mike (8)






                                                                       Daniel John Sobieski


John Brennan defended his thesis that Russia interfered in the 2016 election to help Donald Trump win before the Hoiuse Intelligence Committee. He did nothing to disabuse Congressional Democrats or the mainstream media of the notion that Team Trump colluded with Moscow to change the results of the 2016 election.

Brennan  didn’t explain why he thought that the Russians didn’t want Hillary Clinton to win. Perhaps Clapper could explain why they didn’t prefer Hillary who was Secretary of State when President Obama let Russia violate the INF Missile Treaty and colluded with the Russians to kill missile defense in Europe, telling Then Russian President Dimitri Medvedev to tell Putin he would have more “flexibility” after his reelection.

Clapper didn’t explain why he the Russians didn’t prefer Hillary, Secretary of State for an administration that did nothing when Russia annexed Crimea and invaded Ukraine. Why wouldn’t the Russians want the Secretary of State who called murderous Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad a reformer and was there when President Obama drew the first of his “red lines” than did nothing to prevent the slaughter of 500,000 Syrians while giving Russia freerein in that country?

Why would Russia prefer Trump over Hillary after she and husband Bill brokered deals giving Russia and Putin 20 percent of our uranium supply to benefit  Clinton Foundation donors, including Canadian billionaire Frank Giustra.

As the New York Times reported, this mutual back-scratching gave Clinton donor Giustra control of a significant portion of the world’s uranium supply:

Late on Sept. 6, 2005, a private plane carrying the Canadian mining financier Frank Giustra touched down in Almaty, a ruggedly picturesque city in southeast Kazakhstan. Several hundred miles to the west a fortune awaited: highly coveted deposits of uranium that could fuel nuclear reactors around the world. And Mr. Giustra was in hot pursuit of an exclusive deal to tap them.

Unlike more established competitors, Mr. Giustra was a newcomer to uranium mining in Kazakhstan, a former Soviet republic. But what his fledgling company lacked in experience, it made up for in connections. Accompanying Mr. Giustra on his luxuriously appointed MD-87 jet that day was a former president of the United States, Bill Clinton….

Just months after the Kazakh pact was finalized, Mr. Clinton’s charitable foundation received its own windfall: a $31.3 million donation from Mr. Giustra that had remained a secret until he acknowledged it last month. The gift, combined with Mr. Giustra’s more recent and public pledge to give the William J. Clinton Foundation an additional $100 million, secured Mr. Giustra a place in Mr. Clinton’s inner circle, an exclusive club of wealthy entrepreneurs in which friendship with the former president has its privileges….

In February 2007, a company called Uranium One agreed to pay $3.1 billion to acquire UrAsia. Mr. Giustra, a director and major shareholder in UrAsia, would be paid $7.05 per share for a company that just two years earlier was trading at 10 cents per share.

Now isn’t that special. Both the Clintons and their donor made off handsomely. Uranium One, which was gradually taken over by the Russians, would later be involved in a curious deal involving Hillary Clinton when she was Secretary of State. As the New York Times reported:

At the heart of the tale are several men, leaders of the Canadian mining industry, who have been major donors to the charitable endeavors of former President Bill Clinton and his family. Members of that group built, financed and eventually sold off to the Russians a company that would become known as Uranium One.

Beyond mines in Kazakhstan that are among the most lucrative in the world, the sale gave the Russians control of one-fifth of all uranium production capacity in the United States. Since uranium is considered a strategic asset, with implications for national security, the deal had to be approved by a committee composed of representatives from a number of United States government agencies. Among the agencies that eventually signed off was the State Department, then headed by Mr. Clinton’s wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton.

As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors. Other people with ties to the company made donations as well….

Soon, Uranium One began to snap up companies with assets in the United States. In April 2007, it announced the purchase of a uranium mill in Utah and more than 38,000 acres of uranium exploration properties in four Western states, followed quickly by the acquisition of the Energy Metals Corporation and its uranium holdings in Wyoming, Texas and Utah.

So Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, along with husband Bill, in exchange for donations, gave nuclear power Russia and Putin control of 20 percent of the world’s uranium supply. Is that what Hillary Clinton meant by a “Russian reset”? Yet neither Congressional Democrats, who accuse Trump  of being too cozy with Moscow, nor their wholly owned subsidiary, the mainstream media, are eager to talk about the Clinton uranium deals with Russia.

Based on this assessment, Brennan is wrong that the Russians wanted Hillary to win. They may have hacked into the DNC emails, but they didn’t write them. They didn’t keep Hilary from campaigning in Wisconsin, or make her motivate Trump supporters by calling half of them “deplorable”, or cause ObamaCare premiums to spike weeks before the November election.

There is another scenario as equally plausible as the one saying Team Trump, and perhaps President Trump himself, colluded with the Russians. It is that John Brennan himself colluded with the Russians to help Hillary win to guarantee his continued tenure as CIA Director. It involves the infamous anti-Trump dossier compiled by former British spy Christopher Steele, used by Brenan and others as a pretext for a Trump investigation bonanza.  As the American Spectator reported:

An article in the Guardian last week provides more confirmation that John Brennan was the American progenitor of political espionage aimed at defeating Donald Trump. One side did collude with foreign powers to tip the election — Hillary’s.

Seeking to retain his position as CIA director under Hillary, Brennan teamed up with British spies and Estonian spies to cripple Trump’s candidacy. He used their phony intelligence as a pretext for a multi-agency investigation into Trump, which led the FBI to probe a computer server connected to Trump Tower and gave cover to Susan Rice, among other Hillary supporters, to spy on Trump and his people….

The Guardian story is written in a style designed to flatter its sources (they are cast as high-minded whistleblowers), but the upshot of it is devastating for them, nonetheless, and explains why all the criminal leaks against Trump first originated in the British press. According to the story, Brennan got his anti-Trump tips primarily from British spies but also Estonian spies and others. The story confirms that the seed of the espionage into Trump was planted by Estonia. The BBC’s Paul Wood reported last year that the intelligence agency of an unnamed Baltic State had tipped Brennan off in April 2016 to a conversation purporting to show that the Kremlin was funneling cash into the Trump campaign.

Any other CIA director would have disregarded such a flaky tip, recognizing that Estonia was eager to see Trump lose (its officials had bought into Hillary’s propaganda that Trump was going to pull out of NATO and leave Baltic countries exposed to Putin). But Brennan opportunistically seized on it, as he later that summer seized on the half-baked intelligence of British spy agencies (also full of officials who wanted to see Trump lose).

The Guardian says that British spy head Robert Hannigan “passed material in summer 2016 to the CIA chief, John Brennan.” To ensure that these flaky tips leaked out, Brennan disseminated them on Capitol Hill. In August and September of 2016, he gave briefings to the “Gang of Eight” about them, which then turned up on the front page of the New York Times.

Could it be that Brennan himself is the leaker of classified information? There are reports suggesting he is and isn’t that what is going on in Washington these days – bogus investigations based on reports of collusion with the Russians and other shenanigans. Could that be any crazier than investigations triggered by the Steele dossier, a classic work of slanderous fiction? Two things we do know – that the only crime is the leaking of classified information to the newspapers to damage Donald Trump and that Brennan is wrong on ewho the Russians wanted to win.


          Daniel John Sobieski is a free lance writer whose pieces have appeared in Investor’s Business Daily, Human Events, Reason Magazine and the Chicago Sun-Times among other publications.               

Read more…

Hi Everyone, 

I could use some help here. Does the President still hope to get a full repeal of Obamacare during this Congressional session? Or, more likely, will he be satisfied just to get the revised AHCA (only) bill passed? 

Tonight, at the 100 day rally in Harrisburg, President Trump asked Pennsylvania Congressmen Mike Kelly and Tom Marino to help him get a healthcare bill passed very, very soon.  Presumably, he was referring to the revised AHCA bill.  The bill altered with Rand Paul's help for the approval of the Freedom Caucus. Paul Ryan says he wants to get AHCA passed as soon as he has the votes. 

But, Trump said "repeal & replace" at least three times at the rally.  So, I might presume that the President wants to eliminate Obamacare in large chunks.  Revised AHCA, being the biggest chunk, eliminating the five Obamacare Mandates up front.  Or, is it the case that the President still hopes to achieve a full repeal of Obamacare during this session?   

What do you make of this slight contradiction? What have you heard?

Thanks, Charlie Gaudin
(Jackson, Mississippi)

Read more…



Edit article

                                    By Jiri Valenta with Leni Friedman Valenta

                                                         February 15, 2017

                           Unafraid, Bi-Partisan, Uphold U.S. and Freedom

Unsurprisingly, in light of Michael Flynn’s resignation, there is a heated, nationwide debate ongoing over President’s replacement of Flynn and its significance. We forget Ronald Reagan went through several NSAs during his tenure. 

As during WWII and the turmoil that followed, we are living in times of great disorder and chaos. For Trump, General David Petraeus would be a uniquely excellent choice as NSA for these dangerous times. A warrior, but also a military intellectual, he possesses multiple capabilities in both the arts of war and the peace making.

He also has specific experience in the Middle East. In 2003 his 101st contributed centrally during the fight to Baghdad and then air assaulted north to Mosul, where he and his troopers pioneered a strategy of winning minds and hearts of Iraqi people. He returned after that year to establish the so-called train and equip effort as a three-star general. His powerful manual on counter -insurgency, written together with then-LtGen James “Mad Dog” Mattis, was put to good use when Petraeus admirably commanded the 2007-8 Surge in Iraq. If Petraeus is appointed, the troika of 4-star generals Mattis-Petraeus-and DHS John Kelley would be the bedrock of our national security apparatus.

Petraeus has no close relations with Russian counterparts. And he is unusually nonpartisan-- like Ike. During the 2016 election he neither became a cheerleader for Hillary, as did his colleague General Allen, nor a cheerleader for Trump, like Flynn, declaring “lock her up.” And he has stayed very much in the mix, testifying for three hours most recently two weeks ago before the HASC on “The State of the World.”

With the strongest support among both Democrats and Republicans in the Senate, Petraeus would likely pose no confirmation problem – and, in fact, no confirmation is needed for National Security Advisor. Generally well regarded by the Democrats, he is also admired by another national hero, prominent Republican Senator John McCain. Thus he could help to smooth out uneasy relations between the president and the senator. 

David has one other essential quality --a propensity to speak his mind to his superiors. A military intellectual, he had a 14-month stint as CIA Director, 2011-1012. His resignation because of his affair with his biographer, Paula Broadwell, a fellow West Point graduate and reserve intelligence officer with whom he was later shown to have improperly shared his personal journals, which contained classified material – albeit none of which she included in her biography. 

Again, none of what was improperly shared appeared in her book, entitled All In. In fact, West Point military intellectual, now-Brigadier General (Ret) Michael Meese, Petraeus’ deputy chief of staff in Afghanistan, reviewed the manuscript before publication to confirm that it did not contain any possible national security secrets. Damn good book! The naysayers should read it.

Unlike Hillary, the general did not use an illegal private server with thousands of negligent official e-mails, that surely revealed our national security secrets to our friends and foes alike.

 We also know that unlike Hillary acolyte, former Deputy Director of the CIA Mike Morell, he was not enthusiastic about the famous, scrubbed talking points prepared for Susan Rice on Benghazi-gate. He did not reveal any of this to us, yet from other reliable sources it appears he objected to them. Was that why he was replaced by the author of those alterations, Mike Morell?

We also know the general stood up to his commander-in-chief, Barack Obama, when the President, for political reasons, tried to withdraw our troops from Afghanistan prematurely due to coming 2012 election. He objected even more vehemently than Defense Secretary Robert Gates!

 Petraeus admits he made a mistake with Broadwell. Yet his was mistake of the heart, something we used to tolerate, as in the case of another brilliant commander -- General Ike Eisenhower. Ike’s affair with his Scottish military chauffeur, Kay Sommersby, was well known. Imagine if FDR had treated Ike as Obama did David. We might have jeopardized Operation Overlord -- the 1944 Liberation of Europe

General Petraeus, the patriotic soldier believes that if an American president calls upon you to serve the country, you don’t have any choice but to accept. If Trump is wise, he will make the call.

Prominent national security expert, Dr. Jiri Valenta is the author/editor of several books, and a long-standing member of the Council on Foreign Relations. He, with his co-writer, Yaleite Leni Friedman Valenta, editor-in-chief of their institute’s website, jvlv.net, is working on a forthcoming book, Four Follies of American Foreign Policy-Making.

Read more…



 Jiri Valenta  and Leni Friedman Valenta

January 15, 2017


Far from protecting American security, Morell has repeatedly undermined it.

“No doubt Putin is playing Trump!” Yes, former CIA Deputy Director Mike Morell is indeed at it again. During the presidential campaign he repeatedly attacked Donald Trump as an “unwitting agent of the Russian Federation.” In the same vein, anonymous CIA officials have supposedly provided evidence of our new president’s nefarious dealings with the Kremlin and its agents.

Didn’t Trump’s own lawyer, Michael Cohen, meet in Prague with a Kremlin agent in August 2016? And isn’t this final proof of the ongoing secret liaisons between the tycoon and the tyrant? ‘​Fraid not. But it is déjà vu. Fifteen years ago, Morell vetted and took to the White House, a preliminary report that 9/11 hijacker, Mohamed Atta, met with an Iraqi intelligence officer, Ahmad Samir, Al-Ani at the Iraqi embassy in Prague on April 9, 2001. Both reports have turned out to be bogus.

On August 6, 2001, Morell served as the CIA debriefer for President Bush’s most critical ever Presidential Daily Briefing (PDB); the one that read, “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in the U.S.” It was essential that he impress upon Bush the importance of the memo. But he didn’t. Morell recollected in his memoir that NSC staffer Steve Biegun, who accompanied Morell to the Crawford Ranch where Bush was vacationing, apparently relayed to others that he, Morell, had indicated to the president, “there was no need to worry about an Al Qaida attack on the homeland...” Morrell himself directly observed that in retrospect, “I did not treat it as a ‘hair on fire’ or action-forcing piece and the president did not read it that way either.”

Surely Bush was not given the assessment that Morell’s colleague, counter-terrorism expert, Cofer Black, gave to Condoleezza Rice weeks earlier: “An attack is impending” and “this country needs to go on a war footing now.” On 9/11, close to 3,000 people perished in attacks on both New York and Washington.

The 2003 Iraq War provided an opportunity for Morell to advance his career. Leading a group of CIA analysts, he was assigned to help prepare Secretary of State Colin Powell's February 5 U.N. Security Council speech.

Justifying the forthcoming invasion of Iraq, a passage in the speech affirmed that Iraq possessed "biological weapons and the capability to rapidly produce more, many more.” False! We still don’t know who was directly responsible for leaving this passage in Powell’s speech. However, Morell was in charge of the CIA analysts who were vetting it. In 2015, Morell apologized to Powell.

The most egregious part of Morell's toadying, however, was the terrorist attack that took place on the U.S. consulate and CIA annex in Benghazi on another September 11—this in 2012.

Morell, then CIA Deputy Director, quickly learned it was a well-planned terrorist attack. However he also discovered the President and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, with the 2012 November election in mind, were pushing a different interpretation—a “spontaneous demonstration over an anti-Muslim video. Given his status as a high-ranking official, it would be surprising if he did not receive, or was unaware of, an email from Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes: “The goal: To underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure of [our] policy.”

Then Morell was asked to review an important document—the talking points that U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice was to disseminate to the media explaining the attack. Morell complied. He altered the talking points. The doctored, scrubbed and bogus video story was presented by Rice to the U.S. public on TV stations, helping to save Obama's presidency. Yet, even after the elections, Morell, accompanied by Susan Rice, continued to defend his altered product with three GOP heavyweights, John McCain (R-AZ), Senator Kelly Ayotte (R-NH) and Senator Lindsey Graham (R-NC).

Graham later reported Morell “did not accept responsibility for changing the talking points. He told me the FBI had done this. I called the FBI—They went ballistic. . . . Within 24 hours, this statement was changed where he [Morell] admitted the CIA had done it.”


Morell’s new excuses were his concern about compromising the FBI investigation and being “unprofessional” by exposing the State Department (understand Hillary). He also said he removed the word “Islamic” to describe the “extremists,” because he didn’t want to upset the Islamic world. Handsomely rewarded for his loyalty by Obama, he was asked to serve on the NSA Review Panel, the president’s advisory review board. He also became a television commentator and received a book deal, not to mention a cushy job at Beacon Global Strategies. Nor is this all. In August 2016, Morell proposed “killing Russians and Iranians” in Syria--a recommendation that might well have led to war with Russia. In a separate op-ed August 5 in the New York Times, he had declared that he believed Hillary “will deliver on the most important duty of a president: keeping our nation safe.” Hillary cheered his words in an August 7, 2017 tweet. Likely, he would have been a victorious Clinton’s CIA Director.

Now President-elect Trump is once again under attack by a loyal supporter of the former Clinton team. But as Morell’s record amply confirms, it is he who has, again and again, constituted the actual threat to our national security.


Jiri Valenta is President of the Institute of Post-Communist Studies and Terrorism. He is the recipient of numerous fellowship, including from Brookings, CFR, Woodrow Wilson Rockefeller, Peace Institute, and Fulbright. He is also the author of Soviet Intervention in Czechoslovakia, 1968, Anatomy of a Decision and other books.


Leni Friedman Valenta is the CEO of the Institute of POst-Communist Studies and Terrorism. She is co-writer and editor-in-chief of its Web site, jvlv.net. She has contributed to scholarly publications such as the National Interest, the Aspen Review, the Miami Herald, Kyiv Post, Georgian Messenger (Tbilisi) and the Tico Times, San Jose, Costa Rica.


Read more…

DIVIDING A NATION - The Republican Roll Out as Birther Barrage goes Main-Stream

DIVIDING A NATION - The Republican Roll Out as Birther Barrage goes Main-Stream

FEATURED EDITORIAL at Birther Report /and/ The Post & Email 

Defending what Obama is doing by not holding a hearing on Obama's national security breach, or the standard of the natural born citizen qualification in the Constitution for the Office of the President, is essentially exactly whatRepublicans need to keep doing in order to lose. Rand Paul declared the Republican party may not win the Presidency again in his lifetime.

I said one time that the Republican party was going into extinction, not because that is what I hoped for or anything, but because of the abandonment of the principles of the Constitution I saw happening in the Republican party by a lack of defense for it. Jan 26th, 2012 I wrote with this commercial:
[“It is time to jump into the life boats, and begin representing a clear and Constitutional choice in my candidacy, which is clearly a clean message compared to the mainstream Republican Candidates who we see are very willing to sweep the dirt under the carpet, as well as our Constitution, and that’s not the President’s job or oath!”]

Glenn Beck today related he had spoke to a big GOP elected leader who was concerned about the #defundtheGOP verbrato over the air the last four months. What Glenn said made a lot of sense today here.
see post at codyjudy.blogspot.com for video

So many Republican leaders looked at me and scoffed, "How could the qualification of Obama for the Office of the President held in the demands of the Constitution even compare to the importance of "health-care", or "Our National Debt", or "The Arab Springs"?

Tyrannical dictatorial power is unleashed in ways Rush Limbaugh says today he has never seen with Obama stepping and hopping to the tunes of the 2014 and 2016 election in regards to what parts of the law are enforceableand what parts he decides not to enforce. The impeding play is certainly wrecking Republican strategy to let the law play out and let people see what a disaster Obamacare is.

How can people see what a disaster it is unless its allowed to hit them behind the barn?

What could leaving the Constitution behind bring financially? What is the Birther's Barrage?
Birther's Barrage

Essentially the BIRTHER BARRAGE is indeed more and more people going Birther as the Constitution is going 'main-stream' instead of becoming a dead-stream as so many in Washington perceive it to be going.

Is it safe to say now that if Obamacare had indeed been allowed to unfold as it was intended, without all these exclusions, that the United States would be in open revolt right now against Obama and all Washington Insiders?

You better believe if the people with money were made to tow the line of Obamacare in the big corporations, small businesses, and even federal agencies now, without the decrees of exemptions handed down from Obama by personal executive order, that they would be demanding their elected leaders in the House and Senate begin disability impeachment proceedings immediately.

This was the Republican strategy on Obamacare, let it play out and be seen as the disaster it is! However, its backfired on them once again, just as they hoped Obama would look like the paria, he reverses that upon them by executive order which has totally infuriated Sen. Mike Lee admitting on Fox News Sunday, there's no standing on Obamacare's harm, or time to find someone, calling it a 'shameless power grab' and ruling by his own pen. 

Obama then is seen as the savior by these people for not holding them accountable to Obamacare the way he has all the low people on the totem pole known as main-stream Americans. BUT, Senator Lee has also been unwilling to make the case on Obama's eligibility as a way to stop him which indeed it does, and you have to ask yourself why?

Indeed, Obama's savior'esk trend continues extending to all those employees of Federal Contracts a minimum wage of $10.10 an hour. Of course, main street businesses would either have to raise their prices by a percentage equal or lay off workers in order to clear the same profit margin if they were forced to pay that minimum wage.

How would anyone like paying an additional 30% on milk, peanut butter, soy, wheat, barley, corn, and meat?


Of course Obama's decree is intentionally ordered to divide, something that does seem to come quite naturally to him. How do all the employees making minimum wage feel about working that don't get paid $10.10? 

What if about election time 2014 he promises them also a decree of raising their wage if they will vote Democratic Party ticket?

That's one thing that Obama's discrimination provides. If Obama doesn't equally give to everyone equally he creates out of thin air a favorite child who was seen as deserving while the other child was seen as mean, undeserving, and rebellious.

While it would seem common sense to see this as unequal and discrimination, someone gets the reward someone doesn't, the Republican Party is not willing to exploit it as such, mostly because they fear it being turned on them.

The same mentality exist when it comes to the excuses used by elected leaders not to hold a disability impeachment hearing in The House of Representatives on Obama simply because the U.S. Senate is controlled by Democrats and the point seems 'moot', but lets take a closer look at how that might play out.


Assuming the U.S. Senate just because its controlled by the Democratic party would never remove Obama under a Disability Impeachment process or trial certainly demands the thought process that EVERY single Democratic Party U.S. Senator is 
1) Condoning the use of fabricated long form birth certificates
2) Condoning the use and fabrication or theft of social security numbers
3) Condoning the manipulation of past records of identity like draft registration and college records

Are ALL the Democratic Party leaders really advocating directly and recommending these things? Has the integrity of ALL those elected leaders bottomed out into the abyss of the mob?

Well, if the Republican Majority had a hearing on all of these factors publically, wouldn't that be seen as a light upon the darkness of all those elected leaders indeed right in time for the 2014 elections?

So what's the down side for Republicans holding a hearing on it? Oh, maybe you think boldly standing in front of Barbara Walters, Oprah Winfrey, and Diane Sawyer and asking them if they indeed recommend, condone, and represent this deceitful learning tactic for all of our children is a really bad idea because it just wouldn't fly? Come on!

Believe it, one of the very reasons threats of a collective variety have been issued to all media persons is precisely because of FEAR. Fear based on the reality that if someone is recommending fraud, deceit, forgery, intentionally to harm, most generally the American People are opposed to that.

Its not a hard story to sell to the generally good natured people of the United States of America who in general understand the reasons for our criminal code. Sen. Cruz stated in his objection argument in the debt ceiling debate he filibustered which was catalyst for 11 Republicans to turn into Democrats arms, "that the rules are the rules, the laws are the laws, and we need to follow them and not break them for political expediency.”

One wonders if Sen. Ted Cruz really understands Obama's not a natural born citizen according to the constitution, or if he is secretly hoping that no one is watching him under a microscope as he has passed on vocalizing Obama's real achilles heal he may share in his eligibility or qualification for the Office of the President? Sen. Cruz is set to visit Iowa and N.H. in March and April to a hero's welcome, according to The Hill for his stand in the debt ceiling debate?

Indeed as we speak, News Max is taking an urgent poll to see if you support Sen. Ted Cruz for President.

This shows more fodder for the excuse of 'racism' being used by Republicans and Ann Coulter when she said referring to Obama as "the first black president", if he hadn't have been he would have been impeached by now".

Rush Limbaugh says the leaders are just petrified of being accused of 'racism'. The reason I think that this is now the Republicans lame excuse is because when it comes to equality under the law, they are showing an unwillingness to put Obama under the law for the same reason they don't want Sen. Ted Cruz scoured for his dual citizenship with Canada, as the Huffington Post reports, Cruz denies as McCain did in non-binding U.S. Senate Resolution 511 the step is a concerted effort to go around the law.

This 'racist tactic' they lay on Obama is I believe turning into a very calculated strategy to avoid the justice of the Constitution themselves, in perhaps the Presidential run of another unqualified candidate as McCain was in 2008.

Which party has more people with sites on the 2016 White House who are unqualified Republicans or Democrats? I can name 4 or 5 Republicans who have their sites on the White House who are not natural born citizens who would just be wiped out of that prospect if justice is leveled on Obama.

Besides that, I'm not sure there is not a single member of the House of Representatives that doesn't know that I sued McCain in 2008 and Obama for the natural born citizen clause of the Constitution standing up for the principle of the qualification demands of the Constitution, and continued in the standing in 2012 and 2013 in the United States Supreme Court in Judy v. Obama 12-5276., and still maintain that standing in a 2016 run.

Indeed, Democratic Party tactics would not stay dormant for Obama's qualifications long if Senator Ted Cruz became the nominee for the Republican Party and they would essentially be forced to say, "Well, the Birthers were right, Obama wasn't qualified but he made it, but that was then and this is now and we have to stand for the Constitution, and Sen. Ted Cruz can't be President". Can't you see that coming from the Huffington Post, the WSJ, and The Washington Post?

The fact that I stood up for the principle regardless of party or race for that matter completely shows that the Republican argument of race is indeed a ruse, excuse, or a 'reverse racist tactic'. The need to quiver in fear of being a racist is indeed made 'moot' with a Presidential Candidate with standing and a legal record documenting the stand to hand the media in a frying pan like a nice T-Bone steak.

I think the Republican fabrication or pretense objection on raising the debt ceiling without any concessions on Obamacare or any remotely substantial give-and-take is also a witness to what I'm advocating. They pretty much went willy-nilly along with Obama and the Democrats and we all have seen and witnessed it.


The only remaining conclusion is that the Republicans are also in so deep they can't compete and what I said as far as the Republican Party going into extinction and never winning again is the reality most conservatives are going to have to come to grips with.

Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh, as well as Sean Hannity are indeed recognizing the writing on the wall. If our society has indeed slipped into the abyss of the deep, like Robert Redford's outstanding film without dialogue is named, " All Is Lost", perhaps it really is for the Republican Party?
See the rest of the post here:
Dividing A Nation
Read more…

4063759526?profile=original Republican RINOS and Progressives tried To destroy Tea Party

                  with Obama government shutdown

 “You Americans are so gullible. No, you won’t accept communism outright, but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of socialism until you’ll finally wake up and find you already have communism.” Soviet Premier of Russia Nikita Khrushchev, 1959.

The seeds of the war on America’s principles and founding values were planted 54 years ago by Russia’s leader Nikita Khrushchev, and have found a cherished home in the presidency of Barrack Obama. It was this notion that communism would have a welcome home in the very seat of American power that The Tea Party members across the nation rose in defiance of. Obamacare was the fuse and much like America’s founding fathers’ rebellion against an evil imperialist power, freedom from tyranny was the clarion call.

With the ascendency of the Tea Party and the neutralization of the RINO grip on legislative power in state houses and congress in 2010, the president was waiting as were the pundits to unleash its RINO hell hounds on Sarah Palin, and any other Tea Party favorites to follow.

What is clear to Tea Party patriots as well as conservatives and most Americans who were seriously examining Obama’s actions, was his belief that Americans are gullible as Khrushchev stressed. The president and his minions in congress moved quickly and precisely to disassemble American military power, American economic prominence, and American moral principles and religious Christian values.

The only future that awaited America’s children was one which was staked to the barbed wire ideology of a socialist leader who apologized to Muslim nations for America’s Christian heritage. This was an administration that mocked parents who supported traditional values.

That is why it was predictable that Obama would create this false crisis called a government shutdown. He and his fellow travelers in the mainstream media and the White House knew that by simply letting Republican establishment RINOs unleash their fury on Senators Ted Cruz, Mike Lee, Rand Paul and even Sarah Palin, the liberal pundits could sweep in and create a greater GOP chasm.

But this was a campaign that was doomed to fail from its very inception. Liberals continuously underestimate the power of what truth and freedom mean to those who cannot be bought for thirty pieces of silver, or bribed with favored status on Air Force One rides.

                                                           ( click to read more )

Read more…


By Oscar Y. Harward


Sen. Minority Leader Mitch McConnell may now be spilling out one of his first confirmations to conceal his support of ObamaCare, President Obama, Sen. Harry Reid, and other ‘Liberal’ Capitol Hill Democrats for his guaranteed receipt of a $2 Billion Kentucky payoff in his support of his vote and leadership for many of his 26 other GOP Senate legislators for shredding our Constitutional freedoms.  How cheap can Sen. Mitch McConnell be bought? 


For Sen. McConnell, who included a $2 Billion payout of additional deficit spending for his State of Kentucky included in this new ‘Continuing Appropriations Act, 2014’ legislation, and his additional and similar voting 26 RINO Republican legislators who voted, how much is too much for deficit spending?  Sen. McConnell, is there any limit to spending that is too much?  Have you sold your principles and your own heart for a whole lot ($2 Billion) of taxpayers’ money?  Do you, Sen. Mitch McConnell have any ethics in principles left?  You must resign!


According to Newsmax, “Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell made it clear on Thursday that repealing Obamacare would never be used by Republicans again to bring the federal government to a halt.”  


Rumors on Capitol Hill indicate Speaker of the House John Boehner is trying to accept President Obama’s ObamaCare ‘exemptions’ for Capitol Hill legislators.  Who, why, and when did it become so important for our Capitol Hill legislators to take care of yourself first, rather than to place the American electorate first?


The Capitol Hill Democrat Party and our own Capitol Hill Republican Party ‘leadership’ is selling out our freedoms and values and in return ascertaining more taxpayers’ deficit money and other favors that are left to be paid by our children, and their children, along with other ‘pet’ projects, and other Democrat Party favors.  Cheap!  Cheap!  Cheap!


Capitol Hill Democrats and RINO Republicans on Capitol Hill have lost or forgotten our Constitutional freedoms as based on Christian values.  Capitol Hill Democrats and RINO Republicans must be challenged, defeated, and/or removed in upcoming future elections.


The economy ‘problem’ is simple; excessive deficit spending is breaking our national economy, our individual freedoms, our families, and our Constitution.  The ‘solution’ for a rebuilding economy is simple; stop the spending to save our economy, our individual freedoms, our families, and our Constitution.


Capitol Hill legislators have already added $6.3 Trillion of additional deficit spending debt in less than 5 years under President Obama.  How much deficit spending is enough for President Obama, Capitol Hill Democrats, and/or RINO Republicans?  When will the deficit spending end that is leaving an unbearable debt to (y)our children, their children, etc.? 


A continuation of deficit spending by Democrats, Republicans, and/or Independents is a form of political corruption and this endless progression is destroying our Constitution, our fiscal and social values, as well as our national security.


Republican Senators Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Mike Lee (R-UT), as well as other legislators and supporters who vote and aspire to ‘stop-the-spending’ to save America, our economy, our Constitution, and our families are ‘right on these issues’.   


Do not allow President Obama, Capitol Hill Democrats, and the Liberal ‘main-stream’ Medias destroy our American ‘HERO’ legislators who are trying to stop the out-of-control’ spending.  It is our American ‘HERO’ legislators who are trying to restore our nation and our US economy.


On Capitol Hill, so-called ‘negotiations’ are directed by President Obama, Capitol Hill Democrats, and the Liberal ‘main-stream’ Medias that demand Republican legislators to cross the aisle and join Democrats on ‘more deficit spending; a proven scheme to more quickly destroy our entire nation.


To save our Constitution and our nation, Conservatives must say ‘NO’ to more deficit spending; before it is too late.


God Bless America!

Read more…

4063711538?profile=originalRINO Republican Gabriel Gomez lost to Democrat Ed Markey in the special election to fill the Massachusetts U.S. Senate seat vacated by John Kerry. I say, “Thank God”. We can not allow Democrat-Lite RINO Republicans like Gomez to define the GOP.

However, I have little hope that the stuck on fear, panic and stupid GOP will “get it”. Despite wasting tons of money backing Gomez who agrees with 90% of the Democrat agenda, he still lost. And yet, I guarantee the GOP will interpret the loss as evidence that our party needs to move further to the left.

Why should liberal Massachusetts voters select a Democrat-Lite Gomez over a full-bodied Democrat, Ed Markey? Moderate Republicans thought six one, half dozen of the other and stayed home. Conservative Republicans, rightly so, could not bring themselves to vote for Gomez who promised not to oppose Obama's agenda.

Extremely low voter turnout confirmed that Massachusetts voters, for the most part, did not care. Had there been a true Conservative in the race like Mike Sullivan, at least voters would have had a clear choice, giving the race a little passion, interest and drama.

Folks, I fully realize that sometimes it is wise to hold you nose and vote for the lesser of two evils. We live in an imperfect world with imperfect human beings. Rarely, if ever, will a candidate embody all the qualities and stand for all the issues and values you hold dear.

Having said that, Gabriel Gomez was a horrible ideologically soulless candidate. Gomez just wanted to be elected; willing to play on either team necessary to land him in political office. Disgusting.

Gomez supported the Gang of Eight Bill, Gun Control, abortion and more. Gomez dis conservatives. To win the primary at any and all cost, Gomez attempted to smear Conservative Campaign Committee whose mission is to hoist conservative candidates to victory across America.

My heart aches for conservative candidates who paint as Reagan advised in bold colors rather than pale pastels. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2OznoFCZdS8

We need candidates who can articulate that conservatism equals true compassion and is beneficial to all Americans. Our candidates must not pander to Democratic party socialist/progressive ideas. Quite the opposite. Our candidates must sound the alarm educating voters to the folly of the Democrat's belief that government is god, can fix everything and can legislate equal outcomes. These foolish Democratic party utopian ideas are destroying lives, weakening, undermining and destroying the greatest nation on the planet.

We need conservative candidates with backbone who proudly stand up for what they believe; candidates who say what they mean and mean what they say. Wow, what a concept. Mr RINO Republican Gomez, I am elated and grateful that you lost.

Lloyd Marcus, Proud Unhyphenated American
Chairman, Conservative Campaign Committee http://bit.ly/12kuAWU


Read more…