Truth Has No Agenda (GB)

Radical Liberal Progressive Left

Column: Mounting controversies are all about trust

[MyWayNews.com]

Jun 10, 10:51 AM (ET)

By LIZ SIDOTI

Barack ObamaWASHINGTON (AP) – As a candidate, Barack Obama vowed to bring a different, better kind of leadership to the dysfunctional capital. He’d make government more efficient, accountable and transparent. He’d rise above the “small-ball” nature of doing business. And he’d work with Republicans to break Washington paralysis.

You can trust me, Obama said back in 2008. And – for a while, at least – a good piece of the country did.

But with big promises often come big failures – and the potential for big hits to the one thing that can make or break a presidency: credibility.

A series of mounting controversies is exposing both the risks of political promise-making and the limits of national-level governing while undercutting the core assurance Obama made from the outset: that he and his administration would behave differently.

The latest: the government’s acknowledgement that, in a holdover from the Bush administration and with a bipartisan Congress’ approval and a secret court’s authorization, it was siphoning the phone records of millions of American citizens in a massive data-collection effort officials say was meant to protect the nation from terrorism. This came after the disclosure that the government was snooping on journalists.

(more…)


US attorney, Obama ally takes heat for handling of leak probes

[FoxNews.com]

Published May 24, 2013

U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Ronald Machen Jr. (AP)

While Attorney General Eric Holder is taking heat for his department’s seizure of reporter records, the U.S. attorney who is personally overseeing those investigations is himself starting to face complaints that he’s gone too far in pursuing leaks.

Ronald Machen Jr., the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, was nominated by President Obama in 2009 and now runs the biggest federal prosecutor office in the country. His hundreds of attorneys handle everything from gang violence to corruption.

But in recent years, leak investigations have become a hallmark of his portfolio. And his dogged pursuit of the squeaky wheels in government has led him into the tenuous — and some say unprecedented — territory of lumping in leakers with journalists.

(more…)


Gov’t Official Put on Leave After Benghazi Finally Breaks His Silence and Levels Big Charges

[TheBlaze.com]

May. 21, 2013 10:26am – by  Becket Adams

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. (Getty Images)

Raymond Maxwell, one of four State Department employees recently disciplined by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, made headlines this month for penning slightly cryptic verses critical of the agency’s handling of the Sept. 11, 2012, terrorist attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi.

And now Maxwell, who was placed on forced “administrative leave” despite his claim had no role in consulate-related security issues, is back in the news for ditching the poetry and outright accusing former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton of making him the Benghazi scapegoat.

(more…)


Will U.S. Designate Egypt, Pakistan, Iraq and Nigeria As Religious Freedom Violators?

[CNSNews.com]

May 20, 2013 By Patrick Goodenough

Pakistan-christiansPakistani Christians protest against the country’s blasphemy laws and violence targeting their minority community. An independent U.S. watchdog has urged the executive branch every year since 2002 to designate Pakistan as a “country of particular concern” over religious freedom violations. (AP Photo)

(CNSNews.com) – As the State Department prepares to release its annual report on international religious freedom Monday, a key issue for many Americans concerned about religious persecution is whether it will blacklist a handful of particularly egregious violators – or, as in previous years, ignore the recommendations of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom.

The question is especially sensitive in the case of countries where the plight of minority Christians has worsened, even as their governments benefit significantly at the cost of U.S. taxpayers.

Among the religious freedom violators are four of the top ten recipients of U.S. foreign aid in fiscal year 2013 – Egypt, Pakistan, Iraq and Nigeria. Another is Vietnam, whose communist government has seen its diplomatic and economic ties with the U.S. improve dramatically over the past seven years.

On Monday, Secretary of State John Kerry will release the administration’s report on the state of religious freedom around the world in 2012, a requirement under the International Religious Freedom Act (IRFA), which sought to enhance the importance of religious freedom in the pursuit of U.S. foreign policy.

The primary tool available to the executive branch under the 1998 legislation is the designation of “countries of particular concern” (CPCs) – those whose authorities either commit or are judged to tolerate violations of religious freedom. CPCs are subject to U.S. sanctions or other measures designed to prod governments to improve.

Currently designated CPCs are Burma, China, Eritrea, Iran, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, and Uzbekistan.

But a handful of other countries deserve to be on the list too, in the view of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), an independent body established under the IRFA, comprising unpaid commissioners appointed by congressional leaders and the administration.

When it released its own yearly report three weeks ago, the USCIRF pressed for Egypt, Iraq, Nigeria, Pakistan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Vietnam to be designated CPCs.

In some of those cases, the recommendation has been disregarded for years.

Pakistan, home to some of the world’s most notorious blasphemy laws, has evaded CPC status despite USCIRF recommendation every year since 2002, as have Turkmenistan since 2000, Egypt since 2011, Nigeria since 2009, and Tajikistan since last year.

The other two, Iraq and Vietnam, were both previous designated CPCs. The Bush administration removed Iraq in 2004, following the fall of Saddam Hussein regime; and Vietnam in 2006, citing improvements as a result of active lobbying of the communist authorities in Hanoi.

Each year since 2008 the USCIRF has recommended that Iraq be returned to the CPC list. In the case of Vietnam, the commission never agreed with its delisting, and has recommended its return every year since, also to no avail.

Last week House Foreign Affairs Committee chairman Rep. Ed Royce (R-Calif.) introduced legislation calling on the administration to relist Vietnam as a CPC, citing authorities’ refusals to grant legal recognition to churches, as well as assaults, harassment, imprisonment and home destructions targeting Christians.

Last year’s State Department report on international religious freedom referred to “continued reports of abuses of religious freedom” in Vietnam and said that then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and other senior State Department officials “raised religious freedom concerns with government officials and called for continued improvements in religious freedom.”

Those diplomatic efforts did not appear to have had any effect, however: The report also noted that Hanoi “did not demonstrate a trend toward either improvement or deterioration in respect for and protection of the right to religious freedom.”

A Government Accountability Office (GAO) report earlier this year examining compliance with the IRFA noted tensions between the USCIRF and State Department as each has sought to do its respective job.

The report prompted USCIRF chair Katrina Lantos Swett to underline in a letter to the GAO that the commission’s “mandate is neither to conduct diplomacy nor balance religious freedom against other U.S. national interests.”

Swett said the USCIRF recognized that its role “sometimes poses a challenge for the State Department” – but also noted that “at times, our findings draw the ire of offending governments that would prefer their shortcomings remain hidden.”


Wait Until You Hear Who the Turkish Prime Minister Reportedly Invited to Join His Entourage During U.S. Visit

[TheBlaze.com]

Erdogan-Obama-Getty-620x389Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and President Barack Obama hold press conference at the White House May 16, 2013 (Photo: Saul Loeb / AFP / Getty Images)

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan allegedly invited a special personal guest to accompany him on his visit to the U.S. this week.

According to Turkish media, the father of one of the radical Islamist activists killed in Israel’s raid on the Mavi Marmara in 2010 (the Gaza flotilla) was included as an invited guest in the prime minister’s delegation in the hopes he might be able to meet President Barack Obama.

Furkan Dogan, a 19-year-old with both Turkish and U.S. citizenship, joined the Gaza flotilla where he expressed his desire for “martyrdom.” His father now wants the U.S. government to sue Israel over the raid in which the IDF says its forces were defending themselves from what appeared to them to be an organized attack launched by passengers armed with knives and metal bars as the commandos boarded the ship.

Today’s Zaman reports:

Ahmet Dogan, who asked Erdogan to deliver a letter to US President Barack Obama, joined Erdogan’s delegation upon a request by the Turkish prime minister.

Dogan said Erdogan told him: “I can give this letter [to him], but it is better if you give the letter to him yourself. I will include you among the members of the official delegation.” Dogan also said the prime minister told him he should meet with Obama if they can arrange an appointment with him. The victim’s father said he described Furkan and wrote about his son’s life in the letter.

It’s unknown if the father’s letter was delivered to Obama or if he actually met the President during the trip. That the radical activist’s father was with the prime minister’s entourage was not addressed during the joint Obama-Erdogan press conference Thursday or at the White House or State Department briefings of the past few days.

Furkan Dogan, along with eight Turkish activists, was killed in a battle with Israeli commandos who boarded the ship to enforce the naval blockade on Gaza, instituted after Palestinian terrorists were caught smuggling heavy weapons to the territory by ship.

Flotilla organizers claimed they were on a humanitarian mission, but an Israeli think tank reported that seven of the nine passengers killed had professed a desire to die as “martyrs” before the boat set sail to Gaza. Radical Muslim terrorists and their supporters often glorify the idea of martyrdom for Allah, achieved via jihad.

The Jerusalem Post cited the Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center which reported a month after the raid that eight of the nine passengers killed were members of the IHH, a Turkish group that calls itself humanitarian but which the Israeli government along with some U.S. and European lawmakers characterize as radical Islamist in nature. The State Department has not included the IHH on its list of terrorist groups.

According to the Israeli think tank report, a Turkish newspaper printed this quote from 19-year-old Furqan Dogan’s diary, in which he said he wanted to be a martyr, providing strong evidence his intentions were not peaceful: “These are the last hours before I join the sweet experience of being a shahid (martyr). Is there anything more beautiful than this?”

On his visit to Israel in March, President Obama convinced Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to issue an apology to Turkey for the killing of the flotilla activists and to offer financial compensation for those killed. In exchange, Turkey was supposed to promise to drop any legal suits against the Israeli servicemen involved.

Ever since the apology, Turkey has appeared to backtrack on the deal personally brokered by Obama. Earlier this week, lawyers for the Turks killed filed a complaint against Israel at the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague. That venue is chosen when parties seek investigations of war crimes, genocide or crimes against humanity.

Officially, the suit was referred to the court by Comoros, a small African country in which the Mavi Marmara was registered. Michael Rubin of Commentary Magazine suggests Erdogan wants “plausible deniability,” that it’s not the Turkish government filing the suit in defiance of Obama’s request.

Rubin reveals that the law firm behind the ICC filing employs one principal who is “a long-time AKP party [Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party] activist and the other has been intimately involved in the IHH.” Rubin writes:

Anyone who believes that Erdogan seeks to bury that hatchet more than rub salt into the wounds of the last two years needs only to consider the special guest whom he has had join his delegation.[…]

It is actually quite amazing: Erdogan has endorsed an Al Qaeda financier, embraced not only Hamas but the most militant faction within that terrorist organization, defended the Sudanese leader against charges of genocide, and has been the largest leak in multilateral efforts to sanction Iran. And yet, Obama will not only welcome him to the White House with the highest honors, but help fulfill the Turkish premier’s blatant desire to use the White House as the backdrop to follow through on his pledge to bash Israel at every opportunity.

Erdogan has already rejected a personal request from Secretary of State John Kerry to hold off on visiting the Gaza Strip. Positioned next to Obama, Erdogan used the White House backdrop Thursday to announce the June timeframe for his trip to meet with Hamas leaders in Gaza, a group the U.S. defines as a terrorist organization.

At the press conference, Obama emphasized his strong relations with the Turkish leader. “This visit reflects the importance that the United States places on our relationship with our ally, Turkey, and I value so much the partnership that I’ve been able to develop with Prime Minister Erdogan,” Obama said according to the White House transcript.

Just two days after Turkish citizens got the International Criminal Court to investigate a possible case against Israel, Obama took a moment to compliment Erdogan for the steps he’s taken to fulfill the arrangement Obama brokered between Israel and Turkey.

“Given our shared interest in peace, I want to note the Prime Minister’s efforts to normalize relations with Israel,” Obama said.

White  House Press Secretary Jay Carney said at his daily news briefing Tuesday, “Turkey is one of our strongest partners.”

Besides meeting Obama, Erdogan placed a foundation stone at a new Turkish-American cultural center in Maryland.

According to Hurriyet Daily News, Erdogan said the center reflects the “alliance of civilizations.”

“In a period marked by Islamophobia, this center will express the brotherhood showing how wrong [Islamophobia] is,” he said.


Roskam: Why Did You Tell the ABA About IRS Scandal Before Congress?

[Breitbart.com]

May 17, 2013


Former Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Acting Commissioner Steven Miller, who only took over in November and resigned this week at President Barack Obama’s behest, will testify before the House Ways and Means Committee Friday on his role in targeting Tea Party and conservative groups for audit or excessive review. 

Miller was the first senior IRS official to be disciplined in the scandal, though the problems began before he took over the IRS, and other senior officials were aware of the problem and appear to have misled Congress.

Though Miller’s resignation was reported as a decisive step by the president, his term had been due to expire in early June. Joseph Grant, had been appointed only several days before as Acting Commissioner of the IRS’s tax exempt and government entities division, has also resigned.

(more…)


Backfire: ABC, CNN, NBC Call for White House to Release Libya Emails

[Breitbart.com]

by John Nolte 15 May 2013, 4:34 AM PDT



***UPDATE: NBC’s senior White House correspondent joined the chorus Wednesday. On his MSNBC show, “The Daily Rundown,” Chuck Todd looked into the camera and said, “Attention White House: Release all the emails.” The headline has been updated to add NBC.

Assuming they are the ones who leaked to CNN an email written by Ben Rhoades (a Deputy National Security Advisor close to the President), the White House might have been too clever by half Tuesday. An act that was obviously meant to pour water on the Benghazi fire started by an ABC News report, has only ended up being gasoline. Now both CNN and ABC have joined conservative media in calling for the White House to release all the emails surrounding the editing of the CIA talking points.

Friday, in a bombshell report that blew the long-simmering Libya scandal wide open and right into the arms of the mainstream media, ABC’s Jonathan Karl reported that an email written by Rhoades specifically mentioned the State Department’s concerns about the CIA talking points. Here is how Karl transcribed the Rhoades’ email:

We must make sure that the talking points reflect all agency equities, including those of the State Department, and we don’t want to undermine the FBI investigation.  We thus will work through the talking points tomorrow morning at the Deputies Committee meeting.

(more…)


Kerry Pledges to ‘Leave No Stone Unturned’ on Benghazi Culpability

[CNSNews.com]

May 10, 2013

“I am absolutely determined that this issue will be answered, will be put to bed, and if there’s any culpability in any area that is appropriate to be handled in some way with some discipline, it will be appropriately handled,” he told reporters in Rome as he wrapped up a four-day foreign trip.

“But that judgment awaits me in a report that will be forthcoming, and I’m confident that any recent evidence will be a component of that consideration.”

Responding to questions about claims made during Wednesday’s congressional hearing on Benghazi, Kerry said, “The State Department will leave no stone unturned.”

“I’ve already made it crystal clear to the chairmen of the relevant [congressional] committees that I have assigned my chief of staff, David Wade, to be responsible for liaisoning with them to answer any questions that they have.”

Kerry said he had only “seen the most cursory headlines” about the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing and said he would need to get back to the U.S. before he could “catch up to the full measure of what took place.”

(more…)


Benghazi Hearing…

[FloppingAces.net]

By:

May 09, 2013

hicks benghaziWatching the Benghazi hearings and I’m struck with how the Democrats are trying to filibuster the testimony. One side seems to want to get the facts, one side seems to want to cover Hillary and Obama’s ass.

Sad…but not surprising.

The most important testimony is the fact that the “Foreign Emergency Support Team” was ordered to stand down

Also, Gregory N. Hicks, deputy chief of mission at the U.S. Embassy in Libya, was angry at the Susan Rice narrative, he let it be known that he was angry and was subsequently told to shut up.

What this all comes down to is that the United States was attacked and our ambassador and his protectors were denied help. Then the cover-up began.

And the cover-up is what always brings down the house of cards.

Click here for Video’s, tweets and updates to follow below: 
http://floppingaces.net/2013/05/08/benghazi-hearing/

(more…)


SEAL Team 6 Families to Blame Government For Deaths

[Infowars.com]

“Never before revealed information” to be aired at press conference

By Paul Joseph Watson
May 8, 2013

Seal-Team-6Families of the SEAL Team 6 members who were killed when their helicopter crashed in Afghanistan in August 2011 are set to give a press conference tomorrow during which they will hold the Obama administration partially responsible for the deaths of their sons.

With the administration already reeling over today’s Benghazi revelations, a press release on the ‘Tea Party Command Center’ website promises “never before revealed information” about the circumstances behind the incident.

“Accompanying the families of these dead Navy SEAL Team VI special operations servicemen will be retired military experts verifying their accounts of how and why the government is as much responsible for the deaths of their sons as is the Taliban,” states the press release.

(more…)


State Dept. Won’t Say Its Own Officials Set to Testify on Benghazi Are ‘Credible People’

[CNSNews.com]

May 6, 2013
By Penny Starr

BENGHAZI-SPECIAL MISSION-AP-HANNON_0The burnt-out interior of a building at the U.S. State Department Special Mission Compound in Benghazi, Libya on Sept. 13, 2012. (AP Photo/Mohammed Hannon)

(CNSNews.com) – When asked at a press briefing on Monday to say that two State Department officials set to testify in Congress on Wednesday about the Sept. 11, 2012 terrorist attack in Benghazi are “credible people,” State Department spokesman Patrick Ventrell would not do it.

The two officials are Greg Hicks, who was the deputy chief of mission at the U.S. Embassy in Libya, and Mark Thompson, who was the deputy coordinator for operations in the department’s counter-terrorism division.

“Before we get to the specifics of what they’re expected to testify, I wonder if you could provide us with your assessment of the caliber of these two individuals,” James Rosen of Fox News asked Ventrell. “Are they credible? They’ve been working at fairly senior posts here and abroad for years and years. I wonder first what thoughts the Department has about the caliber of these two individuals.”

(more…)


Why did no one object to the “Pentagon mosque”?

[Salon.com]

pentagon-mosqueMuslims have been praying inside the Pentagon since Sept. 11 but right-wingers have been strangely silent

[Separation of Church and State in a Military Complex like the Pentagon?  What's wrong with this picture?]

Navy imam Chaplain Abuhena M. Saifulislam lifted his voice to God as he called to prayer more than 100 Department of Defense employees Monday at a celebration of Ramadan at the Pentagon.

God is most great, sang the lieutenant commander and Islamic leader, in Arabic, as iftar — the end of the daily fast began.

Uniformed military personnel, civilians and family members faced Mecca and knelt on adorned prayer rugs chanting their prayers in quiet invocation to Allah.

The “ground zero mosque” story seems to be dying down, but nothing lays bare the absurdity of what we’ve just lived through quite so much as this Washington Times story, quoted above, from 2007.

Yes, Muslims have infiltrated the Pentagon for their nefarious, prayerful purposes — daring to practice their religion inside the building where 184 people died on Sept. 11, 2001. They haven’t even had the sensitivity to move two blocks, let alone a mile, away from that sacred site.

The “desecration” began shockingly soon after the attacks. Cox reported in October 2001:

Army Chaplain Abdul-Rasheed Muhammad, the first Muslim chaplain to serve in the military, read a verse from the Koran at the memorial service at the Pentagon on Thursday, exactly one month after the attack. Muhammad, who became a chaplain eight years ago and works at Walter Reed Medical Center in Washington, ministered to rescuers in front of the smoldering Pentagon after the attack.

Any guesses as to why no one has ever heard about Muslims praying at the Pentagon — let alone cared? It’s almost as if the entire “ground zero mosque” controversy was whipped up out of nothing by a right-wing tabloid and politicians in search of a wedge issue …

(h/t Tim Dickinson)

Justin Elliott is a reporter for ProPublica. You can follow him on Twitter @ElliottJustin


For sale: Obama [Used] Cabinet Appointments

[FloppingAces.net]

May 2, 2013

used-cabinet-pritzker-and-obamasAs the country is still standing following the financial crisis, Barack Obama has nominated a key figure in the disaster apparently so she can finish off the country for good.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – President Barack Obama tapped Mike Froman and Penny Pritzker for the last two vacant Cabinet slots on his economic team on Thursday, turning to a law school classmate who is already one of his chief advisors and a billionaire businesswoman who helped put him in the White House.

As key members of his team, the two will work to boost demand for U.S. goods and workers, Obama said as he announced the nominations at the White House shortly before leaving on a trip to Mexico, a key U.S. trading partner.

(more…)


Special forces could’ve responded to Benghazi attack, whistle-blower tells Fox News

[FoxNews.com]

By

Published April 30, 2013

A military special ops member who watched as the deadly attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi unfolded last September told Fox News the U.S. had highly trained forces just a few hours away, and said he and others feel the government betrayed the four men who died in the attack.

Speaking on condition of anonymity, and appearing in a Fox News Channel interview with his face and voice disguised, the special operator contradicted claims by the Obama administration and a State Department review that said there wasn’t enough time for U.S. military forces to have intervened in the Sept. 11 attack in which U.S. Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens, an embassy employee and two former Navy SEALs working as private security contractors were killed.

“I know for a fact that C-110, the EUCOM CIF, was doing a training exercise in … not in the region of North Africa, but in Europe,” the operator told Fox News’ Adam Housley. “And they had the ability to act and to respond.”

“You know, it’s something that’s risky, especially in our line of profession, to say anything about, anything in the realm of politics, or that deals with policy.”

- Special Forces operator

The C-110 is a 40-man Special Ops force capable of rapid response and deployment specifically trained for incidents like last year’s attack in Benghazi. During the night of the Sept. 11, 2012, attack in Libya, in which U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans were killed in Libya, the C-110 were training in Croatia, just 3 ½ hours away.

“We had the ability to load out, get on birds and fly there, at a minimum stage,” the operator told Fox News. “C-110 had the ability to be there, in my opinion, in a matter of about four hours…four to six hours.”

(more…)


‘Obamacare’ Poll Finds 42% of Americans Unaware It’s Law

[ABCNews.com]

Apr 30, 2013 4:03pm
ObamaCareSymbol-with-soviet-sickleA new poll finds that many Americans are confused about the health care overhaul legislation commonly called “Obamacare.  ”The Kaiser Family Foundation released results of a non-partisan study today finding more than 40 percent did not even know the law was in place.

“Four in ten Americans (42%) are unaware that the ACA [Affordable Care Act] is still the law of the land,” the report says, “including 12 percent who believe the law has been repealed by Congress, 7 percent who believe it has been overturned by the Supreme Court and 23 percent who say they don’t know enough to say what the status of the law is.”

The survey showed public opinion on Obamacare is at its second-lowest rating in the past two years. Less than half – 40 percent – of adults viewed the ACA favorably, whereas 35 percent said they viewed it unfavorably.  Another 24 percent said they did not know or refused to answer.

(more…)


Jihad Blows Up the Liberal Utopia

[American Spectator]

President Obama Speaks on Gun Legislation in WashingtonCredibility shredded from Boston to Benghazi.

Jihad has blown up The Liberal Utopia.

The visionary liberal land of political and social perfection.

President Obama is not happy — and he isn’t alone.

You know the place.

• The Liberal Utopia is a land where gun background checks prevent mass murder.

• The Liberal Utopia is a land where Islamic fundamentalists have changed their perception of America because the President travels to Muslim nations to give lovely speeches, believes that the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and elsewhere is a wonderful sign of an Arab Spring, and refuses to use the word “terrorist” whether his administration is investigating Ft. Hood, Boston, or Benghazi.

• The Liberal Utopia is a land where a 2009 presidential video proclaiming a “new beginning” in American relations with Iran will halt the effort to build a nuclear bomb.

(more…)


Vet Abused, Disarmed By Cops Because ‘Polite’ Constitution Has No Place For Rights

[PersonalLiberty.com]

April 16, 2013 by

Vet Abused, Disarmed By Cops Because ‘Polite’ Constitution Has No Place For Rights

WWW.ARMY.MIL
In 2003, while serving in Iraq, then-1st Sgt. C.J. Grisham, left, and his interpreter handed out candy to children while touring Fallujah.

You have the right to bear arms — still relatively un-infringed in some States — unless, of course, agents of the state deem you are doing so in an impolite manner. A decorated veteran who was on a 10-mile hike with his 15-year-old son was illegally disarmed and arrested on a Texas county road for “rudely displaying a firearm.”

FOX News’ Todd Starnes reports that Army Master Sgt. C.J. Grisham was confronted and illegally disarmed of his AR-15 and .45 caliber pistol by the Temple Police Department, despite having the proper permits to publicly carry the weapons. The incident happened as the man and his son were hiking in a rural area known to be home to wild boars and cougars.

Grisham, who describes himself as a serious Constitutionalist and also recently gained notoriety for a blog post criticizing the President, maintains that he has no idea what caused officers to treat him in the manner in which they did.

(more…)


Fisker issues big layoff, employees hire firm that sued Solyndra

[FoxNews.com]

Published April 06, 2013

Fisker KarmaFILE: Nov. 18, 2010: In this file photo, Fisker Automotive’s Fisker Karma, a sports luxury plug-in hybrid car, sits on display at the 2010 Los Angeles Auto Show in Los Angeles. (AP)

Fisker Automotive — the electric-car maker that was granted a half-billion-dollar federal loan and on Friday dismissed about 75 percent of its remaining workforce — is purportedly facing a lawsuit from the same firm that sued the government-funded Solyndra company.

Fisker laid off 160 of its roughly 210 employees Friday morning from its Anaheim, Calif., location, according to Automotive News.

(more…)


US Navy shifts destroyer in wake of North Korea missile threats

[NBCNews]

April 1, 2013

NK_nuke-threat-NBCMost people in Seoul, South Korea think North Korean leader Kim Jong-un is bluffing, but the question is “why?” Experts say Jong-un is in the process of consolidating power and planning to eliminate his rivals. NBC’s Richard Engel reports from Seoul, South Korea.

NBC News Video

By Jim Miklaszewski, and Courtney Kube, NBC News

The U.S. Navy is shifting a guided-missile destroyer in the Pacific to waters off the Korean peninsula in the wake of ongoing rhetoric from North Korea, U.S. defense officials said.

The USS McCain is capable of intercepting and destroying a missile, should North Korea decide to fire one off, the officials said.

Still, U.S. defense officials insist that there is nothing to indicate that North Korea is on the verge of another launch.

(more…)


DHS Seeks Millions More Rounds of Ammunition

[PrisonPlanet.com]

Market survey asks companies if they can provide 2 million bullets within 30-60 day period

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.comDHS-bullets-Oh-Bomb-Uh-Army
May 3, 2013

The Department of Homeland Security has released a market survey asking companies if they are able to provide 2 million rounds of ammunition within a short time period, increasing concerns that the federal agency is continuing its arms build up in preparation for domestic unrest.

With the DHS already having committed to purchasing over 1.6 billion bullets over the course of the last year, a “request for information” on “reduced hazard training ammunition” posted on the FedBizOpps website quizzes bullet manufacturers on how fast they can supply large quantities of ammo;

- Are you capable of producing large quantity orders of any training caliber specified with a short turnaround time of 30-60 days?

- What would your lead time be for an order of 2 million rounds of a single type listed above?

- If you were awarded a contract for some of the calibers listed above, submitted a production lot of one million rounds and that lot or portion of the lot was not accepted, would you be able to replace that order with an additional one million rounds within 60 days?

(more…)


Justices indicate interest in narrow ruling on gay marriage in landmark hearing

[FoxNews.com]

Published March 26, 2013

supreme_court_gay-protesters-THUMB

Several Supreme Court justices indicated they might lean toward issuing a narrow ruling on gay marriage during a landmark hearing Tuesday on California’s same-sex marriage ban, even as lawyers for the plaintiffs argued for legalizing the unions nationally.The case heard Tuesday, the first of two gay-marriage cases the high court is weighing this week, centered on California’s Proposition 8 ban on same-sex marriage but could have national implications. If the justices choose to rule broadly, they could overturn Prop 8 and in doing so invalidate every other restriction on gay marriage in the country.But the justices suggested Tuesday they could decide the case without issuing a ruling that ripples through all 50 states.Several justices, including some liberals who seemed open to gay marriage, raised doubts Tuesday that the case was properly before them. Justice Anthony Kennedy, the potentially decisive vote on a closely divided court, suggested that the court could dismiss the case with no ruling at all.
Such an outcome would almost certainly allow gay marriages to resume in California but would have no impact elsewhere.Click to listen to the Supreme Court arguments in the Prop 8 case.

Kennedy said he feared the court would go into “uncharted waters” if it embraced arguments advanced by gay marriage supporters. But lawyer Theodore Olson, representing two same-sex couples, said that the court similarly ventured into the unknown in 1967 when it struck down bans on interracial marriage in 16 states.

Kennedy challenged the accuracy of that comment by noting that other countries had had interracial marriages for hundreds of years.

There was no majority apparent for any particular outcome and many doubts expressed about the arguments advanced by lawyers for the opponents of gay marriage in California, by the supporters and by the Obama administration, which is in favor of same-sex marriage rights.

Chief Justice John Roberts told Olson that it seemed supporters of gay marriage were trying to change the meaning of the word “marriage” by including same-sex couples.

Lawyers representing supporters of the California ban known as Proposition 8 argued that the court should not override the democratic process and impose a judicial solution that would redefine marriage in the some 40 states that do not allow same-sex couples to wed.

The case attracted high interest. Spectators were waiting in line since Thursday for the chance at being in the room while the two sides try to sway the court.

By ruling broadly, the court could overturn every state constitutional provision and law banning same-sex marriages. Or, they could set back the gay marriage movement by upholding California’s ban and continuing to leave the issue up to the states. By choosing the middle route, though, the justices could dismiss the case — a move likely to let gay marriages resume in California, with no impact anywhere else.

The case before the high court came together four years ago when the two couples agreed to be the named plaintiffs and become the public faces of a well-funded, high-profile effort to challenge Proposition 8 in the courts.

The fight began in 2004 when San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom ordered city officials to issue marriage licenses. Six months later, the state Supreme Court invalidated the same-sex unions. Less than four years later, however, the same state court overturned California’s prohibition on same-sex unions.

Then, in the same election that put President Obama in the White House in 2008, California voters approved Proposition 8, undoing the court ruling and defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman.

The ballot measure halted same-sex unions in California. Roughly 18,000 couples were wed in the nearly five months that same-sex marriage was legal and those marriages remain valid in California.

The high-profile case has brought together two one-time Supreme Court opponents. Republican Theodore Olson and Democrat David Boies are leading the legal team representing the same-sex couples.

They argued against each other in the Bush v. Gore case that settled the disputed 2000 presidential election in favor of George W. Bush. Opposing them is Charles Cooper, Olson’s onetime colleague at the Justice Department in the Reagan administration.

On Wednesday the court will consider a provision that defines marriage as between a man and a woman for the purpose of deciding who can receive a range of federal benefits, as part of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act.

The arguments come at a time of changing views on the issue. Support for gay marriage is becoming a mainstream Democratic position and the issue is causing a sharp divide among Republicans.

The issue has created fault lines within the Republican Party, as some prominent members drop their opposition to same-sex marriage while others stiffen it.

Gary Bauer, president of American Values, told “Fox News Sunday” that proponents of gay marriage are effectively asking “for unelected judges to deny the people of the states the right to decide what marriage is in their state.”

Bauer said he would prefer that every state bar gay marriage. But, acknowledging that’s not likely, he said the court should let the states decide.

However Nicolle Wallace, a former adviser to former President George W. Bush and to the 2008 McCain campaign, said those arguing against Prop 8 are in fact using a “conservative legal argument.”

“They will basically lay out the conservative case that there is not any place in the Constitution that allows for a different set of rules for a different class of people,” she told “Fox News Sunday.” “There’s also a moral imperative here. If you believe, if you value and treasure and revere the institution of marriage, then you should want every family unit to be really wrapped in marriage.”

Top Democrats who previously opposed same-sex marriage — and had taken the more moderate position of supporting civil unions — have in recent months and years shifted course. President Obama announced his support for gay marriage in the months leading up to the presidential election. Hillary Clinton also recently followed suit.

But Republicans have also been crossing to the pro-gay marriage side. Wallace is among dozens of Republicans who filed a brief in the Supreme Court case arguing for Prop 8 to be overturned.  And Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, publicly reversed his position on the issue after his son came out as gay.

The position shifts, though, do not signal a party-wide change of heart. Many Republicans would still prefer the issue be left up to the states and are encouraging the high court justices to rule narrowly.

“They would be far better off to decide these two cases on the narrowest possible grounds,” former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said Sunday. A sweeping decision against gay marriage, he said, would be a “huge mistake” that would “undermine respect for the judiciary.”

Americans as a whole are likewise divided. A Fox News poll released Thursday showed 49 percent of voters favor legalizing gay marriage, while 46 percent oppose it.

That marks a shift since the question was first asked in 2003 — when 32 percent said gay marriage should be legal, and 58 percent opposed it.

Support for gay marriage has grown the most among Democrats, and self-described moderates and independents. Still, support for gay marriage rose by 10 points among Republicans over the past decade, according to the Fox News polling.

Gay marriage has been approved in nine states — Connecticut, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Vermont, Washington — and the District of Columbia. But 31 states have amended their constitutions to prohibit same-sex marriage. North Carolina was the most recent example last May.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.


Vladimir Putin rolls out the red carpet for visit of President Xi Jinping

[UK Independent]

Russian premier gives unprecedented welcome to new Chinese leader as relations thaw

Clifford Coonan | Hong Kong

Friday 22 March 2013

China’s new leader began his first overseas trip as president with a much anticipated visit to Russia today – a symbolic trip that underlines China’s desire to ensure its energy supply while showing defiance in the face of US influence in Asia.

A grand reception was held to welcome President Xi Jinping upon his arrival in Moscow, with guards riding on horseback brought out to greet a foreign leader for the first time. Kremlin guards snapped to attention as Mr Xi and his long retinue walked into the gilded, chandeliered Grand Kremlin Palace, where they met members of official delegations in the ornate St George Hall before sitting down for talks.

“China and Russia are the main and most important strategic partners,” Mr Xi told Russian media upon his arrival. He said he was eagerly anticipating his meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin. “In many ways we speak a common language,” he said.

The grand welcome was a clear indication of the importance placed on the visit by Moscow. Russia is one of the world’s biggest energy producers, and China is the top energy consumer. These realities tend to outweigh the traditionally tense relations between the two neighbouring giants, who were bitter rivals during the Soviet era despite their ideological links.

Russia has watched China’s rise with concern, anxious that it might someday threaten its dominance on its eastern borders. But a bigger concern for the Kremlin, one that it shares with China, is blunting US influence in the region. At the start of talks, Mr Putin described the ties between the two countries as an “extremely important factor of global politics.”

Ahead of Mr Xi’s arrival, he said: “We are working together, helping to shape a new, more just world order, ensure peace and security, defend basic principles of international law.”

Mr Xi said that the relations between the two countries are the best ever.

In recent years, the need to counterbalance the growing might of the US has led to the two to set aside some  differences. Strong trade links have also smoothed some of the wrinkles in the interim, with bilateral trade soaring to a record £58bn last year.

Beijing and Moscow have taken similar stances on some of the biggest geopolitical issues of recent years, from North Korea to Iran to Syria, often voting in concert to veto punitive sanctions by the UN Security Council.

Many analysts believe their relationship is likely to strengthen, especially as the United States tries to expand its influence in Asia, and both countries are firm in rejecting Western criticism of their human rights records.

The two leaders are expected to discuss Syria and North Korea, but the economy is likely to dominate.

Shortly before Mr Xi arrived in Russia with first lady Peng Liyuan, a £1.3bn deal was announced by Russian and Chinese companies to develop coal resources in eastern Siberia. Russia also sees China as a way to diversify its energy markets away from Europe and it is keen to tie up a potentially enormous gas deal which could eventually see almost 70 billion cubic metres of gas pumped to China annually for the next 30 years.

Mr Xi’s tour continues until March 30 and he will also visit Tanzania, South Africa and the Republic of Congo. In South Africa he will attend the fifth BRICS summit.

The five key emerging economies that make up BRICS – Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa – have become an increasingly important channel for China and Russia to counter growing US influence.

BRICS countries hold reserves totalling £3 trillion, most of them held by China, and China now accounts for 20 per cent of Africa’s exports.

China surpassed the US and Europe as Africa’s largest trading partner in 2009 and has maintained its leading place in the years since.

China’s First Lady: A new role model

In China, the big news about Xi Jinping’s first trip as president has not been about energy, investment or BRICS, but rather about his wife Peng Liyuan’s first public appearance as first lady.

Ms Peng is a hugely popular figure in China, indeed, she was probably better known than him until recently, and adored by millions for her stirring renditions of folk tunes in army uniform or ethnic costume.

“Peng Liyuan has a very positive meaning for China. China needs a female role-model. Imagine what would it be like if China had a First Lady like Michelle Obama?” wrote one online fashion commentator.

Since the cult of personality that built up around Chairman Mao Zedong, the Communist Party has sought to avoid making its leaders too personal. Solid, dull technocrats have run the show, and their wives have been even less visible.

Suggested Topics

Rand Paul’s immigration plan: Border security before probationary legal status

[HotAir.com]

posted at 12:01 pm on March 19, 2013 by Allahpundit

rand-paul_01

The AP claimed this morning that Paul was set to endorse a path to citizenship in his speech today. Not so, countered conservatives on Twitter: Read his prepared remarks and you’ll see that citizenship is never mentioned. Which is true, and also irrelevant.

The whole point of Paul’s speech is GOP rapprochement with Latino voters; he spends nearly two-thirds of it extolling Latinos’ work ethic, reminiscing about his friendships with Latinos growing up in Texas, name-checking Jaime Escalante and Pablo Neruda, and of course citing the ancient canard that Latinos are really just Republicans who don’t know it yet. (He mentions abortion and gay marriage as particular areas of overlap.

In fact, younger Latinos support legal abortion in all or most cases and nearly 60 percent of Latinos overall support state recognition of gay marriage.) There’s no earthly way that Paul, having made a conciliatory pitch that florid, would ultimately turn around and insist that illegals be forever barred from seeking citizenship. In his op-ed on immigration today at the Washington Times, he actually refers to them at one point as “undocumented citizens.”(!) When pressed on the issue in the Q&A after his speech, he said this:


Twitter-JohnStanton-hotair
So no, he won’t create a special path to citizenship to help move illegals quickly through the green-card process but there’s a path to citizenship through normal channels in the end. Then again, with the singular exception of Jeb Bush, whom no one believes is serious anyway, every prominent Republican politician I can think of supports a path to citizenship eventually. That’s my whole point: If you’re trying to build goodwill with Latinos, there has to be. But what about the rest of Paul’s plan? Quote:

The first part of my plan – border security – must be certified by Border Patrol and an Investigator General and then voted on by Congress to ensure it has been accomplished…

With this in place, I believe conservatives will accept what needs to come next, an issue that must be addressed: what becomes of the 12 million undocumented workers in the United States?

My plan is very simple and will include work visas for those who are here, who are willing to come forward and work…

(more…)


Dianne Feinstein Battles Ted Cruz in Heated Senate Showdown Over Guns: ‘I’m Not a 6th Grader’

[TheBlaze.com]

Mar. 14, 2013 12:23pm

Sens. Dianne Feinstein & Ted Cruz Testy Senate Judicial Hearing Exchange

Senators Ted Cruz and Dianne Feinstein during a Senate Judiciary Hearing on Thursday got into heated exchange while discussing the California congresswoman’s proposed ban on so-called “assault” weapons.

“The question that I would pose to the senior senator from California is,” Cruz said, referring to Feinstein, “Would she deem it consistent with the Bill of Rights for Congress to engage in the same endeavor that we are contemplating doing with the Second Amendment in the context of the First or Fourth Amendment, namely, would she consider it constitutional for Congress to specify that the First Amendment shall apply only to the following books and shall not apply to the books that Congress has deemed outside the protection of the Bill of Rights?”

“Likewise, would she think that the Fourth Amendment’s protection against searches and seizures could properly apply only to the following specified individuals and not to the individuals that Congress has deemed outside the protection of the Bill of Rights?” he added.

Apparently, Sen. Feinstein was not amused with the Texas senator’s line of questioning.

(more…)


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 752 other followers