Search This Blog

Sunday, December 4, 2016

Clinton opponents vow to continue their pursuit

Clinton opponents vow to continue their pursuit
By Katie Bo Williams - 12-04-16 15:44 PM EST

Hillary Clinton's biggest adversaries are continuing their pursuit of the Democratic presidential nominee, even after her defeat in the election.

President-elect Donald Trump has said that he does not plan to push a prosecution of Clinton, but others haven't given up the chase.

House Oversight Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) argues its his "duty" to see his panel's investigations through to their conclusion.

"A political election does not extinguish the need for transparency, truth and justice," he told Fox News this week.

The conservative watchdog Judicial Watch, a longtime Clinton foe, is also promising to continue its work.

It has a swath of ongoing open records cases against the State Department over emails sent on Clinton's personal email server during her tenure at Foggy Bottom.

Judicial Watch has repeatedly sought to depose Clinton herself and, in one case, is seeking the release of the thousands of emails found on disgraced former congressman Anthony Weiner's laptop found to be relevant to the FBI's original probe into Clinton's server.

And Larry Klayman, another longtime anti-Clinton agitator who founded Judicial Watch and now presides over Freedom Watch, has brought a wrongful death suit against Clinton on behalf of the parents of two men killed during the 2012 attacks on the American outpost in Benghazi, Libya.

"Somebody's gotta do it to make the point," Klayman said.

"She's not going away, and these recounts will tell you that," he added, referring to vote recounts in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania that were spearheaded by the Green Party.

Trump's signal that he isn't interested in pursuing action against Clinton was widely interpreted as a sign of his desire to be seen as bringing the country back together after a divisive election.

He initially said that prosecuting Clinton would not be a priority, and later told New York Times reporters that a prosecution of the Clintons would be "very, very divisive" for the country.

Citing a need for unity, Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway said that the president-elect would not push for any charges against Clinton over either her use of a private email server or allegations surrounding the Clinton Foundation.

The actions have disappointed some of Clinton's pursuers, and may have done little to soften the desire among Trump supporters to punish the former secretary of State.

At a victory rally Thursday in Cincinnati, after Trump talked about how fun it was to fight with Clinton, his crowd started the campaign chant of "lock her up."

Klayman said he's happy to play the role for Trump with regards to the lawsuit he is backing.

Patricia Smith and Charles Woods claim in the suit against Clinton that the attacks that killed their sons, Sean Smith and Tyrone Woods, as well as two other Americans, were "directly and proximately caused, at a minimum" by Clinton's use of a private email server while in office.

"We'll be the special prosecutor [Trump] would have appointed to the extent we can," Klayman said. "We're going to pursue her with Benghazi, we're going to pursue her with follow-through with the FOIA cases we have, [and] she's a defendant in the Black Lives Matter case for inciting violence."

In the latter case, Klayman is representing a black Dallas police officer who has accused 17 defendants, including Black Lives Matter, President Obama and Clinton, of inciting "threats and attacks ... against police officers and other law enforcement persons of all races and ethnicities including but not limited to Jews, Christians and Caucasians."

After Conway signaled Trump would not pursue a Clinton prosecution, the leader of Judicial Watch called for the appointment of a special prosecutor.

"President-elect Trump should focus on healing the broken justice system, affirm the rule of law and appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the Clinton scandals," said Tom Fitton, the Judicial Watch president.

"In the meantime, Judicial Watch will vigorously pursue its independent litigation and investigation of the Clinton email, national security and other corruption scandals," Fitton said.

Meanwhile, Chaffetz and other Oversight Committee Republicans have vowed to continue their investigations into the State Department's retention of Clinton's emails, alleged perjury by Clinton and the pay-for-play allegations against the Clinton Foundation.

Prior to the election, the panel had held numerous hearings based on information revealed by FBI Director James B. Comey at the close of the agency's investigation into whether Clinton mishandled classified information.

The hearings were widely panned by Democrats as political theater designed to damage Clinton's chances of winning the White House.

Prior to the election, when Clinton was widely expected to win, Chaffetz vowed at least two more years of Clinton-related investigations.

Oversight Republicans are apparently undeterred by Clinton's return to private life.

"Congress has an obligation to do oversight. I think you'll see that continue," Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) said in late November.

"The records law looks like it was violated in this situation with regards to her emails and keeping records at the State Department. And then of course there's the whole Clinton Foundation information that came out.

"This is some pretty serious things going on here. And I think the American people want to know the truth. We can do it in the right way, in the constitutional way that we're supposed to, but I think it's something that needs to happen," Jordan said.

Mystery Solved

Check Out the $85 Million Dollar Ghost Hotel in Afghanistan Funded by the US Taxpayer

In 2006, a U.S. government overseas private contracting group approved a proposal to build a 209-room, five-star Marriott hotel and luxury apartment building across the street from the U.S. Embassy in Kabul, Afghanistan. 

The project was intended to be sign of tribute to Muslim investors and serve as a “gateway for returning Afghan citizens who have spent time outside of their homeland.”   The U.S. government jumped at the opportunity to spend more money appeasing the elites of Afghanistan and began construction in 2009 with an initial loan of $60 million.  

Years past by.  The money from the federal government was flowing in but the construction was non-existent.  

In 2011, the construction company asked for $27 million more to complete the project.  In 2013, they notified the government contractor that they were stopping all work on the project due to what they claimed were “security issues.”  Since then, the hotel as remained empty and gutted, guarded by U.S. security forces 24/7.  

And today, 10 years later, "all that’s there is an empty shell — a ghost hotel,” Fox Newsreported.

The Special Inspector General for the Afghanistan Reconstruction visited the site in August and October of this year and found the buildings had numerous problems, including structural cracks in the walls and roof, damaged steel beams and columns, and uninstalled doors and windows. The electrical, elevator, communications, fire prevention and suppression, sewer, heating, ventilation, and air conditioning systems were "incomplete." 

The general wrote:

I am writing to alert you to serious deficiencies in the management and oversight of $85 million in loans made by the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (“OPIC”) for the construction of a hotel and an adjacent apartment building, directly across the street from the U.S. Embassy in Kabul, Afghanistan. I recently toured both buildings and was briefed by my staff about the underlying funding of these projects. Both the hotel and the apartment building now appear to be abandoned empty shells, and both loans are in default, possibly as the result of fraud.

No official timetable or plan has been anounced regarding the future of this project.

How does John Bolton stack up against other SecState contenders?

Winning the Jihad War

State Department Refuses to Deny They Sold Hellfire Missile to Cuba (VIDEO)

Hellfire Missile from Taiwan

Image via: Yen Hung / Shutterstock.com

On Friday, news broke that an American Hellfire missile somehow ended up in Cuba in mid-2014 after it failed to return from a NATO exercise in Europe that year. Unsurprisingly, the island country has refused to give it up, and that fact evidently did not stop the Obama administration from going forward with its push to normalize relations with the country. There have been a lot of possible reasons for its disappearance, ranging from sheer incompetence among the military and government bureaucrats to espionage. Given the way the White House handled its press briefing Friday has left another possible route open that I admit I had failed to even consider, as much as I dislike the Obama administration: that they sold it to the Castro regime. When journalists quizzed State Department spokesman John Kirby, he gave the classic “I can neither confirm nor deny” type response. The video has to be seen to be believed:

Even the journalists in attendance are incredulous at his refusal to outright deny it. From the end of the clip:

JOURNALIST: You’re not suggesting that you actually sold this to the Cubans?

KIRBY: I’m not–I’m not at liberty to comment further. As I said–As I said, I’m restricted under law from commenting on specific defense treaty licensing cases.

JOURNALIST: Why can’t you–I don’t understand why you can’t say, “No, we didn’t sell this to the Cubans, it got there by accident–by mistake,”?

KIRBY: I’ve commented as far as I can go.

JOURNALIST: So you wanna leave open the possibility that the US government sold or gave a Hellfire Missile intentionally to the government of Cuba?

KIRBY: I’ve commented on this as far as I can go.

This seems like something that the White House or the State Department would want to get in front of and deny quickly. With the Obama administration’s desire to open relations with Cuba without imposing any real conditions on the Castro regime, it makes it a lot harder to dismiss the idea that the United States did indeed sell or give the missile to them. That the state of affairs with Obama has gotten to this point is a frightening thought. It’s time for the Congressional Oversight Committees to begin some investigations.

The post State Department Refuses to Deny They Sold Hellfire Missile to Cuba (VIDEO) appeared first on RedState.


Read More Here

Obama Refused Plan to Stop ISIS?

(Steven Hayward)

It is well-established that President Bill Clinton more than once in the 1990s refused to capture or kill Osama bin Laden when we had him in our grasp—a fact that Clintons and their retainers have go to great length to deny or obfuscate, including their frantic efforts first to edit and then suppress the TV movie “The Path to 9/11.”

This afternoon NBC News reports Obama’s equivalent dereliction in a bombshell story:

Obama Nixed CIA Plan That Could Have Stopped ISIS: Officials

by   and 

The CIA in 2012 proposed a detailed covert action plan designed to remove Syrian President Bashar Assad from power, but President Obama declined to approve it, current and former U.S. officials tell NBC News.

It’s long been known that then-CIA Director David Petraeus recommended a program to secretly arm and train moderate Syrian rebels in 2012 to pressure Assad. But a book to be published Tuesday by a former CIA operative goes further, revealing that senior CIA officials were pushing a multi-tiered plan to engineer the dictator’s ouster. Former American officials involved in the discussions confirmed that to NBC News.

In an exclusive television interview with NBC News, the former officer, Doug Laux, describes spending a year in the Middle East meeting with Syrian rebels and intelligence officers from various partner countries. Laux, who spoke some Arabic, was the eyes and ears on the ground for the CIA’s Syria task force, he says. . .

A former senior intelligence official said Laux’s ideas—many of them shared by other members of the CIA’s Syrian task force–were heavily represented in the plan that was ultimately presented to Obama.

But the president, who must approve all covert action, never gave the green light. The White House and the CIA declined to comment.

I’ll bet they decline to comment.

  

Read More Here