Showing posts with label Hillary. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Hillary. Show all posts

Friday, January 17, 2014

TED CRUZ: Senate Report on Terror Attacks in Benghazi Raises More Questions Than It Answers, Hillary

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) released this statement on the Senate Benghazi report released earlier this week


Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, released the following on yesterday’s Senate Select Committee’s Review of the Terrorist Attacks on U.S. Facilities in Benghazi, Libya:

“The majority views of the SSCI report confirm a number of things long suspected about the Benghazi attacks. Our government was warned, and there were steps that could have been taken to protect Americans,” Sen. Cruz said. “But our people were left at significant risk against a known terrorist threat, and when the attack came, there was no help to send. After the attack, the Obama administration tried to mask its failure with false claims of a protest over an Internet video. All the while, the terrorists who carried out this attack are still at large. Most chilling, however, is the conclusion that the attacks were preventable in the first place.”

On the first anniversary of the attacks, Sen. Cruz filed a resolution (S. Res. 225 with 24 Republican co-sponsors) calling for a joint select committee that would put all the resources of both Houses of Congress behind a thorough investigation that could answer the basic questions that remain. For instance:

· Why did any of this happen in the first place?

· Why was there no appreciation for the repeated intelligence warnings about the security situation in Libya?

· Why were the repeated requests for more protection refused?

· Why were no military assets made ready near this acknowledged terrorist hot spot on the anniversary of September 11, 2001?

· Why did the Obama administration falsely insist the attacks were the result of a spontaneous protest over an Internet video?

· Why has no one in our government been held accountable for these failures?

· Why has no terrorist been punished for this outrage?

“This most recent committee report is a valuable bi-partisan effort that demonstrates how reasonable people on both sides of the political aisle are inching closer to consensus on what happened before, during, and after the attacks on our facilities in Benghazi,” Cruz continued. “But it also starkly demonstrates that we are still far from getting clarity on why any of this happened. Unfortunately, this report thus raises more questions than answers. Until we can answer the basic questions that remain, we cannot in any way be confident that history, like the al Qaida terrorists who have attacked us so often, is not preparing to repeat itself. As the minority additional views conclude, the American people and, most importantly, the families of the victims deserve the truth.”


Related: DAMNING: The Complete Benghazi Timeline Spreadsheet

Tuesday, January 14, 2014

"Obama knew Benghazi was a terrorist attack before he went to bed to rest for a Las Vegas fundraiser"

Guest post by Investor's Business Daily

Deceit: Newly declassified transcripts show top defense officials who briefed Obama on the day of the Benghazi attack described it as a terrorist attack and told the president so, yet he pushed a false narrative about a video.

Just as the new book by former Defense Secretary Bob Gates confirmed what many believed, that President Obama was a politically motivated commander-in-chief who had no faith in an Afghan surge he put 30,000 Americans in harm's way to execute, transcripts of congressional testimony by military leaders confirm that President Obama knew Benghazi was a terrorist attack before he went to bed to rest for a Las Vegas fundraising trip.

Fox News reporter James Rosen examined 450 pages of declassified testimony given by senior Pentagon officials in closed-door hearings held last year by Congress. In those hearings, Gen. Carter Ham, who at the time headed Africom, the Defense Department combat command with jurisdiction over Libya, testified that he learned about the assault on the consulate compound within 15 minutes of its start, at 9:42 p.m. Libya time, from the Africom Command Center.

Ham said he immediately contacted Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Martin Dempsey to say he was coming down the hall at the Pentagon to meet with him.

"I told him what I knew. We immediately walked upstairs to meet with Secretary Panetta," Ham testified, adding "they had the basic information as they headed across for the meeting at the White House."

Rep. Brad Wenstrup, R-Ohio, an Iraq war veteran and Army reserve officer, asked 29-year Army veteran Ham what he told Panetta and Dempsey. "As a military person, I am concerned that someone in the military would be advising that this was a demonstration. I would hope that our military leadership would be advising that this was a terrorist attack," Wenstrup said.

Four Headlines of the Apocalypse

Presented without comment for your consideration:

Fmr. Kerry Aide: Iran Should Not Be Required to Cease Terrorism Against U.S.

A longtime aide for Secretary of State John Kerry is urging senators to oppose a new Iran sanctions measure because it would level tough penalties on Tehran should it carry out a terror attack against Americans anywhere in the world.

Rouhani: World powers ‘surrendered’ to Iran with nuclear deal

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani boasted on Twitter that the United States and other world powers effectively "surrendered" to Tehran with the newly struck nuclear deal.

Obama withholds from Israel details of nuclear accord with Iran

Vice President Joe Biden when he met Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu Monday night, Jan. 13, refused to level with him on the detailed agreements which the Americans claimed were reached by the six powers and Iran in their talks earlier this week on the implementation of their first-stage Geneva accord.

Defense minister trashes Kerry and his peace proposals

Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon lashed into US Secretary of State John Kerry and savaged US-led peace talks with the Palestinians in private conversations, according to a Tuesday report in a major Israeli daily... [saying] Kerry'[s] peace plan as being “not worth the paper it is printed on” and something that won’t provide security for Israel... The report also quotes Ya’alon calling Kerry “inexplicably obsessive” and “messianic” in his efforts to coax the two sides into a peace agreement. Ya’alon said Kerry has “nothing to teach me about the conflict with the Palestinians.

Related: The Atomic Mahdi.


Sunday, January 05, 2014

THE BENGHAZI WHITEWASH: The New York Times engages in outright journalistic malpractice

Guest post by Kenneth Timmerman

The New York Times has done excellent reporting on Libya. The newspaper was among the first to reveal that U.S.-approved arms for the Libyan rebels had fallen into the hands of jihadi groups and, more generally, on the rise of al Qaeda-affiliated groups in Libya and North Africa. So the paper’s Dec. 28 “investigation” that determined with utter certainty that the attacks of Sept. 11, 2012, in Benghazi were caused by a YouTube video would be baffling if it weren’t so obvious an attempt to exonerate the Obama administration and Hillary Clinton from responsibility for the deadly failures in Libya that cost the lives of four brave Americans.

The Times’ report misconstrues known facts and simply sweeps under the table mountains of evidence of al Qaeda’s ties to Libyan jihadi groups.

In June 2012, for example, more than a dozen different jihadi groups put the black flag of al Qaeda on parade in Benghazi in what they hoped would be a three-day show of force. Thousands of jihadi fighters, many of them in Pakistani and Afghan dress, paraded through the streets of Benghazi with hundreds of gun trucks.

For The New York Times, though, the black flags were merely “the black flags of militant Islam” and apparently bore no relation to al Qaeda. “Benghazi was not infiltrated by al Qaeda,” The Times flatly asserted.

In August, Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens put his name to a cable with the auspicious title, “The Guns of August,” that explicitly warned about the security vacuum in Benghazi and Tripoli. “What we have seen are not random crimes of opportunity, but rather targeted and discriminate attacks,” the cable warned.

It was one of dozens of cables detailing the growing chaos in Libya that were turned over to the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee after repeated stonewalling by the State Department. My sources say it came on the heels of an alarming security briefing by the CIA chief of station for Stevens and the Embassy security team. But for The New York Times, the cable simply “struck an understanding tone about the absence of effective policing.”

Saturday, January 04, 2014

The New York Times Shreds Obama

Guest post by Caroline Glick

The New York Times just delivered a mortal blow to the Obama administration and its Middle East policy. Call it fratricide. It was clearly unintentional. Indeed, is far from clear that the paper realizes what it has done.

Last Saturday the Times published an 8,000-word account by David Kirkpatrick detailing the terrorist strike against the US Consulate and the CIA annex in Benghazi, Libya, on September 11, 2012. In it, Kirkpatrick tore to shreds the foundations of President Barack Obama’s counterterrorism strategy and his overall policy in the Middle East.

Obama first enunciated those foundations in his June 4, 2009, speech to the Muslim world at Cairo University. Ever since, they have been the rationale behind US counterterror strategy and US Middle East policy.

Obama’s first assertion is that radical Islam is not inherently hostile to the US. As a consequence, America can appease radical Islamists. Moreover, once radical Muslims are appeased, they will become US allies, (replacing the allies the US abandons to appease the radical Muslims).

Obama’s second strategic guidepost is his claim that the only Islamic group that is a bona fide terrorist organization is the faction of al-Qaida directly subordinate to Osama bin Laden’s successor, Ayman al-Zawahiri. Only this group cannot be appeased and must be destroyed through force.

The administration has dubbed the Zawahiri faction of al-Qaida “core al-Qaida.” And anyone who operates in the name of al-Qaida, or any other group that does not have courtroom-certified operational links to Zawahiri, is not really al-Qaida, and therefore, not really a terrorist group or a US enemy.

These foundations have led the US to negotiate with the Taliban in Afghanistan. They are the rationale for the US’s embrace of the Muslim Brotherhood worldwide. They are the basis for Obama’s allegiance to Turkey’s Islamist government, and his early support for the Muslim Brotherhood-dominated Syrian opposition.

They are the basis for the administration’s kneejerk support for the PLO against Israel.

Tuesday, December 31, 2013

New York Times: We Had a Reporter Embedded With Terrorists in Benghazi During the Attack

Based on the headline, I really thought the Twitchy story entitled "NYT: ‘We had a reporter on the scene talking to the attackers during the [Benghazi] attack’" was satire. It wasn't.

What’s that? The New York Times had a reporter on the scene of the Sept. 11, 2012, terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya? Reporter David D. Kirkpatrick, who wrote this weekend’s piece on Benghazi, says it was invaluable to have a reporter on the ground talking to the attackers during the attack.

Which begs the question: who in the hell was this "reporter" and just what the hell was he doing during the attack -- and for the last 15 months? Biff Spackle offers some possibilities:


This scandal needs to go viral.


Monday, December 23, 2013

Susan Rice Stars as Pajamaboy on "60 Minutes"

Guest post by Investor's Business Daily

NSA Spying: The diplomat who blamed four American deaths in Benghazi on a video claims the denials by the director of national intelligence of blanket surveillance of Americans were inadvertent false representations.

It might have been slightly more credible had Pajama Boy appeared on CBS' "60 Minutes" broadcast on Sunday instead of Susan Rice. The current national security adviser and former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations participated in a puff piece that might have been an episode of, "Are You Smarter Than A Fifth Grader?"

For viewers, it was deja vu all over again.

Rice went on five Sunday talk shows on Sept. 16, 2012, five days after an al-Qaida-linked terrorist attack killed four Americans — including the first U.S. ambassador to die on duty in three decades — to parrot the administration lie that it was a spontaneous demonstration provoked by a video. This time, she claimed she had no time to revisit a "false controversy" about talking points, or, as President Obama has described Benghazi, just one of many "phony scandals."

Rice did have time, though, to repeat the line that she subbed for Secretary Hillary Clinton that Sunday because Clinton "had just gone through an incredibly painful and stressful week" and "had to reach out to the families, had to greet the bodies upon their arrival at Andrews Air Force Base."

Part of that stressful week in September 2012 included Clinton repeating the video lie to Charles Woods, father of Tyrone Woods, one of the four killed in Benghazi, in front of his son's casket.

Monday, December 16, 2013

No, really: guess who's helping the Democrats recruit interns.

Oh, dear is right:


Yeah, they went there:


Here ya' go: fixed it for ya'.


"Un self-aware" indeed.



Saturday, December 14, 2013

SURPRISE: Left-Wing Think Tank "Center for American Progress" Funded by Massive Corporations

You can read the headline like this: Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, his hatchet-man John Podesta, and the rest of the Democrat Party are bought and paid for by the nation's biggest corporations.

Let me just say that these corporate executives are beyond stupid.

Are they not seeing what happens to companies -- like health insurers -- that collaborate with the federal government?


Inevitably, the government's insatiable appetite consumes them -- and these jamokes will be no different.

Ben Shapiro, of Breitbart and TruthRevolt, explains

On Friday, the Obama- and Clinton-allied Center for American Progress finally revealed its long-sought corporate donor list after heavy pressure arising from CAP’s quasi-lobbying history. That scrutiny ratcheted up following the announcement that CAP founder John Podesta would be formally joining the Obama administration. Both Politico and The New York Times called for the donor list to meet the public eye.

And so CAP handed over the list to the leftist Huffington Post. Incredibly, its 2013 donor list contains a myriad of massive corporations, including Apple Inc., AT&T, Bank of America, BMW of North America, Citigroup, Coca-Cola, Discovery, GE, Facebook, Google, Goldman Sachs, PepsiCo, PG&E, the Motion Picture Association of America, Samsung, Time Warner Inc., T-Mobile, Toyota, Visa, Walmart and Wells Fargo.

The revelation that huge corporations have been footing the bill for the CAP shatters the myth that major corporations are right-wing repositories. In fact, it shows precisely the opposite: major American corporations including supposedly conservative ones like Walmart are largely in league with a massive government that supports massive subsidizing legislation. Crony capitalism is the order of the day, and it skews leftist – and impacts the donation patterns of America’s most profitable companies.


Gee, and I always thought it was the Republican Party that was in bed with the "evil corporations".

Turns out that the lying leftists of the Democrat Party are secretly funded by those very same cronies.


Ben Shapiro is Editor-At-Large of Breitbart News and author of the New York Times bestseller “Bullies: How the Left’s Culture of Fear and Intimidation Silences America(Threshold Editions, January 8, 2013). He is also Editor-in-Chief of TruthRevolt.org. Follow Ben Shapiro on Twitter @benshapiro.


Wednesday, December 04, 2013

EX-SECRET SERVICE DROPS BENGHAZI BOMBSHELL: Obama Refused Help Fearing Another "Blackhawk Down" During Debates

Writing at The Tatler, Bridget Johnson confirms that the Obama administration had ample time to organize a response to the attacks in Benghazi.

Members of the House Intelligence Committee learned in a closed-door briefing yesterday that more contractors are corroborating the report that the Obama administration had plenty of time to respond to the attack on the Benghazi diplomatic facility ... Nunes said the timeline begs the question: “What if the attack had went on for another 24 hours?”

“Would they have eventually sent help then? I mean, there is no accountability in this process that I’ve seen so far. And nobody knows what the president knew and when he knew it,” he said.

Interviewed late last month on The Mark Levin Show, ex-Secret Service Agent Dan Bongino laid out a timeline that appears to validate Johnson's reporting.

It's worse [than just a scandal]. Having been overseas, having been a Secret Service agent, I walked out of my house with my crying daughters... and I would tell them everything would be okay. This was going to Afghanistan, etc.

I thought the Cavalry would show up! ... I never thought in a thousand years that if we had an "A-to-Z security plan" that "B" would never show up... and that FEST team, the Foreign Emergency Support Team, over a seven-hour fight where our Ambassador was brutally killed, along with Sean Smith and those two heroic SEALs.

It's tough for me to talk about because it brings back really bad memories. I can't imagine if something had broke bad on my end. I can't imagine screaming in the radio calling for help and not one person answered to help. It's a national tragedy and it's worse than people know...

It was an insider attack, planned for months. The administration didn't want to admit that Libya was a failed mess. It had to be a foreign policy success right before the election, they knew there was a foreign policy debate coming up.

He [Obama] had just gotten destroyed during the first debate with Romney because he had nothing to stand on.

So they had to find a scapegoat when this happened. They tried this ridiculous meme about the video, which is basically laughed at now, but back then was accepted by a collaborative media that just wanted to propagate this Aesop's fable.

But I really believe that they just had them stand down because they had memories of "Blackhawk Down."

And if we got stuck over there, we're going to have to tell a story about how Libya is a failure. But they never -- can you imagine listening to the cries for help?

The horror. And now these tapes are apparently out there, there were drones overhead and there's video too, which were there about 90 minutes after the attack started.

They let these people die and suffer grievous injury because of a simple political calculation. It's sick.

In August of this year, unconfirmed but credible reports asserted that Obama consigliere Valerie Jarrett made the call to stand down.

Confidential sources close to Conservative Report have confirmed that Valerie Jarrett was the key decision-maker for the administration, the night of the Benghazi terrorist attack on 9/11/2012...

...at approximately 5 PM Washington time, reports came in through secure-channels that Special Mission Benghazi was under attack. Secretary of Defense, Leon Panetta and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Martin Dempsey summoned the President,and briefed him on the crisis, face to face.

...As that meeting drew to a close, Ms. Jarrett, who is also the Assistant to the President for Public Engagement and Intergovernmental Affairs, went from the living quarters to the White House Situation Room, where the attack in Benghazi was being monitored by Dempsey, Panetta and other top-ranking officials.

Whether she was instructed by the President to go there, or if she went of her own volition, is only known by the President and herself.

Perhaps House Oversight Chairman Darrell Issa could subpoena Valerie Jarrett to determine what she knows about the night of September 11, 2012.

That is, if it doesn't impact the 42 other investigations he's "working on".


Saturday, November 09, 2013

6 Questions For the Benghazi Survivors in Next Week's Hearings

Guest post by Helle Dale

Next week’s testimony before the House Intelligence Committee by three survivors of the Benghazi terrorist attack is spurring an intense new round of questions and media interest.

One year after the attack that killed four Americans, books by survivors of the attack are starting to come out. Their stories challenge the narrative presented by the White House and the CIA. The three witnesses lined up for next week are reportedly working on their own book about the events. Their testimony before the committee will be classified.

As reported by CNN, questions are becoming very pointed. This week, committee member Devin Nunes (R–CA) sent a letter to Speaker John Boehner (R–OH) asking for the appointment of a special independent investigator for Benghazi if the testimony heard by the committee differs significantly from the Obama Administration’s account. Last week, Representative Frank Wolf (R–VA) spoke at length on the House floor of the need to create a House select committee on Benghazi.

Among questions Nunes wants answered:

Monday, November 04, 2013

Federal investigations cast huge shadow over Terry McAuliffe on Election Day

Guest post by Kenric Ward

ALEXANDRIA, Va. — As Virginians head to the polls Tuesday, a darkening cloud of federal investigations hangs over Democratic gubernatorial candidate Terry McAuliffe.

The inspector general at the Department of Homeland Security and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission are conducting separate inquiries into actions involving McAuliffe’s GreenTech Automotive company and its use of a federal investor-visa program.

The investigations, which began last spring after Watchdog.org started digging into McAuliffe’s activities, target U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Director Alejandro Mayorkas and Gulf Coast Funds Management, GreenTech’s fundraising arm.

“Voters should be aware that the two investigations around GreenTech and Gulf Coast may well cripple a McAuliffe administration, as well as the commonwealth’s credibility and ability to move forward,” Virginia state Sen. Tom Garrett told Watchdog last week.

“Literally, from day one, a pall would hang over a McAuliffe administration and over Virginia’s executive branch. Simply put, it would be bad for business,” said Garrett, a Republican and former Louisa County prosecutor.

Friday, November 01, 2013

When Memes Collide

Actual quotes:


BUT


The President was so perturbed about getting to the bottom of the Obamacare debacle, and the slaughter of his diplomats in Benghazi, and his IRS targeting conservative, evangelical, and pro-Israel groups that he went golfing for the 148th time this week.


Hat tip: BadBlue News


Wednesday, October 30, 2013

Apparently Terry McAuliffe thinks Virginians are too stupid to trust with guns, 32-oz. sodas or salt shakers

Ken Cuccinelli has significantly closed the gap with the radical left-wing extremist and Clinton hatchet-man Terry McAuliffe.

I’ve been struggling to find good news in the Virginia Governor’s race and there is finally a bit. Cuccinelli has closed the gap with McAuliffe and is only 4 points behind now, even with the third party candidate at 9%.

Hallelujah.

Ken is a good friend and I’ve been both dearly worried about him and deeply disappointed in a bunch of Republicans who’ve decided to throw him under the bus... But it appears as the reality of a possible Terry McAuliffe victory sets in, they are all returning home.

Ken Cuccinelli is a fine man and will make an outstanding Governor of Virginia. Republicans need to rally to Ken. Many people in the [Establishment] GOP want Cuccinelli to lose so they can blame his loss on social conservatism or populism or anti-corporatism or a host of other things.


Now that the loathsome wannabe dictator Michael Bloomberg has entered the race, sending over a million dollars to McAuliffe, the realities of what would effectively be a Bloomberg governorship in Virginia are hitting home.

Presumably Virginians want to control their own salt intake, buy guns if they want them, and even (*gasp*) drink 32-oz. sodas.

Let’s do what we can to help [Ken Cuccinelli] win. He is within striking distance, there is still time, and he could use any spare cash you might have on hand to close out this last week of the race.


Folks, if you have the wherewithal, please consider helping Cuccinelli turn back the hard left crackpot and Hillary crony McAuliffe. Email your friends in Virginia. Let's send another Ted Cruz or Mike Lee to the U.S. Senate.


Friday, October 25, 2013

YES, VIRGINIA: There Really is a Conspiracy to Take Your Guns, Courtesy of Bloomberg and McAuliffe

Guest post by NRA-ILA.


Apparently, having billions of dollars in disposable income and being the mayor of America's most populous city (and let's face it, a place with problems of its own) isn't enough to keep billionaire Michael Bloomberg busy. We've often reported on his antics here in the Commonwealth of Virginia (see here, here, and here, for example), and we can thank him for at least one pro-gun law being on Virginia's books.


To no one's surprise, the billionaire buttinksi is back and throwing his considerable fortune behind an attempt to defeat NRA "A"-rated Republican Ken Cuccinelli and to elect NRA "F"-rated Democrat Terry McAuliffe in Virginia's upcoming gubernatorial election. Unfortunately for Bloomberg, while his money can buy a huge amount of negative advertising attacking Cuccinelli, it cannot alter basic facts. Even the Washington Post, normally a far friendlier outlet for McAuliffe and Bloomberg than the NRA, had to call foul at an ad Bloomberg is running that tries to fault Cuccinelli over the so-called gun show loophole. In its fact-check of the ad, the Post awarded Bloomberg's super PAC, "Independence USA," three well-deserved Pinocchios for bending the truth.

The ad claims that the "gun show loophole" means "anyone can buy a guy without a background check," including "the dangerously mentally ill" and "criminals." To underscore this point, it flashes pictures of several high-profile murderers who committed their crimes with guns.

The Washington Post takes issue with the ad on the basis that gun shows are rarely the source of crime guns and that none of the criminals pictured actually obtained their firearms at a gun show without a background check. Indeed, as the Post notes, three of the four pictured killers obtained their firearms through licensed dealers, passing background checks in the process. The fourth killed his own mother and then stole the guns he used from her.

In other words, the so-called "gun show loophole" had nothing to do with the murderers pictured. If anything, they represent the failure of the background check system Bloomberg and his puppets seek to expand.

Thursday, October 24, 2013

DON'T GET FOOLED AGAIN, VIRGINIA: Terry McAuliffe and Michael Bloomberg Are Coming For Your Guns

Will Virginians get fooled again?

Gubernatorial candidate Terry McAuliffe is one of the top Democrat fundraisers in the country. Like most Democrats, he has virtually no experience running a company, much less an entire state.

As a Clinton apparatchik, insiders have confirmed that he is running for governor to ensure Virginia flips blue in 2016 for Hillary.

In other words, he's not there to serve Virginians. He's there to serve Hillary.

In order to fool the people of the Commonwealth, he decided to copy Barack Obama's 2012 playbook. This involves making up bizarre claims about Ken Cuccinelli's extremist views. Watching a few of the ads inundating the airwaves in the state, MacAuliffe appears to claim that:

• Ken Cuccinelli will ban divorce

• Ken Cuccinelli will ban contraceptives

In other words, Terry MacAuliffe thinks women are stupid.

Of course these claims are outlandish lies. It's the "War on Women" all over again, but the brutal facts on the ground remain: Democrats have launched their own War on Women through Hillary Clinton's outrageous cover-ups and Barack Obama's destruction of jobs for women.

In addition, here's something all residents of Virginia should be aware of: MacAuliffe has received more than $1,000,000 from former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

The Virginia gubernatorial race has gotten so nasty that New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg has gone so far as to use photos of mass murderers to attack Republican candidate Ken Cuccinelli.

Bloomberg — a big proponent of gun control laws — is running ads against Cuccinelli ahead of the Nov. 5 election through his Independence USA PAC... The new ad — a $1.2 million buy airing on television in Northern Virginia — criticizes Cuccinelli’s views on gun control, while showing photos of “the dangerously mentally ill” and “criminals” from some of the country’s most gruesome shootings in recent history.

...“The gun show loophole,” the ad begins. “It means anyone can buy a gun without a background check. The dangerously mentally ill. Criminals. Endangering our families.”

Terry MacAuliffe will be coming for your guns, Virginia.

That's why the crackpot Michael Bloomberg has filled his campaign coffers.

Tell everyone you know. And help support Ken Cuccinelli for Governor.


Monday, October 21, 2013

Former White House Volunteer: Hillary Clinton IS a "War on Women"

Guest post by Kenric Ward


FALLS CHURCH — Hillary Clinton whipped up a “Women for Terry” crowd for Virginia gubernatorial candidate Terry McAuliffe on Saturday.

AIR KISS: Terry McAuliffe and Hillary Clinton are longtime political allies.

The Democrats’ 2016 presumptive presidential hopeful delivered her “formal endorsement” to the man she said “has always been there for me.”

While the adoring throng at the State Theatre chanted “Hill-ary! Hill-ary!” the New York Post updated the spate of sex scandals involving officials and prostitutes during Clinton’s watch at the State Department.

“Records show that staffers were given cushy jobs or allowed to retire, and watchdogs say the feds have hardly bothered to investigate since the shenanigans came to light this past summer,” the Post said.

Damon Mathias, a lawyer for Aurelia Fedenisn, a former investigator with the State Department’s inspector general who leaked an internal memo citing probes that were derailed by senior officials under Clinton, said, “Nobody’s barking anymore. As a concerned citizen, what the hell is going on here?”

Kathleen Willey, a White House volunteer who alleged she was groped and fondled by then-President Bill Clinton in 1993, called the Terry-Hillary hookup ironic as Democrats pound the Republican Party’s reputed “War on Women.”

“Hillary is the war on women. She goes after any women who crossed her husband’s path. Why people don’t notice that is beyond me,” Willey told Watchdog.org from her suburban Richmond home.

Still jaded two decades after her run-in at the White House, the native Virginian says, “I’ve gotten no help from women’s groups. It comes down to one thing for them: abortion.”

Gloria Steinem publicly defended Clinton at the time, saying his treatment of Willey — even if Willey was telling he truth — did not amount to sexual harassment, let alone sexual battery.

NO FAN: One-time Democrat Kathleen Willey doesn’t feel so warm and fuzzy about Hillary Clinton or Terry McAuliffe these days.

“(Willey) pushed him away,” Steinem said, “and it never happened again.” At least not to Willey.

During the Willey incident, and amid a series of what White House insiders called “bimbo eruptions,” McAuliffe remained a close Clinton confidant. He stayed loyal during the subsequent investigation by Kenneth Starr and the president’s impeachment by the House of Representatives.

“One of the few people the president spoke with regularly was Terry McAuliffe, the chief fund-raiser for the Democrats,” Bob Woodward wrote in the Washington Post.

“The first cheerleader, McAuliffe tried to keep Clinton in a fighting mood. ‘I’m with you,’ he said in a phone conversation. ‘People support you, love you, sir. We’re going to get through this,’” Woodward wrote.

Twenty years on, it’s McAuliffe’s turn to embrace Hillary – and vice versa.

After hosting recent fundraisers for McAuliffe in Georgetown and New York, Mrs. Clinton will headline a Beverly Hills event for McAuliffe on Oct. 30. As with the previous soirees, admission is $15,000 per person, or $25,000 per couple.

It’s a far cry from Willey’s hardscrabble world. She has struggled financially – even before her husband committed suicide – and is fighting to keep her home from foreclosure at the end of the month.

Before giving a deposition in the Paula Jones sexual harassment case in 1998, Willey said the tires on her car were nail-gunned. No culprit was ever charged, and she never pursued legal action against Clinton.

In her book — “Target: Caught in the Crosshairs of Bill and Hillary Clinton” – Willey says she was the target of a “coordinated campaign” by unidentified operatives.

“They threatened my children. They took one of my cats and killed another. They left a skull on my porch. They told me I was in danger. They vandalized my car. They subjected me to a campaign of fear and intimidation, trying to silence me,” wrote Willey, who also told her story on “60 Minutes.”


Hat tips: BadBlue News and @KenricWard.

Sunday, September 22, 2013

PHONY SCANDALS DON'T PRODUCE BODY-BAGS: Democrats Walk Out on Benghazi Victims' Families

Guest post by Investors Business Daily


Benghazi-gate: Democrats couldn't share the grief of a mom who was lied to in front of her son's casket or a grieving father who wonders why the general who could have mounted a rescue was relieved of his post.

It was a shameful spectacle all around, starting with bizarre testimony by the authors of the State Department's Accountability Review Board (ARB) report and including real tears in a scandal branded as "phony" by the Obama administration and the repetition of lies agreed upon.

The scene was Thursday's hearing on the Benghazi terrorist attack before Rep. Darrell Issa's House Oversight Committee. ARB co-chair Thomas Pickering shamelessly repeated the excuse that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was not interviewed by the board because members knew where the responsibility rested — as if an attack on a U.S. diplomatic mission and the murder of an ambassador, the first in three decades, was outside the scope of her interest or authority.

Yet Pickering and Mike Mullen, former Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman, authors of this "independent" investigation, admitted they regularly briefed Clinton and her advisers on their probe, an admission made more telling when the parents of two of the Benghazi dead said they never received the information they were promised on how and why their sons died.

Incredibly, they also explained why they didn't swear in witnesses for the ARB: "We had no reason to believe we would not get truthful testimony." Really? They had no reason to doubt the truthfulness of people who for weeks claimed a terrorist attack was really a spontaneous demonstration triggered by an old Internet video?

But the grim reality of this "phony" scandal really hit home with the testimony of Patricia Smith and Charles Woods, which apparently threatened more revealed truth than most Democrats on the Oversight panel could handle. With the exception of ranking member Elijah Cummings, D-Md., and Jackie Speier, D-Calif., 12 other Democrats on the Committee shamefully left the room and refused to listen to the testimony of Smith, mother of Sean Smith, an information management officer killed in the 9/11 Benghazi attack, or Woods, father of Navy SEAL Tyrone Woods, who was also killed.

Thursday, September 19, 2013

Democrats: Military never told to "stand down" during Benghazi attacks, they were just ordered to "hold in place"

Bradley Klapper of ABC News (if that is his real name) is busy doing what reporters for ABC News do best: protect guilty Democrats:

House Democrats concluded Thursday the U.S. military wasn't ordered to "stand down" during last year's attack on a diplomatic post in Benghazi, Libya, rejecting Republican claims the Obama administration held back military assets while Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans were killed... Democrats called accusations of a stand-down order during the attack "unfounded."

Let me reiterate: Democrats insist the U.S. military wasn't ordered to "stand down" as a U.S. consulate was attacked by terrorists and America's best and bravest were bleeding, fighting and dying.

Back in Realityville, the actual testimony went like this:

Testifying before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, Admiral Mike Mullen said that the direction given to Special Operations Command Africa commander Lt. Col Gibson was to "hold in place" on the night of the attacks.

Gibson is the boss of Gregory Hicks, the former deputy chief of mission in Libya who had testified that a "stand down" order was given to Special Forces who wanted to help Americans who were under assault in Libya.

So if you're Bradley Klapper of ABC News, ordering Special Ops to "hold in place" isn't the same as ordering them to "stand down."

Right.

These people are the lowest of the low.


Hat tip: BadBlue News Service.