Category Archives: Benghazi attack

New poll says majority of Americans regret reelecting Obama


Whatever we know about President Beelzebub today, we already had known in 2012 or, for some of us, in 2008.

And yet, according to the results of a new CNN poll released today, July 27, 2014, a majority of Americans now regret having voted for the POS in 2012.

To the question “Suppose that for some reason a presidential election were being held today and you had to choose between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney. Who would you be more likely to vote for?” or if unsure, “do you lean more toward?”, 53% responded “Mitt Romney,” while 44% answered “Barack Obama.” 3% said “Neither.”

Asked about characteristics they would apply to Obama:

  • 52% say Obama is NOT “a strong and decisive leader”; 48% say he is.
  • 56% say Obama generally does NOT agree with them on issues they care about; 43% say he does agree.
  • 57% do NOT think Obama “can manage the government effectively” vs. 42% who think he does.
  • 53% do NOT believe Obama shares their values vs. 46% who do.
  • On whether Obama “is sincere in what he says,” incredibly, it’s a split: 49% say he is; 49% say he isn’t.
  • On whether “Obama cares about people like you,” 51% still think he does vs. 48% who don’t.

Lest you think the scales really have fallen off the eyes of the “useful idiot” Americans, think again.

When asked “suppose that a presidential election were being held today and you had to choose between Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney. Who would you be more likely to vote for?,” a majority (55%) chose the Hildebeast, with 42% opting for Romney. In fact,

  • An alarming majority (63%) see her as “a strong and decisive leader,” vs. 36% who don’t.
  • A delusional majority (50%) think she “generally agrees with you on issues you care about,” vs. 48% who don’t.
  • An even larger delusional majority (53%) actually believe Hillary “cares about people like you,” vs. 45% who don’t.
  • An even bigger delusional majority (55%) think she “can manage the government effectively,” vs. 44% who don’t — despite then-Secretary of State Hillary’s lying about and complete bungling of the 2012 jihadist attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, abandoning four Americans to their death.

The CNN poll, with interviews, of a national sample of 1,012 U.S. adults, was conducted by telephone (both cell and landline) by ORC International on July 18-20, 2014. The entire sample was weighted to reflect national Census figures for gender, race, age, education, region of country, and telephone usage. Among the entire sample, 32% described themselves as Democrats, 24% described themselves as Republicans, and 44% described themselves as Independents or members of another party. The margin of sampling error for results based on the total sample is plus or minus 3 percentage points.


US Marine Corps commandant openly blasts CIC Obama

Dr. Eowyn:

Retired U.S. military officers and a former secretary of defense have spoken out against Obama, but this is the first time that a still-serving officer is openly critical.

And not just any officer, but the 4-star commandant of United States Marine Corps — a significant indicator of the profound alienation of the military from their commander-in-chief.

Thank you, Gen. Amos, for speaking the truth.

Originally posted on Consortium of Defense Analysts:

USMC Gen. James AmosU.S. Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Amos

On July 15, 2014, speaking at the Brookings Institute think tank in Washington, DC, the Commandant of the United States Marine Corps, 4-star Gen. James Amos, openly and publicly criticized Commander-In-Chief Barack Hussein Obama.

Reporting for The Fiscal Times, David Francis observes that “It’s highly unusual for a high-ranking soldier, let alone a high-ranking Marine, to publicly question White House and Pentagon policy. Yet that’s exactly what four-star Gen. James Amos, Commandant of the Marine Corps, did yesterday in Washington.”

Speaking at the Brookings Institute, Amos criticized the Obama administration for:

1. Paving the way for the emergence of the Islamic State of Syria and Iraq (ISIS) by completely withdrawing American troops in 2011. Amos said: “I have a hard time believing that had we been there, and worked with the government, and worked with parliament, and worked with the…

View original 289 more words

Wall Street owns Clintons; Goldman Sachs biggest donor

Faces of Hillary

So much for the fiction that Democrats are for the poor, the oppressed, the little guy. In truth, Democrats only use them for their votes to stay in power — in other words, as Useful Idiots.

Here’s the evidence.

The Wall Street Journal reports (via Zero Hedge) that, even before Hillary “What difference does it make?” Clinton formally declares she’s running for POTUS in 2016, the Clintons already have accumulated the most formidable war chest in the history of the United States.

To date, during two decades on the national stage through campaigns, paid speeches, and a rat’s nest of organizations advancing their political goals, Clinton Inc. has raised about $3 billion from all sources, including individual donors, corporate contributors and foreign governments.

More than $1 billion of Clinton Inc.’s war chest come from U.S. companies and industry donors, of which Wall Street financial services firms have been one of the single largest sources of money. And of those Wall Street donors, the No. 1 supporter of the Clintons — accounting for nearly $5 million in donation — is Goldman Sachs.

Clinton Inc1The WSJ concludes:

Those deep ties potentially give Mrs. Clinton a financial advantage in the 2016 presidential election, if she runs, and could bring industry donors back to the Democratic Party for the first time since Mr. Clinton left the White House. [...]

Not counting about $250 million the Clinton foundation has received from foreign donors, at least 75% of the money arrived in large donations from industry sources, a category defined by federal regulators and the Center for Responsive Politics. [...]

“She has the credibility among Wall Street donors that could make it likely that Wall Street moves back into the Democratic fold,” said Sam Geduldig, a Republican lobbyist and fundraiser who represents Wall Street firms.


Newspaper Apologizes for Supporting Obama in 2008



Honesty is so refreshing!

BY: Washington Free Beacon Staff
June 30, 2014 12:27 pm

The Billings Gazette apologized on Friday for its 2008 endorsement of Barack Obama for president in an editorial titled “Gazette opinion: Obama earned the low ratings.”

The Gazette said it missed George W. Bush and the “good ol’ days when we were at least winning battles in Iraq.”

It recapped several mistakes Obama has made during his presidency:

Obama has also failed on energy policy by not approving the Keystone XL pipeline, which could be helpful to the economy.
He has failed in Iraq; the country is now on the brink of civil war.
The Gazette wrote that the Bowe Bergdahl exchange made the Obama administration seem incompetent.
The VA system has been mismanaged by the Obama administration, leading to veterans dying before they could receive medical care.
Obama has also broken his promise to become the “most transparent administration in history.” The Gazette said the president’s administration is so opaque that is has earned a reputation worse than that of Richard Nixon.
The Gazette closed its editorial by noting that these mistakes “demonstrate a disturbing trend of incompetence and failure”:

These are all signs — none of them definitive on their own, necessarily. However, when taken in completely, these demonstrate a disturbing trend of incompetence and failure. It’s not just that Americans are in a sour mood about national politics. That’s probably part of it. Instead, Obama has become another in a line of presidents long on rhetoric and hopelessly short on action.

Obama’s hope and change have left liberals and conservatives alike hoping for real change, not just more lofty rhetoric.

Republican Party of South Dakota votes to impeach Barack Obama

There is something very wrong with the U.S. political system.

A recent Gallup poll shows the American people are profoundly alienated from and disapproving of our government.

Only 29% of Americans (a little more than 1 of every 4 Americans) have a “great deal” or “quite a lot” of confidence in the presidency. Congress fares even worse, way way worse. Only 7% (or 7 out of every 100 Americans) have a “great deal” or “quite a lot” of confidence in Congress, the law-making body of the U.S. federal government which supposedly represents us.

Gallup poll 7% confidence in Congress

A main reason why Americans are so disillusioned with Congress is our perception that our elected representatives seem to be in a state of paralysis over just about everything, including mustering up whatever little courage they have to impeach the occupant of the White House who has, time and time again, acted in violation of laws (e.g., Sec. 1035 of the 2014 NDAA) or simply refuses to carry out the law (e.g., enforcing border control to stem the tidal wave of illegals pouring from Mexico at an alarming rate of 35,000 a month into just one state — Texas).

President Richard Nixon’s Watergate is piddling compared to what Obama has done and is doing.

Since Congress refuses to act, the American people and state politicians are taking matters into their own hands:

  • Bikers went to southern California’s border to protest the Mexican government’s arrest and imprisonment of U.S. veteran Marine Sgt. Andrew Tahmooresi.
  • Militias are riding to or are already in place along the Mexican border to “put up a man-fence” against the invasion of illegals.
  • On June 18, 2014, Texas Governor Rick Perry directed the state’s Department of Public Safety (DPS) troopers to begin securing the Texas-Mexico border to stem the flood of illegals.

The latest:

Yesterday, June 21, 2014, the South Dakota Republican Party state convention passed a resolution calling for the impeachment of President Barack Hussein Obama.


David Montgomery reports for Argus Leader, the newspaper of Sioux Falls, SD, June 21, 2014, that the convention resolution says Obama has “violated his oath of office in numerous ways.” As examples, the resolution specifically cites:

  1. Obama’s release of five Taliban combatants in a trade for captive U.S. soldier Bowe Bergdahl.
  2. Obama’s statement that under Obamacare (aka the Affordable Care Act), the American people could keep their insurance companies.
  3. Recent EPA regulations on power plants.

“Therefore, be it resolved that the South Dakota Republican Party calls on our U.S. Representatives to initiate impeachment proceedings against the president of the United States,” the resolution reads.

Convention delegate Allen Unruh (Sioux Falls), who sponsored the resolution, said “I’ve got a thick book on impeachable offenses of the president,” and calls on South Dakota to “send a symbolic message that liberty shall be the law of the land.”

Delegate David Wheeler (Beadle County) disagreed: “I believe we should not use the power of impeachment for political purposes. By doing this, we would look petty, like we can’t achieve our political goals through the political process.”

Delegate Larry Eliason (Potter County) agreed with Wheeler, noting that he opposed the impeachment resolution even though “the only thing (Obama’s) done the last six years that I approve of is when he adopted a pet.”

But Larry Klipp of Butte County, a retired Marine, said matters go beyond mere political disagreements with Obama: “If anyone in this room cannot see the horrendous, traitorous scandals run by the Obama administration, I will pray for you.”

Delegates voted 191-176 in favor of the resolution. The Pennington County delegation voted 47-9 in favor of the impeachment resolution, and Minnehaha County voted 28-15 in favor.

Rep. Kristi Noem (R)

Rep. Kristi Noem (R)

But Congresswoman Kristi Noem, a Republican and South Dakota’s lone delegate in the U.S. House of Representatives — which has the power to initiate impeachment proceedings — is cool to the resolution because she doesn’t believe impeachment is the “best way” to deal with Obama. Her spokesperson, Brittany Comins, explains: “The congresswoman currently believes the best way for Congress to hold the president accountable is to continue aggressive committee oversight and investigations into the administration’s actions like the ongoing VA scandal, the targeting of conservative groups by the IRS, Benghazi, and the recent Taliban prisoner exchange.”

My question to Congresswoman Noem is: “What aggressive committee oversight and investigations?”

If the U.S. House of Representatives were to vote to impeach Obama, the Senate would then rule on the validity of the charges. It takes a two-thirds majority in the Senate to remove a president from office. The Senate, of course, is dominated by Demonrats: 53 Dems; 2 Independents; 45 Republicans.


Hillary’s book: selling well yet bad reviews

HIllary in real life (l) and Photoshopped for her book (r)

Hillary in real life (l) and Photoshopped for her book (r)

Hillary’s new book “Hard Choices” is selling well on Amazon (wonder how many copies Soros and the DNC bought?). Yet out of 5 stars her book is averaging a 2.5 star rating.

Here’s some of the reviews:

  • Five pages in I realized I’d wasted my money. I’d hoped to learn something about HRC that would make me want to vote for her, but her style and super-guarded approach to everything made this a softball pitch at best. Three thumbs down.
  • There is a lot of information here that seems to be thrown together in a hurry, rather than carefully composed. It appears evident that this book was written to give the author a platform for a run at president. Supposed factual information is difficult to support if not impossible to verify.
  • Seriously, I’d rather blow my own butt-air into my mouth than give this woman one red cent to lie to the American people.
  • The hard choice is whether to buy this book or walk in front of a train.
  •  Zero content about anything except bull crap.
  • What was not acceptable was the sense of being tricked by Clinton and the media into buying the book. There is nothing really revealing in the book, except the unabashed display of self-aggrandizement and politicking that Ms. Clinton displays.
  • I am passionate about fiction literature, thought I’d give this a try. Couldn’t stay awake for a single page turn.
  • The narrative is such that I thought someone was trying to convince me of something rather than that of reading a compelling story. I felt the entire time that she was trying to give reasons for shortcomings.
  • The book is only readable if you make a game out of counting the lies, excuses and misrepresentations of events.



US spy agencies heard Benghazi attackers using State Dept. cell phones to call terrorist leaders

Benghazi 4

Fox News: The terrorists who attacked the U.S. consulate and CIA annex in Benghazi on September 11, 2012 used cell phones, seized from State Department personnel during the attacks, and U.S. spy agencies overheard them contacting more senior terrorist leaders to report on the success of the operation, multiple sources confirmed to Fox News.

The disclosure is important because it adds to the body of evidence establishing that senior U.S. officials in the Obama administration knew early on that Benghazi was a terrorist attack, and not a spontaneous protest over an anti-Islam video that had gone awry, as the administration claimed for several weeks after the attacks.

Eric Stahl, who recently retired as a major in the U.S. Air Force, served as commander and pilot of the C-17 aircraft that was used to transport the corpses of the four casualties from the Benghazi attacks – then-U.S. Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens, information officer Sean Smith, and former Navy SEALs Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods – as well as the assault’s survivors from Tripoli to the safety of an American military base in Ramstein, Germany.

In an exclusive interview on Fox News’ “Special Report,” Stahl said members of a CIA-trained Global Response Staff who raced to the scene of the attacks were “confused” by the administration’s repeated implication of the video as a trigger for the attacks, because “they knew during the attack…who was doing the attacking.” Asked how, Stahl told anchor Bret Baier: “Right after they left the consulate in Benghazi and went to the [CIA] safehouse, they were getting reports that cell phones, consulate cell phones, were being used to make calls to the attackers’ higher ups.”


A separate U.S. official, one with intimate details of the bloody events of that night, confirmed the major’s assertion. The second source, who requested anonymity to discuss classified data, told Fox News he had personally read the intelligence reports at the time that contained references to calls by terrorists – using State Department cell phones captured at the consulate during the battle – to their terrorist leaders. The second source also confirmed that the security teams on the ground received this intelligence in real time.

Major Stahl was never interviewed by the Accountability Review Board, the investigative panel convened, pursuant to statute, by then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, as the official body reviewing all the circumstances surrounding the attacks and their aftermath. Many lawmakers and independent experts have criticized the thoroughness of the ARB, which also never interviewed Clinton.

In his interview on “Special Report,” Stahl made still other disclosures that add to the vast body of literature on Benghazi – sure to grow in the months ahead, as a select House committee prepares for a comprehensive probe of the affair, complete with subpoena power. Stahl said that when he deposited the traumatized passengers at Ramstein, the first individual to question the CIA security officers was not an FBI officer but the senior State Department diplomat on the ground.

“They were taken away from the airplane,” Stahl said. “The U.S. ambassador to Germany [Philip D. Murphy] met us when we landed and he took them away because he wanted to debrief them that night.” Murphy stepped down as ambassador last year. A message left with Sky Blue FC, a private company in New Jersey with which Murphy is listed online as an executive officer, was not immediately returned.

Stahl also contended that given his crew’s alert status and location, they could have reached Benghazi in time to have played a role in rescuing the victims of the assault, and ferrying them to safety in Germany, had they been asked to do so. “We were on a 45-day deployment to Ramstein air base,” he told Fox News. “And we were there basically to pick up priority missions, last-minute missions that needed to be accomplished.”

“You would’ve thought that we would have had a little bit more of an alert posture on 9/11,” Stahl added. “A hurried-up timeline probably would take us [an] hour-and-a-half to get off the ground and three hours and fifteen minutes to get down there. So we could’ve gone down there and gotten them easily.”


I’m not holding my breath that Hillary or Obama will truthfully respond to this report. What difference at this point does it make?


Obama chews gum at D-Day ceremonies in Normandy Beach

70 years ago, June 6, 1944 was D-Day – the day of the beginning of the Normandy landings when US and Allied soldiers stormed the beaches of Normandy, France, to free Europe from the grip of Hitler and the Nazis.

The Normandy invasion began on June 4 and ended in mid-July, 1944, with a decisive Allied victory. It marked the beginning of the end of Nazi Germany and the European theater of WWII.

According to the US National D-Day Memorial Foundation, 4,414 Allied soldiers died that day, including 2,499 Americans. Were it not for all those brave men, so many of whom sacrificed their very lives, we’d all be living under the yoke of the Third Reich.

After ignoring the anniversary of D-Day for the past 4 years, this year Obama actually commemorated the historic day by jetting to Normandy Beach for the D-Day 70th anniversary ceremonies.

The reason? The POS wants to polish his image as Commander In Chief after all the military-related scandals — of Benghazi, V.A. hospitals, and the Bergdahl prisoner swap.

But he didn’t really want to be at the D-Day commemorative ceremony and he most certainly doesn’t really want to honor the military and the WW2 veterans. (See “Former U.S. defense secretary: Obama incompetent; suspicious of military”)

So, what did he do?

He chewed gum throughout the D-Day ceremonies, including during the welcome for Britain’s Queen Elizabeth — all captured on camera.

Here are two GIFs of the POS chewing gum at the 70th anniversary of D-Day ceremonies (from WeaselZippers):

Obama chews gumObama chews gum1

French Twitter exploded in outrage. Here’s one example:

Obama chews gum2But the American people aren’t told or shown by the media their President’s disgraceful behavior.

H/t FOTM’s DCG and pnordman


“What difference at this point does it make?”


noun Slang.  1. unmitigated effrontery or impudence; gall. 2. audacity; nerve.

A tweet from Hillary Clinton’s book promoter:


A close up of the middle picture on the top:



Photoshopped Propaganda: “Hillary Clinton Opens Up About Becoming a Grandmother – and Possible Presidential Run”

people magazine cover

People Magazine:  Becoming a grandmother in the fall could influence Hillary Clinton’s decision-making – and not just which carseat to buy (though there’s that, too).

Hillary Rodham ClintonAfter stepping down as Secretary of State in 2013 and enjoying her first free time in a long time, Clinton is now pondering another run for the White House.

I know I have a decision to make,” she recently told PEOPLE in her first at-home interview since the end of husband Bill’s presidency in January 2001. “But part of what I’ve been thinking about, is everything I’m interested in and everything I enjoy doing – and with the extra added joy of ‘I’m about to become a grandmother,’ I want to live in the moment. At the same time I am concerned about what I see happening in the country and in the world.

Hillary April 2014Before Clinton left public life after more than two decades, she fantasized out loud about finally getting to sleep in.  How’d that go? “Oh, my gosh. I slept in to probably 8 o’clock,” she said with a chuckle. “That’s good, huh?”

Clinton provided a glimpse into her life as a private citizen these past 16 months, even dishing on organizing her closets and binge-watching TV. “Oh, that was good, too,” she said, describing a little self-consciously how she and her husband Bill “totally binge-watched” the first season of House of Cards. Part of the appeal, she explained, was “a little bit of the, ‘Oh, my gosh, I can’t believe we can just sit here and do this’ and ‘We’re only going to watch one episode, oh, let’s watch another. Okay, well, we have time, we’re not going anywhere, let’s watch a third.’ I know that sounds kind of devoid of content.” But, she adds, “It wasn’t like I was just lying around trying to catch up on 20 years of lost sleep.”

With her name (and daughter Chelsea’s) now alongside Bill’s on the Clinton Foundation, Hillary has been pursuing meaty projects to stop elephant poaching in Africa (and the illegal ivory trade that funds terror groups), improve the global status of women and girls and promote education.

“I’m just too active and involved,” she said. “But what I’ve loved is having my own schedule.” So don’t count on the once – and maybe again – presidential candidate to lie around in front of Orange Is the New Black.

With her state department memoir Hard Choices launching a nationwide book tour on June 10, Clinton will be back in overdrive.

You know who else probably would have enjoyed having their own schedule and binge-watching TV?