Again; much ado about nothing.....Qatar sold arms to folks in Iraq and Syria, and you, of all people are complaining about it? What happened to, "Not An American Concern"?
Only convenient when you're bashing America I guess...... On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 8:00 PM, plainolamerican <[email protected]> wrote: > U.S.-Approved Arms for Libya Rebels Fell Into Jihadis’ Hands > > WASHINGTON — The Obama administration secretly gave its blessing to arms > shipments to Libyan rebels from Qatar > <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/qatar/index.html?inline=nyt-geo> > last > year, but American officials later grew alarmed as evidence grew that Qatar > was turning some of the weapons over to Islamic militants, according to > United States officials and foreign diplomats. > FROM OUR ADVERTISERS > > - > - > - > - > > No evidence has emerged linking the weapons provided by the Qataris during > the uprising against Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi to the attack that killed four > Americans at the United States diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya > <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/libya/index.html?inline=nyt-geo>, > in September. > > But in the months before, the Obama administration clearly was worried > about the consequences of its hidden hand in helping arm Libyan militants, > concerns that have not previously been reported. The weapons and money from > Qatar strengthened militant groups in Libya, allowing them to become a > destabilizing force since the fall of the Qaddafi government. > Continue reading the main story > <http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/06/world/africa/weapons-sent-to-libyan-rebels-with-us-approval-fell-into-islamist-hands.html?_r=0#story-continues-3> > > - > > The experience in Libya has taken on new urgency as the administration > considers whether to play a direct role in arming rebels in Syria > <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/syria/index.html?inline=nyt-geo>, > where weapons are flowing in from Qatar and other countries. > Photo > Libyans in Benghazi last year in front of a Libyan flag, right, and a > Qatari flag painted on the wall. CreditBryan Denton for The New York Times > > The Obama administration did not initially raise objections when Qatar > began shipping arms to opposition groups in Syria, even if it did not offer > encouragement, according to current and former administration officials. > But they said the United States has growing concerns that, just as in > Libya, the Qataris are equipping some of the wrong militants. > > The United States, which had only small numbers of C.I.A. officers in > Libya during the tumult of the rebellion, provided little oversight of the > arms shipments. Within weeks of endorsing Qatar’s plan to send weapons > there in spring 2011, the White House began receiving reports that they > were going to Islamic militant groups. They were “more antidemocratic, more > hard-line, closer to an extreme version of Islam” than the main rebel > alliance in Libya, said a former Defense Department official. > > The Qatari assistance to fighters viewed as hostile by the United States > demonstrates the Obama administration’s continuing struggles in dealing > with the Arab Spring uprisings, as it tries to support popular protest > movements while avoiding American military entanglements. Relying on > surrogates allows the United States to keep its fingerprints off > operations, but also means they may play out in ways that conflict with > American interests. > > “To do this right, you have to have on-the-ground intelligence and you > have to have experience,” said Vali Nasr, a former State Department adviser > who is now dean of the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International > Studies <http://www.sais-jhu.edu/>, part of Johns Hopkins University. “If > you rely on a country that doesn’t have those things, you are really flying > blind. When you have an intermediary, you are going to lose control.” > > He said that Qatar would not have gone through with the arms shipments if > the United States had resisted them, but other current and former > administration officials said Washington had little leverage at times over > Qatari officials. “They march to their own drummer,” said a former senior > State Department official. The White House and State Department declined to > comment. > > Advertisement > Continue reading the main story > <http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/06/world/africa/weapons-sent-to-libyan-rebels-with-us-approval-fell-into-islamist-hands.html?_r=0#story-continues-4> > > During the frantic early months of the Libyan rebellion, various players > motivated by politics or profit — including an American arms dealer who > proposed weapons transfers in an e-mail exchange with a United States > emissary later killed in Benghazi — sought to aid those trying to oust > Colonel Qaddafi. > > But after the White House decided to encourage Qatar — and on a smaller > scale, the United Arab Emirates — to ship arms to the Libyans, President > Obama > <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/o/barack_obama/index.html?inline=nyt-per> > complained > in April 2011 to the emir of Qatar that his country was not coordinating > its actions in Libya with the United States, the American officials said. > “The president made the point to the emir that we needed transparency about > what Qatar was doing in Libya,” said a former senior administration > official who had been briefed on the matter. > > About that same time, Mahmoud Jibril, then the prime minister of the > Libyan transitional government, expressed frustration to administration > officials that the United States was allowing Qatar to arm extremist groups > opposed to the new leadership, according to several American officials. > They, like nearly a dozen current and former White House, diplomatic, > intelligence, military and foreign officials, would speak only on the > condition of anonymity for this article. > > The administration has never determined where all of the weapons, paid for > by Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, went inside Libya, officials said. > Qatar is believed to have shipped by air and sea small arms, including > machine guns, automatic rifles, and ammunition, for which it has demanded > reimbursement from Libya’s new government. Some of the arms since have been > moved from Libya to militants with ties to Al Qaeda in Mali, where radical > jihadi factions have imposed Shariah law > <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/s/sharia_islamic_law/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier> > in > the northern part of the country, the former Defense Department official > said. Others have gone to Syria, according to several American and foreign > officials and arms traders. > > Although NATO provided air support that proved critical for the Libyan > rebels, the Obama administration wanted to avoid getting immersed in a > ground war, which officials feared could lead the United States into > another quagmire in the Middle East. > > As a result, the White House largely relied on Qatar and the United Arab > Emirates, two small Persian Gulf states and frequent allies of the United > States. Qatar, a tiny nation whose natural gas reserves have made it > enormously wealthy, for years has tried to expand its influence in the Arab > world. Since 2011, with dictatorships in the Middle East and North Africa > coming under siege, Qatar has given arms and money to various opposition > and militant groups, chiefly Sunni Islamists, in hopes of cementing > alliances with the new governments. Officials from Qatar and the emirates > would not comment. > > After discussions among members of the National Security Council, the > Obama administration backed the arms shipments from both countries, > according to two former administration officials briefed on the talks. > > Advertisement > Continue reading the main story > <http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/06/world/africa/weapons-sent-to-libyan-rebels-with-us-approval-fell-into-islamist-hands.html?_r=0#story-continues-6> > > Advertisement > Continue reading the main story > <http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/06/world/africa/weapons-sent-to-libyan-rebels-with-us-approval-fell-into-islamist-hands.html?_r=0#story-continues-6> > > American officials say that the United Arab Emirates first approached the > Obama administration during the early months of the Libyan uprising, asking > for permission to ship American-built weapons that the United States had > supplied for the emirates’ use. The administration rejected that request, > but instead urged the emirates to ship weapons to Libya that could not be > traced to the United States. > > “The U.A.E. was asking for clearance to send U.S. weapons,” said one > former official. “We told them it’s O.K. to ship other weapons.” > > For its part, Qatar supplied weapons made outside the United States, > including French- and Russian-designed arms, according to people familiar > with the shipments. > > But the American support for the arms shipments from Qatar and the > emirates could not be completely hidden. NATO air and sea forces around > Libya had to be alerted not to interdict the cargo planes and freighters > transporting the arms into Libya from Qatar and the emirates, American > officials said. > Continue reading the main story > <http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/06/world/africa/weapons-sent-to-libyan-rebels-with-us-approval-fell-into-islamist-hands.html?_r=0#story-continues-9> > > > > Concerns in Washington soon rose about the groups Qatar was supporting, > officials said. A debate over what to do about the weapons shipments > dominated at least one meeting of the so-called Deputies Committee, the > interagency panel consisting of the second-highest ranking officials in > major agencies involved in national security. “There was a lot of concern > that the Qatar weapons were going to Islamist groups,” one official > recalled. > > The Qataris provided weapons, money and training to various rebel groups > in Libya. One militia that received aid was controlled by Adel Hakim > Belhaj, then leader of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, who was held by > the C.I.A. in 2004 and is now considered a moderate politician in Libya. It > is unclear which other militants received the aid. > > “Nobody knew exactly who they were,” said the former defense official. The > Qataris, the official added, are “supposedly good allies, but the Islamists > they support are not in our interest.” > > No evidence has surfaced that any weapons went to Ansar al-Shariah, an > extremist group blamed for the Benghazi attack. > > The case of Marc Turi, the American arms merchant who had sought to > provide weapons to Libya, demonstrates other challenges the United States > faced in dealing with Libya. A dealer who lives in both Arizona and Abu > Dhabi in the United Arab Emirates, Mr. Turi sells small arms to buyers in > the Middle East and Africa, relying primarily on suppliers of > Russian-designed weapons in Eastern Europe. > > In March 2011, just as the Libyan civil war was intensifying, Mr. Turi > realized that Libya could be a lucrative new market, and applied to the > State Department for a license to provide weapons to the rebels there, > according to e-mails and other documents he has provided. (American > citizens are required to obtain United States approval for any > international arms sales.) > > He also e-mailed J. Christopher Stevens, then the special representative > to the Libyan rebel alliance. The diplomat said he would “share” Mr. Turi’s > proposal with colleagues in Washington, according to e-mails provided by > Mr. Turi. Mr. Stevens, who became the United States ambassador to Libya, > was one of the four Americans killed in the Benghazi attack on Sept. 11. > > Mr. Turi’s application for a license was rejected in late March 2011. > Undeterred, he applied again, this time stating only that he planned to > ship arms worth more than $200 million to Qatar. In May 2011, his > application was approved. Mr. Turi, in an interview, said that his intent > was to get weapons to Qatar and that what “the U.S. government and Qatar > allowed from there was between them.” > > Two months later, though, his home near Phoenix was raided by agents from > the Department of Homeland Security. Administration officials say he > remains under investigation in connection with his arms dealings. The > Justice Department would not comment. > > Mr. Turi said he believed that United States officials had shut down his > proposed arms pipeline because he was getting in the way of the Obama > administration’s dealings with Qatar. The Qataris, he complained, imposed > no controls on who got the weapons. “They just handed them out like candy,” > he said. > > On Tuesday, November 10, 2015 at 1:35:09 PM UTC-6, KeithInTampa wrote: >> >> Much ado, about nothing: >> >> >> http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/oct/19/benghazi-memos-recovered-from-compound-detail-staf/ >> >> Dolarian Capital, part of a small network of U.S. arms merchants that has >> worked with U.S. intelligence >> <http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/us-intelligence/>, confirmed one >> of its licensing requests to ship weapons via Kuwait to Libya >> <http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/libya/> was approved by the State >> Department <http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/department-of-state/>in >> spring 2011 and then inexplicably revoked before the armaments were sent. >> >> “Dolarian Capital submitted the end user certificate in question to the >> U.S. Department of State for review and issuance of a license to transfer >> the arms and ammunition to Libya >> <http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/libya/>. The U.S. Department of >> State responded with a approval, which was revoked shortly thereafter,” one >> of its attorneys said in a statement issued to The Washington Times. “As a >> result no arms or ammunition was shipped or delivered to Libya >> <http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/libya/> under the end user >> certificate.” >> >> On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 1:49 PM, plainolamerican <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> yep ... Hillary was complicate in another failed US interventionist >>> effort to arm middle east terrorists. >>> dems and repubs are two sides of the same coin. >>> >>> On Tuesday, November 10, 2015 at 10:19:41 AM UTC-6, Travis wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/260718/hillary-clinton-arms-dealer-arnold-ahlert >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> *Hillary Clinton, Arms Dealer* >>>> >>>> The dirty deals that put illegal arms shipments into the hands of >>>> Libyan jihadists. >>>> >>>> November 9, 2015 >>>> >>>> *Arnold Ahlert* <http://www.frontpagemag.com/author/arnold-ahlert> >>>> >>>> [image: Description: >>>> http://www.frontpagemag.com/sites/default/files/styles/article_full/public/uploads/2015/11/hill.jpg?itok=MQ4xk3_H] >>>> >>>> In a *scathing* >>>> <http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2015/10/29/cannot-allow-hillary-clinton-midwife-to-chaos-and-public-liar-to-be-our-next-president.print.html> >>>> column >>>> Fox News contributor Andrew Napolitano makes the convincing case that >>>> Hillary Clinton sold weapons to Libya in a direction violation of the U.N. >>>> arms embargo, and then lied about it under oath during her testimony before >>>> the House Select Committee on Benghazi Oct. 22. >>>> >>>> "To pursue her goal of a ‘democratic' government there, Clinton, along >>>> with Obama and a dozen or so members of Congress from both houses and both >>>> political parties, decided she should break the law by permitting U.S. arms >>>> dealers to violate the U.N. arms embargo and arm Libyan rebels whom she >>>> hoped would one day run the new government,” Napolitano explains. "So she >>>> exercised her authority as secretary of state to authorize the shipment of >>>> American-made arms to Qatar, a country beholden to the Muslim Brotherhood >>>> and friendly to the Libyan rebels and a country the U.S. had no business >>>> arming—unless the purpose of doing so was for the arms to be transferred to >>>> the rebels.” >>>> >>>> Memos recovered from the incinerated compound in Benghazi give great >>>> weight to the assertion. The documents were *obtained* >>>> <http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/oct/20/hillary-clinton-state-department-approved-us-weapo/?page=all> >>>> by >>>> the *Washington Times* and they reveal the American diplomats >>>> stationed there were keeping track of numerous potential U.S.-sanctioned >>>> weapons shipments aimed at arming our allies, "one or more of which were >>>> destined for the Transitional National Council, the Libyan movement that >>>> was seeking to oust Gadhafi and form a new government,” the paper reports. >>>> >>>> A file marked “arms deal” reveals that one of those shipments was >>>> supposed to be sent by Dolarian Capital Inc. of Fresno, CA, one of many >>>> arms sellers that work with U.S. intelligence. The file contained an end >>>> use certificate from the State Department’s office of defense trade >>>> controls licensing, and Dolarian confirmed one of the licensing requests >>>> the State Department initially approved in 2011 was an authorization to >>>> send weapons to Libya via Kuwait. The certificate was inexplicably revoked >>>> before Dolarian could ship rocket and grenade launchers, 7,000 machine guns >>>> and 8 million rounds of ammunition originally manufactured by former >>>> Soviet-bloc nations in Eastern Europe. >>>> >>>> “Dolarian Capital submitted the end user certificate in question to the >>>> U.S. Department of State for review and issuance of a license to transfer >>>> the arms and ammunition to Libya,” one of the company's attorneys said in a >>>> statement issued to the* Times*. "The U.S. Department of State >>>> responded with a approval, which was revoked shortly thereafter. As a >>>> result no arms or ammunition was shipped or delivered to Libya under the >>>> end user certificate.” >>>> >>>> Nonetheless, federal court documents obtained by Fox News *reveal* >>>> <http://www.foxbusiness.com/economy-policy/2015/06/27/exclusive-arming-benghazi/> >>>> arms >>>> sales to Libyan rebels that occurred during Clinton’s tenure as Secretary >>>> of State *were* ultimately transacted. "It was then, and remains now, >>>> my opinion that the United States did participate, directly or indirectly, >>>> in the supply of weapons to the Libyan Transitional National Council,” >>>> stated career CIA officer David Manners in a sworn declaration to the >>>> District Court of Arizona on May 5, 2015. >>>> >>>> Manners' testimony was part of a grand jury investigation into American >>>> defense contractor Marc Turi and his company Turi Defense Group, another >>>> entity licensed by State to sell and transport weapons worldwide. The >>>> investigation was focused on both the source and user of weapons defined in >>>> court documents as "end user" or "end use” that were entering Libya in >>>> 2011 while Qaddafi's regime was collapsing--but *before* any Libyan >>>> opposition groups were formally recognized by the United States. >>>> >>>> Turi illuminated what occurred in the midst of that chaos, including >>>> the reality that poor oversight of the operation allowed America’s enemies >>>> to obtain weapons. "When this equipment landed in Libya, half went one way, >>>> and the half went the other way," Turi said. "The half that went the other >>>> way is the half that ended up in Syria.” >>>> >>>> Turi admitted to Fox he had criminal past that included stealing a >>>> computer, his roommate's car, and writing several bad checks including one >>>> for $100,000 dollars. They verified his arrest, conviction and a stint in >>>> an Arizona jail, all of which seemingly conflict with what Fox >>>> characterizes as the "painstaking compliance” required to get the >>>> "necessary approvals set by strict US government regulations” to become a >>>> licensed arms contractor. >>>> >>>> Turi was one cog in a rather large machine of State Department-licensed >>>> contractors awarded a record number of contract during Clinton’s tenure. >>>> "More than 86-thousand licenses with a value of $44.3 billion dollars were >>>> granted in 2011... a surge of more than $10 billion dollars from the >>>> previous year,” the news site reports. >>>> >>>> Turi, who provided documents to Fox revealing exchanges with officials >>>> inside and outside the government, including high level members of >>>> Congress, the military, and State Department employees, explains he was >>>> part of a “zero footprint” supply chain whereby one Arab nation would >>>> supply another. "If you want to limit the exposure to the US government, >>>> what you simply do is outsource it to your allies," Turi explained. "The >>>> partners-the Qataris, and the Emiratis did exactly what they were >>>> contracted to do.” Turi claims he never sent weapons to Qatar and that such >>>> transactions are handled by the government and the State Department's >>>> Bureau of Political and Military Affairs headed by Clinton aide Andrew >>>> Shapiro, who oversaw State’s export control process. >>>> >>>> On March 14, 2011, Clinton and Ambassador Chris Stevens met >>>> with Mustafa Jibril in Paris. Jibril was a senior member of >>>> Libya's Transitional National Council (TNC). This occurred while a $267 >>>> million contract with Turi was working its way through channels. He insists >>>> Clinton was provided a copy of the application a day later when she and >>>> aide Huma Abedin were in Cairo, meeting with Egypt's new foreign minister >>>> Nabil el Arabi. The information was given to the TNC, who subsequently gave >>>> it to Clinton. "That's what was told to me...and emailed, “ Turi insists. >>>> Turi also alerted Stevens in an email, and received a reply from the >>>> ambassador thanking him and stating, "I'll keep it in mind and share it >>>> with my colleagues in Washington. >>>> >>>> A day later, a heavily redacted email provided to the Benghazi >>>> Committee revealed Clinton’s “newfound” interest in supplying weapons to >>>> rebels via contractors. "FYI. The idea of using private security experts to >>>> arm the opposition should be considered," Clinton wrote. In May, Turi got >>>> State Department approval for supplying Qatar. Two months later, federal >>>> agents raided his home. >>>> >>>> The feds are *alleging* <http://www.wnd.com/2015/07/2251045/> Turi >>>> tried to arm Libyans directly by submitting false documents for weapons >>>> shipments to Qatar as a cover up. Turi insists the feds are prosecuting an >>>> innocent man to cover for Clinton. >>>> >>>> Prior to her testimony on Oct. 22, Clinton only had to address the >>>> subject on one previous occasion, during an exchange with Senator Rand Paul >>>> (R-KY) in 2013. "Well, Senator you’ll have to direct that question to the >>>> agency that ran the annex,” Clinton *answered* >>>> <http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2015/05/breaking-rand-paul-was-right-obama-admin-was-running-guns-to-syria-hillary-lied-under-oath/> >>>> at >>>> the time, apparently alluding to the CIA. "And, I will see what information >>>> was available. >>>> >>>> During her Oct. 22 testimony she was equally duplicitous, stating, “I >>>> think the answer is no” when asked a direct question about supplying Libyan >>>> rebels, insisting that arming private militias may have been considered, >>>> but not "seriously considered,” and ultimately answering “no” when asked if >>>> she was aware the U.S. was shipping weapons Libyan rebels directly or >>>> indirectly. >>>> >>>> Napolitano shreds those assertions. "How could she answer ‘no’?” he >>>> writes. "She not only knew about the sending of arms to rebels but also >>>> personally authored and authorized it…The FBI and CIA advised her —in >>>> documents that are now public—that U.S. arms were making their way to known >>>> al-Qaida operatives.” >>>> >>>> The documents to which Napolitano refers were *obtained* >>>> <http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/judicial-watch-defense-state-department-documents-reveal-obama-administration-knew-that-al-qaeda-terrorists-had-planned-benghazi-attack-10-days-in-advance/> >>>> by >>>> Judicial Watch (JW) via court order last May. They were "the first official >>>> confirmation that shows the U.S. government was aware of arms shipments >>>> from Benghazi to Syria,” JW revealed. "Once this plot was hatched, Clinton >>>> and her fellow conspirators realized that some of these rebel groups were >>>> manned by al-Qaida operatives; and selling or providing arms to them is a >>>> felony -- hence the reason for months' worth of missing and destroyed >>>> Clinton emails,” Napolitano explains. >>>> >>>> Based on this additional evidence, which comes on top of the FBI >>>> investigation into Clinton’s failure to secure classified information—that >>>> now includes an *email* >>>> <https://foia.state.gov/searchapp/DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_OctWeb/SS6/DOC_0C05759255/C05759255.pdf> >>>> released >>>> Oct. 30 by the State Department demonstrating irrefutable proof she >>>> *sent* classified information—her obstruction of justice arising from >>>> the wiping of her server, and her perjured *testimony* >>>> <http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/09/politics/hillary-clinton-email-certified-court/> >>>> before >>>> U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan last August, when she insisted she >>>> had turned over all of her work-related emails to the State Department, >>>> Napolitano *believes* >>>> <http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/nov/4/andrew-napolitano-hillary-clintons-new-benghazi-li/> >>>> an >>>> FBI indictment is a virtual certainty. "When those recommendations are made >>>> known, no ballot will bear her name,” he concludes. >>>> >>>> Perhaps. Yet nagging developments suggest otherwise. The endemic >>>> corruption of the FBI and the Justice Department, most recently manifested >>>> in the *dropping* >>>> <http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/23/politics/lois-lerner-no-charges-doj-tea-party/> >>>> of >>>> a criminal investigation against the IRS—despite documents *obtained* >>>> <http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/judicial-watch-new-documents-reveal-doj-irs-and-fbi-plan-to-seek-criminal-charges-of-obama-opponents/> >>>> by >>>> Judicial Watch showing both entities were involved in the scandal itself—is >>>> extremely troublesome. So is the reality that two-term Vice President Joe >>>> Biden *announced* his intention not to run for president the day >>>> *before* Hillary’s testimony, suggesting he might have already known >>>> Democrats weren’t about to be saddled with the terminally-addled Bernie >>>> Sanders as their only presidential candidate. There is also the Benghazi >>>> Committee’s incomprehensible decision not to ask Clinton about a story that >>>> appeared in the *Daily Mail* on Oct. 17, *revealing* >>>> <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3277402/Smoking-gun-emails-reveal-Blair-s-deal-blood-George-Bush-Iraq-war-forged-YEAR-invasion-started.html> >>>> her >>>> unsecured server contained a 2002 email written by former Secretary of >>>> State Colin Powell to George W. Bush, marked “Secret/NoForn” as in >>>> confidential and not for foreign eyes. At the very least this demonstrates >>>> Clinton was *extracting* secure information from the State Department >>>> server. For what purpose, and why didn’t a single American mainstream media >>>> source pick up the story? >>>> >>>> Clinton remains a virtual lock for the Democratic presidential >>>> nomination. As the National Journal’s Ron Fournier *explains* >>>> <http://www.nationaljournal.com/s/91987/when-clinton-scandals-boil-away?mref=scroll>, >>>> "Democrats >>>> are eager to forgive Clinton’s lapses in judgment and honesty,” and >>>> despite the fact that Americans find her inherently *untrustworthy* >>>> <http://www.nationaljournal.com/s/91987/when-clinton-scandals-boil-away?mref=home> >>>> (an >>>> NBC/*WSJ* poll reveals that 53 percent of registered voters don’t >>>> believe she is “being honest and straightforward,” while just 27 >>>> percent do), it is likely nothing short of a criminal indictment will >>>> derail her presidential ambitions. Sadly, that says as much about the >>>> American public as it does about Clinton herself. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> __._,_.___ >>>> ------------------------------ >>>> Posted by: "Beowulf" <[email protected]> >>>> ------------------------------ >>>> >>>> >>>> Visit Your Group >>>> <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/grendelreport/info;_ylc=X3oDMTJmZGJodjJvBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2Z2hwBHN0aW1lAzE0NDcxMDIyNTY-> >>>> >>>> >>>> [image: Yahoo! Groups] >>>> <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJlMGJwcGJyBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNnZnAEc3RpbWUDMTQ0NzEwMjI1Ng--> >>>> • Privacy <https://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/groups/details.html> >>>> • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use >>>> <https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/> >>>> >>>> __,_._,___ >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>> -- >>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. >>> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum >>> >>> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ >>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. >>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more. >>> >>> --- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "PoliticalForum" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>> an email to [email protected]. >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>> >> >> -- > -- > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. > For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum > > * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. > * Read the latest breaking news, and more. > > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "PoliticalForum" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
