13 BENGHAZIGATES UNDER BUSH, THE HUFFINGTON POST LIE AND THE TRUTH

The Huffington Post spouts off about the 13 BENGHAZIGATES UNDER BUSH

that FOX NEWS and the RIGHT WING CONSERVATIVES ignored.  

BUT THE TRUTH IS, THERE IS NO COMPARISON BETWEEN 

WHAT HAPPENED UNDER BUSH AND WHAT IS HAPPENING UNDER

OBAMA.  

HERE'S THE UNCLOUDED TRUTH.  PASS IT ON.

OBAMA ADMITTED HE WAS BORN IN KENYA

KENYAN BORN,

OBAMA ADMITTED IT

AND

THEN SPENT MILLIONS HIDING IT

HERE'S THE PROOF

WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE?  

ALL EXECUTIVE ORDERS SIGNED BY HIM ARE INVALID

ALL LAWS HE SIGNED ARE INVALID

ALL APPOINTMENTS TO HEAD GOVERNMENT AGENCIES ARE INVALID

ALL APPOINTMENTS TO JUDGE POSITIONS ARE INVALID

ALL THE MONEY HE HAS SPENT SHOULD BE RECOUPED

ALL TAXPAYER FINANCED VACATION EXPENSES SHOULD BE RECOUPED

AND THE LIST GOES ON

HILLARY CLINTON, THE TEFLON QUEEN

READ BRENT BOZELL'S ARTICLE ON ALL CRAP SLIDING OFF HILLARY,

THANKS TO THE MAIN STREAM MEDIA

THE REAL HILLARY CLINTON

THE REAL HILLARY

IMPORTANT TO KNOW BEFORE THE 2016 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION

The facts are: Hillary interned with Bob Truehaft, the head of
the California Communist Party.

      She met Bob when he represented the Panthers and traveled all the way to San Francisco to take an internship with him.

      Bill says: "Hillary could have written her own job ticket, but
she turned down all the lucrative job offers."
      The facts are: She flunked the DC bar exam, yes, flunked, it is
a matter of record, and only passed the Arkansas bar.

      She had no job offers in Arkansas , none, and only got hired by the University of Arkansas Law School at Fayetteville because Bill was already teaching there.

      She did not join the prestigious Rose Law Firm until Bill became Arkansas Attorney General and was made a partner only after he was elected Arkansas Governor.

      Bill says: "President Carter appointed Hillary to the Legal
Services Board of Directors and she became its chairman."

       The facts are: The appointment was in exchange for Bill's
support for Carter in his 1980 primary against Ted Kennedy.

      Hillary then became chairman in a coup in which she won a
majority away from Carter's choice to be chairman.

      Bill says: "She served on the board of the Arkansas Children's Hospital."
      The facts are:  Yes she did. But her main board activity, not
mentioned by Bill, was to sit on the Wal-Mart board of directors, for a substantial fee.

      She was silent about their labor and health care practices.

      Bill says: "Hillary didn't succeed at getting health care for all
Americans in 1994 but she kept working at it and helped to create the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) that provides five million children with health insurance."

       The facts are:  Hillary had nothing to do with creating CHIP.

      It was included in the budget deal between Clinton and
Republican Majority Leader Senator Trent Lott.

      I know; I helped to negotiate the deal.

      The money came half from the budget deal and half from the Attorney Generals' tobacco settlement.

      Hillary had nothing to do with either source of funds.

      Bill says: "Hillary was the face of America all over the world."
      The facts are: Her visits were part of a program to get her out
of town so that Bill would not appear weak by feeding stories that Hillary was running the White House.

      Her visits abroad were entirely touristic and symbolic and there was no substantive diplomacy on any of them.

      Bill says: "Hillary was an excellent Senator who kept fighting
for children's and women's issues."
      The facts are: Other than totally meaningless legislation like
changing the names on courthouses and post offices, she has passed only four substantive pieces of legislation.

      One set up a national park in Puerto Rico .

      A second provided respite care for family members helping their relatives through Alzheimer's or other conditions.

      And two were routine bills to aid 911 victims and responders
which were sponsored by the entire NY delegation.

      Presently she is trying to have the US memorialize the Woodstock fiasco of 40 years ago.

      Here is what bothers me more than anything else about Hillary Clinton.

      She has done everything possible to weaken the President and our country (that's you and me!) when it comes to the war on terror.

      1. She wants to close GITMO and move the combatants to the USA where they would have access to our legal system.
      2. She wants to eliminate the monitoring of suspected Al Qaeda phone calls to/from the USA .
      3. She wants to grant constitutional rights to enemy combatants captured on the battlefield.
      4. She wants to eliminate the monitoring of money transfers
between suspected Al Qaeda c ells and supporters in the USA .

      5. She wants to eliminate the type of interrogation tactics used by the military & CIA where coercion might be used when questioning known terrorists even though such tactics might save American lives.

      One cannot think of a single bill Hillary has introduced or a
single comment she has made that would tend to strengthen our country in the War on Terror.

      But, one can think of a lot of comments she has made that weaken our country and makes it a more dangerous situation for all of us.

      Bottom line:

      She goes hand in hand with the ACLU on far too many issues where common sense is abandoned.



      Share this with every female democrat you know ... ask them to prove Dick Morris wrong.

      Think about it - he's said all of this openly, thus if he were
not truthful he'd be liable for defamation of character!

 

CLINTON CAN'T CLAIM SHE DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT NSA EAVESDROPPING ON FOREIGN LEADERS

NSA EAVESDROPPING ON FOREIGN LEADERS

HILLARY CLINTON AS CULPABLE

AS OBAMA

IS IT ENOUGH TO KEEP HER OUT OF THE WHITE HOUSE?

HILLARY WANTS TO BE PRESIDENT? LYING, UNETHICAL OBAMA CLONE

I found this article and thought you'd all like to read it.  It is SO VERY IMPORTANT to know this if you are considering supporting Hillary for President in 2016.  She's been a liar for decades.  Many of her over-the-year's-lies are cited in this article. That's why it was so easy for her to lie about Benghazi.  Putting Hillary in the White House will give us another four years of crooked, lying, thieving politics.  She and Obama are cloned low-lifes.  Read this whole article.  And then campaign, campaign, campaign AGAINST Hillary Rodham Clinton for President in 2016.  The article is fairly long.  But I encourage you to read it ALL.  It's a real eye opener and will give you ammunition when Hillary supporters swarm like biting gnats.

Politics: Watergate-era Judiciary chief of staff: Hillary Clinton fired for lies, unethical behavior

Published by: Dan Calabrese on Wednesday January 23rd, 2013

By DAN CALABRESE - Bet you didn't know this. 

I've decided to reprint a piece of work I did nearly five years ago, because it seems very relevant today given Hillary Clinton's performance in the Benghazi hearings. Back in 2008 when she was running for president, I interviewed two erstwhile staff members of the House Judiciary Committee who were involved with the Watergate investigation when Hillary was a low-level staffer there. I interviewed one Democrat staffer and one Republican staffer, and wrote two pieces based on what they told me about Hillary's conduct at the time.

I published these pieces back in 2008 for North Star Writers Group, the syndicate I ran at the time. This was the most widely read piece we ever had at NSWG, but because NSWG never gained the high-profile status of the major syndicates, this piece still didn't reach as many people as I thought it deserved to. Today, given the much broader reach of CainTV and yet another incidence of Hillary's arrogance in dealing with a congressional committee, I think it deserves another airing. For the purposes of simplicity, I've combined the two pieces. If you're interested in understanding the true character of Hillary Clinton, it's worth your time to read it.

As Hillary Clinton came under increasing scrutiny for her story about facing sniper fire in Bosnia, one question that arose was whether she has engaged in a pattern of lying.

The now-retired general counsel and chief of staff of the House Judiciary Committee, who supervised Hillary when she worked on the Watergate investigation, says Hillary’s history of lies and unethical behavior goes back farther – and goes much deeper – than anyone realizes.

Jerry Zeifman, a lifelong Democrat, supervised the work of 27-year-old Hillary Rodham on the committee. Hillary got a job working on the investigation at the behest of her former law professor, Burke Marshall, who was also Sen. Ted Kennedy’s chief counsel in the Chappaquiddick affair. When the investigation was over, Zeifman fired Hillary from the committee staff and refused to give her a letter of recommendation – one of only three people who earned that dubious distinction in Zeifman’s 17-year career.

Why?

“Because she was a liar,” Zeifman said in an interview last week. “She was an unethical, dishonest lawyer. She conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the committee and the rules of confidentiality.”

How could a 27-year-old House staff member do all that? She couldn’t do it by herself, but Zeifman said she was one of several individuals – including Marshall, special counsel John Doar and senior associate special counsel (and future Clinton White House Counsel) Bernard Nussbaum – who engaged in a seemingly implausible scheme to deny Richard Nixon the right to counsel during the investigation.

Why would they want to do that? Because, according to Zeifman, they feared putting Watergate break-in mastermind E. Howard Hunt on the stand to be cross-examined by counsel to the president. Hunt, Zeifman said, had the goods on nefarious activities in the Kennedy Administration that would have made Watergate look like a day at the beach – including Kennedy’s purported complicity in the attempted assassination of Fidel Castro.

The actions of Hillary and her cohorts went directly against the judgment of top Democrats, up to and including then-House Majority Leader Tip O’Neill, that Nixon clearly had the right to counsel. Zeifman says that Hillary, along with Marshall, Nussbaum and Doar, was determined to gain enough votes on the Judiciary Committee to change House rules and deny counsel to Nixon. And in order to pull this off, Zeifman says Hillary wrote a fraudulent legal brief, and confiscated public documents to hide her deception.

The brief involved precedent for representation by counsel during an impeachment proceeding. When Hillary endeavored to write a legal brief arguing there is no right to representation by counsel during an impeachment proceeding, Zeifman says, he told Hillary about the case of Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas, who faced an impeachment attempt in 1970.

“As soon as the impeachment resolutions were introduced by (then-House Minority Leader Gerald) Ford, and they were referred to the House Judiciary Committee, the first thing Douglas did was hire himself a lawyer,” Zeifman said.

The Judiciary Committee allowed Douglas to keep counsel, thus establishing the precedent. Zeifman says he told Hillary that all the documents establishing this fact were in the Judiciary Committee’s public files. So what did Hillary do?

“Hillary then removed all the Douglas files to the offices where she was located, which at that time was secured and inaccessible to the public,” Zeifman said. Hillary then proceeded to write a legal brief arguing there was no precedent for the right to representation by counsel during an impeachment proceeding – as if the Douglas case had never occurred.

The brief was so fraudulent and ridiculous, Zeifman believes Hillary would have been disbarred if she had submitted it to a judge.

Zeifman says that if Hillary, Marshall, Nussbaum and Doar had succeeded, members of the House Judiciary Committee would have also been denied the right to cross-examine witnesses, and denied the opportunity to even participate in the drafting of articles of impeachment against Nixon.

Of course, Nixon’s resignation rendered the entire issue moot, ending Hillary’s career on the Judiciary Committee staff in a most undistinguished manner. Zeifman says he was urged by top committee members to keep a diary of everything that was happening. He did so, and still has the diary if anyone wants to check the veracity of his story. Certainly, he could not have known in 1974 that diary entries about a young lawyer named Hillary Rodham would be of interest to anyone 34 years later.

But they show that the pattern of lies, deceit, fabrications and unethical behavior was established long ago – long before the Bosnia lie, and indeed, even before cattle futures, Travelgate and Whitewater – for the woman who is still asking us to make her president of the United States.

Franklin Polk, who served at the time as chief Republican counsel on the committee, confirmed many of these details in two interviews he granted me this past Friday, although his analysis of events is not always identical to Zeifman’s. Polk specifically confirmed that Hillary wrote the memo in question, and confirmed that Hillary ignored the Douglas case. (He said he couldn’t confirm or dispel the part about Hillary taking the Douglas files.)

To Polk, Hillary’s memo was dishonest in the sense that she tried to pretend the Douglas precedent didn’t exist. But unlike Zeifman, Polk considered the memo dishonest in a way that was more stupid than sinister.

“Hillary should have mentioned that (the Douglas case), and then tried to argue whether that was a change of policy or not instead of just ignoring it and taking the precedent out of the opinion,” Polk said.

Polk recalled that the attempt to deny counsel to Nixon upset a great many members of the committee, including just about all the Republicans, but many Democrats as well.

“The argument sort of broke like a firestorm on the committee, and I remember Congressman Don Edwards was very upset,” Polk said. “He was the chairman of the subcommittee on constitutional rights. But in truth, the impeachment precedents are not clear. Let’s put it this way. In the old days, from the beginning of the country through the 1800s and early 1900s, there were precedents that the target or accused did not have the right to counsel.”

That’s why Polk believes Hillary’s approach in writing the memorandum was foolish. He says she could have argued that the Douglas case was an isolated example, and that other historical precedents could apply.

But Zeifman says the memo and removal of the Douglas files was only part the effort by Hillary, Doar, Nussbaum and Marshall to pursue their own agenda during the investigation.

After my first column, some readers wrote in claiming Zeifman was motivated by jealousy because he was not appointed as the chief counsel in the investigation, with that title going to Doar instead.

Zeifman’s account is that he supported the appointment of Doar because he, Zeifman, a) did not want the public notoriety that would come with such a high-profile role; and b) didn’t have much prosecutorial experience. When he started to have a problem with Doar and his allies was when Zeifman and others, including House Majority Leader Tip O’Neill and Democratic committee member Jack Brooks of Texas, began to perceive Doar’s group as acting outside the directives and knowledge of the committee and its chairman, Peter Rodino.

(O’Neill died in 1994. Brooks is still living and I tried unsuccessfully to reach him. I’d still like to.)

This culminated in a project to research past presidential abuses of power, which committee members felt was crucial in aiding the decisions they would make in deciding how to handle Nixon’s alleged offenses.

According to Zeifman and other documents, Doar directed Hillary to work with a group of Yale law professors on this project. But the report they generated was never given to the committee. Zeifman believes the reason was that the report was little more than a whitewash of the Kennedy years – a part of the Burke Marshall-led agenda of avoiding revelations during the Watergate investigation that would have embarrassed the Kennedys.

The fact that the report was kept under wraps upset Republican committee member Charles Wiggins of California, who wrote a memo to his colleagues on the committee that read in part:

Within the past few days, some disturbing information has come to my attention. It is requested that the facts concerning the matter be investigated and a report be made to the full committee as it concerns us all.

Early last spring when it became obvious that the committee was considering presidential "abuse of power" as a possible ground of impeachment, I raised the question before the full committee that research should be undertaken so as to furnish a standard against which to test the alleged abusive conduct of Richard Nixon.

As I recall, several other members joined with me in this request. I recall as well repeating this request from time to time during the course of our investigation. The staff, as I recall, was noncommittal, but it is certain that no such staff study was made available to the members at any time for their use.

Wiggins believed the report was purposely hidden from committee members. Chairman Rodino denied this, and said the reason Hillary’s report was not given to committee members was that it contained no value. It’s worth noting, of course, that the staff member who made this judgment was John Doar.

In a four-page reply to Wiggins, Rodino wrote in part:

Hillary Rodham of the impeachment inquiry staff coordinated the work. . . . After the staff received the report it was reviewed by Ms. Rodham, briefly by Mr. Labovitz and Mr. Sack, and by Doar. The staff did not think the manuscript was useful in its present form. . . .

In your letter you suggest that members of the staff may have intentionally suppressed the report during the course of its investigation. That was not the case.

As a matter of fact, Mr. Doar was more concerned that any highlight of the project might prejudice the case against President Nixon. The fact is that the staff did not think the material was usable by the committee in its existing form and had not had time to modify it so it would have practical utility for the members of the committee. I was informed and agreed with the judgment.

Mr. Labovitz, by the way, was John Labovitz, another member of the Democratic staff. I spoke with Labovitz this past Friday as well, and he is no fan of Jerry Zeifman.

“If it’s according to Zeifman, it’s inaccurate from my perspective,” Labovitz said. He bases that statement on a recollection that Zeifman did not actually work on the impeachment inquiry staff, although that is contradicted not only by Zeifman but Polk as well.

Labovitz said he has no knowledge of Hillary having taken any files, and defended her no-right-to-counsel memo on the grounds that, if she was assigned to write a memo arguing a point of view, she was merely following orders.

But as both Zeifman and Polk point out, that doesn’t mean ignoring background of which you are aware, or worse, as Zeifman alleges, confiscating documents that disprove your argument.

All told, Polk recalls the actions of Hillary, Doar and Nussbaum as more amateurish than anything else.

“Of course the Republicans went nuts,” Polk said. “But so did some of the Democrats – some of the most liberal Democrats. It was more like these guys – Doar and company – were trying to manage the members of Congress, and it was like, ‘Who’s in charge here?’ If you want to convict a president, you want to give him all the rights possible. If you’re going to give him a trial, for him to say, ‘My rights were denied,’ – it was a stupid effort by people who were just politically tone deaf. So this was a big deal to people in the proceedings on the committee, no question about it. And Jerry Zeifman went nuts, and rightfully so. But my reaction wasn’t so much that it was underhanded as it was just stupid.”

Polk recalls Zeifman sharing with him at the time that he believed Hillary’s primary role was to report back to Burke Marshall any time the investigation was taking a turn that was not to the liking of the Kennedys.

“Jerry used to give the chapter and verse as to how Hillary was the mole into the committee works as to how things were going,” Polk said. “And she’d be feeding information back to Burke Marshall, who, at least according to Jerry, was talking to the Kennedys. And when something was off track in the view of the Kennedys, Burke Marshall would call John Doar or something, and there would be a reconsideration of what they were talking about. Jerry used to tell me that this was Hillary’s primary function.”

Zeifman says he had another staff member get him Hillary’s phone records, which showed that she was calling Burke Marshall at least once a day, and often several times a day.

A final note about all this: I wrote my first column on this subject because, in the aftermath of Hillary being caught in her Bosnia fib, I came in contact with Jerry Zeifman and found his story compelling. Zeifman has been trying to tell his story for many years, and the mainstream media have ignored him. I thought it deserved an airing as a demonstration of how early in her career Hillary began engaging in self-serving, disingenuous conduct.

Disingenuously arguing a position? Vanishing documents? Selling out members of her own party to advance a personal agenda? Classic Hillary. Neither my first column on the subject nor this one were designed to show that Hillary is dishonest. I don’t really think that’s in dispute. Rather, they were designed to show that she has been this way for a very long time – a fact worth considering for anyone contemplating voting for her for president of the United States.

By the way, there’s something else that started a long time ago.

“She would go around saying, ‘I’m dating a person who will some day be president,’” Polk said. “It was like a Babe Ruth call. And because of that comment she made, I watched Bill Clinton’s political efforts as governor of Arkansas, and I never counted him out because she had made that forecast.”

Bill knew what he wanted a long time ago. Clearly, so did Hillary, and her tactics for trying to achieve it were established even in those early days.

Vote wisely.

VIVE LA DIFFERENCE, WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE? HILLARY'S MOUTH GETS IN HER WAY

HILLARY COULD EAT KITTENS WHILE STOMPING ON A NAKED GRANNY AND THE "MEDIA" WOULD HAIL IT AS "POETRY."  

Here is an outstanding article by Doug Giles discussing Hillary's lies and the Main Stream Media's fawning approval of her lies.  While Hillary sarcastically demands, "What difference does it make," the Media sucks her behind.  

DOUG GILES EXPLAINS IT ALL!

WILD BILL FOR AMERICA SPOUTS OFF ON BENGHAZI

Wild Bill For America has an interesting view on The Bully In The White House, Hillary The Inept Secretary of State, and their miserable failure to protect Americans in Benghazi.

WATCH IT HERE, SHORT BUT OH, SO TRUE

THE INCONVENIENT BENGHAZI TRUTH

Great Peggy Noonan article on the Benghazi cover-up by the Obama administration and Clinton's State Department. Noonan nails it.  Her analysis is 100% accurate, spot on.

PEGGY NOON ON BENGHAZI

MICHELLE MALKIN SAYS CLINTON AND OBAMA'S HOUSE OF LIES IS CRUMBLING

Here is what columnist Michelle Malkin has to say about the Obama/Clinton cover up and lies on the Benghazi murders.  Yes, it was murder.  Four Americans were murdered by Islamic Jihadists.  Too bad Obama, Clinton and their staffs are so politically correct they won't call it what it was.  Refusing to send a nearby rescue crew into Benghazi.  According to yesterday's testimony the Rapid Response Rescue Team was ready to get on the plane and fly out.  Then orders came from somewhere in the bowels of Washington to "stand down."  I believe only the President can issue that type of order.

HERE IS MALKIN'S ARTICLE

"WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE?" HILLARY CLINTON

"What difference does it make?"  Hillary Clinton screams at Senator Ron Johnson (WI) yesterday during her supposed testimony regarding the Benghazi fiasco where four Americans lost their lives.  Hillary, Babe, it matters to the families of those who died there.  Misleading Americans matters.  Lying matters.  It matters to me and it matters to America.  Realizing how unfit to govern the current administration is, including you, Hillary, matters. You got all emotional when discussing the flag draped coffins and meeting with the families of the dead.  Do you think most Americans believed your phone display?  You pounded the table, cried (supposedly), yelled, flailed your arms, flipped out, and then stated "What difference does it make" that four Americans died.  With all due respect, Hillary, IT DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE!  You sounded like a FOOL, looked like a FOOL, and acted like a FOOL.  You are an embarrassment to the U.S., and so is your boss.


HERE IS RON JOHNSON'S STATEMENT FROM TODAY IN RESPONSE TO CLINTON'S "WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE?" STATEMENT

SOCIALISM WOLF IS KNOCKING AT OUR DOOR

Watch Lt. Gen. Jerry Boykin explain why the Socialism wolf is snapping at our heels. The information on the U.N./Obama/Clinton Small Arms Treaty is accurate. Google it and check it out for yourselves. Do your own homework and then decide if the direction the country is going is where you thought it would go under the Obama Regime.

THE ENEMY WITHIN!

CHECK OUT THIS INFORMATION AT THE LINK BELOW THE STORY! This info came to me in an email. I confirmed that it's true.

Huma Abedin Weiner
Through all the talk about Anthony Weiner, jokes about his private parts and jokes about his name, his wife was often mentioned as a victim to his online tomfoolery. And though she did not invite the roof caving in on her, there is some very interesting information about Huma Abedin Weiner.

In 1996, while Bill Clinton was president, he and Hillary met Huma while on a trip to Saudi Arabia . It’s unclear what transpired, but she ended up in Washington DC with close ties to the Clintons . We now know she is Secretary State Hillary Clinton’s deputy Chief of Staff. This is a very sensitive position so we would think Huma was well vetted.

Huma Abedin Weiner is a devout Muslim. Her brother, Hassan, works at the Oxford Center for Islamic Studies (OCIS) at Oxford University . He has close ties with the Muslim Brotherhood. The Egyptian Al-Azhar University is well known for a curriculum that encourages extremism and terrorism, and is active in establishing links with OCIS.

Huma’s mother is co-founder of the Dar El-Hekma women’s college in Saudi Arabia, which has close ties to the Muslim Sisterhood, the female version of the Muslim Brotherhood. The Muslim Sisterhood is also known as International Women’s Organization ( IWO ).

We watched in Egypt as the left sided with the Muslim Brotherhood to take over the country. We are watching the same thing in Libya , only this time we have sent American forces to help the very same people we are fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq .

The left, whether it’s from America or Europe, defends the Muslims at all cost, while consistently portraying Israel as the bad guy. "the occupier." We are fighting Islamic extremists, and their biggest allies are sitting inside our own government, the Democratic Party. With Huma Abedin Weiner having access to so much classified material, the radicals know our every move.

Wonder why there have been no major attacks since 9/11? The radicals have no need to destroy or attack what they are taking over from within. They learned from history when Nikita Sergeyevich Khrushchev, the former head of the Soviet Union, said that the communists would take over the USA from within, not with weapons. The left is using our schools, our churches, the press, television and the Internet to slowly, methodically relinquish our country to radical Islamists.

You can’t turn on the television without hearing how bad Christianity is, while Islam is defended. The Left won't use the word Islam or Muslim Extremist because it might be offensive. The war on terrorism can't be called a war on terrorism. Terrorists are being brought within our borders to stand trial in American courts affording them every right American citizens have. The Left refuses to close our borders and protect this country from terrorist marauders. Wouldn't be politically correct to do that. And it might cost the Left a vote or two.

In the meantime, America, we are at war, and the enemy is not across an ocean. The enemy has hunkered down in Washington.


CLICK HERE FOR MORE INFORMATION

MOSQUE MAKEOVERS WITH YOUR TAX DOLLARS

MOSQUE MAKEOVERS, YOU'RE PAYING THE BILL. OH, NO, I STAND CORRECTED. OUR GOVERNMENT IS JUST WRITING IOU'S TO PAY FOR THIS GARBAGE. YOUR KIDS AND GRANDKIDS WILL BE PAYING THIS BILL. OUR STATE DEPARTMENT AT WORK. THAT'S HILLARY CLINTON WITH DIRECTION FROM BARACKO BABY. ANGRY YET?? CALL YOUR SENATORS AND CONGRESSMEN TO GRIPE ABOUT THIS. DO NOT SIT IN THE "BACK OF THE BUS" AND SHUT UP. YOU CAN FIND CONTACT INFORMATION FOR THE BOZOS IN WASHINGTON EASILY THROUGH GOOGLE. DO IT NOW. THE END IS NEAR FOR AMERICA. CLICK HERE FOR VIDEO

FORTY PIECES OF SILVER - OBAMA BETRAYS THE BRITS

Remember the big Obama push to sign the new START deal with Russia? It's the nuclear arms reduction deal that Obama, Hillary Clinton and The United Nations has called a "first step toward eliminating nuclear weapons" from the world. Oh, and don't forget about everyone in our Congress who signed onto this cockamamie gimmick.

When N. Korea, China, Pakistan, Russia, France and India all are armed to the hilt with nuclear weapons what makes our rattlebrain President, our clueless Secretary of State and the ever-diligent-always-looking-out-for-America United Nations think that any of the nuclear armed nations will "disarm?"

And then there's Israel. They are the smartest country yet. They refuse to enter into any ridiculous arms reduction treaties and in fact, they won't confirm or deny that they even have nuclear weapons. Sounds like a great way to keep the hounds from coming through the door. The hounds don't know which bone will be thrown at them if they do, so they don't.

And yesterday WikiLeaks published documents that show that the U. S. has agreed to give the Kremlin identifying information regarding the number of missiles the U.S. gives to Britain. Britain has long had a policy of refusing to confirm the exact size of its nuclear arsenal and the U.S. has refrained from disclosing this information to any other country. Britain is smart, like Israel. But the U. S. needed a "bargaining chip" to entice Russia to supposedly go along with START. I say supposedly because if you study the START deal, it favors Russia in so many ways. The Russians really snookered Obama, Clinton and Congress.

And this backstabbing, double crossing, underhanded betrayal by Judas Obama and Congress has sold out one of our staunchest allies. This Sneaky Pete maneuver will certainly cost us the loyalty of any other country we have heretofore considered an ally. Why would any country trust us now? We are the Clown in the Courtyard all over the world, the Sucker-punch Champion, and due to the last two years of preschool foreign policy, no country respects us. We can't be trusted when we sell out our friends and pander to an untrustworthy country like Russia. Take the time to study the historic relationship of Russia and the U.S. Decide for yourself how "trustworthy" Russia is.

Our greatest threat to U. S. national security right now? BHO, Barack H. Obama and his progressive band of demons currently running everything in Washington - and those members of Congress who timidly rubber-stamp everything BHO does. If they are so quickly willing to undermine our allies, how long do you think it would take them to sell out Americans, that's us??

ARIZONA IMMIGRATION LAW REPORTED BY OBAMA AS VIOLATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS

Hey, guess what I just found out? Read my blog about Obama's report to the UN on US human rights violations. Then read this. This just came over the wires. The Arizona Immigration law is included in Obama's State Department report to the UN on OUR human rights violations. It is listed as a gross example of human rights violations in the US. The US report to the UN is now going to be scrutinized by a UN panel and they will determine if the Arizona Immigration law is a human rights violation.

Can you believe the audacity of this administration and Hillary Clinton, who is the Sec. of State and runs the State Department, to list Arizona's Immigration law as a violation of human rights??

Wake up People! Get to the polls. Vote. It's our only way out of this travesty of an administration.