Friday, August 19, 2016
Full Replay/Transcript: Donald Trump Gives First Campaign Speech Since Hiring Bannon & Conway
Tuesday, July 26, 2016
BREAKING: LIST OF THE TOP WORST EMAILS LEAKED WIKILEAKS
Monday, July 25, 2016
China Bans Internet News Reporting as Media Crackdown Widens
Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio
iHeart.SmythRadio.com
Facebook.com/SmythRadio
www.bloomberg.com
China’s top internet regulator ordered major online companies including Sina Corp. and Tencent Holdings Ltd. to stop original news reporting, the latest effort by the government to tighten its grip over the country’s web and information industries.
The Cyberspace Administration of China imposed the ban on several major news portals, including Sohu.com Inc. and NetEase Inc., Chinese media reported in identically worded articles citing an unidentified official from the agency’s Beijing office. The companies have “seriously violated” internet regulations by carrying plenty of news content obtained through original reporting, causing “huge negative effects,” according to a report that appeared in The Paper on Sunday.
The agency instructed the operators of mobile and online news services to dismantle “current-affairs news” operations on Friday, after earlier calling a halt to such activity at Tencent, according to people familiar with the situation. Like its peers, Asia’s largest internet company had developed a news operation and grown its team. Henceforth, they and other services can only carry reports provided by government-controlled print or online media, the people said, asking not to be identified because the issue is politically sensitive.
The sweeping ban gives authorities near-absolute control over online news and political discourse, in keeping with a broader crackdown on information increasingly distributed over the web and mobile devices. President Xi Jinping has stressed that Chinese media must serve the interests of the ruling Communist Party.
The party has long been sensitive to the potential for negative reporting to stir up unrest, the greatest threat to its decades-old hold on power. Regulations forbidding enterprise reporting have been in place for years without consistent enforcement, but the latest ordinance suggests “they really mean business,” said Willy Lam, an adjunct professor at the Chinese University of Hong Kong’s Center for China Studies.
Xi’s ‘Crusade’
Xi is cementing his power base and silencing dissenters ahead of a twice-a-decade reshuffle at next year’s party congress. Lam said that he "is really tightening up his crusade to silence opponents in the media."
The regulator will slap financial penalties on sites found in violation of the regulations, the Paper cited the official as saying. A representative of Sohu declined to comment on the report. Tencent, Sina and NetEase didn’t respond to messages and phone calls seeking comment. The cyberspace administration has yet to respond to a faxed request for comment.
The government is now considering ways to exert a more direct form of influence over the country’s online media institutions. In recent months, Chinese authorities have held discussions with internet providers on a pilot project intended to pave the way for the government to start taking board seats and stakes of at least 1 percent in those companies. In return, they would get a license to provide news on a daily basis.
Gray Area
China’s online giants serve content, games and news to hundreds of millions of people across the country -- Tencent’s QQ and WeChat alone host more than a billion users, combined. Online news services however have always operated in a regulatory gray area. They’re not authorized to provide original content and technically aren’t allowed to hire reporters or editors. Still, outlets have recently published investigative stories on official corruption cases, and covered sensitive social issues from demonstrations to human rights. For instance, NetEase ran a feature in April after the party announced an investigation into a senior Hebei provincial official, Zhang Yue. The story was later removed from the internet.
For a Bloomberg Intelligence analysis of the latest media crackdown, click here.
“Current-affairs news” is a broad term in China and encompasses all news and commentary related to politics, economics, military, foreign affairs and social issues, according to the draft version of China’s online information law. The amended draft of the regulation is currently seeking public feedback on the CAC’s official website.
The change in the guidelines on original reporting also comes weeks after China replaced its chief internet regulator. Xu Lin, a former Shanghai propaganda chief who worked briefly with Xi during his half-year stint as Shanghai party boss in 2007, succeeded Lu Wei in June as head of the cyberspace administration.
The regulator has since tightened its grip on online news reports, such as bywarning news or social network websites against publishing news without proper verification. In another sign that the government is exerting influence over information, the publishers of a private purchasing managers index suspended that popular gauge without explanation.
— With assistance by Keith Zhai
Before it's here, it's on the Bloomberg Terminal. LEARN MORE
COMMENTS
4 brutal poll numbers that greet Hillary Clinton at the Democratic National Convention
Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio
iHeart.SmythRadio.com
Facebook.com/SmythRadio
www.washingtonpost.com
Some audience members booed and chanted Bernie Sanders's name when Hillary Clinton was mentioned during the opening invocation at the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia July 25. (The Washington Post)
It's common for presidential candidates to get a bump from their conventions, and two new polls Monday suggest Donald Trump did indeed get that.
But the new polls don't just show Trump's stock rising (however temporarily that may be); they also have some very bad news for Hillary Clinton and her already-declining personal image. Indeed, politically, she's doing as bad as she ever has — if not worse.
A caveat at the outset: The GOP convention was, as was to be expected, very anti-Clinton. There were chants of "lock her up" and plenty of accusations lodged against Clinton. So it's perhaps not surprising to see Clinton's numbers take a hit. But they have been steadily getting worse for months and are now basically worse than ever before.
Below, four key points:
1) 68 percent say Clinton isn't honest and trustworthy
That's according to the CNN poll, and it's her worst number on-record. It's also up from 65 percent earlier this month and 59 percent in May. The 30 percent who see Clinton as honest and trustworthy is now well shy of the number who say the same of Trump: 43 percent.
You heard that right: Trump — he of the many, many Pinocchios — now has a large lead on Clinton when it comes to honesty and trustworthiness.
The CBS poll, for what it's worth, has a similar number saying Clinton is dishonest: 67 percent.
2) Her image has never been worse
CBS showed just 31 percent have favorable views of Clinton and 56 percent have unfavorable ones. Even in Trump's worst days on the campaign trail, he has rarely dipped below a 31 percent favorable rating. Clinton has hit that number a few times, but her negative-25 net favorable rating here is tied for the worst of her campaign,according to Huffington Post Pollster.
In the CNN poll, the 39 percent who say they have a favorable view of Clinton is lower than at any point in CNN's regular polling since April 1992 — when she wasn't even first lady yet. Of course, back then, the reason just 38 percent of people liked her was because many were unfamiliar with her. At the time, 39 percent were unfavorable and 23 percent had no opinion.
Clinton's favorable rating in the CNN poll is currently 16 points net-negative. That's unprecedented in the dozens of CNN polls on her since 1992.
Gallup's new numbers on Monday — 38 percent favorable and 57 percent unfavorable — are also unprecedented over the course of Clinton's political career.
This also appears to be the first time ever that Clinton's image measures worse than Trump's. It does so in both polls.
3) Just 38 percent would be "proud" to have her as president
That's down from 55 percent in March 2015. Sixty percent say they would not be proud.
On this measure, she's basically on the same footing as Trump, whom 39 percent would be proud of and 59 percent wouldn't be.
4) Nearly half of Democratic primary voters still want Bernie Sanders
Clinton dispatched with Sanders and now has his endorsement, but despite 9 in 10 consistent Sanders supporters saying they'll vote Clinton in November, many of them still pine for their first love.
The CNN poll, in fact, shows 45 percent of those who voted in Democratic primaries still say they wish it was Sanders. Just 49 percent say they prefer Clinton — down from 55 percent a month ago.
Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton greets supporters at her primary night victory party on June 7 in Brooklyn, N.Y. (Melina Mara/The Washington Post)
COMMENTS
Tuesday, July 12, 2016
Pence introduces Trump at rally that doubles as VP audition
Tuesday, July 5, 2016
Now it’s up to voters to decide if Clinton’s email use matters
Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio
iHeart.SmythRadio.com
Facebook.com/SmythRadio
www.mcclatchydc.com
The mixed FBI judgment on Hillary Clinton’s email practices – that she’d shown extreme carelessness in her handling of classified information but not enough to merit criminal charges – left Democratic Party loyalists in a familiar place: relieved, exasperated and yet hopeful, with fingers crossed, that once again the Clintons had won.
It was another chapter in what’s now a 25-year-old saga that has seen Hillary and Bill Clinton survive controversies that usually end political careers. Think Bill Clinton’s denials of an extramarital affair early in his 1992 campaign for the presidency or his 1998 impeachment after the separate Monica Lewinsky dalliance exposed him to obstruction-of-justice claims.
Yet he wound up completing his term in 2001 with a 66 percent Gallup approval rating and his wife had been elected to the Senate.
The trust issue will stick around for a while. David Paleologos, Suffolk University Political Research Center
The email mess that came to the public’s attention a year ago had been a weight around Hillary Clinton that she couldn’t shake, not with attempts at humor or lengthy explanations. Now it’s left to voters to settle whether the finding by FBI Director James Comey that no criminal charges are merited will put an end to the controversy.
In focus groups in Illinois, Pennsylvania and Florida throughout this year, McClatchy found that the emails kept coming up among undecided voters. While most people were not familiar with the emails’ contents, they thought this much: They were stark evidence that Clinton was arrogant and untrustworthy.
The question now: Does Comey’s exoneration counter that view, even though the FBI found that Clinton and her aides “were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information”?
EDITORS: BEGIN OPTIONAL TRIM
Democratic insiders were nearly universal in their praise for the FBI’s recommendation of no charges.
“Most voters will see this as Secretary Clinton doing 67 mph in a 65 mile zone and the officials say, ‘No ticket,’ ” said Bob Mulholland, a Chico, California-based Democratic consultant and convention superdelegate for Clinton.
Reaction from rival Bernie Sanders and his backers was largely muted. National Nurses United, one of the Vermont senator’s most vocal supporters, had no comment. Sanders himself had no statement, and he was tweeting about trade and environmental change in the immediate hours after the FBI announcement.
Sanders has been wary of sharply criticizing Clinton over the email controversy, calling it a “very serious issue.” His focus is on affecting the party platform, which party officials will be writing later this week.
EDITORS: END OPTIONAL TRIM
To most Democrats, the announcement ends the threat of having a presidential candidate in legal jeopardy.
“No more dealing with the cloud of an FBI investigation into her server hanging over her or the drip drip of bad news,” said Doug Thornell, managing director of SKDKnickerbocker, a political consulting firm that specializes in Democratic campaigns.
After today, Clinton will be in a stronger position. Doug Thornell, Democratic consultant
Comey, though, left skeptics with plenty of fodder: Notably, that 110 emails sent or received on Clinton’s private server contained classified material. He said seven of those were classified at one of the highest possible levels, Top Secret/Special Access Program.
“There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position . . . should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation,” Comey said.
That sort of finding is likely to hurt the former secretary of state. “It plays right into the perception that Clinton is not trustworthy,” said Tobe Berkovitz, a former media consultant who’s now an associate professor of advertising at Boston University.
That’s especially true with a segment of voters that David Paleologos, director of the Suffolk University Political Research Center, calls the “haters” – the roughly 1 in 5 people who dislike both Clinton and presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump.
Forty-four percent of them were undecided in a recent Paleologos poll.
Clinton leads Trump by 41.1 percent to 36.4 percent in the latest RealClearPolitics average of national polls
Paleologos thinks that many of those “haters” were Republicans who were having trouble warming to Trump. As Republicans maintain a drumbeat of criticism of Clinton, pounding away at the idea that she can’t be trusted, Trump might benefit, he said.
“People who dislike Trump aren’t as deeply rooted” in their opinion as those who dislike Clinton, Paleologos said.
EDITORS: BEGIN OPTIONAL TRIM
Republicans were eagerly playing to that audience Tuesday. GOP Chairman Reince Priebus said the findings “confirm what we’ve long known: Hillary Clinton has spent the last 16 months looking into cameras deliberately lying to the American people.” And Republican calls for a special counsel went unheeded.
EDITORS: END OPTIONAL TRIM
The email controversy, though, might have another unpredictable result in this year of surprises: boosting support for third-party candidates. Libertarian presidential candidate Gary Johnson, a former governor of New Mexico, is averaging 7.4 percent support in national polls, according to the RealClearPolitics average. Green Party candidate Jill Stein is at 3.9 percent.
The more the Republicans pounce, and the more the Clinton emails are discussed, “what you’re going to get is more disgruntled voters,” said Berkovitz of Boston University.
That’s why, he figured, “This could be a boost for everybody.”
COMMENTS
FBI Recommends No Charges for Hillary Clinton over Email Server
Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio
iHeart.SmythRadio.com
Facebook.com/SmythRadio
by BREITBART NEWS5 Jul 20161,194
WASHINGTON (AP) — The FBI won’t recommend criminal charges against Hillary Clinton for her use of a private email server while secretary of state, agency Director James Comey said Tuesday, lifting a major legal threat to her presidential campaign.
Comey’s decision almost certainly brings the legal part of the issue to a close and removes the threat of criminal charges. Attorney General Loretta Lynch said last week that she would accept the recommendations of the FBI director and of career prosecutors.
“No charges are appropriate in this case,” Comey said in making his announcement.
But Comey made that statement after he delivered a blistering review of Clinton’s actions, saying the FBI found that 110 emails were sent or received on Clinton’s server containing classified information. He said Clinton and her aides were “extremely careless” and added that it was possible that people hostile to the U.S. had gained access to her personal email account.
Yet he added that after looking at similar circumstances, the agency believed that “no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.”
The announcement came three days after the FBI interviewed Clinton for hours in a final step of its yearlong investigation into the possible mishandling of classified information.
Though his recommendation apparently ends the legal threat, it’s unlikely to wipe away many voters’ concerns about Clinton’s trustworthiness. And it probably won’t stop Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, who has called for criminal charges, from continuing to make the server a campaign issue.
Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio
iHeart.SmythRadio.com
Facebook.com/SmythRadio
Clnton’s personal email server, which she relied on exclusively for government and personal business, has dogged her campaign since The Associated Press revealed its existence in March 2015.
She has repeatedly said that no email she sent or received was marked classified, but the Justice Department began investigating last summer following a referral from the inspectors general for the State Department and the intelligence community.
The scrutiny was compounded by a critical audit in May from the State Department’s inspector general, the agency’s internal watchdog, which said that Clinton and her team ignored clear warnings from department officials that her email setup violated federal standards and could leave sensitive material vulnerable to hackers. Clinton declined to talk to the inspector general, but the audit said that she had feared “the personal being accessible” if she used a government email account.
The Clinton campaign said agents interviewed her this past Saturday for three and one-half hours at FBI headquarters. Agents had earlier interviewed top Clinton aides including her former State Department chief of staff, Cheryl Mills, and Huma Abedin, a longtime aide who now is the vice chairwoman of Clinton’s campaign.
Lynch on Friday said that she would accept whatever findings and recommendations were presented to her. Though she said she had already settled on that process, her statement came days after an impromptu meeting with Bill Clinton on her airplane in Phoenix that she acknowledged had led to questions about the neutrality of the investigation.
Read More Stories About:
Monday, June 27, 2016
Trump Campaign Details 49 Blistering Allegations about Hillary Clinton
Tuesday, June 21, 2016
Clinton Foundation Said to Be Breached by Russian Hackers
Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio
iHeart.SmythRadio.com
Facebook.com/SmythRadio
www.bloomberg.com
The Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation was among the organizations breached by suspected Russian hackers in a dragnet of the U.S. political apparatus ahead of the November election, according to three people familiar with the matter.
The attacks on the foundation’s network, as well as those of the Democratic Party and Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, compound concerns about her digital security even as the FBI continues to investigate her use of a personal e-mail server while she was secretary of state.
A spokesman for the foundation, Brian Cookstra, said he wasn’t aware of any breach. The compromise of the foundation’s computers was first identified by government investigators as recently as last week, the people familiar with the matter said. Agents monitor servers used by hackers to communicate with their targets, giving them a back channel view of attacks, often even before the victims detect them.
For a primer on recent cyber intrusions, click here.
Before the Democratic National Committee disclosed a major computer breach last week, U.S. officials informed both political parties and the presidential campaigns of Clinton, Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders that sophisticated hackers were attempting to penetrate their computers, according to a person familiar with the government investigation into the attacks.
The hackers in fact sought data from at least 4,000 individuals associated with U.S. politics -- party aides, advisers, lawyers and foundations -- for about seven months through mid-May, according to another person familiar with the investigations.
Thousands of Documents
The thefts set the stage for what could be a Washington remake of the public shaming that shook Sony in 2014, when thousands of inflammatory internal e-mails filled with gossip about world leaders and Hollywood stars were made public. Donor information and opposition research on Trump purportedly stolen from the Democratic Party has surfaced online, and the culprit has threatened to publish thousands more documents.
A hacker or group of hackers calling themselves Guccifer 2.0 posted anothertrove of documents purportedly from the DNC on Tuesday, including what they said was a list of donors who had made large contributions to the Clinton Foundation.
The Republican Party and the Trump campaign have been mostly silent on the computer attacks. In an earlier statement, Trump said the hack was a political ploy concocted by the Democrats.
Information about the scope of the attacks and the government warnings raises new questions about how long the campaigns have known about the threats and whether they have done enough to protect their systems.
The Clinton campaign was aware as early as April that it had been targeted by hackers with links to the Russian government on at least four recent occasions, according to a person familiar with the campaign’s computer security.
U.S. Inquiries
The U.S. Secret Service, Federal Bureau of Investigation and National Security Agency are all involved in the investigation of the theft of data from the political parties and individuals over the last several months, one of the people familiar with the investigation said. The agencies have made no public statements about their inquiry.
The FBI has been careful to keep that investigation separate from the review of Clinton’s use of private e-mail, using separate investigators, according to the person briefed on the matter. The agencies didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment.
Clinton spokesman Glen Caplin said that he couldn’t comment on government briefings about cyber security and that the campaign had no evidence that its systems were compromised.
“We routinely communicate and cooperate with government agencies on security-related matters,” he said. “What appears evident is that the Russian groups responsible for the DNC hack are intent on attempting to influence the outcome of this election.”
The DNC wouldn’t directly address the attacks but said in a written statement that it believes the leaks are “part of a disinformation campaign by the Russians.”
Trump spokeswoman Hope Hicks didn’t respond to e-mails seeking comment about the government warnings. The Republican National Committee didn’t respond to e-mail messages. A Sanders spokesman, Michael Briggs, said he wasn’t aware of the warnings.
IDing the Hackers
The government’s investigation is following a similar path as the DNC’s, including trying to precisely identify the hackers and their possible motives, according to people familiar with the investigations. The hackers’ link to the Russian government was first identified by CrowdStrike Inc., working for the Democratic Party.
A law firm reviewing the DNC’s initial findings, Baker & McKenzie, has begun working with three additional security firms -- FireEye Inc., Palo Alto Networks Inc. and Fidelis Cybersecurity -- to confirm the link, according to two people familiar with the matter, underscoring Democrats’ concerns that the stolen information could be used to try to influence the outcome of the November election.
A spokesman for Baker & McKenzie didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment. DNC spokesman Luis Miranda said the party worked only with CrowdStrike.
If the Democrats can show the hidden hand of Russian intelligence agencies, they believe that voter outrage will probably outweigh any embarrassing revelations, a person familiar with the party’s thinking said.
So far the released documents have revealed little that is new or explosive, but that could change. Guccifer 2.0 has threatened to eventually release thousands of internal memos and other documents.
Line of Attack
Sensitive documents from the Clinton Foundation could have the most damaging potential. The Trump camp has said it plans to make the foundation’s activities a subject of attacks against Clinton; the sort of confidential data contained in e-mails, databases and other digital archives could aid that effort.
An analysis by Fidelis confirmed that groups linked to Russian intelligence agencies were behind the DNC hack, according to a published report.
The government fills a crucial gap in flagging attacks that organizations can’t detect themselves, said Tony Lawrence, a former U.S. Army cyber specialist and now chief executive officer of VOR Technology, a computer security company in Hanover, Maryland.
“These state actors spend billions of dollars on exploits to gather information on candidates, and nine times out of ten [victims] won’t be able to identify or attribute them,” he said.
Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio
iHeart.SmythRadio.com
Facebook.com/SmythRadio
Google accounts
Bloomberg News reported Friday that the hackers who hit the DNC and Clinton’s campaign burrowed much further into the U.S. political system than initially thought, sweeping in law firms, lobbyists, consultants, foundations and policy groups in a campaign that targeted thousands of Google e-mail accounts and lasted from October through mid-May.
Data from the attacks have led some security researchers to conclude that the hackers were linked to Russian intelligence services and were broadly successful in stealing reports, policy papers, correspondence and other information. Dmitry Peskov, a spokesman for President Vladimir Putin, denied that the Russian government was involved.
Russia uses sophisticated “information operations” to advance foreign policy, and the target audience for this kind of mission wouldn’t be U.S. voters or even U.S. politicians, said Brendan Conlon, who once led a National Security Agency hacking unit.
“Why would Russia go to this trouble? Simple answer -- because it met their foreign policy objectives, to weaken the U.S. in the eyes of our allies and adversaries,” said Conlon, now CEO of Vahna Inc., a cyber security firm in Washington. Publishing the DNC report on Trump “weakens both candidates -- lists out all the weaknesses of Trump specifically while highlighting weaknesses of Clinton’s security issues. The end result is a weaker president once elected.”
Russia Link
Russia has an expansive cyber force that it has deployed in complex disinformation campaigns throughout Europe, according to intelligence officials.
BfV, the German intelligence agency, has concluded that Russia was responsible for a 2015 hack against the Bundestag that forced shutdown of its computer systems for several days. Germany is under “permanent threat” from Russian hackers, said BfV chief Hans-Georeg Maassen.
Security software maker Trend Micro said in May that Russian hackers had been trying for several weeks to steal data from Chancellor Angela Merkel’s Christian Democratic Union party, and that they also tried to hack the Dutch Safety Board computer systems to obtain an advance copy of a report on the downing of a Malaysian aircraft over Ukraine in July 2014. The report said the plane was brought down by a Russian-made Buk surface-to-air missile.
The cyber attacks are part of a broader pattern of state-sponsored hacking by Russia focused on political targets, with a goal of giving Russia the upper hand in dealing with other governments, said Pasi Eronen, a Helsinki-based cyber warfare researcher who has advised Finland’s Defense Ministry.
Before it's here, it's on the Bloomberg Terminal. LEARN MORE
COMMENTS
Thursday, June 16, 2016
HILLARY’S STATE DEPT. BLOCKED INVESTIGATION INTO ORLANDO KILLER’S MOSQUE
Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio
iHeart.SmythRadio.com
Facebook.com/SmythRadio
Further proof Hillary fueled rise of ISIS
Kit Daniels - JUNE 13, 20162027 Comments
69.2K
253
336
Hillary Clinton’s State Dept. shut down an investigation into the mosque Orlando killer Omar Mir Siddique Mateen attended because it “unfairly singled out Muslims.”
The Fort Pierce Islamic Center, where Mateen worshipped several times a week, was under investigation by both the FBI and DHS as early as 2011 for ties to a worldwide Islamic movement known as Tablighi Jamaal which was linked to several terrorist organizations.
But the investigation was shut down under pressure from the Clinton-ran State Dept. and DHS’s Civil Rights and Civil Liberties Office out of fear of offending Muslims, according to recently retired DHS agent Philip Haney.
“The FBI had opened cases twice on him, and yet they found no evidence to charge him; it means they didn’t go through the same basic, analytical process that I went through over a three- or four-hour period in which I was able to link the mosque to my previous cases,” he told WND on Sunday.
In other words, the FBI had limited options at stopping Mateen because it was ordered to back off its investigation into his mosque.
Both Clinton and the Obama administration have a history of enabling Islamic terrorism.
In 2012, Clinton’s State Dept. was backing al-Qaeda in Iraq, which morphed into ISIS, and other Islamic extremist groups as a proxy army to topple Syrian President Bashir al-Assad.
“The Salafist [sic], the Muslim Brotherhood and AQI [al-Qaeda in Iraq] are the major forces driving the insurgency in Syria,” a leaked memo between her State Dept. and the Pentagon stated. “The West, Gulf countries, and Turkey support [this] opposition, while Russia, China and Iran ‘support the [Assad] regime.’”
This secret document confirms that Clinton’s State Dept. – and the Obama administration in general – were directly responsible for the rise of ISIS, which is now targeting the West.
The former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency, Lieutenant General Michael Flynn, confirmed the document’s importance.
“I don’t know that [the Obama administration] turned a blind eye [to ISIS], I think it was a decision; I think it was a willful decision,” he said.
Clinton even admitted some responsibility.
“…The United States had – to be fair – we had helped create the problem we’re now fighting,” she said in an interview with Fox anchor Greta Van Susteren. “When the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan, we had this brilliant idea we were going to come to Pakistan and create a force on Mujahideen, equip them with Stinger missiles and everything else to go after the Soviets inside Afghanistan.”
“Now you look back [and] the people we’re fighting today, we were supporting in the fight against the Soviets.”
Additionally, on Oct. 1 President Obama authorized a shipment of guns to ISIS-linked militants in Syria – the exact same day he demanded more gun control in response to Umpqua Community College shooting in Ore.
“The approval came at a National Security Council meeting on Thursday,” CNN reported at the time. “…The President also emphasized to his team that the U.S. would continue to support the Syrian opposition as Russia enters the war-torn country.”
But as his administration admitted in the 2012 leaked memo, the “Syrian opposition” is predominantly jihadist militants – just like the Orlando killer.