Hillary Just Tried To Use Fox News To Defend Herself, And It Did NOT Go As Planned…

Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign and the Federal Bureau of Investigation are at odds over whether certain emails sent during her time as secretary of state and kept on a private server were in fact classified.

The campaign held a late-afternoon conference call Wednesday praising a report filed by Fox News’ Catherine Herridge. Herridge’s exclusive, published Wednesday, identified the two emails that started the investigation into the former first lady’s actions. Representatives for Clinton contend the emails were not considered classified at the time they were sent. The State Department concurs with the campaign’s point of view.

However, a spokesman for the Office of the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community emphasized to Fox News that the information contained in the email was considered classified when it was sent. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, shares the IG’s concerns. 

“Just because the State Department may not think information is or should be classified, it does not have the authority [to] make that decision if it received the information from another agency,” a Grassley spokesperson said.

Clinton campaign spokesperson Brian Fallon acknowledged the FBI and the campaign have differing opinions on whether or not the emails were classified at the time of their sending.

“We again would like to see the government agencies involved in this process to proceed as quickly as possible in conducting a review of the emails,” Fallon said. “We think it will vindicate all the points we made today on this whole matter.”

Fox News broke down the two emails in dispute:

The first was forwarded by Clinton adviser Huma Abedin and contained classified material from military intelligence sources. The 2011 email forwards a warning about how then-Ambassador Chris Stevens was “considering departure from Benghazi” amid deteriorating conditions in a nearby city. The email was mistakenly released by the State Department in full, and is now considered declassified.

The second was sent by Clinton aide Jake Sullivan and contained classified information as well as sensitive law enforcement information on Benghazi. The partly redacted November 2012 email detailed how Libyan police had arrested “several people” with potential connections to the terror attack.

Both Abedin and Sullivan are now employed by the Clinton presidential campaign.  

h/t: Fox News

Is Mrs. Clinton in serious trouble? Share your thoughts in the comments section below.

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

New Report Confirms Findings Of Citizens’ Commission On Benghazi

Citizens’ Commission on Benghazi (CCB) member Clare Lopez believes that, in 2011, Hillary Clinton’s State Department was orchestrating its own gun running operation to the Libyan rebels—and that arms dealer Marc Turi has been set up to take the fall for these “illicit arms deals.”

“The Justice Department has charged Turi with lying on an export-license application, alleging he hid his intent to ship weapons and ammunition to Libya in direct violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 170,” reports Jerome Corsi for WorldNetDaily.

“Marc Turi was set up and framed for something he didn’t do, while others, who actually did collaborate with Qatar and the UAE to deliver the weapons under U.S. and NATO protection and supervision, are not only not prosecuted like Marc Turi, they’re not even mentioned,” Lopez told Corsi.

“Lopez made it clear she was speaking for herself and not for the commission,” he reports.

Corsi has written several previous articles about the work of the CCB, which was established by Accuracy in Media back in 2013. “The commission has been working behind the scenes for the past two years to ensure Congress uncovers what really happened in the Sept. 11, 2012, attack in Benghazi that killed U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans,” writes Corsi.

“Lopez [said the] ‘key point is that Marc Turi, despite receiving written approval from the U.S. government to broker weapons to Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, never actually went through [with] any weapons purchases or shipments to Qatar, to the UAE or to Libya,” he writes.

Lopez referred to the Citizens’ Commission’s April 2014 interim report, which stated: “Even more disturbingly, the U.S. was fully aware of and facilitating the delivery of weapons to the al-Qa’eda-dominated rebel militias throughout the 2011 rebellion. The jihadist agenda of AQIM, the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), and other Islamic terror groups represented among the rebel forces was well known to U.S. officials responsible for Libya policy.”

In fact, “The rebels made no secret of their al-Qa’eda affiliation, openly flying and speaking in front of the black flag of Islamic jihad…” states the report.

When Hillary Clinton’s Libya-related emails were released, they exposed how Mrs. Clinton was interested in arming the rebels before they were “formally recognized by the U.S. or United Nations,” according to Catherine Herridge and Pamela Browne.

Fox News previously reported that Turi had said the “weapons supplied to Libya were in the hands of the U.S. government and the State Department’s Bureau of Political and Military Affairs, headed by key Hillary Clinton aide Andrew Shapiro,” reports Corsi. “Shapiro was responsible to oversee the export control process at the State Department.”

Mrs. Clinton exchanged emails with the Director of Policy Planning for the Department of State, Anne-Marie Slaughter, in the spring of 2011. On March 30, 2011, Slaughter counseled Hillary Clinton that she was “VERY dubious about arming the Libyan rebels.” When Hillary Clinton asked why, Slaughter argued that “sending more arms into a society generally… will result in more violence—against each other” and “adding even more weapons does not make sense.”

Yet Mrs. Clinton emailed her aide, Jake Sullivan, on April 8, 2011, that “FYI. The idea of using private security experts to arm the opposition should be considered.”

Years after the intervention, Libya remains a broken state marred by ongoing violence.

It’s already been established that Mrs. Clinton failed to turn over all of her work related emails, allowed sensitive and classified material on her private email server, and lied about both. Yet we are asked to believe that the more than 30,000 emails that she had deleted and wiped from her server were all personal emails. It’s clear that even her allies in the media are getting nervous about where all of this is headed, since she is the presumed Democratic Party standard bearer. The question is, will she ever be held accountable, and judged by the same standards as others who have “mishandled” classified information? And what about her role in the Libyan and Benghazi scandals? It is looking more and more like the only accountability may come from the American voters.

This article originally appeared at AIM.org and is reprinted here with permission.

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

BOOM: What The U.S Military Just Did To Al Qaeda Puts A MAJOR Dent In Their Operations

On Saturday, two F-15 fighter jets deployed several 500-pound bombs on a specific target in Ajdabiya, an eastern town in Libya.

The U.S. military, working with Libyan officials, was targeting a terrorist leader, Mokhtar Belmokhtar. Libya gave the U.S. military permission to take action after consulting with the Libyan government to ensure that the intelligence was accurate. A government official in Libya stated that the airstrike was authorized and came after several attacks on the country’s citizens by the group that was headed by Belmokhtar. One of the attacks by the terrorist group targeted a hospital.

Belmokhtar was charged by the U.S. with conspiring to support al-Qaeda and for the use of a weapon of mass destruction. He was also charged with conspiracy to take hostages as well as discharging a firearm. Official terrorism charges were filed in 2013.

It was believed that Belmokhtar had connections to the Algerian attack on a gas plant that claimed the lives of 35 hostages, including three Americans.

The airstrike on Saturday comes on the heels of a declaration of holy war last week. The Islamic government of Libya praised its victory over the al-Qaeda extremist group when one of the group’s leaders was shot and killed by a masked gunman.

Authorities offered a $5 million reward for any information that would lead to the arrest of the terrorist leader. Belmokhtar also went by the name of “the one-eyed sheik.” He originally belonged to the Islamic Maghreb, a North African organization that fell under the umbrella of al-Qaeda. He left them and started his own al-Qaeda group.

While the U.S. military and Libyan officials are still reviewing the evidence, the military is confident that the strike was successful.

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

Hawks With Long Knives Aim To Cut Down Rand Paul

I have some serious advice for Senator Rand Paul: Stay clear of the Senate gym steam room and don’t trust anyone in a robe resembling Brutus. There is virtually no one in the GOP establishment who does not want to derail Senator Rand Paul’s bid for the presidency–and with good reason. Rand Paul not only has new ideas for the future of America, but he is honest about the mistakes Republicans, including former presidents, have made in the past.

The biggest establishment taboo Rand Paul has broken most recently is to tell voters that the United States should not arm Islamic Sunni fighters to overthrow secular governments.  Apparently, he did not get the memo from Senator John McCain that we only train and arm “good” Sunni Islamic fighters such as the Harakat al-Hazm brigade. Oops … that “most trusted group” took the weapons we gave them, including TOW missiles, and joined the jihadists early this year. Not to worry; we have a new brigade of Sunni fighters we are training in Jordan to replace them.

The media on the right fears him because he appeals to the conservative voter base rather than the donor base. The Republican voter base, including the military, deep down know the truth about Iraq and are tired of hearing the same old hawkish lines claiming a victory that was never there.

The establishment GOP line is: Bush won the war in Iraq, and Obama lost the peace by not leaving troops there.

In reality, in December of 2008, the last full month of the Bush presidency, there were eleven suicide and roadside bombings in Iraq that killed dozens. One bombing in Mosul killed two U.S. military personnel. This of course does not include shootings or kidnappings. A strong peaceful democracy?

The further establishment GOP line, as Senator Marco Rubio declared it: “The world is a better place without Saddam Hussein.” Tell that to the one million Christians who have been forced out of Iraq or the Yazidi women who have been sold on slave blocks in cities that had secular police forces under the Baath party. In what universe do you have to live in to believe that Iraq today is a better place to live than in 2002? OK … It is a better place to be if you are a jihadist in the ISIL.

Rand Paul has only to whisper “the emperor has no clothes,” and the Wall Street Journal and Fox News go ballistic. The Wall Street Journal editorial headline on May 28th read “Rand Paul Created ISIS.” I am not joking; that is the actual headline. What did Rand Paul say to deserve a ful- out attack by the Wall Street Journal? The Senator said the following:

ISIS exists and grew stronger because of the hawks in our party who gave arms indiscriminately, and most of those arms were snatched up by ISIS. These hawks also wanted to bomb Assad, which would have made ISIS’ job even easier. They created these people. ISIS is all over Libya because the same hawks in my party loved Hillary Clinton’s war in Libya, they just wanted more of it.

But Libya is a failed state and a disaster, Iraq really is a failed state or a vassal state now of Iran, so everything they’ve talked about in foreign policy they’ve been wrong about for 20 years and yet they somehow have the gall to keeping saying and pointing figures otherwise.

The Senator is right. The “secret weapons shipments” early on to Syrian rebels by the Obama Administration were approved by GOP congressional leaders behind closed doors. Every dollar to every mercenary and every gun to every brigade was approved by the appropriate committees in the House and Senate. Every dime and every bullet. The only GOP objections to the Obama Administration’s plan to help the Sunni royal family of Saudi Arabia overthrow the Shia Alawites in Syria was that not enough American money and not enough American weapons were being allocated.

To make matters worse for himself, Rand Paul told the truth about the GOP hawk establishment having supported Hillary Clinton’s war on Libya. He is factual in that hawks John McCain and Lindsay Graham wanted even more American firepower, perhaps even ground forces, in Libya. Instead of being a stable nation under Gaddafi, Libya today is a failed state with roving bands of terrorists.

The donor base of the GOP, including a lot of big companies receiving defense dollars, are sharpening their knives for Rand Paul. That is where the real GOP divide is. The donor base and the voter base of the GOP see things very differently. While the “inside the Beltway bubble” GOP establishment and their donors are hawks, the majority of GOP voters, particularly recent veterans, are not. The polls do show that the largest concern of GOP-leaning voters is national security (cited by about 25%). But a deeper look shows that those 25% are most concerned with stopping Islamic terror on the homeland soil, not toppling secular dictators in the Middle East.

The Wall Street Journal’s biggest issue with Rand Paul is that he is an “anti-interventionist.” Apparently the Wall Street Journal editorial staff has come to the McCain/Graham/Rubio conclusion that the people of Libya, Iraq, and Syria are far better off today thanks to American intervention. Really? Someone should inform the families of those who were beheaded, and the many women forced into sex slave relationships with men who have purchased them at auction blocks. Many Republicans outside the Washington beltway see the truth, that Iraq, like Syria and Libya, is a horrible wreck.

Senator Paul has more to watch out for than would-be assassins in robes, such as Lindsey Graham and John McCain in the steam room. The leftist media also wants to cut him up and toss him out now, before voters on both sides of the fence hear what he as to say.

He is dangerous to the left because he is a champion of many populist ideas such as lowering prison sentences for drug use, a stand that will draw away votes from the Democrats. Currently, possessing less than one fourth of an ounce of crack cocaine draws a minimum five year sentence. Senator Paul says that is wrong, and is unfairly applied to African-Americans. He will also draw liberal (but not radical) environmentalist support from the Democrats, having publicly admitted to planting trees.

The GOP and both the liberal and conservative media want to knock out Senator Rand Paul early, before voters of both parties can hear his message. Rand Paul is dangerous because his ideas are neither left nor right establishment; they are often new and in many cases populist. He has the strange idea that the armed forces should protect the interests of the United States, not be the world’s police force. He wants the unconstitutional practice of the government reading the personal writings and communications of citizens by stealth stopped. And he tells the voters that loving trees is an OK thing to do! How dare he?

William J. Murray is chairman of the Washington, DC-based Religious Freedom Coalition and oversees the Christmas for Refugee program.

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by WesternJournalism.com.

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

Trey Gowdy Just Called In A Witness Who May Be Hillary’s Worst Nightmare…

The House Select Committee on Benghazi plans to issue a subpoena to Sidney Blumenthal, who served as an informal adviser to Hillary Clinton during her tenure as secretary of state. Blumenthal, who had business interests in Libya, was employed by the Clinton Foundation at the time.

The New York Times reported Monday that Blumenthal will be subpoenaed for a privately transcribed interview.  Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., the chairman of the Benghazi committee, hopes to ask the former senior adviser to President Bill Clinton about memos he sent the former secretary of state regarding matters in Libya.

This is some of the information included in the memos Blumenthal sent to Clinton:

  • That Libyan rebels were considering hiring security contractors (April 2011)
  • The threat of a terrorist attack in response to the killing of Osama bin Laden (2011-2012)
  • The role of a business partner advising the new Libyan prime minister (January 2012)
  • Warning forwarded to incoming Ambassador Chris Stevens, one of the four killed in the Benghazi terrorist attack (September 2012)
  • Libyan prime minister wants a better relationship with Israel (August 2012)

The Times noted that the intelligence he gathered came from business associates he advised as they were looking to obtain contracts from the new Libyan government, efforts that ultimately were unsuccessful. The publication continues:

The projects — creating floating hospitals to treat Libya’s war wounded and temporary housing for displaced people, and building schools — would have required State Department permits, but foundered before the business partners could seek official approval.

It is not clear whether Mrs. Clinton or the State Department knew of Mr. Blumenthal’s interest in pursuing business in Libya; a State Department spokesman declined to say. Many aspects of Mr. Blumenthal’s involvement in the planned Libyan venture remain unclear. He declined repeated requests to discuss it.

“These latest moves by the Benghazi Committee-issuing a subpoena without first contacting the witness, leaking news of the subpoena before it was served, and not holding any Committee debate or vote-are straight out the partisan playbook of discredited Republican investigations,” Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Md., the ranking member on the Benghazi panel, said in a statement.

Gowdy told radio host Hugh Hewitt last month he intended to interview Blumenthal. “He is on the list … We are taking the witnesses from the Department of State and CIA whose identities need to be preserved, we’re doing them first, and those are transcribed interviews,” the South Carolina Republican said.

Then we are moving into the people who are more well known, the Susan Rice’s, the Ben Rhodes’, and yes, you can include Sidney Blumenthal.

Do you support Trey Gowdy? Share your thoughts in the comments section.

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