Archive for the ‘Obama’ Category

VIDEO – CORRUPTION AT THE DEPT OF JUSTICE – MARK LEVIN AND SIDNEY POWELL

Thursday, February 7th, 2019

 

 How can we possibly have trust in our Justice Department after hearing the information in this video ?   Nancy
VIDEO – SIDNEY POWELL AND MARK LEVIN ON DOJ CORRUPTION

www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zk-3uaGZsM8

Sidney Powell  –  bio

Sidney PowellSidney Powell was a federal prosecutor in three districts under nine U.S. Attorneys from both political parties, then in private practice for more than 20 years. She is past-president of the Bar Association of the Fifth Federal Circuit and of the American Academy of Appellate Lawyers. A veteran of 500 federal appeals, she published LICENSED TO LIE: Exposing Corruption in the Department of Justice, the true inside story of the corrupted prosecutions of Ted Stevens, Arthur Andersen LLP, Merrill Lynch executives, and many others. In addition to practicing law, Ms. Powell is now Senior Policy Advisor on Justice Reform for America First and a Senior Fellow of the London Center for Policy Research.

The book LICENSED TO LIE focuses on abusive prosecutors—all of whom rose to very powerful positions in the government. The book’s most prominent villain now leads Robert Mueller’s task force investigating the 2106 presidential election. It has recently been discussed by former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich on Cavuto, Hannity, Fox & Friends, with Bill Hemmer, on MSNBC, and on NPR. The book was also featured by John Stossel in a segment of one of his shows on Washington Overlords.

(more…)

Share

RED STATE/BLUE STATE DIVIDE

Tuesday, February 5th, 2019

 

Navigating the Great Divide

By Stephen Moore    January 8, 2019
 In the months after the election of Donald Trump, there was a mini-political movement in California to get the Golden State to secede from the Union.It didn’t get off the ground, though during a recent trip to Northern California, many of the people I met were still so distraught over the Trump presidency that were he to win re-election, secession would be much more seriously pursued. A majority of Californians don’t want to be governed by Donald Trump, and many liberal leaders and talking heads openly compare him to Adolf Hitler.

What if we arrived at a point where a solid majority of Californians wanted independence (and perhaps states like Washington and Oregon sought to join them)? Should they have the moral and constitutional right to do so? Would the other states ever impose military control over Californians to keep them in the Union?

The standard response is this issue was settled during the Civil War. Really? What the Civil War proved was that the North had more military might than the South. Imagine that it were the South in 1860 that held the political and military advantage to impose its will over the North, and moved to legalize the evil of slavery everywhere. Would the North have been morally wrong to secede?

The issue of secession takes on renewed vigor now given the British exit from the European Union. The EU allowed a fairly orderly process for allowing nations to leave the EU governing structure. The political tide in many places around the world appears to be for self-rule and sovereignty.

In America, the deepening and perhaps irreversible red state-blue state schism deserves immediate attention. We as a nation are more divided on ideological, cultural, economic and geographical lines than at any time since the Civil War. Look at the electoral map from recent elections.

(more…)

Share

TECHNOLOGY VERSUS THE WALL

Monday, February 4th, 2019

 

Has anyone suggested “armed drones”  ?  They would certainly get the attention of
those who are illegally crossing our border !   Nancy

Democrats who killed Bush’s ‘virtual fence’ now back ‘technological wall’ at border

by S. A. Miller

January 13, 2019
Bush’ ‘virtual fence’ killed by Obama

The Department of Homeland Security spent seven years and more than $1 billion trying to create a wall of technology at the border — or, as President George W. Bush called it, a “virtual fence.” It was a bust.

Now the idea has returned as the main ante for congressional Democrats in the border security spending fight. Opposed to President Trump’s physical barriers, they say drones, sensors and other electronics are all the tools needed — a “technological wall,” in the words of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, California Democrat.

The Obama administration in 2011 pulled the plug on the Bush-era Secure Border Initiative Network, or SBINet, which was envisioned as an integrated system of radar, sensors and video cameras along the entire U.S.-Mexico border.

Democrats at the time cheered the decision to cancel the contract with Boeing for the long-troubled program.

Rep. Bennie G. Thompson, a Mississippi Democrat who was the ranking member of the House Homeland Security Committee, called SBINet a “grave and expensive disappointment” for squandering a little more than $1 billion to achieve just 53 miles of coverage on the border in Arizona.

Mr. Thompson, who now chairs the committee, said last week that he is ready to try again rather than spend on Mr. Trump’s corrugated steel fence.

“I have been engaging the tech community. They are telling me that they are developing modern technology that will help us identify those vulnerabilities. I would like for us to go in that direction,” he said on “PBS NewsHour.”

He said U.S. Customs and Border Protection already have high-tech sensors that just need to be used in a better way.

The Washington Times asked Mr. Thompson’s office what had changed since 2011 and whether he fully backed Mrs. Pelosi’s “technological wall.”

“He does support proven and effective technology to be used at the border where appropriate. SBINet simply did not work, was not deployed correctly and was overly ambitious,” said Thompson spokesman Adam Comis.

The border security debate and Mr. Trump’s demand for $5.7 billion for a border fence are at the heart of the standoff between the White House and Democrats that has kept the government partially shut down for more than three weeks.

Border security analysts agree that the technology has improved by leaps and bounds since 2011, but they disagree on whether sensors and remote imaging can substitute for physical barriers.

Jay F. Nunamaker Jr., director of the National Center for Border Security and Immigration at the University of Arizona, had no doubt that technology could replace walls and fences.

“The combination of all the cameras, night vision cameras, you could see people walking through marshes and streams like it was bright daylight,” he said, recalling a 2013 visit to a border security command center set up at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in Tucson.

“Technology has only improved since then,” he said.

National security scholar James R. Phelps, co-author of the 2014 book “Border Security,” said the question isn’t whether the technology works in detecting border jumpers — it does.

“The question then becomes, ‘Do they actually stop anybody?’ The answer to that is no,” he said. “It is definitely not a substitute. It works in conjunction with physical barriers.”

A big difference between sensors and fences, he said, is where Border Patrol agents apprehend smugglers or illegal immigrants. The high-tech sensors and video cameras don’t prevent or hamper illegal border crossings.

“Once they are on U.S. soil, inside the United States of America, you now have to go through all the legal processes and administrative processes,” said Mr. Phelps. “You have to determine if they are here legally or illegally, collect the biometrics to put through the criminal check systems, detain them or arrest them, set them up for a deportation hearing, put them in front of a judge, potentially house them, treat them medically. The list goes on and on and on — with all the expenses associated with that person once they set foot in the United States.”

The scenario also depends on Border Patrol agents apprehending border jumpers after they appear on video screens.

“It does no good to detect illegal crossings unless someone is available to track them down, and fairly quickly, before the crossers disappear into the many private homes, farms, businesses, vehicles and natural hiding places that are in the border areas, often very close to the border,” said Jessica M. Vaughan, director of policy studies at the Center for Immigration Studies. “Technology by itself does not prevent anyone from crossing the way a real wall or fence does.”

(more…)

Share

AMERICAN MILITARY SUPERIORITY ‘SERIOUSLY ERODED’

Sunday, February 3rd, 2019

 

American Military Superiority ‘Seriously Eroded’

BY CLARION PROJECT Sunday, February 3, 2019

A US soldier stands at the Qayyarah military base during the ongoing operation to recapture the last major Iraqi city under the control of the Islamic State (IS) group jihadists in October 2016 (Photo: YASIN AKGUL/AFP/Getty Images)American military superiority has eroded seriously in the last decades. This was the conclusion of the latest report by the National Defense Strategy Commission, a bipartisan body charged by Congress to evaluate the U.S.’ defense capabilities.

The commission said the erosion was to such a “dangerous degree” that “America’s ability to defend its allies, its partners, and its own vital interests is increasingly in doubt.”

The report further stated, “If the nation does not act promptly to remedy these circumstances, the consequences will be grave and lasting.”

It notes that due to the superiority of American military power in the past, the U.S.:

  • has deterred or defeated aggression and preserved stability in key regions around the globe
  • ensured freedoms around the globe on which American and international prosperity depends
  • given America unrivaled access and influence
  • prevented America from being coerced or intimidated
  • helped to avert a recurrence of the devastating global wars of the early 20th century, which required repeated interventions at a cost of hundreds of thousands of U.S. lives

“Put simply,” the report states, “U.S. military power has been indispensable to global peace and stability—and to America’s own security, prosperity, and global leadership.”

One of the main reasons America has seen its military edge slip away is budgetary cuts, which have prevented “essential … modernization” that have contributed to shortfalls in readiness.

(more…)

Share

WHAT IF THE FBI HAD PROBED OBAMA ?

Friday, January 25th, 2019

 

What if the FBI Had Probed Obama?

By the bureau’s Trump standard, he looked like an agent of Iran.

 By Lee Smith  January 23, 2019
President Barack Obama speaks in the White House, Nov. 5, 2014. PHOTO: JACQUELYN MARTIN/ASSOCIATED PRESS

The Federal Bureau of Investigation reportedly opened a counterintelligence investigation in 2017 to find out if President Trump was a Russian agent. What if the FBI had similarly looked into whether President Obama was an agent of Iran?

Counterintelligence agents would have examined the target’s personal and professional networks. The FBI investigated at least four Trump campaign figures for supposed ties to Russia. Only one, Mike Flynn, worked in the administration, and for less than a month. The Obama administration had a few senior officials with personal ties to Iran.

Obama confidant Valerie Jarrett was born in the Iranian city of Shiraz and reportedly led back-channel talks with the Iranians in 2012. Secretary of State John Kerry’s daughter quashed right-wing rumors that her Iranian-American husband’s best man was the son of Iran’s Foreign Minister Javad Zarif. But under the FBI’s Trump procedures, that denial might have made her suspect. A month after Trump adviser Carter Page publicly asked then-Director James Comey for an interview to clear his name, the FBI obtained a warrant to wiretap him.

As Mr. Trump’s desire for improved relations with Russia raised eyebrows at the bureau, a 2008 article written by John Brennan—who went on to serve as White House counterterrorism adviser and Central Intelligence Agency director—advocated a grand bargain with Iran. In 2009 the Obama White House conducted secret negotiations with Tehran.

Mr. Obama later sidelined Project Cassandra, an investigation of illicit trafficking networks employed by Hezbollah, Iran’s Lebanese franchise. Launched in 2008, the investigation was run by a multiagency task force, including the FBI itself. Then for 18 months in 2014-15, the Obama White House gave the Iranians $700 million a month in sanctions relief. In January 2016, Mr. Obama sent Iran another $1.7 billion in cash. The administration also had a habit of leaking news of Israeli strikes on Iranian arms convoys and depots in Syria.

(more…)

Share

UNLEASHING THE ENERGY SECTOR

Friday, January 25th, 2019

 

THE WASHINGTON TIMES

Unleashing the energy sector

By Monica Crowley   November 28, 2018

Given the historically significant pressures on the Republican Party in the midterm elections, there were two major things that saved the GOP’s bacon: The thunderous star power of President Trumpand the booming economy he has delivered.

The remarkable economic expansion is a direct result of the Trump tax cuts, widespread deregulation and renegotiation of global trade relationships. But the largely untold part of the economic success story is the Trump administration’s unleashing of the energy sector.

For eight long years, President Obama used the Environmental Protection Agency as a sledgehammer to enforce the leftist energy wish list: Bankrupt the coal industry, subsidize green energy boondoggles such as Solyndra despite massive taxpayer losses, impose cap and trade, halt offshore drilling and exploration projects and kill off oil pipelines such as the Keystone XL. American consumers, domestic energy producers and tens of thousands of jobs be damned.

Once in office, Mr. Trump set about reversing these destructive energy policies with the stated goal of achieving true energy independence.

Mr. Trump understood that energy policy may not be as sexy as tax relief or a new NAFTA agreement, but it is a bipartisan issue vital to the nation’s economic future. Unfortunately, in today’s highly-politicized climate, economic growth can often be caught in the crossfire of ideological activism.

In one of the more egregious recent examples, the Keystone XL pipeline was blocked by a San Francisco judge on Nov. 8, frustrating the president’s agenda. “It was a political decision made by a judge. I think it’s a disgrace,” Mr. Trump told reporters, adding, “Forty-eight thousand jobs. I approved it. It’s ready to start.”

This latest judicial ruling presents significant challenges to Mr. Trump’s energy policy and stalls the prospect of further harvesting abundant U.S. natural resources, hampering national security in the process. Other projects, such as the proposed Atlantic Coast Pipeline (ACP), which was placed on Mr. Trump’s National Infrastructure Priorities List, may yet face similar challenges.

(more…)

Share

SOCIAL JUSTICE MOVEMENT IN OUR UNIVERSITIES

Thursday, January 24th, 2019

 

 

Here is an example of what is happening in colleges and universities.

“DREAMers: How a Youth Movement Challenged Immigrant Rights Orthodoxy” by Prof. Enid Trucios-Haynes, UofL’s Brandeis School of Law

This presentation will discuss the rise of an immigrant rights movement led by undocumented youth over the past decade. In the mid-2000s, undocumented young people came out of the shadows and declared themselves to be undocumented and unafraid. They sought legislation, the DREAM Act, to provide legal status for those who came to the U.S. as children and had become undocumented when they turned eighteen. They challenged the negative dehumanizing terminology of “illegal aliens” by identifying DREAMers as exceptional students, and later by uniting through the creation of national coalitional organizations. After marching in Washington D.C. in 2010, these youth activists used civil disobedience tactics to petition Congress directly for the DREAM Act. Youth activists became empowered to speak for themselves, their undocumented parents, and the entire undocumented community in the U.S. Their progressive agenda, seeking dignity, respect, and recognition, led President Obama to create the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) Program after Congress refused to act. Although this program does not provide legal status, and is currently in limbo due to litigation, undocumented young people — now out of the shadows — continue to build the movement and coalitions to challenge the restrictionist immigration policies of the Trump Administration.

This is part of a 6-week short course that offers historical and contemporary perspectives on a variety of social justice movements. Six scholars from the University of Louisville’s Anne Braden Institute for Social Justice Research and Muhammad Ali Institute for Peace and Justice will explore aspects of social movement-building on topics such as racial justice, youth-led immigrant justice, LGBTQ rights, and solidarity, among others. 

This class is free and open to the public, but registration is required. Call 502-574-1623 to reserve your spot.

Location: Louisville Free Public Library

Main Library
301 York St.
Louisville, KY 40203

Date & Location

Date: 1/24/2019
Time: 6:30 PM to 8:00 PM
Share

WHY WE HAVE SO MANY SHUTDOWNS

Wednesday, January 23rd, 2019

 

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

Why We Have So Many Shutdowns

Congress keeps asserting its power over spending, but it has no means to hold itself accountable.

Share

THE SHAMING OF KAREN PENCE

Wednesday, January 23rd, 2019

 

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

The Shaming of Karen Pence

A mob of secular Puritans targets her for teaching at a Christian school.

By William McGurn    January 22, 2019

 

 

Will no one speak up for Karen Pence other than her husband?

In scarcely a week, the vice president’s wife has become a public face of hate. CNN’s John King suggests that what Mrs. Pence has done is so grievous maybe taxpayers shouldn’t fund her Secret Service security protection. The American Civil Liberties Union says she’s sending “a terrible message to students.”

The Guardian sees in Mrs. Pence a reminder of “the vice-president’s dangerous bigotry.” During a Saturday night performance in Las Vegas, Lady Gaga told her fans that what Mrs. Pence has done confirms she and her husband are “the worst representation of what it means to be Christian.” A former Washington Post editor and senior writer for Politico tweets: “How can this happen in America?”

So what is this terrible thing Mrs. Pence has done? She plans to teach art part-time at Immanuel Christian School in Northern Virginia. This is a small private K-8 academy where Mrs. Pence has taught before. It adheres to a biblically rooted view of human sexuality.

Thanks to the crack reporters at the Washington Post, what this means is no mystery. The Post reports the following provision in the school’s employment contract: “I understand that the term ‘marriage’ has only one meaning; the uniting of one man and one woman in a single, exclusive covenant union as delineated in Scripture.”

Hmmm. Though presented as dangerous stuff, we’ve heard this before. For example, this is how Senate candidate Barack Obama put it in a 2004 radio interview: “I’m a Christian, and so although I try not to have my religious beliefs dominate or determine my political views on this issue, I do believe that tradition and my religious beliefs say that marriage is something sanctified between a man and a woman.”

So why are so many eager to cast the first stone against Mrs. Pence and not Mr. Obama? Because everyone knew when Mr. Obama spoke he didn’t really mean it; his position was taken out of political calculation. Mrs. Pence’s sin is that she really believes what she says.

(more…)

Share

VIDEO ISLAMIC FUNDING TERRORIST ORGANIZATIONS

Wednesday, January 2nd, 2019

 

VIDEO

Terror-Funding Case Being Prosecuted?

Share
Search All Posts
Categories