Monica Goes Viral: Lewinsky revives her Clinton calamity for the social media age

Monica Lewinsky begins her return to the public arena by describing one of her many humiliating moments a decade ago, saying that today it “would have gone viral on Twitter, YouTube, Facebook, TMZ, Gawker. It would have become a meme of its own on Tumblr. The viralness itself would have merited mention on the Daily Beast and Huffington Post.”
None of those existed, of course, when the White House sex scandal exploded back in 1998. So now Lewinsky is seeing what it would be like to analyzed, dissected and ripped apart in the modern world of social media—by reviving and reliving the global embarrassment that will always define her.
That lead anecdote involved an HBO taping in which she was asked about being a “BJ Queen.” Lewinsky has obviously decided that in order to move past her humiliation, she first has to recycle it—and own it.
The onetime White House intern tries to meld her plight with the vast array of people who have been mocked online: “No one, it seems, can escape the unforgiving gaze of the Internet, where gossip, half-truths and lies take root and fester.” True, but in Monica’s case, most of what was said about her was true.
Now that I’ve read the entire Vanity Fair piece, I don’t quite get the conspiracy theory that the Clintons wanted this out and disposed of. First, the accused looney toon is not favorably disposed toward Hillary Clinton: “She wanted it on record that she was lashing out at her husband’s mistress…I find her impulse to blame the Woman—not only me, but herself—troubling.”
Second, Lewinsky knows that by resurfacing after a decade, she is putting the focus back on Bill Clinton’s misdeeds, and his wife calling out the “vast right-wing conspiracy.” And whatever mistakes the thong-flashing, can’t-keep-a-secret Monica made, it was her boss, the president of the United States, who engaged in a classic abuse of power and misled the country about it.
Lewinsky even takes a whack at feminists for failing to give her “girl-on-girl support,” giving her paramour a pass because Clinton was “a president ‘friendly’ to women’s causes.”
Is there a self-serving element to all this? Of course. Lewinsky, single at 40, understandably frustrated by her failure to land a good job, is trying to turn her notoriety in her favor.
Besides, she says, her attempt to lay low has failed: “Every day I am recognized. Every day.”
Still, why now? Lewinsky says that everyone else is talking about her, so why should she stay quiet? She knew her White House exploits would be debated during a Hillary campaign—indeed, Rand Paul has already pressed the issue—and decided she wanted her voice heard.
The question now is whether Vanity Fair is just phase one of her media comeback. We could soon be seeing Monica Lewinsky making the television rounds, trying to move beyond her tawdry past by talking about it again and again.
Click for more from Media Buzz. 

Harry Reid

House panel subpoenas VA Secretary Shinseki for Phoenix hospital documents

A House committee voted Thursday to subpoena Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric Shinseki for emails and documents tied to an alleged secret "waiting list" for sick veterans at a Phoenix VA hospital. 
The vote on the House Veterans Affairs Committee comes as Shinseki begins to face calls -- from Congress and beyond -- for his resignation. In an interview with CBS News, Shinseki brushed aside those calls, while acknowledging that the Phoenix controversy "makes me angry." 
Shinseki has placed top Phoenix officials on leave as the department tries to get to the bottom of what happened. As many as 40 veterans allegedly may have died because of delayed treatment at that hospital. 
The communications being sought by the House committee would deal with the destruction or disappearance of the supposed secret waiting list at that facility. 
Lawmakers said that a prior response from Shinseki did not adequately answer the committee's questions. 
Meanwhile, Shinseki, a retired Army general, told CBS that he sent inspectors to Phoenix immediately when he learned of reports about the deaths. 
"I take every one of these incidents and allegations seriously, and we're going to go and investigate," he said. 
According to the VA, Shinseki has also ordered a "face-to-face audit" for all clinics at VA medical centers. 
"Secretary Shinseki has directed the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) to complete a nation-wide access review.  The purpose of this review is to ensure a full understanding of VA's policy and continued integrity in managing patient access to care," the VA said in a statement. "VA takes any allegations about patient care or employee misconduct very seriously." 
Earlier in the week, the American Legion called for him to step down over this and other controversies about veterans' care. At least two Republican senators have joined that call. 
The White House has voiced support for the secretary amid the calls for his ouster. 
Fox News' Steve Centanni and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

House Dems weigh boycotting Benghazi probe

(Bailey) Four Americans were murdered and they're thinking about boycotting. What a bunch of idiots!
 They're thinking more about covering their asses then protecting Americans.

House Democrats argued behind closed doors Wednesday about the proposed structure of a special investigative committee on the Benghazi attacks -- with some lawmakers arguing they should boycott the investigation altogether. 
At a press conference after the meeting broke up, Democratic leaders would not say definitely what they plan to do. 
"One day at a time," House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said. 
Some rank-and-file members argue that by joining the select committee, they'd be improperly legitimizing what they view as a political effort. Others, though, argue that if they don't participate, they will not be able to shape the direction and narrative of the probe. Several sources told Fox News that based on Wednesday's meeting, it appears Democrats are leaning toward not participating. 
GOP leaders formally outlined the particulars of the select committee on Tuesday evening. They set the stage for a comprehensive probe that would investigate everything from U.S. response efforts to internal communications after the attack. 
"It's not going to be a sideshow, it is not going to be a circus," House Speaker John Boehner said. 
In a move that rankled Democrats, GOP leaders said it would consist of seven Republicans and five Democrats. 
House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and her deputy, Rep. Steny Hoyer, D-Md., objected in a letter to Boehner, calling for the panel to be evenly split between Democrats and Republicans. 
They also called for Democrats to have a "real and equal voice" in issuing subpoenas, questioning witnesses and other areas. 
"In the draft resolution you provided today, you appear to have rejected these principles," they wrote. "If you truly want this new select committee to be bipartisan and fair -- and to be taken seriously by the American people -- we call on you to reconsider this approach before bringing this measure to the House floor for a vote." 
Pelosi and Hoyer did not go so far as to threaten to boycott the committee, as some rank-and-file Democrats have. 
GOP leaders say the select committee is vital, particularly in light of revelations that the Obama administration withheld relevant emails for months -- until they were released as part of a lawsuit last week. 
"I expect the members of this committee -- Republican and Democrat -- to exercise these authorities with a single-minded focus of getting the unvarnished truth about what took place leading up to, during, and following the terrorist attack on our consulate in Libya. The American people will accept no less," Boehner said in a statement. 
Republicans also defended the structure of the committee, noting that a prior select committee under the previous Democratic majority had nine Democrats and six Republicans. 
Among other priorities, the committee will seek to answer what was done in response to the Sep. 11, 2012 attack, including efforts to rescue U.S. personnel. Four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens, died in the assault on the U.S. compound. 
The committee will have subpoena power and may order depositions to be given under oath. 
A final report is required, though some of it may be classified. The next step will be for the House to vote on the committee, and for members to be chosen. 
Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., already has been selected to chair the committee.

Thom Tillis wins North Carolina GOP Senate primary

Thom Tillis, the North Carolina House speaker, won the state's Republican Senate primary on Tuesday, setting up a battle against Democratic incumbent Sen. Kay Hagan in the fall.
Tillis, considered the GOP establishment's candidate, topped Tea Party-aligned candidate Greg Brannon and pastor Mark Harris. Four other Republicans also sought the nomination.
Tillis had the backing of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Right to Life Committee and former presidential candidate Mitt Romney. National party leaders have targeted Hagan as part of their effort to try to gain control of the Senate.
Hagan, whom Republicans have made a top target in their drive to win a Senate majority in the fall, won renomination over a pair of rivals with about 80 percent of the primary vote.
Tillis, giving his nomination victory speech, continued his criticism of Hagan, saying she's too closely aligned with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and has failed to halt President  Obama's most destructive policies, chiefly the federal health care overhaul. Hagan voted for the law.
"Our republic was founded on separate but equal branches, a system with checks and balances," Tillis told cheering supporters at a Charlotte hotel. "But Kay Hagan hasn't provided any balance whatsoever when it's come to having a check on Obama. She's done nothing but abandoned her post for the last six years."
Tillis scarcely had time to savor his victory before the Democrats unloaded on him Tuesday night.
"No one in the country has done more for the Koch brothers than Thom Tillis — cutting public education nearly $500 million, cutting taxes for the wealthy while refusing pay raises for teachers and killing an equal pay bill," the party's Democratic senatorial committee said in a statement referring to the billionaire businessman brothers whom party leaders hope to make into national whipping boys in the fall campaign.
The National Rifle Association countered for Tillis, saying in a statement of its own that "Thom has long been one of most effective gun rights advocates in North Carolina."
Hagan is among the Democrats' most vulnerable incumbents in a campaign season full of them, a first-term lawmaker in a state that is ground zero in a national debate over the health care law that she and the Democrats voted into existence four years ago. Americans for Prosperity, a group funded by the billionaire Koch brothers, has run about $7 million worth of television commercials criticizing Hagan for her position on the law.
Hagan has portrayed herself as a middle-of-the-road U.S. senator who fights for the middle class and veterans and would prevent out-of-state conservatives from essentially buying a Senate seat with their ads criticizing her.
"This election is a simple choice between two very different records. Thom Tillis has spent his time in Raleigh pushing a special interest agenda that has rigged the system against middle-class families," Hagan said in a news release. She added: "North Carolinians know that I am the only candidate in this race who will put our state's needs ahead of what the special interests want."
Tillis and other Republicans said Hagan and a PAC backing Senate Democrats were trying to torpedo Tillis' candidacy and get a perceived weaker nominee, pointing to similar schemes in Nevada in 2010 and Missouri in 2012. Tillis has benefited from millions of dollars in advertising from outside groups critical of Hagan, particularly for her support of the federal health care overhaul law.
By receiving endorsements from National Right to Life and the National Rifle Association, Tillis was able to advertise credentials seen as favorable by potential supporters of Harris and Brannon. Harris is the former president of the North Carolina Baptist State Convention and was a chief spokesman for a group that worked successfully to get the 2012 constitutional amendment passed banning gay marriage. But even Tillis had a role in the amendment, leading the House when it agreed to put the amendment on the statewide ballot.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Obama administration withholding full contents of emails over Fox News Benghazi report

The Obama administration is withholding the full contents of a "media strategy" discussion over a Fox News report on Benghazi, claiming that releasing them would have a chilling effect on their "frank deliberations."
The seven-page email chain was in reference to a Fox News report on Sept. 27, 2012, that the intelligence community knew within 24 hours that Benghazi was a terrorist attack.
The emails, with the subject line "Fox News: US officials knew Libya attack was terrorism within 24 hours, sources confirm,” was circulated at senior levels of the administration. Denis McDonough, the president's deputy national security adviser during Benghazi; John Brennan, the former White House counterterrorism adviser; and presidential communications adviser Ben Rhodes, whose Sept.14 email linked the anti-Islam video to Benghazi, were all part of the discussion.
CLICK HERE TO READ THE EMAILS
"A seven-page dialogue concerning one Fox News report to me demonstrates an alarm bell situation where they are reacting to and trying to shape a response," senior Judicial Watch investigator Chris Farrell told Fox News. “There was a contrarian news report that didn't align with their position and they were clearly reacting to it in a way that would help reinforce their position."
While originally designated "SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED," Justice Department lawyers told a federal court May 1 that the State Department rightfully withheld "...comments, opinions and assessments related to the formulation of a media strategy with respect to an ongoing sensitive matter....The release of this information could reasonably be expected to chill the frank deliberations that occur when State Department and other U.S. government officials are formulating public responses to address sensitive issues."
Two days after the emails, a spokesman for the nation's intelligence chief, the director of national intelligence, released a lengthy statement explaining the evolution in the intelligence community’s thinking from the assault being a spontaneous attack to it being pre-meditated terrorism.
The statement does not mention a video originally cited by then-U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice as being behind the attack. It also does not, on its face, constitute the "media strategy" that was the subject of the seven-page email chain.
An DNI spokesman told Fox he could not comment on what may or may not be in the redacted emails. 
When previously asked about the Sept. 28, 2012 release, the DNI spokesman said the suggestion to “develop the statement came from within the intelligence community.”
Catherine Herridge is an award-winning Chief Intelligence correspondent for FOX News Channel (FNC) based in Washington, D.C. She covers intelligence, the Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security. Herridge joined FNC in 1996 as a London-based correspondent.

Lawmakers fight to cut red tape for terminally ill patients seeking experimental drugs

Should people fighting for their lives have to battle red tape?
That’s the question lawmakers are considering in four states where the “Right to Try” act is moving forward – proposed legislation aimed at giving terminally ill people access to experimental, but potentially life-saving, drugs before they have FDA approval.
Americans like Keith Knapp, of California, have fought hard for this kind of legislation.
Keith Knapp married his high school sweetheart Mikaela. He and Mikaela thought they had their whole lives ahead of them --- until last year, when she was diagnosed with a terminal form of kidney cancer. This began a fight that the two of them never imagined, as they tried to gain access to a promising, but not-yet-FDA-approved, drug that was doing well in clinical trials. The couple learned that without being in one of these trials, current law would not allow them access to the experimental treatment. 
From her hospital bed, Mikaela said recently: “People die from not being able to access these drugs all the time. I don't want to be one of them.”
But sadly, she was. Despite her husband’s passionate efforts to lobby members of Congress, pharmaceutical companies and the FDA -- and a huge media campaign -- Mikaela lost her battle just two weeks ago.
“The amount of effort you have to put into doing this is just far too much at this time in our life when you really just want to slow things down and enjoy being together,” Keith said.
Currently, it takes the FDA about 10 years to complete a clinical trial on a new drug -- and while many try, only 3 percent will gain access to a trial during that time. Meanwhile, 500,000 Americans died last year from cancer alone, with thousands more dying of other illnesses.
In states where the “Right to Try” act has been introduced, bill sponsors often have personal reasons for pushing the issue. In Missouri, state Rep. Jim Neely is trying to save his dying daughter. In Colorado , the law is sponsored by a clinical pharmacologist fighting for her dying brother. In Arizona, the driver of the bill is a man who lost his wife. A similar bill also has been introduced in Louisiana.
For many people who get a terminal diagnosis, they’re willing to try anything -- but once a clinical trial is closed, patients cannot get access to the potentially life-saving medication until it is approved by the government.
A family in Vermont is facing a similar situation. Jennifer McNary’s two young sons Max and Austin have the same disease. Max got into a clinical trial for an experimental drug called eteplirsen and is doing better. Austin did not get into the trial, and is getting worse.
“If Austin is never given the chance to get on eteplirsen, we know with 100 percent certainty that he will die,” she said.  
Austin wants access to the drug that he’s seen make a big difference for his little brother. “My brother Max can run and walk, I can only sit in my wheelchair and watch him. He’s been on eteplirsen for two years -- it’s safe and effective and I want access,” he said.
Despite the heart-wrenching stories, many doctors warn against this -- saying these drugs could actually lessen quality of life and heighten the risk of side effects.
“You don't know that it's better than nothing,” UCLA endocrinologist Dr. Stanley Korenman said. “You don't know that this won't reduce your life expectancy rather than increase your life expectancy because you don't know what the side effects are.” 
Other doctors agree, saying that many of these drugs turn out to be useless and give false hope. They also say it can lead to “snake-oil salesmen” taking advantage of desperate, dying people.
But the Goldwater Institute’s Darcy Olsen believes it’s time for a change. “Every day thousands of Americans are dying when there are potentially life-saving drugs that they could be taking if we simply got this regulatory process up to date and modernized,” Olsen said.
And Keith Knapp agrees.
“This is one area in which policy just does not match what the American people would want, and I would love to see that change so people don't have to go through this in the future,” he said.

California school district cancels lesson plan that involved Holocaust denial

Following a storm of criticism – and at least one death threat – a California school district Monday canceled a lesson plan that instructed middle school students to make arguments denying the Holocaust happened.
The assignment, aimed at eighth-grade students in Southern California’s Rialto Unified School District, sought to teach children to learn the nature of propaganda.
“Some people claim the Holocaust is not an actual event, but instead is a propaganda tool that was used for political and monetary gain,” the assignment said, according to a document posted by The Daily Bulletin. “You will read and discuss multiple, credible articles on the issue, and write an argumentative essay, based upon cited textual evidence, in which you explain whether or not you believe this was an actual event in history, or merely a political scheme created to influence public emotion and gain wealth.”
But critics said the assignment risked misleading the 13- and 14-year-old students into believing that propaganda about the Holocaust bears factual legitimacy.
“Whatever (the district’s) motivation, it ends up elevating hate and history to the same level,” Rabbi Abraham Cooper, the associate dean of the Los Angeles-based Simon Wiesenthal Center, told FoxNews.com on Monday. “We should train our kids to have critical thinking, but the problem here is the teacher confused teaching critical thinking with common sense, because common sense dictates you don’t comingle propaganda with common truth.”
Cooper added that although teaching children about the nature of propaganda is a worthy lesson plan, the district would have been better off having children research Holocaust denial, while meeting with local survivors of the genocide.
In a statement, the district said Monday afternoon the interim superintendent will be speaking with its educational services department to “assure that any reference to Holocaust ‘not occurring’ will be stricken on any current or future argumentative research assignments.”
“The Holocaust is and should be taught in classrooms with sensitivity and profound consideration to the victims who endured the atrocities committed,” the statement reads. “We believe in the words of George Santayana, ‘Those who cannot learn from history are bound to repeat it.’”
Rialto police said one person made a number of calls to police with specific death threats directed at a district spokeswoman and the interim superintendent. Two officers were at the campus on Monday and authorities are investigating the incident.
The Holocaust, which began in 1933 and ended in 1945 with the defeat of Nazi Germany in World War II, was the mass extermination of up to 11 million people, including six million Jews, resulting in the murder of nearly two-thirds of Europe’s Jewery.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Teachers unions get Discovery Channel to cancel 'Bad Teachers' show

After a pressure campaign by teachers unions, the Discovery Channel has knuckled under and canceled the program "Bad Teachers." The true-crime series, which examines cases where teachers became sexually involved with their students, aired its only episode last week.
Steve Dembo, director of social media for the cable channel's Discovery Education website, said in a statement Tuesday to the "millions of dedicated professionals" in education that "we share your concerns" with the Investigation Discovery program "Bad Teacher."
"We appreciate the support of the educational community for bringing [their objections to the show] to our attention and we are pleased to share that Discovery Communications has decided to immediately cancel this program, removing it from ID's on-air and online schedule," Dembo said.
The National Education Association touted the news of the cancelation, and American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten celebrated it:

I was surprised to learn, through a barrage of tweets Sunday night after "Bad Teacher" aired, that Discovery would use its brand to promote such an offensive program. However, I am heartened that it has taken steps to cancel the show and publicly affirm that Discovery Education's mission is to celebrate and support educators.

Every day, educators go into the classroom to make a difference in the lives of our children. Their work should be honored and valued, not bashed, and we hope to work with Discovery to showcase the real work teachers do every day to help kids achieve their dreams.

The network presumably feared that a backlash from the unions would hurt sales of the many educational products that it provides to schools.

Discrepancies between Benghazi emails released to Congress, watchdog group

EXCLUSIVE: Documents reviewed by Fox News show there are differences between Benghazi emails released through the federal courts to the conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch and emails released to the House oversight committee as part of its investigation into the attacks.
The discrepancies are fueling allegations the administration is holding back documents to Congress.
"The key question is whether Congress now has all the documents," Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, a member of the oversight committee, said. As for differences between the two sets of documents, Chaffetz alleged: "They are playing games. The classification and redactions are different. Why should Judicial Watch get more than Congress after issuing a subpoena?"
The emails published by Judicial Watch last week, which showed additional White House involvement in shaping the public explanation of what happened, helped trigger the announcement Friday by House Speaker John Boehner of a select committee to investigate.
Two of the emails, from Sept. 14, 2012, appear to be part of the deliberations in advance of then-U.N. ambassador Susan Rice's Sunday show appearances were she linked an anti-Islam video to the Benghazi attacks. The emails released to Judicial Watch include the names of those who participated in the email chain.
The same emails provided to the House committee do not include names.
While the text and subject line are redacted in full for both Judicial Watch and Capitol Hill, there are unexplained differences in the classification. The emails, originally marked "unclassified," were retroactively classified in February by the Department of State.
The email released to Judicial Watch is now marked "SECRET," and the same email released to the Oversight Committee is marked "Confidential." Both are marked to "DECLASSIFY" on Sept. 13, 2037 -- 25 years after the terrorist attack which killed four Americans.
Fox News also reviewed an email from Sept. 12, 2012 from Rice to members of the U.S. team at the United Nations where Rice was U.S. ambassador at the time. This unclassified email, whose subject line and text are also redacted in full, was retroactively classified on April 16, 2014, one day before it was released. While the contents and subject line were redacted in both versions, the email released as a result of the federal lawsuit to Judicial Watch does include the names, while the other does not. 
Fox News does not have access to all the emails released to the House committee to assess whether this is part of a broader pattern. A spokesman for the oversight committee said they are still reviewing the 3,200 pages.  
The spokesman said: "By withholding information, this Administration has only itself to blame for the continued questions about the before, during, and after of the Benghazi attacks. Removing information from documents subpoenaed by Congress, while the same documents with more information are released publicly, underscores the games the State Department continues to play as Congress presses for full and truthful answers about the deaths of four brave Americans."
When asked about reported differences in the released emails, White House spokesman Jay Carney said last week that the administration was forthcoming.
"We have, again, in a rather unprecedented way, provided documents that normally White Houses and administrations have not or would not provide because they were being mischaracterized," he said.
State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf said there was no effort to slow-walk the release of the emails.
"The notion that we are somehow deliberately doing any of that is just false. We've produced tens of thousands of documents. We've done nine hearings, 46 briefings. Everything we've seen come out in these document releases and on the Hill has underscored the exact same set of facts as we talked about yesterday about what happened in Benghazi and what happened since," Harf explained.
Catherine Herridge is an award-winning Chief Intelligence correspondent for FOX News Channel (FNC) based in Washington, D.C. She covers intelligence, the Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security. Herridge joined FNC in 1996 as a London-based correspondent.

Economy

NLRB rules workers must pay year's worth of dues to decertified union

If you are a worker trying to sever your relationship with a union, you have to make extra certain you didn't make even the tiniest error when you do it. That's what the National Labor Relations Board said Tuesday when it ruled that nine workers who decertified their union in 2012 still had to pay it another year's worth of membership dues because they sent in some of the paperwork too early.
The case involved nine workers for a Brooklyn condo complex who voted unanimously on Sept. 26, 2012, to get rid of United Workers of America Local 621 as their bargaining representative. The following week, the workers individually sent the union letters announcing that they "elected to terminate any and all such membership obligations" with it.
However the NLRB did not officially recognize the decertification vote until Oct. 11, 10 days after the union received the workers' letters. On the basis of that, Local 621 claimed it never received proper termination letters. The union was able to get the workers' employer to continue to deduct membership dues from their paychecks for another full year after they had voted to get rid of it.
The workers filed a complaint, and an administrative NLRB judge ruled in their favor in July, finding that the letters should not have been invalidated just for being a few days early.

Newspaper Reporter Nigel Jaquiss

This narrow minded idiot was actually awarded a  Pulitzer Prize.

Wow! It must be pretty easy to get one. 

Below is the rest of the story. 

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/05/04/power-trip-gop-candidate-booted-from-editorial-meeting-after-calling-out-blah/ 

New ObamaCare Numbers: 8M Enrollees with 28% Being Young Individuals

The enrollment figures for the Affordable Care Act’s first open enrollment period continue to climb, as do the number of young enrollees, according to the latest statistics from the Department of Health and Human Services.
The department announced 8,019,763 people have selected plans on both state and federal exchanges through April 19. This includes enrollment activity after the formal end of open enrollment on March 31 that was extended for those who had continued issues signing up or life circumstances that caused them to enroll late.
The latest enrollment numbers didn’t differ much from President Obama’s April 17 announcement that 8 million people had signed up for coverage, but the report did provide a clearer picture of just who signed up.
The demographic breakdown shows that 2.2 million (28%) of the enrollees were young people, ages 18-34. That number increases to 2.7 million when including those ages 0 to 34.
HHS also announced that more than 4.8 million people had enrolled in Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Plan (CHIP) through the end of March 2014.
The original goal for the first enrollment period was 7 million people with 2.7 million of them being young and healthy enrollees between 18 and 34. Young people are needed to offset the costs of insuring older and less healthy people on exchanges, who can no longer be charged more for their care, under the Affordable Care Act.
The report also shows that 2.6 million enrollees have signed up on state-based marketplaces and 5.4 million on the federally-facilitated exchange. Of the 8 million, 54% are male and 46% are female. In addition, 85% had selected a plan with financial assistance.
Under the ACA, every individual in the country has to have insurance by the end of open enrollment period, which passed on March 31, or they will face a fine of $95 a year or 1% of their annual income for failing to comply.
Questions Remain About Payments
The enrollment figures include everyone who has selected a plan on the exchanges. The insurance industry typically defines someone as enrolled once they made their first month’s premium payment. It is not yet clear how many people have made that payment, although the House Energy and Commerce Committee’s Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee is reporting that on the federal marketplace, only 67% had made their first month’s premium payments through April 15.
The subcommittee sent letters to every insurer participating on the federal exchange, Healthcare.gov, requesting payment information.
HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius had reported in late March that between 80% and 90% of enrollees had made their premium payments.  HHS is pushing back against the subcommittee’s report.
“These claims are based on only about half of the approximately 300 issuers in the Federally-facilitated Marketplace and they do not match up with public comments from insurance companies themselves, most of which indicate that 80 to 90 percent of enrollees have paid their premium.  Additionally, given the significant surge in enrollments at the end of March, it stands to reason that not all enrollees would have paid by the date of this so-called report since many people’s bills were not even due yet,” HHS spokesperson Erin Shields Britt said in an email statement to FOXBusiness.com.
Yevgeniy Feyman, a fellow at the Manhattan Institute, says the likelihood of payment increases with age, which isn’t a good sign since young people’s participation is important.
“The investigation found that only 25% had paid between the ages of 18 and 34,” Feyman says. “It is not good to see that. But on the other hand, this is only through April 15, so we don’t have information on the surge that may have happened after that date.”
That being said, Feyman argues payment data may not be the best “talking point” to use against ObamaCare.
“This will work itself out,” he says. “This could be problematic for Democrats to deal with, but not harmful to the law itself.”
Analysts are already projecting double-digit increases in premium costs for 2015, which are priced in, but it’s based on risk pool composition and not payment data, Feyman points out. If and when the public is privy to payment data, it will be at a politically-beneficial time, he says, as this could impact democrats during the midterm elections.
“Eventually they have to release this data,” Feyman says. “For months they were claiming they didn’t have it, and there is no reason to keep it hidden.”

NAACP

Obama mocks health care website's flawed launch at correspondents' dinner

 (Bailey) This guy thinks that wasting your money and ruining your country is a big joke.


WASHINGTON –  Little was sacred when President Barack Obama tossed out playful but pointed jokes Saturday night -- not even his own health care plan.
"We rolled out healthcare.gov. That could have gone better," Obama said in remarks at the annual White House Correspondents' Association dinner. "In 2008 my slogan was `Yes we can.' In 2013 my slogan was `Control-alt-delete."'
One the plus side, the president said, "they did turn the launch of healthcare.gov into one of the year's biggest movies." On a screen flashed the poster for "Frozen."
When a video Obama introduced failed to play properly, he asked, "Does anybody know how to fix this?" To laughter, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius stepped up and said: "I got this. I see it all the time." In the wake of the problems with the website, Sebelius has announced she is stepping down.
The annual dinner has become a tradition in the nation's capital, promising a black-tie evening of humor and celebrity gazing. The event once again attracted an array of journalists, government officials, politicians and media personalities as the association raised money for college scholarships. The featured entertainer was comic actor Joel McHale, the star of the NBC series "Community."
In his own stand-up routine, Obama didn't waste any time turning his barbed jokes toward the news media.
"MSNBC is here," he said. "They're a little overwhelmed. They've never seen an audience this big before."
Noting that he had traveled to Asia recently, Obama said: "The lengths we have to go to to get CNN coverage these days. I think they're still searching for their table."
The president saved his sharpest jabs for another cable news network. "The Koch brothers bought a table here tonight, but as usual they used a shadowy right-wing organization as a front. Hello, Fox News!"
He added: "Let's face it, Fox. You'll miss me when I'm gone. It will be harder to convince the American people that Hillary was born in Kenya."
Republicans didn't escape untouched. "Washington seems more dysfunctional than ever," Obama said. "Gridlock has gotten so bad in this town you have to wonder: What'd we do to piss off Chris Christie so bad?"
The correspondents' association, which represents the White House press corps, celebrated its 100th anniversary.
Journalists were honored for their coverage of the presidency and national issues:
--Glenn Thrush of Politico and Brianna Keilar of CNN won the Aldo Beckman Award, which recognizes excellence in the coverage of the presidency.
--Peter Baker of The New York Times and Peter Maer of CBS News won the Merriman Smith Award for deadline coverage.
--Megan Twohey of Reuters and a partnership between The Center for Public Integrity's Chris Hamby and ABC News' Matthew Mosk and Brian Ross won the Edgar A. Poe Award for coverage of issues of national significance.
--George E. Condon Jr. of National Journal received the first President's Award for exceptional service to the organization.
The organization also honored the late Harry McAlpin, the first black reporter to attend a presidential news conference, by establishing a scholarship in his name. McAlpin had been denied membership to the WHCA while covering the Roosevelt and Truman administrations because of his race.

Lewinsky scandal

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewinsky_scandal

Rutgers Students Stage Sit-In To Protest Condoleezza Rice Commencement Speech

This is what's destroying America. Soon only view will be the leftist view.

Rice declines Rutgers commencement invite; says it has become a distraction

Condoleezza Rice announced Saturday that she will not be delivering the commencement address at Rutgers University’s graduation ceremony this month, saying the invitation has become a "distraction."
Commencement should be a time of joyous celebration for the graduates and their families. Rutgers' invitation to me to speak has become a distraction for the university community at this very special time,” the former secretary of state under President George W. Bush said in the statement.

"I understand and embrace the purpose of the commencement ceremony and I am simply unwilling to detract from it in any way."- Condoleezza Rice

"I am honored to have served my country. I have defended America's belief in free speech and the exchange of ideas. These values are essential to the health of our democracy. But that is not what is at issue here. As a professor for thirty years at Stanford University and as (its) former Provost and Chief academic officer, I understand and embrace the purpose of the commencement ceremony and I am simply unwilling to detract from it in any way."
On Monday, roughly 50 Rutgers University students staged a sit-in at a school administration building in New Brunswick to protest the school's invitation to  Rice to appear at the university's commencement.
The school's Board of Governors voted to pay $35,000 for her appearance at the May 18 ceremony. She was going to be awarded an honorary degree.
But several faculty members and students wanted the invitation rescinded because of Rice's role in the Iraq War. Rutgers' New Brunswick Faculty Council passed a resolution in March calling on the university's board of governors to rescind the invitation.
Photos and videos of Monday's protest posted to Twitter showed students lining a staircase leading to University President Robert Barchi's office, The Star-Ledger reported.
Some students held up signs reading, "No honors for war criminals," "War criminals out" and "RU 4 Humanity?" the report said.
The sit-in was one of the largest in Rutgers' history, according to The Daily Targum, a student newspaper. Police reportedly responded to the site of the protest after a glass door was broken and a student cut their hand.
Barchi and other school leaders had resisted the calls to "disinvite" Rice, saying the university welcomes open discourse on controversial topics.
"We cannot protect free speech or academic freedom by denying others the right to an opposing view, or by excluding those with whom we may disagree. Free speech and academic freedom cannot be determined by any group. They cannot insist on consensus or popularity," Barchi said in a letter to campus last month.
The Associated Press contributed to this report

Benghazi

Why is school teaching kids ethnic slurs?

What’s worse?

1. Teaching a kindergarten student an ethnic slur.
2. Teaching a kindergarten student a pejorative for a part of the female anatomy.
3. Teaching a kindergarten student fake words.
4. All of the above.

Ashley Zola selected “D”. Her daughter is a kindergarten student at Lakeside Park Elementary School in Hendersonville, Tenn. She was upset after she discovered that her daughter’s homework assignment included an ethnic slur for Italians and a pejorative for a part of the female anatomy.
But she was even more disturbed to learn that her child and all the other kids in the class were being taught “imaginary words.”

“You wouldn’t put ‘Polack’ in a reading list for a child,” Zola said. “That’s offensive to Polish people. So why are you teaching them ‘wop’?”

“I’m very offended and upset about this,” Zola told me in a telephone interview from her home in Hendersonville, Tenn.
The first homework assignment included a list of words that Zola’s daughter was supposed to practice at home. Among the words were “nist,” and “plad.”
“Her grandfather was going over the words along with their definitions so she could understand what she was reading,” Zola told me. “But there were two words that had no meaning.”
So she wrote a note to the teacher asking for an explanation.
The teacher replied, “They are make-believe words. It is part of our curriculum.”
A few days later, her daughter returned home with another assignment.
“Please practice these words at home tonight,” the instructions read. “Remember not all of these words are real words. Some are made up words.”
Among the made-up words were “tid,” “rok,” “rix” and “hep.”
Zola sent back the homework assignment with a note written to her daughter’s teacher.
“We do not teach our child anything fake,” she wrote.
But the assignment also included two other words that made Zola furious – “wop” and “mut.”
“If you were to look up either of those words, they would not be something you would discuss with a five year old,” she told me.
“WOP” is an ethnic slur used against Italians. You’ll just need to Google the other word.
“You wouldn’t put ‘Polack’ in a reading list for a child,” she said. “That’s offensive to Polish people. So why are you teaching them ‘wop’?”
I spoke to the principal of the school – a very nice lady – who assured me the assignments had nothing to do with Common Core.
And while she was unfamiliar with the specifics of the classroom assignment, she said it’s not unusual for teachers to use fake words to teach children about phonetics.
Really? Why not just use real words?
The principal never answered that question. She never returned my subsequent telephone calls. And neither did the Sumner County Schools spokesperson. (I called him three times -- it’s really impolite not to return phone messages)
So here’s the bottom line from Zola.
“I want my daughter to be able to know what she’s reading,” she said. “There’s a difference between reading a word and knowing what that word is – and comprehending it. I have a hard time doing it when the definitions of those words are inappropriate for someone her age.”
That seems like a pretty reasonable request to me.
Todd Starnes is host of Fox News & Commentary, heard on hundreds of radio stations. Sign up for his American Dispatch newsletter, be sure to join his Facebook page, and follow him on Twitter. His latest book is "God Less America”.

leon jenkins naacp

Statement – Resignation of Los Angeles President Jenkins

May 01, 2014

(Baltimore, MD) – NAACP Interim President and CEO Lorraine C. Miller has accepted the resignation of Los Angeles NAACP President Leon Jenkins.

 

In his letter of resignation, Mr Jenkins stated, “Please be advised that the legacy, history and reputation of the NAACP is more important to me than the presidency.  In order to separate the Los Angeles NAACP and the NAACP from the negative exposure I have caused the NAACP, I respectfully resign my position as President of the Los Angeles NAACP.”

 

The national office of the NAACP is developing guidelines for its branches to help them in their award selection process.

 

Internal memos reveal EPA worked behind the scenes to kill Alaska mine project

WASHINGTON –  The Environmental Protection Agency came under fire Thursday after new emails surfaced that allegedly show government officials worked in secret with tribal leaders and other environmental groups to preemptively oppose the controversial Pebble Mine project in Alaska before a review was even conducted.
The internal memos published by The Washington Times show EPA officials working behind the scenes as early as 2008 to kill the gold and copper mine project -- two years before any scientific study or survey was conducted looking into the environmental impact.
“As you know I feel that both of these projects (Chuitna and Pebble) merit consideration of a 404C veto,” EPA official Phillip North wrote, according to the emails.
North, according to the Times, pushed to have the mine’s veto added to the agenda of a 2009 agency retreat.
But the EPA announced in 2011there would be a neutral and scientific review of the mining project. At the time, they said that concerns raised by environmental groups and local tribes would be investigated, but that no decision had been made.
“Alaska is a long way from Washington, D.C.,” Rep. James Lankford, R-Okla., told Fox News. “There is no reason for Washington, D.C., to run affairs in Alaska.”
Lankford says the EPA pre-judged the case and didn’t wait for a full scientific review.
“They are to be neutral in this, and they are definitely not neutral in this,” he said.
In a statement Thursday, the EPA said the emails in question were "authored by a low level staffer stationed in Alaska who had no decision making authority for the Agency.
"Additionally, the focus should be on what the agency has actually done which is taking a deliberative approach based on the science. In fact, the agency leadership had not made a decision on whether to proceed to 404(c) action until the scientific analysis was complete," the EPA said.
The newly published emails are just the latest twist in the Pebble Mine saga which began years ago.
Mine opponents have been urging EPA to take steps to protect the region. They say the project would threaten the billion-dollar commercial fishing industry in Bristol Bay and the 14,000 jobs linked to it.
Supporters, including Pebble Limited Partnership, the investment group behind the proposed multi-billion dollar copper and gold mine, accuse the government of using “junk science” to sabotage the deal.
“Rather than allowing the filing of a mining permit application, the EPA employees secretly plotted with environmental activists to undermine the ability of land owners to objectively evaluate and develop the proposed mining of the Pebble deposit … and thereby establishing a precedent that will have long-term harmful impacts on investment and job creation in the United States,” Pebble Partnership wrote in an April 29-dated letter to the EPA.
The letter also accuses the EPA of misusing taxpayer money to “create a flawed, junk science laden report, called the Bristol Bay Assessment, designed to negatively influence government, financial markets, and public policy.”
Pebble Partnership has said the mine deposit is one of the largest of its kind in the world, with the potential of producing 80.6 billion pounds of copper and 107.4 million ounces of gold over decades.
In February, the EPA announced it was taking the first steps toward restricting the development of the mine, citing concern for a premier sockeye salmon fishery in southwest Alaska. The agency employed a rarely used veto process under the Clean Water Act that gives the government the ability to stop or slow the process.
EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy told reporters the EPA was working on how it can best use its authorities “to project Bristol Bay rivers, streams and lakes from the damage that will inevitably result from the construction, operation and long-term maintenance of a large-scale copper mine.”
Pebble Partnership CEO Tom Collier called the move an example of government overreach.
He told The Hill this week the project had “become the poster child for an expansion of EPA authority."
While the EPA process is underway, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is prohibited from approving a permit for the project.

Why Benghazi should matter to every American

The mainstream media declared the Benghazi story insignificant long ago. To the extent it is covered, the focus is usually on the horrific and unnecessary deaths of four Americans. The Obama administration dismisses it as a lot of fuss about a few silly talking points.
But everybody is missing the big-picture story of the Benghazi affair and its cover-up. It’s about the White House using the intelligence community for its own political purposes, and lying to the American public in order to win an election. It’s about abuse of power, and that is a big deal.
That’s why the administration cannot be allowed to investigate itself. That’s why it is time for Congress to appoint a special committee to get to the bottom of the story.

Benghazi is no longer just a political issue. It’s not just a partisan witch hunt. It goes to the heart of what our system of government is all about.

If it turns out that Benghazi and the cover-up were just a series of junior level mistakes, that is the end of it. But if it turns out the administration was using the military and intelligence communities for political purposes prior to the attack, during the attack and in a subsequent cover-up, it must be held accountable. Because once the precedent is set, future administrations will feel no reluctance to do the same.
America has the most powerful military and intelligence services in the world, probably in the history of the world. They have an infrastructure that endures separately and beyond any administration or politician. 
At the same time, the military-intelligence complex takes its orders from the American people, through their elected/appointed representatives in the White House and Cabinet. 
It’s a sacred trust at the heart of our Constitution, as set out in civilian control of the military. But it comes at a price – that our civilian leaders do not abuse that power and bend the military and intelligence communities to do their political dirty work.
The president doesn’t order the military to seize political opponents. He doesn’t order his intelligence community to lie about national security for political purposes. He uses the military or intelligence communities to protect the United States and our citizens, not to help him win elections.
That’s the heart of the Benghazi scandal and cover-up. The White House twisted intelligence to suit its political needs.
I was part of the Nixon administration during Watergate. I was a junior staffer on the National Security Council and helped keep the classified files. At the heart of the Watergate investigation was the president’s abuse of power – secretly using the intelligence community for political purposes and then using the intelligence community for cover when it became public.
It was a difficult time for the nation, and certainly for anyone in the White House. But it was necessary, especially in hindsight. It wasn’t just about a president lying to the American people. It was a check on the seemingly unlimited power of the president to use the military and civilian career government bureaucracy for his own political goals.
It is now incumbent on the congressional leadership to act. There have been countless hearings into Benghazi by numerous congressional committees, but none have had subpoena power to demand the paper trail, or to force government workers to testify about what they knew and when they knew it.
The questions at the heart of the Benghazi scandal and cover-up are specifically:
1. Did the White House fail to provide adequate security at the Benghazi consulate because it didn’t want to acknowledge that a terrorist threat remained, even though Bin Laden was dead?
2. Did the White House order the intelligence community to change its analysis so the president could claim his policy was a success,  rather than a failure, just a few weeks before an election?
3. And, finally, what was the relationship between an overzealous White House staff and the president himself? What did the president know, and when did he know it?
This is no longer just a political issue. It’s not just a partisan witch hunt. It goes to the heart of what our system of government is all about. That’s why it’s time for Congress to act and create a bipartisan special committee to get to the bottom of this, once and for all. 
That’s why Benghazi matters.

Benghazi Cover Up

GOP rep wants to cut funding for federal ‘paramilitary units’ after BLM dispute

A Republican congressman wants to crack down on the proliferation of armed law enforcement units within the federal government, on the heels of the standoff last month between supporters of Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy and a federal land agency. 
Both sides of that standoff -- agents with the Bureau of Land Management, and states' rights protesters who streamed into Nevada -- were armed, leading the BLM to back down for fear of violence. 
But Utah GOP Rep. Chris Stewart told The Salt Lake Tribune that the BLM doesn't need an armed unit in the first place. He's reportedly looking at ways to cut funding for what he calls "paramilitary units" and require them to rely on local law enforcement instead. 
"There are lots of people who are really concerned when the BLM shows up with its own SWAT team," he told the newspaper. "They're regulatory agencies; they're not paramilitary units, and I think that concerns a lot of us." 
The bill could apply to a host of federal agencies, including the BLM, IRS and others. 
FoxNews.com previously reported, followed controversy over a separate armed raid by the EPA last year in Alaska, that 40 federal agencies have armed divisions. This includes nearly a dozen typically not associated with law enforcement. 
The agencies employ about 120,000 full-time officers authorized to carry guns and make arrests, according to a June 2012 Justice Department report. 
Though most would expect agents within the Drug Enforcement Administration and the Bureau of Prisons to carry guns, agencies such as the Library of Congress and Federal Reserve Board also employ armed officers.    
Among those with the largest armed units are the Fish and Wildlife Service, Bureau of Land Management and Park Service. 
A BLM spokeswoman told the Tribune that the BLM and Park Service had law enforcement on the scene in Nevada to ensure safety -- and that, with just 300 officers covering millions of acres of public land, they already coordinate with local law enforcement. 
But Stewart says they should be able to rely on the local sheriff in these types of incidents. 
Other lawmakers, though, are focusing more on the armed militia members who showed up to protest agents taking Bundy's cattle over a grazing fee dispute. 
KLAS-TV in Las Vegas reported that Sgt. Tom Jenkins, of the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, said officers were concerned for their lives. 
"We didn't show any fear that day, but I can tell you, we all thought in the back of our minds, we all thought it was going to be our last day on earth, if it went bad," he reportedly said.

'Anti-Islam' Filmmaker Blamed for Benghazi Attacks Vows to Finish Controversial Movie

By Stoyan Zaimov, Christian Post Reporter

June 11, 2013|1:41 pm

The filmmaker behind the controversial "Innocence of Muslims" film, the trailer for which was initially blamed for the violence that led to four Americans being killed at the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, in September 2012, has said that he is not anti-Muslim and wants to finish up his movie. His mission is to fight terrorism.
"It is not [a] religion movie," Nakoula Basseley Nakoula shared with Fox News. "I have a lot of Muslim friends and not all the Muslims believe in the terrorism culture. Some of them believe in this culture. That's why we need to fight [against] the culture, not the Muslims. My enemy is the terrorism culture; this is my enemy."
In September 2012, Muslim extremists stormed the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, killing U.S. Ambassador to Libya J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans. After Anti-American protests ranged in front of other Western embassies in the Middle East, reports came out linking a trailer for "Innocence of Muslims" as a motive behind the attacks.
The movie, which apparently depicts the Prophet Muhammad "as a child of uncertain parentage, a buffoon, a womanizer, a homosexual, a child molester and a greedy, bloodthirsty thug," was financed partially by an Israeli-American real estate developer in California, who said that he raised $5 million from 100 Jewish donors to make the film, and called Islam a "cancer."
The Obama administration initially singled out the film for the hostilities aimed at the U.S. embassies, but then admitted that terrorist attacks were behind the violence. Nakoula, a Coptic Christian born in Egypt who came to the U.S. in 1984, was sentenced last November to one year in prison for lying to his probation officer and using fake names in the production of the film. The filmmaker, who must also serve another four years of supervised release following his prison term, insisted that he is going to finish up the film.
"I am the blood voice for everybody who gets killed, or hurt, in this culture," the filmmaker said. "I dedicate my life to fight with this culture … I'm never afraid."

Follow us Get CP eNewsletter ››

Nakoula continued, "Of course I'm proud of it. If I could go back, I would do it again. Everybody gets hurt in this culture. We need the world free of this culture. We have to fight it."
The Egyptian-born man thanked the U.S. government for protecting him following the scandal surrounding the film, revealing that they have treated him "very good." Nakoula added he is "sorry to everybody" who got harmed during the wave of violence in September 2012, especially the Americans who died in Benghazi.

 

White House on defense over new Benghazi emails, claims controversial ‘prep call’ not about attack

The White House found itself on defense Wednesday following the release of emails tying a top aide to former U.N. ambassador Susan Rice's controversial Sunday show statements after the Benghazi terror attack. 
During those interviews, Rice erroneously blamed the attack on protests over an anti-Islam film. New emails indicate a White House adviser helped prep her for those appearances and pushed the "video" explanation -- and now, the White House is facing credibility questions after having downplayed their role in Rice's "talking points." 
During a heated briefing with reporters Wednesday afternoon, Press Secretary Jay Carney repeatedly tried to claim that the so-called "prep call" with Rice -- as it was described in one email -- was not about Benghazi. The prep session, he said, was just about the demonstrations elsewhere in the Muslim world that week.   
"It is not about Benghazi -- it is about the protests around the Muslim world," Carney claimed. 
The White House has said all along that Rice relied on the best available intelligence, from the intelligence community, when she discussed the Benghazi attack. 
But the documents obtained and released by conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch, as part of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, included a Sept. 14, 2012, email from White House aide Ben Rhodes, an assistant to the president and deputy national security adviser for strategic communications. 
The Rhodes email, with the subject line: "RE: PREP Call with Susan: Saturday at 4:00 pm ET," was sent to a dozen members of the administration's inner circle, including key members of the White House communications team such as Carney. 
In the email, Rhodes specifically draws attention to the anti-Islam Internet video, without distinguishing whether the Benghazi attack was different from protests elsewhere. 
The email lists the following two goals, among others: 
"To underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure of policy." 
"To reinforce the President and Administration's strength and steadiness in dealing with difficult challenges." 
Republican critics, who have long claimed the administration's narrative was politically motivated, pointed to that email as a "smoking gun." 
But Carney insisted that the Rhodes email was distinct from the intelligence community talking points in that it referred to preparing Rice for questions about the protests elsewhere. 
"They were about the general situation in the Muslim world," Carney said, going so far as to read headlines from stories at the time that highlighted those protests -- underscoring that they were a big news story at the time. 
He declined to answer directly when asked if the White House would correct the record regarding statements downplaying its role in the talking points. He did acknowledge what was evident from the Rhodes email -- that "the White House had a role in that document, obviously."
House speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, issued a statement Wednesday night saying, “Four Americans lost their lives in Benghazi, and this White House has gone to extraordinary lengths to mislead, obstruct, and obscure what actually took place.
 During the week of the Benghazi attack, protests had broken out by U.S. embassies in several countries in Africa and the Middle East, including intense demonstrations in Cairo. But by the time of Rice's Sunday show appearances, the death of a U.S. ambassador and three other Americans in Benghazi was the dominant story -- Carney faced skepticism in the briefing room in claiming that the Rhodes email was not referring, at least in large part, to that. 
Further, the document sent to Judicial Watch was released in response to a request for records pertaining to Benghazi. 
And the same memo was sent to the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, likewise, following a subpoena seeking Benghazi documents. 
"If this is not a smoking gun, proving beyond any doubt, the story told by the administration about Benghazi was politically motivated and fabricated, nothing will ever prove that," Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said. 
On the heels of the email release, Rep. Frank Wolf, R-Va., renewed his call for a select committee to be established to investigate. He wrote House Speaker John Boehner a letter saying "it is now abundantly clear that senior White House staff were directly involved in coordinating the messaging in response to the Benghazi attacks and were actively working to tie the reason to the infamous Internet video." 
The "video" explanation, though, was not only coming from the White House. Late on Sept. 11, 2012, when the attack was still going on, Hillary Clinton's State Department issued a statement that read: "Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to an inflammatory material posted on the internet. ... let me be clear: There is never any justification for violent acts of this kind." 
Fox News' Catherine Herridge contributed to this report.