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