Wednesday, April 6, 2016

The truth is out there about Clinton. You just have to know how to read--and think

A photo accompanying a New York Times story on Bernie Sanders’ primary win in Wisconsin showed Clinton at a campaign event in Brooklyn, New York, holding a female toddler that the paper for some reason felt justified identifying by name—a rather elongated Russian-sounding one, and her parents likely are not even citizens eligible to vote for Clinton. The only reason why I mention this is because the toddler’s distressed expression in the hands of a grinning Clinton accurately reflects the distress that many of us have that this criminal might actually be elected president of this great country.

Alright, so I and many others have thrown around the word “criminal” rather freely when it comes to Clinton, but it is a word not used lightly.  When we are told by the media and Clinton herself about her alleged “experience,” it is clear by the evidence of her record that her “legal” activities have not produced anything that would justify confidence in her competence to run the country. But unlike, say, Barack Obama, whose “experience” was also somewhat on the thin side, Clinton not only does not have anything approaching a political philosophy beyond serving herself, but she has an alternative stream of “experience”, and this is the one that has produced her most notable “accomplishments”: escaping the reach of the law and evading justice for a mind-numbing series of clearly criminal activities beginning with “Cattlegate” in the late Seventies. 

How has she gotten away with this? The late political columnist William Safire created a firestorm of controversy in 1996 by calling Clinton a “congenital liar.” Yet he spoke the truth. Here are some of Safire’s comments, to refresh the memories of those who seem to believe that Clinton is a helpless “victim”:

Drip by drip, like Whitewater torture, the case is being made that she is compelled to mislead, and to ensnare her subordinates and friends in a web of deceit…(in regard to Cattlegate) She lied for good reason: To admit otherwise would be to confess taking, and paying taxes on, what some think amounted to a $100,000 bribe.

(In regard to Travelgate) Now we know, from a memo long concealed from investigators, that there would be "hell to pay" if the furious First Lady's desires were scorned. The career of the lawyer who transmitted Hillary's lie to authorities is now in jeopardy. Again, she lied with good reason: to avoid being identified as a vindictive political power player who used the F.B.I. to ruin the lives of people standing in the way of juicy patronage. 

In the aftermath of the apparent suicide of her former partner and closest confidant, White House Deputy Counsel Vincent Foster, she ordered the overturn of an agreement to allow the Justice Department to examine the files in the dead man's office…Why the concealment? For good reason: The records show Hillary Clinton was lying when she denied actively representing a criminal enterprise known as the Madison S.& L., and indicate she may have conspired with Web Hubbell's father-in-law to make a sham land deal that cost taxpayers $3 million…By concealing the Madison billing records two days beyond the statute of limitations, Hillary evaded a civil suit by bamboozled bank regulators.

Another reason for recent revelations is the imminent turning of former aides and partners of Hillary against her; they were willing to cover her lying when it advanced their careers, but are inclined to listen to their own lawyers when faced with perjury indictments…Therefore, ask not "Why didn't she just come clean at the beginning?" She had good reasons to lie; she is in the longtime habit of lying; and she has never been called to account for lying herself or in suborning lying in her aides and friends.

And she still hasn’t. Despite this being fresh in the memory, in 2000 the voters  in her “adopted” state of New York, still mesmerized by “good old boy” Bill, elected her to the U.S. Senate. Yesterday I referred to a lengthy op-ed that the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel editorial board felt compelled to publish last week. While most of the mainstream media has been lavishing nauseating love on a congenital criminal and pathological liar, the Journal Sentinel used the toughest language yet from a mainstream newspaper about the need to stop Clinton. Besides the fact that her unethical and corrupt behavior should “disqualify” her from the presidency

The issue immediately at hand — and under investigation by the FBI — is Clinton's use of a private email server for State Department communications. Clinton may have violated national security laws by making top secret documents vulnerable to hackers and available to people without proper security clearance. Violating those laws rightly ended the public service career of Gen. David Petraeus when he was President Barack Obama's CIA director. The FBI and Justice Department must be free to fully investigate and, if warranted, prosecute Clinton in this matter without any political interference from the Obama administration.

In addition, regardless of Clinton's excuses, the only believable reason for the private server in her basement was to keep her emails out of the public eye by willfully avoiding freedom of information laws. No president, no secretary of state, no public official at any level is above the law. She chose to ignore it, and must face the consequences.

See what I mean? Yet the “mainstream” broadcast media  has been reticent about demanding a full and thorough investigation into Clinton’s illegalities and perjury, or doing an investigation themselves; this is no small thing, given that a most people get their “news” from television. Why isn’t her career of crime not a campaign issue in the mainstream media, since they accuse Sanders of making “personal attacks” if he ever deigns to question what she promised Wall Street and energy industry donors for all those millions they gave her? Remember in 2008 how CNN tried to derail Barack Obama’s bid with an outrageous two-week marathon on the Rev. Wright sermon, despite no evidence that Obama was even in attendance at that sermon, or had anything to do what had been said (which happened to be a true statement on race relations in any case).  But Clinton is sacrosanct—even as she whines about the “unfair” treatment she allegedly receives.  

The Journal Sentinel editorial was quite lengthy because Clinton’s record of corruption is that long. It ends by noting that “Clinton has a long track record of public service (well, that is a matter of opinion) but an equally long record of obfuscation, secrecy and working in the shadows to boost her power and further her ambition. We encourage voters to think long and hard about that record when choosing the next president.”

Meanwhile, a story in the Washington Post last week expounded on the criminal nature of Clinton’s latest ethical “problem,” concerning her email server that illegally held sensitive and classified information. Clinton wasn’t allowed to take her Blackberry into secure areas, but it was a matter of “personal comfort” to her that all her communications remained her private domain, even if government business that by law had to be kept on record. But Clinton lied—or failed to inform those in charge of keeping secure document “secure”—that her Blackberry, and those of her closest associates, were digitally “tethered” to a her personal email server hundreds of miles away in New York, completely unprotected. 

One appalling aspect to this is the absolute contempt Clinton had not just for the public’s right-to-know, but for federal law as well in order to satisfy her “comfort,” and her sycophants bended before her every desire. “From the earliest days, Clinton aides and senior officials focused intently on accommodating the secretary’s desire to use her private email account, documents and interviews show. Throughout, they paid insufficient attention to laws and regulations governing the handling of classified material and the preservation of government records, interviews and documents show. They also neglected repeated warnings about the security of the BlackBerry while Clinton and her closest aides took obvious security risks in using the basement server.”

Perhaps even more disturbing is Clinton being allowed to make claims that are patently false. “I opted for convenience to use my personal email account, which was allowed by the State Department, because I thought it would be easier to carry just one device for my work and for my personal emails instead of two.” According to “who” was this “allowed”? She was already told by State Department security that she could not use her Blackberry in secure locations, yet somehow secure information found its way from her Blackberry to her personal server without anyone’s knowledge. That is not “allowed”: According to the Post “Under Title 18, Section 1924, of federal law, it is a misdemeanor punishable by fines and imprisonment for a federal employee to knowingly remove classified information without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location.” Committing willful perjury under subpoena, however, is a felony.

Clinton’s habit of lying if it suited her personal aims was also apparent when during the 2008 presidential primaries she claimed if elected  “‘we will adopt a presumption of openness and Freedom of Information Act requests and urge agencies to release information quickly.’ But in those first few days, Clinton’s senior advisers were already taking steps that would help her circumvent those high-flown words, according to a chain of internal State Department emails released to Judicial Watch, a conservative nonprofit organization suing the government over Clinton’s emails,” according to the Post. Clinton complete disregard for protocol could potentially compromise state secrets, and everyone knew that—except, apparently Clinton on her closest stooges:

But news about her choice to use her own BlackBerry spread quickly among the department’s diplomatic security and “intelligence countermeasures” specialists. Their fears focused on the seventh floor, which a decade earlier had been the target of Russian spies who managed to plant a listening device inside a decorative chair-rail molding not far from Mahogany Row. In more recent years, in a series of widely publicized cyberattacks, hackers breached computers at the department along with those at other federal agencies and several major corporations. The State Department security officials were distressed about the possibility that Clinton’s BlackBerry could be compromised and used for eavesdropping, documents and interviews show. After the meeting on Feb. 17 with Mills, security officials in the department crafted a memo about the risks. And among themselves, they expressed concern that other department employees would follow the “bad example” and seek to use insecure BlackBerrys themselves, emails show.

Recently released emails from the server show that Clinton was repeatedly warned about using her unsecure Blackberry, particularly during a trip to China, where hacking is part-time employment for many. Clinton apparently “acknowledged” these warnings—and ignored them afterward. The emails also revealed that Clinton was frequently exasperated by security protocol, and demanded that aides find backdoor methods of evading lawful procedure. This is, of course, typical Clinton. Remember that she initially denied that any information kept on her server was classified—and then when this was revealed to be a lie, she claimed that she didn’t “know” that she kept classified information on server because it allegedly had not been “marked” as such. 

One must question the competence of this person to be president. To quote the Journal Sentinel editorial again: 

Her horrible track record on transparency raises serious concerns for open government under a Clinton administration — so serious we believe they may disqualify her from public office.

Wise up, people.

No comments:

Post a Comment