The progressive socialist democrats apparently will say or do anything to protect their party and, in the process, protect their presidential heir assumptive, Hillary Clinton.
Rep. Adam Schiff dealt a death blow to the Clinton email scandal by going on CNN and revealing that members of the Benghazi committee have already read the Clinton emails and they contain nothing.
Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) said, “We knew as of last summer that the Secretary used a private email account. This is not something new. We knew also that she was cooperating. She was giving us everything that we asked for.”
Nothing changed except for the pressure on the Republican members of the committee this week became too great for them to resist from the Stop Hillary PAC people and the RNC people, so they issued a subpoena for records that we already have.
Now, the Secretary has called for those records to be made public. Why isn’t the chairman doing that? Why aren’t we doing that? The reason is we’ve read them. There’s nothing in them. My colleague says well, how do we know we have them all? The reality is that if this secretary or anyone else emailed a stand down order as this mythical claim exists out there, there would be several people on the receiving end of that email. There would be people at the Pentagon, people in the field who would have to receive that order. None of that. There is no evidence of that.”
Rep. Schiff brought up a great point. If there were anything in the emails, Republicans would have quickly made the emails public in order to build and prolong the story. The fact that former Sec. Clinton has called for the emails to be released, but Republicans refuse to make them public, speaks volumes about what this “scandal” is really about. The subpoena for documents that they already had in their possession is straight out of the Republican Benghazi playbook. <Source: Hillary Email Scandal Falls Apart As Democrat Reveals The Contents Of Clinton Emails>
Let’s deconstruct Representative Schiff’s assertions …
- “We knew as of last summer that the Secretary used a private e-mail account.” Who is “we?” Like Bill Clinton’s famous, “"It depends on what your definition of 'is' is," we want to know if this information was known to the whole committee, just the democrats on the committee, and the authorities for preserving all official United States documents that belong to “We the People?”
- “This is not something new.” If it was not new, why did the entire media feature the revelation, including the progressive mainstream media including the breaking news by the liberal New York Times? <Source>
- “We knew that she was cooperating.” There are credible reports that Hillary’s minions, at the highest levels” appear to have engaged in a cover-up by selectively sorting the State Department documents that were turned over to the Accountability Review Board. <Source>A Board that saw fit to not question Hillary Clinton and gave her a “heads up” on the Board’s findings prior to their release. <Source>
- “She was giving us everything we asked for.” You cannot ask for that which you know nothing about. It is up to the federal government to maintain official records and then provide those records in response to subpoenas and Freedom of Information Act requests. We do not allow the subject of an inquiry to retain and maintain the records, providing what the individual believes is responsive to legitimate inquiries. In this case the process has been redefined using the best Orwellian techniques – where up is down, wrong is right, and the impermissible is suddenly permissible.
- “… so they issued a subpoena for records that we already have.” They, being the committee majority, requested any and all records – not just those that Hillary Clinton and her minions sought to release. The documents that were produced in response to previous subpoenas an FOIA requests were not only incomplete, but the Department of State did not openly state that there were other records not in their possession that could be responsive to the subpoena or FOIA request. One must question why these documents were not turned over to the Department of State for cataloging and archiving when Hillary Clinton left office – and why they remained on a server under her constructive control for approximately two years? All while the Benghazi affair was being investigated and Hillary Clinton’s actions were of the utmost interest.
- “Now, the Secretary has called for those records to be made public.” Hillary Clinton knows that there is little or nothing of major interest in those records and releasing all 55,000 records turned over to the State Department (900 of which have been produced) is the equivalent of evading the truth in a document dump, similar to finding a needle in a haystack under tight time constraints.
- “The reality is that if this secretary or anyone else emailed a stand down order as this mythical claim exists out there, there would be several people on the receiving end of that email.” This is a bogus assertion on many fronts. One, nobody claimed that Hillary Clinton issued a “stand down order” because she is not in the military chain of command and as a civilian cannot issue a valid order. Two, many important messages were conveyed by Instant Messaging which was known to be safe from archiving. And three, while people might have been on the receiving end of emails, who is to say that her top aids and others did not also use private email accounts away from official scrutiny? And, who is to say that these people would “voluntarily” come forward to provide evidence that could damage their careers and future livelihood? It is well known that the Clintons are vindictive and maintain hate lists. Rewarding their friends and punishing their enemies.
- “There would be people at the Pentagon, people in the field who would have to receive that order. None of that. There is no evidence of that.” Again, there is deception. Apparently one order was given by a CIA operative directly to contractors who defied their orders and went to aid the stricken Americans in the compound. As for other orders, Obama has seen fit to relive both a General and Admiral involved in Benghazi under suspicious conditions. Both associated with a rapid deployment force that could have possibly saved American lives.
- “Republican Benghazi Playbook.” I would suggest that this type of statement and the rhetoric used is straight out of the progressive socialist democrat playbook – to be used when one of their own is apparently caught up in a significant scandal.
Obama’s classic response …
President Obama says he first learned from news reports that his former secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, used a private email account during her tenure, amid reports the White House and State Department may have known as far back as last August that Clinton did not use government email.
“The same time everybody else learned it, through news reports,” Obama told CBS’ Bill Plante, in response to a question of when the president learned of Clinton’s use of a private email account for conducting government business.
Obama, in an interview with CBS aired Sunday, continued to stand by his claims that “the policy of my administration is to encourage transparency… and that's why my emails -- the BlackBerry that I carry around -- all those records are available and archived and I'm glad that Hillary has instructed that those emails that had to do with official business need to be disclosed.” <Source>
If it were not so lame and pathetic, it would be laughable that the President of the United States seems to learn about each and every scandal impacting his “transparent” administration from public news sources rather than his highly-paid intelligence and political staff. Just another example of Obama appearing to believe the American public is stupid.
Bottom line …
There is a pattern and practice of parsing words, legal deceptions, and outright dishonesty associated with Hillary Clinton. Adding together corruption, cronyism, and lying to the American people, she is not fit for public office – any public office where credibility and trust are required.
The major problem with the Clinton emails is not that they may reveal details about Benghazi, but they may reveal a timeline to memorialize “quid pro quote” deals between foreign governments and American corporations, the State Department, and big-money donations to the Clinton Foundation and private slush fund. Reporters are now finding that some large donations may coincide with special interest deals with Hillary Clinton’s imprimatur.
Voting for Hillary Clinton would be to ratify a third-term for Barack Obama and his communist mentors.
-- steve
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
