Reminder: Check out our Blog Feeds in the right column (Scroll to bottom).
    Our readers say it's the best way to keep up with developing news stories!

Scandals Be Damned! Ambitious Obama Is Movin' On Up to SecGen of the United Nations in 2016
  Ban Ki-moon's two terms will end December 31, 2016 — leaving Obama with 10 months to angle for the SecGen position.  And maybe with a little luck or fraud Obama will become the first Supreme Ruler of the New Global Union.

By James Lewis -- Washington rumor has it that Obama wants to be U.N. Secretary General.
There are several reasons that make that likely, and if it's true, it throws new light on a lot of Obama's oddities -- including his Royalty Bows, his Apology Tours, his Muslim Sellout, and the Benghazi Cover-Up.
But first -- why would Obama be planning to become the chief of the U.N. before he has even finished his second term?

(1) OBAMA'S UNBOUNDED EGO
In three and a half years, Obama will be out of a job. He is 50 now and wants to soar to greater heights, because that's what matters more than anything else in his life.
What's better to Obama's Napoleonic self than being U.N. Sec Gen? He is a man who wants to be worshiped by the world, and the path to that goal is clear. It is also an opportunity to carry out his internationalist and pro-Muslim convictions.
Personalities like his need the excitement of taking big risks for big gains. Obama's slogan "the audacity of hope" comes from Napoleon's general, who described his war strategy as "Audacity, audacity, always audacity!" Alinsky's Rules advise: "Always act outside of the experience of the enemy." It now looks like Obama has never won a single clean election, because he has always violated the rules. He always gambles, and as long as his opponents play by the rules, he wins.
Mitt Romney is a good and decent man, and IRS intimidation of political enemies is just not his way. Knowing that, the Obama campaign violated the rules deliberately, cynically, and with malice aforethought. It worked.

(2) OBAMA'S INTERNATIONALIST IDEOLOGY
The Communist anthem is The Internationale. When Obama gave his big speech in Berlin even before the first inauguration, his first words were "Citizens of the world!" That was meant as Marxist symbolism. All the leftists in the world cheered themselves hoarse.
Berlin was Marx's city, the capital of the Prussian Empire that was the model for the Communist Worker's Paradise, to be guided by the new Prussian Junkers, the Communist Party. "Citizens of the world!" was an echo of "Workers of the world, unite! You have nothing to lose but your chains!"
The American media didn't bother to tell us that, but they knew. They knew.
Obama constantly pulls stunts with obvious Marxist overtones. His inner circle laughs at his audacity, and he likes to clown it up for Valerie Jarrett, Michelle, Ayers, and Axelrod.
Obama is a trickster, power-hungry, insatiable, and sociopathic. His enemy is us, or what Jeremiah Wright would call "middleclassness," the values that most of us try to live by.
As a European Socialist, Obama does not believe in the U.S. Constitution. His appointees have no conscience about violating the Constitution, as is obvious from today's news about fundamental IRS violations, fundamental invasion of news reporters' privileges under the First Amendment, and fundamental violations of the ethics of combat commanders -- leaving soldiers under fire to the tender mercies of a vicious enemy.
Obama is audacity man -- violating decent values is his specialty. Bill and Hillary found that out when he played the race card against them at the 2008 Democratic Convention. Democrats always play the race card, but never against each other. In 2008, Obama violated that rule, and he got away with it.

(3) BUTT-KISSING TYRANTS
If Obama wants to run for U.N. SecGen after 2016, he needs two things: a U.S. nomination by a Democratic president and a majority vote in the U.N. General Assembly.
Let's say Hillary gets elected in 2016, as Democrats now are hoping. She nominates Obama to be U.N. SecGen, to rousing cheers from the New York Times and Washington Post, the U.K. Guardian, and Workers' World. Now Obama needs a majority of U.N. General Assembly votes.
By butt-kissing every throwback tyrant in sight, Obama is buying U.N. votes for himself. Obama's public bows to throwbacks like Saudi's King Abdullah and the emperor of Japan are not just another weird thing about this guy. They are strategic, with the purpose of lining up support for the future.
There are 57 Muslim states. (Remember Obama's slip of the tongue when he talked about "all 57 states"? He wasn't thinking about Heinz 57 flavors. He was thinking about Muslim states.)
Europe is the home of imperialist socialism. The European Union is the successor to the Soviet Union, run by an appointed political machine just like the USSR. Obama is a EuroSoc, and he will get enthusiastic support from there.
South America will vote for him, because he is actively supporting leftist regimes below the border. Obama's recent trip to Mexico was full of bowing and scraping to Mexico's tender feelings about losing Texas and California in the 19th century. Blowing open the border is just another favor Obama is doing for Latin America.
If you combine his unbounded ego with his penchant for audacious trickery, it becomes clear why Obama would want to be U.N. Secretary General. To U.N.-worshipers, the SecGen is the basis for a world presidency. Even if it remains a weak position, it could be a wonderful bully pulpit for Obama's endless speech habit. It would crown Obama's life achievements and allow him to crow over the United States with its old-fashioned constitution designed to limit the powers of such as The Trickster.
President Obama could have used the Benghazi attack on 9/11 last year to look like the commander in chief, a role he loves to play. He could have allowed Air Force jets to strafe and bomb the gaggle of Ansar al Shari'a gunmen who overran the compound and killed what are now admitted to be six Americans, including Ambassador Stevens.
This might have been Obama's Heroic Capture of bin Laden — Part 2.
When Obama skips a chance to boast and strut on the stage just before an election, we have to wonder why. He is not usually shy about putting himself in the limelight. Michael Barone and Charles Krauthammer believe that Benghazi was covered up because Obama and Hillary were afraid to admit that al-Qaeda wasn't dead -- that AQ is very much alive, and dangerous as a snake.
On 9/11 last year, there were not one, but two simultaneous assaults on American targets: the Cairo Embassy and the Benghazi compound. The front pages that day showed the black AQ flag flying over a burned part of the U.S. Embassy. Double-simultaneous assaults are an al-Qaeda signature, as we know from 9/11/01, when the Pentagon was assaulted simultaneously with the Twin Towers. Double-bomb attacks spell AL-QAEDA.
Everybody in the Muslim world understood that on the eleventh anniversary of 9/11/01, AQ was telling the world it could strike us at any place and time. Bin Laden may be dead, but jihad keeps marchin' on.
Benghazi was a secret CIA operation to smuggle arms from Libya to the "Free Syrian Army," consisting of radical Islamists. Stevens was at the arms compound in Benghazi to direct a large arms shipment. He was the Libya expert who helped to overthrow Gaddafi in the first place. Now he was shipping Gaddafi's armaments to overthrow Bashir Assad in Syria.
The United States was apparently acting in collusion with radical Muslim factions, probably including al-Qaeda in the Maghreb (the Mediterranean coast of North Africa). We know that Stevens even hired another jihadist faction to guard the CIA compound. Early Benghazi reports showed that they magically disappeared on the day of the attack, as did the Libyan police. Our loyal Libyan allies.
Obama was therefore directly colluding with al-Qaeda, the enemy that destroyed the Twin Towers on 9/11/01. AQ is a big part of the "Free" Syrian Army that is trying to destroy Assad, because Assad is a Shi'ite who runs a secular Baathist regime. One of our friendly radical Islamist groups, Ansar al Shari'a, simply decided to send a bloody message to America that day by killing Stevens and burning the annex.
The strategic purpose of the "Free Syrian Army" is to cut the Shi'ite Crescent running from Iran through Syria to Lebanon. We are involved in a proxy war between Iran and the Sunni Arabs. We are now supporting the Sunni maniacs against Iran's maniacs. That is what Benghazi was about.
One can make a case for pitting Sunnis against Shi'ites. But Obama knows perfectly well that after Assad, Syria will be run by another set of murderous fanatics. Collusion with radical Muslims is standard in this administration. That is completely, profoundly cynical, or it is simply aiding the enemy.
There are many reasons for that collusion, but protecting the United States is not one of them. The policy of appeasement and treachery protects radical Islam and endangers the West. However, if Obama wants to be SecGen of the United Nations in four years, there is an extra reason to buy votes in the Middle East.
None of this should ever become public knowledge, as far as Obama and Hillary are concerned. Benghazi therefore had to be covered up at any price. With Obama, personal ambition and political moves always go together.
Conservatives, beware.

ABUSE OF POWER: The Dots Already Lead to Obama In the IRS Scandal!
  Investor´s Business Daily Editorial:  Any scandal investigation that expects a "Eureka!" moment, a White House e-mail, or Oval Office smoking gun will be misguided. In fact, the dots are already connected directly to the president.
Barack Obama is not foolish enough to have a tape recording system hidden in his desk. And his administration staff are not careless enough to send one another incriminating e-mails.
If the president was behind the IRS unlawfully harassing conservative groups seeking tax-exempt status, we can be sure the communications were all sotto voce and in persona, like any good Chicago political operator.
But as the Wall Street Journal's Kimberly Strassel reminds us in her column "Conservatives Became Targets in 2008," Obama's campaign was demanding the Justice Department criminally prosecute conservative groups with 501(c)4 tax-exempt status. Then, last year, President Obama's re-election campaign "targeted private citizens who had donated to Romney groups."
The chief operative? Longtime Democratic Party lawyer Robert Bauer, general counsel for Obama's presidential campaigns, White House general counsel during Obama's first term, Democratic National Committee general counsel, and the Democrats' counsel in President Bill Clinton's Senate impeachment trial. And, not least, husband of Democratic political strategist Anita Dunn (In 2009 speech she declared Mao Tse Tung her "favorite philosopher"), White House communications director in Obama's first term, and now an MSNBC contributor.
Bauer is author of "Soft Money, Hard Law: A Guide to the New Campaign Finance Law," and serves on the American Bar Association's Advisory Commission on Election Law.
When you've got a legal Rottweiler like Bauer setting the cutthroat example to one and all within the Obama administration regarding the wishes of the president, does anyone really think he — or others in the administration — needed marching orders when it comes to the government's attitude toward opponents of Obama's ideology who were seeking tax-exempt status?
Does anyone really think Obama had to tell Bauer — or anyone else in the administration — if it was OK to, as John Dean once indelicately put it, "use the available federal machinery to screw our political enemies"?
The climate of hate for Obama's political enemies was well established among those around him even before he became president.
It's clear the president, without having to utter a word, approved all along the idea of going after them.
Tyrant Obama Won't Let Up! Appoints 'Vote Fraud Perpetuator' Robert Bauer to Co-Lead Voter Commission
  "Let's Keep 'Vote Fraud' Alive!"
By Laurel Conrad -- The co-chair President Barack Obama appointed Tuesday to help lead the Presidential Commission on Election Administration, Robert F. Bauer, said during the 2012 election that voter ID laws are a Republican tactic to suppress lawful votes.
During the 2012 election, the Obama team tapped Bauer to lead the legal teams for the campaign and the Democratic National Committee. Among his initiatives: fighting voter ID laws enacted by a number of states in an effort to combat voter fraud. During his time as the team’s organizer, Bauer told the Associated Press that he believes that the GOP is enlisting these new laws to impede the right to vote.
“The Republican Party and their allies have mapped out their vote suppression campaign as a response to our success in 2008 with grass-roots organization and successful turnout,” Bauer said. “This is their response to defeat: changing the rules of participation so that fewer participate.” Before his work on the campaign, Bauer served as Obama’s general consul from 2009 to 2011. The White House announced the appointment of ten individuals to the commission, which was formed “to identify non-partisan ways to shorten lines at polling places, promote the efficient conduct of elections, and provide better access to the polls for all voters.” Leading the commission alongside Bauer is Co-Chairman Benjamin L. Ginsberg.
Bauer’s co-chairman, Ginsberg, is the former consul to Republicans George W. Bush and Mitt Romney. His legal advice helped Bush win the Supreme Court case Florida decision that sent him to the White House. It is unclear exactly how much power the commission will have to implement these voting reforms.

OBAMAGATE: Voters Stupidly Voted For Obama Twice and Got 'Saul Alinsky' — And America's Paying A Helluva Price!

Level of Corruption is So High Right Now It's Like
Saul is Running the White House From the Grave!
By Rachel Alexander -- With three full-blown scandals currently surrounding the Obama administration, there are too many “-gates” to name just one. There is the cover-up of the fatal Benghazi terrorist attack, the IRS targeting conservatives, and the Justice Department spying on members of the press. The level of corruption is so high right now it is like Saul Alinsky is running the White House.
Alinsky, the radical activist who wrote "Rules for Radicals", which he dedicated to Satan, taught the radical left to use dishonest tactics in order to achieve their agenda – “by any means necessary.” He advocated lying and harassing those with opposing viewpoints.
  Don't forget about me, my Wellesley thesis was on Saul.  (click for Hillary pic enlargement)

Both Obama and Hillary Clinton were deeply influenced by Saul Alinsky. Alinsky biographer Sanford Howitt has said Obama's 2008 election campaign was influenced by Alinsky, and that Obama followed in his footsteps as a community organizer.
Alinsky's son David wrote in an article that appeared in the Boston Globe, “Obama learned his lesson well. I am proud to see that my father’s model for organizing is being applied successfully beyond local community organizing to affect the Democratic campaign in 2008. It is a fine tribute to Saul Alinsky as we his approach his 100th birthday.” Obama revealed a few years ago that his years training as a community organizer at Alinsky's Industrial Areas Foundation, “gave him the best education of his life.” He has quoted Alinsky in speeches.
Four Americans died during the Benghazi attacks, and it is now coming out that the White House knew the embassy needed more security, and knew terrorists were targeting it, but did nothing. Three whistleblowers have come forward, in spite of being threatened with demotions, to tell Congress that the administration knew at the time of U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice's public comments that the Benghazi terrorist attack was connected to terrorists, and they in fact deleted out those references in her talking points, revising them 12 times. One of the whistleblowers, Gregory Hicks, who was the deputy chief of mission at the U.S. Embassy in Libya during 2012, is a Democrat, not exactly someone who has anything to gain for partisan reasons.
A second scandal is the revelation that the IRS targeted conservative groups with "Tea Party," "patriot," “We the People,” or “Take Back the Country” in their names, and "nonprofit groups that criticized the government and sought to educate Americans about the U.S. Constitution.” Pro-life organizations and generous contributors to Mitt Romney's presidential campaign were also targeted. 75 applications for 501(c)(4) status, almost all from conservative and tea party groups, were set aside for detailed review and required to provide unusual information, like donor lists. Conservative writer Peggy Noonan notes some of the overreaching, prying questions that were asked: What are you thinking about? Did you ever think of running for office? Do you ever contact political figures? What are you reading? One Tea Party organization responded by sending the IRS a copy of the U.S. Constitution.
Those targeted included James Dobson, the well-known Christian author and radio host who has been vocal in his criticism of Obama. Billy Graham, the world-renowned evangelist who is now 94 years old, was audited after he endorsed Mitt Romney. On top of that, the IRS released confidential information about the conservative groups to the George Soros funded liberal media outlet ProPublica.
The head of the IRS division that targeted conservative groups, Sarah Hall Ingram, received more than $100,000 in bonuses between 2009 and 2012, most of it during the time her office was targeting conservatives.
Although Obama has denounced the IRS targeting, forcing the resignation of acting IRS Commissioner Steven Miller and a top deputy six days after the scandal broke, it is hard to believe that he was not involved with it. Obama believes Saul Alinsky tactics are brilliant. If you think that Obama was not involved with the targeting of conservative groups, I have a bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to sell you.
The third scandal that has arisen is the discovery that the Justice Department conducted a broad search of telephone records from the Associated Press, in search of a government employee who leaked information to the press about the CIA’s disruption of a Yemen-based terrorism plot. Unlike previous Justice Department policy, the government did not bother giving the press a chance to negotiate or dispute the subpoenas in advance.
Attorney General Eric Holder insisted that it was one of the most serious leaks he had ever seen, and that is why regular procedures were not followed. But it is coming out that the investigation was done in response to Republicans accusing the administration of purposely leaking defense information to the press in order to make Obama look better, and it was the seventh time the administration had undergone an investigation like this. Even the liberal Washington Post editorialized that this was six investigations too many, especially considering the cost. The Justice Department essentially disregarded the First Amendment in order to fight with Republicans, not due to a security threat.
Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) calls the IRS problem worse than Watergate. Conservative columnist Peggy Noonan believes it is the biggest scandal since Watergate. Sen. James Inhofe is suggesting impeachment. Mike Huckabee is predicting Obama may not serve out his full term. The mainstream liberal media is actually upset about two of the scandals. The Washington Post editorialized that Benghazi is nothing, whereas the other two scandals are serious.
Republicans must be careful how they go about investigating the scandals, or it could backfire on them. Political columnist Chris Adamo warns, “Americans should remember how successfully Hillary Clinton was able to generate a 'scandal overload' and by constantly changing the subject, managed to protect the thoroughly compromised administration of her husband, Bill Clinton, from any repercussions for his malfeasance and innumerable violations of the law.”
Washington Times columnist Eric Golub advises Republicans not to try and impeach Obama. He warns, “The left needed and tolerated the Clintons, but they worship Barack Obama...As a supporter of the 1998 impeachment and a believer in the rule of law, there comes a time to admit that many leftists are above the law.” Golub believes that eventually the American public will become tired of Obama, similar to “Clinton fatigue,” which ruined Al Gore's chances of winning the presidency.
Conservative-leaning reporter Major Garrett, who left Fox News for CBS, provides this candid analysis, "The White House believes its greatest ally in all these scandals are Republicans that overreach and they will try to exploit that to the maximum whenever they can."
How serious are the scandals, is Obama really complicit in some of the most corrupt actions ever undertaken by a president? Look at one of the tactics recommended by his mentor Saul Alinsky. Alinsky describes in Rules for Radicals how he organized a union protest on July 14th. After the organizers had chosen the date – selected because it was the one day the labor unions had no scheduled meetings – Alinsky was asked by a reporter if they had picked that date because it was Bastille Day. Caught by surprise, but realizing he had lucked into a windfall, Alinsky answered, "Not at all. It is fitting that we do so and that's why we did it." He then informed all the speakers to mention Bastille Day in their speeches. Alinsky proudly provides this to the world as an example of justifying lying in order to achieve your means.
We now have pretty overwhelming evidence that Obama is part of serious wrongdoing. But will he ever be held accountable, or have Alinsky's methods become the law?


When the law no longer protects you from the corrupt, but protects the corrupt from you —
you know your nation is doomed.  ~ Ayn Rand


'Holder the Corrupt' OK'd Search Warrant for FOX Reporter James Rosen's Private Emails
  By Michael Isikoff -- Attorney General Eric Holder signed off on a controversial search warrant that identified Fox News reporter James Rosen as a “possible co-conspirator” in violations of the Espionage Act and authorized seizure of his private emails, a law enforcement official told NBC News on Thursday.
The disclosure of the attorney general’s role came as President Barack Obama, in a major speech on his counterterrorism policy, said Holder had agreed to review Justice Department guidelines governing investigations that involve journalists.
"I am troubled by the possibility that leak investigations may chill the investigative journalism that holds government accountable," Obama said. "Journalists should not be at legal risk for doing their jobs."
Rosen, who has not been charged in the case, was nonetheless the target of a search warrant that enabled Justice Department investigators to secretly seize his private emails after an FBI agent said he had "asked, solicited and encouraged … (a source) to disclose sensitive United States internal documents and intelligence information."
Obama's comments follow a firestorm of criticism that has erupted over disclosures that in separate investigations of leaks of classified information, the Justice Department had obtained private emails that Rosen exchanged with a source and the phone records of Associated Press reporters.  Continued >>
BREAKING: DOJ Confirms 'Holder the Corrupt' Personally "Vetted" James Rosen Warrant
By Guy Benson -- A damaging Friday news dump before a holiday weekend? Who could have seen that coming? Dump away, Justice Department:
Fox News reporter whose report on North Korea prompted a leak investigation. In a statement emailed to Reuters, the department said the search warrant for the reporter's email account followed all laws and policies and won the independent approval of a federal magistrate judge.
We're apparently supposed to feel better about everything because the DOJ "followed all laws and policies" and secured their warrant from a judge. That would be the same warrant that designated journalist James Rosen as a potential "criminal co-conspirator" in order to keep it secret. Details about the breadth of the investigation continue to emerge. Via The New Yorker's Ryan Lizza, another eye-opening scoop:
The Obama Administration fought to keep a search warrant for James Rosen’s private e-mail account secret, arguing to a federal judge that the government might need to monitor the account for a lengthy period of time...  Continued >>
Obama Orders 'Holder the Corrupt' to Investigate 'Holder the Corrupt' Regarding Leaks
By Jonathan Karl -- President Obama is a little uneasy with the way journalists have been dragged into the Justice Department’s aggressive pursuit of national security leak investigations. In fact, he has ordered Attorney General Eric Holder to conduct a 45-day review of the department’s guidelines on the issue.
That bit of news was buried in the middle of the president’s hourlong speech today at National Defense University.
“Journalists should not be at legal risk for doing their jobs,” President Obama said. “Our focus must be on those who break the law.”
And then the news: “I have raised these issues with the attorney general, who shares my concern. So he has agreed to review existing Department of Justice guidelines governing investigations that involve reporters, and will convene a group of media organizations to hear their concerns as part of that review. And I have directed the attorney general to report back to me by July 12th.”  Continued >>

Benghazi Investigation Deepens: Lawmakers Seek Interviews of 13 Officials Involved
  By Stephen F. Hayes -- As the investigation into the Obama administration’s handling of the attacks on U.S. facilities in Benghazi intensifies, lawmakers on Capitol Hill are seeking to conduct transcribed interviews with thirteen top State Department officials in the coming weeks in order to learn more.
Those named in the letter include a wide range of current and former State Department personnel, from senior advisers to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to mid-level career officials with responsibility for diplomatic security.
Among those officials: Jacob Sullivan, then deputy chief of staff and director of policy planning (and currently national security adviser to Vice President Joe Biden); Victoria Nuland, then State Department spokesman; Raymond Maxwell, deputy assistant secretary of state for near east affairs; Patrick Kennedy, undersecretary of state for management; and Eric Boswell, former assistant secretary of state for diplomatic security.
In a letter dated May 17, 2013, Representative Darrell Issa, chairman of the House Oversight and Reform Committee, wrote to Secretary of State John Kerry to request formally that Kerry make these current and former State Department employees available.  Continued >>

CBS' Intrepid Reporter Sharyl Attkisson Says Her Computers Have Been Compromised
  Sharyl Attkisson, the Emmy-award winning CBS News investigative reporter, says that her personal and work computers have been compromised and are under investigation. "I can confirm that an intrusion of my computers has been under some investigation on my end for some months but I'm not prepared to make an allegation against a specific entity today as I've been patient and methodical about this matter," Attkisson said on Tuesday. "I need to check with my attorney and CBS to get their recommendations on info we make public."

In an earlier interview with WPHT Philadelphia, Attkisson said that though she did not know the full details of the intrustion, "there could be some relationship between these things and what's happened to James Rosen," the Fox News reporter who became the subject of a Justice Dept. investigation after reporting on CIA intelligence about North Korea in 2009.
On Sunday, The Washington Post reported that the Justice Dept. had searched Rosen's personal e-mails and tracked his visits to the State Dept. The court affadavit described Rosen as “at the very least, either as an aider, abettor and/or co-conspirator" of his government source, presumably because he had solicited classified information from that source -- an argument that has been heavily criticized by other journalists.
Attkisson told WPHT that irregular activity on her computer was first identified in Feb. 2011, when she was reporting on the Fast and Furious gun-walking scandal and on the Obama administration's green energy spending, which she said "the administration was very sensitive about." Attkisson has also been a persistent investigator of the events surrounding last year's attack in Benghazi, and its aftermath.
UPDATE: The Justice Dept. now tells POLITICO that it is not responsible for the irregular activity: “To our knowledge, the Justice Department has never ‘compromised’ Ms. Atkisson’s computers, or otherwise sought any information from or concerning any telephone, computer, or other media device she may own or use," Dean Boyd, a Justice Dept. spokesperson, told POLITICO on Tuesday night.

Obama's Top Witch Lois Lerner Invokes Fifth Amendment Regarding Tea Party Intimidation
  “I have not done anything wrong,” she said. “I have not broken any laws, I have not violated any IRS laws or regulations and I have not given any false information to this or any other committee.”

Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) was applauded at a congressional hearing Wednesday, after he objected to Internal Revenue Service official Lois Lerner pleading the Fifth Amendment and refusing to testify before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
After invoking her right to avoid self-incrimination, Lerner, the head of the tax-exempt division of the IRS, was dismissed from the hearing, which is examining the agency’s inappropriate targeting of conservative groups.
After giving a brief opening statement -- in which she said she did nothing wrong -- then refusing to answer any questions, Lerner was dismissed by Committee Chairman Darryl Issa (R-Calif.), who said he had “no choice” but to respect her constitutional right. Gowdy objected.
Documents Confirm: The Lovely Lois Lerner Directly Participated In Persecution of Tea Party Groups
By Guy Benson -- Not to fear, America — she's been placed on "administrative leave," a terribly severe form of discipline that's effectively tantamount to paid vacation. At this week's House Oversight Committee hearing, Lerner (sort of) invoked her fifth amendment rights and refused to answer any questions.
She claimed she's done "nothing wrong," which explains why she's reportedly refusing to resign. Question, though: Might Lerner be a relatively innocent patsy in all of this (a la the Benghazi scapegoat)? Er, probably not, via National Review:
A series of letters suggests that senior IRS official Lois Lerner was directly involved in the agency’s targeting of conservative groups as recently as April 2012, more than nine months after she first learned of the activity.
Lerner, the director of the IRS exempt organizations office in Washington, D.C., signed cover letters to 15 conservative organizations currently represented by the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) between in March and April of 2012.  Continued >>
BOMBSHELL: Lois Lerner Sued Christian Coalition In Largest FEC Action in History — Then Was Promoted to IRS Where She Targeted Conservatives
Under the direction of Lois Lerner, the Federal Election Commission sued the Christian Coalition in the 1990s. She harassed the Christian Coalition for three election cycles. She lost her case. Lerner even asked one conservative during the case if Pat Robertson prayed over him. (Sound familiar?)
These actions landed her at the IRS where she used the same tactics against conservatives and Christians – only on a much larger scale. 500 conservative and Christian groups were illegally targeted by the Obama IRS during her tenure. For twenty-seven months the Obama IRS refused to approve any Tea Party applications for tax-exempt status. At the same time the Obama IRS approved dozens of progressive applications.

 ●  More on Lerner's History of Harassment from the Weekly Standard
By Mark Hemingway -- Perhaps no other IRS official is more intimately associated with the tax agency's growing scandal than Lois Lerner, director of the IRS’s Exempt Organizations Division. Since admitting the IRS harassed hundreds of conservative and Tea Party groups for over two years, Lerner has been criticized for a number of untruths — including the revelation that she apparently lied about planting a question at an American Bar Association conference where she first publicly acknowledged IRS misconduct.
Still, Lerner has her defenders in the government and the media. Shortly after the scandal broke, The Daily Beast published an article headlined "IRS Scandal’s Central Figure, Lois Lerner, Described as ‘Apolitical.'" Insisting Lerner, and the IRS more broadly, were not not politically motivated has been a central contention of those trying to minimize the impact of the scandal.
The trouble with this defense is that, prior to joining the IRS, Lerner's tenure as head of the Enforcement Office at the Federal Election Commission (FEC) was marked by what appears to be politically motivated harassment of conservative groups.
Lerner was appointed head of the FEC's enforcement division in 1986 and stayed in that position until 2001. In the late 1990s, the FEC launched an onerous investigation of the Christian Coalition, ultimately costing the organization hundreds of thousands of dollars and countless hours in lost work. The investigation was notable because the FEC alleged that the Christian Coalition was coordinating issue advocacy expenditures with a number of candidates for office. Aside from lacking proof this was happening, it was an open question whether the FEC had the authority to bring these charges.
James Bopp Jr., who was lead counsel for the Christian Coalition at the time, tells THE WEEKLY STANDARD the Christian Coalition investigation was egregious and uncalled for. "We felt we were being singled out, because when you handle a case with 81 depositions you have a pretty good argument you're getting special treatment. Eighty-one depositions! Eighty-one! From Ralph Reed's former part-time secretary to George H.W. Bush. It was mind blowing," he said.  Continued >>

Lois Lerner’s Admission of IRS’s Inappropriate Behavior Was Pre-Planned Public Disclosure
Last week, Lois Lerner, head of the tax exempt division of the Internal Revenue Service dropped a bombshell: The IRS had been applying extra scrutiny to conservative groups claiming tax exempt status.
The revelation came seemingly out of the blue, in response to a question during a panel at an American Bar Association conference, leaving the audience baffled, according to reports.
As it turns out, it was not a spontaneous revelation. The question, said outgoing IRS Commissioner Steven Miller in testimony before the House Ways and Means Committee Friday, was planted, as part of a prepared strategy for the IRS to release this information to the public.
Under questioning from Republican Rep. Devin Nunes, Miller said it was a “prepared Q and A,” and the question, which came from tax lawyer Celia Roady had been discussed in advance as well.
Later, Miller, questioned by Rep. Peter Roskam, explained that the disclosure had been made to coincide with the conclusion of the inspector general’s report.  Continued >>

The Devil in Charge During the Tea Party Targeting Now Runs IRS' Obamacare Nightmare
  ABC News is reporting that the woman who was the head of the tax-exempt organizations division of the IRS during the time conservative groups were targeted is now director of the IRS' ObamaCare office. You can't make this stuff up.
So who is Sarah Hall Ingram? Well, she was appointed as Commissioner of the Tax-Exempt and Government Entitles Division of the IRS in 2009. Before that, she was the deputy commissioner, and before that, she was Division Counsel/Associate Chief Counsel for that division. She began her career with the IRS in 1982, in the Tax Litigation Division.  Continued >>
  ●  UPDATE: IRS Tax Exemption/Obamacare Exec Got $103,390 in Bonuses; Did Obama OK Them? -- Sarah Hall Ingram, the IRS executive in charge of the tax exempt division in 2010 when it began targeting conservative Tea Party, evangelical and pro-Israel groups for harassment, got more than $100,000 in bonuses between 2009 and 2012.

Stolen Election: Obama Regime Knew and Hid IRS Scandal 5 Months Before Election
  Activating Their Voter Fraud Operation Probably Wasn't Needed
In no uncertain terms and with no hedging, The New York Times reports that the Obama administration was aware of the fact that the IRS was targeting Tea Party groups as far back as June of 2012. The Treasury Department's Inspector General confirmed that he told senior Treasury officials in June of 2012, a full five months before Election Day:
The Treasury Department’s inspector general told senior Treasury officials in June 2012 he was investigating the Internal Revenue Service’s screening of politically active organizations seeking tax exemptions, disclosing for the first time on Friday that Obama administration officials were aware of the matter during the presidential campaign year.
We still don’t know for sure what the President knew or when he knew it, but this does confirm that the administration was aware of the fact that Obama's political enemies were under fire by the IRS and covered that fact up during an election year.
As Lisa Meyers of NBC News told "Morning Joe" today, "Imagine if we -- if you can -- what would have happened if this fact came out in September 2012, in the middle of a presidential election? The terrain would have looked very different."
The first time President Obama was asked when he found out about the IRS scandal, he told the media that he learned of the news last Friday, the same way the rest of us did -- from the news media.  Continued >>

All the President’s Concealers Tainted the 2012 Election . . . Ya Think Election Should Be Voided!
-- With each passing hour, it becomes more and more clear that the truth was concealed from the American public prior to the election about two major Obama administration scandals.
Benghazi was very much in the news prior to the election. The concealment went to the culpability of the Obama administration in failing to heed warnings about security at the Benghazi consulate, the nature of the pre-planned al-Qaeda attack, the scrubbing of the talking points used by Susan Rice, the failure to go to the aid of Americans in trouble, and the claim that the attack was a result of a YouTube video.
That concealment, which now has been exposed in part (much information still has not been released), helped Obama out on an issue which was very much a part of the campaign, and allowed Obama to rebound in the second and third presidential debates after a disastrous first debate put the election outcome in doubt.
The Benghazi concealment allowed the media and the Obama campaign to get away with distractions such as whether Mitt Romney should have issued a press statement, and whether Obama’s generalized non-specific use of the term “acts of terror” constituted an admission that the Benghazi attack was terrorism. These distractions, rather than the administration’s defalcation of duty, worked to Obama’s great advantage.
The other concealment went to an even more explosive issue, the deliberate and concerted targeting by the IRS of Tea Party and conservative groups seeking tax-exempt status, and leaks of information about conservative groups.
The stories now are legion, and growing, of IRS stall tactics and inappropriate delving into religious and political beliefs, and the identification of persons with whom the groups interacted. No such targeting took place as to liberal and progressive groups. This targeting was known to senior IRS officials long before the election, but was kept quiet in a variety of ways (including denying such documents existed in response to a FOIA request) until after the election.
That the IRS sought to break the scandal through a planted question and answer at a Bar Association event speaks volumes to the consciousness of guilt.
The IRS targeting of Tea Party and conservative groups not only advantaged supporters of Obama, it kept out of the public domain a very potent issue which would have driven a massive anti-Obama turnout among Tea Party and conservative voters generally unenthused about Mitt Romney.
In each of these concealments, it appears that the dirty work was done by agencies under the control of the Obama administration.

The Next Shoe? Did Holder Justice Department Also Tap House of Representatives Cloak Room Phones?
  That’s the revelation made by California Congressman Devin Nunes, who sits on the House Ways And Means Committee on Hugh Hewitt’s Show Wednesday night. Here’s the key part of that transcript:
Hugh Hewitt: The idea that this might be a Geithner-Axelrod plan, and by that, the sort of intimation, Henry II style, will no one rid me of this turbulent priest, will no one rid me of these turbulent Tea Parties, that might have just been a hint, a shift of an eyebrow, a change in the tone of voice. That’s going to take a long time to get to. I don’t trust the Department of Justice on this. Do you, Congressman Nunes?
Devin Nunes: No, I absolutely do not, especially after this wiretapping incident, essentially, of the House of Representative. I don’t think people are focusing on the right thing when they talk about going after the AP reporters. The big problem that I see is that they actually tapped right where I’m sitting right now, the Cloak Room.  Continued >>

Benghazi ‘Hand-Selected’ Emails Directly Contradict White House Claims as Expected
  By Stephen F. Hayes -- The documents, first reported by THE WEEKLY STANDARD in articles here and here, directly contradict claims by White House press secretary Jay Carney and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that the revisions of those talking points were driven by the intelligence community and show heavy input from top Obama administration officials, particularly those at the State Department.
The emails provide further detail about the rewriting of the talking points during a 24-hour period from midday September 14 to midday September 15. As THE WEEKLY STANDARD previously reported, a briefing from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence shows that the big changes came in three waves – internally at the CIA, after email feedback from top administration officials, and during or after a meeting of high-ranking intelligence and national security officials the following morning.  Continued >>

George Soros Gave $6.1 Million to Groups Pressuring IRS to Target Conservative Nonprofits
  Hungarian Puppet Master George Soros (aka Schwartz György)
With Soros funding, anything is possible. The growing scandal where the IRS unfairly targeted politically-conservative groups can be traced back to a lobbying effort begun by George Soros-funded liberal groups in 2010, after the Supreme Court's Citizens United ruling.
The talking points of these groups then bounced around a carefully created progressive "echo chamber," until they eventually made their way into established media outlets. Key IRS policy changes about how it investigated conservative groups took place soon after it received three separate letters sent by Soros-funded liberal organizations.
Several Soros-funded groups including the Campaign Legal Center, Democracy 21, the Center for Public Integrity, Mother Jones and Alternet have worked to pressure the IRS to target conservative nonprofit groups. The subsequent IRS investigation flagged more than 100 tea party-related applications for higher scrutiny, including applications that included the words "Tea Party" and "patriot."  Continued >>

Leftist ProPublica Group Received Confidential Docs From IRS 'Democrat Activists'
The progressive-leaning investigative journalism group ProPublica says the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) office that targeted and harassed conservative tax-exempt groups during the 2012 election cycle gave the progressive group nine confidential applications of conservative groups whose tax-exempt status was pending.
The commendable admission lends further evidence to the lengths the IRS went during an election cycle to silence tea party and limited government voices.
ProPublica says the documents the IRS gave them were “not supposed to be made public”:
The same IRS office that deliberately targeted conservative groups applying for tax-exempt status in the run-up to the 2012 election released nine pending confidential applications of conservative groups to ProPublica late last year... In response to a request for the applications for 67 different nonprofits last November, the Cincinnati office of the IRS sent ProPublica applications or documentation for 31 groups. Nine of those applications had not yet been approved—meaning they were not supposed to be made public. (We made six of those public, after redacting their financial information, deeming that they were newsworthy.)
The group says that "no unapproved applications from liberal groups were sent to ProPublica.”
According to Media Research Center Vice President for Business and Culture Dan Gainor, ProPublica’s financial backers include top progressive donors:
ProPublica, which recently won its second Pulitzer Prize, initially was given millions of dollars from the Sandler Foundation to “strengthen the progressive infrastructure”–“progressive” being the code word for very liberal. In 2010, it also received a two-year contribution of $125,000 each year from the Open Society Foundations. In case you wonder where that money comes from, the OSF website is www.soros.org. It is a network of more than 30 international foundations, mostly funded by Soros, who has contributed more than $8 billion to those efforts.
On Friday, the House Ways and Means Committee is scheduled to hold a formal hearing on the IRS conservative targeting scandal. IRS Commissioner Steve Miller and Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration J. Russell George are slated to testify.
 ●  UPDATE: Here’s the Much-Anticipated IG Report on the IRS’ Political Targeting -- “Ineffective management” is to blame for the Internal Revenue Services’ political targeting of conservative groups, according to the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration’s year-long investigation into the matter. The TIGTA report found that the IRS used “inappropriate criteria” to scrutinize conservative groups and allowed said criteria to remain in place for at least 18 months.
 ●  UPDATE: Watchdog Report Describes Massive Delays as IRS Slow-Walked Tea Party Groups -- A newly obtained watchdog report described how the "inappropriate" IRS program that flagged conservative groups for extra scrutiny led to massive delays, with some organizations stuck waiting years to find out about their applications. The findings were contained in a highly anticipated and highly critical inspector general's report.

Government Obtains Wide AP Phone Records in Probe
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Justice Department secretly obtained two months of telephone records of reporters and editors for The Associated Press in what the news cooperative's top executive called a "massive and unprecedented intrusion" into how news organizations gather the news.
The records obtained by the Justice Department listed incoming and outgoing calls, and the duration of each call, for the work and personal phone numbers of individual reporters, general AP office numbers in New York, Washington and Hartford, Conn., and the main number for AP reporters in the House of Representatives press gallery, according to attorneys for the AP.
In all, the government seized those records for more than 20 separate telephone lines assigned to AP and its journalists in April and May of 2012. The exact number of journalists who used the phone lines during that period is unknown but more than 100 journalists work in the offices whose phone records were targeted on a wide array of stories about government and other matters.  Continued
AP CEO's Gary Pruitt Letter to Eric Holder
May 13, 2013
Attorney General Eric Holder
Department of Justice
Washington, D.C.

Dear General Holder:

I am writing to object in the strongest possible terms to a massive and unprecedented intrusion by the Department of Justice into the newsgathering activities of The Associated Press.
Last Friday afternoon, AP General Counsel Laura Malone received a letter from the office of United States Attorney Ronald C. Machen Jr. advising that, at some unidentified time earlier this year, the Department obtained telephone toll records for more than 20 separate telephone lines assigned to the AP and its journalists.
The records that were secretly obtained cover a full two-month period in early 2012 and, at least as described in Mr. Machen’s letter, include all such records for, among other phone lines, an AP general phone number in New York City as well as AP bureaus in New York City, Washington, D.C., Hartford, Connecticut, and at the House of Representatives. This action was taken without advance notice to AP or to any of the affected journalists, and even after the fact no notice has been sent to individual journalists whose home phones and cell phone records were seized by the Department.
There can be no possible justification for such an overbroad collection of the telephone communications of The Associated Press and its reporters. These records potentially reveal communications with confidential sources across all of the newsgathering activities undertaken by the AP during a two-month period, provide a road map to AP’s newsgathering operations, and disclose information about AP’s activities and operations that the government has no conceivable right to know.
That the Department undertook this unprecedented step without providing any notice to the AP, and without taking any steps to narrow the scope of its subpoenas to matters actually relevant to an ongoing investigation, is particularly troubling.
The sheer volume of records obtained, most of which can have no plausible connection to any ongoing investigation, indicates, at a minimum, that this effort did not comply with 28 C.F.R. §50.10 and should therefore never have been undertaken in the first place. The regulations require that, in all cases and without exception, a subpoena for a reporter’s telephone toll records must be "as narrowly drawn as possible.’’ This plainly did not happen.
We regard this action by the Department of Justice as a serious interference with AP’s constitutional rights to gather and report the news. While we evaluate our options we urgently request that you immediately return to the AP the telephone toll records that the Department subpoenaed and destroy all copies. At a minimum, we request that you take steps to segregate these records and prohibit any reference to them pending further discussion and, if it proves necessary, guidance from appropriate judicial authorities. We also ask for an immediate explanation as to why this extraordinary action was taken, and a description of the steps the Department will take to mitigate its impact on AP and its reporters.
Given the gravity of this situation, I look forward to your prompt response.
Sincerely,
Gary Pruitt


IRS-THUGGERY-GATE Grows!
Wider Problems Found at IRS — Targeted Conservative Groups That Opposed Obama's Tyranny
  WALL STREET JOURNAL -- The Internal Revenue Service's scrutiny of conservative groups went beyond those with "tea party" or "patriot" in their names — as the agency admitted Friday — to also include ones worried about government spending, debt or taxes, and even ones that lobbied to "make America a better place to live," according to new details of a government probe.
The investigation also revealed that a high-ranking IRS official knew as early as mid-2011 that conservative groups were being inappropriately targeted—nearly a year before then-IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman told a congressional committee the agency wasn't targeting conservative groups.
Tax-exempt groups organized under section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code are allowed to engage in some political activity, but the primary focus of their efforts must remain promoting social welfare.

Previously:
  ●  IRS Apologizes for Scrutiny of Conservative Groups
  ●  IRS Apologizes for Improper Scrutiny of GOP Groups

The new disclosures are likely to inflame a widening controversy over IRS handling of dozens of applications by tea-party, patriot and other conservative groups for tax-exempt status.
The details emerged from disclosures to congressional investigators by the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration. The findings, which were reviewed by The Wall Street Journal, don't make clear who came up with the idea to give extra scrutiny to the conservative groups.
The Internal Revenue Service inappropriately flagged conservative political groups for additional reviews during the 2012 election to see if they were violating their tax exempt status. John McKinnon reports on the News Hub.
The inspector general's office has been conducting an audit of the IRS's handling of the applications process and is expected to release a report this week. The audit follows complaints last year by numerous tea-party and other conservative groups that they had been singled out and subjected to excessive and inappropriate questioning. Many groups say they were asked for lists of their donors and other sensitive information.
On Sunday, a government official said the report will note that IRS officials told investigators that no one outside the IRS was involved in developing the criteria the agency now acknowledges were flawed.
On Friday, Lois Lerner, head of the IRS tax-exempt-organizations division, said the agency was "apologetic" for what she termed "absolutely inappropriate" actions by lower-level workers. She said those workers had selected some conservative groups for extra scrutiny to determine whether their applications should be approved. She said they had picked groups for extra scrutiny according to whether they had "tea party" or "patriot" in their names, among other criteria.
Ms. Lerner came to the IRS in 2001 from the Federal Election Commission, and assumed her current position in 2006. IRS officials said Sunday that Ms. Lerner wasn't available for comment, and she didn't respond to an emailed request.
GOP lawmakers stepped up their criticism on Sunday. "The bottom line is [IRS officials] used key words to go after conservatives," Rep. Darrell Issa (R., Calif.), said Sunday on NBC's "Meet the Press." "There has to be accountability for the people who did it. And, quite frankly…there's got to be accountability for people who were telling lies about it being done."
Some Democrats also voiced criticism. "I'm concerned about that," said Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D., Calif.), also on NBC. "Somebody made the decision that they would give extra scrutiny to this particular group. And I think we have to understand why."
The IRS said over the weekend it is in the process of independently confirming the dates mentioned on the timeline of events contained in the inspector general report, "but we believe the [inspector general's] timeline is correct." The IRS said the report supports its view that its missteps weren't politically motivated and were limited to lower-level workers.
The IRS also said the report reflects that "IRS senior leadership was not aware of this level of specific details" at the time of a March 2012 hearing where Mr. Shulman denied any targeting of conservative groups. Mr. Shulman, who no longer works for the IRS, declined to comment.
The new details suggest that agency workers were examining statements in applications for tax-exempt status to determine whether groups had political leanings.
Tax-exempt social-welfare groups organized under section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code are allowed to engage in some political activity, but the primary focus of their efforts must remain promoting social welfare. That social-welfare activity can include lobbying and advocating for issues and legislation, but not outright political-campaign activity. But some of the rules leave room for IRS officials to make judgment calls and probe individual groups for further information.
Organizing as such a group is desirable, not just because such entities typically don't have to pay taxes, but also because they generally don't have to identify their donors.
IRS officials said last week that the focused review of conservative groups was initiated by lower-level civil servants in the IRS Cincinnati office, not by political appointees in Washington, and that it wasn't politically motivated. They say it stemmed from a misguided effort to centralize review of a growing number of applications for tax-exempt 501(c)(4) status.
But questions continued to swirl about the failure of IRS officials to disclose the problems until the inspector general's report was about to become public.
The timeline contained in the draft report indicates that IRS scrutiny of tea-party and other conservative groups began as early as 2010 and came to the attention of Ms. Lerner, the head of the tax-exempt-organizations division, at least by the following year.
The report's timeline indicates that the criteria were changed to be more neutral in July 2011 after Ms. Lerner "raised concerns." The criteria for heightened scrutiny continued to evolve over the next year or so, even as complaints from tea-party groups—and questions from GOP lawmakers—mounted over IRS inquiries to various groups about their activities.
Letters from Ms. Lerner in April and May 2012 responding to questions by Republican lawmakers made no mention of the problems that had surfaced in the IRS unit.
According to the draft report, on April 24 and 25 of last year, officials in Ms. Lerner's office were reviewing "troubling questions" that had been asked of organizations, including "the names of donors."
Ms. Lerner's April 26 letter to Mr. Issa, the chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, said that "there are instances where donor information may be needed…such as when the application presents possible issues of…private benefit."
The report indicates that in 2010 and 2011, some IRS workers weren't just singling out groups because their names contained certain words, as IRS officials suggested on Friday, but appeared to be probing for indications of political interests or leanings.
According to the report, by June 2011 some IRS specialists were probing applications using the following criteria: "issues include government spending, government debt or taxes; education of the public by advocacy/lobbying to 'make America a better place to live'; statements in the case file criticize how the country is being run."

IRS Watchdog: Senior IRS Officials Knew in 2011 Tea Parties' Tax-Exempt Status Being Targeted
This is getting real. Yesterday it was just some “low level” employees involved. Now AP is reporting that senior IRS officials were aware of the targeting, via AP, IRS watchdog: Senior IRS officials knew in 2011 tea parties’ tax-exempt status being targeted (h/t @GabrielMalor):

WASHINGTON (AP) — IRS watchdog: Senior IRS officials knew in 2011 tea parties’ tax-exempt status being targeted.
(added) AP has expanded its report now (h/t reader):
A federal watchdog’s upcoming report says senior Internal Revenue Service officials knew agents were targeting tea party groups in 2011. The disclosure contradicts public statements by former IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman, who repeatedly assured Congress that conservative groups were not targeted.
On Friday, the IRS apologized for what it acknowledged was “inappropriate” targeting of conservative political groups during the 2012 election to see if those groups were violating their tax-exempt status.
The Treasury’s inspector general for tax administration is expected to release the results of a nearly yearlong investigation in the coming week.
The Associated Press obtained part of the draft report.
That report says the head of the IRS division that oversees tax-exempt groups learned that groups were being targeted in June 2011. It does not say whether Shulman was notified.
Remember, you’re not paranoid, they really do hate you. At the highest levels.
As IRS admits it targeted Tea Party groups, remember IRS is Obamacare enforcer.
Hey, low-level IRS workers in Cincinnati, way to validate right-wing conspiracy theories for the rest of the century! bigstory.ap.org/article/irs-ap…
— Daniel Drezner (@dandrezner) May 10, 2013
UPDATE: The AP story is ever-expanding in its detail. H/t Ed Morrissey on this part:
Among the other revelations, on Aug. 4, 2011, staffers in the IRS’ Rulings and Agreements office “held a meeting with chief counsel so that everyone would have the latest information on the issue.”
On Jan, 25, 2012, the criteria for flagging suspect groups was changed to, “political action type organizations involved in limiting/expanding Government, educating on the Constitution and Bill of Rights, social economic reform/movement,” the report says.
Got that? The Chief Counsel knew, and in an election year the targeting expanded to groups educating people on the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
The Democrats and media demonized the Tea Party and Homeland Security painted smaller government groups as potential threats, and guess who gets targeted by the IRS.
IRS anti-Tea Party scandal gets real — senior IRS officials aware of targeting (Update – Chief Counsel knew and targets expanded to groups “educating on the Constitution and Bill of Rights”)

ABC, CBS and CNN Top Executives All Have Siblings or Spouses Working at the White House
  There's Entirely Too Damn Much 'Incestual Bodily Fluids Being Shared' in Cesspool City
CBS News President David Rhodes and ABC News President Ben Sherwood, both of them have siblings that not only work at the White House, that not only work for President Obama, but they work at the NSC on foreign policy issues directly related to Benghazi."
So stated political consultant and media commentator Richard Grenell on Saturday's Fox News Watch (video follows with transcript and commentary):
RICHARD GRENELL: I think the media's becoming the story, let's face it. CBS News President David Rhodes and ABC News President Ben Sherwood, both of them have siblings that not only work at the White House, that not only work for President Obama, but they work at the NSC on foreign policy issues directly related to Benghazi. Let's call a spade a spade.
Let's also show you why CNN did not go very far in covering these hearings because the CNN deputy bureau chief, Virginia Moseley, is married to Hillary Clinton’s deputy, Tom Nides. It is time for the media to start asking questions why are they not covering this. It's a family matter for some of them.
JON SCOTT, HOST: So they don't want to bring embarrassment upon folks who, who they're close to?
GRENELL: Who directly are related to this story. Absolutely. They're covering for them. There's no question about it.

For the record, Ben Sherwood's sister, Dr. Elizabeth Sherwood-Randall, is the Special Assistant to Barack Obama.
Virginia Moseley's husband, Tom Nides, is the Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources.

As for David Rhodes' brother Ben Rhodes, he is Obama's Deputy National Security Advisor for Strategic Communication.
He has a Masters of Fine Arts in fiction writing from NYU. (LINK)
He is President Obama’s deputy national security adviser
He was instrumental in fictionalizing the Benghazi talking points
He is brother of CBS News President David Rhodes (who's silencing reporting on Benghazi)
He helped write the 9/11 Commission Report. (LINK)
He is husband of Ann Norris, senior foreign policy and defense adviser to Sen. Barbara Boxer (who in Oct 2012, slammed Congressman Issa for Releasing Unclassified Benghazi Docs exposing the truth on Benghazi). (LINK)
As ABCNews.com reported Friday, Rhodes was a key player in revising the White House's Benghazi talking points last September:
In an email dated 9/14/12 at 9:34 p.m. — three days after the attack and two days before Ambassador Rice appeared on the Sunday shows – Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes wrote an email saying the State Department’s concerns needed to be addressed.
“We must make sure that the talking points reflect all agency equities, including those of the State Department, and we don’t want to undermine the FBI investigation. We thus will work through the talking points tomorrow morning at the Deputies Committee meeting.”
After that meeting, which took place Saturday morning at the White House, the CIA drafted the final version of the talking points – deleting all references to al Qaeda and to the security warnings in Benghazi prior to the attack.
Consider, too, that CBS News executives possibly including Rhodes have allegedly come down on their own investigative reporter Sharyl Attkisson for "wading dangerously close to advocacy on" Benghazi.
If Attkisson gets the boot, it could very well be with a foot attached to the brother of an Obama administration official directly involved in the cover-up.
A family matter indeed.
 ●  UPDATE: Sharyl Attkisson in Talks to Leave CBS -- Sharyl Attkisson, the Emmy award-winning investigative reporter, is in talks to leave CBS News ahead of contract, POLITICO has learned. Sources familiar with the situation cite disputes between Attkisson and network executives, including CBS Evening News executive producer Patricia Shevlin, as the cause for the talks.
 ●  Report: Tabloid TV Editor To Be Named NBC News President -- The floundering and willfully dishonest enterprise that is NBC News has apparently found its replacement for the disgraced Steve Capus. According to The New York Times, Deborah Turness, the current head of Britains tabloid-style ITV News, will become the next president of NBC News and the first woman to run a television news division.
 ●  NBC Spiked Story ID'ing Benghazi Whistleblower as Obama/Clinton Voter -- Victoria Toensing, attorney for Benghazi whistleblower Gregory Hicks, says Hicks is a Democrat who voted for Hillary Clinton during the 2008 primaries, and President Obama twice for President. Toensing also said that NBC News "spiked" the story this week, prior to Hicks' dramatic testimony before Congress.

Dinosaur Media Bombshell: Benghazi Talking Points Underwent 12 Revisions, Scrubbed of Terror Reference
   EXCLUSIVE:
ABC News has the evidence that proves beyond any doubt that the Obama Administration lied about its involvement in editing the CIA's talking points surrounding the September 11 attack on our consulate in Libya

By Jonathan Karl -- When it became clear last fall that the CIA’s now discredited Benghazi talking points were flawed, the White House said repeatedly the documents were put together almost entirely by the intelligence community, but White House documents reviewed by Congress suggest a different story.
ABC News has obtained 12 different versions of the talking points that show they were extensively edited as they evolved from the drafts first written entirely by the CIA to the final version distributed to Congress and to U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice before she appeared on five talk shows the Sunday after that attack.
White House emails reviewed by ABC News suggest the edits were made with extensive input from the State Department. The edits included requests from the State Department that references to the Al Qaeda-affiliated group Ansar al-Sharia be deleted as well references to CIA warnings about terrorist threats in Benghazi in the months preceding the attack.
That would appear to directly contradict what White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said about the talking pointsin November.
“Those talking points originated from the intelligence community. They reflect the IC’s best assessments of what they thought had happened,” Carney told reporters at the White House press briefing on November 28, 2012. “The White House and the State Department have made clear that the single adjustment that was made to those talking points by either of those two institutions were changing the word ‘consulate’ to ‘diplomatic facility’ because ‘consulate’ was inaccurate.”
Summaries of White House and State Department emails — some of which were first published by Stephen Hayes of the Weekly Standard — show that the State Department had extensive input into the editing of the talking points.
State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland raised specific objections to this paragraph drafted by the CIA in its earlier versions of the talking points:
“The Agency has produced numerous pieces on the threat of extremists linked to al-Qa’ida in Benghazi and eastern Libya. These noted that, since April, there have been at least five other attacks against foreign interests in Benghazi by unidentified assailants, including the June attack against the British Ambassador’s convoy. We cannot rule out the individuals has previously surveilled the U.S. facilities, also contributing to the efficacy of the attacks.”

In an email to officials at the White House and the intelligence agencies, State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland took issue with including that information because it “could be abused by members [of Congress] to beat up the State Department for not paying attention to warnings, so why would we want to feed that either? Concerned …”
The paragraph was entirely deleted.
Like the final version used by Ambassador Rice on the Sunday shows, the CIA’s first drafts said the attack appeared to have been “spontaneously inspired by the protests at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo” but the CIA version went on to say, “That being said, we do know that Islamic extremists with ties to al-Qa’ida participated in the attack.” The draft went on to specifically name the al Qaeda-affiliated group named Ansar al-Sharia.
Once again, Nuland objected to naming the terrorist groups because “we don’t want to prejudice the investigation.”
In response, an NSC staffer coordinating the review of the talking points wrote back to Nuland, “The FBI did not have major concerns with the points and offered only a couple minor suggestions.”
After the talking points were edited slightly to address Nuland’s concerns, she responded that changes did not go far enough.
“These changes don’t resolve all of my issues or those of my buildings leadership,” Nuland wrote.
In an email dated 9/14/12 at 9:34 p.m. — three days after the attack and two days before Ambassador Rice appeared on the Sunday shows – Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes wrote an email saying the State Department’s concerns needed to be addressed.
“We must make sure that the talking points reflect all agency equities, including those of the State Department, and we don’t want to undermine the FBI investigation. We thus will work through the talking points tomorrow morning at the Deputies Committee meeting.”
After that meeting, which took place Saturday morning at the White House, the CIA drafted the final version of the talking points – deleting all references to al Qaeda and to the security warnings in Benghazi prior to the attack.
White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said none of this contradicts what he said about the talking points because ultimately all versions were actually written and signed-off by the CIA.
“The CIA drafted these talking points and redrafted these talking points,” Carney said. “The fact that there are inputs is always the case in a process like this, but the only edits made by anyone here at the White House were stylistic and nonsubstantive. They corrected the description of the building or the facility in Benghazi from consulate to diplomatic facility and the like. And ultimately, this all has been discussed and reviewed and provided in enormous levels of detail by the administration to Congressional investigators, and the attempt to politicize the talking points, again, is part of an effort to, you know, chase after what isn’t the substance here.”
UPDATE:
A source familiar with the White House emails on the Benghazi talking point revisions say that State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland was raising two concerns about the CIA’s first version of talking points, which were going to be sent to Congress:
(1) The talking points went further than what she was allowed to say about the attack during her state department briefings; and,
(2) she believed the CIA was attempting to exonerate itself at the State Department’s expense by suggesting CIA warnings about the security situation were ignored.
In one email, Nuland asked, why are we suggest Congress “start making assertions to the media [about the al Qaeda connection] that we ourselves are not making because we don’t want to prejudice the investigation?”
One other point: The significant edits – deleting references to al Qaeda and the CIA’s warnings – came after a White House meeting on the Saturday before Ambassador Susan Rice appeared on five Sunday shows. Nuland, a 30-year foreign service veteran who has served under Democratic and Republican Secretaries of State, was not at that meeting and played no direct role in preparing Rice for her interviews.
Emails Reveal a Flurry of Changes to Benghazi Talking Points

By Sharyl Attkisson -- As House Republicans piece together the events in Benghazi, Libya on Sept. 11, 2012, that led to the death of four Americans, the focus has fallen on the talking points the Obama administration used to describe the attack in the days following.
The talking points were revised numerous times before United Nations Ambassador Susan Rice used them on political talk shows on Sept. 16. While the White House says the changes were merely stylistic, the changes suggest administration officials were interested in sparing the State Department from political criticism in the wake of the attack.
CBS News has learned there was a flurry of approximately 100 interagency government emails on Sept. 14 and Sept. 15 regarding the content of the talking points to be released to members of Congress regarding the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks that killed U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three others in Benghazi. The email list included officials from the White House, State Department, CIA, FBI and others reviewing the talking points..
An early set of talking points was ready for interagency review at 11:15 a.m. on Friday, Sept. 14.:
11:15 a.m. talking points: "....we do know that Islamic extremists with ties to al-Qa'ida participated in the attack."
4:42 p.m. talking points: Changed "attacks in Benghazi" to "demonstrations in Benghazi."
Added: "On 10 September we warned of social media reports calling for a demonstration in front of the Embassy [in Cairo] and that jihadists were threatening to break into the Embassy." This news that a warning had been given was later removed.
Added: "The Agency [CIA] has produced numerous pieces on the threat of extremists linked to al-Qa'ida in Benghazi and eastern Libya. These noted that, since April, there have been at least five other attacks against foreign interests in Benghazi by unidentified assailants, including the June attack against the British Ambassador's convoy. We cannot rule out the individuals has previously surveilled the U.S. facilities, also contributing to the efficacy of the attacks." This news of advance warning of a threat was later removed.
Removed reference to "ties to al Qa'ida" and again changed "attack" to "violent demonstrations."
In a 6:52 p.m. email: John Brennan, then-Deputy National Security Advisor (now head of CIA) asked for removal of "the crowd almost certainly was a mix of individuals from across many sectors of Libya society."
7:39 p.m. email: State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland expressed the most sweeping concerns. "I have serious concerns about all parts highlighted below in arming members of Congress with information to start making assertions to the media that we ourselves are not making because we don't want to prejudice the investigation... Why do we want the Hill to be fingering [al-Qaeda linked] Ansar al-Sharia when we aren't doing that ourselves until we have investigation results? And the penultimate point is a paragraph talking about all the previous warnings provided by the Agency [CIA] about al-Qaeda's presence and activities of al-Qaeda...[which] could be abused by members of Congress to fault the State Department for not paying attention... so why would we want to cede that, either?"
8:59 p.m. email: A facilitator of the email threads answers Nuland's concerns about "prejudicing the investigation" by stating "The FBI did not have major concerns with the points and offered only a couple of minor suggestions." Nonetheless, they remove a paragraph referring to Ansar al-Sharia from the next version.
8:59 p.m. talking points: Changed "we do know" to "there are indications that" Islamic extremists participated in the violent demonstrations."
Removed "Initial press reporting linked the attack to Ansar al-Sharia. The group has since released a statement that its leadership did not order the attacks, but did not deny that some of its members were involved. Ansar al-Sharia's Facebook page aims to spread Sharia in Libya and emphasizes the need for jihad to counter what it views as false interpretations of Islam, according to an open source study.
9:24 p.m. email: Nuland responds: "These don't resolve all of my issues or those of my building leadership. They are consulting with NSS [National Security Staff.]"
9:25 p.m. email: Jake Sullivan, then-Secretary of State Clinton's Deputy Chief of Staff (now National Security Advisor for Vice President Biden) tells the group "I spoke with Tommy (Vietor-then-spokesman for the White House National Security Council)... we'll work this through in the morning."
9:32 p.m. email: Sullivan to Nuland: "Talked to Tommy (Vietor). We can make edits."
9:34 p.m. email: Ben Rhodes, Deputy National Security Adviser to President Obama regarding a federal agency Deputies meeting that's been called the next morning to discuss the talking points: "...we don't want to undermine the investigation...we want to address every department's equities including the State Department, so we'll deal with this at the Deputies meeting."
The CIA's legislative affairs representatives loops in then-CIA chief David Petraeus, notifying him of "major coordination problems... State has major concerns... the Bureau [FBI] cleared the points but [Ben] Rhodes said they will be reviewed in the Deputies meeting."

What We Learned This Week in a Nutshell:
5 Key Points from Benghazigate Hearing

(1) Two "stand-down" orders were given while the Benghazi attacks were in progress.
(2) The "protest" about a YouTube video was a complete fabrication by the Obama administration.
(3) Cheryl Mills, Clinton's lawyer at the State Department, told witnesses not to speak to House investigators.
(4) The diplomatic personnel on the ground acted with incredible, unheralded heroism.
(5) Democrats came to rebut the eyewitnesses with talking points.
The key question remains unanswered: What did President Barack Obama
do when he learned the consulate was under attack, and why?
Text of Testimonies from Three Witnesses:
Mr. Gregory Hicks -- (Testimony)
Foreign Service Officer and former Deputy Chief of Mission/Chargé d’Affairs in Libya U.S. Department of State
Mr. Mark Thompson -- (Testimony)
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Counterterrorism U.S. Department of State
Mr. Eric Nordstrom -- (Testimony)
Diplomatic Security Officer and former Regional Security Officer in Libya U.S. Department of State

Blow-by-Blow: How Obama & Hillary Left Americans to Die (Excellent Summary)

By Arnold Ahlert -- Wednesday on Capitol Hill, three impeccable witnesses offered the clearest evidence to date that the Obama administration’s response to Benghazi before, during and after the terrorist attack that claimed the lives of Ambassador Christopher Stevens, State Department employee Sean Smith, and former Navy SEALs Glen A. Doherty and Tyrone S. Woods, was a deadly combination of ineptitude, political calculations, and outright lying.
Mark Thompson, acting deputy assistant Secretary of State for counterterrorism; Greg Hicks, former deputy chief of mission in Libya; and Eric Nordstrom, former regional security officer in Libya, offered unshakeable testimony, despite efforts by several Democratic lawmakers to protect both the current administration and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, their party’s most viable presidential candidate for 2016. What the witnesses averred reveals a grim web of deceit likely orchestrated by Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama to cover up the order to ground U.S. rescue teams that could have easily saved our besieged countrymen in Benghazi.  Continued >>

Hillary Lied to Congress with Confidence Knowing that She Hadn't Taken the Oath to Tell "the Truth, the Whole Truth"
  The Election's Over, Obama Won, and I'm the Next!
In her Jan. 23 testimony when asked if she was standing by the absurd story claiming that four Americans were murdered in Libya due to a spontaneous protest due to a spontaneous protest gone bad, outgoing Secretary of State Hillary Clinton played the indignation card. Because she obviously had no answer to justify the ongoing White House deception, Secretary Clinton chose theatrics over a straight answer and clarity responded:
"With all due respect, the fact is we have four dead Americans. Whether it was because of a protest or because guys outside for a walk one night decided to go kill some Americans. What difference at this point does it make?"

Wednesday's testimony on the Benghazi terror attacks by State Department whistleblowers before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform contradicted several statements by then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in testimony before House and Senate committees in January.
However, while Clinton may have misled Congress in her testimony, she likely did not commit perjury because she never actually testified under oath.
Video recordings of Clinton's Jan. 23 testimony before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee suggest that she was never sworn in. Breitbart News subsequently confirmed with staff on both committees that she did not take an oath to tell "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth," as the three witnesses, all career civil servants, did Wednesday before the House Oversight Committee.
A Senate aide confirmed to Breitbart News Thursday: "We checked with the committee and she wasn’t sworn in." A House aide indicated that Clinton had not been sworn in, but added that "all witnesses testifying before the House Foreign Affairs Committee, including Secretary Clinton, are under a legal obligation to tell the truth. Any misrepresentation to the Committee in the context of a review or investigation is a violation of law."
Perjury and lying to Congress are two different crimes. Perjury, defined under 18 U.S.C. § 1621, requires violation of an oath. The crime of making a false statement to Congress, defined under 18 U.S.C. § 1001, covers lying about or concealing a "a material fact" in "any investigation or review, conducted pursuant to the authority of any committee, subcommittee, commission or office of the Congress, consistent with applicable rules of the House or Senate."
The difference is subtle but significant. A witness testifying under oath is under a greater obligation to tell the truth right down to what he or she believes it to be. A witness merely testifying to a committee of Congress without taking an oath may not subjectively believe what he or she is saying but will probably escape punishment, so long as he or she does not "knowingly and willfully" misrepresent or cover up a material fact.
The differential treatment partly reflects the traditional deference shown by the legislature to presidential appointees, but also reflects a phenomenon referred to by the witnesses on Wednesday, who noted that the key decisions had been made by "presidentially-appointed, Senate-confirmed" officials, yet those disciplined thus far had been career civil servants. The message, they said, was that "if you're above a certain level" you will not be held accountable.
Given these contradictions, it appears that Clinton misled Congress. But she did not do so under oath, and it would be difficult to prove her guilty of "knowingly and willfully" concealing material facts when she was reporting her memories and impressions of a volatile situation.
The only way to find out the truth is to recall Clinton--as Rice was once recalled--to testify under oath about what happened on Sep. 11, 2012 and in the days that followed.

Chill the Champagne! Benghazi Impeachment Suddenly Not So Far-Fetched!


By Roger L. Simon -- On October 27th, 2012, only days before the presidential election, I wrote: If Barack Obama is reelected, will he face impeachment over Benghazi — a yet more unpleasant and far more wrenching result than to lose an election?
It could happen — and in my estimation should happen — the way revelations are playing out over the bloody terror attack that took four American lives and has led to weeks of prevarication and obfuscation.
The scandal thus far has at least tarnished and quite possibly implicated everyone from the CIA director, to the secretaries of State and Defense, to the UN ambassador and, of course, the president himself — with no end in sight, because Obama, normally loath to expose himself and even less so in an election season, refuses to answer questions on the subject.
It’s not the crime, but the cover-up, we learned in an earlier impeachment, only in this case the crime may be just as bad or worse.”
That post was a follow-up to my item from the previous week saying that Obama should resign over Benghazi, which was linked to by Drudge, and created a minor brouhaha. Between those two posts, a number of people accused me of being overheated. I even started to feel that way myself. (Hey, I’m a screenwriter. Dramatic license comes with the job description.)  No longer.
Reading Stephen F. Hayes’ new article in The Weekly Standard — “The Benghazi Talking Points”  [Follows this article] — I am beginning to feel like Nostradamus. I’m not ready to make any predictions, but let’s put it this way…
Barack Obama is bloody lucky he’s a Democrat, because if he were a Republican, he’d be in deep trouble right now, close to the brink of extinction. Only his increasingly pathetic loyal media claque can save him. It will be interesting to see if they do so at the expense of their own reputations.
Of course the reputations of the State Department need to be considered as well, that same State Dept that, according to Hayes (and this is corroborated by emails he publishes), bowdlerized and censored all references to al-Qaeda involvement in the Benghazi events before they could reach the fragile American public in an election year, almost even as they were happening. This was before Susan Rice made her dog-and-pony performance on the Sunday shows, asserting it was all caused by a video nobody watched, and long before the oleaginous Candy Crowley famously covered up for Obama on Benghazi at the presidential foreign-policy debate.
Hayes names the names of some of the State Department miscreants involved in this repellent anti-democratic censorship. Among them is one Victoria Nuland, who makes Pinocchio seem like Diogenes. (You can find a video of her as well as some droll tweets from the blogger Ace of Spades demanding an explanation for all this prevarication, and even a tweet from me, here.)
But it’s not just State. According to Hayes, on the CIA side, a fellow named Mike Morell, their deputy director, “cut all or parts of four paragraphs of the six-paragraph talking points — 148 of its 248 words. Gone were the reference to ‘Islamic extremists,’ the reminders of agency warnings about al Qaeda in Libya, the reference to ‘jihadists’ in Cairo, the mention of possible surveillance of the facility in Benghazi, and the report of five previous attacks on foreign interests.”
So why did this all happen? Who were they covering up for, hiding Islamic terror involvement? Post-Boston, it seems particularly despicable, even if it was already bad enough with all the death and injury to U.S. service personnel who risk life and limb to defend our freedom.
But never mind. We are in a fascinating period of unraveling. Whistleblowers in the defense community are appearing. I’m sure at State, some are looking over their shoulders, waiting for the “Night of the Long Knives” to begin. It probably has already.
How far will it go? We will soon, no doubt, be in the period of “limited hangouts.” (The attempt by Jay Carney, Obama’s press secretary, to play the “Benghazi happened a long time ago” dodge on Wednesday arguably fits this definition.) Who will be the John Dean, the Erlichman, and Haldeman? Is “Deep Benghazi Throat” talking at this moment?
While we are making Watergate analogies, it’s worth noting this is far worse than that noxious moment in American history or the other recent impeachment episode — Clinton. In the former, some dumb zealots broke into the campaign headquarters of the opposition party in an election that wasn’t remotely close. Nevertheless, the paranoid Nixon destroyed himself by trying to cover up the idiocy. Clinton wagged his finger at us and lied about sex under oath, while his wife — an important figure in Benghazi where she has already been caught dissimulating — similarly lied by publicly blaming her husband’s philandering on the “great right-wing conspiracy.” (What power!)
Creepy behavior all around and certainly nothing remotely presidential, but, compared to Benghazi, no one died or was even injured. As far as I know, no one even stubbed a toe.
Benghazi, on the contrary, was an important battle in the Global War on Terror, which has now reached our shores more than once. It will undoubtedly do so again. Those who take this casually in the slightest are conscious or unconscious traitors or fools — or so self-interested as to be beneath contempt.
The Congress must be unstinting in pursuing the truth of Benghazi wherever it leads and however high it goes. If they do not, our country will be weakened, probably beyond recognition.
I don’t know about you, but I will be watching closely on Wednesday, May 8th, when Rep. Issa begins his public inquiry. These may be the beginnings of the most important hearings of our lifetime.
In the meantime, for some comic relief, let’s do the “Mashed Potato,” BHO-style, and dedicate it to Jay Carney: “Benghazi started long time ago / With a guy name Gaddafi / No one knew how to spell his name / Come on baby, gonna teach it to you…”

The Benghazi Talking Points — And How They Were Changed to Obscure the Truth


By Stephen F. Hayes -- Even as the White House strove last week to move beyond questions about the Benghazi attacks of Tuesday, September 11, 2012, fresh evidence emerged that senior Obama administration officials knowingly misled the country about what had happened in the days following the assaults.
The Weekly Standard has obtained a [SEE] timeline briefed by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence detailing the heavy substantive revisions made to the CIA’s talking points, just six weeks before the 2012 presidential election, and additional information about why the changes were made and by whom.
As intelligence officials pieced together the puzzle of events unfolding in Libya, they concluded even before the assaults had ended that al Qaeda-linked terrorists were involved. Senior administration officials, however, sought to obscure the emerging picture and downplay the significance of attacks that killed a U.S. ambassador and three other Americans. The frantic process that produced the changes to the talking points took place over a 24-hour period just one day before Susan Rice, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, made her now-famous appearances on the Sunday television talk shows. The discussions involved senior officials from the State Department, the National Security Council, the CIA, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, and the White House.
The exchange of emails is laid out in a 43-page report from the chairmen of five committees in the House of Representatives. Although the investigation was conducted by Republicans, leading some reporters and commentators to dismiss it, the report quotes directly from emails between top administration and intelligence officials, and it includes footnotes indicating the times the messages were sent. In some cases, the report did not provide the names of the senders, but The Weekly Standard has confirmed the identities of the authors of two critical emails — one indicating the main reason for the changes and the other announcing that the talkin points would receive their final substantive rewrite at a meeting of top administration officials on Saturday, September 15.
The White House provided the emails to members of the House and Senate intelligence committees for a limited time and with the stipulation that the documents were available for review only and would not be turned over to the committees. The White House and committee leadership agreed to that arrangement as part of a deal that would keep Republican senators from blocking the confirmation of John Brennan, the president’s choice to run the CIA. If the House report provides an accurate and complete depiction of the emails, it is clear that senior administration officials engaged in a wholesale rewriting of intelligence assessments about Benghazi in order to mislead the public.
The Weekly Standard sought comment from officials at the White House, the State Department, and the CIA, but received none by press time. Within hours of the initial attack on the U.S. facility, the State Department Operations Center sent out two alerts. The first, at 4:05 p.m. (all times are Eastern Daylight Time), indicated that the compound was under attack; the second, at 6:08 p.m., indicated that Ansar al Sharia, an al Qaeda-linked terrorist group operating in Libya, had claimed credit for the attack. According to the House report, these alerts were circulated widely inside the government, including at the highest levels.
The fighting in Benghazi continued for another several hours, so top Obama administration officials were told even as the fighting was taking place that U.S. diplomats and intelligence operatives were likely being attacked by al Qaeda-affiliated terrorists. A cable sent the following day, September 12, by the CIA station chief in Libya, reported that eyewitnesses confirmed the participation of Islamic militants and made clear that U.S. facilities in Benghazi had come under terrorist attack. It was this fact, along with several others, that top Obama officials would work so hard to obscure.
After a briefing on Capitol Hill by CIA director David Petraeus, Democrat Dutch Ruppersburger, the ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, asked the intelligence community for unclassified guidance on what members of Congress could say in their public comments on the attacks. The CIA’s Office of Terrorism Analysis prepared the first draft of a response to the congressman, which was distributed internally for comment at 11:15 a.m. on Friday, September 14 (Version 1 at right). This initial CIA draft included the assertion that the U.S. government “know[s] that Islamic extremists with ties to al Qaeda participated in the attack.”
That draft also noted that press reports “linked the attack to Ansar al Sharia. The group has since released a statement that its leadership did not order the attacks, but did not deny that some of its members were involved.” Ansar al Sharia, the CIA draft continued, aims to spread sharia law in Libya and “emphasizes the need for jihad.” The agency draft also raised the prospect that the facilities had been the subject of jihadist surveillance and offered a reminder that in the previous six months there had been “at least five other attacks against foreign interests in Benghazi by unidentified assailants, including the June attack against the British Ambassador’s convoy.”
After the internal distribution, CIA officials amended that draft to include more information about the jihadist threat in both Egypt and Libya. “On 10 September we warned of social media reports calling for a demonstration in front of the [Cairo] Embassy and that jihadists were threatening to break into the Embassy,” the agency had added by late afternoon. And: “The Agency has produced numerous pieces on the threat of extremists linked to al Qaeda in Benghazi and Libya.” But elsewhere, CIA officials pulled back. The reference to “Islamic extremists” no longer specified “Islamic extremists with ties to al Qaeda,” and the initial reference to “attacks” in Benghazi was changed to “demonstrations.”
The talking points were first distributed to officials in the interagency vetting process at 6:52 p.m. on Friday. Less than an hour later, at 7:39 p.m., an individual identified in the House report only as a “senior State Department official” responded to raise “serious concerns” about the draft. That official, whom The Weekly Standard has confirmed was State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland, worried that members of Congress would use the talking points to criticize the State Department for “not paying attention to Agency warnings.”
In an attempt to address those concerns, CIA officials cut all references to Ansar al Sharia and made minor tweaks. But in a follow-up email at 9:24 p.m., Nuland wrote that the problem remained and that her superiors—she did not say which ones — were unhappy. The changes, she wrote, did not “resolve all my issues or those of my building leadership,” and State Department leadership was contacting National Security Council officials directly. Moments later, according to the House report, “White House officials responded by stating that the State Department’s concerns would have to be taken into account.”
One official — Ben Rhodes, The Weekly Standard is told, a top adviser to President Obama on national security and foreign policy — further advised the group that the issues would be resolved in a meeting of top administration officials the following morning at the White House.
There is little information about what happened at that meeting of the Deputies Committee. But according to two officials with knowledge of the process, Mike Morrell, deputy director of the CIA, made broad changes to the draft afterwards. Morrell cut all or parts of four paragraphs of the six-paragraph talking points — 148 of its 248 words (see Version 2 above). Gone were the reference to “Islamic extremists,” the reminders of agency warnings about al Qaeda in Libya, the reference to “jihadists” in Cairo, the mention of possible surveillance of the facility in Benghazi, and the report of five previous attacks on foreign interests.
What remained—and would be included in the final version of the talking points — was mostly boilerplate about ongoing investigations and working with the Libyan government, together with bland language suggesting that the “violent demonstrations” — no longer “attacks” — were spontaneous responses to protests in Egypt and may have included generic “extremists” (see Version 3 above).
If the story of what happened in Benghazi was dramatically stripped down from the first draft of the CIA’s talking points to the version that emerged after the Deputies Committee meeting, the narrative would soon be built up again. In ensuing days, administration officials emphasized a “demonstration” in front of the U.S. facility in Benghazi and claimed that the demonstrators were provoked by a YouTube video. The CIA had softened “attack” to “demonstration.” But as soon became clear, there had been no demonstration in Benghazi.
More troubling was the YouTube video. Rice would spend much time on the Sunday talk shows pointing to this video as the trigger of the chaos in Benghazi. “What sparked the violence was a very hateful video on the Internet. It was a reaction to a video that had nothing to do with the United States.” There is no mention of any “video” in any of the many drafts of the talking points.
Still, top Obama officials would point to the video to explain Benghazi. President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton even denounced the video in a sort of diplomatic public service announcement in Pakistan. In a speech at the United Nations on September 25, the president mentioned the video several times in connection with Benghazi.
On September 17, the day after Rice appeared on the Sunday shows, Nuland defended Rice’s performance during the daily briefing at the State Department. “What I will say, though, is that Ambassador Rice, in her comments on every network over the weekend, was very clear, very precise, about what our initial assessment of what happened is. And this was not just her assessment, it was also an assessment you’ve heard in comments coming from the intelligence community, in comments coming from the White House.”
It was a preview of the administration’s defense of its claims on Ben­ghazi. After pushing the intelligence community to revise its talking points to fit the administration’s preferred narrative, administration officials would point fingers at the intelligence community when parts of that narrative were shown to be misleading or simply untrue.
And at times, members of the intelligence community appeared eager to help. On September 28, a statement from ODNI seemed designed to quiet the growing furor over the administration’s explanations of Benghazi. “In the immediate aftermath, there was information that led us to assess that the attack began spontaneously following protests earlier that day at our embassy in Cairo. We provided that initial assessment to Executive Branch officials and members of Congress, who used that information to discuss the attack publicly and provide updates as they became available.”
The statement continued: “As we learned more about the attack, we revised our initial assessment to reflect new information indicating that it was a deliberate and organized attack carried out by extremists. It remains unclear if any group or person exercised overall command and control of the attack, and if extremist group leaders directed their members to participate. However, we do assess that some of those involved were linked to groups affiliated with, or sympathetic to al Qaeda.”
The statement strongly implies that the information about al Qaeda-linked terrorists was new, a revision of the initial assessment. But it wasn’t. Indeed, the original assessment stated, without qualification, “we do know that Islamic extremists with ties to al Qaeda participated in the attack.”
The statement from the ODNI came not from James Clapper, the director of national intelligence, but from his spokesman, Shawn Turner. When the statement was released, current and former intelligence officials told The Weekly Standard that they found the statement itself odd and the fact that it didn’t come from Clapper stranger still. Clapper was traveling when he was first shown a draft of the statement to go out under his name. It is not an accident that it didn’t.
The revelations about exactly how the talking points were written, revised, and then embellished come amid renewed scrutiny of the administration’s handling of Benghazi. Fox News spoke to a Special Ops soldier last week who raised new questions about what happened during the attack, and the State Department’s inspector general acknowledged that the office would be investigating the production of the Administrative Review Board report on the attacks because of concerns that investigators did not speak to a broad spectrum of individuals with knowledge of the attack and its aftermath. On May 8, the House Oversight and Government Reform committee will hold another hearing on the matter. And Republicans in Congress have asked the administration to release all of the emails, something that would further clarify how the changes came about.
Stephen F. Hayes is a senior writer at The Weekly Standard.
The Benghazi Scandal Grows — Stephen Hayes' Comments Following Hearing
By Stephen F. Hayes -- CIA director David Petraeus was surprised when he read the freshly rewritten talking points an aide had emailed him in the early afternoon of Saturday, September 15. One day earlier, analysts with the CIA’s Office of Terrorism Analysis had drafted a set of unclassified talking points policymakers could use to discuss the attacks in Benghazi, Libya. But this new version​—​produced with input from senior Obama administration policymakers​—​was a shadow of the original.
The original CIA talking points had been blunt: The assault on U.S. facilities in Benghazi was a terrorist attack conducted by a large group of Islamic extremists, including some with ties to al Qaeda.
These were strong claims. The CIA usually qualifies its assessments, providing policymakers a sense of whether the conclusions of its analysis are offered with “high confidence,” “moderate confidence,” or “low confidence.” That first draft signaled confidence, even certainty: “We do know that Islamic extremists with ties to al Qaeda participated in the attack.”
There was good reason for this conviction. Within 24 hours of the attack, the U.S. government had intercepted communications between two al Qaeda-linked terrorists discussing the attacks in Benghazi. One of the jihadists, a member of Ansar al Sharia, reported to the other that he had participated in the assault on the U.S. diplomatic post. Solid evidence. And there was more. Later that same day, the CIA station chief in Libya had sent a memo back to Washington, reporting that eyewitnesses to the attack said the participants were known jihadists, with ties to al Qaeda.  Continued >>

Every Good Cover-Up Has a 'Fall Guy' --- Meet Poor Mr. Ben Rhodes
  Ben Rhodes and Obama shown crafting routine 'Pack-O-Lies Speech'

By Ed Lasky -- Stephen Hayes of the Weekly Standard has a must read column [See Above Column] regarding the Benghazi cover-up by White House officials CIA career officials clearly and repeatedly identified Al Qaeda and Al Qaeda-linked Islamic terrorists as the culprits behind the murder of four Americans.
Of course, this would cause embarrassment for the Obama team, especially in the few weeks before the election. They had been boasting for years that Al Qaeda had been decimated, the "tide of war" was receding; they had been on a mission to whitewash the prospect of Islamic terrorism as a threat to America (see Lauri Regan's superb column ("Can a President who has promised to stand with Muslims protect America? ).
Obama's Cairo speech before an audience that included Muslim Brotherhood officials that he compelled Egypt to include, was a paean to Islam. It was also, to a great extent, a work of fiction that included grandiose and subsequently disproven claims about the positive contributions Islam has made to America and the world.
That speech was written by Obama's foreign policy speechwriter and now National Security Council team member, Ben Rhodes.
That is the man who Hayes "outs" as a key person behind the Benghazi cover-up.
He reportedly altered the CIA talking points to delete references to Islamic terrorists, "attacks" (they became "demonstrations") and other negative references to Islamism. Also, someone at the White House level apparently dreamt up the idea of blaming an inconsequential video for triggering a spontaneous protest, that in the frenzy of events, led to the murder of Americans. These CIA talking points were eviscerated to whitewash the role of Islamic terrorism.
There was a White House whitewash that should not be dismissed over events that occurred a 'long time ago."  Continued >>
Ben Rhodes -- Obama’s Benghazi Propagandist
By Matthew Vadum -- A young White House speechwriter may be responsible for concocting the official lies about last September’s deadly terrorist attacks in Benghazi, Libya.
Rhodes doesn’t have an obviously radical left-wing background but he is extraordinarily well-connected. His brother, David Rhodes, used to work for Fox News but is now president of CBS News. His wife, Ann Norris, is senior foreign policy and defense advisor to Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.)
A native New Yorker, Rhodes earned a B.A. from Rice University and an M.F.A. from New York University. While earning his master’s degree, he taught writing at NYU and John Jay College.
Rhodes has President Obama’s ear. He urged Obama to reverse three decades of U.S. support for now-deposed Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and to lead an intervention in Libya ostensibly designed to prevent then-dictator Muammar Qaddafi from committing atrocities against civilians. He coined the phrase, “kinetic military action,” the administration’s hideous euphemism for war.   More Here >>



3 More Government Officials to Testify Over Benghazi Attacks

Diplomats Gregory Hicks, Eric Nordstrom and Mark Thompson Contradict the White House Lies on Benghazi

By Sharyl Attkisson -- As the deputy chief of mission for the U.S. in Libya, Gregory Hicks was on the ground at the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli on September 11, 2012, when terrorists launched two attacks on American compounds in Benghazi.
Hicks and two other government officials have been named as witnesses for a Congressional hearing Wednesday before the House Oversight Committee. The others are: Eric Nordstrom, the former lead security official for the State Department in Libya, and Mark Thompson, the acting deputy assistant secretary for counterterrorism at the State Department.
Other so-called "whistleblowers" from federal agencies, including the CIA, have provided information to Congressional investigators, but are said to be unwilling - so far - to speak publicly because they aren't authorized by their agencies to do so. Some claim fear of retaliation.
It's been a remarkably long period of silence from the dozens of American survivors and eyewitnesses who were in Libya the night of the attacks. It's not publicly known what testimony the witnesses will give at this week's hearing, but in a series of interviews and communications, CBS News has obtained information about some of areas of knowledge the witnesses can address.
Hicks was number two to Ambassador Christopher Stevens, who was killed in the attacks. With Stevens in Benghazi on September 11, Hicks was the top Foreign Service official at the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli. When the first U.S. compound in Benghazi fell under attack, Hicks reportedly took the frantic call.
"Greg, we are under attack," Ambassador Stevens told Hicks on the phone. Those were the last words he heard from Stevens.
VIDEO: Rep. Darrell Issa Gives Benghazi Details from Whistle-Blowers: Says Talking Points Were a "Fatal Error"
According to Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., who appeared Sunday on "Face the Nation," Gregory Hicks recently testified privately to the House Oversight Committee: "I never reported a demonstration. I reported an attack on the consulate...I thought it was a terrorist attack from the get-go. I think everyone in the mission thought it was a terrorist attack from the beginning."
Hicks was also on the receiving end of calls when Stevens went missing. Later, he was on the phone when an unidentified man called the U.S. Embassy using Stevens' own telephone to say the ambassador was at Benghazi hospital. Still later, Hicks said he was there when Stevens' body was turned over to U.S. personnel under circumstances that still remain mysterious.

THIS DEVASTING ACCOUNT OF WHAT HAPPENED SHOULD DESTROY THE OBAMA REGIME!
Throughout the night, sources say Americans on the ground in Libya at times felt helpless and abandoned.
"We relied on Washington for dispassionate assessment," one eyewitness told CBS News. "Instead, they [Washington officials] were asking us what help we needed. We answered: 'Send reinforcements!' "
But they were told immediate help wasn't available.
Embassy personnel say they repeatedly asked the Defense Attache on site in Tripoli for military assistance.
"Isn't there anything available?" one Embassy official says he asked. "But the answer was 'NO.'"
"What about Aviano?" the official pressed, referencing the NATO air base with U.S. assets in northeastern Italy. "NO," was the answer.
Two of the four Americans killed that night died hours after the first attack began.

  ●  Official: We knew Benghazi was a terrorist attack "from the get-go"
  ●  Biden, Kerry honor fallen U.S. diplomats
  ●  Full coverage: U.S. Consulate attack in Benghazi
Some have complained the Obama Administration has not explained why there were no military resources available to turbulent North Africa on the Sept. 11 attacks, even at the large Souda Bay U.S. Naval base less than an hour's flight from Libya. The State Department's independent Accountability Review Board said government officials did everything they could, considering the challenges. The Defense Department has since reported implementation of improvements to make military resources more readily available if needed.
Another witness for Wednesday's hearing, Mark Thompson, is a counterterrorism expert. He's likely to address another sore spot surrounding the night of the attacks: the fact that the Obama Administration did not convene its top interagency counterterrorism resource, the Counterterrorism Security Group (CSG). According to Rep. Issa, Thompson will testify that he was locked out of the process "even though he was the individual who was supposed to react to these kinds of things."
Counterterrorism sources and internal emails reviewed by CBS News express frustration that key responders were ready to deploy, but were not called upon to help in the attack.
National Security Council Spokesman Tommy Vietor told CBS News the CSG was not needed.
"From the moment the president was briefed on the Benghazi attack, the response effort was handled by the most senior national security officials in governments. Members of the CSG were of course involved in these meetings and discussions to support their bosses," said Vietor.
"The CSG is the one group that's supposed to know what resources every agency has. They know of multiple options and have the ability to coordinate counterterrorism assets across all the agencies," a high-ranking government official told CBS News. "They were not allowed to do their job. They were not called upon."
Absent coordination from Counterterrorism Security Group, a senior U.S. counterterrorism official says the response to the crisis became more confused. "The response process was isolated at the most senior level," says an official referring to top officials in the executive branch. "My fellow counterterrorism professionals and I (were) not consulted."
Hicks and several others whose accounts are at odds with official government statements about Benghazi have reported feeling marginalized, intimidated and/or subjected to threats of retaliation.
The top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, Dutch Ruppersberger, told Bob Schieffer on Sunday's "Face the Nation:" "Let's get the facts. This should not be a partisan issue at all. This should be to get the facts, an open issue, and to hear from everybody. And when you hear allegations that people are told not to talk, I would hope those issues would come out and if that's the case we should be held accountable."

•  Benghazi Drone Operator's Call to Hannity: ‘Reports Something Might Go-Down... Already Known... Hours Before’
•  Benghazi Drone Operator Asks Sean Hannity: “Why Hasn’t Congress Contacted Me?” (Audio)
•  Carney: Accountability Review Board’s Benghazi Report Was “Rigorous and Unsparing”
•  Is Benghazi Becoming a Watergate, or Iran-Contra, or Both?
•  Issa: "No question" Clinton's circle involved in Benghazi "cover-up"
•  Benghazi Whistle-Blowers: We Sat And Watched Them Die
•  Jay Carney Unable to Answer Questions Regarding Alleged Benghazi ‘Stand Down’ Orders
•  Special Ops Halted from Responding to Benghazi Attacks, U.S. Diplomat Says
•  U.S. Military in Tripoli Ordered Not to Go to Benghazi
•  Benghazi witness: U.S. military response could have 'scared' off attackers, prevented mortar strike
•  Benghazi Smoking Gun Exposed--Obama lied, people died.
•  Democrats' Agenda for Benghazi Hearing: Protect Hillary at All Costs
•  Whistleblower: Hillary cut State’s counter-terrorism bureau out of Benghazi loop
•  Exclusive: Benghazi insider speaks out and backs up Fox News Whistleblower
•  Hillary Clinton’s People Covered Up Al Qaeda Role in Benghazi to Avoid Blame
•  Benghazi Whistleblower: 'My Jaw Hit the Floor' as WH Blamed YouTube Video
•  Chairman Darrell Issa Explosive Details From Benghazi Whistleblowers
•  State Department Blocked Access To Benghazi Witness For Months
•  Official: We Knew Benghazi Was a Terrorist Attack "From the Get-Go"
•  Whistleblower Lawyer: ARB´s Gen Pickering ´Became Physically Ill´ At The Thought of Dealing
•  Newsmax Exclusive: U.S. Hired al-Qaida-Linked Group to Defend Benghazi Mission
•  Benghazi: Does Obama Want To Bring Anyone To Justice?
•  The Scandal That Will Not Die
•  Benghazi: Names of ‘whistleblower’ witnesses revealed
•  Benghazi investigations included CIA activities; personnel had secret base in Libyan city
•  Fox News credited by lawyer for Benghazi whistleblower
•  CBS News' Attkisson Describes Stonewalling From White House on Benghazi
•  Report: Secret timeline shows how the Obama administration doctored intelligence talking-points...
•  Benghazi Whistle Blower: “… Americans Were Deliberately Left There To Die
•  State Department's Benghazi review panel under investigation, Fox News confirms
•  FBI posts wanted photos for Benghazi attack
•  Benghazi was a "Long Time Ago" -- But We Can Still Blame Everything on Bush?
•  Militia Hired by State Dept. Warned It Wouldn’t Protect Stevens’ Movements in Benghazi
•  Obama denies knowing Benghazi terror-attack survivors have been forbidden from talking to Congress
•  REPORT: State Dept. blocking lawyers from representing Benghazi whistleblowers
•  Rep. Trey Gowdy: further Benghazi hearings ‘coming quickly’
•  White House: Clinton’s 'Signature' on Benghazi Docs Doesn't Mean She Knew of Them
•  NBC, ABC Ignore a Blistering House Report Placing Blame for Benghazi on Obama, Hillary Clinton
•  Benghazi investigators demand cable signed by Clinton; White House balks
•  Hillary Clinton Lied, and Four In Benghazi Died
•  House Report: Al Qaeda in Maghreb and Al Qaeda-Linked Ansar al-Sharia Did Benghazi
•  House GOP concludes Hillary Clinton blew Benghazi response
●  HOUSE GOP COMMITTEE MEMO ON BENGHAZI (pdf file)
•  Benghazi Bombshell Drops On Obama, Hillary
•  GOP Benghazi report blames Clinton
•  Boehner Defends Decision Denying Select Committee on Benghazi
•  Ty Woods' Dad Seeks Benghazi Answers on Capitol Hill
•  Issa to CIA: Get your lawyers ready on Benghazi
•  John Kerry On Benghazi: "We Got A Lot More Important Things To Move On To"
•  Kerry “Not Aware” of State Dept. Impeding Congressional Probe Into Benghazi
•  Was Benghazi a Honey Pot Trap?
•  Mother Of Slain Benghazi Officer To Sean Hannity: ‘They Want Me To Shut Up’
•  Hillary Clinton snagged in Benghazi cover-up
•  Benghazi's Silenced Witnesses Hidden In Plain Sight?
•  GOP Should Subpoena Benghazi's Silenced Witnesses
•  Hacker Begins Distributing Confidential Memos Sent To Hillary Clinton On Libya, Benghazi Attack

Thursday, May 23, 2013

NEWS and OPINIONS

► Beyond Chilling: DOJ Cites 'Espionage' Law In Reporter Record Grab - The Justice Department did more than seize a Fox News reporter's emails while suggesting he was a criminal "co-conspirator" in a leak case -- it did so under one of the most serious wartime laws in America, the Espionage Act
► Boehner: House Won’t Pass Senate Immigration Bill - House Speaker John A. Boehner on Thursday flatly ruled out chances of the House passing the Senate’s immigration bill, saying his chamber will debate its own bill instead
► Obama Calls for Gitmo Inmates to Be Transfered to the U.S. -  In a speech today, President Obama is calling for the transfer for Gitmo inmates to the United States
► Former IRS Commissioner Visited White House 118 Times During Tea Party -  Targeting ormer IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman visited the White House 118 times in 2010 and 2011. This is the same time period when Tea Party groups were inappropriately targeted and intimidated by the IRS
► Terror Conspiracy? - Jihadist Ties Emerge in British Soldier Killing

Obama orders Justice Department review after Fox News, AP phone records seized
DOJ invoked Espionage Act in calling Fox News reporter criminal 'co-conspirator'
Roger Ailes' letter to Fox News employees


► Michael Barone - IRS and AP Scandals Cast a Big Chill on Free Speech
► Ann Coulter - When did we vote to become Mexico?
► Kirsten Powers - First They Came for Fox News
► George Will - Obama's Lawlessness
► Michelle Malkin - The Obama Crony in Charge of your Medical Records
► Victor Davis Hanson - Paranoid or Prescient?
► Pat Buchanan - The Spectator President

Bernard Goldberg: How Do We Know Fox reporter Isn't a Commie Spy?
Bob Tyrrell: The Beauty of Confusion
Larry Elder: Obama's Scandals --- and His Media Co-Conspirators
Judge Andrew P. Napolitano: Tyranny Around the Corner
Celia Rivenbark: Having 'Words' with Duh Hubby
Mark Patinkin: No gender roles when it comes to being absurd
John Kass: Tornadoes sound like eerie silence --- then evil
Cathy Young: Stirring diversity, hostile environment
Glenn Garvin: Welcome to 'unwelcome' speech on campus
A. Barton Hinkle: REVEALED: IRS letter to tea party groups
Dana Milbank: The IRS passes the buck
Dick Morris: The IRS audit from hell
Michael Barone: Low-skilled Worked Get Raw Deal Under ObamaCare
Cal Thomas: The president's Morehouse address
John Stossel: Sublet My People Go
Greg Schwem: Rules of the road from the DOD (Department of Dad)
Roger Simon: Walking Tall
Dale McFeatters: Lifeline could be direct line to identity theft
Nat Hentoff: Why Obama is silent on murdered babies
Christine M. Flowers: Circling the presidential-protection wagons
Jay Ambrose: Evidence tells us the administrative state can be grotesquely unfair, unconstitutional, self-contradictory, unspeakably autocratically intrusive, stupid and morally repulsive
Clarence Page: On press freedoms, Obama races Nixon to bottom
Dana Milbank: In AP, Rosen investigations, government makes criminals of reporters
Jonah Goldberg: Obama's 'idiot' defense
Paul Greenberg: The growing case for life
Walter Williams: We Are the Idiots
Thomas Sowell: Undoing the Brainwashing
Dennis Prager: On Using Parents of Murdered Children
Dale McFeatters: American teens' materialism makes sense
Lenore Skenazy: When in Doubt, Blame the Mom
Tom Purcell: Advice from the master
Paul Greenberg: Deja vu all over again
Arnold Ahlert: Progressivism --- A Scandal Unto Itself
Bernard Goldberg: How High Does the IRS Scandal Go?
Debra J. Saunders: Obama Is Stingy With His Pardons
Rich Lowry: The dream and the reality
Byron York: Immigration fight moves to house with deep divide
Mona Charen: Obama's Personal Diplomats?
Wesley Pruden: Mr. Obama and green persimmons
Michelle Malkin: Obama's Emptiest Benghazi Talking Point
Thomas Sowell: Wimps Versus Barbarians
Cal Thomas: Tyranny is no longer 'lurking'
Mark Steyn: Big Government is erecting a panopticon state – one that sees everything, and regulates everything. It's great 'customer service,' except that you can never get out of the store
Mitch Albom: The dream job nobody -- and I do mean NOBODY -- wants
Betsy Hart: There's no place like home --- especially when it's a mess
Dan K. Thomasson: Google Glass is progress at a cost
Dale McFeatters: U.S. spy in Moscow has elements of farce
David Shribman: Crossing sacred lines in Washington
Deroy Murdock: Big government's new legacy of scandal
Star Parker: The ultimate 'pro-choice' irony
Leonard Pitts: In Florida, timely injustice
Greg Crosby: Unbelievable but True Stories
Paul Greenberg: Scandal of the day
Kathryn Lopez: A look behind the veil
Jack Kelly: Scandals aplenty . . . But the AP affair pales next to the IRS and Benghazi
Bill O'Reilly: What Happened, Mr. President?
Feds Don't Look Good Draped in the Fifth - Joe Davidson
Obama's Culture of Intimidation - Sen. Mitch McConnell
Pipe Dreams of Pipeline Jobs - Rep. Conyers & Lennox Yearwood
Obama's Lawlessness - George Will
Obama's "Idiot" Defense - Jonah Goldberg
Begging, K-Street Style - Grae Stafford
The New Enemies List - Ben Domenech
Stop the Leaks - Barr, Gorelick & Wainstein
Sharp Shoppers Scuttle ObamaCare - Douglas Holtz-Eakin
What Recovery? - Ben Casselman
How to Humble a Wing Nut - Cass Sunstein, Bloomberg
A Future So Bright, We Have to Wear Shades - Glenn Reynolds
Horror and Heroism in Oklahoma - Jay Newton-Small
Mike Shedlock: Another Obamacare Lie
Daniel J. Mitchell: Strangled By Red Tape
Charles Payne: Mickey D on Strike
Roger Schlesinger: Time to Figure it All Out
Rick Santorum: Obama vs. The Free Press
Susan Combs: A Breach of Trust
Kathryn Lopez: A Look Behind the Veil
Posted by at 1 comment:
Labels: , ,

Monday, May 2, 2011

Spotting Forged Documents for Dummies

In these two pictures it is easy to see that the signatures on the document come from different sources. The resolution on the Dunham signature (at top) is higher than the resolution of the Sinclair signature (below) which is composed entirely of "big" pixels.

A very easy comparison illustrating that the latest Obama Birth Certificate is a manipulated forgery.





CLICK TO VIEW DOCUMENT! | CLICK FOR 2nd VIEW! | CLICK FOR PDF Format!
Posted by at No comments:

Tuesday, April 26, 2011

Obama's Columbia Transcripts Revealed?

We've had this document awhile now and we have neither disclosed, or provided to Wikileaks or OpenSecrets.

But now that the Donald seems on the verge of spilling the beans, we’ve decided it’s time to go public, so we can scoop, or “Trump” him.

We can’t know for sure whether this is genuine, but in light of the rest of the history that is slowly being revealed, (e.g., by Stanley Kurtz), these Columbia transcripts that the president has refused to release look quite plausible.

We can’t see anything here that jumps out as to why he wouldn’t want us to see them. It’s not like we’re learning anything much new about him.

He did have a rough semester in the fall of ’82, but he seems to have bounced back nicely by focusing on courses the final semester that were more in his wheelhouse. So as far as we are concerned, it looks like the real deal to us.

CLICK DOCUMENT TO ENLARGE:






HOME: http://newsboypost.blogspot.com/

h/t Rand Simberg (BTW, the document is Satire)
Posted by at 1 comment:

Friday, August 27, 2010

Vince Vance's Music Video,

"I am New Orleans"


Newsboy Post — HOMEPAGE

Vince Vance's music video, "I am New Orleans," is a musical collage of sights and sounds of the city released for the fifth anniversary of Katrina.
YouTube Video: "I Am New Orleans" - Running Time: 4:55 minutes

*********
Vince Vance & The Valiants [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vince_Vance] are a country pop and rock and roll musical group from New Orleans, Louisiana, United States. The current Vince Vance, Andy Stone, is the last original member of the Valiants. He was born Andrew John Franichevich Jr. The group is known primarily for the singles "All I Want for Christmas Is You", which charted on the Billboard Hot Country Songs charts on six separate occasions, reaching its peak of #31 in 2000, and "Bomb Iran", which was "The Most Requested Song in the United States", according to Billboard, in 1980 for several weeks during the height of the Iranian Hostage Crisis.


The early years through 1979

The current Vince Vance, Andrew John Franichevich Jr.(Andy Stone), was born January 31, 1950, in Oakland, California, to Melvina Anne "Molly" and Andrew John Franichevich of Croatian nationality, and was raised in New Orleans, Louisiana.
Little is known about Vance's personal life, but at one point he had been a high school teacher, and had even found time to write a children's book and poetry. The Valiants fronted for the Allman Brothers at the Warehouse Concert Venue on New Year's Eve 1971, their founding year. They hit the road the following year and among other gigs, played at the "Soda Pop Festival" in Indiana before about 250,000 music fans, the Super Dome Mardi Gras Concerts in 1975 and 1976, as well as numerous other concerts and club date around the US. The Valiants recorded their first record with Cosimo "Cosmo" Matassa (Fats Domino, Ernie K Doe, Benny Spellman, Erma Thomas et al.) at Cosmo's recording studio in 1972. The Valiants also played and "jammed" with such as Johnny Winter, Jerry Lee Lewis, Chubby Checker, Doctor John, REO Speedwagon, Little Richard, Charlie Daniels, and Rory Gallagher, Chuck Berry at Billy Bob's in Ft Worth among many others.

Website: http://www.vincevance.com/

Vince Vance's music video, "I am New Orleans," is a musical collage of sights and sounds of the city released for the fifth anniversary of Katrina.

VIDEO: "I Am New Orleans" - Running Time: 4:55 minutes

http://www.icompositions.com/music/song.php?sid=147572

Song Information:
Released: Aug 26, 2010 11:52 PM

Category: Spoken Word
File Type: .mp3

File Size: 3.15 MB Plays: 89
License: No derivative works allowed
'I Am New Orleans' is one of your favorites.

Here is a first for you all:

Here is a hit in the making. For the Fifth Anniversary of Katrina's assault on The City that Care Forgot, I took a look back at what the City of New Orleans really is. I tried to tell the truth. I didn't want to gloss over the fact that we have many corrupt politicians. However, I wanted to express the resilience of a people that will never be conquered. Well, evidently I did. I am not being haughty, but this song has gotten 25,000 hits on Youtube and many more than that on the other video outlets where it is posted.

Newspaper columnist, Stephen Sabludowsky, says it the best in his article. Here it is with a live interview of me:http://bayoubuzz.com/buzz/latest-buzz/47937-vince-vance-creates-new-orleans-video-for-katrina-5th-anniversary


Lyrics: "I Am New Orleans"

© 2009/2010 Vince Vance

I’m American, European and African... all by chance
I’m Satchmo, Jumbo, Fountain, Fats,‘Fess* and Vince Vance
I’m the roux in your gumbo; I’m the rice in your beans
I’m the levee that will never break; I am New Orleans.
My blood is the River, my heart is the Quarter
I’m a corrupt politician; a slave that was martyred
A girl who lost her way and a Bourbon Street Queen
A Streetcar Named Desire; I am New Orleans.
I’m praying in the Cathedral; I’m living in sin
I never sleep from the bustle or the fear I live in
I smell like French Bread; my snowball’s nectar cream
In a city that care forgot; I am New Orleans.
I’m stronger from lies; I’m bigger than The Dome
I’m the Saints; I’m the sinners;I am a place called Home
I’m sweating in December; I’m purple, gold and green
I’m Catholic and I’m voodoo; I am New Orleans.
I’m Dixieland Jazz; I’m Redfish Court-Bouillon**
I’m The Blue Room at The Roosevelt, The Knights of Babylon“
Throw me something. Mister!” I hear y’all scream
At the parade that never ends; I am New Orleans.
I'm coffee and beignets, a ferry to Old Algiers,
I’m the Best Bank, Metry, St. Bernard, I drink Abita Beer
I'm a Jambalaya of People seasoned with pralines
I’m Mardi Gras on Canal Street; I am New Orleans.
I was sold by the French and saved by Ole Hickory
There’s water all around me, but I can never come clean
I’m eight feet below sea level and I’m slipping out to sea

Katrina changed me forever, but I am still New Orleans.
They tried to call me Chocolate City, but I’m really White and Black
You can drench me with oil, but you can bet I’m coming back
I’m the healer Dr. Mary and All of Blaine Kern’s dreams
I’m a cemetery angel; I am New Orleans.

* (Satchmo: Trumpeter Louis Armstrong; Jumbo: Trumpeter Alois Hirt; Fountain: clarinetist Pierre "Pete" LaFountaine, Jr.; Fats: Pianist/Composer Antoine Domino; 'Fess: Professor Longhair, pianist/composer Henry Roeland Byrd)

** (popular cajun recipe - pronounced: `coo – bee – yawn)
=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+==+=+=+=+=+=+=

Vince Vance's Music Video, "I am New Orleans"



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V86xxTm8-ek



Posted by at 1 comment:

Sunday, August 22, 2010

Is Obama a Closet Muslim?

We present the facts — You decide.
Newsboy Post — HOMEPAGE

News aggregation weblog featuring over 300 selected news and opinion pieces, plus dozens of updating feeds from top-rated news sites and bloggers. We're better than Drudge!
Relevant Information for the Curious — Finds It's Way to Newsboy Post ®
=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=

Is Obama a Muslim?

We present the facts - You decide.

This photo was taken as Obama prepares for Islamic prayer, shortly after deciding that the White House would not be to observing our National Day of Prayer.

♠ His biological father was a Muslim.
♠ His stepfather was a Muslim.
♠ As a child Barry was enrolled in school as a Muslim in Jakarta Indonesia.
♠ Barack Hussein 0bama's first and middle names are Arabic Muslim names.
♠ 0bama recited the opening lines of the Muslim call to prayer, which includes a vow of fidelity to Islam, in flawless Arabic on a radio program. - Nikolos Kristoff, NYTs, 3-06-07
♠ On that same program he said he thinks the call to prayer is "one of the prettiest sounds on earth."
♠ Obama belonged to Rev. Wright's (a former Muslim) church for twenty years. Many congregants are Muslims.
♠ Obama said that the U.S. is "one of the largest Muslim countries in the world."
♠ Obama holds Muslim celebrations in the WH but canceled the National Day of Prayer.
♠ President Obama's religious adviser, Eboo Patel, once deemed the United States “the ideal place for the renewal of Islam.”
♠ Obama does not give gifts on Christmas.
♠ Obama doesn't celebrate his birthday.
♠ Obama falsely attributes Muslim participation in the founding of America.
♠ Obama required that the cross be covered when he gave a speech at Notre Dame.
♠ Christian symbol covered up during Obama’s Georgetown speech
♠ Obama's first major speech in office was a "Muslim outreach" speech in Cairo Egypt. “The American President told me in confidence that he is a Muslim,” said Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit on Nile TV.
♠ Obama gave strong support to the Cordoba House community center and mosque to be built at the Ground Zero site of Sep. 11, 2001 at a dinner celebrating the day's end of the first day of Ramadan at the WH.
♠ Obama tasked NASA with a mission of "Muslim outreach."
♠ Obama referred to his faith as "my Muslim faith" in an interview with George Stephanopolous. (video 0:12)
♠ Barack Obama Mocks And Makes Fun Of The Bible (video 2:09)
♠ Obama: " We are no longer a Christian nation . . . " (video 1:27)
♠ As a newly elected Illinois State Senator Obama sponsored Bill SR0110 in the 90th General Assembly to declare November 1, 1997 to be Islamic Community Center Day. See the whole bill here.
















=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=

Ǿbämá Loves the 'Muslim Call to Prayer'

On February 27, 2008, speaking to Nicholas Kristof of The New York Times, Bäяáçk Ħūššéiŋ Ǿbämá said the Muslim call to prayer is "one of the prettiest sounds on Earth at sunset."Ǿbämá recited the Muslim call to prayer, the Adhan, "with a first-class [Arabic] accent.

"The opening lines of the Adhan (Azaan) is the Shahada:"
Allah is Supreme! Allah is Supreme!
Allah is Supreme! Allah is Supreme!
I witness that there is no god but Allah
I witness that there is no god but Allah
I witness that Muhammad is his prophet?

"Allah Akbarالله أَكْبَر Allah Is Great

According to Islamic scholars, reciting the Shahada, the Muslim declaration of faith, makes one a Muslim. This simple yet profound statement expresses a Muslim's complete acceptance of, and total commitment to, the message of Islam. Ǿbämá chanted it with pride and finesse. - NY Times
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

"I am a Muslim," Ǿbämá Tells Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit

Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit said he had a one-on-one meeting with Ǿbämá in January, 2010, in which President Ǿbämá told him that he was still a Muslim, the son of a Muslim father, the stepson of Muslim stepfather, that his half brothers in Kenya are Muslims, and that he was sympathetic towards the Muslim agenda. Adul Gheit claimed Ǿbämá told the Arabs to show patience. Ǿbämá promised that once he overcame some domestic issues, like the Health care reform, he would show the Muslim World how to deal with Israel. - Full Story
=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=
Let Me Translate: We Don't Believe Him - or You

American Thinker - By C. Edmund Wright - August 22, 2010

Memo to the ruling class media: We are not ignorant or stupid. We've not forgotten Jeremiah Wright. It's not that we don't "know" what faith Obama subscribes to -- it's more that we don't believe him. Or you. Sorry. Not buying.
Besides, sometimes we just like to tweak you with our poll answers -- and use any poll as an excuse to "vote against Obama" in any way, shape or form.
Frankly, it has been equal parts comedy and insult to watch the ruling class media haplessly wrestle with the reality that millions of Americans believe Obama to be a Muslim. They are so clueless.
As if we needed any more proof-- this is simply another positive dose that the ruling class media and the country are divided by a huge gulf of philosophy, reality and experiences. And they are just beside themselves that a country that was concerned that Obama's (Christian?) pastor is a crazy nut in the spring and summer of 2008 can totally forget about all that in the summer of 2010 and call Obama a Muslim.
They so miss the point. We have forgotten none of that. If fact, apparently now more Americans are deciding to look into all of this and process it in light of Obama's actions.
So allow me to help the media out on this thorny confusing issue:
We know you claim him to be a Christian. We know Obama has at times claimed to be a Christian. We know Jeremiah Wright's Trinity Church claims to be some kind of Christian denomination. We simply doubt it. And the more we watch all of you, the less we are inclined to believe any of it.
(And by "we," I mean folks who would respond "Muslim" or "not sure" to your poll questions).
We also know his father was a Muslim. We know his stepfather was a Muslim. We know that under Sharia Law, he is a Muslim, and that much of the Muslim World regards him as a Muslim. We know his mother was an atheist. We know Obama sent a bureaucrat out to claim that NASA's top mission was Muslim outreach. We know he skipped the Boy Scout's 100th Anniversary bash. We know he's had a couple Freudian slips pertaining to his faith. We know he has called the Islamic call to prayer the most beautiful sound on earth.
We know that in light of all of this, some sycophantic White House spokesperson has the gall to say how "obvious" Obama's Christianity is. Depends on what the meaning of "obvious" is I guess.
There's more. So much more:
We know Jeremiah Wright rejects America's Founding principles -- which are consistent with what we call Christianity -- and many of us believe our founding principles were Divinely inspired. Moreover, we know that Obama is on board with Wright on this -- at least to the point of claiming that our Constitution is flawed in how it grants individual rights and liberty. We happen to think that rights Obama wants to curtail come from our Creator.
We know Obama has appointed proud and unabashed Marxists into his government. We happen to know that Marxism is by definition anti-Christian. We know he has confiscated wealth of others to redistribute to his union thug friends under false pretenses. We know he turned his back on Iranian protestors in lieu of an Islamic regime. We know he publicly defers to folks like Chavez and Saudi royalty more than he does Texas and Arkansas governors. On and on we could go here.
So what is so blamed obvious?
The only thing obvious here is that if Obama is a Christian, he is absolutely awful at walking out his faith. Or -- as might be said at any basic tent revival -- he done "backslid." (does anyone in the media have any idea what either of those phrases mean?)
In other words, we are paying attention to what is real and to what you are reporting -- and the two aren't jiving.
Answering a Poll
Another dynamic here is how the average person contemplates poll question answers. I know that in the isolated sanitized academic world of the ruling class - you tend to look at every poll answer as an equal entity. You tend to look at every answer as a window into the soul and understanding of each responder -- and you assume each responder has given equal thought to your little poll.
You over estimate your importance in our lives.
Frankly, we like to mess with your head sometimes. Had I been polled by Time or the Pew Research group, I'm sure I would have said "Muslim." Do I really believe he is a Muslim? I frankly hadn't given it a lot of thought until now -- but I know he's not a Christian under any definition with which I am familiar.
I know he's a Marxist. I know he hates America. I know he is at the very least sympathetic to Muslims. He has a Muslim sounding name, by the way.
Further, I know that for all of your bashing of George Bush and Sarah Palin over their overt Christianity, it will tick you off if I say I don't believe Obama to be one. For all of your protestations that there's nothing wrong with being a Muslim, you will panic if we think your guy is one. I know you better than you know us.
So to register my displeasure with Obama's "Christianity" and to simply irritate you, I would have answered "he's a Muslim" to your precious poll. It's my way of voting against Obama before November 2010 and 2012.
And certainly I am not alone in this thinking.
And none of us are stupid or ignorant or forgetful. We simply understand that we "shall know them by their fruits." Of course, many in the ruling class ignorant media probably think we are gay bashing when we say that. More proof of how out of touch you are.

Can you hear us now?
=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=
My Muslim President Obama: Why members of

the Islamic faith see him as one of the flock.

Forbes - By Asma Gull Hasan
I know President Obama is not Muslim, but I am tempted nevertheless to think that he is, as are most Muslims I know. In a very unscientific oral poll, ranging from family members to Muslim acquaintances, many of us feel, just as African-Americans did for the non-black but culturally leaning African-American President Bill Clinton, that we have our first American Muslim president in Barack Hussein Obama.
I know it's odd to say this. At first, I thought I was the only Muslim engaging in this folly, and I am reluctant to express it lest right-wing zealots try to use "Muslim" as a smear and cite my theory as proof of an Islamic traitor in the White House or some such nonsense. But, since Election Day, I have been part of more and more conversations with Muslims in which it was either offhandedly agreed that Obama is Muslim or enthusiastically blurted out. In commenting on our new president, "I have to support my fellow Muslim brother," would slip out of my mouth before I had a chance to think twice.
"Well, I know he's not really Muslim," I would quickly add. But if the person I was talking to was Muslim, they would say, "yes he is." They would cite his open nature and habit of reaching out to critics, reminiscent of the Prophet Muhammad's own approach, and also Obama's middle name, Hussein. Most of the Muslims I know (me included) can't seem to accept that Obama is not Muslim.
Of the few Muslims I polled who said that Obama is not Muslim, even they conceded that he had ties to Islam. These realists said that, although not an avowed and practicing Muslim, Obama's exposure to Islam at a young age (both through his father and his stint in Indonesia)

(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...
=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=

Yes, Obama Is A Muslim (by non-halachic standards

and Lenny Bruce)

thejewishweek.com - by Jonathan Mark - 08/20/2010

As an Orthodox Jew, I believe that membership in a religion is not casual but legal, something like American citizenship (if you support the good people of Arizona). You can't just cross the Rio Grande and vote in Phoenix. There is a rigerous citizenship process, a conversion process, or there is Judaism's singular qualification -- being born to a Jewish mother.
But according to my non-Orthodox "Progressive" friends, religion is as religion does, you are what you feel, what you seem, and to the left of Conservative Jews (though surely soon for Conservative Jews, too), you are Jewish if your father was. Intermarried people, technically non-Jews, who never converted, are allowed to participate in the Sabbath services of many liberal synagogues. The Jewish people are filling up with "illegal aliens" given amnesty. Non-Jews claim Jewish credentials by virtue of how they act, not what they actually are.
There are always stories in the papers about soldiers who've been killed while serving in the Israeli army but who can't be buried in Jewish cemetaries because these tragic soldiers are not Jewish, and therefore must can only be buried in non--Jewish cemetaries. There always follows an uproar from non-halachic Jews -- how dare we not bury them in the cemetaries where they want to be buried after what these soldiers did for the Jewish State!
Boy, are the Orthodox mean. Don't they know that religion has nothing to do with being Jewish?
By those modern and widespread standards in the Jewish community, where someone's religion is not judged by legality but by feelings and sympathy, then I'm getting more comfortable with the idea that Obama is a Muslim. Sure, he is technically a Christian, I know, he spent more than 20 years in Trinity Church in the pews of his spiritual mentor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, the crude anti-Semitic and anti-American friend of Louis Farrkahn. You can't choose your family but yes, you can choose your mentors.
I know, Obama is a Christian by virtue of his maternal family, his mother was a Christian.
And yet, by the modern Jewish standards of patrilinial descent, no questions asked, no-fault religion, Obama is a Muslim.
He is Muslim by patrilineal descent and what seems to be Islamic halacha.
As an op-ed contributor wrote in The New York Times in 2008, "In Islam, however, there is no such thing as a half-Muslim. Like all monotheistic religions, Islam is an exclusive faith. As the son of the Muslim father, Senator Obama was born a Muslim under Muslim law as it is universally understood. It makes no difference that, as Senator Obama has written, his father said he renounced his religion. Likewise, under Muslim law based on the Koran his mother's Christian background is irrelevant."
There is no provision in Judaism to renounce your religion, either.
So Obama is a Muslim because of his father -- patrilineal descent -- is one legitimate "halachic" position, although the topic has become so politicized it has rarely been seriously explored in most newspapers, Jewish or otherwise. The idea that Obama might be a Muslim was so quickly branded a slur by the left and the Obama camp, in particular, and protecting Obama had become uppermost in the minds of so many journalists, that most Americans haven't been exposed to an intelligent "comparative religion" discussion about this. The topic is often handled with a schoollyard brush-off, even in usually serious newspapers, by usually serious people: "He's not a Muslim, and you're stupid for saying so."
Yet, for those of us who like our religion discussed at length and with seriousness, what about the assertions in the Times' paragraph? Maybe if the topic was dealt with intelligently and properly -- not politically -- it wouldn't still be an issue going the wrong way in the polls for Obama a full two years later.
And what of the "non-halachic" point of view?
If service in the IDF, or working and living among the Jewish people, is the criteria, Obama had for years lived and studied and prayed among Muslims as a youth in Indonesia. As president, he has served the Islamic people by the shameless pro-Islamic tilt of his Cairo speech "to the Islamic world" in which he linked modern Zionism to the aftershock of the Holocaust instead of telling the Islamic world that Jews are an indigneous people in the Land of Israel; by severely pressuring Israel but not the Palestinians; by treating Prime Minister Netanyahu with greater contempt than any Israeli leader has ever been treated by any president; by eliminating terms such as "jihad" and Islamic terror" from official government usage; by having one person in his administration refer to Jerusalm as Al-Quds, and another deny Islamic motivation to obviously Islamic motivated acts of terror (such as in Fort Hood), and by yet another Obama-appointee teling Al-Jazeera that Obama told him that one of the main jobs of the director of NASA, our space program, is to reach out to the Islamic world, a responsibility that somehow eluded Presidents Eisenhower and Kennedy when we first put men into space.
By every halacha-be-damned modern Jewish colloquial standard of who is a "member of the tribe," Obama is a Muslim, every bit as much as he is a Christian. Two religions are OK in most modern Jewish homes, with Christmas trees and menorahs sharing the same living room, and Obama's childhood living room was both Islamic and Christian. He rejected neither, though Islam became politically inconvenient, which why he didn't use his middle name Hussein publically until he was safely elected and inaugurated as "Barack Hussein Obama." And that is why the centerpiece of his foreign policy became outreach to the Islamic world while threatening Israel if they so much as built an apartment house in a Jewish neighborhood in Jerusalem, while Obama made zero demands on the Palestinian Abbas.
I'm not the only one who sees this. An increasingly number of Americans do, as well. WIth the end of legalistic standards of identification within almost all ethnic and religious groups, Americans are figuing, yeah, this guy sure seems like a Muslim. The protective ring of liberal journalistic propaganda that immunized Obama, at least for a while, is wearing off.
Americans are a practical people. If it walks like a duck, and talks like a duck...
According to a new poll from the highly respected Pew Research Center, with interviews in both English and Spanish, nearly one-in-five Americans (18%) now say Obama is a Muslim, up from 11% in March 2009.
Only about one-third of adults (34%) say Obama is a Christian, down sharply from 48% in 2009. Fully 43% say they do not know what Obama's religion is. And this survey was completed in early August, before Obama's favorable comments about the Ground Zero mosque.
It's not just Republicans, though leftists would prefer that you think so. According to Pew, "the number of independents who say Obama is a Muslim has also increased significantly (up eight points)," and "fewer Democrats today say he is a Christian (down nine points since 2009). Say that again? Even fewer Democrats say Obama is Christian.
Sixty percent of those who say Obama is a Muslim said they came to that conclusion through the media, the overwhelmingly liberal media. The people see and hear Obama in action, with 11 percent being more specific, saying it is not the media as intermediary but they figure Obama is a Muslim from his own "words and behavior," reports Pew.
Are Americans really as stupid as some politicians, Jewish leaders and journalists would have you believe? How is it that the more Americans know about Obama, the more Americans think he is Muslim?
Many Americans grew up with the old Lenny Bruce routine on "Jewish and Goyish." As Lenny said, "Dig: I'm Jewish. Count Basie's Jewish. Ray Charles is Jewish. Eddie Cantor's goyish.... Kool-Aid is goyish.... Pumpernickel is Jewish, and, as you know, white bread is very goyish. Instant potatoes--goyish. Black cherry soda's very Jewish. Macaroons are very Jewish--very Jewish cake. Fruit salad is Jewish. Lime jello is goyish. Lime soda is very goyish."
By Lenny Bruce standards, we can say that Obama is as Islamish as lime jello is goyish.
Of course, as a Jew who respects halacha and the legal codes of other religions, I know full well that Obama is a Christian by matrilineal descent, that he was raised in a two-religion home to understand and love both Islam and Christianity. He probably tilts toward Islam now because perhaps he resents how for so many years, fighting to reach the top, he could only admit to Christianity, forced by politics or (a lack of a courage) to deny his father. Now he is a free to be as he chooses.
My non-Orthodox friends who have drummed it into my head that a Jew is anyone who sort of seems like it, halacha and technicalities be damned, so I'm increasingly of the belief that, yes, Obama is a Muslim -- actually, like many children of intermarried parents, he is both Christian and Muslim. There have been numerous articles in Jewish papers regarding Chelsea Clinton's marriage to a Jew, and how Jewish that child might be, even if that child is officially a Methodist.
In a very real sense, Obama is that child. Like Chelsea's child, the father looms.
OK, OK, Obama's a Christian, please don't waterboard me, I'll confess. I'm not saying Obama prays to Allah, eats Halal, or is in any way a religious Muslim. Hardly. But I've been taught by my Reform, Secular and intermarried friends that a Jew doesn't have to believe in God, or daven, or eat kosher, or be in any way observant, or even have a Jewish mother to be Jewish. These Jews can even go to church and marry a Christian (as did Obama), and raise their children as Christians. These sort of Jews can followed around by a private detective for a month and provide no evidence of being Jewish, but they can be very Jewish deep down, feeling profoundly connected to the Jewish people, coming through when they sense that they are needed by the Jewish people. Many of us have no problem calling people like that Jewish.
We can call Obama a Muslim by that standard. Obama now seems to sense that the Islamic people need him, the Palestinians need him, the Muslims who wish that the evil disgrace of Islamic fascism would just go away, those embarrassed Muslims need him. Obama has responded.
But, in the process, the American people have been responding to something about Obama, too.

How do you say "walks like a duck and talks like a duck" in Arabic?

=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=
Understanding Obama’s Muslim Roots

cashill.com - By Jack Cashill

To understand why President Barack Obama endorsed the Ground Zero Mosque—before he didn’t endorse it—a look at his various parents and their ideological roots might be in order. Much has been made about the Kenyan Obamas and their Muslim heritage, but it has become increasingly clear that Barack Sr. probably never even saw little Barry until he visited the boy and his family in Hawaii ten years after the boy’s birth. Still, the Obamas matter since President Obama has pulled much of his identity from them. For obvious political reasons, however, he has been skittish about their faith. “In reality,...

=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=
The Rev. Franklin Graham Says President Obama was 'Born a Muslim' (And Is Still One)

ABC News - By Bradley Blackburn

On the heels of a new poll suggesting that nearly one in five Americans incorrectly believes that President Obama is a Muslim, one of the nation's most prominent evangelical leaders has weighed in with a seemingly lukewarm endorsement of the president's Christian faith. The Rev. Franklin Graham waded into the discussion with his own controversial explanation of why people wrongly believe the president is a Muslim. Graham, who prayed with Obama in a session with his father, Billy Graham, earlier this year, was asked whether he has any doubts about Obama's self-avowed Christian faith. "I think the president's problem is...

=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=

From: The Obama File by Beckwith: http://www.theobamafile.com/index.htm

From the ‘Religion’ section:http://www.theobamafile.com/ObamaReligion.htm
and ‘Islam’ section: http://www.theobamafile.com/_Islam/ObamaIslamIndex.htm

The United States Library of Congress has selectedTheObamaFile.com for inclusion in its historic collectionof Internet materials.http://www.theobamafile.com/LibraryOfCongress.html.

=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=

From an Online Poster:

He’s a cultural Muslim, the way someone like me is a cultural Catholic—I left the church but still have the connection in many ways.
His 20 years in Rev. Wright’s church (where he’d have us believe he slept through every sermon, I guess) show his real religion is the Marxist/Black Liberation creed. Marxism has been combined with all kinds of ideas—including Islamic ones—into this kind of loose idea of “black freedom.”
Obama attended Wright’s church because of the need to be part of the culture, so he’d be seen as “one of us” by his constituents when he was a community organizer.
Were he a Muslim he wouldn’t have said the “clinging to guns and religion” line. He believes in some of what Islam says, some of what Christianity says, but don’t tell me you’re a Christian but take 18 months to NOT find a church where you can worship.
He’s an atheist (says this atheist) who has a strong emotional and cultural connection/bias toward black Muslims. His true feelings are obvious—watch how he talks about Islam, and then how he talks about Christianity, if you can find him doing so. He invited gays to the White House Easter event, but not to the Muslim one—pretty obvious who he wants to kiss up to and who he wants to tick off.
Muslims see him as one of the flock because in the political part of the Islamic world—the one we have to worry about most—he basically IS a Muslim, for all intents and purposes. He’s got their back, he FEELS connected to them, even if he doesn’t believe in their religion. It’s an important distinction, and in the end it means he’s on their side.

by Darkwolf377
=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=
Is Barack Obama Really A Saudi / Muslim "Plant" in the White House? (Video)

Saturday, August 21, 2010 YouTube - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Jhx_2TqffE&feature=player_embedded

=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=


Newsboy Post — HOMEPAGE


Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)
 13
3 More Suspects Arrested in Boston for Harboring-Aiding Suspects after Bombings
  (L to R) Azamat Tazhayakov & Dias Kadyrbayev, roommates of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev
Three more suspects were taken into custody today in connection with the Boston bombings ABC Local reported: The Boston Police Department says three additional suspects have been taken in to custody in the Marathon bombing investigation. Police did not provide any additional information, saying only that “details would follow.”
More… The THREE SUSPECTS WERE ARRESTED FOR HARBORING/AIDING BOSTON MARATHOJN BOMBING SUSPECTS AFTER THE FACT. WILL BE FEDERAL CHARGES. CBS.
UPDATE: The three people were connected to Dzokhar Tsarnaev, 19, the surviving bomb suspect, at the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth, where Tsarnaev was a student. They allegedly helped him after the bombing, a different source told the Globe.
UPDATE: Azamat Tazhayakov and Dias Kadyrbayev from Kazakhstan were classmates of bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. They posed with him in Times Square.
New Boston Suspects Drove Black BMW with ‘Terrorista #1´ License Plate

The Third Alleged Accomplice Accused of Aiding Dzhokhar Tsarnaev Is Robel Phillipos
  The third alleged accomplice accused of aiding Dzhokhar Tsarnaev after the Boston bombings has been identified as Robel Phillipos, reports NBC News.
He's the only American among the alleged accomplices, the other two being Kazakh nationals who were previously detained on immigration charges. While he is charged with making false statements, the other two are charged with disposing of a backpack full of emptied fireworks tubes that they found in Dzhokhar Tsarnaev's dorm room.
Here's what we know so far about Phillipos...
  ●  He Allegedly Lied to the Feds
Phillipos is charged with making false statements to federal agents investigating the Boston bombings. He allegedly lied by denying that he and other alleged accomplices visited Tsarnaev's dorm room on the night of April 18. For this charge he could face up to eight years in prison. He's not charged with obstruction of justice, as the two other alleged accomplices are — for allegedly disposing of a backpack full of fireworks, emptied of their gun powder.
  ●  Phillipos' parents came to the U.S. from Ethiopia and raised him in Cambridge, Massachusetts. The 19-year-old attended UMass-Dartmouth, beginning in the same year as his friend Tsarnaev.
  ●  He Claims the Fireworks Disappeared While he Was Taking a Nap
  ●  Judging by this account, Phillipos is a marketing student.
  ●  It was Phillipos who first recognized Dzhkokar Tsarneav's photo on the TV news and pointed it out to his friend, telling him to turn on the TV news.

NEWSBOY POST CONNECTS THE DOTS!!!
DON'T EXPECT MSM TO DO ANYTHING!!!

BOMBSHELL EXCLUSIVE: Saudi Arabia 'Warned the United States IN WRITING About Boston Bomber Tamerlan Tsarnaev in 2012'
  Sis, how many millions will the dinosaur media charge to cover-up this one?

 ■  Saudis developed intelligence separately from Russia, which also warned the U.S. about the accused Boston bomber
 ■  A letter to the Department of Homeland Security allegedly named Tsarnaev and three Pakistanis as potential jihadis worthy of U.S. investigation
 ■  Red flags from Saudi Arabia to have included Tsarnaev's name and information about a planned explosive attack on a major U.S. city
 ■  Saudi foreign minister, national security chief both met with Obama in the oval office in early 2013

UK's Daily Mail -- By David Martosko and The American Media Institute -- The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia sent a written warning about accused Boston Marathon bomber Tamerlan Tsarnaev to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security in 2012, long before pressure-cooker blasts killed three and maimed hundreds, according to a senior Saudi government official with direct knowledge of the document.
The Saudi warning, the official told MailOnline, was separate from the multiple red flags raised by Russian intelligence in 2011, and was based on human intelligence developed independently in Yemen. Citing security concerns, the Saudi government also denied an entry visa to the elder Tsarnaev brother in December 2011, when he hoped to make a pilgrimage to Mecca. Tsarnaev's plans to visit Saudi Arabia have not been previously disclosed.
Was it preventable? A senior Saudi official says his country warned the U.S. about Tamerlane Tsarnaev in 2012, advising the federal government that he planned an attack on a major U.S. city.
Did she know? Janet Napolitano sits atop the Department of Homeland Security, the agency that allegedly received a detailed letter from the Saudi kingdom about Tsarnaev and three Pakistani jihadis.The Saudis' warning to the U.S. government was also shared with the British government. 'It was very specific’ and warned that 'something was going to happen in a major U.S. city,' the Saudi official said during an extensive interview. It 'did name Tamerlan specifically,' he added.  Continued >>

Update: Al Qaeda Magazine Found on Laptop of Bomber's Widow . . . Traces of Explosive Residue Found Throughout Her Home
Federal officials investigating the Boston bombings have discovered radical Islamist materials on a computer belonging to the widow of the deceased suspect, it has been revealed. Katherine Russell, 24, has repeatedly claimed through her attorney that she knew nothing about the deadly April 15 bombings allegedly set off by her late husband, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, and his younger brother, Dzhokhar. However, the discovery of al Qaeda’s Inspire magazine on Russell’s computer.  
Update: 'Jihadi Bomber' Died of Blunt Trauma after His ´Brother Ran Him Over´ and Several Gunshot Wounds
Suspected Boston Marathon bomber Tamerlan Tsarnaev died from gunshot wounds and blunt trauma to his head and torso, a funeral home revealed today. Worcester funeral home owner Peter Stefan who´s holding the body of 26-year-old Tamerlan Tsarnaev read the details from his death certificate on Friday. The certificate cites Tsarnaev´s ´gunshot wounds of torso and extremities,´ Stefan said. Tsarnaev died last month after a gunfight with authorities a few days after the deadly marathon bombing. Police have said he ran out of ammunition before his younger brother brutally dragged his body under a vehicle while fleeing the scene.   Continued >>
Update: Bombing Suspects Had Originally Planned for July 4 Attack
The suspected bombers in the Boston Marathon attack had originally intended for the plot to happen on July 4th, CBS News has learned.
According to CBS News correspondent John Miller, a U.S. official confirmed that detained suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev told authorities that the bombing was supposed to take place on the Fourth of July. The actual attack took place on April 15.
The official also said that Tsarnaev revealed that the bombs were constructed at his older brother Tamerlan's residence and that Tamerlan had brought Dzhokhar into the plot a couple of months before.
The official noted that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev had said different things at different times and that it is all subject to investigation.
In other news, the body of Tamerlan Tsarnaev has been claimed. Massachusetts Department of Public Safety spokesman Terrel Harris says a funeral home retained by Tsarnaev's family picked up his body Thursday. He has no more information.
The medical examiner determined Tsarnaev's cause of death Monday, but officials said it won't become public until his remains are released and a death certificate is filed. It was unclear on Thursday evening whether the death certificate had been filed.  Continued >>
Update: Bombing Suspects' Laptop Could Contain 'Jackpot of Intelligence'
A laptop tied to the Boston bombing suspects has been recovered and could provide important clues as authorities look into how the suspects were radicalized.
"The laptop could be critical in learning how they became radicalized and how they learned to make the bombs," Bender says. "(Investigators believe the suspects) became more religious, they became more inspired to do this attack through internet sites, perhaps by communicating with some jihadists overseas."
Jared Stern is the president of Prudential Associates, an investigations and digital forensics company in Rockville, Md. He is not working on the Boston case, but says it's not overly dramatic to say the laptop could provide a "jackpot of intelligence acquisition." "Let's face it, there is everything in the universe potentially on that drive," Stern told WTOP on Thursday.
"For over 99 percent of the population, it is nearly impossible to cloak your historic activities on your computer completely. You can do things and probably make a dent in it. But the forensic tools available to investigators these days are so powerful, you would have to engage in full-volume encryption all day every day -- you almost couldn't have a job."  Continued >>
Update: The Canadian Boxer and the Terror Recruiter Who 'Led Tsarnaev on Path to Jihad'
By Tom Parfitt (Moscow) -- A Canadian boxer who was killed while fighting with jihadists in Russia has emerged as a key contact who may have set the elder Boston bomber on his path to violent extremism.
In what could be a breakthrough in the attempt to understand how Tamerlan Tsarnaev – himself a skilled boxer – became radicalised and turned to violence, Moscow's respected Novaya Gazeta newspaper revealed his links with William Plotnikov, who was killed in a battle with security forces in the troubled southern Russian republic of Dagestan last year.
During his visit to Dagestan last year, Tsarnaev also met on several occasions a terrorist of mixed Dagestani and Palestinian parentage, who was being closely watched by the Russian security services. That man, Makhmud Mansur Nidal, had been under surveillance for six months as a suspected recruiter for Islamist insurgents fighting Moscow's rule in the region.  Continued >>
Update: U.S. Should Have Given the Jihadi Family $100,000 and Told Them to Stay Put in Chechnya
By Chris Cassidy -- The Tsarnaev family, including the suspected terrorists and their parents, benefited from more than $100,000 in taxpayer-funded assistance — a bonanza ranging from cash and food stamps to Section 8 housing from 2002 to 2012, the Herald has learned. “The breadth of the benefits the family was receiving was stunning,” said a person with knowledge of documents handed over to a legislative committee today.
The state has handed over more than 500 documents to the 11-member House Post Audit and Oversight Committee, which today met for the first time and plans to call in officials from the Department of Transitional Assistance to testify.“I can assure members of the public that this committee will actively review every single piece of information we can find because clearly the public has a substantial right to know what benefits, if any, this family or individuals accused of some horrific crimes were receiving,” said state Rep. David Linsky (D-Natick), the committee’s chairman. Continued >>
Update: Katherine Russell Tsarnaev Under Scrutiny after Female DNA Found on Boston Bomb
By Michael Daly -- When it received the bomb fragments from the attack on the Boston Marathon, the Terrorist Explosive Devices Analytical Center had processed more than 80,000 IEDs from the overseas war on terror. As they so often had with IED pieces recovered in Iraq and Afghanistan, the TEDAC technicians subjected the fragments from this domestic bombing to a series of forensic tests that included DNA. The surprise, first reported by The Wall Street Journal, came when TEDAC discovered female DNA on a fragment of a device that supposedly had been assembled and planted by the Tsarnaev brothers and nobody else. Continued >>
Update: ‘Misha’ Speaks: An Interview with the Alleged Boston Bomber’s ‘Svengali’
By Christian Caryl (The New York Review of Books) -- Today I was able to meet “Misha,” whose real name is Mikhail Allakhverdov. Having been referred by a family in Boston that was close to the Tsarnaevs, I found Allakverdov at his home in Rhode Island, in a lower middle class neighborhood, where he lives in modest, tidy apartment with his elderly parents. He confirmed he was a convert to Islam and that he had known Tamerlan Tsarnaev, but he flatly denied any part in the bombings. “I wasn’t his teacher. If I had been his teacher, I would have made sure he never did anything like this,” Allakhverdov said. Continued >>
Update: FBI Closing in on 'Misha': Agents Identify Mysterious Man Allegedly Behind Tsarnaev Radicalization
A man known as “Misha,” who is suspected of being the person who radicalized Boston Marathon bomber Tamerlan Tsarnaev, has apparently been identified by the FBI. Misha, a red-bearded, 30-ish Armenian-American Christian who had converted to Islam, apparently became the Rasputin-like figure who spent hours indoctrinating Tsarnaev, once even visiting the family home. Tsarnaev’s uncle, Ruslan Tsami said: “It started in 2009. And it started right there, in Cambridge. This person just took his brain. He just brainwashed him completely.” After being swayed by Misha, Tsarnaev stopped his plans to attend music school saying Islam frowned on music, and gave up boxing. Continued >>
Update: Russia Recorded Call Between Tamerlan Tsarnaev and Mother Discussing Jihad, Failed to Tell FBI
Russian authorities secretly recorded one of the Boston bombers discussing jihad with his mother in 2011 but failed to alert U.S. security agencies, a report claims today. U.S. officials were told for the first time this week that two calls of note were discovered when the Russian internal security service, the RSB, were bugging calls at the Tsarnaevs family home in Dagestan, according to reports. The recording picked up a 'vague conversation' about jihad between either Dzhokhar or Tamerlan Tsarnaev and their mother Zubeidat, the Associated Press reported. It also picked up a phone call between the bombers' mother and a man under FBI investigation living in Southern Russia.
Update: U.S. Rep. Mike Rogers: 'More Arrests Expected, I Don’t Think This is Over’
U.S. Rep. Mike Rogers (R), chairman the House Committee on Intelligence, said yesterday he expects the feds to make more arrests in their ever-widening probe of the deadly Boston Marathon bombings. “I hear a lot of definitive statements out there that it was just these two men and it’s over, but I will tell you I hear these briefings every day, and I don’t think this is over,” he said.
´LOL THOSE PEOPLE ARE COOKED´ Tweeted the Surviving Islamic Terrorist
Just hours after the bombings, Dzhokhar ´Jahar´ Tsarnaev, the angelic-looking jihadist as depicted by MainStreamMedia's use of an old photo; joked about the fate of victims of the explosions on his Twitter account as he engaged in banter with a friend, making light of the deadly explosions that killed three and injured more than 260. In one of his many tweets, the college sophomore wrote, ´Lol those people are cooked´ likely in reference to a since deleted conversation about the events unfolding in Boston.   Continued >>
FBI: The Jihadi Brothers' Bombs Showed “Additional Training or Expertise”
  The Jihadi Brothers, Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev

By Ed Morrissey -- The media theory over the last several days about the Boston Marathon bombing is that the pressure-cooker design came straight off the Internet and didn’t require any specific training. That assumption ignores a couple of key points even if the bomb design matched those readily available on jihadi websites, such as practice and testing, of which so far the FBI has found no evidence in the U.S.
Second, any deviation from those designs would entirely negate that kind of “lone wolf” scenario — and according to the Wall Street Journal, the FBI now believes that Tamerlan Tsarnaev had to have received assistance and/or training for the designs he used:
 ■  A Federal Bureau of Investigation analysis of the bombs used in the Boston Marathon attacks has concluded that makers of the devices had some knowledge beyond the step-by-step recipes already described by the surviving suspect in the attack.
 ■  Dzhokhar Tsarnaev has told interrogators that he and his brother used bomb-making instructions found in Inspire, an online al Qaeda magazine, according to federal officials. His brother, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, the other accused bomber, was killed during a gunfight with police in Watertown, Mass.
 ■  The FBI’s bomb experts analyzed remnants of both bombs that exploded on April 15 near the marathon’s finish line, as well as additional explosive devices that authorities said were recovered after the encounter with the suspects early on April 19.
 ■  Their early conclusion is that the bomb makers likely had additional training or expertise, in part because they deviated from two recipes in Inspire, according to a report prepared by the Terrorist Explosive Device Analytical Center and law-enforcement officials briefed on the investigation.
The analysis also determined that the explosives used were “consistent with commercial fireworks,” said the report, which was reviewed by The Wall Street Journal. Officials cautioned that the analysis was preliminary.
Boston PD found a cache of discarded fireworks on Wednesday night, many with the gunpowder removed. That would connect with the design of the bomb, although investigators have yet to link the find directly to the Tsarnaevs — yet, anyway.
This does, however, point up the importance of finding what the Tsarnaevs preferred to throw away. With one of the bombing suspects dead and the other in a prison hospital facility, investigators of the Boston Marathon terrorist attack have access to the possessions of the two Tsarnaevs. What about those items that left their possession just before the bombing? CBS News’ John Miller updated viewers on the investigation and reported that FBI agents are now searching for laptops that the two brothers discarded shortly before conducting their attack:
 ■  FBI agents picked through a landfill near the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth, where 19-year-old suspect, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, was a sophomore.
 ■  On “CBS This Morning: Saturday,” CBS News senior correspondent John Miller, a former assistant FBI director, reports the agents were looking for a couple of laptop computers that belonged to the suspects.
 ■  “One of the things in these terrorism cases, particularly, Margaret, where the issue is how did a process of radicalization occur, a lot of that occurs online,” Miller told CBS News correspondent Margaret Brennan, “particularly where they want to know was anyone else involved, was there a mastermind, was he communicating with someone overseas about it.”
 ■  Miller reports that investigators believe those answers are likely to be found in the computers.
 ■  “They believe that what they learned from the brother was that the computer was tossed just before the bombing mission, probably to conceal all that, so they’d really like to get it back,” Miller said.
Earlier, we noted the FBI’s landfill search, which was reported in the context of looking for staging areas for bomb tests. This adds another level of interest in landfills, but the FBI will need a lot of luck in finding evidence in either effort.
The search began, apparently, when Dzhokhar admitted discarding the laptops, and presumably they have a good idea where that took place. Still, actually finding the laptops would still be a challenge, and it’s at least a good possibility that the two were technically adept enough to destroy the hard drives before discarding the computers.
Speaking of technology, it’s not just discarded physical assets that investigators want to find. The FBI has found the little-known Instagram account of Dzhokhar, and preliminary information shows that he was very interested in a dead Chechen warlord and terrorist leader:
 ■  Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s Twitter account and VK Russian social networking profile have drawn heavy public scrutiny, but he left another, more hidden social media trail: a deleted Instagram account that sources close to him tell CNN once belonged to the accused Boston bomber.
 ■  The Instagram account, with the user name “jmaister1,” no longer exists, and friends of Tsarnaev say it was deleted only recently. An Instagram spokesman declined to comment on the account or disclose when the account was deleted.
 ■  CNN National Security Analyst Juliette Kayyem says the account could be significant.
 ■  “If I were an investigator right now, obviously the platform he deleted matters the most,” she said.
Indeed. The last activity they have found (so far) before Dzhokhar deleted the account took place on April 10th, when “jmaister1″ liked a picture and profile of Shamil Basayev, a long-dead Chechen warlord and terrorist. Among other items on Basayev’s resumé is the Beslan massacre, in which more than 380 people were killed, most of them schoolchildren, and hundreds more wounded.
Basayev financed and organized the terrorist attack, later bragging that it had only cost him 8,000 rubles for the whole operation. Russians put a $10 million bounty on Basayev’s head; he later died when a mine he was inspecting detonated unexpectedly. The FSB insinuated that they had a hand in the detonation.
As Kayyem correctly points out, the fact that Dzhokhar had an Instagram account is interesting, and his “like” of Basayev intriguing. Far more interesting is what they haven’t found — and why Dzhokhar went out of his way between April 10th and April 14th to delete the account. Finding their discards might end up being the quickest path to understanding the true nature of the bombers and the bombing.

Plot Thickens in Saudi National Case, and Where in the Hell is Abdul Rahman Alharbi?
  By Arnold Ahlert -- Radio talk show host Glenn Beck is continuing to investigate Abdul Rahman Alharbi, the Saudi national initially identified as a “person of interest” in the Boston Marathon bombing atrocity.
And while many on the left are ridiculing Beck’s efforts, it is difficult to dismiss the possibility that some kind of deception is being perpetrated by the Obama administration. As the rest of the media remain silent, Beck continues to release almost daily a slew of troubling revelations backed by solid evidence.
On Monday night, the radio host made no bones about where he stands. “You want to know why we have terror over and over in our streets?” Beck asked. “Saudi Arabia. It is time someone on network television says it.” He also took the media to task. “We let everyone have all of the other information because we care more about the truth, more about you getting the news,” he said. “There is not ever going to be a member of CAIR crossing this threshold to have a private meeting with me to tell me exactly what would be in my best interest. I’m not taking the meeting. We move differently here.
We are an American network, owned by an American. I am sick and tired of being told there is nothing left to see, move along,” Beck elaborated, noting that since he owns the Blaze network, he is beholden to no outside interests, or foreign (read Saudi) money.
On Tuesday, DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano added fuel to Beck’s fire. Napolitano, who refused to answer any questions about Alharbi immediately following the terror attack, engaged in this somewhat Orwellian exchange with Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA). “With regard to the Saudi student, was he on a watchlist, and if so, how did he obtain a student visa?” Grassley asked. Napolitano firmly responded, “He was not on a watch list. What happened is—this student was, really when you back it out, he was in the wrong place at the wrong time. He was never a subject. He was never even really a person of interest. Because he was being interviewed, he was at that point put on a watch list, and then when it was quickly determined he had nothing to do with the bombing, the watch listing status was removed.”
Beck kept up the pressure on Tuesday as well. He said that “more attention should be paid” to Alharbi, based on information he claims was given to him by government officials “at the highest levels,” some of whom have been “threatened with twenty years in prison…to get this information to you.” Beck dropped another bombshell on his show that night. He told his audience the DHS has “no idea” where Alharbi is currently located. He further noted that Alharbi’s student visa “only permits him to be attending school in Findlay, Ohio, but he never enrolled.”
This latter revelation is troubling. As the Boston Herald reported on April 18, “FBI and ATF agents, along with Boston cops, swarmed the 22-year-old man’s Ocean Avenue apartment Monday night, grilling his roommate for hours and removing several items in evidence bags.” Thus, some obvious questions arise. Why was a man who was supposed to be enrolled at a college in Ohio, living in an apartment in Boston? What has happened to the bags of evidence removed from his apartment? Furthermore, as Beck reasonably concluded, how can Napolitano possibly assert that Alharbi was never even a person of interest, given these two revelations?
Fox News’s Todd Starnes added to the controversy. He reported that Alharbi “had been flagged on a terror watch list and was granted a student visa without being properly vetted.” Starnes went further. “A source close to the investigation revealed that Abdul Rahman Ali Alharbi had been deemed inadmissible under the section of the Immigration and Nationality Act which declares ineligible for a visa—any alien who is engaged in or is likely to engage after entry—in terrorist activity.”
Yesterday, Beck put far more credence behind the reality that Napolitano is utterly disingenuous and Starnes is onto something. After beginning with a brief review of the timeline during which Alharbi went from a “person of interest, to witness, to victim, to nobody,” the radio host presented information obtained by what The Blaze website described as a source who “directly read the original event file, and multiple government sources with knowledge of the case and files (who) contributed their knowledge.”
In short, Beck had allegedly obtained a copy of the original event file.
It was filled with bombshell after bombshell. It revealed that Alharbi was “armed and dangerous,” admitted to the country under “special advisory option usually reserved for visiting politicians, VIPs, or journalists,” and that he was granted his status “without a full vetting.” Moreover, despite officials explaining that Alharbi’s once pending deportation was due to an expired visa, the event file reveals his visa is good until 2016. It further reveals that he was admitted to the country in Boston, even as it says he is a student at the University of Findlay, in Findlay, Ohio.
Beck went further still. “When a file is created in the system, the author(s) are notified via email when it is accessed and given the email address of the person accessing, so there is a record within the government data system of who was there,” he noted. “It was amended to remove the deportation reference, then someone later went in and tried to destroy both the original event file and an amended versions. We won’t say who at this time, but copies have already been made,” he warned.
Beck explained to his audience that an event file is part of the Patriot Act, and that the designation 212 3B given to “a Saudi in the hospital” means that “you were a terrorist, you we’re engaged in terrorism, or you are about to be engaged in terrorism.” Beck further notes that once someone is designated in such a manner, “it is extraordinarily difficult to put it in, and you do not put it in, and then take it off.” According to Beck, only officials at the State Department or the National Counterterrorism Center are capable of revoking the designation.
The cover of the event file contained equally important information, including that fact that Alharbi was “an exact match” to “No Fly subject TPN#1037506192,” and that “derogatory information” reviewed and approved by two high level agents, Chief Watch Commander Maimbourg and Watch Commander Mayfield, “was found to be sufficient to request a Visa revocation.”
Then came the most damming revelation of all. “Subject has One (1) prior event #1648067.” “That means this guy doesn’t have one event,” Beck explained. “When they opened this at the hospital they found, he’s already in the system. He’s already a 212 3B. He has another terrorist event under his belt.”
In closing, Beck excoriated the mainstream media. “This is what’s happening in our country. We have a media that is so out of control, that they will destroy anyone who stands up and says, ‘Americans are in danger. By both parties, by all people involved. It is not an American that is doing this, it is an American that is protecting the country that is shipping terror into our country.”
He also addressed the public. “I want you to know you should have great hope. You should have great pride. There are people who are risking everything to bring you this information. They are stunned and angry at how many journalists will not report this story. There are other journalists that have actually filed reports, and the corner offices…have spiked them with no reason given.”
“I will tell you that CAIR, the Muslim Brotherhood and this administration play for keeps. Anybody who reports on this information is in danger…”
Beck’s revelations will undoubtedly be taken seriously by some, and completely dismissed by others, mostly in the mainstream media and progressive circles. But there is one question Beck asks for which every concerned American should demand an answer from this administration:
Where is Abdul Rahman Alharbi?

Glenn Beck’s Latest Revelations on Saudi National Once a ‘Person of Interest’ in Boston Bombings
  What in the Hell Is Michelle Obama Doing Visiting Saudi That Is 'On the Terrorist Watch List'
By Erica Ritz (The Blaze) -- For the past week, Glenn Beck has been investigating a Saudi national once identified as a "person of interest" in the Boston Marathon bombing. The story has taken a number of alarming twists and turns, but on his radio program Wednesday, Beck released some of the most interesting information yet.
But first, here are a few background points on how the case developed:
■  A Saudi national originally identified as a "person of interest" in the Boston Marathon bombing was set to be deported under section 212, 3B -- "Security and related grounds" -- "Terrorist activities" after the bombing on April 15
■  TheBlaze received word that the government may not deport the Saudi national -- identified as Abdul Rahman Ali Alharbi -- as the story gained traction on April 18.
■  Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano refused to answer questions on the subject by Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-SC) on Capitol Hill on April 18, saying the inquiry was "so full of misstatements and misapprehension that it's just not worthy of an answer."
■  An ICE official said April 18 that a different Saudi national is in custody, but that he is "in no way" connected to the bombings.
■  Key congressmen of the Committee on Homeland Security request a classified briefing with Napolitano on April 22
■  New info provided to TheBlaze reveals Alharbi's file was altered on the evening of April 17 to disassociate him from the initial charges
■  Sources say April 22 that the Saudi's student visa specifically allows him to go to school in Findlay, Ohio, though he appears to have an apartment in Boston, Massachusetts. A DHS official told TheBlaze Alharbi properly transferred his student visa to a school in Massachusetts

■  TheBlaze sources reveal April 22 that Alharbi was put on a terror watchlist after the bombing, and Napolitano confirms he was on a "watchlist" April 23.

On his radio program, Beck began with an overview of how the case unfolded, noting that Alharbi has rapidly gone from "person of interest, to witness, to victim, to nobody."
Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano even said yesterday that Alharbi was just "in the wrong place at the wrong time" and was "never a subject," after ridiculing inquiries into the matter last week.
But Wednesday, Beck presented new information after a Blaze source directly read the original event file, and multiple government sources with knowledge of the case and files contributed their knowledge.
Napolitano could serve "jail time for perjury," Beck declared, and she will be "the first to fall."
Here are a couple of new points, as Beck related them:

■  At the time the event file was created for Abdul Rahman Ali Alharbi, it indicated he was "armed and dangerous"
■  Alharbi was admitted into the country under a "special advisory option," which is usually reserved for visiting
politicians, VIPs, or journalists. The event file cover page indicates he was granted his status without full vetting.
■  One of the first excuses given by law enforcement when confronted about Alharbi's pending deportation was an expired visa. But according to the event file, his visa is good until 11-NOV-2016.
■  The event file indicates he entered the U.S. on 08/28/12 in Boston, MA but says he is a student at the University of Findlay, in Findlay, Ohio. He has an apartment in Boston, and doesn't seem to have been a full-time student in Ohio.
■  When a file is created in the system the author(s) are notified via email when it is accessed, and given the email address of the person accessing, so there is a record within the government data system of who deleted them. It was amended to remove the deportation reference, then someone later went in and tried to destroy both the original event file and an amended versions.
■  Copies had already been made.
■   The original event file was reviewed and approved by two high level agents - Chief Watch Commander Maimbourg and Watch Commander Mayfield.
Certainly, a litany of questions remain.
Was Alharbi considered "armed and dangerous" before the Boston bombing, or at it? Was it related to something they found at his apartment? Was his prior "event" from the days prior, at the bombing, or was it from an earlier period in his life?
Moreover, how was he admitted into the country under a "special advisory option?" How many students receive that privilege, particularly without property security clearance?
In Beck's estimation, the entire situation at the least amounts to an alarming lack of transparency, and at the worst, an abuse of power and cover-up.
"This is not about this one guy," Beck noted, "but by the way -- where is this extraordinarily dangerous man? Ask that question, you're not going to like the answer."
"That's what TheBlaze is releasing today," he continued. "Once they explain away all of this, if you want to continue to discredit me, you will discredit yourself but more importantly, you will put the citizens of this country at stake."
What in the Hell Was Abdul Rahman Ali Issa Al-Salimi Al-Harbi Doing Visiting the White House Several Times Since 2009
  HOLY CRAP – Saudi student Abdul Rahman Ali Issa Al-Salimi Al-Harbi was injured in the Boston Marathon Bombings.
He was once a “person of interest” in the bombings.
He was put on a terror watch list after the bombings.
Michelle Obama visited al-Harbi in the hospital last week.
He posted pictures on his Facebook page:
Then there’s this… Abdul Rahman Al-Harbi has visited the White House several times since 2009.
Of course, the White House will say it was another “Abdul Rahman Al-Harbi.”

T I M E L I N E:
April 15: Saudi college student Abdul Rahman Ali Alharbi is seen near the Boston marathon finish line with two other Saudis. He’s tackled after fleeing the scene of one of the bombings. Authorities question him.
April 15: FBI agents search Alharbi’s apartment, leave with bags of evidence. He’s described as a “person of interest” in attacks.
April 16: Secretary of State John Kerry secretly meets with the Saudi foreign minister, locking out reporters who initially were told the meeting would be open.
April 16: Saudi ambassador phones several papers and insists neither Alharbi nor any Saudi nationals are involved in the bombings. Saudi officials visit the well-connected Alharbi at a Boston hospital.
April 17: Officials clear Alharbi, who’s reportedly related to al-Qaida Gitmo detainees, as a person of interest.
April 17: FBI ID from photos and videos two Mideast-looking men with bags scouting scene of bombings and circulate them among law enforcement. AP, CNN and even Boston Globe report one arrest has been made. CNN describes suspect as “dark-skinned male.” Media swarm Boston courthouse for arraignment.
April 17: Obama has sudden unscheduled meeting with the Saudi foreign minister at White House.
April 17: Justice Dept. scolds CNN for arrest report. FBI cancels press conference. Courthouse bomb scare.
April 17: Terror expert Steve Emerson reports ICE has been ordered to “deport” Alharbi for “national security” reasons, out of reach of FBI questioning.
April 18: Napolitano denies Alharbi will be deported.
April 18: Obamas Visit Boston Marathon Bombing Victims At Hospitals
Saudi Government Lists Six Members of the "Al-Harbi Clan" as Active Fighters in Al-Qaeda and Five Detainees at Gitmo
#15 Badr Saud Uwaid Al-Awufi Al-Harbi
#73 Muhammad Atiq Uwaid Al-Awufi Al-Harbi
#26 Khalid Salim Uwaid Al-Lahibi Al-Harbi
#29 Raed Abdullah Salem Al-Thahiri Al-Harbi
#43 Abdullah Abdul Rahman Muhammad Al-Harbi (leader)
#60 Fayez Ghuneim Humeid Al-Hijri Al-Harbi
Gitmo Detainees:
Salim Salman Awadallah Al-Sai’di Al-Harbi
Majid Abdullah Hussein Al-Harbi
Muhammad Abdullah Saqr Al-Alawi Al-Harbi
Ghanem Abdul Rahman Ghanem Al-Harbi
Muhammad Atiq Uwaid Al-Awfi Al-Harbi

Crickets from
ABCBSNBCNNYTWPBSNPRLAT!!!
Crazy Joe Biden should be warming up in the bullpen!!!


Terrorist Dzhokhar Tsarnaev Captured Alive



Viewing Photo of Dead Suspect Cathartic for Some
Law Enforcement Officers
His mouth is agape. His face is awash in blood. On his right side is a wide gash where doctors cut him open to try to start his heart and save his life.
The image of Tamerlan Tsarnaev, dead and naked on a slab, snapped by an unknown person, was emailed repeatedly by law enforcement officers Friday morning.
"Suspect 1" was written above the gruesome picture.
Seeing a photo of one of the Marathon bombing suspects dead was cathartic, said one law enforcement official who saw the picture.  Continued
suspect 1 dead  |  pictures of dead suspect 1  |  suspect 1 dead photo
WARNING: EXTREMELY GRAPHIC!!!!     Terrorist Tamerlan Tsarnaev Dead PHOTO 1  |  Terrorist Tamerlan Tsarnaev Dead PHOTO 2


How doctor's daughter became the Muslim convert widow of Boston bomber: Terrorist husband 'brainwashed' her and she gave up her dreams of college to have his baby at 21
  Katherine Russell Tsarnaev — Jihadi's wife/widow
■  Schoolfriend tells MailOnline how Katherine Russell had dreams of joining the Peace Corps - but was 'totally transformed' by Tamerlan Tsarnaev
■  'She was this All-American girl who was brainwashed by her super-religious husband. Nobody understands what happened'''

UK's Daily Mail -- Katherine Russell, the widow of Boston bomb suspect, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, was 'an all-American girl who was brainwashed' by her extremist husband according to one schoolfriend.
Today MailOnline has gained the first glimpse and pictures of the early life of the woman who, according to those who knew her best, was 'totally transformed' by Tsarnaev.
At high school her personal motto was 'Do something about it or stop complaining'. She dreamed of going to college and joining the Peace Corps.
She urged her friends to 'lighten up and enjoy the small things,' in life.
Instead she met Tsarneav, 26, a disenfranchised man who came to America from his troubled homeland of Chechnya who rapidly had her in his thrall.
By the time she was 21 she had married him and borne his child, Zahara, now three. She had converted to Islam, hidden her tumble of chestnut hair beneath the hijab and undergone a change so profound that today few friends profess to truly understand it.
Yesterday Katherine, who has been staying at her parents’ home in Rhode Island, returned to the Cambridge, Massachusetts home which she shared with her late husband.
Dressed in a leopard print hijab she darted into the white shingle house to collect some belongings and her pet cat while her daughter waited in the car. Continued

ABC Report: Boston Bombing Terrorist Dzhokhar Tsarnaev Is Responding to Questions in Writing
Boston Marathon bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is awake and responding sporadically in writing to questions, authorities said. Investigators are asking about other cell members and other unexploded bombs, law enforcement sources told ABC News.
Previously officials said Tsarnaev was in no condition to be interrogated.
Tsarnaev, 19, is being treated at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston, where he is listed in serious but stable condition, with wounds to the neck and throat area, according to sources.
The bombing killed three, including a young boy, and wounded about 170. An MIT officer was allegedly killed by Tsarnaev and his brother Tamerlan and a Boston transit cop was badly wounded in a subsequent shootout.
The FBI is still collecting evidence from the Monday's blast site, mainly from the sides of buildings and the bleachers.
Boston Police Commissioner Ed Davis in a news conference Sunday that the circuit board to at least one of the bombs had wires crudely soldered to it and is confident ATF agents will put that bomb back together piece by piece and tell us what it was made of.
Engineers are also checking the structural integrity of buildings near the scene before it fully reopens. Boston Police plan to start returning personal items to people who left behind their things on Monday.
Boston Mayor Thomas Menino said it is time for the city to move forward. "I'm working hard over the last several days develop a plan to reopen Boyleston Street now the most famous street in the world," Menino said at the Sunday news conference.

FBI Hunting 12-Strong Terrorist "Sleeper Cell" Linked to Brothers Tamerlan and Dzhokhar
UK's Daily Mirror -- The FBI was last night hunting a 12-strong terrorist “sleeper cell” linked to the Boston marathon bomb brothers. Police believe Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev were specially trained to carry out the devastating attack. More than 1,000 FBI agents were last night working to track down the cell and arrested a man and two women 60 miles from Boston in the hours before Dzhokhar’s dramatic capture after a bloody shootout on Friday. A source close to the investigation said: “We have no doubt the brothers were not acting alone. The devices used to detonate the two bombs were highly sophisticated and  Continued

Zubeidat Tsarnaeva: “I Don’t Care if My Youngest Son Is Killed. I Will Say Allahu Akbar!”
Owner: Bomber bought fireworks from my store
Tamerlan Tsarnaev and Family Received Welfare
Sen. Chambliss: Intelligence May Have Known About Bombings in Advance
UK's Guardian: Boat Where Dzhokhar Tsarnaev Hid 'Looked Like Swiss Cheese' After Shootout
UK's Daily Mail: Bombing suspect 'tried to kill himself as throat wound reveals he 'put gun in his mouth and fired'
UK's Daily Mail: FBI under growing pressure for missing signs..Russia raised alarm at 'radical ties' in 2011
UK's Daily Telegraph: Boston bomber's US citizenship bid 'rejected after background check'
UK's Daily Mail: Eldest Boston bomber was thrown out of his mosque for 'raged filled rant' against Martin Luther King
Pair 'Specially Trained' for Attack
'No Doubt Brothers Not Acting Alone'
Two from Kazakhstan Taken in Custody
Brothers from Russia region near Chechnya
REPORT: Int'l ties, military experience, in U.S. a year
Police officer shot dead on MIT campus
Bombs strapped to chest, men robbed 7-Eleven
Chase after carjacking; suspects threw explosives at cops

‘BARACK YOU MY DAWG’: Election Tweets and Retweets from Jihadi Dzhokhar Tsarnaev's Account
Multiple news outlets are reporting that @J_tsar is the Twitter handle of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, suspect in the Boston Marathon bombing. As Twitchy reported, the tweets on the account are chilling and one appears to indicate he was a 9/11 truther (something his aunt might endorse). Tweets and retweets sent from the account on Nov. 6 and 7 seem to suggest Tsarnaev was disenchanted with politics, but supportive of Obama and pleased with the president’s victory.
So … your average right-wing Tea Party type -- NOT!!  The Democrats and their MainStreamMedia accomplices are not happy!  Continued >>

Surveillance Image of the Boston Suspect Moments Right Before He Was Captured
  Moments before he was captured by authorities Friday night, this is a surveillance image of Boston Marathon bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, 19, as he was climbing out of the boat where he had likely been hiding for hours. It appears dummy rounds were used so Tsarnaev would use up his remaining ammo, allowing him to be taken alive.

Amazing New Details from the Chase for the Boston Bombers
The police chief of the Watertown police department shares amazing new details of the chase for the Boston bombings suspects from Thursday night into Friday evening:
The police chief, Edward Deveau, describes how cops nearly apprehended the older suspect, and were placing handcuffs on him in the middle of the street Thursday night, when the younger suspect came at officers in a carjacked SUV.
The cops were able "to dive out of the way," and the younger suspect then continued to drive directly over his brother and dragging him through the street. That's how the older suspect died, according to the police chief.
The younger suspect eventually dumped the SUV and ran into the darkness of the night, according to the police chief. It took nearly 18 hours and massive manhunt to find the younger suspect. He gave himself up after a 20-minute negotiation with the FBI, he said, but not before the suspect fired more rounds at the authorities.
The bombers were armed with "pipe bombs and explosives," some of which appear to have been homemade hand-grenades. They had "at least 6 bombs, if you will," says the chief. They also had a some guns.
The chief also says that "there was a major explosion in the middle of the gun fight" between officers and the suspects, Thursday night, when a pressure cooker bomb, like the ones used in the Boston Marathon bombings, went off in the residential area. The interview with the police chief took place today on CNN.

What We Know About Boston Marathon Bomb Suspects Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev
Multiple sources have identified Dzhokhar A. Tsarnaev, 19, as the remaining suspect in the Boston marathon bombings.
His brother, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, 26, has been identified as the first suspect and died overnight following a firefight with police.
NBC News' Pete Williams said earlier Friday morning that the two suspects likely had "foreign military training," and had been in the country for about a year.
Later he said they were brothers, and added, "They were legal permanent residents. They were in this country legally, at least a year. They appear to be from Turkey, possibly Chechens from Turkey. That seems to be the nationality here." [That would likely make them Sunni Muslims, the dominant sect from that area]
Just before 7 a.m. Friday morning, the Associated Press confirmed Williams' reporting and naming Tsarnaev. Born July 22, 1993, according to Williams, Tsarnaev attended Cambridge Rindge and Latin School and has a Massachusetts drivers' license.
The brother, although NBC initially reported he was 20, was 26 and named Tamerlan Tsarnaev. He died overnight in the firefight with police, suffering from "blast and potentially gunshot wounds ...probably a blast injury [and] possibly shrapnel" throughout his trunk.   h/t BuzzFeed.com
Mother Jones: Dead Chechen Jihadist Tamerlan Tsarnaev Posted Video on Al Qaeda Prophecy on His YouTube Page
The deceased suspect in the bombing of the Boston marathon, which killed three and injured more than 170, appears to have posted a video extolling an extremist religious prophecy associated with Al Qaeda to his YouTube page. Tamerlan Tsarnaev, the 26 year-old brother of the second Boston bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, had a YouTube page where he posted religious videos, including a video of Feiz Mohammad, a fundamentalist Australian Muslim preacher who rails against the evils of Harry Potter. Among those videos is one dedicated to the prophecy of the Black Banners of Khurasan which is embraced by Islamic extremists — particularly Al Qaeda. Continued >>
Dead Terrorist: "I don’t have a single American friend, I don’t understand them" — UPDATE: Dzhokar’s website linked Islamist sites; UPDATE: Tamerlan pushed AQ Prophecy
Tamerlan Tsarnaev died in a shootout with Boston police earlier this morning, perhaps killed by bullets, his own IED, or the fact that his brother Dzhokar reportedly drove over him in order to plow through a police barricade after the shootout. He will live on in a photo essay taken when he competed in Golden Glove boxing. The accompanying interview raised at least a yellow flag about the isolation of Tsarnaev from his community in the essay titled “Will Box for Passport”:
Tamerlan, who studies at Bunker Hill Community College in Boston and wants to become an engineer, took the semester off from school to train for the competition.
Tamerlan fled Chechnya with his family because of the conflict in the early 90s, and lived for years in Kazakhstan before getting to the United States as a refugee.
Originally from Chechnya, but living in the United States since five years, Tamerlan says: “I don’t have a single American friend, I don’t understand them.”
If he wins enough fights… Tamerlan says he could be selected for the US Olympic team and be naturalized American. Unless his native Chechnya becomes independent, Tamerlan says he would rather compete for the United States than for Russia.
Tamerlan says he doesn’t drink or smoke anymore: “God said no alcohol.” A muslim, he says: “There are no values anymore,” and worries that “people can’t control themselves.” Continued >>
Islamist Terrorists' Momma Was Arrested for Shoplifting Last Year
  A woman believed to be the mother of Boston bombing suspects Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev was arrested last year for shoplifting at a Cambridge Lord & Taylor department store, according to a police briefing in the Natick Patch. Here's the June 13, 2012 report from the Natick Police: 7:42 p.m.: Loss prevention from Lord & Taylor called to report they had detained a shoplifter. Zubeidat K. Tsarnaeva, 45, of 410 Norfolk St., Apt. 3, Cambridge, was arrested and charged with larceny over $250.  Continued >>
Islamist Terrorists' Daddy Warns: ' Hell Will Break Loose' if Son Dies
The father of suspected Boston Marathon bomber called on his son today to give up peacefully, but warned the U.S. that if his son is killed "all hell will break loose." Anzor Tsarnaev spoke to ABC News from his home in the Russian city of Makhachkala as Boston police carried out an intense dragnet for his son Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, 19, survived a running gun battle with police during the night that left an MIT security officer dead and a Boston cop badly wounded. His older brother died in the shootout.  Continued >>
Jihadi Bombers ("Sweet Boys") Were Members of Wahhabi Cell Funded by Saudi Al Qaeda
Two Chechen brothers from Dagestan, members of a Wahhabi cell funded by Saudi al Qaeda, were identified as the terrorists who detonated two bombs at the Boston Marathon last Monday and carried out a bombing-shooting spree at the MIT campus in Waterton outside Boston, Friday, April 19, in which a police officer was killed in a fiery firefight. The media is criminally silent on this. Instead they are talking about what a "good, sweet boy" he is. Abominable. Two Dagestani brothers nembers of Chechen Wahhabi cell identified as responsible for Boston terror DEBKAfile Special Report April 19, 2013, thanks to  Continued >>

Student Who Married Jihadi Tamerlan Tsarnaev and Had Daughter with Him after Converting to Islam at College
• Slain Chechen terror suspect Tamerlan Tsarnaev was married to middle class college student Katherine Russell, 24.
•The couple have a three-year-old daughter called Zahara
• Tamerlan spent every weekend with Katherine's family at their suburban Rhode Island home
• Bomber's aunt says: 'He has a wife in Boston and from a Christian family, so you can't tie it to religion...he found his love, he married, he had a daughter, and he was very happy about his daughter.' Boston terror suspect Tamerlan Tsarnaev has a three-year-old daughter with a middle-class college student who converted to Islam, MailOnline can reveal. Convert: A woman believed  Continued >>

FBI RELEASES VIDEOS & PHOTOS OF 2 SUSPECTS
We can confirm the Black Hat is a Bridgestone Golf B330 and the White Hat may be a Ralph Lauren Polo cap.
 Dzhokhar A. Tsarnaev, 19 (Above right)



A PO'ed Obama Lashes Out: Lyin' Prez Pushing Bogus Statistic Says Gun Lobby ‘Willfully Lied’
  Watch Unhinged Obama Throw a Tantrum (1:40)
Twitchy (w/comments) -- President Obama gave the Senate a scolding in the Rose Garden this afternoon, declaring today’s defeat of the Manchin-Toomey background check amendment “a pretty shameful day for Washington.” He blamed “politics” for the failure of the legislation and, while standing alongside Gabby Giffords and tearful Newtown families, dismissed charges that he had used people as props for “emotional blackmail.” >>>
CHEERS!  Senate Kills Major Gun Legislation
Much of the drama has already dissipated; most of these amendments will fail. The Toomey/Manchin bipartisan compromise appears to be dead in the water, with Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-NH) and Sen. Heidi Heitkamp (D-ND) pounding home the final legislative nails earlier today. USA Today has a useful primer on what to expect this afternoon and evening, including the items liberals will be watching most carefully: The Public Safety and Second Amendment Rights Protection Act (Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., and three co-sponsors): The compromise background check provision expands background checks to gun shows and Internet sales, but exempts family-to-family >>>

Exploitation-Я-Us: Obama Using Newtown CT Familes as 'Human Shields' with Assault Legislation on 2nd Amendment — Nobody Exploits Victims Like the Obamas!
  Let me see if I’ve got this right: We now know that NoKo has the capacity to put nuclear warheads on missiles (i.e. start WWIII), but Congress is focused on eliminating infringing, or as Obama says, "placing common-sense limitations on American’s 2nd Amendment rights?" I guess that makes sense.
First up, Joey Biden, with his own explanation for why people want guns:
“It used to be we were dealing almost exclusively with hunters," Biden said. "There’s a whole new sort of group of individuals now who, I don’t know what the numbers are, that never hunt at all, but they own guns for one of two reasons: self protection or they just like the feel of that AR-15 at the range." "They like the way it feels. You know, it’s like driving a Ferrari.”
Unfortunately he seems to be getting his bitter-clinger stereotype mixed up with his limousine liberal stereotype.
Joey went on to argue for a mandated reduced sized magazine:
“If there had only been ten bullets in each clip, [the shooter] would have had to change the clip an additional three to five times," he said. "One of those kids would be alive. Somebody would be alive."I’m not trying to be argumentative here, butt maybe he and Big Guy would be better off just trying to ban magazines altogether. I mean, doesn’t it sound like like they’re arguing that it’s okay to kill 10 people, but anything over that is unacceptable? Where’s the common sense in that?
Meanwhile, in Chicago, Lady Moochelle was also busy demonstrating that no one’s too big, no one’s too small to exploit if it’s something we really believe in:
She took a rare step for any first lady into the legislative fight of the hour, saying her husband, President Obama, is “fighting as hard as he can, and engaging as many people as he can, to pass common-sense reforms to protect our children from gun violence.” “These reforms deserve a vote in Congress,” she said.
Because filibustering is only okay if you are a Democrat, which on it’s face proves that you are representing the majority view of the country, not just getting in the way of it.
Note to self: remind Lady Moochelle to register as a lobbyist within 45 days Hoo-wee! I think Hillary better watch her back. She might just get scooped by another Obama in 2016 – I mean, tears, and everything! This looks like a real throw down from where I’m sitting.
But back to the business at hand; as you know, the Senate bowed to MO’s awesomeness and went ahead to pass the gun bill.
Anyway, now that Lady Moochelle is an official lobbyist, maybe she could get the Senate to pass the tabled resolution honoring Lady Thatcher, our staunchest ally in the fight against the evil empire. Oh, I forgot; the Dems don’t really believe in fighting evil unless it is the domestic Republican variety.
And closing the week on a high note: Look! Lady Moochelle is finally getting the Medal of Honor ceremonial clothing right. Except for the fit of course, and the shoes, but hey! We’ve come a long way baby!
Latest Nauseating Stunt: Obama to Hand Mic to Newtown Victim's Mom for Weekly Radio Address
President Barack Obama typically gives the talk, focusing on a topic that's in the news or a policy the White House is pushing. This week, Obama has asked Francine Wheeler to deliver the address instead. Wheeler and her husband, David, lost their 6-year-old son Ben in the December schoolhouse shooting in Newtown, Conn.
Karl Denninger Rant: Obama And Francine Wheeler's New Low
The Market Ticker -- I rarely go after private citizens in my column. Today I'm going to make an exception and the reason is that this person inserted themselves, on their own volition, into an attempt to violate every man, woman and child's fundamental right to life. By doing so they have turned themselves into public figures and as such lose any such pretense of "privacy" in their opinion nor do they have a legitimate shield from the equally-public response by those who they offend. I speak of Francine Wheeler, specifically, who Obama trotted out this morning like a puppet to try to press for more "gun control."  Continued >>

Obama’s Plan Was Hatched at Columbia University!
 Obama Has His Mission, but Your Mission Is to Survive, Thrive, and Prosper Despite Obama's Destruction

By Wayne Root -- President Obama and I were college classmate at Columbia University, class of ’83. I know all too well how mindlessly liberal the students and faculty of that institution can be, and Barack Obama is certainly no exception. My time at Columbia made it crystal clear: liberals always believe they are morally superior.
While they publicly state that their mission is to save the world from prejudice, patriotism, racism, greed, and inequality, they are, in fact, hostile and resentful towards anyone who has achieved self-made success through American values. It is in this cesspool of intolerance that Obama and his Marxist cronies hatched a secret plan to destroy our country.
There are two things you need to know about Obama at Columbia University. First, he was Pre Law and a Political Science major- just like me. I thought I knew everyone studying Political Science during my four years at Columbia. Not Obama. I never met him, never saw him, never even heard of him. Strange. Same major, same career path, and graduated on the same day– where was he? Was he busy attending communist party meetings? No need to guess. In his autobiography he proudly admits attending Socialist Party meetings at Cooper Union in downtown Manhattan. He also admits publicly in his own book to not wanting to meet anyone at Columbia who wasn’t black, Hispanic, gay, or a Marxist professor. His words. So it’s possible he was so busy attending communist meetings and trying to avoid guys like me (white, straight, loved America) that our paths never crossed. Unlikely, but possible.
But, it’s the second thing you really need to know about Obama at Columbia. He says he graduated Class of ’83. Let’s give him the benefit of the doubt. Well then Obama had to attend the same Political Science classes as me and I can tell you, almost to a man, my classmates in the Class of ’83 proudly called themselves Marxist, communist or socialist. They bragged of being radical like a badge of honor. They openly hated America- calling it racist. They hated capitalism- and vowed to bring “the system down.”
In my class the typical Columbia political science student vowed to destroy capitalism, bankrupt business owners, and vaporize what they called “the white power structure.” For the most part these were spoiled brat white students of privilege and power. They were children of wealth, given everything on a silver platter and all they felt was anger and guilt. Their goal was to destroy their own fathers. They talked about it all day long.
So let me tell you a story. Back in 1981 I was sitting in a political science class. The president at the time was Ronald Reagan, a man reviled by the left just as viciously as any Republican is today. Suddenly our lecture was interrupted by a door swinging open violently—whereupon a breathless fellow student raced into the room screaming, “The president has been shot! They’ve just assassinated President Reagan.”
Ronald Reagan was my hero. The news hit me like a ton of bricks. I instantly felt sick to my stomach, and tears flowed down my cheeks. But it was the response of the rest of the class that I will remember for the rest of my life. They cheered. They clapped, they yelled, they high-fived, and whooped in sheer unadulterated joy.
My fellow classmates, the ones I was naively trying so hard to befriend despite their radical leftist views, were HAPPY that my hero President Ronald Reagan was dead (or so they thought). They were celebrating what they thought was the assassination of America’s president.
Incidentally, if Obama actually went to Columbia, he’d almost certainly have to have been in that class leading the cheers. Feel like you need a shower yet? Lest you think I’m exaggerating, British leftists just celebrated and cheered upon hearing of the death of Margaret Thatcher only days ago.
But wait, the most frightening and eye-opening is still to come. You see political science students at Columbia were taught a detailed plan designed by
two former Columbia professors named  Cloward & Piven Strategy — Richard Andrew Cloward (1926–2001) and Frances Fox Piven (b. 1932) to bring down “the system,” destroy capitalism, and turn America into a socialist state.
We discussed it in class, wrote about it, and debated it outside class. It was our #1 topic for four years.
The plan was revolting, but brilliant. Cloward & Piven taught that America could only be destroyed from within. Only by overwhelming the system with debt, welfare, and entitlements could capitalism and the America economy be destroyed. So the plan was to make a majority of Americans dependent on welfare, food stamps, disability, unemployment, and entitlements of all kinds. Then, under the weight of the debt, the system would implode and the economy collapse, bankrupting business owners (i.e. conservative donors). Americans would be brought to their knees, begging for big government to save them. Voila – you’d have a new system- socialism!
Sound familiar?
Lo and behold, one of my classmates was elected as President and it’s clear as a bell that he is using that plan to destroy America, capitalism, and the U.S. economy right in front of our eyes. It’s the exact plan hatched at Columbia University in our college days. Exact in every way.
Under Obama, 660,000 Americans dropped off the job rolls…just last month. 90 million working-age, able-bodied Americans are no longer in the workforce. 90 million. The workforce participation rate is the lowest since 1979. For men it’s the lowest since 1948 (when record keeping began).
Almost 50 million Americans are on food stamps (20% of all eligible adults). 14 million are on disability. Millions more are on welfare, unemployment, housing allowances, aid to dependent children, or 100 other free government programs. Now, add in free healthcare plus 22 million government employees. Record-setting numbers of Americans are emptying their retirement accounts to survive. Student loan debt is a national disaster- with defaults up 36% from a year ago. 16.4 million Americans live in poverty…in the suburbs. Every day under Obama the private sector shrinks, while the government grows like a toxic malignant tumor.
Obama promised to cut the deficit in half; instead he gave us five consecutive trillion dollar deficits. He promised to spend responsibly; instead he became the biggest spender in world history. He called Bush’s $4 trillion in debt over 8 years reckless, then proceed to pile on $6 trillion in only 4 years. He swore to be on the side of small business, but he added 6,118 new rules, regulations and mandates in just the last 90 days. He claimed taxes are low, yet he just raised taxes to the same level as bankrupt EU countries like Greece, Spain, Italy and France. Our federal income taxes are now far higher than former Soviet Republics.
Folks, this is Cloward & Piven. This is Karl Marx, who despised the middle class and vowed to wipe it out. This is  Saul Alinsky (Obama’s mentor) who dedicated his book (Obama’s favorite book) to Lucifer, the devil.
This is no accident, or the work of an economically inept liberal. This is a purposeful plan to drown the nation in debt and hook a majority to government handouts, happening in front of our eyes. It’s crystal clear Obama’s plan was hatched in our college days, at Columbia, Class of ’83.
While I never met Obama at Columbia, I can certainly put him at the scene of the crime. He either went to Columbia, or he didn’t. If he didn’t, he’s a fraud. If he did, he knew the Cloward & Piven plan like the back of his hand. He studied it and his goal- like almost all my classmates- was to use it to bring down the U.S. economy and destroy capitalism to create what they consider to be “equality, fairness and social justice.”
Why would anyone want to purposely collapse the economy you might ask? Saul Alinsky taught the ends justify the means. A bankrupt America wipes out the middle class and small business. That wipes out the majority of donors to conservatives causes- meaning Obama has no opposition. It creates “equality”- by putting everyone on equal footing (shared misery). It causes panic- and in panic, voters often make hasty decisions- like choosing big government to save them.
The destruction and devastation we see happening right now is classic Cloward & Piven. It’s the plan we learned, studied, and discussed day and night at Columbia. This is no coincidence. This is the Marxist attack from within. This is a purposeful attempt to take down the economy, collapse the middle class, wipe out small business, bankrupt the wealthy (conservative donors), and addict the country to big government Nanny State socialism.
And it’s working. Obama has been working on his plan for 30 years (our 30th Columbia class reunion is next month). Now it is time for us to get to work. As I explain in my brand new book, “The Ultimate Obama Survival Guide,” all success, all progress, all the miracles in this world are based on heart, on spirit, on will and on the power of being relentless. We are all going to need to muster the power of relentless to defeat Obama and his socialist game plan. We’re going to need to overcome the damage Obama has done to our economy…and our children’s future. It’s time for battle. Go create your own Booming Personal Economy. Go protect your family. Go take back this country. Your mission is to survive, thrive, and prosper despite Obama.
Wayne Allyn Root is a Capitalist Evangelist, serial entrepreneur, and Libertarian-conservative media commentator. He is a former Libertarian vice presidential nominee. He serves as Executive Vice Chairman of the Conservative Caucus in Washington DC.
Wayne’s latest book is out on April 15, 2013: The Ultimate Obama Survival Guide: How to Survive, Thrive and Prosper During Obamageddon

Jay-Z (aka Shawn Corey Carter) Raps About Cuba Trip — "Obama Said, ‘You Gonna Get Me Impeached'"
  President Barack Obama told Jay-Z he was worried the rapper's controversial trip to Cuba would cost him the White House ... this according to Jay-Z.
Hova just released a new rap, in which he addresses all of the drama surrounding his trip to Cuba last week with his wife Beyoncé (aka Giselle Knowles-Carter).
In the song, titled "Open Letter," Jay says ..."Politicians never did s**t for me ... except lie to me, distort history.”
He continues, "Obama said chill ‘You gonna get me impeached' ... We don’t need this s**t anyway chill with me on the beach.'"
The implication based on the lyric -- that Obama did something shady in helping Jay-Z and Beyonce get into Cuba and he could be in political hot water as a result.
It's a pretty believable lyric, considering how close Jay is with B.O.
There's more -- "I can turn Havana to Atlanta ... ballin’ too much they try to jam you."
“I’m in Cuba, I love Cubans. This Communist talk is so confusing.”  [Another quality rap song destined for #1]
Take this POLL: Was Obama In On It? Yes or No
66% -- Yes
34% -- No
Total Votes: 83,845
Back to Current Poll Results
LISTEN to Jay-Z's "Open Letter" produced by Swizz Beatz (aka Kasseem David Dean)
& Timbaland (aka Timothy Zachery Mosley) - 2:00 min.

We Don't Need Obama's Stinkin' Birth Certificate
  Photo similar to this was a requirement at the time
Obama momma's passport records show no picture of Barack (aka Barry) and Stanley Ann together, and no certified copy of a hospital birth certificate, both required by law

-- I have no use for Barack Obama. I don’t need a President with a history of drug abuse who puts the dreams of his father above the interests of the United States. Obama’s presidency is like a giant sinkhole, swallowing up everything we ever valued as Americans.
It’s almost an insult to our intelligence, to ask us to believe that Obama is a US citizen. He has a schizophrenic timeline of unexplained foreign travel, a list of aliases, and uncomfortable friendships with communists and hostile governments.
We can drop this debate over his birth certificate because we have something even more valuable. We have his mother’s passport files.
Stanley Ann Dunham’s passport files were obtained through the Freedom of Information Act and then posted online. (Strunk v. US Department of State)
Click Here for Stanley Ann Dunham’s Records:
When Obama was young, children traveled as an addition to their parents’ passports. Passport regulations required a photo of parent and child together, as well as a certified copy of a hospital birth certificate. State-issued IDs came much later.
If Obama was born in the United States, as everybody says, then there should be a photo of little Barack Obama with his mother, as well as a certified copy of his Hawaiian birth certificate in her file.
SURPRISE! There are no photos of little Barack Obama in the file. And of course, there is no birth certificate from any hospital in Hawaii.
I know the passport laws for children. Obama’s mother and I would be approximately the same age if she survived. I filled out the very same passport applications for my own daughter, three years after Obama’s mother took him to Jakarta. The laws were the same for both of us.
My daughter was born in an Army hospital in Japan in 1971, when my husband was in the Navy. I added her to my passport so I could bring her back to the United States.
I remember it like it was yesterday because my ex-husband complained about how complicated it was. We had to go to the hospital and get a certified copy of her birth certificate, re-take my passport photo with my daughter, crop it until it fit the requirements, and then go all the way to the US Consulate in Tokyo and stand in line. If there was anything the man hated, it was anything that cost him money or inconvenienced him.
I carried a joint passport for myself and my daughter through US Customs and Immigration in Hawaii. I can tell you from experience that if Obama’s mother tried to take her son through US Customs and Immigration in Hawaii without a joint passport for herself and her son, she would have been stopped.
The obvious question is, who took him through US Customs and Immigration and helped him board the plane in Hawaii? And who brought him back?
The only mention of little Barack Obama is when his mother tried to renew her passport at the US Consulate in Jakarta a few years later. We see evidence of that in the file.
She tried to trick the passport office. She went to the US Consulate in Jakarta and wrote “Barack Obama” in the section where you add your child. She thought, like we did, that they were going to add him to her passport, no questions asked.
They probably laughed and asked her how her son got to Jakarta without a US Passport.
When she failed to go get this Hawaiian birth certificate and retake her photo, the Passport Office crossed out his name.
She found herself stuck in Jakarta, trying to sneak her son back to the United States.
All Congress has to do is ask the Passport Legal Office to explain how Obama’s mother took him through US Customs and Immigration without a US passport. I don’t see that happening.
If there was a logical explanation, Obama should look forward to clearing his name. Or maybe we’ll get lucky, and he’ll just get on a helicopter and leave.

Sheriff Joe's Lead Investigator: High-Profile Credible Source Turns Over New Obama Identity Document Fraud Evidence: Mike Zullo Interview
 Listen to Full Interview Here: Sheriff Joe Arpaio's Lead Investigator Mike Zullo interview 4-5-2013 by WEBY Radio's Host Carl Gallups (Six 15 min. Segments - Here)

BULLET POINTS OF MIKE ZULLO INTERVIEW:
(1)  Lead Investigator for the Cold Case Posse Lt. Mike Zullo reviews his credentials.
(2)  The fraudulent birth certificate represents a crime….a felony.
(3)  “We know it was uploaded from a Mac”
(4)  A program called Preview was used just before the upload which can erase metadata…some of the data was retained however.
(5)  Other Programs used are Adobe Illustrator and Adobe Photoshop.
(6)  It was uploaded to a government server.
(7)  Biggest fraud committed in American history.
(8)  “I have enough evidence to drive a stake in the heart of this document”
(9)  This investigation has been verified.
(10)  New evidence has been turned over to the Cold Case Posse within the last two days from other law enforcement.
(11)  The Investigation is not stopping.
(12)  People in high positions with standing have seen the evidence and others also are making arrangements to see it.
(13)  Promises have been made from people in high positions that the investigation will move forward.
(14)  The “Wheels of Justice” move slowly.
(15)  Ret. Army Lt. Col. Allen West and U.S. Rep. is aware of the evidence and cites future political aspirations as to why he refuses to pursue.
(16)  Lt. Zullo is working toward getting evidence before a DA or Attorney General.
(17)  This is an issue of National Security.
(18)  Other sheriffs are interested in the investigation.
(19)  If you or I proffered a forged birth certificate to gain access to a ballot and was elected to an office and received financial gain from that office that would be a felony offense and we would be indicted immediately.
(20)  Lead Investigator Mike Zullo shines the light on the disinformation campaign being waged in an effort to try and discredit the investigation…and of which can’t be done.
(21)  One individual fled the country because of threats.
Bullet-points provided by Pixel Patriot
Cold Case Posse Investigator Mike Zullo Exposes Author John Woodman as a 'Defunct Entrepreneur' and 'Obamabot'
John Woodman is a one time author, a self proclaimed computer expert who decided to take it upon himself to get recruited, according to CCP Investigator Mike Zullo, and write a book debunking the claims that Obama has a forged birth certificate and that he is not a natural born Citizen.
On Friday, April 5, 2013, Lt. Mike Zullo took calls from listeners for one hour on a radio program. As expected, a caller who has been revealed to be a Obama supporter called in and asked Zullo why he didn't consult with John Woodman on the criminal fraud investigation. At approximately 49:30 Mike Zullo explains why, followed by previously undisclosed information. It is a must listen!
Listen to Full Interview Here: Sheriff Joe Arpaio's Lead Investigator Mike Zullo interview 4-5-2013 by WEBY Radio's Host Carl Gallups

Entertainment Tonight Asks: "How Does It Feel to Have a Husband Who Is a Sex Symbol Like JFK and Bill Clinton?"

Michelle: "He's a Stylish Man, I Think, Who is Healthy and He’s Smart and He’s Passionate and He’s Inspiring”
ENTERTAINMENT TONIGHT: Jackie Kennedy was also one of the first to have a president -- husband -- who is kind of a sex symbol. Like, people used to look at JFK, 'Oh, he's sexy.' And then it was Bill Clinton, and now it's your husband, Barack Obama is looked upon by women across the country as a sex symbol. What do you think?
MICHELLE OBAMA: "He's got a little swag, you know. That’s OK, I’m proud of him.” Obama further flattered her husband, noting that he's “a stylish man, I think, who is healthy and he’s smart and he’s passionate and he’s inspiring. Who wouldn’t fall in love with that?” she asked. “You know? It’s OK, yeah.”

'The Greatest Basketball Player Evah, Who Passed Up Lucrative NBA Career to Be Humble Public Servant' Appears to Be a Myth — Obama Throws Up Bricks at WH Easter Roll, Makes Only 2 for 22 Shots

(At Left) POTUS on court, with kids and Washington Wizards  (At Right) Obama and Biden show old form in pick-up game.

POTUS stepped to free throw line and kids were asked to stand on opposite sides, depending on whether they think he would sink it. Most kids moved in one direction, but one boy went to the "miss" side.
"Oh, man," a stunned POTUS said, hands on hips. The boy didn't budge. And three others joined.In sharp form, POTUS released the ball. It bounced off the rim and circled it -- miss.
"Come on. Come on. Did you see that?" Obama said.
It got worse. A little while later, after playing tennis, Obama started to take shots amid the kids and pros. Miss. Miss. Off the rim. Miss. Miss. Off the rim. Airball.
He moved closer to the net. But time and again, he missed.
Of 22 shots POTUS took, he made two. (22 was general consensus of poolers)
At one point, POTUS handed a ball to a boy and asked for help. The boy made the layup."He couldn't make one. I had to help him out," said Kahron Campbell, 10, of Landover, MD. It was a sad display for a washed-up player.
Presser Jay Carney jokingly conceded that perhaps the leader of the free world needs to spend some more time on the court.
"The president doesn’t get to practice probably as much as he would like to," he said, adding "Having done a few shoot-arounds with him, he’s a pretty good shot."
When a reporter noted that there's a basketball court on the White House grounds, Carney replied, "These are busy times."

Sports Illustrated Names Obama One of the Most Powerful People in Sports

Obama cited for his prowess in Power Cycling, Power Pitching, Thunderous Gorilla Dunks, Power Walking and his avant garde Golf Attire.

44 BARACK U.S. President — [TASTEMAKER ] [WORLD POWER ] [NOBEL PRIZER] [HAS NUCLEAR CODES ] [SOCIAL SAVVY ]
Sports Illustrated has put together a list of the 50 most powerful people in sports and President Obama comes in at -- No. 44: POTUS might be the ultimate global power player, but he also wields significant influence in the Republic of Sports. One relevant riff-on his NCAA tourney picks, on his desire for a college football playoff, on his concern over permitting the sons that he doesn't have to play football-and the sports world takes notice. Plus, the 51-year-old can
shoot the J.   CLICK HERE to see SI's 50 Most Powerful People in Sports
 12
Economists: Obamacare, NOT Sequestration (And NOT Bush's Fault), Was a Factor in "Awful" March Jobs Numbers
 Employers added a disappointing 88,000 jobs in March, confirming fears of a slowdown in payroll growth that economists say could persist for several months. The number of new jobs is less than half what economists had forecast.
The unemployment rate fell to 7.6% from 7.7%, largely because 496,000 Americans stopped working or looking for work, the Labor Department said Friday in its monthly employment report.
Futures trading on Wall Street in major indexes began sinking as soon as the report was released. And investors fled to the safety of U.S. Treasury bonds, where prices soared and yields plummeted.
Former CBO director Douglas Holtz-Eakin describes the totality of the new report as "awful." Few liberal economists can muster the strength to disagree. The civilian workforce participation rate is the real story today, with nearly half-a-million Americans giving up looking for work.
Perversely, this allowed the official U-3 unemployment rate to tick down by a notch, but analysts from across the spectrum recognize that result as fool's gold. The participation rate is now a paltry 63.3 percent, the lowest it's been since 1978.
This is a very disappointing report, which Obama cheerleaders will try to blame on his sequester cuts -- which, in turn, they'll try to blame on Republicans. But these are pre-sequester numbers. Before the furloughs. Before any possible layoffs.
Don't ask me, ask Obama's favorite economist: "I don't think the sequester [is in these numbers] at all," says Mark Zandi, then mentions Obamacare.
That's a double gut-punch to the White House. Their go-to "independent" economist trashes their built-in excuse, then raises the specter of Obamacare (which he's been doing for the last few months).
A number of economists warning of Obamacare-related layoffs acting as a wet blanket atop our struggling "recovery." The nonpartisan CBO has estimated that Obamacare would kill 800,000 American jobs. Thanks Obama, You B* * * * *d!
Payrolls Plunge To 88K, Biggest Miss Since December 2009, Labor Force Participation Rate Sinks to 63.3%, 30 Year Low
So much for "open-ended QE driven recovery". Moments ago the March Non-farm payroll hit and it was a doozy, printing at 88K, below the lowest forecast of 100K, well below the expected number of 190K, and a tragedy compared to the February revised print of 268K (was 236K). This was the biggest miss to expectations since December 2009 and the worst print since June 2012. The unemployment rate declined to 7.6%, but this was due entirely to the collapse in the labor force participation rate, which declined by 20 bps to 63.3%, a new 30 year low. See BLS Full Report.

One in Four Americans Think Obama May Be the Antichrist, Survey Says --- but He Somehow Still Managed Enough Votes for Reelection — We Know What Happened; Voter Fraud Is ‘A Normal Political Tactic’ for the PARTY OF RATS
  UK's The Guardian -- About one in four Americans suspect that President Barack Obama might be the antichrist, more than a third believe that global warming is a hoax and more than half suspect that a secretive global elite is trying to set up a New World Order, according to a poll released on Tuesday.
The survey, which was conducted by Public Policy Polling, asked a sample of American voters about a number of conspiracy theories, phrasing the questions in eye-catching language that will have the country's educators banging their heads on their desks. The study revealed that 13% of respondents thought Obama was "the antichrist", while another 13% were "not sure" – and so were at least appeared to be open to the possibility that he might be. Some 73% of people were able to say outright that they did not think Obama was "the antichrist"
The survey also showed that 37% of Americans thought that global warming was a hoax, while 12% were not sure and a slim majority – 51% – agreed with the overwhelming majority view of the scientific establishment and thought that it was not. The survey also revealed that 28% of people believed in a sinister global New World Order conspiracy, aimed at ruling the whole world through authoritarian government. Another 25% were "not sure" and only a minority of American voters – 46% – thought such a conspiracy theory was not true.
Public Policy Polling's national survey this week took the opportunity to poll 20 widespread and/or infamous conspiracy theories. Many of these theories are well known to the public, others perhaps to just the darker corners of the internet.

HERE'S WHAT PPP FOUND:
 ■  37% of voters believe global warming is a hoax, 51% do not. Republicans say global warming is a hoax by a 58-25 margin, Democrats disagree 11-77, and Independents are more split at 41-51. 61% of Romney voters believe global warming is a hoax
 ■  6% of voters believe Osama bin Laden is still alive
 ■  21% of voters say a UFO crashed in Roswell, NM in 1947 and the US government covered it up. More Romney voters 27% than Obama voters (16%) believe in a UFO coverup
 ■  28% of voters believe secretive power elite with a globalist agenda is conspiring to eventually rule the world through an authoritarian world government, or New World Order. A plurality of Romney voters (38%) believe in the New World Order compared to 35% who don’t
 ■  28% of voters believe Saddam Hussein was involved in the 9/11 attacks. 36% of Romney voters believe Saddam Hussein was involved in 9/11, 41% do not
 ■  20% of voters believe there is a link between childhood vaccines and autism, 51% do not
 ■  7% of voters think the moon landing was faked
 ■  13% of voters think Barack Obama is the anti-Christ, including 22% of Romney voters
 ■  Voters are split 44%-45% on whether Bush intentionally misled about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. 72% of Democrats think Bush lied about WMDs, Independents agree 48-45, just 13% of Republicans think so
 ■  29% of voters believe aliens exist
 ■  14% of voters say the CIA was instrumental in creating the crack cocaine epidemic in America’s inner cities in the1980’s
 ■  9% of voters think the government adds fluoride to our water supply for sinister reasons (not just dental health)
 ■  4% of voters say they believe “lizard people” control our societies by gaining political power
 ■  51% of voters say a larger conspiracy was at work in the JFK assassination, just 25% say Oswald acted alone
 ■  14% of voters believe in Bigfoot
 ■  15% of voters say the government or the media adds mind-controlling technology to TV broadcast signals (the so-called Tinfoil Hat crowd)
 ■  5% believe exhaust seen in the sky behind airplanes is actually chemicals sprayed by the government for sinister reasons
 ■  15% of voters think the medical industry and the pharmaceutical industry “invent” new diseases to make money
 ■  Just 5% of voters believe that Paul McCartney actually died in 1966
 ■  11% of voters believe the US government allowed 9/11 to happen, 78% do not agree
Full results here

H-o-l-y J-o-k-e-s-!  Obama's Official Search Engine Forgot About Easter Sunday — Resurrected an Homage to Some Dead Hombré Named César
And No Acknowledgement of the Easter Bunny or White House 135th Annual Egg Roll Celebration
Ha! We got it! Google got the jump on April Fool's Day.  Clever!  SEE JOKE

By Ben Shapiro -- March 31 marks the birthday of National Farm Workers Association (later United Farm Workers) co-founder César Chávez. Chávez [not to be confused with the recently departed Hugo], who was trained by Saul Alinsky [Obama and Hillary were Saul's most prized disciples to the detriment of America] in the tactics of community organizing, has become a cult figure in California due to his organization of agricultural workers.
March 31 also happens to be another important date this year: EASTER. So, naturally, GOOGLE’s current logo features a graphic of Chávez’s face, rather than anything having to do with Easter.  SEE JOKE
This is not the first time that Google has chosen to honor leftists over tradition. Back on July 4, GOOGLE plastered the words “This Land Was Made For You And Me” in its logo, in honor of Communist fellow-traveler Woody Guthrie’s This Land Is Your Land. On Christmas, GOOGLE featured a holiday-themed logo that popped up this window: “Happy Holidays from GOOGLE!”
GOOGLE can, and likely will switch out to an Easter logo sometime today. But as millions of Christians return home from Easter vigil on the holiest day of their calendar, they are currently being greeted by César Chávez in a white suit.
Ben Shapiro is Editor-At-Large of Breitbart News and author of the book “Bullies: How the Left’s Culture of Fear and Intimidation Silences America” (Threshold Editions, January 8, 2013).
Obama-Google Priorities Confirmed: Obama Delivers 117 Word Statement for Easter — 664 Word Statement for Fellow Alinskyite, César Chávez
 Obama laying a rose on comrade César Chávez's grave in 2012
Read Obama's 117 word, one paragraph statement for Easter  |  Read Obama's 664 word, 12 paragraph statement for César Chávez Day

COMMENTS FROM THE BLOGOSPHERE:
Christians from all walks of life and political views expressed shock, dismay, and exasperation with Google’s diss of Easter:

Wow. Congrats Google, you've managed to alienate all Christians in America today: instead of celebrating Christ, they celebrate Cesar Chavez.
Mom said it best… "Go to hell, Google." Bing, anyone?
"Better a dead lefty, then a risen Lord."
It's not religious bigotry when it's against Christians.
"We now interrupt the international holiday already in progress with this delightfully trendy and totally informative trifle."
Google is a Marxist anti-Christian company.
When will they be doing Vladmir Lenin?
I do not use Google search engine. I use ixquick. I do not have an Android (Google) appliance. I recommend that any conservative should find alternatives to anything Google.
There’s got to be a special place in hell for socialist billionaires.
I'm surprised that Chavez' birthday hasn't been declared a national holiday by now to pander to the hispanic vote. It's a state holiday in California, Colorado, and Texas.
Google’s Doodle logo overlords sure have a way of rubbing their politics in people’s noses.
 11
The Worst of Times!  Obama Plans to Travel the Nation Rallying His Anti-Gun and Homosexual Supporters — How 'Down Low' Can He Get!

The Pink Pistols is a homosexual gun rights organization whose motto is “Armed Gays."
It's unknown whether Obama is a member because all his records are sealed.

Now that Senate Democrats have passed their first budget in four years, Washington is turning its attention away from fiscal issues this week and towards social ones.
President Obama devoted his weekly radio and internet address Saturday to pushing for more gun control in response to the mass killing in Newton, Connecticut last year. “As a nation, the last three months have changed us,” Obama said. “You – the American people – have spoken.
You’ve made it clear that it’s time to do something.” Specifically, Obama called for more background checks and an assault weapon ban. Aides told the Associated Press Obama will make additional trips outside Washington to make his case on the issue.
Back in Washington, the Supreme Court is set to here oral arguments on two same-sex marriage cases. On Tuesday the Court will hear Hollingsworth v Perry, which challenges California Proposition 8 which prohibits the state from recognizing same-sex marriage. On Wednesday the Court will hear United States v Windsor, a challenge to the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) which defines marriage as only a union of a man and a woman.
Activists from both sides have been waiting outside the Supreme Court since last week for seats at the proceedings (although there is no word on whether or not today’s snowfall dislodged them).
This upsurge in social issues that fire up his base could not come at a better time for Obama. As The New York Times reported this weekend, Obama’s advantage over Republicans on economic issues has completely evaporated in the first three months of his second term. Obama’s approval ratings have also steadily declined and, according Pew, Obama’s second term trajectory is currently much closer to that of President Bush than that of President Clinton.
Unless the economy becomes much stronger, expect many more social-issue themed speeches and campaigns like this one from the White House.

Need a Job? Looks Like You'll Have to Wait 'til Obama's Gone — CBO Says America Will Never See Full Employment Under Obama's 'Eight Failed Years'
  The Congressional Budget Office is now projecting that the U.S. economy will never achieve full employment during the eight years Barack Obama serves as president.
That would make Obama the only American president during the post-World War II era who never presided over a year in which the U.S. economy offered full employment to the American people.
The CBO defines “full employment” to be when the national unemployment rate is at or below what it calls the “natural unemployment rate.”
The natural unemployment rate, according to CBO, is the “rate of unemployment arising from all sources except fluctuations in aggregate demand. Those sources include frictional unemployment, which is associated with normal turnover of jobs, and structural unemployment, which includes unemployment caused by mismatches between the skills of available workers and the skills necessary to fill vacant positions and unemployment caused when wages exceed their market-clearing levels because of institutional factors, such as legal minimum wages, the presence of unions, social conventions, or wage-setting practices by employers that are intended to increase workers’ morale and effort.”
In a blog entry published last week, CBO Director Doug Elmendorf said “we think it will take four more years to get back close to full employment.”
In fact, baseline data CBO released last month indicate that the “natural unemployment rate” will be 5.5 percent through the rest of Obama’s presidency and that actual unemployment will never drop below 6.0 percent in any quarter between now and the end of 2016.
According to CBO, unemployment will remain above 7.0 percent through the third quarter of 2015. It will then drop to 6.8 percent in the fourth quarter of 2015, and gradually decline to 6.0 percent by the fourth quarter of 2016.
In the first quarter of 2017, when the next president is being sworn into office, the unemployment rate will drop to 5.8 percent, CBO projects. That would still be above the natural unemployment rate of 5.5 percent.
Finally, in the first quarter of 2018, according to CBO’s projections, unemployment will drop to 5.5 percent. At that point, a year after Obama has left office, the U.S. economy will finally achieve full employment for the first time since 2007.
Thus, according to CBO's projections, America will never see full employment under Obama even though the CBO has increased what it considers to be the natural unemployment rate during Obama’s tenure. From the first quarter of 1999 through the first quarter of 2008, CBO calculated that the natural unemployment rate was 5.0 percent. Thus, for the economy to achieve full employment during that nine-year span, actual unemployment had to fall to 5.0 percent or lower.
Despite this higher standard, the economy did achieve full employment on a number of occasions from 1999 through 2008. This included, on average, the entire years of 2000, 2001, 2006 and 2007.
During the tenures of each American president from Harry Truman through George W. Bush--according to the average annual unemployment rates published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the natural unemployment rate calculated by CBO--there was at least one year in which the U.S. economy achieved full employment.
To see a complete list of the average actual annual unemployment rates compared to the natural unemployment rate for the years from 1988 onward click here.

Obama May Look and Act Like Satan, but Here Are the Top Reasons Why Obama is Not Satan
 Satan: "If I had a son, Obama would certainly be the one."

The Internet is abuzz with the fact that Satan on the History Channel’s "The Bible" miniseries, which has gotten great ratings, looks a tad like Obama if Michele gets him to go on a veggies only diet. We really don’t see much resemblance but it does give us a good excuse to look at the top ten reasons why Obama is not Satan:

(1) Hell has never run a deficit.
(2) Satan, whatever his other manifest evils, has never voted present.
(3) Satan resides in Hell and Obama resides in Chicago. (A small difference we concede.).
(4) Satan is the prince of liars, while Obama is at most an archduke of liars.
(5) Satan to my knowledge has never eaten dog.
(6) Satan has never used a teleprompter as far as I know.
(7) The people of the United States have never elected Satan as President, although if God were running as a Republican and Satan as a Democrat in Cook County, I would not like God’s chances.
(8) Satan has never attempted to have the Catholic Church pay for birth control.
(9) Satan gets almost as bad press in the Mainstream Media as the Republican party.
(10) Satan does not have a second in command as dimwitted as Biden.

'Lady Liberty' Rocks It at CPAC -- Palin Mocks Li'l Bloomberg's Big Soda Ban

"We're not here to rebrand a party, we're here to rebuild the country." (Watch Video)  (Transcript)

Sarah Palin, the 2008 Republican vice presidential nominee, spoke at the Conservative Political Action Conference on Saturday and offered stark criticism of the Obama administration and used the friendly platform to poke fun at New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg's call to ban oversized sodas.
Palin had just finished speaking about the run on gun sales leading up to the Christmas holiday. She said her husband bought her a gun rack and she bought him a gun, saying, "In this go around, he's got the rifle and I got the rack."
The crowd laughed. She ducked under the podium and while the crowd was still clapping, retrieved a clear Big Gulp cup filed with soda and took a long swig. The crowd cheered some more.
"Oh, Bloomberg's not around, our Big Gulp's safe," Palin quipped. "Shoot, it's just pop, with low-cal ice cubes in it. I hope that’s OK."
Earlier this week, Manhattan state Supreme Court Justice Milton Tingling halted Bloomberg's ban on sugary drinks, writing in his opinion that the rules are "arbitrary and capricious," applying to only certain beverages and only certain stores.
Bloomberg, for his part, said the city plans to appeal, calling the ruling "clearly an error."
Palin saved her most pointed criticism for the president, likening him to Ponzi-scheme felon Bernie Madoff.
Taking a shot at the president's call for universal background checks on gun owners, she said, "Dandy idea, Mr. President -- should have started with yours."
The former Alaska governor also urges GOP to broaden message.
"We must leave no American behind," she said in a populist speech that electrified supporters at a conservative summit in suburban Washington. "And we must share our powerful message of freedom and liberty to all citizens -- even those who may disagree on some issues."
Palin has maintained a low profile during last year's election. She's expected to play a limited role in the future of the GOP but shared several recommendations Saturday.
Instead of focusing on rebuilding the Republican Party, she said that party leaders should focus on rebuilding the middle class.

Record 89 MILLION Americans 'Not in Labor Force' — 296,000 Fewer Employed Since January
  The number of Americans designated as "not in the labor force" in February was 89,304,000, a record high, up from 89,008,000 in January, according to the Department of Labor. This means that the number of Americans not in the labor force increased 296,000 between January and February.The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) labels people who are unemployed and no longer looking for work as “not in the labor force,” including people who have retired on schedule, taken early retirement, or simply given up looking for work.
The increase marks the second month in a row, after rising in January from 88.8 million in December. Those not in the labor force had declined in December from 88.9 million in November.
The nation's unemployment rate decreased to 7.7 percent in February, down from 7.9 percent in January. Overall unemployment “has shown little movement, on net, since September 2012,” the Labor Department said.
Total nonfarm payroll employment increased by 236,000 in February, according to the report.

He Should Be Proud — Obama Has Grown the Food Stamp Rolls to Record 47,791,996 in a Snap
23% People Living in Washington, D.C. Proper Are On the SNAP Program
On Friday, the United States Department of Agriculture quietly released new statistics related to the food stamps program, officially known as SNAP (the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program). The numbers reveal, in 2012, the food stamps program was the biggest it's ever been, with an average of 46,609,072 people on the program every month of last year. 47,791,996 people were on the program in the month of December 2012.
The federal government also says that in a given month in 2012, the number of households on food stamps was 22,329,713. The state with the highest average number of participants per month in 2012 was Texas, with an astonishing 4,038,440 folks drawing from the program. The second highest is California, with 3,964,221, and then Florida, at 3,353,064. Washington, D.C., with an estimated population of 617,996, had an average of 141,147 participants. Meaning, roughly 23 percent of folks living in D.C. are on food stamps, according to the numbers provided by the federal government.
Ironicaly, 7 of 10 Nation's Highest Household Income Counties Surround Washington, D.C. — It's Very Good to Be a Bureaucrat
  Twice the pay for half the work — Be rich, be a bureaucrat!
A recent USA Today column reveals that Washington is getting fat, and it does so on money taken from the rest of the country.
Just how fat have Washington and the Beltway counties gotten? According to the latest U.S. Census data, between 2000 and 2010 the richest of the Washington, D.C., area have accrued about twice as much new wealth as those not living in or around the area.
Also, some Washington counties have gotten about twice as much new wealth as some of the other richest counties in the United States.
An April 2012 Forbes article lists the 10 richest counties in the United States — the list contains five D.C.-area counties, including the top three richest on the list.
A comparison with the other richest counties and with the rest of the United States gives a more detailed picture. I compared the differences in median income (family and household) between these 10 counties and the rest of the United States, in addition to looking at income growth over the 10-year period 2000 to 2010. (All of this data that comes from the U.S. Census website)
From 2000 to 2010, the richest Washington-area counties’ income (by two income measures — defined at the end of this article) grew at about twice the rate of the rest of the country. D.C.-area income also grew at almost twice the rate as the other richest counties in the country not located in the Washington area.
Since 2000, Washington D.C. Area Wealth Grew at Twice National Average
The Washington region has emerged from the recession looking even more affluent compared with the rest of the country, boasting seven of the 10 counties with the highest household incomes in the nation, new census numbers show.
With a median household income surpassing $119,000, Loudoun County heads the list. Fairfax County, at nearly $106,000, is second. Both have held the same positions for several years running.
More surprising, Arlington County leapfrogged from the fifth spot to third, with a median household income of almost $101,000, a $6,000 gain in one year. Four in 10 households in the county are single person, leaving Arlington with a relatively small share of residents whose affluence comes from two incomes, compared with Loudoun and Fairfax.
Other counties in the top 10 are Howard, Prince William, Fauquier and Montgomery, which had dropped out of it in 2010. Among states, Maryland has the nation’s highest household income level, and Virginia is ninth.
The rankings in the 2011 American Community Survey released Thursday expand Washington’s dominance among high-income households, reflecting a regional economy that was largely cushioned as the recession yanked down income levels elsewhere.
Household incomes rose in most counties around Washington last year, even as they continued to sink around the country. The stability of an economy built on the pillars of the federal government, its legions of contractors and a flourishing high-tech sector is evident in the income rankings.
In 2007, before the recession began, five counties in suburban Washington made it into the top 10. By 2010, there were six. The seven in the latest ranking is an all-time high.
Federal Bureaucrats Remain Rich, Owe $3.5 Billion in Unpaid Taxes
WASHINGTON -- From military personnel to postal workers, federal employees are on the hook for $3.5 billion in unpaid 2011 taxes, according to a report obtained by WTOP. The amount is a nearly 3 percent increase compared to the year before. About 312,000 employees owe the government a total of $3,519,410,517, according to the Federal Employee/Retiree Delinquency Initiative (FERDI) released on March 8 by the IRS. The total number of delinquent workers dropped between 2009 and 2010 but jumped more than 11 percent in 2011. The number of delinquent civilian taxpayers is the highest since 2005. Roughly 9.8 million people >>>

CIA's Brennan Takes Oath on 'First Draft' Constitution — Which Excluded Protections of First, Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments — Be Afraid, Gird Your Loins!
  According to the White House, John Brennan was sworn in as CIA Director on a “first draft” of the Constitution including notations from George Washington, dating to 1787.
Vice President Joe Biden swears in CIA Director John Brennan in the Roosevelt Room of the White House, March 8, 2013. Members of Brennan’s family stand with him. Brennan was sworn in with his hand on an original draft of the Constitution, dating from 1787, which has George Washington’s personal handwriting and annotations on it.
That means, when Brennan vowed to protect and defend the Constitution, he was swearing on one that did not include the First, Fourth, Fifth, or Sixth Amendments — or any of the other Amendments now included in our Constitution. The Bill of Rights did not become part of our Constitution until 1791, 4 years after the Constitution that Brennan took his oath on.
I really don’t mean to be an asshole about this. But these vows always carry a great deal of symbolism. And whether he meant to invoke this symbolism or not, the moment at which Brennan took over the CIA happened to exclude (in symbolic form, though presumably not legally) the key limits on governmental power that protect American citizens.
Update: Olivier Knox describes how the White House pushed the symbolism of this.
Hours after CIA Director John Brennan took the oath of office – behind closed doors, far away from the press, perhaps befitting his status as America’s top spy – the White House took pains to emphasize the symbolism of the ceremony.
“There’s one piece of this that I wanted to note for you,” spokesman Josh Earnest told reporters gathered for their daily briefing. “Director Brennan was sworn in with his hand on an original draft of the Constitution that had George Washington’s personal handwriting and annotations on it, dating from 1787.”
Earnest said Brennan had asked for a document from the National Archives that would demonstrate the U.S. is a nation of laws.
“Director Brennan told the president that he made the request to the archives because he wanted to reaffirm his commitment to the rule of law as he took the oath of office as director of the CIA,” Earnest said.
Brennan Refuses to Rule Out Drone Assassinations Within the U.S.!
  Picture this circling your man cave
In a written response to this question submitted by the Senate Intelligence Committee, “Could the Administration carry out drone strikes inside the United States?” John Brennan replied, “This Administration has not carried out drone strikes inside the United States and has no intention of doing so.” This is what is known as a non-responsive answer. It is reasonable to assume that if the answer was “no,” Brennan would simply have written, “No.” Instead, in order to avoid a giving straightforward “Yes,” he answered a different question than the one that was asked. A drone attack on U.S. soil would abrogate the U.S. Constitution’s Bill of Rights and the Fifth Amendment’s guarantee that no person shall be “deprived of life … without due process of law.”
Poll: Majority of Americans Opposed to Being Killed by Drone
By Andy Borowitz (New Yorker) -- In a possible setback for the Administration’s controversial drone policy, a new poll conducted by the University of Minnesota shows that a broad majority of Americans are opposed to being killed by a drone strike on U.S. soil.
The poll, which has a margin of error of plus or minus five percentage points, showed that ninety-seven per cent of those surveyed “strongly agreed” with the statement, “I personally do not want to be killed by a drone,” with three per cent responding, “Don’t know/No opinion.”
There’s no other way to interpret these numbers,” said the University of Minnesota’s Davis Logsdon, who oversaw the survey. “The idea of being killed by a drone is not playing well out there.”
And while the poll numbers may not augur well for the Administration’s expanding use of drones, the response was even more negative in a focus group of likely drone victims.
One member of that group, a forty-three-year-old male from St. Paul, complained that “it doesn’t even seem like the government is trying to come up with alternatives to killing us with drones.”
“It seems like they could figure out some kind of system where instead of just being killed by a drone, people could maybe present evidence to see if they’re guilty or not,” he said.
At the White House, spokesman Jay Carney tried to make the best of the poll results, telling reporters, “Look, people are afraid of getting killed by a drone. We get that. But there is still broad public support for drones killing somebody else.” (Above post was satire)
Shock Poll: 41% of Obamabot Dems Think President Should Have Power to Kill Suspected American Terrorist on American Soil (not satire)
“ON HIS OWN.” To be clear, they think he should have the power to do this “on his own.” This is what years of screeching during the Bush era about “the unitary executive” has come to.
I feel like I should issue a correction here. Back when Rand Paul was stumping against John Brennan on grounds that he wouldn’t give a straight answer about whether the White House can order a U.S. citizen killed on U.S. soil, I argued that Brennan’s silence wasn’t a big deal because the public simply wouldn’t stand for drone attacks here and O would surely realize that. Correction: A big chunk of the public, nearly a majority, would stand for it just fine.
In an era of fierce bipartisan disagreement, those numbers are amazingly consistent. According to the DOJ’s “white paper” on targeting U.S. citizens, drone attacks are permissible only if capturing the target isn’t “feasible.” I’d argue that if you’re on U.S. soil, you’re within reach of American law enforcement and therefore, by definition, capture is feasible.
(The DOJ and The One himself have been conspicuously quiet about that.) Judging from these numbers, though, a huge chunk of the public is a lot more lax about defining feasibility than I’d be.
Serious question: Do the people who answered “yes” here think capturing Chris Dorner was “infeasible” because he was holed up in a cabin with a gun? Or have they dispensed with infeasibility as a requirement entirely and are drawing the line on domestic drone strikes simply at whether the target is suspected of being a member of Al Qaeda?
But wait. Let’s refine that last question a bit. What if, instead of asking if the United States should be able to target U.S. citizens here at home — which implies multiple agencies looking at the evidence and coordinating on a strike — we specify that the decision’s coming from the president exclusively? Suddenly, the numbers aren’t so consistent:
Behold the power of partisanship, and ask yourself what those numbers would have looked like if they had tweaked the question to name Obama. Some liberals have admitted that they’re okay with O’s drone program because they trust him personally to administer it judiciously. Rephrase this question so that it’s about him specifically and maybe you get to 50 percent among Dems.
By the way, in the most common drone-strike scenario — a suspected terrorist being targeted on foreign soil with no issue related to citizenship — fully 74 percent approve of the policy including 69 percent of self-identified liberals. Looks like Pelosi was right. For all the media heavy-breathing about drone warfare, it does seem to be popular.
Visions of Drones Swarming U.S. Skies Hit Bipartisan Nerve
New York Times -- The debate goes to the heart of a deeply rooted American suspicion about the government, the military and the surveillance state: the specter of drones streaking through the skies above American cities and towns, controlled by faceless bureaucrats and equipped to spy or kill. That Big Brother imagery — conjured up by Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky during a more than 12-hour filibuster this week — has animated a surprisingly diverse swath of political interests that includes mainstream civil liberties groups, Republican and Democratic lawmakers, conservative research groups, liberal activists and right-wing conspiracy theorists.  Continued >>


WOW! Obama's Nominee Will Be the 'First Muslim' CIA Director — And Everyone Thinks
He's Just Another 'Irish Mick Catholic'
 THE SCAR
"We made it to the top my Taqiyya Bro, but you'll be waterboarded to death if you reveal how
I got my scalp scars or my passport secrets . . . Oh, can I borrow your pocket prayer rug."

John Brennan is a Muslim Convert Who Was Turned to Islam by
the Muslim Brotherhood?

Former FBI agent, John Guandolo, who wrote the first Muslim Brotherhood training manual for the FBI, outs John Brennan, Obama’s nominee for CIA Director, as having converted to Islam while working in Saudi Arabia. Interview from Tom Trento’s radio show was taped February 8, 2013.
Listen to excerpt with John Guandolo here -- Fast forward to 10:50, ends 52 min. mark
John Brennan: Son of Irish immigrants from Roscommon, Ireland, was raised in North Bergen, New Jersey. He attended the Immaculate Heart of Mary elementary school, and graduated from Saint Joseph of the Palisades High School in West New York, New Jersey
While riding a bus to class at Fordham University, he saw an ad in The New York Times that said the CIA was recruiting, and felt a CIA career would be a good match for his "wanderlust" and his desire to do public service. He received a B.A. in political science from Fordham in 1977. His studies included a junior year abroad learning Arabic and taking Middle Eastern studies courses at the American University in Cairo. He also received a Master of Arts in government with a concentration in Middle Eastern studies from the University of Texas at Austin in 1980. He speaks Arabic fluently. Brennan was Chief of Station in Riyadh in 1996.
Listen to John Brennan speak about the beauty of Islam - 3:41 min.
John Guandolo: Former FBI agent, counterterrorism expert, and commander of the FBI Hostage Rescue Team collaborates on a wide variety of educational, training, and consulting objectives through Strategic Engagement Group, Inc., where he works as Vice President of Strategic Planning and Execution.
Following receipt of his B.S. in Engineering from the United States Naval Academy, John Guandolo received commission as an officer and embarked on a seven-year career in the United States Marine Corps. During his time in the military, John Guandolo served as Infantry Platoon Commander in the 2nd Battalion, 2nd Marines (Persian Gulf War) and Assistant Operations Officer, Platoon Commander, and Airborne and Diving Officer in the 2nd Force Reconnaissance Company.
Resigning his commission in the Marine Corps in 1996, John Guandolo began a lengthy period as an Agent in the Federal Bureau of Investigation. He held a number of roles in the FBI’s Washington Field Office, including SWAT Team Leader and Subject Matter Expert (SME) in the Counterterrorism Division (CTD). Owing to his outstanding performance and service to the Bureau, John Guandolo received two commendations for Investigative Excellence from the United States Attorneys’ Office and a Defender of the Homeland Award from the Center for Security Policy.

During Obama's 2008 Presidential campaign, a employee with The Analysis Corp. was arrested and charged for a breach of Obama's passport records at the U.S. State Department.
A principle with The Analysis Corp., former CIA Agent John O. Brennan, was an adviser to the Obama Campaign and a political donor at the time of the arrest.
It was widely reported and generally accepted Obama's passport records included information which could implicate him or associate him with the CIA as an asset and Brennan's firm was discharged with the duty to clean up Obama's passport records. Brennan is currently Obama's nominee for CIA Director.

Shock Claim: Obama Picks Muslim for CIA Chief — Former FBI Expert Claims John Brennan Converted to Islam
By Drew Zahn -- One of the FBI’s former top experts on Islam has announced that President Obama’s pick to head the Central Intelligence Agency, John Brennan, converted to Islam years ago in Saudi Arabia.
As WND has reported, former FBI Islam expert John Guandolo has long warned that the federal government is being infiltrated by members of the radical Muslim Brotherhood. But Guandolo now warns that by appointing Brennan to CIA director, Obama has not only chosen a man “naïve” to these infiltrations, but also picked a candidate who is himself a Muslim.
“Mr. Brennan did convert to Islam when he served in an official capacity on the behalf of the United States in Saudi Arabia,” Guandolo told interviewer and radio host Tom Trento.
“That fact alone is not what is most disturbing,” Guandolo continued. “His conversion to Islam was the culmination of a counterintelligence operation against him to recruit him. The fact that foreign intelligence service operatives recruited Mr. Brennan when he was in a very sensitive and senior U.S. government position in a foreign country means that he either a traitor … [or] he has the inability to discern and understand how to walk in those kinds of environments, which makes him completely unfit to the be the director of Central Intelligence.”
Brennan did indeed serve as CIA station chief in Riyadh in the 1990s and today holds the official title of Deputy National Security Advisor for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism. On Jan. 7, Obama nominated Brennan as the next director of the CIA, though he has yet to be confirmed.    Continued >>>

Did CIA Pick Sanitize Obama's Passport Records?
Employee breached files when 'eligibility issue' arose during 2008 campaign

CIA Nominee John Brennan    L(ei)utenant Quarles Harris Jr. —— One Rewarded, the Other Rubbed Out

By Jerome R. Corsi (NEW YORK) -- John Brennan, the Obama counter-terrorism adviser nominated this week to head the CIA, played a controversial role in what many suspect was an effort to sanitize Obama’s passport records.
On March 21, 2008, amid Obama’s first presidential campaign, two unnamed contract employees for the State Department were fired and a third was disciplined for breaching the passport file of Democratic presidential candidate and then-Sen. Barack Obama.
Breaking the story, the Washington Times on March 20, 2008, noted that all three had used their authorized computer network access to look up and read Obama’s records within the State Department consular affairs section that “possesses and stores passport information.”
Contacted by the newspaper, State Department spokesman Sean McCormack attributed the violations to non-political motivations, stressing that the three individuals involved “did not appear to be seeking information on behalf of any political candidate or party.”
“As far as we can tell, in each of the three cases, it was imprudent curiosity,” McCormack told the Washington Times.
The spokesman did not disclose exactly how the State Department came to that conclusion. By the next day, the story had changed.
The New York Times reported March 21, 2008, that the security breach had involved unauthorized searches of the passport records not just of Sen. Obama but also of then-presidential contenders Sens. John McCain and Hillary Clinton.
Again, the New York Times attributed the breaches to “garden-variety snooping by idle employees” that was “not politically motivated.”
Like the Washington Times, the New York Times gave no explanation to back up its assertion that the breaches were attributable to non-political malfeasance.
Still, the New York Times report indicated then-Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice had spent Friday morning calling all three presidential candidates and that she had told Obama that she was sorry for the violation.
“I told him that I myself would be very disturbed if I learned that somebody had looked into my passport file,” Rice said.
The newspaper quoted Obama as saying he appreciated the apology but that he expected the passport situation “to be investigated diligently and openly.”
According to the New York Times report, Obama’s tone of concern was obvious.
“One of the things that the American people count on in their interactions with any level of government is that if they have to disclose personal information, that is going to stay personal and stay private,” Obama told reporters. “And when you have not just one, but a series of attempts to tap into people’s personal records, that’s a problem, not just for me, but for how our government is functioning.”
The New York Times noted that the files examined likely contained sensitive personal information, including Social Security numbers, addresses and dates of birth, as well as passport applications and other biographical information that would pertain to U.S. citizenship. Only at the end of the article did the New York Times note that State Department spokesman McCormack had emphasized the most egregious violation appeared to have been made against Obama.
Obama was the only one of the three presidential candidates involved who had his passport file breached on three separate occasions. The first occurred Jan. 9, 2008, followed by separate violations Feb. 21 and March 14, 2008. Moreover, all three of the offending employees had breached Obama’s files, while each of the passport files of McCain and Clinton had been breached only once.

The Brennan Connection
The New York Times noted the two offending State Department contract employees who were fired had worked for Stanley Inc., a company based in Arlington, Va., while the reprimanded worker continued to be employed by the Analysis Corporation of McLean, Va.
The newspaper gave no background on either corporation, other than to note that Stanley Inc. did “computer work for the government.”
At that time, Stanley Inc. was a 3,500-person technology firm that had just won a $570-million contract to provide computer-related passport services to the State Department.
Analysis Corporation was headed by Brennan, a former CIA agent who was then serving as an adviser on intelligence and foreign policy to Sen. Obama’s presidential campaign.
After Obama’s inauguration, Brennan joined the White House as assistant to the president and deputy national security adviser for homeland security and counter-terrorism.
By March 22, 2008, the Washington Times reported that the State Department investigation had focused on the contract worker for the Analysis Corporation, because he was the only one of the three involved in breaching the passport records of both Obama and McCain, the two presidential candidates whose eligibility as “natural born” citizens under Article 2, Section 1 of the Constitution were in question.
Keeping with the theme that the motive for the passport breach was attributable to mischief, the three State Department contract employees received relatively light penalties for their offenses – two were fired and one was reprimanded.
Although at the time the State Department promised a full-scale investigation, the public was kept in the dark.
In July 2008, the State Department’s Office of Inspector General issued a 104-page investigative report on the passport breach incidents, stamped “Sensitive But Unclassified.” The report was so heavily redacted, it was virtually useless to the public. Scores of passages were blacked out entirely, including one sequence of 29 consecutive pages that were each obliterated by a solid black box that made it impossible even to determine paragraph structures.
Investigative reporter Kenneth Timmerman said a well-placed but unnamed source told him that the real point of the passport breach incidents was to cauterize the Obama file, removing from it any information that could prove damaging to his eligibility to be president.
According to the theory, the breaches of McCain’s and Clinton’s files were done for misdirection purposes, to create confusion and to suggest the motives of the perpetrators were attributable entirely to innocent curiosity.

Another Thief Enters the Case
Within a few days, a new witness surfaced unexpectedly, providing evidence that breaching passport files was an offense being perpetrated by State Department officials on a massive and everyday basis.
The case centered on L(ei)utenant Quarles Harris Jr., age 24. Harris, who spelled his named differently than the officer rank, was a petty drug dealer and identity-theft criminal who never served in the military or in any police or fire department.
On March 25, 2008, at approximately 9:30 p.m., Officer William A. Smith Jr. of the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department’s Narcotics Special Investigation Division stopped an oncoming vehicle that had tinted windows he believed were in violation of the D.C. Tinted Window Act of 1994.
After stopping the vehicle, Smith found the driver, Harris, and his female passenger had been smoking marijuana. Harris had stuffed in his jacket pocket a large clear zip-lock bag containing 13 smaller clear zip-lock bags, each filled with marijuana.
The affidavit of criminal complaint filed by Smith with the U.S. District Court specified that in the search of the vehicle, the officers found 19 different credit cards with names different from Harris and his female passenger. Also discovered were eight State Department passport applications, also in names different from Harris and his female passenger.
The officers further discovered four of the names on the passport applications matched the names on the credit cards. A check with American Express while Harris was still on the scene of the traffic stop indicated that some of the American Express cards in his possession, but not in his name, had recently been used and that American Express had placed a “fraud alert” on the cards.
Smith brought Harris to the D.C. Metropolitan Police Sixth District, where agents of the U.S. Secret Service, the State Department and the U.S. Postal Service questioned him. Harris’ involvement in passport application theft clearly made him no ordinary petty criminal.
According to the criminal complaint filed by Smith, Harris admitted under questioning that he obtained the passport information from an unnamed co-conspirator working at the State Department. The complaint said the passport applications were used to obtain credit cards in the names of the passport applicants.
Another unnamed co-conspirator working at the U.S. Postal Service intercepted the issued credit cards before they were delivered to the residences of the persons named on the cards.
What was clear from Harris’ statements was that breaching passport records at the State Department had developed into major criminal activity conducted on a continuing basis by State Department employees with access to the State Department’s Passport Information Electronic Records System, commonly known by the acronym PIERS.
What also was clear was that Harris had information related to the State Department employees who had breached Obama’s passport records and that he was cooperating with government officials.
Despite the objection of the prosecutors, the judge at his arraignment released Harris the next day on personal recognizance. He was ordered to return to court for a hearing in June 2008.

Key Witness Murdered
However, Harris did not live to attend the court hearing.
On April 18, 2008, he was found murdered in Washington, D.C., by a single bullet to the head in what appeared to be a drive-by shooting.
The Washington Times reported April 19, 2008, that a “key witness in a federal probe into passport information stolen from the State Department was fatally shot in front of a District church” at close range, around 11 p.m., in the 2800 block of 12th Street NE, according to the Metropolitan Police Department.
Harris, who the Washington Times described as “cooperating with federal investigators,” was found slumped dead at the steering wheel of his car in front of the Judah House Praise Baptist Church in the northeast section of D.C., according to Commander Michael Anzallo, the head of the Metropolitan Police Department’s Criminal Investigations Division.
A police officer patrolling the neighborhood at the time of Harris’ death heard gunshots and ran to the scene, only to find Harris dead inside his car. The Metropolitan Police admitted a “shot spotter” device had been used to locate Harris in the shooting, although police officials declined to say whether his death was a direct result of his cooperation with federal investigators.
There is no evidence that today links Harris’ crimes or murder with the breach of Obama’s passport records by State Department contract employees.
At first glance, Harris could be dismissed as a foot-soldier selling marijuana and peddling credit cards fraudulently obtained via passport-related identity theft.
Yet there is more to the story than petty criminal activity. Obviously, Harris got himself in way over his head when he decided to work with the State Department officials accessing PIERS to obtain passport records without authorization.
Equally obvious was that by being willing to cooperate with police, Harris risked becoming a threat to his accomplices and co-conspirators within the State Department.
ABC news affiliate WJLA-TV in Washington, D.C., reported Cleopatria Harris, the mother of Leiutenant Quarles Harris, believed her son was murdered to keep him from cooperating with the federal investigation into the passport-record breach. She told the TV station her son was in court three days before his murder.
“He felt like he was going to do jail time. He was willing to do jail time,” she said, indicating that she believed news reports that her son had been arrested and was cooperating with the police were the reason he was killed. “Yes I do. think it had a hell of a lot to do with it. [The story] made my son appear to be a snitch.”
Similarly, the Washington Post reported Cleopatria Harris was “absolutely sure” her son was killed because of his involvement in the passport-credit card scam.
Harris’ mother refused to believe her son’s murder was an act of violence unrelated to the passport scheme. Instead, she contended he was killed because he was an important witness regarding a State Department breach of passport records.
To date, the D.C. Metropolitan Police have no suspects in the still unsolved murder of Leiutenant Quarles Harris Jr. Nor has the State Department ever revealed publicly what was discovered in the breach of Obama’s passport records. The three individuals involved in the breach have never come forward in public to tell what they found.

Obama Discloses Trip to Pakistan
But this is not the end of the story. Two weeks after the report that Obama’s passport records had been breached, candidate Obama made the surprising disclosure at a private fundraiser April 7, 2008, that he had traveled to Pakistan during his college years.
Jake Tapper, then senior White House correspondent for ABC News, commented that Obama’s disclosure that he had taken a college trip to Pakistan was “news to most of us.” Tapper said “it was odd we hadn’t heard about it before, given all the talk of Pakistan during this campaign.”
Tapper reported that, according to the Obama campaign, Obama visited Pakistan in 1981, the year he transferred from Occidental College to Columbia University, and that he had visited his mother and sister Maya in Indonesia on the same trip.
Why was Obama disclosing now, for the first time, that he had traveled to Pakistan with his roommates from Occidental College?
Did Obama use an Indonesian passport to travel to Indonesia and Pakistan in 1981, and was he concerned the breach of his passport records might end up disclosing such information, if true?
The attempt to preempt such a disclosure might explain the timing of Obama’s decision to suddenly reveal, at least to the friends assembled for the fundraiser, the previously undisclosed trip to Indonesia and Pakistan.
“I traveled to Pakistan when I was in college,” Obama is heard saying on the poor-quality audiotape that survives from the San Francisco fundraiser. “I knew what Sunni and Shia was [sic] before I joined the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

NOTE: John Brennan’s involvement in the breach of Obama’s passport records was previously reported in the introduction to Jerome R. Corsi’s “Where’s the Birth Certificate? The Case That Barack Obama is Not Eligible To Be President.”
http://superstore.wnd.com/books/Wheres-the-Birth-Certifcate-Hardcover-PLUS-FREE-Wheres-the -REAL-Birth-Certifcate">TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS FANTASTIC DEAL!! Purchase the hardcover of “Where’s the Birth Certificate?” and receive the updated e-book version of “Where’s the REAL Birth Certificate?”

Roger Ailes: Obama Is ‘Lazy — Never Worked a Day in His Life'

Obama Agrees: "I Think There's a Laziness In Me"
In the interview with Barbara Walters, President Obama says, (SEE VIDEO) "Nothing frustrates me more than when people aren't doing their jobs."
Read the transcript of President Obama talking about laziness.
Barbara Walters, ABC News: "What's the trait you most deplore in yourself, and the trait you most deplore in others?"
President Obama: "Laziness."
Walters: "You're lazy?"
Obama: "You know, it's interesting. There is a deep down, underneath all the work that I do, I think there's a laziness in me. It's probably from, you know, growing up in Hawaii and it's sunny outside, and sitting on the beach.

Fox News chief Roger Ailes says President Barack Obama is “lazy’’ and claims the commander-in-chief “never worked a day in his life,’’ a controversial new book claims.
Ailes also takes shots at Vice President Joe Biden, saying, “he’s as dumb as an ashtray,” and at Newt Gingrich, who he says is a “sore loser.”
In his upcoming biography, "Roger Ailes: Off Camera" By Zev Chafets (Amazon - $14.97, Released 3-19-13) writes that Ailes reacted to a crack by Democratic strategist Hilary Rosen that Ann Romney, wife of last year’s Republican presidential candidate, “never worked a day in her life,” with his own blunt opinion of the president.
“Obama’s the one who never worked a day in his life. He never earned a penny that wasn’t public money,’’ Ailes said, according to Chavets.
“How many fundraisers does he attend every week? How often does he play basketball and golf? I wish I had that kind of time. … He’s lazy, but the media won’t report that.”
Ailes insists, however, that he didn’t come up with Obama’s “lazy’’ tag — but rather the president did himself during a 2011 interview with Barbara Walters in which he described his most deplorable trait as “deep down, underneath all the work I do, I think there’s a laziness in me.’’
Ailes, who granted Chavets one-on-one interviews for the biography, also takes the gloves off on Vice President Joe Biden.
“I have a soft spot for Joe Biden. I like him. But he’s dumb as an ashtray,’’ Ailes says, according to the book, which is published by Penguin Sentinel and excerpted on VanityFair.com.
Chavets’ biography shows there’s no love lost between Ailes and Obama and details a testy sit-down between the two during the 2008 presidential campaign in which the future commander-in-chief lit into Sean Hannity.
“Obama was upset by Fox News,’’ writes Chavets. In a private room at the Waldorf Astoria hotel in Manhattan, “Obama arrived with his aide Robert Gibbs, who seated Ailes directly across from Obama, close enough for Ailes to feel the intention was to intimidate him.
“[Ailes] didn’t mind; in fact, he rather appreciated the stagecraft, one political professional to another.’’
Chavets says after some pleasantries, “Obama got to the point. He was concerned about the way he was being portrayed on Fox, and his real issue wasn’t the news; it was Sean Hannity, who had been battering him every night.
“Ailes didn’t deny that Hannity was anti-Obama. He simply told the candidate not to worry about it.
Ailes is quoted as responding: “Nobody who watches Sean’s going to vote for you, anyway.”
According to Chavets, Obama then asked Ailes what his personal concerns were.
“Ailes said he was mainly concerned about Obama’s strength on national security issues. The candidate assured Ailes that he had nothing to worry about,’’ the author writes.
“‘Well, why are you going around talking about making cuts in weapons systems?’ asked Ailes. ‘If you’re going to cut, why not at least negotiate them and get something in return?’”
Obama said Ailes was misinformed, according to Chavets. “He said this looking me right in the eyes,” says Ailes. “He never dropped his gaze, which is the usual tell. It was as good a lie as anyone ever told me.
“I said, ‘Senator, I just watched someone say exactly that on my computer screen before coming over here. Maybe it wasn’t you, but it sure looked like you and sounded like you. I think it was you.’”
At that point, according to Chavets, “Gibbs stood and announced that the session was over. ‘I don’t think he liked the meeting very much,’ says Ailes.’’
Ailes doesn’t let the GOP get by without some criticism.
Of Gingrich, he says, the former GOP House Speaker is a “sore loser and if he had won he would have been a sore winner.” The book claims Ailes also described Gingrich with an obscenity.
Chavets’ book is one of two new biographies on Ailes. The second is the upcoming “The Loudest Voice in the Room: Fox News and the Making of America,” by New York magazine writer Gabriel Sherman.
Meanwhile, The New York Times reports Ailes himself is writing his autobiography, although no date is set for its release.

Secretary of State Dennis Rodman Gives Bizarre Interview to George Stephanopoulos

(Top Right) Obama Shows His Basketball Skills Against Stiff Opposition
WATCH VIDEO!
Clearly frustrating George Stephanopoulos, former NBA great Dennis Rodman gave an insane interview on This Week, claiming that Kim Jong Un is not as bad as he seems. He also says that President Barack Obama should give the North Korean dictator a friendly phone call!
“He wants Obama to do one thing: Call him,” Dennis told George on March 3. “He said, ‘If you can, Dennis – I don’t want to do war. I don’t want to do war.’ He said that to me.”
“He wants President Obama to call him?” George asked.
“He’s a great guy,” the former NBA player added, suggesting that Kim Jong Un and Barack Obama could have a friendly chat with each other.
“He’s a great guy who’s put 200,000 in prison camps?” George quipped. “Guess what?” Dennis said, “we have prison camps here too.”
Why Was Dennis Rodman In North Korea?
Dennis was in North Korea with members of the Harlem Globetrotters and a camera crew from the upcoming HBO series, VICE.
Dennis may go back to North Korea, but George suggests he does a little research first. “The next time you go back you should take this report from Human Rights Watch and ask him about that,” George said.
What do YOU think of Dennis’ interview, HollywoodLifers? Was it bizarre?
WATCH: Dennis Rodman Discusses Trip To North Korea and Meeting with King Jong Un

UPDATE: Dennis Rodman Booted From New York Bar for Screaming About 'How He Loves' Kim Jong Un
Dennis Rodman, just back from visiting Kim Jong Un, was escorted out of the Time Hotel in Midtown on Sunday after spending hours at the restaurant bar loudly telling anyone who would listen what a great guy the North Korean dictator is.
“He was at the bar at Serafina for three hours,” says a spy. “He kept saying what a nice guy Kim is, and how Kim just wants to talk to President Obama about basketball. He was waving around a signed copy of the dictator’s huge manifesto, telling everyone they should read it.”
Added the witness, “Dennis was making a total jerk of himself. He wouldn’t leave, and he wouldn’t let anyone talk to him about shutting up, or what an oppressive country North Korea is. Eventually he had to leave the bar because the bartender was starting to get [bleep]ed-off.”
Rodman, who visited the Communist leader with members of the Harlem Globetrotters for an HBO series produced by VICE television, finally did leave the hotel. While the wacky former NBA star is a regular there, sources tell us staff are fed up with his attention-grabbing antics.
“He’s always a problem,” one insider told us. “He is loud and does weird stuff. Like, he’ll come down to the front desk in his bathrobe in the middle of the night and make demands that people have to run to the store for him. He’s belligerent about it. I thought he was just on TV getting sober?”
Rodman has appeared on both “Celebrity Rehab With Dr. Drew” and “Sober House.” He’s currently a contestant on Donald Trump’s “Celebrity Apprentice.”
After checking out of the Time on Sunday night, Rodman headed to the Marriott Downtown. A rep for him said, “He ended up going to the Marriott because he was leaving in the morning and we wanted him to be closer to the airport.”
Another rep said, “The Time is Dennis’ favorite hotel . . . There were a lot of people taking pictures, his security just didn’t like it and asked to move him out of the hotel. There was certainly no incident.”
Reps for the Time Hotel chose to not comment.

The Low & No Information Voter’s Guide to Politics — Personal Responsibility Is Hard. We're Here to Help.
  By Oleg Atbashian (Creator of ThePeoplesCube.com) -- Are you typically lost when co-workers discuss current events around the water cooler? Do you have trouble figuring out the national debt or who that Ben Ghazi dude is, but you know what’s on Kim Kardashian’s grocery list?
If you think you only deserve fun answers to all life’s questions … you’re right! This primer will help you look smart and morally superior in any political discussion. Just memorize these big words, explained in easy terms you already know from TMZ and The Daily Show:

BIASED: If you have a weird friend who goes to church and her parents are still married, that’s what they are.
ELECTIONS: These are like the Teen Choice Awards: the coolest and most popular wins. Democrats always win because they are cool and popular. Republicans are more like your weird friend’s parents.
DEBT CEILING: This is like Lindsay Lohan’s probation: by law, she should go to jail if she gets arrested, but we all know she won’t.
PUBLIC EDUCATION.Think Memento. Remember how the guy in the movie learned to go through life and fight enemies by relying on snapshots, notes, and tattoos? Public education does that on a national level as a free service.
IM-MI-GRA-TION: Whew, that’s a long word — just like that velvet rope outside nightclubs. When really fun people arrive, you just open it right up.
QUAN-TI-TA-TIVE EASING: Remember Leonardo DiCaprio in Catch Me If You Can, and how he printed his own checks? Well, that’s what the Treasury secretary, Tim Geithner, does. It’s really cool.
TRILLION DOLLARS: This is a silly number. If someone says: “The U.S. national debt has topped 16 trillion,” take it easy. Remember how Jeffrey Dahmer was sentenced to fifteen life terms while having only one life? Once you owe more than you can pay, numbers stop making sense. Anything above that is free money; spend it fast so you can get more.
ECONOMIC STIMULUS: It’s like Whitney Houston upping her dosage to get the same high, always needing to use more and more to “chase the dragon.”
SE-QUE-STRA-TION: This is just a made-up word that Republicans say to make you feel stupid.
FAIR SHARE: Someone you know has three Louis Vuitton handbags and you only have one. As many as you can get somebody else to steal from them and give to you — that is your fair share.
ENTITLEMENTS: This is like celebrities getting a $30,000 bag of goodies for showing up to the Oscars, so that the givers get more street cred and respect. And votes.
FOREIGN POLICY: Think Lady Gaga’s world tour: it’s totally awesome but can also get weird — like, she’s hot in places like Europe and Japan, but gets booed and canceled in places like Indonesia.
IRAN: Think Robert Downey Jr. — he may be calm at the moment, but if he gets his hands on the wrong stuff, he could trash his neighbor’s house and pass out naked on the lawn.
MUSLIMS: These are like the blue people from the movie Avatar — they live in a magic tree and don’t need human technology or any of our laws like gravitation, because they have a miraculous energy source inside their planet. Humans must respect that, and send them humanitarian aid. But instead, an evil corporation from Earth brings drilling equipment; that’s why all humans get killed.
ISRAEL: This is like the evil corporation from Avatar that landed on the blue people’s planet.
OIL: Think magic energy source on planet Pandora that humans want to steal. Get over it, humans!
OCCUPY WALL STREET: People in this movement are fighting greed by forcing Michael Douglas’ character in Wall Street to give more money to the 99% of people like us. We need to support their stand against corporations by friending them on Facebook™ and re-Tweeting them on Twitter™.
MEDIA: The good media are like paparazzi and E! Entertainment who keep it real by telling us all the truth about interesting people. The bad media are like bullies who make good people look bad. Nobody listens to them except for your friend’s weird parents.
HIGH-CAPACITY MAGAZINES: These do not contain expensive perfume samples that you can rip out while waiting at your hair salon. See GUN CONTROL.
GUN CONTROL: If Naomi Campbell had a gun, she would be shooting at her maids all the time. Without a gun she just beats them with a cell phone and then gives them compensation. Everyone is alive and happy. As long as the government keeps guns away from the citizens, Rihanna and Chris Brown will always be together.
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Think Brad Pitt, dashing A-lister who can’t do anything wrong.
FIRST LADY: She is like Kim Kardashian, only with other people’s money.
VICE PRESIDENT: Think Steve Carell, a lovable nincompoop who likes to make others laugh.
WHITE HOUSE: This is like Cribs, a really fancy pad where celebrities hang out and party instead of working.
MIDDLE CLASS: These are like the extras in movies — kind of important but nobody cares who they really are.
CON-STI-TU-TION: It sounds almost like Cosmopolitan, except it’s really old and has no make-up ads or sexy pictures, but some people are really into it, like Antiques Roadshow.
Oleg Atbashian, a writer and graphic artist from Ukraine, currently lives in New York. He is the creator of ThePeoplesCube.com, a satirical website where he writes under the name of Red Square. He is the author of recently published Shakedown Socialism.

Obama DHS Buys 2,700 Light-Armored Tanks, Compliments Their 1.6 Billion Bullet Stockpile
  Tiananmen Square 1989 'Pancaking' Coming to America?

Gateway Pundit's Jim Hoft reports: This is getting a little creepy. According to one estimate, since last year the Department of Homeland Security has stockpiled more than 1.6 billion bullets, mainly .40 caliber and 9mm.
And Modern Survival Blog reported: The Department of Homeland Security (through the U.S. Army Forces Command) recently retrofitted 2,717 of these ‘Mine Resistant Protected’ vehicles for service on the streets of the United States.
Although I’ve seen and read several online blurbs about this vehicle of late, I decided to dig slightly deeper and discover more about the vehicle itself.
SEE TANK PIC: Resistant Armor Protected Vehicle (MRAP)
The new DHS sanctioned ‘Street Sweeper’ (my own slang due to the gun ports) is built by Navistar Defense (NavistarDefense.com), a division within the Navistar organization.)
Under the Navistar umbrella are several other companies including International Trucks, IC Bus (they make school buses), Monaco RV (recreational vehicles), WorkHorse (they make chassis), MaxxForce (diesel engines), and Navistar Financial (the money arm of the company).)
DHS even released a video on their newly purchased MRAPs, Via Pat Dollard.)
The MRAP featured in this video is was in Albuquerque, New Mexico for Law Enforcement Day which was held at a local area Target Store.)
This MRAP is stationed in El Paso, Texas at The Homeland Security Investigations Office. VIEW VIDEO of MRAP: Mine Resistant Armor Protected Vehicle.

Obama: I Would Negotiate With the Opposition if
 They Didn't 'Paint Horns on My Head'
President Barack Obama suggested today he'd be able to negotiate with the opposition better if they didn't "paint horns on [his] head":
"I recognize that Speaker Boehner has got challenges in his caucus," said Obama. "I recognize that it's very hard for Republican leaders to be perceived as making concessions to me.
You know, sometimes I reflect, is there something else I can do to make these guys -- I am not talking about the leaders now, but maybe some of the House Republican caucus members not to paint horns on my head?
And I genuinely believe there is an opportunity for us to cooperate.
But what doesn't make sense, and the only thing we have seen from Republicans so far in terms of proposals, is to replace this set of arbitrary cuts with even worse arbitrary cuts."

Obama: 'I Am Not A Dictator — Patience!'

President Obama: "I am not a dictator; I'm the president. So, ultimately if Mitch McConnell or John Boehner say we need to go to catch a plane, I can't have Secret Service block the doorway, right?" — SEE VIDEO
DENIAL IS CONFIRMATION
By Daniel Greenfield -- Politicians often seem to deny that one quality about them that everyone knows is true. Obama's "I Am Not a Dictator" deserves to join "I Am Not a Crook" in the annals of political denials.
Obama is finding a dozen different ways to say that he doesn't wield absolute power. "I am not a dictator". "I can't mind-meld Congress into making a deal." "Even though I have been doing anything I want with respect to everything else, when it comes to the sequester I can't take control of it, even though the Senate has offered me that opportunity." I am not a dictator, except when I want to be.

Supreme Court Denies Usurper Obama 'Eligibility Case' - Noonan v. Bowen
  On Tuesday, the Supreme Court of the United States rejected a birther eligibility case against President Barack Obama. Docket No. 12A606 entitled Noonan v. Bowen is listed on the SCOTUS website. On Feb. 19, the nation's highest court stated:

Feb 19 2013 Application (12A606) denied by the Court:
The plaintiffs contend that Obama used forged government IDs and a fake social security number in order to run for political office. (See YouTube video at the bottom on CNN's 2008 story on Obama's alleged real father Frank Marshall Davis, a card-carrying communist who the president mentions in his autobiography Dreams from My Father.)
On Tuesday, Orly Taitz - an attorney for the plaintiffs - conveyed some additional allegations against the president beyond what was included in Noonan's case pleadings.
This week, an unidentified source has informed the California-based lawyer that the reason why Michelle Robinson Obama (a graduate of a relative's social security number (Harrison J. Bounel).
The SSN 042-68-4425 is simultaneously tied to Obama and Bounel in background check systems. The source's claim is unsubstantiated. However, birthers are currently investigating the allegation.
On Tuesday, the plaintiffs also protested lower-level clerks' decision to withhold the Supplemental Brief and other case pleadings from several of the Supreme Court justices. Taitz had vouched for a thorough review of the arguments to as many of the high court's judges.
Court records show that on Dec. 26, 2012, or three weeks before Obama's second inauguration, Chief Justice John Roberts reversed Justice Anthony Kennedy's rejection and ordered the case distributed for conference on Feb. 15.
However, on that day SCOTUS released its list of granted petitions and Noonan v. Bowen was not included. Tuesday's decision is a major setback for the birther movement as the federal government's judicial branch has rejected hearing the case.
While there are multiple lower-level lawsuits, such as in California and Washington, birthers now appear to be targeting members of congress to initiate formal hearings which could lead to impeachment of the president.
Impeachment is highly unlikely given that Democrats control the U.S. senate. House Republicans have also been unwilling to investigate Obama's personal and professional background in light of urgent tasks, including the need to address the March 1 sequestration cuts. During the 2012 presidential elections, Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney and his Super Pacs also abstained from questioning Obama's eligibility to serve as president.
On Feb. 17, Taitz sent a request for an investigation to Rep. Bob Goodlatte (Virginia, Republican), who serves as chair of the judiciary committee in the house of representatives.
Plaintiffs and their attorney are demanding an immediate investigation of both the actions of the employees of the Supreme Court of the United States in hiding pleadings and exhibits from the Justices and Barack Obama’s use of forged IDs and a stolen Social Security 042-68-4425.
Thus far, an online petition requesting a formal investigation into the president's government IDs and SSN have resulted in over 32,000 letters and emails to members of congress.

Evidence on Obama Withheld from 5 Supremes — No Surprise Here!
On Sunday, a leading birther plaintiff claimed that clerks of the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) never forwarded to five out of nine justices one single page of pleadings in a lawsuit alleging that Barack Obama is ineligible to serve as president.
Dr. Orly Taitz, who is among the petitioners in the Noonan et al vs. Bowen case, sent a Feb. 17 email to Republican Examiner stating that the clerks did not forward to any of the justices the case's Supplemental Brief which contains evidence that Obama used forged IDs and a fake social security number in order to run for political office. Article 2 Section 1 of the U.S. constitution stipulates that:
In 2008, the Associated Press obtained Obama's Indonesian grade school registration which, when translated into English, identifies him as an Indonesian citizen.
No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President.
Via the Post Office, SCOTUS clerks returned to Taitz several unopened packages of the Supplemental Brief which were intended to be reviewed by the nation's highest court. The attorney took several photographs of the returned packages as evidence of possible sabotage by lower judicial associates.
On Jan. 9, Chief Justice John Roberts had approved Noonan vs. Bowen for distribution in conference for Feb. 15 after being denied by Justice Anthony Kennedy. Last week, four African American clerks prevented Taitz from verifying Kennedy's signature on a SCOTUS document that shows the justice reviewed the case before denying it.
Taitz's Supplemental Brief states, "[a] citizen of Indonesia, as listed in his school registration #203 from Franciscan Assisi school in Jakarta, Indonesia. As a citizen of Indonesia Obama was never eligible and never legitimate for the U.S. Presidency." In 2008, the Associated Press obtained Obama's Indonesian grade school registration which, when translated into English, identifies him as an Indonesian citizen.
On Feb. 17, Taitz sent a request for an investigation to Rep. Bob Goodlatte (Virginia, Republican), who serves as chair of the judiciary committee in the house of representatives.
Plaintiffs and their attorney are demanding an immediate investigation of both the actions of the employees of the Supreme Court of the United States in hiding pleadings and exhibits from the Justices and Barack Obama’s use of forged IDs and a stolen Social Security 042-68-4425.
Thus far, an online petition requesting a formal investigation into the president's government IDs and SSN have resulted in over 32,000 letters and emails to members of congress.

Here are related articles on Barack Obama's birther litigation.
Supreme Court rules on Obama forgery case
Supreme Court to review Obama birther case
Did John Brennan remove evidence from passport?
Calif. appeals court reinstates case against president


Missouri Democrats Introduce Law to Confiscate Guns
  Gun Owners Given 90 Days to Turn in Their Weapons
Missouri House Democrats have introduced an anti-gun bill which would turn law-abiding firearm owners into criminals by banning semi-automatic firearm possession [via @ElliottBobert]:
(4) Any person who, prior to the effective date of this law, was legally in possession of an assault weapon or large capacity magazine shall have 90 days from such effective date to do any of the following without being subject to prosecution:
(1) Remove the assault weapon or large capacity magazine from the state of Missouri;
(2) Render the assault weapon permanently inoperable; or
(3) Surrender the assault weapon or large capacity magazine to the appropriate law enforcement agency for destruction, subject to specific agency regulations.
(5) Unlawful manufacture, import, possession, purchase, sale, or transfer of an assault weapon or a large capacity magazine is a class C felony.
So any Missourian who doesn’t surrender their semi-automatic weapon would be charged with a class C felony. It’s disarmament and a complete dissolve of the Second Amendment. Their focus on magazines, as I’ve said repeatedly, is silly, considering a) they’re universal and b) can be easily made in your garage.
Thankfully Republicans hold a super majority in Missouri legislature. The bill has only been introduced and read twice; it’s a go-nowhere bill but designed, I think, to test the waters as we’ve seen numerous bills of similar sort introduced in other states.
Here is the publicly available contact information for these 4 elected Missouri representatives:
Minnesota Democrats are pushing similar legislation using nearly identical language as the Missouri bill.
MN H.F. No. 241, as introduced – 88th Legislative Session (2013-2014) Posted on Jan 31, 2013

AS SEEN ON TV — Rubio's PAC Sells Water Bottles — Builds War Chest on the 'Sip Seen Across the World'
   OFFICIAL MARCO RUBIO WATER BOTTLE

In response to the outrage over Marco Rubio's decision to drink water during his response to the State of the Union Address, his PAC, Reclaim America, has begun selling water bottles.
"If you had an opportunity to watch Marco's Response to the State of the Union last night, you were undoubtedly energized by his message of upward mobility, free enterprise and limited government," writes Rubio's PAC in an email.
"If you've watched the media coverage since, you might think that Marco spent the entire time gulping gallons of water. The liberals and the pundits flocking to Twitter and blanketing MSNBC can't stop talking about what it means that Marco stopped and took a drink of water in the middle of his speech.
Why would they be so focused on a man reaching for water instead of on what he said? Because they know they can't effectively tear down his message. So they will try and distract from it. What he said was too conservative, too convincing and frankly too inspiring for some in the media and their liberal allies.
So instead of attacking his message they attack the messenger. We've seen it before but it won't work this time.
"But don't get angry at the liberals who want to bury what Marco said. Laugh at them.
So in that spirit, we here at Reclaim America are launching the official line of Marco Rubio water bottles -- GO HERE TO PURCHASE
"Send the liberal detractors a message that not only does Marco Rubio inspire you... He hydrates you too."
MSNBC Replays Rubio Water Sip 155 Times in One Day, CNN (34) and Fox News (12)
The liberal hosts on MSNBC just couldn't get enough of watching U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio reach for a glass of water and take a sip during his rebuttal of President Barack Obama's State of the Union address, airing the snippet a staggering 155 times during the Wednesday broadcast schedule.
Other cable news networks showed the footage far less often. CNN aired it 34 times, and Fox News Channel played it just 12 times -- all of which took place on “The O’Reilly Factor” and “Hannity” while the hosts discussed the media's obsession with the Florida Republican's “watergate” incident.
MSNBC's total would not have been so overwhelming if the host of “The Rachel Maddow Show” hadn't aired it 101 times, along with a loop of the moment at the bottom of the television screen for more than 13 minutes.

Book: The Secret War Behind Benghazi

Ambitious bureaucrats like John Brennan need to be reined in or fired,” say Murphy and Webb

Stealth campaign of assassinations, run by CIA nominee John Brennan, resulted in the death of the Ambassador Stevens and 3 Other Americans

'Benghazi: The Definitive Report' written by Brandon Webb and Jack Murphy, is published by William Morrow Company, an imprint of HarperCollins (Kindle Price: $2.99). It will be available for download in Kindle eBook format February 12th.
By Kyle Smith -- (Part 4 of 4) As Woods was thanking Doherty, though, the attackers were adjusting their mortar fire, and getting closer with each volley. A French 81 mm round ended Woods’ life, though as he fell, his body shielded another security agent, saving his life.
Doherty was killed instantly by a direct hit on his position from another mortar round.
From below, several other agents rushed up to the roof and put themselves in the line of fire while they saved the other two men’s lives. They lowered the bodies down with rope they had cut down from their gym. One JSOC agent strapped a wounded DSS man to his back, then climbed down a ladder under fire.
Everyone at the CIA compound might well have been killed if they had remained, but an unmanned intelligence drone overhead signalled, by tracing heat signatures, that a much larger hostile force was gathering.
Some 30 Americans loaded into vehicles and evacuated the area. They were fired on again during the drive to the airport, but made it and escaped to Tripoli on two flights, at 7:30 and 8:30 a.m. Sept. 12. Stevens’ body was finally recovered when a local was sent to the Benghazi morgue and “there was likely a money exchange,” the authors say, to release the remains, which were on the 8:30 plane.
So, who is to blame for Benghazi? The authors are withering on the subject of John Brennan, our likely next CIA director.
“The overrunning of the consulate and the killing of the two [Navy SEALs] must have come as a shock to” then-CIA chief David Petraeus, Murphy and Webb say. Petraeus had been cut out of the loop as Brennan passed up to Director of Central Intelligence James Clapper “the bare minimum of information needed to keep these secret missions legal.”
Since the CIA didn’t know about the secretive hit squads targeting al Qaeda, the agency and the consulate personnel were caught off guard: “They had no idea that the Special Operations missions would be kicking the hornet’s nest in Libya and therefore could not prepare for the fallout that would result.” Petraeus, the authors say, “was furious about being left in the lurch by the Obama administration.”
Either Murphy or Webb was present, they say, at a Veterans Day parade in New York in 2011 during which Petraeus’s personal security detail lost contact with him for an hour. The authors suggest that such shoddy treatment was a sign that other leading CIA figures wanted him out and “cashed in their chips” by allowing details of the general’s affair with Paula Broadwell, which the FBI had known about for months, to become public. Petraeus’ fall was a “palace coup,” Murphy and Webb claim.
“Ambitious bureaucrats like John Brennan need to be reined in or fired,” say Murphy and Webb. “Or we will see plenty more Benghazis happen. This occurs on a fairly regular basis in Afghanistan, where JSOC will raid a terrorist compound and kill the enemy, and the conventional units who patrol the area end up paying the price. Long after JSOC takes off in their black helicopters, the conventional forces are getting IED-ed along the roads by angry jihadists who are retaliating against any Americans they can find.
“This is what really happened in Benghazi, and this is why the Obama administration is more than happy to have the media fixated on red herrings at the consulate or wound up in an intellectual Gordian knot about some YouTube video.”
How much of Murphy and Webb’s version should we believe? Given that they don’t tell us who their sources are, not to mention the conspiratorial tone to some of their insinuations, skepticism is in order. They tell us not to trust the mainstream media, which is fine, but their utter opacity about sourcing should be taken with a truckload of salt.
Nevertheless, Murphy and Webb raise important questions about the unintended consequence of America’s covert wars, and unless they are peddling sheer Tom Clancy-ish fiction, we need to know more. The Benghazi story isn’t over.
EXCLUSIVE: David Petraeus was brought down after betrayal by vengeful CIA agents and his own bodyguards who made sure his affair was exposed, claims new book
By Michael Zennie -- Brandon Webb, a former Navy SEAL, and Jack Murphy, a former Green Beret, reveal the new claims in their book 'Benghazi: The Definitive Report' ;  which will be available for download in eBook format February 12th.
   ■  “Petraeus was humiliated after a 'palace coup' by high-level intelligence officers who did not like the way he was running the CIA, authors say
   ■  “The book also claims that Petraeus and Ambassador Chris Stevens were caught off guard by Benghazi consulate attack because they weren't briefed about on-going U.S. military operations in Libya
   ■  “Webb and Murphy say Benghazi attack was a retaliation for secret raids authorized by Obama security adviser John Brennan
   ■  “David Petraeus was betrayed by his own bodyguards and vengeful high-ranking enemies in the CIA, who made sure his affair with his biographer was exposed to the public, a new book claims.
MailOnline can reveal a new angle on the story that rocked Washington last fall. It comes from two retired special operations commandos - a Navy SEAL and a Green Beret - who say they discovered a plot against the former CIA director while doing research about the attacks on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya.
Senior CIA officers targeted Petraeus because they didn't like the way he was running the agency - focusing more on paramilitary operations than intelligence analysis. They used their political clout and their connections to force an FBI investigation of his affair with Paul Broadwell and make it public, according to 'Benghazi: The Definitive Report'
'It was high-level career officers on the CIA who got the ball rolling on the investigation. It was basically a palace coupe to get Petraeus out of there,' Jack Murphy, one of the authors, told MailOnline.
Murphy and co-author Brandon Webb also revealed that the September 11 Benghazi terrorist attack that killed four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens, was retaliation by Islamist militants who had been targeted by covert U.S. military operations.
The book claims that neither Stevens nor even Petraeus knew about the raids by American special operations troops, which had 'kicked a hornet's nest' among the heavily-armed fighters after the overthrow of Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi.
John Brennan, President Barack Obama's Deputy National Security Adviser, had been authorizing 'unilateral operations in North Africa outside of the traditional command structure,' according to the e-book. Brennan is Obama's pick to replace Petraeus as head of the CIA.
READ MORE BOOK DISCLOSURES >>>

Ambassador Chris Stevens Didn’t Have to Die in Benghazi –
The Real Story of What Led to His Tortured Death, Would Have Made Great Witness!
  Sean Hannity interviewed on his radio show February 15th Jack Murphy and Brandon Webb regarding their new book 'Benghazi: The Definitive Report' (Kindle Price: $2.99).
I’ve clipped a portion of their interview here which describes something very different than what we’ve ever heard about what led to the attack on the ‘consulate’ and the deaths of Ambassador Chris Stevens, Sean Smith, Glen Doherty and Tyrone S. Woods.
In short, there were two operations going on in Benghazi, neither of which Stevens nor the CIA [Petraeus] were made aware, that made the situation on the ground in Benghazi far more dangerous than they even knew. We already know that Stevens was concerned about security, but he didn’t even know the full story.
One of the operations was direct raids against Al-Qaeda conducted by John Brennan, Deputy National Security Advisor, that instigated blowback in the form of the attack on our ‘consulate’ in Benghazi where Stevens visited that night. But because Stevens wasn’t made aware of these unilateral raids going on in his backyard, there was no way he could have even prepared himself for blowback. Stevens likely didn’t even know why he was being attacked the night he was killed.

Here is Jack Murphy explaining:
You have two major operations being run in Libya that were very compartmentalized and General Petraeus probably had very little if any visibility at all on them.
One of them was the weapons transfer program, transferring weapons from Libyan stockpiles to Syria.
But in a completely separate program from that, run by a different outfit, a different organization, was these direct action raids into Libya from a European airfield, flying – we’re talking boots on the ground, putting commandos on the ground who were hunting down one of the last big name Al-Qaeda personalities named Al-Suri, who was an Iranian facilitator, a money man for Al-Qaeda.
They were definitely after him.
And it was also about reclaiming some of these weapon stockpiles that the militias and the Al-Qaeda affiliated groups had claimed during the war.
Now that the winds of politics have shifted we don’t want these groups to have access to large amounts of weapons, particularly dangerous surface-to-air missiles.
So we’re going to go in and try and get those back.
Now the problem was [Ambassador] Chris Stevens and the CIA did not know about that program, about those operations.
So they had no ability, they had no situational awareness to go ahead and raise their security posture. They could not have anticipated that there would have been blowback from these operations because they had no idea they were happening.

There’s much more in the interview below, including why Murphy says Stevens was kept in the dark on Brennan’s covert programs and the fact that the ‘consulate’ wasn’t even an official consulate, but rather ‘temporary mission facility’.
Now you know why Obama was quick to blame the Muhammad video for the Benghazi attacks. Simply Outrageous.  h/tRightScoop
 10
White House Dared People to Photoshop Obama's 'Staged Gun Picture' — And Photoshoppers Went Wild!
  See Enlargement (1026x685)

You’ve probably seen the newly-released photo of President Barack Obama doing what he says they do “all the time” — skeet shooting at Camp David.
The photo carried a standard notice from the White House concerning how the picture is used:
Tweet from White House Senior Adviser David Plouffe -- Attn skeet birthers. Make our day - let the photoshop conspiracies begin!
“This official White House photograph is being made available only for publication by news organizations and/or for personal use printing by the subject(s) of the photograph. The photograph may not be manipulated in any way and may not be used in commercial or political materials, advertisements, emails, products, promotions that in any way suggests approval or endorsement of the President, the First Family, or the White House.”
Following the release of the picture, Obama adviser David Plouffe sent a tweet basically daring people to mock the image.
So naturally, the American people took up Plouffe’s challenge. Less than 24 hours later, we have amassed a few of the edited photos that are currently circling the Internet.
Shooting both the American flag and the Constitution were popular choices for the photo.
Here are several that have gone viral . . . some good, some not so hot. Several examples can be seen on The Blaze website. More Below

how photo was staged — animation — 0bama with Dukakis — Lee Harvey Oswald — Benghazi skeet shoot — flowers out of barrel — scissors gun — barroom scene — wearing tutu — skeet for dummies — Super Bowl shot — Lincoln — most interesting man — bayonet pic

'Rodham' the Movie — Oh No! This Won't Happen, Will It? Clinton Curse Continues?


Who would play her pol-partner, Slick W. — her oddly dead lover, Vince F. — her commie mentor, Saul A. — her daughter's bio-dad, Web H.
Coming soon to a theater near you: A feisty young woman in the 1970s is torn between her important new job in the big city and the love of her life, who wants her to move to the sticks.
Are you ready for Hillary Clinton: the Chick Flick?
A screenplay dramatizing the secretary of state’s early career — when she was a young lawyer with the House Judiciary Committee, while Bill was getting started in Arkansas politics — is in development by Temple Hill Entertainment.
Last month, “Rodham” was named the fourth-hottest unproduced script in the annual “Black List” poll of Hollywood execs. (Other Washington stories on the list: a thriller about a journalist investigating an Air Force One crash; a Joe McCarthy biopic; a couple of CIA dramas.) Screenwriter Young Il Kim told Politico this week that he was inspired by a photo of Clinton “when she was in her 20s with Coke-bottle glasses and long, hippie hair.”

Here's a plot summary from the Black List announcement:
During the height of the Watergate scandal, rising star Hillary Rodham is the youngest lawyer chosen for the House Judiciary Committee to Impeach Nixon, but she soon finds herself forced to choose between a destined path to the White House and her unresolved feelings for Bill Clinton, her former boyfriend who now teaches law in Arkansas.
FOR HILLARY:
Great, now let’s move on to the fun part: casting!
No names have yet been attached, so we are free to run wild with our purely speculative wish-lists. Bear in mind that Reese Witherspoon and Leo DiCaprio, etc., are already too old, sorry.
Jennifer Lawrence, Kristen Stewart: Too young, don’t you think?
Emma Stone: Sure, why not? She’s in every other movie these days. And she has the gravitas of a young Rodham.
Ellen Page: The “Juno” star is an edgier pick, but we can totally see her do the stringy hair/big glasses thing.
Scarlett Johansson: Stay with us here. Too sexy, you say? But look at those cheekbones, the blond hair/dark brows combo.Maybe? Remember, it is a love story.
FOR BILL:
Ryan Gosling: Just slap a scraggly ’70s beard on that lantern jaw. Canadian, though that can be worked with. But too sensitive?
Justin Timberlake: Southern, at least. Too skinny?
Chris Hemsworth: The guy who played “Thor” — definitely has presence.
Jason Segel: Now, stay with us here. Kind of outside-the-box, yes. But big guy, beaky nose, unconventional appeal. And who says this can’t be a comedy?
Tom Hardy: Fleshy-faced, flirtatious British actor, played Bane in “The Dark Knight Rises.” We’re getting closer here.

Straining Credulity: Alleged Right-Wing FOX News' Owners and Managers Gave
  Nearly Six Times as Much Money to Marxist Obama Than Capitalist Romney

By Joseph Farah -- For many Americans, Fox News is their “alternative” choice for news.
They’ve made it the No. 1 cable news network, largely because they believe its “fair and balanced” promotional slogan.
Many even believe Fox leans to the right and provides news they can’t get anywhere else.
But is Fox really different from the rest of the media? Or has it been successful merely at positioning itself as different?

  ●  Would it surprise you to know that individuals at News Corp., the parent company of Fox News, gave nearly six times as much money to Barack Obama than Mitt Romney in the 2011-2012 election cycle?
       Total contributions to candidates from News Corp individuals: Barack Obama (D) $147,464 — Mitt Romney (R) $29,950, a 6 to 1 ratio
  ●  Would it surprise you to know that individuals at News Corp. gave more to Rep. Howard Berman, D-Calif., than to Mitt Romney?
  ●  Would it surprise you to know that individuals at News Corp. gave more to Ben Cardin, Democrat from Maryland, than to Mitt Romney?
  ●  Would it surprise you to know that News Corp. gave more than TWICE as much to Democratic candidates in 2012 than to Republicans?
  ●  Would it surprise you that this pattern was about the same in 2010 and 2008?
  ●  Would it surprise you to know that News Corp. gave far more money to Democrats running for both the House and Senate in 2012 than to Republicans?

Do the owners and top managers of Fox News and News Corp. not have the right to support any candidates they want to support?
Of course they do.
But the American people have a right to know where the hearts and minds and pocketbooks of their trusted news sources really are – especially when it comes to politics.
Fox News has certainly learned there is a vast public audience whose values and worldviews are unserved by the major media. That’s the secret to its success.
There’s no question other media are even more skewed to the left than is News Corp. CNN, NBC, ABC and CBS are even more in the tank for so-called “progressive” politics. Nevertheless, I’m sure it will be shocking to many Americans just how supportive of the political status quo and the Democratic Party agenda News Corp. truly is.
News Corp. donated more money to Obama than to any other American politician. But this wasn’t a new development in 2011 and 2012. In fact, Rupert Murdoch’s company has been donating more to Democrats since 1989.
CNN, languishing in the cable ratings wars against Fox, has even reported on this fact – presumably hoping it might turn off some Fox News viewers with the truth about political donations.
The CNN report makes the point: Fox News offers viewpoints from many Republicans and conservatives – because it knows those views resonate with the public and helps bolster the network’s “fair and balanced” marketing ploy. But the Bible tells us in Luke 12:34: “For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.”
Where do you think Fox News’ heart is?
I’m not demeaning everyone at Fox. It is clearly better than CNN, MSNBC, CBS, NBC, ABC and PBS. There are some great people who work there.
There are good people who work at every news agency. But when you consider the bias of the Big Media in the U.S. and around the world, don’t be fooled by slogans designed to tickle your ears. Don’t be fooled by clever marketing gimmicks.
One of America’s biggest problems is control of the news and the flow of information by a state-influenced, if not a state-controlled, media.
Constantly I am asked by WND viewers: “Why doesn’t Fox News cover this story?” They ask, “Where’s the rest of the media on that story?”
Now, as the late and incomparably independent Paul Harvey would say, you know the rest of the story.

Without Media Bias of ABCBSNBCNNYTWPBSNPRLAT, Author of New Book on 2012 Election: ‘Without Media Bias, America Would Vote Like Texas or Kentucky’
  “Spin Masters: How the Media Ignored the Real News and Helped Reelect Barack Obama” by David Freddoso

By David Freddoso -- Think of the most liberal city in America — San Francisco, say, or Cambridge, Mass. In 2008, both of those cities voted for Barack Obama over John McCain by margins of 86% to 14%.
Those margins probably don’t surprise you, but here’s something that might: The residents of those cities are actually more conservative, on aggregate, than the Washington presscorps — the people who report the political news.
In fact, according to UCLA political scientist Tim Groseclose, San Francisco and Cambridge are roughly twice as conservative as Washington correspondents.
Conservatives have long complained that the media are too liberal. They refer derisively to “Big Media,” “the drive-by media,” and the “lamestreammedia” whenever they want to signal their skepticism about something they hear in the mainstream press.
Liberals usually respond in one of two ways. They argue that the media only seem liberal because conservatives and their favorite media outlets are so far to the right. Alternatively, they insist that although most reporters hold liberal views and vote for Democrats consistently, they are still professionals who would never even dream of injecting their personal views into their craft.
Multiple studies refute these claims — and so does any objective reading of the newspapers and viewing of newscasts.
Journalists have voted disproportionately for Democratic presidential candidates in every election for at least two generations, and the imbalance is actually getting worse. In the lead-up to the 2004 election, New York Times columnist John Tierney conducted an unscientific poll of 153 journalists.When asked who would make a better president, the journalists from outside the beltway chose Democrat John Kerry 3 to 1.But those based in Washington, DC, preferred Kerry 12 to 1.
Journalists are also much more likely to embrace the liberal label than are average Americans. Among the American population at large, 41% self-identify as conservative and 23% as liberal. According to a 2008 survey of more than 200 journalists by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, self-described liberals outnumbered conservatives 4 to 1.
In his 2011 book “Left Turn: How Liberal Media Bias Distorts the American Mind,” Groseclose setout to calculate media bias mathematically. Using sophisticated statistical analysis, Groseclose concluded that “every mainstream national news outlet in the United States has a liberal bias.”
Groseclose found that 18 of 20 news sources he studied were left of center. The only two to the right were the Washington Times and the “Fox News Special Report with Brit Hume.”
Groseclose’s conclusions generated an avalanche of negative media attention from liberal news outlets, as well as a lot of personal hate mail. But they were rooted in statistical analysis that had been designed to measure the ideological positions of members of Congress and based on a paper he co-authored that appeared in the peer-reviewed Quarterly Journal of Economics.
Groseclose calculated that The New York Times’ ideological slant is roughly on par with that of liberal Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman.
In an e-mail interview, Groseclose asserted, “Without media bias, America would vote about like Texas or Kentucky.” That’s a pretty bold claim, but it certainly isn’t crazy to think that the media have some effect on how people vote — an effect helpful to Democrats.
The public was very aware of the media’s liberal bias in the 2012 election. According to an August 2012 Rasmussen Reports public opinion poll, 59% of likely voters believed Obama had received the most favorable treatment from the media during the campaign. Just 18% thought that of Romney.
Rasmussen also found that 51% of likely voters expected the media to help Obama, while only 9% expected the media to help Romney.
This followed 2008, when 70% of respondents in a Pew poll felt the media wanted Obama to win. Only 9% believed they wanted McCain to win.
And Obama’s re-election didn’t stop the favorable news stories about him; it multiplied them. And if the early days of his second term are any indication, we can look forward to another four years of fawning reports.
Obama’s post-election press conference on Nov. 14, 2012, was his first full press conference in eight months. Ahead of it, Politico published an interesting piece, predicting the types of tough questions Obama would be asked. Among their suggested queries:

  ■   “Do you believe the FBI should have told you and Congress sooner about the investigation that led General Petraeus to resign?”
  ■  “On the fiscal cliff, is your bottom line rates or revenue? Is it enough to close tax loopholes and deductions on the wealthy, or must tax rates also go up in order for you to sign a deal?”
  ■  “Why was the US Consulate in Benghazi so lightly guarded, despite complaints about deteriorating security conditions in Libya?”
And do you suppose journalists asked these? A few tough questions were asked, but there was also a lot of fluff. Here were some of the questions the Washington correspondents asked the president of the United States after he had been under wraps for eight months:
  ■   “What lessons, if any, did Democrats learn from this last election and the Latino vote?”
  ■  “Mr.President, on election night you said that you were looking forward to speaking with Governor Romney, sitting down in the coming weeks to discuss ways that you could work together on this nation’s problems. Have you extended that invitation? Has he accepted? And in what ways do you think you can work together?”

One reporter even offered her congratulations to the newly re-elected president.
With such a cooperative media, it’s a wonder why Obama doesn’t hold more press conferences. It’s always important for a politician to keep in touch with his base.
David Freddoso is the editorial editor of the Washington Examiner. Excepted with permission from his new book, “Spin Masters: How the Media Ignored the Real News and Helped Reelect Barack Obama” (Regnery Publishing), out this week.
Must Read Book: How the Media Ignored the Real News to Get Obama Re-Elected
By Katie Pavlich -- It's been a week full of liberal media bias examples, but after all, every week is full of them.
We saw NBC news purposely edit another video clip smearing Second Amendment supporters in order to push a gun control agenda.
This is the same agenda President Obama just happens to be pushing as he continues to single out the NRA and its members as enemy number one.
The move by NBC impacted public opinion for a few hours until luckily new media, the team over at Twitchy.com precisely, debunked the entire thing.
Although this was a case of editing to fake news in order to influence the current political debate about gun control on Capitol Hill, often times the media simply chooses to ignore the real news for political purposes.
New York Times Best Selling Author and Washington Examiner Editor David Freddoso details this tactic in his newest book, Spin Masters: How the Media Ignored the Real News and Helped Re-Elect Barack Obama, which came out Monday.
In the book Freddoso states, "Sure the mainstream media tilt left -- even wildly left. We all know that, right? But it's even worse than you think. The trouble is not just bias -- it's that the media no longer even bother to report the news or investigate big stories."
Freddoso wades through the past year in media, covering everything from the media promoted war on women to the lack of coverage of big scandals like Operation Fast and Furious and the 9/11 terrorist attack in Benghazi.
Using humor, Freddoso points out media's most ridiculous stories with sections in the book titled, "The Zombie-Eyed Granny-Starver from Wisconsin" and "Violence Against Fact."
If you're interested in knowing how many former mainstream media journalists are actually working in the Obama administration, he's got that covered too.
Get it, read it and remember it next time you watch the news or read the Washington Post. The book is available now on Amazon.
Media Bias in the Age of Obama
By Pete Wehner -- The soft and at times obsequious interview Steve Kroft of “60 Minutes” did with Barack Obama (and Hillary Clinton) has received a lot of justifiable criticism. (Conor Friedersdorf demolishes Kroft in this piece.) Mr. Kroft didn’t help himself when he told CNN’s Piers Morgan that one of the reasons the president turns to Kroft so often is that he doesn’t use “gotcha questions” on Mr. Obama–the kind that “60 Minutes” routinely used against President Bush and other Republicans like Representative Eric Cantor.
But Mr. Kroft, as embarrassing as his interview was, is merely symptomatic of a larger phenomenon: the unprecedented swooning and cheerleading by the press for Barack Obama.
To say that the elite media has a liberal bias is similar to declaring that the sun rises in the east. But it’s never been this transparent, the infatuation never this deep, the advocacy this passionate. We are now seeing shows like “60 Minutes”– once a fearless giant in journalism –give interviews that you would expect to see on Entertainment Tonight or state-run television. We’re at the point when we have to count on tough interviews coming from news outlets like Univision. There are of course exceptions to this–journalists who are both tough-minded and fair-minded. But among the most significant political developments of our time is how many members of the press have become partisans in ways we’ve never before seen.
What explains this?   Continued >>>
WHO KNEW!!! GunGrabber-In-Chief Claims He Does Skeet Shooting All the Time!
   PHOTOSHOPPED: Obama Lies More Than the Serial 'Clinton Liars'
Mag Pushes Fake Picture of Obama Skeet Shooting — Then Deletes It
President Obama recently told the New Republic magazine, "Up at Camp David, we do skeet shooting all the time." Today, after some suggested the president's claim might not be true, the New Republic tweeted a picture supposedly proving that Obama has gone skeet shooting:
The only problem: the picture is a fake, and not hosted on the White House's website.
Within minutes the magazine had deleted the tweet and admitted its mistake:
We see it! We see it! Not the White House!
— The New Republic (@tnr) January 29, 2013
And then the magazine blamed Twitter for its mistake:OK, everyone. Apologies. Twitter sometimes leads to quick accidents.
— The New Republic (@tnr) January 29, 2013
"I'll Beat Him" — Female Congressman Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) Laughingly Challenges Obama to Skeet Shooting
Skeeter? CNN's Erin Burnett Did a Segment Insinuating Obama’s Lying About His Shooting

"THE FIEND" Posted Her 'Gun Ban' Bill Draft Online



VIEW VIDEO of Feinstein on “60 Minutes” in 1995 Saying: “If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for AN OUTRIGHT BAN, picking up every one of them – Mr. and Mrs. America TURN THEM ALL IN - I would have done it. I could not do that – the votes weren’t here.”

Also, in 2004, when Barack Obama was an Illinois state Senator, he voted voted gainst allowing people in their own homes to use guns to protect themselves and their families from rapists and murderers.

A draft of the much-anticipated "assault weapon" ban bill authored by Sen. Dianne Feinstein was posted online this afternoon in advance of it's posting on the Library of Congress THOMAS legislative database site.
NEWBOY POST has received a copy and posted it on the SCRIBD document archive site.
That is necessary because at this writing, searching for the bill on the THOMAS site retrieves a message that "The text of S.150 has not yet been received from GPO Bills are generally sent to the Library of Congress from the Government Printing Office a day or two after they are introduced on the floor of the House or Senate.
"Delays can occur when there are a large number of bills to prepare or when a very large bill has to be printed," the site advises.
Still, the THOMAS site does provide some preliminary information, notably the last major action, "1/24/2013 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary," and a list of the 17 co-sponsors:

THE FOLLOWING ARE ENEMIES OF THE U.S. CONSTITUTION:
Sen Blumenthal, Richard [CT] — Sen Cardin, Benjamin L. [MD] — Sen Carper, Thomas R. [DE] — Sen Durbin, Richard [IL] — Sen Gillibrand, Kirsten E. [NY] — Sen Lautenberg, Frank R. [NJ] — Sen Levin, Carl [MI] — Sen Menendez, Robert [NJ] — Sen Mikulski, Barbara A. [MD] — Sen Murphy, Christopher S. [CT] — Sen Reed, Jack [RI] — Rockefeller, John D., IV [WV] — Sen Schatz, Brian [HI] — Sen Schumer, Charles E. [NY] — Sen Warren, Elizabeth [MA] — Sen Whitehouse, Sheldon [RI]
To access more information on the bill when it becomes available on the search-based site, Go to THOMAS. Go to the "Browse Bill by Sponsor/Select a Senator" option, highlight Feinstein's name and click on "Go." That will take you to the "Bill Summary and Status 113th Congress (2013 - 2014) S.150" page.
Guns Banned by Senator Feinstein's Anti-Constitutional Bill Listed - by Name!

Federal Reserve Admits 0bama Recovery
The WORST In Modern U.S. History!

THE FIX: 'Me and da boyz got lotsa new Benjamins to spread around!'

It is now official. According to the Federal Reserve of St. Louis, this is the WORST economic recovery in modern U.S. history. These charts show the recovery in even starker terms.
The disappointment in the economic recovery can be seen in today’s Bloomberg Consumer Confidence index which fell today to -36.4. It has not risen above -30 that we last saw in 2008.
Moral of the story? Asset bubbles (like housing) are DANGEROUS and don’t let the Federal government enact policies (like Clinton’s National Homeownership Strategy) that nearly destroyed our economy. nhsdream2
But the good news today is that claims for jobless benefits in the U.S. dropped last week to a five-year low. Applications for unemployment insurance payments decreased by 5,000 to 330,000 in the week ended Jan. 19, the fewest since the same week in 2008, according to the Department of Labor.

Not Again! What is it About 0bama that Attracts Flies and Does He Think They Taste Good?

The Latest in the 0bama Vs. Fly Saga —
0bama Wins Again — Yum Yum!
Unfortunately for Obama, it’s not his first run-in with these insects — and several have been captured on camera.
The Daily Rushbo has created an entertaining compilation video of the commander-in-chief’s history with flies. WATCH:
During a Thursday event where President Barack Obama announced he was nominating former U.S. attorney Mary Jo White to head the Securities and Exchange Commission, a rather large house fly annoyed the president by buzzing around his head and then landing on the middle of his forehead.
Reuters photographer Larry Downing snapped the photos that is now quickly spreading across the Internet.

Hillary: "I didn't have sex with that man, Mr. Ben Ghazi . . . I never told anybody to lie, not a single time – never."
  Hillary in the Hot Seat! Some questions Hillary should have been asked when she testified on Benghazi
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton testified on the Benghazi debacle before the House Foreign Affairs Committee. The hearing was held Wednesday, January 23.
I doubt that very many journalists and citizens will closely follow the hearing held so soon after the inauguration. But even so, I have some questions that a member of the Committee may want to ask. (Of course, these questions are the tip of the iceberg.)

(1) On October 15, 2012, did you take responsibility for the lapses in Benghazi security that resulted in the 9/11/12 murders of Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans.
(2) Do you take responsibility for the State Department not improving security or withdrawing after terrorists exploded two bombs (one in April 2012 and the other in June 2012) at the American Benghazi diplomatic post?
(3) Do you take responsibility for the State Department not improving security or withdrawing after a May 2012 terrorist attack on the Red Cross in Benghazi that caused the organization to withdraw effective August 6, 2012?
(4) Do you take responsibility for the State Department not improving security or withdrawing after an attempted assassination of the British Ambassador in Benghazi on June 10, 2012, that resulted in the withdrawal of all British consular staff that same month?
(5) Do you take responsibility for the State Department not improving security or withdrawing after American officials on the ground in Benghazi expressed security concerns in the months prior to 9/11/12?
(6) Do you take responsibility for the failure to rescue the Americans during the fighting that lasted several hours? If you do not take responsibility, then who is responsible?
(7) Please confirm that there were no YouTube video protests at the American Benghazi diplomatic post prior to the terrorist attack.
(8) Please confirm that within hours of the terrorist attack, Ansar al-Sharia, a terrorist organization affiliated with al-Qaeda, claimed credit for the attack, and that the State Department, White House, and FBI were immediately aware of the claim.
(9) When did the Obama Administration first suspect that Ansar al-Sharia had launched the terrorist attack on the American Benghazi diplomatic post?
(10) You are responsible for the security lapses that resulted in the deaths of four Americans, including your close associate Ambassador Chris Stevens. Since you are responsible, why didn't you appear on the five 9/16/12 Sunday news shows to explain to the American people what happened in Benghazi?
(11) Why did UN Ambassador Susan Rice appear on those five shows when according to President Obama she knew nothing about Benghazi? Given that you are responsible for State Department security and your Libyan ambassador had been murdered, did you think then or do you think now that Ambassador Rice was the right person to appear?
(12) On December 19, 2012, three State Department employees took responsibility for contributing to the Benghazi debacle, and they resigned. Did they do the right thing when they resigned? Are they currently employed by the State Department?

HILLARY'S TESTIMONY: A DAY OF FAWNING & SOFTBALLS!

Gets emotional over Benghazi attack
Hillary Shouts: 'What Difference ... Does It Make?!'
I Didn't Select Rice, Wasn't Consulted
NYT: Some Algeria Attackers Hit U.S. Embassy in Libya
Hillary: I never saw requests for more security
Hillary Blames Congress for lack of funding
Rand Paul: 'I would have relieved you of post'
Congressman Dana Rohrabacher: 'Only Person In Jail Right Now Is Filmmaker
 9
A FAKER AND "THE GREATEST FAKER OF ALL TIME"

Inaugural Official: Beyoncé 'Did Not Sing Live' Decision Made Night Before Inauguration Day
An inaugural official who asked not to be identified told CNN Wednesday that pop star Beyoncé lip-synced her performance on Inauguration Day. "She did not sing live," the official told CNN.
A pre-recording of the artist's rendition of the National Anthem was played instead. What was heard by spectators and viewers was the sound of that recording, according to the official.
The official said Beyoncé made the decision herself the night before Inauguration Day. Quick Clicks Famous lip-syncers caught in the act Beyoncé arrived so late Sunday night she did not have time to rehearse with the U.S. Marine Band  Continued >>>
Beyoncé Should Have Sung the National Anthem Live
There's no rational reason to care whether Beyoncé was lip-syncing or really singing when she performed at the presidential inaugural Monday. But the disclosure was troubling nonetheless. It's not that we were all cheated, exactly. No one paid to stand outside in the cold to watch the ceremonies (though presumably the well-connected and the sponsors had no trouble getting bleacher seats). It's that Beyoncé looked overwhelmed with emotion as she belted out the national anthem, giving the impression that her performance reflected her excitement about Obama being re-elected, or better yet, just pride in American democracy. The fact that she  Continued >>>

EXCLUSIVE: Inside the White House After-Party: 0bama Wins 'Gangnam Dance Off'

Michelle Grooved to Beyonce's 'Single Ladies' at Celebrity-Packed Bash
Obama spent the best part of last year fighting a grueling battle for another term in the White House, but hours after President Barack Obama was officially sworn into office on Monday, he had a bigger fight on his hands: Taking on singer Usher in a Gangnam Style dance off.
The president and his wife Michelle threw a spectacular after-party at the White House last night after attending two glitzy events celebrating his inauguration. Hundreds of high-profile guests attended the exclusive bash which finally came to a close at 3 a.m.
Celebrities shared photographs of the first lady, still wearing her glamorous red Jason Wu gown, dancing to Beyonce's hit Single Ladies, while her husband hugged and chatted with guests, his tie undone after a busy day.
And late into the night, he relaxed even more, according to India Benet, the teenage daughter of singer Eric Benet, who performed at the event.
'Getting down on the dancefloor with the COOLEST crowd of people ever!!!' She wrote alongside a picture showing her grinning at the camera in the White House. 'After this, the President and Usher had a dance off to Gangnam style!!'

Human Torture Defined: Enduring 1460 More Days of 'The 0bama Regime'
  0bama Targets Not Just Republicans, but the Constitution Itself
By Joel B. Pollak -- President Barack Obama's second inaugural address has been described as one of the most partisan ever given, heralding a sweeping left-wing agenda and demonizing his opponents. But President Obama's target is not simply the Republican Party: it is the Constitution itself, and the values of liberty that it enshrines.
In the address itself (Columnist Charles Krauthammer called the speech an "ode to Big Government" and a "rebuke to Reaganism"), President Obama made the case that liberty is not timeless; that it must adjust to the times, and that "preserving our individual freedoms ultimately requires collective action"--not to defend those freedoms from infringement, but to give them "meaning" through government regulation and redistribution.
White House communications director Dan Pfeiffer put the point more bluntly in remarks published earlier today:
"There’s a moment of opportunity now that’s important," Pfeiffer said. "What’s frustrating is that we don’t have a political system or an opposition party worthy of the opportunity."
Note the contempt in Pfeiffer's words--not just for the political opposition, but for the political system itself--a system designed by the Framers to include checks and balances to hold government power firmly in check.
Pfeiffer's contempt is widely shared by the clique of media barons and political entrepreneurs that put him in office. As Joel Kotkin writes today, Barack Obama is both the creation and culmination of a new "power class" that shares the impatience of early twentieth century progressives with the democratic process, and prefers a technocratic model that Obama has emulated through his extra-political, executive-order-style management.
A year ago, President Obama observed: "[I]t turns out our Founders designed a system that makes it more difficult to bring about change that I would like sometimes." Back then, facing re-election, he promised to be patient.
Today, he is impatient--with the opposition, and the system itself. He will destroy both, if necessary, to achieve his vision of America--one where "government alone" does not do everything, but rather dictates to individuals what they should do, and choose, and want, to serve its sweeping designs.

Newsweek Mag Declares Obama
'The Second Coming,' but

  Sane Millions View Him Differently

By Paul Bedard -- How did the rest of the media miss this? According to the new issue of NEWSWEEK online, President Obama, who this weekend begins his second term--the third president in a row to do so--is "The Second Coming."
With flattering photographs, the magazine edited by Obama fan Tina Brown holds out hope that in his second Inaugural Address, Obama can inspire and show that he can also lead.
The conservative media watch dog, Media Research Center, first noticed the God-like cover.
"Conservatives have long joked that the national press corps see Barack Obama as the second coming of Jesus Christ. Today, Newsweek - at least what's left of it, an online product for tablets and e-readers - made it official," said Center Vice President Brent Baker
"Next to a side shot of Obama's head, the 'Inauguration 2013' cover story pronounces: 'The Second Coming.'"
Baker notes that the author, long-time Newsweek veteran Evan Thomas, gave Obama God-like qualities during his first year in office, saying on MSNBC, "In a way, Obama's standing above the country, above -- above the world. He's sort of God. He's going to bring all different sides together."

Inauguration Poster Likens 0bama to Jesus
  Inauguration Poster: "Prophecy Fulfilled"

Doomed or Saved — That Is the Question!

By Todd Starnes -- Street vendors and souvenir stores across Washington, D.C. are selling posters depicting President Obama as Jesus Christ — and one national news publication called him the “Second Coming.”
The poster, which does not have the official endorsement of the White House, features an image of the president in prayer with the headline,“Prophecy Fulfilled.”
“Barak is of Hebrew origin and its meaning is ‘flash of lightning,” the poster notes, referencing a passage in in the Old Testament book of Judges.
Hussein, they allege, is a Biblical word meaning “good and handsome.”
“So you see, Barak was destined to be a good and handsome man that would rise like a flash of lightning to win victory in a battle against overwhelming odds,” the poster read.
This week’s cover of Newsweek depicts President Obama as the “Second Coming” – a biblical reference to the return of Christ.
It’s not the first time that Obama has been deified by his supporters.
Actor Jamie Foxx called President Obama “our Lord and Savior” during a recent television appearance.
“It’s like church over here,” Foxx told the audience. “First of all, give an honor to God and our Lord and Savior Barack Obama.”
“Barack Obama,” he shouted as the audience cheered.
Florida A&M professor Barbara Thompson published a book titled “The Gospel According to Apostle Barack.”
The book likens Obama to Jesus Christ and Martin Luther King, Jr.
“I learned that Jesus walked the earth to create a more civilized society, Martin (Luther King) walked the earth to create a more justified society, but, Apostle Barack, the name he was called in my dreams, would walk the earth to create a more equalized society, for the middle class and working poor,” she wrote in an excerpt published by The Daily Caller. “Apostle Barack, the next young leader with a new cause, had been taken to the mountaintop and allowed to see over the other side.”
A controversial painting of President Obama, posed as Jesus Christ on the cross, was part of an art exhibit at Bunker Hill Community College in Boston.
  Michael D’Antuono Painting: “The Truth”
The Michael D’Antuono painting is called “The Truth” — and features the president with his arms stretched out — wearing a crown of thorns. The original debut of the painting four years ago was cancelled due to public outrage, Design & Trend reported. At the time D’Antuono told Air America that he didn’t mean to “disrespect people’s religion. It’s meant as a political piece.” And at the Democratic National Convention street vendors were selling an array of products including a prayer garment embroidered with President Obama’s name — along with a calendar that declared him “heaven sent.”
The entry also included a photograph of Obama along with a passage of Scripture from the New Testament.
“For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life,” the entry read — referencing John 3:16.
The month of November includes an image of individuals with their hands on Obama’s back — with the words “The Lord is my Shepherd, I shall not want.”
Todd Starnes is the author of “Dispatches From Bitter America.”

The Face of Tyranny: 65% See Gun Rights as Protection Against 'America's First Despot'


Two-out-of-three Americans recognize that their constitutional right to own a gun was intended to ensure their freedom.
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 65% of American Adults think the purpose of the Second Amendment is to make sure that people are able to protect themselves from tyranny.
Only 17% disagree, while another 18% are not sure. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
Not surprisingly, 72% of those with a gun in their family regard the Second Amendment as a protection against tyranny. However, even a majority (57%) of those without a gun in their home hold that view.
Many gun control advocates talk of the right to gun ownership as relating to hunting and recreational uses only.
While there are often wide partisan differences of opinion on gun-related issues, even 54% of Democrats agree with 75% of Republicans and 68% of those not affiliated with either major party that the right to own a gun is to ensure such freedom.
As Americans search for answers to the Newtown shooting, attitudes on gun ownership are “not likely to change in a nation where six out of 10 adults would rather live in a neighborhood where they can own a gun and most would feel safer if their children attended a school with an armed security guard.” Scott Rasmussen explains in his latest weekly newspaper column that if Congress is “not willing to go as far as the president wants on gun control, perhaps they… might take stronger action on mental health issues or increase the penalties for crimes committed with a gun.”
In the wake of last month’s horrific elementary school massacre in Connecticut, 51% favor stricter gun control laws. There is strong support for background checks of gun owners, but a plurality believes dealing with mental health issues will lead to more effective results. Fifty-nine percent (59%) think Congress and President Obama are likely to create stricter gun control laws.
How did you do in the new Rasmussen Challenge? Check the leaderboard to find out.
(Want a free daily e-mail update? If it's in the news, it's in our polls). Rasmussen Reports updates are also available on Twitter or Facebook.
The survey of 1,000 Adults was conducted on January 16-17, 2013 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. See methodology.
Seventy-four percent (74%) of all Americans continue to believe that the U.S. Constitution guarantees the right of an average citizen to own a gun. Just 17% disagree. These views haven’t changed in nearly four years of surveying.
The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states, “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” The amendment is part of the Bill of Rights and the Supreme Court has ruled that this does guarantee an individual’s right to own a gun.
The NRA is now viewed favorably by 49% of Americans and unfavorably by 41%. This includes 25% with a Very Favorable opinion of the influential gun-rights organization and 23% with a Very Unfavorable one. The NRA’s favorables are down slightly from 54% in July 2011, but its unfavorable are unchanged.
Sixty-six percent (66%) of Likely U.S. Voters believe in America today there is too much government power and too little individual freedom. Sixty percent (60%) feel the federal government today does not have the consent of the governed.
Americans are now evenly divided over whether the federal government is a protector of individual rights or a threat to those rights.
But even before the Newtown shootings, Americans rated the freedoms of speech and religion as more important the freedom of the press and the right to bear arms. Seventeen percent (17%) believe there is too much individual freedom in the United States today.

Unlike Media, 36% of Americans Believe Obama is Hiding Biographical Information
  By Sven Magnussen -- A Fairleigh Dickinson University Public Mind Poll indicates 36% of a nationwide survey of registered voters think President Obama is hiding information about his background and early life. Also, the poll indicates 20% of Americans think that President Obama’s supporters committed significant voter fraud in the 2012 elections (36 % Republicans, 4% Democrats).
The Fairleigh Dickinson University polled 814 registered voters, nationally, by telephone with both landline and cell phones from December 10 through December 16, 2012.
The margin of error was +/-3.4%.During Obama's 2008 Presidential campaign, a employee with The Analysis Corp. was arrested and charged for a breach of Obama's passport records at the U.S. State Department.
A principle with the The Analysis Corp., former CIA Agent John O. Brennan, was an adviser to the Obama Campaign and a political donor at the time of the arrest.
It was widely reported and generally accepted Obama's passport records included information which could implicate him or associate him with the CIA as an asset and Brennan's firm was discharged with the duty to clean up Obama's passport records. Brennan is currently Obama's nominee for CIA Director.
Contributing to concern Obama was not eligible for the Office of the President of the U.S. was an AP photo published during the 2008 campaign of the school record of Barry Soetoro at St. Francis Assisi, Djakarta, Indonesia.
The enrollment record, dated January 1, 1968, indicated Soetoro was born in Honolulu, HI on the same day Barack Hussein Obama II was born in Honolulu, HI.
The enrollment record also states Soetoro's father was Lolo Soetoro, his religion is Muslim, and nationality is Indonesian.
During the 2008 campaign, Obama admitted Lolo Soetoro was his step-father and he was in Indonesia in 1968 attending elementary school.
Lolo Soetoro and Obama's mother, Stanley Ann Dunham-Soetoro, were married in Hawaii in 1965.
Obama campaign supporters have consistently and repeatedly insisted Indonesian Law would not allow Obama to be adopted by Lolo Soetoro and he could not be naturalized as an Indonesian citizen because of his age.
Furthermore, Obama supporters insist his Indonesian citizenship is irrelevant to his allegience to the United States as a natural born citizen of the United States.
Obama was not adopted in Indonesia. He was adopted by Lolo Soetoro in Hawaii in 1967.
When the Soetoro adoption was finalized in 1967, Obama's original long form birth certificate was sealed by order of the Court and archived by the Hawaii Department of Health (HDOH).
A sealed vital record is null and void for all future legal or administrative proceedings.
In addition to sealing Obama's original long form birth certificate, the Court ordered a Certification of Live Birth (COLB) created and filed by the registrar of HDOH.
Lolo Soetoro was listed as the paternal parent for Barry Soetoro for a live birth on August 4, 1961, Honolulu, HI and filed on August 8, 1961.
Natural born citizenship status is not held in perpetuity.
Native born U.S. Citizens who move out of the U.S. are subject to the issuance of a Certificate of Loss of Nationality for expatriating acts and a preponderance of the evidence standard for a voluntary intent to forfeit U.S. citizenship. In Vance v. Terrazas, 444 U.S. 252 (1980), the Supreme Court of the U.S. reversed and remanded a lower Court ruling.
The Court must conclude that the citizen not only voluntarily committed the expatriating act prescribed in the INA, § 349(a), but also intended to relinquish his citizenship. Cf. Afroyim v. Rusk, 387 U. S. 253. Pp. 444 U. S. 258-263.
Also, the Court ruled expatriation proceedings are civil in nature, and do not threaten a loss of liberty, and thus Congress did not exceed its powers by requiring proof of an intentional expatriating act by only a preponderance of evidence.
The Obama timeline is complicated, but it is well established through FOIA results, Stanley Ann Dunham-Soetoro was in Djakarta, Indonesia in August, 1967 to renew her U.S. passport.
On her 1967 passport renewal, Dunham-Soetoro informed the U.S. State Department she intended to stay in Indonesia indefinately (sic).
The U.S. State Department passport application ask an applicant for a departure date and return date to establish intent of the applicant to return to the U.S.
The applicant is also asked to affirm any person previously included on the applicants passport has not naturalized in a foreign state. On Dunham-Soetoro's 1967 renewal application has Barack Hussein Obama Soebarkah written in the Amend Include (Exclude) section with the name crossed out. The instructions on the application indicate the applicant should cross out the line swearing a person previously included on the passport has not naturalized in a foreign state.
A review of publicly available information of Obama's early years indicate enrolled in St. Francis Assisi, Djakarta, Indonesia, as Barry Soetoro, Indonesian National on January 1, 1968. Therefore, we can reasonably conclude Dunham-Soetoro removed Barack Hussein Obama from her passport in August, 1967 because the Soetoro adoption had been completed and Barry Soetoro was her son's legal name.
The publicly available evidence is clear. Barack Hussein Obama II was adopted by Lolo Soetoro in Hawaii, 1967, with a legal name change to Barry Soetoro. Soetoro's mother, Stanley Ann Dunham-Soetoro, established a preponderance of the evidence standard of intent to forfeit U.S. Citizenship for Soetoro by notifiying the U.S. State Department of intent to stay in Indonesia indefinitely. She then notified the U.S. State Department he should be removed from her U.S. passport because he has naturalized in a foreign state.
Investigation of Obama's Fraudulent Social Security Number: Developing: 1940 New York Census Shows Obama Alias Harrison Bounel Born In 1890; Once Lived In Connecticut
As reported here back in May of 2011 skip-tracer and debt collector Al Hendershot uncovered an alias tied to Barack Obama's Connecticut social security number and Michelle Obama. The following short clip is taken from Hendershot's original TruNews interview that aired back in 2011. He explains how the three are tied together.

More Guns = More Murders? A Myth.
More Guns = Fewer Murders! THE FACTS.
   . -- In the wake of the recent shootings, the liberal media have concluded we need more gun control. President Obama just signed 23 executive actions related to guns, and promises to do more later.
To them the logic seems obvious, that more guns mean more deaths, suicides, and accidents.
And the U.S. supposedly has very high murder rates, they argue, because our nation is teeming with guns. So with stricter gun control, we would suffer fewer murders and less violence.
As Charles Blow recently claimed in the New York Times: "America has the highest gun homicide rate, the highest number of guns per capita ..."
Or as the New York Times earlier this month put forward the notion: "Generally, if you live in a civilized society, more guns mean more death." The claim is all over the news from CNN to various "Fact Check" articles.
It would be nice if things were that simple. The evidence — and there is plenty of it — points to the very opposite, that cutting access to guns mainly disarms law-abiding citizens, making criminals' lives easier. Guns let potential victims defend themselves when the police aren't there.
First, let's just be clear that lots of nations, including "civilized" ones, suffer from both higher overall murder and gun murder rates. Indeed, we are very far from the top.
In 2011, the U.S. murder rate was 4.7 per 100,000 people, the gun murder rate was 3.1.
Much of Eastern Europe; most of Southeast Asia, the Caribbean, and Africa; all but one South American nation; and all of Central America and Mexico suffer even higher murder rates than we do. For example, despite very strict gun control, Russia's and Brazil's homicide rates over the last decade averaged about four to five times higher than ours.
Indeed, if you are going to look across all nations and not just a select few, what you find is that the nations with the strictest gun control tend to have higher murder rates.
The New York Times and others have made much from comparing some arbitrarily defined group of "civilized" nations.
But even with the very questionable data on gun ownership that the Times prefers to use from the Small Arms Survey, the results do not imply the lesson that gun control advocates think they do for the U.S.
If you graph (see graph above) their measure of gun ownership with homicide rates, higher gun ownership means fewer deaths.
A similar pattern holds for all countries as well.
How is this possible?
Many liberals conveniently focus on a few low-murder-rate countries such as England.
Even worse, they ignore that the countries they idolize enjoyed even lower murder rates before they banned guns.
The seemingly most obvious way to stop criminals from getting guns is simply to ban them.
So what happened in the countries that banned either handguns or all guns?
It did not go well: In every single place that we have data for, murder rates went up. Chicago and D.C. provided spectacular failures within the U.S.
But this has been true worldwide. The U.K., Ireland and Jamaica, despite being island nations that can't blame a neighbor for supplying guns, have suffered more murders after gun control was passed.
So what has happened when Americans have been allowed access to guns? Consider a simple fact. Concealed handgun permits and gun sales have been soaring over the last four years, as regular people have worried that Obama would push through gun control. Yet, murders and violent crime have been falling.
That isn't just a recent phenomenon. If you look at the U.S. over the last few decades, even after accounting for other factors, the states that have had the biggest increases in concealed handgun permits and gun ownership have seen the biggest drops in murder and violent crime rates.
Gun control just does not work. Indeed, it makes things worse.
John Lott is a former chief economist at the U.S. Sentencing Commission and the author of "More Guns, Less Crime."

Clown Biden: White House Readies
'19 Executive Actions' on Guns
  The Time Is Nigh - Nigh - Nigh!!!

Congressman Steve Stockman (R-Texas) Threatens '0bama Impeachment' Over Guns

The White House has identified 19 executive actions for President Barack Obama to move unilaterally on gun control, Vice President Joe Biden told a group of House Democrats on Monday, the administration’s first definitive statements about its response to last month’s mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School.
Later this week, Obama will formally announce his proposals to reduce gun violence, which are expected to include renewal of the assault weapons ban, universal background checks and prohibition of high-capacity magazine clips. But Biden, who has been leading Obama’s task force on the response, spent two hours briefing a small group of sympathetic House Democrats on the road ahead in the latest White House outreach to invested groups.
The focus on executive orders is the result of the White House and other Democrats acknowledging the political difficulty of enacting any new gun legislation, a topic Biden did not address in Monday’s meeting.
The executive actions could include giving the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention authority to conduct national research on guns, more aggressive enforcement of existing gun laws and pushing for wider sharing of existing gun databases among federal and state agencies, members of Congress in the meeting said.
"It was all focusing on enforcing existing law, administering things like improving the background database, things like that that do not involve a change in the law but enforcing and making sure that the present law is administered as well as possible," said Rep. Bobby Scott (D-Va.).
The White House declined to comment on the details of what Obama will propose.
But Biden did indicate that the remains of the Obama campaign apparatus may be activated in the effort.
"He said that this has been a real focus on the policy and that the politics of this issue, that a strategy on the politics of the issue hasn’t been undertaken yet," Rep. Jackie Speier (D-Calif.) told POLITICO. "He did remind us that the campaign infrastructure is still accessible."
Biden did not address two of the more significant issues in the gun debate: the appointment of a permanent director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, and the role violent images in the entertainment industry play in the nation’s gun violence.
Obama touched on his expected legislative guns agenda at his own news conference in the East Room on Monday, while stressing the power he has via executive order.
"How we are gathering data, for example, on guns that fall into the hands of criminals, and how we track that more effectively — there may be some steps that we can take administratively as opposed through legislation," Obama said.
Even Democrats who back gun control concede that reinstating an assault weapons ban — the 1994 law expired in 2004 — will be a heavy lift for the White House. During his meeting with gun-rights groups last week, Biden mentioned only an assault weapons ban when telling the NRA and other organizations that Obama has "made up his mind" to support it.
"I think everybody acknowledges that the assault weapons ban is a challenge, but other things — like the size of the magazines, the background checks, straw purchases — are all things that have a good chance of passing," Scott said.
Speier said she told Biden the White House should do as much as it can on its own.
"I urged him to do as much by executive order as possible," she said. "Frankly, I don’t have a lot of confidence that this Congress is going to do anything significant."
And Rep. Mike Thompson (D-Calif.), the chairman of the House Democrats’ Gun Violence Prevention Task Force, said the magazine ban and universal background checks would be far more effective than an assault weapons ban without the political cost.
"Probably the most recognizable thing you can say in this debate is ban assault weapons," Thompson said. "But the other two issues" — forbidding high-capacity ammunition magazines and requiring universal background checks for gun purchases — "those two things have more impact on making our neighborhoods safe than everything else combined. Anytime you try and prohibit what kind of gun people has it generates some concern."
Biden’s personal gun violence outreach now includes the families of the 26 victims of the Dec. 14 school massacre in Newtown, Conn. Biden told the Monday meeting that he’s been reaching out to the families. A White House official confirmed the vice president has been in touch directly with some of the families.
"The vice president mentioned that he has called every one of the families that has lost children in Connecticut, and that the conversations have lasted no less than 45 minutes," Speier said.

0bama's Bully Pulpit: Pushes 'Executive Action' on Guns

By Ben Shapiro -- In the final press conference of his first term, President Barack Obama stood behind the bully pulpit and proceeded to bully.
First and foremost, of course, he bullied on gun control.

"My understanding is the vice president's going to provide a range of steps that we can take to reduce gun violence. Some of them will require legislation, some of them I can accomplish through executive action. And so I will be reviewing those today, and as I said, I will speak in more detail to what we're going to go ahead and propose later in the week. But I'm confident that there are some steps that we can take that don't require legislation and that are within my authority as president, and where you get a step that, has the opportunity to reduce the possibility of gun violence, then I want to go ahead and take it."

What exactly will Obama do with "executive action" rather than legislation? There are several options. First, he can attempt to issue orders that would go to better coordination between state and federal authorities under current law. Or he could stretch. He could attempt to ban types of guns, certain types of magazines, or anything else he try to prevent importation on certain types of weapons, or push harsher law enforcement on certain types of gun sales.
Obama is one Supreme Court justice away from being able to really destroy balance of power; right now, Justices Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, Alito, and Kennedy would likely stand against an attempt to broaden the scope of executive order power. But should Justice Kennedy retire at some point in the future, look for the Supreme Court to sign off on a dramatic shift in the balance of power to the executive.
Ben Shapiro is Editor-At-Large of Breitbart News and author of the book "Bullies: How the Left’s Culture of Fear and Intimidation Silences America" (Threshold Editions, January 8, 2013).
White House Petition Asks 0bama to Shun
Gun-Control Executive Orders
A petition launched on the White House’s "We the People" Web page may put new pressure on President Barack Obama as his administration considers using executive orders to institute nationwide gun-control measures.
Vice President Joe Biden said Wednesday that executive orders — decrees from the White House that neither require nor invite the approval of Congress — will play a role in the administration’s response to the Dec. 14 massacre that left 20 children dead at a Connecticut elementary school.
"The president is going to act," Biden said, seated next to Attorney General Eric Holder, before meeting with victims of gun violence and gun-safety groups Wednesday. Groups represented included Mayors Against Illegal Guns, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, Arizona for Gun Safety and the Campaign to Keep Guns off Campus.
SIGN White House Petition HERE!

Barack 0bama Is a Liberal Fascist!

History Won't Repeat This Time! Confront the Liberal Fascists with Opposite and Overwhelming Force!
By Colonel Lawrence Sellin -- There are now two Americas. One America cherishes individual liberty, respects the Constitution and honors the ideals and traditions that made the United States a great country. The other America, composed of liberal fascists, hates all those values and is pursuing an agenda that will lead to tyranny and oppression.
The continued aggressive tactics of the liberal fascists to destroy the Constitution and individual liberty will make civil war inevitable.
Liberal fascists hate the Constitution because it limits the power of the federal government and protects individual rights.
In a galacticly stupid article, liberal law professor Louis Michael Seidman recommends that we give up the Constitution because our broken government results from “obedience to the Constitution, with all its archaic, idiosyncratic and downright evil provisions.” No, Mr. Seidman, the US government is broken precisely because the Constitution has been deliberately and continuously violated for years by greedy and power-hungry politicians and their financial supporters at the expense of the well-being of the country.
In a blog post made on the extreme left-wing site Blue Hampshire, State Representative Democrat Cynthia Chase advised her fellow legislators to pass laws to restrict conservatives. That is, this liberal fascist proposes to take away the freedoms and liberties from those individuals with whom she politically disagrees.
Liberal fascists hate the 2nd Amendment because it protects the individual, not only from government tyranny, but from government-sponsored violence. Former New York City Democratic mayoral candidate Mark J. Green, for example, thinks gun owners should be treated like child molesters. In a similar vein, an otherwise unknown liberal fascist columnist wrote an article calling for the death of all gun owners (“If some people refused to give up their guns, that ‘prying the guns from their cold, dead hands’ thing works for me”). Reminiscent of the 1998 racist murder of James Byrd, this Iowa “journalist” also suggested tying Republican leaders, Mitch McConnell and John Boehner, to the back of a pickup truck and then drag them around a parking lot until they saw the wisdom of his gun control position. Byrd was dragged behind a pick-up truck along an asphalt road. He remained conscious throughout most of the ordeal, but was killed when his body hit the edge of a culvert, severing his right arm and head. The murderers drove on for another mile before dumping his torso in front of an African-American cemetery.
Such attitudes should come as no surprise because violent rhetoric is a main ingredient of the liberal fascist approach to politics, where images of hate, racism, murder and rape are regularly invoked against their opponents. Like all bullies, however, liberal fascists are basically cowards, who want to use the power of government to conduct their dirty work of abolishing the individual rights of others.
The Obama Administration openly violates the Constitution, is hopelessly corrupt, has brought us to the brink of bankruptcy, has opened our borders to illegal immigration and has permitted a fifth column promoting Sharia law to infiltrate our society.
Many Americans now realize that Obama is the nation’s first openly illegal President and unindicted felon. He has reigned over a lawless administration and, in November 2012, Obama stole the Presidential election through voter fraud. The US Government is presently occupied and supported by liberal fascists, who are intent on destroying our Constitutional republic and our liberty.
Petitioning Congress or the courts for the redress of grievances is futile. The Democrats are tethered to Obama’s disastrous, liberal fascist agenda. The Republican “opposition”, which has succumbed to Obama’s liberal fascist psychological warfare, is paralyzed by fear. Both the Democrats and Republicans are consumed by self-interest and have forgotten their duty to their constituents and the country. They can no longer be trusted as guardians of our posterity.
The first “shots” of a Second American Revolution have not been fired, but the battle lines have been drawn.
To our cowardly politicians and government officials, I can only offer the words spoken by Samuel Adams in 1776:
“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!”
Like the militia at Lexington and Concord, it is now the responsibility of ordinary Americans to restore the Constitution and save the republic.It is time to confront the liberal fascists with opposite and overwhelming force.
Bio: Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D. is a retired colonel with 29 years of service in the US Army Reserve and a veteran of Afghanistan and Iraq. Colonel Sellin is the author of “Afghanistan and the Culture of Military Leadership“. He receives email at lawrence.sellin@gmail.com.

Bamboozled By 0bama! — 0bamabots Shocked, Angry at New Tax Increases

Sometimes, watching a Democrat learn something is wonderful, like seeing the family dog finally sit and stay at your command.
With President Obama back in office and his life-saving “fiscal cliff” bill jammed through Congress, the new year has brought a surprising turn of events for his sycophantic supporters.
“What happened that my Social Security withholding’s in my paycheck just went up?” a poster wrote on the liberal site DemocraticUnderground.com. “My paycheck just went down by an amount that I don’t feel comfortable with. I guarantee this decrease is gonna’ hurt me more than the increase in income taxes will hurt those making over 400 grand. What happened?”
Shocker. Democrats who supported the president’s re-election just had NO idea that his steadfast pledge to raise taxes meant that he was really going to raise taxes. They thought he planned to just hit those filthy “1 percenters,” you know, the ones who earned fortunes through their inventiveness and hard work. They thought the free ride would continue forever.
So this week, as taxes went up for millions of Americans — which Republicans predicted throughout the campaign would happen — it was fun to watch the agoggery of the left.
“I know to expect between $93 and $94 less in my paycheck on the 15th,” wrote the ironically named “RomneyLies.”
“My boyfriend has had a lot of expenses and is feeling squeezed right now, and having his paycheck shrink really didn’t help,” wrote “DemocratToTheEnd.”
“BlueIndyBlue” added: “Many of my friends didn’t realize it, either. Our payroll department didn’t do a good job of explaining the coming changes.”
So let’s explain something to our ill-informed Democratic friends. In 2009, Mr. Obama enacted a “holiday” on the payroll tax deduction from employees’ paychecks, dropping the rate from 6.2 percent to 4.2 percent. But like the holidays, the drop ended, and like New Year‘s, the revelers woke up the next morning with a massive hangover and a pounding head.
“Bake,” who may have been trolling the site, jumped into the thread posted Friday. “My paycheck just went down. So did my wife’s. This hurts us. But everybody says it’s a good thing, so I guess we just suck it up and get used to it. I call it a tax increase on the middle class. I wonder what they call it. Somebody on this thread called it a ‘premium.’ Nope. It’s a tax, and it just went up.”
Some in the thread argued that the new tax — or the end of the “holiday,” which makes it a new tax — wouldn’t really amount to much. One calculated it would cost about $86 a month for most people. “Honeycombe8,” though, said that amount is nothing to sneeze at.
“$86 a month is a lot. That would pay for … Groceries for a week, as someone said. More than what I pay for parking every month, after my employer’s contribution to that. A new computer after a year. A new quality pair of shoes … every month. Months of my copay for my hormones. A new thick coat (on sale or at discount place). It would pay for what I spend on my dogs every month … food, vitamins, treats.”
The Twittersphere was even funnier.
“Really, how am I ever supposed to pay off my student loans if my already small paycheck keeps getting smaller? Help a sister out, Obama,” wrote “Meet Virginia.” “Nancy Thongkham” was much more furious. “F***ing Obama! F*** you! This taking out more taxes s*** better f***ing help me out!! Very upset to see my paycheck less today!”  Continued >>>

0bama Voters Stunned to Discover That They Too Are "Millionaires and Billionaires" — 0bama Sticks It to Those Making Less Than $30K a Year

I had more than my 'fair share' of 0bama's free stuff!

America: You break it, you buy it.
Twitchy.com has more reaction as Obama voters get their latest, smaller paychecks.
The next time an Obamabot complains about taxes, or rising prices, or falling wages, or anything else having to do with the money coming out of his own pocket, you just need to ask him one question:
“Why are you so greedy?”
Update: Trending: #WhyIsMyPaycheckLessThisWeek
Update: “What. Happened? You reelected a lying SCOAMF. That’s what happened.”
Update: What’s the taxpayer pricetag for Obama’s latest Hawaiian vacation? A mere $20 million.
Workers making $2,500 Monthly Will Take a Bigger Hit on Their Pay Than Those Earning $500,000 Annually Under 'Fiscal Cliff' Deal
While the lower brackets will take a bigger hit to their paychecks than those in the $200,000 to $500,000 bucket, their overall federal tax rate will remain smaller — The average increase in tax bills for all earners will be about $1,257
Middle-class workers will take a bigger hit to their income proportionately than those earning between $200,000 and $500,000 under the new fiscal cliff deal, according to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center.
Earners in the latter group will pay an average 1.3 percent more - or an additional $2,711 - in taxes this year, while workers making between $30,000 and $200,000 will see their paychecks shrink by as much as 1.7 percent - or up to $1,784 - the D.C.-based think tank reported. Overall, nearly 80 percent of households will pay more money to the federal government as a result of the fiscal cliff deal.
'The economy needs a stimulus, but under the agreement, taxes will go up in 2013 relative to 2012 - not only on high-income households, as widely discussed, but also on every working man and woman in the country, via the end of the payroll tax cut,' said William G. Gale, co-director of the Tax Policy Center.
'For most households, the payroll tax takes a far bigger bite than the income tax does, and the payroll tax cut therefore - as [the Congressional Budget Office] and others have shown - was a more effective stimulus than income tax cuts were, because the payroll tax cuts hit lower in the income distribution and hence were more likely to be spent,' he added.
Workers making more than $1 million will pay an average 7.8 percent more - or an additional $170,341 - under the new law.
The federal tax rate will be roughly 39 percent for that group, compared to 26 percent for those earning between $200,000 and $500,000 and 14 percent for those making between $40,000 and $50,000.

Rich Envy: First Family's Tropical Getaway — R & R at Palatial 'Plantation Estate' in Paradise


With the fiscal cliff averted at last on New Year's Day, President Barack Obama returned to his vacation spot on Kailua Beach in Oahu, Hawaii Wednesday morning for some much-needed R & R. Obama had previously cut the vacation short to deal with the fiscal crisis.
Each U.S. president has found his own way to unwind from the stresses of leading the free world, including Harry Truman, who once called the White House the "crown jewel of the federal penal system" because he felt so confined there. Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush both escaped to ranches out west.
The First Family rents a home each year on Paradise Point, a lush, green stretch of land in Kailua Beach, Oahu, that juts out over the ocean and contains an exclusive gated community.
But Obama prefers to spend the holidays at lavish rented estates in his former home state of Hawaii, where he plays golf, works out at the nearby Marine Corps base, and spends time with wife Michelle and daughters Sasha and Malia on the beach.
From 2008 to 2010, that home was the "Plantation Estate," a lavish, 5,000-square-foot ocean-front home on Paradise Point described on its web site as "built for exceptional security, comfort and elegance just steps from the silky white sands of Kailua Beach." The home's security is due in no small part to its proximity to the Marine Corps Base Hawaii on Kaneohe Bay, which houses nearly 10,000 Marines, sailors and civilian employees.
Glenn L. Weinberg, who owns Plantation Estate, did not respond to request for information from Whispers.
Wish You Were Here, Boehner! Hope Your Ass Isn't Freezing in Ohio!
  0bama frolicks in the warm waters of Kaneohe Bay in Hawaii

House Speaker John Boehner has been afforded no rest after the passage of the fiscal cliff bill. President Barack Obama, meanwhile, has been vacationing on the sunny beaches of Hawaii - leaving Washington just hours after the deal made it through Congress on Tuesday night.
The White House released a series of year-end photos of the President on Wednesday. The first picture in the series was of shot of a jubilant Obama frolicking in the warm Hawaiian waters.
Meanwhile, Boehner has been forced to put down a revolt by conservatives furious about the $620 billion in tax hikes he pushed through the House. He has also been subjected to withering criticism from Republicans in New York and New Jersey - including Governor Chris Christie - for failing to bring a bill with $60 billion in Hurricane Sandy to a vote.
 8
0bama Wins Again — Consolidates Power!

Hawaii Bound: After masterful rout over the GOP, 0bama boards Air Force One resuming $7 million vacation . . . it's all about golfing.
House Passes Bad ‘Fiscal Cliff’ Bill

$1 IN CUTS FOR EVERY $41 IN TAXES — Deal Means Higher Tax on 77% of Households — CBO: ADDS $3.9 TRILLION MORE TO DEFICIT

The House late Tuesday gave final approval to a Senate-backed bill that will let taxes rise for the richest Americans, shield the middle class from tax hikes and extend emergency unemployment benefits, ending Washington’s long drama over the “fiscal cliff.”
The dramatic vote followed a wild day in which the critical measure was assumed for several hours to be headed for defeat because of widespread Republican objections. The vote was 257 to 167, with 85 Republicans joining with nearly all of the chamber’s Democrats. President Obama, whose vice president, Joe Biden, crafted the deal with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), was preparing to address the nation.
Before the vote, House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) urged his colleagues to vote for the bill “not as a Democrat, not as a Republican, but as an American who understands that our people believe that action is necessary.’’ Yet he expressed some of the reluctance lawmakers on both sides felt over a compromise that seemed to fully please no one.
“I severely regret that this is not a big, bold and balanced plan,” Hoyer said. “We had an opportunity to reach such an agreement in a bipartisan fashion. And we will not reach a big, bold, balanced plan without bipartisanship, because the decisions we’ll have to make will be too difficult not to do in a bipartisan fashion.”
Earlier, in a closed-door meeting with Republican lawmakers, House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) and Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) had outlined options for handling the bill, including a proposal to satisfy conservatives by tacking on billions of dollars in new spending cuts.
But the leaders warned that the Senate was unlikely to approve any changes to the carefully calibrated compromise and that a vote to amend the measure probably would leave the nation facing historic tax increases for virtually every American — and force House Republicans to take the blame.
The other option: Let the measure pass the House unchanged and go to the White House for Obama’s signature. Late Tuesday, it appeared that even some of the chamber’s staunchest conservatives were ready to give up the fight.
“I think the best outcome is to have a clean bill, actually put it on the floor and see what the consensus of the House is,” said Rep. Raul R. Labrador (R-Idaho), a freshman who has opposed every major bipartisan compromise on the budget over the past two years and said he would vote against the measure.
Rep. Lou Barletta (R-Pa.), another freshman, said he would support the legislation as the “safest bet” to prevent a major tax increase that many economists predict would throw the nation back into recession.
“The Senate has gone home,” Barletta said. “I don’t know if playing chicken with the American people at this point is in the best interest of the people.”
If approved by the House, the measure would let the top tax rate rise immediately from 35 percent to 39.6 percent on income over $450,000 for married couples and $400,000 for single people — the first broad tax increase in two decades and the first since 1990 to pass Congress with Republican support.
The measure would protect more than 100 million families earning less than $250,000 a year from significant income tax increases set to take effect this month — although payroll taxes will rise for most households in 2013 with the end of a temporary tax cut approved two years ago.
In addition to dealing with the fiscal crisis, the measure would extend federal farm policies through September, averting an estimated doubling of milk prices. The deal also nixed a scheduled pay raise for members of Congress.
After weeks of partisan bickering over whether taxes should rise for anyone, the compromise bill rolled through the Senate in a highly unusual vote early on Tuesday morning. The measure was approved 89 to 8, with both parties offering overwhelming support.
The moment served as a rare bipartisan coda to what has been one of the most rancorous, partisan Congresses in recent history, as the 11 senators who are retiring received hugs and kisses from their colleagues in both parties.
Three Democrats voted against the measure, including liberal Tom Harkin (Iowa), and moderates Thomas R. Carper (Del.) and Michael F. Bennet (Colo.). Bennet said the bill would do little to reduce record budget deficits.
According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, the measure would increase the national debt by $4 trillion over the next decade than if all of the tax hikes and scheduled automatic spending cuts had been allowed to kick in.
Five Senate Republicans also rejected the measure, including tea party favorites Rand Paul (Ky.), Mike Lee (Utah) and Marco Rubio (Fla.), a potential contender for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination. But 40 others voted for it, including such GOP leaders on tax-and-spending policy as Sen. Patrick J. Toomey (Pa.) and Ronald H. Johnson (Wis.), a tea party star who frequently consults with conservatives in the House.
Neither party was entirely happy with the bill. While conservatives complained about new taxes on the rich and a lack of spending cuts, liberals complained about its provisions regarding inherited estates.
Although the tax rate would rise from 35 percent to 40 percent, estates worth as much as $5 million — $10 million for married couples — would go untaxed. And an inflation adjustment would guarantee that the size of the exemption would grow to $15 million for couples by the end of the decade.
Still, House Democrats largely embraced the measure. “It’s long overdue for us to have this solution to go forward and remove all doubt as to what comes next for our country,” House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said after Biden briefed House Democrats on the contents of the bill.
Hours later, Pelosi indicated via Twitter that a “strong majority” of Democrats supported the legislation and that she was “confident” it would pass if Boehner held a vote.
Among House Republicans, however, the measure at first appeared to run into strong opposition. The GOP held two briefings for its members on the bill. After the first, which lasted nearly two hours, Cantor emerged to announce his opposition.
Rep. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) said Cantor “forcefully” aired his concerns during the closed-door session, during which other GOP members expressed grave doubts about the Senate agreement.
“We should not take a package put together by a bunch of sleep-deprived octogenarians on New Year’s Eve,” said Rep. Steven C. LaTourette (R-Ohio), a moderate and a Boehner ally.
The negative reaction threatened to plunge Washington back into the high-stakes, last-minute drama that has characterized both the fiscal cliff negotiations and a series of other recent confrontations between the two parties over spending and taxes, including the 2011 fight over raising the federal borrowing limit.Rep. Spencer Bachus (R-Ala.) said a “consensus” was developing that the GOP should amend the Senate’s plan and attach additional spending cuts. “I would be shocked if the bill did not go back to the Senate,” he said.
Senate Democrats and administration officials warned darkly that any move to amend the measure would be met with stony silence in the Senate. The House would be responsible for a dive over the cliff hours before U.S. financial markets were set to open Wednesday after the New Year’s holiday.
Some House members in the meeting cautioned colleagues that changing the Senate bill would risk damaging the economy and their reputations, Bachus said. But the prevailing view was that Congress must get a handle on government spending or “doom the markets.”
For hours, there was no decision on how to proceed. As leaders huddled, rank-and-file members returned to their offices and were greeted with confusing messages from conservatives and constituents about how to vote.
Former House speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.), who has opposed any deal to raise taxes, voiced support for Cantor. But conservative writer William Kristol, who is close to House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (Wis.), the 2012 GOP vice presidential nominee, wrote a blog post titled “Say Yes to the Mess.”
“Politically, Republicans are escaping with a better outcome than they might have expected, and President Obama has gotten relatively little at his moment of greatest strength,” Kristol said, advising House Republicans to take the deal.
Throughout the evening, Republican leaders surveyed members about the spending-cut package, and concluded that the Senate bill would pass without it. Around 8 p.m., they announced that they would hold a vote within the next few hours with the expectation that Democrats and Republicans would join forces to approve the measure and avoid much of the fiscal cliff.
0bama: I Have Not Yet Begun to Tax! — the Rich Still Aren’t Paying Their Fair Share!
President Obama cut a video, distributed by his reelection, to reiterate his belief that the wealthiest Americans still aren’t paying their “fair share” of taxes and to outline a second-term agenda ranging from environmental policy to gun control. Obama started by celebrating the tax increases — “making our tax code more progressive than it’s been in decades,” he said — that will take place because of the fiscal cliff deal. “Obviously, there is still more to do when it comes to reducing our debt,” Obama said in the video. “And I’m willing to do more, as long as we do it in a balanced way that doesn’t put all the burden on seniors or students or middle class families, but also asks the wealthiest Americans to contribute and pay their fair share.” . . . Continued >>>


Wild Hillary Speculation: Clinton's 'Blood Clot' Illness Prompts Conspiracy Theories

  "I DON'T RECALL ANYTHING!"

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, perhaps the most famous current female political figure, has fallen ill. "In the course of a follow-up exam today, Secretary Clinton's doctors discovered a blood clot had formed, stemming from the concussion she sustained several weeks ago. She is being treated with anti-coagulants and is at New York-Presbyterian Hospital so that they can monitor the medication over the next 48 hours," a spokesman for the former first lady said yesterday in a statement.
Clinton's illness, and the fact that she has not been seen in public in the last three weeks, has prompted a slew of wild conspiracy theories.
"EXCLUSIVE! HILLARY CLINTON BRAIN CRISIS," the National Enquirer headline reads. "Only days after The ENQUIRER exclusively reported that Secretary of State HILLARY CLINTON was at the center of a shocking BRAIN CANCER drama and was undergoing extensive secret medical tests, her reps went public with the news on Sunday night Dec. 30 that she was indeed hospitalized in New York City and disclosed that she was battling a blood clot that had formed following her head concussion earlier this month!"

Another report (SEE FULL REPORT BELOW), this one in The European Union Times (http://www.eutimes.net), shockingly claims, "A new Foreign Military Intelligence (GRU) report circulating in the Kremlin today is saying that United States Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was injured, and a top U.S. Navy Seal Commander killed when their C-12 Huron military passenger and transport aircraft crash landed nearly 3 weeks ago in the Iranian city of Ahvaz near the Iraqi border."
Before Clinton's admittance into the hospital over the weekend, some speculated that the timing of Clinton's illness was suspicious. After all, she was scheduled to testify in front of Congress about the terror attack on 9/11 in Benghazi, Libya. That testimony was postponed.
Of course, many are still wondering whether Clinton will testify before she steps down as secretary of state, which her office has long claimed she'll do within "days" of President Obama's second inauguration.
Obama has nominated another former Democratic presidential nominee to replace Clinton, Senator John Kerry. So will Clinton be well enough to testify before Kerry can be confirmed? Or will her illness prevent her from answering questions about the terror attack in Benghazi?
All the speculation, however, might not be that surprising. After all, there's a lot of intrigue around Clinton. "Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, in the national spotlight since her husband ran for president in 1992, has broken the Gallup Poll record books, becoming the most admired woman in history, topping their list for the 17th time, far ahead of first lady Michelle Obama, Oprah Winfrey and Queen Elizabeth II," the Washington Examiner reports.
Clinton Injured, U.S. Navy Seal Killed In Secret U.S. Mission To Iran?
The European Union Times is reporting a very different story about Hillary Clinton than what is coming out of U.S. mainstream media.
RUMOR, DISINFORMATION, FACT or FICTION — NEWSBOY POST cannot independently gauge the veracity of this EUT story,
but merely publish it here for the record — CAVEAT LECTOR:

A new Foreign Military Intelligence (GRU) report circulating in the Kremlin today is saying that United States Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was injured, and a top U.S. Navy Seal Commander killed when their C-12 Huron military passenger and transport aircraft crash landed nearly 3 weeks ago in the Iranian city of Ahvaz near the Iraqi border.
Iranian intelligence agents quoted in this GRU report confirm that the C-12 Huron aircraft is still in their possession in Ahvaz, but will only admit that the plane was “forced to land because of technical problems”.
The U.S. Navy Seal member reported killed in this bizarre incident, this report says, was indentified as Commander Job W. Price who as a leader of this highly specialized American Special Forces unit protects high-ranking diplomats traveling in Middle Eastern and Asian combat zones.
Curiously, U.S. media reports on Commander Price’s death say it being investigated as a possible suicide as he died from what the American Defense Department describes as “a non-combat related injury”.
Equally as curious, U.S. media reports state that Secretary Clinton will return to work next week after her having suffered what they describe as a “nasty bout with stomach flu” and a “concussion” which have kept her missing from public view the past three weeks.
This GRU report, however, states that U.S. military flight logs recorded by Russian air and space forces confirm that Commander Price, and other members of U.S. Navy Seal Team 4, left their base in Urozgan Province, Afghanistan on a flight to U.S. Naval Support Activity Bahrain where they met up with Secretary Clinton and all of them transferred to the C-12 Huron that began a flight path to Baghdad, Iraq.
Within minutes of leaving Bahrain airspace, this report says, the C-12 Huron carrying Secretary Clinton and her U.S. Navy Seal protectors, “without notice,” deviated from their assigned flight path heading, instead, directly towards Iran’s Ahwaz International Airport where, coincidentally, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had previously landed on an “unscheduled” visit.
Important to note, GRU analysts say in this report, was that when the C-12 Huron entered into Iranian airspace neither American nor Iran air force units responded clearly indicating that this secret mission was sanctioned.
Upon the C-12 Huron landing at Ahwaz, however, this report says it encountered “extreme turbulence” causing it to leave the runway where its main landing gear then collapsed causing it to crash.
Within seconds of the C-12 Huron crashing, this report continues, Iranian emergency and security personal responded freeing the victims, including Secretary Clinton who was reportedly unconscious and “bleeding profusely.”
After emergency aid was given, GRU agents stationed in Iran state that another U.S. military flight was dispatched from Bahrain to Ahwaz which evacuated all of those wounded and killed in the crash including Secretary Clinton.
UPDATE: State Department Denies Hillary Clinton Injured in Plane Crash
UPDATE 2: ABC News has reported on a U.S. plane making an emergency landing in Iran approximately 17 days ago
Official Update: Hillary Discharged from Hospital After Treatment for Blood Clot

  Hillary shown sitting on rear jump seat of van
Hillary Rodham Clinton is back home and on the mend.
Doctors at Columbia-Presbyterian Hospital discharged the secretary of state last night after three days of treatment for a potentially life-threatening blood clot between her brain and skull.
Joined by ex-president husband Bill, the secretary of state was whisked away from the Washington Heights hospital campus in a van, accompanied by a small motorcade of Secret Service agents. The former first couple arrived in their Chappaqua home at 7 pm, (1-2-13).
“Grateful my Mom discharged from the hospital & is heading home. Even more grateful her medical team confident she’ll make a full recovery,” Chelsea tweeted.
Earlier in the day, Hillary, wearing sunglasses and a purple jacket, was spotted clutching Chelsea’s hand as she exited the main Milstein Hospital Building.
The former president, in a leather jacket, walked behind them grinning.
But rather than being discharged immediately, Clinton, 65, who is stepping down from her Cabinet post and who is considered a 2016 Democratic presidential contender, was driven to another part of the hospital complex, which encompasses several city blocks.
The State Department declined to discuss whether she left to receive additional tests. Bill and Chelsea accompanied her back to the main hospital building within an hour.
“Her medical team advised her that she is making good progress on all fronts, and they are confident she will make a full recovery,” said State Department spokesman Philippe Reines. “She’s eager to get back to the office.”
Clinton is planning to resign as the nation’s top diplomat pending the Senate’s approval of President Obama’s pick, Sen. John Kerry, to replace her.
Doctors had been treating Clinton with blood thinners to fight the clot, which formed behind her right ear.
Before yesterday, she hadn’t been seen in public since Dec. 7.
Last month, Clinton, who was dehydrated and fighting a stomach virus, fainted at home and struck her head causing a concussion. She missed the Dec. 21 congressional hearing on the deadly Benghazi consulate terrorist attack.
She was admitted to the Manhattan hospital on Sunday evening, but the State Department said she remained on the job.
“She’s been quite active on the phone with staff and taking paper, etc.,” spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said, referring to official memos.

Freedom Seeker: Hot Babe Poses Happily with Christmas Present to Herself as Security Measure from Rapacious 0bama Regime
  "Ya want it . . . come 'n get it"
UK's Daily Mail -- Santa Claus came to town - and he was packing heat - as numerous Americans were seen on social networks posing in front of their Christmas trees with the same assault rifle used by the gunmen in three recent bloody killings.
Grinning from ear-to-ear, those who received AR-15 assault rifles took to sites like Twitter and Instagram, posting photos of themselves with their brand new toys.
One Twitter user posted: 'I got just what I wanted. An Armalite semi-automatic AR-15 rifle. It's like the Christmas Story, but I'll shoot more than my eye out.'
The post was in reference to the cult classic holiday film, which follows the life of a young boy who wants nothing but a BB gun for Christmas.
'Furs & guns, yes, it was a redneck Christmas,' said one jubilant Instagram user.
'Don't break into this house.' said another.
The social networking trend, was first reported by TheVerge.com with pictures following in The Atlantic Wire, amid a heated debate over gun control - especially with assault weapons.
The same weapon was used by William Spengler, who killed himself after murdering two firefighters and injuring two more as they responded to a blaze that he started in Webster, New York, on Christmas Eve.
The AR-15 was also used in James Holmes' shooting spree during a midnight premiere of The Dark Knight Rises at a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado, on July 20.
This week, the world's largest firearms dealer said it has sold 3.5 years of magazines for the AR-15 - in just three days, and were struggling to meet the demand.
Pete Brownell, president of Brownells ammunition supplier, made a public apology to gun owners for the delay in fulfilling orders of assault weapon magazines, explaining that the company had experienced 'unprecedented' demand for AR-15 ammunition magazines.
Brownell wrote that the company has sold about 3.5 years worth of magazines in 72 hours.
The statement, first reported by Huffington Post, was made on the web site AK15.com.
'I wanted to take a minute to shed some insight on the magazine situation if I can. First of all I wanted to offer an apology for the situation,' Brownell wrote in his post.
'However, we've been receiving orders at such a pace that these transactions have gotten slower. We absolutely apologize again, we definitely don't want that ever to be your experience,' he added.
'[Brownell's] working like crazy to get these orders to [customers] as quickly as possible.'

NRA Has Higher Favorability Rating (54%) than Both 0bama (52%) and Corrupt Dinosaur Media (40%)
  WE LOVE CHARLTON & NRA!
Recent polling data show that the National Rifle Association has a higher favorability rating than both President Barack Obama and the mainstream media.
Fifty-four percent of Americans said they have a favorable opinion of the NRA according to a USA Today/Gallup Poll conducted Dec. 19-22.
A Gallup poll released earlier this year showed that Americans’ distrust of the media hit a new high with 60 percent saying they had little or no trust in the mass media while 40 percent said they had a great deal or fair amount of trust.
Barack Obama’s popularity falls short of each with a Huffington Post poll showing the president’s average favorability at 52.3 percent.
This average includes ratings of 53 percent in a December 9 NBC News/Wall Street Journal pol; 56 percent in a November 18 CNN poll; 49 percent in a December 16 CBS News poll and 52 percent in a Politico/GWU/Battleground poll; and a Gallup/USA Today poll from Nov. 12 showing a 58 percent favorable rating.

Senator Fiendstein's Gun Control Bill Will Trigger the Next American Revolution
  WE DON'T LOVE FIENDSTEIN!
All political power comes from the barrel of a gun. The communist party must command all the guns, that way, no guns can ever be used to command the party - Mao Tse Tung
By Brandon Smith (Alt-Market blog) -- REVOLUTION? Yes, it all sounds rather “extreme”, but the cold hard reality of our era is not going to comfort us with diplomacies and niceties, so honestly, why should I have to sugar coat anything? We live in extreme times and there is no longer room for prancing around the ultimate consequences of that which is taking place in America today. This country is increasingly sliding towards the edge of internal conflict. The Liberty Movement and true Constitutionalists see it, subsections of Republicans and Democrats see it, and most of all, the federal government sees it. In fact, they may even be counting on it.
Over the past two years alone, multiple draconian policies have been enacted through executive order by the Obama Administration which build upon the civil liberty crushing actions of George W. Bush and press far beyond. The Patriot Acts, the FISA domestic spy bill, the bailouts of corrupt international banks, attempts at CISPA and SOPA, actions like the NDAA authorizing the treatment of U.S. citizens as “enemy combatants” without rights to due process; all paint a picture so clear only a one-celled amoeba (or your average suburban yuppie) would not see it. You and I, and everyone else for that matter, have been designated potential targets of the state. Our rights have been made forfeit.
There is no ambiguous or muddled separation between the citizenry and the government anymore. The separation is absolute. It is undeniable. It is vast. It is only a matter of time and momentum, and eventually there will be unbridled oppression, dissent, and conflict. All that is required is a trigger, and I believe that trigger has arrived…
Though made to appear “complex”, the gun control debate is actually an incredibly simple issue. It all boils down to a couple of questions which gun grabbers rarely ask: How does the 2nd Amendment affect the future? That is to say, what was the original intent, and should we still value that intent as it applies to tomorrow? And, what will really happen if it is forcibly removed? Gun opponents act as though they are unaware of these questions, or maybe they don’t care. However, it is vital to their safety and the safety of our culture in general that they do finally consider the bigger picture.
We’ve all heard the prefabricated gun control talking points before. Some of them so old they predate us. They are numerous and most of them incredibly thin. The gist of the anti-gun position, though, could be boiled down to these three points...
Common Anti-Gun Arguments:
(1) The 2nd Amendment is “outdated” and no longer relevant in today’s modern society.
(2) We do not want to stop you from “defending yourself”, or interfere with the American tradition of hunting, but people do not need “military assault weapons” for either.
(3) Your claimed freedom to own guns should not supersede my freedom to live without fear of guns. We exist in a society, and our society requires us to give up certain freedoms so that it can function.
Again, in response to these arguments, I have to ask, what does the 2nd Amendment mean for the future? What was its original intent? Gun control advocates would like to ignore the fact that the Constitution specifically protects a broad application of gun ownership, but when they cannot deny the legality of it, they instead turn to more abstract and existential methods of attack. They try to twist the original intent of the 2nd Amendment to further their goals. To respond briefly to each of the above fallacies:
(1) The right to self defense from ANY threat, whether it be an individual, or a criminal government, does not “outdate”.  Continued

NRA: Fiendstein Goes for Broke wth New Gun-Ban Bill
By NRA/ILA Staff -- Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)—author of the federal “assault weapon” and “large” ammunition magazine ban of 1994-2004—has announced that on the first day of the new Congress—January 3rd— she will introduce a bill to which her 1994 ban will pale by comparison. On Dec. 17th, Feinstein said, “I have been working with my staff for over a year on this legislation” and “It will be carefully focused.” Indicating the depth of her research on the issue, she said on Dec. 21st that she had personally looked at pictures of guns in 1993, and again in 2012. According to a Dec. 27th..
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)—author of the federal “assault weapon” and “large” ammunition magazine ban of 1994-2004—has announced that on the first day of the new Congress—January 3rd— she will introduce a bill to which her 1994 ban will pale by comparison. On Dec. 17th, Feinstein said, “I have been working with my staff for over a year on this legislation” and “It will be carefully focused.” Indicating the depth of her research on the issue, she said on Dec. 21st that she had personally looked at pictures of guns in 1993, and again in 2012.
According to a Dec. 27th posting on Sen. Feinstein’s website and a draft of the bill obtained by NRA-ILA, the new ban would, among other things, adopt new definitions of “assault weapon” that would affect a much larger variety of firearms, require current owners of such firearms to register them with the federal government under the National Firearms Act, and require forfeiture of the firearms upon the deaths of their current owners. Some of the changes in Feinstein’s new bill are as follows: •Reduces, from two to one, the number of permitted external features on various firearms. The 1994 ban permitted various firearms to be manufactured only if they were assembled with no more than one feature listed in the law.
Feinstein’s new bill would prohibit the manufacture of the same firearms with even one of the features.

  ●  Adopts new lists of prohibited external features. For example, whereas the 1994 ban applied to a rifle or shotgun the “pistol grip” of which “protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon,” the new bill would drastically expand the definition to include any “grip . . . or any other characteristic that can function as a grip.” Also, the new bill adds “forward grip” to the list of prohibiting features for rifles, defining it as “a grip located forward of the trigger that functions as a pistol grip.” Read literally and in conjunction with the reduction from two features to one, the new language would apply to every detachable-magazine semi-automatic rifle. At a minimum, it would, for example, ban all models of the AR-15, even those developed for compliance with California’s highly restrictive ban.
  ●  Carries hyperbole further than the 1994 ban. Feinstein’s 1994 ban listed “grenade launcher” as one of the prohibiting features for rifles. Her 2013 bill carries goes even further into the ridiculous, by also listing “rocket launcher.” Such devices are restricted under the National Firearms Act and, obviously, are not standard components of the firearms Feinstein wants to ban. Perhaps a subsequent Feinstein bill will add “nuclear bomb,” “particle beam weapon,” or something else equally far-fetched to the features list.
  ●  Expands the definition of “assault weapon” by including:
  ●  Three very popular rifles: The M1 Carbine (introduced in 1944 and for many years sold by the federal government to individuals involved in marksmanship competition), a model of the Ruger Mini-14, and most or all models of the SKS.
  ●  Any “semiautomatic, centerfire, or rimfire rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds,” except for tubular-magazine .22s.
  ●  Any “semiautomatic, centerfire, or rimfire rifle that has an overall length of less than 30 inches,” any “semiautomatic handgun with a fixed magazine that has the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds,” and any semi-automatic handgun that has a threaded barrel.
  ●  Requires owners of existing “assault weapons” to register them with the federal government under the National Firearms Act (NFA). The NFA imposes a $200 tax per firearm, and requires an owner to submit photographs and fingerprints to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE), to inform the BATFE of the address where the firearm will be kept, and to obtain the BATFE’s permission to transport the firearm across state lines.
  ●  Prohibits the transfer of “assault weapons.” Owners of other firearms, including those covered by the NFA, are permitted to sell them or pass them to heirs. However, under Feinstein’s new bill, “assault weapons” would remain with their current owners until their deaths, at which point they would be forfeited to the government.
  ●  Prohibits the domestic manufacture and the importation of magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition. The 1994 ban allowed the importation of such magazines that were manufactured before the ban took effect. Whereas the 1994 ban protected gun owners from errant prosecution by making the government prove when a magazine was made, the new ban includes no such protection. The new ban also requires firearm dealers to certify the date of manufacture of any >10-round magazine sold, a virtually impossible task, given that virtually no magazines are stamped with their date of manufacture.
  ●  Targets handguns in defiance of the Supreme Court. The Court ruled in District of Columbia v. Heller that the Second Amendment protects the right to have handguns for self-defense, in large part on the basis of the fact handguns are the type of firearm “overwhelmingly chosen by American society for that lawful purpose.” Semi-automatic pistols, which are the most popular handguns today, are designed to use detachable magazines, and the magazines “overwhelmingly chosen” by Americans for self-defense are those that hold more than 10 rounds. Additionally, Feinstein’s list of nearly 1,000 firearms exempted by name (see next paragraph) contains not a single handgun. Sen. Feinstein advocated banning handguns before being elected to the Senate, though she carried a handgun for her own personal protection.
  ●  Contains a larger piece of window dressing than the 1994 ban. Whereas the 1994 ban included a list of approximately 600 rifles and shotguns exempted from the ban by name, the new bill’s list is increased to nearly 1,000 rifles and shotguns. Other than for the 11 detachable-magazine semi-automatic rifles and one other semi-automatic rifle included in the list, however, the list appears to be pointless, because a separate provision of the bill exempts “any firearm that is manually operated by bolt, pump, lever, or slide action.”

The Department of Justice study. On her website, Feinstein claims that a study for the DOJ found that the 1994 ban resulted in a 6.7 percent decrease in murders. To the contrary, this is what the study said: “At best, the assault weapons ban can have only a limited effect on total gun murders, because the banned weapons and magazines were never involved in more than a modest fraction of all gun murders. Our best estimate is that the ban contributed to a 6.7 percent decrease in total gun murders between 1994 and 1995. . . . However, with only one year of post-ban data, we cannot rule out the possibility that this decrease reflects chance year-to-year variation rather than a true effect of the ban. Nor can we rule out effects of other features of the 1994 Crime Act or a host of state and local initiatives that took place simultaneously.”
“Assault weapon” numbers and murder trends. From the imposition of Feinstein's “assault weapon” ban (Sept. 13, 1994) through the present, the number of “assault weapons” has risen dramatically. For example, the most common firearm that Feinstein considers an “assault weapon” is the AR-15 rifle, the manufacturing numbers of which can be gleaned from the BATFE’s firearm manufacturer reports, availablehere. From 1995 through 2011, the number of AR-15s—all models of which Feinstein’s new bill defines as “assault weapons”—rose by over 2.5 million. During the same period, the nation's murder rate fell 48 percent, to a 48-year low. According to the FBI, 8.5 times as many people are murdered with knives, blunt objects and bare hands, as with rifles of any type.
Traces: Feinstein makes several claims, premised on firearm traces, hoping to convince people that her 1994 ban reduced the (relatively infrequent) use of “assault weapons” in crime. However, traces do not indicate how often any type of gun is used in crime. As the Congressional Research Service and the BATFE have explained, not all firearms that are traced have been used in crime, and not all firearms used in crime are traced. Whether a trace occurs depends on whether a law enforcement agency requests that a trace be conducted. Given that existing “assault weapons” were exempted from the 1994 ban and new “assault weapons” continued to be made while the ban was in effect, any reduction in the percentage of traces accounted for by “assault weapons” during the ban, would be attributable to law enforcement agencies losing interest in tracing the firearms, or law enforcement agencies increasing their requests for traces on other types of firearms, as urged by the BATFE for more than a decade.
Call Your U.S. Senators and Representative: As noted, Feinstein intends to introduce her bill on January 3rd. President Obama has said that gun control will be a “central issue” of his final term in office, and he has vowed to move quickly on it.
Contact your members of Congress at 202-224-3121 to urge them to oppose Sen. Feinstein’s 2013 gun and magazine ban. Our elected representatives in Congress must hear from you if we are going to defeat this gun ban proposal. You can write your Representatives and Senators by using our Write Your Representatives tool here: http://www.nraila.org/get-involved-locally/grassroots/write-your-reps.aspx
Millions of Americans own so-called “assault weapons” and tens of millions own “large” magazines, for self-defense, target shooting, and hunting. For more information about thehistory of the “assault weapon” issue, please visit http://www.GunBanFacts.com.

Cornell West on Sandy Hook: ‘We Can’t Just Shed Tears for Those on the Vanilla Side of Town’
  It's an old bad joke but . . . I'm a human . . . I tell ya!

Princeton University Professor Dr. Cornel West appeared on the Tavis Smiley radio show on Thursday where he weighed in with his thoughts on how the media and lawmakers are responding to the tragic massacre of teachers and children in Newtown, Connecticut. West expressed his frustration over how eagerly the media demanded a conversation about gun laws after Newtown, but seems unmoved by endemic gun violence in America’s cities where the victims are primarily minorities.
RELATED: Limbaugh: ‘Anti-Gun Media’ Don’t Care About Gun Violence When It Involves Urban Neighborhoods
“We can’t just shed tears for those on the vanilla side of town,” West said.” They are precious, but they are no less or more precious than our poor brothers and sisters on Indian reservations — who are killing each other — or be they black or brown or what have you.”
“But it’s a good thing that we now have a discussion on gun control. We need one on drone control. Not a peep, not a mumbling word when black folk get shot,” West added. “But now, Newtown, Connecticut, vanilla side — low and behold we got a major conversation. That’s wonderful. Each life is precious, but it just upsets me when we’re so deferential.”
West echoes a sentiment expressed by conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh who, in the wake of the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School, admonished the media for their collective disinterest in urban gun violence.

Gallup Poll: Opposition to Handgun Ban Hits All-Time High — 74% Against, 24% For
So how would Piers Morgan fare with his proposed constitutional amendment to repeal gun rights? Amazingly, nearly three-quarters of Americans agree on handguns, anyway … but not with Piers Morgan. According to the latest Gallup survey taken within days of the Newtown massacre, a record number of Americans oppose a handgun ban, 74/24:
Despite Americans’ willingness to strengthen gun laws in the wake of Sandy Hook and other deadly mass shootings, Gallup finds public opposition to a broad ban on the possession of handguns at a record-high 74%. Conversely, the 24% in favor is the lowest recorded since Gallup first asked the question in 1959.
How about the “assault-rifle” ban? Technically, an “assault rifle” is an automatic weapon, which is already banned. Gallup asks respondents whether they are “for or against a law which would make it illegal to manufacture, sell, or possess semi-automatic guns known as assault rifles,” which is a badly-written question in several ways. Even so, a majority opposes such a law, by just a slightly narrower gap than a year ago:
Two aspects of the Newtown shooting that have been a focal point of recent discussions about gun laws are the semi-automatic rifle and high-capacity ammunition magazines used by the shooter. Several state and federal lawmakers have already announced that they will seek to ban both from the commercial market.
Nevertheless, Americans’ views on the sale of assault rifles are unchanged. The slight majority, 51%, remain opposed to making it illegal to manufacture, sell, or possess semi-automatic guns known as assault rifles.
Notably, the 44% in favor of assault rifle bans in response to this trend question is nearly identical to the 42% Gallup found favoring assault and semi-automatic bans in a Dec. 18 poll. In that survey, participants responded to a question asking about possible approaches to preventing mass shootings at schools, similar to the shooting that occurred Dec. 14 in Connecticut.  Continued >>>

The Grinch's Economy Hurts Mainly Those Who Voted for Him -- Young People, Unskilled Workers and Single Women


By Ann Coulter -- One bright spot of Barack Obama's re-election was knowing that unemployment rates were about to soar for the precise groups that voted for him -- young people, unskilled workers and single women with degrees in gender studies. But now the Democrats are sullying my silver lining by forcing Republicans to block an utterly pointless tax-raising scheme in order to blame the coming economic Armageddon on them.
Democrats are proposing to reinstate the Bush tax cuts for everyone ... except "the rich." (Why do only tax cuts come with an expiration date? Why not tax increases? Why not Obamacare? How about New York City's "temporary" rent control measures intended for veterans returning from World War II?)
Raising taxes only on the top 2 percent of income earners will do nothing to reduce the deficit. There's not enough money there -- even assuming, contrary to all known history, that the top 2 percent won't find ways to reduce their taxable income or that the imaginary increased government revenue would be applied to deficit reduction, anyway.
Apart from Obamacare, it's difficult to think of a more effective method of destroying jobs than raising taxes on "the rich." This isn't a wealth tax on useless gigolos like John Kerry -- it's an income tax on people who are currently engaged in some profitable enterprise. Their business profits, which could have been used to hire more employees, will instead be used to pay the government.
But Republicans are over a barrel. Unless Republicans and Democrats reach an agreement, the Bush tax cuts expire at the end of the year. By pushing to extend the tax cuts for everyone except "the rich," Democrats get to look like champions of middle class tax cuts and Republicans can be portrayed as caring only about the rich.
And when the economy tanks, the Non-Fox Media will blame Republicans.The economy will tank because, as you will recall, Obama is still president. Government rules, regulations, restrictions, forms and inspections are about to drown the productive sector. Obamacare is descending on job creators like a fly swatter on a gnat. Obama has already managed to produce the only "recovery" that is worse than the preceding recession since the Great Depression. And he says, "You ain't seen nothing yet."   Continued >>>

President Does 'Gangnam Style' Dance
Around the White House

The President has admitted that he loves the PSY track Gangnam Style, much to his two daughters´ embarrassment.
In an interview with People, Barack Obama says he does the South Korean rapper´s infamous dance at home in the White House, with the sole purpose of winding up Malia, 14 and Sasha, 11. He tells the new issue of the magazine: ´They´re cooler than I am. There are things I like that they think are cheesy, like Gangnam Style. I love that.´ Even his wife admits it is 'a little embarrassing' when he attempts to do the routine - and indeed, he warns the reporter that he won't be doing any impromptu performances.
The President also discussed how he feels about his daughters dating. Though he has joked in the past about employing Secret Service officers to keep boys away from Malia, she 'actually doesn't pay any attention to what I say.'
And in truth, he says he and the First Lady trust both their daughters' judgement implicitly, because they have set such a good example of a relationship themselves. Don't embarrass me, Dad! The President with Malia during the National Christmas Tree Lighting ceremony at the White House on December 6.
'I think they have pretty high expectations about how relationships should be, and that gives me some confidence about the future,' he says. 'I joke about this stuff sometimes, but the truth is they are smart, steady young women.'
But it is hard watching them grow up so fast, the President continues - the knowledge that Malia will leave home for college in four years' time is especially difficult.
'It chokes me up,' he admits. 'The finite amount of time you have with your children, and the joy they bring on a minute-to-minute, day-by-day basis - the idea that that's not there all the time is something that can hit me hard sometimes.' Michelle Obama, who was also included in the interview, added that for now, Malia is still only a high school freshman and college still feels a long way off. She reveals that a career making movies could be on the future agenda for her eldest though.
Malia has expressed some interest in filmmaking,' the First Lady says. 'Just like her father, she is an avid reader.' Her youngest, however, is still keeping her options open: 'Sasha, what she likes today will change in an hour. So she doesn't even try and lay it out yet.'  Continued >>>
Annual “Christmas in Washington” Show Starring 'Rapper PSY' Is Ratings Bomb
The 31st annual “Christmas in Washington” concert shown on the TNT cable network December 21 suffered a dramatic 25% loss in viewers from the previous year, according to Nielsen Media Research. The 2011 cablecast of “Christmas in Washington” drew 1.5 million viewers. The 2012 showing had only 1.136 million viewers.
The concert, traditionally attended by the President and his family, drew international attention over the scheduled appearance by Gangnam Style rapper PSY (given name Park Jae-sang) when it was revealed the South Korean entertainer had made highly inflammatory anti-American performances the previous decade.
In an insult to America’s troops and their families, President Barack Obama confirmed his attendance at the taping of the concert several hours before PSY issued a written apology the afternoon the news broke of his anti-American past on Pearl Harbor Day.
As a purported reaction to the war in Iraq, PSY rapped a song at a show in South Korea in 2004 with lyrics that called for the murder of American troops, their children and their extended families. In an earlier performance PSY smashed a model U.S. Bradley Fighting Vehicle. The onstage tantrum was in the context of South Korean anger over GIs not being punished for an accident that killed two school girls walking on the side of a road when they were killed by a military vehicle the men were driving.
It was the lyrics to Dear American, written by fellow South Korean metal band N.E.X.T., which PSY rapped that caused a backlash against his appearance at the Christmas show, including a White House petition by this author that called for President Barack Obama to rescind his invitation to perform at the show:
"Kill those f***ing Yankees who have been torturing Iraqi captives Kill those f***ing Yankees who ordered them to torture Kill their daughters, mothers, daughters-in-law, and fathers Kill them all slowly and painfully " (Profanity edited.)
The Obama administration quickly spiked the petition telling the press, which dutifully repeated to the American people, that the most powerful man in the world had no influence over an event to which he lent by his presence the honor and dignity of the office of the commander-in-chief of America’s armed forces--even when the star performer had publicly called for the savage murder of the troops under his command and their families.
As the show was taped on December 9 at the National Building Museum, reports came out of Obama warmly greeting PSY on stage. A pool photograph soon followed showing Obama and PSY laughing and shaking hands. Vice President Joe Biden was photographed earlier at the show in a group photo with PSY and other performers.
In an interview after the show, PSY said Obama only talked with him about how his family is embarrassed when he dances Gangnam Style. PSY apparently offered no apology to Obama, nor did Obama rebuke him.
Americans showed more respect for their brothers and sisters in arms than their president. Not only did the PSY “Christmas in Washington” show lose 25% of its audience, the show’s key demographic of 18-49 year old viewers was only 300,000, placing it between Brides of Beverly Hills and Fashion Police.
“Christmas in Washington” is a charity event, the proceeds of which went to the National Children’s Medical Center in Washington, D.C. Conan O’Brien emceed the show. Other performers included Motown legend Diana Ross, Megan Hilty, Demi Lovato, Chris Mann, the Naval Academy Glee Club, Scotty McCreery.

0bama Wants to Increase the Democratic Party Base of 'Low and No Info Voters'


Mandatory Voting Is the 0bama Administration's Goal
By George Will -- Poet Carl Sandburg supposedly was asked by a young playwright to attend a rehearsal. Sandburg did but fell asleep. The playwright exclaimed, "How could you sleep when you knew I wanted your opinion?" Sandburg replied, "Sleep is an opinion."
So is nonvoting. Remember this as the Obama administration mounts a drive to federalize voter registration, a step toward making voting mandatory.
Attorney General Eric Holder considers it self-evidently alarming that 60 million adult citizens were not registered in 2008. He wants Washington to register everyone automatically. "The arc of American history," he says, "has bent toward expanding the franchise."
But the fact many people do not register to vote is not evidence that the franchise is restricted other than by voters' inertia.
Holder's argument for trusting Washington, which does so many things badly, to superintend elections capably should be judged against this loopy statement by him: "We should rethink this whole notion that voting only occurs on Tuesday."
This year, voting began in some states in September; as much as 40% of votes were cast before Election Day; 12 states allow online registration.
Assistant Attorney General Thomas Perez, head of Holder's civil rights division, rightly says that voting too often is "an endurance contest" involving a long wait in line, frequently because of questions about voters' registrations. But the Heritage Foundation's Hans von Spakovsky, a former member of the Federal Election Commission, says:
"One of the reasons that state voter registration rolls are in such poor shape today — with large numbers of voters who are dead, have moved or are noncitizens — is because of the restrictive standards imposed by the federal government in 1993 by the National Voter Registration Act.
"That law made it very difficult to remove ineligible voters. Local jurisdictions were sued so often by the Justice Department when they tried to remove ineligible voters, many stopped trying to clean up their lists at all. That is why there are many places around the country where the number of registered voters is greater than the Census says there are individuals of voting age."
Notice the perverse dialectic by which Washington aggrandizes its power: It promises to ameliorate problems exacerbated by its supposedly ameliorative policies. Notice, too, the logic of Perez's thesis that "our democracy is stronger when more people have a say in electing their leaders."
Therefore the public good would be served by penalizing nonvoting, as Australia, Belgium and at least 10 other countries do. Liberals love mandates. Why not mandatory voting?
In 1960, 62.8% of age-eligible citizens voted. In the 13 subsequent presidential elections, lower turnouts than this have coincided with the removal of impediments to voting (poll taxes, literacy tests, burdensome registration and residency requirements).
Turnout has not increased as the electorate has become more educated and affluent and as government has become more involved in Americans' lives. There are four obvious reasons for nonvoting.
One is contentment. Americans are voluble complainers but are mostly comfortable. Second, the stakes of politics are agreeably low because constitutional rights and other essential elements of happiness are not menaced by elections.
Those who think high voter turnout indicates civic health should note that in three German elections, 1932-33, turnout averaged more than 86%, reflecting the terrible stakes: The elections decided which mobs would rule the streets and who would inhabit concentration camps.
Third, the winner-take-all allocation of electoral votes in 48 states — an excellent idea, for many reasons — means many state races without suspense. (Barack Obama and Mitt Romney campaigned in just eight and 10 battleground states, respectively.)
Fourth, gerrymandered federal and state legislative districts reduce competitive races.
A small voting requirement such as registration, which calls for the individual voter's initiative, acts to filter potential voters with the weakest motivations. They are apt to invest minimal effort in civic competence.
As indifferent or reluctant voters are nagged to the polls — or someday prodded there by a monetary penalty for nonvoting — the caliber of the electorate must decline.
It has been said that for every complex problem there is a solution that is clear, simple and wrong. Washington soon may seek a complex "solution" — pre-emption of states' responsibilities; federal micromanagement of elections; eventual coercion of lackadaisical citizens — to the nonproblem of people choosing not to vote.

0bama on Occupy Wall Street: 'I'm On Their Side'

In an interview that will be aired tonight on ABC News, President Obama continues to express his commitment to the Occupy Wall Street protesters. “The most important thing we can do right now is those of us in leadership letting people know that we understand their struggles and we are on their side, and that we want to set up a system in which hard work, responsibility, doing what you’re supposed to do, is rewarded,” Obama tells ABC News. “And that people who are irresponsible, who are reckless, who don’t feel a sense of obligation to their communities and their >>>
0bama Mocks Tea Party Movement ... Says He's Amused by the Tea Party Rallies
Barack Obama told fellow democrats today that he’s “amused by the tea party protests.” The Hill reported: President Barack Obama struck a hyperpartisan note Thursday, telling Democrats that he was “amused” by the Tax Day Tea Party rallies. Obama, addressing a Democratic National Committee (DNC) fundraiser in Miami, did little to endear himself to the Tea Party groups protesting around the country, saying “they should be saying thank you” because of the tax cuts he has signed into law. The president went as far as to say that this week’s special election in Florida, which was won by Democrat Ted >>>

0bama Is on the Wrong Side of History and He's Not on the Side of Law-Abiding Americans!


After a shooting tragedy, muzzy-headed liberals try to take guns away from
those who uphold the 2nd Amendment. We sure as hell don't want to live in a
society where the only people who have guns are the police, the military and
criminals. You hear us, 0bama?   ~~ Blog founder

Eric "Mexican Drug Guns" Holder Wants to Discuss How to Ban Guns in a Responsible Way

By Daniel Greenfield -- Lately it seems like our leaders constantly want to “discuss” things with us. It used to be that principals and doctors would want to “discuss” things with us, like our grades or lack of exercise. Now everyone single time there’s a crackdown it begins with a “serious discussion”.
Attorney General Eric Holder made remarks a short time ago on the tragic school shootings in Newtown, Connecticut, where a 20-year-old gunman killed 20 children and six adults. Holder appeared to suggest the country’s gun laws may need to be looked at more closely in the wake of the latest mass shooting.
“As a nation I think we have to ask orselves some hard questions. We gather too often to talk about these kinds of incidents. We need to discuss who we are as a nation, talk about the freedoms that we have, the rights that we have and how those might be used in a responsible way.”
Please, by all means, let’s have a discussion about how the Second Amendment can be used in a responsible way from a man who ran a gun candy store for Mexican drug lords.
The only thing that we need more than a serious discussion about race from the New Black Panther Party’s advocate who called us a “Nation of Cowards”, is for some “hard questions” about the right to bear arms from a man who killed thousands as a ploy to sabotage that right.
But by all means, let’s ask some serious and responsible questions about guns. Such as why there were no armed personnel in a school, after countless school shootings. How about asking what the point of a gun-free zone is when that gun-free zone means that everyone inside is disarmed?
And here’s a relevant question, what is the point of background checks when the school shooter was able to get guns through his mother despite being a, “headcase”?
But those aren’t the serious questions that Eric “Mexican Drug Guns” Holder wants to discuss with us. What he wants to do is salami slice the Second Amendment some more. Maybe have a serious conversation led by Oprah and Carolyn McCarthy, Long Island’s own Cindy Sheehan, whose husband got killed by Colin “Black Rage” Ferguson, and all she got out of it was 15 years in Congress.
But by all means, let’s have a serious discussion about why the states with the highest rate of gun ownership have the lowest rate of gun violence.
VIEW YouTube --- Eric Holder 1995: We Must “Brainwash” People Against Guns



(10) Hey, at least that successful Mormon didn't win.
(9) Didn't your lady parts warn you this would happen.
(8) Look at the bright side, gay marriage passed in four states.
(7) Hey, Big Bird still has a job. Isn't that the important thing?
(6) Well, now you and Keith Olbermann have something in common.
(5) Well, look at the bright side, Rush Limbaugh is getting a massive tax increase.
(4) Hey, now you'll have more time to play with your unicorn.
(3) Isn't it worth losing your job to know that religious organizations have to pay for contraceptives and abortions?
(2) I am sure 0bama cares deeply about your situation. Maybe he'll send you a postcard from Hawaii.
(1) 
 7
Don't Fret 0bama Voter Outta Worka — Be a Bureaucrat!
  0bama Pays 2X Private Sector Wage for Half the Work!

New Evidence Confirms Federal Bureaucrats Don’t Work Very Hard, Paid Too Much
By Daniel J. Mitchell -- My Cato Institute colleague, Chris Edwards, put together a remarkable (and depressing) chart showing that federal bureaucrats get almost twice the level of compensation as workers in the productive sector of the economy.
Defenders of the bureaucracy (including a federal pay panel dominated by bureaucrats) claim that government employees actually are underpaid because…well…just because.
My modest contribution to the debate was to put together a chart based on the Labor Department’s JOLTS data, which shows that bureaucrats are far less likely to voluntarily leave their jobs than folks in the private sector, which is very strong evidence that they are being over-compensated.
But all this debate about pay is looking at only one part of the equation. What about the stereotype that bureaucrats don’t work very hard? Well, as anyone who’s ever visited a motor vehicles department or a post office already knows, that’s also true.
And the hard data confirm our personal observations. Here are the main findings of new research by Andrew Biggs of the American Enterprise Institute and Jason Richwine of the Heritage Foundation, which was published in the Wall Street Journal.

Overstaffing is a serious problem in government, and the best evidence is a simple empirical fact: Government employees don’t work as much as private employees. …new evidence from a comprehensive and objective data set confirms that the “underworked” government employee is more than a stereotype. …The time-use survey’s data on work time…allow us to analyze both the number of hours individuals work during a typical workweek and the total number of hours they work during the year. …What we found was that during a typical workweek, private-sector employees work about 41.4 hours. Federal workers, by contrast, put in 38.7 hours, and state and local government employees work 38.1 hours. …Put another way, private employees spend around an extra month working each year compared with public employees.
VIEW THE CHART generated by Excel when I entered the data in a spreadsheet. It must be nice to get paid a lot to work a little.

Communist Victory Amerika — Corruption Key to Assumption of Power!
  Election night Obama and his fellow Alinskyites celebrate after hearing their ground game of vote theft in key swing states was successful

PRAVDA (English) -- "All the Truth That's Fit to Print" -- Once upon a time there once was a country so beautiful with spacious skies, with purple mountain majesties where everyone sang "God shed his grace on thee". It promoted freedom of religion and allowed Christianity to grow. It gave opportunities for everyone to better themselves in education and create businesses that not only made them rich but allowed those in poverty to prosper and become middle class citizens. It became the richest country in the world and millions immigrated to this land.
On the other side of the world was an evil government that enslaved its people. It saw this nation as a threat to its plan of world domination but knew conquering it could never be done militarily. "Before we can assume power we must corrupt" they said.
They began to invade the country as a virus infects a body. Like the plague it engulfed the whole land and the strongest lamented over the nation's weakness. These creatures twisted the words freedom into the freedom to do every vice and evil the wicked could conceive. It turned everything upside down. Good was bad. Men became women. Women became men. Sodom and Gomorrah was rebuilt.
Capitalism was no longer there to help others but selfishness grew and greed vomited out its illicit pleasures of entertainment that blinded the minds of millions. Those who could not be perverted were given comforts and toys that would satisfy them. Souls became empty and they reached out for anything that gave them temporary peace again and again.
Through all the invaders efforts there were still noises of discontent. Their shadow government, their "Shadow Party" was not completely effective. There were people who could see the sinister changes in their country. They saw the rising tide of violence. They saw how families were being destroyed as the devil rocked every cradle. The sane were considered insane. The foolish were praised as philosophers. Judges were deranged and released from prison murderers, rapists and child molesters back into the public to kill, rape and sexually assault children. Good people watched in horror on TV. Was it a movie, TV show or was it reality? Like a cat toying with a mouse before it's killed, millions were entranced before meeting their end.
These invaders had to move forward quickly. Their focus on conquering the world weakened their own government. Their very own people had overthrown its yoke of slavery and became free to worship Christ and people were normal again. They were strangers to their own land so they had no choice but to make their home in this foreign country they sought to destroy. No matter. This new country had more power to destroy and influence the world. It is richer and easier to control. They swiftly sat themselves upon the throne and boasted their intentions without fear of being exposed. Their plan of world domination could now be done militarily. "Conquest through corruption was yesterday's game" they said, "We can assume power through military force anywhere, anytime". Promising peace while attacking nations. Promising prosperity while creating poverty. We shall destroy them and they will cheer louder than any people in history.
If Only It Was a Fairy Tale
Those who worshipped their leader lay before him like a whore and gave up their children. They never questioned his background and accepted his lies wholeheartedly. The words of Russian Bishop Ignaty Bryanchaninov in 1927 ring ever so clearly today, "Whoever does not obtain the kingdom of God within oneself will not recognize the Antichrist and will inevitably, become his follower". The presidential elections in Amerika are a set up and always have been after Kennedy was shot.
Americans think the Soviets were not angry about the Cuban missile crisis. While it is true the Soviets did not want a nuclear war they did move Kennedy out of the way and they attacked America within and conquered it. Now they always point at the new Russia with cries of "foul play!" and "stolen elections!". The Communist trick is to accuse their innocent opponent of the illegal activity they themselves are involved in.
Russia in their presidential elections had cameras in every voting station. Anyone could log in and see it. I did it myself. 600,000 Russians volunteered to monitor the Presidential Elections Online. ID and Russian language only was required. Paper ballots avoided fraud. Electronic voting in Amerika is a joke. Foreign observers were accepted in Russia and rejected in Communist Amerika. Any Russian could sign up to volunteer to watch out for voter fraud in person. In the end the election reflected the opinion polls from dozens of independent sources in Russia. Putin was the most popular and he was elected.
In Amerika there are only 2 main parties. Oh sure, there are others but one would never know it the way the Amerikan media hides them. . Russia had 5 parties that qualified for the presidential elections. The mainstream media in Amerika demonized Putin and insulted Russians in this video. Amerika will never show Putin like this video or this on TV. Amerika calls it Russian propaganda. Again, the Communist trick is to accuse their opponent of illegal activity they themselves are involved in. The Communists were the bully in school who first threw a rock at a little boy and then immediately blamed the little boy for doing it. It's the Communist way. It's the Chicago way. They blame others for being a racist when they are really bigots themselves.   Continued >>

A Victory for Demagoguery!
  The U.S.S.A. Is Falling for 0bama's Class Warfare Campaign and the 'Almighty Marxist' Will Punish Those Who Have Achievied Success With Higher Tax Rates

By Mona Charen -- I’m in the camp that believes Republicans have no choice but to agree to raise taxes on the top 2 percent of earners. The party has been successfully caricatured as the servant of the rich. This is unjust, yes, but justice is imperfect in this life. It’s political suicide for Republicans to stand fast on maintaining current rates for high earners even at the cost of raising taxes for everyone else. Imagine if we went over the fiscal cliff. In January, Obama would call upon Congress to pass a law restoring the tax rates for 98 percent of filers. What could Republicans do then, refuse?
There is a time for strategic retreat. Republicans are not without tactical opportunities though. They can reply, as my friend Michael Medved has suggested, that if the Clinton tax rates are desirable, so are the Clinton spending rates. They could resurrect a budget from 1998 and pass it. Democrats would protest that 1998 spending rates are not remotely commensurate with our needs. But wait, don’t they argue that the Clinton years were economic utopia? Were people living in cardboard boxes on the streets in the 1990s? While they’re at it, they could propose Clinton levels of regulation, too.Alternatively, they could pass the Simpson/Bowles proposal, reminding voters that the president ignored his own debt commission. Simpson/Bowles has many flaws (including too few spending reductions), but it does at least make big strides toward taming the debt. Endorsing it would show that Republicans are prepared for painful compromise in the name of getting our house in order. The president talks of a “balanced approach” to deficit reduction — by which he seems to mean more taxes and more spending. His former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff has fingered national debt as the “greatest national security threat” we face. Yet the president has yet to make a genuine proposal to cut spending.
Republicans must bow to political reality about tax rates, but it’s worth a backward glance to consider just how great a victory this is for demagoguery.
Consider that the Democratic party is now committed, body and soul, to defending “the middle-class tax cuts.” They are the party of the middle class, they trill. Yet when these tax rates were enacted, every living Democrat denounced them as “tax cuts for the rich.” Every Democratic tongue swore that Bush had passed “tax cuts for the rich.” The Republicans piped in response: “No, they were tax cuts for everyone.” But they were drowned out. The libel stuck, and it persists even now as Democrats go to the mat for those Bush middle-class tax rates.
Also, the Bush tax cuts made the tax code more, not less, progressive. More than 8 million taxpayers were relieved of paying taxes altogether because the Bush reforms doubled the child tax credit and expanded the Earned Income Tax Credit. That may have been a political miscalculation as it insulated more Americans from the cost of government. But it’s certainly at odds with the conventional wisdom that Republicans didn’t consider the needs of working Americans when they were in power.
As for the rich, yes, the rates went down. But the percent of the total tax burden shouldered by the top 1 percent of earners increased from 37 percent in 2000 to 40 percent in 2007. The bottom 50 percent of taxpayers paid 16 percent less in 2007 than they had in 2000. Their share of the total burden fell from 3.9 percent to 2.9 percent.
Mr. Obama has successfully deluded people into believing that the rich pay less in taxes than their secretaries. In fact, as Steve Moore has shown, the top 5 percent of taxpayers earn 37 percent of national income but pay 61 percent of income taxes.
Democrats, especially this president, have scorned the Bush years for their accumulated debt and for raging inequality. Yet, as Professor Emmanuel Saez of Berkeley (yes, Berkeley) has shown, the income gap during Obama’s first term has been far more pronounced than it was during the Bush years. As Alexander Eichler of the Huffington Post put it, “The rising tide has lifted fewer boats during the Obama years — and the ones it’s lifted have been mostly yachts.”
The demonization of the rich paid electoral dividends: Obama will get his way on tax rates. But the problem he conjured — the rich getting richer at the expense of everyone else — was a crude fiction. It’s the kind of class warfare appeal that has worked all over the globe. We used to be an exception. No more.

Prepare for 12 More Years of H-E-L-L-!
  Hillary's Countless Choices Hinge on One: 2016

New York Times -- You’re one of the most famous women on earth, and you’re jobless for the first time in decades. You’d like to make money, but you don’t want to rule out running for president. So what do you do all day?
Right now, aides and friends say, Hillary Rodham Clinton’s plan looks like this: exit the State Department shortly after Inauguration Day and then seclude herself to rest and reflect on what she wants to do for the next few years. Those who have invited her for 2013 engagements have been told not to even ask again until April or May.
She and her husband would like to buy a house in the Hamptons or upstate New York, several friends said, and Mrs. Clinton will finally have more time for everyday activities like exercise (last summer, between world crises, she was squeezing in 6 a.m. sessions at a pool with a trainer).
She is likely to use her husband’s foundation as at least a temporary perch, several former aides said, and she has been considering a new book — not a painful examination of her failed 2008 presidential bid, as she once proposed, but a more upbeat look at her time as secretary of state.
For the moment, Mrs. Clinton may appear to be a figure of nearly limitless possibility, and her name has come up for prestigious jobs: president of Yale University, head of George Soros’s foundation. But being Hillary Clinton is never a simple matter, and her next few years are less a blank check than an equation with multiple variables. Her status is singular but complicated: half an ex-presidential partnership, a woman at the peak of her influence who will soon find herself without portfolio, and an instant presidential front-runner (a title that did not work out well last time).
Mrs. Clinton may find that her freedom comes with one huge constraint. The more serious she is about 2016, the less she can do — no frank, seen-it-all memoir; no clients, commissions or controversial positions that could prove problematic. She will be under heavy scrutiny even by Clinton standards, discovering what it means to be a supposedly private citizen in the age of Twitter. With the election four years away — a political eon — she will have to tend and protect her popularity, and she may find herself in a cushy kind of limbo, unable to make many decisions about her life until she makes the big one about another White House try. Still, Mrs. Clinton faces some immediate choices, which nearly two dozen current and former aides, friends and donors described: Should she team up with her husband again?   Continued >>
Gingrich: If Hillary Clinton Runs In 2016, Current GOP ‘Incapable Of Competing’
Carville On Hillary: Every Democrat I Know Says "God, I Hope She Runs" (Video - Warning! Nauseating Imagery)

None Dare Call It 'Election Conspiracy'?
  Shush!  Best be in denial than to accept the fact that the government of the United States is hopelessly corrupt (The Democratic Party, primarily).

By Col. Lawrence Sellin -- Americans are no longer citizens of a republic, but subjects of a reigning oligarchy composed of self-serving politicians, who are subservient to international financiers and enabled by a dishonest and partisan press.
The oligarchy operates the government as a “kleptocracy,” which exists to increase the personal wealth and political power of its officials and the ruling class at the expense of the wider population with no longer any pretense of honest public service. It is a government of thieves, where politicians and bureaucrats exploit their posts for personal gain with ever-increasing budget deficits. Through legislation and executive orders, the oligarchy then shifts the burden for debt repayment onto ordinary working people and absolves itself of any responsibility for creating the liability in the first place.
The oligarchy maintains a vice-grip on power by adjusting the levers of government, subverting the electoral process and using the mainstream media to manipulate public perception and opinion.
The outcome of the 2012 Presidential election was determined by massive voter fraud.
This was done in two ways (1) Illegal Voters and (2) Erasing Votes.

Here are only a few of the hundreds of nationwide claims of voter fraud.
►  Barack Obama won St. Lucie County, Florida, which had 141.1% voter turnout. That is, out of 175,554 registered voters, 247,713 votes were cast.
►  It was estimated that more than 20% of registered Ohio voters weren’t eligible. According to authorities, in two counties, the number of registered voters actually exceeded the voting-age population. The report said, in 31 other counties, registrations were above 90 percent of the population, “a rate regarded as unrealistic by most voting experts.”
►  In pivotal Wood County, Ohio, which Obama won, 106,258 people were registered to vote out of an eligible 98,213.
►  In 21 of the 1,022 precincts in Cuyahoga County, Ohio, the statistically impossible happened. Barack Obama beat Mitt Romney by 5,978 to zero. Even third party and write-in candidates got more votes than Romney. In 202 precincts Obama tallied 95% of the vote and in 20 precincts he received over 99%. Furthermore, the average number of voters per precinct decreased by more than half as you move from precincts where Obama won less than 50% of the vote (714) to those where he won 95% (356). In precincts where Romney received zero votes, the average number of voters was 288. These data suggest that Romney votes were being systematically erased.
►  The same type of voting pattern was reported in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, where in 59 precincts Mitt Romney got zero votes. It is also a statistical improbability that out of 19,605 votes, not even one vote was cast in error for Romney.
►  Obama also received 99% of the vote in some precincts in Broward County, Florida.
►  In addition, thousands of votes from members of the military, who were believed to be mostly Romney supporters, went uncounted or missing.

Does anyone detect a pattern?
Even though Obama received 10 million fewer votes in 2012 than he did in 2008, the Democrats were able to win where it mattered. Romney got 2.8 million fewer votes than Republican Presidential candidate John McCain received in 2008, despite indications that the Obama opposition was far more energized in 2012.
In the face of numerous signs and symptoms of a stolen election, there is no investigation. There is only silence. The Republican Party is dead or should be.
There is a report claiming that he Republican Party signed a legal agreement with the Democrat Party in 1982 not to pursue suspected vote fraud.
If there is no guarantee of election integrity, then elections become only window dressing for tyranny.
The conventional wisdom on the Republican side, however, was best reflected in an editorial “You Think Obama Stole the Election? Then Read This,” which appeared in the for-profit blog Red State. Without providing any data whatsoever, the author declared that there wasn’t “enough” voter fraud to affect the outcome of the Presidential election and anyone who questioned that conclusion was a conspiracy theorist similar to those who believed the 9/11 attack was an inside job. Red State plans to ban anyone from their site who disagrees with them.
That is the type of response from those who have some vested interest in maintaining the status quo, usually financial.
So, just how much voter fraud is “enough” and how should honest citizens respond?
That question was answered by ordinary Americans during the “Battle of Athens” in August 1946.
In McMinn County, Tennessee, a wealthy family, the Cantrells, had taken control of the county political machine in the 1930’s. Paul Cantrell was elected county sheriff in 1936, 1938 and 1940. In 1942 and 1944, he was elected to the state senate, while his chief deputy, Pat Mansfield, was elected county sheriff.
The U.S. Department of Justice reDeputies commonly accepted bribes, intimidated voters, tampered with ballot boxes, and began physically assaulting those who spoke out. ceived complaints from county citizens of electoral fraud in the 1940, 1942 and the 1944 elections. The complaints went unanswered. The sheriff’s department falsely ticketed and arrested individuals to obtain money for personal and political purposes. Local political bosses were just as corrupt.
World War II veterans returning to their home county were outraged by the tyrannical establishment. During the 1946 election, veterans fielded their own non-partisan candidates and attempted to have a fraud-free election. Paul Cantrell was again running for sheriff, while the current sheriff, Pat Mansfield, sought the state senate seat.
On August 1, 1946, Election Day, Sheriff Mansfield brought in 200 “deputies” to detain and beat up the veterans, who were acting as poll-watchers to ensure a fair and legal vote.
In addition, they took the ballot boxes to the jailhouse to count the votes privately.
Taking the ballot boxes constituted a violation of Tennessee law, as ballots must be counted in full view of the voting public.
After one poll-watcher was shot by a “deputy,” while trying to stop confiscation of the ballot boxes, enraged veterans armed themselves and sought to obtain the ballot boxes to prevent voter fraud and stop government tyranny.
A firefight at the jailhouse ensued and the veteran blew up the jailhouse door with dynamite to get the ballot boxes.
In a fair count, the veteran electoral candidates were victorious over the deeply entrenched and corrupt political machine.
The rule of law was restored to McMinn County, Tennessee.
The veterans were never prosecuted for their armed resistance to government tyranny.
The voter fraud and government tyranny that occurred in McMinn County is now happening across the country.
Complaints to law enforcement officials are going unanswered.
In the United States today, there are no fair elections, there is no rule of law, there is no means to petition elected officials or courts for the redress of grievances and there is no free press to challenge governmental abuse.
Like the World War II veterans of McMinn County, Tennessee, the government is forcing one remaining option on the citizens – rebellion to restore Constitutional government and the rule of law.
Author Bio: Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D. is a retired colonel with 29 years of service in the U.S. Army Reserve and a veteran of Afghanistan and Iraq. Colonel Sellin is the author of “Afghanistan and the Culture of Military Leadership“. He receives email at lawrence.sellin@gmail.com.

●  Maker of Unskewed Polls Creates ‘Obama Voter Fraud’ Map — See Which States He Thinks Should’ve Been Romney’s
●  Why There Won’t Be a Presidential Recount
●  None Dare Call it Stolen: Ohio, the election, and America’s Servile Press
●  Voter Turnout figures for 2012 indicate possible voter suppression and fraud
●  Vote Scamming in Philadelphia
●  Vote Scamming in Cleveland
●  Was Virginia won by vote fraud?
●  Vote Scamming in Florida

"The Third Term: The Secret Plan to
 Retain Power Through 2020"

Porter Stansberry, founder of Stansberry & Associates Investment Research, predicts a major economic boom is already in progress, and Obama will be its beneficiary. Stansberry's essay is titled..."The Third Term: The Secret Plan to Retain Power Through 2020"

I didn't vote for him. I don't admire him. I don't care for his class warfare politics… or the way he's lived his life. He's never had a real job. He's never tried to make a payroll or hit a sales goal. Instead, he constantly makes excuses for other people and himself. He tells one lie after another… and then grandstands on his “integrity.” He's nothing but a charlatan.
Even so… I know Obama will become the greatest president in U.S. history. Much like Kennedy, this has something to do with his charisma – which I find revolting, but others clearly love. However, that's not the real reason…No, a simple secret lies behind Obama's soaring power, which is still far from its peak.
Even as I write these words, an enormous economic force is building. It is a force that rivals the scope of every single American boom in our history – from the 1880s steel and railroad boom, to the 1920s automobile boom, to the baby boom of the 1960s and the computer boom of the '80s and '90s…The force now behind Obama is more powerful than all of these events – combined.
This force will carry Obama back to the presidency in 2012. And yet again in 2016. It's this force that will carry him into the history books… This new economic force will change everything about the way our country's economy works. It will also reshape the world's monetary flows… for at least the next 50 years.
It will make millions of Americans vastly wealthier… and improve the standard of living across our entire nation.
But, in the process, I believe it will also make an idol of Mr. Obama… It will give him an unprecedented public mandate. He will use this power to reshape our country… and to redraw the rules that govern the presidency. He will seek unlimited power.
I've written you this letter to explain this new force in our economy. And to warn you about how Mr. Obama will try to use this new power and his new popularity during his next administration. The next four years will be a time of tremendous change and opportunity… but also a time of tremendous risks to the liberties we all hold dear.
Very little stands between us… and a tyrant unlike any other in American history…
My name, by the way, is Porter Stansberry.
Almost 15 years ago I founded Stansberry & Associates Investment Research It has become one of the largest and most recognized investment research companies in the world, serving hundreds of thousands of subscribers in more than 120 countries.
I've made a lot of controversial predictions in the past – and they were right. For example, I warned investors about Wall Street's ...Continued

7 Reasons 'Obama's Socialism' Will Make You Poorer Than Capitalism
  Gallup Poll Shows that Mostly Moronic 'Liberal Obama Voters' Have a Positive View of Socialism Than Capitalism

By John Hawkins -- Given what we know in 2012, saying that capitalism will make a society richer than socialism should be about as controversial as saying the earth is round, not flat. This is only possible because there are so many perverse incentives that drive the promotion of socialism. If you're a politician, socialism puts power in your hands while capitalism takes it away. If you want to use the government to control people's lives, socialism is a wonderful vehicle to do just that while capitalism robs you of that opportunity. If you would rather live off the dole than to work or alternately, prefer to make money off "who you know" instead of "how good a service you provide," again socialism works better for you. Now take into account the fact that there are no pure socialist or capitalist economies left and it becomes very easy to muddy the water and keep people from realizing the obvious economic superiority of capitalism.

(1) Socialism benefits the few at the expense of the many:  Socialism is superior to capitalism in one primary way: It offers more security. It's almost like an extremely expensive insurance policy that dramatically cuts into your quality of life, but insures that if worse comes to worse, you won't drop below a very minimal lifestyle. For the vast majority of people, this would be a terrible deal. On the other hand, if you're lazy, completely incompetent or alternately, just have a streak of very bad luck, the meager benefits provided by socialism may be very appealing. So a socialist society forces the many to suffer in order to make it easier for the few. It's just as Winston Churchill once noted, "The inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries."

(2) Capitalism encourages entrepreneurship while socialism discourages it:  A government in a capitalist economy can quite easily give everyone equality of opportunity with a few basic laws and regulations, but socialism strives to create equality of results. This should frighten people who value their freedom because ultimately, as F.A. Hayek has noted, "A claim for equality of material position can be met only by a government with totalitarian powers." You can see this happening in America as our efforts to reduce "inequality" have led to an ever expanding government and a vast regulatory tangle that is almost unexplainable despite the fact that it is certainly enforceable. Capitalism encourages people to start a business and build a better life for themselves while socialism lays in wait with IRS agents, nooses made of red tape and meddling bureaucrats looking for businesses to control and loot.

(3) Capitalism leads to innovation:  Coming up with new products is often time consuming, expensive and hit or miss. Nine ideas may fail before that tenth one takes off. The less the creative people behind these ideas are allowed to benefit, the less time, money and effort they'll put into developing new concepts and inventions. Put another way, the bigger the risk, the bigger the reward has to be to convince people to take it. Capitalism offers big rewards for productive people while socialism offers makers only a parade of bureaucratic leeches who want to take advantage of their "good fortune."

(4) Capitalism produces more economic growth:  Capitalism produces considerably more economic growth than socialism and as John Kennedy said, "A rising tide lifts all boats." A fast growing economy produces more jobs, more wealth and helps everyone. Many people assume that capitalism isn't working if there are still poor people, but that misses the point. In many parts of the world, poverty means living in a hut with a dirt floor while in America, most poor Americans have TVs, refrigerators and cell phones. The rich may take home a larger share of the pie in capitalism, but the poor also benefit tremendously from living in a growing, thriving economy.

(5) Socialism is too slow to adapt:  Capitalism is extremely good at allocating capital to where it's most valued. It has to be. Either you give people what they are willing to pay for or someone else will. On the other hand, socialism is slow and stupid for a variety of reasons. Because the government is spending someone else's money, it doesn’t get particularly concerned about losing money. Political concerns about appearances often trump the effectiveness of a program. Moreover, even if politicians and bureaucrats are intelligent and competent, which are big "ifs," they're simply not going to have the specific knowledge needed to make decisions that may impact thousands of different industries. This is why capitalism may have its share of troubles, but when there are really colossal economic screw-ups, you'll always find the government neck deep in the whole mess.

(6) Socialism is inherently wasteful:  Milton Friedman once said, "Nobody spends somebody else’s money as carefully as he spends his own. Nobody uses somebody else’s resources as carefully as he uses his own." This is very true and it means that the more capital that is taken out of the economy and distributed, the more of it that will be wasted. The market does a considerably better job of allocating resources than the government because there are harsh penalties for failure. A company that makes products no one wants will go out of business. A poorly performing government program that wastes a hundred times more money will probably receive a bigger budget the next year.

(7) Capitalism works in concert with human nature while socialism works against it:  Ayn Rand said it well, "America’s abundance was created not by public sacrifices to ‘the common good,’ but by the productive genius of free men who pursued their own personal interests and the making of their own private fortunes. They did not starve the people to pay for America’s industrialization. They gave the people better jobs, higher wages and cheaper goods with every new machine they invented, with every scientific discovery or technological advance—and thus the whole country was moving forward and profiting, not suffering, every step of the way," but Adam Smith said it better, “It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest.” A man will work much harder to take care of himself, his family and his friends than he will to make money for the state, which will then waste most of it before redistributing it to people who aren't working as hard as the man who earned it in the first place.

Gird Your Loins, Americans! — Socialists Outline Democrats’ Agenda for Next Two Years
   -- Contrary to popular opinion, the U.S. Democratic Party does not set much of its own policy.
Democrat policy is actually dictated by the labor unions and radical think tanks, such as the Center for American Progress, and the Institute for Policy Studies.
The unions are dominated by the U.S.’s largest Marxist organization Democratic Socialists of America – which also works closely with the C.A.P. and I.P.S.
So, by a process of osmosis and deliberate orchestration, D.S.A., and their friends in the Communist Party USA, effectively dictate Democrat policy at state and national levels.
On November 16, the Democratic Socialists of America National Political Committee released After the Election: Keep Fighting, a blueprint for DSA action and priorities for the first segment of Obama’s second term.
It is basically a guide to action for long time DSA ally Barack Obama and the Democratic Party, over the next two years.
Diverting money from the military to social spending will be a huge part of the agenda. After all, a strong U.S. military is the major block to world revolution.
The push will be towards universal socialist healthcare and an economy wrecking Financial Transactions Tax.
Ending poverty through massive re-distribution will be a big focus… capitalizing on the 50th anniversary of DSA founder Michael Harrington‘s famous book “The Other America,” which helped to launch Lyndon Johnson’s catastrophic and completely counter productive “War on Poverty” in the mid-1960s.
Students will be manipulated with promises of loan forgiveness. There will be a huge push for immigration reform.

DSA leader Eliseo Medina, a leader of the movement, has openly boasted that this will mean eight million more Democrat Party votes.
●   The Right, backed by a toxic flow of big money into politics and shameless efforts at voter suppression, tried to turn the 2012 election into a mandate for a regressive political agenda. The Republicans intended to overturn the modest gains of the president’s first term and roll back progressive reforms dating back to the New Deal…
●   Taken as a whole, the results were a narrow but decisive victory for progressives that more than exceeded expectations, demonstrating just how out of touch the Republicans are. Progressive voters and their organizations can be justly proud of their role in achieving this result.
●   The challenges are many, and the best way not to lose heart is to address them sequentially. First, we must resist the immediate blackmail of the “Fiscal Cliff,” that illegitimate offspring of the “Deficit Crisis” mania that paralyzed Washington in Obama’s first term. DSA will work together in local coalitions with the many organizations of the Coalition on Human Needs to defend the interests of the working poor and most vulnerable members of society.
●   DSA will also advance sensible demands that may not be those of all coalition members. Cutting military budgets and recognizing that military projects are ineffective at generating jobs are essential to right the economy. Medicare is best fixed by expanding it to cover all, young and old. A financial transactions tax would go a long way toward reducing the deficit.
●   In 2013, DSA will help mobilize for an August March on Washington for Democracy and Equality, making use of its 50th Anniversary Other America materials in its preparation. We also support the call of Cornel West and Tavis Smiley for a White House Conference on ending poverty.
●   And, we will organize for the YDS campaign for Affordable and Accessible Higher Education and to support the Student Loan Forgiveness Act.
●   Since the election results firmly placed immigration reform on the national agenda, DSA reaffirms its support for comprehensive reform that welcomes and eases the path for millions of new citizens and we will actively take parts in campaigns to achieve it.
●   DSA cannot try to do everything that should be done, but should strive to do a few things well. Part of our internal political education program, using GET UP (Grassroots Economics Training for Understanding and Power) materials, is to bring together our analytic and organizing skills so that we can better set and carry out our local and chapter priorities.
●   DSA is determined to use the breathing space won in the election campaign to refocus our resolve and strengthen our work for real social justice.

Until conservatives and Republicans realize that they are opposing a Marxist dominated party, they are destined to a series of defeats on the way to political oblivion.
This is no longer the party of Truman or Kennedy, but the party of Marx, Lenin, Alinsky and Gramsci.
The old rules of fair play no longer apply. The modern Dems will lie, cheat, steal elections and viciously demonize their opposition at every opportunity.
Republicans are no longer fighting old line Democrats. They are effectively battling D.S.A, the Communist Party and the labor unions.
The Democrats are simply a front for the Marxists. These people play dirty, and they play for keeps.

Taxpayers Spent $1.4 Billion on Our Royal Family Last Year, British Taxpayers Spent a Paltry $58 Million on Their Royals
  60 Million Simple-Minded Supporters Are Comforted Living Vicariously Through the Obamas for the Foreseeable Future

Taxpayers spent $1.4 billion dollars on everything from staffing, housing, flying and entertaining President Obama and his family last year, according to the author of a new book on taxpayer-funded presidential perks.
In comparison, British taxpayers spent just $57.8 million on the royal family.
Author Robert Keith Gray writes in “Presidential Perks Gone Royal” that Obama isn’t the only president to have taken advantage of the expensive trappings of his office. But the amount of money spent on the first family, he argues, has risen tremendously under the Obama administration and needs to be reined in.
Gray told The Daily Caller that the $1.4 billion spent on the Obama family last year is the “total cost of the presidency,” factoring the cost of the “biggest staff in history at the highest wages ever,” a 50 percent increase in the numbers of appointed czars and an Air Force One “running with the frequency of a scheduled airline.”
“The most concerning thing, I think, is the use of taxpayer funds to actually abet his re-election,” Gray, who worked in the Eisenhower administration and for other Republican presidents, said in an interview with TheDC on Wednesday.
“The press has been so slow in picking up on this extraordinary increase in the president’s expenses,” Gray told TheDC. (RELATED: Five shocking truths about Michelle Obama)
Specifically, Gray said taxpayer dollars are subsidizing Obama’s re-election effort when he uses Air Force One to jet across the country campaigning.
When the trip is deemed political, it’s customary for the president to pay the equivalent of a first class commercial ticket for certain passengers. But Gray says that hardly covers the taxpayer cost of flying the president and his staffers around on Air Force One.
“When the United States’ billion-dollar air armada is being used politically, is it fair to taxpayers that we only be reimbursed by the president’s campaign committee for the value of one first-class commercial ticket for each passenger who is deemed aboard ‘for political purposes?’” Gray asks in the book.
“And is that bargain-price advantage fair to those opposing an incumbent president?” (SEE ALSO: Millions of taxpayer dollars used for Disney World conference)
In the book, Gray admits Americans want their president to be safe and comfortable but argues the system should be reformed to stop the amount of unquestioned perks given to the president.
“There is no mechanism for anyone’s objection if a president were to pay his chief of staff $5,000,000 a year,” he told TheDC. “And nothing but a president’s conscience can dissuade him from buying his own reelection with use of some public money.”
Aside from a salary, the president gets a $50,000 a year expense account, a $100,000 travel account, $19,000 entertainment budget and an additional million for “unanticipated needs,” he notes.  Continued >>
Report: Royals Will Enjoy 20-Day Feast in Hawaii at $4 Million Cost to Taxpayers

The first family will be vacationing in Hawaii for the Christmas holidays at a cost of at least $4 million to taxpayers, according to a report from the Hawaii Reporter. The Hawaiian paper reports that residents living near the beachfront homes at Kailuana Place, where the President Obama and first family have visited annually since 2008, were notified Monday that there will be restrictions on their movements in place for 20 days, from Dec. 17 through Jan. 6. The Hawaii Reporter calculated the $4 million cost to taxpayers based in part on the price of a round trip flight to the island > > >

You Know You're in Trouble When …
  the Communist Party USA is Celebrating Obama's Victory


You know you’re in trouble as a nation when the Communist Party USA is openly celebrating the re-election of the president.
And that is exactly what is happening in late November 2012 (Read CPUSA's Gleeful Reaction Here!)
The Stalinists are calling Barack Obama’s win a “victory for the people.” As a former communist (note small c), I can translate that for you. It means a “victory for communism – or, more precisely, a victory for the party.”
Just listen to some of the hyperbolic and ecstatic rhetoric: “We meet on the heels of an enormous people’s victory. It was a long and bitterly contested battle in which the forces of inclusive democracy came out on top. The better angels of the American people spread their wings.
“An African-American president was re-elected to the presidency, the Democrats unexpectedly strengthened their hand in the Senate and House, new progressive voices, like Elizabeth Warren, are coming to Washington, and victories, including for marriage equality, occurred at the state level.
“On the other end of the political divide, Romney lost decisively, and right-wing extremism, while not a completely spent force (and it probably never will be), was greatly weakened. Its candidates and, even more, its ideas were repudiated by tens of millions.
“Moreover, the balance of power, that is, the ground on which people will fight shifted in a progressive direction, thanks in large measure to what might be the most notable development in this election – the further emergence (compared to 2008) of a multi-racial, male-female, working class-based electorate – an electorate that has the potential to renew and realign politics for decades to come.
“Finally, millions come out of this election with a far deeper political understanding – and on a range of issues: corporate plunder and profiteering, racial and gender inequality, sexual orientation and gay marriage, immigrant, reproductive and labor rights, the corrupting role of money in politics, global warming, and militarism and military adventures.
“All this bodes well for the future.”
The party apparatchiks go even further: “The Communist Party said a year ago that the 2012 elections would be the main front of the class and democratic struggle, and subsequent events have confirmed that fact.
“Indeed, we argued (and not everyone on the left agreed and probably still don’t) that defeating right-wing extremism was the key to moving the whole chain of democratic struggle forward.
“Conversely, we said that if right-wing extremists came out victors in the elections, they would accelerate to warp speed a capitalist class counterrevolution against people’s living standards, rights and organizational capacities the likes that we haven’t ever seen.
“But that won’t happen due to the fact that the voters – a rainbow coalition of largely working people – in their majority re-elected the president.”
In other words, the Communist Party is gleeful about the election results.
None of this should surprise anyone, of course. The Communist Party USA openly supported Obama’s election bid in 2008 and again in 2012. When the party chooses not to run its own candidate for president, it signals the party’s happiness with someone already on the ballot. And the party made no secret of its strong preference for Obama in editorial after editorial.
Yet, usually, weeks after an election, you can expect the party to start agitating against “the establishment” again. It’s in the party’s nature. It’s in its DNA. It’s almost a vital necessity for fundraising.
Not this year.
For all intents and purposes, the Democratic Party and the Communist Party USA are one. They share the same goals, the same aspirations, the same dreams of a worker’s paradise, the same illusions of utopia.
Never mind that unemployment is high.
Never mind that working people can’t afford gas.
Never mind that, by every standard of measurement, poverty and misery is up.
The Communists are happy with the status quo in America.
Wow!
Think about that.
America is in a bad way.

Limbaugh: Republicans must walk away from any deal with Obama and the Democrats on the 'fiscal cliff'

Yesterday Charles Krauthammer said that Republicans have leverage right now with the president on this fiscal cliff deal because if tax rates go up on all Americans, Obama’s second term will begin in a recession as the higher tax rates will slow growth even more, and Krauthammer contends that Obama doesn’t want that.
But Rush passionately disagrees noting that analysis disregards Obama’s entire first term. Rush believes that Obama doesn’t care about having a successful economy in his second term, that it’s all part of his push to transform this country into a welfare state because that’s what is fair in his eyes and that’s the only legacy he cares about.
But even more so, Rush argues there is no deal that can be made here that actually helps the country because Obama doesn’t want a deal to help the country. He wants, as part of his transformation process, to destroy the Republican Party and that is exactly what is at stake here. Rush believes the Republicans should stand on principle of not raising taxes and just walk away from the table.
Listen to this excellent Limbaugh monologue >>

Brainy Electorate? Americans Prefer Capitalism Despite Voting for More Socialism: Capitalism 67% - Socialism 24%
Most Americans continue to have favorable opinions of capitalism and the free enterprise system. However, just 24% have a favorable opinion of socialism. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 67% have an unfavorable view of that economic system
Most Americans continue to have favorable opinions of capitalism and the free enterprise system.
However, just 24% have a favorable opinion of socialism. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 67% have an unfavorable view of that economic system. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

Russian News Outlet "Pravda" Labels Obama a ‘Communist’ in Scathing OpEd
  "All the Truth That's Fit to Print"
Obama Voters are Ignorant Tools -- 'Re-Elected by Illiterate Society'

The famed Russian news site “Pravda,” which ironically was formed as the official Communist publication of the former Soviet Union, recently released a scathing opinion column entitled, “Obama’s Soviet Mistake,” (Read the entire piece, especially you Obamabots) in which the author unabashedly labels the U.S. president a “Communist without question promoting the Communist Manifesto without calling it so.”
The author, Xavier Lerma, goes on to note how Obama’s “cult of personality” has mesmerized the ignorant in America, who will follow the hope and change icon in much the same way as ”fools” still praise Lenin and Stalin in Russia.
“Obama’s fools and Stalin’s fools share the same drink of illusion.”
Adding an interesting twist to the article, the author juxtaposes President Obama with Vladimir Putin, noting that the Russian president has been sounding more and more like “Ronald Reagan” or other “conservatives in America” who seek to promote smaller government and lower taxes. Lerma attributes the following remarks to Putin regarding the country’s taxes and the economy:

►  …we are reducing taxes on production, investing money in the economy. We are optimizing state expenses.
►  The second possible mistake would be excessive interference into the economic life of the country and the absolute faith into the all-mightiness of the state.
►  There are no grounds to suggest that by putting the responsibility over to the state, one can achieve better results.
►  Unreasonable expansion of the budget deficit, accumulation of the national debt – are as destructive as an adventurous stock market game.
►  During the time of the Soviet Union the role of the state in economy was made absolute, which eventually lead to the total non-competitiveness of the economy. That lesson cost us very dearly. I am sure no one would want history to repeat itself.”

Reading Putin’s speech “without knowing the author,” begins Lerma, “one would think it was written by Reagan or another conservative in America.” “The speech promotes smaller government and less taxes. It comes as no surprise to those who know Putin as a conservative,” Lerma writes with irony.
After referring to liberalism as a “psychosis,” Lerma blasts ”O’bomber” over Fast and Furious and goes on to state:
He is a Communist without question promoting the Communist Manifesto without calling it so. How shrewd he is in America. His cult of personality mesmerizes those who cannot go beyond their ignorance. They will continue to follow him like those fools who still praise Lenin and Stalin in Russia. Obama’s fools and Stalin’s fools share the same drink of illusion.
The author questions if Americans have ever read history and concludes that American schools have been “conquered by Communists long ago,” paving the way for a revisionist history that would only lead to the election of a Communist president in the U.S.
“President Vladimir Putin could never have imagined anyone so ignorant or so willing to destroy their people like Obama much less seeing millions vote for someone like Obama,” Lerma quips. But the American president wasn’t the only one to draw the author’s ire. He also noted the pervasive influence of the ACLU and the eroding of America’s Christianity — something that was, of course, also a key tenet of the Soviet Union:
The red, white and blue still flies happily but only in Russia. Russia still has St George defeating the Dragon with the symbol of the cross on its’ flag. The ACLU and other atheist groups in America would never allow the US flag with such religious symbols. Lawsuits a plenty against religious freedom and expression in the land of the free.
“Christianity in the U.S. is under attack as it was during the early period of the Soviet Union when religious symbols were against the law,” Lerma notes astutely.
In terms of all of the U.S. States that have filed petitions to secede from the union, Lerma coins these Americans” hostages to the Communists in power” who will eventually need to rise up in the face of “tyranny.” Lerma concludes with a powerful comparison of the suffering endured for nearly a century under the oppression and brutality of the USSR and quotes Don Mclean’s famed song, “American Pie”:
Russia lost its’ civil war with the Reds and millions suffered torture and death for almost 75 years under the tyranny of the United Soviet Socialist Republic. Russians survived with a new and stronger faith in God and ever growing Christian Church. The question is how long will the once “Land of the Free” remain the United Socialist States of America? Their suffering has only begun. Bye bye Miss American Pie!
Those who recall the days of the former Soviet Union, or who have friends and family members who fled a life of degradation, will see much truth in Lerma’s words. Even envisioning the now-famous “Hope” and “Change” campaign posters, which elevated Obama to a cult of personality, strikes fear and anxiety into the hearts of those who lived through eerily similar propaganda behind the iron curtain. It is ironic that this opinion column, so scathing of Communism and so keenly perceptive of how history is repeating itself in President Obama, comes to us from the publication that was formed to be the official Communist mouthpiece of the former Soviet Union itself.
Perhaps that is what lends it all the more weight.
Now should one be mindful of the fact that the author of this opinion column also considers Vladimir Putin a “conservative”? Yes, however, more disturbing still is that Lerma finds Putin conservative in comparison to Obama. Opinions on Putin vary greatly among those living in Russia in much the same way as Americans differ in opinion con President Obama. What’s more, Lerma’s personal views on Putin do not necessarily negate that there is merit to his observations on President Obama. Russians who have witnessed the trappings of the former Soviet Union either during its height or in its aftermath, tend to speak from a place of personal experience — something that warrants careful consideration. Based on our Google search of the author, he does appear to be a Russian columnist for Pravda who also maintains his own conservative-leaning blog.
Shortly after TheBlaze published this article citing Pravda’s opinion column, author David Frum posted a hair-trigger response on his Daily Beast Blog, accusing TheBlaze of agreeing with Pravda on President Obama. Frum disparages Lerma’s “journalistic” credentials and goes on to focus solely on Lerma’s opinions on Vladimir Putin, as well as the Pravda author’s reference to attacks on Christianity in America. Frum does not address any other points raised by Lerma concerning the cult of personality that has been build around Obama, nor the parallels Lerma sees between present-day America and the former Soviet Union. Frum also appears to miss the irony that was the true crux of this Blaze article: That the former official mouthpiece of the Communist Party believes Obama is a Communist and that Putin is Conservative by comparison. That, of course, was the point.
 Simpletons Thought That the 'Marxist Devil' Obama Cared More About Them Than the 'Good Capitalist' Romney
  The Phrase That Lost Romney the Election

By Heather Higgins and Alex Cortes -- What if we told you that the election was decided by a phrase? You might not believe it, but assume we’re right for a minute. What word would you guess decided the election? Hurricane Sandy? The answer lies in perhaps the single most illustrative exit poll question conducted, where CNN asked “What is the most important candidate quality to your vote?”
The response options were “Strong Leader,” “Shares Your Values,” “Has a Vision for the Future,” and “Cares about People.” Among folks that chose one of the first three responses, Mitt Romney won between 54-61% of their vote.
But, among folks who chose “Cares About People,” Romney lost dramatically – 81-18%.
“Cares about you” is the single phrase that lost Romney the election. Those for whom empathy was the most important candidate quality clearly did not get a sense that he cared about people and worse, many eventhought he was antagonistic towards many Americans. Why was this so?
Romney’s business career, which was the central argument for his candidacy in an election dominated by the economy, was turned into a weakness by the left and the Obama campaign early on, with them portraying his experience leading Bain Capital as one of the opposite of care: harm. Laying people off, taking away their pensions, and destroying communities, Mitt Romney allegedly brought all of these across America.
The Bain attacks were less about vilifying Wall Street (though that too) and more about conveying the message “he’s not like us, he doesn’t care about us.”
Many voters bought into this early portrayal of Romney as one who does not care for people. Others, who did not quite buy into it, still held it as a potential lens through which to consider his future actions and statements. Thus, when Romney essentially proclaimed that the 47% of Americans who receive government assistance were a lost cause, the statement confirmed, to the others, the narrative that he does not care for people.
You might ask, could not a rational voter get beyond whether they felt a candidate cared for them, and ask which candidate’s policies would best care for them and future generations? Such a purely rational decision-maker, often referred to as homo economicus, is rare among human beings that are first driven by their moral intuitions, like compassion, before their strategic reasoning.
In The Righteous Mind, moral psychologist Jonathan Haidt presents volumes of research demonstrating the primacy of moral intuitions which “reason” is then used to buttress. It includes his in-person interviews where, of the 1,620 times that the interviewees were told of a repulsive story that explicitly stated no one was harmed, 38%, tojustify their revulsion at the outcome, nonetheless said that someone was harmed. The interviewees’ moral intuitions immediately led them to condemn the repulsive story, claim there was a victim, and then use their strategic reasoning to support their position rather than truly consider whether there was a victim.
If you do not meet people’s moral needs, their strategic reasoning will not be unlocked to consider your arguments, but instead used to search for reasons to reject your arguments. This reality led Jack Kemp to say “They don’t care how much you know until they know how much you care.” Mitt Romney may have had the better plans for America, but before voters were willing to consider them, they first had tothink that he cared about them, which too many did not.
Haidt’s research further elucidates the particular importance of care as a moral foundation. His study of anthropology and evolutionary theory led him to the conclusion that humanity possesses six moral foundations: care, fairness, liberty, authority, sanctity, and loyalty. In over 130,000 individual interviews on how relevant each of these moral foundations are to determining right and wrong, Haidt found that conservatives respond to each of them whereas the center and the left appreciate essentially only two: care and fairness.
With the shrinkage of the Republican base by 9 percent over the last few years increasing the importance of attracting voters beyond the base, it is critical that Republicans frame the discussion of their policies in the context of these two moral foundations that resonate with the entire country. That, or they can slip into permanent minority status.

Pat Caddell: Republican 'Consultant-Lobbyist-Establishment Complex' Responsible For Romney Defeat
Speaking at The David Horowitz Freedom Center's "Restoration Weekend" in Florida on November 16, Pat Caddell indicted what he called the Republican "consultant-lobbyist-establishment" complex for losing a presidential campaign in 2012 President Barack Obama had no business winning.
“No presidential campaign should be run by consultants,” Caddell said. “They should be run by people who are committed to the candidate and not into making big money.”
Caddell, the former Jimmy Carter adviser who consulted on the "Hope and the Change" movie that profiled disaffected Obama 2008 voters who were not going to vote for him in 2012, warned Republicans that the consultant-lobbyist-establishment complex may threaten to take the party into oblivion if not marginalized.
The Romney campaign, Caddell said, was driven be establishment consultants and was a failure of mechanics and message.
“But most of all, it was a failure of imagination,” Caddell said. ““It was the single worst campaign in modern history of a challenger who had a chance to win ... and that’s the truth and nothing can take away from that.”
Caddell said “Republicans never attempted to put a frame around the national election” because “the people who run the messaging in the Republican party and their consultants refused to do it.”
As a result, Rommey lost decisively to voters who voted for the candidate who “cares about me,” which was more than 20% of the electorate.
Many of these voters are Reagan Democrats and independents. “You have to have some connection to the people,” Caddell said, noting Romney lost the “empathy vote” by 65 percentage points to Obama.
Caddell said the Republican establishment thought, “We don’t have to do anything, [Obama] will be defeated because of the economy.”
He said Republicans believed the “numbers” told them they would win the election, and that is why many in the establishment and consultant class thought they could win by default by “holding the ball” and running out the clock.  Continued > >

BarackOFraudo.com: New Website Devoted to Exposing "How They Stole the Election"
  'Unskewed Polling' Creator Launches New Site on How 'Obama's Win' Might Be Based on 'Voter Fraud'
The creator of the so-called "Unskewed" Polling site is now unskewing the actual votes. Last week, Dean Chambers — who admitted he was wrong about the polls shortly after the election — launched BarackOFraudo.com, which attempts to expose "how they stole the election." Its premise centers on the admittedly eye-popping fact that Republican Mitt Romney received sometimes as little as zero votes in certain precincts in Ohio and Pennsylvania. Chambers also alleges that there are "questions" with how votes were counted in Florida and Virginia. You see where this is going — without those four states, President Barack Obama has >>>
►  MORE VOTE FRAUD IN SWING STATES — GO TO "BARACK OBAMA FRAUD 2012"
►  GO TO BarackOFraudo.com

Just 333,000 in 'Swing States' Would Have Given Romney the Presidency
Breitbart -- On November 6, 2012, 3.2 million fewer Americans voted for Mitt Romney than President Obama. 61.8 million Americans voted for Obama, while only 58.6 million voted for Romney. Despite losing the popular vote 51% to 48%--not a landslide for Obama by any means, but on the other hand not the “neck and neck” outcome many predicted--Mitt Romney would be President today if he had secured 333,908 more votes in four key swing states. The final electoral college count gave President Obama a wide 332 to 206 margin over Romney. 270 electoral college votes are needed to win the Presidency. >>>

GOP Legally Barred from Fighting 'Vote Fraud'
By Bob Unruh -- The case is the Democratic National Committee vs. the Republican National Committee, originally from 1982. Democrats alleged Republicans were trying intimidate minority voters in New Jersey and brought the legal action. The RNC, inexplicably, decided to agree to a consent decree before a Democrat-appointed judge rather than fight the claims. The judge, Dickinson Debevoise, appointed by Jimmy Carter, later retired but decided he would continue to control the case. The decision requires the RNC – but not the DNC – to “refrain from undertaking any ballot security activities in polling places or election districts where the racial or ethnic composition >>>

In the Name of National Security, Lapdog Media Declares BenghaziGate a Non-Scandal
 By John Nolte -- After yesterday's closed-door testimony of David Petraeus on the Hill, we now know for a fact that for two weeks the Obama Administration repeatedly and relentlessly lied to the American people about what they knew was the truth behind the September 11 anniversary attack on our consulate in Libya. Unfortunately, we also now know that they're going to get away with it.
Within 24 hours of a coordinated assault that left four Americans dead, then-CIA Director David Petraeus was convinced the intelligence proved a local Libyan militia affiliated with al-Qaeda was responsible, and said so in his report.
Then the Petraeus report was edited (probably by Eric Holder's Justice Department) to remove the terror angle and pile the blame on a spontaneous protest over a YouTube video. Over the course of two weeks, this blatantly false Narrative would only grow and sharpen, even though all knew it was a lie -- and by "all," I mean the White House, the terrorists, the media, and anyone with an IQ above room temperature.
In other words, what critics of the White House narrative knew to be true months ago, has now been verified. There's no longer any dispute that for two weeks the White House knew Benghazi was an act of terror and that for two weeks everyone from President Obama to U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice to White House spokesman Jay Carney to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton repeatedly told us something the Administration knew wasn't true.
And still, the media and Democrats don’t care, because….
  ●   …the administration refrained from saying it suspected that the perpetrators of the attack were Al Qaeda affiliates and sympathizers to avoid tipping off the groups. …
  ●   [N]ames of groups suspected in the attack — including Al Qaeda’s franchise in North Africa and a local Libyan group, Ansar al-Shariah — were removed from the public explanation of the attack immediately after the assault to avoiding alerting the militants that American intelligence and law enforcement agencies were tracking them[.]
That's reporting from The New York Times -- the same New York Times that during the Bush Administration published every piece of classified information leaked to them that might undermine the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
But now, apparently, blatantly lying in the name of national security -- with a lie that just happens to be convenient to the president's reelection bid -- is okey-doke with The New York Times … and the Democratic Party … and almost all of the media.
Let's just take a moment to appreciate how absolutely brilliant this is. Using the rationale of "national' security" as an excuse for a two week pre-election cover up is pure genius. It's total bullshit, but that doesn't mean it's not genius bullshit.
No one believes it, most of all the media, but that's not and never will be the point. Prior to the election, the media was just as desperate as the White House to ensure that the successful assassination of an American ambassador wasn't blamed on the very same al-Qaeda the President had just bragged about decimating in his convention speech. So the lie about a riot over a video was manufactured and a compliant media complied by whack-a-moling Mitt Romney or anyone else who pointed to the lying.
You know, to protect the America they love so much.
All that mattered to the White House and to the media was running out the clock to Election Day. Which they did.
But everyone involved in this conspiracy knew that what we all knew was the truth would eventually come out. Then what? After all, a four-alarm scandal surrounding a White House that engaged at every level in a two week pre-election cover up, could swamp Obama's second-term agenda and damage his legacy. The White House surely doesn’t want that to happen, nor does the media.
What to do? What to do?
Ahhh… The ole' National Security ploy!
Listen, I get that public deception is sometimes necessary in the name of national security, but this wasn't a deception. Absolutely no one was deceived. It was a blatant political move to save Obama from the embarrassment of a successful terror attack occurring under his watch just days after having bragged about his handling of al-Qaeda.
Even though everyone -- including the terrorists we supposedly didn’t want to tip off -- knew from day one that the White House was telling a big fat whopper to help the president win reelection, we're now going to be told another big fat whopper by the media that says this was all okay because it was done for mom, apple pie, and Old Glory.
And I'll bet dollars against rubber washers they get away with it.

Petraeus Knew Benghazi Was Terrorism - Blackmailed To Lie?
  IBD EDITORIAL -- Scandal: David Petraeus' admission that he knew almost immediately that Benghazi was a terrorist attack raises anew our question: Was he coerced into telling lawmakers Sept. 14 that it was caused by a video? The tangled web that is Benghazi-gate got more tangled Friday when, according to Rep. Peter King, David Petraeus testified in a closed-door hearing that his agency determined immediately after the Sept. 11 Libya attack that "al-Qaida involvement" was suspected — but that the line was taken out in the final version circulated to and by administration officials. "No one knows yet exactly who came up with >>>

BREAKING: The President Knew the Truth About Benghazi
By Jennifer Rubin -- In a blockbuster report, John Solomon, the former Associated Press and Post reporter, has ferreted out the president's daily brief that informed him within 72 hours of the Sept. 11 attack that the Benghazi attack was a jihadist operation.Citing officials directly familiar with the information, Solomon writes in the Washington Guardian that Obama and other administration officials were told that "that the attack was likely carried out by local militia and other armed extremists sympathetic to al-Qaida in the region."He adds: The details from the CIA and Pentagon assessments of the killing of Ambassador Chris [Stevens] were far more >>>

Benghazi Betrayal May be a Cover-Up of American Weapons in Hands of Terrorists
By Rachel Alexander -- In a scandal looking more and more like Fast and Furious, information is coming out revealing what may be the real reason why the Obama administration refused to provide military support to save Americans in Benghazi. Obama was terrified the public would find out that American weapons had been given to Libyan terrorists, who then used them against Americans in the attack. Glenn Beck reported that Glen Doherty, the former Navy Seal who was killed alongside Ambassador Christopher Stevens, told ABC News that he was looking for weapons in Libya. Middle East expert Barry Rubin has said U.S. intelligence confirms >>>

Petraeus Stretches the Truth -- Says U.S. Tried to Avoid Tipping Off Terrorists After Libya Attack
By Eric Schmidt -- David H. Petraeus, the former director of the Central Intelligence Agency, told lawmakers on Friday that classified intelligence reports revealed that the deadly assault on the American diplomatic mission in Libya was a terrorist attack, but that the administration refrained from saying it suspected that the perpetrators of the attack were Al Qaeda affiliates and sympathizers to avoid tipping off the groups. Mr. Petraeus, who resigned last week after admitting to an extramarital affair, said the names of groups suspected in the attack — including Al Qaeda’s franchise in North Africa and a local Libyan group, Ansar al-Shariah >>>

Jill Kelley's world: White House visits, Meals with Generals, and Name-Dropping Emails
TAMPA — Her business card is utterly ordinary. No big titles. No hint of connections with the military and political elite. It lists her address, her phone number and her name in elegant script: "Honorable Jill G. Kelley." But the outsized portrait of herself that Kelley presents to the world will fit on no card. It's seen in her emails to Tampa Mayor Bob Buckhorn and others. She drops names. She mentions lunch at the White House in a casual aside, one of three visits she has made there in the last six weeks. The top U.S. general in Afghanistan >>>

Ex-CIA Director Petraeus to Testify He Knew Libya Was Terrorism 'Almost Immediately'

CNN's Pentagon correspondent Barbara Starr reported that a high-placed source informed her that former CIA Chief David Petraeus will use his upcoming testimony to amend his previous testimony. According to this source, Petraeus will tell the closed door congressional hearing that he knew "almost immediately" that the September 11 anniversary attack on our Libyan consulate was a terrorist attack committed by the al-Qaeda-linked militia Ansar Al Sharia.
Frances Townsend, a former Homeland Security advisor to George W. Bush, who is now a CNN analyst, tweeted this out:
CNN: Petraeus wants 2 testify 2 Congrss that he knew 9/11 #Benghazi attacks were terrorism, perpetrated by Ansar Al Sharia 'almost immediately'
— Frances Townsend (@FranTownsend) November 15, 2012
Other than Petraeus's upcoming testimony being "different than what he initially said," Starr's source also reported that Petraeus will tell Congress that at first there were at least 20 different intelligence reports floating around that said the video was responsible for the attack, and that over time, those reports were "slowly disproved."
Petraeus also told this source he believed the CIA talking points given to Susan Rice came from within the White House or Administration. This is all a little muddled, but it's important to keep one vital point in mind...
On September 12, the day after the attack (though it wasn't broadcast by CBS), President Obama told "60 Minutes"...
You're right that this is not a situation that was exactly the same as what happened in Egypt, and my suspicion is, is that there are folks involved in this who were looking to target Americans from the start.
...which means that at that time, the president was pretty sure this was a premeditated attack.
There's no question that at first a "fog of war" excuse made perfect sense. But what's also not in question is that as the days and weeks passed, the White House moved further and further away from what the President said on "60 Minutes" -- which means that as those 20 or so reports were being "disproved," the Administration was moving further and further away from the truth. How did that happen?
The other issue, and this is something I've been pushing for weeks now, is that both White House spokesman Jay Carney and U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice told the media repeatedly that there was absolutely no evidence that Libya was premeditated.
Now we know there was. It's one thing to say you believe the attack was over a video, it's an entirely different tightrope to walk when you're saying in no uncertain terms that there's "no evidence" of a terror attack.
Other than the tragic loss of life and intelligence, nothing is more troubling about Libya than the fact that the White House narrative blaming the attack on the video actually strengthened and sharpened over time -- over almost two weeks. Nothing can can make sense of that; at least, nothing acceptable.

Romney: I Lost Because Ǿbämá Çläúš Gave ‘Free Stuff'’ to Minorities and Dumber Young Voters
  Mitt Romney blamed his loss against President Barack Obama over his opponent’s usage of the “old playbook” to woo “specially the African American community, the Hispanic community and young people” with “gifts” in the form of voting bloc-specific legislation.
“With regards to the young people, for instance, a forgiveness of college loan interest, was a big gift,” the former GOP presidential candidate said during a conference call with his national finance committee. “Free contraceptives were very big with young college-aged women. And then, finally, Obamacare also made a difference for them, because as you know, anybody now 26 years of age and younger was now going to be part of their parents’ plan, and that was a big gift to young people. They turned out in large numbers, a larger share in this election even than in 2008.”
Romney added that the Affordable Care Act was a shoo-in way for Obama to win the votes of Hispanics and blacks, with 71 percent and 91 percent of support from each electorate going to the incumbent.
It wasn’t general issues about the status of America that mattered to minority voters, he said.
“Our campaign, in contrast, was talking about big issues for the whole country —military strategy, foreign policy, a strong economy, creating jobs and so forth,” Romney continued. “And by the way, as you’ll hear from [campaign pollster] Neil [Newhouse], our strategy worked well with many people, but for those who were given a specific gift, if you will, our strategy did not work terribly well.”

Romney So Hated That Fine Folks of Philadelphia
Didn't Give Him a Single Vote in 59 Wards
  Interactive Map: 59 Divisions — ǾBÂMÄ CLOBBERED ROMNEY 19,605 to ZERO-ZILCH-NADA
It's one thing for a Democratic presidential candidate to dominate a Democratic city like Philadelphia, but check out this head-spinning figure: In 59 voting divisions in the city, Mitt Romney received not one vote. Zero. Zilch.
These are the kind of numbers that send Republicans into paroxysms of voter-fraud angst, but such results may not be so startling after all.
"We have always had these dense urban corridors that are extremely Democratic," said Jonathan Rodden, a political science professor at Stanford University. "It's kind of an urban fact, and you are looking at the extreme end of it in Philadelphia."
Most big cities are politically homogeneous, with 75 percent to 80 percent of voters identifying as Democrats.
Cities are not only bursting with Democrats: They are easier to organize than rural areas where people live far apart from one another, said Sasha Issenberg, author of "The Victory Lab: The Secret Science of Winning Campaigns."
"One reason Democrats can maximize votes in Philadelphia is that it's very easy to knock on every door," Issenberg said.
Still, was there not one contrarian voter in those 59 divisions, where unofficial vote tallies have President Obama outscoring Romney by a combined 19,605 to 0?
The unanimous support for Obama in these Philadelphia neighborhoods - clustered in almost exclusively black sections of West and North Philadelphia - fertilizes fears of fraud, despite little hard evidence.
Upon hearing the numbers, Steve Miskin, a spokesman for Republicans in the Pennsylvania House of Representatives, brought up his party's voter-identification initiative - which was held off for this election - and said, "We believe we need to continue ensuring the integrity of the ballot."
The absence of a voter-ID law, however, would not stop anyone from voting for a Republican candidate.
Larry Sabato, a political scientist at the University of Virginia who has studied African American precincts, said he had occasionally seen 100 percent of the vote go for the Democratic candidate. Chicago and Atlanta each had precincts that registered no votes for Republican Sen. John McCain in 2008.
"I'd be surprised if there weren't a handful of precincts that didn't cast a vote for Romney," he said. But the number of zero precincts in Philadelphia deserves examination, Sabato added.
"Not a single vote for Romney or even an error? That's worth looking into," he said.  Continued >>

Election Fraud? You Betcha! Obama Won More Than 99 Percent Of The Vote In More Than 100 Ohio Precincts
Barack Obama received more than 99% of the vote in more than 100 precincts in Cuyahoga County, Ohio (Cleveland area) on election day. In fact, there were a substantial number of precincts where Mitt Romney got exactly zero votes. So how in the world did this happen? Third world dictators don't even get 99% of the vote.
Overall, Mitt Romney received 30.12% of the vote in Cuyahoga County. There were even a bunch of precincts in Cuyahoga County that Romney actually won.
But everyone certainly expected that Cuyahoga County would be Obama territory. And in most of the precincts that is exactly what we saw - large numbers of votes for both candidates but a definite edge for Obama.
However, there are more than 100 precincts in Cuyahoga County where the voting results can only be described as truly bizarre.
Yes, we always knew that urban areas would lean very heavily toward Obama, but are we actually expected to believe that Obama got over 99% of the votes in those areas?
In more than 50 different precincts, Romney received 2 votes or less. Considering how important the swing state of Ohio was to the national election, one would think that such improbable results would get the attention of somebody out there. Could we be looking at evidence of election fraud hidden in plain sight?
Perhaps if there were just one or two precincts where Obama got more than 99% of the vote we could dismiss the results as "statistical anomalies" and ignore them.
But there were more than 100 precincts where this happened in the most important swing state in the nation.
Maybe there is some rational explanation for the numbers that you are about to see. If there is, I would really love to hear it.
What makes all of this even more alarming is that there were reports of voting machine problems during early voting in Ohio. It was being reported that some voters were claiming that they tried to vote for Romney but that the voting machines kept recording their votes as votes for Obama...  Continued >>
MORE VOTE FRAUD IN SWING STATES — GO TO BARACK OBAMA FRAUD 2012

Was the 2012 Election Stolen? Maybe Obama Didn't Win — At Least Not Legitimately

By Selwyn Duke -- As the 2012 election approached, conservative enthusiasm grew. Mitt Romney was drawing huge crowds while Barack Obama spoke in half-filled stadiums. All the passion lay on the right while the left was discouraged with a promised messiah who proved merely a politician.
And the prediction was that, in contrast to 2008, Republican turnout would dwarf the tuned-out and carry the day. Hence the shock November 6 eve. How could Romney lose, especially by such a wide electoral margin?
When I predicted Obama's re-election, I stated that, despite our country's inexorable leftist slide, Romney would still win on Election Day were it not for vote fraud. I explained that the Democrats could steal more than enough votes in crucial swing states to turn the election. And I still believe what I did then: electoral criminality put Obama over the top.
At the time, we heard stories about electronic-machine "glitches" switching Romney votes to Obama ones. And Patrick Moran, son of Congressman Jim Moran (D-VA), was caught on tape facilitating vote fraud while Bridgeport, CT mayor Bill Finch essentially promised to commit same for a political partner in crime.
Since then, the indications of electoral criminality have been overwhelming. First there are the anecdotes, such as the court-appointed Republican poll watchers illegally expelled from 13 Philadelphia polling places in wards that, in most cases, went 99 percent for Obama; the poll observers who noted what they considered vote fraud but were powerless to stop; and the Democrats who actually bragged about voting more than once.
Then there are the statistics, such as this staggering fact: in 59 Philadelphia districts, Romney failed to get even one vote. Final Obama-Romney tally: 19,605 to 0.
Huh? Not even one person voted GOP accidentally? I mean, there even was a Washington, D.C. councilman who inadvertently voted to approve faux marriage, saying that he didn't know what he was voting for (that would be Marion Barry).

Next, consider this report from The Columbus Dispatch:
More than one out of every five registered Ohio voters is probably ineligible to vote.
In two counties, the number of registered voters actually exceeds the voting-age population: Northwestern Ohio's Wood County shows 109 registered voters for every 100 eligible, while in Lawrence County along the Ohio River it's a mere 104 registered per 100 eligible.
Another 31 counties show registrations at more than 90 percent of those eligible, a rate regarded as unrealistic by most voting experts. The national average is a little more than 70 percent.
[...]Of the Buckeye State's 7.8 million registered voters, nearly 1.6 million are regarded as "inactive."
Understand the significance. Years ago I was contacted by a Washington, D.C. community leader (who'll remain anonymous) who told me that he had "done some computer work for several candidates over the years in DC" and had conducted his own study of urban vote fraud. He said that inner cities' great transiency ensures that any given large metropolis will have a great number of voters who no longer live in their precinct of registration
These areas also have Democrat operatives known by the get-out-the-vote term "block captains" or "apartment captains," people who know the lay of the land and thus what registered voters have left town. So all they need do then is vote for these people or have others do so. This is very easy, too, with few voter-ID laws. And this is why Democrats oppose these laws so vehemently. Now consider that Obama "won" Ohio by 100,000 votes. This means that to flip the state, Democrat surrogates had to illegally "activate" only 6.25 percent of its 1.6 million inactive voters.
Note also that Ohio secretary of state Jon Husted did ask Eric Holder's DOJ for help negotiating conflicting federal laws pertaining to the purging ineligible voters from the rolls. The DOJ's ultimate response? "No comment."
Yet a voter doesn't even have to be inactive, just disengaged. For example, when the aforementioned Patrick Moran offered advice on surrogate voting, he told an undercover reporter to masquerade as a pollster and call a targeted individual to make sure he wasn't planning to vote. And this is nothing new. In fact, liberal leg-thriller Chris Matthews himself admitted that it has been going on for years. Then there is the case of the missing military ballots.

As Rachel Alexander at Town Hall reported:
The conservative-leaning military vote has decreased drastically since 2010 due to the so-called Military Voter Protection Act that was enacted into law the year before. It has made it so difficult for overseas military personnel to obtain absentee ballots that in Virginia and Ohio there has been a 70% decrease in requests for ballots since 2008. In Virginia, almost 30,000 fewer overseas military voters requested ballots than in 2008. In Ohio, more than 20,000 fewer overseas military voters requested ballots. This is significant considering Obama won in both states by a little over 100,000 votes.
Frankly, it is inconceivable that military interest in voting could've dropped so drastically given conservatives' passion this election season. The damning conclusion? The Obama machine wants our soldiers to shed blood while it sheds their votes.
Striking as all this is, however, it's likely just a partial picture. As with all crime, it's a given that the discovered vote fraudsters represent only a tiny percentage of the total. And what about vote-fraud methods we haven't even thought of yet? Remember, the Democrats have been honing this act for many, many years.
And vote fraud is Democrat domain. Liberals are the situational-values set, people who for years insisted that right and wrong is relative and that if it feels good, do it. And what feels good to them at election time is stealing votes to win - and they do it. They relish it, in fact. Like the liberal who addressed Bill Clinton's it-depends-on-what-is-is infidelity and adamantly told me, "He did the right thing," leftists love the con. To pull a fast one like private eye Jim Rockford, fool everyone, and get away with it is like winning the Nobel Prize in Prevarication in their world. Thus, it's assured that there's no small number of liberals who are currently brimming with pride at having negated the votes of countless knuckle-dragging conservatives.
Having said this, we can't be sure about the exact magnitude of the vote fraud.
But my judgment is this: The election was likely stolen.
And whatever Barack Obama is presently, I don't believe he will be a legitimate president come January 20.
This is why Congressman Allen West was right not to concede his Florida race. And, frankly, if Romney believes that the election may have been stolen nationally, he should withdraw his concession.
Radical? Unprecedented?
Yes, but so is vote fraud on the scale perpetrated by Obama's minions. And people needn't fear creating a national crisis - we are already in a national crisis. The only question is whether good Americans will stand and be counted or allow 2012 to mark our official descent into banana-republic status.
 6

The Slaughter of 4 Americans Has Turned into a Sex-Filled Soap Opera!

► Investors: Fatal Distraction: Focus On Benghazi, Not Broadwell
► Newsbusters: Krauthammer: WH 'Held Affair Over Petraeus's Head' For Favorable Testimony On Benghazi
► ABC News: Petraeus will testilie before Senate behind closed-doors and probably not under oath
► LA Times: Jill Kelley, Key Figure In David Petraeus Scandal, Led Lavish Life
► The Blaze: Bizarre Twist: Key FBI Agent on Case Actually Sent ‘Shirtless Photos’ to Petraeus Friend
► NY Post: Petraeus helps whistleblower's unstable twin Natalie Khawam in nasty custody fight
► WashPost: Scandal probe ensnares commander John Allen of U.S., NATO troops in Afghanistan
► TampaBayTimes: Petraeus friend Jill Kelley found place hosting military parties
► UK's DailyMail: Paramour Daddy: 'The truth will come out' -- Claims her affair is part of bigger scandal
► Fox News: Petraeus told within last six weeks of probe that found affair so Obama knew
► Breitbart: Petraeus Mistress Suggests Benghazi Attack Aimed at Secret CIA Prison
► NY Times: Threatening E-Mails from Biographer to a Another Woman Led to Petraeus
► WorldNetDaily: Is this why CIA chief really resigned? Gun running to jihadists could dwarf 'Fast and Furious'
► NY Times: A Brilliant Career With a Meteoric Rise and an Abrupt Fall
► UK's DailyMail: Mistress Husband's Letter to NY Times?: 'My wife's having an affair with someone I admire'
► Breitbart: Who Authorized FBI Surveillance of Gen. Petraeus?
► WashPost: FBI probe of Petraeus triggered by e-mail threats from biographer, officials say
► BusinessInsider: Petraeus Collegue: Biographer Paula Broadwell 'Got Her Claws Into Him'
► Fox News: Intel director launches initial leak probe over ex-NYT reporter´s Libya claims
► Commentary Magazine: Who Had the Dirt on Petraeus?
► Weekly Standard: Lawmakers Considered Calling For Resignation Last Month
► Reaganite Republican: NICE TRY Barry: 'Timley' Petraeus Resignation Won't Keep Him Off the Witness Stand, You Snake
► PJ Media: Clinton Turns Down Request to Testify on Benghazi Next Week — Too Busy!
► NY Daily News: Gen. David Petraeus let down his country as well as his family

Hell Hath No Fury as a Mistress Jealous of a Rival — Petraeus' Paramour Emailed Woman and Told Her to 'Back Off' CIA Director
   Jill Kelley (Born Gilberte "Jill" Khawam of Lebanese descent) - possibly just a family friend
Details emerged when she allegedly sent threatening messages to Jill Kelley, a state department military liaison

 ●   The FBI was contacted by the recipient - and the emails were tracked to Paula Broadwell - who by then had been involved with Petraeus
 ●   Friend says that Broadwell is 'not the type' to carry on an affair
 ●   Through their investigation, Federal agents discovered that the general had shared explicit emails with Broadwell

The woman at the center of the Gen Petraeus cheating scandal fired off a threatening email to a military liaison in the State Department whom she felt was getting too close to him, it has been revealed.
An official says 37-year-old Jill Kelley in Tampa, Florida, received the emails from Petraeus biographer Paula Broadwell that triggered an FBI investigation. Ms Kelley is a liaison to the military's Joint Special Operations Command.
Details of the affair between Petraeus and his Broadwell reportedly came to light during a FBI probe of the emails that she allegedly sent to Ms Kelley.
The new revelation raises the possibility that Broadwell was growing increasingly jealous of a government employee whose job it was to keep in contact with Petraeus.
Ms Kelley, fearing for her safety, contacted the FBI. A government official told the New York Post that the emails contained such language as: 'I know what you did,' 'back off' and 'stay away from my guy.'
The official added: '[Broadwell] clearly thought something was going on' and thought she was in a 'lovers triangle.'
A person who knows both Ms Kelley and Petraeus confirmed their friendship and said she saw him often.
Petraeus broke off the steamy affair with Broadwell before it was exposed by the FBI probe, according to friends of the retired general.
Petraeus quit his post as CIA director in disgrace on Friday while offering an apology over the affair, allegedly with his biographer, Paula Broadwell - who allegedly sent a threatening email to another woman whom she felt was getting to close to him.
His apology came as reports show that the affair blew up in Petraeus' face after Broadwell allegedly sent e-mails threatening another woman whom she accused of getting too close to him.

Spurned CIA Director Sent Thousands of Emails, References Such as 'Sex Under the Desk'
  Journo-Paramour Paula Broadwell (Born Paula Dean Kranz)
Obama (or Decider-in-Chief Valerie Jarrett) Delayed Resignation Snafu to Save His Reelection!

By Ronald Kessler -- The resignation of David H. Petraeus as CIA director followed an FBI investigation of many months, raising the question of why he was not forced out until after the election.
In his letter of resignation, Petraeus cited an extra-marital affair he had been having. “After being married for over 37 years, I showed extremely poor judgment by engaging in an extramarital affair,” Petraeus said in his letter to President Obama. “Such behavior is unacceptable, both as a husband and as the leader of an organization such as ours.”
Petraeus, who had a distinguished military career, revealed no additional details. However, an FBI source says the investigation began when American intelligence mistook an email Petraeus had sent to his girlfriend as a reference to corruption. Petraeus was commander of U.S. Forces in Afghanistan from July 4, 2010 until July 18, 2011.
The investigation began last spring, but the FBI then pored over his emails when he was stationed in Afghanistan.
The woman who was having an affair with Petraeus is a journalist who had been writing about him.
Given his top secret clearance and the fact that Petraeus is married, the FBI continued to investigate and intercept Petraeus’ email exchanges with the woman. The emails include sexually explicit references to such items as sex under a desk.
Such a relationship is a breach of top secret security requirements and could have compromised Petraeus.
At some point after Petraeus was sworn in as CIA director on Sept. 6, 2011, the woman broke up with him. However, Petraeus continued to pursue her, sending her thousands of emails over the last several months, raising even more questions about his judgment.
Neither Petraeus nor the CIA’s Office of Public Affairs had any immediate comment.
FBI agents on the case expected that Petraeus would be asked to resign immediately rather than risk the possibility that he could be blackmailed to give intelligence secrets to foreign intelligence agencies or criminals. In addition, his pursuit of the woman could have distracted him as the CIA was giving Congress reports on the attack on the Benghazi consulate on Sept. 11.
The CIA ‘s reporting to Congress included a claim that protests over a YouTube video played a role in the attacks, thus allowing Obama to initially discount the possibility that the U.S. had suffered another terrorist attack just before the election.
In contrast, based on real time video and reports, the State Department was reporting that the attack that led to the deaths of four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, was terrorist-related. The State Department reported that there were no protests at the consulate.
Still, the White House, with concurrence by the FBI and Justice Department, held off on asking for Petraeus’ resignation until after the election. His resignation occurred three days after the election, avoiding the possibility that Obama’s ill-fated appointment of Petraeus could become an issue in the election.
FBI agents on the case were aware that such a decision had been made to hold off on forcing him out until after the election and were outraged.
“The decision was made to delay the resignation apparently to avoid potential embarrassment to the president before the election,” an FBI source says. “To leave him in such a sensitive position where he was vulnerable to potential blackmail for months compromised our security and is inexcusable.”
Michael Kortan, the FBI’s assistant director for public affairs, said he had no comment.

BenghaziGate Cover-Up Gets Sex Twist:
Lt. Col. Ralph Peters On Petraeus Resignation: "Timing Is Just Too Perfect"
  Peters speculates that Petraeus was forced to resign by Obama to prevent him from testifying on BenghaziGate next week

LT. COL. RALPH PETERS: The timing is just too perfect for the Obama administration. Just as the administration claimed it was purely coincidence that our Benghazi consulate was attacked on the anniversary of September 11th.
Now it’s purely coincidence that this affair -- extra-marital affair -- surfaces right after the election, not before, but right after, but before the intelligence chiefs go to Capitol Hill to get grilled.
As an old intelligence analyst, Neil, the way I read this -- I could be totally wrong, this is my interpretation -- is that the administration was unhappy with Petraeus not playing ball 100% on their party-line story.
I think it's getting cold feet about testifying under oath on their party-line story. And I suspect that these tough Chicago guys knew about this affair for a while, held it in their back pocket until they needed to play the card.
I don't like conspiracy theories, I may be totally wrong, but the timing of this, again, right after the election and right before Petraeus is supposed to get grilled on Capitol Hill, it's really smells.  SEE VIDEO

PETRAEUS RESIGNS OVER AFFAIR WITH 'HOTTIE SCRIBBLER'
   A Perfect Book Title!!

The FBI, meanwhile, is currently investigating Petraeus' biographer, 40 year-old Paula Broadwell, for improperly trying to access his email, according to NBC News
Central Intelligence Agency Director David Petraeus has resigned, citing "extremely poor judgment" for having an extramarital affair.
Petraeus, 60, told President Barack Obama of the affair on Thursday and offered to resign, a senior official told NBC News. Obama accepted his resignation in a phone call Friday afternoon.
"Yesterday afternoon, I went to the White House and asked the President to be allowed, for personal reasons, to resign from my position," Petraeus said in a letter to CIA colleagues. "After being married for over 37 years, I showed extremely poor judgment by engaging in an extramarital affair. Such behavior is unacceptable, both as a husband and as the leader of an organization such as ours."
"This afternoon, the President graciously accepted my resignation," Petraeus said in the letter.
Officials told The Associated Press that information about the affair surfaced over the course of an FBI probe. Meanwhile, law enforcement sources told NBC News that the FBI is currently investigating Petraeus' biographer for improperly trying to access his email. The sources emphasized that Petraeus was not under investigation and added that they did not believe the investigation into author Paula Broadwell would result in criminal charges.
Mike Morrell, the deputy CIA director and a long time CIA officer, will likely be offered Petraeus' job as acting director, multiple sources told NBC News. Morrell is a longtime CIA analyst, who was traveling with President George W. Bush as his briefer when terrorists struck on Sept. 11, 2001, and was later in the Situation Room with President Obama during the mission that killed Osama bin Laden, NBC News reported.

HEADQUARTERS Central Intelligence Agency
9 November 2012

Yesterday afternoon, I went to the White House and asked the President to be allowed, for personal reasons, to resign from my position as D/CIA. After being married for over 37 years, I showed extremely poor judgment by engaging in an extramarital affair. Such behavior is unacceptable, both as a husband and as the leader of an organization such as ours. This afternoon, the President graciously accepted my resignation.
As I depart Langley, I want you to know that it has been the greatest of privileges to have served with you, the officers of our Nation’s Silent Service, a work force that is truly exceptional in every regard. Indeed, you did extraordinary work on a host of critical missions during my time as director, and I am deeply grateful to you for that.
Teddy Roosevelt once observed that life’s greatest gift is the opportunity to work hard at work worth doing. I will always treasure my opportunity to have done that with you and I will always regret the circumstances that brought that work with you to an end.
Thank you for your extraordinary service to our country, and best wishes for continued success in the important endeavors that lie ahead for our country and our Agency.

With admiration and appreciation,
David H. Petraeus

Changing Demographics? Bull Manure! It's More Like Enduring Ignorance!

Freedom is hard requiring critical thinking skills, but this new demographic lets others do the thinking for them as long as they get "free stuff" in return
By Arnold Ahlert -- By now, you've heard from most of the chattering classes as to why Democrats in general, and Barack Obama in particular, did so well on election night. You've heard about changing demographics, an opportune storm, media malfeasance, etcetera, etcetera, ad nauseam.
Let me make it much simpler. On election night, for the umpteenth time, I went to the local food mart, and gave the high school kid working the register a five dollar bill for something that cost $2.32. She punched it into the computer, after which I gave her the thirty-two cents. By now, most of you know where this is going: the dazed look, alternating between the change and me, as if I'd handed her the Dead Sea Scrolls and demanded a translation on the spot. Of course if I'd used that analogy to make light of the moment, it wouldn't have mattered: these kids aren't just mathematically illiterate, they wouldn't know what the Dead Sea Scrolls are either--unless it was the name of a new app for their I-phones.
On the way home, I had the radio on. Without a trace of embarrassment or irony in his voice, the newscaster spoke about a mock vote taken at the local high school. "Barack Obama won in a landslide," he gushed. After two generations of leftist indoctrination by unionized educators, whose quid pro quo relationship with the Democrat party is written in stone, I don't doubt it for a minute. Nor was I particularly shocked earlier this year when I wrote about three kids in their late teens and early twenties, who couldn't place the date of the Civil War within the 50-year spread I gave them to do so. Literacy? If it can't be reduced to 140 characters for Twitter's sake, it no longer matters.
None of this is particularly new. In fact, when I taught reading and study skills in NYC schools thirty years ago, it was exactly the same. Those "kids" are now in their 40s. The only thing that semi-shocked me back then was the fact that most of them were no longer ashamed of being ignorant. In fact, many of them were proud of their cluelessness. Now, most of them barely know what shame is, other than having someone say something bad about them on FaceBook. And pride is all about owning the latest gadget, replacing the gadget that replaced the gadget before that.
There's your so-called demographic. We've become a nation with a majority of weak-thinkers, allied with those more than willing to do their thinking for them, as long as they get "free stuff" in return. What is the minority offering as an alternative? Freedom.
Unfortunately, freedom is hard. For one thing, it requires critical thinking skills. For another, it requires effort. Tyranny is easy. Just do whatever someone tells you to do, whether it's a bureaucrat--or a cash register. What was this election really all about? We are now certain that it is impossible to change the trajectory of nation comprised of millions of people who can't make change.
As a result, I have a suggestion for the Republicans, one they won't hear from anyone else: give Barry and Company everything they want, without an iota of resistance. Let 'em raise taxes and the debt ceiling, gut the military, and run up trillions of dollars of additional deficits and debt. Then stand back, and let an utterly corrupt media chronicle the demise--without being able to pin an ounce of the ensuing socialist catastrophe on an "obstructionist" GOP.
Harry Reid wants to end the filibuster? Tell him it won't be necessary. For the next four years, Republicans will do what a certain Senator from Illinois made a career of doing: they will simply vote "present" on every bill put before them in both houses of Congress. In effect, give Democrats they same unassailable majority they had in 2008--the same one that led directly to the passage of ObamaCare.
Radical? Compared to what? Watching a president get re-elected, despite four major scandals, the worst recovery on record, and the explosion of entitlements--all of which was blamed on the aforementioned Republican obstructionism? Being blamed for everything that will go wrong from 2012 to 2016, completely irrespective of reality or the truth?
It's time to get real: the only thing Republicans can do is delay the inevitable. Why bother? The sooner progressives and the media bring America to its knees, the sooner the people who know better can put the nation back on its feet.
I know what you're thinking. What about the hell we'll have to go through between now and then? A couple of answers. First, it's time for the voting majority to get exactly what they voted for--in spades. Second, and this applies not just to America, but to every socialist country that has also run out of other people's money to spend: better an out and out meltdown and genuine recovery after two or three years, than the ongoing twilight of semi-misery we're currently enduring. Misery that could last a decade more--or longer.
Any attempt to meet Democrats "half-way" is a fool's errand. There is no split-the-difference, get along to go along, compromise that can be reached between tyranny and freedom. With respect to the rule of law and the Constitution, you're either in or you're out.A nation is either solvent or bankrupt. It is either exceptional or ordinary. The American majority voted for tyranny, bankruptcy and mediocrity.
Give the people what they want--until they can't stand it anymore.

America Commits Suicide — Twice!


By Alan Caruba -- I had hoped that the majority of voters would elect Mitt Romney, but instead of a man of character they chose charisma. They ignored four years of failure and deception. In advertising, they say “Sell the sizzle, not the steak.” Romney, sadly, lacked sizzle.
Obama’s victory was one of a long line of Progressives from Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and Jimmy Carter. It was not new, but it will likely do more damage on top of what his predecessors have done. It turned out that there were not enough voters from the faith-based communities. You know—the kind of people Obama said “cling to their religion and guns.” There were not enough from a range of population subsets to make a difference.
Like New York’s Mayor Michael Bloomberg who thought a marathon run through boroughs devastated by Hurricane Sandy was a really good idea, Obama has never had any real sense of how people feel about things that are important to them. Why should he?
He was raised in a communist cocoon in which family, friends, fellow students, teachers, and mentors ensured he would never be exposed to the fundamentals of free market capitalism that has been the bedrock of the nation’s prosperity. I have written repeatedly that he just does not like America and that this explains his view that our nation is not an exceptional place in which to live.
His mother was attracted first to an African and, after being divorced, to an Indonesian, both Muslims. And then she abandoned Obama to the care of his leftist grandparents. His academic life led him from Occidental College to Columbia University, and then onto Harvard Law School, all leftist strongholds and, yet oddly few of his fellow students even remembered him.
On the radio of the 1940s there was a show called “The Shadow” about a man with the “power to cloud men’s minds” who used it to fight crime, but Obama developed the power to so utterly charm people that, like any successful confidence man, he left people impressed with all the exterior aspects of him without few clues about what he stood for, what he believed, and what his true goals are.
Despite four years of his campaign and his first term not enough Americans understood that Barack Obama is as alien to America as if he had come from some very different, very foreign place. What is most baffling is why a majority of voters looked at the estimated 23 million of their fellow citizens who were out of work or had stopped looking for work, and whose lives along with their own were even further encumbered by the massive debt Obama had run up; currently $16 trillion and climbing, and thought that was okay?
In a nation whose citizens pride themselves on their ability to work to meet the needs of their families, it was and is profoundly disturbing that 47 million must use food stamps or that millions have fallen below the poverty level.
Why did the majority of voters not understand the fearful implications of the erosion of the nation’s military power, not knowing that peace can only be maintained by a navy that keeps the sea lanes open, the marines who are skilled at making a quick entry into a battle zone, the army that can subdue an enemy, and an air force that has no comparison? The active military and veterans understood what their Commander-in-Chief was doing to them, but the lies about the Benghazi attack that killed a U.S. ambassador and three others were ignored.
Those who voted for Obama were content to believe the cascade of lies Obama told. They ignored the President’s record of failure—the failed “stimulus” that was nothing more than a political slush fund, Obamacare that was forced on the nation by a straight party vote by Democrats in Congress, the bankruptcy of the “clean energy” companies that could not compete even with public funding, and the eruption of Islamic frenzy that saw him abandon friend and foe alike in the Middle East. It was Obamacare that gave birth to the Tea Party movement.
The President, his advisors, the Democratic leaders in the House and Senate never understood what the Tea Party was about. Why would they? The U.S. Constitution was what they wanted to believe it said, not what it really says. Now Obama has the opportunity to fill seats on the Supreme Court with more progressive judges, thus affecting not just the next four years, but generations of Americans to come.
The abandonment of Israel troubled many, but just as troubling was the Democratic Party convention in which the inclusion of God and Jerusalem in the party platform evoked jeers and derision. It was the same Democratic Party that had, since the end of the Civil War, fought against the calls for equality from America’s black community. Even so, the African-American community continued to support them.
In 2008 Americans voted for Obama in the belief that they could demonstrate to the world that it was post-racial, post-partisan. Instead they got a cold, indifferent, arrogant man who listened only to a small circle of leftist advisors and shadowy, unknown and unseen “czars” in the White House.
Obama was as disinterested in Main Street as he was antagonistic to Wall Street. His constant talk of “millionaires and billionaires” and the need to redistribute wealth may have worried some people, but not enough of those who believe they too can achieve the American dream of wealth and success based on hard work and a measure of risk.
The majority of voters ignored the realities of the nation’s economy. They failed to realize that Obama’s opposition to the vast wealth of America’s energy reserves of coal, oil, natural gas, and nuclear will only delay the nation’s way out of debt and dependency.
In 1887 Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of Edinburgh, had this to say about the fall of the Athenian Republic some 2,000 years prior:
"A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse over loose fiscal policy, (which is) always followed by a dictatorship."
John Adams, Founding Father and the nation’s second President warned: "Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide."
Today, conservatives in America are wondering if the 2012 election was a vote to commit national suicide.

Anti-Socialsts Didn't Lose an Election,
They Lost Their Country

Women Vote 55 to 43 for Obama as Socialism Crushes Capitalism



►  ELECTORAL COLLEGE MODEL: Two Colorado professors who created the model, which has correctly forecast every winner of the electoral since 1980, predicts Romney to win 320 electoral votes out of 538, Obama wins 218. It says Romney will also win virtually every state currently considered a swing state, including Colorado.
►  REDSKIN RULE: Good news for Romney — This is a trend involving NFL football and presidential elections where this coincidence has held true since 1940. In 17 of 18 presidential elections, the rule applied: If the Redskins win their last home game before the election, the party that won the previous election wins the next election. If the Redskins lose, the challenging party's candidate wins. The Redskins lost Sunday 21-13 to Carolina — so Romney wins!
►  GEORGE WILL: Predicts 321-217 Romney landslide — Minnesota will go for Romney as well.
►  DICK MORRIS: Romney will win in a 'landslide' — Will win this election by 5 to 10 points in the popular vote. And will carry more than 300 electoral votes.
►  MICHAEL BARONE: Romney beats Obama, handily — Romney 315, Obama 223. That sounds high for Romney. But he could drop Pennsylvania and Wisconsin and still win the election.
►  KARL ROVE: Let's call it 51%-48%, with Mr. Romney carrying at least 279 Electoral College votes, probably more.
►  NEWT GINGRICH: I believe the minimum result will be 53-47 Romney, over 300 electoral votes, and the Republicans will pick up the Senate.
►  HUMAN EVENTS: Republicans Take the Senate — Predicts a gain of 7 Republican seats and a loss of 2 Democratic seats, for a net gain of 5 GOP seats in the Senate. That would give Republicans a 52-48 majority.
►  NATE SILVER: (fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com) Obama is now better than a 4-in-5 favorite to win the Electoral College. His chances of winning it increased to 83.7%, improved from 80.8%.
►  REUTERS NEWS: Predicts Obama winning the big three swing states of Florida, Ohio and Virginia and a final Electoral College score of 332-206.
►  LARRY SABATO: Predicts Obama will get over 270 electoral votes and calls the Senate for Democrats — as long as the presidential race doesn’t break heavily for Romney in the last days. Senate projection is 52 Democrats to 46 Republicans, with two leftover toss-ups, Arizona and Wisconsin.
►  INTRADE: Obama to be re-elected President in 2012 — 65.9% chance Obama wins, only 34.5% it's Romney.
►  NEWSBOY POST: Predicts it will be 52% for Romney, 47.5% for Obama with 309 electoral votes for Romney. Republicans pick up 4 Senate seats and 7 House seats. Newsboy Post doesn't think there are enough anti-American misguided morons for Obama to win.
 5
UnSkewed Polls Projection: Romney 275 Electoral Votes to Obama 263 Electoral Votes


Erasing the Bias to Show an Accurate Picture of Politics:  The QStarNews projection of the 2012 presidential race sees Mitt Romney being elected the next president of the United States with 50.67 percent of the popular vote and 275 electoral votes to President Obama's 48.88 percent and 263 electoral votes.
QStarNews predicts the turnout nationally will includes 36.4 percent Democrats, 36.1 Republicans and 27.5 percent independents. QStarNews predicts turnout will rise by about four percent, or a total of about 131,165,384 voters including about 600,000 for third party candidates and the rest going to Romney and Obama.
Methodology: For EACH state, all of the following information was considered: results from the last four elections averaged together, recent political trends in that state (such as Republicans winning control of both houses of the state legislature in 2010 in Maine and New Hampshire), recent trends in demographic makeup that affect the politics of the state (such as the growth of hispanics in Colorado causing the Democratic Party to become more competitive), and the degree to which one or both of the major campaigns are targetting that state, such as both campaigns making Ohio the most important state and campaigning there more than any other state, and any other relevant political factors and data such as public polls from a variety of pollling firms, as well as data from the QStarNews polls of the presidential race. From all of this information a percentage breakdown of each state is calculated between Romney and Obama. This projection is expected to be spot-on accurate for predicting the outcome in all 50 states and the District of Columbia and close to the actual popular vote.
All the projections and prognosticators agree on the other 39 states and the District of Columbia, leaving the disagreements on which candidate is going to win most of the infamous 11 keys swing states, often referred to as “battleground” states by some. QStarNews and UnSkewedPolls.com have conducted three survey of these 11 keys swing states, including the latest one. Those 11 states are Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Michigan, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin.
Among those states that all seem to agree on in projecting, President Obama leads with 201 electoral votes to Mitt Romney having 191 electoral votes. The Real Clear Politics map with toss-up states, shows those states that are clearly consensus who will win those. Below is the anaylsis of how the 11 keys swing states will fall when all the votes are counted, recounted, litigated, reviewed, recanvassed or whatever else might happen.
Iowa, New Hampshire and Wisconsin are going to be some of the closest states in the entire election. They are all too close to call by the latest polling data. Commentary Kirsten Powers pointed out something interesting about these states on Fox News tonight, that they all allow same-day voter registration and that the Obama campaign has been very good at getting voters registered and voting in states that allow this. That point is well-taken and for that reason these states will very narrowly go for President Obama. That puts the electoral count 221 Obama to 191 Romney.
The next grouping of swing states are Florida, North Carolina and Virginia. These have historically been “red” states and Romney leads in the RCP average in North Carolina and Florida. It's an easy prediction to call those for Romney. Virginia shows a very small Obama lead in the RCP average that is skewed by a few late-reporting skewed polls. Removing those, the RCP average in Virginia would favor Romney as it did just a day or two ago. Mitt Romney will win Virginia close. These states are worth 57 electoral votes, and move the count to Obama 221 to Romney 248.
Like that grouping, the grouping of Michigan, Pennsylvania and Nevada are states that are close but are more likely to go for President Obama. Obama leads in the RCP average in all three, and will win these three. They are worth 42 electoral votes, which brings the count to Obama 263 to Romney 248.
Colorado is in a category by itself. The RCP average shows Obama leading 48.8 percent to Romney at 47.3 percent. Mitt Romney has campaigned extensively in this race recently, has had some great rallies and connected well with the voters. The last Rasmussen survey of the state, based on a very balanced and fair sample, shows Romney winning the state 50 percent to 47 percent. Other than a skewed Public Policy Polling survey, the rest of the polls show Romney tied or leading or trailing by a margin that is within the margin of error. The vote will be within one or two percent with Romney winning Colorado. That puts the count at Obama 263 to Romney 257 with only Ohio left to decide the election.
The race is Ohio is like the national race, it is a story of many believing skewed polls that show President Obama performing stronger than he really is while Romney is likely to surprise them in winning it. Many of the polls for Ohio are skewed and so too is the RCP average because of that. The most recent poll for Ohio is the Ohio Poll/Univ. of Cincinnati survey that shows Obama leading 50 percent to 49 percent with a 3.3 percent margin of error. The latest Rasmussen poll of Ohio has the race in the state tied at 49 percent.
As Karl Rove has pointed out, the Democrats huge advantage in early voting from 2008 has been lessened by a more effective Republican early voting organization this year. This year's early voting includes more than 576,000 Democrats to 492,000 Republicans. That margin is about 265,000 less than the larger margin by which Democrats dominated early voting four years ago in Ohio. That cancels the 262,000 vote margin by which Obama won Ohio four years ago. The election day voting in 2008 was won by McCain by 75,000 votes, who lost the state overall since Obama had won the early voting by more than 337,000 votes. Additionally, it is estimated that more than 350,000 evangelical Christians, who were primary supporters of Mike Huckabee in the 2008 primaries, did not turn out to vote for McCain in the general election.
Mitt Romney is going to easily win the election day voting in Ohio, and the more of those 350,000 evangelicals voting only adds to Romney's margin in Ohio. Romney will win Ohio by two or three percent state-wide and about 200,000 votes. With Ohio's 18 electoral votes, Mitt Romney wins the election with 275 electoral votes to Barack Obama at 263 electoral votes.
Below is the map of the electoral votes and then below that the raw data showing both percentages and actual projected number of votes for the two candidates in each of the 50 states and the District of Columbia. Historical data from the last four elections is included for comparing.

November Surprise: Tabloid "National Enquirer" Finally Reveals Obamas' Sham Marriage on Election Eve

Michelle met with divorce lawyers three times and even had them draw up legal papers — was jealous of "Scandal" beauty Kerry Washington

THE NATIONAL ENQUIRER -- Barack and Michelle Obama's 20-year marriage is a loveless sham – a se­cret they’re keeping from the American people, The ENQUIRER can reveal exclusively.
The president’s marriage has been hanging by a thread since Michelle met with divorce lawyers not once but THREE times and even had them draw up legal papers to make the split official, say sources.
“Barack and Michelle put on a good show when they’re out in pub­lic, but as soon as the cameras are off they are at each other’s throats,” re­vealed a Washington insider.
“They make a lot of political capi­tal about how close they are and how important their marriage is to them – but the reality is that it’s been a sham for a long time.”
Their relationship deteriorated so badly while they were living in Chicago that a distraught Michelle prepared divorce papers in 2000 fol­lowing her husband’s failed attempt to win a House seat.
In his book “The Amateur,” best-selling author Ed Klein wrote that Michelle was furious the future commander-in-chief had entered the race against her wishes and accused him of putting at risk their “stable and secure future.”
One of the first lady’s friends told Klein that Barack, 51, was so de­pressed his pals feared the worst.
Although she never served the legal papers, The ENQUIRER has learned that Michelle, 48, also con­sulted divorce lawyers before her husband launched his successful 2008 bid for the presidency.
“Michelle didn’t want all the at­tention and she didn’t want to raise their children under such magnified scrutiny,” explained the insider. “But she was eventually persuaded to go along with Barack and support the campaign.”
But just last year, Michelle had a secret consultation with a divorce lawyer because she was at her wits’ end over the marriage.
Insiders say that despite what she says in public, Michelle wanted to return to Chicago to give their daughters Malia, 14 and Sasha, 11, a normal life.
“She was also under public attack for wasting taxpayer dollars on her lavish vacation and spending sprees – and she just couldn’t take anoth­er minute living in the fishbowl,” a Washington, D.C., source told The ENQUIRER.
“She didn’t want Barack to seek re-election at the time. She’d had it with everything and that’s when the never-before-disclosed second conference with the divorce attorney took place.
“She was told, however, that it would destroy the White House if she took things further, and she was advised that if it helped, she should move into a guest bedroom or seek therapy.”
Another source claims Michelle blew up just days after the couple’s 20th wedding anniversary, which fell the same day as the president’s disas­trous performance in the first debate against Mitt Romney on Oct. 3.
When she heard Barack was head­ing to Hollywood on a fundraising trip, she demanded that he stay away from TV's "Scandal” beauty Kerry Wash­ington    Can this beauty cure his gayness?
– who’s become one of the most familiar faces on Team Obama – or their marriage was definitely over!
“First Mitt Romney cleaned his clock on the debate floor then Mi­chelle kicked him in the head over her fears of him cheating with Ker­ry,” said an insider.
“The guy just couldn’t get a break!”
The dispute continued as the couple celebrated a tense anniversary dinner in Georgetown on Oct. 6.
“On the ride home their marriage exploded again because Michelle is jealous of Kerry being around Barack,” said a source. “She warned him, ‘If I hear you’re seeing her behind my back, we’re through!’”
In a recent report, sources revealed that the president had a meltdown and blasted Michelle, saying it would be her fault if he loses the election on Nov. 6.
Body language expert Dr. Lillian Glass reviewed recent pictures of the couple together and told The ENQUIRER the tension in the relationship was clear. “In one picture, Michelle really looks on edge and Barack looks like he resents her,” said Dr. Glass.
One of the major causes of their ugly con­frontations is the millions in taxpayer dollars Michelle spends holidaying with daughters to escape from Washington.
“Close aides say their screaming fights behind closed doors are so loud they can clearly hear the shouting,” said a source.
Added the insider: “If the election goes badly for Obama, his job might not be all he loses. His mar­riage may be over as well.”


Real Good Reasons to Oust 0bama!


Gingrich: Senator Told Me Networks May
Have White House Emails Ordering Counterterrorism Group to 'Stand Down and Do Nothing'
On Tuesday night’s “On the Record with Greta Van Susteren” on the Fox News Channel, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said that major news networks might have secret emails proving that the White House canceled plans to assist the besieged U.S. Embassy in Benghazi.
Gingrich said that the bombshell emails could be revealed within the next two days.
“There is a rumor — I want to be clear, it’s a rumor — that at least two networks have emails from the National Security Adviser’s office telling a counterterrorism group to stand down,” Gingrich said. “But they were a group in real-time trying to mobilize marines and C-130s and the fighter aircraft, and they were told explicitly by the White House stand down and do nothing.
This is not a terrorist action. If that is true, and I’ve been told this by a fairly reliable U.S. senator, if that is true and comes out, I think it raises enormous questions about the president’s role, and Tom Donilon, the National Security Adviser’s role, the Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, who has taken it on his own shoulders, that he said don’t go.
And that is, I think, very dubious, given that the president said he had instructions they are supposed to do everything they could to secure American personnel.”
After noting that the rumor, if true, would have a substantial impact on the presidential election, Gingrich pointed to another possible “October surprise” in the coming days.
“The other big story, I think, that is going to break is on corruption and extraordinary waste in the solar power grants and direct involvement by the Obama White House, including the president, in the solar panel grants involving billions of dollars, and I suspect that’s going to break Wednesday and Thursday of this week,” Gingrich added.

ABCBSNBCNNYTAPWPLAT's Cover-Up
 of Benghazi-Gate
Let’s go back to 2004. Cindy Sheehan had been turned into a media star during the 2004 presidential election for no reason other than that her son had died and she was willing to lend her name to the left’s campaign. There was no specific issue that Sheehan raised, but nevertheless the media was willing to cover her every sneeze.
And now 2012. Charles Woods, the father of Tyrone Woods, one of the Navy SEALS killed at the Benghazi consulate, has made serious allegations about his encounter with Hillary Clinton and the refusal of the Obama Administration to save his son. And the media has conducted a complete blackout of the story.
The only mainstream media outlets to report on it are ABC News where Jake Tapper occasionally challenges the administration, but Tapper carefully left out Hillary Clinton’s statement that they were going after the Mohammed filmmaker, which may be the most damning part of the story. And the Christian Science Monitor which leans left but also has a history of being somewhat independent.
And that’s not counting conservative figures like Jennifer Rubin at the Washington Post.
Mainstream media coverage has repeated Panetta’s statement that the rescue could not happen because of a lack of intel, without challenging it in any way. There is hardly any coverage of the controversy because the media refuses to touch it. And yet how can the statements of Senator McCain and Charles Woods not be covered? They can only be sidelined until the election, which is what the media is doing, buying a little more time for Obama to win.
Rahm Emanuel hit the morning shows, mechanically reciting talking points about Obama bringing the killers to justice just like he did Osama bin Laden, while avoiding Bob Schieffer’s questions. When Bob Schieffer asked him about Susan Rice’s false statements about the video, Emanuel began rambling about Obama’s nation building plan at home to provide broadband access.
But at least Bob Schieffer was making an effort. David Gregory shut down any discussion about Libya.
Meanwhile the New York Times chose to suppress coverage of the Congressional hearings on Libya, instead covering “six belonged on The Times’s front page. It had significant news value, regardless of the political maneuvering that is inevitable with less than four weeks to go until the election. And more broadly, there is a great deal of substance on this subject that warrants further scrutiny.
"I can’t think of many journalistic subjects that are more important right now, or more deserving of aggressive reporting."
But the only aggressive coverage of Benghazigate is coming from FOX News. By refusing to cover Benghazigate, the media is acting to cover it up, at least long enough to give the man responsible for it another chance at the Oval Office.

CIA Operators Were Denied Request
for Help During Benghazi Attack
Due knot disturb by ordur of POTUS.  See Valerie Jarrett if gutsy call kneaded.

Fox News has learned from sources who were on the ground in Benghazi that an urgent request from the CIA annex for military back-up during the attack on the U.S. Consulate and subsequent attack several hours later was denied by U.S. officials -- who also told the CIA operators twice to "stand down" rather than help the ambassador's team when shots were heard at approximately 9:40 p.m. in Benghazi on Sept. 11.
Former Navy SEAL Tyrone Woods was part of a small team who was at the CIA annex about a mile from the U.S. Consulate where Ambassador Chris Stevens and his team came under attack. When he and others heard the shots fired, they informed their higher-ups at the annex to tell them what they were hearing and requested permission to go to the consulate and help out. They were told to "stand down," according to sources familiar with the exchange. Soon after, they were again told to "stand down."
Woods and at least two others ignored those orders and made their way to the Consulate which at that point was on fire. Shots were exchanged. The quick reaction force from the CIA annex evacuated those who remained at the Consulate and Sean Smith, who had been killed in the initial attack. They could not find the ambassador and returned to the CIA annex at about midnight.
At that point, they called again for military support and help because they were taking fire at the CIA safe house, or annex. The request was denied. There were no communications problems at the annex, according those present at the compound. The team was in constant radio contact with their headquarters. In fact, at least one member of the team was on the roof of the annex manning a heavy machine gun when mortars were fired at the CIA compound. The security officer had a laser on the target that was firing and repeatedly requested back-up support from a Specter gunship, which is commonly used by U.S. Special Operations forces to provide support to Special Operations teams on the ground involved in intense firefights. The fighting at the CIA annex went on for more than four hours -- enough time for any planes based in Sigonella Air base, just 480 miles away, to arrive. Fox News has also learned that two separate Tier One Special operations forces were told to wait, among them Delta Force operators.
A Special Operations team, or CIF which stands for Commanders in Extremis Force, operating in Central Europe had been moved to Sigonella, Italy, but they too were told to stand down. A second force that specializes in counterterrorism rescues was on hand at Sigonella, according to senior military and intelligence sources. According to those sources, they could have flown to Benghazi in less than two hours. They were the same distance to Benghazi as those that were sent from Tripoli. Specter gunships are commonly used by the Special Operations community to provide close air support.
According to sources on the ground during the attack, the special operator on the roof of the CIA annex had visual contact and a laser pointing at the Liby
n mortar team that was targeting the CIA annex. The operators were calling in coordinates of where the Libyan forces were firing from.Defense Secretary Leon Panetta told reporters at the Pentagon on Thursday that there was not a clear enough picture of what was occurring on the ground in Benghazi to send help.
"There's a lot of Monday morning quarterbacking going on here," Panetta said Thursday. "But the basic principle here ... is that you don't deploy forces into harm's way without knowing what's going on."
U.S. officials argue that there was a period of several hours when the fighting stopped before the mortars were fired at the annex, leading officials to believe the attack was over.
Fox News has learned that there were two military surveillance drones redirected to Benghazi shortly after the attack on the Consulate began. They were already in the vicinity. The second surveillance craft was sent to relieve the first drone, perhaps due to fuel issues. Both were capable of sending real time visuals back to U.S. officials in Washington, D.C. Any U.S. official or agency with the proper clearance, including the White House Situation Room, State Department, CIA, Pentagon and others, could call up that video in real time on their computers.
Tyrone Woods was later joined at the scene by fellow former Navy SEAL Glen Doherty, who was sent in from Tripoli as part of a Global Response Staff or GRS that provides security to CIA case officers and provides countersurveillance and surveillance protection. They were killed by a mortar shell at 4 a.m. Libyan time, nearly seven hours after the attack on the Consulate began -- a window that represented more than enough time for the U.S. military to send back-up from nearby bases in Europe, according to sources familiar with Special Operations. Four mortars were fired at the annex. The first one struck outside the annex. Three more hit the annex.
A motorcade of dozens of Libyan vehicles, some mounted with 50 caliber machine guns, belonging to the February 17th Brigades, a Libyan militia which is friendly to the U.S., finally showed up at the CIA annex at approximately 3 a.m. An American Quick Reaction Force sent from Tripoli had arrived at the Benghazi airport at 2 a.m. (four hours after the initial attack on the Consulate) and was delayed for 45 minutes at the airport because they could not at first get transportation, allegedly due to confusion among Libyan militias who were supposed to escort them to the annex, according to Benghazi sources.
The American special operators, Woods, Doherty and at least two others were part of the Global Response Staff, a CIA element, based at the CIA annex and were protecting CIA operators who were part of a mission to track and repurchase arms in Benghazi that had proliferated in the wake of Muammar Qaddafi's fall. Part of their mission was to find the more than 20,000 missing MANPADS, or shoulder-held missiles capable of bringing down a commercial aircraft. According to a source on the ground at the time of the attack, the team inside the CIA annex had captured three Libyan attackers and was forced to hand them over to the Libyans. U.S. officials do not know what happened to those three attackers and whether they were released by the Libyan forces.
Fox News has also learned that Stevens was in Benghazi that day to be present at the opening of an English-language school being started by the Libyan farmer who helped save an American pilot who had been shot down by pro-Qaddafi forces during the initial war to overthrow the regime. That farmer saved the life of the American pilot and the Ambassador wanted to be present to launch the Libyan rescuer's new school.

CIA Director Petraeus Throws 0bama Under the Bus
Breaking news on Benghazi: the CIA spokesman, presumably at the direction of CIA director David Petraeus, has put out this statement:

CIA SPOX: "No one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate.”

So who in the government did tell “anybody” not to help those in need? Someone decided not to send in military assets to help those Agency operators. Would the secretary of defense make such a decision on his own? No.
It would have been a presidential decision. There was presumably a rationale for such a decision.
What was it? When and why—and based on whose counsel obtained in what meetings or conversations — did President Obama decide against sending in military assets to help the Americans in need?
White House Tries to Throw Military Under Bus
Yesterday, the CIA insisted that "No one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate." The denial is in reference to the report that the CIA held back forces from helping the Americans who were under attack in Benghazi, Libya on 9/11.
And today, the White House is making a similar claim.
"Neither the president nor anyone in the White House denied any requests for assistance in Benghazi," an Obama administration spokesman tells Yahoo's Olivier Knox.
The White House on Saturday flatly denied that President Barack Obama withheld requests for help from the besieged American compound in Benghazi, Libya, as it came under on attack by suspected terrorists on September 11th....
Fox News Channel reported this week that American officials in the compound repeatedly asked for military help during the assault butwere rebuffed by CIA higher-ups. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, asked about that report during a press briefing on Thursday, complained of "Monday-morning quarterbacking" and said he and top military commanders had judged it too dangerous to send troops to the eastern Libyan city without a clearer picture of events on the ground....
And the CIA has denied that anyone in its chain of command rejected requests for help from the besieged Americans.
Lt. Col. Tony Shaffer: I'm Told 0bama Was in the Room Watching Benghazi Attack
Lt. Col. Tony Shaffer said tonight that his sources tell him that Obama was one of the people in the room watching the Benghazi attack go down and both he and Col. David Hunt agree it would have taken an order by the president to intervene. Further, Col. Hunt said that we were only 20 min away by jet and a couple of hours away by AC-130 gunships and special forces, and the decision not to intervene had to be political.
View comments by Lt. Col. Tony Shaffer
Media Blackout: Why 0bama Dodged the Libya Question
President Obama ran into a buzzsaw yesterday while doing a round-robin of satellite interviews with local news outlets in crucial swing states -- and by "buzzsaw," I mean that rare form of species known as a "real reporter." Kyle Clark of Colorado's KUSA actually asked Obama about the latest revelations out of Libya. According to Fox News, the three requests for help made during the seven-hour attack on our consulate in Benghazi were met with orders from U.S. officials to "stand down." Wisely, Obama dodged this question entirely.
I say "wisely" because, as of right now, outside of a very few exceptions, the CorruptMedia has coordinated with the White House to create a complete blackout around this story. Not even yesterday's denial from the CIA that indirectly implicates the White House garnered any media attention.
In the closing days of a reelection campaign the CorruptMedia is desperate to see Obama win, it's glaringly obvious that nothing this potentially damaging to the president will be allowed to see the light of day -- at least not until after November 6.
Had Obama answered Clark's question yesterday, he would've violated this unspoken blackout agreement by making news. This would've forced the CorruptMedia to cover a story they're desperate to pretend doesn’t exist. Obama knows his Media Palace Guards are covering for him, and he knew that wouldn't have been possible had he done anything that nudged the story.
This is also why Obama filibustered his way through the rest of the interview with Clark. Reporters are only granted a few minutes with the president, and one way Obama controls uncomfortable interviews is to launch into absurdly long answers that run out the clock.
And "run out the clock" over these next 10 days regarding the Libyan scandal is exactly what Obama and his media allies are up to.  Continued >>


Who Let Them Die? Newsboy Post Suspects Culprit Might Be Valerie Jarrett!
 
 Obama Just Watched Them Die and Then He Lied

Union Leader Editorial -- Every time President Obama is asked why the U.S. embassy in Libya was denied its multiple requests for extra security at the Benghazi consulate before Sept. 11, he changes the subject. No wonder, as yesterday it was reported that not only were previous requests for extra security denied, but three additional requests on the night of the attack also were denied.
FOX News reported that the two former SEALS killed in the Benghazi raid had requested military support three times after reporting that the consulate was under attack.
Their requests were denied by someone up the CIA chain of command. Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty rescued several personnel and recovered the body of diplomat Sean Smith from the consulate.
At the CIA annex nearby, they came under mortar fire. Their request for a strike on the mortar site was denied. They were later killed by a mortar attack.
Who denied their request for assistance, and why? The families of those brave men deserve answers, as do the American people.
Valerie Jarrett — 0bama Puppet Master and Handler
By Edward Klein -- Trying to figure out Valerie Jarrett’s mysterious hold on Barack and Michelle Obama is a favorite guessing game in the parlors and dining rooms of Washington. No other White House official in history has enjoyed such a unique relationship with both a president and a first lady, and yet the mainstream media have ignored Jarrett’s enormous influence over the shape and direction of the Obama administration.
Jarrett’s official title — senior adviser and assistant to the president for intergovernmental affairs and public engagement — doesn’t begin to do justice to her unrivaled status in the White House. She is Ground Zero in the Obama operation — the first couple’s first friend and consigliere, the last person to leave the Oval Office after meetings, and the only White House official who dines with the first family in their private quarters at night.
“Valerie is the quintessential insider,” one of her longtime friends told me during an interview for my book, The Amateur: Barack Obama in the White House. “She functions as the eyes, ears, and nose of the president and first lady. She tells them who’s saying what about who, who’s loyal and who’s not. She advises them about who they should see when they visit a city or a foreign country. She determines who gets invited to the White House and who is left out in the cold.”
In the White House pecking order, Jarrett has more clout than the president’s chief of staff. During the savage internecine warfare between Jarrett and Obama’s first two chiefs of staff — Rahm Emanuel and Bill Daley — Obama sided most of the time with Jarrett, a classic limousine liberal who believes that Obama was elected president in order to engineer social change. Ultimately, Jarrett emasculated Emanuel and Daley and forced them from their jobs.
She has also been responsible for much of the incompetence and amateurism that have been the hallmarks of Obama’s time in office. Indeed, Jarrett has been on the wrong side of practically every consequential issue to come across the president’s desk. Some examples of her bonehead advice:

● Though both Emanuel and political strategist David Axelrod warned Obama time and again that he didn’t have the votes to ram a comprehensive healthcare bill through Congress, Jarrett was among those who persuaded the president to ignore their advice and go for broke. The result: the hugely expensive, unworkable, unpopular, and probably unconstitutional program known as Obamacare.
● Emanuel tangled with Jarrett over her effort to put the prestige of the presidency behind Chicago’s bid for the 2016 Summer Olympics. Emanuel believed that Jarrett was working on behalf of her old boss, Mayor Daley, and his political cronies, who stood to benefit from the billions of dollars that would be spent on the Olympics. That idea seemed to be lost on the president, who went to Copenhagen to make an impassioned plea for the Olympics, and came back home with egg on his face.
● Jarrett gave her stamp of approval for the $535 million taxpayer-funded loan guarantee to Solyndra, the California solar company that went belly up. Jarrett had close ties to the George Kaiser Family Foundation, which controlled 35.7 percent of Solyndra. The foundation had made a sizable donation to the University of Chicago Medical Center, where Jarrett once served as chairwoman and where one of Obama’s best friends, Eric Whitaker, is currently executive vice president.
● When Jarrett pushed Obama’s proposal to require church-run hospitals and universities to give their employees free contraception, chief of staff Bill Daley secretly arranged an Oval Office meeting between the president and New York Archbishop Timothy Dolan, the head of the U.S. Conference of Catholic bishops, who argued that the policy violated the principle of religious freedom. When Jarrett learned about Daley’s end-run, she went to the president and vented her anger. After that, Daley realized his days were numbered and resigned.
● Like Obama, Jarrett has a fundamental lack of respect for businessmen. In a typical blunder that sent shudders through the business community, she dismissed Tom Donohue, the highly regarded CEO of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, as irrelevant, saying that she preferred to deal with “real” industry executives.
● Jarrett’s lack of judgment in domestic affairs has been matched by her inexperience in international and military affairs. She urged the president not to send in a Navy SEAL team to get Osama bin Laden — the one time that we know of when Obama failed to take Jarrett’s advice.

If Jarrett is wrong so often, why does President Obama trust her above all others and continue to run every decision by her?
In part, her influence stems from the fact that Jarrett is the president’s trusted watchdog. She protects the vainglorious and thin-skinned Obama from critics and complainers who might deflate his ego. No one gets past Jarrett and sees the president if they have a grievance, or a chip on their shoulder, or even an incompatible point of view. That goes for such high-profile supporters as Oprah Winfrey and Caroline Kennedy, who have been largely frozen out of the White House because Jarrett believes they would use the opportunity of a meeting with Obama to push their own competing agenda.
Despite her impeccable social credentials, Jarrett’s record before she went to Washington was spotty at best. After Mayor Daley made her commissioner of planning, she became embroiled in a massive screw-up in the city’s public housing revitalization plan, which cost Chicago millions of dollars in overruns. Daley fired her without explanation.
After she left city hall, Jarrett became CEO of Habitat Executive Services, where she earned $300,000 in salary and $550,000 in deferred compensation. She managed a federally subsidized housing complex that was seized by the government after inspectors found crime-infested slum conditions and widespread blight.
Throughout her career, Jarrett has failed upward. Today she is at the pinnacle of power as Michelle Obama’s closest confidant and Barack Obama’s political soul mate. Though she is the White House official responsible for “public engagement,” she has conspicuously failed to engage. I heard this complaint about Jarrett from practically everyone I interviewed — Republicans and Democrats, African Americans and Jews. They all blamed Jarrett for keeping the president isolated even from those whose good opinion he needed the most.


O C T O B E R   S U R P R I S E S !

If Your Life Has Been 'One Big Deception'
We Suppose a 'Nose Job' Is a Given . . .

"See, I'm the Epitome of Eye Candy Now"
Yet Nother Secret About Obama's Life — After 4 Years in White House, the Surprises Keep Coming
By Jerome Corsi -- It’s becoming increasingly clear, just days before Barack Obama’s bid for re-election, that America still doesn’t know much about the man who has lived in the White House for the last four years.
In the aftermath of Donald Trump’s challenge to Obama to release his college and passport records in exchange for a $5 million donation to Obama’s charities, here’s another secret from Obama’s life of mystery and make-believe.
Filmmaker Joel Gilbert contends President Obama has altered his facial profile for the national stage of American politics, citing two nationally known cosmetic surgery experts he consulted who concluded Obama had a “nose job.”
“It appears Obama had some aesthetic refinement,” said plastic surgeon J. David Holcolm. Gilbert is the producer of “Dreams from My Real Father,” a documentary distributed by the millions to swing states that argues the late Communist Party USA activist Frank Marshall Davis was Obama’s biological as well as ideological father, not Barack Obama, the Kenyan, who came to Hawaii as a student in 1959.
“Obama has gone to great lengths to obscure his past,” Gilbert said. “Now, in addition to the alleged document forgery and photographic forgery by Obama to hide his true identity, we now have evidence of facial forgery.”
Holcolm described in detail his reasons for concluding Obama has had cosmetic surgery.
“The upper and middle nasal vault are both narrowed. The tip and infra-tip are softer and the tip has been rotated up,” he said. “Alar height appears to have been reduced so the lower part of the nose that makes up the nostrils appears softer.
“These changes are not characteristic of the natural aging process,” Holcolm said, “where the tip tends to settle and rotate downward causing the appearance of a longer nose and where the tip also often widens noticeably.”
Wendy Lewis, a cosmetic surgery consultant and author of 11 consumer health and beauty books, including “America’s Cosmetic Doctors & Dentists” and “Plastic Makes Perfect,” agrees.
“In the three younger photographs, Obama appears to have a bulbous nasal tip with wide alar bases, not uncommon with males and with skin of color,” Lewis said. “The more current photos show a thinner nasal tip which suggests some finessing of his nose over the years, but it is a very natural-looking effect.
CLICK HERE -- See Exhibit 2: Obama Nose Comparison, 1990 and 2010

As WND reported, Gilbert mailed 2.7 million DVD copies of “Dreams from My Real Father” to households in Florida, Colorado and Iowa in early October. He previously sent 1.4 million DVDs to households in Ohio, Nevada, and New Hampshire.
“Dreams from My Real Father” is currently the No. 1-selling documentary on Amazon.com and is also available on Netflix streaming.
On the film’s website, Gilbert shows three comparison photographs, seen here as Exhibits 1 through 3, that first led him to suspect Obama had undergone rhinoplasty to change his appearance.
CLICK HERE -- SEE Exhibit 3: Obama Nose Comparison, 2002 and 2008

Gilbert suspects Obama had the surgery because he was “concerned he was looking too much like Frank Marshall Davis as he got older.”
“I don’t think it was a coincidence that Obama chose to undergo a rhinoplasty before running for U.S. Senate and facing the national spotlight,” Gilbert said. “If Obama was identified as Davis’ son, it would connect the Marxist dots of Obama’s entire life journey.”
Gilbert said Obama “needed the Kenyan father fairy tale to misdirect the public away from the fact that he is a red diaper baby, the child of a Communist Party USA propagandist and Soviet agent.”
Gilbert told WND he’s received hundreds of emails people who have received a copy of his documentary in the mail, and the main message is “good folks don’t like it when they’ve been lied to.”
Alex T. from Ohio echoed another common theme: “Your film frightened me for myself, my family and my country. When will the ignorant people realize this man is a fake and is out to destroy our Constitution and way of life?”
“The nose job may not be a bombshell story in itself,” says Joseph Farah, editor of WND. “But it’s just one more piece of evidence amid what has become a mountain range of evidence that Obama is something other than what he has pretended to be. For too long, the Obama-friendly press has systematically withheld the truth about their man and even deliberately hidden and obscured it.”

Obama Pal Claims That Obama Used and Sold Cocaine In College, Romney Camp Rejected Information

A man claiming to be a close pal to President Obama during college made contact with Republican operatives recently, ready to go public with claims that Obama used and sold cocaine in college, RadarOnline.com is reporting exclusively.
The operatives tried to spread the story through the media and the Romney campaign, a source close to the situation told Radar.
“At first he wanted to do a book,” a source close to the situation told RadarOnline.com about the alleged college pal. “But there just wasn’t enough time before the election.
“The people he is involved with have produced other credible information that is damaging to national Democratic figures in the past few years.”
Operatives close to the Romney campaign were contacted and rejected the information, the source told Radar.
“They didn’t want anything to do with it,” the source said. “They thought it was not anything they wanted to be associated with or anything their candidate would want to be associated with.”
In fact, the man’s charges about Obama never reached Mitt Romney.
A proposal of the man’s story was created and viewed by Radar. The document claims that there are multiple sources who can back up allegations that Obama used and sold cocaine in college.
The alleged pal was willing to go on the record for the story and take a polygraph test, according to the source.
“The operatives close to the Romney campaign believed the man’s story would be the ultimate October Surprise but they got nowhere.
“People who would have taken the information to the highest levels of Romney’s campaign just wouldn’t touch it.
“They don’t want their candidate smeared with this type of activity.”
PHOTOS: President Obama Through The Years

Gloria Allred Heads To Court, Attempts to Unseal Mitt Romney Testimony and Lift Gag Order

Famed civil rights attorney Gloria Allred will be in a Boston area courtroom Wednesday in an attempt to unseal the sworn testimony given by Republican Presidential hopeful Mitt Romney, in a prior court case, RadarOnline.com is exclusively reporting.
"The Boston Globe is headed to court tomorrow morning for an emergency hearing in an attempt to obtain a court order to unseal the sworn testimony given by Mitt Romney in a prior court case and to lift a gag order so that the parties can speak about Romney. Gloria Allred will be in court representing one of the parties in the case," a source close to the situation tells RadarOnline.com.
The emergency hearing will take place at the Norfolk Probate & Family Court in Canton, Massachusetts, and Justice Jennifer Ulwick will oversee the proceedings which will begin at 9 amET.As previously reported, Drudge Report founder and respected politico, Matt Drudge, tweeted Thursday: "Here she comes. Hearing Gloria Allred out there again, about to make a move. After all, it's her time of the campaign. Team O at the ready!!"
Allred, an outspoken supporter of President Barack Obama refused to confirm, or deny, Drudge's prediction, telling RadarOnline.com: "I have no comment at this time about Mr. Drudge's Tweet. I don't discuss meetings with potential clients."
President Barack Obama and Governor Mitt Romney are locked in a dead heat according to most polls.

Trump Offers $5 Million for Obama College, Passport Records

Donald Trump is offering to give $5 million to charity if President Obama releases his college and passport records before the election.
"I have a deal for the president, a deal that I don’t believe he can refuse and I hope he doesn’t," Trump said in a video posted on YouTube on Wednesday.
The real estate mogul made the announcement after promising an election bombshell all week. He said he’ll write a $5 million check to a charity of Obama’s choosing if he "opens up and gives his college records and applications and if he gives his passport applications and records." Trump says the records must be released by Oct. 31.
"If he releases these records, it will end the question and indeed the anger of many Americans,” Trump said. “They’ll know something about their president. Their president will become transparent like other presidents.”
The offer comes after days of teasing an announcement. On Monday, Trump appeared on Fox News and declared: “I have something very, very big concerning the President of the United States.”
Trump offered few details, however. “Everybody is asking about my announcement this Wednesday concerning Barack Obama—just wait and see!” the eccentric reality show host wrote Monday on Twitter.
Several rumors began circulating about what the announcement could be. One involved the allegation that the president sold cocaine while in college.
Another was that Trump planned to reveal divorce papers that were prepared and then discarded two decades ago between President Obama and his wife Michelle.
Trump, who has questioned whether Obama is truthful about where he was born and how he got into college, has had success in getting Obama to release records before. "I’m very honored to have gotten him to release his long form birth certificate, or whatever it may be," Trump bragged in the Wednesday video.

Jesse Jackson, Wright 'Arranged' Obama Marriage — Chicago Sources Claim President Was Part of Dark Subculture
   The Obamas with their moms
By Jerome Corsi -- This is the second of a series of articles WND has developed from months of confidential in-person interviews with members of Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago who have known Barack and Michelle Obama on a personal basis over many years. In the first story, members of the church claimed Barack Obama benefited from Wright’s “Down Low Club,” part of a documented underground subculture in which black men who engage in homosexual activity marry to maintain respectability in public. Because of the personal risk the sources perceived they were taking to speak candidly about the president and his family, their identities have been masked.

As a young single woman, Michelle Robinson was a fixture in the home of civil rights leader Jesse Jackson, who along with Rev. Jeremiah Wright “arranged” her marriage to Barack Obama, according to sources in Chicago who know the couple.
“If you want to understand Michelle Obama, you’ve got to go back to Jesse Jackson,” a woman called “Robyn” for this article told WND.
Robyn, who spent several years working for Jackson’s Rainbow PUSH Coalition, explained to a WND investigator in Chicago that Michelle Obama “just about grew up in Jesse Jackson’s home.”
“Jesse should have charged her rent and board for the amount of time she spent in his home instead of her own,” she said. Jackson’s daughter, Santita, is still one of Michelle’s best friends. Santita and Jesse Jr. call her “sis,” short for “sister.”
Santita Jackson said in an interview just before Obama took office in 2008 that she has known Michelle Obama since they car-pooled together as high school classmates. Santita was maid of honor at Michelle and Barack Obama’s wedding, and she is the godmother to the Obama’s older daughter, Malia.
Robyn also pointed out Jesse Jackson Jr., a Democratic Party member of the U.S. House from Illinois, served as the national co-chairman of Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign.
“It all relates back to Trinity and to the Jesse Jackson orbit of blacks here in Chicago who gave Obama legitimacy and helped him establish his identity as a black man,” Robyn explained.
“The political left wanted to push a black to the presidency, and the key operatives in the Democratic Party decided long ago it wouldn’t be Jesse Jackson (Sr.). Then Jesse wanted it to be his son, but Jesse Jr. has serious drug and mental problems that the world knows about now. These were also known about in the past, and Jesse Jr. was never going to be the black president. So, the political left then chose Obama.”
In an interview with the Chicago Sun-Times in August, Sandi Jackson admitted her husband, Jesse Jr., was “completely debilitated by depression,” which has forced him to put his Washington home for sale to pay his medical bills, including his treatment at the Mayo Clinic. He has been absent from Congress since mid-June, putting his House seat at risk in the November election.

They Met Where?
Obama’s retelling of an event most spouses remember precisely for the rest of their lives has caused confusion. Exactly when and how did he first meet Michelle Robinson?
Before a speech at the New Economic School graduation in Moscow on July 7, 2009, Obama stated he first met Michelle in school.
“I don’t know if anybody else will meet their future wife or husband in class like I did, but I’m sure you’re all going to have wonderful careers,” he said, according to Newsweek.
The problem is that Michelle Obama earned her degree from Harvard Law School in 1988, and Obama did not arrive at Harvard Law School until that fall, graduating three years later in 1991.
The commonly accepted story is that they first met in Chicago in 1989, when Barack took a summer job as an intern at the Chicago law firm Sidley Austin, and Michelle, who was employed as a lawyer at the firm, was assigned to be his mentor.
WND has reported Allen Hulton, the U.S. postal carrier who delivered mail to the parents of Weather Underground bomber Bill Ayers in a Chicago suburb, met Obama in the summer of 1989, while Obama was an intern at Sidley Austin.
In 1991, during their engagement to be married, top Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett, then serving as the deputy chief of staff to Mayor Richard M. Daley, hired Michelle to a job in the mayor’s office.
“Michelle hated working for the city even more than she hated working at Sidley Austin,” Robyn told WND.
“At the law firm, she lasted so short of a time because they expected her to do work,” Robyn said. “At the City of Chicago, where she worked under Mayor Daley, Michelle had one of those ‘Jesse hires’ positions. These are patronage jobs where the recipients did nothing.”
Robyn claimed that while working for Daley, Michelle just collected a check, doing very little work.
“She sat at a desk and read the newspaper all day,” Robyn said. “Sometimes she read romance novel paperbacks. No one could say anything to her because she was a ‘Jesse hire.’ This meant if anyone did complain about her not working that Jesse Jackson would get mad at Daley over that, and there would be trouble.”
Robyn said Michelle was “essentially treated like she was Jesse’s daughter, and Michelle’s connections in Chicago were a key to Obama’s rise to power.”

Connections
Political connections played throughout Michelle’s young life in Chicago. Her father, Fraser C. Robinson III, who was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis in his 20s and eventually walked with the use of crutches, was a volunteer Democratic precinct captain in addition to his job in the boiler room at Chicago’s water purification plant.
As Democratic precinct captain, Robinson had power and influence, given his access to “street money” the Daley machine freely handed out at that time in Chicago’s South Side to make sure black voters turned out to vote for Democratic Party machine candidates.
The Chicago sources told WND the selection of Michelle Robinson for Obama was made by Jesse Jackson, and Jeremiah Wright agreed it would be a good combination.
“It all relates back to Trinity United and to the Jesse Jackson orbit of blacks here in Chicago who gave Obama legitimacy and helped him establish his identity as a black man ‘from Chicago,’” Robyn explained.
“Michelle came from a political family; she was intelligent even if she didn’t really like to work. Wright knew Obama was gay, but he needed the cover of a wife if he were to succeed in politics.”
A current member of Trinity church who has known the Obamas for 20 years, “Carolyn,” confirmed Trinity “helped a lot of blacks get successful and connected.”
“That’s what Wright did for Obama,” she claimed. “He connected Obama in the community, and he helped Obama hide his homosexuality.”
According to Robyn, Jackson explained to Michelle that she would live a life of luxury once Obama was president, and that she never again would have to worry about money.
“Michelle was nasty, and most straight guys would never be able to put up with her moods and temperament,” Robyn maintained. “But Obama really didn’t care. Michelle had the credentials and she looked the part. Obama wasn’t interested in her for sex.”
A source WND will identify as Hazel, a long-term member of the Trinity congregation, insisted Obama remained sexually involved with men after his marriage to Michelle.
“I remember being at this function at Reverend Wright’s house, one of the many parties Wright had, in 1996,” Hazel recalled.
“I went to the room where all the coats were on the bed, because I wanted to leave. I was surprised to find the light in the room was off and the coats were on the floor,” she said. “Then I realized there were two men hugging and kissing in there. One of those men was Obama. This was long before anybody knew Obama, before he became famous like he is today.” Hazel has been telling this story in Chicago since 1996.

Cushy Job
When Jarrett left Mayor Daley’s office to head Chicago’s Department of Planning and Development, she took Michelle with her.
Jarrett later became the chairwoman of the Chicago Medical Center, and Michelle again got “a cushy job at the Chicago Medical Center with a salary of $317,000,” as reported by Edward Klein on page 117 of his 2012 book “The Amateur: Barack Obama in the White House.”
New York Times reporter Jodi Kantor wrote in 2008 that Jarrett would have to be at the top of a list of people who helped Barack and Michelle Obama.
“Nearly two decades ago, Ms. Jarrett swept the young lawyers under her wing, introduced them to a wealthier and better-connected Chicago than their own, and eventually secured contacts and money essential to Mr. Obama’s long-shot Senate victory,” Kantor wrote.
Klein, in an interview with Fox News, described Jarrett as the “de facto” president of the United States, “the best friend of the first lady and soul mate of the president.”

“Bathhouse Barry” and Jeremiah Wright’s “Down Low Club"

Hillary’s Campaign Knew About Obama’s Gay Sexcapades — Jokingly Called Him “Bathhouse Barry”

-- Dr. Jerome Corsi has bravely broken the longstanding embargo on talking about Jeremiah Wright’s “Down Low Club” at Trinity United Church of Christ here in Chicago. You can read his article on this HERE, via WND.(Article Follows!)
Like “Fight Club”, the first rule of the “Down Low Club” is to never talk about the “Down Low Club”. If you do, you will be murdered. That’s not a joke. There were a string of murders from 2005-2007 that involved men who were killed because they had knowledge of Jeremiah Wright’s Down Low Club and the closeted gay black men who partook in the club’s orchestrated cover-up of their homosexuality.
In Corsi’s article, he talks about three of the murders (including Donald Young, whom you may have heard of). I also believe a string of bizarre assassination-style killings in Boystown around that same time are also linked to the Down Low Club…but these were white men on the north side of Chicago who were murdered in their apartments by someone the police here never would admit was a serial killer. I moved to Chicago in the spring of 2005 and back then the strip of gay clubs called Halsted was plastered with flyers warning guys to be careful with whom they were bringing home since a murderer was loose killing guys who frequented the bars in Boystown; for those who can remember back to the 90s, this is the same area where Jeffrey Dahmer picked up some of his victims. Chicago was also where John Wayne Gacy (a delegate for Jimmy Carter!) also hunted.
Back then, Mayor Daley did his best to cover up the murders and the corrupt, vintage media worked as a Ministry of Truth (Minitrue for short) for Democrats, as always. “Nothing to see here! Move along!” was the motto of the day, but it never made sense why the killings just stopped at around three guys or why those guys in particular were chosen by the killer.
In 2007, when Donald Young was murdered in his home around Christmas I was already working on the Hillary Clinton campaign and was told repeatedly by my black friends that Young was killed because he started talking to people about Barack Obama being gay.
Hillary’s campaign knew about Obama’s antics on the Chicago gay scene where he was jokingly known as “Bathhouse Barry”.
What conservatives don’t understand is that Hillary couldn’t use anything salacious she had on Obama because she needed the black vote behind her if she won the nomination. Hillary’s hands were always tied when it came to nuking Obama with his homosexuality because if it was tied back to her then blacks would be alienated from the Clintons forever since they “went there” and “ruined” the first viable black presidential candidate. There’s another reason that Hillary Clinton would never out Barack Obama and it’s simply that — despite what the obsessive Hillary-haters have felt for twenty-odd-years — the woman is actually a very nice person who just never wanted to go nuclear on anyone. That right there might mean she wouldn’t have made a good President, if she isn’t willing to dump her biggest weapons on an enemy…but I will leave that up to you to decide for yourself.
To this day, people in Chicago are still scared about being murdered for talking about Barack Obama being gay or about what goes on at Trinity United with the still-active “Down Low Club”. Young, gay, black men are mentored into the club and are eventually paired up with often unattractive and difficult to deal with straight black women who never have boyfriends (since guys don’t want to have anything to do with them). A friend of mine in the “Think Squad” of prominent black professionals I talk to regularly calls these women “heifers” and says it’s very common for “cake boys” to be paired up with “heifers” so that “dummies are fooled” into thinking they are straight. Besides the Obamas, famous examples of this are Steadman Graham and Oprah Winfrey (he’s gay, while she’s just plain nasty and conceited), Star Jones and her gay husband whatever his name was, Terry McMillan and Jonathan Plummer (who eventually came out and left her), and Will Smith and Jada Pinckett (who are actually both gay…which is really rare in these arranged marriages because typically gay guys are not married to lesbians for some reason).
It’s kind of hilarious that straight people can’t see this stuff for what it really is, but then again for many years people believed that Rock Hudson and Elton John were both really married to women for love, too.
In retrospect, that’s laughable and crazy…but so will it be in about 5-10 years when the truth about Barack and Michelle Obama comes out as well. And it will come out, too, as soon as people are no longer afraid of being murdered for talking about it.
Chicago is ruled by fear. Living here, people are terrified of the City coming after them with tickets and fines for all sorts of things. Literally, the City tries to trick you into getting parking tickets by posting sets of signs that restrict parking in ways more Byzantine and tangled than the logic problems on an LSAT exam. Then there’s the very real fear of ever saying and doing something to offend an Alderman…who will often times set out on a course of vengeance against you that results in all manner of fines, your losing your lease, your business license being taken away, etc. These guys operate with impunity like mafia Dons in most cases. If you run afoul of the Democrat Party here in some way, you could lose your job if pressure is applied against your boss to fire you…or you’ll just be beaten by goons hired by precinct captains and ward bosses one day. The police will show interest in ever investigating your beating…or your murder if it was politically ordered by Democrats or friends of Democrats. When you land at O’Hare or Midway and see Al Capone’s face on shot glasses and tee shirts just know that his spirit is very much alive in this city, especially with Rahm Emanuel in the Mayor’s office.
Rahm is gay too. I have friends who have slept with him. And, yes, he’s a total bottom if that’s not too much information for you. For years, Rahm has exclusively hired little gay interns who resemble the Hollywood stars that Rahm years for (if you go to the Mayor’s office and see a lot of guys who look like Zac Ephron hanging around, well now you know why). Rahm’s also been very generous politically with his toy boys…ultimately graduating many of them from his stable into choice positions in law firms and brokerage houses by using his political connections. A lot of these guys are straight, too, by the way…but that’s called “gay for pay” when good looking straight guys and gym bunnies essentially prostitute themselves to older gay men for the chance at gaining access to high-paying careers in a bad economy. You probably don’t want to know what some straight guys are willing to do for a while to land big careers in Chicago. This stuff has been happening for years and is very similar to the way Hollywood studios are run. Very few big name male actors made it to the top without being a bottom for a while on casting couches “paying their dues” to the gay producers, directors, and executives who promised them big things down the line.
Rahm Emanuel is worse than Barney Frank in a lot of ways, but everyone’s always been too terrified of him to speak openly about the things he does. He’s sent people dead fish as warnings…has screamed naked at people in the Congressional gym…and here in Chicago as Mayor he holds the Sword of Damocles over a great many heads with the ability to summon any number of goons to persecute and harass people at will. This is what happens when Democrats are re-elected to office over and over again for generations in a city like Chicago.
All this will end one day, because if enough people ridicule the likes of Rahm and Obama the fear people have will vanish. Ridicule is the antidote to fear. Conservative writers never want to touch these topics because they’re afraid of being blackballed for talking about Rahm or Obama being blueballed and jonesing for the old days when they could just head to the baths any time they want and engage in the activities they liked doing with other guys. Take a look at Erik Erikson at RedState for instance. Do you notice how he’s slowly readjusting what he writes to suit Minitrue’s narratives now that he’s working for CNN and wants to eventually be a full-time personality there? When the big money is pushed in front of conservative writers, they lose interest in writing stories that damage the Left and instead think about all the cool things they’ll get to buy when they sell out completely to Minitrue’s wishes.
I’m surprised Dr. Corsi has put everything on the line and taken on the Trinity United story and the Down Low Club. He’s a brave, brave man. No doubt, he’ll have speaking engagements canceled and will have trouble booking himself on radio and TV shows in the future because when you start telling the secrets about gay politicians there are consequences for you personally and professionally. Minitrue will punish you…but other conservatives will as well since they want to stay in Minitrue’s good graces (in hopes they can become the next Erik Erikson).
A lot of the stuff that people don’t know is because Minitrue doesn’t want you to know any of this…since it hurts Democrats.
But, it’s all there. Like I’ve said a thousand times already, people talk about this stuff NONSTOP in the bars and gay clubs here in Chicago. It’s not a secret to any of us on the ground. Every black person I know has intimate knowledge of the Down Low Club. It’s as well-known as the gospel choir and serves as distinct and important a purpose. Every black church has a “program” like the Down Low Club, though few to none will call it that. Some white Baptist churches have misguided efforts like this too…where clearly gay men are pushed to marry the women in the church that no straight men wants. This prevents the women from becoming spinsters and gives the gay guys the beards they need to be productive (and reproductive, in cases like Obama’s) members of society. What better way to disappear the gay guys in your congregation while simultaneously getting rid of the women that have bad attitudes or are too ugly for straight guys to want anything to do with?
I know it’s bizarre to come to the realization that a closeted gay black man is currently President of the United States…but that is reality, folks. I’ve told you before that I had an aunt who was in LOVE with Liberace all through the 70s and into the 80s…and even ten years after his death she STILL would not admit the man was gay. I heard from my cousin that it was only about five years ago that she FINALLY took down the pictures she had of him in the little shrine she’d created of his memorabilia (and sold it all on eBay). There are older women I know who still walk around brokenhearted over Rock Hudson. In a few years, the teenyboppers of today will be doing the same thing over Taylor Lautner, Zac Ephron, and Leonardo DiCaprio. I don’t know why straight people have such a hard time sometimes picking out gay guys…but then again, I’m oblivious to most closeted lesbians so maybe it’s something that only gay guys can spot in each other.
Trinity United has a lot to lose and will not respond well to Dr. Corsi’s expose. I expect the blowback to be fierce. I hope he’s ready for it. There are a lot of powerful and influential black gay men in Chicago who had their marriages of convenience arranged through Jeremiah Wright who will not want their covers blown. A few Bears players. Doctors. Lawyers. Political figures. Ministers. CEOs. You name it.
And, of course, the current President of the United States too. But you already knew that.

Jeremiah Wright's Trinity Church Members Reveal Obama Shocker!
  "I'm the Epitome of Eye Candy"
'Matchmaker' Rev. Jeremiah Wright 'Provided Cover for Gays'
By Jerome Corsi (NEW YORK) – Ten years ago, the New York Times reported on a growing underground subculture in the black community known as Down Low, comprised largely of men who secretly engage in homosexual activity while living “straight” lives in public.
It’s within that subtext that opposition researchers for Hillary Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign began investigating rumors that Rev. Jeremiah Wright was running a “matchmaking service” for members of his Trinity United Church of Christ known as the Down Low Club, which included Barack Obama.
Over the past several months, WND investigators have interviewed a number of members of the church who claim the president benefited from Wright’s efforts to help black men who engage in homosexual activity appear respectable in black society by finding them a wife.
The 2003 New York Times story, “Double Lives on the Down Low,” said that though many black men reject “a gay culture they perceive as white and effeminate,” they “have settled on a new identity, with its own vocabulary and customs and its own name: Down Low.”
The Times said that while “there are black men who are openly gay, it seems that the majority of those having sex with men still lead secret lives, products of a black culture that deems masculinity and fatherhood as a black man’s primary responsibility – and homosexuality as a white man’s perversion.”
The Down Low Club at Trinity “doesn’t have meetings, and it isn’t like the Rotary Club,” a source identified for this article as “Carolyn” explained to a WND investigator in Chicago.
“It was more that Wright served as a matchmaker,” said Carolyn, a 20-year member of Trinity who has played a role in church administration and knows the Obamas personally.
“He kept his eye on the young guys coming up in Trinity,” she said, “and if he spotted someone that acted or looked gay, then Wright would give them kind of a guidance counselor-type direction on how to keep down low – how to do the things they wanted to do, but then also getting married and looking ‘respectable’ – being part of black society.”
To Trinity insiders, the Down Low Club was simply known as “the program.”
“That’s the terminology. At Trinity, you’re urged to ‘get with the program,’” explained a male beneficiary of the Down Low Club. “What that means is it’s OK to go ahead and have sex with men, just as long as you ‘get with the program’ and marry a woman, somebody no straight guy would want to marry.”
The wife, the Down Low Club member explained, is “your ‘beard,’ your cover – so you can look like you’re living a straight life, even though you’re not.”
The male source was a “computer consultant” who claims not to know “scratch” about computers. But “getting with the program” at Trinity meant he could keep living a “gay” life and receive lots of computer consulting work thrown his way by Trinity, as long as he was willing to marry an unattractive woman who otherwise might have ended up a lonely spinster with no means to provide for living. Carolyn explained that for many black families, attending Trinity was a way out of poverty.
“Trinity was a chance to network,” she said. “The stuff preached was hateful, but about 70 percent of those who go there ignore the radical rhetoric and just trying to get ahead.” Carolyn said Trinity “helped a lot of blacks get successful and connected.”
“That’s what Wright did for Obama,” she claimed. “He connected Obama in the community, and he helped Obama hide his homosexuality.”
Openly homosexual author and commentator Keith Boykin, a former White House adviser to President Bill Clinton, mentions Obama’s former pastor, Wright, on pages 264-265 of his 2005 book “Beyond the Down Low: Sex, Lies, and Denial in Black America.” While Boykin doesn’t refer to the Down Low Club by name, he regards Wright as among a small group of ministers who are “coming to grips with sexuality and opening up a dialogue with heterosexuals, homosexuals, and bisexuals in the pews.”
Chicago-based author, businessman, speaker and HIV/AIDS activist J.L. King wrote a controversial book in 2005 called “On the Down Low: A Journey into the Lives of ‘Straight’ Black Men who Sleep with Men.”
He was a guest on Oprah Winfrey’s Chicago-based TV show in 2004, which described him this way: “J.L. King had a life most would envy. He married his high school sweetheart, had two healthy children and was on the fast track to success. But, unbeknownst to his family and friends, he had a dark secret—he was living on the down low.”

Remember the Choir Director
Carolyn and the other members of Trinity who provided statements corroborating her testimony were insistent that WND conceal their identities as a condition of being interviewed. “I’m still scared to discuss any of this,” Carolyn said.
“At Trinity, if you even hint at talking about Obama being gay, you are reminded of our dear departed choir director,” she said. “He was killed, and it wasn’t a robbery. The Christmas presents weren’t touched. The TV was not taken, nothing in the apartment was missing.”
Carolyn’s reference was to Donald Young, the 47-year-old homosexual choirmaster at Trinity who died of multiple gunshot wounds in his Chicago apartment Dec. 24, 2007.
Young’s murder was preceded Nov. 17, 2007, with the execution-style murder of 25-year-old Larry Bland, another black gay member of Trinity United. He also was murdered in his home, dying of multiple gunshot wounds, according to his death certificate.
Just two days after the murder of Young, a third openly “gay” member of Wright’s church, Nate Spencer, reportedly died of septicemia, pneumonia and AIDS.

Sensational Charges
As WND reported last month, a prominent member of Chicago’s homosexual community claims Obama’s participation in the “gay” bar and bathhouse scene was so well known that many who were aware of his lifestyle were shocked when he ran for president and finally won the White House. In April, WND reported a federal judge dismissed a libel case against Larry Sinclair, a homosexual who claimed Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign had paid to rig a polygraph test regarding Sinclair’s sensational charge that he had sex and used cocaine twice with Obama while Obama was an Illinois state senator. Sinclair tells his story in “Barack Obama & Larry Sinclair: Cocaine, Sex, Lies & Murder.”
WND also reported former radical activist John Drew has said that when he met Obama when Obama was a student at Occidental College, he thought Obama and his then-Pakistani roommate were “gay” lovers.
In addition, rumors have swirled around Obama’s relationship with his personal aide and former “body man,” Reggie Love, who resurfaced on the eve of the Republican National Convention to support his old boss. Love resigned from the White House in November 2011 after compromising photographs of him as a college student received wide circulation.
WND also has documented in two separate articles, here and here, that Obama wore a gold band on his wedding ring finger from the time he attended Occidental College through his student days at Harvard Law School.

Shocking Phone Call
Sinclair gave an affidavit to the Chicago Police Department regarding contacts he says he had with Young just prior to Young’s murder.
According to Sinclair’s affidavit, published in its entirety beginning on page 56 of his book, he contacted Obama’s presidential campaign in September 2007. Sinclair says he requested that Obama correct claims he made about when he stopped abusing drugs to reflect use of crack cocaine during their sex encounters in November 1999.
During the 2008 presidential campaign, Obama had stated famously he stopped using marijuana and cocaine in college, implying his drug abuse ended when he had completed his first two years of college at Occidental in Los Angeles.
Sinclair explained that when he made contact with the Obama campaign in September 2007, he provided callback numbers, in case the campaign wanted to get in touch with him.
Then, in late September or early October 2007, as Sinclair stated in his affidavit, he received a call from a male identifying himself as “Mr. Young,” who stated he was responding to calls Sinclair had made to the Obama campaign.
“This first call shocked me in that this ‘Mr. Young’ asked me why I had not asked Senator Obama to disclose sexual encounters I had with Mr. Obama in 1999,” Sinclair’s affidavit reads. “I was shocked as I had never mentioned to the campaign or anyone working for the campaign any sexual encounters. The call ended with Mr. Young stating I would hear from someone in a few days.”
Sinclair claims it was in a second call from “Mr. Young” that he began to suspect the man had been sexually intimate with Obama. Sinclair said he drew that conclusion “by the tone of the conversation” and by its “sexual nature.”
In late October 2007, Sinclair received a text message from “Mr. Young” stating Young “was intimately involved with Senator Obama and that Obama was discussing with him and his pastor how to publicly acknowledge Senator Obama’s drug use in 1999.”
The text message also indicated Obama wanted to make sure Sinclair had not discussed the sexual encounters or drug use with any media at that time.
In November 2007, Sinclair received a second text message from “Mr. Young,” advising him that Obama would publicly correct his statement as to the last time he used drugs and that Sinclair did not need to concern himself with publicly disclosing it.
Then, in early December 2007, Sinclair received his last contact with “Mr. Young,” with Young making it clear Obama had no intention of acknowledging publicly his use of crack cocaine in 1999.
After Young was murdered, Sinclair had several contacts with Young’s family.
“In several telephone conversations with his sisters, brothers, nieces and others, I was reassured that the family of Donald Young believed he was murdered to protect Barack Obama,” Sinclair wrote. “It also became clear, right from the start that members of the Young family were truly fearful of speaking out publicly, to this day, they fear for their own personal, physical safety.”
On July 17, 2010, the supermarket tabloid The Globe published an interview with Norma Jean Young, the 76-year-old mother of the slain choirmaster, in which she expressed fear that her son was murdered to protect Obama.
“What was the cause of my son’s death?” Norma Jean Young asked in the Globe interview. “I’m very suspicious that it may have been related to Obama. Donald and Obama were very close friends. Whatever went on with this is very private. I am suspicious of a cover-up!”
She insisted there is “more to the story,” calling on Chicago police to ramp up their investigation.
“I do believe they are shielding somebody or protecting somebody,” she told The Globe.
Asked who would benefit from a cover-up, Norma Jean Young said, “It could be anyone, including Obama.”
Shortly after the Globe interview was published, Norma Jean Young left Chicago and lived for a while in Peoria, Ill. Her current residence is unknown.
The murders of Donald Young and Larry Bland remain today open cases of unsolved homicide.

Claim: Obama Hid 'Gay Life' to Become President
  "We're all gay — get used to it!"

"Obama's Not Hetero- or Bi-, He's Homosexual" — Chicago homosexual community shocked he could keep it secret"

By Jerome R. Corsi -- A prominent member of Chicago’s homosexual community claims Barack Obama’s participation in the “gay” bar and bathhouse scene was so well known that many who were aware of his lifestyle were shocked when he ran for president and finally won the White House.
“It was preposterous to the people I knew then to think Obama was going to keep his gay life secret,” said who was an openly gay gossip columnist in Chicago for various blogs when Obama was living in the city as a community organizer and later a state senator.
“Nobody who knew Obama in the gay bar scene thought he could possibly be president,” said DuJan.
DuJan, founder and editor of the Hillary Clinton-supporting website HillBuzz.org told WND he has first-hand information from two different sources that “Obama was personally involved in the gay bar scene.”
“If you just hang out at these bars, the older guys who have been frequenting these gay bars for 25 years will tell you these stories,” DuJan said. “Obama used to go to the gay bars during the week, most often on Wednesday, and they said he was very much into older white guys.”
Investigative journalist Wayne Madsen, who worked with the National Security Agency from 1984 to 1988 as a Navy intelligence analyst, confirmed DuJan’s claims.
“It is common knowledge in the Chicago gay community that Obama actively visited the gay bars and bathhouses in Chicago while he was an Illinois state senator,” Madsen told WND.
WND also spoke with a member of the East Bank Club in Chicago, who confirmed Obama was a member there and was known to be a homosexual. The upscale fitness club says it has some 10,000 members, but it’s one of a number of places identified by the Chicago homosexual community as a “gay gym.”
In April, WND reported a federal judge dismissed a libel case against Larry Sinclair, a homosexual who claimed Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign had paid to rig a polygraph test regarding Sinclair’s sensational charge that he had sex and used cocaine twice with Obama while Obama was an Illinois state senator. Sinclair tells his story in “Barack Obama & Larry Sinclair: Cocaine, Sex, Lies & Murder.”
WND also reported former radical activist John Drew has said that when he met Obama when Obama was a student at Occidental College, he thought Obama and his then-Pakistani roommate were “gay” lovers.
In addition, rumors have swirled around Obama’s relationship with his personal aide and former “body man,” Reggie Love, who resurfaced on the eve of the Republican National Convention to support his old boss. Love resigned from the White House in November 2011 after compromising photographs of him as a college student received wide circulation.
WND also has documented in two separate articles, here and here, that Obama wore a gold band on his wedding ring finger from the time he attended Occidental College through his student days at Harvard Law School.
DuJan said that during Obama’s first presidential campaign, “there was fear in the gay community” about talking openly about Obama being homosexual, particularly after the murder in December 2007 of Donald Young, the openly gay choir director at , who was known to be a close friend of Obama. “People did not want to talk openly about Obama being gay,” he said.
“Then, when we saw how Larry Sinclair was demonized, anybody who would expose Obama worried they would be silenced if they dared to speak the truth about Obama’s gay life,” DuJan said.

‘Obama’s Secrets’
DuJan said he has been told “Obama’s secrets would have to come out just like John Edwards’ secrets came out.”
He said Obama stopped going to gay bars and bathhouses in Chicago when he began running for the U.S. Senate in 2004. “Back then, Obama could walk around Chicago and people generally wouldn’t recognize him, even though he was a state senator in the Illinois assembly at the time,” DuJan said.
DuJan insisted that while he’s a supporter of Hillary Clinton, he holds no personal animus toward Obama. He said he campaigned for Clinton in 2008 “because I had waited for years for her to be able to run.”
“I opposed Obama not because I’m a racist, or that I hate Obama, I just knew the type of person Obama associated with in Chicago,” he said. He pointed to Obama’s association with convicted Chicago real estate magnate Tony Rezko, Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan and Rev. Wright.
“Obama was a dirty politician that the media never wanted to vet – that’s what concerned me about Obama,” Du Jan said.
DuJan spoke further of his claims about Obama in an interview Monday night on Andrea Shea King’s show on BlogTalkRadio.com, which included questions from WND during the last half of the show.

"Man’s Country"
Madsen published an article in his Wayne Madsen Report in May 2010 claiming Obama and Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel were members of the same bathhouse in Chicago.
“President Obama and his chief of staff Rahm Emanuel are lifetime members of the same gay bathhouse in uptown Chicago, according to informed sources in Chicago’s gay community, as well as veteran political sources in the city,” Madsen wrote.
He said the bathhouse, "Man’s Country" catered “to older men,” noting “it has been in business for some 30 years and is known as one of uptown Chicago’s ‘grand old bathhouses.’”
Madsen wrote his 2010 report after traveling to Chicago to interview bartenders and customers at several “gay” bars.
DuJan gave WND a list of “gay” bars in Chicago where older customers hang out and tell stories about how Obama, prior to 2004, frequented visited to pick up men for sex, including several on Halstead Street, widely known as an “uber-gay Chicago street.
Writing in HillBuzz.com Tuesday, DuJan said rooms at Man’s Country bathhouse are still referred to as the “presidential suite,” or the “Oral Office,” because “the current President used to haunt the place when he was a just another Illinois state senator that no one had ever heard of or cared about.”
DuJan said he believes that, someday, “all of this is going to be as public knowledge as JFK’s affair with Marilyn Monroe and the other women he cavorted with while married to Jackie.”
“Someday,” he said, “in the next 10-20 years, everyone will know all about Man’s Country, and the place will no doubt get a plaque of sometime commemorating that place as a gay hangout for the future leader of the free world.”

Still think Obama isn't queer? Then watching this 'Gaydar Slide Show' might change your mind!


Obama Was Elected in Large Measure to Assuage 'White Guilt' — Now Will Voters Reelect Obama to Assuage Their 'Homophobic Guilt'?
  The Return of Obama's 'Body Man' — Reggie Love Resurfaces on Eve of Republican Convention

By Jerome Corsi -- The former personal aide to Barack Obama known as the president’s “body man,” Reggie Love, resurfaced on the eve of the Republican National Convention to support his old boss.
Hired as Obama’s “deputy political director,” the Duke University basketball and football star was the constant companion of the president for two years before resigning last November.
The White House explained Love had decided to pursue further studies at the Wharton School of Business at the University of Pennsylvania, but the Internet, at the time, was abuzz with speculation that Love was dismissed because of the wide circulation of compromising photographs of him when he was a college student. The photos purported to show a heavily inebriated Love surrounded by fellow students assisting him in engaging in a homosexual act at a party on the rival University of North Carolina campus.
In the interview with CNN Monday, Love portrayed Obama as a cool-headed leader who doesn’t let problems ruffle him.
“I think it looks like he’s really, really calm all the time and nothing gets under his skin, but I think from an efficiency standpoint, you know, you can cry about the call or you can look to the next play,” Love told CNN. “And if you spend your time crying about the call, usually you, you miss the next play. And then … instead of having one bad play, now you have two.”
Today, the Drudge Report – which has toyed with headlines, photos and page placement over the years that give the impression Love was something more than a presidential assistant – linked to the story with the headline: “Reggie Love Speaks: Obama leads like he plays … ”
The headline was positioned above a story about former Florida Republican Gov. Charlie Crist’s key speaking role at the upcoming Democratic National Convention. The link was illustrated with a photo of Obama and Crist in which they appear to be preparing to kiss.
The embarrassing photos of Love as a college student have appeared and disappeared with regularity on various websites over the past year.
Earlier this month,when Obama asked Love to join the U.S. official delegation to the closing ceremonies of the London Olympics, reunion photos of Obama and Love showed them “fist bumping” in the Oval Office – a practice Love supposedly introduced to Obama.

Who is Reggie Love?
Love, a graduate of Duke University with a B.A. in political science and public policy, started working in 2006 in a low-level staff position in then-Sen. Obama’s office after failing NFL tryouts with the Green Bay Packers and Dallas Cowboys in 2004 and 2005.
In 2007, just before Obama’s presidential primary campaign was launched, Love moved up to assume the position of “personal assistant” to the candidate, a role typically dubbed as a “body man,” responsible for up-close and personal contact with Obama on virtually a 24-7 basis. As the New York Times reported, the job required anything from carrying Obama’s coat or briefcase, to providing him “cool” Jay-Z music for his iPod, to sneaking off to the gym and playing basketball.
In April 2009, Love won the Huffington Post’s “Who’s the White House’s hottest employee?” contest.
In January 2009, ESPN dubbed Love “Chief of Stuff” in an article that featured the following personal commentary:
Love walks in Obama’s shadow for about 18 hours a day, anticipating all his needs. He wakes up Obama around dawn, works out with him in the morning, answers his cell phone during the day and hangs out with him at night. Much of the time, he carries a black duffle bag stuffed with any drugstore item Obama could possibly need, including mouthwash, Wetnaps, aspirin, Nicorette and ballpoint pens. If the presumptive nominee were to spill something on his tie moments before a nationally televised debate, Love would rescue him with Tide stain remover.
Love played on the 2001 Duke University basketball team that won the NCAA national championship. He was suspended the following year, however, for a drunk-driving incident in which he did not receive a citation because his blood alcohol measured just below the level of legal intoxication.
A further indiscretion with alcohol proved more costly.

Was it the photos?
The embarrassing photographs first gained wide circulation March 16, 2009, when the blog Booker Rising, a self-described “news site for black moderates and black conservatives,” linked to them. Three photographs of the incident began appearing and disappearing on various Internet websites.
Investigative reporter Wayne Madsen, writing in his subscription-only newsletter on Nov. 14, 2011,, suggested that in the wake of the Jerry Sandusky scandal at Penn State, the photos of Love as a Duke student were too much for the White House:
The fallout from Penn State has universities and colleges across the nation checking their records for indications of child abuse and other scandals. … Past gay-oriented sex parties at Duke and the University of North Carolina involving then Duke basketball and football player Reggie Love reportedly cost him his job as President Obama’s ‘body man.’ De facto White House chief of staff Pete Rouse, upon hearing of potential problems regarding Love at Duke and UNC and on the heels of the scandal at Penn State, forced Love to leave the White House staff immediately, even over the objections of Obama.
When Love departed, Obama was quoted in a statement issued by the White House saying, “Over the years, Reggie has been a friend, a teammate and an indispensible member of my staff.” Obama said Love’s “ability to juggle so many responsibilities with so little sleep has been an inspiration to watch.” “He is the master of what he does,” Obama said. “And even though I will miss seeing Reggie every day, I want to thank him for his service and wish him all the best as he begins a new chapter in his career.”
Meanwhile, HillBuzz.org, a w