Wednesday, March 11, 2015

No 889 "En mi opinion" Marzo 11, 2015

No 889 “En mi opinión”  Marzo 11, 2015

“IN GOD WE TRUST”    Lázaro R González Miño    EDITORhttps://blu172.mail.live.com/ol/clear.gif

Enero 20, 2017 FIN DEL DISPARATE
AMENPER: obama, irán y la Constitución de los Estados Unidos
Artículo de la Constitución de Estados Unidos II Sección 2
El presidente estará facultado, por y con el Consejo y consentimiento del Senado, para celebrar tratados, siempre que den su anuencia dos tercios de los senadores presentes;
Diccionario
Tratado |ˈtrētē|Sustantivo (pl. tratados)
Un acuerdo formalmente concluido y ratificado entre países.
El Presidente de los Estados Unidos NO tiene autoridad constitucional para llegar a acuerdos vinculantes "de caballeros" entre él y otras potencias.
Hay buena razón para esto - lo más obvio es que esto hace al Presidente un poder independiente del consentimiento de los gobernados.
Porque haciéndose un poder independiente del consentimiento de los gobernados se convierte en una institución en y de sí mismo se convierte en un dictador.  Para el dictador autoritario le es necesario e indispensable para mantenerse en el poder, que pueda mantenerse su propia ley (no la ley basada en el consentimiento del pueblo de la nación). Este hombre luego se convierte en la piedra angular de la ley y la estabilidad.  Entonces va contra todas sus leyes y todos los enlaces de hombres que le impiden mantener su poder autoritario político y económico.
Este es el cambio fundamental que Obama va a traer a Estados Unidos. Y nos mantendrá de rodillas.
 Los congresistas que envían una carta a Irán,  no "socavan" la autoridad de Obama, como los liberales nos dicen, ellos están ejercitando  su autoridad como representantes electos por el pueblo según los obliga la Constitución.
Los legisladores republicanos advirtieron a los líderes de Irán el lunes que cualquier acuerdo nuclear que hagan con el Presidente Barack Obama podría expirar el día que deje el cargo.
Los legisladores dicen un que un acuerdo sin la aprobación de la legislatura,  sería insuficiente e inaplicable, y han hecho una serie de propuestas destinadas a advertir a Irán sobre la constitución americana — como  que del presidente requiere permiso del Senado sobre cualquier acuerdo para ordenar nuevas sanciones o sanción contra Irán o incluso hacer una declaración de guerra preventiva.
La carta fue escrita el senador Tom Cotton de Arkansas,  veterano de la guerra de Iraq, que se opone a las negociaciones con Irán. Está dirigido a los "líderes de la República Islámica de Irán" y se presenta como una cartilla constitucional al gobierno de a un adversario estadounidense.
La firma del líder de la mayoría del Senado Mitch McConnell  de Kentucky está en la carta,  como la de varios posibles candidatos presidenciales.
La carta explica la diferencia entre un tratado ratificado por el Senado y un mero acuerdo entre Obama y, el Ayatollah Ali Khamenei de Irán.
Advirtieron los senadores: "el próximo Presidente podría revocar un acuerdo ejecutivo con el trazo de un plumazo, y futuros congresos podrían modificar los términos del acuerdo en cualquier momento".
El ministro de relaciones exteriores iraní Mohammed Javad Zarif respondió a medios de comunicación estatales, desestimando la carta como una "estratagema propagandística" teniendo en cuenta que muchos acuerdos internacionales son "meros acuerdos ejecutivo."
Claro que estaba hablando de países donde los dictadores ignoran la constitución.
Sugirió que los senadores estaban socavando no sólo el trato prospectivo con Irán sino así como otros acuerdos internacionales.
Este interés de Irán es una indicación de las ventajas que ellos ven en los acuerdos.
El movimiento de los republicanos para detener un acuerdo nuclear con Irán viene tan sólo unos días después el primer ministro israelí Benjamin Netanyahu habló a una reunión conjunta del Congreso a invitación del republicano House Speaker John Boehner.
En su discurso, Netanyahu advirtió sin rodeos a los Estados Unidos que un acuerdo allanaría el camino de Irán hacia una bomba nuclear.
Todo esto viene junto a las noticias que fuerzas armadas de Irán están tomando la iniciativa en los mandos del ejército de Iraq, tomando parte en las operaciones de guerra.
Lo que advirtió Netanyahu es que una victoria contra ISIS en que Irán tomara la iniciativa y controlará a Iraq sería una derrota peligrosa, no una victoria.  Sus palabras están tomando forma de profecía.
Irán dice que su programa es exclusivamente para fines de investigación médica y energía pacífica.
No dicen para qué entonces los misiles de largo alcance.
 La fecha límite para el acuerdo entero es julio.
En la carta, Cotton sus colegas hicieron hincapié en que los presidentes pueden servir sólo ocho años mientras que los senadores pueden permanecer en la oficina durante décadas. La implicación era que sin la anuencia del Congreso, el trato podría desmoronarse al sucesor de Obama ser juramentado en enero de 2017.
Pero por sí mismos, los republicanos del Congreso no serán capaces, en este momento, de bloquear un acuerdo internacional.
McConnell ha hablado de una acción más adelante este mes autorizando al Congreso a votar sí o no sobre un trato. Pero esa votación sería simbólica.
El tratado será aprobado en contra de la ley y la voluntad de los ciudadanos. 
Por eso es tan importante dejarse de diferencias ortodoxamente doctrinales y asegurarse que el próximo presidente sea una persona que anule el tratado.  Y eso sólo se logrará si el candidato demócrata es derrotado en las elecciones.  El congreso se mantendrá con mayoría republicana, lo que necesitamos es un presidente que no ejercite el veto de una acción del congreso y el senado, sobre el tratado,  y esto lo haría cualquiera de los candidados que aspiran a la presidencia por el partido republicano.
Es la única manera de mantener la geopolítica en jaque para no caer en manos de nuestros enemigos.

AMENPER: Privacidad muy conveniente
Tengo mis dudas sobre que pensar sobre los admiradores de Hillary Clinton cuando oigo sus declaraciones.   ¿Son completamente estúpidos? ¿O se hacen los estúpidos?-
Creo que esto es lo que sabe Hillary, ella sabe que no tiene ninguna oportunidad con nosotros, y que sus seguidores por diversas razones la siguen sin importarle lo que hace.
Únicamente se puede entender si esto es así, por la manera de que Hillary explicó porque uso un servidor privado de Bill para todos sus E Mail. Era conveniente tener un solo teléfono.  Empezar una declaración diciendo que el servidor sigue siendo privado diciendo que no se puede tocar, esto me parece que a cualquiera otra persona le hubieran dicho que si la vida de ella era pública como servidor público no tiene derecho a privacidad en cuestiones como estas. 
Por “conveniencia” no es una buena excusa en un secretario de estado. Pero privacidad si es conveniente en sus caso porque despues de todo que importa esto, ella es Hillary Clinton puede hacer lo que quiera, todo es legal porque ella es la legalidad.
Pero el problema que no es una excusa de ninguna clase.  Dice que así nada más que tenía que tener un solo teléfono.  Es un insulto a todos los que tuvimos que oír esto si yo hubiera sido admirador de ella también me hubiera sentido insultado.
Primero puedes tener un solo teléfono con dos o tres servidores de correos electrónicos, de hecho yo tengo dos AOL y el del negocio, y soy un comemierda que tengo que contestarlos yo mismo, por eso hay veces que se me han cruzado los cables y le he mandado E Mails equivocados a ustedes. Así que pudieramos decir de Hillary que tiene una corte a su disposición cada minuto del día.  Después, públicamente en una entrevista ella había dicho que tenía varios teléfonos entre ellos I Pod y un Blackberry.
Bueno, vamos a dejar que sea el editorial del WSJ el que les diga algo más sobre esto.

Clinton-Alt-Delete
Hillary puts on a 1990s revival show about her private emails.
Hillary Clinton ’s admirers say she’ll run for President in part by invoking the glory days of the 1990s. For a taste of that era, we recommend her brief press conference Tuesday explaining why she had used a private email account as Secretary of State. It had everything nostalgia buffs could want—deleted evidence, blustery evasions, and preposterous explanations that only James Carville could pretend to believe.
In the preposterous category, Mrs. Clinton explained that she preferred a private email account simply as a “convenience” because it allowed her to “carry just one device for my work and for my personal emails instead of two.” We know plenty of people who have two accounts on the same device, and they don’t even have a retinue of aides to help carry their devices.
To allow for such splendid convenience, Mrs. Clinton had to go to the inconvenience of getting her own domain name for this secret email on the day of her confirmation hearing in 2009, and then setting up a system to manage it. Her “one device” excuse reminds us of her explanation from 1993 that she had made a 10,000% killing on cattle futures by reading the Wall Street Journal.
The more likely truth is that she and her husband wanted to control how much of her communications at State would eventually become public—in case, say, she ran for President some day. And sure enough Mrs. Clinton violated State Department policy at the time by not turning over the emails in that private account to the government for its archives. She gave some of them to State only after Congress had requested them as part of the Benghazi probe, and State had none in its possession.
Asked on Tuesday why she didn’t turn over the emails from the start, Mrs. Clinton ducked the question and claimed “I’d be happy to have somebody talk to you about the rules.” She then added a new entry for the Clinton Ethics Pantheon: “I fully complied with every rule that I was governed by.” Just not the policy she was supposed to abide by.
The biggest news Tuesday was Mrs. Clinton’s disclosure that she has since destroyed the rest of the emails that she didn’t turn over to State. These were “personal” business, she averred, and “I didn’t see any reason to keep them.” They were about, you know, things like daughter Chelsea’s wedding, her mother’s funeral, and her “yoga routines,” and “no one wants their personal emails made public.”
Now, that’s what we call convenient. With those emails gone, and her private server off-limits to investigators, no one else will be able to see how much of that “private” business really was private.
Though Mrs. Clinton conducted both State business and personal business in her personal account, only she gets to determine what was really personal and what was the business of State.
Mrs. Clinton also asserted that “I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified material.” But the emails between a Secretary of State and others in government don’t have to be classified to be valuable to foreign hackers.
A simple report to the National Security Adviser about a conversation with a foreign head of state, or advice on how to approach a meeting, could be exploited against U.S. interests. If Mrs. Clinton’s email wasn’t hacked, as she insists it wasn’t, she was lucky.
The entire performance raised more questions than it answered, but if the 1990s pattern holds don’t expect any more explanations. The Clinton method is to settle on a defense and then hunker down unless some new information forces her hand. Maybe the emails will show up in a White House bedroom in 2018, like her Rose Law firm billing records once did. But until they do, the stonewall will be the strategy.
Which ought to make Democrats nervous. They’ve convinced themselves that only Mrs. Clinton can save them from a Republican government in 2017. They might want to delete that assumption and think again.


AMENPER: REFRANES ESPAÑOLES 
Nadie muere la víspera de su muerte.
Nadie es tan viejo que no piense vivir otro año.
Nadie se mira su moco, pero sí el que le cuelga al otro.
Nadie sería mesonero si no fuera por el dinero
Ni compres mula coja pensando que ha de sanar, ni te cases con puta pensando que ha de cambiar
Ni de malva buen vencejo, ni de estiércol buen olor, ni de puta buen amor
No comas judías cuando hayas de andar entre gente de cortesía
No comer por no cagar es dos veces ahorrar
No es macho quien tiene muchas mujeres, macho es el que se aguanta con una sola.
No es pecado ser pendejo, el pecado es no querer dejar de serlo.
No hables mal de las mujeres si te espera una en casa
No hay cosa más rica, que rascar donde pica.
No hay generación donde no haya o puta o ladrón.
No son hombres todos los que mean en la pared.
En toda aldea encontrarás perros con pulgas y casas con putas
Nunca falta un culo para un bacín
Nunca te metas con uno mas jodido que tu; porque se joden los dos.
Puede usar quien tenga en gana, su culo de palangana.
Puta en ventana, mala mañana.
Puta la madre, puta la hija, puta la manta que las cobija.
Puta primaveral, alcahueta otoñal y beata invernal.
Para ser puta y no ganar nada, más vale ser mujer honra(da
Mujer llorona, es puta o ladrona.
Los hombres más importantes, se miden por sus amantes.
Cabellos y virgos, muchos hay postizos
Caga más un buey que cien golondrinas
Chocolate y agua fría, cagalera a mediodía



AMENPER:  Dependencia de los Milagros…
Dependencia de los Milagros, este parece una versión de la virgen o el nombre de una muchacha latina, pero es simplemente la descripción de una situación que ocurre muy a menudo.  Las personas viven su vida esperando un milagro que le resuelva sus problemas.
Por eso la riqueza de Las Vegas y de la rentabilidad de las loterías.
Creo sinceramente que la vida es una serie de casualidades fortuitas, y todo lo que hacemos y todos los que nos encontramos están puesto en nuestro camino necesitan nuestra decisión, y esa decisión puede cambiar nuestra vida. Las decisiones  que tomamos pueden ser malas o buenas, y ahí está el detalle, lo que hay que hacer es que aprender de nuestras malas decisiones para no repetirlas y tratar de estudiar cada decisión para minimizar las malas decisiones.
 Lo que no debemos de hacer es llevar nuestra vida con una dependencia de lo que en inglés llaman “wishful thinking” o sea un deseo de nuestro pensamiento o un milagro de que todo sea como nosotros queremos que sea, porque ese milagro nos puede explotar en la cara y ser un factor determinante negativo en nuestro futuro.
Todos nosotros tuvimos que tomar una decisión difícil, abandonar nuestra patria, tuvimos que medir las consecuencias de irnos o quedarnos.  El factor del deseo de nuestro pensamiento, la caída de Castro, demoró a todos, pero a algunos más que otros porque dejaron que sus ilusiones empañaran la realidad.
El soñar con que nuestra única solución después que de una manera progresiva de lucha de clases se estableció la consolidación de la revolución comunista, fuera esperar que los americanos nos ayudaran a quitar al que el pueblo puso, no era muy lógico, no podemos depender de otros, porque cada país tiene que responder por sus propios intereses, y los gobernantes tiene que actuar según lo que consideren lo mejor para su país, no para el nuestro, y no podemos imponerles el deseo de nuestro pensamiento, pueden estar equivocados, pero no es una traición porque no tienen ninguna obligación para con ninguna otra nación como no afecte sus intereses nacionales.. 
Para otros, el deseo de su pensamiento que los mantuvo en cuba era el milagro de que el paraíso comunista iba a resolver todos los deseos de nuestro pensamientos el próximo año. 
Cuando las diferentes personas que por una razón u otra en el espectro político de Cuba, se dieron cuenta de que puede haber milagros, pero que la mayor parte de los milagros tienen que salir del milagro que Dios nos dio que es el sentido común, entonces era un poco tarde para recuperar los años perdidos, y su mala decisión había afectado el resto de su vida. 
Cuando abandoné mi patria lo hice porque en el 1960, después de Bahía de Cochinos, me parecía que estaba luchando contra mi propio pueblo, y es triste llorar cuando el pueblo ríe.  Ese fue un factor y un razonamiento de que el deseo de mi pensamiento no iba a ocurrir y que tenía que usar mi sentido común.
La mayoría de nosotros estuvimos esperando un deseo de nuestro pensamiento,  la victoria de Mitt Romney en las pasadas elecciones. 
Romney hubiera sido uno de los mejores presidentes que hubiera tenido la nación.  Pero no era doctrinalmente limpio para algunos conservadores.  
¿Pero que es un conservador?  Algunos que se dicen conservadores me lucen militantes revolucionarios.  Un conservador es el que quiere conservar los valores y el status económico, y sobre todas las cosas, amante de la libertad absoluta, y no creo que Romney pudiera ser acusado de no cumplir esos requisitos, como no lo es ninguno de los candidatos que se presentan hoy en día.
Un conservador no usa arengas y dogmas rígidos, porque la libertad absoluta es centro, el núcleo de conservadurismo.  Un conservador no puede ser dogmático, porque los dogmas y doctrinas impuestos esclavizan el pensamiento.  Un verdadero conservador mide cada situación de acuerdo con las circunstancias y toma su decisión libremente, no por una doctrina rígida sino por lo que decide que es mejor para la solución final que es tratar de conservar nuestros valores morales y económicos. Las doctrinas son para los fanáticos religiosos y las filosofías políticas de izquierda como el marxismo.
Por favor, recuerden como un mantra, no existen doctrinas conservadoras, existen personas con pensamientos conservadores.
  Algunos, como en el caso de cuando tuvimos que tomar la decisión en Cuba, tendrán diferentes maneras, diferentes puntos de vistas, pero como en Cuba al final lo que no queríamos era el desgobierno comunista, aquí lo que tenemos en común es que queremos recobrar los valores con un presidente que crea en la democracia representativa.
  Algunos candidatos reúnen las condiciones para que sean nuestros deseos de nuestros pensamientos,  Pero si nos ponemos a atacar virulentamente, como ya está pasando, al otro candidato, estamos dando municiones que los demócratas usarán contra el otro candidato se es el que se escoja en las primarias para la elección general.  Hay que votar por cualquiera, porque ninguno es cualquiera, todos son mucho mejores que el mejor del partido demócrata. 
Hay algo que los que tienen la responsabilidad en los medios de comunicación y en las asociaciones políticas conservadoras tienen que tener en cuenta.  La mayor parte del público está muy ocupado en su trabajo y sus diversiones para educarse políticamente, y es políticamente analfabeto, sobre todo entre los de nuestra comunidad que nunca supieron lo que era un sistema democrático en su patria.   Hay la tendencia cuando ven las luchas intestinas de sentir repulsión con la política, y deciden ignorarla, como nos pasó en Cuba. No se dan cuenta  que el que por ignorar la política no quiere decir que la política te va a ignorar a ti, y cuando se dan cuenta, ya es demasiado tarde.
Quiero creer que el que Romney no haya ganado no fue una casualidad, es una lección, si empezamos unas primarias dejándonos llevar por las emociones de los contrarios al elegido por los deseos de nuestro pensamiento, no hemos aprendido la lección y en vez de un milagro de nuevo viviremos una película de horror en el 2016.



EXPOSED: Undercover Video Shows Hillary Clinton Incriminate Herself Over Email Scandal [WATCH]

Just at the 3:30 mark is where you will hear Hillary Clinton confess it all, ‘Why would I use emails?’
CLINTON: As much as I’ve been investigated and all of that, you know, why would I—I don’t even want—why would I ever want to do e-mail?
Mr. PAUL: No, no.
CLINTON: Can you imagine?




BREAKING: What The Judge Who Blocked Amnesty Order Just Did Could Blow Up Obama’s Plan

This could expose a big lie told to the court...

NORVELL ROSE — 
The federal judge in Texas who blocked President Obama’s executive amnesty order is calling government lawyers on the carpet.
Judge Andrew Hanen late Monday ordered Obama’s legal team to appear in the judge’s courtroom to explain how and why they allegedly lied about what the government has already done with regard to granting rights and privileges to some 100,000 illegal immigrants.
Several days ago, Western Journalism reported that lawyers for the Justice Department had made an astonishing admission — that the Obama administration had misled the federal judge about actions already undertaken as a result of the president’s executive order on amnesty.
Now, as U.S. News & World Report tells us, the federal judge is none too happy and has just told government lawyers thay must appear in court on March 19th.
“The hearing is in response to a filing last week in which the government acknowledged three-year deportation reprieves were granted before Hanen’s Feb. 16 injunction, which temporarily halted Obama’s action, sparing from deportation as many as 5 million people in the U.S. illegally.”
The coalition of 26 states which had convinced Judge Hanen to temporarily block Obama’s executive amnesty charges that the government misled the judge about not implementing part of the plan before the judge halted it, giving the states more time to argue against the president’s unilateral action on immigration.
As Breitbart notes: “Government attorneys had previously said officials wouldn’t accept such requests under Obama’s action until Feb. 18.”
The Reuters news agency says that Judge Hanen had been asked by the administration to decided by Monday whether he would put on hold his previous decision to block Obama’s executive action. Instead of answering that administration request, the judge made his own demand of the Obama legal team.
Judge Hanen’s decision to block Obama’s amnesty oder was an initial victory for the states that brought the case alleging Obama had exceeded his powers by using his pen to let close to 5 million illegal immigrants stay without threat of deportation and also be granted Social Security numbers, work permits and possible federal tax “refunds” even though they had never paid income taxes.
Read more at http://www.westernjournalism.com/breaking-judge-blocked-amnesty-order-just-blow-obamas-plan/#GrjXVv5cyEq4PaUy.99


Scott Walker Punches Back Twice As Hard At Obama

“Despite a stagnant national economy and a lack of leadership in Washington, since we took office, Wisconsin’s unemployment rate is down... View Enlarged Image
Principles: If Republicans want to know how to respond to President Obama's barbs and attacks, they should pay close attention to what Gov. Scott Walker said after Obama smacked him for signing a right-to-work bill.
Obama, who believes that he should comment on anything and everything under the sun, issued a written statement condemning the law.
"I'm deeply disappointed," he said, "that a new anti-worker law in Wisconsin will weaken, rather than strengthen, workers in the new economy."
Obama then claimed that Walker's action was part of an "inexcusable assault on unions, led by powerful interests and their allies in government."
Clearly Obama needs to take a civics refresher course. After all, the bill that landed on Walker's desk was the result of the state's duly elected representatives' 62-35 vote in favor of it — and that after 20 hours of debate. In other words, democracy at work.
But what's really interesting is how Walker responded to Obama's tantrum. Rather than meekly taking Obama's blows, as most Republicans seem wont to do, Walker punched back — hard.
"On the heels of vetoing Keystone pipeline legislation, which would have paved the way to create thousands of quality, middle-class jobs, the president should be looking to states, like Wisconsin, as an example for how to grow our economy," Walker told National Review Online.
"Despite a stagnant national economy and a lack of leadership in Washington, since we took office, Wisconsin's unemployment rate is down to 5%, and more than 100,000 jobs and 30,000 businesses have been created."
Bam! In just two sentences, Walker shoved Obama's phony concern for workers back at him and pointed out that Wisconsin is growing its economy despite the flat recovery Obama's policies have produced nationwide.
Early in the Obama administration, when public anger over ObamaCare was rising at town hall meetings, Jim Messina, a top White House adviser at the time, reportedly offered Democrats this advice:
"If you get hit, we will punch back twice as hard."
Obama himself said during his first presidential run that "if they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun."
The problem is that Republicans too often pull their punches or just run away from the fight. It's unfortunate and unnecessary. When the GOP resolutely defends free-market principles as Walker has done, it wins. When they're defensive and apologetic, they lose.

http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/031015-742791-scott-walker-responds-to-obama-right-to-work-attack.htm


Iran Hawks See a Possible Conspiracy in Menendez Corruption Leak

A Democratic senator is hit with corruption charges. A Republican governor stands ready to replace the senator if he resigns. On paper, it's easy to imagine the troubles of New Jersey Senator Robert Menendez setting up a partisan power struggle.
That's not how the Menendez story is playing out. On Friday afternoon, after CNN broke the news that the Department of Justice was preparing a case against Menendez, conservatives openly asked if this had anything to do with the debate over Iran. Menendez, the ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, was wrangling Democrats for a sanctions bill that the White House had threatened to veto. 
Just days before the leak, Menendez was onstage at the AIPAC conference, winning ovation after ovation. "I am not intimidated by anyone," said Menendez. Now, to many conservatives, it seemed as though someone was trying to intimidate him. Bret Stephens, the Pulitzer-winning Wall Street Journal columnist, reacted quickly and succinctly.
Since, then plenty of pundits have repeated that sentiment, and leading conservative lawmakers like Ted Cruz have also weighed in.
How convenient was it that the key Democrat challenging the administration on Iran, a tough legislator in the final stages of getting votes for his bill, was hit with credibility-sinking charges. The question answered itself. The Obama administration, wrote Lee Smith in Tablet, "took a page from Michael Corleone’s handbook." In Iowa this past weekend, Texas Senator Ted Cruz openly speculated about a DOJ hit on Menendez. 
"The timing is curious," he told reporters. The charges raised "suggestions to other Democrats if you dare part from [the] Obama White House that criminal prosecutions will be used potentially as a weapon against you as well."
After a Monday morning speech in New Hampshire, South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham told Bloomberg Politics that the Menendez allegations did not sit right with him.
"All I can say is, they were leaked," Graham said. "He wasn't actually charged officially. They leaked the fact that he may be charged, is gonna be charged. I hate it when that happens for anybody. I like Bob. Like everybody else, he's innocent until proven guilty. He's been a champion on the Iranian nuclear issue. It just doesn't smell right."
Asked if he thought there was political pressure on the DOJ to embarrass Menendez, Graham said he didn't know. "I just know that leaking a potential indictment now–leaking it all, he doesn't deserve that," he said. "No American deserves that. Reading in the paper that you're going to be indicted, that's not how the system works. I'm just disgusted with the whole process."
Reached Monday morning, the Justice Department declined to comment.
Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/menendez-iran-conspiracy-charges/2015/03/09/id/629040/#ixzz3U0IBKTiL 
Urgent: Rate Obama on His Job Performance. Vote Here Now!


Benghazi chairman insists Clinton must testify twice

COWBOY BYTE —
Created more questions than answers is typical of Hillary.
Check it out:
The chairman of the House panel investigating the 2012 terrorist attacks in Benghazi, Libya, wants Hillary Clinton to testify “at least twice,” citing comments she made at her Tuesday news conference about her use of a private email account while secretary of State.
Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) said in a statement following Clinton’s Tuesday press conference at the United Nations that she had “created more questions than answers.”
The first appearance “will be to clear up her role and resolve issues surrounding her exclusive use of personal email to conduct official business,” according to Gowdy. “This is necessary to establish our Committee has a complete record with respect to Secretary Clinton’s time in office.”
Read more at http://cowboybyte.com/37199/benghazi-chairman-insists-clinton-must-testify-twice/


Will Obama Make Cuts to Social Security This Year?

Newsmax.com
Newsletters
To: LazaroRGonzalez@hotmail.com

Dear Newsmax Reader:
Please find below a message from our advertising sponsor, Mike Cottet, Director, Stansberry Research. Our email report is a free service to you with the help of our sponsors. The products, views, and offerings made by advertisers are not necessarily endorsed by Newsmax.com.
Newsmax.com

Dear Reader,

Last year, President Obama was in the news for proposing massive cuts to Social Security.

His proposals involved “eliminat[ing] aggressive Social Security claiming strategies”  that some Americans are using to maximize their Social Security benefits.

Most Americans don’t realize this, but there are real and proven ways to dramatically boost your Social Security payments. And these options are still available—because Obama’s Social Security cut proposals fortunately haven’t made it into law.

At least not yet.

For example, one couple named Ed and Mary used one of these strategies to earn an extra $750 from Social Security every month...

Another couple from Boston did something similar. They used a simple strategy that earned them an estimated $50,000 extra from Social Security in just four years.

Dr. David Eifrig, Jr.—a medical doctor and former Wall Street trader at Goldman Sachs and other big investment banks -- says there are several totally legal and easy ways to boost your Social Security payments. You just have to understand how these strategies work, and how to put them to use.

That’s why Dr. Eifrig recently put together a complimentary video explaining these strategies in detail, completely free of charge… No credit card, or email address required.

To learn the specifics on how to boost your own Social Security payouts, before Congress threatens to shut them down, go here.

Regards,

Mike Cottet
Director, Stansberry Research

P.S.  Remember, this is YOUR money. You paid into the system and deserve to get as much of your money back from Social Security as you can. There’s several 100% legal ways to do this. You just have to know how. And Dr. Eifrig explains it all, in detail, here.


White House Call Participants Want To Change ‘Thanksgiving Day’ To ‘Celebrate Immigrants Day’ By Executive Order

Susan Payne of Maryland participated in a conference call with Obama's White House.

A conservative political activist who participated in a conference call with the White House said President Obama should change Thanksgiving Day to a holiday dedicated to illegal immigrants.
Susan Payne of Maryland told radio talk show host Joe Miller on KOAN Wednesday this would be happening once this “amnesty mill” is complete. Miller was the Republican nominee for the U.S. Senate in Alaska in 2010.
Earlier this week, the House passed legislation authorizing funding for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security through the end of the fiscal year. Inserted in that legislation is a provision to proceed with President Obama’s executive actions on amnesty, a highly contested issue on which the president ultimately prevailed.
“Once this is all finished, there should be another executive order that changes Thanksgiving to ‘Celebrate Immigrants Day.’” Payne said. “I was about ready to blow my top when I heard that.”
The activist told syndicated radio host Mark Levin in a previous interview earlier in the week the call was hosted by Cecilia Muñoz, assistant to the president and director of the Domestic Policy Council.
Payne, a contributor for radio station WCBM in Baltimore, said people called in from various places in the United States including Chicago, Los Angeles, and Vermont. Her impression of the call, as she described it on the air Wednesday, was: “How can we make life better for an illegal alien? And basically kicking the citizen out to the curb.”
Read more at http://www.westernjournalism.com/activist-white-house-wants-change-thanksgiving-day-celebrate-immigrants-day-executive-order/#rdwDAKhC9Sw0e3h8.99


Clinton: Delete? Hard Drive Destroyed?

Mrs. Clinton’s emails were backed up on her personal server — not on a government one. But she argued that, because she had sent emails to “government officials on their State or other .gov accounts so that the emails were immediately captured and preserved,” she had complied with the rule. Mrs. Clinton did not address how emails she had sent to people outside the government had been preserved.
“Once the American public begins to see the emails, they will have an unprecedented insight into a high government official’s daily communications,” she said.
Mrs. Clinton said that the server that housed her email address had been set up on property guarded by the Secret Service, and that there had been no security breaches. She said she had never emailed classified material to anyone.
It is unclear if the emails were deleted irretrievably, and a spokesman for Mrs. Clinton declined to elaborate on how she had erased the correspondence.
“If the emails were on a server in her house and she deleted them, there’s a chance the emails could still be on the server’s hard drive if you forensically examine it,” said Chester Wisniewski, a senior security adviser at the computer security firm Sophos. “To make sure the emails are really destroyed, you would have to physically destroy the hard drive, which many companies and places like the Defense Department often do.”
Mr. Wisniewski said that if the emails were kept on a third-party provider, they were less likely to be recoverable.

Read more at http://conservativebyte.com/2015/03/clinton-delete-hard-drive-destroyed/



GOP Slams Clinton's Email Comments and 'History of Misleading' Americans

By Todd Beamon
Republicans Tuesday attacked Hillary Clinton's first public comments on her use of private email as secretary of state, saying that her refusal to make her server available for public scrutiny smacked of hypocrisy amid previous claims about transparency and raised serious questions about her judgment.

"The expectation that we merely trust that Secretary Clinton shared all relevant emails and that the process of vetting the emails was as thorough and unbiased as it should have been is insulting given the Clintons’ well-established history of misleading the American people," said California Rep. Darrell Issa. 

"This matter cannot be put to rest without a thorough forensic examination of the email server and an unbiased independent review of the records in question."

South Carolina Rep. Trey Gowdy, chairman of the House select committee investigating the 2012 Benghazi attacks, said the panel will now subpoena the former first lady for two rounds of testimony.

"Having finally heard from Secretary Clinton about her exclusive use of personal email with which to conduct official business while serving as Secretary of State, regrettably we are left with more questions than answers," Gowdy said. "Because Secretary Clinton has created more questions than answers, the select committee is left with no choice but to call her to appear at least twice."

Republican strategist Brad Blakeman described the remarks to Newsmax as "typical Clinton: avoid questions, parsed words.
"Conveniently, all the 'personal' emails that she deemed personal have been deleted — and she will not give the government access to her server.

"This is the Clintons bunkering down — and now, she'll send her attack dogs out … to try to blame this on Republicans," Blakeman said.

In a session with reporters after speaking to the United Nations, Clinton admitted that she should have used a government email account during her four years as the nation's top diplomat, as well as a separate mobile device for her personal emails.

Clinton, the presumed Democratic candidate for the White House in 2016, said that most of her correspondence went to employees using government addresses — and those were automatically preserved.

She added that she provided the State Department with all of her emails that could possibly be work related for archiving purposes.

"I saw it as a matter of convenience," Clinton said at a news conference that came more than a week after The New York Times first disclosed her use of the private account for official business. "I now, looking back, think that it might have been smarter to have those two devices from the very beginning."

Clinton has been under fire for the private email use and the server on which the account was stored that she kept at the family compound in Chappaqua, New York.

Republicans and Internet experts have raised security concerns and have attacked Clinton for possibly shielding important facts about her tenure from the public. Democrats are also wary that the party's likely presidential front-runner could be tarnished.

Clinton took nine questions from reporters — and she appeared to contradict herself over the personal emails.
She said in her opening statement that "I chose not to keep my private, personal emails," adding that "no one wants their personal emails made public."

But when questioned further, Clinton admitted that the private server "contains personal communications from my husband and me" and that "the server will remain private.

"I feel that I have taken unprecedented steps to provide these work-related emails," she said. "They're going to be in the public domain."

Mike Rogers, the former GOP chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, said that the decision whether the server remained private might not rest solely with Clinton.

"I'm not sure if she'll have that choice," he told Wolf Blitzer on CNN. "That will be the subject of probably a subpoena in the very near future.

"I think that's good for her," Rogers added. "I would think she would want to have a third party review that server and put that to bed."

Some Democrats supported Clinton's move to address reporters, but said the comments still raised concerns.

"I think she handled it well, but I do have to question: I have two email accounts and I only have one device," said Gabor Garai, a Democratic donor who is a lawyer in Boston. He raised about $50,000 for President Barack Obama in 2012.
Missouri Sen. Claire McCaskill said she believed the email fiasco will subside.

"I think when it’s all settled out, the American people realize this is a very anxious Republican Party," McCaskill told The Hill before the news conference.

"She’s going to take a lot of incoming over the next 18 months," McCaskill added. "But she’s strong enough and tough enough to handle it."

Maryland Rep. Elijah Cummings and four other Democrats on the Benghazi committee asked the State Department on Tuesday to release 850 pages of the emails Clinton turned over last year, Politico reports.

"Since the department has already produced approximately 850 pages of these documents to the Select Committee on Benghazi, we request that the department begin its review for public release with this subset of 850 pages of Benghazi-related documents in order to make them available to the public first without waiting for the full review of all 55,000 pages of documents," the Democrats wrote in a letter to the agency.

Other Republicans were not placated by Clinton's comments.

"Secretary Clinton would certainly like this matter to go away because it would be the most convenient scenario for her," said Utah Rep. Jason Chaffetz, chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. "Today’s press conference does not bring closure to this matter."

He added that his panel "will continue looking into this matter to ensure that all records were properly preserved in accordance with the law.”

Idaho Sen. James Risch, chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, slapped back Clinton's notion of using only one device for official and private communications.

"She talked about convenience," he also told Blitzer. "All of us carry at least two cell phones, at least two communication devices. That really isn't much of an excuse.

"If there's one thing you can predict about a Hillary Clinton issue, it will go on for a long time," Risch added. "Whitewater did. Benghazi did."

Michael Steel, a spokesman for House Speaker John Boehner, noted that the Benghazi committee had subpoenaed Clinton's emails last year. The panel received about 55,000 documents from the State Department.

"Secretary Clinton didn’t hand over her emails out of the goodness of her heart," Steel said. "She was forced to by smart, determined, and effective oversight. … The American people deserve the truth."

Regarding Clinton's subpoena from the Benghazi committee, Gowdy said that "the first appearance will be to clear up her role and resolve issues surrounding her exclusive use of personal email to conduct official business.

"This is necessary to establish that our committee has a complete record with respect to Secretary Clinton’s time in office," he said. "Our committee will then call her to appear … in a public hearing to answer questions specifically regarding Libya and the Benghazi terrorist attacks that took the lives of our four brave fellow citizens."

The assaults, on Sept. 11, 2012, killed Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans, including two former Navy SEALs.

"There's a difference between being cooperative and being truthful," Gowdy later toldGreta Van Susteren on Fox News, adding that the State Department had been cooperating with the select committee "up to a point."
Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus also called for oversight regarding Clinton's emails.

"Anything short of Hillary Clinton releasing her secret server to an independent arbiter would demonstrate that she’s not interested in being transparent with the American people," he said.

Blakeman told Newsmax that the debacle raised questions about Clinton's judgment.

"Not only to her judgment as secretary of state at the time, but her judgment as a would-be president: the fact that she exercised such poor judgment and control.

"This disqualifies her as a viable candidate," Blakeman said. "The problem for Democrats is that they've put all their eggs in one basket with her — and right now, that's all they've got."

The Associated Press and Reuters contributed to this report.
Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/GOP-reaction-Hillary-clinton-explanation/2015/03/10/id/629410/#ixzz3U5BP3R2r 
Urgent: Rate Obama on His Job Performance. Vote Here Now!



FORMER US AMBASSADOR: Hillary Benefited from Email Double Standard


The Clintons act like they’re untouchable royalty. Time for that to stop!
A former ambassador to Kenya who was fired when Hillary Clinton was in charge of the State Department on Sunday accused Clinton of benefitting from a double-standard when it came to using personal email for official business.
Scott Gration, a former air force general who flew hundreds of sorties over Iraq, spoke to CNN from Kenya about his disappointment at losing his “dream job” as ambassador, saying: “As I look back, it does seem a bit unfair.
“It does appear that there was a different standard that was used in my case and was used in hers,” Gration said.
Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell, meanwhile, said Clinton’s use of personal email could have represented a security breach.
“I am a little bit worried about the security of those emails, they could have been prime targets for a cyber attack,” McConnell told CBS. “I don’t know what the legal picture is.”
Republican congressman Trey Gowdy, who is leading a House investigation into alleged State Department mishandling of the 2012 attacks on US outposts in Benghazi, Libya, expressed concern that Clinton’s use of a personal email service would prevent his panel from obtaining key emails pertaining to the attacks.
“I don’t want everything,” Gowdy said on CBS. “I just want everything related to Libya and Benghazi.”



BOOM: Watch Lebanese TV Anchor SLAM Misogynist Muslim Who Told Her to “Shut Up”

This Lebanese woman doesn’t take crap from this sheik. Watch her rightfully put him in his place.
“Please don’t get all worked up,” Karaki says after telling the guest to skip over some superfluous historical background. “We respect you and know you want to give a complete answer.”
Al-Siba’i responds: “Are you done? Shut up so I can talk.”
But Karaki doesn’t shut up. Instead, she asks him how a “respected sheik can speak to someone like that.” When he refuses to comply and arrogantly asserts that he is respected whether the “woman” Karaki likes it or not, the host cuts his feed. http://clashdaily.com/2015/03/boom-watch-lebanese-tv-anchor-slam-misogynist-muslim-who-told-her-to-shut-up/



(????)PEAJES‏

Armando Lopez-Calleja
To: A Muller Su Bolog, Andrea Jueza del condado Wolfson, Anselmo Pastor Mesa, Armando López-Calleja, Barbara J. Jordan dist. #1 Vice Chairman, Blog de Letra de Molde gamial.com, Bruno Barreiro, Carlos A Jimenez Districdt #7, Chuet Miam Herald Rabin, Clemente Sanchez, David state Representante Richardson, deede Comsionado Weithorn, Demetrio Perez. Jr, Dr. Samuel UCP Yelins, Dr.eladio Armestol, Editor Periodico Esperanza, El nuevo Herald Periodicos de Miami, Elsa UVE Pardo, Emilio HOY Yahni, Enrique Artalejo, Frank Calzon, Gilberto Fco. Pastor Griiña, Graciela y Mario Gomez, Hector Legamet, J. Dario El Encanto Miyares Don Julio, Jaime la mega se pega Baily, Jany Crusero Gutierrez, Javier Souto, Joe Martinez, Jorge Gaston, Jose Antonio Colina Pulido Venezuela, Jose M Burgos, Jose M Izquierdo, Jose Pepe Diaz District #12, Jose Prado, Josefina Fonticoba, Juan 2 Amador, juan felipe, juan molerio, JUANTSANCHEZ@AOL.COM, Julio M. Shiling, La Nueva Nacion, Lazaro Daniel Gonzalez Valdes, Lazaro R. Gonzalez Mino. Editor “En mi opinión”
Outlook.com Active Viewhttps://blu172.mail.live.com/ol/clear.gif
2 attachments (total 63.6 KB)
Click for Options
Carta publica de los ciudadanos del Condado de Miami-Dade.doc
Click for Options
Alerta para todos los automovilistas que pasan por los Talls..doc
Add all to OneDrive
Los electors de las ciudades de Miami Beach, Miami,  y de las ciudades limitrofes, que usamos adiario estas autopistas, unos que vamos atrabajar en esas ciudades limitrofes y otros que vienen a trabajar a estas ciudades, asi como los turistas que se quejan del alto costo de los peajes y de la cantidad de puntos de control que produce un gasto excesivo a los bolsillos de lso usuarios quell estamos oblliados a corici;ar por ella, lo que nos hace mas vulnerables  economicamente, cuando todos sabemos que estamos en medio de una ya prolongada Crisis Economia, que no se le ve el fin a corto ni mediano plazo
Por lo tanto estamos solicitando que se cancelen, dos de los tres puntos de control  de la autopistaa 836 y que se rebajen las tarifas a $0.25 dolares para  el que permanezca  trabjando, de igual manera dejar uno solo en la auto;ista 112 de los dos que existen, que se eliminen los que estan en los acceso a las mismas.
 Ademas es abusivo el precio que se cobra por circular por la via rapida de la I-95 el cual debe ser tambien rebajado, quizas a $5 dolares y seguro que van a circular mas vehiculos
Todas estas medidas Deben permanecer, hasta tanto se realice una auditoria exhaustiva del destino  de estas abusivas recaudaciones=42%, lo poco gastado=24% y las enomres ganancias 72%, entre lo que se recaudaba con las instalaciones existentes en el 2008 y las construidas en el 2013, sin contar  la terminacion de los puntos de control que se terminaron en el 2014

Les estamos adjuntando el articulo "Carta publica de los ciudadanos del Condado Miami-Dade, (30 de Diciembre del 2014) enviada a varias personas para que recolectaran las firmas a todos los interesados, para que firmaran sus protestas, personalmente obtuve 305 firmas en solo 2 dias.
Tenemos que destacar la informacion que se dió por el Canal 41, en el noticieo de la noche,  sobre las mas de 40 personas que estan cobrando salarios mensuales, de mas de $100,000 dolares y que alcanaan al año unos $5 millones de dolares, algo que nunca se nos inform en los intercambio de mensajes que sostuvimos con esa comision.
Pienso que el Poder judicial debia interesarse en esta intrigante situacion

Ing. Armando Lopez-Calleja.-Miembro del CNP de Cuba en el Exilio y de la UCP  

Nota; Les adjunto el mensaje enviado a la Prensa, a los gobernantes del Condado de Miami Dade, Miami Beach,et. el pasado 4 de Agossto del 2013, "Alerta a los automovilistas que pasan por los TALLS. dando un llamado a todos para que estudiaran las reales necesidades de construir nuevos tolls y aumentar el precio del peaje, abusando siin necesidad la economia de todos los electors que pasan por esas autopistas.....Cierto

Existen muchas quejas sobre el aumento excesivo a los peajes y la construcción de adicionales aparatos electronicos de cobro de peajes, pero tanto los gobernantes elegidos como la prensa en general no informan al público la razón de haberse constítuido una Autoridad de Transito en Carreteras Condal (MDX) y la capacidad de determinar su funcionamiento recaudador y de inversión en construcción.
Anteriormente todo el dinero que se recaudaba por ese concepto se enviaba al Gobierno Estatal que lo repartía a partes iguales a los distintos condados, pero aunque Miami-Dade recaudaba mas dinero, recibía lo mismo que los demás condados, ahora ese dinero recaudado se queda en Miami-Dade. Lo negativo de esa entidad independiente creada por la Legislatura Estatal, para colectar dinero o sea impuestos por usar las carreteras, carece de miembros elegidos por los votantes, por lo cuál no temen ser revocados en sus puestos, solamente tener el favor de los oficiales que los nombraron. Varios ciudadanos han comparecido en programas televisivos, entre ellos el Arquitecto Civil, Sr. Armando López Calleja, que ha demostrado con cifras conseguidas de esa agencia gubernamental, que no era necesario esos altos aumentos debido a que existe un sobrante de mas de dos billones de dolares, además de tener un aparato burocratico extenso y exageradamente remunerado. Los ciudadanos de este condado debemos escribir a nuestros congresistas estatales para DEMANDAR que esos dirigentes sean elegidos por nosotros. 
J. Darío Miyares   Tel. 305-229-1062
9625 S.W. 24 Street, Apt. # C-114, Miami, Fl. 33165-8046


Sarah Palin: Hillary Should Have Followed My Example on Emails

By Andrea Billups
Sarah Palin says Hillary Clinton should have followed the former vice presidential candidate's example in releasing her emails publicly the way Palin did when she came under fire as Alaska's governor, The Washington Post reported.

Noting the irony, it appears Clinton was tracking with Palin who kept a state email account and then also created a Yahoo personal account, warning friends to use the latter, lest their correspondence became public record, the Post wrote.

"My NEW personal/private/confidential account will now be: gov.sarah@yahoo.com All other people will be emailing me through the state system at governor@gov.state.ak.us and that is NOT a confidential/private account so — warning — everyone and their mother will be able to read emails that arrive via that state address,” Palin wrote while governor. 
Regardless, such flouting of transparency in government earned the ire of at least one opinions editor at the Alaska Dispatch News, Scott Woodham, who slammed the "hypocrisy" of Palin, noting that "the erosion of public oversight and accountability is a direct threat to representative democracy," the Post said. It added that Palin, unlike Clinton, did not use one private account exclusively while in office.

Palin, in an editorial posted on the Fox News website Monday, said she had faced tough scrutiny over her emails, which were released in 2011. She thinks Clinton should, too.

"As Secretary of State under Obama, Hillary Clinton used private email accounts on a privately maintained server 100 percent of the time for 100 percent government business," Palin noted. "That's unethical, no doubt illegal, and flies in the face of all claims of transparency. Hillary Clinton and her staff weren't trying to be in compliance with the law; they were skirting it altogether. "
Palin joked about her own email scandal, writing: "The release of my emails was a great boon for Alaska's tourism industry because dozens of national reporters descended on Alaska to pour through tens of thousands of pages of my emails looking for some smoking gun. They even crowd-sourced the work out to the general public to help them look for dirt! They were sorely disappointed."

Clinton, on Tuesday, defended the use of private emails as a matter of convenience but agreed it might have been better if she had separated her work and personal correspondence, USA Today reported.

"Looking back it would have been better to use separate phones and two separate e-mail accounts," Clinton said, addressing the scandal publicly for the first time. "I thought one (mobile) device would be simpler. Obviously, it hasn't worked out that way."                              Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/email-scandal-Sarah-Palin/2015/03/10/id/629362/#ixzz3U5D1LGNY 
Urgent: Rate Obama on His Job Performance. Vote Here Now!


Wikipedia to File Lawsuit Challenging Mass Surveillance by NSA

Wikimedia Foundation, the nonprofit organization that runs free online encyclopedia Wikipedia, will file a lawsuit against the National Security Agency and the U.S. Department of Justice, challenging the government's mass surveillance program.
The lawsuit, to be filed on Tuesday, alleges that the NSA's mass surveillance of Internet traffic in the United States - often called Upstream surveillance - violates the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment, which protects freedom of speech and association, and the Fourth Amendment, which protects against unreasonable search and seizure.
The NSA's Upstream surveillance program captures communications with "non-U.S. persons" in order to acquire foreign intelligence information.
"By tapping the backbone of the internet, the NSA is straining the backbone of democracy," Lila Tretikov, executive director of the Wikimedia Foundation wrote in a blog post on its website.
"Wikipedia is founded on the freedoms of expression, inquiry, and information. By violating our users' privacy, the NSA is threatening the intellectual freedom that is central to people's ability to create and understand knowledge."
The NSA's current practices exceed the authority granted by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act that Congress amended in 2008, Wikimedia said.
"We are asking the court to order an end to the NSA's dragnet surveillance of Internet traffic," Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales wrote in an opinion piece in the New York Times.
Wikimedia and eight other organizations filing the lawsuit, including the Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International USA, will be represented by the American Civil Liberties Union.
Major U.S. technology companies suffering from the fallout of NSA's mass surveillance programs are uniting to shore up their defenses against government intrusion.
The NSA and the DoJ were not immediately available for comment outside regular U.S. business hours.
Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/SciTech/wikipedia-file-lawsuit-mass/2015/03/10/id/629230/#ixzz3U5E0VBwp 
Urgent: Rate Obama on His Job Performance. Vote Here Now!


POLITICSNEWS

What Difference Does It Make? Americans Are Paying Attention to Latest Clinton Controversy

Melissa Quinn / @MelissaQuinn97 / 
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton set social media on fire Tuesday afternoon as she addressed the press for the first time since it was revealed she used her personal email address to conduct official government business.
“I thought using one device would be simpler,” @HillaryClinton said of the email controversy.
The newest scandal involving the presidential hopeful is garnering the attention of not just those deemed the “political elite,” but Americans living and working far from Washington, D.C., as well.
According to analysis from Echelon Insights, a research and digital intelligence firm, Clinton’s controversy sparked interest on social media most among those considered “Beltway elites.” However, the issue was not lost among the general population.
In analyzing the top political topics in the week since news of Clinton’s use of a personal email address broke, most Americans using Twitter took interest primarily in Israel and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Netanyahu addressed members of Congress in Washington, D.C., last week. The Clinton controversy followed closely behind in interest.

Hillary: 'Would Have Been Better' to Use Two Email Accounts

Likely Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton said on Tuesday it would have been better if she had used a government email account and a separate mobile device as U.S. secretary of state, but said the vast majority of her correspondence went to employees using government addresses.
Clinton has come under fire for her use of a private email account for official business when she served as the top U.S. diplomat because of concerns about security and concerns that she shielded important facts about her tenure from the public.

Story continues below video.
"I saw it as a matter of convenience," Clinton told reporters during a press conference at the United Nations in New York in an effort to defuse the controversy over her use of a single mobile device and a private email account.
"I now, looking back, think that it might have been smarter to have those two devices from the very beginning."
Clinton, the presumed front-runner for the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination, said she had provided to the State Department all of her emails that could possibly be work related for archiving purposes.
She said she chose not to keep personal emails on topics such as her daughter's wedding.
Clinton said that her emails sent to government addresses had been automatically preserved.
Clinton tried to head off criticism last week by urging the State Department to quickly review and release her emails.
That was not enough to placate Republicans, who have questioned her transparency and ethics, and some Democrats, who are wary that the party's front-runner for the 2016 White House race could be tarnished.
Clinton's decision to address reporters reflects a calculation among her advisers that the issue was ballooning into crisis-like proportions. The story has dominated cable news for days.
The issue has complicated what has been seen as a clear pathway for the Democratic nomination by the former U.S. senator and first lady, who lost the 2008 primary race to Obama.
But the issue may not resonate with voters or with the donors who will be critical to funding her campaign.
Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/hillary-clinton-press-conference-today/2015/03/10/id/629250/#ixzz3U5GSD6xj 
Urgent: Rate Obama on His Job Performance. Vote Here Now!


 

Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)