– “I continue to believe she has not jeopardized national security….but there’s a, uh, uh, a carelessness in terms of managing……..emails.”
‘Any person in her position should have known….Extremely Careless with National Security….’
– Hillary was extremely careless with national security information. In a serious world, where weakness is tested, it is a good thing Hillary was not entrusted with radioactive or biologically dangerous material.
Imagine if she handled such material in a ‘careless manner?’
Now imagine Hillary entrusted with our national security? Why is she not prosecutable. If it were an ordinary citizen she would be seeking bail.
No wonder Hillary Clinton is laughing. The law is for the ‘little people’ no doubt./CJ
Four Times the Declaration of Independence Mentions God, and Why It Matters
– PJ Media
“Many historians call the Founding Fathers “deists,” and many of them were not true Christians — after all, Thomas Jefferson tore all the miracles out of the Gospels! But judging by the Declaration of Independence, our Founders were more religious than many think: our founding document mentions God no less than four times.
This is not to say America was founded as an explicitly Christian nation — the federal government has never had an established religion. But the Jewish and Christian understandings of God deeply influenced the founding generation, and that influence radiates from the Declaration of Independence.
Here are the four times the Declaration mentions the deity:
1. The Laws of Nature and Nature’s God…
The very opening of the Declaration features a reference to God (emphasis added):
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
This reference to God has been cited as an example of deism, but it actually is doing something more than tying nature to God. Deism states that a Creator God made the world and gave humans the capacity to reason but left them to run on their own (it also rejects scripture as twisted and a bad source of truth and morality). He does not engage in human events, and there is (and was) debate on whether He is the source of morality.
God Has Granted Us a Happy Fourth of July
This document explicitly states that the God revealed in nature is also the giver of a moral law between peoples — a law which states that the American colonies ought to be free and independent states. This is, arguably, going farther than deism by giving God the ultimate moral authority. The Declaration of Independence only has force because it appeals to the Natural Law and the law of the one who made nature itself — making the deity the clear source of morality.
2. Endowed by their Creator…
The second reference to God is perhaps better known:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
This sentence, which lays out the three most fundamental rights that all government is bound to respect, is both well-known and beloved by millions of Americans. Yet, it seems few really notice the meaning of this simple statement: our rights come from God Himself, from the being who made humanity.
Of course, this does not mean the Creator is the Christian God, YHWH, or Allah. This is not a statement endorsing one religion above any other, but making the claim that the rights which all governments ought to respect come from the highest moral authority, and that authority is the one singular being who made the universe, and humanity especially.
3. The Supreme Judge of the world…
The Declaration further emphasizes the Creator’s authority:
We, therefore, the Representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by the Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States;
God is not just the creator of the world and the giver of the moral law, but He also has the authority to judge all men and women on earth. This is sounding less and less like an uninvolved deist God and more like a theist God, like the omnipotent being in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.
While some deists at the time of the founding did believe in an afterlife, many did not, and it was unclear even if those who believed in an afterlife also believed that God would judge all human beings after death, a key tenet of the theistic faiths. Deism did not preach that God would judge the world, but the Declaration did.
4. The protection of divine Providence…
Finally, the Declaration declares the least deist idea ever:
And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.
Yes, a document primarily drafted by a deist par excellence proudly declares that the authors submit themselves to God’s protection. How could a deist God, who by definition does not interfere in the world of men and women, be relied upon to safeguard this budding nation? He could not.
While some forms of more recent deism do assert that God interferes in the realm of humanity, “classical deism,” which many of the founders are said to have believed, definitely did not. The Declaration of Independence is not a deist document, whether or not its authors were. If you want a stronger example of deism in politics, look at the anti-religious and anti-clerical French Revolution.
Why it matters.
So the Declaration of Independence mentions God four times, saying He created the world, is the foundation for morality, will judge the world, and interferes in the lives of nations and peoples. Why does this matter today?
These references to God matter because they reveal a key point the Founding Fathers often brought up. Perhaps President John Adams articulated it best in his letter to the Massachusetts militia in 1798. He warned against an unchecked release of passions:
…we have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, abmition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.
The leaders who formed our country based their arguments for independence on the laws of God, and they trusted Him to guide America through its struggles. They looked to faith as a bulwark of freedom, not as its opposite. Would that Americans today might see this with their understanding.”
That is what Abraham Lincoln said: “Fellow citizens, we cannot escape history. We of this Congress and this administration will be remembered in spite of ourselves. No personal significance or insignificance can spare one or another of us. The fiery trial through which we pass will light us down in honor or dishonor, to the latest generation. We – even we here – hold the power and bear the responsibility … “ – Abraham Lincoln, 16th President of the United States
Security Source Details Bill Clinton Maneuvered to Meet Loretta Lynch
– New York Observer
Former president delayed Phoenix takeoff to snare ’20-25 minute encounter’ with Attorney General
“An exclusive interview with a security source who was present at the unplanned meeting Monday night on a Phoenix tarmac between former President Bill Clinton and Attorney General Lorretta Lynch has shed additional light on an unusual summit that is embroiling the AG in charges of favoritism. As attorney general, Lynch heads the Department of Justice just as it is deciding whether to proceed with charges against Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton over her use of a private email server during her tenure as President Obama’s secretary of state.
The source has decades of experience providing security to government officials. The source spoke to the Observer for 20 minutes and answered follow-up questions via text message on the condition that no further details be revealed, including even gender, given the possibility of losing his or her job as an active overseer of security arrangements. This person was on-hand for the entirety of the meeting and some of its aftermath.
According to this source, whose credentials were checked and confirmed by the Observer with sources inside both the FBI and the United States Secret Service, the attorney general was caught completely off guard by the meeting and the source dismisses suggestions that have been raised alleging that she waited there to see Bill Clinton or accommodated his request to see him. In fact, it seems from this source that it was Bill Clinton who was maneuvering for face time with the attorney general, because his plane had been scheduled to leave before hers arrived.
“Fair is fair. I’m a conservative-leaning [person] [gender-identifying word redacted]. I don’t support anything this administration does. I don’t know much about the attorney general’s past, except she has a good reputation. But I really don’t like this executive’s office, so that said, politically, that’s where I’m at. But I just happened to be in a position to know firsthand what went down that day.
The source said that the impromptu visit made an immediate impression upon Lynch’s staff (meaning her non-security personnel).
“I don’t agree with her politics and all that, but I knew from the beginning that she got caught off guard and her staff was already talking about it that it’s going to be a political problem for her. Her staff was flipping out. We didn’t think about the political part until we saw her staff flipping out. For the security guys, it was more of a ‘I’ve got armed guys coming into my perimeter’ problem. But the staff guys saw right away that it was a political problem. After Clinton got off, they were like, ‘that wasn’t good.’ And I know from others who were in the actual car with her that her people knew immediately the political ramifications of it and were very upset.”
Loretta Lynch and Hillary Clinton’s Phoenix Airport Baggage
– HBO / Youtube
– Maher gives out on what he perceives as Bill Clinton’s boorish behavior in boarding Loretta Lynch’s plane on the tarmac in Phoenix. Although it is extremely hard to believe he boarded without the Attorney General’s knowledge or permission.
Another question is: Would Clinton have boarded the plane if the Attorney General of the United States had been a man?/CJ
Law Enforcement Sources: Gun Used in Paris Terrorist Attacks Came from Phoenix
– Judicial Watch
“One of the guns used in the November 13, 2015 Paris terrorist attacks came from Phoenix, Arizona where the Obama administration allowed criminals to buy thousands of weapons illegally in a deadly and futile “gun-walking” operation known as “Fast and Furious.”
A Report of Investigation (ROI) filed by a case agent in the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco Firearms and Explosives (ATF) tracked the gun used in the Paris attacks to a Phoenix gun owner who sold it illegally, “off book,” Judicial Watch’s law enforcement sources confirm. Federal agents tracing the firearm also found the Phoenix gun owner to be in possession of an unregistered fully automatic weapon, according to law enforcement officials with firsthand knowledge of the investigation.
The investigative follow up of the Paris weapon consisted of tracking a paper trail using a 4473 form, which documents a gun’s ownership history by, among other things, using serial numbers. The Phoenix gun owner that the weapon was traced back to was found to have at least two federal firearms violations—for selling one weapon illegally and possessing an unregistered automatic—but no enforcement or prosecutorial action was taken against the individual. Instead, ATF leaders went out of their way to keep the information under the radar and ensure that the gun owner’s identity was “kept quiet,” according to law enforcement sources involved with the case. “Agents were told, in the process of taking the fully auto, not to anger the seller to prevent him from going public,” a veteran law enforcement official told Judicial Watch.
It’s not clear if the agency, which is responsible for cracking down on the illegal use and trafficking of firearms, did this because the individual was involved in the Fast and Furious gun-running scheme. An ATF spokesman, Corey Ray, at the agency’s Washington D.C. headquarters told Judicial Watch that “no firearms used in the Paris attacks have been traced” by the agency. When asked about the ROI report linking the weapon used in Paris to Phoenix, Ray said “I’m not familiar with the report you’re referencing.” Judicial Watch also tried contacting the Phoenix ATF office, but multiple calls were not returned.
The ATF ran the Fast and Furious experiment and actually allowed criminals, “straw purchasers,” working for Mexican drug cartels to buy weapons at federally licensed firearms dealers in Phoenix and allowed the guns to be “walked”—possessed without any knowledge of their whereabouts. The government lost track of most of the weapons and many have been used to murder hundreds of innocent people as well as a U.S. Border Patrol agent, Brian Terry, in Arizona. A mainstream newspaper reported that a Muslim terrorist who planned to murder attendees of a Muhammad cartoon contest in Garland, Texas last year bought a 9-millimeter pistol at a Phoenix gun shop that participated in the ATF’s Fast and Furious program despite drug and assault charges that should have raised red flags. Judicial Watch has thoroughly investigated Fast and Furious and has sued the Obama administration for information about the once-secret operation.”