Jeanine Pirro Asks Obama, “Who’s Side Are You On, Anyway?” (Video)

In this weeks edition of Justice with Judge Jeanine, the host – as is her wont –  excoriated Barack Obama in her opening statement, this time focusing on his disastrous nuke deal with Iran. She concluded by asking a question many before her have asked to explain why the feckless wonder keeps selling out our allies and siding with our enemies.

“Here’s the bottom line,” Pirro said, addressing Obama directly. “Your petty jealousy of a leader who fights hard – who fights to the death for his people is jeopardizing a longstanding relationship between Israel and the United States. You’d rather support a regime committed to the death and destruction of our one true ally in the Middle East – You seem committed to do whatever you can to signal your disdain for Israel. Whatever you can to make friends with our enemy and dis our ally. Mr President…who’s side are you on, anyway?”

Pirro’s first guest was Knesset member Danny Danon coming in via satellite from Tel Aviv to weigh in on the election. Danon credits Obama’s meddling in the election to the Likud’s big win because Israeli’s don’t like outsiders coming in and messing with their elections.

Her second guest was Republican Congressman Lee Zeldin a member of the House Foreign Affairs committee who is investigating the group Obama sent to Israel with $350,000 in taxpayer dollars to try to steal the election for ABB (Anyone But Bibi.)

At issue is whether or not the group violated their tax exempt status by becoming politically involved in the Israeli elecion.

“This was a US 501 (C-3) tax-exempt charitable organization that worked with Obama’s team,” Zeldin noted. “A dozen and a half of Obama’s campaign staffers to try to oust Bibi.”

He added, “They were running an Acorn – Organizing for America Campaign over there with the digital ads, the billboards, the phones….they were targeting Israeli voters.”

For an answer to Pirro’s question, “who’s side is he on?” read Stanley Kurtz at NRO – Pro-Palestinian-in-Chief and What Obama Thinks of Israel


Weasel Zippers: Petraeus Sides With Netanyahu Against Obama: Iran, Not ISIS, Is The Real Enemy

And for your slow burn of the day…


Michael Ledeen reported the story last year:

During his first presidential campaign in 2008, Mr. Obama used a secret back channel to Tehran to assure the mullahs that he was a friend of the Islamic Republic, and that they would be very happy with his policies. The secret channel was Ambassador William G. Miller, who served in Iran during the shah’s rule, as chief of staff for the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, and as ambassador to Ukraine. Ambassador Miller has confirmed to me his conversations with Iranian leaders during the 2008 campaign.

So Obama secretly told the mullahs not to make a deal until he assumed the presidency, when they would be able to make a better agreement. Which is exactly what happened: Obama abandoned the requirement that Iran stop enriching uranium, so that Iran’s nuclear program has sped ahead over the months and years that negotiations have dragged on. When an interim agreement in the form of a “Joint Plan of Action” was announced in late 2013, Iran’s leaders exulted in the fact that the West had acknowledged its right to continue its uranium enrichment program:

“The (nuclear) program will continue and all the sanctions and violations against the Iranian nation under the pretext of the nuclear program will be removed gradually,” [Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif] added. …

“Iran’s enrichment program has been recognized both in the first step and in the goals section and in the final step as well,” Zarif said.

“The fact that all these pressures have failed to cease Iran’s enrichment program is a very important success for the Iranian nation’s resistance,” he added.

So Obama delivered the weak agreement that he had secretly promised the mullahs.


Ledeen: Obama Sent Emissary To Tehran in 2008 To Assure Mullahs He Was A Friend To Iranian Regime:

Via Gateway Pundit, Michael Ledeen wrote about Obama’s secret meetings with Tehran on August 29, 2014.

During his first presidential campaign in 2008, Mr. Obama used a secret back channel to Tehran to assure the mullahs that he was a friend of the Islamic Republic, and that they would be very happy with his policies. The secret channel was Ambassador William G. Miller, who served in Iran during the shah’s rule, as chief of staff for the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, and as ambassador to Ukraine. Ambassador Miller has confirmed to me his conversations with Iranian leaders during the 2008 campaign.

He told Levin this was no secret – he’s mentioned this many times before. But it was the first time Levin had heard it – and likely the first time most in his audience had heard it, too.

Saturday Movie Matinee: Ralph Peters: US Foreign Policy Is Off The Rails

Col. Ralph Peters Says U.S. Policy Is ‘Off The Rails':

In an interview with Neil Cavuto on Fox News, Thursday, Lt. Col Ralph Peters (Ret.) unloaded (as he always does, these days.)

“It’s absolutely astonishing that the president wants to pick a fight (a deadly fight potentially) with Israel – our one true ally – our one outpost of civilization in the greater Middle East..

Peters accused the president of acting like “some snitty, little, high school queen bee.”

“The president’s clear sympathies are with the Palestinians and he attacks Netanyahu. And he’s more comfortable – literally more comfortable dealing with Moscow, or the leadership of Iran or his  former Best Friend Forever Vladamir Putin than he is with the Prime Minister of Israel. Our policy is off the rails.”

Peters also thinks that Obama overplayed his hand in the weeks before the Israeli election (sending operatives to campaign against Netanyahu.)

“He overplayed his hand, so badly, the Israeli people – even the ones who don’t much like Bibi, turned this from an economy-based election to a security-based election.”

Ralph Peters on WMAL 3-16-15:

Ralph Peters Obama Would Blame Bush If He Got Athletes Foot;

NRO: Krauthammer’s Take: Mr. President: Republicans Don’t Oppose Diplomacy, They Oppose Your Bad Deal:

Does Washington Understand The Threat Israel Faces?


The NYTs: White House Antagonism Toward Netanyahu Grows


30,000 deleted emails… Bill Whittle looks at the lawlessness, the arrogance, and the unmasked contempt that Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have for the American people.

 PJ Media: Secrets! Why Obama is Making Hillary Lose | Trifecta on PJTV:

Is Obama trying to keep Hillary from winning the Presidency? Shock! Democrats being manipulative!!! Hear the Trifecta gang explain why.

9 year old Amira Willighagen sings O Mio Babbino Caro  – André Rieu (Love in Venice) Maastricht:

Video: Judge Hanen blasts DOJ Lawyer over immigration claims, threatens sanctions

A “pissed” federal judge thoroughly upbraided a Justice Department attorney at a hearing on Obama’s executive amnesty actions, Thursday, for  misleading him about halting deportation reprieves. Judge Andrew Hanen said that he fell for their subterfuge “like an idiot.”

Fox News reported:

The testy court hearing was held Thursday in Texas by U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen. The judge suggested he could order sanctions against the administration if he finds they indeed misrepresented the facts.

At issue is whether the DOJ misled the judge into believing that a plank of the Obama program — giving deportation reprieves to thousands of young illegal immigrants brought to the U.S. as children — would not go forward before he made a ruling on a request to halt it. In fact, federal officials had given more than 108,000 people three-year reprieves before that date and granted them work permits under the program.

Hanen chided Justice Department attorney Kathleen Hartnett for telling him at a January hearing before the injunction was issued that nothing would be happening with regard to one key part of Obama’s actions, an expansion of the 2012 Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, known as DACA, until Feb. 18.

“Like an idiot I believed that,” Hanen said.

Via Ace of Spades HQ, Quotes From the Hearing courtesy of @gabrielmalor

So if sanctions are of a monetary nature, the taxpayers get to foot the bill. We get to pay the penalty the government had imposed on it for causing damage to we the American people.

What else is on the table? Contempt of court, stripping the DOJ lawyers who deceived him of their law licenses? Perjury charges? Something needs to be done, but the American people should not have to pay for Obama’s criminality.

Hanen told the court that he would issue a ruling “promptly” on what action, if any, he will take against the Justice Department.

Congressional Leaders Pressuring Colleagues To Cut Funding For Obama’s Nuke Negotiations With Iran…

This comes as more disturbing details about the “deal” are leaked.

Via Free Beacon:

Congressional leaders have begun pressuring their colleagues to cut off all U.S. funding for the ongoing talks with Iran over its contested nuclear program as the Obama administration rushes to hash out the details of a deal in the coming months, according to multiple sources and a letter that will be sent next week to appropriators in the House of Representatives.

With the deadline approaching, congressional Republicans have been exasperated by the Obama administration’s efforts to prevent them from having any oversight over the deal.

Reps. Peter Roskam (R., Ill.) and Lee Zeldin (R., N.Y.) are now petitioning their colleagues on the House Appropriations Committee to prohibit all taxpayer funding for the talks, the Washington Free Beacon has learned.

This would purge all U.S. funds available to Obama administration officials for travel abroad, hotel stays, and any other activities related to the P5+1 talks with Iran.

Meanwhile, Speaker Boehner will be traveling to Israel at the end of the month for a visit with Prime MInister Benjamin Netanyahu.

The trip, though planned a few weeks ago, has not yet been publicly announced. The Ohio Republican will head to Israel on March 31, heading a delegation of Republican lawmakers, senior Israeli officials told Haaretz Friday.

According to officials, the final terms of the visit were agreed upon during Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s trip to the U.S. earlier in the month to address Congress on the threat of a nuclear Iran.

Boehner’s trip may or may not cause new drama — as Boehner was who invited Netanyahu to speak to Congress on March 3. Boehner explicitly invited the prime minister without communicating the plans with the White House, something that upset both President Obama and numerous Democratic members of Congress.

The Council Has Spoken!! Our Watcher’s Council Results

The Council has spoken, the votes have been cast, and the results are in for this week’s Watcher’s Council match up.

“”You see, it’s been our misfortune to have the wrong religion. Why didn’t we have the religion of the Japanese, who regard sacrifice for the Fatherland as the highest good? The Mohammedan religion too would have been more compatible to us than Christianity. Why did it have to be Christianity with its meekness and flabbiness?” – Adolf Hitler

“I studied the Qu’ran a great deal. I came away from that study with the conviction that by and large there have been few religions in the world as deadly to men as that of Muhammad. As far as I can see, it is the principal cause of the decadence so visible today in the Muslim world and, though less absurd than the polytheism of old, its social and political tendencies are in my opinion more to be feared, and I therefore regard it as a form of decadence rather than a form of progress in relation to paganism itself” – Alexis de Tocqueville

“All this talk of people who burn the Koran and nothing about the people who reacted in such a stupid way. We are always blaming the victim and not holding them — not most Muslims, but at least a large part of Muslim culture that doesn’t condemn their people… There is one religion in the world that kills you when you disagree with them and they say ‘look, we are a religion of peace and if you disagree we’ll f**king cut your head off, and nobody calls them on it — there are very few people that will call them on it. It’s like if Dad is a violent drunk and beats his kids, you don’t blame the kid because he set Dad off. You blame Dad because he’s a violent drunk” – Bill Maher

This week’s winning essay, Joshuapundit’s The Chicken Or The Egg? looks at some elements of Islamic culture and asks: is it Islam that promotes the extreme violence and misogyny associated with Muslim societies? Or is that just [art of a tribal society that persists in spite of Islam? Here’s a slice:

Unless you’re in a coma, you’ve probably noticed that a great many of the violent and barbaric acts in our modern world can be attributed to followers of Islam.

In the Islamic world today, aside from homicide bombings, jihad and terrorism directed against dar harb ( the part of the world not ruled by Islam), honor killings, female genital circumcision and other forms of violence against women are commonplace, and homosexuals are routinely brutalized and murdered. Non-Muslims are treated as barely human in much of the Islamic world, if they’re allowed to exist at all. Warfare carried out by Muslims is done with modern tools of the trade provided by the despised infidels, but is a relic of the good ol’ primitive and tribal days. Hostages, beheadings and the deliberate killing of civilians are all fair game, and the language of jihad is essentially the same heady stuff used back in the 7th century against the infidel. And through it all, there remains the miasma of seething violent rage at things like the Danish cartoons that simply doesn’t exist in other religious groups.

The question nobody wants to ask keeps floating to the surface: Is Islam to blame? Or, to put it another way, are the perpetrators simply bad Muslims or are they actually good ones who are simply more in tune with Mohammed’s message than the majority? Does Islam itself promote violence? Or are the acts simply a product of primitive tribal society that persists in spite of Islam?

Actually, this is a trick question. I personally believe that Islam and the primitive tribal culture combined back in the day to sustain each other and can’t be separated by their very nature…even though some valiant attempts have been made in the past, and are being made today.

Let’s look at honor killings, for example. Probably the oldest recorded one is in Genesis 34, when Jacob’s daughter Dinah was seduced (or raped, depending on how you interpret the text) by a man from the town of Shechem( modern day Nablus). Afterwards, Jacob’s sons Simeon and Levi instigated the killing of the town’s men in revenge. But the Torah also tells us how Jacob denounced the killings and actually took the time to bad mouth his sons for the deed from his deathbed. Not only that, but you’ll notice a profound difference from the Islamic way of handling this – the onus of punishment fell on the male, not the female.

his isn’t the only honor killing mentioned in the Bible, but they were never condoned or part of Jewish law, just merely reported.

Islam, on the other hand, not only sanctions honor killings but is quite clear about its position in the matter. Killing or flogging an adulteress or a female that has relations with a non-Muslim male are part of sharia ( Qu’ran: 4:15, for example) – provided an Islamic court orders the punishment rather than an individual male family member going off on his own.

Even at that, Islamic courts today in the Muslim world frequently view male family members taking the law into their own hands fairly leniently. In Jordan, for example, many brutal honor killings have been punished by as little as a three month sentence under Jordanian Public Law 340. Moreover, in the context of Islamic society such murderers are often celebrated and held up as role models. Just as homicide bombers and terrorists who kill infidel civilians often are.

But what if a Muslim feels himself disrespected and lives in say, Britain or New Jersey? If no Islamic courts are available, is it permissible to take the law into one’s own hands? Probably. There’s not much in the way of Islamic rulings or commentary on that particular subject, but the near silence of most Muslim clergy in the West when it comes to denouncing honor killings speaks volumes…one of those little inconvenient truths Western apologists for multiculturalism and Islam constantly run up against when a number of Muslim clerics themselves insist that honor killing, female genital mutilation, and stoning of adulterers are mandated by Islam. And, as you’ve probably guessed by now , that’s one of the unspoken reasons behind the push among many Muslims in the West for sharia courts to handle those messy domestic problems that come up with uppity females from time to time.

Violent death penalties for women caught in adultery is fairly typical of a primitive society, but only Islam continues the practice into the present day. No Christian court has ever condemned a woman to death for adultery. And although the death penalty for adultery is found in the Book of Leviticus, there is no record of such a sentence ever carried out by any Jewish court. The same is true of homosexuality; while both Christianity and Judaism consider it ‘a sin and an abomination’ only Islam clearly mandates the death penalty for such activities and carries it out in our present day.

So why does Islamic society persist in these practices ?

Find out at the link.

In our non-Council category, the winner was Daniel Greenfield’sObama’s Treason Is The New Patriotism submitted by The Noisy Room. Daniel has some very hard hitting things to say about President Obama and a number of his questionable actions..and the tendency by the usual suspects to name anyone whom disagrees with the Regime a ‘traitor.’

Here are this week’s full results. GrEaT sAtAn”S gIrLfRiEnD and Rhymes With Right were unabke to vote this week, but were not subject to the usual 2/3 vote penalty for not voting:

Council Winners

Non-Council Winners

See you next week!

Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watcher’s Forum. and every  Tuesday morning, when we reveal the weeks’ nominees for Weasel of the Week!

And remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council, and the results are posted on Friday morning.

It’s a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere, and you won’t want to miss it...or any of the other fantabulous Watcher’s Council content.

And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter..’cause we’re cool like that, y’know?

Who Is Responsible For Spreading The ‘Hands Up, Don’t Shoot’ Lie? (Video)

That was a rhetorical question.

This excellent video by Ben Howe makes perfectly clear who is responsible lest there remain any doubt.

Via MRCTV .org:

The good news is – with every episode like the Gentle Giant saga, the MSM loses a little bit more of its credibility – making them less likely to be believed the next time they want to push a false narrative, hastening their eventual demise.

Lt Col Shaffer: WH Trying To Get Bowe Bergdahl To “Cop To A Deal” To Make Problem Go Away Quietly (Video)

The White House continues to stall the results of the Pentagon’s investigation in to Army deserter Bowe Bergdahl.

And now retired Army Lt. Col. Tony Shaffer, who has been alleging for months that the investigation has concluded, and Bergdahl was found to have deserted, says sources in the Pentagon claimed Thursday that the White House is trying to get  Bergdahl to strike a some kind of deal to avoid an embarrassing trial for the Regime.

Via Fox News:

“They want this to go away as quietly as possible,” Shaffer, a former military intelligence officer, said on Fox News’ “America’s Newsroom.”

President Obama faced criticism for trading Bergdahl, accused by some of deserting, for five Taliban leaders being held at Guantanamo Bay. Shaffer claims there were other options on the table that might have had “better success … without giving up five adversaries.” He added that “these guys are going to be going back to a rock star welcome and return to combat” when conditions on their release are lifted in the coming months.

President Snit-Fit shouldn’t have to stall this out for much longer. Almost a year has passed since the Regime’s grossly inappropriate celebration of that awful trade. The American people’s attention spans are short. Obama counts on that.