Hillary Clinton: ‘We didn’t lose a single person in Libya’

No rehash of Hillary and video, but now she claims “We didn’t lose a single person in Libya” is a capturing reinvention of historical fact. But what is even more objectionable is that she cared not one wit in what happened after she took out Gaddafi. One of her E-Mails tells us all. First a bit of background then the short version of the clip.

Clinton balked at leaving Hamptons for major Libyan meeting – ‘Oh woe’

………….Recall Hillary’s Libya Post-War Plan Was ‘Play It by Ear,’ Gates Says?

But the really important issues—the questions longstanding followers of the U.S. and NATO intervention want answered—are: Why did Hillary Clinton push for strikes that contributed to the fall of Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi? And why didn’t the Obama administration bother to plan for the all-too-predictable chaos that came next?

But with this latest E-Mail we find that she couldn’t so much as give up her vacation. Hillary Clinton was not pleased that her Aug. 2011 Hamptons vacation was to be interrupted by a trip to Paris to discuss efforts to help Libya’s transitional government, emails released by the State Department on Friday show.

Oh, woe,” Clinton lamented in an Aug. 22, 2011 email to Huma Abedin, her longtime aide. “If I have to, I will fly at night, go to mtg and fly right back — to and from Long Island. Can our plane land and takeoff from W’Hampton?”

Clinton and former President Bill Clinton were scheduled to spend the week at the 12,000 square foot East Hampton mansion of New York City real estate developer Elie Hirschfield.

The meeting in question was no minor affair. According to a statement at the time by State Departments spokeswoman Victoria Nuland, the event was a gathering of the Contact Group on Libya, a group of western nations and members of the Arab League that was created to help the Libyan National Transitional Council.

 

 

Clinton balked at leaving Hamptons for major Libyan meeting – ‘Oh woe’

Hillary and her gal pals were so anxious to finish off Gaddafi who after many years had come our way in getting rid of his nukes, (bad move for him) and tolerating Israel. But Hillary wasn’t happy. She wanted her Arab Spring. For a good review try Three women who brought us the new long war in Libya

Recall Hillary’s Libya Post-War Plan Was ‘Play It by Ear,’ Gates Says?

But the really important issues—the questions longstanding followers of the U.S. and NATO intervention want answered—are: Why did Hillary Clinton push for strikes that contributed to the fall of Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi? And why didn’t the Obama administration bother to plan for the all-too-predictable chaos that came next?

But with this latest E-Mail we find that she couldn’t so much as give up her vacation. Hillary Clinton was not pleased that her Aug. 2011 Hamptons vacation was to be interrupted by a trip to Paris to discuss efforts to help Libya’s transitional government, emails released by the State Department on Friday show.

Oh, woe,” Clinton lamented in an Aug. 22, 2011 email to Huma Abedin, her longtime aide. “If I have to, I will fly at night, go to mtg and fly right back — to and from Long Island. Can our plane land and takeoff from W’Hampton?”

Clinton and former President Bill Clinton were scheduled to spend the week at the 12,000 square foot East Hampton mansion of New York City real estate developer Elie Hirschfield.

The meeting in question was no minor affair. According to a statement at the time by State Departments spokeswoman Victoria Nuland, the event was a gathering of the Contact Group on Libya, a group of western nations and members of the Arab League that was created to help the Libyan National Transitional Council.
Read more: Daily Caller

Hillary Clinton 2016 – “We came we saw he died” Laughing About Gadhafi Libya

What Jefferson and Adams knew about Muslims that Progressives don’t

After seeing the Mayor of Philadelphia totally deny that the shooting of a police officer had anything to do with Islam when the perpetrator himself claimed so, I decided to do a re-run of our history.

Our nation has been dealing with these barbarians since the beginning of our nation. Since the beginning, Tunisia and what was then known as the Barbary Coast, the Muslims were barbarous towards the United States. Adams wanted to pay ransom to secure the release of hostages. Jefferson said no more. Appeasement? Or war. It is good to review this piece of History at this time. Here tis a piece of it:

During the meeting Jefferson and Adams asked the Dey’s ambassador why Muslims held so much hostility towards America, a nation with which they had no previous contacts.

In a later meeting with the American Congress, the two future presidents reported that Ambassador Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja had answered that Islam “was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Quran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman (Muslim) who should be slain in Battle was sure to go to Paradise.”

When American colonists rebelled against British rule in 1776, American merchant ships lost Royal Navy protection. With no American Navy for protection, American ships were attacked and their Christian crews enslaved by Muslim pirates operating under the control of the “Dey of Algiers”–an Islamist warlord ruling Algeria.

Because American commerce in the Mediterranean was being destroyed by the pirates, the Continental Congress agreed in 1784 to negotiate treaties with the four Barbary States. Congress appointed a special commission consisting of John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and Benjamin Franklin, to oversee the negotiations.

Lacking the ability to protect its merchant ships in the Mediterranean, the new America government tried to appease the Muslim slavers by agreeing to pay tribute and ransoms in order to retrieve seized American ships and buy the freedom of enslaved sailors.

Adams argued in favor of paying tribute as the cheapest way to get American commerce in the Mediterranean moving again. Jefferson was opposed. He believed there would be no end to the demands for tribute and wanted matters settled “through the medium of war.” He proposed a league of trading nations to force an end to Muslim piracy.

In 1786, Jefferson, then the American ambassador to France, and Adams, then the American ambassador to Britain, met in London with Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja, the “Dey of Algiers” ambassador to Britain.

The Americans wanted to negotiate a peace treaty based on Congress’ vote to appease. For the following 15 years, the American government paid the Muslims millions of dollars for the safe passage of American ships or the return of American hostages. The payments in ransom and tribute amounted to 20 percent of United States government annual revenues in 1800.

Not long after Jefferson’s inauguration as president in 1801, he dispatched a group of frigates to defend American interests in the Mediterranean, and informed Congress.

Declaring that America was going to spend “millions for defense but not one cent for tribute,” Jefferson pressed the issue by deploying American Marines and many of America’s best warships to the Muslim Barbary Coast.

Hillary’s Libya Post-War Plan Was ‘Play It by Ear,’ Gates Says

When Hillary Clinton appears before Congress’s special committee on Benghazi Thursday, she’ll likely be asked all the wrong questions.

Clinton will be peppered with queries about why she kept a private email server, what caused the 2012 attacks on the U.S. special consulate in Benghazi, and how come U.S. forces didn’t respond more quickly to the strikes. But the really important issues—the questions longstanding followers of the U.S. and NATO intervention want answered—are: Why did Hillary Clinton push for strikes that contributed to the fall of Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi? And why didn’t the Obama administration bother to plan for the all-too-predictable chaos that came next?

(Excerpt) Read more at thedailybeast.com

And the consequences of that improvisation are still being felt today. The country is an epicenter of the refugee crisis sweeping the Middle East, North Africa, and Europe. Part of Libya is under the control of the self-proclaimed Islamic State. And the Russians use the U.S.-NATO intervention in Libya to justify their own military incursions in places like Syria.

H/T:Free Republic

Description – Veni Vidi Vici were the brief words spoken by Caesar -pronounced “Kaiser” when he said— ‘I came, I saw and I conquered’ The Latin reference to Hillary Clinton’s phrase that ‘ WE came, WE Saw and HE’s Dead’ is a reference to Libertia the Roman Goddess of Death.. or Persephone the statue effigy on top of either the congress or Senate, I forget right now which has Hades and witch has the consort or Saboath standing over the political theatre. The Statue of Liberty or Columbia is the goddess for the Satanist Cabal standing over in NY Harbour. “Veni Vidi Libertia” … Those are Hillary Clinton’s words about a foreign leader’s death. This news clip is relevant to her political career now as well as for WAR CRIMEs given her possible personal involvement in the assassination of a foreign leader.

Hillary Clinton and her changing views on Syria’s Assad

Seeing Hillary opine on the Iran deal today took me over the top. Now that she has lowered her voice an octave. I wandered into my time machine. Why not do a post on her handling of Syria, as the hordes spring forth out of Syria into Europe and soon the USA. And we should trust her on Iran? Oh, and let’s take a look at Kerry as well.

Watch as Clinton’s keen insight morphs from Assad being a good guy to well, you know, she wishes to dispense with him as she took care of business in Libya and Egypt. But let me throw in a few more characters in this bizarre play that must have the world in absolute astonishment.

Hillary Clinton and her various changing views on Assad.

At this point, Madame Secretary believes that Bashar al- Assad is the good guy. That was in 2011.

Reporters aren’t interested in exploring aspects of Clinton’s job as Secretary of State. One such comment not getting attention is her 2011 labeling of Bashar  al-Assad, the man almost  certainly (maybe) behind a devastating chemical weapons attack, as a “reformer.”

On the March 27, 2011, Clinton insisted, “There’s a different leader in  Syria now. Many of the members of Congress of both parties who have gone to  Syria in recent months have said they believe he’s a reformer.” (The Washington  Post gave this remark three Pinocchios. Clinton later backtracked.)  Yet, ABC, NBC and CBS have not reexamined the comments in the wake of the attack  or its accuracy.

Uploaded on Mar 31, 2011. Included in the clip is her take on the wonders of the administration’s actions in Libya as well. Libya is now a failed State thanks to Hillary. Many many falsehoods about Gadaffi. Spin, spin, spin.

Hillary Labels Syria’s Terrorist-Supporting Dictator A “Reformer”

A SURPRISE at the very ending of the clip.

Hillary Clinton, US Secretary of State, has been calling over and over since 2011(That was quick) for the legitimate president of Syria, Bashar al-Assad, to leave power and to let a bunch of al-Qaeda supporters known as the Syrian National Council (later Syrian National Coalition) replace him. However, the repeated defeats in battles of her “Free Syrian Army” (FSA) and their al-Qaeda Jihadi assistants have caused her much frustration culminating in a blood clot behind her ear. She was replaced by John Kerry.

Nancy Pelosi

In 2007, Nancy Pelosi, over strong objections from the  State Department, visited Syria, and said, “The road to Damascus is a road to  peace.” Senator John Kerry predicted that “Syria will change as it embraces a  legitimate relationship with the United States.” Read more:  Newsbusters

John Kerry

It wasn’t so long ago that Kerry made repeated pilgrimage to Syria, meeting with Assad five times between 2009 and 2011.

He famously used the adjective “generous” to describe Assad, as the Wall Street Journal’s Bret Stephens recalled in a column:

On March 16, 2011—the day after the first mass demonstration against the regime—John Kerry said Assad was a man of his word who had been “very generous with me.” He added that under Assad “Syria will move; Syria will change as it embraces a legitimate relationship with the United States.” (This is the man who is our secretary of state, and mastermind of the Iran nuclear deal.)

As Michael Rubin recently wrote in Commentary Magazine, Kerry’s staffers described “their collective cringe when, after a motorcycle ride with Bashar al-Assad, he returned to Washington referring to Bashar as ‘my dear friend.’”

The National Review detailed more about Kerry’s positive impression of Assad:

After a “long and comprehensive” meeting with Assad in April of that year, Kerry described it as “a very positive discussion.” A month later, Kerry was back in Syria. His spokesman, insisting that “Syria can play a critical role in bringing peace and stability if it makes the strategic decision to do so,” asserted that Kerry had “emerged as one of the primary American interlocutors with the Syrian government.” Despite the senator’s interlocutions, Assad, it appears, has made the wrong “strategic decision.”

The Washington Free Beacon in an article titled “An Affair to Remember: John Kerry Hearts Bashar al-Assad” called Kerry the Syrian dictator’s “highest-ranking apologist in American politics”

Bonus info:

Kerry and his Iranian in-law relatives. Could he be black mailed?

“I am proud of the Iranian-Americans in my own family, and grateful for how they have enriched my life,” Kerry said in the official statement. Kerry also said he was “strongly committed to resolving” the differences between the United States and the Islamic Republic of Iran, “to the mutual benefit of both of our people.”

…let us recall this information about Kerry, and his daughter’s husband’s family who happens to live in Iran. How in the world did Kerry even get a security clearance. Maybe again, another desert lover due to his ties.

“But what if the regime simply decides to round up Nahed’s family members and torture them? Or sends its goons to visit them at home? Or exerts some form of more subtle pressure on them that gets no publicity, and then makes it known they want the United States to release Iranians jailed in the United States on terrorism charges or for attempting to procure weapons technology or military spare parts”?

Clinton latest email dump – ‘Owns Libya policy from start to finish’

No big surprise. Check out the PDF e-mail and who all was copied. One can only wonder why some names had to be scrubbed. Libya is her baby. From start to finish. What different does it make? Ask Gaddafi.

CNSNews.com) – Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had “leadership/ownership/stewardship of this country’s Libya policy from start to finish,” says an email written by one of Clinton’s top aides–and forwarded to Clinton herself–as the Libyan rebellion that sought the overthrow of Muammar Qadhafi appeared to be nearing a triumphant moment.

The email is one of those the State Department has thus far given to the House Select Committee on Benghazi. It is among 349 pages of those emails that were obtained by the New York Times and that the Times has posted online in a PDF.

This email about Clinton’s “ownership” of U.S. Libya policy was sent—on the East Coast of the United States–at 7:40 p.m. on Sunday, August 21, 2011. By then, in Tripoli, Libya, it was already 1:40 a.m. on the morning of Monday, August 22.  More at  CNS

Rodgers faux Benghazi report and his wife’s Defense interests

If there is any question about the faux Benghazi report that just came out from the Intelligence Committee under the less than esteemed Chairman Rodgers, let me answer by looking at the cast of lying weasels that played a part in this. Let’s take a look first at Rodgers wife and just who she is. First as a CEO of a Defense Contractor and then hired by a lobbying firm.

And then the infamous CIA Deputy Director Morel, who also is a national security analyst for CBS News and has a book deal, joined the Beacon firm after retiring from the CIA last year. More about Beacon later. Morell who lied and should have been tried for lying to Congress. Moved on to make big bucks as a payoff for his lies no doubt. First of a two-part post. Tomorrow the second. Here is good ole boy Lindsay Graham for a start:

Published on Nov 24, 2014

Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) told CNN’s State of the Union Sunday morning that last week’s the House Intelligence Committee’s Benghazi report, which hollowed out a number of Republican arguments on the incident, was “full of crap.”

H/T:Right Scoop with video

 Just who Chairman Rodgers wife and her role in D.C?

CNN Transcripts

GRIFFIN: Want an example? Take Kristi Clemens Rogers.

Four years ago, she married the powerful chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Michigan Congressman Mike Rogers.

Up until 2012, she was also the CEO of the American branch of Aegis, a defense and security contracting firm, where. according to her new employer, the law firm, Manatt, Phelps and Phillips, Kristi Rogers successfully developed and led a two-year pursuit and capture strategy to win a five-year, $10 billion contract under the Department of State’s Worldwide Protective Services program.”

And, yes, it’s an area her husband’s committee has Congressional oversight, making sure diplomats and their staffs are properly protected.

You would think Congressman Mike Rogers would at least disclose that family connection, or that in appearing before Congress, Kristi Rogers would disclose her marital ties.

But on his Web site, Congressman Rogers only states he’s in fact married, no name, and Kristi Rogers in an appearance before a presidential commission back in 2010 didn’t mention the name of the man she just married, even though she missed her first appearance due to her honeymoon.
KRISTI CLEMENS ROGERS, WIFE OF REPRESENTATIVE MIKE ROGERS: It was an unfortunate perfect storm. I had just come off my honeymoon. That was not the perfect storm —

GRIFFIN: The congressman declined our interview request, and his press secretary set us straight in this email, telling us this is all old news.

“Kristi Rogers is not a lobbyist,” she writes, and “is not engaging in those activities.”

“She has also never met with any member of Congressman Rogers’ staff or staff members of the intelligence committee in any professional capacity on any issue.”

Kristi Rogers is now the managing director of Federal Government Affairs and Public Policy from Manatt, Phelps & Phillips.

She is not a registered lobbyist. She just happens to work for a firm that does extensive lobbying, and on its Web site, touts its “strong relationships in Congress” with a “solid record of success in securing legislation and federal funding on behalf of clients.” NYHART: And it’s this kind of conflict of interest that leads to this deep distrust.

GRIFFIN: What we are told constantly by the members is, I never talk to my spouse about this issue.

I never talk to her on this business. There’s a firewall between me and my sons who are lobbyists.

Do you buy that?

NYHART: Well, whether you buy it or not, here’s the question of the appearance. I’m sure there’s some reality.

I can’t quite believe that members of Congress don’t care about the fortunes of their family members.

GRIFFIN: And the fortunes go both ways. Mike Rogers’ wife, Kristi becomes CEO of defense contractor, then is hired by a lobbying firm.

Rogers becomes chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, and according to the Federal Election Commission, political donations from the defense industry quadruple, all legal, all within the rules, all routine in the family business of Washington.

Here is a refresher on Morell

‘Revolving door’? Ties between consultancy, gov’t raise questions about Benghazi probe

Morell, who also is a national security analyst for CBS News and has a book deal, joined the Beacon firm after retiring from the CIA last year. In doing so, he joined an organization already stacked with ex-government officials. Among them is Philippe Reines, whom the New York Times magazine recently described as Clinton’s “principal gatekeeper.” According to Beacon’s website, Reines traveled to more than 110 countries with the then-Secretary of State as part of her senior team.

Meet Beacon Global Strategies.

The online bios for its founders and managing directors suggest no group knows more about the Benghazi terrorist attack and the Obama administration’s response. Yet the consulting firm has deep ties to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and others involved in the controversy – ties so intertwined with the administration and Capitol Hill that they raise questions about an upcoming hearing where former CIA Acting Director Mike Morell is slated to testify.

Another employee, Jeremy Bash, was a former chief of staff to Leon Panetta at both the CIA and Defense Department. Andrew Shapiro was a Clinton policy adviser at the State Department whose portfolio included ridding Libya of shoulder-launched missiles called MANPADs.

And it includes Republican J. Michael Allen, who was a former majority staff director for the House Intelligence Committee, headed by Republican Rep. Mike Rogers. The following link is a great read and worth the time.

Fox News: A refresher

Rpt Published April 01, 2014:

Lawmakers want to hear from the chief of station because, according to a Senate Intelligence Committee report, he wrote to Morell and other CIA leadership on Sept. 15, 2012, emphasizing in an email that the attacks were “not/not an escalation of protests.” A day later, then-U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice went on national television and said the opposite.

As first reported by Fox News, Morell is facing accusations he downplayed, or even dismissed, the reporting of U.S. personnel on the ground in Libya, including the chief of station.

Morell, meanwhile, is also appearing for public testimony after facing accusations by Republicans of misleading lawmakers over his role in the talking points. He initially claimed the talking points, before Rice’s interview appearances, were provided to White House officials for awareness and not for their input. Emails later released show administration involvement began at the earliest stages, and Morell personally cut 50 percent of the text.

Read more with video

Benghazi Scandal Frm CIA Deputy DIR Morrell Accused Of Misleading Lawmakers On Benghazi

 

Joe diGenova tells WMAL GOP Congressman Mike Rogers (MI-8) is trying to kill Benghazi Investigation

Posted on 3/10/2014 

Speaking with Larry O’Connor and guest host Christine O’Donnell, Joe diGenova tells WMAL that GOP Congressman Mike Rogers (MI-8) is trying to kill the Benghazi Investigation.

It is so bad, that even John Boehner has taken Mike Rogers to task for his lack of action.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,283 other followers

%d bloggers like this: