If, like many of us, you are deep in the weeds in your understanding of the issues around Benghazi, the 2010 Arab Spring (Tunis, Egypt, Libya, Syria, Bahrain, Yemen), or the CIA operation “Zero Footprint” in Libya and the follow-up operation in Syria, you will enjoy this interview with former Panetta/Petraeus replacement Mike Morell.
Or, if you have a cursory understanding of events, this interview might spur you toward further research.  “The Benghazi Brief” – Regardless of your current level of understanding behind events of the past 7+ years, this interview is well constructed.
Bret Baier has done his homework, and in a refreshing and surprising manner you can see how Baier is able to cut through the distracting ‘talking points’ (no pun intended), and draw out the reality of what lies behind Morell and his foundational motives.

(more…)

Annoying does not seem to adequately identify the frustration projected toward the U.S. media anymore. “Willfully Blind” seemingly seems entirely more appropriate.

Back in 2011 when Hillary Clinton, Susan Rice, Samantha Power and eventually President Obama, engaged in a decision to strike militarily against Gaddaffi in support of Libyan opposition forces (later determined to be al-Qaeda), Jeh Johnson was part of President Obama’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) as Johnson represented the chief legal counsel to the Pentagon.

A little known fact about that controversial time is that Jeh Johnson, the legal counsel, told President Obama his military action was illegal. Yes, Jeh Johnson as part of the OLC told Obama the executive office lacked legal authority to strike militarily against Libya because the Libyan uprising posed no direct threat to the United States, and President Obama had not requested congressional authority.

This was in June of 2011, this was even reported in the NEW YORK TIMES:

WASHINGTON — President Obama rejected the views of top lawyers at the Pentagon and the Justice Department when he decided that he had the legal authority to continue American military participation in the air war in Libya without Congressional authorization, according to officials familiar with internal administration deliberations.  

(more…)

It must be noted at the beginning of this discussion to remind readers of what is not stated, along with what is.

Back in November of 2014 President Obama announced his intention to “fix a broken immigration system” with his pen. The basic outline was sold by the White House as a pending “executive order”.  However when the immediate debate erupted around presidential authority in that regard most readers will note that an “executive order” was never actually issued. Instead, after delivering his nationally televised speech, Obama directed Jeh Johnson to modify his DHS immigration enforcement approach with what was/is now called an “executive action“.
The difference between what Obama promised to the illegal alien community via an “executive order”, and what was delivered days later via an “executive action” reflects a key legal distinction affirming the reality that an “executive order” -to intentionally subvert legislative authority- would have been unconstitutional.
The White House Office of Legal Counsel knew and advised Obama from the outset an executive order was impossible.   This aspect Obama himself admitted numerous times over the preceding two years to Latino audiences.  (more…)

As a complement to Sundance’s article about the budget and “other peoples’ money”, this is a repeat post.

“The rich should pay their fair share.” 
…”when you spread the wealth around it’s good for everybody.”
“Nobody’s ideas or effort are really that much more innately valuable than that of their peers. You can, however, use your abilities to steal that much money.”
”The central lie here being getting rich through hard, honest work. I don’t think anyone has ever gotten rich without the determination of screwing other people out of their money.”
“Romney never created any jobs. He only created wealth for his partners. There is a big difference.”

When asked to explain my belief that Obama’s presidency was a construction created from approximately 10 years of pre-thought exquisitely planned detail, many people are puzzled by my reasoning.
The names of Emanuel, Plouffe, Axelrod, Jarrett and Holder are the visible names, but not the most consequential – nor the subjects worth researching. While most people reference the aforementioned when thinking about how a Junior Senator becomes Chief Executive; and indeed there is some factual reasoning toward that end, the executive office itself was not the majority maneuver.

If you peel back the layers to the Milli Vanilli roadshow – what you will notice is the strategy of putting specific ideologies into the legal affairs offices of all the “non-political” constructs. The Pentagon office of legal counsel, for example, can handcuff the activity of the Pentagon with legal opinion in opposition to the traditional goals of the organization (See Jeh Johnson).
Likewise the CIA office of legal counsel, can have a similar impact on actual outcomes and steer policy. If you want to find out what’s more consequential than the proverbial executive ‘pen and phone’, get to understand the legal counsel who can stop any activity they desire just by writing adverse legal opinion. The legal opinion does not need to meet the criteria of professional review to block activity – indeed most of the time it would be shredded by exterior legal analysis – their goal is not legal standing per se’, the goal is policy influence. (more…)

WASHINGTON DC – President Obama has issued a form of executive action known as the presidential memorandum more often than any other president in history — using it to take unilateral action even as he has signed fewer executive orders.
When these two forms of directives are taken together, Obama is on track to take more high-level executive actions than any president since Harry Truman battled the “Do Nothing Congress” almost seven decades ago, according to a USA TODAY review of presidential documents.
Obama has issued executive orders to give federal employees the day after Christmas off, to impose economic sanctions and to determine how national secrets are classified. He’s used presidential memoranda to make policy on gun control, immigration and labor regulations. Tuesday, he used a memorandum to declare Bristol Bay, Alaska, off-limits to oil and gas exploration. (more…)

Two years ago we took considerable flak for highlighting the Nine Anticipated Stages of Obamacare Outrage.   However, despite the political delays provided by the White House to avoid consequences, and given the context of the Jonathan Gruber video (recently surfaced) we can advance to stage #5.    
The 2013 meme for antagonism around Obamacare was to point out the inherent falsehood behind the statement:

“If you like your insurance plan/doctor, you can keep it“.

Anyone who has spent even a modicum of time following and researching this administration will note the only wording out of place was the first use of the term “you”.
The statement from President Obama would have been accurate if he had said:

..”If I like your insurance plan, you can keep it”

Where “I” is actually defined as the political ideology behind the phrase.
It is the progressive ideology which defines what you can, or cannot, have. Period.
The entire premise of the ACA, or Obamacare, was government defining all the common denominators.  The recent Gruber video puts a fine point on this aspect.

In essence they needed to create two impressions, one real and one false.
(more…)

(Via House Oversight Committee) Last night, in response to an Order from a Federal judge, the Department of Justice turned over 64,280 pages of documents that were withheld from Congress after President Obama asserted Executive Privilege on the eve of a contempt citation for Attorney General Eric Holder in June 2012.

The sheer volume of last night’s document production—which consists entirely of documents that the Justice Department itself acknowledges are not covered by Executive Privilege—shows that the President and the Attorney General attempted to extend the scope of the Executive Privilege well beyond its historical boundaries to avoid disclosing documents that embarrass or otherwise implicate senior Obama Administration officials.
In effect, last night’s production is an admission that the Justice Department never had legitimate grounds to withhold these documents in the first place. Approximately two-thirds of the universe of documents that the Justice Department withheld from Congress has now been shown to be well outside the scope of Executive Privilege. (more…)

For those wondering how President Obama’s ego could handle the scope of Democrat candidates who are trying to distance themselves from him and his consequential policies, the answer has been found.
Yesterday in a recorded interview with White House advisor, MSNBC’s Al Sharpton, President Obama made it crystal clear that every candidate seeking such distance was, in actuality, 100% in alignment with him in all policy positions:

…”The bottom line is though, these are all folks who vote with me, they support my agenda”…

The YouTube ID of 7jSTxwMQ_1A?rel=0 is invalid.
Whether the Democrats up for re-election want to be aligned with the President or not, he, or more aptly, “his ego”, is obviously unable to accept such distance. (more…)