Category Archives: Secretary of State

Hillary Clinton email coverup is Vince Foster deja vu, Canada Free Press nails it, Cohesive strategy smoke and mirrors public relations trick, Investigators told what they want them to know

Hillary Clinton email coverup is Vince Foster deja vu, Canada Free Press nails it, Cohesive strategy smoke and mirrors public relations trick, Investigators told what they want them to know

“The only question that remains today is whether or not Hillary Clinton gets away with another cover-up, like she did in the Vince Foster case, and runs for President in 2016, or will she finally be held accountable, and Americans learn the truth about the Benghazi terrorist attack?”…Canada Free Press December 18, 2012

“Who benefited most from the suicide/murder of Orlando Jones?
Who benefited most from the murder of Donald Young?
Who benefited most from the murder of Lt. Quarles Harris Jr.?
Who benefited most from the suicide/murder of Christopher Kelly?
Who benefited most from the murder of Bill Gwatney?
Who benefited most from the death/murder of Andrew Breitbart?
And now
Loretta Fuddy?”…Citizen Wells

Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.”…George Orwell, “1984”

 

Many thanks to Canada Free Press for this great article from December 18, 2012.

“The Fix is in: Hillary’s Benghazi cover-up—like Vince Foster death investigation”

“Recall how it was Clinton who was one of the first top Obama administration officials to mislead the public by falsely blaming a YouTube video for the deadly attack. President Barack Obama, U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice and White House Press Secretary James Carney towed-the-line and repeated the same falsehood knowing it would be reported as the truth by the media.”

“What you witnessed from the Obama-Clinton regime is called “cohesive strategy.” We have seen that cover-up tactic before. It was successfully used by the Clinton White House during the investigations of the Clinton era as documented in The Whistleblower: How the Clinton White Stayed in Power to Reemerge in the Obama White House and on the World Stage. Additionally, it notably appears in my latest book, Following Orders: The Death of Vince Foster, Clinton White House Lawyer. Cohesive strategy is a smoke and mirrors public relations trick where the White House tells Americans and investigators what they want them to know as opposed to what really happened, and how their scripted version becomes the so-called truth, the ‘talking points,’ the narrative picked up by the media.

It was on July 20, 1993 when Vince Foster, President Bill Clinton’s childhood friend and Hillary Clinton’s closest White House confidante, was found dead of an apparent self-inflicted gunshot wound in the head in Fort Marcy Park, Virginia. Before a preliminary investigation began, Americans were told by White House officials and President Clinton that Vince Foster committed suicide in Fort Marcy Park, nobody saw it coming, and it would remain a “mystery”—the cohesive strategy crafted in Hillary’s White House counsel’s office. Clinton Press Secretary Dee Dee Myers even stated: “the Park Service Police is the only agency that’s investigating [Vince Foster’s death], and that the objective of their search is simply to determine that it was a suicide.”

The fix was in. The objective of the investigation into Vince Foster’s death, the highest ranking government official’s death since President John Kennedy was assassinated, was “simply to determine that it was a suicide [emphasis mine].” The conclusion was predetermined. The cohesive strategy stuck as “truth” and they got away with it. Homicide, foul play, the possibility of blackmail, a potential risk to America’s national security, was never investigated. No need for the Clinton White House to cooperate with investigators or the media. They didn’t. Case closed. Move on….

And now Hillary Clinton and the Obama White House are following the same cover-up playbook in Benghazi.”

“During the Foster death investigations, like Benghazi, investigators were also thwarted, stonewalled, and unable to perform their jobs. Hillary denied them “unfettered” access to Foster’s office, and some evidence was contaminated or outright withheld (despite being subpoenaed). The initial investigation was at best—shoddy.”

Read more:

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/51811

 

AL Supreme Court McInnish V Chapman, Justice Bolin concurrence opinion flawed, Status quo tradition and pass the buck, States control presidential election to electoral certification, Qualified candidates on ballot

AL Supreme Court McInnish V Chapman, Justice Bolin concurrence opinion flawed, Status quo tradition and pass the buck, States control presidential election to electoral certification, Qualified candidates on ballot

“Why has Obama, since taking the White House, used Justice Department Attorneys, at taxpayer expense,  to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells

“Moore said he’s seen no convincing evidence that Obama is a “natural born citizen” and a lot of evidence that suggests he is not.”…Judge Roy Moore interview by WND

“Why does a judge swear to discharge his duties agreeably to the
constitution of the United States, if that constitution forms no
rule for his government? if it is closed upon him, and cannot be
inspected by him?”… Marbury versus Madison

 

 

I still do not know how to take the concurrence opinion from Justice Bolin in the AL Supreme Court McInnish V Chapman decision.

It is still a bit surreal.

On the one hand, Justice Bolin agrees that the disired result is qualified candidates with any difficiencies discovered by the state. I.E. an ounce of
prevention is worth a pound of cure. He also states that the Alabama legislature should pass laws to facilitate this.

On the other hand, he (in sync with most of the nation) passes the buck, abrogating the responsibility of the state of AL to place a qualified candidate on
the ballot. This is in direct contradiction to the US Constitution as well as federal and state election laws. This is well clarified by Chief Justice Moore.

Most law school graduates are intelligent and take a rigorous course of study.

Perhaps all do not take logic 101.
I will address the “High spots” of what Justice Bolin wrote and why I believe that he erred.

Justice Bolin:

“I respectfully disagree with Chief Justice Moore’s dissent to the extent that it concludes that the Secretary of State presently has an affirmative duty to
investigate the qualifications of a candidate for President of the United States of America before printing that candidate’s name on the general-election
ballot in this State. I fully agree with the desired result; however, I do not agree that Alabama presently has a defined means to obtain it.”

The following AL election statute seems clear to me.

“Section 17-13-6

Only qualified candidates to be listed on ballots.

The name of no candidate shall be printed upon any official ballot used at any primary election unless such person is legally qualified to hold the office
for which he or she is a candidate and unless he or she is eligible to vote in the primary election in which he or she seeks to be a candidate and possesses
the political qualifications prescribed by the governing body of his or her political party.”

Justice Bolin:

“The evidence suggests that the Secretary of State had expressed to the plaintiffs and their representatives well prior to the primary and as early as February 2, 2012, that she had no duty to investigate the eligibility qualifications 3 of a presidential candidate. Barack Obama was nominated as
his party’s presidential candidate at the Democratic National Convention on September 5, 2012. For this election, ballots were required to be printed and delivered to the absentee election manager of each county by at least September 27, 2012. See § 17-11-12, Ala. Code 1975. The plaintiffs did not
file their petition challenging Barack Obama’s ballot access until October 11, 2012, approximately eight months after being apprised of the Secretary of State’s position that she had no affirmative duty to investigate and two weeks after the ballots were to be printed and delivered to the various
counties. The failure by the plaintiffs to at least file their petition challenging ballot access during the intervening time between Barack Obama’s nomination as his party’s presidential candidate and the time in which the ballots were due to be printed and delivered to the various counties constitutes, I believe, “inexcusable delay” on the part of the plaintiffs. The prejudice that would have ensued from such a late challenge, if successful, would have been
twofold: first, assuming it could have been accomplished from a practical standpoint, the reprinting and distribution of general-election ballots would have come, at that late date, at great financial cost to the State; and second, and just as important, the reprinted ballots would differ from absentee
ballots already sent to the members of our military and other citizens overseas. This would not be a proper way to conduct such an important election.”

Justice Bolin seems more concerned about a CYA for the Secretary of State than in upholding the constitution.

From the McInnish V Chapman Writ of Mandamus.

“13. On February 2,2072 Plaintiff MCINNISH, together with his attorney and others, visited the Office of the Secretaryo f State,a t which the Hon. Emily
Thompson,Deputy Secretaryo f State,speaking in the absence of and for the Secretary of State, s tated that her office would not investigate the legitimacy of
any candidate ,thus violating her duties under the U.S. and Alabama Constitutions.”

The AL Secretary of State’s office was forewarned.

If the AL Secretary of State had reacted in a responsible, constitutional way, minimally the Attorney General could have been consulted and simple steps
taken to remedy the situation. The plaintiffs were forced to file the Writ of Mandamus. The state of urgency was created by the state of AL. Justice Bolin
attempts to lay the blame on the plaintiffs.

None of the concerns Justice Bolin stated related to upholding the constitution.

“This would not be a proper way to conduct such an important election.”

What about the thousands of disenfranchised voters casting votes for a disqualified candidate?

Justice Bolin:

“Moving beyond the merits of the matter before us, and
with due regard to the vital importance to the citizenry of
the State of Alabama that the names of only properly qualified
candidates appear on a presidential-election ballot for
election to the highest office in our country, I write
specially to note the absence of a statutory framework that
imposes an affirmative duty upon the Secretary of State to
investigate claims such as the one asserted here, as well as
a procedure to adjudicate those claims. The right of a lawful
and proper potential candidate for President to have ballot
access must be tempered and balanced against a clear process
for removal of an unqualified candidate. Nothing in this
process should be left to guesswork, or, with all proper
respect, to unwritten policies of the Secretary of State, and
certainly not without a disqualified candidate having a clear
avenue for judicial review consistent with the time
constraints involved and due-process considerations.”

Nothing in this process should be left to guesswork ???

That is exactly the situation we had in 2008 and 2012. The states abrogating their responsibilities with the last check of checks and balances being the
certification of electoral votes by congress. Congress failed in their duty despite being notified.

Talk about guesswork!

Justice Bolin:

“The general duties and scope of the Secretary of State’s
office are codified in § 36-14-1 et seq., Ala. Code 1975.
Section 17-1-3, Ala. Code 1975, provides that the Secretary of
State is the chief elections official in the State and, as
such, shall provide uniform “guidance” for election
activities. It is, however, a nonjudicial office without
subpoena power or investigative authority or the personnel
necessary to undertake a duty to investigate a nonresident
candidate’s qualifications, even if such a duty could properly
be implied.”

What is his point? There were multiple avenues open to the Secretary of State. The AL Attorney General could have been queried and if necessary a
clarification from the courts. The Secretary of state “shall provide uniform ‘guidance'” and “Only qualified candidates to be listed on ballots.” Do your job
and let others do theirs. The common sense analogy is from the business world. Managers are responsible but delegate or refer tasks to the appropriate
personnel.

Justice Bolin:

“These sections, when read together, require only that the
Secretary of State certify and include on the general-election
ballot those presidential candidates who have been nominated
by their respective parties following that party’s national
convention and who are otherwise qualified to hold the office
of President. However, nothing in the express wording of
these statutory provisions imposes upon the Secretary of State
the duty to affirmatively investigate the qualifications of a
1120465
11
presidential candidate. Consistent with this conclusion is
Op. Att’y Gen. No. 1998-00200 (August 12, 1998), which states:
“The Secretary of State does not have an
obligation to evaluate all of the qualifications of
the nominees of the political parties and
independent candidates for state offices prior to
certifying such nominees and candidates to the
probate judges pursuant to [§ 17-9-3, Ala. Code
1975]. If the Secretary of State has knowledge
gained from an official source arising from the
performance of duties prescribed by law, that a
candidate has not met a certifying qualification,
the Secretary of State should not certify the
candidate.””

Bingo!

“If the Secretary of State has knowledge gained from an official source arising from the performance of duties prescribed by law, that a candidate has not
met a certifying qualification, the Secretary of State should not certify the candidate.”

He just made my point!

Justice Bolin:

“Rather, the Secretary of State contends that the task of ensuring a candidate’s qualifications is left to the leadership of that candidate’s respective political party, a less than ideal procedure for all challengers because of its partisan nature. See generally Knight v. Gray, 420 So. 2d 247
(Ala. 1982) (holding that the Democratic Party had the authority to hear pre-primary challenges to the political or legal qualifications of its candidates).”

Here is the common thread with most states. Tradition within and without state laws wields more power than it should. State officials are used to getting
their cues from political parties. This is written into state laws. However, political parties have no particular consititutional power or responsibility.

Justice Bolin:

“Courts in other states have tended to agree that the investigation of eligibility requirements of a particular candidate is best left to the candidate’s political party. In Keyes v. Bowen, 189 Cal. App. 4th 647, 117 Cal. Rptr. 3d 207 (2010), the plaintiffs brought an action against California’s
Secretary of State and others, alleging that there was reasonable doubt that President Obama was a natural-born citizen, as is required to become President of the United States (U.S. Const., Art. II, § 1) and that the Secretary of State had a ministerial duty to verify that President Obama met the constitutional qualifications for office before certifying him for inclusion on the ballot. The trial court entered a judgment against the plaintiffs, concluding that the
Secretary of State was required to see that state election laws were enforced, but that the plaintiffs had failed to identify a state election law imposing a duty upon the Secretary of State to demand documentary proof of birthplace from presidential candidates. Id. The plaintiffs appealed.”

He quotes a CA ruling (speaks for itself).
2 wrongs don’t make a right.

Finally lucidity and responsibility.

Justice Bolin:

“Looking forward, I would respectfully call upon the legislature to provide legislation that imposes this duty upon the Secretary of State and to give that office the authority and tools necessary to compel the compliance by a candidate, and that candidate’s party, upon penalty of disqualification.”

“However, it should not be necessary to rely on a post-election Congressional remedy if it can be proven before the election that the candidate is not qualified. The Secretary of State should have the written mandate to determine requisite qualifications, and a disqualified candidate should have a defined path of expedited judicial review.”

“There are obvious reasons why such post-election challenges would be undesirable. As Rick Hasen has argued in Beyond the Margin of Litigation, pre-election litigation is generally preferable to post-election litigation. It is generally better to resolve disputes before an election, allowing problems to be avoided in advance rather than putting courts in the difficult position of cleaning up the mess afterwards. This is particularly true in the context of a challenge to a presidential candidate’s qualifications. In the event that a candidate is deemed ineligible, the party could still put up a substitute.
“Of course, it is up to states–and, in particular, to state legislatures–to define the rights and remedies available in cases where a presidential candidate is alleged to be ineligible. There is certainly no constitutional requirement that the state provide either a pre-election remedy
(such as denial of ballot access) or a post-election remedy (like an order invalidating election results) for such disputes. But there remains no
constitutional bar to such state-law remedies. In fact, such remedies would seem to fall squarely within what Article II contemplates in leaving it to
state legislatures to define the manner by which presidential electors are appointed.”

Alabama Supreme Court ruling.

https://acis.alabama.gov/displaydocs.cfm?no=565288&event=40Y0LG67K

Obama Syria actions explained by Obama beholden to Saudis, Manchurian Candidate, Obama allegiance to Muslims, Syrian crisis diverts attention from Obama domestic problems

Obama Syria actions explained by Obama beholden to Saudis, Manchurian Candidate, Obama allegiance to Muslims, Syrian crisis diverts attention from Obama domestic problems

“The Central Intelligence Agency has been training rebels in Jordan under a covert program, and weapons that are to be sent to the opposition by the United States are expected to be funneled through Jordan, both of which might heighten the risk of Syrian retaliation, including against possible training areas.”

“Britain and France have also said there is convincing evidence that Syria has used chemical weapons, but neither they nor the United States have made their evidence public.”…NY Times June 15, 2013

“Khalid Al-Mansour was “raising money” for Obama.”

“Khalid Al-Mansour was trying to help Obama get into Harvard Law School.”…Percy Sutton

“Al Mansour said that he was determined to keep a low profile to avoid embarrassing Obama.”…NewsMax September 23, 2008

 

 

One thing is certain. Regardless of whether or not attention devoted to Syria and alleged chemical weapon use by the Assad regime was a designed diversion or not, it is diverting attention away from the American economy, job crisis and Obamacare problems.

A bigger issue at stake is what many of us began being concerned about in 2008 with Obama’s eligibility issues, natural born citizen deficiencies and allegiances.

Obama is definitely no Christian and whether or not he considers himself a Muslim, that is where most of his influence has come from.

Consider this straight from Obama’s mouth.

“I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.”…Barack Obama

The possibility of Obama being a Manchurian Candidate was also raised in 2008.

Exchange picked up by microphones between Obama and Russian President Dmitri Medvedev Monday, March 26, 2012.

Obama: “On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this, this can be solved but it’s important for him to give me space.”

Medvedev: “Yeah, I understand. I understand your message about space. Space for ”

Obama: “This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility.”

Medvedev: “I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir.”

Apparently Obama is beholden to Saudis for getting into Harvard and educational expenses.

ObamaBowsSaudiKing

From WND September 14, 2013.

“SAUDI TAIL WAGGING U.S. INTO WAR?”
“Powerful U.S. ally Saudi Arabia has been a driving force behind the scenes, pushing for the U.S. to act militarily in Syria.

The Saudis already have been secretly helping to fuel the insurgency to topple Syrian President Bashar al-Assad for the two years that the uprising has been going on. And it was reportedly the Saudi security services that alerted the U.S. to the first claim last February of a sarin gas attack by Assad’s regime.

And WND reported in October 2012 that Saudi Arabia was working with Qatar and Turkey to send weapons to the Syrian rebels.

Further, WND reported at the time that murdered U.S. ambassador Christopher Stevens served as a key contact with the Saudis to coordinate the recruitment by Saudi Arabia of Islamic fighters from North Africa and Libya. The jihadists were sent to Syria via Turkey to attack Assad’s forces, according to informed Middle Eastern security officials.

In a hearing last week, Secretary of State John Kerry said Arab countries have offered to pay for any U.S. military intervention in Syria.

Now the Wall Street Journal has detailed a massive Saudi lobbying effort to push the U.S. to act in Syria.

The Journal fingered Saudi Arabia’s ambassador to Washington, Adel al-Jubeir, as leading a campaign to convince Congress and the White House to expand the U.S. role in Syria.

The newspaper reported an original Saudi goal was to secure U.S. support to train the Syrian rebels at camps in Jordan.

The Saudis were apparently successful.”

 

“Is this what Syria war really about?

Is the reported willingness of Arab Gulf states to fund a U.S. military campaign in Syria really about major oil and gas interests that run through the country?

The potential for trillions of dollars of energy revenue in deals that snake through Syrian territory may be a motivating factor for the U.S., Russia, Turkey and Arab states in the current Syria crisis.

Syria is a key energy transit route to Europe. A number of countries appear to be seeking dominance of the energy market that runs through Syria.

Beside the prospect of its own gas field, Syria is also one of the most strategic locations for natural gas pipelines to flow to Europe.”

Read more:

http://www.wnd.com/2013/09/saudi-tail-wagging-u-s-into-war/

 

 

Secret Assad Forces have hidden chemical weapons throughout Syria, September 13, 2013, Elite Unit 450, 1000 metric tons of chemical and biological agents

Secret Assad Forces have hidden chemical weapons throughout Syria, September 13, 2013, Elite Unit 450, 1000 metric tons of chemical and biological agents

“I do not believe John Kerry is fit to be commander in chief of the armed forces of the United States. This is not a political issue. It is a matter of his judgement, truthfulness, reliability, loyalty, and trust–all absolute tenets of command.”…REAR ADMIRAL ROY F. HOFFMAN, USN (RETIRED)

“I didn’t like Obama from the beginning, I thought he was a hustler and I think he still is.”…Bartle Bull, long time Democrat and civil rights attorney

“And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed
–if all records told the same tale–then the lie passed into
history and became truth. “Who controls the past,” ran the
Party slogan, “controls the future: who controls the present
controls the past.”…George Orwell, “1984″

From Newsmax September 13, 2013.

“Secret Assad Forces Hiding Chemical Weapons”

“A secretive Syrian military unit has been moving stocks of poison gases and munitions to as many as 50 sites to make them harder for the U.S. to track, American and Middle Eastern officials said on Thursday.

The movements of chemical weapons by Syria’s elite Unit 450 could complicate any U.S. bombing campaign in Syria over its chemical attacks, the officials told The Wall Street Journal .

Further, the activity raises questions about the implementation of a Russian proposal that calls for the regime to surrender control of its stockpiles, they said.

The U.S. estimates Syrian President Bashar Assad’s regime has 1,000 metric tons of chemical and biological agents.

“That is what we know about,” a senior U.S. official told the Journal. “There might be more.”

U.S. and Israeli intelligence agencies said they still believe they know where most of the chemical weapons are located, but with less confidence than six months ago.”

“A division of the Syrian Scientific Studies and Research Center, Unit 450 manages the regime’s overall chemicals weapons program, according to the Journal. It has been moving the stocks around for months, officials and lawmakers briefed on the intelligence said.

Movements occurred as recently as last week, the officials told the Journal, after President Barack Obama said he was preparing to launch strikes.

The unit is in charge of mixing and deploying chemical munitions, and it provides security at chemical sites, according to U.S. and European intelligence agencies. It consists of officers from Assad’s Alawite sect.

One diplomat briefed on the unit told the Journal that it was Alawite from “janitor to commander.”

Meanwhile, U.S. military officials have investigated whether to gain influence over members of Unit 450 via inducements or threats.

“In a perfect world, you would actually like to co-opt that unit,” a senior U.S. military official told the Journal. “Who cares who pays them, as long as they sit on the chemical weapons?””

Read more:

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/assad-forces-hide-weapons/2013/09/12/id/525448

No proof Bashar Assad approved chemical attacks in Syria, US intelligence can’t prove Assad directly ordered, Rogue generals and rebels may control

No proof Bashar Assad approved chemical attacks in Syria, US intelligence can’t prove Assad directly ordered, Rogue generals and rebels may control

“I do not believe John Kerry is fit to be commander in chief of the armed forces of the United States. This is not a political issue. It is a matter of his judgement, truthfulness, reliability, loyalty, and trust–all absolute tenets of command.”…REAR ADMIRAL ROY F. HOFFMAN, USN (RETIRED)

“Testimony from victims strongly suggests it was the rebels, not the Syrian government, that used Sarin nerve gas during a recent incident in the revolution-wracked nation, a senior U.N. diplomat said Monday.

Carla del Ponte, a member of the U.N. Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Syria, told Swiss TV there were “strong, concrete suspicions but not yet incontrovertible proof,” that rebels seeking to oust Syrian strongman Bashar al-Assad had used the nerve agent.

But she said her panel had not yet seen any evidence of Syrian government forces using chemical weapons, according to the BBC, but she added that more investigation was needed.”…Washington Times, May 6, 2013

 
“I didn’t like Obama from the beginning, I thought he was a hustler and I think he still is.”…Bartle Bull, long time Democrat and civil rights attorney

Barack Obama and John Kerry have been pushing for an attack on Syria with no proof that the Assad Regime was behind the chemical attacks.

There is compelling evidence that the rebels have used chemical weapons.

Now we are negotiating with Bashar Assad to remove chemical weapons when in fact he may not control them and after any alleged chemical weapons are removed, they may remain in the hands of rogue generals and rebels.

From the Washington Times September 11, 2013.

“U.S. can’t prove Bashar Assad approved chemical attacks in Syria
Control of deadly weapons in question”

“U.S. intelligence has yet to uncover evidence that Syrian President Bashar Assad directly ordered the chemical attacks last month on civilians in a suburb of Damascus, though the consensus inside U.S. agencies and Congress is that members of Mr. Assad’s inner circle likely gave the command, officials tell The Washington Times.

The gap in the intelligence has raised debate in some corners of the wider intelligence community about whether Mr. Assad has full control of his war-weary Army and their arsenal of chemical missiles, which most likely would be treasured by terrorist groups known to be operating in Syria, said officials, who spoke only on the condition of anonymity because they were discussing intelligence matters.

“If there was a rogue general that did it on his own accord, that would be a bigger problem for Assad, because that would imply that he does not have control of his own weapons,” said one senior congressional source familiar with U.S. intelligence assessments on Syria.

Apart from concerns about weapons falling into the hands of such Sunni extremist and al Qaeda-linked groups as the al-Nusra Front, there are also concerns about serious hurdles now likely to lie ahead for the international community trying to assemble a special team to work with Mr. Assad on securing his chemical arsenal.

Some foreign policy insiders, meanwhile, said the lack of specific intelligence about who ordered the Aug. 21 chemical weapons attack is the main reason why top Obama administration officials — including the president himself — have in recent days carefully assigned blame to “Assad’s regime” rather than the Syrian leader personally.”

““As far as I know, there’s no intelligence that links [Mr. Assad] directly to the operation, so that does raise the question of command and control,” said Bruce Riedel, a former CIA officer who heads the Intelligence Project at the Brookings Institution in Washington.”

“What’s worse, he said, is that as international pressure mounts on Mr. Assad to comply with international specialists, there could be “Syrian military units and generals who believe keeping chemical weapons is their trump card and key to their survival.””

Read more:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/sep/11/us-cant-prove-bashar-assad-approved-chemical-attac/

Charlie Rose Bashar Assad interview, Assad claims faulty US intelligence, War will support Al Qaeda, Present what you have as evidence to the public Be transparent

Charlie Rose Bashar Assad interview, Assad claims faulty US intelligence, War will support Al Qaeda, Present what you have as evidence to the public Be transparent

“I do not believe John Kerry is fit to be commander in chief of the armed forces of the United States. This is not a political issue. It is a matter of his judgement, truthfulness, reliability, loyalty, and trust–all absolute tenets of command.”…REAR ADMIRAL ROY F. HOFFMAN, USN (RETIRED)

“I don’t oppose all wars,” “What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war.”…Obama, antiwar rally downtown Chicago October 2002

“Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.”…George Orwell, “1984″

From CBS News September 9, 2013.

“Assad says any U.S. strike on Syria “is going to support al Qaeda”‘
“In an exclusive interview with CBS News’ Charlie Rose, President Bashar Assad said he is “disappointed” in the Obama administration for pursuing a strike against Syria, claiming faulty intelligence and a foreign policy comparable with the policy of former President George W. Bush. He also said any U.S. involvement in Syria’s two-year-old civil war would only embolden America’s enemies.

At first offering a more tempered argument against a U.S. strike, Assad explained it would not serve U.S. security interests.

“The first question that they should ask [themselves], what do wars give America?…Nothing. No political gain, no economic gain, no good reputation. United States’ credibility is at…[an] all-time low. So this war is against the interests of the United States,” Assad said. “Why?”

Assad: I’m no “butcher,” I’m like a doctor who saves lives
Assad: U.S. does not have “a single shred of evidence” of chemical weapons attack
Bashar Assad tells Charlie Rose U.S. should “expect every action” in response to Syria strikes
Complete CBSNews.com coverage: Syria crisis

The Syrian president again called on the U.S. and Congress to present hard evidence proving a chemical attack was launched within Syria and warned that a strike against Syria would only foster the growth of al Qaeda within his borders.

“First of all, because this is the war that is going to support Al Qaeda and the same people that kill Americans in the 11 of September. The second thing that we all want to tell to the Congress, that they should ask and that what we expect, we expect them to ask this administration about the evidence that they have regarding the chemical story and the allegations that they presented,” Assad said.

President Assad said he and the Syrian people are “disappointed” by President Obama’s behavior, and compared his foreign policy to that of former President George W. Bush.”

Read more:

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505263_162-57601934/assad-says-any-u.s-strike-on-syria-is-going-to-support-al-qaeda/

Watch full interview:

http://charlierose.com/watch/60263639

Syria Obama economic diversion, September 9, 2013, Food stamp use soars, Labor force participation rate at 35 year low, Long term unemployed worse than 1970’s 80’s recessions

Syria Obama economic diversion, September 9, 2013, Food stamp use soars, Labor force participation rate at 35 year low, Long term unemployed worse than 1970’s 80’s recessions

“I do not believe John Kerry is fit to be commander in chief of the armed forces of the United States. This is not a political issue. It is a matter of his judgement, truthfulness, reliability, loyalty, and trust–all absolute tenets of command.”…REAR ADMIRAL ROY F. HOFFMAN, USN (RETIRED)

“Over the last six months, of the net job creation, 97 percent of that is part-time work,”…Keith Hall, former BLS chief

 

“I don’t oppose all wars,” “What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war.”…Obama, antiwar rally downtown Chicago October 2002

“Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.”…George Orwell, “1984″

So why would Obama want us constantly thinking about a possible attack on Syria and chemical threats there?

From Zero Hedge September 8, 2013.

“Households On Foodstamps Rise To New Record High: More Americans Live In Poverty Than The Population Of Spain”

“There was much discussion of Friday’s “disappointing” non-farm payrolls goal-seeked, seasonally adjusted, X-13-ARIMA conceived jobs “number.” The conclusion was that it showed an economy which one year after the start of QEternity was growing nowhere near where the Fed has projected and hoped it would be at this time. But in addition to the BLS jobs number, there was another just as important number that was released on Friday: the monthly foodstamp (SNAP) participation update. There was no discussion of this particular number and for good reason. If the NFP number was at least meant to show some economic stability, if subpar, the monthly foodstamp update shows month after month that the greatest depression is nowhere near ending for millions of American living in poverty (83% of SNAP households have gross income at or below 100% of the poverty guideline ($19,530 for a family of 3 in 2013), and these households receive about 91% of all benefits. 61% of SNAP households have gross income at or below 75% of the poverty guideline or $14,648 for a family of 3 in 2013).

To wit: in June, the number of households receiving foodstamps rose to 23.117 million, an increase of 45.9k in one month, and also a new record high. As for the average monthly benefit per household: $274.55, just off record lows.”

Food StampSept2013

Read more:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-09-08/households-foodstamps-rise-new-record-high-more-americans-live-poverty-population-sp

Another hard hitting article from the Greensboro News Record September 7, 2013.
“Just how sturdy is the U.S. job market?

That’s the key question the Federal Reserve will face when it decides later this month whether to reduce its economic stimulus.
The answer depends on where you look.

The economy has added jobs for 35 straight months. Unemployment has reached a 4 1/2-year low of 7.3 percent. Layoffs are dwindling.
Yet other barometers of the job market point to chronic weakness:

The pace of hiring remains tepid. Job growth is concentrated in lower-paying industries. The economy is 1.9 million jobs shy of its pre-recession level – and that’s not counting the additional jobs needed to meet population growth. Nearly 4.3 million people have been unemployed at least six months.

What’s more, employers have little incentive to raise pay. Many unhappy employees have nowhere else to go.

Still, when it meets Sept. 17-18, the Fed is expected to reduce its $85 billion a month in bond purchases by perhaps $10 billion. Its purchases have helped keep home-loan and other borrowing rates low to try to encourage consumers and businesses to borrow and spend more.

Here’s a look at the job market’s vital signs as the Fed’s decision nears:

UNEMPLOYMENT

The unemployment rate slid in August to 7.3 percent, its lowest level since December 2008. Unemployment had peaked in October 2009 at 10 percent and has since fallen more or less steadily. Since then, the number of people who say they have jobs has risen by 5.7 million. And the number of those who say they’re unemployed has dropped by nearly 4.1 million.

That’s the good news behind the tumbling unemployment rate.

But the rate has been falling, in part, for a bad reason: People are dropping out of the labor force. Once people without a job stop looking for one, the government no longer counts them as unemployed.

Some are retiring. Some are young adults who have chosen to go to college rather than brave a tough job market. Some have gone on disability. And some have given up the job search, discouraged by repeated rejections.

The percentage of people either working or looking for work – the so-called labor force participation rate – fell last month to a 35-year low: 63.2 percent. If the participation rate were at the pre-recession level of 66 percent, up to 6.8 million more people could be counted as unemployed. And the unemployment rate could be as high as 11.2 percent.

The 4 million-plus Americans who have been unemployed for six months or more are down from a peak of 6.7 million in April 2010. Yet before 2009, the United States had never seen long-term unemployment surpass 2.9 million, even during the deep recessions of the mid-1970s and early 1980s.”

Read more:

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_JOB_MARKET_VITAL_SIGNS?SITE=NCGRE&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

The above problems are motivation enough for Obama to divert our attention using a Syrian manufactured crisis.

Of course we know that Obama has many more reasons.

Obama uses Youtube evidence again for Syria attack, Syria UN investigation request March 2013, Russian inquiry names rebels, Obama obeying Saudis or diverting attention away from domestic problems

Obama uses Youtube evidence again for Syria attack, Syria UN investigation request March 2013, Russian inquiry names rebels, Obama obeying Saudis or diverting attention away from domestic problems

“I do not believe John Kerry is fit to be commander in chief of the armed forces of the United States. This is not a political issue. It is a matter of his judgement, truthfulness, reliability, loyalty, and trust–all absolute tenets of command.”…REAR ADMIRAL ROY F. HOFFMAN, USN (RETIRED)

“Testimony from victims strongly suggests it was the rebels, not the Syrian government, that used Sarin nerve gas during a recent incident in the revolution-wracked nation, a senior U.N. diplomat said Monday.

Carla del Ponte, a member of the U.N. Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Syria, told Swiss TV there were “strong, concrete suspicions but not yet incontrovertible proof,” that rebels seeking to oust Syrian strongman Bashar al-Assad had used the nerve agent.

But she said her panel had not yet seen any evidence of Syrian government forces using chemical weapons, according to the BBC, but she added that more investigation was needed.”…Washington Times, May 6, 2013

“And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed
–if all records told the same tale–then the lie passed into
history and became truth. “Who controls the past,” ran the
Party slogan, “controls the future: who controls the present
controls the past.”…George Orwell, “1984″

 

 

Obama and John Kerry are trying to make the case for a US attack on Syria.

They are both documented liars.

From Zero Hedge September 7, 2013.

“While one can speculate if the sarin gas attack on August 22 was ordered and orchestrated by Saudi/Qatari petrodollar interests, with the assistance of the CIA and the funding of al Qaeda, and executed by the Syrian “rebels” (there is much circumstantial evidence pointing in the false flag direction: herehere, here and here), the reality is that since the narrative behind Obama’s offensive Syrian air strikes has been staged as punishment for Assad, the onus is on the affirmative proof, namely clear and unequivocal evidence that it was Assad who ordered the attack. So far, despite repeated vows and promises that such proof exists, none has been presented, aside from numerous YouTube clips which show an attack did take place (and even that is in question). When it comes to the actual perpetrator, John Kerry and company are reduced to emotional pleadings to the audience to look at pictures of dead children redirecting from the most important question of all: did Assad actually do it. The reason for such Copperfieldian tactics is that there simply is no link – Reuters reports that  “No direct link to President Bashar al-Assad or his inner circle has been publicly demonstrated, and some U.S. sources say intelligence experts are not sure whether the Syrian leader knew of the attack before it was launched or was only informed about it afterward.” And yet Obama’s entire publicly stated motive is to punish Assad… for something there is zero evidence he did.

The excerpt below from Reuters is how far the mainstream media will go of accusing Obama of conducting a false flag without actually “accusing” him.

While U.S. officials say Assad is responsible for the chemical weapons strike even if he did not directly order it, they have not been able to fully describe a chain of command for the August 21 attack in the Ghouta area east of the Syrian capital.

 

It is one of the biggest gaps in U.S. understanding of the incident, even as Congress debates whether to launch limited strikes on Assad’s forces in retaliation.

 

After wrongly claiming that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction before the 2003 U.S. invasion, the U.S. intelligence community, along with the Obama administration, are trying to build as solid a case as they can about what it says was a sarin nerve gas attack that killed over 1,400 people.

 

The Syrian government, backed by Russia, blames Sunni rebels for the gas attack. Russia says Washington has not provided convincing proof that Assad’s troops carried out the attack and called it a “provocation” by rebel forces hoping to encourage a military response by the United States.

 

Identifying Syrian commanders or leaders as those who gave an order to fire rockets into the Sunni Muslim areas could help Obama convince a war-weary American public and skeptical members of Congress to back limited strikes against Assad.

 

But penetrating the secretive Syrian government is tough, especially as it fights a chaotic civil war for its survival.

But isn’t that what the NSA is for: after all Obama had an extended tangent during his G-20 press conference explaining precisely that the role of the NSA is to keep America breast on non-public developments. And the whole “access to everything” should mean not a single Syrian communication was left unintercepted. Or maybe, just maybe, the NSA was meant solely to spy on America’s citizens, while ignoring what happens in Damascus, instead forcing the administration to come up with made up stories?”

“So what if any evidence is there, aside from YouTube clips of course?

Much of the U.S. claim that Assad is responsible was initially based on reports from witnesses, non-governmental groups and hours of YouTube videos.

 

U.S. officials have not presented any evidence to the public of scientific samples or intelligence information proving that sarin gas was used or that the Syrian government used it.”

Read More:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-09-07/obamas-missing-link-no-direct-connection-between-assad-and-gas-attack

From the UN March 21, 2013.
“Opening remarks to journalists on Syrian Government request to investigate alleged use of chemical weapons

Good morning. Thank you for coming at this early hour and with such short notice. Thank you very much again.

As you know, there have been disturbing reports about the possible use of chemical weapons in Syria.

The two-year long conflict has plunged the country into extreme chaos with terrible consequences for the Syrian people.

As the situation worsens, the international community’s concern about the safety and security of chemical weapons stockpiles as well as possible use of by all parties has increased.

I have repeatedly stated that use of chemical weapons by any side under any circumstances would constitute an outrageous crime. Anyone responsible must be held accountable.

I have emphasized the primary responsibility of the Syrian Government to ensure the safety and security of any such weapons or materials.

I have spoken out on this many times and sent letters to President Assad twice to remind him of this solemn duty.

Against this backdrop, yesterday I received a formal request from the Syrian authorities requesting a specialized, impartial and independent mission to investigate the alleged use of chemical weapons.

If requested by a Member State, I have a mandate to consider conducting an investigation on alleged uses of chemical, biological and toxin weapons pursuant to General Assembly resolution 42/37 C of 1987 and reaffirm by Security Council resolution 620 of 1988.

With this in mind, I would like to announce that I have decided to conduct a United Nations investigation on the possible use of chemical weapons in Syria.

My senior advisers are working on the modalities in close consultation with the relevant bodies, including the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) and the World Health Organization (WHO).

These include detailed issues such as: overall mandate, mission composition, and operational conditions including safety and security.

I have also been in close contact with OPCW Director-General Mr. Ahmet Uzumcu and WHO Director-General Dr. Margaret Chan. They have both assured me of their full support and cooperation.

It is my hope that the mission would contribute to ensuring the safety and security of chemical weapons stockpiles in Syria.

The investigation mission is to look into the specific incident brought to my attention by the Syrian Government. I am, of course, aware that there are other allegations of similar cases involving the reported use of chemical weapons.

In discharging its mandate of an investigation mission, full cooperation from all parties will be essential. I stress that this includes unfettered access.

I will reiterate this point in my communication with the Syrian authorities.

I will also communicate my decision to the Security Council.

There is much work to do and this will not happen overnight. It is obviously a difficult mission. I intend for this investigation to start as soon as practically possible.

Again my announcement should serve as an unequivocal reminder that the use of chemical weapons is a crime against humanity.

The international community needs full assurance that chemical weapons stockpiles are verifiably safeguarded.

Finally, let me repeat that the horrors of the last months and years prove beyond doubt: the military solution in Syria is leading to the dissolution of Syria.

I call on the regional and international community to find unity and support the efforts of Joint Special Representative Lakhdar Brahimi to help the Syrian people reach a political solution.

Thank you very much.”

From The Blaze September 5, 2013.

From The Blaze September 5, 2013.

“RUSSIA DELIVERS 100-PAGE REPORT TO U.N. SAYING SYRIAN REBELS BEHIND SARIN GAS ATTACK IN MARCH”
“Russia has delivered a 100-page report to the United Nations that claims Syrian rebels are responsible for a sarin gas attack in March 2013 — an overlooked incident, it says, in the wake the alleged sarin attack in August that the United States and other nations say the Syrian government is behind, McClatchy news reports.

According to a statement posted to the Russian Foreign Ministry’s site late Wednesday, the March 19, incident in Khan al Asal, a town outside the city of Aleppo, was the reason U.N. investigators were in Syria when the Aug. 21 attack took place.

“Unfortunately, that investigation still essentially has not begun,” the statement said.

In addition, the Russian report on the March attack — in which 26 people died and 86 were injured — says it contains scientific detail that’s lacking in the much-shorter intelligence summaries the United States, Britain, and France delivered as evidence that the Syrian government launched chemical weapons against Damascus suburbs on Aug. 21.

The Russian report, apparently delivered to the U.N. in July but not released, asserts that each of the three nations’ summaries regarding the August attack relies primarily on circumstantial evidence to make its case, and details in each report differ, most notably the number of people who died.

More from McClatchy:

Russia said its investigation of the March 19 incident was conducted under strict protocols established by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, the international agency that governs adherence to treaties prohibiting the use of chemical weapons. It said samples that Russian technicians had collected had been sent to OPCW-certified laboratories in Europe.

The Russian statement warned the United States and its allies not to conduct a military strike against Syria until the United Nations had completed a similarly detailed scientific study into the Aug. 21 attack. It warned that what it called the current “hysteria” about a possible military strike in the West was similar to the false claims and poor intelligence that preceded the United States invasion of Iraq.

“The Russian report is specific,” the ministry statement said. “It is a scientific and technical document.””

Read more:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/09/05/russia-delivers-report-to-u-n-saying-syrian-rebels-behind-sarin-gas-attack-in-march/

 

 

Liberals reject Obama Syria strikes, Obama and Kerry are lying, Progressive Change Campaign Committee survey, 73 percent oppose taking action in Syria

Liberals reject Obama Syria strikes, Obama and Kerry are lying, Progressive Change Campaign Committee survey, 73 percent oppose taking action in Syria

“I do not believe John Kerry is fit to be commander in chief of the armed forces of the United States. This is not a political issue. It is a matter of his judgement, truthfulness, reliability, loyalty, and trust–all absolute tenets of command.”…REAR ADMIRAL ROY F. HOFFMAN, USN (RETIRED)

“I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.”…Barack Obama

“Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.”…George Orwell, “1984″

 

From the Washington Times September 4, 2013.
“Liberals reject Obama’s case for Syria strikes; believe Obama and Kerry are lying”

“President Obama’s liberal activist base is adamantly opposed to military strikes in Syria, according to a new survey the Progressive Change Campaign Committee released Wednesday.

PCCC says more than 57,000 of its activists weighed in, and 73 percent of them opposed the U.S. taking action in Syria. Just 18 percent supported strikes, and just 14 percent said the U.S. should go ahead unilaterally if it can’t find any allies.

Indeed, a majority of the activists don’t believe Mr. Obama and Secretary of State John F. Kerry are being honest when they lay out their justifications for taking military action.”

Read more:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/inside-politics/2013/sep/4/liberals-reject-obamas-case-syria-strikes-believe-/#ixzz2e72L0nBQ

 

Florida courts corrupt biased incompetent?, Voeltz v Obama eligibility case, Obama not natural born citizen, AL VT Supreme Courts eligibility hearings, Election officials ignore laws duties

Florida courts corrupt biased incompetent?, Voeltz v Obama eligibility case, Obama not natural born citizen, AL VT Supreme Courts eligibility hearings, Election officials ignore laws duties

“Why has Obama, since taking the White House, used Justice Department Attorneys, at taxpayer expense,  to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells

“Why do state election officials continue to ignore the US Constitution, federal election code and their own state election statutes?”…Citizen Wells

“Why does a judge swear to discharge his duties agreeably to the constitution of the United States, if that constitution forms no rule for his government? if it is closed upon him, and cannot be inspected by him?”… Marbury versus Madison

I have reported on the Obama eligibility hearings in the Alabama and Vermont Supreme Courts. The reason that I have not written about an eligibility hearing in the Florida Supreme Court is because one has not been scheduled there yet.

Why?

Good question.

The answer appears to be some combination of corruption bias and incompetence.

Here are some crucial points of law and fact. More details will be forthcoming.

Let’s start at the beginning.

The states are responsible for the primaries, general election and events through the Electoral College vote.

US Constitution
Article II
Section 1

“Each state shall appoint, in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a number of electors, equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or person holding an office of trust or profit under the United States, shall be appointed an elector.”

All state officials take an oath to uphold or defend the US Constitution.

In Florida they take the following oath.

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support, protect, and defend the Constitution and Government of the United States and of the State of Florida; that I am duly qualified to hold office under the Constitution of the State, and that I will well and faithfully perform the duties of”

From page 2 of the Florida “2012 Federal Qualifying Handbook”

“PART II: PRESIDENT AND VICE PRESIDENT

Qualifications

1. Must be a natural born citizen of the United States.
2. Must be at least 35 years of age.
3. Must be a resident of the United States for 14 years.”

“Must be” is not a suggestion.

Florida Election statutes

“Title IX

102.168 Contest of election.–
“(1) Except as provided in s. 102.171, the certification of election or nomination of any person to office, or of the result on any question submitted by referendum, may be contested in the circuit court by any unsuccessful candidate for such office or nomination thereto or by any elector qualified to vote in the election related to such candidacy, or by any taxpayer, respectively.

(2) Such contestant shall file a complaint, together with the fees prescribed in chapter 28, with the clerk of the circuit court within 10 days after midnight of the date the last board responsible for certifying the results officially certifies the results of the election being contested.

(3) The complaint shall set forth the grounds on which the contestant intends to establish his or her right to such office or set aside the result of the election on a submitted referendum. The grounds for contesting an election under this section are:”

“(b) Ineligibility of the successful candidate for the nomination or office in dispute.”

AMENDMENT X

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.”

Many of the Secretaries of State or other election officials claim to have only a “ministerial” duty in the elections.

In the recent Vermont Supreme Court hearing with appellant H. Brooke Paige, state attorney Todd Doloz stated that the VT Secretary of State has only a ministerial duty in the elections.

Ministerial defined.

Merriam Webster.

a : being or having the characteristics of an act or duty prescribed by law as part of the duties of an administrative office
b : relating to or being an act done after ascertaining the existence of a specified state of facts in obedience to a legal order without exercise of personal judgment or discretion.

Legal dictionary.

“Ministerial describes an act or a function that conforms to an instruction or a prescribed procedure. It connotes obedience. A ministerial act or duty is a function performed without the use of judgment by the person performing the act or duty.”

Obedience is the common denominator. To a legal order or conforming “to an instruction or a prescribed procedure.”

The US Constitution makes this clear.

The Secretary of State swears an oath to the Constitution.

Florida law explicitly states the requirements for the eligibility of the president.

The attorney for Vermont, in his obfuscation efforts, raised the spectre of each Secretary of State or chief election official proactively verifying the eligibility of each candidate.

No reasonable person is requesting that.

However, there is a clear distinction between that and knowingly, after being alerted of a candidate’s eligibility deficiency, taking no action, ignoring a clear mandate from the US Constitution and allowing a candidate to remain on the ballot potentially disenfranchising thousands if not millions of voters.

This is what should have taken place in FL and all of the states:

Once alerted or challenged on a potential deficiency in eligibility of a candidate, the Secretary of State or other election official should investigate.

In the case of Obama and his natural born citizen status, if there is confusion about the definition, the state attorney general should be queried and if there is still confusion, a court ruling requested.

Passing the buck is dereliction of duty.

In Florida, the situation is much worse.

Not only did the FL Secretary of State fail in their constitutional duty, subsequent court hearings have been delayed and failed in their judicial duties.

Why has the judicial system failed the citizens in Florida?

More details to come.