Obama does the mosque shuffle

So Obama does a reach out to Muslims by going to a well-known mosque with radical ties. What else would anyone expect?

Washington Times

The Islamic Society of Baltimore had an imam who was a leading figure in the extremist Muslim Brotherhood. The organization also is connected to the Islamic Society of North America, a Muslim civil rights group named as an unindicted co-conspirator in a 2008 criminal prosecution in which several individuals were convicted of funneling money to the terrorist group Hamas.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jan/30/obama-visit-baltimore-mosque-show-support-muslims/

On the other hand, as a radical, he ought to fit right in.

Major WH announcement coming

(satire)
This is news you won’t read anywhere else. If you do, don’t believe it. Obama prepares to make his final SOTUS while set to make another announcement.

The day after the State of the Union, he will make a statement about the 2016 election. Obama is expected to announce that, because Hillary is now such a failed candidate, he has decided to run in 2016. Since gun control is such a top issue, and no one else can take it on, he wants to keep guns out of the hands of Americans, er bad people.

The decision is final, according to anonymous advisers. He will officially run as Barry Soetoro. He plans on putting Bernie Sanders on the ticket. Democrat insiders are thrilled.

RightRing | Bullright

When reality catches hell

So we have a man in the Oval Office who believes winning is everything in politics and elections, but sees victory in a war against evil as a meaningless pursuit.

The proverbial question always comes to: is Obama stupid and incompetent, or is he intentionally undermining the country? After much thought I came to the conclusion that yes he’s dumb in many ways, but what he’s doing is very intentional, despite the disastrous results and effects of it all. That could be a good definition of ideologue.

But it is even worse than that. Along with his ideology that permeates everything, which alone would make it hard to defend our country, I believe he is incapable of defending the country. He is not mentally and physically capable, meaning it could come to refusal if someone tried to coerce him into it. So he flat out doesn’t have the will and is incapable, whatever the cost, of doing what is necessary and securing this country. I don’t think we ever saw that with any other President or Commander-in-Chief.

Contrary to Fox’s Bill O’Reilly calling Obama incompetent at every turn, which by now that is almost a laughable insult. The man is incapable of defending this country.

Another thing creeps into the media narrative. The pundits say these policies are political correctness run amok. I almost wish it were that simple. The actions from the justice department — executive amnesty, workplace violence, detainees, enemy swapping, Islam apologetics, anti-police policies, anti-whistle blowers, batched IRS investigations, sanctuary city policy, refugees, lack of accountability, biased civil rights investigations, gun control — are far more sinister than just political correctness run amok. There is a subversive agenda, they only use political correctness as the justification. They’ would like us to think political correctness was the cause of their policies when it is just the means.

Incompetence and political correctness became insults, cheep excuses. I only wish it were.

RightRing | Bullright

Obama pushing back on terrorism label

Report: Obama Told NSC And FBI To ‘Downplay’ Terrorist Angle Of San Bernardino

Daily Caller

The FBI has taken heat for failing to immediately classify the San Bernardino shootings as terrorism, but a new report shows that FBI reluctance could have been due to external pressure from the White House.

A source told Jack Murphy of SOFREP that the FBI instantly believed the shooting, which left 14 dead, to be a clear act of terrorism. The White House, however, didn’t feel the same way and quickly moved in to squash the terror classification.

And why not. it worked for them on Benghazi? You might say they have plenty of experience. I guess Obama’s idea of fighting terrorism is fighting the labeling of it.

This source added that as soon as the shooting took place, Obama convened a meeting with the National Security Council and the heads of other federal enforcement agencies to discuss a public relations strategy. — more>

 

So that photo the WH had strewn across media of Obama meeting with his advisers in the Situation Room was a deceptive photo-op. The picture we never saw from Benghazi he makes sure we see now. Except he was pushing back on calling it terrorism.

Obama’s idea for a P/R strategy meeting was brainstorming to oppose a terrorism narrative. We actually made jokes about that but now it is confirmed that’s exactly what he was doing. It was self-serving for Obama to manage and strategize the story. That is what the situation room is to him, a political strategy room. Funny how even the pictures are deceiving with Obama. It validates my lack of trust for any actions of BHO as CiC.

What a self-centered creature of politics and narcissism. It’s a pathetic state of reality.

What we knew on Bergdahl swap

But what will they do about it?

The Hill:

The report said the administration broke a law requiring it to give members of Congress 30 days’ advance notice of any detainee transfers from the Guantánamo Bay detention facility, where the senior Taliban leaders were held.

http://thehill.com/policy/defense/262772-house-report-says-obama-officials-misled-public-on-berghdahl-swap

Don’t we just love how they investigate the illegal actions of this administration but then cannot or don’t do anything? So, for the record now, we found he broke the law. But we knew that. Everyone with a 5th-grade education knew he did.

Thanks Congress, that was a real tough call.

Obama’s Rendezvous with Terrorism Speech

Dr. Evil acted the part delivering his post terrorism address. But after assorted tries he finally attempts to nail down a message — a message but not a strategy. 4-Point BS.

First, was his comment he would call the president of France later to express his sentiments on the Paris attack. Then, when in Paris, he had a failed press conference getting hammered by questions on terrorism. Then he went to Manila and made statements on the terrorism attack, refusing as he does to call it Islamic terrorism. Then after San Bernardino was labeled an act of terror, he delivers his Saturday address talking about gun control So third bite at the terrorism apple, he has an address on terrorism. He finally called it terrorism only when he could not deny it.

Obama needed to mute the criticism of not making a formal announcement about it. Alas, still, maybe it is Americans fault for the non-inclusive prejudice against Muslims and our rampant Islamophobia? Hardly, they threw the terrorist couple a baby shower just months before. That’s a sure sign of Islamophobia.

All’s fair in warfare, or maybe not.

Obama has become the problem in the way Islam has become the problem. Complacency has led to being complicit. If he wants to manage this homeland terrorism how he managed ISIS, then we are certainly in for more pain with no gain. Obama’s complacency has brought us to this point. So if Sen. Blumenthal can declare Congress complicit for failing to enact gun control, then he should see the reality that Obama is complicit by his failures.

Islam is complicit by their complacency for years to do anything about it. There is a war within Islam, except there is only one side fighting it. Radical Islam is at war with us and only one side is really fighting it. But Obama is building a Climate Caliphate saying that will prove something to ISIS and Islamists.

The San Bernardino attack proved the fallacy in the administration’s terrorism theology. Remember that one? They claimed terrorists are caused by lack of jobs and poor socioeconomic conditions. Syed Farook was working for the government, with all the perks, as a so-called public servant. Scrap that theory, or label government employment a prerequisite for terrorism too. Nope. Oh, then it was droughts are the cause terrorism. There must have been a drought in San Bernardino. He was a health inspector of restaurants. But if only we could give them good jobs and good economic conditions, and prevent the climate from causing droughts. Then stop them from being victims, too.

Obama spoke from the Oval office:

Tonight, I want to talk with you about this tragedy, the broader threat of terrorism, and how we can keep our country safe.

Again he refers to it as a tragedy. Can we move on to the terrorism it was?

The FBI is still gathering the facts about what happened in San Bernardino, but here is what we know. The victims were brutally murdered and injured by one of their coworkers and his wife. So far, we have no evidence that the killers were directed by a terrorist organization overseas, or that they were part of a broader conspiracy here at home. But it is clear that the two of them had gone down the dark path of radicalization, embracing a perverted interpretation of Islam that calls for war against America and the West. They had stockpiled assault weapons, ammunition, and pipe bombs. So this was an act of terrorism, designed to kill innocent people.

Yes, thank goodness the FBI already determined it was terrorism, so you are a little late informing us of that. Still he emphasizes coworkers, as if that really had anything to do with it, except to provide them an opportunity for a soft target. But there he goes parsing the words that we have no evidence of connection to a wider conspiracy at home. (Disclaimer alert) Tell that to the dead and victims in San Bernardino. We know they were connected to terrorism abroad and she swore allegiance to the Caliphate. Pay no attention to that or his trip to Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. The obvious money connections mean nothing either. Oh, it must have been a lucrative government job to amass that arsenal of supplies by his lonesome, making that socioeconomic cause even more ridiculous. They must have dumped all that income into Islamic radical terrorism. So just lip service calling it radical terrorism.

Then he finally admits it is an act of terrorism, born of a radical religious ideology. The “perverted interpretation” some argue is more common and mainstream than many people accept. So this was cover for Obama’s ass to call it terrorism and implying a radical element to it. They were not just walking along, minding their own business, and fell victim to this perverted radical Islam, as victims themselves. No, there were only those real victims and the shooters were not victims. An ISIS spokesman prayed God would accept them as martyrs. Yep, martyrs that kill 14 and wound others in an ambush attack? Definitions shift like Obama.

Our nation has been at war with terrorists since al Qaeda killed nearly 3,000 Americans on 9/11. In the process, we’ve hardened our defenses — from airports to financial centers, to other critical infrastructure.

Wait, you mean the War On Terror term that you abolished in political correctness and naive strategic failure. A war you tried to undermine by scrubbing any reference to radical Islamism in our strategy, plans, or rules. And your war on the term “terrorism?”

Intelligence and law enforcement agencies have disrupted countless plots here and overseas, and worked around the clock to keep us safe.

Our law enforcement and intelligence agencies have been hampered and crippled by your P/C-fied policies and playing politics with our nations security. Treasonous by nature. If someone would have hindered our response after Pearl Harbor would we have allowed it? You mean those counter-terrorism measures our people carried out in spite of your undermining the central objective to root out Islamic terrorism in and out of the country. Kudos to them for that.

And I know that after so much war, many Americans are asking whether we are confronted by a cancer that has no immediate cure.

No, most of us know that, though it could be called a cancer, there is a cure even a short term one you are unwilling to commit to. And making statements calling it a JV team is not the prescription, nor is the denial about the source of this terrorism and ideology. That even inspires the cancer to grow. Pampering Muslims does little to combat it in the immediate future and makes it harder to confront in the longer term. An effect not lost on the terrorists.

Well, here’s what I want you to know: The threat from terrorism is real, but we will overcome it. We will destroy ISIL and any other organization that tries to harm us. Our success won’t depend on tough talk, or abandoning our values, or giving into fear. That’s what groups like ISIL are hoping for. Instead, we will prevail by being strong and smart, resilient and relentless, and by drawing upon every aspect of American power.

You do not have to tell us the threat is real. That is confirmed in real time. You’ve been in denial about it all along, deceiving, saying things like the world has always been a dangerous place. Seems you have no issue with tough talk when it comes to Republicans or even shutting down the government, or getting your way — any way you can, even abusing the Executive-Order pen. Tell us what groups like ISIS are hoping for. Inaction is what they are hoping for and counting on. We are being smart, then, by denying the severity of the threat, by relentlessly criticizing our own people for calling it a threat? Drawing upon every aspect of American power? Really, that is the height of deception you’ve been engaged in. You have constrained and criticized the use of American power. Instead, you use the bully pulpit to chastise American patriots. You take shots at Congress from foreign shores and play politics with our resources, including our military.

So in that manner we will succeed? This blind faith in you strategy has not been working to date, but still you say just believe and stay the course. (the one that brought us to this point) Strong, smart, resilient, relentless. Being strong and smart is not something we lack. It is you that has buried your head in the sand, as in Benghazi blaming it on a video for political reasons. Being nowhere to be found on the night of the Benghazi attack. Or going into Libya by sidestepping Congress. And look where that has led. Or your support and direct involvement in the Arab Spring from the beginning, and the Muslim Brotherhood. Again, a fruitful exercise.

Here’s how. First, our military will continue to hunt down terrorist plotters in any country where it is necessary.

But it is not just the social planners of terrorism who are a problem. It is the terrorists on the street, in sleeper cells that do the damage, and lone wolves.

In Iraq and Syria, airstrikes are taking out ISIL leaders, heavy weapons, oil tankers, infrastructure. And since the attacks in Paris, our closest allies — including France, Germany, and the United Kingdom — have ramped up their contributions to our military campaign, which will help us accelerate our effort to destroy ISIL.

You mean the lackluster politically correct effort you made so far? But now France and others have stepped in to do something besides return armed bombers. Since now you have finally allowed hitting oil tankers. Wouldn’t it have been achievement if you had done some of that before, when ISIS columns were moving into the neighborhood?

Second, training and equipping to the tune of 500 million that produced four warriors.

Third, working with friends and allies sounds a lot like the first. Wait for others, lead from behind. Works every time.

Fourth, more American leadership from behind in the international community “to focus on the common goal of destroying ISIL — a group that threatens us all.” Let’s hope that proves more productive than the Iran deal. A leadership that you, Obama, have failed to demonstrate so far. I only wish you would show the same passion for that as you have for the global warming agenda.

This is our strategy to destroy ISIL. It is designed and supported by our military commanders and counterterrorism experts, together with 65 countries that have joined an American-led coalition. And we constantly examine our strategy to determine when additional steps are needed to get the job done.

You mean those changes you have been so stubbornly against? Yeah, more of that. Or you mean the job of leaving it for the next president to deal with after you removed the thousands of support troops from Iraq and grew the numbers and support for ISIS?

That’s why I’ve ordered the Departments of State and Homeland Security to review the visa program under which the female terrorist in San Bernardino originally came to this country. And that’s why I will urge high-tech and law enforcement leaders to make it harder for terrorists to use technology to escape from justice.

Finally, after an DHS spokesperson said they stand by that policy, you will now “review”(look at) that visa program. Lets hope you don’t look at it like you did the Keystone Pipeline.

To begin with, Congress should act to make sure no one on a no-fly list is able to buy a gun. What could possibly be the argument for allowing a terrorist suspect to buy a semi-automatic weapon? This is a matter of national security.

It is actually a red herring. A great talking point on the left. We have a program plagued with problems now which you want to use to control gun screening.

Finally, if Congress believes, as I do, that we are at war with ISIL, it should go ahead and vote to authorize the continued use of military force against these terrorists. For over a year, I have ordered our military to take thousands of airstrikes against ISIL targets. I think it’s time for Congress to vote to demonstrate that the American people are united, and committed, to this fight.

Another red herring, the Constitution or anything else has not stopped or prevented you before from acting, such as in Libya.

We should not be drawn once more into a long and costly ground war in Iraq or Syria. That’s what groups like ISIL want. They know they can’t defeat us on the battlefield.

That makes no real sense. If they cannot defeat us on the battlefield, why would they want us there? I get it, you are not interested in a war, even if they have declared one on us. Yet you call on Congress to declare authorization for you to act.

Even in this political season, even as we properly debate what steps I and future Presidents must take to keep our country safe, let’s make sure we never forget what makes us exceptional.

Right never forget what makes us exceptional, while denying we are exceptional. That makes sense. By the way, a good many people wish they could trust you.

Let’s not forget that freedom is more powerful than fear;

Let’s talk about that. We aren’t forgetting and haven’t. Just that we value our freedom and sovereignty more than you do. You want to entangle us and give away our sovereignty. How does that make us free or freer?

Now that you mention fear, you are building a Climate Caliphate based and founded on fear. And it seeks to limit our freedom and economic freedoms. How is that compatible with what you advocate? More specious words meant more to deceive rather than heal a climate of frustration with your use(abuse) of power.

RightRing | Bullright

Dr. Evil will speak on terrorism, security

So Dr. Evil, Obama will make a speech Sunday in prime time to address the nation’s terrorism concerns. Days after San Bernardino’s terrorism, the FBI finally says it is investigating it as an “act of terrorism”. Obama, who inspires confidence in less than a third of the country, now feels compelled to make a national speech to reassure people he is taking terrorism and security seriously. Talk talk talk, which is all he ever does.

And what he actually says denyies the Islamic connection to the terrorism and denies the problem we know it is. So his denial has played an active part in supporting the greatest enemy of America right now, Islamic radicalized fascists.

The real problem we didn’t know at the time was if San Bernardino was part of a wider terrorism plot yet unfolding, or an individual cell acting on it’s own. We were hardly reassured by the way they handled it from the beginning. If it was a real time plot unfolding we were kept in the dark and police collecting the bodies afterward was treating the symptoms not the disease. If they were actively preventing an ongoing real-time threat, they didn’t inspire confidence that they were up to the challenge or investigation. Just compared to France there is a big difference.

All that now behind us, after coming to terms with calling it terrorism, Obama will now seek to calm the fears of people that he is taking action, while continuing the denial of Islamic connections to the terrorism. He seems the only person in the world who is not willing to make that connection. Even Muslim countries do not deny the association.

Loretta Lynch has already said her biggest concern is blowback or Islamic hatred — Isamophopbia. Only in Obama’s world are these events downplayed as unrelated to a larger terrorism picture. Terrorists seek to maximize their physical impact while Obama seeks to minimize their (global) impact. That does no one any favors. When he downplays the threat it posses, he does the enemies work for them. Then they seek greater impact, a game no one should want to play. No one but Obama. So rather than confronting reality, he considers gun control the bomb. Likely more of the same in Dr. Evil’s speech.

RightRing | Bullright
12/6/15 5:44 pm

Obama’s “hateful” rhetoric

Obama worries about people “…falling victim to hateful ideologies.”

In Obama’s Saturday Address:

“It is entirely possible that these two attackers were radicalized to commit this act of terror. And if so, it would underscore a threat we’ve been focused on for years — the danger of people succumbing to violent extremist ideologies.”

“All of us…need to work together to prevent people from falling victim to these hateful ideologies.”

I worry of people falling victim to that hateful ideology coming from the White House.

Are we all feeling like victims yet? The man who doesn’t know widows from terrorists.

Obama is worried about “loopholes” yet the fiancée visa loophole, or other amnesty policy (advocacy), is not a problem. DHS said they stand behind that policy. Let’s close those real giant loopholes in America. The 2nd Amendment is not a loophole!

RightRing | Bullright

Obama’s advice: go about your business

Obama said in the face of new terror threats, people should not give in to fear and continue going about their business, like shopping.

Okay, we’re shopping for a new president. That supports the economy too. We’re shopping for a whole new administration. But that seems easier than shopping for a new country.

In 2008, then Senator Obama accused Bush of being dumb.

“President Bush did some smart things at the outset, but one of the opportunities that was missed was, when he spoke to the American people, he said, ‘Go out and shop.'”

The difference is Obama never did any smart things. Oh, and that wasn’t what Bush really said but it doesn’t seem to matter.

Stories R US

I was going to do a post on Obama’s statements and threats. But why give them more attention if we aren’t going to do anything about them anyway? They get plenty.

I thought about doing a post on Hillary’s latest lies. But they are just like all the other lies, and all the other posts. All blend into the septic stew.

I thought about doing one on the real principles Jesus espoused, you know, opposed to lessons liberals harp about. Nah. He drove the money changers from the temple and look where they went.

I thought about doing one of my trademark satires but they end up being too true.

Well, I did notice something weird about this presidential race. Everyone says it’s about the outsiders vs the establishment. It probably is; though this election also seems to be about story lines. Most every Republican candidate has their own story line they are pushing. Not to mention most of them also have a book.

They have constructed or extorted these story lines so that, in turn, it is not an election about a certain individual, it is about the story he/she is promoting. I’m led to think that we are supposed to vote for best story line. It’s not just an outsider story. It’s an outsider, non-politician, neuro-surgeon. It’s about a mega-mogul, celebrity, real estate developer and builder.

So with that background, someone like Cruz has a problem that even his story line is not that big of a deal. Then you have Carly vying for any attention as a woman and business executive turned politician. We’re not asked as much to judge their qualifications as their degree of separation from establishment and their creative story line. Some are naturally better at promoting their story lines than others.

I wonder if we have not now entered the age of the story lines in politics? Is that the natural extension of identity politics? I think it might be. Look on the ither side and you have Hillary running as … are you ready for it…a woman. Then she adds that she would be the ultimate outsider as the first woman. And she already has her own story line which she doesn’t even have to promote. Everyone knows it and does it for her. So the first woman, who was also first lady, married to the serial rapist president doesn’t really work but all the other parts of it are there for the extorting. Now, whether they planned or want it to, this becomes a battle of story lines. That is if you follow the tactics the left uses in politics. Obama was much the same way. The Kenyan, Indonesian black kid rise to president. (we’re still trying to digest that story line and some of us cannot)

Now Trump takes that to the next logical stage. He gave a speech wherein he goes on a rant talking about the details of Ben Carson’s story line — in brief: angry poor black kid to Christian, to top surgeon, to candidate. Media has already gone all-in after Carson’s story. Knocking the candidate’s story is a twofer for the media, it also attacks his trustability polls that are higher than anyone’s. Of course Jeb Bush’s story line that he tries to ignore is the third in line to the Bush dynasty. So instead he promotes his preferred story line, and also tells it in Spanish — a real plus in his case. That includes leaving out the part about Bloomberg’s Foundation promoting abortion around the globe. He tries to make it as attractive as possible.

So we also have Rubio pushing his Cuban ancestry, only in America, story-book story line. Christie pushes his tough guy prosecutor thug image. Trump pushes his anti-P/C story line which allows him the freedom to say just about anything that in some way fits or works in his favor. People seem to like that ballsy approach even if they occasionally blush. Kasich has his own story line, a player all the way. Oh, Carly promotes the ‘woman’ secretary to CEO, to president story. Fill in the others. Cruz may be out-storied.

Is it not about character or ability anymore but about the story line? You can expect that blunt approach from Democrats in the general election.(who are still searching for a black or Hispanic transsexual woman candidate – man doesn’t work) Whoever promotes their story line narrative the best wins. Bernie Sanders has his own story working. He and Hillary are vying for historical firsts. Trump is an expert promoting his. Do people just want a story? Are we bored with positions and policy preferring a narrative instead?

RightRing | Bullright

Unfair and Unbalanced

If Fox News’ tag line is “Fair and Balanced,” then Democrats tag line must be Unfair and Unbalanced — and proud of it. Judging by the Benghazi hearing, they lived up to that standard. Enter the Benghazi Lie.

The story of an internet video was nothing more than a straw man for Democrats. They got as much mileage out of it as they could. Seeing Jay Carney’s prostration of what he had of a reputation before the public and American press pushing a lie was such an act of self-committed denial. But it was in his words that really told the story. He said there was no proof that it was not caused by the video.

See the construction of what we now know were carefully crafted words to deceive.

“What I’m saying is that we have no evidence at this time to suggest otherwise[than the video] that there was a preplanned or ulterior instigation behind that unrest.” — Jay Carney (9/14/12)

So without proof the the Benghazi attack was caused by the video, they asserted it as the reason. See that, lack of proof was never a problem. It’s a contorted abomination of logic: they demanded proof that it was not a video. But they already knew the attack was organized terrorism. It was only the public they were shoveling that lie to. Meanwhile, Hillary wrote to Egypt that we know this is a terrorist attack — and we know it was not caused by the video. Perhaps to reassure them, no matter what they heard from us publicly, that we do “know it was a terrorist attack” not a video reaction.

But the video had nothing to do with Benghazi. Yet they started this game of ‘prove it was not the video.‘ However, what they really wanted to make very clear — in their straw man case — was that the video was not in any way, had nothing to do with, the government.

“In terms of policy, we continue to make clear that in this case, we find the video reprehensible and disgusting. We continue to try to get the message out as broadly as we can that this video is — has nothing to do, is not in any way related to the American government. It does not represent who we are or what we believe. “

It’s funny that I never heard anyone make the case that the video did have anything to do with the government. So they brought in their own accusation that it did. Again without proof that a government-tied video idea was ever postulated.

All this is minor and insignificant, Democrats would say. No, it was very significant. It was a deliberate attempt to deceive, namely the families of victims and the public. That’s why Dems claimed so many times, nothing to see here, move along.

It was only one aspect of Benghazi that was so terrible. If lying didn’t get your ire up, then everything else they did there and about it afterward would.

Q Okay. And if I could just follow up on — you earlier said the cause of the unrest was a video, then you repeated something similar later on. And I just want to be clear, that’s true of Benghazi and Cairo?

MR. CARNEY: I’m saying that that — the incident in Benghazi, as well as elsewhere, that these are all being investigated. What I’m saying is that we have no evidence at this time to suggest otherwise that there was a preplanned or ulterior instigation behind that unrest.

Now you see, Democrats liberals always demand proof when you criticize them. In fact, Hillary’s whole defense is that “there is no evidence that she did anything wrong.” That’s their mantra. Obama told us there was not a smidgen of corruption in the IRS. How many times have they said “there is no evidence of that?” They are obsessed with evidence and proof on every scandal, but they had no evidence that Benghazi was caused by a video. Yet Susan Rice took to the air on that Sunday indicting a video that had nothing to do with it, without a shred of evidence to support it. As Jordan said, that was the message and explanation they took to the American public.

The other false narrative is that it is a political witch hunt, and Republicans are trying to take her down in her bid for President. Let’s deal with that in two parts. There is the political attack defense. Well, the scandal of Benghazi was created from playing politics — presidential campaign politics.(sound familiar?) Now they assert that politics is the problem with the investigation. While making their case, they played partisan politics to the max. They were even going to boycott the committee/investigation. Benghazi was politics from the beginning. That had everything to do with Hillary’s and Obama’s Libyan adventure. Politics was the central reason for Libya and Benghazi.

Secondly, it is a witch hunt by Republicans hell bent on taking her down. First, all these actions were Hillary’s alone and no one forced her. Witch hunt? So, since she is a premier candidate for President, no one is allowed to investigate her actions? Whoops, our bad! So because Hillary is a powerful and prominent person on the left, we aren’t allowed to investigate or question her motives and actions? I didn’t know she was off limits, especially now since she is running, because it may effect her political chances. Then they claim McCarthy stated/admitted it was a political witch hunt against Hillary. No, he didn’t. He stated as a matter of fact that they began a Benghazi investigation and her polls were now down. He did not say that was the motive.

Were they not to investigate because of her political prominence and that she was running, that would be acting for political reasons. Hillary is not stupid, almost the opposite. She knows everything done in Washington has a political angle to it. In fact, she is a stereotypical player in that environment. It was all through Libya and all over Benghazi. They suddenly have a problem with the political environment? I remember the left’s prediction for years was people won’t care about Benghazi in 2016. That won’t matter to voters. But Dems have been playing political footsie with this terrorist attack since it began. Not to forget playing politics with Mo-Bros throughout the ME.

But there was a point in the hearing when I thought it was taking a turn for the worse. ( if it hadn’t already) Near the end Hillary was talking, I believe, about the co-chair of the ARB and she appeared to suddenly choke on something and started a coughing fit. That’s it, I thought, she’s going to lay it out right here on live TV. She’s going to flat line and EMT’s are going to rush in to revive her. The headline will be the Republicans tortured her with grueling questions until she collapsed. Yes, an imagined story but no more a fictional one than Hillary and Obama were trying to sell the public on Benghazi.

Afterward, the liberal media declared it a masterful marathon by Hillary Clinton. (something to that effect) Yes, Hillary was the victim but she excelled and suffered though it all. (badge of courage) Rachael Maddow asked who else ever endured such a spectacle and treatment? I guess they don’t remember Scooter Libby or the contested testimony of General Petraeus, which Hillary declared “requires the willing suspension of disbelief”.

Stunner: Hillary said she didn’t recall when she spoke to Ambassador Stevens after sending him there. Being the gruesome facts and results of Benghazi, wouldn’t you think she would have remembered the last time she spoke to Stevens? And in over 3 years since, she hasn’t been able to remember.

Hillary: I’m taking responsibility and “I was not responsible for specific security decisions.” So her definition of taking responsibility is not taking responsibility. But she ran out to lie to people it was due to a video that she still insists had something to do with it. Again, no proof of that whatsoever. And no one other than the administration said it did.

RightRing | Bullright

Biden Backs Out

There that’s done! He makes an official WH speech to say he’s not running.
But all the hype and media foreplay up until now has not been lost on us, Joe.

So stand behind and consolidate around Hillary, that’s what will matter now.

The best way Joe Biden can campaign now is by not running.
(but Joe we could have told you that before)

But gaffe-on Joe, someone has to provide the entertainment for the Dem Circus.

Take A Number!

Obama’s baffling passivity on Jason Rezaian

Opinion writerOctober 16 | Washington Post

The consequences of President Obama’s passive foreign policy came close to home this week.

My Post colleague Jason Rezaian, the paper’s Tehran bureau chief, has been languishing in an Iranian jail for 15 months on bogus charges of espionage. He was put on secret trial by a kangaroo court. On Sunday, Iranian state TV reported that he had been convicted.

And Obama said . . . nothing. He didn’t go to the briefing room and make a statement. He didn’t even release a written statement. On Tuesday, his press secretary, in response to a reporter’s question at the briefing, responded with what might have been described as minor annoyance with the Iranian regime.

“We’ve got a number of concerns,” the spokesman said, mentioning the “unjust” detention and “opaque” process.

More: http://wpo.st/0Fph0

That’s the White House, Obama’s message. Pick a number, any number…

Which of that number is just wrong and causes Obama to say something? 0

But it’s really not so baffling, for Obama. Yet he can come out to “politicize” a shooting in Oregon before the bodies are moved. Speaking of opaque.

Conspiracies abound on WH

Well, so it is a fictional one. So what. With this guy in office about anything could happen. Ghouls in the White House wreaking havoc. Didn’t I see that movie already, I thought I did? Anyway it’s just a play, just entertainment, according to the creators.

Feds Spend $60,000 for Play About First Gay President Who Fights Zombies in WH Basement

Also an ‘adulterous First Gentleman’
BY: Elizabeth Harrington | Washington Free Beacon
October 9, 2015 2:35 pm

The National Endowment for the Arts gave $60,000 for the production of a play about the first openly gay president of the United States who has to fight zombies in the basement, and who has a cheating First Man.

Sen. Jeff Flake (R., Ariz.) highlighted the grant for “Zombie: The American” in his running series meant to expose wasteful spending.

“The year is 2063 and Thom Valentine, the first openly gay President of the United States, faces a host of problems,” reads the Woolley Mammoth Theater Company’s description of the play. “An imminent civil war, the threat of an African invasion, an adulterous First Gentleman, and zombies in the basement of the White House!”

“With his power, his marriage, and the nation’s well-being at stake, he must decide what he cares most about saving … and at what cost.”

More: http://freebeacon.com/issues/feds-spend-60000-for-play-about-first-gay-president-who-fights-zombies-in-wh-basement/

Whoa, orgasmic plot line! Could happen, you say? What else could they throw in… werewolves, zombies and sex? How about lies, scandals, usurpation and treason? Right, fiction. If someone endowed me with about 60.000 dollars, I think I could bring a good fictional, entertaining plot to fruition. It might be a tad better and more practical. The script is macabre and also has some wild characters.

An ah ha moment on Obama

In a recent conversation I had with Pepp on various topics, I came to a conclusion. I won’t speak for Pepp, she is very capable. It was surrounding Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran (and little Israel thrown in) and Obama’s foreign policy. All that matters is the conclusion which even stunned myself. I’m no fan of Obama or his foreign or domestic policies.

I suddenly realized that, in this volatile world with all that is going on, from Russia to the Middle East, I cannot foresee even the worst things happening in the world, where Obama could take any kind of action, that I could ever support anything big or small that he does using our military. That is a heck of a revelation.

The rule is usually in times of crisis you support the commander-in-chief. But I can’t think of a situation bad enough or simple enough that I could fully support. I am dead serious, though it was a matter of reasoning that out. Sometimes things come out in discussion with someone you wouldn’t realize outside of having that conversation.

There are a number of reasons. I’ll try to outline some of the majors:

A) He would not be trusted and would either throw our efforts or soldiers to the wolves, or under the bus in the situation.(for whatever motives)

B) He cleansed the ranks of many good career generals with experience, knowledge and backbone loyal to their oath.

C) He would not rely on best advice of the Pentagon or those in authority to know.

D) He would change the mission once engaged to some other purpose.

E) He would intentionally change the rules of engagement to suit his ideology.

F) His loyalty to the US cannot be counted on in any situation.

G) He is influenced or led by other interests outside USA’s interest.

H) He’s sided with others, opponents or enemies, while in direct military action.

I) He’s made deals with enemies to the US against our interests and security.

J) He would not be in it to win on behalf of US; other interests take priority.

K) He won’t stand up in the end for US interests or our security.

L) He would overrule or change the plans on a dime himself, for subverted reasons. Everything is fluid, he’s flexible to himself and his political interests.

M) He could and no doubt would undermine our military’s objectives for his own personal reasons, or others. (or his ideology)

O) He does not honor his oath or uphold the Constitution in the US as it is.

P) His words are meaningless anyway, and his credibility is O.

There are probably more. That’s the point. I don’t know of a situation where he or his motives could be trusted to do the right thing if required, and if people depended on it.

So, there is my basic conclusion, tough as it is to think about. Maybe others have already gone through that process. At least some in our military should have walked through the possibilities already. Thus, it is not a matter of trusting our military to do the right thing or be successful. He intervenes in that process into the mission. Intentional failure?

When a lot of people see it the same way, that’s a problem. And when our allies and enemies read it the same way, it’s definitely a real problem

Now I can’t say it would be completely intentional, who can read the diseased mind, but I can say he just cannot be trusted. This, of course, means from the simplest of presidential actions of diplomacy, to treaties, to full-blown military action — anything. That’s mine.

Coming black attractions

So what to expect with Farrakhan’s anniversary march in Washington this month? I wonder if it will get a shout out or endorsement from Obama or the White Spite House?

Fears surge over potential violence at Farrakhan ‘hate rally’

Ominously titled ‘Justice or Else’ on 20th anniversary of ‘Million Man March’
October 4, 2015 | WND

Twenty years ago there was the “Million Man March” in Washington.

Now, on the anniversary of the event organized by Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, comes “Justice or Else!”

Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson, the founder and president of the Brotherhood Organization for a New Destiny (BOND) and author of the new book “The Antidote,” calls it a “hate rally.”

He said evil will come out of the Oct. 10 event, including rising tensions between blacks and whites.

“This is a KKK rally,” Peterson said. “This is a skinhead rally.” …/

[Jesse Lee] Peterson said the outcome may not be pleasant.

“To law enforcement, this is a serious thing for you, because you’re going to have to go out there and calm these people down and protect them, and protect others from them,” warned Peterson. “I pray for you and pray that you watch your backs, because some of these folks at that rally will shoot you down standing there. And with that kind of hatred being encouraged in their hearts, there’s no telling what will happen there.”

Read more: http://www.wnd.com/2015/10/fears-surge-over-potential-violence-at-farrakhan-hate-rally/

The ‘Justice Or Else’ march, no implication there? He;s been working on and building this up for 6 months, so it’s hard not to expect fireworks. The only question is what will Obama and his cabal say? When it is others they have some snide remarks.

I’ve already heard behind the scenes discussion of what they want to do. Can we expect our “government” was listening? That was only a fleeting thought. Everyone in this piece agrees that Farrakhan and his comrades should be taken seriously. The days of dismissing them as just a marginal group have long passed.

Obama’s path of treason

Top General Admitting That Obama Knowingly Armed ISIS Committing Treason

Monday, August 17, 2015 | Before its news

WHEN DOES THE IMPOSTER IN CHIEF END UP IN LEAVENWORTH WAITING FOR HIS LONG WALK TO THE GALLOWS?

Forget blaming the “Evil Republicans,” forget blaming Fox News, forget blaming the “Vast Right Wing Conspiracy,” forget blaming race, forget blaming climate change, or lack of climate change, or any other damn thing liberals will come up with as an excuse to exercise their feigned outrage when the rest of the sane people in the country call His Highness’s Ass the TRAITOR that he is. I know how much liberals HATE facts, but they’re just going to have to deal with them here. As my favorite conservative talk show host Andrew Wilkow likes to say, “We’re right, they’re wrong. That’s the end of the story. The arguments here cannot be broken.” I’m [willing] to bet, many of you have a hard time looking in the mirror when you finish reading this, knowing that you did not get involved.

Article III, Section 3 of the United States Constitution:
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.
The Congress shall have power to declare the punishment of treason, but no attainder of treason shall work corruption of blood, or forfeiture except during the life of the person attainted.

Since liberals have an uncanny knack for what they call “reading between the lines,” I’ll further elaborate on Treason a bit.

Just so there is no confusion, “the mere attempt to provide support” is TREASON.

Continue http://beforeitsnews.com/politics/2015/08/top-general-admitting-that-obama-knowingly-armed-isis-2735122.html

Related: http://800whistleblower.com/top-general-admitting-that-obama-knowingly-armed-isis-how-is-this-not-blatant-treason/

So the story goes on as does the case against him, as he continues. Obama is an enigma; a living antithesis to the Constitution. He swore to uphold the very thing he is hell bent on violating and destroying.

Bush Dynasty dying on the vine, Hillary is in her swan song

The only thing optimistic in the establishment 2016 race now is it looks like both dynasty types are being flushed at the same time — or trying to be — in conjoined toilets At least according to assorted media reports anyway. It’s still worth broadcasting.

Hillary is going down in flames, even white women are aborting Hillary. So her prized constituency of estrogen is not so stimulated with Hillary’s “war on women” demagoguery. If that can’t keep them on board, what can?

The Planned Parenthood’s videos didn’t help much. Even NY Times announced she is now in danger of losing the primary. Seems Hillary’s presumptive anointing is being canceled with no rain date.

CNN said

So, what is going on among women voters? What seems clear is that Hillary is trying to appeal to women in an old-fashioned way that doesn’t work as well as it once did. Her team apparently thinks that by aggressively selling hard facts, advancing policies or giving her version of the email controversy, Hillary’s campaign will have women flocking to her banner.

Depends on the definition of “facts.” But we’ve heard the Hillary death rattles before.

Jeb, for his part — if he ever did get off the ground – is stumbling over itself on the way to the exit. His fundraisers and bundlers are now bailing out. But his campaign says not to worry, they were let go because that phase of the campaign is over. Say what? Ushering in the end of presumptive nominee Jeb era.

Politico

Earlier this week, the New York Times revealed that it had taken steps to rein in some of its spending and had gone so far as to cut some employee salaries. And POLITICO reported one Bush fundraiser expressed concerns about the slowing pace of the campaign’s fundraising after Bush’s shaky debate performance.

Since when did anyone throw out his bundlers and fundraisers? Especially a big money guy like Jeb Bush. What phase of his campaign is he in then, the postmortem phase or digging part? Sounds like another “Read My Lips” moment for another Bush.

Could it also be that the people – for their phase – have decided they really don’t like the idea of a Clinton vs Bush ticket? (and it does seem to be one ticket)

Well, the low-energy Bush is getting rolled by high-energy Marxists anyway.

The arrogant ‘Heartbroken’ bastid-in-chief is back in the Spite House

Oh, right, he never left…

Daily Mail reports:

‘It breaks my heart every time’: Obama reacts to shooting of Virginia TV reporter and cameraman as he says gun-related deaths ‘dwarf those that happen through terrorism’

President Obama has revealed he was heartbroken when he learned a TV news reporter and a cameraman were shot dead during a live broadcast in Virginia.

He also slammed the number of gun-related homicides in the United States, adding that it ‘dwarfs any deaths that happen through terrorism’.

Alison Parker, 24, and Adam Ward, 27, were gunned down by former employee of the CBS affiliate Vester Flanagan while filming an on-air, early morning segment.

The 41-year-old shot and wounded himself several hours later as police pursued him on a Virginia highway. He died later at the hospital, police said.

Speaking to ABC, Obama said: ‘It breaks my heart every time you read or hear about these kinds of incidents.’

Still waiting for word from Obama about the shooting death of a girl in Ferguson  doing her homework on her mothers bed. Not like they haven’t had days now to respond. But he took this one off the teletype to harp on gun control. Shameless.  There have been more car accidents than deaths of terrorism, too. So what is the point of that? There isn’t one.

The gun-runner in chief has problems with gun laws — or lack thereof?

Heartbroken in Waiting

Hillary also chimed in interrupting her server defense road tour.

‘So, yes, I feel just great heartache at what happened and I want to reiterate how important it is we not let yet another terrible instance go by without trying to do something more to prevent this incredible killing that is stalking our country.’

Democratic candidate for president Hillary Clinton also weighed in on the shooting, tweeting to her followers that she was ‘heartbroken and angry.’

‘We must act to stop gun violence, and we cannot wait any longer. Praying for the victims’ families in Virginia,’ the former secretary of state wrote.

More Daily Mail: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3211578/Two-Virginia-television-journalists-fatally-shot-air-attack.html

How long have we been waiting for the Truth about Benghazi to come out? Now she’s the impatient one, having got an ambassador and 3 American patriots killed in Libya, who operated a renegade server as Secretary of State. So she throws out the “war on women” nonsense and she can’t wait any longer. She should be indicted and banned from holding any public office. She won’t even say if she would approve the Keystone XL Pipeline. But she has a “war on the Second Amendment”.

Obama’s Cuban Crisis

Not much talk about this news, but then what would you expect from a media led around by the ruling class elites?

Apparently Cuban dissidents got their protest on. And while at it they are sporting Obama masks to blame him for Castro’s recent crackdown on freedom of expression. Well, they do have the right guy anyway. But if they think its bad there, they should see what Obama is doing to Amerika at home. Maybe they wouldn’t feel quite as jilted personally.

Protesters in Cuba Send a Message to President Obama By Wearing These Masks

By Joe Perticone | IJ Review

Nearly 90 individual activists were arrested in Cuba on Sunday, just days ahead of Secretary of State John Kerry’s expected visit to the new American embassy on communist island-nation.

According to Agence France-Presse, Cuban security forces engaged and arrested 40 or so activists who were marching through Havana wearing masks depicting President Obama.

“It’s [Obama’s] fault, what is happening… That’s why we have this mask on. Because it’s his fault.”

Read more>

As Secretary of State, John Kerry prepares to visit Cuba on Friday, they are gearing up for that in Cuba. It doesn’t look too good when people protest an administration for the effect they are feeling from its policies, while Kerry is meeting with Castros and smoking Havana cigars. I’d say its just the type of optics or visual that will tick the people off, especially when the hammer is coming down on them.

Yep, it’s Obama’s fault, it’s Kerry’s fault. And keep on going cause it’s Hillary’s fault too. Fresh off an Iranian deal from Hell, he is going to schmooze it up with dictators in Cuba. Love those optics. I wonder if the press coverage, surely in tow on the visit, will show any of the protest landscape in their live shots from the embassy? Nah.