Faced with felony accusations, Hillary Clinton goes into damage control

After being caught using a secret email account to conduct all of her official State Department business as Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton is now trying to feign transparency to get out of a jam.  The email server was operated out of her house with a domain registered under a fake name, and multiple FOIA requests specifically requesting emails from personal accounts were ignored (not denied, completely ignored).  Also, according to several reports, many of her emails from this account may have already been deleted.

This amounts to a violation of two Federal statutes: the Freedom of Information Act and the Federal Records Act.  The penalties are not good for Hillary Clinton.

from National Review:

But Mrs. Clinton did something here that went well beyond occasional or incidental use of private e-mail accounts. She eschewed the use of an official account entirely, and deliberately established a private e-mail account, apparently maintained on a server in the Clintons’ New York home. As a result, her e-mails were at no time during her tenure in office subject to the Federal Records Act. (She provided some of the e-mails only after she left office, and only when the Department of State asked for them back.) As our friends at Judicial Watch will no doubt remind everyone, there were plenty of Freedom of Information Act requests that would have implicated her e-mails. But they were never searched, even though a reasonable search of all responsive federal records must be made in response to FOIA requests. And the records would have been relevant to congressional inquiries as well, including continuing investigations of the Benghazi attacks. 

Why does that matter? Well, a federal criminal law makes it a felony when any custodian of official government records “willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same.” The crime is punishable by up to three years in prison. And interestingly, Congress felt strongly enough about the crime that it included the unusual provision that the perpetrator shall “forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States.”

read the rest

Now, Hillary Clinton is saying that she wants everyone to read her emails, but this comes only after she’s had plenty of time to destroy whatever she wants destroy.  There is virtually no way of knowing whether any record how many emails she sent using the secret account is accurate because she failed to comply with the Federal Records Act while in office.

Unfortunately, it would be the Obama Justice Department that would be required to press any criminal charges against Hillary Clinton, and the chances of that happening about as good as having the Justice Department prosecute itself. So, even though it’s plainly obvious that Clinton committed a felony, the chances of her facing any actual consequences for it are very slim.

The political damage, however, could be catastrophic.  She will face intense questioning from Congress, who has already subpoenaed what remains of her emails. Judicial Watch is suing for not only her emails, but her top aid Huma Abedin’s as well.  The AP is threatening a lawsuit for her violation of their FOIA requests

At this point, Clinton is damaged goods, and everybody knows it.  

Comment references to Pew Research Center, which found that 63 percent of Republican millennials born between 1981 and 1996 feel that the use of marijuana should be legal. (X)  

geoffmullings is one of my tumblr, Twitter, and Facebook faves. You should follow him. And here is his newspaper’s Twitter, tumblr, website, and Pinterest

Headline of the day: "Maybe Hillary Clinton Should Retire Her White House Dreams"

This isn’t from some right wing blog.  It’s from the National Journal:

"We can’t have a coronation when she’s handing Republicans an inquisition," the Democrat said.

Put me in the same category. Like these two Democrats, I’ve known both Clintons for years. I admire their intelligence and passion and empathy. They’ve been good to my family. I’ve actually long thought that she has the potential to be a better president than he was.

But now I wonder whether there is a part of her that doesn’t want to be president. She seems to be placing obstacles in her lane before the race begins. Is this sabotage or something else?

We’ve had sleazy and stupid—and, now, with these emails, suspicious. If she runs, are we going to have a full Seven Dwarfs?

Seedy.
Sanctimonious.
Self-important.
Slick.  

 My concern is that Clinton does not see this controversy as a personal failing. Rather, she sees it as a political problem that can be fixed with more polls, more money, and more attacks. In a Politico story about the push to assemble a presidential campaign staff, a former senior Clinton aide said, “We have had our head up our ass. This stuff isn’t going to kill us, but it puts us behind the eight ball.”

Due respect, Clinton’s problem isn’t a lack of staff. It’s a lack of shame about money, personal accountability, and transparency.

read the rest

If the law were followed, Hillary Clinton wouldn’t have a choice.  She should be serving 3 years in prison for her felony violation of the Federal Records Act, and that would disqualify her from ever running for office again

Bad News: Eating breakfast, lunch, and dinner is now racist

I’m not going to bother linking to this drivel because I don’t want to give Mother Jones any extra business.  But you should at least see this quote:

When European settlers got to America, they also imported their meal habits: a light meal—maybe cold mush and radishes—in the morning, a heavier, cooked one midday, and a third meal similar to the first one later in the day. They observed that the eating schedule of the native tribes was less rigid—the volume and timing of their eating varied with the seasons. Sometimes, when food was scarce, they fasted. The Europeans took this as “evidence that natives were uncivilized,” Carroll explained to me in an email. “Civilized people ate properly and boundaried their eating, thus differentiating themselves from the animal kingdom, where grazing is the norm.” (So fascinated were Europeans with tribes’ eating patterns, notes Carroll, that they actually watched Native Americans eat “as a form of entertainment.”)

(h/t Weasel Zippers)

Wait…what?  Watching people eat for entertainment is racist? Does that mean I have to stop watching Man vs Food and Anthony Bourdain? Who knew the Food Network, the Travel Channel, and CNN all had such racist intentions!

With liberals, everything is racism.  

The next time some commenter writes us and correct our grammar, I’m just going to let him know he’s a dirty, dirty racist.

It seems like not a day goes by without my reading about some new absurdity. I ran across an article written by some left-wing lunatic who purports to be an English teacher and who is part of what she calls the “social justice movement”. She writes for a blog called Everyday Feminist. She claims that demanding that everyone speak proper English grammar is “grammar snobbery” and is oppressive and racist. Why is it oppressive and racist? Because the dictionary was written by a white supremacist, heteropatriarchal system:

“As educated (and - okay - snarky) activists, we’re quick to respond to “According to the dictionary” arguments with “Who wrote the dictionary, though?”
“We understand that a reference guide created by a white supremacist, heteropatriarchal system does nothing but uphold that status quo.”
“Similarly, we have to use that line of thinking when talking about the English language: Who created the rules? And who benefits from them?”


The author, Melissa A. Fabello, introduced two schools of thought on what she calls successful communication: prescriptive and descriptive grammar. Prescriptive grammar is the true, honest pure language that is correct and acceptable (oppressive grammar).

JERUSALEM—Iranian officers who lead Shiite volunteers from Iran, Iraq, and Afghanistan have taken over the battle against rebels in southern Syria, within six miles of the Golan border, according to a reserve Israeli army general.

Gen. (res.) Israel Ziv, who led counter-terrorism efforts for the Israeli General Staff, wrote in Yediot Achronot Thursday that ten thousand volunteers have been flown in by Tehran to bolster the flagging efforts of the regular Syrian army and their Hezbollah allies from Lebanon in meeting an offensive by Sunni rebels pushing towards Damascus from near the Jordanian border.

“Iran is taking over the reins in Syria,” said Ziv. Members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) stay close to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad on the grounds that he needs protection, he said. “In fact, no military decision [in Syria] is made without [the IRGC].” He described Assad as “a puppet looking out at his lost land.”

The presence of Iranian advisers in Syria and Lebanon in recent years is well known but Ziv writes that there is now an entirely new dimension with Iranian officers leading combat troops within six miles of the Golan Heights, captured by Israel in the Six Day War. There has thus far been no direct clash with Israeli troops, but an Iranian general and five other Iranian military personnel, as well as six Hezbollah militiamen, were killed when an Israeli aircraft attacked vehicles reconnoitering the Golan border in January.

Ziv said the Iranian-led forces were displacing Syrian troops who had been deployed opposite the Golan since the 1973 Yom Kippur War and who kept the Golan line the most peaceful of Israel’s borders with Arab states.

The general said the steady erosion of Assad’s regime since the civil war began four years ago has made him increasingly dependent on Iranian financial and military assistance. What is happening near the Golan border, wrote Ziv, constitutes a strategic threat to Israel no less than that of Iran’s nuclear program.

The IRGC no longer has confidence in the efficacy of the Hezbollah fighters who were supposed to bear the brunt of the fighting in southern Syria, wrote Ziv. They have taken control of the fighting, with the Shiite volunteers. There has been no mention of direct intervention of Iranian combat troops.

The diminution of American presence in the area, wrote Ziv, has enabled Iran to cultivate its ambitions as a regional power. “The U.S. has been attacking [the Islamic State] but it has totally ignored the changes to the balance of forces in the area. It has in fact given backing to the Iranian takeover of Damascus in return for a shaky nuclear arms deal,” wrote the Israeli reserve general.

Iran is close to 1,000 miles from Israel and is separated from it by Iraq and Syria. Iran and Israel have never been at war with each other but have periodically engaged in clandestine operations against each other.

—  Israeli General: Iranian Officers Have Taken Over Battle Against Syrian Rebels http://ift.tt/1EQJg3o
Democrats trying to kill grants for any climate scientist who's not a global warming alarmist

There’s nothing political about science…at least there shouldn’t be.  Science should be based on hard-data and proven facts.  But for Democrats, they want “science” to be based on who’s getting money from whom. 

from Washington Times:

Their objective? To find out whether the organizations “are funding scientific studies designed to confuse the public and avoid taking action to cut carbon pollution, and whether the funded scientists fail to disclose the sources of their funding in scientific publications or in testimony to legislators.”

The result is that Democrats find themselves facing the kind of criticism usually reserved for Republicans in academic circles, even at left-leaning institutions such as the University of Colorado Boulder, where environmental studies professor Roger Pielke Jr. is among those under investigation.

“We stand behind him,” said a university official last week, referring to Mr. Pielke, leading the Denver Post to declare in a Tuesday editorial, “CU rightly defends Roger Pielke Jr. against political bully.”

“I think the Democrats, any time you’re trying to enforce group-think or punish a professor for their scientific and legitimate views — and if you listen to this professor’s [views], they sound fairly reasonable, frankly — I think the Democrats look very bad on this,” Denver political analyst Floyd Ciruli said Sunday on KUSA-TV’s “Between the Lines” with Brandon Rittiman.


Mr. Grijalva said in letters to universities that he wants to ascertain whether the professors have financial conflicts of interest, but his probe has lawmakers, academics and scientists outraged by the potential for a “chilling effect” on research.

The professors have challenged the theory that climate change is driving extreme weather events such as hurricanes and blizzards.

“Publicly singling out specific researchers based on perspectives they have expressed and implying a failure to appropriately disclose funding sources — and thereby questioning their scientific integrity — sends a chilling message to all academic researchers,” said Keith L. Seitter, executive director of the American Meteorological Society, in a letter last week to Mr. Grijalva.

read the rest

If you read that and think, “This is nothing but a political witch hunt,” you wouldn’t be the first to come to that conclusion.  Democrats, the supposed “party of science,” are feeling the pressure because increasingly, actual science does not support their political agenda.  They’re left with no alternative but to attack the scientists who disagree with them.

This is the same kind of political witch hunt that got Galileo jailed for saying that the Earth revolved around the sun. 

The United States Air Force announced new initiatives to recruit and retain more women and minorities, as Air Force Secretary Deborah Lee James warned that those who choose to not understand “diversity and inclusion” will not thrive in the service.

The changes include giving women shorter than 5 feet 3 inches waivers so they can meet the height requirements to become pilots and “gender-neutral standards for all jobs.”

Federal News Radio reports:

Troubled by a lack of women and minorities at the Air Force’s higher levels, its leaders are rolling out nine initiatives focusing on recruitment, promotions and retention. Some are new ideas. Others are existing programs that will be enhanced, Air Force Secretary Deborah Lee James said. […]

Women make up 19 percent of the Air Force. But they are twice as likely as men to cut their military careers short, James noted. Furthermore, she said, both women and people of color are underrepresented in the pilot ranks. She attributed the imbalance to a male-oriented military culture, rigid regulations and laws.

The initiatives were announced on Wednesday to coincide with Women’s History Month. James laid out the plan during a “Women and Leadership in National Security” conference in Washington, D.C.

“Fostering inclusion ensures an environment that capitalizes on the strengths of every individual to achieve his or her maximum potential,” a memo on the initiatives read. “Our foundation will be a reaffirmation of our dedication to leadership’s role because diversity and inclusion are not programs or initiatives; they are national security imperatives and critical force multipliers.”

The Air Force will begin setting “gender-neutral standards for all jobs, including those in the seven career fields now closed to women,” Federal News Radio reported.

The new plan will also “make it easier for shorter people, those under 5-foot-4, to become pilots.”

“Height limits are set according to the size of the most restrictive cockpits, James said, but there are many other planes that shorter people could fly,” according to the report. “By making the waiver process more widely accessible to ROTC cadets, James estimated that 900 more women could become pilots over the next five years.”

The Air Force currently requires pilots to be at least 5 foot 3 inches tall, and no taller than 6 foot 4 inches. They must also weigh between 160 to 231 pounds, depending on height.

The initiatives also include “career development teams” that will create more flexibility for women who leave the service to start families, and “promotion boards” that are “considering whether candidates have proven that they can lead in diverse, inclusive environments.”

“Those who cannot or choose not to understand that point aren’t going to thrive in our Air Force as much as those who do,” James said.

—  Air Force Announces ‘Diversity and Inclusion’ Initiatives to Recruit More Women http://ift.tt/1H0dwrC

Syphilis was all but wiped out around 2000.. Now it’s finding a second life, particularly in Multnomah County. In 2008, there were just 20 cases of syphilis reported in the area. Five years later, that number jumped to 239 a 200% increase. Come On Portland We Can be the http://chumly.com/tag/1 City in America for Syphilis infections. It’s easy, if a man has syphilis it presents as a dime size “chancre”, a raised, demarcated, festering pustule on his penis. This can not be missed. The pus is pungent, and malodorous. If the chancre occurs inside an orifice and is not visible. Then the only sensation would be that of thrusting your penis against sand paper. Either way God gave you fingers for a reason. Use them. They might save you from HIV.

Ted Cruz unveils patient-centered replacement for Obamacare

Ted Cruz is not only the loudest opponent of Obamacare on Capitol Hill. He’s also the only Senator to propose an alternative in the form of an actual bill.  Other so-called “alternatives” have only amounted to general ideas and op-eds but not legislation. 

from the Hill:

Cruz’s bill, called the Health Care Choices Act, would allow people to buy health insurance across state lines, long a Republican health policy goal. It would also repeal Title I of ObamaCare, which would undo much of the law, including the mandate to buy insurance, the insurance marketplaces and subsidies to help people afford coverage.

Republicans are looking to show that they have a plan ready if the court strikes down subsidies for around 7.5 million people in the roughly three-dozen states using federally run marketplaces. The court will hear arguments in the case, King v. Burwell, on Wednesday.

The Obama administration insists that it does not have a contingency plan and that it will prevail in Court.

“The administration has done absolutely nothing to prepare for an upcoming Supreme Court decision that could leave millions of Americans unable to afford insurance thanks to this failed law,” Cruz said in a statement. “Republicans must offer the American people alternatives that lower costs and break the status quo that favors big government and big health care business over hardworking Americans.”

read the rest

The timing of Ted Cruz’s bill is vitally important because yesterday’s oral arguments before the Supreme Court specifically went into the details of what would happen if the majority of justices struck down Obamacare’s illegal Federal subsidies.  The Obama administration claims that there is no alternative to Obamacare (which is laughable because the law has only existed for 4 years), but clearly there are alternatives.  Ted Cruz’s bill completely undermines one of the primary arguments the Obama administration made before the court yesterday.