Leftist Corruption Update: Obama’s FBI Partners With Left-Wing Extremist Group

Obama FBI Partners With Left-Wing Extremist Group – Townhall

The magnitude of this Obama administration’s “progressive” radicalism becomes more evident with each passing day. In recent months, there has been a drastic spike in acts of both anti-Christian and anti-conservative discrimination and intimidation on military bases across the country. This mounting harassment is not being carried out at the hands of regular enlisted folk but, rather, at the hands of high-ranking officials who, in their official capacity, are targeting Christian and conservative organizations and individuals in an effort to silence them.


It has long been suspected that the Obama administration is using propaganda circulated by the roundly discredited Southern Poverty Law Center, or SPLC, a left-wing extremist group that, in recent years, has adopted two primary goals: 1) raising truckloads of money and 2) smearing as “domestic hate groups” dozens of mainstream Christian ministries like the Family Research Council, or FRC, and the American Family Association, or AFA.

This suspicion has now been verified.

The problem on military bases has gotten so bad, in fact, that the U.S. Congress is demanding answers from the Pentagon. Recently, the AFA-affiliated OneNewsNow.com newsgroup reported that “Congressman Alan Nunnelee (R-Mississippi) is 1 of 38 members of Congress signing off on a letter to the Secretary of the Army – especially about an incident last month at Camp Shelby, Mississippi, in which the Tupelo-based American Family Association was labeled in Army training material as a ‘hate group.’ The Army initially claimed it was an isolated incident.

“‘But as we looked into it, [we found] this is not an isolated incident,’ Nunnelee [told] OneNewsNow. ‘There are a number of cases where the Army has singled out the American Family Association and other Christian organizations as hate groups, and service men and women have been threatened with sanctions if they support these groups.”

After a tremendous public outcry – and in an embarrassing slap to the face of the SPLC – the Pentagon quickly backpedaled, later apologizing about the Camp Shelby incident and publicly admitting that, despite the SPLC’s absurd claims to the contrary, the AFA is not a “hate group.”

Still, rather than distancing itself from the anti-Christian SPLC as one might expect, the Obama administration has, instead, strengthened ties to the hard-left outfit. Even after this string of military scandals.

For instance, I recently learned that on its official website, the FBI lists as one of its primary “hate crimes resources,” the Southern Poverty Law Center.

This is especially mysterious when you consider that the FBI’s own verified hate crimes statistics are completely at odds with numbers put out by the SPLC in its fundraising propaganda. Whereas the FBI indicates that there was a sharp 24.3 percent decrease in hate crimes from 1996 to 2010, with racial hate crimes dropping by 41.9 percent, the SPLC incongruously claims that since 2000, the number of “hate groups” has somehow increased by 67.3 percent.

So send your money right away!

The FBI’s empirical data doesn’t track with the SPLC’s political propaganda. Consequently, by partnering so closely with this discredited organization, the Department of Justice significantly undermines its own credibility.

Still, while the SPLC has proven utterly unreliable in its actuarial acumen – as well as intentionally dishonest – it has also proven demonstrably dangerous in its prolonged campaign of anti-Christian agitation.

You may recall that it was the Southern Poverty Law Center’s somewhat clever, yet patently dishonest and reprehensible strategy of juxtaposing, as fellow “hate groups,” mainstream Christian organizations like the FRC and the AFA alongside violent extremist groups like the Aryan Brotherhood and the Skin Heads that, on Aug. 15, 2012, led to an actual act of domestic terrorism.

On that date, “gay” activist Floyd Lee Corkins II – who later confessed in court that he was spurred-on by the SPLC’s anti-Christian materials – entered the lobby of the Washington-based Family Research Council intending to kill every Christian within.

Corkins was armed with both a gun and a backpack full of ammunition. He also had 15 Chick-fil-A sandwiches that he intended to rub in the faces of his would-be victims. (FRC had recently defended the food chain’s COO Dan Cathy for pro-natural marriage statements he made.)

The only thing standing between Corkins and mass murder was FRC facilities manager and security specialist Leo Johnson. As Corkins shouted disapproval for FRC’s “politics,” he shot Johnson who, despite a severely wounded arm, managed to tackle Corkins and disarm him.

Of Johnson’s actions, D.C. Police Chief Cathy Lanier said, “The security guard here is a hero, as far as I’m concerned.”

I agree.

Upon hearing of Leo’s selfless act of heroism, I was reminded of John 15:13: “Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends.”

But according to both the SPLC and the FBI (by virtue of its close ties to the group), Leo’s heart is, instead, full of hate. Everyone at FRC is hateful.

In fact, if you happen to be a Bible-believing Christian, you too are hateful.

You get the drill.

The Obama administration has absolutely no business partnering with this extremist organization – and it’s an outrage that it does. If this troubles you as much as it does me, please contact the FBI at (202) 324-3000 and respectfully voice your concern. Then call or email your local FBI office. (Click here to find that location.) It’s critical that freedom-loving Americans light-up the FBI’s phone lines and demand that all facets of government completely disassociate from the SPLC and disavow any further use of its anti-Christian propaganda.

The Southern Poverty Law Center must be held accountable for its inflammatory and potentially deadly anti-Christian bigotry.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story


Hillary Clinton’s Head Fake

Hillary Clinton’s Head Fake – New York Post

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was set to face a grilling from Congress this week over the terrorist attacks in Benghazi when she started channeling the late poet Shel Silverstein.

“I have the measles and the mumps / A gash, a rash and purple bumps,” said Clinton, in effect, informing the House and Senate (with regrets!) that she was suffering too many maladies to testify as expected about the Sept. 11 attack in Libya.

America’s top diplomat was to provide her first public answers regarding the murder of US Ambassador Chris Stevens.

Now that won’t happen.

Clinton’s story beggars belief: While traveling in Europe, she contracted a stomach virus . . . which made her dehydrated . . . which made her faint at home . . . which caused her to fall and hit her head . . . which gave her a nasty concussion.

So Clinton’s deputies will appear in her stead before the House Foreign Affairs Committee and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Thursday to explain the State Department’s failures.

That is not nearly enough.

We’ve chided the Obama administration in the past for its lack of transparency – but this looks like one of the most transparent dodges in the history of diplomacy.

And if Congress allows the secretary of state to wriggle free from scrutiny in the last days of her tenure (she may be gone from Foggy Bottom before the next round of congressional hearings in 2013), it will be a shame on that body as well.

So it’s clear that Clinton needs to testify.

And the Republicans, at least, seem to realize it.

“We still don’t have information from the Obama administration on what went so tragically wrong in Benghazi that resulted in the deaths of four patriotic Americans,” said Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, who chairs the Foreign Affairs Committee, when Clinton reported her noggin-bump. “This requires a public appearance by the secretary of state herself.”

Thursday’s hearing covers the State Department’s Accountability Review Board, the squad of DC luminaries who’ve been investigating the attack since October and who delivered their findings to Clinton yesterday.

The report may shed some light on the attack, but it behooves Clinton to explain why the administration spent weeks misleading the public by pinning blame for the strike on an obscure YouTube video.

No, she owes the public true accountability – not a paper press release from some former bureaucrats.

And that requires her to testify before Congress, before the public.

Nothing else will suffice.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

Obama Donors Got $21,000 In Government Money For Every $1 They Gave

Obama Donors Got $21,000 In Government Money For Every $1 They Gave – Front Page


Who says that there are no great investments anymore? Sure the Stock Market might be uneven, but while free enterprise might be going to the dogs, there’s still one solid investment. Obama (OBM) whose shares just keep rising until the bubble bursts and he runs out of Chinese money to buy off his donors with.

Peter Schweizer, president of the Government Accountability Institute, said President Barack Obama had a “recycling” program that used crony capitalism to reward its campaign contributors, who would then funnel money back to the Obama campaign.

Appearing on Fox News’s one-hour special on Thursday about the “District of Corruption” movie, Schweizer said crony capitalism was so rampant in the Obama administration that Obama campaign bundlers received more than $21,000 on average in government-backed loans and grants for every dollar they contributed to the Obama campaign.

Schweizer said the Obama administration treated taxpayer dollars as “gift bags” to give to its top donors, which he called “the Obama recycling program.”

One such company was Amyris biotechnologies in Berkeley, California. Weeks before Amyris received a $25 million grant from the Obama administration, Feinstein and her husband bought nearly a $1 million in equity in the company. Then, the initial investors, such as Gore, saw a $12 million investment balloon to more than $80 million after they took the company and cited the government grants as a reason the company would be successful. As Schweizer noted, the IPO was only possible because of taxpayer dollars.

Now there’s a classic example of people who didn’t build that.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

There Was No Protest Outside Libyan Consulate; Everything The Obama Regime Told Us Was A Lie

White House Comes Clean: No Protest Outside Libya Consulate – Big Peace

Tomorrow marks the beginning of a major Congressional hearing on the terror attack In Libya and in a desperately transparent attempt to get ahead of damaging news, at the very last minute tonight, the State Department finally came clean:


In other words, absolutely everything we were told by our government – by President Obama, Secretary of State Clinton, Ambassador Susan Rice. White House Spokesman Jay Carney, and any number of staffers and surrogates – was 100% false.

There were no protests, no benign crowds exploited by local militias, and nothing had anything to do with a video. Our Ambassador, another diplomat, and two Navy SEALs were murdered in a brutally efficient and coordinated terrorist attack.


End of story.

In other words, just days after the president declared al-Qaeda all but obliterated at his convention in Charlotte, and because no one took direct threats and pleas for added security seriously, on the anniversary of September 11, four Americans were assassinated in Libya by al-Qaeda associates. And for days and days and days afterward, the Obama Administration covered this fact up with lies of omission, half-truths, double talk, and outright lies.

By keeping our focus and anger on a completely fabricated fable about a stupid video and a “spontaneous” protest gone bad, the White House could pretend the lack of security or the lack of turning a pile of intelligence into something “actionable,” wasn’t their fault.

What I would like to know is where was the evidence for this “spontaneous protest?” What was this nonsense based on? Because since day one, every piece of concrete evidence pointed to a coordinated terror attack. In fact, the only evidence I know of of a spontaneous protest gone bad was what our dishonest government was telling us.

And they told us this all the way through September 19.

When Ambassador Rice did the Sunday Show round-robin FOUR days after the attack, and told America…

We do not – we do not have information at present that leads us to conclude that this was premeditated or preplanned.

…she lied.

During a White House briefing, when Jay Carney told this to the White House Press Corps a full SEVEN days after the attack

All I can tell you is that based on the information that we had then and have now we do not yet have indication that it was pre-planned or pre-meditated.

…he lied.

If the corrupt media were to give this unraveling scandal a tenth of the attention it deserves, Obama’s reelection chances would be non-existent. Libya isn’t just a scandal about criminally lax security, it’s also a cover up committed by a White House betting on the media to be a co-conspirator.

And thus far, with rare exception, that’s been a pretty safe bet.

And if Obama does win reelection, that’s when the media will finally stop protecting him and we can all expect his second term to be completely crippled by this scandal for years.

You know, had Obama been half as concerned with the security of overseas assets in the form of personnel and intelligence as he is with securing more welfare for Big Bird, the world would look a whole lot different today.

But Big Bird is Big Bird and Libya was just a “bump in the road.”

Click HERE For Rest Of Story


Related article:

State Department Holds Conference Call On Benghazi Terror Attack, Excludes Fox News – Gateway Pundit

The Obama State Department held a conference call with reporters tonight on the Benghazi terror attack. They did not invite Fox News on the call. Bret Baier told viewers on Special Report that Fox is usually included on such calls.

During the call, the Obama State Department said there was no protest at the consulate on 9-11 and that terrorists attacked the compound after 8:30 PM. This contradicts directly what the administration was saying after the deadly 9-11 attacks.



Related video:


Fast And Furious Cover-Up Continues: Obama Asserts Executive Privilege Over Documents

Obama Asserts Executive Privilege Over Fast And Furious Documents – Daily Caller

President Barack Obama has asserted executive privilege over documents pertaining to Operation Fast and Furious. The move followed Attorney General Eric Holder’s last-second request for him to do so, ahead of a scheduled House Oversight Committee vote to begin contempt of Congress proceedings against Holder.

Obama granted the 11th-hour request after negotiations between Holder and the committee’s chairman, Rep. Darrell Issa, fell apart again on Tuesday evening after a 20-minute meeting. Holder had agreed beforehand that he would provide internal DOJ documents to Issa ahead of the meeting. He did not bring the documents. On Tuesday evening, Issa gave him one final chance to provide the documents before the 10 a.m. scheduled vote to hold Holder in contempt.

Holder again did not provide the documents to Congress. Then, on Wednesday morning, minutes before the meeting, it was announced Obama had agreed to assert executive privilege over those documents.

Appearing on Fox News shortly after the announcement, Arizona Republican Rep. David Schweikert said the next steps are for Congress to move forward with contempt proceedings. According to Fox News, Issa’s committee is expected to move forward with the contempt proceeding.

Ranking Member Democratic Rep. Elijah Cummings said the assertion of executive privilege doesn’t block the committee from access to all documents, only some.

“As I understand it, the assertion does not cover everything in this category, such as whistleblower documents, and the administration has indicated that it remains willing to try to come to a mutual resolution despite its formal legal assertion,” Cummings said. “As a member of Congress, I treat assertions of executive privilege very seriously, and I believe they should be used only sparingly. In this case, it seems clear that the administration was forced into this position by the committee’s unreasonable insistence on pressing forward with contempt despite the attorney general’s good faith offer.”

The Hill reported that this is the first time Obama has ever asserted the executive privilege.

Iowa Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley said this assertion raises more questions than answers.

“The assertion of executive privilege raises monumental questions,” Grassley said. “How can the President assert executive privilege if there was no White House involvement? How can the President exert executive privilege over documents he’s supposedly never seen? Is something very big being hidden to go to this extreme? The contempt citation is an important procedural mechanism in our system of checks and balances. The questions from Congress go to determining what happened in a disastrous government program for accountability and so that it’s never repeated again.”

Indiana Republican Rep. Dan Burton, a former chair of the oversight committee for six years, said Issa has been “patient.” He said the president’s decision to assert executive privilege to withhold documents makes him wonder if Obama knew of Fast and Furious.
“The attorney general has asserted on numerous occasions that he didn’t know about this, now the president of the United States has claimed executive privilege,” Burton added. “And now that brings into question how much Holder knew about this, and that the president knew about this. My question is, who knew about this, how high up did it go, did it go to the attorney general or president of the united states and when did they know about this?”

New York Democratic Rep. Carolyn Maloney said she was “horrified” that Issa was moving forward with contempt proceedings after Obama asserted the executive privilege. She accused Issa of conducting a “political witch hunt” against Holder.

Michigan Republican Rep. Justin Amash tweeted that Obama’s assertion of executive privilege means Fast and Furious “must rise all the way to Pres. Obama.”

“Stunning admission by White House,” Amash tweeted.

House Speaker John Boehner’s spokesman Michael Steel told The Daily Caller that President Obama’s claim of executive privilege implies a startling new allegation pertaining to Fast and Furious: The White House was either involved with the operation or a cover-up.

“Until now, everyone believed that the decisions regarding ‘Fast and Furious’ were confined to the Department of Justice,” Steel said in an email. “The White House decision to invoke executive privilege implies that White House officials were either involved in the ‘Fast and Furious’ operation or the cover-up that followed. The Administration has always insisted that wasn’t the case. Were they lying, or are they now bending the law to hide the truth?”

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

‘Devoid Of Evidence,’ Holder Still Pursues Pro-Lifer

‘Devoid Of Evidence,’ Holder Still Pursues Pro-Lifer – WorldNetDaily

Eric Holder, Barack Obama’s hand-picked attorney general, is appealing a decision that favored a Florida pro-life activist even though the district judge who dismissed the case for lack of evidence said he considered sanctions against the federal government.

Holder’s notice of appeal yesterday to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida came in Eric H. Holder Jr. v. Mary Susan Pine.


Harry Mihet, senior litigation counsel for Liberty Counsel, commented that the Justice Department “has apparently forgotten its name and that its purpose is to pursue justice, not unconstitutional, groundless claims manufactured by abortion clinics to intimidate and silence pro-life Americans.”

“Mr. Holder’s appeal will meet with the same fate as his initial lawsuit,” he said. “His time would be better spent protecting, rather than undermining, the Constitution he swore to uphold.”

The dispute was over whether Pine could be prosecuted under a federal law that bans obstructing access to a “clinic,” or in her case an abortion business.

Earlier this year, U.S. District Judge Kenneth L. Ryskamp dismissed the complaint against the woman for lack of evidence, but he did not stop there.

Ryskamp charged that there appeared to be some sort of collusion between abortion business operators and the federal government. He suggested that if there was a little more evidence, he might have taken action.

“It is rather curious that the Department of Justice was able to meet with the [Presidential Women’s Center in West Palm Beach, Fla.] staff and police officers the very next day after the alleged violations occurred. It is also curious that the government failed to make any efforts to obtain the identities of the passengers who are the alleged victims in this case – the court finds it hard to believe that the government was completely unaware of the existence of the sign-in sheets and video surveillance system,” he wrote.

The judge said the court “can only wonder whether this action was the product of a concerted effort between the government and the PWC, which began well before the date of the incident at issue, to quell Ms. Pine’s activities rather than to vindicate the rights of those allegedly aggrieved by Ms. Pine’s conduct.”

“If this is the case, the court would be inclined to sanction the government with, at a minimum, an adverse inference. Given the absence of further evidence substantiating the court’s suspicions, the court is not authorized to do so,” the judge wrote.

The judge’s 21-page ruling granting Pine a summary judgment and clearing her of the charges said the entire episode raised questions.

“The court is at a loss as to why the government chose to prosecute this particular case in the first place,” Ryskamp wrote. “The record [is] almost entirely devoid of evidence that Ms. Pine acted with the prohibited motive and intent or that Ms. Pine engaged in any unlawful conduct. The government has failed to create a genuine issue for trial on all three elements of its FACE (Federal Access to Clinic Entrances) claim, and Ms. Pine is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”

Federal prosecutors had accused her of stopping a car to talk to the occupants while they were going into a parking lot. There was no evidence that they were heading to an abortion clinic.

The judge wrote:

Congress, undoubtedly aware of FACE’s potential First Amendment implications, specifically provided that FACE shall not be construed “to prohibit any expressive conduct including peaceful picketing or other peaceful demonstrations protected from legal prohibition by the First Amendment to the Constitution.”

A person is entitled to express his or her views on abortion so long as by doing it does not interfere with another’s right to obtain an abortion. In this case, Ms. Pine was on a public driveway conducting a peaceful demonstration on an important topic of public concern…

Stretching the terms of FACE to apply to this case so that delaying a vehicle for a matter of seconds constitutes an unlawful physical obstruction, or so that a desire to provide people with information about alternatives to abortion constitutes an unlawful motive, would unjustifiably impinge on Ms. Pine’s First Amendment rights.

There is thus no competing constitutional right to justify the burden placed on Ms. Pine’s right of expression and hold her liable for a hefty civil penalty of up to $10,000.

Now, Liberty Counsel has confirmed that the case was absent “any evidence of wrongdoing,” but Holder was taking it to the next level anyway. The notice of appeal was signed by Cathleen S. Trainor, senior trial attorney, on behalf of Holder.

Liberty Counsel noted that the “Holder’s complete failure to present any evidence of wrongdoing, coupled with the DOJ’s cozy relationship with PWC and their joint failure to preserve video surveillance footage” prompted the judge to suspect “a conspiracy at the highest level of the Obama administration.”

Liberty Counsel confirmed it has asked Ryskamp to award Pine about $140,000 in attorney’s fees and costs for having to defend herself against “Holder’s political lawsuit.”

But, the legal firm said “the DOJ now appears to be doubling down, committing yet more taxpayer funds and resources to the abortion lobby’s efforts to silence pro-life Americans.”

Holder launched the attack on the women in 2010. Pine routinely approaches vehicles and pedestrians entering and exiting the PWC’s shared parking lot, talking about abortion and offering information about “life-affirming” alternatives, the court opinion explained.

“Sometimes people stop and accept her literature; many people do not.”

The situation developed on Nov. 19, 2009, when Sanjay Raja, a police officer, was on duty. He had positioned himself so he could observe Pine from about 300 feet away.

He reported a green sedan started entering the lot through the “exit only” drive, and stopped, and Pine approached the driver’s window. The driver rolled the window down, and she talked with the driver and a passenger.

The officer told them not to block traffic, and the car moved on.

The DOJ started working on a FACE prosecution the next day, but the judge noted that the government never asked for any surveillance videos or login records from the abortion business, and they later were destroyed routinely.

The judge noted Pine sought the dismissal because the government failed to prove she obstructed the sedan or even that the vehicle occupants were en route to the abortion business.

“Although one might suspect that the government was in fact aware of such facts [about surveillance videos], and that it purposely neglected to prevent destruction of the sign-in sheets and surveillance tapes because they were detrimental to its FACE claim, mere speculation is insufficient to support a finding of bad faith,” the judge wrote. “The government’s failure to take the necessary steps to prevent the destruction of potentially critical evidence was indeed negligent, and perhaps even grossly negligent.”

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

It’s Still On: Six More Members Of Congress Call For Eric Holder’s Resignation

It’s Still On: Six More Members Of Congress Call For Eric Holder’s Resignation – Hot Air

Between the contraception kerfuffle and the GOP primaries, the MSM has had too much to cover to tackle the fallout from Fast and Furious, too. Just kidding. Even if nothing else were going on, you’d still hear this news from just a handful of people.


The Daily Caller’s Matthew Boyle reports this morning that the count of congressmen calling for Attorney General Eric Holder’s resignation has reached 109:

Spokespeople for Florida Republican Reps. Cliff Stearns and Mario Diaz-Balart told The Daily Caller their bosses agree with the surging group of members already demanding Holder’s resignation. Meanwhile, four new members have signed onto the official House resolution of “no confidence” in Holder – House Resolution 490 – because of Fast and Furious: Republican Reps. Bill Huizenga of Michigan, Cory Gardner of Colorado, and Pete Olson and Mike Conaway, both of Texas.

The groundswell has grown steadily since the first House members demanded Holder resign last October. Three U.S. Senators, two sitting governors and all major Republican presidential candidates have joined those 109 House members.

As a reminder, Fast and Furious – a program of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms – was a purported drug-busting operation in which ATF officials intentionally sold guns to straw purchasers who, in turn, sold the weapons to leaders of Mexican drug cartels. But if the intention of the officials was to bust the cartels, they had a curious way of showing it: No credible attempt was made to track the weapons from the hands of the straw purchasers into the hands of the drug cartel leaders. As a result, the weapons were never interdicted and some have since shown up on the scene of violent crimes in both the U.S. and Mexico. The ultimately lethal program led to the deaths of U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry and more than 200 Mexicans. Hundreds more of the guns are still not accounted for and likely to turn up at the scenes of future tragedies.

The congressional investigation led by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) has revealed enough for us to know Attorney General Eric Holder was either aware and in approval of the program or incompetent and negligent – either of which scenario would be grounds for Obama to demand his resignation.

My question: Why have just 109 congressmen called for this man to leave the administration? Do they not care about U.S.-Mexico relations, border security or the deaths of more than 200 people?

Click HERE For Rest Of Story