Category Archives: Obama

Plain and Simple: Anti-Zionism Is Anti-Semitism

This is a fantastic piece by PJ Media worthy of your attention.

 

PJ Media:

Jewish philosopher and theologian Emil Fackenheim has outlined three stages of anti-Semitism: “You cannot live among us as Jews,” leading to forced conversions; “You cannot live among us,” leading to mass deportations; and “You cannot live,” leading to genocide. Amnon Rubinstein, patron of the Israeli Shinui party and author of From Herzl to Rabin: The Changing Image of Zionism, has added a fourth stage: “You cannot live in a state of your own,” which leads to boycott, divestment, sanctions, biased reporting, pro forma support of the Palestinians, and calls for the delegitimation, territorial reduction, and in some cases even the disappearance of Israel as we know it.

If this is not unqualified anti-Semitism, then nothing is. As Martin Luther King Jr. observed at a Harvard book fair during which Zionism came under assault:  “It is the denial to the Jewish people of a fundamental right that we justly claim for the people of Africa and freely accord all other nations of the Globe. It is discrimination against Jews, my friend, because they are Jews. In short, it is anti-Semitism. … Let my words echo in the depths of your soul: When people criticize Zionism, they mean Jews — make no mistake about it.” King understood, as so many have not, that there is really no daylight between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism. To deprive Jews of their national haven or to submerge them in a so-called “binational state” with an Arab majority is to render them vulnerable to prejudicial fury, scapegoating, pogroms, and, ultimately, even to Holocaust.

King’s homespun analysis has been confirmed in a report released in the August 2006 issue of the Journal of Conflict Resolution by the Yale School of Management in collaboration with its Institute for Social and Policy Studies. The report concludes that the statistical link between anti-Zionism and antisemitism can no longer be denied — a correlation that should have been obvious years ago despite the disclaimers regularly circulated by covert Jew-haters and Jewish revisionists.

In Why The Jews? Dennis Prager and Joseph Telushkin similarly point out that:

The contention that anti-Zionists are not enemies of Jews, despite the advocacy of policies that would lead to the mass murder of Jews, is, to put it as generously as possible, disingenuous. … Given, then, that if anti-Zionism realized its goal, another Jewish holocaust would take place, attempts to draw distinctions between anti-Zionism and antisemitism are simply meant to fool the naïve.

All that has happened, according to these authors, is “only a change in rhetoric.” Anti-Zionism, they claim, “is unique in only one way: it is the first form of Jew-hatred to deny that it hates the Jews.”

Read the rest HERE.

Senate Judiciary Committee Fires Letter to Justice Department Over Bogus Recess Appointments

http://www.grassley.senate.gov/judiciary/upload/Recess-Appointments-01-06-12-SJC-members-letter-on-OJC-input-on-recess-appointments-signed-letter.pdf

Dear Attorney General Holder:

On Wednesday, President Obama deviated from over 90 years of precedent established by the Department of Justice (Department), and the Department’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC), by recess appointing four individuals to posts in the Administration, namely Richard Cordray as the director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and three members of the National Labor Relations Board, despite the fact that the Senate has not adjourned under the terms of a concurrent resolution passed by Congress. This action was allegedly based upon legal advice provided to the President by the Office of White House Counsel. We write today seeking information about what role, if any, the Department or OLC played in developing, formulating, or advising the White House on the decision to make these recess appointments. Further, we want to know whether the Department has formally revised or amended past opinions issued by the Department on this matter.

In 1921, Attorney General Daugherty issued an opinion to the President regarding recess appointments and the length of recess required for the President to make an appointment under Article II Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution. The Attorney General opined that “no one, I venture to say, would for a moment contend that the Senate is not in session when an adjournment [of 2 days] is taken. Nor do I think an adjournment for 5 or even 10 days can be said to constitute the recess intended by the Constitution.”

The reasoning of the 1921 opinion was given affirmative recognition in subsequent opinions issued by the Department, including opinions issued in 1960, 1992, and 2001.

The Department has also weighed in on the applicable time period for recess appointments in legal filings in federal courts. In 1993, the Department filed a brief in the federal district court for the District of Columbia arguing, “If the recess here at issue were of three days or less, a closer question would be presented. The Constitution restricts the Senate’s ability to adjourn its session for more than three days without obtaining the consent of the House of Representatives.”

Additionally, the Department, via the Office of the Solicitor General, argued in a 2004 brief to the Supreme Court, “To this day, official congressional documents define a ‘recess’ as ‘any period of three or more complete days-excluding Sundays-when either the House of Representatives or the Senate is not in session.” This exact argument was also filed by the Solicitor General in another case during 2004. Most recently, the Deputy Solicitor General argued before the Supreme Court in 2010 that “the recess appointment power can work in – in a recess. I think our office has opined the recess has
to be longer than 3 days. ”

Taken together, these authorities by the Department clearly indicate the view that a congressional recess must be longer than three days – and perhaps at least as long as ten 9-in order for a recess appointment to be constitutional. These various authorities have reached this conclusion for over 90 years and have become the stated position of the Executive Branch, including multiple representations before the Supreme Court, regarding the required length of time for a recess in order for the President to make a recess appointment.

Read more at the link above…

Incomes Drop 6.7 Percent During Obama ‘Recovery’

 

Jeff Anderson at The Weekly Standard:

New evidence suggests there’s a reason why this economic “recovery” hasn’t felt much like a recovery. Figures from the Census Bureau’s Current Population Survey, compiled by Sentier Research, show that the “recovery” has actually been harder on most Americans than the recession from which they’ve allegedly been recovering.

According to Sentier’s report, the median American household income has actually fallen during the “recovery.”  Not only that, but it has fallen even more than it did during the recession. Gordon Green, former chief of the Governments Division at the U.S. Census Bureau and co-author of the report (with fellow Census veteran John Coder), says, “Real income fell by 3.2 percent during [the recession].  And during the recovery it went down by 6.7 percent.” So “income [has] declined twice as much in the recovery as in the recession itself.”

According to the report — which has been referenced by both the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times — in early 2000, Americans’ median annual household income was $55,836, in real (inflation-adjusted, June 2011) dollars. By the start of the recession (in December 2007), Americans’ real incomes had fallen 0.9 percent, to $55,309 — a decline of $527. During the recession (which ended in June 2009), their incomes fell an additional 3.2 percent, to $53,518 — a decline of another $1,791. During the first two years of the “recovery” (from June 2009 to June 2011), they fell an additional 6.7 percent, to $49,909 — a decline of another $3,609.

So, from the start of 2000 to mid-2011, the typical American household’s real income dropped nearly $6,000 — and more than 60 percent of that drop (over $3,600) came after the start of the “recovery” and thus squarely on Obama’s watch.

While the real median income of American households dropped 6.7 percent during the first two years of the “recovery,” the incomes of many households dropped even more than that. The income drop was steeper for those under 25 years of age (their incomes were down 9.5 percent), for those between 25 and 34 years of age (down 9.8 percent), for black Americans (down 9.4 percent), for families with three or more children (down 9.5 percent), and for families headed by part-time workers (down 11.5 percent). And that’s despite the fact that the report’s income tallies include unemployment compensation and monetary public assistance (both state and federal).

In fact, the anemic economy has meant that Americans’ incomes have declined during the “recovery” even without adjusting for inflation. According to Green, in actual (non-inflation-adjusted) dollars, the median American household income was $51,140 at the start of the “recovery,” but it fell to $49,909 two years later.

Another Obama Donor Convicted of Fraud: Engineered a $21 Million Bank Fraud Scheme

Welcome to Chicago…
New York Daily News:

A Democratic fundraiser was found guilty Friday of engineering a $21 million bank fraud scheme.

Courtney Dupree was convicted of vastly overstating the billings of his Long Island City-based lighting company GDC Acquisitions in order to fraudulently obtain a loan from Amalgamated Bank.

Dupree, 42, sat stone-faced as the verdict was read in Brooklyn Federal Court. He faces up to 30 years in prison and has to pay back at least $18 million.

Government already blew through the $2.1 trillion debt ceiling increase! Now Obama wants another!

This has got to stop and soon or the consequences will be dire.

Al-Reuters:

The White House plans to ask Congress by the end of the week for an increase in the government’s debt ceiling to allow the United States to pay its bills on time, according to a senior Treasury Department official on Tuesday.

The approval is expected to go through without a challenge, given that Congress is in recess until later in January and the request is in line with an agreement to keep the U.S. government funded into 2013.

The debt is projected to fall within $100 billion of the current cap by December 30, when the United States has $82 billion in interest on its debt and payments such as Social Security coming due. President Barack Obama is expected to ask for authority to increase the borrowing limit by $1.2 trillion, part of the spending authority that was negotiated between Congress and the White House this summer.

Under the agreement struck in August during the showdown over the government’s debt limit, the cap is automatically raised unless Congress votes to block the debt-ceiling extension. Lawmakers have 15 days within receiving the request to vote, which is largely symbolic because the president can veto it and Congress would be unlikely to muster the two-thirds majority to override it. Moreover, the U.S. House of Representatives also is in recess until January 17.

The deal called for raising the debt ceiling by $2.1 trillion to serve the nation’s borrowing needs into 2013 and also included mandatory cuts to the federal budget deficit. Since then, the extension has been increased twice by a total of $900 billion.

The debt limit currently stands at $15.194 trillion and would increase to $16.394 trillion with the request.

Islamic militants receive two-thirds vote in Egypt

“But its just a tiny percentage of them that are like that…”

No it is not.

Reuters:

(Reuters) – Egypt’s two leading Islamist parties won about two-thirds of votes for party lists in the second round of polling for a parliament that will help draft a new constitution after decades of autocratic rule, the election committee said Saturday.

The party list led by the Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party (FJP) won 36.3 percent of the list vote, while the ultra-conservative Salafi al-Nour Party took 28.8 percent, pushing the liberal Wafd party into third place.

The vote, staged over six weeks, is the first free election Egypt has held after the 30-year rule of President Hosni Mubarak, who routinely rigged polls before he was overthrown by a popular uprising in February.

The West long looked to Mubarak and other strongmen in the region to help combat Islamist militants, and has watched warily as Islamist parties have topped votes in Tunisia, Morocco and now Egypt.

 

AP: Missing $4,155? It Went Into Your Gas Tank This Year

AP:

It’s been 30 years since gasoline took such a big bite out of the family budget.

When the gifts from Grandma are unloaded and holiday travel is over, the typical American household will have spent $4,155 filling up this year, a record. That is 8.4 percent of what the median family takes in, the highest share since 1981.

Gas averaged more than $3.50 a gallon this year, another unfortunate record. And next year isn’t likely to bring relief.

In the past, high gas prices in the United States have gone hand-in-hand with economic good times, making them less damaging to family finances. Now prices are high despite slow economic growth and weak demand.

That’s because demand for crude oil is rising globally, especially in the developing nations of Asia and Latin America. But it puts the squeeze on the U.S., where unemployment is high and many people who have jobs aren’t getting raises.

The trap has caught Michael Reed of Charlotte, N.C. He hasn’t been able to find work since he lost his computer-support job in 2009. Now high gas prices are claiming more of what he has left. He and his wife won’t exchange gifts this Christmas.

“I try to drive as little as possible so it doesn’t take such a chunk out of my wallet,” he says.

AP: Egyptian Women March Against Abuse by Military

Be sure to check out our Egypt category for more information.

AP:

CAIRO–Thousands of Egyptian women have taken to the streets of Cairo in a mass demonstration against the military’s brutality against women during a crackdown on protesters that shocked many in the largely conservative society.

Ringed by a protective chain of male protesters, women from different social classes and religious background gathered in Tahrir Square Tuesday and marched through the streets of Cairo. Many carried signs with images of soldiers dragging protesters by the hair and kicking and stomping on them on the ground. One image was particularly shocking, showing a veiled woman who had been partially stripped by soldiers who dragged and beat her on the ground.

“They say they are here to protect us, but they are stripping us naked,” the chants echoed through the streets of Cairo.

Social-media-savvy protesters have widely circulated some of the most brutal images of the crackdown.

Those images drew the ire of the United Nations rights chief and unusually harsh words from U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton. Addressing students at Georgetown University on Monday, Mrs. Clinton said the events in Egypt in recent days were shocking, and she accused the Egyptian security forces and extremists of specifically targeting women.

“And now, women are being attacked, stripped, and beaten in the streets,” she said. “This systematic degradation of Egyptian women dishonors the revolution, disgraces the state and its uniform, and is not worthy of a great people.”

Over the past few days, the military has dealt with the protesters much more roughly than at any other time since Mr. Mubarak stepped down. The crackdown may reflect the military’s fury over the activists’ distribution of videos showing soldiers bludgeoning women and other protesters. The weak showing of the pro-democracy movement in the parliamentary elections that began last month may have also emboldened the military.

Read more HERE.

Obama kills 200,000 oil shale jobs by yanking permits in Ohio

This makes rational people ill…

They will say, “Ohh but it is just a delay”. Nonsense. It is a delay until the next delay. It will also make investors flee.

Obama O jobs

Washington Examiner:

President Obama’s United States Department of Agriculture has delayed shale gas drilling in Ohio for up to six months by cancelling a mineral lease auction for Wayne National Forest (WNF). The move was taken in deference to environmentalists, on the pretext of studying the effects of hydraulic fracturing.

“Conditions have changed since the 2006 Forest Plan was developed,” announced WNF Supervisor Anne Carey on Tuesday. “The technology used in the Utica & Marcellus Shale formations need to be studied to see if potential effects to the surface are significantly different than those identified in the Forest Plan.” The study will take up to six months to complete. The WNF study reportedly “will focus solely on how it could affect forest land,” despite the significance of hydraulic fracturing to united proponents of the delay, “and not how it could affect groundwater.”

Speaking of the WNF gas drilling, one environmentalist group spokesman suggested that moving forward with drilling “could turn the Ohio Valley into Ozone Alley,”  even though Wayne National Forest already has nearly 1300 oil and gas wells in operation which this study does not affect.

The Ohio Oil and Gas Energy Education Program (OOGEEP) recently estimated that drilling in the Utica shale, which is affected by the suspension of the mineral lease auctions, would produce up 204,500 jobs by 2015. [Update: the USDA estimates that the creation of only a few dozen to 200 jobs will be delayed by this study.]

“The President’s plan is to simply say ‘no’ to new energy production,” House Natural Resources Committee chairman Doc Hastings, R-Wash, said to Interior Secretary Ken Salazar during a hearing pertaining to hydraulic fracturing. “It’s a plan that is sending American jobs overseas, forfeiting new revenue, and denying access to American energy that would lessen our dependence on hostile Middle Eastern oil.”

Obama Justice Department Coordinating with ACORN Vote Fraud Group

Welcome to classic Chicago Style vote fraud…

 

Via BigGovernment:

Judicial Watch has done it again. It has produced–following a Freedom of Information Act request filed with the United States Department of Justice (DOJ)–documents that suggest extensive coordination and communications between the DOJ Voting Section and former ACORN affiliate Project Vote.

Project Vote appears to be directing DOJ resources toward particular states; is having meetings with DOJ staff; and is even recommending lawyers to work in the Justice Department Voting Section that will oversee the 2012 presidential election.

Project Vote also appears to have played a role in the Justice Department’s lawsuit against Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal’s administration, which aims to force the state to increase voter registration in welfare agencies and drug treatment offices.

The documents also appear to show that Project Vote receives special access to, and meetings with, DOJ officials. So do other voter fraud-deniers, such as the NAACP Legal Defense Fund; Tova Wang at Demos; and the Brennan Center for Justice. I write about numerous similar instances in my book,Injustice: Exposing the Racial Agenda of the Obama Justice Department.

These activist groups have enjoyed access to the top political appointees at DOJ over voting–including Aaron McCree Lewis, in the Office of the Attorney General; Sam Hirsch, Deputy Associate Attorney General; and Deputy Assistant Attorney General in charge of voting issues, Matthew Colangelo.

Emails obtained by Judicial Watch also suggest that Project Vote was directing complaints to the persons at DOJ responsible for deploying election monitoring resources, urging them to devote resources to races around the country–particularly where Tea Party groups were active in efforts to combat voter fraud.

On February 23, 2010, Estelle Rogers, head of Project Vote and a former ACORN lawyer, also urged Voting Section Chief Chris Herren to hire two particular ACORN-approved attorneys to work in the Justice Department Voting Section. “Now that the application period has closed, I want to heartily recommend two candidates to you,” she wrote.

“Thanks very much Estelle,” Herren wrote back.

Eventually, the Voting Section in fact hired numerous lawyers from left-wing groups, such as those that were dedicated to aggressive enforcement of the welfare agency voter registration provisions of Motor Voter. The relevant emails obtained by Judicial Watch are redacted, so we don’t know if the individuals hired were the same ones suggested by Rogers. However, we do know that DOJ hired attorneys expert in Motor Voter–such as Bradley Heard and Elizabeth Westfall, who brought lawsuits while at the Advancement Project that stopped Colorado and Michigan from purging voter rolls of ineligible voters prior to the 2008 Presidential election.

But that isn’t the worst of it. Other documents suggest that a swarm of left-wing groups is meeting regularly with top DOJ election officials. The documents show these groups urging the DOJ to open investigations into particular people, states and events.

Read more of the details HERE.

 

Contractors: Obama Administration Pressed to ‘Soften’ Job-Loss Estimates From Mining Rule

More lies and more concentrated efforts by this administration to kill jobs and how many times has the administration used this tactic to try and silence contractors, insurance companies and corporations?

Fox News:

The Obama administration pressured analysts to change an environmental review to reflect fewer job losses from a proposed regulation, the contractors who worked on the review testified Friday.

The dispute revolves around proposed changes to a rule regulating coal mining near streams and other waterways. The experts contracted to analyze the impact of the rule initially found that it would cost 7,000 coal jobs.

But the contractors claim they were subsequently pressured to not only keep the findings under wraps but “revisit” the study in order to show less of an impact on jobs.

Steve Gardner, president of Kentucky consulting firm ECSI, claimed that after the project team refused to “soften” the numbers, the firms working on the study were told the contract would not be renewed. ECSI was a subcontractor on the project.

The government “‘suggested’ that the … members revisit the production impacts and associated job loss numbers, with different assumptions that obviously would then lead to a lesser impact,” Gardner testified before a House Natural Resources subcommittee. “The … team unanimously refused to use a ‘fabricated’ baseline scenario to soften the production loss numbers.”

Obama Administration buys bio-fuel for the Navy at $15 a gallon!

Cronyist ripoff….

Heritage:

Navy Buys Biofuels for $15 Per Gallon From Stimulus-Linked Firm

A California company has been hired to provide 450,000 gallons of advanced biofuels to the U.S. Navy – the “single largest purchase of biofuel in government history,” according to the Navy – at $15 per gallon, or about four times the market price of conventional jet fuel.

The Institute for Energy Research unearthed the purchase in a recent post on its website:

Last week, the Navy signed a contract with two biofuel companies to purchase 450,000 gallons of advanced biofuels at $12 million to assist in President Obama’s goal to establish a domestic biofuels industry and to advance it in ways that do not require Congressional approval. Of course, given the Navy’s mission, they claim to be pursuing biofuels to ensure adequate fuel in the future without relying on crude from the Middle East or other overseas sources that may be a threat to our national security. While this purchase is only a drop in the bucket compared to the Navy’s annual usage of more than 670 million gallons, their goal is to fuel a normal Navy mission with a 50-percent blend of biofuels and gasoline by 2016.

The company selling the fuel to the Navy is called Solazyme. The company’s corporate board includes “strategic advisor” T.J. Glauthier, who “advises companies dealing with the complex competitive and regulatory challenges in the energy sector today.”

Glauthier was the Deputy Secretary and Chief Operations Officer of the Department of Energy from 1999 to 2001, meaning he has experience dealing with energy issues on both sides of the regulatory equation.

Also of note: Glauthier served (pro bono) on President Obama’s White House Transition Team, where he specifically worked on the energy provisions of the stimulus package, according to Solazyme’s website. Solazyme itself landed a $21.8 million stimulus grant to build a biofuel refinery.

 

Read more – LINK

Romney doesn’t get Reagan.

REAGAN

Mitt Romney’s latest comments about not having strident criticisms of President Obama is an indicator of how he is absorbed by a beltway mentality that is the antithesis of Ronald Reagan. Romney also said in multiple interviews that people in the primary are making bombastic comments that by implication they do not believe.

Bombastic. You know like when Mitt Romney told Rick Perry that one cannot be too against illegal immigration.

What statements has Newt Gingrich or Rick Santorum or John Huntsman or Herman Cain said about Barack Obama that was not demonstrably true?

This thinking comes from the “beltway” idea that most voters lean liberal, that if we go directly after Democrats foolishness and corruption that they will send voters into the Democrats arms; as if the Democrats never say bombastic things about Republicans such as

Republicans want to bring back Jim Crow
Republicans want dirty air and water
Republicans hate old people
Republicans hate children….

…All of which are common fare from the Democrat Party leadership.

The numbers show that in 2009 and 2010 that independents responded to the traditional/conservative TEA Party message in a big way, including women and Catholics in nine of the top ten swing states.

Here is a novel idea Mitt Romney, instead of saying things that you think beltway independents want to hear, how about you show us that you have a core and tell us what you genuinely believe, assuming of course there is anything. David Axelrod says that do not have a core. You are proving him correct.

As far as President Reagan, he savaged the left, he savaged Jimmy Carter. Reagan did it with the truth because he understood that truth is indivisible.

Reminder to the ‘Civility Police’: Reagan Savaged Carter and the Democrats With the Truth

In this piece I quote President Reagan and show you his speech at Liberty Island where he blasted the left and Jimmy Carter. Please click the link above for the video.

The Carter record is a litany of despair, of broken promises, of sacred trusts abandoned and forgotten. Eight million — eight million out of work. Inflation running at 18 percent in the first quarter of this year. Black unemployment at 14 percent, higher than any single year since the government began keeping separate statistics. Four straight major deficits run up by Carter and his friends in Congress. The highest interest rates since the Civil War, reaching at times close to 20 percent, lately they’re down to more than 11 percent but now they’ve begun to go up again. Productivity falling for six straight quarters among the most productive people in the world.

Through his inflation he has raised taxes on the American people by 30 percent, while their real income has risen only 20 percent. The Lady standing there in the harbor has never betrayed us once. But this Administration in Washington has betrayed the working men and women of this country.

Gallup: Americans Say Reagan is Greatest President

Here is more of Ronald Reagan being strident.

Reagan’s short stories: Leftist college student vs. capitalist. The story of the Little Red Hen

Reagan didn’t just go after the failed apparatchiks of the leviathan state, he went after the core of their belief system.

And the elite media didn’t like it either….

Reagan vs. Obama

Media Research Center: How the Elite Media Worked to Distort, Dismantle and Destroy Reagan’s Legacy

Sloppy Hit Piece on Gingrich has Freddie Mac Execs Admit Conservatives Were Pushing Reform

by Political Arena Editor Chuck Norton

In what was an attempt to create a hit piece against Newt Gingrich, Freddie Mac execs have admitted that through the last decade it was “conservatives” who were pushing reforms to “dismantle” Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac before they could blow up the mortgage market and the banking system.

The next time Obama says that it was the Republicans who caused this, remind him of this article. This piece helps Republicans and makes a liar out of Obama far more than it hurts Newt.

So let us address what the anonymous Freddie Mac execs have to say about Newt.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac execs are almost all Democrat appointees. Newt has been blasting them in public since 2008 if not before, so under condition of anonymity what do you think they are going to tell a reporter?

Obama and the Democrats have protected Fannie/Freddie from serious reform, have been bailing them out for hundreds of billions and the Democrats, using language in the stimulus bill inserted by the Democrat leadership, made sure that Fannie/Freddie execs (as well as AIG execs) got their many millions of bonuses for running the mortgage industry into the ground.

So I ask you again what are they going to tell a reporter about the Republican front runner? If any Republican is elected their gravy train gets cut off.

Readers, does anyone honestly believe that people in the same position as Frank Raines, Jim Johnston, or Jaime Gorelick would ever say to a reporter, “Yup! Newt told us not to do what we were doing”?

Remember that Fannie/Freddie bought almost every lobbying and consulting firm in DC to prevent people from working against them. Fannie/Freddie  also spent $20o million in partisan donations with the vast majority going to Democrats.

Business Insider:

BUSTED: Newt Gingrich Lied About What He Did For Freddie Mac

In last week’s CNBC debate, newly-minted top-tier Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich claimed he was hired by Fannie Maeto be a “historian,” and claimed that pointed out flaws in their “insane” business model.

But an investigation by Bloomberg reveals that Gingrich was much more involved with the government-backed lender than he let on — and that he was hired to promote the company (and its business practices) to other conservatives.

Bloomberg reports:

“Former Freddie Mac officials familiar with the consulting work Gingrich was hired to perform for the company in 2006 tell a different story. They say the former House speaker was asked to build bridges to Capitol Hill Republicans and develop an argument on behalf of the company’s public-private structure that would resonate with conservatives seeking to dismantle it.”

While not technically lobbying, he worked directly for Mitchell Delk, Freddie Mac’s chief lobbyist, taking in at least $1.6 million from Freddie Mac from 1999 to 2008.

In the debate, Gingrich claimed he warned the company that it was causing a housing “bubble,” but Freddie Mac executives told Bloomberg he was never critical of its business model.

“Former Freddie Mac officials familiar with his work in 2006 say Gingrich was asked to build bridges to Capitol Hill Republicans and develop an argument on behalf of the company’s public-private structure that would resonate with conservatives seeking to dismantle it.”

His close ties to Freddie Mac are likely to be a liability in the Republican primary — where voters are deeply skeptical of the government-backed lenders, and furious that the public had to bail them out for their bad business practices.

In statement on his campaign website, Gingrich admits to helping the company reach out to conservatives — more than he said he did in the debate — but does not disclose how much he made from his consulting work:

“Freddie Mac was interested in advice on how to reach out to more conservatives. The Gingrich Group stressed that Freddie Mac must be open to reform of their lending practices but that by stressing the historical success of public-private partnerships in achieving public goods at a minimum of taxpayer money and bureaucracy.”

After Gingrich left Freddie Mac’s payroll, Bloomberg notes that he quickly turned into one of its most vocal critics, writing in his 2011 book “To Save America” that the companies “are so thoroughly politicized and preside over such irresponsible lending policies that they need to be replaced with smaller, private companies operating without government guarantees, whose leaders focus on making a profit, not manipulating politicians.”

m

Indiana 2008 Presidential Primary Election Fraud Probe Heats Up

[This scandal happened in my home town. The article mentions that the Democratic Machine here is much like Chicago and that is very true. Some business owners in downtown South Bend tell me that they vote GOP, but do not dare to put anything but Democrat signs in their windows or the city will exact revenge. The same goes for many road workers and police officers.  – Editor]

UPDATE – Charges Filed – LINK

Eric Shawn at Fox News [The link has video]:

Charity Rorie, a mother of four, sat in her Mishawaka, Ind., kitchen, stunned that her name appeared on a 2008 Democratic presidential primary petition for then-candidate Barack Obama.

“That’s not my signature,” she told Fox News, saying her signature is “absolutely” a fake. She also said she was troubled someone forged both her signature and that of her husband, Jeff, and listed personal details such as their address and birthdays.

“It’s scary,” Rorie said. “It’s shocking. It definitely is illegal. A lot of people have already lost faith in politics and the whole realm of politics, so that just solidifies all of our worries and concerns.”

Robert Hunter Jr. said his name was faked, too.

“I did not sign for Barack Obama,” he told Fox News, adding his signature supporting the then-Illinois senator’s effort to get on the primary ballot was also a forgery.

As he examined the Obama petition he held in his hands, Hunter pointed out that “I always put ‘Junior’ after my name, every time … there’s no ‘Junior’ there.” He said the signature on the petition looks “very close” to his real one, but it clearly is not.

“My wife and I actually signed a petition for Hillary Clinton,” he said. “I am an Obama fan, but not in the primaries I wasn’t.”

The prospect that theirs are two of an estimated 150 signatures that may have been forged on the petitions has raised the question of whether President Obama actually reached the legitimate number of signatures needed to be placed on the ballot in Indiana. Under state law, presidential candidates need to file 500 signatures from each of the state’s nine congressional districts. Indiana election officials say that in St. Joseph County, the Obama campaign qualified with 534 signatures; Clinton’s camp had 704. The certified signatures were never challenged.

“I had always thought that, now-President Obama, had earned his victory in Indiana,” said the state’s Republican chairman, Eric Holcomb. “But then I quickly learned that he had cheated his way on to the ballot in the primary.”

The allegations that election fraud touched a race for the highest office in the land are at the center of an investigation by St. Joseph County Attorney Michael Dvorak . He would not comment, but sources say the probe is gaining steam as prosecutors delve into the petitions that sailed through the St. Joseph County Voter Registration Board, located in South Bend. There have been reports that as many as seven people may have been involved in an alleged conspiracy to fake the petitions.

[Political Arena Editor’s Note – Dvorak has been a part of the Democratic Machine for a long time. A small clique in the Democratic Party plays musical chairs here in St. Joe County. A politician will be a city councilman, a member of the local administration, a state senator, back to the local administration etc. The same people just keep getting recycled into different local positions.]

“I was very surprised,” said the newly elected Democratic chairman of St. Joseph County, State Sen. John Broden. “This is a bipartisan issue that we need to take a look at … so I hope that this is something, that we as both parties, try to look at what exactly happened, and most importantly, how do we prevent it from happening again.”

Broden recently replaced long-serving Democratic Chairman Butch Morgan, who resigned suddenly in October under party pressure because of the scandal.

“There is no evidence that Butch Morgan ever personally directed, authorized or condoned the forging or alteration of petition signatures,” [Notice that is not a denial – Political Arena Editor] said his attorney, Shaw Friedman, who argued against the resignation. He said Morgan did “absolutely not” forge any signatures, or know who might have.

“This is a man who has worked mightily over the 20 years that he served as district chairman, to do so fairly, ethically, appropriately, and my concern was that he not leave under these circumstances,” Friedman told Fox News.

He called the alleged forgeries “a sloppy, amateurish effort, ordinarily that kind of thing would have been caught by the voter registration offices. I’m not quite sure here why it slipped through.”

St. Joseph County Board of Voter Registration worker Dustin Blythe has reportedly been identified as having handwriting that matches the writing on some of the suspect Obama petitions. The South Bend Tribune and the political newsletter Howey Politics Indiana hired a handwriting analyst who examined the documents and says Blythe’s writing can be found on “nine suspicious pages from the Obama petition,” according to the newspaper.

Blythe, 37, works at one of the desks in the Board office. When Fox News asked if he forged any signatures or faked any petitions, he repeatedly replied, “I don’t have anything to say.”

Blythe’s LinkedIn profile describes him as a “government employee” who is also an “independent contractor/volunteer at Indiana Democratic Party” and a St. Joseph County Democratic Party “volunteer.” His Facebook page includes a photograph of him taken with former Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards.

Blythe’s lawyer, Andre Gammage, has said that his client did not do anything wrong. He told Fox News that handwriting comparisons don’t mean anything.

“Handwriting is not the same as DNA, handwriting is not the same thing as fingerprints,” Gammage said.

Authorities would not comment about any aspect of the ongoing investigation, including any possible targets of the probe.

Government Emails: Use “Fast and Furious” to argue for gun restrictions

UPDATE:  Eric Holder lied to Congress & threatened with impeachment!

Holder: Lying has to do with your state of mind …..

Wow, talk about Clintonian answers. Holder didn’t mean to lie when what he said to Congress wasn’t true repeatedly…

In the document dumps the Justice Dept has delivered to Congress, there is not one email from Eric Holder on the issue, in spite of his deputies and chief of staff being all over it – Video Link

*****Original Story*****

First of all, we would like to show appreciation to CBS News reporter Sharyl Attkisson. Her courage in the face of derision and implied threats to get this story right has earned her great respect. If we had an award for Reporter of the Year it would go to Sharyl Attkisson.

Please examine our other operation gunrunner news HERE.

CBS News:

Documents obtained by CBS News show that the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) discussed using their covert operation “Fast and Furious” to argue for controversial new rules about gun sales.

PICTURES: ATF “Gunwalking” scandal timeline

In Fast and Furious, ATF secretly encouraged gun dealers to sell to suspected traffickers for Mexican drug cartels to go after the “big fish.” But ATF whistleblowers told CBS News and Congress it was a dangerous practice called “gunwalking,” and it put thousands of weapons on the street. Many were used in violent crimes in Mexico. Two were found at the murder scene of a U.S. Border Patrol agent.

ATF officials didn’t intend to publicly disclose their own role in letting Mexican cartels obtain the weapons, but emails show they discussed using the sales, including sales encouraged by ATF, to justify a new gun regulation called “Demand Letter 3”. That would require some U.S. gun shops to report the sale of multiple rifles or “long guns.” Demand Letter 3 was so named because it would be the third ATF program demanding gun dealers report tracing information.

On July 14, 2010 after ATF headquarters in Washington D.C. received an update on Fast and Furious, ATF Field Ops Assistant Director Mark Chait emailed Bill Newell, ATF’s Phoenix Special Agent in Charge of Fast and Furious:

“Bill – can you see if these guns were all purchased from the same (licensed gun dealer) and at one time. We are looking at anecdotal cases to support a demand letter on long gun multiple sales. Thanks.”

On Jan. 4, 2011, as ATF prepared a press conference to announce arrests in Fast and Furious, Newell saw it as “(A)nother time to address Multiple Sale on Long Guns issue.” And a day after the press conference, Chait emailed Newell: “Bill–well done yesterday… (I)n light of our request for Demand letter 3, this case could be a strong supporting factor if we can determine how many multiple sales of long guns occurred during the course of this case.”

This revelation angers gun rights advocates. Larry Keane, a spokesman for National Shooting Sports Foundation, a gun industry trade group, calls the discussion of Fast and Furious to argue for Demand Letter 3 “disappointing and ironic.” Keane says it’s “deeply troubling” if sales made by gun dealers “voluntarily cooperating with ATF’s flawed ‘Operation Fast & Furious’ were going to be used by some individuals within ATF to justify imposing a multiple sales reporting requirement for rifles.”

Read more of the emails HERE.

UPDATE – Michelle Fields at the Daily Caller with New York Democratic Party Luminaries: None of them knew what “Fast & Furious” was – LINK /w video

Swedish Paper: Photo of Obama in Situation Room Photoshopped

[Editor’s Note – I am am American of Swedish ancestry so I keep up on Swedish news.  Afton Bladet is a real paper and this is real news. The photo is “Photoshopped” as we will demonstrate further.]

Via our friends at Gateway Pundit:

Swedish news agency Afton Bladet claims the famous “chipmunk in the small chair” was photoshopped.
What’s wrong with this picture?
The Swedish news agency Afton Bladet says Obama was photoshopped into the picture. AB insists that the president was just way to small in the picture. It must be a fake. Via Free Republic.

Indeed it is an obvious Photoshop.

Not only is President Obama sized incorrectly when inserted, but look at the light angles of the flash. Judging by the glare it is clear that the flash is being held up and to the right of where the camera is (and aimed slightly upward as well). This is a tactic that helps reduce “redeye effect” and is used to reduce the amount of glare in the photo. It is obviously a directed photo because all of the laptop screens are off.


I used Microsoft Paint to add the red circles which remakes the entire picture, but if you look at the “original” photo up top examine Obama’s shoulders and then look at Biden’s. Obama is obviously a digital insertion because one can see how pixilated the angle of his shoulders are against the beige wall and one can see that Biden’s shoulders are not pixilated (they are smooth). Vice President Biden was in the room. President Obama was not.