By BYRON TAU and KATIE GLUECK
An anti-Hillary Clinton group has filed a Federal Election Commission complaint against the former secretary of state and an independent group promoting her potential 2016 presidential bid.
In what election law experts say is a long-shot argument, the hybrid PAC Stop Hillary claims that Clinton and her political team have essentially authorized a campaign by renting her official resources to a super PAC.
The Wednesday complaint singled out Clinton and the super PAC Ready for Hillary — a group that is urging Clinton to run for president but is forbidden by law from coordinating with Clinton or her staff.
To read the full article, click HERE
6 BENGHAZI FACTS EVERYONE MUST KNOW BEFORE 2016:
1. The nonpartisan Accountability Review Board and the Senate report did not find Hillary Rodham Clinton directly responsible for the Benghazi attacks. Hillary never received the cables requesting more security. In-fact, Ambassador Christopher Stevens turned down additional security according to the Senate’s latest report — a report that never mentions Hillary by name (except in the Republican dissenting section). In other words, Hillary was never found to be directly responsible for Benghazi by any of the official Benghazi reports.
2. Republicans cut millions and millions of dollars in “embassy security.” Cuts that Hillary Clinton called “detrimental” to our security overseas. If Benghazi is so important to Republicans, why are they cutting embassy security? It just proves they are only using Benghazi as a political tool to try to hurt Hillary in 2016. Republicans are spitting on the graves of those lost in Benghazi for political gain.
3. Over 50 people died from embassy/consulate attacks under George Bush’s Presidency. Where was the Republican outrage over that? Republicans didn’t care when Bush lied about WMDs, nor did they express outrage over 9/11/2001, the Iraq War, or the 13 embassy attacks with 50+ dead under Bush. Their outrage over Benghazi is phony and they are essentially spitting on the graves of those lost in Benghazi for political gain. If Republicans cared so much about embassy security, why didn’t they express outrage over the 13 embassy/consulate attacks under Bush?
4. The Obama Administration did not “cover-up” the Benghazi attacks. Counterterrorism Director Matthew Olsen told Senator Joe Lieberman that Benghazi was a “terrorist attack”. This was only a few days after Susan Rice went on the Sunday morning talk-shows. Therefore, this would have to be the shortest “cover-up” in history.
Senator Joe Lieberman: “Let me begin by asking you whether you would say that Ambassador Stevens and the three other Americans died as a result of a terrorist attack.”
Counterterrorism Director Matthew Olsen: “Certainly on that particular question I would say, yes. They were killed in the course of a terrorist attack on our embassy.”
5. Hillary’s quote, “What difference, at this point, does it make” has been taken out of context. Hillary was referring to the Republican’s obsession with what Susan Rice said, not Benghazi itself. We now know the intelligence communities talking points that Susan Rice presented were incorrect. But to accuse the Administration of intentionally lying (when Counterterrorism Director Matthew Olsen called it a “terrorist attack” only a few days after Susan Rice went on the Sunday morning talk shows) is dishonest. Take your issue up with the intelligence community and their talking points, but don’t accuse Susan Rice and Hillary Clinton of intentionally lying.
6. The reason the YouTube video was cited as a possible reason for Benghazi is because violent protests had been erupting throughout the Middle East when Benghazi took place. Some of the protests had to do with the YouTube video, which is why it was originally thought Benghazi was also related to the YouTube video. The attackers in Benghazi hijacked the protests that had erupted throughout the Middle East in order to launch their attack successfully.