"Barrack" Now!

Audio: Today's Podcast

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Barrack) — Sun, 19 May 2013 15:46:00 +0000

On today's show...

The IRS Scandal - Clips from May 17th House Ways and Means Committee Hearing

Did Huma Abedin "quietly" step down as Deputy Chief of Staff to Hillary Clinton in the same month that five Congressmen raised questions about her familial ties to the Muslim Brotherhood?

New York Times says yes.

Videos: Most notable exchanges with Outgoing IRS Commissioner at House Ways and Means

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Barrack) — Sat, 18 May 2013 13:19:00 +0000

When IRS Commissioner Steven Miller testified in front of the House Ways and Means Committee about the scandal that has befallen the Obama administration, there were multiple exchanges worth noting. Rather than doing several separate posts, I decided to put them into one.

First up (no particular order), Rep. Mike Kelly (R-PA). In this exchange, Kelly truly represented not only his own constituents but those belonging to most in Congress. The evidence is in the standing ovation he received when he was done grilling Miller.

Next, Rep. Dave Reichert (R-WA) revealed during his questioning of Miller that the congressman had been a cop for 30 years. At this point, those watching realized why his questioning was so effective. When Miller was asked a "yes" or "no" question and continued to repeat the same lawyered up response, it became obvious Reichert busted him. He then successfully got Miller to give up a name. The clip ends with Reichert shaking his head in disgust.

Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) dressed down the Commissioner by quoting from testimony given by Miller at a previous hearing that directly contradicts what has been learned since, via the scandal itself.

Next up, Rep. Tom Reed (R-NY) elicits an amazing statement from Miller early on in this clip that shows just how out of touch the Commissioner is. As Reed is pointing out that Miller is suffering no real consequences for a scandal that would mean serious consequences for private citizens, Miller rhetorically asks, "nothing bad is happening to me, Congressman?" as if to disagree with the assertion.

Rep. Kevin Brady (R-TX) provided a real-life example of IRS harassment and then asks, "Is this still America?"

Rep. Aaron Schock (R-IL) highlighted the harassment of pro-life groups. Miller could not answer a question about why IRS agents asked one pro-life group to explain the content of its 'prayers'. In light of the revelations brought to light in the Kermit Gosnell trial, this is a particularly chilling reality. Schock asked the IG (seated next to Miller) about letters sent by Senators Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Max Bauchus (D-MT), and Al Franken (D-MN) to the IRS in which they asked for heavier scrutiny of Tea Party groups.

Rep. Charles Boustany (R-LA) began by playing a video of a response from the previous IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman at a hearing in 2012, in which Shulman's testimony contradicts what the scandal has revealed is accurate.

Rep. Jim Gerlach (R-PA) hones in on the issue of sharing confidential taxpayer information. Again, Miller had trouble answering questions and attempted to re-phrase the ones asked so he could answer it the way he wanted to. That didn't work.

Rep. Peter Roskam (R-IL) pressed Miller on conversations the Commissioner had with Lois Lerner, the woman in charge of Tax-exempt filings, after which Miller referred to needing to look at his "notes". Roskam seized on the revelation that notes were in existence by asking Miller about these "notes", to which Miller suddenly couldn't remember if he had any. This is a short-term memory problem that rivals Tom Hanks during a Saturday Night Live skit. Roskam also followed-up on Reichert's previous questioning of Miller. It's a good one.

Rep. Pat Tiberi (R-OH) referred to a real-life example of IRS harassment of an Ohio Tea Party group, the Liberty Township Tea Party (LTTP). Tiberi pointed to a list of questions that LTTP which were utterly ridiculous.

Miller: We provided horrible customer service.

Tiberi: You targeted an individual!

Kermit Gosnell 2.0: The despicably heinous charges against a Houston abortionist

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Barrack) — Sat, 18 May 2013 04:15:00 +0000

Leftists have justified their support for abortion by saying that the crimes of Kermit Gosnell were simply those of a rogue, unclean abortion doctor. In fact, Senate Majority leader Harry Reid expressed this exact view. Gosnell's Philadelphia 'clinic' was an 'outlier', they said.

These heartless people have a new problem and its name is Douglas Karpen, an abortionist in Houston. Like Gosnell, Karpen allegedly zeroed in on the necks of babies who survived botched abortions. Unlike Gosnell, Karpen reportedly used several different techniques.

Via the Daily Mail:

Houston doctor Douglas Karpen is accused by four former employees of delivering live fetuses during third-trimester abortions and killing them by either snipping their spinal cord, stabbing a surgical instrument into their heads or 'twisting their heads off their necks with his own bare hands'.

Other times the fetus was so big he would have to pull it out of the womb in pieces, Karpen's ex-assistant, Deborah Edge, said in an Operation Rescue video, which has prompted a criminal investigation into the doctor.

'Sometimes he couldn't get the fetus out... he would yank pieces – piece by piece – when they were oversize,' Edge explained.

'And I'm talking about the whole floor dirty. I'm talking about me drenched in blood.'

Two of Edge's colleagues, Gigi Aguliar, and Krystal Rodriguez, also described the hellish scenes which took place at the Aaron Women's Clinic in Houston in 2011, and possibly two other abortion clinics run by Karpen in Texas.

Here is a documentary on Karpen.

Dr. Kermit Gosnell epitomized the phrase made famous during the Nuremberg trials. That phrase was - and is - the banality of evil. In fact, if one were honest with himself, the trial that ultimately found him guilty of enough charges to put him away for life was a mini-Nuremberg trial. What went on inside that Philadelphia clinic was simply a microcosm of the exact same evil.

The left did its level best to ignore the trial as well as the case, altogether.

A video was made about Gosnell's clinic too. It was entitled 3801 Lancaster and you can view it here:

Video: More fireworks between Darrell Issa and Eric Holder

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Barrack) — Thu, 16 May 2013 12:10:00 +0000

Over the past couple of years, there have quite a few epic exchanges between Rep. Darrell Issa and Attorney General Eric Holder, mostly over Operation Fast and Furious. Issa, the chairman of the House Oversight Committee, is also a member of the House Judiciary Committee, which is where he often appears a bit more unfettered with respect to challenging Holder. As such, the Judiciary Committee is where the most compelling exchanges between the two men usually takes place.

Yesterday was no exception and it didn't even involve questions about any of the three major scandals that have befallen the White House in recent days.

Some might remember Barack Obama's controversial appointment of Thomas Perez as Secretary of Labor a couple of months ago. Over the past several years, Perez had been the Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights division. Aside from his extremely suspect testimony in front of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights about the New Black Panther Party (NBPP) case or his involvement in targeting the state of Arizona back in 2010 over SB 1070, an immigration law signed by Governor Jan Brewer, Perez was also involved in shady quid pro quo deal with the state of Minnesota.

This is what Issa decided to hammer Holder over yesterday and it was, again, epic. As an added bonus, Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee (the registered Democratic socialist who asked where on the planet Mars astronauts planted the U.S. flag) butts in without having a case. If she was smart enough to understand how stupid she looked, she wouldn't have butted in at all.

For a fuller appreciation of what was going on here, PowerLine wrote about the case back in March and lays it out quite well.

This is a must-watch, even if it isn't about any of the three big scandals.

Where was Hillary's Muslim Deputy when Benghazi talking points were being altered?

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Barrack) — Tue, 14 May 2013 13:53:00 +0000

At the time of the 9/11/12 attacks in Benghazi, one of Hillary Clinton's deputies was a woman named Huma Abedin. To this point, Abedin's name has not been introduced into the scandal publicly. However, at the May 8th Oversight Committee hearing, Rep. Trey Gowdy referred to an email sent by Beth Jones, Assistant Secretary for Near Eastern Affairs. As Gowdy listed the names of people Jones sent that email to, he ended with:

"...near as I can tell, to almost everyone in the State Department."

In that email - sent one day after the attacks - Jones made it clear to everyone on her distribution list that Ansar al-Sharia had been responsible. Was Abedin - Hillary's Deputy Chief of Staff at the time - included in that e-mail? Based on Gowdy's claim, coupled with Abedin's high position at State, it's certainly possible and it would be relevant as Ansar al-Sharia and al-Qaeda are both offshoots of the Muslim Brotherhood, a group to which Abedin is linked extensively through her family.

Shouts of 'guilt by association' do not apply in this case. As has been reported previously, relationships and associations very much matter when it comes to the security clearance that came with the position Abedin held.

As the details of the Benghazi cover-up have been unfolding, it's become widely accepted that the CIA talking points were altered because the truth about Ansar al-Sharia / al-Qaeda being behind the attacks disrupted the pre-election narrative of the Obama administration. However, as is often the case with political agendas, shared ends do not necessarily equate to shared motives.

If anyone had a stake in making sure that the talking points did not identify Ansar al-Sharia, al-Qaeda, or even Islamic extremists, Abedin's mother and brother may very well have been candidates. Had Brotherhood offshoot groups been implicated in the murders of four Americans - one an Ambassador - on American soil, it likely would have been a little too close for the comfort of Brotherhood operatives.

Saleha (Mahmood) Abedin is a very prominent figure in the Muslim Brotherhood and is one of 63 leaders in the Muslim Sisterhood. Brother Hassan Abedin has a rather interesting history with the spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood - Yusuf al-Qaradawi - and al-Qaeda financier Abdullah Omar Naseef.

As the purveyor of the Brotherhood tactic known as Muruna, Qaradawi is very much concerned about not blowing the Brotherhood's cover. While terror groups like al-Qaeda and Ansar al-Sharia share his Sunni strain of Islam as well as his objectives, they certainly don't share his tactics. In fact, the tactics of these groups actually serve to undermine the Brotherhood's more stealthy, political agenda.

Access is the mother's milk of politics and let there be no doubt that Huma's mother had access - through her daughter - to Hillary. As the Vice Dean at Dar Al-Hekma College in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia Saleha hosted Hillary in 2010 with the help of her daughter, Huma.

In recent days, several individuals have been implicated in removing references to Ansar al-Sharia, al-Qaeda, and Islamic extremists from the CIA's version of the talking points before UN Ambassador Susan Rice lied on five separate Sunday talk shows on September 16th.

Let's take a look at the names of those who have been revealed as being involved to varying degrees. To illustrate how high-ranking Abedin's position at State was, consider the name Jake Sullivan. Not only did he hold the same title - Deputy Chief of Staff to Hillary Clinton - but he appears to have been the point man for the State Department who worked with Deputy CIA Director at the time - Mike Morell - and White House adviser - Ben Rhodes - on that high stakes Saturday, September 15th meeting. It was during that meeting that the now infamous talking points took their final form.

As an aside, since his involvement in altering the talking points, Sullivan has since become Vice President Joe Biden's National Security Adviser. TIME had this to say about Sullivan:

Sullivan was the reliable point of contact between the White House and Clinton’s 7th floor even when other White House and State staffers were at each others’ throats. Losing him to Biden’s office closes one line of influence to the White House for Kerry.

It's also been widely reported that when Susan Rice lied on those five Sunday talk shows, she undermined what Libyan president Mohammed al-Magariaf, who had appeared on one of those shows (CBS' Face the Nation) shortly before her and said the attacks were 'pre-planned'.

Consider that when the Benghazi attacks occurred, al-Magariaf had only been in office for about one month. While reports suggest that relations between the newly elected Libyan president and the Muslim Brotherhood were friendly, he was not the group's choice. In fact, the Brotherhood appears to have been quite disappointed at the time because its main interest was in who took the Prime Minister slot. The Brotherhood apparently very much wanted Awad Barasi as the PM.

Via the Libya Herald in an article from last August:

…it would not be wrong to interpret Magarief’s victory as a another significant setback for the Muslim Brotherhood’s Justice and Construction party (J and C).

Quite apart from misleading headlines that Magarief is ‘pro-Islamist’ (of which more later), the simple fact is that the main prize desired by the Islamists in this contest was always the prime minister, not the speaker, and they contemplated significant compromises over who should be selected for the latter post in order to maximize the chances of getting their choice for the former.

As a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, the choice of the J and C and their allies for prime minister was, and remains, Barasi.

While Barasi did not become the PM of Libya, he is currently the Second Deputy Prime Minister there. Interestingly, at the time of the Benghazi attacks, the matter of who would be Libya's PM was very much in a state of flux and up for grabs.

Currently, the PM of Libya is a guy named Ali Zeidan who defeated the Muslim Brotherhood's preferred candidate about one month following the Benghazi attacks.

Again, let's get back to the desire for shared outcomes if not shared motives. As a representative of the Muslim Brotherhood and a Muslim Sisterhood leader, didn't Huma's mother represent an entity that would have wanted to undermine the Libyan president?

The following is a list of names of former / current State Department employees that are implicated to varying degrees in what happened in Benghazi, both before and after the 9/11/12 attacks:

Hillary Clinton: Secretary of State
Victoria Nuland: State Department spokesman
Elizabeth (Beth) Jones: Assistant Secretary for Near Eastern Affairs
Cheryl Mills: Chief of Staff to Hillary Clinton
Jake Sullivan: Deputy Chief of Staff to Hillary Clinton
Bill Burns: Deputy Secretary of State
Patrick Kennedy: Under Secretary of State for Management
Eric Boswell: Asst Secretary of State for Diplomatic security
Charlene Lamb: Deputy Asst Secretary for Embassy security

So far, this list does not include the name Huma Abedin.

Should it?

Obama in 2013: 'There there'; Clinton in 1998: 'Is is'

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Barrack) — Tue, 14 May 2013 00:00:00 +0000

When asked about Benghazi at today's press conference, Barack Obama said there is no "there there":

When asked about Lewinsky during his 1998 deposition, Bill Clinton said "is is":

h/t GWP

Video: Proof IRS Commissioner committed Perjury?

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Barrack) — Mon, 13 May 2013 21:55:00 +0000

2011: IRS Commissioner knew conservatives were being singled out by his agency.

2012: IRS Commissioner testified this was not going on.

Perjury?

h/t WZ

Are Nazi comparisons to IRS and Obama's associates finally warranted?

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Barrack) — Mon, 13 May 2013 16:03:00 +0000

When the Internal Revenue Service Scandal (IRSS) broke, it was reported that conservative groups (capitalists) were targeted specifically for harassment. Perhaps more chilling than that was soon thereafter reported; Jewish groups were not only targeted but asked to explain any support for Israel.

Via the Jewish Press (h/t NRO):

And at least one purely religious Jewish organization, one not focused on Israel, was the recipient of bizarre and highly inappropriate questions about Israel. Those questions also came from the same non-profit division of the IRS at issue for inappropriately targeting politically conservative groups. The IRS required that Jewish organization to state “whether [it] supports the existence of the land of Israel,” and also demanded the organization “[d]escribe [its] religious belief system toward the land of Israel.”

Godwin's law, established in 1990, refers to the injection of Hitler / Nazis into any political debate. Taken further, when someone does this, Godwin's law states that he / she automatically loses the argument.

It states:

"As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one."

When it comes to the actions and affiliations of Barack Obama, breaking Godwin's law may be counter-intuitive but it may be warranted.

Frank Marshall Davis: A childhood mentor of Barack Obama was a member of the Communist Party USA (CPUSA) did not leave the party even after Adolf Hitler and Josef Stalin signed the pact that precipitated the holocaust.

William Ayers: Founder of the Weather Underground and friend of Barack Obama who shared an office with the president for at least three years in the 1990's. According to the sworn testimony of Larry Grathwohl, the only man to successfully infiltrate the Underground for the FBI, Ayers wanted to send 'capitalists' to re-education centers and 'eliminate' (kill) '25 million' people 'who could not be re-educated'.

Isn't the mass murder of specific groups of people based on beliefs / ideology part of Nazism?

Jeremiah Wright: Barack Obama's anti-Semitic pastor who published the manifesto of Hamas leader Mousa Abu Marzook in his church's newsletter. Hamas is an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood, which allied with Hitler in World War II. In fact, the man Hitler allied with during the war - Hajj Amin al-Husseini - was the grand mufti of Jerusalem at the time. He became the head of the Muslim Brotherhood after the war.

Rashid Khalidi: Columbia University professor and friend of Barack Obama. Khalidi was once a mouthpiece for Yasser Arafat's Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). Arafat is known to have been an early protege of none other than Hitler ally, al-Husseini. Like he did with Ayers, Wright, and Davis, Obama attempted to downplay his relationship with Khalidi:

Kermit Gosnell: As the guilty verdicts in the trial of this abortionist make clear, mass genocide was committed within the walls of his abortuary. His trial is not that dissimilar from what a microcosm of a Nuremberg trial would have been like. Yet, Obama supports much of what went on inside that clinic. Babies who survived botched abortions were murdered. At least one woman died as well. The severed feet of babies was found inside jars inside Gosnell's clinic. Despite the gruesome details, Barack Obama attended a Planned Parenthood event and closed by saying, 'God Bless you'.

Now it's been learned that under the Obama administration, his IRS targeted Jewish groups. Perhaps that should lead to a discussion about Kristallnacht (night of broken glass), during which Nazis descended on Jewish neighborhoods and shattered the windows of Jewish storefronts:

In the first half of 1938, numerous laws were passed restricting Jewish economic activity and occupational opportunities. In July, 1938, a law was passed (effective January 1, 1939) requiring all Jews to carry identification cards. On October 28, 17,000 Jews of Polish citizenship, many of whom had been living in Germany for decades, were arrested and relocated across the Polish border. The Polish government refused to admit them so they were interned in "relocation camps" on the Polish frontier.

Among the deportees was Zindel Grynszpan, who had been born in western Poland and had moved to Hanover, where he established a small store, in 1911. On the night of October 27, Zindel Grynszpan and his family were forced out of their home by German police. His store and the family's possessions were confiscated and they were forced to move over the Polish border.

Zindel Grynszpan's seventeen-year-old son, Herschel, was living with an uncle in Paris. When he received news of his family's expulsion, he went to the German embassy in Paris on November 7, intending to assassinate the German Ambassador to France. Upon discovering that the Ambassador was not in the embassy, he settled for a lesser official, Third Secretary Ernst Von Rath. Von Rath, was critically wounded and died two days later, on November 9.

The assassination provided Joseph Goebbels, Hitler's Chief of Propaganda, with the excuse he needed to launch a pogrom against German Jews.

It should be clear that when one discusses the relationships, intentions, and actions of Barack Obama's associates and at least one entity under his charge (the IRS), Godwin's law does not apply.

Audio: Today's Podcast

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Barrack) — Sun, 12 May 2013 16:31:00 +0000

On today's show...

Analysis of the Oversight Committee hearing on Benghazi.

Anthony, TX: Where TWO of Hillary's most problematic Filmmakers are locked up

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Barrack) — Fri, 10 May 2013 11:16:00 +0000

The anti-Muhammad filmmaker - Nakoula Basseley Nakoula - currently sits in a federal prison in West Texas. So does another thorn in Hillary Clinton's side. His name is Peter Paul. That two of Hillary's most problematic individuals are locked up in the same federal prison is indeed worth a look, especially since Paul is serving a sentence that is longer than what the maximum sentence for his crime allows.

If there was a single individual who came out of the May 8th Benghazi hearings looking worse than anyone else, it was former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. The number two man in Libya - before Ambassador Christopher Stevens was murdered - was Gregory Hicks. During his testimony, all signs pointed to the buck needing to stop at the very top of the State Department. Cheryl Mills, Hillary's Chief of Staff, was named as a key player in what is to objective eyes, a cover-up.

Barack Obama doesn't exactly have a reputation for telling the truth but when he referred to Nakoula Basseley Nakoula - the alleged man behind the anti-Muhammad video blamed for the 9/11/12 Benghazi attacks - as a 'shadowy character', Obama said something truthful. While the alleged filmmaker's past associations should certainly raise more eyebrows than they currently do, Nakoula is seemingly being kept in the shadows by the administration.

No one could have accurately predicted that an obscure YouTube video Nakoula was involved in producing would be a central component in the cover-up of the Benghazi attacks. On September 14th, just three days after the attacks, then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton allegedly told the father of Tyrone Woods - the former Navy SEAL who was murdered in Benghazi - that the man behind the film would be arrested and prosecuted.

If the administration wanted Nakoula locked up not just to send a message to the Muslim world but also to prevent his story from being told, it certainly picked an interesting place to put him.

In his article the Benghazi Patsy, Rich Lowry writes:

...Nakoula was brought in for questioning by five Los Angeles County sheriff’s deputies at midnight, eventually arrested and held without bond, and finally thrown into jail for a year. He sits in La Tuna Federal Correctional Institution in Texas right now, even as the deceptive spin that blamed his video for the Benghazi attack looks more egregious by the day.

If Nakoula's story provides trouble for Hillary Clinton, the fact that he sits at the La Tuna facility is a case of history repeating itself, which leads to the story of Peter Paul, who isn't scheduled to be released until 2014. The problem with that release date is that the maximum sentence for Paul's crime is ten years and he was first jailed for his alleged white-collar crime in 2001 - in a Brazilian prison, with hardened criminals.

In short, in 2000, Paul was a Hollywood mogul and put on a star-studded gala for Bill and Hillary. For Bill, it was a farewell gala and for Hillary, it was a campaign fundraiser for her U.S. Senate run in New York. In exchange, Paul expected Bill to work for him and Stan Lee (of Marvel Comics fame) as a rainmaker for Paul's company after Bill left office.

Unfortunately for Paul, once the gala was over, the Clintons reneged and he was discarded. Unfortunately for the Clintons (Hillary in particular), Paul would not go quietly. In 2007, while under house arrest, he put together a team that produced a documentary entitled, Hillary Uncensored. For nearly a decade, he dogged Hillary relentlessly. The trailer for his video - seen below - caught fire just as Hillary's primary with Obama was heating up. In fact, in October of that year, the video was the number one viewed video on Google, garnering more than 50,000 views / day. Then, magically, on one Saturday in early November, it was no longer in Google's top 100 videos.

When all was said and done, the trailer got more than 10 Million views before Hillary conceded defeat to Obama for the nomination.

Here is that trailer:

Videos: Benghazi Whistleblower names names at Oversight Hearing

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Barrack) — Thu, 09 May 2013 12:03:00 +0000

Here are three videos from the House Oversight Committee hearing in which three whistleblowers testified. First up, committee member Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) questioned the senior most whistleblower and second in command in Libya behind Ambassador Christopher Stevens - Gregory Hicks. In this line of questioning, Gowdy begins by showing how absurd it was for Ambassador Susan Rice to go on five Sunday talk shows on 9/16/12 and point to a demonstration and a video.

Gowdy also introduces a new name into the Benghazi scandal - Beth Jones. Jones is the Acting Assistant Secretary for Near Eastern Affairs. He reads an excerpt from an email sent by Jones to several high ranking members of the State Department on September 12th in which Jones relayed a conversation she had with the Libyan Ambassador. That conversation included an urging by Jones to the ambassador to 'continue to make strong statements'. Jones also said on September 12th that 'Islamic extremists' and 'Ansar al-Sharia' was behind the attacks.

The Libyan president flew to Benghazi and appear on Face the Nation on 9/16/12 right before Rice did. Unfortunately for Libya's president, while he did make a strong statement on the CBS Sunday show, Rice's appearance followed and she totally contradicted him with the 'protest' / 'video' narrative. It is this appearance by Rice that chilled relations with Libya and is largely looked to as the reason the FBI was not permitted into Libya.

A related video comes from Rep. Jim Jordan's exchange with Hicks. An increasingly common occurrence these days seems to be bureaucrats who express dissent often end up being targets. In this exchange, the topic of Beth Jones came up again. After Rice's appearance on the Sunday talk shows, Hicks had received a call from Jones. During that conversation, he asked her why Rice said what she did on those shows (why did she lie). According to Hicks, ever since having the gall to ask that question, he has been a target.

Another individual's name is introduced in this exchange. Her name is Cheryl Mills and she was Hillary Clinton's Chief of Staff. According to Hicks, he received a phone call from a very angry Mills during a visit to Libya by Oversight Committee member, Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT).

Listen to him explain during this exchange with Jordan:

Here is Gowdy at the end of the hearing:

Video: Interview with man who Rescued three women from years of Captivity

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Barrack) — Tue, 07 May 2013 14:48:00 +0000

Three women from Cleveland who have been missing for years have been found and rescued. Their hero is a guy named Charles Ramsey. Over the years, there have been countless interviews with people who rescue others but this is - by far and away - the best one to date.

Awesome.

h/t GWP

Video: Harry Reid calls Ted Cruz a 'Schoolyard Bully' (Scut Farkus alert)

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Barrack) — Tue, 07 May 2013 11:36:00 +0000

If there is one thing Democrats have in their DNA, it's projection. Nearly every single criticism that Democrats levy at their opponents is nothing more than an act of projection. In this case, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid - the same guy who helped to ram Obamacare down the throat of the American people who didn't want it - calls Ted Cruz a 'schoolyard bully'. What's particularly interesting is that Reid is the most powerful bully in the Senate. Cruz, a freshman, should be the weakest.

In reality, Reid is like Scut Farkus calling Ralphie a 'schoolyard bully'.

Watch Cruz show his senior colleagues how it's done:

Oh, wait. When the schoolyard bully pushes his victims around for a little too long, this is what usually happens. Reid, the real bully, is behaving like Scut Farkus:

When you're a freshman GOP Senator who gets called a 'wacko-bird' by an establishment RINO Senator, it means you're ruffling feathers. It also means you're exhibiting leadership and showing your colleagues - all of whom have more experience and should already be leading - how to lead as well. When your Democratic colleagues - like Senate Majority leader Harry Reid - calls you a 'school-yard bully', it means you're making life difficult for those who have been running roughshod over the Constitution for far too long. Besides, whenever a Democrat calls you a name, it's usually projection.

The truth is that conservative voters have been screaming for backbone and leadership from their party for over four years now. To this point, no one at Cruz's level has met the challenge.

That he is a freshman should be an embarrassment to the rest of his caucus, who should lead, follow, or get out of the way (that includes McCain).

Via HillTube:

Video: Darrell Issa previews Benghazi hearings on Face the Nation

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Barrack) — Mon, 06 May 2013 11:15:00 +0000

House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-CA) appeared on Face the Nation to preview the May 8th Benghazi hearings. Gregory Hicks will be one of those witnesses and the quotes attributed to him that were read by host Bob Schieffer were indeed shocking. Without question, UN Ambassador Susan Rice's five Sunday show appearances on 9/16/12 - five days after the attacks - will come under renewed and even more intense scrutiny.

May 8th is likely going to be very significant.

During an appearance on Fox News one day earlier, former UN Ambassador John Bolton expressed shock at how high up the chain of command the whistleblowers go. Hicks - next in line after Stevens - is certainly an example of what Bolton was talking about.

Via Freedom's Lighthouse:

Audio: Today's Podcast

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Barrack) — Sun, 05 May 2013 16:13:00 +0000

On today's show...

* Why do conservative politicians partner with registered socialists?
* Upcoming Benghazi hearings (Hillary's spokesman implicated in coverup?)
* Why is there not more contrasting of Fast and Furious with Sandy Hook at NRA Convention?
* Update on Saudi prisoner in Colorado (renewed interest)?

Obama offers Fast and Furious opportunities to Conservatives at NRA Convention (So far, no takers)

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Barrack) — Sat, 04 May 2013 18:25:00 +0000

On the same day that the 2013 NRA Convention began in Houston, TX Barack Obama was in Mexico telling an audience that "most of the guns used to commit violent crimes here in Mexico, come from the United States." What he didn't tell that audience was that his administration is responsible for Operation Fast and Furious, a program in which the ATF told reluctant gun store owners to sell high-powered guns to bad guys who would then 'walk' those guns to drug cartels in Mexico.

Yet, Republicans and gun rights activists have avoided bludgeoning those in the administration and on the Democratic side of the aisle by contrasting the exploitation of Sandy Hook with the failed attempt to exploit the consequences of Fast and Furious by pointing to its consequences. Those consequences have been - and continue to be - hundreds of murdered people. The Obama administration wanted to used those consequences to push gun control but couldn't because of whistleblowers in general, and one in particular - ATF Agent John Dodson.

Dodson came forward when one of the guns found at the murder scene of Border Agent Brian Terry on December 14, 2010 was a gun from Operation Fast and Furious. In 2012, Attorney General Eric Holder was found in contempt of Congress and Obama asserted Executive Privilege to prevent documents from coming forward that would reveal the truth about the operation.

Despite all of this, Obama presented every speaker at the NRA Convention with a golden opportunity to draw this contrast. To this point, no one has highlighted this contrast.

Said Obama on Friday, May 3rd, the first day of the NRA Convention:

"I will continue to do everything in my power to pass common sense reforms that keep guns out of the hands of criminals and dangerous people that can save lives here in Mexico and back home in the United States... So we'll keep increasing the pressure on gun traffickers who bring illegal guns into Mexico. We'll keep putting these criminals where they belong - behind bars."

This is gall-dacity.

Despite this low-hanging fruit, even Ted Cruz and Sarah Palin have avoided contrasting Obama's exploitation of Sandy Hook with his failure to do so in Fast and Furious... because he got caught.

It's hard to explain why conservatives are avoiding the one argument that will deliver the most severe blow. They don't even use it when they're being taunted by Obama.

Makes. No. Sense.

Here is Cruz. Good speech but he also avoided Fast and Furious vs. Sandy Hook:

Wake Up, Marco! Your Gang of Eight Buddy speaking to Che Guevara supporters

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Barrack) — Fri, 03 May 2013 11:39:00 +0000

'Gang of Eight' member, Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) attended a 'May Day' rally in Chicago. During that rally, he spoke to a crowd that had clearly identified itself as being filled with communists. In fact, as Durbin was speaking, there was a rather large Che Guevara flag being waved from about the tenth row; there is no way that Durbin didn't see it. Though, when asked by a reporter from Breitbart, he attempted to laugh off as ridiculous, any notion that there were communists or socialists in the audience.

Via Breitbart:

Little more than two weeks ago, Rubio made the Sunday talk show circuit and was asked about Jay-Z's trip to Cuba. Rubio pointed out that one of Jay-Z's heroes is Che Guevara. The Senator from Florida then pointed out that Guevara was a racist and a murderer.

It's not just that Durbin spoke at a rally that had a Guevara flag. It's that the movement he was speaking to - and attempted to defend when it became obvious he couldn't deny - was communist and that support for Che Guevara in that crowd was pervasive.

Rubio understands communism and he knows the history of Cuba better than most Americans. Marco himself is quite educated on the subject as well. He often talks of his close childhood relationship with his grandfather, who couldn't stand Castro.

His alliance with Durbin on anything was misplaced and ill-advised. For starters, communists lie so when someone like Durbin attempts to deny he spoke to communists and then defended the act because it was his only play at that point, it's right to ask if he'd be lying if he says he isn't a communist sympathizer.

Back in January, I wrote that Rubio's first mistake with the 'gang of 8' was engaging with members of that group at all; aligning with Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) on anything was a mistake. The optics of Rubio yucking it up with these guys would not do him any favors. Nonetheless - and for whatever reason - he thought he could get something done by working with them. Conservatives knew better.

Since joining the Gang of Eight, Rubio has had a lot of trouble selling it. In the end, the only thing he might have to show for it is this:

As an aside, here is another instance of Durbin-style denial on May Day. Only in this instance, the person in denial is a local NBC News reporter in New York City. If you've ever found yourself scratching your head about why the mainstream media doesn't cover what's blatantly obvious, here is the perfect microcosm for you.

This woman's responses are worse than Durbin's. When asked about Communist flags at the event she's covering, she pretends they don't exist despite the fact that they're waving all around her.

It is amazing what the liberal mind will deny in the interest of ideology. This has got to be a form of mental illness on display.

It. Has. Got. To. Be.

Via GWP:

Marco Rubio's attempts to explain his Immigration stance sounding a bit convoluted

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Barrack) — Thu, 02 May 2013 12:45:00 +0000

A common response from radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh when it comes to the question about whether Barack Obama is intentionally trying to destroy the country or is doing so because he doesn't know what he's doing is one of dismissal. In Limbaugh's view, it doesn't matter because the result is the same.

Conservatives - whether they want to admit it or not - are being faced with a similar reality when it comes to U.S. Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) - a Tea Party darling - and his involvement with the 'Gang of 8', which consists of Senators who simply cannot be trusted to do what's best for America, let alone what's right on immigration (Schumer, Durbin, Menendez, McCain, Graham, etc.). When it comes to Rubio, conservative talk show hosts scratch their heads and want to know why Rubio is doing this. Is he naive or does he have an agenda diametrically opposed to conservatives who put him in office?

To paraphrase Limbaugh, it doesn't matter because the result will be the same if immigration reform is passed without first securing the border.

When you listen to Rubio attempt to explain why he's part of the 'gang of eight' or why he's supporting such a monstrous bill, he says the issue is 'complicated'. It's really not. Conservatives see it as quite simple and have for years. They're willing to talk amnesty, citizenship, reform, blah, blah, blah after one thing - and one thing only - happens.

The. Border. Is. Secured.

What's complicated is trying to understand what Rubio is saying. When you're done listening to him attempt to explain his position, you just keep coming back to one very simple question:

Why can't we talk about this after the border is secured? Rubio doesn't seem capable of asking that question. Then again, these conservative talk show hosts don't want to press him too hard, apparently because of his Tea Party bonafides. In fact, listening to his interview with Mike Gallagher, the lead up to Gallagher's first question reminded me of all those Senators who burned up precious minutes during Hillary Clinton's Benghazi testimony, praising her for being such a great Secretary of State and for serving her country.

A noteworthy moment during Rubio's exchange with Gallagher comes around the 5:50 mark. Gallagher asks Rubio if he believes there are Democrats on the other side of the aisle who simply do not want border enforcement and want open borders. Rubio's answer was quite telling:

"There's no doubt there are people that feel that way but they're not a serious player in this conversation..."

Really Senator? If that is indeed true, then you should be able to pass one very simple, one-page bill that demands the border be secured. There is a reason that hasn't been done; 'serious players' are preventing it.

I would love to know how Rubio is defining 'serious player' because every single one of his fellow Senators is one in this conversation and certainly the rest of the 'gang of eight' is. Are we to believe that Schumer and Durbin want a secure border? Please. Rubio's counterparts in the House will be 'serious players' as well. Essentially, what Rubio is saying is that every member of his 'gang of eight' wants a secure border.

Again, we're back to either naivete, denial, or dishonesty. The fact that we DON'T have a secure border right now is proof positive that we already have 'serious players' who don't want it secured.

Here is a portion of Rubio's interview with Sean Hannity, via Daily Caller:

The benchmark for conservative politicians is former U.S. Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC), who now heads the Heritage Foundation. He's obviously not happy with Rubio's stance or the 'gang of eight' which should most definitely reinforce the concerns conservatives have about what Rubio is doing. As if that's not enough, as you'll see at the beginning of this clip, Barack Obama is praising the efforts of Rubio's gang (so is Howard Dean).

Via Daily Caller: Rubio is so on the wrong side of this issue and it doesn't matter if he's doing so intentionally or because he doesn't know what he's doing - the result will be the same.

Must-See Video: Ted Cruz rips RINOs over Gun Control

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Barrack) — Tue, 30 Apr 2013 14:02:00 +0000

There are many reasons to like Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX). First and foremost, the Sarah Palin effect, which is that the more a political figure is ridiculed by the mainstream media and the left, the more that political figure should be supported by conservatives. The second indicator is when RINOs like John McCain calls you a 'wackobird'.

There is another reason that comes across in this video from Freedom Works and it has to do with the ability to inspire and encourage.

Right out of the gate, Cruz doesn't just tell the audience what he knows they want to hear - that they are 'winning' - but he does it in such a way that it's believable. He then proceeds to make the case by citing what happened in the recent gun control debate. The story he relays from a Senatorial luncheon is classic and has John 'wacko bird' McCain written all over it.

Via NRO:

Look, the Tea Party in particular and the conservatives in general started becoming demoralized and a bit more crestfallen each day it became more apparent that Mitt Romney was going to be the Republican nominee. Rock bottom was hit on election night. Establishment Republicans in office began caving to the Obama agenda almost immediately. Conservatives were so de-energized that they did little more than watch in disgust.

If there has been a consistent theme among conservatives since the election - perhaps even since the 2010 mid-terms - it's been disgust over the Republican Party's willingness to admit the truth and fight the Obama agenda.

Ironically, Cruz said establishment guys who wanted to cave in to the gun control push, yelled at him for not going along with the program. It's a self-evident truth that such political hacks are more comfortable yelling at a principled member of their own caucus than they are at our "Muslim socialist" president.

By the way, those aren't my words; they're Obama's:

Videos: The Banality of Abortion Clinics

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Barrack) — Mon, 29 Apr 2013 10:45:00 +0000

It is not an exaggeration to compare what went on in the abortion clinic of Kermit Gosnell to what took place in Nazi Germany. We were told over and over again by the pro-abortion crowd that Gosnell's Philadelphia clinic was an 'outlier.' Now, thanks to Live Action, we have evidence of two more 'outliers' - one in New York City (Video #1) and the other in Washington, D.C. (Video #2). In fact, the people working at these 'clinics' seem to match perfectly the profile of many of the Nazis put on trial at Nuremberg.

Via Doug Linder:

Those who come to the trials expecting to find sadistic monsters are generally disappointed. What is shocking about Nuremberg is the ordinariness of the defendants: men who may be good fathers, kind to animals, even unassuming--yet who committed unspeakable crimes. Years later, reporting on the trial of Adolf Eichmann, Hannah Arendt wrote of "the banality of evil." Like Eichmann, most Nuremberg defendants never aspired to be villains. Rather, they over-identified with an ideological cause and suffered from a lack of imagination or empathy: they couldn't fully appreciate the human consequences of their career-motivated decisions.

Another characteristic of the Nazis was that the longer they engaged in the heinous behaviors, the less it affected them. The demeanor of this clinic employee says it all. She boasts that she's seen a lot over the eleven years that she has worked there. When you watch how calmly this clinic worker tells her would-be patient to flush her baby down the toilet if she gives birth after being given a treatment but before she can return the clinic, you will know exactly what is meant by the term, 'banality of evil'.

As for Gosnell's clinic being an 'outlier'... Do you honestly think that people who endorse / commit this kind of evil wouldn't lie about it?

Via Live Action:

In this clinic, the male worker essentially admits that if a baby survives a botched abortion in his clinic, they 'will not help it'. This is a violation of federal law, which he seems quite banal about breaking:

Of course, add to these 'outliers' in Philadelphia, New York, and Washington, D.C. this exchange between the Florida state legislature and a Planned Parenthood lobbyist, who clearly has an agenda that includes not helping babies born alive after surviving an abortion.

Why would the largest abortion provider - Planned Parenthood - take such a position in an entire state? Just how many 'outliers' are there in Florida?

Or is that a banal question?

Oh, and then there's this so perhaps we can add Delaware to the 'outlier' list, not to mention all of the other despicable revelations about what Planned Parenthood does.

Audio: Today's Podcast

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Barrack) — Sun, 28 Apr 2013 17:14:00 +0000

On Today's show...

* The latest on the Boston bombers and Vladimir Putin's reaction
* The transformation of Chris Matthews
* Newscorp. and Rotana
* Congressman promises 'explosive' Benghazi hearings

Video: Rep. Trey Gowdy promises 'explosive' hearings on Benghazi

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Barrack) — Sat, 27 Apr 2013 22:03:00 +0000

During an appearance on Fox News, House Oversight Committee member, Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) promised that there will be 'explosive' hearings into the Benghazi attacks and that they will be coming quickly. Unfortunately for the American people, the House of Representatives is led by people like John Boehner and not by people like Gowdy.

Perhaps the best line during this interview:

"...there's a reason we don't let kids grade their own papers in school and there's a reason we don't let defendants sentence themselves in court and the State Department should not be the ones investigating whether or not the State Department did a good job; it should be Congress, and it's going to be Congress very shortly."

Giddy up.

Consider the Nerve Struck: Democratic Congressman, registered socialist, and Congressional Black Caucus member Elijah Cummings wants Benghazi report rescinded

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Barrack) — Thu, 25 Apr 2013 22:37:00 +0000

On Tuesday, April 23rd, a House Republican conference released a report that was quite damning of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Not only did it seem to have the goods on Hillary relative to a decision to withdraw security in Benghazi in the form of her signature but it also seemed to imply that she committed perjury back in January.

Now we know that at least one Democratic congressman - Elijah Cummings - who happens to be someone who registered with the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) caucus and is currently a member of the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC), just couldn't remain silent. This is almost always a sign that a nerve has been struck.

Via the AP:

A senior House Democrat called on House Speaker John Boehner Thursday to retract a report blaming former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton for security deficiencies at the U.S. diplomatic mission in Libya before last September's deadly attack.

Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Md., said in a letter to Boehner that the report, written by the Republican chairmen of five committees, misrepresents an important document and suggests that Clinton lied to Congress. In addition to pulling the report, Cummings said, Boehner also should apologize to Clinton on behalf of the report's authors.

Here is what is alleged in the report:

April 19, 2012, the response cable from the Department of State to Embassy Tripoli, bearing Secretary Clinton’s signature, acknowledges Ambassador Cretz’s request for additional security but instead articulates a plan to scale back security assets for the U.S. Mission in Libya, including the Benghazi Mission.

Now, let's go back to the AP story:

...Cummings said his staff reviewed the cable, and it does not bear Clinton's signature. The cable includes only her typed name at the bottom of the page next to the word "signature," just as thousands of other cables sent each year from the State Department do.

This question that needs to be asked of Mr. Cummings is as follows:

Do you, sir, have any intellectual curiosity at all when it comes to who is specifically responsible for withdrawing security?

It would seem that if Hillary's name is next to the word "signature" and that the document does not bear her signature, someone treated a typed version of her name as authorization to act on something OTHER THAN her signature. Instead of going after the conference, shouldn't Cummings be going after whomever made that decision?

Better yet, why didn't Hillary?

Then again...

House Republicans on Benghazi Attacks: Hillary's signature on document calling for reduced Security, conflicts with her testimony

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Barrack) — Wed, 24 Apr 2013 11:28:00 +0000

Folks, this may just be bigger than previously thought. Yesterday, the news was that a conference of House Republicans found Hillary Clinton accountable for the lack of security in Benghazi prior to the attacks on 9/11/12 but the evidence presented in its report backs up the charge because it includes a document with her signature; that document conflicts with her January testimony.

The report released by a House Republican Conference, made up of five separate Chairmen from five separate Committees is definitely a positive step in that direction.

Those five are:

Buck McKeon - Armed Services
Ed Royce - Foreign Affairs
Bob Goodlatte - Judiciary
Darrell Issa - Oversight
Mike Rogers - Intelligence

The conference has just released its report on Benghazi and rests accountability right at the feet of then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

The report is available through Speaker Boehner's office.

One doesn't have to read past the second paragraph in the Executive Summary to find where the conference has found culpability:

Reductions of security levels prior to the attacks in Benghazi were approved at the highest levels of the State Department, up to and including Secretary Clinton. This fact contradicts her testimony before the House Foreign Affairs Committee on January 23, 2013.

On the same day that Clinton testified in front of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, she also testified in front of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. During that testimony, Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) said that if he'd have been president when the Benghazi attacks happened, he would have fired Hillary. It would seem that the report backs up that position.

There are two more bullet points in the Executive Summary, one having to do with the administration altering the talking points in order to blame the anti-Muhammad video for the attacks, the other regarding claims that this one done to protect classified information.

On page two (referenced again on page seven), the conference points to a document with Clinton's signature on it:

Repeated requests for additional security were denied at the highest levels of the State Department. For example, an April 2012 State Department cable bearing Secretary Hillary Clinton’s signature acknowledged then-Ambassador Cretz’s formal request for additional security assets but ordered the withdrawal of security elements to proceed as planned.

It was also good to see the report include reference to a 'quick reaction force' that was relied upon to help defend the Consulate (Special Mission Compound) actually had sympathies with terrorists:

...the Benghazi Mission used local, unarmed guards, who were responsible for activating the alarm in the event of an attack, as well as four armed members of the February 17 Martyrs Brigade, who were to serve as a quick reaction force. The February 17 Martyrs Brigade was one of the militias that fought for Gadhafi’s overthrow. Numerous reports have indicated that the Brigade had extremist connections, and it had been implicated in the kidnapping of American citizens as well as in the threats against U.S. military assets.

Let's take a look at what very well could be perjury on the part of Clinton during her testimony this past January. On page 10 of the report, the conference cites the April 19, 2012 document that Clinton signed, which discusses pulling back on security despite acknowledgment that a request for more security had been made, and juxtaposes it with her January 23, 2013 testimony:

“I have made it very clear that the security cables did not come to my attention or above the assistant secretary level where the ARB [Accountability Review Board] placed responsibility. Where, as I think Ambassador Pickering said, ‘the rubber hit the road.’”

And...

"...I was not aware of that going on, it was not brought to my attention…"

When it comes to the issue of perjury, the closest Hillary seemed to come was during her exchange with Senator Rand Paul (R-KY), in which she claimed she had no idea - one way or the other - if there was any arms shipments to Turkey from American outposts in Benghazi. It would seem she should have at least known the answer to the question - yes or no.

These new revelations courtesy of the House Republican conference seem to not only point to perjury with respect to Clinton not knowing about the requests for additional security but also a smoking gun in the form of a document bearing her signature that put the lives of the four Americans who were murdered on 9/11/12 in more danger.

For some reason, this :35 second exchange Hillary had with Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI) is taking on increasingly added significance, very much in the spirit of 'thou doth protest too much':

There is a reason the Conference felt confident in resting accountability at Hillary's feet. That reason is far more newsworthy than the report that they did so.

Please read.

Audio: Rand Paul asked about Hillary committing Perjury at January Benghazi hearing

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Barrack) — Tue, 23 Apr 2013 11:21:00 +0000

Back on January 24th, after then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton testified in front of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, I wrote about her response to Senator Rand Paul's question about arm shipments from Libya to Turkey. That response struck me as being the most noteworthy because it was a question she should have known the answer to. Instead, she said she didn't know.

If she did know - one way or the other - it seems her response would constitute perjury.

Fast forward to this week. On his radio show, Aaaron Klein asked Senator Paul if he thought Clinton may have committed perjury when she said she didn't know the answer to that question.

Via WND: