Video: Peter King: National Security Leaks Designed to Make Obama “Look Like George Patton or John Wayne” (With Updates)

Rep. Peter King (R-NY), Chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security, on Fox News Channel “America’s News HQ” discussed the recent damaging leaks of classified information.

He said it’s the “most shameful cascade of leaks” he’s ever seen in government, insisting that it’s clear that the leaks are coming right from the White House, National Security Council, and the Situation Room.

King alleged that based on what these leaks have been saying, it’s clear that Obama’s inner circle knows.

“For the President to say that he’s outraged, ‘how could anyone say this is happening in his White House’…

That annoys me, too – my White House? It’s not his White House, fact is, it’s the people’s house. That shows the type of arrogance that’s going on, here.”

When asked if  all of this is designed to make the President look tough in the war on terror, King quipped, “sure he is, he’s trying to look like George Patton or John Wayne…..He’s not even supposed to be talking about drone attacks.”

This “most ethical”, “transparent” and “scandal-free” administration in history, sure is having to endure an unfortunately large  number of  “distractions” this election year.


Here’s the clip of Obama feigning indignation and  saying that the notion that his White House would do such a thing is  “offensive” and “wrong”.

The last  President who lied this shamelessly was, well –  BJ Clinton. But Obama’s a piker compared to him. He may have far surpassed Clinton in quantity,  in terms of quality, style and panache, Clinton clearly, is still the king.

The YouTuber who posted the video,  , made some good points about Obama’s lawyerly language.

He never actually says there was no leak of classified information from his office, but rather “the notion of that is offensive.” He was unclear as to exactly what was “its wrong.” Is it that people having this notion is wrong? His lawyer speak is loud and clear here. And the last statement about people not knowing how he runs the office doesn’t state or mean anything relevant.


The Sunday talk shows were devastating for the Obama administration. The wheels are coming off the this  sad clown car of miserable fail:

The Blaze: McCain: Eric Holder Has ‘No Credibility’ to Oversee Leaks Investigation:

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) on Sunday said Attorney General Eric Holder has “no credibility” to oversee the investigation into the recent spate of national security leaks and called for a special counsel to investigate instead.

“Mr. Holder’s credibility with Congress — there is none,” McCain said on CNN’s “State of the Union.“ ”We continue to have this problem with him withholding information on Fast and Furious which resulted in the killing of a Border Patrol agent in Arizona. He is close to being held in contempt. There is no credibility.”

While saying he had “great respect” for the two individuals tapped to head up the process — U.S. Attorneys Ronald Machen and Rod Rosenstein — McCain said the investigation really needs “a special counsel, someone entirely independent of the Justice Department.”

Fox News: Rep. Smith: Those behind intel leaks should face jail time:

“We can’t take the President’s word for it.”

Gateway Pundit: Israel: Stuxnet Is Our Baby – Obama Disclosed It For Reelection Campaign:

Israeli Mossad agents told Haaretz that Stuxnet was developed by Mossad and not the Bush Administration. The agents also claim the Obama Administration disclosed the program to help Barack Obama’s reelection campaign.

Additional Thoughts:

Pundits on Fox are now openly saying that either Obama is lying and he knew, or he’s completely oblivious to what is going on in his own White House – the same dynamic we see in the Fast and Furious scandal — either Holder knew, or he’s an incompetent AG because he doesn’t know what’s going on in his own department.

IMHO, they both knew. Holder is stonewalling and hoping that Democrats continue to carry his water. He plans to ride out the sh*t storm as long as he can – which in today’s corrupt media environment, could be as long as he wants. Obama’s statement above is a clear message to his toadies in the MSM: Drop it. Do what you have to do to cover my ass on this, and let this scandal die a slow death in media oblivion.

It’s worked for him, before.

The plan is that by this October, all will be forgotten.

Obama’s Gutsy Call movie is not to be tainted by any of this.

We’ll see if it works for him.

See Also:

Tom Lifson, The American Thinker: The Clintons’ Covert War on Obama:

Senator Dianne Feinstein truly cares about national security.  But I also know that she can read the handwriting on the wall.  Last week, she came out and made the leaking of national security information into a scandal with bipartisan support for an inquiry.  This is criminal behavior.  She is far from the only powerful Democrat who sees the wisdom of disentangling herself from the Obama disaster.

Obama does not want to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the leaks, and his press conference Friday took a strong stand against them and promised a thorough internal investigation.  Eric Holder has appointed two subordinates — U.S. attorneys, one of whom donated thousands of dollars to Obama’s 2008 campaign.  This does not pass the giggle test.  If Senator Feinstein or any other prominent Democrat comes out in support of an independent prosecutor this week, the pressure on Obama and his cohorts will build.  Scooter Libby was ruined, and he didn’t actually leak anything.

The signal also has been received by the mainstream media allies of the Clintons.  Many of them are already fed up with the high-handedness, venality, incompetence, and amateurishness of the Obama crowd.  But now that they see that it is okay to notice when the emperor has no clothes, they can breathe the intoxicating air of honesty and start to include some of the obvious warts on the idealized image.  Obama is starting to realize that his media invisible shield is falling apart.

Flopping Aces: Dr. John at The man who couldn’t shut up:

After the Bin Laden kill, one leak after another came from “his” White House. At first, it seemed like only we in the conservative media were noticing. Because they were given pass after pass, a few dangerous leaks about the Seals and operational details about the raid became a virtual “cascade” of national security leaks, as King so aptly put it. They continued leaking with abandon – anything to make this weak-assed Commander-in-Chief look strong.

As tide of public opinion began to shift against him, Barack Obama released more national security information as a means of buttressing his support. First came the Obama-Personally-Selects-You-For-The-Kill-List leak to the NY Times, followed quickly by the news of the StuxNet cyberattack on Iran. The Obama administration leaked the fact that the US and Israel were behind the StuxNet worm.

Denials of leaking from Obama are mendacious at best, as Alexander Kazam points out:

Of course, we don’t know who exactly was in the room, but this a high-level national security meeting. The culprit may not be a “White House official,” but the leaks came out of a White House meeting — directly from the president’s top national-security advisers. This is not some guy in the bowels of the State Department passing e-mails to Julian Assange; it is one degree removed from the president.

This disclosure carries with it a very significant risk- by Pentagon definitions it’s an act of war.

A must read essay on the the NYTs coverage of Obama’s “kill lists” by Empire Burlesque: Hymns to the Violence: The NYT’s Love Letter to Obama’s Murder Racket

…this portrait of an American president signing off — week after week after week after week — on the extrajudicial murder of people all over the world is presented as something completely uncontroversial. Indeed, the main thrust of the story is not the fact that human beings — including many women, children and men who have no connection whatsoever to “terrorism,” alleged or otherwise — are being regularly killed by the United States government; no, the main focus is how this program illustrates Barack Obama’s “evolving” style of leadership during the course of his presidency. That’s what’s really important. The murders — the eviscerated bodies, the children with their skulls bashed in, the pregnant women burned alive in their own homes — are just background. Unimportant. Non-controversial.

Here’s how it works:

“Every week or so, more than 100 members of the government’s sprawling national security apparatus gather, by secure video teleconference, to pore over terrorist suspects’ biographies and recommend to the president who should be the next to die.

“This secret “nominations” process is an invention of the Obama administration, a grim debating society that vets the PowerPoint slides bearing the names, aliases and life stories of suspected members of Al Qaeda’s branch in Yemen or its allies in Somalia’s Shabab militia. … A parallel, more cloistered selection process at the C.I.A. focuses largely on Pakistan, where that agency conducts strikes.

“The nominations go to the White House, where by his own insistence and guided by Mr. Brennan, Mr. Obama must approve any name. He signs off on every strike in Yemen and Somalia and also on the more complex and risky strikes in Pakistan — about a third of the total.

“Aides say Mr. Obama has several reasons for becoming so immersed in lethal counterterrorism operations. A student of writings on war by Augustine and Thomas Aquinas, he believes that he should take moral responsibility for such actions.

“He realizes this isn’t science, this is judgments made off of, most of the time, human intelligence,” said Mr. Daley, the former chief of staff. “The president accepts as a fact that a certain amount of screw-ups are going to happen, and to him, that calls for a more judicious process.”

Again, words fail. Aides pumping reporters with stories about the wise, judicious philosopher-king consulting Aquinas and Augustine before sending a drone missile on a “signature strike” on a group of picnickers in Yemen or farmers in Pakistan. The philosopher-king himself nobly taking on the “moral responsibility” for mass murder. And the cavalier assertion that “a certain amount of screw-ups are going to happen” — a bland, blithe acceptance that you are in fact going to slaughter innocent human beings on a regular basis — precisely as if you walked up to an innocent man on the street, put a gun to his head and blew his brains out all over the sidewalk …. then walked away, absolved, unconcerned, and free to kill again. And again. And again. This psychopathic serial killing is, evidently, what Augustine meant by “moral responsibility.” Who knew?

Do yourself a favor and read the whole thing.


Coney Island Principal Bars Kindergartners From Singing “God Bless the USA”

A Coney Island principal is refusing to  let students sing “God Bless the USA” at their upcoming graduation ceremony, sparking fireworks at a school filled with proud immigrants.

The New York Post reports:

Greta Hawkins, principal of PS 90, the Edna Cohen School, won’t allow kindergartners to belt out the beloved Lee Greenwood ballad, also known as “Proud to be an American,” at their moving-up ceremony.

Five classes spent months learning the patriotic song, which skyrocketed in popularity after the 9/11 attacks and the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

It was to be the rousing finale of their musical show at the June 20 commencement. The kids, dressed up for their big day, would wave tiny American flags — which, as the lyrics proclaim, “still stand for freedom.”

But Hawkins marched in on a recent rehearsal and ordered a CD playing the anthem to be shut off, staffers said.

She told the teachers to drop the song from the program.

The first reason given, “We don’t want to offend other cultures,”  didn’t wash because the multicultural school is filled with immigrants from Pakistan, Mexico and Ecuador, and they “love it,” according to one of the disappointed moms, Luz Lozada.

The song was sung by fifth graders, last year, and “Everybody applauded and whistled,” the mom said. “They gave it a standing ovation.”

A teacher agreed: “It makes them a little goosebumpy and teary-eyed. I’ve never come across anyone who felt it insulted their culture.”

So a second excuse was given:

Department of Education spokeswoman Jessica Scaperotti gave The Post an explanation staffers said they never heard — that Hawkins found the lyrics “too grown up” for 5-year-olds.

Another dubious excuse, given the fact that a flirty Justin Bieber song about teen romance, “Baby,” was deemed a fine selection for the show.
Hawkins had no problem with 5-year-olds singing lines such as, “Are we an item? Girl, quit playing.”
See, now — I would have a problem with that. Not God bless the USA.
Let’s cut the chase, shall we? The reason Hawkins and Scaperotti have a problem with the song is because of its unapologetic patriotism and association with Republican Presidents and wars.
It was played at the 1984 Republican National Convention with President Reagan and  Nancy Reagan in attendance, and  gained even greater prominence during the Gulf War in 1990 and 1991, under President HW Bush. It’s popularity became greater still after the September 11, 2001 attacks and during the 2003 invasion of Iraq, under President GW. Bush.
Always remember, leftists are totalitarians at heart. No diversity of thought and opinion allowed. The acceptance of a conservativish song that glorifies patriotism, constitutes a thought-crime as far as these people are concerned.
I have no doubt in my mind that both Hawkins and Scaperotti would have had no problems at all with these same kindergartners singing an ode to Barack Hussein Obama (“mmmm mmmm mmmm!”)
But a song associated with {{{Republicans}}} — no thank you. Tough luck, kiddies.


A couple more things about the principal, mentioned at the very end of the article:

School insiders say Hawkins tried to end the school’s tradition of reciting the pledge each morning,  a couple years ago but staff objected.

The song uproar comes amid tensions. Hawkins has been called a tyrant and bully by some staffers.

The DOE reprimanded her in 2010 after teachers complained she called the school “racist” and declared: “I’m black. Your previous principal was white and Jewish. More of us are coming.”

Linked by Michelle Malkin, thanks!
Hat tip: Brian B.


Romney Releases New Ad: “Fine?” (Video)

Mitt Romney couldn’t believe his fortune when Obama  declared “the private sector is doing fine” the other day. Obama couldn’t have been more generous with his verbal gift if he had wrapped it up and tied it with a bow.

Romney pounced immediately:

“Is he really that out of touch?” GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney asked as Obama’s initial comments ricocheted through the presidential campaign.

The Romney campaign released this new web ad, this Sunday morning.

“We’ve seen layoffs, cutbacks,” a woman says in the video, titled “Fine?” “When it’s all said and done I’m making $200 a month,” a man says afterward.

“No, Mr. President, We Are Not ‘Doing Fine,'” the video concludes in text.

See Also:

iOWNTHEWORLD: Big Fur Hat created his own video:The Private Sector’s Doing Fine

Hot Air: Video: Axelrod dodges CNN question on “private sector doing fine” … three times

Linked by Ace of Spades HQ, and Michelle Malkin, thanks!