The ObamaGATE

[Mark]

TSA Admits Lying About Illegal Aliens Flying Without Proper ID

A new letter from the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) admits that illegal aliens were being allowed to board planes using Notice to Appear forms they received after entering the U.S. illegally. The revelation directly contradicts a TSA statement last month denying such allegations to various media outlets, including Breitbart News. In July Breitbart Texas Managing Director Brandon Darby broke the news that the TSA was letting illegal aliens board planes using Notice to Appear forms; subsequently, a TSA spokesperson publicly attacked Darby on Twitter, insisting that his report was "completely wrong."

The newly-surfaced TSA letter was penned on August 7, according to the Gateway Pundit. It was reportedly sent from the TSA to Rep. Kenny Marchant (R-TX), a member of the Border Security Caucus. The letter confirms that illegal aliens are being allowed to board planes using a Notice to Appear form (also known as I-862), as Darby revealed in July.

Hector Garza, a spokesman for the National Border Patrol Council (NBPC) told Darby that Notice to Appear forms can "easily be reproduced or manipulated on any home computer. The Notice to Appear form has no photo, anyone can make one and manipulate one. They do not have any security features, no watermark, nothing. They are simply printed on standard copy paper based on the information the illegal alien says is the truth."

According to the Gateway Pundit, the August 7 letter from the TSA admitted, "If a passenger does not have an acceptable form of identification, then the passenger is allowed to present two other forms of identification. One of the two forms of identification must bear the individual’s name and other identifying information such as photo, address, phone number, social security number, or date of birth. TSA may assess a variety of government issued documents to establish passenger identity. The I-862 form may be used along with another form of identification in this instance."

It continued, "If a passenger can only present a Form I-862, TSA will attempt to establish the passenger’s identity through DHS partner Components, such as U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) or U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)."

Despite the letter's admissions, the TSA had previously insisted that Darby's report--which detailed the acceptance of Notice to Appear forms at airports--was untrue.

Ross Feinstein, a press secretary and spokesman of the TSA, took to Twitter to attack Darby and his sources at the NPBC. After claiming that Darby's report was "completely wrong," Feinstein falsely complained that no one had “contacted us for a statement and/or info. before publishing story."

Darby responded to Feinstein, showing a screenshot which proved that he had, indeed, attempt to reach out to the agency via email prior to the publishing of his article.

The TSA continued to deny Darby's allegations. The agency said in a statement to multiple news outlets, "These reports are false. A Notice to Appear, issued by the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR), is not an acceptable form of ID at the TSA checkpoint."

Reacting to the TSA's letter, Garza told Breitbart Texas, "Ross Feinstein and the TSA higher ups should apologize to the NBPC and to Brandon Darby for reporting the truth. ... The men and women of the Border Patrol reported this very serious situation directly to the TSA managers at the Laredo International Airport, but their concerns were ignored by the TSA. Soon after that, the NBPC was notified by Border Patrol agents of what was taking place at the Laredo International Airport and how TSA was allowing illegal aliens to board planes with only a notice to appear and without verifiable identification."

He continued, "The NBPC informed the American public of this very serious situation through a news article with Breitbart Texas Managing Director Brandon Darby. If anyone is saying the truth, it is the men and women of the Border Patrol, the NBPC and reporter Brandon Darby for reporting the truth."

"If the TSA and Ross Feinstein were allowed to continue lying to the American Public, it could have resulted in the next terrorist attack on American soil. We hope that terrorists did not enter our country while TSA was violating these security protocols and while Ross Feinstein continued to deny their actions," Garza said. "Shame on Ross Feisnten and the TSA for lying to the American Public and for saying that border patrol agents, the NBPC and Brandon Darby were liars."

The most recent incident is not the first time that the Department of Homeland Security has publicly attacked Darby and the NBPC. On June 4th Breitbart Texas' Managing Director Brandon Darby broke the news that U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) would be relocating illegal immigrants from Texas to California. Within moments of that story being published, the official Twitter account of the San Diego CBPtweeted at Darby, insisting the report was “erroneous” and asking for it to be removed from the internet.

Days later the San Diego CBP deleted the tweet from their official account. Subsequent reports, outlining plans to fly immigrants to Southern California, proved CBP had indeed planned the relocation all along.

rest: http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-Texas/2014/08/22/TSA-Admits-Illegal-Aliens-Boarding-Planes-Using-Notice-to-Appear-Forms

[Mark]

18 Signs That The Obama Administration Is Openly Hostile To The Military

Has there ever been an administration that has had more disdain for the U.S. military than the Obama administration?  The way that this administration treats our veterans and the way that this administration is gutting our armed forces is absolutely shameful.  As you will read about below, Obama and his minions have been purging the military of officers that do not agree with their agenda, they have labeled veterans returning from overseas wars as “potential terrorists”, and they have turned our military into a playground for political correctness and social experiments.  Not that Obama has been afraid to use the military.  In fact, he has sent troops more places than just about any other president in U.S. history.  He is running our brave men and women into the ground at the same time that he is relentlessly reducing the size of the Army, Navy and Air Force.  As a result, our armed forces are smaller, weaker, more spread out and less prepared for a major war than at any other time in recent memory.  Please share this article with as many people as you can.  The American people deserve to know the truth.  The following are 18 signs that the Obama administration is openly hostile to the military…

#1 A new VA training guide compares our precious military veterans to Oscar the Grouch.

#2 Military veterans have been repeatedly labeled as “potential terrorists” in official government documents during the Obama years.

#3 According to a new report put out by the office of U.S. Senator Tom Coburn, the negligence of the VA while the Obama administration has been in charge may have resulted in the deaths of more than 1,000 veterans.

#4 Things have gotten so bad since Obama took over that some veterans have had to wait more than a year just to get an appointment with a doctor at a VA hospital.

#5 At one point during Obama’s reign, it was taking more than half a year for the average claim for veteran benefits to be processed, and the Department of Veterans Affairs had a backlog of more than half a million overdue claims for benefits that were at least 125 days old.

#6 Thanks to budget cuts that the Obama administration gleefully pushed for, a lot of really good career officers are being forced out of the military.  For example, earlier this month it was reported that more than 500 Army majors and more than 1,100 Army captains were getting “pink slips” due to these budget cuts.

#7 Since Obama entered the White House, dozens of very high ranking officers such as generals and admirals have been “purged” from the ranks of the military.  In a previous article, I included a very long list of the names of some of these officers.  A significant number of them were known to disagree with the Obama administration on matters of military policy.

#8 During Obama’s second term, the size of the U.S. Army is being reduced by a total of 60,000 soldiers.

#9 The size of the U.S. Air Force is going to be reduced by 500 planes over the next five years.

#10 According to retired Army Lt. Col. Robert Maginnis, the U.S. Air Force once had more than twice as many squadrons as it does today…

    “Our tanker aircraft are on average 47 years old and our strategic bombers 34 years old, and besides, their numbers are totally insufficient for America’s global missions. For example, our air force shrank from 82 fighter squadrons at the end of the Cold War to 39 today and our Navy is in worse shape.”

#11 Thanks in part of Obama, the U.S. Navy is already the smallest that it has been since World War I.

#12 Barack Obama has repeatedly used the military as a tool to advance the cause of political correctness.

#13 In an incredibly reckless move, the Obama administration left billions of dollars worth of military equipment in Iraq.  Now ISIS has captured much of that equipment and is using it to take over vast portions of Iraq and Syria.  It has been estimated that the equipment that ISIS has captured up to this point could equip an army of 200,000 soldiers.

#14 During the Obama years, sexual assaults in the U.S. military have soared to an all-time high, and most of the assaults have been male on male.

#15 In some areas of the country the Department of Veterans Affairs has been caught red-handed banning the words “God” and “Jesus” during funeral services for veterans.

#16 All over the United States, “mental illness” is being used as an excuse to take guns away from military veterans.

#17 Under the Obama administration, some military veterans have actually had to pay to have their medals shipped to them.  For example, one soldier had to shell out a 21 dollar shipping fee just to get his Purple Heart.

#18 Barack Obama seems to have a particular disdain for the U.S. strategic nuclear arsenal.  In fact, he seems absolutely determined to do all that he can to gut it.  The following is an extended excerpt from one of my previous articles…

*****

Back in 1967, the United States had an arsenal of more than 31,000 strategic nuclear warheads.

Since 1967, the size of the U.S. strategic nuclear arsenal has been reduced by about 95 percent.  The START Treaty that Barack Obama signed back in 2010 limits both the United States and Russia to a maximum of 1,550 deployed strategic nuclear warheads.

Unfortunately, that was not nearly enough of a reduction for Obama.

In June 2013, he announced to the world that he has decided that the United States can reduce the number of our deployed nuclear warheads by another one-third…

    After a comprehensive review, I’ve determined that we can ensure the security of America and our allies, and maintain a strong and credible strategic deterrent, while reducing our deployed strategic nuclear weapons by up to one-third.  And I intend to seek negotiated cuts with Russia to move beyond Cold War nuclear postures.

If those cuts are made, that would reduce the size of the U.S. strategic nuclear arsenal to about 1,000 warheads.

And there has even been some talk that the Obama administration ultimately wants to reduce our arsenal down to just 300 warheads.

*****

Are you starting to get the picture?

Barack Obama and his underlings do not value our armed forces.

They are more than happy to use them as political and social tools, but when the time comes to spend money for our national defense or to take care of our veterans they are always hesitant to do so.

At a time when the world is getting crazier than ever, our military is in a deep state of decline.

One day we might look back and bitterly regret what Obama has done to us.

http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/18-signs-that-the-obama-administration-is-openly-hostile-to-the-military

[Psalm 51:17]

http://news.yahoo.com/republicans-tone-down-benghazi-talk-as-elections-near-042821732.html
Republicans tone down Benghazi talk as elections near

With growing unrest in the Middle East and President Obama's sinking popularity, Republicans fear Benghazi media 'circus' could hurt their 2014 electoral chances
9/2/14

Just four months ago, the future chairman of the House Select Committee on Benghazi delighted core elements of the Republican base when he declared that the panel would be probing “what appears to be a White House cover-up.”

Rep. Trey Gowdy of South Carolina said he had secret evidence proving that President Obama’s administration had deliberately withheld key documents from lawmakers looking into the Sept. 11, 2012, attacks in the eastern Libyan city.

"I have evidence that not only are they hiding it, there’s an intent to hide it,” he told Fox News in May. “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.”

Now, with the 2014 midterm elections fast approaching and the panel’s first hearing slated for September, the former prosecutor from Spartanburg, S.C., is taking a more tempered, bipartisan tone. He has declared he wants to avoid a media “circus.” Other House Republicans are sending out similar signals, denying that their creation of the special panel was ever political in nature.

“You want to get on the news, go rob a bank,” Gowdy told ABC News in August, after saying that he meant “no disrespect to the media.”

“If you take the approach 'Are we doing this to learn more and better ourselves as a people? And be respectful of their sacrifice?' then you won’t let it become a circus,” he continued.

When the House voted in May to authorize the select committee, which could cost taxpayers up to $3.3 million to operate, the media attention such a panel was sure to draw was a huge part of the attraction for the Republicans who pushed for it. They wanted a channel to attack Obama and the Democrats in the lead-up to the midterm elections — so much so that House Democrats weren’t even sure they wanted to appoint representatives to the panel out of fear it would legitimize the GOP’s charged rhetoric on the issue.

But the politics of Benghazi have shifted. Domestically, the GOP appears poised to win back the Senate for the first time in nearly a decade, and internationally, the foreign policy picture has become much more complicated, with unrest in the Middle East growing dramatically since the last election.

The attacks on two American facilities in Benghazi left four Americans dead, including Ambassador Chris Stevens. In the nearly two years since, Republicans have held up the tragedy to argue that the Obama administration has failed to prosecute the war on terrorism, and accused the president of fighting tooth and nail to keep evidence of incompetence (or worse) from the public.

But a pair of reports from the House Armed Services Committee and the House Intelligence Committee – both of which are run by Republicans – has deflated many of the wildest allegations, with the intelligence panel publishing its findings in early August. In turn, these fact-finding operations have raised fresh questions about the purpose the special panel can serve.

Gowdy, in a written statement to Yahoo News, declined to say whether he would hold more public hearings than the first one, which is about a topic suggested by one of the committee’s reluctant Democratic participants.

“Public hearings are only one part of the work of this committee. The main work of an investigation involves much more outside the spotlight,” Gowdy said. “Depositions and witness interviews, both of which are not public, are more effective for gathering facts. The work of the committee will continue throughout the fall, whether it includes more public hearings or not.”

As American foreign-policy makers grapple with a new set of challenges across the Middle East, such as the rise of the brutal Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL, also known as ISIS), there seems to be more risk for the GOP in looking political in its investigation.

Accordingly, House Republicans have publicly and privately worked to shore up the bipartisan credibility of Gowdy’s investigation and banish all of what one Republican aide called the “circus” surrounding past GOP probes.

“The timing is not completely right on this. There’s other stuff happening. There is ISIS happening. The most important thing for Republicans is to be careful with this. This could blow up in their face,” said John Feehery, a former senior House Republican aide who is now president of QGA Communications.

Republicans hope to draw in independents and turn out their base in large numbers in November in their bid to defeat Democrats, who traditionally vote in smaller numbers in midterm elections. With the president’s popularity already at a low ebb and the public unfazed by relatively good economic news, the last thing Republicans should do, some strategists say, is alienate potentially sympathetic voters or energize disaffected Democrats with a fresh over-the-top hearing on the inflammatory topic of Benghazi.

“Things are going pretty well for Republicans,” Feehery explained. “Why screw it up? This is the time when you take the three [club] out but don’t take the driver out.”

Gowdy has said he does not believe the committee will finish its work before the midterms. In order for the panel to continue its work during the next Congress, the House would have to vote again to reauthorize it. Given its cost and current existential predicament, though, that vote might not be as easy in 2015 as it was in 2014.

That’s a long way from where Republicans were even in May, when Speaker John Boehner of Ohio finally relented to rank-and-file pressure to create the panel. Leadership had been reluctant to vote to form the committee. Now there may be no greater example of the shift in tone for Republicans on Benghazi than Gowdy himself, who was once one of the most outspoken advocates for going after the administration.

Where he once invoked secret evidence of a cover-up, the chairman has put the rhetorical fireworks away and decreed that the committee’s first formal hearing will focus on how well the State Department has implemented the 24 recommendations of the independent Accountability Review Board formed to investigate Benghazi.

Whether the GOP can stop the “circus” it now seems so intent on preventing remains an open question. One of the long-standing challenges this House conference has faced is keeping its conservative, flame-throwing rank-and-file membership in check. Just because Gowdy or Republicans involved have changed their tune does not mean others have — or have to.

Moreover, with millions of dollars allocated to the operation of the panel, there’s still the need for Gowdy to produce some final product, beyond what regular committees have done.

Democrat Adam Schiff of California, the member who came up with the idea for the first hearing, told Yahoo News that while there seems to be an air of bipartisanship to the select committee now, that could change if and when Gowdy takes heat over the effectiveness — or lack thereof —of the committee.

"The challenge will come down the road. I think there's going to be enormous pressure on the chairman to deliver something to justify the time, the expense of the select committee. Whether he can withstand that pressure, or wants to withstand that pressure, will determine how the committee is ultimately viewed," said Schiff.

When he was asked whether it was a good idea for Democrats to participate in this effort at all, Schiff’s answer was revealing: "I guess time will tell whether the committee is constructive and whether our participation on it helps it be productive, or whether it degenerates into a circus."

[Psalm 51:17]

Got this in my email(Scott's end times current events newsletter)...

From: Bradley B
Subject: my testimony http://www.biblicaltruthkjv.com/ Go to testimony page.
 
Kent Hovind to be prosecuted by Eric Holder to extend his sentence!
GUESS WHO THE PROSECUTOR FOR THE U.S. GOV'T IS AGAINST KENT HOVIND...YEP. ERIC HOLDER !!!!!!!!MEANWHILE HOLDER WANTS TO PRESS ANOTHER CRIMINAL CHARGE....... A NEW ONE AGAINST KENT HOVIND... INCLUDING "FRIVOLOUS"...AND 81 OTHER CHARGES...FOR "ENCUMBERING" THE COURT SYSTEM......
THEY HAVE STUFFED HIM INTO A COUNTY JAIL IN SANTA ROSA,FLORIDA AND WOULD NOT ADDRESS ANY OF HIS GRIEVANCES. In spite of the fact that in the county facility, he has no access to his legal files, he will be represented by a public defender at his September 8 trial. SEND THIS TO AS MANY AS POSSIBLE. WRITE HIM, CALL, VISIT AND PRAY: FOR HIS IMMEDIATE RELEASE
KENT HOVIND O6452-017
SANTA ROSA COUNTY JAIL
5755 E. MILTON ROAD
MILTON, FLORIDA 32583
http://www.kenthovindblog.com/

[Psalm 51:17]

[Mark]

White House denies threatening families of James Foley and Steven Sotloff over ISIS ransom but adds 'we made the law clear to them'

    Journalists James Foley and Steven Sotloff were executed last month in graphic videos released by ISIS
    Both families claim they were threatened with prosecution if they tried paying ransoms to free their sons


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2755906/White-House-denies-threatening-families-James-Foley-Steven-Sotloff-ISIS-ransom-adds-law-clear.html#ixzz3DOVuUPHp

[Psalm 51:17]

http://rare.us/story/this-ted-cruz-bill-gives-shocking-new-powers-to-barack-obama/
This Ted Cruz bill gives shocking new powers to…Barack Obama?

9/19/14

Senator Ted Cruz isn’t one to throw a bone to the Obama administration. But a new bill that he introduced would give the government enormous new powers when it comes to national security.

It’s called the “Expatriate Terrorist Act” and on the surface its intentions seem good enough. It allows the United States to revoke the citizenship of anyone fighting for or aiding a terrorist group like ISIS.

“If we do not pass this legislation, the consequence will be that Americans fighting alongside ISIS today may come home tomorrow with a U.S. passport, may come home to New York or Los Angeles or Houston or Chicago and innocent Americans may be murdered if the Senate does not act today,” Cruz said yesterday.

The Cruz bill is similar to one former senator Scott Brown introduced last year, co-sponsored with former senator Joe Lieberman. Earlier this week Brown appeared on Fox News to boast that he’d given Cruz the idea.

As many as 100 U.S. citizens are believed to have linked up with ISIS, all of whom could theoretically return home and stage an attack on the United States. So Cruz’s idea is common sense, right?

There’s just one problem: Cruz’s bill allows the feds to strip someone of citizenship without requiring due process for suspects. As Ian Millhiser points out:

    Should Cruz’s bill become law, [the government] would only need to prove it by a “preponderance of the evidence” standard — which is to say there’s a lot of evidence against the suspect, but it’s not necessarily an iron-clad case. That’s a much lower burden of proof on the government than the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard that applies in criminal proceedings.

Meaning Ted Cruz is actually ceding an enormous power to Barack Obama’s government: the ability to revoke someone’s citizenship without meeting the usual high standards of the criminal justice system.

Plus, as Millhiser notes, the crime of aiding and abetting ISIS is already covered in the Constitution: it’s treason, and treason has a much higher evidentiary standard than just a “preponderance of the evidence.”

Yesterday Democrats blocked Cruz’s bill in the Senate, saying that more time was needed to review its constitutional implications. As they do so, let’s hope they remember Senator Rand Paul’s words on Anwar al-Awlaki who was killed by a United States drone strike.

“In our country, even if you are a terrible person, if you are murderer or a rapist, you are accused, but then you’re given a chance to confront your accusers,” Paul said. “The burden is on the government.”

[Psalm 51:17]

I'm guessing this is a stunt used to further push more gun control agendas.

Prosecutor: 800 rounds found in intruder case
9/22/14
http://news.yahoo.com/white-house-intruder-expected-appear-court-071102681--politics.html

WASHINGTON (AP) — Investigators found more than 800 rounds of ammunition, a machete and two hatchets in the car of the former soldier accused of scaling the White House fence and sprinting inside while carrying a knife, a federal prosecutor said Monday. President Barack Obama was "obviously concerned" about the weekend incident, a spokesman said.

The Secret Service increased security around the famous grounds on Pennsylvania Avenue in the nation's capital, some guards openly holding weapons, others escorting dogs. There was talk of expanding the security zone beyond the current area as a major investigation began into the question of how the man managed to get to the building without being stopped.

Forty-two-year-old Omar J. Gonzalez of Copperas Cove, Texas, faces charges of entering a restricted building or grounds while carrying a deadly or dangerous weapon. He had been arrested earlier in the summer in Virginia with a carful of weapons, authorities said, and a federal prosecutor said Monday in court that Gonzalez had had a map then with the White House circled.

Authorities ran into Gonzalez again, less than a month ago on Aug. 25, when he was stopped while walking along the south fence of the White House, his car parked nearby. He had a hatchet in a rear waistband but no firearms, a federal prosecutor said at Monday's hearing. Gonzalez gave permission to search his car and was not arrested.

Friday evening, Obama and his family had left the White House for Camp David when the incident occurred. Gonzalez was seized just inside the building's front door. No guns were found in his car.

In court, Gonzalez, with a gray beard, a shaved head and dressed in a standard prison orange jumpsuit, listened impassively as the prosecutor spoke. He could face up to 10 years in prison if convicted of illegally entering a restricted area with a dangerous weapon.

The Army said he served from 1997 until his discharge in 2003, and again from 2005 to December 2012, when he retired due to disability.

Obama, asked about the incident at the White House, said, "The Secret Service does a great job, and I'm grateful for the sacrifices that they make on my behalf -- and my family's behalf."

But spokesman Josh Earnest said the president was "obviously concerned" about what had happened.

At the federal court hearing, Assistant U.S. Attorney David Mudd said Gonzalez already was under indictment in southwestern Virginia, accused of having a sawed-off shotgun and trying to elude police this summer.

In that case, state troopers and agents from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives found a cache of weapons that included two semi-automatic military style rifles, including one with a bipod and flashlight and one with a bipod and scope, three .45-caliber handguns and several loaded ammunition magazines, Wythe County Deputy Commonwealth Attorney David Saliba said in a telephone interview. Saliba said he also had a hatchet and camping equipment.

The weapons and ammunition were seized in that July 19 incident, but Gonzalez was released on bail.

Earnest said the Secret Service investigation will include a review of protective efforts both inside the White House grounds and outside the fence line along Pennsylvania Avenue, including staffing and threat assessment policies and procedures.

The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee announced it would hold a hearing next week.

Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson said he would ultimately review the findings of the investigation ordered by Secret Service Director Julia Pierson. Johnson said the public should not rush to judgment about the security breach and urged against second-guessing security officers whom he said "had only seconds to act."

The Secret Service didn't open fire on Gonzalez or send attack dogs after him.

Officers who spotted Gonzalez scale the fence quickly assessed that he didn't have any weapons in his hands and wasn't wearing clothing that could conceal substantial quantities of explosives, a primary reason agents did not fire their weapons, according to a U.S. official briefed on the investigation.

Another consideration was whether bystanders behind the fence could have been hit by errant gunfire, said the official, who was not authorized to discuss the investigation by name and spoke only on condition of anonymity.

The Secret Service has long tried to balance public access to the "People's House" and security of the presidential residence.

The two-block stretch of Pennsylvania Avenue in front of the White House's north gates has been closed to vehicle traffic since May 1995, when President Bill Clinton ordered the immediate closure of the road in an effort to prevent a potential car- or truck-bomb attack.

On any given day, numerous uniformed officers can be seen patrolling parts of the sprawling lawns on either side of the White House, and others are stationed along the fence line on Pennsylvania Avenue. Many more were in view on Monday.

But the pedestrian-only zone hasn't entirely prevented security breaches along the fence.

Last September a man was arrested and accused of throwing firecrackers over the fence on the north lawn, near the area where Gonzalez is accused of climbing over the barrier.

A few weeks later a Connecticut woman set off a police chase through downtown Washington after ramming a security checkpoint near the White House. Miriam Carey, 34, was shot and killed by police near the Capitol.

In May, a man was arrested after he followed a motorcade carrying President Obama's daughters through the gates. A charge of unlawful entry was later dismissed.

On a lighter note, in August a toddler managed to slip through the slats in the metal fence. The Secret Service joked that they would wait until the boy learned to talk before questioning him.

Less than 24 hours after Gonzalez's arrest, a second man was taken into custody after he drove up to a White House gate and refused to leave, the Secret Service said.

The Secret Service identified the man as Kevin Carr, 19, of Shamong, New Jersey. Earlier, Carr had been turned away at a different entrance, which he had approached on foot, claiming he communicated with the president through telepathy and had an appointment, a court document said.

The incidents have only intensified the scrutiny of the Secret Service, which is struggling to rehabilitate its image following a series of allegations of misconduct by agents in recent years, including agents on Obama's protective detail.

[Psalm 51:17]

http://washingtonexaminer.com/something-is-terribly-wrong-with-the-secret-service/article/2553800#!
Something is terribly wrong with the Secret Service
By Byron York | September 22, 2014 | 6:05 pm

President Obama is supporting the Secret Service in the wake of a deeply troubling incident in which a disturbed man jumped the White House fence, sprinted across the North Lawn, and actually entered the White House Friday evening.

The man, 42 year-old Omar Gonzalez, had a folding knife in his pocket and had left 800 rounds of ammunition in his car not far from the White House. Gonzalez had also drawn the attention of authorities at least twice a few weeks ago — once in Virginia, when he was found with a sniper rifle, a sawed-off shotgun, and a map with the White House circled on it, and a second time when he walked near the White House fence with a hatchet in his waistband.

On Friday, Gonzalez was briefly in the White House itself.

Nevertheless, the president had nothing but praise for the agency responsible for his security. "The Secret Service does a great job," Obama said during an Oval Office meeting Monday. "I'm grateful for all the sacrifices they make on my behalf and on my family's behalf."

White House spokesman Josh Earnest added that the president has "complete confidence" in the Secret Service.

Despite all that positive talk, it appears something is very, very wrong with the Secret Service.

After the incident, the organization began to leak proposals for some major security changes around the White House. Some reports suggested the Secret Service would clear the area around the current White House fence and erect another barrier farther out. That would presumably make it impossible for a fence jumper make a long run to the White House door without being caught.

But the key question arising from Friday's incident is not whether the White House perimeter should be expanded, but why Secret Service agents did not act more quickly when Gonzalez jumped the fence and began running toward the mansion. Why was no agent able to catch him outside? Why did agents not release the dogs that are trained to stop intruders? And why did agents not lock the White House door once the perimeter had been breached?

Those were human failures, not design shortcomings. And to some members of Congress, those human failures have been going on for quite a while at the Secret Service.

Calling the breach "totally unacceptable" and expressing amazement that the White House door was open, Republican Rep. Jason Chaffetz of Utah, a member of the House Homeland Security Committee, hinted there is more trouble than the public knows about. "This is not the first time Secret Service has shown too much vulnerability," Chaffetz tweeted after the incident. "There are other unreported incidents. I will continue to push."

"Been investigating the Secret Service for some time," Chaffetz continued. "Frustrating. Good men and women but HUGE question marks for their leadership." Lawmakers could hold a hearing on the matter soon.

House Intelligence Committee chairman Mike Rogers, a former FBI agent, also believes the Secret Service's problems go deeper than a new fence. In an interview Sunday, Rogers suggested that a guard's attention can wane when he is stationed in one place for long periods of time — a lapse that cannot be tolerated when the president's security is involved.

"It happens frequently in other places where there are static security forces," Rogers told CBS. "And it's just a matter of the Secret Service upping their game to make sure that they can maintain that every detail matters. A door locked, a quick reaction when somebody hits the fence and over the gate. I think they're going to have to reinstate some of these ongoing checks ... self-audits on their security."

Secret Service director Julia Pierson, appointed last year by President Obama to clean up the agency after the 2012 Colombia **** scandal, is starting an investigation. Pierson's boss, Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson, is trying to calm things down while asking for time to look into the incident.

"I encourage all of us to not rush to judgment about the event and not second-guess the judgment of security officers who had only seconds to act, until all the facts are in," Johnson said in a statement Monday.

But members of Congress are right to express deep concern. The Secret Service knew about Omar Gonzalez, who might as well have carried a sign saying "I AM A THREAT TO THE PRESIDENT." And yet he made it through the White House door.

It's not enough for the president and his aides to express confidence. They need to find out what is wrong with the Secret Service and fix it, fast.

[Psalm 51:17]

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/obama-approval-rating-climbs-more-191500109.html
Obama’s Approval Rating Climbs the More We Bomb ISIS
10/2/14

After many months in a popularity trough, President Obama appears to be getting a little bump in the polls as a result of Americans strong support for U.S. airstrikes against ISIS jihadist forces in Iraq and Syria.

A new Washington Post-ABC News poll shows that 50 percent of Americans approve of his handling of the military campaign against ISIS, compared with 44 percent who say they disapprove.  That represents an eight-point improvement over the response back in August -- when just 42 percent said they approved of the president’s handling of the situation -- although that question only mentioned the bombing in northern Iraq and not the expanded warfare in Syria.

Some political analysts predicted that Obama would see his numbers rise a little after he announced Sept. 10 that the United States would step up its military air war against Islamic State fighters “wherever they exist.” While many have reservations or questions about the details of Obama’s joint operations with European and Middle Eastern allies, the American air campaign is highly popular with many Americans and lawmakers.

Seven in 10 Americans say they support the action, according to the new poll, which is up from 65 percent in early September. However, Obama’s decision to send in nearly 2,000 U.S. forces to train Iraqi government troops and coordinate airstrikes against Islamic State fighters is less popular. Still, 53 percent of Americans say they support that decision.

Overall public support for going after ISIS is up from the 60 percent level registered in a Gallup survey last month, a fairly solid majority although still slightly below their average of 68 percent for 10 other Obama military actions that Gallup has asked about in the past.

More importantly for Obama and the Democrats, however, the president’s approval rating is beginning to pick up after spending months in the 40-percent range. According to Gallup’s most recent three-day average, Sept. 28 to 30, the president’s approval rating stands at 44 percent, up a percentage point from the previous soundings.


Whether there will be enough improvement in Obama’s standing to make a difference in the Nov. 4 mid-term election is highly questionable. Political analysts say Republicans stand a good chance of picking up at least the six net seats they will need to regain control of the Senate. Moreover, many Democratic incumbents are keeping their distance from the President in the final weeks of campaigning –fearing that his continued unpopularity will rub off on them.

For example, Obama will be in Chicago Thursday afternoon to deliver a major speech on the economy. While there, he will hold a private fundraiser for embattled Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn that has been closed to the press. And there are no plans for Obama to publicly campaign for Quinn.

[Psalm 51:17]

http://theweek.com/article/index/269169/speedreads-george-w-bush-to-fox-news-im-not-gonna-second-guess-our-president
10/2/14
George W. Bush to Fox News: 'I'm not gonna second guess our president'

Former President George W. Bush sat down with Fox News Thursday to discuss everything from his brother's potential White House run — Bush says he's all for it — to ISIS. And though Bush said he stood by his warning in 2007 that pulling U.S. troops from Iraq could be disastrous, he declined to criticize President Obama for doing so.

"I'm not gonna second guess our president," he said. "I understand how tough the job is. And to have a former president, you know, bloviating and second-guessing is I don't think good for the presidency or the country."

The remark comes around the 5:30 mark in the video below. --Jon Terbush

[Mark]

Obamacare website won’t reveal insurance costs for 2015 until after election

Those planning to purchase health insurance on the Obamacare exchange will soon find out how much rates have increased — after the Nov. 4 election. Enrollment on the Healthcare.gov website begins Nov. 15, or 11 days after the midterm vote, and critics who worry about rising premium hikes in 2015 say that’s no coincidence. Last year’s inaugural enrollment period on the health-care exchange began Oct. 1.   

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/oct/14/obamacare-website-wont-reveal-insurance-costs-for-/

[Mark]

Obama Asserts Fast and Furious Executive Privilege Claim for Holder’s Wife

Judicial Watch announced today that it received from the Obama Department of Justice (DOJ) a “Vaughn index” detailing records about the Operation Fast and Furious scandal.  The index was forced out of the Obama administration thanks to JW’s June 2012 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request and subsequent September 2012 FOIA lawsuit (Judicial Watch v. Department of Justice (No. 1:12-cv-01510)).  A federal court had ordered the production over the objections of the Obama Justice Department.

The document details the Attorney General Holder’s personal involvement in managing the Justice Department’s strategy on media and Congressional investigations into the Fast and Furious scandal.  Notably, the document discloses that emails between Attorney General Holder and his wife Sharon Malone – as well as his mother – are being withheld under an extraordinary claim of executive privilege as well as a dubious claim of deliberative process privilege under the Freedom of Information Act.  The “First Lady of the Justice Department” is a physician and not a government employee.

This is the first time that the Obama administration has provided a detailed listing of all records being withheld from Congress and the American people about the deadly Fast and Furious gun running scandal. The 1307-page “draft” Vaughn index was emailed to Judicial Watch at 8:34 p.m. last night, a few hours before a federal court-ordered deadline.  In its cover letter, the Department of Justice asserts that all of the responsive records described in the index are “subject to the assertion of executive privilege.”

The Vaughn index explains 15,662 documents. Typically, a Vaughn index must: (1) identify each record withheld; (2) state the statutory exemption claimed; and (3) explain how disclosure would damage the interests protected by the claimed exemption.  The Vaughn index arguably fails to provide all of this required information but does provide plenty of interesting information for a public kept in the dark for years about the Fast and Furious scandal.

Based on a preliminary review of the massive document, Judicial Watch can disclose that the Vaughn index reveals:

    Numerous emails that detail Attorney General Holder’s direct involvement in crafting talking points, the timing of public disclosures, and handling Congressional inquiries in the Fast and Furious matter.

    President Obama has asserted executive privilege over nearly 20 email communications between Holder and his spouse Sharon Malone. The administration also claims that the records are also subject to withholding under the “deliberative process” exemption. This exemption ordinarily exempts from public disclosure records that could chill internal government deliberations.

    Numerous entries detail DOJ’s communications (including those of Eric Holder) concerning the White House about Fast and Furious.

    The scandal required the attention of virtually every top official of the DOJ and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF). Communications to and from the United States Ambassador to Mexico about the Fast and Furious matter are also described.

    Many of the records are already publicly available such as letters from Congress, press clips, and typical agency communications. Ordinarily, these records would, in whole or part, be subject to disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act.  Few of the records seem to even implicate presidential decision-making and advice that might be subject to President Obama’s broad and unprecedented executive privilege claim.

Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton criticized President Obama and his disgraced Attorney General in a statement today:

This document provides key information about the cover-up of Fast and Furious by Attorney General Eric Holder and other high-level officials of the Obama administration. Obama’s executive privilege claims over these records are a fraud and an abuse of his office.  There is no precedent for President Obama’s Nixonian assertion of executive privilege over these ordinary government agency records.  Americans will be astonished that Obama asserted executive privilege over Eric Holder’s emails to his wife about Fast and Furious.

Once again, Judicial Watch has proven itself more effective than Congress and the establishment media in providing basic oversight of this out-of-control Administration.  This Fast and Furious document provides dozens of leads for further congressional, media, and even criminal investigations.

On June 28, 2012, Attorney General Eric Holder was held in contempt by the House of Representatives over his refusal to turn over records explaining why the Obama administration may have lied to Congress and refused for months to disclose the truth about the gun running operation.  It marked the first time in U.S. history that a sitting Attorney General was held in contempt of Congress.

A week before the contempt finding, to protect Holder from criminal prosecution and stave off the contempt vote, President Obama asserted executive privilege over the Fast and Furious records the House Oversight Committee had subpoenaed eight months earlier. Judicial Watch filed its FOIA request two days later.  Holder’s Justice Department wouldn’t budge (or follow the law), so JW filed a FOIA lawsuit on September 12, 2012.

But then the Justice Department convinced U.S. District Court Judge John D. Bates to stay our lawsuit, in part to allow ongoing settlement discussions between the Holder’s government lawyers and the House Committee to continue.  Unsurprisingly, the “negotiations” between politicians running the House and the Justice Department went nowhere.

Fed up with the interminable delay caused Holder’s gamesmanship and stonewalling, JW renewed its request to the Court to allow our transparency lawsuit to continue.  Thankfully, this past July, Judge John D. Bates ended the 16-month delay and ordered the Obama administration to produce a Vaughn index of the alleged “executive privilege” records by October 1. Judge Bates noted that no court has ever “expressly recognized” President Obama’s unprecedented executive privilege claims in the Fast and Furious matter.

Unhappy with having to produce the records prior to the elections, Justice lawyers asked the judge to give them one extra month, until November 3 (the day before Election Day!) to produce the info.  Judge Bates rejected this gambit, suggested that the Holder’s agency did not take court order seriously.  Rather than a month, Judge Bates gave Justice until yesterday to cough up the Vaughn index. Judge Bates issued his smack down on September 23.

Attorney General Eric Holder announced his resignation two days later.

Many share our opinion it was “no coincidence” that Holder’s resignation came “on the heels of another court ruling that the Justice Department must finally cough up information about how Holder’s Justice Department lied to Congress and the American people about the Operation Fast and Furious scandal, for which Eric Holder was held in contempt by the House of Representatives.”

The House had been separately litigating to obtain the records but had gotten nowhere until after Judge Bates ruled that the DOJ finally had to disclose information to Judicial Watch.

On September 9, U.S. District Court Judge Amy Berman Jackson, citing Judicial Watch’s success, ordered the Justice Department to produce information to Congress by November 3.

Fast and Furious was a DOJ/Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) “gun running” operation in which the Obama administration reportedly allowed guns to go to Mexican drug cartels hoping they would end up at crime scenes, advancing gun-control policies. Fast and Furious weapons have been implicated in the murder of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry and hundreds of other innocents in Mexico.  Guns from the Fast and Furious scandal are expected to be used in criminal activity on both sides of the U.S.-Mexico border for years to come.

Guns from the Fast and Furious scandal continue to be used in crimes.  Just last week, Judicial Watch disclosed that a Fast and Furious gun was used in gang -style assault on a Phoenix apartment building that left two people wounded.  We figured this out from information we uncovered through another public records lawsuit against the City of Phoenix.

Congress officially confirmed the AK-47 was used in the assault that terrorized residents in Phoenix.  In an October 16 letter sent from Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA) and Rep. Darryl Issa (R-CA) to Deputy Attorney General James Cole discloses that “we have learned of another crime gun connected to Fast and Furious.  The [Justice] Department did not provide any notice to the Congress or the public about this gun….This lack of transparency about the consequences of Fast and Furious undermines public confidence in law enforcement and gives the impression that the Department is seeking to suppress information and limit its exposure to public scrutiny.”

We have many other active lawsuits over the Fast and Furious scandal:

On October 11, 2011, Judicial Watch sued the DOJ and the ATF to obtain all Fast and Furious records submitted to the House Committee on Oversight.

On June 6, 2012, Judicial Watch sued the ATF seeking access to records detailing communications between ATF officials and Kevin O’Reilly, former Obama White House Director of North American Affairs at the U.S. National Security Council.

On September 5, 2013, Judicial Watch sued the DOJ seeking access to all records of communications between DOJ and the Oversight Committee relating to settlement discussions in the Committee’s 2012 contempt of Congress lawsuit against Holder. The contempt citation stemmed from Holder’s refusal to turn over documents to Congress related to the Fast and Furious gunrunning scandal.

On May 28, 2014, Judicial Watch sued the DOJ on behalf of ATF Special Agent John Dodson, who blew the whistle on Operation Fast and Furious and was then subjected to an alleged smear campaign designed to destroy his reputation.

http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2014/10/obama-asserts-fast-furious-executive-privilege-claim-holders-wife-2/

[Mark]

BREAKING: Judicial Watch Obtains List of Fast and Furious Documents Held Under Obama's Executive Privilege

Late last night the Department of Justice complied with a court order and turned over a list to government watchdog Judicial Watch , known as a Vaughn Index, of Fast and Furious documents being held from Congress and the American people under President Obama's assertion of executive privilege. Not surprisingly, DOJ failed to fully comply with the requirements of providing a Vaughn Index.

    The Vaughn index explains 15,662 documents. Typically, a Vaughn index must: (1) identify each record withheld; (2) state the statutory exemption claimed; and (3) explain how disclosure would damage the interests protected by the claimed exemption. The Vaughn index arguably fails to provide all of this required information but does provide plenty of interesting information for a public kept in the dark for years about the Fast and Furious scandal.

rest: http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2014/10/23/fast-and-furious-news-n1909193

[Mark]

Valerie Jarrett Key Player in Fast and Furious Cover-Up After Holder Lied to Congress

OCTOBER 24, 2014

President Obama’s trusted senior advisor, Valerie Jarrett, was a key player in the effort to cover up that Attorney General Eric Holder lied to Congress about the Fast and Furious scandal, according to public records obtained by Judicial Watch.

The information is part of a Department of Justice (DOJ) “Vaughn index” detailing records about the gun-running operation known as Fast and Furious. JW had to sue the agency for the records after the Obama administration failed to provide them under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). A federal court ordered the DOJ to provide the records over the agency’s objections. Yesterday JW reported on the broad information in the records, including that Obama asserted executive privilege for Holder’s wife as part of the administration’s efforts to cover up the scandal.

Practically lost in the 1,000-plus pages of records is an index that shows Jarrett was brought in to manage the fact that Holder lied to Congress after the story about the disastrous gun-running operation broke in the media. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco Firearms and Explosives (ATF) ran the once-secret program that allowed guns from the U.S. to be smuggled into Mexico so they could eventually be traced to drug cartels. Instead, federal law enforcement officers lost track of hundreds of weapons which have been used in an unknown number of crimes, including the murder of a U.S. Border Patrol agent in Arizona.

The files received by JW include three electronic mails between Holder and Jarrett and one from former U.S. Attorney Dennis Burke to Jarrett. The e-mails with Holder are all from October 4, 2011, a significant date because, on the evening of October 3rd, Sheryl Attkisson (then at CBS news) released documents showing that Holder had been sent a briefing paper on Operation Fast and Furious on June 5, 2010. The paper was from the director of the National Drug Intelligence Center, Michael Walther.

This directly contradicted Holder’s May 3, 2011 testimony to the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, during which he stated that he, “probably heard about Fast and Furious for the first time over the last few weeks.” The October 4, 2011 date may also be significant because it came shortly after the August 30, 2011 resignation of U.S. Attorney for Arizona Dennis Burke and reassignment of acting ATF director Kenneth Melson to the position of “senior forensics advisor” at DOJ.

The description of one of the e-mails, written from Jarrett to Holder, reads, “re: personnel issues.” Another, also from Jarrett, reads, “outlining and discussing preferred course of action for future responses in light of recent development in congressional investigation.” Unfortunately, the index is vague and that’s all the information we have about them. Nevertheless, given the timing and subject of these e-mails, it seems clear that Jarrett quickly became a key player in the Fast and Furious cover-up in the immediate aftermath of the revelation that Holder had lied to Congress

http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2014/10/valerie-jarrett-key-player-fast-furious-cover-holder-lied-congress/

[Mark]

   Is Barack Obama Attempting To Harass And Intimidate Media Personalities On His ‘Enemies List’?

Barack Obama Giving Orders - Public DomainSomeone is attempting to harass and intimidate media personalities that are very critical of Barack Obama and his administration.  Whoever is doing this has extremely advanced technical capabilities.  As you will see below, there is very strong anecdotal evidence that federal agents are involved.  But these agents would never commit such actions on their own.  It seems clear that they are getting orders from someone above them.  Of course Barack Obama (or any of his top lieutenants) would never come out and publicly admit that Gestapo tactics are being used against media personalities on Obama’s rumored “enemies list”, but that appears to be precisely what is happening.  Hopefully by shining a light on these activities it will cause those that are doing these things to cease and desist.  And it is very important to point out that what is being done to these media personalities is illegal.  Anyone that is involved in harassing media personalities because of what they are saying is violating federal law and is in danger of going to prison for a very, very long time. (Read More...)

http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/is-barack-obama-attempting-to-harass-and-intimidate-media-personalities-on-his-enemies-list

[Mark]

wooops

30,000 missing emails from IRS' Lerner recovered

The U.S. Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) informed congressional staffers from several committees on Friday that the emails were found among hundreds of “disaster recovery tapes” that were used to back up the IRS email system. 

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/30000-missing-emails-from-irs-lerner-recovered/article/2556522

[Psalm 51:17]

With all this technology we have - pretty much anything can be recovered.

[Mark]

IRS mistakenly penalizes Christine O’Donnell a second time, placed levy on bank accounts

Adding to the long-running saga of IRS dealings with conservatives, former Senate candidate Christine O’Donnell says the tax agency punished her mistakenly for the second time in five years by imposing an erroneous levy on her bank accounts.

Ms. O’Donnell told The Washington Times that she discovered the levy when she couldn’t access her checking account as she was preparing to visit relatives over Thanksgiving.

“The day before I was heading out of town for the Thanksgiving weekend, my bank told me the IRS had frozen my accounts. They didn’t give me a reason why, just a phone number to call,” Ms. O’Donnell said in an interview this week.

She said she called the Internal Revenue Service and was told the agency had concluded she owed $30,000 in taxes from a 2008 house transaction, which was long ago accounted for on her federal returns. She said she implored the agency to check her tax records and eventually was told the levy was generated in error and her accounts would be freed up.

Although IRS officials removed the levy, they first withdrew all the funds from her account. They said that, too, was in error and the funds would be returned to her. The funds have not been replaced, Ms. O’Donnell said.

Ms. O’Donnell, who writes a column for the online Washington Times Communities, says her only current matter pending with the IRS is that she filed for an extension to pay her 2013 taxes but that the levy had nothing to do with that filing.

“They said it was a mistake, and they removed the levy. I’m grateful, but I also wonder what someone with less government experience might do when they find themselves frozen from their money because the IRS got its paperwork mixed up. It can be scary. You feel helpless if you can’t even buy gas for your car,” she said.
Asked where she thought her latest IRS run-in fit into the bigger controversy over the agency’s dealings with conservatives, she answered cautiously.

“While I don’t believe in coincidences, it’s possible that this was just bureaucratic bungling. But either way, the IRS has to be held accountable. It needs to do its job right and not target or inconvenience taxpayers unfairly,” she said.
IRS officials said federal tax privacy laws prohibit them from commenting on individual taxpayer matters.

Ms. O’Donnell, a tea party favorite who burst onto the national stage in 2010 when she upset a longtime incumbent and won the Republican nomination for U.S. Senate in Delaware, has been one of several high-profile conservatives to claim mistreatment from the IRS and other federal authorities.

Senate investigators continue to probe why Delaware state authorities accessed Ms. O’Donnell’s IRS tax file on a Saturday morning in spring 2010, right around the time she announced her candidacy and a story was leaked alleging that she owed back taxes to the IRS, which was later proved to be false.

Delaware authorities claim the records check was routine but that the computer records detailing what was searched have since been destroyed. Lawmakers in both parties have cited the episode in raising concerns about possible lax access for state agencies to sensitive federal tax records.

The first tax lien was placed on a house she had sold more than two years earlier, and it created headaches for her finances and her campaign. The lien was highly publicized and used to discredit Ms. O’Donnell’s candidacy just as it was getting off the ground, even though she no longer owned the home in question.

The IRS eventually removed the lien, blaming it on a computer error. Ms. O’Donnell sold the home in 2008, and financial documents from her lender show that her back payments were satisfied in July 2008, long before the IRS initiated the bogus lien.

Ms. O’Donnell also battled a three-year audit of her personal finances that ultimately ended with her repaying $1,100 to the federal government. She said friends and family also were subjected to intrusive audits, though they were cleared. She believes the first round of IRS intrusions were political and malicious, and she has called on Congress to rein in the tax agency.

The second erroneous tax lien was revealed the same week that House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell E. Issa, California Republican, released a report highlighting emails he said showed a clear anti-conservative bias inside the IRS. It was also the same week that the House Ways and Means and Senate Judiciary committees confirmed they were still investigating the 2010 breach of Ms. O’Donnell’s tax records.

Story Continues →

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/dec/25/christine-odonnell-tea-party-figure-says-irs-mista/#ixzz3N0zLJdJ8

[Mark]

Exposed: Obama team working on election campaigns worldwide

Intuitive Winston Churchill’s warning: “A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on” can now be taken literally.

The lies of President Barack Obama’s have reached all the way over to Israel and are still traveling with the truth yet to get its pants on.

Obama claimed that neither he nor his Secretary of State John Kerry can meet with Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu when he addresses Congress next month because “Our general policy is, we don’t meet with any world leader two weeks before their election”. (Daily Mail, Jan. 28, 2015)

Press Secretary Josh Ernest made the big whopper worse when he further explained, “This administration goes to great lengths to ensure that we don‘t give even the appearance of interfering or attempting to influence the outcome of democratic elections abroad”.

The plain truth?

The Obama administration is using taxpayer dollars from the State Department with boots on the ground to promote an Israeli campaign run by Obama campaign aides to defeat Netanyahu.

Churchill’s lie getting halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on suits to a tee V15—which arrogantly stands for ‘Victory 2015’—-that has the colossal nerve to try to cover its attempted sabotage of Israel ‘s 2015 election with the whitewash alibi that 270 Strategies, the company owned by President Barack Obama’s 2012 campaign national field director Jeremy Bird organizing its efforts: “works on election campaigns worldwide”.

We thought it was just Israel and Canada.  There’s more?!

With Obama’s Fundamental Transformation of America already in the bag, guess you could call influencing the outcome of the general elections in Israel and Canada, while feverishly trying to return the Muslim Brotherhood to Egypt,“working on election campaigns worldwide”.

Get your pants on, Israel and Canada.  Through his top election aides, Obama is trying to add your nations to his coveted kingdom.

It is only thanks to providence that intuiting Obama’s every move to reinstall the Muslim Brotherhood to Egypt, President Abdel-Fattah el Sisi jumped into his pants before even being elected.

The necessity for truth hurrying to get its pants on should also apply to V15‘s audacious claim that it is only “conservative media speculation” that Big Bird Jeremy was sent to participate in Israel elections by Obama.  The White House denies it had any knowledge of Bird’s involvement in Israel elections.  That’s their story and they’re sticking to it.

File Obama’s not knowing what his own national field director of 2012 elections is up to in Israel under ‘h’ for horse feathers, as it belongs in the same deceit category that Obama did not know at least one of the top five Taliban generals he irresponsibly traded off for deserter Bowe Bergdahl would make an attempt to go running back to the jihad as soon as the coast became clear.

In the real world,  V15 partners in Israel with ‘pro-peace’ organization One Voice.  The goal of this partnership is to recruit thousands of volunteers who will go door to door before the election to persuade as many as one million people to vote to change the government.

When it bolted out of the barn, Obama’s ‘Hope & Change’ made it all the way over to Israel.

In their own words this is the precise kind of peace OneVoice advocates:

    “OneVoice is an international grassroots movement that amplifies the voice of mainstream Israelis and Palestinians, empowering them to propel their elected representatives toward the two-state solution. The Movement works to forge consensus for conflict resolution and build a human infrastructure capable of mobilizing the people toward a negotiated, comprehensive, and permanent agreement between Israel and Palestine that ends the occupation, ensures security and peace for both sides, and solves all final-status issues in accordance with international law and previous bilateral agreements. The 1967 borders form the basis for the establishment of an independent, viable Palestinian state, with permanent borders and any modifications to be agreed upon by both parties. The Movement recognizes that violence by either side will never be a means to end the conflict.

    “Our mission is premised on the notion that everyday people have a crucial role to play in creating the political conditions necessary to propel their leaders toward ending the conflict and the occupation. While a majority of Israelis and Palestinians support the two-state solution, an emphasis on the risks of an agreement and the compromises it entails has led many to lose sight of the transformative change that peace can bring. An increasing percentage also doubt they will see such an agreement in their lifetimes, widening the ‘incredulity gap’ of those who would readily accept a two-state compromise but cannot envision one.

    From the Caucus to End the Arab-Israeli Conflict that we established in the Israeli Knesset to our “Wake Up! What Is Your Role Campaign?” to mobilize Palestinians to end the occupation and the conflict through non-violent activism, we are providing the centrist mainstream on both sides with the opportunities and tools to build momentum for a peace agreement and #2StatesNOW

At least someone is exposing Jeremy Bird “working on election campaigns worldwide” in Israel:

“Likud petitioned the Central Elections Committee on Wednesday for an order barring campaigning by the V15 organization, after Haaretz earlier this week reported on the organization’s efforts to replace the Likud-led government. (Haaretz, Jan. 30, 2015)

    “The Likud petition argued that V15 - which it termed an “extreme left-wing organization” - was indirectly campaigning on behalf of Likud’s rivals, Zionist Camp and Meretz, thereby circumventing campaign-finance restrictions imposed by law.

    “Specifically, the petition said, the organization “is making criminal use of anonymous foreign funding in extremely large amounts.” The petition also demanded that V15 reveal its funding sources.

    “The petition cited the Haaretz report of Bird’s hiring to bolster its argument, writing that “hiring services of this sort costs a fortune. We’re talking about foreign funding on an enormous scale, in violation of the Party Funding Law.”

Meanwhile, we don’t know what, if any, measures are being taken to protect Canada’s federal election against Obama meddling.

Other than Canada Free Press (CFP), there’s been no mainstream coverage of the Globe & Mail’s Dec. 27 story:

“With polls pointing to a Liberal victory over Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s Conservative government come October, key Obama presidential campaign bigwigs will brand unwitting Canada with the Big O stamp.” (Canada Free Press Jan. 5, 2015)

“Justin Trudeau’s Liberals have quietly been getting regular advice from Jennifer O’Malley Dillon, Barack Obama’s deputy campaign manager in the last U.S. presidential campaign. (Adam Radwanski, Globe and Mail, Dec. 27, 2014)

“Somewhat more openly, Tom Mulcair’s New Democrats have been receiving guidance from Jeremy Bird, who was Mr. Obama’s national field director.”

It’s not just Canada’s Prime Minister the Obama election team aims to replace, the team also participated in the elections of Ontario, Canada’s largest province.
(CFP, Oct. 28, 2013)

And while elections in Egypt aren’t imminent, anti-Muslim President Abdel-Fattah el-Sisi’s on Obama’s hit list.

“Earlier this week, State hosted a Brotherhood-linked delegation looking to mobilize support for the overthrow of Egyptian President Abdel-Fattah el-Sisi.” (The Washington Beacon, Jan. 30, 2015).

So there it is, Obama’s ‘Fundamental Transformation of the Free World’ on public display.

Where is the respect for sovereignty and democratic elections in Israel and Canada?

If sovereignty counts for naught in the U.SA., where ‘Executive Amnesty’ is on the way, it counts for naught in Israel, Canada and Egypt too.

Meanwhile, if the truth doesn’t get its pants on, and get them on, on the double,  Obama will have have transitioned himself from American president to Uncrowned King of the World.

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/69458

[Psalm 51:17]

http://news.yahoo.com/axelrod-obama-misled-gay-marriage-2008-135612155.html
Obama concealed support for gay marriage in 2008, former senior adviser claims in new book
2/10/15

As Barack Obama campaigned for president in 2008, the then-U.S. senator hid from Americans his support for same-sex marriage, but he did so at the guidance of his former political adviser, David Axelrod.

And, it is Axelrod who is exposing Obama’s flip-flop on the very politicized issue in a new book, “Believer: My Forty Years In Politics.”

“I’m just not very good at bulls----ing,” Obama told Axelrod after a campaign event where he stated his opposition to gay marriage, according to an excerpt from the Axelrod's book published by Time magazine.

“I just don’t feel my marriage is somehow threatened by the gay couple next door,” Obama told Axelrod, according to the excerpt.

As a state senate candidate in 1996, Obama filled out a questionnaire stating he was in favor of legalizing same-sex marriages, and “would fight efforts to prohibit such marriages.”

But Axelrod, who was Obama’s chief campaign adviser in 2008, says he advised the then-Illinois senator to conceal his support for gay marriage in an effort to help him win the White House.

“Opposition to gay marriage was particularly strong in the black church,” Axelrod writes, “and as [Obama] ran for higher office, he grudgingly accepted the counsel of more pragmatic folks like me and modified his position to support civil unions rather than marriage.”

But “having prided himself on forthrightness,” Axelrod continues, “Obama never felt comfortable with his compromise and, no doubt, compromised position. He routinely stumbled over the question when it came up in debates or interviews.”

In 2010, Obama told reporters his position on same-sex marriage was “evolving” — an assertion Axelrod, who was then a senior White House advisor, says was also not true.

If “Obama’s views were ‘evolving’ publicly,” he writes, “they were fully evolved behind closed doors. The president was champing at the bit to announce his support for the right of gay and lesbian couples to wed — and having watched him struggle with this issue for years, I was ready, too.”

But it wasn’t until 2012, after Vice President Joe Biden said on “Meet the Press” that he was “absolutely comfortable” with marriage equality, that the president publicly revealed his support for gay marriage.

“I would have preferred doing this on my own terms, but it is what it is,” Obama told Axelrod, according to the book. “I know Joe screwed up, and when I have lunch with him tomorrow, I’m going to talk to him about it. It was sloppy. But you know, I can’t be too hard on him. He was speaking from a bigheartedness.”

[Mark]

All the President’s Boot Lickers Still Pretend Obama is a Christian

They routinely lament on twitter that there surely must be more important things than conservatives focused on Benghazi, Fast and Furious, the IRS scandal, the Libyan disaster, the Syrian disaster, the growth of ISIS, the resurgence of Al Quaeda, etc., etc., etc. They lament that we are a frivolous society easily distracted from important things. They give awards to deep thinkers who write 20,000 word pieces on subjects no one cares about outside of the Circle of Jerks who make up the political press.

Then Rudy Giuliani, the former mayor of New York and failed Presidential candidate who will never serve in public office again, suggests President Obama does not love America (he doesn’t, by the way). The very same Circle of Jerks who lament a lack of seriousness in American discourse, immediately swing into action to protect their precious.

These are Barack Obama’s boot lickers.

From the New York Times to the Washington Post to the Atlantic to the Politico to National Journal to the various news networks to NPR, these people want to have President Obama’s baby, protect his policy, and advance his cause.

They could be focusing on all the important stories they lament are being ignored, but instead they have to ask Republicans whether they believe in evolution and whether they believe President Obama is a Christian. He’s not, by the way.

This is not just why Americans increasingly hate the media, it is also why Republican Presidential candidates should kick them, rhetorically, in the nuts at every opportunity. When some Presidential boot licker asks a Presidential candidate if he believes Barack Obama is a Christian, he should ask the boot licker why it is relevant to anything. After all, the constitution says there can be no religious test for office.

The most amazing thing about the bootlickers is that they think this stuff matters. They are mostly atheist and in some part agnostic, but are highly offended that anyone would point out Barack Obama is not a Christian, or at least has no evidence of being one. They misquote Matthew 7 claiming statements of fact are judging then slide into bed next to their significant other who, increasingly, is a member of the Obama Administration.

They really think the 2016 campaign will be waged on evolution and whether President Obama, who will not even be on the ballot, is a Christian. These are people who got into journalism to defend the precious and that is what they will do.

But there are two important conclusions that must be drawn.

First, the outrage from people who are, at bet, nominal Christians over other people pointing out Barack Obama is not one shows just how important it is for even the faithless to pretend to be faithful in a society they tell us is increasingly secular.

Second, the outrage flows in large part as a recognition that though liberal secularists have been fairly successful at posing as all sorts of things in modern American life, they continue to fail at posing as actual Christians and must, as a result, scream loudly at those who point it out hoping to shut them up.

As the President’s Boot Lickers continue to focus on the obscure, ridiculous, and essentially impose a religion test on Republican candidates for office, conservatives need a guerilla movement like that of Jason Mattera.

    We should be asking Democrats if they believe taxpayers should pay for the sex change treatments of Bradley Manning.
    We should be asking Democrats if they believe God created the Heavens and Earth.
    We should be asking Democrats if they believe Muhammad is a legitimate prophet and, if yes, why aren’t they following him.
    We should be asking Democrats if they believe gender is something you are born with or something you choose.
    We should be asking Democrats if we need to raise taxes to pay for global warming cures.
    We should be asking Democrats if they believe Jesus is a real person and, if yes, why aren’t they following him.

We’ve got lots of questions to ask Democrats and should start shoving cameras in their faces while President Obama’s bootlickers are distracted by his boots.

http://www.redstate.com/2015/02/23/all-the-presidents-boot-lickers-still-pretend-obama-is-a-christian/

[Psalm 51:17]

Too little, too late - Giuliani and his ilk should have been vocal about this 7 years ago(when Obama first ran for the Presidency, that is). IOW, the damage has already been done.

And GOP Presidential candidates like Scott Walker have stood down when asked questions over whether Obama is a Christian. So it's not like these "liberal media outlets" are the only "boot lickers".

[Psalm 51:17]

http://www.nowtheendbegins.com/blog/?p=31273
OBAMA BLATANTLY DECEIVING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ABOUT IRAN’S NUCLEAR AMBITIONS
Geoffrey Grider | February 28, 2015 | 10 Comments

OBAMA IS NEITHER DELUSIONAL OR INCOMPETENT, HIS CONTINUED ACTS OF DECEPTION WHEN IT COMES TO IRAN ARE WILLFUL AND PLANNED.

Barack Obama wants us all to simmer down about Iran. He wants Senator Bob Menendez, a fellow Democrat, and the donors he represents to butt out of the sanctions debate. He wants Republicans to quit crying wolf about Iran’s nuclear weapons program. He wants the media to stop hyping terror threats. He wants the American people in the dark about the secret correspondence he’s had for years with Iran’s supreme leader. He wants John Boehner to be mindful of protocol. And most of all, he wants Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu to stop questioning his accommodationist approach to Tehran.

With the breezy confidence that is his trademark, the president has repeatedly delivered a reassuring message on Iran to the country and the world: Trust me.

With respect, Mr. President: No.

From the earliest moments of his first term, Obama sought to convince the country that threats from our erstwhile enemies were overblown. He forged an approach to jihadist attacks and rogue regimes meant to be a stark contrast from that of his predecessor. He ended the war on terror, quietly sought rapprochement with radical Islamist movements like the Muslim Brotherhood and the Taliban, and ostentatiously undertook a more conciliatory approach to terror-sponsoring regimes like Syria and Iran.

Notwithstanding periodic drone strikes on bad guys, Obama has demonstrated repeatedly that his instinct is to ignore, dismiss, or downplay threats to the United States and its interests and allies. The record over six years is a long list of mistaken judgments, awkward euphemisms, and false assurances.

Read the rest of the story on the Weekly Standard…

[Mark]

Obama 'Very Interested' In Raising Taxes Through Executive Action

...."Now I don't want to leave you with the impression that there is some imminent announcement..." Earnest continued. "But the president has asked his team to examine the array of executive authorities that are available to him to try to make progress on his goals. So I am not in a position to talk in any detail at this point, but the president is very interested in this avenue generally," Earnest finished. 

MORE http://townhall.com/tipsheet/conncarroll/2015/03/02/obama-very-interested-in-raising-taxes-through-executive-action-n1964629

[Psalm 51:17]

http://www.naturalnews.com/048806_vaccine_petition_White_House_fraud.html
EXCLUSIVE: Whitehouse.gov caught freezing vaccine choice petition to prevent signatures from reaching 100,000 threshold
3/1/15

(NaturalNews) A WhiteHouse.gov petition calling for the prohibition of laws requiring mandatory vaccines has been throttled by the White House, buried from public view and finally frozen for over 36 hours to prevent the petition from achieving 100,000 signatures, Natural News can now reveal.

The petition, which was rapidly headed toward the 100,000 signatures needed to trigger a response from the White House, was frozen mid-day Friday and has remained stuck at 56,791 signatures for over 36 hours.

The petition is titled "PROHIBIT ANY LAWS MANDATING THE FORCE AND REQUIREMENT OF VACCINATIONS OF ANY KIND." It can be found at this link.

The petition reads:

No human being should be FORCED to be vaccinated against their will and/or personal/religious beliefs. I petition against making vaccinations of any kind mandatory. This includes forcing children to be vaccinated to attend public schools, activities, and daycare centers. This also includes adults working in the public or private sector.

The petition still allows people to sign it, and it still sends a confirmation email that claims your signature counts. But the numbers on the petition website never change, no matter how many people sign it.

Petition signatures systematically ignored

As the following screen shot shows, the petition confirmation page claims, "Your signature has been verified and counted."



But in reality, your signature doesn't count at all, and the signatures number on the petition page stays frozen:



Throttled to a maximum of 100 per hour before being frozen

Before the petition was frozen by the White House to prevent it from reaching 100,000 signatures, it was throttled to allow a maximum of 100 signatures per hour.

Dr. Rima Laibow of the Natural Solutions Foundation has been monitoring the petition's numbers for several days. "Counsel Ralph Fucetola, JD, and I were tracking the number of signatures for the petition on our Skype chat and I noted something rather strange: there were many hours when the number increasing on the petition was exactly, EXACTLY, 100," she told Natural News.

"We realized that although it is really important in this debate to get to the 100,000 signature threshold on this petition, the system was gamed, making it harder than it should be. We knew that if we did not reach that number, the White House juggernaught would claim that only a tiny fraction of Americans were against Mandatory Adult Vaccines and would use that against us."

"...the White House Petition Site programming is not recording signatures on a petition it disagrees with," Dr. Laibow concludes in a breaking news warning published at her website.

WhiteHouse.gov buried the petition to try to hide it from the public

Even before the throttling and the freezing of the petition numbers, the White House went to great lengths to bury the petition and make sure it could not be easily found by the public.

Unlike other petitions which are easily found at Petitions.WhiteHouse.gov, the petition opposing vaccine mandates was deliberately hidden from view and could only be accessed if someone knew the direct URL.

On YouTube, this is equivalent to setting a video to "unlisted" status to prevent the public from finding it.

To help people find the petition, Rima Laibow set up a new link that directs people to the correct petition URL:

http://TinyURL.com/VaccinationISViolation

A pattern of systematic deceit by vaccine pushers

This fraudulent attempt by the White House to suppress this petition and prevent it from reaching 100,000 signatures is part of an extraordinary pattern of lying and deceit on the part of today's medical extremists who demand all people be injected with vaccines, even against their wishes and in blatant violation of the American Medical Association's code of ethics.

The vaccine industry, we have all observed, is willing to do anything it takes to prevent the public from learning real facts about vaccines or even achieving success with an online petition that calls for the protection of medical choice for mothers and their children.

USA Today, the same publication that ran an article authored by a mentally deranged vaccine fanatic who called for the arrest and imprisonment of "anti-vaxxers," recently conducted an online survey that asked Americans whether they support the arrest and imprisonment of people who rejected vaccines. The results of that survey reveal that 92% of Americans support vaccine choice and reject government coercion for forced vaccinations.



Jail parents who opt out: 2%
It's a choice: 92%
Fine parents who opt out: 5%
Inform parents vs. jail: 2%

Only 2% support government coercion against parents who choose to avoid toxic vaccines. Public support for laws prohibiting forced vaccination policies is remarkably high; far higher than public support for President Obama himself.

So in an attempt to destroy the perception that the public strongly opposes the government coercion of medical choice (also called "medical fascism"), the White House has now gone to extraordinary lengths to suppress the online petition that calls for fundamental human rights and medical choice.

This pattern of deceit and coercion is far larger than the White House alone. It includes:

• The CDC's deliberate burying of scientific data linking vaccines to autism (as confessed by the CDC whistleblower Dr. William Thompson).

• The mainstream media's blatantly one-sided media coverage of vaccines, where no scientific questions about vaccines are ever allowed to be aired, and any doctor who asks an intelligent question about vaccine ingredients, vaccine safety or vaccination schedules is verbally assaulted with the derogatory, intellectually-bigoted label of "ANTI-SCIENCE!"

• The ongoing delusion of "mercury denialism" where even the Associated Press publishes articles that falsely claim mercury has been "phased out" of all vaccines even though the CDC confirms mercury, MSG, formaldehyde and aluminum are still used in vaccines.

• The Disneyland measles hoax, where the CDC knows full well that the viral strain of measles found in MMR vaccines is different from the strain of measles that has spread among children. The genetics don't match, which means the MMR vaccine would have done little or nothing to stop the outbreak in the first place.

• The complete suppression of true stories of vaccine-damaged children who have suffered severe neurological harm, painful skin disorders, comas and even death due to vaccines. See horrifying photos here of just some of the children who are being medically mutilated by the very same vaccines that government authorities tell us are "safe."

• The widespread refusal of the FDA to acknowledge the truth that it does not test vaccines for safety or efficacy and instead relies entirely on Big Pharma's own self-funded studies to "prove" vaccines work. But those studies have been faked, say the industry's own scientists, who describe how animal antibodies were used to spike human blood samples in order to defraud the FDA and keep selling vaccines that do not work.

• The publication of a medical extremism article in USA Today which openly called for the government to arrest and imprison so-called "anti-vaxxers." This article, like nearly all articles on vaccines that appear in the mainstream media, was written by a mentally ill vaccine fanatic with a bizarre desire to incarcerate informed vaccine skeptics who raise intelligent, rational questions about vaccine safety and immunization scheduling. USA Today has no problem giving a platform to mentally ill vaccine fanatics as long as they keep calling for more vaccines.

[Psalm 51:17]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2015/03/02/2016-gop-hopefuls-not-willing-to-fight-obama-lawlessness-with-every-fiber-of-their-being/
3/2/15

2016 GOP hopefuls not willing to fight Obama lawlessness with every fiber of their being

To hear conservatives tell it, the question of whether Republicans are prepared to use Department of Homeland Security funding to fight President Obama’s executive deportation relief is a test of their resolve to combat Obama’s lawlessness. So you’d think the GOP presidential candidates would have a good answer when pressed on this.

Yet when Byron York posed that question to Scott Walker, he did not get anything close to a clear answer. First, Walker claimed that Congress “needs to find a way to fund homeland security,” but added that it’s understandable if lawmakers are reluctant to give up their leverage to “to push back on the president’s questionable, if not illegal, actions.” Asked whether Republicans should stand firm against Obama’s actions, or agree to fund Homeland Security independently of continuing the battle against them, Walker replied:

“I think they have to figure out some way to have the bridge to continue to fund homeland security, but in a way that doesn’t remove their ability to come back sometime in the not too distant future if the court rules or if the administration changes how they do this action in a way that could be upheld in court. They need to have the power of the purse string to offer a counter to that.”

York asks: “What does that mean, exactly?” It’s a good question. What it seems to mean is that Walker is not willing to say Republicans should entirely relinquish Homeland Security funding as leverage to block Obama’s actions, but he also doesn’t want to appear unwilling to keep the department funded. So his answer, if you can call it that, is that Republicans should fund DHS now, while retaining the promise of using that funding as leverage against Obama’s actions later — for example, if the courts ultimately uphold them. But it could be months until this is settled in the courts. And at any rate, House Republicans were unable to pass something funding DHS for a mere three weeks.

Jeb Bush, by contrast, has given a clearer answer to this question. When pressed on it by Sean Hannity last week at CPAC, Bush said:

“Congress ought to pass a bill that does not allow him to use that authority. I’m not an expert on the ways of Washington. It makes no sense to me that we’re not funding control of our border, which is the whole argument. I’m missing something. The simple fact is the president has gone way beyond his Constitutional powers to do this. And Congress has every right to reinstate their responsibilty for what law is about.”

This seems to mean Bush doesn’t think Republicans should allow the Homeland Security funding fight to get tied up in the battle over Obama’s executive actions. He says Congressional Republicans should exercise their authority by passing something restricting Obama’s authority to carry out the actions themselves, as opposed to trying to restrict funding to them. As it happens, that’s exactly what House Republicans did earlier this year, passing such measures as amendments to the Homeland Security funding bill. Bush’s position is basically that if Congressional Republicans want to restrict Obama’s actions, they should vote to roll back the president’s authority, but not take the added step of holding up DHS funding to accomplish it.

There is an actual difference between the candidates here. (Ted Cruz is fully committed to using DHS funding to block Obama’s actions, unlike Walker, who wants to keep that option open for later, and Bush, who wants to take it off the table.) And this is no small matter: The GOP continues to be deeply divided on it, with Senate Republicans more oriented towards Bush’s position, and many House Republicans still in the Walker or Cruz camps. The resolution of this difference (though it will probably end with House GOP leaders passing clean DHS funding with a lot of Democrats) remains uncertain.

This whole question has become a big test of whether Republicans are willing to walk through political fire to prevent Obama’s lawless overreach from destroying the Constitution and the country, and Jeb Bush was willing to give a straighter answer to it than Scott Walker was.

[Mark]

White House formally exempts office from FOIA regs

The White House on Tuesday will announce new rules exempting an administrative office from subjection to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), which allows citizens to obtain government documents from federal agencies.

In a Federal Register notice scheduled to publish Tuesday morning, the action to exempt the Office of Administration is listed as a final rule, which means there will be no opportunity for public comment. It formalizes a longstanding policy for the office that was upheld in multiple courts.

ADVERTISEMENT
The move stems from a lawsuit that began before President Obama took office, but it comes at an odd time – during Sunshine Week, in which government watchdogs promote and push for more transparency. 

“From the day he took office, the President committed his Administration to work towards unprecedented openness in government. Over the past six years, Federal agencies have gone to great efforts to make government more transparent and more accessible than ever,” said Brandi Hoffine, a White House spokeswoman.

While much of White House operations are not subject to FOIA laws and regulations – including the president, vice president and immediate advisors – one of its largest offices, the Executive Office of the President, must hand over certain documents when requested. 

The Executive Office of the President is headed by the president’s White House chief of staff and includes the Office of Management and Budget and the Council of Economic Advisors. 

The Office of Administration is also within the Executive Office of the President – and complied with FOIA requests for years – but stopped doing so during the Bush administration.

The Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) sued the office after being denied access to documents it had requested to obtain details about a slew of emails that had gone missing from White House servers. 

After a lengthy appeal, the court upheld the ruling that the Office of Administration, which advises and assists the president, is not an “agency” as defined by the FOIA.

Since it only “performs only operational and administrative tasks in support of the president and his staff,” the court ruled in 2009, “under our precedent, [the Office of Administration] lacks substantial independent authority.”

The White House, which has not released any Office of Administration records under FOIA, used the ruling to defend the change.

“This federal register notice does not change any aspect of the Administration’s FOIA policy.  It simply removes outdated regulations that no longer apply to the Office of Administration and haven’t applied since the Bush Administration,” a White House official told The Hill in an email. 

“Generally speaking, the Administration has gone to great lengths to release more information on the front end so that individuals do not have to file a FOIA to get access to government data and other information,” the official added.

However, the appeals court ruling is almost six years old, which makes for odd timing – as a week that features organizations pushing for government openness began on Sunday. Monday is National Freedom of Information Act Day.

“This step makes mockery of that commitment [to transparency], especially given that it's Sunshine Week. The White House has reversed a decades long practice of opening the files of OA to the public,” Anne Weissmann, CREW’s interim executive director and senior counsel, told The Hill. “Apparently they have abandoned even the appearance of transparency.” 

The White House did not respond to questions about the timing of the official rule change, but did note that President Obama won an award from the organizing groups of Sunshine Week in 2011 for his policies.

A tally of government records last year by the Associated Press paints a less rosy picture – the administration had censored or denied access to records more frequently than ever in 2013 and cited more legal reasons than ever for exempting them. Some redactions could be names or personal information, while others may take up large chunks of entire pages.

The Obama administration responded to 678,391 FOIA requests in 2014, according to its own count, an increase over last year. The Justice Department says that 91 percent of records were released in whole or in part.

“While there is always more work to be done, our record demonstrates this Administration’s commitment to transparency is second to none,” the White House said.

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/235900-white-house-exempts-office-from-foia-regs

[Mark]

Investigative Journalist Shreds Official WH Story on Bin Laden Raid
"Blatant lie"



Investigative journalist Seymour Hersh wrote a blistering report questioning the official White House account of the raid that killed Osama bin Laden four years ago.

In his piece for the London Review of Books, Hersh accuses the Obama administration of "blatant lies" and claims to have a "major U.S. source" to back up his assertions. Though the source is unnamed, Hersh says he is "a retired intelligence official" with close ties to the Navy SEALs and "after-action reports."

Other sources Hersh cites come from inside the U.S. as well as Pakistan, where, he states, senior military leadership shared "widespread dismay" over President Obama's public announcement of the death of bin Laden.

"The White House’s story might have been written by Lewis Carroll," Hersh begins. "Would bin Laden, target of a massive international manhunt, really decide that a resort town forty miles from Islamabad would be the safest place to live and command al-Qaida’s operations? He was hiding in the open. So America said."

Hersh explains that his U.S. source described Obama at the time as "cautious," because "it was just too crazy" that bin Laden would live so exposed in Abbottabad. "Don’t talk to me about this any more unless you have proof that it really is bin Laden," Obama had said, according to the source.

Another claim was that bin Laden was an invalid and unable to defend himself. But Hersh's source said they weren't allowed to mention that. That was the main reason the Pakistani doctor was ordered to move nearby, he said, so that medical treatments could be administered. As is stated in the report, "You mean you guys shot a cripple? Who was about to grab his AK-47?"

Hersh states that the SEALs going into the compound were well aware that they were on a mission of "premeditated murder" despite the White House's continual insistence that bin Laden would have been taken alive if he had only surrendered.

The source also told Hersh a very different version of the raid on the compound:

    One of bin Laden’s wives was screaming hysterically and a bullet – perhaps a stray round – struck her knee. Aside from those that hit bin Laden, no other shots were fired. (The Obama administration’s account would hold otherwise.)

    ‘They knew where the target was – third floor, second door on the right,’ the retired official said. ‘Go straight there. Osama was cowering and retreated into the bedroom. Two shooters followed him and opened up. Very simple, very straightforward, very professional hit.’ Some of the Seals were appalled later at the White House’s initial insistence that they had shot bin Laden in self-defense, the retired official said. ‘Six of the Seals’ finest, most experienced NCOs, faced with an unarmed elderly civilian, had to kill him in self-defense? The house was shabby and bin Laden was living in a cell with bars on the window and barbed wire on the roof. The rules of engagement were that if bin Laden put up any opposition they were authorized to take lethal action. But if they suspected he might have some means of opposition, like an explosive vest under his robe, they could also kill him. So here’s this guy in a mystery robe and they shot him. It’s not because he was reaching for a weapon. The rules gave them absolute authority to kill the guy.’ The later White House claim that only one or two bullets were fired into his head was ‘bullshit’, the retired official said. ‘The squad came through the door and obliterated him. As the Seals say, “We kicked his ass and took his gas."'

Because one of the Black Hawk helicopters crashed at the compound, the Obama administration felt it necessary to immediately address the public because "the explosion and fireball would be impossible to hide." According to Hersh, this meant ignoring a previous agreement with Pakistan in which the president would say bin Laden was killed in an earlier drone attack. This is explained as Obama getting "in front of the story."

Hersh even questions bin Laden's burial at sea stating that it was just another cover by the Obama administration because there was not much of his body left after being riddled with gunfire. It is stated that the SEALs made initial claims that bin Laden's body parts were thrown from the sky as they made their way back from the mission. But once Obama decided to make the announcement of bin Laden's death, administration officials scrambled for a body to wrap and toss in the ocean.

There is a lot more to Hersh's story and it can be read here. The White House has since responded to his claims calling them "baseless," according to Yahoo News. White House National Security spokesman Ned Price said, "There are too many inaccuracies and baseless assertions in this piece to fact-check each one."

http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/investigative-journalist-shreds-official-wh-story-bin-laden-raid

[Mark]

Obama: "I will never engage in a politics in which I’m trying to divide people”

Thats all you have ever done.

 Today the White House proudly posted on Twitter a video clip of President Obama speaking somewhere - it's unclear when and where, but he was clearly without the assistance of teleprompters.

The highlight of the short clip was Obama's assertion that

    One of my core principles is that I will never engage in a politics in which I’m trying to divide people, or make them less than me because they look different or have a different religion. That's not something I would violate.

Needless to say, the responses on Twitter expressed incredulity:

tweets: http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/obama-i-will-never-engage-politics-which-im-trying-divide-people