Archive for the ‘Barack Obama’ Category




by Bethany Blankly

When more people are unemployed and don’t have health insurance, when more veterans are suffering and dying in the U.S. than ever before, why is Barack Obama sending Iran another $1.3 billion?
The Washington Examiner reports that the State Department confirmed that it already paid Iran another $1.3 billion “to settle a failed arms deal from 1979.”

Yet, the State Department could not state who the U.S. government paid in the Iran government.

Nor could the State Department explain what form of payment was used. Did the U.S. send $1.3 billion to Iran in cash, check or money transfer?

Also, the State Department confirmed that it can’t guarantee that the $1.3 billion will not end up in the hands of known terrorists.

State Department spokesman Mark Toner told reporters:

“We can always hand it over to someone who can hand it over to the IRGC,” (Iran Revolutionary Guard Corps, which finances terrorism).
Obama argues that the U.S. owes Iran $1.7 billion plus interest to compensate Iran for weapons purchases it made in 1979 but never received because of the uprising and overthrowing of its previous government.

The first installment was the notoriously illegal shipment of $400 million in cash to Iran, which depending on the day, was reportedly a ransom payment for the release of American hostages.

The remaining money Obama says the U.S. owes Iran has not been sent, but will be, but the State Department doesn’t know how or when that will take place. It also doesn’t know who is receiving the payment in Iran.

Toner said:

“I’ll try my best to get details about that.

“I believe it was Iranian officials, Iranian government officials, I don’t know particularly who individually it was.”
Who paid the $400 million to Iran? Apparently someone Toner “was ‘certain’ that some in the U.S. knew, and said he just didn’t have that information.”

But, it wasn’t a ransom, because the U.S. owes Iran money.

This is blatant treason, but no one is doing anything about it in Congress. Where is Obama getting this money? How is he sending it without Congressional approval?

Chicago: ‘Deadliest July in 10 Years’ for Gun Control Haven


Facts are so inconvenient to libs. I wonder what percentage of victims and perps were black? This is what you get when brain dead liberals like Rahm and Obama are in control. Why doesn’t Obama walk the talk and settle on the Southside of Chicago when he saunters out of the WH? I’m sure all his Trayvon “sons” would welcome him with open arms. Meanwhile, CNN is focused on Trump eating KFC with a fork and knife.
July 2016 was the “deadliest July in 10 years” for heavily gun-controlled Chicago: Sixty-five individuals were shot and killed.

Moreover, according to the Chicago Tribune, such death figures do not set a new record — they simply tie a record set in 2006, when 65 individuals were killed in the month of July. This brings Chicago’s homicide total to “nearly 400” for the first seven months of 2016 alone. The number of homicides for the whole year of 2015 was 490.

Police Superintendent Eddie Johnson tried to abate the feeding frenzy on the July death numbers by pointing out that they are at least better than the numbers for June, “when 72 homicides were reported.”

Breitbart News previously reported that May 2016 was also a recording-setting month. Almost 400 people were shot and 66 people were killed in that one month. The Chicago Tribune reported May 2016 as the deadliest May since 1995, when 75 people were gunned down.

On August 2, the Chicago Tribune reported a total of 2,395 shooting victims in Chicago for the seven months of 2016. There were 2,988 shooting victims for all of 2015. These shootings come in spite of the city’s “assault weapons” ban, “violence tax,” strict rules on acquiring handguns, and micro-management of the number of gun stores in the city, as well as of the locations of those stores.

Did Obama Copy a Scene from ‘Breaking Bad’ When He Sent $400 Million in Cash to Iran?

By Gary DeMar
The Wall Street Journal is reporting that “The Obama administration secretly organized an airlift of $400 million worth of cash to Iran that coincided with the January release of four Americans detained in Tehran, according to U.S. and European officials and congressional staff briefed on the operation afterward.

“Wooden pallets stacked with euros, Swiss francs, and other currencies were flown into Iran on an unmarked cargo plane, according to these officials. The U.S. procured the money from the central banks of the Netherlands and Switzerland, they said.”

Read related article: “Obama Secretly Paid $400 Million Dollar Ransom to Iranian Regime!“

There’s a scene from the AMC series Breaking Bad where a storage unit is opened and a large pallet of money is shown. Ill-gotten gains from the drug trade. It reminds me of Obama’s shady deal with Iran:

Is this where President Obama got the idea to send $400 million in untraceable cash to the Iranians? I can just see Hillary and President Obama looking over the $400 million in cash and saying, “Hillary, I’ve made it possible for you to do anything.”

If you or I attempted to move a large amount of cash out of the country, two things would happen. First, the cash would be confiscated, and second, we’d go to jail.

What President Obama did was illegal. “The $400 million was paid in foreign currency because any transaction with Iran in U.S. dollars is illegal under U.S. law.” He skirted this law by paying in foreign currencies. Again, if you or I did anything like this, we’d be serving time in prison. It’s a form of money laundering and structuring.

“Structuring, also known as smurfing in banking industry jargon, is the practice of executing financial transactions (such as the making of bank deposits) in a specific pattern calculated to avoid the creation of certain records and reports required by law, such as the United States’ Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) and Internal Revenue Code section 6050I (relating to the requirement to file Form 8300).”
But it’s OK if a Democrat President does it.

Moreover, if a Republican President had done this, it would be front page news everywhere.

Let’s see if the leftist news sources (1) report on the story, and if they do, (2) how will they spin it to absolve President Obama of any guilt.

The reasons why the globalists are destined to lose

Under the surface of almost every sociopolitical and economic event in the world there burns an ever-raging, but often unseen, war. This war, for now, is fought with fiction and with truth, with journalistic combat and with quiet individual deeds. It is defined by two sides which could not be more philosophically or spiritually separate.

On one side is a pervasive network of corporate moguls and elites, banking entities, international financial consortiums, think tanks and political puppets. They work tirelessly to reshape public psychology and society as a whole into something they sometimes call the “New World Order;” a completely and scientifically centralized planet in which they control every aspect of government, trade, life and even moral compass. I often refer to them simply as the “Globalists,” which is how they at times refer to themselves.

On the other side is a movement that has developed organically and instinctively, growing without direct top-down “leadership,” but still guided through example by various teachers and activists, driven by a concrete set of principles based in natural law. It is composed of the religious, the agnostic and even some atheists. It is soldiered by people of all ethnic and financial backgrounds. These groups are tied together by a singular and resounding belief in the one vital thing they can all agree upon — the inherent and inborn rights of freedom. I call them the “Liberty Movement.”

There are those who think they do not have a dog in this fight, those who ignore it and those who are completely oblivious to it. However, everyone can and will be affected by it, no exceptions. This war is for the future of the human race. Its consequences will determine if the next generation will choose the conditions of their environment and maintain the ability to reach their true potential as individuals or if every aspect of their lives will be micromanaged for them by a faceless, soulless bureaucracy that probably does not have their best interests at heart.

As you can probably tell, I am not unbiased in my examination of these two sides. While some of the more “academically minded” cynics out there do attempt to marginalize the entire conflict by accusing both sides of simply trying to impose “their ideology” on the rest of humanity, I would say that such people are generally ignorant of what is at stake.

There is in fact an elemental force behind this war. I would even call it a conflagration between good and evil. For a more in-depth analysis on the evil behind globalism, read my article “Are Globalists Evil Or Just Misunderstood.”

Some people don’t adhere to such absolutes or they think good and evil are fantasies created by religion to keep society in check. I have no intention of trying to convince them otherwise. All I can say is, I have seen and experienced these absolutes first hand and, therefore, I have no choice but to remain a believer.

I would also point out that the general experience of most men and women is that the act of organized and legitimate oppression is inherently evil and such actions in the name of satisfying delusional elitist narcissism are even more evil. While these experiences are subjective, they are also universal, regardless of the culture, place or time in history. Most of us feel the same horror and the same defiance when facing rising tyranny. We can’t necessarily explain why, but we all know.

While I am firmly on the side of liberty and am willing to fight and trade my life to stop the “New World Order” the globalists are so obsessed with, I will not turn this examination of their tactics into a blind or one sided farce. I will point out where the elites are effective just as I will point out where they are ineffective. It would do more harm than good to portray the globalists as “stupid” or bumbling in their efforts. They are not stupid. They are actually astonishingly clever and should not be underestimated.

They are indeed conniving and industrious, but they are not wise. For if they were wise, they would be able to see the ultimate futility of their goal and the world would be saved decades of tragedy and loss. Their cultism has dulled their senses to reality and they have abandoned truth in the name of control. Here are some of the primary strategies that the globalists are using to gain power and work towards total centralization and why their own mindset has doomed them to failure.

Globalism vs. “populism”

The globalists have used the method of false dichotomies for centuries to divide nations and peoples against each other in order to derive opportunity from chaos. That said, the above dichotomy is about as close to real as they have ever promoted. As I explained in my article, “Globalists Are Now Openly Demanding New World Order Centralization,” the recent passage of the Brexit referendum in the U.K. has triggered a surge of new propaganda from establishment media outlets. The thrust of this propaganda is the notion that “populists” are behind the fight against globalization and these populists are going to foster the ruin of nations and the global economy. That is to say — globalism good, populism bad.

There is a real fight between globalists and those who desire a free, decentralized and voluntary society. They have just changed some of the labels and the language. We have yet to see how effective this strategy will be for the elites, but it is very useful for them in certain respects.

The wielding of the term “populist” is about as sterilized and distant from “freedom and liberty” as you can get. It denotes not just “nationalism,” but selfish nationalism. And the association people are supposed to make in their minds is that selfish nationalism leads to destructive fascism (i.e. Nazis). Therefore, when you hear the term “populist,” the globalists hope you will think “Nazi.”

Also, keep in mind that the narrative of the rise of populism coincides with grave warnings from the elites that such movements will cause global economic collapse if they continue to grow. Of course, the elites have been fermenting an economic collapse for years. We have been experiencing many of the effects of it for some time. In a brilliant maneuver, the elites have attempted to re-label the liberty movement as “populist” (Nazis), and use liberty activists as a scapegoat for the fiscal time bomb they created.

Will the masses buy it? I don’t know. I think that depends on how effectively we expose the strategy before the breakdown becomes too entrenched. The economic collapse itself has been handled masterfully by the elites, though. There is simply no solution that can prevent it from continuing. Even if every criminal globalist was hanging from a lamp post tomorrow and honest leadership was restored to government, the math cannot be changed and decades of struggle will be required before national economies can be made prosperous again.

Communism vs. fascism

This is a classic ploy by the globalists to divide a culture against itself and initiate a calamity that can be used as leverage for greater centralization down the road. If you have any doubts about fascism and communism being engineered, I highly suggest you look into the very well documented analysis of Antony Sutton. I do not have the space here to do his investigations justice.

Today, we see elites like George Soros funding and aiding the latest incarnation of the communist hordes — namely social justice groups like Black Lives Matter. The collectivist psychosis and Orwellian behavior exhibited by race junkies like BLM and third-wave feminists is thoroughly pissing off conservatives who are tired of being told what to think and how to act every second of every day. And this is the point…

If you want to get a picture of America in 2016, look back at Europe during the 1930’s. Communist provocateurs, some real and some fabricated by the establishment itself, ran rampant in Europe creating labor disintegration and fiscal turmoil. The elites then funded and elevated fascism as the “solution” to communism. Normally even-handed conservatives were so enraged by the communist spitting and ankle biting that they became something just as evil in response.

The U.S. may be on the same path if we are not careful. The latest shootings in Texas will make hay for the globalists. Think about this for a moment — on one side you have Obama telling the liberals that the answer to police brutality is to federalize law enforcement even more that it already is. On the other side, you have some Republicans arguing that a more militarized police presence will help prevent groups like BLM from causing more trouble. Notice that the only solution we are being offered here is more federal presence on our streets?

I do see, though, a rather large weakness in the plan to ignite a communist vs. fascist meltdown in the U.S., and that weakness is the existence of the Liberty Movement itself. The movement has grown rather sophisticated in its media presence and prevalent in influence. It does have enough sway now to diffuse some aspects of a rise to fascism in the political Right. The only option the elites have is to find a way to co-opt us. If they can manipulate the liberty movement into supporting a fascist system, then they would be very close to winning the entire fight. This would be highly unlikely given the stubbornness of liberty proponents when adhering to their principles.

The elites might be able to get a large part of the public to take sides in their false paradigm, but if they can’t con the millions that make up the liberty movement into the fold, then their job becomes much harder.

Moral compass vs. moral relativism

Moral relativism is perhaps the pinnacle goal of the globalists. Why? Because if you can convince an entire society that their inherent conscience should be ignored and that their inborn feelings of morality are “open to interpretation,” then eventually any evil action can be rationalized. When evil becomes “good,” and good becomes evil, evil men will reign supreme.

The problem is, conscience is an inborn psychological product, a result of inherent archetypal dualities universal to almost all people. It is ingrained in our DNA, or our very souls if you believe in such a thing. It cannot be erased easily.

Moral relativism requires a person to treat every scenario as a “gray area.” This is not practical. Conscience dictates that we treat every situation as potentially unique and act according to what we feel in our hearts is right given the circumstances. This does not mean, though, that there is no black and white; or that there are no concrete rules. There is almost always a black and white side to a situation dealing with right and wrong. Moral “dilemmas” are exceedingly rare. In fact, I don’t think I have ever encountered a real moral dilemma in history or in personal experience. The only time I ever see moral dilemmas is in movies and television.

Only in television fantasy is moral relativism ever the “only way” to solve a problem. And despite the preponderance of moral relativism in our popular culture, the ideology is still having trouble taking hold. If it was so easy to undermine conscience, then the NWO would have already achieved complete pacification. We are still far from total pacification. Whoever hard wired our conscience should be applauded.

Total control vs. reality

This is where the globalists philosophy really begins to break down. The elitist pursuit of total information awareness and total social control is truly perverse and insane, and insanity breeds delusion and weakness. The fact is, they will never complete the goal of complete micro-control. It is mathematically and psychologically impossible.

First, in any system, and in complex systems most of all, there are always elements that cannot be quantified or predicted. To understand this issue, I recommend studying the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. To summarize, the uncertainty principle dictates that anyone observing a system in action, even from a distance, can still affect the behavior of that system indirectly or unconsciously in ways they could never predict. Unknown quantities result, predictability goes out the window and total control of that system becomes unattainable.

This principle also applies to human psychology, as numerous psychoanalysts have discovered when treating patients. The doctor, or the observer, is never able to observe their patient without indirectly affecting the behavior of their patient in unpredictable ways. Therefore, a completely objective analysis of that patient can never be obtained.

What the elites seek is a system by which they can observe and influence all of us in minute detail without triggering a reaction that they wouldn’t expect. The laws of physics and psychology derail this level of control. There will always be unknown quantities, free radicals, wild cards, etc. Even a seemingly perfect utopia can be brought down by a single unknown.

To break this down even further to the level of pure mathematics, I recommend research into Kurt Godel and his Incompleteness Proof. This, I believe is the ultimate example of the elites struggling against the fact of unknown quantities and failing.

Godel’s work revolved around either proving or disproving the idea that mathematicians could define “infinity” in mathematical terms. For, if infinity can be defined, then it can be understood in base mathematical axioms, and if infinity can be understood, then the universe in its entirety can be understood. Godel discovered the opposite — his incompleteness proof established once and for all that infinity is a self inclusive paradox that cannot be defined through mathematics. Keep in mind that a proof is a set of mathematical laws that can never be broken. Two plus two will always equal four; it will never equal anything else.

Well known globalist Bertrand Russell worked tirelessly to show that the entirety of the universe could be broken down into numbers, writing a three volume monstrosity called the Principia Mathematica. Russell’s efforts were fruitless and Godel’s proof later crushed his theory. Russell railed against Godel’s proof, but to no avail.

Now, why was an elitist like Russell who openly championed scientific dictatorship so concerned by Godel? Well, because Godel, in mathematical terms, destroyed the very core of the globalist ideology. He proved that the globalist aspirations of godhood would never be realized. There are limits to the knowledge of man, and limits to what he can control. This is not something globalists can ever accept, for if they did, every effort they have made for decades would be pointless.

As mentioned earlier, the issue is one of unknown quantities. Can human society ever be fully dominated? Or, is the act of rebellion against stagnating and oppressive systems a part of nature? Is it possible that the more the elites wrap the world in a cage, the more they inspire unpredictable reactions that could undermine their authority?

This might explain the establishment’s constant attention to the idea of the “lone wolf” and the damage one person acting outside the dictates of the system can do. This is what the elites fear most: the possibility that despite all their efforts of surveillance and manipulation, individuals and groups may one day be struck by an unpredictable urge to pick up a rifle and put the the globalists out of everyone’s misery. No chatter, no electronic trail, no warning.

This is why they are destined to lose. They can never know all the unknowns. They can never control all the free radicals. There will always be rebellion. There will always be a liberty movement. The entirety of their utopian schematic revolves around the need to remove unknowns. They refuse to accept that control at these levels is so frail it becomes useless and mortally dangerous. In their arrogance, they have ignored the warnings of the very sciences they worship and have set their eventual end in stone. While they may leave a considerable path of destruction in their wake, it is already written; they will not win.

— Brandon Smith

Obama TRASHES Cops… Makes SICK “Black Folks” Comment About Alton Sterling Shooting

President Barack Obama weighed in on the Dallas shooting that left five police officers dead yesterday, calling the incident “troubling.” He also managed to trashed police officers with a “back folks” statement that seemed terribly out of line.

“When people say black lives matter, that doesn’t mean blue lives don’t matter, it means all lives matter,” the president said, according to The Hill. “But the data shows that black folks are more vulnerable to these kinds of incidents.”

Obama added that we should all be troubled by the shootings because they are not isolated incidents. He also mentioned statistics indicating that black and Hispanic men were more likely to be pulled over, arrested and shot by police than white people are.
Wow. Just after five police officers were killed and one gunman admitted to police that he wanted to kill white people — especially white officers — Obama had the nerve to say that blacks are more vulnerable to violence than anyone else in our communities.

It’s a statement that was beyond disgraceful — and simply not true — but one that the Black Lives Matter movement will no doubt cling to and run with while planning more of their hate-filled rallies.

As we have come to expect, Obama weighed in on these incidents well before all of the facts were known.
The president also showed a lack of leadership when making statements that fuel the hatred spewed by the Black Lives Matter movement. He only agitates people with remarks likes these — and, make no mistake, he knows what he’s doing.

It’s despicable that our commander in chief felt compelled to make such racially charged statements when he did, but sadly, it’s not surprising.

It appears he would rather stoke the racial tensions that already exist in America than try to do something about them.

Share this story on Twitter and Facebook if you agree that Obama is way off base with these kinds of remarks and is only making things worse by making them.

BUSTED! Billionaire Clinton Foundation Donor Caught in Illegal Scheme

We would say that this was surprising but sadly it is not. We could also say that someone should be in jail for this type of corruption but it is attached to Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation. If this were a Republican foundation and a Republican was involved in these improprieties, things would already be in motion to make arrangements for jail food and a cot. Read the story below.
A foreign billionaire and seven-figure donor to the Clinton Foundation has been caught funding a reportedly illegal voting scheme that links straight to the Democratic National Committee and presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

A computer hacker who goes by the moniker Guccifer 2.0 recently leaked emails allegedly from the DNC outlining their 2016 general election strategies — and one of them details a coordinated effort with a foreign entity, funded entirely with $100 million from big-time Clinton donor and Swiss billionaire Hansjorg Wyss, to influence the results of the 2016 election.

The group was allegedly targeting pro-Clinton demographics for voter registration as well as “outreach, organizing, and legal and policy advocacy on voting laws”, and according to Washington Beacon reporter Lachlan Markay, that’s illegal.

The group behind the $100 million voter registration push, The Wyss Foundation, is registered as a 501(c)(3) charitable foundation. It is forbidden by law from financing direct political projects.

Critics say the document, titled “Wyss Foundation Democracy Strategy Discussion Memo,” provides clear evidence the group was violating this law, with the DNC’s participation and knowledge.

Markay writes, “The document details the scope of Democratic efforts to boost grassroots organizing, and sheds light on how some of the left’s deepest pockets are facilitating those efforts through nonprofit vehicles generally restricted to charitable activity.”

Wyss himself, as a foreign national, is also legally banned from any federal or state political donations — a rule he’d allegedly violated up to 30 times in a nine-year period, according to The Daily Caller News Foundation.

Wyss has also has ties to Clinton, and had previously given between $1 million to $5 million to the Clinton Foundation. Additionally, “Wyss’ now-defunct HJW Foundation previously employed Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta, who received $87,083 from the group in 2013 for consulting services,” according to Markay.

As the country is still trying to put together the pieces of the Dallas ambush of police by Black Lives Matter, one cop says the president OBAMA is to blame.

William Johnson, who runs the National Association of Police Organizations, took to the airwaves to lambast the president’s lack of foresight in his treatment of groups such as Black Lives Matter, stating that their rampant radicalization making violence inevitable while the commander in chief twiddled his thumbs.

“’I think [the Obama’s administration] continued appeasements at the federal level with the Department of Justice, their appeasement of violent criminals, their refusal to condemn movements like Black Lives Matter, actively calling for the death of police officers, that type of thing, all the while blaming police for the problems in this country has led directly to the climate that has made Dallas possible,’ William Johnson, the executive director of the National Association of Police Organizations, said in an interview with Fox on Friday morning.

“‘It’s a war on cops,’ Johnson also said. ‘And the Obama administration is the Neville Chamberlain of this war.’
“Obama on Friday morning strongly condemned the Dallas shootings, which happened at the end of a protest about the killings of two black men by police officers earlier this week, as a ‘vicious, calculated and despicable attack.’”
Barack Obama’s soft stances on several matters of national security have been called into question lately, including this fight to allow Syrian refugees to enter the country unabated, and now this inability to recognize and condemn a hate group when he sees one.
The head of a law enforcement advocacy group lashed out at President Barack Obama in the wake of the Dallas shootings that left five police officers dead, accused the president of carrying out a “war on cops.”
“I think [the Obama administration] continued appeasements at the federal level with the Department of Justice, their appeasement of violent criminals, their refusal to condemn movements like Black Lives Matter, actively calling for the death of police officers, that type of thing, all the while blaming police for the problems in this country has led directly to the climate that has made Dallas possible,” William Johnson, the executive director of the National Association of Police Organizations, said in an interview with Fox on Friday morning.
Story Continued Below

Johnson said although the Thursday night shooting of law enforcement officers reminded him of “the violence in the streets in the 60’s and 70’s,” he pointed out how Obama’s response appeared different than his predecessors.
“I think one of the big differences then was you had governors and mayors and the president — whether it was President Johnson or President Nixon, Republican or Democrat — condemning violence against the police and urging support for the police,” Johnson said. “Today that’s markedly absent. I think that’s a huge difference, and that’s directly led to the climate that allows these attacks to happen.”
“It’s a war on cops,” Johnson also said. “And the Obama administration is the Neville Chamberlain of this war.”
Obama on Friday morning strongly condemned the Dallas shootings, which happened at the end of a protest about the killings of two black men by police officers earlier this week, as a “vicious, calculated and despicable attack.”
“Let’s be clear there are no possible justifications for these attacks or any violence towards law enforcement,” he said from Warsaw, Poland, where he is attending a NATO meeting

On Thursday, before the Dallas shootings, Obama tried to strike a balance as he talked about anger and grief in the African-American community after the latest killings by police and the feeling among some law enforcement officials that Obama has not always supported them.
“To be concerned about these issues is not to be against law enforcement,” he said. ”When people say black lives matter, it doesn’t mean blue lives don’t matter.”
Other law enforcement groups on Friday called for better relationships between cops and their communities.
DC Police Union Secretary Jimmy White admitted there was a clear racial disparity in the criminal justice system, and police officers needed better relationships with their communities.
“To put all the blame on one aspect of the problem is incorrect. You can’t just say it’s only Obama that has created this culture,” White told POLITICO on Friday. “We have to look into communities, into employment, we have to look into everything.”
“It just seems that there could be more effort by our government as far as making sure that the playing field is leveled,” the secretary said.
White also criticized trends on social media like #BlueLivesMatter or #BlackLivesMatter, saying “we focus too much” on labels instead of addressing the community’s needs.
“There is a balance between giving the public what they want and keeping our police officers safe,” he said. “We are hurting as an agency and as a union and we just wish that the events of yesterday did not happen and never happen again. We will grow, we will heal from this, and we will watch each other’s backs.”
Chuck Canterbury, national President of the Fraternal Order of Police, said he would encourage the Department of Justice to investigate the Dallas shooting as a hate crime.
“Nobody should die because of the color of their skin and nobody should die because of the color of the uniform that they’re wearing either,” he said in an interview with NPR on Friday.
Canterbury added that individual officers “are not in control of their training,” pointing out that police in Chicago “have been asking for Taser training for almost eight years.”
“Less-than-lethal methods need to be improved every day. Police officers would like that. Nobody goes to work, pins on a badge or a star and wants to end somebody else’s life,” the FOP president said.

Read more:
Follow us: @politico on Twitter | Politico on Facebook



And Obama is worried about waterboarding? Ha! Here is how Russian-supported troops treat their ISIS captives

Russian troups12
This is how Russian-supported troops in Syria deal with ISIS captives.

And Barack Hussein is worried about waterboarding? Really?