ABC tries to quell Shadow fires

Well, apparently ABC has taken on its wings the task of fact-checker, and accusation debunker. So move over liberal Snopes, Fact-Check, ABC wants a piece of the action.

Case in point: they are now chasing accusations conservatives have long proposed and bandied around that Obama will run a shadow government — feeding a potential coup of Trump’s White House. But those are more than rumors.

Now I would not go into all the reasons for the support of the shadow idea. Obama is certainly doing nothing to put out the accusation fires. No, in fact, he feeds them. The more you see his old guard politicos or officials out in the media, while the burrowed-in Obama loyalists leak from within the state, the more valid you have to take these charges.

Obama continually lectured people to stop believing what they see, only pay attention to what he or his media sycophants say. It worked at least on 30% of the people.

Here is ABC lecturing us not to believe the stories of a shadow government and its coup underway. What other reason would there be for the shadow entity existence, but to undermine the sitting president and his administration? A lot of work for nothing.

No, former President Obama isn’t planning a coup against President Trump

By RYAN STRUYK — Feb 22, 2017 | Abc News

A fake news story making the rounds on Facebook claims in the headline that Congress is concerned that former President Barack Obama might make a “treasonous coup attempt” against President Trump — and that they’re taking steps to stop him.

It’s not true.

Though the headline screams “BREAKING: Congress Moves to STOP Obama’s Treasonous Coup Attempt Against Trump,” only parts of the story are based on facts. It’s done by seeding the story with quotes that are true, but are twisted out of context.

The original version of the article, posted on a website called Angry Patriot, has 38,000 shares. And since this fake news story’s text has been posted more than two-dozen times on other webpages, its false headline has been shared even more on social media networks.

One of the other sites, Trump Media, has a disclaimer page: “All the information on this website is published in good faith … The Trump Media does not make any warranties about the completeness, reliability and accuracy of this information.” Neither The Trump Media nor Angry Patriot sites responded to requests for comment from ABC News…./

The key point is that there’s no tie between the leaked information from U.S. intelligence agencies and former President Obama, as this fake news headline suggests.

[much more]

More: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/president-obama-planning-coup-president-trump/story?id=45665594

Notice the story they are worried about is the mere accusation of a shadow government, not what it is doing. Its actions are not the story, only our interpretation of them — or what Obama’s allies do to disrupt and obstruct Trump.

Add to this the protest roll out of the “Indivisible” movement — started by 3 former Congressional Democrat staffers. Now credentialed by media as the beauty of democracy in action. (opposed to “tea-baggers,” remember?) All under a guise of Resistance.

I don’t know about you but simply stating it is not true just does not do it, at all, for me. To believe Obama is not going to take advantage of every speck of power and opportunity he can pilfer under a rock ‘requires the willing suspension of disbelief’.

This is no longer the lamestream media pretending to be objective but allying itself with deep state and all the various political operatives on the left, in the way it only dreamed it could do before — for a common end But since they share common allegiances, generally to Obama’s legacy, well, all hands on deck now. ‘We are all agents of the shadow state now.’ Shorthand, we are all Obama now. And they are all radicals now — fellow radical subversives, hell bent on undermining the administration and its goals and agenda.

Yet we are asked to believe all the accusations about Russia involvement in the Trump campaign/administration. But a lack of evidence for all their charges only adds fuel to their accusations. They attack away. So in their elite view: it’s one big Russia and Trump conspiracy, that is the problem. But Obama’s and the left’s shadow state working to undermine the administration is just a big bogus theory? Right.

RightRing | Bullright

Media Showdown and conventional history meets metaphor

CNN runs a special called “The End” as Fox starts a daily show called “first 100 days.” Does anything highlight the contrast more than that? The beginning and the end.

On one hand Liberals are in mourning. They look back at radical nostalgia ending while the rest of us, thinking people, are in mourning for what Obama has done to this country.

Conservatives, Republicans, and normal people look forward to Trump coming in to fix some of the many problems — created or magnified by Obama, called accomplishments.

This brings up another thought nicely illustrated by that photo of Obama visiting the Henry Ford Museum, sitting on the bus Rosa Parks rode on. (look it up here )

The picture shows Obama sitting alone on an empty bus from a bygone era, which was famous for what took place on it. Namely Rosa Parks making her stand for civil rights and changing or challenging culture. That was the picture. But it is also a powerful metaphor for Obama and his legacy. Let’s see how much mileage I can get out of it? None of this applies to Rosa Parks but to Obama, who is caught in the nostalgia of it all.

In the end, Obama seems to be alone, surrounded by his failed legacy, staring out a window seemingly oblivious to what all took place. He wanted a coveted spot in the public and he got it. He started off wanting to “fundamentally change” America and our perception of it, only to himself become the chief symbol for what is rotten in Washington. In effect, there was a backfire, like those old buses were prone to do.

Then the big one. Obama’s finale of two terms and his legacy gets derailed and replaced by the newer Trump Train — a popular uprising of disgust from the people. They have had enough, finally, and sent a messenger to demonstrate their conviction. They beat back the status quo rules and establishment to get there. A David vs. Goliath story.

Obama argued that this movement, or man now leading it, was unqualified and ill-suited for the job, and not to be trusted. Trump deserved no seat and his movement was to be blacklisted by putting every label on it the left could, including racist. That further fueled resentment and resistance to the self-serving establishment — government run amuck.

After it all, there sits Obama alone on an empty bus staring outward. Alone on his own bus. He will now have to single-handedly defend his legacy, with help from his allies. But he is the only one who could make the case for his radical legacy. All the others will be just cheerleaders. He now leads his parade of one to secure and protect his legacy.

A moment of history illustrated, metaphorically, by a simple photo of Obama sitting on Rosa Parks’ bus in a dated backdrop. Obama rode on the past racial history to propel himself. He extorted every circumstance to usher in his radicalism as America’s cure, rather than the disease. How’s that for milking a metaphor? (more could be said)

RightRing | Bullright

Boycotting America: the infertile resistance breeds

The week of hypocrisy and double standards, and here we go.

The hearings were one thing, emphasis on race and Russia – not necessarily in that order — but dialogue and media are another which got progressively worse, right on script.

We finished the week by having the self-anointed civil rights leader, John Lewis call Trump’s election and his presidency illegitimate. Anyone NOT see that coming? These people certainly are predictable, if nothing else.

“I don’t see this President-elect as a legitimate president,” Lewis told NBC News Friday. “I think the Russians participated in helping this man get elected. And they helped destroy the candidacy of Hillary Clinton.” – NBC

No, unfortunately, Lewis was not a lone voice. Predictable. He did it intentionally on Friday before MLK Day — which I guess is now ensconced as the day of hate.

Now you would think that Lewis making this statement would be like a bomb going off, and the shock of it from a sitting senior Congressman would outrage people. You would think immediately people would distance themselves from his remarks, en masse. The condemnation would be fierce. And you would think a media outcry would demand every single Democrat condemn his remarks or be condemned. Nope.

Actually, Michelle Obama kicked it off on Oprah saying “we’re feeling what not having hope feels like.” She was praised for saying we have no hope. They cheered her on.

One Democrat pundit said on Sunday, “this is the resistance; this is just what it looks like now.” Ah, “what it looks like now” is short for this is the way it’s going to be. No, it’s actually going to be worse. They know it and so do we. And then their shadow Obama government will be adding to the resistance.

What you would think should be a normal response, in their racist political correctness, now is reversed. Rather than blanket condemnation, the praises for John Lewis came from everywhere: media, Congress, the black community, the public. Hard to find anyone who does condemn his statements.

Remember Joe Wilson, the SOTUS “heckler”? He had the audacity to make a public disagreement with Obama. He got a good talking to from the Republican leadership. And Mitch McConnell, all he said was that job #1 was to make Obama a one-term president. Democrats turned that into a giant insult and classic racism. Justice Alito shook his head. People were called racists for asking questions about Obama’s birth certificate or records — since he really had no trail. Just questioning Obama was blatant racism.

So it was way more than Obama ever received, even before Trump takes office. Now resistance is celebrated. Calls for obstruction ring from every corner of the Left. Respect is out, Resistance is in.(lockstep of course) In fact, the Left even says, proudly, it is following the model that worked so well for Republicans. (choke, gag) Get that, they even blame us for their radical resistance. They blame Russia for the election results. And they blame Trump for the condition of America which preceded any thought of his to run. Now they are trying to even make us own Obamacare.

Well, the total fallout of John Lewis is wide agreement with him. In fact, 23 members of Congress are boycotting the inauguration. It’s the cool thing now to join the resistance. They will institutionalize it, celebrate it, take it into schools and claim it as righteous.

All this deception won’t work. The people have been awakened and are not going to take their eyes off this, We survived their decade of decadence and aren’t happy. Sorry, Dems, don’t even try to out anger us. It ain’t happening. The blame projection won’t work. But they have the towers of media carrying their water, and soon will have every one of their shadow operatives opposing Trump. Exactly the way they did in the general election. Almost as if the election never happened because, to them, it didn’t.

Protests are highly overrated. Respectful protests were fashionable toward Obama, disrespectful protests toward Trump are now in. When Tea Party protests were born, the IRS and media assailed “speaking truth to power” using their big-gov firehouses, under a black president. It was Democrats in the sixties who opposed Lewis and their ‘civil rights’ agenda. Now they blame Republicans but no one is supposed to know the truth.

Now their resistance stuff is all the rage. Resisting what? – doesn’t matter. On the IRS Tea Party scandal, blacks and Democrats stood on the side of big government fire hoses. They stood up and walked out. Eric Holder was in contempt and they stood up for him, who was standing up for Obama. But now they see illegitimacy as the cause de jure.

So the answer, my friend, ain’t blowing in the wind. No, their answer to nothing is to boycott Trump and whatever he does. Take that Mitch McConnell. He let them beat him up for eight years for a benign statement. Then people bent over backwards for Obama. Republicans stood there like deer in the headlights, as radicals ruled the White House and administration. That really worked?

The boycott of Trump takes full shape before the parade or swearing in. What will they do when he’s in office? I think we know. (whatever was not done to Obama) Can’t you smell what the boycott is cooking? It means de facto protesting America and what it stands for, the rule of law. So civil rights or justice are excuses, the real boycott is against America.

And happy MLK Day, for what that’s worth.

RightRing | Bullright

The Left: hypocrisy is thy name

I always stand prepared to be outraged at the depth of hypocrisy on the left. Then I am not really. But this issue is deeper than that. I’ve come to believe there are two kinds of hypocrisy at work. There is a standard blatant hypocrisy and then there is a more sinister, fundamental hypocrisy. The latter is what I see more and more of.

The election highlighted it. During the debates before the election, there were all the calls of Trump to accept the results of the election. All those now discredited polls had showed Trump losing and Hillary the unchallenged winner. It was obvious they said. Media had pointed out daily that there was no chance for Trump to win. They asserted that the election was not based on a popular vote, whether you like it or not, but on the electoral system. That system favors Clinton, they said. They told us it was all about getting over 270 in the electoral college.Again, that would put Hillary in the White House and makes it albeit impossible for Trump to meet that daunting uphill task.

Then there was Larry Sabato going from network to network telling us there really was no way for Trump to win. He would not say zero chance but he gave him very little chance. There were all those polls, which never seem to put Hillary down by much. They mostly had her with around a six point lead in states. Closer to election it was 3 or 4 points. (I know I am generalizing but it doesn’t matter — they gave her a heavy advantage)

So everywhere they could, they were looking for concessions from Trump. “Will you accept the results of election” system? Trump just refused to play their submission game. Hillary even said she was outraged saying that, for the first time in history, we have someone unwilling to say he would accept the results. At the time, I thought it would be ironic if he won and Dems refused to accept the results. But they kept repeating it was Trump who would not accept results and the rules, as they were laid out.

Then we had the election and people were surprised. First, surprised by the results; then by the denial and refusal to accept the results as they happened. Media did report it because they really had no choice. When AP declared the winner, they could not disagree. But almost immediately it became about the popular vote.

Democrats said we don’t know the final tally of the popular vote, and it went from there. They became obsessed with the popular vote count. Before the election, they said that regardless of popular vote count the results would be determined by the electoral college. So much for that.

Now that we have the results, this fits with all their other hypocrisy. They really don’t care about that; it doesn’t bother them. However, when you notice how rooted hypocrisy is in their DNA, you see the bigger problem. It is who they are, say one thing do another.

They make a big issue about something — digging in their heels — until it is inconvenient for them to hold that position. Then they turn on a dime to support the opposite position. That’s just the way it is with the left. They are always prepared to be hypocrites because it doesn’t matter to them. Their blatant hypocrisy means nothing to them because it is a fundamental tenant of their ideology, politics rules to the left. They will do and say anything to justify their political position at the time. (subject to revision)

This is the same type of fundamental hypocrisy we see in their foreign policy positioning. They were against warring mentality. Democrats stood for Libyan intervention and then Benghazi, right up to the minute they had to take responsibility for it. Then they were AWOL about it.

All along, Democrats played with the notion of Russian involvement and sorted ties to Russia. We heard these claims from everywhere. Hillary supporter. and confident, Mike Morell took to the editorial page calling Trump an unwitting agent of the Russia federation. Charges were fierce. They even accused Trump of encouraging espionage.

“It’s pretty clear you won’t admit that the Russians have engaged in cyberattacks against the United States of America, that you encouraged espionage against our people, that you are willing to spout the Putin line, sign up for his wish list, break up NATO, do whatever he wants to do, and that you continue to get help from him, because he has a very clear favorite in this race,” Clinton said to Trump at the third presidential debate in October. — Politifact

Putin had also blamed Hillary for intervening in their election and stirring dissent afterward, a subject completely lost in the media. Yet Obama and his cohorts had been dabbling in other countries’ elections throughout both his terms, even in Israeli.

They went all-in behind the rise of Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and elsewhere. Has Obama even visited Egypt since the coupe stabilized the situation? No, sort of odd considering he started out his apology tour with a Cairo speech.

Here starts the big story: blame Russia for the election results. Which is really funny because Dems claim Russians’ objective was to influence the election and undermine the integrity of our system. Mission accomplished. Democrats certify that Russia did influence the outcome, despite lack of proof. Since the election is over, given the results, Dems claim our electoral college system is not so great. Undermine the integrity of our election? Mission accomplished. How many ways can one challenge an election?

The very thing Dems accused Russia of trying to do, they willingly did themselves. No one can undermine our process as well as Democrats, when they set their minds to it. They embarked on a recount program and questioned the legitimacy of the electoral college. They tried to undermine that system by influencing the electorates, to get them to switch allegiance from Trump.

But Obama previously mocked the Russian geopolitical threat. Obama promised Russia and Putin he would be more “flexible” after his last election. Putin is still collecting.

If all Russia was trying to do was undermine the integrity of the process, then count Democrats in for that. But earlier they stood on the platform of integrity, declaring our example to the world of peaceful power transfer and our long established history of accepting election results — whether we like them or not. Scratch that!

First NYT reported:

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration said on Friday that despite Russian attempts to undermine the presidential election, it has concluded that the results “accurately reflect the will of the American people.”

The statement came as liberal opponents of Donald J. Trump, some citing fears of vote hacking, are seeking recounts in three states — Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania — where his margin of victory was extremely thin.

In its statement, the administration said, “The Kremlin probably expected that publicity surrounding the disclosures that followed the Russian government-directed compromises of emails from U.S. persons and institutions, including from U.S. political organizations, would raise questions about the integrity of the election process that could have undermined the legitimacy of the president-elect.”

But wait, Democrats were all about undermining the legitimacy of Trump even as a candidate. It was a personal thing to Obama, who declared Trump was unqualified from the presidential podium. Hillary and her operatives questioned Trump on nuclear codes.

“Nevertheless, we stand behind our election results, which accurately reflect the will of the American people,” it added.

They “stand behind the results?” Well, that is until they don’t. Democrats started a hashtag #AuditTheVote. Which is it, they stand behind the resuts or they don’t?

Independent Journal Review

Obama’s counterterrorism and homeland security adviser Lisa Monaco told reporters on Friday:

“We may have crossed into a new threshold and it is incumbent upon us to take stock of that, to review, to conduct some after-action, to understand what has happened and to impart some lessons learned.”

Added White House spokesman Eric Schultz at the daily press briefing:

“This will be a review that is both broad and deep at the same time.”

“Obviously, you can imagine a report like this is gonna contain highly, you know, sensitive and even classified information….[We’ll] make public as much as we can.”

So now they aren’t sure they will disclose the results. But isn’t doing an investigation an attempt to reassure the public and restore credibility in our system? Yet they let it be known, beforehand, that they are going to selectively report the results. Uh?

First Obama had claimed that he did not want to get involved in presidential election politics. Now he goes all in to investigate presidential election, questioning foreign involvement in our election process. See how this Hypocrisy thing works? First Obama lectured, and mocked, Trump on questioning our rigged system or the outcome of our election as ridiculous. Now he is the chief tin-foil hat in the process questioning the integrity of our election.

But then this is the same president who is claiming his administration is scandal free, too. I guess there is time enough to start one more scandal over the results of the election.

Funny how before the election, who cared? But we had how many hackings all over our government. One report is anyone who ever worked in government has had their personal information stolen. Did we hear Obama’s outrage about that? How about Democrats’ outrage calling for us to do something about it? We do know nothing stopped Obama, who could have taken action on any one of these hacks. But yet, he hasn’t. (at least that we know of, and we probably would know if they did)

Obama now tees up a Russia conflict for Trump, when he would do nothing on cyber warfare before. And he now warns Trump about the immediate “near term” North Korea threat. So all problems become elevated to red alert when Trump is sworn in. Media to follow suite. But hypocrisy? — Not a problem.

RightRing | Bullright

Obama’s faulty “radar screen”

CNN tried to help Obama explain his legacy in an interview with Fareed Zakaria.

Rise of ISIS surprised Obama

“The ability of ISIL[sic] to not just mass inside of Syria, but then to initiate major land offensives that took Mosul, for example, that was not on my intelligence radar screen,” Obama told Zakaria.

Oops, cleanup in isle one. Anyone would have to ask “what the hell else was not on your intelligence radar screen? And why the hell wasn’t it?” Not Fareed.

But don’t expect his sycophant media darlings to breach that deep subject with him. It was similar to his statement that his big error was not having a “day after plan” for Libya. He drops these assertions then….silence.

We know at the very same time his intelligence radar was failing, he was dismissing the threat of the ISIS caliphate by calling them a JV team, making excuses for them, and instructing us that they are not Islamic. Or he was engaged in arguing against people — lecturing us on — using the term “radical Islamic terrorism.” He was lecturing Christians about the Crusades and our lack of love. Most of which he took great pleasure in.

What was going on there besides his malfunctioning radar screen? It was that he embarked on a misinformation campaign about it all. It seems to reveal he did know but was in denial and trying to deceive us about it. Obama’s fellow travelers were also busy saying that our real threat was not from ISIS — and their vast network of sympathizers — but from “homegrown,”white Christian terrorism. Aka “Look over there, don’t look at Islam.

That was all part of Obama’s misinformation campaign he rolled out on America while the Commander-in-Chief’s radar screen was supposedly on the fritz.

So he didn’t know or realize the threat of “ISIL” in real time. Normally he has to find out things from the media, first, and then be reminded while discussing his legacy.

Obama parses the damage by explaining it this way:

“Have we been flawless in the execution of what is a complicated policy in the region? Absolutely not. I think flawless is not available when it comes to foreign policy or the presidency, at least with mere mortals like me at the helm,” he told Zakaria. “But have we made, I think, the best decisions that were available to us, at each stage? The answer is yes.” – more

Still he claims to have made the best decisions… at each stage, even with a radar malfunction. Is he contemptible? Now we are being lectured about fake news stories.

RightRing | Bullright

Stocking the Cabinet of Deployables

Let’s review what Obama’s administration looks like: cabinet secretaries, sub cabinet, and all those influential and controversial Czars.

In order of succession to the Presidency: 15 cabinet, 6 sub cabinet, 32 czars

Vice President of the United States

Department of State

Department of the Treasury

Department of Defense

Department of Justice

Department of the Interior

Department of Agriculture

Department of Commerce

Department of Labor

Department of Health and Human Services

Department of Housing and Urban Development

Department of Transportation

Department of Energy

Department of Education

Department of Veterans Affairs

Department of Homeland Security

The following positions have the status of Cabinet-rank:

White House Chief of Staff

Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Management & Budget

United States Trade Representative

United States Mission to the United Nations

Council of Economic Advisers

Small Business Administration

Then there were all those controversial Czars which Obama denied were czars.

“Green Jobs Czar” ————- “Diversity Czar”

“Car Czar” ————————- “Cyber Czar”

“Intelligence Czar” ————– “Regulatory Czar”

“Safe Schools Czar” ————- “Border Czar”

“Science Czar” ——————— “Climate Czar”

“Energy Czar” ——————— “Afghanistan-Pakistan Czar”

“Pay Czar” ————————–  “Health Czar”

“Homeland Security Czar” or “Drones Czar”

“AIDS Czar” ————————- “Manufacturing Czar”

“Weapons Czar” ——————– “WMD Czar”

“California Water Czar” ——— “Asian Carp Czar”

“Great Lakes Czar” ————— “Information Czar”

“Technology Czar” —————– “Auto Recovery Czar”

“Drug Czar” ————————–  “Domestic Violence Czar”

“Urban Affairs Czar” ————– “Gitmo Czar”

“Mideast Czar” ———————- “Iran Czar”

“Stimulus Accountability Czar”

What’s missing? I know, how about a “Hope Czar” – Ambassador of Hope?

Oh but the Obama administration pushed back on using the term Czar. Maybe he just didn’t want to call them czars. Let’s hope Trump — or no other president for that matter — ever has a penchant for czars like Obama.

My reply to Hillary’s concession speech

Hillary delivered a self-centered concession speech, long after the results were known — away from her glamorous setting she had for winning.

My response to her is:

Frankly, my dear, I don’t give a damn!

Clinton’s exile begins.

The people are coming, the people are coming!

Hillary can’t hide from the truth

Hillary is like the first female ambassador of ISIS. She aided in creating ISIS. Now she claims they are rooting for Trump to win. Why would they do that, when no one did more for their efforts than Obama and Hillary?

Counter Jihad

The result was that the western part of Iraq once again became fertile ground for an Islamist insurgency. ISIS swept western Iraq because of the failures of Hillary Clinton and her boss, President Barack Obama.

But that is only half the story. ISIS also exists in Syria. How is it that the United States allowed it to survive there? Lee Smith, at Tablet magazine, points out that letting Syria fester was the intentional policy of the Obama administration — in order to cosy up to Iran.

Audacity: Clinton Claims ISIS ‘Praying to Allah’ to Elect Trump

Probably the scariest part is that she falls for propaganda and apparently gave up critical thinking some years ago. Now she says trust her to protect America’s interests.

For someone who will not say ISIS terrorists are Muslim or Islamic, she claims they are praying to Allah over Trump. I bet they are secretly hoping for Hillary — in their Islamic way — who’s been very, very good for them.

Conclusion: Hillary needs to be put out to permanent pasture with her hubby, Bubba and fenced off from public service, ever.

Obama’s vacation, it’s how he rolls

Over the week, Louisisana has flooded, we had riots in Milwaukee, and reports on cooked intell reports came out. And Obama was vacationing in Martha’s Vineyard playing golf.

Now some people in Louisiana are telling Obama to cut the vacation short, get in the plane and go to Louisiana to survey the damage. If you have to tell him to, what is the point?

He has no real compassion or empathy for the American people. But for radicals and racists, sure he’ll make time in his schedule. Heck, he wants to put on his marching shoes and march with them.

But for victims in America, whether its gays being killed in Orlando by a terrorist or floods in the South, the answer is a defiant “mail it in”. For BLM, bring them to the White House.

Repugnant, arrogant a-hole. Empathy does not exist in Obama.

Cooked Books on ISIS and beyond

Yet another symptom of the national disease rears its ugly head.

Scathing House Intel Report on ISIS Fuels Trump’s Attack

Foreign Policy Magazine
A new report showing the Pentagon exaggerated its battlefield successes gives the GOP nominee fresh ammunition in the political fight over the terror group’s rise.

A new congressional investigation has concluded that senior military officials presented an overly positive spin on the progress of the U.S. fight against the Islamic State, but its initial findings stopped short of explicitly charging the Obama administration with cooking the books.

The White House shouldn’t break out the champagne: The findings could still be a lose-lose proposition for both the Obama administration and Hillary Clinton just as Donald Trump appeared to be on the ropes amid plunging poll numbers and sharp attacks from members of his own party. […./]

Read more

Funny how media always stops short of accusing Obama or Hillary of cooking the books. Where else does the direction come from? Well, FBI Dir Comey stopped short of saying Hillary should be prosecuted. However, Hillary and Obama are the two people most in need of prosecution in America. But that has been turned into a taboo.

A new area of investigation of Hillary’s Clinton Fundation corruption popped up and what happened? Loretta Lynch said it was more political so a case is not warranted. But the media can come out afterward to (1)clean up the news damage and (2)to say they did cover and talk about it, to say there was not much there. See that is the racket: no one can say MSM actually buried it, they just buried the truth about it.

The next step is Hillary and Bill will try to claim that DoJ’s failure to open the investigation was a validation that they did nothing wrong. (they’ve played that game for years) Who else could use a taxpayer-funded investigation failure as a political victory? Can you say Clintons? Look how much time and money these two cretins cost taxpayers.

Now we have the confirmation of cooking the books with false intelligence on ISIS progress. Nothing to see there for media. Except when the US uses phony intelligence to make policy it is very dangerous. Trump’s statement about Obama and Hillary being honorary founders of ISIS is a serious, egregious charge. Cooking our intelligence, because the C-in-C does not want bad news about ISIS, is no big problem to media. Imagine a Republican doing that? It must go to the President because he is in charge. We knew this was going on but when confirmation comes out it gets whisked away, like ISIS, as if it didn’t exist.

What scares many people is we know how important intelligence is. To have that cooked is akin to aiding and abetting the enemy.It puts our nation and military at risk because our policy and strategy is based on that intelligence. A foreign agent would like to taint our intelligence to compromise our mission. What is Obama doing then?

Obama vacations in style at Martha’s Vineyard preparing for his exit with faulty intelligence at his fingertips, which could jeopardize our country and future missions. He’s the Margaretta Commander in Chief. We even have an enemy he cannot name.

Accountability means nothing to Obama or the perfumed heiress Hillary. So he’s with her, she’s with him, Dems are with her and we are screwed. Where do they get off calling Trump a risk? Where are military, CIA, national security spokesmen who politically attacked Trump as unqualified? …It makes me sick.

RightRing | Bullright

Standing truth on its head for Hillary

Former CIA Dir Mike Morell put out a scathing op-ed declaring Trump is turned an unwitting agent of the Russian Federation.

That happens at the same time Media and Dems (as if there were a difference) are hell bent in collaboration to demonize Trump. The intentional lying and muddying campaign continue from Hillary. That is Hillary muddying her own record and actions because she cannot explain her record of lies. Then there’s her smear campaign on Trump by any means possible, Morell being the latest attempt.

Yet it continues against Trump. Its a scary thing when the DNC media, and all the establishment and their lackeys team up on one person. Had to know it was coming but to this level I’ve never seen before. There’s a genuine, massive conspiracy for you.

Morell could have just endorsed Hillary, but he wanted to harpoon him. That’s what he should have done. But he had to try to turn him into a Russian agent.

“On Nov. 8, I will vote for Hillary Clinton. Between now and then, I will do everything I can to ensure she is elected as our 45th president,” Morell wrote.

Isn’t that wonderful? Obviously he already is doing everything he can do, including label Trump a Russian agent. Actually, it only makes me wonder more about Hillary and Morell.

But there must be something really wrong with his eyesight.

“Donald J. Trump is not only unqualified for the job, but he may well pose a threat to our national security.”

“My training as an intelligence officer taught me to call it as I see it. This is what I did for the CIA. This is what I am doing now. Our nation will be much safer with Hillary Clinton as president.”

Okay, add to that the recent statements from Obama in his official press conference. He labels Trump unfit and a risk to national security or to be trusted. What hogwash. Obama has been the greatest threat America has had. He’s done more damage than anyone too.

Now here is the problem, if there was anything in question about Trump, he shouldn’t have been putting it out that way. I doubt op-eds are the prescribed method or procedure.

It does open the can of worms though. Obama was caught on a national stage being a dupe to Putin’s henchman telling him that he would have more flexibility after his election. Where was Morell on that? Where was Morell over the past eight years as Obama compromised our security? Oh, sorry, he helped push the phony video narrative on Benghazi, which the rest of us call Lying. What about Muslim Brotherhood ties?

Now he is warning us about a threat when we’ve been living with this growing threat from within for eight years. But you can always count on Leftists to stand truth on its head. Its a natural thing to progressives.

Remember it was Obama who laughed and mocked the Russian threat. He also minimized the threat of Iran too.

“And the 1980’s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back — because the Cold War has been over for 20 years.”

But it is Obama’s failed leadership and foreign policy from Clinton through, that caused the current crisis. He more less put his stamp of approval on ISIS. He set the stage for Libya’s failed state. He encouraged mass illegal invasion on our border. Now he is engaged in bringing Syrian (and who knows from where) refugees into our country and spreading them across the states. Then sanctuary cities. Trump complains and is called an agent?

The leaked DNC memos caused a reaction from Dems. Then Trump made a simple comment about her missing emails. See how quick they jumped on Trump saying he was inviting Russia to hack? (like they need our invitation) Then they said Russia was trying to influence our elections. But when they start to put stories in media about Trump being an unwitting agent, it is they who are trying to influence the election with scare tactics, undermining our election with Russia’s help. That a former CIA director is doing it is way beyond the pale. But then there are no limits.

I used to just see the hypocrisy on a massive scale. Yes but I didn’t realize how intentional it was. It’s not that the Left doesn’t care about being hypocritical, and they don’t. It is that they have so many reasons they need to be hypocritical for their agenda. It’s part of the job. To that end, Mike Morell gladly cooperates in this charade illusion.

Of course the ones we have to watch out for are Hillary and Obama commies, with all the related DC allies, cohorts and operatives. But they don’t want us looking at them. And media doesn’t want to talk about that.

RightRing | Bullright

What is the Terrorism debate about numbers?

What is this numbers game over the number of dead Muslims verses the non-Muslims?

I’ll give anyone the prize of the week if they can tell me why it matters so much that terrorists are (1)killing other Muslims and (2)that they are killing more Muslims than us — prsumably non-Muslims? Might as well watch this before it disappears.

This Georgia Professor goes off that terrorists are killing Muslims.

I confess I don’t understand her point of argument. But it is the same one even Obama uses. Since they are killing other Muslims, is that proof that they are not Muslims, Islamic or terrorists? No. Does it mean we are not a target or that they not are coming after us, as Buck Sexton said? No. Then what could it mean?

Note how the moderator, Don Lemon cuts Buck off and then proposes that maybe the terrorists are also Muslim? Of course, the only ones denying terrorists are Muslims is probably Obama and the White House. But what does that all matter?

Of course they are Muslim, Islamic Terrorists and of course they also kill other Muslims. Is anyone really disagreeing with that? I didn’t think so. But this seems to be their chief talking point, “they are killing Muslims too.” Well, duh! And this means what exactly?

They never tell us what it is supposed to mean. We are supposed to conclude that they are not just after us. Does it mean they aren’t targeting us only other Muslims? No. Whew, I feel better now because they are killing other Muslims too, not just us non-Muslims.

Terrorism, by design, has a certain randomization to it. Maybe that was frowned on at one time, by ethical terrorists, but seems to be justified now. (if there is any justification for terrorism in their minds) Come on, people, we are above this simple numbers game stuff. Why do they tell us all the time that we Americans and Westerners are their targets? Don’t you think they can rationalize killing 100 Muslims if 15 or 20 are non-Muslims? Can’t they also kill other Muslims that are in their way to prove a point and send a message to other Muslims? Of course. So this argument is almost as ridiculous as it sounds. But I am not trying to prove that they do not kill other Muslims. It should make the point that they are plenty evil enough to kill anyone. They’re terrorists, it’s what they do.

Her other point was just as bad, explaining their “lashing out” motivation. It sounds a little like John Kerry. So they kill out of weakness, out of desperation. I get it, the weaker they are the more of these attacks they do. Every time liberals try to explain terrorism they confuse the crap out of it and end up making excuses for terrorists. Like what we are doing is “a recruiting tool,” so stop it. Stop our action and the terrorists will stop? No.

This is to imply a terrorist’s mind is totally logical and rational. But Obama has been making these arguments for years and they don’t sound any better than they did then. And we’re told how logical Obama is. In fact, they are as old as the Saudi sand.

RightRing | Bullright

What did Charlie Daniels say?

I saw this article from November, 2013 and I was mostly through it cheering before I realized it was written by Charlie Daniels. Normally I’m aware of his writings when I read them. But at least you will know in advance who wrote it. It is all the more true now. A few selected excerpts:

The government that was founded to serve the people has turned the equation around and now they believe that the people are supposed to serve the government. That we should be willing to put up with whatever taxes they choose to levy, to abide by every ridiculous rule or regulation their bureaucratic little minds can conceive and allow them to regulate every facet of our lives…while they live above the law out of the clutches of Obamacare and shrinking retirement plans.

They pass out billions of dollars in contracts to their political allies and subsidize companies that have no hope of succeeding while they exempt those they choose from the programs they’re forcing the rest of the country into.

They can hire thousands of agents to enforce their will on the public.

They can forsake Americans in the Foreign Service – leave them to die without even attempting to rescue them.

They can look into a television camera and lie with a straight face.

Amidst all this passivity, however, there is great frustration, a smoldering, white-hot anger that only awaits a rallying point to ignite and become the most motivated political force in this nation.

If there has ever been a time in the history of this country for a true leader to step forth, it is now.

Read at: http://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/charlie-daniels/what-has-happened-america

This was worth going back to read, in the context of when it was written of course. But since then, even more has been exposed about this cauldron of corruption going on.

Is it any wonder now, a few years later, the way the election process has unfolded?

More of his articles: http://www.cnsnews.com/author/charlie-daniels

President – “On A Happier Note”

A frosty terrorism response to Turkey, and on to politics as usual.

Sorry, but we have never had a genuine “happier note” with Obama. Clearly his golden rule is never let terrorism get in the way of your political agenda. Turkey no exception.

Obama’s presidency has been terrorism by other means. He worries about offending his BFF Mo-Bro and the greater Islamic family. Obama stokes fears of Global Warming.

On Wednesday, Obama took less than a minute giving condolences to Turkey, saying he “called President Erdoğan” this morning. Then he said “On a happier note.” turning to the politics of his meeting in Canada. No matter how hard he tries, his climate change, global warming agenda will not defeat terrorism.

Contrast Turkey with Orlando where he didn’t even bother to call the governor. I cannot think of a more disgusting example of a President than Barack Obama, or their nominee.

We were told by Loretta Lynch that love and compassion are the solution to the terrorism in Orlando. Maybe if the victims in San Diego would have given the shooter another baby shower or housewarming, the Islamists would have taken a shine to them?

Now Hillary says

FB: “Terrorists have struck again in the heart of one of our NATO allies—and all Americans stand united with the people of Turkey against this campaign of hatred and violence. Already, stories of heroism on the part of Turkish police are emerging, as their quick actions to confront the suspects may have prevented an even worse tragedy. Today’s attack in Istanbul only strengthens our resolve to defeat the forces of terrorism and radical jihadism around the world. And it reminds us that the United States cannot retreat. We must deepen our cooperation with our allies and partners in the Middle East and Europe to take on this threat. Such cooperation is essential to protecting the homeland and keeping our country safe. Our thoughts and prayers are with the victims, their families, and the Turkish people.”

Do you mean “retreat” like you and Obama did in and after the Benghazi attack? You mean how you made excuses and lied about the source of that attack? You mean how we stood down our defense in response to that attack even while you were the chief proponent of military action in Libya? A place now known as a terrorist haven and failed state. Thanks.

John Kerry, live from Aspen, said:

“We are still collecting information and trying to ascertain what happened and who did it,” Secretary of State John Kerry told reporters Tuesday at the Aspen Ideas Festival. “And I won’t comment further on it except to say that this is daily fare. That’s why I say the first challenge we need to face is countering non-state violent actors.”

“Heigh-ho heigh-ho,” it’s off to collect we go…

    We dig dig dig dig dig dig dig
    In our mine the whole day through
    To dig dig dig dig dig dig dig
    Is what we like to do — Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs

You can bet that if Obama does say more about Turkey’s terrorism attack, it will be to lecture Christians for their reaction, lack of empathy, patience, or some nonsense. The brutal truth of the Islamic war on the West to be buried in a subterfuge of political attacks. Much like a terrorist cell, Obama really only has one thing in mind.

RightRing | Bullright

Word police, DHS, Jeh Johnson and speech p/c

DHS report before Orlando massacre: Political correctness needed to fight Islamic terrorism

Washington Times

A report by the Homeland Security Advisory Council released days before the Islamic terror attack in Orlando, Florida, stressed the importance of combating extremism by avoiding terms that might offend Muslims. A HSAC subcommittee first created by DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson in 2015 published its report on June 9. Some instructions found in the report include:…

More

The Daily Caller reports:

The report urges DHS officials to “Reject religiously-charged terminology and problematic positioning by using plain meaning American English.”

For example, the report says the DHS should be “using American English instead of religious, legal and cultural terms like ‘jihad,’ ‘sharia,’ ‘takfir’ or ‘umma.’”

The report acknowledges that, “There is a disagreement among scholars, government officials, and activists about the right lexicon to use around the issues of violent extremism.”

Nevertheless, the report states, “Under no circumstance should we be using language that will alienate or be disrespectful of fellow Americans.”

“We must speak with honor and respect about all communities within the United States. We should give dignity to the many histories and diversities within our nation and advocate for a consistent whole of government approach that utilizes agreed terms and words. Tone and word choice matter,” the report states.

Read more

It says that they should not use words like Sharia, Jihad, Takfir and refrain from using religiously charged terms. But the President of Islam defense goes to the prayer breakfast and lectures about Crusades and criticizes Christians.

The report advocates using and promoting gender diversity to youth. But avoid those things and terms that may be charged or problematic toward Muslims or Islam. Though any opportunity they get to critiize Christians or speak ill of them is acceptable.

For instance when they promote abortion and same-sex marriage, those are not divisive, religiously charged or problematic terms. My disgust meter registered a new high. Talking derogatorily about and marginalizing Christians is acceptable. In fact, it is encouraged.

I bet that would have some effect on Radical Islamic Terrorism.

Trump entering the great Unknown

Off we go int the wild blue yonder. That’s the sentiment I feel. so we enter a new era — or error if you naysayers prefer — of the great unknown of Trump. We entered still not knowing where it will lead, or what the way out will look like if there is one. Or does this, as some say, change everything into the future forever? I’m not quite sure yet being a bit more a realist, based on what we can see so far. But compared to what we now have….

Let me add some color to that, not necessarily between the lines because many of them have been erased. I take all this mostly as a good thing, as I have for months . But I know how many people disagree or question even mild optimism about all the Trumpism.

Now that the confirmation is official that he is R-nominee, there is a period at the end of the sentence. I’ve been flushing out some of my unspoken thoughts. I haven’t changed my mind on things due to Trump. I don’t have any phony reasons for supporting him. I have my own conservative philosophy and Trump meshes with it in many ways.

First, what is needed in the US. We keep looking, hoping for a Reagan. But I’m not sure there is one, or that it is possible anymore. In some ways, America moved on since the Reagan years. Sadly, we disintegrated after the pinnacle of Reagan. His legacy now is even twisted or skewered regularly by liberal Democrats. Though I still remember much of the criticism then. They really ganged up on him at the time and it had an effect with the public. It finally became clear that we were lucky for his leadership and wisdom. They could not take that support away from him. Trump was demonized, but then it backfired.

Trump vs Fox the real reality series — Exhibit A.

“How Trump Beat Fox News”

By Amy Moreno May 29, 2016 (excerpt)

Donald Trump is me because he said out loud the things I had been screaming at my TV for 8 years. He validated the anger I felt at my political party for deceiving me – and even more importantly, thanks to Trump I began to understand why they betrayed me. Donald Trump woke me up from a clueless slumber where I assumed that if you had an “R” in front of your name we were on the same team.

Boy, was I wrong.

So, when my BFF Fox News began attacking Trump with an endless array of snarky comments and a parade of nonstop negative commentary, they weren’t just attacking Trump – they were actually attacking me – and I defended myself, my point of view, my frustration, and my lifestyle by fighting back.

Hardcore.

I took to social media and I boldly pointed out every snarky comment and bias criticism spoken by my friend Fox News. From the rolling eyes of Dana Perino to the petty one-liners of Greg Gutfeld, every unfair jab at Trump was addressed – because those stupid facial expressions and juvenile zingers that were intended solely for Trump, struck the heart of millions of disenfranchised people who had been screwed sideways by an arrogant government and shunned by elitist pundits who whistled irrelevant tunes from gilded cages – both of these groups blissfully detached from the real-life struggles facing the very people they professed to support, understand, and speak on behalf of. ,,,/

Read More: http://truthfeed.com/?p=4560

The common denominator is a lot of people identified with Trump. His words were different and his ideas had outsider written on them. Whatever you thought of him, he was definitely not the establishment pick. Fox only confirmed the mountain of estabo opposition to him. The more they said no way can he be the nominee, the more he kept winning. It seemed he only became more popular in spite of all their criticism.

The multifaceted Trump campaign is nothing we’re seen before. Multifaceted because he is running multiple campaigns all at the same time. He runs against Clinton and his political opponents, which is one big campaign. He also has to run against the media and Left-wing attack organizations — a few more. Trump ran a successful attack on media. Something I haven’t seen another candidate or politician do. Then he has the business campaign that attacks his business interests, plotting against him. Most of it may be coming from the Left but there are still various campaigns.

The beauty is that none of the common negative expectations have worked so far. Trump is unique and so are his results. Odds that before were insurmountable now aren’t. Undefeatable opponents no longer are. That is the good news. The bad news is that it all does not stop. In fact, they are trying even harder. The attacks come from everywhere: media, pundits, Hillary and her many surrogates, organizations and protestors. Almost anyone who has an interest in opposing Trump. Since he represents change, that means almost everyone. Funny how a lot of people don’t want change. On top of it all, now attacks come straight from Obama and the White House, even while on foreign shores.

Obama had his live from Asia jabs. He claims to speak for the world leaders. He sure made a mess of his loyalties. Trump is somehow the problem. Funny how people think just the opposite. Obama the wrecking ball of the US passes judgment.

That’s where the great unknown optimism comes in. Usual politics do not seem to apply. The danger is it could lead to an overconfidence that he cannot be stopped. Finally something has worked to oppose status quo, the media and politics as usual. And it has been messy, what would you expect? So some world leaders are rattled. Since when is that a major concern? But maybe a certain US pric is rattled, and that’s a good thing.

RightRing | Bullright

Obama’s historic achievement: escaping accountability

The liberal-Marxist Left told us how historical Obama’s election was. Four years later they pumped out the same BS. I have a perspective about it all. It may be early yet.

After January 23rd, we will pass the opportunity to impeach or try him for treason. And he’ll have escaped that accountability, in tact. Done. Truth is they were not going to do that, and Obama anticipated as much. It was one thing fixed in Congress they would not do no matter. They were never going to hold Obama accountable.

Given Obama’s massive malfeasance record, if it did happen, imagine what that mountain of case would have been like? And imagine the cost and the time and resources it would take? Look how long it took with Eric Holder, on the IRS commissioner, with Hillary’s emails, or with the Benghazi investigation.

Now considering Obama’s track record, I’m not going to list it all. But I have to give these Leftist radicals credit for one thing. When they do something FUBAR, they do it right. They want to make sure it is beyond all repair.

Do we really need proof? They make sure they commit so many atrocities and abuses that it is hardly possible to keep up or deal with them all, by design. That is part of the insurance policy that you cannot deal with them all. If you did, it would suck up all the time and how many congresses would it take? Look at Obamacare, they lie and use whatever means trying to make it irreversible. It’s true to form of Alinsky tactics, overwhelm your opposition. Then blame them.

So to them this is a beautiful thing having all these conditions in their favor. You would not have enough time or manpower, never mind cooperation. The abuses go on daily. It is the closest thing to King George and the founders as we have seen. Just read the list of grievances in the Declaration. It screams a long train of abuses: “fatiguing” legislative bodies, and “obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws.”

The point is Obama has something to be proud of, when he passes that date, and even now, that he will not have been tried, impeached, even censured for his actions. And how long will it take to correct whatever we can? But so much damage is already done.

When they do something FUBAR, they do it right. They go all the way.
Regardless, we can still be sure that nothing will be done.

RightRing | Bullright

Eric Holder, Obama and Snowden

Obama disagrees with Holder on Snowden

By Susan Crabtree | Washington Examiner

President Obama does not agree with the view of his former Attorney General Eric Holder that Edward Snowden performed a “public service” by leaking classified documents about the United States’ sweeping surveillance programs.

Holder, in an interview with CNN’s David Axelrod over the weekend, said Snowden’s illegal act had some silver linings for people by shining a light on U.S. surveillance techniques. But he also said the former contractor for the National Security Agency must pay a penalty for the crimes.

White House spokesman Josh Earnest was unequivocal in his response to a question on whether Obama agreed with Holder’s perception that Snowden’s actions had some redeeming qualities for the public.

“A careful review of [Obama’s] public comments will indicate that he does not” share Holder’s view, Earnest said

Read: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/obama-disagrees-with-holder-on-snowden/article/2592644

Odd that Obama would be forced to publicly disagree with Holder. So Axelrod interviews Holder, and that is real credible journalism? I wonder if this is the beginning of the talk which is to end in a Snowden pardon? Since when should a former AG come out to defend a criminal? But then these guys are radicals, it’s what they do.

Press vetting and NACH

The National Association of Collective Hypocrites has run out now with an army to dig up stories and information on Trump. Amazon CEO, Jeff Bezos told his Washington Post to dig up everything they can find on Trump, “doing articles about every phase of his life.”

From what Bob Woodward admitted to Fox, the Bezos mandate is a political initiative to influence the ballot box. He warns that people must have access to all information about Trump before going into the voting booth. “The New York real estate world is more complex than the CIA,” Woodward says. Complexity is a rationale.

But they unabashedly stomped all over the news on Barack Obama, even on Hillary. Instead of digging and putting information out there, they played a game of wack-a-mole waiting for any critical stories about Obama to surface and then aggressively beat them down, collectively. Rhodes and Gruber both confirmed media’s role.

They outright refused to vett him, dismissing or completely ignoring huge stories like Constitutional qualifications or his birth certificate. They operated under the assumption that we must prove he is not qualified rather than actually vetting him for people to decide. Media either did not want people to know or have fundamental questions about Obama. They wanted everyone on board with their narrative of a historical election — reassuring serfs that all was well in their kingdom. “Complexity” then was their excuse.

Only racists cared about Obama’s history or life. Only racist bigots cared about his qualifications. He tried writing two biographies just to keep people from concentrating on his disturbing history. Obama called people bitter clingers. Then the media buried anything critical of him. Revisionists were in high demand.

Imagine if Ben Franklin were around to see what they did? They abdicated their duty and wanted people to go into the voting booth without critical information about Obama. They wanted people to ignore basic questions and information — the dumber the better. And once elected, they declared the time for questioning was over. They told us the American people elected him. They told us the information was out there but we elected him anyway. They put a an exclamation point at the end of the sentence. “Game over!”

Old Ben would be shocked that the modern press apparatus collectively took a pass to vet or cover Obama with anything near a hint of objectivity. He’d wonder how they could intentionally do that and what their real purpose was for doing it?

So now we have a citizenry fed up with the elite political establishment, but secondly just as fed up with the mainstream media agenda. Oh right, they are one and the same now — another thing Franklin would find fascinating and troubling. That this collective cabal would essentially decide who our president should be and that voters would be putty or pawns in media’s hands.

Now the National Association of Collective Hypocrites pulls out their rule book to say it is their job to dig into every faucet of one’s life and expose all the character flaws of the candidate. Anything short of that would be dereliction of their duty. And they’ll tell us the public demands it and nothing less. We could not shame them into vetting or questioning Obama. They can’t even report on what he has done in office. Instead, like Rhodes claimed, the press are only echo chambers for the administration. But truth about Obama’s agenda could be toxic and even hazardous to the press — thou shalt not be critical of Obama.

RightRing | Bullright

Iran from bad to worse

GOP Failure Theater: the Iran nuclear vote, Cruz-Rubio edition

By: streiff (Diary) — May 8th, 2015 | Red State

Failure Theater. When the GOP talks a good game about opposing Obama’s policies but, in fact, vote to go along with them.

Yesterday the US Senate voted 98-1 to go along with whatever Barack Obama decides to give to Iran. Though the feckless Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN) has portrayed it as a successful “bipartisan” bill, part of Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY)‘s erotic dream of “governing”, in fact it is a huge defeat for our Constitution. By turning the treaty process on its head, by giving Obama carte-blanche to do as he will unless Congress can muster the necessary 2/3 vote to abrogate his actions, the GOP has effectively taken the Congress out of any role in shaping US foreign policy.

This bill, thanks to Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY)‘s bipartisanship fetish did not even require the Iran cease supporting terrorist attacks on Americans. Nope, reasoned the addled Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN) and the big brain types in the GOP leadership, requiring Iran to forego terrorism before we help them get a nuke was just too much. Obama would never stand for it.

http://www.redstate.com/streiff/2015/05/08/gop-failure-theater-iran-nuclear-vote-cruz-rubio-edition/

So much for strategy. And Obama is running around complaining about the Republicans? Incomprehensible chaos. Maybe Iran could nickname its program “bipartisan”?