Tag Archives: Hillary Clinton
Of course, I trust Putin’s mouthpiece about as far as I can throw him, but he’s right in the fact that it’s the JOB of an ambassador to talk to people and build multilateral relationships.
Russian President Vladimir Putin’s spokesman said in an interview Sunday that the Russian ambassador who met with Trump campaign officials also met with “people working in think tanks advising Hillary or advising people working for Hillary.”
“Well, if you look at some people connected with Hillary Clinton during her campaign, you would probably see that he had lots of meetings of that kind,” Dmitry Peskov told CNN “GPS” host Fareed Zakaria. “There are lots of specialists in politology, people working in think tanks advising Hillary or advising people working for Hillary.”
Peskov said it is the job of Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak to meet with officials on both sides to talk about “bilateral relations.”
And Trump, but more Clinton.
(CNN)Donald Trump surpassed the necessary 270 votes in the Electoral College on Monday, taking the next step in the official process to become President.
Trump received 304 electoral votes to Hillary Clinton’s 227. Seven “faithless” electors voted for other candidates, costing Trump two votes and Clinton four. Hawaii’s votes — three for Clinton and one breaking from the state’s results and supporting Bernie Sanders — were the last to be counted.
(CNN)President-elect Donald Trump’s administration will break a campaign promise and not pursue further investigations of Hillary Clinton related to her private email server or the Clinton Foundation, Trump’s former campaign manager Kellyanne Conway said Tuesday.
“I think when the President-elect, who’s also the head of your party, tells you before he’s even inaugurated that he doesn’t wish to pursue these charges, it sends a very strong message, tone, and content” to fellow Republicans, Conway said in an interview on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.”Trump’s decision represents a significant break from a major campaign promise — at the second presidential debate in early October, Trump threatened Clinton, saying that “if I win, I am going to instruct my attorney general to get a special prosecutor to look into your situation.”
In the closing weeks of the presidential race, Hillary Clinton’s campaign — and the outside groups that supported it — aired more television advertisements in Omaha than in the states of Michigan and Wisconsin combined. The Omaha ads were in pursuit of a single electoral vote in a Nebraska congressional district, which Clinton did not ultimately win, and also bled into households in Iowa, which also she did not win. Michigan and Wisconsin add up to 26 electoral votes; she appears not to have won them, either.
Strategic decisions can make all the difference in a close race. Clinton lost the White House (despite winning the popular vote) to Republican Donald Trump on the strength of about 100,000 votes in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. That is the definition of a close race.
But a review of Democrats’ advertising decisions at the end of the race suggests Clinton and her allies weren’t playing to win a close one. They were playing for a blowout. And it cost them.
Hillary Clinton has blamed her defeat in the US presidential election on interventions by the FBI director.
James Comey’s announcement of a new inquiry into her use of email while secretary of state shortly before election day had stopped her campaign’s momentum, Mrs Clinton said.
The Democratic candidate was speaking to top party donors in a phone call, which was leaked to the media.
Never mind her poor campaign, raging ethical issues, illegal activities, and record of failure – not to mention that she was campaigning on the wildly unpopular and failing Obamacare, tepid economy, and overbearing federal government. Nah… those things didn’t have anything to do with it.
Trump’s acceptance speech was everything you would hope it to be. It was gracious, unifying, filled with gratitude, and the uncaveated statement of love for this nation is so welcome after the last 8 years.
Now it is time for America to bind the wounds of division, have to get together. To all Republicans and Democrats and independents across this nation, I say it is time for us to come together as one united people.
It is time. I pledge to every citizen of our land that I will be President for all of Americans, and this is so important to me. For those who have chosen not to support me in the past, of which there were a few people, I’m reaching out to you for your guidance and your help so that we can work together and unify our great country.As I’ve said from the beginning, ours was not a campaign but rather an incredible and great movement, made up of millions of hard-working men and women who love their country and want a better, brighter future for themselves and for their family.It is a movement comprised of Americans from all races, religions, backgrounds, and beliefs, who want and expect our government to serve the people — and serve the people it will.[…]
And I can only say that while the campaign is over, our work on this movement is now really just beginning. We’re going to get to work immediately for the American people, and we’re going to be doing a job that hopefully you will be so proud of your President. You will be so proud. Again, it’s my honor.It’s an amazing evening. It’s been an amazing two-year period, and I love this country. Thank you.Thank you very much. Thank you to Mike Pence.
Of course they did. Did any of you expect a different result?
Hillary Clinton should not face criminal charges after a review of new emails.
“Based on our review, we have not changed our conclusions that we expressed in July,” Comey wrote in the new letter to congressional committee chairmen.
Just consider how reckless, to use the kindest word possible, Clinton was to allow this to happen.
The FBI has found emails related to Hillary Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state on the laptop belonging to the estranged husband of Huma Abedin, Anthony Weiner, according to a U.S. official.
These emails, CBS News’ Andres Triay reports, are not duplicates of emails found on Secretary Clinton’s private server. At this point, however, it remains to be seen whether these emails are significant to the FBI’s investigation into Clinton. It is also not known how many relevant emails there are.
Because of course they did. And we’re also supposed to believe that this same State Department didn’t cover for Clinton either.
Emails from the files of Clinton’s campaign chairman John Podesta show that the department official provided Clinton aides with the agency’s official response to a New York Times reporter in advance of the newspaper’s March 2015 report that Clinton had used a private email account to conduct all of her work-related business as secretary.
The stolen emails were released Wednesday by WikiLeaks, part of a massive trove of emails released by the document-leaking group on a daily basis since last month. WikiLeaks has indicated it intends to leak emails stolen from Podesta’s account every day through the election.
In a March 1, 2015 email, State Department press aide Lauren Hickey told Clinton’s spokesman Nick Merrill and two other advisers that then-State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki had “just cleared” a reply to the Times. Hickey provided the agency’s response to the Clinton aides and also appeared to agree to a change requested by the campaign, saying: “Yes on your point re records – done below.” It is not clear what specific change was requested and made.
Trump earned a -569. Clinton, a -481. That places both candidates in the second-lowest category, characterized as “failure.” “We’ve never seen scores this bad, ever,” sales Alexander Edwards, president of Strategic Vision. When the firm asks consumers to rate vehicles they’ve purchased, there’s rarely a score below 200. One of the lowest scores for any vehicle accrues to the Chevy Express Cargo Van, which earns a score of 207. This is the vehicle that pleases consumers far more than either of their main choices for president this year:
The research firm did similar polling in 2012. President Obama scored 331. His Republican opponent, Mitt Romney, scored 307. Both polled in the range between “satisfied” and “excellent.” There are some obvious difficulties applying polling methodology meant for automobiles to political candidates. For one thing, people who buy a car have dozens of choices, many tailored to their specific needs and desires. This year’s presidential candidates are more like survivors of attrition warfare than market-tested favorites. Clinton’s shiftiness causes huge trust issues; Trump’s caustic treatment of women, minorities and critics suggests he’s a thin-skinned bully.
Given the timing, we likely won’t know any real details until after the election. But there is a real chance that our president will have to illegally quash this investigation or issue an outright pardon to avoid indictment.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Federal investigators have secured a warrant to examine newly discovered emails related to Hillary Clinton’s private server, U.S. media reported on Sunday, as a prominent Democrat accused FBI Director James Comey of breaking the law by trying to influence the election.
The warrant will allow the Federal Bureau of Investigation to examine the emails to see if they are relevant to its probe of the private email server used for government work by Clinton, the Democratic presidential nominee, while she was secretary of state from 2009 to 2013.
FBI officials were unavailable for comment on the status of their investigation. Reuters could not independently confirm that the search warrant had been issued.
I’m not as optimistic as Koffler, but it’s good to see the FBI pretending to be serious.
The FBI today wrote to lawmakers to inform them that it is effectively reopening the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server for State Department business. They’ve found some new emails, though we don’t know what they contain. But it must be pretty bad to do this eleven days before the election.
I can’t underemphasize what a big deal this is. The election is actually quite close. The key factor that will tip it is whether swing voters are more uncomfortable with Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton. This will have voters wondering whether by voting for Hillary they are electing someone who either could wind up in jail or will be under constant investigation.
Not to mention someone wholly unethical.
Doesn’t matter if in a few days the FBI says it’s sewing the case back shut again. The damage is done, and it’s considerable.
Huma Abedin warned Clinton’s campaign team that Hillary would have to ‘stick to her notes’ at an event because she was ‘still not perfect in her head.’
The personal emails, belonging to Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta, were published by WikiLeaks on Tuesday.
The exchange in April, 2015, came at the end of a discussion between the Democratic candidate’s aides about Jeb Bush’s utilization of Super PACs.
Pure bribery taking place here. And yes, bribes are almost always done through intermediaries.
The political organization of Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe, an influential Democrat with longstanding ties to Bill and Hillary Clinton, gave nearly $500,000 to the election campaign of the wife of an official at the Federal Bureau of Investigation who later helped oversee the investigation into Mrs. Clinton’s email use.
It would be true to form.
The ex-agent told the FBI that they were aware of Clinton or her aides ‘removing lamps and furniture from the State Department which were transported to her residence in Washington, D.C.’
The female agent did not know whether the items were returned, the FBI noted.
The claim is particularly resonant for the Clintons, who left the White House with massive amounts of furniture and other items which they then either returned – including sofas, a chair, and an ottoman – or paid for.
In total they declared $190,000 in gifts as they left the White House, but ended up paying $86,000 in cash and handing back $48,000 worth of items – after public outrage at what they had done.
The State Department denied the ex-agent’s allegation, saying it was ‘not true’ and that the items removed from the building had been paid for by the then Secretary of State.
My column for the West Bend Daily News is online. Here it is:
For the first time in my life, I am sitting here in the middle of October of a presidential election year and I do not know for whom I will vote for President of the United States. Yet, choices must be made and the consequences will be felt.
I am a firm believer that one of the responsibilities of citizenship is to inform oneself and vote even when the choices on the ballot are poor. Our electoral system does not allow for do-overs or “none of the above.” Someone will actually win the election and assume power. The voters will decide who that will be and it is my responsibility to express my choice through the ballot box.
Often, perhaps far too often, this choice comes down to choosing the better of two evils. That is the determination many are trying to make this year between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. But as I consider these two choices, I cannot discern a lesser of the two. They are just two evils.
Clinton is one of the most corrupt people in American politics. Her decades in public life have shown her to be a liar whose overriding motivations are rooted in her own advancement. Repeated disclosures have catalogued how she has violated federal law, used the Clinton Foundation as a vehicle to trade money for favors when she was secretary of state, exposed our national secrets to hostile foreign governments, and attacked the women whom her husband allegedly sexually assaulted. She is a vile person who will abuse the office of president for her personal gain and to advance policies detrimental to the United States.
Donald Trump, who was a liberal New York Democrat until he decided he wanted to run for president, has also spent decades in public life swaddling himself with dishonor. He is also a proven liar who has no scruples about trampling the people and institutions around him for his personal advancement. His willful and unapologetic ignorance of the basic tenets of the Constitution, the separation of powers, international affairs, and the basic duties and limits of the executive leave little doubt that President Trump would cast off any remaining moorings of the American presidency.
Many of my fellow conservatives have weighed and measured the two candidates differently and concluded that Trump is a tolerable choice. Some of them argue that the eventual appointments to the Supreme Court and Trump’s mouthing of support for some conservative principles tip the scale. While I understand and respect those arguments and the people making them, it is not a path I can walk with them this time. In Wisconsin, at least, it is a discussion that is more philosophical than tangible. Wisconsin will vote for Clinton irrespective of how the conservative minority splits their votes.
The history of governments amongst people is replete with examples of bad, corrupt, evil leaders in both representative and other forms of government. We will survive and build for ourselves a better future after this setback. It is critical that we build a bulwark against the excesses of a tyrannical presidency by electing strong Conservatives to the House and Senate like Sen. Ron Johnson, Speaker Paul Ryan and representatives Glenn Grothman, Sean Duffy, Mike Gallagher and Jim Sensenbrenner. While that is true in any election, it is paramount in this one.
By the time Election Day is upon us, I will exercise my franchise for the least offensive choice for president and it will likely be for one of the third party candidates. Then I will pray for our nation to fight off the worst excesses of our next president as we look to build a brighter future.
Like I said earlier, there are some real issues out there that are being intentionally ignored during this election. Remember that it was Clinton who was Obama’s Secretary of State during the “reset” with Russia. Well, it worked. We’ve reset it to about 1961.
The next U.S. president will inherit an increasingly fraught relationship with Russia in which Washington’s attempts to deter Putin have mostly failed. Moscow’s decision this month to pull out of a landmark agreement on disposing tons of weapons-grade plutonium, coupled with reports last week that Russia deployed new nuclear-capable missiles to Kaliningrad on the Baltic Sea, underscore how Putin is flexing Russia’s power in new and often unpredictable ways.
U.S. and European officials are increasingly alarmed over Putin’s willingness to risk military confrontation and threaten to use his country’s nuclear arsenal over issues the West sees as unrelated and separate. That makes it devilishly difficult for the United States and its European allies to find an effective response to Putin’s audacious tactics that in recent years range from Russia’s annexation of Crimea, to its air war in support of the Syrian regime, to Moscow’s suspected hacking of America’s presidential election.
“It very much feels like we are entering a very troubled and dangerous phase in this bilateral relationship,“ said Julianne Smith, a former senior Pentagon official who oversaw NATO policy and a former senior advisor to Vice President Joe Biden. “The next president will face some big strategic choices,” said Smith, who now advises Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton on Europe and Russia.
President Barack Obama’s successor will have to choose from a range of unpleasant and risky options when it comes to handling a resurgent Russia, current and former officials said. A more conciliatory stance, aimed at cutting a grand bargain with Russia focused on Ukraine, would defuse tensions in the short term but at the cost of ultimately emboldening Putin. A more hawkish line — like the one championed by Clinton, who is leading nationwide polls — would risk escalation, with the chance of a military showdown in Syria or the Baltics.
On Aug. 17, 2014 — eight months before she declared her candidacy for president — Clinton sent a detailed strategy for combating the Islamic State, which she referred to as ISIL, in an email to John Podesta, then a White House counselor and now her campaign chairman.
Along with a military campaign to roll back the terror group in Iraq, the Clinton email talks about confronting the Saudis and the Qataris, both key U.S. allies, over what she refers to as governmental backing of ISIL.
The Clinton email states: “We need to use our diplomatic and more traditional intelligence assets to bring pressure on the governments of Qatar and Saudi Arabia, which are providing clandestine financial and logistic support to ISIL and other radical Sunni groups in the region.”
As a basis for the assertions, Clinton in the email cites “Western intelligence, U.S. intelligence and sources in the region.”
In a realpolitik view, however, we can’t abandon our decades-old alliance with the Saudis. With Russia asserting its power and influence through its proxies in Iran and Syria, the U.S. needs its alliance with Saudi and the Gulf states to have any influence in the Middle East – a crucial geopolitical fulcrum. So while Clinton is undoubtedly stating a truth, the real question is what are you going to do about it?
We all knew it was happening, and now we have proof. Hillary Clinton’s State Department made it a point to funnel billions of dollars of aid to people who put money in her family’s pocket. It is the purest form of quid pro quo and it is both immoral and illegal.
However noble the motives of the officials working to get supplies into Haiti after the 2010 earthquake, numerous messages show a senior aide to then–Secretary of State Hillary Clinton coordinating with a Clinton Foundation official to identify FOBs. The Clintons have said repeatedly that the State Department never gave favorable treatment to foundation supporters in Haiti or anywhere else.
“Nothing was ever done for anybody because they were contributors to the foundation,” Bill Clinton told CBS News’ Charlie Rose in September. “Nothing.”
The correspondence offers a glimpse into the first stages of a $10 billion Haiti recovery effort. The emails appear to show a State Department process that at times prioritized — and, some argue, benefited — people with close ties to the Clintons.
“I think when you look at both the State Department and the Clinton Foundation in Haiti, that line was pretty faint between the two,” said Jake Johnston, a Haiti analyst for the nonpartisan Center for Economic and Policy Research. “You had a lot of coordination and connection between the two, obviously. And I think that raises significant questions about how they were both operating.”
So I understand from the news this morning that Donald Trump is a sexist pig and Hillary Clinton is a crooked liar. Neither of these facts are revelations. We, as Americans, have chosen two of the most despicable people imaginable to contend for the presidency atop the two major parties.
At this point, given that both candidates are horrible people with enough baggage to fill a caravan on the Silk road to hell, the person who will win the election is the one we talk about the most until election day. The more we talk about Clinton, the more we hate her. The more we talk about Trump, the more we hate him. That’s why Clinton won the first debate – they spent most of the time talking about Trump. If they spend the most time talking about Clinton in the second debate, Trump will win.
I truly hate this presidential election. Our nation is diminished by the mere fact that these are the candidates for the major parties.