Playing The Blame Game — Avoiding Responsibility and Accountability — Government Failure! — 9/11: Trump Blames Bush — Clinton Blames Republicans ! — Videos

Posted on October 22, 2015. Filed under: American History, Ammunition, Blogroll, Bomb, Books, Bunker Busters, Business, Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), Communications, Constitution, Corruption, Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), Drones, Economics, Education, Ethic Cleansing, Faith, Family, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Federal Communications Commission, Federal Government, Foreign Policy, Freedom, Genocide, government, government spending, history, Illegal, Immigration, Islam, Language, Law, Legal, liberty, Life, Links, media, Missiles, National Security Agency (NSA), National Security Agency (NSA_, Non-Fiction, Nuclear, People, Philosophy, Photos, Pistols, Political Correctness, Politics, Radio, Rants, Raves, Rifles, Spying, Strategy, Taxation, Taxes, Terrorism, Video, War, Wealth, Weapons, Weapons of Mass Destruction, Welfare, Wisdom, Writing | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

Project_1

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts

Pronk Pops Show 556: October 19, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 555: October 16, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 554: October 15, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 553: October 14, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 552: October 13, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 551: October 12, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 550: October 9, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 549: October 8, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 548: October 7, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 547: October 5, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 546: October 2, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 545: October 1, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 544: September 30, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 543: September 29, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 542: September 28, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 541: September 25, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 540: September 24, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 539: September 23, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 538: September 22, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 537: September 21, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 536: September 18, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 535: September 17, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 534: September 16, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 533: September 15, 2015  

Pronk Pops Show 532: September 14, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 531: September 11, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 530: September 10, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 529: September 9, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 528: September 8, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 527: September 4, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 526: September 3, 2015  

Pronk Pops Show 525: September 2, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 524: August 31, 2015  

Pronk Pops Show 523: August 27, 2015  

Pronk Pops Show 522: August 26, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 521: August 25, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 520: August 24, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 519: August 21, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 518: August 20, 2015  

Pronk Pops Show 517: August 19, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 516: August 18, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 515: August 17, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 514: August 14, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 513: August 13, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 512: August 12, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 511: August 11, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 510: August 10, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 509: July 24, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 508: July 20, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 507: July 17, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 506: July 16, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 505: July 15, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 504: July 14, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 503: July 13, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 502: July 10, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 501: July 9, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 500: July 8, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 499: July 6, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 498: July 2, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 497: July 1, 2015

Story 1: Playing The Blame Game — Avoiding Responsibility and Accountability — Government Failure! — 9/11: Trump Blames Bush — Clinton Blames Republicans ! — Videos

Hillary Clinton and the “Dark Forces” in Benghazi

Kenneth Timmerman, author of Dark forces: The Truth About What Happened in Benghazi, looks at Hillary Clinton’s next scheduled appearance before the Benghazi special committee and the Iranian nuclear deal. He cites evidence that the Iranians were behind the attack in Benghazi that killed four Americans on September 11, 2012. In addition, Timmerman says Iran was involved in the September 11, 2001, attacks. Timmerman also discusses Russian backing for Iran and the Russian role in attacking the opponents of Assad in Syria. Timmerman also looks at: Will Russia attack the Kurds? And who are the Kurds? Is Obama a Muslim? Will Israel strike Iran?

Donald Trump blames George W. Bush for 9/11

Did Donald Trump blame Bush for 9/11?

Jake Tapper calls out Jeb Bush for saying his brother is blameless for 9/11

9-11 WTC Attacks Original Sound

Who Was Really Behind the 9/11 Attacks?

George Bush Takes Questions After Meeting With 9/11 Commission – 4/29/2004

Richard Clarke, Former Counterterrorism Chief, Apologizes for 9/11

Why Government Failure Occurs: Richard Clarke on National Security Disasters (2008)

Your Government Failed You: Richard Clarke at the September 11 Commission on Counterterrorism (2004)

Richard Alan Clarke (born October 27, 1950) is the former National Coordinator for Security, Infrastructure Protection, and Counter-terrorism for the United States.

Clarke worked for the State Department during the presidency of Ronald Reagan. In 1992, President George H.W. Bush appointed him to chair the Counter-terrorism Security Group and to a seat on the United States National Security Council. President Bill Clinton retained Clarke and in 1998 promoted him to be the National Coordinator for Security, Infrastructure Protection, and Counter-terrorism, the chief counter-terrorism adviser on the National Security Council. Under President George W. Bush, Clarke initially continued in the same position, but the position was no longer given cabinet-level access. He later became the Special Advisor to the President on cybersecurity. Clarke left the Bush administration in 2003.

Clarke came to widespread public attention for his role as counter-terrorism czar in the Clinton and Bush administrations in March 2004, when he appeared on the 60 Minutes television news magazine, released his memoir about his service in government, Against All Enemies, and testified before the 9/11 Commission. In all three instances, Clarke was sharply critical of the Bush administration’s attitude toward counter-terrorism before the 9/11 terrorist attacks, and of the decision to go to war with Iraq.

On March 24, 2004, Clarke testified at the public 9/11 Commission hearings.[17] At the outset of his testimony Clarke offered an apology to the families of 9/11 victims and an acknowledgment that the government had failed: “I also welcome the hearings because it is finally a forum where I can apologize to the loved ones of the victims of 9/11…To the loved ones of the victims of 9/11, to them who are here in this room, to those who are watching on television, your government failed you. Those entrusted with protecting you failed you. And I failed you. We tried hard, but that doesn’t matter because we failed. And for that failure, I would ask, once all the facts are out, for your understanding and for your forgiveness.”[17]

Many of the events Clarke recounted during the hearings were also published in his memoir. Clarke charged that before and during the 9/11 crisis, many in the Administration were distracted from efforts against Osama bin Laden’s Al-Qaeda organization by a pre-occupation with Iraq and Saddam Hussein. Clarke had written that on September 12, 2001, President Bush pulled him and a couple of aides aside and “testily” asked him to try to find evidence that Saddam was connected to the terrorist attacks. In response he wrote a report stating there was no evidence of Iraqi involvement and got it signed by all relevant agencies, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the CIA. The paper was quickly returned by a deputy with a note saying “Please update and resubmit.”[18] After initially denying that such a meeting between the President and Clarke took place, the White House later reversed its denial when others present backed Clarke’s version of the events.

Clarke is currently Chairman of Good Harbor Consulting and Good Harbour International, two strategic planning and corporate risk management firms; an on-air consultant for ABC News, and a contributor to the Good Harbor Report, an online community discussing homeland security, defense, and politics. He is an adjunct lecturer at the Harvard Kennedy School and a faculty affiliate of its Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs.[35] He has also become an author of fiction, publishing his first novel, The Scorpion’s Gate, in 2005, and a second, Breakpoint, in 2007.

Clarke wrote an op-ed for the Washington Post on May 31, 2009 harshly critical of other Bush administration officials, entitled “The Trauma of 9/11 Is No Excuse”.[36] Clarke wrote that he had little sympathy for his fellow officials who seemed to want to use the excuse of being traumatized, and caught unaware by Al-Qaeda’s attacks on the USA, because their being caught unaware was due to their ignoring clear reports a major attack on U.S. soil was imminent. Clarke particularly singled out former Vice President Dick Cheney and former Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice.

911 Press for Truth

Intelligence Stove Piping Is System Failure

Fannie Mae, Jamie Gorelick and The 911 Commission

911 Commission Co-Chair Explains Need for New Investigation

Jamie Gorelick for FBI director? Are you kidding me?

Inside Libya’s Militias

Libya War: What They Don’t Want You to Know

How Will History Judge U.S., Coalition Intervention in Libya?

Libyan No Fly Zone Necessary But Intervention Has Imperialist Objectives

Debate The Libyan Intervention: Humanitarian or an Aggression?

Democracy and Hypocrisy in Libya

Backlash? Wave of terror feared in Europe over Libya intervention

Semantics – The Rise and Fall of Muammar al Gaddafi

Why Did America and the West Intervene in Libya?

Former State Department officer Ethan Chorin explains, the United States and the West provided Muammar Qaddafi and his forces with many of the weapons they used to fight the rebels during the 2011 Libyan revolution. Therefore, the U.S. and NATO had a moral responsibility to help the anti-Qaddafi forces

US special forces already on ground in Libya – FoxNews 110324

Obama authorized CIA covert operation in Libya – FoxNews 110331

The Truth About The War On Libya Government Lies Revealed A Goverment Conspiracy 2011

SYRIA Retired General Suspects A US Covert Operation For Running Libya Arms To Syria

LIBYA TIMELINE SHOWING LIE AFTER LIE BY OBAMA ADMINISTRATION – LYBYAGATE COVERUP

Murder Of Chris Stevens In Benghazi Attack Ordered By American Military Leadership, Possibly Obama

Know The TRUTH ~ Step By Step ~ Bret Baier’s ~ ‘Death and Deceit in Benghazi’

FLASHBACK] Hillary Clinton blames youtube video for Benghazi

Obama and Hillary Blame Youtube Video for Benghazi Terrorist Attack as Coffins Arrive

Rand Paul Destroys Hillary Clinton Over Benghazi-Gate During Capitol Hill Press Conference

Benghazi Attack Cover Up! Obama Armed Al Qaeda?

Former CBS reporter Sharyl Attkisson: Emails Reveal White House Hid Truths About Benghazi Attack

Sharyl Attkisson: White House Hiding Photos of Obama on Night of Benghazi Attack

Explosive: Rep. Trey Gowdy Unloads Unreleased Email Exposing Benghazi Coverup

Benghazi Hearing Trey Gowdy — “I don’t give a damn whose careers are ruined

Hillary Ad Hammers Republicans On Bogus Benghazi Investigation

Why Is Hillary Clinton Blamed For The Benghazi Attack?

For The Record-Zero Footprint

Treason Exposed! Obama Used Benghazi Attack to Cover Up Arms Shipments to Muslim Brotherhood

Trump’s take on birthright citizenships

Mark Levin: No Birthright Citizenship – Hannity 8/19/2015

Mark Levin: The Citizenship Clause of 14th Amendment, birthright citizenship & illegal immigration

Donald Trump’s Tense Presser, Illegal Immigration, Birthright Citizenship Debate- Mark Levin Hannity

Jeb Bush dismisses Donald Trump’s immigration plans

Jamie Gorelick’s wall

– The Washington Times – Thursday, April 15, 2004

The disclosure that Jamie Gorelick, a member of the September 11 commission, was personally responsible for instituting a key obstacle to cooperation between law enforcement and intelligence operations before the terrorist attacks raises disturbing questions about the integrity of the commission itself. Ms. Gorelick should not be cross-examining witnesses; instead, she should be required to testify about her own behavior under oath. Specifically, commission members need to ask her about a 1995 directive she wrote that made it more difficult for the FBI to locate two of the September 11 hijackers who had already entered the country by the summer of 2001.

On Tuesday, Attorney General John Ashcroft declassified a four-page directive sent by Ms. Gorelick (the No. 2 official in the Clinton Justice Department) on March 4, 1995, to FBI Director Louis Freeh and Mary Jo White, the New York-based U.S. attorney investigating the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. In the memo, Ms. Gorelick ordered Mr. Freeh and Ms. White to follow information-sharing procedures that “go beyond what is legally required,” in order to avoid “any risk of creating an unwarranted appearance” that the Justice Department was using Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrants, instead of ordinary criminal investigative procedures, in an effort to undermine the civil liberties of terrorism suspects.

At issue was the oft-noted wall of separation that prevented counterterrorism agents and federal prosecutors from communicating with one another prior to September 11. Information collected under special FISA warrants, which do not require a probable cause, was generally not to be shared with personnel responsible for enforcing federal criminal laws — where probable cause must be demonstrated for a warrant to be issued. As lawyers David Rivkin and Lee Casey noted on our Op-Ed page yesterday, the practical effect of the wall was that counterintelligence information was generally kept away from law enforcement personnel who were investigating al Qaeda activities. But Ms. Gorelick’s memo clearly indicated that the Clinton administration had decided as a matter of policy to go even beyond the law’s already stringent requirements in order to further choke off information sharing.

As Mr. Ashcroft noted during his testimony before the September 11 commission, all of this had a devastating effect into the investigation of al Qaeda operations in this country in the summer of 2001. For example, in late August, when the CIA told the FBI that Khalid Almidhar and Nawaf Alhazmi had entered the country, FBI investigators refused to permit criminal investigators with considerable knowledge about the most recent al Qaeda attack to join the manhunt. Also, a criminal search warrant to examine the computer of Zacarias Moussaoui, whose interest in flying aircraft had attracted attention, was rejected because FBI officials were afraid of breaching the wall.

Ms. Gorelick has been among the most partisan and aggressive Democratic panel members in questioning the anti-terror efforts of the Bush administration. The nation deserves a full accounting from Ms. Gorelick of why the Clinton administration felt it necessary to go the extra mile in order to hamper the capability of law enforcement and intelligence agents to talk to one another. If Ms. Gorelick fails to provide this, her actions would bring into serious doubt the credibility of the commission.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2004/apr/15/20040415-094758-5267r/

Mistress of Disaster: Jamie Gorelick

Ken Lay and Jack Abramoff must be green with envy over the all the mischief that has been accomplished by Jamie Gorelick, with scarcely any demonization in the press.
Imagine playing a central role in the biggest national defense disaster in 50 years. Imagine playing a central role in one of the biggest economic disasters in your country’s history. Imagine doing both as an un-elected official. Imagine getting filthy rich in the process, and even being allowed to sit self-righteously on a commission appointed to get to the bottom of the first disaster, which of course did not get to the bottom of that disaster or anything else for that matter.
Imagine ending, ruining or at least causing signficant quality deterioration in the lives of millions of people, most of whom will never know your name. Imagine counting your millions of dollars while people who tried to stop you from causing all this mayhem were getting blamed for most of the ills you actually contributed to.
Well, as un-imagineable as this is, there is one American who doesn’t have to imagine it. One Jamie Gorelick is this American. And without pretending that she caused the loss of countless thousands of lives and countless billions of dollars of wealth by herself, she certainly did push some of the early domino’s in catastrophic chain events that are a major factors in life in America today.
This is not a bad millineums’s work, when you think about it. Gorelick, an appointee of Bill Clinton, is the one who constructed the wall of separation that kept the CIA and the FBI from comparing notes and therefore invading the privacy of nice young men like, say, Muhammed Atta and Zacarius Moussaoui. While countless problems were uncovered in our intelligence operations in the wake of 9-11, no single factor comes close to in importance to Jamie Gorelick’s wall.
In fact, it was Gorelick’s wall, perhaps more than any other single factor, that induces some people to blame Clinton himself for 9-11 since he appointed her and she acted  consistent with his philosophy of “crime fighting.” She put the wall into place as Deputy Attorney General in 1995.
And for good measure, she was appointed by Tom Daschle to serve on the “non partisan” 9-11 Commission. And we thought the fox in the henhouse was simply a metaphor. Of course, in a splendid example of “reaching across the aisle,” feckless Republican Slade Gorton of Washington did all he could to exonerate Gorelick in the commission. Thanks, Slade. God forbid the nation actually knows the truth.
But for Ms. Gorelick, one earth shaking catastrophe is just not enough. You might think that she caused enough carnage to us infidels on 9-11 as to qualify her for the 72 virgins upon her death. (this would also keep her consistent with several of Clinton’s philosophies).
Alas, that’s only part of her resume. Her fingerprints are all over the Fannie Mae-Freddie Mac mess, which is to say the mess that is central in the entire mortgage-housing crisis. Without so much as one scintilla of real estate or finance experience, she was appointed as Vice Chairman of Fannie Mae in 1997 and served in that role through 2003, which is when most of the systemic cancers that came home to roost today happened. She was instrumental in covering up problems with Fannie Mae while employed there and took multiple millions in bonuses as she helped construct this house of cards.
From Wikipedia:
One example of falsified financial transactions that helped the company meet earnings targets for 1998, a “manipulation” that triggered multimillion-dollar bonuses for top executives.  On March 25, 2002, Business Week  Gorelick is quoted as saying, “We believe we are managed safely. Fannie Mae is among the handful of top-quality institutions.” One year later, Government Regulators “accused Fannie Mae of improper accounting to the tune of $9 billion in unrecorded losses”
As we know, the financial damage done by the housing related problems in this country are still incalculable. Ms. Gorelick’s evil tab is still growing.
But it doesn’t stop there. She managed to be on the wrong side of the Duke LaCrosse case, working for Duke University to protect that school from it’s damaging knee jerk reactions to the spectacularly unbelievable charges filed by a stripper. (excuse me, exotic dancer). So, even on a smaller scale, she continues to make money while working to ruin the lives of innocent Americans in defense of liberal dogma. At the Department of Defense, when she served as legal counsel there in 1993, she drafted the “Don’t ask /don’t tell” policy.
From what can be gleaned, it all comes from being well connected. She was educated (is that what they call it?) at Harvard undergrad and Harvard Law. From there, she kept getting appointed to positions above her experience level where she could flex her liberal muscles, add a resume item, and move upward.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/09/mistress_of_disaster_jamie_gor.html#ixzz3p3M8KxQf
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts Portfolio

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 556

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 546-555

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 538-545

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 532-537

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 526-531

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 519-525

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 510-518

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 500-509

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 490-499

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 480-489

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 473-479

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 464-472

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 455-463

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 447-454

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 439-446

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 431-438

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 422-430

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 414-421

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 408-413

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 400-407

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 391-399

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 383-390

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 376-382

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 369-375

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 360-368

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 354-359

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 346-353

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 338-345

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 328-337

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 319-327

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 307-318

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 296-306

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 287-295

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 277-286

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 264-276

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 250-263

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 236-249

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 222-235

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 211-221

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 202-210

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 194-201

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 184-193

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 174-183

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 165-173

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 158-164

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 151-157

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 143-150

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 135-142

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 131-134

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 124-130

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 121-123

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 118-120

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 113 -117

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 112

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 108-111

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 106-108

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 104-105

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 101-103

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 98-100

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 94-97

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 93

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 92

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 91

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 88-90

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 84-87

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 79-83

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 74-78

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 71-73

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 68-70

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 65-67

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 62-64

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 58-61

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55-57

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 17-26

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 01-09

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Muslim Brotherhood in America — Videos

Posted on August 19, 2013. Filed under: American History, Babies, Blogroll, Business, Communications, Crime, Cult, Economics, Federal Government, Foreign Policy, Genocide, government spending, history, Islam, Islam, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, People, Philosophy, Politics, Raves, Religion, Resources, Shite, Strategy, Sunni, Talk Radio, Terrorism, Video, War, Wealth, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , |

 

7-Muslim-Brotherhood-Murfre (1)

Muslim Brotherhood in America, Part 1: The Threat Doctrine of Shariah & the Muslim Brotherhood

Muslim Brotherhood in America, Part 2: ‘Civilization Jihad’ in America

Muslim Brotherhood in America, Part 3: Influence Operations Against Conservatives & the GOP

Muslim Brotherhood in America, Part 4: Suhail Khan, A Case Study in Influence Operations

Muslim Brotherhood in America, Part 5: The Organizations Islamists Are Using to Subvert the Right

Muslim Brotherhood in America, Part 6: Electing Islamist Republicans

Muslim Brotherhood in America, Part 7: Advancing the Islamists’ Agendas

Muslim Brotherhood in America, Part 8: Team Obama & the Islamists

Muslim Brotherhood in America, Part 9: Team Obama & the Islamist Agenda

Muslim Brotherhood in America, Part 10: What’s To Be Done?

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

The Dirty Dozen aka Soros, Obama, Jarrett, Shulman, Kelley, Hull, Hall, Lerner, Paz, Thomas, Seok IRS Agents: White House–IRS Collectivist Conspiracy Targets Pro Israel, Pro Life, Tea Party and Conservative Movement Groups To Suppress Voter Turnout! — Violation of Civil Rights — Videos

Posted on May 30, 2013. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, Communications, Constitution, Crime, Culture, Economics, Federal Government Budget, Fiscal Policy, government spending, history, IRS, Law, liberty, Life, Links, media, People, Philosophy, Politics, Press, Radio, Religion, Talk Radio, Tax Policy, Taxes, Video, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

UPDATED June 7, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 111: May 31, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 110: May 24, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 109: May 17, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 108: May 10, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 107: May 3, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 106: April 26, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 105: April 19, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 104: April 12, 2013

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 108-111

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 106-108

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 104-105

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 101-103

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 98-100

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 94-97

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 93

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 92

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 91

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 88-90

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 84-87

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 79-83

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 74-78

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 71-73

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 68-70

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 65-67

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 62-64

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 58-61

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55-57

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 17-26

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 01-09

Segment 0: The Dirty Dozen aka Soros, Obama, Jarrett, Shulman, Kelley, Hall, Lerner, Paz, Thomas, Seck, IRS Agents: White House–IRS Collectivist Conspiracy Targets Pro Israel, Pro Life, Tea Party and Conservative Movement Groups To Suppress Voter Turnout! — Videos

George-Soros

902px-Barack_Obama_and_Valerie_Jarrett_in_the_West_Wing_corridor_cropped

Douglas_ShulmanWhithouse_Visits_Douglas_Shulman

shulman_lerner

colleen_Kelley_NTEU

Sarah-Hall-Ingram-IRS

Lois_Lerner

IRS Subject Matter Expert
Holly Paz Holly Paz
Manager
Exempt Organizations Guidance

Holly is a manager in Exempt Organizations’ Guidance office, which is responsible for drafting notices, announcements, revenue procedures, and other guidance on exempt organization matters. Holly’s work often involves coordination with the Office of Chief Counsel and the Treasury Department on legislative and technical issues, as well as providing information to the tax writing committees of Congress.

Before coming to Exempt Organizations, Holly served as an attorney-advisor in the Taxpayer Advocate Service, an independent organization within the Internal Revenue Service that helps taxpayers resolve problems with the IRS. She also worked for eight years as an attorney in private practice focusing on exempt organizations issues. She earned her juris doctor from the University of Pennsylvania Law School.

tax-exempt-chart

IRS-org_chartIRS_Scandal_names

ObmaCare-IRS

The Dirty Dozen Movie Trailer

Dirty Dozen (1967) – General Inspection

Movie of the Week: Dirty Dozen – Lee Marvin Review by Best Movies By Farr

cartoon

 George Soros Exposed – Puppet master Glenn Beck

Obama Admin Evolution Of A Scandal – IRS Enemies List – Hannity

Targeted By The Taxman – He Made Us Do It! RPT: IRS Worker Names ATT”Y Carter Hull

Reality Check: IRS Scandal Exclusive

Heads are starting to roll at the IRS. Ben is following a story that is going in many directions. With many who are distancing themselves. In fact, He first told

you on March 1, 2012 that Tea Party and Liberty Groups in seven states claimed they were being targeted by the IRS: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Sit-….

In this Reality Check compilation, Ben goes in-depth on the IRS vs. Tea Party, Liberty groups, and religious organizations.

The IRS apologized. The white House decries the unacceptable actions and any connection to the current administration.

Ben has tracked the chain of command through the Cincinnati office and is going to show you how this situation transitions into the Washington D.C. office, and possibly beyond.

Obama Admin IRS Scandal & Congress Dealing With Scandals – Krauthammer On O’Reilly

IRS Worker At Center Of Targeting Scandal Gets Promoted -RPT – Cavuto – Wake Up America

Goldberg on IRS Scandal on IRS

Stein on IRS Scandal

IRS – May 6th Letter To Conservative Group Suggest Targeting Is Not Over Cavuto

Tea Party Groups Protests The IRS

The Blaze TV “The IRS Tax Scandal” Matt Kibbe & Adam Brandon 5/29/13

Part II – The Blaze TV “The IRS Tax Scandal” Matt Kibbe & Adam Brandon 5/29/13

Tea Party Groups To Sue IRS Over Targeting Of Conservatives – Megyn Kelly -Wake Up America

Katie Pavlich on Shulman’s 159 Visits to WH – IRS Scandal with Neil Cavuto – Fox Business – 5-30-13

IRS Scandal, How High Does It Go? Catastrophic Failure! – Greta On The Record

FreedomWorks VP: IRS Scandal Just Beginning [The Christian Broadcasting Network]

IRS Scandal – New Information On IRS Chain Of Command – Missing Link Cindy Thomas? – Megyn Kelly

IRS Targeting Scandal Sarah Hall Inram Now Running Obamacare Office & Benghazi Update

Glenn Beck » IRS, ObamaCare, And The White House

You are a conspiracy theorist if you blame Obama

Peakaboo Politics: The IRS Scandal — A Timeline of Confusing Statements

IRS Lois Lerner Pleads The Fifth, Dismissed From Scandal Hearing

IRS 5-22-2013 House Oversight Committee 4

TRIFECTA — Targeting Tea: Obama’s IRS Singles Out Conservative Groups

Mark Levin on Hannity: Obama Said Only Learned About IRS Story on Friday

The IRS and Sarah Hall Ingram

The IRS And ObamaCare

Former IRS Commish Shulman cites Easter Egg Roll for visiting White House 118 times

U.S. Treasury Knew About I.R.S. Partisanship

Why IRS Scandal Could Haunt Obama

FTN: NTEU urges political contributions

Why I Serve: Colleen Kelley, National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU)

Myth About Federal Workers

2013 NTEU Legislative Conference – Press Conference

Glenn Beck – IRS targeted conservatives

Obama to “rule” as president

Who is Valerie Jarret?

Fall of America: G. Edward Griffin on Conspiracy Theories

G. Edward Griffin – The Collectivist Conspiracy

PJTV: Obama IRS Scandal Uncovers the Ugly Side of Income Taxes

IRS scandal: GOP looks to seize election opportunity, CBS News Video 5-30-2013

FreedomWorks On Tap “The IRS Tax Terror” 5-16-13

Another 30 Mins w/ Glenn Beck & Richard Poe @ GBTV Regarding “The ShadowParty” Book, George Soros

Former IRS Chief’s Wife Works for Leftist Campaign Finance Reform Group

On Friday, reports broke that Former IRS chief Doug Shulman’s wife works with a liberal lobbying group, Public Campaign, where she is the senior program advisor. Public Campaign is an “organization dedicated to sweeping campaign reform that aims to dramatically reduce the role of big special interest money in American politics.”

The goal of Public Campaign is to target political groups like the conservative non-profits at issue in the IRS scandal. The Campaign says it “is laying the foundation for reform by working with a broad range of organizations, including local community groups, around the country that are fighting for change and national organizations whose members are not fairly represented under the current campaign finance system.”

CEO of Public Campaign Nick Nyhart has offered words of support for the IRS’ targeting: “There are legitimate questions to be asked about political groups that are hiding behind a 501(c)4 status. It’s unfortunate a few bad apples at the IRS will make it harder for those questions to be asked without claims of bias.”

Public Campaign gets its cash from labor unions like AFL-CIO, AFSCME, SEIU, and Move On.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/05/31/former-IRS-chief-Public-Campiagn

George Soros Gives $1 Million To Barack Obama Super PAC

The Huffington Post | By Paul Blumenthal

The Democrats heavy-hitters are finally coming out of the dugout to play ball in the brave new world of unlimited contributions and super PACs.

A spokesperson for Priorities USA Action, the super PAC backing President Barack Obama’s reelection, confirmed to The Huffington Post Thursday that billionaire investor George Soros has committed $1 million to the PAC. A spokesman for House Majority PAC also confirmed to HuffPost that Soros had given a combined $500,000 to House Majority PAC and the Senate Majority PAC in September.

The New York Times’ Nick Confessore was first to publish the news about the Soros donations. According to Confessore, Soros’ political adviser Michael Vachon announced the contributions at a meeting of the liberal donor group, Democracy Alliance where former President Bill Clinton, Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) were urging donors — most of whom have refused until now — to give to super PACs. Aside from the Soros donations, another $10 million was promised by donors attending the meeting.

Confessore writes that Soros, who did not attend the meeting, sent an email to Democracy Alliance members explaining his contributions:

“I fully support the re-election of President Obama,” Mr. Soros said in the email. He had not contributed until now, he wrote, because he opposed the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision in 2010, which paved the way for super PACs and unlimited money in politics. But since then, Mr. Soros wrote, he had become “appalled by the Romney campaign which is openly soliciting the money of the rich to starve the state of the money it needs to provide social services.”

It’s a sharp contrast to where Soros stood shortly after the 2010 midterm elections, when he expressed criticism of the Obama administration before a group of donors at a private meeting and suggested they pledge their money elsewhere.

Soros already has given $1.275 million to super PACs, the majority of which went to the Democratic opposition research hub American Bridge. His announced contributions this election still come nowhere near the amount that he gave to try to unseat President George W. Bush in 2004. Soros donated more than $30 million in that election — a record sum until international casino billionaire Sheldon Adelson dropped more than $70 million this year into a host of super PACs and non-disclosing non-profits.

George Soros: His Influence on the Media and the IRS Scandal

Soros’ Hand in the IRS Scandal

By Russ Jones

New details regarding the IRS scandal that found the nation’s top tax office intentionally targeting conservative groups are surfacing. Like, for example, the fact that George Soros-funded organizations sent letters encouraging the IRS to investigate conservative organizations.

According to findings reported by the Media Research Center (MRC), Soros gave $6.1 million to liberal groups who urged the Internal Revenue Service to investigate conservative non-profit organizations, including various tea party and Christian groups.

Dan Gainor, vice president of business and culture for MRC, says the scandal could be traced to a series of letters that two liberal groups — Campaign Legal Center (CLC) and Democracy 21 — sent to the IRS in 2010 and 2011 asking for an “investigation” of political consultant Karl Rove’s Crossroads GPS.

“What they need to focus on is this timeline,” Gainor suggests. “We actually carry the timeline here, and the timeline is when these lefty operations sent their letters to the IRS and what the IRS did soon after.”

Pro Publica, The Huffington Post and Mother Jones were just a few of the accomplices that helped instigate IRS investigations. But as of 2010, Pro Publica received a two-year contribution of $125,000 each year from George Soros’ Open Society Foundations.

“It is a who’s who of far-left organizations,” the MRC spokesman offers. “Remember — this is George Soros, who has given $8.5 billion to charity. Of that … that we could track, $550 million has gone to liberal operations here in the United States.”

Applications of nine organizations applying for tax-exempt status that had yet to be approved were sent to Pro Publica. Unapproved applications are not supposed to be made public.

SOURCE: http://www.onenewsnow.com/politics-govt/2013/05/20/soros-hand-in-the-irs-scandal

Soros Gave $6.1 Million to Groups Linked to Pressure on IRS to Target Conservative Nonprofits

By Mike Ciandella (CNS News), May 15, 2013 •

As IRS efforts targeting politically-conservative groups gained momentum, George Soros-funded liberal groups repeatedly called on the IRS to investigate conservative nonprofit organizations.

While the first reported instances of extra IRS scrutiny for conservative groups began in Cincinnati in March of 2010, the attacks began to pick up steam on a national level soon after Soros-funded groups began firing off letters to the IRS in October of that year – following the Supreme Court’s Citizens United ruling.

The talking points of these groups then bounced around a carefully created progressive “echo chamber,” until they eventually made their way into established media outlets. Key IRS policy changes about how it investigated conservative groups took place soon after it received three separate letters sent by Soros-funded liberal organizations.

Several Soros-funded groups including the Campaign Legal Center, Democracy 21, the Center for Public Integrity, Mother Jones and Alternet have worked to pressure the IRS to target conservative nonprofit groups. The subsequent IRS investigation flagged more than 100 tea party-related applications for higher scrutiny, including applications that included the words “Tea Party” and “patriot.”

The IRS scandal can be traced back to a series of letters that the liberal groups Campaign Legal Center (CLC) and Democracy 21 sent to the IRS back in 2010 and 2011. Both groups were funded by George’s Soros’s Open Society Foundations. The CLC received $677,000 and Democracy 21 got $365,000 from the Soros-backed foundation, according to the Foundation’s 990 tax forms.

The letters specifically targeted conservative Super PACs like Karl Rove’s Crossroads GPS, asking the IRS to scrutinize them more thoroughly to determine whether or not they should retain their tax-exempt status.

On Oct. 5, 2010, when the first letter was sent to the IRS, calling specifically for the agency to “investigate” Crossroads GPS. The letter claimed Crossroads was “impermissibly using its tax status to spend tens of millions of dollars in the 2010 congressional races while hiding the donors funding these expenditures from the American people.” Democracy 21 President Fred Wertheimer wrote a blog post for the liberal Huffington Post to promote it, and the effort to get the media to notice the anti-conservative campaign began.

On June 27, 2011, a second letter by the CLC and Democracy 21 complained about enforcement of 501(c)(4) tax regulations, asking “that the IRS issue new regulations that better enforce the law.” Two days later, an IRS senior agency official was briefed on a new policy targeting groups which “criticize how the country is being run,” according to a Washington Post story. According to the Post, this policy was later revised.

A third letter by the CLC and Democracy 21, on Sept 28, 2011, got media traction. The letter showed the escalation of the left’s complaint about 501(c)(4) groups. It challenged “the eligibility of four organizations engaged in campaign activity to be treated as 501(c)(4) tax exempt organizations.” The four organizations included Crossroads GPS, Priorities USA, American Action Network and Americans Elect.

The Soros-funded Center for Public Integrity ($2,716,328) published a “study” on 501(c)(4) groups, on October 31, which drew heavily from, and referenced, the CLC and Democracy 21. The Center for Public Integrity has strong media connections and boasts an advisory board that includes Ben Sherwood, president of ABC News, and Michele Norris, an NPR host, as well as a board of directors with such prominent names as Huffington Post CEO Arianna Huffington, Steve Kroft of CBS News’s 60 Minutes and Craig Newmark (founder of Craigslist).

This study then led to a Mother Jones article about a month later, on November 18, which was reposted on the left-wing blog Alternet on November 21. By December of 2011, the topic had been picked up in a New York Times editorial, and then began receiving other media coverage. That editorial called for “the Internal Revenue Service to crack down on the secret political money already flooding the 2012 campaign from partisan operatives ludicrously claiming to be ‘social welfare’ activists.”

On Jan. 15, 2012, the IRS targeted groups focused on limiting government or educating people about the Constitution and Bill of Rights

Alternet and Mother Jones are both members of The Media Consortium, which is designed to do exactly what happened here. The Media Consortium was created to be a progressive “echo chamber,” where 63 separate left-wing media outlets can network and share ideas, as well as cross-promote stories. Other members of the Consortium include such liberal outlets as The Nation, Democracy Now! and The American Prospect. The consortium has also received $675,000 in Soros funds since 2000. Alternet ($285,000) and Mother Jones ($485,000) have both also received individual funding from Soros’s Open Society Foundations.

This isn’t the only time the IRS has targeted conservative groups recently, nor is it the only connection between the IRS and Soros-funded groups. The IRS gave the left-wing journalism site ProPublica the applications for nine conservative groups pending tax-exempt status.

The IRS also released the confidential donor lists of the National Organization for Marriage to the liberal Human Rights Campaign. Both the Human Rights Campaign ($2,716,328) and ProPublica ($300,000) are also Soros-funded. Despite its blatant liberal leanings, ProPublica boasts a staff of well-known journalists, including veterans of The New York Times and The Wall Street journal, as well as of liberal operations like the Center for American Progress and The Nation, and has even won two Pulitzer Prizes.

Timeline Shows Influence of Soros-Funded Groups:

March 1-17, 2010: First ten reported cases of targeting by the IRS against groups that had ties to the “tea party or similar organizations.”

Sept. 16, 2010: TIME article “The New GOP Money Stampede” quotes Wertheimer;

Sept. 23, 2010: DISCLOSE act, a campaign finance disclosure act specifically targeting a Tea Party group, in the writing of which the CLC participated, fails in the Senate;

Sept. 28, 2010: Democrat Senator Max Baucus writes a letter to the IRS, citing the TIME article;

Oct. 5, 2010: Democracy 21 and Campaign Legal Center petition IRS, Wertheimer writes HuffPo article;

Oct. 7, 2010: Legal brief from HoltzmanVogel PLLC against the Democracy 21 petition;

Oct. 14, 2010: Dick Durbin asks IRS to investigate American Crossroads, HuffPo coverage;

June 27, 2011: Second petition to the IRS by CLC and Democracy 21;

June 29, 2011: IRS senior agency official Lois Lerner briefed on efforts to target groups which “criticize how the country is being run”;

Sept. 28, 2011: CLC and Democracy 21 petition IRS again, this time about four conservative groups;

Oct. 31, 2011: CPI “investigation”;

Nov. 18, 2011: Mother Jones article;

Nov. 21, 2011: Alternet repost of Mother Jones Article;

Dec. 29, 2011: New York Times oped;

Jan. 15, 2012: IRS targeted groups focusing on limiting government or educating on the Constitution and Bill of Rights;

February 2012: First articles promoting this issue appear in New York Times, Washington Post and LA Times.

$6.1 Million in Soros Funding Since 2000

  • Center for Public Integrity: $2,716,328
  • Campaign Legal Center: $677,000
  • Media Consortium: $675,000
  • Mother Jones: $485,000
  • Democracy 21: $365,000
  • ProPublica: $300,000
  • Alternet: $285,000
  • Human Rights Campaign: $600,000

SOURCE: http://cnsnews.com/blog/mike-ciandella/soros-gave-61-million-groups-linked-pressure-irs-target-conservative-nonprofits

IRS Chain of Command Suggests Scandal Not Limited to ‘Low-Level Employees’

By MARK HEMINGWAY

After the IRS revealed it had wrongly targeted hundreds of conservative and Tea Party groups, the agency claimed that the misconduct was limited to “low-level employees” in its Cincinnati office. Yesterday, the attorney for Lois Lerner, the head of the IRS’s tax-exempt organizations division, told the House Oversight Committee she would invoke her Fifth Amendment rights, making that explanation much less credible.

Now the local Cincinnati Fox affiliate, FOX19, has done some digging and uncovered information suggesting that top officials at the IRS weren’t too far removed from the six low-level employees identified as making unjustified inquiries. Fox19 has not only identified all six IRS agents in question, it turns out that they all have only one supervisor in common:

When an application for tax exempt status comes into the IRS, agents have 270 days to work through that application. If the application is not processed within those 270 days it automatically triggers flags in the system. When that happens, individual agents are required to input a status update on that individual case once a month, every month until the case is resolved. …

So who in the chain of command would have received all these flags? The answer, according to the IRS directory, one woman in Cincinnati, Cindy Thomas, the Program Manager of the Tax Exempt Division. Because all six of our IRS workers have different individual and territory managers, Cindy Thomas is one manager they all have common.

Cindy Thomas’s name is significant, because Thomas is the woman who leaked nine tax documents to the journalism outlet ProPublica last year. The leaking of pending tax documents is a clear violation of the law. After having uncovered the nature of Thomas’s involvement, FOX19 looks at her place in the IRS chain of command:

Former Acting IRS Commissioner Steven Miller… retires

Joseph Grant, Commissioner of Tax Exempt and Government Entities… retires.

Lois Lerner, Head of Exempt Organization…says she will invoke her 5th amendment right to not incriminate herself when called before Congress on Wednesday.

Holly Paz, Director of Exempt Organizations, subpoenaed to Washington to be interviewed by members of Congress.

All of this IRS leadership, in Washington D.C.

Then one level down is Cindy Thomas, the highest ranking employee in Cincinnati in this Tax Exempt and Government Entities Department that no one in Congress is talking to… yet.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/irs-chain-command-suggests-scandal-not-limited-low-level-employees_728777.html

Cracks Widen In The IRS Scandal Stonewall

Scandal Watch: New evidence makes it clear that the Internal Revenue Service campaign against conservatives wasn’t the result of two “rogue” agents, but was directed from higher up. The question is, how high up?

The claim that a couple of workers in the bowels of an IRS office in Cincinnati managed to block tax-exempt applications from conservative groups for more than two years, while subjecting them to outrageous, intrusive and improper requests for information, started falling apart days ago.

Last weekend, the Washington Post quoted a staffer saying that “everything comes from the top” at the IRS.

As Colleen Kelley, president of the union that represents IRS agents, told the Associated Press, “No processes or procedures or anything like that would ever be done just by frontline employees without any management involvement.”

And the New York Times reported that IRS accountants got a “directive from their manager” in early 2010 to “be on the lookout” for Tea Party-type groups.

This week, NBC News quoted a former manager of that Cincinnati office who explained how various internal checks and balances would have prevented workers from carrying out such a scheme on their own.

And Cincinnati’s Fox 19 News, which has done more solid reporting on this story than most of the major news outlets, looks to have put the final nail in the “rogue agent” story.

The local news station found that there were six agents — not two as former IRS head Steven Miller insisted just last week — who worked on these tax-exempt applications. These agents, Fox 19 learned, all had different direct managers, who in turn had different territory managers.

That means any directive applying to all these workers would had to have come from at least three levels up the management chain.

That manager turns out to be Cindy Thomas — who the IRS says oversees “exempt organization determinations” nationwide. She also happens to be the same person who ProPublica said signed off on releasing nine confidential tax-exempt applications from conservative groups to that liberal-leaning news website.

So if Thomas ordered the targeting, why? And if someone told her to get it done, who was that?

Fox 19 also learned all these managers would have known that Tea Party applications were being blocked long ago. IRS agents must handle tax-exempt applications within 270 days, after which the system automatically sends out an alert, making the agent provide a status update each month until the case is resolved.

Since the IRS started blocking Tea Party-type applications in April 2010 and didn’t approve a single one for more than two years, “thousands of red flags would have been generated.” Given the 270-day schedule, the first alerts would have hit back in December 2010.

Given all this, it’s not surprising that one top IRS official is now pleading the Fifth, and that the IRS is stonewalling congressional requests for communications relating to the targeting, including crucial emails.

Every new tidbit of information only makes the scandal look worse.

IRS Union Chief Stonewalls

By Jeffrey Lord

Yesterday I asked in this space, among other questions about the IRS scandal, this:

What was the subject of the Obama-Kelley March 31, 2010 meeting?

I received the following response to my question from the National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU) — the union for IRS employees headed by ex-14 year agent Colleen Kelley. The response came from union spokesperson Dina Long. It reads, in its entirety, this:

Statement of NTEU

On March 31, 2010, NTEU President Colleen M. Kelley attended the White House Forum on Workplace Flexibility at the Old Executive Office Building. The forum was attended by approximately 200 attendees including business leaders, workers, policy experts and labor representatives discussing telework and worklife balance issues. Attendees were broken into five groups to discuss workplace issues. The president made opening remarks. President Kelley did not have any direct contact with the president or the first lady. President Kelley has never discussed the tea party with the president.

Below is a description of the March 2010 forum from the White House web site:

On March 31, 2010, President Barack Obama, First Lady Michelle Obama and the White House Council on Women and Girls hosted the White House Forum on Workplace Flexibility. The Forum brought together small business owners, corporate leaders, workers, policy experts, and labor leaders to explore the importance of creating workplace practices that allow America’s working men and women to meet the demands of their jobs without sacrificing the needs of their families. Building on the momentum coming out of that forum, the Administration is hosting follow-up forums around the country and encourages others to convene events in their communities to engage in dialogue and take action on this important issue.”

Sounds reasonable, yes?

Read again. Let’s see how the Washington game is played.

Over here, in a story by the Daily Caller’s Caroline May, the NTEU responded to Ms. May with the exact same statement that was sent to me.

With one difference. This interesting sentence:

President Kelley has never discussed the tea party with the president.

The folks over at the Daily Caller, Tucker Carlson’s site, are no dummies. If that sentence had been included in the otherwise identical response they received from the NTEU, they would have reported it.

So why was that one particular sentence tacked on to the otherwise identical statement from the NTEU? In a response to me?

Because in fact it is an answer — a disturbingly partial answer — to but one question of eight questions that I asked of Ms. Kelley. Let me share with you the exact email I sent to the NTEU for Colleen Kelley:

Hi…

This is Jeff Lord from the American Spectator.

I am the author of today’s article Obama and the IRS: The Smoking Gun? http://spectator.org/archives/2013/05/20/obama-and-the-irs-the-smoking which mentions NTEU president Colleen Kelley.

US News reports today the March 31, 2010 meeting mentioned in the article was a ” ‘Workplace Flexibility Forum,’ a March 2010 event that was about the state of flexible work arrangements.” I realize there are a number of questions here, but under the circumstances of this IRS controversy I want to make sure that Ms. Kelley has the opportunity to answer. I will be happy to publish her answers verbatim in The American Spectator.

Thanks,
Jeff Lord
The American Spectator

US News mentions that it has received no comment from Ms. Kelley. I would like to get a response from Ms. Kelley to the following questions:

• Did the President himself ever, at any time, discuss the Tea Party with Ms. Kelley?

• Did the President ever communicate his thoughts on the Tea Party to Kelley – in any fashion other than a face-to-face conversation such as e-mail, text or by phone?

• Was the Tea Party or any other group opposing the President’s agenda discussed at the March 31st meeting, or before or after that meeting?

• Will Ms. Kelley be asking the White House to release any e-mails, text or phone records that detail Kelley’s contacts with not only Mr. Obama but his staff? Will Ms. Kelley release any of these communications that are in the files of NTEU?

• Will Ms. Kelley ask the IRS to release all e-mail, text or phone records between Kelley or any other leader of the NTEU with IRS employees? With the Oversight Board? IRS employees are federal employees paid with taxpayer dollars.

• Has Ms. Kelley ever been given access to IRS records of Tea Party cases? Has she ever discussed the Tea Party or any conservative organization with IRS employees at any level?

• What did Ms. Kelley discuss with the President or any White House or government official at the December 3, 2009 White House Christmas Party that she attended?

• What role did Executive Order 13522 play in the IRS investigations of the Tea Party and all these other conservative groups?

That would be eight questions for “President Kelley,” as she was called in the NTEU response.

The very first question was:

Did the President himself ever, at any time, discuss the Tea Party with Ms. Kelley?

To which the NTEU responded by simply tacking on the following single sentence to their boilerplate reply to the media:

President Kelley has never discussed the tea party with the president.

But the rest of it? The answers to questions two through eight?

Silence.

Silence from the official NTEU spokesperson Dina Long. Silence from Colleen Kelley herself.

There was no “I’ll get back to you further.” There was no “Give us some time, what’s your deadline?” There was just….silence.

Note as well that when contacted by the Washington Post last week, the NTEU’s Kelley was, in the words of the Post headline, “mum.” Wrote the Post:

So far, the National Treasury Employees Union, which generally is not shy with public comment, has next to nothing to say about that or anything else.

NTEU is working to get the facts but does not have any specifics at this time. Moreover, IRS employees are not permitted to discuss taxpayer cases. We cannot comment further at this time,” NTEU President Colleen M. Kelley said via e-mail.

A call to the NTEU office in Cincinnati resulted in a similar response: “We’ve been directed by national office. We have no comment.”

So what do we have here?

This.

A powerful labor union — the union that represents IRS employees — is displaying a pattern of refusing to answer questions. Other than the solitary statement to The American Spectator that “President Kelley has never discussed the tea party with the president.”

Beyond a generic, boilerplate answer to media inquiries, there is silence.

No answers about releasing union e-mails or phone records to or from the White House, the IRS or the IRS Oversight Board (on which board sits a former NTEU president) and no answers on all the rest.

But over here at the Washington Post, we have, buried in a story about the Cincinnati office of the IRS, this key phrase:

“Everything comes from the top. We don’t have any authority to make those decisions without someone signing off on them. There has to be a directive.”

Got that?

“Everything comes from the top.”

The top is where Colleen Kelley, the head of all those unionized IRS workers in Cincinnati, operates.

The top is the White House, the IRS offices in Washington, D.C., and the IRS Oversight Board.

The top is what makes it possible for the IRS union to have the run of the IRS, to get an Executive Order (# 13522) from the President to “allow employee and unions to have pre-decisional involvement in all workplace matters….”

The top is where Colleen Kelley goes to a White House Christmas party as the guest of President and Mrs. Obama — six days before that Executive Order 13522 is issued.

The top is where Colleen Kelley can be the head of the IRS union that gets its dues, its very survival money, from employees being paid by taxpayer dollars — and not have to answer questions about the details of her “collaboration” with the White House, the Obama-run IRS and the IRS Oversight Board.

And being at the top is what gives Ms. Kelley the belief that she can head an IRS public employees union — and do the old Nixon stonewall.

She isn’t the only one at the top busy stonewalling right now.

And as with Watergate, the place to get to the bottom of the top is Congress.

Where a new version of an old question should be asked:

What did the IRS union president know — and when did she know it?

http://spectator.org/archives/2013/05/21/irs-union-chief-stonewalls/

The Liberal Union Behind the IRSBy Jeffrey Lord

“My question is who is going to jail?”
House Speaker John Boehner on the IRS Scandal

The President couldn’t even bring himself to breathe a word of the truth.

He could fire some hapless Acting Commissioner, but last night Mr. Obama never came close to discussing that which must never be discussed.

The IRS?

It’s about a union: the National Treasury Employees Union. The NTEU. A left-wing union representing 150,000 employees in 31 separate government agencies, including the IRS. A union that not only endorsed President Obama for election and re-election, but a union whose current president, Colleen Kelly, was a 14-year IRS agent and now is both union president and Obama administration appointee (of which more in a moment).

It’s about 94% of NTEU union contributions going to Democrats in the Senate and House in 2012 — candidates who campaigned as vociferous opponents of the Tea Party.

And the recently released report from the Treasury Inspector General? You will not find a single reference to the NTEU. Whose members are both player and referee in the exploding controversy over the IRS targeting of conservative groups.

Which raises the obvious question: how many NTEU members were involved in the writing of the Inspector General’s report?

Even more to the point, what contact — what coordination — has the Obama White House had with their allies in the NTEU leadership as both the White House and the NTEU race to get on top of a scandal that is rapidly engulfing both?

Did I mention that the NTEU has no comment on all of this? And that when President Obama went in front of cameras to make his statement on the IRS scandal — he never once mentioned his very powerful union buddies that have the run of the IRS? Right down to the control of who gets a Blackberry? Literally.

Let’s first see how the IRS/NTEU game with the Tea Party and conservatives is played, shall we?

In the 2012 election cycle, the IRS union gave its money this way:

For the U.S. Senate:
Total to Democrats: $156,750
Total to Republicans: $1,000

For the U.S. House:
Total to Democrats: $391,062
Total to Republicans: $23,000

And the candidates on the receiving end of those IRS employee dollars? Yes indeed. They were candidates who were running flat out against the Tea Party, depicting Tea Party-supported candidates as dangerous, extremists, and crazies. Exhibiting exactly the anti-Tea Party antipathy on the campaign trail that has been revealed to be permeating the IRS.

No wonder. These Senate and House races were fueled in part by money donated by IRS employees.

Let’s take a look at specific races where the IRS employee money was involved.

Wisconsin: One of those IRS employee-backed Senate candidates was Democrat Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin, who in fact won her Senate race over ex-Republican Governor Tommy Thompson.

The NTEU, the union representing IRS employees, gave Baldwin $8,500. And what was Baldwin’s view of the Tea Party? If you check over here at the Midwest Values PAC, a left-wing political action committee set up by liberal Senator Al Franken of Minnesota, you will find this headline:

National Memo: Tammy Baldwin Runs Straight At The Tea Party

The story begins this way, and I have put the key sentence in bold print:

Wisconsin Democratic Rep. Tammy Baldwin wants to be the first openly gay candidate elected to the United States Senate. In an exclusive interview with The National Memo over the weekend, she made clear how she means to go about doing it: running straight at the Tea Party.

Indiana: In the Indiana Senate race, the Democrats’ candidate was Joe Donnelly, who used his $5,000 contribution to run a winning anti-Tea Party race against Republican Richard Mourdock. Donnelly’s campaign website, presumably financed in part with the money contributed by IRS employees, has this headline attacking the Tea Party:

FACT CHECK: Mourdock Trying to Change Subject from Extreme TEA Party Views

The text of the Donnelly press release begins this way, with a direct attack on the Tea Party:

Indianapolis, Ind.—Today, Joe Donnelly’s campaign responded to Richard Mourdock’s latest ad trying to change the subject from his pattern of extreme TEA Party views.

“Hoosier voters are rejecting Richard Mourdock’s pattern of TEA Party extreme positions, so he is desperate to change the subject,” said Paul Tencher, campaign manager. “In fact, Indiana voters are responding to Joe’s message of working with both parties to get things done for middle class families. The only person playing politics in this race is Mr. Mourdock, as he tries to distract voters from his extreme views that are out of the mainstream.”

Missouri: Over in the Missouri Senate race between Democrat Claire McCaskill and Republican Todd Akin, the IRS employee money — in the form of a $10,000 contribution to McCaskill — was used by the McCaskill campaign to help send this e-mail to supporters that bluntly attacked the Tea Party as “dangerous”:

Akin’s Rap Sheet Makes It Clear: Tea Party Congressman’s Outside Of The Mainstream Views, Dangerous Policies Are Wrong for Missouri, From his record to his rhetoric, everything about Todd Akin’s Tea Party policies are outside of the mainstream and dangerous for Missouri families.

When Missouri Republicans nominated him last night, they pinned their Senate hopes on a far right, Tea Party Congressman whose candidacy diminishes the party’s prospects for November.

And over in House races? At the very top of the high dollar list were two vividly anti-Tea Party candidates who each received a $10,000 contribution of IRS employee dollars.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi: Pelosi’s strategy was made plain in this interview with liberal columnist Eleanor Clift of the Daily Beast:

Stung by the debt-deal loss, the minority leader plans to get Democrats back on their jobs message and hammer Tea Party lawmakers as extremists who want to destroy government.

House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer: Hoyer famously attacked the Tea Party this way, as seen with this headline:

Hoyer: Tea Party People Come From Unhappy Families

There are a whole lot of people in the Tea Party that I see in these polls who don’t want any compromise. My presumption is they have unhappy families.

Understanding all of this — that IRS employees themselves are paying, through their union the NTEU, for the election of anti-Tea Party candidates — the absence of any mention whatsoever of the connection between the IRS and the NTEU puts the IG report in a very different light.

For example.

The IG report says — and I will bold print the key phrases — the following:

The IRS used inappropriate criteria that identified for review Tea Party and other organizations applying for tax-exempt status based upon their names or policy positions instead of indications of potential political campaign intervention. Ineffective management: 1) allowed inappropriate criteria to be developed and stay in place for more than 18 months, 2) resulted in substantial delays in processing certain applications, and 3) allowed unnecessary potentially involving information requests to be issued.

Although the processing of some applications with potential significant political campaign

intervention was started soon after receipt, no work was completed on the majority of these

applications for 13 months. This was due to delays in receiving assistance from the Exempt Organizations function Headquarters office. For the 296 total political campaign intervention applications TIGTA reviewed as of December 17, 2012, 108 had been approved, 28 were withdrawn by the applicant, none had been denied, and 160 were open from 206 to1,138 calendar days (some for more than three years and crossing two election cycles).

More than 20 months after the initial case was identified, processing the cases began in earnest. ….IRS officials stated that any donor information received in response to a request from its Determinations Unit was later destroyed.

Just in these opening statements of the IG report there is one very significant and glaring omission.

Where is the NTEU?

Note the phrases in bold print:

“The IRS”
“identified for review Tea Party and other organizations”
“Ineffective management”
“the processing”
“delays in receiving assistance from”
“approved”
“IRS officials stated”
“request from its Determinations Unit”

In each and every case these phrases identify actions taken by people — by IRS employees. IRS employees are members of the NTEU. The NTEU that is using money from these very same IRS employees to fund the campaigns of anti-Tea Party candidates like Baldwin, Donnelly, McCaskill, Pelosi and Hoyer. Not to mention all the rest of the Democrats who got a piece of the IRS employee money action.

As one would suspect, given the enormous clout of the liberal IRS union, it’s all about the politics. Liberal politics and the financing of the liberal welfare state. A federal version, if you will, of the recent famous struggle between Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker and state employee unions.

How powerful is the NTEU within the IRS?

Look no further than this IG report from back in January of this year that discusses the role the union has inside the IRS bureaucracy in the minutia of which IRS employees get to carry a Blackberry. The report notes:

In June 2010, the IRS and the NTEU signed an agreement to standardize IRS policy regarding which IRS employees would be allowed (referred to as a “profiled” position in the agreement) to receive certain information technology equipment, including aircards and BlackBerry® smartphones.

Notice: the NTEU, which gave 94% of its campaign money to anti-Tea Party candidates, has the clout within the IRS to demand a say in who can and cannot carry a Blackberry and receive other high tech communications equipment. The report goes on to say:

Initially, IRS policy limited the assignment of BlackBerry® smartphones to executives and senior/departmental managers. However, the agreement between the IRS and the NTEU expanded availability to employees below the executive and senior/departmental level.

This doesn’t even mention the power the NTEU has inside the IRS to decide everything from promotion rules to size of employee workspaces and on and on.

So the obvious.

If you are working in the IRS, and you are an NTEU member, and you know your union leadership is funneling your union dues to anti-Tea Party candidates, and your union has so much raw power within the IRS that they even control whether you, an IRS employee, can get even such mundane tech gear as a Blackberry — what attitude are you going to display as you review Tea Party applications that must, by law, come in to the IRS for approval?

You already know what to do. And inside the IRS, that’s exactly what was done. The Tea Party, in the vernacular, was screwed. By IRS bureaucrats whose union money is being used to attack the Tea Party. Of course these IRS employees know what to do — most probably without even being asked. There is no need to ask. And if they don’t follow the union program — and want a Blackberry — tough luck.

And what of the NTEU president, Ms. Kelly? The one-time IRS agent also doubles as an Obama appointee (announced here by the Obama White House) to the Federal Salary Council. Identified in the Washington Post as:

…a panel obscure to most Washingtonians but one that performs a vital role in recommending raises for most federal employees.

Got that? The President of the NTEU — a union that has gone out of its way to use IRS employee money to defeat the Tea Party — has a “vital role in recommending raises for most federal employees” — which includes, of course, IRS employees.

As if IRS employees don’t have enough incentive to go after the Tea Party, their anti-Tea Party president has a say in whether they get not just a Blackberry but a raise as well.

Can you say: “conflict of interest”?

Let’s stop here and take a look at a famous incident with the IRS that has made news in the last few days: the Articles of Impeachment filed against President Richard Nixon.

By now, all manner of people have been reminded that President Nixon’s resignation was prompted by the House Judiciary Committee passing Articles of Impeachment, with Article 2, Section One specifically saying:

He has, acting personally and through his subordinates and agents, endeavored to obtain from the Internal Revenue Service, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, confidential information contained in income tax returns for purposed not authorized by law, and to cause, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, income tax audits or other income tax investigations to be initiated or conducted in a discriminatory manner.

But there’s something missing in this recall of the tale of Nixon and the IRS.

In the early 1970s, President Nixon bypassed Congress and postponed salary increases for General Schedule federal employees. This included, of course, the IRS. The NTEU was furious with Nixon and took the President to court in a case called NTEU v. Nixon. The union won, and the federal government was forced to pay $533 million in back pay to federal employees.

So far, so normal in the world of Washington and relationships between a president and federal employees. Right?

Wrong.

Two years later, in 1974, the year the Watergate scandal reached high tide and Nixon was forced to resign, his abuse of the IRS cited in Article 2 as one of the reasons, there was another story out there involving the IRS and Richard Nixon.

As the liberal drive to get Nixon increased to the force of a political hurricane, reporter Jack White of Rhode Island’s Providence Journal-Evening Bulletin received an illegal leak — from the IRS. Specifically, an illegal leak from someone inside the IRS — an IRS employee — that leaked Richard Nixon’s 1970 and 1971 taxes. There was an immediate uproar — not about the leak or the identity of the leaker — but over the accusation that Nixon had underpaid his taxes. The House Judiciary Committee took the information and ran with it, opening an entire line of inquiry about Nixon’s tax deductions. So public was this it resulted in Nixon famously answering a question at a press conference this way:

People have got to know whether or not their President is a crook. Well, I’m not a crook. I’ve earned everything I’ve got.

And while people are remembering Nixon in the current furor over the IRS because of his own abuse of the IRS and Article 2, there was another Article —Article 4 — that was based on the leaked information from the still-unknown IRS employee to reporter Jack White. Read Article 4:

He knowingly and fraudulently failed to report certain income and claimed deductions in the year 1969, 1970, 1971, and 1972 on his Federal income tax returns which were not authorized by law, including deductions for a gift of papers to the United States valued at approximately $576,000.

Nixon vigorously disputed this, of course. But it didn’t matter. He was out the door, forced to resign. A leak from the IRS to the media about Nixon’s taxes one big no-never-mind.

And what happened to reporter Jack White? The man who received the illegal leak of Nixon’s tax returns — a violation of law — and published them?

Jack White was rewarded by his liberal media peers with the 1974 Pulitzer Prize in Journalism for National Reporting.

So.

What’s really going on with the IRS?

The Internal Revenue Service , with all of its mighty taxing and police powers, is in the hands of anti-Tea Party, anti-conservative, political activists. Liberal political activists from the NTEU masquerading as neutral career bureaucrats. The money of IRS employees used to fuel the National Treasury Employees Union’s open and expensive assault on the Tea Party and conservatives.

And comment on all this from the NTEU? Here’s this from the Washington Post:

So far, the National Treasury Employees Union, which generally is not shy with public comment, has next to nothing to say about that or anything else.

“NTEU is working to get the facts but does not have any specifics at this time. Moreover, IRS employees are not permitted to discuss taxpayer cases. We cannot comment further at this time,” NTEU President Colleen M. Kelley said via e-mail.

A call to the NTEU office in Cincinnati resulted in a similar response: “We’ve been directed by national office. We have no comment.”

No comment? No wonder.

IRS employees are not permitted to discuss taxpayer cases”??!! What a joke.

Here in the Wall Street Journal is author James Bovard with a short history of the political manipulation of the IRS by various presidents, and Bovard notes that: “With the current IRS scandal, we may have seen only the tip of the iceberg.”

Aside from Nixon they include FDR, JFK, and Bill Clinton. The difference is the latter three weren’t forced to resign because of it — and Clinton’s abuse of the IRS was not include in the Articles of Impeachment that focused on his lying to a grand jury over that liberal favorite — sexual harassment.

The real question now?

With the IRS assuming serious police powers of Obamacare, in effect the members of one left-wing labor union will have access to the private health care records of every single American.

And notes the Wall Street Journal, again the bold print for emphasis:

This March the IRS Inspector General reiterated that ObamaCare’s 47 major changes to the revenue code “represent the largest set of tax law changes the IRS has had to implement in more than 20 years.” Thus the IRS is playing Thelma to the Health and Human Service Department’s Louise. The tax agency has requested funding for 1,954 full-time equivalent employees for its Affordable Care Act office in 2014.

Got that? The real meaning here is that the NTEU is asking for 1,954 more union members whose union dues will be put to use to “hammer the Tea Party” in the words of Nancy Pelosi.

As James Taranto also noted over in the Wall Street Journal yesterday:

The Internal Revenue Service last year supplied a left-leaning nonprofit charity with confidential information about conservative organizations, which the charity disseminated to the public, ProPublica reported yesterday.

Once again, IRS employees — they of the anti-Tea Party union NTEU — were caught leaking private information.

Did I mention they were targeting Billy Graham — 95 year old Billy Graham??!!! Why? Because the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association was urging “voters to back ‘candidates who base their decisions on biblical principles….’”

You know what terrifies every liberal in America right now? You want to know the real reason President Obama abruptly felt the need to go on national television last night and fire the Acting Commissioner of the IRS last night as Americans were having their dinner?

The distinct possibility that the IRS and the whole confection of Big Government liberalism built around the federal taxing power is about to implode in scandal.

Big scandal. The kind of scandal that will make Watergate look like a piker.

And the irony?

That in seeking to destroy the credibility of the Tea Party, the Obama administration and its allies have destroyed not just the credibility of the IRS and one very seriously powerful union.

They have destroyed their own credibility.

http://spectator.org/archives/2013/05/16/the-liberal-union-behind-the-i

IRS’s Shulman had more public White House visits than any Cabinet member

Publicly released records show that embattled former IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman visited the White House at least 157 times during the Obama administration, more recorded visits than even the most trusted members of the president’s Cabinet.

Obama-admin-visitors

Obama officials who’ve visited the White House (As prepared by The Daily Caller)

Shulman’s extensive access to the White House first came to light during his testimony last week before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. Shulman gave assorted answers when asked why he had visited the White House 118 times during the period that the IRS was targeting tea party and conservative nonprofits for extra scrutiny and delays on their tax-exempt applications.

By contrast, Shulman’s predecessor Mark Everson only visited the White House once during four years of service in the George W. Bush administration and compared the IRS’s remoteness from the president to “Siberia.” But the scope of Shulman’s White House visits — which strongly suggests coordination by White House officials in the campaign against the president’s political opponents — is even more striking in comparison to the publicly recorded access of Cabinet members.

An analysis by The Daily Caller of the White House’s public “visitor access records” showed that every current and former member of President Obama’s Cabinet would have had to rack up at least 60 more public visits to the president’s home to catch up with “Douglas Shulman.”

The visitor logs do not give a complete picture of White House access. Some high-level officials get cleared for access and do not have to sign in during visits. A Washington Post database of visitor log records cautions, “The log may include some scheduled visits that did not take place and exclude visits by members of Congress, top officials and others who are not required to sign in at security gates.”

The White House press office declined to comment on which visits by high-ranking officials do and do not get recorded in the visitor log, but it is probable that the vast majority of visits by major Cabinet members do not end up in the public record.

Nevertheless, many visits by current and former Cabinet members are in the logs, and the record depicts an IRS chief uniquely at home in the White House.

Attorney General Eric Holder, President Obama’s friend and loyal lieutenant, logged 62 publicly known White House visits, not even half as many as Shulman’s 157.

Former Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, to whom Shulman reported, clocked in at just 48 publicly known visits.

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton earned a cool 43 public visits, and current Secretary of State John Kerry logged 49 known White House visits in the same timeframe, when he was still a U.S. senator.

Shulman has more recorded visits to the White House than HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius (48), DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano (34), Education Secretary Arne Duncan (31), former Energy Secretary Steven Chu (22) and former Defense Secretary Robert Gates (17) combined.

The Daily Caller’s analysis includes current, former and presently-nominated members of Obama’s Cabinet.

After Shulman, Acting Secretary of Commerce Rebecca Blank (86), Asst. Attorney General Thomas Perez (83) and Penny Pritzker (76) — Obama’s nominee for Commerce Secretary — have the most publicly known White House visits.

IRS Crosses Green Line

Pro-Israel groups felt wrath of Obama IRS, WFB investigation reveals

BY: Alana Goodman

A Washington Free Beacon investigation has identified at least five pro-Israel organizations that have been audited by the IRS in the wake of a coordinated campaign by White House-allied activist groups in 2009 and 2010.

These organizations, some of which are too afraid of government reprisals to speak publicly, say in interviews with the Free Beacon that they now believe the IRS actions may have been coordinated by the Obama administration.

Many of the charities openly clashed with the Obama administration’s policy of opposing Israeli settlement construction over the so-called “Green Line,” which marks the pre-1967 boundary between Israel and the West Bank and West and East Jerusalem.

After the Obama administration took up the Israeli-Palestinian peace process as one of its most prominent foreign policy priorities in early 2009, and made a cessation of Israeli settlement construction the cornerstone of its approach, the nonprofits were subjected to a string of unflattering media reports.

White House-allied lobbying groups joined the media criticism by challenged the nonprofits’ tax-exempt status, arguing that they undercut President Barack Obama’s Middle East policies.

“Our concern at that time was that these articles weren’t just appearing by happenstance, but may have reflected an evolving policy shift in the Obama administration to scrutinize charitable giving by organizations on behalf of Jewish communities and institutions over the Green Line,” said Jerusalem-based attorney Marc Zell, who convened a private meeting of pro-Israel groups in August 2009 to discuss these concerns.

Tax-exempt charities that support Israeli settlements have been the subject of controversy for years. But the issue came to a head after Obama made opposition to settlement construction a focus of his Middle East policy in 2009 and demanded Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu halt all construction beyond the Green Line, including in the Israeli capital of Jerusalem.

While it is not illegal for these charities to contribute to groups and individuals across the Green Line, critics say that they should not receive tax-exempt status because they support communities the administration views as antagonistic to administration policy.

The media scrutiny began as early as March 26, 2009, when the Washington Post’s David Ignatius published a column questioning the groups’ tax-exempt status.

The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC) announced the next day that it would begin a campaign of filing legal complaints with the IRS and the Treasury Department to investigate groups “allegedly raising funds for the development of illegal settlements in the occupied West Bank.”

ADC is closely tied to the Obama White House. The president recorded a video greeting to the group’s annual conference and sent two senior administration officials to attend.

The ADC announced in October 2009 that it had expanded its legal campaign against pro-Israel charities and was “working with a number of coalition partners, both nationally and internationally, in conducting this ongoing campaign.”

The chief negotiator for the Palestinian Authority raised the issue two days later during a meeting with U.S. Consul General Daniel Rubenstein, according to a State Department cable revealed by Wikileaks.

“[Palestinian negotiator Ahmad Quraya] gave the Consul General a copy of an article by Uri Blau and Nir Hasson, published in Israeli daily Haaretz newspaper on August 17, entitled ‘American Non-profit Organization Raises Funds for Settlement,’ and asked the USG to review the situation with an eye toward eliminating organizations’ tax exempt status if they are funding settlement activity,” said the cable.

On July 5, 2010, the New York Times published its 5,000-word cover story on the groups, following up with a Room for Debate series two days later. The article quoted an unnamed senior State Department administration official calling such groups “a problem” and “unhelpful to the efforts that we’re trying to make.”
The story also quoted a senior Obama Middle East adviser, Daniel Kurtzer, saying the groups “drove us crazy.”

J Street, a pro-Palestinian lobbying group that was closely aligned with the White House in 2009 and 2010, called the following week for an investigation into U.S. charities that contribute to settlements.

One pro-Israel targets was HaYovel, which was featured prominently in the New York Times article. Six months after the article was published, the IRS audited the Nashville-based charity, which sends volunteers to work in vineyards across the Green Line.

“We bookend that [New York Times] story. We were the first [group mentioned]. They really kind of focused on us,” said HaYovel’s founder Tommy Waller. “Then six months later we had an audit.”

Shari Waller, who cofounded HaYovel with her husband, said the couple received a phone call from the IRS in December 2010. She said she was not aware of anything in their tax documents that may have prompted the audit, and added that the additional scrutiny came during the group’s first five years of existence when audits tend to be rare.

“They contacted us the week of Christmas and told us they wanted to audit us, right now,” she said. “The most unusual thing to me was they contacted us at a time [that] for most people is a very hectic time, and we had just returned from Israel. To think about taking calls for an audit on the telephone—official business is usually conducted through the mail.”

Tommy Waller said he found the timing of the audit “suspicious” and believes it may have been politically motivated.

“We 100-percent support Judea and Samaria, and Jewish sovereignty in that area, and the current administration is 100 percent opposed to Jewish sovereignty in that area of Israel,” he said. “That’s why we suspected that we would have to deal with [an audit].”

Two other organizations—the American arm of an educational institution that operates across the Green Line and the American arm of a well-known Israeli charity that was mentioned in the New York Times article—say they were also audited.

Another organization that was criticized in multiple articles during 2009 and 2010 was audited last year. The organization, like many of the groups with whom the Free Beacon spoke, asked to remain anonymous out of fear of political retaliation and concern that exposure would harm fundraising efforts.

“The IRS carried out an examination of our organization, reviewing all of our accounting records, tax returns, bylaws, bank records, grant awards, etc, for the relevant period,” said a senior official of this organization.

“There was no vindictiveness in the audit itself and it was completed within a matter of months. Our feeling at the time was that this order must have come from above. The IRS seemed to be responding to a request or a complaint from higher up.”

Concerns that the IRS was targeting pro-Israel groups were first raised publicly by Z Street, a pro-Israel organization run by Lori Lowenthal Marcus.

Z Street filed a lawsuit against the IRS in 2010, alleging its application for tax-exempt status was delayed because it disagreed with the Obama administration’s Israel policy.

According to the suit, Marcus’s attorney was informed by IRS official Diane Gentry that Z Street’s “application for tax-exempt status has been at least delayed, and may be denied because of a special IRS policy in place regarding organizations in any way connected with Israel, and further that the applications of many such Israel-related organizations have been assigned to “a special unit in the D.C. office.”

Neither the IRS nor Gentry responded to a request for comment.

Marcus said Z Street has not funded anyone or any groups in the settlements. But, she added, the problems her organization faced could be related to the administration’s concerns over settlement-supporting groups.

Z Street’s application for tax-exempt status first ran into trouble with the IRS on July 19, 2010, two weeks after the lengthy New York Times article was published.

“Even if that is the case, that’s an explanation, but it’s not an answer. It’s not an adequate reason,” said Marcus. “It’s totally inappropriate.”

Zell told the Free Beacon he has not personally witnessed a shift in IRS policy since the 2009 meeting suggesting settlement-supporting nonprofits have been targeted.

However, he said it is a “yellow flag” that at least five of these organizations have been audited since 2009, considering the recent finding by the IRS inspector general that the agency targeted conservative groups.

“Now with the revelations of the IRS abuses vis-a-vis U.S. right-wing organizations, that have been published of late, there is renewed concerned that these kinds of policies, same kinds of policies and procedures, may have been targeted at these organizations [that support settlements],” he said.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop

Senior Advisor Valerie Jarrett

Valerie B. Jarrett is a Senior Advisor to President Barack Obama. She oversees the Offices of Public Engagement and Intergovernmental Affairs and chairs the White House Council on Women and Girls.

Prior to joining the Obama Administration, she was the Chief Executive Officer of The Habitat Company. She also served as Co-Chair of the Obama-Biden Presidential Transition Team, and Senior Advisor to Obama’s presidential campaign.

Ms. Jarrett has held positions in both the public and private sector, including the Chairman of the Chicago Transit Board, the Commissioner of Planning and Development for the City of Chicago, and Deputy Chief of Staff for Mayor Richard M. Daley. She also practiced law with two private law firms.

Jarrett also served as a director of corporate and not for profit boards, including Chairman of the Board of the Chicago Stock Exchange, Director of the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, and Chairman of the University of Chicago Medical Center Board of Trustees.

Jarrett received her B.A. from Stanford University in 1978 and her J.D. from the University of Michigan Law School in 1981.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/staff/valerie-jarrett

Background Articles and Videos

Obama Soros Glenn Beck Fox News America under ATTACK Part 2 A CALL to ACTION

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

501 (c) (4) Non-profit Social Welfare Organizations — Tea Party, Conservatives, Religious, Pro Life, Constitutionalists, Libertarians Targeted By IRS — Videos

Lois Lerner –Top IRS Official — Took The Fifth Amendment — House and Senate Hearings On IRS Targeting Conservative Groups — Videos

Sarah Hall Ingram Deputy Commissioner of the Tax Exempt/Government Entities Division (TE/GE) Targeted Tea Party — Now In Charge of IRS Health Care Office — Mission Accomplished Got $100,000 bonuses between 2009 and 2012 — Got Obama Elected President! — Videos

Conspiracy Theories and Secret Societies in History — World War III — New World Order — Videos

George Soros–The Puppet Master–Hits Conservative Activists–The Endgame–Videos

George Soros Inciting Revolutions?–You Betcha–Videos

World Wide Revolution–Communism, Caliphate, Crony Capitalism or Constitutional Republic?–The Puppet Master, George Soros, knows! –Videos

George Soros: Government Interventionist and Global Socialist–Obama’s Puppeter Master–Videos

George Soros: Barack Obama’s Money Man and Agenda Puppeter

George Soros On Reflexivity And Fallibility–Videos

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Progressive President Problem — Warfare and Welfare State — Big Government Intervention In Economy At Home and Militarily Abroad — Government Dependency — Serfdom and Collectivism in The New World Order — They Have Won — The Solution — Freedom Force International– Videos

Posted on April 25, 2013. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, Business, College, Communications, Constitution, Crime, Demographics, Economics, Education, Employment, Federal Government, Federal Government Budget, Fiscal Policy, government, government spending, history, History of Economic Thought, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Macroeconomics, media, People, Philosophy, Politics, Rants, Raves, Regulations, Security, Talk Radio, Tax Policy, Taxes, Technology, Terrorism, Video, War, Wealth, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

progressive_presidents

5_Living_US_Presidents

roundtables

Mind blowing speech by Robert Welch in 1958 predicting Insiders plans to destroy America

G. Edward Griffin: The Collectivist Conspiracy (Full Length)

An Idea Whose Time Has Come – G. Edward Griffin – Freedom Force International – Full

G. Edward Griffin Promotes Freedom Force International Part 1 of 2

G. Edward Griffin Promotes Freedom Force International Part 2 of 2

Capitalism Without Guilt – Yaron Brook on morals of capitalism.

Invisible Empire A New World Order Defined Full

George W. Bush breaks down at library dedication

Bill Clinton speaks of Carroll Quigley at 1992 Democratic National Convention

tragedy-and-hope

Hillary Clinton admits that the CFR runs the Government

Dick Cheney ex-director of CFR talks to David Rockefeller

Americans and Collectivism – TheBlazeTV – The Glenn Beck Program – 2013.04.26

Glenn Beck Predicts New World Order. Global Reset. U.S. Will Be A 3rd World State

Glenn Beck- ‘How Did Communism Become Cool?’

Super rich are in a conspiracy to rule the world – G. Edward Griffin

G. Edward Griffin The Dangerous Servant A Discourse on Government

The Quigley Formula – G. Edward Griffin lecture

tragedyandhope.3

“Legalized Plunder of the American People” – G. Edward Griffin

The Shadows of Power: The Council on Foreign Relations and the American Decline | James Perloff

Invisible Empire A New World Order Defined Full

[yotube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NO24XmP1c5E]

THE CREED OF FREEDOM

INTRINSIC NATURE OF RIGHTS
I believe that only individuals have rights, not the collective group; that these rights are intrinsic to each individual, not granted by the state; for if the state has the power to grant them, it also has the power to deny them, and that is incompatible with personal liberty.
I believe that a just state derives its power solely from its citizens. Therefore, the state must never presume to do anything beyond what individual citizens also have the right to do. Otherwise, the state is a power unto itself and becomes the master instead of the servant of society.

SUPREMACY OF THE INDIVIDUAL
I believe that one of the greatest threats to freedom is to allow any group, no matter its numeric superiority, to deny the rights of the minority; and that one of the primary functions of a just state is to protect each individual from the greed and passion of the majority.

FREEDOM OF CHOICE
I believe that desirable social and economic objectives are better achieved by voluntary action than by coercion of law. I believe that social tranquility and brotherhood are better achieved by tolerance, persuasion, and the power of good example than by coercion of law. I believe that those in need are better served by charity, which is the giving of one’s own money, than by welfare, which is the giving of other people’s money through coercion of law.

EQUALITY UNDER LAW
I believe that all citizens should be equal under law, regardless of their national origin, race, religion, gender, education, economic status, life style, or political opinion. Likewise, no class should be given preferential treatment, regardless of the merit or popularity of its cause. To favor one class over another is not equality under law.

PROPER ROLE OF THE STATE
I believe that the proper role of the state is negative, not positive; defensive, not aggressive. It is to protect, not to provide; for if the state is granted the power to provide for some, it must also be able to take from others, and that always leads to legalized plunder and loss of freedom. If the state is powerful enough to give us everything we want, it also will be powerful enough to take from us everything we have. Therefore, the proper function of the state is to protect the lives, liberty, and property of its citizens, nothing more. That state is best which governs least.


THE THREE COMMANDMENTS OF FREEDOM

The Creed of Freedom is based on five principles. However, in day-to-day application, they can be reduced to just three codes of conduct. These are The Three Commandments of Freedom:

INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS
Only individuals have rights, not groups. Therefore, do not sacrifice the rights of any individual or minority for the alleged rights of groups.

EQUALITY UNDER LAW
To favor one class of citizens over others is not equality under law. Therefore, do not endorse any law that does not apply to all citizens equally.

FREEDOM OF CHOICE
The proper function of the state is to protect, not to provide. Therefore, do not approve coercion for any purpose except to protect human life, liberty, or property.


THE THREE PILLARS OF FREEDOM

Another way of viewing these principles is to consider them as the three pillars of freedom. They are concepts that underlie the ideology of individualism, and individualism is the indispensable foundation of freedom.

For the rational and historical support for The Creed of Freedom, see The Chasm in the Issues section of his site. This 21-page document will take 10 to 45 seconds to load depending on the speed of your Internet connection.

Background Articles and Videos

Freedom Force International speaker for Liberty in Pittsburgh

Rare Carroll Quigley interview

Professor Carroll Quigley, Bill Clinton’s mentor at Georgetown University, authored a massive volume entitled “Tragedy and Hope” in which he states: “There does exist and has existed for a generation, an international network which operates, to some extent, in the way the radical right believes the Communists act. In fact, this network, which we may identify as the Round Table Groups, has no aversion to cooperating with the Communists, or any other groups, and frequently does so. I know of the operations of this network because I have studied it for twenty years and was permitted for two years, in the early 1960s, to examine its papers and secret records. I have no aversion to it or to most of its aims, and have, for much of my life, been close to it and to many of its instruments. I have objected, both in the past and recently, to a few of its policies, but in general my chief difference of opinion is that it wishes to remain unknown, and I believe its role in history is significant enough to be known.”

[1 of 5] Rare Carroll Quigley Interview

Carroll Quigley was the historian for the Council on Foreign Relations and author of Tragedy and Hope (tragedy is all the people who must suffer and die for the NWO, and the hope is the NEW WORLD ORDER )

Professor Quigley was a Globalist, he supported the idea NEW WORLD ORDER and wrote about it, he, unlike the elites, thought the people should know about it.

“I know of this network because I have studied it for twenty years and was permitted for two years in the early 1960s to examine its papers and secret records. I have no aversion to it or to most of its aims and have, for much of my life, been close to it and to many of its instruments. I have objected, both in the past and recently, to a few of its policies … but in general my chief difference of opinion is that it wishes to remain unknown, and I believe its role in history is significant enough to be known.” — Dr. Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope

“The powers of financial capitalism had another far reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements, arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences…”

“The apex of the system was the Bank for International Settlements in Basle, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the worlds’ central banks which were themselves private corporations…”

“The growth of financial capitalism made possible a centralization of world economic control and use of this power for the direct benefit of financiers and the indirect injury of all other economic groups.” Tragedy and Hope: A History of The World in Our Time (Macmillan Company, 1966,) Professor Carroll Quigley of Georgetown University

“The Council on Foreign Relations is the American branch of a society which originated in England … [and] … believes national boundaries should be obliterated and one-world rule established.” Dr. Carroll Quigley

“As a teenager, I heard John Kennedy’s summons to citizenship. And then, as a student, I heard that call clarified by a professor I had named Carroll Quigley.”President Clinton, in his acceptance speech for the Democratic Party’s nomination for president, 16 July 1992

[2 of 5] Rare Carroll Quigley Interview

[3 of 5] Rare Carroll Quigley Interview

[4 of 5] Rare Carroll Quigley Interview

[5 of 5] Rare Carroll Quigley Interview

The Creature From Jekyll Island (by G. Edward Griffin)

The Creature From Jekyll Island
A Second Look at the Federal Reserve
by G. Edward Griffin

Recorded: 1994

Edward Griffin – The Subversion Factor

CFR – List of Members and Organisations Involved

Jimmy Carter Administration

President Carter (who became a CFR member in 1983) appointed over 60 CFR members to serve in his Administration:

  • Walter Mondale (Vice-President)
  • Zbigniew Brzezinski (National Security Advisor)
  • Cyrus R. Vance (Secretary of State)
  • W. Michael Blumenthal (Secretary of Treasury)
  • Harold Brown (Secretary of Defense)
  • Stansfield Turner (Director of the CIA)
  • Gen. David Jones (Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff)

Ronald Reagan Administration

There were 75 CFR and Trilateral Commission members under President Reagan:

  • Alexander Haig (Secretary of State)
  • George Shultz (Secretary of State)
  • Donald Regan (Secretary of Treasury)
  • William Casey (CIA Director)
  • Malcolm Baldridge (Secretary of Commerce)
  • Jeanne J. Kirkpatrick (U.N. Ambassador)
  • Frank C. Carlucci (Deputy Secretary of Defense)
  • William E. Brock (Special Trade Representative)

George H. W. Bush Administration

During his 1964 campaign for the U.S. Senate in Texas, George Bush said: “If Red China should be admitted to the U.N., then the U.N. is hopeless and we should withdraw.” In 1970, as Ambassador to the U.N., he pushed for Red China to be seated in the General Assembly. When Bush was elected, the CFR member became the first President to publicly mention the “New World Order” and had in his Administration nearly 350 CFR and Trilateral Commission members:

  • Brent Scowcroft (National Security Advisor)
  • Richard B. Cheney (Secretary of Defense)
  • Colin L. Powell (Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff)
  • William Webster (Director of the CIA)
  • Richard Thornburgh (Attorney General)
  • Nicholas F. Brady (Secretary of Treasury)
  • Lawrence S. Eagleburger (Deputy Secretary of State)
  • Horace G. Dawson, Jr. (U.S. Information Agency and Director of the Office of Equal Opportunity and Civil Rights)
  • Alan Greenspan (Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board)

Bill Clinton Administration

When CFR member Bill Clinton was elected, Newsweek magazine would later refer to him as the “New Age President.” In October, 1993, Richard Harwood, a Washington Post writer, in describing the Clinton Administration, said its CFR membership was “the nearest thing we have to a ruling establishment in the United States”.

  • Albert Gore, Jr. (Vice-President)
  • Donna E. Shalala (Secretary of Health and Human Services)
  • Laura D. Tyson (Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors)
  • Alice M. Rivlin (Deputy Director of the Office of Management and Budget)
  • Madeline K. Albright (U.S. Ambassador to the U.N.)
  • Warren Christopher (Secretary of State)
  • Clifton R. Wharton, Jr. (Deputy Secretary of State and former Chairman of the Rockefeller Foundation)
  • Les Aspin (Secretary of Defense)
  • Colin Powell (Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff)
  • W. Anthony Lake (National Security Advisor)
  • George Stephanopoulos (Senior Advisor)
  • Samuel R. ‘Sandy’ Berger (Deputy National Security Advisor)
  • R. James Woolsey (CIA Director)
  • William J. Crowe, Jr. (Chairman of the Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board)
  • Lloyd Bentsen (former member, Secretary of Treasury)
  • Roger C. Altman (Deputy Secretary of Treasury)
  • Henry G. Cisneros (Secretary of Housing and Urban Development)
  • Bruce Babbit (Secretary of the Interior)
  • Peter Tarnoff (Under Secretary of State for International Security of Affairs)
  • Winston Lord (Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs)
  • Strobe Talbott (Aid Coordinator to the Commonwealth of Independent States)
  • Alan Greenspan (Chairman of the Federal Reserve System)
  • Walter Mondale (U.S. Ambassador to Japan)
  • Ronald H. Brown (Secretary of Commerce)
  • Franklin D. Raines (Economics and International Trade).

George W. Bush Administration

  • Richard Cheney (Vice President, former Secretary of Defense under President G.H.W. Bush)
  • Colin Powell (Secretary of State, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under Presidents Bush and Clinton)
  • Condoleeza Rice (National Security Advisor, former member of President Bush’s National Security Council)
  • Robert B. Zoellick (U.S. Trade Representative, former Under Secretary of State in the Bush administration)
  • Elaine Chao (Secretary of Labor)
  • Brent Scowcroft (Chairman of the Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board, former National Security Advisor to President Bush)
  • Richard Haass (Director of Policy Planning at the State Department and Ambassador at Large)
  • Henry Kissinger (Pentagon Defense Policy Board, former Secretary of State under Presidents Nixon and Ford)
  • Robert Blackwill (U.S. Ambassador to India, former member of President Bush’s National Security Council)
  • Stephen Friedman (Sr. White House Economic Advisor)
  • Stephen Hadley (Deputy National Security Advisor, former Assistant Secretary of Defense under Cheney)
  • Richard Perle (Chairman of Pentagon Defense Policy Board, former Assistant Secretary of Defense in the Reagan administration)
  • Paul Wolfowitz (Assistant Secretary of Defense, former Assistant Secretary of State in the Reagan administration and former Under Secretary of Defense in the Bush administration)
  • Dov S. Zakheim (Under Secretary of Defense, Comptroller, former Under Secretary of Defense in the Reagan administration)
  • I. Lewis Libby (Chief of Staff for the Vice President, former Deputy Under Secretary of Defense).

http://modernhistoryproject.org/mhp?Article=FinalWarning&C=5.3

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Obama’s Approval Rating On Economy Hits New Gallup Poll Low Of 26%–Republican Presidential Candidates Romney, Perry, Paul and Bachmann Attack Obama’s Job Creation Record–Videos

Posted on August 22, 2011. Filed under: Banking, Blogroll, Business, Communications, Demographics, Economics, Employment, Federal Government, Fiscal Policy, Foreign Policy, government, government spending, Inflation, Law, liberty, Life, Links, media, Microeconomics, Monetary Policy, Money, People, Philosophy, Politics, Rants, Raves, Taxes, Unemployment, Video, War, Wealth, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

OBAMA´S APPROVAL RATING ON ECONOMY HITS LOW

Peter Schiff, John Lonski, Dennis Berman – on Inflation, Deflation & Recession

Mitt Romney Presidential Announcement

Obama Isn’t Working: Chicago

Obama Isn’t Working: Allentown, PA

Obama Isn’t Working: New Hampshire

Obama Isn’t Working: Where are the Jobs?

Gov. Rick Perry Blasts Obama’s Record on Jobs as an “Economic Disaster”

Rick Perry announces he will run for President (Part 1 of 2) — August 13, 2011

Rick Perry announces he will run for President (Part 2 of 2) — August 13, 2011

Ron Paul Ad – “The one who can beat Obama”

Ron Paul on America Live with Megyn Kelly

Ron Paul: Perry Makes Me Look Like a Moderate

 

Ron Paul – the Most Untalked About Top Tier Presidential Candidate

Ron Paul Ignored By The Media

Editor-in-Chief Insights: Intense Favorites

 

Face The Nation with B…: Michele Bachmann wins straw poll, lays out

Face The Nation with B…: GOP presidential race picks up the pace

Newt Gingrich Releases 2012 Presidential Candidacy Announcement Video

A new job’s plan

Obama Plans Major Jobs/Debt Speech

Obama’s jobs plan – What’s the holdup [CNN 8-18-2011]

Obama says new job creating plan on the way 8/17/2011

SR Allstars – August 17 – Part 1: Obama Jobs Plan?

SR Allstars – August 17 – Part 2: 2012, Perry, Ryan, Paul

Fox’s Andrew Napolitano Predicts Obama’s Jobs Plan Will Be A ‘Giveaway To Select Groups That He And

The Triumph of Human Freedom: THE PLAIN TRUTH by Judge Napolitano 8/18/11

 

Obama’s approval rating on economy hits new Gallup Poll low of 26 percent

Republican presidential candidates Romney, Perry, Paul and Bachmann attack Obama’s job creation record

By Raymond Thomas Pronk

In Feb. 2009 President Barack Obama’s Gallup Poll approval rating on the economy was at its highest at 59 percent and his disapproval rating was at its lowest of 30 percent. The official unemployment rate was 7.8 percent in Jan 2009. In Aug. 2011 Obama’s Gallup Poll approval rating on the economy was 26%, a new low, and his disapproval rating was 71%, a new high.  The July 2011 unemployment rate was 9.1%. The unemployment rate has been over 8% for the last 31 months. Obama’s overall job approval rating according to the Gallup’s daily three-day rolling average tracking poll of Aug. 11-13 dipped below 40 percent for the first time when it hit a new low of 39 percent. It fell again on Aug. 20 to 38 percent.

Unemployment Rate Percent from Jan. 2001-Aug. 2011

 

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Department of Labor

In the Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Aug. 23, 2011 President Obama also hit a new low on the Presidential Approval Index of -26 with 45 percent strongly disapproving and 19 percent strongly approving. Rasmussen Reports on Aug. 23, 2011 that among likely voters Obama is at 39 percent and Paul at 38 percent. In a matchup between Obama and a generic Republican candidate among likely voters, Obama is at 43 percent and the generic Republican at 48 percent.

The Misery Index is an economic indicator that is the sum of the unemployment and inflation rates. When President Obama entered office, his Misery Index stood at 7.73 percent. Today it is over 12.7 percent. Obama’s average Misery index is 10.52 which is greater than George W. Bush’s average Misery Index of 8.11 and Bill Clinton’s average misery index of 7.8 percent.

Should the U.S. economy enter another recession, the unemployment rate will most likely again exceed 10 percent. Obama’s approval rating on the economy will most likely fall even lower and his Misery Index will be even higher. However, it is unlikely that Obama’s Misery Index will beat President Jimmy Carter’s June 1980 record Misery Index of 21.98. Ronald Reagan beat Jimmy Carter in the 1980 presidential election with 489 electoral votes and 43,903,230 popular votes to Jimmy Carter’s 49 electoral votes and 35,480,115 popular votes—a landslide Republican victory over an incumbent Democratic president.

Jobs and the economy will be the number one political issue in the 2012 Presidential election. The leading Republican candidates, former Massachusetts’s Governor Mitt Romney, Texas Governor Rick Perry, Texas Congressman Ron Paul and Minnesotan Congresswoman Michele Bachmann have been very critical of President Obama’s performance in terms of job creation and the growth in the economy measured by the Gross Domestic Product.

A television attack ad paid for by Romney ends with the tagline, “Obama isn’t working”, with a photo of an unemployment office with a long twisting line of Americans looking for jobs. This is one of a series of one minute attacks ads where the phrase, “Obama isn’t working” is repeated and the employment situation prior to the Obama administration is compared with the employment situation today in a particular city or state. Another attack ad in the series is directed at college students and begins with Obama promising students at the University of Maryland a better future in 2009 and ends with the questions, “Where is the opportunity? Where are the jobs?”

Perry recently entered the presidential race and does not have any Obama attack ads to date. However, Perry in a recent speech to the South Carolina GOP blasted Obama’s record on job creation comparing it to his record on job creation in Texas. Perry stated “The fact is one in six work eligible Americans cannot find a full time job. That is not a recovery, it is an economic disaster.” Perry continued that “we tried for two and half years government trying to create jobs. It is time for the private sector to be given the chance to create jobs.” Perry is proud of his job creation record in Texas and pointed out that “since June of 2009 my home state has created 40 percent of all new jobs created in America.”

Paul has a one minute TV attack ad which asserts that he was the one “voting against every tax increase, every unbalanced budget, every time, standing up to the Washington machine, guiding by principle, Ron Paul who will stop the spending, save the dollar, create jobs, bring peace, the one who will restore liberty. Ron Paul the one who can beat Obama and restore America now.”

Bachmann in an interview on Face the Nation emphasized that she is the chief author of two bills that would repeal Obamacare (the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act) and the Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. Companies are telling her “that those bills are leading them not to be able to create jobs.” Bachmann also favors “repeal of the existing tax code in its current form, it is 3.8 million words”; “we need a tax code that is job friendly, this is not a job friendly tax code. When you have one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world at 34 percent that is not going to incentivize people to start new businesses.”

President Obama announced that he will release his new jobs plan after Labor Day. He said “I will be putting forward when they come back in September a very specific plan to boost the economy, to create jobs, and control our deficit.” Two of the specifics of Obama’s plan that have leaked to the press include an extension of unemployment benefits and extension of the payroll tax cut. The Romney and Paul ads, Perry speech, Bachmann interview and Obama announcement can be viewed in their entirety on YouTube.com with links to them on www.pronkpops.wordpress.com .

In a recent Gallup Poll released on Aug. 22, President Obama is running neck and neck with the top four Republican candidates. Romney leads Obama 48 percent to 46 percent. Perry and Obama are tied in the poll at 47 percent each. Obama leads Republican candidates Paul, 47 percent to 45 percent and Bachmann, 48 percent to 44 percent.

Among independents Romney and Paul lead Obama by 3 percent and Perry leads Obama by 2 percent. Obama beats Bachmann by 6 percent among independents. The Gallup Poll was conducted on Aug. 16 and 17  and has a margin of error of 3.3 percent. For the American people, jobs and the economy are the leading issues of the 2012 presidential election.

[Raymond Thomas Pronk is host of the Pronk Pops Show on KDUX web radio from 3-5 p.m. Wednesday and author of the companion www.pronkpops.wordpress.com blog with links to online videos and articles and past radio show podcasts and downloads—Give It A Listen!]

Background Articles and Videos

Gallup poll: GOP contenders neck-and-neck with Obama

Republicans line up behind candidates to a greater extent than Dems behind president

By Steven Shepard

“…The poll, conducted last week as Obama’s approval rating cratered around 40 percent, shows Obama leading Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., 48 to 44 percent, and Rep. Ron Paul, R-Tex., 47 to 45 percent.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry ties the president at 47 percent each, and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney leads Obama, 48 to 46 percent.

At this early stage of the campaign, Republicans are largely lined up behind their candidates to a greater extent than Democrats are behind the incumbent president.

Republicans are firmly behind Perry (92 percent) and Romney (91 percent). Bachmann (86 percent) and Paul (82 percent) perform slightly worse among members of their own party. …”

“…Independents are split: Romney and Paul lead among that group by three points, Perry by two, but Obama leads Bachmann among independents by six points. …”

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44235036/ns/politics-decision_2012/t/gallup-poll-gop-contenders-neck-and-neck-obama/

Gallup Daily: Obama Job Approval

Each result is based on a three-day rolling average

http://www.gallup.com/poll/113980/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Job-Approval.aspx

Rasmussen Reports

Daily Presidential Tracking Poll

Tuesday, August 23, 2011

// // <!–[CDATA[
OAS_rn = new String (Math.random());
OAS_rns = OAS_rn.substring (2, 11);
document.write(”);
// ]]>http://b3.mookie1.com/2/247B3/ATTW/2H_11Q3/AV/300/1197849455@x90

“…The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Tuesday shows that 19% of the nation’s voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as president. Forty-five percent (45%) Strongly Disapprove, giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -26 (see trends).

This is the lowest Approval Index rating yet measured for President Obama. The previous low was -24 reached yesterday and also in September 2010. Additionally, the level of Strong Approval matches the lowest yet recorded. By way of comparison, President Bush had ratings near the end of his second term in the minus 30s.  …”

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

Obama 39%, Paul 38%
“…The president and the maverick are running almost dead even in a hypothetical 2012 election matchup.Texas Republican Congressman Ron Paul earns 38% of the vote to President Obama’s 39% in the latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Likely U.S. Voters. Fourteen percent (14%) like some other candidate, and eight percent (8%) remain undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

Just a month ago, Obama posted a 41% to 37% lead over Paul, who ran second to Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann in the recent high-profile Ames Straw Poll in Iowa.

Paul, whose long run afoul of the GOP establishment with his libertarian policy prescriptions, picks up 61% of the Republican vote, while 78% of Democrats fall in behind the president. Voters not affiliated with either of the major political parties prefer the longtime congressman by 10 points – 43% to 33%. …”

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2012/election_2012_presidential_election/obama_39_paul_38

Election 2012: Generic Presidential Ballot
Election 2012: Generic Republican 48%, Obama 43%
“… A generic Republican candidate now holds a five-point advantage over President Obama in a hypothetical 2012 election match-up for the week ending Sunday, August 21. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Likely U.S. Voters finds the generic Republican earning 48% of the vote, while the president picks up support from 43%.  Two percent (2%) prefer some other candidate, and seven percent (7%) are undecided. ,,,”

The US Misery Index
January 1948 to July 2011

Misery Index = Unemployment rate + Inflation rate

http://www.miseryindex.us/customindexbymonth.asp

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Victor Gold: Invasion of the Party Snatchers–Videos

Posted on June 24, 2011. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, Communications, Economics, Federal Government, Foreign Policy, government, government spending, history, Inflation, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, People, Philosophy, Politics, Raves, Religion, Security, Strategy, Talk Radio, Taxes, Unemployment, Video, War, Wealth, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , |

 

 

“…Victor Gold wants his party back. Gold is the former press aide to Barry Goldwater and the former speechwriter and senior advisor for George H. W. Bush. He is incensed that the Neo-Cons and the Evangelical Right have betrayed the ideals of the conservative cause. Now he’s fighting back. A Republican insider for 40 years, Gold is ready to tell all about the war being waged for the GOP’s soul, the elder Bush’s opinion of his son’s presidency, the significance of the Democratic resurgence, and how Goldwater would have reacted to it all. Among Gold’s explosive disclosures is the truth about Cheney’s manipulation of George W., and the chilling, puppet-like role of the President amongst Neo- and Theo-Conservatives. “Entertaining, provocative . . . Mr. Gold is on to something.” -The Washington Times “For those disillusioned with the state of the GOP, this quick, uncompromising polemic provides substantial support, along with a large dose of cold comfort.” -Publishers Weekly “Like his political mentor Barry Goldwater, Gold pulls no verbal punches in telling the story of how the Bush-Cheney White House has made a mockery of the conservative values it claims to uphold.” -Frank Mankiewicz, former press secretary to Robert Kennedy and George McGovern’s campaign manager “Victor Gold unleashes a bitter yet comic blend of ferocity and ridicule at the neo-conservatives and theocrats who have taken over his party.”

 -Jules Witcover

http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/invasion-of-the-party-snatchers-victor-gold/1019419946?ean=9781402247903&itm=1&usri=victor%2bgold

 

Victor Gold Speech pt1

 

Victor Gold Speech pt2

 

Victor Gold Speech pt3

 

Neo-cons: Invasion of the Party Snatchers Part 1

 

Neo-cons: Invasion of the Party Snatchers Part 2

 

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

Neoconservatives–Not New and Not Conservative–American Empire Interventionists

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

William F. Buckley–Right From The Start–Videos

Posted on February 9, 2010. Filed under: Blogroll, Communications, Economics, Federal Government, Fiscal Policy, Foreign Policy, government, Law, liberty, Life, Links, media, Monetary Policy, People, Philosophy, Politics, Quotations, Rants, Raves, Religion, Technology, Video, War, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , |

Fox News – William F Buckley – Right From The Start

 

Fox News – William F Buckley – Right From The Start

Fox News – William F Buckley – Right From The Start

Fox News – William F Buckley – Right From The Start

Fox News – William F Buckley – Right From The Start

Fox News – William F Buckley – Right From The Start

Related Posts On Pronk Palisade

Mr. Conservative In Heaven–William F. Buckley Jr. RIP

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Woodrow Wilson–Richard Norton Smith on Woodrow Wilson–Videos

Posted on September 19, 2009. Filed under: Blogroll, Communications, Demographics, Economics, Education, Employment, Energy, Foreign Policy, history, Law, liberty, Life, Links, People, Philosophy, Politics, Quotations, Rants, Raves, Strategy, Taxes, Video, War, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , |

 woodrow_wilson

Richard Norton Smith on Woodrow Wilson (1 of 6)

Richard Norton Smith on Woodrow Wilson (2 of 6)

Richard Norton Smith on Woodrow Wilson (3 of 6)

Richard Norton Smith on Woodrow Wilson (4 of 6)

Richard Norton Smith on Woodrow Wilson (5 of 6)

Richard Norton Smith on Woodrow Wilson (6 of 6)

Background Articles and Vdeos

Richard Norton Smith

“…Richard Norton Smith (born Leominster, Massachusetts in 1953- ) is an American speechwriter and historian. “There’s no excuse for a dull book, a dull museum, or a dull speech,” says Richard Norton Smith. “Especially when dealing with history – the most fascinating subject I know.” His unstuffy approach to the past, combined with his trademark humor, flavors the commentary he provides regularly on C-SPAN and The Newshour With Jim Lehrer.

Born in Leominster, Massachusetts in 1953, Mr. Smith graduated magna cum laude from Harvard University in 1975 with a degree in government. Following graduation he worked as a White House intern and as a free lance writer for The Washington Post. After being employed as a speech writer for Massachusetts Senator Edward Brooke, he went to work for Senator Bob Dole, with whom he has collaborated on numerous projects over the years.

Mr. Smith’s first major book, Thomas E. Dewey and His Times, was a finalist for the 1983 Pulitzer Prize. He has also written An Uncommon Man: The Triumph of Herbert Hoover (1984), The Harvard Century: The Making of a University to a Nation (1986) and Patriarch: George Washington and the New American Nation (1993). In June 1997, Houghton Mifflin published Mr. Smith’s The Colonel: The Life and Legend of Robert R. McCormick, which received the prestigious Goldsmith Prize awarded by Harvard’s John F. Kennedy School, and has been described by Hilton Kramer as “the best book ever written about the press.” Currently Mr. Smith is at work on a biography of Nelson Rockefeller, a massive project involving thousands of pages of newly available documents, as well as more than 150 interviews with Rockefeller associates.

Between 1987 and 2001, Mr. Smith served as Director of the Herbert Hoover Presidential Library and Museum in West Branch, Iowa; the Dwight D. Eisenhower Center in Abilene, Kansas; the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library and the Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation and the Reagan Center for Public Affairs in Simi Valley, California; and the Gerald R. Ford Museum and Library in Grand Rapids and Ann Arbor, Michigan respectively.

At each of the libraries he contributed to significantly higher public visitation through major temporary exhibits, imaginative public programs, and educational outreach efforts. In addition to expanding and renovating the Hoover Library, Mr. Smith overhauled the permanent exhibitions at Hoover, Reagan and Ford. In 1990 he organized the Eisenhower Centennial on behalf of the National Archives.

In 2001 Mr. Smith became director of the Robert J. Dole Institute of Politics at the University of Kansas, where he supervised construction of the Institute’s landmark home and launched several high profile programs. In October, 2003 he was appointed Founding Director of the Abraham Lincoln Presidential Library and Museum, in Springfield, Illinois. In two and a half years he turned around the troubled project, which has since received international acclaim for its innovative approach to history. During this same period, Mr. Smith also served as Executive Director of a revitalized Abraham Lincoln Presidential Library Foundation, which doubled its endowment under his leadership.

On February 12, 2009, Mr. Smith was a featured speaker at the Congressional Bicameral Celebration of Abraham Lincoln’s 200th Birthday, held at the U.S. Capitol. He concluded his speech with the line, “Long before he was the President against whom all others are measured, Abraham Lincoln was the American we might all aspire to be.”

Mr. Smith is presently a Scholar in Residence at George Mason University in suburban Washington, D.C. …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Norton_Smith

Woodrow Wilson

“..Thomas Woodrow Wilson, Ph.D. (December 28, 1856–February 3, 1924)[1] was the 28th President of the United States. A leading intellectual of the Progressive Era, he served as President of Princeton University from 1902 to 1910, and then as the Governor of New Jersey from 1911 to 1913. With Theodore Roosevelt and William Howard Taft dividing the Republican Party vote, Wilson was elected President as a Democrat in 1912. To date he is the only President to hold a doctorate (Ph.D.) degree aside from those who have held JDs, and the only President to serve in a political office in New Jersey before election to the Presidency.

In his first term, Wilson supported a Democratic Congress to pass the Federal Reserve Act,[2] Federal Trade Commission, the Clayton Antitrust Act, the Federal Farm Loan Act and America’s first-ever federal progressive income tax in the Revenue Act of 1913. In a move that garnered a backlash from civil rights groups, and is still criticized today, Wilson supported imposing segregation in many federally-funded agencies,[3][4] which involved firing black workers from numerous posts.[5]

Narrowly re-elected in 1916, Wilson’s second term centered on World War I. He based his re-election campaign around the slogan “he kept us out of the war,” but U.S. neutrality would be short-lived. When German Foreign Secretary Arthur Zimmermann sent a message to Mexico offering to return Arizona, New Mexico and Texas to them if they would ally with Germany in the event of war, and began unrestricted submarine warfare, Wilson wrote several admonishing notes to Germany, and, finally in April 1917, asked Congress to declare war. He focused on diplomacy and financial considerations, leaving the waging of the war primarily in the hands of the military establishment. On the home front, he began the United States’ first effective draft in 1917, raised billions in war funding through Liberty Bonds, set up the War Industries Board, promoted labor union growth, supervised agriculture and food production through the Lever Act, took over control of the railroads, enacted the first federal drug prohibition, and suppressed anti-war movements. National women’s suffrage was also achieved under Wilson’s presidency.

In the late stages of the war, Wilson took personal control of negotiations with Germany, including the armistice. He issued his Fourteen Points, his view of a post-war world that could avoid another terrible conflict. He went to Paris in 1919 to create the League of Nations and shape the Treaty of Versailles, with special attention on creating new nations out of defunct empires. Largely for his efforts to form the League, he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. In 1919, during the bitter fight with the Republican-controlled Senate over the U.S. joining the League of Nations, Wilson collapsed with a debilitating stroke. He refused to compromise, effectively destroying any chance for ratification. The League of Nations was established anyway, but the United States never joined. Wilson’s idealistic internationalism, now referred to as “Wilsonianism”, which calls for the United States to enter the world arena to fight for democracy, has been a contentious position in American foreign policy, serving as a model for “idealists” to emulate and “realists” to reject ever since.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woodrow_wilson

World War I: Entry Of The United States – part 1/4

World War I: Entry Of The United States – part 2/4

World War I: Entry Of The United States – part 3/4

World War I: Entry Of The United States – part 4/4

Woodrow Wilson at the White House, 1917

Woodrow Wilson Speaking at Labor Convention, 1918?

Woodrow Wilson at Airmail Service Dedication, May 25, 1918

Woodrow Wilson’s funeral

American Progressives

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

Liberal Fascism–Jonah Goldberg–Videos

New Media Connects The Dots–SDS–Jeff Jones–Apollo Alliance–Big Media–Pelosi–Jim Jones–Cult of Personality–Barack Obama

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 2 so far )

New World Order–They Are Coming To Take You Away–Hossana Obama–HO-HO–HO!

Posted on November 15, 2008. Filed under: Blogroll, Books, Comedy, Communications, Cult, Education, Energy, Life, Links, Music, People, Politics, Quotations, Rants, Raves, Religion, Security, Talk Radio, Video, War | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

 

Black Hawk – blackhawk helicopter music video

Looks like the black helicopters will be landing any minute.

Time to find a cave and stay there.

HO-HO-HO

Santa Claus is coming to town!

 

Bruce Springsteen – Santa Claus Is Comin’ To Town


 

You better watch out
You better not cry
Better not pout
I’m telling you why
Santa Claus is coming to town
He’s making a list
And checking it twice;
Gonna find out Who’s naughty and nice
Santa Claus is coming to town
He sees you when you’re sleeping
He knows when you’re awake
He knows if you’ve been bad or good
So be good for goodness sake!
O! You better watch out!
You better not cry
Better not pout
I’m telling you why
Santa Claus is coming to town
Santa Claus is coming to town

 

New World Order

 

The New World Order is Here!

 

CNN/DOBBS: W FULFILLS HIS DAD’S DREAM OFA NEW WORLD ORDER

 

New World Order – Time to blow the cover

 

NORTH AMERICAN UNION

 

North American Union Discussed on FOX


 

Defamation And The Takeover Of America

 

Background Articles and Videos

 

New World Order

“…New World Order refers to a supposed conspiracy in which a powerful and secretive group is plotting to eventually rule the world via an autonomous world government, which would replace sovereign states and other checks and balances in world power struggles. In this theory, many significant occurrences are said to be caused by a powerful secret group or groups. Historical and current events are seen as steps in an on-going plot to rule the world primarily through a combination of political finance, social engineering, mind control, and fear-based propaganda.[1][2][3][4][5]

 

The modern use of the phrase New World Order originated in the early 20th century with Cecil Rhodes, who advocated that the British Empire and the United States of America should jointly impose a Federal World Government (with English as the official language) to bring about lasting world “peace”.[6] A sinister motive is seen in the fact that Rhodes founded the Rhodes Scholarship as a global brotherhood of future leaders. Lionel Curtis, who also believed in this idea, founded the Round Table movement in 1909, which led to the establishment of the British-based Royal Institute for International Affairs in 1919 and the U.S.-based Council on Foreign Relations in 1921.[7] The concept was further developed by Edward M. House, a close advisor to Woodrow Wilson during the negotiations to set up the League of Nations (it is unclear whether it was House or Wilson who invented the actual phrase). Another important influence was the author H.G. Wells, a vigorous advocate for world government.[8]
One official mention which has garnered attention was in Gerald Ford’s “Declaration of Interdependence” on October 24, 1975; according to the ex-general counsel of the Export-Import Bank of the United States, Peter Beter, the Declaration of Interdependence states that:

We must join with others to bring forth a new world order… Narrow notions of national sovereignty must not be permitted to curtail that obligation.[9]

Elements are present in the populism of the nineteenth century. In present form, this can be traced to the collapse of the Soviet Union and President George H. W. Bush’s new world order speech of September 11, 1990. In it, he described the United States’ objectives for post-cold-war cooperation with the former Soviet Union, using the phrase new world order.[10]

Alternative terms for the New World Order are used by theorists: Cryptocracy, Fourth Reich, High Cabal, Illuminati Bankers, Power Elite, Powers That Be, and Synarchist International. …” 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_World_Order_(conspiracy)

 

Security and Prosperity Partnership Of North America
Security and Prosperity Partnership Of North America

Security and Prosperity Partnership Of North America

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“…The Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP) was launched in March of 2005 as a trilateral effort to increase security and enhance prosperity among the United States, Canada and Mexico through greater cooperation and information sharing.

This trilateral initiative is premised on our security and our economic prosperity being mutually reinforcing. The SPP recognizes that our three great nations are bound by a shared belief in freedom, economic opportunity, and strong democratic institutions.

The SPP provides the framework to ensure that North America is the safest and best place to live and do business. It includes ambitious security and prosperity programs to keep our borders closed to terrorism yet open to trade.

The SPP builds upon, but is separate from, our long-standing trade and economic relationships. It energizes other aspects of our cooperative relations, such as the protection of our environment, our food supply, and our public health. …”

http://www.spp.gov/

 

Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America

“The Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America is a region-level dialogue with the stated purpose of providing greater cooperation on security and economic issues.[1] The Partnership was founded in Waco, Texas on March 23, 2005 by Paul Martin, Prime Minister of Canada, Vicente Fox, President of Mexico, and George W. Bush, President of the United States.[1]…”

“…The stated goals of the SPP are cooperation and information sharing, improving productivity, reducing the costs of trade, enhancing the joint stewardship of the environment, facilitating agricultural trade while creating a safer and more reliable food supply, and protecting people from disease.

The SPP is based on the belief that prosperity is dependent on security, and claims that the three nations are bound by a shared belief in freedom, economic opportunity, and strong democratic institutions. It is intended to assist, rather than replace, existing bilateral and trilateral institutions like the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and claims to work towards the three North American countries working cooperatively in the face of common risks and economic competition from low cost comulti-modal transportation system along the International Mid-Continent Trade and Transportation Corridor to improve both the trade competitiveness and quality of life in North America.

North American Facilitation of Transportation, Trade, Reduced Congestion & Security (NAFTRACS) is a three phase pilot project designed to focus on business processes and information as freight is transported from buyers to sellers. The project is intended to create a partnership between businesses and local, state, and federal governments, while claiming to foster cooperation among the same entities. …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_and_Prosperity_Partnership_of_North_America

The Dangers of the “North American Union” by Jerome Corsi


 

Roy Masters as a guest on The Joe Franklin Show 1/2

 

Roy Masters as a guest on The Joe Franklin Show 2/2

 

Roy Masters: Be still and “you’ll know.”

 

Roy Masters: This Is Not An Ordinary Discussion

 

Roy Masters “How Not to React”

 

Roy Masters “Understand, Don’t Learn”

 

PART 1 Meditation Exercise by Roy Masters “Be Still & Know”

 

PART 2 Meditation Exercise by Roy Masters “Be Still & Know”

 

Foundation of Human Understanding

* * * S P E C I A L F E A T U R E * * *
Democrats: The Trojan Horse of Democracy?

http://fhu.com/

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 2 so far )

Profiles in Opportunism–General Colin Powell–RINO Ingrate

Posted on October 21, 2008. Filed under: Blogroll, Economics, Links, Politics, Quotations, Rants, Raves, Science, Security, Strategy, Taxes, Technology, Video, War | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

“One man’s opportunism is another man’s statesmanship”

 ~Milton Friedman

 

The personal attacks against me during the primary finally became so heavy that the state Republican chairman, Gaylord Parkinson, postulated what he called the Eleventh Commandment: Thou shalt not speak ill of any fellow Republican. It’s a rule I followed during that campaign and have ever since.

~Ronald Reagan

 

RicePowellBushRumsfeld.jpg

 

General Colin Powell Endorses Barack Obama! pt.1

 

General Colin Powell Endorses Barack Obama! pt.2

 

h4>General Colin Powell Endorses Barack Obama! pt.3

 

I would have voted for General Powell had he decided to run and obtained the nomination in 1996.

While not totally surprised by General Powell’s endorsement of Senator Obama, his reasoning is highly suspect. Frankly it does not make sense.

Senator Obama is a radical socialist that has associated with a black racist minister for over twenty years, two terrorist bombers for over twelve years, convicted felons, and the very far left of the Democratic Party and several leftist socialist parties.

 

Top 20 Obama Pastor Comments You Never Saw

 

Barack Obama & Friends Sean Hannity Special

 

Barack Obama & Friends Sean Hannity Special Part 2

 

Barack Obama & Friends Sean Hannity Special Part 3 

 

Barack Obama & Friends Sean Hannity Special Part 4

 

Barack Obama & Friends Sean Hannity Special Part 5

 

Barack Obama & Friends Sean Hannity Special Part 6

 

 

Barack’s Trinity Church (Part 1 of 2)

 

Barack’s Trinity Church (Part 2 of 2)

 

Ayers’ Weathermen planned “re-education”, genocide

 

Either General Powell has not done his homework or he has conveniently chosen to ignore it.

Senator Obama could not pass a routine FBI or Secret Service background check.

Red flags would be flying!

Obama is an economic illiterate, ask Thomas Sowell for his opionion. He is no fan of either Senator McCain or Senator Obama.

Senator McCain is a moderate Republican that leans towards to right some of the time.

The problem the Republican Party has is it moved to the left over the last four years and nearly destroyed the party in the process.

Senator McCain did not fire you General Powell, President George W. Bush did when he asked for your letter of resignation.

Instead Senator McCain wanted your opponent Defense Secretary Rumsfeld fired.

Senator McCain was right and President George W. Bush was very slow in changing strategy and leadership of the war in Iraq.

While I understand identity politics, I think people who vote this way will be very disappointed.

Several Republican Presidents gave General Powell career opportunities that very few military officers are ever given.

For General Powell at this late date to decide to support a Senator that is unqualified and of questionable character smells of opportunism, ingratitude and poor judgement.

General Powell was fooled, he will regret his endorsement.

President McCain will remember this betrayal by General Powell of his former party.

Weapons of mass destruction did exist and still exist in Iraq and Syria.

 

Democrats on Iraq + WMD’s (Weapons of Mass Destruction)

 

Al Gore: No Doubt Saddam’s Weapons Are Grave Threat

 

If Bush Lied, Did Bill Clinton Lie on Iraq WMD?

 

Gore criticizes Bush for ignoring Iraq’s ties to terrorism

 

Newt Gingrich on Powell endorsement

 

Our own “Phoney War” – Newt Gingrich

 

Rush Limbaugh, Race And The Colin Powell Endorsement

 

Colin Powell

Colin Luther Powell (born April 5, 1937[1]) is a retired General in the United States Army. He was the 65th United States Secretary of State (2001–2005), serving under President George W. Bush. As a General in the United States Army, Powell also served as National Security Advisor (1987–1989) and as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (1989–1993), holding the latter position during the Gulf War. He was the first and, so far, the only Jamaican American to serve on the Joint Chiefs of Staff or in the Cabinet. …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colin_Powell

Republican In Name Only

Republican In Name Only, or RINO, is a neologism created by Los Angeles conservative activist Celeste Greig. It is considered a disparaging term for a member of the Republican Party of the United States (the GOP) whose political views or actions are perceived as insufficiently conservative or otherwise outside the party mainstream. …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_In_Name_Only

 

The Colin Powell endorsement: Triumph of hope over reality

By Michelle Malkin  

“…Powell’s embrace of Barack Obama is a triumph of hope over reality. He told Tom Brokaw that Obama’s “steadiness” and “not jumping in and changing every day” convinced him that The One was ready to lead.

Hello?

Guess Powell relied on Obama’s website after he purged his surge criticism from it.

Powell then goes on to pooh-pooh Obama’s longtime “limited relationship” with Weather Underground terrorist Bill Ayers as an “issue that is not central” to the campaign — just as evidence of the closeness of these two very chummy “neighbors” mounts.

Judgment, schmudgment, eh, Secretary Powell?

Finally, we arrive at the real reason Powell is endorsing Obama: The party, he complains, has become too “narrow” for his tastes. Pro-abortion Powell can’t stand the thought of two more Republican Supreme Court appointments. He thinks Sarah Palin is too conservative. He shares the Obama view of our base as racist and non-inclusive — but has nothing to say about the rabid pack of America-damning preachers who helped make Obama the “transformational” figure Powell has placed his faith in.  …” 

http://michellemalkin.com/

 

Thomas Sowell: Obama has voters convinced his ‘change’ is needed

“…Perhaps a defining moment in showing Obama’s priorities was his declaring, in answer to a question from Charles Gibson, that he was for raising the capital gains tax rate. When Gibson reminded him of the well-documented fact that lower tax rates on capital gains had produced more actual revenue collected from that tax than the higher tax rates had, Obama was unmoved.

The question may be the economic issue, but the political issue is whether socking it to “the rich” in the name of “fairness” gains more votes.

Since about half the people in the United States own stocks — either directly or because their pension funds buy stocks — socking it to people who earn capital gains is by no means socking it just to “the rich.”

If you are a nurse or mechanic who will be depending on your pension to take care of you when you retire — as Social Security is unlikely to do — you may not think of yourself as one of the privileged.

Obama is for higher minimum wage rates. Does anyone care what actually happens in countries with higher minimum wage rates? Of course not. Studies show that higher minimum wage rates usually mean higher unemployment rates among lower skilled and less experienced workers.

http://www.norwichbulletin.com/opinions/columnists/x518448713/Thomas-Sowell-Obama-has-voters-convinced-his-change-is-needed

 

Barack Obama on Taxes

 

 United States Security and the Strategic Landscape

 

Thomas Barnett: The Pentagon’s new map for war and peace

 

The Pentagons New Map – Thomas Barnett lecture

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4689061169761152025

 

“Pat Brown brought Senator Edward Kennedy to California to help him campaign, and he began a speaking trip around the state declaring, “Reagan has never held any political office before and here he is seeking the top spot in the government of California.” He abandoned that theme after my next speech, when I said, “I understand there’s a senator from Massachusetts who’s come to California and he’s concerned that I’ve never held office prior to seeking this job. Well, you know, come to think of it, the senator from Massachusetts never held any job before he became a senator.”

~Ronald Reagan

http://www.ronaldreagan.com/campaign.html

LOL

Red State Update: Colin Powell Endorses Obama

 

 

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

Killer of American Dreams–Barack Obama–Radical Socialist–Video 

Phoney Political Polls–Just Flip It Off–McCain 55% vs. Obama 40%

New Poll: McCain/Palin Will Win 50 States!–Obama/Biden Will Win 57 States?

General George S. Patton vs. Senator Barack H. Obama–No Contest

Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Castro, Chavez, Ayers–Obama, Biden–Socialist Thieves All!

George Soros: Barack Obama’s Money Man and Agenda Puppeter

The Movement Conservatives Will Rock You Obama!

Obama Anthem, Flag and Salute for The First Democratic Party Rally in Stadium

Conservative Turnout Will Determine the Outcome of The Presidential 2008 Race Between McCain vs. Obama

ACORN–Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now–Obama’s Red Shirts

Barrack “Taxman” Obama–Yes He Can Take Your Money–But Only You Can Stop Socialism!

Voters Beware: The Radical Rules of Saul Alinsky and Leftist Democrats

Obama–ACORN–CRA–Congress–Democratic Party–Fannie Mae–Barrack Obama’s Kansas Values–Killing Babies in Cold Blood?

Unconstrained Obama vs. Constrained McCain: A Conflict of Visions

Outting Obama: Radical Racist Rabble Rouser Reader

Barack Obama: The First Previable Puppet Presidential Candidate!

Barack Obama–A Reader Not A Leader!

Barack Obama Cult? 

Barack Obama: A Watermelon Man–Green on The Outside–Red on The Inside

Barack Obama–Damaged Goods–Birds of A Feather Flock Together

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 7 so far )

The Sovereign Wealth Fund Threat: Are Chinese Communists Behind Rush In Passing Bailout Bill?

Posted on October 3, 2008. Filed under: Blogroll, Books, Economics, Investments, Links, Music, People, Politics, Quotations, Rants, Raves, Regulations, Resources, Technology, Uncategorized, Video, War | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

What is going on?

The Elite Looting Americans


 

Rep. McCotter discusses Sovereign Wealth Funds

Ron Paul talks @ Sovereign Wealth Funds Hearing 9/10/8

Sovereign wealth funds explained – Newsnight video

Lee Kuan Yew on Singapore sovereign wealth fund

Sovereign Wealth Funds On The Rise

Sovereign wealth funds – what China will do next?

Sovereign Wealth Funds — Navarro’s China Effect

17th Annual Conference:Sovereign Wealth Fund Investment 7/10

17th AnnualConference:Sovereign Wealth Fund Investment 10/10

Paul Volcker on Sovereign Wealth Funds and the Economy


 

China’s threat to American economic stability: CNN

America’s Fate in the Coming Era of Chinese Hegemony

“…a parliament or government which becomes a charitable institution thereby becomes exposed to irresistable blackmail. And it soon ceases to be the ‘deserts’ but becomes exclusively the ‘political necessity’ which determines which groups are to be favoured at general expense.”

~Friedrick A. Hayek, The Political Order of a Free People, page 150.

“…once wide coercive powers are given to governmental agencies for particular purposes, such powers cannot be effectively controlled by democratic assemblies.”

~Friedrick A. Hayek, The Constitution of Liberty, page 116.

“It would scarcely be an exaggeration to say that the greatest danger to liberty today comes from the men who are most needed and most powerful in modern government, namely, the efficient expert administrators exclusively concerned with what they regard as the public good.”

~Friedrick A. Hayek, The Constitution of Liberty, page 262.

 

Why all the rush in passing the bailout bill?

Why were alternative courses of action ruled out?

Why does the Federal government need to purchase the assets of financial institutions instead providing liquidity in the form of loans or investment to these financial institutions?

Is this an October surprise to influence the US elections?

Why are President Bush, Senators McCain and Obama resorting to dire fear mongering and very similar phrases and stories to try to convince and scare the American people to supporting the quick passage of the United States Government bailout of financial institutions, the so-called Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008?

George W. B ush statement on failure of wall street bail out 

McCain statement of failure of bailout bill

Obama Still Begging Taxpayers To Support Wall Street Bailout Bill

The fear campaign is not working.

Credit is not frozen.

The American people are calling their banks, credit unions, and car dealers–loans are being made.

Business as usual.

Just like it was business as usual in Congress.

The American elites are lying to the American people and the American people know it.

Some suspect that the Chinese Communists may have made it known to the US that China will not continued to hold US Treasury securities unless the US Federal government purchases from Chinese financial institutions those US mortgage-backed and related securities that are currently depressed in prices-so-called troubled assets.

In other words the US Treasury needs to bail out Chinese financial institutions that have purchased securities from US financial institutions, such as investment banks.

Why?

How much mortgage backed securities do Chinese financial institutions hold in their investment portfolios?

How much have these Chinese financial institutions  lost on holding this type of securities?

A lot of questions, but not many answers from the American elites.

Just hurry up and pass the bailout bill or else the US economy goes into a severe recession if not depression?

The American elites are not leveling with the American people. 

Charlie Rose – Economist Milton Friedman

What is going on?

First read the following from the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 that the Senate passed:

Sec. 112. Coordination with foreign authorities and central banks.  

The Secretary shall coordinate, as appropriate, with foreign financial authorities and central banks to work toward the establishment of similar programs by such authorities and central banks. To the extent that such foreign financial authorities or banks hold troubled assets as a result of extending financing to financial institutions that have failed or defaulted on such financing, such troubled assets qualify for purchase under section 101. 

The Secretary shall coordinate, as appropriate, with foreign financial authorities and central banks to work toward the establishment of similar programs by such authorities and central banks. To the extent that such foreign financial authorities or banks hold troubled assets as a result of extending financing to financial institutions that have failed or defaulted on such financing, such troubled assets qualify for purchase under section 101. 

The Secretary shall coordinate, as appropriate, with foreign financial authorities and central banks to work toward the establishment of similar programs by such authorities and central banks. To the extent that such foreign financial authorities or banks hold troubled assets as a result of extending financing to financial institutions that have failed or defaulted on such financing, such troubled assets qualify for purchase under section 101. 

Note that the definition of what is a “troubled asset” under section 101 is quite broad:

TROUBLED ASSETS

—The term ‘‘troubled assets’’ means—

(A) residential or commercial mortgages and any securities, obligations, or other instruments that are based on or related to such mortgages, that in each case was originated or issued on or before March 14, 2008, the purchase of which the Secretary determines promotes financial market stability; and

(B) any other financial instrument that the Secretary, after consultation with the Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, determines the purchase of which is necessary to promote financial market stability, but only upon transmittal of such determination, in writing, to the appropriate committees of Congress. 

 http://banking.senate.gov/public/_files/latestversionAYO08C32_xml.pdf  

Looks like the United States will be buying billions of dollars of troubled assets from foreign banks, including China.

The failure of Congress and specifically the Democratic Party to allow appropriate regulation and oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac will result in the bailout of China who bought upwards of $400 billion of mortgaged backed securities or agencies.

Now what is the source of all those campaign contributions to certain Presidential candidates coming from abroad in 2008? 

Secret, Foreign Money Floods Into Obama Campaign

By: Kenneth R. Timmerman 

“…And then there are the overseas donations — at least, the ones that we know about.

The FEC has compiled a separate database of potentially questionable overseas donations that contains more than 11,500 contributions totaling $33.8 million. More than 520 listed their “state” as “IR,” often an abbreviation for Iran. Another 63 listed it as “UK,” the United Kingdom.

More than 1,400 of the overseas entries clearly were U.S. diplomats or military personnel, who gave an APO address overseas. Their total contributions came to just $201,680.

But others came from places as far afield as Abu Dhabi, Addis Ababa, Beijing, Fallujah, Florence, Italy, and a wide selection of towns and cities in France.

Until recently, the Obama Web site allowed a contributor to select the country where he resided from the entire membership of the United Nations, including such friendly places as North Korea and the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Unlike McCain’s or Sen. Hillary Clinton’s online donation pages, the Obama site did not ask for proof of citizenship until just recently. Clinton’s presidential campaign required U.S. citizens living abroad to actually fax a copy of their passport before a donation would be accepted.

With such lax vetting of foreign contributions, the Obama campaign may have indirectly contributed to questionable fundraising by foreigners. …”

http://www.newsmax.com/timmerman/Obama_fundraising_illegal/2008/09/29/135718.html?s=al&promo_code=6BD9-1  

Also consider that in the 1996 Presidential election significant campaign contributions were given to President Clinton from Chinese sources:

1996 United States campaign finance controversy

“The 1996 United States campaign finance controversy was an alleged effort by the People’s Republic of China to influence domestic American politics during the 1996 federal elections.

The issue first received public attention in early 1997, with news that a Justice Department investigation had uncovered evidence that agents of China sought to direct contributions to the Democratic National Committee (DNC) in violation of U.S. laws regarding foreign political contributions.[1] While the Chinese government denied all accusations, twenty-two people were eventually convicted for fraud or for funneling Asian funds into the United States elections. …”

“…According to the United States Senate report Investigation of Illegal or Improper Activities in Connection with 1996 Federal Election Campaigns, prior to 1995 China’s approach to promoting its interests in the United States was focused almost exclusively on diplomacy, including summits and meetings with high-level White House officials. In these meetings, Chinese officials often negotiated with the United States government by using the appeal of their huge commercial market.[2]

Around 1995, according to the Senate report, Chinese officials developed a new approach to promote their interests with the United States government and to improve China’s image with the American people. The proposals, dubbed the “China Plan”, were prompted by the United States Congress’s successful lobbying of the president to grant a visa to Taiwan President Lee Teng-Hui. United States Secretary of State Warren Christopher had previously assured his Chinese counterpart Qian Qichen that granting a visa would be “inconsistent with [the United States’] unofficial relationship [with Taiwan]”[3] and the Clinton Administration’s acquiescence to the Congressional resolutions led China to conclude that the influence of Congress over foreign policy was more significant than it had previously determined. When formulating the so-called plan, Chinese officials acknowledged that, compared to other countries, it had little knowledge of, or influence over, policy decisions made in Congress, which had a sizeable pro-Taiwan faction under the influence of a more established “China Lobby” run by the Kuomintang.[2]

The plan, according the Senate report, instructed Chinese officials in the U.S. to improve their knowledge about members of Congress and increase contacts with its members, the public, and the media. The plan also suggested ways to lobby United States officials.[2]

Over the years, China has repeatedly denied these lobbying efforts involved financial contributions of any kind:

[S]ome people and media in the United States speculated… about so-called participation by Chinese individuals in political donations during the U.S. elections. It is sheer fabrication and is intended to slander China. [China] has never, nor will we ever, use money to influence American politics — China’s Foreign Ministry spokesman, May 1998.[4] …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1996_United_States_campaign_finance_controversy

Why all the rush now to bail out foreign countries whose financial institutions bought “troubled assets”?

Who is pulling the trigger on the financial crisis?

Why was the trigger pulled now?

Defeat the cram down bailout bill.

Only you can prevent socialism in America. 

“We are only beginning to understand on how subtle a communication system the functioning of an advanced industrial society is based–a communications system which we call the market and which turns out to be a more efficient mechanism for digesting dispersed information than any that man has deliberately designed.”

~Friedrick A. Hayek, ‘The Pretense of Knowledge’, New Studies, page 34.

 

“The effective limitation of power is the most important problem of social order.”

~Friedrick A. Hayek, The Political Order of a Free People, page 128.

What is going on? 

 

~Marvin Gaye “What’s Going On / What’s Happening Brother

 
 
 

 

 

 

Background Articles and Videos 

  

 

Sovereign wealth funds explained – Newsnight video

 

Corporate Advisory Insight: Sovereign Wealth Funds

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFIyqhUejqc&feature=related

  
 
 

 

 
 

 

Lee Kuan Yew on Singapore sovereign wealth fund

 

Davos Annual Meeting 2008 – Sovereign Wealth Funds

  
 
 

 

 
 

 

LOL

Bird & Fortune: George Parr, Conservative MP

 
 
 

 

 

 

 

 
 
 

 

 

 
 
 

 

 
 

 

Sovereign wealth fund

“A sovereign wealth fund (SWF) is a state-owned investment fund composed of financial assets such as stocks, bonds, property, precious metals or other financial instruments. Sovereign wealth funds have gained world-wide exposure by investing in several Wall Street financial firms including Citigroup, Morgan Stanley, and Merrill Lynch. These firms needed a cash infusion due to losses resulting from the subprime mortgage crisis. 

Some sovereign wealth funds are held solely by central banks, who accumulate the funds in the course of their fiscal management of a nation’s banking system; this type of fund is usually of major economic and fiscal importance. Other sovereign wealth funds are simply the state savings which are invested by various entities for the purposes of investment return, and which may not have significant role in fiscal management.

The accumulated funds may have their origin in, or may represent foreign currency deposits, gold, SDRs and IMF reserve positions held by central banks and monetary authorities, along with other national assets such as pension investments, oil funds, or other industrial and financial holdings. These are assets of the sovereign nations which are typically held in domestic and different reserve currencies such as the dollar, euro and yen. Such investment management entities may be set up as official investment companies, state pension funds, or sovereign oil funds, among others.

There have been attempts to distinguish funds held by sovereign entities from foreign exchange reserves held by central banks. The former can be characterized as maximizing long term return, with the latter serving short term currency stabilization and liquidity management. Many central banks in recent years possess reserves massively in excess of needs for liquidity or foreign exchange management. Moreover it is widely believed most have diversified hugely into assets other than short term, highly liquid monetary ones, though almost no data is available to back up this assertion. Some central banks have even begun buying equities, or derivatives of differing ilk (even if fairly safe ones, like Overnight Interest rate swaps).[citation needed] …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_wealth_fund 

  
 
 

 

 
 

 

 

Sovereign Wealth Funds Threat to United States Economy 

“…However, there is mounting concern–fed by the lack of transparency–that these government-owned investment funds could be used to advance a political as well as economic agenda. If sovereign investors manage assets to promote more than a healthy return on investment, asset prices in countries receiving sov­ereign capital may not reflect market fundamentals, and resources will not be allocated efficiently– exacting a real cost on the economies involved.[4]

Moreover, some fear that rather than use these funds as a means to hold a diversified asset portfolio and earn a solid return on investment, countries might instead use these funds to destabilize finan­cial markets, protect industries and companies, or even expropriate technology.

With little public information available on most sovereign investors’ financial objectives, countries– including the U.S.–are increasingly uncertain about the real benefits of receiving investment from these funds and worry that they instead represent a grow­ing threat to their economic and national security. France and Germany have already declared their intention to block state-owned funds from investing in their economies.[5]

However, it is important to remember that such funds have been in operation for some time and that there is little evidence indicating that nations use their sovereign wealth funds to intentionally cause harm to the countries and firms in which they invest. Furthermore, open and competitive markets are quick to punish any investor, sovereign or otherwise, that would mismanage their holdings. Few governments–even those with highly question­able free-market credentials–intentionally allocate scarce resources to gain control of an asset for the sole purpose of destroying the value of that asset and reducing their own wealth. …” 

http://www.heritage.org/RESEARCH/TRADEANDFOREIGNAID/hl1063.cfm

 

 China Investment Corporation  

“The China Investment Corporation (CIC) is responsible for managing part of the People’s Republic of China’s foreign exchange reserves with $200 billion United States dollars of assets under management, which makes it the fourth largest Sovereign Wealth Fund.[1][2] This sovereign wealth fund officially began operations on Saturday, September 29, 2007. It bought a US $3 billion stake of Blackstone Group in June[3] and a 9.9% stake of Morgan Stanley worth US$ 5 billion on December 19, 2007.[4][5][6] 

The People’s Republic of China has US $1.7 trillion in currency reserves. The China Investment Corporation was established with the intent of utilizing these reserves for the benefit of the state, modeled according to Singapore’s Temasek Holdings. The state-owned Central Huijin Investment Corporation was merged into the new company as a wholly-owned subsidiary company.[5]

“…The Corporation aims to invest in around fifty large-sized enterprises across the world. Special treasury bonds were issued to create the capital that the CIC needed. 1,550.35 billion yuan ($207.91 billion) was issued in this bond sale. The bond process was completed in December 2007.[7] According to Lou Jiwei, the CIC needs to make a profit of 300 million Yuan every day just to pay the interest on the bonds and operation costs. The CIC paid its first interest on the bonds in February 2008 where it paid 12.9 billion yuan.[8] …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_Investment_Corporation  

 

Sovereign Wealth Funds and U.S. National Security

by Daniella Markheim  

“…In the 1990 decade, and early 2000 decade, hedge funds flexed their muscles, demonstrated their power, and earned both respect and animosity. Hedge funds have been blamed for several effects, like pushing up crude oil prices via speculation, even aiding and abetting the mortgage finance bubble. They grew in size to 9000 funds controlling $1.6 trillion in total. They stand first in line for carnage, having taken huge losses in the mortgage bond and Collateralized Debt Obligation (CDO) bond debacle. Most have suffered losses, while the great minority of smarter ones have profited on the opposite side of trades. In the process, hedge funds generally have lost a great deal of collective power, in a tarnished image. Meanwhile, the SWF funds have taken over as the prominent funds in the news, making their presence felt. In their arena, being entities connected and funded by major governments, they are huge in size. The SWF funds are the sharks operating in the ocean of liquidity, much fewer in number than the thousands of hedge fund minnows. Many hedge funds are over $1 billion in size though.

ONE COULD CONCLUDE THAT FOREIGN INSTITUTIONS HAVE BEGUN TO SHUN US$-BASED BONDS. CENTRAL BANKS ARE INCREASINGLY TURNING TO SOVEREIGN WEALTH FUNDS AS PROFITABLE INVESTMENT VEHICLES. SWF FUNDS ENABLE A CHANGE IN COURSE, ONE WHICH THREATENS US BANKERS TO THE EXTREME. UK BONDS ARE IN THE SAME SEWER PIPE AS THE US BONDS. AFTER SWF FUNDS BUY UP BIG SLICES OF US BANKS, THEY CAN PURCHASE GOLD FREELY AND PULL THE DOG CHOKER ON US BANKERS IF NEED BE, RESTRAINING THEM. …”

http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article3388.html 

What to do about big, foreign funds that are buying up the West? 

“…The biggest sovereign wealth funds “are owned by West Asian oil-producing countries, other oil producers such as Norway, and big Asian exporters such as China and Singapore….[O]il-rich West Asian nations and Russia as also large exporters such as China have been deploying part of their huge foreign-exchange reserves in sovereign [wealth] funds as investment vehicles that have grown significantly in size.” However, with all that cash moving around the global marketplace, some “rich nations, including Germany and the U.S., have…expressed uneasiness [since their governments believe that] these funds may be investing in their economies for political purposes.” Such governments are shocked – shocked! – by the notion that money might ever be used to influence the tone or direction of their policies. …” 

“…We are starting to get wind of who the winners and losers are in the government seizure of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  It is not a pretty picture.  Holders of mortgage-backed debt of the two companies, so called agency debt, and holder of subordinated debt are the big winners.  Why? Government cash investments will be paid behind the payments to the mortgage-backed and even subordinated debt.  Any threat of a default and the government will make the payments on the debt.  Who holds this stuff.  The largest holders of agency debt are 1) foreign countries through state owned banks and through sovereign wealth funds and 2) a worldwide network of private banks and 3) United States pension funds.  The largest foreign holdings of agency debt are China ($400 billion) and Japan (($230 billion).   We are bailing out China and Japan, the world’s investment banks, and our pension funds.  Who is hurt??  Shareholders.  The government gets paid back before any preferred shareholders and common shareholders get any dividends.  Some shareholders are also holders of agency debt and do not mind; their gains on the debt side will swamp their loses on the stock side.  Some American investment banks and many pension funds are in this category.  But there are some banks that hold predominately preferred stock, most of them are regional banks or commercial banks, and they are big losers.  Shares are held in the public markets and usually in diversified portfolios.

Shareholders should lose (they are the residual claimants and they elect the board) but so should the debt-holders, particularly the subordinated debt holders (they took a risk of buying an instrument very similar to preferred stock).  Many debt holders have written down the value of their debt and now, suddenly, it is worth 100 cents on the dollar.  Why bailout foreign governments and why now — both companies had reserves — thin ones — and could have run on their own for another year or so?

The answer is political, regrettably.  Treasury did not want a blowup with China and Japan before the election and it wanted to create another method of subsidizing the economy (through Frannie and Freddie) that would take effect before the election. China threatened to sell not only agency debt but Treasuries and it would roil our debt markets; tight debt markets hurt GDP.  This threat is one we need to stand up to (emergency tariffs on Chinese goods are WTO legal). …” 

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/sfgate/detail?blogid=15&entry_id=30088  

 

Chinese Government is Top Foreign Holder of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Bonds

$376 Billion in Chinese Agency Bond Holdings Subject to Taxpayer Bailout Proposals According to FreedomWorks Analysts

“…The top five foreign holders of Freddie and Fannie long-term debt are China, Japan, the Cayman Islands, Luxembourg, and Belgium. In total foreign investors hold over $1.3 trillion in these agency bonds, according to the U.S. Treasury’s most recent “Report on Foreign Portfolio Holdings of U.S. Securities.”

FreedomWorks President Matt Kibbe commented, “The prospectus for every GSE bond clearly states that it is not backed by the United States government. That’s why investors holding agency bonds already receive a significant risk premium over Treasuries.”

“A bailout at this stage would be the worst possible outcome for American taxpayers and mortgage holders, who have been paying a risk premium to these foreign investors. It would change the rules of the game retroactively and would directly subsidize the risks taken by sophisticated foreign investors.”

“A bailout of GSE bondholders would be perhaps the greatest taxpayer rip-off in American history. It is bad economics and you can be sure it is terrible politics.”

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/chinese-government-top-foreign-holder/story.aspx?guid=%7B347DF7BF-F0B7-48C9-A418-5A0B903D9F72%7D&dist=hppr 

 

Mike Pence Opposes Bailout 9/29/08

 

 
We Are Under Martial Law! As Declared By The Speaker Last Night! Rep Burgess

  
 
 

 

 
 

 

Michael Savage Argues About Financial Bail Outs Crooks on Wall Street – (9/29/08)

 
 
 

 

 

 

 

The Senate votes: Crap Sandwich 2.0 with sugar on top passes 74-25 

By Michelle Malkin  

“…There were 25 bailout busters (15 Republicans, 10 Democrats). …”

 http://michellemalkin.com/2008/10/01/the-senate-votes-crap-sandwich-20/

Who’s afraid of sovereign wealth funds?

By Tim Weber 

“…Sovereign wealth funds – government-controlled investment funds – are one of the hottest topics at the World Economic Forum in Davos. But are they really dangerous?

 
 
 

 

Richard Fuld, Lehman Brothers chief executive

Richard Fuld says the funds could soon control up to $20 trillion

 

 

Picture this: You are finance minister and several very large banks in your country are in trouble. An investment fund steps into the breach and provides the much-needed cash – say $10bn (£5bn) or thereabouts. It helps to avoid a financial meltdown.

So far so good. But what if this fund is controlled by a foreign government with unclear intentions? What if such a fund also wants to buy your nation’s most important ports?

And what if the fund takes a large stake in a business that is a rival to its country’s national champion?

Across the Western world, politicians are grumbling, and economists and business leaders are pricking their ears. …”

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7207715.stm 

 

Economists on the Bailout

 

US Economy: Even Hank Paulson’s bail-out plan cannot detox global banking

“…Around the world, investors were dumping assets they regarded as risky. World stocks were down sharply, while gold and U.S. Treasuries surged in the rush to safety.

The world’s central banks, led by the U.S. Federal Reserve, announced a $330 billion expansion of currency swap arrangements, which allows them to increase the amount of money they can provide in their home markets, effectively throwing more money at the crisis.

Earlier, the governments of Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg moved to partly nationalize Belgian-Dutch group Fortis NV with an injection of more than $16 billion, and German lender Hypo Real Estate Holding AG secured a credit line from the German government and banks of up to 35 billion euros.

British mortgage lender Bradford & Bingley Plc was brought under the government’s wing, shares of French bank Dexia tumbled on a report that it might need emergency capital, and bank rescue deals also emerged in Iceland, Russia and Denmark.

“The contagion is spreading to mainland Europe and everyone’s asking, ‘Who’s next?'” said Mark Sartori, head of European sales trading at Fox-Pitt, Kelton in London.

The Wachovia deal is the latest in a series of events that has transformed the American financial landscape and wiped out hundreds of billions of dollars of shareholder wealth.

The changes include the government takeover of mortgage finance companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc, the failure of giant savings and loan Washington Mutual, and Bank of America Corp’s purchase of Merrill Lynch & Co Inc. …”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/financialcrisis/3088685/US-Economy-Even-Hank-Paulsons-bail-out-plan-cannot-detox-global-banking.html

 
 
 

 

 

  

Largest sovereign wealth funds

 

Country  ↓ Abbreviation  ↓ Fund  ↓ Assets $Billion  ↓ Inception  ↓ Origin  ↓ Approx wealth per citizen ($)  ↓
Flag of Abu Dhabi United Arab Emirates (Abu Dhabi Emirate) ADIA Abu Dhabi Investment Authority 875 [9] 1976 Oil 1,000,000
 Norway GPF Government Pension Fund of Norway 391 [10] 1990 Oil 81,500
 Singapore GIC Government of Singapore Investment Corporation 330 [9] 1981 Non-commodity 100,000
 Kuwait KIA Kuwait Investment Authority 264.4 [11] 1953 Oil 80,000
 China CIC China Investment Corporation 200 [12] 2007.09.28 Non-commodity 151
 Singapore   Temasek Holdings1 159.2 [9] 1974 Non-commodity 35,400
 Australia FFMA Australian Government Future Fund 81.3 [13] 2004 Non-commodity 3,900
 Qatar QIA Qatar Investment Authority 60 [14] 2005 Oil 250,000
 United States (Alaska) APFC Alaska Permanent Fund 40.1 1976 Oil 61,000
 Libya   Libyan Investment Authority 50 2007 Oil 7,200
 Russia RNWF Russian National Wealth Fund 31.92 [15] 2008 Oil n/a
 Brunei BIA Brunei Investment Agency 30 1983 Oil 90,100
 South Korea KIC Korea Investment Corporation 30 2005 Non-commodity 417
 Malaysia KN Khazanah Nasional 18.3 1993 Non-commodity 658
 Kazakhstan KNF Kazakhstan National Fund 23.0 2000 Oil 1170
 China SAFE State Administration of Foreign Exchange n/a n/a Non-commodity n/a
 Taiwan NSF National Stabilisation Fund 15 2000 Non-commodity 652
 Canada (Alberta) AHF Alberta Heritage Fund 16.6 1976 Oil & Gas 5000
 Iran OSF Oil Stabilisation Fund 12.9 1999 Oil 174
Flag of Dubai United Arab Emirates (Dubai Emirate) DB Dubai World 100 2006 Oil n/a
 Saudi Arabia   Saudi Arabia Sovereign Wealth Fund 5.2 [16] 2008 Oil n/a

 

 

Defeat the Cram Down Bullshit Bailout Bill: Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008

Bailout Bill vs. Rescue Economy American People (REAP) Law

The American People Want A Full Meal Buffett Deal–Not A Bailout!

Stop The Bailout: The American Elites’ Bum Rush of The American People–No Sale!

Obama Bombs Bailout Meeting–Whitehouse Still Standing–McCain Saved By House Republicans

Obama–ACORN–CRA–Congress–Democratic Party–Fannie Mae–Freddie Mac–Bailout–Socialism– Just Say No!

ACORN–Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now–Obama’s Red Shirts 

 

 

 
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 80 so far )


Liked it here?
Why not try sites on the blogroll...