End Times and Current Events
March 28, 2024, 07:33:36 am
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Welcome To End Times and Current Events.
 
  Home Help Search Gallery Staff List Login Register  

The Hillary Scandal's

Shoutbox
March 27, 2024, 12:55:24 pm Mark says: Shocked Shocked Shocked Shocked  When Hamas spokesman Abu Ubaida began a speech marking the 100th day of the war in Gaza, one confounding yet eye-opening proclamation escaped the headlines. Listing the motives for the Palestinian militant group's Oct. 7 massacre in Israel, he accused Jews of "bringing red cows" to the Holy Land.
December 31, 2022, 10:08:58 am NilsFor1611 says: blessings
August 08, 2018, 02:38:10 am suzytr says: Hello, any good churches in the Sacto, CA area, also looking in Reno NV, thanks in advance and God Bless you Smiley
January 29, 2018, 01:21:57 am Christian40 says: It will be interesting to see what happens this year Israel being 70 years as a modern nation may 14 2018
October 17, 2017, 01:25:20 am Christian40 says: It is good to type Mark is here again!  Smiley
October 16, 2017, 03:28:18 am Christian40 says: anyone else thinking that time is accelerating now? it seems im doing days in shorter time now is time being affected in some way?
September 24, 2017, 10:45:16 pm Psalm 51:17 says: The specific rule pertaining to the national anthem is found on pages A62-63 of the league rulebook. It states: “The National Anthem must be played prior to every NFL game, and all players must be on the sideline for the National Anthem. “During the National Anthem, players on the field and bench area should stand at attention, face the flag, hold helmets in their left hand, and refrain from talking. The home team should ensure that the American flag is in good condition. It should be pointed out to players and coaches that we continue to be judged by the public in this area of respect for the flag and our country. Failure to be on the field by the start of the National Anthem may result in discipline, such as fines, suspensions, and/or the forfeiture of draft choice(s) for violations of the above, including first offenses.”
September 20, 2017, 04:32:32 am Christian40 says: "The most popular Hepatitis B vaccine is nothing short of a witch’s brew including aluminum, formaldehyde, yeast, amino acids, and soy. Aluminum is a known neurotoxin that destroys cellular metabolism and function. Hundreds of studies link to the ravaging effects of aluminum. The other proteins and formaldehyde serve to activate the immune system and open up the blood-brain barrier. This is NOT a good thing."
http://www.naturalnews.com/2017-08-11-new-fda-approved-hepatitis-b-vaccine-found-to-increase-heart-attack-risk-by-700.html
September 19, 2017, 03:59:21 am Christian40 says: bbc international did a video about there street preaching they are good witnesses
September 14, 2017, 08:06:04 am Psalm 51:17 says: bro Mark Hunter on YT has some good, edifying stuff too.
View Shout History
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 7   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: The Hillary Scandal's  (Read 18224 times)
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21786



View Profile
« Reply #60 on: May 08, 2013, 08:21:14 pm »

'WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE?'
http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/article/2013/may/07/context-hillary-clintons-what-difference-does-it-m/

White House struggles to respond to new Benghazi revelations...
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/may/8/white-house-stands-its-benghazi-story-hearing-unfo/

Shock testimony from witnesses...
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57583388/benghazi-whistleblowers-head-to-house-committee/

Moment-by-moment account of attack...
http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/breaking-news/2013/may/8/benghazi-breaking-news-congress-set-probe-potentia/

Emotional recollection of murders...
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/benghazi-whistleblower-chokes_721903.html

CONGRESSMAN: 'Death is part of life'...
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/benghazi-whistleblower-chokes_721903.html

Fourth whistleblower blocked from testifying...
http://dailycaller.com/2013/05/08/fourth-benghazi-witness-gagged-by-red-tape/

Diplomat Says Questions Led to Demotion...
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/09/us/politics/official-offers-account-from-libya-of-benghazi-attack.html

Dick Morris: Beginning of end...
http://thehill.com/opinion/columnists/dick-morris/298369-benghazi-beginning-of-end
dick morris hasnt been right in YEARS!!!

REPORT: CBSNEWS BOSSES IRKED BY CORRESPONDENT'S REPORTING; 'DANGEROUSLY CLOSE TO ADVOCACY'...
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2013/05/08/report-cbs-news-bosses-irked-by-correspondents-thorough-benghazi-reporting-n1591242

Hillary in spotlight...
http://thehill.com/blogs/global-affairs/middle-east-north-africa/298395-new-evidence-in-benghazi-probe-puts-the-spotlight-back-on-clinton

MOTHER: 'I BLAME HER'...
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/05/07/mother_of_slain_benghazi_victim_rips_hillary_clinton_i_blame_her.html

Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21786



View Profile
« Reply #61 on: May 11, 2013, 07:28:13 am »

Benghazi Talking Point Revised 12 Times

New details from the investigation of last year's Sept. 11 assault on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, reveal 12 revisions were made to the talking points about the attack.
     
Edits included the State Department referencing al Qaeda and prior CIA warnings.     
     
The versions obtained by ABC News show how the drafts evolved from the CIA's original version to the final draft distributed to Congress, which was used by U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice on five Sunday talk shows following the attack.
     
White House press secretary Jay Carney contends the edits were "stylistic and non-substantive."
 
"The CIA drafted these talking points and redrafted these talking points," Carney said. "The fact that there are inputs is always the case in a process like this, but the only edits made by anyone here at the White House were stylistic and nonsubstantive."
 
"This all has been discussed and reviewed and provided in enormous levels of detail by the administration to Congressional investigators, and the attempt to politicize the talking points, again, is part of an effort to, you know, chase after what isn't the substance here," he added.

http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/world/2013/May/Benghazi-Talking-Point-Revised-12-Times/
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21786



View Profile
« Reply #62 on: May 11, 2013, 07:45:31 am »





Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Kilika
Guest
« Reply #63 on: May 12, 2013, 02:58:17 am »

They are trying so hard to package her for 2016.
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #64 on: May 12, 2013, 09:59:17 pm »

They are trying so hard to package her for 2016.

If we make it to 2016(looking at the faster rate things are going on alone, doesn't look like it) - but only the Lord's will be done.

With that being said, yeah - wouldn't surprise me if the 2016 race is between Hillary and Jeb Bush. Either way, the winner will be given the prize of putting that last nail in the coffin.
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #65 on: May 15, 2013, 10:32:24 am »

Why is Boehner Resisting a Special Committee on Benghazi?
5/15/13
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013/05/why_is_boehner_resisting_a_special_committee_on_benghazi.html

Some things don't stack up. On Monday, Politico headlined that Speaker John Boehner was fixated with the bubbling Benghazi scandal. In fact, Politico termed the speaker's fixation as "big."

So why is Boehner dragging his feet on empanelling a special (or select) committee to tackle the Benghazi disaster? Why is the speaker standing pat on last week's statement that House standing committees are getting the investigative job done?

Most everyone has Boehner's snapshot: cautious by nature, a Washingtonized pol who'd rather play than fight. But, as Politico contends, the speaker is invested in the growing Benghazi controversy. Politico outlined the speaker's behind-the-scenes involvement:

With Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) as the public face and the speaker's office as the muscle, House Republicans are turning turn [sic] the story of the Sept. 11, 2012, attack in Libya that left four Americans dead from a mesh of confusing details into a defining political fight with President Barack Obama.

And more from Politico:

Starting last fall, Boehner has run a Capitol-wide campaign to keep turf-conscious committee chairs informed, at the same time using his sway to press the Obama administration to comply with congressional investigators trying to untangle what happened.

The speaker has privately strategized with high-profile GOP senators like John McCain of Arizona and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, and held briefings for top committee figures like House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers (R-Mich.).

Boehner has told leadership colleagues when they're focusing on the terrorist attack, they're fighting on their political ground.

"This is all Boehner," said one senior Republican aide of the focus on Benghazi. "He's obsessed with it. He brings it up all the time." The sentiment was echoed with conversations throughout leadership, and the dynamic is acknowledged by his own aides.

As The Hill reported last week, why would Rep. Frank Wolf (R-VA), who's pushing hard for a special committee, intimate that the speaker would be "complicit" in a White House cover-up if he failed to get a select committee up and running?

Wolf has rounded up a large majority of his House Republican colleagues to support his push. Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham, notably, have made public and direct calls to Boehner urging the committee.

We could take at face value Boehner's insistence that the House's standing committees are doing their jobs in outing the scandal's facts and will eventually hold to account those culpable for the disaster and cover-up.

Perhaps Boehner -- ever cautious -- wants more time to see how the State Department's internal review of the disaster plays out before triggering a select committee. But as White House Dossier reports:

There is no mention in the report of the what Clinton or Obama did related to Benghazi. In fact, Obama isn't mentioned at all in the document, and Clinton only once -- in the context of her appointing the Review Board. There is no suggestion that Clinton or Obama were interviewed or even examined by the investigation.

Strategically, Boehner may think that a multiplicity of committees investigating Benghazi protracts the controversy, which redounds to the GOP's advantage as the nation approaches the 2014 midterm elections.

Or perhaps Boehner sees a special committee as taking away his captaincy of the issue, given his current strong behind-the-scenes role.

Or maybe some combination of all of the above with other considerations thrown in for good measure.

At the American Spectator yesterday, Jed Babbin asks:

Will Boehner have the guts to pass Wolf's bill? He should, for a host of reasons both substantive and political. In a Friday editorial the Wall Street Journal wrote, "Across this country's history, the murder of an American ambassador, the nation's representative, has been taken as not merely a tragedy but an attack on U.S. interests that demands an official accounting to the American people." With the Journal providing cover for him, Boehner has no excuse to not pass it.

As Babbin explains, a select committee becomes the focal point of the investigation, a powerful consolidated entity that will create a unified narrative and command media attention.

Writes Babbin:

The select committee would, under Wolf's bill, have the power to subpoena witnesses and documents. So who's getting subpoenaed this week? Is Obama resisting the document subpoenas? Has he claimed executive privilege yet? What did Hillary's spokeswoman, Victoria Nuland, say in her deposition? It's easy to see that creating a select committee could have one overriding effect: the White House should be as tied up with it as Congress was with Obamacare. Our politicians spent about eighteen months on that without a break.

Give Boehner credit: he's been engaged on Benghazi, pushing the issue ahead. But, clearly, a select committee is in order. Practically, the speaker risks more if he defies his conference by continuing to stall on making a special committee a reality.

Boehner understands that there's much a stake over Benghazi -- for the nation, for justice, for his party, and his speakership. The speaker needs to yield, and soon.


Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013/05/why_is_boehner_resisting_a_special_committee_on_benghazi.html#ixzz2TNLIDdpU
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook
Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21786



View Profile
« Reply #66 on: May 16, 2013, 10:33:06 am »

Benghazi Emails Directly Contradict White House Claims

The White House on Wednesday released 94 pages of emails between top administration and intelligence officials who helped shape the talking points about the attacks in Benghazi, Libya, that the CIA would provide to policymakers in both the legislative and executive branches.

The documents, first reported by THE WEEKLY STANDARD in articles here and here, directly contradict claims by White House press secretary Jay Carney and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that the revisions of those talking points were driven by the intelligence community and show heavy input from top Obama administration officials, particularly those at the State Department.
 
The emails provide further detail about the rewriting of the talking points during a 24-hour period from midday September 14 to midday September 15. As THE WEEKLY STANDARD previously reported, a briefing from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence shows that the big changes came in three waves – internally at the CIA, after email feedback from top administration officials, and during or after a meeting of high-ranking intelligence and national security officials the following morning.

The initial CIA changes softened some of the language about the participants in the Benghazi assault – from “Islamic extremists with ties to al Qaeda” to “Islamic extremists.” But CIA officials also added bullet points about the possible participation of Ansar al Sharia, an al Qaeda-linked jihadist group, and previous warnings about the deteriorating security situation in Benghazi. Those additions came out after the talking points were sent to “the interagency,” where the CIA’s final draft was further stripped down to little more than boilerplate. The half dozen references to terrorists – both in Benghazi and more generally – all but disappeared. Gone were references to al Qaeda, Ansar al Sharia, jihadists, Islamic extremists, etc. The only remaining mention was a note that “extremists” had participated in the attack.
 
As striking as what appears in the email traffic is what does not. There is no mention of the YouTube video that would become a central part of the administration’s explanation of the attacks to the American people until a brief mention in the subject line of emails coming out of an important meeting where further revisions were made.
 
Carney, in particular, is likely to face tough questioning about the contents of the emails because he made claims to reporters that were untrue. “The White House and the State Department have made clear that the single adjustment that was made to those talking points by either of those two – of these two institutions were changing the word ‘consulate’ to ‘diplomatic facility,’ because the word ‘consulate’ was inaccurate,” he told reporters on November 28, 2012.
 
That’s not true. An email sent at 9:15 PM on September 14, from an official in the CIA’s Office of Public Affairs to others at the agency, described the process this way. “The State Department had major reservations with much or most of the document. We revised the document with their concerns in mind.”
 
That directly contradicts what Carney said. It’s also difficult to reconcile with claims made by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton during testimony she gave January 23 on Capitol Hill.
 
“It was an intelligence product,” she said, adding later that the “intelligence community was the principal decider about what went into talking points.” (See here for the original version of the talking points and the final one.)
 
Carney and other top Obama administration officials have long maintained that CIA officials revised the talking points with minimal input from Obama administration officials. The claim made little sense when they made it – why would CIA officials revise on their own a set of talking points they’d already finalized? The emails demonstrate clearly that it isn’t true.
 
Another CIA email, this one a draft of a message for CIA director David Petraeus, noted that the talking points process had “run into major problems,” in part because of the “major concerns” raised by the State Department. That same email reported that the issues would be revisited at the Deputies Committee meeting on Saturday morning.

Elsewhere, CIA officials seemed to understand that the document had been stripped of most of its content. An email from an official with the CIA’s Office of Terrorism Analysis, the office that drafted the original version of the talking points, signed off on the final version but seemed to understand that the new version wouldn’t please those who had requested it. “They are fine with me,” this CIA official wrote. “But, pretty sure HPSCI [the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence] won’t like them. :-)”
 
When Petraeus received the rewritten talking points, he objected. “Frankly, I’d just as soon not use this,” he wrote to a legislative affairs staffer. But he declined to put up a fight. 
 
The documents answer some questions and raise many others. Did Hillary Clinton have any role in the efforts of State Department staffers to push for the many substantive revisions to the talking points? Clinton, who testified that she was a hands-on part of the State Department’s response to the attacks, has claimed she had nothing to do with the talking points.
 
And what about the administration’s claims that State and White House officials weren’t involved with substantive edits? In one email, Jake Sullivan, deputy chief of staff to Hillary Clinton, reports to State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland that he’s spoken with Obama’s top spokesman at the National Security Council, Tommy Vietor. “I spoke with Tommy. We’ll work through this in the morning and get comments back.”
 
In a separate email, he writes: “Talked to Tommy. We can make edits.”

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/newly-released-benghazi-emails-directly-contradict-white-house-claims_724603.html
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #67 on: May 16, 2013, 12:21:33 pm »

Unless the Illuminati really want Obama out, this "scandal" will eventually die out. Otherwise, it will be nothing more than "puppet show" entertainment while other draconian legislation(ie-immigration reform and possibly gun control) gets pushed through quietly. Same happened with the whole Joe Wilson/Scooter Libby fiasco 6 years ago.
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #68 on: May 17, 2013, 04:50:55 pm »

Ron Paul Agrees With Obama: The Debate Over Benghazi Is A ‘Sideshow’
5/17/13
http://www.mediaite.com/online/ron-paul-agrees-with-obama-the-debate-over-benghazi-is-a-sideshow/

Could President Obama have read this op-ed by Ron Paul before his joint press conference with British Prime Minister David Cameron this morning? The president’s assessment of the Benghazi scandal was remarkably similar to that of the former congressman. Both men called the controversy a “sideshow.”

While Obama primarily went after Republicans for trying to politicize his administration’s response to the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya last September, Paul chose a more equal opportunity approach in his article, published this morning on the website of the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity.

Quote
“Congressional hearings, White House damage control, endless op-eds, accusations, and defensive denials. Controversy over the events in Benghazi last September took center stage in Washington and elsewhere last week. However, the whole discussion is again more of a sideshow. Each side seeks to score political points instead of asking the real questions about the attack on the US facility, which resulted in the death of US Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans.”

Paul accused Republicans of smelling “political opportunity over evidence that the Administration heavily edited initial intelligence community talking points about the attack to remove or soften anything that might reflect badly on the president or the State Department.” But he also went after Democrats for offering “the even less convincing explanation for Benghazi, that somehow the attack occurred due to Republican sponsored cuts in the security budget at facilities overseas. With a one trillion dollar military budget, it is hard to take this seriously.”

“Neither side wants to talk about the real lesson of Benghazi,” Paul wrote. “Interventionism always carries with it unintended consequences.” He repeated his disdain with both sides of the argument in his conclusion:

Quote
“The real lesson of Benghazi will not be learned because neither Republicans nor Democrats want to hear it. But it is our interventionist foreign policy and its unintended consequences that have created these problems, including the attack and murder of Ambassador Stevens. The disputed talking points and White House whitewashing are just a sideshow.”

Paul’s son, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), has been far less even-handed in his public remarks on the Benghazi controversy, recently saying the events should “preclude” Hillary Clinton from holding political office.
Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21786



View Profile
« Reply #69 on: August 14, 2013, 05:42:52 am »

Filmmaker Blamed for Benghazi Attacks Speaks in First TV Interview

In his first television interview since being released, the filmmaker who produced the YouTube video blamed for inciting the 9/11 attacks in Benghazi urged the Obama administration to be more careful in its assessments in the future. He was released from a Texas jail last week after serving an eleven-month sentence and is currently living in a halfway house, where he said the government is currently “hiding” him.

“Before you do anything, please give yourself time to think about it,” Nakoula Basseley Nakoula advised the administration on Tuesday in an interview with CNN’s Jake Tapper.

Nakoula said he was “shocked” when he first heard reports that his film had triggered riots, but added that he does not blame the president for alleging that his film incited protests outside of the American diplomatic facility in Benghazi that preceded the attack on the building and the murders of four Americans. “We need to make [a separation] between the president and the administration,” he said. When asked if held a grudge against former secretary of state Hillary Clinton, however, or whether the administration’s claims, now widely debunked, put his life in danger, Nakoula declined to comment.

Just days after last year’s September 11 attacks in Benghazi, Libya, Nakoula was arrested and charged with a parole violation for a bank-fraud conviction. President Obama, Clinton, and then–U.S. ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice blamed Nakoula’s film for the attack.

video: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/355704/filmmaker-blamed-benghazi-attacks-speaks-first-tv-interview-andrew-johnson
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Boldhunter
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 347


View Profile
« Reply #70 on: August 30, 2013, 10:10:16 am »

Hmmmm - Scapegoat? Puppet? Or does he even exist?
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #71 on: August 30, 2013, 10:47:55 am »

Hmmmm - Scapegoat? Puppet? Or does he even exist?

Who? Obama or that youtube filmmaker?

Personally, it just seems like this whole (ungodly)world(ie-everything you see on tv) is nothing more than a puppet show to deceive the masses. Not that I endorse Bill Cooper, but pretty much in his research, he pretty much came to this conclusion over how the Illuminati operates through their occult practices.
Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21786



View Profile
« Reply #72 on: September 03, 2013, 09:21:30 am »

Book: Clinton's State told Benghazi was a 'terrorist attack' minutes after it began

Just minutes after 35 jihadists crashed through the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, nearly one year ago, the facility got word to the State Department, FBI and Pentagon that terrorists were attacking, according to a forthcoming book that provides the fullest review of the assault to date.
 
In “Under Fire, the Untold Story of the Attack in Benghazi,” it is revealed that an unidentified security official in the Benghazi compound protecting Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens messaged the U.S. embassy in Tripoli: “Benghazi under fire, terrorist attack.” Stevens and three others died that night.
 
Twenty-five minutes after it began, the operation center at State received an electronic cable announcing the attack, according to authors Fred Burton, a former State Diplomatic Security agent and Samuel Katz, an author and expert on international special operations and counterterrorism.

rest: http://washingtonexaminer.com/clintons-state-told-benghazi-was-a-terrorist-attack-minutes-after-it-began/article/2535081
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #73 on: September 03, 2013, 11:15:36 am »

Book: Clinton's State told Benghazi was a 'terrorist attack' minutes after it began

Just minutes after 35 jihadists crashed through the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, nearly one year ago, the facility got word to the State Department, FBI and Pentagon that terrorists were attacking, according to a forthcoming book that provides the fullest review of the assault to date.
 
In “Under Fire, the Untold Story of the Attack in Benghazi,” it is revealed that an unidentified security official in the Benghazi compound protecting Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens messaged the U.S. embassy in Tripoli: “Benghazi under fire, terrorist attack.” Stevens and three others died that night.
 
Twenty-five minutes after it began, the operation center at State received an electronic cable announcing the attack, according to authors Fred Burton, a former State Diplomatic Security agent and Samuel Katz, an author and expert on international special operations and counterterrorism.

rest: http://washingtonexaminer.com/clintons-state-told-benghazi-was-a-terrorist-attack-minutes-after-it-began/article/2535081

It's as if they're telegraphing their punches WIDE OPEN like this(in a NON-fictional book), but en yet not many will listen, nor care.
Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21786



View Profile
« Reply #74 on: September 21, 2013, 10:38:12 am »

BENGHAZI 'INNOCENCE OF MUSLIMS' FILMMAKER TO BE RELEASED MONDAY

Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, the filmmaker falsely blamed by for 2012's terrorist attack in Benghazi, tells Breitbart News he will be released from prison Monday and will finish his sentence at a half-way house facility.

Nakoula is not going back to his original home, as he has privacy and safety concerns.

“I’m still okay. I’m better, but I’m worried, because I’m afraid," says Nakoula, an Egyptian-born Coptic Christian from Southern California. "Anything can happen—not from Muslim people. I’m not afraid of them, but from something else. I just don’t want to go back to jail again.”

Nakoula, who will immediately begin his probation, says he looks forward to seeing his children again and has aspirations to visit Washington, D.C. In the meantime, he plans to look for a job and apparently find stability in his life.

While serving his sentence, he wrote a book titled Innocence; it is currently available on Amazon.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/09/20/Benghazi-Filmmaker-To-Be-Released-Monday
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21786



View Profile
« Reply #75 on: September 23, 2013, 09:35:36 am »


Egypt bans Muslim Brotherhood group

CAIRO (AP) — An Egyptian court on Monday ordered the Muslim Brotherhood to be banned and its assets confiscated in a dramatic escalation of a crackdown by the military-backed government against supporters of the ousted Islamist president Mohammed Morsi.

Associated Press
http://news.yahoo.com/egypt-bans-muslim-brotherhood-group-120620175.html
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21786



View Profile
« Reply #76 on: October 28, 2013, 07:33:44 am »

First Western eyewitness in Benghazi to go public gives account of attack, warning signs

The witness -- a former British soldier who for decades helped protect U.S. diplomats and military leaders -- told CBS’ “60 Minutes” that Al Qaeda forces first attacked the U.S. Special Mission Compound in which Ambassador Christopher Stevens was killed. Then they launched a second attack on a secret CIA annex about a mile across the city. “They knew what they were doing,” the security guard told CBS. “That was a well-executed attack.” 

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/10/28/report-first-western-eyewitness-in-benghazi-to-go-public-gives-account-attack/?intcmp=latestnews
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21786



View Profile
« Reply #77 on: November 11, 2013, 05:35:22 am »

'60 MINUTES' Airs Apology on Benghazi...
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/11/business/media/60-minutes-airs-apology-on-benghazi.html

Simple web search would have saved humiliation...
http://www.wnd.com/2013/11/60-minutes-bungles-benghazi-even-worse/

I feel that his whole CBS bungled story is meant to have been a failure in reporting. I’m thinking this is to get the story out of the headlines permanently, and to "justify" why the MSM is going after their messiah like they should be on this.
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Christian40
Moderators
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3836


View Profile
« Reply #78 on: November 14, 2013, 03:46:11 am »

Pentagon Report: Obama Regime Paid More than $150 Million to Fund Terrorist Attacks Against Americans

"As Americans struggle to make ends meet, as the current economic climate is anything but healthy, the Obama Regime is pumping millions of dollars into foreign companies that finance attacks on Americans.

Surely, there is a better use for our money than financing terrorism against our own people.

The national debt is just over $17.1 trillion dollars. Specifically, it is $17,162,395,935,482.18- or, at least it was when this article was written. In the time it took to type the numbers, the U.S. borrowed another $195,976. By this time tomorrow, the national debt will have increased by roughly $2,690,000,000.

We our hemorrhaging money at an astonishing rate and saddling Americans with unconscionable debt. A million here, a million there-money we don’t have is tossed around and thrown away like dropped pennies in a parking lot while our “leaders” not only refuse to make any meaningful changes to our unsustainable economic model, but make future plans for how to enlarge government and spend even more money.

And while that may seem like a betrayal of Americans, it cannot compare to the fact that America has given $150 million to groups that fund terrorists actions against Americans.

In our nation’s Quixotic quest to make the world love us, the U.S. has been funding terrorism against Americans. In a report by the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction, the Pentagon has admitted that we are subsidizing at least 43 companies that are linked to Taliban leaders who have targeted and arranged attacks on Americans.

    “It’s like the United States government subsidizing the Taliban, al Qaeda, the Haqqani network, those groups that are trying to shoot and kill our soldiers,” New Hampshire Democratic Senator Jeanne Shaheen stated.

The Haqqani network is responsible for the 2011 attack on the American embassy in Kabul that left 16 dead. The Haqqani Network, rather than receiving money directly from the U.S., receives its money from a road construction company owned by the Haqqani Network that received a government contract from the U.S.

However, this is merely one such example of the U.S. funding terrorism; in all, the Pentagon report lists 43 private companies that receive government money and fund terrorism.

    “The reason they’ve given us is that it’s not fair to these contractors that the evidence that we’ve presented, and this is evidence collected by the United States government, is classified,” said Special Inspector General John Sopko.

    “That’s the absurdity of it. We can probably attack them via drone on Monday and we’ll issue them a contract on Tuesday,” Sopko continued.

Though the report’s revelations are startling, the Pentagon has been unwilling to immediately pull the contracts due to bureaucratic red tape. The Army has, however, released a statement saying that they will not be issuing new contracts to the companies. The statement also stopped short of indicating that they will be taking any steps to remove the contracts.

“The army takes seriously any allegations of improper contractor activities and has vigorous processes to ensure that those with whom we do business are not supporting the insurgency or otherwise opposing U.S. and collation forces in Afghanistan,” the statement said.

It seems the take-away message for terrorist groups is: If your attacks on Americans are being subsidized by America, we will take a good, long look at whether or not we will continue to fund your attacks. We mean it.

The Obama Administration has made many claims about Republicans being terrorists, bullies and other various slanderous accusations. If the Obama Administration is even remotely interested in stopping real terrorism, the first step should be to, as obvious as it may seem, stop funding companies that are fronts for terrorist organizations."

http://teapartyheadlines.streamshare.com/posts/8403#/8403
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #79 on: November 14, 2013, 10:56:00 am »

Wow - they are really spending these millions like they're board game play money.
Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21786



View Profile
« Reply #80 on: December 29, 2013, 05:24:20 am »

NY Times makes up story to help Hillary Clinton in 2016 run for president...

Top 3 Shocking Claims in NY Times Benghazi Report

A voluminous investigative piece published Saturday by The New York Times offers a number of startling revelations on the September 2012 Benghazi attacks, but the big three would appear to be as follows:
 
1. There’s “no evidence that Al Qaeda or other international terrorist groups had any role in the assault,” the Times reported.
 
2. “The attack was led, instead, by fighters who had benefited directly from NATO’s extensive air power and logistics support during the uprising against Colonel Qaddafi.”

But what may be the most surprising alleged unearthing, given the “yes it was responsible-no it wasn’t responsible” outcries surrounding it…
 
3. The Times reported that the attack was indeed “fueled in large part by anger at an American-made video denigrating Islam.”
 
The Times noted the uprising’s “two contradictory story lines”:
 

One has it that the video, which was posted on YouTube, inspired spontaneous street protests that got out of hand. This version, based on early intelligence reports, was initially offered publicly by Susan E. Rice, who is now Mr. Obama’s national security adviser.
 
The other, favored by Republicans, holds that Mr. (Christopher) Stevens died in a carefully planned assault by Al Qaeda to mark the anniversary of its strike on the United States 11 years before. Republicans have accused the Obama administration of covering up evidence of Al Qaeda’s role to avoid undermining the president’s claim that the group has been decimated, in part because of the raid that killed Osama bin Laden.

The Times report noted that the “reality in Benghazi was different, and murkier, than either of those story lines suggests.”
 
Benghazi “was not infiltrated by Al Qaeda, but nonetheless contained grave local threats to American interests. The attack does not appear to have been meticulously planned, but neither was it spontaneous or without warning signs,” the Times reported.
 
Then this:
 

The violence, though, also had spontaneous elements. Anger at the video motivated the initial attack. Dozens of people joined in, some of them provoked by the video and others responding to fast-spreading false rumors that guards inside the American compound had shot Libyan protesters. Looters and arsonists, without any sign of a plan, were the ones who ravaged the compound after the initial attack, according to more than a dozen Libyan witnesses as well as many American officials who have viewed the footage from security cameras.
 
The issue of the anti-Islam video fueling anger that led to the attacks was an initial claim, which was soon overshadowed by a determination that Benghazi was a terrorist attack, an issue that seemed to raise the ire of then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
 
Check out the entire New York Times article here: http://www.nytimes.com/projects/2013/benghazi/?/?chapt=0#/?chapt=0

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/12/28/top-3-shocking-claims-in-ny-times-benghazi-report/
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21786



View Profile
« Reply #81 on: December 08, 2015, 07:34:22 pm »

Judicial Watch Releases ‘Compelling Benghazi Email’ It Says ‘Worsens the Scandal of Benghazi’

A conservative government watchdog group released a new Benghazi email Tuesday that then-Department of Defense Chief of Staff Jeremy Bash sent to the State Department offering military forces that could have moved into the area.

Bash sent his email — obtained by Judicial Watch through a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit — to three senior State Department officials just hours after the deadly 2012 attacks initially unfolded.

[W]e have identified the forces that could move to Benghazi,” he wrote. “They are spinning up as we speak.”

The email was sent to Jacob Sullivan, who served as deputy chief of staff to Hillary Clinton. Wendy Sherman and Thomas Nides were both senior State Department officials.

Much of the email was redacted, but it seemingly contradicted testimony from the Obama administration that an immediate response was not feasible. Then-Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta testified in 2013 that “time, distance, the lack of an adequate warning, events that moved very quickly on the ground prevented a more immediate response.”

Gregory Hicks, Deputy Chief of Mission to the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli, had previously testified that even a single fighter jet scrambled after the attack “would have been scared to death” the enemy “that we would have gotten a laser on them and killed them.”

Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton released a statement Tuesday after the publication of the email.

“The Obama administration and Clinton officials hid this compelling Benghazi email for years,” Fitton said. “The email makes readily apparent that the military was prepared to launch immediate assistance that could have made a difference, at least at the CIA Annex. The fact that the Obama Administration withheld this email for so long only worsens the scandal of Benghazi.”

Conservative political super PAC American Crossroads also released a statement, going particularly after Clinton.

“After years of spin, deception, and distraction from President Obama and Hillary Clinton, this email makes it clear that the Obama Administration and then-Secretary Clinton had a chance to save the four Americans killed in Benghazi – and shamefully did nothing,” said the organization’s director, Ian Prior.

The Clinton campaign did not respond to a request for comment from TheBlaze Tuesday evening.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/12/08/judicial-watch-releases-compelling-benghazi-email-it-says-worsens-the-scandal-of-benghazi/
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21786



View Profile
« Reply #82 on: December 09, 2015, 06:43:35 pm »

Hillary now denies blaming video to Benghazi victims' families

The media obsessed with Donald Trump’s memory of “thousands” of Muslims celebrating 9/11 are giving a total pass to Hillary Clinton over her shameless lie Sunday.  Appearing on This Week with George Stephanopoulos, she averred to her husband’s former aide that she never told family members that she blamed an anti-Islam video for the deaths of four Americans in the Benghazi attack, and that the video maker would pay.  This contradicts the accounts of four separate survivors.

Guy Benson of Hot Air has the story:

… by the time the murdered Americans’ flag-draped coffins arrived home several days later, the Obama administration was in full-blown election season spin mode, which entailed muddying the waters on whether the deadly raid was, in fact, a premeditated terrorist attack.  At the now-infamous Andrews Air Force base ceremony on September 14, 2012, Hillary Clinton told grieving family members that their loved ones had been murdered by a bloodthirsty mob incited by an online anti-Islam video.  Four different relatives of three separate victims have publicly shared that recollection, including one who jotted down notes shortly after the meeting:



“I gave Hillary a hug and shook her hand. And she said ‘we are going to have the film maker arrested who was responsible for the death of your son,'” recalls Tyrone Woods’ father, reading directly from his written record from that day. Sean Smith’s mother and uncle remember the same thing, as does Glen Doherty’s sister.  Now watch Hillary’s performance from this past Sunday.  Note how anchor George Stephanopoulos, to his credit, asks a very specific question, preceded by clips of statements from several of the aforementioned family members:



STEPHANOPOULOS: Did you tell them it was about the film? And what’s your response?

CLINTON: No. You know, look I understand the continuing grief at the loss that parents experienced with the loss of these four brave Americans. And I did testify, as you know, for 11 hours. And I answered all of these questions. Now, I can’t — I can’t help it the people think there has to be something else there. I said very clearly there had been a terrorist group, uh, that had taken responsibility on Facebook, um, between the time that, uh, I – you know, when I talked to my daughter, that was the latest information; we were, uh, giving it credibility. And then we learned the next day it wasn’t true. In fact, they retracted it. This was a fast-moving series of events in the fog of war and I think most Americans understand that.

It is now Wednesday, and outside the conservative blogosphere, nobody in the media is interested in Hillary’s blatant lie.  And her implication that grieving family members lied.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2015/12/hillary_now_denies_blaming_video_to_benghazi_victims_families.html#ixzz3tsGKel2o
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21786



View Profile
« Reply #83 on: March 09, 2016, 11:08:56 pm »

Clinton Says Benghazi Victim’s Mother Is ‘Absolutely Wrong’ [VIDEO]

Hillary Clinton said during Wednesday’s debate that the mother of one of the four Americans killed in the Benghazi attacks is “absolutely wrong” when she says that Clinton and other Obama administration officials personally told her that a Youtube video was the catalyst for the Sept. 11, 2012 terrorist attacks.

“She’s wrong. She’s absolutely wrong,” Clinton told debate moderator Jorge Ramos when asked about comments made last year by Patricia Smith, the mother of State Department information officer Sean Smith.

During an interview with CNN in October, Smith said that during a memorial service for her son and the other Benghazi victims held on Sept. 14, 2012, Clinton said that the short Youtube movie “Innocence of Muslims” was the catalyst for the attack.

“She’s lying! She’s absolutely lying! She told me something entirely different at the casket ceremony. She said it was because of the video and that she would get back to me and tell me what happened with my son,” Smith told CNN last year.

Clinton offered her sympathies for Patricia Smith and the other victims’ families. But she did not directly address what she did or did not say to them during the memorial service.

“This was fog of war. This was complicated,” Clinton said Wednesday. She also maintained that she does believe that the terrorists who carried out the attack were partially motivated by the video.

WATCH:

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2016/03/09/clinton-says-benghazi-victims-mother-is-absolutely-wrong-video/#ixzz42TPZ86Zh






Fact Check: Hillary came up with Benghazi video explanation
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/06/11/fact-check-what-hillary-left-out-benghazi-chapter.html





LIAR!!!!
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21786



View Profile
« Reply #84 on: March 10, 2016, 06:50:16 pm »

Infuriated Benghazi Mom Responds to Clinton: ‘There’s a Special Place in Hell for People Like Her’

The mother of a Benghazi victim lashed out at Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton Thursday, saying Thursday on the Fox Business Network that “there’s a special place in hell” for her.

The blistering comments came one day after Clinton said at a Democratic debate that Patricia Smith was “absolutely wrong” about the accusation she lied to her face.

“We were nose-to-nose at the coffin ceremony. She lied to me,” Smith said, doubling down on her claim. “She told me it was the fault of the video. I said ‘are you sure?’ She says ‘yes, that’s what it was… it was the video.’ And she knew full well it wasn’t at that time. And then she says she was going to check and if it’s any different she would call me back, she would let me know.”

Smith said she had not had any contact with Clinton since.

“She has never once spoken to me or [has] her office,” Smith told Fox Business. “The only thing I ever got out of them is that I am not a member of the immediate family and I don’t need to know… I know what she said. I don’t lie. She’s a proven liar and I call her out for that. I know what I heard.”

The grieving mother said that she would like to talk with Clinton personally.

“I want to speak to her personally and I want to be able to ask her what happened. I want her to be able to tell me what happened. I don’t believe she has the guts to do that,” she said.

Smith concluded her interview drawing on words from Secretary of State Madeleine Albright.

“There’s a special place in Hell for people like her [Clinton] and I hope she enjoys it there!”

video: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2016/03/10/infuriated-benghazi-mom-responds-to-clinton-theres-a-special-place-in-hell-for-people-like-her/
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21786



View Profile
« Reply #85 on: April 15, 2016, 11:41:50 pm »

BREAKING: State Dept. Releases Phone Transcript of Hillary Admitting She Knew Benghazi Was Planned Attack

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton blamed an “awful” internet video for the deaths of four Americans in the terror attack on the US Consulate in Benghazi.

Hillary made the comments just three days after the assault on the compound that killed Ambassador Stevens, Sean Smith, Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty.



Hillary lied—

The State Department released a phone transcipt this week that proves Hillary Clinton knew the Benghazi massacre was a planned attack and not a protest.

Judicial Watch obtained the documents this week.
BizPac Review reported:

The conservative political watchdog group Judicial Watch obtained a transcript of telephone call between the then-secretary of state and then-Egyptian Prime Minister Hisham Kandil.

“We know the attack in Libya had nothing to do with the film,” Clinton told Kandil. “It was a planned attack – not a protest.”

Kandil agreed.

“You’re not kidding. Based on the information we saw today we believe that group that claimed responsibility for this is affiliated with al-Qaida.”

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/04/breaking-state-dept-releases-phone-transcript-hillary-admitting-knew-benghazi-attack-planned-weeks/
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21786



View Profile
« Reply #86 on: May 04, 2016, 06:18:22 pm »

Romanian hacker Guccifer: I breached Clinton server, 'it was easy'

The infamous Romanian hacker known as “Guccifer,” speaking exclusively with Fox News, claimed he easily – and repeatedly – breached former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s personal email server in early 2013.   

"For me, it was easy ... easy for me, for everybody," Marcel Lehel Lazar, who goes by the moniker "Guccifer," told Fox News from a Virginia jail where he is being held.

Guccifer’s potential role in the Clinton email investigation was first reported by Fox News last month. The hacker subsequently claimed he was able to access the server – and provided extensive details about how he did it and what he found – over the course of a half-hour jailhouse interview and a series of recorded phone calls with Fox News. Fox News could not independently confirm Lazar’s claims.

The former secretary of state’s server held nearly 2,200 emails containing information now deemed classified, and another 22 at the “Top Secret” level.

The 44-year-old Lazar said he first compromised Clinton confidant Sidney Blumenthal's AOL account, in March 2013, and used that as a stepping stone to the Clinton server. He said he accessed Clinton’s server “like twice,” though he described the contents as “not interest[ing]” to him at the time.

“I was not paying attention. For me, it was not like the Hillary Clinton server, it was like an email server she and others were using with political voting stuff," Guccifer said.

The hacker spoke freely with Fox News from the detention center in Alexandria, Va., where he’s been held since his extradition to the U.S. on federal charges relating to other alleged cyber-crimes. Wearing a green jumpsuit, Lazar was relaxed and polite in the monitored secure visitor center, separated by thick security glass.

In describing the process, Lazar said he did extensive research on the web and then guessed Blumenthal’s security question. Once inside Blumenthal's account, Lazar said he saw dozens of messages from the Clinton email address.

Asked if he was curious about the address, Lazar merely smiled. Asked if he used the same security question approach to access the Clinton emails, he said no – then described how he allegedly got inside.

“For example, when Sidney Blumenthal got an email, I checked the email pattern from Hillary Clinton, from Colin Powell from anyone else to find out the originating IP. … When they send a letter, the email header is the originating IP usually,” Lazar explained.

He said, “then I scanned with an IP scanner."

Lazar  emphasized that he used readily available web programs to see if the server was “alive” and which ports were open. Lazar identified programs like netscan, Netmap, Wireshark and Angry IP, though it was not possible to confirm independently which, if any, he used.

In the process of mining data from the Blumenthal account, Lazar said he came across evidence that others were on the Clinton server.

"As far as I remember, yes, there were … up to 10, like, IPs from other parts of the world,” he said.

With no formal computer training, he did most of his hacking from a small Romanian village.

Lazar said he chose to use "proxy servers in Russia," describing them as the best, providing anonymity.

Cyber experts who spoke with Fox News said the process Lazar described is plausible. The federal indictment Lazar faces in the U.S. for cyber-crimes specifically alleges he used "a proxy server located in Russia" for the Blumenthal compromise.

Each Internet Protocol (IP) address has a unique numeric code, like a phone number or home address.  The Democratic presidential front-runner’s home-brew private server was reportedly installed in her home in Chappaqua, N.Y., and used for all U.S. government business during her term as secretary of state. 

Former State Department IT staffer Bryan Pagliano, who installed and maintained the server, has been granted immunity by the Department of Justice and is cooperating with the FBI in its ongoing criminal investigation into Clinton’s use of the private server. An intelligence source told Fox News last month that Lazar also could help the FBI make the case that Clinton’s email server may have been compromised by a third party.

Asked what he would say to those skeptical of his claims, Lazar cited “the evidence you can find in the Guccifer archives as far as I can remember."

Writing under his alias Guccifer, Lazar released to media outlets in March 2013 multiple exchanges between Blumenthal and Clinton. They were first reported by the Smoking Gun.

It was through the Blumenthal compromise that the Clintonemail.com accounts were first publicly revealed.

As recently as this week, Clinton said neither she nor her aides had been contacted by the FBI about the criminal investigation. Asked whether the server had been compromised by foreign hackers, she told MSNBC on Tuesday, “No, not at all.”

Recently extradited, Lazar faces trial Sept. 12 in the Eastern District of Virginia. He has pleaded not guilty to a nine-count federal indictment for his alleged hacking crimes in the U.S. Victims are not named in the indictment but reportedly include Colin Powell, a member of the Bush family and others including Blumenthal.

Lazar spoke extensively about Blumenthal’s account, noting his emails were “interesting” and had information about “the Middle East and what they were doing there.”

After first writing to the accused hacker on April 19, Fox News accepted two collect calls from him, over a seven-day period, before meeting with him in person at the jail. During these early phone calls, Lazar was more guarded.

After the detention center meeting, Fox News conducted additional interviews by phone and, with Lazar's permission, recorded them for broadcast. 

While Lazar's claims cannot be independently verified, three computer security specialists, including two former senior intelligence officials, said the process described is plausible and the Clinton server, now in FBI custody, may have an electronic record that would confirm or disprove Guccifer’s claims.

"This sounds like the classic attack of the late 1990s. A smart individual who knows the tools and the technology and is looking for glaring weaknesses in Internet-connected devices," Bob Gourley, a former chief technology officer (CTO) for the Defense Intelligence Agency, said.   

Gourley, who has worked in cybersecurity for more than two decades, said the programs cited to access the server can be dual purpose. "These programs are used by security professionals to make sure systems are configured appropriately. Hackers will look and see what the gaps are, and focus their energies on penetrating a system," he said.

Cybersecurity expert Morgan Wright observed, "The Blumenthal account gave [Lazar] a road map to get to the Clinton server. ... You get a foothold in one system. You get intelligence from that system, and then you start to move."

In March, the New York Times reported the Clinton server security logs showed no evidence of a breach.  On whether the Clinton security logs would show a compromise, Wright made the comparison to a bank heist: "Let’s say only one camera was on in the bank. If you don‘t have them all on, or the right one in the right locations, you won’t see what you are looking for.”

Gourley said the logs may not tell the whole story and the hard drives, three years after the fact, may not have a lot of related data left. He also warned: "Unfortunately, in this community, a lot people make up stories and it's hard to tell what's really true until you get into the forensics information and get hard facts.”

For Lazar, a plea agreement where he cooperates in exchange for a reduced sentence would be advantageous. He told Fox News he has nothing to hide and wants to cooperate with the U.S. government, adding that he has hidden two gigabytes of data that is “too hot” and “it is a matter of national security.” 

In early April, at the time of Lazar’s extradition from a Romanian prison where he already was serving a seven-year sentence for cyber-crimes, a former senior FBI official said the timing was striking.

“Because of the proximity to Sidney Blumenthal and the activity involving Hillary’s emails, [the timing] seems to be something beyond curious,” said Ron Hosko, former assistant director of the FBI’s Criminal Investigative Division from 2012-2014.

The FBI offered no statement to Fox News.

There was no immediate response from the Clinton campaign.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/05/04/romanian-hacker-guccifer-breached-clinton-server-it-was-easy.html
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21786



View Profile
« Reply #87 on: May 05, 2016, 01:01:45 am »

Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21786



View Profile
« Reply #88 on: May 10, 2016, 07:20:22 pm »

REPORT: Hillary’s Emails Hacked by Russia – Kremlin Deciding Whether to Release 20,000 Stolen Emails (VIDEO)

The Kremlin is debating whether to release the 20,000 emails they have hacked off of Hillary Clinton’s server.

According to a report from four days ago, beginning in 2011, the Russians began monitoring Romanian computer hacker Marcel Lazăr Lehel (aka Guccifer) after he attempted, unsuccessfully, to break into the computer system of the Russian funded RT television network.

After monitoring Guccifer, the Russians were reportedly able to record (both physically and electronically) his actions which allowed the Russian intelligence analysts, in 2013, to not only detect his breaking into the private computer of Secretary Clinton, but also break in and copy all of its contents as well.

The report notes that shortly after Russia obtained Clinton’s emails, they released a limited amount to RT TV which were published in an article in March 2013, titled Hillary Clinton’s ‘hacked’ Benghazi emails: FULL RELEASE.



Apparently no Western journalists promoted this story in 2013.

A couple of years later, in 2016, the US then brought in Guccifer for questioning related to this incident.  According to the report, NBC news knew why Guccifer was being questioned but withheld this information from the American public.

The Associated Press reported in October 2015 that “Hillary Clinton’s private email server maintained in her home while serving as secretary of State was possibly hacked by Russia-tied authorities, and others, on five separate occasions.”

The AP report noted that investigators discovered among Clinton’s cache of released emails malicious software aimed at transmitting data to three overseas computers, including at least one in Russia. This malicious software was reportedly activated by clicking on it; but in October it was not clear if Clinton actually opened these messages or not, per the AP.

Recently separate reports have come out noting that Guccifer had indeed hacked Clinton’s emails.  Now according to this latest report, Clinton’s server was not only compromised by Guccifer but also by Russia. Guccifer told FOX News last week that he hacked Hillary’s homebrew server and so did at least 10 others.

UPDATE: Judge Andrew Napolitano told Megyn Kelly on Monday,

    “There’s a debate going on in the Kremlin between the Foreign Ministry and the Intelligence Services about whether they should release the 20,000 of Mrs. Clinton’s emails that they have hacked into.”



http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/05/hillarys-emails-hacked-russia-kremlin-deciding-whether-release-20000-emails-hacked/
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21786



View Profile
« Reply #89 on: May 10, 2016, 07:31:01 pm »

https://www.facebook.com/10157029148580725/
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 7   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
Free SMF Hosting - Create your own Forum

Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy