if hillary's private emails & server would exonerate her from all violation of the law, and further & lower skulduggery, (such as treason, for instance), she would publish them.
they will not, rather they will provide overwhelming complicity in all kinds of things. that's why she attempted to hide them.
caption: tip of the old hat to carolyn e. no, i don't know when "ce" sleeps, she is on this kinda stuff instantly. she just pounces.
that's why she will not "publish." she cannot publish, as she would place the noose around her own neck.
she will not utter, "publish, and be damned." field marshall the 1st duke of wellington, sir arthur wellesley. http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/rear-window-when-wellington-said-publish-and-be-damned-the-field-marshal-and-the-scarlet-woman-1430412.html .
if she is to be hung, and she will be, it will be at the hand of others, and not her own.
john jay @ 03.11.2015
p.s. the libtards are abandoning ship on old, tired, fat & homely hillary.
his legal and political opinion? hillary's "private server" was illegal, illegal and a little more illegal, under the freedom of information act and under the official documents act. period. end of discussion.
when will the son of a bitch get his own severed head to carry around, to make abundantly clear his loyalty and allegiance lies with islam, and with africa?
i received the following email from russ h. and carolyn e., so kudos to them, and a tip o' the hat. i do not know to whom attribution is owed for compiling this photo compilation/essay, and if anyone does know, please inform me. all i can tell you w/ authority is that the credit does not lie w/ me, and more is the pity. many have shown the picture of the president flashing "the other finger," (and some are linked below), none that i can find put it w/ the severed heads.
this is what he supports. plain and simple.
so, i simply reproduce the email, below. but, not without this comment. the state department would be the natural agency within the u.s. government to be carrying on diplomatic and/or clandestine communications w/ the agents of islam, and even of i.s.i.s. would it not serve the purposes of a president of the united states who is muslim to have a private communications link w/ the agents of islamic terror, not sourced nor surveyed by the government, beyond the reach of observation? would not a server "owned" by a secretary of state be the ideal communications link to islam? this president of the united states is as computer savvy as any politician who has ever drawn breath. how likely is it that he did not recognize that secretary of state clinton communicated with him on her own private server? how likely is it, that this did not serve obama's purposes, as much as hers.
but, to the email, without further delay. all that is below is from the email.
i went to the link, and plenty beheadings there, but none of the pictures` shown below, sent to me in the email. they are such "busy little people", those terrorists, so there is no shortage of photos of people getting their heads cut off. as in all things, the muzzies are incompetent killers, which makes the death endured by their victims all the more horrific.]
Why did Barack Hussein Obama make the famous ‘One-Finger ISIS’ salute at the African Leaders’ Summit in Washington D.C.?
A photo taken at last August’s U.S.-African Leaders’ Summit in Washington D.C. might shed considerable light. It shows Barack Hussein Obama flashing the one-finger affirmation of the Islamic State to dozens of African delegates.
American Thinker The Associated Press took this astonishing photo as the African dignitaries joined Obama, who hosted the event, in a State Department auditorium for a group photograph. It was published in an article in Britain’s Daily Mail, and it was the only use ever of the photo.
The one-finger display is the distinctive Muslim gang sign (most notably the sign of ISIS): The index finger points straight up while the thumb wraps underneath and presses against the digital phalange of the middle finger. The remaining fingers are squeezed against the palm in order to highlight the extended forefinger.
ISIS jihadist with ISIS flag and one-finger ISIS salute
The extended finger is symbolic of the one-God concept of Muhammad and is understood by all believers to be a symbolic shahada, the Muslim affirmation of faith: There is but one God and Muhammad is his messenger.
Thus when believers stick their index finger in the air, they demonstrate they are partisans of Muhammad’s God concept. And they also affirm their belief in Muhammad’s claim he was the interface between God and man. They also demonstrate they are part of the umma, the exclusive transtribal supertribe of believers that Muhammad started 1,400 years ago.
With his forefinger in the air, Obama affirmed his membership in this tribe.
African dignitaries understood, and a range of reactions can be detected among the ones who observed the gesture: amusement, surprise, curiosity, disapproval, contempt.
Note the reactions of Abdelilah Berkirane, the prime minister of Morroco pictured just behind Obama’s left shoulder, and Ibrahim Boubacas Keita, the president of Mali in white garb and hat. They are Muslims through and through, and they are all smiles. They knew what Obama’s upright forefinger meant.
The reaction of Togo president Faure Gnassingbe, at the top row second to the left, is less approving. Through his face you can read the mind of this Sorbonne- and George Washington University educated leader. His mind is screaming, “You gotta be kidding!”
Faure Gnassingbe
Gnassingbe’s country is squeezed between Benin and the Ivory Coast and is not far from Nigeria and its Boko Haram plague — perhaps a two-hour flight in a slow Cessna from Togo’s capital to the Nigerian capital, less than an hour in something faster.
At the time of the Washington conference, Boko Haram’s leader Abubakar Shekau had just declared Borno State in northeastern Nigeria as the seat of his caliphate. Massacres of entire villages were taking place; only a few months earlier nearly three hundred girls were abducted from a Borno secondary school.
ISIS jihadist posing with severed heads in Syria
Togo has seven million people, 50 percent animists, 30 percent Christian. The remainder are Muslims, part of the umma. Gnassingbe and all other non-Muslims of Togo have reason to worry about radicalization of some of these members of the transtribal supertribe of Muhammad who reside among them. And so his look of disdain. “You gotta be kidding.”
Maybe it was Obama’s idea of a joke, but that is unlikely. The finger in the air was a position statement brazenly stated. His entire administration has been a promotion of Islam at home and abroad, and just cataloging the evidence would fill a book. He has made this country cozy for Islam, from ordering NASA to make Muslims feel good about themselves to calling ISIS beheading victim Peter Kassig by the Muslim name that he had adopted in the vain hope of saving his life.
If only Obama’s coziness were limited to such gestures, but from the very beginning of his administration, he labored to topple the strongman governments that had kept a lid on Islamic extremism: Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Yemen. Overthrowing the Syrian government was also part the program, not yet achieved but still possible.
The methodology of each was a tactic from old-school radicalism: stir up domestic trouble that triggers a crackdown, then use the reaction to discredit the government and as a pretext for stirring up greater cycles of trouble until the targeted regime is replaced.
Obama is comfortable with Islam’s extreme. He arms such people throughout the Middle East. He has let them into our government. He supported the Muslim Brotherhood’s Muhammad Morsi as the replacement for Hosni Mubarak, a staunch US ally and enemy of the Muslim Brotherhood, and threatened and bullied Egypt when a massive revolt replaced Morsi with a religious moderate.
The thread of all of these efforts was the reestablishment of the Islamic caliphate, the line of successors of Muhammad that ended nearly a century ago with the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. This has always been a Muslim Brotherhood objective. In their grandiose plans, the reestablished caliphate would stretch across the Middle East with Jerusalem as its capital.
The glory of Islam resurrected! These people aspire to world domination, and the caliphate would serve as the base for an ever-expanding war on the world until domination is achieved. That was always the goal of their role model. Muhammad ordered his followers to make Islam the only religion — to create a universal umma. As with Obama, they are just following orders.
There is nothing in Obama’s head that is American. He is an antithetical American, a polar opposite of its values that he is routinely undermining. He is an unabashed member of the transtribal supertribe that Muhammad created 1,400 years ago; he is of the umma, not of America. His finger in the air at the African Leaders’ Conference is unambiguous evidence.
hillary has thrown her stake on the table, all in, and defied law, legal process, and public opinion. stick a fork in her, she is done.
she has taken a magnificent gamble, because she has no other course, no other option. she is devoid of options. so has no room to maneuver, the law is clear, her actions are admitted. so, she has simply elected to go down swinging, which is her case, is to throw a hissy, fall on the floor yelling and screaming, and to kick her legs and pound her fists. and, to contort her face into an even more hideous effigy.
update, 03.11.2015. i am in good company. victor david hanson, though no doubt he is unaware of my views, agrees w/ me. he describes hillary's speech in his own inimitable way a bit more elaborately, and sedately, (no mention of spittle on the shoes) but comes to the same conclusion. she is all in, and all rests on her speech, and it doesn't/she didn't cut it. here, http://victorhanson.com/wordpress/?p=8279 . the end. for hillary. end update.
she told a news conference at the united nations that she will not hand over her private server, will not let anyone examine it. that is an extraordinarily arrogant statement from an obvious law breaker.
good for her. i want to be there, in the front row, for her public hanging. i hope the spittle as her neck snaps lands on my shoes.
please see, http://pamelageller.com/2015/03/defiant-hillary-at-news-conference-says-shes-not-letting-anyone-near-her-private-server.html/ .
hillary did not follow the law in dealing with information that should have been sent in protected & secured government channels, when she used her own personal computer to send information dealing w/ state department affairs, when secretary of state. in doing so, no matter the recipient, she sent the material outside of official channels.
well, as hillary might say, what damned difference does it make. well, this is what difference it makes.--
former four star general of the u.s. army, and head of the central intelligence agency, david petraeus has apparently filed an agreed statement of facts and a plea agreement in the u.s. district court for the western district of north carolina, according to adam b. lerner writing in the blog "special operations speaks."
he was charged in a one count indictment with " ... possessing 'documents and materials containing classified information of the United States' and 'unlawfully and knowingly remov[ing] such documents and materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents and materials at unauthorized locations.”
what david petraeus is pleading guilty to is exactly what hillary clinton has done. by sending any classified material from the premises of the department of state without authorization, via her private email to any destination or unauthorized location, she has done what pretraeus has pleaded guilty to in a criminal prosecution in federal court.***
it is as simple as that. in this case, it is tit for tat. whadda ya make of that, jack?
john jay @ 03.09.2015
*** a fuller account, also written by lerner, is found here at "politico" -- http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/david-petraeus-guilty-plea-report-115698.html .
update, 03.10.2015 . compare and contrast the media treatment of hillary clinton with that received by sarah palin. (hint: a reporter moved next door to gov. palin's residence in alaska, just so he could snoop in her garbage, and get gossip from her neighbors.) why are the media so deferential to the clintons, and so blood thirsty on sarah palin? well, i suppose it could be that sarah palin never had anybody murdered? who knows?
every email sarah palin made as governor, scrutinized and made public. the media will be unable to recover anything written by clinton, and neither will congress. hey, could it be that they are all in the same game, and on the same team? end update.
hat tip to carolyn e, who sent me the link to the following story w/ regard to hilary clinton's use of her private email for conducting the diplomacy of this country.
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/235077-white-house-obama-emailed-to-clintons-private-account . at "the hill," the article "clinton used private email address with obama," by jordan fabian this date. the gist of the story is that obama has not been forthcoming about the extent of his email contact w/ clinton over her private address.
fancy that.
we must ask a simple, obvious question, one not addressed by the issue that it is against our domestic law for clinton and obama to have used private emails when conducting governmental business.
and, it is simply this.-- is there an intelligence service of any country in the world that could not have hacked into clinton's private email service, and thence into obama's? is it conceivable that russia, china, iran, iraq, the muslim brotherhood, israel, england or any fair to middling intell apparatus have/has not known exactly u.s. intentions in foreign policy, politics and military strategy while clinton was secretary of state?
maybe we can ask putin if the dumb bitch really intends to run for president. he ought to know as well as anyone.
john jay @ 03.09.2015
p.s. my guess is that the only souls in the world who didn't crack clinton's email security were the congressional republicans, who seem clueless in almost everything.
http://www.aresdefense.com/?page_id=729 . this page gives a nice overview.
in issue 16 of recoil magazines, page 38, you will find an article entitle "the ares defense scr takes ar mags and ar uppers--and is new york legal," by peter palma. (you can also view the recoil web link above.) the article describes a rifle made by ares defense to be compliant w/ new york state law proscribing the legalities of semi auto rifles in that state. the authors conclude that the ares rifle is compliant with new york law, ... , as for myself, i am not so much interested in that topic, as i am with the fact that the new rifle is the spitting image of a rifle designed by melvin johnson in the late 1930's as a rival to the m-1 service rifle designed by mr. garrand, and as adopted by the u.s.a. as the m-1 rifle.
this is the ares defense rifle, the image taken from the web link given above. in essence, ares has fashioned a lower receiver compatible both, with the standard ar-15 upper with the substitution of a special bolt carrier group and mechanical link, and with the laws of the state of new york governing semi automatic rifles. (in the opinion of the recoil magazine authors, i pass no opinion on the subject.) the ares scr lower receiver, consisting of magazine well and fire controller system, e.g., the trigger. if you look with care, you will see where the strut/linkage from the bolt carrier inserts into the wrist of the stock, just like the johnson.--
caption: image from the "recoil" magazine website. the magazine well is pure ar-15, as in the captive pins used at the front & back of the receivers which secure the upper receiver when attached. the trigger group appears unique. and, finally, at the right bottom of the mortise cut for the trigger group, you can seen a round plug assembly against which the strut from the bolt carrier fits, and acts upon the spring. just like the johnson semi auto, model of 1941.
what ares has done is to put a mechanical strut on the bolt carrier, which passes down into the butt stock of the rifle to impinge on an operating spring contained therein. and, this is precisely the arrangement used in johnson's semi auto rifle, model of 1941.
the johnson was a "short recoil" operated rifle, meaning that the barrel and bolt carrier operated together in recoil for about 1/8" or so, at which point the barrels movement was arrested, and the bolt carrier continue moving backwards in recoil from the inertia imparted it by the barrel and residual pressures from combustion still remaining in the barrel. this is a bit different from the ar-15 rifles, whose bolt group is moved solely by gas pressures tapped off the barrel.
other than that, the rifles are extremely similar in function, (as is the ar-15 in general to the johnson semi auto rifle.) both rifles have multi-lugged bolts which engage in battery to a barrel extension fastened to the barrel at the receiver; both rifles have an upper receiver which detached from the lower receiver; and both rifles have the fire control system housed in the lower receiver of the rifle.
historically, the ar-15 bolt carrier has acted directly upon the action spring in the butt of the ar-15, with no mechanical linkage between them. now, with the ares defense contrivance of a mechanical linkage from the bolt carrier to the operating spring, this difference has been removed.
the johnson rifle was designed for the main battle cartridges of the day, to include the .30-06 springfield, and the 7x57mm mauser. the ares defense rifle is built around the 5.56mm nato/.223 remington cartridge, e.g., it has been downsized considerably to handle the smaller intermediate infantry round favored in today's battle doctrine.
but, given the design similarities, these two rifles may be regarded as father and son, so close are the designs. i am a big fan of the johnson, considering it a better design than the m-1 garrand. i think the ares defense scr is probably a better rifle in most respects than the ar-15/m-16/m-4 family of rifles.
i hope it sells. if i can figure a way, i will purchase an ares defense scr in .223, and would consider it superior to the ar-15 and the ruger mini-14, both of which i consider fine rifles. you can have your ak's.
john jay @ 03.09.2015
p.s. some photos, taken from the web.--
caption: an ar-15 of some sort at the top of the photo, fitted w/ a suppressor. beneath it, an ares defense rifle with a "standard butt stock." (and, if it looks familiar, say similar to the butt stock used by remington in the model 870 shotguns, and the 760 pumps & 740 semi autos, that is because it is one and the same.)
caption: this is a johnson semi auto, model of 1941 with a box magazine used to hold the cartridges. it is very similar to the ares defense rifle. in my opinion, this is very good, as the johnson was, imho, a very fine rifle.
caption: this is the johnson as more usually seen, equipped with a 10 shot rotary magazine that could be loaded via a gate just under the bolt, either with single rounds or with a clip, even while the rifle was charged and loaded. this is something that the m-1 garrand could not do, and as a matter of fact, the ar-15 cannot do to this day. whether or not this is a tactical superiority in the johnson as opposed to the other rifles of its day is a matter of some debate.
