Nov 092017
 

Judge Moore – please don’t drop out. Please.

They did the same thing to Herman Cain, and all his accusers disappeared just as soon as he dropped out.

The GOP establishment leaders also tried to tell President Trump to drop out just before the election. We are SO glad he didn’t.

To others – the GOP leaders do not want Judge Moore in the Senate and supported his primary opponent.  Failing that, they simply realized this was a good time to try this – while all the other accusations are swirling around concerning so many other people.  They think this is their best chance to get rid of him – so they jumped at it.

Please hang in there Judge Moore – we are praying for you.

Donald Trump’s Contract With The American Voter

 Comments Off on Donald Trump’s Contract With The American Voter
Nov 112016
 

By DONALD TRUMP

October, 22, 2016

What follows is my 100-day action plan to Make America Great Again. It is a contract between myself and the American voter — and begins with restoring honesty, accountability and change to Washington

Therefore, on the first day of my term of office, my administration will immediately pursue the following six measures to clean up the corruption and special interest collusion in Washington, DC:

* FIRST, propose a Constitutional Amendment to impose term limits on all members of Congress;

* SECOND, a hiring freeze on all federal employees to reduce federal workforce through attrition (exempting military, public safety, and public health);

* THIRD, a requirement that for every new federal regulation, two existing regulations must be eliminated;

* FOURTH, a 5 year-ban on White House and Congressional officials becoming lobbyists after they leave government service;

* FIFTH, a lifetime ban on White House officials lobbying on behalf of a foreign government;

* SIXTH, a complete ban on foreign lobbyists raising money for American elections.

On the same day, I will begin taking the following 7 actions to protect American workers:

* FIRST, I will announce my intention to renegotiate NAFTA or withdraw from the deal under Article 2205

* SECOND, I will announce our withdrawal from the Trans-Pacific Partnership

* THIRD, I will direct my Secretary of the Treasury to label China a currency manipulator

* FOURTH, I will direct the Secretary of Commerce and U.S. Trade Representative to identify all foreign trading abuses that unfairly impact American workers and direct them to use every tool under American and international law to end those abuses immediately

* FIFTH, I will lift the restrictions on the production of $50 trillion dollars’ worth of job-producing American energy reserves, including shale, oil, natural gas and clean coal.

* SIXTH, lift the Obama-Clinton roadblocks and allow vital energy infrastructure projects, like the Keystone Pipeline, to move forward

* SEVENTH, cancel billions in payments to U.N. climate change programs and use the money to fix America’s water and environmental infrastructure

Additionally, on the first day, I will take the following five actions to restore security and the constitutional rule of law:

* FIRST, cancel every unconstitutional executive action, memorandum and order issued by President Obama

* SECOND, begin the process of selecting a replacement for Justice Scalia from one of the 20 judges on my list, who will uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States

* THIRD, cancel all federal funding to Sanctuary Cities

* FOURTH, begin removing the more than 2 million criminal illegal immigrants from the country and cancel visas to foreign countries that won’t take them back

* FIFTH, suspend immigration from terror-prone regions where vetting cannot safely occur. All vetting of people coming into our country will be considered extreme vetting.

Next, I will work with Congress to introduce the following broader legislative measures and fight for their passage within the first 100 days of my Administration:

  1. Middle Class Tax Relief And Simplification Act. An economic plan designed to grow the economy 4% per year and create at least 25 million new jobs through massive tax reduction and simplification, in combination with trade reform, regulatory relief, and lifting the restrictions on American energy. The largest tax reductions are for the middle class. A middle-class family with 2 children will get a 35% tax cut. The current number of brackets will be reduced from 7 to 3, and tax forms will likewise be greatly simplified. The business rate will be lowered from 35 to 15 percent, and the trillions of dollars of American corporate money overseas can now be brought back at a 10 percent rate.
  2. End The Offshoring Act. Establishes tariffs to discourage companies from laying off their workers in order to relocate in other countries and ship their products back to the U.S. tax-free.
  3. American Energy & Infrastructure Act. Leverages public-private partnerships, and private investments through tax incentives, to spur $1 trillion in infrastructure investment over 10 years. It is revenue neutral.
  4. School Choice And Education Opportunity Act. Redirects education dollars to give parents the right to send their kid to the public, private, charter, magnet, religious or home school of their choice. Ends common core, brings education supervision to local communities. It expands vocational and technical education, and make 2 and 4-year college more affordable.
  5. Repeal and Replace Obamacare Act. Fully repeals Obamacare and replaces it with Health Savings Accounts, the ability to purchase health insurance across state lines, and lets states manage Medicaid funds. Reforms will also include cutting the red tape at the FDA: there are over 4,000 drugs awaiting approval, and we especially want to speed the approval of life-saving medications.
  6. Affordable Childcare and Eldercare Act. Allows Americans to deduct childcare and elder care from their taxes, incentivizes employers to provide on-side childcare services, and creates tax-free Dependent Care Savings Accounts for both young and elderly dependents, with matching contributions for low-income families.
  7. End Illegal Immigration Act Fully-funds the construction of a wall on our southern border with the full understanding that the country Mexico will be reimbursing the United States for the full cost of such wall; establishes a 2-year mandatory minimum federal prison sentence for illegally re-entering the U.S. after a previous deportation, and a 5-year mandatory minimum for illegally re-entering for those with felony convictions, multiple misdemeanor convictions or two or more prior deportations; also reforms visa rules to enhance penalties for overstaying and to ensure open jobs are offered to American workers first.
  8. Restoring Community Safety Act. Reduces surging crime, drugs and violence by creating a Task Force On Violent Crime and increasing funding for programs that train and assist local police; increases resources for federal law enforcement agencies and federal prosecutors to dismantle criminal gangs and put violent offenders behind bars.
  9. Restoring National Security Act. Rebuilds our military by eliminating the defense sequester and expanding military investment; provides Veterans with the ability to receive public VA treatment or attend the private doctor of their choice; protects our vital infrastructure from cyber-attack; establishes new screening procedures for immigration to ensure those who are admitted to our country support our people and our values
  10. Clean up Corruption in Washington Act. Enacts new ethics reforms to Drain the Swamp and reduce the corrupting influence of special interests on our politics.

On November 8th, Americans will be voting for this 100-day plan to restore prosperity to our economy, security to our communities, and honesty to our government.

This is my pledge to you.

And if we follow these steps, we will once more have a government of, by and for the people.

https://assets.donaldjtrump.com/CONTRACT_FOR_THE_VOTER.pdf

Sick, liberal policies were being pushed down our throats. It’s as simple as that.

 Comments Off on Sick, liberal policies were being pushed down our throats. It’s as simple as that.
Nov 102016
 

Today, I am angry. Thugs rioting in the streets over Trump’s election? Seriously? I mean – what do these foolish protesters think WE went through for the last eight years?

Remember when Conservatives rioted in the streets after Obama was elected?  No?

Don’t assume we didn’t feel like it.  I had a friend contemplate suicide after Obama was elected the second time. But my friend got counseling rather than commit suicide – and we made our way through the years without throwing stones through the White House windows.

Do these big crybabies believe THEY are the only people in the nation who should ever have a say?  Do they honestly believe things are always supposed to go their way?  Apparently. Look at what the Universities have been coddling for the last couple years.

Most Conservatives are TREMENDOUSLY  relieved by this election.  We are people – U.S. citizens – who did everything by the book for this election.  No stuffing ballots, rigging polls, or sending non-citizens to vote as the Democrats do.

In fact – knowing that they probably did all that and more – it is all the more amazing Trump pulled this off.

I am so sick and tired of the extreme left liberals in this nation.  So ANGRY at the lot of them – see them ALL as corrupt, yucky, worst of the worst people.  People who demand the right to murder full term babies – babies who, if given a few moments, could be born alive and free of their horrific mothers.  There is NO  – absolutely NO – medical condition that demands a baby be dead prior to delivery – and in fact, the mother would be rid of a full-term baby FASTER if the child is allowed to live, because holding it back in order to kill it takes time.

There is just skin and mBaby in wombuscle between a full-term child and the outside world.  LET THE CHILD LIVE.

There is no MEDICAL reason for murdering the baby. The ONLY incentive or benefit is for the sale of body parts. THAT IS A FACT.  And it is fact which will be soon more widely understood, now that those who make money off of harvesting children are no longer in control. WATCH: April, 2016 – Congressman says probe DID show Planned Parenthood ran ‘Amazon.com of baby body parts’

 

Aug. 19, 2016 – Aborted baby’s heart was beating as we harvested his brains: worker in new Planned Parenthood video

This has become such a sick, sick society and I am so sick of extreme left liberals expecting us to just sit back and accept every idiotic, sick thing they suddenly decide they HAVE to have.

You WANT to understand Trump voters?  Understand that.

Abortion and the Supreme Court were the two primary reasons many I know voted for Trump. But there are many, many reasons beyond those.

Plain and simple: Obama pushed his agenda too far. What did he and other liberals think would happen when just nine months ago – they demanded that we women put up with men in our bathrooms?  You don’t think that was a factor in us wanting to scream and rampage?  It wasn’t an issue that was talked about in the debates – there was WAY too much that needed to be talked about – but it was NEVER an issue far from our minds.  That was the first thing many thought of when Hillary said she was going to continue HIS policies.

June 6, 2016 – School stops enforcing Obama’s trans bathroom policy after parents pulled kids out

Poll: Two-thirds of Americans oppose government forcing transgender bathrooms

How could they possibly be SO dumb as to think they could push something like this – DURING THE ELECTION EVEN – and believe that we would just SIT AND TAKE IT?

July 2016 – Leaked Emails Show DNC Pushed Narrative Against NC’s Transgender Bathroom Law

LOOK – they didn’t even leave it with full-fledged trans – they said ANY man – whether he was dressed as a woman or not – whether he felt like a man yesterday but felt like a woman today – they said it is FLUID and we just have to accept whatever this poor person wanted to do – because we can’t hurt his feelings.  He can be dressed as a man, with no apparent reason for not using the men’s room – but if he wants to use the women’s room, that’s his right –  and ONE sick liberal official said our girls just have to accept seeing genitals in locker rooms!  And high schools have to allow boys to sleep with the girls on high school trips!  And it went on and on – getting sicker and sicker.

Under the Obama administration’s federal guidance:

– School districts must allow biological males and females to spend the night together in the same hotel room on field trips;

– Colleges must let men who say they are transgender be roommates with one or more women; and

– School officials cannot even tell those young women or their parents in advance that their new roommate is a man, without risking a federal lawsuit.

Tucked away in the letter is a section requiring schools to provide transgender students proper “housing.”

“A school must allow transgender students to access housing consistent with their gender identity,” it states, “and may not require transgender students to stay in single-occupancy accommodations or to disclose personal information when not required of other students.”

Are you KIDDING me?

Many women do NOT feel safe with a man in the room – yet their feelings do not matter. Talk about misogyny – it is Obama, Clinton and their supporters who discount the feelings of women as being “overly dramatic” and “homophobic.” January,, 2016 – Female Office Worker Encounters Man Urinating in Ladies’ Room Exposed

Further – we feel our children are being preyed upon by the left with their agenda: June 2016 – Washington State to Teach Kindergartners about Transgenderism

ACLU DIRECTOR WHO RESIGNED BECAUSE OF BATHROOM BILL EXPOSES DANGERS OF POLITICAL CORRECTNESS

Don’t even try to tell us it hasn’t hurt women or girls. Many men have been arrested for committing crimes against women and girls in rest rooms over the last nine months – and a LOT of it isn’t getting reported in most papers. bathrooms-6

May 4, 2016 – Young Girl in Women’s Changing Room at Target sees man taking pictures over the wall with his cell phone….

“The man was in a female dressing room at the Target and was seen by the victim, over the wall with his cell phone, taking photos of the victim.” “…the girl ran and told Target staff who told police.”

Sept 30, 2016 – Target’s Transgender Bathroom Policy Leads to 10 Crimes Targeting Girls Undressing, Says AFA

Hillary Clinton fully supported the murder of full-term children, as well as forcing women to accept men in their bathrooms (Something she wouldn’t have to deal with, as it is doubtful she uses public bathrooms) – yet Clinton wanted us to believe she was the strongest supporter of women, children and families.

Give us a break.

Frankly – the liberals can take their sick agendas and shove it.  How DARE they say they are offended by TRUMP – when they keep coming up with this sick crap. And then Clinton has the foulest entertainers on her stage – and talks about how much she loves them – while at the same time pretending to be offended by Trump.  Meanwhile.. her husband flies the Lolita express.

WE are sick of it all.  Trump made his millions off of encouraging vice. We KNOW that.  But that’s the point – we KNEW who he was, but he was telling us our world would be different now.  She was LYING about who she was – and telling us things would not only stay the same, but get worse.

Couple all this with the left’s constant bashing of the Christian Faith, the threat of terrorism, Clinton Cronyism, criminal corruption, Wikileaks, Benghazi, and more. There were so many reasons to vote against Clinton, they probably can’t be all counted.

YOU REALLY want to pretend this was all about Clinton being a woman??  Please.

Very simply – it was about PROTECTING our children and ourselves from the woman who claimed to champion children and women.  We wanted TRUE concern for children – not Clinton’s faux show of concern – a claim she tried to make fly in the last few months of her campaign.

Safety and Children – Period.  Those two words – Safety and Children – include more than just abortion and bathrooms. It includes all issues of immigration, obamacare, foreign policy, terrorism, law and economy.

Fools.

PRAISE GOD for the results of this election.

 

And YES – many of us want to see her in prison. We have made that clear. Don’t you dare use the fact that Trump ran against her in the election as an excuse for her to get away with her crimes.

Don’t even go there. We are already mad as heck at the establishment.

 

Bill Clinton’s 1993 tax plan cut Trump’s taxes.

 Comments Off on Bill Clinton’s 1993 tax plan cut Trump’s taxes.
Nov 072016
 

It was Bill Clinton’s 1993 tax plan that allowed Donald Trump to claim his Altantic City losses and not pay taxes. Honesty would have Bill Clinton stepping up three months ago and owning the law.

From a DNC staffer’s email –

“The Clinton proposal should be good for the real estate market with its easing of the passive loss rules, its easing of the rules that govern pension fund investment in commercial and debt-financed real estate, and its easing of the oversight regarding bank lending policies.”

READ: – Courtesy of Wikileaks…

Date: 2016-05-20 14:19
Subject: RE: WaPo: Trump’s income tax returns once became public. They showed he didn’t pay a cent.

I know very little about this, but from a quick sweep it looks like passive-loss relief was a core component of Bill Clinton’s 1993 tax plan:

AP: Siegel says ripple effects will likely reach other investment markets as well. “The Clinton proposal should be good for the real estate market with its easing of the passive loss rules, its easing of the rules that govern pension fund investment in commercial and debt-financed real estate, and its easing of the oversight regarding bank lending policies.” …

Chicago Sun-Times: Last year, Bentsen’s Senate Finance Committee approved a change in the passive-loss system designed to provide partial tax-relief to property owners – and new buyers – who are “active participants” in real estate trades or businesses. Basically, the plan allowed such owners to escape the clutches of passive-loss treatment, and to write off losses from their real estate against net income derived from real estate. Guess what ended up in Bill Clinton’s tax package? You got it: The very passive-loss relief plan that sailed through Bentsen’s committee.

The Associated Press March 1, 1993, Monday, PM cycle Clinton Plan Has Something For Wall Street
BYLINE: By CHET CURRIER, AP Business Writer
SECTION: Business News
LENGTH: 594 words
DATELINE: NEW YORK

Though President Clinton’s economic ideas have drawn a lot of fire from Wall Street, his plan could well be a boon to the business of banks, brokers and other financial-services industries. In the eyes of some of his critics on the Street, Clinton has presented himself as a Robin Hood intent on redistributing wealth according to a system of “fairness” that is open to dispute. At the same time, however, observers say there is a very real prospect that his proposals could lead to greater demand for a wide variety of Wall Street’s merchandise, from municipal bonds to individual retirement accounts. “Everyone’s got a bellyache about Clinton’s proposal,” observed Ethan Siegel, a Washington analyst at Prudential Securities.

“While the market mulls over the proposal and its likely impact on the economy, I’d point out that there are pluses in the package that cannot be ignored.

“The overall message remains that there is going to be less Washington money for high-income retirees – in both pension and health care benefits. As more and more people find it necessary to provide for their own retirements, this will be a plus for the mutual funds, the financial planners and the banks.”

Analysts like Siegel raise these visions at a time when expectations for financial businesses are already on the rise. As of late last week, Standard & Poor’s index of financial stocks sported a 23.31 percent gain over the past 12 months. That stood in sharp contrast to an advance of just 3.08 percent for S&P’s index of industrial stocks, and a 6.88 percent rise overall for S&P’s 500-stock composite index. The financial group’s performance reflects the fact that financial firms of many types have been recovering from the early-1990s credit crunch, and reviving their profitability, with help from falling interest rates. As many analysts see it, these businesses also stand to benefit from demographic forces as the nation’s population ages in the years ahead, dramatically increasing the size of the over-40 set. This is the group that has always provided many of Wall Street’s best customers.

Richard Hoffman, chief investment strategist at Cowen & Co., cites as a primary market theme of the ’90s “anything that 40-year-olds and above buy and use.” Wall Street is already well into a prolonged marketing blitz seeking to woo this horde of potential clients as it faces the need to prepare in earnest for its retirement years.

Clinton’s proposals already have touched off a boom in the tax-exempt municipal bond business, based on the likelihood of higher tax brackets for upper-income individuals and couples. By the same reasoning, people’s appetites would stand to be whetted as well for annuities, life insurance, and retirement savings vehicles like IRAs, Keogh plans and employer-sponsored 401(k) plans – all of which offer some degree of shelter from taxes. Siegel says ripple effects will likely reach other investment markets as well.

“The Clinton proposal should be good for the real estate market with its easing of the passive loss rules, its easing of the rules that govern pension fund investment in commercial and debt-financed real estate, and its easing of the oversight regarding bank lending policies.”

Many Wall Streeters object to Clinton’s expressed faith in government, rather than private industry and market forces, as a driving force behind change and progress. From another angle, however, says Rao Chalasani at Kemper Securities in Chicago, “the president called for turning to investment, away from consumption.”

Chicago Sun-Times February 26, 1993, 
FRIDAY , FINAL Clinton Economic Plan Gives Real Estate a Break
BYLINE: Kenneth R. Harney
SECTION: HOMELIFE; THE NATION’S HOUSING; Pg. 6;
N LENGTH: 711 words

Real estate owners, investors and brokers could emerge from the 1993 federal legislative sweepstakes with something they haven’t seen since 1981: A tax bill that giveth rather than taketh away. Compared with other key sectors of the economy that were asked to share the pain of deficit-reduction, real estate came out as a net winner in the Clinton administration’s economic recovery program unveiled last week. Not a big winner, to be sure; but not a loser by any stretch.

First, the Clinton administration posted a last-minute hands-off sign on two of the fattest, and most politically sensitive, potential sources of new tax revenue: deductions for home mortgage interest and local property-tax payments. Plans for limiting both were on the table until late in the budget-crafting process, according to administration sources. One official said key staff members favored at least modest cuts in the deductions for philosophical as well as revenue-raising reasons.

Second, the fingerprints of pro-real estate legislators like former Sen. Lloyd Bentsen (D-Texas), now secretary of the Treasury, are clear in the Clinton package. While chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, Bentsen supported efforts to encourage pension funds to put more of their money into housing and real estate. The Clinton plan includes precisely such a plank. Bentsen also supported efforts to roll back features of the Tax Reform Act of 1986 that severely penalized new investment in commercial real estate. Those provisions hampered resales of office buildings, apartment complexes and other property financed by failed S & Ls, which were glutting the market in his home state.

Among the biggest impediments to real estate investment: the controversial “passive loss” system created by the 1986 reform act. That law defined all forms of rental real estate as “passive” activities, no matter how much time and effort owners spend on managing or operating their real estate. Under the law, losses generated by passive activities cannot be deducted against ordinary income from other, active sources. Instead they can only be written off against income generated by other passive activities. If there is no passive income available to a taxpayer, the 1986 reform law required the losses to be “carried forward” – put on ice until the property is sold or the taxpayer generates net passive income to offset the frozen passive losses.

Last year, Bentsen’s Senate Finance Committee approved a change in the passive-loss system designed to provide partial tax-relief to property owners – and new buyers – who are “active participants” in real estate trades or businesses. Basically, the plan allowed such owners to escape the clutches of passive-loss treatment, and to write off losses from their real estate against net income derived from real estate.

Guess what ended up in Bill Clinton’s tax package? You got it: The very passive-loss relief plan that sailed through Bentsen’s committee. But that’s just part of the new tax plan’s lean toward real estate. Consider these other features: Permanent reauthorization of the two most important sources of financing for affordable housing. These are the low-income tax credit for subsidizing rental units, and the mortgage revenue bond program that provides cut-rate mortgage money for more than 100,000 modest-income first-time home buyers per year.

Both programs have expired periodically when Congress failed to approve annual or biannual tax bill reauthorizations. A rollback of the 1992 federal tax bill’s proposed depreciation standards for commercial real estate. The Clinton plan calls for a 36-year depreciation schedule for non-residential property. While that’s up from the 31.5-year schedule included in the current tax code, it’s four years below the 40-year standard contained in the 1992 tax legislation, which was vetoed by President Bush.

Commercial real estate lobbyists would have preferred no change at all, but even last year they accepted the 40-year standard as a necessary revenue-raiser in exchange for passive-loss relief. The Clinton package turns out to be kinder and gentler to real estate, in other words, even when it passes the hat looking for more tax dollars.

 

From: Graham, Caroline
Sent: Friday, May 20, 2016 12:07 PM
To: Miller, Lindsey; Dillon, Lauren; Bauer, Nick; Roberts, Kelly; Sarge, Matthew Cc: Brinster, Jeremy; Dieter, Austin
Subject: RE: WaPo: Trump’s income tax returns once became public. They showed he didn’t pay a cent.

Brinster – do we have any boomerang here?

These are the specifics on 78/79. As long as Brinster doesn’t see a flag, then I’d like to round all of this up in a doc, but tighten up the frame a bit and make sure we’re driving the “Trump’s always in it for himself” narrative. That should help downplay his call for higher taxes on the wealthy (non-real estate) folks.

Trump Paid No Taxes Due to Losses on Rental Properties. A Division of Gaming Enforcement report from October 1981 stated: “The Division notes that in 1978 and 1979 Trump incurred no federal income tax liability. In 1979, the lack of such liability is primarily attributable to losses incurred by Trump in the operation of rental properties located at Third Avenue, Fifth Avenue, East 56th Street, East 57th Street, East 6lst Street and East 62nd Street, New York City, New York. The expenses for the operation of the aforesaid rental properties were actual cash disbursements as reflected in Trump’s cash disbursements journal. The foregoing losses were also traced to interest due on amounts owed to Fred C. Trump and Chase Manhattan Bank during 1978 and 1979. Additionally, Trump incurred losses during 1978 and 1979 in the operations of the Park Briar Associates, Regency-Lexington Partners and 220 Prospect Street Company, partnerships in which Trump has an interest.” [Division of Gaming Enforcement Report to the Casino Control Commission, 10/16/81]

Does Podesta partake in “spirit cooking” and molestation of children?

 Comments Off on Does Podesta partake in “spirit cooking” and molestation of children?
Nov 042016
 

These issues leave us speechless, not knowing if there is truth behind the conjecture. So until more information is available, we will simply show some of the emails that are being talked about.

Well…maybe we aren’t quite speechless.

We do know this: The woman inviting Tony Podesta and his brother John to what appears to be a very sick dinner – called “spirit cooking” – has a very disturbing history. One would think her displays of “performance art should have been a red flag for mental illness a long time ago.  There is no denying Marina Abramovic, who goes by the twitter handle that includes the numbers 666 in succession, dabbles in the spirit-cooking-imageoccult.

Here is an image. We are assuming it is part of her “art” – illustrating the significance of “spirit cooking.”

According to DC writer, Cassandra Fairbanks, “Abramovic is known for her often-gory art that confronts pain and ritual. Her first performance involved repeatedly, stabbing herself in her hands. The next performance featured her throwing her nails, toenails, and hair into a flaming five-point star — which she eventually jumped inside of, causing her to lose consciousness.

“During the next, she ingested a medication to treat people who are catatonic, which caused violent muscle spasms.

“Perhaps most famously, in 1974, Abramovic placed 72 objects on a table, including a rose, a feather, honey, a whip, olive oil, scissors, a scalpel — and a gun and a single bullet. Alongside the items was a sign informing the audience that the items could be used on her in any way that they chose.

“For six hours, she remained at the mercy of the audience, allowing them to do as they pleased. During that time, she was stripped, cut, and one audience member even held the gun to her head.

“What I learned was that … if you leave it up to the audience, they can kill you. … I felt really violated: they cut up my clothes, stuck rose thorns in my stomach, one person aimed the gun at my head, and another took it away. It created an aggressive atmosphere. After exactly 6 hours, as planned, I stood up and started walking toward the audience. Everyone ran away, to escape an actual confrontation,” she later said of the performance.”

(http://wearechange.org/spirit-cooking-disturbing-podesta-email-yet-warning-graphic-content/ )

Seriously? She drew in sick people to watch her gore shows, then invited them to do nasty stuff to her, then feigns surprise? And even tries to make this a statement about people in general? This woman has needed either psychiatric help (or an exorcist) for a long time – but none of her “friends” – including Podesta or, as we are now hearing, Hillary, or Huma, cared enough about her to get her help.  They were enjoying her “art” too much.

Here is the email with the Podesta invitation to the Spirit Dinner. We will leave it to you to google just what a “Spirit Dinner” is.

Podesta invitation to dinner

In this Reddit posting three years ago, the ‘artist’ explains that her work is ‘art’ when done in a studio, but ‘occult’ when done at home…

reddit-occult-confession

Second subject of the day

Various other emails have people talking about pizza and hotdogs. Many readers wonder why these two items seem to be a favorite food among Podesta’s friends.  One email even states that Obama had paid tens of thousands of dollars to order in pizza and hotdogs from Chicago, and wondered if they could go through the same channels…

obama-chicago-pizza-and-hotdogs-65000

We have a right to be upset about this email. $65,000 in taxpayer money to fly in pizza and hotdogs from Chicago?  There is a new Wal-mart in DC, just a few blocks north of the White House.  There is also a deli – “Roland’s Deli” – down the road on Pennsylvania Ave.  We are sure that if pizza and hotdogs couldn’t be found at either of these fine places, there had to be somewhere in DC where they could.

So why fly these things in from Chicago, let alone at taxpayer expense. Other emails mention not caring what kind of pizza is obtained – just so that it doesn’t have “hair” in it this time.

Some people aren’t so sure it is children’s food that is being discussed. Some are worried it is something horrific. We know that Bill Clinton has had issues with sexual addiction for decades.  We know Anthony Weiner has a problem with sexual addition.  We know Huma and Hillary have been aware of their husband’s problem for a long time, but neither have seemed to have addressed it in any significant way.  Could it be that this behavior isn’t as abhorrent in their circle as it is to so many other Americans?

This email below invites Podesta to a pool party, and promises three children will be there for entertainment. Do they mean that they are funny, fun kids… or that they have a singing routine?  It may be as simple as that – but lots of people no longer trust the Clintons or their co-horts.  Trust simply does not exist, and people are ready to believe the worst.

…yet, if someone is willing to play with the occult, the possibility of worse does in fact exist.

Podesta email pool-party-with-children

 

Finally – (at least in this post) – some might remember a Laura Silsby, who attempted to take children from Haiti and was arrested for child trafficking, along with members of an Idaho church.

The Church members were freed after a short time. They were along for the ride, having believed everything Silsby told them, and knew nothing about what was really going on. Silsby did not have the paperwork she needed, despite having been told repeatedly that she needed it. The attorney representing Silsby, as it turns out, had been involved in child trafficking in the past.  Did she ingratiate herself to the church as a cover?

Something wasn’t right.  Maybe there is a lot more to this kind of thing than any of us naive bystanders will ever really know.  At any rate – here is a list of Hillary’s involvement with Ms. Silsby –

 

concerning-laura-sibley-2016

As we know…Hillary Clinton doesn’t normally help people out of the goodness of her heart. She requires a payment.  So why the interest in this ‘Church woman’ from Idaho?

Clearly we don’t have answers to any of the many questions.  There are so many scandals involving the Clinton’s, if there were anything to be concerned about in these emails, they could only be added to the pile.

We pray the FBI does its job this time, investigates thoroughly, and brings clear answers to America – as well as indictments if necessary.

 

 

TRUMP: Do NOT quit – Do NOT abandon us to the Power Brokers

 Comments Off on TRUMP: Do NOT quit – Do NOT abandon us to the Power Brokers
Oct 082016
 
http://dakotansforhonestyinpolitics.com/

ARE YOU KIDDING ME?? The GOP wants Trump to drop out of the race????

Hillary has a mountain load of obvious corruption going on and has proved without a doubt she has been totally inept as an office holder – but no one calls for her to quit the race. Nope. But dig up a decade old tape of Trump with a potty mouth – and the GOP ‘leadership’ (if you can call it that) has a meltdown?

The only thing that many of us lower rung, average, middle-America people can guess from the reaction of the GOP elite is that they are doing everything they can to maintain their gravy train, even if it means putting horrifically corrupt Clinton into office.

You want us to believe this is about the degrading of Women? Or as Mitt Romney put it, “…vile degradations” demeaning “our wives and daughters” and corrupting “America’s face to the world”? As IF that isn’t what Bill and Hillary Clinton have already done?

QUESTION: Imagine, readers, if you will, that your boss is inviting women into his office for sex several times a month. Seriously try to imagine it.
– Imagine further that some of these women are your co-workers.

Would you feel disgusted, appalled, angry? Or would you smile, go about your job – and tell yourself it’s none of your business and doesn’t affect the workplace at all?

How many men have been rightfully sued for sexual harassment in the workplace? There is a general understanding of power issues involved. But even if we choose to perceive the behavior of your boss as consensual…

…Do you still feel at ease when there is a possibility of the Boss’ wife showing up unannounced, and you will have to decide whether you should distract her from going in? …She is a powerful woman. Standing in her way would not be comfortable or easy – and might even feel dangerous to your job. Maybe…maybe you should be on her side because you know how angry she might be at the entire office for helping him…

…Or …or…maybe she already knows… and will she be angry at you for NOT helping him in maintaining the secret… After all – you have seen how she has reacted to women in the past who have made it public that he has molested or raped them – you know how angry she can be. She has viciously and publicly destroyed them.

– – Would you KNOW how you should act? Would you truly be entirely comfortable with what was going on in your workplace?

It is unbelievable that so many people give the Clintons a pass on their behavior.

This is NOT defending the bad behavior of Trump. But we’ve all known who he is for years. We went into this election KNOWING he is a cad. Yet now the power brokers are jumping on a years old tape as an excuse to demand he quit the race? Why are these people pretending his behavior is a sudden surprise??

– And WHY are these people SERIOUSLY pretending the Clinton’s are better??

Not only has Bill Clinton done much worse than Trump in relation to women – right in the Oval Office, no less – but Hillary Clinton deliberately destroyed the reputation of every women he raped who dared to come forward and say what he did. People should read the book by the Secret Service Agent who manned the Oval Office door during the Clinton years to begin with – and then if one needs more – read the many well-documented publications, Congressional hearings and court records concerning the Clintons over the last 30 years.

Unbelievable that the GOP elite is all in for the Clintons – despite everything the Clintons have done – from women to crime and corruption – not to mention their willingness to continue supporting the current insane LGBT agenda, murder unborn children for profit, and appoint three leftist Justice’s to the Supreme Court. It is beyond understanding how the GOP elite could embrace all that.

We are done with the power brokers from both parties. The Jeb Bush’s and Mitt Romney’s can take a flying leap, right along with their friends, the Clintons. We never want to see any of them in office again. We want genuine change!

Trump – as blemished as you have been – you are our only real hope of making DC different. DO NOT GIVE IN TO THE GOP ELITE.

(Not to mention… we do believe you have made some changes in your heart, which is much more than the Clintons have done. Their hearts remain just as they have always been.)

PEOPLE: Read the words of the Secret Service agent stationed at the door of President Clinton’s Oval Office, who was appalled by the behavior he witnessed from the first family and alarmed by the constant security issues resulting from the behavior. It wasn’t just about a president’s private, personal life; it was happening in the workplace, compromising issues of security, obvious to many, and forcing several staff to even participate… forcing them to choose between personal integrity and obedient cover up…

“Crisis of Character” by Gary J. Byrne, New York: Hachette Book Group, 2016.

https://www.amazon.com/Crisis-Character-Discloses-Firsthand-Experience/dp/1455568872

Gary Bauer’s Take on the 2016 VP Debate

 Comments Off on Gary Bauer’s Take on the 2016 VP Debate
Oct 052016
 

From Gary L. Bauer’s ‘End of Day’ Report, October 5, 2016

Pence Prevails

Gov. Mike Pence won last night’s vice presidential debate hands down!

Instant polls confirmed that voters at home thought Pence won. A focus group revealed that independent voters really connected with Gov. Pence. His strong performance undoubtedly reassured many that the Trump/Pence ticket is ready to lead and ready to make America great again.

While Governor Pence was calm and collected, Senator Tim Kaine turned into “Mr. Buttinsky,” interrupting more than 70 times in 90 minutes. One focus group observer, a likely Clinton supporter, said that Kaine “came across as a jerk.”

What got less attention is how often the moderator, Elaine Quijano of CBS News, interrupted Pence. Like Lester Holt, Quijano asked Pence eight pointed questions and only one of Tim Kaine. And when Pence started making strong points about Hillary’s email server or the Clinton Foundation, Quijano jumped in and talked over him.

Nonetheless, Pence still prevailed.

If you want an idea of just how badly Tim Kaine did last night, consider this analysis from MSNBC’s Chris Matthews:

“I thought [Pence] was very effective at being a conservative. What I really think he accomplished tonight is he made himself probably the front-runner for the Republican nomination in 2020. He hit all the bases on the conservative side. He was pro-life. He was rather eloquent on it at the end. . . On the other hand, I thought at times, and I like the guy, Kaine was a . . . little desperate there.”

Of course, the only thing Matthews gets wrong here is that when Pence runs in 2020, it will be as vice president for the second Trump term!

Defending The Sanctity Of Life

Abortion came up last night, and, predictably, Tim Kaine did what Democrats have done for decades. Stuck in the 1970s, Kaine portrayed abortion as a women’s issue and accused Republicans of being anti-women extremists because of their pro-life position.

Mike Pence turned the tables on Kaine, pointing out that Hillary Clinton and the modern Democrat Party are the real extremists in the abortion debate. Pence raised Hillary’s support for the gruesome procedure of partial-birth abortions, which the American people overwhelmingly reject.

Here was a very telling moment: When Kaine was asked to describe a time when he agonized over the role of his faith in public life, he brought up capital punishment. For Tim Kaine, the agonizing thing was allowing convicted murderers to receive the death penalty, not forcing innocent children to be destroyed by abortion.

As a practicing Catholic, Kaine did not agonize over being the “right-hand person” of a pro-abortion extremist who wants taxpayers to pay for abortions through all nine months of pregnancy!

It is telling that big media is largely silent about that exchange last night. Mike Pence exposed the Clinton/Kaine ticket as pro-abortion extremists, and their media allies know how vulnerable they are.

Most Disgusting Attack Of The Night

Kaine repeatedly said last night that because Donald Trump had a tax loss in 1995, he was against our veterans and against our national security. This is coming from a man whose party is stuck in a pre-9/11 mindset. They deny we are at war with radical Islam. His party has advocated defense cuts for decades.

Polling shows that military voters and veterans are overwhelmingly for Trump/Pence. There is a reason for that.

By the way, over the course of his lifetime, Donald Trump has paid millions of dollars in taxes to all levels of government. And that does not include the thousands of jobs he created and the salaries he paid his employees who in turn paid taxes on that income.

Clueless Kaine

One of Tim Kaine’s big themes last night was that Donald Trump would appease Vladimir Putin. Hillary Clinton spent four years as secretary of state appeasing Putin. The president she served has continued appeasing Putin.

What Donald Trump and Mike Pence have said about Putin is that he gets up every morning and does whatever he can to advance the interests of his country. That is what leaders should do.

We have a president who gets up every morning and seemingly looks for ways to apologize for America or intentionally takes America down a notch. Obama and Clinton created a leadership vacuum in the world, which allowed ISIS to emerge and which Putin is now filling.

By the way, Tim Kaine’s comments on terrorism should be disqualifying. At one point, Kaine suggested that climate change was just as serious a threat as terrorism. Then he actually suggested that we are safer today, saying, “The terrorist threat has decreased.”

Really? I can think a lot of people in Paris, Brussels, San Bernardino, Orlando and New York City who would disagree. In fact, the majority of the country disagrees with Tim Kaine.

The Worst Lie

Kaine stated over and over again that Hillary Clinton ended the Iranian nuclear program. The Iranian nuclear program has not been ended. Obama made far too many concessions to effectively end it.

Iran continues developing ballistic missiles, the delivery vehicles for . . . nuclear weapons.

Kaine claimed several times that even Israel believes Iran’s nuclear program has ended. That is not the view of the Israeli government, which recently compared the Obama/Clinton/Ayatollah nuclear deal to the 1938 Munich Agreement. Hardly a ringing endorsement.

Coincidence? I Doubt It

Kaine and Pence had a spirited exchange over the criminal justice system and policing. Kaine offered obligatory praise for the police, but immediately started spouting talking points about racism that sounded like he was reading from the Black Lives Matter script.

Pence told the audience that his uncle had been a police officer in Chicago and that the demonizing of the police must stop. He reminded Americans watching the debate that leading police unions have endorsed the Trump/Pence ticket.

In Indianapolis last night, someone drove past the police headquarters and fired more than a dozen shots into the building. So on the night that the governor of Indiana made an impassioned defense of the police, someone attacked the police headquarters.

It is time for Hillary Clinton and Tim Kaine to demand that their supporters and sympathizers stop engaging in violence — violence against Trump supporters and violence against the courageous men and women in law enforcement.

* * * * *

FOLLOW GARY ON FACEBOOK AND TWITTER. VISIT END OF DAY ARCHIVES TO SHARE REPORTS ON FACEBOOK.

SIGN UP FOR GARY BAUER’S “END OF DAY REPORT”.

EMAIL GARY BAUER

If you would like to support our work, please click on the following link: Support CWF or you may mail contributions to the following address:

Campaign for Working Families
2800 Shirlington Road
Suite 930
Arlington, VA 22206

Phone: 703-671-8800
Fax: 703-671-8899

Gary L. Bauer served in President Ronald Reagan’s administration for eight years, as Under Secretary of Education and Chief Domestic Policy Advisor. After leaving the Reagan White House, Bauer became President of the Family Research Council and a Senior Vice President of Focus on the Family.

Bauer took his pro-family, pro-life message across the country during the 2000 Republican presidential primaries and debates.
Today, Bauer serves as Chairman of Campaign for Working Families PAC, dedicated to electing conservative candidates to Congress, and as President of American Values, an educational non-profit organization. He writes a weekly column at Human Events and co-hosts a weekend talk show on Sirius/XM Radio.

In 1973, Bauer received his law degree from Georgetown Law School in Washington, D.C. He is married to the former Carol Hoke, and lives in Virginia. Gary and Carol have three grown children.

Advocating for honesty – while supporting a flawed candidate…

 Comments Off on Advocating for honesty – while supporting a flawed candidate…
Oct 012016
 

We established this org to promote ‘the election of officials who perform their responsibilities with honesty and integrity.’

Ugh.

Well, despite obvious and deeply ingrained corruption within many levels and agencies of our federal government – our goal and hope remains. Just as we said from the beginning (because this level of political dishonesty did not happen over night) – we will continue to push for and promote honesty amongst our politicians.

This does not mean we can only vote for those with impeccable character. That would be impossible – for at this point in time there is none.

But the chances of our nation nominating a person of impeccable character in 2016 were never good.

Good character is so sorely lacking within our society as a whole, and hatred of “Christian” standards is too high.  Members of our society openly celebrate vulgarity and self-indulgence, parading it in the streets and glorifying it in movies, books and games. In this environment, when candidates have even mentioned Biblical standards, they have been vilified.

Godly candidates did not win the nomination for presidency. Period.

Good, honest people did run for office of the presidency.  They were not nominated.

That all said, we, as an organization continue to insist our state and federal governments embody honesty and integrity. We will not stop pushing and praying for honest elected officials.

At this point in time – only one of our presidential candidates has a long history of corruption while in office – and this is where the line must be drawn.  Only ONE of our presidential candidates has manipulated the DOJ, FBI and other entities to cover her corruption. Only ONE has used her position of political power to financially benefit herself.

We stand against this person and will do everything in our limited power to keep her out of office.

The following questions were written by a man named YJ Draiman. We believe these unanswered questions (and many others) need to be asked at the next debate:

Mrs. Clinton:

  • When you left the White House after your husband’s last term as president, why did you steal 200,000.00 worth of furniture, china, and artwork that you were forced to return?
  • Mrs. Clinton, when you were Secretary of State, why did you Solicit contributions from foreign governments for the Clinton foundation after you promised President Obama you would not?
  • Mrs. Clinton, why do you and your husband claim to contribute millions of dollars to charity for a tax write off when it goes to your family foundation that gives out less than 15% of the funds you collect and you use the balance to support yourself tax free?
  • Mrs. Clinton, why are you unable to account for 6 billion dollars of State department funds that seem to have disappeared while you were Secretary of State?
  • Mrs. Clinton, why did you say you were broke when you left the White House, but you purchased a 2 million home, built an addition for the secret service, and charge the tax payers of the Untied States rent in an amount equal to the entire mortgage?
  • Mrs. Clinton, how is it that your daughter, Chelsea, can afford to buy a 10.5 million apartment in New York City shortly after you left the White House?
  • Speaking of Chelsea, how is it that her first paying job, in her late 20’s, was for more than the President of the United States’ salary? Was there a quid pro quo of any sort involved?
  • We would also like to know about METRO CARE HOME SERVICES. Their address is the same as Chelsea’s apartment. What’s the deal with that?
  • Mrs. Clinton why did you lie to the American people about the terrorist attack in Benghazi but managed to tell the truth to your daughter the same night it happened?

This is just the tip of the iceberg of questions that must be answered.

http://www.dakotansforhonestyinpolitics.com/

– https://www.facebook.com/DakotansforHonestyinPolitics/

Who Writes Angry Missives at 3 AM?- – WE do…

 Comments Off on Who Writes Angry Missives at 3 AM?- – WE do…
Oct 012016
 
http://dakotansforhonestyinpolitics.com/

I used to react like Trump. Well, not quite as sharply as Trump responds… although …maybe I did and just didn’t think I did. Some people from back then thought of me as angry. I did get pretty catty sometimes.

This was back twenty years ago when lots of people read the letters to the editor. That was my first, main way of getting a political message out – before Facebook and Twitter.

‘Letters to the editor’ played best in small counties, where you were sure to get printed. Only trouble was that they were ‘weeklies’ – and a back and forth took a LOOONG time. Readers needed to have patience. ‘Word wars’ back then could take three or four weeks to play out in the weekly paper, as opposed to today, when Twitter or Facebook ‘word wars’ play out in just a couple hours.

That said … I understand how embarrassing it is when someone tries to shame you publicly – in my case, in front of the entire county. I understand Trump’s agonizing urge to strike back. I couldn’t ‘not’ respond. The attacks STUNG. They would keep me awake at night, with all my arguments running over and over through my head. Sometimes, unable to sleep, I would finally get out of bed and get my thoughts down on paper in the form of another letter to the editor. I never felt tired while writing – even if in the wee hours of the morning. I was energized by my thoughts and emotion. Further, writing is much easier in the quiet hours while the rest of the family is sleeping. – Once finished, I could finally feel tired and go to sleep.

One time someone said they saw me at a restaurant yelling at the restaurant owner – and that I got thrown out of the restaurant. How do you not respond to something as ridiculous as that? So I wrote angrily in the paper the next week “Tell me exactly what restaurant and the date it happened – because I want to go talk to that owner.”

The person responded the week after that – “well, it must have been someone else.” Sure. Because it never happened.

I was vindicated – but still upset because some people might have read the first week’s attack and never saw the third week’s back-track (sans apology, by the way.)

The paper’s editor liked our letters. Their entertaining drama sold papers.

But a friend told me to stop responding to attacks.

… ‘WHAT? And let people get away with saying things like that?? If I don’t say something – people will think it was true!!’

He gently replied, “Sometimes your angry responses say more about you than they say about the other guy.” He added a piece of advice my mother used to always say as well: “Ignore them.” That advice never made sense to me when she said it – and still didn’t make sense to me from him.

It took me years to learn to ‘not’ respond – and to be at peace with not responding.

But I finally now know: If I behave on a higher level and people learn to trust me for it, they won’t mistakenly believe I was thrown out of a restaurant for arguing with the owner. Conversely: if they see me blowing a gasket in my writing, they might believe I got thrown out of a restaurant. We have to act better than our attackers.

That said: I know I could get in trouble if I start responding to attacks on our political Facebook page, so I make decisions (again and again) to not even look at nasty comments. When opponents say things that are outright lies – they are deliberately baiting me – and I don’t need to play in to it. If someone wants to have a mature conversation or debate – that’s great. But I don’t need nonsense. They can spew it elsewhere.

I have also gotten good at simply ignoring the stuff they say about us elsewhere. Some of our supporters sometimes send me a link and say, “you should see what they are saying about you today.” Or “You need to go to this site and stick up for yourself.”

No – I don’t need to. I am extremely busy and don’t have any time to waste on garbage. The fact is, it wouldn’t make a bit of difference if I went to those sites and said anything. They aren’t saying these things because they are seeking truth. They are saying it to discredit and stop me. So they aren’t going to respond to polite correction with, “Oh! My bad! We see your point now. Sorry, won’t happen again.”
It is a waste of time to respond to blatant attacks and will only serve to aggravate and escalate the situation.

Therefore, I keep my eyes on my own work, not on them. It doesn’t matter what they do or say. The only thing that matters is that I steadfastly do the best work I can – with the utmost honesty and integrity.

ANYWAY. Trump felt shamed in front of the entire country the night of the first debate. I understand that. The advice I can give him is the same advice my mother gave.

“Ignore them.” Plain and simple.

Full Statement by FBI Director James B. Comey on the Investigation of Secretary Hillary Clinton

 Comments Off on Full Statement by FBI Director James B. Comey on the Investigation of Secretary Hillary Clinton
Jul 062016
 

FBI Director Comey stated, “…there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.”

“…seven e-mail chains concern matters that were classified at the Top Secret/Special Access Program …any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position…should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation. …None of these e-mails should have been on any kind of unclassified system, …housed on unclassified personal servers not even supported by full-time security staff…”

Due to the amount and depth of investigation done by the FBI, we believe him when he saidthis investigation was done competently, honestly, and independently.” and Only facts matter, and the FBI found them here in an entirely apolitical and professional way.”  

HOWEVER – we also believe him when he truthfully said, “To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now.

What is unclear is whether he was forced to give the recommendation he did, despite the evidence collected. 

_________________________________________________

(Highlights in the full statement text are by editor and are not part of original transcript)

Statement by FBI Director James B. Comey on the Investigation of Secretary Hillary Clinton’s Use of a Personal E-Mail System

Washington, D.C.July 05, 2016
  • FBI National Press Office(202) 324-3691

Remarks prepared for delivery at press briefing.

Good morning. I’m here to give you an update on the FBI’s investigation of Secretary Clinton’s use of a personal e-mail system during her time as Secretary of State.

After a tremendous amount of work over the last year, the FBI is completing its investigation and referring the case to the Department of Justice for a prosecutive decision. What I would like to do today is tell you three things: what we did; what we found; and what we are recommending to the Department of Justice.

This will be an unusual statement in at least a couple ways. First, I am going to include more detail about our process than I ordinarily would, because I think the American people deserve those details in a case of intense public interest. Second, I have not coordinated or reviewed this statement in any way with the Department of Justice or any other part of the government. They do not know what I am about to say.

I want to start by thanking the FBI employees who did remarkable work in this case. Once you have a better sense of how much we have done, you will understand why I am so grateful and proud of their efforts.

So, first, what we have done:

The investigation began as a referral from the Intelligence Community Inspector General in connection with Secretary Clinton’s use of a personal e-mail server during her time as Secretary of State. The referral focused on whether classified information was transmitted on that personal system.

Our investigation looked at whether there is evidence classified information was improperly stored or transmitted on that personal system, in violation of a federal statute making it a felony to mishandle classified information either intentionally or in a grossly negligent way, or a second statute making it a misdemeanor to knowingly remove classified information from appropriate systems or storage facilities.

Consistent with our counterintelligence responsibilities, we have also investigated to determine whether there is evidence of computer intrusion in connection with the personal e-mail server by any foreign power, or other hostile actors.

I have so far used the singular term, “e-mail server,” in describing the referral that began our investigation. It turns out to have been more complicated than that. Secretary Clinton used several different servers and administrators of those servers during her four years at the State Department, and used numerous mobile devices to view and send e-mail on that personal domain. As new servers and equipment were employed, older servers were taken out of service, stored, and decommissioned in various ways. Piecing all of that back together—to gain as full an understanding as possible of the ways in which personal e-mail was used for government work—has been a painstaking undertaking, requiring thousands of hours of effort.

For example, when one of Secretary Clinton’s original personal servers was decommissioned in 2013, the e-mail software was removed. Doing that didn’t remove the e-mail content, but it was like removing the frame from a huge finished jigsaw puzzle and dumping the pieces on the floor. The effect was that millions of e-mail fragments end up unsorted in the server’s unused—or “slack”—space. We searched through all of it to see what was there, and what parts of the puzzle could be put back together.

FBI investigators have also read all of the approximately 30,000 e-mails provided by Secretary Clinton to the State Department in December 2014. Where an e-mail was assessed as possibly containing classified information, the FBI referred the e-mail to any U.S. government agency that was a likely “owner” of information in the e-mail, so that agency could make a determination as to whether the e-mail contained classified information at the time it was sent or received, or whether there was reason to classify the e-mail now, even if its content was not classified at the time it was sent (that is the process sometimes referred to as “up-classifying”).

From the group of 30,000 e-mails returned to the State Department, 110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time; and eight contained Confidential information, which is the lowest level of classification. Separate from those, about 2,000 additional e-mails were “up-classified” to make them Confidential; the information in those had not been classified at the time the e-mails were sent.

The FBI also discovered several thousand work-related e-mails that were not in the group of 30,000 that were returned by Secretary Clinton to State in 2014. We found those additional e-mails in a variety of ways. Some had been deleted over the years and we found traces of them on devices that supported or were connected to the private e-mail domain. Others we found by reviewing the archived government e-mail accounts of people who had been government employees at the same time as Secretary Clinton, including high-ranking officials at other agencies, people with whom a Secretary of State might naturally correspond.

This helped us recover work-related e-mails that were not among the 30,000 produced to State. Still others we recovered from the laborious review of the millions of e-mail fragments dumped into the slack space of the server decommissioned in 2013.

With respect to the thousands of e-mails we found that were not among those produced to State, agencies have concluded that three of those were classified at the time they were sent or received, one at the Secret level and two at the Confidential level. There were no additional Top Secret e-mails found. Finally, none of those we found have since been “up-classified.”

I should add here that we found no evidence that any of the additional work-related e-mails were intentionally deleted in an effort to conceal them. Our assessment is that, like many e-mail users, Secretary Clinton periodically deleted e-mails or e-mails were purged from the system when devices were changed. Because she was not using a government account—or even a commercial account like Gmail—there was no archiving at all of her e-mails, so it is not surprising that we discovered e-mails that were not on Secretary Clinton’s system in 2014, when she produced the 30,000 e-mails to the State Department.

It could also be that some of the additional work-related e-mails we recovered were among those deleted as “personal” by Secretary Clinton’s lawyers when they reviewed and sorted her e-mails for production in 2014.

The lawyers doing the sorting for Secretary Clinton in 2014 did not individually read the content of all of her e-mails, as we did for those available to us; instead, they relied on header information and used search terms to try to find all work-related e-mails among the reportedly more than 60,000 total e-mails remaining on Secretary Clinton’s personal system in 2014. It is highly likely their search terms missed some work-related e-mails, and that we later found them, for example, in the mailboxes of other officials or in the slack space of a server.

It is also likely that there are other work-related e-mails that they did not produce to State and that we did not find elsewhere, and that are now gone because they deleted all e-mails they did not return to State, and the lawyers cleaned their devices in such a way as to preclude complete forensic recovery.

We have conducted interviews and done technical examination to attempt to understand how that sorting was done by her attorneys. Although we do not have complete visibility because we are not able to fully reconstruct the electronic record of that sorting, we believe our investigation has been sufficient to give us reasonable confidence there was no intentional misconduct in connection with that sorting effort.

And, of course, in addition to our technical work, we interviewed many people, from those involved in setting up and maintaining the various iterations of Secretary Clinton’s personal server, to staff members with whom she corresponded on e-mail, to those involved in the e-mail production to State, and finally, Secretary Clinton herself.

Last, we have done extensive work to understand what indications there might be of compromise by hostile actors in connection with the personal e-mail operation.

That’s what we have done. Now let me tell you what we found:

Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.

For example, seven e-mail chains concern matters that were classified at the Top Secret/Special Access Program level when they were sent and received. These chains involved Secretary Clinton both sending e-mails about those matters and receiving e-mails from others about the same matters. There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation. In addition to this highly sensitive information, we also found information that was properly classified as Secret by the U.S. Intelligence Community at the time it was discussed on e-mail (that is, excluding the later “up-classified” e-mails).

None of these e-mails should have been on any kind of unclassified system, but their presence is especially concerning because all of these e-mails were housed on unclassified personal servers not even supported by full-time security staff, like those found at Departments and Agencies of the U.S. Government—or even with a commercial service like Gmail.

Separately, it is important to say something about the marking of classified information. Only a very small number of the e-mails containing classified information bore markings indicating the presence of classified information. But even if information is not marked “classified” in an e-mail, participants who know or should know that the subject matter is classified are still obligated to protect it.

While not the focus of our investigation, we also developed evidence that the security culture of the State Department in general, and with respect to use of unclassified e-mail systems in particular, was generally lacking in the kind of care for classified information found elsewhere in the government.

With respect to potential computer intrusion by hostile actors, we did not find direct evidence that Secretary Clinton’s personal e-mail domain, in its various configurations since 2009, was successfully hacked. But, given the nature of the system and of the actors potentially involved, we assess that we would be unlikely to see such direct evidence. We do assess that hostile actors gained access to the private commercial e-mail accounts of people with whom Secretary Clinton was in regular contact from her personal account. We also assess that Secretary Clinton’s use of a personal e-mail domain was both known by a large number of people and readily apparent. She also used her personal e-mail extensively while outside the United States, including sending and receiving work-related e-mails in the territory of sophisticated adversaries. Given that combination of factors, we assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton’s personal e-mail account.

So that’s what we found. Finally, with respect to our recommendation to the Department of Justice:

In our system, the prosecutors make the decisions about whether charges are appropriate based on evidence the FBI has helped collect. Although we don’t normally make public our recommendations to the prosecutors, we frequently make recommendations and engage in productive conversations with prosecutors about what resolution may be appropriate, given the evidence. In this case, given the importance of the matter, I think unusual transparency is in order.

Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before bringing charges. There are obvious considerations, like the strength of the evidence, especially regarding intent. Responsible decisions also consider the context of a person’s actions, and how similar situations have been handled in the past.

In looking back at our investigations into mishandling or removal of classified information, we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts. All the cases prosecuted involved some combination of: clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information; or vast quantities of materials exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct; or indications of disloyalty to the United States; or efforts to obstruct justice. We do not see those things here.

To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now.

As a result, although the Department of Justice makes final decisions on matters like this, we are expressing to Justice our view that no charges are appropriate in this case.

I know there will be intense public debate in the wake of this recommendation, as there was throughout this investigation. What I can assure the American people is that this investigation was done competently, honestly, and independently. No outside influence of any kind was brought to bear.

I know there were many opinions expressed by people who were not part of the investigation—including people in government—but none of that mattered to us. Opinions are irrelevant, and they were all uninformed by insight into our investigation, because we did the investigation the right way. Only facts matter, and the FBI found them here in an entirely apolitical and professional way. I couldn’t be prouder to be part of this organization.

 

Source: https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/statement-by-fbi-director-james-b.-comey-on-the-investigation-of-secretary-hillary-clintons-use-of-a-personal-e-mail-system, Accessed July 6, 2016, 9:45 am CST.

Hillary Clinton says she’ll put Bill ‘in charge’ of fixing economy

 Comments Off on Hillary Clinton says she’ll put Bill ‘in charge’ of fixing economy
May 232016
 

 

Hillary Clinton has been campaigning since 2008 as “the first woman president.”  She has inferred she can not only do just as good a job as any male candidate, but because she’s been both Senator and Secretary of State, she can do a better job than any other candidate.

On the one hand, she wants people to believe she is the woman to prove ‘women can do anything.’  “I am woman, hear me roar.”

On the other hand, she wants people to think her husband will be her co-president  – and told one group that Bill will handle the economy for her because “he is good at that kind of thing.”

So is she capable of running the country on her own, or isn’t she?

She expects all women to rally around her, and former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright has said any woman who doesn’t help her win can go to hell. …(or, in her more polite language, ‘there is a special place in hell’ for them.)

Yet on Sunday, May 15, she told a crowd in Kentucky “I will put my husband in charge of revitalizing the economy ’cause he knows what he’s doing.”

So…what is she saying – that she doesn’t know what she is doing?

This will be the first President in American history to hand over a major part of the job over to her spouse.  Will the First Husband end up managing all Affairs of State, while Hillary attends State dinners and funerals?  (Well… if that is all she needs to do, then she is qualified… because that is all she did as SOS).

…or…maybe she is playing the good wife’ – stepping aside and letting her husband take the lead as so many women her age have done through the years.

Either way…what kind of example is that for the daughters of feminists?

…Perhaps feminists will say to their daughters, “Don’t worry dear, this was just a baby step.  She is elderly and kind of stuck in old ruts. We’ll have a better candidate next time.”

Come on people. This candidate has just admitted she isn’t up for the job. There are term limits for a reason – and Bill Clinton has already had his turn as president.  I, for one, am not interested in electing Bill Clinton to a third term through the faux candidacy of his wife.

When we elect a woman president, it will be a woman who can hold her own and be a role model for our children.

And not only hold her own, but be a person of honesty, integrity, and humility. There are a lot of people to choose from with intelligence, skills and character.  We do not have to settle for Hillary Clinton.

 

Read Article: If she’s elected president, Hillary Clinton says she’ll appoint her husband, Bill, to oversee the economy.

http://money.cnn.com/2016/05/16/news/economy/hillary-bill-clinton-economic-job-growth/

 

Our world has gone nuts

 Comments Off on Our world has gone nuts
May 142016
 

Our world appears to have gone crazy. Those wishing to remain within the boundaries of sanity and reality must fight for it, as well as for our children.

Many of us in America are at a loss to understand how our world has gotten so crazy so quickly.  What has been known for centuries to be right and good is now, suddenly, in the last twenty years been turned the opposite.  What all have known to be evil is now considered good – and what has been good is now said to be evil. Darkness takes the place of light, and light for darkness. Bitter is now ‘sweet’ – and sweet is exchanged for bitter.

sBrothers and Sisters – stand fast for what you know to be true. Stand strong for what you know to be good and right for your children and grandchildren. And when you have done all – continue to stand.

You are not the crazy one.

Unfortunately – it is not just our worldview and way of life that is under attack.  Christians around the world are being persecuted and even murdered – crucified, church’s blown up, heads cut off –  simply because they acknowledge Jesus is Lord and Messiah.

None of us know where the current persecution of Christians and Jews across the world is headed.  But most of us realize we are just at the beginning of whatever is coming.

In the 1930’s, a European government began pushing new laws and world view upon its people.  Many – in their hearts – recognized the evil.  Further, contrary to popular belief, many citizens did not agree or go along with it.  Many, unfortunately, died in their efforts to stop the evil.

Praise God – although that evil government went on to torture and murder millions – they did not prevail with their intention to take over Europe and then the world.  They did not go on to murder millions more.

They were stopped. And if we care at all for the world and our children – it is incumbent on us all to stand in the gap – stand strong – and stand up for what is right and good. …and having done all, to stand firm.

 

For more encouragement and information, visit “Women Pushing Back” on Facebook….

https://www.facebook.com/WomenPushingBack/

 

 

 

Pundits Missed the Forest: Why Obama Won

 Comments Off on Pundits Missed the Forest: Why Obama Won
Nov 252012
 

November, 25, 2012

There are many conservatives across the nation today who are seriously distraught over the election, panicked because the results made no sense and worried sick over what is to come. In the hope of giving some kind of comfort, I want to assure my conservative brethren that the pundits, scrambling to explain the Obama re-election in terms of conventional wisdom, have missed an important factor.  It wasn’t the only factor, but it was a huge one.

You could call this new factor “Unlikely Voters.” I count several of my extended relatives, whom I love but face reality about, among this group:  first-time voters who never bothered nor cared to vote, but did so on Nov. 6 solely out of hope for the loosening of drug laws and moral absolutes and the perception that the change promised will mean easier access to unearned money, food and housing.

Go ahead and call me names for saying it. I really don’t care. Those were their reasons. They weren’t voting about abortion, Libya, Hurricane Sandy—not even the economy. If you were to ask these relatives about Fast and Furious, most of them would think you were referring to a movie.

As a member of a very diverse family I have been privy to disturbing posts on Facebook, like these two the day before the election:

Person 1: do u kno wat romney really wants to do with native americans and our treaties?

Person 2: Those who need rides to vote can call ACLU at 444-2285 :)Good service ACLU!! Thanks for your help!

Later, someone else exalts the fact that all the “hoodie tokers” and “hoes” were watching this election, and that is something ‘no other president had ever done.’

The election now over, they continue with day-to-day conversation.

Person 3:  Cool cool I just got my food stamps… ima walk up 2 the store

Person 4: ur one lucky dude – cuz im one of them peps that dnt get any foodies… gota buy dem from peps, my countys fkd up lol.

[Translation: “You are one lucky dude, because I am one of those people who don’t get food stamps… I have to buy them from people (food money on the card is “sold” for cash to use for drugs/alcohol.)  My county is f….. lol.”]

As this small illustration shows, far more important than gender, age or other conventional distinction was the split between those who see beyond tomorrow and prefer discipline, and those who live for today and prefer pleasure. These ‘unlikely voters’ truly only cared that Obama looks cool, their friends all like him, and they think he will relax repressive laws. It’s probably no coincidence that Colorado, which legalized marijuana, and Maine and Maryland, which legalized gay marriage, also went for Obama.

Some of these are the voters whom the Democratic party went out of the way to get to the polls. They’re not on Dick Morris’ radar because he was using logic, but they weren’t making decisions based on logic. Because their friends believed the street rumor that Romney was going to toss out Indian treaties, they believed it. Because they were told that there was a war on women and minorities, they believed it.  What they were told on the street about Obama was all that mattered and nothing was going to change that.

Remember, conservatives swept the polls in 2010. Those conservative voters did not disappear nor change their minds on the issues. We did well in 2010 because Obama wasn’t running. There was therefore no interest on the part of some ‘unlikely voters’ to get out there and vote. We should be able to count on 2014 to be like 2010.

I don’t know if the Dems will find someone as “cool” to get the attention of the gang crowd in 2016. I doubt it. It could be that once Obama is done, we will be back to normal. Hillary isn’t cool enough to excite some of my relatives to get out and vote—and neither is Biden. But whether or not these relatives and others ever vote again, we do need to deal somehow with an immoral bent in our country, a very unhealthy element that is growing.

We were surprised and broken-hearted Nov. 6 because we thought that Romney was doing so well, making so much sense, and there was so much that was against Obama. Romney did do well, and there was much against Obama. But it was all beside the point. It never mattered to some voters what Romney did or didn’t do. They weren’t even listening.

Paul Ryan Wins VP Debate as Biden Yells, Interrupts, and Bullies

 Comments Off on Paul Ryan Wins VP Debate as Biden Yells, Interrupts, and Bullies
Oct 122012
 

October 12, 2012

Talking heads can say what they want in their attempts to pretend that Joe Biden did well,  looked presidential, or behaved (as one has already said) “passionately” but maturely during the debate between the Vice Presidents tonight, Thursday, October 11th.

The bottom line is that Joe Biden was rude,  condescending, arrogant, and simply over the top in his behavior throughout the entire debate; so much so that his behavior was the primary topic of discussion on all the social networks.  Little can be remembered about what he actually said – but a lot will be remembered about how he behaved.  Over and over during the debate, people commented about how irritating and obnoxious he was.

Here is just a sampling of tweets reflecting the average voter’s thoughts during the debate, beginning with Libya and then moving on.  Tweets equating Biden with the rear of a donkey have been omitted –

_______________________

RT @poliquest: #Biden already sounding stupid. The men that did it were in the pics! Ur pres apologized for US! #VPDebate

RT @LessaT: Oh, but Joe you & the Dem’s mistake cost 3 men’s lives

RT @lonelycon: Ryan comes out swinging, diplomat in Paris has Marine guard but not Benghazi? #VPDebate

RT @Lilleth71: Good job @PaulRyanVP … Not letting Biden weasel out of #BengaziGate

RT @RichardUSA: Biden didn’t answer the first question. Debate is over.

RT @ChuckNellis: Biden’s face is turning red already. Do you think his head might blow up on live TV?

RT @Dataaide: What is Biden talking about? Is this ‘opposite day’ in junior high school? #debate #tcot

RT @TJMcCormack: Same intelligence community that told us WMD, Joe? #debates

RT @funkyconserv: Biden is getting defensive! LOL

RT @DavidLimbaugh: Bull you weren[t told they wanted more security. #VPDebate

RT @Aijadaina: #vpdebate Wow, Ryan is hitting right between the eyes. Unraveling of Obama foreign policy. We should not project weakness …

RT @RightKlik Biden “We weren’t told that they needed more security” *TIP: Stop skipping intelligence briefings #VPDebate #tcot

RT @MelissaTweets: Is anyone buying what Biden is selling? He’s like a used car salesman.

RT @cicecandy: Is this a joke what the he’ll is Biden grinning about

RT @indyrallen Is it just me or is Biden coming off as a jerk? #VPDebate

RT @fuzislippers: Slow Joe needs to stop giggling like a lunatic, it’s off-putting and strange. #VPDebate

RT @torreymspears: Biden has to stop laughing. #VPDebate #tcot #p2

RT @RalstonReports: Ryan’s answer on Iran is strong, focused, tough. Biden: “It’s incredible.”

RT @themick1962: “We should not be apologizing for standing up for our values” Paul Ryan #Amen #VPDebate

RT @fr33dm4us: Slow Joe @VP, left his Respect at the door with his brain! #CSPAN2012

RT @NolteNC: What is Biden doing laughing like this?

RT @nogirlemen: Is English a 2nd language for Biden?? He makes no sense #VPdebate

RT @Mkber5: Wow can clearly see moderator is siding with uncle Joe. #vpdebate

RT @hughhewitt: Iran is a good way away? What? #debate

RT @AlinskyDefeater: They’re a good way away. Thanks for pinning that down Joe. #ocra #tcot

RT @DickMorrisTweet: #debates Biden looks weak on Iran. nobody believes that they are not close to a weapon.

RT @TXCupCake: I’m sickened by Joe Biden… And he doesn’t even have to say anything. It’s the fact that he is chuckling during this top …

RT @ObotNot: Biden: “This is just a bunch of STUFF!” kinda like your brain, Joe… #VPDebate

RT @Shavaun66: #VPdebates did the moderator blow off the fact that the Obama Administration #LIED about the Libyan Embassy attack? #Orga …

RT @jeffemanuel: RT @jstrevino: Bibi Netanyahu was 24 in 1973, when Biden says their friendship formed, leading commando teams into Syria.

RT @djohnsUSA: Someone needs to tell Bibi Obama talks to him all the time because he doesn’t seem to know that. #VPdebate

RT @BrianFaughnan: Biden: all options on the table, but war is worse than an Iranian nuclear weapon.

RT @TerriGreenUSA: “@schmidtkevinall: Is Joe Biden really trying to criticize Romney and Ryan for Gaffes? Pot this is Kettle, do you re …

RT @DavidLimbaugh: So Joe, you are on a hit assignment now to be insulting to Romney and Ryan tonight. You squirrel. #VPDebate

RT @redsteeze: I’m sure glad Joe Biden thinks this is all funny. Chris Stevens isn’t laughing #VPDebate

RT @fitethegoodfite: RT @chrisrbarron: Biden is totally blowing this… unbelievable… 2 disasters in a row for them

RT@Dataaide: Wow. What a blowhard Biden is. Ryan responds beautifully, and then Biden tries to interrupt again, and then laughs like a schoolboy…

RT @TeriChristoph: Biden’s cackling is tailor-made for an SNL skit.

RT @cbierzonski: Point scored on Scranton for Ryan! #debate

RT @StevenErtelt: Not sure how much longer Biden thinks he can interrupt Ryan without looking like a jerk.

RT @SwiftRead: Biden Lied! Tax rate lowered for ALL, allowing US economy to grow & collect more income/sales tax = revenue http://t. …

RT @zanieladie: ZING…Ryan: 1 Biden: 0

RT @southsalem: RT @DLoesch: “I think the vice president very well knows that sometimes words don’t come out the right way.” Ryan #vpdeb …

RT @Shavaun66: Your rambling JOE #VPdebates

RT @Dataaide: Thank you for interrupting Biden’s banter and allowing Ryan to speak some substance! #debate #tcot

RT @EyeOnPolitics: Biden asking Ryan to “show me a policy”… I have a feeling Ryan is about to show him several. #VPdebate #debates

RT @Jarjarbug: SHOW ME A #Budget Joe!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! #VPDebate

RT @Miz_Eisenhower: Biden is totally obnoxious.

RT @kerpen: Detroit DID go bankrupt after Bush and Obama flushed bailout money in a futile attempt to avoid bankruptcy. http://t.co/Xr914UM5

RT @readmylipstick: Every time Biden laughs that nasty smirky laugh I like him a little less… #vpdebates

RT @sdo1: Bingo. React to the guy. RT @LegInsurrection: Ryan needs to stop Biden from talking over him

RT @RedAlert: Ryan asks if it was a good idea to borrow money from China, and Biden giggles.

RT  @Dataaide:”Every VP dabate I hear this stuff about panels” – wasn’t a funny statement, Biden. It was dumb. #debate #tcot

RT @BiasedGirl Sounds like it. “@JessaNaomi: Did Biden just say that 4% of the green jobs didn’t go under? #VPdebate” #debate #tcot

RT @cgpb: Biden’s gaffes, inventions & hyperboles will go on tonight in d world’s book of debating records!

RT @brandootr: I used to kinda like Joe, but he is showing his inner a–hole tonight #vpdebate

RT @sanuzis: Biden is being just OBNOXIOUS as hell continuously interrupting Ryan –

RT @FoxNewsInsider: Chris Wallace: Never seen a candidate as ‘openly disrespectful of the other as [Joe] Biden was to Paul Ryan’ http:// …

______________________________

Just Sayin.  The talking heads can spin it if they want, but this is what people actually thought during the debate.

Of course it is the issues that matter most – but it was hard to hear the actual discussion with all VP Biden’s interruptions. Which was perhaps the purpose.

Why does it matter how he acted, other than the fact that in doing so, he prevented us from fully hearing Ryan’s answers?  The man who wins this seat is just one heart beat away from the presidency. I pray it isn’t Biden.

Is Acorns CEO Bertha Lewis Covering Corruption?

 Comments Off on Is Acorns CEO Bertha Lewis Covering Corruption?
Sep 212009
 

September 21st, 2009

What, pray tell, had Lewis changed about this disingenuous – some say even criminal – organization?

When Acorn CEO and Chief Organizer Bertha Lewis told Fox News Sunday that she has made many changes, and “Since I took over, I have overhauled the entire system,” what changes was she speaking of?

She said that there at now firewalls protecting the organizations finances, but Congressman Darrell Issa responded, “Your own counsel, Kingsley, said is not true. You don’t have firewalls.”

When Host Christ Wallace asked Congressman Issa to explain why he thinks Acorn is a criminal organization, the Congressman said,

“Well, one thing they did was they covered up an embezzlement, both internally and externally, and then glossed over the dollars…almost a million dollars. Basically, the founder stayed on the board until this became public eight years later. Now he’s with affiliates doing the same work and able to say well, he’s not with the company. The bottom line is there’s no transparency in Acorn. Any charity that you would look at…You normally find out who’s paid what, where the money goes, what the collection costs are and so on.

“Here we have literally hundreds of organizations tied under the ACORN umbrella, and you can’t even find out what their incorporation is, whether they pay taxes, who makes what or, more importantly, whether corporations within the affiliates work in different areas — political fundraising, getting candidates elected, voter registration, other community activities, whether or not those moneys are fungibly moved illegally.”

The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reforms issued an 88-page report in July charging that “Acorn has committed investment fraud, deprived the public of its right to honest services, and engaged in a racketeering enterprise affecting interstate commerce.”

But Ms. Lewis doesn’t seem to understand how all this matters.  On September 12, she stated, “We are their Willie Horton for 2009.  We are the boogeyman for the right wing and its echo chamber,”

During Fox News interview, Ms. Lewis also called the proposal to defund Acorn an “Anti-Acorn Amendment,” as if it was an unwarranted and prejudicial attack rather than the logical result of Acorn’s own mismanagement.

Chris Wallace asked Lewis, “Can you still say this is just about race and politics?”

She avoided the question by responding with the excuse, “Any organization is not entirely perfect.”

Mr. Wallace, it is clear that Ms. Lewis does still think this is about race, as evidenced by her continual references to her organization as “mostly people of color” and her constituents as, “500,000 poor black and brown, Asian and white people in this country.”  People that don’t feel race is a priority don’t continuously and unnecessarily refer to the color of people’s skin. I know, I’m also the administrator of an organization serving a minority issue. I refer to heritage only when necessary and I refuse to count or keep data on the heritage of our members or donors.

After telling Ms. Lewis that he doesn’t know of any other organization structured like Acorn (a political wing of the Democratic Party, closely related to unions, taking federal dollars as well as charity, yet no disclosure or transparency) Congressman Issa asked, “If you’re going to change this, will you come before Chairman Towns, a man who, by the way, voted not to cut off your funding, and get — and give the kind of disclosure to where the Government Oversight and Reform Committee can know that you are doing work with firewalls… so the American people know that their dollars don’t end up doing political activities prohibited by law?”

Ms. Lewis not only refused to answer, she refused to even look at him. Instead she immediately jumped into a prepared statement, saying, “Here’s the question that we really should be asking…”

Wallace attempted to stop her, saying, “…no, no. Answer his question, if you will,” but she continued avoiding it, seeking instead the collective white guilt that had so been so effective in the past, “There are poor people in this country every day that we’re saving their homes,” she started…

Wallace tried to redirect her back to the question seven more times, but she continued to talk over him, …“my job is to serve our 500,000 members. My job…”

Congressman Issa finally got her attention when he said, “There is no God-given right for any organization to receive a grant from the American people. The fact is there are organizations standing in line that wish they won instead of you, and they’re giving us the transparency so we can have the confidence the money is spent only for the purpose of the grant.”

But even in this response she wouldn’t look at Issa or even address it to him.  Addressing Wallace instead, she said, “Congressman Issa is right. You have competitive grants and you need to compete with a lot of other folks. You need to deliver those services. He’s absolutely right…Since I took over; I have overhauled the entire system…”

Not seeing the overhaul, Congressman Issa again asked her to come with transparency before the committee.  Once more, Lewis refused to respond.

The Congressman later ended by saying, “… my opinion continues to be you shouldn’t get another penny of federal dollars until you demonstrate that those dollars are firewalled for only that use, and that has not been the history of the organization.”

Lewis, again, not understanding the severity of the issues and not addressing the Congressman directly, retorted, “And I’m glad Congressman Issa said that is his opinion.”

What is it that Ms. Lewis doesn’t understand? The founder of Acorn, despite his embezzlement, continued to work with Acorn affiliates.  That’s on Ms. Lewis’ watch. Earlier this month, eleven Acorn staff were arrested in Florida for filing fraudulent voter registrations.  That was on Ms. Lewis’ watch.  And now the pimping, tax evasion, child smuggling videos – again, Lewis’ watch.  Further, she not only refused to face the Congressman when he was speaking to her, but refused to answer his questions, talked over the host, and instead of understanding the severity of the problems, snapped about things being just peoples “opinions.”

For many of us in the public, Ms. Lewis seemed not only evasive, but rude.  This, while at the same time accusing her employees of being too stupid to understand that they are not reaching professional standards.  Ms. Lewis, what is YOUR understanding of professional standards?

If Congressman Issa is right about Acorn being a criminal organization, one has to wonder just which standards Lewis’s employees have ‘stupidly” bungled on.  Were they unprofessional in the advice they gave, or in not being careful as to whom they gave it to?

Just what, pray tell, had Lewis changed about Acorn in the last year, and what can we realistically hope will be changed this year?