Rep Schiff (D) says that after 17 months there is nothing new. Really, emails and stonewalling are not a factor? She blamed a video and even now she admits it was not the reason. Sent her family an email telling them it was a terrorist attach before telling the general public. Oh well, what difference does it make. LOL yes in that regard nothing has changed in her mind.
Today was bad for the committee and really good for Hillary. The republican committee members look like clowns.....the dem committee members look like clowns also.....and Hillary looks like the smartest, most prepared and the lone adult in the room. The right is gonna hate to hear it and will never admit it but it's the truth......this was a big win for her. I'm guessing repubs can see this so I expect that false accusations to really start flying.
Trey Gowdy TAKES APART HILLARY in questioning at Benghazi Committee!! [FULL VIDEO]
Hillary does her best to look bored and disinterested which seems to be the strategy she’s using to show her disdain for the proceedings and for the four dead Americans killed by terrorists that she ignored for so long.
Read more: http://therightscoop.com/trey-gowdy-grills-hillary-at-benghazi-committee-full-video/#ixzz3pKpk9fxi
Slapping-silly90))
Hillary does her best to look bored and disinterested which seems to be the strategy she’s using to show her disdain for the proceedings and for the four dead Americans killed by terrorists that she ignored for so long.
Read more: http://therightscoop.com/trey-gowdy-grills-hillary-at-benghazi-committee-full-video/#ixzz3pKpk9fxi
Slapping-silly90))
BOOM! JIM JORDAN NAILS HILLARY CLINTON AS A LIAR WITH HER OWN EMAILS
This is amazing. Hillary Clinton told her family via email, the president of Libya, and the Prime Minister of Egypt that she KNEW the attack in Benghazi was a terrorist attack and not a protest over a video. But she told the American people it was a protest over a video. And that’s what Jim Jordan revealed in his questioning below.
Watch his full questioning below:
Read more: http://therightscoop.com/boom-jim-jordan-nails-hillary-clinton-with-her-own-emails/#ixzz3pKsJuAbo
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"It was a protest over a video!"
"It's Youtube's fault!"
The criminal witch lied to the American people. Shocker! :>(
This is amazing. Hillary Clinton told her family via email, the president of Libya, and the Prime Minister of Egypt that she KNEW the attack in Benghazi was a terrorist attack and not a protest over a video. But she told the American people it was a protest over a video. And that’s what Jim Jordan revealed in his questioning below.
Watch his full questioning below:
Read more: http://therightscoop.com/boom-jim-jordan-nails-hillary-clinton-with-her-own-emails/#ixzz3pKsJuAbo
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"It was a protest over a video!"
"It's Youtube's fault!"
The criminal witch lied to the American people. Shocker! :>(
"Where did the false narrative start? It started with you, Madame Secretary," Ohio Republican Jim Jordan pressed Clinton.
"I referred to the video that night in a very specific way. I said some have sought to justify the attack because of the video. I used those words deliberately, not to ascribe a motive to every attacker but as a warning to those across the region that there was no justification for further attacks," Clinton said.
"It was some Youtube video guy!!!!"
"I referred to the video that night in a very specific way. I said some have sought to justify the attack because of the video. I used those words deliberately, not to ascribe a motive to every attacker but as a warning to those across the region that there was no justification for further attacks," Clinton said.
"It was some Youtube video guy!!!!"
UNBELIEVABLE: Hillary says she SAVED AMERICAN LIVES by speaking out against the Muslim youtube video!!!
Wow Grandma Clinton is really doubling down on the ridiculous notion that the Benghazi attackers were not organized terrorists but were random killers who were angered by a youtube video.
In fact, she’s now claiming that her speaking out against the video actually saved more American lives!!
Watch below:
Just unbelievable. Can they produce one terrorist who says that her speaking out on the video kept them from beheading an American? Somehow I doubt it…
Read more: http://therightscoop.com/unbelievab...ainst-the-muslim-youtube-video/#ixzz3pL5e8It0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Desperate times call for desperate measures!
"We saved American lives by speaking out against some guy on youtube!"
Wow Grandma Clinton is really doubling down on the ridiculous notion that the Benghazi attackers were not organized terrorists but were random killers who were angered by a youtube video.
In fact, she’s now claiming that her speaking out against the video actually saved more American lives!!
Watch below:
Just unbelievable. Can they produce one terrorist who says that her speaking out on the video kept them from beheading an American? Somehow I doubt it…
Read more: http://therightscoop.com/unbelievab...ainst-the-muslim-youtube-video/#ixzz3pL5e8It0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Desperate times call for desperate measures!
"We saved American lives by speaking out against some guy on youtube!"
HOMEEDITORIAL BOARD
Cool under pressure. Photographer: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images" itemprop="image" style="box-sizing: border-box; -webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0); text-shadow: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.00392157) 1px 1px 1px; border: 0px; display: block; margin: 0px auto; max-width: 100%; max-height: 100%; height: 360px;">COOL UNDER PRESSURE.
PHOTOGRAPHER: CHIP SOMODEVILLA/GETTY IMAGES
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Google+
Email
DECLASSIFIED[h=1]Clinton Says Source of Libya Intelligence Was a Mystery[/h]
220 OCT 22, 2015 6:00 PM EDTBy Josh Rogin & Eli Lake
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton testified Thursday that she wasn’t aware of the source of information about Libya provided by her friend Sidney Blumenthal and that it didn’t matter. Republican lawmakers and former officials were shocked she had so little curiosity about information she shared with top members of her staff, and thought it relevant that Blumenthal was working with a partisan former intelligence official as well as a longtime friend of the Clinton family.
Representative Trey Gowdy, chairman of the House Select Benghazi Committee, pressed Clinton to disclose exactly how much she knew about the credibility of the information that Blumenthal was sending to her personal e-mail account about the political and security situation on the ground in Libya in 2011 and 2012. E-mails released by the committee showed that Clinton sometimes solicited knowledge from Blumenthal. She often passed on his memos for review and feedback to top White House and State Department officials, including Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens, who was killed in the attack on Sept. 11, 2012.
Clinton said that as far as she knew at the time, Blumenthal was collecting information from a wide network of associates that included journalists and other types of people around Washington.
“I don’t know who wrote them," she said. "I don’t know where he got the information.” She “did learn later,” she said, that Blumenthal was talking to “former American intelligence officials.”
Blumenthal was not an official or unofficial advisor on Libya, she insisted, just a friend who passed on information, similar to people who buttonhole her at a cocktail party. “On occasion, I forwarded on what he sent me to make sure that it was in the mix,” she said.
But if there was nothing below board about the source of the information, Gowdy asked, why did Clinton remove Blumenthal’s name from the information before she passed it on to the White House? Clinton claimed that officials would be better able to evaluate the information on its own, without knowing where it was coming from.
Many experienced intelligence officials would disagree. Michael Hayden, who served as director of the National Security Agency and the Central Intelligence Agency under President George W. Bush and is an adviser to the Jeb Bush presidential campaign, told us, "In evaluating human intelligence, the source is everything."
Several of the e-mails Blumenthal sent contained analysis from a former CIA officer, Tyler Drumheller, who at the time had a consulting firm. At times those spot intelligence reports contained bad information, such as a rumor that the journalist Seymour Hersh was about to meet Libyan dictator Muammar Qaddaffi for an interview.
Drumheller was not an impartial observer. In 2006, he published a memoir about his time in the CIA that accused the Bush White House of politicizing intelligence before the Iraq War, a contention that remains disputed. After his book came out, many progressive groups celebrated Drumheller as a whistleblower. The liberal watchdog group Media Matters wrote about him 11 times in 2006 and 2007.
Republican sources on the Benghazi committee told us they had intended to call Drumheller as a witness, but he died in August.
Blumenthal and Drumheller worked on the Libya memos with Cody Shearer, a longtime Clinton family friend and Democratic political operative. This was revealed in 2013, when a hacker posted a tranche of e-mails between Blumenthal and Clinton. Blumenthal, Drumheller and Shearer discussed their dealings with retired General David Grange, the chief executive officer of a company named Osprey, which we reported was seeking State Department contracts in Libya after the war.
Clinton said on Thursday that Blumenthal’s e-mails did not influence her policy decisions. But in some cases Clinton's private e-mails contradict this. For example, Politico reported on an e-mail from the State Department's chief of policy planning, Jake Sullivan, who wrote that Blumenthal's ideas were being incorporated in a speech Clinton was planning.
Republicans on the committee have compared Blumenthal's access to Clinton to that of Ambassador Stevens. Representative Mike Pompeo asked if Stevens had Clinton's personal e-mail, cell phone, home address and fax machine number, which Blumenthal, he said, used to contact her.
Clinton shot down an earlier assertion from Pompeo that Blumenthal was her primary Libya adviser, saying she received information on Libya from a number of channels including the U.S. intelligence community, the State Department and the military.
Blumenthal’s e-mails to Clinton also came up Thursday in the context of the actual attack on the U.S. facility in Benghazi. Blumenthal had passed on intelligence the night of the attack to Clinton asserting that it had followed a protest about a video mocking the Prophet Muhammad that had been aired on Egyptian television. Later bipartisan Congressional investigations revealed that to be false.
For the first time Thursday, Clinton acknowledged that she had told the Egyptian foreign minister the day after the attack that the video was not the culprit. “We know that the attack in Libya had nothing to do with the film. It was a planned attack -- not a protest,” she told the Egyptian official, according to contemporaneous notes released by the Benghazi committee Democrats. That contradicts what State Department officials were saying publicly at the time, including to the victims’ families.
Clinton wrote in her memoir that she often went back and forth over the role the video played in the attack. A talking-points memo released by the White House in 2014, however, showed that senior government officials were encouraged to publicly say the Benghazi attack stemmed from a protest over the film.
Clinton’s explanation for this and other discrepancies involving Benghazi has repeatedly been that it was a complicated situation and perceptions were constantly changing due to conflicting streams of information and the fog of war. Her claim today that she didn’t know the source of some of that information is troubling, but more so is her assertion that it didn’t matter.
PHOTOGRAPHER: CHIP SOMODEVILLA/GETTY IMAGES
Google+
DECLASSIFIED[h=1]Clinton Says Source of Libya Intelligence Was a Mystery[/h]
220 OCT 22, 2015 6:00 PM EDTBy Josh Rogin & Eli Lake
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton testified Thursday that she wasn’t aware of the source of information about Libya provided by her friend Sidney Blumenthal and that it didn’t matter. Republican lawmakers and former officials were shocked she had so little curiosity about information she shared with top members of her staff, and thought it relevant that Blumenthal was working with a partisan former intelligence official as well as a longtime friend of the Clinton family.
Representative Trey Gowdy, chairman of the House Select Benghazi Committee, pressed Clinton to disclose exactly how much she knew about the credibility of the information that Blumenthal was sending to her personal e-mail account about the political and security situation on the ground in Libya in 2011 and 2012. E-mails released by the committee showed that Clinton sometimes solicited knowledge from Blumenthal. She often passed on his memos for review and feedback to top White House and State Department officials, including Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens, who was killed in the attack on Sept. 11, 2012.
Clinton said that as far as she knew at the time, Blumenthal was collecting information from a wide network of associates that included journalists and other types of people around Washington.
“I don’t know who wrote them," she said. "I don’t know where he got the information.” She “did learn later,” she said, that Blumenthal was talking to “former American intelligence officials.”
Blumenthal was not an official or unofficial advisor on Libya, she insisted, just a friend who passed on information, similar to people who buttonhole her at a cocktail party. “On occasion, I forwarded on what he sent me to make sure that it was in the mix,” she said.
But if there was nothing below board about the source of the information, Gowdy asked, why did Clinton remove Blumenthal’s name from the information before she passed it on to the White House? Clinton claimed that officials would be better able to evaluate the information on its own, without knowing where it was coming from.
Many experienced intelligence officials would disagree. Michael Hayden, who served as director of the National Security Agency and the Central Intelligence Agency under President George W. Bush and is an adviser to the Jeb Bush presidential campaign, told us, "In evaluating human intelligence, the source is everything."
Several of the e-mails Blumenthal sent contained analysis from a former CIA officer, Tyler Drumheller, who at the time had a consulting firm. At times those spot intelligence reports contained bad information, such as a rumor that the journalist Seymour Hersh was about to meet Libyan dictator Muammar Qaddaffi for an interview.
Drumheller was not an impartial observer. In 2006, he published a memoir about his time in the CIA that accused the Bush White House of politicizing intelligence before the Iraq War, a contention that remains disputed. After his book came out, many progressive groups celebrated Drumheller as a whistleblower. The liberal watchdog group Media Matters wrote about him 11 times in 2006 and 2007.
Republican sources on the Benghazi committee told us they had intended to call Drumheller as a witness, but he died in August.
Blumenthal and Drumheller worked on the Libya memos with Cody Shearer, a longtime Clinton family friend and Democratic political operative. This was revealed in 2013, when a hacker posted a tranche of e-mails between Blumenthal and Clinton. Blumenthal, Drumheller and Shearer discussed their dealings with retired General David Grange, the chief executive officer of a company named Osprey, which we reported was seeking State Department contracts in Libya after the war.
Clinton said on Thursday that Blumenthal’s e-mails did not influence her policy decisions. But in some cases Clinton's private e-mails contradict this. For example, Politico reported on an e-mail from the State Department's chief of policy planning, Jake Sullivan, who wrote that Blumenthal's ideas were being incorporated in a speech Clinton was planning.
Republicans on the committee have compared Blumenthal's access to Clinton to that of Ambassador Stevens. Representative Mike Pompeo asked if Stevens had Clinton's personal e-mail, cell phone, home address and fax machine number, which Blumenthal, he said, used to contact her.
Clinton shot down an earlier assertion from Pompeo that Blumenthal was her primary Libya adviser, saying she received information on Libya from a number of channels including the U.S. intelligence community, the State Department and the military.
Blumenthal’s e-mails to Clinton also came up Thursday in the context of the actual attack on the U.S. facility in Benghazi. Blumenthal had passed on intelligence the night of the attack to Clinton asserting that it had followed a protest about a video mocking the Prophet Muhammad that had been aired on Egyptian television. Later bipartisan Congressional investigations revealed that to be false.
For the first time Thursday, Clinton acknowledged that she had told the Egyptian foreign minister the day after the attack that the video was not the culprit. “We know that the attack in Libya had nothing to do with the film. It was a planned attack -- not a protest,” she told the Egyptian official, according to contemporaneous notes released by the Benghazi committee Democrats. That contradicts what State Department officials were saying publicly at the time, including to the victims’ families.
Clinton wrote in her memoir that she often went back and forth over the role the video played in the attack. A talking-points memo released by the White House in 2014, however, showed that senior government officials were encouraged to publicly say the Benghazi attack stemmed from a protest over the film.
Clinton’s explanation for this and other discrepancies involving Benghazi has repeatedly been that it was a complicated situation and perceptions were constantly changing due to conflicting streams of information and the fog of war. Her claim today that she didn’t know the source of some of that information is troubling, but more so is her assertion that it didn’t matter.
[h=2]‘Crimson Peak’ and ‘Paranormal Activity: The Ghost Dimension’ Reviews[/h]When is a horror film not a horror film? When it’s a gothic romance ghost story
SHARE
TWEET
EMAIL
BY: Sonny Bunch
October 23, 2015 5:01 am
There has been some consternation about the marketing of Crimson Peak. It has been sold to viewers as a baroque horror film, one that mixes lush imagery with cheap jump scares. Director Guillermo del Toro, on the other hand, explained in a “foreword” distributed to writers attending a preview screening that his latest film is a “Gothic romance”: “heightened melodrama layered with a lot of darkness and the Gothic atmosphere of a dark fairy tale.”
No wonder, then, that audiences polled by Cinemascore gave Crimson Peak a B-minus, the worst grade received by a film opening last weekend. It’s not surprising because audiences hate being lied to, for starters. But Crimson Peak has its own undeniable problems, one that made lying to prospective viewers almost unavoidable: It is beautiful and well acted, expertly staged and shot, but tonally very uneven, veering wildly from one style of film to another with little warning.
After opening on a brief shot of Edith Cushing (Mia Wasikowska) in the snow—a cut on her cheek, what appears to be blood on the ground—we flash back to her childhood. She knows ghosts are real, she tells us, because she first saw one after her mother died. Though terrifying in appearance, the apparition of dearly departed mom comes to comfort and offer a warning: “Beware of Crimson Peak.” The warning is delivered again some years later to Edith as an adult right before the arrival of Sir Thomas Sharpe, Baronet (Tom Hiddleston), about whom more in a bit.
Though the spooks that litter Crimson Peak take on a typically creepy del Toro-esque design—disproportionate limbs; long, deformed faces; wispy tendrils whipping about, blown by an unfelt breeze; brought to life by del Toro regular Doug Jones—they are, generally, helpful in nature. They are eerie, but not scary, and their onscreen activities are treated with more subtlety and care than the monsters in your average horror film.
Sharpe and his sister, Lucille (Jessica Chastain), are the real terrors. Titled and entitled Brits from a spent bloodline and nearly spent fortune, the Sharpes are in America attempting to earn financing for a machine that will help them excavate a blood-red clay from beneath their creaking, collapsing home. Unable to earn the respect of, and an investment from, Edith’s father, Carter (Jim Beaver), Thomas and Lucille earn a stroke of good luck when the old man is mysteriously, brutally, murdered.
And it is brutal, Carter’s murder. This is the biggest problem with Crimson Peak. One moment we’re in a costume drama where Thomas and Edith are waltzing by candlelight; the next we’re in a slasher film where an old man’s head is being bashed violently and repeatedly into a porcelain sink, his face caved in as blood pools around him. One moment Edith is walking through a park, marveling at the beautiful butterflies as we appreciate the costume design that causes Wasikowska to mimic theMonarch; the next Lucille, spindly and black-clad, has placed the winged insect in the midst of a pile of ants and we zoom in, watching the insects chow down on the eyes of the beautiful butterfly.
As with any Del Toro movie, it’s worth watching for his attention to detail alone. Thomas and Lucille’s manor, where the final two-thirds or so of the film takes place as Edith attempts to uncover the Sharpes’ dark secrets, has walls that ooze crimson clay and natural wind tunnels created by holes in the walls and ceiling. The house bleeds and breathes, fitting for a mansion in which many violent murders have taken place. Crimson Peak is not a movie that will be accused of subtlety—the dialogue is occasionally laugh-out-loud silly and every twist is telegraphed twenty minutes ahead of time—but it is worth watching.
Even if it’s not a horror film.
If it’s horror you’re after, then Paranormal Activity: The Ghost Dimension will be more to your liking. The sixth entry in the venerable microbudget found footage horror mainstay, The Ghost Dimension is, supposedly, also the last.
Originally a simple, cheap horror film whose thrills were predicated on the horror of unexplained door openings and closings in a new house, the Paranormal Activity series has developed a whole mythology about witches and covens and demons and inter-dimensional doors and time travel to explain the spooky goings-on in the first film.
Adding layer upon layer to the mythology gives the series a reason to keep going, I suppose, but it also detracts from the thing that made the original entry so compelling and effective. Whereas Paranormal Activity relied on little more than cameras capturing odd shadows, random noises, and the weird night-time movements of Katie (Katie Featherton) in order to generate terror, Paranormal Activity: The Ghost Dimension actually shows the audience what is making everything go bump in the night: a smoky wraith that can be felt by anyone—especially when it’s angry—but can only be seen by those using a mysterious VHS camcorder.
That wraith, a demon who goes by the name Tobi, has been haunting the victims of the series since the beginning. Tobi, previously the playmate of Katie and her sister Kristi (Jessica Tyler Brown), now wants to claim Leila (Ivy George) from her parents Ryan (Chris J. Murray) and Emily (Brit Shaw). If he gets his way he’ll be a spirit no longer, and who knows how much trouble a corporeal hellbeast with goat horns and a half-dozen eyes can cause.
I will offer a rare word of praise for the use of 3D in this movie. The effect only kicks in when we see the action through the ancient “spirit photography”-producing VHS camcorder that Ryan stumbles upon in the movie’s opening moments. Tobi-the-Cloud has a depth to him; Ryan and company can wade into him and are often slammed back by his violent tantrums. It distracts viewers from the rampant stupidity of virtually every character in the film.
Paranormal Activity: The Ghost Dimension isn’t a bad movie, exactly, in that it accomplishes what it sets out to do. Audiences will experience the same brand of giddy terror that they have in each of the series’ previous entries, the same jump scares generated by the camera stumbling onto a spooky-looking kid with blacked-out eyes, the same creeping dread spawned by dark rooms spied by handheld cameras during the witching hour. But that sameness is the problem: Paranormal Activity‘s shtick has clearly run its course.
SHARE
TWEET
Credit: Jeff Victor
BY: Sonny Bunch
October 23, 2015 5:01 am
There has been some consternation about the marketing of Crimson Peak. It has been sold to viewers as a baroque horror film, one that mixes lush imagery with cheap jump scares. Director Guillermo del Toro, on the other hand, explained in a “foreword” distributed to writers attending a preview screening that his latest film is a “Gothic romance”: “heightened melodrama layered with a lot of darkness and the Gothic atmosphere of a dark fairy tale.”
No wonder, then, that audiences polled by Cinemascore gave Crimson Peak a B-minus, the worst grade received by a film opening last weekend. It’s not surprising because audiences hate being lied to, for starters. But Crimson Peak has its own undeniable problems, one that made lying to prospective viewers almost unavoidable: It is beautiful and well acted, expertly staged and shot, but tonally very uneven, veering wildly from one style of film to another with little warning.
After opening on a brief shot of Edith Cushing (Mia Wasikowska) in the snow—a cut on her cheek, what appears to be blood on the ground—we flash back to her childhood. She knows ghosts are real, she tells us, because she first saw one after her mother died. Though terrifying in appearance, the apparition of dearly departed mom comes to comfort and offer a warning: “Beware of Crimson Peak.” The warning is delivered again some years later to Edith as an adult right before the arrival of Sir Thomas Sharpe, Baronet (Tom Hiddleston), about whom more in a bit.
Though the spooks that litter Crimson Peak take on a typically creepy del Toro-esque design—disproportionate limbs; long, deformed faces; wispy tendrils whipping about, blown by an unfelt breeze; brought to life by del Toro regular Doug Jones—they are, generally, helpful in nature. They are eerie, but not scary, and their onscreen activities are treated with more subtlety and care than the monsters in your average horror film.
Sharpe and his sister, Lucille (Jessica Chastain), are the real terrors. Titled and entitled Brits from a spent bloodline and nearly spent fortune, the Sharpes are in America attempting to earn financing for a machine that will help them excavate a blood-red clay from beneath their creaking, collapsing home. Unable to earn the respect of, and an investment from, Edith’s father, Carter (Jim Beaver), Thomas and Lucille earn a stroke of good luck when the old man is mysteriously, brutally, murdered.
And it is brutal, Carter’s murder. This is the biggest problem with Crimson Peak. One moment we’re in a costume drama where Thomas and Edith are waltzing by candlelight; the next we’re in a slasher film where an old man’s head is being bashed violently and repeatedly into a porcelain sink, his face caved in as blood pools around him. One moment Edith is walking through a park, marveling at the beautiful butterflies as we appreciate the costume design that causes Wasikowska to mimic theMonarch; the next Lucille, spindly and black-clad, has placed the winged insect in the midst of a pile of ants and we zoom in, watching the insects chow down on the eyes of the beautiful butterfly.
As with any Del Toro movie, it’s worth watching for his attention to detail alone. Thomas and Lucille’s manor, where the final two-thirds or so of the film takes place as Edith attempts to uncover the Sharpes’ dark secrets, has walls that ooze crimson clay and natural wind tunnels created by holes in the walls and ceiling. The house bleeds and breathes, fitting for a mansion in which many violent murders have taken place. Crimson Peak is not a movie that will be accused of subtlety—the dialogue is occasionally laugh-out-loud silly and every twist is telegraphed twenty minutes ahead of time—but it is worth watching.
Even if it’s not a horror film.
If it’s horror you’re after, then Paranormal Activity: The Ghost Dimension will be more to your liking. The sixth entry in the venerable microbudget found footage horror mainstay, The Ghost Dimension is, supposedly, also the last.
Originally a simple, cheap horror film whose thrills were predicated on the horror of unexplained door openings and closings in a new house, the Paranormal Activity series has developed a whole mythology about witches and covens and demons and inter-dimensional doors and time travel to explain the spooky goings-on in the first film.
Adding layer upon layer to the mythology gives the series a reason to keep going, I suppose, but it also detracts from the thing that made the original entry so compelling and effective. Whereas Paranormal Activity relied on little more than cameras capturing odd shadows, random noises, and the weird night-time movements of Katie (Katie Featherton) in order to generate terror, Paranormal Activity: The Ghost Dimension actually shows the audience what is making everything go bump in the night: a smoky wraith that can be felt by anyone—especially when it’s angry—but can only be seen by those using a mysterious VHS camcorder.
That wraith, a demon who goes by the name Tobi, has been haunting the victims of the series since the beginning. Tobi, previously the playmate of Katie and her sister Kristi (Jessica Tyler Brown), now wants to claim Leila (Ivy George) from her parents Ryan (Chris J. Murray) and Emily (Brit Shaw). If he gets his way he’ll be a spirit no longer, and who knows how much trouble a corporeal hellbeast with goat horns and a half-dozen eyes can cause.
I will offer a rare word of praise for the use of 3D in this movie. The effect only kicks in when we see the action through the ancient “spirit photography”-producing VHS camcorder that Ryan stumbles upon in the movie’s opening moments. Tobi-the-Cloud has a depth to him; Ryan and company can wade into him and are often slammed back by his violent tantrums. It distracts viewers from the rampant stupidity of virtually every character in the film.
Paranormal Activity: The Ghost Dimension isn’t a bad movie, exactly, in that it accomplishes what it sets out to do. Audiences will experience the same brand of giddy terror that they have in each of the series’ previous entries, the same jump scares generated by the camera stumbling onto a spooky-looking kid with blacked-out eyes, the same creeping dread spawned by dark rooms spied by handheld cameras during the witching hour. But that sameness is the problem: Paranormal Activity‘s shtick has clearly run its course.
[h=1]HILLARY CLINTON’S 5 BIGGEST LIES IN HER BENGHAZI TESTIMONY[/h]
Saul Loeb/AFP/Getty Images
by BEN SHAPIRO22 Oct 20152,597
[h=2]Vice President Joe Biden’s announcement on Wednesday that he would not run for president of the United States made it a foregone conclusion that the media would worship at the shrine of Hillary Clinton during her Benghazi testimony on Thursday.[/h]They have no other choice. The precious must be protected at all costs, which means covering up for her lies, her calculated obfuscations, and her charmless faux-gravity.
Already the narrative has been set: Hillary Clinton was a victim of a political Benghazi committee dedicated to her destruction. Every Congressional committee in history has entailed some political motivation—would anyone argue that the Watergate investigations were completely apolitical?—but the media myopically focused on the idiotic comments of
Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA)
before Hillary’s testimony, crafting the story of her victimization before it had even taken place.Hillary, as always, is the poor, put-upon victim of a vast right-wing conspiracy. She set up a private email server and deleted relevant emails from it for purely political reasons; she pressed for a pointless invasion of Libya for political reasons, chortled at its conquest for political reasons, watched it descend into chaos while doing nothing for political reasons, and then allowed her ambassador to twist in the Libyan tornado without proper security for political reasons; finally, she covered up that disaster by lying about its causes for political reasons. But those who ask questions about such matters are partisan politicians.
As Charles Krauthammer rightly observed on Thursday evening, “We’re not going to get the facts, we’re not going to get the real story underlying it. We’re living in an age where what you say and its relation with the facts is completely irrelevant.”
But after 11 hours of lying—which is only slightly longer than the hours Hillary and her boss’ administration did virtually nothing as Americans died under fire in Benghazi—we may as well examine Hillary’s most important lies.
Hillary Cared Deeply About the Human Cost.
Hillary kept claiming that she cared deeply about her good friend Chris Stevens. At one point, she whipped out her pre-planned righteous indignation to complain, “I would imagine I’ve thought more about what happened than all of you put together. I’ve lost more sleep than all of you put together.” This was salt in the wound, the equivalent of Johnny Cochrane lamenting his worries over the fate of Nicole Brown Simpson.
Hillary admitted in her testimony on Thursday that her good friend Chris Stevens did not have her private email address, and that she could recall no conversations with him after he became ambassador to Libya. The night of his death, she wrote an email with the subject line: “Chris Smith,” conflating his death with that of diplomat Sean Smith. She didn’t bother speaking with survivors of the attacks until days later.
As to the notion that Hillary lost sleep, she apparently didn’t the night of the attack—she went home instead of sticking around at the State Department or heading over to the White House, because, she said, she had to prepare for what would be a rough rest of the week. She didn’t talk to then-Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta or Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Martin Dempsey. We do know that she spent the night alone, a fact which led her to chortle. Hillary may have lost sleep over her failures later—clearly, she spent some time coming up with lies about a YouTube video.
Hillary Thought The Attacks Had Something to Do With a YouTube Video.
Hillary maintained on Thursday that she believed the attack still had something to do with the YouTube video, “The Innocence of Muslims.” But the night of the attack, she emailed Chelsea Clinton and told her that an al-Qaeda-like group had killed the ambassador. As
Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH)
said to Clinton, “You tell the American people one thing. You tell your family an entirely different story.”In fact, Hillary told the Egyptian Prime Minister the day after the attacks, “We know the attack in Libya had nothing to do with the film. It was a planned attack. Not a protest.” Hillary tried to state that she had actually told people that some people were pinning the attack on the video, but she herself pinned the attacks on the YouTube video in videos released in Pakistan. She lied, because it was obvious that she had failed in her central duty to protect her diplomats in the most dangerous part of the world—a part of the world she had made more dangerous with her favorite invasion.
Hillary Didn’t Use Sidney Blumenthal As an Advisor.
Hillary Clinton had reams of email exchanges with hitman Sidney Blumenthal. Blumenthal had been banned from the Obama administration for his corruption and Clintonian loyalties. Hillary said that the emails were unsolicited.
Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC)
shot that idiocy down easily: “You wrote to him, ‘Thanks and please keep them coming,’ ‘Greetings from Kabul and thanks for keeping this stuff coming, any other info about it?’ ‘What are you hearing now?’” Hillary then tried to amend her statement by saying they began as unsolicited emails. Hillary used Blumenthal as an advisor, and she routinely corresponded with him. Any implication to the contrary is absolutely false.Hillary Was Transparent About Her Emails.
Hillary insisted again on Thursday that she’d been fully transparent about her emails. Even the State Department has rejected that nonsense repeatedly. The hearings did provide some perspective into just why Hillary might have deleted 30,000 emails, however, she claimed that her correspondence about Libya, which dropped dramatically from 2011 to 2012, was not because she cared less about the country—it was because she had people shuttling documents to her in suitcases. In fact, she said, she didn’t even have a computer in her office. A State Department email address could have confirmed whether any of that was true. Now we will presumably never know.
Chris Stevens Was Responsible for His Own Death.
The most despicable lie of the day came from Hillary’s defense of her own conduct via ripping Chris Stevens, the dead ambassador. She spent virtually the entire day suggesting that Stevens knew the risks of his job, that he accepted those risks, and that he died knowing those risks. She even said that Stevens “felt comfortable” on the ground. If that is true, it’s certainly odd that the State Department team in Libya asked for more security over 600 times. Hillary said she didn’t receive any of those requests and blamed her security team for not granting more security—all the while saying she took responsibility for what had happened.
Then, the capper: Hillary said that when Stevens wrote an email asking about whether the Benghazi compound would be closed, he was just being a sly jokester. She said, “One of the great attributes that Chris Stevens had was a really good sense of humor, and I just see him smiling as he’s typing this because it’s clearly in response to the email down below talking about picking up a few ‘fire sale items from the Brits.’” When told that those “fire sale items” were security barricades, Hillary answered, “Well, I thought it showed their entrepreneurial spirit.” Disgusting.
Hillary Clinton was largely responsible for a pointless invasion of Libya, which promptly turned into a terrorist-run hellhole. She was responsible for the security of her diplomats in Libya, but she didn’t provide for it. She had no correspondence with those diplomats on the ground but plenty of time for Sidney Blumenthal. When those diplomats and those who ran to help them were killed, she blamed a YouTube video. And finally, she used her jerry-rigged email server to selectively edit the material the public would see.
But don’t worry—Hillary’s the victim. Republicans are the perpetrators. And Chris Stevens is just one more bump in the road on her journey to the White House.
4112
27
809
by BEN SHAPIRO22 Oct 20152,597
[h=2]Vice President Joe Biden’s announcement on Wednesday that he would not run for president of the United States made it a foregone conclusion that the media would worship at the shrine of Hillary Clinton during her Benghazi testimony on Thursday.[/h]They have no other choice. The precious must be protected at all costs, which means covering up for her lies, her calculated obfuscations, and her charmless faux-gravity.
Already the narrative has been set: Hillary Clinton was a victim of a political Benghazi committee dedicated to her destruction. Every Congressional committee in history has entailed some political motivation—would anyone argue that the Watergate investigations were completely apolitical?—but the media myopically focused on the idiotic comments of
Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA)
45%
before Hillary’s testimony, crafting the story of her victimization before it had even taken place.Hillary, as always, is the poor, put-upon victim of a vast right-wing conspiracy. She set up a private email server and deleted relevant emails from it for purely political reasons; she pressed for a pointless invasion of Libya for political reasons, chortled at its conquest for political reasons, watched it descend into chaos while doing nothing for political reasons, and then allowed her ambassador to twist in the Libyan tornado without proper security for political reasons; finally, she covered up that disaster by lying about its causes for political reasons. But those who ask questions about such matters are partisan politicians.
As Charles Krauthammer rightly observed on Thursday evening, “We’re not going to get the facts, we’re not going to get the real story underlying it. We’re living in an age where what you say and its relation with the facts is completely irrelevant.”
But after 11 hours of lying—which is only slightly longer than the hours Hillary and her boss’ administration did virtually nothing as Americans died under fire in Benghazi—we may as well examine Hillary’s most important lies.
Hillary Cared Deeply About the Human Cost.
Hillary kept claiming that she cared deeply about her good friend Chris Stevens. At one point, she whipped out her pre-planned righteous indignation to complain, “I would imagine I’ve thought more about what happened than all of you put together. I’ve lost more sleep than all of you put together.” This was salt in the wound, the equivalent of Johnny Cochrane lamenting his worries over the fate of Nicole Brown Simpson.
Hillary admitted in her testimony on Thursday that her good friend Chris Stevens did not have her private email address, and that she could recall no conversations with him after he became ambassador to Libya. The night of his death, she wrote an email with the subject line: “Chris Smith,” conflating his death with that of diplomat Sean Smith. She didn’t bother speaking with survivors of the attacks until days later.
As to the notion that Hillary lost sleep, she apparently didn’t the night of the attack—she went home instead of sticking around at the State Department or heading over to the White House, because, she said, she had to prepare for what would be a rough rest of the week. She didn’t talk to then-Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta or Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Martin Dempsey. We do know that she spent the night alone, a fact which led her to chortle. Hillary may have lost sleep over her failures later—clearly, she spent some time coming up with lies about a YouTube video.
Hillary Thought The Attacks Had Something to Do With a YouTube Video.
Hillary maintained on Thursday that she believed the attack still had something to do with the YouTube video, “The Innocence of Muslims.” But the night of the attack, she emailed Chelsea Clinton and told her that an al-Qaeda-like group had killed the ambassador. As
Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH)
94%
said to Clinton, “You tell the American people one thing. You tell your family an entirely different story.”In fact, Hillary told the Egyptian Prime Minister the day after the attacks, “We know the attack in Libya had nothing to do with the film. It was a planned attack. Not a protest.” Hillary tried to state that she had actually told people that some people were pinning the attack on the video, but she herself pinned the attacks on the YouTube video in videos released in Pakistan. She lied, because it was obvious that she had failed in her central duty to protect her diplomats in the most dangerous part of the world—a part of the world she had made more dangerous with her favorite invasion.
Hillary Didn’t Use Sidney Blumenthal As an Advisor.
Hillary Clinton had reams of email exchanges with hitman Sidney Blumenthal. Blumenthal had been banned from the Obama administration for his corruption and Clintonian loyalties. Hillary said that the emails were unsolicited.
Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC)
85%
shot that idiocy down easily: “You wrote to him, ‘Thanks and please keep them coming,’ ‘Greetings from Kabul and thanks for keeping this stuff coming, any other info about it?’ ‘What are you hearing now?’” Hillary then tried to amend her statement by saying they began as unsolicited emails. Hillary used Blumenthal as an advisor, and she routinely corresponded with him. Any implication to the contrary is absolutely false.Hillary Was Transparent About Her Emails.
Hillary insisted again on Thursday that she’d been fully transparent about her emails. Even the State Department has rejected that nonsense repeatedly. The hearings did provide some perspective into just why Hillary might have deleted 30,000 emails, however, she claimed that her correspondence about Libya, which dropped dramatically from 2011 to 2012, was not because she cared less about the country—it was because she had people shuttling documents to her in suitcases. In fact, she said, she didn’t even have a computer in her office. A State Department email address could have confirmed whether any of that was true. Now we will presumably never know.
Chris Stevens Was Responsible for His Own Death.
The most despicable lie of the day came from Hillary’s defense of her own conduct via ripping Chris Stevens, the dead ambassador. She spent virtually the entire day suggesting that Stevens knew the risks of his job, that he accepted those risks, and that he died knowing those risks. She even said that Stevens “felt comfortable” on the ground. If that is true, it’s certainly odd that the State Department team in Libya asked for more security over 600 times. Hillary said she didn’t receive any of those requests and blamed her security team for not granting more security—all the while saying she took responsibility for what had happened.
Then, the capper: Hillary said that when Stevens wrote an email asking about whether the Benghazi compound would be closed, he was just being a sly jokester. She said, “One of the great attributes that Chris Stevens had was a really good sense of humor, and I just see him smiling as he’s typing this because it’s clearly in response to the email down below talking about picking up a few ‘fire sale items from the Brits.’” When told that those “fire sale items” were security barricades, Hillary answered, “Well, I thought it showed their entrepreneurial spirit.” Disgusting.
Hillary Clinton was largely responsible for a pointless invasion of Libya, which promptly turned into a terrorist-run hellhole. She was responsible for the security of her diplomats in Libya, but she didn’t provide for it. She had no correspondence with those diplomats on the ground but plenty of time for Sidney Blumenthal. When those diplomats and those who ran to help them were killed, she blamed a YouTube video. And finally, she used her jerry-rigged email server to selectively edit the material the public would see.
But don’t worry—Hillary’s the victim. Republicans are the perpetrators. And Chris Stevens is just one more bump in the road on her journey to the White House.
