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: Just-Released Hillary Emails Reveal This HUGE Bombshell That Could Sink Her Campaign

”I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified material,” Hillary Clinton said at a March news conference to address the scandal exploding around her use of a personal email account managed on a private server. “So, I’m certainly well aware of the classification requirements and did not send classified material.”

Now — in a newly released batch of emails from the massive collection of Clinton communications being reviewed by the State Department — it turns out there is classified information. Politico reports that the big question about these classified materials is when the were labelled as such.

State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf said less than two full sentences of information was “upgraded” to a “SECRET” classification at the request of the FBI.

“It wasn’t classified at the time,” Harf said. “The occurrence of a subsequent upgrade doesn’t mean that anyone did anything wrong.”

That Harf explanation might well remind one of the classic Clinton ploy of parsing words in a cynical game of political dodgeball — as Bill once infamously said, “It depends upon what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is.”

In addition to the question of whether Hillary misled or out-and-out lied about having included classified information in her official communications when she was secretary of state, this first batch of emails — comprising about 3,000 of the 55,000 pages Clinton turned over to State last year — also draws attention to other issues and activities of the former chief diplomat.

As Politico notes in its coverage of the State Department’s email dump: “The emails also provide a raw look into the grave danger that US Ambassador Chris Stevens faced — and the extent to which top State Department officials knew of his precarious situation from the time he arrived in Benghazi in the spring, in the midst Libya’s civil war.” Stevens, of course, was one of four Americans killed in the 2012 attack on the U.S. compound at Benghazi.

The Daily Mail reveals other interesting bits and pieces from the Clinton communications: “They also paint the onetime first lady and New York senator as technologically maladroit — she was all thumbs with an office fax machine — and distant enough from her husband Bill that their aides kept each informed about the other’s doings. She used her email to let aides know she was thirsy. ‘Pls call Sarah and ask her if she can get me some iced tea,’ one message read.”

One of the mysteries raised in this initial email dump concerns an unidentified figure called “Santa” who was apparently on the then-secretary’s meeting schedule. The Daily Mail article notes of the “Santa” reference by Hillary: “‘I’m seeing Santa at 8:30,’ she wrote her deputy chief of staff Huma Abedin six months after taking office, ‘so won’t take off until closer to 9:30.’”

GOP Rep. Trey Gowdy, the head of the House Select Committee on Benghazi, has been trying to get all of Clinton’s Benghazi-related emails released. The South Carolina congressman has said he will schedule Hillary for a hearing before his committee when he is satisfied he has the necessary record of her communications on which to base his questioning.

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

College Couldn’t Afford Hillary, So They Paid Her Daughter THIS For 10-Minute Speech

One heartland university settled for former first daughter Chelsea Clinton to come speak at their school after they learned former secretary of state Hillary Clinton was out of their price range, a report says.

The Washington Post reported Tuesday the University of Missouri at Kansas City reached out to the elder Clinton to headline its gala luncheon opening its women’s hall of fame in February.

But when quoted a fee of $275,000, they sought other options. This lead to Chelsea for the comparatively modest fee of $65,000. Still, the fee quoted was remarkably more expensive than left-wing feminist Gloria Steinem at $30,000, and journalists Cokie Roberts ($40,000), Tina Brown ($50,000), and Lesley Stahl ($50,000) The Post gives the details from there:

More than 500 pages of emails, contracts and other internal documents obtained by The Washington Post from the university under Missouri public record laws detail the school’s long courtship of the Clintons.

They also show the meticulous efforts by Chelsea Clinton’s image-makers to exert tight control over the visit, ranging from close editing of marketing materials and the introductory remarks of a high school student to limits on the amount of time she spent on campus.

The schedule she negotiated called for her to speak for 10 minutes, participate in a 20-minute, moderated question-and-answer session and spend a half-hour posing for pictures with VIPs offstage.

“Chelsea was the perfect fit,” Amy Loughman, an alumni relations official, wrote in an email a few days later. “It created fantastic buzz in the community.” A spokesman for Chelsea told The Post that the fee paid by the university went to the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation. “Chelsea is grateful to have the opportunity to speak at events like this while also supporting the work of the Clinton Foundation,” said spokesman Kamyl Bazbaz, adding Chelsea was happy to “celebrate the legacy of women in their community.”

The Post also noted Clinton made nine paid speeches on behalf of the Clinton Foundation in recent years, raking in between $370,000 and $800,000. The foundation has received between $12 million and $26 million in speaking fees.

Are the Clintons worth that much money? Share your thoughts in the comments section below.

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