Obama’s Treatment Of The Mainstream Media

 Political  Comments Off on Obama’s Treatment Of The Mainstream Media
Feb 252017
 

Remember when Obama framed the Mainstream Media as the opposition party?

“We’re going to treat them the way we would treat an opponent,” said Anita Dunn, the White House communications director, in a telephone interview on Sunday. “As they are undertaking a war against Barack Obama and the White House, we don’t need to pretend that this is the way that legitimate news organizations behave.”

Obama's Treatment Of The Mainstream Media

Attacking the news media is a time-honored White House tactic but to an unusual degree, the Obama administration has narrowed its sights to one specific organization, the Fox News Channel, calling it, in essence, part of the political opposition.

“We’re going to treat them the way we would treat an opponent,” said Anita Dunn, the White House communications director, in a telephone interview on Sunday. “As they are undertaking a war against Barack Obama and the White House, we don’t need to pretend that this is the way that legitimate news organizations behave.”

Her comments are only the latest in the volatile exchange between the administration and the top-rated network, which is owned by the News Corporation, controlled by Rupert Murdoch. Last month, Roger Ailes, the chairman of Fox News, and David Axelrod, a senior adviser to President Obama, met for coffee in New York, in what Politico, which last week broke that news, labeled a “Fox summit.”

While neither party has said what was discussed, some have speculated that a truce, or at least an adjustment in tone, was at issue. (Mr. Ailes and Mr. Obama reportedly reached a temporary accord after a meeting in mid-2008.) But shots are still being fired, which animates the idea that both sides see benefits in the feud.

Fox seems to relish the controversy.

“Instead of governing, the White House continues to be in campaign mode, and Fox News is the target of their attack mentality,” Michael Clemente, the channel’s senior vice president for news, said in a statement on Sunday. “Perhaps the energy would be better spent on the critical issues that voters are worried about.”

Source…

Or how about the time, back in 2008, when OBAMA Kicked reporters off his plane because their papers had endorsed John McCain?

OBAMA Kicked reporters off his plane
 

The Real Deporter In Chief

 Political  Comments Off on The Real Deporter In Chief
Feb 142017
 

The Real Deporter and Chief
During Obama’s rein over 2.5 million illegal immigrants were deported, this number equates to half a million more than during the George W. Bush administration. Obama within many circles was labeled the “Deporter in Chief

ICE enforcement of this policy has been common place in many cities throughout Obama’s terms and never reported by the Mainstream Media. No video’s, no protests, no outrage and not a dissenting peep from the Democrats.

The current ICE raids, rounding up illegal immigrants who have committed felonies and already had deportation orders are the ones be being targeted by ICE. This in fact is a continuation of the Obama policies, these scheduled raids had little to nothing to do with the Trump administration.

Obama’s policy on deporting illegal immigrants was well noted in numerous speeches throughout his two terms and was never met with a word of opposition.

But now these very same policies, that were enacted by Obama to uphold the rule of law regarding illegal immigration, are being used by the very same democrats who were silent, to bash Trump to make him look like the man ripping little Mexican children off the street clinging to their teddy bears.

The problem with Obama’s illegal immigration policy was really not flawed from the street level. The policy was flawed post deportation. This is why so many of these criminals who were deported under the Obama administration, through ICE lacked success. The reason? These illegal immigrants would simply re-enter through our porous southern border, to carry on their crimes over and over again.

Trumps policies on illegal immigration actually mirror those of Obama’s. The difference? KEEPING THEM OUT! This is where the border wall, increased border patrols and security play a major role. When you look at the billions of dollars spent capturing, processing and deporting illegal criminals over and over again, the cost of that “wall” starts to look far more cost-effective.

We are a nation of laws that must be adhered to. Illegal cannot be justified, especially for so many that are working to enter the country legally.

The hypocrisy and politicizing of the left is absolutely disgraceful, considering they applauded the very same policies on immigration the Obama echoed so many times.

This can serve as a lesson for all those simple-minded fools protesting the policies of Obama, that they now blame Trump for.

The Real Deporter and Chief

 

Trump Listening To Clinton And Obama On Immigration

 Political  Comments Off on Trump Listening To Clinton And Obama On Immigration
Feb 062017
 

WOW! President Trump is actually going to carryout the promises made by Bill Clinton and Barrack Obama. Promises made but forgotten, ignored and never accomplished.

It becomes more evident now that the paid Liberal riots and protests are nothing more than political theater intended to delegitimize Trump and cause division. The Democrats are the party of slavery, the party of hypocrisy and the party of their own invention “Fake news”. The party of degenerate, Fascist anti-America Losers.

 

FLASHBACK: Booker: ‘Honored’ To Work With Sessions On Civil Rights

 Political  Comments Off on FLASHBACK: Booker: ‘Honored’ To Work With Sessions On Civil Rights
Jan 102017
 

Cory Booker in 2016: ‘I Feel Blessed and Honored’ to have partnered with Senator Sessions on Civil Rights.


New Jersey Democratic Sen. Cory Booker, who will break Senate tradition and testify against the confirmation of a colleague for a cabinet post, once praised GOP Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions for working with him to honor civil rights activists.

Booker will testify against Sessions’ confirmation as attorney general. He told MSNBC’s Chris Hayes Monday night that he has serious concerns about Sessions’ civil rights record.

Just last year in February 2016, Sessions partnered with Booker to award the Congressional Gold Medal to those who participated in the 1965 Voting Rights March from Selma to Montgomery, Ala.

Read more...

 

US Interfered In Foreign Presidential Elections At Least 81 Times In 54 Years

 Political  Comments Off on US Interfered In Foreign Presidential Elections At Least 81 Times In 54 Years
Dec 292016
 
The US was found to have interfered in foreign elections at least 81 times between 1946 and 2000 – not counting US-backed military coups or regime change efforts.

US Interfered In Foreign Presidential Elections At Least 81 Times In 54 Years
Ever since Donald Trump managed to win the US Presidential Election last month, the US establishment – which largely backed Hillary Clinton – has pounced on any and all opportunities to accuse a foreign power, namely Russia, of having “interfered” in the US election. Though such accusations have been proven to be based solely on speculation and not hard evidence, that hasn’t stopped the US political elite for crying foul for an act, they say undermines democracy in the worst way possible. Yet, absent from all of this post-election hysteria, is any mention of the US’ own well-documented practice of interfering with the elections of numerous foreign nations under the pretext of protecting or furthering US “interests” abroad.

Dov Levin, a political scientist at Carnegie Mellon University, amassed a database of US election interference abroad, which shows just how common that practice has been throughout recent US history. According to Levin’s work, the US interfered in 81 foreign elections between 1946 and 2000. The definition of intervention used in the study was “a costly act which is designed to determine the election results [in favor of] one of the two sides.” However, other types of intervention in elections, such as US “assistance” in the electoral process via election monitoring etc, was not included. The incidents of intervention cited in the database were largely carried out in secret as only one-third of intervention efforts were carried out publicly. Methods included the dissemination of misinformation or propaganda, training one side in campaigning techniques, making threats against a particular candidate, threatening to withdraw foreign aid, and bank-rolling a particular candidate among others. In 59% of the cases examined, the candidate that had received US “assistance” emerged victorious, though Levin estimated that the average effect of “partisan electoral interventions” only swayed the vote by an average of 3%.

However, these incidents do not include those that have taken place over the past 16 years. Under Bush, election intervention was a common policy practiced jointly through regime change, as evidenced by Bush’s covert intervention in the Iraqi elections of 2005. In a 2006 interview, Hillary Clinton argued that allowing Palestine to hold elections was a mistake. “I do not think we should have pushed for an election in the Palestinian territories. I think that was a big mistake,” said Clinton. “And if we were going to push for an election, then we should have made sure that we did something to determine who was going to win.” The same such interference continued later under Obama, such as in the 2015 elections in Haiti.

It is also worth noting that the report does not include the numerous military coups and regime change efforts the US has led in the same time period. Notable military coups of the past century include those which took place in Guatemala, Iran, and Chile – all of which were bank-rolled and executed with US military assistance. Regime change efforts continue to today, particularly in Syria, as US imperialism seeks continue to dominate all other nations in the name of “protecting democracy.” Though President-Elect Trump has pledged to not continue this long-standing practice, it remains to be seen if he will be able to resist the “deep state” or if he will be forced to serve its interests like the Presidents before him.

 
Source…

Nov 302016
 

Flag Protection Act hillary-clinton-and-the-flag-protection-act-of-2005

While Donald Trump has taken flack from Civil Libertarians and the Mainstream Media for his statement on the flag-burning issue, it’s worth noting that in 2005, Hillary Clinton proposed a law that would send people to jail for 1 year for burning of the American flag.

flag-protection-acr-2005

Click to enlarge

The bill she co-sponsored with Bob Bennett “outlawed flag burning, and called for a punishment of one year in jail and a fine of $100,000” when the flag is burned for “breach of the peace” or “intimidation”.

Another brilliant move by Trump to expose “Fake News” and the hypocrisy of Clinton supporters and the Mainstream media.

 

Obama Adds A Home In California To Live In After He Leaves Office

 Political  Comments Off on Obama Adds A Home In California To Live In After He Leaves Office
Nov 222016
 

So, Obama will leave office with homes in Washington DC, Chicago, California, and Hawaii… yet he has never worked in the private sector. He has written books. Surely, that’s where most of the money is from. Funny… Liberals love to complain about African dictators that get rich while in power, sounds like those foreign dictators are junior varsity thieves.

What is interesting about this is that Obama is moving into an area that isn’t even remotely diverse.

This California home is in Rancho Mirage, a town with a population of only 17,218, based on figures from the 2010 census.

Rancho Mirage is highly sought after as a top golf spot, as the town features twelve golf courses. Obama is a huge fan of golf and has visited the town on numerous occasions during his presidency.

Details on the home itself are lacking, but the 2010 census paints an interesting picture of the community’s demographics.

According to the census, 88.7 percent of the population is white, with 81.7 percent registering as non-Hispanic white. In contrast, only 1.5 percent of the local population is African American. About half of a percent is Native American. In 2010, there were 651 Asians, making them only 3.8 percent of the community. Hispanics or Latinos comprised 11.4 percent, which is less than the national figure.

The Obama administration has been the most diverse administration in history, but that track record won’t follow the Obamas outside the White House — at least in terms of their new place in Rancho Mirage.

However, it’s also notable that despite boasting of a diverse administration, the Department of State’s Refugee Processing Center has taken steps to funnel almost all the ;Syrian refugees sent to Virginia into low-income, poverty-stricken areas far from the wealthy suburbs just outside Washington, D.C.

Although the Obamas purchased a home in California — which now makes them bi-coastal — in the meantime, they will be remaining in Washington, D.C., at least until Sasha can finish high school at Sidwell Friends School. The family is leasing a nine-bedroom $4.3 million dollar mansion in D.C. for the time being.

Source…

Quite an impressive number of homes. Not bad for a Community Organizer, those people are racking in like tens of thousands a year!

Coming soon… The Obama Global Initiative.