Heitkamp dismisses Clinton comments on civility as 'ridiculous'
The Senate Judiciary Committee confirmed Friday that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's security clearance has been revoked by her own request. The move comes more than a year after Judiciary Committee chairman Chuck Grassley requested the department to investigate if Clinton still had security clearance.
According to the letter released by Grassley, the State Department said that Clinton's clearance was revoked on Aug. 30. Five of Clinton's aides, who she had asked be designated as researches, had their security clearances revoked on Sept. 20.
Security clearances: How do they work?
During Clinton's run for president, lawmakers and investigators looked into her and her staff's security clearance as part of the investigation into her use of a private email server.
Retiring senior officials usually retain a basic level of security clearance, but the Trump administration has been "exploring" the possibility of revoking security clearances of several intelligence officials who have criticized the president.
Press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said in July that the White House is evaluating on a "case by case basis" the clearances of several of President Obama's intelligence officials, including former FBI director James Comey and former National Security Adviser Susan Rice.
In August, President Trump ordered former CIA Director John Brennan, one of those officials, be stripped of his security clearance.
The CIA "holds" former directors' security clearance and renews it every five years for the rest of their lives. But that requires former CIA directors to behave like current CIA employees if they want to keep their clearance, which means avoiding travel to certain countries and generally living in a manner above reproach.
Other former government employees can keep their security clearances if they move to a private sector job where they work with classified information, such as at a defense contractor. The company would then apply to the government for someone to keep or receive a security clearance. The security officers at the different agencies then grant or rule if someone can keep their clearances.
Hundreds if not thousands of private companies apply for their employees to receive security clearances. In an interview with Bloomberg earlier this year, the CEO of Lockheed Martin said that 60,000 of her employees have a security clearance of some kind.
Hillary Clinton's security clearance revoked by her own request
Anyone think she would have revoked her clearance if there was no pressure on her to do so?
Hillary keeps trying hard to stay relevant.
It's sad really. In her own mind she was preparing to become the first female President in the history of the United States...only to be relegated to an historical footnote in time...the loser whose hubris and arrogance made her snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
Hillary doesn't need to try to stay relevant. The slobbering, frothing hatred of the Nazis sees to that.
A mere 1700 posts into the Hillary thread.
Nov. 8 2016 put the icing on the cake.
Off topic a wee bit - I caught part of a discussion today on C.B.C. radio between Monica Lewinski and Linda Tripp. A conspiracy over a period of 3 months in 1997 to nail Bill. From what I could gather from Linda Tripp, she literally feared for her life. According to her, Bill was 3 rd rate vermin with no conscience. Hillary must be proud!
Heitkamp will suffer the same fate as Mrs. Clinton.
Hillary, Bill Clinton to go on tour this year with stops in Toronto and Montreal
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toron...real-1.4854613
An example of slobbering, frothing hatred of Nazis seeing to it that Mrs. Clinton stays relevant.
Dear God, Hillary Clinton. Please, Just Go.
We’re three weeks out from the 2018 midterm election, and Hillary Clinton is popping up again like a Halloween ghoul who keeps rising from the grave to terrorize the American public; only this time accompanied by the increasingly #MeToo burdened uber-villain, Bubba.
The Clintons, it seems, can’t seem to call it quits, even if it means leaving members of their own party cringing and many more voters ready to “headdesk” themselves into a coma.
This time, it’s happening courtesy of a pa-through-the-nose-to-see-them rehab tour. Because if there’s one thing America hasn’t had enough of over recent decades, it’s efforts by the Clintons to recast themselves as normal, likeable people, as they cash checks and play the victim.Previous editions of this show have included Hillary’s two Senate runs and two presidential runs, which, depending on one’s perspective, were either an attempt to show independence from her husband or to be compensated for his myriad screw ups.
But despite the last run ending with a loss to Donald Freaking Trump, the most flawed candidate Republicans could conceivably have run in 2016, it appears that nothing will get Hillary out of our political debate once and for all.
Hillary remains caught up in the delusion that the only reason she lost in 2016 was because of Russian interference. She does not seem to have fully processed the fact that she lost the electoral college, the only vote that counts. She touts the fact that she got nearly three million more votes than Trump while conveniently leaving out that her tally of the vote still fell well below 50 percent.
Both of the major party nominees in 2016 were so unlikable, flawed and—let’s be candid—unethical that lots of us just couldn’t pull the lever for her even if we couldn’t stand Trump. According to a study from American National Election Studies, the words most associated by voters with Hillary in 2016 were “experienced liar.” Is it logical that she’d want to rehab her image, given all this? Perhaps. Is it possible? No. Do we need to watch her try? Definitely, definitely, definitely not.
That might be especially the case if you’re a Democrat.
Hillary’s continual pursuit of limelight and headlines ensures that the image of the Democratic Party remains an outdated, outmoded, and frankly despicable for far too many voters. This comes at a time when leading Democrats are attempting to focus voters’ attention on the future—2020, and beating Trump—and jostling for the role as the new party leader.
It also undercuts Democrats’ positioning as the only party that really cares about #MeToo and that will fight for survivors, a contrast Dems are only too keen to spotlight in the wake of Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation to the Supreme Court and ongoing allegations about President Trump’s treatment of women. Only sheer partisan convenience could allow someone to insist that Dr. Christine Blasey Ford’s testimony is credible while downplaying the numerous allegations of mistreatment (and worse) made by women against Bill Clinton.
More: https://www.thedailybeast.com/dear-g...ease-just-go-3
“They all look alike.”
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Xo6qBq5u3qM
What would the left do if Trump, or any, Repeublican, had said this.
I am not shocked. The Democrats have always been racist. Hillary is no different. Anyone who supports the Democrats are racist.
