Saturday, January 18, 2014

This week, once again, we heard President Obama defiantly pronounce that he has no intention of letting a little thing like constitutional checks and balances get in his way and interrupt his royal prerogative.

"We are not just going to be waiting for legislation in order to make sure that we're providing Americans the kind of help that they need," said Obama. "I've got a pen, and I've got a phone."

What other president has ever talked like this?

I thought Democrats had an aversion to "unilateral" executive action. Wasn't one of their pet peeves against President George W. Bush that he acted unilaterally in attacking Iraq? Never mind that this was a complete fabrication, in that Bush assembled the largest coalition of nations he could to join us in the effort.

Oh, this is different, you say, because Bush was allegedly acting unilaterally on the international stage? Well, apart from the fact that he wasn't, why should that bother liberals more than a president's acting unilaterally on domestic issues?

I'll tell you why: Liberals are more concerned about whether leftist foreign governments like us than they are about whether a president is acting within the scope of his constitutional authority.

In Bush's case, even if the false allegations that he was "going it alone" had been true, he secured a joint resolution of Congress before commencing "shock and awe."

Before contrasting Bush's actions on foreign policy with Obama's on domestic policy, let's recall how Obama operated in a comparable foreign policy situation. When he decided -- unilaterally -- to take military action in Libya, he did not even bother to consult Congress, much less get its approval, before initiating his intervention. He was in constant contact with his fellow leftists at the United Nations, however, consistent with his desire to please foreign leaders above complying with the Constitution.

For all of Obama's bellyaching during the 2008 presidential campaign about how much the United States was hated in the world by Muslims and non-Muslims alike under Bush, Obama has made things worse across the board.

How's that "reset" with Russia going, President Obama? Tell us again the juicy details of how you've incapacitated al-Qaida as it gobbles up formerly won cities in Iraq. Explain how our growing unpopularity in the Muslim world squares with your arrogant promise to heal those relations. Fill us in on the Saudi government's outright distrust of your administration. How about Britain? Germany? Israel?

Returning to the domestic front, Obama is continuing the pattern he has established throughout his time in office. In my first Obama book, "Crimes Against Liberty," I wrote, "The full strategy of using executive orders to circumvent Congress became clear following Scott Brown's victory in Massachusetts" because much of his agenda remained stalled in Congress. "The New York Times reported Obama was planning on 'an array of actions using his executive power to advance energy, environmental, fiscal and other domestic policy priorities.'" Obama proceeded to act unilaterally to create a bipartisan budget commission, to reverse the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy, and on a host of environmental regulations when Congress wouldn't pass his farcical cap-and-trade legislation, to name a few.

In my second Obama book, "The Great Destroyer," I related Obama's insolent threats to take executive action in his "next two years." "What I'm not gonna do is wait for Congress," he proclaimed in an interview on "60 Minutes."

This wasn't an idle threat. When the Senate wouldn't confirm his appointee to run the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau established by Dodd-Frank, he carved out a "special advisory role" and appointed anti-capitalist Harvard professor Elizabeth Warren to serve temporarily. Then, when the Senate balked on confirming Richard Cordray to head the CFPB, he took the unprecedented step of exercising the recess appointments power when the Senate was technically still in session.

When a federal judge struck down Obama's executive order forcing taxpayers to fund embryonic stem cell research, his National Institutes of Health essentially told researchers they could disregard the court's ruling.

It would take me thousands of words to describe the other unconstitutional actions he's taken, from his executive orders to facilitate "stealth land grabs" to his orders on offshore drilling to his 19 executive actions on gun control to his outrageous executive action to do an end run around Congress' failure to pass the DREAM Act -- and on and on.

Obama is simply a lawless president who regards his own counsel higher than his duty to obey the Constitution. He believes that advancing his political agenda justifies ignoring clear limitations on his power.

In rationalizing these imperial outrages, Obama tells us that he is going to provide the American people with the help they need -- as if he is the sole arbiter of that, as if Congress is a potted plant and as if the Supreme Court is either impotent or a rubber stamp.

Obama's overreaches would be just as outrageous if he were providing Americans with what we need, but he is doing the opposite as he is systematically destroying the country.

What a nightmare!
So Benghazi finally claims another victim.

The knife sticking out of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s back was stuck there slowly by fellow pantsuiter, Sen. Diane Fienstein, (D-Kalf.) who chairs the Senate Intelligence committee for the gentleman’s club also known as the United States Senate.

That knife means that Hillary is probably dead.

At least as a presidential candidate.

Oh, yes, the New York Times won’t give it up quite yet.

But for Hillary, it’s o-v-e-r.

The Senate report on Benghazi released by Feinstein’s office is largely a compendium of what you, I and everyone outside of the Obama administration already knows: Benghazi was a terror attack, as acknowledged from the very beginning, and was largely preventable.

The preventer should have been the Secretary of State. Obama and the White escape responsibility.

Seriously. They should too. They can't even build a website. The intelligence process is waaaay past them.

“The IC produced hundreds of analytic reports in the months preceding the September 11-12, 2012, attacks,” says the Senate report, “providing strategic warning that militias and terrorist and affiliated groups had the capability and intent to strike U.S. and Western facilities and personnel in Libya.”

A Defense Intelligence Agency analysis specifically mentioned Benghazi, while other reports also emphasized the deteriorating situation in “eastern” or “northeastern” Libya of which Benghazi is the major hub.

The report also found that the State Department should have increased security based on those reports.

“The State Department should have increased its security posture more significantly in Benghazi based on the deteriorating security situation on the ground and IC threat reporting on the prior attacks against Westerners in Benghazi including two incidents at the Temporary Mission Facility on April 6 and June 6, 2012.”


It’s all the State Department’s fault.

And that’s what difference it makes, Hillary.

The report reads like one of those scary movies where you know the bad guy is in the house and the ditzy chick in her underwear narrowly avoids going into the same room over and over with the bad guy, heightening the tension.

And you sit in your seat and shout: “Get out of the house!”

Only in this case the victims knew they were about to be sacrificed and couldn't get the State Department to do something.

As I peruse the report I feel like I’m reading the audit from a local U.S. postal facility, where union workers don’t take action because it’s "not their job."

Repeatedly, warnings are given, actions are taken but somewhere along the line, nothing gets done to improve the security posture of the mission.

In an interview this week with Lt. Col. Allen West on Ransom Notes Radio, West said that he’d have to defer to then-AFRICOM commander general Carter Ham’s official version of events. Ham has said that there was no “stand down” order to him preventing him from sending in a rescue team as the attack unfolded.

The Senate report concludes that Ham expressed concern several times to Ambassador Stevens about the deteriorating security profile around Benghazi in the weeks leading to the attack and that Stevens even declined the use of Site Security Teams offered by the DoD.


It’s the dead guy's fault, too.

Of course that contradicts what several off-the-record sources have told journalists, and contradicts the testimony of Rep. Jason Chaffetz, who questioned Ham in House oversight hearings.

Much of Chaffetz’s back and forth with Ham was redacted in the unclassified release to the public, but Chaffetz says that despite pleas coming from the Benghazi mission and the CIA annex, orders never came from either the White House or the Defense Secretary to the head of AFRICOM to send support.

So technically, there may not have been so much a stand-down order, as Ham says, but just benign neglect until the problem(s) died.


West did note that Ham and vice admiral Gaouette were both relieved of duty shortly after the Benghazi attacks. Ham, who has a pension at stake, says it was just a normal rotation.

Gaouette, who is still under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, was disciplined for swearing and making racially insensitive remarks aboard the carrier the USS Stennis, so says the official account.

Writes the MilitaryTimes:

Gaouette’s style “is not the leadership style that the Navy currently preaches,” one of Stennis’ officers said. “But, I mean, if you fired everybody for being a jerk, we wouldn’t have very many people in the Navy.”
Actually, I’m ok with the jerks in the Navy.

It’s the jerks in D.C. I have a problem with.

There’s a large difference between yelling at sailor for driving an aircraft carrier recklessly as vice admiral Gaouette did, and yelling at the rest of us for cringing at reckless legislation, spineless “leadership” and evasion of responsibility, as D.C. does daily.

I suspect that none of this is over, yet, but there is a strange reticence amongst military leaders, the intelligence community and the GOP in Congress to get to the bottom of the Benghazi scandal.

And it makes me sick.

Even if the knife in Hillary’s back makes me smile a bit.

Damning evidence for sure

I was asked by people on FB to post this large 
as FB only allows pics up to a certain size...very 
damning evidence for sure...
It's originally from Jihad Watch.

Devastating Benghazi timeline: Obama missed intel briefing five days in a row before jihad attack, went to campaign rally right after it

From Jihad Watch / Posted by Robert Spencer


Note that Obama says, "Al Qaeda is on the path to defeat" the day before a Libyan defense militia warned State Department officials about the jihad threat in Benghazi. "Devastating Benghazi Timeline Reveals Obama MIA," by Wynton Hall for Breitbart, January 16:
The government watchdog group that revealed that President Barack Obama failed to attend over half of his daily intelligence briefings (known officially as the Presidential Daily Brief, or PDB) released a devastating Benghazi timeline Wednesday.... 
As the GAI timeline reveals, Obama failed to attend his daily intelligence briefing for the five consecutive days leading up to the September 11, 2012 attack of the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi.
The Benghazi timeline catalogues Obama’s continuous campaigning even as terrorist forces vowed Libyan attacks and State Department officials were warned of security threats.
The day following the deadly attacks, Obama departed for a Las Vegas campaign rally.

NSA collects millions of text messages daily; DOJ forbids agents from singling out Muslims in counterterror investigations

From Jihad Watch / Posted by Robert Spencer

NSA.jpgThis surveillance scandal arises out of our national bipartisan unwillingness to face the reality of Islamic jihad. Because we all agree that Islam is a religion of peace, we can't possibly address where the threat is really coming from, and monitor mosques or subject Muslims with Islamic supremacist ties to greater surveillance. Instead, we have to pretend that anyone and everyone is a potential terrorist, and surveil everyone. Our freedoms and privacy are now at risk because of our refusal to admit the truth about Islam.

So in the interests of preserving their politically correct fictions about Islam and jihad, the TSA pretends that 80-year-old wheelchair-bound Methodist grandmothers are just as much of a terror threat as 25-year-old Pakistani Muslim males, and the NSA subjects everyone -- everyone -- to massive surveillance, while the success of Islamic supremacist protests decrying the FBI's surveillance of Muslim communities means that probably the least monitored and spied-upon people in the U.S. are Muslims, including would-be Islamic jihadists.

"NSA collects millions of text messages daily in 'untargeted' global sweep," by James Ball in The Guardian, January 16:
The National Security Agency has collected almost 200 million text messages a day from across the globe, using them to extract data including location, contact networks and credit card details, according to top-secret documents. 
The untargeted collection and storage of SMS messages – including their contacts – is revealed in a joint investigation between the Guardian and the UK’s Channel 4 News based on material provided by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden.
The documents also reveal the UK spy agency GCHQ has made use of the NSA database to search the metadata of “untargeted and unwarranted” communications belonging to people in the UK.
The NSA program, codenamed Dishfire, collects “pretty much everything it can”, according to GCHQ documents, rather than merely storing the communications of existing surveillance targets.
The NSA has made extensive use of its vast text message database to extract information on people’s travel plans, contact books, financial transactions and more – including of individuals under no suspicion of illegal activity....
"U.S. to Expand Rules Limiting Use of Profiling by Federal Agents," by Matt Apuzzo for the New York Times, January 15:
The Justice Department will significantly expand its definition of racial profiling to prohibit federal agents from considering religion, national origin, gender and sexual orientation in their investigations, a government official said Wednesday.
The move addresses a decade of criticism from civil rights groups that say federal authorities have in particular singled out Muslims in counterterrorism investigations and Latinos for immigration investigations.
The Bush administration banned profiling in 2003, but with two caveats: It did not apply to national security cases, and it covered only race, not religion, ancestry or other factors.
Since taking office, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. has been under pressure from Democrats in Congress to eliminate those provisions. “These exceptions are a license to profile American Muslims and Hispanic-Americans,” Senator Richard J. Durbin, Democrat of Illinois, said in 2012.
President George W. Bush said in 2001 that racial profiling was wrong and promised “to end it in America.” But that was before the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11. After those attacks, federal agents arrested and detained dozens of Muslim men who had no ties to terrorism. The government also began a program known as special registration, which required tens of thousands of Arab and Muslim men to register with the authorities because of their nationalities.
“Putting an end to this practice not only comports with the Constitution, it would put real teeth to the F.B.I’s claims that it wants better relationships with religious minorities,” said Hina Shamsi, a national security lawyer with the American Civil Liberties Union.
It is not clear whether Mr. Holder also intends to make the rules apply to national security investigations, which would further respond to complaints from Muslim groups.
“Adding religion and national origin is huge,” said Linda Sarsour, advocacy director for the National Network for Arab American Communities. “But if they don’t close the national security loophole, then it’s really irrelevant.
The NSA Scandal…Obama tried to make it go away...he failed
By: Diane Sori

“I will end the program as it currently exists."                                                     - Barack HUSSEIN Obama, 1/17/14
OK folks…I’ll begin at the end…Barack HUSSEIN Obama saying “God Bless America” twice at the end of yesterday’s press conference just turned my stomach because you could see him choking on those words while trying to get them out…good thing they were on the teleprompter or I doubt they would have come out at all, but back to the beginning.

Yesterday, after a six-month White House ‘supposed’ investigation into whistleblower Edward Snowden’s flood of disclosures about the true scope of U.S. spying, President Obama (gag) held a press conference to discuss the changes he will implement in how the NSA collects and stores data on ‘We the People,’ our allies, and our enemies.

Saying that the NSA officials did NOT “intentionally abuse” the program to invade our privacy…yeah right…Obama went on to say that he believed opponents of the program had been correct in saying that without proper safeguards the data collection could be used to garner even more personal information about the private lives of Americans then they already had, and that it could open the door to even more intrusive programs.  Nice words but the thing is Barack HUSSEIN Obama was the very man who ordered the NSA to 'spy' on American citizens and will continue to order them do so.

And critical to all he said…actually to what he did NOT say (taqiyya in action)…is that in NO way will the invasion of our privacy be stopped… translating into the information will still be collected just NOT as much of it…at least that we can see that is. 

Also, Obama said that ‘some’ of the changes he intends to make will take effect immediately, but that ‘other’ changes will require further study…which means more of our taxpayer dollars will be wasted on a study of a program that clearly violates our 4th Amendment rights…and that those changes may take an action of Congress to be implemented.  Uh oh…this sitting Congress does NOTHING as it is so I guess that means that in regards to spying on ‘We the People’ they will do even less than NOTHING.

"The reforms I am proposing today should give the American people greater confidence that their rights are being protected, even as our intelligence and law enforcement agencies maintain the tools they need to make us safe,” Obama said during the press conference.

Greater confidence in an administration that shoved the ObamaCare monstrosity down our throats, still covers-up ‘Fast & Furious and does even worse in regards to Benghazi…NO...I don’t think we have any confidence at all in anything this most miserable of presidents proposes.

So folks here now is just a bit of what Obama proposed…and just this bit alone should have you hopping mad.  First off, effective immediately, the NSA will be required to get a ‘secretive' court’s (actually the Foreign Surveillance Intelligence Court) permission before accessing phone records and data that will still be collected from millions of law-abiding Americans…but I say why NOT an ‘open court’ of public record...why a ‘secretive court’…what’s he still trying to hide…hmmmmm…

And Obama said that those phone records...which includes numbers dialed and length but NOT content of calls...will NO longer be stored by the government itself but either by a third party or by the phone providers themselves. Oh really…and what of the huge data mining storage center that he had built in Bluffdale Utah…who now will be the keeper of the phone records when a  ‘For Sale’ sign gets tacked to its front door.  And with the phone companies opposing the expense and potential liability of holding said data, and with NO ‘credible’ third party yet to come forward, you can rest assured that if a third party does takes over they will be one hand-picked from his many campaign donors so that all Obama has to do when he wants to do his snooping is just mossy on over to that third party and say, ‘let me see’…just a slight detour in his targeted control of ‘We the People.’

And this little goody…which al-Qaeda operatives and other assorted terrorists will love…borders on the outright dangerous when it comes to the monitoring of true terrorist activity (the only activity that actually should be monitored), as Obama has said that the government will NO longer be allowed to access phone records beyond two so-called ‘hops’ from the person they are targeting... meaning NO access to phone records for someone who called someone, who called someone, who called the suspect, will be allowed…. NOTHING like helping the brethren yet again.

  Also saying that the U.S. won’t monitor the communications of “our close friends and allies overseas” unless there’s a ‘compelling’ national security reason is pure hogwash as Obama is NOT releasing a list of which countries fall under that category…and Obama being what he is with America’s allies being his enemies and America’s enemies being his allies, heaven only knows where he’s going with this one…or should I say hell only knows to be more exact.

And Obama stating that he will be issuing a ‘presidential directive’ (an order that has the same legal standing as an executive order that remains in effect until a change in administration deems otherwise),that will state the government can only use collected phone data for counterintelligence, counterterrorism and cyber-security to protect U.S. forces and allies, and to "combat weapons proliferation and transnational crime” is again even more hogwash as first, we cannot believe a single word coming out of his proven to be lying mouth ("If you like your current health insurance policy you can keep it…period”) and second, everyday Americans like you and me are NOT involved in spying, terrorism, cyber-hacking, weapons trading, or international crime and Obama and his NSA buddies know it as well as we know that it’s ‘We the People’ who will still be the ones spied on.

And proof is that Obama wants to give foreigners protections against spying and is directing the Director of National Intelligence and his ‘good bud’ AG Eric ‘Fast & Furious’ Holder to put in place safeguards as to how long the U.S. can hold information on non-citizens overseas, and restrictions on how the data is used.  This he does for non-Americans while ‘We the People’ continue to get the proverbial shaft…and again continue to be spied on.

But NO matter what changes Obama says he will make but NOT really do, the bottom line remains that Barack HUSSEIN Obama stands by and completely supports the NSA’s spying on ‘We the People.’  By calling said spying "necessary for national security” he continues to look away at what he called ‘the foreigners’ in our country…meaning his muslim brethren…who are the only real terrorists this program needs to keep track on. And being that he left all the final decisions primarily to Eric Holder's anything but Justice Department and to intelligence agencies that oppose making any changes to the current surveillance operations at all, you just know this entire matter will soon be swept under the rug...or at least that is what Obama will try to do.  Maybe this time Congress will make sure it's NOT but I'm NOT going to hold my breath for that.

Oh and by the way, Obama's shiny and sweating face...that you can see got shinier, sweatier, and pastier as time went a dead give-away that even he knows all his talk was NOTHING but empty political bloviatings...smoke and mirrors if you he tried to get our attention focused off ObamaCare and Benghazi...and to that I say he failed miserably.