Monday, August 31, 2015


WH Plans A Country Within A Country With Citizens Pushed Aside

Reprint from February of this year

The White House has plans to legalize 13 to 15 million illegal immigrants who will then establish a “country within a country.”
The following Mark Levin interview with Susan Payne is shocking but it also puts all the pieces into place.
Susan Payne is a contributor to WCBM, Baltimore and Co-Host of the Pat McDonough Radio Show,
Unbeknownst to the Obama officials, Ms. Payne was invited to listen in on conference calls at an immigration rally. Cecilia Munoz, director of the White House Domestic Policy Council, and 16 members of the White House cabinet were on the first call. White House officials were on all three calls.  What Ms. Payne learned needs to be immediately shared with Congress and the public.
It should be noted that Ted Hayes, founder of America’s Black Shield, also listened in on these calls.


Obama Threatens War on Israel if it Attacks Iran

Originally Posted by EU Times on Mar 5th, 2015 // 75 Comments
US President Barack Obama threatened to take military action against Israel not to let Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu strike Iran.
Netanyahu was planning airstrikes at an emergency meeting with Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon, Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman and Chief of Staff of the Israeli army Benny Gantz, the Kuwaiti newspaper Al-JarĂ®da said.
The meeting was held after it became known that Barack Obama’s administration and the clergy of Iran had concluded a secret agreement.
Israel even conducted test flights of its fighter jets in the airspace of Iran after it became possible to overcome the radar protection. However, US Secretary of State John Kerry disclosed Netanyahu’s plans. Afterwards, Obama threatened to shoot down Israeli planes on their way to Iran. As a result, the Israeli Prime Minister had to curtail the operation. The relationship between Israel and the United States have been worsening since then.
Benjamin Netanyahu has recently expressed opposition to Obama’s intention to sign the agreement with Iran on its nuclear program. The Israeli politician promised to make every effort not to let the parties sign the document. TheWhite House accused Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu of having a destructive approach to the relations between the United States and Israel.


An Objective Guide to Birthright Citizenship

This is a guide to the constitutional issue of whether a child is a citizen if born in the United States to alien parents here illegally.  If you are simply looking for arguments to bolster your political views, look elsewhere.  If you are genuinely interested in the merits of this issue, keep reading. The Fourteenth Amendment became part of the Constitution in 1868.  Its first clause states that "[a]ll persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state in which they reside." Although some claim that merely being born in the U.S. makes one a citizen, neither the Constitution nor the Supreme Court supports that view.  The Fourteenth Amendment further specifies that one must be "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States.  The critical question is whether the child of a resident illegal alien meets that requirement. Anyone who...(Read Full Article)

Sunday, August 30, 2015

Saturday, August 29, 2015


Mexico Warns Texas Over Refusing Birth Certificates to Illegals' Babies
The refusal of some Texas counties to issue birth certificates for children born to undocumented parents ... [Full Story]

BOEHNER IS THE BIGGEST JACKASS IN A PARTY FULL OF JACKASSES...It is time for a Republican Party revolution to throw out the jackasses and install principled representatives who will listen to the people.

Boehner is typical of Jackass GOP Leaders
 By Jeff Crouere Full Story

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black! This week at a Colorado fundraiser House Speaker John Boehner stunned donors when he referred to Texas Senator Ted Cruz as a “jackass.” During remarks at the event for Congressman Scott Tipton, Boehner said he was grateful that Cruz was often campaigning for President, which kept that “jackass” away from Capitol Hill.

Friday, August 28, 2015

Ebeneezer Biden: Better at Giving Away Your Money Than His
 By William Kevin Stoos Full Story

Recently, Ace Reporter Hugh Betcha--named Univision's "Most Trusted Conservative Reporter, 2015," and MSNBC's "Reporter We Would Most Like to Hang Out With, 2015" overheard a discussion in the ObamaMedia about Republican politicians' charitable giving habits. Since liberal politicians are so caring for the poor, since Hillary is taking a nose dive in the polls, and kindly Uncle Joe Biden is about to enter the race for President, Hugh decided to explore the would-be Democrat standard bearer's history of charitable giving. Certainly his private giving must match his avowed love of and desire to help the poor.
Obama Administration’s Direct Connection and Material Support for Known Terrorists Intent on Destroying America

Obama Administration’s Direct Connection and Material Support for Known Terrorists Intent on Destroying America

Why does Lois Lerner, the head of the IRS, and Hillary Clinton need an e-mail address while using a fake identity? The only answer that makes any sense is that they are both involved in criminal activities that they need to

“The Obama administration is obsessed with supporting nationwide sanctuary and unlawful amnesty for illegal aliens – even illegal aliens who have committed violent crimes,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “These new documents show the Obama administration’s soft-on-crime approach to illegal alien crime is a clear and present danger to the safety of innocent Americans.”

Our Immigration System Is Not Broken
 By Dr. Robert R. Owens Full Story

Why is it that when African Americans whose families have been in this country for hundreds of years commit crimes they go to jail and when illegal immigrants commit crimes they get released?
Oh, how the mighty Megyn has fallen

Joan Swirsky, RenewAmerica analyst

August 28, 2015

Most people, including me, know that Megyn Kelly is not only gorgeous, but also smart, sassy, incisive in her interviews, and genuinely funny. But the interview she conducted Wednesday night, August 26, with Jorge Ramos was disgraceful – the kind of toadying and biased interrogation that should be Exhibit #1 in journalism schools across the country about how not to be a legitimate journalist.

Ramos is a reporter for Univision, the company being sued by presidential candidate Donald Trump after they terminated their contractual relationship (including television broadcast obligations) with the Trump-backed Miss Universe Organization. The official charges include breach of contract and defamation, with the plaintiffs seeking more than $500 million in damages. Univision took its punitive action after Mr. Trump said that Mexican immigrants, including criminals and rapists, were teeming over our southern border – in other words, harmed him for exercising his constitutional right to free speech.

The Kelly interview was about Mr. Trump's ousting of Ramos from a press conference the previous evening, after the candidate pointed to an audience member who had a question to ask. Interrupting, Ramos stood up and preempted the question, not with a question of his own, but with a virtual filibuster of grievances. And what did Ramos have the chutzpah to whine to Megyn Kelly about? That his free speech was being curtailed! Now that is rich!

Kelly had no doubt watched the film of exactly what had taken place. But not a peep out of her to give her audience the context of what had actually transpired. She also knew that Trump initially responded to Ramos's outburst by saying repeatedly, "You weren't called on, sit down." Peepless.

Kelly also knew that Trump's personal aide came out to the lobby to invite Ramos back into the auditorium. Not a peep. And she knew that the two men then engaged in a lengthy back and forth, apparently to the satisfaction of both of them. Still no peep.

Did Kelly's viewing audience learn of any of these mitigating circumstances? Again, not a single peep from Kelly, who allowed – indeed encouraged – Ramos to go on and on in the victim role he so clearly basks in.

Did Kelly ask Ramos if it were true that his daughter works for Hillary Clinton? Would that not have been highly relevant? Not a peep!

Megyn's interview was as dishonest as it gets in the world of what should be legitimate journalism (although in today's America, "legitimate journalism" may be the ultimate oxymoron!). While Ramos portrayed himself as the victim of big, bad Donald Trump, and himself as the virtuous believer in free speech and the right to be heard, Megyn put on her most sincere listening face, but failed to challenge any of Ramos's lies.

Kelly fits neatly into the pack
The pack, that is, of other TV personalities who forgot but were then reminded that they were simply employees. Both Paula Zahn and Alisyn Camerota were Fox News Network news readers, commentators, hosts, co-hosts, anchors, whatever – both delivering their commentary with a distinctly conservative flavor.

When they moved to CNN, however (Zahn in 2001; Camerota in 2014), their commentary magically became unmistakably liberal.

But it wasn't magic at all. Both women worked for the big business of American media, with bosses who issue directives and, in essence, tell them what to say – not the exact phrasing, but certainly the slant. That's how business works...the boss calls the shots and the employees either comply or get booted.

And if you think that the bosses have the final say, think again. The major outlets – both print and electronic – take a lot of their marching orders from the White House. That's right, and while the government-controlled press/TV/radio didn't begin with Mr. Obama, his regime has certainly taken it to unprecedented heights. As just one example, have we heard about one single civilian casualty in the thousand of drone strikes Mr. Obama has ordered over the past almost-seven years in the Middle East? Even one? I rest my case.


But I digress. For decades, the media have prided themselves on having the greatest influence on who gets elected and who doesn't, particularly in the big contests for president (of which there is only one) and senators (of which there are only 100). They also like to pick their favorite spokespeople, even if those selections are completely unrepresentative of public sentiment.

Karl Rove of Fox is a perfect example. A big kahuna in the President George W. Bush years and a virtual encyclopedia of electoral minutiae, Rove likes his politicians rather tame and manipulable, and that is why he appears to call the shots for Reince Priebus, the head of the Republican National Committee, who faithfully echoes Rove's white bread sentiments.

Clearly, Rove and his Democrat counterparts – recycled dinosaurs, all – are kept on because of the pricey contracts they've signed. It is certainly not that they shed any light! And then along comes Donald Trump and all they can do is hurl snooty insults and wage bets against the obvious frontrunner.

Yes, that Donald Trump, the guy who tells it like it is, never fails to remind you that he knows how to negotiate and strike deals and make America great again, the guy who has learned through thousands of negotiations how to "read" people (and the language they use) with unerring accuracy.

Even before he "read" Megyn Kelly, he came out of the candidate's box with an insult to Sen. John McCain and a virtual manifesto against illegal immigration. And how did the media – both conservative and liberal – react? With reflexive horror, well-practiced political correctness, tsk-tsk raised eyebrows, and uniform condemnation.

We the people

And how did the public react – that would be me and you and all the other ignorant rubes who the media elites believe can't hold a candle to own their immense wisdom and knowledge?

We-the-People not only gave Mr. Trump huge poll ratings, but also heaved a huge sigh of gratitude. At last, they seemed to say, a guy who speaks to our concerns and doesn't give a damn about the political correctness that violates our First Amendment rights every minute of every day, a guy who not only wants to protect our southern border, but also do away with every aspect of the horrors we've experienced over the past several years, including:
  • The diminishing of our military (and the shabby treatment of our veterans)
  • The horrific socialized medicine nightmare of Obamacare
  • The ghastly dumb-down-our-kids education fiasco known as Common Core
  • The crushing national debt
  • The Mt. Everest heights of unemployment
  • The infiltration of the America-loathing and anti-Semitic Muslim Brotherhood into the highest reaches of our government (including State, Homeland Security, the Pentagon, Health and Human Services, and the White House itself!)
  • On and on...
We know that not a single Democrat candidate for president is speaking out on these America-destroying issues. All we hear from them is victim, victim, victim, more money, more money, more money. Nothing with the Democrats has changed in over 70 years – and nothing has succeeded!

But the Trump promise to do away with or change or fix our problems is ringing true to the American public. Why? Because he's proved it again and again in his own business life, surmounting losses and turning them into profits, and in his personal life, weathering disappointments in his marriages – and yet his two former wives are his biggest fans, and his children are model citizens!

Yes, there is an embarrassment of riches on the Republican side, and at least four or five candidates are impressively articulate in stating their plans for a better America. But none of them has the business experience and toughness and aggressiveness (which we need right now) of Mr. Trump.

The same Mr. Trump who perceived, quite accurately, I think, that Megyn Kelly was more than provocative in the first debate, indeed in a "gotcha" mode to entrap, embarrass, and diminish him. To the entire country's surprise, Trump fought back, accusing Kelly of being, in essence, unprofessional and of gratuitously baiting him.

The next day...poll numbers boomed for Mr. Trump!

However, Mr. Trump went a step further. He went directly to Megyn's boss, Roger Ailes, president of Fox News and chairman of the Fox Television Stations Group, and according to the candidate's own report, it was a productive meeting in which Ailes promised that Fox would "be fair" to him Mr. Trump. All good. And then – coincidence? – Megyn announced she was leaving for a two-week vacation.

But when she came back, Mr. Trump tweeted that Megyn was not on her game, and apparently both Rupert Murdoch, the owner of Fox (and The New York Post, among numerous other holdings), and Roger Ailes, decided that they would summon all their power and influence to take Trump down. Clearly, they've dispatched General Megyn Kelly to the front lines.

On Wednesday, the news was preoccupied by the tragic death of two young media people from Virginia who were murdered while on air. But throughout the day there was a steady drumbeat of anti-Trump commentary and innuendo on Fox.

If things continue on the same trajectory for Mr. Trump, I suspect he may end up thanking Fox for kicking his poll numbers into the stratosphere!

Thursday, August 27, 2015

Anchor Babies, Common Law, The Constitution, Eliminate birthright citizenship for the children of illegal immigrants
The Children of Illegal Immigrants Are Not Born American Citizens

 By Tim Dunkin Full Story

Once again, Donald Trump has managed to open up a robust national discussion about an issue that up to this point had been largely ignored by the political class. This time, the discussion is about so-called "birthright citizenship," the idea that whenever a foreign national (regardless of legal status and with a very few exceptions) has a child on American soil, this child automatically becomes an American citizen from birth.


Update on Impeachment Mission! 

Anchors AwayJan LaRueIt is ridiculous to believe that the 14th Amendment was intended to allow those who commit a criminal act to give birth to a “citizen.”More

Let's Ask Serious 

Questions About Hillary

By Andrew Napolitano   |   Thursday, 27 Aug 2015 
What if former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has been pulling the wool over our eyes for years?

What if, while she was secretary of state, she ran two secret wars, one in Libya and one in Syria? What if there already were wars in each of those countries, so she used those wars as covers for her own?

What if President Obama gave permission for her to do this? What if the president lacks the legal authority to authorize anyone to fight secret wars? What if she obtained the consent of a dozen members of Congress from both houses and from both political parties?

What if those few members of Congress who approved of her wars lacked the legal authority to authorize them?

What if her goal was to overthrow two dictators, one friendly to the U.S. and one not? What if the instruments of her war did not consist of American military troops, but rather State Department intelligence assets and American-made military-grade heavy weapons?

What if under federal law the secretary of state and the secretary of the Treasury are permitted on their own to issue licenses to American arms dealers to sell arms to the governments of foreign countries?

What if Clinton secretly authorized the sale of American-made military-grade weapons to the government of Qatar? What if Qatar is a small Middle Eastern country, the government of which is beholden to and largely controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood?

What if the Muslim Brotherhood is a recognized terrorist organization? What if the U.S. has no lawful or military purpose for putting military hardware into the hands of a government that supports or is controlled by a terrorist organization?

What if the real purpose of sending military hardware to Qatar was for it to end up in the hands of rebels in Syria and Libya? What if it got there? What if some of those rebels are known al-Qaida operatives?

What if some of those operatives who received the American military hardware used it to assault Americans and American interests?

What if among those assaulted was the U.S. ambassador to Libya? What if Ambassador Christopher Stevens was assassinated in Benghazi, Libya, by al-Qaida operatives who were using American-made military-grade hardware that Clinton knowingly sent to them?

What if the U.S. had no strategic interest in deposing the government of Libya? What if Congress never declared war on Libya? What if Col. Gadhafi, the then-dictator of Libya who was reprehensible, was nevertheless an American ally whose fights against known terrorist organizations had garnered him praise from President George W. Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair?

What if the U.S. had no strategic interest in deposing the dictator of Syria, President Assad? What if Congress never declared war on Syria? What if the government of Syria, though reprehensible, has been fighting a war against groups and militias, some of whom have been designated as terrorist organizations by the secretary of state?

What if that secretary of state was Hillary Clinton?

What if Clinton had a political interest in deposing the governments of Libya and Syria? What if her goal in fighting these secret wars was to claim triumph for herself over Middle Eastern despots?

What if it is a federal crime to fight a private war against a foreign government? What if it is a federal crime to provide material assistance to terrorist organizations? What if these are crimes no matter who consents or approves?

What if, when asked about this while testifying to the Senate Armed Services Committee, Clinton professed ignorance? What if it is a federal crime for a witness to lie to or mislead Congress?

What if the outcome of Clinton's war in Libya has been the destruction of the Gadhafi government and ensuing chaos? What if that chaos has brought terror and death to many thousands of innocents in Libya?

What if Clinton has failed to achieve any noticeable result with her secret war in Syria?

What if she managed these wars on an e-mail system that was not secured in a government venue? What if she did that to keep her thoughts and actions secret from the president and from the State Department in case she failed to win the wars?

What if she used a BlackBerry she bought at Walmart instead of a secure and encrypted government-issued phone?

What if her management of these wars on the private e-mail system exposed national security secrets to anyone who could hack into her server or her router? What if the server or the router had been kept in the bathroom of an apartment of an employee of a computer company in Denver, Colo., and not under lock and key and armed guard in her home in New York as she has represented?

What if Clinton just doesn't care whether she has broken any federal laws, illegally caused the deaths of thousands of innocents, and profoundly jeopardized and misled the American people?


Obama: Virginia shooting shows gun control is more urgent than fighting terrorism
 By Dan Calabrese Full Story

We touched yesterday on the left's out-of-the-gate seizing on the Roanoke shooting to kick off the latest gun control push. It's what they do, and no one was surprised that they did it - tinged as always with warnings like "we can't wait any longer," which imply, I guess, that everyone knows the left's gun control agenda would stop killings like this, and we're all just dragging our feet because the approval of the NRA is more important than the lives of folks like Alison Parker and Adam Ward.

Wednesday, August 26, 2015

Nearly 200 retired U.S. military generals and admirals sent a letter to Congressional leaders Wednesday, asking them to vote down the Iran nuclear deal. According to The Washington Post, which obtained a copy of the letter, many of the signees have worked in the White House going back three decades. [Full Story]

Through the Eye of the Needle - The Art of Esther Nisenthal Krinitz

Is Megyn Kelly dumb or intellectually dishonest?

Posted on | August 26, 2015 |
Is Megyn Kelly dumb or intellectually dishonest?
By Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ
Yesterday on her show Megyn Kelly made several points, which made me wonder: is she dumb or intellectually dishonest.
Fist, she criticized Trump for kicking belligerent Jorge Ramos from his press conference and excluding foul Des Moines Register from his press conferences. Kelly compared Trump’s actions to Obama’s actions in attempting to exclude FOX from his presidential press conferences.
Really? Is she that stupid and does not know the difference? Obama acted as a sitting US president, government official paid by us, the tax payers, and attempted to exclude a major network. The public and the citizens were correct in standing up for FOX.
Trump is not a president yet, he is not a public official. He is conducting a private event, paid by his campaign, and he does a press conference before the event. He has a full right to exclude anyone from his private event, particularly  a belligerent reporter who speaks without being called upon and refuses to sit down when told not to speak out of turn.
Further, Ramos is not even a legitimate reporter. He is acting as a biased advocate for open borders. His daughter works for Clinton campaign.  A bona fide reporter asks questions, Ramos on the other hand, makes defamatory and malicious statements and stages attacks on Trump by calling Trump “the face of evil in America,”  he states that there is no such thing as illegal alien, that every person is legal.  Ramos’s statements are so idiotic that even Chris Cuomo from CNN took Ramos to task.     Today, on his show, Cuomo stated to Ramos: “Jorge, how can you state that there is  no such thing as illegal? When people cross the border illegally, they are illegal here.” Even a liberal like Cuomo cannot take Ramos’s idiocy any further.
However, going back to Kelly, after making this bizarre comparison to Obama, she continued making flagrantly fraudulent and misleading statements. She went on interviewing Chris Christy and stated that the 14th amendment states that if a person is born in the US, he is a US citizen. Kelly is a lawyer, she know that this is not what it says. It says: “being born and subject to the US jurisdiction”. Senators Lyman Trumbell and Jacob Howard, who wrote the 14th amendment, stated that this does not include foreign nationals and aliens.  Leading constitutional scholar, former dean of Chapman university law school, John Eastman stated that children of illegal aliens inherit the citizenship of their parents and are not subject to the US jurisdiction. So, Kelly intentionally misstated the language of the 14th amendment in order to mislead the public. She can be sanctioned by the NY bar for this. This is clearly an unethical conduct.
So, my question is: is Megyn Kelly dumb or is she intellectually dishonest? What do you think?
Further, I would like to weigh in on the question O’Reilly and Kelly asked both Trump and Cruz: will you deport US born children when you deport their illegal alien parents?
Here  is my answer.
First of all, children of illegal alien parents inherit the citizenship of their parents.
Second of all, I would not forcefully deport children of illegals, who already obtained the US citizenship under the current interpretation of the 14th amendment, however I would give their parents two choices:
First choice: We are not deporting your children, however you need to decide whether you want to abandon your children in the US, while you are being deported to your country of origin. If you abandon them here, we will find an American family to adopt them, however that will take away your right to apply for a relative visa and green card when your children turn 21.
Second choice: you can take your children to your country of origin, raise them there, pay for all of their needs and when they reach 21, they can come here, work, pay taxes, support themselves and apply for relative visas and green card for you, as parents.
I assure you that majority of illegal aliens will choose option B.
This policy will save us, law abiding, hard working US citizens, billions of dollars. Currently, 71% of illegal aliens with children receive welfare. Under this policy, we will save billions, as we will not have to pay for education, health care, housing and other social needs of millions of children of impoverished illegal aliens.
What do you think?
The Unconstitutional "Anchor Baby" Delusion
 By Lt. Col. (P) Bill Connor Full Story

"The United States have not recognized a double allegiance. By our law a citizen is bound to be ‘true and faithful’ alone to our government.” – House Report No. 784, June 22, 1874

Tuesday, August 25, 2015

She will not suffer, I assure you, from being ousted as she will revert back to her missionary philanthropic Foundation ready to, once again, enrich herself and her darling husband
Like all her other scandals, Clinton will escape unscathed from the email scandal

 By Obie Usategui Full Story

For many, Hillary Clinton’s most recent scandal regarding the use of a non-government server for her personal email accounts while conducting highly sensitive and confidential government business may come as somewhat of a revelation in terms of the enormous publicity she has received given the potential consequences that may ensue from her actions, including but not limited to her being indicted on a criminal offense.

Monday, August 24, 2015

Raising the red flag 12

An Investor’s Business Daily editorial lists some of Obama’s far left appointees, and asks: “Does he have any friends who aren’t crackpots?”
But the question that arises from the list is: Has Obama any friends – has he ever had any friends – who aren’t communists?
America is a country of 320 million people, most of them holding to traditional values. Yet President Obama keeps mining the fringes for his hires. Does he have any friends who aren’t crackpots?
Seriously. The president keeps saying he champions the middle class and its values. But his choices of people to help him run the country are the most extreme in U.S. history, and his second-term nominations are more radical than the first.
No sooner had even some Senate Democrats joined Republicans in voting down a cop killer-coddler for civil rights chief, Debo Adegbile, than Obama sent up a 2nd Amendment-basher for U.S. Surgeon General. Dr. Vivek Murthy advocates doctors asking patients if they keep guns in the home, a shocking invasion of privacy.
Murthy may also have a rocky path ahead of him, but other extreme-left nominees are getting confirmed.
Last year, Obama tapped former Congressional Black Caucus chief Mel Watt as, of all things, head of the federal agency regulating Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which together underwrite 90% of all new-home loans. Republicans blocked his confirmation. But thanks to Democrats invoking the “nuclear option” and ending the filibuster, one of the most radical lawmakers in Congress is now effectively running America’s mortgage industry.
Meanwhile, radical racialist Tom Perez runs the Labor Department, where he’s threatening to sue employers who don’t hire minority felons, just like he sued bankers who didn’t make prime loans to un-creditworthy minority borrowers when he was civil rights chief.
You have to be a Kremlinologist to keep track of all the communist-sympathizing cronies orbiting this White House.
Obama’s previous appointees include:
• Valerie Jarrett, his closest White House adviser, whose father-in-law worked closely with Obama mentor and Communist Party leader Frank Marshall Davis in a number of front groups during the Cold War.
• David Axelrod, Obama’s political aide, whose mother worked for a communist organ in New York and whose mentor was Soviet agent David Canter.
• Van Jones, an admitted communist hired by Jarrett as Obama’s green jobs czar.
• Anita Dunn, former White House communications director and Obama’s 2012 foreign policy debate coach, who listed communist dictator and mass murderer Mao Zedong as one of her two favorite philosophers whom “I turn to most” when questions arise.
The other was Mother Teresa. The message: Torture, kill, pray.
• Cass Sunstein, Obama’s regulatory czar who wrote a socialist “bill of rights” and who advocates redistributing wealth through climate-change policy.
• Samantha Power, ambassador to the United Nations, a 9/11 apologist who advised the president to follow a “doctrine of mea culpa” and literally bow down to foreign leaders as atonement for America’s “sins.”
• Anne-Marie Slaughter, former State Department policy chief, who advised the president to apologize for the War on Terror.
 Rashad Hussein, Obama’s Mideast envoy, who once defended a convicted terrorist (then got caught lying about it), and drafted the president’s Cairo speech apologizing for the War on Terror.
• Rose Gottemoeller, Obama’s Soviet-sympathizing chief nuclear arms negotiator, who thinks America is a global “bully” and must unilaterally disarm for the sake of world peace.
• John Trasvina, assistant HUD secretary for fair housing who once headed the radical Mexican-American Legal Defense and Education Fund, whose co-founder made racist statements about whites.
• Cecilia Munoz, head of White House domestic policy who used to work for La Raza, the militant Latino group that advocates illegal immigrant rights.
• Erica Groshen, Bureau of Labor Statistics chief who sends her children to Camp Kinderland, aka “Commie Camp,” a communist-founded institution where kids during the Cold War sang Soviet anthems.
• John Holdren, Obama’s science czar, who’s advised surrendering U.S. sovereignty to a “Planetary Regime” that will redistribute the West’s wealth to underdeveloped countries and who once advocated “adding a sterilant to drinking water” to control population.
• Harold Koh, former State Department general counsel who believes in “trans-nationalism” and sees nothing wrong with Shariah law in U.S. courts.
• Tony West, associate attorney general who oversees Gitmo policy, even though he defended al-Qaida and Taliban terrorists including John Walker Lindh, who pleaded guilty to aiding the enemy and fighting U.S. troops in Afghanistan.
So what? In Washington, personnel are policy. These people make the rules we have to live by, from health care to home loans to homeland security.
And these radical political appointees hire other radicals at the bureaucratic levels, where they’ll become entrenched as career federal employees.
In 2008, before Obama was nominated, we warned about his radical associations, including his ties to Davis — a hardened communist with a thick FBI file — at his Honolulu home. His defenders wrote off this Marxist indoctrination as youthful experimentation.
When we pointed out Obama spent 20 years in the pews of an America-bashing preacher, his apologists argued he was merely attending Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s church to burnish his urban bona fides.
When we noted Obama launched his political career in the living room of an unrepentant communist terrorist, his defenders argued Bill Ayers had blossomed into a respected professor, that his days of cheering on the Vietcong and bombing the Pentagon were behind him.
We were told the parade of anti-American subversives Obama came in contact with throughout his life amounted to ancient history. But now we have this roster of radical appointments, a current record that’s harder to explain away and which raises the indefeasible question of whether they’re a reflection of himself.
Only there can be no question about it. He and they are birds of a feather.
The enemy has gained the commanding heights of power.

Ten Ways the Iran Deal is Worse Than Munich
By Don Feder
August 24, 2015

It's 220 miles and 77 years from Munich – which epitomized the appeasement that led to World War II – to Vienna, where Obama's nuclear capitulation to Iran was negotiated. Whenever a grounded-in-reality person (non-Democrat) compares the Iran surrender to peace-for-our-time, liberals get unhinged.

In a way, they're right. Vienna is worse than Munich.

Hyperventilating in the pathetically predictable Christian Science Monitor, on July 26, staff writer Dan Murphy insisted, "The comparison being tossed around (Iran and Munich) is full of false equivalences, a misunderstanding of European history, and perhaps a deliberate distortion of the Iran deal."

Murphy argues that Iran "hasn't invaded or annexed anything." Its military capacity is insignificant compared to that of the West and it has no aspirations for global conquest. Apparently, the planetary Caliphate is to come about democratically.

Besides, Hitler had a moustache and Grand Ayatollah Khamenei has a beard. So there!

In September 1938, Hitler was relatively weak. Then, the combined aircraft production of Britain and France exceeded Germany's.

Before Munich, it could plausibly be argued that Hitler also hadn't invaded anything. He had remilitarized the Rhineland, which was German territory. When the Wehrmacht crossed the border into Austria in March of 1938, there wasn't even token resistance. The Anschluss was approved overwhelmingly by a plebiscite.

Both Nazi Germany and Ayatollah-infested Iran were/are ruled by fanatical followers of megalomaniacal religions (the worship of the Aryan race on the one hand and Islamic millenarianism on the other). Like the Third Reich, the Islamic Republic of Iran is virulently anti-Semitic, hates the West, is committed to violence and is crazy enough to unleash its own Gotterdammerung.

Here are ten ways the Iran deal is worse than the Munich Pact.

1. Munich didn't free up $100 billion to $150 billion in Nazi assets – Chamberlain at Munich: "Oh, Mister Hitler, you forgot your check for $150 billion." Adolf; "How thoughtful of you, Neville. That will buy a lot of tanks and planes and help us to expand the Wehrmacht." We don't have to guess what the ayatollahs will do with $100 billion to $150 billion in newly thawed assets – hint: not build a Museum of Tolerance. The deal also includes lifting bans on conventional weapons and ballistic missiles, so Iran can buy a lot more of both.

2. It was easier for Britain and France to deceive themselves about Hitler – At Munich, Hitler had been in power a shorter time than Obama. Iran's ruling theocracy has been in place for 36 years. In that time, it hasn't changed one iota. From Supreme Leader Ruhollah Khomeini to Supreme Leader Ali Hosseini Khameini, the rhetoric, the goals, the hatred, and the brutality have been consistent.

3. Chamberlain didn't accuse Churchill of being allied with the SS – The president recently said radical Islamists opposed to the treaty-which-isn't-a-treaty are "making common cause with the Republican Caucus." In Obama-land, there are militant Iranians opposed to the deal, and moderate, reasonable, middle-of-the-road fanatics who support it. On his return from Munich, imagine Chamberlain telling the British people, "Radical National Socialists are allied with members of parliament opposed to the pact, which we negotiated with the nice Nazis."

4. By September 1938, Hitler hadn't killed more than 1,000 British soldiers or held British hostages for over a year – We're entering an agreement with same regime that held 60 Americans hostage for 444 days following the 1979 takeover of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran. Ret. Col. Richard Kemp and Ret. Major Chris Driver-Williams disclose: "Iranian military action, often working through proxies using terror tactics, has led to the deaths of well over a thousand American soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan over the past decade and a half."

5. The Nazis didn't support a worldwide terror network – True, they intervened in the Spanish Civil War and supported indigenous Nazi parties in various European states. But, up to Munich, acts of terror were directed primarily against their own people. A State Department report says Iran's support for terrorism was "undiminished in 2013-2014 and the U.S. remains very concerned about the activities of Iran's Revolutionary regime and its proxies in the Middle East." In testimony before a House committee late last month, Secretary of State John Kerry was asked if he believed "that Iran is the world's foremost sponsor of terrorism?" Not wishing to elaborate on the point, Kerry simply said "Yes."

6. At Nuremberg, Hitler didn't lead chants of "Death to England!" – On al-Quds (Kill Jews) Day, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani led the bloodthirsty mob in chanting "Death to America" and "Death to Israel." There were also the standard flag-burnings and references to the Great Satan (us) and the Zionist Entity. Rouhani is Obama's partner in the nuclear deal, you know, one of those sensible, trustworthy Islamists.

7. Chamberlain didn't promise to help the Germans defend their Panzer and Stuka factories – Senator Marco Rubio says the treaty's Annex III (innocuously labeled on "civil nuclear cooperation") provides that the United States will help the Iranian regime to secure its nuclear facilities against acts of sabotage. So if Israelis feel threatened because the ayatollahs have drawn a giant bull's-eye around their country, and try to forestall a nuclear attack, we will have to help the Iranians protect their weapons of mass destruction.

8. Britain didn't have a leader who called National Socialism the ideology of peace – Chamberlain did not tell the British people: "You can't blame all Nazis for random acts of violence perpetrated by a few troubled individuals. Ideologies aren't responsible for violence and terrorism. People are responsible for violence and terrorism. Oh, by the way, Kristallnacht was workplace-related violence."

9. The Nazis didn't promise to wipe Czechoslovakia or Jewish Palestine off the map. – That was always Hitler's intension; he was just more circumspect than the Iranians. The Tehran regime has repeatedly pledged to annihilate the Zionist Entity and with it 6 million Jews (43% of the world's Jewish population). Then it will get the rest. Mohammed told his followers that in the end times (which the ayatollahs believe is now) Moslems will institute their own final solution. Then every stone and tree will say: "'O Moslem, 'O servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me. Come and kill him."

10. Chamberlain didn't hate his country. – Obama has told us that white people (a majority of Americans) are racists in their DNA, that small town America is made up of bitter-clingers (gun nuts, religious zealots and xenophobes) and that this nation has no right to control its borders. He began his political career in the home of Maoists Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn. He started his presidency with a notorious apology tour. He's reached out to America's sworn enemies (besides Iran – Cuba, China, and the Muslim Brotherhood), while jeering at our historic friends and allies. What does he have to do to make the point, burn the American flag on the South Lawn of the White House?

Munich gave Hitler strategic territory and assets that allowed him to launch a war for world conquest a year later. The Iran deal will give a gang of apocalypse-drunk ayatollahs the power to bring about nuclear Armageddon. 
Update on Impeachment Mission!
Posted By Sharon Rondeau On Monday, August 24, 2015 


by U.S. Patriots Union, ©2015
We started the National Impeachment movement only weeks ago, in Tennessee and have since established Constitutional Accountability Coalitions in at least 22 states…
Legally, we only needed ONE House Republican to introduce the NALC Articles of Impeachment in the House Judiciary Committee to begin the Impeachment process…
Now we are working with that Representative to gather other House Republicans to stand up and initiate Impeachment against Barack Hussein Obama…. and we will not be releasing the name or names of these Representatives until they are ready to introduce the Articles.
CAC Packages are being delivered to House Republicans daily now, from 22 states… Calls are being made, emails sent and meetings scheduled…. In fact, this week, a number of very important meetings with powerful House Republicans will take place… all of it focused on the single goal of impeaching the most impeachable administration in American history…
JOIN The United States Patriots Union
JOIN Veteran Defenders of America
SUPPORT The North American Law Center