Iranian Attacks Are An Act Of War!
Editor’s Note – In the historic rally in Paris, the United States was represented by its Ambassador to France, Jane Hartley. When the world’s leaders, like Israel’s Bibi Netyanyahu and up to 40 others do attend openly, the Obama Administration embarrassed our nation by not sending a higher ranked official.
Stand Up America’s sources tell us that French President Hollande had told Netanyahu not to come, but he came anyway. In a video inside the synagogue, it even appeared that Netahyahu and Hollande, sitting together were chatting and Hollande abruptly got up and left. But there was no Secretary of State John Kerry, he was too busy in India at “Climate’ conference.
Netanyahu spoke eloquently at the event in clear French and was roundly cheered. Yet, no Obama.
There was no President Obama, or Vice President Biden – why? Was the football schedule more important? Obama’s schedule indicated the day was cleared, why? But Attorney General Eric Holder already there – why didn’t he attend?
Our sources tell that Eric Holder was basically told to take a hike because all he was talking about at the security meetings already underway was not “stereo-typing.” Can we be certain he left because he was no longer welcome and that prompted the White House to send no one, we may never know, but what is for certain is that the White House is now admitting it should have sent someone more prominent.
France is our oldest and one of dearest allies – what was the real reason Obama spurned the French? Today, a lot of walking backwards, stuttering, and damage control is clearly underway.
We are embarrassed! Our sources also tell us that Obama never intended on going anyway, he never consulted the Secret Service on doing so. But assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland did attend and marched, the Obama administration pointed out! Embarrassing!
The damage control may not be strong enough to fix this rift, or our ever weakening world reputation even as the French attempted to downplay it as well.
Damage control after Obama skips unity rally in Paris
By Eric Bradner, CNN
Washington (CNN) – President Barack Obama’s administration admitted it erred by failing to send a higher-ranking representative of the United States to the Paris unity march on Sunday.
“I think it’s fair to say that we should have sent someone with a higher profile to be there,” White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said Monday afternoon.
He said Obama himself would have liked to attend the march “had the circumstances been a little different.” But planning began Friday night, 36 hours before the event began, and there wasn’t enough time for the “onerous and significant” security work that needed to take place ahead of a presidential visit, Earnest said. He said Obama’s presence also would have meant extra restrictions on the people who were there.
“That said, there is no doubt that the American people and this administration stand foursquare behind our allies in France as they face down this threat,” he said. “And that was evident throughout last week.”
More than 40 world leaders, including the British, German and Israeli heads of state and Russia’s foreign minister, joined at least 1.5 million people on the Paris streets Sunday for a unity march that became France’s biggest-ever public demonstration.
But Obama and his administration’s top hands were nowhere to be found — an absence that triggered complaints that he missed a key leadership opportunity.
The United States appeared to have options to send to the march: Obama spent Sunday at the White House with no public events on his schedule. Vice President Joe Biden was at home in Delaware for the weekend, also with a blank public schedule. Outgoing Attorney General Eric Holder was already in Paris for security meetings — and even recorded interviews with several U.S. Sunday morning programs — but he didn’t attend the march.
A Secret Service official said the agency was not asked to draw up security plans for a potential presidential trip to Paris in advance of Sunday’s march.
“We weren’t asked or notified about a trip,” the official said. But the agency had Secret Service agents on the ground in Paris, per its standard operating procedure.
During the White House briefing, Earnest suggested security challenges were a factor in not having the president travel to Paris. But Earnest acknowledged the Secret Service could have pulled it off. An agency official noted previous “last minute” presidential trips have happened during the Obama presidency, including a hurried visit to South Africa in December 2013 for the memorial service for Nelson Mandela.
The White House noted that it was represented in Paris on Sunday — and has offered support to France in recent days.
U.S. Ambassador to France Jane Hartley was in the march, as was assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland. At a security summit, Holder was joined in those security meetings by deputy Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas.
Obama personally visited the French Embassy in Washington last week to offer his support.
Secretary of State John Kerry, meanwhile, will visit Paris on Friday.
Kerry skipped Monday’s march because he was in India on Monday for a long-planned event there with new Prime Minister Narendra Modi — a key relationship as the United States tries to improve long-strained trade ties with the country.
Kerry brushed the criticism off as “quibbling,” saying he’ll visit Paris on his way back to the United States to make “crystal clear how passionately we feel” about the attacks and response.
“The U.S. has been deeply engaged with the people of France since this incident occurred,” Kerry told reporters, adding that the United States has offered intelligence and law enforcement help.
“This is sort of quibbling a little bit in the sense that our assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland was there and marched, our ambassador was there and marched, many people from the embassy were there and marched.”
France’s ambassador to the United States, Gerard Araud, sought to show there are no hard feelings, tweeting on Monday: “I am extremely grateful for the overwhelming support France has received from everybody here, from the President to the ordinary American.”
The White House’s push-back comes as Obama takes heat — particularly from Republicans considering 2016 presidential bids — for his absence.
Rick Perry tweeted that Obama “should have stood with France in person to defend Western values and show support for victims.”
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) wrote for Time: “Our President should have been there, because we must never hesitate to stand with our allies.”
And Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) said Monday that “it was a mistake not to send someone.”
Rubio said on CBS’ “This Morning” that he understands that the President’s security detail can be problem in mass gatherings like the rally, but suggested Holder or Kerry should have gone in his place.
“I think in hindsight, I would hope, that they would do it differently,” Rubio said.
Who did go
British Prime Minister David Cameron, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov were among those who attended, along with religious leaders.
Fareed Zakaria, host of CNN’s “Global Public Square,” called the absence of top U.S. officials a mistake.
France is the United States’ “deepest ideological ally,” he said, and it would have been a meaningful image to have a senior administration member, or the President, standing shoulder to shoulder with other leaders.
Zakaria noted that security concerns didn’t dissuade Netanyahu or Abbas or other leaders from showing up. But Obama’s absence did show that the struggle against radical Islam is “not all about America,” Zakaria said.
“Many people have tended to think that Islamic terrorism wouldn’t exist without America,” Zakaria said. “This is really a struggle between the civilized world and a band of extremists. Even if you take the U.S. out of it … the civilized world is up in arms.”
And Jake Tapper, host of CNN’s “The Lead,” said American leaders were conspicuously absent from historic Paris rally, perhaps the most important public demonstrations in Europe in the last generation.
Tapper not only called out the President and his administration, but also prospective 2016 hopefuls from both parties, for missing the opportunity to share in the global moment.
What Obama said
Obama spoke about the Paris attacks on Friday, saying he wants the people of France to know the United States “stands with you today, stands with you tomorrow.”
The White House also announced Sunday that it will host a February 18 summit aimed at countering violent extremism.
Earnest said that event will “highlight domestic and international efforts to prevent violent extremists and their supporters from radicalizing, recruiting or inspiring individuals or groups in the United States and abroad to commit acts of violence, efforts made even more imperative in light of recent, tragic attacks in Ottawa, Sydney and Paris.”
He said the summit will include presentations, panel discussions and small group meetings, focused on the local, state and federal government levels.
By Scott W. Winchell and Denise Simon, SUA Editors
In light of recent tragedies, terror attacks, domestic scandals, wars in the Middle East, a new Caliphate terror state, voter fraud in Afghanistan, border humanitarian and national security lapses, what do we really have as the leader of our nation?
We have a ‘do-nothing’ leader of the free world. Effectively, what we really have is a “Campaigner-in-Chief,” or “President Glitterati,” or “Fund-Raiser-in-Chief,” or more precisely, a “President Emeritus.” After all, he has retired it seems, and took his show on the road.
Obama is not really in charge of anything anymore it appears, or doing anything to solve any issues other than making sure Democratic Party coffers continue to grow.
The trouble is not really the huge number of fund raisers, but that he chooses them over doing his actual job. Then there are the family vacations, the trips around the globe, the ‘selfies’ at Mandela’s funeral, and so on.
But on several occasions, it has been at the absolute wrong time to be somewhere other than where a President should be. During times of national security issues unfolding before our eyes he is AWOL, or avoiding them because it may be a photo-op.
Where was he for seven hours the night of the Benghazi raid, only to board a plane to Las Vegas for a fund raiser the next morning?
Where was he as thousands of Central Americans poured over the Rio Grande into Texas, only to be distributed throughout the rest of the United States?
Fund Raiser, fund raiser, fund raiser…sternly worded speech, then off to another fund raiser. Heck, even his UN Ambassador, Samantha Power sounded more Presidential, and she is a total uber-leftist, Israel loathing, one-world-order, anti-constitutionalist.
Since it is obviously more important to him to milk “cash cows” during times of great importance, perhaps he should replace Debby Wasserman-Schultz “who doesn’t even have a national message” as “President Emeritus,” and Chairman of the DNC.
He can jet all around the country, yakking to those who adore him no matter what, and campaign, campaign, and campaign some more.
Heck, we would gladly see the tax-payer dollar do that for him …oops, sorry, we forgot, we already do. We know this is his first love, besides a mirror, because that is all he has done in 67 months as the leader of the free world.
Who would then take over the mantle of actually doing something?
Yes, we know what you will say, “Mr. Gaffe-tastic” would fumble and stumble all over the place, but at least he might actually do something. Something is better than nothing.
We would not have to worry about Biden golfing all the time, or vacationing in some posh location since he always swings in the wind politically anyway, using his tongue as a 4-iron, slicing and hooking…FORE!
We wouldn’t even have to worry about the divots, Joe already knows ‘plugs.’ In fact, Delaware is not far away, so think of the vacation savings as well.
The world might actually become fearful of the power of the United States once again.
They thought George W. Bush was a “Cowboy” and feared him to some degree, imagine the fear of knowing that a completely unpredictable one was in charge – a man who can step on his tongue faster than any speeding bullet.
Imagine foreign leaders trying to decide whether his last speech was plagiaristic or just fabricated – he will have them guessing so much they may not know where to invade next.
Our current President does nothing, and doing nothing is in effect a something; making things worse. As it is now, Obama has Joe Biden make most of the calls to foreign leaders, so why not just let him take over, how much worse off would we be?
We only hope though, if Joe gets to be Commander-in-Chief, that the Secret Service actually carries the “football” for him, with a whole extra layer of procedures so he does not accidentally shoot his own foot off, or blow up a foreign capital.
We also hope he assigns one duty only to his Secretary of State, yes, that other “king of failed efforts” John Kerry. He must keep Kerry counting ‘hanging chads’ in Afghanistan for the next two plus years.
This might actually give him the boost he so desires – legitimacy in the race for the Democratic nomination for President in 2016.
That might actually take two more potential a-bombs out of the picture, Hillary Clinton and Senator “Lieawatha” Elizabeth Warren.
We do apologize for the levity in such dire times, but really, how much worse could it be?
Think about it, two more years of this, and then the possibility that another complete failure as a US Secretary of State or a person that will say anything to get elected, again becomes Commander-in-Chief. So, let’s let ol’ Joe swing away and Obama go campaign away.
Hey Obama, America is calling and they want their country back.
Editor’s Note – Like a lot of information coming from this White House, little can be believed, yet they spout these lies with verve and elan. They know they are lying but that’s okay if your a liberal as long as your aim is “honorable”. When it comes to statistics, this group has ceaselessly overwhelmed the nation with false numbers and we have reported on it so often its amazing we have to point it out at all.
Now its ‘gun time’ again and lies and ancient statistics are all they need to mislead America into giving up their unalienable rights. This lie however is so over the top, yet no one in the main stream media will touch it.
John Fund at National Review absolutely dismantles President Obama’s phony “40 percent of all gun purchases are conducted without a background check” factoid today. It’s astonishing just how absolutely and completely false this figure is. It’s not a little clever wordplay or a bit of disingenuous number-twisting from the President; it’s a flat-out lie, and he knows it.
To summarize Fund’s case: the study that purportedly produced the 40 percent figure (which was actually 36 percent, but Obama rounded it up, presumably because he thinks his target audience can’t handle two-digit numbers) comes from a tiny survey of only 251 people, conducted twenty years ago, which means “most of the survey covered sales before the Brady Act instituted mandatory federal background checks in early 1994.”
And those who responded to this survey only thought they might have been buying guns from unlicensed dealers, based on their perception of the seller’s operation. No effort was made to verify if these impressions were accurate. Furthermore, the total included guns transferred as gifts or inheritances – transactions not even President Obama’s new proposals really crack down on.
Fund talked with economist John Lott, the author of More Guns, Less Crime for the true percentage of guns sold without background checks. ”We don’t know the precise number today,” said Lott, “but it is hard to believe that it is above single digits.”
Barack Obama is the President of the United States, not some casual Net surfer who stumbled across a juicy statistic and breathlessly related it in a Facebook post. He has a gigantic staff. He and his people know perfectly well his statistic is false. They even “sexed up” the number to a nice even 40 percent… a volume of fudge that might equal half of the real percentage.
This illustrates the danger of allowing our perceptions to be manipulated with dubious appeals to authority. Not all “studies” are equally valid; even the earnest ones can have failures of methodology. And the people who want to panic us with scary numbers rarely bother to explain all of the variables in the equation behind those numbers. How foolish would Obama have looked during his big gun control Romper Room press conference if he had said, “A twenty-year old study of 251 people revealed that some of them thought they were buying guns from unlicensed dealers who didn’t perform background checks, and if you throw in all the guns handed down from father to son, you might be up to 36 percent?”
An Obama defender might respond, “Well, the exact numbers don’t matter. There are still too many unchecked gun sales. And if we can take an action that saves just one life…” But the numbers do matter, or Obama wouldn’t have cited one. He made a false effort to turn an emotional argument, or at best a discussion of general principles, into a scientific debate. If reasonably accurate figures are not important to a discussion, then no figures have any place within it.
If Obama’s gun control case is so strong, why can’t he make it without using cooked numbers, or surrounding himself with children?
Editor’s Note – When an American Vice President tells a reporter: “Don’t screw with me” after he was asked why a sitting VP used such foul tactics at a recent “Job’s Bill” meet and greet, the question arises; is this the level of class we expect from the number 2 man? We all know that ‘Sheriff’ Joe is a gaffe machine, but the total lack of class is beyond the pale. Additionally, his facts were wrong, he mis-quoted himself, and these gutter, Chicago-style tactics are not the bottom of the barrel, they can be found under the barrel. Please read on if you missed it, and watch the video of the confrontation the VP had.
We wonder what was going through the minds of the officers standing behind him. Bet they do not want to be known for that moment. Look Little Susie, grandpa was standing behind the Vice President of the United States of America…but don’t turn the sound on!
Written by Doug Powers
Courtesy Michelle Malkin
Instead of thanking Jason Mattera of Human Events for giving him an opportunity to reiterate his assertion that robberies, rapes and murders will go up if Congress fails to pass the “jobs bill,” Sheriff Joe Biden’s office is instead complaining that Mattera broke the rules:
Joe Biden’s office has complained to the Senate press gallery about a confrontation the vice president had with a conservative journalist last week on Capitol Hill.
Biden aides asked whether Senate rules were broken in the wake of the contentious exchange between the vice president and the reporter.
Jason Mattera, who works for Human Events, a conservative magazine, used a pretext to catch Biden off guard in a Senate hallway and grill him on claims the vice president has made about jobs legislation.
Biden’s office has also contacted the standing committee of correspondents, which oversees the gallery, regarding whether Mattera broke the rules by ambushing him.
Heather Rothman, the chairwoman of the gallery’s standing committee, said the matter is under review.
“We’re aware of the concerns,” said Rothman, a reporter for BNA. “It’s being discussed.
“We’re aware this occurred and the vice president’s office [has made] contact,” she added, noting the standing committee itself hasn’t met to deliberate the issue.
If they start banning any reporter with the potential to make Joe Biden look silly, the press gallery is going to be as sparsely populated as Capitol Hill’s next “I quit earmarks, ask me how” seminar.
Here’s the “confrontation” in question, in case you missed it: