Posts tagged ‘lying’
Hillary – Warts and All
Posted on July 6, 2016
Hillary’s main claims about the email scandal have been proven as lies. Read below and find out just exactly how she lied.
Key assertions by Hillary Clinton in defense of her email practices have collapsed under FBI scrutiny, as Associated Press fact check has found.
A look at Clinton’s claims since questions about her email practices as secretary of state surfaced and how they compare with facts established in the FBI probe:
CLASSIFIED MATERIAL ON EMAIL
CLINTON: ‘I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified material.’ News conference, March 2015.
THE FACTS: Actually, the FBI identified at least 113 emails that passed through Clinton’s server and contained materials that were classified at the time they were sent, including some that were Top Secret and referred to a highly classified special access program, Comey said.
Most of those emails — 110 of them — were included among 30,000 emails that Clinton returned to the State Department around the time her use of a private email server was discovered. The three others were recovered from a forensic analysis of Clinton’s server. ‘Any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position or in the position of those with whom she was corresponding about the matters should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation,’ Comey said. Clinton and her aides ‘were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information,’ he said.
CLINTON: ‘I never received nor sent any material that was marked classified.’ NBC interview, July 2016.
THE FACTS: Clinton has separately clung to her rationale that there were no classification markings on her emails that would have warned her and others not to transmit the sensitive material. But the private system did, in fact, handle emails that bore markings indicating they contained classified information, Comey said.
He said the marked emails were ‘a very small number.’ But that’s not the only standard for judging how officials handle sensitive material, he added. ‘Even if information is not marked classified in an email, participants who know, or should know, that the subject matter is classified are still obligated to protect it.’
‘I PROVIDED ALL MY EMAILS THAT COULD POSSIBLY BE WORK RELATED’
CLINTON: ‘I responded right away and provided all my emails that could possibly be work related’ to the State Department. News conference, March 2015.
THE FACTS: Not so, the FBI found.
Comey said that when his forensic team examined Clinton’s server it found there were ‘several thousand work-related emails that were not in the group of 30,000’ that had been returned by Clinton to the State Department.
‘I THOUGHT IT WOULD BE EASIER TO CARRY JUST ONE DEVICE’
CLINTON: ‘I thought it would be easier to carry just one device for my work and for personal emails instead of two.’ News conference, March 2015.
THE FACTS: This reasoning for using private email both for public business and private correspondence didn’t hold up in the investigation. Clinton ‘used numerous mobile devices to view and send email’ using her personal account, Comey said. He also said Clinton had used different servers.
‘THERE WERE NO SECURITY BREACHES’
CLINTON: ‘It was on property guarded by the Secret Service, and there were no security breaches. … The use of that server, which started with my husband, certainly proved to be effective and secure.’ News conference, March 2015.
CLINTON campaign website: ‘There is no evidence there was ever a breach.’
THE FACTS: The campaign website claimed ‘no evidence’ of a breach, a less categorical statement than Clinton herself made last year, when she said there was no breach. The FBI did not uncover a breach but made clear that that possibility cannot be ruled out.
‘We assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton’s personal email account,’ Comey said.
He said evidence would be hard to find because hackers are sophisticated and can cover their tracks. Comey said his investigators learned that Clinton’s security lapses included using ‘her personal email extensively while outside the United States, including sending and receiving work-related emails in the territory of sophisticated adversaries.’ Comey also noted that hackers breached the email accounts of several outsiders who messaged with Clinton.
Comey did not mention names, but a Romanian hacker who called himself Guccifer accessed and later leaked emails from Sidney Blumenthal, an outside adviser to Clinton who regularly communicated with her.
More From The Travels of Hillary Clinton As She Travels Down “DENIAL RIVER”
Michael Ramirez – Tuesday, May 17, 2016
URL of the original posting site: http://townhall.com/political-cartoons/michaelramirez/
by AWR Hawkins, 9 Mar 2015
URL of the Original Posting Site: http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/03/09/obama-important-second-amendment-responsible-for-high-homicide-rates/
Speaking at Benedict College in South Carolina on March 6, President Obama said the “Second Amendment … is important,” that it is “part of our culture” and “part of who were are.” Then he quickly added, “But what we also have to recognize is, is that our homicide rates are so much higher than other industrialized countries–by like a mile.”
So, the Second Amendment is important but…
Moreover, Obama hinted that the individual right to bear arms–the very right protected by the Second Amendment–is the result of a Supreme Court interpretation. On June 22, Breitbart News reported that The Washington Post espoused this same liberal talking point, claiming that the Supreme Court created an individual right to keep and bear arms via the District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) decision.
In other words, prior to 2008, there was no individual right to keep and bear arms. It wasn’t what our Founding Fathers intended and it wasn’t what generation upon generation of Americans from 1791 to 2008 believed and lived by. It’s all based on a decision by a group of justices.
In his speech, aired on C-SPAN, Obama said:
We have a long tradition of gun rights and gun ownership in this country. The Second Amendment has been interpreted by the Supreme Court to mean the people have the right to bear arms. There are a lot of law-abiding, responsible gun owners who use it for protection or sport. They handle their weapons properly. There are traditions of families passing down [hunting] from father to son, or daughter … and that is important; that’s part of who we are. But what we also have to recognize is, is that our homicide rates are so much higher than other industrialized nations–by like a mile.
However, the gun control lobby’s relentless claim that America’s homicide rate is so much higher than other industrialized countries breaks down under scrutiny.
For example, in August 2013, Breitbart News reported on a study in the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy which showed that the murder rate in heavily gun-controlled Russia was approximately 20.52 per 100,000 people in 2002. A high point for America was 6.6 per 100,000 people in 1993, and that rate fell to 3.2 per 100,000 by 2011, after the number of privately owned guns in America went from 192 million in 1994 to 310 million in 2009.
So, 20.52 per 100,000 people are murdered in Russia versus America’s 6.6 per 100,000–later to be 3.2 per 100,000–yet, according to President Obama, America’s murder rate is, “like a mile” higher than that of other industrialized countries.
DISCLAIMER BY JERRY BROUSSARD OF WHATDIDYOUSAY.ORG
Joseph Farah is a highly opinionated patriot. I have enjoyed many of his articles. With that in mind, please take care as you read the following knowing it is the opinion of Joseph Farah, and not WhatDidYouSay.org. While I have heard a vast number of people discuss this, along with multiple scenarios of how it could happen, and the facts surrounding what Imperial President Obama has done in office, including his developing his own civilian Army by transforming Homeland Security into his own machine.
Still, what you are about to read is heavy speculation. Take it for what Joseph Farah intended; to make you think and ask questions.
Jerry Broussard of WhatDidYouSay.org
Posted By Joseph Farah On 03/05/2015
Article reblogged from WND: http://www.wnd.com
URL of the Original Posting Site: http://www.wnd.com/2015/03/will-obama-leave-office-in-2017/
Question: Why are Americans so certain there will be a presidential election in 2016 and that Barack Obama will leave office in January 2017?
Answer: Because it’s the law and because it’s American tradition.
However, we currently have a man in the White House who respects neither the law nor the American tradition of peaceful changes of power. With regard to his contempt of the law, here are just a few examples:
- He abused his executive authority for the purpose of effectively changing immigration law, even after admitting repeatedly that he had no constitutional authority to do so. He even broke administrative law in the process, according to a federal judge who reviewed the action and ruled it was illegal. Obama’s response? He dug in his heels and doubled down in his determination to carry out his illegal plan, threatening any government employees who refused to execute his order with retribution.
- He conducted military intervention in Libya without congressional approval.
- In Operation Fast and Furious, the Obama administration ordered gun store owners to illegally sell thousands of firearms to Mexican drug dealers, resulting in the deaths of many including Border Patrol agent Brian Terry.
- He gave $535 million in taxpayer dollars to campaign contributors and lobbyists, claiming it was for a revolutionary “green energy” startup called Solyndra that would create 4,000 new jobs. The company quickly went bankrupt, after selling its product for less than the cost of production. By publicly overstating the company’s financial condition, Obama broke the same law that resulted in Martha Stewart, a private citizen, going to prison.
- By appointing dozens of “czars” without seeking Senate confirmation, Obama violated the Constitution according to Democrats Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W.V., and Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis.
- He signed Obamacare into law despite the fact that it was a revenue bill and did not initiate in the House of Representatives as per the Constitution.
As for his disrespect for American tradition, recall that as a candidate for the presidency he called for “the fundamental transformation of America.”
While downplaying and ignoring foreign threats to national security, Obama and his administration have both hyped the domestic threat of “right-wing extremists,” even participating in a raid of a lawful Texas political meeting in which all parties were detained and fingerprinted.….
So with all of this history – and much more, in fact – why do we assume Obama will step aside willingly from the presidency following an election in 2016?
Maybe we assume he will respectfully leave office after two terms because he has publicly said he would. In 2013, Obama said he and his family might remain in Washington after leaving office.
But that begs the question of whether Obama is truthful.
Remember what he said about his immigration order before issuing it: “This is something I’ve struggled with throughout my presidency. The problem is that I’m the president of the United States; I’m not the emperor of the United States. My job is to execute laws that are passed. And Congress right now has not changed what I consider to be a broken immigration system. And what that means is that we have certain obligations to enforce the laws that are in place even if we think that in many cases the results may be tragic. … [W]e’ve kind of stretched our administrative flexibility as much as we can.”
Remember what he said about Obamacare before it was implemented: “No matter how we reform health care, we will keep this promise to the American people. If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor, period. If you like your health-care plan, you’ll be able to keep your health-care plan, period. No one will take it away, no matter what.”
Remember what he said about ISIS? Now what does he say? “I didn’t call the Islamic State a ‘JV’ team.”
Again, do I think Obama will leave office in January 2017? Yes I do.
But, with a track record like this – and, actually much worse – should we simply take it for granted?
Media wishing to interview Joseph Farah, please contact firstname.lastname@example.org.
A Washington woman who received a presidential shout-out learned afterwards that if Obamacare is too good to be true, it probably is. It turns out that the “affordable” coverage she was originally promised is unaffordable, and she’ll have to go without.
When touting the Affordable Care Act at his Oct. 21 Rose Garden speech, President Barack Obama added a heartwarming and memorable testimonial from a struggling single mom, according to the Washington State Wire.
“I recently received a letter from a woman named Jessica Sanford in Washington state, and here’s what she wrote,” the president said, who then read from her letter.
I am a single mom, no child support, self-employed, and I haven’t had health insurance for 15 years because it is too expensive. My son has ADHD and requires regular doctor visits, and his meds alone cost $250 a month. I have had an ongoing tendinitis problem due to my line of work that I haven’t had treated. Now, finally, we get to have coverage because of the ACA for $169 a month. I was crying the other day when I signed up. So much stress lifted.
Obama closed with the following: “Now, that is not untypical for a lot of folks like Jessica who have been struggling without health insurance,” he said. “That is what the Affordable Care Act is all about.”
When Sanford applied for coverage under Obamacare, she was informed that most of her premiums would be covered by a tax credit.
“I’m really terribly embarrassed,” she told the Wire. “It has completely turned around on me. I mean, completely.”
Another Obamacare computer glitch, as the Wire reported:
Chalk it up to a bollixed-up state website that apparently still has major problems. Originally it said Sanford and her child would get a whopping tax credit that would reduce their total premium to $169 a month. Now the state is telling her it goofed – twice – and she has to pay full ticket. There may even be a third goof involved: At least one health-insurance broker says she may qualify for a tax credit after all, albeit a small one. Officials at the state Healthplanfinder website could not be contacted Sunday night. But it just goes to show that even in the state of Washington, which has earned national kudos for a health-insurance exchange that seems to function better than the dysfunctional federal website, there are big, big problems.
Sanford’s $169 health insurance premium was based on her qualification for a monthly $452 discount.
Four days after the president’s shout-out to her, Sanford received her first letter from the state, informing her that the previous calculations were made in error and that her discount would be reduced to $110. She felt she could still work with this by switching to a less favorable plan — one with higher deductibles and copays.
“I knew I would be struggling in my slow months,” Sanford said. “I didn’t know how I was going to do it. But honestly, I just wanted to get it in my budget and start working on it right away and start working on saving money toward it – that was all I could do, just work at it and hope for the best and try to take the money from here or there or wherever.”
Then the other shoe dropped. She got a second letter from the state last week informing her that she was entitled to no tax credit at all. She has no choice but to continue without insurance.
“They have to own up to what is going on,” Sanford says. “They have to fix it. They can’t just go around and say this is working great. In my opinion they ought to shut it down and just get all of it straightened out.”
So much for the “affordable” in the Affordable Care Act.
Because of this backlash, Obama made what is now being called a “fake apology” on national television. But, what how are the Democrats in Congress handling this “bungled” implementation of a “thrown together in a rush” health care fiasco? With the 2014 elections just around the corner, one Democrat is calling Obama’s guarantee of “If you like your healthcare plan, you can keep your healthcare plan, period” grossly misleading the American public.
Rep. Kurt Schrader (D-OR) stated on KGW-TV, “A lot of Americans, a lot of Oregonians, have stayed with the same policy for a number of years and are shocked that their policy got canceled.”
According to The Daily Caller:
“So I think the President saying you could stay with it and not being honest that a lot of these policies were going to get canceled was grossly misleading to the American public and is causing added stress and added strife as we go through a really difficult time with healthcare,” Schrader added.
Democratic Minority Whip Steny Hoyer acknowledged two weeks ago that Democrats had been aware that some people might lose their insurance plans when the law took effect, saying, “We knew there would be some policies that would not qualify and therefore people would be required to get more extensive coverage.”
At a Tuesday briefing with reporters, Hoyer said he disagreed with Schrader’s statement.
“Do I think he grossly misled? No,” Hoyer stated.
“I think the president was not precise, and I think that, he should have been precise,” Hoyer said. “We all should have been more precise.”
Wow! There is so much manure coming out of Washington these days that a couple of these Democrat Obama idolators needs to stand in the small garden plot my parents have to fertilize it for this spring’s planting season. They would have a bumper crop for sure!
It is nice to see that Schrader is calling Obama’s statement “grossly misleading;” however, Obama lied – not once, not twice, but repeatedly, in order to deceive the American public into accepting Obamacare for something it is not. The only reason America is going through a “really difficult time with healthcare” is because of the unconstitutional, atrocious Obamacare. Schrader is attempting to fool his constituency and the American public into thinking he is advocating for the citizenry. The only thing he is advocating for is keeping his seat in the House to be exempt from Obamacare and assist with the “nobility rule” of the American masses.
“We knew some people had policies that covered what they needed but we wanted them to purchase more than what they needed because we know what is best for everyone where their health is concerned.”
I can see where single males might need that prenatal care coverage or contraceptive coverage and possibly baby murder coverage; after all, the pregnancy rate among single males is staggering. (Yes, this is heavy sarcasm.)
Hoyer, in contrast to Schrader, excuses outright lying by qualifying that the president and Congress “were not precise.” Hello? Hoyer? Anybody home in that brain of yours? I can see the lights are on but no one is answering the door!
These people think Americans are stupid. Video evidence abounds showing Obama making a precise, definitive, clear, unmistakable statement – “If you like your healthcare plan, you can keep your healthcare plan, period.” I pride myself on reading and verbal comprehension as it was drilled into me by first my mother, then my college professors and nursing instructors. Can someone please tell me where this statement is not precise and where this statement is unclear? Obama didn’t give all the details and hid from the American public the true effect of this healthcare monster. He engaged in deception and fraud.
Obama has been back-peddling and issuing qualifying statements in contrast to his “less than precise” statement, even to the point of denying making that definitive statement. This man thinks everyone in America is a fool and that video evidence is a lie. Everyone is lying; everyone is against him; everyone misunderstood. This is the repertoire of victim mentality.
Poor, poor Obama! He’s a victim of those nasty Republican, the terrorist Tea Party groups and those annoying Christians so we have to help him by supporting his anti-American agenda; if we don’t, we’ll be labeled as racists. Democrats act like their hands are tied by their political party. Democrats passed this law without a single Republican vote. Democrats passed this law without even reading it. Democrats chose to knowingly inflict injury on the American public. So, Democrats own this mess and no amount of “playing victim” can change that. There are no victims in Washington.
Schrader and Hoyer need to go; vote them out. Obama and his cronies knew when this law was passed millions of Americans would lose healthcare insurance they were satisfied with. Those Democrats who were elected after the law was passed knew weeks before implementation millions of Americans would lose healthcare insurance they were satisfied with. Schrader is hitting the band wagon early to keep his position. Hoyer, his nose still up Obama’s anus, really doesn’t give two shakes so he follows lead by issuing qualifying statements.
As time goes on and the full impact of Obamacare is exposed, there will be more manure, back-peddling, and qualifying statements issued all around in order that these deceiving Democraps can keep their seat of power. It all revolves around keeping themselves part of the “ruling nobility:” no more, no less. Sadly, they don’t care what they have to do to remain there even if it means selling out their constituents and all of America. Franklin D. Roosevelt and Lyndon B. Johnson would be so proud of this “New Deal – Great Society.”
Ted Cruz: “I Don’t Trust Republicans.”
Stephen King said: “The trust of the innocent is the liar’s most useful tool.”
We are a world of liars; a Mecca to deceivers; living to eke out inches simply to get ahead. Once there–in a comfortable position–we lie even more, so that we may stay in that position. The reason we have Presidential term limits is because of this very human compulsion to lie. We have term limits because power is a strong tonic that, once taken, invigorates the user, and can compel them to do whatever it takes to stay in power.
Trust is a fool’s gambit. Well, blind trust. Proficient liars—the best of which are in the political world—use blind trust to take advantage of Americans every day. These lies pour from the mouths of Democrats and Republicans like water from the mouth of a river. These lies are never ending. As Reagan said: we must trust, but verify. We must make ourselves good students of character, so that we may see through deception, and find the honest politicians. Difficult as it may be to believe, they do truly exist.
Something I appreciate about Ted Cruz is that he is completely unafraid of offending his own Party. Not only is he articulate, but he stand on his convictions with an unwavering commitment. He gives a killer cross-examination (Dianne Feinstein) and he has a scalpel tongue, slicing apart his opponent’s arguments with surgical precision.
In the vein of offending his own Party, Cruz recently objected to his own Party forming a committee to hash out a budget. According to The Hill:
“Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said he thought it was ‘bizarre’ that a member of his own party was objecting to forming a conference committee with the House to work out a budget.”
McCain said: “Isn’t it a little bizarre, this whole exercise? What we’re saying is that we don’t trust our colleagues on the other side of the Capitol.”
In response to this, Cruz said:
“The senior senator of Arizona urged senators to trust House Republicans…and frankly, I don’t trust Republicans…It’s the leaders of both parties that got us in this mess…A lot of Republicans were complicit in this spending spree.”
What Cruz said has extraordinary resonance for two reasons. One, he is exactly correct regarding Republicans being complicit in spending us to death. Two, he is unafraid of distancing himself from the Party that could very well have to support him in the 2016 Presidential race.
This lack of fear shows a maturity, and an understanding that doing what’s right isn’t about following Party lines; it’s about the truth; no matter the response. Ted Cruz represents an ideal of the Republican Party; an expectation that is often spoken of, but rarely met. Cruz is a rare brand, and we need to support him with everything we have.
In 2016, the Democrats and many Republicans will try to keep us in the dark; Cruz is the point of light toward which we can walk. Trust, but verify. So far, my trust in Cruz has been validated.
Just in case you just arrived here from Mars (or other planetary locations), you will need some guidance on how to listen to the political garbage that is on every media type, and will be getting more intense. Of course, I am not writing to those ideologues that represent 40% of both political parties. I’m writing to the 20% free thinking, “No-Koolaid-Drinking”, human beings that actually think for themselves, and then come to a conclusion to act upon.
Have you noticed people around you trying to have a discussion about anything, and you can’t understand what they are saying because they are talking over one another. Neither actually care what they other is saying, they just want those listening to only hear what they want you to hear. RUDE. You might be thinking, “How did our society ever get this rude?”
Answer?; Listen to any cable political show where pundits are trying to have a discussion. Generally speaking, the person(s) yelling the loudest, trying to drown out their opponents voice, are those that do not want anyone to hear their opponent’s side. Some truth might actually be spoken. Can’t have that. Civil people are those that are secure in their place. They are supported by facts that can be verified. Those that are doing the yelling are usually those that throw out percentages and numbers they can never support, and are never challenged to prove. Maybe someone could invent a button for our television that when pressed would force those speaking to present actual proof, supporting their claims.
Remember, just because someone makes a claim that sounds good, doesn’t mean they are correct. In ancient Middle East was a group of people known as the Berean’s. They where will known for NOT taking anything that someone claimed as fact until they checked it out completely. That is what we need to become. Hopefully, we can start dwindling the two ideology sides, a little at a time, to start doing the same thing.
Imaging. A Society that actually makes its politicians prove what they say.