The Cover-Up At A Fast And Furious Pace
Jun 20, 2012 Political
There has been a tendency on the part of this administration [Bush Administration] to try to hide behind Executive Privilege every time there is something a little shaky taking place and I think the administration would be best served by coming clean on this. ~ Senator Barack Obama
Attorney General Eric Holder is involved in a very bad cover-up of wrong doing in a little thing known as Fast and Furious. Fast and Furious was an illegal gun running operation conducted under the direction of Holder. It was all designed to allow the Obama regime to enact strict gun control but went south when guns the regime allowed to flow into Mexico showed up at murders, including the murder of a Border Patrol Agent. Make no mistake, the guns were allowed to run into Mexico because the Justice Department forced gun dealers to make illegal sales.
Holder has been under investigation for nearly a year and has stonewalled every step of the way. He refuses to release documents relating to the illegal operation and a vote to hold him in contempt looms in the House.
Through all of this the Obama regime claimed ignorance of the operation (and they even blame it on, wait for it, Bush). BTW, this has been disproved) and Holder has done his best to protect Obama from being implicated in the operation. Obama did not see anything, has no knowledge and is not involved.
Eric Holder wrote a letter to Barack Obama asking him to invoke Executive Privilege to cover the documents that Holder does not want to release. Barack Obama did indeed invoke Executive Privilege. Now, if Obama has never seen them and was not involved then how could he possibly know they are documents that should be protected by Executive Privilege? It seems that Barack Obama knows what is in those documents and he is invoking Executive Privilege in order to assist Holder in the cover-up.
This is the same Barack Obama who, as a Senator, said that he was against hiding behind Executive Privilege. This video is from an interview on the Larry King Show:
When Richard Nixon was president there was a little thing called Watergate. Nixon was threatened with impeachment and eventually resigned from office because of it. It is believed that Nixon was not involved in the decision to conduct the break in, his staff was involved in that. Nixon got in trouble because after he was informed about it he was implicated in the cover-up that took place. The reason Nixon was implicated is because he had a recording system in his office and there were tapes of the meetings where the cover-up was discussed. Nixon attempted to assert Executive Privilege to keep the tapes from being released but the Supreme Court ruled that he had to hand them over.
Nixon attempted to assert Executive Privilege in order to cover-up the wrong doing and he ended up losing his job under threat of impeachment (and the certainty he would be found guilty by the Senate). Does this sound familiar?
Today Barack Obama had his Richard Nixon moment and time will tell if he will be treated the same way by the Democrats and their media wing.
Where are Woodward and Bernstein now?
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: barack obama, cover up, eric holder, executive privilege, fast and furious, lies, richard nixon, watergate
Requesting ID Is Racist?
Jun 10, 2012 Political
Eric Holder and the other race hustlers on the left have convinced people that requiring ID to vote is racist and disenfranchises people. This flies in the face of reality because many of the people who would allegedly be disenfranchised have ID. None of them ever cry about needing ID to get welfare or board a plane, buy liquor or tobacco products or any of the dozens of other things that an ID is needed for.
No, they happily provide ID and no one ever cries about racism or being disenfranchised.
This is all a smoke screen to protect those who should not vote but do and the reason is simple. Those folks vote for Democrats. Democrats know that requiring an ID to vote would cost them votes. This is not racism and it is not disenfranchising. It is simply ensuring the law is followed and that the one person one vote principle is followed so long as the one person is legally allowed to vote. It is quite simple and is no more an impediment to voting than requiring an ID to buy alcohol is an impediment to those who are legally allowed to drink.
You know that it is all a sham and it is easy to see. One must present an ID to get into the building where Eric Holder works.
One must present an ID to get into the Democrat Convention.
And one must provide an ID to get a book signed by Michelle Obama.
This is all an elaborate game designed to protect those among us who break the law by voting when they are not allowed to do so. The Democrats want to protect their base and they want to ensure they get as many votes as possible whether they are legal or not.
If they really think IDs are racist and that it disenfranchises people to request an ID then perhaps they would take things further by removing ID requirements all together. No more ID to buy alcohol or tobacco, no more ID to enter government buildings, no ID to enter the Democrat Convention and no ID to get on a plane.
That will never happen but Democrats will fight tooth and nail to keep states from requiring an ID to vote.
Their hypocrisy never ends.
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit
Tags: eric holder, laws, lies, michelle obama. id, votes
Eric Holder Says Voter ID Not Needed…
Apr 9, 2012 Political
The left opposes voter ID in any shape or fashion and the only reason is because those who are not supposed to vote traditionally vote Democrat. The left will claim that there are too many people who don’t have IDs but that is a myth. There might be some folks who don’t have IDs but by and large, people have them.
Even the most downtrodden must have an ID to get government services. If this is not the case then we have another real problem where IDs would be beneficial.
Truth is, most people have some sort of ID and those who don’t probably don’t vote anyway. Even if they do, there are programs where they can get an ID (assuming they have never, ever needed one) at no cost.
The issue is that Democrats don’t want to get rid of an entire block of voters, the ones not allowed to vote, because they like to win elections. They must do that before they can run our lives.
James O’Keefe has exposed the reason we need ID to vote. First he went to a state and was issued ballots in the names of other people (including those who are dead) and now he has shoved the issue right down Attorney General Eric Holder’s throat.
O’Keefe has a video of a person requesting Holder’s ballot (he gave Holder’s name and address) and the poll worker tries to give it to him. The person says he does not have ID but is told that he does not need it. He says he wants to show it and leaves (before getting the ballot).
Holder says there is no problem but O’Keefe shows just how easy it is. And let us not be fooled by the rhetoric that IDs won’t solve the problem. This is dispelled by the video.
When he leaves he says “faster than you can say furious” which is absolutely hysterical.
A few take aways from this video. What does it say that these folks did not think it suspicious that someone claiming to be Holder asked for a ballot? Sure, there could be more than one Eric Holder but shouldn’t they verify? Perhaps they do not know who he is, which is a sad statement in and of itself.
Second take away; it is clear that an ID would have prevented this.
Third take away. Note the irony that he needed an ID to get into the Department of Justice to see someone in the building (like Holder) but did not need one to vote (and could have voted in Holder’s name).
Voter ID laws disenfranchise people but only those who are voting illegally…
If those voting illegally voted Republican the Democrats would pass voter ID in a heartbeat.
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: eric holder, illegal votes, james o'keefe, lies, voter fraud
The New Black Panther Vigilante Party
Mar 25, 2012 Commentary
The lawbreaking racists of the New Black Panther Party (NBPP) have weighed in on the killing of Trayvon Martin. The NBPP has decided that George Zimmerman, the guy who shot Martin as Martin was allegedly beating him, is a child killer and has issued a “Wanted: Dead or Alive” poster for Zimmerman.
Never mind that the NBPP, taking its cues from the MSM, has published a 5 year old picture showing Martin as a child rather than the thuggish looking photos from his Facebook page and never mind that the police are investigating the issue and can arrest Zimmerman at any time should the situation warrant it. No, the NBPP has decided that it will play vigilante and has published the poster. The NBPP has also stated it will recruit 10,000 men to hunt Zimmerman down.
Remember how the left focused the blame for the Gifford’s shooting on the right and talk radio? Remember how Sarah Palin was blamed for this and how quickly the MSM toned it down when it was discovered that the shooter was fairly apolitical but his beliefs echoed the left? Look at how the left has blamed Rush Limbaugh and other talk hosts for the shooting of Martin.
Ignoring the fact that the left always finds someone else to blame for something, who will they pin the blame on if the NBPP or one of the mush heads who follows that racist group ends up killing Zimmerman?
Will they blame talk radio or will they place the blame where it belongs and that would be in the hands of Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Louis Farrakhan, Barack Obama, the NBPP and a number of others who have incited violence by refusing to allow the police to investigate the shooting and to gather all relevant facts in the case. A witness says that the 6’2″ Martin attacked Zimmerman and was on top of him beating him as Zimmerman screamed for help. It was then that Zimmerman shot Martin which seems to me to be a pretty open and shut case of self defense. This might play out differently but the important thing is to let the police investigate.
Zimmerman is in danger from radical black racists who are intent on exacting vigilante justice. It has issued a Dead or Alive poster and there is now a great possibility that one of the morons who follow that group will kill Zimmerman. Will the media call it justified and will we then issue wanted posters for those who kill Zimmerman? When will it stop?
Suppose groups of people issued wanted posters for the blacks who have raped and murdered white people across this nation. There are plenty of examples of this happening with no rallies from the race baiters and certainly no presence of the NBPP calling for the death of the criminals. I imagine that if wanted posters went out the race baiters would then rally to defend the murderers.
Imagine what would have happened if a wanted poster had been issued for the NBPP morons who threatened people at the voting polls in Philadelphia thus violating their right to vote.
Do you think Barack Obama and his racist Attorney General would get involved then?
There is no need for the hype surrounding this case but the stakes get higher each day as the race baiters are allowed to incite violence. This would include the race baiters in the media who continually referred to the shooter as a white man when he is clearly a Hispanic.
Let the police do their jobs and let the facts in this case come forward absent the threats of violence.
If we truly want justice then we need the race baiters to tone it down and stop inciting violence.
If the NBPP ends up killing Zimmerman there will be all kinds of hell to pay in this nation as race relations get set back decades.
UPDATED: The NBPP has offered a 1 million dollar bounty for Zimmerman. These morons are blaming white America. Better be careful what you ask for guys. Where is Obama and his pleas for civility?
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: black panthers, eric holder, george zimmerman, justice, lies, nbpp, Obama, police, trayvon martin, vigilante
Unions Oppose Voter ID Except When It Is A Union Vote
Mar 12, 2012 Political
Imagine you belong to a union and that union is voting on something (contract, leadership, etc). You arrive at the union hall which belongs to the union and its members. Before you are allowed to vote you must show an ID. Why? What are the odds that the people in the room are not part of the union? Could they really get so many non union folks in there to affect the outcome of the vote without someone noticing they don’t belong? If there is any place where the likelihood of voter fraud is low it is in a union hall (with regard to non members voting, all kinds of fraud takes place in unions) so why is an ID required?
Better yet, why do the same unions that require an ID to vote in its processes oppose voter ID laws with regard to our state political elections?
The unions oppose voter ID when the general population is voting in political elections even though the potential (and actual) fraud is much higher than could ever be expected in a union hall where ID is required.
The reason is pretty simple. The unions do not want voter ID laws because those laws would keep the unions from committing voter fraud. The unions are heavily vested in the Democrat Party and the unions do a lot of fraudulent things. They intimidate people who are campaigning, they intimidate people who vote, and they help the dead get to the polls while also ensuring there are an adequate number of “extra” votes for the people they want to win.
Democrats and unions are one in the same. The same philosophy, same criminal activity, and same voter fraud (ACORN anyone) found in unions are found in the Democrat Party. They work hand in hand because unions work to get Democrats elected and then Democrats work to transfer taxpayer money to the unions. The violation of law leading to investors being shafted while unions took ownership of auto companies was a payoff and this kind of stuff happens all the time.
Since Democrats and unions are the same it should come as no surprise that Democrats oppose voter ID. Eric “The Red” Holder and his Justice Department just put the nix on a Texas voter ID law because of the phony claim that it might disproportionately affect Hispanics. Evidently, all those Hispanics in Texas who have jobs do not have ID. Evidently, all the Hispanics in Texas who receive welfare or drive a car do not have a valid ID. I can’t imagine how so many people could be affected by this law but evidently in Texas they let people work, drive, or receive welfare without an ID.
Let me tell you the real concern of Holder and the Obama regime. They are worried that a voter ID law would keep illegals from voting in elections and those would be lost Democrat votes. Illegals are not allowed to vote and ID laws would prevent more of them from doing so and this is a non starter for the Obama regime. The regime needs the illegals and all the other votes it can get in Texas because it is a very red state that contains a lot of electoral votes.
I know Texas is under special scrutiny because of past discrimination as are a few other states. It always seemed arbitrary to me because there are states not subject to the scrutiny and they were as discriminatory as any on the list.
Be that as it may, the argument that the law is discriminatory to Hispanics does not hold water. The Supreme Court has already ruled that a similar law in another state is Constitutional.
But Holder has pressed on with his crusade against voter ID.
He knows that those laws will likely be upheld by the SCOTUS (because they already have) but the legal process takes time.
And Holder only needs to delay until after this November.
If we are lucky, he will be in jail by then…
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: eric holder, justice, lies, texas, union, voter id, votes