Monday, August 17, 2015



hillary 2016

Hillary Clinton Turns Over Server; Problems Just Beginning

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

As of last week, Hillary Clinton's e-mail server is safely in the hands of the Department of Justice. As Secretary of State, she used a private server to handle her e-mails rather than using the servers owned and operated by the federal government. Her use of private e-mail has come under scrutiny because she appears to have sent and received e-mails concerning matters marked "Top Secret." If she sent or received those e-mails on her private account — over her private server — she most likely violated federal law.
The investigation is being handled by the FBI and is considered a criminal investigation, according to sources in the Department of Justice. In fact, though such cases are customarily handled by one of the many field offices around the country, the Clinton case is being handled out of the Hoover Building. It is highly unusual for a case like this to handled at FBI headquarters, but then again, this is an unusual case. The New York Times reported, "given this inquiry's importance, senior F.B.I. officials have opted to keep it closely held in Washington in the agency's counterintelligence section, which investigates how national security secrets are handled."
While it was not illegal for her to use a private e-mail server (it was, in fact, allowed by the State Department), the question is whether she followed the proper standards for securing and storing the classified data on that server. Sending "Top Secret" e-mails would almost certainly violate those standards. Clinton has denied that she sent or received such e-mails, but the evidence seems to indicate that on at least two occasions, she did just that.
Before turning over the server, Clinton turned over a USB thumb drive containing samples of the e-mails stored on the server. Charles McCullough, inspector general for the intelligence community, told Congress last week that of the 30,000 e-mails on the USB drive, 40 of them were randomly selected for the purposes of seeing whether they contained sensitive information. Of those 40, two contained information classified as "Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information." Doing the math, McCullough estimates there could be hundreds of e-mails on Clinton's server that were "Top Secret."
Clinton initially refused to turn over the e-mail server, saying, "The server contains personal communications from my husband and me and I believe I have met all of my responsibilities and the server will remain private." It rings with echoes of "I'm not going to have some reporters pawing through our papers. We are the president." She has since reversed herself and turned over the server, but it may not help her dodge the legal problems she will face if it is determined that she handled state secrets in any way that was "prejudicial to the safety or interest of the United States." Even if she escapes legal trouble, this scandal is likely to cause her serious problems with her campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination. The case is likely to last longer than her attempt to reoccupy the White House.
Charles Lipson, a professor of international politics at the University of Chicago, wrote in his piece for Real Clear Politics that there are several "legal questions with huge political ramifications" that Hillary Clinton will have to answer. He added that her problems "could well be insurmountable politically." Among those questions are:
• Did the Clinton server meet the federal government's standards for how servers are built, how they are secured, and how data is retained? • Was all sensitive material encrypted or did it circulate without those protections? • Did anybody hack into the server? • Did Secretary Clinton, who says she erased all 'personal' e-mails from the server, actually erase some government documents? • If so, was that inadvertent or a possible cover-up? • Who handled IT security for this server? Could he read the materials if he wished?
These are all very good questions that need to be investigated thoroughly. This writer believes the questions for voters who might have considered reliving the Clinton era are:
• Can we trust this woman? • Is she dishonest or just lacking in sound judgment? • Should someone who is either so shady or so inept serve as president? • Do we really want four or eight more years of Clinton drama in the White House?
For her part, the former First Lady chalks it all up to an error in judgment. Hindsight is, after all, 20/20. Back in March, when pressure began to mount over her use (or misuse) of the private e-mail server, Clinton said, "Looking back, it would have been better if I'd simply used a second email account and carried a second phone, but at the time, this didn't seem like an issue." It sure seems like an issue now. It could land her in jail, and many feel that it will almost certainly keep her out of the White House.

Hillary: ‘With a Cloth or Something?’ Refusing to Say Whether or Not She Wiped The Server

"Like With A Cloth?" - Hillary Clinton Jokes About Wiping Server 

FBI Begins Analysis of Hillary Clinton's Private Email Server

Gutfeld: Faced with crisis, Hillary plays her one-hit wonder

Published on Aug 19, 2015
She's using females to hide the emails Her Campaign Is Literally in the Toilet': Gutfeld on Latest in Hillary's Email Scandal On "The Five" today, Greg Gutfeld reacted to Hillary Clinton's shrinking poll numbers and revelations that her private email server was housed in the bathroom closet of a Denver apartment. He said that as her problems mount, Clinton is now playing the sexist card. "When in crisis, the 'war on women' is Hillary's one hit wonder," Gutfeld said. "The problem: it's old, it's a lie, and it exposes a truth about Hillary's own war on women. "He pointed out that women working for her made $16,000 less per year than men from 2002 to 2008. "Her defending women is like termites defending wood," Gutfeld said. He added that her claim that she didn't know that the emails were classified is hard to believe. "Exchanging national security for personal secrecy, it's not just calculated deception, but an entitled, lawless arrogance," 
Gutfeld said. "Now we find that Hill's email firm was run from an apartment with its servers in the bathroom, it all makes sense.

Hillary's Troubles Mount Over 

Wiped E-mail Server

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Hillary Clinton has a long list of titles: former attorney, former first lady, former New York senator, and former secretary of state. Considering the severity of her e-mail scandal, she may soon add another title to that list: former candidate for the Democratic nomination. As the facts continue to come out, her problems are looking increasingly serious. And — her protestations to the contrary notwithstanding — she seems to know it.
There's a special type of narcissism that seems to have set up permanent residence in the minds of Bill and Hillary Clinton. The rules that apply to everyone else simply don't apply to them. They keep straight faces while telling the biggest lies. It's almost as if they believe it when they say things such as, "I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Monica Lewinski," and "I never sent or received any e-mail that was deemed classified, that was marked classified." After all, they have dodged everything so far (including the military draft for Bill); why should whatever recent scandal is afoot be any different?
But even Hillary seems to realize that this time is different. The private e-mail server she turned over to the Department of Justice was wiped of data before being surrendered. This indicates to many who are either involved in or following this case that Hillary Clinton knows she has something to hide. Her lawyer, David Kendall, admitted in a letter to Congress that the server had been wiped, but did not indicate who had done it or whether Hillary Clinton had ordered it to be done.
When she was asked about it by Ed Henry of Fox News after a town hall meeting in Las Vegas, Hillary Clinton was customarily dismissive and gave a very Clintonian non-answer. As Breitbart reported,
Hillary, when asked if she had overseen efforts to wipe the drive, first seemed to understand that it meant deleting the contents of the hard drive. "Did you try to wipe the entire — so that there'd be no email, no personal and no official?" Ed Henry asked. Hillary replied, "Well, my personal emails are my personal business." Hillary then repeated her claim, made since March, that her staff went through a "painstaking" process to identify any work-related e-mails and turned those over to the State Department.
When her obvious attempt at obfuscation failed to deflect the question, Henry tried again: "Did you try to wipe the whole server?" Hillary's answer: "I have no idea." It is difficult to imagine that in the midst of a criminal investigation being handled by the FBI at its headquarters and treated with such scrutiny, Hillary Clinton expects anyone to believe that she has "no idea" whether or not she attempted to destroy evidence in that investigation.
So, Henry pressed the question once more: "You were the official in charge of it. Did you wipe the server?" Her answer shows not only her casual disregard for the truth — which many who are familiar with the Clintons have come to expect — but also her willingness to treat a serious matter with flippancy. When asked, "Did you wipe the server?" she pantomimed cleaning a surface and said, "What, like with a cloth or something?"
Maybe it depends on what the meaning of the word "wipe" is.
Hillary's "poker face" may not be enough to save her this time. With her lawyer's admission that the drive was wiped, she may be raising the stakes so high that she will be in big trouble if her bluff is called. She seems to be gambling that the FBI will not be able to retrieve the deleted contents of the drive. That ploy did not work very well for her husband's former vice president, Al Gore, when he attempted to delete e-mails showing that he had conducted illegal fundraising for the Clintons and the Democrat Party. Those e-mails were recovered, and though he did not face criminal charges over it, he did face public scrutiny.
Gore was able to avoid criminal charges — at least in part — because he had powerful allies in high places. Hillary may find that President Obama is not very willing to help her out of this mess. At least he has not done anything so far to help her.
As The New American reported Wednesday, there is little doubt that she did send classified e-mails over the server. From that article:
Before turning over the server, Clinton turned over a USB thumb drive containing samples of the e-mails stored on the server. Charles McCullough, inspector general for the intelligence community, told Congress last week that of the 30,000 e-mails on the USB drive, 40 of them were randomly selected for the purposes of seeing whether they contained sensitive information. Of those 40, two contained information classified as "Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information." Doing the math, McCullough estimates there could be hundreds of e-mails on Clinton's server that were "Top Secret."
Hillary Clinton may have hundreds of good reasons for wanting to hinder this investigation by wiping the server.
With her obvious knowledge that the contents of the drive were deleted, Clinton has been coy in her statements to reporters. On Tuesday, she told reporters, "We have turned over the server. They [FBI investigators] can do whatever they want to with the server to figure out what's there or what's not there." She need not doubt on that account. The FBI will do all in its very powerful abilities to "figure out what's there or what's not there."
The Washington Times reports that "the FBI is conducting a criminal probe and the bureau is 'optimistic' it can retrieve the wiped data," adding that the FBI will also investigate whether "she may have had a second server," and that "her top aides — Huma Abedin, Cheryl Mills, and Jake Sullivan — are now also in investigators' sights."
If that data is retrieved and shows what is almost certain — that Hillary did send classified information via her unsecured private account — she may be charged with some very serious crimes. According to a report by the Washington Free Beacon, she could be charged with violating 18 USC Sec. 1924, "which outlaws the unauthorized removal and storage of classified information. Penalties can include fines and imprisonment for up to one year." She could also find herself facing charges for running afoul of 18 USC Sec. 793. The Beacon says, "That law covers national defense information and people who misuse it to injure the United States or benefit a foreign power. Those convicted of violating that law face fines and up to 10 years in prison."
Add to that that she has destroyed evidence in a criminal investigation, and Hillary Clinton may face charges for obstruction of justice. It looks as though she has more to worry about than her political career. While all of this will almost certainly hurt her bid for the Democratic nomination, it may even give her yet one more new title: inmate.



Sen. Rand Paul blasts Jeb Bush
for support of Common Core
December 21, 2014

Ted Cruz Says Jeb Bush Stands By His Principles, Supports Common Core and Embraces Amnesty

Most of Common Core criticism from 'fringe group'?

Jeb Bush Calls Common Core Education “Poisonous” at Iowa Campaign: Unfortunately, He Forgot He Supports It

SEE: below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

Speaking to the gathered crowd at the Iowa State Fair, Former Florida governor and GOP candidate Jeb Bush spoke against Common Core standards, calling them “poisonous,” even though he has previously stated that he supports it.
“The term ‘Common Core’ is so darn poisonous, I don’t even know what it means,” said Jeb. “[But] I’m for higher standards – state-created, locally implemented – where the federal government has no role in the creation of standards, content or curriculum.”
This is very different than the position that Jeb expressed back in May, when he offered support for the program.
“Because people have a different view of what Common Core is, am I supposed to back away from something that I know works?” Bush told attendees at an event in Tennessee.
So which is it? Is Common Core poisonous or does it work? Bush seems to be walking a tight line on the issue. On the one hand, he doesn’t want to alienate conservatives that hate Common Core. On the other, he has expressed support for the program in the past.


SEE: below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

Appearing on Fox News’ The Kelly File on Monday night, 2016 prospective presidential candidate and former Florida Governor Jeb Bush explained that he would not try to undo President Barack Obama’s executive actions on immigration.

“Passing meaningful reform of immigration and make it a part of it,” Bush answered when asked how he would undo Obama’s unilateral amnesty. “If you’ve been here for an extended period of time, you have no nexus to the country of your parents,” Bush explained. “What are we supposed to do? Marginalize these people forever?” Bush then added that his unwavering position on immigration demonstrated his toughness in the face of critics: “Do you want people to bend with the wind, to mirror people’s sentiment whoever is in front of you? Oh, yes, I used to be for that but now, I’m for this. Is that the way we want to elect presidents?”
He continued in this vein:
I think illegal immigration ought to be punished by coming out from the shadows, earning legal status over an extended period of time where you pay a fine, where you work, where you don’t receive government assistance, where you learn English, where you don’t — you know, you’re where deported if you commit a crime as is the law…There are no, very few other options that I can see.  The option of self-deportation, or making things so harsh is not really — I don’t think that’s practical.  And rounding people up door to door, isn’t practical either.  We need to enforce the, enforce the laws of our country for sure, and enforce the border.
He then stated that Americans could be “persuaded” to agree with him.
Bush is now the second major Republican candidate to embrace Obama’s executive amnesty; fellow Floridian 
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL)
 embraced Obama’s executive amnesty while speaking in Spanish on Jorge Ramos’ television show on Univision. Both Rubio and Bush continue to hide behind the fig leaf of replacement legislation rather than simple repeal of Obama’s executive orders. This position contrasts sharply with that of Iowa and New Hampshire frontrunner Governor Scott Walker (R-WI), who has said that he would not merely stop illegal immigration but would severely limit legal immigration.

Bush also wavered on his support for Pamela Geller, the activist who organized a Garland, Texas event featuring cartoons of Islamic prophet Mohammed – an event that two ISIS-associated terrorists attempted to attack before being shot to death by police. “I think the First Amendment and freedom, freedom of expression trumps everything else,” Bush said. “It doesn’t mean it’s necessarily appropriate to do what they did…The guy who’s the real hero in this isn’t Mrs. Geller or anybody on the other side arguing now. They have every right to do that. It’s the police officer who, you know, unarmed with bulletproof vests, I guess, shot these two guys dead.”
Bush’s position, according to left-leaning The Daily Beast, put him in “a sweet spot on the issue.” It also made a mockery of his speech at Liberty University over the weekend in which he explained regarding religious liberty, “Federal authorities are demanding obedience, in complete disregard of religious conscience – and in a free society, the answer is no.” But apparently he will allow the dictates of political correctness to quash his enthusiasm for Geller.
Kelly asked Bush about his position on the Iraq war. More specifically, she asked whether he would have invaded Iraq given the information we now know about faulty intelligence regarding Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction program. Bush answered in the affirmative: “I would have, and so would have Hillary Clinton, just to remind everybody. And so would almost everybody that was confronted with the intelligence they got.” But the question, of course, was not whether Bush would have invaded Iraq given the intelligence his brother received; it was whether he would still invade Iraq given errors in that intelligence. By failing to answer that question, he put himself in a precarious political situation.
Finally, Kelly asked Bush about his support for federal Common Core standards. “Common Core,” Bush said, “means a lot of different things to different people. So [critics] could be right based on what’s in front of them. I respect having a view, but the simple fact is that we need higher standards.” Oddly, Bush then called for state standards and said the federal government should “play no role” in those standards – which begs the question as to why the federal government should set the basic standards in the first place.
Bush’s poll numbers have been dropping substantially over the last few months. What was once a solid national lead has now shrunk to within the margin of error, and he is trailing heavily in Iowa and running even with Rubio, Walker, and 
Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY)
 in New Hampshire. His carefully calibrated positions on hot-button issues are obviously destroying his credibility with primary audiences. “The polls are totally irrelevant,” Bush said. “I’m not a candidate yet. So… everybody needs to take a chill pill on the polls until it gets closer.” That hot take is unlikely to convince potential donors, who are simultaneously being courted by several credible candidates as well as mainstream icon Karl Rove, who has long been at odds with his former boss’ brother.

Jeb Bush Would Expand NSA Spy Powers at Expense of Civil Liberties

During the South Carolina forum, Bush asserted that there is “no evidence” that the NSA’s data collection has violated civil liberties. “I’ve found not one” case, he said.



Reclaiming America for Christ

The Battlefield
SEE: below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
“For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.” Ephesians 6:12
Salt & Light Citizenship Ministries are needed at churches across America because the future of our nation is at stake. As Dr. Kenyn Cureton of the Family Research Council said, “… the battle to defend the faith, the value of human life, the biblical definition of marriage, our Judeo-Christian heritage, and a host of other important moral issues, is not just a political battle, it is a spiritual battle - and the prize is the America our children and their children will inherit.”
Satan is attacking the three-pronged foundation upon which God has established society, specifically the family, the church, and the government.
Satan is attacking the family by:
  • perverting the concept of marriage, which God created to be between one man and one woman only.
  • also perverting the picture of the family as He has ordained it.
  • usurping parental responsibilities and transferring the role and responsibilities to others, including the government.
  • undermining parental authority.
  • promoting abortion, sexual promiscuity and pornography.
Satan is attacking the Church by:
  • marginalizing and silencing it.
  • deceiving it with false doctrine and warped ideologies such as tolerance of sin and acceptance of same-sex “marriage.”
  • falsely applying the concept of separation of church and state.
Satan is attacking the biblical model of government by:
  • encouraging us to view government as a god, able to cure our social ills and our economic woes.
  • detaching our government from the moral foundation intended by our Founding Fathers.
  • expanding government into areas never intended by God, such as using tax dollars to fund activities that violate our biblical values.
  • obscuring of the principle of stewardship in financial matters. 
  • judicial activism, whereby judges violate the separation of powers established by our Constitution and oppose the moral values upon which it is based.
Prayer, biblical worldview education and taking action are practical steps toward victory over Satan's attacks. Start a Salt and Light Biblical Citizenship Ministry in your church today. Click Here.

Attention Pastors: Salt & Light Council

Our Mission train and equip churches to establish Salt & Light Biblical Citizenship Ministries that
will defend and promote life, traditional marriage, our constitutional and religious liberties.
WHO IS THE SALT & LIGHT COUNCIL? We are a non-political, non-partisan organization, dedicated to promoting biblical moral values in the public sector. Further, we are a coalition of cross-denominational churches with active Salt and Light Citizenship Ministries working to rebuild our Christian heritage in America. We seek to love and care for all of God's people, transforming hearts and minds through prayer, education and action.
We mobilize Christians at the grassroots level, helping them to live out their responsibility to influence government and civic affairs for good. History has clearly shown that without a strong, godly influence to overcome the natural tendency toward evil, governmental authority will destroy God-given rights, including the right to hear and speak His truth.
HOW WE DO IT? We have created a successful "model" citizenship ministry that can be easily replicated, thereby eliminating the need for church leaders to "reinvent the wheel."
Acting as a clearinghouse of information, we collect news from various ministries, policy councils, research organizations, and news-wire services. Each month, we highlight one state and national issue issues of high priority or interest and disseminate this condensed information to our member churches. All issues are vetted in advance from both a legal and a scriptural perspective.
We provide a structure that enables a quick, collective response to the issues that attack family values and God’s “non-negotiable” moral issues. We provide training, biblical worldview education, resources, and on-going support for the Salt and Light Citizenship Ministries at our member churches.

Our Beginnings
The year was 2008. California voters had previously passed Proposition 22, legislation that defined marriage as between one man and one woman only. Judicial activists threw it out, thereby opening the door for same-sex “marriages” to be performed in violation of voters’ wishes and, more importantly, in violation of how God established the family unit—the best environment for raising the next generation. Concerned citizens quickly mounted a campaign to place new legislation on the ballot that would trump the judicial ruling by inserting the definition of marriage directly into the state’s Constitution. It was a desperate, but ultimately victorious, battle… waged largely by Mormons and Catholics. Where was the evangelical church? This was not a political issue; it was a biblical issue!
Sadly, the voice of the Church has become a whimper; we are an increasingly persecuted and marginalized group, obediently accepting the admonition to keep our religious views to ourselves. Pastors were relatively silent during the Prop. 8 battle and many who did ultimately speak out waited until it was almost too late. Churches were not properly positioned to be able to “rally the troops” (grassroots citizens of the church). They were properly utilizing the warning information available from policy councils and watchdog groups. Furthermore, Prop. 8’s margin of victory compared to Prop. 22’s margin (4.5% vs. 23%) is a clear indication that the enemy of family values is quickly closing the gap.
One visionary pastor, Jim Garlow, pastor of Skyline Church and Director of the Pastors Rapid Response Team, saw the need for Salt and Light Citizenship Ministries to be established in as many churches as possible across the country. These Citizenship Ministries provide solutions to the obstacles observed in the Prop. 8 battle, including: The proper role of churches in civil government, pastors who mistakenly believed they should stay silent; church members who were ignorant of what the Bible says about a given issue, also ignorant about our nation's Christian heritage; people who wanted to engage in the battle but didn’t know how or where to start.
Pastor Garlow approached Dran Reese and asked her to take the lead in San Diego and California… and the Salt & Light Council was born. The Council is a non-profit 501C3 corporation whose purpose is to train and equip churches nationwide to start and maintain Salt and Light Citizenship Ministries.
Along the way, the Council became aware that more ministries would be started if there were a carefully tested approach to establishing the individual Citizenship Ministries, one with rigorous standards that was able to cross Christian denominations—in short, a model. So a model citizenship ministry was established and it is available to churches now. With pastoral approval, we provide a turnkey ministry with minimal investment and eternal rewards. Our methods are proven and successful; your church can engage in prayer, education and action on issues and legislation with the utmost confidence. Our focus is on working at the grassroots level to carry out the essential action items needed to be a godly influence in our state, nation and world.
Thus, if you want your church involved in the restoration of our nation's soul, then Salt and Light is a vehicle to help you accomplish that. We tackle biblically relevant issues of public policy, including those related to the sanctity of life, the family unit, our Christian heritage, our role as citizens in civil government and our right to hear and freely speak His truth. The Church can and should strongly influence the national legacy of America that we will pass on to the next generation, and do so with assurance. All materials from the Salt & Light Councilare legally backed and biblically sound.
The battles continue—indeed are escalating on so many fronts—and a victory for biblical principles is by no means guaranteed. Subsequent to the passage of Prop. 8 in California, one homosexual activist judge proceeded to overturn the votes of 7 million people by deeming it unconstitutional. This critical, biblical issue will likely end up at the Supreme Court level where five, very powerful, unelected judges will decide on behalf of the entire nation what the family unit will look like.
As this one example demonstrates, our nation has fallen far from God's plumb line. Europe has slipped into the abyss of postmodernism and our own country may not be far behind. It is time to restore America back to its Christian foundations. Will you be part of the solution?