#RedNationRising News Alert #DemDebate THE GOLDEN RULE OF DIS INFORMERS My Psychological Makeup Of The Narcissist #TheDirtyElection2016 #Hillary2016 #HesYourManHillary #GOPDebate Their Lies And Corruption #DemDebate


THE GOLDEN RULE OF DIS INFORMERS2iau73l
Always accuse your adversary of whatever is true about yourself. #Benghazi The Spontaneous Lie From : The House Of Obama Straight To The Lies Of Hillary ClintonThe House Intelligence Committee, in its 2014 report on the incident, said “there was a stream of contradictory and conflicting intelligence that came in after the attacks.”

The CIA’s deputy director, Michael Morell, testified that the first time he learned there had not been a protest at the diplomatic facility was after receiving an e-mail from the Libya station chief on Sept. 15, three days after the attack. (An intelligence report from the Tripoli station making a similar observation arrived on Sept. 14.) Morell said the assessment “jumped out” at him because it contradicted the views of CIA analysts in Washington that the attacks were inspired by the storming of the U.S. Embassy in Cairo (which had been spurred by the video).

(Morell’s testimony contradicts Rubio’s claim on CNN on Oct. 29, the morning after the debate, that “there was never a shred of evidence presented to anyone that this was spontaneous. And the CIA understood that.” On CBS, Rubio also claimed that it was “not accurate” that the CIA changed its assessment, which is also wrong.)

Ironically, the CIA’s initial Sept. 12 executive update stated that “this was an intentional assault and not the escalation of a peaceful protest.” But because the report had no intelligence to support it, that language was dropped as analysts developed a theory about a protest, the House panel report said.

In all, CIA analysts received 21 reports that a protest occurred in Benghazi, both from the media and inside the intelligence community. The Washington Post even had a front-page story on Sept. 12 about a protest preceding the attack, quoting among others, the Libyan deputy interior minister.

Amazingly, the CIA analysts did not gain access to eyewitness accounts until Sept. 22, when the FBI first published an intelligence report on its interviews.

The intelligence community “only changed its initial assessment about a protest on September 24, 2012, when closed caption television footage became available on September 18, 2012 (two days after Ambassador Susan Rice spoke), and after the FBI began publishing its interviews with U.S. officials on the ground on September 22, 2012,” the House report said.

A similar conclusion was reached by the Senate Intelligence Committee (of which Rubio is a member) in its report on Benghazi: “Intelligence analysts inaccurately referred to the presence of a protest at the Mission facility before the attack based on open source information and limited intelligence, without sufficient intelligence or eyewitness statements to corroborate that assertion. The IC took too long to correct these erroneous reports, which caused confusion and influenced the public statements.”

In an article published in Politico in 2015, Morell wrote:

“We believe that in Benghazi—over six hundred miles away—extremists heard about the successful assault on our embassy in Egypt and decided to make some trouble of their own, although we still do not know their motivations with certainty. Most likely they were inspired by the prospect of doing in Benghazi what their ‘brothers’ had done in Cairo. . . . Still others might have been motivated by the video—although I should note that our analysts never said the video was a factor in the Benghazi attacks. Abu Khattala, a terrorist leader and possibly one of the ring leaders of the attacks, said that he was in fact motivated by the video.”

Hillary Clinton’s statements

10:08 p.m., Sept. 11, press statement:

“I condemn in the strongest terms the attack on our mission in Benghazi today. As we work to secure our personnel and facilities, we have confirmed that one of our State Department officers was killed. We are heartbroken by this terrible loss. Our thoughts and prayers are with his family and those who have suffered in this attack.

“Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet. The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. Our commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation. But let me be clear: There is never any justification for violent acts of this kind.”

11:12 p.m., Sept. 11, e-mail to her daughter, Chelsea Clinton:

“Two of our officers were killed in Benghazi by an al Qaeda-like group. . . . Very hard day and I fear more of the same.”

Sept. 12, e-mail recounting phone conversation with Egyptian foreign minister:

“We know that the attack in Libya had nothing to do with the film. It was a planned attack—not a protest. . . . Based on the information we saw today we believe the group that claimed responsibility for this was affiliated with al Qaeda.”

Sept. 13, public remarks with Moroccan foreign minister on Sept. 13, in which the attack in Benghazi is also briefly mentioned:

“I also want to take a moment to address the video circulating on the Internet that has led to these protests in a number of countries. Let me state very clearly – and I hope it is obvious – that the United States Government had absolutely nothing to do with this video. We absolutely reject its content and message.   America’s commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation. And as you know, we are home to people of all religions, many of whom came to this country seeking the right to exercise their own religion, including, of course, millions of Muslims. And we have the greatest respect for people of faith.”

Sept. 14, remarks at transfer of remains ceremony:

“This has been a difficult week for the State Department and for our country. We’ve seen the heavy assault on our post in Benghazi that took the lives of those brave men. We’ve seen rage and violence directed at American embassies over an awful internet video that we had nothing to do with. It is hard for the American people to make sense of that because it is senseless, and it is totally unacceptable.”

Looking at Clinton’s public statements, it is clear she was very careful to keep the attacks separate from the video; the two incidents do not appear in the same sentence (unlike the controversial televised remarks by then-U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice).

For instance, in her Sept. 14 remarks, Clinton devotes one sentence to the “heavy assault” in Benghazi and then another sentence about the “rage and violence” over the “awful Internet video.” She does not say they are connected, although listeners may have gotten that impression.

Speaking before the Benghazi committee, Clinton explained that her private remarks reflected the fragmentary information that was available at the time. “We were not making up the intelligence,” she said. “We were trying to get it, make sense of it, and then to share it.”

She added: “When I was speaking to the Egyptian prime minister or in the other two examples you showed, we had been told by Ansar al-Sharia that they took credit for it. It wasn’t until about 24 or more hours later, that they retracted taking credit for it.”

Clinton also said she was reacting to the continuing turmoil in the region over the video, which resulted in 40 protests around the globe. “I needed to be talking about the video, because I needed to put other governments and other people on notice that we were not going to let them get away with attacking us, as they did in Tunis, is they did in Khartoum,” she said.

(Update: John Nolte of Breitbart faulted The Fact Checker for not including a reference to Clinton’s conversation with Libyan president and a State Department notice that Ansar al-Sharia had claimed credit, both of which took place before the issuance of the 10:08 statement. We are not sure what this adds to the picture. Ansar al-Sharia within 24 hours withdrew its claim of credit. Meanwhile, State could not ignore the fact that the video had generated an attack of the U.S. Embassy in Cairo.)

(Mark Hemingway of the Weekly Standard offered another critique of this fact check.)

However, Rubio also said that Clinton spoke about the video to the families of the victims. Several family members have asserted this is true.

Charles Woods, the father of Navy SEAL Tyrone Woods, told Fox News: “I gave Hillary a hug and shook her hand and she said, ‘We are going to have the filmmaker arrested who was responsible for the death of your son,’” Woods said, reading the account from his journal.

Kate Quigley, sister of Glen Doherty, told CNN:

“I met her when we were at Andrews Air Force base. She spoke to my family about how sad we should feel for the Libyan people because they are uneducated, and that breeds fear, which breeds violence, and leads to a protest. . . . When I think back now to that day and what she knew, you know,  it shows me a lot about her character that she would choose in that moment to basically perpetuate what she knew was untrue.”

It’s hard to reconcile these statements by the relatives with the careful phrasing Clinton used in public. (Update: Please read our follow-up columnin which we interviewed more family members about what they heard from Clinton.)

The Rubio campaign did not respond to a query. Josh Schwerin, a Clinton spokesman, said, “Rubio’s statement that she ever said the video was the cause is false.”

The Pinocchio Test

Focusing just on the public statements made by Clinton — as opposed to the rest of the administration — one find little support for Rubio’s claim that Clinton told the American people that the attacks were because of a video. She certainly spoke about the video, but always in the context of the protests that were occurring across the Middle East.

As the nation’s chief diplomat, Clinton had a responsibility to be precise and careful in her public statements. One could imagine she would be less guarded in private, referring to claims by an al-Qaeda group even before an official CIA assessment. Rubio is wrong when he says the CIA assessment did not change, given that a Senate report he signed documented that the CIA assessment changed several times and was not set in stone until more than 10 days after the attacks.

Yet family members say that Clinton, when meeting with them in private, emphasized the role of the video when they met her at the transfer of remains ceremony. This was on Sept. 14, after Ansar al-Sharia retracted taking credit for the attack and before the officials at CIA headquarters had analyzed the report from the Tripoli mission chief that there was no protest at the diplomatic compound.

Can Rubio really attribute this to a “lie” rather than the fog of war? A “lie” suggests a deliberate effort to deceive, while the documentary evidence suggests there were few hard answers available then to policymakers. Even the Senate report signed by Rubio says the reports from the intelligence community “caused confusion and influenced the public statements” of policymakers.

Rubio is certainly within his rights to point out Clinton’s contradictory statements — and the remarks of the family members give us pause — but he does not have enough evidence to label Clinton a liar.

Two Pinocchio Liars Hillary and Bill Clinton and His Fellow Criminal Colleagues,  The Clinton Crime Family fail to understand that there are just some things in life people cannot change, and there are other things that can only be changed through hard work and discipline. Had Clinton gone into recovery for his addiction problem, perhaps he would have learned to accept things he could not change. The Sick Rapist And His Goldman Sachs Wall-Street Queen Of Corruption Are Murders Check The CoverUp Below Read It Well American Voters 

Serenity Prayer God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change;courage to change the things I can and wisdom to know the difference.
Living one day at a time Enjoying one moment at a time Accepting hardships as the pathway to peace Taking, as He did, this sinful world as it is, not as I would have it Trusting that He will make all things right if I surrender to His Will That I may be reasonably happy in this life and supremely happy with Him Forever in the next. Amen – Reinhold Niebuhr http://www.cptryon.org/prayer/special/serenity.html
One formula the Illuminati uses is to multiply two negatives together in the belief they can turn theirnegatives into a positive by magic. His mother was a sleazy lowborn slut, so he had to have a child by a prostitute to erase her negative influence.
The British Press has continued its investigation into Clinton’s affair with the
black LittleRock prostitute Bobbie Ann Williams. London Daily Mail columnist James Dalrymple, wrote on Jan. 14, 1997, that Bobbie Ann Williams and her sister Lucille Bolton passed two lie detector tests proclaiming that Clinton is the father of her illegitimate son Danny.
Arkansas State Trooper Buddy Young states that in 1983, he drove Clinton and the black women to his mother’s home near Hot Springs for a sexorgy. Clinton’s mother was conveniently out-of-town. In 1984 Bobby Ann had a baby boy she named Danny. He looks exactly like Clinton. He has refused to take a blood test to confirm or deny the allegation.Mr. Dalrymple states that Bobby Ann has disappeared from Little Rock and both her sister and mother now refuse to discuss the matter. They have not taken out a “missing person’s warrant.”Thus it is safe to assume that they know where she is. Little Rock sources have informed this publication that she now lives in Australia where Danny, now age 13, is attending a private school.Dalrymple charges that the liberal media refuses to report this story and is thus helping Clinton as part of a “massive cover-up.” He says that a politician could never get away with this in England. 

What Happened To America’s Golden Boy. Bill Clinton The Rapist Liar And  WHO BENEFITS? Like blind men examining an elephant, we attribute this conspiracy to Jews Illuminati, Vatican, Jesuits, Freemasons, Black Nobility, andand Bilderbergs etc.The real villains are at the heart of our economic and cultural life. They are the dynastic families who own the Bank of England, the US Federal Reserve and associated cartels. They also control the World Bank and IMF. Their identity is kept secret, but Rothschild is certainly one of them.England is in fact a financial oligarchy run by the “British Crown” which refers to the “City of London,” not the Queen. The City is run by the Bank of England, a “private” corporation. The City is a sovereign state located in the heart of greater London. Considered the “Vatican of the financial world,” the City is not subject to British law.   That is a question that should be asked following a political assassination, or even when foul play is suspected. The monopoly press, from the time of Abraham Lincoln to date, never asks THAT QUESTION. Common Americans are to be fed from a bottomless garbage can of “lone assassin”, or “accident” rubbish.John F. Kennedy, Jr., most would have to admit, was charming and articulate, and had none of the ghosts and scandals in his closet that others of his relatives seem to have had or have. If he ran for important public office, he most likely would sweep the field if not just giving every other candidate a hard time.There are two reasons for his death, one being the main one and then, for some, an alternative.Main reason:His family knew he planned, on August 1, 1999, to announce, that like his father, he was going to run for President. http://www.cloakanddagger.de/Skolnick/jfkjr.htlm
Jacqueline Kennedy also was a victim of medical murder. She took her own life so as not to be manipulated by Clinton, who had identified himself to Jacqueline as her killer when she sailed with him. When they sailed they went to Buzzard’s Head. Clinton made sure her cancer spread to herbrain as a response to her statement. She already knew she had cancer at this point.The list of murders goes on and on.So, my brother was murdered on the 9/17 birthday of Clinton’s privileged half-brother, and was murdered on the same day JFK Jr. was killed 7/16. This shows that Clinton wanted to be my brother, the king, and that he also wanted to be a Kennedy, or a legitimate son. Clinton kills for impossible goals. He believes by killing all who represent what he does not have will solve his problems and make him legitimate.Bill Clinton is a psychopath. Still, the other Rothschilds have not caught on that murdering other Rothschilds is wrong behavior. If they had, they would have demanded justice. There is no excuse for the other Rothschild standing back and allowing these slaughters, let alone participating in them.Bill Clinton and George W. Bush and the rest of these freeloaders are still alive.
And so, like other stalkers, he set out to destroy the object he most admired, that he most coveted,and in doing so accomplish something of note. The stalker and the nonpolitical assassin are obsessed with the object of their attention and/or what they represent. In some cases, as with Mark David Chapman, killer of John Lennon, they out-and-out want
to be
that person. And when they can’t, they decide that no one else can be, either… And like Chapman with Lennon, John Hinckley with his actress idol Jodie Foster and other stalkers, there was part of Cunanan that wanted to be forever linked to his target  The real villains are at the heart of our economic and cultural life. They are the dynastic families who own the Bank of England, the US Federal Reserve and associated cartels. They also control the World Bank and IMF. Their identity is kept secret, but Rothschild is certainly one of them.England is in fact a financial oligarchy run by the “British Crown” which refers to the “City of London,” not the Queen. The City is run by the Bank of England, a “private” corporation. The City is a sovereign state located in the heart of greater London. Considered the “Vatican of the financial world,” the City is not subject to British law Guy, Clinton’s promoter, had his own motives for allowing Clinton to murder another cousin,Amschel Rothschild. Amschel was murdered in 1996. Raphael was murdered in 2000, just one year after graduating from Brown University. Amschel murder was one of Clinton’s prized accomplishments because Amschel was the head of the banking empire.  

disloyal to Meyer’s will that will not be avenged, even if demons from hell must arise themselves to avenge the murder. Temporarily, before Clinton meets his judgment, he regaled in the role of Rothschild killer and Princess killer. These unique opportunities reinforced his sense of self-worth and his specialness in an effort to to mask his feelings of inadequacy
the violent act is the result of a deep-seated feeling of inadequacy on the part of the assassin.The Anatomy Of Motive 
The murder of Amschel was one more crime in which Guy favored Clinton over his own blood relatives leading Clinton to have an unrealistic  view of his role in this story. Of course, Guy had a personal motive for wanting the death of his young cousin, Amschel. There was no retaliation because Guy authorized this murder in order to put his son, David, in Amschel banking chairmanship. Guy had a vendetta against David’s biological father who was also Amschels father – Lord Victor Rothschild, the explosives expert, biologist and esteemed member of Parliament. Although Clinton worked as Guy’s lackey, he took the attitude that he was above the law when it came to killing Rothschilds – a hobby of Guy’s.Raphael’s death was also sanctioned by his own grandfather – Guy’s cousin, Elie de Rothschild, aunt case, as a sacrifice to his lover, Elizabeth Mountbatten.SHATTERED SELF-IMAGE Being President of the United States did not fix Clinton’s shattered self image.
…No matter who we look at,
we’re going to find an individual
– overwhelmingly a white male in his twenties –
who does not feel good about himself and never has. In someway, he sees the violent act as the solution to his problem.
The Anatomy of Motive 
#Narcissist
the Omnivore (Perfectionism and Completeness)There is another “omni” component in grandiosity. The narcissist is an omnivore. He devours and digests experiences and people, sights and smells, bodies and words, books and films, sounds and achievements, his work and his leisure, his pleasure and his possessions.
The narcissist is incapable of ENJOYING anything because he is in constant pursuit of perfection and completeness.Classic narcissists interact with the world as predators do with their prey. They want to own it all, be everywhere, experience everything. They cannot delay gratification. They do not take “no” for an answer.
And they settle for nothing less than the ideal, the sublime, the perfect, the all-inclusive, the all-encompassing, the engulfing, the all-pervasive, the most beautiful, the cleverest, the richest, and the most brilliant.
The narcissist is shattered when he discovers that a collection he possesses is incomplete,
that his colleague’s wife is more glamorous, that his son is better than he is in math, that his neighbour has a new, flashy car, that his roommate got promoted, that the “love of his life” signed a recording contract.
It is not plain old jealousy, not even pathological envy (though it is definitely a part of the psychological makeup of the narcissist). 
Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s