Showing posts with label  Obama. Show all posts
Showing posts with label  Obama. Show all posts

Monday, June 20, 2016

Public Outcry Forces Obama’s Hand: Uncensored Orlando Transcripts Released

Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio
iHeart.SmythRadio.com
Facebook.com/SmythRadio

Omar Mateen

by KATIE MCHUGH20 Jun 20163,932

The Department of Justice and the FBI released a more complete transcript of Muslim terrorist Omar Mateen’s 9-1-1 phone call with his statement pledging allegiance to the Islamic State after he gunned down dozens in a gay Orlando night club last Sunday.

“Unfortunately, the unreleased portions of the transcript that named the terrorist organizations and leaders have caused an unnecessary distraction from the hard work that the FBI and our law enforcement partners have been doing to investigate this heinous crime,” the joint statement read. “As much of this information had been previously reported, we have re-issued the complete transcript to include these references in order to provide the highest level of transparency possible under the circumstances.”

The new transcript still replaces the Muslim god “Allah” with God:

2:35 a.m.: Shooter contacted a 911 operator from inside Pulse. The call lasted approximately 50 seconds, the details of which are set out below:

(OD) Orlando Police Dispatcher

(OM) Omar Mateen

OD: Emergency 911, this is being recorded.

OM: In the name of God the Merciful, the beneficent [Arabic]

OD: What?

OM: Praise be to God, and prayers as well as peace be upon the prophet of God [Arabic]. I wanna let you know, I’m in Orlando and I did the shootings.

OD: What’s your name?

OM: My name is I pledge of allegiance to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi of the Islamic State.

OD: Ok, What’s your name?

OM: I pledge allegiance to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi may God protect him [Arabic], on behalf of the Islamic State.

OD: Alright, where are you at?

OM: In Orlando.

OD: Where in Orlando?

[End of call.]


The Obama administration drew intense criticism for initially scrubbing the terrorist’s references to the Islamic State as he perpetuated the deadliest mass shooting in U.S. history. “What we’re not going to do is further proclaim this man’s pledges of allegiance to terrorist groups, and further his propaganda,” Attorney General Loretta Lynch declared Sunday, before the administration reversed its decision.

Read More Stories About:

JihadNational SecurityObama,Department of JusticeFBIOmar Mateen,Orlando Terror Attack

Wednesday, May 11, 2016

Obama: Crime Created by ‘System,’ Successful People ‘Just Lucky,’ ‘Wasn’t Nothin’ You Did’

Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio iHeart.SmythRadio.com
Facebook.com/SmythRadio

Getty

by WARNER TODD HUSTON10 May 2016Washington D.C.3,476

In his commencement speech to the graduating class at Howard University last weekend, President Obama excused crime in the African American community as something fostered by an “unfair and unjust” system.

He also said successful people were “just lucky” and hinted they didn’t make their success; “It wasn’t nothin’ you did,” he insisted.

Obama appeared at the historically African American Howard University on May 7 to send the graduates off into the world with some inspiring words. But much of what the president said was less inspirational and more conspiratorial.

The president spent a large portion of the first 15 minutes of his speech properly impressing upon the minority students in attendance that they are living in an era of unprecedented opportunity. But even as he noted how far African Americans have come in America today, he said he would be speaking to the inequities blacks face.

Still, in the first half of his speech Obama did mention how far African Americans have come since he was a child. For instance, Obama praised pop queen Beyoncé and TV showrunner Shonda Rhimes as examples of how far African Americans have progressed since the Civil Rights movement began in the U.S. He also noted that blacks have come a long way in business and the law.

But finally, about twenty minutes into his speech, he did, indeed, get to the usual victim mentality all too often seen on the political scene today.

At one point Obama excused crime as a result of an “unfair and unjust” system and noted that success is all just “luck.”

advertisement

The president decried the judicial system and insisted blacks are being imprisoned unfairly.

“We can’t just lock up a low-level dealer without asking why this boy, barely out of childhood, felt he had no other options,” Obama said.

He went on to claim crime was a result of the system, not the actions of criminals.

“We have cousins and uncles and brothers and sisters who we remember were just as smart and just as talented as we were, but somehow got ground down by structures that are unfair and unjust,” he said.

That brought the President to his thoughts on success being more a result of luck than hard work.

“And that means we have to not only question the world as it is,” Obama intoned, “and stand up for those African Americans who haven’t been so lucky–because, yes, you’ve worked hard, but you’ve also been lucky.”

advertisement

As an aside, the President of the United States then told his audience of his “pet peeve.”

“That’s a pet peeve of mine — people who have been successful and don’t realize they’ve been lucky. That God may have blessed them; it wuddn’t nothin’ you did. So don’t have an attitude.”

This line invokes his “you didn’t build that” gaffe from 2012 when Obama insisted that people with a successful business “didn’t build that” on their own and that government was really the catalyst for success.

The President’s commencement message is essentially that if you are black in the U.S. and you are successful, it was just luck and most blacks are held down by an “unfair and unjust” system that won’t allow them to succeed.

Obama also raised eyebrows when he insisted that he never intended to create a “post-racial society” with his presidency.

“My election did not create a post-racial society,” Obama told the graduating class “I don’t know who was propagating that notion. That was not mine.”

advertisement

It was a speech that talkshow host Rush Limbaugh called “hideous.”

The President’s speech comes on the heels of years of releasing into the public tens of thousands of illegal immigrants who have been apprehended and convicted of committing violent criminal offensesincluding rape, drug dealing, drunk driving, and even murder.

Further, with his “national reentry” policy, Obama has also worked to soften or eliminate the consequences of committing serious crimes and ensure ex-cons are given the same advantages as lifelong, law-abiding citizens.

Obama’s own efforts are only emboldened by the efforts of the Republican leadership in the House of Representatives in pushing asentencing reform bill that some senators charge will release violent felons and drug traffickers back into the public.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on Twitter@warnerthuston or email the author at igcolonel@hotmail.com

advertisement

Read More Stories About:

Big GovernmentCrimeObamaObama,economyJobsAfrican AmericansHoward University

Wednesday, April 27, 2016

Donald Trump on Benghazi: ‘Hillary Clinton Decided to Go Home and Sleep’

Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio iHeart.SmythRadio.com
Facebook.com/SmythRadio

by ALEX SWOYER27 Apr 2016Washington, DC902

GOP frontrunner Donald Trump, looking toward the general election, criticized Democrat frontrunner Hillary Clinton and President Obama’s foreign policy during his formal address on Wednesday at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, D.C.

“We have made the Middle East more unstable and chaotic than ever before,” Trump said. “Our actions in Iraq, Libya and Syria have helped unleash ISIS. And we’re in a war against radical Islam, but President Obama won’t even name the enemy!”

“We’ve let our rivals and challengers think they can get away with anything,” he added. “If President Obama’s goal had been to weaken America, he could not have done a better job.”

Trump then turned his attention to Clinton.

“Hillary Clinton also refuses to say the words “radical Islam,” even as she pushes for a massive increase in refugees,” he jabbed.

Trump brought up the 2012 terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya where four Americans died under Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s tenure.

After Secretary Clinton’s failed intervention in Libya, Islamic terrorists in Benghazi took down our consulate and killed our ambassador and three brave Americans. Then, instead of taking charge that night, Hillary Clinton decided to go home and sleep! Incredible.

Clinton blames it all on a video, an excuse that was a total lie. Our Ambassador was murdered and our Secretary of State misled the nation – and by the way, she was not awake to take that call at 3 o’clock in the morning.


“And now ISIS is making millions of dollars a week selling Libyan oil,” Trump charged, vowing, “This will change when I am president.”

Trump’s full foreign policy speech can be read here.

Read More Stories About:

Big Government2016 Presidential Race,Donald TrumpHillary ClintonObama,foreign policy

Thursday, April 21, 2016

Obama: Britain Should Stay in the EU Because Of Iran, Climate Change, TTIP, And Because Sovereignty Is Outdated

Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio iHeart.SmythRadio.com
Facebook.com/SmythRadio

Getty

by RAHEEM KASSAM21 Apr 20161,468

U.S. President Barack Obama has penned an opinion columnin Britain’s Daily Telegraphnewspaper outlining why he believes Britain should remain in the European Union (EU). The core of his arguments are: that Britain’s voice would be lost without Brussels bureaucrats; his failing deal with the largest state sponsor of terrorism; the pro-mass-privatisation TTIP deal; and the fact that dead American servicemen are buried in Europe.

One might argue that he has failed to read the room.

Just as President Obama parodied himself in his multitude of snubs to Britain during his tenure, he has, probably unknowingly, lampooned himself again – which hasn’t gone unnoticed by staff at the Telegraphthemselves, when tweeting out his column tonight.

President Obama begins by talking up the United Nations and NATO: institutions that are increasingly being called into question not just in Britain, but across Europe and further afield. And he acknowledges the timing of his visit is poor to say the least, jesting:

“I realise that there’s been considerable speculation – and some controversy – about the timing of my visit. And I confess: I do want to wish Her Majesty a happy birthday in person.”


But his op-ed column takes a turn for the bizarre when he mentions the U.S. servicemen who died defending sovereignty and freedom in Europe. This is perhaps especially concerning when he is effectively backing a new German takeover of the continent. He writes:

“The tens of thousands of Americans who rest in Europe’s cemeteries are a silent testament to just how intertwined our prosperity and security truly are. And the path you choose now will echo in the prospects of today’s generation of Americans as well.”


And then comes the attack on the idea of sovereign nations themselves. President Obama insists that “collective action” is more pressing than the idea of independent countries: a notion that those same American servicemen died fighting against:

“And in today’s world, even as we all cherish our sovereignty, the nations who wield their influence most effectively are the nations that do it through the collective action that today’s challenges demand.”


President Obama then goes on to cite the nuclear deal with Iran that has emboldened the country – the globe’s largest state sponsor of terrorism, and enemy of the Western world and its allies:

“When we negotiated the historic deal to verifiably prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon, it was collective action, working together with the permanent members of the UN Security Council and Germany, that got the job done. And the EU’s seat at the table magnified the United Kingdom’s voice.

“When the climate agreement in Paris needed a push, it was the European Union, fortified by the United Kingdom, that ultimately helped make that agreement possible.”


Finally, President Obama discusses theTrans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) deal – now widely knownto be a corporate lobbyist effort to privatise Britain’s National Health Service en masse and give corporations the right to sue governments. It is massively unpopular with the socialist left and the nationalist right, yet he says:

“When it comes to creating jobs, trade, and economic growth in line with our values, the UK has benefited from its membership in the EU – inside a single market that provides enormous opportunities for the British people. And the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership with the EU will advance our values and our interests, and establish the high-standard, pro-worker rules for trade and commerce in the 21st century economy.”


Just this week France threatened to derail the entire deal.

Conclusively, one might argue that President Obama’s op-ed is a litany of unpopular, establishment narratives. The most worrying thing about it? Most people aren’t likely to have a clue what he’s talking about.

Read More Stories About:

Big GovernmentBreitbart LondonIran,GermanyObamabarack obamaClimate ChangeEU referendumUnited Nations,NatoTTIPTelegraph

Thursday, February 11, 2016

Obama’s Justice Department Sues Ferguson City When Council Rejects Draft Deal


AP

by LEE STRANAHAN10 Feb 2016Ferguson, MO293

Attorney General Loretta Lynch announced Wednesday afternoon that the federal Department of Justice will sue the cash-strapped city of Ferguson, Missouri, because the city council rejected an expensive deal negotiated by federal officials.

The rejection “leaves us no further choice,” Lynch said in her prepared statement, adding that Ferguson residents “have waited decades for justice. They should not be forced to wait any longer.”

With support from local residents, the racially mixed council rejected the deal unanimously because of its impact on the city’s budget.

The deal between the Department of Justice and the city of Ferguson was drafted after President Barack Obama’s administration investigated the city following the 2014 shooting death of Mike Brown, an 18-year-old black man who had accosted a store owner and then a white police officer. Widespread local misinformation about the shooting led to local riots and looting, as well as angry protests by the Black Lives Matter movement across the country.

The department’s investigation last year exonerated police officer Darren Wilson in the shooting death of Brown but also criticized the criminal justice system in Ferguson. The report found that Ferguson was using the police department and the court system to generate revenue through ticketing.

The deal reached last month would have required a number of expensive changes, including raises for the police, training, and the hiring of an independent monitor. The costs would have required a tax increase on citizens. But after parts of the city were set fire by Black Lives Matter protesters, Ferguson has had a budget deficit of about $2.5 million.

At a meeting in Ferguson on Tuesday night that was monitored by top DOJ officials via a video, angry residents and city council members said that Ferguson could not afford the deal.

The council rejected the deal, partly because pay raises for police could cause a costly effect on pay for other municipal employees. The council offered some changes to the deal, and black councilman Wesley Bell said, “This is a way to meet the demands of the D.O.J., make progress with reform and keep lights on in the city.”

Wednesday’s decision by the Department of Justice shows that they are playing hardball. The move by the DOJ will likely cost Ferguson millions of dollars.

The aggressive moves by the Obama Department of Justice against Ferguson are part of a wave of lawsuits filed by the DOJ against police departments around the country.

Ferguson officials said that they plan to continue reforms, including the creation of a civilian oversight panel, despite the lawsuit.

Follow Breitbart News investigative reporter and Citizen Journalism School founder Lee Stranahan on Twitter at @Stranahan.

Read More Stories About:

Big GovernmentEric HolderLaw EnforcementObamaBlack Lives Matter,Social Justiceloretta lynchanti-police,taxesDepartment of JusticelawsuitDOJ,Riotscriminal justice reformpolice shootingDarren WilsonFerguson Effect,Hands Up Don't ShootMike Brown,Ferguson Missouri

Former Spokesman Jay Carney: Obama ‘Wants Hillary to Win the Nomination’


Chuck Kennedy/White House via Getty Images

by CHARLIE SPIERING10 Feb 2016425

Former White House press secretary Jay Carney says President Obama wants Hillary Clinton to win the 2016 Democratic nomination.

“I don’t think there is any doubt that he wants Hillary to win the nomination and believes that she would be the best candidate in the fall and the most effective as president in carrying forward what he’s achieved,” said Carney on CNN.

Obama, in public, has maintained neutrality in the race, meeting with both candidates to discuss the election while trying to remain above the fray. He has not ruled out an endorsement, but says he prefers not to get involved until a nominee has been chosen.

But Carney isn’t as reticent.

“I think the President has signaled, while still remaining neutral, that he supports Secretary Clinton’s candidacy and would prefer to see her as the nominee,” Carney said. “He won’t officially embrace her unless and until it’s clear that she’s going to be the nominee. I think he is maintaining that tradition of not intervening in a party primary.”

Read More Stories About:

Big Government2016 Presidential Race,White HouseHillary ClintonObama,barack obamaBernie SandersJay Carney

Thursday, February 4, 2016

Obama: Criticism of Muslim Americans ‘Has No Place In Our Country’


MANDEL NGAN/AFP/Getty Images

by BEN SHAPIRO3 Feb 20161,747

On Wednesday, President Obama, who has become the executive branch equivalent of a professional Salon.com commenter troll, took his traveling roadshow of perverse failure to the Islamic Society of Baltimore.

There, he lectured Americans – as always – on our own intolerance, the glories of Islam, and how if we just gaze longingly into his eyes, our souls will be set free of the baser matter surrounding them.

First, a note: the Islamic Society of Baltimore has significant ties to terror supporters. Its former imam, Mohamed Adam el-Sheikh, presided over the mosque for 18 years and justified Palestinian suicide bombings in the pages of The Washington Post, as well as founding the radical Muslim Brotherhood-associated Muslim American Society.

Now, on to President Obama’s speech.

Obama began by stating that the ISB is as American as apple pie (minus the whole former imam who supported suicide bombing thing). He then said, “So the first thing I want to say is two words that Muslim Americans don’t hear often enough — and that is, thank you. Thank you for serving your community. Thank you for lifting up the lives of your neighbors, and for helping keep us strong and united as one American family. We are grateful for that.”

So, no bitter clinger talk for those who worship Allah. Got it.

Then he moved on to his real message: Americans who aren’t nice like President Obama are super duper mean to Muslims. Never mind the fact that, according to FBI statistics, 60.3 percent of all hate crimes based on religion target Jews, as opposed to 13.7 percent targeting Muslims. Muslims who must fear intolerant Americans, and must rely on President Obama’s great goodness to protect them from the slobbering, yabbering masses who would emerge en masse on the streets of the United States, armed with pitchforks and torches, to roust them from their homes and do them harm. Here’s Obama:

I know that in Muslim communities across our country, this is a time of concern and, frankly, a time of some fear. Like all Americans, you’re worried about the threat of terrorism. But on top of that, as Muslim Americans, you also have another concern — and that is your entire community so often is targeted or blamed for the violent acts of the very few.


Oh. Well, statistically, virtually all suicide bombings across the planet are conducted by Muslims. Hundreds of millions of Muslims hold extreme beliefs. In the United States, as Mark Krikorian wrote at National Review in December, “Muslims account for only about 1 percent of the U.S. population but account for about half of terrorist attacks since 9/11. That means Muslims in the United States are about 5,000 percent more likely to commit terrorist attacks than non-Muslims.”

But statistics are Islamophobic, so Obama merely ignored them. Instead, he focused on the “inexcusable political rhetoric against Muslim Americans that has no place in our country,” lamenting “the threats and harassment of Muslim Americans have surged.” No statistics, just anecdotal evidence, followed. And then more scaremongering:

[Y]ou also could not help but be heartbroken to hear their worries and their anxieties. Some of them are parents, and they talked about how their children were asking, are we going to be forced out of the country, or, are we going to be rounded up? Why do people treat us like that? Conversations that you shouldn’t have to have with children — not in this country. Not at this moment. And that’s an anxiety echoed in letters I get from Muslim Americans around the country. I’ve had people write to me and say, I feel like I’m a second-class citizen… These are children just like mine.


So Obama’s adding to his fictional family of victims once again. First, there was Trayvon. Then there was his fictional son who got hurt playing football. Now he’s got fictional Muslim children. That family’s growing by leaps and bounds!

That wasn’t Obama’s only fiction here. Who, exactly, is talking about “rounding up” Muslims? Who is talking about forcing Muslims out of the country? What brand of verbal cow-vomit is this?

It was just Obama setting up the strawman for its ceremonial Islamic sacrificial burning, apparently. Obama called for Americans to “tackle this head on,” to be “honest and clear about it,” to “speak out.” He then began gibbering platitudes until someone had to tap him on the shoulder and remind him where he was:

Islam is rooted in a commitment to compassion and mercy and justice and charity….The world’s 1.6 billion Muslims are as diverse as humanity itself…. Here’s another fact: Islam has always been part of America… Jefferson and John Adams had their own copies of the Koran.


He did not quote what Jefferson and Adams once said about their dealings with Islamic pirates:

The ambassador answered us that [the right] was founded on the Laws of the Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have answered their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as prisoners, and that every Mussulman who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.


Probably best for Obama to ignore that.

Ignore it he did, and instead called for changes to American media and culture to be nicer to Islam. He suggested that “our television shows should have some Muslim characters that are unrelated to national security.” Sounds great! Let’s start an #OscarsSoIslamophobic campaign, which will work fantastically well until Muslims around the world riot when somebody does an improper depiction of Mohammed.

After attempting unsuccessfully to carve off the Islamic State from Islam, Obama then set forth four points.

First: “We are all God’s children. We’re all born equal, with inherent dignity.” Obama could say that to the wide swaths of Muslims sanguine about the stabbing of Jewish children in Jerusalem and the shooting of Christian ones in Syria; instead, he chose to direct that at the inhabitants of the most tolerant nation in the history of humanity.

Second: “[W]e have to stay true to our core values, and that includes freedom of religion for all faiths… if we’re serious about freedom of religion – and I’m speaking now to my fellow Christians who remain the majority in this country – we have to understand an attack on one faith is an attack on all religions.” Well, not necessarily. An attack on the teachings of Satanism is not an attack on Christianity. An attack on the nature of Islam is not an attack on Judaism. Not all religions are the same, contrary to Obama’s presumably-treasured COEXIST bumper sticker. And it’s rather insulting directing his ire toward American Christians rather than the hundreds of millions of Muslims around the planet responsible for the vast majority of religious warfare, bloodshed, and targeted violence.

But Obama continued, “We have to be consistent in condemning hateful rhetoric and violence against everyone. And that includes against Muslims here in the United States of America.” “Hateful rhetoric” is not violence, although Obama would lump the two together. Doing that is a dangerous violation of free speech. But Obama doesn’t care about that – after all, the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam, remember?

Third: “[T]he suggestion is somehow that if I would simply say, these are all Islamic terrorists, then we would actually have solved the problem by now, apparently…. I refuse to give [ISIL] legitimacy. We must never give them that legitimacy. They’re not defending Islam.” It would, in fact, help for Obama to acknowledge our enemies and their ideology. Wishing their philosophy into the corn field won’t work; no serious Muslim takes Obama’s interpretation of Islam seriously, anymore than serious Jews take Obama’s interpretation of Judaism seriously. But Obama is too busy wishing, and lecturing Americans that the best way to thwart radical Islam is to “celebrate and lift up the success of Muslim Americans,” as though ISIS cares whether we have White House Ramadan dinners other than to think us weaklings and fools. That’s not a case against White House Ramadan dinners – it is a case that such dinners make no difference in the fight against radical Islam.

Fourth: “Muslims around the world have a responsibility to reject extremist ideologies that are trying to penetrate within Muslim communities.” Nice of Obama to get around to this one. But he promptly said that Muslims were doing enough, and put the responsibility on Americans to “amplify them more.” So actually, the Muslims are doing just fine, it’s the Islamophobic Westerners who are, as always, the problem.

Hilariously, Obama added this note:

[I]n the discussion I had before I came out, some people said, why is there always a burden on us? When a young man in Charleston shoots African Americans in a church, there’s not an expectation that every white person in America suddenly is explaining that they’re not racist.


LOL. Let me expand: LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL. President Obama and the entire media blamed the Confederate damn flag for Charleston, and then lectured us on the continuing racism of white Americans.

But back to Obama’s demagoguery:

We will — I will — do everything I can to lift up the multiplicity of Muslim voices that promote pluralism and peace….We can’t give in to profiling entire groups of people. There’s no one single profile of terrorists…. We are one American family. We will rise and fall together. It won’t always be easy. There will be times where our worst impulses are given voice. But I believe that ultimately, our best voices will win out. And that gives me confidence and faith in the future.


Obviously, Obama believes that the greatest threat to America is the cruel voices of those like Donald Trump, not the stealthy recruitment of Muslim radicals. He believes that Americans need his lectures, and Muslims just need reassurance that we care about them. He believes a lot of things that simply aren’t true.

And so more Americans will die.

Which means he will give us more speeches about Islamic peace and American intolerance.

Ben Shapiro is Senior Editor-At-Large of Breitbart News, Editor-in-Chief of DailyWire.com, and The New York Times bestselling author, most recently, of the book,The People vs. Barack Obama:The Criminal Case Against The Obama Administration (Threshold Editions, June 10, 2014). Follow Ben Shapiro on Twitter @benshapiro.

Wednesday, January 27, 2016

The Anti-Trump Network: Fox News Money Flows into Open Borders Group

Andy Kropa/Getty Images

by JULIA HAHN26 Jan 2016Washington D.C.1,827

The announcement from Donald Trump’s campaign that the Republican frontrunner will “definitely not” partake in Thursday night’s Fox News debate has sent shock waves throughout the nation’s political scene.

At a press event Tuesday evening, Trump seemed to cite disparate treatment from the network as his reasoning for not participating. “What’s wrong over there, something’s wrong,” Trump said of the “games” Roger Ailes and the network are “playing.”

In asking the question of “what’s wrong over there?” Trump has shined a spotlight on one of Washington’s best kept secrets: namely, Fox’s role via its founder Rupert Murdoch in pushing an open borders agenda. The Trump campaign is a direct threat to Murdoch’s efforts to open America’s borders. Well-concealed from virtually all reporting on Fox’s treatment of Trump is the fact that Murdoch is the co-chair of what is arguably one of the most powerful immigration lobbying firms in country, the Partnership for a New American Economy (PNAE).

In addition to blanketing the country, media, and politicians with literature, advertisements, and a barrage of lobbyists pushing for open border immigration policies, the Partnership for A New American Economy (PNAE) was a prime lobbyist for one of the biggest open borders pushes in American history: Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL)’s 2013 Gang of Eight immigration bill.

While Donald Trump has pledged to deport those illegally residing in the country and temporarily pause Muslim migration, Rubio’s immigration bill would have granted immediate amnesty and eventual citizenship to millions of illegal aliens, it would have doubled the annual admission of foreign workers, and it would have dispensed 33 million green cards to foreign nationals in the span of a single decade despite current record immigration levels.

While Megyn Kelly made headlines with her heated questioning of Donald Trump, not one of the Fox News anchors asked Rubio in the first Fox News debate about his signature piece of legislation, which Murdoch’s immigration lobbying firm had endorsed. Instead, they lobbed Rubio a series of softballs, such as asking Rubio if he could put God and veterans in the same sentence.

Interestingly, Bill Sammon — FOX News’s vice president of News and Washington managing editor —  is the father of Brooke Sammon, who is Rubio’s press secretary.

As Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) told The New Yorker’s Ryan Lizza back in 2013, Fox News was essential to the Rubio-Schumer effort to expand immigration levels beyond all known historical precedent. As Lizza wrote at the time:

McCain told me, “Rupert Murdoch is a strong supporter of immigration reform, and Roger Ailes is, too.” Murdoch is the chairman and C.E.O. of News Corp., which owns Fox, and Ailes is Fox News’s president. McCain said that he, [Lindsey] Graham, [Marco] Rubio, and others also have talked privately to top hosts at Fox, including Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity, and Neil Cavuto… “God bless Fox,” Graham said. “Last time [i.e. during the 2007 immigration push], it was ‘amnesty’ every fifteen seconds.” He said that the change was important for his reelection, because “eighty per cent of people in my primary get their news from Fox.” He added that the network has “allowed critics to come forward, but it’s been so much better.”


Murdoch’s support of open borders immigration policies has been identified as a potential conflict of interest for years. As ABC reported in 2013:

Murdoch, Australian born and a naturalized U.S. citizen, has become an outspoken advocate for immigration reform and mass legalization of the country’s undocumented immigrants, partnering with New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg in this cause. Whether Murdoch’s personal views will percolate through his network, or at least temper criticism on the airwaves of those who don’t share it, remains to be seen.


In 2013, during the Rubio-Schumer Gang of Eight push, Mickey Kaus similarly pointed out:

In 2007, John McCain’s “comprehensive” immigrant-legalization bill failed after opponents flooded the Senate with calls, shutting down the switchboard… It won’t be that easy this time… The GOP donor class is asserting itself… One of the more influential members of this “donorist” class is Rupert Murdoch, which means that FOX News has for all intents and purposes switched sides, giving immigration “comprehensivists” a monopoly in the MSM–five networks to none.


Indeed, Murdoch has himself expressed his support for large-scale immigration. In a 2014 op-ed published in the Wall Street Journal’s open borders opinion pages, titled, “Immigration Reform Can’t Wait,” Murdoch wrote:

When I learned that House Majority Leader Eric Cantor had lost his Republican primary, my heart sank. Not simply because I think he is an intelligent and talented member of Congress, or because I worry about the future of the Republican Party. Like others who want comprehensive immigration reform, I worried that Mr. Cantor’s loss would be misconstrued and make Congress reluctant to tackle this urgent need. That would be the wrong lesson and an undesirable national consequence of this single, local election result.


In his Wall Street Journal op-ed, Murdoch echoed Rubio’s position on granting citizenship to illegal immigrants. Murdoch wrote, “We need to give those individuals who are already here… a path to citizenship.” Murdoch even decried Americans who opposed amnesty as, “nativists who scream about amnesty” — a statement which is perhaps even more significant given the fact that Murdoch is himself a beneficiary of the nation’s generous immigration policy.

Murdoch praised President Obama for showing “wise restraint” on immigration, even though, at the time of Murdoch’s writing, Obama had already implemented his first unconstitutional executive amnesty, giving away American jobs to illegal aliens — including the jobs of black Americans whose have suffered some of the greatest harms from mass immigration.

When asked about the president’s unconstitutional 2012 executive amnesty, known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals [DACA], Marco Rubio has said that, if he is elected president, he “wouldn’t undo it immediately.” This was another statement of Rubio’s which the Fox News anchors utterly failed to probe in their first debate to which they came loaded with questions for Trump, who — unlike Rubio — had not pushed an immigration plan backed by the network’s founder.

Murdoch also called for an unlimited number of foreign workers to fill coveted tech jobs through the H-1B visa program, which experts have described as an “indentured servitude” program:

We need to do away with the cap on H-1B visas, which is arbitrary and results in U.S. companies struggling to find the high-skill workers they need to continue growing. We already know that most of the applications for these visas are for computer programmers and engineers, where there is a shortage of qualified American candidates.


Contrary to Mr. Murdoch’s assertions, there are more than 11 million Americans with degrees in Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM) who lack employment in these fields, and U.S. schools are graduating two times more students with STEM degrees than are annually finding employment in these fields.

Here again is another undisclosed conflict of interest from Fox News. Sen. Rubio introduced legislation last year — the Immigration Innovation Act — which would have tripled H-1B visa issuances. This legislation was endorsed by Murdoch via the Partnership for a New American Economy, on whose board also sits Disney CEO Bob Iger.

Though, once again, Rubio was not questioned about the legislation by Megyn Kelly and her fellow Fox News hosts, scores of American workers in Florida Disney were terminated and forced to undergo the humiliation of training their lower-paid foreign replacements, now the subject of a lawsuit against Disney.

Mickey Kaus has long documented Fox News’s coverage of the immigration issue. As Kaus explained last year, Fox News —perhaps recognizing how at-odds its views of open borders are with its viewership (one Fox News poll reveals that Americans by a 2-to-1 margin want to see visa issuances reduced) — implemented an “immigration tamp-down,” blocking out coverage of key immigration fights in Washington D.C.

Kaus analyzed “a list of the lead story each day on Megyn Kelly’s ‘Kelly File’ show from January 14 (the day the House sent the Senate a DHS bill with a ‘rider’ blocking Obama’s amnesty) until March 3, the day the House finally caved and passed a ‘clean’ DHS bill,” and he ultimately found that immigration was not the lead story once. [See list here].

Instead, Kaus writes, “immigration was discussed as the underlying issue in the funding fight only 6 times over the whole 34 show period — and only 3 times in the crucial 20 show period that followed the Senate Dems’ initial filibuster of the Republican DHS proposal.”

Conservative columnist and best-sellingauthor Ann Coulter has criticized the media’s fixation on ISIS to the exclusion of immigration, considering that the only way that ISIS terrorists will be able to personally carry out attacks against American citizens on American soil is if our immigration system allows them into the country.

The way media bias on immigration often manifests itself is not simply in what media outlets and anchors do cover (i.e. focusing on the needs of illegal immigrants rather than Americans), but what the don’t cover.

As any casual viewer of Fox News would observe, one sees scant to any coverage at all on the record-setting, foreign-born population inside the United States; nor coverage of census findings that immigration is about to surpass all historical records; nor stories on the total number of immigrants allowed into the country each year and the strain this number puts on education, the economy, the welfare states and the profound changes to U.S. culture. By not covering these issues in any real depth, it helps clear the way for the enactment of the Murdoch-backed immigration agenda — bringing in the New American Century hoped for by Rupert Murdoch, Marco Rubio, and Barack Obama.

Read More Stories About:

Big GovernmentBig Journalism2016 Presidential RaceFOX NEWSDonald TrumpMarco RubioimmigrationJohn McCainObamaMeg

Tuesday, January 19, 2016

Iran Pledges to Defy U.S. Sanctions, Build up Ballistic Missile Program

Getty Images

by JORDAN SCHACHTEL18 Jan 2016Washington, DC1,431

Iran will ignore recently-passed U.S. sanctions against its ballistic missile program, the regime’s defense minister pledged on Monday, promising to unveil new homemade weapons systems in the near future.

“[Any] attempt to impose new sanctions [against Iran] under irrelevant pretexts is indicative of the continued US hostile policy and acrimony toward the Iranian nation, and a futile effort to undermine Iran’s defense might,” said Iranian Defense Minister Brig. Gen. Hossein Dehqan on Monday.

U.S. sanctions enacted over the weekend will have minimal effect on Iran’s missile development programs, he added.

“Hence, sanctions against [certain] people and companies will have no impact on the development of the industry, and we will actually demonstrate [their ineffectiveness] by displaying new missiles,” Dehqan said, in comments reported by state-run PressTv.

The Defense Minister’s comments follow a statement from Iran’s foreign ministry statement pledging to thwart the United States’ “destructive” sanctions against Iran’s weapons program.

“We will respond to such propaganda stunts and disruptive measures by more robustly pursuing our lawful missile program and promoting our defense capabilities and national security,” read a statement from Iran Foreign Ministry spokesman Hossein Jaberi Ansari.

On Sunday, the U.S. Treasury Department announced it would impose sanctions against a number of individuals and organizations over Iran’s ballistic missile program.

“Iran’s ballistic missile program poses a significant threat to regional and global security, and it will continue to be subject to international sanctions,” read a statementfrom Adam Szubin, acting Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence. “We have consistently made clear that the United States will vigorously press sanctions against Iranian activities outside of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action – including those related to Iran’s support for terrorism, regional destabilization, human rights abuses, and ballistic missile program.”

The new sanctions come as Iran is expected to receive tens of billions of dollars in frozen assets in accordance with the Iran nuclear deal, also known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), agreed upon by the regime in Tehran and the P5+1 world powers.

On Sunday, Secretary of State John Kerryannounced the U.S. had granted Iran $1.7 billion dollars, repaying the Ayatollah’s theocracy a $400 million dollar debt plus $1.3 billion in interest. Kerry called the payment a “fair settlement.” President Obama agreed, claiming “the settlement could save us billions of dollars that could have been pursued by Iran.”

Read More Stories About:

National SecurityDefenseIranMiddle EastObamaterrorismjihadiran deal,Iran Nuclear Dealnational securitytehran,SanctionsIran SanctionsJCPOAballistic missilesIran Missile Program

Friday, January 15, 2016

Obama Frees 10 Guantánamo Detainees in Largest Recorded Single-Day Release

AP Photo/Charles Dharapak, File

by JORDAN SCHACHTEL14 Jan 2016Washington, DC2,948

The Defense Department announced Thursday that 10 Yemeni detainees have been set free from Guantánamo Bay detention camp in Cuba. All of them were sent to the Gulf state of Oman, the Pentagon said. Less than 100 detainees now remain at the military facility.

“The Oman transfer of 10 is the single largest transfer to a single country at one time under the current administration,” A Pentagon spokesman told the media.

Since the beginning of 2016, 14 detainees have been released from the detention facility. Previously released detainees include Al Qaeda terrorists and a man whopledged to kill Americans should he be allowed back home.

Moreover, the Obama Administration expects to release at least three more detainees by the end of January, officials told VOA.

There are now only 93 detainees at the Guantanamo detention center.

The detainees released are: Fahed Abdullah Ahmad Ghazi, Samir Naji al-Hasan Muqbil, Adham Mohamed Ali Awad, Mukhtar Yahya Naji al-Warafi, Abu Bakr Ibn Muhammad al-Ahdal, Muhammad Salih Husayn al-Shaykh, Muhammad Said Salim Bin Salman, Said Muhammad Salih Hatim, Umar Said Salim al-Dini, and Fahmi Abdallah Ahmad Ubadi al-Tulaqi.

Some of the aforementioned men were associated with Al Qaeda and/or had close ties to Osama Bin Laden’s inner circle, according to leaked files.

Speaking at a ceremony at U.S. Southern Command, Defense Secretary Ashton Carter said Thursday that the U.S. is “diligently” working “to close this chapter in our history.”

Lee Wolosky, a State Department envoy who negotiates transfers, told the media that the Administration will work to release 40 more of the alleged terrorists by this summer.

“Sustained diplomatic engagement led us to this important milestone,” said Wolosky. “We are very grateful to our friends and partners in the gulf and elsewhere who have resettled Yemeni detainees, and we expect to be in a position to empty Guantánamo of all detainees who are currently approved for transfer by this summer.”

In his State of the Union Address Tuesday night, President Obama pledged to continue “working to shut down the prison at Guantánamo,” claiming it serves as a “recruitment brochure for our enemies.” In 2008, he vowed to shut down the facility shortly after he took office.

A recent Politifact review found that Guantánamo is not a “key component” of jihadist recruitment. Groups such as the Islamic State rarely discuss the facility in their propaganda magazine, Dabiq, or through their various multimedia endeavors.

Read More Stories About:

National SecurityMiddle EastObama,terrorismAl Qaedajihadnational security,CubaPentagonGuantanamo bayOsama Bin LadenGuantanamoGuantanamo Bay Detention CenterGTMO

Thursday, January 14, 2016

5 Lies the Obama Administration Told to Defend Iran’s Humiliating Seizure of Navy Sailors

by BEN SHAPIRO13 Jan 2016193

Barack Obama has a history of humiliating photo-ops associated with his full-blown Radical Islam Denial Syndrome: the burning consulate in Benghazi juxtaposed with Obama partying it up in Vegas with Beyonce; the dead bodies of ISIS-slain Parisians juxtaposed with Obama telling the world that ISIS could be fought with a climate change summit; corpses in San Bernardino juxtaposed with Obama simultaneously telling a national audience that ISIS was contained.

Perhaps the worst one yet happened on Tuesday.

As Obama prepared for his last State of the Union address – an event he pitched with hijinks and mugging for the cameras – the Iranian Revolutionary Guard arrested 10 American sailors and seized two Navy boats. Obama never mentioned it in his State of the Union address; the day after the address, Iran returned the sailors, unharmed.

But the message was clear to those who were watching: Obama had been castrated on the world stage by Iran, a country he once termed “tiny compared to the Soviet Union.”

That message became clearer on Wednesday morning, when Iran also released photos of American sailors on their knees, hands behind their heads, at the beck and call of a Shiite terrorist army; a female sailor forced to wear a hijab; a male sailor forced to apologize on camera for supposedly encroaching into Iranian waters. The IRG accused the Americans of “snooping” and Iranian army chief Major General Hassan Firouzabadi said, “This incident in the Persian Gulf, which probably will not be the American forces’ last mistake in the region, should be a lesson to troublemakers in the U.S. Congress.”

Meanwhile, Obama bragged to Americans about his “smarter approach” to world affairs, including an Iranian deal that will grant the mullahs the bomb in ten years, and hundreds of billions of dollars now.

This juxtaposition could not be maintained publicly. It was too pernicious, too humiliating. So, as with Benghazi, and Paris, and San Bernardino, Obama had to come up with a cover story.

And he did, with the tacit approval of the Iranians. According to Jay Solomon of the Wall Street Journal:

.@JohnKerry, Iran FM @JZarif decided on Tuesday call naval incident could be turned into “positive” story for US &#Iran, says US official.

— Jay Solomon (@WSJSolomon)January 13, 2016


And John Kerry spent hours on the phone with Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif coordinating that “positive” story.

All it took was a few lies.

Here are five lies spewed by the Obama administration so far in their defense of the indefensible:

“This Was Just Standard Nautical Practice.” Those were the words of Vice President Joe Biden on CBS This Morning, explaining why the whole incident was no big deal. He added that Iran “rescued” the sailors and acted as any of the “ordinary nations would do.” Except, of course, that it is not standard nautical practice to forcibly garb stranded sailors in Islamic dress or release photos of them disarmed, nor is it standard nautical practice to hold them overnight. As National Review points out, the images themselves violated Article 13 of the Geneva Convention. But no big deal. This was just like Triple A towing you to the mechanic when your car breaks down. Just with some forced Islamic headgear and some surrender photos. You know, the usual.

Also, according to Iran’s naval chief, Gen. Ali Fadavi, “We were highly prepared with our coast-to-sea missiles, missile-launching speedboats and our numerous capabilities. The US and France’s aircraft carriers were within our range and if they had continued their unprofessional moves, they would have been afflicted with such a catastrophe that they had never experienced all throughout the history. They could have been shot, and if they were, they would have been destroyed.”

Sounds like things were perfectly peaceful. Standard nautical practice.

“They Are Being Sort of Afforded The Proper Courtesy That You Would Expect.” No, they weren’t. Unless forcing a woman into a hijab is a form of respect, or distributing pictures of surrendering members of the American military. But that’s exactly what White House press secretary Josh Earnest told CNN yesterday.

“There Was No Looking For Any Apology.” Again, Joe Biden off the rails. He insisted that the United States had not in any way apologized to the Iranians for the incident. Then video broke of an American sailor apologizing directly to the Iranians, at their behest. Iranian General Ali Fadavi said that Zarif had demanded an apology: “Mr. Zarif had a firm stance, saying that they were in our territorial waters and should not have been, and saying that they [the US] should apologize.”

“I Also Want to Thank The Iranian Authorities For Their Cooperation and Quick Response.” Secretary of State John Kerry went so far as to thank the Iranians for all their help in supposedly rescuing our sailors. He then compared Iran’s behavior to the United States’ under similar circumstances:

As a former Sailor myself, I know the importance of naval presence around the world and the critical work being done by our Navy in the Gulf region. I’m proud of our young men and women in uniform and know how seriously they take their responsibilities to one another and to other mariners in distress.


Defense Secretary Ash Carter read from the same hymnal, explaining, “I want to personally thank Secretary of State John Kerry for his diplomatic engagement with Iran to secure our sailors’ swift return.”

The response was not necessary, nor was it quick. It took overnight to release American sailors, and not before the interviews and the pictures and the humiliation and the demands for apology from the Iranians. But we’re thanking them to make this whole sham look good.

“This Is A Testament To The Critical Role That Diplomacy Plays.” These words came courtesy of Kerry as well, and have become the Obama administration’s go-to defense of the Iran deal, which hands these radical Islamic nutjobs a nuclear weapon. Josh Earnest stated on CNN yesterday that the whole purpose of pursuing the nuclear deal was situations like these hostilities – as though only giving away the store to Iran pre-emptively could have prevented catastrophic war. What nonsense. The Iranians held 15 British sailors captive for almost two weeks in 2007. The British didn’t then sign off on a nuclear weapons deal.

The Iranian government made Barack Obama and the United States look ridiculous before their own population and the world. And Barack Obama, so as to hoodwink his own population, greenlit a public relations scheme that would make PT Barnum blush: he played the entire situation as a glowing success. Since there are no bodies this time, he might get away with it. If not, he can always dig up a YouTube filmmaker.

Ben Shapiro is Senior Editor-At-Large of Breitbart News, Editor-in-Chief of DailyWire.com, and The New York Times bestselling author, most recently, of the book, The People vs. Barack Obama: The Criminal Case Against The Obama Administration (Threshold Editions, June 10, 2014). Follow Ben Shapiro on Twitter @benshapiro.

Read More Stories About:

National SecurityJihadObamaJohn Kerry,Joe Bidenjosh earnestash carter,Mohammad Javad Zarifgeneva convention,PT Barnumen. Ali Fadavi

Wednesday, January 13, 2016

Watch: Trump Fires Back at Obama, Haley for SOTU, GOP Response Criticisms

by JEFF POOR13 Jan 2016

In an appearance on Wednesday’s “Fox & Friends,” Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump reacted to rhetoric that appeared to be aimed at him during last night’s State of the Union address from President Barack Obama and during the Republican response from Gov. Nikki Haley (R-SC).

On Obama, Trump said he was living in a “fantasy land” when it comes to the seriousness of the threats facing the country.

However, as for Haley, he took her to task for weak on immigration and for having sought campaign contributions from him in the past.

“She’s weak on illegal immigration, and she certainly has no trouble asking me for campaign contributions, ‘cause over the years she’s asked me for a hell of a lot of money in campaign contributions. So, you know, it’s sort of interesting to hear,” he continued. “Perhaps, if I weren’t running she’d be in my office asking for money. But now that I’m running, she wants to take a weak side on immigration. I feel very strongly about illegal immigration. She doesn’t, and I think the people in her great state, I love her state, I’m there a lot, and by the way I have a massive lead in South Carolina. We have a massive lead. They’re incredible people, and they feel like I do. Believe me. Because they don’t like what’s happening in our country.”

Trump was also asked about the potential of a Trump-Haley GOP presidential ticket, to which Trump seemingly dismissed.

“We’ll pick somebody, but we’ll pick somebody who’s very good,” he replied. “But whoever I pick is going to be very strong on illegal immigration. We’ve had it. We’ve had it with illegal immigration.”

Follow Jeff Poor on Twitter @jeff_poor

Read More Stories About:

About:

Breitbart TV2016 Presidential RaceDonald TrumpObamabarack obamaNikki Haley,Fox Friends,