VIDEO: Classified Cable Identified 10 Islamist/Al Qaeda Groups in Benghazi in August – Clinton and Obama Denied Pleas for Help!

An August 16th cable requested additional security and reported there were ten Islamist militias and Al Qaeda groups in Benghazi and they could not sustain an organized attack.  This information reportedly went directly to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton from Ambassador Stevens.  Stevens also informed Clinton that he feared an attack on the consulate would be next.

Fox News also reports: “It was revealed that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had ordered more  security at the U.S. mission in Benghazi before it was attacked where four  Americans, including U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens were murdered by  Al-Qaeda but President Obama denied the request.”

 

 

As Catherine Herridge said, “This may be the smoking gun.”  I fervently hope it is enough evidence to fire and prosecute those in charge!

ALDRICH: Hillary Clinton’s abominable national security record

By Gary Aldrich via The Washington Times

History of incompetence and dangerous decisions -

I have extensive experience in national security matters, including years  served in the House, the Senate and the White House, where I was detailed as  senior FBI special agent liaison and investigator with the Bush and Clinton  White House counsel’s office.

There was never a question that national security was a top priority for  George H.W. Bush’s executive branch. The security system was ironclad, serious  and professional.

The rest of the federal agencies followed the lead of the Bush  White House.

Our national security group consisted of the FBI, the CIA, the Department of  Defense and the Secret Service, all working united in a common mission. I cannot  recall a single complaint that the Bush administration ignored warnings or  suggestions of those ready to give their all — including their lives — to  protect the president and his White House, and our national security. We  performed our mission, and it was appreciated by the Bush team.

Contrast that with the mess that occurred when Bill Clinton and Hillary  Rodham Clinton took office. The administration, with few exceptions, did not  take national security seriously. National and White House security were not  priorities. We were shocked.

Because of an obvious disregard for security-related matters throughout the  executive branch, career professionals left the Clinton White House and their  respective agencies in droves. I knew many who did, and it was a sad day when  another one would greet us in the hallways of the Old Executive Office Building  with an announcement of retirement, transfer or outright resignation. I could  not blame them. I also approached my FBI managers with my own request for  reassignment.

Why did I want to leave one of the most unique assignments an FBI agent could  achieve? The bad attitude the Clintons had toward national security made it  impossible for us to perform our duties successfully. Their failure to properly  assess threat levels, along with their unwillingness to acknowledge that they  knew little about national security, was a recipe for disaster. We knew this  from experience.

Mrs. Clinton eventually was accused in congressional testimony of ordering  the hiring of Craig Livingstone — a former bar bouncer — to head the White House  security office. Mr. Livingtone also headed up liaison with the FBI. His was not  a serious appointment — he was a joke. Some of my security friends thought that  this was Mrs. Clinton’s way of showing us that she held no respect for us.

Lacking respect did not discourage Mrs. Clinton from using security agencies  as a hammer to attack and punish those who stood in her way. The FBI, the Secret  Service and the Internal Revenue Service hounded and then prosecuted seven  innocent men who worked for the White House travel office simply because they  were standing in the way of Mrs. Clinton’s political interests and ambitions.  She knew federal investigations would destroy those good men, but she wanted her  friends in those slots, and that was all that mattered.

No one could understand why Mrs. Clinton would want to insert herself into  security matters. She was neither elected nor appointed, and day-to-day security  issues were considered dry or boring. Security usually is not micromanaged by  the front office. Moreover, a good front office always staffs this important  function with the best candidates. One possible reason for Mrs. Clinton’s  unusual interest was that she and her husband had much to hide. There was no  statutory authority for her to be so involved, but that didn’t seem to matter,  either.

The Clintons left a wake of questionable activities behind them. Both had  come up from the same crowd — the anti-war left, where Saul Alinsky taught that  all truth was relative, a tool to be used to win. Having won the White House,  Mr. Clinton had little interest in staffing, as documented in articles and books  explaining the chaos, released after the fact.

Mrs. Clinton called on Arkansas Rose Law Firm associates to staff the Clinton  White House Counsel’s Office. Most memorable among these was Vince Foster, who  died in Fort Marcy Park of an apparent self-inflicted gunshot wound. Foster, a  seemingly decent man, was deputy counsel in charge of the overall security  program in the White House. He possessed no background or education for the job.  Foster’s deputy, William Kennedy, also a former co-worker of Mrs. Clinton,  supervised Craig Livingstone. FBI and Secret Service agents did their best to  work with this trio, but within days it was clear that there was not a dime’s  worth of experience between them regarding White House security or national  security. That didn’t seem to register in Washington, where perception trumps  logic and truth.

Soon the predictable happened, as the Clinton White House became a swamp of  scandal and chaos, eventually resulting in Mr. Clinton’s impeachment. We were  lucky that nothing worse than the Monica Lewinsky scandal occurred. The Clinton  White House — with a security system conceived and overseen by Mrs. Clinton — was an exceptionally soft target for espionage and also for a deadly terrorist  attack.

Five House members recently raised questions about Huma Abedin, an aide in  Mrs. Clinton’s State Department, whose family has ties with terrorist  sympathizers. This aide should not be a candidate for close access. Only those  completely above suspicion should ever be given close access to a Cabinet  secretary’s daily business or schedule. Such a person would require the highest  clearance possible. Agendas, comings, goings, identities, plans, what the  president says and thinks — that is a virtual treasure trove of key data if a  potential spy can access an inner circle participant. Of course, Mrs. Clinton’s  choice for a constant travel companion could be an innocent person, but if the  FBI director’s closest aide was the son of a Mafia boss, would that be deemed  acceptable?

On the heels of this national security background investigation mystery, now  there are four deaths — one of a U.S. ambassador — apparently because of other  lapses in national and embassy security procedures at Mrs. Clinton’s State  Department. She hired a former bar bouncer for White House security — who runs  the State Department’s security office?

Mrs. Clinton has a documented track record of interference and poor judgment  as she micromanaged the White House security program, sans credentials. In  recent days, she has said that what happened in Libya is her fault, and maybe  that’s the truth. The media ought to ask her some tough questions about State  Department security, and then seek to get some straight answers.

Read the rest here.

Slain SEAL’s Father: Biden asked ‘Did Your Son Always Have Balls the Size of Cue Balls?’; Obama and Clinton Emotionless and Insincere (Videos)

Today Fox News Channel’s Jennifer Griffin reported that sources on the ground in Benghazi told her “that three urgent requests from the CIA annex for military back-up during the attack on the U.S. Consulate and subsequent attack nearly seven hours later were denied by officials in the CIA chain of command — who also told the CIA operators to ‘stand down’ rather than help the ambassador’s team when shots were heard at approximately 9:40 p.m. in Benghazi on Sept. 11.”  It was also reported that the events were being broadcast live as they were unfolding in Benghazi.

This came as quite a shock to Charles Woods, father of slain operative Tyrone Woods.

Mr. Woods said that, as a family, they did not want to politicize the death of their son; however, he is extremely upset and frustrated with an administration that refuses to provide truth and facts surrounding his son’s death.

In an interview with Glenn Beck yesterday Mr. Woods described his meeting with the President, Vice President and Hillary Clinton at the memorial service at Joint Base Andrews for his son and the three other Americans killed.  He claimed the President appeared emotionless and  “shaking hands with him, quite frankly, was like shaking hands with a dead fish. His face was pointed towards me but he would not look me in the eye, his eyes were over my shoulder.” “I could tell that he was not sorry,” he added. “He had no remorse.”

He recalled Vice President Biden saying to him “in an extremely loud and boisterous voice,” “Did your son always have balls the size of cue balls?” He questioned the sincerity of their sympathy, and that of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

 

 

He said Clinton told him “they would find and prosecute the person who made the video” that she claimed was the cause of the massacre. “When she said that, I could tell that she was not telling me the truth,” Woods said about Clinton.

 

 

Mr. Woods called into the Lars Larson radio program:

 

As events unfolded Mr. Woods was interviewed by Megyn Kelly on Fox News:

 

 

It is inconceivable that any American could watch and listen to these and then vote for Obama. I sympathize with Mr. Woods and pray he and his family get the answers they deserve. I hope his son receives the honor and respect he deserves for putting his life on the line for his fellow Americans. Mr. Woods, you should be very proud of your son and I am so very sorry your country is letting you down.

 

Obama Admin spends $70,000 on Pakistan ads denouncing Muhammad video instead of denouncing Terrorism!

The Obama administration has finally admitted the attack in Benghazi was an act of terror but is still apologizing for the ‘movie’ that is supposedly the center of the Islamist murder sprees.  Just last year, Hillary Clinton attended a performance of the Book of Mormon in New York - where is the apology tour to all Mormons?

 

Via Jihad Watch

 

 

This will fix everything. Doubtless a rosy pro-American future looms in the Islamic world, courtesy of the Film Critic-In-Chief. What this ridiculous campaign will do for the freedom of speech, however, is not quite so rosy. “State Department spending $70G on Pakistan ads denouncing anti-Islam film,” from the Associated Press, September 20 (thanks to Kenneth):

The American Embassy in Islamabad, in a bid to tamp down public rage over the anti-Islam film produced in the U.S., is spending $70,000 to air an ad on Pakistani television that features President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton denouncing the video.

The State Department said Thursday the embassy had compiled brief clips of Obama and Clinton rejecting the contents of the movie and extolling American tolerance for all religions into a 30-second public service announcement that is running on seven Pakistani networks. Obama and Clinton’s comments, which are from previous public events in Washington, are in English but subtitled in Urdu, the main Pakistani language.

Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said the aim was to get the messages to the widest possible audience in Pakistan, where tens of thousands of protestors angry about the film tried to reach the U.S. embassy before being turned back by Pakistani police. She said embassy staffers had decided the ads were the best way to spread the word. The seven networks have a potential audience of 90 million people, she added.

“The sense was that this particular aspect of the president and the secretary’s message needed to be heard by more Pakistanis than had heard, and that this was an effective way to get that message out,” Nuland told reporters in Washington. The ads are not running in other countries, she said.

In the ad, Obama is seen talking about America’s tradition of religious tolerance and Clinton is seen saying that the U.S. government had nothing to do with the video that contains vulgar depiction of the Prophet Muhammad.

“We absolutely reject its content and message,” Clinton says in the advertisement.

A caption on the ad reads: “Paid Content” and it ends with the seal of the American Embassy in Islamabad….

They could have taken the opportunity to explain the importance of the freedom of speech. But no.

WE ARE AT WAR AND I WANT A LEADER! Obama campaigns with Beyonce and Clinton celebrates Muslim holiday!

The United States is in crisis mode while Obama skips security briefings to chat with ‘Pimp with a Limp’ and Hillary hosts Lockerbie bomber supporter!  We are at war and I want a leader – not a narcissistic detached campaigner who supports the Muslim Brotherhood.

 

The United States just lost four Americans, 17 others are wounded, and we have experienced another 9/11 terrorist attack – where is our President?  He is busy campaigning and scheduling appearances with David Letterman, Beyonce, and Jay Z.   Our ‘Commander in Chief’ passed up security briefings to discuss football and his favorite rappers with Pimp with a Limp.  But not to worry, Iranian-born Valerie Jarrett is still in charge at the White House!

Reports have also circulated that the attack in  Benghazi was an inside job and that the U.S. Department of State knew of the attack up to 48 hours ahead of time, yet chose to do nothing.

Well, not exactly nothing. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was busy celebrating Muslim holiday Eid Mubarak two days after 9/11 attacks with Libyan ambassador Ali Sulaiman Aujali - the man who supported Scotland’s release of Lockerbie bomber.  But not to worry, Muslim-sisterhood member Huma Abedin has our backs!

Obama has put his campaign and ego ahead of national security and our safety.  Hillary Clinton is in denial.  Libya, Egypt, Tunisia, Morocco are burning flags and chanting ‘Death to America.’  Are they concerned?  Obama declined a meeting with our Israeli ally, Bibi Netanyahu, while endorsing and assisting the Muslim Brotherhood in the Middle East.  In “Audacity of Hope” he writes: “I will stand with them should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.”  Well, sir, they are shifting in an ugly direction and we now know where you stand.

As the bodies of the four victims were returned to the US today, I was astonished to hear Clinton say this tragedy occurred because of a movie.  THAT is denial.  THAT was an excuse to kill Americans.  When will this administration understand that Islam is NOT a religion of peace?

As our President and Secretary of State play down the volatile situation in the Middle East, Newt Gingrich tells it like it is:

President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton again perpetuated the kind of intellectual dishonesty that cripples the U.S. response to radical Islamists.

The president asserted we have to oppose “the kind of senseless violence that took the lives of these public servants.”

Clinton reinforced his analysis when she said, “We condemn in the strongest terms this senseless act of violence.”

This concept of “senseless violence” is at the heart of the left’s refusal to confront the reality of radical Islamists.

These are not acts of senseless violence.

These are acts of war.

We are at war and we should demand a leader who will make our safety and the safety of our men and women serving in the Middle East his top priority!  Clint Eastwood nailed it – President Obama has failed us and it is time for him to go!

Related articles

Muslim Brotherhood Poster Child Huma Abedin – The Enemy Within?

Tarek Fatah and Ezra Levant discuss Huma Abedin and her alleged links to the Muslim Brotherhood.  As a former Personnel Security Specialist and Adjudicator with the Department of Defense, I would love to know why this women has access to Hillary Clinton and most probably our national security secrets.  I hope the next administration takes our national security seriously, unlike the Muslim Brotherhood sympathizer currently in office.

The Muslim Students’ Association Pledge of Allegiance:  “Allah is my lord; Islam is my life; the Koran is my guide; the Sunna is my practice; Jihad is my spirit; righteousness is my character; and paradise is my goal. For I enjoin what is right; I forbid what is wrong; I will fight against oppression; AND I WILL DIE TO ESTABLISH ISLAM.”  As a member, Huma Abedin surely recited this pledge!

 

 

We need to be less politically correct and more defense oriented or we will soon be wondering ‘What the hell just happened?’

Obama’s Stump Speech Myths (AKA – Dreams from My Presidency)

‘President Obama has a hard time telling the truth.’  Ya think???  He has given new meaning to the word ‘spin’ and has even received several Pinocchios from the very liberal Washington Post.  I wish I could be amazed at the lack of true journalism and reporting in our progressive media but sadly I am not.  Conservative news organizations and bloggers are the only ones willing to vet Obama and his ‘Dreams from My Presidency’ campaign speeches.  I often wonder if he is still doing a ‘little blow’ in his hallucinogenic make-believe world.  Thank you Brett Bozell for the following article from Townhall!

 

Barack Obama has trouble telling the truth.

 This is the man who admitted his memoir “Dreams from My Father” was semifictional. “For the sake of compression, some of the characters that appear are composites of people I’ve known, and some events appear out of precise chronology.” Translation: On some pages, I’m taking poetic license with the facts to burnish my image.

The problem is, Obama’s still using poetic license. So where are the reporters to point out when he doesn’t tell the truth? Let’s take just one typical Obama stump speech, on July 5 in Sandusky, Ohio, and look for the fibs and stretches. They’re not hard to find.

1. There are the biographical tall tales. “My grandfather fought in Patton’s army.” In 2009, AP’s Nancy Benac noted that the president’s grandfather, Stanley Dunham, was in a supply and maintenance company, not in combat. That’s noble work, but “fought in Patton’s army” implies something else. Moreover, Benac reported Dunham’s company was assigned to Patton’s army for two months in 1945, and then quoted Obama’s own self-boosting memoir: “Gramps returned from the war never having seen real combat.” Why has Benac been alone in exploring this blatant exaggeration?

2. There are the policy myths. “So when folks said let’s go ahead and let the auto industry go bankrupt, we said no let’s bet on American workers. Let’s bet on American industries, and now, GM is back on top, and Chrysler is moving, and Ford is going strong.”

Put aside for a moment that GM being “on top” is a stretch. GM still owes the public $30 billion for the bailout. But the real screamer in that passage is Ford never succumbed to bankruptcy and bailouts and therefore shouldn’t be included in any boast of any sort of Obama achievements.

Some lines in the speech just sound ridiculous based on the last three and a half years, such as: “I want to balance our budget. I want to reduce our deficit, deal with our debt, but I want to do it in a balanced and responsible way.” This might not be strictly “false” — it’s opinion — but it’s certainly disingenuous. He said the same thing in 2008 and then delivered the biggest trillion-dollar deficit in history.

Obama also refuses to admit the failure of the “stimulus,” claiming in one passage, “I do want to rebuild our roads and our bridges” because it would “put a lot of people back to work — and that’s good for the entire economy.” Except, it’s demonstrably not true.

3. Then there are the religious myths. “When I first got my job as an organizer for the Catholic churches in Chicago … they taught me that no government program can replace good neighbors and people who care deeply about their communities (and) who are fighting on their behalf.”

In how many ways is this deeply insincere? Obama was hired by a Jewish Alinsky-ite leftist named Jerry Kellman for something called the Developing Communities Project, which did have Catholic support, but Obama’s own memoir described the community organizing work as a chance to “start to build power” — with a “hard-headedness” based on “politics, not religion.”

In his stump speech, Obama’s trying to create two false impressions: 1) That he’s not waging war on the Catholic Church with his Department of Health and Human Services mandate to force Catholics to fund contraceptives and sterilization against their conscience. 2) That he’s some sort of moderate about how government programs couldn’t possibly replace person-to-person private charity. If he were Catholic, he might be excommunicated.

4. Finally, there are the campaign myths. Obama bizarrely told the crowd in Sandusky “back in 2008, everybody said we couldn’t do it because we were outspent, we weren’t favored.” Did Obama mean in the primary race? By a slim margin, he outraised Hillary Clinton, who was the early favorite. But this spin is comical if it refers to the general election, where Obama outraised McCain $779 million to $347 million.

Then Obama added: “That first race that I ran as a state senator, Michelle and I, we were going around knocking on doors, passing out leaflets. Nobody gave us a shot. Everybody said, ‘Nobody can pronounce your name, how are you going to win?’” But Obama ran unopposed in 1996, both in the primary and the general election. In a burst of Chicago-style politics, Obama removed his primary opponents, including the incumbent state senator, Alice Palmer, from the ballot by challenging their signatures.

Read more at Townhall.

Suppose Michele Bachmann is right? (Islam seeks Supremacy, not Coexistence)

By Cal Thomas via WORLD Magazine

Like the ghosts of Shakespeare’s Banquo or Dickens’ Jacob Marley, the  specter of the late commie-hunting congressman from Wisconsin, Joseph  McCarthy, will always be with us. It is summoned up today, by some on  the left, who use it as a tool to thwart legitimate questions about  people and ideologies that seek to destroy America.

According to many commentators, the McCarthy spirit has inhabited Rep.  Michele Bachmann, R-Minn. In several letters to high-ranking government  officials, Bachmann has raised questions about Huma Abedin, a  Muslim-American, who is deputy chief of staff to Secretary of State  Hillary Clinton. Bachmann’s concern is Abedin’s relatives in the Middle  East, some of whom—such as Abedin’s mother—she claims “are  connected to Muslim Brotherhood operatives and/or organizations.”  Abedin’s job, according to Bachmann, “affords her routine access to the  secretary and to policymaking.” And, as a result of that access, says  Bachmann, “The State Department, and in several cases, the specific  direction of the secretary of state, have taken actions recently that  have been enormously favorable to the Muslim Brotherhood and its  interests.”

Sen. John McCain says Abedin is “a dedicated American.” Even if he is  correct, the larger issue is being obscured. Many in government and the  media don’t want to face the possibility that infiltration is a tactic  of Islamic extremists who repeatedly say they want to destroy not only  Israel but the “Great Satan” America. Such objectives should be taken  seriously, given their violent history.

If you revile Rep. Bachmann, perhaps former British Prime Minister Tony  Blair is more to your liking. Charles Moore of the London Daily  Telegraph writes that Blair “… now thinks he underestimated the power  of the bad ‘narrative’ of Islamist extremists. That narrative—that  ‘The West oppresses Islam’—’is still there; if anything, it has  grown.’ It seeks ’supremacy, not coexistence.’” Blair also expressed  fear that “The West is asleep on this issue.”

Blair’s view is echoed in Battle for Our Minds: Western Elites and the  Terror Threat, a new book by Michael Widlanski, a specialist in Arab  politics and a former journalist for mainstream publications such as The  New York Times, the Cox Newspapers-The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, and The  Jerusalem Post. Widlanski’s main point is that political correctness has  stifled the West’s ability to understand and fight terror.

Among Widlanski’s criticisms is that the West “came to rely on ‘experts’  without field experience in, or scant knowledge of, the Middle East:  people who do not speak the languages, did not study the cultures, and do  not know the history. Even worse, some ‘experts’ have been forgiving  and even sympathetic to the terrorists and their aims.”

National Public Radio reported last month that “The FBI has conducted  more than 100 investigations into suspected Islamic extremists within  the military.”

What else would infiltration look like? It’s more than an academic  question, or a subject for spy novelists. Those who attack Michele  Bachmann should answer it.

It might look like CAIR, the Council on American Islamic Relations,  which sent a nasty letter to Bachmann concerning her comments about Ms.  Abedin. CAIR’s executive director, Nihad Awad, wrote, “We remain  eternally grateful that, like Sen. Joseph McCarthy before you, your  power is limited, enumerated, and constrained by our nation’s  constitution.”

According to The Global Muslim Brotherhood Daily Report (GMBDR), “an  intelligence digest covering developments in the worldwide Muslim  Brotherhood network,” documents released in the 2007 Holy Land trial in  Dallas, in which federal prosecutors brought charges against the Holy  Land Foundation for funding Hamas and other “Islamic terrorist  organizations,” revealed the founders and current leadership of CAIR  were part of the Palestine Committee of the Muslim Brotherhood. A recent  post on the GMBDR website discussed an interview with the deputy leader  of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, in which he confirms a relationship  between his organization and CAIR.

Investigative research posted by the GMBDR “has determined that CAIR had  its origins in the U.S. Hamas infrastructure and CAIR and its leaders  have a long history of defending almost all individuals accused of  terrorism by the U.S. government, frequently calling such prosecutions a  ‘war on Islam.’”

In 2009, according to GMBDR, a U.S. federal judge ruled, “The government  has produced ample evidence to establish the associations of CAIR, ISNA  (Islam in North America), and NAIT (North American Islamic Trust) with  (Holy Land Foundation), the Islamic Association for Palestine, and with  Hamas.”

This is what infiltration looks like.

Government and media elites may not like to hear it from Rep. Bachmann,  but suppose her concerns are valid? If people are uncomfortable with  her, they can listen to Tony Blair. All ties between Americans and  Islamic extremist groups need further and serious investigation.

Read more here.

Top Ten Things Obama Has Not Released

By Joel B. Pollak via Breitbart

As the Obama campaign and the media continue to press Mitt Romney to release more of his tax returns, and to suggest–without a shred of evidence–that he is a “felon,” it is worth noting how much critical information Barack Obama has withheld from view–both as a candidate in 2008, and during his term in office. Here is a Breitbart News top ten list of things that Obama has refused to release (a complete list would fill volumes):

10. State senate papers. In the 2008 primary, Obama criticized Hillary Clinton for not releasing papers from her eight years time as First Lady–but failed to produce any papers from his eight years in Springfield. “They could have been thrown out,” he said.

9. Academic transcripts. His supposed academic brilliance was a major selling point, but Obama (by his own admission) was a mediocre student. His GPA at Occidental was a B-plus at best, and his entering class at Columbia was weak. Can he prove his merit?

8. Book proposal. Obama’s literary agent claimed he was “born in Kenya”–for sixteen years. His original book proposal exists–biographer David Maraniss refers to it–and seems to have embellished other key details of his life. Yet it has never been released.

7. Medical records. In 2000, and again (briefly) in 2008, GOP presidential candidate Sen. John McCain released thousands of pages of his medical records. Obama, who had abused drugs and continued smoking, merely provided a one-page doctor’s note.

6. Small-dollar donors. In 2008, the McCain campaign released the names of donors who had contributed less than $200, though it was not required to do so. But the Obama campaign refused, amidst accusations it had accepted illegal foreign contributions.

5. The Khalidi tape. In 2003, Obama attended a party for his good friend, the radical Palestinian academic Rashid Khalidi. The event featured incendiary anti-Israel rhetoric. The LA Times broke the story, but has refused to release the tape–and so has Obama.

4. The real White House guest list. Touting its transparency, the Obama White House released its guest logs–but kept many visits secret, and moved meetings with lobbyists off-site. It also refused to confirm the identities of visitors like Bertha Lewis of ACORN.

3. Countless FOIA requests. The Obama administration has been described as “the worst” ever in complying with Freedom of Information Act requests for documents. It has also punished whistleblowers like David Walpin, who exposed cronyism in Americorps.

2. Health reform negotiations. Candidate Obama promised that health care reform negotiations would be televised on C-SPAN. Instead, there were back-room deals woth millions with lobbyists and legislators–the details of which are only beginning to emerge.

1. Fast and Furious documents. After months of stonewalling Congress, Attorney General Eric Holder asked President Obama to use executive privilege to conceal thousands of documents related to the deadly scandal–and Obama did just that.

In addition to the above, Obama and his campaign have lied about many facts about his past–his membership in the New Party; his extensive connections with ACORN; and his continued relationship with domestic terrorist Bill Ayers and Jeremiah Wright, among other examples. Obama’s own memoir is filled with fabrications. And now he is lying about his opponent’s honorable record in business. He–and the media–have no shame.

For more click here.

Hillary Clinton Urges Muslims To ‘Not Pay Attention’ To Republicans

Published in Fox News

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton suggested Sunday she may have been less  than diplomatic when she told an audience in Tunisia to “not pay attention” to  the rhetoric coming from the Republican presidential primary race. But she  doesn’t take back the gist of her comments.

Speaking Saturday in the first country to undergo the transformation of the  “Arab Spring,” the nation’s top diplomat was answering a question from an  audience member who asked how Arabs can trust candidates on both sides who “run  toward the Zionist lobbies to get their support in the states. And afterward,  once they are elected, they come to show their support for countries like  Tunisia and Egypt.”

Without addressing the audience member’s question about supporting the Arab  “enemy,” Clinton, who was vanquished by Obama in the 2008 Democratic primary,  said that Tunisians will learn as their democracy grows that “a lot of things  are said in political campaigns that should not bear a lot of attention.”

“There are comments made that certainly don’t reflect the United States,  don’t reflect our foreign policy, don’t reflect who we are as a people. I mean,  if you go to the United States, you see mosques everywhere, you see  Muslim-Americans everywhere. That’s the fact. So I would not pay attention to  the rhetoric,” Clinton said.

She then added that the audience should “watch what President Obama says and  does.”

“He’s our president. He represents all of the United States, and he will be  reelected president, so I think that that will be a very clear signal to the  entire world as to what our values are and what our president believes,” she  said, adding that she is sometimes “a little surprised that people around the  world pay more attention to what is said in our political campaigns than most  Americans.”

“So I think you have to shut out some of the rhetoric and just focus on what  we’re doing and what we stand for, and particularly what our president  represents,” Clinton said.

Clinton, whose post is supposed to be non-political, acknowledged Sunday that  her comments may have been overly exuberant.

“Probably my enthusiasm for the president got a little out of hand,” Clinton  told CNN when asked about the remarks, claiming that her remarks stem only from  wanting what’s best for the country.

Clinton said sometimes her political juices get  flowing and she needs to rein them in.

“I tried to dampen them down, get them taken out in  a blood transfusion, but they occasionally rear their ugly heads,” she said,  adding that the comments on the campaign trail don’t represent America.

“I know what happens in campaigns. I’ve been there,  done that, and I know that things are said that are not going to be put into  practice or policy,” she said. “I did think I needed to point that out to the  audience.”

Clinton’s partisan remarks, made after the president  this week was criticized for apologizing to Afghanistan’s president over the  unintentional mishandling of Korans by U.S. military personnel, are the third  this week from the administration declaring that Obama will win  reelection.

In an interview that aired Thursday, Obama stated in  a Univision interview that he will have “five more years” in office.   White House spokesman Josh Earnest followed that on Friday during the daily  press briefing, saying the president “will win.”

For more information click here.