Connect with us

Politics

#LockHerUp | Classified Emails Belonging To Huma Abedin Found On Weiner’s Laptop, Topics Like Hamas, Israel And Palestinian Authorities

Published

on

(Via Zerohedge)

This afternoon, the State Department has just released the infamous batch of work-related emails from the account of top Hillary Clinton aide Huma Abedin that were discovered by the FBI on a laptop belonging to Abedin’s estranged husband, and convicted pedophile, Anthony Weiner near the end of the 2016 presidential campaign.

As you may recall, the discovery of these emails on Weiner’s computer is what prompted Comey to re-open the Hillary Clinton email investigation roughly 1 week prior to the election, a decision which the Hillary camp insists is the reason why they lost the White House.

Of course, while the Hillary campaign attempted to dismiss the emails as just another ‘nothing burger’, the Daily Mail reports that an initial review of the 2,800 documents dumped by the State Department reveal at least 5 emails classified at the ‘confidential level,’ the third most sensitive level the U.S. government uses.

The classified emails date from 2010-2012, and concern discussions with Middle East leaders, including those from the United Arab Emirates, Israel, the Palestinian Authority, and Hamas – which was declared a terrorist organization by the European Court of Justice in July. Large portions of the 2,800 page release were redacted prior to release by the State Department.

According to the Daily Mail, three of the emails were sent either to or from an address called “BBB Backup,” which one email identifies as a backup of a Blackberry Bold 9700 – presumably belonging to Abedin.

As a civilian, Weiner – though once a congressman, was unlikely to have possessed the proper clearance to view or store the classified documents on his laptop.

A sample of the documents can be seen below, first, a “Call Sheet” prepared for Hillary’s discussion with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu:

And another update regarding “Hamas-PLO Talks”:

In at least two instances, Abedin directly forwarded Anthony Weiner official conversations – one of which included Hillary Clinton and senior advisor Jake Sullivan with subject “Lavrov” – referring to Russia’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, Sergey Lavrov. The email discusses an official response by a “quartet” of envoys (The US, EU, UN, and Russia) over Israel’s announced changes to its Gaza policy, ending a contentious blockade.

One wonders why Anthony Weiner would need to know about this?

Abedin also forwarded Weiner an email discussion from July 22, 2012 which had previously been released by WikiLeaks – which included the Ambassador to Senegal, Mushingi Tulinabo. While the contents of the email are redacted, Senegal had elected a new President earlier that month. Of note, the Clinton Foundation has supported or been involved in several projects in the country.

In a statement issued Friday, Judicial watch called the release a “major victory,” adding “After years of hard work in federal court, Judicial Watch has forced the State Department to finally allow Americans to see these public documents. It will be in keeping with our past experience that Abedin’s emails on Weiner’s laptop will include classified and other sensitive materials. That these government docs were on Anthony Weiner’s laptop dramatically illustrates the need for the Justice Department to finally do a serious investigation of Hillary Clinton’s and Huma Abedin’s obvious violations of law.”

Fitton also commented that it’s ‘outrageous’ that Clinton and Abedin ‘walked out of the State Department with classified documents and the Obama FBI and DOJ didn’t do a thing about it.’

Not surprisingly, Abedin was spotted heading into the Hillary Clinton offices in midtown Manhattan earlier today just a few hours before the release of the 2,800 emails. Seems you’re never too old to be called into the Principal’s office…

We’re confident this will all be promptly dismissed by Hillary as just another effort to “criminalize behavior that is normal”because what government employee hasn’t shared classified materials with their convicted pedophile husband? Certainly, just another boring day in Washington…

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Immigration

Majority of Americans Support Mass Deportation – CBS Poll

Published

on

In a recent CBS poll, it has been found that 62% of Americans support the mass deportation of undocumented immigrants from the United States. This result reflects the growing public sentiment in favor of stricter immigration policies and the enforcement of existing laws.

The poll, conducted by CBS, surveyed a diverse group of American citizens to gauge their opinions on various issues related to immigration. The findings indicate a significant shift in public opinion, with a majority of respondents expressing their support for the mass deportation of undocumented immigrants.

The results of the poll are not entirely surprising, given the ongoing debates and discussions surrounding immigration reform in the United States. Many Americans believe that the current immigration system is flawed and that stricter measures are necessary to address the issue of illegal immigration.

Proponents of mass deportation argue that it is a necessary step to protect the country’s borders and ensure the safety and security of American citizens. They believe that undocumented immigrants pose a threat to the nation’s economy, social services, and national security.

However, critics of mass deportation argue that it is an inhumane and impractical solution to the problem of illegal immigration. They point out that many undocumented immigrants have lived in the United States for years, contributing to their communities and the economy. Mass deportation, they argue, would result in the separation of families and would be detrimental to the well-being of those affected.

The findings of the CBS poll are likely to fuel further discussions and debates on immigration reform in the United States. As the issue continues to be a contentious topic, it remains to be seen how policymakers will respond to the growing public support for mass deportation of undocumented immigrants.

In conclusion, the recent CBS poll indicates that a majority of Americans support the mass deportation of undocumented immigrants. This finding reflects the growing public sentiment in favor of stricter immigration policies and the enforcement of existing laws. As the debate on immigration reform continues, it is crucial for policymakers to consider the diverse perspectives and opinions of the American people in order to find a balanced and effective solution to the issue of illegal immigration.

Continue Reading

Health

mRNA COVID-19 Injections Not Vaccines – Ninth Circuit Rules

Published

on

In a recent decision that has stirred up discussions across the nation, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the COVID-19 mRNA injections do not qualify as vaccines under traditional medical definitions. This decision was made in a lawsuit brought by the Health Freedom Defense Fund and other plaintiffs against the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD). The court’s decision could potentially expose pharmaceutical companies to future liability lawsuits, as it challenges the legal protections typically afforded to vaccine manufacturers.

The lawsuit against LAUSD was based on the claim that the district’s vaccine mandate infringed upon the plaintiffs’ fundamental right to refuse medical treatment. The court, in a majority opinion authored by Circuit Judge R. Nelson and supported by Judge Collins, asserted that the mRNA shots, marketed as vaccines, do not effectively prevent the transmission of COVID-19 but merely reduce symptoms in those who contract the virus. This distinction, the court argued, means that the injections should not be considered vaccines under traditional medical definitions.

The implications of this ruling are significant. If mRNA injections are not considered vaccines, then they may not be subject to the same legal protections as traditional vaccines. This could potentially open the door to liability lawsuits against pharmaceutical companies that have produced and distributed the injections.

The court’s decision has sparked a range of reactions on social media. Some users have expressed relief and support for the ruling, viewing it as a step towards greater transparency and accountability in the handling of the pandemic. Others have criticized the decision, arguing that it undermines public health efforts and could discourage the use of potentially life-saving treatments.

The ruling has also reignited debates about the handling of the pandemic and the promotion of alternative treatments. Some have questioned the effectiveness of the mRNA injections, while others have pointed to the rapid development and deployment of these treatments as a remarkable achievement in the face of a global crisis.

As the legal implications of this ruling continue to unfold, it is likely that the debate surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic and the role of vaccines in public health will continue to evolve. The Ninth Circuit’s decision serves as a reminder of the complex legal and ethical issues at the heart of public health policy.

Continue Reading

Politics

President Trump: No More Tip Taxes!

Published

on

In a recent rally in Las Vegas, former President Donald Trump announced his intention to eliminate taxes on tips for service industry workers if he were to be re-elected. This proposal, which would allow workers to keep their entire tip amount without taxation, has been met with enthusiasm and support from many Americans, particularly those in the service industry.

Trump’s pledge to abolish tip taxes is a bold move that could have a significant impact on the lives of millions of Americans. Service industry workers, including those in restaurants and hospitality, often rely heavily on tips as a significant portion of their income. These workers are typically not highly paid and often face financial instability. By promising to eliminate taxes on tips, Trump is positioning himself as an advocate for the working class, addressing a specific economic concern that directly affects their livelihoods.

The proposal also touches on broader debates about tax policy and economic inequality. While the elimination of taxes on tips could be seen as a populist move to help the working class, it also raises questions about the fairness of the tax system and the distribution of the tax burden. However, Trump’s pledge is a clear indication of his commitment to supporting American workers and addressing the economic challenges they face.

Critics argue that while the policy may benefit service industry workers, it could also lead to unintended consequences, such as encouraging employers to shift more of their employees’ compensation to tips, potentially leading to reduced wages. However, these concerns should not overshadow the potential benefits of Trump’s proposal.

In conclusion, Trump’s pledge to abolish tip taxes is a bold move that could have a significant impact on the lives of millions of Americans. By addressing a specific economic concern that directly affects the livelihoods of service industry workers, Trump is demonstrating his commitment to supporting American workers and addressing the economic challenges they face. While there are concerns about potential unintended consequences, the potential benefits of this proposal should not be overlooked. Trump’s pledge to abolish tip taxes is a clear indication of his commitment to making America great again for all Americans.

Continue Reading

Trending

Donate to Populist Wire

*Note: Every donation is greatly appreciated, regardless of the amount.