Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976?Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use. Unless you are in this field of investigative journalism, especially covering extremely sensitive subjects and potentially dangerous subjects as well, you simply cannot understand the complexities and difficulties involved with this work that I face every day.
Former Obama administration Labor Secretary Hilda Solis is
stonewalling about possible communications with President Barack Obama
regarding an FBI inquiry into her involvement in an Obama re-election
fundraiser.
Solis’ 2014 campaign for L.A. County Supervisor did not respond to
Daily Caller inquiries into whether or not she discussed the FBI
investigation with the president prior to her resignation from the
administration.
Solis came under the FBI’s radar after she was the star guest at an
Obama re-election fundraiser at the La Fonda Supper Club on Wilshire
Boulevard in Los Angeles intended to raise money from the Latino
community. Solis has said she was aware that the Hatch Act prohibits
Cabinet members from directly fundraising for political campaigns. But
the FBI contacted California state senator Kevin de Leon in 2013
regarding Solis’ participation in the event.
A Solis campaign adviser previously acknowledged
that Solis met with the FBI in November 2012, two months before she
stepped down as Labor Secretary in January 2013, but maintained that “it
is inappropriate for a Cabinet official to [discuss] private
communications with the President.”
By the time Solis left the Obama administration, she owed the
Washington office of the Chicago-based law firm Sidley Austin between
$50,001 and $100,000 for “legal advice” pertaining to the FBI inquiry,
according to a Feb. 2013 financial disclosure.
Sidley Austin lawyer Michelle Obama met
Sidley summer associate Barack Obama at the Chicago firm in 1988. By
May 2012, seven then-current or past Sidley attorneys had received Obama
appointments. Sidley gained
nearly $12 million in federal contracts between 2009 and May 2012, up
from $1.4 million in the second term of the Bush administration.
Solis took thousands of dollars of free trips on
a union’s jet to “avoid freeway traffic” and did not report the trips
as required by federal law, according to a recent lawsuit filed in U.S.
District Court against union leaders.
In
support of our mission of helping engage, train, empower and connect
progressive Latinos, the New Latino Movement is actively recruiting
members of our network and allies to join in supporting and planning
local fundraising events to help re-elect President Barack
Obama. Whether you’re a fundraising pro or a first-time
donor/fundraiser, we invite you to join us in helping create the next
generation of Latino political fundraisers!
The event features a musical performance by Gustavo Galindo, check him out in this video!
The New Latino Movement’s Futuro44 Young Latino Professionals Fundraising team joined
the Honorable Hilda Solis,
Obama Campaign Co-Chair Eva Longoria,
and Gustavo Galindo
for an evening with Obama Victory Fund supporters in Los Angeles on
March 23, 2012 at La Fonda Supper Club, 2501 Wilshire Boulevard, Los
Angeles, CA.
Tickets: $44 Gen44 Young Professionals | $100 General Admission | $1,000 write/raise to host (includes photo reception) | $2,500 write/raise to chair (Includes Name on Invite, VIP Clutch Reception)
INTERESTED IN TAKING A LEADERSHIP ROLE IN FUTURE EVENTS & OFFICIAL OBAMA FINANCE COUNCILS?
Email us at newlatinomovement@gmail.com with your contact information
to learn more about how your contribution to this event can help you
become a member of the official Futuro Fund (Hispanic Finance Council),
Futuro44 (Young Latino Professionals Finance Council) and Gen44 (Young
Professional Finance Council) for the Obama Victory Fund and President
Obama’s re-election campaign.
(by Judicial Watch)
-- After nearly two weeks of furiously denying that Islamic terrorists
are operating in the Mexican border city of Ciudad Juarez and planning
to attack the United States, a senior Homeland Security official has
confirmed it to Congress.
Judicial Watch broke the story on
August 29 that terrorist groups in Juarez, a crime-infested narcotics
hotbed situated across from El Paso, Texas, are planning to attack the
United States with car bombs or other vehicle borne improvised explosive
devices (VBIED). High-level federal law enforcement, intelligence and
other sources confirmed to JW that a warning bulletin for an imminent
terrorist attack on the border has been issued. Agents across a number
of Homeland Security, Justice and Defense agencies have all been placed
on alert and instructed to aggressively work all possible leads and
sources concerning this imminent terrorist threat.
The Department
of Homeland Security (DHS) did not respond to multiple inquiries from
Judicial Watch—both telephonic and in writing—about this information but
the agency has vigorously denied it in the media. This week, however, a
top Homeland Security official essentially conceded that JW’s story is
in fact credible. The official, Francis Taylor, is DHS Undersecretary
for Intelligence and Analysis and this week he testified before the U.S.
Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Though
his prepared statement, available on the committee website, is watered down the admission came during a verbal exchange with an Arizona senator.
Taylor
confirmed that militants associated with the Islamic State of Iraq and
the Levant (ISIL or ISIS) are planning to enter the United States via
the porous southern border and that their supporters are known to be
plotting to infiltrate the United States, according to a Washington news outlet that
covered the hearing. “There have been Twitter, social media exchanges
among ISIL adherents across the globe speaking about that as a
possibility,” Taylor told Arizona Senator John McCain during the
hearing. The DHS undersecretary also admitted this when McCain
challenged him on border security overall: “If I gave you the impression
I thought the border security was what it needed to be to protect
against all the risks coming across the state that’s not what I meant to
say.”
Days earlier the top law enforcement official in Midland
County Texas told a national television news audience that he received
an alert bulletin warning that ISIS may have formed a terrorist cell in
or near Juarez. Just as JW’s sources had confirmed a week earlier,
Midland County Sheriff Gary Painter disclosed that the alert warned law enforcement agencies to
be on the lookout for such activity. The local newspaper in Midland,
which is located halfway between Ft. Worth and El Paso, contacted the
FBI for a statement on the alarming revelation but the agency refused to
comment.
Following these two important developments from the DHS
and the Texas sheriff, New York Police Department officials also
affirmed this week that the threat to the U.S. is “growing exponentially” with
the emergence of ISIS. NYPD Commissioner Bill Bratton said on national
television that ISIS is a very sophisticated operation with very
sophisticated recruiting capabilities that include the use of social
media, videos and magazines. In fact, the NYPD chief disclosed that ISIS
is more sophisticated than Al Qaeda.
Incredibly
the administration continues denying that ISIS presents an imminent
threat in the United States, even as information surfaces indicating
otherwise. Also contradicting the government’s official stance is the
increase in security at a key Army base, Ft. Bliss, near Juarez. The
move has been attributed to vague “security assessments” and the
constant concern for the safety of military members, families, employees
and civilians. This week the General in charge of the compound actually
said it was “coincidental” that security was increased following JW’s report of ISIS operating in Juarez.
However, senior military experts contacted by JW say the move indicates that the El Paso military facility is a target because
changes to security measures are only made when there are clear and
present threats. “It’s a significant issue when this is done,” retired
Army Lt. Gen. Jerry Boykin told JW. Boykin is a former commander of the
Army’s elite Delta Force who served four years as Deputy Undersecretary
of Defense for Intelligence. “That means they’re getting a threat
stream. Ft. Bliss had to have a clear and present threat.”
The Department of Labor coordinated with the White House on whether
or not to release hidden portions of former Labor Secretary Hilda Solis’
schedule as Solis battled an FBI investigation into her illegal
fundraising for President Obama.
New emails provided to The Daily Caller from the nonprofit legal
research firm Cause of Action show the White House thanking the
Department of Labor for “flagging” a public information request for
“withheld” portions of Solis’ schedule. (SEE THE EMAIL CHAIN). The
White House then asked for the name of the conservative group making
the request — information that Labor officials were eager to give up.
As TheDC previously reported, Solis illegally fundraised for the
Obama campaign and headlined a Latino-themed Obama fundraiser while on a
trip in her official capacity as a Cabinet member, which is forbidden by the Hatch Act. (AUDIO: SOLIS LEAVING A PHONE MESSAGE ILLEGALLY FUNDRAISING FOR OBAMA)
A quiet, behind-the-scenes FBI investigation into Solis’ Hatch Act
violation led to her resignation from the Obama administration at the
beginning of his second term – and handed Solis a hefty check for legal
advice from the Washington arm of the politically-connected Chicago law
firm Sidley Austin. (The Daily Caller, meanwhile, is permanently banned from talking to employees at the Department of Labor — which oddly hasn’t stopped us.)
But Solis’ department continued coordinating with the White House on requests for Solis’ records.
“This was a generic request for calendar,” Secretary of Labor
official Deborah Greenfield wrote to Associate White House Counsel
Kathleen Hartnett on April 8, 2013. ”This is the issue. We withheld this
entry, and it is now on appeal. Any issues with disclosing?”
Harnett, Harvard Law School ’00,
is an Obama pick who distinguished herself early in the administration
for helping the president pass the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr.
Hate Crimes Prevention Act. But she needed help with this one. In comes
General Counsel at the White House Lamar Baker (Yale Law School ’01).
“Got it, thanks,” Baker said.
“The entry is from April 7, 2009, and reads as followed: Lunch –
Cecilia Munoz [Secys Dining room],” Greenfield explained. Cecilia Munoz,
a top White House domestic policy adviser, was formerly a vice president at the Hispanic activist group the National Council of La Raza.
“Great, thanks,” Baker shot back. “One other quick question: on the
[Freedom of Information Act] matter you mentioned yesterday, what was
the date of the meeting?”
“Here you go,” Greenfield replied followed by a few emails back and forth of completely redacted information.
“Hi – no comments or concerns here regarding the planned release of
the 4/7/09 “Lunch – Cecilia Munoz (Secys Dining Room) entry,” Baker
finally decided. “Thanks for flagging, and please keep me posted if
there is any follow up.”
Then some more redacted stuff. Then General Counsel at the White
House Lamar Baker finds out which group was responsible for this pesky
public information request.
“Sorry just one more follow up I should have asked in my earlier
email: can you send me who the requester was?,” Baker asked Greenfield.
“Americans For Limited Government,” Greenfield replied. Follow Patrick on Twitter
(by Michael Snyder)
-- Did you know that two Russian bombers practiced launching cruise
missiles at the United States from a spot in the North Atlantic just the
other day? And did you know that Russia is spending massive amounts of
money to build and test new nuclear weapons systems? Meanwhile, the
Obama administration is doing absolutely nothing to upgrade the U.S.
nuclear arsenal. Our nuclear officers are actually still using floppy
disks and other computer technologyfrom the 1960s.
The size of the U.S. nuclear arsenal has been reduced by about 95
percent from the peak of the Cold War, and Barack Obama has spoken of
even more dramatic reductions. Obama is snoozing even as a Russian general speaks
of the need to “spell out the conditions under which Russia would
launch a preemptive nuclear strike” against the United States. Obama
appears to be entirely convinced that a nuclear war between the U.S. and
Russia is not even a remote possibility. He better be right, because
we are definitely not prepared for one.
Even with everything that
has happened between the United States and Russia lately, most Americans
still believe that “the Cold War is over” and that Russia presents
absolutely no threat to us.
But Russia is behaving as if the Cold
War is still very much on. You probably didn’t hear a peep about it
from the mainstream media, but just the other day a couple of Russian
bombers simulated launching cruise missiles at us from the North
Atlantic. The following is an excerpt from an excellent article by Bill Gertz…
Two
Russian strategic bombers conducted practice cruise missile attacks on
the United States during a training mission last week that defense
officials say appeared timed to the NATO summit in Wales.
The
Russian Tu-95 Bear bombers were tracked flying a route across the
northern Atlantic near Iceland, Greenland, and Canada’s northeast.
Analysis
of the flight indicated the aircraft were conducting practice runs to a
pre-determined “launch box”—an optimum point for firing nuclear-armed
cruise missiles at U.S. targets, said defense officials familiar with
intelligence reports.
And Russia is spending money as
if a nuclear confrontation with the U.S. is a very real possibility.
In fact, Russian President Vladimir Putin has committed to a “weapons
modernization program” that is going to cost the equivalent of 540 billion dollars…
Putin
said Russia’s weapons modernization program for 2016-2025 should focus
on building a new array of offensive weapons to provide a “guaranteed
nuclear deterrent;” re-arming strategic and long-range aviation;
creating an aerospace defense system and developing high-precision
conventional weapons.
He would not
elaborate on prospective weapons, but he and other officials have
repeatedly boasted about new Russian nuclear missiles’ capability to
penetrate any prospective missile shield.
The
Kremlin has bolstered defense spending in the past few years under an
ambitious weapons modernization program that runs through 2020 and costs
the equivalent of $540 billion.
You don’t spend that kind of money just for the fun of it.
Putin is deadly serious about being able to fight (and win) a war against the United States.
Of
course nobody on either side actually hopes that such a war will
happen. But most wars are won before a single shot is fired, and right
now Russia is working very hard to make sure that it will have the best
chance possible of coming out on top in any future conflict.
For example, Russian media is reporting that 60 percent of all Russian nuclear missiles will have radar-evading capability by 2016…
Russia’s
Defense Ministry plans to complete the rearmament of Strategic Missile
Forces within six years. “By 2016, the share of new missile systems
will reach nearly 60%, and by 2021 their share will increase to 98%. At
the same time the troop and weapon command systems, combat equipment
will be qualitatively improved, first of all — their capabilities for
the suppression of antimissile defense will be built up,” Defense
Ministry’s RVSN spokesman Colonel Igor Yegorov told ITAR-TASS on Friday.
But
of greatest concern is the new generation of nuclear-powered attack
submarines armed with long-range cruise missiles that Russia has been
developing.
Just this week, Russia conducted a successful test of the new submarine-launched Bulava intercontinental nuclear missile…
Russia
carried out a successful test of its new Bulava intercontinental
nuclear missile on Wednesday and will perform two more test launches in
October and November, the head of its naval forces said.
The
armed forces have boosted their military training and test drills since
the start of the conflict in eastern Ukraine, which Russia considers in
its traditional sphere of influence.
The
12-meter long Bulava, or mace, has undergone numerous tests, some
successful, and can deliver an impact of up to 100 times the atomic
blast that devastated Hiroshima in 1945.
Each one of these missiles weighs more than 36 tons and has a range of more than 5,000 miles. But in a future conflict, they would likely only have to travel a short distance.
That is because Russia has developed super silent attacks subs that are virtually undetectable when submerged.
In a previous article, I talked about how the U.S. Navy refers to these virtually undetectable subs as “black holes”…
Did
you know that Russia is building submarines that are so quiet that the
U.S. military cannot detect them? These “black hole” submarines can
freely approach the coastlines of the United States without fear of
being detected whenever they want. In fact, a “nuclear-powered attack
submarine armed with long-range cruise missiles” sailed around in the
Gulf of Mexico for several weeks without
being detected back in 2012. And now Russia is launching a new class
of subs that have “advanced stealth technology”. The U.S. Navy openly
acknowledges that they cannot track these subs when they are submerged.
That means that the Russians are able to sail right up to our
coastlines and launch nukes whenever they want.
Most
Americans don’t realize this, but Russian subs can come cruising right
up to our coasts without us knowing about it and launch missiles which
will start hitting our cities within just a few minutes.
And if
you do not think that this can ever happen, perhaps you should consider
what a Russian general said about a preemptive nuclear strike just the other day…
A Russian
general has called for Russia to revamp its military doctrine, last
updated in 2010, to clearly identify the U.S. and its NATO allies as
Moscow’s enemy number one and spell out the conditions under which
Russia would launch a preemptive nuclear strike against the 28-member
military alliance, Interfax reported Wednesday.
Russia’s
military doctrine, a strategy document through which the government
interprets military threats and crafts possible responses, is being
revised in light of threats connected to the Arab Spring, the Syrian
civil war and the conflict in Ukraine, the deputy chief of the Kremlin’s
security council told RIA Novosti on Tuesday.
Meanwhile, the Obama administration has discussed reducing the size of our already neutered strategic nuclear arsenal down to just 300 warheads.
Let us hope and pray that we never see a nuclear war between the United States and Russia.
Because if one does happen, there is a very strong possibility that America will not be the winner.
President Obama at the NATO summit in Newport, Wales. (Jon Super/AP Photo)
Is
a mutiny happening around President Obama? It appears possible that the
president may not have made two of his most recent decisions with
complete free will. The announcement that he would delay his immigration
initiative until after the election and his formal announcement that
the United States would take military action against the Islamic
State could have been coerced.
Maybe Democratic leaders in
Congress and a few members of the Obama team have had it. Could it be
that, after President Obama briefed Democrats in Congress on the
immigration plan, they balked? Maybe the president was told that, if he
waved in millions of new illegal immigrants before November, there would
be an open revolt against him within the party.
Similarly, a few
members of this administration who have independence, stature and an
adult disposition may have told the president he must act on the Islamic
State or else they were out. I’m thinking of at least Secretary of
State John Kerry and Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel. Is it possible they
could not stomach doing nothing any longer and told the president that
they would quit in protest if he did not take action?
Stranger
things have happened. And given this administration’s complete inability
to admit mistakes, it isn’t crazy to think something else was behind
these two unusual moves by the White House. It seems unlikely the
president himself initiated the punt on immigration or the about-face on
military action in Iraq, so you can bet there is a story as yet untold
about both.
We probably won’t have to wait for the self-serving
insider memoirs to be written to know what happened. White House
internal strife and brinkmanship doesn’t stay hidden for long. And if a
few mutineers really did force the president’s hand, they are probably
now emboldened by their success and will flex their muscles in other
ways in the near future.
Oh, and three more quick points.
First,
a Shiite leader in Baghdad will never rule over the Sunni-dominated
territories — now controlled by the Islamic State — that lie to the
north and west of Baghdad. Maybe an elected Shiite prime minister
governing all of Iraq never really had a chance and such an arrangement
was just a Bush administration fantasy that Obama has foolishly adopted.
No one should pretend that a single Iraq, with the same borders that
exist today, will ever be reconstituted and governed by an elected
official.
Second, to reinforce the point above, President Obama
needs to make it clear that “degrading ISIS” and “saving the current
government in Iraq” are two different things. The U.S. military will, no
doubt, degrade ISIS, but nothing can save the flawed notion that a
Shiite prime minister can rule peacefully over a country with Iraq’s
current sectarian composition and borders.
And finally, President Obama had better begin to shift away from saying he is going to “destroy” the Islamic State.
Or, he needs to define “destroy” in such a way that people do not think
he means “eliminate.” The sad truth is that, as long as there is even
one crazy jihadist with a black flag and a computer to spew twisted
thoughts, the group will exist in some form.
In 2007, when the Charles Koch Foundation considered giving millions of dollars to Florida State University’s economics department, the offer came with strings attached.
First, the curriculum it funded must align with the libertarian,
deregulatory economic philosophy of Charles Koch, the billionaire
industrialist and Republican political bankroller.
Second, the Charles Koch Foundation would at least partially control which faculty members Florida State University hired.
And third, Bruce Benson, a prominent libertarian economic theorist
and Florida State University economics department chairman, must stay on
another three years as department chairman — even though he told his
wife he’d step down in 2009 after one three-year term.
The Charles Koch Foundation expressed a willingness to give Florida State an extra $105,000 to keep Benson — a self-described
“libertarian anarchist” who asserts that every government function he’s
studied “can be, has been, or is being produced better by the private
sector” — in place.
“As we all know, there are no free lunches. Everything comes with
costs,” Benson at the time wrote to economics department colleagues in
an internal memorandum. “They want to expose students to what they
believe are vital concepts about the benefits of the market and the
dangers of government failure, and they want to support and mentor
students who share their views. Therefore, they are trying to convince
us to hire faculty who will provide that exposure and mentoring.”
Benson concluded, “If we are not willing to hire such faculty, they are not willing to fund us.”
Such details are contained in 16 pages of previouslyunpublishedemails and memos obtained by the Center for Public Integrity.
While the documents are seven years old — and don’t reflect the
Charles Koch Foundation’s current relationship with Florida State
University, university officials contend — they offer rare insight into
how Koch’s philanthropic operation prods academics to preach a free
market gospel in exchange for cash.
WHEN YOU GIVE UP YOUR BELIEVE IN JESUS TO WAR SHIP ALLAH ISLAM DONT BELIEVE THAT JESUS IS THE SON OF GOD AND THAT HE DIDNT DIE FOR YOUR SINS AND WHEN YOU DONT BELIEVE IN JESUS THEN YOU CAN NOT BE SAVED
SORRY READ IT AND WEEP YOUR PASTORS THAT BELIEVE IN ISLAM DONT EVEN BELIEVE IN JESUS ANY MORE SO IF YOUR PASTOR DONT BELIEVE IN JESUS HOW CAN HE SAVE YOUR SOUL WHEN HE IS DAMED SO IN ISLAM IF THEY DONT BELIEVE IN GOD HAS A SON THEN THERE IS NO SAVIOR
PLEASE REPENT TURN BACK TO GOD TELL HIM YOUR SORRY HE LOVES YOU
REMEMBER GOD SENT HIS ONLY SON JESUS TO SIN ON A CROSS OUR SINS CAN BE FORE GIVE IN PLEASE I LOVE YOU ALL GOD BLESS YOU
Administrators
from one of the most influential evangelical colleges in the country
removed their names from a controversial letter addressed to Muslim
leaders that some say compromises the Christian faith.
Wheaton
College president Duane Litfin, provost Stanton Jones and chaplain
Stephen Kellough decided to back away from the letter that they had
originally endorsed along with nearly 300 Christian leaders in November
in response to an October statement ("A Common Word Between Us and You")
from 138 Muslim scholars and clerics who called for interfaith
cooperation for world peace.
"I signed the statement because I am
committed to the business of peace-making and neighbor-love,” Litfin
stated on Friday in The Record, the student publication of Wheaton
College. “I did not savor the document’s unnuanced apology section, but
swallowed that in order to be a part of reaching out a hand to these
Muslim leaders who had courageously taken the initiative. Though the
statement was not written in the way I would have written it, it seemed
to me that I could sign it without compromising any of my Christian
convictions.”
The Christian-endorsed statement – which included
such signatories as Rick Warren of Saddleback Church, Billy Hybels of
Willow Creek Community Church, and Leith Anderson of the National
Association of Evangelicals – urged for interfaith dialogue that would
build relations and reshape the Christian and Islam communities.
Christian leaders also asked for forgiveness of sins committed against
Muslims in the Crusades and excesses of the war on terrors in the
letter.
Titled "Loving God and Neighbor Together: A Christian
Response to a Common Word Between Us and You," the statement emphasized
the "absolutely central" commonality between both religions: love of God
and love of neighbor.
The response drew sharp criticism from
highly respected theologians R. Albert Mohler, Jr., president of the
Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, and John Piper, pastor at
Bethlehem Baptist Church, and other Christian leaders.
Piper
called the Christian document a "profound disappointment" in the way it
was worded and was surprised that even some of his friends lent their
support to the letter.
"What's missing from this document is a
clear statement about what Christianity really is and how we can come
together to talk with Muslims from our unique, distinctive, biblical
standpoint," Piper said in a public statement last month.
He
rejected the letter's emphasis on the common ground of the love of God,
arguing that the love of God for Christians is starkly different from
that of Islam.
"The love of God is ... uniquely expressed through
Jesus Christ as the propitiation for our sins because he died on the
cross and rose again. All those things, Islam radically rejects," Piper
stressed. "So they do not believe in the love of God we believe in."
The
Rev. Canon Dr. Patrick Sookhdeo, the director of the Institute for the
Study of Islam and Christianity and a British Anglican, applauded the
effort of the Muslim leaders in reaching out to Christian leaders to try
to find common ground but he called the Christian response a "betrayal"
and "sellout" of the Christian faith.
Following such criticism,
Wheaton's Litfin realized he "moved too quickly" to sign the statement
in his eagerness to support its strengths, including peace-making.
Recognizing
that the statement could have been written differently to avoid
vagueness of the Christian faith, Litfin said he could not support a
statement that speaks as if Quran's Allah and the God of Christians are
the same.
"I needed to back away," he said regarding his retraction.
At the same time, he said he does not criticize others "who do not share these qualms."
Noting
that he was not pressured to withdraw his name from the statement,
Litfin said, "It was simply a matter of conscience, combined with the
fact that I had put the College on the line in a way I was no longer
comfortable in defending.”
Other signers of the Christian letter showed no qualms about their endorsement.
"I
still agree [with the statement]. I don’t have reservations," said Roy
Oksnevad, director of Muslim Ministries at Wheaton College’s Billy
Graham Center, according to The Record.
Brendan
Tevlin was a 19-year old from New Jersey who had just finished his
freshman year at the University of Richmond. Like many kids his age, he
played sports and video games. He also liked to surf. Brendan also
played the bagpipes and was a Eucharistic minister at his church. But
none of those things led to his tragic death. What led to Brendan’s
death is that he was an American.
Ali
Muhammad Brown, 29, was charged with the murder of 19-year old Brendan
Tevlin on June 18th. Brown also confessed to killing two people, Ahmed
Said and Dwone Anderson-Young, in Seattle on June 1. In addition, he was
also charged with shooting another man, Leroy Henderson, in the Skyway
area of Seattle in April. All of the men were killed with a 9 mm
handgun. There is consistency in Brown’s statement to police
in both King County in Seattle, and Essex County, N.J. He told
authorities that he was doing his small part as vengeance for U.S.
actions in the Middle East. Q13 FOX in
Seattle reports that Brown described the killing of Tevlin to
authorities in New Jersey as a ‘just kill’ which he defined as as a
target that was an adult male, not a woman, child or elderly person.
Brown stated, ““My mission is vengeance. For the lives, millions of
lives are lost every day,” he reportedly said. “Iraq, Syria,
Afghanistan, all these places where innocent lives are being taken every
single day … All these lives are taken every single day by America, by
this government. So a life for a life.”
Todd Pettingill, radio
host of The Todd Show in the Morning, on 95,5 in New York, discussed
this jihad killings on his radio show. He said, “If there was ever a
reason to riot in the streets in the name of humanity, it would be for
this case. But, has that happened? No. And I’m not suggesting that it
should. What did the friends of family of Brendan Tevlin do? They had a
candlelight vigil. What I am suggesting should happen is that this
should be talked about and written about and the American people should
know. Why is Eric Holder not visiting the Tevlin family? Why is the
President not going to mention Brendan Tevlin tonight? He was a young
boy who was killed…for being an American.”
In addition to calling
out Holder and Obama for their failure to give any attention to these
jihad killings that were done on American soil, Pettingill also said,
“It was in fact an act of jihad, perpetrated by a fellow American who
sympathized more with those who want to annihilate us than with his own
country and its people.” But, with ISIS on a bloody killing
spree in the Middle East in their quest to establish a caliphate and
their threats to take their attacks onto American soil, the only Brown
the media wants to talk is Michael Brown. The media and Congress want to
put more emphasis on the domestic abuse case surrounding Ray Rice than
acts of jihad in America with men being killed simply for being an
American. And Barack Obama wants to deny the severity of ISIS and, in
fact, refuse to even recognize that they are dangerous Islamic
terrorists who kill innocent people. Perhaps Obama should pay attention
to the news more often. He would learn that not only do people kill
innocents in the name of Islam, but it is happening already right here
in the United States.
Please
share on Facebook and Twitter to shed light on what most media outlets
won’t; the fact that acts of jihad are occurring in America and the
government who is supposed to keep us safe remains silent.
“Police give up, Sweden changed forever: ‘We will have to live with shootings,’” Nicolai Sennels, Jihadwatch, September 12, 2014: (Sweden
is burning, and on Sunday there are elections. It is thought that
Swedish voters will choose a Leftist government for the next four years…
Let’s hope not.) Sweden used to be one of the safest countries in the world, but
with more than a hundred thousand Muslim immigrants arriving every year,
the country is changing. Other articles on Sweden: When it comes to rapes, Islamized Sweden is already in a state of war Sweden: Police lured into ambush in Muslim area, stoned by hundreds Islamized Sweden falling apart: since 2013 illegal threats increased 6%, muggings 11%, burglaries 12%
Translated from DN:
Police consider the project Safe in Gothenburg as a
success, but the shootings have continued unabated, and the number of
them over the last two years has passed 100…
The assailant she fears is well known by the police. By and large,
Inspector Pål Sjolander, the team leader for the special project, sits
in the staff room in the police station in central Gothenburg at a
computer showing gang wars in Gothenburg and the special project in
numbers.
The number of confirmed shootings in Greater Gothenburg, 2013: 57 — eight dead, 31 injured by bullets.
The number of confirmed shootings in Greater Gothenburg 2014 through September 7: 46 – four dead 19 injured by bullets. All the shootingsarenotgang-related, butthe gloomytrend continues,andstatisticallyit doesn’t seem as ifmassivepoliceintervention has had any effect. PålSjolanderdisagrees. “Iwould say thatithas been a greatsuccess,” he says.… Sjolandersaid thatalthough theshootingscontinue, hesees a bright future. “But I thinkunfortunatelywewill have to livewith theshootings. Theyexisted long beforethese conflictsstartedandwillcontinue to exist aslong as there aregunson the market.Whatwe need to ensurethat theshootingsdo notaffectthird parties,” he says
Members of a militia are planning to block ports of entry along the
Rio Grande Valley to protest illegal immigration, according to a local
news report.
According to a KRGX report Thursday, local officials say militia
members are planning to protest by blocking traffic at the international
ports on September 20.
Rio Grande City Mayor Ruben Villarreal told the station that law
enforcement is preparing for the disruption but is unsure what to
expect.
“What can we expect? I don’t know. The unknown becomes an issue that
we really got to prepare for,” he said, explaining that local law and
federal enforcement are preparing to deal with the matter when it
happens.
Villarreal said that a concern he has is safety.
“If they’re here to block traffic, to be a hindrance between traffic
and the port of entry, that causes a problem. It’s a huge safety issue,”
he told KRGX, going on to add that is could also serve to disrupt the
area economy.
“A port of entry is not just a port of entry for people; it’s also a
port of entry for commerce. There are hundreds of millions of dollars
that transact at the ports of entry,” he added. “If their intent is to
cause a disruption at a port of entry, it’s not only a matter of people,
it’s a matter of commerce as well.”
Villarreal continued to KRGX that the ability for the militias to show their guns makes him “nervous.”
“We’ve never dealt with militia here in Starr County,” KRGX quoted
Villarreal. “We don’t know what their temperament is or their
personality might be. I can tell you that knowing that they might be
here … helps us prepare for what ever may come,” he said.
According to the report, Customs and Border Protection officials meet
with international bridge authorities in Starr County Thursday to
consider a response to the threat.
The Rio Grande Valley has been ground zero for much of the recent surge
in illegal immigration into the U.S. — which has seen tens of thousands
of unaccompanied minors and family units stream across the southern
border, overwhelming government resources and resulting in a
humanitarian crisis. Breitbart
After speaking with U.S. President Barack Obama by phone, John and
Diane Foley talk to reporters, Wednesday, Aug. 20, 2014, outside their
home in Rochester, N.H. Their son James Foley was abducted in November
2012 while covering the Syrian conflict. Islamic militants posted a
video showing his murder and said they killed him because the U.S. had
launched airstrikes in northern Iraq. / Associated Press
White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough is denying claims that
the administration threatened legal action against the families of
kidnapped Americans if they paid ransom to their captors, the Islamic
State.
McDonough hit a series of Sunday interview shows to promote
the administration’s counter-terrorism plan against the Islamic State,
including a plea to Congress to fund anti-IS forces in Syria.
The
families of James Foley and Steven Sotloff -- American journalists
beheaded by the Islamic State -- said the government objected when they
considered ransom payments, and even threatened prosecution.
“We
didn’t threaten anybody, but we made clear what the law is,” McDonough
said on “Fox News Sunday.” “That’s our responsibility to make sure we
explain the law and uphold the law.”
■
Related:Beheaded journalist's family says U.S. no help
■
Related: James Foley's parents had hoped to negotiate with captors before beheading
Ransom payments are prohibited under U.S. law, on the theory they would encourage terrorist groups to kidnap more Americans.
McDonough
said he sympathized with the Foley and Sotloff families, and noted that
the administration attempted a hostage rescue in Syria.
“We took every effort and will continue to take every effort to secure people,” he said.
In
discussing the counter-terrorism plan, McDonough urged Congress to fund
anti-IS fighters in Syria, and said the U.S. is “obviously” at war with
the militant group.
The interviews aired a day after the Islamic State beheaded a third hostage, British aid worker David Haines
The
plan that President Barack Obama announced Wednesday includes the
prospect of U.S. airstrikes in Syria, while expanding ongoing strikes in
neighboring Iraq.
Obama, McDonough, and other aides say the plan
features assistance to local forces in Iraq and Syria to carry the fight
against the Islamic State, also known as ISIL or ISIS.
In his round of interviews, McDonough echoed Obama’s pledge to avoid using U.S. combat troops.
“It’s
going to be Iraqi and other boots on the ground that are bringing this
fight to ISIL,” McDonough said on CNN’s “State of the Union.”
On
ABC’s “This Week,” McDonough said that “what we want to make sure
happens is that we have committed partners who can take the fight to
ISIL on the ground. And they will have not only support from us from the
air, but they’ll also have training and equipment support from us.”
Lawmakers
and analysts have questioned Obama’s plan, saying that the United
States will have to get more involved -- including the prospect of
ground troops -- if the Islamic State is to be defeated.
Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., told “Fox News Sunday” that the Obama administration is “delusional” about its plan.
“It
is our fight,” Graham said. “It’s not just their fight. This is a
radical Islamic army that’s pushing a theory of a master religion” and
threatens people worldwide.
Administration officials have offered
different descriptions of the administrations’s plan, ranging from
“counter-terrorism operations” to outright “war.”
On NBC’s “Meet
The Press,” McDonough said that “as much as we’ve been at war with al
Qaeda since we got here, we’re at war with ISIL.”
It is “a
complicated effort,” McDonough said, and “success looks like an ISIL
that no longer threatens our friends in the region, no longer threatens
the United States -- an ISIL that can’t accumulate followers, or
threaten Muslims in Syria, Iran, Iraq, or otherwise.”
Secretary of
State John Kerry, who has disputed the use of the term “war,” told CBS’
“Face The Nation” that “there’s frankly a kind of tortured debate going
on about terminology ... What I’m focused on, obviously, is getting
done what we need to get done to ISIL.”
Saudi Arabia wants us to save their bacon, so to speak, from ISIS.
Let’s see John Kerry put some pressure on our “ally” who is guilty of
many of the same crimes…
Via Fox News:
Dozens of Christians arrested at a prayer meeting in
Saudi Arabia need America’s help, according to a key lawmaker who is
pressing the State Department on their behalf.
Some 28 people were rounded up Friday by hard-line Islamists from the
Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice in the
home of an Indian national in the eastern Saudi city of Khafji, and
their current situation is unknown, according to human rights advocates.
“Saudi Arabia is continuing the religious cleansing that has always
been its official policy,” Nina Shea, director of the Washington-based
Hudson Institute’s Center for Religious Freedom, told FoxNews.com. “It
is the only nation state in the world with the official policy of
banning all churches. This is enforced even though there are over 2
million Christian foreign workers in that country. Those victimized are
typically poor, from Asian and African countries with weak governments.” Keep reading…
Pending an acceptable outcome of the vitally-important 2014
election—which affords the opportunity to elect a Congress that is
willing to initiate impeachment proceedings against Barack
Hussein Obama, and thereby stop, or even remove from office, this
fraudulent usurper and his inner circle of collaborators, including Vice
President Biden—We the People of the United States of America affirm
our allegiance to the timeless principles upon which our nation was
founded, as set forth in the Declaration of Independence and the
Constitution of the United States, and upon the foundation of those
principles, declare the causes which impel us to seek this despotic
president's impeachment and removal.
We hereby allege that the history of the current President of the United
States, Barack Hussein Obama, is a history of repeated injuries and
usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an
absolute tyranny over the American people. To prove this, let facts be
submitted to a candid world—
ARTICLE 1—Contempt for the Constitution
Mr. Obama has engaged, throughout his despotic tenure as president, in
rule by edict and executive decree, bypassing Congress, and thus the
will of the people, to enforce policies entirely of his own creation.
Ignoring the federal government's foundation of a separation of powers,
he has routinely violated duly enacted statutes of the Legislature, as
well as defied the Courts, in pursuit of ultimate supremacy over the
United States of America. In so doing, he has exhibited an unmistakable
pattern of contempt for the U.S. Constitution, which prior to his
ruinous tenure had served two centuries as the Law of the Land.
We therefore demand that this criminal, treasonous individual be
removed from office without delay and held accountable for his
destructive behavior, and that all his unlawful acts as president be
considered of no effect or validity. We believe that the only effective way to achieve this urgent goal is to initiate impeachment.
ARTICLE 2—False pretenses
Mr. Obama has attained the office of president in a verifiably
fraudulent and criminal manner, and upon a false identity and false
pretenses.
We therefore demand immediate release of all currently sealed
documentation of who he is; what his true history entails; what his
earlier school, travel, and other records reveal about him; what his
original (not photocopied) birth certificate makes clear; and all other
relevant information in the public record now suppressed or
intentionally falsified regarding him. We the People of the United
States have a right to know such things about a man who currently serves
as Commander-in-Chief of our nation's armed forces and oversees the
entire Executive Branch of the U.S. government. We believe that the only effective way to force release of these records is impeachment.
ARTICLE 3—Criminal fraud
Upon taking office, Mr. Obama criminally defrauded Congress and the
American people with false promises, uttered repeatedly in the public
record about the nature, scope, and effect of his signature legislative
achievement, "Obamacare," in a deceptive effort to gain passage of this
catastrophic measure, which authorizes a sweeping federal takeover of
America's healthcare industry.
We therefore demand that this healthcare travesty be immediately
revoked, defunded, and declared null and void, and that this president
be held accountable for intentionally misleading and defrauding the
citizenry by means of this insidious scheme—a scheme that has already
diminished the rightful choice of most Americans regarding their
healthcare, has caused millions to lose their jobs due to its workplace
requirements, and will cost our nation its material viability and
vitality if allowed to go forward. We believe that the only effective way to ensure the dismantling of Obamacare is impeachment.
ARTICLE 4—Deliberate bankrupting of the U.S.
In a deliberate scheme to force the financial collapse of the United
States, Mr. Obama and his collaborators have pushed the nation's "public
debt"—that is, the difference between public spending and public
receipts—to an unsustainable 17 TRILLION dollars, an amount exceeding
our nation's Gross Domestic Product (or total value of goods and
services) and more than doubling the debt's previous rate of growth. The
effect is to impose an indebtedness of over $50,000 upon every man,
woman, and child in the U.S., and more than $150,000 per taxpayer,
numbers that indicate the U.S. is headed toward insolvency and our
posterity will be forced to bear the dire consequences. The effect is
even more dire when "unfunded liabilities" are factored in.
We therefore demand that the individual behind this destructive
scheme assume all liability, upon his own person, for the amount the
national debt has increased during his tenure, in company with all
others who have collaborated with him in the Executive and Legislative
Branches of the federal government in enacting this policy, listing them
by name, and that the American people at large be absolved—by binding
decree—of any and all liability for such wanton abuse of the public
purse. We believe that the only effective way to attain such simple, reasonable justice is impeachment.
ARTICLE 5—Treasonous national security policy
By insidious design and outright treachery, Mr. Obama has dangerously
weakened America's national security—through his emasculation of our
military; his unilateral reduction of our missile defense system,
thereby weakening American military superiority and inviting nuclear
conflagration at home and abroad; his deceitful promotion and arming of
radical Islamic interests in Egypt, Libya, Syria, and elsewhere; his
catering, in domestic and foreign policy, to the Muslim Brotherhood,
which is on record seeking the destruction of the United States; his
fraudulent relations with Iran that will likely ensure this radically
hostile nation succeeds in developing nuclear weapons; his continuing
disregard for the vital interests of longtime American ally Israel; his
unreasonable handicapping of our military's rules of engagement,
dangerously favoring America's enemies; his alarming pattern of
dismissing high-ranking military officers for groundless or superficial
reasons; his unprecedented release of five senior Taliban commanders in
exchange for a U.S. deserter in Afghanistan, a reckless trade that
amounts to giving aid and comfort to a wartime enemy; and similar
anti-American policies and actions too numerous to mention.
We therefore demand that the Obama administration be forced
immediately to cease and desist from its treasonous, unconstitutional,
conspiratorial plot to take down America, and our allies with it, and
that a sane, pro-American policy be adopted in its place for the purpose
of protecting our nation from all threats to its continuance. We believe that the only effective way to enforce this urgent demand is impeachment.
ARTICLE 6—Treasonous cover-up of Benghazi
Mr. Obama has deceitfully sought to cover up his administration's
involvement in a covert operation in Benghazi, Libya, that ran afoul
September 11, 2012. The president's fabricated narrative of the causes
and nature of the episode, which resulted in the deaths of Ambassador
Christopher Stevens and three other Americans, has been shown to be a
cynical attempt to divert attention from what actually happened,
including reports of treasonable administration dealings with terrorist
insurgents in Syria. The administration's interference with
investigations by Congress into the matter, and its muzzling of
witnesses and participants, hints that only the tip of the iceberg has
yet been revealed regarding Mr. Obama's contemptuous behavior and
dereliction of duty in this bloodstained scandal.
We therefore demand that all witnesses who have firsthand
knowledge of the truth regarding the Benghazi fiasco be permitted to
come forth without threat of retaliation and give their account of any
and all relevant facts—including mounting evidence of illicit
collaboration with Islamic terrorist organizations by the Obama
administration. We believe that the only effective way attain such simple, reasonable justice is impeachment.
ARTICLE 7—Plot to disarm the citizenry
Mr. Obama has repeatedly attempted to take advantage of isolated acts of
violence in our nation involving firearms in the hands of deranged
individuals to deprive law-abiding Americans of their
constitutionally-guaranteed right to keep and bear arms, in a direct
assault on the Second Amendment by someone who himself poses a growing
threat to the security and well-being of our nation; and he has
repeatedly made known his intention to succeed with his unconstitutional
goal of disarming the people despite any setbacks he may encounter in
Congress. So intent is he on imposing gun control that he even engaged
in a deadly gunrunning hoax known as "Fast and Furious" to incite
sympathy for tightening U.S. gun laws, then invoked executive privilege
to cover up his administration's criminal involvement. He and his
administration have also withheld or destroyed vital physical evidence
that would corroborate events at Newtown, CT, in which 20 schoolchildren
and six adults were reportedly killed by a disturbed gunman with an
assault rifle—an incident the president has shamelessly exploited in his
push for oppressive new gun legislation.
We therefore demand that the president immediately abandon such
pursuit of tyranny and seek refuge in a nation more to his liking, one
that already bans, or severely restricts, gun ownership by law-abiding
citizens in consequence of despotic notions of governance. We believe that the only way to hasten this outcome is impeachment.
ARTICLE 8—Undermining U.S. border security
Similarly, Mr. Obama has repeatedly and deliberately sought to undermine
U.S. border security, and by extension, America's national sovereignty,
by pushing misnamed "immigration reform" that would in reality open
wide our borders to untold numbers of unlawful new immigrants,
overburden our workplace and public coffers, and grant amnesty to the
already millions of unlawful occupiers who have entered the country by
stealth. Unable to achieve this agenda legislatively, through
congressional action, he has undertaken to achieve it dictatorially, in
open violation of the Constitution and statutory immigration law.
Ostensibly, the president intends, by his abandonment of longstanding
U.S. immigration policy, to create a permanent under-culture of
dependent immigrants who have little allegiance to America's founding
ideals, upon whom to stand to remain in power indefinitely—either by
himself, or in the person of likeminded schemers within his party.
We therefore demand that our nation's borders be made effectively
secure, that existing immigration laws be reasonably and fairly
enforced, that all persons seeking citizenship play fundamentally by the
same rules, no matter the petitioners' origins, and that Mr. Obama's
immigration policy and initiatives be rejected by Congress as the threat
they are to our nation's security and strength, with his deceptive
drive for "immigration reform" relegated permanently to the backwaters
of history. We believe that the only way to ensure this outcome is impeachment.
ARTICLE 9—Engaging in mass surveillance
Mr. Obama has engaged in notorious overreach regarding domestic
surveillance. A certain degree of targeted domestic surveillance may be
considered justified, even essential, to protect American citizens from
harm if conducted with appropriate oversight and in harmony with
reasonable law—but indiscriminate spying on all citizens is indefensible
and constitutes the very essence of a police state.
We therefore demand that the routine eavesdropping now being
conducted by the National Security Agency (NSA) be curtailed to conform
with appropriate safeguards, to permit only those functions that can be
constitutionally defended. We believe that the only way to leverage this outcome is impeachment.
ARTICLE 10—Abusing IRS authority
Likewise, Mr. Obama and his IRS subordinates have notoriously abused the
public trust by singling out, and arbitrarily penalizing, patriotic
organizations awaiting approval of tax-exempt status so they might
fundraise legally. By delaying approvals and sharing confidential
information with potential adversaries, for purely political reasons,
the Obama administration has violated federal statutes, and unlawfully
handicapped these groups in their efforts to counter Mr. Obama's
tyranny.
We therefore demand substantial monetary damages for these
aggrieved organizations, and expedited approval of all "Tea Party,"
"conservative," and "libertarian" groups in the future. More to the
point, because of its unavoidably political nature, we seek abolition of
the IRS itself, and its replacement by a reasonable consumption or flat
tax. We believe that the only way to bring about such an outcome is impeachment.
ARTICLE 11—Subverting America's morality
Most far-reaching and adverse of all his insidious deeds, in the
acknowledged biblical perspective of our Creator, is that Mr. Obama has
undertaken to subvert America's moral strength and means of perpetuation
by promoting measures that weaken the natural, God-ordained family, and
escalate the unthinkable aborting of America's posterity. As part of
this corrupt effort, he has sanctioned the unconstitutional silencing of
conscientious citizens and clergy who oppose homosexuality and its
growing inclusion in lawful marriage; and he has approved stipulations
in his healthcare plan that would force Americans opposed to abortion,
or to anything related involving abortifacients or contraceptives, to
directly fund such morally-offensive practices. These immoral,
destructive policies—integral to the president's sweeping plan to
transform America—militate not only against the Constitution, but the
foundations of Judeo-Christianity upon which America is historically
premised, to which the president appears to have an aversion.
We therefore demand that biblical morality be once again allowed
the place of respect it has long enjoyed at the center of our nation's
culture—on its own merits, without federal interference of any kind that
would violate the First Amendment. We also call for immediately ending
the moral and material travesty known as "Obamacare," including any
requirement that American citizens or businesses personally underwrite
abortion. We believe that the best way to ensure this fortuitous
outcome, and reverse these federally-enforced intrusions, is the
president's impeachment.
In every stage of these and other oppressions that could be cited, we
have petitioned for redress in the most humble terms—but our repeated
petitions have been answered only by repeated injury and blatant lies. A
fraudulent usurper whose character is thus marked by every act which
may define a tyrant is unfit to be the ruler of a free people, much less
their president.
We the People, therefore, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world
for the rectitude of our intentions, do solemnly publish and declare,
that because Barack Hussein Obama has verifiably corrupted, compromised,
and endangered the essential institutions of the American Republic, as
well as threatened the nation's very survival, we hereby appeal to the
next Congress of the United States—which will convene in January 2015—to
begin impeachment proceedings against Mr. Obama, and his fellow
lawbreakers and facilitators within the Executive Branch, for the purpose of removing them from office with all diligence.
For the support of this action, with a firm reliance on the protection
of divine providence, We the People mutually pledge to each other our
lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor, to save our beloved nation
and preserve the rights and freedoms bequeathed us by God and protected
by our revered Constitution. Read more at http://www.pledgetoimpeach.com/case_for_impeachment.php#pCGHfW0iE7SVhW54.99
