Obama administration officials threatened whistle-blowers on Benghazi, lawyer says.

Benghazi Massacre Blog copy

Obama administration officials threatened whistle-blowers on Benghazi, lawyer says

By James Rosen

Published April 29, 2013

FoxNews.com

At least four career officials at the State Department and the Central Intelligence Agency have retained lawyers or are in the process of doing so, as they prepare to provide sensitive information about the Benghazi attacks to Congress, Fox News has learned.

Victoria Toensing, a former Justice Department official and Republican counsel to the Senate Intelligence Committee, is now representing one of the State Department employees. She told Fox News her client and some of the others, who consider themselves whistle-blowers, have been threatened by unnamed Obama administration officials.

“I’m not talking generally, I’m talking specifically about Benghazi – that people have been threatened,” Toensing said in an interview Monday. “And not just the State Department. People have been threatened at the CIA.”

Toensing declined to name her client. She also refused to say whether the individual was on the ground in Benghazi on the night of Sept. 11, 2012, when terrorist attacks on two U.S. installations in the Libyan city killed four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens.

However, Toensing disclosed that her client has pertinent information on all three time periods investigators consider relevant to the attacks: the months that led up to the attack, when pleas by the ambassador and his staff for enhanced security in Benghazi were mostly rejected by senior officers at the State Department; the eight-hour time frame in which the attacks unfolded, and the eight-day period that followed the attacks, when Obama administration officials incorrectly described them as the result of a spontaneous protest over a video.

“It’s frightening, and they’re doing some very despicable threats to people,” she said. “Not ‘we’re going to kill you,’ or not ‘we’re going to prosecute you tomorrow,’ but they’re taking career people and making them well aware that their careers will be over [if they cooperate with congressional investigators].”

Federal law provides explicit protections for federal government employees who are identified as “whistle-blowers.” The laws aim to ensure these individuals will not face repercussions from their superiors, or from other quarters, in retaliation for their provision of information about corruption or other forms of wrongdoing to Congress, or to an agency’s inspector-general.

Rep. Darrell Issa, the Republican from California who chairs the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, wrote to Secretary of State John Kerry on Friday to complain that the department has not provided a process by which attorneys like Toensing can receive the security clearances necessary for them to review classified documents and other key evidence.

“It is unavoidable that Department employees identifying themselves as witnesses in the Committee’s investigation will apply for a security clearance to allow their personal attorneys to handle sensitive or classified material,” Issa wrote. “The Department’s unwillingness to make the process for clearing an attorney more transparent appears to be an effort to interfere with the rights of employees to furnish information to Congress.”

The Obama administration maintains that it has been more than forthcoming on Benghazi and that it is time for the State Department to move on. At a recent hearing before the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Kerry noted that administration officials have testified at eight hearings on Benghazi, provided 20 briefings on the subject and turned over to Congress some 25,000 documents related to the killings.

“So if you have additional questions or you think there’s some document that somehow you need, I’ll work with you to try to get it and see if we can provide that to you,” Kerry told committee Chairman Rep. Ed Royce, R-Calif., on April 17. But Kerry added: “I do not want to spend the next year coming up here talking about Benghazi.”

Asked about Issa’s complaints about attorneys not receiving security clearances, State Department spokesman Patrick Ventrell on Monday indicated that – far from threatening anyone – the administration hasn’t been presented with any such cases. “I’m not aware of private counsel seeking security clearances or — or anything to that regard,” Ventrell told reporters. “I’m not aware of whistle-blowers one way or another.”

Ventrell cited the work of the FBI – whose probe of the attacks continues almost eight months later and without any known instances of perpetrators being brought to justice – and the Accountability Review Board. The board was an internal State Department review panel led by former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Thomas Pickering and former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen. An unclassified version of the board’s final report that was released to the public contained no conclusions that suggested administration officials had willfully endangered their colleagues in Benghazi or had misled the public or Congress.

“And that should be enough,” Ventrell said at Monday’s press briefing. “Congress has its own prerogatives, but we’ve had a very thorough, independent investigation, which we completed and [which was] transparent and shared. And there are many folks who are, in a political manner, trying to sort of use this for their own political means, or ends.”

Claim: State Department Preventing Benghazi Whistle-Blowers  From Getting Legal Representation

 

 

Apr. 29, 2013 6:30pm Erica Ritz

An armed man waves his rifle after buildings and cars were set on fire inside the US Consulate compound in Benghazi late on Sept. 11. (AFP/Getty Images)

Former U.S. Attorney Joe DiGenova appeared on the radio show “Mornings on the Mall” on WMAL-FM in Washington, D.C. Monday, where he told hosts Larry O’Connor and Brian Wilson that the U.S. Department of State is preventing Benghazi whistle-blowers from getting adequate legal representation.

And if the whistle-blowers don’t have attorneys, many of them are unlikely to speak out.

DiGenova explained:

“Victoria Toensing, my partner, has just been retained by one of the Department of State whistle-blowers who are going to appear before the Issa committee.  On April 26, Congressman Issa sent a letter to the new Secretary of State John Kerry demanding that the lawyers who are going to represent these whistle-blowers be [given] clearances so they can talk to their clients in the committee about classified information.  The Department of State is ​refusing​ to grant clearances to Victoria and other people who want to represent the whistle-blowers in an attempt to prevent the testimony.  There’s going to be a constitutional showdown here.  Congress is going to win.  The administration’s effort to cover up what happened at Benghazi is going to fail…

“The whistle-blowers are out there.  These are great Americans; they are are heroes.  They were on the ground in Benghazi, they want to tell their story, and the administration is going to do everything it can to stop them from testifying under oath in public…They want to protect Hillary [Clinton] and the president, that’s what this is all about.”  [Emphasis added]

Amazingly, DiGenova says, Toensing has received top secret clearance from other high-profile cases as recently as this year, but the government will not clear her on Benghazi.

“This is so outrageous,” DiGenova said, arguing there would be mass outrage if the president were Republican.

The Government Accountability Office Investigating DHS Ammo Purchases

GAO Now Investigating DHS Ammo Purchases

By ELIZABETH FLOCK

April 29, 2013

(Left) A box of. 223 ammunition and a case of 9 mm ammunition in Duke's Sport Shop in New Castle, Pa.(Left) A box of. 223 ammunition and a case of 9 mm ammunition in Duke’s Sport Shop in New Castle, Pa.

The Government Accountability Office tells Whispers it is now investigating large ammunition purchases made by the Department of Homeland Security. Chuck Young, a spokesman for GAO, says the investigation of the purchases is “just getting underway.”

The congressional investigative agency is jumping into the fray just as legislation was introduced in both the Senate and the House to restrict the purchase of ammo by some government agencies (except the Department of Defense). The AMMO Act, introduced Friday, would prevent agencies from buying more ammunition if “stockpiles” are greater than what they were in previous administrations.

Donelle Harder, a spokeswoman for Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla., who introduced the legislation in the Senate, tells Whispers the bill would also require GAO to share the findings of its report on DHS purchases with Congress.

Officials at DHS have denied to both Whispers and lawmakers that it is stockpiling ammunition. The Associated Press reported in February that DHS wanted to buy more than 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition, but DHS officials testified last week it was only planning to buy up to 750 million.

Now we are monsters! Pentagon Taps Anti-Christian Extremist for Religious Tolerance Policy

 

military-chaplain-ap

Pentagon Taps Anti-Christian Extremist for Religious Tolerance Policy

“Today, we face incredibly well-funded gangs of fundamentalist Christian monsters who terrorize their fellow Americans by forcing their weaponized and twisted version of Christianity upon their helpless subordinates in our nation’s armed forces.”

Those words were recently written by Mikey Weinstein, founder of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF), in a column he wrote for the Huffington Post. Weinstein will be a consultant to the Pentagon to develop new policies on religious tolerance, including a policy for court-martialing military chaplains who share the Christian Gospel during spiritual counseling of American troops.

Weinstein decries what he calls the “virulent religious oppression” perpetrated by conservative Christians, whom he refers to as “monstrosities” and “pitiable unconstitutional carpetbaggers,” comparing them to “bigots” in the Deep South during the civil rights era.

He cites Dr. James Dobson—the famous Christian founder of Focus on the Family—as “illustrating the extremist, militant nature of these virulently homophobic organizations’ rhetorically-charged propaganda.” Regarding those who teach orthodox Christian beliefs from the Bible, Weinstein concludes, “Let’s call these ignoble actions what they are: the senseless and cowardly squallings of human monsters.”

Weinstein then endorses the ultra-left Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), who publishes a list of “hate groups.” Alongside truly deplorable organizations like the KKK, the SPLC’s list includes a host of traditional Christian organizations (for their support of traditional marriage) and Tea Party organizations (for supporting limited government). Weinstein says SPLC correctly labels them all as “hate groups.”

Floyd Lee Corkins—the first person ever convicted of domestic terrorism in federal court under the laws of Washington, D.C.—told the FBI that he chose his intended shooting spree targets from the SPLC website’s map. Corkins was arrested at the offices of the Family Research Council (FRC) after shooting a security guard in August 2012. His court documents state that Corkins intended to kill as many people as possible.

Weinstein also supports Lt. Col. Jack Rich, the Army officer who wrote to subordinate officers that soldiers who hold traditional Christian beliefs agreeing with organizations on SPLC’s “hate group” list are incompatible with “Army values” and should be carefully watched and excluded from military service.

According to Weinstein, “We should as a nation effusively applaud Lt. Col. Rich.” He adds that the nation should “venture further” than Rich’s recommendations, saying, “We MUST vigorously support the continuing efforts to expose pathologically anti-gay, Islamaphobic, and rabidly intolerant agitators for what they are: die-hard enemies of the United States Constitution. Monsters, one and all. To do anything less would be to roll out a red carpet to those who would usher in a blood-drenched, draconian era of persecutions, nationalistic militarism, and superstitious theocracy.”

Many media outlets are silent on this disturbing new alliance between fanatical secularists and leaders in the Pentagon appointed by President Barack Obama and Secretary Chuck Hagel, under which the U.S. military would officially consult with someone with such foaming-at-the-mouth passionate hostility toward traditional Christians, including Evangelicals and devout Catholics. The military—America’s most heroic and noble institution—includes countless people of faith, and this represents a radical departure from the U.S. military’s warm embrace of people of faith in its ranks.

pentagon_080725_mn

Yet the little coverage this story is getting is positive, such as this Washington Post column that somehow manages not to carry any of these frightening quotes from Weinstein and instead actually endorses the Pentagon’s meeting with him. Sally Quinn’s Post column also approvingly quotes MRFF Advisory Board member Larry Wilkerson as saying, “Sexual assault and proselytizing, according to Wilkerson, ‘are absolutely destructive of the bonds that keep soldiers together.’”

Did you get that? They say having someone share the Christian gospel with you is akin to being raped. Weinstein makes sure there are no doubts, being quoted by the Post as adding, “This is a national security threat. What is happening [aside from sexual assault] is spiritual rape. And what the Pentagon needs is to understand is that it is sedition and treason. It should be punished.”

Another MRFF Advisory Board member, Ambassador Joe Wilson (the far-left husband of CIA employee Valerie Plame from the Iraq War’s yellow-cake uranium scandal a decade ago), said a military chaplain “is to minister to spiritual needs. You don’t proselytize. It’s a workplace violation.”

In other words, it should be the official policy of the United States to decree what a human being’s spiritual needs are, and punish for violations a military officer who is an ordained clergyman who attempts to share his own personal faith with another service member when discussing religious matters. You cannot imagine such a thing ever happening under any previous president.

Weinstein goes on:

“If these fundamentalist Christian monsters of human degradation … and tyranny cannot broker or barter your acceptance of their putrid theology, then they crave for your universal silence in the face of their rapacious reign of theocratic terror. Indeed, they ceaselessly lust, ache, and pine for you to do absolutely nothing to thwart their oppression. Comply, my friends, and you become as monstrously savage as are they. I beg you, do not feed these hideous monsters with your stoic lethargy, callousness and neutrality. Do not lubricate the path of their racism, bigotry, and prejudice. Doing so directly threatens the national security of our beautiful nation.”

God help us now when someone with such visceral hatred of conservative Christians—literally tens of millions of Americans—who says sharing this gospel is “spiritual rape” is helping develop policies for how to deal with Christians in the military.

Weinstein says those guilty of this “treason” must be “punished.” Under federal law, the penalty for treason is death. And the Obama administration is sitting down to talk with this man to craft new policies for “religious tolerance” in our military.

Breitbart News legal columnist Ken Klukowski is senior fellow for religious liberty at the Family Research Council and on faculty at Liberty University School of Law.  

Mario’s note:  What does Obama have to do with all of this?   Under his watch the haters of Christ have been emboldened.  His tirade against the faith began with his derisive slander of the Christians in Pennsylvania referring to those “cling to their guns and religion.”   A leader sets a tone and the tone that Obama has set allows voices like this to come out from under the rocks, be taken seriously and allowed to advise the Pentagon of religious tolerance.

House Panel Rips Obama Over Drilling Permits

MESSAGE1-articleLarge

 House Panel Rips Obama Over Drilling Permits

The House Natural Resources Committee has issued a statement lambasting the Obama administration for dragging its feet in issuing permits for oil and gas drilling on federal lands.

According to the committee’s statement, it takes the Bureau of Land Management an average of 307 days to process a permit to drill, nearly twice as long as the 154 days it took in 2005.

In Colorado, it takes just 27 days to approve a permit on state and private lands, and in North Dakota, just 10 days.

To put the federal delay into perspective, the committee claimed that in 307 days, a person can drive from Washington, D.C., to Los Angeles 154 times, watch the movie “Die Hard” 3,349 times, or hike the entire Appalachian Trail — twice.

“President Obama has touted that U.S. oil and natural gas production is at its highest levels in years, but he’s only telling half the story,” according to the committee’s statement.

“The recent increase in U.S. oil and gas production can all be attributed to state and private lands — not federal.”

Natural Resources Committee Chairman Doc Hastings, R-Wash., said: “The Obama administration’s federal energy policies are costing American jobs, impeding economic growth and recovery, and robbing the U.S. Treasury of much needed revenue to help us balance our budget.

“We’ve seen how energy production on state lands can create new jobs … [and] ease the pain of high gasoline prices. So why is the Obama administration refusing to take the same steps as the states to develop these resources?”

The statement was issued following an April 17 oversight hearing. One witness at the hearing, Utah Lt. Gov. Gregory S. Bell, noted that “state and federal permits require similar regulatory and engineering reviews, so it is hard to understand why a federal permit should take four times as long to be issued.”

Bell concluded: “The status quo of federal overreach is simply unacceptable.”

Texas Land Commissioner Jerry E. Patterson also appeared as a witness and said: “The states lead the way in leasing, permitting, drilling and most important, the production of oil and gas. This administration should look to the states and follow their lead if we are to become energy independent. Sadly, federal policies hamper the development of vitally needed energy.”

Back in February, President Obama said in his State of the Union address that his administration has been actively working to speed up the permitting process: “That’s why my administration will keep cutting red tape and speeding up new oil and gas permits.”

The committee responded at the time: “Facts are stubborn things, and that statement simply is not true.”

Even Candy Land Isn’t Safe From Sexy

Even Candy Land Isn’t Safe From Sexy

The little-kids’ board game, like so many other classic toys, has gotten a makeover.
PEGGY ORENSTEINAPR 25 2013, 8:09 AM ET
More
orenstein_boardbox_post.jpg

Hasbro Games

New examples of the sexualization of girlhood crop up all the time. Of course there are the dolls that look like Sesame Streetwalkers—Monster High, Winx Club, Bratz; the makeup lines for third-graders; the padded bikini tops for seven-year-olds. But a Facebook reader recently pointed out evidence of this phenomenon in the last place I’d expect: Candy Land.

Here is the original Candy Land, circa 1949:

orenstein_Candyland-1949.jpgYum. Here is the game in 1978:

orenstein_candyland.jpg

I dreamed of those ice cream floats…

Things begin to change more significantly in the 1980s. That’s when Candy Land ditched the Dick-and-Jane outfits for generic his-and-hers overalls:

orenstein_Candyland-1980s.jpg

They also added some friendly candy characters: Plumpy with his plum tree, Mr. Candy Cane, Gramma Nutt, Princess Lolly, Queen Frostine. More on some of them in a moment.

Then we hit 2010. On the upside, Milton Bradley finally recognized, at least in some versions, that there are children who are not white and blonde (nothing against blonde white kids—I was one myself—I’m just saying):

candy-land-kids_2010.pngBeyond that, though…Yikes! Check out today’s board!

orenstein_kids2.jpg

In case you can’t see it: here’s the new Princess Lolly:

orenstein_lolly.png

And Queen Frostine turned into a Bratz doll:

orenstein_frostine.png

Candy Land isn’t the only classic that has, without our notice, gotten a hot makeover. (And I’m not the only one who finds this evolution alarming.) The Disney Princesses have grown gradually more skinny and coy over time. And,check out Strawberry Shortcake, Rainbow Brite, Trolls (now called “Trollz”). Even Care Bears and My Little Pony have been put on a diet.

When our kids play with toys that we played with, we assume that they are the same as they were when we were younger. But they aren’t. Not at all. Our girls (and our boys) are now bombarded from the get-go with images of women whose bodies range from unattainable to implausible (Disney Princesses, anyone?).

Toymakers say they are reflecting the changing taste of their demographic. Maybe, but then it’s the change that’s so disturbing. Consider a recent study on body image among elementary school-aged girls. Psychologists at Knox College in Galesburg, Illinois used paper dolls to assess self-sexualization in 60 girls ages six to nine recruited largely from public schools. The girls were shown two dolls: One was dressed in tight, revealing “sexy” clothes and the other in a trendy but covered-up loose outfit. Both dolls, as you can see, were skinny and would be considered “pretty” by little girls.

Using a different set of dolls for each question, the researchers then asked each girl to choose the doll that: looked like herself, looked how she wanted to look, was the popular girl in school, was the girl she wanted to play with. In every category, the girls most often chose the “sexy” doll.

In another study, researchers engaged three-to-five-year-old girls in games of, yes, Candy Land as well as Chutes & Ladders, asking them to choose among three game pieces—a thin one, an average-sized one and a fat one—to represent themselves. While in the past children that age showed little ability to distinguish between average and thin weights, today’s wee ones grabbed thin pieces at higher rates not only than fat ones but than those of “normal” weight. When asked by researchers to swap a thin figure for a fat one, the girls not only recoiled but some refused to even touch the chubbier game piece making comments such as, “I hate her, she has a fat stomach,” or “She is fat. I don’t want to be that one.”

There’s ample evidence that the ever-narrowing standard of beauty creates vulnerability in our girls to low self-esteem, negative body image, eating disorders, poor sexual choices. Not to mention the negative impact fat-shaming has on overweight kids. I think a lot about something that Gary Cross, a historian of childhood, once told me: that toys traditionally have communicated to children our expectations of their adult roles. What are we telling girls we expect of them with this?

A Jury has found that fraud put Obama on 2008 ballot meaning that he likely did not qualify.

bo shhh don't tell anybody_thumb[1]

Jury: Fraud put Obama on ’08 ballot

Democrat officials convicted of making up names for qualifying petition

Two Democrats in Indiana have been found guilty of submitting unauthorized names on the petition that placed then-Sen. Barack Obama on the 2008 presidential election primary ballot, meaning he likely did not qualify.

Fox News reports the jury in South Bend found guilty on all counts former longtime St. Joseph County Democratic Party chairman Butch Morgan Jr. and former county Board of Elections worker Dustin Blythe.

Ads by Google

Asian Production CostsChina Cost Advantage Is Diminishing While Other Asian Markets Grow. http://www.ftijournal.com

Do You Hate Democrats?Find out what the democrats don’t want you to know. Read this now. OnePoliticalPlaza.com

The two faced accusations of petition fraud and forgery, as well as falsely making a petition.

The verdicts raise anew questions about election fraud by Democrats, a subject that was analyzed after the 2012 election.

The report found vote fraud occurred in the 2012 presidential election and cumulatively was likely enough to decide the outcome.

“In reality, although no single instance or aspect of vote fraud was likely enough to tip the election for Obama, the aggregate of their [Democrats] corrupt activities – including illegal campaign donations, taking advantage of states without voter ID requirements, military ballots delivered too late … may well have been,” the analysis said.

 

Fox News reported that two former Indiana elections board officials who pleaded guilty said Morgan told Democrat officials and workers to fake the names and signatures that Obama and Hillary Clinton needed to qualify for the presidential race.

Prosecutor Stan Levco told Fox, “I think this helped uphold the integrity of the electoral system. Their verdict of guilt is not a verdict against Democrats, but for honest and fair elections.”

Affidavits citing the testimony of former Board of Registration worker Lucas Burkett said the scheme was created in January 2008. Burkett reportedly was aboard the plan at first but later dropped out. Fox News reported he waited three years to reveal the scheme.

Fox News notes that if revelations about any forgeries were raised during the election, the petitions could have been challenged at that time.

A candidate who did not qualify with enough legitimate signatures at the time could have been removed from the ballot.

State law in Indiana requires candidates to have 500 signatures from each of the nine congressional districts to qualify. But in St. Joseph County, Obama qualified with only 534.

Prosecutors alleged that nine of the Obama petition pages apparently were forged, and each contained up to 10 names, bringing doubt on up to 90 names.

“If faked, [they] could have brought the Obama total below the legal limit required to qualify,” Fox News reported.

Fox reported it was told by “numerous voters” they did not sign their names, nor did they authorize their names to be used.

“That’s not my signature,” said Charity Rorie, a mother of four. “It’s scary, it’s shocking. It definitely is illegal.”

Added Robert Hunter Jr., “I did not sign for Barack Obama.”

WND’s extensive report on fraud in the 2012 race looked at claims that Obama, in some districts, got 100 percent of the vote, questions about absentee ballots and efforts by Democrats to prevent poll watchers from observing the election.

Some of the issues that were uncovered:

Seventy-five GOP vote inspectors were ordered to leave Philadelphia poll locations by Democrat poll judges. One judge was caught on audio. A court order sent them back but it’s unknown what happened when they were gone. These poll locations were all within the 59 precincts where Romney received no votes.

In Philadelphia, the Community Voters Project, an ACORN clone that employs some former ACORN workers, shredded Republican voter registrations. It’s not the first time they have been in trouble.

The Florida AFL-CIO threatened True the Vote and Tampa Fair Vote with legal action for submitting voter registration challenges.

Maryland Representative Elijah Cummings issued a highly publicized threat against True the Vote and Election Integrity Maryland just for checking voter rolls. EIM found 11,000 questionable registrations, including 1,566 dead voters. The Maryland Board of Elections took no action.

Cummings also attacked the Ohio Voter Integrity Project with the same baseless claims.

Think Progress falsely claimed True the Vote was “under investigation” by Rep. Cummings, when in fact he has no legal authority to do so.

Despite overwhelming nonpartisan public support for voter ID laws, Attorney General Eric Holder’s Justice Department and liberal jurists have delayed, emasculated or defeated ID laws in Texas, Wisconsin, South Carolina, Arizona and Pennsylvania.

Holder has vowed to fight voter ID laws as restricting voters’ rights.

The Obama administration “spiked investigations” of eight states that had major voter roll problems.

The Holder Justice Department conspired with Project Vote on National Voter Registration Act (aka Motor Voter) enforcement lawsuits, which force state and local agencies to become, essentially, low income voter registration drives.

In 2009 DOJ announced to its attorneys that it would not enforce voter roll maintenance laws because it wouldn’t increase voter turnout.

The report also found the election rolls nationwide in shambles. Pew Research Center published a report revealing election rolls in a shambles nationwide. It found:

24 million invalid or inaccurate voter registrations

1.8 million deceased voters

2.75 million registered in multiple states.

The WND report also focused on the mechanics of the election: voting machines.

There were a number of complaints about electronic voting machines that tallied votes for Democrats despite a Republican vote and a few instances of the opposite case.

Voters in Pueblo County, Colo., complained that their votes were being changed to Obama, reported local NBC affiliate KOAA.

Maryland congressional candidate and veteran investigative journalist Ken Timmerman reported many voters claiming this happened to them, lodging complaints with vote judges. Timmerman has requested to see voting machine records.

Maryland Delegate Kathy Afzali and Carroll County Commissioner Richard Rothschild have requested the FBI impound two electronic voting machines suspected of switching votes based on complaints from other voters, including a state official.

Robert Ashcroft, a Republican poll watcher in Allentown, Pa., reported that about 5 to 10 percent of electronic votes would “change the selection back to default – to Obama.”

EVM problems were also reported to have occurred in Ohio, Nevada, North Carolina and Texas.

A 2008 Fox News report showed how electronic voting machines can be infected with a computer virus to change votes. A Princeton University study in 2006 found the same thing.

And the fraud didn’t go unnoticed. A few of the higher-profile cases:

Patrick Moran, son of longtime U.S. Rep. Jim Moran, was caught on video by James O’Keefe’s Veritas Project, telling an undercover journalist how to commit vote fraud.

Other Veritas videos showed Obama campaign officials in Texas, New Jersey and New York providing multiple forms to journalists posing as voters so that they could vote in two or more states.

On Election Day, Veritas reporters recorded poll officials on camera telling voters not to vote for Romney.

The Obama campaign continues to accept illegal donations from other countries. WND’s Aaron Klein proved it by donating to the Obama campaign twice under the name “Osama bin Laden” using a Pakistani web address.

WND has filed a complaint with the FEC demanding an investigation of overseas donations to the Obama campaign.

In 2008, the Obama campaign accepted almost $30,000 from Palestinian donors.

A Korean interpreter in Flushing, N.Y., directed Korean voters to vote Democrat. He was expelled from the poll.

Two cases of forged votes were reported in Poughkeepsie, N.Y., by Republicans who discovered their votes had already been made.

Non-citizens were charged with voting illegally in Austin, Minn.

Cases of double voting in Ohio are being investigated.

Non-citizen allegedly voted in Iowa

Double voting is being investigated in North Carolina

NBC reported dead voters voting in California

Mentally disabled were coaxed to vote for Obama in North Carolina

Widespread absentee vote fraud is being investigated in South Texas

A non-English-speaking, under-18 youth reported he was “told he can vote.”

Many other cases.

Mario’s note:

Once again a well-meaning but uninformed believer asks why I am speaking out in these blogs.  I believe Obama is deliberately trying to dismantle America and pull our nation under the thumb of government.  

It is the height of naivete to ignore the signs of a national take over.  The steps have been clearly outlined for years by experts and Obama is going by the book. Here are the official rules.

1. Seize control of healthcare and you will control the economy.

2. Bring division and distraction and demonize your opposition by creating false crisis and the people will blindly give you more power.

3. Undermine core values and discredit constitutional laws that block your takeover.

4. Disarm law abiding citizens.

Should a man of God involve himself in these matters?  Hebrews 13:17 says, “Obey those who rule over you, and be submissive, for they watch out for your souls, as those who must give account. Let them do so with joy and not with grief, for that would be unprofitable for you.

As a man of God I must warn those entrusted to me about anything that will harm them or bring disaster.  I must do this especially if I see that there is still hope to avert the danger. However, my greatest motivation is that I will stand before God to answer for what I did in this moment in history.

I would that my brethren who remain silent would see that last part.  To be sure there is a short term benefit to silence.  The masses may still like you, your tithers may not leave you but in the end you will be listed among those who abandoned their post in America’s darkest hour.  You will stand before God and He will ask you why you buried your prophetic gift when it was so desperately needed.

It is possible to tell the truth without love but it is impossible to love without telling the truth.

Obama fatigue has opened the way to Bush affection.

fatigue blog

The Presidential Wheel Turns

Disaffection for Bush gave us Obama. That explains the new affection for Bush.

  • By PEGGY NOONAN

  • Barrack Obama was elected president in 2008 because he was not George W. Bush. In fact, he was elected because he was the farthest thing possible from Mr. Bush. On some level he knew this, which is why every time he got in trouble he’d say Bush’s name. It’s all his fault, you have no idea the mess I inherited. As long as Mr. Bush’s memory was hovering like Boo Radley in the shadows, Mr. Obama would be OK.

In an excerpt from a longer interview, former Florida Governor Jeb Bush is asked by Peter Robinson of the Hoover Institution whether he plans to run for president in 2016. “Uncommon Knowledge” is produced by the Hoover Institution for WSJ Live.

This week something changed. George W. Bush is back, for the unveiling of his presidential library. His numbers are dramatically up. You know why? Because he’s the farthest thing from Barack Obama.  Obama fatigue has opened the way to Bush affection.

In all his recent interviews Mr. Bush has been modest, humorous, proud but unassuming, and essentially philosophical: History will decide. No finger-pointing or scoring points. If he feels rancor or resentment he didn’t show it. He didn’t attempt to manipulate. His sheer normality seemed like a relief, an echo of an older age.

And all this felt like an antidote to Obama—to the imperious I, to the inability to execute, to the endless interviews and the imperturbable drone, to the sense that he is trying to teach us, like an Ivy League instructor taken aback by the backwardness of his students. And there’s the unconscious superiority. One thing Mr. Bush didn’t think he was was superior. He thought he was luckily born, quick but not deep, and he famously trusted his gut but also his heart. He always seemed moved and grateful to be in the White House. Someone who met with Mr. Obama during his first year in office, an old hand who’d worked with many presidents, came away worried and confounded. Mr. Obama, he said, was the only one who didn’t seem awed by his surroundings, or by the presidency itself.

Mr. Bush could be prickly and irritable and near the end showed arrogance, but he wasn’t vain or conceited, and he still isn’t. When people said recently that they were surprised he could paint, he laughed: “Some people are surprised I can even read.”

Coverage of the opening of his presidential library Thursday was wall to wall on cable, and a feeling of affection for him was encouraged, or at least enabled, by the Washington press corps, which doesn’t much like Mr. Obama because he’s not all that likable, and remembers Mr. Bush with a kind of reluctant fondness because he was.

But to the point. Mr. Obama was elected because he wasn’t Bush.

Mr. Bush is popular now because he’s not Obama.

The wheel turns, doesn’t it?

Here’s a hunch: The day of the opening of the Bush library was the day Obama fatigue became apparent as a fact of America’s political life.

When Bush left office, his approval rating was down in the 20s to low 30s. Now it’s at 47%, which is what Obama’s is. That is amazing, and not sufficiently appreciated. Yes, we are a 50-50 nation, but Mr. Bush left office in foreign-policy and economic failure, even cataclysm. Yet he is essentially equal in the polls to the supposedly popular president. Which suggests Republicans in general have some latent, unseen potential of which they’re unaware. Right now they’re busy being depressed. Maybe they should be thinking, “If Bush could come back . . .” Actually, forget I said that. Every time Republican political professionals start to think that way, with optimism, they get crude and dumb and think if they press certain levers the mice will run in certain directions.

The headline of the Bush Library remarks is that everyone was older and nicer.

Jimmy Carter, in shades, with wispy white hair, was gracious and humorous. Anyone can soften with age, but he seemed to have sweetened. That don’t come easy. Good for him.

George H.W. Bush was tender. He feels the tugs and tides of history. “God bless America, and thank you very much.” He rose from his wheelchair to acknowledge the crowd. That crowd, and the people watching on TV—the person they loved and honored most was him.

Bill Clinton does this kind of thing so well—being generous to others, especially former opponents. “We are here to celebrate a country we all love,” he said. He was funny on how he wanted Mr. Bush to paint him and then saw Mr. Bush’s self-portrait in the bath and thought no, I’ll keep my suit on. He got a laugh when he called himself the black sheep of the Bush family. I said everyone was older and nicer. It’s occurred to me that the Clintons and both Bushes were president when baby boomer journalists were in their 30s and 40s and eager to rise. Everyone was meaner, both the pols and the press, because they were all young. Now they’re in their 60s. When they went through the 9/11 section of the library, the day before the opening, some had tears in their eyes. They understood now what that day was. Young journalists: You’re going to become more tolerant with time, and not only because you have more to tolerate in yourself. Because life will batter you and you’ll have a surer sense of what’s important and has meaning and is good.

President Obama was more formal than the other speakers and less confident than usual, as if he knew he was surrounded by people who have something he doesn’t. “No matter how much you think you’re ready to assume the office of the president, it’s impossible to understand the nature of the job until it’s yours.” This is a way of seeming to laud others when you’re lauding yourself. He veered into current policy disputes, using Mr. Bush’s failed comprehensive immigration reform to buttress his own effort. That was manipulative, graceless and typical.

George W. Bush was emotional: “In the end, leaders are defined by the convictions they hold. . . . My deepest conviction . . . is that the United States of America must strive to expand the reach of freedom. I believe that freedom is a gift from God and the hope of every human heart.” He then announced that on Saturday he would personally invade Syria. Ha, kidding. It was standard Bush rhetoric and, in its way, a defiant pushing back against critics of his invasions and attempts to nation-build. Who isn’t for more freedom? But that bright, shining impulse, that very American impulse, must be followed by steely-eyed calculation. At the end Mr. Bush wept, and not only because the Bush men are weepers but because he means every word of what he says, and because he loves his country, and was moved. John Boehner weeps too when he speaks about what America means to him. You know why they do that? Because their hearts are engaged. And really, that’s not the worst thing.

Back to the point. What was nice was that all of them—the Bush family, the Carters and Clintons—seemed like the old days. “The way we were.” They were full of endurance, stamina, effort. Also flaws, frailty, mess. But they weren’t . . . creepy.

Anyway, onward to Obama fatigue, and the Democratic Party wrestling with what comes next. It’s not only the Republicans in a deep pit.