King Calls For Wider Investigations of Obama, Clinton…


Rep. Steve King (R-IA) just became one of my new political heroes. He berated Congress in session (7/27/17) over ignoring ALL the Dem Party corruption while being hot to sick Robert Mueller on witch hunt to take down the Trump Administration.

 

Check it out:

 

VIDEO: BREAKING: [VIDEO] CONGRESS DEMANDS THE INVESTIGATION OF HILLARY CLINTON

 

Posted by Trumpet News

Published on Aug 1, 2017

 

The Gateway Pundit summarizes King’s message this way:

 

Rep. Steve King (R-IA) addressed Congress last Thursday in support of legislation that requires the Attorney General to turn over documents regarding former FBI Director James Comey’s involvement in various controversial cases.

 

The legislation passed 16-13 with King voting in favor of it. King addressed Congress with an impassioned and detailed inquiry/speech. … (Rep. Steve King Calls for Full Investigations Into Obama, Clinton, Comey, Soros, Lynch, and Others (VIDEO); By Carter; Gateway Pundit; 8/1/17 4:36 pm)

 

Below are the talking points in the AWESOME video you just watched from Rep. Steve King’s website.

 

JRH 8/4/17

Please Support NCCR

***************

King Calls For Wider Investigations of Obama, Clinton, Comey, Soros, Lynch, Abedin, and Weiner Scandals

 

Jul 27, 2017

Press Release

SteveKing.House.gov

 

Congressman Steve King released the following video of statements he made during Judiciary Committee debate of legislation requiring the Attorney General to provide copies of any document, record, audio recording, memo, correspondence, or other communication that refers or relates to a number of troubling aspects of James Comey’s tenure as FBI director.

 

In the course of his remarks, Congressman King recounted a litany of facts and events that reveal the corruption that surrounds many of the nation’s most prominent Democrats, as well as their disturbing pattern of using American taxpayer money to interfere in foreign elections. King’s entire remarks can be viewed here.

 

King concluded his remarks by asserting the trail of Democratic election corruption leads to Barack Obama, and that the examples he cites should be investigated fully.

 

Excerpted remarks:

 

On Barack Obama’s election interference in other countries:

 

“It’s pretty clear the Obama administration sent their people over to Israel to work against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Pretty much openly. Significant dollars invested in that campaign over there. The President of the United States, with at least the moral support of the people that had worked for him, in the country of Israel, [sought] to shift the results of the election against the seated Prime Minister, Bibi Netanyahu.”

 

 

“The Obama administration is a long ways from clean on this, as far as being involved in elections in other countries.”

 

On George Soros’ Use of Taxpayer Money to interfere in election in the Balkans:

 

learned the United States government, borrowing money from China and Saudi Arabia, had handed over at least $5,000,000 in contracts transferred through USAID into George Soros’s organizations that were used to manipulate elections in the Balkans.”

 

On the need to reopen investigations into Huma Abedin and Anthony Weiner:

 

The long string that we should be looking at with this investigation and special counsel that is our request here goes a long ways back. It goes clear back to Huma Abedin, Anthony Weiner, 650,000 emails, which we still have access to.”

 

On James Comey’s sham investigation of Hillary Clinton:

 

This [Comey’s Investigation of Clinton] is what looks like, on its face, a sham investigation. Plus, they destroyed a tremendous amount of information: at least 30,000 emails, crushed hard drives, bought bleach bit, hired outside contractors to scrub emails up. And we’re to take James Comey’s word for this, that there wasn’t enough substance there to bring a prosecution, even though a year ago, July 5th, James Comey delivered 15 minutes of a summary of prosecution that was completely convincing to me until we got down to the last couple sentences of that presentation which was, ‘well, we can’t prove intent.’ Well, curiously there is no requirement for intent in the two statutes that appear to be violated.”

 

I look back in the records to the previous October and previous April, Barack Obama stated into the news media record ‘Hillary Clinton would never intend to put our national security at risk; Hillary Clinton would never intend to harm America’s security. That’s the previous October and April. Well, James Comey latched onto that word, ‘intend’, and they made up new law and gave Hillary Clinton an exemption for this intent that they said they couldn’t prove which is absolutely proven by the facts [Comey] delivered to us in the summary that day.”

 

On Loretta Lynch:

 

“Not only does this trail lead through Hillary Clinton and James Comey, but the Loretta Lynch component of this as well. When you put this in place, and look at the example of them on the tarmac, it’s hard to imagine they sat there for 45 minutes and discussed grandchildren.”

 

On allegations Democratic Operatives went to the Ukraine to get dirt on Candidate Trump:

 

“That brings me to Alexandra Chalupa who went off as a DNC contractor to Ukraine to try to gather dirt on the Trump people. So, bringing this around, Mr. Chairman, I’ll conclude with this: the trail leads also to Barack Obama and we need to investigate all of this.”

 

________________

Steve King Bio on House Page

 

Steve King grew up in a law enforcement family in Storm Lake, Iowa. He attended Denison Community High School, where he met Marilyn Kelly, whom he married in 1972. They have lived in Kiron since 1976 and are members of St. Martin’s Church in Odebolt. Steve and Marilyn have three grown sons and seven grandchildren.

King studied math and science at Northwest Missouri State University. He started King Construction in 1975 and built the business up from one bulldozer. He brings valuable knowledge to Congress as an agribusinessman and a small business owner for 28 years. King’s oldest son now owns the construction business.

He served in the Iowa State Senate for six years. He was a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, Judiciary Committee, Business and Labor Committee, the Commerce Committees, and chair of the State Government Committee. He worked in the State Senate to successfully eliminate the inheritance tax, enforce workplace drug testing, enforce parenting rights, including parental notification of abortions, pass tax cuts for working Iowans, and pass the law that made English the official language in Iowa.

King was elected to Congress in 2002 to represent Iowa’s Fifth Congressional District. During the 2012 election cycle, Iowa was redistricted to four districts. King now represents the Fourth Congressional District in the 114th Congress which includes: Ames, Fort Dodge, Mason City, Sioux City and Spencer. He brings personal experience, Constitutional principles, traditional marriage and family values and the perspective of representing one of the top producing agriculture districts in the nation to the people of Iowa’s Fourth Congressional District.

King serves on the Agriculture Committee. He has long been dedicated to adding value as close to the corn stalk and bean stem as possible, as …

 

 

King is also a member of the House Judiciary Committee, where he sits on the Constitution and Civil Justice Subcommittee and the Immigration and Border Security Subcommittee. He believes the Constitution means what it says and that it should be read with the intent of our Founding Fathers in mind. King is never caught without a copy of the Constitution in his coat pocket. He is a strong advocate of the Rule of Law and enforcing our borders. King is a full-spectrum, Constitutional Conservative.

 

King, for more than a decade, has chaired the Conservative Opportunity Society, a powerful and legendary House caucus that has become the conscience of Constitutional conservatives in the U.S. Congress. (READ ENTIRETY)


 

 

CONGRESSMAN: HILLARY BUSTED IN MONSTER ‘LIE’


Hillary on Benghazi - 'What difference does it make'

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton testifies before he Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Jan. 23, 2013 – “What difference does it make?”

Yesterday I cross posted the James Rosen article summarizing what Obama was actually aware of pertaining to the Benghazigate Scandal. To summarize what knowledge Obama had about the Islamic terrorist attack in Benghazi that killed four Americans including Ambassador Chris Steven with one word – LIAR. Obama lied AND the President told his Administration surrogates to lie (such as Hillary Clinton, Susan Rice and Jay Carney).

 

Undoubtedly the Mainstream Media will twist some propaganda to make lite of one these so-called Obama phony scandals so below is another perspective based on an interview with Rep. Steve King (R-IA) conducted by WND’s Garth Kant that focuses on the next Dem Party darling in former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

 

JRH 1/16/14

 

Please Support NCCR

***************************

CONGRESSMAN: HILLARY BUSTED IN MONSTER ‘LIE’

‘I heard her with my own ears’

By GARTH KANT 

January 14, 2014

WorldNetDaily

 

WASHINGTON — President Obama has problems with credibility, as the world well knows after he disingenuously insisted, “If you like your health-care plan, you can keep your health-care plan” about two dozen times in public.

 

Now, it turns out, the Democrat most political observers believe will try to replace Obama as president apparently also has problems telling the truth.

 

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton lied to the American people about Benghazi, a congressman who recently returned from a fact-finding trip to Libya told WND.

He said she also lied to Congress.

 

Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, was unequivocal when WND asked him, “What makes you so certain that Hillary Clinton lied?”

 

“Because,” King replied, “I heard her with my own ears.”

 

And, what contradicted her?

 

“The facts.”

 

King also had a blistering response to a famous question posed by Clinton.

 

During a Senate committee hearing Jan. 23, 2013, when asked what caused the death of four Americans in Benghazi, Clinton responded indignantly, “At this point, what difference does it make?”

 

WND asked King if he had an answer for her.

 

“The reason it makes a difference, Hillary Clinton, is because this administration lied to the American people. Her voice was one of those voices that lied to the American people.”

WND VIDEO: Part 1 Kant Interviewing Rep. King

 

The congressman related how Clinton and other administration officials were dishonest when they briefed Congress within a week of the terrorist attack at the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, on Sept. 11, 2012, in which U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens, computer specialist Sean Smith and CIA security contractors Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty were killed.

 

King said he could not divulge what was said during a classified briefing he attended, but, “I will just tell you that the administration’s officials told the same lies to members of Congress in a classified setting that they told the public five times on Sunday.”

 

He was referring to appearances on five political talk shows by then-Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice on Sept. 16, 2012, during which she claimed the attack was a spontaneous protest inspired by anger over an obscure anti-Muslim video on the Internet.

 

“We know that’s false,” King told WND. “On top of that, we know they knew it was false. They knew within three hours that it was a calculated, strategized attack by an organized enemy on that compound and that annex in Benghazi.”

 

Strong confirmation of King’s version of events has just come to light, as newly declassified documents show top defense officials briefed Obama that a terrorist attack was underway in Benghazi not long after it began.

 

During a classified, closed-door hearing last year, Gen. Carter Ham, who was responsible for U.S. forces in North Africa, testified that he very quickly got to the point and told then-Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, that it was a terrorist attack and not a protest.

 

Panetta and Dempsey then met immediately with Obama.

 

Last February, Panetta told the Senate Armed Services Committee that he told Obama “there was an apparent attack going on in Benghazi.”

 

Panetta said, “There was no question in my mind that this was a terrorist attack.”

 

And yet, for the next few weeks, as the 2012 presidential election reached the crucial home stretch, a number of aides to both Clinton and Obama repeatedly insisted there was no evidence the attack on Benghazi was planned, but it appeared to be protest that turned violent.

 

That was contradicted by testimony on May 8, 2013, by U.S. diplomat Gregory Hicks, who was in Libya at the time of the Benghazi terrorist attack.

 

He, and two other key witnesses agreed, there was no basis for Rice to claim the attack began as a protest of an anti-Islamic film. And yet, Obama and Clinton repeatedly made that claim in the hours and days after the incident.

 

Hicks pointedly said he was “stunned” by Rice’s response to the Benghazi attack.

 

“My jaw dropped, and I was embarrassed,” he said.

 

Hicks was asked if there was any indication of a protest in Benghazi in response to the Internet video.

 

“The YouTube video was a non-event in Libya,” he said.

 

“We know from the testimony,” King told WND. “We know it wasn’t the movie. It is a fact that it wasn’t the movie.”

 

He also pointed out that people who worked in the intelligence community as well as the State Department have testified under oath that they knew the movie did not trigger the attack.

 

“And they (administration officials) have not retracted them. They were dishonest,” King flatly stated.

 

The congressman made the blunt assertions to WND in his first published remarks following a recent trip he organized to hotspots in North Africa and the Middle East, with Reps. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, and Michele Bachmann, R-Minn.

WND VIDEO: Part 2 Kant Interviewing Rep. King

 

The Iowan had more answers to Clinton’s question, “What difference does it make?”

 

He said, of course, the loss of Ambassador Stevens and the three other Americans “who stood there bravely to defend that compound” was a “significant tragedy.”

 

But, he called the truth an even bigger casualty.

 

“[T]he biggest tragedy of this is this administration came forward within days and began to misinform the American people on what took place in Benghazi.”

 

That’s because, King insisted, “It’s a tragedy when the integrity of the presidency and the administration of President Obama, or any president of the United States, can be sacrificed for a political agenda.”

 

The congressman noted that former Defense Secretary Robert Gates described in his new book how then-senator and presidential candidate Clinton took a position against the surge in Iraq in the presidential primary contests in 2008 for political reasons.

 

“If political decisions are made on war policy in Iraq when you’re campaigning for office, and if political conditions were part of the decision as to whether there would be a surge in Afghanistan, that’s also part of Gate’s book, then those two things all but confirm that the story that the administration promoted coming out of Benghazi was a political story, designed to cover,” charged King.

 

And why did they need cover? Because they were in the peak of the president’s re-election campaign, said the congressman.

 

He said the administration “should have told the American people the straight-up truth as soon as they knew it,” but instead, “they continue to cover-up Benghazi and the only reason they’ve been allowed to do it is a media that is, for a large part, complicit.”

Conceivably, that could derail presidential ambitions Clinton might harbor.

Judge Andrew Napolitano says the former secretary of state could be prosecuted if she did, in fact, lie.

 

“Lying to Congress carries the same criminal liability and the same punishment as lying under oath to Congress. I’m not suggesting that Mrs. Clinton lied, but I’m saying that a case could be made out, either legally in a courtroom if a prosecutor wanted to, and certainly politically in a public sphere should she decide to seek higher office,” Napolitano said, the day after Hicks testified to Congress that the video played absolutely no role in the Benghazi attack.

WMD VIDEO: Judge Andrew Napolitano on Benghazi Lies

 

When WND asked King if those he spoke with in Libya share his observations about the attack on Benghazi, he said it depends on who you talk to.

 

He had nothing but praise for U.S. Ambassador to Libya Deborah Jones, calling her “excellent” and “terrific.”

 

“She’s in a very dangerous place, and she has a very difficult task. She’s upbeat, she’s knowledgeable,” and King said all of their discussions encouraged him that “we’ve got a good State Department operating in Libya.”

 

Follow Garth Kant on Twitter @DCgarth

________________________________

© Copyright 1997-2014. All Rights Reserved. WND.com.