Louis Farrakhan Pleads With Obama To Open Area 51 To Prove Existence of Giant Mother Wheel In The Sky

mothership-LF-eye-460

Louis Farrakhan, the leader of the Nation of Islam, has called upon the president to “open up Area 51,” a government location in New Mexico known for sparking conspiracy theories surrounding aliens and UFO landings.

Via The Blaze,  comic relief for trying times…

During the final installment of his year-long sermon series “Time and What Must Be Done,” The Minister Louis Farrakhan called on President Barack Obama to “open up Area 51,” a government location known for sparking conspiracy theories surrounding aliens and UFO landings.

“President Barack Obama, call the scientists. Open up Area 51 to the scientists to the world, because you America are the leader that Allah God has raised and made you powerful that he might make himself known through you,” Farrakhan said. “And if America calls the scientists of the earth to such place, they will respond.”

The Nation of Islam leader said that calling “the scientists” to the location would “show them the sign of the presence of God to right the wrongs of the earth and heal it.”

Farrakhan maintained that Obama would place the “shadow government” — a coalition that is purportedly “controlled by the global elite” and has seemingly veiled Area 51 and UFOs in secrecy — in danger of being exposed if he complies.

The faith leader believes that this secretive government force has hidden the presence of UFOs from American presidents and the public alike for decades. This includes The Mother Wheel, a massive spaceship that he believes remains in orbit and will eventually rescue Nation of Islam adherents from earth.

“The scientists all over the earth will know, especially through the clarity of our voice and what they see that God is present and that we whom they have destroyed would not have this knowledge if it did not come from the highest of sources,” Farrakhan continued. “We believe our words that we have shared on the presence of the Wheel could help the president and America to avert Allah’s warning of chastisement and destruction if America does not bow down.”

Farrakhan described the mother-wheel, thus in a 2011 speech:

It took 15 billion dollars in gold at that time to build it. It is made of the toughest steel. America does not yet know the composition of the steel used to make an instrument like it. It is a circular plane, and the Bible says that it never makes turns. Because of its circular nature it can stop and travel in all directions at speeds of thousands of miles per hour. He said there are 1,500 small wheels in this Mother Wheel, which is a half mile by-a-half-mile. This Mother Wheel is like a small human built planet. Each one of these small planes carry three bombs.”

“Its gonna be astounding to see how scary them people gon look bruh,” said one commenter on YouTube.

Someone is slightly off his rocker, you guys.

Posted in WOW!. 4 Comments »

Greta Van Susteren: Obama’s News Police Meant to Intimidate, Stifle and Chill Speech (Video)

On Wednesday night’s On the Record with Greta Van Susteren, a panel discussed the Obama Regime’s latest power grab – an FCC pilot program that would send “researchers” to newsrooms to grill reporters, editors and station owners about how they decide which stories to run. Former FCC Commissioner AJIT PAI wrote about the plan in his Wall Street Journal piece, The FCC Wades Into the Newsroom.

The purpose of the CIN, according to the FCC, is to ferret out information from television and radio broadcasters about “the process by which stories are selected” and how often stations cover “critical information needs,” along with “perceived station bias” and “perceived responsiveness to underserved populations.”

How does the FCC plan to dig up all that information? First, the agency selected eight categories of “critical information” such as the “environment” and “economic opportunities,” that it believes local newscasters should cover. It plans to ask station managers, news directors, journalists, television anchors and on-air reporters to tell the government about their “news philosophy” and how the station ensures that the community gets critical information.

Susteren is outraged. She had on The Hill’s AB Stoddard, The Washington Post’s Karen Tumulty and the Washington Examiner’s Byron York to discuss the Regime’s stealth attempt to bring back the  Fairness Doctrine, and they all agreed that it was a horrible idea that no self-respecting newsroom would tolerate.

Greta named three things that she thought she’d never see happen in her own country – the NSA spying on all American citizens, the use of drones to kill American citizens, and now this. Tumulty noted the FCC was also planning to visit newspapers which they don’t even have the power to regulate.

“You ask a news organization what their news philosophy is – it’s to cover the news and make a profit out of that”, Tumulty declared.

Greta retorted, “if they asked me, you know what I’d say? None of your business.” She went on to say she hoped any other news organization would respond the same way.

Stoddard wondered why any newsroom or newspaper would feel like they would have to comply with these FCC inquisitions. “I can’t imagine even the most liberal outfit coming from this profession being willing to share their philosophy and change the way they cover anything…” She said.

Greta asserted that the whole thing is “meant to intimidate and to stifle and to chill,” and expressed shock and horror that someone thought that this was a good idea to begin with.

AB Stoddard agreed, “it seems so ludicrous – so unAmerican – that I can’t believe that it would ever become real, but the fact that someone had an idea about it and it didn’t get slapped down – is more than strange.”

One gets the uneasy feeling that Obama looks to Communist South American Dictators who take control of the news media with great admiration and envy.

SEE ALSO:

Doug Ross: NOT CREEPY AT ALL: Obama FCC Placing Government Monitors in Newsrooms to Police Media:

Every major repressive regime of the modern era has begun with an attempt to control and intimidate the press.

As Thomas Jefferson so eloquently said, “our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost.”

The federal government has absolutely no business determining what stories should and should not be run, what is critical for the American public and what is not, whether it perceives a bias, and whose interests are and are not being served by the free press.

It’s an unconscionable assault on our free society.

Imagine a government monitor telling Fox News it needed to cover stories in the same way as MSNBC or Al Jazeera. Imagine an Obama Administration official walking in to the editorial board of the Wall Street Journal and telling it that the American public would be better served if it is stopped reporting on the IRS scandal or maybe that reporting on ObamaCare “glitches” is driving down enrollment.

It’s hard to imagine anything more brazenly Orwellian than government monitors in newsrooms.

Via Dick Morris: 

Surveys will be distributed to reporters, news editors, assignment editors, publishers, owners, on-air reporters, film editors and other station or newspaper staff. These are the questions they will ask:

–What is the news philosophy of the station?

–Who else in your market provides news?

–Who are your main competitors?

–Is the news produced in-house or is it provided by an outside source?

–Do you employ news people?

–How many reporters and editors do you employ?

–Do you have any reporters or editors assigned to topic “beats”? If so how many and what are the beats?

–Who decides which stories are covered?

–How much influence do reporters and anchors have in deciding which stories to cover? –How much does community input influence news coverage decisions?

–How do you define critical information that the community needs?

–How do you ensure the community gets this critical information? On-Air Staff? Reporters? Anchors?

–How much news does your station air every day?

–Have you ever suggested coverage of what you consider a story with critical information for your customers (viewers, listeners, readers) that was rejected by management? If so, can you give an example? What was the reason given for the decision? Why do you disagree?

These intrusive questions, prying into station politics and policies, can only send a chilling message to radio and television outlets.

Fox News: ‘The Kelly File’ looks at the FCC’s proposal to study newsrooms:

A Federal Communications Commission proposal to “study” how the news media operates by placing researchers in newsrooms, “The Kelly File” reported on Wednesday.

“It’s very reminiscent of the kinds of questions that were asked of my clients in the IRS matter that is currently in federal court,” said Jay Sekulow of the American Center for Law and Justice. “Same kind of questioning process of content, determination on point of view, and I think this government, this administration is bent on aiming and targeting those they don’t like.”

Katie Pavlich, the news editor of Townhall.com, wondered why the Obama administration didn’t learn following the fallout over the Justice Department’s wiretapping of Associated Press journalists.

“Now, they want to send investigators into newsrooms all over the country,” she said. “This is about controlling what people say, and this is about intimidating the news.”

Pavlich agreed with host Megyn Kelly’s assertion that the proposal provides a window into “how the FCC is thinking” when it comes to an independent press.

I emboldened what Sekulow said because I was thinking the same thing and I think it is key.

Do a Google search on this story, and you’ll quickly notice which media outfits are the most concerned about this – the WSJ, which broke the story, Fox News, the ACLJ, Mediaite, and lots of conservative blogs.

Why do you suppose ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC,  CNN, the Washington Post and NYTs (the Democrat media complex as Andrew Breitbart used to call them) are mum? Why is this not a big story for them? Could it be because they are already voluntarily complying with the Regime’s PC requirements? Are they not already simpatico with the Regime’s Statist worldview? In 2016, can we fully expect them to run interference  for the Democrat candidate  like they did so shamelessly for Obama in 2008 and 2012? Of course they will. They pretend to be impartial, but when it counts – they will sting the Republican. It is their nature.

So who do you think is being “targeted” here? As usual, it’s the disfavored conservative leaning rabble-rousers who don’t tow the Regime’s Statist line. And the Democrat media complex is once again, looking away from a scandal,  giving the Regime their tacit approval.

Greta Van Susteren has every reason to be horrified.

Andrew Klavan, Truth Revolt: KLAVAN: A Sick Media #BOWDOWN To Their Own Oppressors:

…we don’t need a thuggish FCC to know this administration wants the media choir to sing the White House song castrato. Reporters Without Borders has already downgraded the U.S. fourteen spots to number 46 on the World Press Freedom Index this year alone. The president’s men have tapped reporters’ phones and email. And even Jill Abramson, editor of the leftist New York Times, says, “This is the most secretive White House… I have ever dealt with.”

And yet the Times and the news networks continue to play down presidential malfeasance — including that which threatens their own freedom!

It was unbelievably childish of journalists to believe, as Barbara Walters put it, that Obama was “the next messiah.” It is venal of them to turn a near-sighted eye to his IRS abuse, Benghazi cover-up and unconstitutional non-enforcement of law. But for American news people to #BOWDOWN before an administration that shows open hostility to the First Amendment — that’s just hashtag-pathological.

Ben Shapiro, Big Government: OBAMA CRACKDOWN ON PRESS FREEDOM ESCALATES:

Last week, Reporters Without Borders dropped America in the World Press Freedom Index 2014 from 33rd to 46th. James Risen of The New York Times rightly explained, “I think 2013 will go down in history as the worst year for press freedom in the United States’ modern history.” And he’s right. The violation of press freedoms has been egregious under this administration, even as the press fetes President Obama as an honest and effective commander-in-chief.

Selective Access. President Obama has regularly granted special access to reporters who give him preferential coverage. CBS’ Steve Kroft admitted as much after a late-2012 interview with the President during which CBS clipped Obama’s explicit refusal to label Benghazi an act of terror: “(Obama) knows that we’re not going to play ‘gotcha’ with him, that we’re not going to go out of our way to make him look bad or stupid.”

Michael Lewis, author of Moneyball, got special access for a profile of Obama for Vanity Fair – but Obama insisted on redlining his quotes. Lewis explained that “the White House insisted on signing off on the quotes that would appear.” A reporter from the San Francisco Chronicle was threatened for covering an anti-Obama protest. As early as 2008, candidate Obama was kicking dissenters off planes after their outlets endorsed John McCain.

Targeting Reporters. In May 2013, the Associated Press dropped the bombshell that the Department of Justice had grabbed phone records for its reporters and editors of the course of two months. Records for 20 telephone lines belonging to the AP and reporters for it were seized between April and May of 2012. Those seizures affected over 100 journalists.

The AP’s President and CEO Gary Pruitt stated, “There can be no possible justification for such an overbroad collection of the telephone communications of The Associated Press and its reporters.” Fox News’ James Rosen was also targeted by the DOJ after running a story about North Korea nuclear development. His State Department visits were tracked and his movements were followed. His parents’ phone records were even grabbed.

Newly Released Treasury Dept Memo Reveals Holders of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Stock Unable To Access Future Earnings

 fmfm

A recently uncovered memo to Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner reveals that he approved a policy that ensures that the “existing common equity holders will not have access to any positive earnings from the G.S.E.’s in the future.”  Experts say this previously undisclosed arrangement could violate securities laws and amounts to a de facto nationalization of the companies.

The New York Times dropped this little bombshell over the weekend.

This month, an internal United States Treasury memo that outlined this restriction came up at a forum in Washington.

The memo was addressed to Timothy F. Geithner, then the Treasury secretary, from Jeffrey A. Goldstein, then the under secretary for domestic finance. In discussing Fannie and Freddie, the beleaguered government-sponsored enterprises rescued by taxpayers in September 2008, the memo referred to “the administration’s commitment to ensure existing common equity holders will not have access to any positive earnings from the G.S.E.’s in the future.”

The memo, which was produced in a lawsuit filed by Fannie and Freddie shareholders, was dated Dec. 20, 2010. Securities laws require material information — that is, information that might affect an investor’s view of a company — to be disclosed. That the government would deny a company’s shareholders all its profits certainly seems material, but the existence of this policy cannot be found in the financial filings of Fannie Mae. Neither have the Treasury’s discussions about the future of the two finance giants mentioned the administration’s commitment to shut common stockholders out of future earnings. Freddie Mac’s filings do refer, albeit incompletely, to the administration’s stance, noting that the Treasury “has indicated that it remains committed to protecting taxpayers and ensuring that our future positive earnings are returned to taxpayers as compensation for their investment.” Note that this reference does not say all earnings.

Lewis D. Lowenfels, a securities law expert in New York, found this statement insufficient. “If there is disclosure regarding future Fannie and Freddie earnings and the administration has a commitment that existing Fannie and Freddie common equity holders will never receive any future positive earnings,” he said, “this commitment would be material to investors and should be disclosed.”

When the memo was written, plenty of people held these stocks. Regulatory filings show that 18,000 investors held 1.1 billion shares of Fannie Mae common stock, while just over 2,100 investors held 650 million Freddie Mac shares.

The Washington Free Beacon has more…

Thousands of investors in the companies were not made aware of the memo, which outlined a policy that deprived them of future earnings. Securities laws require the disclosure of any “material” information that might affect an investor’s view of a company.

James Cummins, a leading securities lawyer who has litigated against Fannie and Freddie since 2004 on various issues, said in an interview that the information in the memo would have been of great interest to potential investors at the time.

“It’s material information because it was going to tell people who might want to buy stock, ‘Hey, by the way, you’re not going to get any dividends and all of the earnings of the company are going to U.S. Treasury,’” he said.

***

Critics accuse Fannie, Freddie, and the FHFA—which still guarantee nine out of every 10 U.S. mortgages—of crowding out competition from private mortgage insurers.

“It’s like a sick person going into a hospital, being cured of the illness, and then having the hospital refuse to release the patient,” Cummins said.

“It’s so different from what the entrepreneurial, capitalistic dream of the U.S. is supposed to be,” he added. “It’s just totally different from what anybody anticipated was going to happen.”

Cummins said Treasury’s control of the earnings, coupled with presidential appointments to the board of directors for Fannie and Freddie, more closely mirrors nationalized industries “in the Soviet Union or in Mexico.”

Or perhaps Venezuela.

Shock: IRS Partners With Progressive Organization To Process Data Filed By Small Tax-Exempt Groups

irs scandal2

In an exclusive report for WND, investigative journalist Aaron Klein revealed that the IRS has contracted with  “an avowedly progressive organization funded by George Soros to process data filed by smaller tax-exempt groups.”

The federal agency process sends details contained in the annual filings for organizations with $50,000 in annual receipts or less to the Urban Institute, which is funded at least partly by government payments as well as contributions from far-left activist George Soros.

The IRS page directs groups to file with the Urban Institute, although apparently other providers also can file the Form 990 documentation, which is required of every nonprofit, small and large.

The IRS.gov page on the “Annual Electronic Filing Requirement for Small Exempt Organizations – Form 990-N (e-Postcard)” includes instructions to file online, and includes a direct link to the Urban Institute.

It’s for “most small tax-exempt organizations whose annual gross receipts are normally $50,000 or less,” since they are “required” to electronically submit Form 990-N, unless they choose an alternative Form 990 or Form 990-EZ.

“The organization that fails to file required e-Postcards … for three consecutive years will automatically lose its tax-exempt status,” the IRS warns.

There, in the “How to File” box, are instructions to use “this link” to file. The IRS explains, “When you access the system, you will leave the IRS site and file the e-Postcard with the IRS through our trusted partner, Urban Institute. The form must be completed and filed electronically. There is no paper form.”

Click here to see images of the forms.

Klein goes on to note that employees at the Urban Institute” have a record of donating nearly 100 percent of their political contributions to Democrats, and officially, the Urban Institute advocates for totally socialized medicine, carbon taxes and amnesty for illegal aliens.”

The president of allegedly nonpartisan organization is Sarah Rosen Wartell, who is also the co-founder of the Center for American Progress, which is  widely considered to be the brain trust behind many of the Obama administration’s progressive policies.

Cleta Mitchell, the attorney for a number of tea party and conservative groups targeted by the IRS, told WND, “If true, this is a violation of federal law. And since most of the tea-party groups have annual revenues of [$50,000] or less, this would redirect their filings to a group whose mission is fundamentally at odds with tea-party organizations.”

She continued, “Federal law strictly prohibits the disclosure of confidential taxpayer information to persons outside the IRS. It is a felony to disseminate the information.

“Surely this cannot be happening. Surely,” she said. “This would be well more than a ‘smidgen’ of corruption.”

A disgusted Christopher Monckton  said the entire IRS is corrupt. “Sack the lot,” he declared.

“Where a department behaves as corruptly as the IRS, first selectively moving against conservative nonprofits only and then forcing all nonprofits to file their tax returns with a hard-left group only, with the menace that if they did not do so they would lose their nonprofit status, one statute springs to mind.

“The RICO statute,” he wrote.

“The IRS, by its actions, has shown itself to be a racketeer-influenced criminal organization. The nonprofits should band together, now, and mount a RICO action against it.

“Their lawyers will tell them they cannot possibly win. But they will win. And win big. The RICO statute, designed to deal with an earlier generation of Chicago gangsters, pays the successful plaintiffs three times their costs in fighting the action. Once the courts have held the IRS to be corrupt, it can and will be closed down,” he wrote.

He said a foreign company should be contracted for the IRS work.

“An organization that has behaved with such outrageous disregard for the iron obligation of strict political neutrality that is the first and most sacred duty of any tax-gatherer can only have done so because throughout its senior management there is ingrained contempt for the taxpayer and for the law,” he added. “The IRS has put politics above the law. Sack the lot.”

CT Collectivist Gun Grabber Ruthlessly Exposed By Sipsey Street Irregulars

And how. If you haven’t yet read Mike Vanderboegh’s superb expose and  take-down of Michael Lawlor, Connecticut Governor Dannell Malloy’s “hatchet man” on the State’s gun control efforts, you need to stop everything and read it, right now. Take it all in and know that there are many more such men and women peppered throughout the Democrat/Media Complex – right to the highest reaches of government. And I do mean highest.

Michael Lawlor CT Office of Policy & Mgt

“You can either surrender the weapon to us, destroy the weapon, or sell it to a federal firearms licensee. After that date (January 1) that hasn’t been declared or register is banned and if you get caught, you’re going to get arrested.” — Michael Lawlor.

An Open Letter to Michael Lawlor, the CT Governor’s Hatchet Man on Firearms Confiscation. “How’s your KGB file hangin’, Mike?”

You know it is quite ironic that on the morning I sit down to write this letter we discover that Adam Lanza (whose evil deeds were the supposed excuse for your Intolerable Act) was something of a twisted fellow traveler of collectivism being an apparently homosexual, environmentalist vegan who was anti-Christian enough to forbid his mother to put up a Christmas tree. “Gee,” I thought when I read that, “This kid could have grown up to be a Connecticut Democrat politician.” That he provided the bloody excuse for tyrant wannabes such as yourself is certainly the Devil’s own joke — send a collectivist killer to enable future collectivist power. Old Scratch must be laughing his ass off.

You know after just a cursory reading of your biography here and here, I realized that I owed you an apology. Previously I had described you as Malloy’s “Eichmann.” But Eichmann was a rather colorless bureaucrat, defining as Hannah Arendt spelled out, “the banality of evil.” But you, sir, are no bureaucratic handmaiden of evil. No, to call you an Eichmann would require an apology to both you and Eichmann. You, sir, are a true believer — more of a Heydrich than an Eichmann. Or, if you raise a Godwin’s objection, shall we say a Felix Dzerzhinsky? Yes. Dzerzhinsky is certainly more fitting.

I note that while you were at UConn in 1977 you “participated in language studies in Russia in 1977″ at Moscow and Leningrad. You then earned a Master’s Degree in Soviet Area Studies from the University of London in 1981. You were, what, 20 when you first experienced the Soviet Union at the height of the Cold War? It must have fascinated you early on in life. Yet after you got your Masters in Soviet Area Studies from the University of London at a time when that and other British universities were prime recruiting grounds for KGB “political warfare” assets, and you subsequently “received a Fulbright-Hays Scholarship to study economic reform in Hungary in 1982,” you decided to change course and become, in quick succession, a lawyer, a prosecutor and then a Democrat Party politician.

Why the change, Mike?

Your KGB file might provide some clues along those lines, of course. I had a long chat with a former CIA Cold Warrior who is intimately familiar with the KGB infiltration and subversion tactics of the time of your stay in the Soviet Union. He says that you certainly have a KGB file and had a KGB officer assigned to your case with the object of making an asset of you. No one from the United States got into the Soviet Union back then without the close inspection of the KGB. NO ONE.

And what would the KGB be looking for, I asked? “A lot of dewy-eyed kids were going to the Soviet Union back then with this fascination for the other side. They thought the Vietnam War proved the evil nature of American society and they wanted to see what the other side was like. So they (the KGB) would look for someone with those misconceptions and then look for other vulnerabilities. And their recruitment operations were vast. VAST.” What other vulnerabilities? I asked.

“For one, homosexuality or other sexual deviance,” he answered. He drew my attention to these passages regarding the Prime case from The New KGB: Engine of Soviet Power by William Corson and Robert Crowley:

Prime exhibited most of the disabilities on the KGB check list and more than qualified as a target for recruitment. A loner, a young man with sexual problems and someone who, by his own admission, believed that the downtrodden of the world would fare better under communism. Such symptoms and attitudes assured that, at an appropriate moment, he would fall into the Soviet bag. The case is not a tribute to the Soviets’ prescience but another instance of their readiness for an event such as Prime’s self-selection, their single-minded patience, clerical effort, and corps of competent case officers who were trained and fully aware of what their jobs entailed.

In Berlin the Soviet support nets are massive. In addition to surveillance, drivers, couriers, police, and postal employees, they include “swallows” who specialize in foreigners who enjoy mild or other forms of perversion. . . The KGB’s ‘girls’ . . . provide the organs with volumes of information about their clients. . . The girls are also alerted to spot the six “d’s” — discontent, disaffection, depression, drunkenness, desperation, and sexual dysfunction — nany one of which might provide a future lever. — pp. 390-361.

It is a matter of record that after being long in the closet, you “came out” only in 2006.

Of course Prime was not a homosexual but the KGB did not lack for male “swallows” if their target had those appetites.

Read the whole thing, here.

UPDATE:

And now there’s…

My Second Open Letter to Mike Lawlor — On “Nightcrawlers” and Treason Played for Laughs. We’ve already established that you are willing to sell out your country. Now we’re just haggling about the price.

 MBV Note to Readers: In my first letter to Connecticut’s own Felix Dzerzhinsky,Mike Lawlor, we explored the subject of that tyrannical collectivist’s KGB file. The response to that missive was very gratifying, as well as rewarding in terms of further clues and offers of assistance. I hope you like this letter as much as you liked the first.
***

You know, it’s the arrogance about you collectivist pricks that always strikes me as ironically misplaced. You’re always the smartest guy in the room, dispensing orders from on high as if to the purple born, yet when it comes to the important things you really aren’t all that bright.

Take that slip you made in the interview when you played the subject of treason for laughs. Of course you have long thought yourself safe from scrutiny of any questions about what you were up to back in the 70s and early 80s. But mentioning that a. you had tried to get a job with the CIA right out of law school and b. that they had turned you down, well, even to a guy like me who’s nothing particularly special other than an amateur student of history, why, that’s just plain stupid.

It raises so many questions and reinforces the ones I’ve already asked. Why would the CIA, at the height of the Cold War when it needed every trustworthy Russian speaker and analyst, turn you down? I guess the key word there is “trustworthy.” The CIA, and not because of the bad joke, must have found compelling reasons to find you untrustworthy. That must have stung, huh? Not that you weren’t accepted — you would play that for laughs, for you are the smartest guy in the room and that just proves their stupidity, right? As a homosexual you already were struggling with issues of identity, loyalty, societal trust, etc. And again, homosexuality is not the issue. It is not now, nor was it then, grounds (by itself) for exclusion from employment by the CIA. According to my sources, the Agency knowingly hired many homosexuals from its inception onward as long as it was convinced of their loyalty, their trustworthiness. And, my sources say, as long as that was understood up front there was no blackmail risk and the Agency only very rarely was proved wrong about their pick.

So why did they turn you down, Mike? What was it that they spotted about you? I am told by sources who were once in a position to know that you have not only a KGB file and a CIA file, but an FBI file as well. We’ll never get anything out of the CIA, but I wonder what a FOIA of the FBI might turn up? Have you got the juice to work your will upon the Fibbies as well?

And again, why apply to the CIA at all? Why did you change your career from Soviet Studies academic to zealous public prosecutor seeking the brass ring of political power? You are a public official. These are legitimate questions. Not that I expect an answer from you, at least not a written one.

Hat tip: Larwyn’s Links.

Linked by Maggie’s Farm, thanks!

What’s Wrong With This Picture?

At the State of the Union, last night one of House Minority Leader Eric Cantor’s staffers was evicted from the Capitol because he didn’t have his ID on him.  Doug Heye,  Cantor’s deputy chief of staff for communications was in Statuary Hall chatting with some reporters, when a Capitol Police officer came by to check for credentials.

sotu_tw004_012814Heye, right, forgot his ID. (Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call)

 He searched every pocket and didn’t have it. A fellow staffer, Cantor Communications Director Rory Cooper, vouched for Heye, but to no avail.

Heye had momentarily dressed down in the hours leading up to SOTU — “Left my ID in my topcoat!” he told HOH — but rocketed back to the office to retrieve his congressional credentials.

ID’s were apparently not an issue for the 5  illegal immigrants who were official guests of various Democrats (including the Obamas) at the SOTU, last night.

Rep. Joe Garcia (D-Fla.) proudly announced that his guest to the State of the Union was Mayra Rubio Limon,  a “Dreamer” who was arrested last November at the Capitol Hill at (ironically enough) Eric Cantor’s  office.

arrested

Rep. Garcia is not the only one who has invited illegal aliens.  Sitting with Michelle Obama is illegal alien Cristian Avila.  Illinois delegation members Reps. Brad Schneider (D-Ill.) and Bill Foster (D- Ill.), invited Estefania Garcia and Maria Torres, while Lucas Codognolla is the guest of Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.). All five have been granted Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), which allows certain illegal aliens to stay and work in the United States for two years, with eligibility for extension.

SEE ALSO:

The Daily CallerICE officer slams Obama for illegal immigrants attending State of the Union

The head of the union representing Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers and staff issued a harsh rebuke to President Obama for having illegal immigrants in the chamber during his State of the Union address.

“According to news accounts, the President has once again invited illegal immigrants to the State of the Union — and yet the President still refuses to meet with ICE officers,” National ICE Council head and ICE officer Chris Crane in a statement. “We have a President who will provide those illegally in the US with the seat of honor at one of the most important events of the year, but ICE officers who serve under him are unwelcome in the White House.”

Video: Obama Admin Accused Of Filing Standard and Poor’s Lawsuit In Retaliation For 2011 US Credit Downgrade

When Holder’s politically weaponized Justice Department filed a $5 billion dollar fraud lawsuit against S&P a year ago, who didn’t think it was political retaliation for crossing Obama?  Now, according to claims made in their multi-billion dollar lawsuit, S&P  have removed all doubt.

Via Fox News Insider:

The financial services firm, Standard & Poor’s, threw down a stunning challenge in court claiming that former U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner threatened the chairman of S&P’s parent company in a phone call that warned of consequences after the downgrade came.

It came just days after S&P angered the White House by downgrading the U.S. credit rating in the middle of the 2011 debt ceiling debate.

Harold McGraw III said, according to the sworn legal declaration, “[Geithner] said that, ‘you have done an enormous disservice to yourselves and to your country.’”

He went to attribute the following threats from Geithner, “S&P’s conduct would be ‘looked at very carefully’ he said. Such behavior could not occur, he said, without a response from the government.”

The Justice Department filed a $5 billion dollar fraud lawsuit about a year ago, accusing S&P of lying about the credit worthiness of complicated financial instruments in the run out to the 2008 financial crisis.

Megyn Kelly opened her show, last night, with the bombshell allegations. She had on Chief Counsel from the ACLJ, Jay Sekulow, and Chris Stirewalt of the Washington Examiner to talk about it.

Stirewalt noted that the man making the allegation, Harold McGraw III “ain’t Glenn Beck….. he’s not a conservative activist, not somebody who is known for his criticism of any political figures – or anyone at all. What he’s known for is being a white shoe, elite, New York, big business, Chamber of Commerce, gives money to Democrats and Republicans kind of guy. He’s not someone who you would ever expect to hear criticizing anyone in power from either party.”

“Air FLOTUS’ Promotes Healthy Eating (Video)

I’m not even going to comment on this because you know whatever we say – it will be indicative of A. Raaaaacism: hating on the First Lady because she’s black, or B. sexism: Hating on the First Lady because she’s a powerful woman.

So, I will just let the video speak for itself and say, well done Michelle Obama! I’ve never seen a First Lady do anything like this, before.

Unbelievable: Amanda Marcotte Accuses The Little Sisters Of The Poor Of Trying To ‘Weasel Out’ Of Contraception Mandate Exemption (Video)

Writing at the amateur webzine, Slate, radical feminista and noted abortion advocate, Amanda Marcotte weighed in on the Obama adminstration’s contraception fight against the Little Sisters of the Poor.

As Rich Lowrey explained at National Review, the Catholic nuns want no part in authorizing coverage of contraceptive or abortive drugs:

When the contraception mandate first caused an uproar, the administration contrived a so-called accommodation for religiously oriented groups (actual churches have always been exempt). But whoever crafted it had a sick sense of humor. The very same document by which a group registers its moral objection to contraceptives and abortifacients also authorizes the insurer to cover them for the group’s employees. What the accommodation gives with one hand, it takes away with the other.

The Little Sisters refuse to sign such a document. They happen to be in an unusual situation because they get their insurance from another religiously affiliated organization opposed to contraceptives and abortifacients, so it may be that these drugs don’t get covered no matter what. But the Little Sisters can’t be sure of this — the regulations are complicated and subject to change.

In making the point that by signing the  form, the nuns would be exempting themselves from having to cover their employees, (so what’s the problemo??!!), Marcotte accused the Little Sisters of the Poor – an order of nuns who have dedicated their lives to helping the poor, sick and elderly, of trying to “weasel out of it.”

That’s right: These groups are arguing that filling out a form is a violation of their religious freedom and that “religious freedom” means that you should have control over your employee’s health care decisions even when they happen outside of the insurance coverage you directly provide for them. Even the lawyer for one of the groups, the Little Sisters of the Poor Home for the Aged, admits that this lawsuit is about trying to weasel out of nothing more onerous than signing a piece of paper. “Without an emergency injunction,” Mark Rienzi told the Associated Press, “Mother Provincial Loraine Marie Maguire has to decide between two courses of action: (a) sign and submit a self-certification form, thereby violating her religious beliefs; or (b) refuse to sign the form and pay ruinous fines.”

Last Friday, Megyn Kelly cited the Slate column when she interviewed Mark Rienzi about the case. He said, the form is actually a permission slip.

Rienzi made the point that the Obama DOJ would not be fighting the nuns all the way to the Supeme Court and threatening them with huge fines if this were merely an innocent exemption form as the Obama administration and its acolytes suggest.

The nuns’ objection to this is not just about their objection to contraception, but on the Government’s lack of a Constitutional right to dictate what is and is not “religious”.They feel that signing anything would amount to conceding that the Government has a role, here.

Video: 32 Year Old Welfare Queen Makes Good Living On The Dole – Says Working is Stupid – Taxpayers Fools

Lucy, a 32 year old an Austin welfare recipient called into Austin’s Morning News to brag that she gets so  much welfare money and “benefits” she can stay home and smoke weed. She gets $550.00 for rent $425.00 for food stamps, $150.00 for electric, free cell phone, $100.00 for water, and even Christmas presents for her three kids. “Why should I work?” she asked.  She’s married, but her husband rarely works. “He doesn’t really see the need for it”, she said.

Via Zero Hedge:

“…To all you workers out there preaching morality about those of us who live on welfare… can you really blame us? I get to sit around all day, visit my friends, smoke weed.. and we are still gonna get paid, on time every month…”

She said “taxpayers are the fools.”

This will probably be the most depressing thing you hear all day.

Welcome to ObamAmerica.

 

SEE ALSO:

Watchdog.org: Obama not telling the truth about SNAP? Surely you can’t be serious:

Obama, who is touting the taxpayer-funded program as a fiscal engine that helps boost the economy, claims in a report released this week that SNAP participation and spending will fall significantly as America recovers from tough financial times.

If only that were true.

Since Obama signed into law the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, which provided close to $45.2 billion in additional SNAP benefits over four years, the national unemployment rate has dropped from 8.3 percent to 7.3 percent, according to the U.S. Department of Labor.

From 2009 to 2012, the country’s gross domestic product increased from $13.9 trillion to $15.6 trillion and the national average wage index also jumped from $40,711 to $44,321.

Yet the number of people who take advantage of SNAP and the money allocated for the program continue to skyrocket every year.

In 2008, the year Obama was first elected president, close to $37.5 billion was spent on SNAP, with 28.2 million Americans and 12.7 million households participating.

Funding set aside for SNAP has more than doubled since Obama was elected president.

Funding for SNAP more than doubled to $78.4 billion in 2012, and this year is on pace to surpass that total.

Approximately 46.6 million people and 22.3 million households received SNAP assistance in 2012.

Ed Schultz Is Nuts (Video)

Yesterday on his MSNBC show, a delusional and manic Ed Schultz channeled former Democratic Governor Howard Dean, screeching a supportive “yeah!” after  showing a clip of Obama out on the  permanent campaign trail defending ObamaCare.

Via Newsbusters:

Schultz wondered aloud, “Am I asking too much as an Obama supporter to want that?” The liberal host then mocked Obama’s performance at a news conference as ” Well, we haven’t been very good. I’m not happy.” An increasingly manic Schultz began shrieking, “…The next time you go into the press room in Washington, you give it to them! You let them have it! This is good! This is great for America!”

Had to share this – it’s just too funny watching pro-Obama dead-enders melt down in comic fashion as their hero’s “signature achievement” crashes and burns.
Newsbusters reports that on Wednesday, Schultz actually justified the President lying to Americans about the health care law. What else are they going to do at this point? They denied the lies for years – when the lies could no longer be denied – they had to be justified, somehow. Hey, the American people don’t know what’s good for them. They can’t handle the truth. We must place our faith and trust in our Lord and Savior King Obama.

What was Obama even doing in Cleveland yesterday, you might be wondering. I was.
According to Cleveland.com, “Obama returned to feed off a friendly vibe while attempting to move his administration beyond the maelstrom of his signature health care program’s debut.”
In other words – ObamaCrash is making DC a huge bummer for him. He needed to return to a union strong Democrat stronghold to bask in the glow of his adoring drones. How pathetic is that?
I don’t know who I feel more scornful of – Obama or the dead-enders who still support him.

Whoa: Obama Threatens To Veto House ‘Keep Your Health Plan Act’

Just this morning Obama announced his  illegal  “fix” to Obamacare. Now he’s threatening to veto the House’s legal fix to Obamacare? This is crazed.

The Hill reports:

The White House issued a formal veto threat Thursday night of a bill offered by House Republicans that would allow insurance companies to continue offering health plans that existed before the beginning of the new year.

The legislation, sponsored by Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.), is coming up for a vote on Friday.

In a statement from the Office of Management and Budget, the administration argues the law is intended to “sabotage” ObamaCare.

“[The bill] rolls back the progress made by allowing insurers to continue to sell new plans that deploy practices such as not offering coverage for people with pre-existing conditions, charging women more than men, and continuing yearly caps on the amount of care that enrollees receive,” the statement said.

Millions of Americans have received cancellation notices from insurance companies saying that their current plan will no longer be available under ObamaCare. Originally, the law did not permit grandfathering of plans that had been purchased or substantially altered since the health bill was passed three years ago. Some insurance companies also opted to stop offering plans that did not satisfy the minimum coverage requirements mandated for new enrollees under the Affordable Care Act.

There has been a debate among conservatives about whether the Republican fix would do more harm than good.

I’ve listened to both sides of the argument and remained conflicted until now. Let’s face it – after the last five years or so, the idea of Republicans outmaneuvering Democrats in Washington seemed like a stretch. But by gosh, it looks like their bet that Obama would veto the bill and he and Dems would take all the political damage may have won the day. Millions of Americans are still ObamaCare’s big losers – but so are Barack Obama and his Democrat clown posse in Congress.

And keep in mind…Obama made explicit what his totally bogus, illegal “fix” was all about at his presser when he said, “the Affordable Care Act is not going to be the reason why insurers have to cancel your plans.” He’s trying to shift the blame from ObamaCare onto the insurance companies for the canceled plans. But no one is buying it. NO ONE. Everyone understands that it’s nearly impossible to restore all the canceled policies in the amount of time they have to do it.

The media are not giving him a free pass on this one. Obama’s BS is no longer flying.

Congress needs to focus on REPEAL and replace. It’s time to unveil the health care plan they have waiting in the wings: The American Health Care Reform Act.

SEE ALSO:

Twitchy: President threatens to veto Keep Your Health Plan Act

John Hayward, Conversation: Obama threatens to veto the measure he just called for

Linked by Doug Ross, thanks!

Egypt Accuses Obama and His Bro Malik Of Crimes Against Humanity (Video)

Well this is  awkward. Obama has his hands full right now. All he does is work, work, work for the American people (especially the middle class!) – and now he has to deal with these embarrassing terrorism charges!

Media sources in Egypt are reporting that Egyptian lawyers have filed criminal terrorism charges against the president in addition to the criminal terrorism charges that have already been filed against his half brother Malik.

Raymond Ibrahim reported at CBN News:

According to Egyptian newspaper El Watan, a group of Egyptian lawyers has submitted a complaint charging U.S. president Barrack Hussein Obama with crimes against humanity at the International Criminal Court.

The complaint charges Obama of being an accessory to the Muslim Brotherhood, which incited widespread violence in Egypt both before and after the June 30 Revolution.

Along with Obama, the complaint reproduced by El Watan mentions several Brotherhood members by name, beginning with the leader of the organization Muhammad Badie, and other top ranking leaders such as Mohamed al-Beltagy, Essam al-Erian, and Safwat Hegazi, adding that “Obama cooperated, incited, and assisted the armed elements of the Muslim Brotherhood in the commission of crimes against humanity in the period from 3/7/2013-8/18/2013, in the Arab Republic of Egypt.”

***

As for the Obama administration’s support for the Brotherhood, if most Americans are clueless or indifferent about it, average Egyptians have long known and resented it—hence the many large placards and signs held during the June 30 Revolution calling on Obama to stop supporting terrorism and calling on Americans to wake up.

One need only follow the words and deeds of Anne Patterson, John McCain, Lindsay Graham, Hillary Clinton, et. al. to know that the U.S president is a firm supporter of the crimes-against-humanity-committing Muslim Brotherhood.

Of course, whatever the merits of El Watan’s report—here is another English-language article talking about apparently a different complaint of crimes against humanity leveled against Obama by Coptic activists—all these complaints seem futile, as the U.S. is not a signatory to the International Criminal Court.

However, all technicalities aside, the facts are clear: by any definition, the Muslim Brotherhood and its supporters have committed numerous crimes against humanity in Egypt, especially in the context of the Christian Copts; and by its ongoing support for the Brotherhood, the Obama administration is complicit. Remember this next time the Obama administration cites concerns about “human rights” violations as reason to involve the U.S. in war—as it recently tried to do in Syria, again, to support more Islamic terrorists who are committing even worse crimes against humanity.

In this  CBN News video, Raymond Ibrahim reported details about the alleged Muslim Brotherhood atrocities in which Obama is deemed complicit.

Several prominent media sources in Egypt are now reporting that Egyptian lawyers have filed criminal terrorism charges in the International Criminal Court against President Obama in addition to the criminal terrorism charges previously filed in Egyptian courts against the president’s half-brother Malik Obama.

Malik Obama is quickly becoming a person of interest in Egypt for his alleged management of funds for a terrorist organization based in neighboring Sudan. A group of Egyptian lawyers, meanwhile have charged President Obama with crimes against humanity for his support of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/11/criminal-terror-charges-filed-against-obama/#WSDusBIPzWYf5DzD.99

Several prominent media sources in Egypt are now reporting that Egyptian lawyers have filed criminal terrorism charges in the International Criminal Court against President Obama in addition to the criminal terrorism charges previously filed in Egyptian courts against the president’s half-brother Malik Obama.

Malik Obama is quickly becoming a person of interest in Egypt for his alleged management of funds for a terrorist organization based in neighboring Sudan. A group of Egyptian lawyers, meanwhile have charged President Obama with crimes against humanity for his support of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/11/criminal-terror-charges-filed-against-obama/#WSDusBIPzWYf5DzD.99

Several prominent media sources in Egypt are now reporting that Egyptian lawyers have filed criminal terrorism charges in the International Criminal Court against President Obama in addition to the criminal terrorism charges previously filed in Egyptian courts against the president’s half-brother Malik Obama.

Malik Obama is quickly becoming a person of interest in Egypt for his alleged management of funds for a terrorist organization based in neighboring Sudan. A group of Egyptian lawyers, meanwhile have charged President Obama with crimes against humanity for his support of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/11/criminal-terror-charges-filed-against-obama/#WSDusBIPzWYf5DzD.99

Several prominent media sources in Egypt are now reporting that Egyptian lawyers have filed criminal terrorism charges in the International Criminal Court against President Obama in addition to the criminal terrorism charges previously filed in Egyptian courts against the president’s half-brother Malik Obama.

Malik Obama is quickly becoming a person of interest in Egypt for his alleged management of funds for a terrorist organization based in neighboring Sudan. A group of Egyptian lawyers, meanwhile have charged President Obama with crimes against humanity for his support of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/11/criminal-terror-charges-filed-against-obama/#WSDusBIPzWYf5DzD.99

Several prominent media sources in Egypt are now reporting that Egyptian lawyers have filed criminal terrorism charges in the International Criminal Court against President Obama in addition to the criminal terrorism charges previously filed in Egyptian courts against the president’s half-brother Malik Obama.
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/11/criminal-terror-charges-filed-against-obama/#WSDusBIPzWYf5DzD.99

Meanwhile, Obama’s half-bro Malik is in hiding… Walid Shoebat reports that when Kenyan authorities attempted to serve him, he could not be located.

Well I’m glad we’re not living in what could effectively be called a Banana Republic headed by a corrupt, lying, outlaw despot or anything. Geez. That would be bad.

SEE ALSO:

The Algemeiner: Why is Obama Allowing Iran to Build Nuclear Weapons?

Rest assured that Iran’s appetite for concessions and humiliation from the U.S. “The Big Satan,” may bring up some new demands. As with prior “negotiations” with Iran, the U.S. and the others agreed to meet again. We will witness more stalling from Tehran to allow it to fulfill its nuclear agenda. By then, the U.S. withdrawal from the Middle East will be complete and its pledge to have Israel’s back will be ignored.

In the meantime, the news about the American “reverse sanctions program” has led the Saudis to let it be known that they are ready to collect the nuclear bombs they’ve ordered from Pakistan.

In addition to abandoning Washington’s traditional policy of preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons, the Obama Administration’s actions are all but going to set the region on fire. Years of Iranian lies are dismissed in complete disregard to the predictable outcome. One wonders why Obama forges ahead with his plans to give Iran the time to develop nuclear weapons.

Yes…one wonders.

Atlas Shrugs: Syria: At Least 9 Children killed after Obama-backed jihadis’ mortars hit Christian school, bus In Damascus

Obama is backing these savages. The NY Times reported back in April that there were no secular forces to speak of. It’s all jihad — al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood. And yet President Obama had signed a secret order in April — months earlier than previously reported — authorizing a C.I.A. plan to begin arming the Syrian rebels.

And he wants a military strike on behalf of these monsters.

Syria: At Least 9 Children Killed After Islamist Rebel Mortars Hit Christian School, Bus In Damascus (thanks to Midnight Watcher)

Bangkok Post – “Nine children were killed and 27 people wounded when mortar rounds hit a school and a school bus in the Syrian capital Damascus on Monday, state television reported.

Extortion: How Obama’s “Squeegee Man” Eric Holder Punishes Obama’s Political Enemies (Video)

Author Peter Schweizer was on Hannity, Tuesday night to talk about  his explosive new book Extortion.

He talked about the mind-blowing corruption and political extortion that is rampant in DC,  these days on both sides of the aisle but noting  that it comes from the top. He compared the Regime to “the squeegee man that used to be in NYC – - they’d walk up to your car and say I want to clean your windshield – they’ve got a cloth in one hand and a brick in the other, and you’ve got to pay them or the brick’s coming through the windshield”….

He said that’s a huge problem at the DOJ. “Eric Holder is the basically the Squeegee guy holding the brick. There are companies that are being told that they are subject to DOJ investigation, criminal and civil, and then these companies are solicited for political donations to the Obama Campaign (in 2012) and now to political committees and there is statistical evidence in the book that literally, you cut your chance of going to jail in half if you make a contribution.”

He said, “the other thing they’re doing is after the 2010 midterm elections, when they had that stunning defeat in Congress, the Obama Department of Justice targeted the industries that financed the tea party candidates that got elected.”

Literally days after President Obama made that famous statement “we’re going to punish our political opponents,”[the Holder DOJ sent out an industry sweep letter to companies in the oil and gas sector which said you are subject to criminal investigation and you'd better share and cooperate....it was a clear intimidation tactic being used."

Remember what happened to Gallup when they released some polls that weren't pleasing to Obama, last year? All of a sudden, they were the subject of a DOJ investigation into their poll methodology..."Punish your enemies..." My God, Hannity's right, we're living in a Banana Republic. When are people going to wise up???

Schweizer continued to say that "the top Republican financiers in 2012 were all subject to DOJ criminal charges." Every one.   "It's shocking really unlike anything we've ever seen," he added.

"The top five positions at the DOJ beginning with Eric Holder were all campaign bundlers for the Obama Campaign.  These Obama fund raisers were raising money to put Obama into power, and now are making decisions about who they are going to prosecute and who they're not going to prosecute."  Schweizer  called it  " melding of the DOJ and the campaign apparatus of the Obama campaign."

And remember how electing this brilliant man of the left was going to elevate our standing in the world? Yeah, not so much...

Schweitzer said, "the world bank and World Economic Forum ...do a study every year on competitiveness of countries. Since 2009 in both of these major studies, we've gone from the middle of the pack among advanced industrialized countries in perceived corruption, to now in 2013 we are at the bottom of the pack. We are now seen as most prone to corruption of any industrialized country in the world. That's how far it slipped and how quickly it slipped."

"And the DOJ"  Schweizer claims, "is right in the middle of it."

Serious question: Why is Eric Holder still Attorney General?

Hat tip: Doug Ross

SEE ALSO,  Bastion of Liberty: The Egotist Part 2: “Laws Are For Using Against The Little People”

Previously:

Regime Slaps JP Morgan With $13 Billion Fine After CEO Criticizes Obama (Video)

The Obama Administration’s Ugly and Embarrassing Public Spat With Gallup

Why Is The Obama Administration Targeting Gibson Guitars?

How Obama Is Pitting Americans Against Each Other

More Thug Politics: Obama Administration Investigates Humana’s Free Speech

Obama Threatening T.V. Stations (Again)!

More Heavy Handed Assaults On Free Speech From Obama Brigades

How Obama Fights

Obama Threatening TV Stations For Airing Ayers Ad (UPDATE: AIP Responds)

 

Reid: Why Would We Want To Pass A Bill To Help Children With Cancer? (Video)

More stunningly bad optics for the Dems. When asked by Dana Bash at CNN why he isn’t willing to help even one child who has cancer, Reid responded “Why would we want to do that?”

BASH: But if you can help one child with cancer, why wouldn’t you do it?

REID: Why would we want to do that? I have 1100 people at Nellis Air Force Base sitting home. They have problems of their own.

Reid then attacked Bash’s intelligence, “For someone of your intelligence to suggest such a thing is irresponsible.”

Video via NRSC Blog:

What?!

We need more of this. We need more Obama, Reid, and Pelosi in front of the cameras showing us who they really are. They are our best weapon right now.

#RetireReid

MORE:

NRSC: Are All Memorials Closed To Veterans?

Via The Daily Caller: 

Appearing before the memorial, hours after World War II veterans passed through the Park Service’s barricade, RNC Chairman Reince Priebus announced that the committee has put aside enough money to hire 5 full-time security personnel for the next 30 days to keep the memorial open.

“Make no mistake, it was the Obama administration’s choice to barricade this memorial and it was their choice to lock out veterans across this country,” Preibus said.

Jim Geraghty, Campaign Spot: How the Park Service Is Enforcing the Shutdown on the Mall Today

  • Blog Stats

    • 4,585,802 hits
  • free counters
  • Is your cat plotting to kill you?
  • Follow

    Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

    Join 505 other followers

    %d bloggers like this: