Sunday, October 30, 2016

All Americans vote for Trump - States where you can change early vote.... It is not too late

You asked for a chance to redo your vote, dear Americans, I give you the F.B.I.

Trump's promise to you the American People!
FIRST, propose a Constitutional Amendment to impose term limits on all members of Congress;
  • SECOND, a hiring freeze on all federal employees to reduce federal workforce through attrition (exempting military, public safety, and public health);
  • THIRD, a requirement that for every new federal regulation, two existing regulations must be eliminated;
  • FOURTH, a 5 year-ban on White House and Congressional officials becoming lobbyists after they leave government service;
  • FIFTH, a lifetime ban on White House officials lobbying on behalf of a foreign government;
  • SIXTH, a complete ban on foreign lobbyists raising money for American elections.
  • On the same day, I will begin taking the following seven actions to protect American workers:
    .     FIRST, I will announce my intention to renegotiate NAFTA or withdraw from the deal under Article 2205
    • SECOND, I will announce our withdrawal from the Trans-Pacific Partnership
    • THIRD, I will direct my Secretary of the Treasury to label China a currency manipulator
    • FOURTH, I will direct the Secretary of Commerce and U.S. Trade Representative to identify all foreign trading abuses that unfairly impact American workers and direct them to use every tool under American and international law to end those abuses immediately
    • FIFTH, I will lift the restrictions on the production of $50 trillion dollars’ worth of job-producing American energy reserves, including shale, oil, natural gas and clean coal.
    • SIXTH, lift the Obama-Clinton roadblocks and allow vital energy infrastructure projects, like the Keystone Pipeline, to move forward
    • SEVENTH, cancel billions in payments to U.N. climate change programs and use the money to fix America’s water and environmental infrastructure
    Additionally, on the first day, I will take the following five actions to restore security and the constitutional rule of law:
    • FIRST, cancel every unconstitutional executive action, memorandum and order issued by President Obama
    • SECOND, begin the process of selecting a replacement for Justice Scalia from one of the 20 judges on my list, who will uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States
    • THIRD, cancel all federal funding to Sanctuary Cities
    • FOURTH, begin removing the more than 2 million criminal illegal immigrants from the country and cancel visas to foreign countries that won’t take them back
    • FIFTH, suspend immigration from terror-prone regions where vetting cannot safely occur. All vetting of people coming into our country will be considered extreme vetting.
    Next, I will work with Congress to introduce the following broader legislative measures and fight for their passage within the first 100 days of my Administration:
    1. Middle Class Tax Relief And Simplification Act. An economic plan designed to grow the economy 4% per year and create at least 25 million new jobs through massive tax reduction and simplification, in combination with trade reform, regulatory relief, and lifting the restrictions on American energy. The largest tax reductions are for the middle class. A middle-class family with 2 children will get a 35% tax cut. The current number of brackets will be reduced from 7 to 3, and tax forms will likewise be greatly simplified. The business rate will be lowered from 35 to 15 percent, and the trillions of dollars of American corporate money overseas can now be brought back at a 10 percent rate.

    2. End The Offshoring Act Establishes tariffs to discourage companies from laying off their workers in order to relocate in other countries and ship their products back to the U.S. tax-free.

    3. American Energy & Infrastructure Act. Leverages public-private partnerships, and private investments through tax incentives, to spur $1 trillion in infrastructure investment over 10 years. It is revenue neutral.

    4. School Choice And Education Opportunity Act. Redirects education dollars to gives parents the right to send their kid to the public, private, charter, magnet, religious or home school of their choice. Ends common core, brings education supervision to local communities. It expands vocational and technical education, and make 2 and 4-year college more affordable.

    5. Repeal and Replace Obamacare Act. Fully repeals Obamacare and replaces it with Health Savings Accounts, the ability to purchase health insurance across state lines, and lets states manage Medicaid funds. Reforms will also include cutting the red tape at the FDA: there are over 4,000 drugs awaiting approval, and we especially want to speed the approval of life-saving medications.

    6. Affordable Childcare and Eldercare Act. Allows Americans to deduct childcare and elder care from their taxes, incentivizes employers to provide on-site childcare services, and creates tax-free Dependent Care Savings Accounts for both young and elderly dependents, with matching contributions for low-income families.

    7. End Illegal Immigration Act Fully-funds the construction of a wall on our southern border with the full understanding that the country Mexico will be reimbursing the United States for the full cost of such wall; establishes a 2-year mandatory minimum federal prison sentence for illegally re-entering the U.S. after a previous deportation, and a 5-year mandatory minimum for illegally re-entering for those with felony convictions, multiple misdemeanor convictions or two or more prior deportations; also reforms visa rules to enhance penalties for overstaying and to ensure open jobs are offered to American workers first.

    8. Restoring Community Safety Act. Reduces surging crime, drugs and violence by creating a Task Force On Violent Crime and increasing funding for programs that train and assist local police; increases resources for federal law enforcement agencies and federal prosecutors to dismantle criminal gangs and put violent offenders behind bars.

    9. Restoring National Security Act. Rebuilds our military by eliminating the defense sequester and expanding military investment; provides Veterans with the ability to receive public VA treatment or attend the private doctor of their choice; protects our vital infrastructure from cyber-attack; establishes new screening procedures for immigration to ensure those who are admitted to our country support our people and our values

    10. Clean up Corruption in Washington Act. Enacts new ethics reforms to Drain the Swamp and reduce the corrupting influence of special interests on our politics.

    On November 8th, Americans will be voting for this 100-day plan to restore prosperity to our economy, security to our communities, and honesty to our government.

    This is my pledge to you.

    And if we follow these steps, we will once more have a government of, by and for the people.”

    New 'Clinton Cash' film reveals how the couple exploited Colombian rainforests to generate millions for Clinton foundation

    Clinton Cash

    (NaturalNews) An explosive new film detailing how Bill and Hillary Clinton used their positions of power and influence to raise millions for themselves and billions for their "charitable" foundation details, among other things, a deal that helped to enrich a friend and donor at the expense of invaluable, irreplaceable rainforest.

    The film, "Clinton Cash," which you can view online in its entirety here, thoroughly explains the nexus between Hillary Clinton's State Department, her ex-president husband, the Clinton Foundation, and foreign governments and business interests all conspiring to raise money at the expense of ordinary people and the environment.

    Here is one of the most egregious examples.

    In June 2010, Bill Clinton, along with friend and mining billionaire Frank Guistra, a Canadian, flew into Bogota, Colombia, where, coincidentally, they arrive at about the same time as Secretary Clinton, who flew in on a government plane. In her memoirs, which she wrote after leaving the State Department, she claimed that the meeting between her, her husband and Guistra was just happenstance – as if the two of them had no idea they would both be in Bogota, Colombia at the same time.

    Follow the money

    But of course, the meeting wasn't just happenstance.

    The following morning, after the Clintons dined together at a restaurant in the capital city, Bill Clinton has an early morning meeting with outgoing President Alvaro Uribe; Secretary Clinton had a noon lunch meeting with Uribe as well. During the meeting with Mrs. Clinton, the U.S. government grants Colombia a number of technical agreements the Uribe administration had been seeking.

    In the days that followed, three companies belonging to Guistra received major concessions from the Colombian government. One of the companies, Prima Colombia Hardwood Inc., received permission to cut timber from a rainforest along the Pacific coast.

    One more thing: The rainforest timber was not bound for the United States or even Canada; it was exported to China.

    Environmentalists, as well as many of the Colombian people, figured out what was going on eventually and were outraged. Eventually, the permit to cut timber was pulled by a new Colombian government, but not before Giustra's company was able to massively profit from cutting down acres upon acres of irreplaceable rainforest.

    For their part, the Clintons have come out in public in support of "sustainable forests" and other environmental causes, but after receiving millions in donations to their foundation – and after Bill Clinton raked in nearly $2 million in speaking fees – their environmentalism took a back seat to their desire for payola.

    So much for principles

    It wasn't just the Colombian timber deal where the Clintons' ostensible environmental principles were ignored. There was Clinton chicanery when it came to the Keystone XL pipeline as well, one of the touchstones of the so-called "climate change" debate. (See more on that here) The pipeline is designed to carry oil from tar sands fields in Canada to refineries in Texas and Louisiana.

    When Hillary Clinton was named as President-Elect Obama's secretary of state in late 2008, there was an issue related to the pipeline waiting for her on her desk. She was to decide whether or not to approve an environmental and economic impact statement and decide whether the pipeline project should be approved; it was a State Department decision (among others) because the pipeline was multinational in scope.

    At that exact time, Bill Clinton received an offer of nearly $2 million to give 10 speeches in Canada – from entities that had never before hired him to speak. The company that offered the deal, TD Bank Investment Group, it turns out, is a major shareholder in the Keystone XL project.

    Clinton gave the last speech in May 2011; three months later, Secretary Clinton's State Dept. released an environmental impact letter widely seen as favoring the construction of the pipeline. She had in her hands the power to kill the deal but she, mysteriously, signed it – even though she and her boss, Obama, seemed to be opposed to the pipeline as an environmental issue.

    Watch the entire Clinton Cash documentary here.

    Learn more:

    After the election results were announced in early December, Micky’s devoted supporters rioted for three straight days. Hillary Clinton, in turn, told President Preval that if he didn’t force Celestin to drop out, Congress would cut off aid to Haiti. Martelly soon became the second candidate in the runoff.
    In March 2011, Sweet Micky parlayed his support from the Duvalier-aligned Haitian right and the U.S. into a comfortable victory. On the night he won the runoff, Hillary’s State Department team celebrated, with her chief of staff Cheryl Mills assuring them that “You do great elections.”
    By the end of 2015, according to a congressional report, “much of the Haitian public” believed that international disaster relief money had been mismanaged, fueling calls for Martelly’s ouster (PDF). Under Martelly, the Haitian gourde also depreciated by 30 percent, compounding the nation’s rapidly growing food crisis.
    Instead of the grandmotherly figure of Dr. Mirlande, in the aftermath of the devastating earthquake Haiti was ruled by a risqué, misogynist musician. Yet despite his volatile character, once in office Micky remained a consistent ally of the Clintons.

    One year into Martelly’s term, U.S. Ambassador Pam White informed Mills (PDF) that Haiti insiders viewed Martelly “not dumb as many may think, [but] he is wild.” Martelly soon appointed close Clinton ally Laurent Lamothe as prime minister, but Lamothe was forced to step down two years later.
    When Caracol Industrial Park, a signature project of the Clinton Foundation, opened in northern Haiti in October 2012, Sweet Micky joined Bill and Hillary at the ceremony. There Haiti’s president and the U.S. Secretary of State heaped high praise on one another.
    Martelly, Clinton declared, was the impoverished nation’s “chief dreamer and believer.” Sweet Micky, in turn, said the Caracol project showed that Haiti “is open for business, and that’s not just a slogan.”
    The high-profile launch of the industrial park, Time reported, was also designed to rebut criticisms within Haiti regarding exactly where the many billions in post-earthquake aid money had ended up.
    At the time, Martelly proclaimed that the Caracol project would deliver more than 100,000 jobs, while the Clinton Foundation vowed that it would bring 60,000 in five years. As of mid-2015, the actual number was closer to 5,000.
    Throughout his five-year term, Martelly gave free rein to NGOs and foreign business interests. Amidst Haiti’s ongoing turmoil, a simple question thus arises: Why, exactly, did Hillary Clinton’s State Department support Sweet Micky instead of Dr. Mirlande Manigat?
    Theodore Hamm is chair of Journalism and New Media Studies at St. Joseph’s College in Clinton Hill, Brooklyn.

    Posted on August 26, 2016 by Paul Mirengoff in Clinton Cash, Hillary Clinton, National Security, Russia

    Memo sheds new light on Clinton-Russia uranium scandal

    Of all the Clinton Foundation/Clinton cash scandals, the one I’ve always considered most disturbing involves the Russians gaining control over a large share of America’s uranium. Relying on a New York Times report, I wrote about this scandal here.

    Newly uncovered State Department documents shed additional light on this scandal. But before getting to the new material, I’ll summarize what the New York Times reported.
    What we knew already

    In 2005, Bill Clinton and Frank Giustra visited Kazakhstan. Giustra is a massive donor to the Clinton Foundation.

    Giustra’s goal was to buy uranium mines in Kazakhstan. To this end, he and Bill Clinton met with leaders of the Kazakhstan government.
    As a result of the visit, Giustra got major mining concessions, which were approved by the Kazakhstan government. Kazakhstan got Bill Clinton publicly to praise its alleged progress in democracy and human rights. The Clintons received a $31 million donation to their Foundation from Giustra, along with a pledge to donate $100 million more.

    The deal with Kazakhstan made Giustra’s company, Uranium One, a major player. It proceeded to buy large amounts of holdings in the United States, and became an attractive target for Russia. A Russian company made a hugely attractive offer to purchase the company. Uranium One agreed to the purchase.

    The deal required approval by the U.S. government, including by the Secretary of State — Hillary Clinton. During the period when the deal with Russia was under consideration, the Clinton Foundation reportedly $2.6 million from Uranium One. Its contributions were not disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Hillary had reached with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors.

    During this period, Bill Clinton also received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank that was promoting Uranium One stock. This was more than his usual speaking fee.
    Hillary Clinton duly approved the deal. It made the Russian company Rosatom one of the world’s largest uranium producers and brought Vladimir Putin closer to his goal of controlling much of the global uranium supply chain.

    The deal left huge amounts of U.S. uranium under the control of Russia. The New York Times estimates this share at 20 percent. But Peter Schweizer, the author of Clinton Cash, say that it amounts to up to 50 percent of projected U.S. uranium output.

    What we have recently learned When Hillary Clinton was questioned about the deal, she said she had no reason to intervene in the decision. But Raphael Williams of Circa reports that memos contained on WikiLeaks show Clinton was warned about Russian attempts to flex its muscle in uranium markets. And members of Congress also sounded the alarm.

    The State Department had obtained a “strategy paper” from Rosatom, the Russian company seeking to purchase Uranium One. The strategy paper alarmed U.S. diplomats because it confirmed fears that Russia was moving to control the long-term supply of nuclear fuel, shut Westinghouse out of the market, and extend Moscow’s influence over Europe.

    The resulting diplomatic cable lays out what Williams calls “a clear warning from career U.S. officials about why expanding Russia’s control of uranium markets was bad for the United States and for its allies in Europe.”

    In addition, members of Congress pointed to the dangers of the Rosatom deal. Sen. John Barasso said it “would give the Russian government control over a sizable portion of America’s uranium production capacity.” Rep. Peter King said it “would pose great potential harm to the national security of the United States.”

    Clinton, then, had ample reason to intervene in the decision. But doing so would have been inconsistent with the interests of those who were donating so generously to her Foundation.
    Despite the warnings from her own diplomats and from Congress, Clinton let the deal go through.
    Who were the winners in the transactions that began with Bill Clinton’s visit to Kazakhstan and ended when the U.S. approved the Uranium One-Rosatom deal? The Russians, obviously, but not just them.

    Frank Giustra won big. So did the Clintons who raised tens of millions, if not more, in this saga. Even Kazakhstan came away with something, though whether it contemplated Russia controlling its uranium is another matter.

    Only America is the loser.

    Clinton Corruption:  The Teneo Memo



    Hillary will bring higher taxes and Health Care Premiums

    The average premium for some Obamacare plans is set to increase by an average of 25 percent across the 39 states that use the exchange.
    Tax on Stock Trading --
     Clinton has proposed a new tax on stock trading. Costs associated with this new tax will be borne by millions of American families that hold 401(k)s, IRAs and other savings accounts. The tax increase would only further burden markets by discouraging trading and investment. Again, no dollar figure for this tax hike has been released by the Clinton campaign.
    “Exit Tax” – Rather than reduce the extremely high, uncompetitive corporate tax rate, Clinton has proposed a series of measures aimed at inversions including an “exit tax”

    on income earned overseas. The term “exit tax” is used by the campaign itself. Her campaign document describing this proposal says it will raise $80 billion in tax revenue, but claims some of the $80 billion will be plowed into tax relief. How much? The campaign doesn't say.
    This proposal completely fails to address the underlying causes behind inversions: The U.S. 39% corporate tax rate (35% federal rate plus an average state rate of 4%) and our "worldwide" system of taxation, which imposes tax on all American earnings worldwide. The average corporate rate in the developed world is 25%. Thirty-one of thirty-four developed countries have cut their corporate tax rate since 2000. The U.S. has not.

    Read more:
    Follow us: @taxreformer on Twitter

    Trevor Loudon
    Byan Pagliano
    Justin Cooper
    Your best bet is to use an antivirus program to catch the classic threats and an anti-malware program, like Malwarebytes Anti-Malware Premium, or the newer, more advanced dangers.

    Executive Order 13526- Classified National Security Information
    This order prescribes a uniform system for classifying, safeguarding, and declassifying national security information, including information
    relating to defense against transnational terrorism

    Hillary Server:  SESSML32U To:,,,  Date: 2012-01-19 16:52 Subject: RE: Call with Laura and Cheryl.

    Was info on checked replaced by
     On Cheryl's calendar Joanne -----Original Message-----
    From: Michelle Barretta []
    Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2012 1:51 PM
    To:;; Bruce Lindsey Cc: Ana Maria Coronel; Laura Graham; Laszczych, Joanne Subject: Re: Call with Laura and Cheryl. 

    All This call will be Monday at 2pm ET. Please dial in 866-652-0222. Pass code 395-955-2195.

    Thanks. ----- Original Message -----
    From: Seher Syed <>
    To: Michelle Barretta; <>; Bruce Lindsey Cc: Ana Maria Coronel; Laura Graham; <>
    Sent: Thu Jan 19 12:33:19 2012
    Subject: RE: Call with Laura and Cheryl.  2 pm ET works for John.
    Thanks, Seher Seher Syed Center for American Progress 1333 H Street N.W.,10th Floor Washington, D.C. 20005 Tel: 202-682-1611
     -----Original Message----- From: Michelle Barretta [] Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2012 12:32 PM To:; Bruce Lindsey; Seher Syed Cc: Ana Maria Coronel; Laura Graham; Subject: Re: Call with Laura and Cheryl.  Apologies, adding John's assistant.
    ----- Original Message -----
    From: Michelle Barretta To: <>; Bruce Lindsey Cc: Ana Maria Coronel; Laura Graham; <>
    Sent: Thu Jan 19 12:22:01 2012 Subject: Call with Laura and Cheryl.  Hi Trying to set this call up for Monday. So far the best times are at 2 or 230pm ET. Will either of these times work for you?

    Q Okay. Are you familiar with FOIA? 11:35:23
    3 A Yes. 11:35:25
    4 Q Okay. And during your tenure at the State 11:35:25
    5 Department, were you aware that federal records 11:35:29
    6 belonged to the agency? 11:35:32
    11 A Yes. 11:35:43
    12 Q Okay. And during your tenure at the State 11:35:43
    13 Department, were you aware of your obligation not to 11:35:50
    14 delete federal records or destroy federal records?
    A The e-mails on my State Department system 11:37:03
    19 existed on my computer, and I -- I didn't have a 11:37:07
    20 practice of managing my mailbox other than leaving 11:37:11
    21 what was in there sitting in there. 11:37:15
    22 So for my BlackBerry, if I exceeded the --
    the limit, I think it -- it auto deleted. But, no, 11:37:21
    2 I didn't -- it wasn't my -- I didn't -- I didn't 11:37:25
    3 have a -- I didn't go into my e-mails and -- and 11:37:28
    4 delete e-mails. They just lived on my 11:37:35
    5 computer. 11:37:38

    6 Q Okay. The question is not just limited to 11:37:38
    7 e-mails; it's in connection to all of your 11:37:42
    8 e-mails for State Department business. 11:37:46
    9 A That was my practice for all my e-mail 11:37:50
    10 accounts. I -- I -- I didn't -- I didn't have a 11:37:52
    11 particular form of organizing them. I had a few 11:37:57
    12 folders, but they were not deleted. They all stayed 11:38:00
    13 in whatever device I was using at the time or 11:38:03
    14 whatever desktop I was on at the time. 11:38:06
    15 Q Okay. When -- to clarify for the record, 11:38:08
    16 when you say you had a few folders set up -- 11:38:11
    17 A Yeah. 11:38:14
    18 Q -- is that on your e-mail account, or are 11:38:14
    19 these physical folders that you had set up? 11:38:16
    A It would have been folders on my Outlook 11:38:23
    2 account on the -- on the -- my State Department 11:38:26
    3 computer. 11:38:28

    4 Q Okay. Could you access your 11:38:28
    5 e-mail on your desktop at the State 11:38:31
    6 Department? 11:38:34
    7 A Yes. 11:38:34
    8 Q And did you access your Clinton e-mail -- 11:38:34
    9 A Yes. 11:38:37
    10 Q -- dot com? 11:38:37
    11 A Yes, I did. 11:38:40
    12 Q Did you do that for State Department 11:38:40
    13 business? 11:38:45
    14 MR. BRILLE: Objection to form. 11:38:46

    15 A I did that when I was working or 11:38:47
    16 responding to e-mails that came in. I couldn't 11:38:52
    17 check my Clinton BlackBerry, so it was the only -- I 11:38:54
    18 didn't have access to my Clinton e-mail BlackBerry 11:38:56
    19 when I was in the office, so it was the only way I 11:38:58
    20 could check my Clinton e-mails. 11:39:01
    21 Q How did you access your 11:39:03
    22 account off your desktop? 11:39

    A It was just a -- it was a fairly simple 11:39:13
    2 login system. It was through a web browser. 11:39:16
    3 Q Okay. Was it connected to your Outlook? 11:39:19
    4 A No. No. 11:39:22
    5 Q Okay. 11:39:23
    6 A It was just Safari or ... 11:39:23
    7 Q Okay. During your tenure at the State 11:39:26
    8 Department, were you aware of your obligations to 11:39:34
    9 search your e-mails for State-related business under 11:39:37
    10 FOIA? 11:39:45

    11 MS. WOLVERTON: Objection. Calls for a 11:39:46
    12 legal conclusion, lack of foundation. 11:39:47
    13 MR. BRILLE: Objection. Lack of 11:39:49
    14 foundation. 11:39:50

    15 A It -- it was never any -- it was never a 11:39:52
    16 matter that was raised with me. I was never asked 11:39:55
    17 to search my e-mails for anything related to FOIA 11:39:57
    18 when I was at State, that I ... 11:39:59
    19 Q Okay. I guess that's my question. Did 11:40:02
    20 you ever search your account for any 11:40:10
    21 e-mails in response to a FOIA request or litigation? 11:40:13
    22 A No, I did not. 11:40
    Did you ever search your 11:40:39
    13 account for -- in response to a FOIA request or FOIA 11:40:43
    14 litigation during your tenure at the State 11:40:48
    15 Department? 11:40:52
    16 A No, I did not. 11:40:52

    17 Q Okay. Were you ever asked to search your 11:40:53
    18 account during your tenure at the 11:40:56
    19 State Department in response to a FOIA request or 11:41:02
    20 FOIA litigation? 11:41:05
    21 A No, I was not. 11:41:06

    22 Q Okay. Do you know if anybody else
    searched your account for you -- this is your 11:41:13
    2 account -- in response to a FOIA request 11:41:17
    3 or FOIA litigation during your tenure there? 11:41:20
    4 A Not that I'm aware of. 11:41:23
    5 Q Okay. Are you aware if anybody else 11:41:23
    6 searched your account during your 11:41:29
    7 tenure at the State Department in response to a FOIA 11:41:32
    8 request or FOIA litigation? 11:41:34
    9 A Not that I'm aware of. 11:41:36

    10 Q Are you aware of any FOIA requests that 11:41:37
    11 were sent or received to the Secretary's office 11:42:04
    12 during your tenure at the State Department? 11:42:07
    13 MS. WOLVERTON: Objection. The question 11:42:09
    14 extends beyond the scope of the authorized 11:42:10
    15 discovery. 11:42:12
    16 MR. BRILLE: Same objection. 11:42:15
    17 A I don't remember any such instances. 11:42:19
    18 Q Do you know how FOIA requests were 11:42:20
    19 processed in the Secretary's office during your 11:42:29
    20 time -- tenure at the Department of State? 11:42:33
    21 A No, I am not aware. 11:42:34

    22 Q Did you ever discuss any FOIA requests 11:42:35
    with anybody in the Secretary's office during your 11:42:42
    2 tenure there? 11:42:45
    3 A I don't have any memory of -- of doing so. 11:42:46
    4 Q Okay. How about FOIA in general; do you 11:42:49
    5 recall any discussions that you may have had either 11:42:53
    6 with Cheryl Mills, Secretary Clinton, or anybody 11:42:54
    7 else in the Secretary's office, about FOIA? 11:42:57
    8 A It wasn't anything that I remember having 11:43:02
    9 discussions about. 11:43:04
    10 Q And you knew Clarence Finney during -- 11:43:06
    11 during your tenure at the State Department. Right? 11:43:15
    12 A Yes, I did. 11:43:15

    13 Q Okay. And did you ever discuss FOIA with 11:43:16
    14 Mr. Finney during your tenure at the State 11:43:18
    15 Department? 11:43:20
    16 A I don't -- I don't remember any specific 11:43:24
    17 conversations with Clarence. I -- I remember 11:43:26
    18 briefing with Clarence when he first arrived about 11:43:28
    19 the documents that we were able to bring in with us. 11:43:30
    20 But I don't remember having a conversation like that 11:43:32
    21 with Clarence. 11:43:36
    1 Department, did you know that your e-mails relating 11:43:42
    2 to State Department business were subject to FOIA? 11:43:48
    3 MS. WOLVERTON: Objection. Assumes facts 11:43:52
    4 not in evidence, calls for legal conclusion. 11:43:55
    5 MR. BRILLE: I'll just say an objection, 11:43:59
    6 foundation. 11:44:00
    7 You can answer. 11:44:00
    8 A Yes. 11:44:01

    9 Q Okay. And when you were at the State 11:44:01
    10 Department, did you know that your e-mails relating 11:44:09
    11 to State Department business on your 11:44:12
    12 account were also subject to FOIA? 11:44:15
    13 MS. WOLVERTON: Objection. Calls for a 11:44:20
    14 legal conclusion. 11:44:22
    15 MR. BRILLE: Same objection. 11:44:23
    16 A I -- yes. 11:44:24
    17 Q All right. Did Secretary Clinton know, as 11:44:26
    18 far as you're aware, that her e-mails relating to 11:44:32
    19 State Department business on her 11:44:37
    20 account were subject to FOIA? 11:44:41

    She Printed Emails out at her house..........
    A I used -- I was using my e-mail 11:45:58
    2 for the majority of my State Department business. 11:46:02
    3 In many instances it was forwarding a document to be 11:46:05
    4 printed, a press clipping, a -- a schedule. So 11:46:08
    5 those were all e-mails that were captured in the 11:46:14
    6 system. And it was sent to Clinton e-mail. I had 11:46:16
    7 forwarded it to Clinton e-mail to print. 11:46:19
    8 So I -- my -- my understanding, my 11:46:23
    9 practice, from what I -- how I was functioning, I -- 11:46:29
    10 I wasn't perfect, but I did the best I could, was 11:46:32
    11 putting everything on There were 11:46:35
    12 documents that were forwarded from to 11:46:38
    13 Clinton e-mail. Those were captured in the system. 11:46:41
    14 And so that's -- that is how I operated. And I 11:46:44
    15 understood that everything that was on the 11:46:46
    16 system was kept in the system and retained in the 11:46:49
    17 system. 11:46:52
    18 Q Was the issue about how Secretary 11:46:55
    19 Clinton's e-mails could be accessed to respond to 11:46:56
    20 FOIA ever discussed by anybody within the 11:47:00
    21 Secretary's office? 11:47:04
    Q Do you know if Secretary Clinton or anyone 11:47:20
    9 on her behalf informed Mr. Finney about -- that she 11:47:30
    10 had State Department work-related e-mails on her 11:47:40
    11 account? 11:47:46
    12 MS. WOLVERTON: Objection. Asked and 11:47:48
    13 answered. 11:47:49
    14 MR. BRILLE: Same objection. 11:47:49

    15 A Not that -- not that I'm aware of. 11:47:51
    16 Q When you used your 11:47:53
    17 account for State Department-related business, did 11:48:12
    18 you ever print and file the e-mails? 11:48:18
    19 A No. I don't believe I did. 11:48:22
    20 Q Okay. Did you ever save the e-mails 11:48:24
    21 either as a PST or a PDF file? 11:48:28
    22 A No, I did not. 11:48:32
    A Honestly, I wish I thought about it at the 11:48:43
    3 time. As I said, I wasn't perfect. I tried to do 11:48:45
    4 all of my work on And I do believe I did 11:48:48
    5 the majority of my work on 11:48:52
    6 And many of the instances where I was on 11:48:56
    7 Clinton e-mail, it was because I had forwarded 11:48:59
    8 something from a account into Clinton 11:49:02
    9 e-mail, and in other instances from my Clinton 11:49:07
    10 e-mail I was communicating with somebody who was on 11:49:09
    11 a account, and it was captured through 11:49:11
    12 there. 11:49:14
    13 I -- I did the best I could to do 11:49:16
    14 everything right. I -- it did not occur to me to 11:49:19
    15 print and file. 11:49:21
    16 Q All right. But it is your testimony that 11:49:22
    17 there were times that you communicated with 11:49:30
    18 Secretary Clinton where both of you used only the 11:49:31
    19 accounts for State Department 11:49:34
    20 business. Right? 11:49:37
    21 MR. BRILLE: Objection. Form. 11:49:38
    22 A Yes. There -- 11:49:40

    Videotaped Deposition of Huma Abedin
    Conducted on June 28, 2016
    888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
    1 MR. BRILLE: Lack of foundation. 11:49:41
    2 A Yes. There were instances where that 11:49:43
    3 occurred. 11:49:44
    4 Q Okay. With respect to those State 11:49:44
    5 Department work-related e-mails on the 11:49:48
    6 accounts, what did you do, if 11:49:49
    7 anything, to preserve those e-mails? 11:49:55
    8 A I did -- those -- I did not do anything to 11:50:01
    9 preserve those e-mails. 11:50:04
    10 But again, many of those e-mails were sent 11:50:05
    11 from The instances where it was 11:50:07
    12 Clintonemail to Clintonemail, there were instances 11:50:10
    13 where the content of those e-mails had personal 11:50:14
    14 matters in there, and there may have also been State 11:50:18
    15 Department matters in there, too. It was a -- a 11:50:21
    16 combination. 11:50:24
    17 But I did not -- I did not preserve those 11:50:25
    18 e-mails. 11:50:28
    19 Q As far as you know, if you know, what did 11:50:28
    20 Secretary Clinton do to ensure that her work-related 11:50:38
    21 e-mails were preserved? 11:50:43
    22 A She generally e-mailed people on their 11:50:47
    Videotaped Deposition of Huma Abedin
    Conducted on June 28, 2016
    888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
    1 e-mail accounts, and -- and through that 11:50:49
    2 manner, those -- those e-mails were captured in the 11:50:55
    3 system. 11:50:58
    4 Q Okay. Do you know if any of the 11:50:58
    5 Secretary's e-mails relating to State Department 11:51:04
    6 business were printed and filed on the Secretary's 11:51:06
    7 behalf during your tenure at the State Department? 11:51:12
    8 A Not that -- 11:51:16
    9 MS. WOLVERTON: Objection. Foundation. 11:51:17
    10 MR. BRILLE: Go ahead. You can answer. 11:51:19
    11 A Not that I'm aware of. 11:51:20
    12 Q Do you know how the Secretary managed her 11:51:22
    13 Inbox on her account during her 11:51:27
    14 tenure at the State Department? 11:51:30
    15 A No. 11:51:31
    16 Q Do you know if Secretary Clinton deleted 11:51:31
    17 any of her work-related e-mails -- 11:51:37
    18 MS. WOLVERTON: I'm going to -- 11:51:41
    19 Q -- during her tenure at the State 11:51:42
    20 Department? 11:51:44
    21 MS. WOLVERTON: I'm going to object. 11:51:44
    22 MS. COTCA: I would just like to finish 11:51:46
    Videotaped Deposition of Huma Abedin
    Conducted on June 28, 2016
    888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
    1 asking the question. Thank you. 11:51:47
    2 Q Do you know whether Secretary Clinton ever 11:51:50
    3 deleted any of her work-related e-mails on her 11:51:55
    4 account during her tenure at the 11:51:57
    5 State Department? 11:52:01
    6 MS. WOLVERTON: I'm going to object to 11:52:01
    7 this line of questioning as extending beyond the 11:52:02
    8 scope of the authorized discovery. 11:52:04
    9 MS. COTCA: It goes to the operation of 11:52:11
    10 the system. 11:52:12
    11 MS. WOLVERTON: It goes to records 11:52:13
    12 preservation, which is beyond the scope. 11:52:15
    13 MS. COTCA: And operation of the 11:52:17
    14 system. 11:52:18
    15 MS. WOLVERTON: I would disagree. 11:52:19
    16 MS. COTCA: Your objection is stated on 11:52:21
    17 the record. 11:52:22
    18 MR. BRILLE: I'll -- I'll -- same 11:52:24
    19 objection. 11:52:27
    20 You can answer. 11:52:27
    21 A Not that -- not that I'm aware of. 11:52:29
    22 Q Are you familiar with tasking forms or 11:52:31
    search slips in connection with FOIA requests at the 11:52:55
    2 State Department? 11:52:59
    3 A I'm not familiar with those terms. 11:53:01
    4 Q Okay. How about Form DS 1748; have you 11:53:03
    5 ever seen a form like that? 11:53:09
    6 A I don't know what that is. 11:53:10
    7 Q All right. Did you ever have any 11:53:11
    8 knowledge or any involvement in the processing of 11:53:15
    9 any FOIA request that came to the State Department 11:53:21
    10 during your tenure at the State Department? 11:53:25
    11 MR. BRILLE: Objection. Asked and 11:53:27
    12 answered. 11:53:28
    13 MS. WOLVERTON: Same objection. Also 11:53:29
    14 extends beyond the scope of authorized discovery. 11:53:30
    15 A I don't remember any such instance. 11:53:35
    Q Okay. Do you have knowledge about a FOIA 11:55:08
    22 request that was submitted by CREW in December 2012 11:55:25
    Videotaped Deposition of Huma Abedin
    Conducted on June 28, 2016
    888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
    1 to the State Department for records relating to 11:55:30
    2 Secretary Clinton's e-mails? 11:55:35
    3 A Can you -- did you -- did you say CREW? 11:55:36
    4 Q Yes. 11:55:38
    5 A I -- no, I'm not. I don't know what that 11:55:41
    6 is, and I'm not -- I'm not aware. 11:55:43
    7 Q It's an organization, a nonprofit 11:55:46
    8 organization, that submitted a FOIA request in 11:55:51
    9 December 2012 to the State Department for records 11:55:55
    10 relating to Secretary Clinton's e-mail accounts and 11:55:58
    11 use of those accounts for State Department business. 11:56:02
    12 A Yes. 11:56:04
    13 Q Do you have any knowledge about that 11:56:04
    14 request? 11:56:06
    15 A I -- I know about it through media reports 11:56:09
    16 in the last year, yes. 11:56:12
    17 Q Okay. Do you -- so you -- did you not 11:56:14
    18 have any knowledge about it during your tenure at 11:56:17
    19 the State Department? 11:56:19
    20 A No. 11:56:20
    21 Q Okay. And since leaving the State 11:56:20
    22 Department, what did you learn about that request? 11:56:23
    Videotaped Deposition of Huma Abedin
    Conducted on June 28, 2016
    888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
    1 A Just, as I mentioned, media reports 11:56:28
    2 mentioning that there had been a FOIA request sent 11:56:31
    3 while -- while she was at State that wasn't received 11:56:36
    4 until after she left. I mean, that's the extent of 11:56:40
    5 my memory from what I read in the -- in the -- in 11:56:43
    6 the news stories. 11:56:45
    7 Q All right. Did you -- are you aware of 11:56:46
    8 the State Department's OIG report that was issued in 11:56:50
    9 January 2016 discussing processing of FOIA during 11:56:54
    10 Secretary Clinton's tenure? 11:56:58
    11 A I'm -- I'm aware there was a report, yes. 11:57:00
    12 Q Okay. Did you review that report at any 11:57:01
    13 point? 11:57:05
    14 A I have not reviewed that report. 11:57:05
    15 Q Okay. Did you discuss it with anybody 11:57:07
    16 other than your attorneys? 11:57:09
    17 A No. 11:57:10
    18 Q So it's fair then that you do not know 11:57:10
    19 Cheryl Mills' involvement, State Spokesperson Brock 11:57:20
    20 Johnson, Heather Samuelson's involvement with that 11:57:28
    21 FOIA request? 11:57:31
    Q Okay. Since leaving the State Department, 11:57:56
    12 did you learn anything with respect to Cheryl Mills' 11:57:59
    13 involvement with processing of the FOIA requests 11:58:02
    14 submitted by CREW in December 2012? 11:58:05
    15 A No. 11:58:07
    16 Q All right. Since leaving the State 11:58:08
    17 Department, did you learn anything with respect to 11:58:10
    18 Heather Samuelson's involvement in processing that 11:58:12
    19 same request? 11:58:15
    20 A No. 11:58:16
    21 Q All right. Same question with respect to 11:58:17
    22 State Spokesman Brock Johnson's involvement with 11:58:21
    Videotaped Deposition of Huma Abedin
    Conducted on June 28, 2016
    888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
    1 respect to processing that FOIA request. 11:58:27
    2 A No. 11:58:27
    3 Q Okay. And the same question with respect 11:58:28
    4 to State Department Attorney Josh Dawson and his 11:58:29
    5 involvement in processing that FOIA request? 11:58:34
    6 MS. WOLVERTON: Objection. Calls for 11:58:36
    7 attorney-client, attorney work product information. 11:58:39
    8 MS. COTCA: I don't see that at all. But 11:58:44
    9 unless you're -- 11:58:47
    10 MR. BRILLE: Just -- just in answering the 11:58:47
    11 question, to the extent you have knowledge of 11:58:48
    12 discussions with lawyers, just don't reveal the 11:58:50
    13 discussions. 11:58:52
    14 You can answer the question, I think, as 11:58:52
    15 she has phrased it. 11:58:54
    16 THE WITNESS: Okay. 11:58:56
    17 A No. 11:58:56
    18 Q Did you ever discuss this FOIA request -- 11:58:57
    19 and by this FOIA request: I mean the CREW FOIA 11:59:10
    20 request -- with Cheryl Mills? 11:59:13
    21 A No. 11:59:15
    22 Q How about with Secretary Clinton? 11:59:15
    Videotaped Deposition of Huma Abedin
    Conducted on June 28, 2016
    888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
    1 A No. 11:59:17
    2 Q Were you contacted -- 11:59:17
    3 MS. COTCA: I'm sorry. 11:59:22
    4 MR. BRILLE: I was just going to ask when 11:59:23
    5 you were getting to a breaking point for lunch. I 11:59:25
    6 was just going to inquire. 11:59:27
    7 MS. COTCA: Sure. I think we can come to 11:59:28
    8 a good breaking point in just a couple of minutes. 11:59:30
    9 MR. BRILLE: Okay. 11:59:32
    10 MS. COTCA: Thank you. 11:59:33
    11 BY MS. COTCA: 11:59:33
    12 Q Were you contacted by the State 11:59:34
    13 Department's OIG office with respect to their 11:59:36
    14 investigation for their January 2016 report? 11:59:40
    15 MR. BRILLE: Objection. Scope. Is 11:59:44
    16 there -- do you want to tell me what the scope is? 11:59:48
    17 MS. COTCA: Sure. The investigation deals 11:59:50
    18 with FOIA processing during State Department -- 11:59:52
    19 during Secretary Clinton's tenure at the State 11:59:54
    20 Department and is a completed investigation. So I 11:59:58
    21 think it falls entirely within the scope. 12:00:00
    22 MR. BRILLE: I'm going to object and 12:00:02
    Videotaped Deposition of Huma Abedin
    Conducted on June 28, 2016
    888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
    1 instruct the witness not to answer. 12:00:03
    2 I don't think it's in scope. 12:00:05
    3 Q Were you contacted by the State 12:00:09
    4 Department's OIG office to discuss FOIA processing 12:00:12
    5 at the State Department during Secretary Clinton's 12:00:19
    6 tenure? 12:00:22
    7 MS. WOLVERTON: I'm going to object also 12:00:25
    8 as beyond the scope. 12:00:27
    9 MR. BRILLE: Same. 12:00:27
    10 MS. WOLVERTON: Beyond the scope. 12:00:29
    11 MR. BRILLE: Same objection. 12:00:30
    12 I'm going to instruct the witness not to 12:00:31
    13 answer. 12:00:32
    14 Q Okay. In the past -- well, since 12:00:34
    15 January -- strike that. 12:00:49
    16 Since September of 2015, were you 12:00:54
    17 contacted by anybody within the State Department's 12:00:58
    18 OIG office to discuss issues relating to FOIA 12:01:01
    19 processing in Secretary Clinton's office during her 12:01:07
    20 tenure at the State Department? 12:01:10
    21 MS. WOLVERTON: Objection. 12:01:12
    22 MR. BRILLE: Same objection. 12:01:13
    Videotaped Deposition of Huma Abedin
    Conducted on June 28, 2016
    888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
    1 MS. WOLVERTON: Beyond the scope, vague. 12:01:14
    2 MS. COTCA: Are you instructing her not to 12:01:17
    3 answer? 12:01:18
    4 MR. BRILLE: Yes. 12:01:18
    5 MS. COTCA: Okay. 12:01:19
    6 Q And are you following the advice of your 12:01:20
    7 counsel by not answering the question? 12:01:23
    8 A Yes. Uh-huh. 12:01:24
    18 MS. COTCA: And then we'll come back after 12:01:58
    19 lunch. 12:02:00
    20 MR. BRILLE: Okay. 12:02:00
    21 VIDEO SPECIALIST: We are off the record 12:02:01
    22 at 12:02. 12:02:02
    VIDEO SPECIALIST: Here begins Tape 3. We 12:58:45
    3 are back on the record at 12:58. 12:58:50
    4 BY MS. COTCA: 12:58:52
    5 Q Welcome back, Ms. Abedin. 12:58:53
    6 Your attorney I believe had something to 12:58:57
    7 say I believe with respect to a previous 12:58:58
    8 instruction. 12:59:00
    9 MR. BRILLE: Yes. Thank you. Ms. Cotca, 12:59:00
    10 we have -- at the break we've reflected on our prior 12:59:03
    11 instruction with respect to the question regarding 12:59:05
    12 the OIG report. 12:59:08
    13 We're going to maintain the scope 12:59:08
    14 objection, but we're going to withdraw the 12:59:10
    15 instruction on the question. So to the extent you 12:59:13
    16 have questions in that regard, we're going to allow 12:59:15
    17 Ms. Abedin to answer. 12:59:17
    18 MS. COTCA: Thank you very much. 12:59:18
    19 BY MS. COTCA: 12:59:18
    20 Q Ms. Abedin, then let's just go back to the 12:59:19
    21 questioning about the State Department's OIG's 12:59:22
    22 report issued in January of 2016, in connection with 12:59:25
    A The Secretary's office was also packed up 13:08:59
    22 and the materials that were put in boxes, this was 13:09:03
    Videotaped Deposition of Huma Abedin
    Conducted on June 28, 2016
    888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
    1 everything from the books that she had on her 13:09:06
    2 bookshelf, to decorations or gifts that she may have 13:09:11
    3 received, and paper. All of those items were packed 13:09:15
    4 by staff, and those boxes were also not sealed until 13:09:20
    5 the protocol office had signed off on the items that 13:09:24
    6 were taken. And the same thing with the -- the 13:09:27
    7 papers. 13:09:30
    8 She may have been in her office when that 13:09:31
    9 happened. I have no memory of her -- of her being 13:09:36
    10 there herself when we were packing. 13:09:39
    11 Q Did the Secretary provide any instructions 13:09:41
    12 with respect to what to do with her work -- State 13:09:44
    13 Department-related e-mails on her 13:09:49
    14 prior to leaving the State Department? 13:09:52
    15 A Not that I'm aware of. 13:09:54
    16 Q Did you ask her for any instructions with 13:09:55
    17 respect to what to do with her State-related 13:10:02
    18 e-mails? 13:10:06
    19 A I don't remember. 13:10:07
    20 Q Do you know if anybody did? 13:10:08
    21 A I don't. 13:10:11
    22 Q Did you at any point during the meeting or 13:10:12
    Videotaped Deposition of Huma Abedin
    Conducted on June 28, 2016
    888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
    1 after the meeting inform Mr. Finney about the 13:10:20
    2 State-related e-mails on your prior 13:10:28
    3 to leaving to the State Department? 13:10:32
    4 MS. WOLVERTON: Objection. Asked and 13:10:35
    5 answered. 13:10:36
    6 MR. BRILLE: Yeah. Same objection. 13:10:36
    7 A I don't remember talking to Clarence. 13:10:38
    8 Q Okay. Do you know if anybody informed 13:10:39
    9 Mr. Finney with respect to your State-related 13:10:41
    10 e-mails on your system in this 13:10:45
    11 transition period prior to leaving the State 13:10:49
    12 Department? 13:10:54
    13 MS. WOLVERTON: Same objection. 13:10:54
    14 A I -- I'm not aware. 13:10:56
    15 Q Do you know if anybody instructed -- or 13:10:58
    16 informed Mr. Finney with respect to State-related 13:11:03
    17 e-mails on Secretary Clinton's e-mail account during 13:11:06
    18 this transition period prior to leaving the State 13:11:13
    19 Department? 13:11:16
    20 MS. WOLVERTON: Objection. Asked and 13:11:16
    21 answered. 13:11:17
    22 A I'm -- I'm not aware. 13:11:21
    Videotaped Deposition of Huma Abedin
    Conducted on June 28, 2016
    888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
    1 Q Do you know why nobody informed Mr. Finney 13:11:28
    2 about the State-related e-mails on Secretary 13:11:32
    3 Clinton's account? 13:11:38
    4 MS. WOLVERTON: Objection. Assumes facts 13:11:43
    5 not in evidence, lack of foundation. 13:11:44
    6 MR. BRILLE: Objection. Lacks foundation. 13:11:45
    7 A I -- as I think I've mentioned earlier, it 13:11:48
    8 is not anything that occurred to us. We all wish we 13:11:52
    9 could go back and that not be the case. It did not 13:11:57
    10 occur to those of us who were involved. 13:12:00
    11 Q And is that the same answer? I'm 13:12:05
    12 specifically asking for the time period during the 13:12:07
    13 transition process prior to leaving the State 13:12:10
    14 Department. 13:12:12
    15 A Yes, ma'am. I understand. It did not -- 13:12:13
    16 it did not occur to us. 13:12:15
    17 Q Was anybody else other than Mr. Finney who 13:12:16
    18 participated in the meeting from the Office of the 13:12:29
    19 Correspondence and Records? 13:12:32
    20 A I remember Clarence. I don't remember -- 13:12:36
    21 I don't remember anybody else from his office being 13:12:38
    22 there. 13:12:39
    Videotaped Deposition of Huma Abedin
    Conducted on June 28, 2016
    888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
    1 Q Do you remember anybody else from any 13:12:40
    2 other office being in the meeting? 13:12:44
    3 A No, I don't. 13:12:45
    4 Q Ms. Abedin, are you familiar with the 13:12:46
    5 SMART system that was introduced at the State 13:13:04
    6 Department in 2009? And SMART system stands for 13:13:06
    7 State messaging and archiving retrieval toolset. 13:13:10

    She had no knowlege of this archieve system.................
    8 A I -- I don't know what that is. 13:13:15
    9 Q Okay. Do you recall any discussions in 13:13:16
    10 the State Department about electing to use that 13:13:25
    11 system to preserve records in the Secretary's office 13:13:28
    12 at all during your tenure at the State Department?
    MS. WOLVERTON: Objection. Exceeds the 13:13:35
    14 scope of discovery. 13:13:37
    15 A I don't. I don't know what that is. 13:13:38
    16 Q And you don't recall any discussions 13:13:39
    17 about -- about it? 13:13:44
    18 MS. WOLVERTON: Same objection. 13:13:45
    19 A I -- I don't know. I don't recall any 13:13:46
    20 discussions, no. 13:13:47
    The 13:40:52
    15 Secretary was also taking a short -- a brief 13:40:54
    16 vacation with her family at a rental house. 13:40:58
    17 And there -- and she was having 13:41:02
    18 communications issues, and the department was made 13:41:08
    19 aware of it. Cheryl and Steve. 13:41:12
    20 Q Okay. When you say "Cheryl," is that 13:41:15
    21 Cheryl Mills? 13:41:18
    22 A Cheryl Mills and Steve Mull. 13:41:19
    We did take testimony last week from another top aide familiar with Secretary Clinton’s email and BlackBerry: Ambassador Stephen D. Mull, executive secretary of the State Department from June 2010 to October 2012. It was Mull who suggested that Clinton be issued a State Department BlackBerry, which would protect her identity while still being subject to FOIA requests.
     In his testimony, Mull said that he doesn’t remember how or when he first learned about the former secretary of state’s use of the BlackBerry. The Daily Caller reported on the deposition under this headline: “State Dept. Official Who Discussed Hillary’s Private Server Now Says He Can’t Remember Anything About It.”
     “Do you know how you learned [about Clinton’s server]?” Judicial Watch attorney Michael Bekesha asked Mull.
    “I can’t recall, no,” Mulls responded.
    “Do you recall when you learned that?” came the follow-up question.
    “No. I can’t recall,” said Mull.
     That line of questioning about a series of August 30, 2011, emails also caught the attention of U.S. District Court Judge Emmett Sullivan. Judge Sullivan cited the emails in his Memorandum and Order granting Judicial Watch discovery into the Clinton email matter:
     "In August 2011 communication difficulties experienced by Secretary Clinton prompted discussion among State Department staff about whether issuing a State Department blackberry might solve the problem . . . Stephen Mull, Executive Secretary of the State Department at the time, noted that if Secretary Clinton used a State issued BlackBerry, her identity 'would be secret' but that the email account 'would be subject to FOIA requests.' Ms. Abedin responded 'let's discuss the state BlackBerry, doesn't make a whole lot of sense.'"
     You may not be shocked to learn that Amb. Mull said he did not recall the circumstances behind the August 2011 email exchange.
     Amb. Mull now serves as the State Department’s lead coordinator for Iran nuclear implementation.
     We had yet another deposition this past Wednesday. Our attorneys deposed Karin Lang, director of executive secretariat staff and designated representative for the State Department. Lang was designated by the State Department as its 30(b)(6) witness.
     A 30(b)(6) witness is assigned to provide the agency’s testimony on the Clinton email issue.
     Lang testified that key State Department federal recordkeeping officials did not know that Clinton and her top aide Huma Abedin were using email to conduct government business.
     She also testified that the State Department could not say whether Clinton or Abedin has turned over all emails in their possession that may be potentially responsive to Judicial Watch’s Freedom of the Information Act (FOIA) request.
     Lang also said that it would not be reasonable to search all 70,000 State Department email accounts in order to retrieve Clinton’s emails. (Clinton has suggested that the State Department would have many of her emails because she sent most of them to State Department employees on their government accounts.)
     Lang also testified that a picture of Mrs. Clinton using a Blackberry spurred a State official to ask again if she was using account. Again, he was told “no.” Lang signed, under the penalty of perjury, State Department answers to Judicial Watch’s written interrogatories about the Clinton email system and FOIA.
     The State Department acknowledged in its answers that it “has no method of identifying which State Department officials and employees had and/or used an account on to conduct official government business.”
    Amb. Mull and Ms. Lang are among seven depositions of former Clinton top aides and State Department officials that Judicial Watch has scheduled over the next three weeks.
     Huma Abedin is scheduled to testify on June 28, and top State Department official Patrick Kennedy on June 29.
     And we hope the Court will allow us to bring Mr. Pagliano, the Clinton supposed go-to IT expert on her email system, soon (see story above).
    Breaking News at

    Q Did you ever inform Mr. Mull about 13:47:24
    2 Secretary Clinton's e-mail account on the 13:47:47
    3 server? 13:47:50
    4 MR. BRILLE: Objection. Asked and 13:47:52
    5 answered. 13:47:54
    6 But, go ahead. 13:47:54
    7 A I don't remember informing him, but her 13:47:56
    8 e-mail account was not -- was not a secret in our -- 13:47:59
    9 in the department, and with senior members of the 13:48:04
    10 State Department, so. But I don't remember 13:48:08
    11 informing him myself, no. 13:48:10

    Monday, October 24, 2016

    Obamacare Premium Costs Continue To Grow For Your Family - Vote Trump for a change in direction for the nation and your pocket book.

    Hillary can not help herself.
    Hillary Lies
    Hillary Lies
    Kenneth R. Timmerman - Dark Forces - The Truth about what Happened at the Attack on US Consulate in Benghazi and in US Headquarters and why our people died when aid was just a DECISION away.
    Do not trust Hillary... Vote Republican -- Vote Trump.

    Illinois‘ insurance regulator said ObamaCare premiums in the state will jump as high as 55%. The Obama administration’s response to this and other news of massive rate hikes....”
    For Jobs Vote Trump.
    Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you.
    Today, I’m going to outline a plan for American economic revival – it is a bold, ambitious, forward-looking plan to massively increase jobs, wages, incomes and opportunities for the people of our country.
    My plan will embrace the truth that people flourish under a minimum government burden, and it will tap into the incredible unrealized potential of our workers and their dreams.
    Right now, 92 million Americans are on the sidelines, outside the workforce, and not part of our economy. It’s a silent nation of jobless Americans.
    Look no further than the city of Flint, where I just visited. The jobs have stripped from this community, and its infrastructure has collapsed. In 1970, there were more than 80,000 people in Flint working for GM – today it is less than 8,000. Now Ford has announced it is moving all small car production to Mexico.
    It used to be cars were made in Flint and you couldn’t drink the water in Mexico. Now, the cars are made in Mexico and you can’t drink the water in Flint.

    We are going to turn this around.

    My economic plan rejects the cynicism that says our labor force will keep declining, that our jobs will keep leaving, and that our economy can never grow as it did once before.
    We reject the pessimism that says our standard of living can no longer rise, and that all that’s left to do is divide up and redistribute our shrinking resources.
    Everything that is broken today can be fixed, and every failure can be turned into a great success.
    Jobs can stop leaving our country, and start pouring in. Failing schools can become flourishing schools. Crumbling roads and bridges can become gleaming new infrastructure. Inner cities can experience a flood of new jobs and investment. And rising crime can give way to safe and prosperous communities.
    All of these things, and so much more, are possible. But to accomplish them, we must replace the present policy of globalism – which has moved so many jobs and so much wealth out of our country – and replace it with a new policy of Americanism.
    Under this American System, every policy decision we make must pass a simple test: does it create more jobs and better wages for Americans?
    If we lower our taxes, remove destructive regulations, unleash the vast treasure of American energy, and negotiate trade deals that put America First, then there is no limit to the number of jobs we can create and the amount of prosperity we can unleash.
    America will truly be the greatest place in the world to invest, hire, grow and to create new jobs, new technologies, and entire new industries.
    Instead of driving jobs and wealth away, America will become the world’s great magnet for innovation and job creation.
    My opponent’s plan rejects this optimism. She offers only more taxing, regulating, more spending and more wealth redistribution – a future of slow growth, declining incomes, and dwindling prosperity.
    The only people who get rich under Hillary Clinton’s scheme are the donors and the special interests.
    In Hillary Clinton’s America, we have surrendered our status as the world’s great economy, and we have surrendered our middle class to the whims of foreign countries.
    Not one single idea she has will create one net American job, or create one new dollar of American wealth for our workers. The only thing she can ever offer is a welfare check. Our plan will produce paychecks, and they’re going to be great paychecks for millions of people now unemployed.
    In the course of this campaign, I have travelled all across this country and I’ve met the most amazing people. Every day, I’ve seen the goodness and character of our country, and brave citizens proudly fighting through hard times and difficult circumstances.
    In many parts of our country, the hard times never seem to end. I’ve visited cities and towns in upstate New York where half the jobs have left and moved to other countries.
    Politicians have abandoned these places all over our country and the people who live there.
    Worse still, politicians have heaped scorn and disdain on these wonderful Americans. My opponent described tens of millions of American citizens as deplorable and irredeemable – how can Hillary Clinton seek to lead this country when she considers its citizens beyond redemption?
    The hardworking people she calls deplorable are the most admirable people I know: they are cops and soldiers, teachers and firefighters, young and old, moms and dads, blacks, whites and Latinos – but above everything else, they are all American. They love their families, they love their country, and they want a better future.
    These are the forgotten men and women of America. People who work hard but don’t have a voice.
    I am running to be their voice, and to fight to bring prosperity to every part of this country.
    Too many of our leaders have forgotten that it’s their duty to protect the jobs, wages and well-being of American workers before any other consideration.
    I’m not running to be President of the world. I’m running to be President of the United States – and as your President, I will fight for every last American job.
    We are the nation that tamed the West, dug out the Panama Canal, won two World Wars, and put a man on the moon.
    It’s time to start thinking big once again.
    That’s why I believe it is time to establish a national goal of reaching 4% economic growth.
    In working with my economic team, we’ve put together a plan that puts us on track to achieve that goal. Over the next ten years, our economic team estimates that under our plan the economy will average 3.5% growth and create a total of 25 million new jobs. You can visit our website to see the math.
    This growth means that our jobs plan, including our childcare reforms, will be completely paid-for in combination with proposed budget savings.
    It will be deficit neutral. If we reach 4% growth, it will reduce the deficit.
    It will be accomplished through a complete overhaul of our tax, regulatory, energy and trade policies.
    Right now, under Obama-Clinton policies, the economy grew only 1.1 percent last quarter – that translates to millions of lost jobs.
    This is the weakest so-called recovery since the Great Depression.
    Over the last 7 years, the economy grew only 2.1 percent, the slowest period in seventy years. Had the economy grown under Obama at the same rate as Reagan, it would have meant 10 million more jobs.
    Perhaps most shockingly, 1 in 6 men aged 18-34 are either in jail or out of work.
    Meanwhile, another 2 million Hispanic-Americans have been added to the ranks of those in poverty.
    On top of it all, the Obama-Clinton policies have doubled the national debt. It took more than 230 years for the United States to accumulate it’s first $10 trillion dollars in debt – it took President Obama only eight years to add another $10 trillion.
    Now, it would be one thing if that money had been used to completely rebuild our nation, our military, and our infrastructure.
    Instead, the opposite happened. We doubled our debt and, in return, we have dilapidated infrastructure, failing schools, a badly depleted military, and another 14 million people who have left the workforce.
    Never has so much money been spent so poorly.
    But we’re going to turn that all around. Here’s how.
    It begins with bold new tax reform.
    As outlined in Detroit, our tax plan will greatly simplify the code and reduce the number of brackets from 7 to 3. The 3 new brackets will be 12, 25 and 33, but low-income Americans will pay no income tax at all – in fact, our plan will remove millions and millions of workers from the income tax rolls entirely.
    By lowering rates, streamlining deductions, and simplifying the process, we will add millions of new jobs.
    In addition, because we have strongly capped deductions for the wealthy and closed special interest loopholes, the tax relief will be concentrated on the working and middle class taxpayer. They will receive the biggest benefit – it won’t even be close.
    This is a working and middle class tax relief proposal.
    The tax relief for these workers will be expanded by my childcare proposals that I have worked on with my daughter, Ivanka.
    These proposals are a central element of our comprehensive tax reform and economic growth plan.
    Families will be able to fully deduct the average cost of childcare from their taxes, including stay-at-home parents. Because this deduction is capped, it will disproportionately benefit working and middle class families. The less you make, the larger a share of your income you can exclude from taxation.
    Parents will also be able to enroll in tax-free dependent care savings accounts for their children or elderly relatives. Low-income households will benefit from both an Expanded Earned Income Tax Credit – in the form a Childcare rebate – and a matching $500 contribution for their savings accounts.
    A married couple earning $50,000 per year with two children and $8,000 in child care expenses will save 35% from their current tax bill.
    A married couple earning $75,000 per year with two children and $10,000 in child care expenses will receive a 30% reduction in their tax bill.
    One of our greatest job creation measures is going to be our 15% business tax rate – down from the current 35% rate, a reduction of more than 40 percent. An explosion of new business and new jobs will be created. It will be amazing to watch.
    We will also allow U.S.-based manufacturers to fully expense the cost of new plants and equipment.
    On top of that, we will bring back trillions in business wealth parked overseas and tax it at a 10% rate. Some people say there are $2 trillion dollars overseas, I think it’s $5 trillion. By taxing it at 10% instead of 35%, all of this money will come back into our country.
    We will turn America into a magnet for new jobs – and that means jobs in our poorest communities.
    Next, comes regulations.
    One of the keys to unlocking growth is scaling-back years of disastrous regulations unilaterally imposed by our out-of-control bureaucracy.
    Regulations have grown into a massive, job-killing industry – and the regulation industry is one business I will put an end to.
    In 2015 alone, federal agencies issued over 3,300 final rules and regulations, up from 2,400 the prior year. Every year, overregulation costs our economy $2 trillion dollars a year and reduces household wealth by almost $15,000 dollars.
    I’ve proposed a moratorium on new federal regulations that are not compelled by Congress or public safety, and I will eliminate all needless and job-killing regulations now on the books.
    This includes eliminating some of our most intrusive regulations, like the Waters of The U.S. Rule. It also means scrapping the EPA’s so-called Clean Power Plan which the government itself estimates will cost $7.2 billion a year. This Obama-Clinton directive will shut down most, if not all, coal-powered electricity plans in America. Remember what Hillary Clinton said? She wants to shut down the miners, just like she wants to shut down the steel mills.
    We’re going to put our great miners and steel workers back to work.
    Energy reform is central to our plan as well
    According to the Heritage Foundation, by 2030, President Obama’s energy restrictions will eliminate another half a million manufacturing jobs, reduce economic output by $2.5 trillion dollars, and reduce incomes by $7,000 dollars per person.

    Hillary Clinton wants to go even further, and her plan could cost the economy $5 trillion dollars.

    A Trump Administration will lift restrictions on all sources of American energy production. According to the Institute for American Energy Resources this will:

    increase GDP by more than $100 billion annually
    add over 500,000 new jobs annually
    increase annual wages by more than $30 billion over the next 7 years
    increase federal, state, and local tax revenues by almost $6 trillion over 4 decades
    increase total economic activity by more than $20 trillion over the next 40 years.

    In addition, we will streamline the permitting process for all energy infrastructure projects, including the billions of dollars in projects held up by President Obama – creating countless more jobs in the process.
    Finally, comes trade – the foundation for everything
    America’s annual trade deficit with the world is now nearly $800 a billion a year – an enormous drag on growth.
    Between World War II and the year 2000, the United States averaged a 3.5% growth rate. But, after China joined the World Trade Organization, our average growth rate has been reduced to only 2 percent.
    Predatory trade practices, product dumping, currency manipulation and intellectual property theft have taken millions of jobs and trillions in wealth from our country.
    It is no great secret that many of the special interests funding my opponent’s campaign are the same people profiting from these terrible trade deals. The same so-called experts advising Hillary Clinton are the same people who gave us NAFTA, China’s entry into the World Trade Organization, the job-killing trade deal with South Korea, and now the Trans-Pacific Partnership.
    The verdict is in. All of the special interests that the media race to for comment have been proven wrong about every single deal they’ve promoted – every lie and every prediction has crashed upon the rocks of reality.
    Our manufacturing base has crumbled, communities have been hollowed out, wages have declined, and households are making less today than they were in the year 2000.
    I have proposed a detailed plan to reform our trade policies and bring vast new jobs and wealth to America. This includes the following steps:
    I'm going to direct the Secretary of Commerce to identify every violation of trade agreements a foreign country is currently using to harm our workers. I will use every tool under American and international law to end these abuses, and I will use our greatest business leaders and finest negotiators – and I know who you are, many of you are in the room.
    We are going to start with NAFTA, which is causing so much damage to our country. We will entirely renegotiate NAFTA into a deal that will either be good for us or will be terminated until a brand new and productive deal can be signed.
    We are also going to keep America out of the Trans-Pacific Partnership.
    Next, I am going to instruct my Treasury Secretary to label China a currency manipulator, and to apply tariffs to any country that devalues its currency to gain an unfair advantage over the United States.
    I am going to instruct the U.S. Trade Representative to bring trade cases against China. China's unfair subsidy behavior is prohibited by the terms of its entrance to the WTO, and I intend to enforce those rules.
    If China does not stop its illegal activities, including its theft of American trade secrets and intellectual property, I will apply countervailing duties until China ceases and desists.
    Just the single action of enforcing intellectual property rules alone would add millions of new American jobs. According to the U.S. International Trade Commission, improved protection of America’s intellectual property in China would add 2 million jobs a year to the United States every single year.
    We are going to stop the outflow of jobs from our country, and open a new highway of jobs back into our country.
    Here is how the plan adds up
    We are proposing a $4.4 trillion tax cut that will score as $2.6 trillion under a dynamic growth model, which is how taxes should be scored. This includes the childcare plan.
    Our economic team has further modeled that the growth-induced savings from trade, energy and regulation reform will shave at least another $1.8 trillion off of the remaining cost.
    That leaves around $800 billion dollars. This money can all be saved through simple, common sense reforms. If we save just one penny of each federal dollar spent on non-defense, and non-entitlement programs, we can save almost $1 trillion over the next decade – again this is spending that does not touch defense, and that does not touch entitlements.
    If our plan exceeds the 3.5% ten-year growth average, then our jobs proposal will actually reduce the deficit. Savings will be compounded by the fact that people who are currently receiving unemployment or welfare will finally be able to find jobs.
    This is the most pro-growth, pro-jobs, pro-family plan put forth perhaps in the history of our country.
    This is what our new future will look like
    I am going to lower you taxes; I am going to get rid of massive amounts of unnecessary regulations, on business and in your life; I’m going to unleash American energy; I’m going to repeal and replace Obamacare; I’m going to appoint Justices to the Supreme Court who will follow the Constitution; I’m going rebuild our depleted military and take care of our vets; I’m going to save your 2nd amendment; I’m going to stop illegal immigration and drugs coming into our country, and yes, we will build the wall [Mexico will pay]; and I’m going to renegotiate our disastrous trade deals, especially NAFTA – and we will only make great trade deals that put the American worker first.
    And we are going to put our miners and our steelworkers back to work.
    We will rebuild our roads, bridges, tunnels, highways, airports, schools and hospitals.
    American cars will travel the roads, American planes will soar in the skies, and American ships will patrol the seas.
    American steel will send new skyscrapers into the clouds.
    American hands will rebuild this nation – and American energy, harvested from American sources, will power this nation. American workers will be hired to do the job.
    We will put new American metal into the spine of this country.
    Jobs will return, incomes will rise, and new factories will come rushing back to our shores.

    We Will Make America Wealthy Again.

    We Will Make America Strong Again.

    And Will Make America Great Again.

    Thank you, and God Bless!

    Brent Smith  on Obama Care.
    This fall Illinois Obamacare premiums will increase by an average of 48% – the Bronze by 44%, the Silver by 45% and the Gold by 55%.
    What ever happened to that $2500 savings we were promised? Well, some will save – in fact, make out like bandits. Those being subsidized will see their subsidies increase, allowing plans to be offered for less than $100 per month – for every increase in our premium means an increase in the subsidy.
    And if you think Illinois is an outlier, think again. As one state’s losses pile up, other states will follow. Nationwide, insurers and exchanges are recording massive losses, which means the rest of us will be stuck holding the bag with 40-50 percent increases every year to pay for those losses and the subsidized.
    Well, what about seniors? They are the ones in need of medical care most and more often. Surely they will taken care of. No – no they won’t. “The latest Medicare Trustees report, warns that by 2040 half of all hospitals, 70% of all skilled nursing homes and 90% of home health care services will not be able to survive under Medicare’s increasingly skimpy fees.”
    Translation: Because facilities can’t remain in business merely accepting payment from Medicare, seniors will either have to make up the difference, which many cannot afford, or be refused service and care.
    But fear not for all is not lost. Obama has been hard at work in the waning months of his reign as the first American Monarch. Thankfully for us he and his healthcare brain-trust have kept their noses to the grind-stone developing a “new” plan. He is calling “for a ‘public option’ – that is, an insurance plan wholly run by the government – after he leaves office. ‘Congress should revisit a public plan to compete alongside private insurers in areas of the country where competition is limited,’ he wrote in the Journal of the American Medical Association.”
    What a great “new” idea – only it’s not. If you have been following this, you’ll recognize that this has been the devious scheme all along and things are progressing by the book, possibly even ahead of schedule. The progressives could not have planned it better, which is exactly what they did – planned it. Obama originally said it may 10 or 15 years to get a single-payer system.
    Recall, all the way back in 2003, Obama, speaking to a group of Illinois AFL-CIO thugs said: “I happen to be a proponent of a single payer universal health care program.” (applause) “I see no reason why the United States of America, the wealthiest country in the history of the world, spending 14 percent of its Gross National Product on health care cannot provide basic health insurance to everybody. And that’s what Jim is talking about when he says everybody in, nobody out. A single payer health care plan, a universal health care plan. And that’s what I’d like to see.”
    His vision has never changed. In 2008 he reiterated his collectivist dream by saying: “If I were designing a system from scratch, I would probably go ahead with a single-payer system.”
    This is what we conservative “chicken littles” have been warning of all this time. This was the plan all along. Obama, like Hillary (remember Hillarycare of the early `90s), designed the current system to fail, so eventually things would get so bad that people would beg the government to step in and “fix it.” 
    Of course, the only way to do so would not be to re-privatize healthcare, but for the government to take it over – lock, stock and barrel. And here we are already.