________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

General

Home: George's Daily

Welcome New Readers

Updated Quick Guide to GIAC2002.ORG

To Contact Us or Receive Daily E-mails

Classic Links

George's Musings

Alerts                

World Resources
Time to reconsider the military use of gas?

National Resources

"Pedal to the metal" on a Convention of States
Constitutionally Rein in Federal Government and Recall the President

Amending the Constitution

Constitutional Convention

Most Recommended Voting System: Automated Fingerprint Verification

Free Speech Limits to Protect an Ideal Society

Interim Voting System:

Automated One Vote Per Person Verification

Recognize and Remember America's Enemies

Congressmen to Remember in 2014

You Made Rush Revere Number One

What is the ideal society for humans?

Ensuring Valid Vote Counts

Basics of Roberts Rules of Order with Comments

Voting System & Fraud Prevention Tradeoffs

Voting System Recommendations

A Road Map for America's Future

Republican Medicare and Social Security Plans

Heritage Foundation

Freedom Works

National Commentary

What Will It Take?

Wake up America!

Voter Fraud Instances

2012 National Election

Public Education

'Contract From America'

Tea Party America Refounding Principles

CBO Analysis of Congressman Ryan's

501(c)(4) Information

Pursuit of Truth in a Digital Age

Nation/World  

Take Action

Bills in Congress

Fox News

Wall Street Journal

Lucianne Goldberg

Drudge Report

Townhall

Human Events

■NewsMax

Washington Times 

National Review

The Blaze

Canada Free Press

Rush Limbaugh Show Transcripts

American Thinker

RightBias

The Heritage Foundation

Cybercast News

Tea Party Patriots

Yahoo! News

Google News

American Presidency Project

U. S. Constitution

Contact President

Contact U.S. House

Contact U.S. Senate

Flat and Fair Taxes   3/7/09

 

Features

Stock Market

Sports

Music

Weather

TV Schedule

TV Movie Information

Movies

Dear Abby

Horoscope

Comics

Technology

 

South Carolina Related Links

South Carolina Measures

Warranting Consideration

Getting Out the Vote Info

SC Voter Registration Form

SC Poll Mgrs Hdbk for Elections

George's Notes

for SC Poll Mgrs

SC Election Commission

S. C. State Ethics Commission 6/5/06

South Carolina 'State Legislature Information.

South Carolina Code

SC Hotline: Politics and Newspapers

South Carolina Google News

California Property Tax Cap'Experience

 

Horry County

Related Links

Getting Out the Vote Info

Horry County Government

Horry County Ordinances

Horry County Schools

Horry County Libraries

Horry County Democrats

Horry County Republicans

The Sun News

Myrtle Beach Herald

Horry Independent

Myrtle Beach Tea Party

Myrtle Beach Tea Party Bylaws 9/17/12

Myrtle Beach Tea Party Bylaws 9/2/11

Carolina Patriots

 

References

Dictionary

Encyclopedia

Almanac

Gazetteer

"All" References

Laws

Internet Archive

Healthfinder

Yahoo! People Search

Area Codes

Zip Codes

Thomas Register

Consumer Reports

Maps

Invisible Web

Librarians Index

Public Library Reference

Horry County

Library System

Open Directory

 

 

            

Click here to go to the top of today's index

4/2/15 Buying Time: Iran Talks Produce Non-Binding 'Outlines of an Understanding'

With Scant Details Guy Benson, TownHall

 

  "Some in the media will call this a 'deal.' It's not. It's a face-saving, time-buying charade -- an implicit admission that years of repeatedly-extended negotiations have resulted in nothing concrete, with yet another deadline disappearing in the rearview mirror. Consider this tortured verbiage provided to the Associated Press: . . ." [Click the date for more.]

 

Click here to go to the top of today's index

 

4/2/15 Iran Deal: Holocaust in 2016 By DIck Morris, DickMorris.com

  "So the basic tradeoff achieved by Secretary of State John Kerry in the talks with Iran boils down to this: Iran has to watch its step for ten years.  Then all bets are off.  A year later, bombs away!  By 2025, most of the sanctions will have been lifted and there will be no incentive for Iran to keep its deal to limit uranium enrichment.  And, in any event, the limits will have been weakened after the ten year period.

  "What other nation could be content for its principal adversary to reach a deal not to annihilate it until ten years have passed?  

  "Obama's and Kerry's strategy for getting the deal through Congress becomes evident.  Get Iran to agree to a relatively tough deal for now in return for a short deadline and no restrictions thereafter.  All the skeptics have focused their attention on the outcome of the talks and the issues at play that nobody has been impolite enough to address the central question of how long the deal will restrain Iran.  Those Democrats who pose as Israel's friends in Congress will now likely cave in and go along with the deal as the best we can get.

  "But that will be because the Administration agreed to a time limit to the deal in the first place.  Twenty years is no better, really, than ten.  The issue is not duration, but whether or not there is change in the goals and aspirations of the Iranian regime.  If it remains hell bent on destroying Israel, what does it matter how soon they can get the bomb.  Israel is ultimately doomed.  The deal should not be contingent on how much time has elapsed, but on whether Iran demonstrates that it has stepped back from confrontation, subversion, expansionism, and terrorism.  If there is an improvement in the behavior of Teheran, as there was in Moscow until Putin took over and as there has been in Beijing, then there can be a relaxation of sanctions and limits.  But not before."

Click here to go to the top of today's index

 

4/2/15

Iran Accuses U.S. of Lying About New Nuke Agreement

By: , Free Beacon

Says White House misleading Congress, American people with fact sheet

  "Just hours after the announcement of what the United States characterized as a historic agreement with Iran over its nuclear program, the country’s leading negotiator lashed out at the Obama administration for lying about the details of a tentative framework.

  "Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif accused the Obama administration of misleading the American people and Congress in a fact sheet it released following the culmination of negotiations with the Islamic Republic.

  "Zarif bragged in an earlier press conference with reporters that the United States had tentatively agreed to let it continue the enrichment of uranium, the key component in a nuclear bomb, as well as key nuclear research.

  "Zarif additionally said Iran would have all nuclear-related sanctions lifted once a final deal is signed and that the country would not be forced to shut down any of its currently operating nuclear installations.

  "Following a subsequent press conference by Secretary of State John Kerry—and release of a administration fact sheet on Iranian concessions—Zarif lashed out on Twitter over what he dubbed lies.

  "'The solutions are good for all, as they stand,' he tweeted. 'There is no need to spin using ‘fact sheets’ so early on.'

  "Zarif went on to push back against claims by Kerry that the sanctions relief would be implemented in a phased fashion—and only after Iran verifies that it is not conducting any work on the nuclear weapons front.

  "Zarif, echoing previous comments, said the United States has promised an immediate termination of sanctions.

  "'Iran/5+1 Statement: ‘US will cease the application of ALL nuclear-related secondary economic and financial sanctions.’ Is this gradual?' he wrote on Twitter.

  "He then suggested a correction: 'Iran/P5+1 Statement: ‘The EU will TERMINATE the implementation of ALL nuclear-related economic and financial sanctions’. How about this?'

  "The pushback from Iran’s chief diplomat follows a pattern of similar accusations by senior Iranian political figures after the announcement of previous agreements.

  "Following the signing of an interim agreement with Iran aimed at scaling back its nuclear work, Iran accused the United States of lying about details of the agreement.

  "On Thursday evening, Zarif told reporters the latest agreement allows Iran to keep operating its nuclear program.

  "'None of those measures' that will move to scale back Iran’s program 'include closing any of our facilities,' Zarif said. 'We will continue enriching; we will continue research and development.'

  "'Our heavy water reactor will be modernized and we will continue the Fordow facility,' Zarif said. 'We will have centrifuges installed in Fordow, but not enriching.'

  "The move to allow Iran to keep centrifuges at Fordow, a controversial onetime military site, has elicited concern that Tehran could ramp up its nuclear work with ease.

  "Zarif said that once a final agreement is made, 'all U.S. nuclear related secondary sanctions will be terminated,' he said. 'This, I think, would be a major step forward.'

  "Zarif also revealed that Iran will be allowed to sell 'enriched uranium” in the international market place and will be 'hopefully making some money' from it."

 

Click here to go to the top of today's index

 

4/2/15 France has left the US-led nuclear talks with Iran in Lausanne, saying it will return

when it is 'useful.' By: , Jewish Press

 

  "Speaking at a joint news conference with Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel in Berlin, French President Francois Hollande said it would be better to have no deal than a bad deal – the same opinion expressed last month by Israel’s Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu while speaking to the U.S. Congress.

  "And yet, talks are continuing in a marathon effort to reach a deal which by all accounts other than those of the negotiators themselves, appears to be a bad deal, at least for everyone other than Iran. . . .

  "The five world powers led by the United States (P5+1) meanwhile warned that nothing could be done without concessions from Iran as well. These include access to sites where nuclear research is being conducted, a severe reduction in the number of centrifuges operating to produce enriched uranium and other issues still to be worked out.

  "But Israel is maintaining that the deal as it currently stands is altogether a bad deal – that no centrifuges should be allowed to operate, and that Iran should not be allowed to produce any enriched uranium, the fuel that powers atomic weapons of mass destruction.

  "White House spokesperson Josh Earnest told reporters at a briefing in Washington that U.S. negotiators won’t keep talking 'until June' to reach a deal. 'If we’re not able to reach a political agreement, then we’re not going to wait … until June 30 to walk away,' he said. June 30 is the date a final agreement was originally to be signed, sealed and delivered – not just a basic outline.

  "At this point, Obama seems to have painted himself into a no-win situation: if negotiators reach a deal in Lausanne, Switzerland, America’s allies in the Middle East will be profoundly unhappy. Israel is not the only nation that does not trust Iran’s word at the negotiating table: Saudi Arabia and many other nations in the region have been urging the United States to end the talks or — more to the point — consider a 'better' deal."

 

Click here to go to the top of today's index

 

4/2/15 RINOs Ceded the Social Issues to Democrats and Now the Social Issues

Are All That Matter Rush Limbaugh transcript excerpts

RUSH: We are free to talk about social issues all we want now, folks, 'cause the left owns them. Yeah, we're talking about the social issues the left cares about now so it's perfectly fine, and all of a sudden -- as I point out -- the left seems to be in support of the spreading of nuclear weapons, the proliferation of nuclear weapons to a terrorist nation with oil that executes gays and punishes women for daring to speak up.

 It's fine and dandy that they get nuclear weapons. It's fine and dandy that we have relations with 'em. It's fine and dandy that we negotiate with 'em. It's fine and dandy that we accord them great respect, that we talk them up. No, the real enemy in the United States of America at this moment is Indiana -- and, by extension, Christianity. It's an all-out war, ladies and gentlemen.

 And, in fact, it's proceeding at full speed with nobody having the slightest idea how to stop it, how to return fire.

 How many of you saw story: "The Department of Justice has decided not to seek any criminal contempt chargers against former IRS official Lois Lerner, the central figure in a scandal that erupted over whether the IRS improperly targeted..." There's no scandal about "whether." They did it! There's no "whether." There's no scandal "over whether the IRS improperly targeted conservative political groups." They did it!

The scandal is that nothing's gonna be done about it.

 

Click here to go to the top of today's index

 

4/2/15

Click here to go to the top of today's index

 

4/2/15 Fox News Poll: Walker jumps to top of GOP field, Clinton emails 'bad judgment'

  "Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker is the new frontrunner for the GOP presidential nomination, while former Sec. of State Hillary Clinton easily maintains her lead among Democrats. And despite the personal email scandal, Clinton’s personal favorable number is still higher than the rest of the pack, according to the latest Fox News poll. 

  "Walker tops the field for the Republican nomination with 15 percent among self-identified GOP primary/caucus voters. He’s followed by former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush who receives 12 percent, retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson at 11 percent and Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee each at 10 percent."

Click here to go to the top of today's index

 

4/2/15

Click here to go to the top of today's index

 

4/2/15

Click here to go to the top of today's index

 

4/2/15

Click here to go to the top of today's index

 

4/2/15

Click here to go to the top of today's index

 

4/1/15 A Naïve Deal with Iran Tops Obama’s Bungled Mideast Policy

By , The Fiscal Times
Bush had his War on Terror. Obama has a War on Reality. Which will prove more costly? 

  "Obama has doggedly pursued negotiations aimed at restricting Iran’s access to a nuclear weapon even though the mullahs in Tehran have done nothing to prove their peaceful intentions. They have continued and even expanded their proxy wars throughout the Middle East, while also refusing to answer questions about their presumed development of advanced weapons. In the talks, they have conceded almost nothing. 

  "Notwithstanding Iran’s intransigence, the United States, which is orchestrating the talks, has apparently backtracked on demands that Iran shut down most of its centrifuges, ship its stockpile of enriched uranium out of the country, close or permanently disable its once-secret underground facility at Fordo and answer questions raised by the IAEA about its research on possible delivery systems. 

  "Certain of these demands were considered non-negotiable, and critical to refusing Iran a nuclear weapon. Even though Iran’s economy has been crushed by international sanctions, it is clear that Obama is the more desperate party.  

  "The self-imposed deadline of yesterday for a preliminary agreement has come and gone because Tehran has refused to comply with the demands of the P5+1 group. The good news is that the U.S.-led coalition did not settle for a meaningless deal, and the talks will continue. However, the damage already done by these one-sided negotiations is profound. 

  "Relations between Israel and the United States have arguably never been worse. And, more alarming, the Obama White House may have ignited a nuclear arms race in the unstable Middle East – an outcome that decades of diplomacy had sought to prevent. 

  "How on earth did we get here? 

  "Recently, former Defense Intelligence Agency head (under Obama) Lt. General Michael Flynn described the president’s policy in the Middle East as the product of 'willful ignorance.'   Maybe, but naïveté and extreme over-confidence have been at work as well. . . . " 

Click here to go to the top of today's index

 

4/1/15

Saudi Defense Minister to Congress: ‘Iran Can’t Be Trusted’

By Adam Kredo, Free Beacon
Concerns mounting on Capitol Hill

  "LAUSANNE, Switzerland—Saudi Arabia’s newly installed defense minister told members of Congress on a recent trip to the oil-rich nation that “Iran can’t be trusted,” according to a readout of the meeting provided by Rep. Vern Buchanan (R., Fla.).

  "Buchanan, a member of the House Ways and Means Committee, participated in a meeting with Saudi Arabia’s defense minister, Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who is the son of the newly crowned King Salman, to discuss regional issues and Iranian aggression.

  "When asked by Buchanan and other lawmakers present at the sit-down about the current talks with Iran—which have now passed their March 31 deadline—Salman called the tentative agreement disastrous for the region.

  "Salman 'said Iran can’t be trusted,' according to a readout provided by Buchanan following the hour-long meeting in Riyadh. 'He questioned why we would be negotiating with the Iranians when they are responsible for growing tension in the Middle East.'

  "One foreign policy analyst with extensive contacts in the Middle East told the Free Beacon that regional players are dismayed by the concessions that Washington is willing to make to Iran.

  "'Parties in the region are aghast. It literally seems like there’s nothing the Iranians could do that would convince the Americans Tehran is too hostile and untrustworthy to deal with,' said the source.

  "Saudi Arabia has criticized the Obama administration’s dealings with Iran, vowing in recent days to pursue its own nuclear weapons program as an avenue to counter the Islamic Republic’s growing influence in the region.

  "Salman spoke in harsh terms when asked by Buchanan to explain his position on the negotiations.

  '“I asked the Prince what he thought about the discussions between the U.S. and Iran, and he responded that he doesn’t think the United States is taking the threat posed by Iran seriously,' according to Buchanan. 'He said the Saudis would also like more military assistance from the U.S. to combat Iran’s growing influence in the region.'

  "Salman and his government are also concerned about ties between Iran and Russia. The two countries recently secured an arms pact that will provide Tehran with advanced weaponry as well as light water nuclear reactors.

  "As the talks between Western powers and Iran stretch past a self-imposed deadline with what the parties and sources consider insufficient progress, traditional U.S. allies such as the Saudis, Israel, and France are becoming increasingly exasperated with the Obama administration’s rush to procure an agreement they consider dangerous. . . ."

 

Click here to go to the top of today's index

 

4/1/15 President Obama Must Not Complete a Disastrous Deal With Iran By

Forget Churchill—Obama Isn't Measuring up to Neville Chamberlain

 

Click here to go to the top of today's index

 

4/1/15 Obama’s Next Move May Be Lifting U.S. Protection of Israel at UN

   "While the world remains fixated on the negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program, the Obama administration is facing another foreign policy showdown in the United Nations Security Council.

   "The administration has signaled that it might abandon the decades-long U.S. policy of protecting Israel at the UN and back a Security Council resolution laying out terms for a two-state solution to the almost 67-year-old dispute between the Jewish state and the Palestinians.

   "Robert Malley, the Middle East director for President Barack Obama’s National Security Council, told at least one European nation two weeks ago that the administration is more willing than it has ever been to work on a Security Council resolution defining the parameters for a Mideast peace agreement, according to a report on the conversation to superiors by a Washington-based European diplomat. A copy of the report was viewed by Bloomberg News.   

   "The reported comments by Malley are 'completely false,' Bernadette Meehan, a spokeswoman for the National Security Council, said in an e-mail. 'Rob has not had any conversation on this topic with any European diplomats then or since..

   "Obama, though, has left no doubt that he’s considering whether to bend the U.S. policy of vetoing UN resolutions that Israel opposes and, in the process, punish Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for pledging that he will ensure that no Palestinian state is created anytime soon. Netanyahu also opposes the talks with Iran, warning Tuesday that the deal the U.S. seeks would 'pave the way' for the Islamic Republic to develop nuclear weapons.

   "'We have to do an evaluation of where we are' on Mideast peace efforts, Obama said at a news conference on March 24.

   "Past U.S. Security Council vetoes were “'predicated on this idea that the two-state solution is the best outcome,' White House spokesman Josh Earnest has said. 'Now our ally in these talks has said that they are no longer committed to that solution. That means we need to reevaluate our position.'

   "Obama said he’ll wait for Netanyahu to form his new coalition government by the preliminary April 22 deadline before announcing the conclusions of his Mideast peace policy reassessment.

   "While Palestinians and Europeans are excited by the prospect of U.S. support for a two-state solution, they remain wary of how much political and diplomatic latitude Obama has to follow through.

   "Republican lawmakers are promising to fight back if Obama qualifies U.S. support for Israel at the UN. Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina has warned of a 'violent backlash by the Congress, bipartisan in nature,' if Obama lets a Security Council resolution defining the terms of a peace agreement go forward without first getting both sides to agree. . . ."

 

Click here to go to the top of today's index

 

3/31/15 US releases military aid to Egypt, cites national security Associated Press, FoxNews

Click here to go to the top of today's index

 

3/31/15 Saudi Arabia Gives Israel Clear Skies to Attack Iranian Nuke Sites FoxNews

  "Saudi Arabia has conducted tests to stand down its air defenses to enable Israeli jets to make a bombing raid on Iran’s nuclear facilities, The Times of London reported Saturday.

  "In the week that the U.N. Security Council imposed a new round of sanctions on Tehran, defense sources in the Gulf say that Riyadh has agreed to allow Israel to use a narrow corridor of its airspace in the north of the country to shorten the distance for a bombing run on Iran. To ensure the Israeli bombers pass without hindrance, Riyadh has carried out tests to make certain its own jets are not scrambled and missile defense systems not activated. Once the Israelis are through, the kingdom’s air defenses will return to full alert.

  "'The Saudis have given their permission for the Israelis to pass over and they will look the other way,' said a U.S. defense source in the area. “They have already done tests to make sure their own jets aren’t scrambled and no one gets shot down. This has all been done with the agreement of the [U.S.] State Department.”

  "Sources in Saudi Arabia say it is common knowledge within defense circles in the kingdom that an arrangement is in place if Israel decides to launch the raid. Despite the tension between the two governments, they share a mutual loathing of the regime in Tehran and a common fear of Iran’s nuclear ambitions. 'We all know this. We will let them [the Israelis] through and see nothing,' said one."

 

Click here to go to the top of today's index

 

3/31/15 Obama vetoes measure against swifter union elections FoxNews

 

  "Republicans and business groups opposed the rule, arguing that it would limit the ability of businesses to prepare for what some critics have dubbed 'ambush elections.' Opponents also said workers wouldn't have enough time to make informed decisions about whether to join a union."

 

Click here to go to the top of today's index

 

3/31/15 Meet Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, the conservative threat to Jeb Bush (w/video)

  "Combine a milquetoast Midwestern demeanor with his record of pushing through a polarizing conservative agenda, and you see a governor who wins in a swing state. He has done it by overwhelmingly uniting Republicans while also handily winning independent voters.

  "Now put him in a presidential election cycle where the GOP establishment appears to have its weakest grasp on the party in decades, the base is hungry for a fighter and a doer, and voters of all stripes are fed up with Washington. You wind up with Walker — virtually unknown to most Americans, untested on the national stage and lacking a college degree — leading the field by 8 percentage points in Iowa and tied for first place in New Hampshire with Bush, according to the average of recent polls compiled by RealClearPolitics. . . .

  "With a complexion that can variously look ruddy or pale beneath his black hair, Walker looks more like your grocer or insurance agent than your president. He speaks calmly, directly, in a manner more warm than hot. The low-key demeanor belies his tough-as-nails ideological instincts in a way that supporters say makes him more broadly appealing and approachable than some charismatic conservative firebrands in the presidential mix.

  "Walker notes that as a high school track runner he used to win by drafting behind the lead runner and then blowing past at the end.

'  ""My coach would always tell me afterwards, 'Scott, you know that's great but it's a lot easier to win if you're just ahead.' In our case, we're not ahead. Jeb's clearly ahead in terms of finances, name recognition, otherwise, but having shown up on the radar screen, we'll take it,' he told the Tampa Bay Times over coffee in Manchester, N.H.

  "'More than anything what it reflects I think is that people are paying attention to what's happened in America. People notice what we've done in Wisconsin — and not just in winning three elections in four years, but they saw the big reforms we took on. They saw the protests, they heard about the threats, they saw the pushback and they said, 'Hey, this guy in Wisconsin didn't back down. He won without caving.'

• • •

  "Even in Florida, home turf of 2016 contenders Bush and Marco Rubio, Walker is making inroads. A new Public Policy Polling survey shows Bush leading Walker among likely Republican voters 25 percent to 17 percent, followed by 15 percent for Rubio. Among Florida Republicans describing themselves as 'very conservative,' Bush actually trails Walker, 23 percent to 19 percent.

  "The Wisconsin governor has made at least seven trips, mostly below the radar, to southeast and southwest Florida — a mecca for Midwestern transplants. In a state where Bush overwhelmingly controls the GOP money machine, Walker has several top Republican fundraisers, and millionaire and billionaire donors actively helping him.

  "Among them: former dairy company executive and Republican Jewish Coalition leader Marc Goldman of Boca Raton; Dr. Jeffrey Feingold of Boca Raton, another RJC leader; veteran Republican fundraiser Gay Gaines of Palm Beach; billionaire couple Frayda and George Lindemann of Palm Beach; oil company executive Lee Hanley and his wife, Allie, of Palm Beach; hedge fund manager Ron Santella of Naples; and insurance company executive Glen Blauch of Naples.

  "'Scott Walker by his deeds has shown himself to be the kind of leader that people throughout the country are looking for,' Goldman said. 'The problems we face have become so deep and so fraught that only someone who has proven they are willing and able to deal with the fallout and flak that comes when dealing with these problems is what's needed if we're going to turn the country around.' . . .

  "On a snowy afternoon in New Hampshire, John Bassett turned out to hear Ted Cruz talk to GOP activists and loved his uncompromising and fiery speech about 'lawless' President Barack Obama. But, Bassett said, winning is the real goal, so Walker probably will earn his vote.

  "'We definitely need fresh blood, not another Bush,' he said. 'And as much as I support Ted Cruz, Scott Walker seems a lot less polarizing. He has real appeal to the common man, and that's important.'"

Click here to go to the top of today's index

 

3/30/15 Of Course: Iran Makes Another Last-Minute Demand, West Looking to Achieve 'Narrative'

Guy Benson, TownHall

  "The 'P5+1' nuclear negotiations with Iran are coming down to the wire, with the Obama administration hellbent on attaining a deal before tomorrow's deadline (which Iran doesn't acknowledge, by the way). As Conn has reported, if an agreement is reached, it likely won't be formalized or written down for a period of months. What Western diplomats are scrambling to 'achieve,' therefore, is an informal consensus on the principles and outlines of a deal -- struck with an evil, untrustworthy regime. The British Foreign Minister told reporters last week that they're hoping to secure a 'narrative,' whatever that means:

 

We envisage being able to deliver a narrative. Whether that is written down or not, I don’t think is the crucial issue,” [British Foreign Minister Philip] Hammond told reporters at the British ambassador’s residence during a visit to Washington. 'This will be a political statement, or perhaps political statements from the [negotiating partners] and Iran which create enough momentum to make it clear that we’ve now got this boulder over the hill and we are into the detailed work to produce an agreement.'… Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has said he sees no need for a written document describing an interim agreement in advance of the June 30 deadline for a comprehensive deal… 'The challenge is: as soon as you write anything down, you’ve got to write everything down,' Hammond said.

  "Allahpundit notes that (a) Iran and the US have already been wrangling over the terms of the current interim agreement, and (b) just a few days prior to Hammond's comment, other Western diplomats assured the media that of course there was agreement that an oral deal with Iran -- i.e., a 'narrative' -- wouldn't cut it, given their history and behavior on the world stage. Leon Panetta, former CIA chief and Obama-era Defense Secretary, agrees: "One thing I’ve learned both at the CIA and as Secretary of Defense is that the Iranians can't be trusted.'  Perhaps because they do things like this at the eleventh hour, to exploit Western desperation to extract even more concessions:

 
With a negotiating deadline just two days away, Iranian officials on Sunday backed away from a critical element of a proposed nuclear agreement, saying they are no longer willing to ship their atomic fuel out of the country. For months, Iran tentatively agreed that it would send a large portion of its stockpile of uranium to Russia, where it would not be accessible for use in any future weapons program. But on Sunday Iran’s deputy foreign minister made a surprise comment to Iranian reporters, ruling out an agreement that involved giving up a stockpile that Iran has spent years and billions of dollars to amass. 'The export of stocks of enriched uranium is not in our program, and we do not intend sending them abroad,' the official, Abbas Araqchi, told the Iranian media, according to Agence France-Presse. 'There is no question of sending the stocks abroad.' Western officials confirmed that Iran was balking at shipping the fuel out, but insisted that there were other ways of dealing with the material. Chief among those options, they said, was blending it into a more diluted form.

  "So in addition to being able to maintain their rogue nuclear program's infrastructure, keep thousands of centrifuges spinning, do nothing to renounce or scale back their support for terrorism/regional power plays/human rights abuses, or give up their long-range missile program, Tehran has insisted that they also be allowed to keep their fortified underground enrichment bunkers in operation, and is now backing away from a previously-stated willingness to remove enriched uranium from the country.  (In addition to asking that sanctions relief begin immediately, based upon no evidence of compliance). The US and partners reportedly acceded to the former late-breaking demand, and are seeking ways to accommodate the latter. Remember that tough sanctions forced Iran to the bargaining table in the first place, with their economy in tatters. This deal would lift those sanctions -- with restrictions on the regime beginning to phase out after just ten years. The Obama administration has basically been lying to the public, repeatedly stating that no deal at all is preferable is a bad one. It's becoming entirely clear that they don't believe that to be true. They are frantic to reach an agreement that they can trot out as a historic Smart Power success, and the mullahs understand this. Short of firing missiles at Tel Aviv or New York, or formally stating their intention to build and use nuclear weapons, Iran knows that there's almost nothing they can say or do to drive the Americans away from the table. This is the textbook definition of a hopelessly weak negotiating position. And Team Obama has placed the United States in this mess because they're obsessed with a very strange notion of presidential legacies: . . . "[Click the date for the entire original article.]

 

Click here to go to the top of today's index

 

3/30/15 Lucianne.com Must Reads [Click the date to access.]

 

Click here to go to the top of today's index

 

3/30/15 Obama's Mental Health: A Checklist By Patricia McCarthy, American Thinker

 

  "If anyone had doubts about the mental health of the president and some of the other more visible people within the Obama administration, there can be doubts no longer. In the past few days Yemen has further erupted into explosive chaos and the long-known but finally admitted facts of Bowe Bergdahl's desertion were announced.  But his spokespersons, Josh Earnest, Marie Harf, and Jen Psaki, with blank, straight faces, still doggedly maintain that that Yemen is a 'counterterrorism success' and that turning over five Taliban terrorists of the Taliban's choosing in exchange for Bergdahl was a wise and wonderful plan. 

  "Like a schoolyard bully, the president continues to find treacherous ways to punish Bibi Netanyahu and Israel in increasingly vicious ways. He has leaked details of Israel's nuclear program, threatened to circumvent Congress on the Iran deal by going to the UN, and threatened to withhold from Israel needed supplies for its self-defense. Denis McDonough spoke at J-Street and called for, 'an end to the occupation,' a wholly inaccurate term for Israel's existence and present boundaries. Jews around the world have not known such peril since the 1930s.

  "Many people have written about the president's narcissism. Some have suggested that he may be a sociopath. There is a checklist, developed by Dr. Robert D. Hare in the 1970s and used around the world to diagnose psychopathy. Dr. Hare would likely admit that it is not perfect but it is widely used in psychiatric settings and prisons to determine if an inmate is safe for release.  It may be useful in assessing our president and the people with whom he has surrounded himself.

  'Dr. Hare’s test is simple: a list of 20 criteria, each given a score of 0 (if it doesn’t apply to the person), 1 (if it partially applies) or 2 (if it fully applies). The list in full is: glibness and superficial charm, grandiose sense of self-worth, pathological lying, cunning/manipulative, lack of remorse, emotional shallowness, callousness and lack of empathy, unwillingness to accept responsibility for actions, a tendency to boredom, a parasitic lifestyle, a lack of realistic long-term goals, impulsivity, irresponsibility, lack of behavioural control, behavioural problems in early life, juvenile delinquency, criminal versatility, a history of 'revocation of conditional release' (ie. broken parole), multiple marriages, and promiscuous sexual behaviour. A pure, prototypical psychopath would score 40. A score of 30 or more qualifies for a diagnosis of psychopathy." 'Psychopaths:  How to Spot One' Tom Chivers, Telegraph, April 6, 2014)  

  "Here is Dr. Hare's official checklist:  [Click the date to read the original article with this checklist.]

  "Mr. Obama, as well as a number of people is his orbit (David Axelrod, Rahm Emanuel, Valerie Jarrrett, John Kerry, Michelle Obama), would easily score a 2 on each of the four traits listed in Factor 1. For obvious reasons, psychopaths find their ways to the top and once there wreak havoc. In Factor 2, Mr. Obama and his wife would certainly score a 2 on "parasitic lifestyle," and the president does suffer from a 'lack of realistic long-term goals'. (Too many examples to list but Iran is and will always be an enemy!) He may score a 1 or 2 on 'Impulsivity' when one considers his many off the cuff remarks that have so often created problems ('57 states,' 'bitter clingers,' 'tell Vlad I'll have more flexibility after my reelection,' etc.  There are numerous websites devoted to 'Obamisms,' his impulsive gaffes spoken when he goes off teleprompter.)

  "In Facet 2, he would score a 2 on each of the four items. The items in Facet 4 are not so obviously known except from what he wrote in his own autobiographies in which he admitted having used marijuana and cocaine and to being a slacker in high school. His academic records have never been released to the public. If they were exemplary, they would have been.  So it is safe to assume they were mediocre.

  "While few may be psychiatrists, the American people have had six years, far more than the three hours recommended, to observe President Obama. His score would easily be between 24 and 28. This is the man whom Americans twice elected to the presidency. And that is why the entire world is erupting in violence, confused and dangerous, more dangerous than at any time since the end of WWII. This man who lies pathologically and feels no empathy (again, too many examples to list but his reactions to the murders of Christopher Stevens and James Foley are indicative), has disdain for America and has set out to do the nation harm as surely as a psychopathic murderer sets out to kill an innocent human being. And he does it all without breaking a sweat or feeling an iota of responsibility or guilt."

 

Click here to go to the top of today's index

 

3/28/15 Ousted Yemeni president backs Saudi airstrikes on Houthi militants

Click here to go to the top of today's index

 

3/28/15 Why the chaos in Yemen could force Obama to take a harder line with Iran

 

Click here to go to the top of today's index

 

3/28/15   Exclusive: Paris Saying ‘Non’ to U.S. Control of Peace Process By Colum Lynch, ForeignPolicy.com

Click here to go to the top of today's index

 

3/27/15 Emerging details of possible Iranian nuclear deal draw bipartisan ire FoxNews

  "Emerging details of a possible nuclear deal with Iran have drawn sharp criticism from congressional lawmakers on both sides of the aisle, who say the U.S. and its international partners may be ceding too much as a key deadline nears. 

  "If reports are true, 'then we are not inching closer to Iran’s negotiating position, but leaping toward it with both feet,' charged Sen. Robert Menendez, D-N.J., top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and a vocal critic of the direction of the talks. 

  "'My fear is that we are no longer guided by the principle that ‘no deal is better than a bad deal,’ but instead we are negotiating ‘any deal for a deal’s sake.’'  

  "The deal is not done, but sources tell FoxNews.com negotiations seem to be reaching a climax at the P5+1 talks in Lausanne, Switzerland. Lawmakers, meanwhile, appear to be getting more restive about whether the demands on Iran will be tough enough.

  "Details of the emerging deal include a possible trade-off which would allow Iran to run several hundred centrifuges in a once-top secret, fortified bunker site at Fordo, in exchange for limits on enrichment and nuclear research and development at other sites -- in particular, Iran's main facility at Natanz.  

  "The terms of the agreement have not been confirmed and were shared with The Associated Press by officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity.  

  "According to the AP report, no centrifuges at Fordo would be used to enrich uranium, but would be fed elements like zinc, xenon and germanium for separating out isotopes for medicine, industry or science. 

  "Initially, the P5+1 partners, which include the U.S., U.K., Russia, France, China and Germany, had wanted all centrifuges stripped away from the Fordo facility. However, under this reported deal, Iranian scientists would be prohibited from working on any nuclear research or development program there, and the number of centrifuges allowed would not be enough to produce the amount of uranium it takes to make a bomb within a year anyway, [emphasis added] according to the officials.  

  "The site also would be subject to international inspections.  

  "But that did not seem to boost the confidence of detractors. In a symbolic statement underscoring the concerns of many lawmakers, the Senate also voted unanimously late Thursday for a non-binding Iran amendment -- to an unrelated budget measure. The amendment endorses the principles of separate legislation that would re-impose waived sanctions and level new ones on Iran if President Obama 'cannot make a determination and certify that Iran is complying' with an interim agreement or any new one that is established in current talks. 

  "Last Friday, 367 House lawmakers, including 129 Democrats, also wrote to Obama warning that a deal must 'foreclose any pathway to a bomb' before they’ll support legislation lifting sanctions on Tehran. The letter was spearheaded by Reps. Ed Royce, R-Calif., and Eliot Engel, D-N.Y., the leaders of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. 

  "It is not clear whether the recent details emerging from the talks would satisfy that. 

  "But Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., also spoke out, calling them 'disturbing.'    

  "'[The Iranians] have been cheating for the last 20 years, this facility [Fordo] was found out in 2009. At the end of the day it is a hardened site. To allow enrichment here would be, I think, very irresponsible,' he said in an interview with Greta Van Susteren on Fox News' 'On the Record' on Thursday.    

  "'It would be delusional for any P5+1 agreement to allow [Iran] to enrich in a fortified facility,' Graham added. 'The Arabs are not going to accept such a deal, and they’ll get a bomb of their own, then you’re on the road to Armageddon.'  

  "Other observers of the agreement say the critics are rushing unnecessarily to judgment.  

  "'We don’t know whether the reports are true –' . . . "

Click here to go to the top of today's index

 

3/27/15 Texas governor Greg Abbott on border tour with Scott Walker FoxNews

Wisconsin governor Scott Walker tours Texas-Mexico border with Gov. Greg Abbott

[Click the date to access this important video.]

 

Click here to go to the top of today's index

 

3/27/15 Bolton: To stop Iran, bomb Iran FoxNews

Fox News contributor defends controversial column [Click the date to access this video.]

 

Click here to go to the top of today's index

 

3/27/15

Trey Gowdy: Hillary Clinton wiped her server clean
 

Click here to go to the top of today's index

 

3/27/15 Obama’s Two Obsessions: Weaken Israel and Empty Gitmo , Commentary Magazine

[Both are totally consistent with an Islamic sympathyzer aiming to dismantle America and to defeat its interests.]

 

Click here to go to the top of today's index

 

3/26/15 Greta: is Pres. Obama snubbing the Constitution? Greta Van Susteren, FoxNews

  "A potential nuclear deal with Iran is a treaty. Does Pres. Obama know that?"

[Click the date to access this video and hang on long enough to hear another video of a clear associated danger.]

 

Click here to go to the top of today's index

 

3/26/15 US Declassifies Document Revealing Israel's Nuclear Program 

By Ari Yashar, Matt Wanderman, ARUTZ SHEVA, Israel National News.com
Obama revenge for Netanyahu's Congress talk? 1987 report on Israel's top secret nuclear program released in unprecedented move.
 
  "In a development that has largely been missed by mainstream media, the Pentagon early last month quietly declassified a Department of Defense top-secret document detailing Israel's nuclear program, a highly covert topic that Israel has never formally announced to avoid a regional nuclear arms race, and which the US until now has respected by remaining silent.

  "But by publishing the declassified document from 1987, the US reportedly breached the silent agreement to keep quiet on Israel's nuclear powers for the first time ever, detailing the nuclear program in great depth.

  "The timing of the revelation is highly suspect, given that it came as tensions spiraled out of control between Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and US President Barack Obama ahead of Netanyahu's March 3 address in Congress, in which he warned against the dangers of Iran's nuclear program and how the deal being formed on that program leaves the Islamic regime with nuclear breakout capabilities.

  "Another highly suspicious aspect of the document is that while the Pentagon saw fit to declassify sections on Israel's sensitive nuclear program, it kept sections on Italy, France, West Germany and other NATO countries classified, with those sections blocked out in the document.

  "The 386-page report entitled 'Critical Technological Assessment in Israel and NATO Nations' gives a detailed description of how Israel advanced its military technology and developed its nuclear infrastructure and research in the 1970s and 1980s.

  "Israel is 'developing the kind of codes which will enable them to make hydrogen bombs. That is, codes which detail fission and fusion processes on a microscopic and macroscopic level,' reveals the report, stating that in the 1980s Israelis were reaching the ability to create bombs considered a thousand times more powerful than atom bombs.

  "The revelation marks a first in which the US published in a document a description of how Israel attained hydrogen bombs.

  "The report also notes research laboratories in Israel 'are equivalent to our Los Alamos, Lawrence Livermore and Oak Ridge National Laboratories,' the key labs in developing America's nuclear arsenal.

  "Israel's nuclear infrastructure is 'an almost exact parallel of the capability currently existing at our National Laboratories,' it adds.

  "'As far as nuclear technology is concerned the Israelis are roughly where the U.S. was in the fission weapon field in about 1955 to 1960,' the report reveals, noting a time frame just after America tested its first hydrogen bomb.

  "Institute for Defense Analysis, a federally funded agency operating under the Pentagon, penned the report back in 1987. 

  "Aside from nuclear capabilities, the report revealed Israel at the time had 'a totally integrated effort in systems development throughout the nation,' with electronic combat all in one 'integrated system, not separated systems for the Army, Navy and Air Force.' It even acknowledged that in some cases, Israeli military technology 'is more advanced than in the U.S.'

  "Declassifying the report comes at a sensitive timing as noted above, and given that the process to have it published was started three years ago, that timing is seen as having been the choice of the American government.

  "US journalist Grant Smith petitioned to have the report published based on the Freedom of Information Act. Initially the Pentagon took its time answering, leading Smith to sue, and a District Court judge to order the Pentagon to respond to the request.

  "Smith, who heads the Institute for Research: Middle East Policy, reportedly said he thinks this is the first time the US government has officially confirmed that Israel is a nuclear power, a status that Israel has long been widely known to have despite being undeclared."

Click here to go to the top of today's index

 

3/26/15 Bergdahl Deal Is No Surprise Coming from the Man Who Leaked Israel's

Nuclear Secrets Rush Limbaugh transcript excerpts

RUSH: The Obama "Pentagon early last month quietly declassified a Department of Defense top-secret document detailing Israel’s nuclear program, a highly covert topic that Israel has never formally announced," on purpose. They've not confirmed that they have a nuclear bomb. There are many resaons for this, at the top of the list is "to avoid a regional nuclear arms race."

Without the official confirmation or admission from Israel that they've got the bomb, the other nations in the region that do not can't say, "Well, hey, they've got it! They've got it! We should have one, too."  It's always been in our arsenal to stop Iran from having a nuclear weapon, never having confirmed the Israelis do.  Well, Obama's taken care of that. We just revealed it!  This is unprecedented, and this is Obama. I'm certain it's because his nose is out of joint 'cause he thinks Netanyahu disrespected him by showing up over here and giving that speech to a joint session of Congress. 

This documents all the way back 1987, folks.  "[B]y publishing the declassified document from 1987, the US reportedly breached the silent agreement to keep quiet on Israel's nuclear powers for the first time ever, detailing the nuclear program in great depth." Well, here we go.  We're in the midst of talking nukes with Iran, and we're being told that the Iranians are gonna be able to get a nuke in ten years but we're gonna try to talk 'em out of ever using it.  Now we've got an AP exclusive report that we are letting them ramp up their use of centrifuges. 

And on top of that, we release a document that makes it official -- and in diplomatic circles this is big.  Common sense doesn't count in diplomacy.  What everybody knows to be true doesn't matter 'til somebody actually admits it, and nobody's ever admitted that Israel has nukes.  It's always been an assumption and everybody's had an assumption, and everybody's pretty sure that they do. But it's never been officially stated, and now it has been.  The Obama Regime has released it. 

Well, you know what the Iranians are gonna do with that.  Exactly what you do when you find out your neighbor's got something that you covet. "Well, why can't I?  They've got it! We are now threatened.  You have now admitted that the Israelis have nukes.  We are entitled to our own as a defensive nature," and Obama's saying, "How can we say 'no' to that?"  So, I don't know. I'm kind of worn out analyzing this administration like any other administration's been analyzed, day to day, within the context of normal political discourse. 

[One might ask is Obama the stupidest man in the world or an out-and-out traitor.]

Click here to go to the top of today's index

 

3/26/15

U.S. Caves to Key Iranian Demands as Nuke Deal Comes Together

By Adam Kredo, Free Beacon
Limited options for Congress as Obama seeks to bypass lawmakers

  "The Obama administration is giving in to Iranian demands about the scope of its nuclear program as negotiators work to finalize a framework agreement in the coming days, according to sources familiar with the administration’s position in the negotiations.

  "U.S. negotiators are said to have given up ground on demands that Iran be forced to disclose the full range of its nuclear activities at the outset of a nuclear deal, a concession experts say would gut the verification the Obama administration has vowed would stand as the crux of a deal with Iran.

  "Until recently, the Obama administration had maintained that it would guarantee oversight on Tehran’s program well into the future, and that it would take the necessary steps to ensure that oversight would be effective. The issue has now emerged as a key sticking point in the talks.

  "Concern from sources familiar with U.S. concessions in the talks comes amid reports that Iran could be permitted to continue running nuclear centrifuges at an underground site once suspected of housing illicit activities.

  "This type of concession would allow Iran to continue work related to its nuclear weapons program, even under the eye of international inspectors. If Iran removes inspectors—as it has in the past—it would be left with a nuclear infrastructure immune from a strike by Western forces.

  "'Once again, in the face of Iran’s intransigence, the U.S. is leading an effort to cave even more toward Iran—this time by whitewashing Tehran’s decades of lying about nuclear weapons work and current lack of cooperation with the [International Atomic Energy Agency],' said one Western source briefed on the talks but who was not permitted to speak on record.

  "With the White House pressing to finalize a deal, U.S. diplomats have moved further away from their demands that Iran be subjected to oversight over its nuclear infrastructure.

  "'Instead of ensuring that Iran answers all the outstanding questions about the past and current military dimensions of their nuclear work in order to obtain sanctions relief, the U.S. is now revising down what they need to do,' said the source.  'That is a terrible mistake—if we don’t have a baseline to judge their past work, we can’t tell if they are cheating in the future, and if they won’t answer now, before getting rewarded, why would they come clean in the future?'

  "The United States is now willing to let Iran keep many of its most controversial military sites closed to inspectors until international sanctions pressure has been lifted, according to sources.

  "This scenario has been criticized by nuclear experts, including David Albright, founder and president of the Institute for Science and International Security.

  "Albright told Congress in November that 'a prerequisite for any comprehensive agreement is for the IAEA to know when Iran sought nuclear weapons, how far it got, what types it sought to develop, and how and where it did this work.'

  "'The IAEA needs a good baseline of Iran’s military nuclear activities, including the manufacturing of equipment for the program and any weaponization related studies, equipment, and locations,' Albright said.

  "One policy expert familiar with the concessions told the Washington Free Beacon that it would be difficult for the administration to justify greater concessions given the centrality of this issue in the broader debate.

  "'The Obama administration has gone all-in on the importance of verification,' said the source, who asked for anonymity because the administration has been known to retaliate against critics in the policy community. 'But without knowing what the Iranians have it’s impossible for the IAEA to verify that they’ve given it up.'

  "A lesser emphasis is also being placed on Iran coming clean about its past efforts to build nuclear weapons. The Islamic Republic continues to stall United Nations efforts to determine the extent of its past weapons work, according to the Wall Street Journal.

  "By placing disclosure of Iran’s past military efforts on the back burner, the administration could harm the ability of outside inspectors to take full inventory of Iran’s nuclear know-how, according to sources familiar with the situation.

  "It also could jeopardize efforts to keep Iran at least one year away from building a bomb, sources said.

  "On the diplomatic front, greater concessions are fueling fears among U.S. allies that Iran will emerge from the negations as a stronger regional power.

 

Click here to go to the top of today's index

 

3/25/15 Meaning of "High Crimes and Misdemeanors" By Jon Roland, Constitution Society, Constitution.org

  "Under the English common law tradition, crimes were defined through a legacy of court proceedings and decisions that punished offenses not because they were prohibited by statutes, but because they offended the sense of justice of the people and the court. Whether an offense could qualify as punishable depended largely on the obligations of the offender, and the obligations of a person holding a high position meant that some actions, or inactions, could be punishable if he did them, even though they would not be if done by an ordinary person.

  "Offenses of this kind survive today in the Uniform Code of Military Justice. It recognizes as punishable offenses such things as perjury of oath, refusal to obey orders, abuse of authority, dereliction of duty, failure to supervise, moral turpitude, and conduct unbecoming. These would not be offenses if committed by a civilian with no official position, but they are offenses which bear on the subject's fitness for the duties he holds, which he is bound by oath or affirmation to perform.

[This authoritative article deserves your full attention and consideration. Whether or not impeachment of President Obama would result in conviction by the current U.S. Senate, on the basie of this article, is immaterial. One would think that even our establishment media would sufficiently air the the seriousness of the charges by the U. S. House of Representatives to alert more of the public.]

  "Perjury is usually defined as 'lying under oath'. That is not quite right. The original meaning was 'violation of one's oath (or affirmation)'.

  "The word 'perjury' is usually defined today as 'lying under oath about a material matter', but that is not its original or complete meaning, which is 'violation of an oath'. We can see this by consulting the original Latin from which the term comes. From An Elementary Latin Dictionary, by Charlton T. Lewis (1895), Note that the letter 'j' is the letter 'i' in Latin.

periurium, i, n,, a false oath, perjury.
 
periurus, adj., oath-breaking, false to vows, perjured. iuro, avi, atus, are, to swear, take an oath.
 
iurator, oris, m., a swearer.
 
iuratus, adj., sworn under oath, bound by an oath.
 
ius, iuris, that which is binding, right, justice, duty.
 
per, ... IV. Of means or manner, through, by, by means of, ... under pretense of, by the pretext of, ....

  "By Art. II Sec. 1 Cl. 8, the president must swear: 'I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.' He is bound by this oath in all matters until he leaves office. No additional oath is needed to bind him to tell the truth in anything he says, as telling the truth is pursuant to all matters except perhaps those relating to national security. Any public statement is perjury if it is a lie, and not necessary to deceive an enemy.

  "When a person takes an oath (or affirmation) before giving testimony, he is assuming the role of an official, that of 'witness under oath', for the duration of his testimony. That official position entails a special obligation to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, and in that capacity, one is punishable in a way he would not be as an ordinary person not under oath. Therefore, perjury is a high crime.

  "An official such as the president does not need to take a special oath to become subject to the penalties of perjury. He took an oath, by Art. II Sec. 1 Cl. 8, to 'faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States' and to 'preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States' to the best of his ability. While he holds that office, he is always under oath, and lying at any time constitutes perjury if it is not justified for national security.

  "Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr erred in presenting in his referral only those offenses which could be 'laid at the feet' of the president. He functioned like a prosecutor of an offense against criminal statutes that apply to ordinary persons and are provable by the standards of 'proof beyond a reasonable doubt'. That is not to say that such offenses are not also high crimes or misdemeanors when committed by an official bound by oath. Most such offenses are. But 'high crimes and misdemeanors' also includes other offenses, applicable only to a public official, for which the standard is 'preponderance of evidence'. Holding a particular office of trust is not a right, but a privilege, and removal from such office is not a punishment. Disablement of the right to hold any office in the future would be a punishment, and therefore the standards of 'proof beyond a reasonable doubt' would apply before that ruling could be imposed by the Senate.

  "It should be noted, however, that when an offense against a statute is also a 'high crime or misdemeanor', it may be, and usually is, referred to by a different name, when considered as such. Thus, an offense like 'obstruction of justice' or 'subornation of perjury' may become 'abuse of authority' when done by an official bound by oath. As such it would be grounds for impeachment and removal from office, but would be punishable by its statutory name once the official is out of office.

  "An executive official is ultimately responsible for any failures of his subordinates and for their violations of the oath he and they took, which means violations of the Constitution and the rights of persons. It is not necessary to be able to prove that such failures or violations occurred at his instigation or with his knowledge, to be able, in Starr's words, to 'lay them at the feet' of the president. It is sufficient to show, on the preponderance of evidence, that the president was aware of misconduct on the part of his subordinates, or should have been, and failed to do all he could to remedy the misconduct, including termination and prosecution of the subordinates and compensation for the victims or their heirs. The president's subordinates include everyone in the executive branch, and their agents and contractors. It is not limited to those over whom he has direct supervision. He is not protected by 'plausible deniability'. He is legally responsible for everything that everyone in the executive branch is doing.

  "Therefore, the appropriate subject matter for an impeachment and removal proceeding is the full range of offenses against the Constitution and against the rights of persons committed by subordinate officials and their agents which have not been adequately investigated or remedied. The massacre at Waco, the assault at Ruby Ridge, and many, many other illegal or excessive assaults by federal agents, and the failure of the president to take action against the offenders, is more than enough to justify impeachment and removal from office on grounds of dereliction of duty. To these we could add the many suspicious incidents that indicate covered up crimes by federal agents, including the suspicious deaths of persons suspected of being knowledgeable of wrongdoing by the president or others in the executive branch, or its contractors.

  "The impeachment and removal process should be a debate on the entire field of proven and suspected misconduct by federal officials and agents under this president, and if judged to have been excessive by reasonable standards, to be grounds for removal, even if direct complicity cannot be shown."

Click here to go to the top of today's index

 

3/22/15 Israel: Beware of Obama By Michael Goodwin, NYPost

  "First he comes for the banks and health care, uses the IRS to go after critics, politicizes the Justice Department, spies on journalists, tries to curb religious freedom, slashes the military, throws open the borders, doubles the debt and nationalizes the Internet.

  "He lies to the public, ignores the Constitution, inflames race relations and urges Latinos to punish Republican 'enemies.' He abandons our ­allies, appeases tyrants, coddles ­adversaries and uses the Crusades as an excuse for inaction as Islamist terrorists slaughter their way across the Mideast.

  "Now he’s coming for Israel.

  "Barack Obama’s promise to transform America was too modest. He is transforming the whole world before our eyes. Do you see it yet?

  "Against the backdrop of the tsunami of trouble he has unleashed, Obama’s pledge to 'reassess' America’s relationship with Israel cannot be taken lightly. Already paving the way for an Iranian nuke, he is hinting he’ll also let the other anti-Semites at Turtle Bay have their way. That could mean American support for punitive Security Council resolutions or for Palestinian statehood initiatives. It could mean both, or something worse.

  "Whatever form the punishment takes, it will aim to teach Bibi Netanyahu never again to upstage him. And to teach Israeli voters never again to elect somebody Obama doesn’t like.

  "Apologists and wishful thinkers, including some Jews, insist Obama real­izes that the special relationship between Israel and the United States must prevail and that allowing too much daylight between friends will encourage enemies.

  "Those people are slow learners, or, more dangerously, deny-ists.

  "If Obama’s six years in office teach us anything, it is that he is impervious to appeals to good sense. Quite the contrary. Even respectful suggestions from supporters that he behave in the traditions of American presidents fill him with angry determination to do it his way.

  "For Israel, the consequences will be intended. Those who make excuses for Obama’s policy failures — naive, bad advice, bad luck — have not come to grips with his dark impulses and deep-seated rage.

  "His visceral dislike for Netanyahu is genuine, but also serves as a convenient fig leaf for his visceral dislike of Israel. The fact that it’s personal with Netanyahu doesn’t explain six years of trying to bully Israelis into signing a suicide pact with Muslims bent on destroying them. Netanyahu’s only sin is that he puts his nation’s security first and refuses to knuckle ­under to Obama’s endless demands for unilateral concessions.

  "That refusal is now the excuse to act against Israel. Consider that, for all the upheaval around the world, the president rarely has a cross word for, let alone an open dispute with, any other foreign leader. He calls Great Britain’s David Cameron 'bro' and praised Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood president, Mohammed Morsi, who had called Zionists, 'the descendants of apes and pigs.'

  "Obama asked Vladimir Putin for patience, promising 'more flexibility' after the 2012 election, a genuflection that earned him Russian aggression. His Asian pivot was a head fake, and China is exploiting the vacuum. None of those leaders has gotten the Netanyahu treatment, which included his being forced to use the White House back door on one trip, and the cold shoulder on another.

  "It is a clear and glaring double standard.

  "Most troubling is Obama’s bended-knee deference to Iran’s Supreme Leader, which has been repaid with 'Death to America' and 'Death to Israel' demonstrations in Tehran and expanded Iranian military action in other countries.

  "The courtship reached the height of absurdity last week, when Obama wished Iranians a happy Persian new year by equating Republican critics of his nuclear deal with the resistance of theocratic hard-liners, saying both 'oppose a diplomatic solution.' That is a damnable slur given that a top American military official estimates that Iranian weapons, proxies and trainers killed 1,500 US soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan. Who in their right mind would trust such an evil regime with a nuke?

  "Yet Netanyahu, the leader of our only reliable ally in the region, is ­repeatedly singled out for abuse. He alone is the target of an orchestrated attempt to defeat him at the polls, with Obama political operatives, funded in part by American taxpayers, working to elect his opponent.

  "They failed and Netanyahu prevailed because Israelis see him as their best bet to protect them. Their choice was wise, but they better buckle up because it’s Israel’s turn to face the wrath of Obama, "

[It's more than time for Obama to feel the wrath of America, Republicans and Democrats.]

Click here to go to the top of today's index

 

3/21/15

Khamenei calls ‘Death to America’ as Kerry hails progress on nuke deal

  "Iran’s Supreme leader Ali Khamenei called for 'Death to America' on Saturday, a day after President Barack Obama appealed to Iran to seize a 'historic opportunity' for a nuclear deal and a better future, and as US Secretary of State John Kerry claimed substantial progress toward an accord.

  "Khamenei told a crowd in Tehran that Iran would not capitulate to Western demands. When the crowd started shouting, 'Death to America,' the ayatollah responded: 'Of course yes, death to America, because America is the original source of this pressure.'

  "'They insist on putting pressure on our dear people’s economy,' he said, referring to economic sanctions aimed at halting Iran’s nuclear program. 'What is their goal? Their goal is to put the people against the system,' he said. 'The politics of America is to create insecurity,' he added, referring both to US pressure on Iran and elsewhere in the region.

  "Khamenei’s comments contrasted with those of Iranian President Hassan Rohani, who said 'achieving a deal is possible' by the March 31 target date for a preliminary accord.

  "Kerry was more circumspect, as he spoke to reporters after six days of negotiations in the Swiss city of Lausanne. The talks, made 'substantial progress,' he said, but 'important gaps remain'. . . ."

Click here to go to the top of today's index

 

3/21/15 Israel's future: Hillary Clinton's silence on Netanyahu's win speaks volumes

  "Clinton’s history with Netanyahu includes, as MSNBC.com pointed out that, “…longtime [Hillary] Clinton message guru Paul Begala went to Israel to help Netanyahu’s rival, and several strategists who worked for Barack Obama and could potentially join a Clinton campaign—led by field organizer Jeremy Bird—are working with a nonprofit that opposes Netanyahu. Clinton’s longtime pollster, Stan Greenberg, has worked for the opposition Labor Party in the past as well.

  "But whatever reservations Clinton has about Netanyahu, she needs to go on the record (as her Republican counterparts have) about where she stands regarding what Megyn Kelly rightly referred to as an American-Israeli relationship that is 'critical for both sides'—including a working relationship with Mr. Netanyahu. . . .

Click here to go to the top of today's index

 

3/21/15 Israeli PM Netanyahu: Peace agreement must be negotiated, not imposed

The Kelly File, FoxNews [Click the date to access the video.]

Click here to go to the top of today's index

 

3/21/15 Our Supreme Leader is a Supreme Fool

  "I know that Barack Obama fancies himself a grand strategist the likes of which the world has never seen. (Okay, that may be true, but not in the way he thinks.) In an important essay last month at Mosaic, Michael Doran drew a revealing portrait of “Obama’s secret Iran agenda” that cast light on dark corners.

  "If you want to understand Obama’s strategery, Doran’s essay is the place to go. Today Steve Hayes adds a timely update in his Weekly Standard editorial 'Obama’s Iran agenda.'

  "Whatever the sophisticated thinking behind it, Obama’s strategy looks like appeasement. It certainly has a lot in common with it. Indeed, we seem to have entered the tertiary stage of appeasement, in which wishful thinking and self-deception are the dominant characteristics.

  "To take one example, I give you President Obama’s annual statement on Nowruz, the Persian new year. The Wall Street Journal has posted the text of Obama’s statement here. The White House has posted the video below of Obama reading the statement. It is addressed to 'the people and the leaders of Iran.' [Click the date if you want to access the video.]

  "In his statement Obama says: 'My message to you—the people of Iran—is that, together, we have to speak up for the future we seek.' Obama addresses the people of Iran as though they are free to speak their minds.

  "That is immediately followed by this: 'As I have said many times before, I believe that our countries should be able to resolve this issue peacefully, with diplomacy. Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei has issued a fatwa against the development of nuclear weapons, and President Rouhani has said that Iran would never develop a nuclear weapon.'

  "As we have noted several times, the alleged fatwa doesn’t exist. Obama’s citation of it is evidence that we have entered the tertiary stage of his diplomatic vision.

  "But wait! There is more.

  "Obama’s citation of President Rouahani’s statement as though it is worthy of belief is laughable. This is the guy who bragged openly on Iranian state television about how he had helped flout a 2003 agreement with the IAEA in which Iran had promised to suspend all uranium enrichment and certain other nuclear activities.

  "And of course we must have a classic iteration of his political opponents’ position: '[T]here are people, in both our countries and beyond, who oppose a diplomatic resolution.' He didn’t say they favor war, or call out the Jooz, but he didn’t have to. His target audience understands.

  "There is so much that is wrong with this short statement; it warrants the closest examination. The charitable interpretation is that Our Supreme Leader is a Supreme Fool."

 

Click here to go to the top of today's index

 

3/21/15 Petraeus Puts the Icing on Bibi's Iran Cake By Larry Kudlow, NewsMax

 

  "Don’t just rely on Benjamin Netanyahu’s passionate advice to Congress on his way to re-election that Iran is our arch enemy.

  "Now we have the counsel of retired general David Petraeus, who gave a remarkable interview this week to the Washington Post.

  "Petraeus agrees with Netanyahu: Iran, not ISIS, is the real enemy.

  "His message: 'I would argue that the foremost threat to Iraq’s long-term stability and the broader regional equilibrium is not the Islamic State; rather, it is Shiite militias, many backed by — and some guided by — Iran.'

  "The general adds, 'Longer-term, Iranian-backed Shia militia could emerge as the pre-eminent power in the country, one that is outside the control of the government and instead answerable to Tehran.' (Italics mine.)

  "Netanyahu is arguing against a bad U.S.-Iran deal that might end the economic sanctions and permit Iranian nuclear development after 10 years. (Of course, nobody believes Iran will wait for, or permit, true verification.)

  "But the thrust of the Petraeus interview is that unless U.S. military strategy completely changes, Iran is going to take over Iraq.

  "Petraeus gives ample evidence of this: These Shiite militias are being run by Iran’s top military man, General Qasem Soleimani. He’s the head of the Quds Force of the Revolutionary Guard. He has been spotted and filmed on the ground in Iraq. And he has been making battlefield tours the way Petraeus did during the surge.

  "In the Post interview, Petraeus relates a remarkable story: In the midst of the surge, the general got a note from Soleimani: 'General Petraeus, you should be aware that I, Qasem Soleimani, control Iran’s policy for Iraq, Syria, Lebanaon, Gaza, and Afghanistan.' (Italics mine.) Petraeus told the intermediary he could tell Soleimani to 'pound sand.'

  "Overall, Petraeus makes it very clear that the current Iranian regime 'is not our ally in the Middle East,' is part of the problem, not the solution, and is 'deeply hostile to us and our friends.'

  "Without ever mentioning Obama’s name, it’s clear that Petraeus is splitting from administration policy.

  "And isn’t all this what Bibi Netanyahu told the U.S. Congress? Didn’t he say Iran’s goal is to control the whole area, and of course attempt at some point to blast Israel off the face of the Earth?


  "So why are President Barack Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry trying to do business with Iran? If we know who the militias really are and know that Iran wants to take over Iraq and control the whole region, why is the United States talking about lifting economic sanctions and negotiating some sort of accommodationist deal with our arch enemy?

  "And why is the U.S. doing this with oil down 50 percent and Iran a high-cost producer?

  "The economic table is set for a catastrophic fiscal blow to Iran — our enemy.

  "According to a Wall Street Journal news report, Iran needs $130.70 per barrel of oil to balance its budget. But the price of Brent crude is about $55, or roughly 60 percent below what Iran needs.

  "It’s hard to get credible economic numbers for Iran, but it’s a safe guess that the budget is most of the state-run economy. Therefore, cheap oil is deadly for Iran.

  "So I ask again: Why are we helping them? We’ve got Iran on the ropes. Why loosen the sanctions?

  "Talking to the Post, General Petraeus acknowledges that we moved troops out of Iraq way too soon and in doing so sent a signal of weakness that we were pulling back from the Middle East overall.

  "I would guess that these last-ditch efforts at an Iranian treaty will be perceived as even greater U.S. weakness in the Middle East.

  "Who knows if this can be stopped.

  "Surely the Senate must vote on any U.S.-Iran deal.

  "But the conundrum is, if we know Iran is our enemy, if we know Iran wants to conquer the Middle East, if we know Iran wants to destroy Israel, if we know Iran is continuing to develop nuclear weapons, and if we’re hearing all this not just from the Israeli prime minister, who has the burden of defending his nation, but also from a retired general who is out of office and has no skin in the game, why won’t the present administration come to acknowledge the real situation, reverse course, and halt any efforts to placate our arch enemy Iran?


  "Why do we even have to ask this question?"

 

Click here to go to the top of today's index

 

3/20/15 No peace in our time By Charles Krauthammer, Jewiah World Review

 

  "Benjamin Netanyahu's stunning election victory, none is more ubiquitous than the idea that peace prospects are now dead because Netanyahu has declared that there will be no Palestinian state while he is Israel's prime minister.

  "I have news for the lowing herds: There would be no peace and no Palestinian state if Isaac Herzog were prime minister either. Or Ehud Barak or Ehud Olmert for that matter. The latter two were (non-Likud) prime ministers who offered the Palestinians their own state — with its capital in Jerusalem and every Israeli settlement in the new Palestine uprooted — only to be rudely rejected.

  "This is not ancient history. This is 2000, 2001 and 2008 — three astonishingly concessionary peace offers within the past 15 years. Every one rejected.

  "The fundamental reality remains: This generation of Palestinian leadership — from Yasser Arafat to Mahmoud Abbas — has never and will never sign its name to a final peace settlement dividing the land with a Jewish state. And without that, no Israeli government of any kind will agree to a Palestinian state.

  "Today, however, there is a second reason a peace agreement is impossible: the supreme instability of the entire Middle East. For half a century, it was run by dictators no one liked but with whom you could do business. For example, the 1974 Israel-Syria disengagement agreement yielded more than four decades of near-total quiet on the border because the Assad dictatorships so decreed.

  "That authoritarian order is gone, overthrown by the Arab Spring. Syria is wracked by a multi-sided civil war that has killed 200,000 people and that has al-Qaeda allies, Hezbollah fighters, government troops and even the occasional Iranian general prowling the Israeli border. Who inherits? No one knows.

  "In the last four years, Egypt has had two revolutions and three radically different regimes. Yemen went from pro-American to Iranian client so quickly the United States had to evacuate its embassy in a panic. Libya has gone from Moammar Gaddafi's crazy authoritarianism to jihadi-dominated civil war. On Wednesday, Tunisia, the one relative success of the Arab Spring, suffered a major terror attack that the prime minister said "targets the stability of the country."

  "From Mali to Iraq, everything is in flux. Amid this mayhem, by what magic would the West Bank, riven by a bitter Fatah-Hamas rivalry, be an island of stability? What would give any Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement even a modicum of durability?

  "There was a time when Arafat commanded the Palestinian movement the way Gaddafi commanded Libya. Abbas commands no one. Why do you think he is in the 11th year of a four-year term, having refused to hold elections for the last five years? Because he's afraid he would lose to Hamas.

  "With or without elections, the West Bank could fall to Hamas overnight. At which point fire rains down on Tel Aviv, Ben Gurion Airport and the entire Israeli urban heartland — just as it rains down on southern Israel from Gaza when it suits Hamas, which has turned that first Palestinian state into a terrorist fire base.

  "Any Arab-Israeli peace settlement would require Israel to make dangerous and inherently irreversible territorial concessions on the West Bank in return for promises and guarantees. Under current conditions, these would be written on sand.

  "Israel is ringed by jihadi terrorists in Sinai, Hamas in Gaza, Hezbollah in Lebanon, Islamic State and Iranian proxies in Syria, and a friendly but highly fragile Jordan. Israelis have no idea who ends up running any of these places. Will the Islamic State advance to an Israeli border? Will Iranian Revolutionary Guards appear on the Golan Heights? No one knows.

  "Well, say the critics. Israel could be given outside guarantees. Guarantees? Like the 1994 Budapest Memorandum in which the United States, Britain and Russia guaranteed Ukraine's "territorial integrity"? Like the red line in Syria? Like the unanimous U.N. resolutions declaring illegal any Iranian enrichment of uranium — now effectively rendered null?

  "Peace awaits three things. Eventual Palestinian acceptance of a Jewish state. A Palestinian leader willing to sign a deal based on that premise. A modicum of regional stability that allows Israel to risk the potentially fatal withdrawals such a deal would entail.

  "I believe such a day will come. But there is zero chance it comes now or even soon. That's essentially what Netanyahu said Thursday in explaining — and softening — his no-Palestinian-state statement.

  "In the interim, I understand the crushing disappointment of the Obama administration and its media poodles at the spectacular success of the foreign leader they loathe more than any other on the planet. The consequent seething and sputtering are understandable, if unseemly. Blaming Netanyahu for banishing peace, however, is mindless."

 

Click here to go to the top of today's index

 

3/20/15 Obama Takes His Rage to World Stage

Click here to go to the top of today's index

 

3/20/15 On Iran, Obama Is Ignoring Public Opinion at His Own Peril

By , National Journal The president's pursuit of a nuclear deal with Iran underscores the lengths to which he is willing to bypass public resistance.

Click here to go to the top of today's index

 

3/20/15 Glenn Beck: Obama Is ‘Special Kind of Liar’ Who Won’t Stop Lying

  "Glenn Beck was practically boiling over on his radio show today calling President Barack Obama a bald-faced liar on health care. He repeatedly said he doesn’t want to be the one saying this and insisted he respects the office of the presidency, but lamented that no one else is willing to say it out loud, so he has to.

  "'The fact is,' Beck said, 'the president is a special kind of liar because he can lie about things that have long been proven to be lies and then… he actually has the nerve to tell you to look up the evidence, when the evidence, if you look it up, would prove it to be a lie.'

  "He ran through recent comments by the president, taking a shot at the critics of Obamacare for making consistently wrong predictions, 'evidence be damned.' Beck went from mocking the president to seething with anger at him in a manner of minutes as he played audio clips showing a few administration flip-flops on the health care law.'  "He concluded that “there are literally hundreds of lies that we could highlight from this man,' but didn’t have time to go through more of them.

  "Watch the video below, via TheBlaze TV: [Click the date to access the video.]"

 

Click here to go to the top of today's index

 

3/20/15

Interior's new fracking rules get swift GOP backlash
By , Politico

  "Twenty-seven Senate Republicans have introduced a bill to halt the regulations as a threat to the U.S. energy boom.

  "The Obama administration unveiled the first major national safety restrictions for fracking on Friday, touching off a swift backlash from the president’s critics in Congress and the energy industry. [every possible effort to diminish America continues.]

  "Two oil industry groups immediately sued to challenge the rules, calling them “' reaction to unsubstantiated concerns,' while 27 Senate Republicans introduced legislation to block them from taking effect. Meanwhile, green groups were divided on whether the long-awaited regulations go far enough. . . .

  "The new rules are the federal government’s most comprehensive foray to date toward regulating the technology at the heart of the U.S. oil and gas boom, addressing worries such as potential dangers to drinking water. They also offered oil and gas supporters new room to accuse President Barack Obama of seeking to throttle fossil-fuel production, despite his repeated boasts about the nation’s booming energy supplies."

Click here to go to the top of today's index

 

3/20/15 The Mind of Muhammad By F. W. Burleigh, American Thinker

 "The fundamental problem with Islam is the belief that God talked to Muhammad and dictated the contents of the Koran to him. Muslims are indoctrinated into believing this is so, and they act on the numerous incitements to violence that they find in it.

  "As with much of the Koran, substitute Muhammad for Allah and the real meaning comes through. What these verses mean in plain language is that the Jews surrendered after a three-week siege, hoping Muhammad would exile them as he had done to the other Jewish tribes, but he beheaded the men and boys -- somewhere between 400 and 900 with 700 being the likely number of victims.  He happily seized all of their wealth of farms, date plantations, fortresses, and homes, and he enslaved all of the woman and children. The booty was distributed among his followers who participated in the siege -- minus the 20 percent cut he kept for himself.  The likely reason he attacked the Jews was to seize their wealth to pay off his followers for the hardships they had endured during the Battle of the Trench.  The fact they had briefly taken sides with the Meccans was merely the pretext. . . . '

 

Click here to go to the top of today's index

 

3/19/15 Spite: Angry Obama Doubles Down on Iran Deal, Punishes Israel After Netanyahu Victory

Guy Benson, Town Hall [Click the date to read the full article. You should to be fully informed and to get its full impact.]

 

  "My point was pretty simple.  This president has extremely thin skin and extraordinary self regard.  He views rejections of his agenda as personal affronts; in his mind, such setbacks not are not occasions for reflection and reconsideration, but unforgivable provocations and betrayals.  Hence the White House's assertion that Obama feels 'liberated' by Republicans' 2014 sweep, evidenced by his executive amnesty power grab -- which he'd previously dismissed as illegal, and against which the GOP had successfully campaigned.  Given Obama's vindictive posture against political opponents and voters who don't accede to his wishes, I reasoned, there was a good chance he'd turn his petty instincts against Israelis and their leader.  Our president personally despises Netanyahu, partly because Israel's Prime Minister has demonstrated the temerity to challenge and defy him in public.  By endorsing Netanyahu, despite alleged and unseemly American influence, the Israeli electorate explicitly crossed Obama, an inexpiable sin.  Indeed, there will be consequences. . . ."

 

Click here to go to the top of today's index.

 

3/19/15 ISIS claims responsibility for deadly Tunisia museum attack FoxNews

 

Click here to go to the top of today's index.


3/19/15 Bibi Beats Obama Dick Morris, DickMorris.com
[Click the date to access this video.]

 

Click here to go to the top of today's index.

 

3/19/15 UN Getting Ready to Force Back Bibi’s Election Promise

By Judi McLeod, Canada Free Press

  "Two days after Israel President Benjamin Netanyahu swept past the sabotage of Barack Obama’s campaign experts to re-election, it’s 'welcome to a New World where your country and its sovereignty don’t count anymore'.

  "Welcome to a world where elections have no consequences.

  "Welcome to a world where borders are becoming passé; where children can be taken away from parents for indoctrination by the state before kindergarten and where patriotism is being redefined as racism.

  "The United Nations, the world’s largest bureaucracy which has long masqueraded as a warm fuzzy blanket;  as a self-professed body there only to legislate World Peace; the one and the same that now owns lock, stock ad barrel every village, duchy, town and city through the spread of Agenda 21, is set to gobble up Israel in one greedy bite—Bibi Netanyahu and the millions of trusting Israelis who just re-elected him as their chosen prime minister notwithstanding.

  "And the gobbling up of sovereign countries isn’t going to stop there as you can count on it being already on its way to a country near you.

  “After years of blocking U.N. efforts to pressure Israelis and Palestinians into accepting a lasting two-state solution, the United States is edging closer toward supporting a U.N. Security Council resolution that would call for the resumption of political talks to conclude a final peace settlement, according to Western diplomats. (Foreign Policy, March 18, 2015)

  'The move follows Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s decisive re-election Tuesday after the incumbent publicly abandoned his commitment to negotiate a Palestinian state — the basis of more than 20 years of U.S. diplomatic efforts — and promised to continue the construction of settlements on occupied territory. The development also reflects deepening pessimism over the prospect of U.S.-brokered negotiations delivering peace between Israelis and Palestinians.' . . .

  "Through the history of all the UN’s infamous Inaction in Action, we watched 500,000 to one millionTutsis and moderate Hutu get slaughtered by the machete-wielding Hutu majority in Rwanda; ;  had eyes glazing over when the internal investigation into the largest scandal of the world, the UN Oil-for-Food scandal was underway and weren’t overly bothered when their blue-helmeted staff were caught red-handed raping the women of the countries they were charged with protecting.

  "Somehow through all we all held back, allowing the UN to grow like the proverbial Topsy moving from its multi-million dollar Manhattan headquarters into mega billion renovated ones.

  "Under Barack Obama, the UN has now stepped out of the closet.

  'For decades, Democratic and Republican administrations have resisted a role for the U.N. Security Council in dealing with the Middle East crisis. They have argued consistently that an enduring peace can only be achieved through direct negotiations between the parties. Israeli leaders have also strongly opposed giving the world body a greater role in bringing about a deal. (Foreign Policy)

  'However, the prospect of direct negotiations appeared to evaporate with Netanyahu’s pre-election declaration that he would never allow the creation of a Palestinian state. The comment completely reversed the Israeli leader’s previous support for an independent Palestine as part of a permanent peace deal between the two sides.

  'The deliberations over the future of the U.S. diplomatic efforts are playing out just weeks before the Palestinians are scheduled to join the International Criminal Court, a move that is certain to heighten diplomatic tensions between Israel and the Palestinians. On Wednesday, the Palestine Liberation Organization’s top diplomat in the United States told Foreign Policy the Palestinians would move forward with plans to use the ICC to try to hold Israel accountable for alleged war crimes during last summer’s war in Gaza. (Israel says it worked hard to avoid civilian casualties, of which there were many, and blames Hamas militants for taking shelter in populated areas.)

  'The fact that we have a government in Israel publicly opposing a two-state solution just reinforces our position that this conflict must be handled by the international community,' Maen Rashid Areikat said.'

  "We should have known something was amiss when Barack Obama was handed the Nobel Peace Prize a mere two weeks after gaining the Oval Office through the 2008 election.  That made about as much sense as when the UN made tyrant Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe its Ambassador of Tourism.

  "Obama sent one of his top czars, Samantha Power as U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. to babysit until they were ready to over-rule democratic elections.

  "Barack Obama is not president of the United States.  He’s the UN-manufactured King of the World.

  "We no longer have to ponder Obama’s rise to power.  Maurice Strong, Al Gore, Bill Clinton and all those who came before him like Samantha Power were merely paving the way.

  "The order is coming down the UN pike any day now:  All global citizens bow down to Comrade Obama."

Click here to go to the top of today's index.

 

 

3/19/15 ICE Released More Than 30,000 Criminal Illegals Last Year

Todd Beamon, NewsMax

 

Click here to go to the top of today's index.

 

3/19/15 Obama Floats Idea for Mandatory Voting in the US NewsMax

 

Click here to go to the top of today's index.

 

3/19/15 ‘I’ve Made My Decision — I’m Out.’ Glenn Beck Leaves The Republican Party

Al Weaver, Daily Caller

  "Conservative radio host Glenn Beck announced on his radio show Wednesday morning that he has officially left the Republican Party.

  "Beck, whose program appears on TheBlaze.com, said the GOP lost him when they said “they were going to stand against Obamacare and illegal immigration.” Beck added that the party “set us up” and “enough is enough.”

  "'I’ve made my decision — I’m out. I’m out of the Republican Party.  I am not a Republican. I will not give a dime to the Republican Party. I’m out,' Beck said on his program. 'I highly recommend — run from the Republican Party. They are not good. And you see it now.'

  "'All this stuff that they said and they ran and they said they were doing all of these great things and they were going to stand against Obamacare and illegal immigration. They set us up,' Beck said. 'They set us up. Enough is enough. They’re torpedoing the Constitution, and they’re doing it knowingly.'

  "'They’re taking on people like Mike Lee and Ted Cruz and they are torpedoing them knowingly,' Beck continued, 'and these guys are standing for the constitution.'”

Click here to go to the top of today's index.

 

3/19/15 Hillary Clinton: What if former secretary of state will never respect our laws?

By , FoxNews [Quoted completely from the original Web article.]

 

 

Click here to go to the top of today's index.

 

3/18/15 Netanyahu surges to victory in Israeli vote By ARON HELLER, APNews.MyWay

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's right-wing Likud Party scored a resounding victory in Israel's election, final results showed Wednesday, a stunning turnaround after a tight race that had put his lengthy rule in jeopardy.

Netanyahu surged ahead after a last-minute lurch to the right in which he opposed Palestinian statehood and vowed continued settlement construction, setting the stage for fresh confrontations with the White House just weeks after criticizing U.S. talks with Iran in a divisive address to Congress.

With nearly all votes counted, Likud appeared to have earned 30 out of parliament's 120 seats and was in a position to build with relative ease a coalition government with its nationalist, religious and ultra-Orthodox Jewish allies.

On Wednesday, Netanyahu visited the Western Wall in Jerusalem's Old City, a remnant of the biblical Jewish Temple and the holiest site where Jews can pray. "I'm touched by the weight of the responsibility that the people of Israel have put on my shoulders. I wish to say that I will do anything in my power to ensure the well-being and security of all the citizens of Israel," he said.

The election was widely seen as a referendum on Netanyahu, who has governed for the past six years. Recent opinion polls indicated he was in trouble, giving chief rival Isaac Herzog's center-left Zionist Union a slight lead. Exit polls Tuesday showed the two sides deadlocked but once the actual results came pouring in early Wednesday, the Zionist Union dropped to just 24 seats.

Click here to go to the top of today's index.

 

3/18/15 New rift opens between Obama, Netanyahu after election victory FoxNews

 

[Obama operatives using ACORN type tactics, funded by the administration's channeling of taxpayer dollars, in an effort to defeat Netanyahu certainly did not help. Note the establishment media did not report this, and after predicting a close election for some time is mum about the landslide.]

  "After staying mum on Israeli issues in the run-up to the election, the White House on Wednesday broke its silence -- answering Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's victory with fresh criticism and making clear that a new rift has opened between U.S. and Israeli leaders, this time over Palestinian statehood. 

  "In its first public response to Netanyahu's election triumph, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said President Obama still believes in a two-state solution. This was after Netanyahu, shortly before the vote, reversed his stance and stated he would not allow the creation of a Palestinian state. 

  "Earnest acknowledged Wednesday that the U.S. would have to 're-evaluate' its position on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in light of those comments. But he stressed that Obama believes a two-state solution is best. And State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki clarified that the administration 'absolutely' will continue to push for this. 

  "Further, Earnest chided Netanyahu's Likud Party on Wednesday, saying the White House was 'deeply concerned' about divisive language emanating from Likud. He said the party had sought to marginalize Israel's minority Arabs, an apparent reference to social media posts the Likud distributed that warned Israelis about the danger of high turnout by Arab voters [that the Obama team probably helped in busing to the polls.]

  "'These are views the administration intends to convey directly to the Israelis,' Earnest said. 

  "The comments suggest there is likely to be no thaw in the chilly relationship between Netanyahu's administration and the White House. Netanyahu's Likud won a major victory on Tuesday, leaving him poised to secure a third consecutive term as prime minister. 

  "While tensions have flared for years between the two leaders, the last several weeks have seen their relationship further fray. 

  "In the run-up to the election, Netanyahu took a hardline stance on the two issues on which his government and the Obama administration are most intertwined -- Iran nuclear talks and the seemingly far-off prospects for an agreement with the Palestinians. 

  "Netanyahu pronounced earlier this week he would not allow the creation of a Palestinian state -- something which not only Obama supports but is a key demand of the Palestinians for any peace agreement. 

  "Netanyahu also infuriated the White House early this month when he delivered a speech to the U.S. Congress criticizing an emerging nuclear deal with Iran. 

  "Secretary of State John Kerry and other international negotiators are scrambling to reach the framework for an Iran deal by the end of the month. Netanyahu, though, has warned that the details he's seen provide for Iran to eventually pursue a nuclear weapon years down the road, and has urged the U.S. to scrap the pending deal. 

  "With the victory of his Likud Party, Netanyahu is stronger-positioned to keep making that case on the international stage -- and needle Obama administration efforts to etch an agreement with Tehran. 

  "Earnest said Wednesday that Kerry has called to congratulate Netanyahu. Obama has not yet, but will in the coming days, according to Earnest. A day earlier, he insisted that Obama has 'no doubt' that the strong U.S.-Israel bond will endure 'far beyond this election' no matter the result. 

  "But David Axelrod, a former top adviser to Obama, tweeted overnight as returns were coming in: 'Tightness of exits in Israel suggests Bibi's shameful 11th hour demagoguery may have swayed enough votes to save him. But at what cost?' 

  "Speaking on CNN on Wednesday, White House Director of Political Strategy David Simas congratulated the Israeli people -- but notably, not Netanyahu personally. 

  "'We want to congratulate the Israeli people for the democratic process of the election they engaged in with all of the parties that engage in that election,' he said. 'As you know the hard work of coalition building now begins. Sometimes that takes a couple of weeks and we're going to give space to the formation of that coalition government and we're not going to weigh in one way of the other except to say that the United States and Israel have a historic and close relationship and that will continue going forward.' 

  "Indeed, Netanyahu's next step would be to build a coalition government. 

  "With nearly all the votes counted, Likud appeared to have earned 30 out of parliament's 120 seats and was in a position to build with relative ease a coalition government with its nationalist, religious and ultra-Orthodox Jewish allies. 

  "The election was widely seen as a referendum on Netanyahu, who has governed the country for the past six years. Recent opinion polls indicated he was in trouble, giving chief rival Isaac Herzog of the opposition Zionist Union a slight lead. Exit polls Tuesday showed the two sides deadlocked but once the actual results came pouring in early Wednesday, Likud soared forward. Zionist Union wound up with just 24 seats. 

  "Even before the final results were known, Netanyahu declared victory and pledged to form a new government quickly. 

  "'Against all odds, we achieved a great victory for the Likud,' Netanyahu told supporters at his election night headquarters. 'I am proud of the people of Israel, who in the moment of truth knew how to distinguish between what is important and what is peripheral, and to insist on what is important.' 

  "Netanyahu focused his campaign primarily on security issues, while his opponents instead pledged to address the country's high cost of living and accused the leader of being out of touch with everyday people. 

  "While his victory may rattle the Obama administration, conservatives worried about the Iran talks saw Netanyahu's election as a strong sign. 

  "Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, who is weighing another presidential bid, said in a written statement that 'it is time for the U.S. government to stand with Israel once again.' He told Fox News on Wednesday that Netanyahu has a clear 'mandate' and argued this is good not only for the U.S. but also other Middle Eastern countries worried about the prospect of a nuclear Iran. 

  "'The worst thing that can happen is to trust Iran,' Huckabee said. 

  "Former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, who also is flirting with another Republican presidential bid, likewise said in a statement Wednesday that, 'It is my great hope that our next President will be able to stand side-by-side with Israel and Prime Minister Netanyahu' to 'defeat this Radical Islamist enemy and ensure Iran never develops a nuclear weapon.'" 

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Click here to go to the top of today's index.

 

3/18/15 The Lesson of Netanyahu's Victory: Conservatism Will Defeat Barack Obama

Rush Limbaugh transcript excerpt

RUSH: Conservatism can beat Barack Obama.  Conservatism can beat the Democrat Party.  I'll tell you who needs to realize this is the Republican Party... Centrism will not beat Barack Obama. RINOs will not beat Barack Obama. Moderates will not beat Barack Obama. Republican Northeastern liberals, Rockefeller types, are not gonna beat Barack Obama.  By Obama, I mean the Democrat Party, or Hillary Clinton, throw your name in there.

 

Click here to go to the top of today's index.

 

3/18/15

Cheney: Obama is 'worst president of my lifetime'
David Jackson, USA TODAY

  "In an interview published in Playboy, Cheney called Obama 'the worst president in my lifetime,' and that his damaging legacy will endure.

  "'I used to have significant criticism of Jimmy Carter,' said the former Republican vice president. 'But compared to Barack Obama and the damage he is doing to the nation — it's a tragedy, a real tragedy, and we are going to pay a hell of a price just trying to dig out from under his presidency.'"

 

Click here to go to the top of today's index.

 

3/17/15 St. Patrick’s Day Miracle in Israel: Netanyahu Comes From Behind to Win

By Joel B. Pollak, Breitbart

  "Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has apparently defied the mainstream media and the Obama administration with a stunning, come-from-behind victory in Israel’s elections on Tuesday. Netanyahu’s Likud Party had been projected to lose to Isaac Herzog’s Zionist Union by a margin of 26-22. Two exit polls released at the close of voting, however, suggested Likud would win, 28-27 (a third poll showed them tied). Netanyahu is now expected to form a new governing coalition.

  "The results suggest that the race shifted dramatically in the last few days, as Netanyahu opted for an all-in, “gevalt” effort to rally his supporters.

  "Netanyahu had three messages: first, that if Israelis wanted him to return to power, they would have to vote for his party; second, that he would not allow a Palestinian state to be created despite earlier commitments; third, that foreign donors and governments were mobilizing Arab voters, including some who oppose Israel’s existence, to turn out.

  "It was a blunt, ugly message that may create future political and diplomatic problems for Netanyahu, but it appears to have worked.

  "Meanwhile, the mainstream media are at a loss for words. They had expected Netanyahu to lose, perhaps even by a wide enough margin to put Herzog in the pole position to form a new government. They had expected economic issues to trump security issues, which were Netanyahu’s focus. And they expected far stronger Arab turnout (as did Netanyahu).

  "Herzog did put up a good fight, and will have cemented his leadership role in the opposition while building an international profile. The real loser is President Barack Obama, who undoubtedly hoped for a poor showing by Netanyahu. And the even bigger loser is the Iranian regime, who will now face an emboldened Israeli leader who made the case for his re-election on the grounds of strong public opposition to the generous terms of the nuclear deal that Obama is negotiating with Iran.

  "The most important immediate consequence of the election is that Netanyahu’s defense minister, Moshe “Bogey” Ya’alon, is likely to retain his post. A thorn in the side of Secretary of State John Kerry, whom he called 'messianic, Ya’alon is one of the few military planners in the western world with a grasp on the strategic realities of the Middle East. He has been a counsel of patience for Netanyahu, advising him not to waste resources on Hamas while Iran still looms as the enemy."

 

Click here to go to the top of today's index.

 

3/17/15 EPA ‘burning the Constitution’ with carbon rules, Harvard scholar says

, The Washington Times

 

  "As President Obama forges ahead in his fight against climate change, a leading Harvard Law School scholar says a central piece of the president’s strategy is akin to 'burning the Constitution' merely to advance an environmental agenda.

  "In testimony before the House Energy and Commerce Committee on Tuesday, Harvard constitutional law professor Laurence H. Tribe said the Environmental Protection Agency’s plan to limit greenhouse gas emissions from U.S. power plants is built on a shaky legal foundation. The proposal, Mr. Tribe argues, far exceeds EPA’s authority under federal law and strikes a blow to the 10th Amendment by essentially making states subservient to Washington on energy and environmental matters.

  "Mr. Tribe’s testimony — with which other legal scholars strongly disagreed during Tuesday’s hearing — comes about a month before the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals will hear arguments in a case that challenges EPA’s so-called 'Clean Power Plan,' which would limit pollution from both new and existing power plants and is designed to reduce coal use across the country.

  "Critics long have argued the proposal, which will be finalized this summer, would cost thousands of jobs and drive up electricity prices for consumers. But Mr. Tribe and others believe there are deeper problems with the looming regulations.

  "'EPA’s proposal raises grave constitutional questions, exceeds EPA’s statutory authority and violates the Clean Air Act,' said Mr. Tribe, who has argued before the Supreme Court dozens of times and represented Al Gore in the case that ultimately decided the 2000 presidential election.

  "'EPA is attempting an unconstitutional trifecta — usurping the prerogatives of the states, the Congress and the federal courts all at once,' he continued. 'Burning the Constitution of the United States … cannot be a part of our national energy policy.'. . . .

 
  "Critics also say the EPA is weakening states’ rights by requiring them to pursue unrealistic and ultimately unattainable greenhouse gas emissions rates. The EPA claims it is giving states a great deal of flexibility in figuring out how to meet emissions standards, but opponents of the plan say the standards themselves cannot be met and the supposed flexibility is an illusion."

 

Click here to go to the top of today's index.

 

3/16/15 Has a Christian Holocaust begun? When will West wake up to ISIS threat

Click here to go to the top of today's index.

 

3/16/15 ISIS' dark agenda: Terror group's tweets show more destruction of sacred Christian

sites [Click the date to view photos of the extensive wanton purposeful directed destruction of religious relics.]

  "Chilling new images released Monday show ISIS thugs advancing the Islamist army's dark agenda of eradicating Christianity from Iraq by smashing crosses, toppling statues and destroying sacred relics that have been in place for thousands of years. 

  "The latest batch of photos, culled from the Internet by watchdog Middle East Media Research Institute, show ISIS members in the heart of Iraq's once-thriving Assyrian Christian community of Nineveh, destroying symbols the Islamist terror group considers polytheistic and idolatrous. The images show the men removing crosses from atop churches and replacing them with the black ISIS banner, destroying crosses at other locations such as atop doorways and gravestones, and destroying icons and statues inside and outside churches. The sickening images are just the latest evidence of ISIS' ongoing effort to cleanse its so-called caliphate of its Christian heritage.

  "'They don't care what it's called; they are just following their ideology and that means getting rid of churches and minorities,' said MEMRI Executive Director Steven Stalinsky. 'It is the Islamic State, and there's no room for anyone else.

  "'This has been going on for some time, a systematic campaign to rid the region" of any vestiges of Christianity.

  "Although the United Nations has condemned the acts, Islamic State, as ISIS is also known, has enthusiastically circulated photos of its fighters destroying the sacred symbols and relics.

  "'We cannot remain silent,' Irina Bokova, head of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, said Friday. 'The deliberate destruction of cultural heritage constitutes a war crime. I call on all political and religious leaders in the region to stand up and remind everyone that there is absolutely no political or religious justification for the destruction of humanity’s cultural heritage.'

  "Bokova spoke after ISIS reportedly used heavy equipment to demolish the site of the ancient Assyrian capital of Nimrud, 18 miles south of Mosul, Iraq’s second-largest city. Statues, tablets and other relics have been taken from churches and destroyed or possibly sold on the black market. While the humanitarian crisis facing Iraq's Christian community is of paramount concern, religious leaders also lament the loss of the religion's most ancient artifacts.

  "In Iraq, Chaldean Catholic Patriarch Louis Sako last week called on the central government and the international community 'to act as soon as possible for the protection of innocent civilians and to offer them the necessary assistance in lodging, food and medication.'

  "ISIS 'is burning everything: human beings, stones and civilization,' he said in a March 9 statement.

  "Sako said thousands of families have been displaced by the fighting, and he called for an emergency meeting of Iraq’s Council of Ministers and the National Assembly deputies 'to discuss this situation that threatens to deteriorate from bad to worse.'

  "'This is obviously a human catastrophe that cannot suffer any silence,' he said.

  "Nimrud, built more than 3,000 years ago, was the capital of the Neo-Assyrian Empire after 883 B.C. The Neo-Assyrian Empire, whose rulers spoke a language distantly related to Arabic and Hebrew, ruled Mesopotamia, the ancient name for Iraq and parts of Syria, until approximately 600 B.C. For centuries, the region along the Tigris River retained monuments, frescos, temples and a ziggurat, the stepped pyramid characteristic of Mesopotamian civilizations.

  "But earlier this month, ISIS released video showing men smashing statues with sledgehammers in the Nineveh Museum, in Nineveh, the capital of the Neo-Assyrian Empire after 705 B.C.

  "In recent weeks, ISIS has also set off bombs around Mosul Central Library, destroying as many as 10,000 priceless and irreplaceable books and manuscripts.

  "Many relics have been taken to museums in Baghdad or around the world for safekeeping, but artifacts in churches, including murals and statues, have been left where they stood for millennia, until the rise one year ago of the black-clad terrorist army. Last summer, ISIS fighters used explosives to blow up the tomb of a key figure in Christianity, Judaism and Islam. The holy site in Mosul was believed to be the burial place of the prophet Jonah, who was swallowed by a whale in the Islamic and Judeo-Christian traditions."

 

Click here to go to the top of today's index.

 

3/16/15 Expert Fears White House Deliberately ‘Whitewashing’ Iran, Hezbollah Terror Threat

The Algemeiner

  "A recent US Intelligence report which appears to downplay the terrorist activities from Iran and its proxy groups has raised questions about what could have motivated the change from previous similar reports.

  "Cliff May, President of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, a Washington DC think tank, called the Director of National Intelligence’s 2015 Worldwide Threat Assessment 'disturbing.' May said he is worried that the Administration is attempting to minimize the terror threat of Iran and Hezbollah in an effort to lift sanctions against Iran, and further nuclear negotiations.

  "As first reported in The Times of Israel, the 2015 report to the Senate Armed Services Committee by James Clapper, Director of National Intelligence, appears to largely omit the terrorism threat posed by Iran and Hezbollah when compared to previous reports.

  "'People are very concerned that the White House is whitewashing Iran and Hezbollah’s involvement with terrorism,' May told The Algemeiner. “If that’s the case, the next question is why. The working presumption might be to facilitate the nuclear negotiations. A related concern: that this could be a way to unravel the sanctions on Iran that are based on terrorism, rather than illicit nuclear activities. If any of that is accurate it should be alarming.”

  "The 2015 intelligence report does include a section on Iran. It mentions that Iran 'is an ongoing threat to US national interests' because of its support to the Assad regime in Syria, promulgation of anti-Israeli policies, development of advanced military capabilities, and pursuit of its nuclear program.

  "The 2015 report also describes Iran’s efforts to combat 'Sunni extremists' and 'empower “Shia communities,' in addition to Iran’s desire to 'dampen sectarianism, build responsive partners, and deescalate tensions with Saudi Arabia…' Though the report mentions Hezbollah, it does so in the context of Lebanon.

  "Unlike reports in previous years, there is no mention of Iran directly threatening US allies, or of an alarming increase in Hezbollah’s global terror activities.

  "For example, the 2014 national intelligence report to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence contained a section on Iran and Hezbollah that stated “[o]utside the Syrian theater, Iran and Lebanese Hizballah (sic) continue to directly threaten the interests of US allies. Hizballah (sic) has increased its global terrorist activity in recent years to level we have not seen since the 1990s.”

  "The 2013 intelligence report to that same committee contained similar sections on Iran and Hezbollah, but wrote that both were reluctant to confront the US directly.

  "The 2012 report even had a section entitled 'The Threat from Iran' that assessed 'Iran’s willingness to sponsor future attacks in the United States…'

  "Cliff May of FDD told The Algemeiner that there is no evidence that either Iran or Hezbollah has “forsworn terrorism in any sense.”

  "'Implying that Iran is a responsible power, makes it easier to hold negotiations over its nuclear program,' May said. 'By removing these references, you are implying that they are becoming more responsible.'

  "May also cautioned against viewing Iran as an ally in light of its opposition to ISIS.

  "'It is a fallacy to believe that the answer to the Islamic state is the Islamic Republic,' May told The Algemeiner.

  "May said the Obama Administration needs to answer for the apparent omissions in the 2015 intelligence report.

  "'We should be demanding further explanation from the administration on what this is intended to achieve,' he said."

 

Click here to go to the top of today's index.

 

3/16/15 Did You See What Happened in New Hampshire This Weekend?

Rush Limbaugh transcript excerpts

RUSH: Have you seen what happened in New Hampshire over the weekend?  There's this guy, he's the governor of Wisconsin, Scott Walker. He went into New Hampshire and basically owned it.  I wonder why this is happening wherever this guy goes. Iowa, now New Hampshire, wherever he goes, he's drawing enthused, rabid, huge, large crowds, and he is giving those crowds what they want.  I wonder how this is happening. 

Governor of Wisconsin. It's Scott Walker. He's the governor of Wisconsin. . . .

Scott Walker is the front-runner. . . . [H]e went into New Hampshire and the crowds showed up and they were huge and they were enthusiastic.

He gave them what they wanted. He got 'em fired up; they expected to be fired up. I'm telling you, I think this has the Republican establishment on its heels a little bit.  At this time, you know, it was supposed to be Jeb and Chris Christie and there were a bunch of them in the field. But this was not supposed to be. This wasn't in the cards.  I mean, they thought Walker might go.

But they didn't think anybody'd ever heard of him and they didn't think anybody would care.  "This is Wisconsin! It's the Midwest and so forth, and our big guns are here in the Northeast. Mitt and Christie and Jeb now and whoever else might get in."  But wherever he goes, his crowds are enormous and enthusiastic.  Meanwhile, Mrs. Clinton is the exact opposite. She can't draw a crowd. She can't sell her book.  I mean, the contrast is deep and profound.  

 

Click here to go to the top of today's index.

 

3/16/15 The Obama Administration’s Attack on the Constitution: Part 2, Environmental Protection Agency John Hinderaker, PowerLine [Click the date to continue the lengthy but important series started earlier]

 

Click here to go to the top of today's index.

 

3/15/15 Bolton calls Iran deal 'unprecedented' surrender By Mark Hensch, The Hill

 
  "Former United Nations Ambassador John Bolton said Saturday that President Obama is negotiating 'an unprecedented act of surrender' with Iran in discussions over its nuclear weapons program.
 
  "'This deal is fundamentally flawed,' Bolton said at the South Carolina National Security Action Summit in West Columbia, S.C. 'There really is no deal I’d trust Iran with. It is a regime determined to have nuclear weapons and this deal will give it to them.'
 
  "The Obama administration is hoping Iran will slow or stop its nuclear armaments research in exchange for removing economic sanctions. Britain, China, France, Germany and Russia are aiding U.S. efforts to bargain with Iran. The two sides will resume talks in Lausanne, Switzerland, next week.
 
  "Controversy erupted over an open letter Republicans sent Iran’s leadership Monday. It vowed Congress can void any deal it finds unsatisfying and was signed by 47 GOP senators.
 
  "President Obama said Friday he was 'embarrassed' for the message’s signers. The move has drawn swift criticism from social media, with the hashtag #47Traitors a recurring trend online last week. [There is a definite question who they traitors are.]
 
  "Bolton rebuked the president’s response as unjustified Saturday. He said the Senators were not traitors, but rather lawmakers who 'stood up for the Constitution.' [Those who do not are at the minimum betraying the constitution they swore to uphold.]
 
  "'The president coddles the Iranian ayatollah and attacks his own countrymen and our closest allies over this deal,' Bolton said Saturday. 'The danger we hope to avoid is now imminent. This is just one example of how the President doesn’t care about America’s national security.'
 
  "Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s Supreme Leader, blasted the letter’s 'backstabbing' on Thursday. Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), the letter’s driving force, criticized the Ayatollah’s regime Tuesday.
 
  "'They’ve been killing Americans for 35 years, they’ve killed hundreds of troops in Iran, now they control five capitols in the Middle East,' Cotton said on MSNBC’s 'Morning Joe.' 'They are nothing but hard-liners in Iran, and if they do all of those things without a nuclear weapon, imagine what they would do with one.'
 
  "Bolton said Saturday that Obama’s eagerness for a deal would give Tehran a 'free pass' for nuclear arms. He said American voters should thus make national security the central issue of 2016’s presidential elections.
 
  "'The gravest threat to our national security sits in the Oval Office,- [Emphasis added.] Bolton said. 'The next two years can’t pass swiftly enough. For God’s sake, let’s not make the same mistake in 2016.'

 

Click here to go to the top of today's index.

 

3/15/15 MO Lt Governor: Holder Incited Mob Many Times By Pam Kelly, Breitbart

  "Sunday on Fox News Channel’s 'America’s News HQ,' Lt. Governor Peter Kinder (R-MO) said Attorney General Eric Holder 'on many occasions' seemed to 'be inciting the mob.'

  "Kinder  said, 'He is sounding the right notes today, this afternoon. I just wish he had been more judicious and measured in his comments since the August 9. Because Mr. Holder came in and seemed on many occasions to be inciting the mob. He seemed to be putting his weight on the one side of the scales of  justice and not backing up law enforcement. And if he is now, you know, backing up law enforcement mode, then I will be among those cheering him. And I hope that’s the way he is from now on.'

  "When asked if he had spoken to Mr. Holder directly, Kinder said, 'No, no, no, he doesn’t bend to speak with people like me. He comes into town and meets with one side. He met with the family of Michael Brown, and that’s fine that he met with