Topic: Is Hillary Clinton Trustworthy? - page 77. (Read 234741 times)

Emails Show Hillary’s State Department Communicating With Google About Blocked Benghazi Video



Emails among State Department officials show the administration was in contact with Google regarding a blocked YouTube video after President Obama conceded that the Benghazi attack was a preplanned act of terror.

On Sept. 27, 2012, Nora Toiv, a special assistant to the counselor of the Department, sent an email to other State Department officials with the subject line “RE: Google and YouTube.” The email referenced a phone conversation with a person named Sue who assured Toiv a block would remain on an unnamed video at least through Oct. 1, 2012. “Sue just called back and the block will stay through Monday,” Toiv said in the email. “They will not/not be unblocking it before then.”

Toiv’s message, sent at 1:35 pm, was in response to an email sent an hour earlier by Denis McDonough, current White House Chief of Staff who was then the Deputy National Security Adviser. McDonough’s email appears to contain the mobile and office phone numbers of Google CEO Larry Page and YouTube CEO Salar Kamangar. The numbers have been redacted in the copies made available to the public.

The email, which was made public in May as part of the State Department’s release of 296 emails related to the Benghazi attacks, was reported on by the Daily Caller and ABC News.

Although the emails do not name the video that is being blocked, much of the controversy following the Sept. 11, 2012, attacks on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, centered on a YouTube video called The Innocence of Muslims. Hillary Clinton and other State Department and White House officials blamed the Benghazi attack on the video but later backed off the claim.

Radical Islamists in several countries did organize protests over the video, among other issues, including a large demonstration at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo, Egypt, that occurred on the same day as the Benghazi attack.

In her first public remarks after the Benghazi attacks, Hillary Clinton addressed the video. “The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others,” she said. “Our commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation.”

Charles Woods, father of Navy SEAL Tyrone Woods who was killed in Benghazi, said in an interview with Glenn Beck that Hillary Clinton promised to arrest and prosecute the person responsible for making The Innocence of Muslims at a memorial for his son. That man, Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, was later arrested and prosecuted in connection to producing the video. The Obama administration bought $70,000 of ads on Pakistani television featuring clips of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton disavowing the video.

In the days after the attacks the White House requested Google remove The Innocence of Muslims under YouTube’s policy against hosting hate speech. Google refused to do so, according to the New York Times. The emails from Toiv and McDonough show the State Department was still in contact with Google well after the White House’s request.

Although Google refused to remove the video from YouTube it did block it for residents of numerous Middle Eastern countries in the immediate aftermath of the attacks. “This video—which is widely available on the Web—is clearly within our guidelines and so will stay on YouTube,” YouTube told CNN. “However, given the very difficult situation in Libya and Egypt we have temporarily restricted access in both countries.”

It is unclear if or when Google lifted those blocks on viewing in those countries. However, YouTube remains banned by local governments in several countries including Pakistan.

The emails show the State Department was still concerned about the video after the president declared the attacks in Benghazi were preplanned. “It was a preplanned act of terrorism directed against American citizens,” President Obama told the United Nations General Assembly on Sept. 25, 2012, two days before the email exchange between McDonough and Toiv.

The State Department declined to comment on the content of the video. “I cannot offer further context on that specific email,” Alec Gerlach, a State Department communications adviser, told the Washington Free Beacon. “But if you’re asking about the Innocence of Muslims video, this has been addressed by the Administration.”

Gerlach then directed the Free Beacon to a May 1st, 2014, press conference by then-White House Press Secretary Jay Carney.

“What we know is that there was an attack, that there were extremists involved, and four Americans were killed,” Carney said in the briefing. “We have been saying that from the beginning.  Again, if you look at the language provided at the time by the IC to members of Congress and the White House, that’s what Ambassador Rice stuck to.”

“And as I said and others, it was based on what we believed to be true at the time, and they were caveating all the time about the fact more information might become available, more details might become available, and as they did there would be more information to provide.”

Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign and Google did not respond to requests for comment.



http://freebeacon.com/politics/emails-show-hillarys-state-department-communicating-with-google-about-blocked-benghazi-video/

Don't let her gender fool you,  just
She's just as much a man as the rest of them, she'll do what's always been done,  make the biggest promises when votes are needed and then screw the people to protect the money when in power.

She is trustworthy as she is Bill Clinton's wife. Bill did not have sex with that other women in the White House, and Hillary did not go for presidency while Bill did not have sex with that other women.

I would trust her and Bill with my private key.

Yes, Clinton lied about her emails




It is rare for news events, even as momentous as the past week's, to drown out absolute proof that a candidate for president has lied willfully to the public and Congress. Yet precisely such proof has emerged, and it has appeared not only in this newspaper but also in The New York Times (albeit with a headline designed not to draw attention).

Americans learned this spring that Hillary Clinton, in contravention of federal records rules and current law, conducted all her State Department business using a private email address, housed in a server at her home in Westchester County, N.Y.

But not to worry — the former secretary of state swore that she had diligently preserved and passed to the State Department every email she had written in the course of her job. Even though she destroyed all the evidence by wiping the server afterward, she assured the public that everything related to her conduct of official business had been kept and turned over, as the law requires.

It turns out that this is not true. Not only did Clinton fail to turn over work-related emails, but she or her staff also edited some of those emails before submitting them, as the Examiner's Sarah Westwood reported Saturday.

The missing materials, which the State Department says it does not have, came to Congress by other means. They include writings about the jockeying for oil contracts in Libya after President Obama engaging in a war without congressional approval to overthrow Moammar Gadhafi. This comes among her back-and-forth emails with Sidney Blumenthal, a former staffer who had been barred from employment in the Obama administration, to continue offering his insight and advice on Libya.

It is possible but not plausible to construe these omissions as an honest mistake. The wife of a president who caviled over "what the the meaning of the word 'is' is" will split hairs and dispute what is and what is not a work-related email.

But the proof of intent to deceive comes in the fact that Clinton or her staff actually edited some of the emails and turned over censored versions to State before destroying her copy of the originals.

One of Clinton's emails to Blumenthal, for example, arrived at State missing a description of a telephone call she had with Libya's new president. She also tampered with Blumenthal's words in some cases. For example, she removed his admonition that "simply completing the election...and fulfilling a list of proper democratic milestones may not create a true democracy," and his warning that Libya could soon be ruled by Islamic law.

What was the motive for these excisions? Perhaps the motive was to spare Clinton some embarrassment, because surely she did not expect anyone to know about her reliance on Blumenthal as a source of intelligence.

But that is not the only question. Another is, if Clinton and her staff went over these emails finely enough to edit and remove portions of them, is it not likely that she tampered with others, or just dropped them down the memory hole? Recall that Clinton submitted her communications on paper and not electronically, which is a way of cleaning up any hidden electronic signs of tampering.

There is no way to put a good face on this one: Hillary Clinton lied about her emails. She had something to hide, and she hid it. She deliberately deceived Congress, which asked for her communications on Libya, and she spoke falsely to the public.

Once a public figure can no longer be trusted, Congress has an obligation to restore transparency. Congress should demand physical possession of Clinton's server and let the best minds in the computer world attempt to put the pieces back together again.



http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/yes-clinton-lied-about-her-emails/article/2567368

An Inside Look at How Hillary Clinton Plays the Media

"Greta...is malleable."



Reines replied with a lengthy email explaining why the narrative was not as "dire as it seems in the moment." He noted that President Barack Obama would be delivering a major speech in the Middle East the following day that would "blanket coverage and extinguish the Cuba stuff, so we just need to weather the night."

He wrote:

we are suffering from two significant tactical problems: 1) you are here and removed 2) our press corps was out of position today and in flight, so the people we worked on all week and the ones likely to skew our way were replaced by reporters not connected to us. The two issues above will be rectified tomorrow in your two interviews - especially Greta who is malleable. We can use that to make a strong case on the principle, and the simple fact Cuba wasn't in the OAS yesterday, and won't be tomorrow. Everyday that passes reinforces that point. The time difference to East Coast will help us in moving whatever is said in these interviews tomorrow.

In his email, Reines was referring to an interview with Fox News' Greta Van Susteren, which aired the following day. The topic of the OAS meeting did indeed come up:

VAN SUSTEREN: I know you've been to Honduras. The OAS, after you left—it looks like Cuba's going to be invited back in.

CLINTON: No, that wasn't the outcome.

VAN SUSTEREN: It wasn't the outcome? What happened?

CLINTON: Well, we were very adamantly opposed to those who wanted to lift the 1962 suspension and leave it at that. That was not acceptable to the United States. That's, unfortunately, the path that they were on earlier. And we made the case to many countries and found a receptive audience that we could agree to lift something from so long ago that was really part of the cold war, but we had to reaffirm the values and principles of the OAS. We had to explicitly reaffirm democracy and human rights. And then we had to have a process.

So yes, you can lift the suspension, but that's the beginning, that's not the end. Then Cuba has to decide whether it wishes to become a member of the OAS. And then the OAS must, according to its practices, purposes and principles, enter into a dialogue with Cuba and make a decision.

So this was the beginning. Unlike what some had hoped, to have a kind of fait accompli, we were able to create a consensus that the majority of countries in the OAS agreed with the United States.

VAN SUSTEREN: So we haven't been snubbed.

CLINTON: Oh, not at all. In fact, this was a very good example of the kind of diplomatic engagement that we want to be involved with.


http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/07/hillary-clinton-emails-greta-van-susteren-leslie-gelb

FLASHBACK: When David Axelrod said he didn't know anything about Clinton's private server



Former White House senior adviser David Axelrod said in June he was unaware Hillary Clinton conducted business from a personal email server when she served as secretary of State – but a State Department document dump Tuesday evening raises questions about how much he knew.

Asked last month in an interview whether he knew anything about Clinton's "homebrew" system when they worked together in the Obama administration, Axelrod responded, "I didn't know."



http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/article/2567391

Email bombshells from Hillary's secret account show she didn't know when cabinet meetings were held, was dumbfounded by a fax machine and emailed aides to fetch her iced tea


Hillary Clinton's emails have been a subject of partisan finger-pointing and hand-wringing since the revelation in April that she had used a private home-brew server to store her messages during the four years she was secretary of state.

On Tuesday the State Department released the first in a series of document-dumps comprising about 3,000 of the 55,000 pages Clinton turned over to State late last year.

They describe the ordinary and the shocking – everything from ordinary meeting recaps to the involvement in the agency of Sidney Blumenthal, Clinton's 2008 election hatchet-man who had officially been exiled from the administration.

They also paint the onetime first lady and New York senator as technologically maladroit – she was all thumbs with an office fax machine – and distant enough from her husband Bill that their aides kept each informed about the other's doings.

She used her email to let aides know she was thirsy. 'Pls call Sarah and ask her if she can get me some iced tea,' one message read.

And then there's 'Santa' – an unknown person apparently on Clinton's meeting schedule.

'I'm seeing Santa at 8:30,' she wrote her deputy chief of staff Huma Abedin six months after taking office, 'so won't take off until closer to 9:30.'

Despite the collective shock inside the D.C. beltway when news surfaced that Clinton had a secret email account, many of Washington's most influential Democrats were already in on it.

Political operative David Axelrod had her email address almost from the start, but claimed just weeks ago that he was unaware of it.

Treasury Secretary Jack Lew and then-White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel wrote to her at the now-infamous '[email protected].'

So did outgoing Maryland Senator Barbara Mikulski, liberal think tank chief John Podesta of the Center for American Progress, and lawyer-lobbyist Lanny Davis – who was later shamed for taking millions from West African strongmen.

Missing, so far, is any evidence of wrongdoing in the Benghazi saga.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
So far there is no trace of any communication between the secretary of state and ANYTHING regarding/related to benghazi or the death of his "good friend" ambassador steven... not even a simple "OMG!"

Nothing. How strange.

It was she who ordered when her husband was president, hence the manner of operation would be the same.

Judicial Watch: Newly Released Documents Confirm White House Officials Set Hillary Clinton’s Benghazi Response

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch today released new State Department documents showing that Hillary Clinton and the State Department’s response to the Benghazi attack was immediately determined by top Obama White House officials, particularly Ben Rhodes, then-White House deputy strategic communications adviser, and Bernadette Meehan, a spokesperson for the National Security Council. The new documents were forced from the U.S. State Department under court order in a Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:14-cv-01511)).

Judicial Watch filed a FOIA request on June 13, 2014, and subsequently a lawsuit on September 4, 2014, seeking:

Any and all records concerning, regarding, or related to notes, updates, or reports created in response to the September 11, 2012 attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya. This request includes, but is not limited to, notes taken by then Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton or employees of the Office of the Secretary of State during the attack and its immediate aftermath.

A September 11, 2012, email sent at 6:21 p.m. by State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland to Meehan, Under Secretary for Management Patrick F. Kennedy, and Clinton’s personal aide Jacob Sullivan shows that the State Department deferred to the White House on the official response to the Benghazi attack. Referencing pending press statements by Barack Obama and Clinton, Nuland wrote: “We are holding for Rhodes clearance. BMM, pls advise asap.”

Meehan responded three minutes later, at 6:24 p.m.: “Ben is good with these and is on with Jake now too.”

Rhodes sent an email at 9:48 p.m. to senior White House and State officials on the issue: “We should let the State Department statement be our comment for the night.”

An email from Meehan, sent at 10:15 p.m. on September 11 to Rhodes, Nuland, Sullivan, Kennedy and Clinton aide Philippe Reines, further confirms the White House approval of Hillary Clinton’s statement tying the Benghazi terrorist attack to an Internet video: “All, the Department of State just released the following statement. Per Ben [Rhodes’] email below, this should be the USG comment for the night.”

The “USG comment” turned out to be Clinton’s notorious public statement, made hours after the initial terrorist attack, falsely suggesting that the Benghazi assault was a “response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet.”

Rhodes emailed Meehan, Sullivan and Reines at 11:45 p.m. on September 11, writing, “Fyi – we are considering releasing this tonight.” The next line is redacted. The email also included a “Readout of President’s Call to Secretary Clinton,” the contents of which are also completely redacted.

...

http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/judicial-watch-newly-released-documents-confirm-white-house-officials-set-hillary-clintons-benghazi-response/

Video: White House “disgusted” by Hillary e-mail scandal — and it’s getting worse



The issue of Hillary Clinton’s emails got deeper today. Not only did Hillary fail to give the State Department all of the work-related emails from her private server as she publicly stated, now it appears those she did submit may have been altered. That brings up all sorts of new questions about whether Hillary and her team have tampered with evidence in a government investigation:

Hillary Clinton withheld Benghazi-related emails from the State Department that detailed her knowledge of the scramble for oil contracts in Libya and the shortcomings of the NATO-led military intervention for which she advocated.

Clinton removed specific portions of other emails she sent to State, suggesting the messages were screened closely enough to determine which paragraphs were unfit to be seen by the public. …

Clinton selectively edited other portions of emails she declined to provide to the State Department.

For example, in July 2012, Clinton removed paragraphs from a Blumenthal memo that warned “simply completing the election…and fulfilling a list of proper democratic milestones may not create a true democracy.” Blumenthal also wrote — in sections that Clinton deleted before providing the document to State — that the government would likely be “founded on Sharia,” or Islamic laws.

The group advocating to implement Sharia, Ansar al-Sharia, is a designated terrorist group that played a role in the Benghazi attacks.

But Clinton hid how much she knew about that development.


This would present a huge legal issue for anyone whose name didn’t rhyme with Millary Minton. The Federal Records Act requires work-related communications to go to the National Archive, where the government determines what can and cannot be published for public review. That is why the Obama administration instructed its agencies not to use personal e-mails unless those communications were copied to official accounts, in order to comply with the FRA. Hillary and her team flat-out disregarded those directives and flouted the law in running their own private email system. Now, with records under subpoena by an official committee of Congress, it seems clear that Hillary and her team not only destroyed email subject to the subpoena but tampered with the evidence they did provide.

Any other government official would be looking at jail time for that kind of action. Sandy Berger got caught doing essentially the same thing with official government documents not under subpoena (presumably for the same purpose, to clean up after the Clintons), and traded his law license in exchange for not getting prosecuted. The chances of Hillary Clinton getting investigated for this by the Department of Justice are roughly nil while Barack Obama is President, but it’s certainly a good argument for keeping that authority away from Hillary by ensuring she doesn’t succeed Obama to the White House.

That’s not to say that the Obama administration is entirely enamored of her flouting of the law. Ron Fournier told MSNBC’s Morning Joe that they’re getting pretty “disgusted” by it:





http://hotair.com/archives/2015/06/29/video-white-house-disgusted-by-hillary-e-mail-scandal-and-its-getting-worse/

Benghazi night call between Clinton and Obama withheld, documents show





New documents released by a federal court show President Obama called then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on the night of the 2012 Benghazi attack — but the contents are being withheld by the State Department.

It had previously been disclosed that Clinton and Obama spoke the night of the terror attacks. But the documents offer additional information about the timing of the call — after the initial attack on the U.S. consulate, but before the second wave where mortars hit the nearby CIA annex and killed former Navy SEALs Ty Woods and Glen Doherty.

The contents of the call, however, are being withheld, not because the information is classified but because the administration claims they represent internal deliberations about the 2012 terror assault.

The claim comes as Clinton also faces accusations that she withheld Benghazi-related emails from her private server in the trove of emails handed over to the State Department.

The contents of the call were only shared with Obama’s and Clinton’s closest aides. Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes sent an email on the call to State Department officials Jake Sullivan and Philippe Reines, and National Security Council spokeswoman Bernadette Meehan.

The email was released as part of an ongoing lawsuit by conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch.

The email on the Obama-Clinton phone call bears the subject line, “Call.” The text of the email says, “Readout of President’s Call to Secretary Clinton,” but the rest of the details are fully redacted. The State Department cited the so-called “B5″ exception for internal deliberations.

The emails also show that Rhodes, on the night of Sept. 11, 2012, and before the attack was over, endorsed a statement from Clinton that cited an anti-Islam Internet video.

That statement noted some tried to justify the assault “as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet.” Rhodes told Clinton’s aides that “we should let State Department statement be our comment for the night.”


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/06/29/benghazi-night-call-between-clinton-and-obama-withheld-documents-show/

Interesting post, Chef Ramsay. I was unfortunate enough to have lived in Arkansas while Slick Willy was Governor. Not unfortunate to have lived there, just unfortunate that it was while he was Gov. Arkansas is a beautiful state, and I loved it there. It was a great place to have spent a few years of my adolescence. Mena is a beautiful city too.

Now, I was just a young lad at the time, so I didn't pay much attention to Willy boy. But I remember when the Gennifer Flowers thing broke (look it up if you don't know about it) where he was diddling her and she filed a sexual harassment suit against him. And I remember hearing about Whitewater and the Mena thing too. I also remember when he ran for POTUS. I didn't live in Arkansas at the time, but I remember being in my Civics class in High School and we were discussing the upcoming election and saying who we would vote for if we would have been old enough. One girl in my class said she would vote for Clinton "because he was from the South and would do great things for us Southerners." I just laughed about that one.

Sorry, I know how corrupt the whole family is. None of them are trustworthy. It is a shame that the sheep are lapping up her BS like a 5-course meal.

Ex-charity exec who helped expose $500G Clinton Foundation donation faces legal threats







A former charity executive who helped expose a questionable $500,000 donation to the Clinton Foundation is now being threatened by her old bosses with a lawsuit seeking tens of thousands of dollars, FoxNews.com has learned.

Sue Veres Royal, former executive director at the Happy Hearts Fund, was initially quoted in a May 29 New York Times article that said the charity lured Bill Clinton to a 2014 gala only after offering a $500,000 donation to The Clinton Foundation. His office previously had turned down the charity’s invitations, but this time he accepted; the accompanying donation amounted to almost a quarter of the gala’s net proceeds.

Veres Royal, who spoke to FoxNews.com about the fallout from that report, is now embroiled in a legal battle with the charity. She filed a formal complaint June 4 with the New York attorney general’s Charities Bureau, as the charity itself threatened her with legal action for allegedly breaking her confidentiality agreement.


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/06/20/ex-charity-exec-who-helped-expose-500g-clinton-award-stands-firm-in-face-legal/

Tom Cruise as CIA’s Barry Seal in ‘Mena’: movie could derail Hillary Clinton, Jeb Bush

(1776 Channel) — Hollywood actor Tom Cruise is reportedly in talks to portray hefty renegade drug pilot Adler ‘Barry’ Seal, a central figure in a true story that involves one of America’s darkest secrets since the Kennedy assassination: CIA-sanctioned cocaine import/weapons export smuggling between Central America and Arkansas during the 1980s Iran-Contra affair. The project, tentatively titled Mena, will be distributed by Universal Pictures and directed by Doug Liman of Bourne Identity fame.

This studio theatrical release of the Barry Seal story featuring A-List actor Cruise could spell disaster for the 2016 presidential campaigns of Hillary Clinton and Jeb Bush if the producers choose not to expunge politically explosive details from Seal’s clandestine life.

Governor William Jefferson Clinton (husband of Hillary Clinton) is alleged by an FBI/CIA whistleblower to have protected Seal’s Mena, Arkansas air base and flight operations and to have subsequently received quid pro quo CIA support that secured his meteoric rise to the U.S. Presidency.

Bill Clinton publicly denied those allegations when confronted by legendary White House correspondent Sarah McClendon.

*Seal is alleged to have blackmailed Vice President Herbert Walker Bush by threatening to release surveillance video of brothers George Walker and Jeb Bush using the family’s Beechcraft King Air turboprop to accept delivery of two kilos of cocaine during a 1985 DEA drug sting at an airport near Miami. Seal was brutally assassinated by members of the Medellin Cartel in Baton Rouge, Louisiana a short time later. Some reports claim that Seal’s body was found with Vice President Bush’s personal phone number still in his wallet.

...

The producers of Mena have at their disposal politically sensitive details about Seal’s life that the creators of Doublecrossed did not. The publication of Compromised (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nCSCCGLCNYA) was a game changer that the next generation of Hollywood filmmakers cannot afford to ignore. If Liman, Cruise and the studio choose to detour the politically dangerous elephants in the room which comprise Seal’s life story as it is understood post-Compromised, they risk appearing dishonest or COMPROMISED themselves.

The enormity of the responsibility resting on the shoulders of Hollywood right now cannot be underestimated. As Mena enters the production cycle, Hollywood will have to examine itself.

If the powerful (some insiders would argue dangerous) Clinton and Bush political machines are rewarded with a Wiffle ball movie that ignores Clinton’s protection of Seal’s CIA activities and Reed’s claim that Seal knew about the Bush brothers DEA sting, the country will be worse off than before Universal optioned the screenplay.

Much more...http://1776channel.com/2015/02/tom-cruise-is-cias-barry-seal-in-mena-movie-could-derail-hillary-clinton-jeb-bush/

Seeing her doing her thing over the last few days I've realized just how much of a liar Hillary really is.
Worst thing about this is that she may actually be the next president of the USA.
God help us.

i cannot say even begin to say how true that is and i am suprise that this is the case literaly all around the world i mean who in this say and age can we trust. the choices in election is who is better of the two devil that is not good

TRUMP CAMPAIGN RESPONDS TO HILLARY LINKING HIM TO SOUTH CAROLINA SHOOTING: ‘SHE MUST BE NERVOUS’

GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump says he thinks Hillary Clinton lost all credibility when she blamed him for the massacre at a church in South Carolina.

The 2016 Democratic presidential frontrunner hinted that the shooting at a church in Charleston, South Carolina is in some way connected to Donald Trump’s recent presidential announcement. Clinton told an interviewer:

Public discourse is sometimes hotter and more negative than it should be, which can, in my opinion, trigger someone who is less than stable. I think we have to speak out against it. Like, for example, a recent entry into the Republican presidential campaign said some very inflammatory things about Mexicans. Everybody should stand up and say that’s not acceptable.

Clinton was referring to Trump’s announcement speech, when he commented about the illegal aliens coming across the southern border from Mexico.

“They’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people,” Trump said in his announcement speech.

More...http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/06/19/trump-campaign-responds-to-hillary-linking-him-to-south-carolina-shooting-she-must-be-nervous/

Hillary Clinton Blames Donald Trump’s Announcement Speech For Charleston Shooting…








Hillary Clinton didn’t call The Donald out by name, but she suggested in an interview Thursday that comments like ones the real estate tycoon-turned-Republican presidential candidate made during his recent announcement speech could “trigger” events like this week’s church shooting in Charleston, South Carolina.

“We have to have a candid national conversation about race, and about discrimination, hatred, prejudice,” Clinton said of the Charleston shooting in an interview with Jon Ralston on his show “Ralston Live.”

“Public discourse is sometimes hotter and more negative than it should be, which can, in my opinion, trigger someone who is less than stable.”

Clinton, the Democratic presidential candidate, did not say Trump’s name, but went on to explicitly mention remarks he made during his announcement speech on Tuesday, the day before a white gunman opened fire in a historically African-American church, killing nine people.

“I think we have to speak out against it,” Clinton explained. “Like, for example, a recent entry into the Republican presidential campaign said some very inflammatory things about Mexicans. Everybody should stand up and say that’s not acceptable.”



http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/hillary-clinton-suggests-donald-trump-comments-trigger-events/story?id=31884003#.VYQdeBdbnoM.twitter

Hold on hold on hold... a TRUSTWORTHY politician in the 21st century??? LOL

Insightful input. Thank you.