A president not a potentate

From the Warning Signs of Alan Caruba at Facts-not-Fantasy

Know the Warning Signs From Alan Caruba at Facts-not-Fantasy

In 2010, before the midterm elections, President Obama said, “We’re gonna punish our enemies and we’re gonna reward our friends.”

Instead, it was the Democratic Party that got punished as voters rejected its candidates, rendering it some of its biggest losses since the Great Depression. The Republican Party gained 63 seats in the House of Representatives, recapturing the majority, the largest seat change since 1948.

In November 2014, the voters gave complete control of Congress to Republicans for the first time in eight years as they retained every one of the GOP Senate seats up for reelection and added six more to ensure a Republican majority.

What was apparent before the 2010 election and since has been a President who regards himself and his powers as that of a potentate, a monarch scornful of the Congress in the same way English kings scorned their parliament until forced to relinquish total power and grant individual freedom to their subjects.

In the twenty-two months before Obama’s second and final term ends, I am, I confess, increasingly fearful of what he has in mind for America. The voters have already made it clear they oppose his gun control efforts, his views on illegal immigration and they want ObamaCare repealed.

As this is written, Americans are growing increasingly concerned over the outcome of the negotiations with Iran. Obama’s chief of staff, Denis McDonough, has written to Bob Corker (R-TN), the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, harshly criticizing the notion that the Senate should have anything to say regarding the negotiations and suggesting that Obama has the authority to lift the sanctions imposed by Congress on Iran. He doesn’t.

A White House that believes it has powers that a simple reading of the Constitution tells them are limited is dangerous place. Obama’s White House has been gaining a reputation for lawlessness and we have seen this in the way the IRS denied conservative groups the right to tax-exempt status to which they were entitled. Then, not so mysteriously, the emails that would reveal this were “lost.”

In the wake of the Benghazi tragedy in which our ambassador and three other staff were killed on September 12, 2012—the anniversary of the attack on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon—the emails of the then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have gone missing along with all the rest of those wiped clean from her personal server. I still recall seeing her stand beside the President when he blatantly lied to Americans and the world that the attack was the result of a video no one had ever seen.

Facts-not-Fantasy

In his book, “Our Lost Constitution: The Willful Subversion of America’s Founding Document”, by Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) he devotes a chapter to the Fourth Amendment:

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probably cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the

place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

Colonial Americans had watched a famous case in England in which John Wilkes had led the fight to ensure that the King could no longer arbitrarily search and seize the property of anyone.

They had fought a Revolution to be free of such tyranny. In the effort to secure the ratification of the Constitution, in 1789 James Madison began drafting the Bill of Rights that several of the states said had to be part of the Constitution if they were to ratify it. It was introduced to the First Congress that same year.

Sen. Lee expresses concern that “for the past eight years, the federal government has relied on an excessively broad interpretation of an excessively broad provision of the USA Patriot Act to collect and, in some circumstances, search through vast amounts of information that most Americans would consider both private and entirely unrelated to national security.”

Noting the intelligence agencies such as the National Security Agency that routinely gather enormous information about all our electronic communications, telephone calls and email, Sen. Lee says that “One could argue, however, that that far greater threat to government of the people, by the people, and for the people is the near certainty that those who wield this power will eventually use it to identify and punish anyone whom may disagree with them. This type of abuse could weaken or even destroy constitutionally limited government as we know it.”

That’s what has me worried specifically about Barack Obama. I have no doubt at all that he would and probably has used the vast information gathering capacity at his disposal to “punish” those he regards his enemies.

Consider what he did to Iraq War hero Gen. David Petraeus who he had appointed as Director of the CIA. He drove him from that post and threatened him with jail for an infraction that likely was discovered by monitoring his private communications.

By contrast, Hillary Clinton’s email server was, according to intelligence experts, likely hacked to the point where our enemies knew exactly what she and the State Department was doing. And she wants to be your next President.

My ultimate concern is that Obama might declare martial law for whatever spurious reason he would give. It would suspend the Constitution and leave us with no rights at all, subject to arrest for resisting his takeover of the nation. It would also mobilize the largest army in the world…America’s hunters and gun owners!

Obama has been working to federalize police authorities around the nation. He has purged the military of any officer that was deemed to disagree with his policies. All that stands between us and him is the Constitution and Congress. And the fact that millions of Americans, thanks to the Second Amendment, are armed in the event he tries to assert dictatorial powers.

______________________________________________

Become a Truth Serum Partner Now

Money trail reveals Islamist U.S. influence

Money trail reveals Islamist influence in American policy from the files of Allen B. West

Follow the Islamist Money Trail

I’m often asked how it is and why it is that Islamists have such a strong influence on American policy. The answer to that question is simple: follow the money. Here’s a perfect example.

As reported by the Algemeiner, “Questions are emerging over possible conflicts-of-interest after The New York Times highlighted Qatari funding for U.S. think tanks, including the Brookings Institute, employer of former U.S. envoy Martin Indyk, who was directly involved in recent negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians.

“Qatar, the small but wealthy Middle East nation, agreed last year to make a $14.8 million, four-year donation to Brookings, which has helped fund a Brookings affiliate in Qatar and a project on United States relations with the Islamic world,” according to The Times.”

If you follow the money on the campuses of many U.S .colleges and universities, you’ll find many Middle Eastern studies programs are benefactors of Saudi Arabia funding — as well as many of the mosques built in America.

But what is most disturbing about Qatar is that it is the major funding source for the Islamic terrorist group Hamas. As a matter of fact, the leader of Hamas, Khaled Meshaal, resides not in Gaza but in Qatar. Hamas chief Meshaal said on Aug 21, that “Our relationship with Qatar is not new… We appreciate Qatar’s stand, the brave political stand of its government and people,” after a meeting with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas.

“Qatar’s support is not just for Hamas movement, the country extends its support to all the Palestinian people,” Meshaal said, according to local media.

And to whom did President Barack Hussein Obama release the five senior Taliban unlawful enemy combatants? Yes, to the Qataris. Let us not forget the infamous statement by Nancy Pelosi that “Hamas is a humanitarian organization” because that is what the Qataris told her.

During the recent conflagration between Israel and Hamas, it was U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry who sat with Qatar and Turkey — instead of Egypt — two Islamist supporting states, to “secure” a ceasefire on behalf of Hamas. And it was a ceasefire agreement, which Hamas broke, that resulted in Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu chiding Obama to “never second guess me again.”

We shared with you here that the recent bombings in Libya by the UAE and Egypt came as Qatar provides more support to Islamic terrorists in that neighboring country — as Qatar colludes with the Muslim Brotherhood. So why with all this hard evidence are the Qataris allowed to influence an American think tank?

Most disturbing, according to a report in the UK-based Telegraph, “both Qatar and Kuwait were singled out for openly, and even avidly, aiding fundraising efforts for ISIS terrorists who are currently engaged in fierce clashes with the Syrian army alongside Israel on the Golan Heights.” We’ve known Qatar is supporting ISIS for quite sometime. I suppose if Obama were to read his daily intel briefs, he’d know as well.

If it were up to me, I would cease all diplomatic relations with Qatar and expel their representatives from the U.S. I would shut down Al Uided AB outside of Doha. And I would ban all Qatar Airlines flights from entering the U.S. Any Qatari assets in the U.S. would be frozen — heck, I’d use those assets for debt reduction.

It will be interesting to see if this is a part of the Obama strategy on defeating ISIS he’ll announce on Wednesday, I know, never gonna happen under this Obama Islamist sympathetic administration. We can hope, but nothing will change.

Algemeiner says “in July, then-Israeli President Shimon Peres told United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, who was visiting the region, that Israel would not stand by while Qatar continued to finance Hamas militants. In his last full day in office, Peres, a historically dovish leader, struck a defiant tone in a statement delivered to the media after meeting Ban at the President’s Residence, in Jerusalem.

“Qatar does not have the right to send money for rockets and tunnels which are fired at innocent civilians,” Peres said. “Their funding of terror the must stop.”

However, I don’t believe the UN Secretary-General would give any heed to what Peres stated since Newsweek‘s Benny Avni reported that the Qatari government also paid for the UN Secretary-General’s flight through the Middle East at the time — where his first stop was Doha, where he denounced Israel’s Operation Protective Edge.

Should the Brookings Institute — a left-leaning policy think tank — return the millions of dollars it has received from Qatar? Yes, if not, it should be viewed as an agent of Hamas operating here in the United States. It is unconscionable that such a blatant conflict of interest would be allowed to occur.

Even more disconcerting, we have willingly allowed our enemies to fund their vile terrorist aims right here in America — and the frontline advocacy group for the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas in America is the Council for American Islamic Relations (CAIR) who has a posh office building right near Capitol Hill.

This sucks.