Categories
Archives
Please donate any amount you can to help us try to recover legal costs in defending liberty and the right of free speech !

Posts Tagged ‘Obama’

Trey Gowdy Just Uncovered Something Huge, Claims He Has Evidence To Arrest Obama

According to recent reports, Trey Gowdy claims that he has evidence of a “systematic, intentional” effort by the Obama administration to hide some revealing documents that may give Congress insight into the 2012 Benghazi attacks.

“I have evidence that, not only are they hiding it, but there’s an intent to hide it,” the Republican House Member told Fox News. “I can’t disclose that evidence yet, but I have evidence that there was a systematic, intentional decision to withhold certain documents from Congress—and we’re just sick of it.”

Gowdy made the comments in response to a question regarding why Secretary of State John Kerry had been subpoenaed by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. According to reports, California GOP Rep. Darrell Issa wants an explanation from Kerry about why the panel did not receive an email that revealed Ben Rhodes providing U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice to link the Benghazi attacks to an anti-Muslim video.

The shocking email was released by Judicial Watch, who sued the State Department in order to obtain documents relating to Benghazi last year.

“Not only are we trying to get answers with respect to Benghazi, we’re also now investigating what appears to be a White House cover-up in one of the worst explanations for why they didn’t turn the documents over,” Gowdy told Fox. “I think the speaker just finally lost his patience. I’m glad he did what he did. “

What do you think of Gowdy’s claims? Does Obama need to be thrown in jail NOW?

Obama’s Staggering Blindness to Growing Terror Threat

by David LimbaughObama113

One does not need to be Sun Tzu or George Patton to know that a nation must recognize an enemy before it can develop a strategy to defeat it. But one apparently does have to be someone other than President Barack Obama.

Since he took office, Obama has spent considerable energy trying to convince us how peaceful and magnificent the religion of Islam is and how exceptional acts of terrorism springing from it are.

He has also been telling us in words and deeds that such terrorism can best be prevented by overtures of peace and good will toward Islam, understanding that the root cause of this violence is poverty, and developing an action plan to address it.

That means the United States must downsize its military, because our sheer strength and power constitutes a threat — a provocation to the rest of the world. It means that we must pursue “economic justice,” a wretched euphemism for undermining our capitalist system and redistributing our wealth at home and abroad.

But even Obama’s stalwart supporters in the liberal media now understand that this man doesn’t have a clue about how to deal with threats to the United States. He is highly proficient at campaigning, community organizing, partisan agitating and ordering underlings to carry out his agenda, but he is psychologically incapable of attending to the details himself and appears to have no interest in actual governance beyond setting his statist goals and issuing his implementation orders.

Obama either can’t focus on high-level problems he didn’t anticipate in connection with his various utopian schemes or is so narcissistic that he rides around blindly in his golf cart like Mr. Magoo, wholly unaware of the damage he’s done to his own reputation as a serious, engaged and thoughtful person.

I do mean “utopian.” He mistakenly believed that his stimulus would work like a magic elixir to send the economy to new heights (or he knew better and it was a ruse to redistribute funds to his political cronies and funnel money to his pet projects). He believed that his beloved Obamacare was a panacea for improving the quality and affordability of health care (or he knew better and it was a Trojan horse for establishing governmental control over all aspects of our lives).

He thought he could achieve world peace by withdrawing our forces from foreign entanglements — even without plans to preserve the order — making nice speeches about Islam, removing the term “terrorist” from our vocabulary (except for its application to tea partyers), instituting a “reset” with Russia, whatever that means, and downsizing our military and defense systems (and there’s no indication at all that he knew better on this one).

But here we are, after his insistence that al-Qaida was on the run and that the Islamic State is the JV squad, watching an Islamic caliphate proliferate in front of our eyes in the Levant.

Even if hard reality is finally forcing Obama to grudgingly recognize the threat the Islamic State represents to the Middle East, he still refuses to believe or admit it represents a danger to the United States, especially with the porousness of the border he has made sure to effectuate.

It’s not just his reckless naiveté but his compulsion to place his political self-interests above the national interests that inhibits him from publicly acknowledging the magnitude of the threats we are facing.

In his mind, to make such an admission is tantamount to conceding that he was wrong and that his policies have exacerbated these threats — and that’s a charitable assessment. That’s why he reportedly dragged his feet for a month before approving a rescue attempt on American journalist James Foley. That, and he didn’t want to risk a Jimmy Carter-type failure — again because he cares more about his political image than the problems he is duty-bound to address.

Even if Obama is willfully blind to the enormity of the threat, sentient Americans not similarly blinded by his ideology have to be disturbed by what we’re witnessing in the world.

The Islamic State is massacring Christians, beheading American journalists, surging toward the borders of Turkey, marching across the Middle East with the swiftness of Alexander the Great and brazenly boasting that it is inside America, poised to attack. Islamist forces have taken control of the Libyan capital, Tripoli, and seized an airport there. They have captured a key Syrian air base near the Iraqi border. The Pentagon is saying the Islamic State threat is “beyond anything we’ve seen.”

Meanwhile, Obama has been riding around in his golf cart, which might as well sport a bumper sticker of Mad magazine’s Alfred E. Neuman saying, “What, me worry?”

Honestly, I have been horrified by Obama’s lawlessness, his destructive domestic policies leading to a permanently anemic economy and workforce, his staggering debt expansions, and his horrendous taxing, spending, regulatory and health care policies. But these foreign and domestic terror threats, along with the border invasion, may even be more troublesome.

I hate to be negative, and I refuse to be pessimistic, but anyone not alarmed by current events is in some physical, mental or emotional state I am powerless to comprehend.

DID OBAMA CHOOSE HIS IMAGE OVER FOLEY’S LIFE?

obama-golf-cart-laugh-300x180
By Rebekah Maxwell

Obama delayed Foley’s rescue to avoid bad PR: The President is having a tough vacation. True, he’s not really worried about Iraq falling to ISIS control, war raging in Israel, war brewing in Ukraine, chaos in Ferguson, the invasion on the border, or even the beheading of a American citizen. But he is worried about the most important thing of all: his own image.

In fact, he was so worried about his top priority, that he may actually have cost James Foley his life.

As reported by Breitbart News, Obama may have delayed a mission to rescue Foley for nearly a month:

A new Sunday Times report, “Pentagon sources said Foley and the others might well have been rescued but Obama, concerned about the ramifications of US troops being killed or captured in Syria, took too long to authorize the mission.”

It’s claimed that Obama was concerned about his administration being Carterized had the mission failed.

However, it also seems worth noting that the eventual timing of the mission may have made for a nice July 4th weekend announcement for Obama had the mission succeeded. Instead, Obama played golf on July 5th, as well as an additional six times in the month he is said to have spent agonizing over his decision, the delay of which may have cost journalist Foley his life.

Anthony Shaffer, a former lieutenant-colonel in US military intelligence who worked on covert operations, said: “I’m told it was almost a 30-day delay from when they said they wanted to go to when he finally gave the green light. They were ready to go in June to grab the guy [Foley] and they weren’t permitted.”

So…setting aside the responsibility a President might have to his own citizen who’s been captured by terrorists (because you know he already has), which scenario makes for better PR? 1) Making a rescue attempt when your military experts say it’s a good time, running the risk that the attempt may fail, but knowing you tried; or 2) “Agonizing over the decision” from the golf course until the terrorists make the decision for you and one innocent American is decapitated?

Instead, we get a brief statement of remorse, and it’s back to the golf course.

Just send one of your Admin’s bright sparks to tell us that Foley’s murder is not about the U.S. That’s very leadershipy.

Better play another round, Mr. President. The media will tell you when when the barbarians burn down the White House.

Ben Carson vs Jesse Jackson on racism: The concept of Dr Ben Carson running for president has many grassroots voters interested, and a few disquieted. He has no voting record, so people are paying close attention to every word he says. When it comes to application of principles (say on life or the 2nd Amendment), Carson can trip up. But when it comes to the meta-narratives (matching today’s problems with American solutions), Carson transcends.

On FOX News Sunday, Dr. Carson went head to head with Jesse Jackson over the Mike Brown shooting in Ferguson. Jackson likened Brown’s death to Rodney King and Trayvon Martin, that it was a racist “state execution.”

Carson pushed back, declaring that the 18-year-old’s death has “nothing to do with race,” citing his own experience growing up in urban dysfunction.

“If you take race out of the issue altogether,” he explained, “and you take a group of young men and you raise them with no respect for authority, not learning to take on personal responsibility, having easy access to drugs and alcohol, they’re very likely to end up as victims of violence and incarceration. Has nothing to do with race.”

I’ll take conversations that no other 2016 candidate will have for $400, Alex. This is one example of what Ben Carson can uniquely bring to the table– personal credibility on some of society’s biggest controversies. And if you’re one of the growing number who want Ben Carson to run, this is probably an example of why.

Rand says Dems are “scared” he’ll take liberal votes from Hillary: With war between Hamas and Israel, and ISIS slashing their way to power, foreign policy has come to the forefront of voters’ minds. And of all the 2016 hopefuls, the one who has the most to prove on that front is Rand Paul.

On NBC’s “Meet the Press,” Paul said his libertarian foreign policy is a threat to Hillary’s campaign, since he’s more anti-war than she is:

“I think the American public is coming more and more to where I am and that those people, like Hillary Clinton, who—she fought her own war, ‘Hillary’s war,’ you know?”

“And I think that’s what scares the Democrats the most: Is that in a general election, were I to run, there’s going to be a lot of independents and even some Democrats who say, ‘You know what? We are tired of war. We’re worried that Hillary Clinton will get us involved in another Middle Eastern war because she’s so gung-ho,” Paul said.

“If you want to see a transformational election in our country, let the Democrats put forward a war hawk like Hillary Clinton, and you’ll see a transformation like you’ve never seen.”

Most of Paul’s base is cheering right now at his comments. Most of the American public would have been cheering 9 months ago. But now we have to ask hard questions. How would a President Paul handle ISIS beheading American citizens? How would he answer a foreign declaration of war?

Current threats will force Rand to gel his theories into some real-world application. Being anti-war sounds good, but telling us to ‘play nice with ISIS’ will play about as well with general audiences as his dad’s “if I were Iran, I’d want a nuclear bomb, too” line. As in, a campaign killer. How does your theory apply to reality, Rand?

Meanwhile in Ferguson: The story that made a Missouri suburb into a racially-charged battleground continues to show how little we really know about living peaceably with all men.

Thousands gathered in Ferguson today for the funeral of Michael Brown, including White House staffers and Trayvon Martin’s parents. A eulogy was delivered by MSNBC’s Al Sharpton. Media livestreamed the ceremony online.

They’re laying to rest “the unarmed eighteen-year-old who was shot and killed by a Ferguson police officer” pointing out that Brown “was set to begin college just days after he was killed.”

“Michael Brown’s blood is crying from the ground, crying for vengeance, crying for justice,” said the Rev. Charles Ewing, the teenager’s uncle. “There is a cry being made from the ground, not just for Michael Brown, but for the Trayvon Martins, for those children at Sandy Hook Elementary School, for the Columbine massacre, for the black-on-black crime.”

The death of any young person is tragic, especially a violent death. An avoidable death. His family has the right to mourn their loss. And we have a duty to respect their grief.

But it’s difficult to watch the world at large broadcast Brown’s funeral as a modern-day martyrdom for public and political spectacle. It’s difficult to watch the story of one young man’s death become a justification for further crime and hatred. It’s difficult to watch a pastor equate the terms “vengeance” and “justice,” and compare his 18-year old (robbery suspect) nephew to the kindergarteners massacred at Sandy Hook. It’s also hard to watch an American city become a civil war zone, to which the only solution is more federal and more forceful government control. The world is reacting to what they feel, and won’t let information hinder their indignation.

We know that Mike Brown was unarmed. We do not know that he was innocent.
We know Officer Darren Wilson was armed. We do not know if he is guilty.

We know that violence has begotten more violence, and bloodshed has begotten more bloodshed.

We know that we don’t trust our authorities and we cannot trust in vigilantes.

We know that we’re not looking for truth anymore: we’re looking to act out our anger and be called heroes (while behaving like villains).

And I do not know what kind of future we can expect when lawlessness reigns supreme. But I fear we’re finding out in Ferguson.

Read more at http://stevedeace.com/news/obama-choose-image-foleys-life/#OtSsaeyLkhkJUaYt.99

You Do Realize that Obama Funded and Trained ISIS, Right?

Just so we are all clear here. Now that ISIS, or the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, is becoming a threat so powerful Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel told reporters at the Pentagon that the terrorist group is “beyond anything we’ve seen,” it’s time to remind everyone of a few little factoids regarding how exactly that came to be.

Hagel’s exact quote was:
“They are beyond just a terrorist group. They marry ideology, a sophistication of … military prowess. They are tremendously well-funded. This is beyond anything we’ve seen.”
Well-trained in military prowess. Tremendously well-funded. Super sophisticated terrorists. Hm.
And how do you think they got that way so fast? Super magic terrorist training money tree fairy dust?

Apparently the mainstream establishment media would more likely attempt to have people believe such a thing exists rather than expose the blatant reality that yes, the U.S. has trained and funded ISIS and without the U.S. government, ISIS would not be the threat it has become.
It came out back in 2012 that the U.S., Turkey and Jordan were jointly running a US CIA and Special Forces command training base for Syrian rebels out of the Jordanian town of Safawi, but apparently according the Jordanian officials, that training ‘wasn’t meant to be used in Iraq’ (via WND):
Syrian rebels who would later join the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, or ISIS, were trained in 2012 by U.S. instructors working at a secret base in Jordan, according to informed Jordanian officials.
The officials said dozens of future ISIS members were trained at the time as part of covert aid to the insurgents targeting the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in Syria. The officials said the training was not meant to be used for any future campaign in Iraq.
So future ISIS members were specially trained by the U.S. government, huh? Ya don’t say. But they weren’t supposed to be used for campaigns in Iraq?
Oops.
This was, at least superficially, so they could wage war against the Bashar al-Assad regime in Syria, and again, they weren’t called ISIS at the time, they were referred to as the Syrian rebels.
But the government won’t even admit what they’ve done here. Instead, they’re just bombing Iraq and hoping for the best…
Meanwhile, our government is still funding the “Syrian rebels” today!
Back at the end of June, Obama was requesting another $500 million in aid for them, even though the fact that many were now calling themselves ISIS was so blatantly obvious even back then that it could no longer be disputed.

As Hagel said, ISIS are not just well-funded, but “tremendously well-funded.” Now you know where ISIS gets a hefty chunk of its tremendous funding.
This really isn’t that hard to figure out, just hard to comprehend; mostly because IT’S COMPLETELY INSANE.
Even worse, former state department official Andrew Doran let the cat out of the bag back in June that some of these ISIS members are actually combat veterans from Western nations including the U.S. who have passports and could return home anytime, basically asserting that ISIS could easily attack America at any time.
Of course, it isn’t like anyone would need a passport, what with the porous U.S.-Mexico border basically sitting there wide open.
A documentary maker recently even dressed up in an Osama Bin Laden mask and crossed the Southern border just to make the point.
Either way, this is madness.
Now we not only have Hagel telling America that ISIS is ‘beyond anything the Pentagon has ever seen’ but in the same week the former deputy director of the CIA is telling CBS This Morning that he fears ISIS is going to start carrying out 9/11-style attacks on American soil, including this little gem:
“If an ISIS member showed up at a mall in the United States tomorrow with an AK-47 and killed a number of Americans, I would not be surprised.”
If anyone is terrorizing America directly right now, it’s the American government that would first fund and train terrorists who are raping people and setting them on fire, crucifying Christians and beheading children, then conspire with the media to scare the American people that the government’s own terrorist creation is going to attack here 9/11-style RIGHT BEFORE ANOTHER 9/11 ANNIVERSARY.
Creating one’s own enemies then declaring war on them while putting the rest of the world in grave danger…

Again. This is madness.
And the lunatics are running the asylum.

Read more at http://freedomoutpost.com/2014/08/you-do-realize-that-the-us-funded-and-trained-isis-right/#lv2ej7kGXpSdyllE.99

If ISIS Beheaded A Golf Club Obama Would Bomb Their Ass Into Oblivion

PastedGraphic-1-630x445

4-day plan to solve the border crisis

by Garth Kant
esq-steve-king-110211-xlg-e1406333323175
WASHINGTON – It’s a trap.

That’s what Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, thinks about the plan fashioned by GOP House leaders to solve the border crisis.

He believes it is an attempt to pass so-called Comprehensive Immigration Reform by another name because, not only does it not address the issue of amnesty, it would leave the door wide open for President Obama to extend amnesty to many more millions of illegal immigrants.

Another big problem in King’s eyes is that the revised plan that came out of a GOP House meeting on Friday is a “package,” or collection of many different ideas.

And, he told WND, “A package has no chance at becoming law and has every chance of coming back to us with who-knows-what hung on it. All it becomes is an excuse for us to say we did something.”

Instead, the congressman offered his simplified plan to fix the border crisis in less than a week.

“Monday, I would pass a resolution that was Rep. Trent Frank’s (R-Ariz.) idea, that says, ‘These are all the things the president did to cause this (crisis), and this is what he needs to do to fix it.’ The National Guard should be called up by all the border state governors.”
“Tuesday, I would send the Senate a fix to the 2008 bill (that requires all minors from Central America have lengthy judicial hearings before any deportation) as a stand-alone bill. That would take the fig leaf away from the president and the Democrats. Even though it’s not the cause of this problem (he believes the prospect of amnesty is luring the immigrants), it will take away the excuse.”
“Wednesday, I would send the Senate a stand-alone appropriations bill that gives funds directly to the states to send the National Guard to secure the border.”
“Thursday, I’d put the other good ideas that have been suggested into a much-smaller package bill and send it to the Senate.”
Rep. Kay Granger, R-Texas, had released her draft of the House leaders’ plan on Wednesday, which contained a litany of proposals but nothing addressing amnesty.
texas-mexico-bordereve King,

However, after a meeting of GOP House members on Friday morning in which conservatives had a chance to register their input, she said the plan had been pared-down to “bare-bones suggestions,” primarily: revising the 2008 law; allowing Border Patrol agents to access federal lands; deploying National Guard troops; assigning more immigration judges; and a call for greater cooperation with Central American countries to repatriate unaccompanied children.

What she called “bare-bones,” King still saw as an over-ambitious attempt to cobble together too many plans in one package.

King said if the House simply passed his four proposals, Congress would have done everything it could and “removed some of the tools people are using to play politics. ”

Otherwise, he said, Congress will have subscribed to the president’s agenda for the rest of his term, which is “open borders.”

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2014/07/4-day-plan-to-solve-the-border-crisis/#Wr0I7TUCcd42UHff.99

Please donate any amount you can to help us try to recover legal costs in defending liberty and the right of free speech !