BREAKING: Hillary Gets Another Challenger For The Nomination, As Democratic Field Gets Bigger

Former Virginia Senator Jim Webb formally announced his candidacy to seek the Democratic presidential nomination. It will be an uphill battle for Webb, as former secretary of state Hillary Clinton is the consensus favorite, according to recent polls.

Webb made the announcement through a statement on his website Thursday. He acknowledged the difficulty of winning the hearts and minds of Democratic voters:

I understand the odds, particularly in today’s political climate where fair debate is so often drowned out by huge sums of money. I know that more than one candidate in this process intends to raise at least a billion dollars – some estimates run as high as two billion dollars – in direct and indirect financial support. Highly paid political consultants are working to shape the “messaging” of every major candidate.

A RealClearPolitics average of Democratic presidential polls has Webb at 2.3 percent, almost 60 points behind Clinton.

Webb, who served as secretary of the Navy under former president Ronald Reagan, took a jab at Clinton’s vote to go into Iraq. “Let me assure you, as President I would not have urged an invasion of Iraq, nor as a Senator would I have voted to authorize it,” he wrote.

I warned in writing five months before that invasion that we do not belong as an occupying power in that part of the world, and that this invasion would be a strategic blunder of historic proportions, empowering Iran and in the long run China, unleashing sectarian violence inside Iraq and turning our troops into terrorist targets.

The former senator also said he would work to “restore true economic fairness” by “making our tax laws more balanced and increasing the negotiating leverage of our working people.”

In his statement, Webb also called for criminal justice reform. “This isn’t a political issue, it’s a leadership issue. It’s costing us billions of dollars,” he wrote. “It’s wasting lives, often beginning at a very early age, creating career criminals rather than curing them. It’s not making our neighborhoods safer.”

Would Jim Webb be a formidable Democratic opponent? Share your thoughts in the comments section below.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

WATCH: If Every American Saw This 3 Minute Video, Hillary Clinton Wouldn’t Stand A Chance

National Review just released a video compiling in less than three minutes some of the main reasons Hillary Clinton is not a trustworthy choice for the highest office in the land.

The video, which is entitled Who is Hillary Clinton?, opens with various high profile Democrats offering their reasons why Clinton is the best choice. She is the “most qualified,” they all appear to mimic.

“And by the way, thoroughly vetted,” one notes.

The video then delves into several recent revelations (covered by National Review), including:

1) Her use of a personal email server while secretary of state

2) Her wiping that server clean of all those emails, while purporting to turn over hard copies of all the work-related emails to the State Department (which is required by the Public Records Act)

3) The conflicts of interests in play as she served as secretary of state–her husband earned millions of dollars in speaking fees, and the Clinton Foundation took in tens of millions in foreign donations (the most egregious example perhaps being the Uranium One deal with Russia).

4) Her failure to turn over all work-related emails to the State Department, as previously claimed

5) The revelation in some of those emails that Sidney Blumenthal provided solicited, not unsolicited, counsel to Clinton on Libya and other matters, contrary to what she previously claimed. All this occurred while Blumenthal was employed at the Clinton Foundation and had personal business interests in Libya.

Presidential candidate Mike Huckabee asks one important, overarching question concerning her effectiveness as secretary of state (while all the above was going on): “Name one country on this planet, which we have a better relationship than we have in January, 2009?”

As reported by Western Journalism, former President Jimmy Carter asked the same question last week.

A clip of Clinton’s own campaign video brings NRO’s to a close. “Let the conversation begin, I think it’s going to be very interesting,” the candidate says.

h/t: The Right Scoop

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

Watch: Shocked Millennials Consider Changing Their Vote When They Learn THIS About Hillary

Campus Reform set up an informal survey called “Candidates’ Cribs” in front of the White House recently. The college news site (sponsored by the Leadership Institute) asked Millennials walking by to take part.

Each participant was shown pictures of four extravagant mansions and asked to guess who they belonged to among six choices: billionaire Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton, Sen. Marco Rubio, former Md. Gov. Martin O’Malley, Dr. Ben Carson, and former Fla. Gov. Jeb Bush.

Not surprisingly, people mostly guessed Donald Trump, while Rubio and Carson came up a couple of times too.

None of the participants shown in the video picked Hillary Clinton.

The Campus Reform reporter then asked: “What if I told you all four of these homes were Hillary Clinton’s?

People responded with amazement: “What?!” “Oh wow, are you serious?” “Are they really? D–n, she does have that kind of money.”

“I am very surprised, I did not know Hillary Clinton had that much money, at all.”

The reporter asked some participants: “Does this make you question things a bit, if you vote for her?”

“Ah…yeah, it definitely plays a factor whether I vote for her,” a young woman replied.

Another said: “Now, you’re changing my opinion on the election a little bit.”

As reported by Western Journalism, Hillary Clinton claims she wants to be the “champion” of everyday Americans. She says she can relate to their problems because she wasn’t always a member of the top 1 percent of wage earners in America. The Republican Party put out a chart to illustrate just how relatable her salary is to those of everyday Americans.

Clinton famously said that she and Bill were “dead broke” when they left the White House in 2001, even as they purchased a $1.7 million dollar home in Chappaqua in well-to-do West Chester County, just north of New York City. Oprah featured Bill giving a tour of the home on her show. The median annual household income in the town was approximately $160,000 in 2014.

But the Clintons didn’t just have Bill’s pension and Hillary’s salary to make do with; the speaking fees began rolling in almost immediately. The New York Times reports that the Clintons have now earned $125 million in speaking fees since leaving the White House. Their combined income last year, according to a financial disclosure the candidate was required to file, was $30 million.

Bill Clinton was asked last month if he planned to stop taking enormous speaking fees from groups that might create a conflict of interest if his wife should become president, and he said that he would not. The reason why? “I gotta pay the bills,” he responded.

With four mansions to maintain, there are likely bills a-plenty.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

BREAKING: The Supreme Court Just Made A HUGE Move That Threatens Dem Campaign Cash

In a surprise move that could pose a major threat to organized labor — a key Democrat constituency that supports liberal candidates with vast amounts of campaign cash — the U.S. Supreme Court has just said it will hear a controversial case out of California. USA Today reports that the justices have agreed to consider the case of Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association, “challenging the requirement that teachers contribute to unions, even if they don’t join them or agree with their positions on issues.”

The USA Today article points out that, in the most recent case to come before the court in which the forced union dues have been challenged by people who don’t support what those dues have paid for politically, a sharply divided court ruled against the union policy.

“…the court ruled 5-4 along ideological lines that home-care workers in Illinois do not have to pay dues to public employee unions. The workers said the unions lobbied the government, often on issues the workers oppose — thereby abridging their First Amendment rights.”

In the California case that will bring the critical issue back before the Supreme Court in late fall, two lower courts have upheld the demand by the California Teachers Association that teachers contribute to the union, even if they don’t belong to the union or don’t agree with the group’s position of issues.

The Los Angeles Times article on the high court’s taking up the case notes just how important the eventual outcome of the matter could be to public employee unions and the causes, candidates and campaigns they support with massive amounts of money. What makes this pending decision even more critical is its timing as the 2016 election cycle moves into high gear.

The case is likely to be seen as crucial test of public employee unions, which have under political attack in several Republican-led states. The outcome may well have a political impact as well, because these unions have been reliable supporters of the Democratic Party.

The Times coverage notes just how much money the public-sector union collects from each member and non-member. “The lawsuit said full dues for teachers who join the union are about $1,000 a year, but non-members still have to pay about $650 on average for their share of the cost of collective bargaining….”

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

Revealed: The Dying Wish Of This Top Dem’s Child Could Keep Hillary Out Of The White House

Just two days ago, The Washington Post — generally not a newspaper to hyperventilate about matters of national politics involving high-profile Democrats — ran a story with the surprising headline: “In Bernie Sanders, an unlikely — but real — threat to Hillary Clinton.” Say what? The Post writers believe that the 73-year-old senator from Vermont, a self-declared socialist, has a shot at spoiling Hillary’s bid for her party’s presidential nomination?

Apparently, the Post thinks the Sanders campaign has enough “oomph” to give the presumptive front-runner a real run for her money…even though the far-left lawmaker has relatively little — money, that is.

Sanders’s emerging strength has exposed continued misgivings among the party’s progressive base about Clinton, whose team is treading carefully in its public statements.

Now, as The Wall Street Journal notes, there could be another “threat” to the Clinton campaign just over the horizon — a threat that would, presumably, be much more serious that the non-performing campaigns of announced candidates Martin O’Malley and Lincoln Chafee. The Journal reports that at least two members of Vice President Joe Biden’s family, including his late son Beau Biden, have urged him to seek the nomination.

“Before his death last month [of brain cancer], elder son Beau Biden encouraged his father to get into the race, people familiar with the matter said. And Hunter Biden told a friend in recent weeks he, too, would like to see the vice president wage one more campaign for the White House,” reports The Wall Street Journal.

Now 72 years old, Biden has waged two previous bids to become the country’s top elected official. Though he failed in both attempts, Biden is now seen as, potentially, a more formidable candidate. Ironically, it could be the tragic death of his 46-year-old son, Beau, that makes the vice president a more sympathetic figure in the eyes of the American public.

A Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll earlier this month showed that Americans’ image of Mr. Biden is growing more positive. A total of 40% saw him in a favorable light, versus 31% who had a negative view of him. In November 2014, Mr. Biden’s favorability rating stood at 35%, compared with 38% who viewed him unfavorably.

There is a draft-Biden committee now working to convince the vice president that he should challenge Hillary Clinton for the party’s top electoral spot in 2016. The article in the Journal points out that the group has not received Biden’s formal endorsement–nor has it gotten the vice president to show up at any events promoting his possible candidacy.

A life-size cutout of the vice president—dubbed ‘Cardboard Joe’—is ever-present at the group’s events and has proved to be a draw in lieu of an actual candidate. Supporters can buy ‘I’m ridin’ with Biden’ merchandise to back the cause.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth