[VIDEO] The Controversial Ad: ‘I’d Like to Ask’

Wouldn’t you like to know why four Americans were murdered in Benghazi? #idliketoask #stophillaryfb.com/stophillarypac | http://www.stophillarypac.org

Krauthammer: Hillary ‘Hiding in the Bunker’ as Clinton Foundation Story Creates Problems

The curious case of the Clinton Foundation’s cash continues to unravel, and it’s not good for Hillary, says Charles Krauthammer.

“Where is she? First, they put out their stooges to go out and defend them; then their daughter, then the husband. She’s sort of hiding in the bunker.”

But those proxies are not working out. The Clinton campaign had to “throw [Bill] under the bus,” Krauthammer noted, following a less-than-encouraging interview with NBC over the weekend. “ ‘Well, it’s just him,’ [says the campaign.] Well, it may be just him, but the name of the Foundation is Hillary and Bill and Chelsea.”

“The one thing that impresses me. You mentioned how no Democrats are coming out. The numbers in the Wall Street Journal poll are very telling. Democrats are hanging onto Hillary. Those numbers are stable. They are all in either because they believe in her, or they know that they’ve got no choice — this is it.”

(read more)

National Review Online

It Begins: Hillary’s Email Practices to be Examined in Congressional Investigation

ABCNews-Boehner-EmailsDuring a news conference last week, Clinton did not go into the details of how the review of her email was conducted, but said it was “thorough” and that she went “above and beyond” what she was required to do in turning over many of her emails to the State Department.

“We went through a thorough process to identify all of my work-related emails and deliver them to the State Department,” she said, adding that all other emails were personal and pertained to matters such as “yoga routines,” “family vacations,” and “planning Chelsea’s wedding.”

After the news conference, Clinton’s team distributed a lengthy question-and-answer document that detailed the “multi-step” process. The process appeared to have included an extensive, nuanced search of Clinton’s inbox, but the document did not make clear how many of the emails were opened and read in the review.

On Sunday, Clinton’s spokesman clarified that “every email was read” and that the steps they outlined in the document “were in addition to reading them all, not in lieu of reading them all.”

According to the document, here is a summary of how Clinton’s attorneys, who were tasked with the job, said they sorted through her emails:

First, a search was done of all emails Clinton received from a .gov or state.gov account during the period she was secretary of state — from 2009 to 2013.

Then, with the remaining emails, a search was done for names of 100 State Department and other U.S. government officials who Clinton may have had correspondence with during her tenure. Read the rest of this entry »

Chris Cillizza: ‘There Are 31,380 Clinton E-mails We’ll Never See. There’s Something Wrong With That’


Chris Cillizzaimrs-1.php writes: It’s been 18 hours (or so) since Hillary Clinton addressed questions about her decision to exclusively use a private e-mail address (and mail server) during her four years as secretary of state. And there’s one thing, actually one number, that I just keep getting stuck on: 31,380.

That’s the number of e-mails that Clinton and her lawyers deemed “private, personal records” and, therefore, neither turned over to the State Department nor preserved in any way, shape or form. What that means: Roughly half of all e-mails — 62,320 — that Clinton sent and received during her time as the nation’s top diplomat are gone forever. And that the only way anyone can verify that they were, as Clinton insisted on Tuesday, “private” and “personal” is to take her word for it.


That fact becomes even more politically troublesome for Clinton when you consider how, according to a document her office released in the wake of her news conference, the sorting of work-related and personal e-mail was conducted. Here are the four criteria her office used:

1. Any e-mail sent to or received from an address including “.gov” was included.

2. The e-mail set was searched for the first and last name of 100 State Department employees and government officials. Any matches were reviewed.

3. All of the other e-mails were reviewed to evaluate the sender and recipient, in case of typos.

4. All of the e-mails were searched for specific terms, including “Libya” and “Benghazi.”

Okay. What those criteria never make clear is whether anyone actually read every one of Clinton’s 62,000-plus e-mails to determine whether there might be something in each one that could be seen as not purely personal. It’s possible that the fact that the e-mails were “reviewed to evaluate the sender and recipient” could mean that someone read each one, but that language is decidedly dense (whether purposefully or not).

It all comes back to this simple fact: People being paid by Clinton reviewed — whether individually or through a series of filtered searches — all of her e-mails and made a decision that more than 30,000 of them were purely personal. Read the rest of this entry »

a picture thats either of Chelsea Manning…

…or a preview of the upcoming season of Homeland.

via Ace of Spades HQ.