1, Missing boxes of emails
2. Docs show WH coordinated with Clinton camp on email issues
3. State Dept. And White House Coordinated To ‘Crush’ Clinton Email Coverage
The State Department and White House coordinated to shield Sec. of State John Kerry from being asked last March about Hillary Clinton’s emails in an interview on CBS News’ “Face the Nation,” newly released emails show.
“Think we can get this done so [Kerry] is not asked about email,” Jennifer Palmieri, then the White House’s communications director, wrote to then-State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki on March 12, 2015, two days after Clinton held her first press conference to answer questions about her email practices.
The emails were obtained by the Republican National Committee in a lawsuit and viewed by The Daily Caller. The Wall Street Journal and Washington Examiner also reported on the documents.
4. Wall Street Journal (Behind paywall)
5. Watchdog group accuses Clinton campaign of election law violations
A nonpartisan watchdog group Thursday called for a federal investigation of Hillary Clinton’s campaign committee, accusing it of illegally accepting millions of dollars worth of “opposition research” and other assistance from Correct the Record, an outside super-PAC, in violation of U.S. election laws.
The Campaign Legal Center also filed complaints with the Federal Election Commission to initiate probes of Donald Trump’s campaign, and two super-PACs backing it, for similar violations of laws barring “coordination” between political campaigns and outside groups.
But the Campaign Legal Center’s detailed 52-page complaint against Hillary for America and Correct the Record — part of the sprawling political empire run by Clinton backer David Brock — is likely to get special attention, given Clinton’s repeated advocacy of campaign finance reform. She has vowed to “curb the influence of big money in American politics” and to push for a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United — the controversial ruling that opened the door for groups such as Correct the Record to accept unlimited donations to benefit political candidates.
6. White House coordinated with State Department, Clinton campaign on email issue, documents show
Docs show WH coordinated with Clinton camp on email issues
Newly disclosed emails show top Obama administration officials were in close contact with Hillary Clinton’s nascent presidential campaign in early 2015 about the potential fallout from revelations that the former secretary of state used a private email server.
Their discussion included a request from the White House communications director to her counterpart at the State Department to see if it was possible to arrange for Secretary of State John Kerry to avoid questions during media appearances about Mrs. Clinton’s email arrangement.
In another instance, a top State Department official assured an attorney for Mrs. Clinton that, contrary to media reports, a department official hadn’t told Congress that Mrs. Clinton erred in using a private email account.
7. FBI files reveal missing email ‘boxes’ in Clinton case, allegations of evidence tampering
(Video at site)
Buried in the 189 pages of heavily redacted FBI witness interviews from the Hillary Clinton email investigation are details of yet another mystery — about two missing “bankers boxes” filled with the former secretary of state’s emails.
The interviews released earlier this month, known as 302s, also reveal the serious allegation that senior State Department official Patrick Kennedy applied pressure to subordinates to change the classified email codes so they would be shielded from Congress and the public
8. Bill Whittle on Clinton’s use of her office for gain
9. Was Donald Trump told that illegals are being allowed to vote, and that is why Obama won’t deport them?
There is a ton more in the daily links post.
Thank you, Wrath of Khan, M., Richard and a LOT of people who are on top of this.
Again, this is not the focus of this site. But its very difficult to untangle a US administration that seems to be heavily working with the Muslim Brotherhood to “fundamentally transform America” at a few levels. Certainly having a country as powerful as the US and as corrupt as it appears to be, with Clinton inventing her reality as she goes along, and for what appears to be her own personal benefit and not despite its consequences, but perhaps for those consequences to the state.
It is hard to ignore. In fact, its downright depressing. If only this was between JFK and Barry Goldwater. At least both men loved liberty, America and her constitution. As opposed to this judge for example.
Please add related links to reliable sources on the various clinton crimes in this post if you all would. And thank you.
I would love to say that this family is what has caused the corruption in DC, I would love to but I can’t. There has always been corruption in the political process of all nations, but the Clintons are the ones that are the first people to occupy the White House that work against the Nation that they were suppose to lead and protect. They are the catalyst that brought the corruption to new new heights and to corrupt all who are around them.
This crime family has corrupted and politicized all Departments in the Administrative branch of the US Government and through their Judaical appoints have corrupted the Judicial System and our Judicial Code. The corruption that they have spread through out the Democrat Party and has continued under President Obama who has brought in members of foreign groups that are sworn to destroy the US and Western Civilization into high ranking positions in his administration. All who love freedom and the rule of law need to work against the election of Hillary and for her and her advisors to be tried and sent to prison for a very long time.
This one isn’t directly about her scandals but is indirectly connected, it also may be wishful thinking but I think is is probably right.
How Poll Bias Obscures Trump’s Likely Election
Be mindful of secret rejecters and false positives.
“Put not your trust in princes” as Psalm 146 advises… nor put such trust in princesses or polls. For “princess,” awaiting a queenly coronation, read Hillary C and for “polls” include any of those focused on the current presidential race.
In point of fact, as the Brits would say, the proper way to read the current presidential polls may be with a modicum of cryptographic decoding and guided by a few essential considerations.
The first is the obvious fact that a respondent answering the pollster may not rank toward the top of the ingenuousness scale. That is to say, he (she) may be directly lying about, or incorrectly predicting, his (her) ultimate vote… and that includes, as well, the possibility of not voting at all.
The second pertinent fact is that such inauthentic self-reports are not randomly distributed so as to generate mere statistical “noise” of the sort reflected in the reported “error limits” of the particular poll. To the contrary, the majority of those who misinform the interviewer may go in one direction rather than the other, whether the choice is between classical or country music or between Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump.
From what precedes there follows this crucial assertion: considerably more pro-Clinton respondents in the current polls will, in ultimate fact, vote for Trump than will “Trumpers” vote for Clinton. A much smaller number of others will vote for the Libertarian candidate or won’t vote at all. Does this prediction have a basis in any reality known to pollsters, sociologues, and social psychologists or is it mere wishful conjecture? It does indeed have a very potent basis. To use the jargon of the social psychologist, that basis is now called “Evaluation Apprehension.”
Simply put, EA is the respondent’s concern that he be positively evaluated by the interviewer who is on the phone or at the other end of the social media link. This inner pressure toward positive self-presentation is, of course, stronger in some people and weaker in others. But if there are cues available suggesting what the asker privately favors, those among the asked who are prone to EA arousal will tend to shape their answers in the direction that they think likely to win the asker’s approval or at least to fend off his displeasure.
And are such cues actually available? Of course they are and in vast supply. The media and digital spheres are full of them, as we know to the point of surfeit, and the redundant prevailing message is that Trump is crude, ignorant, brutal, sexist, probably criminal, and incapable of sustained thought. In effect, his possible election looms as a national disaster that must be prevented.
Amplified through the now omnipresent media blitz this view of Trump is available to all, influencing many, fostering rejection by others, and undisclosed rejection by yet a few others. It is the last group, the secret rejecters, who are most prone to enact the EA sequence: say Clinton to the pollster, but vote against her or don’t vote at all at the “moment of truth.”
It follows that the slight Clinton majorities coming from the “closely contested” and electorally crucial states such as Pennsylvania, Florida, and North Carolina may be illusory. If there is a small silent majority for Trump out there it will show from the privacy of the voting booth rather than in the polls.
But to this realistically optimistic assurance, a worried postscript must be added. Namely, that so much depends on whether Trump can, for the next month, render irrelevant the dour view from another biblical source, Ecclesiastes who tells us that “Vanity of vanities, all is vanity.”
http://spectator.org/how-poll-bias-obscures-trumps-likely-election/?utm_source=American+Spectator+Emails&utm_campaign=96b415db3d-Friday_October_7th10_7_2016&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_797a38d487-96b415db3d-104523669
We have all seen the videos of the way Trump supporters are treated in the cities so a lot of them will not say they are going to vote for Trump because of fear of this getting out and their getting hurt or killed by the mob action of the Hillary supporters.
Fueled by Hillary Clinton, White House Debated Nominating Wikileaks Founder for Obama-Controlled Drone “Kill List”
Just hours after Hillary Clinton proposed to top aides killing Wikileaks founder Julian Assange with a military drone, the then-Secretary of State attended a stealth White House meeting of the country’s top intelligence brass assembled to nominate potential human targets for execution by drone, according to State Department and U.S. intelligence sources.
Dubbed “Terror Tuesday” and “Killer Tuesday” by U.S. intelligence agency insiders, Clinton met with President Obama and National Security Council members, among other diplomats, on Tuesday, November 23, 2010 in the Situation Room to specifically hand-select the next so-called national security threats to die via the U.S. drone strike program, sources confirmed. Assange, largely considered internationally as a trouble-making journalist and muckraker, was part of that Tuesday’s proceedings and debate, sources familiar with the meeting have confirmed to True Pundit.
Terror Tuesday was the day at the White House every few weeks during President Barack Obama’s first term when the highest ranking members of the U.S. government conveyed to nominate what human targets were going to die and which other targets were likely to be spared from deadly U.S. military drone strikes on the international landscape. If the Terror Tuesday hierarchy lobbied for a certain assassination, President Obama could be swayed to add that individual to a stealth government “kill list” and target them for drone execution, sources confirmed. It was that simple: This enemy of the U.S. lives. That enemy of the U.S. dies. There was never any Congressional oversight of the meetings or Senate input to confirm or deny the fate of individual human drone strike targets. Therefore, actors thousands of miles away, including Assange and even U.S citizens located abroad, had zero clue that their terror target value was being debated and their fates decided in a crowded White House conference room filled with bureaucrats on a regular and arbitrary basis.
President Obama alone decided who died via drone strike, sources said. The largely secret initiative granted President Obama sweeping and chilling power to kill at will anyone, including Americans, whom he considered a threat to national security, absent accountability and seemingly valid legal precedent. And at least two Americans so far — Anwar al-Awlaki and fellow propagandist Samir Khan (who wasn’t on the kill list but was traveling with Awlaki) — have proven fatalities. Hundreds of other foreign nationals nominated on Terror Tuesday have likewise been targeted and killed. What about a person’s constitutional rights under U.S law or human rights safeguards under international law and weighed by impartial judges and juries? These rights weren’t considered as part of the quiet Terror Tuesday initiative. President Obama ultimately served as judge, jury and executioner.
http://truepundit.com/fueled-by-hillary-clinton-white-house-debated-nominating-wikileaks-founder-for-obama-controlled-drone-kill-list/
ICE Officials Tell TRUMP Illegals Are Being Allowed to Vote – That’s Why They They Won’t Deport Them
Jim Hoft Oct 7th, 2016 9:47 am 379 Comments
ICE officials reportedly told Donald Trump illegal aliens are being allowed to vote this year.
What you pick up in the conversation is agent from Tucson telling Donald Trump basically why are these undocumented illegals with criminal records, why aren’t they being kicked out. And why is there such a rush to give these illegals citizenship. And he says the ICE official says simply so they can vote.
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/10/ice-officials-tell-trump-illegals-allowed-vote-thats-wont-deport-criminals/
Richard: They are fast tracking citizenship for everyone they can, they think the vast majority of these will vote for Hillary.
JudicialWatch: New Benghazi e-mail shows DoD offered State Dept. Forces that could move to Benghazi immediately – specifics blacked out