitt Romney tax lies, it's finally time to publish a column I wrote contemporaneously with the Nevada senator's McCarthy-like tactic during the 2012 campaign," writes Ralston, Nevada's leading Capitol Hill pundit.

"The column was never published because Las Vegas Sun Editor Brian Greenspun attempted to protect his friend, Reid, from the criticism. I never wrote for the Sun again."

Reid, who was Senate Majority Leader when Ralston's column was pulled, told Bash this week that he has no regrets about falsely accusing Romney during the 2012 presidential campaign of failing to pay his taxes.

"I don't regret that at all. No one would help me. They were afraid the Koch brothers would go after them, so I did it on my own," said Reid, adding, "Romney didn't win, did he?"

Ralston, who left the Las Vegas Sun in 2012 and never wrote for the newspaper again, has reprinted his column in his current blog, according to Politico.

While denouncing Reid for his "ruthless, Machiavellian side" in the column, Ralston called out the senator for crossing the line with his "shameless" accusation against Romney.

"I don't think anyone – the Senate majority leader or lesser beings – should be able to make unsupportable statements about how much Romney has paid, simply to pressure him to release more information," wrote Ralston in 2012.

"As a public figure who had had to endure vicious and often tenuous allegations – in the 1970s, he was even linked to organized crime after a mobster boasted of having him in his pocket – you would think Reid would be more sensitive to such tactics. I have an extremely credible source who says he is not.

"I suppose it's possible that someday we may learn Romney did not pay taxes for 10 years – although I highly doubt it considering the presumptive GOP nominee's vehement denials. But even that would not justify Reid's grotesque rumormongering."

Ralston's 2012 column concluded by saying, "it's one thing to use every trick in the book to win a campaign or to carelessly spout invective about other public figures.

"But it's quite another thing for one of the most powerful Democrats in the country to make serious assertions about a Republican presidential candidate, without any proof and without a named source.

"Sometimes the ends do not justify the means, even in the political swamp. Someone needs to draw the line for Reid since he is so unable to draw one for himself."

Following a serious eye injury from a fall, Reid announced last week that he will be retiring from the Senate when his current term ends in January 2017.
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Jon-Ralston-Las-Vegas-Sun-Harry-Reid-Mitt-Romney/2015/04/02/id/635993/

Goodbye and good riddance!

posted April 02, 2015 05:00 PM            

Where's Romney's civil suit for slander by Hairy Reid?

Hello, Hairy Reid made those lying remarks from the floor of the US Senate and is therefore EXEMPT from suit.

He's still a lying bast@rd. He knows it and everyone else knows it too...except for the usual suspects and far left loon Kool-Aid drinkers.

posted April 09, 2015 07:01 PM            

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's expected presidential campaign got some bad news in a new set of Quinnipiac University polls released Thursday.

Quinnipiac surveyed three crucial swing states — Colorado, Iowa, and Virginia — and found Clinton's lead slipping against her possible Republican rivals. Peter Brown, assistant director of the polling outfit, said the shift is because voters increasingly see Clinton as a dishonest candidate.

"Clinton's lead is wilting against leading Republican presidential candidates," Quinnipiac said in its write-up of the survey. "In head-to-head matchups, every Republican candidate effectively ties her in Colorado and almost all Republicans effectively tie her in Iowa."

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Kentucky), who launched his campaign for president this week, performed particularly well against Clinton in the poll. In Colorado, Paul led Clinton 44% to 41%, and in Iowa, he narrowly led her 43% to 42%.

However, Brown said Clinton should be concerned that all of her potential Republican foes appear to be gaining traction against her.

"These numbers are a boost for US Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky as he formally launches his campaign," he said in a statement. "Ominous for Hillary Clinton is the broad scope of the movement today compared to her showing in Quinnipiac University's mid-February survey. It isn't just one or two Republicans who are stepping up; it's virtually the entire GOP field that is running better against her."

Brown attributed Clinton's drop in the polls to the recent controversy over her email use as secretary of state. At the start of last month, The New York Times reported Clinton exclusively used her personal email for official government business, which allegedly broke federal guidelines and could have placed sensitive communications at risk. Facing a barrage of criticism, Clinton eventually said she turned over about 30,o00 work-related emails to the State Department. However, she raised eyebrows by revealing she deleted the other 30,000 "personal" messages on her server.

posted April 09, 2015 09:01 PM            

Once upon a time, before he was a senator, X worked for a law firm that helped a shady developer score $43 million in government funding. When X left the firm and became a legislator, he helped the developer get another $14 million in taxpayer funds, with $855,000 in fees for his former boss and the developer.

In return, the slumlord funneled at least a quarter-million dollars to Senator X’s campaigns. He also enabled the Senator to buy a $1.56-million mansion by purchasing an adjacent lot the seller also owned and insisted on selling at the same time.

The developer had already been indicted on 16 counts of fraud and extortion.

After receiving $1,500 from a radical priest, the senator scored $225,000 for the priest’s church. For $5,000 in donations, $1,000 each from straw donors, he steered $75,000 to a dubious charity. In exchange for at least $2,300, Senator X helped an Iraqi official land a lucrative contract to train security personnel.

When he was elected to the U.S. Senate, X’s wife’s salary as VP for community relations at a prestigious university hospital was bumped up by nearly $200,000 to $317,000. Despite two Ivy-League degrees, Mrs. X was unable to write a coherent sentence in English. This was not a problem, as her chief responsibility was to oversee a program that steered unprofitable patients to other hospitals in the community. The position had not existed before Mrs. X was appointed, and it was terminated when she resigned. The senator later scored $12 million for the hospital.

Cut to the present.

Senator Y accepted $300,000 in donations and some plane rides from a doctor on whose behalf he intervened with the Department of Health and Human Services and the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Agency.

Of course, selling their services for contributions is what members of Congress do for a living. No senator or representative is listed by charitynavigator.org. Still, these cases were a bit egregious.

Earlier this month, Senator Y was indicted for bribery. Senator X returned some of the campaign contributions and confessed that his behavior was “boneheaded,” but was never charged with any crime.

Both men are Democrats. What’s the difference?

Senator X was The Great Black Hope, the multicultural reconciler.

Senator Y opposes a deal with a radical Islamacist terrorist state, the new Middle East partner of now President X.