Tag: Major

Major Evangelical Leader In Iowa Endorses Ted Cruz For President

You Can’t Win Iowa Without This Person’s Endorsement, And One GOP Candidate Just Got It – Politistick

.

.
The Iowa Caucus, which will be held on February 1, is the first caucus in the country. As a result, it is a key focal point for nearly everyone running for president. It is a critical state to win as it helps set the stage for all the caucuses that follow.

For a Republican to win the caucus in Iowa, there is one man’s endorsement that is critical to secure. He is a top evangelical leader in the state and his endorsement matters. On Thursday morning, Bob Vander Plaats, President and CEO of Family Leader, announced his endorsement for the 2016 presidential race and the weight of his name behind this candidate is expected to be a game changer.

Vander Plaats announced that he is endorsing Texas Senator and constitutional conservative Ted Cruz for the presidency. The blessing of the Cruz campaign by Vander Plaats carries a lot of weight with the coveted and important evangelical Christian voting bloc in Iowa.

Speaking with the Des Moines Register, Vander Plaats shared why he chose to endorse Ted Cruz instead of one of the other 14 candidates in the GOP presidential race. He said, “At the end of the day, we truly believe that Ted Cruz is the most consistent and principled conservative who has the ability to not only win Iowa but I believe to win the (Republican) nomination.”

The majority of the GOP presidential candidates were trying desperately to secure Vander Plaats’ endorsement. Donald Trump, Ben Carson, Marco Rubio, Carly Fiorina, Rand Paul, Mike Huckabee, Rick Santorum and Lindsey Graham were all hopefuls for this endorsement. Each auditioned with Vander Plaats in an attempt to get his support. The only two candidates who did not work to get his endorsement were Jeb Bush and Chris Christie.

Vander Plaats not only shared why he chose to endorse Cruz, but also explained why he chose Cruz over a few of the other candidates.

In regards to Donald Trump, Vander Plaats said, “Mr. Trump, he was probably taken off our radar when he made the decision not to attend the forum.” He said the two will move on as friends, however.

Though he described Marco Rubio as a conservative, his history regarding amnesty and illegal immigration played a major role in Rubio not getting Vander Plaats’ endorsement.
.

“However, I do believe the one issue he decided he was going to lead in Washington, D.C., with (Democratic New York U.S. Sen. Chuck) Schumer and (Republican Arizona U.S. Sen.) John McCain and the ‘gang of eight’ gave and gives everybody a little bit of cause for pause. And with immigration being such a big issue today, I think that’s going to be a hurdle that’s going to be a very steep for Marco Rubio to clear.”

.
Though some have attempted to portray Ted Cruz as a DC insider since he is a sitting senator, Vander Plaats begged to differ with such a description of Cruz. He contended, “But I think what’s appealing about Ted Cruz is he still gives that ‘outside’ appearance. He has not been embraced by the Washington establishment community, on either side of the aisle. So he’s still viewed as that outside candidate who really knows how this thing works and what needs to be changed.”

.

.

*VIDEO* Another Double Whammy: The Donald Holds Major Rally In OK Right After D.C. Event (09/25/15)


.
Love him or hate him, Trump is the Energizer bunny of the 2016 election cycle. This guy is freakin’ everywhere!
.
Click HERE to watch his Values Voter Summit speech from earlier in the day.

.

.

NOAA: Record 119 Months Since Major Hurricane Has Struck U.S.

NOAA: Hurricane Drought Hits Record 119 Months – CNS

.

.
As of today, no major hurricanes, defined as Category 3 or above, have struck the continental U.S. in a record-breaking 119 months, according to hurricane data kept by the National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) Hurricane Research Division (HRC) dating back to 1851.

Last year, President Obama warned that hurricanes will become “more common and more devastating” because of climate change.

But Obama is now the longest serving president (since the 1851 start of NOAA’s data) not to see a major hurricane strike the U.S. during his time in office. He is also the first president since Benjamin Harris was in office 122 years ago to have no major hurricane strike during his term.

The last major hurricane to make landfall on the U.S. mainland was Hurricane Wilma, which came ashore on October 24, 2005.

That year was one of the most active hurricane seasons in recorded history, according to NOAA.

Hurricanes Katrina, Rita and Wilma all wreaked havoc on the U.S. during an intense two-month period between August 29 and October 24 of 2005.

However, during the nearly 10 years since Wilma struck the U.S., no major hurricanes have made landfall and none are expected by the end of the current hurricane season.

According to the Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Wind Scale, major hurricanes classified as Category 3 or above have sustained wind speeds of more than 111 miles per hour and are capable of causing “devastating” or “catastrophic” damage.

The previous record was an eight-year span during the 1860’s in which no major hurricanes struck the U.S.

The current hurricane drought is “a rare event” that is “unprecedented in the historical record,” according to Timothy Hall, a hurricane researcher at the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies.

Hall also said there is only a 39 percent chance that the current hurricane drought will end next year.

Researchers at the Centre for Marine Sciences at the University of the West Indies traced hurricane activity over the past 1,000 years by studying sediment deposits in Jamaica’s Grape Tree Pond, which gets very little precipitation outside of hurricane season.

“Our results corroborate evidence for the increasing trend of hurricane activity during the Industrial Era; however, we show that contemporary activity has not exceeded the range of natural climate variability exhibited during the last millennium,” according to a paper published August 5 in Nature.

.

.

Turkish Islamist Party Dealt Major Electoral Blow

Turkish People Deliver Major Electoral Blow To Erdogan And His Islamist AKP Party – Right Scoop

For the first time in 13 years, the Turkish AKP, led by President Erdogan and Prime Minister Davutoglu, has lost its majority hold on the parliament. Just four years ago, the AKP won 326 seats in the parliament, well over the 276 needed for a majority. All they needed was four more seats and they could hold a public referendum on rewriting the constitution to make Erdogan a sultan-like figure to rule over Turkey.

But this election proved disastrous for Erdogan as the AKP lost around 68 seats, enough to remove their majority for the first time since 2002.

The election results are below. As you can see the AKP won only 258 seats, 18 seats below what they needed to maintain their simple majority. The new HDP Kurdish party managed to get almost 13%, which is a big deal because they needed a minimum of 10% to get into the parliament.

.

.
So going forward the AKP must form a coalition with one of the opposition parties to govern, and everything I’ve read suggests that the MHP is the most likely to form a coalition with the AKP. The MHP is known as a part-religious (Islamist), part-nationalist party in Turkey.

If no coalition is formed, they will have to hold elections again.

The interesting thing about all this is how much Erdogan had riding on this election. He’s been strongly promoting the ‘New Turkey’ he is creating as well as his need for a new ‘presidential system’, almost daily. Indeed, he’s been heavily criticized for holding so many rallies for the AKP, as the president of Turkey is supposed to be a non-partisan figure.

Erdogan had really put himself out there and for his party to lose so many seats, it makes me wonder how he will respond to this.

I must admit I was surprised to see Erdogan’s party lose so many seats, as I’ve been saying they would win ‘by hook or by crook’. But perhaps the loss was so big that even electoral fraud couldn’t have overcome the results.

So at the moment Erdogan’s ‘New Turkey’, his revived Ottoman Empire, has suffered a major blow and stands in question. We’ll have to see how things go in the days that follow to see if Erdogan tries to fix this within the realm of democracy or if he decides to use more authoritarian tactics.

.

.

Obamanomics: Major U.S. Retail Chains Closing 6,000 Stores

Retail Apocalypse: Major Chains Closing 6,000 Stores – WorldNetDaily

.

.
The long feared “retail apocalypse” may be hitting with little or no fanfare if a growing list of store-closing plans by major chains is any indication.

Major U.S. retailers have announced the closing of more than 6,000 stores from coast to coast. The list includes only those retailers that have announced plans to close more than 10 outlets this year and next.

For example, 1,784 Radio Shack stores are vanishing, 400 stores in the Office Depot/Office Max chain by 2016, and 340 Dollar Tree/Family Dollar stores.

The growing list of stores getting shuttered coincides with the decline in discretionary consumer spending over the past six months.

“Expect to see more storefronts closed at malls across the country,” one retail watcher told WND. “It’s getting ugly out there.”

Another factor, the source said, is that Americans’ credit is maxed out – a problem that will impact holiday season sales later this year. Add the demand of rising taxes, housing and health-insurance costs and you’ve got a formula for belt-tightening across the board.

Expected to be hit hardest by the trend are poorer- and lower-middle class neighborhoods. The recent riots in Baltimore are expected to make retailers even more skittish.

See the big list:

.

.

.

Harry Reid (Dumbass-Nevada) Accused Of Major Ethics Violation

Harry Reid Just Got Accused Of A Huge Ethics Violation – Western Journalism

.

.
Senator Harry Reid, D-Nev., illegally used Senate resources for his campaign, according to a conservative watchdog group.

The report by the group states that Reid illegally met with his caucus in order to promote his re-election campaign, which would be a violation of Senate ethics rules.

The complaint was filed by the Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust (FACT), a conservative watchdog group founded by former U.S. Attorney Matt Whitaker.

According to Whitaker:

“The only reported topic [of the meeting] was to announce, ‘I’m running,’” Whitaker wrote in the complaint. “Even Politico admitted the meeting – attended by more than fifty Senate staffers – was ‘unusual.’”

Whitaker alleges that the meeting could even violate federal law.

The meeting took place in the Capitol building’s Mansfield Room.

A story in Politico alleges that Reid kicked off the meeting by saying that he planned on running for reelection next year.

The complaint states that Reid “reportedly announced his reelection campaign from the confines of an official Senate meeting room located mere steps from the Senate floor.”

The complaint further reads:

“Federal law prohibits the use of official funds for any use other than that for which they were appropriated,” the complaint says. “The Congress has not appropriated money for the day-to-day operation of the Senate for campaign use.”

According to Senate ethics rules, senators cannot use official resources “to assist campaign organization.” Also, Senate rules prohibit “campaign activity in federal buildings.”

Adam Jentleson, a spokesman for Reid, stated when asked to respond to the complaint: “do you mean a story taking it seriously?”

.

.

Russian Opposition Leader Boris Nemtsov Murdered One Day Before Major Anti-Putin Protest

Shot In The Kremlin’s Shadow: Russian Opposition Leader Killed In ‘Politically Motivated’ Attack A Day Before Major Anti-Putin Protest – Daily Mail

A leading Russian opposition politician and vocal critic of Vladimir Putin was gunned down in a ‘politically motivated’ drive-by shooting on the streets of Moscow last night.

Former deputy Prime Minister Boris Nemtsov, 55, was under surveillance by his killers before they fatally shot him down in the shadow of the Kremlin the day before a major anti-Putin protest.

He had been working on a report presenting evidence he believed proved Russia’s direct involvement in the separatist rebellion that erupted in eastern Ukraine last year.

The father-of-four was shot four times by assailants in a white car as he walked across a bridge over the Moskva River with 23-year-old Ukrainian model Anna Duritskaya, who was unhurt.

‘The murderers knew Nemtsov’s route, he was spied on,’ said a police source.

Just hours before his death, Nemtsov told Ekho Moskvy radio that Putin had pushed Russia into an economic crisis through his ‘mad, aggressive and deadly policy of war against Ukraine.’

President Putin has condemned the murder and assumed ‘personal control’ of the investigation into the killing, said his spokesman Dmitry Peskov.

.

.

.

.
Mr Peskov, said the shooting could also be a ‘provocation’ as the opposition has planned a big protest in Moscow on Sunday.

He said Putin had been quickly informed of the killing and that the president had expressed his condolences and ordered the security agencies to investigate.

Nemtsov was one of the organisers of the Spring March opposition protest set for Sunday, which comes amid a severe economic downturn in Russia caused by low oil prices and Western sanctions.

He leaves behind his wife Raisa Akhmetovna and four children.

Opposition activist Ilya Yashin told Ekho Moskvy radio he had no doubt that Mr Nemtsov’s murder was politically motivated.

He said: ‘Boris Nemtsov was a stark opposition leader who criticised the most important state officials in our country, including President Vladimir Putin.

‘As we have seen, such criticism in Russia is dangerous for one’s life. He got lots of threats, mostly via social networks, anonymously.

‘I have no doubt this was a political killing. The only threat to his life came from his political activity. He had no foes other than political ones.’

Nemtsov’s death came one year after the Russian annexation of Crimea in a special operation by Russian special forces. The politician was a strong and outspoken critic of Putin’s policy on Ukraine.

Just hours earlier, Putin had declared 27 February a new ‘professional holiday’ for special operation soldiers in his armed forces and secret services.

.

.

.
Political analyst Sergey Parkhomenko alluding to this new holiday said that Nemtsov’s killing was carefully planned and a ‘present’ for someone.

‘There is a war going on here. If someone thinks otherwise… we’re now living in a country that is fully-fledged in a war.’

‘Nemtsov’s murder is a terrible tragedy for Russia,’ said ex-finance minister Alexei Kudrin, a Putin ally.

Britain has said it will follow closely investigations into the killing.

A Foreign Office spokeswoman said: ‘We are shocked and saddened by news that former Russian deputy prime minister Boris Nemtsov has been shot and killed in Moscow.

‘Our thoughts are with his family and we offer our condolences to them. We deplore this criminal act. Those responsible must be brought to justice. We will continue to follow the situation closely.’

US President Barack Obama has also condemned the ‘brutal murder’, the White House National Security Council said tonight on Twitter.

The White House called on the Russian government to conduct a ‘prompt, impartial and transparent investigation’ and to ‘ensure those responsible are brought to justice.’

Obama said he met Nemtsov in Moscow in 2009 when the Russian was willing to ‘share his candid views with me’.

‘We offer our sincere condolences to his family and to the Russian people, who have lost one of the most dedicated and eloquent defenders of their rights,’ he said.

Police cars blocked the street where Nemtsov was shot, and an ambulance was also nearby.

‘Nemtsov B.E. died at 2340 hours as a result of four shots in the back,’ an Interior Ministry spokeswoman said.

Nemtsov, 55, first gained an international profile after being spotted by former British premier Margaret Thatcher as a future leader of Russia, and she praised his market reforms after visiting Nizhny Novgorod where as governor in the early 1990s he led spearheaded reforms.

Later he rose to become deputy prime minister under Boris Yeltsin, but he was always opposed as too Western and liberal by hardliners.

He had angered the government two years ago when he charged that billions of dollars had been stolen from funds designated for the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi, his home town.

He blamed ‘Putin’s friends’ for the alleged embezzlement, which he described as ‘a real threat to Russia’s national security.’

Putin’s former premier Mikhail Kasyanov, now an opposition leader, said: ‘The comments are very easy: the bastards.

‘They killed my friend in Moscow city centre, near the Kremlin wall.’

He warned: ‘This is a demonstration for all of us, for all open-minded people of Russia. How freedom of speech is finished in today’s Russia.

.

.

.
‘Could we have imagined an opposition leader killed by the Kremlin wall yesterday? We couldn’t. The country is rolling to the abyss. It is terrible.’

His death was ‘payback for the fact that Boris consistently, for many, many years fought for Russia to be a free democratic country.’

Former Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev warned against jumping to conclusions.

‘Certain forces will try to use the killing to their own advantage. They are thinking how to get rid of Putin,’ he said.

Another key opposition figure Vladimir Ryzhkov said: ‘I’m absolutely shocked. It’s the first case of political murder in many years, a slaying of a politician of federal level.’

The killing was an ‘extraordinary, shocking event.’

He said that ‘political responsibility for what happened is with the authorities.’

Nemtsov had publicly expressed concerns for his life earlier this month and was outspoken in his opposition to Putin.

He was highly critical of the government’s inefficiency, rampant corruption and the Kremlin’s policy on Ukraine, which has strained Russia-West ties to a degree unseen since Cold War times.

He helped organise street protests and wrote extensively about official corruption. He had been due to take part on Sunday in the first big opposition protest in months in the Russian capital.

Ironically, hours earlier, Putin had declared 27 Febrary a new ‘professional holiday’ for special operation soldiers in his armed forces and secret services.

Political analyst Sergey Parkhomenko alluding to this new holiday said that Nemtsov’s killing was carefully planned and a ‘present’ for someone.

‘There is a war going on here. If someone thinks otherwise… we’re now living in a country that is fully-fledged in a war.’

‘Nemtsov’s murder is a terrible tragedy for Russia,’ said ex-finance minister Alexei Kudrin, a Putin ally.

.

.
Nemtsov’s 87 year old mother Dina had had a premonition that her son would be killed.

He told earlier this month how his mother warned him: ‘When will you stop cursing Putin? He’ll kill you for that.’

‘She was completely serious,’ said Nemtsov, who admitted he was ‘somewhat worried’.

The assassination also comes after Nemtsov criticised Putin in the Financial Times on Thursday.

The politician had said residents he met in a town northeast of Moscow had complained about the country’s economic problems.

He added: ‘They believed that the embargo on imported foods is America’s fault, and they were surprised when I told them no, that was not Obama, it was Putin.

‘This is what we need to make people aware of: the crisis, that’s Putin.’

Mikhail Kasyanov, a former Russian prime minister now also in opposition, said he was shocked by the murder.

‘In the 21st century, a leader of the opposition is being demonstratively shot just outside the walls of the Kremlin!’ Kasyanov told reporters as Nemtsov’s body was placed in a plastic bag.

‘The country is rolling into the abyss.’

Kasyanov said the rally organisers decided that instead of the planned demonstration on Moscow’s southeastern outskirts, they will stage a demonstration in the centre of the capital to commemorate Nemtsov.

The murdered politician was known as an economic reformer during his time as governor of one of Russia’s biggest cities, Nizhny Novgorod.

Political analyst Stanislav Belkovsky told the radio station that he did not believe that Mr Nemtsov’s death would in any way serve Mr Putin’s interests.

‘But the atmosphere of hatred towards alternative thinkers that has formed over the past year, since the annexation of Crimea, may have played its role,’ he said, referring to the surge of intense and officially endorsed nationalist discourse increasingly prevalent in Russia since it annexed Ukraine’s Crimean Peninsula.

Nemtsov, who was Deputy Prime Minister of Russia from 1997 to 1998 during Boris Yeltsin’s presidency, was sentenced to 15 days in jail in January 2011 after being arrested at a New Year’s Eve protest rally for ‘disobedience towards police’.

One of Russia’s most prominent opposition leaders, he was among 68 people arrested at an unsanctioned rally at a central Moscow square.

Nemtsov and other protesters had gathered on the opposite side of the square from an authorised protest.

He was sentenced for failure to follow police orders, the state news agency RIA Novosti reported at the time.

A year ago, Putin had predicted a high profile opposition killing, claiming his deeply divided foes would kill on of their own number.

‘They are looking for a so-called sacrificial victim among some prominent figures,’ said Putin. ‘They will knock him off, I beg your pardon, and then blame the authorities for that.’

Nemtsov hit back at Putin for the statement, declaring:

‘If the head of the federal government, who controls all intelligence agencies, makes a public statement that he has information about such a provocation and such a crime, he must do everything to prevent it and not just publicly scare Russians.’

He warned: ‘If the authorities fail to do everything to prevent such a scenario,’ Nemtsov said then, ‘they will become accomplices in this grave crime being plotted.’

Nemtsov had accused Putin of turning Russia back to the Cold War.

‘He believes that everything he did was absolutely right… he is not critical about himself at all. He says that he is right and the world is wrong. Sometimes I believe that he is mad,’ he said.

When he died he was allegedly preparing to reveal evidence in a report entitled ‘Putin, War’ of Russia’s direct involvement in the Ukrainian crisis.

Sergei Mitrokhin, leader of the opposition Yabloko party, called the killing an ‘act of political terrorism’.

‘This is a challenge not just to the opposition but to the leadership of the country.’

.

.

Corruption Update: Obama Busted For Major Ebola Cover-Up

Obama Busted For Major Ebola Cover Up… Details Are Infuriating – Conservative Tribune

.

.
On Sept. 16, President Barack Obama assured the American people that the risk of an Ebola outbreak within the United States was “extremely low.” As subsequent events proved, he was wrong.

But an alarming new revelation from Israel’s Arutz Sheva proves that Obama was more than just wrong; he was dishonest.

The report says that a federal study by the Defense Threat Reduction Agency and the federal Models of Infectious Disease Agency released on Sept. 2 found a nearly 25 percent chance of the deadly hemorrhagic fever reaching America’s shores within three to six weeks, according to The Daily Caller.

Despite the reported “probability of Ebola virus disease case importation,” Obama lied to the American people, downplaying the threat.

“First and foremost, I want the American people to know that our experts, here at the CDC and across our government, agree that the chances of an Ebola outbreak here in the United States are extremely low,” Obama said.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has also assured the nation on multiple occasions that the Ebola risk was low since the publication of the government-funded study.

As it turns out, even the official estimate was optimistic, as Thomas Eric Duncan arrived in Dallas only 18 days later.

We wish that we could be shocked by yet another revelation of incompetence, dishonesty, and blatant disregard for the safety of the American people from the Obama White House, but at this point, we’ve come to expect no less from this president.

Why would he lie? Because this president must downplay the threat of Ebola in order to continue with his number one policy agenda — open borders. An America concerned about Ebola is an America that will demand strict controls on who enters the country.

After the 2014 midterm elections, Congress should have a little more leeway to rein in the lawless and reckless actions of this president, who is clearly more concerned with enacting his own liberal policies than protecting the American people.

After all, chances of Democrats holding on to Senate control are “extremely low,” right Mr. President?

.

.

Reminder: IRS Commissioner Koskinen Is Major Democrat Donor

Reminder: IRS Commissioner John Koskinen Is Major Democratic Donor – Washington Free Beacon

IRS Commissioner John Koskinen is in the spotlight as he is set to further testify to Congress regarding the IRS targeting of conservative groups. It is important to remember that Koskinen has shelled out nearly $100,000 to Democratic candidates and groups.

.

.
Koskinen has been contributing to Democrats for four decades, starting with a $1000 contribution to Democratic candidate for Colorado Senate candidate Gary Hart in 1979.

Koskinen has been a reliable donor over the years, contributing a total of $19,000 to the Democratic National Committee from 1988 to 2008. He has made a contribution to the Democratic candidate for president in each election since 1980, including $2,300 to Obama in 2008, and $5000 to Obama in 2012.

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has received $3,000 from Koskinen since 2008, and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee received $2,000 from 2004 to 2006.

Hillary Clinton has received $3,800 for her various political campaigns from Koskinen.

Koskinen’s most recent contribution was $2,500 to Sen. Mark Warner (D., Va.) in February of 2013.

Koskinen was appointed IRS commissioner later that year, and was tasked with revamping the tax agency in the wake of criticism that it was allowing partisanship dictate which groups applying for tax-exempt status would receive extra scrutiny.

“John is an expert at turning around institutions in need of reform,” Obama said in the statement announcing Koskinen’s appointment. “With decades of experience, in both the private and public sectors, John knows how to lead in difficult times, whether that means ensuring new management or implementing new checks and balances.”

Sen. Orrin Hatch (R., Utah) said at the time that he was “more than a little mystified” at the partisan appointment in a time that the agency was under fire for just that.

At a House Ways and Means Committee hearing last week, Koskinen was berated by Rep. Paul Ryan (R., Wis.) over his claim that IRS email records have been permanently lost.

“I’m sitting here, listening to this testimony, I don’t believe it,” Ryan told Koskinen. “That’s your problem. Nobody believes you.”

Koskinen will face congressional hearings again this week. He will testify Monday evening for the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and then face the same committee for a follow-up hearing on Tuesday.

Koskinen was president of the U.S. Soccer Foundation from 2004 to 2008, before he was appointed the non-executive chairman of Freddie Mac, where he served from 2008 to 2012.

.

.

Major Democrat Donor Jeffrey Thompson Pleads Guilty To Campaign Finance Violations

Top Democrat Money Man Pleads Guilty To Campaign Finance Violations – Human Events

.

.
“This is probably why Harry Reid’s been going after the Kochs so much,” muses Instapundit’s Glenn Reynolds as he delivers news of top Democrat money man Jeffrey Thompson’s guilty plea for campaign finance violations. It sure does sound like a gigantic case of projection, which has always been a major component of Democrat psychology – they love to cast their own sins at their enemies.

If you don’t spend any time in the left-wing fever swamps, you might be surprised at how large the demonic Koch Brothers loom in their mythology, and probably thought it was a bit odd for Senate Majority Leader Reid to rail against these private citizens from the Senate floor. Were you taken aback to learn that the World’s Greatest Deliberative Body would be used for purposes higher than partisan primal scream therapy, in which the controlling party shrieks insults at law-abiding Americans who have the nerve to participate in our national political discussion? One reason for Reid’s conduct is that hurling his slander from the Senate floor immunizes him against legal retaliation. Another might be that he knew the Thompson story was brewing, and wanted to ratchet up the Koch hatred to cushion its impact.

Here, as the Washington Free Beacon reports, we have a Democrat-supporting fat cat who is what they like to accuse the Koch Brothers of being:

A major Democratic donor pleaded guilty on Monday to funneling millions of dollars in illegal campaign donations to federal and local politicians, including an unnamed 2008 presidential candidate believed to be Hillary Clinton.

District of Columbia businessman Jeffrey Thompson, who federal prosecutors say financed a “shadow campaign” for D.C. Mayor Vincent Gray in 2010, pleaded guilty to conspiracy to violate campaign finance laws.

Thompson claimed some of the candidates, including Gray, were aware of the illegal fundraising.

According to prosecutors, Gray decided to invent a phony name for Thompson, “Uncle Earl,” to protect his identity. It evidently didn’t work. Gray’s people deny that he had any knowledge of Thompson’s illegal activities… which would make his use of the pseudonym more than a little odd, wouldn’t it? Is Gray really going to make the case that he didn’t notice almost half a million dollars pouring into his campaign? Is Hillary Clinton going to try the same “Vote For Me – I’m Oblivious!” strategy in 2016?

Gray’s campaign objected to the prosecutors’ focus on the D.C. mayor, and said Thompson’s claims that Gray knew about the scheme are not believable.

“We’re talking about millions of dollars [Thompson allegedly distributed] to subvert democracy, including a presidential election, an historic presidential election,” Gray campaign manager Chuck Thies told the Washington Free Beacon. “It’s dumbfounding… I think he should spend a decade or more in prison.”

“The message to people who seek to skew the outcome of a presidential election is ‘eh, if we catch you you’ll get six months in jail,’” Thies added. “It’s a frightening message.”

Actually, I think the current message would be more like, “If you seek to skew the outcome of a presidential election without going to jail, use the IRS.”

Today’s developments present an immediate crisis for Gray, who’s going into a fairly crowded primary in a couple of weeks as he seeks re-election to the mayor’s office. Fox News finds the residents of D.C. holding their breath and waiting to learn if prosecutors decide to file charges against Gray. Their public statements certainly make him sound indictable, but they might lack the evidence to take the case any further.

More details from Fox about the activities Gray was allegedly involved in:

[Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael Atkinson] said Gray personally requested the funds from Thompson, who pleaded guilty to two conspiracy charges. Atkinson said that Gray presented Thompson with a one-page budget for $425,000 and asked him to “pay for a get-out-the-vote campaign,” to which Thompson agreed.

Gray has not been charged with a crime and has denied any wrongdoing in the 2010 campaign. Robert Bennett, Gray’s lawyer, said Monday the mayor continued to maintain his innocence, calling the claims mere “allegations.”

“The mayor’s position on that is that it is absolutely not true,” Bennett said. “That has not changed one bit.”

Thompson in pleading guilty reportedly admitted to channeling hundreds of thousands of dollars into a campaign operation for somebody identified in court papers as “Mayoral Candidate A,” in the 2010 mayoral race in the District.

I would surmise that much of Gray’s fate will hang on whether prosecutors can get their hands on a copy of that “one-page budget for $425,000.” If I might indulge in a bit of further speculation, I doubt they currently have the paper in their possession, or they would have charged him already – with a primary only weeks away, they have every reason to move quickly. Especially since another of the candidates, Vincent Orange, has a bit of history with Thompson:

According to the document, Thompson, the former owner of a well-connected accounting firm, funded illicit campaign activity for Clinton, Gray and seven other candidates for local office in the district. All told, the efforts were valued at more than $2 million.

Prosecutors also said Thompson exceeded contribution limits by using straw donors and funneling money from his corporation through intermediaries. Thompson contributed more than $500,000 to local candidates and more than $250,000 to federal candidates and political-action committees over a six-year period, according to the 10-page document.

Thompson, 58, had long been suspected of giving money to Gray’s 2010 campaign to fund get-out-the vote and other efforts, and the document put the value of the shadow campaign at $668,000. He was also charged with pouring $608,750 into Clinton’s 2008 presidential bid. The efforts to help Clinton were detailed in a previous case against a Thompson associate.

The document details shadow campaigns for eight candidates for office in the district, with a total value of nearly $1.5 million. The most recent race Thompson sought to influence, the document shows, was a race for an at-large City Council seat in 2011, which Democrat Vincent Orange won with support from Thompson’s network of donors. Orange, who has acknowledged handing over documents related to his 2011 campaign to federal investigators, is also running for mayor this year. He did not immediately return a call seeking comment but also has denied wrongdoing.

Thompson also ran a $278,000 shadow effort for a mayoral candidate in 2006, the document shows. Adrian Fenty defeated Linda Cropp in that year’s mayoral primary, and Cropp received contributions that year from Thompson and his associates.

Prosecutors are reportedly also investigating what might have been a quid pro quo for Thompson’s shady campaign support, as detailed by the Washington Post:

After the election, prosecutors said, Thompson gave a $10,000 check to Gray’s “close family member” to settle debts with campaign workers. At Gray’s request, Thompson also gave $10,000 to fund a unnamed union election campaign.

Later, after Gray was inaugurated, Thompson gave $40,000 to the mayor’s “close personal friend” in part to finance home improvements, Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael Atkinson said.

Subsequently, prosecutors said, Thompson appealed to Gray, through an associate, Jeanne Clarke Harris, to “expedite” a pending settlement with the city involving his firm, D.C. Chartered Health Plan.

When asked in court whether Harris had talked to the mayor, Thompson said, “Based on what Miss Harris told me, yes.”

Thompson soon learned that the District government was “resolving the matter,” according to his plea agreement.

Investigators have been looking at the city’s decision to pay Thompson’s health-care company $7.5 million to settle a dispute over reimbursements that had begun during the Fenty administration. Investigators have explored what role, if any, Gray and his deputies played in the 2011 deal.

The mayor has said that Thompson never asked him for any favors, and city officials have defended the Chartered settlement as aboveboard and equitable.

Of course, whatever prosecutors decide to do next, Gray will likely be tried in the court of public opinion, where the requirements for evidence are much more flexible. An interesting detail from the Washington Post: prosecutors only named Gray in court as their suspect for “Mayoral Candidate A” because the judge insisted on it. No doubt observers familiar with the case would have connected the dots on their own, but it’s significant that Gray’s name was dropped in the courtroom.

Mike DeBonis of the Washington Post sees today’s revelations as a reset button for the mayor race, where Gray previous held a significant lead over his seven Democrat challengers, with good approval ratings from his previous term in office. His opponents pounced; the specter of the disgraced Marion Barry was raised; and a new independent candidacy was declared for the general election.

But unless prosecutors get serious about indicting Gray, it’s probably a bit much to declare the mayoral race shaken to its core. This is D.C., after all. It has a very high threshold for permanent disgrace. Just ask City Councilman Marion Barry, last heard complaining about traffic jams caused by presidential motorcades.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

Major Bitcoin Exchange Shuts Down After $380 Million Virtual Currency Theft

$380 Million Virtual Currency Theft From MtGox Sparks Debate: Bitcoin Or ‘Sh*tcoin’? – Big Peace

The world’s largest bitcoin trading exchange shut down on Tuesday, sparking a massive sell-off that calls into question the long-term viability of the nascent virtual currency trade.

.

.
“This is extremely destructive,” risk-management expert and former Federal Reserve Bank Examiner Mark Williams told the Los Angeles Times. “What we’re seeing is a lot of the flaws. It’s not only fragile, it’s fragile as eggshells.”

The halt in trading occurred when reports hit the Internet that the Tokyo-based Mt. Gox bitcoin exchange suffered the theft of 744,000 bitcoins worth an estimated $380 million.

Internet currency forums are now asking the question whether “bitcoin” has morphed into “shitcoin.”

Others expressed optimism that the crisis will spawn better measures.

“I think it’s a significant event, but I think there’s a decent chance that it is part of what we would call this sort of shaking out of the industry as it matures and slowly becomes a little more regulated,” New York state’s top financial regulator Benjamin M. Lawsky told the New York Times.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

Proposal To Split California Into Six Separate States Clears First Major Hurdle

Proposal To Split California Into Six States Clears Major Hurdle… Here Are The Proposed New States – The Blaze

A seemingly long-shot proposal to split California into six smaller U.S. states cleared a major hurdle this week, with the golden state’s secretary of state’s office saying that proponents “may begin collecting petition signatures.”

.

.
The initiative is sponsored by Silicon Valley venture capitalist Tim Draper, according to the AFP, and contends that ”political representation of California’s diverse population and economies has rendered the state nearly ungovernable.”

The proposal aims to divide California into ”six smaller state governments, while preserving the historical boundaries of the various counties, cities and towns,” the AFP reported.

States would reportedly include Silicon Valley, South California, West California, Central California, North California and Jefferson, if the proposal is ultimately approved.

The Tuesday move by the secretary of state’s office allows the movement to begin collecting the needed 807,615 signatures necessary for the initiative to arrive on the ballot.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

Top 10 Major Media Cover-Ups Of 2013

Top 10 Major Media Cover-Ups Of 2013 – WorldNetDaily

In an administration known for its dissembling, deciding which lies are its biggest is a challenge.

.

.
But as health care takes center stage in the run-up to the 2014 mid-term elections, the many lies that were used, with the aid of a compliant media, to convince the nation that the passage of Obamacare presented nothing to worry about top WND’s annual list of the 10 most “spiked” or underreported stories of the last year.

At the end of each year, many news organizations typically present their retrospective replays of what they consider to have been the top news stories of the previous 12 months. WND’s editors, however, long have considered it more newsworthy to publicize the most underreported or unreported news events of the year – to shine a spotlight on those issues that the establishment media successfully “spiked.”

WND Editor and CEO Joseph Farah has sponsored “Operation Spike” every year since 1988, and since founding WND in May 1997, has continued the annual tradition.

Produced with the help of WND readers, here are the WND editors’ picks for the 10 most underreported or unreported stories of 2013:

1. THE LIES BY OBAMA, SEBELIUS, REID, PELOSI AND OTHERS CONCERNING OBAMACARE

Before President Obama’s so-called Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was rammed through Congress and signed by the president March 12, 2010, 85 percent of Americans had health-care coverage. Further, an ABC News/Kaiser Family Foundation/USA Today survey found that 88 percent of the insured rated their coverage as excellent or good and 89 percent were satisfied with the quality of care they received.

Those facts belie the insistence of Obama, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Democratic House Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi that the health-insurance system was broken beyond repair and needed a complete overhaul orchestrated by the federal government, which, they contended, somehow could serve Americans better than the free enterprise system alone.

The Democrat leaders promised Americans that if they already had insurance, they had nothing to worry about.

They declared over and over again: “You can keep your doctor,” “You can keep your health-care insurance plan” and “The Affordable Care Act is about insuring more people and about affordable health care.”

Pelosi infamously said Congress needed to pass the bill “to see what’s in it.”

Americans certainly are finding out what’s in it as millions lose their insurance while only a fraction of the number needed to sustain the system have signed up.

By the end of November, only 137,204 people had “selected a marketplace plan.” By Sunday, the administration announced, 1.1 million had signed up, far short of the expectation of 3.3 million. But the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services won’t say how many people have actually enrolled. To become enrolled, the insurer must receive the first month’s premium payment.

Some who have signed up for coverage on the notoriously failed website are receiving email notices informing them they shouldn’t assume they are covered unless they “have seen the Confirmation Letter from the Disbursing Office.”

A poll in December found that 58 percent of uninsured haven’t even looked at exchanges yet. Also, 59 percent of those without coverage think getting insurance would “hurt them financially.”

Those who have signed up might have insurance beginning Jan. 1, but analysts are warning that the plans are likely to give them access to fewer doctors and hospitals. So much so, they warn, that the system could begin to resemble Medicaid, the health care program for low-income Americans.

A panel of doctors testified before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform that they are being dropped from patient provider networks because of Obamacare.

While much has been made about the Obamacare website’s inaccessibility, those who have been able to complete the process have become susceptible to ID theft because the site doesn’t fails to meet the standards of the Federal Information Security Management Act.

Sebelius has refused to answer forthrightly about whether and how often she met with President Obama about Obamacare and the website prior to the rollout. HHS, meanwhile, is obstructing a congressional investigation by instructing contractors working on the website not to release documents to the investigators.

Among the many other problems: Most insurers aren’t advertising the Obamacare taxes that are added to premiums. Individual tax filers earning more than $200,000 and families earning more than $250,000 will pay a 0.9 percent Medicare surtax in addition to the existing 1.45 percent Medicare payroll tax. An extra 3.8 percent Medicare tax also is assessed on unearned income, such as investment dividends, rental income and capital gains.

In a rare, candid moment at Obama’s pre-Christmas press conference, the president summarized not only his health-care fiasco, but his entire administration, writes WND founder and CEO Joseph Farah.

“Since I’m in charge,” Obama said, obviously, we screwed it up.”

2. THE PURGING OF TOP MILITARY LEADERS

An in-depth series of WND reports found that as many as 200 senior officers have been dismissed since Obama became president.

Several former high-ranking military officers have told WND they believe the firings, while often citing real offenses, are politically motivated.

Military analyst Elaine Donnelly of the Center for Military Readiness told WND that officers have gotten the Obama administration’s message of political correctness – “and most have been virtually silent ever since.”

Retired Army Maj. Gen. Paul E. Vallely said Obama is “intentionally weakening and gutting our military, Pentagon and reducing us as a superpower, and anyone in the ranks who disagrees or speaks out is being purged.”

Retired Army Maj. Gen. Patrick Brady, a recipient of the U.S. military’s highest decoration, the Medal of Honor, told WND he believed Obama had fired a number of generals to mask his “serial scandals, all prefaced by lies – Fast and Furious, Benghazi, NSA, IRS.”

Brady said Obama needs to apply the same standards to his political appointees as he does to the military.

“Just when you thought the leadership of this government could not get any worse, it does,” Brady said. “Never in history has an administration spawned another scandal to cover the current one.”

WND reported that three of the nine firings of generals and flag officers by Obama this year were linked to the controversy surrounding the Sept. 11, 2012, terrorist attack on the CIA special mission in Benghazi, Libya.

In one case, U.S. Army Gen. Carter Ham, who commanded U.S. African Command when the consulate was attacked and four Americans were killed, was highly critical of the decision by the State Department not to send in reinforcements.

Obama has insisted there were no reinforcements available that night.

But Ham contends reinforcements could have been sent in time, and he said he never was given a stand-down order. However, others contend that he was given the order but defied it. He ultimately was relieved of his command and retired.

Another flag officer involved in the Benghazi matter – which remains under congressional investigation – was Rear Adm. Charles Gaouette, commander of the Carrier Strike Group.

After he contended that aircraft could have been sent to Libya in time to help the Americans under fire, he was removed from his post for alleged profanity and making “racially insensitive comments.”

Army Major Gen. Ralph Baker was the commander of the Combined Joint Task Force Horn of Africa at Camp Lemonier in Djibouti, Africa. Baker contended that attack helicopters could have reached the consulate in time on the night of the attack.

Military personnel still on duty have told WND on condition of anonymity that the large number of senior military officials being relieved of duty under the Obama administration is part of the creation of a “compliant officer class.”

A veteran Army intelligence officials told WND that in creating a compliant officer class, the Obama administration has made it harder to find “senior officers with a pair of balls in there (the military) now that would say no to anything.

“Maybe at the rank of major or below, and possibly there are some in SOF (Special Operations Forces), but to make colonel and higher is all politics,” he said.

Brady added that Obama’s agenda is decimating the morale of the U.S. ranks to the point that members no longer feel prepared to fight or have the desire to win.

“There is no doubt (Obama) is intent on emasculating the military and will fire anyone who disagrees with him” over such issues as “homosexuals, women in foxholes, the Obama sequester,” Brady said.

In addition, colonels – who are lined up in rank to replace outgoing generals – are quietly taking their careers in other directions.

3. CONCENTRATION OF EXECUTIVE POWER TO BYPASS CONGRESS

At a House Judiciary subcommittee meeting in December, liberal Georgetown law professor Jonathan Turley warned America that the concentration of executive branch powers is approaching a crisis under Obama.

“The problem with what the president is doing is that he’s not simply posing a danger to the constitutional system,” Turley said. “He’s becoming the very danger the Constitution was designed to avoid.”

Turley, who has said he voted for Obama, explained that the Founders’ system of checks and balances is “now being put to the test as many members remain silent in the face of open executive encroachment by the executive branch.”

Nicholas Rosenkranz, a constitutional law professor at Georgetown also affiliated with the libertarian Cato Institute, pointed to Obama’s suspension of the “employer mandate” in Obamacare via presidential decree. He also cited Obama’s enactment of the DREAM Act, which repeatedly had failed to pass Congress.

A third example was the IRS discrimination against and punishment of conservative political opponents.

Rosenkranz argued the Constitution does not allow the president to suspend the laws altogether.

“He cannot favor unenacted bills over duly enacted laws. And he cannot discriminate on the basis of politics in his execution of the laws,” he said.

“The president has crossed all three of these lines.”

Michael Cannon, director of health policy studies at the Cato Institute, noting he supported Obama’s social policies regarding women, minorities and homosexuals, nevertheless was critical of the president’s numerous unilateral actions.

One was Obama’s effort to retool Obamacare, which he said was, in effect, making law.

WND columnist Diana West noted that establishment media either yawned at the hearing, or, in the case of Dana Milbank in the Washington Post, misreported it as a meeting of impeachment-obsessed Republicans.

Cannon stated dramatically that if the government does not respect the restraints that the Constitution places on it, there is a constitutional solution.

“Abraham Lincoln talked about our right to alter our government or our revolutionary right to overthrow it. That is certainly something that no one wants to contemplate,” he said. “If the people come to believe that the government is no longer constrained by the laws, then they will conclude that neither are they.”

Meanwhile, Obama’s hiring in December of former Clinton chief of staff John Podesta as a top adviser appeared to underscore Obama’s intent to increase executive powers.

Podesta, founder of the progressive Center for American Progress, specializes in the use of executive authority to bypass Congress.

The New York Times reported Podesta will help the White House on “matters related to the health care law, administration organization and executive actions,” with particular focus on so-called climate change issues, according to a person familiar with the plans.

In November 2010, Podesta co-authored a 48-page Center for American Progress paper titled “The Power of the President: Recommendations to Advance Progressive Change.”

“The U.S. Constitution and the laws of our nation grant the president significant authority to make and implement policy,” wrote Podesta in the paper’s introduction.

“These authorities can be used to ensure positive progress on many of the key issues facing the country through executive orders, rulemaking, agency management, convening and creating public-private partnerships, commanding the armed forces… diplomacy.”

Podesta stressed: “The ability of President Obama to accomplish important change through these powers should not be underestimated.”

In a conference call to reporters after the release of the paper on executive authority, Podesta recalled that after Democrats lost control of Congress in 1994, President Clinton utilized his executive privileges to enact progressive change without the help of Congress.

Podesta’s paper details how Obama can push executive change on a host of issues.

4. PERSECUTION OF CHRISTIANS AROUND THE WORLD

A survey in 2010 concluded that at least 75 percent of religious persecution reported over the previous two years worldwide targeted Christians.

In the 20th century, atheistic states such as the Soviet Union, China and North Korea were among the most common perpetrators. Today, as communist countries fall by the wayside or ease their restrictions on religious believers, the greatest threat to Christians is in Muslim-majority countries

On Christmas Day, Jihad bombers murdered 34 people as Christians left a church building in Baghdad while, worldwide, Muslims threatened and protested against Christmas celebrations.

Earlier this month, as WND reported, a Syrian city overrun by Muslim Brotherhood jihadists fighting the regime of Bashar al-Assad was the scene of the execution of three Christian men who refused to convert to Islam.

“There’s a Christian cleansing going on over the entire Middle East. Unless we really connect the entire picture together, the full cleansing situation cannot be understood,” Joseph Hakim, president of International Christian Union, told WND.

Hakim said that the U.S. government is wrong to call the Christian victims of the Middle East conflicts simply “casualties.”

“They would never say people killed in violence in Arizona or in New York are casualties of war,” he said, “so why do they say Christians are simply casualties of war?”

Iranian-born pastor Saeed Abedini, a former Muslim who converted to Christianity in 2000 and became an American citizen, has become a casualty of Iran’s Islamic Republic, led by Muslim clerics who follow Islam’s dictate that “apostates” – those who abandon Islam – must be punished, ultimately by death.

Abedini was sentenced in January to eight years in prison, reportedly on charges of undermining national security. His advocates say his arrest was due to his conversion and missionary efforts.

He planted about 100 house churches in 30 Iranian cities with more than 2,000 members. When Mahmoud Ahmedinejad came to power in 2005, Iranian authorities cracked down on the movement and the Abedinis moved back to the U.S. In July 2012, he was arrested on a missionary trip to Iran.

Along with the Middle East and Asia, Africa has been the scene of a bloody encroachment by Islam from the north.

In November, about 70 Christians were murdered in Nigeria in attacks by Boko Haram, a group designated as a terrorist organization by the U.S. government has labeled a “Foreign Terrorist Organization.” Boko Haram means “Western education is forbidden.”

Nigerian Christian Adamu Habila testified before a congressional committee that he was shot in the face and left for dead by Boko Haram because he refused to renounce Jesus Christ and become a Muslim.

Ahead of Christmas, as WND reported, establishment media filed misleading and, in some cases, outright false reports about the state of Christianity and life in Bethlehem.

Ignoring the influence of Muslim intimidation, media suggested Israeli policies are responsible for the city’s economic downturn and that the Jewish state’s security measures have prompted the massive flight of Christians from Bethlehem.

Christian leaders and residents told WND they face an atmosphere of regular hostility. They said Palestinian armed groups stir tension by holding militant demonstrations and marches in the streets. They spokes of instances in which Christian shopkeepers’ stores were ransacked and Christian homes attacked.

Many reports blamed the “wall” that protects Israel from terrorist attacks.

Simple demographic facts disprove the contention entirely. Israel built the barrier 11 years ago. But Bethlehem’s Christian population started to drastically decline in 1995, the very year Arafat’s Palestinian Authority took over the holy Christian city in line with the U.S.-backed Oslo Accords.

Meanwhile, in the U.S., the controversy over “Duck Dynasty” star Phil Robertson’s politically incorrect view of homosexuality has many American “waking up to the fact that homosexual rights are trumping religious rights,” said Liberty Counsel founder and chairman Mat Staver, who has battled “gay” marriage all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Robertson’s paraphrase of a passage in the biblical book of 1 Corinthians set off a firestorm in December that led to A&E’s decision to suspend him from the show. The backlash against Robertson’s statements escalated a couple of days later when a video was unearthed of a 2010 sermon in which he cited the Apostle Paul’s condemnation of homosexual behavior in the first chapter of Romans.

In September, a Christian who owned a bakery shop in Oregon was forced to shut down operations after refusing to make a cake for a same-sex wedding.

In a similar case, earlier this month, a judge ordered a Colorado cake baker to make a wedding cake for a same-sex couple’s wedding.

A Washington state florist in April was sued by both the American Civil Liberties Union and the state attorney general for refusing to provide service to a “gay” couple planning their wedding.

The Ohio Supreme Court in November ruled a school district justifiably dismissed a science teacher on grounds of insubordination who kept a Bible on his desk and taught his religious beliefs in class.

5. THE IRS TARGETING OF CONSERVATIVE NON-PROFITS

Matt Drudge, creator of the highly influential Drudge Report, summarized the establishment media’s response this year to the IRS targeting of conservative and Christian organizations.

“Journos ‘scared sh**less’ to mention IRS scandal,” Drudge wrote in a Twitter message Dec. 30.

While leading IRS officials called to testify before Congress pleaded the Fifth Amendment, some have confirmed the charges of conservative groups who say their requests for tax-exempt status were delayed, limiting the effectiveness of nearly 500 activist organizations as Barack Obama and his liberal agenda rolled to victory in 2012.

One group was told, for example, it had to reveal the content of members’ prayers or make promises about what they would or would not say.

Numerous lawsuits allege the Obama administration violated the First and Fifth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution and the Administrative Procedure Act along with various rules and regulations.

The American Center for Law and Justice filed a case against the government in May on behalf of dozens of conservative organizations that claim they had their applications delayed or denied because of their beliefs.

ACLJ contends the evidence shows there was a “politically motivated attack on conservative organizations by the IRS – a secret and illegal targeting campaign – aimed at the organizations because of their political beliefs.”

Jay Sekulow, ACLJ chief counsel, said “the intimidation campaign conducted by the IRS is much more politically motivated and coordinated than previously thought.”

The lawsuit is believed to be the largest of its kind against the IRS, representing 41 different organizations that claim biased treatment.

WND reported earlier this month that the IRS remains on the attack, proposing new regulations that would silence the president’s critics.

6. TRUE LEVEL OF DECEPTION AND UNTRUTHFULNESS IN OBAMA ADMINISTRATION

On the first full day of his presidency in 2008, Barack Obama declared: “Let me say it as simply as I can, transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency.”

Nearly five years later, polls find a majority of Americans don’t trust him.

One of his most recent untruths was uttered at his last press conference of the year.

Obama declared he and his party are attempting to pull off a “historic deficit reduction” campaign, claiming Democrats had reduced the deficit by 50 percent and that Republicans are trying to thwart their effort.

Noting the budget this year is an estimated $759 billion, that would mean the higher number was $1.5 trillion. But the highest deficit ever recorded in American history was $1.4 trillion under a Democrat-controlled Congress in 2009 that spent $800 billion in government “stimulus” money.

Previously, the largest deficit ever recorded in American history was $459 billion in 2008, which means that Obama nearly tripled the size of the deficit in his first year in office and now wants to take credit for bringing it down 50 percent.

He has presided over the five largest deficits in history.

Obama’s deceptions as a national figure began from his first appearance, at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, when he endeared many to his story of parents from two continents who “shared not only an improbable love” but “an abiding faith in the possibilities of this nation.” But evidence reported first by WND now shows his parents never lived together.

Pushing his health-care plan, Obama said his mother spent “the last months of her life in the hospital room arguing with insurance companies because they’re saying that this may be a pre-existing condition and they don’t have to pay her treatment, there’s something fundamentally wrong about that.” But CIGNA never denied Obama’s mother coverage for her disease.

At a candidate forum at Rick Warren’s Saddleback Church in 2008, Obama stated he believed that “marriage is the union between a man and a woman.” He said that “as a Christian, it’s also a sacred union. God’s in the mix.”

Despite evoking the unchanging Creator, he said in 2012 that he had “evolved” on the issue and now favored allowing homosexual couples to marry.

Obama stated regarding the ongoing “Fast and Furious” scandal that it was a “field-initiated program begun under the previous administration.”

But even ABC News headlined a story “President Obama falsely claims fast and furious program ‘begun under the previous administration.’”

He promised as a 2008 candidate that when his health plan was in Congress, the parties would not negotiate behind closed doors but would come together and have the proceeding broadcast on C-SPAN.”

“When the chips are down I have Israel’s back,” said at a press conference before signing away Israel’s security with the Iranian nuke deal.

In August 2012, Obama declared: “We have been very clear to the Assad regime” and “a red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized.” Two weeks later, Obama said, “First of all, I didn’t set a red line.”

In one of the many lies that likely helped him get reelected, Obama stated at the second debate with Mitt Romney in 2012: “The day after the attack, governor, I stood in the Rose Garden, and I told the American people and the world that we were going to find out exactly what happened, that this was an act of terror, and I also said we are going to hunt down those who committed this crime.”

Romney replied: “You said in the Rose Garden the day after the attack it was an act of terror? It was not a spontaneous demonstration, is that what you are saying?”

At that point, CNN’s Candy Crowley infamously came to the rescue after Obama said off camera, “Get the transcript.”

Waving a piece of paper, Crowley said to Romney: “He did in fact, sir, call, so let me call it an act of terror.”

“Can you say that a little louder, Candy,” said Obama.

“He did call it an act of terror,” lied Crowley.

As Jack Cashill wrote: “So saying, she consummated the most egregious act of real-time media malpractice in recent memory and likely saved Obama’s presidency. In the age of Obama, that is how the media rolled.”

In a CNN panel after the debate, Crowley admitted that Romney was “right in the main.”

“Right after that I did turn around and say, but you’re totally correct that they spent two weeks telling us this was about a tape and that that there was this riot outside the Benghazi consulate which there wasn’t,” Crowley said.

“He was right in the main, I just think he picked the wrong word,” she concluded.

Her instinct, she explained, forced her to correct Romney even though his “thrust” was correct.

7. COVER-UP OF THE BENGHAZI ATTACK AND FALSE TESTIMONY BY HILLARY CLINTON

The key to understanding the Sept. 11, 2012, Benghazi attack is rooted in WND’s exclusive reporting that the U.S. mission in Benghazi and nearby CIA annex was an intelligence and planning center for U.S. aid to the rebels in the Middle East, particularly those fighting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s regime.

Middle Eastern security officials speaking to WND said the aid included weapons shipments and was being coordinated with Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar.

Days after the Benghazi attack, WND broke the news that Ambassador Christopher Stevens played a central role in recruiting the jihadists.

There was no official acknowledgement of such activity until Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., stated in interview with Fox News in March that Stevens was in Benghazi to keep weapons caches from falling into the hands of terrorists.

There was no official acknowledgement of such activity until Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., stated in interview with Fox News in March that Stevens was in Benghazi to keep weapons caches from falling into the hands of terrorists.

WND also was first to report the U.S. was training Syrian rebels in Jordan.

Then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that she had no knowledge of the weapons transfers, but panel member Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., said he doubts she was telling the truth.

Paul cited a New York Times story stating Clinton “was the big cheerleader for arming Syria when there [were] two factions within the Obama administration arguing this.”

“She was the hardliner that wanted to get involved in the war in Syria, and yet in the hearing she says, oh, she never heard of this,” Paul said. “I find that hard to believe.”

Over the weekend, an extensive New York Times investigation into the Benghazi attack contradicted information from the U.S. government, Benghazi victims and numerous other previous news reports.

One of the main contentions of the Times piece is that “contrary to claims by some members of Congress,” the Benghazi attack “was fueled in large part by anger at an American-made video denigrating Islam.”

The Times article seeks to link the Benghazi attack to protests planned outside the U.S. Embassy in Cairo. However, the Cairo protest on Sept. 11 was announced days in advance as part of a movement to free the so-called “blind sheik,” Omar Abdel-Rahman, held in the U.S. over the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.

Another main contention of the Times article on Benghazi is there was “no evidence that Al Qaeda or other international terrorist groups had any role in the assault.”

However, the Times’ next statement in effect contradicts that claim. The Times said the attack “was led, instead, by fighters who had benefited directly from NATO’s extensive air power and logistics support during the uprising against Colonel Qaddafi.”

Scores of news media reports documented that the “fighters” included al-Qaida groups among their ranks. Many were widely quoted in news media reports as fighting under the al-Qaida banner.

The Times further claims Benghazi “was not infiltrated by Al Qaeda, but nonetheless contained grave local threats to American interests.”

The contention is contradicted by the U.S. government, as WND was first to report.

A Library of Congress report detailed that, one month before the attack, al-Qaida established a major base of operations in Libya in the aftermath of the U.S.-NATO campaign that deposed Muammar Gadhafi and his secular regime.

The report documented al-Qaida and affiliated organizations were establishing terrorist training camps and pushing Taliban-style Islamic law in Libya while the new, Western-backed Libyan government incorporated jihadists into its militias.

The document named Benghazi as a new central headquarters for al-Qaida activities.

CIA agents on the ground in Benghazi have testified to lawmakers they were loaded into vehicles and ready to aid the besieged U.S. special mission on Sept. 11, 2012, but were told by superiors to “wait,” a congressman privy to the testimony revealed.

Unreported is that the new accounts seemed to contradict claims made by the State Department’s Accountability Review Board, or ARB, which stated that the response team one mile away in the CIA annex was “not delayed by orders from superiors.”

8. THE “KNOCKOUT GAME” AND OTHER BLACK ATTACKS ON WHITES

Colin Flaherty has done more reporting than any other journalist on a nationwide trend of skyrocketing black-on-white crime, violence and abuse.

Finally, after scores of reports by WND about the problem, Fox News launched a full-frontal assault in November on the shocking phenomenon its own analysts said is intentionally suppressed by national news media.

At least three of the top-rated cable network’s prime-time broadcasts focused on the issue, with the common conclusion that it’s a racist crime trend of black individuals pummeling white victims.

“It’s savagery. It’s very difficult to watch those tapes,” former CBS News correspondent Bernard Goldberg told Bill O’Reilly on “The O’Reilly Factor.”

WND has featured the reports to counterbalance the virtual blackout by the rest of the media due to their concerns that reporting such incidents would be inflammatory or even racist. WND has considered it racist not to report racial abuse solely because of the skin color of the perpetrators or victims.

In the racially charged and sometimes deadly crime, one or more assailants, usually black, target a randomly selected white person and, for amusement, try to knock out the unsuspecting victim with a single punch.

Despite the documented violence caused by the Knockout Game, including six deaths nationwide since 2009, some on the left are downplaying the violence.

Numerous liberal commentators and news outlets have disparaged those who report factually on the Knockout Game. A Los Angeles Times columnist called the game a “faux trend.” A Slate writer claimed that those concerned about the Knockout Game have “concoct[ed] weird trends and games out of thin air.”

The New York Times believes there is a question as to whether the Knockout Game is “a spreading menace or a myth.”

However, Peter Vallone Jr., head of New York City’s Public Safety Committee with oversight over the police department, insists there’s no question.

“People who don’t believe that it exists in NYC right now remind me of people who used to say the Internet is just a fad,” he said.

9. THE RACIAL DIVISION CREATED BY THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION

Within hours of the February 2012 shooting of Trayvon Martin, the Obama administration helped shape the media narrative that turned American Latino George Zimmerman, who was acquitted by a jury in July, into a white man bent on killing innocent blacks out of racially inspired hatred.

Eric Holder’s Department of Justice was even caught aiding anti-Zimmerman activists with funds and personnel, which, along with the activism of the discredited Al Sharpton and others, helped force a trial after the evidence indicated Zimmerman was acting in self-defense.

Already known for accusing white Cambridge, Mass., police officers of “acting stupidly,” Obama jumped into the fray, declaring: “If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon.”

Journalist and author Jack Cashill, who followed the Zimmerman case closely and wrote about it in his new book, “If I Had a Son: Race, Guns, and the Railroading of George Zimmerman,” said that the case provides ammunition for Holder’s racial agenda and boosts support for an agenda targeting the Democratic Party base.

“What’s he doing, and I don’t think it’s coincidental that he said it on an election day when Virginia was still in play, is to rally the base. Saying we’re going to protect and the other guys won’t,” Cashill told WND.

Cashill said Holder has had an unusually high focus on racial issues since be became attorney general and has not even tried to hide his agenda from the American public.

“It’s been about race since he took over – one of the first things he did was that he killed the suit, which had already been won, against the [New] Black Panthers in Philadelphia who were involved in voter intimidation. That’s the amazing thing about it is that he is so transparent and that he has gotten away with so much, and no one calls him on it,” Cashill stated.

He believes that a large portion of the conservative media has not been willing to go after Holder on the issue for fear of being labeled a racist.

“Even the respectable conservative media is afraid of tackling the racial issue for the fear of being called racists themselves; it’s the great neutralizer in this debate,” Cashill commented.

According to Cashill, the victims of the agenda are people like Zimmerman who serve as unwitting scapegoats for the efforts of Holder and the Department of Justice.

“Yet, poor George Zimmerman – how much of a scapegoat can you make out of one individual?” Cashill wondered.

Just last month, Holder declared that his department has not given up on its investigation into Zimmerman.

Meanwhile, Obama ally Oprah Winfrey recently stated that white opposition to Obama was rooted in racism and that older whites “just have to die” for racism to diminish.

Cashill notes that Zimmerman’s acquittal settled nothing, with death threats amplifying, Holder continuing to hound him despite full clearance by the FBI more than a year prior and the media crying “Injustice!”

10. ADVANCEMENT OF THE CLOWARD-PIVEN STRATEGY OF ORGANIZED CRISIS

Frances Fox Piven, co-architect of a strategy to overload the U.S. welfare system to precipitate a transformative economic crisis, was an early builder of the socialist-leaning New Party, which, according to reliable evidence, once had Barack Obama as a member.

Piven, together with her late husband, activist and fellow Columbia professor Richard Cloward, developed the Cloward-Piven strategy, which called for overloading the U.S. public welfare system.

The duo’s stated goal was to agitate a financial crisis that would collapse the U.S economy and replace it with a national system with “a guaranteed annual income and thus an end to poverty.”

Conservatives believe this is Obama’s playbook, while liberals dismiss it as right-wing paranoia.

But the agenda of the Cloward-Piven strategy and Obama’s relationship with the corrupt community organizing group ACORN seems to provide the best explanation for many of Obama’s actions.

It even explains why his promotion of a national health-care strategy seems to have been designed to fail, writes WND founder and CEO Joseph Farah in a column.

Farah said most Americans “still can’t conceive of the notion that a president of the United States would actually want to promote policies that could never work in the conventional understanding of the word ‘work.’”

However, he continued, “if your ultimate goal is greater and greater state control of the population and the economy, which Obama’s ultimate goal surely is, then it all begins to make sense.”

The strategy also can be seen in Obama’s foreign policy, Farah said.

He noted the Washington elite, including the Republican elite, favor internationalism.

What’s the goal of international interventionism? It is to promote a global one-world order – or New World Order, as George H.W. Bush candidly explained a long time ago,” Farah wrote.

But something has changed recently, he said, pointing out Obama faced serious opposition domestically to attacking Syria at the behest of the Saudis and changed directions.

He also did a 180-degree turn on Iran. Now he’s talking to Iran, proposing a cutback on sanctions that has come as a major shock to the Saudis, which are now turning to Russia and others.

Why is Obama apparently turning away from Saudi Arabia after bowing and scraping to its leaders since he entered office?

“It’s because Obama doesn’t have what we would call a coherent foreign policy at all,” Farah said. “It’s simply about fostering crises that only international authorities can resolve.”

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

Major Obama Bundler Bankrolling “Libertarian” Candidate In Virginia Governor’s Race

Surprise: Obama Bundler Bankrolling Libertarian In VA Governor’s Race – Townhall

.

It’s one of the oldest tricks in the book: backing a third candidate in order to beat the main competition. This time, this tactic is being used in the Virginia gubernatorial race by Democrats who are heavily backing “Libertarian” candidate Robert Sarvis in an effort to pull votes away from Republican Ken Cuccinelli. Meredith Jessup at The Blaze has all of the dirty details.

A major Democratic Party benefactor and Obama campaign bundler helped pay for professional petition circulators responsible for getting Virginia Libertarian gubernatorial candidate Robert C. Sarvis on the ballot – a move that could split conservative votes in a tight race.

Campaign finance records show the Libertarian Booster PAC has made the largest independent contribution to Sarvis’ campaign, helping to pay for professional petition circulators who collected signatures necessary to get Sarvis’ name on Tuesday’s statewide ballot.

Austin, Texas, software billionaire Joe Liemandt is the Libertarian Booster PAC’s major benefactor. He’s also a top bundler for President Barack Obama. This revelation comes as Virginia voters head to the polls Tuesday in an election where some observers say the third-party gubernatorial candidate could be a spoiler for Republican Ken Cuccinelli.

Naturally, Sarvis’ campaign won’t explain the backing and refused to discuss whether he was recruited by Democrats to upset the race in Democrat Terry McAuliffe’s favor.

Last week, NRO’s Charles C.W. Cooke destroyed Sarvis’ “Liberatarian” credentials, pointing out his big government positions on climate change, taxes and supporting GPS tracking devices in Virginia cars.

In a recent Reason interview, Sarvis explained that he was “not into the whole Austrian type, strongly libertarian economics,” preferring “more mainstream economics” instead. The candidate expanded on this during an oddly defensive interview with MSNBC’s Chuck Todd, in which he seemed put off not so much by “strongly libertarian economics” as by libertarian economics per se. As governor, Sarvis told Todd, he would be hesitant to cut taxes, unsure as to how he might “reduce spending,” and open to indulging the largest piece of federal social policy since 1965 by expanding Virginia’s Medicaid program.

Worse yet was Sarvis’s rambling interview with the Virginia Prosperity Project, in which the candidate expressed his enthusiasm for increasing gas levies, and for establishing a “vehicle-miles-driven tax.” It strikes me that it is almost impossible to square such a measure with any remotely coherent “libertarian” position on that most sacred of rights: privacy. Virginia’s mooted VMT plan requires the installation of government GPS systems in private cars – an astonishingly invasive proposal.

So, is the split the vote tactic working? We’ll have to see what happens tonight as the polls close, but up to this point the answer is yes.

A Quinnipiac poll released Wednesday showed Republican Kenneth T. Cuccinelli II trimming Democrat Terry McAuliffe’s lead in the Virginia governor’s race to 4 percentage points, suggesting the contest is much closer than some analysis has indicated.

The survey gave Mr. McAuliffe a lead of 45 percent to 41 percent, with 9 percent of likely voters opting for Libertarian candidate Robert Sarvis. That advantage is down from 46 percent to 39 percent for Mr. McAuliffe in a Quinnipiac poll last week, when Mr. Sarvis had 10 percent.

Former presidential candidate and Congressman Ron Paul, notorious for his Libertarian views and dedication to principle, campaigned for Cuccinelli in Virginia last night. When Ron Paul is campaigning for the Republican in the race, you know the Libertarian is fake.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.
——————————————————————————————————————————–
.

Related articles:

.
Ron Paul: ‘Insane’ To Vote For ‘Libertarian’ Robert Sarvis – Big Government

On Monday, former Congressman and staunch libertarian Ron Paul (R-TX) campaigned for Virginia Republican Governor candidate Ken Cuccinelli and said Virginias would be giving up on liberty if they voted for Democrat Terry McAuliffe in Tuesday’s election and would be “insane” if they voted for so-called libertarian Robert Sarvis, the third-party candidate who may siphon enough votes from Cuccinelli to spoil the election.

Specifically referring to the mileage taxes that Sarvis indicated he may support and which may require GPS systems to be installed in everyone’s cars, Paul said “anybody who would conceivably vote for someone who would endorse a mileage tax” is “insane” because a mileage tax would be an “invasion of privacy” and would just give the government more money it could waste. In an interview on MSNBC, Sarvis indicated that he could support “vehicle-miles-driven taxes.”

Appearing with Cuccinelli, Paul also noted that Cuccinelli would cut taxes and would not support any new taxes. He said though Cuccinelli may not be in the Libertarian Party, he’s a “Constitutionalist, so he’s an ally.”

Paul also ripped Democrats for thinking that individuals are not smart to take care of themselves.

“Why should we grant this authority to a few thugs who want to take over the government to make all our decisions for us?” Paul said.

Paul said Cuccinelli is a “defender” of liberty and asked Virginians not to “give up on liberty.”

“If you elect the other guy, you are [giving up on liberty],” Paul said of McAuliffe.

Paul also said Cuccinelli has already proven that he is able to take on the federal government and called Obamacare a “monster” that Cuccinelli has fought from the beginning.

Earlier, Cuccinelli mentioned how much of an infringement Obamacare was on the liberty of Virginians and detailed his strong defense of property rights. Cuccinelli said that McAuliffe sleeps in Virginia but is of Washington and asked Virginians to say “‘No’ to Obamacare and ‘Yes’ to Liberty” by voting for Cuccinelli.

.

.
Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.
——————————————————————————————————————————–

.
Democrats’ Stunning Election-Eve Dirty Tricks – WorldNetDaily

It would be like accusing Obama of opposing Obamacare.

Democrats are apparently telling voters in Virgina that gubernatorial candidate Ken Cuccinelli supports Obamacare, even though the Republican was the first attorney general in the country to file a lawsuit against the health-care law.

Why would Democrats make such an accusation?

To keep conservative voters from going to the polls Tuesday, according to state Republicans.

Democratic candidate Terry McAuliffe is already mired in scandals and his once double-digit lead in the Virginia gubernatorial race is virtually gone, down to just two points in a poll released over the weekend.

So now, he is resorting to dirty tricks, according to a Virginia lawmaker.

Scott Lingamfelter, a Republican member of the Virginia House of Delegates, said he received a robo-call on Sunday claiming that Cuccinelli supports Obamacare.

He also said the call claimed vehemently pro-life Cuccinelli supported taxpayer financing for abortions.

“They are shameless in their lies,” he wrote on his Facebook page.

“I guess they are trying to suppress GOP voters,” Lingamfelter concluded.

Lingamfelter said the recording announced it was paid for by the Democratic Party of Virginia.

He pleaded with Virginians to “understand that the party that wants Terry McAuliffe to be your governor will flat lie about anything!”

Lifenews reports, “[T]he calls may have been going on for a while, as Virginia resident Shirley Widlacki wrote on Twitter in early October that she received a similar robo-call with false claims about Cuccinelli.’

.

WND called the Democratic Party of Virginia for comment. Press Secretary Ashley Bauman said she’d been “on the road” for a while. She directed the inquiry to another staff member and gave WND an email address. WND has not received a response.

When WND contacted the Cuccinelli campaign for reaction, a representative provided a press release from the Republican Party of Virginia, which read, “It’s a despicable attempt at voter suppression. It’s shameless, it’s dishonest, and it’s utterly unsurprising.”

Referendum on Obamacare

Obamacare has become the top issue for Cuccinelli in the Virginia gubernatorial race as it heads for a neck-and-neck finish.

In an op-ed column published in Politico on Monday, Cuccinelli portrayed the election as a referendum on Obamacare.

“Virginia can send Washington a message that we oppose Obamacare with our votes on Tuesday.

“Virginians who oppose Obamacare can vote for me, and Virginians who want to see Obamacare grow further can vote for McAuliffe,” he wrote.

“This is the first chance for people to speak clearly at the ballot box about the impact this law is having on their lives and on our economy,” Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., said Monday while campaigning for Cuccinelli.

“That health care law will only get worse,” he added. “The website is just the tip of the iceberg.”

President Obama seems to be running away from his own health-care law, not even mentioning Obamacare once during his entire 21-minute speech while campaigning for McAuliffe on Sunday.

Democrats seem to be hoping Republicans will get more blame for the government shutdown than Democrats will get for the Obamcare disaster.

Referring to the shutdown, McAuliffe said, “He (Cuccinelli) stood with the tea party and not with Virginia families.”

“Can you even imagine if Ted Cruz, Ken Cuccinelli and the tea party ran the Virginia government?” he wondered.

The president literally tried to scare up votes for his candidate, telling supporters, “Nothing makes me more nervous than when my supporters start feeling too confident, so I want to put the fear of God in all of you,” Obama said.

And campaigning for McAuliffe Monday, Vice President Joe Biden tried to paint Cuccinelli’s traditional values as old fashioned, warning that tea-party views are “out of the ’30s and ’40s and ’50s.”

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

Chinese Hackers Access Major U.S. Weapons Systems

Chinese Hackers Access Major U.S. Weapons Systems – Washington Free Beacon

Chinese hackers have gained access to designs of more than two dozen major U.S. weapons systems, a U.S. report said on Monday, as Australian media said Chinese hackers had stolen the blueprints for Australia’s new spy headquarters.

.

Citing a report prepared for the Defense Department by the Defense Science Board, the Washington Post said the compromised U.S. designs included those for combat aircraft and ships, as well as missile defenses vital for Europe, Asia and the Gulf.

Among the weapons listed in the report were the advanced Patriot missile system, the Navy’s Aegis ballistic missile defense systems, the F/A-18 fighter jet, the V-22 Osprey, the Black Hawk helicopter and the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.

The report did not specify the extent or time of the cyber-thefts or indicate if they involved computer networks of the U.S. government, contractors or subcontractors.

But the espionage would give China knowledge that could be exploited in a conflict, such as the ability to knock out communications and corrupting data, the Post said. It also could speed China’s development of its defense technology.

In a report to Congress this month, the Pentagon said China was using espionage to modernize its military and its hacking was a serious concern. It said the U.S. government had been the target of hacking that appeared to be “attributable directly to the Chinese government and military.”

China dismissed the report as groundless.

China also dismissed as without foundation a February report by the U.S. computer security company Mandiant, which said a secretive Chinese military unit was probably behind a series of hacking attacks targeting the United States that had stolen data from 100 companies.

AUSTRALIAN “SECURITY BLUNDER”

In Australia, a news report said hackers linked to China stole the floor plans of a A$630 million headquarters for the Australia Security Intelligence Organization, the country’s domestic spy agency.

The attack through the computers of a construction contractor exposed not only building layouts, but also the location of communication and computer networks, it said.

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei, asked about the Australian report, said China disapproved of hacking.

“China pays high attention to the cyber security issue and is firmly opposed to all forms of hacker attacks,” Hong said at a daily briefing.

“Since it is very difficult to find out the origin of hacker attacks, it is very difficult to find out who carried out such attacks,” Hong said. “I don’t know what the evidence is for media to make such kinds of reports.”

Repeating China’s position that every country was susceptible to cyber attacks, Hong said nations should make joint efforts towards a secure and open Internet.

Australia security analyst Des Ball told the ABC that such information about the yet to be completed spy headquarters made it vulnerable to cyber attacks.

“You can start constructing your own wiring diagrams, where the linkages are through telephone connections, through wi-fi connections, which rooms are likely to be the ones that are used for sensitive conversations, how to surreptitiously put devices into the walls of those rooms,” said Ball.

The building is designed to be part of an electronic intelligence gathering network that includes the United States and Britain. Its construction has been plagued by delays and cost over-runs with some builders blaming late design changes on cyber attacks.

The ABC report said the Chinese hacking was part of a wave of cyber attacks against business and military targets in the close U.S. ally.

It said the hackers also stole confidential information from the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, which houses the overseas spy agency, the Australian Secret Intelligence Service, and had targeted companies, including steel-manufacturer Bluescope Steel, and military and civilian communications manufacturer Codan Ltd.

The influential Greens party said the hacking was a “security blunder of epic proportions” and called for an inquiry, but the government did not confirm the breach.

Prime Minister Julia Gillard said the reports were “inaccurate”, but declined to say how.

Despite being one of Beijing’s major trade partners, Australia is seen by China as the southern fulcrum of a U.S. military pivot to the Asia-Pacific. In 2011, it agreed to host thousands of U.S. Marines in near-permanent rotation.

Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei was last year barred from bidding for construction contracts on a new Australian high-speed broadband network amid fears of cyber espionage.

The Reserve Bank of Australia said in March that it had been targeted by cyber attacks, but no data had been lost or systems compromised amid reports the hackers had tried to access intelligence negotiations among a Group of 20 wealthy nations.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

Nanny Bloomberg Throws Major F-Bomb Fueled Hissy Fit, Threatens To Destroy Taxicab Industry

Mike Unleashes A ‘Hail’ Storm – New York Post

Mayor Bloomberg went on a spitting-mad rant against a city cab-fleet boss who won a court victory over Hizzoner’s planned “Taxi of Tomorrow” – vowing to “destroy your f–king industry” when he leaves office, The Post has learned.

.

A fuming Bloomberg made the threat against Taxi Club Management CEO Gene Freidman at Madison Square Garden’s private 1879 Club during last Thursday’s Knicks playoff game, a witness said yesterday.

“It was like Gene had kidnapped his child. He used the f-word twice,” the witness said.

Freidman confirmed the blow-up to The Post, and said Bloomberg’s tirade included the warning that, “After January, I am going to destroy all you f–king guys.”

That’s bad news for Bloomberg’s political enemies, who could all become targets once the revenge-minded billionaire has nothing but time on his hands.

Freidman approached Bloomberg at the exclusive club a day after a judge ruled that the mayor’s plan to replace the city’s taxi fleet with the Taxi of Tomorrow violated a city code requiring a hybrid-cab option for garage owners.

“I saw Bloomberg and his security there in the club, so I went over and said, ‘Tell me what is going on with the Taxi of Tomorrow?’” Freidman, 42, said yesterday.

“He turns to me, and said, ‘Come January 1st, when I am out of office, I am going to destroy your f–king industry.’

“I said, ‘Whoa, Mr. Mayor, calm down! Why can’t I sit down with you and figure out something that works?’ He got back in my face and said, ‘After January, I am going to destroy all you f–king guys,’ ” said Freidman, whose company operates a fleet of 925 yellow cabs.

Freidman said a red-faced Bloomberg’s jaw was clenched.

“He was very angry, very scary, very violent in a non-physical way. He was grinding his teeth, he was spitting, he was red and he was in my face,” the self-styled “King of the Road” claimed.

“The mayor was extremely disrespectful, and not ‘mayorly’ at all. He cursed at me, and when we walked away, I asked a friend who was with me, ‘Did the mayor just threaten me?’

“My friend responded, ‘No, he threatened you twice.'”

Bloomberg this morning said he doesn’t recall unleashing that profanity-laced tirade — or virtually any other details from that night.

“The only thing I remember from that night was the [basketball] court. It was the court in the middle of Madison Square Garden and the Knicks won,” the suddenly memory-challenged mayor said.

“It was a great game… that’s all I remember from that night.”

The witness said Bloomberg was just being a sore loser over state Supreme Court Justice Peter H. Moulton’s ruling.

The Taxi of Tomorrow is a Bloomberg pet project that would have replaced nearly the entire of fleet of yellow cabs with a more spacious model that Nissan won the right to design in an open competition.

The taxi industry, led by Freidman, challenged the overhaul – and Bloomberg seeing his foe at MSG set him off, the witness said.

“Bloomberg thinks that everyone should just follow his decisions,” he said.

Freidman said he tried to placate the mayor by reminding him of a meeting in 2006 when Bloomberg praised him for introducing hybrid fuel and wheelchair-accessible taxis.

But nothing would calm Bloomberg – who at one point looked about for security to toss Freidman from the club.

“This was my club that Bloomberg was a guest in, that I had paid to get in, and he wasn’t getting me kicked out of my own place,” said Freidman.

His lawyers have asked MSG to preserve any surveillance video that may have captured the exchange.

Freidman wondered how the mayor planned to “destroy” his industry.

“I don’t know how he’ll destroy me, whether he’ll start a black-car service that will take people for free,” he said. “Perhaps he’ll put $10 million of his own money to lobby against the taxi industry – that is pretty powerful.”

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.