The following article from front page magazine is extremely interesting, in view of myprevious article regarding Anthony Weiners wife:
http://frontpagemag.com/2011/06/17/why-is-weiners-muslim-brotherhood-wife-not-resigning/2/
I have no way of know how much of this is accurate. It does, at a minimum, explain why someone should be asking really obvious questions.
TDM
The situation in Libya is deteriorating rapidly. It is clear that NATO went in half-cocked with no clear mission and has only succeeded in wasting at least $1 billion and countless lives with no tangible results. They thought they would lob in a few bombs and Gaddafi would fold like a cheap umbrella. They were wrong. Now NATO is running out of planes, ships and ammunition. Our typically limp wristed European allies, not Gaddafi, are the ones ready to fold.
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/analysis-nato-first-blink-gaddafis-war-nerves-102552889.html
Obama is trying to explain to Congress why he made the decision to surrender U.S. foreign policy to France so we could carry the heavy lifting on another French fiasco. This is beyond bad. It is one thing to thumb your nose at congress and the U.S. Constitution so you can play at war. It is a whole new level of incompetence when you stupidly turn command over to the French and expect anything other than an embarrassing surrender. At this rate, we will be lucky to just find a way out of this mess.
In the ultimate irony Dennis Kucinich, who tried to impeach George W. Bush with regard to the war in Iraq, just praised Bush in comparison to Obama. Kucinich pointed out, correctly, that unlike Barack Obama; Bush did consult congress and ask for authorization before going to war. Now when an extreme left wing guy like Kucinich makes this kind of comment it is proof positive that Obama has lost the extreme left wing base of the Democratic Party.
The latest poll results show public support for our military intervention is Libya is evaporating:
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/184288.html
Obama desperately needs support, either from Democrats or Republicans. But, he is making it nearly impossible for anyone to give him that support. In his latest move, he is refusing to give congress any more information:
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/166871-white-house-says-libya-report-should-suffice
Obama’s political support is leaking like a sieve. One of the few people still supporting our efforts in Libya is John McCain. Yet while McCain continues to support the mission, in doing so he does even more damage to Obama:
http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/166883-mccain-slams-obama-yet-supports-libya-effort-
“The administration made an announcement that will strike most of my colleagues as a confusing breach of common sense,” said McCain, referring to a 32-page report released by the White House that argues the Libya mission does not need congressional authorization because it doesn’t amount to “hostilities.”
“The administration sought the blessings of the United Nations, the Arab League and NATO before using force in Libya but still has not sought a similar authorization or statement approval from the representatives of the American people,” McCain said.
The accumulated consequences of all this delay, confusion and obfuscation has been a wholesale revolt in Congress against the administration’s policy.”
In other words, McCain is acknowledging that Obama is an incompetent boob, but argues we still need to support him because losing to Gaddafi would be even worse. When your friends are talking like this, you don’t need enemies.
Today this situation has exploded. Both Democratic and Republican leaders are stunned and outraged. The problem is that Obama has lied one too many times. Those of us who have been paying attention already know that Obama is the liar in chief. He lied about his personal history. He lied about his relationship with William Ayers. He lied about his relationship with Reverend Wright. He lied about his home purchase. He lied about his health care plan. He lied about his political appointees. He lied about the economy. He lied about the jobs he created. But the main stream media just continued to give him a free pass. But now he has lied about a war in a way that is beyond ridiculous. The following article explains this very well:
We have got drone attacks under way, we’re spending $10 million a day,” Boehner told reporters. “We’re part of an effort to drop bombs on Gadhafi’s compound. It doesn’t pass the straight-face test, in my view, that we’re not in the midst of hostilities.”
Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va., a combat veteran and member of the Armed Services Committee, scoffed at the notion.
“Spending a billion dollars and dropping bombs on people sounds like hostilities to me,” Webb said in an interview.
Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., called the claims “really totally bizarre.” Rep. Tom Rooney, R-Fla., said telling Congress and Americans “that this is not a war insults our intelligence. I won’t stand for it and neither will my constituents.”
Obama has put himself into a remarkably similar box as Anthony Weiner. He has been caught in a bald faced lie. No one, and I mean no one, is even arguing that Obama is telling the truth. Even Nancy Pelosi, who is trying to support him, said the following:
Countering the criticism, House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi of California said Obama did not need congressional authorization, but she acknowledged the congressional frustration.
“It’s like a marriage,” Pelosi said. “You may think you’re communicating, but if the other party doesn’t think you’re communicating, you’re not communicating enough
Some Democrats wanted to impeach George Bush for lying about the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. But the problem was that they could not find one single example of where Bush lied. Senator Jay Rockefeller looked at every single statement made by Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice and Powell prior to the war and could not find anything that was inconsistent with the intelligence. The best he could even offer was that on a couple occasions Cheney and Rumsfeld “exaggered” the risk. Yet now we have a President who has lied repeatedly and this time it is really easy to prove. Which is worse, lying about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, when most people in both parties already believed they existed, or lying about sending troops into combat by pretending there is no combat?
Six weeks ago I would have said that there was no possibility that anyone would even consider impeaching Obama. Republicans sure don’t want to do that, because they are still smarting over the backlash from the Clinton impeachment. Democrats don’t want to do that, because Obama is one of their own. Yet Obama’s stubborn refusal to deal with reality and his obvious lies could end up forcing one or even both of them to do the unthinkable. At some point, if things continue on this path, there may be no other option. Both Republicans and Democrats have been saying that Obama has violated the law and is ignoring the constitution. Now they are saying he is lying about it. Someone is bound to ask the obvious question: “if this is true, why aren’t you doing something about it?”
TDM
President Obama has adopted a bizarre and convoluted legal explanation for violating the War Powers Act. He cannot be held responsible, as Commander-in-Chief, for leading us into war because he isn’t leading. He feels he doesn’t need authority from our congress, because he isn’t the one who made the decision to intervene in Libya; that was NATO. He also believes that he has avoided legal responsibility for sending our troops into combat because he also yielded command and control to NATO. Since NATO, not the U.S., is in charge, he isn’t responsible because our troops are only working in a “support” role. It’s bad enough that he blames Bush for everything, now he’s blaming NATO!
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/166771-war-powers-standoff-escalates-over-libya
The White House leaked its report to the New York Times before it bothered to send it to congress. Speaker Boehner is not amused:
“If the White House intends to assuage Congress’s concerns, they might want to share the report with Congress before leaking it to The New York Times,” the aide said
Obama is openly defying congress, yet I will be very surprised if they press the issue. They should be outraged. How much damage are they willing to accept before they stop this man from shredding our constitution? One Senator who gets it is Rand Paul: Following are his comments on this subject:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/jun/15/obamas-unconstitutional-libyan-war/
Rand Paul shreds Obama’s primary argument that this isn’t a military action by the United States because we are only acting in a support rule:
Thus far, the United States has provided 93 percent of the cruise missiles, 66 percent of the personnel, 50 percent of the ships and 50 percent of the planes in this Libyan mission.
It looks like the only thing we aren’t providing is leadership! Obama is pretending this isn’t war, so he can justify ignoring our own congress while our military is literally taking orders from a French Canadian Admiral. As soon as Admiral Bouchard took command he explained that NATO wasn’t taking sides it was just trying to protect civilians:
http://www.breakingnews.ie/world/nato-commander-denies-taking-sides-in-libya-conflict-498996.html
(This sounds more French than Canadian to me!)
Perhaps it’s just me, but it seems like a lot more civilians have been killed as a result of this military action than would have been killed if we had not intervened. Obama is claiming that our intervention saved “thousands of lives.” This is remarkably similar to the claim that his fiscal policy has saved millions of jobs and is equally lacking in credibility.
If we going to do this kind of stuff can we at least man up and admit it. Our military is caught between a Barack and a hard place. We have no mission. We have no goal. We have no exit strategy and our Commander in Chief is primarily concerned about avoiding being confused with a leader. That is one thing he got right. No intelligent person would confuse Barack Obama with a leader. Folks, it just doesn’t get any worse than this.
TDM
I have often felt that Obama has more to fear from Democrats that Republicans. Both Democrats and Republicans are well aware that he is a failed President likely to take the Democratic Party to ruin in 2012. Democrats are still reeling from the shellacking they took last fall. In addition, the Democratic Party is dominated by true KoolAid drinking anti-war liberals. While no one is impressed with Obama’s handling of Libya, liberal Democrats are outraged. They could barely tolerate his continuation of the Bush policies in Iraq and Afghanistan. They were totally unprepared for him to go off half-cocked with his adventure in Libya. Normally Dennis Kucinich is a harmless diversion. But when you combine this with Boehner’s blunt warning to Obama, this is now very serious:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/57032.html
It looks like the Obama administration is going to have to go hat in hand to congress. The problem is that they have no hat to carry and no hand to play. It is really hard to justify intervening in Libya and not Syria. In addition, while we were distracted in Libya, Afghanistan is melting down and Iran is nuking up. At best, this is highly embarrassing for the Obama administration at worst he may have blundered into a constitutional crisis.
TDM
This didn’t take long!
Boehner just put Obama on notice that he considers the administration to be in violation of the War Powers Act. He gave them until Friday to comply:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/jun/14/boehner-gives-obama-friday-deadline-libya/
One would hope that the Obama administration will be smart enough to head off a potential constitutional crisis. So far Obama is saying that he “notified” congress so he’s good to go. Obviously, Boehner has a different opinion. I suspect that Boehner has overwhelming support in congress, including from Democrats. No matter how this ends up, it is a public slap in the face for Obama. The only question is how badly he will be hurt. It sure looks like Boehner is willing to take this on.
TDM
Hillary Clinton, Leon Panetta and John Kerry all shrugged off the House’s resolution on the war in Iraq as irrelevant. Kerry said neither measure will even come up for a vote in the Senate. This story is about to go in one of two directions very quickly. Either the House will meekly back down, giving this President free reign, or they will challenge him. My hunch is that a big time challenge is right around the corner.
President Obama has mishandled everything since he became President, and we are paying a price for it all over the world. Our economy is headed toward a double digit recession and our foreign affairs are in shambles. There is zero evidence of brilliant leadership here, just one gaff after another. It is an unprecedented combination of arrogance and incompetence. No amount of main stream media spin can make up for such pathetic performance.
It would appear that his worst mistake was ignoring a direct challenge from the House of Representatives. Ironically, if he had just asked, they probably would have grudgingly supported him on the war in Libya. But he is too arrogant, too stubborn and too dumb to ask.
Perhaps this is a Democratic disease. They start to believe their own lies. If you want a recent example, look at Anthony Weiner. Even top Democrats are asking him to resign, yet he is just now considering the possibility. People like this are so arrogant and so narcissistic they are incapable of self-evaluation. They live in their own delusional world where they have convinced themselves that the universe revolves around them.
Leon Panetta is currently undergoing confirmation hearings in the Senate. This is pretty amazing stuff. John McCain apparently has no problem with the imperial Presidency. Jim Webb, on the other hand, strongly disagrees. The following article lays out the issue:
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/panetta-obama-can-use-military-without-c
Ironically a serious problem for Obama is that “constitutional scholar” Obama, said during the election, said that what President Obama is doing now is unconstitutional.
“The president does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.”
No one from the Obama administration has even argued that Libya was an actual or imminent threat to the nation. That begs the question: “Was he wrong then, or is he deliberately ignoring the constitution now?”
Barack Obama has openly challenged congress and arrogantly told them they have no voice in how he uses our military. If he had a 60% approval rating, he was winning the war and the economy was soaring, he might have gotten away with that. But, the opposite is true. I think congress is going to act, and they are going to do so with a fury that will be stunning to behold. In many ways, they have no choice. They are faced with a challenge similar to the one George Bush gave the UN. He said you either back up what you say, or you become a meaningless organization. What makes this so dangerous for Obama is that John Boehner will have wide-spread bi-partisan support for what he does. I suspect we are about to find out that hell hath no fury like a congress ignored.
TDM
Sarah Palin is the face of the Republican Party. The main stream media is pouring over her e-mails as Governor of Alaska and finding out that Sarah Palin is a very nice person, who did a good job. They didn’t find the naïve idiot they expected. Instead they found someone pretty focused on doing a good job as Governor, yet at the same time, a remarkably nice person. At the same time people were inventing conspiracy theories about her son Trig, she wrote an e-mail to her friends saying that he was a gift from God and she looked upon him as a blessing rather than a burden. Remarkable!
On the other hand, the face of the Democratic Party is Anthony Weiner. Each day we wake up to more coverage and more disgusting details about his personal life. Less than a year ago, this was the fresh new face of the Democratic Party. They were already talking about him as a future major of New York, future Governor New York and perhaps future President of the United States. This is similar to what happened with Obama. Weiner gave an exciting speech and the main stream media wets their pants in the excitement, failing to recognize that the speech was a big lie. He spoke with passion and that is all that mattered. Now, of course, Weiner is literally melting down before our eyes. He was exposed for who is really is, a two-bit narcissistic opportunist with little real substance.
The contrast between the two could not be starker. Weiner is a whiner that cares only about himself. He is a loser in every sense of the word. Each new revelation just peels away another layer of paint revealing a very ugly person. Sarah Palin is a winner and the exact opposite happened. As the false layers of paint slapped on by the hateful main stream media are stripped away we find a brilliant leader and a beautiful person. They say a picture is worth a thousand words. Right now the picture of the Democratic Party is Anthony Weiner and the picture of the Republican Party is Sarah Palin.
TDM
The State of Alaska just released 24,000 e-mails from Sarah Palin. The New York Times and the Washington Post immediately leaped at the chance to find some dirt. They literally went on the internet begging for volunteers to help them dig pour through these e-mails digging for gold. Never in the history of this country has the main stream media demonstrated such viral hatred for a political figure. Clearly they are desperate to find a smoking gun so they can destroy her once and for all.
But this has the potential to backfire big time. The problem is that the main stream media has painted a false picture of Sarah Palin as someone who is not very focused and too stupid and uninformed to understand major issues. They have pretended that her speeches are written for her and even accused her of using a ghost writer on her book. Instead we are suddenly seeing all these e-mails, clearly written by Palin herself, revealing someone who is extremely smart, focused and very well informed. The more e-mails released the more obvious it is going to be that Sarah Palin is a lot sharper than the media admits.
Prior to release of these e-mails and the upcoming documentary of her term as Governor, I thought that Sarah Palin had no chance of being a successful candidate for President. But initial reports are that liberal females asked to review the documentary were shaken to their core and were observed sobbing. Apparently the video images of arrogant liberal males viciously and relentlessly dumping on Sarah Palin is pretty hard to ignore. Now the e-mails may destroy, once and for all, the myth of the stupid Sarah.
Most contemporary reporters were not impressed with Abraham Lincoln’s performance during the Gettysburg Address. But later, when they read the words, they were stunned by the eloquence. They suddenly realized they had grossly underestimated the speech and the eloquence of the man. Sarah Palin is a good speaker, but she has a high squeaky voice and a “you betcha” accent that sometimes distracts from her message. It is quite possible that when people read what she has to say, rather than just listen to soundbites, they may respond very differently. Time will tell.
A spotlight does different things to different people. It tends to accentuate flaws but sometimes it also reveals a superstar. The main stream media may learn to regret turning this bright light on Sarah Palin.
TDM
Truth is often stranger than fiction. Anthony Weiner finally admitted that he did send the lewd picture of himself. This is pretty amazing after he spent hours over the weekend trying to deny it. In a failed attempt to lie his way out of trouble, he came perilously close to committing a crime. But, perhaps, the real story is with regard to the potential security risk represented by his wife, Huma Abedin.
While in the military I had a very high security clearance. They not only investigated me, they investigated my family and everyone who knew me. One of the hard and fast rules was that a high-level security clearance should never be given to someone who has close blood relatives living overseas. The problem is that people in this position could be intimidated into violating security. For example, suppose someone has a close family member living overseas. He is told that if he does not provide certain information his relative will be tortured and killed. How many people would be strong enough to resist that kind of pressure? Huma Abedin was raised in Saudi Arabia. Her father was of Indian descent and was an Islamic scholar. He apparently died when she was 17. Her mother is a well-known Islamic scholar and is the Deputy Director of the Dar Al Hekma College for Women, an Islamic school in Saudi Arabia. She is a Pakistani by birth. The following article, which covers a presentation made by Huma Abedin’s mother, explains her view of the world:
http://www.amritavarsham.org/summit/women/saleha.htm
There are a lot of Republicans, as well as Democrats, who speak highly of Huma Abedin. She apparently is well-respected and admired. However, some of the most successful spies in history have been well respected and liked. Alger Hiss was the classic example. The following article from www.history.net does a good job of explaining who Alger Hiss was:
http://www.historynet.com/the-alger-hiss-spy-case.htm
As you can see, there always were and still are people convinced that Alger Hiss was innocent. But, as this article points out, the evidence against him is overwhelming. The real issue is not whether or not he was really innocent, the issue was whether or not we could afford to take the risk in the first place. There is a big difference between accusing someone of being a spy and being prudent with regard to who has access to our most important secrets. Huma Abedin seems, from all accounts, to be a very smart and nice person. She appears to be a loyal citizen. So did Alger Hiss. But, none of that changes the simple reality that because of her personal background she appears to represent a potential security risk. Yet, she is the personal assistant to the former First Lady, former U.S. Senator and current Secretary of State. She is also married to a U.S. Congressman. The following article explains who she is:
Perhaps someone in the main stream media should start asking some rather obvious questions. Why do we allow people who could not obtain a security clearance through normal procedures to have such intimate personal contact with people in power? Suppose that Huma Abedin is strongly influenced by Saudi Arabia. That would seem at least possible because she is a practicing Muslim and her mother was given an award directly by Prince Abdullah. This seems to be a lot more important than whether or not Anthony Weiner likes to take pictures of his private parts and send them to women on the internet.
Significant security risks have almost always been people who were liked, respected and considered to be above suspicion. That is what made them so dangerous. Kim Philby was so admired that he was being considered for the new Director of MI-6. He was also one of the worst traitors in the history of Great Britain. There were numerous warning signs that Philby was a potential security risk. He fell in love with a woman named Litz Friedman, who he met in Vienna. She was an Austrian Communist. He married her to help her escape to England. She had close blood relatives living in communist countries. No one considered that to be a problem. His father was St. John Philby, who was also a member of British Intelligence. His father converted to Muslim, took an Islamic name and married a Muslim Worman. He later became an advisor to the King of Saudi Arabia. Ironically, the name Kim may have been taken from the name of an Indian Spy in one of Rudyard Kiplings books. No one considered this to be a problem either. I could add more details, but I think you get the point.
TDM
The Rod Blagojevich trial continues to represent very high risk for the Obama administration. The prosecutor has been determined to convict Blagojevich but seems spectacularly uninterested in the other players. One of those players is Rahm Emmanuel. According to the following article, the FBI taped a phone conversation between Rod Blagojevich and Rahm Emmanuel:
In this particularly tape Rahm Emmanuel apparently asked Blagojevich to appoint someone to replace him in congress when Emmanuel became Obama’s Chief of Staff:
In the conversation, according to the transcript filed in the motion, Emanuel tells Blagojevich the appointment would give a successor an advantage in winning the seat in an eventual special election and that he wanted someone who didn’t want the job in Congress as a “lifetime commitment.”
Emanuel tells Blagojevich that Forrest Claypool, then a county official, was interested in the congressional seat for “like one term or two max.” Emanuel recently named Claypool to head the Chicago Transit Authority, which oversees one of largest subway and bus networks in the nation.
Blagojevich tells Emanuel his lawyers say he cannot do that as it would be illegal. Emanuel responded with a creative strategy on how Blagojevich can circumvent the law:
Emanuel responds he knows that to be true and suggests a legal alternative: If Emanuel steps down three weeks before the end of his term, Blagojevich could make an interim appointment of someone who would take the seat up to the election.
“OK? You would appoint somebody to finish those three weeks …,” Emanuel says in the transcript. “It gives him a head start (over other candidates) and a presumption. So I am going to check that legally out, and then we will, uh, and I, this is between you and I …”
This may not be illegal, but it comes awfully close to influence peddling. When Emmanuel says he will remember this, the implication is that Blagojevich will be rewarded. Being “remembered” by the Chief of Staff to the President of the United States is a big deal. The FBI apparently taped several conversations between Blagojevich and a cast of thousands. Several of those conversation involved people like Rahm Emmanuel. Prior to now, the prosecutor has only released the tapes he wanted to release and redacted them to only point the finger at Blagojevich. I have always felt that this “selective disclosure” was unfair to Blagojevich and was designed to shield others, potentially including Obama, The lid is now officially off that box. This could go in a million different directions.
It is always dangerous when lies start to unravel. Once the lid comes off, some people are going to be asking some very interesting questions. Up until now, while the suspicions were always there, there was no evidence to consider. That all changed dramatically with the release of this very interesting transcript.
Blagojevich’s defense has always been that he did nothing different then everyone else with regard to the politics of choosing Obama’s replacement in the Senate. It looks like he’s got a point!
In some ways this is similar to the Anthony Weiner case. He made one mistake and accidentally sent one tweet to the wrong person. That is all it took for his whole sordid history to become public knowledge. I suspect there are a lot of people in the Obama administration who are very nervous tonight.
TDM