Friends and Patriots, It’s major duct tape time ’cause you’ll need it to keep your head from exploding. Are you ready for this? Here we go….
The RNC and DNC made their Consent Decree 30 years ago, in 1982. The agreement in effect gives a carte blanche to the Democrat Party to commit vote fraud in every voting district across America....
LBN:WTH?? How could a 'decree' like this even be considered legal/constitutional?? As we all feared, Obama would win re-election from voter fraud... http://obamavoterfraud.com documents several incidents quite well. However, if you were wondering why the RNC has not acted on reports of well documented voter fraud, here is the answer....
PolitiJim writes for Gulag Bound, November 13, 2012, that during the weekly True the Vote webcast, Catherine Engelbrecht related a meeting she had with Reince Priebus, the chairman of the Republican National Committee (RNC), asking what the GOP would do about voter integrity. The answer?
This all goes back to a lawsuit 31 years ago, in 1981. The following is compiled from an account on The Judicial View, a legal website specializing in court decision research and alerts, and from “Democratic National Committee v Republican National Committee,” Case No. 09-4615.
In 1981, during the gubernatorial election in New Jersey (NJ), a lawsuit was brought against the RNC, the NJ Republican State Committee (RSC), and three individuals (John A. Kelly, Ronald Kaufman, and Alex Hurtado), accusing them of violating the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 1971, 1973, and the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States.
The lawsuit was brought by the Democratic National Committee (DNC), the NJ Democratic State Committee (DSC), and two individuals (Virginia L. Peggins and Lynette Monroe).
The lawsuit alleged that:
The RNC and RSC targeted minority voters in New Jersey in an effort to intimidate them.
The RNC created a voter challenge list by mailing sample ballots to individuals in precincts with a high percentage of racial or ethnic minority registered voters. Then the RNC put the names of individuals whose postcards were returned as undeliverable on a list of voters to challenge at the polls.
The RNC enlisted the help of off-duty sheriffs and police officers with “National Ballot Security Task Force” armbands, to intimidate voters by standing at polling places in minority precincts during voting. Some of the officers allegedly
wore firearms in a visible manner.
To settle the lawsuit, in 1982, the RNC and RSC entered into an agreement or Consent Decree, which is national in scope, limiting the RNC’s ability to engage or assist in voter fraud prevention unless the RNC obtains the court’s approval in advance. The following is what the RNC and RSC, in the Consent Decree, agreed they would do:
[I]n the future, in all states and territories of the United States:
(a) comply with all applicable state and federal laws protecting the rights of duly qualified citizens to vote for the candidate(s) of their choice;
(b) in the event that they produce or place any signs which are part of ballot security activities, cause said signs to disclose that they are authorized or sponsored by the party committees and any other committees participating with the party committees;
(c) refrain from giving any directions to or permitting their agents or employees to remove or deface any lawfully printed and placed campaign materials or signs;
(d) refrain from giving any directions to or permitting their employees to campaign within restricted polling areas or to interrogate prospective voters as to their qualifications to vote prior to their entry to a polling place;
(e) refrain from undertaking any ballot security activities in polling places or election districts where the racial or ethnic composition of such districts is a factor in the decision to conduct, or the actual conduct of, such activities there and where a purpose or significant effect of such activities is to deter qualified voters from voting; and the conduct of such activities disproportionately in or directed toward districts that have a substantial proportion of racial or ethnic populations shall be considered relevant evidence of the existence of such a factor and purpose;
(f) refrain from having private personnel deputized as law enforcement personnel in connection with ballot security activities.
The RNC also agreed that the RNC, its agents, servants, and employees would be bound by the Decree, “whether acting directly or indirectly through other party committees.”
As modified in 1987, the Consent Decree defined “ballot security activities” to mean “ballot integrity, ballot security or other efforts to prevent or remedy vote fraud.”
Since 1982, that Consent Decree has been renewed every year by the original judge, Carter appointee District Judge Dickinson R. Debevoise, now 88 years old. Long retired, Debevoise comes back for the sole purpose of renewing his 1981 order for another year.
In 2010, the RNC unsuccessfully appealed “to vacate or modify” the Consent Decree in “Democratic National Committee v Republican National Committee,” Case No. 09-4615 (C.A. 3, Mar. 8, 2012). (I paid The Judicial Review $10 for the PDF of Case No. 09-4615 and uploaded the 59-page document to FOTM’s media library. To read Case No. 09-4615, click here!)http://fellowshipofminds.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/rnc-v-dnc.pdf
In 1982, the Republican National Committee (“RNC”) and the Democratic National Committee (“DNC”) entered into a consent decree (the “Decree” or “Consent Decree”), which is national in scope, limiting the RNC’s ability to engage or assist in voter fraud prevention unless the RNC obtains the court’s approval in advance. The RNC appeals from a judgment of the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey denying, in part, the RNC’s Motion to Vacate or Modify the Consent Decree.
Although the District Court declined to vacate the Decree, it did make modifications to the Decree. The RNC argues that the District Court abused its discretion by modifying the Decree as it did and by declining to vacate the Decree. For the following reasons, we will affirm the District Court’s judgment.
Surprise! The judge who denied the RNC’s appeal to “vacate” the 1982 Consent Decree is an Obama appointee, Judge Joseph Greenaway, Jr., of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.
Those four states, with a collective margin of 406,348 votes for Obama, add up to 69 electoral votes. Had Romney won 407,000 or so additional votes in the right proportion in those states, he would have 275 electoral votes.
This election was stolen by the Democrats via vote fraud. Despite all the evidence of fraud, the Republican Party has been strangely silent about it.
Now you know why.
While this is disturbing and appears hopeless, we can still try to do something about this as well as the RNC. We must get a higher court to overturn this unconstitutional decree, even if we must take it to the Supreme Court.
The RNC may require permission according to the decree to challenge voter fraud, but the candidate, the Secretary of State in each state and other members of the GOP can still challenge this and have it repealed.
We should contact our representatives in Congress, the Secretary of State in each state and the Governors, as well as fellow patriots to challenge this.
We must make others aware of this issue, by contacting the media, especially talk radio, Fox News and other outlets who will work to share this message with other patriots, via twitter, Facebook, op-eds/letters to the editor in newspapers etc.
We must contact Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan and others from his campaign committee to encourage them to challenge this as well. I heard that the votes won't be certified until December 15, 2012 and Obama's inaguration for a second term isn't scheduled until January 21,2013.
Therefore, while time is limited there is still time to take action to get this Decree overturned and time for Romney, other members of the GOP, fellow citizens to contest the election and demand a recount due to voter fraud
PETITION:Recount the election! Over 96,000 have already signed!! Repost Everywhere! http://sco.lt/7jSneD
The House science committee is demanding the White House explain why top administration officials are using secret e-mail accounts and other techniques to conceal their taxpayer-paid activities from p...
This administration is the most corrupt, treasonous admin ever.....sadly the House makes these efforts, like F&F to condemn them and bring attention to their fraud, but then nothing happens. What's it going to take before Congress acts for the people?? Or do WE The People need to ACT?? The Declaration of Indepence says we have the right to act against our government and start anew...perhaps it's coming to that time??
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."
Since the Declaration of Independence is a Charter of our Constitution, the birth certificate for our country, I would say this secstion still applies today, without having to officially write another Declaration to declare Independence from tyranny again. This administration is treasonous, tryannical and has continuously lied to the American people. It MUST stop or we will forever by enslaved by our government and never be a truly free nation again.
We the people have the power and right to stand for freedom because our Declaration of Independence protects our inalienable rights to 'life, liberty&to pursue happiness'. These freedoms were granted to us through our Creator,not our government. Our Declaration of Independence protects us from tyranny, while our Constitution limits the powers of the government. When our government no longer respects our Constitution we must defend it and our inalienable rights.
After authorizing the killing of thousands identified as terrorists or militants, he has positioned himself as something new in American history...
Interesting couple articles I came across today on Esquire.com of all places. While the author appears somewhat libertarian in their views, they may also be a liberal because he blames Obama's mass drone strikes on General Patraeus, even though prior to Patraeus nomination to the CIA Obama was still conducting more drone strikes and killing more civilians than he was capturing terrorists in Afghanistan.
The first article, entitled the "Lethal Presidency of Barack Obama" is clipped below....I am only sharing portions of the first page of a five page article:
Sure, we as a nation have always killed people. A lot of people. But no president has ever waged war by killing enemies one by one, targeting them individually for execution, wherever they are.
They're careful because when it comes to waging war on individuals, the distinction between war and murder becomes a fine one. Especially when, on occasion, the individuals we target are Americans and when, in one instance, the collateral damage was an American boy.
You are a historic figure, Mr. President. You are not only the first African-American president; you are the first who has made use of your power to target and kill individuals identified as a threat to the United States throughout your entire term. You are the first president to make the killing of targeted individuals the focus of our military operations, of our intelligence, of our national-security strategy, and, some argue, of our foreign policy. You have authorized kill teams comprised of both soldiers from Special Forces and civilians from the CIA, and you have coordinated their efforts through the Departments of Justice and State. You have gradually withdrawn from the nation building required by "counterinsurgency" and poured resources into the covert operations that form the basis of "counter-terrorism." More than any other president you have made the killing rather than the capture of individuals the option of first resort, and have killed them both from the sky, with drones, and on the ground, with "nighttime" raids not dissimilar to the one that killed Osama bin Laden. You have killed individuals in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, and Libya, and are making provisions to expand the presence of American Special Forces in Asia, Africa, and Latin America. In Pakistan and other places where the United States has not committed troops, you are estimated to have killed at least two thousand by drone. You have formalized what is known as "the program," and at the height of its activity it was reported to be launching drone strikes in Pakistan every three days. Your lethality is expansive in both practice and principle; you are fighting terrorism with a policy of preemptive execution, and claiming not just the legal right to do so but the legal right to do so in secret. The American people, for the most part, have no idea who has been killed, and why; the American people — and for that matter, most of their representatives in Congress — have no idea what crimes those killed in their name are supposed to have committed, and have been told that they are not entitled to know.
This is not to say that the American people don't know about the Lethal Presidency, and that they don't support its aims. They do. They know about the killing because you have celebrated — with appropriate sobriety — the most notable kills, specifically those of Osama bin Laden and Anwar al-Awlaki; they support it because you have asked for their trust as a good and honorable man surrounded by good and honorable men and women and they have given it to you. In so doing, you have changed a technological capability into a moral imperative and have convinced your countrymen to see the necessity without seeing the downside. Politically, there is no downside. Historically, there is only the irony of the upside — that you, of all presidents, have become the lethal one; that you, of all people, have turned out to be a man of proven integrity whose foreign and domestic policies are less popular than your proven willingness to kill, in defense of your country, even your own countrymen ... indeed, to kill even a sixteen-year-old American boy accused of no crime at all.
It's an American story. A promising student from a poor country is selected to go to America on a Fulbright scholarship. His country is an agricultural one — an agricultural country simmering in the desert — so he goes off to study agricultural economics. He enters New Mexico State University in 1966, gets his business degree three years later, and he's studying for his master's when his first son is born. "I remember the name of the gynecologist!" he says. "I remember the name of the hospital — Las Cruces General! The next day I went to school and was very pleased. At the time in America, they distributed cigars if it was a boy. So that's what I did — I distributed cigars. It was a fantastic thing, to have my firstborn son be born in the United States."
It was 1971, and Nasser al-Awlaki named his American son Anwar. He got his Ph.D. at the University of Nebraska at Lincoln — "The year I got there, they took the national college football championship! They beat Oklahoma in the Game of the Century!" — and then got an offer to teach at the University of Minnesota. "We took Anwar to nursery school there. He was a very brilliant boy. His nursery-school teacher wrote him every year, even when he came back to Yemen. I joined the University of Sanaa and took Anwar to bilingual school. In three months he was speaking and writing Arabic!"
Anwar al-Awlaki, firstborn son of Nasser, never lost his American citizenship, though he eventually gained his Yemeni one. In 1991, he got his own scholarship to Colorado State University, and the American story — the story of the American al-Awlakis — was told a second time. "He studied civil engineering," his father says. "After he got his degree, he came back to Yemen in 1994 in order to get married. He married his second cousin and then took his wife back to America, to Denver. His first son was born in August 1995, in Denver, Colorado. My wife and my mother went to Colorado for the birth and stayed six months. He was a beautiful, lovable little boy — and of course we were all very happy that he was born in America."
You must know the boy, Mr. President. Though you've never spoken a word about him, you must know his name, who and what he was. He was, after all, one of yours. He was a citizen. He had certain inalienable rights. He moved away when he was seven, but in that way he was not so different from you. He moved around a lot when he was growing up, because his father did. He went from Denver to San Diego, and from San Diego to a suburb of Washington, D. C. Then he went to Yemen. He was an American boy, but his father came to feel that America was attacking him, and he took his wife and son back to Yemen and began preaching hatred against Americans. Anwar al-Awlaki took it as his constitutionally guaranteed right to do so. When you decided that you had to do something about him, you also had to decide whether his citizenship stood in the way. You decided that it didn't.
Anwar al-Awlaki fled into the mountains of Yemen. The boy lived with his grandfather Nasser in the capital city of Sanaa. He didn't see his father for two years. He loved his father and missed him. He was sixteen. One morning last September, he didn't show up for breakfast. His mother went to find him and instead she found a note. He had climbed out the window of the apartment building where he lived. He had gone in search of his father. You might not have known him then — you might not have had cause to know his name. But his name was Abdulrahman al-Awlaki, and he knew you as both the president of the United States and as the man trying to kill his father.
LBN: The second article refers to the sex scandal of Gen Patreaus and his downfall at the CIA. In this article he points out how Obama manages a 'kill list' and puts blame on the CIA, particularly Gen Patraeus for militarizing the CIA, and JSOC. The article says the CIA and JSOC is actually responsible for carrying out drone strikes in several countries, rather than the military, which led to the death of American terrorist Anwar Awalki and his son in 2011.
The same author of "The Lethal Presidency of Barack Obama", writes in Esquire:
The revelation that President Obama managed a “kill list” from the Oval Office rightly drew a great deal of attention; but just as remarkable were the killings in which the President had no direct hand. It has been estimated that the White House has ordered about a third of the targeted killings that have taken place under the Obama Administration; the rest have come at the behest of JSOC and the CIA. The President was consulted about the killing of Anwar al-Awlaki, and ordered it to be carried out on September 30, 2011; apparently he was not consulted about the drone strike that two weeks later killed al-Awlaki’s son Abdulrahman, a 16-year-old American citizen never associated with terrorism.
I don't know how accurate his accusations are that the CIA and JSOC are responsible for the majority of drone strikes around the world, including Yemen, Libya, Pakistan, Africa and Latin America. However, as President and Commander in Chief I would still put all responsibility and liability against Obama. Just as he is responsible for successes of our military/intelligence actions ie: the killing of Osama, he is also responsible for the failures ie: Benghazi and the attacks in Afghanistan against our troops by Afghanistan 'allies' and the recent attack on Camp Bastion.
Obama selected the leadership of our military, state department and intelligence agency and is therefore responsible for their failures when they fail to protect Americans and keep our troops safe while in volitale parts of the world. Sure, war is dangerous and those who join the military do so voluntarily and know that there are risks involved, however without the proper leadership and direction our troops are only as safe as their leaders keep them. If the Commander in Chief is missing intel meetings for months, and the CIA Director is distracted by having an extra marital affair, and the Commander in Afghanistan is also distracted by thousands of email exchanges with another woman then how do they have time to focus on their job and the security of our nation and our troops?? It's no wonder four Americans are now dead in Benghazi and proper security wasn't provided in Benghazi even though there were several requests for additional security.
However, as we all know this scandal goes deeper than the affair the media is focusing on and hopefully through the intelligence hearings we will finally get to the truth. Until then...it makes you wonder why such a decorated&admired General as Patraeus would align himself with an administration that lacks the experience and integrity to assure they are upholding the Constitution and protecting Americans. Perhaps because Patraeus is only human he not only made the mistake of having an affair with Paula Broadwell, he also made the mistake of aligning himself with such a corrupt, incompetent administration.
Tomorrow we'll see if he is able to at least redeem his credibility as a competent General and former CIA Director and explain why he originally went along with the Obama admin narrative/claim that the attacks in Benghazi were the result of a spontaneous mob reacting to an unknown anti-Islam film.
Somehow I doubt we will get the whole truth, but hopefully enough of it that the Obama administration collapses completely and we can impeach all those involved and try them for treason for dereliction of duty and aiding and abetting our enemies with weapons.
Congressional report blames Corzine in MF Global collapse. “…former CEO Jon Corzine’s reckless tactics doomed the firm and ultimately led to a shortfall of $1.6 billion in customer funds.” So it wasn’t the filmmaker?
However, Saxby Chambliss attended today's hearing and according to his statements to Fox News confirmed the real time video sent back to the State Dept via the drone showed the attack was a terrorist attack and not a randomly started mob that went out of control. He also stated there is no such secret prison in Benghazi, as Paula Broadwell mentioned during a speech in Denver on Oct 26. He also concluded that the investigation is still pending and the reasons for Susan Rice going on Sunday talk shows and blaming the attacks on an anti-Mohammed film were not answered.
However, Obama stated yesterday during his first press conference in eight months, that the White House, he, directed her to go on the talk shows and gave her that information based on intelligence received and that she was just the messenger relaying the information. He was upset and obviously angered that members of the Senate Intelligence Committee, namely John McCain and Lindsey Graham[but also Kelly Ayotte sent him a letter stating their distrust in Rice as a potential nominee for Sec of State] were questioning her competence and ability to serve as Secretary of State should Obama decide to nominate her after Hillary's resignation.
Patraeus is expected to testify on Friday behind closed doors. Hopefully after he testifies everything will come out and we will finally get to the truth about what happened and why the administration continued to blame the unknown video rather than terrorism.
Rep. James Clyburn (D-SC) played the race card on Susan Rice critics: “They are attacking this young African-American woman…” According to Clyburn, it’s not that she’s incompetent and dense, it’s that she’s black that Republicans are going after her.
Some already are losing work to big prime firms and are frustrated at officials’ failure to reach a deal.
NO Kidding...but it's DEMs who want to raise taxes that will cause job cuts...and DEMs who want to make federal cuts and hold our military hostage while being unwilling to cut entitlement spending. Taxing the rich and spending doesn't work....see Greece, Spain, France, etc for an example.
A disabled US war veteran was pushed from his wheelchair and soaked in his own urine after United Airlines employees refused to help the man to his seat on the plane. The retired Marine has filed a lawsuit for the treatment and injuries he sustained.
A Staten Island man was arrested yesterday after allegedly sexually assaulting a FEMA inspector who came to check his home for storm damage. The inspector, 49, arrived at Robert Langshultz's door Monday afternoon, the New York Post reports.
Jobless Claims Jump as Sandy Hurts U.S. Factories: EconomySan Francisco ChronicleIn Europe, the euro-area economy succumbed to a recession for the second time in four years as governments imposed tougher budget cuts and leaders struggled to contain...
Sadly, heard the trailer carrying the Veterans and their wives got stuck on the track somehow and the crossing signs never came down....many jumped and ran but obviously several were unable to and many were injured. :(
A new Twitter scam teases a fake video of the president punching someone for calling him a derogatory term, all in the hope of stealing passwords and pushing malware. Read this article by Donna Tam on CNET News.
The FBI agent who started the email inquiry that eventually led to the resignation of CIA Director David Petraeus is known for his work in Seattle leading the investigation into millennium bomber Ahmed Ressam.
The picture, which was sent to a reporter at The Seattle Times in 2010, was taken following a "hard workout" with the SWAT team at MacDill Air Force Base. He's posed between a pair of target dummies that have a remarkable likeness to the buff agent. The caption on the photo, which was sent from a personal email account, reads, "Which One's Fred?" Humphries, who works out of the Tampa, Fla., FBI office, has found himself swept up in the intrigue and mystery surrounding revelations that Petraeus was having an affair with his biographer.
The relationship was revealed after Kelley went to Humphries, who is a family friend, with concerns over disturbing emails she had received. That email, it turned out, was sent by Paula Broadwell, Petraeus's lover.
Humphries took Kelley's concerns to the FBI cybercrime division, but later was worried that the FBI was dragging its feet — possibly for political reasons — and took his worries to U.S. Rep. Dave Reichert.
Humphries' actions have resulted in him being internally investigated for sending the picture and reprimanded for interfering in the Kelley investigation, according to sources.
Humphries has a history of bucking the system on principle, once agreeing to testify for the defense of convicted would-be "millennium bomber" Ahmed Ressam about Ressam's harsh treatment by the agent's colleagues after the 9/11 attacks.
He was outspoken in opposing the FBI's decision at the time to turn Ressam over to agents from New York after the attacks, and warned their tough tactics were undoing the cooperation Humphries had coaxed out of the al-Qaida-trained terrorist. Eventually, Ressam ceased cooperating, as Humphries predicted.
Humphries found himself sharply criticized within the bureau. He insisted he had done right and owed it to Ressam.
That same sense of right and duty may be what drove Humphries late last month to contact Reichert. Reichert, R-Auburn, took Humphries' concerns to House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, who took the message to FBI Director Robert Mueller.
Congressional leaders have since complained that they weren't told about the probe until Petraeus resigned three days after the election.
Humphries, in a telephone interview on Wednesday, acknowledged he sought out Reichert, through his former boss, retired Seattle FBI Special Agent in Charge Charlie Mandigo, but declined to elaborate. Humphries said his motives were not political. Humphries, 47, said he sent the photo to Kelley and others in the fall of 2010, shortly after he had transferred to the Tampa office from Guantánamo Bay, where Humphries had been an FBI liaison to the CIA at the detention facility there.
Indeed, among his friends and associates, Humphries was known to send dumb-joke emails in which the punch line was provided by opening an attached photo.
Mandigo confirmed he received a copy of the photo as well and described it as "joking." The photo was sent from a joint personal email account shared by Humphries' wife. Humphries said that, at one point, his supervisor posted the picture on an FBI bulletin board as a joke and that his wife, a teacher, has a framed copy.
Humphries joined the FBI after serving as an Army infantry and intelligence officer, leaving with the rank of captain. He had been with the FBI for just two years when he was made the case agent in the Ressam investigation, involving a 1999 plan to set off a bomb at Los Angeles International Airport.
The trial judge in the Ressam case, U.S. District Judge John Coughenour, praised Humphries' efforts and integrity repeatedly.
The New York Times quotes Humphries' attorney, Lawrence Berger from the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association, as saying that the Humphries and Kelleys socialized, and that was part of the reason Jill Kelley went to him about the troubling emails.
In May 2010, while an agent in the Tampa field office, Humphries shot and killed a disturbed, knife-wielding man outside the gate of MacDill Air Force Base, where Humphries was training with SWAT and special-forces soldiers.
In an email to The Seattle Times reporter several months later, Humphries described the incident. "I had 4 seconds, that seemed like 40, to go through my mental checks," he recalled. With cars and civilians around, he waited "'till he was five feet from me before firing two rounds ... after repeatedly warning him.
"I worried it was a FT Hood scenario," he said, referring to the shooting spree in 2009 at the Texas Army base that left 13 dead and dozens wounded. "I didn't even have time to put on my ballistic vest. Crazy world."
The shooting was deemed justified. Locally, Humphries is remembered as a driven and dedicated counterterrorism agent whose first big case was Ressam, during which he wound up traveling nearly 300,000 miles. Ressam is serving a 37-year sentence.
Humphries also was a key agent in the investigation into James Ujaama, a Seattle man who tried to set up a terrorist training camp in Oregon.
Andrew Hamilton, a King County senior deputy prosecutor and former federal prosecutor in the Ressam case, said of Humphries on Wednesday, "I can honestly say he was one of the finest agents I have ever worked with." He said "one of the reasons" Ressam cooperated with federal investigators "is the way he was treated by Fred Humphries."
"I think Fred was very caring, he was honest and very professional," Hamilton said of the agent's dealings with Ressam. "Let me just say this, Fred never got tired," Hamilton added. "He would work until the job was done."
I can see that this was a joke and there was nothing sexual about it, especially if he sent it to several people/friends as a joke, with the heading "Which One's Fred".
The agent, Fred Humphries was responsible for leading the investigation of Ahmed Ressam the millenium bomber in Seattle and other top terrorist and criminal investigations.
While his defense of a terrorist and his treatment by others might have been controversial, the picture was sent long before the Patraeus investigation occured and shouldn't be used against him to reprimand him or cause him to lose his job. It sounds like overall he's a good agent and was only seeking to do his job and investigate the harassing emails for a friend/Jill Kelley.
Overall, the Patraeus affair and investigation doesn't really have anything to do directly with what happened in Benghazi and the failure of the Obama administration from providing proper security before the attack. Again, the buck stops at the top and Obama should be the one to blame for the attacks and the failure to provide proper security before, during and after the attacks. The failed leadership of the Obama administration also led to another attack in Afghanistan at Camp Bastion, which resulted in the deaths of two Americans and the largest loss of US aircraft since the Vietnam War.
According to this report by Michelle Malkin, 15 Taliban infiltrators -- dressed in American combat fatigues and armed with assault rifles, rocket-propelled grenades and other weapons -- resulted not only in two deaths, but also in the most devastating loss of U.S. airpower since Vietnam. Six Harrier jets were destroyed; three refueling stations were wiped out; six hangars were damaged.
The attack came exactly six months after a failed suicide attack targeting Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and three days after the deadly attack on our consulate in Benghazi.
While Petraeus stepped down, Obama “has faith in Gen. Allen, believes he’s doing and has done an excellent job” overseeing security in Afghanistan, Carney said.
Are families of our Marines at Camp Bastion happy with Allen and the Obama administration? Donella Raible, widow of Lt. Col. Raible, was blunt. “I’m not,” she told me Tuesday afternoon by phone. “I’m mortified. It shows the corruption in the whole Washington/Arlington culture.” Mrs. Raible, who is now raising three children (ages 11, 9 and 2) on her own, said, “I couldn’t sleep at night if I were (Obama). If they’re happy with things in Afghanistan, they should come look at the faces of those left behind.”
If not for the heroism of Lt. Col. Raible, Sgt. Atwell and their fellow brothers-in-arms, the entire Harrier squadron and a barracks-full of sleeping Marines could have been lost. Another Camp Bastion Marine wife and mother of two told me: “My husband survived, and I am so grateful, but I am also heartbroken for those who died. ... There is no excuse for this. We are the United States of America and supposed to be the badass of all badasses, and we are constantly made out to be fools and caught off guard. ... I blame this administration for these recent preventable losses of life.”
Deborah Hatheway, aunt of Sgt. Atwell, said the family received a standard-issue condolence letter from the White House last week. “That means nothing. This was not supposed to happen,” Hatheway told me. She blasted the “negligence, irresponsibility, incompetence and plain ignorance” that led to her nephew’s murder, and she believes the failures in Benghazi are tied to the fate of the fallen at Camp Bastion.
Off the record, several family members of Camp Bastion Marines have voiced persistent concerns about security in what was touted as one of the safest places to be in Afghanistan. “It is not a matter of if, but when” the compound is attacked again, one told me. Another relayed how a few weeks before the 9/14 attack, razor wire on the perimeter kept disappearing -- but Marine sentries were barred from firing on suspected thieves to avoid causing civilian casualties. Others wondered why security hadn’t been stepped up given the public threat by the Taliban on September 10 to kill Prince Harry, who was stationed at Camp Bastion.
Prior to these attacks, Iran captured a US drone after they supposedly shot it down or it crashed in Iran, even though there is no damage to the drone based on pictures they have presented. In addition to the Benghazi attacks, Camp Bastion and the drone capture, Over 20 SEALs were killed in a Chinook helicopter 'crash' that caused the death of many of SEAL Team 6 members. The investigation into this attack/crash claims there was no blame on the military but there is still no answer as to why so many SEALs were put on one helicopter during a rescue operation. Then at the beginning of November another US drone was shot at by Iran, who claimed it entered their airspace despite being in International airpace. In the meantime, the Obama administration, DOD, etc have not done anything about these provocative attacks and lapses in security.
Too bad Allen West didn't run for POTUS, he would have won against Obama and his race baiting party...he's behind in FL due to voter fraud, but with West's conservative credentials, strong voice and strong foreign policy knowledge and military experience, plus a strong VP candidate like Paul Ryan on fiscal issues, he would have won the election. Santorum would have been successful, if he would have been black...and more aggressive like West. I think we will see both of them running in 2016 and likely Rick Perry will be back. However, between the three of them I think Allen West may have the best chance, especially if he picks a strong, possibly Hispanic or woman, fiscal conservative VP.
Sharing your scoops to your social media accounts is a must to distribute your curated content. Not only will it drive traffic and leads through your content, but it will help show your expertise with your followers.
How to integrate my topics' content to my website?
Integrating your curated content to your website or blog will allow you to increase your website visitors’ engagement, boost SEO and acquire new visitors. By redirecting your social media traffic to your website, Scoop.it will also help you generate more qualified traffic and leads from your curation work.
Distributing your curated content through a newsletter is a great way to nurture and engage your email subscribers will developing your traffic and visibility.
Creating engaging newsletters with your curated content is really easy.