State Department to Turn over All FBI Clinton Email Records to Judicial Watch-

State Department to Turn over All FBI Clinton Email Records to Judicial Watch–47gh. ,B43

– Judicial Watch today announced that the State Department has agreed to produce to Judicial Watch all emails sent or received by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that were uncovered by the FBI in its investigation of Clinton and her use of the system:

[T]he FBI completed its transmission to the State Department of documents recovered by the FBI in the course of its investigation in connection with former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s use of a personal e-mail system during her time as Secretary of State. State has voluntarily agreed to produce non-exempt agency records responsive to plaintiff’s FOIA request contained in the information transmitted.

Any and all emails sent or received by former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton in her official capacity as Secretary of State during her tenure as Secretary of State.

The timeframe for this request is February 2, 2009 to January 31, 2013.

In a separate filing in another Judicial Watch FOIA lawsuit, the State Department acknowledged that an entire disc “containing information recovered by the FBI in the course of its investigation” had not been included “in the materials provided to the State Department by former Secretary Clinton in December 2014.”

Clinton has repeatedly stated that she believes that the 55,000 pages of documents she turned over to the State Department in December 2014 included all of her work-related emails.  In response to a court order, she declared under penalty of perjury that she had “directed that all my emails on in my custody that were or are potentially federal records be provided to the Department of State, and on information and belief, this has been done.”  This acknowledgment by the State Department is also at odds with her official campaign statement suggesting all “work or potentially work-related emails” were provided to the State Department.

The State Department also stated to the court that the FBI sent “a second disc containing classified documents.”

The State Department is also processing six other discs of records from “custodians other than former Secretary Clinton … including [but not limited to] materials from Ms. Abedin’s account.”  One of the discs of information is so large that State has asked the court for additional time to process them: “Because of the volume of materials located on the final disc, State requires additional time to load them into a document management system so that they can be searched.”

These statements from the State Department result from a FOIA lawsuit before U.S. District Court Judge Emmet G. Sullivan that seeks records about the controversial employment status of Huma Abedin, former Deputy Chief of Staff to Clinton.  The lawsuit was reopened because of revelations about the system. (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:13-cv-01363)).

“The American people will now see more of the emails Hillary Clinton tried to hide from them,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.  “Simply put, our lawsuits have unraveled Hillary Clinton’s email cover-up.”

source-judical watch, judge james boasberg,

Newest Guccifer 2.0 Leak Reveals More Corruption, Rigged Primaries

Newest Guccifer 2.0 Leak Reveals More Corruption, Rigged Primaries–15gh.,b26

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee quietly picks favored candidates

On August 21, hacker Guccifer 2.0 published a few documents apparently obtained from the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC). Guccifer 2.0 also shared an additional batch of documents with the Observer regarding three congressional elections in Pennsylvania.

The hacker began releasing Democratic National Committee (DNC) documents in June, leaking internal memos in which the DNC anticipated Hillary Clinton being the Democratic presidential nominee as early as March 2015. In addition to the releases from WikiLeaks, the collective documents provide glimpses into how the DNC colluded to campaign against Sen. Bernie Sanders, including planning to manipulate favorable media coverage for Clinton.

In the most recent releases, the DCCC appear to rally around their preferred congressional candidate in Pennsylvania’s 6th, 7th and 8th districts long before the state’s April primaries. The DCCC focused on these congressional districts because Democrats hold only five of 18 congressional seats in Pennsylvania, and these districts voted around or above 50 percent for Barack Obama in presidential elections.

In Pennsylvania’s sixth congressional district, the DCCC strategized with Mike Parrish, an Army colonel and CEO of a natural resources company based in Pennsylvania.

“Please tell Parrish to work closely with the DCCC on his staffing process and consultant selection,” instructed one memo from former DCCC Southern Political Director Andrew Piatt to DCCC Chair Ben Ray Lujan, few days before Parrish formally announced his congressional campaign. Included in the release were DCCC documents containing background research on Parrish. A few weeks later in a separate memo, Piatt wrote to Lujan regarding a potential primary opponent for Parrish: “Physician Joe Denham filed paperwork with the FEC this week. Unclear if he will be a serious primary threat to Parrish. The best thing Parrish can do is secure political and financial support and leave Denham with no path to winning the nomination.”

Parrish would have run against 25-year-old Lindy Li, a Princeton graduate who headed to an upset in the Democratic primaries until Parrish challenged the validity of Li’s petition due to a notarizing technicality. The challenge forced Li to withdraw from the race following a court hearing, leaving Parrish unchallenged in the congressional district’s Democratic primary. Parrish will now face Republican incumbent Ryan Costello in the general election.

The DCCC heavily favored Bill Golderer to defeat Mary Ellen Balchunis in the Democratic primaries in Pennsylvania’s seventh congressional district to challenge Republican incumbent Patrick Meehan. The DCCC coordinate meetings between Golderer and several Democrats in Congress, including Reps. Dennis Heck, Cheri Bustos, Diana DeGette, and Elizabeth Esty. In each memo preceding the meeting, the representatives were ask to “please tell Bill that he is exactly the type of candidate we need to put this seat in play in the general election.”

The DCCC also matched Golderer with the political director of End Citizens United.

“Ask her if you can have ECU’s PAC contribute to your campaign this quarter,” wrote Southern Regional Political Director for the DCCC John Bivona, in a memo to Golderer. Despite the name, End Citizens United has provided large contributions to Democrats, including over $100,000 to the Ready PAC—formerly “Ready for Hillary.” The PAC changed its name once Clinton formally announced her presidential campaign.

In one of the memos regarding Golderer’s campaign, the DCCC refers to Clinton as the presidential nominee before the Democratic primaries even began.

“We expect the Philadelphia suburbs to be a major battleground in the Presidential contest this cycle and the Clinton campaign will fight hard on the air and on the ground to win this swing area of the state,” states one memo, dated January 2016.

Regarding Pennsylvania’s eighth congressional district, a DCCC memo specifically cites “DCCC has taken a neutral stance in the competitive Democratic Primary in this district.” This disclaimer reveals the DCCC’s standard operation is to circumvent democracy, and prop up their own preferred candidate in congressional democratic primaries.

source- new york observer, observer politics,michael sainato, mike piatta, ben ray lujan, joe denham, lindy li, bill goldberer, mary ellen balchunis, end citizens united, john bivona,

Obama reportedly declined to enforce red line in Syria after Iran threatened to back out of nuclear deal-

Obama reportedly declined to enforce red line in Syria after Iran threatened to back out of nuclear deal–17gH.,b5

President Barack Obama infamously drew a “red line” with the regime of President Bashar al-Assad in Syria only to back away from it, and we now know why.

Wall Street Journal reporter Jay Solomon, who recently wrote a book called “The Iran Wars,” told MSNBC on Monday that the Obama administration’s determination to close the Iran nuclear deal is to blame for the failure to act on its own red line in Syria.

“When the president announced his plans to attack [the Assad regime] and then pulled back, it was exactly the period in time when American negotiators were meeting with Iranian negotiators secretly in Oman to get the nuclear agreement,” Solomon said.

“US and Iranian officials have both told me that they were basically communicating that if the US starts hitting President Assad’s forces, Iran’s closest Arab ally … these talks cannot conclude.”

The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, a powerful military arm in Iran, reportedly “would not accept a continued engagement with the US if its closest ally was being hit,” Solomon said.

Obama said in 2012 that his red line with the Assad regime would be the use of chemical weapons. Later that year, Assad’s forces killed nearly 1,500 people in a chemical-weapons attack.

But then Obama got cold feet — he sought congressional approval for military intervention in Syria, which he was not likely to get, and eventually brokered a deal with Russia that had Assad agreeing to destroy most of the regime’s arsenal of chemical weapons.

Many foreign policy experts have said that Obama’s decision not to attack damaged US credibility in the international community.

Obama’s establishment of the red line came as a surprise. Even his defense secretary at the time, Leon Panetta, told The Atlantic earlier this year that he “didn’t know it was coming.”

Obama gave The Atlantic several reasons for not enforcing the red line — uneasiness about a strike against Syria not being sanctioned by Congress, a lack of support from the international community and the American people, the possibility that the intelligence on the chemical-weapons attack wasn’t 100% solid — but did not mention the Iran deal among them.

The Iran deal is thought to be the crowning foreign policy achievement of the Obama administration, and experts have speculated previously that his determination not to compromise the deal affected his policy on Syria.

SOURCE- jay solomon, oamela engel, world business leader, msnbc, the atlantic

We’ve Compiled a List of the Top Reason’s Hillary WANTS to Be President

We’ve Compiled a List of the Top Reason’s Hillary WANTS to Be President–47GH., 43

After eight years of Barack Hussein Obama, America is hurting on every level. More than any previous President in history we as a nation are suffering. We need a change and we need it now. All the ‘hope and change’ was a farce for a fundamental transformation of the freest nation in the world.

What makes Hillary Rodham Clinton want to run for the highest office in the land?

We asked 3100 Facebook users and here is why they think Hillary wants to run for President of the United States.

Here are their responses in no particular order except the first two were unanimous across the board.

  1. More Power: Power hungry
  2. Greed, Financial Gain
  3. It’s Her Turn
  4. She Feel’s Entitled
  5. Immunity: She is the only one who would pardon her crimes
  6. Eventually the suicide excuses get suspicious
  7. She has some Amendments to kill.
  8. Better Access to Corrupt Monies
  9. She wants to set the record for “Executive Orders.”
  10. She didn’t screw up Foreign Policy enough as Secretary of State
  11. Ego: To give her narcissistic supply
  12. Control
  13. To finish the destruction of America that Obama Started
  14. She thinks she is owed
  15. Continue the push of Socialism, Progressivism and the liberal agenda (She’s a progressive and she wants to keep a progressive agenda going for our country.)
  16. New World Order: (she is a puppet of the NWO/communists/socialists)
  17. Globalism and #1 Power
  18. Soros needs a new puppet and she’s available
  19. Hide all the bodies, the files that implicate her cohorts, expand graft and corruption while giving Sharia law firm establishment in the USA….
  20. Fulfillment of a life long obsession. Age and health make it now or never.
  21. To keep her promises to the donors of the Clinton Foundation satisfied….
  22. Prestige
  23. It is her humble desire to sacrifice & serve us all. <cough, cough>



How ObamaCare is splitting in two-

How ObamaCare is splitting in two–23gh, 13.14

There’s the one in coastal and northern areas, where the marketplaces include multiple insurers and plans. And there’s the one in southern and rural areas, where there is often little competition, a situation that can lead to higher premiums.

“There’s really two kind of stories that are playing out,” said Cynthia Cox, who studies insurer competition at the Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF).

The trend is likely to be accelerated by the departure of Aetna and UnitedHealthcare from ObamaCare marketplaces in 2017. The loss of those insurers won’t affect all parts of the country equally, experts say.

“The combined effect of these exits is mostly concentrated in southern states and particularly rural counties within those states,” Cox said.

According to an analysis from the consulting firm Avalere, as of now, there will be just one insurer offering ObamaCare coverage next year in seven states: Alabama, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Wyoming, Alaska, North Carolina and Kansas. It is possible that more insurers could enter these markets before next year.

In one county in Arizona, there might not be an ObamaCare plan available at all.

Aetna had been the only insurer offering a plan in Pinal County. Unless federal and state officials can find another insurer to fill the void in 2017, the county’s 400,000 residents will not be able to buy coverage on an ObamaCare exchange.

The dearth of options in rural, sparsely populated areas is a far cry from what Democrats promised when selling the Affordable Care Act.

Obama talked at the time about how the law would create a “one-stop shop” for insurance, comparing it to websites where people can look for airline tickets.

“Just visit, and there you can compare insurance plans, side by side, the same way you’d shop for a plane ticket on Kayak or a TV on Amazon,” Obama said in 2013. “You enter some basic information, you’ll be presented with a list of quality, affordable plans that are available in your area, with clear descriptions of what each plan covers, and what it will cost.  You’ll find more choices, more competition, and in many cases, lower prices.”

In states like Oklahoma, the reality is different, with just one insurer to choose from in the online marketplace.

“We certainly see this as an issue,” said Mike Rhoads, Oklahoma’s deputy insurance commissioner. “With only a single carrier out there, there is no competition.”

“I think competition drives price sensitivity by these carriers,” Rhoads said.

Adding to the geographic disparities under ObamaCare, many of the same states where insurance competition is lacking declined the health law’s expansion of Medicaid. Because of that, many lower-income people have no insurance option at all.

Still, many rural areas had few insurance options before ObamaCare came along. Back then, individual plans were pricey and difficult to find, and insurers could reject people with preexisting conditions.

Under ObamaCare, insurers cannot deny coverage for health conditions, and lower-income people receive financial assistance to offset the cost of premiums.

Cox, the Kaiser Family Foundation expert, said the main consequences of insurers leaving ObamaCare next year will be enrollees having to switch plans. The cost to the federal government of providing ObamaCare, meanwhile, could rise if premiums increase.

In Oklahoma, Rhoads said he has been trying to recruit more insurers to join the ObamaCare marketplace, but found no takers.

“We see no other carriers willing to come in,” he said. “We certainly have had conversations with some of the national players.”

Rhoads said he spoke with two insurers that participated in ObamaCare’s first year about returning. They declined, citing the financial losses they suffered before.

“There’s a little bit of giggling in the background when we ask this question, and we understand that they’ve been there, they’ve done that, they’ve taken their lumps,” Rhoads said.

“As we discussed with one of the CEOs of a large HMO, who had competitive rates, they had their losses and their board of directors was just incensed that they hadn’t made money, and it caused some turmoil within the organization,” he added.

Relying on just one insurer to offer coverage runs the risk of having ObamaCare disappear, should that insurer bail from the marketplace.

In areas with just one insurer, it is almost always a Blue Cross Blue Shield plan. While those plans have generally expressed their commitment to continuing to offer ObamaCare coverage, they have also pressed the Obama administration for policy changes like tightening up the rules for extra sign-up periods that sick people can use to game the system.

source–peter sullivan, cynthia cox, avalere, mike rhoads

:Lead Plant in MO closing–20gh.,b12-1–

“Doe Run” closing its doors!

All lead for bullets will have to come from overseas!  This move will also make the cost 100 LL (100 low lead aviation fuel) UNAFFORDABLE. Approximately 2 g of lead is added to each gallon of aviation fuel!

There are numerous alarming reasons why the US government and the military have been buying up all the ammo.  Here’s one of them.

Obama and the EPA just shut down the last lead smelting plant in the US . They raised the EPA regulations by 10 fold and it would have cost the plant $100 million to comply. You can own all the guns you want, but if you can’t get ammo, you are out of luck.

Remember when Obama promised his minions that he was working on gun control behind the scenes?


Welcome to it.  Now, all domestic mined lead ore will have to be shipped overseas, refined and then shipped back to the US .  Not only will ammo now be even harder to come by, the demand and the process of supply will cause the price to skyrocket even more.

And ponder this. There is an excellent chance that Obama will rig the market to where all ammo has to be purchased from a government entity instituting de facto ammo registration.

So much for the Second Amendment.  There has not been a peep about this in the major news outlets and it is done.

With the US no longer producing lead, all supplies will now have to come from China , Australia or Peru , with the overwhelming emphasis on China . More redistribution of wealth; more economic and liberty crippling of the US on tap.

Marxists will do or die and are doubling down on the destruction of energy in America , our way of life and the Constitution.

The smelting plant has known since 2010 this was coming.  They couldn’t stop it and no one else rose up to stop it either.  The business had been in production for 120 years and now goes the way of our auto industry.

The military’s obsession with ammo was related to security and supply.  They knew this was coming too, so they bought up all they could get before the plug was pulled.  Screw the average American.  It’s as Chris Muir said, he’s not as worried about where the bullets will come from, as much as how the government will deliver them and I’m right there with him on that one.

So, back door gun control is moving forward and while we are all distracted with shiny stuff, our Second Amendment rights are just about gone.  Obama is one Marxist dictator who is savvy at political chess.  He has flanked the Second Amendment.  Now it’s our move.

In forcing the country’s last lead smelting plant to close, the Environmental Protection Agency is making a severe impact on the manufacture of ammunition. By Joe Wolverton, II, J.D.

Long term what this means:  Your investment in ammo may be your best investment.  Guns will be plentiful but ammo will be another story.  How does $3.75 a round (that’s for one bullet) for a 9mm work for you?  Box of 50 would only cost you $187.50

Do we have a great president or not? He hates America and I am learning to Hate Him

source-joe wolverton


FINALLY! Hillary Made to DO SOMETHING!47gh.,b43

It’s about doggone time! Regardless of how you look at this it is a step in the right direction. Hillary is being forced to do something she has been avoiding for some time. Through lawyers and red tape Hillary has evaded the simplest of requests … to give answers to questions under oath. Yesterday, a federal judge ordered Hillary Clinton to answer questions from Judicial Watch under oath. The organization had hoped to question her in person, but the judge has ruled she only has to answer in writing.

Judicial Watch must submit its questions by October 14th and she has 30 days to respond – which means her answers could potentially be delayed until after the election. Obviously we’re hoping Judicial Watch submits those questions by like…Monday.

“We are pleased that this federal court ordered Hillary Clinton to provide written answers under oath to some key questions about her email scandal,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “We will move quickly to get these answers. The decision is a reminder that Hillary Clinton is not above the law.”

the State Department shall release all remaining documents responsive to Judicial Watch’s Freedom of Information Act request by no later than September 30, 2016; and it is FURTHER ORDERED that, consistent with Rule 33 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Judicial Watch may serve interrogatories on Secretary Clinton by no later than October 14, 2016 … Secretary Clinton’s responses are due by no later than thirty days thereafter … Judicial Watch may depose Mr. Bentel by no later than October 31, 2016.

In his opinion Judge Sullivan writes:

The Court is persuaded that Secretary Clinton’s testimony is necessary to enable her to explain on the record the purpose for the creation.

source-allen west, michele hickford,