Obama’s parting lie

Serial liars, like serial arsonists or serial wife-beaters, have a compulsion that frequently cannot be suppressed. Such is the case with Hillary Rodham Clinton, as is the case with Barack Hussein Obama, former president.

From the NationalReview.com:

Obama’s Final Whopper as President

by John Fund

He claimed that other countries don’t have voter-ID laws, though many do.

President Obama is known for telling some whoppers — “If you like your health care plan, you can keep it” is perhaps the most infamous – so it shouldn’t surprise anyone that he told a final one as president right before leaving office last week.

At his final press conference, Obama promised that he would continue to fight voter-ID laws and other measures designed to improve voting integrity. The U.S. is “the only country among advanced democracies that makes it harder to vote,” he claimed. “It traces directly back to Jim Crow and the legacy of slavery, and it became sort of acceptable to restrict the franchise. . . . This whole notion of election-voting fraud, this is something that has constantly been disproved. This is fake news.”

Okay, stop right there. I have, just on my blog, example after example after example, many on video, of blatant examples of voter fraud. I haven’t even referenced the James O’Keefe Project Veritas voter fraud videos. So just stop, Obama.

But you can’t. You don’t have it in you. You are mentally incapable of telling the truth. Your Brain Housing Group simply isn’t wired that way.

The argument over whether or not there is voter fraud will rage on, in part because the Obama administration has spent eight years blocking states from gaining access to federal lists of non-citizen and other possibly illegal voters. Even so, there is abundant evidence that voter fraud is easy to commit. The Heritage Foundation’s website contains hundreds of recent examples of people convicted of stealing votes.

Voter fraud, thy name is California. I wrote that, in my estimation, Hillary Clinton was able to win the popular vote simply because of the existence of California. Further, that a massive amount of votes for HRC resulted from illegals having access to and taking advantage of voting in California.

But Obama’s first statement — that the U.S. is unique in trying to enforce ballot integrity — is demonstrably false.

All industrialized democracies — and most that are not — require voters to prove their identity before voting. Britain was a holdout, but last month it announced that persistent examples of voter fraud will require officials to see passports or other documentation from voters in areas prone to corruption.

Idea: use this article for reference when an uninformed Leftist begins the standard Jim Crow argument against voter ID. Or you can show them this video:

Please note: all the Caucasoids are ignorant and biased.

BZ

 

Let the silencing of free speech commence

freedom-of-speechBecause, after all, you didn’t think it would stop at the internet, did you?

Silly person.

From the WashingtonExaminer.com:

FEC Dems lay groundwork to ban Fox, WSJ political coverage

by Paul Bedard

In their biggest threat yet to conservative media, Democrats on the Federal Election Commission are laying the groundwork to bar companies with even the tiniest foreign ownership from American politics, a move that could ban Fox, the Wall Street Journal and even the New York Times from covering political races or giving endorsements.

In a last-minute submission Wednesday, a top Democrat on the evenly split FEC proposed that the Thursday meeting of the commission begin the process to prohibit companies with foreign ownership as small as 5 percent “from funding expenditures, independent expenditures, or electioneering communications.”

Democratic Commissioner Ellen Weintraub

Stop right there. Note: “Democratic Commissioner Ellen Weintraub.”

said in her submission, “Given everything we have learned this year, it blinks reality to suggest that that there is no risk of foreign nationals taking advantage of current loopholes to intercede invisibly in American elections. This is a risk no member of the Federal Election Commission should be willing to tolerate.”

Under Weintraub’s proposal, entities that reach her foreign ownership target would conceivably be banned from advocating for a candidate’s election or defeat.

Right. It’s okay if we sell most anything to foreign nationals but the precious press — it must be protected so that it may continue to be the pure, unvarnished and unbiased agent for the Left that it was and is. The Leftist bent of the American Media Maggots cannot be diverted for any reason. So, we’ll simply make up as much specious shite as possible since we already recognize the internet has been compromised.

Several media giants have at least 5 percent foreign ownership, some with as much as 25 percent. Included is News Corp, which owns Fox, the New York Post and the Wall Street Journal. The New York Times also has foreign ownership, as do many politically active firms like Ben & Jerry’s.

Oh no. American ice cream has been tainted by foreign ownership.

That prohibition could include Fox commentator Sean Hannity or Wall Street Journal editorials. And, according to one analysis, because foreign nationals also are prohibited from making electioneering communications, those media would not even be able to mention Donald Trump or Hillary Rodham Clinton, even if just covering them.

Democrats on the commission have been on a three-year campaign to limit the voice of conservative media, stopped by Republican commissioners who have warned that the First Amendment is under attack in the FEC.

Let us not forget that roughly two months ago the DNC was hacked and America learned the DNC was helping CBS to create the poll questions in a bias of clear and obvious proportions.

No. I’m not making this up.

Leftists, Demorats and Progressives really do wish to silence you — unless your speech, writings, opinions and thoughts are completely congruent with theirs. They will brook no opposition, no pushback, not even discussion.

The First Amendment is being attacked, openly, nakedly, right in front of our eyes, hiding in plain sight, because — guess who? — isn’t covering much of it at all.

This is orchestrated, this is purposeful, this is organized, this is an assault on your freedoms and my freedoms. Just wait a few minutes; the FCC will be piling on any moment now in the same manner.

America, are you listening? Are you seeing? Are you comprehending?

I fear you are asleep.

BZ

 

States’ suit in re ICANN: shot DOWN by OBAMA federal judge

free-speech-eliminatedA federal US District Court judge in the Southern District of Texas — nominated by Barack Hussein Obama on January 7th of 2015 — has denied an emergency request by Arizona, Texas, Oklahoma and Nevada to stay the relinquishment of ICANN control from the US to a globalist body.

Transfer now occurs at midnight.

From UPI.com:

Judge rejects plea from states to stop U.S. from giving up control of Internet

by Allen Cone and Doug G. Ware

GALVESTON, Texas, Sept. 30 (UPI) — A federal judge on Friday rejected a last-ditch effort by four states to stop the U.S. government from handing over control of the Internet to an international body when the calendar turns to Saturday.

Judge George Hanks, Jr., of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas denied an emergency request by the states — Arizona, Texas, Oklahoma and Nevada — for a temporary restraining order to interrupt the handover, which was scheduled for midnight Friday.

Attorneys general from the states filed the lawsuit Wednesday.

And there you have it. Your First Amendment protections on the internet surrendered not with a bang, but with a whimper.

The lawsuit argued that the states “will lose the predictability, certainty, and protections that currently flow from federal stewardship of the Internet and instead be subjected to ICANN’s unchecked control.”

The suit says Obama’s plan to hand over control of the Internet is an illegal transfer of U.S. government property and that it requires congressional approval.

Your grand and glorious Congress had its chance to intervene but decided — mehnot to.

No one forced us to do this. The United States was not under pressure to do so. The US was not sued in some globalist court in order to acquire this result.

It was the decision of one man.

Judge Hanks, however, ruled Friday that the plaintiffs failed to prove that irreparable harm would result from the handover and denied the injunction — clearing the way for the transfer to occur at midnight Friday.

And transfer it will.

BZ

 

US surrenders internet control for NO purpose

obama-internet-icannAnd the crunch day is today.

From Yahoo.com:

US prepares to cede key role for internet

by Rob Lever

Washington (AFP) – The US government is set to cut the final thread of its oversight of the internet, yielding a largely symbolic but nevertheless significant role over the online address system.

Barring any last-minute glitches, the transition will occur at midnight Friday (0400 GMT Saturday), when the US contract expires for the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, which manages the internet’s so-called “root zone.”

When the agreement with the US Commerce Department runs out, ICANN will become a self-regulating non-profit international entity managing the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority, the system for online “domains” such as .com.

US and ICANN officials say the change is part of a longstanding plan to “privatize” those functions, but some critics complain about a “giveaway” that could threaten the internet’s integrity.

That’s putting it mildly.

Let’s listen to Senator Ted Cruz:

Then, let’s watch Senator Ted Cruz with ICANN CEO and President Goran Marby regarding ICANN in the Judiciary Subcommittee:

Is it just me, or does Mr Marby veritably reek of dripping condescension, equivocation, superiority and aloofness? Yes. It’s just me.

To whom are we ceding, essentially, control of the internet? From Breitbart.com:

Meet the New Authoritarian Masters of the Internet

by John Hayward

President Barack Obama’s drive to hand off control of Internet domains to a foreign multi-national operation will give some very unpleasant regimes equal say over the future of online speech and commerce.

Let the massive significance of that paragraph roil around in the fetid recesses of your brainulus for a bit.

Equal. Say.

I wonder: what other nation possesses a First Amendment? Oh. That’s right: no other.

In fact, they are likely to have much more influence than America, because they will collectively push hard for a more tightly controlled Internet, and they are known for aggressively using political and economic pressure to get what they want.

Consider: Russia, China, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Turkey — all countries that have either already censored, taken down or negatively impacted the internet on numerous occasions. To them, uncensored speech is a danger and not a core freedom.

The rest of the world, taken in total, is very interested in suppressing various forms of expression, for reasons ranging from security to political stability and religion. Those governments will never be comfortable, so long as parts of the Internet remain outside of their control. They have censorship demands they consider very reasonable, and absolutely vital. The website you are reading right now violates every single one of them, on a regular basis.

As does my blog. There are already persons in the United States who believe I should not be able to write what I write here. That I should need a “license to blog” and that I and others should be forced to operate under the former FCC “fairness doctrine” which had no fairness attached whatsoever. If you wish to take down my blog you’ll certainly not care for my upcoming radio show on SHR Media.

As my headline indicates, the US under Barack Hussein Obama has determined to surrender control of ICANN and turn it over to a conglomeration of interests that have a history of little or no interest in free speech.

That begs the question: why? Why, indeed. This is another in a continuing series of capitulist, surrender-monkey moves where the United States, under Obama, manages to give away power and control under the guise of “negotiation” for little if anything in return; witness Guantanamo, witness Bergdahl, witness Iran.

For the answer we must, in my opinion, hearken back to Obama’s formative years under, literally, Communists (“Communism is not love.  Communism is a hammer which we use to crush the enemy.” -Mao), Muslims and Socialists. Mr Obama was taught that America’s “colonialist ways” have damaged the entire planet and, for that, we must atone.

This country, the United States of America, shames Mr Barack Hussein Obama. There is little, in his mind, of which to be proud. Hence, his endless hammering on the various wedges that divide our country. Mr Obama has become and is the Divider-In-Chief.

From Obama’s spiritual advisor Pastor Jeremiah Wright, to his mentor (and co-author) Bill Ayers, to his idols Saul Alinsky, Richard Clower, Frances Fox Piven, Che Guevara and more.

Atonement, you see, now comes in the form of Mr Obama purposefully attempting to minimize the role America plays around the globe — leading from behind, if you will. He believes you are lazy. On this one I must agree, but with the appellation applied to those generational parasites sucking Free Cheese from my American Taxpayer vein. Odd, coming from a person who has built nothing in his life, managed not one payroll or even started a lemonade stand.

Obama is weakening our defenses. He is weakening the defenses of our allies. Mr Obama is dismissed as a buffoon by our enemies, Russia, China, North Korea, much of the Middle East, because they realize he is a true Paper Tiger and means little of what he says, particularly at this juncture. He emboldens our enemies and undermines our allies.

It is no shock, therefore, that he continues in the fine capitulist tradition he began in 2008.

To the most free internet you’ll see in this lifetime, wave “buh-bye.”

There are no existential threats” to the US today, Mr Obama says.

Except himself.

BZ

 

Obama LIES about Iran hostages RANSOM

Shocked, anyone?  (BZ looks around for shocked faces, sees none.)

Barack Hussein Obama LIES AGAIN.

This time it is about the literal pallet of cash flown to Iran.

For background, please see my story here about the original ransom payout.

That is what State Department spokeman John Kirby said Thursday.

As the NYPost.com writes:

State Dept.: $400M to Iran was contingent on US prisoners’ release

by Daniel Halper

The State Department admitted Thursday that the US would not hand over $400 million in cash to Iran until it released four American hostages — two weeks after President Obama insisted the payment was not a “ransom.”

State Department spokesman John Kirby was asked at Thursday’s press briefing: “In basic English, you’re saying you wouldn’t give them $400 million in cash until the prisoners were released, correct?”

“That’s correct,” Kirby replied.

Here, Barack Hussein Obama insists that no ransom was paid.

In an Aug. 4 press conference, President Obama said the opposite.

“We do not pay ransom. We didn’t here, and we won’t in the future,” the president told reporters, speaking of the Jan. 17 payment and hostage release.

Mr Obama, as you may recall, got on his high horse and cast wave after wave of righteous indignation onto those who dared question His Royal Highness about the incident.  How dare he be second-guessed?

Here is John Kirby also stating that no ransom was paid.  It was all a random coinky-dink.

We may conclude two clear things:

  1. John Kirby is a LIAR.  Therefore most everything presented officially by the State Department is likely a lie as well, and
  2. Barack Hussein Obama is a LIAR.  But we knew that already because of the following video — but only as one instance.  There are scores more.

One of the released hostages specifically said:

“I just remember the night at the airport sitting for hours and hours there, and I asked police, ‘Why are you not letting us go?’ ” Abedini said. “He said, ‘We are waiting for another plane so if that plane doesn’t come, we never let [you] go.’ ”

I wrote in my original post about Obama’s payment of $400 million dollars to Iran:

Also, that is completely exclusive of the fact that, unless one wants to embolden hostage-takers, villains, dictators and criminals, a country or an entity or an individual should never pay a ransom because — obviously, due to the nature of criminals — the hostage-taking will not stop.  It merely proves that the act of hostage-taking is productive.

Further, that cash will be used in furtherance of one thing: terrorist acts against Muslims and against the West.  Violence, death, chaos and carnage.

Now that the LIE is out and it is obvious and it is naked and blatant, let’s see how the Obama Media LapdogAmerican Media Maggots address the situation — other than, perhaps, doing their level best to sweep the situation under the media rug.

BZ