Arab Media: Obama's Secret $8 Billion Deal With The Muslim Brotherhood

The Obama Administration has been putting enormous pressure on the new Egyptian government to release former president Mohamed Morsi and other top Muslim Brotherhood figures. The above video sheds some light on why. There's also this translation of a story which appears in French from Poste deVeille in Canada:

There was a secret agreement between the Obama administration and the Muslim Brotherhood (not the Egyptian government) to give 40% of the Sinai and the annexation of that part of Egyptian territory to Gaza.The objective was to conclude a comprehensive peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians.

This agreement was signed by Khairat el Shater (number 2 of the Brotherhood) by Morsi and the Supreme Guide of the Muslim Brotherhood (FM in French). The sum of U.S. $ 8 billion was paid in exchange to the Brotherhood.

The document was seized by the army following the removal of Morsi. The army has leaked the news.

An investigation is ongoing on Morsi and El Shater. An arrest warrant was filed against the Guide to the Muslim Brotherhood and other members of his office. Brotherhood signatories to the agreement are could receive the death penalty for treason.

The Obama administration is trying to reach an agreement with el Sissi (chairman of the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces): recognition of the legitimacy of the "coup" in exchange for his silence about the secret agreement. But el Sissi would be more interested in the conviction of The Brotherhood and discrediting their organization which is Egypt's main source of danger.

The Republican members of Congress are seriously looking into the case. If proven, the process of Obama impeachment could be triggered.

I doubt that last paragraph is an accurate reading of what could happen, but a sitting president of the United States paying $8 billion in taxpayer funds to give more land to Hamasistan, a recognized terrorist organization according to U.S. law would definitely be problematic for this president.

Do I believe this to be true? I'd file it under plausible. Here's why:

• As we know by now, President Obama absolutely loves the Muslim Brotherhood and Islamists in general.His administration is honeycombed with people with extremely close ties to the Brotherhood as well as numerous sympathizers.

• I have it on good authority from a reliable source that the president completely lost it when his backroom pressure on al-Sissi failed and Morsi was removed from office. And that he was even angrier at the developments in Qatar that saw Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood thrown out of that country, formerly a huge Brotherhood supporter and haven,and subsequent Saudi and GCE steps to provide bridge financing for Egypt's new government, giving al-Sissi some independence when it came to U.S. aid to Egypt.
  
  I also know that the Obama Administration is trying its best to subvert the new Egyptian government, even to the point of inciting an Egyptian civil war

• President Obama has a history of ignoring both congress and existing U.S. law when he feels like it.There's no doubt in my mind that he would happily pay over $8 billion of our money to the Muslim Brotherhood in order to enhance Hamas, which is merely the Gaza-based Palestinian branch of the Brotherhood. There's no question either than Morsi and the Brotherhood would sign off on the deal, since they needed the money and since their loyalty is to the Brotherhood and the making of the Caliphate rather than Egypt per se. The deal would also be a step towards integrating Hamasistan with Egypt, something else Morsi and his friends were very interested in. So the deal was a win-win for both sides.

• I also know that the new Egyptian government is preparing a criminal case to try Morsi and his Ikhwan friends, including the Brotherhood's Supreme Guide Mohammed Badie.They're accused of spying, inciting the killings of protesters, and damaging the economy.

Assuming Morsi, Badie and other Brotherhood figures are charged, do I expect anything to come out about this secret deal to turn over a part of Egyptian territory to Hamas at the American Taxpayer's expense?

I doubt it. The Egyptian military is U.S. equipped, and that means they're dependent on U.S. spare parts, as well as American largess to fund the Egyptian military's various business enterprises. This is something al-Sissi would likely hold in reserve in case the Obama Administration's interference in Egypt's affairs became to egregious to ignore.

Again, I consider this plausible leaning towards probable rather than written in stone. But too many of the details fit together too well. And it says something about the current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue that something like this would even be possible, let alone plausible.

The White House Makes It Official: $500K For Direct Access To President Obama

 

President Obama's political campaign slash community organizer group Organizing For Action (formerly known as Organizing For America) is selling direct access to the president for a modest fee - a mere $500,000:

In private meetings and phone calls, Mr. Obama’s aides have made clear that the new organization will rely heavily on a small number of deep-pocketed donors, not unlike the “super PACs” whose influence on political campaigns Mr. Obama once deplored. …

But those contributions will also translate into access, according to donors courted by the president’s aides. Next month, Organizing for Action will hold a “founders summit” at a hotel near the White House, where donors paying $50,000 each will mingle with Mr. Obama’s former campaign manager, Jim Messina, and Mr. Carson, who previously led the White House Office of Public Engagement.

Giving or raising $500,000 or more puts donors on a national advisory board for Mr. Obama’s group and the privilege of attending quarterly meetings with the president, along with other meetings at the White House. Moreover, the new cash demands on Mr. Obama’s top donors and bundlers come as many of them are angling for appointments to administration jobs or ambassadorships.

“It just smells,” said Bob Edgar, the president of Common Cause, which advocates tighter regulation of campaign money. “The president is setting a very bad model setting up this organization.”

It does smell, but no worse than a lot of the other behavior this president has engaged in that he learned in the sewer he emerged from known as Chicago politics.

Here's a funny video of White House spokeshole Jay Carney literally fleeing the podium when asked about this:



Now before, this sort of thing might have been assumed at times, but it took the likes of President Barack Obama to have enough contempt for America to make it explicit. And remember, after all..people don't fork over that money and expect nothing in return but a few minutes pleasantly chatting with the president.

Don't buy the horse manure that this money 'won't be used politically'. Of course it will. It'll be used to fight things like voter ID laws to leave the ground fertile for voter fraud, for voter registration that will somehow all turn out to be Democrats, for pushing for redistricting to benefit Democrats, to gin up social unrest, for community organizing and union activity that results in more manpower and in kind contributions to Democrats and for lobbying Congress to pass President Obama's agenda.

It's the Chicago way...

Top Obama Fundraiser To Release Bin Laden Film 2 Days Before The Election

What a coincidence, eh?

Harvey Weinstein, a prominent Obama fund raiser and bundler is going to release a film dramatizing the Osama bin-Laden raid that is scheduled to air - wait for it - November 4th, 2 days before the election:

A film dramatizing the death of Osama bin Laden is set to debut next month on the National Geographic Channel, two days before the presidential election.

“Seal Team Six: The Raid on Osama bin Laden,” from The Weinstein Co. and Voltage Pictures, will air Sunday, Nov. 4, the channel said. {...}

National Geographic Channel chose the film’s debut date to help promote the start of its fall season, channel President Howard T. Owens said Thursday.

“Harvey obviously doesn’t schedule our network,” Owens said. He added that the channel is “not political. We are opportunistic from a programming perspective.”

National Geographic Channel did take into account Weinstein’s desire to get out ahead of a competitive movie about the U.S. Navy SEALs’ hunt for the al-Qaida leader, Owens said.

“Zero Dark Thirty,” from director Kathryn Bigelow and screenwriter Mark Boal, who won Oscars for “The Hurt Locker,” is scheduled to be released in theaters at the end of the year.

“Seal Team Six,” directed by John Stockwell (“Into the Blue”), also was intended for a big-screen release until the channel made what it called a “preemptive bid” for it. The film will be available to Netflix U.S. subscribers a day after its premiere.

Owens said he and Weinstein have a previous business relationship: Owens represented Miramax Television while working at the William Morris Agency.

Now it just so happens that Howard T. Owens is also an Obama supporter and donor. Just a coincidence of course.

So let's replay this scenario.

One Obama donor goes to his old agent, who's also an Obama donor. The first Obama donor has a first run movie ready to roll that he's spent millions (borrowed from one of the banks, actually) to make, but makes a deal to shelve his plans for a lucrative theater release in favor of a small screen debut on a relatively small cable network 'because he wanted to get out ahead of a competitive movie' that's not being released for 3 months...even though Weinstein obviously has his film already made and ready to go.

And just by coincidence, it airs the Sunday before the election!

Just for giggles, let's go Hollywood on this one.

A major, well connected donor to the campaign of a sitting president has a movie in the can that's ready for release. But instead of going to one of the majors for distribution, he contacts his pals working on the president's re-election campaign, shows them an advance copy of his movie and tells them, "I have a connection to get this released on cable the Sunday night before the election in prime time through my old agent. But I can't do this one as a freebie. I spent money on this, I need to at least pay the banks off and make a little profit. You wanna help each other out here?"

So the campaign pays of the major donor via the major donor's old buddy, now head of a small cable network. The donor's buddy, who also supports the president, is happy to help because not only does he assist the re-election campaign, he gets a first run movie to boost his ratings. And the donor gets his money and a major favor to call up in the future should he need it.

Badda-bam, badda-bing!

Now there's a script for you. After all, Weinstein obviously sold it once already.

Obama To Union Auto Workers: "I Bet On You"

President Obama was in Toledo, Ohio today speaking to a group of UAW workers on the eve of the Democrat's convention in Charlotte and made the following statement and chest thumping about his supposed rescue of the auto industry:

"I bet on you. I'll make that bet any day of the week and because of that bet, three years later, that bet is paying off for America," he said.

Just two things...first of all, President Empty Chair made that bet with other people's money, not his. He risked nothing.

And second, that bet isn't paying off for anyone except the unions, who spent $40 million and up in 2008 to elect this president.

The rest of us are the ones doing the paying, and the tab is in the billions...at least $43 billion in direct aid we'll never see again and losses on devalued stocvk the government was left holding, and an additional $45.4 billion dollar tax credit against future profits at the American taxpayer's expense given to them by the Obama Administration that could keep GM tax free for years.

GM and Chrysler could have easily been bailed out using a managed bankruptcy instead of a massive taxpayer bailout, after which they could have renegotiated their contracts with the unions. But that's not what the union bosses were buying when they purchased Barack Obama.

It's about time someone mentioned it and questioned President Obama's claim of an 'achievement'.

L.A. DA Won't Prosecute Former Obama Commerce Secretary On Hit And Run Felony Charges

Of course not.

Just as I predicted...there's one law for your average schlub and another for the wealthy and well connected. Maybe a campaign donation changed hands.

Manus manum lavat, one hand washes the other

'Government Motors' - Taxpayer Losses On GM Bailout Rise to $35 Billion

The cost of the Obama Administration's bailout of General Motors keeps rising. GM shares fell to a 2012 low of 19.57 yesterday.

If you recall, GM's starting share price in the company's initial public offering (IPO) after the bailout was $33 per share. Most experts estimated that the stock would have to rise to at least $52 and by some estimates as high as $103 in order for the taxpayers to just break even on the large block of shares the government was holding as 'collateral' for the $85 billion bailout.

As it turned out, the IPO was a huge bust and the Obama Administration was forced to dump stock at below market prices, something probably against SEC rules if a private investor did it.

The losses on the stock sale plus the declining price of the 26.5% of GM, or 500 million shares the taxpayers still own adds up to $16.6 billion...not counting the $26.4 billion in direct aid that's never been recouped.

There's also that $45.4 billion dollar tax credit against future profits at the American taxpayer's expense given to them by the Obama Administration that could keep GM tax free for years.GM earned a $7.6 billion 'profit' in 2011 but paid no taxes.

The gifting of GM to President Obama's union allies was simply a transfer of wealth directly from taxpayers to the unions who invested millions in campaign work hours and in contributions to get the president elected, and you can bet that a substantial amount of the taxpayer money spent to keep GM alive will simply be 'recycled' back into campaign funds for President Obama and his fellow Democrats.

Commerce Secretary Bryson Resigns Following Auto Crash Spree In L.A.

I have to admit, I expected this:

Commerce Secretary John E. Bryson has resigned, WTOP has learned, but will continue serving in an advisory role to the president.

In a letter to President Barack Obama, Bryson, 68, says he chose to give up his cabinet position following a "recent seizure and medical leave of absence."

The secretary was involved in two traffic accidents in the Los Angeles area in early June as a result of a seizure, the government said.

"I have concluded the seizure that I suffered on June 9th could be a distraction from my performance as Secretary and that our country would be better served by a change in the leadership of the Department," Bryson wrote in the letter to the president.

As I wrote earlier, Bryson's behavior after the first accident, for which he was cited for felony hit and run was not that of someone who had suffered a seizure but of someone panic fleeing to avoid being caught at something. His being found unconscious at the scene of the second accident was more likely the result of a seizure brought on by stress after the fact.

I'd be willing to bet even money that he'd had seizures before. People get their driver's licenses yanked when they first have seizures and Bryson was probably driving without a license. He fled when he was involved in the first wreck where he rear ended another car to avoid being caught.

Bryson is quite wealthy, and I'm sure he had his lawyers make a suitable financial settlement with the victims involved in exchange for their not pressing charges or cooperating with any police investigation. Since no one was seriously hurt, the felony charges will almost certainly be dropped, especially since the local D.A. hasn't filed formal charges yet on a wealthy and influential local man.

Meanwhile Bryson took a 'medical leave of absence' to get the story off the front pages and give his people time to get this sufficiently handled, put in his resignation and everyone's reasonably happy.

Manus manum lavat, one hand washes the other.

Hidden Bail Out; States Divert Cash Meant For Mortgage Relief To Fill Budget Holes

You might remember that a five of the country's largest banks were essentially arm twisted into a settlement of $25 billion dollars in cash and mortgage credits by the feds to be used to provide foreclosure prevention, investigations of financial fraud and a partial cure for the effects of the housing crisis.

I thought then that for the most part, it was simply a transfer of wealth with the Obama Administration and its regulatory czars providing the muscle. Now it turns out I had it exactly right.

The cash part of the settlement, $2.5 billion, is being used by most of the states that received it not to aid homeowners, but to fill the gaps in their state budgets. In California, for instance, the $400 million the Golden State received will be going directly towards filling the shortfall in the State's budget and Governor Jerry Brown has already crunched the numbers to include that money as part of his figuring.

What that essentially means is that rather than the homeowners the money was intended for, the public employee unions are getting it, since they're by far the biggest part of California's budget shortfall. Most of the Blue states are using their share of the swag in similar fashion, so the unions need not participate in any belt tightening.

Needless to say, the Obama Administration and the Justoce Department aren't doing anything about this since they were in on the game from the start. This was just another bail out, and it will be paid for with higher fees and interest rates by these bank's customers.

This should provide a giggle to those of us in the know the next time some OWS moron starts hyperventilating about 'banksters' and 'the 1%'.

The worst exploiters of working people and the middle class aren't located on Wall Street They're in places like Sacramento and Washington DC.

How Democrats Gamed 'Non-Partisan' Redistricting To Steal Seats In California

A fascinating article. Hey, if you can't legitimately win election's there are other ways.Here's a slice:

This spring, a group of California Democrats gathered at a modern, airy office building just a few blocks from the U.S. Capitol. The meeting was House members only — no aides allowed — and the mission was seemingly impossible.

In previous years, the party had used its perennial control of California’s state Legislature to draw district maps that protected Democratic incumbents. But in 2010, California voters put redistricting in the hands of a citizens’ commission where decisions would be guided by public testimony and open debate.

The question facing House Democrats as they met to contemplate the state’s new realities was delicate: How could they influence an avowedly nonpartisan process? Alexis Marks, a House aide who invited members to the meeting, warned the representatives that secrecy was paramount. “Never say anything AT ALL about redistricting — no speculation, no predictions, NOTHING,” Marks wrote in an email. “Anything can come back to haunt you.”

In the weeks that followed, party leaders came up with a plan. Working with the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee — a national arm of the party that provides money and support to Democratic candidates — members were told to begin “strategizing about potential future district lines," according to another email.

The citizens’ commission had pledged to create districts based on testimony from the communities themselves, not from parties or statewide political players. To get around that, Democrats surreptitiously enlisted local voters, elected officials, labor unions and community groups to testify in support of configurations that coincided with the party’s interests.

When they appeared before the commission, those groups identified themselves as ordinary Californians and did not disclose their ties to the party. One woman who purported to represent the Asian community of the San Gabriel Valley was actually a lobbyist who grew up in rural Idaho, and lives in Sacramento.

In one instance, party operatives invented a local group to advocate for the Democrats’ map.

California’s Democratic representatives got much of what they wanted from the 2010 redistricting cycle, especially in the northern part of the state. “Every member of the Northern California Democratic Caucus has a ticket back to DC,” said one enthusiastic memo written as the process was winding down. “This is a huge accomplishment that should be celebrated by advocates throughout the region.”

Statewide, Democrats had been expected to gain at most a seat or two as a result of redistricting. But an internal party projection says that the Democrats will likely pick up six or seven seats in a state where the party’s voter registrations have grown only marginally.

“Very little of this is due to demographic shifts,” said Professor Doug Johnson at the Rose Institute in Los Angeles. Republican areas actually had higher growth than Democratic ones. “By the numbers, Republicans should have held at least the same number of seats, but they lost.”

As part of a national look at redistricting, ProPublica reconstructed the Democrats’ stealth success in California, drawing on internal memos, emails, interviews with participants and map analysis. What emerges is a portrait of skilled political professionals armed with modern mapping software and detailed voter information who managed to replicate the results of the smoked-filled rooms of old.

The losers in this once-a-decade reshaping of the electoral map, experts say, were the state’s voters. The intent of the citizens’ commission was to directly link a lawmaker’s political fate to the will of his or her constituents. But as ProPublica’s review makes clear, Democratic incumbents are once again insulated from the will of the electorate.

Read the rest here to find out exactly how this was done...hopefully this will end up as a learning experience in other states.

please donate...it helps me write more gooder!

Issa Investigating Sweetheart Loans To Congress - And A Flashback To Obama's Loan

Along with his investigation of a number of instances of Washington malfeasance, Re. Darrell Issa, chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee is now pulling the cover off of 'VIP' loans at rates and terms unavailable to the public made to influential members of Congress and their key staff members.

In a letter to Reps. Jo Bonner (R-Ala.) and Linda Sanchez (D-Calif.), the chairman and ranking member of the House Ethics Committee, Issa stated that he has evidence that four members of Congress got such loans via the now defunct Countrywide Financial in a program called in house by the name 'Friends of Angelo', named for Angelo Mozilo, Countrywide’s founder and former CEO. And that they may have transferred this 'benefit' to favored staff members:

“Documents reviewed by the Committee show that four current members of the U.S. House of Representatives received loans through this VIP program,” Issa said in his Dec. 16 letter to Bonner and Sanchez. “In accordance with this Committee’s policy to forward information relating to possible wrongdoing by Members of Congress to the appropriate ethics committee, I write to bring the existence of these loans to your attention.”

Issa added:”Between January 1996 and June 2008, Countrywide’s VIP unit gave discounted loans to employees of the federal government including the U.S. Congress… My staff is also aware of the possibility that loans with VIP-benefits were conferred to other Members, and serviced by a separate loan processing branch.”

House ethics rules require that lawmakers and staff may only accept “loans from banks and other financial institutions on terms generally available to the public.

While Issa didn't name the four legislators he had in mind, Rep. Edolphus Towns (D-N.Y.), the former chairman of Oversight and Government Reform, has already acknowledged that he got two loans through the 'Friends of Angelo' program. Which of course, he claims he was unaware of!

Two others likely on the list are ex-Senator Chris Dodd,(D-CT) AKA 'Mr. Financial Integrity' and retiring Senator Kent Conrad (D-ND), both of whom got sweetheart loans through Countrywide and were casually 'investigated' a while back. Since Dod is already gone, that would leave two more sitting members of Congress Issa is talking about.

Of course, there's another person who got a sweetheart loan back when he was still a sitting senator - and it wasn't through Countrywide.

Yes, that would be the current occupant of the White House, Barack Obama, back when he closed the very interesting transaction he made to buy his Chicago mansion, apparently with the assistance of Tony Rezco...and a very helpful bank:

The freshman Democratic senator received a discount. He locked in an
interest rate of 5.625 percent on the 30-year fixed-rate mortgage, below the
average for such loans at the time in Chicago. The loan was unusually large,
known in banker lingo as a "super super jumbo." Obama paid no origination fee or
discount points, as some consumers do to reduce their interest rates.

The Obama campaign called the rate "consistent with Northern Trust policies, and it reflected the base rate set for that period discounted to address the competition for the account and other opportunities, such as personal financial services, that the relationship would bring to Northern Trust."

It was a pretty good investment on their part, since Northern Trust later received preferential treatment when it came to taxpayer provided stimulus funds after Barack Obama became president..some of which they spent in rather interesting ways. Other opportunities, indeed.

You'll remember the story on the Obama's Hyde Park mansion of course.

The Obamas apparently bought the place for $300,000 less than the $1.95 million asking price, right at the height of the real estate boom in 2006, something more than a little bit unusual in a seller's market with prices on the upswing.

Funny thing, on the same day the Obamas closed, the wife of Obama's chief fundraiser Tony Rezco closed on an adjoining side lot with the same owner for the full asking price of $625,000, which Tony Rezco's wife Rita later sold to the Obamas at a deep discount.

Odd that a developed property with a palatial house on it would sell for a deep discount in a seller's market while an undeveloped lot next door would go for full asking price.

Unless, of course, the seller received full asking price on the lot in exchange for discounting the price of the house, which would reduce the loan amount, down payment, and property taxes the new owner of the house would have to pay....

Chicago baby. I doubt Darrell Issa's going to be investigating that particular transaction.

please donate...it helps me write more gooder!

Obama Delegates Fighting Hard For UN 'Climate Tax' To Bankrupt America

As I reported previously, President Obama has his people working hard on a scheme to soak America with a huge 'climate tax' and transfer billions to the UN while bypassing Congress.

This is taking place at a UN climate conference in Durban, South Africa, where what's on the table is a new tax levied by the UN on every foreign currency transaction in the world and a UN tax on imports and exports.This would cost Americans billions, and is essentially the mother of all wealth transfers.

President Obama is reportedly prepared to implement this by executive order to bypass Congress, since a formal treaty would need to be ratified by the Senate.This would affect America much more than the EU, since they managed to get a provision exempting transactions with the eurozone.

Needless to say, you're not hearing anything about this in the media or from any of the presidential candidates in the debates.

The latest developments? The US is fighting tooth and nail with China and India, who are refusing to sign on:

But behind the back and forth over language and technical details, the talks have boiled down to a tussle between the United States, which wants all polluters to be held to the same legal standard on emissions cuts, and China and India who want to ensure their fast growing economies are not shackled.

The fractious late night exchanges punctured the earlier mood of cautious optimism which had suggested agreement on the four separate accord in the package was possible.

Should the talks collapse on Sunday, that would represent a major setback for host South Africa and raise the prospect that the Kyoto Protocol could expire at the end of 2012 with no successor treaty in place.

Aside from the Chinese being concerned about their own exports to places like America, they are also likely concerned about the effect this would have on America's economy and the US debt they are holding as investors.

Another problem is that some of the potential Third World beneficiaries aren't satisfied with language talking vaguely about a 'protocol' or 'legal instrument' . They want an actual treaty or something close to it, to ensure that they're able to glom on to all that money.

Asked if the latest language was acceptable, Karl Hood, who represents an alliance of 43 small island states, said: "No it's not. Never was and never will be. It's too broad a statement."

His alliance colleague MJ Mace, added: "You need a legally binding instrument. You have legal outcomes all the time. A decision is an outcome. You need something treaty like."

President Obama has been working quite hard to punish America and shackle its economy, and a UN 'climate tax' is a decent vehicle, especially one that bypasses Congress.

I'm rooting for the Chinese on this one..let's hope the talks collapse and that President Obama's latest big idea is a stillborn one.

please donate...it helps me write more gooder!

Obama To Bypass Congress And Hit US With UN 'Climate Tax'

President Obama has a wonderful new scheme to raise taxes - oh,sorry, 'new revenues' - on America's collective back in the making. And this time, it's not even for America but for the UN!

President Obama's negotiators at the at the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Durban, South Africa are apparently prepared to approve an agreement calling for a tax on foreign currency transactions designed to pay for a "Green Climate Fund."

Negotiators at the conference are considering "a new tax on every foreign currency transaction in the world," according to the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT). "Every time you travel abroad, you'll have to pay a climate tax," explains CFACT, the group that released the "Climategate" emails. "More importantly, every time we import goods, every time we export our fine products (think jobs) we will do so with a climate tax skimming off the top."

European countries would evade much of the tax burden, however, because "transactions within the Eurozone won't have to pay this new tax."

CFACT suggests that Obama is open to implementing this tax and similar policies in the absence of a full climate treaty, which would require congressional approval. "We have learned that while many have discounted this conference, knowing that a full climate treaty is difficult to achieve especially with a U.S. Senate that will not vote to ratify," CFACT says. "Obama and his fellow climate travelers are working around the Senate and planning to stick America with the bill."

Higher taxes, punish America, do an end run around Congress - tell me that doesn't sound exactly like a wet dream for the current occupant of the White House.

please donate...it helps me write more gooder!

The Eurozone Under The Gun: France And Germany At Odds

Saving the eurozone has come down to two countries, France and Germany. President Sarkozy and Chancellor Merkel are meeting today to try and craft a common proposal to save the eurozone and the EU,but their differences are fairly wide.

The Germans are desperate to preserve the eurozone because their economy depends on exports, and returning to the Deutschmark would create a rise in the prices of German products. On the other hand, German taxpayers are fed up with costly bailouts.

Merkel wants a 'federalized' eurozone to enforce budget discipline and to have euro zone states surrender the control of their budgets to a European authority with veto power and the ability to punish governments that step out of line.

France opposes this, and Sarkozy, with only five months to go before elections, is taking major criticism from his political opposition and the press over handing French sovereignty to unelected EU officials.

At that, a proposal along the lines of what the Germans want might necessitate a change in the EU treaty.

It'll be interesting to see what they come up with.

Meanwhile, Italy has joined Greece, Spain, Ireland and Portugal as another country whose debt is out of control and may need an EU bailout.

please donate...it helps me write more gooder!

Solyndra - Obama Administration Asked Company To Postpone Layoffs Until After Midterms

Some evidence surfaced today that showed that Solyndra, one of the Obama Administrations Green Energy scams that saw Obama's donors and bundlers getting loans with little or no oversight was 'asked' by the Adminstration not to announce planned layoffs until after the 2010 midterm elections.

The Obama administration urged officers of the struggling solar company Solyndra to postpone announcing planned layoffs until after the November 2010 midterm elections, newly released e-mails show.

Solyndra, the now-shuttered California company, had been a poster child of President Obama’s initiative to invest in clean energies and received the administration’s first energy loan of $535 million. But a year ago, in October 2010, the solar panel manufacturer was quickly running out of money and had warned the Energy Department it would need emergency cash to avoid having to shut down.

The new e-mails about the layoff announcement were released Tuesday morning as part of a House Energy and Commerce committee memo, provided in advance of Energy Secretary Steven Chu’s scheduled testimony before the investigative committee Thursday.

Solyndra’s chief executive warned the Energy Department on Oct. 25, 2010, that he intended to announce worker layoffs Oct. 28. He said he was spurred by numerous calls from reporters and potential investors about rumors the firm was in financial trouble and was planning to lay off workers and close one of its two plants.

But in an Oct. 30, 2010, e-mail, advisers to Solyndra’s primary investor, Argonaut Equity, explain that the Energy Department had strongly urged the company to put off the layoff announcement until Nov. 3. The midterm elections were held Nov. 2, and led to Republicans taking control of the U.S. House of Representatives.

“DOE continues to be cooperative and have indicated that they will fund the November draw on our loan (app. $40 million) but have not committed to December yet,” a Solyndra investor adviser wrote Oct. 30. “They did push very hard for us to hold our announcement of the consolidation to employees and vendors to Nov. 3rd – oddly they didn’t give a reason for that date.”

Hmmm..they couldn't figure out that the quid pro quo had something to do with the upcoming election? Oh, my sides!

In any event, Solyndra made the announcement as asked, on Nov. 3, 2010 that would lay off 40 workers and 150 contractors and shut down its Fab 1 factory. Just as a coincidence, the Obama Department of Energy agreed to continue giving Solyndra the installments of its federal loan even though the company was in default of the terms, and restructured the loan in February to give the investors a chance to recover the $75 million in new money they put into the company before taxpayers would be repaid.

What a coincidence, eh?

Not only that,but other e-mails that have surfaced show that Rahm Emmanuel was in this up to his neck.

please donate...it helps me write more gooder!

Democrats Draw A Hard Line - Tax Increases Before Any Spending Cuts

I predicted this would happen, and it certainly wasn't much of a stretch.

When Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and House Speaker John Boehner gave in to President Obama's desire to raise the debt ceiling, much was touted about a so called 'super committee' made up of six Democrats and six Republicans who were to come up with recommendations to cut the deficit by at least $1.2 trillion over 10 years. it they weren't able to agree by November 23, Boehner and McConnell stupidly allowed themselves to be maneuvered into agreeing to massive automatic spending cuts, with a majority coming from the defense budget.

With a made to order deal like that, is it any wonder the Democrats are taking a hard line? If they dig their heels in, they get what they want either way. Either they get the tax increases they want, thus making the Republicans complicit in unpopular tax increases or they get massive cuts in the defense budget, where President Obama wants to slash by $700 billion anyway.

Virtually every Democrat member of the committee (James Clyburn, Chris Van Hollen and Xavier Becerra from the House, Max Baucus , John Kerry and Patty Murray from the Senate) are notorious for being on the far Left of the Party and never seeing a tax increase they didn't like. The GOP, on the other hand, went out of its way to avoid anyone associated with the Tea Party or on the party's conservative wing. The closest thing the GOP side of the committee has to that is Senator Pat Toomey from Pennsylvania.

I still like Pat Caddel's description of our two parties...as he often says, there's the corrupt party and the stupid party.

If the stupid party is to survive, they had better smarten up.

please donate...it helps me write more gooder!

Quid Pro Quo..GOP Senators Approve Financing To Avert Shutdown In Exchange For...

The Republicans in the Senate voted along with their Democrat colleagues Monday for a last minute bill that will keep the government running through November 18.

Only 12 Republicans voted against the bill, which was touted as a way to keep FEMA from running out of cash at the end of the fiscal year.

Part of the price for GOP support was not disclosed however. It was an under the table deal to confirm four conservative US attorneys recommended by Republicans that had been stonewalled by the Obama DOJ and its allies in Congress.

In other words, in order to make the deal, Harry Reid was willing to toss the Democrat Left under the bus.

Another part of the deal according to my sources involves delaying the Senate taking on President Obama's 'jobs' bill - you know, the one that needs to be passed now, now, now - until after the recess and after other items were dealt with, so the bill might not even come up for debate before the Christmas/holiday recess.

A number of the Senate Democrats were reportedly happy to delay that particular turkey as long as possible, since none of them are anxious t6o have their names attached to what essentially is a tax increase with elections coming up.

please donate...it helps me write more gooder!

Two American Hikers Finally Freed After Iran Receives $1 Million 'Bail'

American hikers Josh Fattal and Shane Bauer were finally released from Teheran's notorious Evin prison today after two years of imprisonment on espionage charges.

The pair were flown to Oman after a 'bail' of $500,000 apiece was paid to the Iranian government, which then commuted their sentences and will keep the money. In most circles, this would be referred to as paying ransom to kidnappers.

The families were there to greet the two released captives.

"Today can only be described as the best day of our lives," the families said in a statement. "We have waited for nearly 26 months for this moment and the joy and relief we feel at Shane and Josh's long-awaited freedom knows no bounds.

"We now all want nothing more than to wrap Shane and Josh in our arms, catch up on two lost years and make a new beginning, for them and for all of us."

Fattal and Bauer were arrested along with Sarah Shourd, Bauer's girl friend a little over two years ago when they accidentally strayed over the unmarked border with Kurdistan into Iran while on a trip in the region. Shourd was released a year ago on medical grounds...after paying a similar $500,000 'bail' of course.

The idea that these three were spies were absolutely ludicrous. None of them are fluent in Farsi (although Bauer speaks Arabic and is reportedly an Arabophile), were carrying none of the sort of advanced photographic or communications gear you would expect spies to have. And the trio were conducting their trip on a shoestring, staying in budget accommodations.

Another factor ruling out their being spies was that all three unreservedly `anti-Zionist', solidly pro-Palestinian and on the far, far Left to the point of almost being cartoonish. They also happened to be Jews, something I'm sure had a lot to do with their arrest and sentencing.

According to what the Iranian lawyer for Fattal and Bauer, Masoud Shafiee, told CNN, the $1 million 'bail' was paid by the Omani government, as was the $500,000 for Shourd. Since there's no rational reason for Oman to do so, what that means essentially is that the US government paid Iran a cool $1.5 mil in ransom money to get these three released, but used Oman as a conduit to avoid the appearance of dealing directly with Iran.

I'm certainly glad to see these people released from the clutches of the Mullahs, but I also remember when we had a very different policy towards Muslim states who kidnapped Americans.

please donate...it helps me write more gooder!

Ambassador Rice:US 'Not Involved' In Toning Down Language Of Pal UN Statehood Resolution

America's Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice dropped a bombshell on a selected group of Jewish journalists in a press conference today, saying America is not involved in trying to tone down or modify language for the upcoming draft U.N. resolution on 'Palestinian' statehood.

“We’re not negotiating any text, we’re not engaged in efforts to water down a text,” Rice said Thursday in a briefing with selected Jewish journalists. “We’re making the case that this is not a productive course.”

The Obama administration has promised to use its veto on any 'Palestinian' statehood resolution that reaches the U.N. Security Council. But if the Palestinians bring a resolution asking for Palestinian membership in the United Nations to the U.N. General Assembly, it's almost certain to pass.

If the 'Palestinians' can upgrade their status there to non-voting member, it means the non-existent state of 'Palestine' will be able to get on international bodies and attempt to sue Israel through the International Criminal Court.

Rice's statement should clue you in to two things. First, that all the talk of 'a last minute diplomatic push' by the Obama Administration to pressure the 'Palestinians' is sheer bolshoi, and second that a deal has likely been attempted between President Obama and 'Palestinian' capo del tutti capo Mahmoud Abbas, and it will likely be finalized as the two meet prior to the UN vote.

The president doesn't really want to have to use the US veto in the UN against the 'Palestinians' and some of you might recall the bizarre anti-Israel rant Ambassador Rice uttered on the floor of the Security Council the last time it happened.



The president's reluctance has nothing to do with any regard for Israel. Instead, his hand is being forced by two considerations. First, politics. President Obama has finally woken up to the fact that he can no longer take the Jewish vote for granted because of his policies towards Israel. Failing to use a veto to block a 'Palestinian' state in the UN would add fuel to what's already a pretty healthy fire.

Second, what a lot of people don't realize is that the 'Palestinians' are abrogating two treaties they signed by going unilaterally to the UN - the Oslo Accords and the Road Map. The US is a signatory to both treaties too, and the 'Palestinians' are putting us in the position of having to support them in violating treaties we signed on to.

In fact the entire aspect of the 'Palestinians' having any kind of foreign relations like a UN ambassador prior to them becoming an actual state is a gross violation of the Oslo Accords, which prohibits that very thing.

Rice's statement is a clue as to what's coming.

Both President Obama and Secretary Clinton are fetishists for the UN and the 'International Community' and the 'Palestinians' going to the UN Security Council for full statehood and the president having to cast a veto to block it would have embarrassed him no end in those circles. So instead, what the president is shooting for is to have the 'Palestinians' go to the General Assembly for an upgrade to non-voting member status instead to help President Obama out. That way, President Obama can have Ambassador Rice cast an ineffectual vote against it, which assures that the 'Palestinians' get what they want and gives President Obama political cover to hide behind and tell people how pro-Israel he is.

Of course, is President Obama was really pro-Israel and wanted to stop this in its tracks, he could do what President George HW Bush did in 1989 the last time the 'Palestinians' tried this, threatening to cut off funds for the UN if they proceeded. It worked quite well then. But that's obviously not President Obama's intention in the least.

As usual with this president, it's all kabuki, designed to try and fool America's Jews into voting for him.

In fact, most of the press conference with Ambassador Rice was devoted to massaging the assembled 'selected Jewish journalists' about how pro-Israel President Obama is.

Rice said that President Obama has done more than any previous president to ratchet up the pressure and sanctions on Iran,( arguably not true and a pretty low bar anyway) and has enhanced Israel’s security by increasing foreign military financing ( after a de facto arms freeze for almost the first six months of the administration, not to mention all the other ways the president has distanced himself from Israel..there's a reason his popularity there is at 4%) .

She also carefully touted the praise that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and ex-Mossad chief Ephraim Halevy had given President Obama for helping secure the safe release of Israeli diplomatic personnel in Cairo who were trapped in their embassy last Friday by an Egyptian mob who broke into the building while Egyptian security personnel assigned to protect the building stood by and watched.

Considering the president's role in paving the way for the ousting of former Egyptian President Mubarak and the empowering of the Muslim Brotherhood there, I think she's stretching it. Just a bit.

As for the Israelis, the 'Palestinian' gambit to the UN represents a huge opportunity if they have the courage to utilize it properly.

Israeli PM Netanyahu has thus far remained conciliatory and continued to offer to go to negotiations, but a far better stance might be calling Abbas' bluff.

Israel should make it clear that if the 'Palestinians' abrogate the Road Map and Oslo by going to the UN, the so-called peace process is over, that this unilateral action will be regarded as a hostile act no matter what the result is and that there will be a heavy price tag involved; an annexation of land in Judea and Samaria in areas A and B along the lines Israel chooses including the Jordan Valley, the expulsion of all 'Palestinians' now living in Israel without Israeli citizenship in places like East Jerusalem to the new 'Palestinian' state, and an end to all security co-operation,work permits for 'Palestinian' citizens, tax remittances, and trade relations.

The timing for drawing this kind of line in the sand also works in Israel's favor. The 'Palestinian' Authority's economy is almost totally dependent of government jobs funded by the US and the EU, corruption is widespread and 'Palestine's' gullible donors are finally wising up to the fact that a 'Palestinian' state is going to be a permanent welfare basket case....one they can't afford to prop up anymore, given the economic problems in the US and the eurozone.

The 'Palestinians' are committed to establishing an apartheid reichlet where not a single Jew will be permitted, to not recognizing Israel as a Jewish state and to making sure that refugees in refugee camps will not receive 'Palestinian' citizenship, even if the 'refugees' are already living in the new 'Palestine' so that the conflict is never-ending.

There no way to make peace with that kind of agenda, since it embraces Israel's destruction as it's raison d'être. And it's not as if anything Abbas or Fatah agree to means anything in the real world anyway.

The so-called peace process ended a long time ago, and as Arafat's old commissar in Jerusalem Feisel Husseini once famously said, to the 'Palestinians' it was never more than a Trojan Horse anyway. The Israelis are being presented with a golden opportunity to finally rid themselves of it.

please donate...it helps me write more gooder!