Friday, July 25, 2014

SHOCK: Obama Wants Repeal Of Iraq War Authorization To Guarantee No U.S. Troops Can Stop ISIS, Christian Holocaust

SHOCK: Obama Wants Repeal Of Iraq War Authorization To Guarantee No U.S. Troops Can Stop ISIS, Christian Holocaust
Home  »  Special Features  »  SHOCK: Obama Wants Repeal Of Iraq War Authorization To Guarantee No U.S. Troops Can Stop ISIS, Christian Holocaust

Jul 25, 2014 No Comments ›› Chuck Biscuits iraq-isis-violence-usa.si_
Excerpted from FREE BEACON: The Obama administration is calling on Congress to fully repeal the war authorization in Iraq to ensure that no U.S. troops return to the country, which is under siege by the extremist Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL or ISIS).
White House national security adviser Susan Rice petitioned Speaker of the House John Boehner (R., Ohio) in a letter Friday to completely repeal the war authorization, officially known as the Authorization for Use of Military Force in Iraq, or AUMF.
Rice’s letter was sent as Congress just hours before it approved a resolution opposing U.S. military intervention in Iraq, where the terrorist group ISIL claims to have established an Islamic caliphate.
“We believe a more appropriate and timely action for Congress to take is the repeal of the outdated 2002 Authorization for Use of Military Force in Iraq,” Rice wrote, according to a copy of her letter obtained by the Washington Free Beacon.
“With American combat troops having completed their withdrawal from Iraq on December 18, 2011, the Iraq AUMF is no longer used for any U.S. government activities and the administration fully supports its repeal,” Rice wrote. “Such a repeal would go much further in giving the American people confidence that ground forces will not be sent into combat in Iraq.”

Eleanor Holmes Norton says 'you don't have a right to know' what's going on in government

Eleanor Holmes Norton says 'you don't have a right to know' what's going on in government

By |
Eleanor Holmes Norton, the non-voting congressional delegate for the District of Columbia, angrily sputtered during a congressional hearing Friday that the White House should not be held up to scrutiny, saying that there was no right to know what it was doing behind closed doors.
"You don't have a right to know everything in a separation-of-powers government, my friend. That is the difference between a parliamentary government and a separation-of-powers government," Norton said during a House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing.
It was, to put mildly, a significant departure from the more traditional liberal stance that openness and transparency are must to prevent abuses of power by government officials. Instead the leading advocate for statehood for the District of Columbia literally argued that even the congressional committee charged with oversight shouldn't be asking questions in the first place.
She made the comments while protesting the committee's Republican majority for voting to ignore a claim by the White House that David Simas, director of it's Office of Political Strategy and Outreach, was immune to a congressional subpoena to testify. Republicans believe the office is being used a political campaign operation, a violation of federal election law.
Chairman Darrell Issa, R-Calif., noted he was not alleging any wrongdoing by Simas, but there was a history of violations involving that particular office in prior administrations that justified requesting his testimony.
Under President Obama, the White House has asserted sweeping executive powers, including the right to ignore pretty much all congressional inquiries. The administration has regularly ignored subpoenas from congressional committees.
Holmes was clearly down with that. She called Issa's subpoena a "showcase fishing expedition." She went on to argue that the Constitution's separation of powers specifically gives the people who work directly under the chief executive immunity from subpoenas. "The president's immediate advisor is not an agency and this is not a matter of policy," she said, before going to further clarify that we "don't have a right to know" everything that the administration does.
Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Md., top ranking Democrat on the Oversight Committee, thanked Holmes for her comments.
"I associate myself with your comments," Cummings added, thus making it clear that he doesn't believe the public has right to know what is going on inside the White House either.

Adviser Ignores Subpoena Again as White House Defies Issa... Dem: 'You don't have right to know' what's going on...

Adviser Ignores Subpoena Again as White House Defies Issa... Dem: 'You don't have right to know' what's going on...


(The Washington Examiner) -- Eleanor Holmes Norton, the non-voting congressional representative for the District of Columbia, angrily sputtered during a congressional hearing Friday that the White House should not be held up to scrutiny, saying that there was no right to know what it was doing behind closed doors.
"You don't have a right to know everything in a separation-of-powers government, my friend. That is the difference between a parliamentary government and a separation-of-powers government," Norton said during a House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing.
It was, to put mildly, a significant departure from the more traditional liberal stance that openness and transparency are must to prevent abuses of power by government officials. Instead the leading advocate for statehood for the District of Columbia literally argued that even the congressional committee charged with oversight shouldn't be asking questions in the first place.
<br/>
She made the comments while protesting the committee's Republican majority for voting toignore a claim by the White House that David Simas, director of it's Office of Political Strategy and Outreach, was immune to a congressional subpoena to testify. Republicans believe the office is being used a political campaign operation, a violation of federal election law.

New IRS Form Proves Obama Lied About Individual Mandate Tax

New IRS Form Proves Obama Lied About Individual Mandate Tax


Posted by John Kartch and Ryan Ellis on Friday, July 25th, 2014, 10:59 AM PERMALINK

On Thursday the IRS released a slew of draft 2014 tax forms. The new draft Form 1040 shows a new surtax line has been created for the payment of the individual mandate surtax – see line 61 of the 1040:


President Obama has repeatedly denied that the surtax is in fact actually a tax. The most prominent example was a heated exchange on ABC’s This Week in Sept. 2009, when George Stephanopoulos confronted Obama with a dictionary:
STEPHANOPOULOS: I -- I don't think I'm making it up. Merriam Webster's Dictionary: Tax -- "a charge, usually of money, imposed by authority on persons or property for public purposes."
OBAMA: George, the fact that you looked up Merriam's Dictionary, the definition of tax increase, indicates to me that you're stretching a little bit right now. Otherwise, you wouldn't have gone to the dictionary to check on the definition. I mean what...
STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, no, but...
OBAMA: ...what you're saying is...
STEPHANOPOULOS: I wanted to check for myself. But your critics say it is a tax increase.
OBAMA: My critics say everything is a tax increase. My critics say that I'm taking over every sector of the economy. You know that.
Look, we can have a legitimate debate about whether or not we're going to have an individual mandate or not, but...
STEPHANOPOULOS: But you reject that it's a tax increase?
OBAMA: I absolutely reject that notion. [Transcript]


It was always obvious that the penalty for not complying with Obamacare’s individual mandate was just another surtax:
  • The surtax is collected by, and enforced by, the IRS.
  • As shown by the newly released draft Form 1040, the surtax is paid as part of normal income tax filing by taxpayers.
  • The individual mandate surtax was written into tax law itself by the Obamacare statute.
  • Revenues derived from the individual mandate surtax have always been scored by the Congressional Budget Office as tax revenue.

Famously, Chief Justice John Roberts pointed out that the individual mandate surtax is in fact a tax. However, that does not compel conservatives to agree that Obamacare’s individual mandate is Constitutional. The same decision declared the individual mandate unconstitutional under the Commerce Clause. Conservatives can accept that this surtax is a tax increase without accepting the constitutionality of the individual mandate.
The Obamacare individual mandate non-compliance surtax is one of at least seven Obamacare taxes that violate the President’s “firm pledge” not to raise any tax on any American making less than $250,000 per year. Thorough documentation of Obama’s promise can be found here.

More from Americans for Tax Reform

“You’ve all gone insane!” Joan Rivers defends Israel

“You’ve all gone insane!” Joan Rivers defends Israel

27 Comments
Rivers1
Unfortunately your browser does not support IFrames.
“The BBC should be ashamed of themselves, CNN should be ashamed of themselves…”
Watch this whole clip. At last, some common sense. No wonder the ADL hates Joan Rivers. Will the ADL attack her again?
The fact that we have to look to Joan Rivers for moral clarity is indicative of the low state of the world.
Joan Rivers for Secretary of State.
Email this page

TONY PALMER (UPDATE)

Who Thinks President Obama Will Be Impeached? The White House

Who Thinks President Obama Will Be Impeached? The White House


Don't dismiss the possibility of the House of Representatives bringing articles of impeachment against President Obama, senior White House adviser Dan Pfeiffer said today.
"I think a lot of people in this town laugh that off," Pfeiffer said at a breaking with reporters in Washington hosted by the Christian Science Monitor. "I would not discount that possibility. I think that Speaker [John] Boehner, by going down this path of this lawsuit, has opened the door to Republicans possibly considering impeachment at some point in the future."
He went on to say that the executive actions being considered by the White House on immigration would probably “up the likelihood” of impeachment, making the point that lawmakers such as Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, already have said the president is violating the law with his unilateral moves on immigration.
Pfeiffer noted that the House is set to file a formal lawsuit next week against the president over his executive actions. While the idea of impeachment is only being discussed by the likes of Sarah Palin -– and very few elected lawmakers –- that could change.
He went on to say that the White House views the lawsuit as “validation” of its “year of action” strategy, saying of executive actions: “If they were small-ball, the Republicans would not be suing over them.”
Asked whether impeachment would be good for the president, Pfeiffer said: “No, I don’t think so.”
Boehner, who has publicly ruled out impeachment, responded in a statement through his spokesman.
"We have a humanitarian crisis at our border, and the White House is making matters worse with inattention and mixed signals,” Boehner spokesman Michael Steel said in a statement. “It is telling, and sad, that a senior White House official is focused on political games, rather than helping these kids and securing the border."

White Flags on Brooklyn Bridge What It Means Also U.N. in U.S.A Word Con...

Congressional Resolution Against U.S. Troops in Iraq Amended and Moved Toward a Vote on Floor of The House of Representatives

Congressional Resolution Against U.S. Troops in Iraq Amended and Moved Toward a Vote on Floor of The House of Representatives
July 25, 2014 • 9:50AM
House Concurrent Resolution 105 (H.Con.Res. 105), introduced on July 11 by Rep. James McGovern and co-sponsors Barbara Lee and Walter Jones, "Directing the President, pursuant to section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution, to remove United States Armed Forces, other than Armed Forces required to protect United States diplomatic facilities and personnel, from Iraq" has gained five additional co-sponsors, most recently Rush Holt and Michael Honda.
On the House of Representatives floor on Wednesday, as reported by the Congressional Record, Rep. Richard Nugent moved that H.Con.Res. 105, as amended that day, be considered to have been adopted by the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and was ready for a vote by the House after one hour of debate on the House floor. The House Clerk's website reports that the motion was agreed to without objection.
The text of the resolution after its introductory paragraph quoted above, as also reported by the Congressional Record, now reads:
"SECTION 1. PROHIBITION REGARDING UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES IN IRAQ. The President shall not deploy or maintain United States Armed Forces in a sustained combat role in Iraq without specific statutory authorization for such use enacted after the date of the adoption of this concurrent resolution.
SEC. 2. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION. Nothing in this concurrent resolution supersedes the requirements of the War Powers Resolution (50 U.S.C. 1541 et seq.)."
According to the principals, the debate and vote will occur on Friday, July 25.

Israel recruits non-Israeli Jews to fight in Gaza

Israel recruits non-Israeli Jews to fight in Gaza
Fri Jul 25, 2014 8:26AM GMT
23
Related Interviews:
Israel is recruiting young Western Jews to use them in the war on the besieged Gaza Strip, Press TV reports.
The young Western Jews include many Britons, who have been joining Israel’s army under a program called “the Mahal,” which targets young non-Israeli Jews, men younger than 24 and women younger than 21.
The death toll from Israel’s military attacks on Gaza has risen to more than 800 now, with thousands more injured and displaced.
Some estimates show there are currently as many as a hundred British Jews fighting for the Israeli regime against the oppressed Palestinian nation.
“Many of those have gone to join the Israeli army, perhaps for an 18 months period or something similar, will presumably be taking part in operations within Gaza, some of which have been alluded to very recently of course, and the UN body has seen them as potential war crimes,” Charles Shoebridge, a security analyst, told Press TV.
“That has implications for those British people taking part because those people could then be prosecuted,” Shoebridge added.
“Should people come back to the United Kingdom, perhaps they are traumatized, perhaps they had caught PTSDs. Those people could come back to the United Kingdom and even if they were not to take action against the mainstream community  or the state itself, then there’s a possibility of course that they could decide to target individuals in Britain based upon their religion or their ethnicity,” Shoebridge said.
"The Mahal" recruitment project is reportedly currently working on plans to have thousands of volunteers from more than 40 countries enrolled in all branches of the Israeli military, many of them in combat units.  
Last week, the US State Department confirmed that two US citizens, Max Steinberg and Sean Carmeli, who were serving in the Israeli army, were killed in Shujaiya neighborhood of Gaza City.
MOL/HJL/HMV

Lead — LaRouche Reiterates: Congress Must Remain in Session Until Obama is Impeached and Glass-Steagall is Restored

Lead — LaRouche Reiterates: Congress Must Remain in Session Until Obama is Impeached and Glass-Steagall is Restored
July 24, 2014 • 6:41PM
Lyndon LaRouche today reiterated his July 19 warning that Congress must not leave Washington for recess until the urgent business of the nation has been accomplished. So long as President Barack Obama remains in office, the world is on the very edge of thermonuclear war extinction and/or a total disintegration of the present global financial system built on a $1.7 quadrillion derivatives bubble that can never and will never be paid.
Some on Capitol Hill are finally getting the message, as indicated by the fact that the Republican leadership has begrudgingly agreed to a modified version of the McGovern-Jones-Lee HCR 105 forbidding Obama from sending combat forces to Iraq without Congressional approval. After over 100 Members of Congress from both parties signed on to the Barbara Lee-Walter Jones letter to President Obama warning him not to engage US combat forces in Iraq without Congressional approval, the Republican leadership, facing warnings that they would be billed, along with Obama as the War Party, relented to the pressure. There will be a debate and vote on the revised HCR 105 on the House floor on Friday, July 25.
The Obama impeachment issue is also front and center, with Huffington Post having published a warning by Rep. Walter Jones (R-NC) that the Boehner law suit against Obama is a diversion from Congress doing its Constitutionally-mandated duty by putting forward articles of impeachment against the President.
What is happening now would have never taken place without Lyndon LaRouche’s persistent demands, dating back to April 2009, that Obama be constitutionally removed from office for his high crimes and misdemeanors. We know there is a growing backlash against Obama’s persistent attacks against Russia and his personal vitriol against Russian President Vladimir Putin. A former NATO commander briefed Congress earlier this week on the colossal folly of the US provoking war against the Russians. A former top Swiss military officer similarly warned EIR representatives that Russia and China will avoid the Obama provocations while preparing, systematically, for a war with the United States at some point in the next two years.
Just as LaRouche has been the author of the demands for restoring the Constitution by ousting Obama from office, he has also spelled out the critical steps that must be taken now to avert the financial and physical economic collapse. The United States Congress must immediately reinstate Glass Steagall and implement the other three cardinal rules for an economic revival spelled out by LaRouche: restore a national bank/Hamiltonian credit system, issue trillions of dollars in credit through a restored commercial banking system, and launch an international Manhattan Project to achieve thermonuclear fusion in the decade.
Such measures, following the removal of President Obama, will perfectly align the United States with the BRICS nations who have launched the seeds of a just, new world economic order to replace the hopelessly bankrupt and genocidal British Empire system of the IMF and World Bank. As LaRouche made perfectly clear in discussions with colleagues on Wednesday, the debt bubble can never be paid and shall never be paid. What the world needs is a debt cancellation of the quadrillions of dollars in derivatives and other illegal debts. The case of Argentina is paradigmatic, with the Presidential chief of staff on Thursday vowing that the nation will never capitulate to the vultures.
The alternatives to taking these urgent measures are being spelled out daily on-the-ground in Gaza and in eastern Ukraine, where an outright population genocide is being carried out with the full duplicity of Obama and other Western leaders. The United Nations human rights commissioner has said that Israel is committing Nazi-like war crimes against the civilian population of Gaza, with the latest atrocities by the Israeli Defense Forces taking the form of targeting of United Nations relief workers and refugee centers. Three UN workers have been killed in the past several days of targeted bombings. And just as LaRouche has warned, the chickens are coming home to roost in Ukraine, where the government collapsed on Thursday when several parties pulled out of the coalition, after fist fights erupted on the floor of the parliament after EU-demanded austerity measures were pushed and after the government announced a draft call-up targeting all able bodied men—under the age of 60!
Today is the debate and vote in the House on HCR 105. Congress, as of now, is scheduled to return to Washington next week for three days before recessing for the month of August. In this window of time, we must get the breakthrough that LaRouche called for last Saturday. No recess before Obama is impeached and Glass Steagall is restored. Any Member of Congress in their right mind will see that this is the only right thing to do. It is our job to deliver that message with such force and clarity that they cannot hide from their responsibilities.

Ebola, Bubonic Plague, Open Borders, Litmus Tests - The Perfect Recipe f...

ALERT! Arrest Warrant Issued for Illegal Alien On the Run with 'Drug-Res...

Muslim Brotherhood Reveals Obama Ordered Shift of Support from US Allies to Islamist Groups

Muslim Brotherhood Reveals Obama Ordered Shift of Support from US Allies to Islamist Groups

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is a New York writer focusing on radical Islam. He is completing a book on the international challenges America faces in the 21st century.

obama-terrorism
This is interesting not just because the contents provide proof that Obama did in fact set out to shift support to the Muslim Brotherhood, but because of the source of the revelation.
The Obama administration conducted an assessment of the Muslim Brotherhood in 2010 and 2011, beginning even before the events known as the “Arab Spring” erupted in Tunisia and in Egypt.
The President personally issued Presidential Study Directive 11 (PSD-11) in 2010, ordering an assessment of the Muslim Brotherhood and other “political Islamist” movements, including the ruling AKP in Turkey, ultimately concluding that the United States should shift from its longstanding policy of supporting “stability” in the Middle East and North Africa (that is, support for “stable regimes” even if they were authoritarian), to a policy of backing “moderate” Islamic political movements.
To this day, PSD-11 remains classified, in part because it reveals an embarrassingly naïve and uninformed view of trends in the Middle East and North Africa (Mena) region.
The revelations were made by Al Hewar centre in Washington, DC, which obtained the documents in question.
Through an ongoing Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit, thousands of pages of documentation of the US State Department’s dealings with the Muslim Brotherhood are in the process of being declassified and released to the public.
A State Department Cable classified “Confidential” report says the following: “Benghazi Meeting With Libyan Muslim Brotherhood: On April 2 [2012] Mission Benghazi met with a senior member of the Muslim Brotherhood steering committee, who will speak at the April 5 Carnegie Endowment `Islamist in Power’ conference in Washington, D.C.
Another State Department paper marked “Sensitive But Unclassified (SBU)” contained talking points for Deputy Secretary of State William Burns’ scheduled July 14, 2012 meeting with Mohammad Sawan, the Muslim Brotherhood leader who was also head of the Brotherhood’s Justice and Construction Party. The document is heavily redacted, but nevertheless provides clear indication of Washington’s sympathies for the emergence of the Muslim Brotherhood as a major political force in the post-Gaddafi Libya
The story is from the Gulf News, which operates out of the Anti-Brotherhood UAE. Al-Hewar, which actually got hold of the documents, is linked to the International Institute of Islamic Thought… which is a Muslim Brotherhood front group.
Figures in the Muslim Brotherhood had threatened to leak understandings with Obama Inc. This is the next best thing. It warns Obama that if he tries to forget about them, they can prove that the relationship was official policy.

black crowes - she talks to angels

U.S. dollars flow to fund jihad

U.S. dollars flow to fund jihad

Flow through Muslims living in the U.S. via U.S. dollars flow to fund jihad.
Some of Africa’s most notorious jihad groups, such as Boko Haram and al-Shabaab, are benefiting from an elaborate, international funding network, including large sums of money flowing from the United States.
MoneyJihad.com founder, Terror Finance Blog analyst and writer A. D. Kendall says Somalis residing in the United States, for example, are a major source of al-Shabaab’s financing.
“First and foremost, the Somalis contribute through remittances and hawala. Somalis wire money home, which is often processed by Dahabshiil, a business that routinely pays off al-Shabaab,” Kendall told WND. “Dahabshiil’s involvement in financing terrorism is the reason why Barclays attempted to end its business relationship with Dahabshiil.”
Barclay’s moved to shut down its connections with Dahabshiil because of numerous reports of money transfers from Somalis in the U.S., Canada and Europe to al-Shabaab through the Dubai-based company.
Kendall adds that American Somalis also support jihad through direct fundraising.
“There’s international zakat for the mujahideen,” Kendall said. “Somali activists like Amina Farah Ali in Minnesota or Basaaly Moalin in California raise money from their communities for jihad and send it to al-Shabaab.”
Amina Farah Ali, in fact, was convicted in federal court for funneling money to al-Shabaab.
Moalin was also sentenced to 18 years in prison for “providing material support to al-Shabaab.”
Kendall further points to Somali media that openly report direct contributions from American Somalis to al-Shabaab.
“Western readers should be aware of separate, independent reports by the Somali diaspora news media that Dahabshiil finances terrorism. According to reports by Waagacusub, Kalshaale and Suna Times, Dahabshiil pays one-half million dollars twice a year to al-Shabaab,” Kendall said.
One such report was posted this week in Waagacusub.
“Sometimes these fundraisers expressly mention jihad to donors, sometimes they don’t, and often they don’t have to mention it, because it’s commonly understood that the purposes aren’t truly charitable,” Kendall said.
Dave Gaubatz, a former Air Force intelligence officer, Family Security Matters contributing editor and co-author of “Muslim Mafia”, says a large amount of the money flowing to Africa’s jihadist groups originates in the U.S., some from legally incorporated businesses.
“There are many companies operated by people supportive of the jihad groups,” Gaubatz told WND. “One is the gas station and convenience store. The real money, however, does not come from sales at their store. They buy truck loads of tobacco products from Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Tennessee. The taxes on tobacco are so low in these states. They then transport (and sell the cigarettes) in states with very high taxes on tobacco, like Michigan and New York.
“The money is clean because they own a legitimate store,” he continued. “The profits in turn go to jihad-supporting groups to distribute and also directly to jihad groups operating in America.”
When asked if some of the money raised through these operations goes to Boko Haram, al-Shabaab or other groups operating in sub-Saharan Africa, Gaubatz answered, “Yes it does.”
Kendall confirms Gaubatz’s allegation of cigarette re-sales: “Hezbollah launders money through West Africa. It’s not just drug money from Latin America, but from fraudulent activities in North America, such as used car dealer schemes and cigarette-smuggling rings.”
Both men’s comments are confirmed by the story of Bassam Kiriaki, a Pawtucket, Rhode Island, accountant who pleaded guilty this year of bringing $1.2 million of cigarettes to Rhode Island from Virginia.
“Kiriaki admitted to the court that he made false representations to law enforcement and created a false tax document in order to conceal the conspiracy,” The Providence Journal reported. “According to court records, on March 30 the Virginia State Police stopped an alleged co-conspirator and seized $30,000 from his vehicle.
“After the stop and seizure, the FBI intercepted calls made by Kiriaki during which he agreed to call Virginia State Police and to tell them that the money was to buy merchandise for a new store in Virginia, Bad Boys Tobacco Stop, Inc.,” the Journal report said.
Kiriaki’s conviction is the latest in a series of arrests for illegal cigarette trafficking.
Yahoo News reported in March of this year 56 percent of the cigarettes sold in New York City were brought illegally from out of state sources.
It’s reported that 15 Palestinians and a South Carolina imam were arrested for participating in the New York City cigarette-smuggling operation. In one case, the Palestinian ringleader was also charged with a plot to kill the witnesses in one of the operations.
Continue reading at WND.

Whoops: Congressman Accidentally Reveals Why Democrats Really Want Amnesty

Whoops: Congressman Accidentally Reveals Why Democrats Really Want Amnesty

Rep. Luis Gutiérrez (D-IL) may have let the cat out of the bag when he confirmed the true reason behind his party’s push toward amnesty for illegal immigrants.
Elections. Specifically, amnesty would bring in 4-5 million new Democrats.
Gutiérrez, appearing on MSNBC’s Morning Joe, railed against portions of his own party standing in the way of human rights at the border. He urged his colleagues in the Senate not to play politics on this matter.
Then he provided this little dangling carrot.
Amnesty after all, can be a good thing for the Democrat party:
“Let me just say in about an hour, I’m going over to the White House. I’ll be meeting with Jeh Johnson and the Chief Legal Counsel to the President of the United States. We’re going to sit down and we’re going to negotiate additional terms and avenues the President can use and prosecutorial discretion, and I think we can get three or four or maybe even five million people.”
Watch the clip below (via Digitas Daily):
Of course, anyone who has been paying attention knows that increasing Democrat numbers is the one true goal behind a push for amnesty or immigration control.
Obama crony and former SEIU Vice President Eliseo Medina has the best look into the mindset of liberal lawmakers when it comes to immigration laws, or the lack thereof.
Medina previously served as a member of Obama’s National Latino Advisory Council and as honorary chair of the Democratic Socialists of America. As such, he used the platform of an America’s Future Now! Conference in 2009 to outline a plan for long-term Democrat rule through blanket amnesty.
“We reform the immigration laws; it puts 12 million people on the path to citizenship and eventually voters. If we have eight million new voters who care about, and will be voting, we will be creating a governing coalition for the long term.”
Rest assured, Democrats won’t stop in their pursuit of “a governing coalition for the long term.”

Stone Temple Pilots - Plush

Hagmann & Hagmann - 24 July 2014 - Paul McGuire - Future Prophecy Of Ame...

Stone Temple Pilots - Dead and Bloated

Cold As Ice - Foreigner (1977)

New Obama Executive Action Plan on Amnesty: Bring Kids to U.S. Directly From Central America

Katie Pavlich
With no plans to secure the border, President Obama is considering executive action without Congress to grant Hondurans amnesty and to set up a program to screen "refugees" in the country before green lighting them into the United States, cutting out the process of trekking through Mexico. From the New York Times:
The Obama administration is considering whether to allow hundreds of minors and young adults from Honduras into the United States without making the dangerous trek through Mexico, according to a draft of the proposal.

If approved, the plan would direct the government to screen thousands of children and youths in Honduras to see if they can enter the United States as refugees or on emergency humanitarian grounds. It would be the first American refugee effort in a nation reachable by land to the United States, the White House said, putting the violence in Honduras on the level of humanitarian emergencies in Haiti and Vietnam, where such programs have been conducted in the past amid war and major crises.

Critics of the plan were quick to pounce, saying it appeared to redefine the legal definition of a refugee and would only increase the flow of migration to the United States. Administration officials said they believed the plan could be enacted through executive action, without congressional approval, as long as it did not increase the total number of refugees coming into the country.
This plan contradicts initial claims by the administration children in the United States illegally will be sent back. Not only is the White House not stopping the flow of illegal alien children, they're planning to increase the number of unaccompanied children in the U.S. with President Obama's pen.
Last night Senators Jeff Sessions and Ted Cruz ripped the administration's plan on the Senate floor.
"Know that we are facing an exceedingly grave threat of an unbelievable expansion of his unilateral executive orders of amnesty that go beyond anything we've ever seen in this country and threatens the very constitutional framework of our republic and the very ability of this nation to even have borders," Sessions said.
“The current situation in the Rio Grande Valley is a humanitarian crisis of this Administration’s making. President Obama set the stage for this crisis by refusing to live up to his most basic responsibility to secure our border, imposing huge human and financial costs on border communities and on immigrants who come here illegally,” Sen. Cruz said in a statement. “He has also sent a message to the world that the United States is not serious about enforcing its immigration laws by lawlessly granting amnesty through the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals Program. To solve this problem, we must put a stop to President Obama’s amnesty and give governors all options possible to mitigate this crisis in light of the federal government’s inaction.”
Cruz has introduced legislation , the Protect Children and Families Through the Rule of Law Act, in order to "stop President Obama’s amnesty, reform the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Act, and empower governors to utilize the National Guard to address this specific crisis at federal expense, including authority to arrest violators of federal immigration, drug trafficking, human trafficking, and terrorism laws."
Meanwhile, leaders from Central American countries are meeting at the White House today to discuss the ongoing crisis.
President Barack Obama is summoning Central American leaders to the White House to discuss the influx of young immigrants from their countries to the U.S., hoping to show presidential action even as Congress remains deeply split over proposals to stem the crisis on the border.

The meeting comes as the administration is considering creating a pilot program giving refugee status to young people from Honduras, White House officials said Thursday. The plan would involve screening youths in their home country to determine whether they qualify for refugee status. The program would be limited and would start in Honduras but could be expanded to include other Central American countries.
Earlier this week, Speaker John Boehner sent a letter to President Obama threatening funding if border security is not taken seriously.

Netroots Nation: Transgender Equality In The Military Gets Cool Reception

Matt Vespa
Last week, I ventured into a sea of liberalism at Netroots Nation, which was held at the Cobo Center in Detroit, Michigan. It was a buffet of liberal issues: LGBT issues, workers rights, water rights, social justice, abortion, single-payer healthcare, and many more that would drive ordinary conservatives insane.
Yet, on the issue of transgender rights, especially the right for them to serve in our military openly, the conference was less than enthusiastic as proven by the scarce attendance at this panel.
In the program given to us at the registration desk, this panel is described as such:
Today, it is outdated military policies – not the law – that ban transgender people from serving and forces their discharge if they are found out. Despite changes to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, which removed “gender identity disorder” as a mental illness, the U.S. military has not updated their policies. Service members are still discharged with this discredited diagnosis. Drawing on lessons learned from the campaign to repeal [Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell] DADT, and the model for open transgender service in other counties, this session will explore the path toward full equality.
So, why do transgender Americans want to serve (quietly) in an institution hostile to them?
Allyson Robinson, a transgender veteran and LGBT activist, noted that the military is still a great opportunity. It provides health care, housing, and a chance to serve one’s country. It’s a great job. She also said that good job opportunities are two to five times harder for transgender Americans to find.
The other reason transgender Americans join the military is family tradition. Robinson alluded that this was her reason for signing up, as her family had a long history of serving in the military that dates back to the Revolutionary War.
Kayla Williams, a cisgender veteran, or someone who associates with the gender assigned at birth, served in Iraq described the “austere” conditions she lived in at times during her deployment. She said she took hormonal birth control to regulate her menstrual cycle.
“No one wants to see a woman change her tampon in a sandstorm,” she said. Williams added that the military was accommodating and capable to handle her needs.
Fiona Dawson, host and producer of Transmilitary; a show about transgender military lives, served as the panel’s moderator and asked another transgender veteran, Landon Wilson, who was born female, but transitioned to male, about the military providing treatment for his needs.
“A hormone is a hormone is a hormone, alright,” he said. “When you break it down really and – trans-hormones are no different than non trans-hormones so if we have a guy in the military who was born male, lives as male, and his testosterone is low; what’s the difference in somebody who is a trans-man who’s testosterone is really low who needs that same hormone? There isn’t one.”
Dawson asked if these treatments could be taken into – and administered in – austere environments, Wilson said absolutely.
I had to leave the room due to an emergency phone call, but I was able to catch Williams declaring that “this is an incredibly important human rights issue and it’s time for everyone in the progressive community and national security community to come out and speak out on full equality for trans-personnel.”
But, as Robinson noted, this fight is different; there needs to be more awareness. She recollects how in the fight to repeal Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, Congressman, Senators, and their staffs count the number of postcards, phone calls, and constituent visits they receive on issues. But, at the Pentagon, they couldn’t care less about constituent services.
Nevertheless, Robinson told the audience that contacting their representatives is key, as is sharing, liking, and retweeting what she, and other organizations devoted to this cause, disseminate on social media. It’s to build awareness.
“I don’t know about you, I’m constantly hearing big applause from the room across the hall, right? There’s a lot of people in that room – um, look around [observing the virtually empty room]; this is the situation that we deal with,” said Robinson.
Sue Fulton, an army veteran who graduated West Point in 1980, is also fighting to make the U.S. Military more LGBT-friendly at an organization called SPART*A. She said networking with fellow members in this community is essential. It offers a base of support, but more importantly; allows this movement to obtain facts on the ground. It allows them to get the stories and bring them – anonymously – to the people who make the decisions.
Fulton acknowledged that she was a little surprised by the amount of transgender Americans serving in the military who are coming out to their fellow comrades and commanding officers and not experiencing harsh resistance.
“There’s surprisingly less resistance – in general – than we may have expected a few years ago…there’s a growing understanding of what this is about,” she said.
The panel ended with something that has always plagued progressive/Democratic politics since George McGovern’s 1972 presidential bid; the accusation that left-wingers are anti-military and soft on defense.
Well, some things never change.
Dawson noted how groups advocating for open trans-service in the military are met with anti-military and anti-war comments from transgender Americans on social media.
Robinson declared she is a proud progressive, but said, “We assume that we all think exactly the same on every issue, right? And, the fact is, of course, we don’t…I think that if we’re going to be about anything it shouldn’t be about marginalizing people, right? If we’re going to be a movement about anything, we should be a movement about – where everyone is free to talk about what they believe and to be part of what we’re doing where we have agreement.”
This may come as a shock to these folks, but conservatives are also for not marginalizing people and we love debate.
Robinson claims there are 15,000 transgender Americans serving in the U.S. Military.

-- Articles Of Impeachment updated with new Article III (MUST READ)

URGENT UPDATE -- Articles Of Impeachment updated with new Article III (MUST READ)



"Resolution Impeaching Barack Hussein Obama, President of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors."

I have prepared these updated formal Articles of Impeachment as a Constitutional lawyer. They are in proper legal form and all allegations are provable. We have now confirmed that at least one, and possibly more, members of Congress have submitted the articles to the House judiciary Committee for consideration. Please feel free to forward this to your representative in Congress.
Michael Connelly, Constitutional Attorney
mrobertc [at] hotmail.com

Impeaching Barack Hussein Obama, President of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors.

Resolved, That Barack Hussein Obama, President of the United States, is impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors and that the following articles of impeachment be exhibited to the United States Senate:
Articles of impeachment exhibited by the House of Representatives of the United States of America in the name of itself and of the people of the United States of America, against Barack Hussein Obama, President of the United States of America, in maintenance and support of its impeachment against him for high crimes and misdemeanors.

Article I

In his conduct while President of the United States, Barack Hussein Obama, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has willfully corrupted and manipulated the executive branch to increase its power and destroy the balance of powers between the three branches of government that is established by the Constitution of the United States.

The means used to implement this course of conduct or scheme included one or more of the following acts:
(1)  Shortly after being sworn in for his first term as President of the United States, Barack Hussein Obama began creating new departments and appointing Czars to oversee these departments. These Czars were never submitted to the United States Senate for approval as required by Article 2, Section 2 of the Constitution. In addition, these Czars and the Departments have budgets that are not subject to being controlled by Congress as provided for by Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution. He also made recess appointments when the Senate was not in recess and these appointments were struck down by the Supreme Court.

(2)  Article 2, Section 3 of the Constitution mandates that the President of the United States “shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed…” Barack Hussein Obama, in violation of his oath of office has repeatedly ignored this Constitutional mandate by refusing to enforce laws against illegal immigration, defend in court the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), and refusing to enforce Federal voting laws.

(3)  Article 1 of the Constitution establishes the legislative branch of the U.S. government and sets forth the powers of the Senate and House of Representatives to make laws. These powers are exclusive and the Constitution does not grant the President the power to either make laws or amend them on his own. Barack Hussein Obama has ignored these provisions and made or changed laws by either issuing unconstitutional executive orders or instructing governmental departments to take illegal and unconstitutional actions. Specific actions include, but are not necessarily limited to:
A.   Ordering the Environmental Protection Agency to implement portions of the Cap & Trade bill that failed to pass in the U.S. Senate.
B.   Ordering implementation of portions of the “Dream Act” that failed to pass in Congress.
C.   Orchestrating a government takeover of a major part of the automobile industry in 2009.
D.   Ordering a moratorium on new offshore oil and gas exploration and production without approval of Congress.
E.   Signing an Executive Order on March 16, 2012 giving himself and the Executive branch extraordinary powers to control and allocate resources such as food, water, energy and health care resources etc. in the interest of vaguely defined national defense issues. It would amount to a complete government takeover of the U.S. economy.
F.    Signing an Executive Order on July 6, 2012 giving himself and the Executive branch the power to control all methods of communications in the United States based on a Presidential declaration of a national emergency.
G.  Signing an Executive Order on January 6, 2013 that contained 23 actions designed to limit the individual right to keep and bear arms guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the Constitution.
H.  Amending portions of the Affordable Healthcare Act and other laws passed by Congress without Congressional approval as required by Article 1 of the Constitution.
I.      Issuing Executive orders in January 2014 amending the HIPPA law to allow the turning over of confidential medical records to Federal agencies if there is any information to be used to add individuals to the NICS list to prohibit them from purchasing firearms.
J.     Having the EPA impose regulations on the coal industry that will force many utility companies and coal mines out of business. This will cost the U.S. economy thousands of jobs and dramatically increase the cost of energy to the public. This is being done without Congressional approval.
K.  Hindering the ability of the U.S. Border Patrol Agency to not only stop illegal immigration, but to stop human and drug trafficking.
L.   Removing the work requirement from welfare reform legislation without Congressional approval.

Article II

(1) Article 2, Section 3 of the Constitution mandates that from time to time the President “shall give to Congress information on the State of the Union….” Implicit in this is an obligation for the President to be truthful with the Congress and the American people. Barack Hussein Obama has repeatedly violated his oath of office and the requirements of the Constitution by willfully withholding information on important issues or actively taken part in misleading the Congress and the American people. Specific actions include, but are not necessarily limited to:
A.   Using Executive privilege to block Congress from getting documents relating to the DOJ’s Operation Fast and Furious and the death of U.S. Border Patrol Brian Terry.
B.   Had members of his administration provide false information about the act of terrorism committed in Benghazi, Libya on September 11, 2012 and refusing to allow the State Department and other federal agencies to cooperate in the Congressional investigation.
C.   Falsely labeled the mass murder of American soldiers at Ft. Hood, Texas as “workplace violence” instead of the act of Islamic terrorism it was.
D.   Falsely labeling the IRS targeting of conservative and Christian groups as a “phony” scandal and refusing to order an active pursuit of the investigation into who was ultimately responsible.
E.   Refusing to order an independent investigation of the actions of Eric Holder and the DOJ in targeting the phone records of members of the news media.
F.    Telling the American people on a television show that the NSA was not prying into the emails and phone calls of Americans when the facts prove otherwise.

(2) The oath of office of the President of the United States requires him to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution. This obviously includes what may be the most important part of the Constitution, the Bill of Rights. Barack Hussein Obama has repeatedly violated his oath of office by seeking to limit both the individual rights and the rights of the States guaranteed in the first ten amendments to the Constitution. Specific actions include, but are not necessarily limited to:
A.    Having the Department of Health and Human Services order religious institutions and businesses owned by religious families to provide their employees free contraception and other services that are contrary to their religious beliefs. This is being done under the auspices of the Affordable Health Care Act and violates the religious freedom clauses of the First Amendment.  
B.    Having the military place restrictions on the religious freedom of Chaplains and other members of the military in order to favor gay rights advocates and atheists in violation of the First Amendment.
C.    Having the military place restrictions on the freedom of speech of members of the military and the civilian employees of the DOD in violation of their rights under the First Amendment.
D.    Using Executive orders and government agency actions to limit Second Amendment rights. This includes actions by the Veterans Administration to disarm American veterans without due process as required by the Fifth Amendment.
E.    Having the National Security Agency intercept and monitor the private communications of millions of Americans without a court order and in violation of the Fourth Amendment.
F.     Joining with foreign governments in lawsuits against sovereign U.S. states to prohibit them from enforcing immigration laws. This is in violation of the Tenth Amendment.
G.   Filing suits under the Voting Rights Act against sovereign U.S. states to prevent them from enforcing Voter ID laws despite rulings by the Supreme Court upholding these laws. This is another violation of the Tenth Amendment and the balance of powers.
H.   Having the IRS propose new regulations on conservative 501 (C ) (4) organizations to limit their freedom of speech and political activities during election cycles in violation of the First Amendment to the Constitution.
I.      Having the FCC prepare new rules on internet neutrality in violation of the ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court striking down such regulations.
J.     Having the FCC institute a plan to place agents in newsrooms of radio and television stations as well as print media to monitor whether they are providing the “proper” news content to the public, a direct violation of the First Amendment to the Constitution.
K.   Having the Secretary of State sign the U.N. Small Arms Treaty despite the opposition of a majority of the U.S. Senate and with full awareness that the implementation of the treaty would violate the Second Amendment rights of American citizens. 

(3) Under Article 2, Section 2 of the Constitution the President of the United States is the Commander in Chief of the United States military and as such is responsible for using them in a manner that best serves the national security of the United States and protects our soldiers from unnecessary risks and harm. Barack Hussein Obama has violated his oath of office in this regard. Specific actions include, but are not necessarily limited to:
A.   In the name of “political correctness,” he imposed unnecessary and dangerous rules of engagement on our troops in combat causing them to lose offensive and defensive capabilities and putting them in danger. Many American service personnel have been killed or wounded as a result of this policy.
B.   Releasing the identity of American military personnel and units engaged in dangerous and secret operations such as the killing of Osama bin Laden by Navy Seal team 6.
C.   Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution gives Congress the exclusive power to declare war. Yet, without consulting Congress President Obama ordered the American military into action in Libya.
D.   Having the Attorney General tell Secretaries of State that they do not have to comply with the Federal law requiring states to timely send absentee ballots to military personnel.

Article III

(1) Article 2, Section 2 of the Constitution establishes the President as Commander in Chief of the United States Military. This requires him to use his power and authority to oversee the proper use of the military to properly protect and defend the people and territory of the United States against all enemies, both foreign and domestic. He is further responsible for using the U.S. military in a manner that is effective and protects members of the military and takes proper care of veterans.
The President takes an oath of office that encompasses these duties. Barack Hussein Obama has consistently violated these duties and violated his oath. Specific actions include, but are not necessarily limited to:
A.   Imposing Rules of Engagement on the active military in war zones that have unnecessarily endangered the lives of American soldiers.
B.   Allowed the leaking of classified information about U.S. military operations to the media in order to enhance his political image. Such leaks place the lives of U.S. soldiers in danger. 
C.   Despite being informed in 2009 of problems in the Veterans Administration involving treatment of veterans, took no action improve the situation, but instead ordered the VA to spend a major part of its budget on green energy projects at VA facilities instead on veteran care. 
D.   Endangered the lives of members of the American military and American civilians by negotiating with terrorists to trade five high level Taliban leaders in exchange for an American soldier who deserted his post and his fellow soldiers. In addition, he did the foregoing action in violation of Federal law since he did not provide the legally required thirty day notice to members of Congress of his intent to release prisoners from Guantanamo Bay. 
E.   Continues to refuse to enforce immigration laws passed by Congress in violation of Article 2, Section 3 of the Constitution, and further has used illegal and unconstitutional Executive orders to grant amnesty or de-facto amnesty to illegal aliens currently in the United States. 
F.   Has deliberately destroyed the morale and effectiveness of Border Patrol agents by interfering with their attempts to fulfill their oath of office and enforce laws legally passed by the U.S. Congress.
G.   By his deliberate actions encouraged parents of thousands of children in Central America to send their children, often unaccompanied by adults, across the U.S. border and then asking for billions of taxpayer dollars to care for these children. 
H.   Ordered the Border Patrol and Department of Homeland Security to place thousands of these children on buses or planes and dumping them in communities around the country; often without any prior notifications to the local elected officials in these communities.
I.   Allowed the TSA to let these children, as well as possible teenage gang members and unidentified to fly in U.S. Airlines at taxpayer expense without proper identification required by Federal law. 
J.   Has refused to respond to lawful requests by Governors of the southern Border States to close the Southern border to any further illegal immigration and has created a severe financial crisis for Border States and other states in order to advance his own political agenda.  
K.   Has ordered the release of thousands of illegal aliens who have been convicted of serious crimes in the U.S. to be released and stay in the country after they have served their sentences. This violates the requirements of Federal law that such people be immediately deported.
L.   Ordered the immediate release of approximately 68,000 other criminals in Federal prisons that have been convicted of drug offenses. These actions endanger the lives and property of honest and law abiding American citizens that the President is legally and constitutionally required to protect. 
M.   Has authorized the IRS, HHS, BATF, DHS, and EPA to propose new regulations not authorized by Congress that will adversely affect the rights of Americans protected by the First, Second, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments to the Constitution.

In all of this, Barack Hussein Obama has undermined the integrity of his office, has brought disrepute on the Presidency, has betrayed his trust as President and has acted in a manner subversive of the rule of law and justice, to the manifest injury of the people of the United States.
Wherefore, Barack Hussein Obama, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust or profit under the United States.

Follow Us: @redflagnews on Twitter
Get the RedFlag app today for Apple and Android devices...

Hagmann & Hagmann - 24 July 2014 - Paul McGuire - Future Prophecy Of Ame...

White House says it is taking impeachment talk seriously

White House says it is taking impeachment talk seriously



Senior White House advisers are taking very seriously the possibility that Republicans in Congress will try to impeach President Obama, especially if he takes executive action to slow deportations.
Dan Pfeiffer, a senior adviser to Obama, said Friday that the White House is taking the prospect of impeachment in the GOP-controlled House more seriously than many others in Washington, who see it as unlikely.
ADVERTISEMENT
Pfeiffer noted that former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, who has a large following among Tea Party conservatives, has called for Obama’s impeachment and a large block of the GOP’s base favors it.“I saw a poll today that had a huge portion of the Republican Party base saying they supported impeaching the president. A lot of people in this town laugh that off. I would not discount that possibility,” he told reporters Friday at a breakfast sponsored by The Christian Science Monitor.
Pfeiffer said Speaker John Boehner’s (R-Ohio) decision to file a lawsuit against Obama over his use of executive actions increased the chance of impeachment proceedings in the future.
He said that possibility could become more likely if Obama takes executive action to halt the deportations of illegal immigrants who have strong ties to the United States, such as those who have family members who are U.S. citizens.
“I think Speaker Boehner, by going down the path of this lawsuit, has opened the door to Republicans possibly considering impeachment at some point in the future,” he said.
Palin wrote an op-ed for Breitbart earlier this month calling for Obama’s impeachment because of his handling of the surge of unaccompanied minors from Central America on the Texas border, calling it the “last straw that makes the battered wife say ‘no mas.’
She has also criticized Boehner’s lawsuit as a weak move.
Boehner has pushed back against pressure from Palin and other conservatives.
“I disagree,” he told reporters this month.
A poll by CNN/ORC International released Friday shows a majority of the U.S. public say Obama should not be impeached.
Two-thirds of the survey’s respondents said they opposed impeachment, while 35 percent endorsed it.
But nearly 60 percent of Republicans said they would support impeachment proceedings against Obama. More than a third of independents, and 13 percent of Democrats also want to see Obama impeached.
The House, then controlled by Republicans, impeached former President Bill Clinton in 1998, but the GOP-controlled Senate acquitted him in 1999.
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who at the time was a member of the House and served as a prosecutor in Clinton’s impeachment trial, warned this summer that there would be calls for impeachment if Obama released more prisoners from the Guantanamo Bay prison camp without first informing Congress.
Obama has dismissed the impeachment talk as lacking merit.
“You hear some of them: ‘Sue him! Impeach him!’” Obama said in Austin, Texas, recently. “Really? For what, doing my job?”
Conservatives in Congress, however, have become increasingly agitated by what they say is the president’s Obama failure to follow the law.
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) said Obama’s executive order to defer the deportations of illegal immigrants who came to the country at a young age spawned the Texas border crisis. He argues it is part of a broader pattern.
Cruz released a report in May that listed 76 examples of what he called Obama’s “lawless” acts.
“The pattern of lawlessness by this Administration should concern every citizen, regardless of party or ideology,” Cruz said. “Rule of law means that we are a nation ruled by laws, not men.
This story was updated at 12:23 p.m.