OBAMA’S CIVIL WAR

There is no mistake about it, Obama was the most divisive President ever. Receiving the Peace Prize was a fallacy. Obama didn’t know how the world worked. “Might makes Right,” Words without backup mean nothing. Obama’s Red Line turned into a White Flag; he alone is responsible for 400,000 plus killed in Syria, not counting the havoc placed upon another 12 million or more. Obama, when history is written, will go down as the twenty century (Peace of Our TimeNeville Chamberlain .

His speeches inflamed minorities to revolt. Most if not all of Obama’s interpretation of events was biased in one way or another in support of race bating tactics that he hoped would ignite the civil war; he always longed for the final battle. Obama took the minority position when a White vs Black confrontation developed and that was before the facts were known. In other words he had a preconceived notion on White bias from the beginning.  The problem with Obama, he is half white; why did he turn against his other half? Because of his Mother who hated White people; simple as that.

Moving on to the Trump era we find hostility beyond the pale. Antifa gangs roam the streets, hired by alleged thugs from the Soros foundation; they are well organized, funded and armed with various weapons. Their aim is to take down capitalism. Former Attorney General Holder and Obama work behind the scenes.  Recently California hired this race provocateur to defend the state against Obama’s policies that they deemed harmful to the state. They are subversives hell bent on taking us down.  But wait, our time is now, Kennedy or Bader-Ginsburg are coming to the end of their careers, in Ginsburg’s case, life too. So the possibility of 6-3 Supreme Court decisions are in the realm of possibility. Can’t wait for the gloves to come off.

Look no further than Obama’s kissing cousins, the Muslim Brotherhood and don’t forget the golf game with the premier of Malaysia on Christmas day. Oh sure he is a Christian over our dead body.  “We are no longer a “Christian nation” speech was double talk.  We are a Christian nation in philosophy, maybe not religion, but that isn’t the point – the Judeo-Christian ethic reins supreme, always has, always will. Obama wanted to get in his Muslim two cents by combining it with other religions.

Click here for Dr. Ben Carson on Political Correctness (PC). Very important read; Great speech! Notice Obama’s posture! Dr. Ben Carson, a true American. Thank you. And don’t forget Obama and the progressive liberals (all Democrats) vigorously protect the education industry run by the TEACHERS UNION.
The thugs running Cuba received the blessing of Obama before he left office, soon after the guns were reloaded. But don’t forget the Zelaya affair in Honduras; Zelaya supported by Clinton and Obama against the Supreme Court of Honduras. Another example of the Obama administration supporting a left wing Communist government.

So when it is all said and done, Patriots like yourself know what end is up. We Americans truly believe in the law, freedom of speech and the 2nd Amendment, but will not sit still until the illegals are rounded up and sent back to their country of origin. Remember these criminals who broke into our country are responsible for 30 to 40 million anchor babies. This is an insult to our justice system. Once the Supreme Court addresses the 14th Amendment and they will, the decision and interpretation of it will right the wrongs of the past two centuries.

Read about it here; This article addresses are Sovereignty as a Nation.

“Birthright Citizenship”: Revisionism v Rule of Law

Started by Jim Delaney

We’ve all heard the stats: currently, only the United States grants birthright citizenship to illegal aliens and 8% of babies born in the US are so-called “anchor babies” born of illegal aliens. In and of itself, this doesn’t constitute a crisis, but, for many of us, it does illustrate how far we’ve strayed from the Constitution.

Like all babies, “anchor babies” too are sweet and cuddly, and deserving of mother’s love and society’s protection. But automatically conferring citizenship on babies of illegal aliens is an ideologically-motivated perversion not only of internationally accepted legal norms, but, much more importantly, of both the Constitution and the 14th Amendment as well.

By nimbly mischaracterizing the motives of birthright citizenship opponents, many in the media and blogosphere—to include attorneys who should know better– have irresponsibly misrepresented the framers’ intent and have reduced the level of discourse on this legitimate constitutional issue to that of ad hominem, race-baiting, specious legal citations, contrived legal justifications, and mindless pandering. Shamelessly seeking ideological and political supremacy, to these people the Constitution and the rule of law mean absolutely nothing. And for a nation which once prided itself as being a “nation of laws”, that is inexcusable.

During an interview with Mr. Trump last night, what annoyed me greatly was Bill O’Reilly’s characteristically bombastic–and wholly erroneous–claim that “the 14th Amendment says that any person born on US soil is a US Citizen. Period”.  Poppycock! He couldn’t have read the amendment at all to reach this specious conclusion. And the fact that even Judge Napolitano, a Libertarian jurist, a few days earlier asserted this revisionist and ignorant view is nothing short of bewildering and scary.  But, this does underscore just how flawed and fallible jurists and seemingly bright, well-informed talking heads can really be.

That said, for my own edification I decided to take the time to again review the actual words of the 14th’s framers, pertinent case law and the opinions of jurists and legal scholars on both sides of the question to determine the truth in this matter.

Here are my findings and conclusions:

First, while researching pertinent materials, I soon discovered that understanding the clear intent and meaning of the 14th Amendment was much simpler than anticipated. In fact, the meaning of the 14th was surprisingly straightforward. Lesson learned: if one simply abandons one’s ideological blinders for a moment and commit to an honest effort to objectively review a constitutional issue, clarity is nearly always one’s reward.

It also became apparent that from a strictly Constitutional standpoint, and despite assertions to the contrary from both the left and right, a constitutional amendment is NOT needed to deny US Citizenship to an “anchor baby”. In short, I was unable to find any convincing constitutional evidence that so-called anchor babies can legitimately and automatically acquire U.S citizenship. Thus, a simple act of Congress–and most certainly NOT an amendment to the Constitution—to restate the original intent and meaning of the 14th Amendment is all that is really needed.

Toward that end, introduced on April 2nd, 2009, and co-sponsored by 93 congressmen, inclusive of one lonely Democratic supporter, Mississippi’s Gene Taylor, HR 1868 (Birthright Citizenship Act of 2009) amends section 301 of the Immigration & Nationality Act to provide that a person born in the US is “subject to the jurisdiction” of the US for citizenship purposes if the person is born in the US of parents, one of whom is: 1) a US citizen or national; 2) a lawful permanent resident alien who resides in the US; or 3) an alien performing military service in the US Armed Forces.” And if one simply reviews the original meaning of the 14th Amendment one can easily see that there is absolutely nothing at all revolutionary about this bill’s language. In any event, the bill failed.

Intended to protect the rights of emancipated Negroes, the 14th Amendment specifically provided that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and the State wherein they reside.”

And as I very quickly learned, of central importance in this statement is the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof”, something birthright citizenship proponents have consistently and very conveniently ignored.

To begin, Sen. Jacob Howard of Michigan, co-author of the 14th Amendment, expressly asserted that “this will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers.” And it is in this plain-spoken construction birthright proponents somehow discover ambiguity or a totally different meaning. Amazing!
.
Under Section 1992 of the US Revised Statutes, the same Congress which adopted the 14th Amendment confirmed that “all persons born in the United States who are not aliens, excluding Indians not taxed, are declared to be citizens of the United States.”

In 1873, the US Atty Gen ruled the word “jurisdiction” under the Fourteenth Amendment to mean the absolute and complete jurisdiction. Aliens, among whom are persons born here and naturalized abroad, dwelling or being in this country, are subject to the jurisdiction of the US but only to a limited extent. Political and military rights do not pertain to them.”

Sen. Trumbell noted during the drafting of the 14th Amendment that it was the amendment’s goal to “make citizens of everybody born in the US who owe allegiance to the US,” and if “the negro or white man belonged to a foreign government he would not be a citizen.”

On March 1, 1866, Rep. James Wilson of Iowa, House Judiciary Committee, added that “we must depend on the general law relating to subjects and citizens recognized by all nations for a definition, and that must lead us to conclude that every person born in the US is a natural-born citizen of such States, except that of children born on our soil (jus soli) to temporary sojourners or representatives of foreign governments.” This statement served to nicely clarify Sen. Howard’s construction above.

John Bingham, framer of the 14th Amendment’s first section, stated that Sec. 1992 of the Revised Statutes meant “every human being born within the jurisdiction of the US of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of the Constitution itself, a natural born citizen.”

And if we reach way back to our founders in search of a definition of citizens of a foreign power, Thomas Jefferson said “Aliens are the subjects of a foreign power.”

To a man, among the framers the premise behind “within the jurisdiction thereof” was that all children born to parents who owed no foreign allegiance were to be citizens of the US; thus, not only must a child be born on US soil (jus soli) but born of parents whose complete allegiance was to the US.

Subsequently, Sen. Howard further explained that “only thru expatriation, which could be accomplished thru law alone, and not thru any immigrant acting on his own outside the law—and certainly not by any act of birth alone—could an alien become a citizen.” This, of course, would mean that the alien/sojourner would need to affirmatively renounce his allegiance to his/her country of origin before s/he could be considered completely within the jurisdiction of the US.

Sen. Howard also stated the following: “…the word ‘jurisdiction’, as here employed, ought to be construed so as to imply a full and complete jurisdiction on the part of the US, coextensive in all respects with the constitutional power of the US, whether exercised by Congress, the executive, or the judiciary; that is to say, the same jurisdiction in extent and quality as applies to every citizen of the US now.” In effect, he was saying that an alien may, by treaty arrangements with his country of origin, avail himself of the protection of the US, much as sojourning US citizens in the alien’s country of origin would avail themselves of that country’s protection, but that an alien’s physical presence alone in the US would not render him/her under the “complete jurisdiction” of the US. Simple enough.

The rationale behind not granting automatic citizenship can be illustrated by the fact that American Indians could not be subject to the jurisdiction of the US because the US dealt with them through treaties. By logical extension, aliens sojourning in the US are extended privileges and protections by virtue of treaties in force with their countries of origin, much as American citizens are granted similar rights and privileges—but not citizenship–when sojourning in those countries. Logically, therefore, only if an alien voluntarily and affirmatively renounces his citizenship and expresses an intent to swear allegiance to the US may the alien, through operation of law (a formal naturalization process) be granted US citizenship. Thus, in a nutshell, since neither children of tourists/sojourners nor of diplomats born in the US can be US citizens, children of illegal entrants cannot be lawfully granted the privilege of US citizenship.

In 1867, George Yeaman, American Minister to Denmark, in his highly respected treatise on allegiance and citizenship and for whom the framers had great respect, asserted that “the idea of a double allegiance and citizenship united in the same person, and having reference to two separate, independent, and sovereign nations or governments, is simply an impossibility.” Thus, dual citizenship was also a no-no. (Take note, BHO.)

P. A. Madison, a modern day master of constitutional analysis, points out that “since illegal aliens are unlawfully in the US, their native country has a proper and primary claim of allegiance on the child. Thus, the completeness of their allegiance to the US is impaired, which therefore precludes automatic citizenship.” Slam dunk obvious, I’d say.

Also, Rep. Aaron Sargent, a representative from California during the Naturalization Act of 1870 debates, said the 14th Amendment’s citizenship clause was not a de-facto right for aliens to obtain citizenship. Significantly, none of his contemporaries disputed that assertion.

Adding to this mix, here is a little case law since the 14th’s ratification.

In the Slaughterhouse Cases(1873), the Supreme Court observed that the 14th Amendment overturned the Dred Scott decision by making all persons born within the United States and subject to its jurisdiction, citizens of the US; the ruling went on to point out “that [the 14th Amendment’s] main purpose was to establish the citizenship of the Negro” and that “the phrase ‘subject to its jurisdiction’ was intended to exclude from its operation children of ministers, consuls, AND citizens or subjects of foreign states born within the United States”, thus reinforcing Sen. Howard’s construction above. So, since they cannot be subject to US jurisdiction, children of citizens of foreign sovereignities and children of foreign ministers/consuls/ambassadors cannot be lawfully considered US Citizens. Makes perfect sense.

Then, in Elk v Wilkins (1884), the Supreme Court ruled that the 14th Amendment did not even confer citizenship on Indians—because they were subject to tribal jurisdiction, not U.S. jurisdiction. In effect, the court essentially stated that the status of the parents determines the citizenship of the childand not merely the fortuitous birth of that child on American soil. (Note: not until the Citizens Act of 1924 was U S citizenship granted to American Indians. As with many whimsical court rulings over the years, I was unable to understand the legal grounding for this reversal. Thus, it would seem that judicial arbitrariness is not an affliction peculiar to modern day American courts alone.)

In US v Wong Kim Ark (1898), the courts held that children born in the US of parents of foreign descent who, at the time of the child’s birth are subjects of a foreign power but who have a permanent domicile and residence in the US and are carrying on business in the US, and are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity under a foreign power, and are not members of foreign forces in hostile occupation of US territory, become a citizen of the US at the time of birth. As expressed in the minority opinion, this decision violated the 14th Amendment. But, in any case, how many new illegal aliens have permanent domiciles in the US and how many of them are carrying on business in the US at the moment of their child’s birth on US soil? I suspect precious few. 

In Steel v Citizens for a Better Environment (1998), the court stated that “jurisdiction is a word of many, too many, meanings.” However, and as can be clearly seen above, Sen. Trumbell and, yes, Sen. Howard, 14th Amendment co-authors, had long ago provided a definition by declaring that “the provision is, that all persons born in the United States, and ‘subject to the jurisdiction thereof’’, are citizens. That means ‘subject to the complete jurisdiction thereof. What do we mean by ‘complete jurisdiction thereof’? Not owing allegiance to anybody else. That is what it means.” And this from the framers’ themselves! (Clearly, majority jurists in the Steel v Citizens court didn’t bother to research the framers’ clear intent and meaning. And one must wonder if a neophyte, such as I, can easily deduce original meaning, why can’t trained jurists? Could it be incompetence or do political agendas get in the way of constitutional law?)

Despite the clear meaning and intent of the 14th’s framers, we fast forward to the somewhat enigmatic ruling in US ex rel. Hintopoulis v Shaughnessy (1982), which some bloggers have used to justify birthright citizenship. In that case, and out of whole cloth, somewhere in the ruling it asserted, almost unconsciously/unwittingly, that although a child born in the US to two illegal aliens was a US Citizen (????) that, nonetheless, “suspending the alien parents’ deportation based upon “the accident of birth in the US of their son would be to deprive others, who are patiently awaiting visas…” Thus, since the glancing allusion to the legality of birthright citizenship, though gratuitous—and erroneous—was woven into this suspension of deportation decision, birthright proponents often blithely and excitedly cite this case to substantiate the legality of birthright citizenship. Grabbing at straws, I’d say.

Then, true to activist form, in Plyler v Doe (1982) the court, apparently without access to the 14th framers’ erudition and written words, mysteriously ruled 5-4 that there is “no plausible distinction” with respect to “jurisdiction” between resident aliens who entered the country lawfully and those resident aliens who entered unlawfully. Wowee! Clearly a yawning divergence from the framers’ clear meaning and intent. Seems judicial activism was as alive and well in 1982 as it is today.

To me, these two rulings which capriciously and arrogantly turned Thomas Jefferson and the framers of the 14th on their heads are clearly unlawful at worst, convenient contrivances at best.

When I explained all this on-line to an attorney who is also a strong proponent of birthright citizenship, this was her reply: “I disagree with your interpretation of the phrase ‘subject to the jurisdiction thereof’. The first rule of statutory construction is that we don’t look to the drafters’ intent if the words are plain and unambiguous…If the drafters meant to include some allegiance test, they would have. They didn’t.” That sort of revisionism, gobbledeg***, willful ignorance and dishonesty is, folks, what this country is up against. My rejoinder was civil, but to the point: “It wasn’t MY lowly interpretation. It was the framers’ interpretation. But, ignore original intent and meaning? A living constitution is like having no constitution at all. We can merely make it up as we go along and continue to hand-off an increasingly irrelevant document to the next generation. While I sincerely hope this isn’t what you have in mind, at this juncture I can see there’s really nothing more to discuss with you on this or any other constitutional issues. How very sad.”

Finally, based upon what I now understand, we must be faithful to the 14th Amendment framers’ clear intent and meaning—surely a tall order with so many activists and social engineers infesting our courts these days. In the case of “birthright citizenship”, Congress is constitutionally empowered to re-assert the original meaning of the the 14th Amendment, and that’s precisely what it should do.

 

 

A LEGEND IN HIS OWN MIND

Obama, a “legend in his own mind.”

Eight years in office with nothing to show for it. Oh he will tell you that Obamacare is his signature achievement; well sorry to say, but come next week America will kiss it goodbye. Please don’t insult us Mr. President because Americans know all too well that Obamacare was instituted by Democrats and Democrats only to lasso potential voters of the Democrat persuasion.

We know how socialism works, once people are dependent on government there are very few indeed who will jump ship. Why stop the gravy train? That’s what it is all about. One hand washes the other, a power grab by the political elite. But when the music stops, as it did in Venezuela, the people become a little unruly, antsy we might say. Good thing you only were allowed eight years, America could not put up with the damage you would have done in another four. You see, Americans are much smarter than you think. You see that guy in the background, his name is Maduro, the now president of Venezuela. A true commie like you, excuse us, a socialist. Pardon us for mixing the two up. Your ex-head of the DNC, Wasserman-Schultz, may she rest in peace, said or implied or couldn’t answer the question of what the difference was between a Democrat and a Socialist. She choked up. Like Hillary choked up on your dime. See, people have had it with parasites, liars, leaches, illegals, divisive politics and all that stuff you are for.

We hear you are staying around for a couple of years. That’s nice! It is about time you get a first hand look at the Capitalistic Machine in action. Many of your Washington pals will be begging you for help. They will have their hands out. See Trump knows who they are and is not afraid to tell them that there is no free lunch. Also he will tell them to get lost. And your lackey Holder, he hooked up with Governor Moon Beam; the two make a whacky couple. BTW Holder has taken the cream off the top to the tune of $300 big ones and that is for his mind.  His job, recommending and consulting on suing Uncle Same when the time comes.  Trump will send in ICE, round up the illegals and march them back across the border. Some will be made to swim. Expect Holder to speak out for the illegals. Gee whiz, a man of the Constitution, like you, who does not know what the word “ILLEGAL” means.

Last but not least. Representative Lewis from Georgia went Tongue Loose. All kinds of rubbish from his mouth. He doesn’t like the result of the election and calls Trump an illegitimate president. Matter of fact many of the socialist bottom feeders were and are quite upset about the Trump landslide. Thank you for making it all possible. These malcontents are on a rampage, having hissy fits. We expect to see them in Washington on Friday. However, the Trump riot police will be there too.  This type of behaviour is expected from spoiled rats, sorry we mean brats. We can’t recall this type of action back in 2008 and 2012.

Well, President Obama, THANK YOU FOR SERVING, thank you for Obamacare and thank you for backing Hillary. WE WILL MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN without your help. YOU’LL SEE.

 

” CONFLAGRATION” DEFINES OBAMA’S PRESIDENCY

Vitriol aside, Barack Hussein Obama, did not live up to expectations. In fact he disappointed a whole generation – especially the Black Community; one poignant example is the lack of commitment to a better education for those who live in the inner city. Against Charter Schools from the START due to the very fact of the AFT supporting his run for the White House. Blacks have endured eight years of hardship under Obama. Well done Mr. President! You sold them out and they know it.

Obama’s accomplishments weren’t many, but one really stands out. Obama set out  to divide the country between Black and White and did an excellent job. Congratulations Mr. President. His coat tails were far and few in between, his condescending speeches were enough to turn off many of those who initially voted for him. He is to be congratulated for his very fine commentary, especially his comment regarding Trayvon Martin. He learned from that experience to hold his tongue even though a future event demanded an inflammatory response.  All of this lead to early supporters sitting out the 2016 election. Great job POTUS, thanks for gang banging Hillary.  As Trayvon was your son, your made your sister Hillary a two time loser. We are very proud of this accomplishment.

But putting all that aside, we still thank you from the bottom of our hearts for setting the Middle East on fire. Great job here, 400,000 thousand civilians killed on your watch; millions more on the run. Some of them are Jihadists that have entered OUR country illegally, suicide bombers killed at random, raped our women and burglarized neighborhoods. Thank you Mr. President for inviting them in. You gave Mr. Trump his meal ticket and now he is showing you the door – don’t let it hit you on the way out.

Last but not least, we understand that you filled many of the judgeships with hard assed progressives. The D.C. court is filled up with those with the liberal-progressive bent pushing their own agenda. We know where they are coming from. What will set them straight is a backhand from the Supreme Court.

Oh, your Garland fellow never made it – sorry about that. Soon, old lady Ginsberg will bite the bullet paving the way for Trump to nominate two conservatives. Guess what they will do to the lower courts? Eviscerate them along with many of your illegally touted regulatory schemes, count on them being history.

BOTTOM LINE MR. PRESIDENT – THE ERA OF BIG GOVERNMENT IS OVER – AMERICA HAS VOTED TO SUICIDE BOMB THE PARASITIC LEACH WHO HAS LIVED OFF IT FOR DECADES.

ENJOY YOUR RETIREMENT MR. EX PRESIDENT OBAMA, WE WISH YOU WELL. 

 

RUSSIA-CHINA ALLIANCE STRIKES FEAR THE WORLD OVER

They shall “fear us” says the Russian Bear. We shall plunge the RED SPEAR into their chest; pressing it into their very heart, draining their blood for the Revolution, never backing down to the capitalistic dogs; revolution the world over is our goal – right or wrong we  seek unrest, we thrive on it.

China, on the other hand intimidates its foes by shear numbers; they know that the small fry don’t have the intestinal fortitude to bring it on. Afraid of bloodshed most countries lie down as the Chinese tanks roll over them – the United States included. A show of force is all that is needed. Western Democracies who preach piece are timid in the face of confrontation.

A prime example is President Obama’s wishful thinking speech at Hiroshima Japan. He did not go nuclear and apologize, but certainly by any account he went their like a San Francisco hippie. He would have been better off not speaking but smoking a joint; a peace sign emblazoned on his chest and flowers in his hair. CLICK HERE FOR MORE ON THE STORY OF THE “FAT MAN

Today’s world is different, far from the days of Truman and Eisenhower where America’s might was second to none and we weren’t afraid to show it. Bullies only stand down when they face force; Obama has given our enemies the RED CARPET. A Hillary Clinton administration would be a “carry on” of the Obama Agenda, which is the continuation  “To make America weak again.

THE TICKING TIME BOMB

Until every single Muslim with a grudge renounces violence and Satin and at the same time embraces the moral equivalency of Christianity there will always be the “TICKING TIME BOMB.” No country, state or city is safe from the suicide bomber. Passed down from father to son, from mother to daughter, the psychology of the lone wolf cannot be altered; it is part of their DNA.

WND EXCLUSIVE

2,000 ‘TICKING TIME BOMBS’ IN U.S. – AND COUNTING

New American mosque opens every week and many preach jihad

Read more at http://mobile.wnd.com/2016/04/over-2000-ticking-time-bombs-in-u-s/#XbQefOCrJBDpveDt.99

President Obama visits mosque in Maryland in January.President Obama visits mosque in Maryland in January.

  • In Germany, following a wave of Islamic immigration, one political party is considering a call for shutting down all of the country’s mosques in a desperate bid to prevent terrorist attacks, rape sprees and other acts of violence and Muslim domination.
  • In the U.S., President Obama marked the new year by visiting a mosque and has invested a great deal of effort to downplay the connection between Islam and terrorism, while leading Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has proposed temporarily halting all Muslim immigration.
  • A growing chorus of U.S. politicians, pundits and scholars are calling for closer monitoring of U.S. mosques, the number of which has grown exponentially since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks that killed nearly 3,000 people on U.S. soil.

Experts on Islamic terrorism are calling the estimated 2,500 to 3,100 mosques in America “ticking time bombs.”

Every state now has at least one. California and New York lead the way, each with more than 500 mosques, followed by Texas with just over 300.

As the number of mosques increase, so do acts of Islamic terror in the U.S.

FBI Director James Comey told Congress recently that his agency is stretched to the limit trying to keep up with nearly 1,000 active ISIS investigations in all 50 states, and that does not include probes tied to al-Qaida, al-Shabab or other Islamic groups.

While the FBI is able to foil the vast majority of Islamic terror plots, last year was particularly bloody with jihadist shootings in Chattanooga that killed five U.S. servicemen and another attack that took 14 lives at a Christmas party in San Bernardino.

Jihadist knife attacks at a restaurant in Columbus, Ohio, and on the campus of University of California at Merced have recently injured at least a dozen others, some critically.

And everyone is jittery after what happened in Brussels, Belgium, last month.

Of the thousands of mosques in America, nearly 80 percent of them have been opened since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
Read more at http://mobile.wnd.com/2016/04/over-2000-ticking-time-bombs-in-u-s/#XbQefOCrJBDpveDt.99

HOLA FIDEL, HOLA RAUL, VIVA CUBA

 Fidel Castro walking with fellow revolutionary Che Guevara in 1960.  Although Fulgencio Batista was the Mafia’s main man and ran a repulsive anti-democratic government, the 56 years that the Castro’s have been in power have been worse. Private property has been seized, freedom of the press extinguished and freedom to pursue a better life threatened under the Castro’s military regime. But that doesn’t matter to President Obama who envies the likes of Castro and the Chavisimo; may he rest in peace.hugoobama
So President Obama arrived in Cuba today with great fanfare. Click here to read the latest from Fox News. 

JUDGE JEANINE DESTROYS NIKKI HALEY

By now we have heard the reply to Obama’s last State of the Union Address. A pitiful rebuke if there ever was one. The South Carolina Governor acted like a Union soldier killing General Grant after the surrender of General Robert E. Lee at the Appomattox Court House.

Image result for appomattox court house surrender
The Battle of Appomattox Court House, fought on the morning of April 9, 1865, was one of the last battles of the American Civil War. It was the final engagement of Confederate Army general Robert E. Lee‘s Army of Northern Virginia before it surrendered to the Union Army under Lt. Gen. Ulysses S. Grant.

Judge Jeanine Pirro had none of it, she again manifested her rage with a right on diatribe, a vitriolic invective that Nikki Haley had coming. Click here for Judge Jeanine.  Chalk up Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan for the negativity against Trump. Now we know why these two Obama lapdogs have licked the feet of Obama for the past seven years. 

PRESIDENT OBAMA’S ACCOMPLISHMENTS – THIS LIST WILL SURPRISE YOU

Quit Bashing  Obama ! by COL. ROBERT F. CUNNINGHAM and PATRICK RISHOR, The  Gilmer  Mirror (Northeast Texas Newspaper)  
Quit trashing  Obama ‘s accomplishments. He has done more than any other President before him. Here is a list of his impressive accomplishments:
 
1. First President to be photographed smoking a joint.  
2. First President to apply for college aid as a foreign student, then deny he was a foreigner.
3. First President to have a social security number from a state he has never lived in.
4. First President to preside over a cut to the credit-rating of the United States.
5. First President to violate the War Powers Act.
6. First President to be held in contempt of court for illegally obstructing oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico.
7. First President to require all Americans to purchase a product from a third party.
8. First President to spend a trillion dollars on “shovel-ready” jobs when there was no such thing as “shovel-ready” jobs.
9. First President to abrogate bankruptcy law to turn over control of companies to his union supporters.
10. First President to by-pass Congress and implement the Dream Act through executive fiat.
11. First President to order a secret amnesty program that stopped the deportation of illegal immigrants across the U.S., including those with criminal convictions.
12. First President to demand a company hand-over $20 billion to one of his political appointees.
13. First President to tell a CEO of a major corporation (Chrysler) to resign.
14. First President to terminate America’s ability to put a man in space.
15. First President to cancel the National Day of Prayer and to say that America is no longer a Christian nation.
16. First President to have a law signed by an auto-pen without being present.
17. First President to arbitrarily declare an existing law unconstitutional and refuse to enforce it.
18. First President to threaten insurance companies if they publicly spoke out on the reasons for their rate increases.
19. First President to tell a major manufacturing company in which state it is allowed to locate a factory.
20. First President to file lawsuits against the states he swore an oath to protect (AZ, WI, OH, IN).
21. First President to withdraw an existing coal permit that had been properly issued years ago.
22. First President to actively try to bankrupt an American industry (coal).
23. First President to fire an inspector general of AmeriCorps for catching one of his friends in a corruption case.
24. First President to appoint 45 czars to replace elected officials in his office.
25. First President to surround himself with radical left wing anarchists.
26. First President to golf more than 150 separate times in his five years in office.
27. First President to hide his birth, medical, educational and travel records.
28. First President to win a Nobel Peace Prize for doing NOTHING to earn it.
29. First President to go on multiple “global apology tours” and concurrent “insult our friends” tours.
30. First President to go on over 17 lavish vacations, in addition to date nights and Wednesday evening White House parties for his friends paid for by the taxpayers.
31. First President to have personal servants (taxpayer funded) for his wife.
32. First President to keep a dog trainer on retainer for $102,000 a year at taxpayer expense.
33. First President to fly in a personal trainer from Chicago at least once a week at taxpayer expense.
34. First President to repeat the Quran and tell us the early morning call of the Azan (Islamic call to worship) is the most beautiful sound on earth.
35. First President to side with a foreign nation over one of the American 50 states (Mexico vs Arizona).
36. First President to tell the military men and women that they should pay for their own private insurance because they “volunteered to go to war and knew the consequences.”
37. Then he was the First President to tell the members of the military that THEY were UNPATRIOTIC for balking at the last suggestion.
I feel much better now. I had been under the impression he hadn’t been doing ANYTHING. 

 

THE ROPE IS TIGHTENING AROUND LOIS LERNER’S NECK

IRS stooge, Lois Lerner, is one step closer to the gallows. Many of her so-called lost emails have been found. Although it will take weeks to decode them, we are of the opinion that they will provide enough rope to see that justice is done.

Remember that Lerner and her colleagues presumably on Obama’s order, targeted the TEA PARTY; limiting their ability to form 501-3c entities and thus stopping them from raising funds for the 2010 election. This stifled their 1st Amendment right to free speech enabling Barry Soetoro to survive a tough election and claim a 2nd term.