Friday, August 12, 2016

Ex-GOP lawmakers, party staffers urge Priebus to cut off Trump funding


Dozens of Republicans – including ex-lawmakers and former party staffers – have signed a letter urging Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus to “suspend” funding for Donald Trump’s campaign and divert all resources to congressional races, in the latest rebuke of the nominee from inside the party.
The letter, which is in draft form and expected to be sent next week, urges Priebus to focus RNC resources on saving the Republican majority in the House and Senate – effectively casting Trump’s campaign as a lost cause dragging congressional candidates down.
“Given the catastrophic impact that Donald Trump’s losing presidential campaign will have on down-ballot Senate and House races, we urge you to immediately suspend all discretionary RNC support for Trump and focus the entirety of the RNC’s available resources on preserving the GOP’s congressional majorities,” the letter says.
The letter, obtained by Fox News, cites a litany of complaints ranging from his controversial comments on the trail to his suggestion he might balk on NATO treaty obligations to his refusal to release his tax returns.
To date, however, Priebus has stuck by his public support for the nominee. He delivered a full-throated endorsement at last month’s Republican National Convention, where he declared: “With Donald Trump and Mike Pence, America is ready for a comeback after almost a decade of Clinton-Obama failures.”
The letter, signed by over 70 Republicans and first reported by Politico, is just the latest flare-up from Trump’s detractors inside the party.
The latest headlines on the 2016 elections from the biggest name in politics. See Latest Coverage →
Fifty former security and diplomatic officials from Republican administrations signed a letter earlier this week opposing Trump, while other prominent Republicans have either come out against him or gone a step further and endorsed Hillary Clinton. One of those figures was former Connecticut Rep. Chris Shays, who also signed the forthcoming letter.
Other co-signers include former New Hampshire Sen. Gordon Humphrey; former Missouri Rep. Tom Coleman; former RNC communications director B. Jay Cooper; and former RNC chief digital strategist Mindy Finn.
Trump has brushed off the intra-party tensions. After the security-official letter went public, he said those officials “are the ones the American people should look to for answers on why the world is a mess, and we thank them for coming forward so everyone in the country knows who deserves the blame for making the world such a dangerous place.”

Thursday, August 11, 2016

Dem's Hack Cartoons





Cyberattack that targeted Democrats reportedly bigger than it appears

Dumb ass?
A cyberattack that targeted members of the Democrats reportedly was more widespread than previously thought and affected the private email accounts of more than 100 officials and groups.
The New York Times reported Wednesday that the increasing scope of the hack prompted federal authorities to widen its investigation and that several Democratic officials have been notified that Russians may have tried to breach their accounts.
According to the report, the hack attack appeared to have targeted the personal email accounts of campaign officials for Hillary Clinton and a handful of different party groups.
Sources told Fox News last month that a hack into the House Democrats’ campaign arm bears similarities to the breach of the Democratic National Committee files with early indications pointing to possible Russian involvement. The sources said the malware used in the breach of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is similar to that used in the DNC hack reported in June.
The New York Times reported that the Democratic Governors’ Association may have also been affected by the security breach. Democratic officials said they fear another batch of internal messages may be dumped soon.
The latest releases of emails from the Democratic National Committee cost Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz her job before the convention in Philadelphia. CEO Amy Dacey; chief finance officer Brad Marshall; and communications director Luis Miranda also stepped down last week.
The latest headlines on the 2016 elections from the biggest name in politics. See Latest Coverage →
The FBI and other intelligence officials are taking the matter seriously and have briefed staff members of the House and Senate Intelligence Committee on the investigation into the security breach of the DNC, according to The Times.
The paper reported that groups tied to the Democratic Party have been going through files and emails to see what may have been compromised and have also been beefing up cybersecurity defenses.
A DNC member said the threats have been taken “seriously,” but declined to further explain what measures have been taken to ensure that their security was up to par and wouldn’t be breached again.

Clinton accused of aiding Moscow ops with push for 'Russian Silicon Valley'

Was the Clinton Foundation involved with State Department?
A 2010 program headed by then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to help Moscow develop a “Russian Silicon Valley” may instead have drawn some of America’s biggest tech companies into “industrial espionage” – even advancing the country’s military and spying operations, according to a new report by Clinton critic Peter Schweizer’s Government Accountability Institute.
“There are serious national security questions that have been raised,” the report said.
The program was pitched as a partnership involving U.S. and Russian government entities and companies. Major U.S. corporations like Boeing, Google, General Electric, Cisco and Microsoft – also generous donors to the Clinton’s family foundation – were solicited by Clinton to invest more than a billion dollars in the Skolkovo tech park outside Moscow, formally called the Skolkovo Innovation Center. The goal, Clinton said in speeches and to Russian media, was to “break down barriers with Russia,” create “more free flow of people and information” between the two countries, and ultimately strengthen Russia.
“We want to help because we think that it’s in everyone’s interest do so,” Clinton said in a 2010 speech at a U.S.-Russia summit, as she discussed building a technology center “right outside Moscow.”
However, the project may have inadvertently launched some of these companies into risky terrain. The FBI issued an “extraordinary warning” in 2014 to companies doing business with the Skolkovo Foundation that “Skolkovo could draw them unwittingly into industrial espionage,” noting Skolkovo was a crucial part of Dmitry Medvedev’s plan to modernize Russia’s military.
The FBI also said Skolkovo “may be a means for the Russian government to access our nation’s sensitive or classified research, development facilities and dual-use technologies with military and commercial applications.”
The latest headlines on the 2016 elections from the biggest name in politics. See Latest Coverage →
Jeff Bechdel, communications director for the anti-Clinton America Rising PAC, said the Democratic presidential nominee effectively “put our national security at risk” with the project.
“Leveraging Clinton Foundation donors, Clinton assisted in speeding up the Russians’ weaponized technology sector, and in so doing, demonstrated she lacks the judgment necessary to determine friend from foe on the international stage,” he said in a statement.
The Clinton campaign is pushing back on the latest report from Schweizer’s group. Schweizer also authored the anti-Clinton book “Clinton Cash” and is a longtime adversary of the family.
“This report is just the latest false attack by Republican operative and friend of the Koch brothers, Peter Schweizer, who was widely discredited for making baseless accusations in his debunked Clinton Cash book, that even he admitted was not backed up by any evidence,” campaign spokesman Josh Schwerin said in a statement.
The campaign also rejected the group’s claim that the FBI and Army found the project substantially enhanced Russia’s military tech capabilities, citing a 2014 article in which the FBI acknowledged it did not have hard evidence of such activity.
The partnership itself stemmed from President Obama and the Clinton State Department’s efforts to “reset” relations with Russia early in the Obama administration. This included a plan to “identify areas of cooperation and pursuing joint projects and actions that strengthen strategic stability, international security, economic well-being, and the development of ties between the Russian and American people.”
The State Department paid for a delegation of 22 private tech entrepreneurs to go to Russia in May 2010, which led to an exclusive arrangement with Russia allowing entrance into what would become an industry tech park accommodating some 30,000 people.
“The State Department actively and aggressively encouraged American firms to participate in Skolkovo,” the Government Accountability Institute report said. “Indeed, many of the Memorandums of Understanding signed by U.S. companies to invest and cooperate in Skolkovo were signed under the auspices of Hillary Clinton’s State Department.”
Many of the key figures in the Skolkovo tech park development had major financial ties to the Clintons, the report said, noting 17 of 28 companies, both Russian and American, made financial commitments to the Clinton Foundation or sponsored speeches by Bill Clinton.
“During the Russian reset, these figures and entities provided the Clintons with tens of millions of dollars, including contributions to the Clinton Foundation, paid for speeches by Bill Clinton, or investments in small start-up companies with deep Clinton ties,” the report said.
Margaret E. Kosal, an associate professor at Georgia Tech’s Sam Nunn School of International Affairs, said while the project might have seemed a good opportunity to work in an emerging market, there are challenges working in Russia including dealing with cronyism and government bureaucracy.
But from a national security perspective, Kosal said the biggest concern is the ability of the Russian military to obtain, misuse, or develop nanotechnology for an application that catches the U.S. by surprise.    
Relations with Russia have since become a focal point in the 2016 presidential election, with Clinton criticizing Republican opponent Donald Trump for both his campaign manager’s reported business ties to Russia and supposed lack of knowledge about international affairs. But Bechdel said history shows it is Clinton’s connections and relations that should be scrutinized.
"Clinton may talk a big game against Russia now, but when it mattered most and she had the opportunity to hold Russia accountable as Secretary of State, Clinton’s priority was aiding Russian efforts to accelerate their technology sector, not keeping America safe,” Bechdel said.
The Clinton Foundation did not respond to a media inquiry from FoxNews.com.
A spokeswoman for Skolkovo told the Irish-based Independent news that all allegations of Kremlin spying were false, claiming it is "an international project and all our operations are fully transparent for our Russian and international partners".

Emails raise new questions on ties between Clinton Foundation, State Department


A new batch of emails released Tuesday is raising fresh questions about whether Clinton Foundation donors got preferential treatment from the State Department during Hillary Clinton's tenure at the top.
Conservative watchdog Judicial Watch released 44 new email exchanges which it says were not in the original 30,000 handed over to the State Department, despite the Democratic presidential nominee's claims she turned over all work-related emails amid the now-closed probe into her private server use.
The documents, produced as a result of the group's FOIA lawsuit, appear to challenge Clinton's insistence that there is "no connection" between her family foundation and her work at the department.
Though the campaign is downplaying the emails, Republican opponent Donald Trump, at a campaign stop in Virginia on Wednesday, suggested the emails reveal potentially illegal activity.
“It’s called pay for play,” Trump said.
In one email exchange released by Judicial Watch, Doug Band, an executive at the Clinton Foundation, tried to put billionaire donor Gilbert Chagoury -- a convicted money launderer -- in touch with the U.S. ambassador to Lebanon because of the donor’s interests there.
The latest headlines on the 2016 elections from the biggest name in politics. See Latest Coverage →
In the email, Band notes that Chagoury is a “key guy there [Lebanon] and to us,” and insists Clinton aide Huma Abedin call Ambassador Jeffrey Feltman to connect him with Chagoury.
Chagoury is a close friend of former President Bill Clinton and has appeared on the Clinton Foundation donor list as a $1 million to $5 million contributor. He’s also pledged $1 billion to the Clinton Global Initiative. Chagoury was convicted in 2000 in Switzerland for money laundering. He cut a deal and agreed to repay $66 million to the Nigerian government.
In another email from April 2009, Band seems to pressure Clinton’s former aides Cheryl Mills and Abedin into hiring a foundation associate.
In the email, Band writes it’s “important to take care of [name redacted].”
Abedin responds, telling Band, “Personnel has been sending him options.”
The latest batch of emails came more than a week after Clinton said, in a "Fox News Sunday" interview, that “there is absolutely no connection between anything that I did as secretary of state and the Clinton Foundation.”
The Republican National Committee seized on the appearance of favor-trading in the latest batch of documents.
“That the Clinton Foundation was calling in favors barely 3 months into Hillary Clinton’s tenure at the State Department is deeply troubling and it is yet another reminder of the conflicts of interest and unethical wheeling and dealing she’d bring to the White House,” spokesman Michael Short said in a statement.
But a Clinton campaign spokesman said: “Neither of these emails involve the Secretary or relate to the Foundation’s work. They are communications between her aides and the President’s personal aide, and indeed the recommendation was for one of the Secretary’s former staffers who was not employed by the Foundation.”
The campaign initially was responding to an account in The Wall Street Journal.
The emails are separate from a larger batch of several thousand work-related emails that FBI officials recovered from Clinton's private server.
Clinton's legal team turned over more than 30,000 emails from her server to the State Department last March but only after deleting another 30,000 messages that Clinton's team deemed private and personal. The FBI plans to turn over the reconstructed Clinton emails to the State Department for public release.
The new Clinton emails also include a February 2009 message to her from Stephen Roach, then-chairman of Morgan Stanley Asia, saying he planned to testify to Congress that week and was "happy to help in any way I can." Roach later met with Clinton over the summer for 30 minutes, according to Clinton calendars obtained by The Associated Press.
In another email, Clinton's chief of staff, Cheryl Mills, informed her that National Security Agency and State Department officials discussed an attempt to develop a modified blackberry for Clinton that might be used when she worked in a restricted State Department office that did not allow private phones.
Clinton called the development "good news," but she continued using a private Blackberry tied to her private server.

Trump charges Obama with being 'founder of ISIS'



Donald Trump charged President Barack Obama on Wednesday with being the founder of the Islamic State during a campaign rally in Florida.
"In many respects, you know, they honor President Obama," Trump said during a campaign stop in Fort Lauderdale. "He is the founder of ISIS."
Last week, his campaign tried to draw financial links between the Clinton Foundation and the terror group. Wednesday, he called Democratic Presidential nominee Hillary Clinton the groups “co-founder.”
Trump has long accused Obama and Clinton for pursuing Middle East policies that created a power vacuum in Iraq that was exploited by Islamic State. He had criticized Obama for announcing he would yank U.S. troops out of Iraq, which Obama critics believe created the instability in which extremist groups thrive.
The White House had yet to comment on Trump’s remarks.
The Islamic State group began as Iraq's local affiliate of Al Qaeda, the group that attacked the U.S. on Sept. 11, 2001. The group carried out massive attacks against Iraq's Shiite Muslim majority, fueling tensions with Al Qaeda’s central leadership. The local group's then-leader, Jordanian-born Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, was killed in 2006 in a U.S. airstrike but is still seen as the Islamic State group's founder.
The latest headlines on the 2016 elections from the biggest name in politics. See Latest Coverage →
The Trump campaign alleged in a statement last week that the Clinton Foundation ties to a corporation “funding” ISIS.
The campaign detailed financial contributions the Clinton Foundation received from a cement-making company called Lafarge. The same statement cited reporting in French media outlets that the company had entered deals with the Islamic State and other armed groups in Syria to protect its interests there.
“More than any major presidential nominee in modern history, Hillary Clinton is tied to brutal theocratic and Islamist regimes. Now we learn she has accepted money from a company linked to ISIS,” Trump senior policy adviser Stephen Miller said in a statement.
Trump brought up the accusation during his rally in Florida to a raucous crowd.
He railed against the fact that the Orlando shooter's father, Seddique Mateen, was spotted in the crowd behind Clinton during a Monday rally in Florida, adding, "Of course he likes Hillary Clinton."

Tuesday, August 9, 2016

Media justify anti-Trump bias, claim he's too 'dangerous' for normal rules



The media’s legions of Trump-bashers are finally acknowledging the obvious.
And trying their best to justify it.
But there’s one problem: Tilting against one candidate in a presidential election can’t be justified.
This is not a defense of Donald Trump, who has been at war with much of the press since he got in the race. Too many people think if you criticize the way the billionaire is being covered, you are somehow backing Trump.
And it’s not about the commentators, on the right as well as the left, who are savaging Trump, since they are paid for their opinions.
This is about the mainstream media’s reporters, editors and producers, whose credo is supposed to be fairness.
The latest headlines on the 2016 elections from the biggest name in politics. See Latest Coverage →
And now some of them are flat-out making the case for unfairness—an unprecedented approach for an unprecedented campaign.
Put aside, for the moment, the longstanding complaints about journalists being unfair to Republicans. They never treated Mitt Romney, John McCain, George W. Bush or Bob Dole like this.
Keep in mind that the media utterly misjudged Trump from the start, covering him as a joke or a sideshow or a streaking comet that would burn itself out. Many of them later confessed how wrong they had been, and that they had missed the magnitude of the anger and frustration that fueled Trump’s unlikely rise.
But since the conventions, and fueled by his own missteps, Trump has been hit by a tsunami of negative coverage, all but swamping the reporting on Hillary Clinton. Liberal investigative journalist Glenn Greenwald recently told Slate that “the U.S. media is essentially 100 percent united, vehemently, against Trump, and preventing him from being elected president”—and, given his views, he has no problem with that.
Now comes Jim Rutenberg, in his first season as media columnist for the New York Times. He’s a good reporter and I give him credit for trying to openly grapple with this bizarre situation.
But Rutenberg is, in my view, trying to defend the indefensible:
“If you view a Trump presidency as something that’s potentially dangerous, then your reporting is going to reflect that. You would move closer than you’ve ever been to being oppositional. That’s uncomfortable and uncharted territory for every mainstream, nonopinion journalist I’ve ever known, and by normal standards, untenable.”
Yet normal standards, says Rutenberg, may not apply.
By “closer to being oppositional,” he means openly siding against Trump and thereby helping Clinton. And that’s precisely the kind of thing that erodes our already damaged credibility. If a reporter believes Trump is a threat to America, he or she should go into the opinion business, or quit the media world and work against him. You can’t maintain the fig leaf of neutral reporting and favor one side.
Rutenberg acknowledges that “balance has been on vacation since Mr. Trump stepped onto his golden Trump Tower escalator last year to announce his candidacy. For the primaries and caucuses, the imbalance played to his advantage, captured by the killer statistic of the season: His nearly $2 billion in free media was more than six times as much as that of his closest Republican rival.”
I have to push back on this $2-billion argument. Trump got more coverage not just because he was good for clicks and ratings, but because he did many, many times more interviews than anyone else running. Much of this “free” media, rather than being a gift, was harshly negative. But that too helped Trump, because he drove the campaign dialogue and openly campaigned against the press.
Next Rutenberg argues that Trump is just too over the top in his rhetoric:
“And while coded appeals to racism or nationalism aren’t new — two words: Southern strategy — overt calls to temporarily bar Muslims from entry to the United States or questioning a federal judge’s impartiality based on his Mexican heritage are new.”
What’s disappointing is that Rutenberg doesn’t cite a single example of biased coverage from his paper, or any other paper or news outlet. (He does point to criticism from MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough, who is, as the columnist acknowledges, a commentator.)
Instead he quotes Carolyn Ryan, the Times’ senior editor for politics, as saying Trump’s candidacy is “extraordinary and precedent-shattering” and “to pretend otherwise is to be disingenuous with readers.”
And Rutenberg agrees, saying it would “be an abdication of political journalism’s most solemn duty: to ferret out what the candidates will be like in the most powerful office in the world.”
No one wants to abdicate that duty. No one is pretending Trump’s candidacy isn’t extraordinary. No one is saying he shouldn’t be fully vetted.
But there is an assumption among many journalists and pundits that of course Hillary Clinton is qualified, she’s been around forever, she just doesn’t need the relentless reporting that Trump requires. And so critical stories about Clinton—even when she said she “short-circuited” in that Chris Wallace interview on the email mess—are overshadowed by the endless piling on Trump.
Many of the reporters who feel compelled to stop Trump are undoubtedly comfortable because all their friends feel the same way.
But they are deluding themselves if they think that going after one candidate in a two-candidate race is what journalism is about.
Howard Kurtz is a Fox News analyst and the host of "MediaBuzz" (Sundays 11 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET). He is the author of five books and is based in Washington. Follow him at @HowardKurtz. Click here for more information on Howard Kurtz.

Gore's Climate Change Cartoons





Clinton, Trump clash on economy


Hillary Clinton clashed from afar with Donald Trump on the economy Monday, accusing him of peddling “old, tired ideas” that benefit the “really wealthy” – after the Republican nominee hammered the Democrats' “job-killing” agenda in a speech of his own where he unveiled a revised plan to jolt the economy by slashing taxes and regulations.
Trump delivered his economic address early Monday afternoon in Detroit, touting a plan he called a "night-and-day-contrast" with the “job-killing, tax-raising, poverty-inducing Obama-Clinton agenda.”
Clinton returned fire hours later during a rally in St. Petersburg, Fla., saying her GOP rival has simply hired advisers trying to “make his old, tired ideas sound new.”
“His tax plans will give super big tax breaks to large corporations and the really wealthy,” she said. "He wants to repackage trickle-down economics."
Clinton said economists have already warned Trump’s policies “would throw us into recession.”
The sparks mark an abrupt return to the economy on the campaign trail, after a post-convention week during which Trump was caught up in controversies that had little to do with policy.
The latest headlines on the 2016 elections from the biggest name in politics. See Latest Coverage →
Despite Clinton’s accusations, Trump insisted Monday that his proposals would help lower- and middle-class Americans the most.
And he used the setting of the speech – Detroit – to draw a stark contrast with his rival’s approach.
“Detroit is a living, breathing example of my opponent’s failed economic policies,” said Trump, arguing bad international trade deals like NAFTA have resulted in record unemployment for the city and made a “total disaster” of the entire U.S. economy.
“Detroit is still waiting for Hillary Clinton’s apology,” he continued.
Trump vowed to create 500,000 jobs annually in the first seven years of his administration, while cutting business taxes and reducing federal regulations. Trump touted his plan to eliminate the estate tax, put a moratorium on new federal regulations and reduce the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 15 percent, in his speech at the Detroit Economic Club.
He also vowed to re-negotiate the decades-old North American Free Trade Agreement and warned that Clinton, if elected, would enact the Obama administration’s Trans Pacific Partnership, which critics argue would create even more disadvantages for the United States in international trade.
“We cannot let her win because that will be disaster for Detroit and everybody else,” Trump said. “Hillary Clinton’s Trans Pacific Partnership will be even bigger and even worse than NAFTA.”
Clinton says she opposes the TPP in its current form.
In an appeal to unemployed steel workers, miners and other blue collar workers whom Trump hopes to win over in Rust Belt states, the GOP nominee also vowed to end federal regulations that have throttled coal plants and eliminated jobs.
“The Obama-Clinton [agenda] has blocked jobs through anti-energy regulations,” he said. “The Obama-Clinton war on coal has cost Michigan jobs. Clinton said she will put coal miners out of business. … A Trump administration will end this war on the American worker and unleash an energy revolution that will bring vast new wealth.”
The businessman and first-time candidate hopes to steady his campaign after a rough week in which he was criticized for comments about a Muslim-American family whose son, an Army captain, was killed in the Iraq War and for temporarily withholding his endorsement of House Speaker Paul Ryan in Tuesday's Wisconsin primary.
The Clinton campaign ripped into the proposed Trump plan earlier Monday morning, saying his tax breaks are only for the wealthy and includes no paid family leave or increase in the federal minimum wage.
“We wanted to offer a look at how a Trump presidency would cause damage to the American economy and working families,” the campaign said in a 7-point memo. “We can be certain of this because we’ve read Trump’s ‘plans,’ listened to his words, reviewed what analysts have to say about what he wants to do. And it's the only logical conclusion.”
Trump, though, hammered Clinton Monday for seeking tax hikes as part of her economic agenda.
Clinton indeed has proposed raising taxes on the highest-income earners, including a surcharge on multimillionaires, but analysts have found lower-income earners would see little change beyond measures like additional tax credits for expenses like out-of-pocket health care costs.
In his speech Monday, Trump also announced his plan to allow parents to fully deduct the cost of childcare from their taxable income. He also called again for boosting domestic energy production -- a plan his campaign estimates can add $6 trillion in local, state and federal revenue over the next four decades.

Report: Clinton's jobs push as senator fell flat, helped donors


Hillary Clinton’s jobs record as a New York senator – which her campaign has made a centerpiece of her pitch to voters – is coming under fresh scrutiny, with a new report claiming her economic initiatives fell flat for workers, while benefiting deep-pocketed donors.
The Washington Post report found that, as a senator from 2001-2009, the now-Democratic presidential nominee was unable to pass “big ticket legislation” that she introduced to benefit upstate New York, as job growth stagnated and manufacturing jobs fell by almost 25 percent.
The Post cites U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics numbers showing upstate New York lost jobs during Clinton’s first term, with Albany losing more than 31,000 payroll jobs between October 2001 and December 2006.
Former officials told the Post that smaller-scale projects also fell flat despite positive news coverage, with jobs failing to materialize and others leaving the state ahead of her failed 2008 presidential run.
Republican rival Donald Trump seized on the report Monday, citing the “devastating” findings as he delivered an economic address in Detroit.
“She was all talk, no action,” he said.
The latest headlines on the 2016 elections from the biggest name in politics. See Latest Coverage →
The report casts doubt on Clinton’s claim to be a pragmatist who can overcome Washington gridlock and give the economy a lift. Her campaign has cited her work in New York as a blueprint for her presidency, and has used her record to try and neutralize Trump’s selling point that he has a record as a job creator and knows how to boost the economy.
Further, the Post notes that a number of the companies Clinton worked with in upstate New York also contributed to her campaign and the Clinton Foundation – the Clintons' charitable wing that has come under scrutiny for its financial dealings amid accusations of “pay-to-play.”
In the Senate, for instance, Clinton struck up a relationship with Corning – an upstate glass and high-tech product manufacturer. The Post reports that while Clinton helped steer money to Corning through legislation and federal grants, Clinton’s efforts did not reverse the economic decline of Steuben County, where Corning is based.
Meanwhile, employees of the company have donated to Clinton’s campaign; the company paid $225,500 for her to speak in 2014; the chief executive co-hosted a 2015 fundraiser for her; and the company has given over $100,000 to the Foundation, the Post reported.
Clinton also cited her role in creating an “eBay university” to train budding entrepeneurs to sell products on eBay. The relationship with the company followed a similar pattern – then-CEO John Donahoe hosted a 2015 fundraiser for Clinton; eBay paid $315,000 for a 20-minute Clinton speech in 2015; and eBay’s charitable wing gave more than $50,000 to the Foundation.
Campaign spokesman Glen Caplin told the Post: “It’s no surprise that people who saw that work wanted to support her election campaigns and efforts to make a difference in people’s lives around the world.”

Parents of 2 Benghazi victims sue Hillary Clinton for wrongful death, defamation


The parents of two of the four Americans who died in the Benghazi attack in 2012 filed a lawsuit Monday against Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, alleging her "reckless handling" of classified information contributed to their deaths.
The case was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia by Larry Klayman of Freedom Watch USA on behalf of Patricia Smith, the mother of Sean Smith, and Charles Woods, the father of Tyrone Woods, for allegedly wrongfully causing the death of their sons as well as for defamation and intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress.
The lawsuit suggests that Clinton's use of a private email server contributed to the deaths of Smith and Woods, adding that terrorists were able to "obtain the whereabouts of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and thus the U.S. State Department and covert and other government operations in Benghazi, Libya and subsequently orchestrate, plan, and execute the now infamous September 11, 2012 attack."
"Having used a secret private email server that we now know was used to communicate with Ambassador Christopher Stevens with confidential and classified government information, and which we also now know was likely hacked by hostile adversaries such as Iran, Russia, China and North Korea aligning with terrorist groups, it is clear that Hillary Clinton allegedly negligently and recklessly gave up the classified location of the plaintiffs' sons, resulting in a deadly terrorist attack that took their lives,” Klayman said in a statement announcing the suit.
In addition to the wrongful death and negligence charges named in the suit, the parents also claim that Clinton defamed them in statements to the media, according to court documents.
"During her campaign for President, Defendant Clinton has negligently, recklessly, and/or maliciously defamed Plaintiffs by either directly calling them liars, or by strongly implying that they are liars, in order to protect and enhance her public image and intimidate and emotionally harm and silence them to not speak up about the Benghazi attack on at least four separate occasions," Klayman wrote in his complaint.
The latest headlines on the 2016 elections from the biggest name in politics. See Latest Coverage →
Patricia Smith has previously spoken out against Clinton, most recently at the Republican National Convention in July.
Clinton's campaign has not yet responded to requests for comment about the lawsuit.
In an interview last week on "Fox News Sunday," Clinton denied telling family members of those killed that the attack was sparked by an anti-Islam video, and was not terrorism.
She instead suggested the family members misunderstood her because they were overwhelmed by grief.
“I understand the grief and the incredible sense of loss that can motivate that,” Clinton said. “As other members of families who’ve lost loved ones have said, that's not what they heard. I don't hold any ill feeling for someone who, in that moment, may not fully recall everything that was or wasn't said.”

Iran's ex-president Ahmadinejad asks Obama to 'fix' $2B Supreme Court ruling



Iran's former hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad sent a letter on Monday to President Barack Obama, asking him to "quickly fix" a U.S. Supreme Court ruling allowing families of people killed in attacks linked to Iran to collect damages from some $2 billion in frozen assets.
While writing that his letter "is by no means of (a) political nature," Ahmadinejad's message to Obama arrives amid swirling speculation that the hard-line politician may run as a candidate in Iran's presidential election next year.
It also comes as average Iranians largely have yet to see the benefits of Iran's nuclear deal with world powers -- something a discontent Ahmadinejad and other hard-liners could mine in any potential campaign against moderates.
In the letter, posted on a website associated with the former president's office, Ahmadinejad focuses on the Supreme Court's decision in April. The court's 6-2 ruling allows families of victims of the 1983 Marine barracks bombing in Beirut and other attacks linked to Iran to collect monetary damages from Iran.
At risk for Iran is $1.75 billion in bonds, plus accumulating interest, owned by Iran's Bank Markazi and held by Citibank in New York.
"It is the clear expectation of the Iranian nation that the particular case of property seizure ... be quickly fixed by your excellency and that not only the Iranian nation's rights be restored and the seized property released and returned, but also the damaged caused be fully compensated for," the letter said.
"I passionately advise you not to let the historical defamation and bitter incident be recorded under your name," Ahmadinejad added.
Ahmadinejad's letter was delivered to the Swiss Embassy in Tehran, which has overseen America's interests in the country in the years after the 1979 Islamic Revolution and U.S. Embassy takeover. Embassy officials declined to comment.
It's unclear what steps Ahmadinejad expects Obama to take. There was no immediate comment from the White House regarding the letter.
The timing of the letter, however, is interesting as Ahmadinejad's name continues to circulate as a possible challenger to moderate President Hassan Rouhani in Iran's coming May 19 election. Rouhani's administration negotiated the nuclear accord, which put limits on Iran's atomic program in exchange for the lifting of crippling economic sanctions.
While Ahmadinejad previously served two four-year terms, Iranian law calls only for a one-term cooling-off period before he's eligible to run again.
How Iranians would react to another Ahmadinejad run, however, remains to be seen if and when it happens.
Under his presidency, Iran found itself heavily sanctioned over the nuclear program as Ahmadinejad questioned the scale of the Holocaust and predicted the demise of Israel. His disputed 2009 re-election saw widespread protests and violence. Two of his former vice presidents have since been jailed for corruption.

Monday, August 8, 2016

Cash to Iran Cartoons




Cotton says cash to Iran sends 'dangerous' message to bad guys worldwide


Sen. Tom Cotton suggested Sunday that he’ll accept President Obama’s explanation that the roughly $400 million in cash to Iran amid the country holding several Americans captive was part of a decades-old settlement, but said the move sends a “dangerous” message to terrorists and others around the world.
“He said this payment was not a ransom,” the Arkansas Republican and major critic of Obama’s recent Iran nuclear deal, said on “Fox News Sunday.”
“It doesn't really matter though what President Obama says. It matters what the Iranians think and it matters what dictators and terrorists and gangsters all around the world think. And they clearly think that this was a ransom payment … That's why it's so dangerous.”
Cotton also accused administration officials of stonewalling Congress and the American public about the specifics of the deal and the cash delivery roughly six months ago, continuing his criticism last week of the settlement.
“We didn't know the cash payment, for instance,” Cotton said. “We didn't know that it was paid for with bills that could be easily laundered or used for terrorism or support for Iran's allies throughout the region. And we didn't know that the Department of Justice opposed it. … There are still a lot of questions left to be answered. And the Obama administration continues to stonewall on this.”
The first-term senator also used a litany of strong words to describe the money delivery, in Euro notes, and how the administration behaved, including acting like a “third world gun runner” and a “drug cartel to the world’s most dangerous terror state.”
News reports surfaces Tuesday about of the money being flown to Tehran in an unmarked aircraft -- on pallets and wrapped in cellophane. Within hours, the administration said the delivery and the release of the hostages were unrelated.
And Obama said Thursday at the Pentagon: “We announced these payments … many months ago. They were not a secret. It was not a nefarious deal. … We do not pay ransom for hostages."
The administration had announced in January that the U.S. government would give roughly $1.7 billion to Iran and release frozen Iranian assets in connection with a failed, 1970’s-era arms deal, instead of potentially paying more through arbitration.
On Sunday, Democratic vice presidential nominee Sen. Tim Kaine tried to end the controversy, arguing in part that the only new news was Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump thinking there was a video of the cash delivery.
“There's just no 'there' there,” Kaine, of Virginia, said on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” also insisting that the timing of the delivery and hostage release did not look like the paying of ransom.
“Nope,” he said. “We don't pay for hostages. We don't negotiate for hostages.”

Gingrich on Clinton's latest email explanation: new way to 'lie about lying'


Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said Sunday that Hillary Clinton’s latest attempt to explain her email scandal -- that her brain had a “short circuit” -- is a “very dangerous” excuse and a new way to “lie about lying.”
“She now has a fundamental way of saying, ‘I didn’t quite lie to you; I just short-circuited,' ” Gingrich, a Georgia Republican and top supporter of GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump, also told “Fox News Sunday.” "It’s one thing to lie, it’s another to lie about lying."
He was joined on the show by California Democratic Rep. Xavier Becerra who, like other Clinton supporters, is trying to move past Clinton as secretary of state using a private email server and the related FBI investigation.
“While we want to make more of it, like [FBI Director James] Comey said, let’s move on,” said Becerra, who tried to turn the debate with Gingrich to Trump’s immigration policy, calling him an “immigrant basher.”
“He just wants his immigrants to be legal,” Gingrich told Becerra, who is joining others in questioning the legal status of Trump’s immigrant wife, Melania.
Gingrich and Becerra also sparred over each of their candidate’s economic policies and plans to defeat the Islamic State terror group.
The latest headlines on the 2016 elections from the biggest name in politics. See Latest Coverage →
Becerra repeated the argument that Trump’s plan would cost the U.S. economy a “breathtaking” 3.5 billion jobs. And he backed Clinton saying last week that Obama didn’t have enough time to fully execute is economic recovery plan, including a nearly $1 billion stimulus plan.
“He had a chance with $900 million and blew it,” Gingrich said. “You campaign on things being good enough. We’ll campaign on things should be better. And we’ll see who wins.”
Becerra criticized Trump’s plan to defeat ISIS, arguing it’s in large part based on allowing the U.S. military to torture detainees and “cozying up” to Russian President Vladimir Putin. 

Kasich hints at Trump endorsement, says Ohio victory 'really difficult'


Ohio Gov. John Kasich is long gone from the Republican presidential primary but on Sunday hinted about finally endorsing Donald Trump while also predicting Trump winning his home state will be “really difficult."

Kasich, whose only primary win was in Ohio, has created problems for the Trump campaign, despite conceding in May to the GOP presidential nominee -- refusing to endorse Trump or attend official events during the party’s nominating convention last month in Cleveland.
Such actions appear to have so far hurt efforts to create state party unity and Trump’s chances of winning Ohio, considering no GOP presidential nominee has been elected to the White House without winning the state.
“He's going to win parts of Ohio where people are really hurting," Kasich told CNN's "State of the Union." “But I still think it's difficult if you are dividing to be able to win Ohio. I think it's really, really difficult."
The so-called battleground state -- which voted in 2008 and 2012 for President Obama -- has 18 electoral votes, in the contest to get 270.
And the campaigns for Trump and Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton have already made several stops in Ohio since their respective party’s nominating conventions concluded a couple of weeks ago.
The latest headlines on the 2016 elections from the biggest name in politics. See Latest Coverage →
Winning Ohio and other so-called Rust Belt states, whose populations and economies have dwindled over recent decades with the decline of U.S. manufacturing, appears essentially in what would or could be Trump’s narrow path to victory.
"There will be sections he will win because people are angry, frustrated and haven't heard any answers,” Kasich also said Sunday. “But I still think it's difficult if you are dividing to be able to win Ohio."
Polls show Clinton and Trump deadlocked in the state.
Kasich on CNN also left open the possibility of endorsing Trump, a bitter primary rival, with less than 100 days remaining before Election Day.
"We still have time. That's something I think about a little bit but not a lot," he said.
Kasich also attempted to explain his decision not to attend the convention, saying, "If I weren't prepared to get up there and endorse the nominee, I thought it was inappropriate to go.”

Giuliani: Clinton refusal to seek police endorsement shows Dems as ‘anti-law enforcement party’



Hillary Clinton’s decision not to seek the endorsement of The Fraternal Order of Police is a sign that the Democrat presidential nominee leads “an anti-law enforcement party,” former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani said on Sunday.
Giuliani, who supports Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump, said on “Fox and Friends” that he sees an anti-police atmosphere developing in America, and he blames Clinton and the Democrat Party for fomenting those feelings.
“It comes right from the top, it includes Hillary, and she’s made herself a part of it,” Giuliani said. “You don’t even go talk to and seek the endorsement of one of the major police unions in the country?”
During her campaign, Clinton has voiced support for the Black Lives Matter movement, which grew out of recent controversial shootings of black men by police officers. Clinton also invited mothers whose sons were killed by police officers to speak on stage at the Democratic National Convention – though the same convention also featured a speech by Dallas County Sheriff Lupe Valdez.
Still, Clinton's decision not to seek The Fraternal Order of Police’s stamp of approval makes Clinton just the second Democratic presidential candidate in at least the last 20 years not to do so. John Kerry, the 2004 Democratic nominee, also did not seek the endorsement of the union, which represents 335,000 members. The FOP endorsed Bill Clinton in 1996, but has given the nod to Republicans in 2000, 2004 and 2008. The union did not endorse any candidate in 2012.
“We were talking to the highest levels of the campaign, and we had all indications that she was going to return the questionnaire,” FOP President Chuck Canterbury told The Hill on Friday. “And on the deadline date we were advised that they declined.”
The latest headlines on the 2016 elections from the biggest name in politics. See Latest Coverage →
Clinton’s campaign, speaking to The Hill, did not directly address why the form wasn’t submitted, but instead focused on how “Hillary and her team had engaged law enforcement throughout the campaign.”
“As she said from the beginning of her campaign, across the country, police officers are out there every day inspiring trust and confidence, honorably doing their duty, putting themselves on the line to save lives,” Clinton spokesman Jesse Ferguson said. “She believes we must work together to build on what’s working and to build the bonds of trust between police and the communities they serve – because we are stronger together.”
Trump has submitted his endorsement paperwork, and Canterbury stressed Trump’s “long history of being friendly to law enforcement.”
Giuliani said the choice not to submit the FOP questionnaire is indicative of the extreme left swing of the current Democrat Party and its presidential candidate.
“I think this only makes the point that the Democratic Party has gone so far to the left now – so far to the left – that it won’t even seek the endorsement of the major police organization in the country,” Giuliani said.

Sunday, August 7, 2016

Ryan Cartoons





Will Trump endorsement hurt Ryan in Tuesday's primary against outsider?


House Speaker Paul Ryan appears likely to win a 10th term ahead of his primary challenge Tuesday, but an endorsement earlier this week from GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump is causing its share of political headwinds for the Wisconsin congressman and other Republicans seeking reelection.
Trump on Friday night endorsed the House leader, along with incumbent GOP Sens. Kelly Ayotte, New Hampshire, and John McCain, Arizona, in an apparent effort to create party unity with the general election less than 100 days away.
However, the endorsement is not without some peril for Ryan, despite leading primary rival and conservative businessman Paul Nehlen by as much as 66 percent points, according to poll released this week by the Remington Research Group.
The Wisconsin GOP primary is Tuesday.
Trump is not particularly popular among Wisconsin voters, considering they decisively backed Texas Sen. Ted Cruz in the state’s early-April primary, arguably Trump’s biggest loss of the season.
And weeks earlier, Trump bashed popular Wisconsin GOP Gov. Scott Walker, a Cruz supporter, arguing Walker’s record on jobs and the economy was overrated.
Nehlen, in a narrowly crafted announcement Friday, praised Trump for endorsing Ryan, saying the decision was “appropriate” and a sign of “true leadership.”
However, he also argued Trump’s delay in endorsing Ryan, like Ryan did earlier with Trump, “is a clear signal to Wisconsin voters that Ryan is not his preferred candidate in this race.”
Still, most political observers think Ryan will retain his seat.
“I don’t think it will be a problem for Ryan,” Republican strategist Rob Carter said Saturday. “People in his district know him and see him as a straight shooter.”
However, he argued the bigger issue is Trump’s decision to withhold the endorsement.
“The real story is the divisiveness of the Trump campaign and the selfishness of the candidate himself,” Carter said.
The Nehlen campaign -- which is hitting Ryan on his qualified support of the Obama administration’s international trade deal known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership -- thinks its candidate can still pull off an upset.
Campaign official Noel Fritsch on Saturday called the Remington poll a “farce” and argued that 83 percent of the GOP electorate voted for so-called “outsider” candidates in the 2016 party primaries.
“It’s quite obvious that establishment Republicans are in trouble,” said Fritsch, who argues that campaign contributions are coming in from across the country. “This just steels folks’ resolve to get out and vote.”
To be sure, several Republican senators in tough reelection bid, particularly in Democrat-leaning states, have struggled with the Trump endorsement.
Ayotte has said she will vote for Trump but has yet to officially endorse him. And Pennsylvania Sen. Pat Toomey says he’s backing Trump, despite some political differences and Trump being neither his first nor second choice as the party’s presidential nominee.
Despite endorsing Ryan, Trump on Monday used his Twitter feed to acknowledge support from Nehlen, who is driving around Wisconsin in a yellow dump truck with a sign that reads “Dump Paul Ryan.”
A Ryan aide said Saturday that the speaker "appreciates" Trump's endorsement and that Ryan will "continue to focus on earning the endorsement of the voters in southern Wisconsin."
Ryan supporters also argued that several polls show Ryan with a double-digit lead.
Those who foresee a potential upset point to Tea Party-backed, first-time candidate Dave Brat’s 2004 primary upset of House Majority Leader Rep. Eric Cantor, who lost in large part because voters thought he was more focused on national politics than district concerns.
“This is not and should not be considered the 'Eric Cantor' seat of 2016. Above all else, Speaker Ryan has been a consistent and effective advocate for his constituents for years. And I am sure he will continue to do so well into the future,"  Republican strategist  Rob Burgess said Saturday.

CartoonDems