You better be praying because tonight’s debate is totally rigged

Mario wrote this before the debate. Everything he said happened the way he said it would.   If you haven’t read it read it now.  If you have read it—read it again…the most widely shared blog in our history.

You better be praying because tonight’s debate is totally rigged

There will be no fairness tonight.  There will be no balance.  You are about to witness a kangaroo court.  Hillary will get zero tough questions.  Trump will get only loaded questions.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that a plurality (46%) of Likely U.S. Voters believes most moderators will try to help Clinton in the upcoming debates. Only six percent (6%) think they will try to help Trump instead. Just 32% say most of the moderators will try to be unbiased, while 15% are undecided.

The entire night will be an infomercial for Hillary.  She will be declared the most experienced person ever to run for president. Trump will be portrayed a virtual Adolf Hitler.

Nothing will be said about Benghazi, Emails, Whitewater, The Clinton Foundation, and the 20 other scandals she has created.  You will only hear remarks about Trump that “prove” he is hateful to women, racist and lacks the temperament to be president.

The goal of tonight’s debate is to rescue Hillary and to repudiate Trump.

Here—by the numbers—is why I am right about tonight:

1. Lester Holt will go Candy Crowley.  Remember the 2012 debate? Candy Crowley repeatedly interrupted Mitt Romney and gave Obama much more time to speak.  When Romney raised a killer point about Obama, Crowley literally shut him down and went to a commercial.

Lester Holt has already signaled that he will do what Candy Crowley did.   CNN’s Brian Stelter says Lester Holt is signaling to his NBC colleagues that he may enter the fray in Monday night’s presidential debate as a participant rather than a moderator — thanks to intense left-wing backlash over Matt Lauer’s performance at the “Commander in Chief Forum” weeks ago.

lester-holt-candy-crowley-640x4802.  The left will destroy moderators who are fair to Trump.  Matt Lauer was eviscerated by the left for being fair to Trump in the Commander in Chief forum. All of the moderators are under intense pressure to see Hillary win the debate.  They know they it could be a career ender to let Trump win.

3. Obama. He ordered the FBI not to recommend an indictment against Hillary. He ordered the Justice Department to stone wall congress and refuse to release evidence that would incriminate her.  Obama has protected her every step of the way.  He has—without a doubt—exerted extreme pressure on the moderators to let her win.

4. Google, Apple, Microsoft, Facebook, You Tube, Twitter, USA Today, The New York Times, NBC, CBS, ABC, MSNBC, CNN and PBS are all firmly in Hillary’s camp. They will take tonight’s debate and spin it into a fair fight that Hillary won fair and square. Any reporting to the contrary will censored.

5. Total desperation: All of the people and media outlets I have named are now totally desperate.  They realize that Hillary is a terrible candidate.  They will gladly risk the appearance of bias if it is only the only way to save her.  It is now a no-holds-barred smack down of Trump by a band of bloodthirsty leftists who will stop at nothing to get her elected.

For his part Trump only has to do three things to win tonight and to become president.

  1. He has to remind America that her treatment of women is a basket of deplorables.  She—rather than blame her husband—has worked to ruin women that her husband raped.  I do not know any way to treat women worse.
2. He has to show that she will not keep America safe.  She has promised to make the Supreme Court a leftist activist arm of government. She will increase the number of Muslim immigrants from Syria by 500%.  She has promised to continue the failure of Obama in dealing with ISIS. She has sided with rioters against the police.  She will not hear America’s cry for help any more than she heard the cries of the 4 Americans who died in Benghazi.
3. He must expose the lie of her experience. The very experience she touts as qualifying her for the White House is—in fact—the very reason to reject her. She has been in government for 30 years and cannot point to one accomplishment.  Her record is a blank slate.  Now she says she is going to do all of these things if she is elected.  Why would anyone believe that?
In my opinion these are killer points that will destroy her candidacy.   If Donald Trump calmly makes these points, it is over for her.  It’s just too bad that he will not be allowed to make them…unless of course, there’s a miracle.  Pray.

The most disgraceful hour on television: 60 minutes.

What President Obama really said in that ’60 Minutes’ interview about Benghazi

by Bret Baier | November 05, 2012

ANALYSIS: Two days before the election, CBS posted additional portions of a Sept. 12 “60 Minutes” interview where President Obama seems to contradict himself on the Benghazi attack. As the Benghazi investigation gets more attention and focus, CBS is once again adding to the Benghazi timeline.

In the interview, according to the latest portions, Obama would not say whether he thought the attack was terrorism. Yet he would later emphasize at a presidential debate that in the Rose Garden the same day, he had declared the attack an act of terror.

That moment was one of the most intense exchanges in the second presidential debate.  Romney was on the offensive on what conservatives believed was a serious vulnerability of Obama — the handling of the Benghazi attack and what he called it from the beginning.

The town hall questioner asked, “Who was it that denied enhanced security and why?”

Obama did not provide a direct answer, but said: “When I say that we are going to find out exactly what happened, everybody will be held accountable, and I am ultimately responsible for what’s taking place there, because these are my folks, and I’m the one who has to greet those coffins when they come home, you know that I mean what I say.”

Romney pounced, saying, “There were many days that passed before we knew whether this was a spontaneous demonstration or actually whether it was a terrorist attack. And there was no demonstration involved. It was a terrorist attack, and it took a long time for that to be told to the American people.”

On rebuttal, Obama seemed rehearsed, but indignant. “The day after the attack, Governor, I stood in the Rose Garden, and I told the American people and the world that we are going to find out exactly what happened, that this was an act of terror… And the suggestion that anybody in my team, whether the secretary of state, our U.N. ambassador, anybody on my team would play politics or mislead when we’ve lost four of our own, Governor, is offensive. That’s not what we do. That’s not what I do as president. That’s not what I do as commander in chief.”

Governor Romney walked forward and started questioning …

ROMNEY: You said in the Rose Garden the day after the attack it was an act of terror. It was not a spontaneous demonstration.

OBAMA: Please proceed.

ROMNEY: Is that what you’re saying?

OBAMA: Please proceed, Governor.

ROMNEY: I want to make sure we get that for the record, because it took the president 14 days before he called the attack in Benghazi an act of terror.

OBAMA: Get the transcript.

CROWLEY: It — he did in fact, sir. So let me — let me call it an act of terrorism — (inaudible) —

OBAMA: Can you say that a little louder, Candy? (Laughter, applause.)

CROWLEY: He did call it an act of terror. It did as well take — it did as well take two weeks or so for the whole idea of there being a riot out there about this tape to come out. You are correct about that.

ROMNEY: This — the administration — the administration — (applause) — indicated that this was a — a reaction to a — to a video and was a spontaneous reaction.

CROWLEY: They did.

ROMNEY: It took them a long time to say this was a terrorist act by a terrorist group and — and to suggest — am I incorrect in that regard? On Sunday the — your — your secretary or —

Obama — who had clearly won the moment (largely thanks to Candy Crowley) — clearly wanted to move on from that victorious moment — and quickly.

   OBAMA: Candy —

   ROMNEY: Excuse me. The ambassador to the United Nations went on the Sunday television shows and — and spoke about how this was a spontaneous reaction.

   OBAMA: Candy, I’m — I’m happy to —

   CROWLEY: President, let me — I —

   OBAMA: I’m happy to have a longer conversation about foreign policy.

   CROWLEY: I know you — absolutely. But I want — I want to move you on.

   OBAMA: OK, I’m happy to do that too.

   CROWLEY: And also, people can go to the transcripts and —

   OBAMA:I just want to make sure that —

   CROWLEY: — figure out what was said and when.

   OBAMA:– you know, all these wonderful folks are going to have a chance to get some — their questions answered.

Now, we may know why.  Soon after that debate exchange, CBS released a previously unseen clip of an interview “60 Minutes‘” Steve Kroft did with Obama on Sept. 12 — the day after the Benghazi attack.

The clip added to the previous sound that had been released and seemed to back up the president’s claim that he was referring to the Benghazi attack as a terrorist act in the Rose Garden on Sept. 12. Here’s what CBS put out Oct. 19, five weeks after the attack.

KROFT: But there are reports that they were very heavily armed with grenades, that doesn’t sound like your normal demonstration.

OBAMA:  As I said, we’re still investigating exactly what happened, I don’t want to jump the gun on this.   But your right that this is not a situation that was exactly the same as what happened in Egypt.   And my suspicion is there are folks involved in this. Who were looking to target Americans from the start.  So we’re gonna make sure that our first priority is to get our folks out safe, make sure our embassies are secured around the world and then we are going to go after those folks who carried this out.”

After the second debate back and forth, this seemed to back up the president’s stance. The only problem? Kroft started his question with “but.”

I always thought, it seems that he’s following up on a question — I wonder if there was a question before that question?

This week, we got the CIA timeline of events in which they detail all of the response of the CIA and what they put up the chain of command in the minutes and hours after the attack began.  Of all the details of the specific times the CIA contractors respond to the fight, I found this one most interesting:

“1:15 a.m.: CIA reinforcements arrive on a 45-minute flight from Tripoli in a plane they’ve hastily chartered. The Tripoli team includes four GRS security officers, a CIA case officer and two U.S. military personnel who are on loan to the agency. They don’t leave Benghazi airport until 4:30. The delay is caused by negotiations with Libyan authorities over permission to leave the airport, obtaining vehicles, and the need to frame a clear mission plan. The first idea is to go to a Benghazi hospital to recover Stevens, who they correctly suspect is already dead. But the hospital is surrounded by the Al Qaeda-linked Ansar al-Shariah militia that mounted the consulate attack.”

So the U.S. Ambassador to Libya is at the Benghazi hospital and suspected dead. The CIA contractors know that, but they can’t get there because the hospital is surrounded by the Al Qaeda-linked group Ansar al Shariah, the “militia that mounted the consulate attack.”

This goes up the chain communication at 1:15 a.m. on Sept. 12.  The White House, the Situation Room, and all of those paying attention to intel channels know that the guys on the ground have determined the group that’s behind this. It’s the Al Qaeda-linked militia that are still fighting and have the hospital surrounded.

About 12 hours later — before heading to Las Vegas for a campaign event — Obama sits down for that “60 Minutes” interview with Steve Kroft.

And Sunday night, 54 days after the attack and almost two weeks after putting out the first additional clip that appeared to back up the president after the second debate, CBS without fanfare posted the rest of the Benghazi question online — the question before the question.

Remember this is from a president who has been saying he was calling Benghazi a terrorist attack from the very first moment in the Rose Garden. Also, remember what he said in the debate and notice the new part — underlined in bold.

Click here to see the “60 Minutes” interview. 

   KROFT: Mr. President, this morning you went out of your way to avoid the use of the word terrorism in connection with the Libya Attack, do you believe that this was a terrorism attack?

   OBAMA: Well it’s too early to tell exactly how this came about, what group was involved, but obviously it was an attack on Americans.  And we are going to be working with the Libyan government to make sure that we bring these folks to justice, one way or the other.  

KROFT: It’s been described as a mob action, but there are reports that they were very heavily armed with grenades, that doesn’t sound like your normal demonstration.

OBAMA:  As I said, we’re still investigating exactly what happened, I don’t want to jump the gun on this.   But your right that this is not a situation that was exactly the same as what happened in Egypt.  And my suspicion is there are folks involved in this. Who were looking to target Americans from the start.  So we’re gonna make sure that our first priority is to get our folks out safe, make sure our embassies are secured around the world and then we are going to go after those folks who carried this out.

KROFT: There have been reports, obviously this isn’t the first time…there have been attacks on the consulate before. There was an attack against the British ambassador. Do you…this occurred on Sept. 11. Can you tell me why the ambassador was in Benghazi yesterday? Was it to evaluate security at the consulate?

OBAMA: Well keep in mind Chris Stevens is somebody that was one of the first Americans on the ground when we were in the process of saving Benghazi and providing the opportunity for Libyans to create their own democracy. So this is somebody who had been courageous, had been on the ground, had helped to advise me and Secretary Clinton when we were taking our actions against Muammar Qaddafi. And is somebody who is very familiar with the train. He was doing the work that he does as a diplomat helping to shape our policies in the region at a time when things are still fairly fragile. But I think it’s important to note that we have a Libyan government in place that is fully cooperative, that sees the United States as a friend that recognizes we played an important role in liberating Libya and providing the Libyan people an opportunity to forge their own destiny. And in fact we had Libyans who helped protect our diplomats when they were under attack. But this is a country that is still rebuilding in the aftermath of Qaddafi. They don’t necessarily always have the same capabilities that countries with more established governments might have in helping to provide protection to our folks. But beyond that, what I want to do is make sure that we know exactly what happened, how it happened, who perpetrated this action, then we’ll act accordingly.”

These are two crucial answers in the big picture.  Right after getting out of the Rose Garden, where, according to the second debate and other accounts he definitively called the attack terrorism, Obama is asked point blank about not calling it terrorism. He blinks and does not push back.

Understand that this interview is just hours after he gets out of the Rose Garden.

How after this exchange and the CIA explanation of what was being put up the chain in the intel channels does the Ambassador to the United Nations go on the Sunday shows and say what she says about a spontaneous demonstration sparked by that anti-Islam video? And how does the president deliver a speech to the United Nations 13 days later where he references that anti-Islam video six times when referring to the attack in Benghazi?

There are many questions, and here are a few more.

Why did CBS release a clip that appeared to back up Obama’s claim in the second debate on Oct. 19, a few days before the foreign policy debate, and not release the rest of that interview at the beginning?  

Why on the Sunday before the election, almost six weeks after the attack, at 6 p.m. does an obscure online timeline posted on CBS.com contain the additional “60 Minutes” interview material from Sept. 12?

Why wasn’t it news after the president said what he said in the second debate, knowing what they had in that “60 Minutes” tape — why didn’t they use it then? And why is it taking Fox News to spur other media organizations to take the Benghazi story seriously?  

Whatever your politics, there are a lot of loose ends here, a lot of unanswered questions and a lot of strange political maneuvers that don’t add up.

That’s what reporters should live for, but this time they’re not.  We will.

Read more: http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2012/11/05/what-president-obama-really-said-60-minutes-interview-about-benghazi/#ixzz2BNy7GtQq

Three great lies in presidential history.

Three unforgettable lies by Presidents but Obama’s is the most dangerous one of all.

  1. Richard Nixon: “I am not a crook.”
  2. Bill Clinton: “I did not have sex with that woman.”
  3. Barrack Obama: “I said that this was an act of terror.”

President Barack Obama “point-blank lied”  “I think the president indicted himself” on the Libya issue, Reince Priebus, chairman of the Republican National Committee said. “He point-blank lied on Libya. He never called it a terrorist attack. At the end of the speech in the Rose Garden, he said that ‘Acts of terror won’t shake the nation,’ then he went on seven times and talked about the fact that this thing was from a YouTube video.

If you come away with nothing from this blog at least get this:  Something happened last night that is a first in American history.  A moderator of a presidential debate stepped in at a key moment to protect Obama from the impact of a lie.  A lie so heinous, that in any other universe, it would end his chances for reelection.   Candy Crowley’s actions went way beyond bias.  She was literally a willing partner in a mass manipulation of the facts.

I told you the night before the debate that I felt troubled in the Spirit.  I knew that there was going to be some kind of trick.  I am certain that this is the very thing that I sensed was coming.

Obama lied about his remarks in the Rose Garden on September 12th.  This is crucial because it should be the nail in the coffin of his campaign.   He refused to call the attack an act of terror for some very shameful reasons. Read on.

Obama cannot express the natural outrage of a true American President.  For the first time since 1979 an American Ambassador has been assassinated!   Moreover, he was assassinated on of all days, September 11th.   Even when he had the chance to address the nation he condemned a video before he condemned the terrorists!

It gets worse.  Instead of calling for emergency action over an act of war on American soil, he leaves for Las Vegas to raise money for his campaign.  How could he do this without fear of a backlash?   Because he knew that the media would shield him from any such backlash.

It just gets even worse.  He lied when he said there was faulty intelligence.   He lied when he said they needed an ongoing investigation.   The State Department was watching the attack on a live feed in real time!   The attack went on for 8 hours!  They saw that there was no mob rioting over a video.  They could see that weapons and tactics were in play that were clearly preplanned and the work of Al Qaeda.

Can it get any worse?   Yes.  He instructs Susan Rice, the U.S. Ambassador to the U.N., to keep the charade going, and say to the public that the attack was because of the video.  Obama and Clinton make a commercial for Pakistani T. V., apologizing for the video.   Jay Carney tells the press corps that is all about the video.   Obama appears on The View and throws Hillary Clinton under the bus.  Joy Behar asks, “was this a terrorist act?  Your Secretary of State now says it was, what do you say?”   His reply, to his everlasting shame, “we are still doing an investigation.”

Two weeks pass.  He still shows no outrage over the assassination.  No plan to get those responsible.  And then the final infamy:  an act so jaw dropping outrageous that there are no words.   He stands there and says, in front of millions that from the very beginning, “I said, this was an act of terror.”

Like a ref in a fixed fight, Crowley laid low as long as she could.  When she saw the knockout punch coming from Romney, she jumped in, yet again, to save the anointed one.   The lie lives on.  And that is what makes this lie so dangerous.  In the past, the press worked to expose lies, now they are helping to cover them up. 

CROWLEY INTERRUPTS ROMNEY 28 TIMES, OBAMA JUST 9

Below is an article that proves what I warned our readers about.  I felt that Romney was walking into a trap.  I sensed that there was a set up.  Again, here’s the proof.  It should give every honest heart pause to think our media is this committed to Obama’s agenda.  It should also be clear that prayer in fact worked in this instance because as slanted as the debate was, as easy as they made it for Obama to shine, he still came off amateur, with no plan, while Romney stood presidential.

CROWLEY INTERRUPTS ROMNEY 28 TIMES, OBAMA JUST 9

by WILLIAM BIGELOW

Amid persistent complaints and interruptions from both candidates, President Obama ultimately got more than three extra minutes of speaking time than Mitt Romney during Tuesday’s debate.  According to CNN’s timekeeping, Obama got 44:04 minutes of speaking time, while Romney got 40:50.

Candy Crowley, who was suspected of being one more liberal moderator in the tank for Barack Obama, was more than just in the tank for him; she dove in and sucked all the water out for him so he could pretend he walked on water.

In the first presidential debate, Jim Lehrer, no slouch at shilling for the Democratic Party, interrupted Mitt Romney 15 times and Barack Obama only five.

Crowley made Lehrer look like an amateur. She interrupted Obama nine times, (although four of those were when he wouldn’t respect the time limit when discussing assault weapons; he went over his time limit all night long), but when it came to Mitt Romney, she was utterly beyond the pale.

Crowley interrupted Romney 28 times. 28 times. Her desperation to keep Romney from scoring points was so patently obvious that it wasn’t really a surprise when she had her infamous moment: the moment when she interrupted and falsely claimed Romney was incorrect in accusing Obama of refusing to call the Benghazi attack an act of terror.

And even beyond the interruptions, there were numerous instances where Crowley’s obvious partisanship prompted her to treat Romney with great disrespect:

1. She wouldn’t let him respond when Obama lied about the auto industry. First she called him Mr. Romney instead of governor, then protested, “there’ll be plenty of chances here to go on, but I want to… We have all these folks.  I will let you absolutely… OK. Will – will – you certainly will have lots of time here coming up.” Romney never did get the chance to respond.

2. After the question asking whether gas prices as they stand now are the new normal, Obama got 2 chances to respond. When Romney asked for his second chance, Crowley shut him off by saying, “ … in the follow up, it doesn’t quite work like that. But I’m going to give you a chance here. I promise you, I’m going to.” She didn’t.

3. When discussing how he would deal with deductions, just as Romney was about to destroy Obama with statistics, Crowley jumped in to save her man not only by denying the value of statistics, but changing the narrative to say Romney’s numbers couldn’t possibly add up:

“And Governor, let’s – before we get into a vast array of who says – what study says what, if it shouldn’t add up. If somehow when you get in there, there isn’t enough tax revenue coming in. If somehow the numbers don’t add up, would you be willing to look again …”

4. When Romney was trying to make a point of Obama’s pension investing in China, Crowley cut him off by insinuating people were tired of him talking:

“Governor Romney, you can make it short. See all these people? They’ve been waiting for you.  Make it short.”

Then she really tried to humiliate him with this: “If I could have you sit down, Governor Romney. Thank you.” She never asked Obama to sit down.

5. The infamous incident when she interrupted Romney’s claim about Obama’s refusal to call the Benghazi murders a terror attack:

“It – it – it – he did in fact, sir. So let me – let me call it an act of terror…

Prompted by Obama to say it a little louder, Crowley obliged:

“He – he did call it an act of terror. It did as well take – it did as well take two weeks or so for the whole idea there being a riot out there about this tape to come out. You are correct about that.”

6.  6. Just as egregiously, when the question was about assault weapons and Romney naturally started to discuss fast and furious, Crowley quickly shifted him away from that and turned it into an attack on Romney’s assault ban position:

“Governor, Governor, if I could, the question was about these assault weapons that once were once banned and are no longer banned. I know that you signed an assault weapons ban when you were in Massachusetts, obviously, with this question, you no longer do support that. Why is that, given the kind of violence that we see sometimes with these mass killings? Why is it that you have changed your mind?’

The fact that Obama escaped all night long by lie after lie didn’t seem to disturb Crowley in the slightest. She had her shadowy agenda, and she stuck to it fiercely. Now it is our job to throw her out into the sun where every American can see exactly how dirty she is.

I believe Romney is walking into a trap in the next debate.

 

                             CANDY CROWLEY

 

By Mario Murillo

I am sensing in the Spirit that a massive trap is being laid for Mitt Romney in the next debate.  Every alarm bell that I have within me is going off.    We must pray fervently for our nation and for the weapon formed against us to be diffused.

To begin with it does not take supernatural discernment to know that the deck is stacked by the moderator Candy Crowley from CNN.  She is an avid Obama supporter. She once referred to the Romney, Ryan ticket as “Republican suicide.”

Here is an excerpt of a post by Noel Sheppard at Newsbusters:

As NewsBusters has been noting all Saturday morning, now that Paul Ryan has been chosen as Mitt Romney’s running mate, the goal of the Obama-loving media is to rip him to shreds.

Doing her part Saturday was CNN’s Candy Crowley who claimed some Republicans (unnamed, of course) think this “looks a little bit like some sort of ticket death wish.”

Crowley’s comments are in keeping with the media’s past treatment of GOP vice presidential nominees. Here’s a quick look at how the media have always echoed Democratic talking points against everyone from Sarah Palin and Dan Quayle to Dick Cheney and Jack Kemp.

Transcript of Crowley’s remarks is below:

CANDY CROWLEY, CNN: We’ve already had this debate. All they have to do at Obama Reelect is open up the files because this debate has already happened. They just bring it back, it goes, it is, you know, what they talk about. But I think the other thing that’s worth pointing out is not every Republican has signed on to this kind of, I mean, they will publicly. But there is some trepidation…

GLORIA BORGER, CNN: They’re afraid.

CROWLEY: …that this might be, looks a little bit like some sort of ticket death wish. That, oh, my gosh, do we really want to talk about these thing? Is this where we want to go when the economy is so bad? We could have stayed on that.

A ticket death wish?

Readers are advised this came right after CNN’s Gloria Borger called Ryan “a polarizing figure.”

Is this how the folks at CNN think they’re going to improve their continually declining ratings?

The second paragraph of an earlier version of this piece read, “Doing her part Saturday was CNN’s Candy Crowley who said that this ‘looks a little bit like some sort of ticket death wish.'” Also, the original title was, “CNN’s Candy Crowley: Ryan Pick ‘Looks a Little Bit Like Some Sort of Ticket Death Wish.'”

The piece has been changed to better reflect Crowley’s claim that this is coming from Republicans even though she didn’t name any.  This of course is a common strategy by media members to impart their own opinions by saying they came from nameless others.”

I believe that there will be plants in the town hall audience and that the questions will be blatantly slanted to make Romney look like the evil capitalist outsider and restore Obama’s tarnished image as the savior of the world.    The tone of the debate if it goes as planned, will be to make it seem that Obama is the only choice to avoid war and destruction, and that all he needs is a little more time.  Pray, Pray, Pray.

I know that these feelings do not hit me without cause.  I am calling on God’s people everywhere to pray for the entire hoax to be exposed.   It is time to put an end to this dictatorship of the Obama administration and the news media.