Tuesday, May 21, 2013

Half Of Americans Want Obama Impeached (Including Democrats!)

High Crimes: Half Of Americans Want Obama Impeached (Including Democrats!)

Mac Slavo
May 20th, 2013
SHTFplan.com
Read by 8,912 people
Printer Friendly Version of this Page Signup for Our Regular News Updates

Conservative think tank and media outlet WND conducted an independent poll overseen by research firm Wenzel Strategies asking Americans if they think President Obama should be impeached for the various scandals currently in the news – the specific targeting by the IRS of conservative groups and Obama enemies, the illegal wiretapping for personal gain of AP news journalists, and the cover-up of the events leading up to the death of four Americans in Benghazi ahead of the election last year.
A stunning 50% of Americans surveyed said yes. What’s more, a full 25% of democrats polled by the firm agreed. The poll has a margin of error of 4.36%.
“It may be early in the process for members of Congress to start planning for impeachment of Barack Obama, but the American public is building a serious appetite for it,” said Fritz Wenzel.

“Half or nearly half of those surveyed said they believed Obama should be impeached for the trifecta of scandals now consuming Washington.”
Actually, on the issue of the Benghazi scandal, where four Americans were killed when in what may have been a politically motivated series of moves, a surging danger to Americans at the foreign service facility there was ignored until al-Qaida-linked terrorists attacked, 50.1 percent of Americans said Obama should be impeached. That included 27.6 percent of the responding Democrats.
On the scandal of the Internal Revenue Service intentionally harassing conservative and Christian organizations? Forty-nine percent said they agree that impeachment is appropriate, including 24.4 percent of the Democrats.
And on the fishing trip the Obama administration took into AP reporters’ telephone records in search of something that may well have been done by his own administration, 48.6 percent impeachment is appropriate. That included 26.1 percent of the Democrats.
WND Poll
Is this the most corrupt administration ever?
Let’s see how I do with the list.
  • Fast And Furious (guns for drug lords, resulting in murder of Americans and Mexicans)
  • Robosigning (over 100,000 perjured affidavits filed in court cases)
  • IRS Tea Party and other group and individual abuse in direct violation of the law (politically-based harassment and now apparently-perjured testimony before Congress)
  • Money Laundering for terrorists and drug lords (by multiple large banks)
  • Intentional and unlawful destruction of property rights (GM bondholders screwed for political cronies in the UAW)
  • Intentional and unlawful destruction of your saved wealth (QE, QE2, QE3, QEinfinity, $1 trillion+ deficits, etc; Treasury and Federal Reserve actions)
  • Benghazi (apparent illegal arming of terrorists, then an attempt to reverse that leading to the attack on our CIA outpost and what appears to beintentional indifference and orders to stand down during the attack that had to come from the White House despite ability to respondthis amounts to conspiracy with the terrorists to kill Chris Stevens and the others who died.)
  • Swindles by the billions in countless schemes during the 2000s related to securitizations and other hinky deals (where despite black letter legal requirements for actual endorsement and delivery of documents banks simply did not comply and now argue there should be no penalty for not having done so, and that these defects are “mere procedural errors” despite intent to not comply.)  The result is that our land title system no longer has any resemblance of integrity.
  • Intentional destruction of anything approaching a “free market” for health care going back 30+ years and now compounded through active conspiracy by Obama and all of the political parties to grant, protect and enforce through government monopolies and cost-shifting resulting in cost escalations of 500-1,000% or even more against market prices and now, with Obamacare, abuse of the IRS tax power to force another 100% or more increase in those expenses down your throat for the express purpose of enrichment of those in the medical industry.
Source: Karl Denninger’s Market Ticker
This administration is involved in machinations and back-office deals that have not only cost Americans trillions of dollars in economic losses, but countless lives as evidenced by Benghazi and the Fast & Furious gun running operation.
As an American citizen you live under the rule of law; it’s a law that is supposed to apply to every one of us, equally.
If you forge signatures on official documents you go to prison.
If you fail to pay your taxes you go to prison.
If you attempt to hide money within our banking system you go to prison.
If you tap someone’s phone – or even attempt to record federal or state officials in public venues with your cell phone, they send you to prison.
If you knowingly sell guns to criminals you go to prison.
If you conspire to create a story and lie about your involvement in the murder of others you go to prison.
But if you’re an Obama administration official or have political and financial ties to the President, you have immunity or “Executive Privilege”.
This is NOT how our system of justice is supposed to work.
One set of laws for us – another set of laws for them.
There is only one solution – and it involves handcuffs… for a lot of people, from the President of the United States on down.
How 50% of Americans can sit idly by while their nation and their personal liberties are supplanted at every turn is beyond words.
Remember, impeachment does not mean the President would be kicked out of office. It means that he and his administration would be extensively investigated by independent prosecutors, questioned by Congress, and judged by the American people in a public forum.
To the question of “Should President Obama be impeached,” 100% of Americans should have responded with a resounding yes.
The integrity of the highest office in our land is being called into question – and half of our countrymen don’t care.
It’s a stark reminder of where we’re headed.

US military has granted itself the power to deploy troops on the streets of America

The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 was originally established to protect American citizens from the federal use of military troops to enforce and execute the laws of the land unless expressly authorized by the Constitution or  Congress. Since then, for over a century, this task has fallen upon local and federal law enforcement. But with the War on Terror taking center stage in the United States for the last decade, elements within the government have been working tirelessly to expand the mission of the US military on the domestic front.
First, they passed the Patriot Act, which gave the government sweeping new powers to categorize any individual as a terrorist, whether they are operating on foreign lands or here at home. In 2011, as America brought in the New Year, they signed into law the National Defense Authorization Act, which made it possible for American citizens who were categorized as domestic terrorists under the Patriot Act to be detained and imprisoned indefinitely without charge or trial.
Finally, last week we learned that, as President Obama came under fire for the many scandals rocking his administration, the government was quietly moving to give the Department of Defense unprecedented authority on U.S. soil, effectively nullifying Posse Comitatus.
Eric Blair of Activist Post writes:
First, the senate is debating an expansion of the already broad powers of the 2001 Authorization to Use Military Force (AUMF) so the U.S. can essentially engage any area in the world in the war on terror, including America. Which brings us to the second development: the Pentagon has recently granted itself police powers on American soil.
Assistant Secretary of Defense Michael Sheehan told Congress yesterday that the AUMF authorized the US military to operate on a worldwide battlefield from Boston to Pakistan.  Sheehan emphasized that the Administration is authorized to put boots on the ground wherever the enemy chooses to base themselves, essentially ignoring the declaration of war clause in the US Constitution.
While Americans were distracted with three developing scandals pushed by both wings of the mainstream media, sinister developments were taking place behind closed doors. In essence, the US military has granted itself the power to deploy troops on the streets of America without approval from the President or Congress, and the AUMF, which was originally designed to target the terrorists responsible for 9/11, has been expanded to give the government authority to use military assets on the domestic front without a declaration from Congress.
Thanks to the hard work of Eric Blair at Activist Post we understand that Washington D.C. has been very busy eroding your freedom.
In fact, Senator Angus King went so far as to say that the hearing he was involved in was the most astonishing and disturbing hearing he has ever seen.
Even John McCain, war hawk John McCain, came out and said the government has gone way beyond its authority.
What are they talking about? The AUMF – Authorization to Use Military Force.
This piece of legislation that was put into place way back when we started the war on terror that is now turning from foreign enemies to YOU. Don’t be shocked by that, because you are on the list if you are a freedom minded, free thinker that believes in a Constitutional Republic.
They are changing the wording of this thing so that the military can be used on the streets of this country.
It’s not a conspiracy theory. It’s not some kind of a fancy fantasy that may come true down the road.
It is happening right now, in the guise of other news events that are not news events.
Even more terrifying is the fact that West Point has come out recently and said that you – if you have a theory that the federal government is trying to take over and implement a national police force – you could fall into the category of a domestic terrorist.
A domestic terrorist that can be dealt with by military force…
The only conspiracy here is what the government is telling us.
This legislation is real. The militarization of America is in full force. We are the targets. (while we were worried about the IRS abuses and the Freedom of the Press, another protection of American citizens fell by the wayside. So long to the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878. Editor)

Now it's Obama’s War on Fox News

Obama’s War on Fox News Reporters


Rosen-DOJIn a stunning sequences of events that unfolded yesterday, it was revealed the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) efforts to intimidate the media went beyond targeting reporters and editors at the Associated Press. Early in the day, the Washington Post reported that the DOJ not only seized the phone records of Fox News reporter James Rosen, but used his security badge to access records tracking his movements at the State Department, traced the timing of his calls with a Department security advisor suspected of giving him classified information, and obtained a search warrant to access his personal emails. Later in the afternoon another bombshell was dropped: two more Fox staffers, reporter William La Jeunesse and producer Mike Levine, were also targeted by the DOJ.
We begin with Rosen and his involvement with State Department advisor Steven Kim. Kim is a naturalized citizen from South Korea who was indicted in 2009 for telling Rosen that the intelligence community believed North Korea’s response to additional UN sanctions would be another test of its nuclear capabilities. Rosen published a story to that effect on June 11, 2009, noting that the CIA had received the information form sources inside North Korea.
That story was posted the same day a top-secret report was made available to Kim, arms expert with security clearance, and 95 other members of the intelligence community. Using the surveillance techniques described above, the FBI built a case that the information Rosen received came directly from those documents. Yet Kim did not obtain unauthorized access to top-secret information, steal or sell documents or secrets, or collaborate with the enemy. He gave exclusive information to a reporter, a reality that occurs every day. Furthermore, according to the New York Times, four months prior to disseminating the information for which he was indicted, Kim was asked by a State Department press officer to speak to Rosen about North Korea, “and the two began to talk and exchange e-mails,” the paper reported.
Despite this reality, Kim is facing 15 years in prison for violating the Espionage Act.
The Washington Post explains that in building the case against Kim, the DOJ resorted to the aforementioned tactics to build their case. Thus, despite having substantial amounts of evidence gleaned from Kim’s computer and phone records, Justice insisted they needed access to two days’ worth of Rosen’s personal emails, and all of his email exchanges with Kim. Those records necessitated a subpoena.
In an affidavit obtained by the Post, FBI agent Reginald Reyes revealed the DOJ’s rationale for seeking it. “From the beginning of their relationship, the Reporter asked, solicited and encouraged Mr. Kim to disclose sensitive United States internal documents and intelligence information about the Foreign Country” he wrote. “The Reporter did so by employing flattery and playing to Mr. Kim’s vanity and ego.”
More importantly, Reyes further declared there was evidence that Rosen had broken the law “at the very least, either as an aider, abettor and/or co-conspirator.” A federal judge signed off on the search warrant.
The Guardian’s Glenn Greenwald explains the implications of targeting Rosen. “Under US law, it is not illegal to publish classified information,” he explains. “That fact, along with the First Amendment’s guarantee of press freedoms, is what has prevented the US government from ever prosecuting journalists for reporting on what the US government does in secret. This newfound theory of the Obama DOJ–that a journalist can be guilty of crimes for ‘soliciting’ the disclosure of classified information–is a means for circumventing those safeguards and criminalizing the act of investigative journalism itself.”
Fox News’ Brit Hume echoed that assessment. “The Obama-Holder Justice Department is now prepared to treat the ordinary newsgathering actives of reporters to seek information from government officials as a possible crime,” he warned.

Sunday, May 19, 2013

EPA "Fees for Conservatve group's requests, none for Liberal groups."

EPA waives fee requests for friendly groups, denies conservative groups

May 14, 2013 | 7:19 am | Modified: May 14, 2013 at 11:05 am
Conservative groups seeking information from the Environmental Protection Agency have been routinely hindered by fees normally waived for media and watchdog groups, while fees for more than 90 percent of requests from green groups were waived, according to requests reviewed by the Competitive Enterprise Institute.
CEI reviewed Freedom of Information Act requests sent between January 2012 and this spring from several environmental groups friendly to the EPA’s mission, and several conservative groups, to see how equally the agency applies its fee waiver policy for media and watchdog groups. Government agencies are supposed to waive fees for groups disseminating information for public benefit.
“This is as clear an example of disparate treatment as the IRS’ hurdles selectively imposed upon groups with names ominously reflecting an interest in, say, a less intrusive or biased federal government,” said CEI fellow Chris Horner.
For 92 percent of requests from green groups, the EPA cooperated by waiving fees for the information. Those requests came from the Natural Resources Defense Council, EarthJustice, Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, The Waterkeeper Alliance, Greenpeace, Southern Environmental Law Center and the Center for Biological Diversity.
Of the requests that were denied, the EPA said the group either didn’t respond to requests for justification of a waiver, or didn’t express intent to disseminate the information to the general public, according to documents obtained by The Washington Examiner.
CEI, on the other hand, had its requests denied 93 percent of the time. One request was denied because CEI failed to express its intent to disseminate the information to the general public. The rest were denied because the agency said CEI “failed to demonstrate that the release of the information requested significantly increases the public understanding of government operations or activities.”
Similarly, requests from conservative groups Judicial Watch and National Center for Public Policy Research were approved half the time, and all requests from Franklin Center and the Institute for Energy Research were denied.
“Their practice is to take care of their friends and impose ridiculous obstacles to deny problematic parties’ requests for information,” said Horner.
Freedom of Information Act requests from CEI forced th