Obama should know from the Supreme Court ruling on Richard Nixon and Watergate……’executive privilege’ can’t be used to cover up a crime.

For six weeks in the 1980s, the Iran-Contra Affair was covered for several hours each day, by the news media. I know this, because I watched it (no such media event has occurred with this investigation). In the end, due to the cooperation of the administration, it was found that Reagan was not guilty of any portion of the operation. However, today, as the house gears up for a contempt vote, Obama issued Holder “Executive Privilege” so that he would not have to turn over documents requested by Darryl Issa and the Fast and Furious investigation. As many of us know from the Nixon years, executive privilege does not cover criminal activity. It’s not surprising that Obama thinks the law does not apply to him or members of his cabinet, as he is, at best, disturbed that anyone assumes he is to follow the laws of this nation.
Obama, himself, has said it best, “Only people with something to hide…” and he’s right. His attempts to save his attorney general may be more of an attempt to keep his name out of mess that likely was initiated by the bungler-in-chief. Another thing many of us remember is that Nixon’s crimes were those of a rank-amateur compared to Obama and his thuggie White House allies. Nixon is probably rolling in his grave thinking, ‘Why didn’t I just ignore the Constitution?’
The news this morning has been filled with crimes Obama intends to commit. The leaks from SCOTUS have effectively declared the Obamacare mandate un-Constitutional, and the Democrats have determined that they will ram through as much of what remains of the law as they can before the whole law becomes “null and void.” The Obama administration is watching their house of cards crumble, and they’re fighting for dear life. Of course, these are the same people that snuff the life out of babies, and anyone declared an enemy of the United States. They don’t believe in trials for the condemned.
At the very least, Darryl Issa and the investigative committee have given Holder a chance to clear himself, and the Democrats/Liberals/Socialist/Communist/Marxists have cried foul. With all that has taken place within the last year, several true Democrats or just those wishing to save their cushy jobs have backed away from Obama and the convention. Although, the Republicans are not always the best guys in the ring, they are heads above the Democrats who have taken over control of the government and sent us spiraling into a heap of Third World Dung.
Would that this nation see the honesty and the dignity that we held during the Reagan years when men admitted their guilt and then did the right thing by resigning their posts. Those were the years of men governing a country and not boys playing at political peril. What has happened this morning is just one more piece of proof that the liberal party will always act above the law while making laws that allow them to commit criminal acts for which they have no intentions of paying. Fast and Furious was responsible for the murder of American and Mexican citizens, including the deaths of two border patrolman, and if the house fails in their attempt to find justice, those lives will forever be immoral sacrifices.

Why President Obama Will Lose in a Landslide

Comments Off on Why President Obama Will Lose in a Landslide

Wayne Allan Rootis a former Libertarian Vice-Presidential nominee and a Las Vegas oddsmaker. Root states up front that he won’t vote for either Obama or Romney. Being a Libertarian, his first choice is Ron Paul, but since Paul is not running as a third-party candidate, Root’s going to vote for Libertarian Presidential candidate Gary Johnson. Even so, Root thinks Romney will win in a landslide.

He presents some interesting historical facts that he says point to “a resounding Romney victory.” In 1980, Root points out, “Reagan was losing by 9 points to Carter. Romney is right now running even in polls.” Root offers the following on popular voting blocks to back up his landslide claim:

1. Black voters. Obama has nowhere to go but down among this group. His endorsement of gay marriage has alienated many black church-going Christians. He may get 88% of their vote instead of the 96% he got in 2008. This is not good news for Obama.

2. Hispanic voters. Obama has nowhere to go but down among this group. If Romney picks Rubio as his VP running-mate the GOP may pick up an extra 10% to 15% of Hispanic voters (plus lock down Florida). This is not good news for Obama. [Editor’s Note: Obama’s latest immigration ploy could affect the Hispanic vote. How Romney responds will make a difference.]

3. Jewish voters. Obama has been weak in his support of Israel. Many Jewish voters and big donors are angry and disappointed. I predict Obama’s Jewish support drops from 78% in 2008 to the low 60s. This is not good news for Obama.

4. Youth voters. Obama’s biggest and most enthusiastic believers from 4 years ago have graduated into a job market from hell. Young people are disillusioned, frightened, and broke — a bad combination. The enthusiasm is long gone. Turnout will be much lower among young voters, as will actual voting percentages. This not good news for Obama.

5. Catholic voters. Obama won a majority of Catholics in 2008. That won’t happen again. Out of desperation to please women, Obama went to war with the Catholic Church over contraception. Now he is being sued by the Catholic Church. Majority lost. This is not good news for Obama.

6. Small Business owners. Because I ran for Vice President last time around, and I’m a small businessman myself, I know literally thousands of small business owners. At least 40% of them in my circle of friends, fans and supporters voted for Obama 4 years ago to “give someone different a chance.” I warned them that he would pursue a war on capitalism and demonize anyone who owned a business…that he’d support unions over the private sector in a big way…that he’d overwhelm the economy with spending and debt. My friends didn’t listen. Four years later, I can’t find one person in my circle of small business owner friends voting for Obama. Not one. This is not good news for Obama.

7. Blue collar working class whites. Do I need to say a thing? White working class voters are about as happy with Obama as Boston Red Sox fans feel about the New York Yankees. This is not good news for Obama.

8. Suburban moms. The issue isn’t contraception; it’s having a job to pay for contraception. Obama’s economy frightens these moms. They are worried about putting food on the table. They fear for their children’s future. This is not good news for Obama.

9. Military Veterans. McCain won this group by 10 points. Romney is winning by 24 points. The more our military vets got to see of Obama, the more they disliked him. This is not good news for Obama.

Add it up. Is there one major group where Obama has gained since 2008? Will anyone in America wake up on election-day saying “I didn’t vote for Obama 4 years ago, but he’s done such a fantastic job. I can’t wait to vote for him today”? Does anyone feel that a vote for Obama makes their job more secure?

Forget the polls. My gut instincts as a Vegas oddsmaker and common sense small businessman tell me this will be a historic landslide and a world-class repudiation of Obama’s radical and risky socialist agenda. It’s Reagan-Carter all over again.

But I’ll give Obama credit for one thing — he is living proof that familiarity breeds contempt.

Judge Napolitano: Invoking Executive Privilege Opens Holder Up To Charges Of ‘Misleading The Congress

Comments Off on Judge Napolitano: Invoking Executive Privilege Opens Holder Up To Charges Of ‘Misleading The Congress

Judge Andrew Napolitano appeared on Fox News Channel’s America Live to discuss President Barack Obama’s invocation of executive privilege to keep certain documents relating to the Fast and Furious gun walking scandal from being released. “They can’t have it both ways,” Napolitano said. The administration could argue that Fast and Furious related to national security, which would be covered by executive privilege, but that would open Attorney General Eric Holder to charges he mislead Congress.

We may be on the precipice of a constitutional confrontation between the executive branch, the White House, and the Congress. Executive privilege is defined in the leading Supreme Court case, interestingly United States v. Nixon, that’s Richard Nixon, that’s the Watergate-era. That’s the efforts of the special prosecutor to subpoena tapes from President Nixon as protecting conversation with the President himself.

Now the letter that Eric Holder wrote to the President saying ‘please give me executive privilege’ does not say ‘because I discussed this with you Mr. President, but the implication is there. Executive privilege protects communications with the president; the human being of the president – not the people who work for him and the Justice Department.

Fox News anchor Bill Hemmer summarized Napolitano’s argument, that he feels that these documents relating to Fast and Furious are not subject to executive privilege, and asked “why would [the White House] seek this?”

Napolitano said that there is something in the documents that Holder is trying to keep secret. “If the Attorney General discussed this with the President, he probably doesn’t want the Congress and the public to know that because we know about the awful events that occurred as a result of the Fast and Furious escapade,” said Napolitano.

He said that executive privilege only applies to matters of national security and “fighting the drug war,” in his opinion, would have to be defined by the administration as falling within the rubric of national security.

“The last time this happened – 40-years-ago in the Nixon Watergate saga, a federal judge ruled against the President and the Supreme Court upheld his ruling,” said Napolitano. “We may see this going in that direction now.”

Finally, Napolitano inferred that the invocation of executive privilege suggests that Holder discussed the details of this operation with the President which is “at odds” with his testimony before Congress – this could lead to a charge of “misleading the Congress.”

“They can’t have it both ways,” Napolitano concluded. “If the President was not personally involved, executive privilege does not apply.” He said that the administration could make a case that these documents relate to national security, but that would contradict Holder’s testimony before Congress.

continue reading

House Committee holds Eric Holder in contempt after President Obama invokes executive privilege for first time

Comments Off on House Committee holds Eric Holder in contempt after President Obama invokes executive privilege for first time

You’ve got to ask yourself…….if the President knew nothing about the Fast and Furious program as he said, then why invoke Executive Privilege? He must know, it didn’t work during Watergate for Nixon!

A House committee voted to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt Wednesday for not releasing documents related to Operation Fast and Furious, a botched gun-tracking operation in which federal agents permitted Mexican drug smugglers to buy thousands of firearms that were eventually used in crimes.

Earlier, President Obama had invoked executive privilege to deny the committee the papers it sought. Obama’s assertion of executive privilege — the right of the president to withhold information from Congress or the courts — was the first of his presidency and an escalation of a protracted power struggle between his administration and congressional Republicans.

As a senator in 2007, Obama condemned the use of executive privilege by President George W. Bush, saying “there’s been a tendency on the part of this administration to try to hide behind executive privilege every time there’s something a little shaky that’s taking place.”

The Mitt Romney campaign quickly labeled Obama a hypocrite.

“President Obama’s pledge to run the most open and transparent administration in history has turned out to be just another broken promise,” campaign spokeswoman Andrea Saul said in a statement.

Read more

You can read Eric Holder’s letter to President Obama asking for use of Executive Privilege here

The North American Union Continues: Mexico and Canada Invited to Join the Secret TPP Negotiations

Comments Off on The North American Union Continues: Mexico and Canada Invited to Join the Secret TPP Negotiations

If you think the North American Union or the SPP was stopped, think again!

This week President Obama and U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) Ron Kirk announced that Canada and Mexico have been invited to join the secret negotiations aimed at establishing the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).

We are delighted to invite Mexico, our neighbor and second largest export market, to join the TPP negotiations. Mexico’s interest in the TPP reflects its recognition that the TPP presents the most promising pathway to boosting trade across the Asia Pacific and to encouraging regional trade integration. We look forward to continuing consultations with the Congress and domestic stakeholders as we move forward.

That statement was followed by a similar one on Tuesday welcoming Canada to the TPP fold:

Inviting Canada to join the TPP negotiations presents a unique opportunity for the United States to build upon this already dynamic trading relationship. Through TPP, we are bringing the relationship with our largest trading partner into the 21st century. We look forward to continuing consultations with the Congress and domestic stakeholders regarding Canada’s entry into the TPP as we move closer to a broad-based, high-standard trade agreement in the Asia-Pacific region.

Notably, in both statements Ambassador Kirk places the approval of “domestic stakeholders” (read: large corporations) on a level with that of the Congress. It is precisely this exalting of big business that has troubled many of the people’s representatives in Congress.

For example, last week Zach Carter of the Huffington Post reported that Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee’s Subcommittee on International Trade, Customs and Global Competitiveness, was stonewalled by the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) when he attempted to see any of the draft documents related to the governance of the TPP.

In response to this rebuff, Wyden proposed a measure in the Senate that would force transparency on the process and that was enough to convince the USTR to grant the Senator a peek at the documents, though his staff was not permitted to peruse them.

Wyden spokeswoman Jennifer Hoelzer told HuffPost that such accommodations were “better than nothing” but not ideal in light of the well-known fact that on Capitol Hill the real work of drafting and evaluating legislation is performed by the representatives’ staff members who are often experts in particular areas of domestic and foreign policy.

“I would point out how insulting it is for them to argue that members of Congress are to personally go over to USTR to view the trade documents,” Hoelzer said. “An advisor at Halliburton or the MPAA is given a password that allows him or her to go on the USTR website and view the TPP agreement anytime he or she wants.”

That’s right. A duly elected senator of the United States has to beg and plead and threaten legislation in order to be able to gain access to the TPP trade agreement, but corporate interests are given by a password by the USTR that grants them a priori access to those same documents.

Read more

Obama asserts executive privilege over ‘Fast and Furious’ documents

Comments Off on Obama asserts executive privilege over ‘Fast and Furious’ documents

Justice Department officials on Wednesday said President Obama has asserted executive privilege over documents sought by a House committee in an investigation of the botched “Fast and Furious” operation.

The last-minute move came just prior to the start of a scheduled hearing by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee on a contempt on Congress citation against Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr., who has refused since October to honor a committee subpoena seeking the documents.

In a letter to Committee Chairman Darrell E. Issa, California Republican, a Justice Department official said the privilege applies to documents that explain how the department learned there were problems with the investigation, which allowed more than 2,000 weapons to be “walked” to drug smugglers in Mexico.

A contempt vote against Mr. Holder became likely after he and Mr. Issa failed to reach an agreement over turning over the documents during a 20-minute meeting Tuesday on Capitol Hill. Mr. Holder did not turn over any records at the Tuesday meeting and later told reporters he would not turn over Fast and Furious documents unless Mr. Issa agreed to another meeting, where he said he would explain what is in the materials.

He said he wanted an assurance from Mr. Issa that the transfer of the records would satisfy the committee’s subpoena.

“I had hoped that after this evening’s meeting I would be able to tell you that the department had delivered documents that would justify the postponement of tomorrow’s vote on contempt,” Mr. Issa said. “The department told the committee on Thursday that it had documents it could produce that would answer our questions.

“The assertion of executive privilege raises monumental questions,” said Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa, ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee who first began the Fast and Furious investigation.

“How can the president assert executive privilege if there was no White House involvement? How can the president exert executive privilege over documents he’s supposedly never seen? Is something very big being hidden to go to this extreme? The contempt citation is an important procedural mechanism in our system of checks and balances,” he said.

“The questions from Congress go to determining what happened in a disastrous government program for accountability and so that it’s never repeated again.”

Washington Times

Children singing ‘God Bless the USA’ heckled by man screaming ‘burn in hell’

Comments Off on Children singing ‘God Bless the USA’ heckled by man screaming ‘burn in hell’

You’ve just got to ask yourself……what is wrong with people today?

Children singing “God Bless the USA” with a Republican congressman were heckled by protesters who said that those responsible for the event will “burn in hell.”

The event was held outside Public School 90 in Coney Island, N.Y., where school principal Greta Hawkins decided to axe Lee Greenwood’s hit from a kindergarten “moving up” ceremony while keeping Justin Bieber’s chart-topping “Baby.”

Some were offended by the principal’s decision, prompting Rep. Bob Turner, who is running for the U.S. Senate, to organize the event on Tuesday morning.

Shortly after the ceremony began, chaos ensued.

“You Republicans come go to a Republican area and do that, we don’t do that here,” one protester said. “This is ridiculous, this is sad. This is so crazy. This is sad.”

“Excuse me sir, can you let the kids sing please?” a man presumed to be a Turner staffer interjected.

The heckler immediately screamed “No!” and added “The kids don’t even know what they’re singing! They got something you tell them to say! It’s ridiculous! It’s sad, sad, sad. Y’all are going to burn in hell! You all burn in hell! Shame on you! Shame on you!”

After the kids finished singing, the children began to chant “USA! USA! USA!” to drown out the protesters, but the chanting failed to deter the hecklers.

Talk-show radio host Rush Limbaugh commented on the action this afternoon, saying, “A bunch of Democrat adults show up to heckle them. ‘You are all gonna burn in hell! Burn in hell!’ That was the reaction to kids singing ‘God Bless the USA.’ Why in the world would that make anybody mad? And the fact that it does tells us a whole lot.”