Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi should have to eat this news and very slowly

By Rob Janicki

Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi relish tagging Republicans as the Party of the rich and wealthy, with the Koch brothers as the piñata poster children they like to trash on a regular basis.  The Koch brothers, however, have never been convicted of any illegal political contributions and where their businesses have been found guilty of any civil infraction, they have made the appropriate changes and, if necessary, paid any civil penalties.  That brings us to the latest liberal Democrat donor, who doesn't seem to be that lucky.

Obama megadonor Kareem Ahmed was indicted Tuesday by a California grand jury in an alleged multimillion-dollar insurance kickback scheme, TPM reports.

Ahmed was a major Obama donor during the 2012 election. He gave $1 million to Priorities USA Action in 2012. He also donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to other Democratic candidates.

Additionally, Ahmed called House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) his “best friend,” according to TPM.

Fifteen of his associates were also were also indicted.

What makes this situation particularly sticky, for Ahmed and his associates, is that it includes a criminal charge of involuntary manslaughter, which involves the death of a minor in the use of a medical product pushed by Ahmed's group.  Mr. Ahmed, if convicted, could be facing prison time for his participation in pushing his questionable medical cream product that lead to the death of the minor.

Read the details of this sleazy Obama supporter here.   

Some days everything just seems to turn to s**t as experienced recently by a California mayor.

By Rob Janicki

SAN MARINO, Calif. (AP) — The doo-doo has gotten too deep for the mayor of a wealthy Los Angeles suburb who flung dog poop onto a political opponent's property.

The Pasadena Star-News reports San Marino Mayor Dennis Kneier (kuh-NEER') resigned Tuesday after outcry from residents who say he smeared their image. 

Well, at least Mayor Kneier had the good sense to just step down in a timely manner to save himself and the City of San Marino any further embarrassment.  More politicians could do well to learn from Mr. Kneier's swift action to resign, rather than stonewalling, obfuscating and making insipid pleas for understanding and forgiveness as so many politicians attempt to do when caught in more egregious circumstances.

Kneir will remain on the San Marino City Council as a council member, since the mayor's position is determined by a vote of the council members, as is common in a mayor-council system of municipal government.

Note:  I live approximately 20 miles from San Marino, a very pleasant upscale community nestled in the San Gabriel mountain foothills looking south upon the greater Los Angeles area.

Connecticut high school blocks conservative websites preventing students from accessing balanced information

By Rob Janicki

In a blatant attempt to suppress free speech comes this almost unbelievable news.  Keep in mind that the high school in question below is a public high school that is suppressing legitimate educational research sources for its students and it's only suppressing websites with conservative information.  How much more authoritarian can this practice be?  Think liberal thought control. If students are only exposed to one ideological point of view at the high school level, which way do you think they will lean after this not so subtle liberal mind control act?

Andrew Lampart, a senior at Nonnewaug High School, discovered that he couldn’t get on the National Rifle Association’s website while on campus as he was doing research for a classroom debate on gun control in May.

“So, I went over to the other side,” Lampart told WTIC. “And I went over on sites such as Moms Demand Action or Newtown Action Alliance and I could get on these websites but not the others.”

The 18-year-old decided to investigate further by broadening his search terms to political parties in Connecticut.

“I immediately found out that the State Democrat website was unblocked but the State GOP website was blocked,” Lampart said.

The student took it a step further and looked at websites focusing on abortion issues and religion. He discovered that “right-to-life” groups were blocked by the firewall but that Planned Parenthood and Pro-Choice America weren’t.

Lampart even tried to explore websites like Christianity.com and the Vatican’s site but they were both blocked. However, Islam-guide.com was not blocked.

Read more here.  

Gallup Poll reports a majority, 51% of people polled, believe Obama is not honest and trustworthy

By Rob Janicki

No real surprise here, except it makes a person wonder why the majority number it isn't even greater.  All one has to do is look to all the scandals of the Obama administration and Obama's personal excuse that he was unaware of the scandal de jure, except for his having read about it or seen it on the TV news.  This should tell the reader that Obama actually watches Fox News, since Fox News is the only major media source that actually reports on what is really going on with the Obama administration. 

Fifty-one percent of the Americans who responded to a Gallup poll conducted June 5-8said that they do not believe the phrase “is honest and trustworthy” applies to President Barack Obama.

It begs the question of what action it would really take from Obama to drive this number even

higher considering the large majority of instances where Obama has been proven to the satisfaction of a reasonable person, to have lied?  In other words, would it be a matter of how much more lying Obama would have to engage in or, would it have to be something so egregious and patently obvious to drive even the most skeptical person to believe Obama is an inveterate liar?

The latest poll, conducted June 5-8, was the first time that a majority said the description “is honest and trustworthy” does not apply to Obama.

The poll surveyed 1,027 adults and had a margin of error of +/- 4 points, which means that as many as 55 percent or as few as 47 percent may believe the description “is honest and trustworthy"  does not apply to Barack Obama.

Are we Seeing the Cloward Piven Strategy of a Manufactured Crisis at our Southern Border?

By Rob Janicki

I believe the answer to that question is a resounding, "Yes!".

What is the Cloward Piven strategy?  It arose out of the 1960's liberal activism of the anti-Vietnam War movement, which eventually drove President Lyndon Johnson (D-TX) from seeking re-election and lead to the presidential election of Republican Richard Nixon.

The Cloward–Piven strategy is a political strategy outlined in 1966 by American sociologists and political activists Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven that called for overloading the U.S. public welfare system in order to precipitate a crisis that would lead to a replacement of the welfare system with a national system of "a guaranteed annual income and thus an end to poverty".

Read more on the background of the Cloward Piven strategy here.

Are we seeing the implementation of the Cloward Piven strategy at our border with Mexico?  It would seem to be an orchestrated effort to use children, teenagers and young adults streaming up from Central America and South America through Mexico to literally flood our border states and the Border Patrol with tens of thousands of illegal alien entries, thus overwhelming both local, state and federal agencies and services to deal with this tsunami of young illegal immigrants streaming into the U.S. in absolutely unprecedented numbers never before seen in American history.   

Reports coming from Central and South America indicate that a mass information release is being made to encourage illegal immigration into the U.S. with the idea that these illegal immigrants were being well taken care of and that social services were available for those entering the U.S..

Currently there are three military bases used to collect and warehouse these illegal immigrants for processing.  

And those are just the illegal immigrants that are being picked up for processing and return to their home country.  The problem is that these illegal immigrants cannot simply be dumped back across the border in Mexico since the vast majority of these illegal immigrants are not Mexicans and Mexico will not take any responsibility for their return to their country of origin.  The system is being overloaded and it's being done in an orchestrated manner. 

President Obama and his henchman, Attorney General, Eric Holder, have done their very best to ignore enforcement of existing immigration laws, while claiming that they have actually increased apprehension of illegal immigrants.  All of the Obama obfuscation over this latest phenomena is part of the implementation of the Cloward Piven plan to create absolute chaos in our social services and immigration services.

The problem is that the statistics that the Obama administration uses to bolster their argument of increased border enforcement laws is a pure fabrication achieved by manipulating the definitions of illegal immigrants caught and returned to the border.  

The Obama administration has used a different definition and statistical analysis of illegal immigration into the U.S. than did the Bush administration.  Changing the data formula to compute illegal immigration has produced false outcomes and the Obama administration knew what they were doing when they made the change in data collection, analysis and publication.

Read more in greater detail about this planned and orchestrated action by the Obama administration at Human Events

Sec. of Defense, Chuck Hagel, Falls on his Sword for Obama's Failure in the Sgt. Bergdahl Prisoner Swap

By Rob Janicki

We knew Hagel was incompetent as a United States Senator and during his Senate confirmation hearing for Secretary of Defense, Hagel amply demonstrated his ineptitude and incompetence to even lead a Cub Scout Pack.

As the news of the prisoner swap came to light over the weekend, the Obama administration took a victory lap through the end zone, spiking the ball in self congratulations over releasing the top five most dangerous Taliban terrorists in Gitmo for one American Army deserter.

On Monday, Chuck Hagel was questioned in congressional hearings about who made the decision to trade the five Taliban prisoners for Sgt. Bergdahl.  Hagel acknowledged that the decision was ultimately President Obama's, as any such significant decision should be made by the president.

Nov we are seeing Hagel flip flop on that assertion as the whole prisoner swap has raised public ire and condemnation of the Obama administration.  As is usual, the White House has now distanced itself from responsibility for the decision to swap the five Taliban prisoners for Sgt. Bergdahl.  Instead, the White House has come out and indicated that the swap deal decision was really made by Secretary Hagel.

Sec. Hagel was quick to fall on his figurative sword draped in myriad excuses and obfuscations.  Hagel became the "good soldier" by accepting responsibility for a decision that had to have come from President Obama.  No one is claiming that Hagel didn't concur with Obama's decision.  Obviously Hagel agreed with Obama's decision to the prisoner swap as Obama's sycophant.  Hagel follows Obama so closely that I suspect his nose is brown from his efforts.

One question comes to my mind over and over again.  What happened to the long standing advertised United States policy not to negotiate with terrorists?  Instead, we are inundated over and over again with the newly enunciated principle of never leaving an American soldier on the battlefield.  The Obama administration is now doing a quick shuffle on the issue of negotiating with terrorists in an absolutely convoluted and tortured logic that goes like this.  According to the Obama administration, the United States did not negotiate with terrorists.  Instead, the United States negotiated with Qatar, which in turn negotiated with the Taliban in Pakistan.  Apparently this makes it all good and proper.  Only in an Alice in Wonderland scenario would anyone buy this delusion, but that doesn't stop the Obama administration from trying to peddle this tripe.

The Obama administration actually proffered this silly excuse with the expectation that the public would buy it, which it hasn't and shouldn't.  Meanwhile, the incompetent Obama administration marches on filled with "good soldiers" willing to fall on their figurative swords to cover the next Obama administration blunder, which is probably right around the corner based upon past performances.  In conclusion, I think the Bergdahl scandal will hang around for some time to come no matter how liberals try to spin it.  I'm guessing the DNC will try to change the narrative to the shocking demise of House Majority Leader, Eric Cantor, losing the Virginia Republican Party Primary election to retain his House seat in the next congress beginning in January 2015..

Expect Democrats to jump on this fact to declare that the Republican Party is now in complete chaos and in the throes of being overtaken by the radical rightwing Tea Party faction within the Party.  Further expect that Democrats will once again predict the demise of the Republican Party, pretty much like they have predicted the end of the world, as we know it, through global warming. 

In the end Democrats won't be any more successful in turning the current political narrative to Republican Party chaos, than they have been in convincing people of global warming as a danger to mankind.  However, that won't stop them from trying.

Iraq on the brink of collapse? Barbaric Islamic Jihadists seek Islamic Caliphate of Syria and Iran.

By Rob Janicki

What we are witnessing in Iraq is the beginning of the inevitable fall of the Iraqi government.  I say inevitable, because the Iraqi government is demonstrating that it is incapable of defending itself in the face of murderous and barbaric Islamic Jihadist terrorists seeking to create an Islamic Caliphate comprised of both Iraq and Syria.  

Let's remember that President Obama purposely left Iraq with no status of forces agreement in force to leave any American military assets in place to provide support and training for Iraqi military forces.  Obama wanted to get out of Iraq so badly that he ignored all professional advice to the contrary so he could rack up political points with his liberal base as the man who got the U.S. out of Iraq.  Obama is now engaged in employing the very same strategy in Afghanistan with the announcement that all U.S. military forces would be removed from Afghanistan by 2016.  So far there has been no status of forces agreement with the existing government in the capital of Kabul.

Obama's shortsighted decision is now coming back to bite millions of Iraqis and eventually the U.S. and its allies in Europe.  This is not particularly a surprise since early on everyone who follows politics realized that all Obama's decisions are based upon the politics of his radical liberal agenda to fundamentally change America.  Part of that fundamental change involves a diminishing role for the U.S. as a world leader advocating for individual liberty and freedom, while seeking to prevent the rebuilding of any Islamic Jihadist terrorist organization that aims to harm America and its allies.

You know Iraq is in serious trouble when NBC News admits on their evening news with Brian Williams just how tenuous the situation is in Iraq.  Major cities in north and west Iraq have fallen to these al Queda like, Islamic Jihadist terrorists, including Iraq's second largest city, Mozul.  These are the same terrorists that are operating across the Iraqi border in Syria.  These offshoots of al Queda  terrorists seek to create an Islamic Caliphate joining Syria and Iran into this fabled dream of theirs.

The Iraqi government has lost control of several large territories in northern and central Iraq to a jihadist group, an offshoot of al Qaeda. On Wednesday, they seized Mosul, the second-largest city in Iraq.

According to Engel, “some Iraqi security forces are fighting, but most appear to be stripping off their uniforms, leaving them in the streets, and abandoning their posts, weapons and vehicles”, while “thousands of civilians are fleeing the area, living in tents.” Read more 

If Iraqi military forces are fleeing in the face of these terrorists early on in this conflict, there isn't any reason to believe that they will somehow miraculously regroup and hang around to defend Baghdad or the  remaining parts of Iraq that are not currently held by these terrorists.  NBC News seems to be of the opinion that the situation in Iraq will be a long drawn out conflict.  I suspect this is more wishful thinking than sound reasoning.  

The facts of the ground indicate otherwise.  The terrorists have captured an Iraqi bank with a reported $100 million dollars on hand.  Couple that resource with all the American military equipment the terrorists have captured from the Iraqi military forces as they flee in the face of terrorist forces and it becomes obvious that iraq's future is bleak and it could collapse in a state of complete chaos in the not too distant future

It should be noted that these terrorists are the same barbarians who regularly are participating in beheadings in Syria to strike terror in the hearts of all their enemies and the civilian population.  They are beginning to do the same thing in Iraq.

Emergency Rooms See Patient Numbers Rising Greatly

By Rob Janicki

President Obama and everyone of his cohorts in Congress and the main stream media trumpeted loud and clear how the Affordable Care Act (ACA) also known as Obamacare, would finally give millions more people primary care physicians to see, rather than having to use emergency rooms for their medical needs, whether they were emergencies or not.

Every opponent of Obamacare predicted the exact opposite would occur and it has.

It wasn't supposed to work this way, but since the Affordable Care Act took effect in January, Norton Hospital has seen its packed emergency room become even more crowded, with about 100 more patients a month.

That 12 percent spike in the number of patients — many of whom aren't actually facing true emergencies — is spurring the hospital to convert a waiting room into more exam rooms.

And all this in the face of expanded Medicaid enrollment under Obamacare.

That's just the opposite of what many people expected under Obamacare, particularly because one of the goals of health reform was to reduce pressure on emergency rooms by expanding Medicaid and giving poor people better access to primary care.

The question is why are more people, now covered under expanded Medicaid, seeking non emergency services in ER rooms?

Experts cite many reasons: A longstanding shortage of primary-care doctors leaves too few to handle all the newly insured patients. Some doctors won't accept Medicaid. And poor people often can't take time from work when most primary care offices are open, while ERs operate round-the-clock and by law must at least stabilize patients.

Plus, some patients who have been uninsured for years don't have regular doctors and are accustomed to using ERs, even though it is much more expensive. Others have let illnesses and injuries fester so long they have become emergencies.

Here's my take on why emergency rooms are seeing even more patients these days.  Medicaid has some substantial problems finding doctors that will accept Medicaid reimbursements.  Doctors accepting Medicaid are spread out pretty thin making it a greater imposition on patients to find a primary care doctor close to home for them.  Hospital ER's, on the other hand, are usually a lot closer and those ER's have to accept these Medicare patients.

Studies have shown that Medicaid patients were among the most frequent ER users before health reform, and becoming newly insured only increases ER use by giving an avenue to get treatment to patients who had been forgoing care because they couldn't afford it.

As Medicaid enrollment increases, expect tot see even more usage of ER's as Medicaid patients find it easier  and more convenient to access medical services through local ER's than to find and get access to primary care physicians who will actually accept Medicaid patients.

Read more from the Louisville Courier-Journal article here.  

Dr. Thomas Sowell Destroys the Liberal Rational for making Economic Choices based upon Emotions rather than Rational Empirical Evidence

By Rob Janicki

Economic choices are called opportunity costs.  When one choice is fulfilled, another choice is denied.  What liberals either fail to understand or refuse to acknowledge is that economic choices are to be made on a cost/benefit analysis basis.  This compares the costs and the benefits of the choices under consideration.  

Benefits can be more intangible and thus become subjective in the analysis process, but none the less, monetary numbers will be attached to the intangible elements as best as possible in order to make rational judgments.  Liberals don't like to quantify those intangibles and then they completely overlook them or deny their existence.  

Every welfare program is a wealth redistribution program at its core.  The federal government has enacted many of these wealth redistribution programs, such as Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and now the Affordable Care Act.  All have failed to honestly address the costs of these programs and the resulting benefits from these programs going forward.  Everyone of these programs have failed miserably to honestly address the costs associated with each individual program and were pushed by liberals on the basis of emotional appeal.  Liberals have always characterized themselves as more caring than those on the political right, yet have failed to provide substantive proof of their assertions. 

What liberals never acknowledge are the true costs to society for these huge and expansive welfare programs.  Every sane individual knows there is no "free lunch".  Every economic action has a reaction resulting in costs to someone or some group of people.  Essentially, liberals have made themselves the determinant element in who will pay for these wealth redistribution programs and who will receive the resulting benefits, without ever acknowledging who or which group will actually being paying for these "entitlement" or welfare programs. 

Liberals will never acknowledge that these welfare programs are transferring significant debts to future generations that will result in one of two outcomes.  Either the welfare program will go bankrupt or it will result in significant benefit reduction payments to recipients.  In either case, promised benefits will not be met and real people will suffer the consequences of these Ponzi scheme giveaways from the public treasury.

Spending other people's money and creating debt for future generations has no significance to liberals, since their concern is about seizing control over people to create their own elitist class to enforce servitude upon those who will be expected to pay for the creation of all these liberal Utopian pipe dreams.  

Remember this simple concept that liberals are always trying to achieve and it will make more sense in understanding their tactics engaged to achieve their strategic goals and objectives.  

It's all about control of people, which is anathema to individual liberty and freedom.  

The last thing liberals want is for people to be able to think for themselves and make decisions that are in their own best interests.  Liberals believe in the "collective" while they deny individual liberty and freedom, since these concepts challenge liberal dogma to control people, culture and society.

A very interesting development in one California Congressional primary

By Rob Janicki

An interesting turn of events occurred on Tuesday in the 33rd Congressional District in California.  What is important or at least noteworthy is that the leading candidate happens to be a Republican.  The seat in the 33rd CD is currently held by ultra liberal Henry Waxman, who has announced his retirement at the conclusion of his present House term in January 2015. Waxman has been a U.S. Congressman for 39 years in a variety of CD's that have changed their numbering with redistricting.  However, the district remains the same for the most part.

California's 33rd Congressional district has long been considered one of the Democrats' most valuable stretches of real estate, but in Tuesday's open primary Republican Elan Carr was the top vote-getter among a field of 18 candidates vying for a chance to advance to the general election.

Carr jumped to an early lead as the Democrats split the vote in the race to succeed longtime U.S. Rep. Henry Waxman. State Sen. Ted Lieu, who finished in second place, will face off against Carr in the November election.

The 33rd CD is very liberal and heavily Jewish, which should make it an interesting contest on November 4, 2014.  and here's why.  Carr is Jewish and a strong supporter of Israel with family ties to Israel.  Both of his parents immigrated from Israel.  Carr's parents are also prominent in several synagogues in the 33rd District.  Also, Carr is an Iraq war veteran and gang prosecutor with the Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office.

Carr's challenge will be in raising funds for the general election this November.  Somehow, I think Carr will manage to find the funds necessary to run a competitive race.  Waxman needed over $2 million dollars to win his last re-election bid in 2012.  Carr raised $423,000 for the primary, which was far from the most raised among all the candidates running in the primary.  Carr will be facing a Democrat that brought in $1 million dollars in funding and still ran second to Carr.

Good news doesn't always travel as fast as bad news for conservatives.

By Rob Janicki

Sometimes good news for conservatives slips by the wayside.  Hopefully, this post will rectify the bad news that I managed to miss.

The House of Representatives passed an amendment Thursday to stop all federal funding to be used for the Department of Justice’s Operation Choke Point, an anti-fraud operation that was found to be cutting off legitimate businesses from their banking lines.

This was a direct slap down of Attorney General Eric Holder.  But more importantly than being a personal slap down of a Marxist socialist, it brings sanity to an otherwise blatant attempt to illegally crack down on virtually any business or organization the Obama administration doesn't like.  

Had the amendment passed, it would have given the Dept. of Injustice the power to essentially shut down any business it wanted to.  The DoJ could use virtually any pretext to accomplish this Gestapo-like act and force a business to take the government to court to prove its innocence.  It doesn't get much more heavy handed than this brazen attempt to use the power of government to destroy those it sees as enemies of the Obama administration.

“This is a major victory for consumers, law-abiding businesses, and anyone who believes in due process and restraint of government encroachment,” said the Community Financial Services Association of America, a trade group opposed to the operation, in a statement Friday. “Additionally, our banking system benefits as it will not be put in the position to police customers or make judgments about the political popularity of businesses and industries.”

Most readers may not be able to fathom just how dangerous this DoJ program would have been.  It would have given the DoJ the pretext to interfere with and intimidate legitimate businesses for the purpose of bringing to bear immense power against anyone or any business that may have offended the Obama administration for any reason.

The DoJ has virtually unlimited resources to charge individuals and businesses with crimes, even if those charges never see the inside of a courtroom.  Merely charging people or businesses with a criminal act forces them to spend untold amounts of money to even begin to defend themselves and that's where the DoJ can simply wear down or bankrupt a victim of this quasi-legalized extortion.  And that's what it would be, extortion.

The Obama administration is all about rewarding useful allies and idiots and punishing enemies to the greatest extent possible.  Obama's personal adviser, Valerie Jarrett said as much after Obama won the 2012 presidential election.  It was payback time.

Global warming causes slow down in Lake Superior ice melt for 2014. Oh, wait! No global warming for 17 years and 9 months.

By Rob Janicki

Doesn't global warming cause just about everything from frostbite to hemorrhoids?  It does if you are a delusional liberal or a scientist who has sold out his or her soul for government grants and commercial endorsements from those seeking to make money off of the greatest hoax in at least 100 years.

News of the day.

Lake Superior ice is still present as of these photos of June 1, 2014, and estimates indicate the lake ice may last into July.  That global warming thing is really tricky if it can do this.

Moving on with more on global warming.  Oh, wait!  There isn't any global warming, but that just proves to liberal nut cases that there is global warming.  Sort of like a double negative in logic. 

One basic point has to be made for the average reader.  All global warming predictions are based upon computer PROJECTIONS and nothing else.  The classic computer programming cliche applies here.  Garbage in, garbage out.  

And that's what we are seeing and hearing from the One World globalists trying to shove Cap and Trade down our throats to the detriment of all Americans. The latest RSS satellite data indicates that there has been no global warming for 17 years and 9 months.

According to the RSS satellite data, whose value for May 2014 has just been published, the global warming trend in the 17 years 9 [months] since September 1996 is zero (Fig. 1). The 213 months without global warming represent more than half the 425-month satellite data record since January 1979. No one now in high school has lived through global warming.

How much longer can these lying liberals continue this charade?  As long as it takes.

For the charts and graphs folks, much more can be found here.

White House apologizes for an "Oops!" moment in failing to advise Senate Intel Committee

By Rob Janicki

The White House, in conducting a prisoner exchange of the five highest risk Taliban prisoners for one American soldier in Taliban custody in Afghanistan, is coming up against a violation of law.

The White House has apologized to Senate Intelligence Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) for failing to alert her in advance of a decision to release Taliban commanders from Guantanamo Bay.

Feinstein told reporters that she received a call from Deputy National Security Adviser Tony Blinken on Monday evening apologizing for what the administration is calling an “oversight.”

Was this an "oversight"?  Only an idiot would believe that excuse from the Obama White House.  

The White House has a complete staff of advisers to make certain that there are no "Oops!" moments.  Is it logical or reasonable to believe that the entire White House staff of advisers could have had a singular moment of mass amnesia in forgetting the law that demands the White House inform Congress of such prisoner releases from Gitmo Bay incarceration no less than 30 days from the anticipated change in status of any Gitmo terrorists?  

There are no exceptions written in the law.  There is no wiggle room for the President to use the excuse of "time is of the essence." Obama has clearly overstepped his authority in an illegal act.  Mark this up on the wall with all the other illegal acts Obama has engaged in.  Be prepared for many more similar instances.  

If Republicans manage to capture the Senate with a significant majority beginning in January 2015, they should consider impeachment proceedings.  By then America will have sustained even more financial hardship from Obamacare and all the other Executive Orders and EPA regulations that Obama has managed to essentially incorporate as if these actions were actually law. 

What the White House has done in the instant case of releasing five Taliban terrorists could easily be construed as a standalone, impeachable offense for President Obama. Let's remember that there are no Constitutional or statutory conditions that have to be met for the House of Representatives to bring charges of "high crimes and misdemeanors" against a sitting president.  

It is all dependent upon the process for the House and the Senate to determine what constitutes an impeachable offense.  Basically, anything that a president does that challenges the oath of office to protect and defend the American people and the states of the United States is grounds for bringing charges of impeachment.  

Again, there is no specific law or laws that outline specific crimes that would constitute "high crimes and misdemeanors" as stated in the Constitution.  It is totally dependent upon the entire Congress to determine whether a president has violated his oath of office.

More can be read here.

The Obama Administra​tion is Rapidly Unraveling into a State of Chaos. Is this their Plan?

By Rob Janicki

Extreme circumstances require extreme actions.  That's the cover
that radical liberals have always used as a tactic to expedite their totalitarian ambitions for control of our government.

The ongoing case with Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl is something out of nowhere, even in Obama's world of inept, incompetent and corrupt governance.  

What was the Obama administration thinking about in cutting such a bad deal, or any deal for that matter, with the Taliban terrorists over what now is most certainly an Army deserter, who has gone over to the side of the Taliban terrorists?  

What happened with the long standing American policy of never negotiating with terrorists?  Why has the idea of never leaving behind an American soldier on the field of battle, trumped the policy of no negotiations with terrorists?  

By the way, America has left many American military personnel behind on the battlefield and unaccounted for since the Korean War.  So Obama's claim is specious at best, if not a down right lie.  Obama's claim notwithstanding, there are hundreds of American military personnel, if not more, who remain unaccounted for around the world and are suspected of having been imprisoned in North Korea and Vietnam, since they were not identified as having been killed in combat.  

This situation is not going away anytime soon and, as more information is revealed, it will only grow into a scandal that may well overshadow the Benghazi and IRS scandals.  

If the Obama administration thinks they can survive this latest scandal as a means to put the other two prominent scandals on the back burner, they may want to rethink that tactic.  It seems that the Obama administration may have grossly mistaken the Bergdahl case as an opportunity to cover all the other failures of the Obama administration.  Or, the Obama administration believes they can control the chaos for even more nefarious ends.  Think about that.

What Obama has done in releasing the five Taliban leaders is a clear violation of law according to every constitutional scholar, despite an "Oops!" excuse from the White House.  

Obama's latest violation of the Constitution is simply part of an overall plan to degrade and diminish the role of the rule of law in our constitutional republic.  The end justifies the means for Obama, just as it was written and practiced by Karl Marx and is practiced by every Marxist adherent since then.  

By the way, radical Islamists coincidentally practice the same philosophy of lying to achieve the greater end of advancing Islam around the world to convert or subjugated all of mankind.  Before a problem can be addressed, it must be acknowledged to be a problem.  

Politicians don't want to publicly admit that Obama is a Marxist socialist, but their refusal to acknowledge the truth of the matter doesn't change the fact that what Obama has been doing since day one, encompasses every Marxist socialist tactic to overwhelm and functionally overthrow our constitutional republic.  

Politicians are merely dancing around the political margins of each and every illegal act that Obama has used to continue leveraging increasing power to assume complete control over America and all Americans.

Will politicians ever confront Obama or will they merely protect their own little fiefdoms and continue to go along to get along?

Are we about to see some kind of civil unrest fomented by the radical liberals in the Obama administration and then framed as a national emergency, followed by a declaration of martial law?  Just asking, since we seem to be headed toward some kind of cataclysmic social political event from an imperial presidency that hasn't hesitated to regularly run rough shod over the Constitution at every opportunity.  

Has America been Deceived about the Weekend POW exchange with the Taliban?

By Rob Janicki

Before getting into the story of U.S. Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, it should be noted that the arbitrary act of exchanging five enemy POW's by the Obama administration for Sgt. Berghdahl, appears to violate U.S. law.  

Let's set that legal issue aside for the moment and return to a quick description of the details and background of an American being 'captured' by enemy Islamist Taliban terrorists in Afghanistan.

The return of Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, Taliban captive for almost five years, is raising more questions than it is answering.  The White House, in the form of President Obama, says America does not leave its own on the battlefield, meaning that we, as a country, will not forget an American soldier captured by the enemy.  It gives the instant situation an aura of an heroic act by our government to save an America patriot captured by the enemy in the war against Islamic terrorism in Afghanistan.

But, is that the real narrative of what has transpired?

But behind the scenes ... is a darker and more complicated story about a young soldier who allegedly abandoned his post after growing disillusioned with America's wars and the potentially illegal deal struck by the White House to free him.

This doesn't sound like the stuff heroic tales are built upon to later become legends.  Now we are finding out that all was not well in Sgt. Bergdahl's understanding of the world and his role in it as a U.S. soldier.

He deployed to Afghanistan in 2009 full of idealistic conviction that he and his comrades could push back the Taliban and improve life in the long-subjugated country.

But hopefulness soon gave way to despair after his unit began to take casualties and he saw how US troops treated the Afghans they were supposed to be saving.

Here's what is known about the last three days before Sgt. Bergdahl disappeared and was supposedly captured by the Taliban.

 "These people need help, yet what they get is the most conceited country in the world telling them that they are nothing and that they are stupid," he wrote in an email to his parents on June 27, 2009.

Three days later, according to Rolling Stone, the 23-year-old soldier simply walked off his base in Patika province, carrying a knife, his diary and a small camera.

Right now we are operating on a number of details surrounding the capture and now release of Sgt. Berhdahl by the Taliban.  Much more needs to be determined in a world of demonstrable evidence  before America or anyone really makes any hard and fast characterizations about what we are seeing in the return of Sgt. Bergdahl.

Read the entire Telegraph report here.