Tag Archives: Rush Limbaugh

Why are they so afraid of Donald Trump?

The GOP Establishment has gone beyond issuing death threats via “consultants” and “jokes” against Donald Trump. See:

The GOP is now bringing out the big guns:

(1) Mitt Romney

2012 Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney has now come out publicly against Trump, although Romney went out of his way to secure Trump’s endorsement in 2012.

At the Washington Ideas Forum on March 2, Romney said he doesn’t think the Republican nominee is “going to be Donald Trump” because the GOP “has historically nominated someone who’s a mainstream conservative and someone who has a foundation in foreign policy that gives people confidence that they can guide the ship of state in troubled waters.” Trump said Chris Christie, Marco Rubio, John Kasich, Jeb Bush, Lindsey Graham, and Carly Fiorina are might qualify as a “mainstream conservative”. Since Christie, Bush and Fiorina have all dropped out of the race, that leaves Rubio and Kasich.

(2) John McCain & Paul Ryan

A day later on March 3, as reported by the APRomney intensified his attack, now joined by 2008 Republican presidential nominee Senator John McCain and Romney’s 2012 running mate House Speaker Paul Ryan, calling Trump unfit for office and a danger for the nation and the GOP.

McCain called Trump’s statements on national security issues “uninformed and indeed dangerous,” while Romney declared Trump “is not the temperament of a stable, thoughtful leader” and called Trump “a phony” who is “playing the American public for suckers,” a man whose “imagination must not be married to real power.” Romney said that “Given the current delegate selection process, this means that I would vote for Marco Rubio in Florida, for John Kasich in Ohio and for Ted Cruz or whichever one of the other two contenders has the best chance of beating Mr. Trump in a given state.”

As the AP and under political analysts observe, the GOP is now in a panic because “there is little they see to stop Trump’s march toward the presidential nomination. Party leaders are poring over complicated delegate math, outlining hazy scenarios for a contested national convention and even flirting with the idea of a third-party effort.”

(3) Rush Limbaugh

On his radio talk show on March 2, Rush Limbaugh after outlining three ways to defeat Trump: (1) waiting for Trump to implode; (2) splitting the Republican convention delegates so Trump won’t have the 1,237 needed to secure the nomination on the first vote; and (3) uniting behind Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, Limbaugh proposed that the GOP unite behind Ted Cruz as “their smartest move.” But Limbaugh predicted that the GOP “will not do that” and that “Rubio is the desired candidate because that’s where the moneyed people want to go. He’s closer to the establishment, this whole Gang of Eight business.”

So what exactly are the reasons for why GOP elites and conservative pundits so object to Trump? 

(1) A Trump nomination ensures a Hillary victory

That’s the conventional “wisdom”. As The FT reports, many mainstream Republicans believe Trump would struggle to beat Hillary Clinton and are urgently rallying around their man Rubio. Some senior Republicans, e.g., Bill Kristol, are even saying privately that they might consider voting for Hillary if Trump were to end up as their party nominee.

Let me get this straight: The GOP objects to Trump because they think he will lose to Hillary, and so their solution is to vote for Hillary, thereby ensuring precisely what they say they fear — that Trump will lose to Hillary. Does anyone understand their twisted circular logic?

So the question is: Will Trump lose if he goes against Hillary Clinton?

As the following RealClearPolitics chart shows, it’s far too close to call. More importantly, the gap  between Clinton and Trump is closing. (H/t ZeroHedge)

Clinton vs. Trump polling data

Tantalizingly, as reported by the New York Post on Feb. 28, 2016, confidential polling data actually show that in heavily democratic New York, Hillary could lose the presidential election to Trump, even without former New York mayor Michael Bloomberg in the race (Bloomberg is hinting he might enter the race as a third party candidate). Support for Trump is strong even in Westchester and on Long Island, the key suburbs often viewed as crucial swing bellwethers on how statewide elections will turn out.

The polls found that Hillary often had higher negative ratings with voters than did Trump. Some of the polls also found a greater degree of intensity among Trump’s potential voters than among Clinton’s, a finding that mirrors the stronger GOP turnouts that have been registered in the presidential primaries.

It’s not just confidential polling data that find surprisingly strong support for Trump in New York. A recent publicly disclosed Siena College poll of Long Island voters found Trump narrowly beating Clinton among Long Island voters, 41% to 38%, while he was crushing his two nearest GOP primary opponents, Marco Rubio and John Kasich, by 37 percentage points each.

(2) Thoughtful anti-Trump Reasons

I have found two individuals who have articulated thoughtful and thought-provoking reasons for why Donald Trump should give us pause. Both express empathy for the frustrations that so many of us have with the dysfunctional U.S. political system and politics.

Senator Ben Sasse

In an “Open letter to Trump supporters,” Senator Ben Sasse (R-Nebraska), who calls himself not an “establishment Republican” but a “movement conservative who was elected over the objections of the GOP establishment” who is against open borders and will vote for neither Hillary nor Trump if those are the choices, conveys his misgivings on Trump not respecting the U.S. Constitution. (Note: Sen. Sasse, whom Sarah Palin endorsed in 2014, has the 4th most conservative record in the Senate, and the endorsement of Sarah Palin in 2014.) Sasse gives two reasons for being concerned about Trump:

  • Trump’s “relentless focus” on dividing Americans and on “tearing down rather than building back up” our country.
  • Trump is not a Constitutionalist because he seems to think a president of the United States is a king, instead of a servant of the people: “Much like President Obama, he displays essentially no understanding of the fact that, in the American system, we have a constitutional system of checks and balances, with three separate but co-equal branches of government. And the task of public officials is to be public ‘servants.’ The law is king, and the people are boss. But have you noticed how Mr. Trump uses the word ‘Reign’ – like he thinks he’s running for King? It’s creepy, actually. Nebraskans are not looking for a king. We yearn instead for the recovery of a Constitutional Republic…. The president’s job is not about just mindlessly shouting the word “strong”…. No, the president’s core calling is to “Preserve, Protect, and Defend the Constitution…. So let me ask you: Do you believe the beating heart of Mr. Trump’s candidacy has been a defense of the Constitution? Do you believe it’s been an impassioned defense of the First Amendment – or an attack on it?…. I believe a sizable share of Christians – who regard threats against religious liberty as arguably the greatest crisis of our time – are unwilling to support any candidate who does not make a full-throated defense of the First Amendment a first commitment of their candidacy. Conservatives understand that all men are created equal and made in the image of God, but also that government must be limited so that fallen men do not wield too much power. A presidential candidate who boasts about what he’ll do during his ‘reign’ and refuses to condemn the KKK cannot lead a conservative movement in America.”

To illustrate his concerns, Senator Sasse points to these quotes by Trump:

  • “We’re going to open up libel laws and we’re going to have people sue you like you’ve never got sued before.”
  • “When the students poured into Tiananmen Square, the Chinese government almost blew it. They were vicious, they were horrible, but they put it down with strength. That shows you the power of strength. Our country is right now perceived as weak…”
  • “Putin, who has killed journalists and is pillaging Ukraine, is a great leader.”
  • The editor of National Review “should not be allowed on TV and the FCC should fine him.”
  • On whether he will use executive orders to end-run Congress, as President Obama has illegally done, Trump said, “I won’t refuse it. I’m going to do a lot of things” and “I mean, he’s [Obama] led the way, to be honest with you.”
  • “68% [of illegal immigrants?] would not leave under any circumstance. I think that means murder. It think it means anything.”
  • On the internet: “I would certainly be open to closing areas” of it.
  • Trump’s lawyers to people selling anti-Trump t-shirts: “Mr. Trump considers this to be a very serious matter and has authorized our legal team to take all necessary and appropriate actions to bring an immediate halt…”
  • Similar threatening legal letters to competing campaigns running ads about his record.

Sasse signed his open letter as “Humbly, Ben Sasse, Nebraska”.

For his part, attorney Jay Gaskill, writing in The Out*Lawyer’s Blog, is troubled by the absence of Trump’s presidential staff, i.e., named policy advisers who may make up the cabinet of a Trump presidency. In Gaskill’s words:

For now, “The Donald” is enjoying a Halo-Effect…. The Halo is always a mirage…. Anyone who has followed “The Donald’s” career knows that he is a very shrewd operator….

Trump is the known, unknown candidate. For most Americans he’s the self-confident image of success, the millionaire (or billionaire?) of Celebrity Apprentice, brazenly charming enjoying the guilt-free glamour of a “self-made” rich man. He is a savvy manipulator with a gift for publicity. And – for most people – he is a likeable character, someone that people like Bill and Hillary liked to be seen with. His glamour is a projected image – a screen….

Whatever policy differences one might have, and whatever the ultimate verdict of history on the Reagan presidency, his presidency proved decisively that a good staff is absolutely essential to good governance. Reagan’s staff was first rate. Bill Clinton’s first term floundered because the former Arkansas Governor had poor staff support.

The contrast between Ronald Reagan and Donald Trump is stark….

“The Donald” appears to be the hollow candidate in the race, the walking, talking mirage, the one POTUS aspirant without experts, without even a detailed policy outline – other than his trademark fogball slogans….

Donald Trump is seeking the highest executive position in the free world, standing on a high wire without a strong policy portfolio, and with no visible presidential staff.  Presumably Mr. Trump thinks he can hire the necessary people at the last minute. One wonders if it has dawned on him yet that he will be legally required to put all his business ventures into a blind trust for the duration of his service. Of course, there are a number of reasons why someone in Donald Trump’s position would want to remain vague and fluid on concrete proposals, and to refrain from identifying specific experts and key staff members – assuming he has yet figured out who he even wants. But most of those reasons (still working on it, not ready yet, having recruiting issues) are no longer defensible.

The real reason to me stems from Trump’s shrewdness.

As soon as a candidate in his position starts to flesh out the prospective governance picture, to color in the lines, to fill the blanks, that candidate will pierce the bubble of unreasonable expectations. And with that “pop,” the fake halo is exposed. Donald Trump will then risk becoming that TV personality and real estate developer guy who wants us to trust him with the future of the United States of America. And based on what? Trump Tower? A few slogans? An honest face?

Former Congressman and House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who was a presidential candidate in the 2012 primaries, said he thinks the opposition of Republicans like Mitt Romney is because Trump is “an outsider” who’s “not part of the club,” did not go through the “initiation rites” of “the secret societies” (like George W. Bush’s Yale Scull and Bones?), and is therefore “uncontrollable”. “They have no idea how to relate to him.”

H/t FOTM‘s MomOfIV and bongiornoc


Rush Limbaugh: What I heard about Harry Reid’s “exercise” injuries

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nevada) recently admitted that he is now blinded in his right eye from injuries he sustained from “exercising” on New Year’s Day in his home in Henderson, a suburb of Las Vegas. Supposedly, an “elastic exercise band” snapped so violently that Reid was flung across the room and crashed into a filing cabinet, resulting in broken ribs and facial bones.

Or so we are to believe.

Harry Reid blind in one eye

Nor is this the first time Reid had been injured from “exercising.”

In May 2011 in Washington, D.C., Reid dislocated his shoulder, bumped his forehead, and sustained a contusion just below his left eye when he slipped and fell during a morning jog in the rain. Reid said he was leaning on a wet car near his home in the Ritz-Carlton hotel  when he tumbled to the ground.

Harry Reid injuries

Now, our suspicions about the real cause of Reid’s New Year’s Day injuries are confirmed: They were from a beating, not from “exercising.”

From the transcript of Rush Limbaugh’s radio show yesterday, April 15, 2015:

It’s a couple of weeks ago now, I got an e-mail from John Hinderaker at Power Line, and he said that he had been in contact with somebody in Las Vegas who claimed to know what happened to Harry Reid, and that this man wanted to tell the story to both Hinderaker and me, on the phone.  I was asked if I would join a phone call and listen to the story, and I said, “Sure, but I’m not committing to using any of it. I’m making no commitments about anything.”  Everybody understood that.

So after the program one day a couple of weeks ago I got on the phone with John Hinderaker and this caller from Las Vegas who claimed to know what happened to Dingy Harry Reid.  Hinderaker wrote the story up and published it on Power Line.  I don’t know what the date was because I didn’t print.  But it’s just a couple, three weeks ago.  And here’s the upshot of it.

Hinderaker writes:  “On Monday I got a phone call from a man named Easton Elliott. We talked briefly on Monday, and have had additional telephone conversations since then. Elliott*,” with an asterisk, “is a businessman who lives in the Las Vegas area, and he thinks he knows what really happened to Harry Reid. This is the story as he related it to me.”

Note: Hinderaker had an asterisk * after the name Elliott because “Easton Elliott” is the name he goes under in his second career as an addiction recovery life coach. In his business career he uses his given name. He is known to the AA members who witnessed the events he describes here, and to the recovery community generally, as Easton Elliott.

Here you go.  Elliott, the caller, who wanted to speak to Hinderaker and me, “Elliott spent a portion of last New Year’s Eve at an Alcoholics Anonymous meeting in Henderson, Nevada,” which, for all intents and purposes, is Vegas.  “His AA group has meetings every hour on New Year’s Eve, along with a pot luck supper. There were approximately 20 people present at the meeting during the events,” that you will next hear about.

Some time between 10:00 and 11:30 p.m., a man entered the meeting. His appearance was striking: there was blood on his clothing, beginning around his midsection. His left hand was swollen. He appeared to be somewhat intoxicated and was visibly agitated,” and he wanted to share, at this AA meeting.

He introduced himself as ‘Larry.’  In a group discussion that was heard by a number of people, Larry said that he had just had a fight with a family member. Larry said he had been at a family get-together, and he didn’t remember much about the fight because he had blacked out. When he came to, he was rolling on the ground, fighting with a family member, and his clothes were bloody,” and in fact that’s how he showed up at the AA meeting.  “Now, he said, he was frightened that the Secret Service would come after him.” […]

So this guy, Larry, “stayed for the rest of the meeting, and for a while afterward. There is a front room where coffee is served, and he remained there for a while. At some point during that time, he asked whether anyone could give him a ride to Searchlight. Larry’s appearance at the AA meeting was memorable, as references to fighting, bloody clothes and so on are extraordinary in that group.” It’s not something that happens at every AA meeting.

And the guy we were talking to, Easton Elliott, he didn’t think much more about this guy, Larry, until several weeks later when “he saw a newspaper story about Larry Reid, Harry Reid’s brother, being arrested for DUI and assaulting a highway patrolman. The story was accompanied by a photograph, and Elliott immediately recognized Larry Reid as the ‘Larry’ who had attended the AA meeting,” weeks previous, who was drunk, who was bloody, who had a swollen left fist, and claimed he had been in a fight with a family member and was worried the Secret Service was gonna follow him.

Then everybody said, “Whoa, wait a minute!  The guy who came in here who we thought was a kook is Harry Reid’s brother?”  So they started putting two and two together because this story’s accompanied by a photograph. Easton Elliott “immediately recognized Larry Reid as the ‘Larry’ who had attended the AA meeting on New Year’s Eve. Putting that fact together with news stories about Harry Reid being admitted to a hospital on New Year’s Day, and with Larry’s references to the Secret Service, he concluded that the family member with whom Larry fought was Harry Reid. He also knew that Harry Reid’s home is within a short distance of the location of the AA meeting.

[…]Larry Reid is 73, a short, pugnacious guy, and is a well-known brawler, by the way, subsequent research has indicated.

Larry Reid

Now, “Subsequent to the news story about Larry Reid’s arrest, Elliott discussed with several others who had been present on New Year’s Eve his belief that ‘Larry’ had been Larry Reid. They, too, recognized Larry from the newspaper photograph. One of those who had been present at the AA meeting called Las Vegas’s Channel 8 to tell them about Larry Reid’s account of fighting with a family member, but that person said that whoever he spoke with at the television station told him they were not interested.” […]

So, bottom line, somebody attacked Harry Reid on New Year’s Eve or New Year’s Day.  That much seems clear from pictures and from the nature of his injuries.  Nobody’s investigated this.  […]

As Hinderaker wrote, his investigation “consisted of answering my telephone.” And he posits maybe “those reporters who were so eager to dig through Sarah Palin’s dumpster and track down Mitt Romney’s high school classmates,” or to find out whether Romney had paid his taxes or not, “will now swing into action, carry out an actual investigation, and either confirm or refute the events described by Mr. Elliott,” and the people at the AA meeting.

And, by the way, the man known as Easton Elliott was more than willing to come on the radio.  In fact, he wanted to.  He was more than willing to tell the story himself.  He’s willing to go on TV.  He said: “I’m a citizen who believes in God and feels compelled to do the right thing — tell the truth. Harry Reid could learn a lesson from me in being truthful!

He also made a point over and over of saying he’s not a political guy.  He’s a small businessman. He’s had several businesses in the Vegas area.  Hinderaker called Harry Reid’s spokesman, gave him an opportunity to comment, and they didn’t deny it, but they said they’re not gonna comment, either.

So that’s the extent of our knowledge about what happened.  Dingy Harry’s out now blaming me for starting a rumor that he was beaten up by the mob.  I didn’t say mob, but it’s clear from the pictures that an exercise machine in a bathroom did not do what happened to Harry Reid.  Is it not?  So now there’s this story on the table, that it was his brother, Larry Reid, and they got in a family fight.

For John Hinderaker’s account, much of which was repeated by Rush Limbaugh yesterday, see “What Really Happened to Harry Reid? Part 3.”

3 monkeys

Here’s contact info for the incurious, disgraceful KLAS Channel 8 Las Vegas:

Channel 8 Main Switchboard: (702) 792-8888
News Hotline: (702) 650-1960
Email address of Emily Neilson, President & General Manager: eneilson@8newsnow.com


Dennis Prager, Michael Medved and the Gatekeepers of the Right

Dennis Prager

Do you ever listen to Dennis Prager?

I do. He’s a very wise man.

So is Michael Medved, Sean Hannity, Mark Levin, Bill O’Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, and a host of other conservative talk show hosts. All of them very wise men. By listening to them speak, or by reading their books, you can learn a lot about morality, conservatism, liberalism, the right, the left, economics, etc., but the one thing you’ll never hear is the Truth.

As wise as all these men are, they choose to live in a sort of conspiratorial fantasy world. A world where if it’s not on the front page of the New York Times, or front and center on the NBC Nightly News, then it’s not real. It doesn’t exist.

This is ironic, because all of these men constantly rail about lies and distortions in the mainstream media. And yet they allow this same mainstream media, though proven by their own experience and observation to be untruthful and riddled with bias, to dictate their reality. Think about that for a moment. These are otherwise very intelligent men, who represent millions of other otherwise very intelligent men, who allow their lives to be controlled and manipulated by the very same media sources which they themselves know to be filled with disinformation and lies. It’s positively mind-boggling.

You can prove this to yourself very easily: call up one of their shows and mildly suggest that perhaps the truth about Sandy Hook or the Boston Marathon bombing are not quite what we’ve been told in the mainstream media. You’ll be insulted, slandered, and hung up on so fast it’ll make your head spin.

Forget facts. Never mind evidence. Those subjects are simply off-limits. So are the words “crisis actor”, aka Obama’s Connecticut social security numbers or homosexual past, satanism in the entertainment industry, the 1982 Consent Agreement between the RNC and DNC, any mention of the connection between vaccines and autism, and a whole host of other subjects.

Some people suggest that these men are professional disinformationists, or controlled opposition. I’m not sure about that. It’s hard for me to imagine Dennis Prager or Michael Medved as less than honorable men. And yet they are far too intelligent to be labeled useful idiots. Perhaps useful intelligentsia.

Rush Limbaugh is too damn smart not to know what’s really going on. Is he afraid of losing credibility if he speaks the Truth? Is that what they’re all afraid of?

These men have all built nice cushy careers peddling a form of mainstream conservatism. Is their fear of losing their prestige greater then their sense of duty to God and country? I wonder if they really believe in the fantasy world that they claim exists. It takes courage to face reality and look evil in the face. Most men are just too frightened to do that. For most people, the idea that evil exists and the possibility that the reality they’ve grown up with might be false is enough to set off alarm bells in most people’s heads and short circuit their brain.

What do you think?

The demon is coming out of Obama again

Four years ago in mid-October, less than 3 weeks before the mid-term elections of 2010, it wasn’t looking good for the Democrats. Indeed, that was the election in which the Republicans wrestled a House majority away from Nancy Pelosi and her fellow Demonrats.

In campaign rallies during the weekend of Oct. 15-16, 2010, Obama was angry.

More than angry, he was frightening looking — which was noted by Drudge Report as well as Rush Limbaugh, who said, “An American president has never had facial expressions like this. At least we’ve never seen photos of an American president with facial expressions like this.”

These were some of the pics taken of Obama in those 2010 rallies. Trust what your instincts tell you.

Flash forward four years to another mid-term election campaign rally.

As in the midterm elections of 2010, once again it’s not looking good for the Demonrats.

The pic below was taken of Obama when he spoke at a rally for Gov. Pat Quinn, D-Ill., at Chicago State University on Sunday, Oct. 19, 2014, in Chicago.

Look at his eyes!!! Trust what your instincts tell you.

evil angry ObamaAP Photo/Evan Vucci (Source: WOKV)

Here’s a close-up of those eyes.

evil angry Obama eyes Oct. 2014

I see anger, desperation, madness….

And behind those eyes, there’s nobody there.

Just emptiness. A vacuum.

Earlier that day, Obama was at a campaign rally in Upper Marlboro, Maryland, for the gubernatorial campaign of Maryland lieutenant governor Anthony G. Brown, in which members of the audience walked out while the president of the United States of America was still speaking. (See “Mainly black crowd walks out on Obama at Democratic campaign rally“)

As in 2010, once again Obama’s mask — the narcissistic psychopath’s charming social mask — is slipping and what emerges sure ain’t pretty.

It’s unholy and demonic.

See also:


America is a Nation of Eunuchs

When has America become a nation of eunuchs, being tyrannized by the whiny few?

But it’s not just any whiny minority. It has to be a group that the Left has designated to be An Official Victim Group.

Yesterday, on his radio talk show, Rush Limbaugh brought up the subject of the alleged offensiveness of the name of the NFL team, the Washington Redskins.

Roger Goodell

Roger Goodell, the commissioner of the National Football League (NFL), was on a Washington sports radio station and was asked about Dan Snyder, owner of the Washington Redskins, saying he will never change the name of the Redskins, despite some people allegedly finding the word “Redskins” to be offensive.

Goodell was asked: “Is that his [Snyder’s] decision to make alone…?”

Imagine that. The owner of a private business cannot decide on his own what name to call his business!

Goodell answered: “I grew up in Washington.  The Colts were my team early on, and then I became a Redskins fan.  I know the team name is part of their history and tradition, and that’s something that’s important to the Redskins fans, and I think what we have to do, though, is we have to listen.  If one person’s offended, we have to listen.

Did you get that? The commissioner of the NFL says:

“If one person is offended, we have to listen.”

That is the same eunuch mentality that led a school in Brentwood, Tennessee to ban pork from the school’s menu to avoid offending Muslims.

Sunset Elementary School

Todd Starnes reports for Fox News Radio, Aug. 15, 2013, that Sunset Elementary School banned students from eating ham sandwiches, BLT’s and anything else made with pork.

Parents found out about this ridiculous Muslim-appeasing ban when Sunset’s third grade teachers sent home an “Approved Snack List” for the school year, which specifically banned anything that comes from a pig.

memoThe memorandum says:

“Starting Monday, August 12, 2013 your child must provide their own snack from the above approved snack list.” “Only choose a food from the following list to bring into school for snack.” And in bold-face type: “No other food items are permitted.”

The approved snack list consists of 7 items, beginning with Item No. 1: Fresh Fruits.

Item No. 3 on the approved snack list states “No meats containing pork.”

There was such an uproar among parents about the pork ban that a day after the ban went into effect, Williamson County Schools posted a message on their Facebook page telling parents to ignore the rules:

“Schools should only be offering suggested snack choices, and that information will be sent home only if your child is in a classroom where there is a food allergy. Any reference to not allowing pork products in school is incorrect. Please disregard.”

The district lamely said the memorandum was to address food allergies but did not explain why pork was banned. One parent wrote on Facebook: “I’ve never heard of a life-threatening pork allergy.”

Nashville radio host Michael DelGiorno wrote on his Facebook page that the memo’s approved snack list was a “typical list for a Madrassa.” One of his listeners wrote: “If you think this has anything to do with something besides appeasing Muslims then you are either stupid or willfully ignorant.”

H/t Patriot Action Network


Report Says Valerie Jarrett Gave The Order To Stand Down In Benghazi

I’m thinking skippy doesn’t even scratch without Broom Hilda‘s permission. Yikes, she’s scary.   

She eats Children. She is Evil Personified. Yikes!!!

She eats Children. She is Evil Personified. Yikes!!!


August 8, 2013

A post at the Conservative Report Online made the shocking claim that Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett gave the order to stand down in Benghazi during the Sept. 11 terror attack that saw four Americans killed, citing only unnamed “confidential sources.” The report was discussed by Rush Limbaugh on Tuesday and an editorial at the Investor’s Business Daily said Wednesday that it would not have been the first time Jarrett issued such an order.

“The military-order, not to initiate action, saving our men in Benghazi, was issued by the President’s Advisor, Valerie Jarrett,” Chip Jones wrote.

Limbaugh said that if the story is true, it would explain “all of the serial lies and the cover-ups and the obfuscation and all of the efforts that were made to distract people’s attention from this.”

“Somebody had to give the order, and Obama was off the grid. That has always, to me, been one of the most interesting aspects of Benghazi. Five o’clock he tells Panetta and whoever else — we were originally told that Hillary, secretary of state, was there, too,” he added.

Naturally, the ultra-left wing Media Matters weighed in, attacking Limbaugh for mentioning the story.

Others also reported on Jones’ account, but did not get scrutinized by Media Matters.

The Blaze said the allegations are worth noting for two main reasons:

  1. The White House hasn’t been forthcoming with details about the deadly terror attack. In fact, the administration has gone out of its way to craft blatantly false narratives involving a YouTube video; and
  2. It’s been widely reported that Jarrett’s influence has shaped our management of international crises, specifically her role in convincing President Obama to call off the planned raid on Osama bin Laden’s Pakistani hideout three separate times.

Meredith Jessup said she is taking the report with a grain of salt, but added that the burden of proof is on the White House, since it “has worked overtime to muddy the water and obfuscate the truth.”

Now the administration is claiming the entire scandal is “phony,” a mere distraction cooked up by Republicans to keep Congress from acting on Obama’s economic plans.

“Until the Obama administration is forthright and truthful with the American people, the rumor mill will continue churning out reports from unnamed sources,” Jessup added.

Video of Limbaugh’s on-air segment can be seen http://www.examiner.com/video/rush-limbaugh-did-valerie-jarrett-issue-the-order-to-stand-down-benghazi


Pres. Lucifer’s SS “visits” a no-name anti-Obama critic

Rush Limbaugh recently said America is in the midst of a coup d’état by the Obama regime.

Indeed, every day brings more confirmation that we are no longer living in America, land of the free. Without a peep, our country has morphed into a dystopia like Nazi Germany or Stalinist Russia.

President Lucifer’s Secret Service Gestapo paid a visit to an ordinary law-abiding American named Tom Francois who, the SS agents themselves admit, had never threatened to do harm to Obama. (Note: This post’s title’s reference to Francois as a “no-name” anti-Obama critic is not meant to be disrespectful toward Francois, but rather is meant to emphasize that he, like FOTM, is one of the “little people” who pose no threat to big and powerful Pres. Lucifer.)

The SS goons paid Francois a visit for this simple reason: Francois had tweeted criticisms of Obama and made cartoons making fun of The One, like the one below.


Tom Francois Obama cartoon

Harriet Baldwin reports for the Examiner, June 11, 2013:

After you read this- you will wonder what country we are in.

Tom Francois is an outspoken critic of Barack Hussein Obama- and has a robust Twitter presence. He also likes to dabble with his “paint” program to create funny cartoons. He has never threatened the President in any way, manner or form.

On April 11, 2013, he heard relentless pounding on his door shouts of “Police!” The officers introduced themselves as members of The Secret Service and asked if they could “take a look around.”

Since Tom had nothing to hide (and he didn’t want any return visits) – he complied fully with their request. He even signed a consent to search his premises AND an “Authorization To Review Medical and Mental Health Records!”

They asked Tom if he ever left his state or traveled to Washington, D.C.

One Agent asked Tom if he has any intentions of “whacking” the President.” To which Tom replied- “Of course not. I wish him no harm. I disagree with his policies and actions and I make no bones about it. It’s my First Amendment Right and I intend to exercise it.”

When I spoke to Tom he said, “Yes, I am EXTREMELY critical of Obama in my posts, but I never cross the line and threaten his being. EVER. It’s just the idea of Obama’s Secret Service intruding on my life when they knew I wasn’t really a threat.”

The Secret Service had a thick FBI file- filled with screenshots of hundreds of posts. Said Tom, “I flat out told them ‘I have NEVER threatened Obama’s life! Yes, I despise him as you can plainly see, but I have that right!’ They actually ADMITTED and agreed with me that I hadn’t threatened Obama.”

They had run a background check and discovered that Tom legally owned two guns- and they asked to see them. Tom showed them his firearms. They asked, “Are they loaded?” Tom replied in the affirmative. “What good are guns if they aren’t loaded?”

So why harass Tom? “The Secret Service officers claimed that “they were concerned that since I have a large Twitter following, and the things I said could be acted upon by some nut case out there! What the hell? They turned my life upside down for THAT?”

Tom didn’t refuse the search because they just would have gone and gotten a warrant. “They would have proceeded to tear my house apart. No thanks. I have nothing to hide. They left empty-handed and my house is still intact.”

When they left Tom’s house, one Secret Service Agent ‘advised’- “Keep in mind, if you step over the line, we’ll come back for your guns.”

After the “visit” to Tom, the Secret Service also visited Tom’s 22 year old daughter- terrifying her and making her fear for her father’s safety. She asked them what they were going to do with the information about her Dad. They said they were going to “turn it over to Eric Holder- he has the last word on what to do, if anything.”

Should anyone have any doubt about the veracity of this report, Mr. Francois had the presence of mind to make copies of the Consent To Search (which expressly included computers, hardware, software, recording devices, cell phones, data storage, etc). It also states: “I understand that any contraband or evidence may be used against me in a court of law.”

The “Consent To Search” and the “Authorization To Review Medical and Mental Health Records” signed and dated by the special agents of the Secret Service- were furnished to this reporter.

Wake up, America.

This administration is spying on Americans, via the NSA and targeting Tea Party and religious groups for voter suppression via the IRS. Now- Obama’s Secret Service is paying personal “visits”- on law abiding citizens? This is TYRANNY!

Keep in mind, dear readers- this raid upon Tom Francois and his home – took place just 4 days before The Boston Bombing. Was this a good use of manpower?

Everyone should be outraged by this story. Republican, Democrat, Independent, Libertarian- EVERYONE!

This kind of intimidation and strong arm tactics CANNOT stand.

Just because a thin-skinned president doesn’t like what a private citizen posts (as his First Amendment Right) on the internet?