Mr. President, when it rains it pours, but most Americans hold their own umbrellas. Today in the Rose Garden you dismissed the idea of a Special Counsel to investigate the IRS scandal. With that, your galling political hubris shined bright in the midst of today’s dark clouds.
Mr. President, how can we trust your Justice Department to conduct an independent investigation when there is a systemic violation of the Hatch Act throughout your administration?
Surely you are aware that the Hatch Act prevents certain federal employees from engaging in political activity. Specifically, it’s illegal for these federal employees to engage in action in support of or in opposition to a political party, a candidate for partisan political office, or a partisan political group.
Yet that is exactly what’s happened within the IRS, the Justice Department, and in the Benghazi cover-up. This scandalous hat trick is on your watch. It is not believable that you knew nothing about Obama administration actions in dealing with these scandals. And in regards to Benghazi, when you should have taken appropriate action to save American lives – for instance by calling in the Marines – you were AWOL. Just weeks before the election your team scrubbed the Benghazi talking points in 12 different versions, lied to the American people about some YouTube video being to blame for the deaths of brave Americans who put our country first, and you prove Michael Barone right when he writes, “What actually happened in Benghazi was out of sync with the Obama campaign line.” That’s why you all did what you did. Pure raw politics were at play during a horrific time of loss.
For more evidence of Hatch Act violations right under your nose, simply consider DOJ’s “massive and unprecedented intrusion” into the free press. Do you think they picked up some political talk when tapping the phones in the House press gallery?
Your team is out of control. Those who cannot remember the past and learn from it are doomed to repeat it, and that is exactly what is happening. Look back exactly 40 years ago this week and apply that disheartening chapter of American history to the team you’ve chosen and lead today.
Some of us warned America; we cautioned voters in 2008 that a community organizer with no executive experience and no sense of accountability would be a very poor choice for the nation’s top management position.
Mr. President, you said today that you have “complete confidence” in the Attorney General. America doesn’t. Eric Holder needs to appoint an unbiased Special Counsel to investigate the illegal political action of this administration. And then Eric Holder needs to resign.
Most Americans see ominous dark clouds looming beyond the White House Rose Garden, Mr. President. They’ll roll away only when light is shined on the Obama administration’s antics, and America will only recover when you cease avoiding responsibility in this mission of yours to fundamentally transform America. For that to happen, the press had better learn from their experiences of being duped and provide a deserving public fairer, more intelligent coverage.
Speaking of coverage, glad you finally called in the Marines… shame it was just to hold your umbrella.
Hicks, the former deputy chief of mission for the U.S. in Libya and the highest ranking official in the country at the time of the Benghazi attacks, testified that either AFRICOMM or SOCAFRICA issued the stand down order, though he didn’t have a name or where the command originated.
Hicks said Lt. Col. Gibson, a Special Operations Command (SOC) Africa commander, was “furious” after receiving the stand down order. “Lt. Col. Gibson was furious. I had told him to go bring our people home. That’s what he wanted to do,” he said.
However, the burning question remains: Who, with the appropriate authority, actually gave the stand down order? And why?
2. Whistleblower ‘Effectively Demoted’ After Questioning Benghazi Talking Points
Gregory Hicks told members of Congress that he has been “effectively demoted” from his position as deputy chief of mission shortly after he questioned United Nations Ambassador Susan Rice’s explanation that the Benghazi attack was the result of a spontaneous protest sparked by a YouTube video.
Hicks, the former deputy chief of mission under murdered U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens, now holds the title of foreign affairs officer in the Office of Global Intergovernmental Affairs.
“In hindsight I think it began after I asked a question about Ambassador Rice’s statement on the TV shows,” Hicks said, after being asked what the “seminal” moment had been in all of his new professional criticism.
3. Benghazi Witness Told Not to Speak With Congressional Investigator Alone
A State Department lawyer accompanied the delegation and tried to be in every single meeting he was involved in, Hicks claimed.
Chaffetz, who traveled to Benghazi after the attack to investigate, also claimed back in October that the administration assigned a State Department attorney to follow him in his every “footstep” during his investigative trip.
4. Who Is Lt. Col. Gibson?
Benghazi whistleblower Gregory Hicks repeatedly brought up a man by the name of Lt. Col. Gibson. Other than the fact that he was a Special Operations Command (SOC) Africa commander, we don’t know much else about him.
But more importantly, we don’t know what else he knows about the tragic events of Sept. 11, 2012. On the night of the Benghazi attack, Gibson was “furious” when a stand down order was given, preventing Special Forces from intervening in Libya, Hicks testified.
Hicks said Gibson wanted to bring the Americans trapped in Benghazi home, but was unable to act. Does Gibson know who personally issued the stand down order? Does he know how far up the chain of command the order originated?
These are questions to keep in mind as the investigation proceeds.
5. State Department Official Fingered Terror Group Day After Attack
One of the biggest points of contention in the Benghazi investigation has been: Why did the Obama administration initially blame the terrorist attack on a YouTube video when there was no apparent evidence to support that theory? During the House Oversight Committee hearing on the Benghazi attack, Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) read from an email sent by Beth Jones, the acting assistant secretary for Middle Eastern affairs at the State Department, to Benghazi whistleblower Gregory Hicks and other top administration officials. In it, she fingered Ansar al-Sharia, a radical Islamic terror group, as the perpetrator behind the attack after the Libyan government speculated that they might be ex-Gadhafi forces.
The email was sent the day after the attack on Sept. 12, 2012 — well before the Obama administration started pushing the YouTube video narrative.
“I spoke to the Libyan ambassador and emphasized the importance of Libyan leaders continuing to make strong statements,” the email read. “When he said his government expected that former Ghadafi regime elements carried out the attacks, I told him that the group that conducted the attacks, Ansar al-Sharia, is affiliated with Islamic terrorists.”
Gowdy said the email was previously unreleased, but not classified.
WASHINGTON (TheBlaze/AP) — Seeking an elusive middle ground, President Barack Obama is proposing a 2014 budget that embraces tax increases abhorred by Republicans as well as reductions, loathed by liberals, in the growth of Social Security and other benefit programs.
“What I will say is that this is not the president’s idealized budget,” Carney said. “It is not what he would do if he were king, or if only people who supported his proposals were in Congress. It was what he believes is a fair and balanced approach to our deficit challenges. One that allows us to invest, that protects seniors, that helps secure the middle class–and give ladders to those who want to get into the middle class.”
The plan, if ever enacted, could touch almost all Americans. The rich would see tax increases, the poor and the elderly would get smaller annual increases in their benefits, and middle income taxpayers would slip into higher tax brackets despite Obama’s repeated vows not to add to the tax burden of the middle class. His proposed changes, once phased in, would mean a cut in Social Security benefits of nearly $1,000 a year for an average 85-year-old, smaller cuts for younger retirees.
Obama proposed much the same without success to House Speaker John Boehner in December. The response Friday was dismissive from Republicans and hostile from liberals, labor and advocates for the elderly.
But the proposal aims to tackle worrisome deficits that are adding to the national debt and placing a long-term burden on the nation, prompting praise from independent deficit hawks. Obama’s budget also proposes new spending for public works projects, pre-school education and for job and benefit assistance for veterans.
The budget, which Obama will release Wednesday to cover the budget year beginning Oct. 1, proposes spending cuts and revenue increases that would result in $1.8 trillion in deficit reductions over 10 years. That figure would replace $1.2 trillion in automatic spending cuts that are poised to take effect over the next 10 years if Congress and the president don’t come up with an alternative, thus delivering a net increase in deficit reduction of $600 billion.
Counting reductions and higher taxes that Congress and Obama have approved since 2011, the 2014 budget would contribute to $4.3 trillion in total deficit reduction by 2023.
The budget wouldn’t affect the $85 billion in cuts that kicked in last month for this budget year
A key feature of Obama’s plan is a revised inflation adjustment called “chained CPI.” This new formula would effectively curb annual increases in a broad swath of government programs but would have its biggest impact on Social Security. By encompassing Obama’s offer to Boehner, R-Ohio, the plan would also include reductions in Medicare spending, much of it by targeting payments to health care providers and drug companies. The Medicare proposal also would require wealthier recipients to pay higher premiums or co-pays.
Obama’s budget proposal also calls for additional tax revenue, primarily by placing a 28 percent cap on deductions and other tax exclusions. That plan would affect wealthy taxpayers as would a new administration proposal to place limits on tax-preferred retirement accounts for millionaires and billionaires.
Obama made the same offer to Boehner in December when he and the speaker were negotiating ways of avoiding a steep, so-called fiscal cliff of combined across-the-board spending cuts and sweeping tax increases caused by the expiration of Bush-era tax rates. Boehner rejected that plan and ultimately Congress approved tax increases that were half of what Obama had sought.
“If you look at where the president’s final offer and Boehner were … they were extremely close to each other,” said Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. “We do think that it’s a very good sign that the president has included real entitlement reforms in the budget.”
Boehner, in a statement Friday, said House Republicans made clear to Obama last month that he should not make savings in entitlement programs that both sides agree on, contingent on more tax increases.
“If the president believes these modest entitlement savings are needed to help shore up these programs, there’s no reason they should be held hostage for more tax hikes,” Boehner said. “That’s no way to lead and move the country forward.”
The inflation adjustment would reduce federal spending on government programs over 10 years by about $130 billion, according to White House estimates. Because it also affects how tax brackets are adjusted, it would also generate about $100 billion in higher taxes and hit even middle income taxpayers.
Once the change is fully phased in, Social Security benefits for a typical middle-income 65-year-old would be about $136 less a year, according to an analysis of Social Security data. At age 75, annual benefits under the new index would be $560 less. At 85, the cut would be $984 a year.
The concept behind the chained CPI is that consumers substitute lower-priced alternatives for goods whose costs spike. So, for example, if the price of oranges goes too high for some consumers, they could buy alternatives like apples or strawberries if their prices were more affordable. This flexibility isn’t considered in the current system of gauging inflation, a calculation that determines how much benefits grow each year. Taking it into account means such benefits won’t grow by as much.
Advocates for the elderly say seniors pay a higher portion of their income for health care, where costs rise more quickly than inflation.
The White House has said the cost-of-living adjustments would include protections for “vulnerable” recipients.
“The president should drop these misguided cuts in benefits and focus instead on building support in Congress for investing in jobs,” AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka said in a statement.
AARP’s legislative policy director said Obama’s budget proposal, while not a surprise, was a disappointment.
“The message seems to be that the president wants a deal and is willing to even sacrifice such important benefits as Social Security as part of that deal,” said David Certner. The seniors lobby argues that Social Security doesn’t belong in the budget talks because it isn’t contributing to the deficit and is separately financed with its own dedicated taxes.
Citing the effect on veterans, Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., chairman of the Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, said he was “terribly disappointed” in the Obama plan and would “do everything in my power to block” it.
While Obama has proposed the slower cost of living adjustment plan during fiscal negotiations with Republican leaders, placing it in the budget would put the administration’s official imprint on the plan and mark a full shift from Obama’s stand in 2008, when he campaigned against Republican Party nominee John McCain.
In a Sept. 6, 2008, speech to AARP, Obama said: “John McCain’s campaign has suggested that the best answer for the growing pressures on Social Security might be to cut cost-of-living adjustments or raise the retirement age. Let me be clear: I will not do either.”
Obama also proposes $305 billion in cuts to Medicare over a decade, including $156 billion through lower Medicare payments to drug companies and higher premiums or co-pays from wealthy recipients. That’s to the right of the conservative budget of House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wis., which barely touches Medicare in the coming 10 years, cutting just $129 billion from the program. The huge Medicare savings from Ryan’s proposal, which transforms the system into a program in which the government subsidizes health insurance purchases on the private market, wouldn’t accrue until the following decade.
Obama’s budget comes after the Republican-controlled House and Democratic-run Senate passed separate and markedly different budget proposals. House Republicans achieved long-term deficit reductions by targeting safety net programs; Democrats instead protected those programs and called for $1 trillion in tax increases.
But Obama has been making a concerted effort to win Republican support, especially in the Senate. He has even scheduled a dinner with Republican lawmakers on the evening that his budget is released next week.
As described by the administration officials, the budget proposal would also end a loophole that permits people to obtain unemployment insurance and disability benefits at the same time.
Obama’s proposal, however, includes calls for increased spending. It proposes $50 billion for public works projects. It also would make preschool available to more children by increasing the tax on tobacco.
Obama Surrounds Himself With The Most Extreme Appointees In American History
Much has been written about Obama’s controversial appointments, not only to the federal bench, but to key cabinet positions, as well as to the unaccountable (and probably unconstitutional) “Czar” positions. Much of the criticism has dwelled on the Obama administration’s lack of vetting when filling these rolls—but that’s not the issue.
To the contrary, the Obama team did investigate thoroughly and they choose precisely. When an administration repeatedly nominates hard-left individuals, it’s not a vetting error—it’s a pattern. We should not allow the media to portray these appointments as a series of errors; but rather, we need to realize that Team Obama is simply nominating those who share their goal of radically changing America.
Most Americans have a hard time understanding this because they refuse to believe Obama is this extreme. But he is. For a year prior to his election conservatives warned voters that everything we knew about Obama indicated that his views were far from the mainstream. This was obvious when one analyzed his friends, which groups he funded while a “community activist,” his Illinois State Senate record, his United States Senate record and even what he wrote in his own books.
The reality, of course, is that Obama’s views are far from the mainstream and it is embarrassing so many Americans fell for his leftist candy-coated lies. Indeed, it appears that Obama is the most far left President in American history. His appointees only confirm this. These appointees hail from the crowd who regard their pedigree as the 60’s activists who cheered on the Vietcong, while American boys were slaughtered in the jungles of Vietnam. They hate America, or more precisely, they hate America’s heritage; American institutions, and the American Constitution.
Many of these extremists nominated by Obama hail from academia, where they were shielded from outside scrutiny while they quietly indoctrinated our youth. But don’t let the cloak of academia fool you; they are out to change America in ways most Americans oppose. More importantly, Americans need to realize their views are Obama’s views.
The American media is partly responsible for bringing such extremists to power. There is little doubt the media engaged in a massive propaganda effort to convince Americans that Obama was some kind of hip moderate; a breath of fresh air, a reformer, and someone who would fight the corrupt ways of Washington. Until Americans wake up and stop relying on the mainstream media for their source of news, they will continue to pay a heavy price for their ignorance. Unfortunately, this report covers just a few of Obama’s policy-makers, but there are many more such extremists within his administration.
Domestic Policy:
The Regulatory Czar – Cass Sunstein
Sunstein was nominated and approved to be Obama’s “Regulatory Czar.” He supports massive gun control and doesn’t believe the 2nd Amendment is an individual right. He has straight out said, “We ought to ban hunting.” While this fruitcake strips Americans of their Constitutional right to own guns, he wants to give rights to animals and has argued that “Animals should be permitted to bring suit…” Naturally, he also supports the “Fairness Doctrine,” the wrongly-named concept which allows the government to regulate the airwaves.
Climate Czar – Todd Stern
Stern, a veteran of the Clinton administration, was the U.S. negotiator at the Kyoto conference in 1997 (which called for dramatic climate change regulations based on bogus assumptions.) Had the treaty been implemented, it would have plunged the world into economic chaos.
Since then, new evidence has revealed that the major climate models used to justify the Global Warming alarm was, in fact, not accurate. One would think Stern would address this, but chances are he won’t. Climate change seems to be more about giving the government control over our lives, than about phony climate crises. Indeed, Stern has made it clear that he thinks international agencies, such as the United Nations, should take the lead on forcing climate change down the throats of national governments. Stern has even gone as far as to propose that world powers form an “E8” group, who would meet yearly and dictate environmental policy to the rest of the world. What about national sovereignty? Clearly, Stern feels that’s an outdated concept.
Stern is also the nutcase behind the Cap and Trade proposal which, even an analysis by Obama’s own Treasury Department concluded, would cost American taxpayers up to $200 billion dollars—just what we need for today’s economy!
Science Czar – John Holdren
In his book, Holdren advocates some of the most bizarre and horrifying policy stances imaginable. In the event of a “over-population crises,” Holdren supports “laws requiring compulsory abortion,” government confiscation of new born babies, the “development of a long-term sterilizing capsule that could be implanted under the skin,” and, incredibly, “adding a sterilant to drinking water or stable foods….” as long a livestock would not be affected (as experimentally implemented in India). Holdren wants the government to dictate family size and advocate a “planetary regime,” run by the United Nations. This real life Dr. Frankenstein will be deciding science policy for the United States of America.
Chief Diversity Officer, Federal Communications Commission – Mark Lloyd
While Obama is playing coy with his plans to shut down conservative talk radio, we know what his real intentions are, due to his appointment of Mark Lloyd. Lloyd’s view of the 1st Amendment is shocking:
“It should be clear by now that my focus here is not freedom of speech or the press.
This freedom is all too often an exaggeration. At the very least, blind references
to freedom of speech or the press serve as a distraction from the critical examination
of other communications policies. “[T]he purpose of free speech is warped to protect
global corporations and block rules that would promote democratic governance.”
Like many of Obama’s appointees, Lloyd worked for George Soros, the foreign billionaire who funds anti-America groups. He seems to be enamored with dictators and has even publicly praised Venezuelan Communist dictator Hugo Chavez’s “incredible…democratic revolution.” He also wants to use the Fairness Doctrine to “balance” talk radio and believes there are too many white people in the media. He has written that unless there are “more people of color, gays and other people…we will not change the problem.” One of his solutions to “balance” the media is to fine conservative radio stations up to $250 million and give the proceeds to National Public Radio. Get ready for censorship like America has never seen before.
Attorney General – Eric Holder
Like most of Obama’s appointees, Holder is a member of the American Constitution Society, a ACLU-type group dedicated to destroying much the Constitution in order to make it “relevant” to the modern world. And as with many Obama’s appointees, he is obsessed with race, even to the point of refusing to pursue the prosecution of two Black Panther thugs who intimidated white voters at a polling place. The thugs were screaming things at the voters such as, “You are about to be ruled by the black man, cracker.” If whites had harassing blacks at a polling place, they would still be sitting in a jail within days. Nevertheless, Holder apparently doesn’t mind undermining the democratic process. He is currently challenging the rights of states to enact citizen verification procedures previously approved by two federal courts. In other words, Holder wants to make it easier for illegal aliens to vote, which also happens to be ACORN’s goal. This comes as no surprise; Holder has been undermining the rule of law for most of his career. While serving as the #2 official in Clinton’s Justice Department, Holder was the driving force behind the effort to pardon members of the notorious Puerto Rican terrorist group, FALN, a group that engaged in over 130 attacks in the USA, killing six people. By refusing to carry out justice against the Black Panthers and the Hispanic FALN terrorists, he was clearly pandering to these two racial groups for political reasons. So this is what Obama’s Justice Department will be all about: racial pandering first and justice last. Speaking at an ACS convention last November, Holder announced that America would soon be “run by progressives.” At least he’s honest.
Deputy Attorney General – David Ogden
This appointment must have been a favor for the porn industry; Ogden has probably done more than anyone in America to defend the “rights” of pornographers. Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala., said Ogden “is more than just a lawyer who has had a few unsavory clients. He has devoted a substantial part of his career, case after case, for 20 years, in defense of pornography.” For example, he argued in support of the American Library Association when they went to court to challenge mandatory anti-obscenity internet filters in school libraries. Incredibly, the ALA/Ogden position was that libraries should be free-speech zones in which school children should have the right to access anything they want – even pornography – on school computers. This comes as no surprise, when Ogden was an attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union, he argued on constitutional grounds to strike down the conviction of a defendant who received and possessed child pornography. Ogden believes there is a constitutional right to possess child pornography. The appointment of Ogden is apparently what Obama means when he talks about promoting “family values.”
Solicitor General – Elena Kagan
Elena Kagan has also been mentioned by the Obama forces as the next nomination to the Supreme Court. This is ironic considering her complete lack of judicial or appellate experience. She has never even been a judge or argued before the Supreme Court! Kagen has served as the Dean of Harvard Law School, but her job was to fundraise and make the students “comfortable.” As the Boston Globe writes, “Some of her initial acts as dean were small-scale improvements, like offering free coffee in classroom buildings and free tampons in women’s bathrooms.” Isn’t that nice! However, the few legal views she holds are certainly far from the mainstream. She described the “don’t ask, don’t tell” homosexual military policy adopted by President Clinton as “a profound wrong – a moral injustice of the first order,” and favors homosexuals being allowed to openly serve in the military. She argued that it was unconstitutional for Congress to withhold funds from colleges that banned military recruiters and she even took it upon herself to ban military recruiters from Harvard because of their policy regarding homosexuals. Clearly, her lesbianism has clearly created a bias that affects her shallow legal views.
Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel – Dawn Johnson
Johnson is the former legal director for the National Abortion Rights Action League, a group on the extreme left of the abortion debate. They oppose any restrictions on abortion for any reason, at any time of pregnancy—even late term abortions. She has also worked for the ACLU. Johnson has argued that abortion is all about “sexual freedom.” That’s right: have sex with whoever you want and whenever you want and if you get pregnant, get an abortion. This same mentality has led to skyrocketing sexual disease rates, unwanted pregnancies, and untold sorrow. In a brief filed while working with NARAL,Johnson cited a source that said forcing women to bear children was “disturbingly suggestive of involuntary servitude, prohibited by the 13th Amendment, in that forced pregnancy requires a woman to provide continuous physical service to the fetus in order to further the state’s asserted interest.” In other words, being pregnant is comparable to being a slave. Secretary, Department of Education – Arne Duncan. Obama appointed Duncan due to his alleged success as CEO of Chicago’s public schools. However, in 2007, only 10% of black 4thgraders in Chicago reached the proficiency level in reading and for black 8th graders, only 9% reached reading proficiency. In math, only 8% of black students reached proficiency in 4th grade and just 6% reached proficiency in 8th grade. This was the disappointing outcome, despite spending $13-$14,000 per student and is among the highest of any major city.Even worse, a majority of Chicago public school students drop out or fail to graduate with their class. Needless to say, the Duncan era was a disaster. He did, however, pursue an aggressive agenda to promote the homosexual lifestyle in the schools. So Chicago kids can’t read or write, but they all know how to engage in homosexual sex. If anyone tells you Duncan is an “education reformer,” tell them you’re the tooth fairy.
Assistant Deputy Secretary, Department of Education – Kevin Jennings
Jennings is the founder of the Gay Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), a group dedicated to promoting the homosexual agenda to school children as young as five. They’re sick people and even promote books that feature adult-child sex in a favorable way. Regardless, Obama must have been impressed with Jennings, as he appointed him to carry out his perverted mission nationwide in his new role as head of the Department’s “Office of Safe & Drug Free Schools.”
The reality is that homosexuality is not safe; it takes years off the average lifespan of males. But for Obama, is not really about safety; it’s about keeping the homosexual community happy—after all, they helped elect him. Jennings has been in the press lately due to revelations that he gave encouraging advice to a boy who privately confessed to him he was having sex with an older man. And what was Jennings’s advice? Buy a condom. Parents, start monitoring what your schools are teaching your children. It’s going to get ugly.
Foreign PolicyUnited States Ambassador to United Nations – Susan RiceEven though she served on the National Security Council under President Clinton, Rice seems to have slept through the last two decades. She is fanatically pro-UN and wants the United States to work closely with the United Nations in order to carry out all kinds of humanitarian and military actions, seeming unaware that the UN has never been supportive of US interests. They don’t stop wars; they don’t sanction terrorist regimes, and their internal corruption is so pervasive they can’t even carry out humanitarian missions. But rather than hold the UN responsible for its obvious failings over the years, Rice blamed Bush for being “unilateral” and for “stiff-arming our partners.” She even sits on the board of the UN Fund for UNICEF, an agency which has been repeatedly caught giving aid to terrorists, and during the Cold War, assisting communist insurgents.More seriously, she is overly cautious in regard to fighting terrorism. The former Ambassador to Sudan implicated Rice as the person who bungled the opportunity to take out Osama bin Laden when Sudanese officials offered him to the USA on a silver platter during the Clinton years.She rejected their offer. There’s a good chance 9/11 could have been avoided if Rice had accepted the Sudanese offer. Apparently, even though she worked for the NSC, she didn’t regard Al-Qaeda as a threat. No wonder we were hit on 9/11. And now she’s our UN Ambassador? I wonder whose interests she will serve…probably the UNs.
Counsel, State Department – Harold Koh
The man Obama has named as the State Department’s legal advisor is Harold Koh. Koh believes America should defer to the International Court of Justice to determine legal precedents; a totally unconstitutional endeavor. He is a member of the “trans-nationalism” school of legal thought that believes all distinctions between American Constitutional law and international law should vanish. Incredibly, he even believes Muslim law –Sharia law– should be applied to some disputes in US courts. Clearly, his views are in contradiction to the Constitution he swore to uphold, but no matter, he is now in charge of all legal issues for the U.S. State Department.
National Security Council – Samantha Power
Power is an anti-Israel pseudo intellectual, a strange position given that Israel is our top ally in the Middle East. She holds the view that until Israel allows Palestine to set up a separate state, all the other problems in the Middle East will remain. This, of course, ignores the 1,300 year old war of conquest waged by Islam against the West, most of it occurring long before the modern day Israel/Palestine conflict. She also holds to the conspiratorial view that everything America does in the Middle East – like the Iraq war – is due to Israeli influence.Finally, she pooh-poohs the idea that Iran is developing nuclear weapons, a thoroughly discredited view in light of recent events. While she opposed sending troops to Iraq – she called it an “occupation”—she favored sending US troops to Israel to forcibly impose a Palestinian state. Power’s writing grossly exaggerates “war crimes” committed by Israel and never condemns terrorist activity by the Palestinians. The last thing we need in the midst of war between the West and Islamic terrorism is a nut on the NSC giving the President advice favoring our enemies.
Advisor, Under-Secretary of Defense for Policy – Rosa Brooks
This genius wrote that Al-Qaeda was just an “obscure group” until America began the war on terrorism, ignoring all the documentation that Al-Qaeda was making plans for rapid growth long before 9/11. Apparently, it’s America’s fault that terrorist groups exist today! She called President Bush “our torturer in chief” and compared Bush’s anti-terrorist policies to Hitler’s policies. Clearly, she ignored the fact that Bush’s policies were responsible for stopping over 17 different terrorist plots against the United States. She also called the successful surge in Iraq a “feckless plan” and seems completely blind to the successes we have had in the war on terrorism. But we shouldn’t be surprised; she used to work for a foundation funded by the foreign America-hater George Soros. It’s hard to believe Brooks is now deciding defense policy.
White House Staff Senior Advisor and Assistant to the President for Public Engagement and Intergovernmental Affairs – Valerie Jarrett. Jarrett is involved with vetting all the extremists Obama has appointed and thus, has to be an extremist as well. For example, she was aware that former Green Czar Van Jones (who withdrew) had a long history of involvement in Communist Party causes, but still said she was “delighted to be able to recruit him into the White House.” She had to have known, because she married into a family with a pedigree of Communist Party involvement. Her father-in-law, Vernon Jarrett, worked closely with Obama mentor and Communist Party leader Frank Marshall Davis in a number of Communist Party front groups during the Cold War years. Valerie married Vernon’s son in 1983 and later became chief of staff for Mayor Richard Daley, where she was a key player in perhaps America’s most corrupt big city political machine. Obama does not go forward with anything without her counsel.
Political advisor – David Axelrod
For those who think Axelrod is just a good campaign consultant, you couldn’t be more wrong. Axelrod has a long history of working for obscure socialist candidates and Obama was no different, politically, from his other clients. In fact, promoting socialist causes was a family tradition. His mother wrote for a New York City tabloid called PM Magazine, which often promoted the Communist Party line. Indeed, author IF Stone, later revealed to be working for the KGB, was PM’s DC correspondent. Much of the tabloid’s funding came from Marshall Field, a hard left millionaire who also funded Saul Alinsky’s training school. Axelrod has spent his entire life promoting extremist candidates, but no one bothered to look into his background. Today, he advises Obama on all things political.
Director of the White House Office of Energy and Climate Change – Carol Browner
Browner previously served as head of the EPA during the Clinton regime where she advocated incredibly stupid environmental regulations that destroyed entire industries. At a time when America is losing jobs in record numbers, she is precisely the right person for the Obama job-killing machine. Browner is a socialist and was picked by Socialist International to be one of 14 leaders of a group it created called the Commission for a Sustainable World Society. SI believes in massive wealth redistribution from the West to the Third World, choosing to ignore the evidence that Third World countries are poor due to their socialist policies.
Moreover, SI constantly attacks the free market in general and the United States in particular. The fact that Obama has chosen both Browner and Todd Stern (Climate Czar) does not bode well for the American economy. The recent disclosure that the climate models used by Browner and Stern to justify draconian new regulations – such as Cap and Trade – are based on inaccurate data, has not fazed the Obama administration one bit. For Obama, environmentalism is a tool for increasing government control and nothing else.
General Counsel and Senior Policy Advisor, Office of Management & Budget – Preeta Bansal
Bansal is very close to Obama; she acts behind the scenes advising him regarding the selection of federal judges. She is on the far left side of the judicial spectrum and is a leader of the misnamed American Constitutional Society, a group that believes in a “living Constitution” and works to “debunk” the “original intent” concept. Indeed, ACS’s view that the Constitution should constantly change undermines the very purpose for having a constitution. Needless to say, the ACS is obsessed with criminal rights, illegal alien rights, terrorist rights, and other phony rights. ACS is America’s main networking group for far-left attorneys and is where Bansal is recruiting many of Obama’s judicial nominees.
Bansal is also a member of the “critical race theory (CRT)” school of legal thought that boils all legal concepts down to racist conspiracies and that racism permeates all aspects of American society. Indeed, she even co-authored a paper claiming that republicanism is based upon racist consensus. In other words, she believes the entire concept of representative democracy is based upon racist assumptions. Indeed, CRT advocates even believe the founding of America was primarily due to racial motivations.
Judge Richard Posner of the United States Court of Appeals called CRT supporters the “lunatic core” of “radical legal egalitarianism.” Bansal is a lunatic and her appointment will ensure that Obama’s judicial appointments will be far more about “diversity” than they will be about competence.
Director of Intergovernmental Affairs, Executive office of the President — Cecilia Munoz
Munoz is a hard-core open borders advocate who served recently as the Vice President for the National Council of La Raza (NCLR), where she supervised all legislative activities. La Raza is the nation’s foremost supporter of “rights” for illegal aliens and the granting of amnesty to the millions of illegals here in America. She does not care that illegal aliens are costing America billions of dollars; she believes they should enjoy the same rights as citizens. Not surprisingly, she served on the U.S. Programs board of the
Open Society Institute, a George Soros-funded group. You can expect Munoz to quietly push for a massive transfer of benefits and welfare to illegal aliens and for legislation granting amnesty to all those here illegally.
Director, Domestic Policy Council – Melody Barnes
Barnes is a certified wacko. She was previously Vice President of the far-left Center for American Progress and also served as Chief Counsel for Senator Ted Kennedy on the Senate Judiciary Committee. Her view on abortion is so extreme, she served on the boards of both Emily’s List and the Planned Parenthood Action Fund. She favors unrestricted abortions for any reason at any time of pregnancy.
Incredibly, some naïve pro-life leaders supported Obama, believing he was pro-life because he supposedly wanted to find ways to reduce abortions. Barnes has put that myth to rest. In a meeting with key pro-family leaders, Barnes made it clear that “It is not our goal to reduce the number of abortions.” As reported, the room went silent. Barnes glorifies abortion as being a “concept of liberty that includes women as equal.” She has written that “reproductive rights are human rights.” My guess is that the baby being aborted doesn’t quite feel the same way. Needless to say, there will NOT be any pro-life measures supported by this administration. The Nation magazine praised Barnes as a “dyed-in-the-wool progressive,” a nice term for a socialist. She is also a former staff member for the American Constitutional Society, the far-left legal group mentioned elsewhere.
I’m sure everyone remembers when Vice President Dan Quayle made the Potato remark that resonated throughout the Media for weeks and months and is still referred to today.
One has to wonder where the Media is when we hear this constant barrage of Joe Biden gaffes?
Seems the media has a certain bias when it comes to reporting the news.
I remember eight years of the George W. Bush Presidency where the Media gave him night and day coverage on anything and everything he said and did.
Funny, it was all negative and yet today the Media cannot find one negative thing to say about the worst President and Vice President in American history.
Yep, it sure is funny……. or is it?
To give credit where credit is do, I would like to acknowledge that Vice President Joe Biden did get it right at least one time, but nobody listened
The organization has been targeted by many on the left in the wake of the tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary last December. While the NRA argues that more guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens creates a safer community, many in the administration and on the left disagree, saying it leads to more gun violence and accidental deaths.
Most recently, the NRA has been publicizing a memo it by from the Justice Department that says the success of universal background checks would depend in part on “requiring gun registration,” and says gun buybacks would not be effective “unless massive and coupled with a ban.”
LaPierre began his speech with a reminder on why he believes it’s so important to counter strict gun control measures:
“The Second Amendment — it’s not just words on parchment. It’s not a frivolous suggestion from our Founding Fathers to be interpreted on a whim. It lies on the very heart of what our country was founded upon. Our Founding Fathers knew that without the Second Amendment, all of our other freedoms could be in jeopardy. [And] our freedoms are the very essence of America. They are what make America unique.”
Now, he said, we’re witnessing the single-most devastating attack on that right that “our country has ever seen.”
He discussed NRA proposals to make schools safer, noting that Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) admitted that she had gun control legislation in her desk for a year and was waiting for the “right time” to introduce it. In his opinion, many gun control opponents more about politics than they are proven solutions.
“Waiting for an unspeakable act to occur so the American people could be persuaded to buy her political agenda?” LaPierre commented with disgust. “It’s not about making our kids or our streets safer, it’s all about their decades-old agenda.”
He soon got to the heart of his speech: universal background checks, and what he claims they’re really all about:
“Don’t you be fooled. There is nothing “universal,” nor “reasonable” about it. They ought to stop pretending and stop calling it what it will never be. Criminals will never be a part of it, and I have come to believe that the adjudicated mentally incompetent [won't either]…This so-called universal background check that you’re hearing about is aimed at one thing: it’s aimed at registering your guns and, when another tragic opportunity presents itself, that registry will be used to confiscate your guns.”
“Imagine right now, your name on a massive government list,” he asked the audience, noting that it would be pretty “handy” for a drug dealer, thug, or criminal. “How safe do you think that government list will be?” he continued, noting the flood of personal information released this year by various media outlets on gun owners.
LaPierre proceeded to highlight other gun control proposals state by state, concluding with a word on how the Mexican government has asked the U.S. Senate for a registry of all gun owners in the United States.
“What is the point of that?” he asked.
“They have all the security they want,” LaPierre said, referring to politicians. “Our only means of security is the Second Amendment when the glass breaks in the middle of the night, and we have a right to defend ourselves…They don’t have the right to take that right away.”
“Was this what our Founding Fathers intended?” he asked. What Washington needs to do is recognize that Americans really have shared goals: they want their communities to be safer, and they will do anything to protect their kids.
Start focusing on that, he said, and “stop trying to convince the American people that all law-abiding gun owners are criminals in waiting.”
He concluded with an inspiring statement on how many gun control proposals have failed, and NRA members and Americans need to continue standing up and making their voices heard. He told the crowd to call their congressmen and senators this week, then sit down and write a hand-written letter, and follow up with an email.
“We will not be duped. We will not be demonized. And we will not be divided,” he said.
“As lawful gun-owners, we deserve nothing less than absolute respect as people that believe in our individual rights, believe in individual responsibility, believe in protecting our families, and believe in defending our country.”
Missouri Dems Introduce Alarming Gun Confiscation Bill Giving Law-Abiding Gun Owners 90 Days to Turn in Certain Firearms or Become Felons
Democrats in Missouri introduced startling anti-gun legislation that would require gun owners to hand over their legally purchased so-called “assault weapons” to “the appropriate law enforcement agency for destruction” within 90 days.
Under the proposed bill, “Any person who, prior to the effective date of this law, was legally in possession of an assault weapon or large capacity magazine shall have ninety days from such effective date to do any of the following without being subject to prosecution.”
(1) Remove the assault weapon or large capacity magazine from the state of Missouri;
(2) Render the assault weapon permanently inoperable; or
(3) Surrender the assault weapon or large capacity magazine to the appropriate law enforcement agency for destruction, subject to specific agency regulations.
4. Unlawful manufacture, import, possession, purchase, sale, or transfer of an assault weapon or a large capacity magazine is a class C felony.
So essentially the law would turn a law-abiding gun owner today, into a felon tomorrow.
State Reps. Rory Ellinger (D-86) and Jill Schupp (D-88) reportedly introduced the anti-gun legislation, House Bill 545, this week.
Gun confiscation is being talked about more and more by lawmakers as a means to get so-called “assault weapons,” which are really semi-automatic rifles, off the streets. Democrats in California last week also proposed legislation that called for the potential confiscation of the state’s 166,000 legally purchased semi-automatic rifles.
30 dead after Egyptians angry about riot verdicts try to storm prison
By Reza Sayah and Amir Ahmed, CNN
Cairo (CNN) — A stern Egyptian court ruling tied to a soccer riot spurred clashes that left at least 30 people dead on Saturday, the latest round of violence in the unsettled North African nation.
In addition to those killed, more than 300 were wounded when people in the northeastern city of Port Said clashed with authorities outside a prison where their kin were being held, the head of Port Said hospitals told state-run Nile TV.
They were angry because 21 of their relatives had just been sentenced to death for their role in a February 1 riot in a Port Said stadium.
That 2012 incident — during a game between Cairo’s prestigious Al-Ahly football club and the host Al-Masry team — ended with 73 dead.
Two months later, Egypt’s general prosecutor charged 75 people with “premeditated murder and attempted murder,” while three Al-Masry officials and nine police officers were charged with “assisting the murderers.”
According to the prosecutor’s office, those in the latter group knew about the assault ahead of time, didn’t confiscate weapons in advance, didn’t stop them and — in the case of an electricity engineer who was charged — turned off the lights directly over the bleachers where the Al-Ahly fans were sitting right after the visiting team wrapped up its 3-1 victory.
Fans from both sides bashed each other with rocks and chairs, yet prosecutors claimed the Port Said supporters were also armed with knives and other weapons.
Many died after falling from bleachers inside the stadium, while others suffocated.
It was unclear whether intense sports rivalries or political strife sparked the riot, though witnesses said tensions had grown throughout the game with Al-Masry fans throwing bottles and rocks at the opposing players.
That violence begat more on Saturday, after some of the defendants’ relatives tried to storm the Port Said prison to free their loved ones being held inside, Interior Ministry spokesman Brig. Gen. Osama Ismail told Nile TV.
The reaction was far different in Cairo, where Saturday’s verdict was issued due to security concerns.
One man cried for joy, feeling that “justice has been survived” following the death of his oldest son, the married father of two children.
“I finally felt that I am in a civilized country,” added a woman in Cairo’s capital. “My son (did) nothing wrong. But my son’s legacy will live on, because of the true justice served here.”
Egypt embroiled in deadly political unrest
Saturday’s Port Said violence comes on the heels of other bloodshed around the nation, which was tied more explicitly to unrest about Egypt’s current leadership but nonetheless symptomatic of instability and insecurity two years after longtime President Hosni Mubarak was ousted.
More recently, protesters have focused their anger at current President Mohamed Morsy.
The former Muslim Brotherhood leader, who became Egypt’s first democratically elected leader last year, has come under fire by some who compared him to Mubarak and said he amassed power for himself and his Islamist allies. He has insisted his moves were necessary to move Egypt forward in the face of pressing issues and persistent obstacles.
On Friday — the anniversary of what some call the January 25 Revolution — six people were killed in Suez and one in Ismailia, amid clashes involving anti-government protesters and those supportive of Morsy, as well as police. Hundreds more were injured in the unrest nationwide.
Referring to this violence and what happened Saturday in Port Said, Information Minister Salah Abdul Maqsoud read a statement on state TV saying the government was considering implementing a state of emergency in some areas.
“The (National Defense Council) denounces the acts of violence and demands all national and political forces be committed to the peaceful ways to express their opinion,” Maqsoud said after a meeting led by Morsy. “(The council) calls for wider national dialogue, led by (prominent) figures, to discuss the issues of political disagreement and reach national accordance.”
On Saturday in Suez — about 90 miles south of Port Said — the government deployed troops and armored military vehicles in response to the previous day’s clashes.
Brig. Gen. Adel Refat, the head of security in Suez, asked for the help after declaring the area “out of control,” according to state news. Protesters accused Egyptian forces of opening fire during the demonstrations, a claim Refat strongly denied.
Meanwhile, in Cairo, clashes extended to areas around the Shura Council, the upper house of parliament. Protesters overnight waged a standoff outside the Nile TV offices, with some tossing Molotov cocktails and police responding with tear gas.
Journalist Ramy Francis and CNN’s Reza Sayah reported from Cairo; CNN’s Amir Ahmed reported Atlanta. CNN’s Chelsea J. Carter, Greg Botelho, Yousuf Basil and Hamdi Alkhshali contributed to this report.
The most important Election in the History of these United States is about to take place and YOU will determine what America will Become or what she will Remain
Hat tip to The Blaze for reporting this story
Joe Biden to Father of Former Navy SEAL Killed in Benghazi: ‘Did Your Son Always Have Balls the Size of Cue Balls?’
The father of one of the former Navy SEALs killed in the terrorist attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi, Libya says President Barack Obama wouldn’t even look him in the eye and Vice President Joe Biden was disrespectful during the ceremony when his son’s body returned to America. He also says the White House’s story on the attack doesn’t pass the smell test.
Charles Woods, father of Tyrone Woods, called into “The Glenn Beck Program” on TheBlazeTV Thursday and recounted his interactions with the president, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Biden at the ceremony for the Libya victims at Andrews Air Force Base in Maryland. He told host Glenn Beck that what they told him, coupled with new reports that indicate the Obama administration knew very good and well, almost immediately, that a terrorist attack was occurring in Benghazi, make him certain that the American people are not getting the whole truth.
Vice President Biden, as he has become known to do, reportedly made a wildly inappropriate comment to the father who had just lost his hero son.
Woods said Biden came over to his family and asked in a “loud and boisterous” voice, “Did your son always have balls the size of cue balls?”
“Are these the words of someone who is sorry?” said Woods.
The grieving father also described his brief encounter with President Obama during the ceremony for the Libya victims.
“When he finally came over to where we were, I could tell that he was rather conflicted, a person who was not at peace with himself,” Woods said.
“Shaking hands with him, quite frankly, was like shaking hands with a dead fish. His face was pointed towards me but he would not look me in the eye, his eyes were over my shoulder.”
“I could tell that he was not sorry,” he added. “He had no remorse.”
Beck said he wanted to give the president “the benefit of the doubt,” and asked Woods how he could be sure that Obama wasn’t just uncomfortable or nervous during their conversation. Woods said it was Obama’s “demeanor.”
Hillary Clinton’s comments to Woods raise even more questions about the White House’s official story on the Benghazi attack, which has already been extremely inconsistent.
After apologizing for his loss, Woods said Clinton told him that the U.S. would “make sure that the person who made that film is arrested and prosecuted.”
Obviously, Clinton was referring to the anti-Muslim YouTube video that the Obama administration spent nearly two weeks blaming for the attack. White House Press Secretary Jay Carney, U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice, Clinton and the president himself all blamed the video at various points. Beck pointed out that the White House is now trying to claim that it has always considered terrorism as the cause of the attack.
“When she said that, I could tell that she was not telling me the truth,” Woods said about Clinton.
Watch part I of the interview with Beck here via TheBlazeTV:
Reading another State Department email that further calls into question the U.S. response to the attack, Beck revealed that the U.S. government was made aware that the compound in Benghazi was under attack by “mortar fire,” hardly a sign of a spontaneous protest.
“The question that I had in my mind,” Woods replied, “was why did we not do something to protect our forces?”
“We didn’t even dispatch anybody,” Beck lamented.
“You released the information that the White House within minutes of the attack, watched in real time the events unfolding,” Woods told Beck earlier in the program. “They denied the pleas for help and they watched my son die.”
Woods went on to read the following statement, in honor of his son:
“I want to honor my son, Ty Woods, who responded to the cries for help and voluntarily sacrificed his life to protect the lives of other Americans. In the last few days it has become public knowledge that within minutes of the first bullet being fired the White House knew these heroes would be slaughtered if immediate air support was denied. Apparently, C-130s were ready to respond immediately. In less than an hour, the perimeters could have been secured and American lives could have been saved. After seven hours fighting numerically superior forces, my son’s life was sacrificed because of the White House’s decision. This has nothing to do with politics, this has to do with integrity and honor. My son was a true American hero. We need more heroes today. My son showed moral courage. This is an opportunity for the person or persons who made the decision to sacrifice my son’s life to stand up.”
Tears in his eyes, Beck told Woods that his son was not even there for security purposes but after hearing cries for help he voluntarily protected his fellow Americans, knowing his life would be put in danger. Beck called Tyrone Woods a “hero” multiple times throughout the show.
“I am sorry for your loss, and I know there are millions of Americans that are sorry for your loss,” Beck concluded.
Obama Supporters Slam ‘Romney’ Policies…Then Find Out They’re Actually Obama’s
Back in September, radio personalityHoward Sternhighlighted an often overlooked aspect of the average voter– namely, that they tend to feel strongly about the candidates they like and dislike, but know very little about what the candidates actually stand for.
In a new video by “We Are Change,” controversial reporter Luke Rudkowski (he appears to have a number of 9/11 “truther” connections) went to New York City, where he told a number of self-described Obama voters that the president’s policies are actually being supported by Mitt Romney.
Though Rudkowski has a history of “stirring the pot,” it’s certainly fascinating to see how people respond.
Romney was quickly called “crazy,” “his” policies deemed “unconstitutional” and “immoral.” The crowd seemed particularly disturbed by the expansion of the Patriot Act, the National Defense Authorization Act (which allows U.S. citizens to be detained without trial), and the proposed “Kill List.”
So what happened when Rudkowski had to tell the group that the policies they just eviscerated were actually being supported by their presidential pick?
To their credit, a number of the voters said they needed to look it up and do some more homework. Others refused to believe the man, while others spun 180 degrees almost immediately.
One girl concluded: “Well, I mean, I understand what you’re saying, but there’s a lot of other reasons I’m going to vote for Obama, and hearing that stuff honestly doesn’t change it…”
In the video’s description, the organization reiterated that their intention is not to support Mitt Romney, but to try to get an honest answer on certain issues.
Hat tip to Freedombytheway for this most excellent exerpt:
As the 2012 Presidential election rapidly approaches, I would like to share a quote from an article (translated into English) from the Prager Zeitung, a publication in the Czech Republic, dated 18 April 2011. “The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry capable of entrusting an inexperienced man like him with the Presidency. It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an
Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails America . Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The Republic can survive a Barack Obama. It is less likely to survive a multitude of Idiots such as those who made him their president.”
Hat tip to The Blaze for this report
Attorney General – Eric Holder
Assistant Deputy Secretary, Department of Education – Kevin Jennings
to carry out all kinds of humanitarian and military actions, seeming unaware that the UN has never been supportive of US interests. They don’t stop wars; they don’t sanction terrorist regimes, and their internal corruption is so pervasive they can’t even carry out humanitarian missions. But rather than hold the UN responsible for its obvious failings over the years, Rice blamed Bush for being “unilateral” and for “stiff-arming our partners.” She even sits on the board of the UN Fund for UNICEF, an agency which has been repeatedly caught giving aid to terrorists, and during the Cold War, assisting communist insurgents.More seriously, she is overly cautious in regard to fighting terrorism. The former Ambassador to Sudan implicated Rice as the person who bungled the opportunity to take out Osama bin Laden when Sudanese officials offered him to the USA on a silver platter during the Clinton years.She rejected their offer. There’s a good chance 9/11 could have been avoided if Rice had accepted the Sudanese offer. Apparently, even though she worked for the NSC, she didn’t regard Al-Qaeda as a threat. No wonder we were hit on 9/11. And now she’s our UN Ambassador? I wonder whose interests she will serve…probably the UNs.
Counsel, State Department – Harold Koh 
Advisor, Under-Secretary of Defense for Policy – Rosa Brooks
Political advisor – David Axelrod
Bansal is very close to Obama; she acts behind the scenes advising him regarding the selection of federal judges. She is on the far left side of the judicial spectrum and is a leader of the misnamed American Constitutional Society, a group that believes in a “living Constitution” and works to “debunk” the “original intent” concept. Indeed, ACS’s view that the Constitution should constantly change undermines the very purpose for having a constitution. Needless to say, the ACS is obsessed with criminal rights, illegal alien rights, terrorist rights, and other phony rights. ACS is America’s main networking group for far-left attorneys and is where Bansal is recruiting many of Obama’s judicial nominees.
Director, Domestic Policy Council – Melody Barnes
