Conservative Blogger
Wednesday, October 19, 2016
Fox News' Chris Wallace brings experience, sterling reputation to moderator's role
When Chris Wallace takes up the moderator’s role at Wednesday’s third and final debate of the 2016 presidential election, he will bring more than 50 years’ experience and an impeccable reputation to the task.
The debate between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton will air on Fox News Channel on Wednesday, Oct. 19 at 9 p.m. ET.
Wallace, the anchor of "Fox News Sunday," moderated Fox News Channel's GOP primary debates alongside Bret Baier and Megyn Kelly and considers his role to let the candidates take center stage.
"If people say, 'it was a great debate and I don't remember you being there,' I will have done my job," said Wallace.
Wallace has announced the topics, which will be discussed in six 15-minute segments.
- Debt and entitlements
- Immigration
- Economy
- Supreme Court
- Foreign hot spots
- Fitness to be President
See the Fox News 2016 battleground prediction map and make your own election projections. See Predictions Map →
Wallace has participated in coverage of nearly every major political event and has secured several high-profile interviews with dignitaries and U.S. leaders in his 13 years at Fox News Channel. Serving as moderator of the 90-minute session at University of Nevada, Las Vegas is the latest milestone in an illustrious career.
"I'm the first Fox moderator to do a general election debate and I'm very proud for the news organization,” Wallace recently told Baier. “I think it's a recognition of the fact that we do serious journalism. Some critics say no, but the fact is, you and I know we do. And here's the Commission on Presidential Debates recognizing that."
To watch, tune in at 9 p.m. to Fox News Channel.
The debate also will be streamed live on FoxNews.com and the Fox News app.
CLICK HERE TO LEARN HOW TO WATCH THE DEBATE ON YOUR SMARTPHONE OR TABLET
Wallace has interviewed presidents before, including an exclusive sit-down earlier this year with President Obama, his fourth interview with Obama. He has also handled moderating duties in the past, working alongside co-anchors Baier and Megyn Kelly in August 2015, during the first GOP presidential debate of the 2016 election.
Wallace also co-moderated the network’s second and third debates of the 2016 cycle, held on Jan. 28 in Des Moines, and March 3 in Detroit.
In prior election years, Wallace served as a panel member and moderator of FNC's South Carolina, New Hampshire and Florida debates during the 2012 primary campaign season. He also played an integral role in Fox News' 2008 and 2004 election coverage.
It was 1964 when Wallace got his first taste of presidential politics, serving as news legend Walter Cronkite's "go-fer" at the RNC convention.
Over the next 50-plus years in broadcasting, Wallace has won every major broadcast news award for his reporting, including three Emmy Awards, the Dupont-Columbia Silver Baton, the Peabody Award and the Sol Taishoff Award for Broadcast Journalism, which was awarded to him by the National Press Foundation.
Most recently, he received the 2013 Paul White Award for lifetime achievement and service to electronic journalism from the Radio Television Digital News Association. Wallace has been described as an "equal opportunity inquisitor" by The Boston Globe, "an aggressive journalist," "sharp edged" and "solid" by The Washington Post and "an equal-opportunity ravager" by The Miami Herald.
Before joining FNC, Wallace worked at ABC News for 14 years where he served as the senior correspondent for “Primetime Thursday” and a substitute host for “Nightline.” During his tenure with ABC News, Wallace hosted multiple groundbreaking investigations and received numerous awards for his work.
Prior to joining ABC News, Wallace served as NBC’s chief White House correspondent from 1982-1989. While at NBC, he covered the 1980, 1984 and 1988 presidential campaigns as well as the Democratic and Republican conventions in those years. Wallace moderated “Meet the Press” from 1987-1988.
Wallace attended Harvard College.
Emails expose Chelsea clashes with parents' aides, amid Clinton Foundation concerns
 |
| “As they say, the apple doesn’t fall far. A kiss on the cheek while she is sticking a knife in the back, and front.” |
While the media started asking critical questions about The Clinton Foundation when Hillary Clinton launched her presidential bid last year, newly published emails show Chelsea Clinton was digging deeper into the foundation's dealings as far back as 2011.
According to hacked documents released by WikiLeaks, the former first daughter discovered and shared wide-ranging allegations involving conflict-of-interest concerns, suspected internal cyber spying and other issues.
In nearly four-dozen emails from October 2011 to February 2012, Chelsea Clinton’s sometimes-abrasive relationship with her father’s top confidant and other key Clinton aides is on full display. The emails are purportedly part of a trove of 50,000 messages stolen from the gmail account of Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman, John Podesta.
Podesta was named a special adviser for The Clinton Foundation on Oct. 31, 2011, when Chief Executive Bruce Lindsey fell ill and required a hospital stay. The same day Podesta was appointed to the post, Chelsea Clinton, using the pseudonym Anna James, emailed Podesta with an “urgent” issue.
“This is all coming to a head more quickly than we all had hoped,” she wrote.
Chelsea, writing shortly after her grandmother had died, went on to describe an encounter between Bill Clinton and longtime aide, Doug Band. At the time, Band was a board member with the Clinton Global Initiative, an offshoot of The Clinton Foundation, and was co-founder of global advisory firm Teneo. Bill Clinton also had a financial relationship with Teneo in addition to his Clinton Foundation responsibilities. But with then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton entering her final year in President Obama’s cabinet, preparations were under way to clear the foundation of any conflicts of interest that could hinder her post-State Department aspirations. A law firm-directed “Governance Review” was under way, too, in an effort to identify best practices and cut down on any possible conflicts.
See the Fox News 2016 battleground prediction map and make your own election projections. See Predictions Map →
“Doug called and yelled and screamed at my Dad about how could he do this to [senior adviser] Justin [Cooper] and him, he would be nothing without him, etc.,” Chelsea wrote to Podesta on Nov. 1. “My Dad responded that he could not have this conversation with Doug and that he was trying to do the right thing by all. I cannot believe Doug did this on the day my grandmother died. My mother is exhausted, we are all heartbroken but we need a strategy and my father needs advice/counsel.”
Podesta responded that he would speak to Bill Clinton the next morning.
“Don’t want this situation to get to a point of no return and things are said that hurts everyone,” he wrote.
But Podesta’s efforts evidently were for naught. Three days later, Chelsea unloaded on specific issues that had been reported to her.
She claimed an employee witnessed Cooper loading spyware onto two other employees’ computers, and Cooper also was alleged to have read the emails of at least one other co-worker. She further relayed allegations that Band threatened various employees; Band was “hustling” business for Teneo while working at CGI; and Cooper and Hannah Richert, a personal assistant, had taken “significant sums of money from my parents personally.”
“As ever, on some of the above I am sure there are three sides as my grandmother would say – his, hers and the truth,” Chelsea wrote. “On others, it seems more clear. All of it makes me very sad.”
On Nov. 10, Chelsea told Podesta about a private meeting Bill Clinton had with Cooper and Band. During the conversation “Doug apparently kept telling my dad I was trying to push him out, take over.”
Two days later, Band sent a memo apparently addressing some of the issues Chelsea raised to top Hillary Clinton aide Cheryl Mills, who forwarded the message to Podesta. Band wrote the memo needed to get out “asap.”
“Although I’m sure [Chelsea] won’t believe it to be true [because] she doesn’t want to,” he wrote. “I realize it is difficult to confront and reason with her but this could go [too] far and then we all will have a real serious set of other problems.”
Then Band’s growing frustration spilled out.
“I don’t deserve this from her and deserve a tad more respect or at least a direct dialogue for me to explain these things,” he wrote. “She is acting like a spoiled brat kid who has nothing else to do but create issues to justify what she’s doing because she, as she has said, hasn’t found her way and has a lack of focus in her life.”
A little more than a week later, an email went out announcing that Chelsea has been appointed to the CGI board, though that doesn’t seem to decrease tensions.
Following a benign back-and-forth on Nov. 27 to arrange a meeting time, Band emailed Podesta: “This is the 3rd time this week where she has gone to daddy to change a decision or interject herself in the process she says is so important to maintain…”
On Dec. 6, Chelsea emailed Podesta and other foundation leaders with more distressing information, including reports that one employee has called members of the British Parliament “on behalf of President Clinton … without my father’s knowledge and inelegantly and ineffectually at best …” Chelsea also shared misgivings regarding Teneo. Podesta responded to say the situation needed to be resolved quickly.
Clinton severed his financial ties with Teneo on Dec. 17, no longer serving on the group’s advisory board. Band, meanwhile, decided to leave CGI.
“Bill went to Doug and said, ‘You can do CGI or Teneo, but you can’t do both,’” a friend of the Clintons told The New York Post at the time. “Doug chose Teneo.”
But problems between Band and Chelsea persisted even after the split.
Chelsea reportedly “told one of the Bush 43 kids that she is conducting an internal investigation of money within the foundation from CGI to the foundation,” Band wrote in a January email to Podesta. One of the Bush daughters allegedly repeated the information to someone else who then passed it on to a Republican operative.
Then, after repeatedly raising concerns about them to Podesta, Chelsea wrote Band and Cooper on Jan. 27 to report on a conversation she had with a mutual friend, in a generally pleasant exchange. Band forwarded the message to Podesta.
“She sends me one of these types of emails every few days/week,” Band wrote. “As they say, the apple doesn’t fall far. A kiss on the cheek while she is sticking a knife in the back, and front.”
Vandals toss bricks through window of Indiana county Republican office
 |
| Democrats getting desperate? |
An Indiana Republican Party office was vandalized last week after someone tossed two bricks through the window, officials said Monday.
Signs for presidential nominee Donald Trump and Rep. Todd Young were hanging in the window of the Delaware County office on Oct. 8 when the landscaping bricks were tossed through the glass, officials said in a Facebook post.
Officials said it would cost about $1,200 to replace the window and those interested in helping out with the cost could donate online.
Delaware County Sheriff Ray Dudley said that there have been numerous reports of campaign signs being stolen from yards in Yorktown and Mount Pleasant Township, according to Fox 59.
Dudley added that the reports were being taken seriously and that removing signs from homeowners’ yards could call for prosecution under the Indiana criminal code.
The news of the Delaware County Republican office being trashed comes days after a Republican headquarters in North Carolina was firebombed.
Fox News Poll: Clinton tops Trump by 6 points
 |
| Fox joining in with the main stream media :-) |
Hillary Clinton remains ahead of Donald Trump with just three weeks until Election Day.
She has a six-point lead over Trump, 45-39 percent, in a new Fox News Poll of likely voters. Clinton was up by seven points last week (45-38 percent) and by two in early October (44-42 percent). Gary Johnson stands at 5 percent and Green Party’s Jill Stein at 3 percent.
In the head-to-head matchup, Clinton’s up by 49-42 percent. It was 49-41 percent at the end of last week (Oct. 10-12).
Clinton’s advantage over Trump is at the edge of the poll’s margin of error in the four-way contest and outside the margin of error in the head-to-head ballot.
The national poll, released Tuesday, was conducted Saturday through Monday. The third and final presidential debate will be moderated by Fox News Channel’s Chris Wallace in Las Vegas Wednesday.
CLICK HERE TO READ THE FULL POLL RESULTS
See the Fox News 2016 battleground prediction map and make your own election projections. See Predictions Map →
Whites with a college degree favor Clinton (+9 points), while whites without a degree go for Trump (+27). He’s also the choice among whites (+10 points), veterans (+17), and those who regularly attend religious services (+16).
Trump has an edge among independents (+7), but is hurt by a lack of party loyalty. Only 80 percent of Republicans back him. Eighty-seven percent of Democrats support Clinton.
The two are about equally matched on strength of support and interest. About two-thirds of each candidate’s supporters back their choice “strongly,” and almost all of their supporters are extremely or very interested in the race.
There are, however, major differences on temperament and judgment. Overall, 61 percent of voters say Clinton has the temperament to serve effectively as president. Sixty-one percent think Trump doesn’t.
By a 7-point margin, voters say Clinton has the judgment to serve (53-46 percent). It’s the reverse for Trump, as by a 23-point margin they believe he lacks the judgment (37-60 percent).
That goes a long way toward explaining why Clinton is preferred over Trump by more voters when it comes to making decisions about using nuclear weapons (+25 points), handling an international crisis (+19), and handling foreign policy (+18).
While the two are more closely matched, Clinton also comes out on top on nominating Supreme Court justices (+6 points), as well as on handling the issues of Social Security/Medicare (+8), immigration (+6), and terrorism (+4 points).
However, Trump tops Clinton by six points on handling the economy -- and voters say that’s the most important issue facing the country. Clinton briefly had the edge last week (+3 points). Otherwise, Trump has consistently had a single-digit advantage on the economy.
Republican pollster Daron Shaw says if the election focus is on creating jobs and spurring economic growth, then “Trump is very competitive.” Shaw conducts the Fox News Poll with Democrat Chris Anderson.
Despite her close ties to the Obama administration, by a slim 47-44 percent margin, voters pick Clinton over Trump as the one who will “change the country for the better.”
More registered voters would feel “enthusiastic” or “pleased” if Clinton were to win in November (37 percent), than would feel that way about a Trump win (30 percent).
Both candidates receive more negative reactions to them winning (displeased/scared) than positive ones (enthusiastic/pleased). Over half would feel negatively if Trump were to become the next president (56 percent), including 46 percent who would feel “scared.” For Clinton, 48 percent would react negatively, including 31 percent “scared.”
Seventy-six percent of Democrats would feel scared about a Trump presidency. Far fewer Republicans, 56 percent, say a Clinton victory scares them.
It’s well-established that neither candidate is seen as honest by the electorate. Yet on specific scandals, the poll finds a difference: more voters think Clinton is lying about how her emails were handled while she was secretary of state (67 percent) than think Trump is lying about the allegations women are making against him (51 percent). Even so, the email issue matters less in vote choice, as 24 percent of those who think Clinton is lying still back her, while just 8 percent of those who believe Trump is lying support him.
While neither is beloved, Trump’s personal ratings are worse than Clinton’s. She has a net negative rating of 4 points (47 percent favorable vs. 51 percent unfavorable). Trump is under water by 19 points (40 percent favorable vs. 59 percent unfavorable).
Again, the party faithful aren’t all with Trump: 22 percent of Republicans have a negative opinion of him. That’s more than twice the number of Democrats who view Clinton unfavorably (9 percent).
Even so, 77 percent of Republicans view Trump favorably, which is much more positive than their view of some of his GOP primary opponents: Ted Cruz (59 percent), Jeb Bush (56 percent), and John Kasich (44 percent). Former NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani, a Trump surrogate, is viewed favorably by 72 percent of Republicans.
Clinton (91 percent favorable) has higher favorable ratings among Democrats than some of her surrogates, like former President Bill Clinton (88 percent favorable) and former Vice President Al Gore (76 percent favorable).
The stand-out is First Lady Michelle Obama, who gets a 59 percent positive rating overall, and a 95 percent favorable among Democrats.
Pollpourri
Are the media being fair to the candidates? Many voters don’t think so.
Fifty-one percent say news coverage of Trump has been fair (46 percent) or biased in his favor (5 percent). Yet 43 percent say it’s been unfairly biased against him.
On the other hand, more than 8-in-10 think coverage of Clinton has either been fair (55 percent) or unfairly positive (27 percent). Only 11 percent feel it’s been anti-Clinton.
Seventy-eight percent of those backing Clinton think her coverage has been fair or in her favor. For Trump, that number is just 13 percent.
The Fox News Poll is based on landline and cellphone interviews with 1,011 randomly chosen registered voters nationwide and was conducted under the joint direction of Anderson Robbins Research (D) and Shaw & Company Research (R) from October 15-17, 2016. The survey includes results among 912 likely voters. The margin of sampling error is plus or minus three percentage points for results among both registered and likely voters.
Tuesday, October 18, 2016
Judge Nap: Kennedy's FBI Offer 'So Clinton Couldn't Be Blamed For Exposing Security Secret'
Fox News senior judicial analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano reacted on The Kelly File to revelations that a friend of Hillary Clinton's, then an undersecretary of state for John F. Kerry, offered a "quid pro quo" to an FBI agent to change the classification marking on a document accumulated in the Clinton email scandal investigation.
"An FBI agent who was in charge of handling documents...in the Clinton investigation was approached by Patrick Kennedy [not the former Rhode Island Congressman]-- he makes the offer--'can you change the markings on this document?'." Napolitano told Megyn Kelly.
"Markings on documents are changed all the time," Napolitano said, explaining that changes are made so that lower-level bureaucrats can read them if they have reason to.
"They are never... lawfully changed after they've been subpoenaed, and when they've been accumulated in a criminal investigation," he said.
The FBI agent reported the offer to his superiors, Napolitano said, and did not change the classification of the document.
"The offering of the carrot," Napolitano said, describing the quid pro quo, "[was] an attempt to commit bribery."
"The FBI didn't see it that way. They didn't charge him with anything...[but] the evidence is there in the FBI document...he offered [them] something of value if [they] would alter evidence. So, that's an offer to bribe."
Napolitano and Kelly said Kennedy likely wanted the document's classification changed so that it could not be used as part of the email investigation and "[Clinton] could not be blamed for exposing a national security secret."
JournoCash: Media gives $382,000 to Clinton, $14,000 Trump, 27-1 margin
 |
| Donald Trump slams media for 'rigged' election |
Already accused of "rigging" the election to help Hillary Rodham Clinton beat Donald Trump, America's journalists have reinforced that perception of bias by handing Clinton nearly $400,000 in donations so far, according to an explosive new report.
The watchdog Center for Public Integrity on Monday said that journalists favored Clinton 27-1 over Trump, who got a tiny $14,000.
Some 430 in the media business donated to Clinton compared to 50 to Trump.
Journalists from the ESPN, Vogue, Elle, the New Republic, Facebook, and many others coughed up cash for Clinton in record form. Even the Pulitzer Prize winning media critic for the New Yorker wrote a check for the Democrat.
'Quid pro quo': FBI files show top State official tried to 'influence' bureau on Clinton emails
A senior State Department official proposed a “quid pro quo” to convince the FBI to strip the classification on an email from Hillary Clinton’s server – and repeatedly tried to “influence” the bureau’s decision when his offer was denied, even taking his plea up the chain of command, according to newly released FBI documents.
Fox News first reported Saturday that the FBI interview summaries and notes, known as 302s, contained allegations of a quid pro quo. Republican Rep. Jason Chaffetz, who initially told Fox News of the claim, called it a “flashing red light of potential criminality.”
Documents published Monday morning confirm the account. Notes from an interview with an unnamed FBI official reveal the State Department Undersecretary for Management Patrick Kennedy tried to horse-trade with the FBI, offering additional slots for the bureau overseas if they would de-classify a particular email marked “SECRET.”
According to the documents, an unnamed individual said he was “pressured” to “change the classified email to unclassified.”
“[Redacted] indicated he had been contacted by PATRICK KENNEDY, Undersecretary of State, who had asked his assistance in altering the email’s classification in exchange for a ‘quid pro quo,’” the 302 states. “[Redacted] advised that in exchange for marking the email unclassified, STATE would reciprocate by allowing the FBI to place more Agents in countries where they are presently forbidden.”
At a subsequent meeting at the State Department regarding the classification review of Clinton’s materials where Kennedy presided, someone asked whether any of the emails in question were classified.
“Making eye contact with [redacted] KENNEDY remarked, ‘Well, we’ll see,’” the document says. The official, according to one account, was “attempting to influence the FBI to change its markings.”
Kennedy allegedly asked at that point who else he could speak with and was referred to Michael Steinbach, then a top official with the FBI’s Counterterrorism Division. Kennedy “continued to pressure the FBI to change the classified markings on the email to unclassified,” the document says. “STEINBACH refused to do so.”
The document says Kennedy then asked about whether the FBI would be making a public statement and was told they would not. Shortly afterward, the story about the email contents broke in the press and Clinton publicly denied having sent classified emails on her server.
In the wake of the document release, House Oversight Committee Chairman Chaffetz and House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., have written letters to Secretary of State John Kerry and Inspector General Steve Linick seeking Kennedy’s removal and a misconduct investigation.
"We find Under Secretary Kennedy's actions extremely disturbing. Those who receive classified intelligence should not barter in it - that is reckless behavior with our nation's secrets,” they said in a statement. “Someone who would try to get classification markings doctored should not continue serving in the State Department or retain access to classified information. Therefore, President Obama and Secretary Kerry should immediately remove Under Secretary Kennedy pending a full investigation."
State Department spokesman Mark Toner on Monday denied the “quid pro quo” allegation.
At a press briefing, he said, “[Kennedy] contacted the FBI to understand what their rationale was for requesting an upgrade of this particular information.”
A spokesperson at the FBI provided a lengthy statement to Fox News on Saturday night ahead of the document release -- disputing Chaffetz's characterization and stating that, while the conversation did happen, the two issues discussed were not connected.
The FBI account is as follows:
“The FBI determined that one such email was classified at the Secret level. A senior State Department official requested the FBI re-review that email to determine whether it was in fact classified or whether it might be protected from release under a different FOIA exemption. A now-retired FBI official, who was not part of the subsequent Clinton investigation, told the State Department official that they would look into the matter. Having been previously unsuccessful in attempts to speak with the senior State official, during the same conversation, the FBI official asked the State Department official if they would address a pending, unaddressed FBI request for space for additional FBI employees assigned abroad. Following the call, the FBI official consulted with a senior FBI executive responsible for determining the classification of the material and determined the email was in fact appropriately classified at the Secret level.”
According to the FBI, “The classification of the email was not changed, and it remains classified today. Although there was never a quid pro quo, these allegations were nonetheless referred to the appropriate officials for review."
The FBI documents fueled GOP allegations about Clinton’s handling of classified material.
“These documents further demonstrate Secretary Clinton’s complete disregard for properly handling classified information. This is exactly why I called on DNI Clapper to deny her access to classified information,” House Speaker Paul Ryan said in a statement. “Moreover, a senior State Department official’s attempt to pressure the FBI to hide the extent of this mishandling bears all the signs of a cover-up.”
Kennedy appears in other sections of the FBI documents as well. According to another FBI interview, Kennedy wanted some information changed to an obscure code known as B9 to “allow him to archive the document in the basement of DoS [Department of State] never to be seen again.”
The State Department inspector general also told the FBI Kennedy’s “tone and tenor were definitely not positive when dealing” with their office.
Melania Trump calls husband's comments 'offensive,' says attacks on Bill Clinton 'justified'
Melania Trump, wife of Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump, spoke out for the first time Monday since a videotape was released of her husband making lewd comments about women in 2005, saying, "we are moving on."
Trump made the comments to Fox News' Ainsley Earhardt in an interview to air in full Tuesday morning on "Fox & Friends."
“Those words, they were offensive to me and they were inappropriate,” Trump told Fox News. “And he apologized to me. And I expect -- I accept his apology. And we are moving on.”
She also said that it's fair for the media and her husband to bring up former President Bill Clinton's infidelities amid his wife's presidential campaign.
“They're asking for it. They started,” Trump said, referring to nude images from the 1990s published by the New York Post earlier this year. “They started from the beginning of the campaign putting my picture from modeling days."
"That was my modeling days and I'm proud what I did. I worked very hard,” she added.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
-
How many times do we need to say this? If you’re here illegally and get caught, you’re going back. It’s the la...
