Patterico's Pontifications

11/1/2015

The One Percent Stick Together: Hillary Clinton’s Private Email Address Given To Hollywood Star, But Not To Ambassador Stevens

Filed under: General — Dana @ 9:04 am



[guest post by Dana]

With another batch of Hillary Clinton’s emails released last week, we now know that Hollywood megastar (and fellow-member of the One Percent club), Ben Affleck, had Hillary Clinton’s private email address. In fact, Affleck was corresponding with Clinton in 2012, the same year that Ambassador Stevens, who was not granted access to Clinton’s private email address, was killed in the attacks at Benghazi.

Untitled-1

Unfortunately, the ambassador simply didn’t have the same Hollywood credentials to rate having that sort of access:

Asked why Stevens did not personally get in touch with Clinton to re-iterate his numerous requests for more security at the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Clinton admitted that Stevens did not have her clintonemail.com address.

“Congressman, I – ” Clinton said, then paused. “I do not believe he had my personal email…He had the direct line to people he had worked with for years. He was in constant contact with people. Yes he and the people working for him asked for more security. Some of those requests were approved, some were not.”

–Dana

34 Responses to “The One Percent Stick Together: Hillary Clinton’s Private Email Address Given To Hollywood Star, But Not To Ambassador Stevens”

  1. Yet again, outraged by this woman.

    Dana (86e864)

  2. Wait-I cannot believe this.Chris Stevens was Hillary’s good friend, her chosen rep in Libya, someone she valued as a State Department workplace resource and an important part in the Libya policy, correct? Or at least that was her testimony a few days ago. Grant every nasty thing you can say about every GOP candidate, and Bernie Sanders. NONE OF THEM is the complete dishonest piece of shit this woman is. Her husband was a talented and pragmatic politician if flawed man. Not a man I voted for, but I can see the appeal. She has none of his charm nor talent, simply an appetite for power and an unprecedented sense of entitlement. If you vote for this person, know you vote for the biggest lair in American political history, which featuring LBJ, Nixon etc. is saying something.

    And who ever the GOP nominee is, that person cannot shy away form pointing this out.Not to say said nominee has to be nasty, but it has to be said early and often; Hillary is a total and completely shameless liar about all things great and small. The McCain/Romney go along to get along/ be polite nonsense is not acceptable at all.

    Bugg (fa64ec)

  3. Words cannot express the disgust this woman deserves. I have friends who are Democrats. I can’t bring myself to ask them why they would support her. It’s like asking someone if they have child pornography.

    Mike K (90dfdc)

  4. Yes he and the people working for him asked for more security. Some of those requests were approved, some were not.

    I wonder if anyone asked her at the hearing why “some” were not.

    J.P. (cc46f4)

  5. Perhaps Stevens should have asked Affleck.

    Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie™ (f4eb27)

  6. That begs another question: Why do/should Hollywood stars have emails or access to powerful politicians the people don’t have? I could understand people in businesses and industries working in close contact with government but what could Ben Affleck possibly offer Hillary! other than money? Therefore, using her email is another corruption of the system and breach of protocol.

    Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie™ (f4eb27)

  7. Well, Libya was an out-of-the-way country of no particular interest to Hillary, right? Or could it be that the little sociopath didn’t give a crap about her minions?

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  8. Words cannot express the disgust this woman deserves. I have friends who are Democrats. I can’t bring myself to ask them why they would support her.

    I originally would quip — dripping with sarcasm — that liberalism is a form of mental illness. But as each day goes by, as each year passes in this era of Obama’s America (or Kirchner’s Argentina, or Maduro’s Venezuela, or Hollande’s France, etc, etc) such a comment becomes less a matter of flippancy and more a case of a very plausible theory.

    Mark (f713e4)

  9. Mark, there was a time liberalism was a mental illness but it has evolved into a religion with rules as strict as Islam. We’ve seen what they do to apostates.

    Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie™ (f4eb27)

  10. These douchebags certainly do stick together. Affleck – who isn’t half the actor his brother Casey is – plays a tough guy on screen, but he’s a pussy at heart. He and Clinton both view Republicans as “the enemy”, Islamic fundamentalists/ terrorists have just gotten bad breaks in their eyes.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  11. It’s not the same at ALL! No way was Stevens going to give a lot of money to her PAC!

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  12. Why is Affleck’s email address redacted? He is a member of the public that has contacted the Clinton in her official capacity as US Secretary of State, and as such, I don’t see how his email address would qualify to be exempted from disclosure under the FOIA. In my state (WA), had he contacted our state secretary of state and this had been produced as a public record under WA’s public records law, there exists no exemption for email addresses of members of the public. So while I’m pretty well-versed in WA public records laws, I’m no expert with the federal FOIA.

    Can anyone explain this?

    School Marm (f96753)

  13. For that matter, how is the draft of what was being proposed Clinton respond to Affleck being redacted? Under what statutory exemption under FOIA? Does the fact that the entire contents of the proposed draft response to Affleck indicate that the contents of this response are a threat to national security or otherwise contain information requiring a security clearance that was apparently OK for Affleck to have access to, but we as the rest of the public cannot? [In other words, was Clinton going to share info with Affleck that should never have been disclosed to Affleck?]

    School Marm (f96753)

  14. Wait-I cannot believe this.Chris Stevens was Hillary’s good friend, her chosen rep in Libya, someone she valued as a State Department workplace resource and an important part in the Libya policy, correct? Or at least that was her testimony a few days ago. Grant every nasty thing you can say about every GOP candidate, and Bernie Sanders. NONE OF THEM is the complete dishonest piece of garbage this woman is. Her husband was a talented and pragmatic politician if flawed man. Not a man I voted for, but I can see the appeal. She has none of his charm nor talent, simply an appetite for power and an unprecedented sense of entitlement. If you vote for this person, know you vote for the biggest lair in American political history, which featuring LBJ, Nixon etc. is saying something.

    And who ever the GOP nominee is, that person cannot shy away form pointing this out.Not to say said nominee has to be nasty, but it has to be said early and often; Hillary is a total and completely shameless liar about all things great and small. The McCain/Romney go along to get along/ be polite nonsense is not acceptable at all.

    Bugg (fa64ec)

  15. There was absolutely no reason what so ever for Stevens to have Hillary’s private email address. After all how much was he contributing to the clinton foundation. Lets get real

    Since he wasnt contributing to the Clinton foundation – what difference does it make.

    Joe from Texas (debac0)

  16. Since Ambassador Stevens was (purportedly) homosexual, p’raps we can say that it was homophobia on Secretary Clinton’s part? 🙂

    The snarky Dana (1b79fa)

  17. In the recent cache of emails released, Hillary was also clearly warned not to conflate the attacks on Benghazi with the internet video – two days before trotting Susan Rice out with video talking points:

    “Colleagues, I mentioned to [redacted] this morning, and want to share with all of you, our view at Embassy Tripoli that we must be cautious in our local messaging with regard to the inflammatory film trailer, adapting it to Libyan conditions,” the official wrote.

    Our monitoring of the Libyan media and conversations with Libyans suggest that the films [sic] not as explosive of an issue here as it appears to be in other countries in the region. The overwhelming majority of the FB comments and tweets we’ve received from Libyans since the Ambassador’s death have expressed deep sympathy, sorrow, and regret. They have expressed anger at the attackers, and emphasized that this attack does not represent Libyans or Islam. Relatively few have even mentioned the inflammatory video. So if we post messaging about the video specifically, we may draw unwanted attention to it.

    “And it is becoming increasingly clear that the series of events in Benghazi was much more terrorist attack than a protest which escalated into violence,” the official continued. “It is our opinion that in our messaging, we want to distinguish, not conflate, the events in other countries with this well-planned attack by militant extremists. I have discussed this with [redacted] and he shares PAS’s view.”

    Dana (86e864)

  18. it’s clear that stevens was sacrificed, to make up for al libi’s targeting,

    http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/11/cnbc_media_matter_less.html

    narciso (ee1f88)

  19. Consider: Had Stevens not endured his awful fate, we would not know this. But, more shocking than his unheardvcries for security, the Ambassador at one of the most volatile flash points in the world didn’t have a direct line to the Sec State???

    Robert C. J. Parry (6ea4aa)

  20. Done. Now there is no one believe you, Madam. Even it’s true, this big scandal will put an period for everything.

    lupus overview (735f73)

  21. Watch the video again.

    Notice what happens at about the halfway point. Watch as Hillary looks to her right, lifts a note of some sort, and places it in front of her. When she resumes talking, watch as her eyes are downcast the entire time.

    Does anyone know who that aide of hers behind her and to her right is?

    L.N. Smithee (6b7eae)

  22. Difficult to identify in the video, but during the hearing that spot was consistently occupied by Cheryl Mills, who frequently passed notes to the Blood-Stained Liar Who Would Be Queen.

    ropelight (42b722)

  23. L N,

    You can see an aide hand Hillary a note. I think ropelight is correct. It looks like Cheryl Mills.

    DRJ (15874d)

  24. Does anyone know who that aide of hers behind her and to her right is?

    Yes, L.N. Smithee, it’s Satin. He’s never far behind her.

    Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie™ (f4eb27)

  25. Sorry, “Satan” not satin. Though he is smooth.

    Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie™ (f4eb27)

  26. So it’s the Clinton White House; a Cabinet meeting; and “poof” the Devil appears in a puff of sulfurous smoke. All the Secretaries and staff run out but Clinton stays sitting there cool as a cucumber. The Devil says, “Billy, how come you ain’t scairt of me?” (The Devil always talks the language of the person he’s talking to.) Clinton shrugs, “I’ve been married to your sister for 20 years”.

    nk (9faaca)

  27. How do you come up with these gems, nk?

    DRJ (15874d)

  28. Ya gotta love the Clintons, narciso, they have their beak in everything. How much, if anything, are the “commissioners” paid? Or is this just to ramp up future speaking fees?

    Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie™ (f4eb27)

  29. R.I.P. Fred Thompson, Senator, actor, presidential candidate, happyfeet pal

    Icy (16eae5)

  30. There’s an illustration currently posted on the drudgereport.com of wrinkly-faced Hillary in red with a gun pointed at the viewer, for the cover of a book titled “My Turn.” The author is a leftist who isn’t a fan of Hillary but the artist is another leftist who adores Hillary. That artist (a female, btw) calls the image of Hillary “pulpy and sexy” and definitely wants Hillary to be the US’s next president.

    What irks me the most about such people of the left is if they’re living the good life in some protected or rather privileged part of America. They should all be packed up and moved to a place where their liberalism oozes out in buckets, where liberalism is on full display, where just about everyone around them will vote or does vote pretty much the same way they do, and where liberalism has reached its logical exhausted end. They should all be made to live in Detroit, Michigan or Caracas, Venezuela, and certainly not some comfy section of Manhattan, San Francisco, Seattle, Boston or LA’s Brentwood, Pacific Palisades or Santa Monica.

    Mark (f713e4)

  31. When you talk to the average Hillary! voter they are proud of the fact that Hillary! is a brazen, shameless liar and a criminal. It is better for Hillary! to commit crimes and violate the Espionage Act, the Federal Records Act, the Freedom Of Information Act, and to lie about it then to give Republicans the kind of ammunition they’d get if she followed the law and told the truth.

    Liberals know their politicians must lie, and expect them to lie. You simply can’t get elected to national office by telling the truth about what you as a liberal want to do to this country. Take the “one percent” lie. It’s always the other guy, the billionaires, who will see their taxes go up to pay for all the free stuff Bernie Sanders, Hillary!, and O’Malley are promising to to hand out. Not You!

    They’ve known this since at least Mondale, when he lost to Reagan by letting the truth slip out that he was going to raise taxes on the middle class. The knuckle dragging neanderthals who don’t know what’s good for them and think they can survive without the nanny state taking their money so they don’t make stupid decisions with it won’t cross over and vote for liberals unless liberals lie to them.

    But the funny part is, the liberal voters who nod and wink to each other knowingly as if they’re the smart ones in on the fraud are voting for Hillary! in large part because of her anti-Wall Street, anti-one percent rhetoric. And the people the rank-and-file Hillary! voters think of as “the one percent” and Wall Street are laughing all the way to the bank.

    They’ve got her private email address! That’s how important they are to her.

    Even without that information the evidence is overwhelming. Chelsea is married to the kind of hedge fund manager that, if you didn’t know any better, Hillary! hates. Chelsea herself has made, what, $11 mil on Wall Street. She sits on corporate boards for no other reason than her mom is Hillary! which means a potential in at the WH (meaning the revolving door between Wall Street and the WH under the first historic black President Goldman Sachs will continue to exist under the first historic woman President Goldman Sachs). Chelsea’s father-in-law is apparently a welcome guest in the Clinton home despite being convicted of the kind of financial felonies Hillary! pretends to despise. And Hillary! herself is obviously an inside trader. Although I doubt anybody in the LHMFM will grow curious about any of these links even though the odds of Hillary! turning $1k into $100k legally are a lot less than Donald Trump flapping his arms and flying out of the room.

    It’s almost funny. Hillary! voters expect her, like all they’re favorite pols, to lie to other guy.But it’s really them who are falling for the lie. The Clinton crime family is literally in bed with Wall Street, and her voters think she’s on their side against “the one percenters.” What a bunch of unbelievable suckers.

    This is why liberal pols think people are stupid. Because they know their own voters are stupid, and they think their own voters are representative.

    Steve57 (88230f)

  32. Gorelick was on the 9/11 commission. “Conflict of interest? What’s that?”

    nk (9faaca)

  33. Actually, there are clean reasons for the candidates to have their “man in there” when setting up the debates, but “clean” and “Clinton” are antonyms.

    nk (9faaca)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1402 secs.