Obama Regime To Send $47M In “Humanitarian Aid” To Palestinian Terrorists

US To Send $47M In Humanitarian Aid To Gaza Strip – Fox News

The U.S. is sending $47 million in humanitarian aid to the besieged Gaza Strip to help tens of thousands of Palestinians there who have been forced from their homes since war broke out two weeks ago.

.

.
A State Department breakdown of the aid that was released Monday said nearly a third of the money – $15 million – will go to the United Nations’ refugee mission in Gaza.

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry was expected to discuss the aid with U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon in a meeting late Monday in Cairo.

Kerry arrived in the Egyptian capital only hours earlier in a U.S. push to help broker a truce between Israel and the militant group Hamas that controls Gaza.

.

.

*VIDEO* Rep. Don Young Verbally Bitchslaps Obama’s EPA And Congressional Democrats Over Federal Overreach


.

.

Holy Crap! Even Time Freakin’ Magazine Is Calling Obama A Coward Now – Clearly Its Staff Are RACISTS!!!

Time Magazine Calls Obama A Coward, Implores Him To Lead – Downtrend

.

.
Besides being wrong about everything, the biggest slam on Obama is he essentially does nothing. He’ll make a few speeches blaming Republicans for his failings, then whisk off for golf, vacations, and fundraising. Conservatives have noticed this behavior since the beginning of his first term, but now with his inaction on the border crisis, the liberals are waking up to it, and they’re just as pissed off as the rest of us.

Surprisingly, Time Magazine has issued a kick to Obama’s groin with a piece called The Border And Obama, published today. In it, author Joe Klein calls Obama a coward and begs him to do something, anything, presidential. And those are some of the nicer things he says about our Procrastinator-In-Chief.

I almost couldn’t make it to the juicy stuff because this article starts out as a very pro-illegal alien piece that advances the bogus theory that the hoard of Central American children are fleeing war torn lands. But as Klein gets into the fact that religious organizations are taking an active roll in the crisis, he takes Obama to task for doing absolutely nothing.

Barack Obama should see the Catholic Charities mission in McAllen. His job, after all, is to rise above the rancor and, well, lead. You don’t do this by making a speech to a favored audience. You do it by taking action, setting a personal example. The President has gone to the scene of other human tragedies. He has acknowledged the suffering personally in the past. But not now, and you have to wonder why.

Klein thinks he knows why Obama refuses to address the border crisis:

True political courage is near extinct.

But does the President have courage?

Nowadays politicians are swaddled by their media consultants, who determine whether it is “safe” to be “courageous.” But acts of courage don’t come with a money-back guarantee. They are courageous because they’re potentially dangerous or, more likely, embarrassing. Courage’s reward comes subtly, in the form of trust as the public learns that a politician is willing to take risks to tell the truth. Obama is currently wandering about the country, trying to meet average people, but the choreography is more stringent than the Bolshoi’s. He said he didn’t want to go to the border because it would only be a “photo op”… on the same day his office published a photo of the President and Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper shooting pool. Who choreographed that?

Klein lists a variety of hands-on actions Obama could take in dealing with the flood of illegal alien children invading our country but doesn’t. The least of which is to go down to the border and see first hand what is going on, something the President has refused to do.

These are precisely the sort of things that Obama doesn’t seem to do anymore. There has been a skein of stories indicating he’s thrown in the towel. He’s so tired of head-banging with Republicans that he has taken refuge in late-night dinners with celebrities and intellectuals.

Klein also says Obama has a distaste for politics and suggests that the president feels it is all beneath him. He issues a warning concerning Obama’s legacy:

If he’s going to accomplish anything in the last two years of his presidency, he’s going to have to change his style, which will be near impossible for a man as entrenched behind his flacks-in-jackets as the President is.

Change his style? How about his ideology? I disagree with a lot of what Klein has written, but he’s right the eff on about Obama being a rhetoric machine with little to no substance. It’s just a shame it took him almost 6 years to figure out Obama loves the fame of the Presidency, but hates the work a president is expected to do.

.

.

Leaked Intelligence Report On Border Crisis Shreds Narrative From Obama Regime And Leftist Media

Leaked Border Crisis Intel Shreds Narrative From Media And Obama Admin – Breitbart Texas

.

.
An elite, law-enforcement sensitive El Paso Intelligence Center (EPIC) intel report from July 7, 2014 was leaked to Breitbart Texas and reveals that homicide rates in Central America suggest violence is likely not the primary cause of the surge of thousands of unaccompanied minors and incomplete family units illegally entering the United States.

The EPIC report indicates that the belief among the illegal immigrants that they would receive permisos and be allowed to stay was the driving factor in their choices to come to the United States and that the crisis will continue until ‘misperceptions’ about U.S. immigration benefits were no longer prevalent . The report also states that the migrants cited Univision and other other outlets as having shaped their views on U.S. immigration policy. Another implication of the report is that family members already in the U.S. are encouraging the minors to come and organizing the travel with smugglers. EPIC is a widely respected intelligence analysis group and was initially staffed by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA).

According to the official DEA website, EPIC now contains representatives from a host of law enforcement agencies. The DEA states:

Agencies currently represented at EPIC include the Drug Enforcement Administration; Department of Homeland Security; Customs & Border Protection; Immigration & Customs Enforcement; U.S. Coast Guard; Federal Bureau of Investigation; Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives; U.S. Marshals Service; Department of Transportation; Internal Revenue Service; U.S. Department of the Interior; National Geospatial – Intelligence Agency; U.S. Department of Defense/IC; Joint Task Force – North; Joint Interagency Task Force – South; Texas Department of Public Safety; Texas Air National Guard; National Guard Counter Narcotics Bureau; Department of State; Bureau of Indian Affairs; Union Pacific Railroad Police; Kansas City Southern Railroad Police; El Paso Police Department; and the El Paso County Sheriff’s Office.

The leaked EPIC report discusses the motivational factors of the illegal immigrants in their choice to migrate to the United States:

(U//LES) In late May, the U.S. Border Patrol interviewed unaccompanied children (UAC) and migrant families apprehended in the Rio Grande Valley. Of the 230 total migrants interviewed, 219 cited the primary reason for migrating to the United States was the perception of U.S. immigration laws granting free passes or permisos to UAC and adult female OTMs traveling with minors. Migrants indicated that knowledge of permisos was widespread across Central America due to word of mouth, local, and international media messaging – prompting many to depart for the United States within 30 days of becoming aware of these perceived benefits, according to the same reporting.

(U//LES) A majority of migrants interviewed also noted that they had encountered family units, consisting of a mother and child under the age of 18 during their journey to the United States and that the families had indicated they planned to surrender to U.S. authorities because they were informed that they would likely be released.

The EPIC report discusses the lack of correlation between violence rates in Central America and the current border crisis:

(U//LES) EPIC assesses homicide trends and migrant interviews suggest violence is likely not the principal factor driving the increase in UAC migration. While CBP data from early fiscal year 2011 indicates a steady increase in OTM and UAC migration, United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) statistics – within this same timeframe – show a decline in per capita homicide rates in these three countries; El Salvador saw the sharpest decline, followed by Honduras and Guatemala, respectively.

.

.

.

.
The EPIC report discusses the media outlets that the illegal immigrants claimed shaped their perceptions about U.S. policies towards illegal immigrants of this nature:

…Migrants cited Univision, Primer Impacto, Al Rojo Vivo and several Honduran television news outlets for helping shape their perception of U.S. immigration policy.

(U) Although EPIC lacks reliable reporting of Central American newspapers broadcasting the perceived benefits of U.S. immigration policies, several U.S. media outlets since June 2014 have identified Central American newspapers that have enticed minors to travel to the United States. For example, Honduran and El Salvadoran press have reportedly advertised the DACA policy, accommodations for detained UAC, and the promise of reunification with family members in the United States.

The EPIC report discusses the illegal immigrants’ family members already living in the U.S. as encouraging the minors to illegally enter the nation and setting up the travel arrangements with smugglers:

(U//LES) U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) also notes that a large number of migrants interviewed claimed family members in the United States encouraged their travel because the U.S. government would cease issuing permisos after June 2014. (U//LES) U.S. Border Patrol officials report that the majority of migrants interviewed in late May indicated that they made arrangements with smugglers in their respective countries through the assistance of family members and friends in the United States.

The EPIC report states that near-term slowdown in the crisis is unlikely and that traditional migration factors will likely continue to fuel the wave of illegal immigration. It states that the crisis will continue until the migrants’ “misperceptions” about U.S. immigration benefits are changed:

(U//FOUO) EPIC assesses that UAC flow to the border will remain elevated until migrants’ misperceptions about US immigration benefits are changed. We further judge that this process could take the remainder of 2014 given the time needed for bi-lateral coordination efforts – such as information and enforcement campaigns in Mexico and Central America – to take hold. Nonetheless, traditional underlying immigration factors, such as family reunification and poor socioeconomic conditions, will continue to drive alien flow – including minors – from Honduras, Guatemala, and El Salvador.

Breitbart Texas provides a redacted version of the leaked intel report here. All redactions were made by Breitbart Texas. The redactions are limited to source material citations, names, and contact information.

.

.

Four-Star Marine Corps General James Amos Slams Obama Over His Handling Of Iraq War (Audio)

Top Marine Corps General Slams Obama’s Handling Of Iraq – Washington Times

Four-star Gen. James Amos, commandant of the Marine Corps, used a speaking engagement at the Brookings Institute on Tuesday to deliver a stinging rebuke of the Obama administration’s handling of Iraq.

“I have a hard time believing that had we been there, and worked with the government, and worked with parliament, and worked with the minister of defense, the minister of interior, I don’t think we’d be in the same shape we’re in today,” Gen. Amos said, the Fiscal Times reported Wednesday.

It is rare for an active-duty serviceman to give such blunt public criticism of a sitting president. While Gen. Amos was careful not to mention the president by name, The Fiscal Times reported that the top general’s upcoming retirement this fall may have played a role in his decision.

“We may think we’re done with all of these nasty, thorny, tacky little things that are going on around the world – and I’d argue that if you’re in that nation, it’s not a tacky, little thing for you. We may think we’re done with them, but they’re not done with us,” the commandant of the Marine Corps added, the paper reported. “We’re probably the only country in the world that has the resources and the capability to be able to do some of this that others can’t.”

The decorated officer added that it is breaking the hearts of Marines to see many of the gains made before U.S. troops pulled out in 2011 squandered. Sunni radicals with the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) have taken over large swathes of Iraq since June.

Roughly 852 Marines were killed and 8,500 injured during deployments to Iraq, The Fiscal Times reported.

.

………………………..Click on image above to hear audio.

.

.

Rep. Issa: Voicemail Left By Former Top Obama Regime Official A Clear Violation Of Federal Law (Audio)

Listen To The Voicemail Left By Former Top Obama Administration Official That Darrell Issa Says Is A Clear Violation Of Federal Law – The Blaze

Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) is sounding the alarm regarding new alleged audio of former Labor Secretary Hilda Solis leaving a voicemail for someone “off the record” to ask the individual to contribute and help organize a fundraising event for President Barack Obama’s campaign. Issa says Solis violated the Hatch Act, which prohibits political activity on official time.

In his opening statement during a House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing on Wednesday, Issa played the voicemail Solis reportedly left to pressure a Labor Department employee to donate to Obama’s re-election campaign.

.

.
Read a transcript of the controversial Solis voicemail:

“Hi – this is Hilda Solis calling, um, just calling you off-the-record here – Wanted to ask you if you could, um, help us get folks organized to come to a fundraiser that we’re doing for Organizing for America for Obama campaign on Friday at La Fonda at 6 p.m. Steven Smith, an attorney, and his staff are helping us [inaudible]. There are a lot of folks that we know that are coming but wanted to ask you if you might help contribute or get other folks to help out. I would encourage you to call this number, [inaudible] – that’s his assistant – at [phone number] and you can call [the attorney] yourself who’s a good friend, an attorney, good friend of mine, at [phone number]. And it’s for a Friday event at La Fonda [inaudible] we’re just trying to raise money to show that we have support here in [inaudible].”

.

.
Issa went on to slam the Obama administration for showing what he called an “indefensible” attempt to avoid oversight.

“It is deeply ironic that an administration claiming to be the most transparent ever, has resisted oversight of its political office and offered less corroboration than its predecessors,” he said.

Watch Issa’s full opening statement below:

.

.

.

Woman Who Believed Obama Would Pay For Her Gas And Mortgage Now Not Such A Big Fan (Video)

Remember The Woman Who Said Obama Would Pay Her Gas And Mortgage? Her Transformation Is Amazing – TPNN

.

.
Remember the viral video from the 2008 presidential election, showing a sycophantic Obama supporter, caught up in the “hope and change” mantra, believing that his election win would put an end to her having to pay her own gas and mortgage bills?

Well, she’s had what you might call a “fundamental transformation.” Meet Peggy Joseph.

“I won’t have to worry about putting gas in my car. I won’t have to worry about paying my mortgage,” a worshipful Ms. Joseph said after attending a 2008 Obama rally at the height of his messianic euphoria stage.

Joel Gilbert caught up with Peggy Joseph for the filming of his new full-length documentary film, “There’s No Place Like Utopia,” six years after Joseph thought that Barack Obama would pay for her gas and her mortgage.

Ms. Joseph told Gilbert, after viewing the 2008 segment together that gave her notoriety, that not only has Obama not been paying her gas or mortgage, but both have gotten progressively harder to pay.

“During that time, we needed a change, but change for the better, not for the worse,” an awakened Peggy Joseph told Gilbert.

“He had a very big voice, just like the Wizard of Oz,” Joseph said, comparing Obama to the famous phony wizard. “The wizard was this little teeny-teeny tiny man, and I think it’s the same thing with Obama, the man behind the curtain,” Ms. Joseph said in a reflective, disappointing tone.

Ms. Joseph looks back at the time of her 2008 interview, saying, “I was Dorothy in the Wizard of Oz. That’s how I feel.”

“What I learned is never trust the Wizard,” Joseph now says. “It’s within ourselves to have the determination, the courage, and the brains, to bring us to our destiny.”

Gilbert told WND that he was shocked to find Peggy Joseph “was a suburban soccer mom with four children, who earned her living as a hard-working nurse, the daughter of Haitian immigrants,” and had “no history of ever accepting any form of government assistance or taxpayer-funded handouts.”

Watch below:

.

.

.

Black Chicagoans Slam Obama Over Illegal Immigration: “Worse President Ever Elected” (Video)

Chicago Inner City Blacks Go Off On Obama Over Illegal Immigration; “Worst President Ever” – Gateway Pundit

So much for Hope and Change -

Chicago southside African-Americans GO OFF on President Obama.

Rebel Pundit interviewed the community this week about Barack Obama’s open border policies and his spending on the illegal immigrant community. Let’s just say – they are NOT HAPPY.

One local resident even says, “Barack Obama will go down as the worst president ever elected.”

The Chicago resident below says:

“With the president setting aside all these funds for immigrants and forsaken African-American community and African-American families, I think that’s a disgrace. And Barack is from the heart of 55th in the City of Chicago… He will probably go down as the worst president ever elected. Bill Clinton was the African-American president.“

.

.
And this Chicago woman goes off on Barack Obama.

“Mr. President, we’re asking for you. You’re spending billions of dollars in Texas but we got a problem here in Chicago. We will not stand by this here and keep letting this senseless killing and shooting happening in our community.”

.

.
Read more on the outrage in the black community here.

They have had enough!

“He will probably go down as the worst president ever!”

.

.
So far this July 120 people have been shot and at least 26 killed in Chicago.

And the month is not even halfway through.

.

.

Obama’s HHS Bankrolled Catholic And Baptist Churches From 2010 To 2013 To Prepare For Illegal Alien Invasion

HHS Bankrolled Catholic And Baptist Church From 2010 To 2013 To Prepare For Obama’s 2014 Invasion – Liberty News

.

.
A month or two ago news broke that Obama’s HHS was calling for private contractors to help transport illegal aliens throughout the interior United States. What made this already big news even bigger is the fact that the original call for proposals came out in January, long before the bulk of the illegal alien surge began.

The breaking news you’re about to read is ten times bigger, because the following proves the Obama administration was bankrolling America’s churches back in 2010. And the tens of millions were flowing in to prepare for the invasion currently underway.

The following is a small taste of what’s out there in grant records. This is just the tip of the iceberg, folks.

Between Dec 2010 and Nov 2013, the Catholic Charities Diocese of Galveston received $15,549,078 in federal grants from Health & Human Services for “Unaccompanied Alien Children Project” with a program description of “Refugee and Entry Assistance.”

Last year, the Catholic Charities Diocese of Fort Worth received $350,000 from Department of Homeland Security for “citizenship and education training” with a program description of “citizenship and immigration services.”

Between September 2010 and September 2013, the Catholic Charities of Dallas received $823,658 from the Department of Homeland Security for “Citizenship Education Training” for “refugee and entrant assistance.”

From Dec 2012 to January 2014, Baptist Child & Family Services received $62,111,126 in federal grants from Health & Human Services for “Unaccompanied Alien Children Program.”

Any questions?

Document about Unaccompanied Alien Children Project located here.

.

.

*VIDEO* Congressman Trent Franks Calls Obama’s Foreign Policy Cowardly


.

.

Issa Subpoenas Obama Lackey Over Claims Staffers Are Doing Campaign Work With Taxpayer Money

GOP House Committee Chairman Subpoenas White House Political Chief Over Claims Obama Staffers Are Doing Campaign Work With Taxpayer Funds – Daily Mail

House Oversight and Government Reform Committee chair Rep. Darrell Issa sent his latest subpoena to the Obama administration on Friday, demanding testimony from the director of a controversial White House office reportedly tasked with political work on taxpayers’ dime.

David Simas, the director of the White House Office of Political Strategy and Outreach, has refused to testify voluntarily but will be required to answer questions in a July 16 hearing on Capitol Hill.

President Barack Obama closed the White House Office of Political Affairs in 2011, just days before an Office of Special Counsel report warned that it risked ‘transforming from an official government office into a partisan political operation.’

But the president reopened the office six months ago under a new name as Democrats began to gear up for a contentious midterm election fight.

The New York Times reported then that the White House was ‘serious about defending Democratic control of the Senate and taking back the House from Republicans.’

.

.

.
‘White House officials,’ according to the Times, ‘said it makes more sense to have a political office during a congressional election year to focus attention on candidate needs, including fund-raising.’

Issa, a hard-charging California Republican who has pressed the administration on alleged IRS abuses, said Friday that the White House’s reboot of its Office of Political Affairs was an ‘effort to appease its political allies’ by ‘assist[ing] in partisan election efforts and fundraising.’

Former Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis and former Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius Issa said, ‘were faulted by the Office of Special Counsel for inappropriately using their offices in violation of the Hatch Act.

That federal law prohibits most executive branch employees from engaging in political activity while on duty, or at any time in their workplaces. It also prohibits them from soliciting or receiving political contributions, according to the U.S. Office of Government Ethics.

In 2012 Sebelius slipped a political message into a speech to the Human Rights Campaign, a gay advocacy group. The Office of Special Counsel later accused her of violating the Hatch Act.

She later said she had made a ‘technical’ error, and pledged not to repeat it.

The initial move to shutter the White House’s political office was spearheaded by California Rep. Henry Waxman in 2007, when Democrats controlled the House of Representatives and Waxman chaired the committee now run by Issa.

At the time it was seen as a partisan move to prohibit the George W. Bush White House from using the president’s bully pulpit to affect the 2008 presidential election.

.

.
Waxman’s staffers interviewed 20 political appointees and pored over nearly 70,000 documents. They issued a report one month before Obama defeated Republican Mitt Romney, declaring that ‘American taxpayers should not pay the salaries of White House officials when they are engaged in helping members of the president’s political party.’

The Obama White House did not respond to a request for comment.

But newly minted White House Counsel W. Neil Eggleston wrote to Issa in June to insist that the new incarnation of the political office operates without violating the Hatch Act.

Special Counsel Carolyn Lerner, however, wrote in March that the Obama administration reopened the office without consulting ith her to determine if it was legal.

Lerner will testify in the June 16 hearing, along with Simas and Scott Coffina, a former Associate Counsel to the President during the Bush Administration.

In March, Issa asked the White House to provide copies of all its documents related to the 2014 reopening. To date, it has provided none.

.

.

IRS Employee Suspended For Urging Customer Service Help Line Callers To Vote For Obama

IRS Worker Suspended For Pro-Obama Activities – Washington Times

An IRS employee was suspended for 100 days for using his job at the agency’s help line to try to convince callers to vote for President Obama, a government watchdog agency announced Thursday.

.
…………

.
The employee, whose name wasn’t mentioned in the announcement from the Office of Special Counsel, admitted to using his job for political purposes and agreed to the settlement that involved a 100-day suspension.

“OSC’s complaint alleged that, when fielding taxpayers’ questions on an IRS customer service help line, the employee repeatedly urged taxpayers to re-elect President Obama in 2012 by delivering a chant based on the spelling of the employee’s last name,” the investigative office said.

The OSC also announced a U.S. Postal Service employee was fired after he ran for seats in Congress and solicited donations to his campaign, violating the Hatch Act that limits government employees’ ability to get involved in politics.

That man, Marcus Lewis, ran despite being warned against it by the OSC, leading to a series of personnel hearings that resulted in the Merit Systems Protection Board demanding he be fired.

The judgment against the IRS employee, meanwhile, was the third instance where the tax agency has run afoul of the Hatch Act in recent months.

The OSC announced in May that the Dallas office of the IRS had to be warned after complaints that it was “commonplace” to have pro-Obama screensavers on computers, and to have campaign-style buttons and stickers at the office.

And an IRS employee in Kentucky served a 14-day suspension for blasting Republicans in a telephone conversation with a taxpayer.

.

.

*VIDEO* John Cornyn: Obama Refuses To Visit Southern Border And Witness Crisis He Created



……………………….Click on image above to watch video.

.

.

*VIDEO* Ted Cruz: Humanitarian Crisis On Southern Border A Direct Result Of Obama’s Lawlessness



……………………….Click on image above to watch video.

.

.

Obama: Treacherous Or Incompetent? (Lawrence Sellin PhD)

Obama: Treacherous Or Incompetent? – Lawrence Sellin PhD

.

.
For many, it is difficult to decide whether Barack Obama is intentionally trying to destroy the United States or that he is doing so as a consequence of some type of ideology-induced stupidity.

The damage wrought through the implementation of his absurd and impractical liberal “solutions” to national problems is readily evident.

When Barack Obama was inaugurated on January 20, 2009 the national debt of the United States was $10,626,877,048,913. As of Jun 26, 2014, the debt was $17,512,592,730,102.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), in 2007 on the eve of the recession, there were 146.6 million Americans working. Today, after six years of the Obama Administration, there are 145.8 million Americans in jobs, 800,000 below the previous peak. Since Obama came into office in 2009, 7.2 million people have left the workforce, making the true unemployment rate 8.3 percent, not 6.1 percent. Median household income is down almost $2,300 from what it was when Obama took office. Real wages are lower than they were in 1999. Growth in the first quarter of this year was a negative 2.9%, the biggest downward revision from the agency’s second GDP estimate since records began in 1976.

In April, prior to the present massive and growing surge in illegal minor immigration, Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) said Obama has created an “open borders” situation by failing to enforce U.S. immigration law. One could fairly conclude that the current crisis was a deliberate policy decision because the Obama indicated that he would expand Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), a program that offers amnesty for illegal immigrant children and provides an incentive for exactly the type of mass illegal invasion we are witnessing on our southern border.

There should be little doubt that Obama’s open borders policy is meant to fundamentally transform the country’s demographics, produce millions of additional Democratic voters and welfare recipients and permanently undermine the national security of the United States.

The ATF “Fast and Furious” scheme, likely designed to erode Second Amendment rights, allowed weapons from the U.S. to “walk” across the border into the hands of Mexican drug dealers. The ATF lost track of hundreds of firearms, many of which were used in crimes, including the December 2010 killing of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry.

Obama’s IRS targeted his perceived political enemies, conservative and pro-Israel groups, prior to the 2012 election. Questions are being raised about why this occurred, who ordered it, whether there was any White House involvement and whether there was an initial effort to hide who knew about the targeting and when. Obama apparently lied when he told Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly that there was “not even a smidgen of corruption” in IRS activities.

The Obama administration knew about allegations of secret waiting lists at the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) as early as 2010, although, on May 19, 2014, White House spokesman claimed Obama learned about the scandal only recently through press reports.

The unfolding sectarian violence in Iraq is just the latest crisis where the Obama administration seemingly has been caught off guard. From the Veterans Affairs scandal to Russia’s swift annexation of Crimea, news of the world somehow keeps taking Obama and his team by surprise. Or are they just lying to camouflage flawed or failed policies, which have harmed the United States?

The attack on our “consulate” in Benghazi on September 11, 2012 was perhaps the most egregious of Obama’s many foreign policy failures because four Americans needlessly died due to a failure to provide adequate protection both before and during the attack.

Obama falsely blamed an internet video as the cause of the attack to hide the truth: the resurgence of jihadists in Muslim Brotherhood-governed Egypt, the continuing demand for the Blind Sheikh’s release (which underscored the jihadists’ influence), and the very real danger that jihadists would attack the embassy (which demonstrated that al-Qaeda was anything but “decimated”).

It is likely that a clandestine operation supplying weapons through Turkey to the Syrian rebels was being run out of Benghazi. Efforts were made not to draw attention to what was happening there. That could explain why local militias were paid to provide security, why requests for increased security were denied and why the US military was either unprepared to respond or told not to do so.

A Benghazi cover-up may have also prevented a thorough examination of the possible passivity or complicity of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood government in the attacks in Cairo and Benghazi and the potentially dangerous consequences of arming Islamic factions in Syria over which the US has little control, where the weapons we supplied may someday be used against us.

It should be obvious that Obama lied about Benghazi, he lied about Obamacare, the IRS, the VA scandal and in countless other instances.

Nevertheless, the liberal media remain willfully ignorant, will not report the truth and continue to protect Obama, regardless of the costs to the country.

Obama will survive in office until public awareness of his administration’s treachery matches its level of incompetence and exceeds the media’s capacity to tolerate corruption.

Jimmy Carter made mistakes. Barack Obama, a creator of crises, practices deceit and the willful betrayal of trust.

It does matter whether the damage inflicted upon our country results from ineptitude or premeditation.

It is ideology-induced treachery.

.

.

*VIDEO* Rep. Mo Brooks: Obama’s Border Security Lies And Incompetence



……………………….Click on image above to watch video.

.

.

Murrieta Patriots Divert Third Round Of Obama Buses Loaded With Illegals (Video)

Stand Your Ground: Protesters Divert 3rd Round Of Buses From Murrieta – Breitbart

.

.
Demonstrators opposed to illegal immigration stood their ground again at the Murrieta Border Patrol station on Monday, where U.S. Border Patrol had been scheduled to transfer a third round of buses, with approximately 140 illegal aliens aboard in total, transferred from overcrowded Texas detention facilities.

For a third time, the buses were rerouted to the San Ysidro, California Border Patrol station, near the U.S.-Mexico border, for processing. The demonstrators gathered in areas to the north and south of the Murrieta station after law enforcement blocked off the road near the station itself. Many told Breitbart News they considered their stand a success, since buses scheduled for Murrieta are avoiding it as long as demonstrators remain.

The anti-illegal immigration protests Monday brought out new, first-time demonstrators and onlookers from many different backgrounds–from young enlisted Marines to legal immigrants from Germany, Mexico, and Central America. Karen Siegemund of Rage Against the Media, comedian and author Evan Sayet, and radio host Kender Macgowan made it out as well.

Despite the news of buses being re-routed for the second time since a standoff with three buses in Murrieta July 1, anti-illegal immigration demonstrators plan to continue to monitor and be at the ready should any transfers of illegal aliens to the Murrieta station resume.

The general sentiment is that the moment that demonstrators leave, transfers to the station will continue.

.

.

.

More Obama-Muslim Brotherhood Cooperation Revealed: Smells Like Treason To Me (Allen West)

More Obama-Muslim Brotherhood Cooperation Revealed: Smells Like Treason To Me – Allen West

.

.
We’ve frequently addressed the mounting evidence showing the deep ties between the Obama administration and the Muslim Brotherhood. In fact, just recently we reported on Mohammed Elibiary’s tweets about America being an Islamic country – he just happens to be an Obama administration advisor on Homeland Security with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.

As par for the course, liberal progressives prefer to put their heads in the sand and dismiss the growing evidence – like this particular story, for instance.

According to the Gulf News, cooperation between the Obama administration and the Muslim Brotherhood has been going on for quite some time. In 2010 even before the “Arab Spring,” Obama personally issued Presidential Study Directive 11 (PSD-11) to assess the Muslim Brotherhood and other “political Islamist” movements, including the ruling AKP in Turkey. The report concluded the United States should shift from its longstanding policy of supporting “stability” in the Middle East and North Africa (in other words, supporting “stable regimes” even if they were authoritarian), to a policy of backing “moderate” Islamic political movements.”

Just go back and review the speeches Obama gave in 2009 to the Turkish General Assembly and at Cairo University in Egypt and you’ll get the sense that President Obama wasn’t taking the Islamist threat seriously – or at least didn’t think there was anything wrong with it.

Gulf News says, “to this day, PSD-11 remains classified, in part because it reveals an embarrassingly naïve and uninformed view of trends in the Middle East and North Africa (Mena) region.”

If you need a little refresher about the Muslim Brotherhood’s ultimate goals – or still refuse to acknowledge it – take a quick read of their Explanatory Memorandum.

According to Gulf News, “through an ongoing Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit, thousands of pages of documentation of the US State Department’s dealings with the Muslim Brotherhood are in the process of being declassified and released to the public. US State Department documents obtained under the FOIA confirm that the Obama administration maintained frequent contact and ties with the Libyan Muslim Brotherhood. At one point, in April 2012, US officials arranged for the public relations director of the Libyan Muslim Brotherhood, Mohammad Gaair, to come to Washington to speak at a conference on “Islamists in Power” hosted by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.”

Don’t you find it interesting that the Obama administration unilaterally made the decision to engage in military operations in Libya? And don’t give me the NATO line because the U.S. is NATO. President Obama violated the War Powers Act – something where Dennis Kucinich and I stood together – and committed U.S. military resources in support of Islamist militia. It was also the same Obama who praised the rise of Mohammed Morsi – formerly an imprisoned Muslim Brotherhood member – as the President of Egypt but did not recognize the more than 30 million Egyptians who took to the streets for the ouster of Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood. And the Obama administration is still wound up about Egypt cracking down on the Brotherhood, as Kerry’s spokesman clarified.

Gulf News reveals the contents of a State Department Cable classified “Confidential” report saying in April 2012, Mission Benghazi met with a senior member of the Muslim Brotherhood steering committee to discuss the Muslim Brotherhood’s decision to form a political party as both an opportunity and an obligation in post-revolution Libya after years of operating underground.”

“Another State Department paper marked “Sensitive But Unclassified (SBU)” contained talking points for Deputy Secretary of State William Burns’ scheduled July 14, 2012 meeting with Mohammad Sawan, the Muslim Brotherhood leader who was also head of the Brotherhood’s Justice and Construction Party. The document is heavily redacted, but nevertheless provides clear indication of Washington’s sympathies for the emergence of the Muslim Brotherhood as a major political force in the post-Gaddafi Libya.”

And just for coincidental posterity, the July 14 meeting was attended by both Secretary Burns and Ambassador Christopher Stevens. Barely two months later, Ambassador Stevens and three other American diplomats were dead.

I know Speaker of the House, John Boehner, is pursuing a lawsuit against President Obama for constitutional power usurpation. I think we need to be looking under another rock – the one of aiding and abetting the enemy that leads to high crimes and misdemeanors. The Obama administration’s collusion with the Muslim Brotherhood is just that – and could easily be seen as treasonous.

.

.

The Lawyers Behind The Lawsuit Against Obama (Ian Tuttle)

The Lawyers Behind The Lawsuit Against Obama – Ian Tuttle

.

.
For some time now, Elizabeth Foley and David Rivkin have had two questions about the 44th president: “How is he getting away with this? And why isn’t someone doing something about this?” Foley, a professor of constitutional law at Florida International University College of Law, and Rivkin, lead outside counsel of Florida et al. v. United States Department of Health and Human Services, one of three Obamacare challenges that ended up before the Supreme Court in 2012, are doing something. They are the architects of the House of Representatives’ likely lawsuit against President Obama, which would challenge the president’s selective suspension of various laws as violations of his constitutional duty to faithfully execute the laws, and as violations of the constitutionally prescribed separation of powers.

“It began,” Foley tells National Review Online, “with utter fascination,” a reaction that should be universal, Foley adds, among constitutional lawyers observing the current executive. Foley and Rivkin have a list of questionable executive actions, going back to the president’s first term, that range from little-reported executive orders to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to controversial, large-scale actions, such as the multiple suspensions of Obamacare provisions and the unilateral implementation of the DREAM Act. “Over a period of time, the president has taken increasingly bold actions that defy the congressional actions that preceded them,” Foley says. “With every step, he gets more aggressive.” Foley and Rivkin corresponded frequently and pondered various legal possibilities – “but we kept coming back to the problem of standing.”

The pair first outlined a potential solution in a January 15 Politico article, “Can Obama’s Legal End-Run Around Congress Be Stopped?” That article spurred an invitation to testify before the House Judiciary Committee, which had been searching for an answer to the same question. In December 2013, the committee had heard testimony from four legal experts on “the constitutional concerns raised by recent non-enforcement policies and the President’s duty to faithfully execute the law of the United States,” as Jonathan Turley, a George Washington University law professor (and self-avowed liberal), put it in his testimony. Foley appeared before the committee in late February 2014 and elaborated on the points she and Rivkin had first outlined in Politico. “I knew the committee was looking for information about standing, so I saw it as an opportunity to give Congress and that committee a roadmap” to addressing executive overreach. Her testimony occasioned several conversations with House Judiciary Committee staff members, which rapidly led to meetings with House leadership and the consolidation of a legal strategy that has, in their view “a likelihood of success.”

The strategy depends on successfully establishing that the House of Representatives has “standing” to sue the president. Only one criterion is provided by the Constitution: identification of an injury-in-fact, in this case the apparent nullification of Congress’s institutional power. Showing this, Foley and Rivkin say, is the easy part. But they suggest that the courts have identified three additional factors that, if met, would strengthen the claim that the House has standing. They are not constitutionally necessary, but they are “‘plus’ factors that will take the lawsuit over the finish line in terms of standing,” Foley notes.

“The idea,” Rivkin tells me, “is to create the perfect combination of all relevant factors to create the perfectly configured legislative-standing case.”

The first plus-factor criterion is to demonstrate the lack of a private plaintiff. In Foley’s and Rivkin’s characterization, the president’s actions are “benevolent” suspensions of law — that is, they are specially intended to assist particular groups (young immigrants or small businesses, for example). Because assisting certain people was the president’s aim, no individuals have suffered sufficient injury to have standing to sue. “No one can challenge benevolent suspensions in court except Congress, because they constitute an institutional injury to Congress qua Congress,” Foley explains. The offense is not against private citizens; it is against the powers that the Constitution guarantees to Congress as a body.

Along with demonstrating the impossibility of a private plaintiff, the House should explicitly authorize the lawsuit, they say, through either a formal resolution or the use of the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group (BLAG), a standing group of House members that is authorized by House rules to represent that chamber in the courts. This would count as a plus factor because institutional-standing cases do not require formal authorization from the institution. The House members could therefore file on behalf of the House without getting the body’s formal approval, but such approval would probably help the case.

The House should also show that no political remedy (“self-help”) for the situation is available. This third element is a point of contention among legal theorists on the right. Opponents of the House lawsuit contend that the Constitution provides the House with two obvious remedies, neither of which it has exercised: the power of the purse and the power of impeachment. Foley and Rivkin counter that these are not “proportionate remedies” to the problem at hand. With regard to impeachment, Foley asks: “What do you do when the president’s own party controls one of the chambers of Congress?” Moreover, “impeachment is overkill for this particular transgression,” she says. “All Congress wants is for the president to faithfully execute the law. This does not mean that they think he should be kicked out of office.” The second option, cutting funds, “creates major distortions in political accountability, which is the genesis, the heart, of the notion of the separation of powers.” Congress, says Foley, should not be blamed for the president’s misdeeds – but that is just what will happen if the House has no recourse but to penalize innocent organizations as a means of punishing the president. Political self-help is important, Foley observes, “but only when proportionate and related to the transgression.”

If the House can establish standing by fulfilling these four criteria – the establishment of injury-in-fact, as required by the Constitution, and the three “plus” factors – they will have the opportunity to make their case to the courts that the president has flouted his constitutional mandate. While they believe there are a number of transgressions to choose from, Foley and Rivkin plan to present only the strongest infraction in court. They are mum about which one that might be. There is a mindset in both Washington and legal academia that this case is doomed because of the question of standing. The answer, Foley and Rivkin counter, is “creativity” – and their auspicious pairing. “David has been around D.C. a long time; he’s an old-school neocon, very Article II,” Foley says, referring to the portion of the U.S. Constitution that addresses the executive branch. “I’m more libertarian, more focused on individual rights. It’s important to have those differences.”

The pair is adamant that this is not their lawsuit: “It’s the House of Representatives’ lawsuit.” But they are equally adamant about the stakes: “The president is taking actions that are directly contrary to congressional instructions,” Foley says. “The constitution is clear: He has a duty to faithfully execute the laws. Congress needs to preserve its lawmaking prerogative.”

“It is incredible brazenness,” Rivkin adds. “And he continues in part because he’s gotten away with it.”

With any luck, Foley and Rivkin hope, not for long.

.

.

Obama Regime Delivering 290,000 Illegal Aliens To Relatives In U.S.

Border Meltdown: Obama Delivering 290,000 Illegals To U.S. Homes – Daily Caller

.

.
The vast majority of 50,000 unaccompanied youths and children who have illegally crossed the Texas border during the last few months have been successfully delivered by federal agencies to their relatives living in the United States, according to a New York Times article.

A second New York Times article report revealed that officials have caught an additional 240,000 Central American migrants since April, and are transporting many of them to their destinations throughout the United States.

The 290,000 illegals – so far – are exploiting legal loopholes that allow them to get temporary permits to stay in the United States.

Experts say that President Barack Obama’s administration has failed to close the loopholes and is unlikely to deport more than a small percentage of the illegals, despite the high unemployment rates among American Latino, African-American and white youths, and the strapped budgets of many cities and towns.

The president’s policy has caused protests by frightened citizens in towns such as Murrieta. But Obama’s allies – such as La Raza, an ethnic lobby for Latinos – are eager to escalate the conflict and to paint the protestors as racists. Those protests may escalate before the November elections.

The Central American parents of the 50,000 youths and children are using a 2008 law to ensure their children are transported to them for free by a relay of border patrol and Department of Health and Human Services officials. The youths are delivered to the border patrol by smugglers, dubbed coyotes, in exchange for several thousand dollars.

Half of the 50,000 Central American youths were delivered by taxpayer-funded employees directly to their parents now living in the United States, and another third were delivered to people who said they were close relatives, said the July 3 article.

That new data was included in the 19th paragraph of a 20-paragraph July 3 article.

Top immigration officials choose to not check if the relatives or parents who pick up the children are in the country legally.

Both New York Times articles described the border-crossing illegal aliens as “immigrants.” In fact, “immigrants” is the term for people who legally migrate into the United States.

The 240,000 strong-group largely consists of many mothers and young children, most of whom are now being flown and bussed to destinations near where they wish to settle. That new 240,000 number was included in the seventh paragraph of a 24-paragraph article.

Few of the illegal immigrants are high-school graduates, or have skills that would allow them to earn more than they cost to federal, state and local taxpayers.

Officials have not said where they’ve delivered the adults or youth illegals, but pro-American activists are keeping track of some locations, including San Diego, Calif.

Officials have defended the administration’s catch-and-release policy, which critics say is inviting more Central Americans to cross the border in the hope of being arrested by the border patrol.

“When you have a noncriminal [border-crossing ] mother, they are going to be released,” David Jennings, the head of the Immigrations and Customs Enforcement agency in southern California. “The most humane way to deal with this is to find out where they are going and get them there,” he said at a town meeting held in Murrieta, Calif., according to the New York Times.

.

.