Showing posts with label treason. Show all posts
Showing posts with label treason. Show all posts

Twitter Censored Me For Advocating US Legal Code

On September 14, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) tweeted that Gen. Mark Milley had worked "to subvert the military chain of command and collude with China," and that "He should be court martialed [sic] if true."

Sen. Paul was referring to Milley subverting the chain of command by effectively attempting to omit the Commander In Chief (Trump at the time) from the decision-making process, and by phoning a top Chinese general to promise advance warning should Trump decide that an attack on China or Chinese forces was necessary.

Sen. Rand Paul tweet


If Milley did "subvert the military chain of command and collude with China," he could be guilty of treason, mutiny, and/or sedition as defined by US Code. (More on that below.) Sen. Paul did not say what kind of punishment he would wish for Milley if he is ever court-martialed. So I replied to Sen. Paul's tweet by suggesting that Milley should be "executed if convicted." US Code allows for execution as a punishment for treason. But the fools at Twitter HQ don't care.


Note that I wrote, "if convicted." That's important because I was not advocating the unjustified killing of anybody. 

By writing that Milley should be executed if convicted I obviously meant after a legal trial (court-martial). If convicted, US Legal Code also calls for execution as a possible punishment. In other words, I was advocating the application of federal law.

Nevertheless, Twitter accused me of violating their rules of "abuse and harassment." I did neither.

I don't want to make this post about whether or not Gen. Milley is guilty of anything (although he is, in my opinion). Rather, this is about Twitter limiting my account for, in their flawed opinion, advocating the killing of somebody. (Note: It's also possible that some idiot at Twitter misinterpreted my reply to Sen. Paul as a threat.)



Twitter limited me on September 14
for saying that Gen. Mark Milley should be "executed if found guilty." They demanded that I delete the offending tweet.

I appealed it. Three times. No response.

That was no real surprise, of course, but I decided to wait it out just to see if I was wrong. After 13 days of waiting, I decided to delete the tweet and get back fully into the Twitterverse.

It's well know that Twitter is inconsistent with enforcement of their own rules. Just for fun, go to Twitter and search for "milley should be executed" or "execute milley" to see a ton of tweets still posted.

As I said earlier, I merely advocated federal law as defined by U.S. Code. Many say that Milley went rogue, and may have even committed treason. U.S. Legal Code offers some distinct possibilities for severe punishment, specifically:

10 U.S. Code § 894 - Art. 94. Mutiny or sedition (my emphasis added):

(a) Any person subject to this chapter who—

(1) with intent to usurp or override lawful military authority, refuses, in concert with any other person, to obey orders or otherwise do his duty or creates any violence or disturbance is guilty of mutiny;

(2) with intent to cause the overthrow or destruction of lawful civil authority, creates, in concert with any other person, revolt, violence, or other disturbance against that authority is guilty of sedition;

(3) fails to do his utmost to prevent and suppress a mutiny or sedition being committed in his presence, or fails to take all reasonable means to inform his superior commissioned officer or commanding officer of a mutiny or sedition which he knows or has reason to believe is taking place, is guilty of a failure to suppress or report a mutiny or sedition.

(b) A person who is found guilty of attempted mutiny, mutiny, sedition, or failure to suppress or report a mutiny or sedition shall be punished by death or such other punishment as a court-martial may direct.

Keep in mind that the Commander In Chief is a civilian and, therefore, embodies civil authority.

18 U.S. Code § 2381 - Treason (my emphasis added):

Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

It is plain that the US Code (federal law) says that Milley should (or could) be executed if found guilty of treason, mutiny, or sedition. All I did was echo that.


BOMBSHELL: New FBI Texts Detail Internal Furor Over Handling Of ‘Crossfire Hurricane’ Investigation

Sean Davis and Mollie Hemingway, two fine investigative journalists, filed this amazing report that was published by The Federalist on September 24:

Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agents tasked by fired former Director James Comey to take down Donald Trump during and after the 2016 election were so concerned about the agency’s potentially illegal behavior that they purchased liability insurance to protect themselves less than two weeks before Trump was inaugurated president, previously hidden FBI text messages show. The explosive new communications and internal FBI notes were disclosed in federal court filings today from Sidney Powell, the attorney who heads Michael Flynn’s legal defense team.

“[W]e all went and purchased professional liability insurance,” one agent texted on Jan. 10, 2017, the same day CNN leaked details that then-President-elect Trump had been briefed by Comey about the bogus Christopher Steele dossier. That briefing of Trump was used as a pretext to legitimize the debunked dossier, which was funded by the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign and compiled by a foreign intelligence officer who was working for a sanctioned Russian oligarch.

“Holy crap,” an agent responded. “All the analysts too?”

“Yep,” the first agent said. “All the folks at the Agency as well.”

Full story at The Federalist.

UPDATED: Max Keiser Says "Supremely Treasonous" Obama "Wiped His Butt With The Constitution"

Max Keiser
Mad Max: Keiser Report
June 11, 2013 - Wow. Max Keiser is a madman financial expert with his own talks show, and he pulls no punches. He doesn't allow politeness to get in the way of bluntly expressing himself. In the June 11 episode of his "Keiser Report" show on Russia Today (RT), he lays into Barack Obama like no other talk show host you've heard. Watch the video below.

Keiser accuses Obama of "supreme treasonous action." Obama has killed America, he said (he's referring, I'm sure, to the spirit in which American was founded). "Barack Obama got into bed with these guy who run PRISM." Keiser and co-host Stacy Herbert show a photo of Obama at a dinner meeting with the top dogs of Apple, Facebook, Google, Yahoo and others in February, 2011. You know, the key players at the key companies that make PRISM possible. (More below the video.)



"The last supper," Keiser says of that meeting. "An undertakers' convention. It's the moment when Barack Obama complicitly got in bed with these guys who run PRISM. That's the moment....this is when Barack Obama essentially took the Constitution and wiped his butt with it, and it's the moment of supreme treasonous action by the President of the United States. America is dead. 1776 to PRISM. Thanks, Barack, you killed the country."

Max Keiser
"Thanks Barack, you killed America!"
As I said, Keiser does not mince his words. The only other guy on the talk show circuit who comes close to Keiser's red hot barbs is Dennis Miller, but Keiser's serrated edge leaves a bloodier wound.

Keiser is the kind of guy you either love or hate. Or both at once. "Some call Max Keiser a 'traitor'," said The Independent UK, "but America's most outrageous political pundit is about to become the most widely watched newscaster on the planet." It's not hard to understand why.

In the full June 11 show, Keiser and Stacy Herbert ask, "What is Boundless Informant, PRISM, Trans-Pacific Partnership, SOPA, PIPA and ACTA if not copyright prostitutes colluding and beating up the competition? Max also informs President Barack Obama that a food stamp is NOT a job" and much, much more.

Keiser not only has a wicked tongue. He's a vicious tweeter, too. For example:

Max Keiser ‏@maxkeiser
New stamp in US will have a 'scratch and sniff' with bits of Obama's poop to give every American a chance to experience licking O's ass.

That's one of his milder tweets, actually. He gets rough, so approach @maxkeiser knowing there will be some salty language. But dammit, it's refreshing as hell to have a guy who says what we're all thinking actually say it. It would be beautiful if the mainstream media guys and gals in the US were even half as blunt as Mad Max.

Clinging to Guns and Religion, Like the Muslim Brotherhood

Taliban fighter clings to his guns and religion.
Original photo: Reuters  Wording: Unknown
Jan. 1, 2013 - Had to share this graphic with you. It's a Reuters photo of a Taliban soldier. It says, "I wonder when Obama is going to tell the Muslims to stop clinging to their guns and religion."

That's a darkly funny reference to Obama's insult to Americans who believe in God and/or own firearms as the Constitution says they can. (I don't know who added the words.) The irony in all of this, of course, is Obama's firm support for the Islamo-fascist Muslim Brotherhood, which recently came to power in Egypt with help from the Obama Administration.

Obama made his insulting comment while running for the presidency in April, 2008.  He was referring mainly to unemployed blue collar voters when he said, "They get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations." If that describes any group, it best describes militant Muslims. You know, such as the Taliban, al-Qaeda, the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas and so many other groups.

Muslim Obama Logo by Tom Mannis, Chicago News Bench
Image by T. Mannis,
Chicago News Bench
Hillary Clinton, running against Obama at the time, said, "His remarks are elitist and out of touch." Watch a video of Hillary criticizing Obama for his "elitist" remark. A few years later, Hillary Clinton would be Obama's Secretary of State, and would help make possible the ascension of the Muslim Brotherhood. Did Clinton ever consider how "out of touch" it was to give so much assistance and political legitimacy to the terrorists of the Muslim Brotherhood?

Neither Clinton or Obama considered the opinion of the Egyptians who would fall under the oppressive rule of President Morsi and his Muslim Brotherhood. They should have consulted with Egyptian democracy activist Michael Meunier, who says Obama "needs to stop supporting the Muslim Brotherhood flat out."

NEW BOMBSHELL: Obama Hiding Arms Shipments To Syrian Jihadists (Video)

Oct. 31, 2012 - New video from Western Center for Journalism details the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, and also suggests that The Traitor Obama was hiding arms shipments to radical jihadists in Syria. Video uploaded today. This makes me so damned angry that I can't even write about it. Just watch the damned video. Obama needs to stand trial for high treason. Pronto.

Left To Die: Obama Knew Benghazi Attack Was Terrorism But Did Nothing

Oct. 25, 2012 - A new video (below) shows how the Obama Administration was more than merely negligent in the deaths of Ambassador Chris Stevens and four others in the deadly attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya on Sept. 11, 2012. Email from the doomed U.S. consulate just before and during the attack show that the attack was not a simple protest. Real-time video of the attack was watched in the White House situation room.  Obama, it seems, intentionally left the U.S. consulate in Benghazi vulnerable and easy pickings for terrorists. That's a strong statement, but they received repeated requests for more security from Stevens in the months leading up to the Sept. 11 attack. Instead of listening to the ambassador and giving him more security staff, security was actually decreased.  

More following this video...

IN REAL TIME: An excellent report by Peter Ferrara at Forbes.com (Oct. 25) notes that documents released by the House Oversight Committee show that on Sept. 11, "the White House situation room starts receiving emails at about 1 pm that the mission is under hostile surveillance. The only response was that the Pentagon sends a drone armed with a video camera so that everyone in Washington can see what transpires in real time, as it happens, at the White House, at the State Department, at the Pentagon, at the CIA."

Photo: Reuters
You may recall that in the hours and days after the attack, Sec. of State Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama both blamed the violence on spontaneous protests in response to an anti-Muslim video. This, we now know, was not true.

Worse yet, Clintion and Obama were lyingThey knew that it was a well-planned terrorist attack and not an ordinary protest that got out of hand.

"The drone documents no crowds protesting any video," continues the Forbes report. "But at 4 pm Washington receives an email from the Benghazi mission that it is under military style attack."

The subject of that email: "U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi Under Attack."

The email from the consulate in Benghazi said that the consulate was "under attack." It said nothing about any protests. "Ambassador Stevens, who is currently in Benghazi, and four COM personnel are in the compound safe haven," said the email.

"Just one hour flight time away were U.S. Air Force bases," says Forbes, "that could have been rousted in minutes to send fighter planes and attack helicopters that could have routed the attackers in minutes of fighting." Officials in Washington watched the events in real time. No help was sent. "Obama went to bed," noted BeforeItsNews, "knowing that the embassy was under attack and then went to a fundraiser in Las Vegas the next morning."

Related:

Did Obama Want Chris Stevens Kidnapped To Trade For Blind Sheik?

UPDATE, Oct. 25: Left To Die: Obama Knew Benghazi Attack Was Terrorism, Did Nothing
UPDATE, Oct. 28: The Indictment of Barack Obama For Murder and Treason


Oct. 17, 2012 - A stunning video accuses Barack Obama of deliberately decreasing security at the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya to eventually make himself look like a hero. If true, Obama would be guilty of treason and other high crimes, not to mention more than a few misdemeanors.

This amazing theory and accusation comes from Kevin Dujan,  a political analyst and radio and TV host. As the Western Center For Journalism reports, Dujan "wrote an article and appeared on radio on October 8 putting forth a theory that the attack of the Libyan consulate was tied neither to a video or terrorism, but a botched kidnapping of Ambassador Stevens." Obama was allegedly so desperate for an "October surprise" in the presidential election that he was willing to endanger the lives of all of the consulate staff in Benghazi. Dujan also posted about this on his own website, Hill Buzz.

BUT THAT'S NOT THE MOST SHOCKING PART of what Dujan says. He also believes that Obama made arrangements with the Muslim Brotherhood to, as Western Journalism writes, "kidnap the Ambassador, and through Obama’s supposed affinity with the Muslim world, Obama would save the day and get the ambassador released. But the Muslim Brotherhood wanted something in return. Their beloved Blind Sheik."  

The "Blind Sheik," Omar Abdel Rahman, is serving a life sentence in a U.S. prison, convicted for the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and for plotting to destroy other New York landmarks. In late September, 2012 the White House announced that he would not be released from prison.

The theory sounds bizarre, but it is also not outside the realm of possibilities. The video here, titled "Benghazi Attack Was Botched Kidnapping to Trade Blind Sheik," was produced by Western Journalism.
At 2:20 into the video, the narrator says, "And how does one guarantee the success of an October surprise? Make a treasonous deal with your enemies. This was the plan: Obama would arrange to decrease the amount of security at the consulate, only leaving Libyan security guards that could be easily paid to leave their post. He then arranged for the ambassador to be taken hostage by a group tied to the Muslim Brotherhood, and Obama, like the cavalry riding in to save the day, would, through the power of his persuasion and affinity with the Muslim world, arrange for Ambassador Stevens's release days before the election. But that wasn't all. The Muslim Brotherhood president of Egypt, Mohammed Morsi, recently vowed that the 'Blind Sheik' would be released, and Obama had been negotiating with the Muslim Brotherhood.
If Kevin Dujan is correct in his accusation against Obama, then this could be the biggest October surprise ever. It would not be the surprise that Obama was hoping for, however.

Related:

Is the U.S. Giving Away Several Alaskan Islands to Russia?

February 20, 2012 - Under any other President, this would seem unbelievable. Under the current psychocratic regime, however, it seems to be just another way to bring America to its knees.

"It appears Congress had nothing to do with this 7-island giveaway with tens of thousands of square miles of oil-rich seabeds. The Department of the Interior says these islands are a source of BILLIONS of barrels of oil. Our president and the State Department can just give away American sovereign land – Alaskan land," says Maggie's Notebook on February 18. Maggies gives an excellent report, and notes that this issue pre-dates the Obama Administration.

"The longer story is that this covert mission began under G.W.H. Bush," says Maggie, "but the thing to remember is that no he, nor any president following made the giveaway reality."

It would seem that the Obama Administration has every intention to make it reality.

The islands to be given away, says Joe Miller, include Wrangel, Bennett, Jeannette and Henrietta. Miller was the unsuccessful 2010 Republican nominee for U.S. Senate in Alaska. Miller "broke this story" in a post that was published on February 16 on World Net Daily's website, and reposted about at Gateway Pundit. Included in the deal, says Millier, would be billions of barrels of oil.

Here is an excerpt from Miller's post at WND (emphasis added):
Part of Obama’s apparent war against U.S. energy independence includes a foreign-aid program that directly threatens my state’s sovereign territory. Obama’s State Department is giving away seven strategic, resource-laden Alaskan islands to the Russians. Yes, to the Putin regime in the Kremlin.

The seven endangered islands in the Arctic Ocean and Bering Sea include one the size of Rhode Island and Delaware combined. The Russians are also to get the tens of thousands of square miles of oil-rich seabeds surrounding the islands. The Department of Interior estimates billions of barrels of oil are at stake.

The State Department has undertaken the giveaway in the guise of a maritime boundary agreement between Alaska and Siberia. Astoundingly, our federal government itself drew the line to put these seven Alaskan islands on the Russian side. But as an executive agreement, it could be reversed with the stroke of a pen by President Obama or Secretary Clinton.

The agreement was negotiated in total secrecy. The state of Alaska was not allowed to participate in the negotiations, nor was the public given any opportunity for comment. This is despite the fact the Alaska Legislature has passed resolutions of opposition – but the State Department doesn’t seem to care.
A quick review: The State Department supervised this giveaway. The head of the Department of State is Hillary Clinton. It is inconceivable that this deal was made without Obama's knowledge and consent. Furthermore, this is not a new issue. The idea of giving these islands to Russia dates back to the days when Russia was still the Soviet Union.

At the end of the World Net Daily piece, there is an "Author’s addendum" that notes that both the Bush and Clinton administrations failed to act to resolve the question of ownership of these islands.

"A maritime agreement negotiated by the U.S. State Department," says the addendum, "set the Russian boundary on the other side of the disputed islands, but no treaty has ratified this action. Consequently, it is within the president’s power to stop this giveaway. The Alaska delegation’s failure to put pressure on the administration is inexplicable. State Department Watch, an organization that assisted with this article, has confronted each administration and is currently confronting the Obama administration — and has been met by silence."

Indeed, World Net Daily has previously covered the issue of giving away Alaskan lands to Russia, as has NewsMax.
Enhanced by Zemanta

Audio of Ahmadinejad, Farrakhan, New Black Panther Leader Plotting Overthrow of U.S.

December 28, 2010 - TREASON - The New York Post had this back in September, but today we get shocking audio (hear it below) of a meeting between New Black Panther leader Malik Zulu Shabazz, Louis Farrakhan and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. What did they discuss? "Ways," writes Gateway Pundit, "to build an alliance, secure raw materials and overthrow America." That's right: Overthrow the United States with a bloody Muslim-race war. Might they start by killing "cracker babies?" Will we be hearing condemnations of Shabazz and Farrakhan anytime soon from President Barack Hussein Obama have to say about this? Or Jesse Jackson? Or Al Sharpton? Don't count on it. Does a meeting with a hostile foreign leader, in which you discuss ways to overthrow your own nation constitute treason? You bet it does. Here's the New York Post's story from Sept. 27: President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's six nights in New York featured a secret sit-down with militant minister Louis Farrakhan, heckling in a hotel bar, and a fear of being rubbed out that bordered on paranoia, the New York Post reported Sunday. The president shared a hush-hush meal with Farrakhan and members of the New Black Panther Party Tuesday at the Warwick Hotel on West 54th Street. Full story here... RELATED: Fox Interview of Malik Zulu Shabazz, Chairman of the New Black Panther Party New Black Panther Party: "Lets kill some Cracker babies"

The Ultimate Goal of Obama's Change

Welcome, Comrades, to the United Socialist States of America.  You think this little photo chop I did is an exaggeration? Okay, it is - for the moment. But it's coming, fellow Amerikans, it's coming. Just ask Jeffrey T. Kuhner, who reported the following at the Washington Times:

President Obama is close to completing his socialist revolution. Since coming to power last year, he has sought relentlessly to transform America. From his days as a student radical, Mr. Obama has been obsessed with smashing the traditional free-market system. Like most leftists, he thinks capitalism is the enemy.

We tried to warn you about Comrade Obama for years, people, we of the conservative blogosphere, and writers like Kuhner at conservative publications. The evidence of Obama's not-so-closeted communism and distaste for the USA has been readily available. Too many of you, however, were drunk on the Leftist Kook-Aid.

More from Kuhner:

"He was a Marxist-socialist in college," said John C. Drew, who knew Mr. Obama as a university student, in an interview. "He kept talking about the need to overthrow capitalism in favor of a working-class revolution."

Yep. That's the "change" that the rat-bastard Obama has had in mind for us all along, for years and years. A week and a half ago, he nationalized one sixth (nearly 20%) of the US economy with his health care "reform." Yesterday, he nationalized student loans. Warrantless wiretapping continues under his regime. We are now living under a soft tyranny. I could go on, but why bother? If you're not aware of the coming hard tyranny by now, you're beyond reach. Oh, it may not happen under Comrade Obama, but the path he just kicked us down, if followed without detour, will surely take us to a slightly friendlier version of Russia just before the USSR fell apart. If you are aware of it, hang in there. Good luck to you.

Adam Shaw, an British writer who specializes in politics and religion, recently wrote a post called "Obama's Socialism," at American Thinker. "To call someone a socialist is not conspiratorial," Shaw penned, "and it is not fear-mongering; it is simply the truth, and it is time for some in the conservative media to take a deep breath and admit it -- America has a socialist leading the country. Welcome to the club: It stinks!"

Obama Lying About Public Support for Oil Drilling

Drill Now? The public wants the United States to develop its ability to become more energy self-sufficient. An official poll by the federal government even said so. Will Barack Obama honor the wishes of the American people? Shhhh-yaaah, right ... not. Do you even need a poll to tell you that we need to be energy independent? If you’re the President of the United States or one of his political appointees and you’re ideologically opposed to new oil and natural gas development offshore, what do you do when the public registers its overwhelming support for new drilling in public opinion polls? You dance, delay, and deceive. You speak melodious words about seeking the wisdom of the public in making these decisions and then ignore evidence of the public will when you get it, or worse, you hide it. So writes Vince Haley at BigGovernment.com today. If you're a leftist ideologue like Barack Obama, bent on destroying the energy industry, no poll in the world will alter your opinion, or your goal of keeping energy costs high. You think that's an overstatement? It's not. Obama WANTS energy costs to remain high - and to go even higher. LISTEN to him admit that himself, and remember that the next time you're at a gas pump. It amounts to economic sabotage, and that qualifies as treason. RELATED: Obama: Spike energy costs to make people go 'green' Obama's Energy Budget: More Taxes, Higher Prices Leave a Comment * Conservative T-Shirts * Follow CNB on Twitter * RSS Feed

Is Obama a KGB Mole? No Really, Is He?

Move over birthers. Here's something even bigger to chew on: Allegations that Barack Obama is a KGB mole. This ought to shock a lot of people but, frankly, I've suspected this for a couple of years now. Then again, I still suspect that Gorbachev was a CIA mole and that the United States is still a democracy. Crazy world, eh? In an interview with Physicist Thomas Fife and Geopolitical Analyst, Jeff Nyquist (jrnyquist.com), it is alleged that the KGB infiltration into American politics goes back many years and it is DEEPER than you all think. 

Obama on the Edge of Treason

"Barack Obama has a truckload of problems on his hands,"wrote Anthony G. Martin at Examiner.com. "He has enacted policies that fit the description of impeachable offenses. He can be thankful that Congress is controlled by his partners-in-crime, or else he would be facing serious charges."

NOTE: This is one of those long posts that most of you will not read. I don't care; as a blogger, I often write for myself with the always-open invitation for you to peek into my journal. This post is meant as reference, my own primarily, but you are welcome to chew on it.

If you are concerned about the immense damage that Barack Obama has already done and continues to do to the U.S., then please read on.

The main thrust of this post is plain: Barack Obama has commited acts that could be - probably should be - considered as treasonous. If the subject of your President waging economic war on our 50 states, giving Aid and Comfort to our Enemies and working to harm this nation does not interest you, then you probably found this blog by mistake. This post is not meant to be comprehensive, but a primer.

There are already books on the subject of Obama's questionable loyalty, and there will be hundreds more written in the future. Students a century from now will read about the president who tried to destroy the nation with his marxist agenda.

You know the enemy. The enemy wants to kill us or to destroy our economy and society. The enemy drove two airplanes in the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001. The enemy recently went on a killing spree at Fort Hood, Texas.

The enemy is among us, operating a filthy meat market on Devon Avenue on Chicago's north side, consipiring with others to blow up Danish newspapers, among other terrorist acts. The enemy advertises his intentions with videos carried by donkeys through the mountains of Pakistan.

The enemy is, in effect and by proxy, by intent and by unintended consequences, occupying the White House, blinded by his hateful obsession with Tea Parties and other distractions. 

Obama’s problem is that he does not know who the enemy is. To him, the enemy does not squat in caves in Waziristan, clutching automatic weapons and reciting the more militant verses from the Koran: instead, it sits around at tea parties in Kentucky quoting from the US Constitution. Obama is not at war with terrorists, but with his Republican fellow citizens. He has never abandoned the campaign trail. (Emphasis added)

That passage is by Gerald Warner at the Telegraph UK. Warner hits Obama hard for being an indecisive wimp in his column from April 24, 2009. Although Warner's column is now seven months old, it is as fresh today as it was when he wrote it. Obama's ongoing war with FoxNews and conservative talk radio hosts is not just embarrassing, it's dangerous.

The Commander in Chief is allowing himself to be distracted by partisan bullsh*t, all the while deferring time sensitive decisions about increasing troop strength in Afghanistan and other hot issues.

Another excerpt (emphasis added):

If al-Qaeda, the Taliban and the rest .... want to kick America to death, they had better move in quickly and grab a piece of the action before Barack Obama finishes the job himself. Never in the history of the United States has a president worked so actively against the interests of his own people – not even Jimmy Carter. Warner's main beef is Obama's disrespect of CIA (emphasis added): He cynically subordinated the national interest to his partisan desire to embarrass the Republicans. Then he had to rush to Langley, Virginia to try to reassure a demoralised CIA that had just discovered the President of the United States was an even more formidable foe than al-Qaeda. Warner, a Brit, poses a question that so many Americans are asking: President Pantywaist’s recent world tour, cosying up to all the bad guys, excited the ambitions of America’s enemies. Here, they realised, is a sucker they can really take to the cleaners. His only enemies are fellow Americans. Which prompts the question: why does President Pantywaist hate America so badly?

I would stop just short of accusing Obama of actual treason, but he's pushing it. Treason, by definition in the Constitution, is defined simply in the U.S. Constitution, Article 3, Section 3:

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court. 

Let's break it down: (1) Obama and his Administration are levying war against the states; (2) Obama has adhered to our Enemies; (3) Obama has given our Enemies both Aid and Comfort; (4) There are billions of witnesses, not merely two, to Obama's overt Acts; (5) There has not (yet) been a Confession in open Court, but that's being worked on.

So, then, Obama's Acts of Treason, point by point:

(1) LEVYING WAR AGAINST THE STATE: Obama's war on the 50 states is not being waged with guns or bombs, but with more and more controls that violate the states' Tenth Amendment rights. It's gotten so bad that there is a very active movement to fight the Obama power grab.

The Tenth Amendment to the Constitution is very clear: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” In other words, the Federal Government should not meddle in affairs that the Constitution says are completely in the hands of state legislatures, not in the hands of the U.S. Congress nor of the President. The movement I referred to above is called, simply, the Tenth Amendment Movement.

Writer James Perloff explains (all emphasis added):
... a new campaign called the Tenth Amendment Movement is now sweeping state legislatures across the nation. This is not an effort by the states to secede from the Union, but an attempt to persuade the federal government to abide by the Constitution. Leading the charge is Oklahoma. On February 18, its House of Representatives passed House Joint Resolution 1003 by a vote of 83 to 13, resolving “that the State of Oklahoma hereby claims sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States.” HJR 1003 also states “that this serves as Notice and Demand to the federal government, as our agent, to cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of these constitutionally delegated powers.” It directs that copies of the resolution be distributed to, among others, the president of the United States, the president of the U.S. Senate, and the speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives. 
Sound familiar? It should, if you know your history. It recalls nothing less than the Declaration of Independence, unanimously signed by the Continental Congress of the thirteen united States of America on July 4, 1776. The first paragraph of that document says this: When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

Although Oklahoma and other states are not moving to "dissolve the political bands which have connected them" with the Federal Government, those states are demanding that the Federal Government, lead by Obama, respect their rights as provided by the Constitution. The reason for the demand is simple: The Obama Administration has been waging a war of economics and law against the states.

Gene Healy of the CATO Institute wrote this about that on November 17, 2009: Not yet a year into his administration, Obama’s record on 10th Amendment issues is already clear: He’ll let the states have their way when their policies please blue team sensibilities and he’ll call in the feds when they don’t. Thus, he’ll grant California a waiver to allow it to raise auto emissions standards, but he’ll bring the hammer down when the state tries to cut payments to unionized health care workers. That’s not how it’s supposed to work. As Madison explained in Federalist 45, the powers delegated to the federal government were “few and defined,” to be exercised mainly on “external objects” like foreign policy and international trade. All else — criminal law, marriage, social policy — remained with the states or the people.

Another complaint, quoted from the Declaration of Independence, is appropriate today and applies as well to Obama in 2009 as it did to King George in 1776: "He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance."

(2) OBAMA HAS ADHERED TO OUR ENEMIES: Kind words and overly generous tolerance of Fidel Castro, Mahmoud Ahmedinejad and others, including the enemies of democracy in Honduras such as Hugo Chavez. High-level advisors who openly admit their admiration for Mao Tse Tung, who died a sworn enemy of the West. I refer you to this short but excellent post. (For background, read this.) And we should not forget Obama's historic embracing of homegrown enemies of the United States, most notably but not exclusively, bomber-terrorist and close friend William Ayers.

(3) OBAMA HAS GIVEN OUR ENEMIES BOTH AID AND COMFORT: On November 20, 2009 House Republican leaders sent a letter to Barack Obama. It said, in part, "For over two months you have been engaged in a strategy review that has left the country, our military, and allies uncertain about your commitment to the war in Afghanistan and unsure about your will to do what is necessary to win this conflict. Worse, we fear the process has emboldened our enemies." That letter urged Obama to act on Gen. Stanley McChrystal's request for more U.S. troops in Afghanistan. Every hour that Obama fails to act provides more Aid and Comfort to the Taliban.

Additionally, Obama and his marxist circle believe that it's better to engage those sworn to our destruction in conversation that to engage then in battle or tough negotiation. More Aid and Comfort. "Aid" is not defined by the Constitution, so it's meaning could be broadly interpreted. Emotional and psychological encouragement is certainly a form of "Aid," and certainly provides our enemies with "Comfort," which is also left undefined.

(4) THERE ARE MILLIONS OF WITNESSES, not merely two, to Obama's overt Acts as described above. As I said earlier, this is not intended to be a comprehensive listing of Obama's disturbing acts. It merely scratches the surface.

Funds Meant for US Troops Diverted to Earmarks

This is shameful, but sadly typical of the games Congress plays with your tax money. The Washington Times has this shocking report: Senators diverted $2.6 billion in funds in a defense spending bill to pet projects largely at the expense of accounts that pay for fuel, ammunition and training for U.S. troops, including those fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, according to an analysis. According to the Times, there were 778 projects, known as earmarks. Those earmarks were tucked into that defense spending bill, and examples include $25 million for "a new World War II museum at the University of New Orleans and $20 million to launch an educational institute named after the late Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, Massachusetts Democrat." Full Article... The next time you hear about a US soldier dying in Iraq, Afghanistan or anywhere else, consider this: That soldier might not have died if they'd been better equipped, and they might have been better equipped if not for those piggish, quasi-treasonous earmarks. Conservative Caps, Shirt and more! Leave a Comment - Chicago News Bench RSS Feed Visit us on Twitter!

Glenn Beck Proves Obama is a Communist

Sounds crazy, doesn't it, to say that Barack Obama is a Communist? Sure, I suppose it does unless you know enough to realize that ... it's not crazy at all. Glenn Beck presents strong evidence of Obama's radicalism and of his Communist tendencies. His strong ties to ACORN, SEIU and self-avowed Communists - and their writing of a huge chunk of the "stimulus" legislation through the shadowy "Apollo Alliance." WATCH THE VIDEO BELOW, in which Beck brilliantly lays it out in a chart before your very eyes with the help of Phil Kerpen, director of policy for Americans for Prosperity. It is evidence so strong that it should convince all but the most hypnotized that Obama and his fellow travelers are laying the groundwork for a Marxist transformation of the United States. A stunning piece of work, a brilliant presentation, this video is a must-see. Tell everyone you know to watch it. (A full transcript of the segment is available here; originally aired on July 29, 2009) Related links follow, below this video. RELATED: Why ACORN and SEIU Want Obama's Healthcare Bill Passed - Glenn Beck Communist-Linked Apollo Alliance Dictates to Congress - Canada Free Press ACORN-Blago-Obama-SEIU - BackyardConservative Barack Obama, the Quintessential Liberal Fascist - American Thinker Obama, Our Marxist-Minded President - Philadelphia Bulletin Barack Obama's ACORN Tree ACORN Watch Report ACORNcracked BarackBook Leave a Comment... See Our Online Store Chicago News Bench RSS Feed We're on Twitter...

Hunt for Obama's Birth Certificate Rolls On

This story will NOT go away. Why won't Obama the Usurper release all of his documentation? The massive effort to force Barack Hussein Obama to become “transparent” about his birth place and circumstance, his college years and his passport records is gathering steam. Despite a million dollars in legal fees aimed at keeping Obama’s entire life history Top Secret, a relentless pursuit of the mystery messiah not only persists,—its going viral on the web and main stream in the press… FULL STORY Leave a Comment... See Our Online Store Chicago News Bench RSS Feed We're on Twitter...

ACORN's Secret Finances

Bill O'Reilly interviews two ACORN chiefs, Gloria Swieringa and Bertha Lewis. They dance around O'Reilly's straightforward questions in this amusing - and disturbing - interview: Leave a Comment... See Our Online Store Chicago News Bench RSS Feed We're on Twitter...

BOMBSHELL - House GOP, "ACORN a Criminal Enterprise"

Listen to Rep. Steven King (R-Iowa) talk about accusations that ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform) has engaged in "fraudulent activities and widespread corruption," and how Congressional Republicans are calling for a criminal investigation into the group that has worked so hard for Democrats over the years. According to Fox News, a congressional report released just this afternoon (July 23) "offers the first detailed account of the allegations that have dogged the organization in recent months....The report accuses ACORN, after receiving more than $53 million in federal funds since 1994, of blurring the legal distinctions among 361 tax-exempt and non-exempt entities to divert that money into partisan political activities. Evidence found in the report relies in part on documents provided by former ACORN employees." ACORN has received tens of millions of taxpayer dollars, and current "stimulus" legislation pegs millions more for the advocacy group. RELATED: Video: ACORN History - Glenn Beck GOP Congressional Report Accuses ACORN of Political Corruption In Vote Fraud Case, Acorn Challenges a Law as UnconstitutionalACORN files lawsuit on voter registration - Washington Times CNSNews.com - Will ACORN Get Cash Earmarked in Health Care Bill ... Video: Glenn Beck, Acorn, Oversight Report, US House of Representatives ... Video: CNN Exposes How ACORN Steals Votes For Democrats Video: Lou Dobbs - ACORN Fraud & Obama Ties Video: Bill O'Reilly with Glenn Beck - ACORN Investigation ACORN WATCH: Should they work on the 2010 Census? American ... Leave a Comment... See Our Online Store Chicago News Bench RSS Feed We're on Twitter...

Nancy Pelosi Can't Even Lie Well

OCCUPIED WASHINGTON – For years, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and other Democrats criticized the Bush Administration for waterboarding prisoners in the war on terror. Very recently, it was revealed that Pelosi has known about the waterboarding for at least six years. She was briefed about it by CIA. In other words, Pelosi knew about and condoned waterboarding even as she publicly criticized it. Now, Nancy Pelosi is telling some of the dumbest lies ever told, even by a politician. Let's look at what Pelosi said, and see just how bad a liar she is. Julie Hirschfeld Davis of the Associated Press gives us this today (emphasis added): Under strong attack from Republicans, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi accused the CIA and Bush administration of misleading her about waterboarding detainees in the war on terror and sharply rebutted claims she was complicit in the method's use. "We were told specifically that waterboarding was not being used," she told reporters, referring to a formal CIA briefing she received in the fall of 2002. Keep that in mind as you read on. Pelosi says, above, that she was "specifically" told that "waterboarding was not being used." Uh huh, okay. Davis' AP story continues (number and emphasis added): Pelosi said (1) she subsequently learned that (2) other lawmakers were told (3) several months later by the CIA about the use of waterboarding. "I wasn't briefed, (4) I was informed that someone else had been briefed about it," she said. Let's look the six points that I numbered above. (1) Subsequently learned, eh? Pelosi admits, then, that she did know about waterboarding, regardless of whether it was the CIA that told her about it, and shortly after her CIA meeting. (2) She claims that other lawmakers were told by CIA about waterboarding (3) several months after her 2002 CIA meeting - the one in which, she claims, CIA told her that waterboarding wasn't being used. Question: Why would CIA tell her that it was not being used, but only a few months later tell other lawmakers that it was being used? Pelosi now claims (4) that she "was informed that someone else had been briefed about it." If that's the case, why didn't she run back to CIA and confront them with that, and demand that she get the same briefing as "someone else" had received? We can safely assume that she knew, from being told about the other person being "briefed about it," that she knew that waterboarding was being used. Again, why did she not delve into the matter and seek more information? More to the current point, why, six years ago, did she not publicly decry the practice? Pelosi admits that CIA told the truth about waterboarding to other lawmakers, but she claims that CIA mysteriously singled her out for exclusion. She offers no explanation as to why the CIA would tell "other lawmakers" but not her. As pointed out in the AP story by Davis, House Republican Leader John Boehner thinks Pelosi is, to put it politely, not telling the truth (my words, not AP's). AP quotes Boehner as saying, "When you look at the number of briefings that the Speaker was in and other Democrat members of the House and Senate, it's pretty clear that they were well aware of what these enhanced interrogation techniques were," and, "They were well aware that they had been used, and it seems to me that they want to have it both ways. You can't have it both ways." Not in real life, you can't, but were talking about Pelosi, a leader of the the Party of Pretend. It's an old joke by now that if a Republican is caught with his hand in the cookie jar, the Democrat Party and the Republican Party will both demand his resignation. But let a Democrat get caught red handed as he steals the purse of a woman he just raped in the middle of a busy intersection, and the Democrats will make excuses for him and do their best to let it pass. So, in real life having it both ways is usually not possible. In the Democrat Party, however, dreams come true, and often substitute for truth itself. Davis also reports in her AP story that "an official at the CIA neither disputed nor accepted the California Democrat's statements. Instead, George Little, a CIA spokesman, told The Associated Press: 'It is not the policy of this agency to mislead the United States Congress'." That's that CIA being overly diplomatic. The hidden (and probably intended) meaning is that Pelosi is out of her mind or lying, or both. CIA, a government agency, has to be diplomatic in their statements, especially about members of Congress. I don't have to so diplomatic, however, which why I have no problem opining that Nancy Pelosi is a lying, self-serving, two-faced whore of a hypocrite who couldn't lie her way out of a women's rest room without raising suspicion. If that's not blunt enough, drop me a line and I'll let you know how I really feel about the treasonous witch. UPDATED, MAY 15: CIA's Panetta Counters Pelosi Leave a Comment on our Guestbook CommieBama Hats and More Chicago News Bench RSS Feed Follow ChiNewsBench on Twitter