quote:

Originally posted by Sig2340:
I'll be satisfied when video of Hillary's body cavity search is up on free porn sites.

The same goes for the rest of the cabal at DOJ, FBI, DOS, EOTP, and EIEIO.

That is wrong on soooo many levels.

quote:

Originally posted by flashguy:

quote:

Originally posted by arfmel:
Looking forward to reading that filthy, treasonous sow’s obituary. Hopefully sooner, rather than later.

I'd be satisfied with seeing her in an orange suit, doing prison laundry.

flashguy

Forgive me - I know this post is a month old. But, I just have to say:

I'd be much, much more satisfied to see Hillary in an orange jump suit rather than her obituary. Her obit would mean she lived and died and never really paid for her crimes (and murders!) while she was on this earth. Doing time in a prison would be a statement to the world: "This woman is as guilty as all get out, and she has to pay for her crimes just like anybody else would."

quote:

Originally posted by Rightwire:

quote:

Originally posted by Sig2340:
I'll be satisfied when video of Hillary's body cavity search is up on free porn sites.

The same goes for the rest of the cabal at DOJ, FBI, DOS, EOTP, and EIEIO.

That is wrong on soooo many levels.

See Rules 34, 35, 36, and 39.

Fitton's opening sentence "We are still doing the heavy lifting in the Hillary Clinton email case" meaning Judicial Watch and them alone is why I donate to no candidate for any office on any level. JW gets a nice check from me every year instead of some candidate who may or may not do what he say's at the time he or she is asking you for money.

Trump campaigned on this pretty hard, every bit as hard as he did immigration and he has not taken one step forward on doing anything about it and he is getting a pass on it from his supporters. The chants of lock her up have pretty much gone to whispers at his rallies.

Making her accountable on this as well as Benghazi and all her other corruption while serving as SOS would do more to turn this country back on the right path than anything else would. And at the same time make the Democrat party irrelevant for decades to come.

I'm hoping with a new AG Trump gets this right.

Read/listen to The Deep State by Jason Chaffetz and you’ll understand why nothing has been done to this bitch, or anyone else in the Obama administration. You get an idea why people like he and Gowdy are leaving government service; both sides of the aisle are complicit in protecting crooked pols and there’s not a whole lot Trump can do about it.

I watched Tom Fitton on YouTube last night while I was unable to sleep. Everyone should add the Judicial Watch channel to your list of favorite YouTube channels.

This will be interesting...

A U.S. District Court judge is ordering former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to answer two additional questions pertaining to the setup and use of her controversial private email server, as well as the content of the emails on it.

From Judicial Watch, these are the two questions that Clinton will have to answer:

“Describe the creation of the clintonemail.com system, including who decided to create the system, the date it was decided to create the system, why it was created, who set it up, and when it became operational.”

During your October 22, 2015 appearance before the U.S. House of Representatives Select Committee on Benghazi, you testified that 90 to 95 percent of your emails “were in the State’s system” and “if they wanted to see them, they would certainly have been able to do so.” Identify the basis for this statement, including all facts on which you relied in support of the statement, how and when you became aware of these facts, and, if you were made aware of these facts by or through another person, identify the person who made you aware of these facts.”

She submitted written answers to the judge in 2016, and now he is ordering her to answer those two questions within 30 days.

https://www.judicialwatch.org/...aign=press%20release

I can give you the answers right now. "I don't recall"

quote:

Originally posted by gearhounds:
Read/listen to The Deep State by Jason Chaffetz and you’ll understand why nothing has been done to this bitch, or anyone else in the Obama administration. You get an idea why people like he and Gowdy are leaving government service; both sides of the aisle are complicit in protecting crooked pols and there’s not a whole lot Trump can do about it.

That's been on my reading list for awhile I should get to it. The fact is that if nothing can be done to or about the deep state than nothing that the deep state does not condone can ever be accomplished at least in a lasting manner. If guys like Chaffetz and Gowdy would sooner leave and write books rather than to try to fight and change things then we are truly and wholly screwed. Trump is just a blip, a minor disruption in the course of things.

Former FBI Director James Comey said on Thursday that Republicans have subpoenaed him to appear before a closed-door meeting of the House Judiciary Committee early next month.

In a Thanksgiving Day tweet, Comey said he would be happy to answer the House Judiciary Committee’s questions, but will “resist a ‘closed door’’ for fear that his testimony will be leaked and distorted.


“Got a subpoena from House Republicans. I’m still happy to sit in the light and answer all questions,” Comey tweeted. “But I will resist a ‘closed door’ thing because I’ve seen enough of their selective leaking and distortion. Let’s have a hearing and invite everyone to see.”

The subpoena calls Comey to testify as part of the congressional inquiry into allegations of anti-Trump bias that led to the shutting down of the probe of Hillary Clinton's private email server and the opening of the investigation into purported ties between the Trump campaign and Russia.

Comey’s tweet partly confirms a story published in Politico that reported that the former FBI director and former President Barack Obama’s attorney general, Loretta Lynch, had both been subpoenaed.

So far Lynch has not made any public statement on the subpoena.

The office of Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., the outgoing chair of the House Judiciary Committee, was also unavailable for comment.

Comey has been the target of attacks by both Trump and Republicans for his time at the head of the FBI, with the president labelling the investigation into allegations of collusion between his campaign and Russia – now headed by Special Counsel Robert Mueller – a “witch hunt.”

Democrats, however, argue that the GOP-led investigation in the House is itself a partisan move to undermine Mueller’s investigation and have promised to renew investigations of their own into Trump’s attacks on the FBI and Justice Department when they take the House majority in January.

In a statement sent to Fox News, Comey’s lawyer, David Kelley, said: "Mr. Comey embraces and welcomes a hearing open to the public, but the subpoena issued yesterday represents an abuse of process, a divergence from House rules and its presumption of transparency. Accordingly, Mr. Comey will resist in Court this abuse of process."

The news of the subpoenas comes on the heels of a busy week in the Mueller investigation that saw Trump provide the special counsel with written answers to questions about his knowledge of Russian interference in the 2016 election, his lawyers said Tuesday, avoiding at least for now a potentially risky sit-down with prosecutors.

The compromise outcome, nearly a year in the making, offers some benefit to both sides. Trump at least temporarily averts the threat of an in-person interview, which his lawyers have long resisted, while Mueller secures on-the-record statements whose accuracy the president will be expected to stand by for the duration of the investigation.

The responses may also help stave off a potential subpoena fight over Trump's testimony if Mueller deems them satisfactory. They represent the first time the president is known to have described to investigators his knowledge of key moments under scrutiny by prosecutors.

Also this week, it was revealed by the New York Times that Trump told his counsel's office last spring that he wanted to prosecute Clinton and former FBI Comey, an idea that prompted White House lawyers to prepare a memo warning of consequences ranging up to possible impeachment.

Then-counsel Don McGahn told the president he had no authority to order such a prosecution, and he had White House lawyers prepare the memo arguing against such a move, The Associated Press confirmed with a person familiar with the matter who was not authorized to discuss the situation. McGahn said that Trump could request such a probe but that even asking could lead to accusations of abuse of power, the newspaper said.

https://www.foxnews.com/politi...russia-investigation

She wants to... oh so bad, but can't seem to get anyone to show up for her 'world tour'.


NO GO: Hillary Clinton Won't Run In 2020, Top Dem Says

While Hillary Clinton has been coy about whether she'll run for president again in 2020 — even suggesting that she just might — a former Democratic National Committee chairman said the two-time loser will be a no go.

Donna Brazile said Tuesday that she doesn't think Clinton will toss her hat in the ring again.

“The Democrats, who many of us believe ‘spent some time in the wilderness’ have come from behind — and I thought that we would have to go to Count Dracula’s blood bank to get new blood in the Democratic Party. Thank God we got some new blood,” Brazile said at the annual meeting of The Wall Street Journal CEO Council.

“There are a lot of freshmen from across the country. Many of them lack legislative experience and so it will kind of take time for them to get accustomed to the slow pace of passing legislation," she said.

But when asked if Clinton will be among the contenders, Brazile said flatly: "No."

Brazile's prediction comes on the heels of another from longtime Clinton aide Philippe Reines, who said Hillary is “more likely to win Powerball" than to run for president again.

Mark Penn, a pollster and senior adviser to Bill and Hillary Clinton from 1995-2008, and Andrew Stein, former Democratic Manhattan borough president and president of the New York City Council, wrote a piece last month saying Hillary will go.

"Hillary Will Run Again." The sub-headline went further: "Reinventing herself as a liberal firebrand, Mrs. Clinton will easily capture the 2020 nomination."

And the lead said:

"Get ready for Hillary Clinton 4.0. More than 30 years in the making, this new version of Mrs. Clinton, when she runs for president in 2020, will come full circle—back to the universal-health-care-promoting progressive firebrand of 1994. True to her name, Mrs. Clinton will fight this out until the last dog dies. She won’t let a little thing like two stunning defeats stand in the way of her claim to the White House."

https://www.dailywire.com/news...dem-says-joseph-curl

not sure of the implications of this

https://www.chicagotribune.com...-20181206-story.html

A U.S. judge ordered the Justice and State departments Thursday to reopen an inquiry into whether Hillary Clinton used a private email server while secretary of state to deliberately evade public records laws , and to answer whether the agencies acted in bad faith by not telling a court for months that they had asked in mid-2014 for missing emails to be returned.

The order risks reopening partisan wounds that have barely healed since Clinton's unsuccessful 2016 presidential bid, but in issuing the order Thursday, U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth said the spirit of the Freedom of Information Act required it.

In a narrow but sharply worded 10-page opinion, Lamberth wrote that despite the government's claimed presumption of transparency, "faced with one of the gravest modern offenses to government openness, [the Obama administration's] State and Justice departments fell far short" of the law's requirements in a lawsuit for documents.

Lamberth added that despite President Donald Trump's repeated campaign attacks against Clinton for not making her emails public, "the current Justice Department made things worse," by taking the position that agencies are not obliged to search for records not in the government's possession when a FOIA request is made.

Lamberth wrote he took no pleasure in "questioning the intentions of the nation's most august" Cabinet departments, but said it was necessary when their response "smacks of outrageous misconduct."

Conservative legal watchdog group Judicial Watch filed its FOIA lawsuit in July 2014 seeking State Department talking points issued after the September 2012 attacks on U.S. facilities in Benghazi, Libya, that left the U.S. ambassador dead.

The suit came months before news broke in March 2015 that Clinton exclusively used a private email account as secretary from 2009 to 2013.

Between July 2014 and March 2015, the State Department said in court filings that its document searches were adequate and did not mention unsearched records as it, proposed to settle the case. The agencies later acknowledged that additional searches would be needed, without disclosing that it had received 30,000 emails returned by Clinton.

At best, Lamberth said the government's actions reflect "negligence born of incompetence," adding, " At worst, career employees in the State and Justice departments colluded to scuttle public scrutiny of Clinton, skirt FOIA, and hoodwink this court ."

Lamberth said he had delayed ruling on the order until a similar 2016 case before another federal judge in the District had wound down.

Lamberth ordered the government's attorneys to meet with Judicial Watch and by Dec. 17 propose to answer additional questions into whether "Clinton used a private email to stymie FOIA, whether State's attempts to settle the case in 2014 and 2015 amounted to bad faith, and whether State's subsequent searches have been adequate."

Tom Fitton / Judicial Watch is a godsend.

Whether anything becomes of any wrong doings by the swamp creatures is ultimately our fault at this point.

Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), the incoming chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, revealed Friday that he will end the Republican-led probe into decisions made by the FBI and Department of Justice during the 2016 presidential election.

“Yes, [I will end it] because it is a waste of time to start with,” Nadler told reporters after momentarily stepping outside the closed-door hearing of fired FBI Director James Comey. He branded the probe a political stunt designed to divert attention from special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into potential collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia during the election.

“The entire purpose of this investigation is to be a diversion of the real investigation, which is Mueller. There is no evidence of bias at the FBI and this other nonsense they are talking about,” the Democrat claimed.

In October 2017, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) and House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy (R-SC) announced a joint investigation into decisions made by the agencies in 2016. The panels have sought to obtain answers to why the FBI elected to publically announce an investigation into Hillary Clinton’s handling of classified information, while keeping its investigation into the Trump campaign under wraps. Further, Republicans have been looking into the FBI’s decision not to charge Clinton over the matter.

Nadler, who has promised to launch a series of investigation into the president and members of his administration, said this week that he is weighing legislation that would halt the timing of the statute of limitations during a president’s term in a bid to make prosecuting presidents more efficiently for any wrongdoing after leaving office. “[W]e ought to, and I’m considering introducing legislation to this effect, toll the statute of limitations on any president while he is president, so that he can’t be above the law,” Nadler said on MSNBC’s The Last Word Tuesday. “If he can’t be impeached for improper conduct, if there are crimes, he should be made to be prosecuted.”


https://www.breitbart.com/poli...-democrat-collusion/

FireEye Cyber Defense Summit

Anything wrong w this picture ? Anything ?



https://summit.fireeye.com/

Empowering Defenders. Together.

Cyber security is not any one defender’s responsibility, but a global effort – a cause championed by many for the good of all. By coming together as a community to innovate, build strategies and share knowledge on today’s threats and tomorrow’s risks, we empower ourselves as defenders with the collective wisdom to protect our way of life and the technologies that have become central to it.

Now in its 10th year, Cyber Defense Summit brings together many of the world's leading security experts, frontline heroes, government leaders, and executives from various industries to address the challenges of today’s threat landscape.

In addition to informative and insightful keynotes from industry thought leaders and FireEye executives, Cyber Defense Summit will feature breakout sessions across three tracks:

Executive Track: What managers, executives, lawyers, and boards of directors need to know about cyber security

Technical Track: What security practitioners need to know to mitigate, detect, and respond to cyber attacks

Solutions Track: How FireEye solutions are used on the front lines of cyber security
Take this opportunity to share best practices, learn about the latest advancements, and enhance your cyber preparedness.

^^^^^
Maybe they’re including the old hag to show the worst case scenario...

quote:

Originally posted by gearhounds:
to show the worst case scenario...

Could be an effective message: “Follow good security practices or you might not get elected President.”

I imagine they are bring her their to demonstrate BleachBit

Hopefully she'll have to apply for a furlough from the Federal prison she'll be residing in to attend.

Jim