Hillary’s email caper: She had inside help

By 92 Comments 4,633 views

hillary shrugs

 

If the following is accurate, someone besides Hillary is in really deep sh*t. Former State Department officials have called Hillary Clinton email assertions “total BS.”

Former State Department security officials don’t buy Hillary Clinton’s latest alibi that she couldn’t tell that government e-mails — which she improperly, if not illegally, kept for several years on an unsecured home server — contained top-secret information because they lacked official markings and weren’t classified until later.

Such messages contain sensitive “keywords” distinguishing them from unclassified information, even if the material didn’t bear a classified heading as she claims.

The secretary would have known better, the department ­officials say, because she was trained to understand the difference when she was “read in” on procedures to ID and handle classified information by diplomatic-security officials in 2009.

Clinton also went through a so-called “read-off” when she left ­office in 2013. In that debriefing, security officials reminded her of her duty to return all classified documents, including ones in which the classification status is “uncertain,” which would have included the e-mails stored on her private server — which she only this month turned over to authorities. The read-off would have included her signing a nondisclosure agreement.

Former Attorney General Mike Muskasey says that it’s “inconceivable” that most of Clinton’s emails weren’t classified.

Courtesy of the Washington Free Beacon, here is a montage of how Hillary Clinton’s email mendacity evolved.

She did have classified information in her emails. Top secret information at that.

At least two classified messages on Hillary Clinton’s home-brew email server contained top-secret intelligence including signal intercepts and information from keyhole satellite conducted by the CIA and the Pentagon’s satellite-spying National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency.

U.S. Intelligence Community Inspector General Charles McCullough reported to Congress on Wednesday that the sensitive information dated from 2006 and 2008, and was ‘classified up to “TO.PSECRET//SI/TK//NOFORN”.’

The last three designations refer to ‘Special Intelligence,’ ‘Talent Keyhole’ – a kind of satellite – and a prohibition on any non-Americans seeing the information.

She is supposed to know when something is “classified.” Her latest defense is that she’s an idiot who can’t recognize sensitive information. The million dollar question is “How did that information get onto her server?” It’s not a small thing. It’s everything.

A member of my family sent me a link to a segment of the Michael Savage show. You do want to listen to it:

The satellite imagery data had to originate at the Department of Defense. It ended up on Clinton’s server. According to the callers on the audio the DoD intranet is NOT connected with the outside world. Security measures exist to prevent that from being a possibility. In order for Hillary for come into possession of this kind of data on her own homemade server someone would have had to download the information, place it on a device (like a thumb drive or SD card), take the device or card out of the SCIF , upload the information to a conventional server, PC or smartphone, strip off the classified labels and then email it to Hillary Clinton’s private server. It’s called spillage.

All of this is HIGHLY illegal.

If all this is accurate, Hillary had someone on the inside who knew what they were doing and knew it was wrong.

If all this is accurate, we’re going to hit 9 on the Richter scale.

Everyone’s been so focused on Hillary simply having classified information on her server I don’t think anyone’s addressed how that could even happen. Who sent the emails containing the classified information to Hillary? We do need to know. Remember how big a deal Valerie Plame was? This is way, way bigger.

Adding to the mystery- the State Department made no effort to secure Clinton’s server after it was hacked in 2013.

DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 30 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 30 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter on her way into the field of education. DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed. Except for liberals being foolish.

92 Responses to “Hillary’s email caper: She had inside help”

  1. 51

    Artfldgr

    @james raider: DrJohn, it is entirely possible that although the Admin knows all this, as does Hillary and all her minions, Clinton holds information which would be gravely damaging to Obama, . . . on Benghazi, etc. The Clintons can fry Obama’s legacy. Clintons didn’t trust Obama/Jarrett and that is why they kept an off-site private server. Obama let her, but that, IMHO, was a Catch 22 event. 2 fraudsters and liars caught in a web of deception.

    irrelevent to law… ie. obama is not king, and cant “let her”, despite his signing changes to the law in 2014 which prohibit her…

    Laws are not arguable in terms of “i had a good reason to break the law”, which also was self serving to do so… if this was the case she should have become a whistleblower… not violated the law which the dems changed and caught themselves up in… duh.

  2. 53

    Artfldgr

    @Greg: The only thing that has been established is that a lot of people are making claims repeatedly without having a single, solitary bit of reliable evidence to back them up. There’s nothing bouncing around inside the echo chamber but hearsay.

    no, they HAVE given such proof, its just that you dont accept proof of guilt…

    as i asked before, you do know what is required to get a federal warrant for search and seizure?

    (c) Persons or Property Subject to Search or Seizure. A warrant may be issued for any of the following:

    (1) evidence of a crime;

    (2) contraband, fruits of crime, or other items illegally possessed;

    (3) property designed for use, intended for use, or used in committing a crime; or

    (4) a person to be arrested or a person who is unlawfully restrained.

    ie. to get a warrant one needs evidence for a crime… or evidence that property that was designed or intended to be used for a crime… the other points dont apply.

    so a federal judge agreeing there was a crime, didnt listen to greg, and issued a warrant to which the evidence was obtained…

    the process of getting a warrant requires a crime be demonstrated… its a constituitional thing, duh.

    and

    (B) Warrant Seeking Electronically Stored Information. A warrant under Rule 41(e)(2)(A) may authorize the seizure of electronic storage media or the seizure or copying of electronically stored information. Unless otherwise specified, the warrant authorizes a later review of the media or information consistent with the warrant. The time for executing the warrant in Rule 41(e)(2)(A) and (f)(1)(A) refers to the seizure or on-site copying of the media or information, and not to any later off-site copying or review.

    deleting personal emails is a violation of
    18 U.S. Code § 1519 – Destruction, alteration, or falsification of records in Federal investigations and bankruptcy

    Whoever knowingly alters, destroys, mutilates, conceals, covers up, falsifies, or makes a false entry in any record, document, or tangible object with the intent to impede, obstruct, or influence the investigation or proper administration of any matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States or any case filed under title 11, or in relation to or contemplation of any such matter or case, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.

    she does not get to make a determination, the court does… so she is not legally allowed under several statutes to delete information… she cant delete cause she is a secretary of state and the 2014 law says so… she cant delete if there is any investigation or there may be, as that is tampering…

    in effect, she deleted evidence that said the material was not evidence, which violates the tampering laws (and others that come into play as well)

    as a federal employee of the people, everything she does is subject to examination by her employers… which is the people. which is why these special records laws exist, the tampering laws exist for many reasons, and so on..

  3. 56

    Budvarakbar

    @DrJohn: Actually I think this has been in the works all along — hildabeast was just a smokescreen and crazy joe is just another place holder — we won’t know who the Bolsheviks really want to stuff up our butts next for several more months — may be warren but she doesn’t have much curb appeal so they most likely have some other crapuscent poser under wraps

  4. 57

    Artfldgr

    Former CIA director John Deutch was also found to have stored classified documents — including top-secret intelligence — on computers in his homes in Bethesda and Belmont, Massachusetts, leading to an investigation by the CIA inspector general and a criminal investigation by the Justice Department.

    Deutch was stripped of his security clearance and ended up reaching a plea agreement admitting to his crimes — but was saved by a last-minute pardon from none other than … President Bill Clinton.

  5. 59

    Artfldgr

    @Budvarakbar:

    these are not bolshiviks, these are menshiviks.
    one wants violent overthrow
    the other wants incremental change…

    ie. menshviks are “social democrats” which is why whats her face couldnt answer the intervewer as to what is the difference between communist party and democrat party…

  6. 61

    Budvarakbar

    @Artfldgr:

    ie. menshviks are “social democrats” which is why whats her face couldnt answer the intervewer as to what is the difference between communist party and democrat party…

    Thanks for clearing that up — the problem is that when you say ‘mensheviks’ it throughs them all off — wondering if it may be something gender-based/biased maybe — ‘Bolsheviks’ has a little better chance to jolt someone’s attention span.

    The menshiviks have been working for over a hundred years now in this country and have had fabulous success — they were able to pull out all stops after they were able to debunk McCarthy and then mesmerize most of the country with the kennedy crap

  7. 62

    Artfldgr

    @Budvarakbar:

    it throws them off because to them the bolshiviks won, and mercator killed trotsky who learned how not to pick your friends… 🙂

    in the west the menshiviks became the fabians and progressives.. though in truth the progressives tend to be more fascistic as most of them follow the idea of Ford and certain others who realized that ownership was nothing and control was everything.

    the quote is something like
    i want to own nothing and control everything.. .

    so under the communists, the state owns everything and so the state is responsible for everything, and so can be blamed

    under chrony capitalism, fascism, the state controls things others own and tells them what they can or cant do with their property… so now the state is in control, but the individual owner is responsible and suffers the consequences of the states actionns, while the state goes on again

    the marvelous thing about socialism is that it offers a huge opportunity to skim money and take money and unlike old time graft you get to avoid having to actually build a bridge or building… at least old time graft got you things like the railroads and empire state building built… just take a look at how long it took new fangled socialist systems to find the money to pay for the new trade center buildings… how many years? how much money?

    take a look at Warren Buffet… i used to respect him before i figured out how dirty he was in detail… (i dont assume all wealthy people are dirty, i have met tons more good ones who have helped people a lot than i have met bad ones).

    he bought 100% of BNSF rail and then had obama and billionaire friend steyer block keystone so that his 100,000 per share stock went to 200,000 per share. think steyer has some of that? natch… meanwhil the army of unpaid socially concious people could not invest in keystone at $40 a share… as the money and growth went to what amounts to a billionaires investment club

    i wonder if you ask the idiots protesting what they think that steyer could do with his berkshire hathaway stock at 100k doubled to 200k… and that they were the key force involved with doubling billionaires moneys and stopping small investors from earning what they would say..

    but go figure… they are so full of themselves like greg they actually think that a totalitarian state (dictatorship of the proletariat – or soverign democracy like russia) would give them more than they get now…

    now people who thought the same in venezuela hear paranoid soviet era rhetoric to explain away the communist states failings, military power and such shutting down borders that are bringing food, and having to wait hours on line for some toilet paper. just like in soviet russia years ago…

    so what makes greg think that he will get better?
    what makes him think that they dont see him as a traitor to his own people

    my family came from slovakia and latvia, and lived under stalin twice and hitler once, and what was clear to the family was that those that helped the revolution were seen as enemies of the state… not heroes or people to be rewarded!!!

    they are the scaffolding that is used to make a new state, once that changes, they wake up because of what happens, and then become the zealots of the counter revolution. to avoid unmaking what they made for the leaders, the leaders eliminate them. but i wonder why they dont learn this in history and realize that once you betray your own people, even if you dont think so, why would the people asking you to betray them and facilitating it trust you?

    ie. if you went aginst things in good times and plenty to make it somethig else wh would you be trusted in the something else and not be bribable or betray that?

    sadly, i ahve met lots of gregs in my life…
    they think that they will ahve more, cause the new regime will see how great they are and lift them out of their ilfe into something else…

    they love to spout quotes but have not actually read that which they spout from
    they would be suprised to know about holodomar and how lenin said, you dont work, you dont eat… even more so when you tell them that its the capitalists that have welfare, its the communists that have workcamps for those who they want work from but dont want to pay, and serves population control of the cattle.

    they wont get it… they dont even believe how it is to live under anything different thinking that how things are around the world are variations on a theme and that the US is successful because they cheat.. not that the system is different and so begets great gains and that their improvements and interventions are what is making it anemic

    one way they will learn or another
    since they refuse to lerarn from others such as fools refer
    they will learn in misery if they live long enough

    the rest of us are along for the ride in the fools basket
    after all, the number of idiots vastly outnumbers the number of intelligent
    and yet, they dont get a clue that if they are winning elections by mass agreement, by definition they are on the side with the idiots.

  8. 63

    Greg

    @Artfldgr, #53:

    The only thing that has been established is that a lot of people are making claims repeatedly without having a single, solitary bit of reliable evidence to back them up. There’s nothing bouncing around inside the echo chamber but hearsay.

    no, they HAVE given such proof, its just that you dont accept proof of guilt…

    No proof has been presented.

    If there were proof, the right wouldn’t be relying exclusively on a shit storm of rumors, accusations, insinuations, and other assorted tools of character assassination in their effort to destroy a person who would otherwise simply step over them on her way through the White House door. All they would have to do is state the charges and present the evidence, and that would be the end of that. Obviously they haven’t got evidence. It’s obvious, at least, to anyone who isn’t as dumb as a box of rocks.

    The GOP is focusing almost exclusively on efforts to destroy their opponent’s reputation because they haven’t got anything else to focus on. On their record? What record? They haven’t done anything constructive since winning control of the House in 2012, and they’ve been no better since adding the Senate to their control. With control of both the House and Senate they still talk but do nothing—unless you want to count enormously expensive and unnecessary government shutdowns, threats of credit defaults, endless politically motivated investigations of their enemies on the taxpayers dime, and efforts to sabotage foreign policy at every turn. Nor do they have a presidential candidate with much chance of winning on the issues. Their current front runner is a manipulative egotist who punches whatever button gets an immediate rise in the polls—never mind the 180-degree position reversals or the implausibility of his promises—who is widely considered the greatest single threat by the leaders of his (allegedly) own party. All they can hope to do is damage their opponent so badly that anyone they offer will win by default.

    Their problem, of course, is that Hillary Clinton is not their only potential opponent.

  9. 64

    Bill

    @Greg: The one and only reason Biden is considering entering the race is because HE believes she is toast… which she most certainly is. I guess Biden is part of the “vast right-wing conspiracy”, huh?

    You’d best begin getting yourself prepared for a huge disappointment, Greg. She is most definitely a liar, most definitely mishandled vital national security information and she most certainly tried to delete all the evidence of her failures and corruption and she most certainly is going to be hounded by this until she drops out of the race (by Obama, not the right).

  10. 65

    Greg

    @Bill, #64:

    You can repeat most definitely however many times you like. If they could, Hillary Clinton’s accusers would simply state the charges, present the proof, and be done with it. They would like nothing better. The fact that they aren’t doing so means that they can’t. They don’t have any evidence.

    Biden would be a perfectly acceptable candidate to most Democrats. I don’t expect he’ll openly oppose Hillary Clinton; just that he’ll be ready if she drops out.

  11. 66

    another vet

    @Artfldgr:

    my family came from slovakia and latvia, and lived under stalin twice and hitler once,

    You obviously bring some good experience to the table and can spot a neo-communist/Marxist when you see one. The lefties here (and elsewhere) paraphrase Marx and Lenin a lot and promote their ideas. I often wonder if it is because they are students in their school of thought or they just don’t know it.

  12. 67

    Rick Foreman

    Hillary and Bill are frantically working on how to exit with dignity. Blaming republicans is incriminating. Admitting guilt is un-Clinton. Somehow holding on and waiting for a democratic challenger to pass her in the polls is her best escape.

  13. 68

    Redteam

    @Greg:

    state the charges, present the proof,

    They have ‘stated the charges’, and ‘presented the proof’ and it’s all downhill for the Shrill from here. Her future for the next year is going to be trying to stay out of her orange jump suit.

  14. 69

    Greg

    They have ‘stated the charges’, and ‘presented the proof’

    Then why can’t any credible sources be found that state specifically what the charges are and cite the specific evidence that serves as proof?

    The short answer? Because it’s all a load of bullshit.

  15. 70

    Ditto

    contributor

    Greg’s such a disingenuous tool. The investigation is ongoing. Greg knows full well that full charges are not entered until the investigation is complete. There is certainly enough evidence to warrant the investigation to a degree that Hillary’s server was ordered turned in. Hillary admits to wiping the server. She no longer denies that she received classified information, because she knows that the FBI has evidence that she did, and that would be perjure herself, so she is now pretending that she is too stupid and lacks the savvy to know what classified information is. Even though State Department personnel has verified that she received to proper training.

    No one believes the disassembling web of deceit woven by Hillary or her staunch defender Greg, because both have proven themselves to be unworthy of trust.

  16. 71

    Greg

    Something tells me the investigation will be “ongoing” right up until the election, or up to the point when Clinton drops out. Meanwhile, House republicans are slow-pedaling their New and Improved Benghazi Investigation tricycle, pacing themselves for a maximum-effort attempt to generate the most possible negative media attention at the most politically opportune point. This will almost certainly involve subpoenaing Hillary Clinton yet again. Maybe they can time it all for a back-to-back double feature, with the Benghazi show followed immediately by an email event. Or they could spread things out a bit, leaving an interlude in between for Donald Trump to juggle.

  17. 72

    Bill

    @Greg: Which part do you need verified? That she had a server she kept secret and did not turn over emails until caught? That she illegally had classified data on an unsecured server? That she lied about said unsecured classified data? That she went to the trouble to have said server professionally wiped clean in anticipation of the FBI seizing it? That she lied about Benghazi? That she lied about why she had a secret server in the first place?

    Which of these established facts, any of which makes her unfit for office, are still denying?

    Something tells me the investigation will be “ongoing” right up until the election, or up to the point when Clinton drops out.

    Exactly. And whose investigation is it, Greg? Who controls the FBI? The only reason the various investigations into Obama administration corruption carry on is due to the administration’s own stalling. Because they are corrupt.

  18. 73

    Nanny G

    Before Hillary will give up on her run she will throw a top-level aid under her bus.
    Speculation is that it will be Huma Adebin.
    Huma is starting to look like the fall-girl for Hillary

    There’s a political cartoon of Hillary robbing a bank, caught on camera.
    The headlines by that say: ”Democrats concerned could affect electability,” and, ”still polls ahead of GOP field.”
    (Payne)

    I think the truth is somewhere in between these two stories.
    Hillary isn’t planning on going anywhere.
    She’s in this to win it.
    Of course she has to have various contingency plans, Huma-under-the-bus might be one of them.
    And the media will help as much as it can for as long as it can, generally speaking.
    We are already seeing media falling away as their own credibility would soon be ruined forever if they blindly press on.

  19. 74

    Greg

    @Bill, #72:

    Which part do you need verified? That she had a server she kept secret and did not turn over emails until caught? That she illegally had classified data on an unsecured server? That she lied about said unsecured classified data? That she went to the trouble to have said server professionally wiped clean in anticipation of the FBI seizing it? That she lied about Benghazi? That she lied about why she had a secret server in the first place?

    The answer would be Yes, to all of the above. Hillary Clinton’s accusers need proof for each and every damaging assertion, because they have a very strong political motive to be spinning out lines of total bullshit, and a very long history of doing exactly that. Truth is like kryptonite to the right. It’s like sunlight to vampires. They talk about it constantly but speak it infrequently. Their entire political reality is woven of lies, deceptions, misrepresentations, and—perhaps most important of all—projections.

  20. 75

    Bill

    @Nanny G: Remember Susan McDougal? The Clinton’s have always been able to find sacrificial lambs that will sit in jail for the crimes of the Clinton’s. Seems McDougal came to regret the decision, though.

    @Greg:

    The answer would be Yes, to all of the above.

    Well, Greggie, ALL OF THE ABOVE are verified; it is why the FBI is on the case. Remember, in the Obama administration, gross negligence like ignoring terror threats and requests for security resulting in the deaths of an ambassador and three other Americans or the murder of a border agent with a gun the DOJ allowed to fall into the hands of drug smugglers can be happily swept under the rug; why on earth would they be investigating Hillary for… as you contend…. “nothing“?

    I warn you again, to prevent an emotional crash and burn… prepare yourself for the inevitable. Hillary is dirty as hell on this, you know it but you have yet to confess it to yourself.

  21. 76

    Greg

    Well, Greggie, ALL OF THE ABOVE are verified; it is why the FBI is on the case.

    If proof existed, it would be the top story on every news channel and the headline on every newspaper.

    No one would be able to respond by asking So, what’s this proof you claim to have? and get nothing but blank looks and evasive answers. You’d be able to state what the proof is.

    The FBI is involved? Big effing deal. The FBI investigated Ray Bradbury. The FBI investigated Elvis. They’ve probably investigated half of the people in Congress—or should have, if they haven’t done—and not by party line. They investigated me before I entered MOS training, along with any other military and/or civilian federal employee who was ever cleared to handle classified documents. Have you bought a firearm recently? Then they’ve done at least a computerized records check on you, too. The fact that the FBI is investigating some aspect of the situation doesn’t mean squat. Their findings could mean something, but no one has heard them yet.

  22. 77

    Ditto

    contributor

    @Bill:

    Greg can’t handle the truth. He is too busy covering his ears and shouting “La – la – la – la – I can’t hear you.” His only defense is to continually, completely deny everything that has been reported so far in the investigation. Who you gonna believe Hillary or your lying eyes.

  23. 78

    john

    Ditto you live in the fantasy world taht is enclosed by the rightwing news bubble, Most people have a different sense of reality than you do. You no doubt believed the faux scandal of the UNDERAGE DOMINICAN HOOKERS that all the posters here were only too happy to believe. You probably also think that we won the war in Indochina and Iraq

  24. 79

    Greg

    What has been reported thus far is at least 95 percent hearsay. Based on that, you have somehow attained 100 percent certainty.

    I’ll wait to consider the evidence, if it ever makes a public appearance.

  25. 80

    Bill

    @Greg:

    If proof existed, it would be the top story on every news channel and the headline on every newspaper.

    Oh, Greggie! You should start a career as a stand-up comedian!! Once a viable replacement arises to satisfy the corrupt leftist media, you will get your headlines. Meanwhile, just as with the anti-gun DOJ going into the gun-running business (resulting in the death of a border agent and numerous Mexican citizens), Benghazi (resulting in 4 dead Americans, including an ambassador), the weaponization of the IRS, the utter failure of Obamacare, the embarrassing weakness of the Obama economy, the horrors of Planned Parenthood, the Obama-induced collapse of Iraq/rise of ISIS or any of the many other liberal embarrassing failures, Hillary’s corruption will remain on the hush-hush.

  26. 81

    Bill

    @Greg:

    I’ll wait to consider the evidence, if it ever makes a public appearance.

    Oh. Like you did with “Hands Up, Don’t Shoot”?

    No, what you are doing is denying the facts.

  27. 82

    Greg

    @Bill, #79:

    Oh, Greggie! You should start a career as a stand-up comedian!! Once a viable replacement arises to satisfy the corrupt leftist media, you will get your headlines.

    Complete nonsense. News Corp’s FOX outlets have the single largest audience share of all news outlets. Do you expect me to believe they’re holding back details out of consideration for the left? They don’t hesitate to roll out reports that are based on little more than rumor. They simply attribute them to unnamed sources. The entire Benghazi scandal was built in that fashion.

    The Declassified Transcripts Show A “Woefully Ill Prepared And Ill Postured Military.” Bullshit. “The U.S. Government Knew An Attack Was Imminent And Didn’t Do A Thing About It.” Bullshit. A “Stand Down” Order Was Given To Benghazi Response Teams. Bullshit. Obama Administration Engaged In Cover-Up Over Benghazi Bullshit. There was Absolutely No Link To Anti-Muslim YouTube Video. Also bullshit. The Senate investigative committee wasn’t quite so sure on that point:

    “It remains unclear if any group or person exercised overall command and control of the attacks or whether extremist group leaders directed their members to participate. Some intelligence suggests the attacks were likely put together in short order, following that day’s violent protests in Cairo against an inflammatory video, suggesting that these and other terrorist groups could conduct similar attacks with little advance warning.” [Review Of The Terrorist Attacks On U.S. Facilities In Benghazi, Libya, September 11-12, 2012, U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, 1/15/14]

    FOX never reported on that conclusion, did they?

    Fox’s K. T. McFarland: “It Was Probably A Political Decision Not To Rescue Them.”

    That one is worse than bullshit. It’s slanderous. The woman is a propagandist. No responsible news outlet would let her get away with that sort of crap. FOX, on the other hand, writes her a check.

    So don’t tell me the media is pulling punches or holding back. FOX is the media. The reason there’s no specific evidence being reported is because there no credible evidence to report. Perhaps there will be, but there’s none at present.

  28. 83

    Ditto

    contributor

    I do believe our little trollop “John’s” mother is calling for him(?) to turn off the basement lights and go to bed. If he(?) wants to visit the real world and learn where any one of us stands on issues, he(?) should put on big-boy pants, put away his milk and cookies, and try searching Flopping Aces for our monikers and the relevant subject matter.

  29. 84

    Bill

    @Greg:

    FOX never reported on that conclusion, did they?

    Here is what YOU forbid yourself from accepting; there is AMPLE evidence of communications, some in real time at the time of the attack stating that the attack was a well-planned, well-executed and well-equipped attack, not “some guys out for a walk that decided to kill some Americans”. There was absolutely no reasonable or logical reason or implication to assume that attack was a result of the obscure and relatively unknown video. None. The only reason to make that lame excuse AND immediately go on national news programs to promote it was to cover political ass. Nothing more. No other logical reason or explanation.

    There is also AMPLE evidence of requests…. PLEAS… for additional security and intelligence warnings of terrorist activity. AMPLE. IGNORED. Al Qaeda was on the run; no need to attract attention to concerns about terror attacks when Military Master Obama had them on the run; elections matter more than lives to corrupt liberals. DEAL with it, Greg; you support corrupt liars that get people killed and them cover it up.

    Fox’s K. T. McFarland: “It Was Probably A Political Decision Not To Rescue Them.”

    “FOX”S” McFarland?!? I have seen her on CNN, CBS, NBC, ABC… she is a “contributor”; she doesn’t belong to anyone. Weak and silly, Greg. Very weak and revealingly silly.

    However, there WAS no attempt made to rescue them, was there? And there are military and intelligence personnel (oh… not “Fox’s”) that state they got stand-down orders. So, on that account as well, Greg… SHOVE IT.

    I WILL tell you that all of the corrupt, liberal, left wing media is pulling punches for liberals…. Hillary, Obama, Sharpton, Reid, Pelosi, Holder, Sebelius, Lerner, Schultz…. the liberal media covers up ALL their incompetence. Fox reports it and, of course, you and the rest of the liberal failures cannot STAND it.

    Hillary got the consulate sacked. People died. She and Obama lied about it. Hillary mishandled vital national security. Obama put that in his hip pocket until he could use it as a political vengeance weapon; he doesn’t CARE about national security. Note to Blind Greg… the F**KING FBI is doing the investigating, not FOX. Hillary has created this mess and Obama is driving the exposure to destroy her candidacy. They are liars and corrupt.

  30. 85

    Greg

    @Bill, #84:

    However, there WAS no attempt made to rescue them, was there?

    Look at the timeline of events as they unfolded and the points at which there was clear understanding of them, and then look at the locations of available military forces. There was no military support that could have arrived in time to help. That’s a fact. It’s the reality of time and distance.

    Of course, right wing media outlets immediately became a sounding board for this sort of stuff:

    “The FBI has interviewed the survivors, but they refuse to release that information to Congress, let alone the American people! And despite the efforts of Senators Lindsey Graham and Kelly Ayotte, who have been on the front lines of the Benghazi scandal, the Obama Administration is point-blank refusing to allow the representatives of “we the people” any access to those firsthand accounts. At this juncture, President Obama is hiding the injured survivors in a heavily guarded wing of Walter Reed National Military Medical Center. And those not currently needing medical treatment are supposedly legally barred by non-disclosure agreements from even admitting they were present during the attacks – something that should have been fixed by the Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act of 2012.”

    (An authoritative pronouncement from the guy who runs this website.)

    Evidently the investigative committee of the republican-controlled House of Representatives is either a willing part of the cover-up, or was lied to by the CIA and the FBI, since their official conclusions were quite different.

    The solution to such a disappointment, of course, is to totally ignore the politically useless conclusions of their own investigative committee and hold another full investigation of the same event. Which they’re now doing. It’s just not getting much attention at the moment, because timing is everything. Perhaps they can admit 13 Hours: The Inside Account of What Really Happened In Benghazi—a book based on the personal account of a CIA security contractor—as evidence, or maybe arrange a Congressional screening of the major motion picture based upon it, which will be conveniently released early next year during the 2016 election cycle.

    There’s a conspiracy, alright. There’s little question about it. It’s right in front of your noses, but evidently as invisible as water is to the fish that swim in it.

  31. 86

    Bill

    @Greg: Look at the timeline of events as they unfolded and the points at which there was understanding of them, and then look at the locations of available military forces.

    Same lame-ass excuse, Greg. How long were the ex-Navy SEALS going to hold out, Greg? How long could they fight on? Unknown, right? Yet Hillary and Obama just wrote them off and went to bed (Obama had an important fundraiser to attend to the following day). Too much trouble to scramble jets or the forces in Tripoli. Not worth it. Probably dead anyway. Right, Greg?

    Disgusting. Absolutely and totally disgusting. And YOU defend it.

  32. 88

    Bill

    @Greg: Yeah. Lame ASS. They could have lasted for hours. No one knows how long. But with Obama, if they were goddamn deserters, he would have tried. With Hillary, if they were campaign contributors, she would have tried. But, unfortunately for them, they were just brave Americans… people liberals ignore.

    L a m e A s s.

  33. 89

    Greg

    @Bill, #88:

    So why did the House Intelligence Committee report released in November 2014 after exhaustive investigations find no wrongdoing in connection with Benghazi, and no evidence of any deliberate effort to mislead the the American people on the part of the Obama administration? How is it that five previous Congressional investigative panels came to essentially the same conclusions?

    The House was under republican control when the Benghazi incident occurred, and has been continuously under republican control throughout the investigations. Are they all part of the Benghazi cover-up conspiracy? It was the House’s own investigative committee that thoroughly investigated and formally debunked the GOP’s favorite Benghazi allegations. It wasn’t some snow job undertaken by democrats.

    GOP-led House panel releases Benghazi probe findings

  34. 90

    Missy

    @Greg:

    Hillary’s emails were under her control at that time, since that investigation more information has been revealed. Now the FBI is on it because of the Inspector General’s investigation and the House still has that special committee going strong. So, old news may be good news for you, but for the rest of us it’s way past the sell by date.

  35. 91

    Greg

    What more has been revealed? I haven’t heard about any recent Benghazi revelations.

    As near as I can tell, a lot of people still haven’t taken in the fact that House republicans are totally ignoring the findings of their own investigative panels and committees. They’re already running a couple of revelations behind.

  36. 92

    Bill

    @Greg:

    What more has been revealed? I haven’t heard about any recent Benghazi revelations.

    That’s because you work very hard to maintain your willful ignorance. “Exhaustive” is a peculiar choice of words since it must be exhausting trying to get information out of this administration. As shown, recent emails show that ALL knew they were lying (LYING) about the video; NO evidence pointed to that and most EVERYTHING pointed to a terrorist attack (a pre-warned terrorist attack).

    But, that’s OK, Greg. You have the right to ignorantly support a corrupt liar that fails at every attempt at governance. In fact, you have a history of it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *