Tom DeLay claims the FBI is ‘ready to indict’ Hillary Clinton and will go public if charges are not pursued
The disgraced former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay had some interesting comments to make about the FBI’s criminal investigation into Hillary Clinton’s email scandal today. He made the claim that the FBI is “ready to indict” Hillary Clinton and that if the Department of Injustice does not follow the recommendation some members of the FBI is “going public” with this during the campaign.
Here is more:
The FBI is ready to indict Hillary Clinton and if its recommendation isn’t followed by the U.S. attorney general, the agency’s investigators plan to blow the whistle and go public with their findings, former U.S. House Majority leader Tom DeLay tells Newsmax TV.
“I have friends that are in the FBI and they tell me they’re ready to indict,” DeLay said Monday on “The Steve Malzberg Show.”
“They’re ready to recommend an indictment and they also say that if the attorney general does not indict, they’re going public.”
“One way or another either she’s going to be indicted and that process begins, or we try her in the public eye with her campaign. One way or another she’s going to have to face these charges.”
The left is sure to claim that Tom DeLay is not a credible source–and honestly I do not know if he is–because he was convicted on corruption charges for violating election laws but of course they will forget his conviction was overturned and he was acquitted of the charges. His past has no bearing on Hillary Clinton’s future because if what he is saying is true and he does have friends in the FBI who are in the know this could pose a real problem for Hillary Clinton even if the Injustice Department does not pursue charges.
Unless the rift between the Obama’s and the Clinton’s is as real as many of us believe it is it would seem highly unlikely that the rogue agency would indict Hillary Clinton, but even if they do not this story is not going to go away before the 2016 election and it could lead wavering Democratic voters to decide Bernie Sanders is a safer option.
malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium
Yesterday vs Today: Donald Trump on the establishment
Most of Donald Trump’s popularity has to do with the fact that many people are upset with the establishment politicians in Washington and I share their frustrations if not their candidate. However recently Donald Trump made some statements when attacking Ted Cruz that I believe should have thrown up red flags with his supporters when he said that the Senator from Texas was a “nasty guy” and that nobody in the Congress liked him.
If it is true that nobody in the Congress likes Ted Cruz it is because he has gone against the establishment on several occasions so these seemed like strange comments coming from somebody who is promising to take on the establishment.
And then just a couple of days ago Donald Trump made the claim that “serious establishment types” were contacting him looking to join his campaign. Again, if true, one has to wonder exactly how anti-establishment Donald Trump is. He also made the claim that you have to be a little establishment to get things done in Washington.
So after making those comments just a couple of days ago imagine my surprise when I saw this new Donald Trump anti-establishment video today:
January 24th open thread: Pick Yourself Up
Here is the open thread for Sunday, January 24th. Please feel free to post links to interesting articles and to discuss whatever issues arise during the course of the day. Nothing is off-topic here.
Last week we covered 11 stories, did you miss any of them? If so there is an easy way to make sure it does not happen again. I understand that all of you are busy and cannot always find the time to check the blog for updates so why not subscribe to America’s Watchtower and receive email updates whenever I write a new post? That is the easiest way to follow the blog to ensure you never miss another post.
In addition to subscribing you can also follow America’s Watchtower on Facebook and Twitter by clicking the links on the right. But you will get more than that for I often post links to articles I probably will not be writing about so it is a great way to keep up with what is happening.
The Twitter widget in the sidebar is fully interactive. This widget updates my tweets in real time and allows you to respond to or retweet my tweets right from the blog. It also allows you to tweet me right from America’s Watchtower. How cool is that! If you do not have a Twitter account what better reason do you need to sign up for one!
Now onto the musical selection: A couple of times in the past I had thought about posting a video of one of my guilty pleasures in the open thread only to back out at the last minute, but in the comments section of last week’s open thread Lou tricked me 🙂 into revealing that little secret so this week I have decided to reveal it to anyone who missed that exchange.
My family knows that I am a huge Fred Astaire fan and that I own every musical he was ever in, but until now I have kept this knowledge hidden from everyone else. Today the veil is lifted, here is Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers performing “Pick Yourself Up” from the movie “Swing Time.”
In this scene Fred Astaire pretends that he does not know how to dance in order to get a free dance lesson from his love interest Ginger Rogers. After purposely stumbling his way through the lesson they go into “Pick Yourself Up” and then she tries to teach Fred Astaire how to dance again. Fred Astaire stumbles again which leads Ginger Rogers to declare she cannot teach him how to dance. The owner of the studio hears this and fires Ginger Rogers. Fred Astaire then shows the owner of the studio how much Ginger Rogers has “taught” him to the amazement of both the studio owner and Ginger Rogers. In this humorous scene Fred Astaire puts his hand up every time he dances by the owner as if to say “can you believe this?” She is immediately hired back.
You Tube did not have the scene in its entirety so the first video has the song while the second video has the dance, enjoy:
frui diem
Some of Hillary Clinton’s emails were so sensitive that members of the Oversight Committee could not review them
Hillary Clinton has made the claim over and over again while on the campaign trail that she never sent nor received sensitive information on her personal email server while she was Secretary of State. This claim is laughable on its face considering the fact she conducted ALL State Department business on her homebrew email server because it would mean she was never involved in any sensitive communications while she was Secretary of State. And if this is true it would mean she only held the position of Secretary of State in name only and her tenure as Secretary of State was just a resume enhancer with no real responsibility attached to it and nobody believes that to be the truth.
However we know this is a lie because she did in fact transmit information which was above top secret, and on top of that she also transmitted at least one email which contained information about a spy working undercover in the field.
But be that as it may her supporters still claim, despite the fact the FBI is conducting a criminal investigation into the possibility that Hillary Clinton mishandled classified information, that this is nothing more than a continuance of the vast right-wing conspiracy which haunted her husband when he was President.
Despite the left’s claim that “there is no there there” it turns out, if this story is true, that the members of the Oversight Committee who are investigating Hillary Clinton’s email scandal had to have their security clearances upgraded in order to read her emails. Here is more:
Michael Bloomberg is ‘seriously considering’ a third party run for President in 2016
The country is almost split down the middle in terms of politics and as such the race for the Presidency is likely to be close no matter who the nominees are. If a person with both name recognition and money was able to mount a third party candidacy is could throw the election results into disarray and effect the outcome of the election. But is there such a candidate out there?
According to this story there just might be, it appears as if former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg is now “seriously considering” a run for the Presidency as an Independent. Here is more:
Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg is seriously considering a run for president and is asking aides to explore a potential bid.
Mr. Bloomberg, 73 years old, has long contemplated a run at the White House. But the unlikely rise and continued strength of Donald Trump, along with polls suggesting Hillary Clinton’s campaign may be flagging, have driven the billionaire businessman closer than ever before to entering the race, a close adviser said Saturday.
Eyeing a potential opening for the first time, Mr. Bloomberg has retained a consultant to help him run on the independent ballot in state primaries. He has commissioned polls to test his path to victory. And he has directed the close circle of advisers who worked for him as mayor and have remained by his side over the past two years since he left office to begin mapping out a blueprint for a run, one adviser said.
That adviser said the former mayor has been upset by what he sees as extremist rhetoric from Republicans in the race, as well as a leftward turn from Mrs. Clinton, who is fending off an unexpectedly strong challenge in the Democratic primary from the more liberal Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders.
The article goes on to say that his path to the Presidency “remains narrow and unlikely” however I believe it could have a big impact on the outcome of the election if he decides to run. Mitt Romney might have lost the 2012 election when a video surfaced of him saying that he did not care about the 47% of voters who would vote for Barack Obama no matter what.
This was spun by the mainstream media to suggest that he did not care about the poor but that is not what Mitt Romney meant. Mitt Romney simply meant that he should not focus on votes he could not win during the election, but rather he should focus on the 5% or so of voters who could be swayed to vote for him, he was right and that is where this Michael Bloomberg news gets very interesting.
If the 2016 election is as close as I think it will be, and recent history suggests it will be, a third party candidate who can gain the support of even just 5% of the vote could impact this election in a remarkable way. In my opinion most of the people who decide to vote for Michael Bloomberg will be Democratic voters and I cite the former New York City Mayor’s position on gun control as proof very few Republican voters will support him as President. This could be enough to hand the victory to the Republican nominee.
And there is another aspect to this story that I find fascinating; if Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton, and Michael Bloomberg are the three candidates on the ballot in November it will mean that all the candidates have ties to New York. Is it possible this could split the New York vote and hand that state to Donald Trump? If so that could be a game changer.
malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium
Video: ‘The Trump Tapes Vol. 1’
I understand that there are many regular readers of America’s Watchtower who are supporters of Donald Trump and those same readers know that I am not a supporter of his because I do not trust him. He is holding many positions in this election which are inconsistent with the positions he has held in the past and that leads me to question which Donald Trump we would see as President. Would it be the Donald we see now or the Donald of years gone by? I think this is a legitimate question to ask.
Here is a video entitled “The Trump Tapes Vol. 1” which I think all Republican primary voters should watch before they head to the polls. I think it is pretty damning:
Report claims Hillary Clinton’s emails included ‘human spying’ intel
Last week, in what should be a devastating blow to Hillary Clinton’s claim that she never sent nor received classified information on her homebrew computer network, as well as he Presidential aspirations, we learned that an Inspector General found the former Secretary of State actually had emails in her system which were “beyond top secret.”
But the news gets even worse if this story is true:
At least one of the emails on Hillary Clinton’s private server contained extremely sensitive information identified by an intelligence agency as “HCS-O,” which is the code used for reporting on human intelligence sources in ongoing operations, according to two sources not authorized to speak on the record.
Both sources are familiar with the intelligence community inspector general’s January 14 letter to Congress, advising the Oversight committees that intelligence beyond Top Secret — known as Special Access Program (SAP) — was identified in the Clinton emails, as well the supporting documents from the affected agencies that owned the information and have final say on classification.
According to a December 2013 policy document released by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence: This designation “is used to protect exceptionally fragile and unique IC (intelligence community) clandestine HUMINT operations and methods that are not intended for dissemination outside of the originating agency.”
Gunrunner: .50 caliber rifle found at El Chapo’s hideout linked to Fast and Furious
Eric Holder once said that weapons linked to Fast and Furious would continue to turn up at crime scenes for years to come and unfortunately that is most likely the truth because that was the plan all along. The Obama regime wanted these weapons to turn up at crime scenes in order to prove the 90% lie, they just did not want them to be linked back to the government.
And now the BATF has traced a .50 caliber rifle found at drug lord El Chapo’s hideout back to the disastrous Fast and Furious gunrunning scheme, here is more:
New poll shows Bernie Sanders up by 27 points over Hillary Clinton in New Hampshire
Hillary Clinton is in big trouble here in New Hampshire: every time a new poll comes out in the Granite State it shows Bernie Sanders’ lead over the former Secretary of State growing and now the latest poll has him up by 27 points.
Here is more:
Bernie Sanders’ lead over Hillary Clinton in New Hampshire is on the rise, with the Vermont senator leading the former secretary of state by 27 points, 60% to 33%, a new CNN/WMUR poll has found.
The new poll, mostly conducted before Sunday night’s debate, found Sanders’ support has grown by 10 points since a late-November/early December CNN/WMUR poll, which found Sanders holding 50% to Clinton’s 40%.
It appears all but certain at this late date that Hillary Clinton is going to lose the New Hampshire primary and it could be a route. The only question at this point is, will Bernie Sanders be able to parlay this result into victories in any of the states that follow and if the latest national poll is any indication it would appear as if Hillary Clinton could be ripe for the picking.
malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium
Gunrunner: Federal Judge rejects Barack Obama’s defense for withholding Fast and Furious documents by Executive Privilege
When it appeared as if the investigation into Fast and Furious was getting too close to comfort for then Attorney General Eric Holder he ran to Barack Obama and requested he seal the documents using Executive Privilege. Barack Obama quickly obliged him.
Today a Federal judge rejected Barack Obama’s defense for withholding Fast and Furious documents, here is more:
A federal judge has rejected President Barack Obama’s assertion of executive privilege to deny Congress access to records pertaining to Operation Fast and Furious, a gunrunning probe that allegedly allowed thousands of weapons to flow across the border into Mexico.
U.S. District Court Judge Amy Berman Jackson ruled Tuesday that the Justice Department’s public disclosures about its response to the so-called “gun walking” controversy undercut Obama’s executive privilege claim.
“There is no need to balance the need against the impact that the revelation of any record could have on candor in future executive decision making, since any harm that might flow from the public revelation of the deliberations at issue here has already been self-inflicted,” Jackson wrote. “The Department itself has already publicly revealed the sum and substance of the very material it is now seeking to withhold. Since any harm that would flow from the disclosures sought here would be merely incremental, the records must be produced.”
America's Watchtower 