LIAR!!! Hillary Clinton & Her Attorney David Kendall Caught in a Lie to the Benghazi Committee Regarding Clinton Email Accounts … email@example.com
LIAR … HOW MANY LIES AND SCANDALS IS IT GOING TO TAKE TO DISCREDIT HILLARY CLINTON FROM RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT? HILLARY IS NOT FIT TO BE PRESIDENT
The New York Times, yes you read that correctly, the New York Times published Monday a story showing that while Secretary of State Hillary Clinton used another private email address other than the one that she and her attorney claimed they did. The article shows that Hillary Clinton was using a second email account to conduct business, firstname.lastname@example.org. That is what Hillary Clinton and her attorney David Kendall told the Benghazi Committee headed by Trey Gowdy (R-SC).
But what difference does it make that I am incapable of telling the truth?
The messages shown here are among roughly 900 pages of emails related to Libya that Hillary Rodham Clinton said she kept on the personal email account she used exclusively as secretary of state. These emails are related to memos she was sent in 2011 and 2012 by Sidney Blumenthal, a confidant who worked for the administration of former President Bill Clinton and who at the time was employed by the Clinton Foundation.
WE WERE TOLD THERE WAS NO SECOND EMAIL ADDRESS … GUESS WHAT AMERICA, HILLARY CLINTON LIED AGAIN.
Needless to say the DNC and the Benghazi Committee are very interested in this turn of events. However, it is the American people who should be more concerned. The below multiple emails show Hillary Clinton used the following email account “email@example.com” while serving in the Obama administration as secretary of state.
Clinton’s attorney, David Kendall, had previously told Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) that that particular address had not “existed (see letter HERE) during Secretary Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State. I guess it all depends on what “One” is or “Address” is.
“NOTE: On April 8, 2011, Clinton Messaged Jake Sullivan Using The Account ” firstname.lastname@example.org. ”
(“Selected Libya-Related Messages From Hillary Clinton’s Personal Email Account,” The New York Times , 5/18/15)”
“NOTE: On January 5, 2012, Clinton Messaged Jake Sullivan Using The Account ” email@example.com. ”
(“Selected Libya-Related Messages From Hillary Clinton’s Personal Email Account,” The New York Times , 5/18/15)”
“NOTE: On August 28, 2012, Clinton Messaged Jake Sullivan Using The Account ” firstname.lastname@example.org. ”
(“Selected Libya-Related Messages From Hillary Clinton’s Personal Email Account,” The New York Times , 5/18/15)”
In A Letter To Rep. Trey Gowdy, Clinton’s Attorney, David Kendall, Stated That ” email@example.com ” Was “Not An Address That Existed During Secretary Clinton’s Tenure As Secretary Of State.”
(David E. Kendall, Letter To Rep. Trey Gowdy , 3/27/15)
Hillary Clinton forwarded unsubstantiated intelligence on Libya from a family ally to top officials at the State Department, according to documents obtained by The New York Times.
Sidney Blumenthal, a longtime Clinton family counselor and, according to the Times, an employee of the Clinton Foundation at the time, sent the intelligence reports based on information he had gathered while working as an adviser to Constellations Group, a private consultancy.
That relationship is now under scrutiny from Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), chairman of the House Select Committee on Benghazi. Committee sources confirmed to POLITICO that Gowdy plans to subpoena Blumenthal for a private transcribed interview to discuss the memos and his role as an adviser to Clinton while she led the State Department.
University of Virginia Dean Sues Rolling Stone Magazine for ‘False’ Portrayal & Defamation Lawsuit in Retracted Rape Story
YOU KNEW THIS ONE WAS COMING, ALSO THE FRAT WILL MOST LIKELY DO THE SAME …
UVA to sue Rolling Stone magazine for defamation. I am generally not a law-suit happy individual; however, this one was a no-brainer. Following the completely irresponsible reporting by Rolling Stone, A Rape on Campus, and the subsequent retracting of the story and apology after the story fell apart, University of Virginia associate dean of students filed a multimillion-dollar defamation lawsuit against Rolling Stone magazine Tuesday. GOOD!!! With what Rolling Stone did, might just be the poster-child of cases for defamation.
Rolling Stone reported, A Rape on Ca,pus, What went wrong. Many people have been asking since the magazine retracted their story, Rolling Stone journalism … what went wrong?
A University of Virginia associate dean of students filed a multimillion-dollar defamation lawsuit against Rolling Stone magazine Tuesday, alleging that it portrayed her as callous and indifferent to allegations of sexual assault on campus and made her the university’s “chief villain” in a now-debunked article about a fraternity gang rape.
Nicole Eramo is seeking more than $7.5 million in damages from Rolling Stone; its parent company, Wenner Media; and Sabrina Rubin Erdely, the investigative journalist who wrote the explosive account of sexual assault on the campus in Charlottesville. The magazine retracted the article after news organizations and the Columbia University journalism school found serious flaws in it.
Eramo, who is the university’s chief administrator dealing with sexual assaults, argues in the lawsuit that the article destroyed her credibility, permanently damaged her reputation and caused her emotional distress. She assailed the account as containing numerous falsehoods that the magazine could have avoided if it had worked to verify the story of its main subject, a student named Jackie who alleged she was gang-raped in 2012 and that the university mishandled her case.
Read the full complaint HERE.
According to a recent AP-GfK Poll, Hillary Rodham Clinton is lacking in being inspiring, likable and of course honesty. One has to wonder what qualifies her to be president of the United States and why people would vote for her with these 3 strikes against her.
What difference does it make what you think
Americans appear to be suspicious of Hillary Rodham Clinton’s honesty, and even many Democrats are only lukewarm about her presidential candidacy, according to a new Associated Press-GfK poll.
Is she strong and decisive? Yes, say a majority of people. But inspiring and likable? Only a minority think so.
Clinton’s struggles to explain her email practices while in government, along with questions about the Clinton Foundation and Republican criticism of her openness, wealth and trustworthiness seem to have struck a nerve in the public’s perception of the dominant Democratic figure in the 2016 campaign. In the survey, 61 percent said “honest” describes her only slightly well or not at all.
Nearly four in 10 Democrats, and more than six in 10 independents agreed that “honest” was not the best word for her.
Even so, she is viewed more favorably than her potential Republican rivals, none of whom are as well-known as the former secretary of state, senator and first lady.
FRIVOLOUS LAW SUITS MATTER …
The family of Michael Brown, the 18 year old black teen that was shot by a white police officer, is planning on filing a law suit against Ferguson for wrongful death. HUH?The formal announcement is expected Thursday morning in St. Louis. Id the Brown family looking for strike 3? A grand jury has already refused to indict police officer Darren Wilson in the shooting death of the so-called “Gentle Giant”, see below pic of Brown in a strong armed robbery of a store clerk for a box of cigars. Then, Eric Holder and the Justice Department dropped the civil law suit against officer Wilson as there was no there, there to charge Wilson on racial bias.
Does some one need to remind the Brown family that “Hands Up, Dont’ Shoot” was based upon a lie? Trust me, if Eric Holder could not get a scalp with his DOJ investigation of officer Wilson, there is nothing there. In fact, the DOJ investigation showed that all of the credible witnesses corroborated officer Wilson’s events of what happened. The family may want to really just let this go as they may do even more harm than good to the legacy of Michael Brown.
Lawyers for the parents of Michael Brown, the unarmed, black 18-year-old who was fatally shot by a white police officer in a St. Louis suburb, announced Wednesday night that they planned to file a civil lawsuit the following day against the city of Ferguson.
Attorneys for the family said in a statement Wednesday night that the wrongful death lawsuit would be filed Thursday. The lawsuit had been expected. Attorneys for Brown’s mother, Lesley McSpadden, and his father, Michael Brown Sr., announced at a press conference in early March that a wrongful death lawsuit would be filed “soon.” Attorneys said at the time that the lawsuit would also name former Officer Darren Wilson, who shot Brown.
White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest Not Categorically Denying Clinton Foundation Donors Received Special Treatment From Sec. of State Hillary Clinton
HMM … OBAMA WHITE HOUSE NOT CATEGORICALLY DENYING CLINTON FOUNDATION DONOR AND FORMER SEC. OF STATE HILLARY CLINTON QUID PRO DOUGH SPECIAL TREATMENT …
Why would it be difficult for Barack Obama’s White House press secretary Josh Earnest to say categorically that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton did not provide special treatment for those who were donors of the Clinton Foundation? One would think that would be a straight forward response of, absolutely not. However, not with the most transparent presidency in history. The Obama White House does not seem to have an answer to the accusations made from the recent book by Peter Schweizer, Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich” otherwise known as Quid Pro Dough.
The new book, “Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich” by Peter Schweizer, lays out the case that contributions to the foundation influenced State Department policy from 2009 to 2013, during Clinton’s tenure.
ABC News reporter Jonathan Karl asked Earnest Monday, “Can you say categorically that no donors to the Clinton Foundation – nobody paying any honoraria to former President Clinton – received any favorable treatment from this administration or from the State Department?”
Earnest talked at length about the memorandum of understanding Clinton signed when she joined the Obama administration, saying that it went above and beyond ethical guidelines, given her unique circumstances.
“I know there have been a lot of accusations made about this but not a lot of evidence,” Earnest said. “So, the president continues to be extraordinarily proud of the work Secretary Clinton did as secretary of state. For the details of some of those accusations, I’d refer you to Secretary Clinton’s campaign.”
Karl pressed, “Can you assure us absolutely no favorable treatment given to donors of the Clinton Foundation?”
Earnest repeated, “There are lots of accusations. There is no one who is marshaling the evidence for this. I don’t want to be in a position.”
Bombshell Book … “Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich,” by Peter Schweizer
HILLARY CLINTON’S QUID PRO CASH …
The New York Times is reporting on a bombshell book, “Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich,” by Peter Schweizer, that even Democrats are going to find shocking and possibly question her run for the presidency. Let’s see Hillary Clinton try and scrub this one from the public’s awareness or dodge questions regarding cash for favors while Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State. The book asserts that foreign entities made payments to the Clinton Foundation and to Mr. Clinton through high speaking fees received favors from Mrs. Clinton’s State Department in return. Hmm, isn’t this called a bribe? It was not too long ago that Ron Fournier stated that the Clinton email controversy was a scandal for “Anybody With A Brain” … but stressed that the Clinton Foundation taking foreign money when she was Secretary of State was an even bigger controversy.
The book does not hit shelves until May 5, but already the Republican Rand Paul has called its findings “big news” that will “shock people” and make voters “question” the candidacy of Hillary Rodham Clinton.
“Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich,” by Peter Schweizer — a 186-page investigation of donations made to the Clinton Foundation by foreign entities — is proving the most anticipated and feared book of a presidential cycle still in its infancy.
The book, a copy of which was obtained by The New York Times, asserts that foreign entities who made payments to the Clinton Foundation and to Mr. Clinton through high speaking fees received favors from Mrs. Clinton’s State Department in return.
“We will see a pattern of financial transactions involving the Clintons that occurred contemporaneous with favorable U.S. policy decisions benefiting those providing the funds,” Mr. Schweizer writes.
If was recently that Rand Paul said there was ‘big news coming’ in weeks that will take Hillary down. I guess this was it, as opposed to all the other lies and misrepresentations from Hillary. I guess we know why Hillary scrubbed her private server that contained her emails while she was Secretary of State.
The money line comes out at the 9:00 minute mark of the video below
Sen. Rand Paul keeps referring to “big news coming” about Hillary Clinton’s foreign donations, and now it appears the big secret will be revealed in May.
Last week, in a speech to the pro-life Susan B. Anthony List, the Kentucky Republican and presidential candidate said, “There’s going to be stuff coming out about the Clinton Foundation and their donations from different companies that get special approval from the secretary of state. Coming out in the next couple of weeks,” Bloomberg reported.
According to The New York Times, that “stuff” is a book titled “Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich,” by Peter Schweizer.
Schweizer investigated donations made to the Clinton Foundation by foreign entities.
IS THERE ANYTHING THAT HILLARY IS CAPABLE OF TELLING THE TRUTH ON …
Hillary Clinton has stepped in it once again, this time spinning a yarn about her Faux immigrant family. Hillary has been telling the story of her immigrant grandparents because one, it sounded good and was politically expedient for her and two, well it must be true because Hillary always thought of them as immigrants. UNREAL. This woman is simply incapable of telling the truth. You mean she never thought as she is running for the highest office in the land and has a severe credibility issue with voters thought to vet the story?
This is from the same person who said she was names after Sir Edmund Hillary, the man who climbed Mt. Everest. Eventually, Hillary was forced to admit that was not true either as Hillary Diane Rodham born on October 26, 1947 and Sir Edmund Hillary did not conquer Mt Everest until May 29, 1953. Even Kool-aid drinking sycophant liberals can do that math.
She’s Just Making it Up as she Goes …
Speaking in Iowa Wednesday, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said that all her grandparents had immigrated to the United States, a story that conflicts with public census and other records related to her maternal and paternal grandparents.
The story of her grandmother specifically immigrating is one Clinton has told before. Clinton’s sole foreign-born grandparent, Hugh Rodham Sr., immigrated as a child.
“Her grandparents always spoke about the immigrant experience and, as a result she has always thought of them as immigrants,” a Clinton spokesman told BuzzFeed News. “As has been correctly pointed out, while her grandfather was an immigrant, it appears that Hillary’s grandmother was born shortly after her parents and siblings arrived in the U.S. in the early 1880s.”
“All my grandparents, you know, came over here and you know my grandfather went to work in lace mill in Scranton, Pennsylvania, and worked there until he retired at 65. He started there when he was a teenager and just kept going,” Clinton said.
As PJ Media opines, “She has always thought of them as immigrants” — summing up the Clintons and the rest of the Mendacious Left in a nutshell. They feel something is true (mostly because it’s politically useful to them), ergo, it is true.
Maybe the real records of Hillary Clinton’s genealogy tree was saved on her private server that she scrubbed? When one cannot tell the truth on the simple things in life, imagine what type of liar they would be with the big things?
Hillary Clinton Was Asked About Use of Private Email 2 Years Ago in 12/13/12 Letter from Congressional Investigators
THERE IS NO WAY THIS WOMAN SHOULD EVER BE CONSIDERED TO BE PRESIDENT WITH A TRACK RECORD LIKE THIS …
As reported by The New York Times, Hillary Rodham Clinton was asked by congressional investigators in a December 2012 letter whether she had used a private email account while serving as secretary of state. Hillary Clinton never responded to the letter and purposely tried to hide the fact that she was in fact using a private email account. The question was asked to Mrs. Clinton in a December 13, 2012, letter from Representative Darrell Issa, the Republican chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. Conveniently she never responded. Maybe she shredded that too. When Mr. Issa received a response from the State Department on March 27, all he got was a description of the department’s email policies. UNREAL.
What difference Does it Make that I Mislead congress and the American People …
Hillary Rodham Clinton was directly asked by congressional investigators in a December 2012 letter whether she had used a private email account while serving as secretary of state, according to letters obtained by The New York Times.
But Mrs. Clinton did not reply to the letter. And when the State Department answered in March 2013, nearly two months after she left office, it ignored the question and provided no response.
The query was posed to Mrs. Clinton in a Dec. 13, 2012, letter from Representative Darrell Issa, the Republican chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. Mr. Issa was leading an investigation into how the Obama administration handled its officials’ use of personal email.
“Have you or any senior agency official ever used a personal email account to conduct official business?” Mr. Issa wrote to Mrs. Clinton. “If so, please identify the account used.”
How can anyone, whether they be Hillary Clinton or not, be even considered as a viable candidate to run for president when they have a track record of purposely and willfully lying to Congress and trying to evade and stonewall an investigation? As we all know now, Hillary Clinton exclusively used a (many) private email accounts while she was secretary of state, also stored them on her own private email server and has since reportedly scrubbed the hard drive. Sorry, this should 100% disqualify one from running for president.
Hillary Clinton, in Her Own Words from Benghazi-gate to Dems Defending Obamacare to Flip-Flop on Gay Marriage to Poor Clinton’s to Foreign Policy Empathizing with One’s Enemies to Email Scandal
Hillary Clinton, in Her Own Words …
America, all you have to do is listen to what Hillary has done in the past to know what she will be like as a president. Hillary Clinton is synonymous with scandal, there is no getting around it, even if the Hillary anti-free speech police try and prevent people from speaking the truth. Hillary launched the worst kept secret of 2015 this weekend and officially announced her run for president in 2016.
We certainly know that she won’t be claiming she will have the most transparent administration ever. Then again, she claims to be for the common folk and that is not true either.
The VIDEO shows clips from just some of the recent Hillary scandals as well as her opinions on foreign policy:
- Democrats Defending Obamacare
- Flip-Flop on Gay Marriage
- Hillary crying Poor
- Empathizing with One’s Enemies – Really, we are supposed to empathize and respect terrorist groups like ISIS, al-Qaeda, Boko Haram and the rest?
- Email/Server Scandal – Hmm, even Richard Nixon didn’t destroy the tapes … remember what she said about GWB admin shredding docs?
Folks claims they want something new, if that is the case, how is Hillary Clinton even a consideration?
Sabrina Rubin Erdely, Author of Rolling Stone Magazine Article on University of Virginia Rape Offers Apology for False Story to all but the Fraternity
HEY SABRINA, YOU MISSED SOME ONE IN YOUR APOLOGY FOR FALSE RAPE STORY …
Rolling Stone magazine is in full retreat on their now completely discredited University of Virginia rape story where the so-called rape victim, Jackie, was assaulted at a UVA fraternity. The author of the article, Sabrina Rubin Erdely, is now offering an apology and Rolling Stone is asking what went wrong. Hmm, you mean besides everything? Rolling Stone has officially retracted the article, ‘A Rape on Campus,’ as nothing can ce corroborated; however, has the damage already been done? Sabrina Rubin Erdely offered an apology saying, “I want to offer my deepest apologies: to Rolling Stone’s readers, to my Rolling Stone editors and colleagues, to the U.V.A. community, and to any victims of sexual assault who may feel fearful as a result of my article.” Um, and I can’t actually believe I am saying this as I have no love for the fraternity system, but where is Rolling Stone’s apology to the Phi Kappa Psi fraternity where the faux rape occurred? Could it be because the fraternity will most likely sue Rolling Stone for libel?
Rape is a terrible crime unto itself and affects a victim for the rest of their life. But to report such a sensational, false story like this and not have any journalistic integrity, no fact checking, no nothing what so ever, is a crime itself.
Sabrina Rubin Erdely, the author of a now-discredited article in Rolling Stone magazine about a rape at a University of Virginia fraternity, issued this statement:
“The past few months, since my Rolling Stone article “A Rape on Campus” was first called into question, have been among the most painful of my life. Reading the Columbia account of the mistakes and misjudgments in my reporting was a brutal and humbling experience. I want to offer my deepest apologies: to Rolling Stone’s readers, to my Rolling Stone editors and colleagues, to the U.V.A. community, and to any victims of sexual assault who may feel fearful as a result of my article.
“Over my 20 years of working as an investigative journalist — including at Rolling Stone, a magazine I grew up loving and am honored to work for — I have often dealt with sensitive topics and sources. In writing each of these stories I must weigh my compassion against my journalistic duty to find the truth. However, in the case of Jackie and her account of her traumatic rape, I did not go far enough to verify her story. I allowed my concern for Jackie’s well-being, my fear of re-traumatizing her, and my confidence in her credibility to take the place of more questioning and more facts. These are mistakes I will not make again.
There seems to be more missing from the Rolling Stone mea culpa on this false rape article that they published, who is being held responsible for such a miscarriage of journalism? Who got suspended, who got fired … no one. So how are we to believe this will never happen again at Rolling Stone, because they said so? Sorry folks, but as private investigators Sam Spade, Humphrey Bogart, said in The Maltese Falcon, some one must take the fall.
So, there was a massive “failure of journalism” here, but none of the journalists who failed so massively will lose their jobs, and none of the journalistic practices that led to this failure will change.
Somehow, this is so America 2015. Leaders “take full responsibility” for failure, but rarely seem to pay a price for it. As we tell our children, “‘Sorry’ is not a magic word.” That is, it’s great to say “I’m sorry” when you’ve done wrong, but saying the word does not erase the consequences of the deed. You have to show by your actions that you mean it.
The editors who handled that UVA story will remain in place. Unbelievably, even the writer who wrote the catastrophic lies will not suffer any professional penalty at the magazine.