Posts Tagged ‘lies’

Shepard Smith Joins the Liberal National Temper Tantrum Over Trump With an On-Air Rant. Trump Still President.

July 15, 2017

shep-800x430

Fox News’ Liberal News Anchor let his mask slip off and fall completely to the ground yesterday, leaving his colleague, Chris Wallace, speechless.

Aaron Blake wrote the following article yesterday titled “‘Lie after lie after lie’: Fox News’ Shepard Smith has a Cronkite moment on Russia” for his blog, “The Fix”, which can be found in The Washington Post

Between its “Fox and Friends” morning show and Sean Hannity at night, Fox News has become a haven for those who think this whole Russia thing is nonsense. On Friday morning, Steve Doocy even declared that “the Russia story is starting to fall apart.”

But on Friday afternoon, a Fox host went off on the Trump administration’s handling of Russia in a way we’ve rarely seen.

Shepard Smith is no stranger to challenging the administration and occasionally launching into personal editorials — including one about refugees back in 2015. But on Friday afternoon, he took it a step further, repeatedly accusing the administration of lying, deception and a coverup.

After reporting that there appeared to be more people in that meeting with Russian lawyer than previously acknowledged, Smith had either a Howard Beale or a Walter Cronkite moment, depending on your perspective, and he lit into the White House.

Here’s the transcript:

“We’re still not clean on this, Chris [Wallace]. If there’s nothing there — and that’s what they tell us, they tell us there’s nothing to this and nothing came of it, there’s a nothingburger, it wasn’t even memorable, didn’t write it down, didn’t tell you about it, because it wasn’t anything so I didn’t even remember it — with a Russian interpreter in the room at Trump Tower? If all of that, why all these lies? Why is it lie after lie after lie? If you clean, come on clean, you know? My grandmother used to say when first we practice to — Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive. The deception, Chris, is mind-boggling. And there are still people who are out there who believe we’re making it up. And one day they’re gonna realize we’re not and look around and go, Where are we, and why are we getting told all these lies?”

Most journalists are reluctant to use the L-word — “lie.” This blog has covered the administration’s contradictory claims and misleading statistics regularly, but calling something a lie implies you know that it was intended to deceive.

An exasperated Smith had clearly had enough of dancing around that word on Friday afternoon.

Where was ol’ Shep when “The Lightbringer” and the 2016 Democratic Presidential Nominee were lying their hindquarters off?

Here is a list of Obama’s biggest lies, posted on Kevin Jackson’s theblacksphere.net on March 7, 2015…

“I, Barrack Hussein Obama, pledge to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America.”

 

I will have the most transparent administration in history.

 

The stimulus will fund shovel-ready jobs.

 

I am focused like a laser on creating jobs.

 

The IRS is not targeting anyone.

 

It was a spontaneous riot about a movie.

 

If I had a son.

 

I will put an end to the type of politics that “breeds division, conflict and cynicism”.

 

You didn’t build that!

 

I will restore trust in government.

 

The Cambridge cops acted stupidly.

 

The public will have 5 days to look at every bill that lands on my desk

 

It’s not my red line – it is the world’s red line.

 

Whistle blowers will be protected in my administration.

 

We got back every dime we used to rescue the banks and auto companies, with interest.

 

I am not spying on American citizens.

 

Obama Care will be good for America . You can keep your family doctor. Premiums will be lowered by $2500. If you like it, you can keep your current healthcare plan. It’s just like shopping at Amazon.

 

I knew nothing about “Fast and Furious” gunrunning to Mexican drug cartels.

 

I knew nothing about IRS targeting conservative groups.

 

I knew nothing about what happened in Benghazi .

 

I have never known my uncle from Kenya who is in the country illegally and that was arrested and told to leave the country over 20 years ago. And, I have never lived with that uncle. He finally admitted (12-05-2013) that he DID know his uncle and that he DID live with him.

And then, there’s the “woman who should have been elected”, Hillary Clinton.

Lord knows she is not crooked.

Neither is a dog’s hind leg.

Here’s a list of Hillary’s indiscretions, courtesy of The Washington Times

• Flunked the D.C. Bar Exam.

• Was removed from her House Judiciary Committee staffer job because of incompetence and lying.

 • The Whitewater scandal.

• Married a serial liar and cheater, who occasionally had sexual encounters with nonconsenting partners.

• Lied about “sniper fire” in an attempt to simulate exposure to danger in a war zone.

• The subject of a “vast right-wing conspiracy” that led to the impeachment and disbarment of her husband

• Took crockery, furniture, artwork and other items from the White House — had to return and/or pay for them.

• Said “what difference, at this point, does it make” about four brave people killed in Libya as a direct result of her failure to protect them on the anniversary of 9/11.

• Totally ignored the structure and rules for the handling of sensitive national security information.

• Amassed a personal fortune with “speaking fees” and payments from private sector political donors and foreign governments into transparent “foundations” in obvious exchange for future political favor.

Two conclusions emerge from this nefarious list of “accomplishments”:

First, Hillary’s brief solo “professional” career [without Bill] was a total failure, and of her own doing. This despite high-level political sponsorship to get her a key “entry level” job as a legal staffer on the Nixon Impeachment investigation in the early 1970s. But she flunked the D.C. Bar Exam [perhaps the easiest in those days] and got fired from her staff job.

Second, she is identified today in friendly media solely by her “career” post-marriage to Bubba. This is the part that Barack Obama recently described as making her “probably the best qualified person ever to run for president.” This is both laughable and ironic, as she is better qualified than was Mr. Obama, arguably the most unqualified person ever elected president. And, as presidential aspirants go, they had one professional “qualification” in common: Neither had ever worked in a “real job.”

As quickly as the Murdoch Brothers booted Roger Ailes and Bill O’Reilly, they should move with as great a speed to get rid of Shepard Smith.

It is not simply the fact that he is a Liberal. And, it is not because he came out and told the American Public recently what we already knew, that he is homosexual,

It is because he is supposed to be a “news reporter”, not a Liberal attempting to relive the “Glory Days” of Air America, a Liberal Radio Network which disappeared faster than a box of donuts in front of Rosie O’Donnell.

Shepard Smith stands out like a sore thumb on the Fox News Channel.

If he wishes to be a Liberal Political Pundit, great. Let him and Juan rotate on “The Five”, like Juan Williams and Bob Beckel used to.

For the Former Ole Miss Cheerleader to launch into a rant resembling the National Temper Tantrum being thrown by immature Liberals from coast to coast is not only unseemly, it’s unprofessional.

As I have listed, the guy who occupied the Oval Office for the last eight years and his “chosen successor”, whom average Americans rejected like the other two bachelors on “The Dating Game”, have left behind them a Grand Canyon full of lies and corruption, which is full to overflowing, as we are finding more and more shady dealings committed by both of them every day.

In fact, as we are finding out more about Donald Trump, Jr’s meeting with that “Russian Lawyer”, it is looking more and more like a Democratic Party Set-up.

So, if I were Shepard Smith, I would take some Xanax, keep my histrionics to myself, and act like a Professional News Anchor.

Americans are not buying what these temper tantrum-throwing Liberals are attempting to sell.

Until He Comes,

KJ 

 

Advertisements

It All Depends on What Your Definition of “E-mail” is: Washington Post Admits Hillary Lied to America About E-mailgate.#NeverHillary

August 5, 2016

Clinton-Dummies-600-LIPAST: in the spring of 1974, Hillary Rodham became a member of the presidential impeachment inquiry staff, advising the Judiciary Committee of the House of Representatives during the Watergate Scandal.Her boss back then, Jerry Zeifman, now-retired general counsel and chief of staff of the House Judiciary Committee, tells a very revealing story concerning her work there.According to Zeifman, a lifelong Democrat, Hillary got a job working on the investigation at the behest of her former Yale Law Professor, Burke Marshall, also Sen. Ted Kennedy’s chief counsel in the Chappaquiddick affair.When the Watergate Investigation was over, Zeifman fired Hillary from the committee staff and refused to give her a letter of recommendation. That made the Future First Lady and Secretary of State one of only three people who earned that badge of dishonor in Zeifman’s 17-year career.Why?

According to Zeifman,

Because she was a liar. 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.

Zeifman claims that 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 plotted to deny Richard Nixon the right to counsel during the investigation.

Zeifman believes  that they were deathly afraid of putting the break-in’s mastermind E. Howard Hunt on the stand to be cross-examined by Counsel to the President.  The reason being, Hunt had the goods regarding some dirty dealings  in the Kennedy Administration that would have made Watergate look like a kid busting open his Piggy Bank…dealings which purportedly included Kennedy’s complicity in the attempted assassination of Fidel Castro.

Hillary and her associates were acting directly against the decision of top Democrats, up to and including then-House Majority Leader Tip O’Neill, who all believed that Nixon clearly had the right to counsel.

The reason that Hillary and the rest came up with the scheme is because they believed that they could gain enough votes on the Judiciary Committee to change House rules and deny counsel to Nixon.

In order to pull off this scheme, Zeifman says Hillary wrote a fraudulent legal brief, and confiscated public documents to hide her deception.

Hillary wanted to present in her brief that there was no right to representation by counsel during an impeachment proceeding. Zeifman 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.

Douglas was allowed to keep counsel by the Judicial Committee in place at the time, which clearly established a precedent. Zeifman told Hillary that all the documents establishing this fact were in the Judiciary Committee’s public files.

That was  a mistake, per Zeifman…

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.

Hillary then wrote a legal brief which argued that there was no precedent for the right to representation by counsel during an impeachment proceeding…ignoring the Douglas case completely.

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

Zeifman says that if Hillary and her associates 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 be a part of the drafting of articles of impeachment against Nixon.

After President Richard M. Nixon resigned in August, rendering the matter of her deception moot, Hillary became a faculty member of the University of Arkansas Law School in Fayetteville, where her Yale Law School classmate and boyfriend Bill Clinton was also teaching.

Hillary Rodham married Bill Clinton on October 11, 1975

PRESENT: Foxnews.com reports that

Hillary Clinton is getting hammered for saying on “Fox News Sunday” that FBI Director James Comey confirmed her statements on her email scandal were “truthful” – with one prominent fact-checker giving the claim four “Pinocchios.”

The former secretary of state cited Comey when asked to account for her repeated claims that she never sent or received material marked classified on her personal email account. When host Chris Wallace noted that Comey said those things were not true, Clinton disagreed.

“That’s not what I heard Director Comey say … Director Comey said that my answers were truthful and what I’ve said is consistent with what I have told the American people, that there were decisions discussed and made to classify retroactively certain of the emails,” she said.  

The Washington Post Fact Checker picked apart that statement, ultimately giving it four “Pinocchios,” its worst rating for truthfulness.

“Clinton is cherry-picking statements by Comey to preserve her narrative about the unusual setup of a private email server. This allows her to skate past the more disturbing findings of the FBI investigation,” the Post wrote, noting that she was relying on Comey’s statement to Congress: “We have no basis to conclude she lied to the FBI.”

However, the FBI director did not say the same about her statements to the American public. And during testimony before a House committee, Comey said it was “not true” that nothing Clinton sent or received was marked classified. To the contrary, he said, “there was classified material emailed.”

The Post concluded: “While Comey did say there was no evidence she lied to the FBI, that is not the same as saying she told the truth to the American public — which was the point of Wallace’s question. Comey has repeatedly not taken a stand on her public statements.

“And although Comey did say many emails were retroactively classified, he also said that there were some emails that were already classified that should not have been sent on an unclassified, private server. That’s the uncomfortable truth that Clinton has trouble admitting.”

…The campaign has stressed, with regard to the emails apparently marked classified, that Comey acknowledged during the hearing in question the markings themselves were not properly marked. The State Department also has suggested those markings shouldn’t have been there.

Comey, though, also challenged other statements by Clinton during his testimony. On her claim that she used one device, Comey said, “She used multiple devices.” And on her claim that she turned over all work-related emails, he said, “No, we found work-related emails, thousands that were not returned.”

Clinton, meanwhile, acknowledged again on “Fox News Sunday” that she made a “mistake,” while appearing to spread the blame around.

“I take classification seriously. I relied on and had every reason to rely on the judgments of the professionals with whom I worked. And so, in retrospect, maybe some people are saying, ‘Well, … among those 300 people, they made the wrong call,’” Clinton said. “At the time, there was no reason, in my view, to doubt the professionalism and the determination by the people who work every single day on behalf of our country.”

OUR NATION’S FUTURE: Even though the Clintons have always appeared to be above the law, and skip past every scandal  like a fried egg in those Teflon Skillet commercials, with this November’s Presidential Election, an example must be set, so that the America’s secrets and the safety of our Military and Intelligence Operatives acting covertly in foreign lands, will be protected for the continued sovereignty of our nation.

A President of the United States must be trustworthy, not only for the reassurance of its citizens that they will do the right thing when a crisis occurs, but also for the assurance of our overseas allies, that we will have their backs in case of a crisis in their nation.

Time and time again, from Watergate to Travelgate to Benghazigate, and now to E-mailgate, Hillary Clinton has proven to be a ruthless, untrustworthy, Machiavellian professional politician, who only cares about herself and her ascension to the Presidency of the United States of America.

Every successful person is ambitious. Donald J Trump is an ambitious man. However, judging from his track record and the charitable things that he has done for Americans behind the scenes,  for which he neither sought nor received any publicity for, and his public accomplishments, along with his stated love for this country and his wish for us to prosper economically and once again resume our place as Leader of the Free World, as an average American, I will be voting for him in November of 2016 to become our next President.

America has endured enough duplicity and political chicanery in the last 7 years to last us for centuries. The deleterious effect of the Presidency of Barack Hussein Obama has left a stain of incompetent leadership and out-of-control political correctness which will take years to wash away.

America and the rest of the Free World cannot afford the devastating effects of a Hillary Clinton Presidency.

Just like the Broadcast Networks have ended just about all of their soap operas which aired on their channels on a daily basis, Americans need to pull the plug on the failed leadership and the legacy which Barack Hussein Obama is leaving behind.

Indeed, it is time to make America great again.

Until He Comes,

KJ 

E-mailgate: FBI Offers Staffer Immunity While the Potential President Proceeds With Her Prevarications

March 3, 2016

Her-shadow-600-LI (2)As the “Inevitable” Democrat Presidential Candidate, Hillary Rodham Clinton, continues her march toward that Political Party’s Nomination, the FBI Investigation into the mishandling of Top Secret E-mails by her and her staff, while she was the Secretary of State, continues to grow.

The Washington Post reports that

The Justice Department has granted immunity to a former State Department staffer, who worked on Hillary Clinton’s private email server, as part of a criminal investigation into the possible mishandling of classified information, according to a senior law enforcement official.

The official said the FBI had secured the cooperation of Bryan Pagliano, who worked on Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign before setting up the server in her New York home in 2009.

As the FBI looks to wrap up its investigation in the coming months, agents are likely to want to interview Clinton and her senior aides about the decision to use a private server, how it was set up, and whether any of the participants knew they were sending classified information in emails, current and former officials said.

The inquiry comes against a political backdrop in which Clinton is the favorite to secure the Democratic nomination for the presidency.

So far, there is no indication that prosecutors have convened a grand jury in the email investigation to subpoena testimony or documents, which would require the participation of a U.S. attorney’s office.

“There was wrongdoing,” said a former senior law enforcement official. “But was it criminal wrongdoing?”

Clinton has since apologized for what happened: “Yes, I should have used two email addresses, one for personal matters and one for my work at the State Department. Not doing so was a mistake. I’m sorry about it, and I take full responsibility.” 

Any decision to charge someone would involve Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch, who told Congress when asked last month about the email inquiry: “That matter is being handled by career independent law enforcement agents, FBI agents, as well as the career independent attorneys in the Department of Justice. They follow the evidence, they look at the law and they’ll make a recommendation to me when the time is appropriate.”

The fact that there is ambivalence concerning going forward with an indictment is not a surprise.

There is too much at stake.

The depth and breadth of Hillary’s lying is no surprise, either.

She has had a lifetime of practice.

In 1971, she arrived in Washington, D.C. to work on U.S. Senator Walter Mondale’s sub-committee on migrant workers. The next summer found her out west, working for the campaign of Democratic presidential nominee George McGovern.Then, in the spring of 1974, Rodham became a member of the presidential impeachment inquiry staff, advising the Judiciary Committee of the House of Representatives during the Watergate Scandal.Her boss back then, Jerry Zeifman, now-retired general counsel and chief of staff of the House Judiciary Committee, tells a very revealing story concerning her work there.According to Zeifman, a lifelong Democrat, Hillary got a job working on the investigation at the behest of her former Yale Law Professor, Burke Marshall, also Sen. Ted Kennedy’s chief counsel in the Chappaquiddick affair.When the Watergate Investigation was over, Zeifman fired Hillary from the committee staff and refused to give her a letter of recommendation. That made the Future First Lady and Secretary of State one of only three people who earned that badge of dishonor in Zeifman’s 17-year career.Why?

According to Zeifman,

Because she was a liar. 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.

Zeifman claims that 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 plotted to deny Richard Nixon the right to counsel during the investigation.

Zeifman believes  that they were deathly afraid of putting the break-in’s mastermind E. Howard Hunt on the stand to be cross-examined by Counsel to the President.  The reason being, Hunt had the goods regarding some dirty dealings  in the Kennedy Administration that would have made Watergate look like a kid busting open his Piggy Bank…dealings which purportedly included Kennedy’s complicity in the attempted assassination of Fidel Castro.

Hillary and her associates were acting directly against the decision of top Democrats, up to and including then-House Majority Leader Tip O’Neill, who all believed that Nixon clearly had the right to counsel.

The reason that Hillary and the rest came up with the scheme is because they believed that they could gain enough votes on the Judiciary Committee to change House rules and deny counsel to Nixon.

In order to pull off this scheme, Zeifman says Hillary wrote a fraudulent legal brief, and confiscated public documents to hide her deception.

Hillary wanted to present in her brief that there was no right to representation by counsel during an impeachment proceeding. Zeifman 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.

Douglas was allowed to keep counsel by the Judicial Committee in place at the time, which clearly established a precedent. Zeifman told Hillary that all the documents establishing this fact were in the Judiciary Committee’s public files.

That was  a mistake, per Zeifman…

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.

Hillary then wrote a legal brief which argued that there was no precedent for the right to representation by counsel during an impeachment proceeding…ignoring the Douglas case completely.

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

Zeifman says that if Hillary and her associates 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 be a part of the drafting of articles of impeachment against Nixon.

President Richard M. Nixon resigned that August. (***courtesy of canadafreepress.com and discoverthenetworks.org)

On Jan. 8, 1996, in a still-relevant commentary titled “Blizzard of Lies,” New York Times columnist William Safire described Hillary Clinton as “a congenital liar.” Here are excerpts from that article.

Americans of all political persuasions are coming to the sad realization that our First Lady — a woman of undoubted talents who was a role model for many in her generation — is a congenital liar. Drip by drip, like Whitewater torture, the case is being made that she is compelled to mislead, and to ensnare her subordinates and friends in a web of deceit.

1. Remember the story she told about studying The Wall Street Journal to explain her 10,000 percent profit in 1979 commodity trading? We now know that was a lie told to turn aside accusations that as the Governor’s wife she profited corruptly, her account being run by a lawyer for state poultry interests through a disreputable broker.

She lied for good reason: To admit otherwise would be to confess taking, and paying taxes on, what some think amounted to a $100,000 bribe.

2. The abuse of Presidential power known as Travelgate elicited another series of lies. She induced a White House lawyer to assert flatly to investigators that Mrs. Clinton did not order the firing of White House travel aides, who were then harassed by the F.B.I. and Justice Department to justify patronage replacement by Mrs. Clinton’s cronies.

Now we know, from a memo long concealed from investigators, that there would be “hell to pay” if the furious First Lady’s desires were scorned. The career of the lawyer who transmitted Hillary’s lie to authorities is now in jeopardy. Again, she lied with good reason: to avoid being identified as a vindictive political power player who used the F.B.I. to ruin the lives of people standing in the way of juicy patronage.

3. In the aftermath of the apparent suicide of her former partner and closest confidant, White House Deputy Counsel Vincent Foster, she ordered the overturn of an agreement to allow the Justice Department to examine the files in the dead man’s office. Her closest friends and aides, under oath, have been blatantly disremembering this likely obstruction of justice, and may have to pay for supporting Hillary’s lie with jail terms.

Again, the lying was not irrational. Investigators believe that damning records from the Rose Law Firm, wrongfully kept in Vincent Foster’s White House office, were spirited out in the dead of night and hidden from the law for two years — in Hillary’s closet, in Web Hubbell’s basement before his felony conviction, in the President’s secretary’s personal files — before some were forced out last week.

…One reason for the Friday-night dribble of evidence from the White House is the discovery by the F.B.I. of copies of some of those records elsewhere. When Clinton witnesses are asked about specific items in “lost” records — which investigators have — the White House “finds” its copy and releases it. By concealing the Madison billing records two days beyond the statute of limitations, Hillary evaded a civil suit by bamboozled bank regulators.

Another reason for recent revelations is the imminent turning of former aides and partners of Hillary against her; they were willing to cover her lying when it advanced their careers, but are inclined to listen to their own lawyers when faced with perjury indictments.

So, now, here we are.

A Modern Madame Bovary, who has assumed power and vitality at the expense of others, from Arkansas to New York to Washington, DC, is about to be the Democrat Nominee for the Presidency of the greatest country on the Face of the Earth, with the present (in more ways than one) President as, apparently, her willing accomplice…and, an emaciated-appearing, crotchety, old Ex-President playing the role of Renfield to her incarnation of Dracula (“Yes, Mistress..heh heh…heh heh.”)

The late, great William Safire was a prophet.

Lying comes as naturally to The Former First Lady as breathing in and out.

As I have written, from the time she was fired from the Watergate Investigative Committee to wiping her private e-mail server, Hillary Rodham Clinton has been as crooked as a dog’s hind leg.

Machiavellian in political ambition and armed with a vocabulary that would make the legendary Gong Show Judge, Jaye P. Morgan, blush (look her up, kids), “the Hildebeast” has cut a wide swatch in her path to Political Power.

It should be obvious to Americans by now, that she believes that morality and ethics are for “the little people” (i.e., you and me).

We already have a congenital liar in the White House.

We certainly do not need another one.

Oh…and Ambassador Christopher Stevens remains unavailable for comment.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Clinton/Sanders Debate: Two Old Northeast Progressives “Swapping Stories”

February 5, 2016

Hil-Bern-600nrdIn case you didn’t know, didn’t care, or you just didn’t want to watch a couple of old white “Progressives” from the Northeast lie like rugs on National Television, there was an actual Democrat Presidential Candidate Debate held in Prime Time on Thursday, and not in the dead of night on the Weekend.

Politico.com reports that

The niceties are finished.

After a string of debates where Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders discussed (and occasionally disagreed about) the fine points of progressive policy, the two finally had a full-fledged throwdown Thursday night.

Clinton accused Sanders of going negative on the campaign trail, telling the Vermont Senator at the Democratic debate that his campaign was smearing her name.

“I think it’s time to end the very artful smear that you and your campaign have been carrying out in recent week,” Clinton said after Sanders talked about getting money out of politics.

Sanders has boasted about not receiving money from Wall street, and has pointed out in recent weeks that Clinton has received large sums in exchange for speaking.

“Sen. Sanders has said he wants to run a positive campaign. I’ve tried to keep my disagreements over issues, but time and time again, by innuendo and by insinuation there is this attack that he is putting forth,” Clinton said.

“Which really comes down to anyone who ever took donations or speaking fees from interest groups has to be bought, and I absolutely reject that Senator. I really don’t think those attacks by insinuation are worthy of you,” Clinton continued

Then she leveled the challenge: “If you have something to say, say it. But I have never changed a view or a vote because of a donation I’ve received.”

Hold on a second. We’ll get back to this “Challenge”

Now about the lies…

Foxnews.com reports that

WASHINGTON –  Hillary Clinton cast the financial industry as an adversary in her presidential campaign — despite the money that industry has poured into her White House effort. Bernie Sanders once again mischaracterized the share of the wealth taken by the very richest Americans.

A look at some of the claims in their latest Democratic presidential debate:

CLINTON on Wall Street: “They are trying to beat me in this primary.”

THE FACTS: Wall Street is not the anti-Clinton monolith she implied. People in the securities and investment industry gave more than $17 million last year to super political action committees supporting her presidential run and nearly $3 million directly to her campaign, according to OpenSecrets.org, a campaign-finance watchdog. Wall Street is the top industry donating to her effort, ahead of the legal profession, non-profit institutions and others.

Clinton is taking heat from Sanders over her Wall Street ties, which go back decades.

The Washington Post reported Thursday that Clinton has brought in more money from the financial sector during her four federal campaigns — for Senate and president — than her husband, Bill Clinton, did in his quarter-century political career. In all, more than $44 million was raised for her campaigns. This includes more than $1 out of every $10 of the money contributed for her 2016 campaign.

Clinton has often talked about how much she has raised from teachers, as opposed to big corporate interests. But the $2.93 million given directly to her campaign last year by people in the securities and investment industry surpassed the $2.88 million given by people in education, OpenSecrets found.

SANDERS: “Almost all new income and wealth is going to the top 1 percent.”

THE FACTS: This has been a common mantra by Sanders but it relies on outdated numbers. In the first five years of the economic recovery, 2009-2014, the richest 1 percent captured 58 percent of income growth, according to Emmanuel Saez, a University of California economist whose research Sanders uses.

That’s a hefty share, but far short of “almost all.” In the first three years of the recovery, 2009-2012, the richest 1 percent did capture 91 percent of the growth in income. But part of that gain reflected an accounting maneuver as the wealthiest pulled income forward to 2012 in advance of tax increases that took effect in 2013 on the biggest earners.

Many companies paid out greater bonuses to their highest-paid employees in 2012 before the higher tax rates took effect. Those bonuses then fell back in 2013. And in 2014, the bottom 99 percent finally saw incomes rise 3.3 percent, the biggest gain in 15 years. Average wages also showed signs of picking up last year as the unemployment rate fell, suggesting the bottom 99 percent may have also seen gains in 2015.

CLINTON: “I am against American combat troops being in Syria and Iraq. I support special forces. I support trainers. I support the air campaign.”

THE FACTS: Clinton makes a dubious distinction. Although it can be debated whether certain types of military personnel fit the definition of “combat” troops, there is little doubt that special operations forces like those now operating both in Syria and Iraq do.

In the fall, a special operations soldier was killed in a firefight in Iraq during a joint U.S.-Kurdish commando raid on an Islamic State prison.

The Pentagon recently sent up to 200 special operations troops to Iraq to carry out a range of risky missions, including raids against Islamic State targets.

Pilots of fighter aircraft, bombers and other warplanes that have flown over Iraq and Syria, dropping bombs and missiles on Islamic State targets on a daily basis, certainly are engaged in combat.
Clinton said she supports Obama’s reluctance to take the lead in ground combat in Iraq and Syria. But many military members are now engaged in combat.

SANDERS: “You have three out of the four largest banks in America today, bigger than they were, significantly bigger than when we bailed them out because they were too big to fail.”

THE FACTS: Sanders is right that JPMorgan, Bank of America and Wells Fargo are larger than they were in mid-2008, before they received bailout money. But those gains largely reflect mergers and acquisitions that occurred, frequently at the government’s behest, during the financial crisis. JPMorgan bulked up by purchasing Bear Stearns, in a deal facilitated by the Federal Reserve. Bank of America ballooned when it acquired Merrill Lynch and Wells Fargo roughly doubled in size when it bought a floundering Wachovia Bank.

But the Dodd-Frank financial regulatory overhaul bill, passed in 2010, has forced banks to hold more capital as a cushion against risk and to make future bailouts less likely. That requirement and others has caused several banks, including JPMorgan, Goldman Sachs and Citi, to shed assets to avoid growing larger and triggering further oversight.

CLINTON on Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal: “I said that I was holding out that hope that it would be the kind of trade agreement that I was looking for. I waited until it had actually been negotiated because I did want to give the benefit of the doubt to the administration. Once I saw what the outcome was, I opposed it.”

THE FACTS: As Obama’s secretary of state, Clinton was far more enthusiastic about the Pacific trade deal taking shape than she became once she was running for president and trying to appeal to the liberal wing of her party. As secretary she had given speeches around the world in support of the deal under negotiation, saying in Australia in 2012 that it “sets the gold standard in trade agreements,” a cheerleading sentiment she echoed elsewhere.

She’s stated since that the final agreement didn’t address her concerns. But the final version actually had been modified to drop certain provisions that liberal activist groups had opposed.

CLINTON: “I am not going to make promises I can’t keep. I am not going to talk about big ideas like single-payer and then not level with people about how much it will cost.”

THE FACTS: Clinton was taking aim at Sanders’ universal health care coverage plan that he calls “Medicare for all,” and a new independent analysis suggests that she was correct about his understating the cost.

The nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget found that the tax increases in Sanders’ plan would only cover about 75 percent of the estimated spending under the plan, creating at least a $3 trillion hole over 10 years.

The analysis was based on Sanders’ estimate of how much his plan would spend. If that turns out to be low, then the financing gap would grow.

The group represents deficit foes from both political parties. Leon Panetta, a CIA director and a defense secretary under President Barack Obama, is a co-chairman of its board.

Remember Former Secretary of State Clinton’s challenge from last night, regarding donations that she has received?

“If you have something to say, say it. But I have never changed a view or a vote because of a donation I’ve received.”

Challenge accepted.

Back in April of 2015, NYMag.com reported that

The qualities of an effective presidency do not seem to transfer onto a post-presidency. Jimmy Carter was an ineffective president who became an exemplary post-president. Bill Clinton appears to be the reverse. All sorts of unproven worst-case-scenario questions float around the web of connections between Bill’s private work, Hillary Clinton’s public role as secretary of State, the Clintons’ quasi-public charity, and Hillary’s noncompliant email system. But the best-case scenario is bad enough: The Clintons have been disorganized and greedy.

The news today about the Clintons all fleshes out, in one way or another, their lack of interest in policing serious conflict-of-interest problems that arise in their overlapping roles:

The New York Times has a report about the State Department’s decision to approve the sale of Uranium mines to a Russian company that donated $2.35 million to the Clinton Global Initiative, and that a Russian investment bank promoting the deal paid Bill $500,000 for a speech in Moscow.The Washington Post reports that Bill Clinton has received $26 million in speaking fees from entities that also donated to the Clinton Global Initiative.The Washington Examiner reports, “Twenty-two of the 37 corporations nominated for a prestigious State Department award — and six of the eight ultimate winners — while Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State were also donors to the Clinton family foundation.”And Reuters reports, “Hillary Clinton’s family’s charities are refiling at least five annual tax returns after a Reuters review found errors in how they reported donations from governments, and said they may audit other Clinton Foundation returns in case of other errors.”

The Clinton campaign is batting down the darkest and most conspiratorial interpretation of these stories, and where this all leads remains to be seen. But the most positive interpretation is not exactly good.

When you are a power couple consisting of a former president and a current secretary of State and likely presidential candidate, you have the ability to raise a lot of money for charitable purposes that can do a lot of good. But some of the potential sources of donations will be looking to get something in return for their money other than moral satisfaction or the chance to hobnob with celebrities. Some of them want preferential treatment from the State Department, and others want access to a potential future Clinton administration. To run a private operation where Bill Clinton will deliver a speech for a (huge) fee and a charity that raises money from some of the same clients is a difficult situation to navigate. To overlay that fraught situation onto Hillary’s ongoing and likely future government service makes it all much harder.

And yet the Clintons paid little to no attention to this problem. Nicholas Confessore described their operation as “a sprawling concern, supervised by a rotating board of old Clinton hands, vulnerable to distraction and threatened by conflicts of interest. It ran multimillion-dollar deficits for several years, despite vast amounts of money flowing in.” Indeed, as Ryan Lizzareported in 2012, Bill Clinton seemed to see the nexus between his role and his wife’s as a positive rather than a negative:

Regardless of Bill Clinton’s personal feelings about Obama, it didn’t take him long to see the advantages of an Obama Presidency. More than anyone, he pushed Hillary to take the job of Secretary of State. “President Clinton was a big supporter of the idea,” an intimate of the Clintons told me. “He advocated very strongly for it and arguably was the tie-breaking reason she took the job.” For one thing, having his spouse in that position didn’t hurt his work at the Clinton Global Initiative. He invites foreign leaders to the initiative’s annual meeting, and her prominence in the Administration can be an asset in attracting foreign donors. “Bill Clinton’s been able to continue to be the Bill Clinton we know, in large part because of his relationship with the White House and because his wife is the Secretary of State,” the Clinton associate continued. “It worked out very well for him. That may be a very cynical way to look at it, but that’s a fact. A lot of the stuff he’s doing internationally is aided by his level of access.”

The Obama administration wanted Hillary Clinton to use official government email. She didn’t. The Obama administration alsodemanded that the Clinton Foundation disclose all its donors while she served as Secretary of State. It didn’t comply with that request, either.

The Clintons’ charitable initiatives were a kind of quasi-government run by themselves, which was staffed by their own loyalists and made up the rules as it went along. Their experience running the actual government, with its formal accountability and disclosure, went reasonably well. Their experience running their own privatized mini-state has been a fiasco.

With the revelation of “the gift” of massive quantities of Uranium to the Russians and an Iranian Connection regarding some of the money given to the Clinton Foundation, this is not just a scandal involving money and unscrupulous political ladder-climbing through the peddling of “favors”, the actions of the Clintons crossed the line into the abhorrent abyss of treason.

Clinton does not belong in the White House. She belongs in jail.

And, Sanders need to move to the tiny country of Denmark and like the rest of his life in that failed “Socialist Paradise”

Or, he needs to be fitted with a short white jacket with long sleeves that tie behind the back.

Just sayin’.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Hillary, Benghazi, and the Democrat Nomination: Inaction Has Consequences, Too

January 16, 2016

untitled (18)In the Arena of Presidential Politics, sometimes what is lauded as “inevitable”, “ain’t necessarily so”.

The Washington Post has the story…

Some leading Democrats are increasingly anxious about Hillary Clinton’s prospects for winning the party’s presidential nomination, warning that Sen. Bernie Sanders’s growing strength in early battleground states and strong fundraising point to a campaign that could last well into the spring.

What seemed recently to be a race largely controlled by Clinton has turned into a neck-and-neck contest with voting set to begin in less than three weeks.

On Capitol Hill and in state party headquarters, some Democrats worry that a Sanders nomination could imperil candidates down the ballot in swing districts and states. Others sense deja vu from 2008, when Clinton’s overwhelming edge cratered in the days before the Iowa caucuses.

Just as Barack Obama’s stunning upset there helped assure Democrats in later states that a black man could win votes from whites and propelled him to victory in South Carolina and other places, so, too, could a Sanders victory on Feb. 1 in Iowa and then Feb. 9 in New Hampshire ease doubts about the viability of a self-described “democratic socialist,” some said.

“It’s just like the weak spot for Barack Obama was his skin color, but he got cured of that in Iowa,” said Rep. James E. Clyburn (D-S.C.), the party’s leading African American in Congress.

“If [Sanders] comes out of Iowa and New Hampshire with big victories — if it’s close in both places, that’s one thing — but if he comes out of there with big victories, hey, man, it could very well be a new day,” Clyburn added.

One Clinton ally on Capitol Hill said some in the party are starting to seriously consider what it would mean for Democrats nationally if Sanders were to win.

“There’s definitely an elevated concern expressed in the cloakroom and members-only elevators, and other places, about the impact of a Sanders nomination on congressional candidates,” Rep. Steve Israel (D-N.Y.) said.

Israel, a former chairman of the Democrats’ House campaign committee, said that a Sanders nomination “increases the level of anxiety that many of our candidates have in swing districts, where a Hillary Clinton nomination erases that anxiety.”

Sensing the tightening race, some state party officials have gone out of their way to keep the peace with supporters of Sanders, hoping to tap their energy and keep them activated for the general election campaign.

The reevaluation of the Democratic primaries — which seemed destined for a Clinton coronation after she recovered from a summer slide amid controversy over her use of a private email system while secretary of state — comes as state and national surveys show her sliding fast once again.

A Des Moines Register survey of likely Iowa caucus voters released Thursday showed a statistical dead heat, with Clinton at 42 percent and Sanders at 40. That marks a significant shift from a month ago, when Clinton held a lead of nine percentage points and saw her share of the vote at 48 percent. In New Hampshire, Sanders holds a commanding lead, 53 percent to 39 percent, according to a Monmouth University poll released this week. 

Clinton and Sanders have escalated their attacks on each other, with each claiming to be the strongest general election candidate.

The new dynamic will be on display in South Carolina this weekend, when the Democratic candidates attend a party dinner and then a fish fry hosted by Clyburn ahead of their debate Sunday night. The pre-debate events, expected to draw hundreds of activists, will serve as a chance for Sanders to prove that his campaign has an effective organization beyond the first two states.

“We’re really at the front end of the process for states beyond Iowa and New Hampshire,” said Sanders adviser Tad Devine. “Part of the process is to convince people Bernie is a serious option, and doing well in early states helps.”

Clinton’s allies have said that they have always planned for a difficult primary season and that they expect their well-structured campaign to pay dividends when the race moves on to larger states with more diverse electorates than the two earliest states. They note that a recent trip to Oklahoma, part of the Super Tuesday bloc of 10 states on March 1, demonstrated their campaign’s long view of the race.

“From Day One, we have told everyone who will listen this would be a dogfight,” said Jerry Crawford, a longtime Clinton supporter in Iowa. “Hillary will continue to fight for every vote just as she has done since Day One in Iowa, and I wouldn’t trade places with any other campaign.”

Whether or not he wins, Sanders’s rise has created challenges for party leaders by highlighting policy differences between the Democratic establishment and the party’s support base.

Many Sanders proposals — Medicare for all, free college and breaking up big banks — go beyond congressional Democrats’ agenda but are embraced by an ascendant wing of the party.

Those policy prescriptions win support in primaries, but many Democratic elites fear how they would play in a general election. At the same time, Democratic leaders know they can’t afford to alienate an energized party base.

Some recent surveys suggest that Sanders is drawing support beyond the liberals and young voters who have flocked to his rallies.

A Quinnipiac University poll early this month found Sanders trailing Clinton by an insignificant two percentage points among moderate and conservative Democrats, a sharp shift from Clinton’s 24 percentage-point lead among that group in December.

“Whatever the success that Senator Sanders, that Bernie Sanders, has, I think it’s important to recognize that his supporters are essential to our success in winning the White House,” House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) told reporters in the Capitol on Wednesday.

In the Senate, more than two-thirds of the Democratic caucus has endorsed Clinton. For now, the senators will remain calm, even if she loses the first two states, according to a senior consultant working on Senate races.

However, full-fledged panic would set in if Clinton loses the Nevada caucuses, wedged in between New Hampshire and South Carolina, the consultant said.

A Clinton defeat would complicate matters for one of the country’s most vulnerable Democrats, Rep. Cheri Bustos (D-Ill.). Bustos said that much of her campaign strategy is based on energizing female voters with the potential of a female presidential nominee . “There’s a lot of excitement about having a woman at the top of the ticket,” Bustos said, without directly critiquing Sanders.

While the Elite of the Democrats are excited about the prospect of having “The Queen of Mean” as their Presidential Candidate, others are, as the article alluded to, beginning to distance themselves from Hillary and her “baggage”.

Regardless of what she proclaimed in front of a sub-committee, what happened at a remote Embassy Compound in Libya DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE.

And now, it is on “the Big Screen” for all Americans to see.

The Christian Post reports that

Pat Smith, mother of American 2012 Benghazi terrorist attack victim Sean Smith, called presumptive 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton “a liar” this week after viewing the Benghazi-themed film “13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi.”

Smith, in an appearance on Fox News with Megyn Kelly this week, said she couldn’t complete watching the film after seeing the portrayal of her deceased son in the movie. 

“Hillary is a liar! I know what she told me,” screamed Smith pointing to the Obama administration blaming a YouTube video for the controversial attack.

Kelly noted that Clinton had denied telling families of the Benghazi victims that the YouTube video was what caused the terrorist attack but Smith replied “bull feathers.”

“Oh, Pat. I know it must be so hard. So many people want to put this behind them and say, Hillary sat there and testified, she testified with her own 13 hours. And they say it’s done. They say there’s no story about Benghazi. And that she did everything she could do to the war and she came right out and said she is not lying. Suggesting you are the one who is lying about what happened [at] that Air Force base,” said Kelly.

“Bull feathers! That is just plain old bull! I know what she said and not only did she say it, but Obama said the same thing to me. And Panetta. And Biden. And Susan Rice. I went up to all of them, begging them to tell me what happened. And they all said, that it was the video. Every one of them,” said Smith. 

“13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi” is an action thriller based on the 2014 non-fiction book written by journalist Mitchell Zuckoff with the Annex Security Team. The film depicts the harrowing true story of the attack on a CIA annex in Benghazi, Libya, on September 11, 2012, which killed four Americans. After the assault begins, a U.S. Special Ops team are sent to the annex to protect those still trapped within the compound. The film is directed by Michael Bay, and stars John Krasinski, James Badge Dale, and Pablo Schreiber.

We have learned a lot of things since the Benghazi Massacre.

On October 27th, 2012, I reported that

Fox News has learned from sources who were on the ground in Benghazi that an urgent request from the CIA annex for military back-up during the attack on the U.S. consulate and subsequent attack several hours later on the annex itself was denied by the CIA chain of command — who also told the CIA operators twice to “stand down” rather than help the ambassador’s team when shots were heard at approximately 9:40 p.m. in Benghazi on Sept. 11.

Former Navy SEAL Tyrone Woods was part of a small team who was at the CIA annex about a mile from the U.S. consulate where Ambassador Chris Stevens and his team came under attack. When he and others heard the shots fired, they informed their higher-ups at the annex to tell them what they were hearing and requested permission to go to the consulate and help out. They were told to “stand down,” according to sources familiar with the exchange. Soon after, they were again told to “stand down.”

Woods and at least two others ignored those orders and made their way to the consulate which at that point was on fire. Shots were exchanged. The rescue team from the CIA annex evacuated those who remained at the consulate and Sean Smith, who had been killed in the initial attack. They could not find the ambassador and returned to the CIA annex at about midnight.

At that point, they called again for military support and help because they were taking fire at the CIA safe house, or annex. The request was denied. There were no communications problems at the annex, according those present at the compound. The team was in constant radio contact with their headquarters. In fact, at least one member of the team was on the roof of the annex manning a heavy machine gun when mortars were fired at the CIA compound. The security officer had a laser on the target that was firing and repeatedly requested back-up support from a Spectre gunship, which is commonly used by U.S. Special Operations forces to provide support to Special Operations teams on the ground involved in intense firefights.

CIA spokeswoman Jennifer Youngblood, [on orders from General Petraeus] though, denied the claims that requests for support were turned down.

“We can say with confidence that the Agency reacted quickly to aid our colleagues during that terrible evening in Benghazi,” she said. “Moreover, no one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate. In fact, it is important to remember how many lives were saved by courageous Americans who put their own safety at risk that night-and that some of those selfless Americans gave their lives in the effort to rescue their comrades.”

That means that the order to stand down had to come from Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and/or President Barack Hussein Obama. [or Valerie Jarrett]

We also learned on October 26, 2012, that there were two drones circling overhead, as four brave Americans were being slaughtered. Obama and his Administration knew exactly what was happening, yet, for the sake of political expediency, chose to do nothing about it.

What Hillary’s  appearance before the Benghazi Hearings showed, was a pathological predilection for dishonesty, insincerity, and inappropriateness, not only on the part of Former Secretary of State, Hillary Rodham Clinton,  but the whole Obama Administration, as well, from the top on down.

They all knew that the cause of the attacks was not some stupid Youtube Video, but a full-blown Muslim Terrorist Attack.

However, for the sake of Political Expediency…and the re-election of President Barack Hussein Obama and the legacy of his rapidly-failing Foreign Policy, known as Smart Power!, they had to quickly come up with an excuse for their liability in the deaths of those four brave Americans.

And now, Hillary Rodham Clinton, with her Oscar-worthy Performance in front of the House Committee, which including circuitous answers to Yes or No Questions and inappropriate smirks, accompanied by cackling laughter, echoes across the years, proving completely true and accurate as to what I and my fellow Conservative Americans have said about her all along:

She is a sociopath, who envisions herself to be smarter than everybody else, above the law, and White House-bound, because, “it’s her turn”.

The new movie about that fateful night of September 11, 2012, hopefully, will be the final nail in her Political Coffin.

The only place that she should be bound, at least in this life, is jail.

Her final destination promises to be a more Southern Locale…and infinitely hotter.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

 

 

Hillary Begins Her Campaign…With Hoaxes and Lies

April 16, 2015

Hillary underwaterWell, Former First Lady, New York Senator, and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton has begun her campaign for the Democratic Party’s President Candidate Nomination.

I think a Quote from Abraham Lincoln describes her early campaign better than I could:

You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time.

To prove Abe’s point, here are some headlines from the London Daily Mail:

Campaign staff DROVE ‘ordinary’ Iowans to Hillary’s first campaign stop – including health care ‘lobbyist in training’ who was an Obama campaign intern and Biden chauffeur

Austin Bird sat for coffee on Tuesday morning in the town of LeClaire, Iowa, chatting with Hillary Clinton as photographers snapped pictures
News reports called him a ‘student’ and her campaign called it an unscripted event

But Clinton’s Iowa political director Troy Price drove Bird and two other people to the coffee house

Bird is a hospital government relations official who interned with Barack Obama’s 2012 presidential campaign

The Iowa Democratic Party, which Price ran until a month ago, tasked him to be Joe Biden’s driver during an October Senate campaign trip in Davenport

The Daily Mail goes on to say that 

Hillary Clinton’s astroturf candidacy is in full swing in Iowa.

Her Tuesday morning visit to a coffee shop in LeClaire, Iowa was staged from beginning to end, according to Austin Bird, one of the men pictured sitting at the table with Mrs. Clinton.

Bird told Daily Mail Online that campaign staffer Troy Price called and asked him and two other young people to meet him Tuesday morning at a restaurant in Davenport, a nearby city.

Price then drove them to the coffee house to meet Clinton after vetting them for about a half-hour.

The three got the lion’s share of Mrs. Clinton’s time and participated in what breathless news reports described as a ’roundtable’– the first of many in her brief Iowa campaign swing.

Bird himself is a frequent participant in Iowa Democratic Party events. He interned with President Obama’s 2012 presidential re-election campaign, and was tapped to chauffeur Vice President Joe Biden in October 2014 when he visited Davenport. 

‘What happened is, we were just asked to be there by Troy,’ Bird said Wednesday in a phone interview.

‘We were asked to come to a meeting with Troy, the three of us, at the Village Inn.’

The other two, he confirmed, were University of Iowa College Democrats president Carter Bell and Planned Parenthood of the Heartland employee Sara Sedlacek. 

‘It was supposed to be a strategy meeting,’ Bird recalled, ‘to get our thoughts about issues. But then all of a sudden he says, “Hey, we have Secretary Clinton coming in, would you like to go meet her?”‘

‘And then we got in a car – Troy’s car – and we went up to the coffee house, and we sat at a table and then Hillary just came up and talked with us.’

Bird said ‘we all were called.’

‘I mean, Troy asked us all to do – to go to a meeting with him. And we didn’t really know what it was about. I mean, he did. He knew.’

While we are on the subject of sleaziness…

The Wall Street Journal reports that

The board of the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation has decided to continue accepting donations from foreign governments, primarily from six countries, even though Hillary Clinton is running for president, a summary of the new policy to be released Thursday shows.

The rules would permit donations from Australia, Canada, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway and the U.K.—countries that support or have supported Clinton Foundation programs on health, poverty and climate change, according to the summary.

That means other nations would be prohibited from making large donations to the foundation. But those governments would be allowed to participate in the Clinton Global Initiative, a subsidiary of the foundation where companies, nonprofit groups and government officials work on solutions to global problems.

Ministers from any government would be allowed to attend meetings and appear on panels at the group’s meetings and their governments would be allowed to pay attendance fees of $20,000.

The new policy, which was designed to address growing concern that the donations would present a conflict of interest for a Hillary Clinton presidency, all but ensures that Mrs. Clinton’s links to the charity will be a feature of the emerging presidential campaign.

Just how dishonest is Hillary Rodham Clinton? She wouldn’t lie about her own family would she?

…I mean, besides Bubba.

Is Michael Moore barred from all buffets in the Continental United States?

Buzzfeed.com broke the following news last night…

Speaking in Iowa Wednesday, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said that all her grandparents had immigrated to the United States, a story that conflicts with public census and other records related to her maternal and paternal grandparents.

The story of her grandmother specifically immigrating is one Clinton has told before. Clinton’s sole foreign-born grandparent, Hugh Rodham Sr., immigrated as a child.

“Her grandparents always spoke about the immigrant experience and, as a result she has always thought of them as immigrants,” a Clinton spokesman told BuzzFeed News. “As has been correctly pointed out, while her grandfather was an immigrant, it appears that Hillary’s grandmother was born shortly after her parents and siblings arrived in the U.S. in the early 1880s.”

“All my grandparents, you know, came over here and you know my grandfather went to work in lace mill in Scranton, Pennsylvania, and worked there until he retired at 65. He started there when he was a teenager and just kept going,” Clinton said.

…Hanna Jones Rodham, Clinton’s paternal grandmother (the wife of Hugh Rodham Sr.) was born in Pennsylvania in 1882, according to the 1910 census. (Hugh Rodham Sr. was born in England and immigrated with his parents as a child according to records.)

A  much cleaner 1920 census form also lists her place of birth as Pennsylvania (Clinton’s father, Hugh, is also listed). 

An article in the Irish-America by an ancestry researcher sent to BuzzFeed News by the Clinton campaign also noted Hannah Jones was born in Scranton.

All of the Clinton’s grandparents were born in the United States, “with the exception of Hugh,” Megan Smolenyak, the article’s researcher said. Smolenyak noted seven of Clinton’s eight great-grandparents were immigrants

Donnie Radcliffe, the Washington Post reporter who chronicled first ladies and wrote a biography of Hillary Clinton tells a similar ancestry, tracing only Hugh Rodham Sr. as foreign-born.

Clinton’s maternal grandmother, Della Howell (previously Murray) was born in Illinois in 1902 according to records. She married Edwin Howell (born 1887 in Illinois) in 1918 according to records.

His World War I draft card also lists his place of birth as Illinois:
In 1927, Della and Edwin Howell divorced. Clinton’s maternal grandmother, Della, later remarried. The 1940 census lists also lists her as born in Illinois.

These latest revelations should come as no surprise to anyone who has been paying attention.

Lying comes as naturally to The Former First Lady as breathing in and out.

As I have written, from the time she was fired from the Watergate Investigative Committee to wiping her private e-mail server, Hillary Rodham Clinton has been as crooked as a dog’s hind leg.

Machiavellian in political ambition and armed with a vocabulary that would make the legendary Gong Show Judge, Jaye P. Morgan, blush (look her up, kids), “the Hildebeast” has cut a wide swatch in her path to Political Power.

It should be obvious to Americans by now, that she believes that morality and ethics are for “the little people” (i.e., you and me).

We already have a congenital liar in the White House.

We certainly do not need another one.

Oh…and Ambassador Christopher Stevens remains unavailable for comment.

Until He Comes,

KJ
 

Obama and the Ayatollah: Another Charlie Brown and Lucy

April 9, 2015

 

Charlie BrownRemember how President Obama said that he and Secretary of State John Kerry had reached a “framework” of a deal with the Rogue Nation of Iran?

Apparently, he overestimated himself…again.

Foxnews.com reports that

Fiery criticism from Iran’s Supreme Leader, coupled with steep demands from the upper echelon of the regime, are throwing the nuclear “deal” reached last week into doubt — with Iran and the U.S. each claiming the agreement said different things, and neither side backing down.

Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has final say on all state matters, tore into the U.S. in remarks published on his official website and on his Twitter account.

Khamenei made clear he was neither endorsing nor rejecting the framework deal announced last week. But he challenged the way the U.S. was describing it — specifically, a fact sheet put out by the White House saying sanctions would be removed only after inspectors verify Iran’s compliance.

The Ayatollah, in one tweet, claimed the fact sheet was “contrary to what was agreed.”

In another, he said: “I trust our negotiators, but I’m really worried as the other side is into lying & breaching promises; an example was White House fact sheet.”

Ever since the preliminary deal was unveiled, Iranian officials have claimed — in their own remarks and fact sheets — that the agreement allows for sanctions to be lifted immediately once a final deal is reached.

On Thursday, both the Ayatollah and Iranian President Hassan Rouhani again insisted that all sanctions be removed as soon as a deal is reached, or implemented.

“We will not sign any agreement, unless all economic sanctions are totally lifted on the first day of the implementation of the deal,” Rouhani said during a ceremony marking Iran’s nuclear technology day, which celebrates the country’s nuclear achievements.

But the U.S. was not backing down.

State Department spokesman Jeff Rathke said Thursday that the White House fact sheet — which claimed sanctions relief was conditional — was accurate.

“Sanctions will be suspended in a phased manner upon verification that Iran has met specific commitments,” he said. “Those are among the agreed-upon parameters.”

He could not say whether it’s possible that Iran could actually meet those commitments on day one of any deal, but stressed that sanctions relief “will only begin” when the country takes “major nuclear steps” and increases its so-called “breakout time” — the time it would take to get enough fissile material for a weapon — to at least one year.

At the same time, Rathke said, “we’re not negotiating in public.” He acknowledged all sides have a “very tough series of negotiations” ahead. He also could not say if a final deal would include a signed document.

The U.S., Iran and five other world powers merely announced a framework last week and are trying to reach a final deal by a June 30 deadline.

In that time, both U.S. and Iran officials are trying to sell the framework to their own people.

As part of that, it had been expected that Iran’s leaders would position the agreement as a win for their country. Indeed, the remarks Thursday surely are part of that posturing.

But the split over the pace and nature of sanctions relief cuts to a fundamental issue, and several influential U.S. lawmakers have pointed to that split in questioning what was actually agreed to last week.

“As each new day reveals a new disagreement, it’s increasingly clear that Iran, in fact, failed to reach agreement with the United States and its partners on a political framework that addresses all parameters of a comprehensive agreement. At best, Iran agreed to disagree with the United States on key nuclear weapons-related issues and to continue talks,” Sen. Mark Kirk, R-Ill., said in a statement on Thursday.

When Congress returns from a break next week, Republican senators — with some Democratic support — are planning to push a bill that would demand Congress have a say in any nuclear deal, a bill President Obama opposes.

The sanctions in question have had a crippling effect on Iran’s economy. Since 2012, the sanctions have reduced Iranian exports of oil by nearly 1.5 million barrels per day — around 60 percent of its production — to around 1 million barrels per day, Reuters reports.

Obama on Thursday — speaking in Jamaica, where he visited in advance of a summit in Panama — continued to defend the deal framework.

“But as I’ve said from the start, this is not done until it’s done,” Obama said. He said the next few months will be “critical.”

A senior Israeli defense official repeated his nation’s fears Thursday that Iran could still obtain a nuclear weapon if sanctions were lifted immediately, and would have additional funds to arm regional groups.

Those of us who are 50 years old and older, grew up with the comic strip Peanuts, the classic creation of Charles M Schulz, now only seen in barely-read Liberal newspapers, through reprints of the original strip.

One of the classic moments in that comic strip, which was repeated often in its run, was the scenario of Charlie Brown presenting Lucy with a football to hold so that he could kick it, only to have Lucy pull it away at the last moment, causing Charlie Brown to fall flat on his back in a spectacularly-humiliating fashion.

This scenario is exactly what we have going on with the “Iran Deal”, only the stakes are much higher and the man who is playing Charlie Brown is supposed to be the President of the United States of America.

Whether it be naivete or arrogance, Barack Hussein Obama seems blissfully unaware that he is being made the fool on the international stage by the Ayatollah Khamenei.

While the world watches to see if Obama will ever catch on to the game that the Ayatollah is playing with him, Americans are watching with our jaws hanging to the floor, in disbelief.

We knew that this guy was a lightweight, but, this is ridiculous.

In his quest to fulfill his fervent desire to leave a lasting legacy, Obama is giving away the safety of our nation, a nation which he is supposed to protect, not destroy.

What Obama has yet to figure out, is a painful lesson which Jimmy Carter learned the hard way: You cannot negotiate with barbarians from a position of weakness. Barbarians prey upon the weak.

How can you negotiate in a civilized manner, with people who don’t even use toilet paper?

However, come to think of it, that is about all that this “Agreement” will be good for.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Bubba Spills the Beans About Hil’s Head Injury

May 16, 2014

Hillary Ramirez CartoonBack in the early 1980s, America’s Clown Prince of Comedy, Richard Bernard “Red” Skelton, appeared in a series of concerts, filmed in Canada, for HBO.

Red, in his late 70s, was as hilariously masterful as ever, establishing a rapport with the audience and then, taking them on a seamless flight of comedic bliss and fancy, including a quite memorable “poetry reading” by Red’s  legendary character Clem Kadiddlehopper, performing a take-off of Rudyard Kipling’s classic “Drums”, with the title of “Frogs”, during which, at the end of each quatrain,the words, “…and, there’s no silence in the night”, was followed by a licking of his thumb , and a rhythmic page turn.

Frogs. Frogs. Frogs, they are everywhere.
Frogs. Frogs. Frogs croaking fill the air.
Louder. Louder. Louder is their blasting blare
and there’s no silence in the night.

Frogs. Frogs, croaks heard three miles away.
Five. six. seven beyond that they say.
Frogs. Frogs multiplying more each day
and there’s no silence in the night.

Frogs. Frogs don’t try to seek them out.
Frogs. Frogs. Frogs hiding all about.
Grab. Grab. Grab their throats and wring them out.
’cause there’s no silence in the night.

Frogs. Frogs their good is only bad.
Flirting. Flirting. Flirting on their lily pad.
Mom. Mom. Mom says no, but you know Dad.
and there’s no silence in the night.

Frogs. Frogs don’t you know the strain?
Frogs. Frogs. Please, please, please refrain
and listen [croak, croak] there they go again. Frogs. Frogs
and there’s no silence in the night.
[Gun shots]

Watch it at

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ldSyvZkBBoE

At one point during his performance, Red is telling the audience how wonderful his second wife is, and how much he loves her…then, at just the right moment, he lolls to the left…then to the right, makes a motion for the crowd to lean in toward him, while he leans in toward them, and says softly, with a wry grin,

But, where she spits…grass never grows again!

But, I digress…

I believe that ol’ Bubba Clinton can relate to Red’s dilemma.

The dailymail.co.uk reports that

Former President Bill Clinton divulged on Wednesday that it took former secretary of state Hillary Clinton ‘six months of very serious work’ last year to recover from a fainting spell in December 2012 that resulted in a concussion and blood clot.

Her long recovery is ‘something she never low-balled,’ Bill said.

But Bill’s timeline contradicts the State Department’s claims just after the conclusion of Hillary’s treatment in January 2013 that ‘she seems to be fully recovered.’

Former George W. Bush adviser Karl Rove reignited the debate about Hillary’s physical and mental condition last week when he suggested at a conference that she was hiding something about her health.

‘Thirty days in the hospital?’ Rove said, according to the New York Post. ‘And when she reappears, she’s wearing glasses that are only for people who have traumatic brain injury? We need to know what’s up with that.’

The Post insinuated that Rove claimed Hillary may be suffering from brain damage as a result of the clot.

‘Karl Rove has deceived the country for years, but there are no words for this level of lying,’ Clinton spokesman Nick Merrill fired back.

‘She is 100%. Period,’ he said of Hillary’s heath.

Rove told Fox News on Tuesday he never said Hillary had brain damage.

‘She had a serious health episode and my point was that I think it was from the 7th of December in 2012 through the 7th of January of 2013, she underwent, first she had apparently a serious virus,’ he said after being confronted with the fact that the former secretary of state was only in the hospital for three days, not 30 days.

After Rove explained his comments on Fox, Merrill accused Republicans of politicizing Hillary’s health.

‘First they accused her of faking it, now they’ve resorted to the other extreme — and are flat out lying,’ he said.

‘Even this morning, Karl Rove is still all over the map and is continuing to get the facts wrong. But he doesn’t care, because all he wants to do is inject the issue into the echo chamber, and he’s succeeding. It’s flagrant and thinly veiled.’

Speaking at an event in Washington, D.C. on Wednesday, Bill Clinton said he was ‘sort of dumbfounded’ by Republicans’ on going questions about Hillary’s health. Clinton said they would do ‘whatever it takes’ to sully her political career, and ‘there was nothing to’ claims she was untruthful about her health issues.

‘They went to all this trouble to say she had staged what was a terrible concussion that required six months of very serious work to get over,’ he said. ‘It’s something she never low-balled with the American people, never tried to pretend it didn’t happen.”

Clinton laughed Hillary’s critics off, saying, ‘You can’t be too upset about it.’

‘It’s just the beginning. They’ll get better and better about it,’ he said. ‘It’s just part of the deal.’

As for Rove, Clinton said, ‘I got to give him credit, you know, that embodies that old saying that consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.’

Clinton said his wife was in good health.

‘Look, she works out every week. She is strong. She is doing great,’ Clinton said according to Buzzfeed. ‘As far as I can tell, she’s in better shape than I am.’

Hillary left the State Department in February of 2013, less than a month after returning in the wake of her accident. She hit the speaking circuit just five months later in July of 2013.

The presumed 2016 candidate has spent the last year giving speeches on he own behalf and on behalf of the Clinton Foundation and working on her memoir, Hard Choices, which comes out in June.

She was also in Washington for a speech, yesterday. Unlike her husband, she did not discuss the controversy surrounding her recovery, however. 

So, the Clinton Legacy of Lies continues.

And, this woman wants to be the Leader of the Free World.

The truth of the matter is, she always has.

While Bubba had all the people skills of a professional politician, the Clinton Partnership was like the old saying,

Behind every successful man, there’s a woman…pushing as hard as she can.

Hillary was always the ambitious one.

And, as Dennis Miller once observed, while on Bill O’Reilly’s Program,

The Clinton Marriage couldn’t be more about convenience if there was a Slurpee Machine at the foot of the bed.

With this current revelation and all the other previously documented lies in Hillary’s personal and professional history, it appears that she is extremely qualified to assume Barack Hussein Obama’s mantle of Prevaricator-in-Chief.

The question now is: with all of her baggage, will the Democrats want her to?

Until He Comes,

KJ

“Shocka”: Majority of Americans Believe Obama Lies Like a Rug

April 18, 2014

ObamalyingIf the President of the United States lies and no one is listening to him, is it really still a lie? You betcha.

Foxnews.com reports that

Sixty-one percent of respondents in the poll released Thursday said Obama lies at least some of the time on important issues. An additional 20 percent said he lies every now and then.

Only 15 percent believe the president is completely truthful.

Predictably, Republicans were more likely to believe Obama is a liar, with 85 percent saying he lies some or most of the time. Thirty-one percent of Democrats said the president is always truthful.

What’s interesting is that independents were slightly more likely to believe Obama lies at least some of the time — 63 percent, compared with 61 percent for the total sample.

Sign Up for the Politics Today newsletter!
The April 13-15 poll of 1,012 registered voters had a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points. Democrats were 39 percent of the sample, Republicans 38 percent and independents 20 percent.

I only bring this poll up because yesterday afternoon, President Barack Hussein Obama, went on television again, to entertain us with another victory dance for Obamacare.

You would think that we would be used to this by now, since Obama has lied incessantly from the moment he took office… and shows no signs of stopping.

I have never been a good liar.

Number 1…I wasn’t raised that way.  Number 2…when I tried to get by with it as a kid, my mother whupped me (Southern colloquialism for “delivered disciplinary punishment”) on the back of my legs with a yardstick. I swear, to this day, the back of my legs read 4…5…6…

But, I digress…

Did you ever wonder why they have kept the president’s early days of childhood and growing up so secretive?

If you will read what has gotten out to the public, you will understand. He wasn’t raised like you and me. His mother, shall we politely say, was a free spirit. After young Mr. Obama’s dad ran away, his mom married a fellow by the last name of Soetoro, who took them home with him to Indonesia, where young Barry attended a Muslim school for wealthy citizens’ children.

While at the Madrassa, Barry learned a great many things, including the Muslim practice of Taqiyya.

The word “Taqiyya” literally means: “Concealing, precaution, guarding.” It is employed in disguising one’s beliefs, intentions, convictions, ideas, feelings, opinions or strategies. In practical terms it is manifested as dissimulation, lying, deceiving, vexing and confounding with the intention of deflecting attention, foiling or pre-emptive blocking. It is currently employed in fending off and neutralizing any criticism of Islam or Muslims.

Author David Pryce-Jones wrote in his book, “The Closed Circle” An interpretation of the Arabs, that

Lying and cheating in the Arab world is not really a moral matter but a method of safeguarding honor and status, avoiding shame, and at all times exploiting possibilities, for those with the wits for it, deftly and expeditiously to convert shame into honor on their own account and vice versa for their opponents. If honor so demands, lies and cheating may become absolute imperatives. 

Are you starting to catch on, boys and girls?

When that marriage didn’t work out, Obama and his Mom returned home to Hawaii, where he was raised by his grandparents, growing up next door to the pedophile, Frank Marshall Davis.

Because of all that and more, as I wrote about in my Blog, “The Great Disconnect: The Whole Ugly Truth about Barack Hussein Obama” , it is quite logical that Obama’s handlers sought to keep his background as secret as possible.

For, if all the details of Obama’s background that came out after the 2008 election were known beforehand, then the results of that election would have been different.

I truly believe that yesterday’s victory dance was meant to distract us from the horrible job that Obama is doing in handling the Ukraine Invasion by Putin and the Russians, where he is coming off like the world’s biggest wuss.

By trumpeting his perceived victory, in terms of Obamacare, instead of detailing his epic foreign policy failure, Obama is accentuating the positive and eliminating the negative.

In the old days,we called this propaganda.

Unfortunately for the president, propaganda is only effective if your nation’s citizens believe it.

And, as the poll at the beginning of this post shows, Americans are not believing Obama’s propaganda anymore.

I mean at least 4y percent of Americans have been gullible enough in the past 6 years to believe him.

So, what went wrong? Why have those numbers changed?

I think it has a lot to do with the fact that the economy is not getting any better.

Then, on top of that, you add the lies he’s told about Obamacare in the first place.

Lies such as:  if you like your doctor you can keep your doctor. And, if you like your insurance plan you can keep your insurance plan.

Even the adoring throngs whom he has bussed in to his “town hall meeting”s, are not feeling the love anymore.

The only time that an Obama supporter faints now, is when their insurance plan is cancelled, and their Obamacare will not pay for the treatment that they need.

It is well known that Obama does not care for foreign policy. He wanted to be strictly a domestic policy president.

The reason being, he cannot “spread the wealth around” of other nations, radically changing their country into a socialist nation.

Which if you’re thinking about it, the European nations are doing that on their own, already.

The fact of the matter is Americans are a long-suffering people. We will give a person the benefit of the doubt, even if it puts us under duress.

However, as Obama is finding out, Americans do not possess infinite patience. Eventually, our long tempers lead to a barrel of dynamite.

And now, all the lying in the world will not make us believe that any of his plans, schemes, and policies are worth a flip.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama: “I’m Sorry.” America: “We Know.”

November 8, 2013

obamamyworkLast night, NBC News aired an exclusive interview, which Chuck Todd conducted with President Barack Hussein Obama, in the White House. During the course of the interview, the President “apologized” to the millions of Americans who have lost and will lose their Health Insurance Coverage because of the monster he himself created…Obamacare.

I am sorry that they are finding themselves in this situation based on assurances they got from me.

We’ve got to work hard to make sure that they know we hear them and we are going to do everything we can to deal with folks who find themselves in a tough position as a consequence of this.

Thanks, Scooter. That helps a lot. Not.

Researchers have found that Obama Promised the American people no less than 29 times that,

…if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan.

For example, on Saturday, August 8, 2009, during his Weekly Address, Obama said,

As we draw close to finalizing – and passing – real health insurance reform, the defenders of the status quo and political point-scorers in Washington are growing fiercer in their opposition. In recent days and weeks, some have been using misleading information to defeat what they know is the best chance of reform we have ever had. That is why it is important, especially now, as Senators and Representatives head home and meet with their constituents, for you, the American people, to have all the facts.

So, let me explain what reform will mean for you. And let me start by dispelling the outlandish rumors that reform will promote euthanasia, cut Medicaid, or bring about a government takeover of health care. That’s simply not true. This isn’t about putting government in charge of your health insurance; it’s about putting you in charge of your health insurance. Under the reforms we seek, if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan.

And while reform is obviously essential for the 46 million Americans who don’t have health insurance, it will also provide more stability and security to the hundreds of millions who do. Right now, we have a system that works well for the insurance industry, but that doesn’t always work well for you. What we need, and what we will have when we pass health insurance reform, are consumer protections to make sure that those who have insurance are treated fairly and that insurance companies are held accountable.

On Monday of this week, Obama, speaking at an Organizing for America Campaign Event, said,

Now, if you have or had one of these plans before the Affordable Care Act came into law and you really liked that plan, what we said was you can keep it if it hasn’t changed since the law passed. So we wrote into the Affordable Care Act, you’re grandfathered in on that plan. But if the insurance company changes it, then what we’re saying is they’ve got to change it to a higher standard. They’ve got to make it better, they’ve got to improve the quality of the plan they are selling. That’s part of the promise that we made too. That’s why we went out of our way to make sure that the law allowed for grandfathering.

If we had allowed these old plans to be downgraded, or sold to new enrollees once the law had already passed, then we would have broken an even more important promise — making sure Americans gain access to health care that doesn’t leave them one illness away from financial ruin. The bottom line is that we are making the insurance market better for everybody and that’s the right thing to do.

Obama’s promises all have an expiration date: the moment they are spoken…or written…like the following Policy Statement, posted shortly after Obama was inaugurated in January of 2009, on  whitehouse .gov:

“Transparency and Open Government”

Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies

SUBJECT: Transparency and Open Government

My Administration is committed to creating an unprecedented level of openness in Government. We will work together to ensure the public trust and establish a system of transparency, public participation, and collaboration. Openness will strengthen our democracy and promote efficiency and effectiveness in Government.

Government should be transparent. Transparency promotes accountability and provides information for citizens about what their Government is doing. Information maintained by the Federal Government is a national asset. My Administration will take appropriate action, consistent with law and policy, to disclose information rapidly in forms that the public can readily find and use. Executive departments and agencies should harness new technologies to put information about their operations and decisions online and readily available to the public. Executive departments and agencies should also solicit public feedback to identify information of greatest use to the public.

The 44th President of the United States is a serial liar. There is no doubt about it. His entire political career has been based on lies, from the days, as a former classmate has now stated, he attempted to pass himself off as a foreign student in a Hawaiian High School and ,quite possibly, while continuing to claim a foreign birth, all the way through college in order to obtain scholarships and privileges.

But, the lies did not end there. They were just getting started. During his days as a Community Organizer, he used his contacts through his “Social Justice Networking”, like Father Pfleger, the activist priest, and a former American Muslim named Jeremiah Wright, to build up his “street cred”, while networking among the Rich Liberal Movers and Shakers of Chicago.

As he entered the political arena, it was obvious to those watching that he was being grooming, from the moment he kicked off his political campaign in the living room of Bomber Bill Ayers, whom he now refers to as “a guy from the neighborhood”.

The lessons in political shenanigans. which he learned in the backrooms of Chicago, have served him well over the years.  His ability as a Snake Oil Saleman brought him all the way to the White House.

What he did not count on, is the Americans who elected him, and to whom he promised all the free stuff to, actually expect results, because they actually took him at his word.

And, when he promised the American people 29 times that 

…if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan

…a good number of Americans trusted Obama. Because, after all, he is the President of the United States, and, is always supposed to act in our nation’s best interests, and not his own.

With all of the scandals during his time in office, such as the IRS Scandal, Benghazigate, and now, the Obamacare Disaster, Barack Hussein Obama has decisively proven what a lot of Americans said from the get-go:  He is in over his head and is not to be trusted.

President Barack Hussein Obama, has most assuredly proven the old axiom that, after all is said and done,

A man is only as good as his word.

Until He Comes,

KJ