ObamaCare Halbig Court Decision

Update II: Well at least one person agrees with us – Obama’s law professor: There’s a “very high risk” that a federal court is going to gut ObamaCare. How big is Halbig? Big, big, big, says Lawrence Tribe from his feathery perch at Harvard:

Obamacare could take another spin in front of the Supreme Court – with vastly uncertain consequences.

Harvard legal scholar Laurence H. Tribe warned Tuesday of a “very high risk” that a crucial aspect of Obamacare – its government subsidies provision – could fall victim to a major legal challenge being mounted by conservatives. That is why, he also said, that the Supreme Court will almost certainly get “a second bite of the apple” in determining the fate of President Obama’s signature health law, with uncertain consequences.

Tribe, 72, a prominent proponent of the Affordable Care Act – who taught both Obama and Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts as constitutional law students at Harvard Law School years ago – warned of the ACA’s prospects for surviving intact during an exclusive, hour-long interview in New York with editors of The Fiscal Times. [snip]

“It looks like the panel is quite divided over what to do with what might [have been] an inadvertent error in the legislation or might have been quite deliberate,” Tribe said. “But it’s very specific that only people that go onto a state exchange are eligible for the subsidies. And if that becomes the ultimate holding of the U.S. Supreme Court, where this is likely to end up – that’s going to have massive practical implications for the administrability of Obamacare.”

“I don’t have a crystal ball,” Tribe said in discussing the law’s chances should it reach the Supreme Court for yet another critical review. “But I wouldn’t bet the family farm on this coming out in a way that preserves Obamacare.

Tribe, whose new book, Uncertain Justice, takes a deep dive into the Roberts court, said the plaintiffs make a strong argument. The legislative language is clear, he said, that the subsidies apply to exchanges established by states. Yet in drafting the law, Tribe said the administration “assumed that state exchanges would be the norm and federal exchanges would be a marginal, fallback position” – though it didn’t work out that way for a plethora of legal, administrative and political reasons.

Holy Kalamazoo Batman! Tribe guessed right in the earlier ObamaCare case about his former law student upholding ObamaCare but now Tribe is um, like Elizabeth Warren in other ways, off the reservation by saying the law is “very specific” and possibly trying to open a shut door for Roberts to walk through:

Tribe suggested that the case will, like the individual mandate challenge before it, hinge on Chief Justice John Roberts’s decision. “He would be asking himself the hard question: ‘Is it so clear under existing law that it has to be construed in this literal and somewhat bizarre way . . . that subsidies or tax credits cannot be provided on the federal exchanges, or is it sufficiently ambiguous that it gives me the necessary legal wiggle room’ [to side with the administration once again?]” Tribe said.

Forbes contributor Jeffrey Dorman notes that a recent ruling in a case involving the Environmental Protection Agency could make it harder for Roberts to conclude that he has that wiggle room.

“The power of executing the laws necessarily includes both authority and responsibility to resolve some questions left open by Congress that arise during the law’s administration. But it does not include a power to revise clear statutory terms that turn out not to work in practice,” Justice Antonin Scalia wrote in an opinion that Roberts joined in full.

So Tribe thinks the law is “very specific” and also thinks the question for Roberts is “Is it so clear under existing law” – it’s almost as if Tribe is answering himself and making the case for Roberts – shutting, opening, then shutting the door again.

As Halbig goes big time, Judge Walton hit the IRS over the head today as he prepares to crush the IRS soon:

A federal judge Friday gave the IRS one week to hand over details on Lois Lerner’s crashed hard drive and how to track it, the second federal judge in as many days to seek more information about the elusive emails.

Judge Reggie Walton of the U.S. District Court of the District of Columbia ordered the the tax agency to find out by July 18 what happened to the crashed hard drive responsible for erasing two years worth of the former IRS official’s emails, including whether it’s traceable through a serial number.

If such information is gone, the judge wants an affidavit written under penalty of perjury by an IRS IT professional with “firsthand knowledge” of the situation. [snip]

Walton did not rule on the request for expedited discovery or injunction relief — both of which the government argued were not necessary.

Instead he ordered more information due by next Friday, including a rundown of TIGTA’s qualifications for the probe, a date when it will be completed and the qualifications of individuals who “previously conducted forensic examinations or otherwise attempted to recover information” from Lerner’s computer.

I still would want to know the expertise of the individuals doing the investigation, and also why the hard drive can’t be identified,” Walton said.

It is unclear when Walton will rule on the potential of appointing an outside forensic specialist.”

“Now we’re cooking with peanut oil” as the Duck man says. For now, we’re staying on the sunny side of the street with galoshes on and an umbrella handy.

————————————————————————–

Update: Maybe our idea of a judicial branch/legislative branch coalition against the gangster executive branch will come to pass. Thus far there is no Halbig decision but there is much pertinent news. Consider – Public opinion of the Supreme Court has improved in the wake of the Hobby Lobby decision, particularly among independents. If the courts are afraid of a public backlash against taking on Obama gangster government they can feel a bit more at ease.

With an eye towards justice, not the polls, another court joins the fight. Federal judge to IRS: Explain these “lost” e-mails, please … under oath.

Later on Friday we will hear from yet another judge. Judge Reggie Walton will soon issue another decision/assault against the gangster government iron triangle – the Obama White House, the Holder Justice Department, and Obama congressional henchmen/hemchwoman (all aided by a corrupt Big Media).

Oh, and before any Obama race-baiters start spewing “lynch mob” or “raists!” against these potential John Sirica’s, both Judge Sullivan and Judge Walton are African-Americans.

——————————————————————

So many Barack Obama caused disasters are raging through this land and the world it is quaint of us to focus on the Frankenstein monster still pillaging the nation – ObamaCare. Pardon us for not focusing today on the Obama gangster government disasters at the southern border of this country, Obama’s pals attacking Israel with rockets and commandos, VA illegalities and Va whistle-blower suppression, the Marine held in a Mexican prison, and the many other high crimes and misdemeanors, as well as the usual day-to-day treacheries and booberies of King Boob Obama I.

Today we take another walk on the sunny side of the street.

We are way overdue for a court decision on an ObamaCare case Halbig v. Sebelius that if successful would be equivalent to sawing through the axles of a covered wagon. The rickety contraption known as ObamaCare – thus far kept from collapse only by the gangster lawlessness of Barack Obama and his henchmen, might find itself without an axle to grind as early as this Thursday if and when the Federal District Appeals Court issues its decision.

Halbig v. Sebelius can be explained simply. In brief and in plain English, the printed letter of the ObamaCare law specified that subsides for individuals buying ObamaCare insurance must do so “through an Exchange established by the State under Section 1311”. Obama and his henchmen and henchwoman ignored that wording and declared that everyone, whether on the federal or state exchanges, would qualify for government subsidies.

If the Federal Appeals Court says that the letter of the law applies, that Obama cannot rewrite laws though rules and regulations, ObamaCare is deader than dead. Yes, Obama and his lawless henchmen will appeal that decision to a full panel of the appeals court and they will likely win in the full panel. But then the case would go to the Supreme Court with a victory notch in the belt.

Many will scoff that the Supreme Court will not rule against ObamaCare and their sturdy evidence is the contortions Chief Justice John Roberts underwent to pronounce the law “constitutional”. Without delving into whether it was Obama thuggery, or that ObamaCare really is not a mandate but a tax (a political argument Mitt Romney failed to exploit), or gay blackmail against Roberts, we/ve espoused a much more generous attitude towards the Chief Justice which many do not share but which leads us to believe that the Supreme Court will eventually send ObamaCare to a death panel.

Why do we think the above? A small part of our confidence is based on the post ObamaCare case decisions. Chief Justice Roberts has mustered unanimous decisions for more than half the decisions issued in the last term. Some of those unanimous decisions, such as the recess appointments opinion, have been disastrous for Obama’s lawless rule. When necessary, Roberts and the conservatives on the court have proven they will issue tough opinions. The Hobby Lobby ObamaCare decision is an example of the lessened temerity of the court’s conservative wing.

The main reason for our belief that the Supreme Court might cut the axles on the ObamaCare Conestoga is the strategic landscape on Halbig.

The strategic benefits of Halig v. Sebelius are that the ObamaCare collapse would be in slow motion not in one fell chop. In the big ObamaCare case which rescued ObamaCare by declaring it a tax Chief Justice Roberts was aware that a declaration by the Supreme Court that ObamaCare was unconstitutional would have meant the immediate sudden death of ObamaCare. The Supreme Court would have been the central issue in the 2012 presidential campaign and no doubt charges of racism and other lies would have been spat out by Obama and his thugs.

With Halig v. Sebelius the political trap is avoided. A slow death of ObamaCare after the November elections will deprive Obama of a new politically useful distraction from his myriad other catastrophes and prevent Obama from denouncing the Supreme Court for his nefarious political schemes.

There is also a matter of complexity. On the big ObamaCare case there were legal issues aplenty to consider such as the Anti-Injunction Act and Commerce Clause jurisprudence which to most American are difficult to understand. Not so with Halbig v. Sebelius:

Obamacare may have its problems, including more bugs than you can find in the cornfields of Nebraska, but its legal worries were meant to end after the Supreme Court upheld the individual mandate, the heart of the Affordable Care Act. [snip]

“This is literally the simplest case I’ve ever had in 30 years of practicing law,” Carvin said at a Cato event this summer. “No one but a lawyer could seriously stand up here and tell you that north means south, black means white and state means federal. And all you need to do is read the statute and know that that is what the law is.” [snip]

Defenders of the law argue that the phrase “established by the State under section 1311” does not exclude federally-run marketplaces. Their legal argument is simple: the law defines an “Exchange” as established by the state, then orders the federal government to establish the exact same exchange, denoted as “such Exchange,” if a state fails to act. In other words, it authorizes the government to act as the state and set up an exchange as it is defined in section 1311. Whether a particular section of the law references an “Exchange” or an “Exchange established by the state” is the same thing as referring to the law variously as the “Affordable Care Act” and “Obamacare,” two terms with identical meaning, because a federally-run exchange is, for the purposes of the law, the same as a state-run exchange.

While it is true that the Supreme Court provides great leeway for agencies to implement laws as they see fit the question remains as to whether the subsidies are meant only for state exchanges. The plaintiffs in Halbig should easily demonstrate that Congress meant to induce the states to establish ObamaCare exchanges with the sweetener of subsidies denied to the federal exchange. The implications are enormous:

In a nutshell, plaintiffs in the case Halbig v. Sebelius claim those often-valuable subsidies are illegal because the Affordable Care Act only authorized such tax credits for people who bought insurance through one of the exchanges originally set up by an individual state or the District of Columbia—not the federal exchange. Nearly 90 percent of the people who enrolled in plans via the federal exchange qualified for those subsides because they had low or moderate incomes.

Take away those subsidies and many, if not most, of the enrollees on HealthCare.gov might not buy insurance next year because they will find it unaffordable at the full premium price. That, in turn, could create a much-feared “death spiral,” where insurance pools have too many sick enrollees and not enough young healthy ones, and premium rates skyrocket. [snip]

And if those subsidies are not available to individuals in the states served by HealthCare.gov, it would also mean that businesses in those states could not be mandated starting next year to offer affordable health insurance to their workers or pay a fine. That’s because the so-called employer mandate is linked to the availability of those subsidies for workers who opt to buy individual insurance.

Thirty-four states have refused to foist the ObamaCare scam on their citizens so an adverse decision on Halbig will have massive impact. No matter how much ObamaCare supporters deride Halbig, it is a serious lawsuit which most Americans can understand:

So, the IRS rode to the rescue. It wrote a regulation that, despite the provisions in the ACA itself, provided a subsidy for all income-qualified purchasers, even those on federally-run exchanges. A result is that an employer could face a substantial new tax if just one employee receives a federal subsidy, even if the employer’s state has chosen not to set up an exchange. And the states would no longer have an incentive to run an exchange since residents would receive federal subsidy on federally-run exchanges.

This seems pretty straightforward: There are two types of exchanges under the ACA, one established by states, and another established by the federal government. The statute only authorizes subsidy on state-run exchanges.

The piano players in the ObamaCare whorehouse are worried about an adverse ruling:

If the legislation is just stupid, I don’t see that it’s up to the court to save it,” Judge A. Raymond Randolph said during oral arguments in March.

Randolph, a George H.W. Bush appointee, said the text of the statute “seems perfectly clear on its face” that the subsidies are confined to state-run exchanges. Carter-appointed Judge Harry T. Edwards slammed the challengers’ claims as “preposterous.” So the deciding vote appears to be with George W. Bush-appointed Judge Thomas B. Griffith, who wasn’t resolute but sounded unconvinced of the Obama administration’s defense, saying it had a “special burden” to show that the language “doesn’t mean what it appears to mean.”

Turley said, “If this case were decided on the basis of the statutory language, the advantage goes to the challengers. If the court is willing to broaden its interpretation then the administration may have an edge. It depends entirely on how the panel structures its analysis.”

If the three judge panel decides based on the language of the law and thereby guts ObamaCare, ObamaCare defenders will go to the full appeals panel (7 Democrats, 4 Republicans). Barack Obama has appointed four of the eleven judges on this panel during his second term – which demonstrates he is worried about this decision and that is why he instructed Harry Reid to destroy the Senate rules on the filibuster.

For now the ball is with the three judges. Oral argument was a fearsome maw for ObamaCare defenders. But Halbig is not the only ObamaCare injury in the emergency room:

Most state health insurance rates for 2015 are scheduled to be approved by early fall, and most are likely to rise, timing that couldn’t be worse for Democrats already on defense in the midterms.

ObamaCare is in a death spiral already but Halbig might be the pillow over the face that finishes it off. And Halbig is about much more than just ObamaCare. Remember all that stuff in our first paragraph we said we weren’t writing about today? Halbig is about all of them in a way. Jonathan Turley sees it that way too:

In crafting the act, Congress created incentives for states to set up health insurance exchanges and disincentives for them to opt out. The law, for example, made the subsidies available only to those enrolled in insurance plans through exchanges “established by the state.” [snip]

The administration attempted to solve the problem by simply declaring that even residents of states without their own exchanges were eligible for subsidies, even though the law seemed to specifically say they were not. [snip]

But the D.C. Circuit Court may see things quite differently, especially in light of recent Supreme Court opinions holding that the Obama administration has exceeded its authority and violated separation of powers.

In Michigan vs. Bay Mills Indian Community, for example, Justice Elena Kagan noted that “this court does not revise legislation … just because the text as written creates an apparent anomaly as to some subject it does not address.” In Utility Air Regulatory Group vs. EPA, Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for the majority, stressed that “an agency has no power to tailor legislation to bureaucratic policy goals by rewriting unambiguous statutory terms.” And a third strike came last week in National Labor Relations Board vs. Canning, when the Supreme Court unanimously found that President Obama had violated the Constitution in circumventing Congress through his use of recess appointments.

The D.C. Circuit Court is expected to rule any day now on the Halbig case, and supporters of the Affordable Care Act are growing nervous. In January, an Obamacare advocate described the Halbig case to a reporter for the Hill as “probably the most significant existential threat to the Affordable Care Act. All the other lawsuits that have been filed really don’t go to the heart of the ACA, and this one would have.” And in a fraught oral argument before the D.C. Circuit Court, the administration seemed to struggle to defend its interpretation.

Halbig is an opportunity for the courts and the judicial branch to lock arms with Congress, the legislative branch in opposition to Barack Obama and the Chicago gangster lawlessness he represents and imported to the nation’s capital.

Share

119 thoughts on “ObamaCare Halbig Court Decision

  1. Favorite video of the day:

    http://newsbusters.org/blogs/mark-finkelstein/2014/07/09/watch-mika-get-verklempt-over-obama-impeachment-talk

    But on today’s Morning Joe, that reality did not prevent Mika Brzezinski from getting verklempt and asking for time to compose herself before introducing a segment on impeachment talk from Sarah Palin and Iowa Republican Senate candidate Joni Ernst.

    MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Now we have this, given all that we’re talking about here, renewed talk of — I’m going to read this straight.

    MIKE BARNICLE: Ughh. You really are?

    BRZEZINSKI: I am. Hold on. Just give me a second.

    BARNICLE: Want me to hold your hand while you do it?

    BRZEZINSKI: There’s renewed talk of the president’s impeachment . . . So I want to highlight something. I’m not laughing. This scares me actually. It’s disturbing. I’m sorry. I’m not trying to be — that whole sound bite that we just played and the impact I know it has really scares me.

  2. DALLAS — President Obama on Wednesday forcefully defended his decision not to visit the Texas border with Mexico to view a burgeoning humanitarian crisis, saying he’s “not interested in photo ops” and challenging Congress to give him new authority to respond to the situation.

    “Nothing has taken place down there that I’m not intimately aware of,” Obama said during a hastily arranged news conference here, where he began a two-day visit to the state for Democratic fundraising and an economic event. “This is not theater.”

    **********************************************************

    O’s entire presidency has been one photo op after another…

    he says ” nothing has taken place down there he is not intimately aware of”

    really? have you stood in the Texas heat with the “kids” during this ‘humanitarian crisis’…have you smelled the air they are lving in?

    have you looked into their faces?

    or the people who actually live in that area who are American citizens who actually live there to listen and try to understand their concerns and fears?

    who is he trying to kid? this is the same kind of attitude he had the night of benghazi…’nothing he could do, he may as well go to sleep…big fundraiser the next day…

    this is his MO…what a disaster he is…

    I hope that what Admin says about the Courts and Congress linking arms to save us from this MIA presidential pretender comes true…

    He is appalling…and the only thing I find as bad is listening to these stupid Dims trying to rationalize this man’s behavior and choices…

    Major Kudos for Henry Cuellar, Democratic Representative from Texas…for truly and courageously speaking ‘truth to power’

    …he said he has received a call from the WH to stop criticizing O…stay strong Henry…you are a rarity and give a ray of hope…

  3. moononpluto
    July 9, 2014 at 7:35 pm
    God, The running sewermouth is off his meds again…..
    Obama’s evolving position:
    Two weeks ago: I will act unilaterally on immigration!
    Now: I can’t do anything without Congress, sorry.
    ————
    A foolish consistency is the hobgolblin of small minds.

    As for messiahas . . .

    Well, damnit, if he is a small minded hyperpartisan one we have been waiting for kind of messiah, well then consistency is out of the question.

    That’s what he has Carnies for.

    Picture Carney the dog cleaning up after Obama takes a dump–dirt flying in all directions.

  4. Yes, I know, Carney’s gone. But his spirit lives on. Eventually, when the seawater rises above the gunnels, Obama will offer the job to Chris Matthews. At that point, the crazy albino’s cosmic destiny will be fulfilled. And we can all bring rotten tomatoes to the press room to celebrate his condemnation. This scenario is not as unlikely as it may sound. The reason Matthews hates the Hillary is because he wanted that job and they had the good sense not to give it to him.

  5. July will end with a bang:

    http://www.nationaljournal.com/congress/the-boehner-lawsuit-against-obama-is-beginning-to-take-shape-20140708

    The Boehner Lawsuit Against Obama Is Beginning to Take Shape
    A vote on the resolution to authorize the legal action is set for the week before August break.

    Starting next week, House Republicans will launch a highly visible—and likely tumultuous—three-week process of bringing to the floor legislation to authorize their promised lawsuit against President Obama over his use of executive actions.

    “In theory, you could report out a resolution tomorrow and vote on it,” said a House GOP aide on Tuesday. “But that is not the approach [the leaders] want to take.”

    Rather, the aim is to display—if not actually engage in—a more deliberative process, even if amid controversy. This drawn-out script builds toward a potentially dramatic floor vote held just days, or even hours, before the House adjourns on July 31 for its August-long summer break.

    It will all start playing out when a panel of experts is called to testify next week on issues surrounding such litigation and to answer members’ questions during a hearing of the House Rules Committee.

    The resolution to authorize the legal action will then be formally written, or marked up, by the committee during a hearing the following week. The floor vote on the legislation will follow the week after that, in the days before the break.

    Then, a bipartisan House leadership committee controlled by Republicans—the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group, or BLAG—will finalize the language and legal direction of the lawsuit, deciding which arguments will have the most chances of success in a court.

    Against this buildup toward actually filing the lawsuit, there is some Republican concern over the potential embarrassment of a quick dismissal of such litigation in the courts. In fact, legal experts say there looms a substantial roadblock in the form of a presumption against congressional standing required to maintain such a case in federal court.

    Speaker John Boehner has so far provided few public details of what exactly will be in the lawsuit, or how that obstacle of its legal merits might be dealt with.

    In an op-ed he wrote appearing this weekend on CNN’s website, Boehner asserted that “the president has not faithfully executed the laws when it comes to a range of issues, including his health care law, energy regulations, foreign policy, and education.” Boehner did not mention immigration issues specifically.

    But Boehner added, “The president has circumvented the American people and their elected representatives through executive action, changing and creating his own laws, and excusing himself from enforcing statutes he is sworn to uphold—at times even boasting about his willingness to do it, as if daring the American people to stop him.”

    But while Boehner was vague on legal specifics, two lawyers whom Republicans consulted on the issue have written a column entitled “Can Obama’s Legal End-Run Around Congress Be Stopped?” in which they address some of the issues and arguments for such legal action.

    David Rivkin Jr. and Elizabeth Price Foley write that Obama has worked around Congress with “breathtaking audacity.”

    Not only do they say he has unilaterally amended the Affordable Care Act multiple times—including delaying the employer mandate—they also write that the president has suspended immigration law, refusing to deport some young undocumented immigrants.

    And “with the stroke of a magisterial pen,” they write, Obama has “gutted huge swaths of federal law that enjoy bipartisan support, including the Clinton-era welfare-reform work requirement, the Bush-era No Child Left Behind law, and the classification of marijuana as an illegal controlled substance.”

    The two lawyers note in their column that Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., has already filed a lawsuit challenging the president’s decision to exempt Congress from the health law exchanges. And they point out that Rep. Tom Rice, R-S.C., has a resolution called the Stop This Overreaching Presidency that would authorize the House to legally challenge several presidential work-arounds.

    “But Congress’s ability to reclaim its powers through litigation faces a substantial roadblock in the form of a presumption against congressional ‘standing,’ ” Rivkin and Foley write. A plaintiff has standing in a case when he or she can demonstrate a concrete, particularized injury the court can remedy.

    But the Supreme Court previously seemed to shut the door to congressional standing in a 1997 case, Raines v. Byrd, in which six members of Congress challenged the constitutionality of a presidential veto. The Court held that the claimed loss of congressional power by the six lawmakers was “wholly abstract.”

    At the same time, the two lawyers contend that the issue of standing should not bar enforcement of the separations of powers where “there are no other plaintiffs capable of enforcing this critical constitutional principle.

    “This is because they are ‘benevolent’ suspensions, in which the president exempts certain classes of people from the operation of law. No one person was sufficiently harmed to create standing to sue, for instance, when Obama instructed the Department of Homeland Security to stop deporting young illegal immigrants,” they write.

    In addition, they write that in Raines, it was an ad hoc group of members of Congress that filed the suit. But, in a reference to BLAG, the lawyers argue that when House or Senate rules “have a mechanism for designating a bipartisan, official body with authority to file lawsuits on their chamber’s behalf, the case for standing is more compelling.”

    “Then, the lawsuit is not an isolated political dispute, but a representation by one of the two chambers of the legislative branch that the institution believes its rights have been violated,” they assert. “These types of serious, broad-based institutional lawsuits should be in a different category” than the Raines case, they assert.

    “If congressional standing is denied in such cases, there will be no other way to check such presidential usurpation short of impeachment,” the two write.

    Obama has responded to the threat of the potential lawsuit by calling it a “stunt.”

    The president also said late last month, “If Congress were to do its job and pass the legislation I’ve directed them to pass, I wouldn’t be forced to take matters into my own hands.”

  6. Admin: I read Roberts differently. The most important thing to him is not the Constitution. The most important thing to him is that the court seek some consensus, any consensus, to preserve the dignity and majesty of the institution. The cases which have been decided against Obama lately have been half measures, and tinkering around the edges. The one case which would have gutted the law, he flapped around on the deck of the boat like a tuna for several days, and became a bit of a laughing stock among the law clerks. Justice Kennedy did his level best to keep the man on the reservation, but in the end it was no use. This case is of the same ilk as the original one. It goes for the jugglar, and does not lend itself to tinkering around the edges. I do not see Roberts manning up to that kind of challenge. Frankly, it would have been easier for him to have done so the last time, because the entertainment industry lawyer who Obama appointed as Solicitor General conceded the very issue that Roberts sua sponte resurrected in upholding the law.

  7. “If congressional standing is denied in such cases, there will be no other way to check such presidential usurpation short of impeachment,” the two write.
    ———–
    No other way?

    No other way besides the proper way,

    you know the one the founding fathers had in mind,

    i.e. impeachment.

    Impeachment however is more of a political act

    The legal groundwork has been brilliantly laid out by former prosecutor Andy McCarthy

    But the political will is lacking, mainly because the RINO is too frightened to lead.

    As we speak, their consultants are telling them forget about saving the nation

    Just stand back and let Obama self destruct

    Then the voters will turn to you, and you will get your contributors back.

  8. I missed the words short of impeachment. I recommended this cause of action before they figured it out, but now I see this as one more half measure. More tinkering around the edges. More politics. Justice delayed is justice denied. That is true for defendants and it is just as true for this nation.

    Therefore, I would like to see this case dismissed for lack of standing. Yes, you heard me right.

    I believe a dismissal would back the RINO into the corner I want him in, where he must decide to either sit there like a castrade while Obama goes through the act out stage of his narcissism, or take the only action that will achieve effective relief–impeachment. While the country and the world look on.

  9. Suppose, on the other hand, that the court takes jurisdiction and after a couple years renders a decision adverse to Obama. How can anyone be sure that he will adhere to that decision. Look at the track record. He, not congress, and certainly not the courts, decides which laws (and decisions) he will enforce, and which ones he will ignore. A weak man like John Roberts would have to wonder how that would effect the dignity and majesty of the court.

  10. More wisdom of the ages from the one we have been waiting for. The miracles just keep coming.

    —————–

    President Barack Obama racked up a big win this week, and he’s making sure everybody knows all about it.

    “I walked down the block to shoot some pool with [Colo.] Governor [John] Hickenlooper at his old bar, the Wynkoop Brewing Company,” the commander in chief told supporters at a July 9 speech in Colorado.

    “You should not ask him who won, heh. No, no, really, don’t ask Gov. Hickenlooper who won at pool,” Obama laughed.

    Admittedly, even as Obama celebrated his triumph, hundreds of thousands of unskilled migrants are flooding over the Texas border and even more poor people are northwards from Central America.

    The Middle East is in flames, the nation’s economy is stalled, wages are flat, Russian tanks are threatening to move on Ukraine, Obama’s polls are heading below 40 percent, and Democrats may lose their Senate majority.

    But at a fundraiser shortly after his speech, Obama again boasted of his great victory over the Hickenlooper threat, according to a report from the press pool.

    “We walked over to Hickenlooper’s old joint. … Hickenlooper’s there, challenged me to pool. You can ask him how that went,” said Obama.

    “I took his lunch money,” added Obama.

    Some Democrats might want to ask Obama why he’s talking up a pool-table win amid a cascade of disasters for himself, the nation and the Democratic Party.

    “The optics … are that he’s not paying attention to this [border

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2014/07/09/obama-racks-up-big-win-at-colorado-pool-table/#ixzz37285AQTM

  11. The president also said late last month, “If Congress were to do its job and pass the legislation I’ve directed them to pass, I wouldn’t be forced to take matters into my own hands.”
    ————–
    “I have DIRECTED them to pass”??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

    The role of the president is to execute the laws congress passes. It is not to direct them to pass those he offers.

    Either he does not understand the Constitution or else he is a text book narcissist.

    Since he is a Harvard Trained Law Review President and the smartest man to ever occupy the White House, according to presidential historian Michael Bechloss, and big media, we can safely rule out the former explanation. And that my friends leaves us only with the second explanation, which is what I have maintained all along. A stone cold narcissist.

  12. This Nero does not fiddle while Rome burns. To do so would be unseemly, and, even worse, bad form. This Nero plays pool while Rome burns. And he steals the lunch money from that gun grabbing fanatic from Colorado. This proves that despite having airforce 1, the adulation of big media, and a supine Republican Party, good old Hussein Obama remains a man of the people.

  13. I wonder whether anyone in big media is smart enough to realize that they will be held accountable for their betrayal of the country in supporting this guy. I wonder if the realize that he is just the weirdo they do not need, if they are to continue to promote the long cocktail line of Washington. Someone who I make it a point never to quote Jennfer Rubin makes one point that bears repeating. She does not wish to live in Washington, because sure as day follows night, there will come a point where their centralization of power will collapse, and so will the bon vivante of its members.

  14. O’Reilly had Casper Milqtoast Kurtz and a dumb blonde (no, not the one on morning joe, another one) on pondering whether and if so why big media is turning on the messiah. Milqutoast and DB seemed to agree that there is a change, but not a sea change necessarily. Love is love is love. Kurtz did say the reason is Obama is always behind the eight ball, dumb blonde said it is because journalists are human beings, and I say it is because those fucking fourflusher who created the problem of Obama, just as Obama created the problem at the border, are now in a state of panic. Yes, they are panicking because they know sooner or later they will be in the cross hairs of public opinion, and what they did to blind the American People to what they were dealing with in Obama, namely a mentally unbalanced man, will be hang around their collective necks like an albatross. Blame big media, and you will never be wrong. And do not be fooled by their latter day pivot. They are the same traitors they were in 2008, and now that the wheel has come for circle and driven into the iceberg we all knew was there, they are starting to man their gold plated life boats.

  15. mainstream media’s collective bobbysoxer swoon for the presidential candidate . . . I am struggling for the level of punishment that fits the crime for what they have done to this nation and its people. Forget about the first amendment for the moment–that was never intended to condone the sort of treachery we see now from this group of people. Besides which, I am not talking about a court of law, but the court of public opinion. The defective product they put out is akin to bad heroin. What’s an addict to do? It is not enough to run an opinion poll where respondents say that they do not trust their dealer. The American people must learn to wean themselves off this toxic drug by going cold turkey. No information is bad, but twisted lies like they peddle are even worse. They are the vehicle which the bad guys have used to undermine this nation and there is no living with it. In this article, Ed Driscoll makes reference to their perverse elitism, and faux credentials. Seriously, who gives a fuck that many of them went to the Columbia School of Journalism, instead of serving an apprenticeship in the hard drinking hard living world of their predecessors. All this has given them is a profound ignorance of the world, seen not from the ground floor, but from the balcony of an ivory tower . . . and all the hubris that goes with it. They are all, in their own ways, Samantha Powers, whose academic theories have the smell of the lamp, and crash and burn when they are introduced in the real world. And then, to cover their tracks they start lying and can never stop.
    ——————–
    The journalists who populated America’s newspapers in the pre-Watergate 20th century by and large weren’t Columbia Journalism School graduates, but for the most part, blue collar types who could pound their Underwoods and had a keen sense for wanting to know who was screwing who over what and a desire to share it with the world. (See The Front Page or His Girl Friday to get a sense of this era of journalism.) Similarly, Mark Steyn has noted that in England, “Fleet Street was a great place, because the whole culture of British journalism was these kind of hard-drinking, scurrilous, unrespectable hacks. And compared to the kind of pompous, acetic, clean-living blowhards of today’s mainstream media in the United States, I’d rather have all those grubby Fleet Street guys.”

    No matter how many degrees they have on their cubicle walls, today’s MSM journalists are, if anything, much more ignorant about the state of their city and America — and certainly about the average Joe who reads their paper, whom they openly despise — than the hardscrabble predecessors who earned their papers’ reputations. Couple that with a growing number who openly admit to deceiving their readers with a postmodern Clinton-esque nonchalance about lying, and no wonder, as Hemingway writes:

    Trust in the media has hit record lows, according to a new Gallup poll.

    I can’t help but suspect this statistic would look less grim if our media were even slightly more informed about the things they act like they know so much about.

    Oh and by the way, her line plaintively asking if only “our media were even slightly more informed about the things they act like they know so much about” explains volumes about their collective bobbysoxer swoon for the presidential candidate they would go on to champion with such veracity in 2007 and 2008, doesn’t it?

  16. There was a Clark Gable Doris Day movie in the 1950s that reflected the tried and true theme of boy meets girl boy loses girl boy wins girl . . that drivel. And we got the song by that name, i.e. Teachers Pet. The only reason I mention this obscure movie is that regardless of anything else, it depicted the inevitable clash between the hard living hard drinking reporter of yesteryear who was obessed with digging and finding the truth behind what is happening as opposed to just the headlines–the Sharyl Atkisson of another era, vs. the snippy academic status driven professor of journalism who in just about every respect embodies the people who run big media today. If you ever have a chance to watch it, and can stand the campy syrupy plot, you will see the depiction of this clash of cultures is quite good.

  17. What are the Dems up to ….

    JohnCornyn: Words I never expected to write: the Senate Judiciary Committee is voting now on amending the Bill of Rights

    CRUZ: “It saddens me 46 Democratic Senators have signed their name to repeal free speech provisions of Bill of Rights”

    We need people removed and quick.

  18. This hearing is stunning. It’s just Democrats complaining about political speech they don’t like and how they want to shut it down

  19. No free speech for Sarah Palin:

    http://newsbusters.org/blogs/scott-whitlock/2014/07/09/unhinged-msnbc-host-sarah-palin-made-treasonous-accusations-against-

    MSNBC host Michael Eric Dyson on Wednesday lashed out at Sarah Palin, accusing the conservative of committing “treason” against Barack Obama by calling for the President’s impeachment. The guest host of the Ed Show first praised the President for “his tireless effort to help [illegal children who have crossed the border].” Dyson then fumed, “The President’s push towards positive and crucial change was met with treasonous accusations.”

    During the last administration, however, Dyson called for the impeachment of George W. Bush. In a highly edited clip of Palin on Fox News, the Republican insisted, “Impeachment is a message that has to be sent to our President that we’re not going to put up with lawlessness… I really want Congress to do its job, the constitutional power that they have to halt an imperial presidency.”

  20. They would just love to shut us all up and make us all act like good little children and not question the manchild and his wisdom……seriously, it would make anybody want to go against the system.

    This is the sort of mood it puts me in when they try this shit…..you’ll only pull this crap so far on us.

  21. Dyson should read this before he defends Obama on immigration (or is Dyson an anti-black racist? 🙂 ) :

    One of the sleeper issues surrounding the debate on amnesty for illegal immigrants – an inconvenient one that no proponent of a widespread amnesty wishes to acknowledge – is the devastating effect so-called immigration reform will have on African Americans.

    The black unemployment rate is almost 11 percent, far higher than that of any other group profiled by labor statistics. African Americans are disproportionately employed in lower-skilled jobs – the very same jobs immigrants take. As Steven Camarota asked in a recent column, why double immigration when so many people already aren’t working?

    Who will be harmed most by amnesty? African-Americans.

    The issue resurfaced this week when a YouTube video emerged of two young African-Americans confronting pro-illegal-immigration demonstrators in Murrieta, California. Murrieta is one of the towns in which undocumented minors are being relocated — and supporters are squaring off with protestors.

    The young man argues:

    If somebody brought six children to your house and you ain’t got no job, are you gonna take them in?… What are you gonna do? Are you gonna try to go out there and take care of these children AND the children you got already that you can’t take care of?… What are we going to do for the people who are here who are starving already?… We got our OWN people that are starving and hungry…. Why would we add to the problem?!

    He also laments the problems in black neighborhoods where prices “are upped on everything” after large groups of immigrants move in.

    The young woman argues:

    It’s just too much…. We already have our own poor people. Starvation, kids walking with no shoes…. We don’t need other people’s kids to bring more problems…. You’re gonna watch America go spiraling down… We’re already in debt as it is. [Now] we’re gonna need more money to support these kids.

    Why are Democratic politicians disregarding the concerns and needs of black Americans in a push to address the concerns and needs… of foreigners? Amnesty proponents speak of the need to grant others a better life – but what of the need to look out for our fellow Americans? What of those black Americans whose ancestors quite literally built this nation through the sweat of their brows?

    Instead, Democrats are chucking aside black voters in their rush to lock in the Latino vote (or so they’re hoping). Taken for granted as a given come election-time, blacks are now actively harmed as the Democrats vow to grow their voting base through importing more and more of what they see as future blue-voters. It’s the husband who leaves his wife of 30 years: ‘We had a good run, honey, but I’ve found someone new.’

    Black attorney and member of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights Peter Kirsanow, serves as one of the lone voices of reason, repeatedly outlining the harm amnesty will cause black Americans. In a 2013 letter to the Congressional Black Caucus, he wrote: “The obvious question is whether there are sufficient jobs in the low-skilled labor market for both African-Americans and illegal immigrants. The answer is no.” Kirsanow’s statistics demonstrate the way in which immigration impacts the wages and employment opportunities of black males and hurts the black community. [snip]

    Senator Jeff Sessions’s recent National Review column “On Immigration, It’s Time to Defend Americans,” hits the nail on the head. Sessions notes:

    Harvard professor George Borjas estimated that high immigration rates from 1980 to 2000 resulted in a 7.4 percent wage reduction for lower-skilled American workers…. The Center for Immigration Studies issued a study based on Census data showing that “since 2000 all of the net gain in the number of working-age (16 to 65) people holding a job has gone to immigrants.”… If mass immigration is so good for the economy, why then — during this long sustained period of record immigration into the U.S. — are incomes falling and a record number of Americans not working?

    Birthright citizenship is already bad enough; largely refusing to deport illegal immigrants is already bad enough.But now, we’ve upped the ante even further. Overburdened taxpayers, including black taxpayers, are covering the cost to feed, clothe and educate illegals, and black Americans face the additional burden of having their historic suffering belittled and their precarious circumstances made even worse.

    Democrats have built a brand as the party willing to stand up for black Americans, but the amnesty push shows what a false promise that was. The message to black voters is: “Yes, your ancestors endured unimaginable hardships and helped build this country, and we said we’d help you out. But now we have a new trophy wife.”

  22. Oh no…oh, (panting), I am so scared. Oh, my bleached wig might fall off, oooo the horror…

    STFU BRZEZINSKI…you are just another mindless Barbie on tv.

  23. Are black Americans finally waking up to the reality that “Obama cannot be trusted on any issue by friend nor foe” as this clip suggests?

    http://therightscoop.com/houston-black-woman-goes-on-epic-rant-about-unaccompanied-illegals-why-cant-they-go-back/

    It’s not right. Now billions of dollars want to be borrowed from the White House to help feed and house them.

    What about the kids here? In our neighborhood? In our country? Not just in this neighborhood but in our country.

    All these kids? Really? Why can’t they go back?

    I’m sorry that their parents are in poor living conditions or surroundings or whatever’s going on out there. I don’t care.

    I care about what’s going on right here in my own back yard, my neighborhood.

    Am i the only one in this community that’s out here that watches the news this morning. Oh, my god! I feel alone right now this this, and I’m very saddened by it.

    She’ll go right back to supporting Obama.

  24. She’ll go right back to supporting Obama.

    ——
    Yup Admin, no matter how bad he gets, most AA’s stick together for their race.

    If only women were more supportive of their gender, we would have had no problem breaking that effin’ glass ceiling, years ago.

    Hillary would already be our President and we wouldn’t be in such decline as a nation.

  25. This is all going to get nasty and is stoking a very big race war on the doorstep of the border and its all Obama’s fault. Always sticking his big hoofs where they ain’t wanted.

  26. admin
    July 10, 2014 at 11:58 am

    No free speech for Sarah Palin:
    ___________________________________

    😆 Admin but what fun watching all those heads exploding OOOPs there goes another one. 😆

  27. More on Baracko throwing his ‘people’ under the bus…

    Black Americans: The True Casualties of Amnesty

    [snip]

    Instead, Democrats are chucking aside black voters in their rush to lock in the Latino vote (or so they’re hoping). Taken for granted as a given come election-time, blacks are now actively harmed as the Democrats vow to grow their voting base through importing more and more of what they see as future blue-voters. It’s the husband who leaves his wife of 30 years: ‘We had a good run, honey, but I’ve found someone new.’

    [snip]

    http://www.nationalreview.com/article/382338/black-americans-true-casualties-amnesty-j-delgado

  28. In a stunning display of callousness, the Defense Department has announced that thousands of soldiers — many serving as commanding officers in Afghanistan — will be notified in the coming weeks that their service to the country is no longer needed.

    Last week, more than 1,100 Army captains — the men and women who know best how to fight this enemy because they have experienced multiple deployments — were told they’ll be retired from the Army.

    The overall news is not unexpected. The Army has ended its major operations in Iraq and is winding down in Afghanistan. Budget cuts are projected to shrink the Army from its current 520,000 troops to

    http://nypost.com/2014/07/09/sending-pink-slips-to-a-war-zone/

  29. A federal judge has ordered the IRS to explain “under oath” how the agency lost a trove of emails from the official at the heart of the Tea Party targeting scandal.

    U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan gave the tax agency 30 days to file a declaration by an “appropriate official” to address the computer issues with ex-official Lois Lerner.

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/07/10/federal-judge-orders-irs-to-explain-lost-lerner-emails-under-oath/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+foxnews%2Fpolitics+%28Internal+-+Politics+-+Text%29

  30. Shadowfax
    July 10, 2014 at 4:26 pm

    Foxy

    Those soldiers are needed at our own borders.
    ____________________________

    I agree Shadow that is probably what Barry will do. 🙄

  31. I don’t recommend TV much but if they show this in the USA, watch it, it is one of the best spy thrillers i have seen in years.

    Its in 8 parts and i have just watched the first 2 episodes and its utterly gripping and so timely in its subject matter.

    The Honourable Woman

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xQYsZEbu1RI

    i think its coming to Sundance TV on July 31st.

  32. You know dipshit is in trouble when the harpies at MSNBC are getting the vapors and attacking him.

  33. Holy Shit

    Congress just ordered the arrest of Lois Lerner.

    Rep. Steve Stockman ‏:

    We just filed a resolution directing the Sergeant-At-Arms to arrest Lois Lerner for contempt. Statement coming in minutes.

  34. Finally….

    Rep. Steve Stockman, R-Texas, has just submitted a bill, HR 664, which finds Lerner in contempt of Congress for refusing to testify before a congressional committee.

    Lerner, the former head of the IRS tax-exempt division, has admitted the IRS improperly targeted conservative groups seeking 501(c)(3) status.

    However, Lerner twice invoked her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination and refused to testify before the House Oversight Committee.

    The bill only has to pass the House, not the Senate, in order to go into effect.

    And the House is controlled by Republicans, so its passage would seem assured.

    If the House passes the bill and finds Lerner in contempt, she could go to jail, according to a copy of the legislation.

    The bill states that she should be held in contempt because the threat of prosecution has clearly been insufficient to encourage her “to be honest and candid with Congress regarding the heinous actions of the Internal Revenue Service.”

    It further states, “That the Speaker issue his warrant directed to the Sergeant-at-Arms, or his deputy, commanding him to arrest and take into custody forthwith, wherever to be found, the body of Lois G. Lerner and bring her to the bar of the House without delay to answer to the charge of contempt of its authority, breach of its privileges, and gross and wanton insult to the integrity of its proceedings, and in the meantime keep the body of Lerner in his custody in the common jail of the District of Columbia, subject to the further order of the House.

  35. Lerner better not go for any walk in the woods by herself for fear of committing very assisted suicide.

  36. MoonOnPluto, it’s what we suggested here: http://www.hillaryis44.org/2014/04/15/irs-blood-moon-rising/

    It would be great if the House would do as Stockman proposes. In addition, the Judge Sullivan decision today which Foxyladi14 reported on below, added to the possible Judge Walton decision tomorrow gives us hope.

    Wbboei however might be proven right in all this so we continue to walk on the sunny side of the street while carrying an umbrella. 🙂

  37. OT..but FYI for American Horror Story viewers…

    Emmy Nominations:

    Outstanding Lead Actress in a Miniseries or a Movie

    Jessica Lange, “American Horror Story: Coven”
    Sarah Paulson, “American Horror Story: Coven”

    Outstanding Miniseries

    “American Horror Story: Coven”

    Outstanding Supporting Actress in a Miniseries or a Movie

    Frances Conroy, “American Horror Story: Coven”
    Kathy Bates, “American Horror Story: Coven”
    Angela Bassett, “American Horror Story: Coven”

    …the ladies at the ‘AHS: Coven’ run away with the nominations…

    …and just for fun…and it is funny…

    Outstanding Comedy Series

    “Silicon Valley”

  38. Lerner in contempt of Congress

    I hope Trey is behind this and is a preview of his determination to get the truth on Benghazi too.

    If the Rethugs backdown on her arrest, they will prove they have no coconuts.

  39. I don’t like Silicon Valley. Reminds me of the far left children that have gotten us in this situation.

  40. Unfortunately bozo went to my favorite restaurant in Austin. ..Magnolia cafe, good p organic, healthy, but mucho delicious with very large servings.
    Very hippie, pretty sure lefty, but hey, I have been going for 30 years…

    My daughter is a Principal now and in East Tx…they have been put on alert about masses of illegal children that will enter their school system. They literally are not a rich school system, this will be a disaster.

  41. gonzotx…SV, the tv show, is meant to be a spoof…sort of like laughing at the sterotypes…all I remember is literally laughing out loud at the most unpredicable time…and that does not happen often…

    …that scene with ‘Jared’ getting stranded on the automated island…and that cast and the characters they created, in general, just cracked me up…

    *******************************************

    sorry to hear your daughter and her students will be effected by O and his continued destruction of the USA…

    notice O did not shy away from his Austin photo op…

    when is America going to wake up…

  42. So bozo is a few hundred miles from the Mexican border and NOT a word about our military hero imprisoned for a wrong exit!
    Oh, but God, we need American taxpayers to foot 3.8 billion dollars for the illegals!

  43. This black demagogue Dyson, who condemns Sarah, is sick puppy.

    His reputation for rank stupidity and bias precedes him.

    For example:

    He calls the attorney general “the law giver”. Under the Constitution, Congress is the law giver, and the President (and the attorney general who reports to him is the law enforcer. Dyson knows this, but he conflates the two functions because he supports Obama’s efforts to establish an imperial presidency.

    He goes on to call Eric Holder, who is by all accounts the most corrupt attorney general in American History–Moses. Moses? This proves that Dyson is not simply stupid. He is floridly delusional.

  44. Yes, Obama’s welcoming of illegal immigration hurts black Americans in the pocket book and the correlation between prior but less substantial waves of illegal immigration and a concomitant drop in black employment proves the point statistically.

    But there is one more piece to the puzzle that is too easily overlooked. To millions of Americans of all other races, the grievance complaint by blacks is no longer well received. Yes, there as institutional discrimination and it has been negated. We fought a civil war to end slavery, and thereafter we had the civil rights act, affirmative action, blockbusting, bussing and culminating in a black president. Black leaders demand we do more, but what more can we do?

    Blacks want us to feel sympathy. But as millions of illegals flood across the border, many of them children, those who are moved by the travails of the less fortunate are likely to say the black/white problem is unsolvable. Perhaps the sympathy we once felt for them should be transferred to the more deserving–these people who have nothing.

    Blacks can thank Obama for both of these things–higher unemployment, wage deterioration and no one to toll the bell for them. Their special victim status will be assumed by the children crossing the border. Personally, my sympathy is running a little bit short as well. We need to focus on solvable problems.

  45. in East Tx…they have been put on alert about masses of illegal children that will enter their school system.

    They literally are not a rich school system, this will be a disaster.

    ————
    I know east Texas, and what you say rings very true.

    Coincidentally, the chairman of Kaufman County Republican Party sent me a Ted Cruz sweatshirt, because he knows I admire someone who speaks truth to power. This cuts against Larry Summers advice to Elizabeth Warren, that insiders do not attack insiders.

  46. Admin…nice clip…

    …have to agree with one thing the article you posted mentioned:

    One notable Canadian omission Thursday was Orphan Black star Tatiana Maslany, who was snubbed in the lead dramatic actress category.

    *****************************

    don’t know what it takes for her to get the nod for an emmy…at last count I think she is playing at least six very different characters (clones)simultaneously…

    she won the critic’s choice last year and got a Globe nom…but she seems invisible to the Emmys…must be the insular politics of the US studios…

    a little background on her and the show…

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/20/arts/television/tatiana-maslany-plays-many-characters-in-orphan-black.html?_r=0

    **************************

    I’m pulling for Jessica Lange…she’s due…they’ll probably give it to Cicely Tyson and their darling, Julia Roberts for supporting…hope I am wrong…

  47. this isn’t getting much coverage…more salt on the wound of this country…take $4 BILLION US taxpayer dollars to give to cartel escorted illegal underage immigrants across our borders and then settle them wherever in our country and get them on benefits…but no money left for soldiers still on active duty overseas…or as that woman says in the clip above…what about her neighborhood…her kid’s schools…her family that is poor and have no jobs…

    http://nypost.com/2014/07/09/sending-pink-slips-to-a-war-zone/

    ****************************************

    O was not kidding when he said he was going to radically transform this country…I cannot believe O is getting away with all of this…

    ************************************************

    like him or not, Hannity is down at the Texas border now with Rick Perry and the Border agents and they are showing and explaining what is going on down there…intercepting conversations with ISIS, drug cartels, many dead bodies that end up in fields and get eaten up down to the bone…kids being raped…

    …while the kids are coming in…they are a distraction and the drug cartels are having a field day and pouring in at the Rio Grande…what an invitation and no brainer for all the worldwide terrorists that hate us that are watching this while O plays pool and drinks beer…and they watch O have a hissy fit that he does not have to go to the border…

    over 600,000 crimes committed by illegal immigrants against US citizens and not one peep from O or Biden on that, instead now we hear many of them are released and set free…it is as if American citizens are the lowest on the totem poll and really all they need to do is shut up, obey O and his supporters and keep giving their tax dollars to pay for the food, shelter, toys, medical care, etc for the illegals that are just walking in…

    this is insane…

  48. Has anyone been watching these Senate hearings on ‘Unaccompanied Immigrant Children’?

    Jeh Johnson from Homeland Security and Sylvia Burwell from HSS stating what the O admin wants and how imperative it is to get the money as soon as possible because they are going to be out of money by Oct…

    …frankly, I could not believe a word coming out of them…especially Johnson…what they are saying does not even make sense…thank goodness there are some critical thinking people asking realistic questions…unfortunately most of them were on the republican side…

    I will however give big credit to Mary Landrieu for seemingly trying to cut through all the BS and mumbo jumbo coming from the spokespeople for the Admin…again, especially Johnson…imho…unless I was misunderstanding…she shot through alot of what they were proposing and seemed to stop them in their tracks…she made mince meat out of the State Dept representative…

    bottom line…the Admin wants $4Billion dollars to build or contract for more and more detention facilites…and maybe they will consider some more National Guard..maybe not…and their ‘plan’ is to hire more judges to try to reduce the time that might return some of the kids back home…BUT…a big but…that ‘promise’ flies in the face of a current backload of over 300,000 cases which already have a waiting time of 3-5 years before they can be processed…

    bottom, bottom line…there is no plan…the “plan” is to get $4 Billion dollars and then try to figure out what to do…and their “plan” is to keep most of the kids here and take care of them…that $ 4 Billion dollars is going to evaporate and this problem is going to continue to get worse…

  49. Here’s an HRC-friendly article about what the author calls Hillary’s “identity crisis,” meaning that she is going to have to decide between “Friend or foe of Wall Street.” Some suggestions:

    She could, for starters, propose cutting taxes on employers who raise wages in line with the nation’s annual productivity increase, and raising the levy on employers who don’t. She could propose hiking taxes on capital gains and dividends at least to the level of taxes on work-derived income. She could propose cutting taxes on corporations that divide their boards equally between representatives of shareholders and employees, as the Germans do, and raising the tax rates of corporations that don’t, that are run almost solely for the benefit of their large shareholders and their top executives — as most U.S. corporations are.

    There are also quotes and references from JFK and FDR.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/harold-meyerson-hillary-clintons-identity-crisis/2014/07/09/9c7a45cc-0794-11e4-a0dd-f2b22a257353_story.html

  50. His wisdom is the wisdom that passeth all understanding, so behold ye of little faith.

    After living it up with a rich trial lawyer from Dallas, the one we have been waiting for was snookered into doing what he never intended to do–meet with governor Perry. Give up a date with the pool table to meet with him. Why not send in his goon jeh Johnson. He can lie his way out of this one. What Jeh (yup, that’s his name) is busy lying to congress.

    When Obama finally gets there he discovers something he never realized. He is unalterably opposed to letting states protect their borders, says that is the sole domain of the feds, and learns from Governor Perry that the federal agents are not stationed on the Rio Grande, but 50 miles inland, and that their job through his agency is not to repel the invaders at the border, but to apprehend them once they are inland–and do the good old catch and release program, as if they were salmon, rather than invaders.

    Obama is, without a doubt, the stupidest motherfucker that ever lived.

    Rick Perry then told the big media beloved messiah something else his big brain had failed to fathom. It is technologically possible to close the border by stationing 3000 national guard, drones and cameras–every inch of it. When Perry was asked how did the great man respond to this proven fact, he said he was encouraged. By what he was asked. What did he say? Perry responded he did not say anything. And why pray tell is that?

    I can tell you the answer to that obvious question. He could not figure out in the moment how stopping the flood tide of illegal aliens and drug dealers and al Quaeda operatives and preventing the murder of Americans would help him politically. Therefore he will have to talk to Axelrod and Jarrett to figure that one out, and in the meantime, Rome burns. Simply put, the ignorance of this man is absolutely, positively stunning.

  51. When Obama finally gets there he discovers something he never realized. He is unalterably opposed to letting states protect their borders, says that is the sole domain of the feds, and learns from Governor Perry that the federal agents are not stationed on the Rio Grande, but 50 miles inland, and that their job through his agency is not to repel the invaders at the border, but to apprehend them once they are inland–and do the good old catch and release program, as if they were salmon, rather than invaders.
    ———————–
    Think about that for a minute . . . Okay that is long enough.

    If the feds are the exclusive agents to protect the border, and if the states are precluded from exercising concurrent jurisdiction, and if the feds fail to station themselves on the border, but 50 miles back, then they have effectively conceded US sovereignty over that 50 mile stretch to the drug cartels, and it has become the practical equivalent of no man’s land.

    Nice work by our first black president!

    But fear not, ye of little faith. “Moses’s” boss has given us the answer which has eluded those of us of inferior intellect. (No, don’t be offended. We are in the company of that nineteenth century retard Putin, among others who is ripping Obama’s ass in the Ukraine, and that eigth century thug who runs Iran, whom Obama is begging to attack Isis. Its like that old song, the life that loves the valley is lonely on the hills, but Obama has responded to the call of destiny, and that is why he does what he does, tripping the light fantastic with a rich trial lawyer who wants to be part of the nobility, so he invites Obama and his cecil b demille cast of thosands into his humble 25,000 square foot humble abode, which must never be seen by the jury while he plies them with sob stories about his clients).

    This is another milestone in his sainted presidency. Previously, the Messiah was content to cede our sovereignty to the United Nations, those voices in distraction. Now, he has decided that it would be equally appropriate to cede our sovereignty to drug cartels. One bad turn deserves another. In the meantime, fly me to my next fundraiser, and don’t spare the jet engines.

  52. Shame on me. I neglected to mention that the Messiah has struck boldly against this invasion. He has ordered Homeland Security to post signs in that 50 mile stretch he has conceded to the drug cartels, that it is unsafe for American citizens to go there. If they happen to live there, however, that presents a problem–one that is above his pay grade, as the messiah so coyly put it–to the endless delight of big media (ohhhhhh, he is so cute and so smart–to the bobbysoxers who run those perverse institutions, but not to the rest of us.) A riddle within a riddle. Should I warn the people who live there who already know it is unsafe and have been complaining about the rising tide of crime? If they are white, then why bother. On the other hand, maybe I should delegate that problem to Jeh. Always good to have a good liar at your beck and call. And if they tire of him, I can throw the IRS commissioner at them. You know, the bald headed turd who bristles when the RINO who could not stand up to crazy joe biden tells him he does not believe him. That guy would be equally good at defending an indefensible position. He looks like ET/

  53. http://video.foxnews.com/v/3669053118001/rick-perry-on-securing-the-border-with-a-show-of-force/#sp=show-clips

    At 4:30 there is compelling testimony that Obama has not had the feds at the border repeling the invaders, but 50 miles back. If you combine this with his unilateral grant of amnesty to children under the DREAM act, and the message that has been sent explicitly and implicitly to the people in central america, and his failure to hold Mexico’s feet to the fire for not interdicting this invasion, his intentions–and those of his fellow democrats become crystal clear: to import a more docile electorate, who will allow the elites to do whatever they want, and the same time that the uniparty is conspiring in places like Mississippi and Georgia to eliminate the Tea Party which is the voice of the people who are aggrieved by the actions of our dom Perrione imbibing and caviar swallowing elites.

  54. The other thing I would say, Obama’s encouragement of this invasion serves the further purpose of turning Texas blue, which is a central plank of the Texas Democrat Party which has been under his control since 2007. I know this because I saw the transition first hand. Yes. Without a doubt. This is a conspiracy by Obama, and others against our nation. No other explanation can suffice. And it is reasonable to assume that the cartels and terrorists are coordinating their own actions with those of Obama, without him even realizing it.

  55. She could propose cutting taxes on corporations that divide their boards equally between representatives of shareholders and employees, as the Germans do,
    ————-
    I have direct personal experience with the Germans, and I would be reluctant to hold them up as an example of good corporate governance. They are so wrapped up in formality, aristocracy and national pride that they tend to fuck things up. And it takes them years to admit they are wrong. I used to think that the superb craftsmanship and engineering they were known for would carry over into the realm of governance. Nothing could be further from the truth.

  56. Imho This was all planned and executed by Barry and Val Jar
    As a giant laundry scheme the money he wants will go to his Union goons and then back in the Dim coffers to reelect Dims in Nov. 👿

  57. One thing you learn in dealing with the Germans is their upper echelon tends to be freighted with over educated people who insist on being addressed as doctor. They wax eloquent about the Holy Roman empire. And they make grandiose claims about being the Bismark of this industry, or that one, and later quietly slip from the scene after taking a plea for tax fraud. I wonder about Merkel. She is a survivor and the comparisons between her and Lady Thatcher are obvious. Still, she is no Lady Thatcher.

  58. History lessons:

    http://cdn.rollcall.com/news/immigration_reform_proponents_must_consider_results_from_100_years_ago-234569-1.html?popular=true&cdn_load=true&zkPrintable=1&nopagination=1

    Immigration Reform Proponents Must Consider Results From 100 Years Ago

    The effect on the congressional immigration debate after House Majority Leader Eric Cantor’s surprising primary loss should not be about whether to have reform, but whether that reform should be about increasing foreign labor or reducing it.

    Cantor represented the unanimous views of the leadership of both parties, which have only differed in how and how much to increase lifetime immigrants, guest workers and legalizations of unlawful foreign visitors.

    By stressing the opposite option — reductions in legal immigration — during his campaign against Cantor, victorious economics professor Dave Brat has suddenly given hope to the many members of Congress whose immigration policy vision for wage-earning Americans has been blocked by their parties’ leaders. Echoing themes articulated tirelessly by Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., Brat argues for dramatic cuts in future visas for immigrant and other foreign labor, The purpose is to allow the labor supply to tighten, raise wages and make it more likely that employers will recruit from the neglected American populations in today’s economy.

    This is a prescription that has worked well in the past. Perhaps the most stunning example was 100 years ago, when the outbreak of World War I abruptly stopped a three-decades-old massive importation of immigrant labor into the United States.

    Northern manufacturers responded by aggressively recruiting, training and employing the still-living freed slaves and their descendants. Since the 1880s, manufacturers had virtually ignored this source of workers, preferring to send ships to Europe to bring in immigrants to expand their factories. But 1914 began a domestic people movement from plantations to cities that has been celebrated in literature and art as “The Great Migration.” It was the start of a decades-long mass movement of black Americans into the non-agrarian economy of the nation and the building of a large black middle class. But it happened only after easy access to foreign labor was removed.

    Brat’s campaign focused on the current three-decades-long surge in immigration. He views the country’s over-supply of working-age adults — constantly engorged by more than a million new immigrants each year — as offering employers little market-based reason to figure out how to hire from groups of Americans with low labor participation rates.

    He used the difference in immigration approach between himself and congressional leaders to advance his larger campaign claim that Cantor was more representative of outside corporate interests than the concerns of wage-earning constituents.

    As if to underscore Brat’s point, corporate heavyweights including Rupert Murdoch, Sheldon Adelson and Mark Zuckerberg’s immigration organization have immediately lamented Brat’s victory as hurting what they see as necessary efforts to increase foreign labor to avoid what they insist are looming worker shortages.

    According to Jay Timmons, CEO of the National Association of Manufacturers, industry will have difficulty thriving unless Congress passes a bill that would double legal immigration over the next decade to around 20 million and that would give lifetime work permits to some 12 million foreign nationals in the country illegally.

    Brat’s victory puts a spotlight on a very different option for the government. It is one that would prefer that businesses hire their next employees not from immigration flows, but from among the 18 million Americans whom the government’s broad U-6 category of unemployment shows want a full-time job but can’t find one.

    Some 3 million of these Americans have college degrees. Another 5.5 million have some college, while 6 million have only a high school diploma and more than 2 million don’t. In short, there are millions of Americans at every educational level who are looking for jobs at every skill level. And that doesn’t count the tens of millions of working-age Americans who aren’t in the labor market at all, having given up long ago.

    Among the most neglected in this economy are young Hispanic-American citizens whose broad unemployment rate among those age 18-29 is around 18 percent for those with some college, 27 percent for those with only a high school diploma and 37 percent if they have less than a diploma.

    Even more neglected are the young descendants of Americans who suffered in slavery, with the broad unemployment rate around 26 percent for black Americans with some college, 39 percent for those with only a high school diploma and 57 percent for those with less than a diploma.

    A century ago, a war forced a change on employers and required them to recruit from American groups they previously hadn’t considered. The thrill of what that did for our nation was famously captured by a Fortune magazine spread of 60 paintings in 1941. “The Migration Series” by Jacob Lawrence depicted northern employers flooding the South with labor agents. “All other sources of labor having been exhausted, the migrants [southern blacks] were the last resource,” reads the caption under one panel.

    It should not take a war to bring these benefits to economically suffering Americans. Congress can immediately create the same conditions. Just imagine how this nation would change if employers needed labor urgently enough to send armies of recruiters into the inner cities, barrios and depressed rural economies of today. It is an option that now should be in the middle of all immigration debate in Congress.

  59. admin
    July 11, 2014 at 11:27 am
    —————
    I am a supporter of the author of that piece, and that is one of the only organizations I contribute to at this point. This is not music to the ears of Jackson and Sharpton. They prefer the role of overseers of the welfare state plantation and a lifetime of dependency for its charges. Sadly, that is also the position of the democrat party, and billionaire air heads like Zuckerberg/

  60. Update: Maybe our idea of a judicial branch/legislative branch coalition against the gangster executive branch will come to pass. Thus far there is no Halbig decision but there is much pertinent news. Consider – Public opinion of the Supreme Court has improved in the wake of the Hobby Lobby decision, particularly among independents. If the courts are afraid of a public backlash against taking on Obama gangster government they can feel a bit more at ease.

    With an eye towards justice, not the polls, another court joins the fight. Federal judge to IRS: Explain these “lost” e-mails, please … under oath.

    Later on Friday we will hear from yet another judge. Judge Reggie Walton will soon issue another decision/assault against the gangster government iron triangle – the Obama White House, the Holder Justice Department, and Obama congressional henchmen/hemchwoman (all aided by a corrupt Big Media).

    Oh, and before any Obama race-baiters start spewing “lynch mob” or “raists!” against these potential John Sirica’s, both Judge Sullivan and Judge Walton are African-Americans.

    ——————————————————————

  61. Zuckerberg is a textbook example of a tunnel vision capitalist who cannot see beyond the four corners of his balance sheet to the greater good of society, and covers his tracks with humanitarian rhetoric. The harm he does is illustrated by the paradigmatic example of The Tragedy of The Commons:

    The tragedy of the commons is an economics theory by Garrett Hardin, according to which individuals, acting independently and rationally according to each one’s self-interest, behave contrary to the whole group’s long-term best interests by depleting some common resource.(wiki)

  62. admin
    July 11, 2014 at 12:09 pm
    —————
    Justice Robert Jackson, who hoped to succeed Harlan Stone as Chief Justice, but fell on his sword in the prosecution of Herman Goering at Nuerenberg, maintained that the Supreme Court followed election results and they were a factor in its decisions. I found that admission troubling, but perhaps not, for the one branch of government that is appointed, rather than elected. There is an insecurity associated with that status, in what purports to be, but really is not, a democratic nation, small d. I suspect it comes from the closely held knowledge that they have neither the power of the purse or of the sword. Their weapon is words, and words alone are not self enforcing.

  63. foxyladi14
    July 11, 2014 at 12:13 pm
    Poor over worked Barry needs a vacation.
    —————–
    Then impeachment is on the table?

  64. Why settle for half measures. A two year vacation would seem to be in order. The only mystery about this vacation is where will Wolfe and other Soros associates secretly meet with him to give him his marching orders. I can hardly stand the suspense. Perhaps the old Nazi himself will give the Messiah an audience. Now wouldn’t that be grand.

  65. Wbboei, your viewpoint is entirely justified and rational. We hope we are not the ones irrationally walking on the sunny side of the street while storm clouds bring down dams.

    Van Susteren and Krauthammer feed our hope:

  66. This is about right, except for his shot at NumbersUSA. I am not sure he understands their position. These children are not professional victims, like Sharpton and Jackson create for hard cash in their pockets. These children have been placed in harms way by the policies of the big media beloved messiah, and the parents who have abandoned them. They are victims, and Beck is right to recognize this. If we need to punish someone, then punish the conniving big media beloved messiah, for one more element in this twelve point plan to destroy this nation.
    ————–
    Neil Stevens at Red State:

    I see a pattern in the online debates over Glenn Beck’s plan to bring a few thousand hot meals to children sent alone to to the US from Mexico. Anytime someone defends the practice, his critics get derailed in a massive non sequitur, beginning to argue about the gravity of the illegal immigration crisis, the economics of illegal immigration, and other related topics. The net effect is to say or to imply that the defender of Glenn Beck is simply wrong on illegal immigration.

    The fact is, Glenn Beck’s actions are right or wrong independent of the correct policy on illegal immigration, and the entire debate is indicative of a moral decay that extreme leftists have injected into our rhetoric. We need to throw off their influence, now.

    Let’s get this out of the way now. The President and his party have no regard for the people of Mexico. We saw that with the Fast and Furious scandal, and we see it now with their unguarded, reckless rhetoric that, as Beck himself has said, “engineered a humanitarian crisis in order to advance progressive policies on illegal immigration.” It’s amoral political posturing, degrading the rule of law and creating a horrible situation.

    Further, the parents of these kids should be locked up. They’re putting their kids at risk of serious harm or even death, in order to game a political system. They are using their children for personal gain. It’s just a shame that, to borrow from Golda Meir, they don’t love their children more than they love the idea of moving to America.

    But as much as we see these two forces at play, and understand what they are, that doesn’t change the fact that it’s happening. The crisis may be engineered, but the kids are real, and enduring this parental abandonment to be made into political pawns by American Democrats, and into a ticket to social bennies by their own parents.

    These children are victims. They aren’t incentivized to do anything, they are powerless to make decisions here, and they are far from home with nobody to love them. That we would even debate whether we would show compassion for these kids, is a sign of how far down the road of Malthusian dehumanization that the pied pipers of the anti-immigration movement have led us.

    I’ve long urged conservatives to ignore the group NumbersUSA. The group is good at tricking conservatives into adopting their propaganda, twisting our natural desire for rule of law into their Malthusian push for an extreme anti-immigration policy. The group’s founder, Roy Beck, is a long-time green left ‘journalist’ whose works, their website brags, are used by UN groups, including the pro-abortion and forced-sterilization UN Population Fund.

    In their minds, it’s still 1970, and we’re still pretending that Malthusian doom is right around the corner, only they don’t seem to realize that Jonathan Swift was not serious when he proposed sacrificing children to achieve our policy aims.

    Dehumanization is a core element of the NumbersUSA program. Illegal aliens to them aren’t people, they’re overpopulation. They’re numbers, hence the name of the group. So they stand up against “anchor babies,” “chain migration,” and other policies that refer not to illegal immigration, but to legal rights given to babies born in the United States of America, surely as native as I am born in Long Beach. Fundamentally, NumbersUSA wants you to stop thinking of immigrants as people like you or I.

    It’s perfectly alright to be angry about illegal immigration. At my high school growing up, by far the largest club in my school was MEChA, a student group of the same racist, socialist agenda as La Raza. Hundreds of students would gather at my school to celebrate the prospect of reversing the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo with a passion for replacing the American government in the southwest with a racist regime of “Aztlan.”

    It’s absolutely natural to get furious when reading stories like those in Victor Davis Hanson’s Mexifornia, of rootless migrant farmers who disrespect everything and everyone in this country, because they’re only staying until they get their money, and then go back home.

    But the kids Glenn Beck is feeding aren’t criminals. They aren’t ideologues. They aren’t racists seeking the overthrow of the United States government. They’re victims of that kind of ideology, abandoned by their parents to The Cause.

    What’s done is done. Barack Obama has made his choices. The parents of these kids made their choices. We can either join in the dehumanization of these children, like the progressives, like the Mexican radicals, and like the Earth Day greenie weenies at NumbersUSA. Or we can draw a line, and say “No, on our side of the border, there is human dignity.”

    We’re not talking about giving them the vote, or in-state tuition, or a ‘path to citizenship.’ Though as effective refugees of a mass movement of parental abandonment in Mexico, they may have a case for those, under existing legal immigration law. This isn’t about Comprehensive Immigration Reform. This is about helping kids who are victims of a nasty political fight.

    Mitt Romney in 2012 ran on a program of removing benefits to illegal immigration, enforcing laws already on the books, to create an environment removing the magnet of illegal immigration, and causing those already here to self-deport. But that’s not applicable to children.

    What are we supposed to do? Drop them off at a bus stop in Mexicali or Tijuana? I don’t know, but tonight, we can give them a hamburger, a blanket, and a safe place to sleep. That’s not politics. That’s basic human dignity that conservatives have always stood up for against the alliance of green and progressive radicals.

  67. I wonder if Greta is thinking this thing through. Now that Judicial Watch has taken Obama to court and two judges have shown some inclination to get to the truth, the last thing those seeking the truth should demand is a special prosecutor, who will be appointed by the administration, and will give the people who have the answers to say I cannot comment on a continuing investigation. I suspect Andy McCarthy would agree with me on this point. To repeat, Greta, who I know wants to get to the bottom of this is making a major tactical error in telling Obama to tell Holder to appoint a special prosecutor. That ship has sailed.

  68. Wbboei you are correct about this special prosecutor business. But just to be safe we do need to clear up some confusion about special prosecutors which we hear all the time from many sources.

    First, the calls for Eric Holder to appoint a special prosecutor are misplaced because as you point out it is the corrupt Eric Holder that would appoint said special prosecutor. An Eric Holder appointed special prosecutor would be as corrupt as Eric Holder and the Justice Department.

    Second, a special prosecutor appointed by the courts is the way to go. Here is some background on what Clinton appointee Judge Sullivan did:

    http://observer.com/2014/06/breaking-meet-emmet-sullivan-irs-judge-who-once-sicced-a-special-prosecutor-on-doj/

    Emmet G. Sullivan, a graduate of Howard University and Howard Law who was appointed by President Clinton, is one of the heroes of my new book, Licensed to Lie: Exposing Corruption in the Department of Justice. Judge Sullivan ordered an independent investigation of the Department of Justice, which revealed its corrupted prosecution of United States Senator Ted Stevens.

    In the book, I write, “An experienced trial judge, Sullivan was a distinguished man and widely held in high regard. He was no ordinary federal judge; he had worked hard all his life on several different courts and had been appointed by three presidents representing both political parties. . . . He had great respect for the rule of law and strived to apply it equally and fairly in all cases in his courtroom.”

    In the Stevens case, Judge Sullivan publicly upbraided the government lawyers before an overflow courtroom, “In nearly 25 years on the bench, I’ve never seen anything approaching the mishandling and misconduct that I’ve seen in this case. . . . When the government does not meet its obligations to turn over evidence, the system falters.”

    Judge Sullivan was taking the extraordinary step of appointing a special prosecutor. He chose highly respected DC attorney Henry Schuelke III to investigate the prosecutors for possible criminal charges. The judge ordered the department to preserve all of its files, electronic correspondence—everything—and cooperate fully in the investigation, including providing Schuelke access to investigative files and all witnesses.

    Sidney Powell worked in the Department of Justice for 10 years and was lead counsel in more than 500 federal appeals. She served nine US Attorneys from both political parties and is the author of Licensed to Lie: Exposing Corruption in the Department of Justice.

    Are Judge Sullivan and/or Judge Walton made of the same stern stuff as Judge John J. Sirica?

  69. Watch Obama’s locution whenever he is challenged or asked to explain something that went wrong.

    I was reading the latest issue of Imprimus, and came across this insight from a doctor who spent time interviewing murderers:

    “It was in prison that I first learned I should listen carefully, not only to what people said, but how they said it. I noticed how, for example, murderers who had stabbed someone, always said of the fatal moment–“the knife went in”.

    This was an interesting locution, because it implied that it was THE KNIFE THAT GUIDED THE HAND, RATHER THAN THE HAND THAT GUIDED THE KNIFE.

    This sort of locution serves to absolve the culprit of responsibility for his act. It also serves to persuade his audience that that something other than his actions led to the death of the victim.”

    Now tell me that is not exactly what Obama does, to the thunderous applause of big media? I can assure you, it is exactly that. Everyone in his administration, including the late Mr. Carney merely followed Obama’s lead.

  70. Another part of Obama’s constant invocation and appeal to the lowest common denominator, the hatred of whitey, the flames of which have been fanned by those in his party as well, from Dean and Pelosi and Van Hollen, to name three. This quote from Shakespeare’s play King Lear, by the evil son of the Earl of Gloucester:

    “This is the excellent foppery of the world: that when we are sick in fortune–often surfeit of our own behavior, we make guilty of our disasters the sun, the moon and the stars;

    As if we were villains by necessity; fools by heavenly compulsion; knaves and thieves by spherical predominance; drunkards liars by enforced obedience to planetary influence; and that we are all evil by divine thrusting on.

    An admirable evasion of whoremaster man, to lay his goatish disposition at the charge of a star.”

    That said, I submit that the false charges of racism propounded by big media (NBC and CNN in particular–a white Hispanic, etc.), and the Obama administration are of the same ilk. Apolgologist dismiss this as energizing their base. Truth tellers regard it for what it too often is: the big lie, which is part and parcel of the democrat platform–and now as we see in Mississippi the opposing party as well. Were it not so, then Rence Priebus would have been all over this, and would not need to have been prodded by the Missouri party chairman And we know that Haley Barbour who is one of the key members of their policy committee was the evil architect.

  71. admin
    July 11, 2014 at 1:37 pm
    ————-
    Thank you for clearing up my confusion on that important point.

  72. I should have known that because I did know that a federal appellate judges were the ones who appointed Ken Starr as special prosecutor with a little noodge from then Sentor Jesse Helms. That is different than the case at bar. My only point is to acknowledge yours. And your point is better than Greta’s because she wants Holder to do it, and if he does not she wants Obama to take action. Put differently, by the same logic as Sullivan used to appoint a court supervised special prosecutor to investigate politically inspired abuses in the justice department, because the executive branch cannot be relied on to investigate itself, a judge who is confronted with politically inspired abuses in the IRS should follow the same course, and not allow Holder to take over the investigation. As noted, he had his chance, and now that ship has sailed.

  73. Sullivan is a fine judge, and I am sure he elevates the law over politics. Still, it must be some relief from the hailstorm of politics, which engulfed a weaker man by the name of John Roberts, to know that the wife of the man who appointed him has stated that the IRS investigation should go on, notwithstanding Obama’s assurance which was bought by big media that there is not a smidgeon of corruption before circling the wagons.

  74. Perhaps I am being too tough on Obama. Arguably it is unfair to expect a president who scoffs at state efforts to protect their citizens without realizing that his own federal border people are 50 miles back from the front line. How could anyone that ignorant known anything worth knowing, except for the time, date and place of his next fundraiser. Or the next liason with big media who is always willing to suck his cock.

  75. Holy Smokes, $6k/month, tax free to parent illegal children???

    I betcha that will encourage a lot of spanish speaking folks, legal or illegal to rake in that coin.

    Ah, where is that money going to come from?

    Us tax payers…keep running on that hamster wheel.

    Is that why Berry needs almost 4 Billion to cover this ‘crisis’? Only 100,000 will be used on the borders.

    True, we will have to pay for their healthcare, their housing, food, clothes, entertainment and college.

  76. Connecting the dots…

    …between just listening to what was said at the Senate hearings by Jeh Johnson and Sylvia Burwell as they tried to explain the muddled mess that is supposed to be the O admin “plan” to save “the children” and simultaneously make some feeble attempt to protect our borders…then

    considering what Foxy says, I believe, correctly nails at:

    foxyladi14
    July 11, 2014 at 10:59 am

    then digesting what Wbboei is sayin in general, and specifically regarding the complete ignorance of O and what really is going on at the borders he won’t go to and in the past made stupid, uneducated jokes about:

    wbboei
    July 11, 2014 at 10:02 am

    then taking into consideration the motivation for all of this from the information Admin posted at:

    admin

    July 11, 2014 at 11:27 am
    History lessons:

    *************

    and then finally just using our own common sense to see that these “children” are being used by the O Admin as pawns to secure all the motivation factors stated above…that these kids were essentially invited in by O and then the cartels take over with getting the kids on the journey here…and then the kids end up warehoused in ‘detention’ camps until O can SUDDENLY wrangle $ 4 Billion dollars to start ‘laundering’ to various “contracts” (that will benefit greatly and be higly rewarded with taxpayer money) …contracts that will create more and more “beds”, housing, medical care, schooling, food, all kinds of benefits…

    …following that trail…it becomes very clear…and now even AA O supporters are starting to wake up…everyone is starting to understand how this is hitting our “home”

    finally…I woke up listening to Washington Journal this morning and one of the segments was asking callers how they felt about the borders and to offer their solutions…

    and almost every call, including democrats and calls from AA, want the borders closed…they want the national guard there and the borders secured…

    something really interesting going on with O’s plan…I think it is backfiring…we all know there is no limit to the arrogance of O and his crew…they thought they had the American people in the bag on this ‘immigration’ issue…

    I think they have overplayed their hand…they are losing control of the situation…and the “people” – Americans – are starting to “get it” and they are turning on O…he is even ‘succeeding’ in turning AA against the hispanic community…

    I guess O never considered that Americans might want to put their own struggling house in order before they started letting chaos take over…that Americans might want to help others but they can’t help others when they are still in such need…

    but O and his crew just want to keep jumping from one thing to another…and screwing them all up…

    …no wonder O wants to get out of town…his gig is up…it is full of holes and falling apart

  77. btw…caught a bit of an interview Harris Faulkner was having with a reporter from ‘The Hill’ and finally I heard someone ask out loud a question that I have been wondering about…

    she asked “how did Pres O go from about to ask for $ 2 BILLION US taxpayer dollars to within 6 days that increasing to $ 4 BILLION and counting…?”

    and the reporter said that in the backrooms, many repubs also support coming up with this money…and don’t want to be tagged with being against the kids, etc…

    ….however based on the discussion some of us are having here…it seems obvious that the bumped to $4 Billion to make the pie bigger to carve up for the upcoming “contracts” with various agencies to take care of the kids and then get them settled…

    so it appears that the $ 4 Billion (and counting) is meant to spread around to give both sides of the aisle money to play with…

    another ‘never let a good crisis go to waste”

    **********************************

    the other thing that is blaring to me is how this is another example of O “having no idea this could happen”…just like all the other instances of him and his admin getting caught flat footed with things that just suddenly happened and they had no idea…

    doesn’t that make you feel safe? according to O’s Jeh J and Burwell, this thing happened so suddenly that they will soon be out of money to house these kids…

    so my point is…makes you wonder about whatever else is out there that the O admin is going to get caught flat footed on that they have no idea would be happening…

    with O just hanging out with the people and drinking and chatting and ready to go on a two week vacation…not even interested enough to go to the borders to see for himself how bad this is…what else are the bad guys planning knowing they can so easily take advantage of this unfocused and detached O admin…the bad guys must just regale in seeing O just playing around out of washington with the folks…

    what a ripe opening for who knows what…hannity last night reported from the border that they have apprehended people trying to get in from Syria, etc at the borders…

    We look so shallow and stupid to the rest of the world…and O looks like an immature, irresponsible, flippant and petulant…boob…

  78. The glorious messiah’s defense mechanisms won’t help the border crisis. On the contrarty they stand in the way. The roots are psychological, as I have said innumerable times here before. He is a stone cold narcissist. But now, a qualified medical expert advances that diagnosis for public consumption. He never gets quite to I am, but as no drama obama completes the arc of his acting out stage, more people will see it. Today they are still blinded by big media. According to Rassmaussen today 45% still approve of his job performance. Yesterday two friends of mine, who are connoseuirs of big media told me that we are out of the recession. I told them that was a hypertechincal statement since 2 out of 5 people of working age are not working. They told me that they did not know that. It is not that they live in Potemkin Village, it is the fact that big media censors that information.
    ————————

    By Dr. Manny Alvarez

    U.S. President Barack Obama makes a statement on the border crisis after his meeting with Texas Governor Rick Perry (not seen) in Dallas July 9, 2014. (REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque)

    During his five years in the White House, President Obama has mastered a great talent: the art of the primitive defense mechanism.

    For ages, psychologists have studied the innate ability of humans to create common defense mechanisms to avoid dealing with their problems.

    And if you look at the actions taken by President Obama during his tenure in office, they all have classic aspects of someone who prefers to deal with American issues from a defensive standpoint.

    Here are some examples of the president’s favorites:

    Denial

    Denial is the refusal to accept reality or fact, and people use it to avoid dealing with the problem at hand when they are being confronted. Crisis after crisis (and there have been some major crises over the past five years), the president never acknowledges the problem. He doesn’t accept the facts. A perfect example of this denial is the current immigration crisis we have at the border. It was a problem when he took office, but his denial of the issue has made it into a humanitarian catastrophe.

    Acting out

    Every solution that the president brings forward lacks one simple component: a frank discussion. It seems when he does decide to tackle a problem, no one else can have an opinion other than his own, and that he has been born with the God-given ability to always make the right choice. This is why he has acted out by threatening the American public with his “pen and his phone” – meaning he will take executive action if Congress fails to act on his legislative agenda.

    Dissociation

    The president seems disconnected from the very real problems that are happening in the world. He does not acknowledge that there are some valid points being made by many moderate conservatives, and he doesn’t acknowledge the failures in his foreign policies. Is the world safer today than it was five years ago? I can hardly imagine any human being on this planet who would agree with that. The Middle East is a disaster, Central American countries are in disarray, the African continent is falling into radical Islam, Russia has invaded a neighboring country – and yet, the president seems disconnected from all this chaos that is ensuing.

    So, to me, this border controversy is very clear: The problem falls at the feet of the president, not Congress. He created this mess by denying it, dissociating himself from it, and now, the only thing he knows how to do is act out. And what he wants is money – but money will not yield any positive solutions to the problem. Not one.

    I agree with many of his supporters that we must comfort those innocent children who have been caught in this mess created by the very people that should be caring for them. But at the same time, there are many American children who also need help, and right now, they deserve the president’s attention too.

    So here’s an idea, Mr. President: If you’re looking for $3.7 billion dollars, why don’t you take some money from the more than $500 million you give to Mexico in foreign aid that comes out of my pocket. And while you’re at it, take some from the more than $500 million that goes to Colombia. Then take some from the millions upon millions in aid that we send to the Middle East, and before you know it, you might just have some real money to throw at this border crisis.

    Dr. Manny Alvarez serves as Fox News Channel’s Senior Managing Editor for Health News.

  79. In summertime at Annapolis the uniform of the day on Sundays was service dress whites with high colors gold buttons and white suade shoes.

    In summertime at Annapolis the noon meal (what civilians call lunch) was rigatoni beef casserole with mozzara cheese.

    In summertime at Annapolis, it was not unusual for an upper classman to ask a plebe who is horsecock Harry?

    The proper response was Horsecock Harry was the meanest roughest toughest son of a bitch that ever stoked a navy boiler.

    Annapolis was male only in those days.

    And it was incumbent upon the plebe while carrying on in this manner to pound the table so hard as to cause rigatoni beef casserole to fly in all directions leaving tomato stains on those service dress whites as a tribute to a rare form of military intelligence.

    Obama is horsecock Harry, and that is why big media falls on their knees to support him.

  80. Update II: Well at least one person agrees with us – Obama’s law professor: There’s a “very high risk” that a federal court is going to gut ObamaCare. How big is Halbig? Big, big, big, says Lawrence Tribe from his feathery perch at Harvard:

    Obamacare could take another spin in front of the Supreme Court – with vastly uncertain consequences.

    Harvard legal scholar Laurence H. Tribe warned Tuesday of a “very high risk” that a crucial aspect of Obamacare – its government subsidies provision – could fall victim to a major legal challenge being mounted by conservatives. That is why, he also said, that the Supreme Court will almost certainly get “a second bite of the apple” in determining the fate of President Obama’s signature health law, with uncertain consequences.

    Tribe, 72, a prominent proponent of the Affordable Care Act – who taught both Obama and Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts as constitutional law students at Harvard Law School years ago – warned of the ACA’s prospects for surviving intact during an exclusive, hour-long interview in New York with editors of The Fiscal Times. [snip]

    “It looks like the panel is quite divided over what to do with what might [have been] an inadvertent error in the legislation or might have been quite deliberate,” Tribe said. “But it’s very specific that only people that go onto a state exchange are eligible for the subsidies. And if that becomes the ultimate holding of the U.S. Supreme Court, where this is likely to end up – that’s going to have massive practical implications for the administrability of Obamacare.”

    “I don’t have a crystal ball,” Tribe said in discussing the law’s chances should it reach the Supreme Court for yet another critical review. “But I wouldn’t bet the family farm on this coming out in a way that preserves Obamacare.

    Tribe, whose new book, Uncertain Justice, takes a deep dive into the Roberts court, said the plaintiffs make a strong argument. The legislative language is clear, he said, that the subsidies apply to exchanges established by states. Yet in drafting the law, Tribe said the administration “assumed that state exchanges would be the norm and federal exchanges would be a marginal, fallback position” – though it didn’t work out that way for a plethora of legal, administrative and political reasons.

    Holy Kalamazoo Batman! Tribe guessed right in the earlier ObamaCare case about his former law student upholding ObamaCare but now Tribe is um, like Elizabeth Warren in other ways, off the reservation by saying the law is “very specific” and possibly trying to open a shut door for Roberts to walk through:

    Tribe suggested that the case will, like the individual mandate challenge before it, hinge on Chief Justice John Roberts’s decision. “He would be asking himself the hard question: ‘Is it so clear under existing law that it has to be construed in this literal and somewhat bizarre way . . . that subsidies or tax credits cannot be provided on the federal exchanges, or is it sufficiently ambiguous that it gives me the necessary legal wiggle room’ [to side with the administration once again?]” Tribe said.

    Forbes contributor Jeffrey Dorman notes that a recent ruling in a case involving the Environmental Protection Agency could make it harder for Roberts to conclude that he has that wiggle room.

    “The power of executing the laws necessarily includes both authority and responsibility to resolve some questions left open by Congress that arise during the law’s administration. But it does not include a power to revise clear statutory terms that turn out not to work in practice,” Justice Antonin Scalia wrote in an opinion that Roberts joined in full.

    So Tribe thinks the law is “very specific” and also thinks the question for Roberts is “Is it so clear under existing law” – it’s almost as if Tribe is answering himself and making the case for Roberts – shutting, opening, then shutting the door again.

    As Halbig goes big time, Judge Walton hit the IRS over the head today as he prepares to crush the IRS soon:

    A federal judge Friday gave the IRS one week to hand over details on Lois Lerner’s crashed hard drive and how to track it, the second federal judge in as many days to seek more information about the elusive emails.

    Judge Reggie Walton of the U.S. District Court of the District of Columbia ordered the the tax agency to find out by July 18 what happened to the crashed hard drive responsible for erasing two years worth of the former IRS official’s emails, including whether it’s traceable through a serial number.

    If such information is gone, the judge wants an affidavit written under penalty of perjury by an IRS IT professional with “firsthand knowledge” of the situation. [snip]

    Walton did not rule on the request for expedited discovery or injunction relief — both of which the government argued were not necessary.

    Instead he ordered more information due by next Friday, including a rundown of TIGTA’s qualifications for the probe, a date when it will be completed and the qualifications of individuals who “previously conducted forensic examinations or otherwise attempted to recover information” from Lerner’s computer.

    I still would want to know the expertise of the individuals doing the investigation, and also why the hard drive can’t be identified,” Walton said.

    It is unclear when Walton will rule on the potential of appointing an outside forensic specialist.”

    “Now we’re cooking with peanut oil” as the Duck man says. For now, we’re staying on the sunny side of the street with galoshes on and an umbrella handy.

    ————————————————————————–

  81. That peanut oil is starting to smolder, finally someone is talking to IT experts on what kind of information to ask for and the qualificatons of those IT folks.

    ’bout frickin’ time someone intelligent is stepping up to the plate!

    …Judge Reggie Walton of the U.S. District Court of the District of Columbia ordered the the tax agency to find out by July 18 what happened to the crashed hard drive responsible for erasing two years worth of the former IRS official’s emails, including whether it’s traceable through a serial number.

    If such information is gone, the judge wants an affidavit written under penalty of perjury by an IRS IT professional with “firsthand knowledge” of the situation. [snip]

  82. I got a little curious for a bit more info on who Judge Reggie Walton is…

    Reggie Barnett Walton
    February 8, 1949 (age 65)

    very interesting…appointed by Ronald Reagan, Bush, Sr, Bush Jr and John Roberts

    …he was a Judge for the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court

    and one of his cases:

    United States v. Libby

    Main article: United States v. Libby

    Walton also presided over the trial of Vice President Dick Cheney’s former chief of staff, Scooter Libby. On March 6, 2007, the jury convicted Libby of four of the five counts with which he was charged: two counts of perjury, one of obstruction of justice, and one of making false statements to federal investigators. On June 5, 2007, Walton sentenced Libby to 30 months in federal prison and a fine of US$250,000, and, subsequently, he ordered that Libby report to jail without bail pending any appeals. On June 20, 2007, Libby appealed Walton’s ruling in federal appeals court. The next day, Walton filed a 30-page expanded ruling, in which he explained his decision to deny Libby bail in more detail.

    Further information: United States v. Libby § Sentencing and United States v. Libby § Libby ordered to jail pending appeal

    Walton received several threatening letters after pronouncing sentence on Libby.

    **********************************************

    this man sounds like a straight shooter…a man of convictions…

    I hope so…we need a hero…

  83. why don’t O and MO go on the road and raise the money for the humanitarian crisis?

    may as well…Sondra and her buddies alone could cover it…

    http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Barack-Obama-Michelle-Hollywood-dinner/2014/07/11/id/582139/

    Barack, Michelle Cordially Invite You for Dinner With Shonda Rhimes: Cost $25,000

    President Barack Obama is going Hollywood — again.

    And you don’t have to be a Tinseltown VIP to meet Obama and first lady Michelle face-to-face.

    But it will cost you – and big!

    On July 23, the president will attend a photo reception and dinner at the home of Shonda Rhimes, producer of the ABC medical drama “Grey’s Anatomy” and the political thriller “Scandal,” with “Scandal” star Kerry Washington hosting.

    The price for attending the photo reception and taking a photo with the president is $5,000 per person.

    For a mere $10,000, you can also sit down to dinner with Obama.

    Is Obama running again? Not exactly, but he is filling the coffers of the DNC.

    Earlier, on July 15, Michelle Obama will attend a small roundtable discussion and field questions for an hour. Attendance will set a guest back $5,000.

    Packages are also available. The $15,000 special includes attendance for two guests at the Michelle Obama roundtable and the July 23 reception and photo with the president.

    And the $25,000 package includes the first lady roundtable plus a seat at a small roundtable with President Obama on July 24.

    And for a tidy $32,000, two guests can attend the photo reception and dinner with the president, and one can claim a seat at the president’s roundtable on July 24.

    The July visit will reportedly be President Obama’s 18th fundraising trip to Los Angeles since he took office.

    In September, he appointed Rhimes to the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts Board of Directors.

    **********************************

    they have no shame at all…

  84. And the $25,000 package includes the first lady roundtable plus a seat at a small roundtable with President Obama on July 24.
    __________________________________

    That is more then my entire yearly income. 😯

  85. Admin: VERY IMPORTANT

    At this point, the influence of money on our political system is widely assumed. Some of us believe that said influence rises to the level of de facto control, whereas others believe that the American People can, and some day will rise up against the corrupt establishment, without the support of big media who is clearly in bed with them.

    For those of us who believe in the theory of control, the evidence to date has been largely antecdotal. Yes, we do know who gets money from what corporations, but that does not tell us how this system actually operates.

    Now, thanks to a friend of mine, a former Hillary supporter, and professor at Purdue, a new site has emerged which gives us the key to the kingdom–the mechanics of how the system of legal bribery actually operates.

    Here is the site in question: http://maplight.org/

    What we learn from this site is that lobbyists are the conduit for corporate money–which taken by itself is no surprise. That money is given to the leadership of one or both parties in both houses of congress. Since it takes more money to win a senate seat, and the term of office is longer, the contributions to senators is more.

    A bill is introduced to the floor which has been written by corporate or other special interests. Often the title, e.g Marketplace Fairness, belies its actual purpose. Leadership tells members how to vote on the bill. After they do so, and generally within five days, a corporate or special interest contribution of thousand(s) to several million dollars is made to the campaign of that official.

    Yes, it is that blatant. On one particular bill, that heroic liberal, that man of the people, that visage ripped from the druid figures of the Stonehenge, Honest Tom Harkin got greased to the tune of $5 million. Put a beard on this son of a bitch and he would look more like Lincoln that Obama. Obama on the other hand looks more like Franklin Marshall Davis, de mortium nil nisi bonum. And, it is no different for the other party.

    That, in a nutshell is the game. It explains, among other things, why the elites get their way 45% of the time, on issues where the American People are unalterably opposed, and why the American People get their way only 15% of the time, according to a recent Princeton study. It also explains why Larry Summers told Elizabeth Warren that insiders do not criticize insiders.

    Why bother with this? Don’t we have enough proof that we are not a democracy? Do we really need to know that contrary to the intentions of our founding fathers and mothers, the American People are now at the bottom of the food chain, and the only time anything good happens for them is if the elites can make money off it?

    Here is my reasoning. When big media attacks Hillary for being too close to Wall Street, people need to understand that all politicians are guilty of the same thing. Ergo, to the heart of the matter, in the event that the left mounts an Elizabeth Warren insurgency, based on the premise that she is an opponent of Wall Street, we may discover that when and if that happens, the conception is not nearly as immaculate as the left assumes, and that information can be used to destroy her candidacy, in ways that her false claims of Indian ancestry and gaming the affirmative action system, and ownership of a mansion that big media refuses to write about never could.

    And even if the best defense they can mount at that point is everyone is doing it, the false claim to ideological purity and trust buster will be discredited in a way that will sap her support at the grass roots level.

  86. S
    July 11, 2014 at 7:55 pm
    ————-
    He is very highly thought of by the Bar in general, and the lawyers who practice in front of him. Any attorney who tries to be slick, by engaging in a level of nuance and evasion that is characteristic of Obama, will find himself in contempt of court. My friend who was a senior partner at one of the top firms in Washington used to tell me over drinks that the most dangerous man in the country is a federal judge who concludes that you are lying to him, and you had better dust off your habeus corpus papers because you are likely to need them in short order. When the contempt power is used appropriately by a federal judge, justice is possible, where otherwise it would not be.

  87. foxyladi14
    July 12, 2014 at 11:31 am
    wbboei
    July 12, 2014 at 11:27 am
    ______________________________
    Thanks for the link Wbboei. 😀
    ———-
    You are welcome.

    The value of this information is obvious.

    You can argue until the cock crows that your candidate is a good candidate and get nowhere.

    To break the impasse, you should ask them who do they support–and why.

    The answer you are likely to get is utopian.

    And nothing will burst their balloon faster than concrete information like this, which proves that the object of their hearts desire, is a corporate shill as well.

    And when they fall back and say, they have to play the game in order to do good things for the people.

    You can tell them don’t be naive. He who pays the piper calls the tune.

  88. This is not a joke. This is a weird form of gay rights Muslim style:

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2014/07/11/Egyptian-Cleric-Muslim-Brotherhood-Sheiks-Issued-Fatwa-Permitting-Anal-Jihad

    An Egyptian cleric formerly known as the “preacher of the revolution” during the revolt against President Hosni Mubarak warned Egyptian television viewers this week that Muslim Brotherhood sheiks have issued a fatwa permitting “anal jihad” for terrorists far from their wives, which is exactly what it sounds like.

    In televised remarks on Egypt’s Al-Tahrir TV on June 26 and translated into English by the Middle East Media Research Institute, cleric Mazhar Shahin told his viewers that members of the Muslim Brotherhood were engaging in homosexual anal sex acts as a way to “wage jihad in the name of Allah.” It was a “new kind of jihad,” he explained, where “they practice homosexuality with one another, thinking, wrongly, that this constitutes jihad for the sake of Allah.” The acts are sanctioned if the jihadists are far from their wives. He does not explain how engaging in homosexual sex in private furthers the cause of establishing an Islamic caliphate – the goal of most mujahidin – but compares it with “sexual jihad,” an act he describes as when “somebody takes a woman and has sex with her because he is waging jihad.”

    The anal jihad “catastrophe,” he continued, was proof that “the (Muslim Brotherhood) is a bunch of hopeless and desperate peddlers who have reached a state of foolishness, stupidity, filth, and so on, to the highest imaginable degree.” He emphasizes multiple times that this is not just deviant behavior performed by individuals straying from jihadist ideals, but rather, behavior sanctioned by Muslim Brotherhood sheiks. “Their sheiks permit them to do these things. This is despicable, foolish, and asinine,” he concludes.

    The excuse of “somebody takes a woman and has sex with her because he is waging jihad” is what the civilized world calls rape.

  89. Agree with this comment 😀

    Obama never wanted to govern, that’s why he never ran for Governor. He wanted to vote present, that’s why he ran for Present-I-din’t… as in I din’t do it… them evil Tea parties caused it!

    NiteOwl on July 11, 2014 at 4:25 PM

Comments are closed.