Observations of the Presidents and First Ladies

 

These are from Secret Service agent Ronald Kessler's book about his observations of the Presidents and First Ladies are pretty much the image they projected while in office but some or very interesting.  I especially like the last one about Gen. McChrystal’s response to Obama. Scroll down to read what Kessler thinks of the presidents he served. Interesting, but not surprising!
  

JOHN & JACQUELINE KENNEDY
*A philanderer of the highest order.*
*She ordered the kitchen help to save all the left-over wine

from State dinners, mixed it with fresh wine and served again

during the next White House occasion.*
 
LYNDON & LADYBIRD JOHNSON
*Another philanderer of the highest order. In addition, LBJ was as crude as the day is long. Both JFK and LBJ kept a lot of women in the White House for extramarital affairs and both had set up early warning systems to  alert them if/when their wives were nearby. Both were promiscuous and oversexed men.*
*She was either naive or just pretended to not know about her husband's many liaisons.*

RICHARD & PAT NIXON
*A "moral" man but very odd, weird, paranoid.

He had a horrible relationship with his family

and was almost a recluse.* She was quiet most of  the time.*

   
SPIRO  AGNEW
*Nice, decent man. Everyone in the Secret Service was surprised by his downfall.*

GERALD & BETTY FORD
*A true gentlemen who treated the Secret Service with respect and dignity.

He had a great sense of humor.  *She drank a lot!*

JIMMY & ROSALYN CARTER
*A complete phony who would  portray one picture of himself to public and very different in private e.g. would be shown carrying his own luggage but the suitcases were  always empty. He kept empty ones just for photo ops. He wanted people to see him as pious and a non-drinker but he and his family drank alcohol a lot! He had disdain for the Secret Service and was very irresponsible with the "football" with nuclear codes. He didn't think it was a big deal and would keep military aides at a great distance. Often did not acknowledge the presence of Secret Service personnel assigned to serve him.*
*She mostly did her own thing.*


RONALD & NANCY REAGAN
*The real deal, moral, honest, respectful and dignified. They treated Secret Service and everyone else with respect and honor, thanked everyone all the time. He took the time to know everyone on a personal level. One favorite story was early in  his Presidency when he came out of his room with a pistol tucked on his hip. The agent in charge asked: "Why the pistol, Mr. President?" He replied, "In case you boys can't get the job done, I can help." It was common for him to carry a pistol. When he met with Gorbachev, he had a pistol in his briefcase. 
*She was very nice but very protective of the President and the Secret Service was often caught in the middle. She tried hard to control what he ate. He would say to the agent, "Come on, you gotta help me out." The Reagan's drank wine during State dinners and special occasions only otherwise they shunned alcohol. The Secret Service could count on one hand the times they were served wine during family dinner. For all the fake bluster of the Carters, the Reagan's were the ones who lived life as genuinely moral people.*

GEORGE H. & BARBARA BUSH
*Extremely kind and considerate, always  respectful. Took great care in making sure the agents' comforts were taken care of. They even brought them meals. One time she brought warm clothes to agents standing outside at Kennebunkport. One was given a warm hat and, when he tried to say "no thanks" even though he was obviously freezing, the President said "Son, don't argue with the First Lady. Put the hat on." He was the most prompt of the Presidents. He ran the White House like a well-oiled machine.*
*She ruled the house and spoke her mind.*


BILL & HILLARY CLINTON
*Presidency was one giant party. Not trustworthy. He was nice mainly because he wanted everyone to like him but to him life is just one big game and party. Everyone knows about his sexuality.*
*She is another phony. Her personality would change the instant cameras were near. She hated, with open disdain the military and Secret Service. She was another who felt people were there to serve her. She was always trying to keep tabs on Bill Clinton.*


ALBERT  GORE
*An egotistical ass who was once overheard by his Secret Service detail lecturing his son that he needed to do better in school or he would end up like these guys, pointing to the agents.*

 
GEORGE W. & LAURA BUSH
*The Secret Service loved him and Laura Bush. He was also the most physically in shape who had a very strict workout regimen. The Bushes made sure their entire administrative and household staff understood that they were to respect and be considerate of the Secret Service.*
*She was one of the nicest First Ladies, if not the nicest. She never had any harsh word to say about anyone.*


*BARACK & MICHELLE OBAMA
*Clinton all over again - hates the military and looks down on the Secret Service. He is egotistical and cunning. He looks you in the eye and appears to agree with you but  turns around and does the opposite. He has temper tantrums.*
*She is a complete bitch who basically hates anybody who is not black, hates the military and looks at the Secret Service as servants.*

A TRUE STORY ABOUT General McChrystal's resignation in Obama's office from General McChrystal's book  NEVER STAND IN LINE AGAIN:

Some men carry and handle their diplomacy better than  others. When former U.S. Military commander in  Afghanistan, General McChrystal, was called into the Oval Office by Barack Obama, he knew things weren't going to go well when the President accused him of not supporting him in his political role as President.

"It's not my job to support you as a politician, Mr. President, it's my job to support you as Commander-in-Chief," McChrystal replied, and he handed Obama his resignation.
 
Not satisfied with accepting McChrystal's resignation, the President made a cheap parting shot. "I bet when I die  you'll be happy to pee on my grave."
 
The General saluted and said, "Mr. President, I always told myself after leaving the Army I'd never stand in line again."

Funny cartoon explaining "If ObamaCare was like buying coffee.

Very simple way of understanding this crazy scam call Obama Care
You will like the video!

The stroy behind the Obamacare website

Michelle Obama's Princeton classmate is a top executive at the company that earned the no-bid contract to build the disastrous Obamacare website.

Toni Townes-Whitley, Princeton class of '85, is senior vice president at Canadian company CGI Federal, which earned the no-bid contract to build the so far costing $678 million Obamacare enrollment website at Healthcare.gov.

Townes-Whitley and his Princeton classmate Michelle Obama are both members of the Association of Black Princeton Alumni.

Toni Townes, Pricenton '85, is a onetime policy analyst with the General Accounting Office and previously served in the Peace Corps in Gabon , West Africa .

George Schindler, the president of the CGI Federal's Canadian parent CGI Group, became an Obama 2012 campaign donor after his company gained the Obamacare website contract.

________________________________________________

Soooooo...........

Let's see if we can connect the dots here ...

1.) No American companies considered for building Obamacare's website;

2.) CGI Federal was chosen by God knows which criteria and hired;

3.) CGI Federal was given a NO BID contract worth $93 million;

4.) A top executive at CGI Federal was a Princeton classmate of Michelle Obama;

5.) Previous company's experience was building a gun registry for the Canadian government;

6.) CGI Group was fired by Canadian Government for overruns that cost Canada $100 million;

4.) CGI has continued its practice of overruns as the Obamacare enrollment website has gone from $98 million to costing U.S. tax payers $678 million, and it's still going up.

Does this bother anybody else besides me? 

EXECUTIVE ORDERS AND YOUR FUTURE

For the SHOCK of your life, take 1 minute to comprehend what you read below. During our lifetimes, all Presidents have issued Executive Orders. For various reasons, some have issued more than others. These things will directly affect us all, in years to come. Question is: Do YOU care enough to send this, 'shocking info,' to people you love and others?

NUMBER OF EXECUTIVE ORDERS ISSUED by U.S. Presidents in the last 100 years:

Teddy Roosevelt - 3
All Others until FDR - 0
FDR - 11 in 16 years
Truman - 5 in 7 years
Ike - 2 in 8 years
Kennedy - 4 in 3 years
LBJ - 4 in 5 years
Nixon - 1 in 6 years
Ford - 3 in 2 years
Carter - 3 in 4 years
Reagan - 5 in 8 years
Bush - 3 in 4 years
Clinton - 15 in 8 years
George W. Bush - 62 in 8 years

Obama - 923 in 3 1/2 years! More than 1000+ and counting Executive Orders in 6 years...

Read some of them below – unbelievable!

Next step -dictatorship... (Looks like we are there already!)

If you don't get the implications, you're not paying attention. How come all the other presidents in the past 100 years have not felt it necessary to INCREASE GOVERNMENT’S POWER OVER THE PEOPLE with more than 1,000 Executive Orders? This is really very scary. And most Americans have absolutely no idea what is happening.

YES, THERE IS A REASON THAT THIS PRESIDENT IS DETERMINED TO TAKE CONTROL AWAY FROM THE HOUSE AND THE SENATE.
Even some Democrats in the House have turned on him, plus a very small number of Democrat Senators have questioned him. Rightfully so. -
WHAT IS OBAMA REALLY TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH????
Remember what he told Russia's Putin: "I'll be more flexible after I'm re-elected".

Now look at these:

EXECUTIVE ORDER 10990 --allows the government to take over all modes of transportation and control of highways and seaports.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 10995 --allows the government to seize and control the communication media.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 10997 --allows the government to take over all electrical power, gas, petroleum, fuels and minerals.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 10998 --allows the government to take over all food resources and farms.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11000 -- allows the government to mobilize civilians into work brigades under government supervision.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11001 --allows the government to take over all health, education and welfare functions.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11002 --designates the registration of all persons. Postmaster General to operate a national registration.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11003 -- allows the government to take over all airports and aircraft, including commercial aircraft.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11004 --allows the Housing and Finance Authority to relocate communities, build new housing with public funds, designate areas to be abandoned, and establish new locations for populations.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11005 --allows the government to take over railroads, inland waterways and public storage facilities.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11049 --assigns emergency preparedness function to federal departments and agencies, consolidating 21 operative Executive Orders issued over a fifteen year period.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11051 --specifies the responsibility of the Office of Emergency Planning and gives authorization to put all Executive Orders into effect in times of increased international tensions and economic or financial crisis.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11310 --grants authority to the Department of Justice to enforce the plans set out in Executive Orders, to institute industrial support, to establish judicial and legislative liaison, to control all aliens, to operate penal and correctional institutions, and to advise and assist the President.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11921 --allows the Federal Emergency Preparedness Agency to develop plans to establish control over the mechanisms of production and distribution, of energy sources, wages, salaries, credit and the flow of money in U.S. Financial institution in any undefined national emergency.Italso provides that when a state of emergency is declared by the President, Congress cannot review the action for six months.

Feel free to verify the "executive orders" at will.....and these are just the major ones. I'm sure you've all heard the tale of the "Frog in the Pot"... Watch Obama's actions, not his words! By his actions he will show you where America is headed.

Obama has issued executive orders that seek to "harmonize" U.S. Economic regulations with the rest of the world. These executive orders are yet another incremental step that is pushing us closer to a North American Union and a one world economic system.

Obama used the stage at the 50th anniversary of Martin Luther King’s I have a dream speech to announce two new executive orders infringing on your second amendment rights.. The first bans the importation of antique military firearms for sale to sportsman and collectors.. He intentionally mislabels them military grade weapons to deceive the sheeply, but make no mistake . . . the order was written specifically to ban the importation of surplus M1 carbines, M1 Garands, 1903 Springfields and other antiques coveted by collectors and sport shooters. This order is the death knell for the civilian marksmanship program. Congress had previously passed the sportsman protection act in 1986 which among other things guaranteed that the importation of the historic relics for collectors and the CMP would not be impeded by unreasonable regulations..But Emperor Obama does not bend to the will of the people or the rule of law.. He will impose on his subjects what he wishes, when he wishes. Kind of like Papa Joe Stalin or the short Austrian with the funky mustache!

Unfortunately, most Americans have absolutely no idea what is happening.

The American people need to understand that Barack Obama is constantly looking for ways to integrate the United States more deeply with the rest of the world.
The globalization of the world economy has accelerated under Obama, and this latest executive order represents a fundamental change in U.S. economic policy. Now federal regulators will be required to "harmonize" their work with the international community.

If THIS IS DIFFICULT TO BELIEVE, THEN PROVE TO YOURSELF IT'S WRONG - Google it!

http://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/executive-orders

Government steals your home under "Free Obamacare"

Fine print: State can seize your assets to pay for care after you’re forced into Medicaid by Obamacare
POSTED AT 9:41 PM ON DECEMBER 16, 2013 BY MARY KATHARINE HAM


My, this is an unpleasant consequence of Obamacare. I’m not going to call it unintended because in its current form, it potentially earns a bunch of money for states, so I’m pretty sure that’s intentional. What I think is unintentional is anyone noticing this is what they’re up to.

But the Seattle Times noticed:

It wasn’t the moonlight, holiday-season euphoria or family pressure that made Sophia Prins and Gary Balhorn, both 62, suddenly decide to get married.

It was the fine print.

As fine print is wont to do, it had buried itself in a long form — Balhorn’s application for free health insurance through the expanded state Medicaid program. As the paperwork lay on the dining-room table in Port Townsend, Prins began reading.

She was shocked: If you’re 55 or over, Medicaid can come back after you’re dead and bill your estate for ordinary health-care expenses.

The way Prins saw it, that meant health insurance via Medicaid is hardly “free” for Washington residents 55 or older. It’s a loan, one whose payback requirements aren’t well advertised. And it penalizes people who, despite having a low income, have managed to keep a home or some savings they hope to pass to heirs, Prins said.
So, here’s the deal. There used to be a provision whereby the state could recuperate funds spent on a Medicaid patient post-55 years old from whatever assets he owned. So, a low-income individual in nursing home care after age 55 might pass away and his kids would find out the family home or car of whatever he had to his name had to be bought back from the state if they wanted it. It’s called estate recovery, and sounds pretty shady if it’s not boldly advertised as the terms for Medicaid enrollment, which is most definitely is not.

Before the Affordable Care Act’s Medicaid expansion, there weren’t that many people in Medicaid who had much in the way of assets for seizing. But now that Medicaid enrollment requirements have been relaxed, more people with assets but low income are joining the program or being forced into it. For instance, a couple in their 50s who, say, retired early after losing jobs in the bad economy may have assets but show a very low income. Under Obamacare, if their income is low enough to qualify for Medicaid, they must enroll in Medicaid unless they want to buy totally unsubsidized coverage in the now-inflated individual market. As teh Times notes, this is no small difference:

People cannot receive a tax credit to subsidize their purchase of a private health plan if their income qualifies them for Medicaid, said Bethany Frey, spokeswoman for the Washington Health Benefit Exchange.

But they could buy a health plan without a tax credit, she added.

For someone age 55 to 64 at the Medicaid-income level — below $15,856 a year — it’s quite a jump from free Medicaid health insurance to an unsubsidized individual plan. Premiums in King County for an age 60 non-tobacco user for the most modest plan run from $451 to $859 per month.
The couple in the Times story was able to marry, combine their incomes, and get out of the Medicaid trap. Others will not be so lucky, and may not even read the fine print:

Prins, an artist, and Balhorn, a retired fisherman-turned-tango instructor, separately qualified for health insurance through Medicaid based on their sole incomes.

But if they were married, they calculated, they could “just squeak by” with enough income to qualify for a subsidized health plan — and avoid any encumbrance on the home they hope to leave to Prins’ two sons.
For no one else in the world is it a-okay to give low-income people a loan that might endanger their family’s assets and not even clearly inform them they’re getting a loan.

This Daily Kos diarist has a nice write-up (I know) on the toll this could take on lower and middle-class people looking for relief and getting what amounts to a surprise predatory loan instead:

We haven’t had lots of people younger than 65 on Medicaid, because in most states simply earning less than the Federal Poverty Level did not qualify one for Medicaid.

And we haven’t had many people with lots of assets on Medicaid, because in most places you have to have less than around $2400 to your name before Medicaid will cover you. You can keep your house and your car, but Medicaid reserves the right to put liens on them and take them when you die.

But now we have the Affordable Care Act, and its expectation that everyone in the lower tier of income will end up in the Medicaid system. To accomplish this, they have dropped the asset test. So now we will have lots of people ages 55-64, who have assets but not a lot of income right now, for whatever reason, on Medicaid.

The kicker of it is, if you make the right amount to qualify for a subsidized health insurance plan, your costs are going to be shared and subsidized by the government. But if you go on Medicaid, you owe the entire amount that Medicaid spends on you from the day you turn 55…

How will this play out? No one knows, as far as I can tell. But it is easy to see how this could become a real problem. If someone is low income and goes on Medicaid, will Medicaid put a lien on their house? If they need to sell their house and move, will they then lose all their equity in paying off the lien? Will people get hit with bills and liens for many thousands of dollars, even if they were healthy and hardly ever went to the doctor?
The fact that this is being treated with seriousness at Kos is an indication of how large a liability it could be for this government program. Washington is scrambling to change the law. No doubt other states will start looking at their implementation of this part of Obamacare. But there will be people caught unaware that their houses effectively belong to the government because the government forced them into Medicaid coverage. You’re welcome!

Hillary for President?

The Anadolu Agency www.aa.com.tr/en interviewed wife of Morsi, the ousted president who belongs to the Muslim Brotherhood. She is known as Om Ahmad 'Mother of Ahmed".

Interviewer: Do you have ties with Barak Obama?

Om Ahmad: It was the Muslim Brotherhood who helped Barak Obama to win twice.

Interviewer: What about Hillary Clinton?

Om Ahmad: Hillary Clinton relies on us to help her win the presidential election.

Interviewer: Do you stay in touch with Hillary Clinton?

Om Ahmad: Our communications never stopped. She always uses official and non-official brothers and sisters of the Muslim Brotherhood to help her solve problems with the Middle East issues.

Interviewer: Who leads the jihadest (fighters) after the arrest of the leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood?

Om Ahmad: Their wives.

The whole text of the interview in Arabic:

فى حوار لها مع "وكالة انباء الاناضول"، ادلت السيدة الاولى زوجة الرئيس المصرى "محمد مرسى" بتصريحات هامة، و طلبت ان نناديها باسم ابنها البكر "ام احمد". 
********** 
تربطك صداقة عائلية مع ميسز "هيلارى كلينتون"، فهل لا تزال صديقة لك، بعد "الانقلاب العسكرى" ضد زوجك؟! 
"ام احمد": زوجى مختطف منذ شهور، و سيعود من الاختطاف، و يمارس مهامه الشرعية كرئيس للبلاد، قريبا جدا، و اقرب مما تتصورون، و سيدفع الانقلابيون ثمنا باهظا للخيانة، اما ميسز "كلينتون" فتربطنا بها منذ سنوات طويلة، صداقة عائلية، فقد عشنا فى الولايات المتحدة الامريكية، و تعلم ابنائى هناك، و توطدت اكثر بعد ان اصبح زوجى رئيسا شرعيا منتخبا للبلاد. 
********** 
هل تراجعت تلك الصداقة بينكما فى الاشهر الاخيرة؟ 
"ام احمد": العكس هو الصحيح، فاتصالاتنا لم تنقطع، و جميعها مسجلة، و هى تستعين باخوة و اخوات من الجماعة، بصورة رسمية و غير رسمية، لمساعدتها فى ادارة الازمات الخاصة بمنطقة "الشرق الاوسط"، بالاضافة الى بعض البيزنيس المشترك، و هى تعتمد علينا بدرجة كبيرة، فى انجاحها فى الانتخابات الرئاسية القادمة، مثلما فعلنا مرتين مع الرئيس الامريكى "باراك اوباما". 
********** 
و ماذا عن علاقتك بالسيدة الاولى "ميشيل اوباما"؟ 
"ام احمد": علاقتنا طيبة، لكنها لم ترتقى الى درجة الصداقة. 
********** 
"هوما عابدين"، هل هى قريبة لك؟! 
"ام احمد": ارفض التعرض لاسماء بعينها، لكنكم تعلمون ان لنا ابناء و بنات فى "البيت الابيض"، و بعض الاجهزة الحساسة، فى الولايات المتحدة الامريكية، و اكثر من سبعين دولة حول العالم، و املك بين اصابع يدىّ خزينة اسرارهم، و لهذا يخشون غضبتى. 
********** 
هل هناك ما يمنع من قيادة النساء للمجاهدين من الرجال؟! 
"ام احمد": على العكس، و انا حاليا اقود المجاهدين، و معى زوجات فضليات من نساء الجماعة، و بعضهن لازواج مختطفين ايضا، و اقول لهن ان الصبر على الحرمان من حقوقهن الشرعية له عظيم الاجر، و لو استشهد ازواجهن، سنزوجهن بمجرد انتهاء فترة العدّة، و سننفق على ابنائهن، كما ان سلطات "الاحتلال"، تخشى التعرض للنساء. 
********** 
هل اموال الجماعة على هذا القدر من الضخامة اذن؟ 
"ام احمد": نحن فى حالة حرب و جهاد، و لنا الغنائم، وفقا لشرع المولى عز و جلّ، و ننفق بسخاء لاجل اعلاء كلمة الله و راية الاسلام. 
********** 
هل سنرى راية الاسلام ترفرف فى الدول الغربية قريبا؟ 
"ام احمد": ان شاء الله. ان شاء الله. بمجرد ان نطبق الحدود على الكافرين هنا. 
*********** 
هل تقلقك الحملة الاعلامية الشرسة ضد جماعة الاخوان، ووصفها بالارهاب، و محاولة تشويه صورتها امام العالم؟! 
"ام احمد": مطلقا. فرجالنا يعلمون تماما ما يجب عمله، و لا يدخرون جهدا و لا مالا و لا ابتكارا، و لست اخاف من ان اعلن اننا نعد "لانقلاب ضد الانقلاب"، كما اننا فى حالة حرب و جهاد، و لدينا المام بكل ادوات الحرب، القديم منها و الحديث، و احتفظ لنفسى بالتفاصيل، لان الحرب خدعة، و لن يهدأ بالى الا بتعليق الخونة جميعهم على المشانق

Barack Obama Identified

DID GEORGE WASHINGTON PREDICT AMERICA’S FALL? Barack Obama Identified in 1st president’s Farewell Address.

Posted on Sunday, December 1st, 2013 at 12:26 am.by: Benjamin Franklin

(Matt Barber, WND)  America’s reluctant first chief executive sought to forestall the predictably devastating consequences of a national break from America’s Judeo-Christian moorings.

In fact, during his Farewell Address, Washington spoke of exactly the kind of subversive, anti-theist provocateurs who make up the aforementioned ACLU, FFRF, et al. He called them unpatriotic. He underscored the critical role religion and morality play to our national survival and, though he did not specifically identify them as such, warned of secular-”progressives” like Barack Obama – a man who, exposed as a serial liar, would later bring great shame upon the noble office Washington first held.

“Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity,” declared Washington, “Religion and Morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of Patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of Men and Citizens. … [R]eason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.”

Regrettably, Washington’s parting words exemplify, to a great extent, the current state of affairs in the very government he helped to bring about.

“Let it simply be asked,” he warned, “‘where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice?”

Where indeed? Not only have our courts of justice abandoned any “sense of religious obligation,” they increasingly seek to subvert “we the people’s” very freedom to exercise such obligation.

Is it any wonder, then, that, with a government that weaponizes the IRS, brushes off the gross moral failings of our public servants and facilitates the brutal slaughter of tens of millions of its most vulnerable citizens – security for property, reputation and life has disappeared?

Continued Washington: “It is substantially true that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule indeed extends with more or less force to every species of free government. Who that is a sincere friend to it can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric?”

That “necessary spring” of “virtue and morality” has run dry. A “constitutional right” for sodomy-based “marriage”? – a sin both Washington and the criminal codes called an “infamous crime”? Seriously? A government mandate that Christians fund your abortion homicide, despite a non-negotiable biblical command to do no such thing? Are you kidding?

The foundation has fractured. The fabric has frayed.

In 1788, eight years prior to his Farewell Address, Washington wrote: “[T]he [federal] government … can never be in danger of degenerating into a monarchy, an oligarchy, an aristocracy, or any other despotic or oppressive form so long as there shall remain any virtue in the body of the people.”

We are in danger. As our national virtue melts away, it strains credulity to deny that we are entering, as Washington warned, a dark era of American despotism. Like water to the gulch, such despotism pervades in the absence of religion and morality.

And as history has shown, the despotic nation is not long for the world. Read the full articleby Matt Barber via WND…

Interesting, if not just a little bit scary! Who is Obama?

OBAMA DOJ CLAIMS INTERNATIONAL TREATIES TRUMP THE U.S. CONSTITUTION

OBAMA DOJ CLAIMS INTERNATIONAL TREATIES 

TRUMP THE U.S. CONSTITUTION

Posted 10.31.13 by Greg Campbell, TPNN Political Analyst

As Americans argue over Obamacare, illegal immigration and a variety of other important issues, the very real threat of Second Amendment infringements continues to creep as anti-gun rights advocates seek to approve the United Nations’ Arms Trade Treaty (ATT).

The United Nations General Assembly approved the ATT earlier this year, which has been designed to regulate the traffic and possession of weapons between countries. The treaty has been signed by Secretary of State John Kerry, however the international treaty must be approved by the Senate in order to be recognized.

While Kerry and others try to gain support for the treaty, Tea Party Senator Ted Cruz warns that the Obama Administration is already making the argument that an international treaty supersedes the rights outlined in the Constitution.

Justice Department attorneys are arguing before the Supreme Court a position that undermines American sovereignty. Obama’s Department of Justice is arguing that a law that abides by an international treaty adopted by the U.S. would allow the federal government to prosecute a case that would otherwise be handled by state or local authorities.

The case in question is Bond v. United States, where a woman allegedly used chemical agents for revenge against a woman with whom her husband had an affair. While the use of a weapon would normally fall under the state’s jurisdiction to prosecute, the federal government has gotten involved and seeks to undermine state sovereignty by claiming that the woman is in violation of the Chemical Weapons Convention Implementation Act, the international agreement that Syrian dictator Bashar Assad has been accused of violating.

While the woman’s actions may be heinous, the DOJ’s position, if affirmed, would place the federal government in a position to use international treaties to prosecute American citizens.

“The Constitution created a limited federal government with only specific enumerated powers,” Cruz told said in an interview. “The Supreme Court should not interpret the treaty power in a manner that undermines this bedrock protection of individual liberty.”

Bond’s lawyer similarly agrees, stating,

“The problem here is precisely that Congress, rather than implementing the treaty consistent with our constitutional system of federalism, enacted a statute that, if construed to apply to petitioner’s conduct, would violate basic structural guarantees and exceed Congress’s enumerated powers.”

The issue is much larger than who gets to prosecute the defendant. If this position is allowed to stand, then the federal government is in a position to invoke treaties that run contrary to our constitiuional protections.

If anti-gun rights supporters can garner the necessary votes in the Senate to pass the ATT, then the ATT can be used to restrict American Second Amendment liberties under the authority of the international treaty.

The treaty calls for regulation of firearms and while it’s supporters have claimed that the treaty does not violate our Constitutional rights, the very nature of the treaty’s enforcement suggests otherwise as a registry would be necessary to enforce the provisions of the treaty to crack down on gun trafficking. As the U.N. is largely concerned with where the firearms ultimately end up, it would be impossible to track firearm usage without noting who bought each firearm and when.

Further, the treaty would afford the international community greater powers to regulate arms imports and exports, conceivably allowing for the barring of import or export of certain classes of firearms to and from the U.S. that “endanger women and children.”

With such broad, overreaching outlines as to what the treaty does and does not do, it quite naturally has gun rights advocates worried. The international community is largely unfriendly to the uniquely American concept that firearm ownership is a right and that government is not only allowed to permit such a right, it is duty-bound to uphold and protect that right.

“The Obama administration is once again demonstrating its contempt for our fundamental, individual Right to Keep and Bear Arms,” said Chris W. Cox, executive director of the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action. “This treaty threatens individual firearm ownership with an invasive registration scheme. The NRA will continue working with the United States Senate to oppose ratification of the ATT.”

Is Obama a Usurper?

Posted on Friday, October 25th, 2013 at 11:03 pm.by: Thomas Jefferson

via The Free Patriot
by Brandon Walker

What if the whole Military purge had a bit of self-preservation to it? What if the US Military has grounds to arrest President Obama, not under impeachment, but under usurper status?

This may not be as far-fetched as it seems. In fact, it has some very prominent figures looking at the idea. The argument seems centralized on two very key points. The first is that under the Constitution’s Bill of Rights, there was a fail safe built-in, a third grand jury. There was a citizens grand jury. The last time it was used properly was 1935. It states that there is a third grand jury specifically for corruption. Obama has already been indicted by several of these grand juries. Here is one:

There are several from the NAACP, the Black Caucus, Freedom Watch, and others from as early as 2009 to as late as 2013. The trick is who has the jurisdiction to enforce it?

The second relies on if Obama is a Usurper. A Usurper by definition is to seize and hold power (position, authority, etc) by force and without legal right or t to commit forcible or illegal seizure of an office, power, etc.; encroach (Dictionary.com). There are several videos on that as well. Here is one from WND:

We know he gave up his US Citizenship for Indonesia. Forget the Birther movement, did he ever apply to get his US Citizenship back? We don’t know because he sealed his records. If he is a Usurper, it would be the Military’s duty to remove him from that position. Is that why he is purging the Military at a rapid rate?

With that thought in mind comes a well researched account by a person calling themselves watchdog. It is very informative.

It is obviously clear. President Obama is a threat not only to the American people. He is destabilizing the United States every way he can. He did this paying for Treyvon protest trying to start race wars as one example. He is a threat to world peace. He has to be neutralized before he takes the world into an age of war and destruction. Now how can that be done? Congress can pass all the impeachment bills. The US Senate will not by two thirds vote him guilty removing him from office. Politically there is very little that can be done to interpose between Obama and him destroying the world.

So who will step in and take action to avert a disaster from happening? The usurper in the White House is the most lawless President in history that makes Nixon and Clinton look like choir boys in comparison. President Obama does not respect the Constitution and international law. He is waging war against the American people economically and shredding our Bill of Rights daily.

He is waging war against Christianity on the domestic front attacking religious freedom by forcing people of conscience to pay for Obamacare the pays for abortions. He is attacking Christians in the military daring to say the name of Jesus forcing chaplains to marry homosexuals against the moral conviction of the clergy. At the same time erecting Pagan places of worship on military installations. For this matter I call on the Patriots to relieve officers of duty and command who attack the religious freedom of the men and women in uniform. I do not care if the commander is a Buddhist and gay. He must respect and defend all faiths and conscience. If he is willing to follow an unlawful, immoral order without question that will weaken the fighting strength. Then the commanders and officers who carry these immoral orders need to be relieved of command.

Click here to read more.

The Mad American agrees with this commentary  and calls on America to wake up, stand up and fight back!

This is as EVIL of a deception as Obama has publicly displayed yet... Disgusting!!!!

This prearranged fainting event is just evil!

Evil because Obama is using a pregnant woman to make him look like a protector of the weak during his shameless promotion speech on his healthcare scam.

View the video and listen to the commentary.

I say they missed some;

1.   No way could Obama know what was happening behind him

2.   In no way did he support her in his (rescue) effort but instead used her as a puppet master pulls strings on his dummy.

3.   The poor girl to her right could hardly contain her smile at the whole con and never seemed the least bit concerned for her friends condition even as Obama turned to hold her.

4.   Obama wants you to believe this, believe that he is the defender and protector of women and children.

This is as EVIL of a deception as Obama has publicly displayed yet... Disgusting!!!! 

Obama is nothing but a con man, and he has coned America into the great decline we have ever seen!

Lies that the media promotes

This is one of the reasons for the down fall of America, It's the consent lies and cover ups that the media engages in daily  to protect their liberal President.

What happened to a free and honest press that at one time held our elected officials accountable to us, the people!



Now the Media is so liberal that it has become the enemy of America and free speech, and not it's protector.

Very sad....

Hit Man Insider Admits That He Murered People, On Command, For Bill and Hillary Clinton

Posted on 18 October, 2013 by Dylan

via dcclothesline

Larry Nichols, former 10 year accomplice to the Clinton’s , can now add hit-man to his list of dirty deeds. Nichols dropped a bombshell on The Pete Santilli Show when he very calmly admitted that he had murdered people, on command, for Bill and Hillary Clinton. Mr. Nichols has been a voice crying out in the wilderness since he brought to light the sexual brutality of Bill Clinton during his reign as Governor in Arkansas. That information would eventually play a key role to Clinton’s impeachment in the 90′s. Larry says he makes no apologies.

They sent me overseas to kill people for them and told me it was for the good of the Country. So when they asked me to do it for them in the States it felt no different. The real truth is, I did it for the money and I didn’t give a shit about the women I beat and the men I murdered. The Clintons are bad people and I did bad things for them. I had to live with that all of these years and now I just don’t care anymore who knows it.

Larry maintains the Clintons were into so many illegal activities at the time, they had to have a team of mercenaries made up of friends and state-troopers to cover it all up and keep them protected from the public finding out. According to Larry Nichols, both Bill and Hillary were wild and out of control and both were relentless in their pursuit for money and power. From running drugs, to the rape and beating of women and young girls, both of the Clintons are guilty of the unspeakable crimes.

When Pete asked Larry about Gennifer Flowers making headlines last week claiming Bill had told her Hillary had eaten more pussy than he had Larry said that’s old news, and indeed it is … Larry had made that same statement on the Pete Santilli show early last spring. Larry is adamant that Hillary Clinton is a “Dyke” and always has been.

One thing I know for sure She did have enough sex with men to have a kid, but it wasn’t Bill Clinton’s Kid she had … Chelsea is actually the daughter of Web Hubble.

Nichols and many other insiders claim Clinton began having sex with Hubble to gain employment at The Rose Law Firm which she believed would eventually advance Bill Clinton’s chances of becoming Governor of Arkansas.

The above quotes came from a radio interview. I have obtained a video that is posted on the same page. It is 4 hours long and I have not had time to isolate the comments so I have no idea what segment of the show contains them. I am posting the video for those who might have time to listen to it.

The club posts, you decide 

A must read here! You could be fined over $4000 and still have no Health care coverage!

DISTURBING REPORT — Obamacare Fines to be Seized From Bank Accounts?

Posted on 2 October, 2013 by Amy

(Redflagnews) (PAUL JOSEPH WATSON) — A man who attempted to sign up for Obamacare online was told that a fine of over $4,000 dollars a year for refusing to take out mandatory health insurance could be taken directly from his bank account, and that his drivers license would be suspended and a federal tax lien placed against his home, according to an entry on the HealthCare.gov Facebook page.

Will Sheehan claims that when he tried to sign up for Obamacare and then register to opt out, he received an ominous warning. Sheehan’s full Facebook post reads;If true, the implementation of Obamacare is going to be a whole lot more draconian than Americans have been led to believe.

“I actually made it through this morning at 8:00 A.M. I have a preexisting condition (Type 1 Diabetes) and my income base was 45K-55K annually I chose tier 2 “Silver Plan” and my monthly premiums came out to $597.00 with $13,988 yearly deductible!!! There is NO POSSIBLE way that I can afford this so I “opt-out” and chose to continue along with no insurance.

I received an email tonight at 5:00 P.M. informing me that my fine would be $4,037 and could be attached to my yearly income tax return. Then you make it to the “REPERCUSSIONS PORTION” for “non-payment” of yearly fine. First, your drivers license will be suspended until paid, and if you go 24 consecutive months with “Non-Payment” and you happen to be a home owner, you will have a federal tax lien placed on your home. You can agree to give your bank information so that they can easy “Automatically withdraw” your “penalties” weekly, bi-weekly or monthly! This by no means is “Free” or even “Affordable.”

Sheehan went on to point out that the site makes you input all your personal information before giving you an indication of the costs, meaning a database of the “uninsured” is being built. He added that he could not afford to pay the premium so would have to break the law and pay the fine, leaving him with no health care coverage. (Do you understand this! He will have to pay the fine of over $4,000 and still have NO Health Care coverage!)

The federal government has consistently denied that any fines pertaining to Obamacare non-compliance could be seized from bank accounts.

“There’s no criminal sanctions for not paying this, and there’s no ability to levy a bank account or do seizures,” then-IRS commissioner Douglas Shulman said in April 2010.

In addition, Americans who refuse to pay for mandatory health insurance “shall not be subject to any criminal prosecution,” according to the law itself. (Then why the tax and fines that are enforced by all the new IRS agents?)

Section 1501(g)(2) of the Affordable Care Act also states that the IRS cannot “file notice of lien with respect to any property of a taxpayer by reason of any failure to pay the penalty imposed by this section.”

EIther Sheehan’s claim that he received this notice is a lie, or the feds have been dishonest with the American people all along, and the revolt against Obamacare is about to take “don’t tread on me” to a whole new level. (hmmm, they lie about Obama care? You must be a T-Bagger radical racist homophobic that clings to his guns and religion)  

Read a copy of the full exchange on Facebook below. Read more via Infowars

Obama care is designed to kill America as we know it!

The Truth About the Health Care Bills
– Michael Connelly, Ret. Constitutional Attorney
Well, I have done it! I have read the entire text of proposed House Bill 3200:
The Affordable Health Care Choices Act of 2009.
I studied it with particular emphasis from my area of expertise, constitutional law. I was frankly concerned that parts of the proposed law that were being discussed might be unconstitutional. What I found was far worse than what I had heard or expected.
To begin with, much of what has been said about the law and its implications is in fact true, despite what the Democrats and the media are saying. The law does provide for rationing of health care, particularly where senior citizens and other classes of citizens are involved, free health care for illegal immigrants, free abortion services, and probably forced participation in abortions by members of the medical profession.
The Bill will also eventually force private insurance companies out of business, and put everyone into a government run system. All decisions about personal health care will ultimately be made by federal bureaucrats, and most of them will not be health care professionals. Hospital admissions, payments to physicians, and allocations of necessary medical devices will be strictly controlled by the government.
However, as scary as all of that is, it just scratches the surface. In fact, I have concluded that this legislation really has no intention of providing affordable health care choices. Instead it is a convenient cover for the most massive transfer of power to the Executive Branch of government that has ever occurred, or even been contemplated. If this law or a similar one is adopted, major portions of the Constitution of the United States will effectively have been destroyed.
The first thing to go will be the masterfully crafted balance of power between the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of the U.S. Government. The Congress will be transferring to the Obama Administration authority in a number of different areas over the lives of the American people, and the businesses they own.
The irony is that the Congress doesn't have any authority to legislate in most of those areas to begin with! I defy anyone to read the text of the U.S. Constitution and find any authority granted to the members of Congress to regulate health care.
This legislation also provides for access, by the appointees of the Obama administration, in direct violation of the specific provisions of the 4th Amendment to the Constitution, of all of your personal healthcare information, your personal financial information, and the information of your employer, physician, and hospital. All of this is a protecting against unreasonable searches and seizures. You can also forget about the right to privacy. That will have been legislated into oblivion regardless of what the 3rd and 4th Amendments may provide.
If you decide not to have healthcare insurance, or if you have private insurance that is not deemed acceptable to the Health Choices Administrator appointed by Obama, there will be a tax imposed on you. It is called a tax instead of a fine because of the intent to avoid application of the due process clause of the 5th Amendment. However , that doesn't work because since there is nothing in the law that allows you to contest or appeal the imposition of the tax, it is definitely depriving someone of property without the due process of law.
So, there are three of those pesky amendments that the far left hate so much, out the original ten in the Bill of Rights, that are effectively nullified by this law. It doesn't stop there though.
The 9th Amendment that provides: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people;
The 10th Amendment states: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are preserved to the States respectively, or to the people. Under the provisions of this piece of Congressional handiwork neither the people nor the states are going to have any rights or powers at all in many areas that once were theirs to control.
I could write many more pages about this legislation, but I think you get the idea. This is not about health care; it is about seizing power and limiting rights. Article 6 of the Constitution requires the members of both houses of Congress to "be bound by oath or affirmation to support the Constitution." If I was a member of Congress I would not be able to vote for this legislation or anything like it, without feeling I was violating that sacred oath or affirmation. If I voted for it anyway, I would hope the American people would hold me accountable.
For those who might doubt the nature of this threat, I suggest they consult the source, the US Constitution, and Bill of Rights. There you can see exactly what we are about to have taken from us.
Michael Connelly
Retired attorney,
Constitutional Law Instructor
Carrollton , Texas

Obama care is designed to kill America!