Skip to content

UPDATES DAILY: An incestual mainstream press- The WH struggling to coverup scandals..

May 12, 2013

Don’t Blow It on Benghazi: The Focus Must Be Obama, NOT HILLARY CLINTON!

America could be on the cusp of a great victory–a victory for accountability and truth. The Benghazi debacle is, at last, breaking into the public consciousness. Indeed, in its outlines, finally visible as the coverup unravels, Benghazi is starting to look like a scandal, bringing up memories of an earlier scandal, Watergate.

Yet the Republicans could still blow it, not only for themselves, but much more importantly, for the country. They could blow it, that is, if they make the terrible mistake of turning an honest and necessary inquiry about the events of 2012 and 2013 into a contrived exercise in political positioning for 2016.

Yes, I am looking at you, Karl Rove. After your abysmal campaign performance in 2012, it’s painfully evident that your too-clever-by-half tricks in 2013–injecting your presidential-campaign-style attack spot into the Benghazi investigation–could undercut your own party yet again.

We’ll get back to Rove in the third installment, but first, let’s assess where we are on Benghazi.

As we all know by now, the Obama administration bungled everything about Benghazi on September 11, 2012, leading to the tragic death of our ambassador and three more brave Americans. Yet at the same time, we must admit that the administration was successful in covering up its own fecklessness–at least well enough to get through last year’s presidential election.

Yet in the last few days, that coverup has been uncovered, as all Americans can now see. [snip]

Speaking of coverups and the obstruction of justice, I might add that for me, as someone who experienced Richard Nixon’s Watergate scandal firsthand back in the 70s, the memories of that sordid mess have all come flooding back as I think on this new sordid mess.

The cliché of scandals is that it’s usually not the incident itself that’s so serious, but rather, the cover-up of the incident. That was certainly true of Watergate; yes, it was a criminal conspiracy from the outset–a conspiracy to rig the re-election of Richard Nixon–but it’s not clear that Nixon knew about it in advance. Yet he did know soon after the June 17, 1972 break-in, and instead of cleaning house, he helped to cover it up. That’s what turned Watergate from a election scandal into an impeachment scandal. [snip]

But of course, then Obama would have had to cancel his campaign events, hunker down in the White House, and prove himself to be a real commander-in-chief. [snip]

It never seems to have occurred to Obama, or anyone else in his administration, that the Benghazi tragedy required some sort of midcourse correction, away from campaigning and toward governing. No, the campaign strategy had been set in Chicago long before: The Obama re-election campaign was predicated on the idea that the 44th President had killed Osama Bin Laden and won the war on terror.

So Obama’s team was all assembled for that famous photo in the White House Situation Room as they awaited the news of the Bin Laden raid in Pakistan on May 1, 2011. But then, more than a year later, a new attack by Al Qaeda on a new 9/11 simply wasn’t part of the carefully laid out campaign script. And since campaigning was paramount,the Al Qaeda role in the Benghazi attack had to be airbrushed out by the White House–with the aid, of course, of an adoring media.

Thus the terrorist assassins became, in the Obama narrative, just an unruly mob, fired up by some dumb Mohammed video made in California. Once that cover story was settled upon, that was the beginning of the cover-up of Benghazi.

As the rubble in Benghazi was still smoldering, the President declared, on September 12, 2012, “We will work with the Libyan government to bring to justice the killers who attacked our people.” And then he was aboard Air Force One, off to Las Vegas, for a rally and fundraiser.

The immediate question, of course, is what Obama left behind in Washington D.C. that day. Increasingly, it appears that he left his underlings in Washington to work out the new and dishonest Benghazi narrative–the cover-up. The goal was to insulate the President from all this bad news–he had nothing to do with it. Isn’t it interesting, for example, that no photos were ever released of the President working on the Benghazi crisis on the night of the attacks? Nope, with the November election just six weeks away, the White House strategy was clear: The President was to kept far, far away from anything that might make the votes wonder if they had the right commander-in-chief.

Thus we come to the more important question–the ultimate question: What did the President know? (and when did he know it?)

Everything else, in the long run, flows from that. Obama might not know it or think it, but he is, as JFK said more than a half-century ago, “the responsible officer of this government.” That is, the President is primary in the Benghazi saga; inquiries into the role of anyone else–including the former secretary of state, Hillary Clinton–are decidedly secondary or even tertiary. In an investigation such as this, we shouldn’t be looking to the capillaries, or even the arteries; we should be going right to the heart–Obama. If others wish to obscure his role, well, we must seek to clarify his role.

Yet even as we keep our focus on the President, we still have to understand how his men and women acted on his behalf.

The first document of the cover-up, of course, were those dozen-times rewritten Benghazi talking points, the ones that Susan Rice used to mislead the nation on September 16, 2012–five ways to Sunday, one might say. We might immediately note that the Mohammed video never appears in those “talkers.” It was only in the days to come that the blame-the-video narrative was repeated by not only the President, but also the Vice President, Hillary Clinton, Susan Rice, and everyone else in the administration. So there’s a mystery to be unraveled? Who dropped the Mohammed video argument into the national dialogue?

So who was ultimately in charge of those talking points? Not Hillary Clinton, nor her State Department. Instead, the buck seems to have stopped at the White House–but nowhere near the President, of course.

Instead, it was a second-tier functionary at the National Security Council who took the lead. The key figure seems to be one Ben Rhodes, whose title is deputy national security adviser for strategic communications and speechwriting–which should be translated to, “spinning and talking-point massaging.” He was the main rewrite guy.

But here’s where the cover-up gets even more interesting. How so? Because, after all, Rhodes is not in charge of the NSC. And if the actual head of the NSC doesn’t leap to mind, well, that’s proof that the plan is working. What plan? The plan to keep Tom Donilon out of the news and out of the line of fire.

The Benghazi cover-up at the White House was, in fact, a double cover-up. As we have seen, the President was to be insulated from Benghazi. But so, too, was someone else. That someone else is Thomas E. Donilon, the national security adviser at the White House, who is, of course, Ben Rhodes’ boss at the National Security Council. So if Rhodes is doing something as vital as managing the Benghazi message, we can be reasonably sure that Donilon was all over it. We can be reasonably sure of it, that it, but what we can’t actually see it, because Donilon has chosen to become politically invisible. Yes, if you and I haven’t heard much of Donilon lately, that’s not an accident; even though he is very ambitious, he has always been a behind-the-scenes player. And he’s been very behind-the-scenes for these past eight months.

I consider Donilon to be the greatest spinner and string-puller working in Washington today, and those talents have been good for his career. He started out as a political hack who then parlayed those talents into a gig that made him millions at Fannie Mae . And while the Fannie scandal has destroyed many Beltway careers, and deservedly so, Donilon managed to worm his way up into the highest rung of US national-security policymaking.

Yet not surprisingly, Donilon’s rise has been terrible for the country. I have warned about Donilon extensively in the past, noting, in particular, his skill as a master-leaker and news master-manipulator. In particular, Donilon has been in the middle of the Stuxnet leaks from last year–the leaks designed to make the Obama administration look tough against Iran. And although many Washington leaders, including Sen. Dianne Feinstein(D-CA) were forthright in expressing their concerns about the leaks, and in suggesting that the White House was involved, nothing happened to anyone in the White House–certainly not Donilon. So perhaps that’s how Donilon developed the hubristic arrogance to think that he could leak and spin anything, even Benghazi.

As an aside, to see Donilon in action, we might take another look at that famous Sit Room photo from May 1, 2011. Look closely at the picture: Who’s the dominant figure? It’s not Obama; he’s hunched down on the side. No, the alpha male in the shot is the bluff fellow in the blue-green shirt, his arms sternly folded across his chest–Tom Donilon. These things don’t happen by accident; it’s Donilon, not the others, who runs the Sit Room, and he is smart enough to know where to stand. Does that seem petty? Sure it does. Is it petty? Sure it is. Welcome to Washington.

However, Donilon’s skills seem to have stopped there, with his ability to look commanding in a photo. By contrast, his command of American foreign policy and national security is considerably weaker–more like atrocious.

Donilon could have gone to the President after Benghazi and suggested that course-correction. Donilon could have said, “Mr. President, the situation has changed. You must face up to the challenge of terror and confront it head on.” Once again, not only would such a new and resolute course of action have been the right thing to do, but it would have proven to be, as a residual result, good politics for Obama, as well. Yet Donilon, whom I have known for 35 years, isn’t that smart. If he ever knew that JFK had said, in the wake of the Bay of Pigs back in 1961, “I am the responsible officer,” he obviously failed to grasp the positive impact of forthright candor.

Lacking any larger vision of his own job, Donilon just defaulted to what he knew best–conniving and cover-upping. And conniving and cover-upping not only for Obama, but also for himself. Instead, he was the offstage orchestra conductor, and the maestro; he orchestrated a campaign to of minimize, marginalize, misdirect, and mislead the country.

Yet even Donilon could also see that the Benghazi cover-story effort was not going to be a particularly happy experience for anyone. And so Donilon himself went underground–a hard feat for a national security adviser. Yet Donilon, the “invisible man” when he wants to be–and with the help of a dependent and subservient press–has so far gotten away with it. Thus it’s Ben Rhodes getting kicked around, not his boss.

If the only issue were who is getting credit when things are good (Donilon and Bin Laden), and discredit when things bad (Rhodes and Benghazi), then West Wing power games would be, well, a somewhat amusing little game.

However, as we know, the stakes are much higher than any mere game, In fact, the echoes between Benghazi and Watergate are eerie, indeed. Yet the stakes are, in fact, much higher because they go to not only the credibility of the presidency, but also to the security of the country.

Yet as we learned in Watergate–or should have learned, anyway–a complicated cover-up conspiracy cannot succeed. So Tom Donilon and his tactics are not only a cancer on the presidency, but they are also, by now, a threat to Obama’s credibility and legacy.

Most of all, though, Donilon and his ways, now metastasized across the federal government, are a threat to the United States of America.


Next: The Eerie Parallels Between Benghazi and Watergate

You can read Cadell’s very enlightening article in it’s entirety here:


Yes, there is more than one scandal brewing in a White House cauldron of LIES! Let’s begin at the beginning. What was Amb Stevens doing in Benghazi in the first place with little or no security just the bare minimum of locals providing protection?

In order to get to the bottom of this mystery, the daily news reports are forced to work backwards until they arrive at the beginning. In my opinion, we must establish why Christoper Stevens was asked to go to Benghazi (at the May 2012 Correspondent’s Dinner) by Obama? That answer has been bandied about in several reports but nothing concrete has yet been established except for the fact it was about GUNS- Were those gun made in the USA? Were they leftover guns from Kadaffi’s storehouse? Why was it imperative to use the Ambassador to collect those guns?  Obama asking him to accept the mission at the Correspondents Dinner? (these questions have yet to receive clear concise answers. So they remain at the forefront of our questions list until they are answered as the beginning of the ‘Benghazi Odyssey” of Chris Stevens.)

Here is a recent compilation posted in The New Yorker by Alex Koppelman, entitled “Spinning Benghazi”. I suggest you open the links (as you go) for the details before you continue reading if you are not aware of all the facts as this story is pieced together.

“Spinning Benghazi”

It’s a cliché, of course, but it really is true: in Washington, every scandal has a crime and a coverup. The ongoing debate about the attack on the United States facility in Benghazi where four Americans were killed, and the Obama Administration’s response to it, is no exception. For a long time, it seemed like the idea of a coverup was just a Republican obsession. But now there is something to it.

On Friday, ABC News’s Jonathan Karl revealed the details of the editing process for the C.I.A.’s talking points about the attack, including the edits themselves and some of the reasons a State Department spokeswoman gave for requesting those edits. It’s striking to see the twelve different iterations that the talking points went through before they were released to Congress and to United Nations Ambassador Susan Rice, who used them in Sunday show appearances that became a central focus of Republicans’ criticism of the Administration’s public response to the attacks. Over the course of about twenty-four hours, the remarks evolved from something specific and fairly detailed into a bland, vague mush.

From the very beginning of the editing process, the talking points contained the erroneous assertion that the attack was “spontaneously inspired by the protests at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo and evolved.” That’s an important fact, because the right has always criticized the Administration based on the suggestion that the C.I.A. and the State Department, contrary to what they said, knew that the attack was not spontaneous and not an outgrowth of a demonstration. But everything else about the changes that were made is problematic. The initial draft revealed by Karl mentions “at least five other attacks against foreign interests in Benghazi” before the one in which four Americans were killed. That’s not in the final version. Nor is this: “[W]e do know that Islamic extremists with ties to al-Qa’ida participated in the attack.” That was replaced by the more tepid “There are indications that extremists participated in the violent demonstrations.” (Even if we accept the argument that State wanted to be sure that extremists were involved, and that they could be linked to Al Qaeda, before saying so with any level of certainty—which is reasonable and supported by evidence from Karl’s reporting—that doesn’t fully explain these changes away.)

Democrats will argue that the editing process wasn’t motivated by a desire to protect Obama’s record on fighting Al Qaeda in the run-up to the 2012 election. They have a point; based on what we’ve seen from Karl’s report, the process that went into creating and then changing the talking points seems to have been driven in large measure by two parts of the government—C.I.A. and State—trying to make sure the blame for the attacks and the failure to protect American personnel in Benghazi fell on the other guy.

But the mere existence of the edits—whatever the motivation for them—seriously undermines the White House’s credibility on this issue. This past November (after Election Day), White House Press Secretary Jay Carney told reporters that “The White House and the State Department have made clear that the single adjustment that was made to those talking points by either of those two institutions were changing the word ‘consulate’ to ‘diplomatic facility’ because ‘consulate’ was inaccurate.”

Remarkably, Carney is sticking with that line even now. In his regular press briefing on Friday afternoon (a briefing that was delayed several times, presumably in part so the White House could get its spin in order, but also so that it could hold a secretive pre-briefing briefing with select members of the White House press corps), he said:


“The only edit made by the White House or the State Department to those talking points generated by the C.I.A. was a change from referring to the facility that was attacked in Benghazi from “consulate,” because it was not a consulate, to “diplomatic post”… it was a matter of non-substantive factual correction. But there was a process leading up to that that involved inputs from a lot of agencies, as is always the case in a situation like this and is always appropriate.”

This is an incredible thing for Carney to be saying. He’s playing semantic games, telling a roomful of journalists that the definition of editing we’ve all been using is wrong, that the only thing that matters is who’s actually working the keyboard. It’s not quite re-defining the word “is,” or the phrase “sexual relations,” but it’s not all that far off, either.

The New Yorker link

For reading about the incestual press aiding in the coverup read here:

  1. May 26, 2013 12:34 am

  2. May 26, 2013 6:33 am

    2 FBI Agents Involved in Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s Arrest “FALL” Out of Helicopter and Die

    Two members of the FBI’s elite counterterrorism unit died Friday while practicing how to quickly drop from a helicopter to a ship using a rope, the FBI announced Monday in a statement.

    The statement gave few details regarding the deaths of Special Agents Christopher Lorek and Stephen Shaw, other than to say the helicopter encountered unspecified difficulties and the agents fell a “significant distance.”

    Last month, the team was involved in the arrest of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, a Muslim suspect in the Boston Marathon bombings. And in February, it rescued a 5-year-old boy held hostage for six days in an underground bunker in Alabama.

    “Whenever things go really wrong, the FBI calls in the Hostage Rescue Team. It’s the government’s 911,” Coulson said.

    Irvin Wells, a former FBI special agent who retired in 1990 after leading the Norfolk field office for three years, stressed that the Hostage Rescue Team is different from the FBI’s regular SWAT teams. He noted that agents assigned to a field office’s SWAT team also must perform other jobs inside the bureau, while agents assigned to the Hostage Rescue Team have no other duties.


    hmm…. spooky…. read the rest at link… See what you think. Déjà vu,, Seal Team 6?

  3. May 26, 2013 7:05 am

    Who Outed the CIA Annex in Benghazi?

    by Eli Lake

    May 24, 2013

    In a classified hearing, a House panel is trying to figure out how the attack transpired. Did the attackers know that secret location, or did they learn it that night?

    More than eight months after the 9/11 anniversary attacks on the U.S. mission in Benghazi, Libya, the CIA is still trying to find out how the attack that killed two former Navy SEALs at the agency’s annex transpired.

    The attack on the CIA base came more than seven hours after an armed mob stormed the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, setting the compound ablaze and killing U.S. Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens and Sean Smith, a State Department communications officer who was with him.

    On Wednesday, Deputy CIA Director Mike Morell—along with CIA officers who were at the agency’s Benghazi base on the night of the attack—testified at a classified hearing before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. In the closed hearing, according to U.S. officials with knowledge of the proceedings, Morell was asked by Republican members about how the second wave of attackers knew to go to the CIA annex, which was a mile away from the diplomatic mission. Morell responded that at this point the CIA did not know whether the attackers had known the location of the annex or learned about it on the evening of the attack, according to these sources.

    The attackers fired five mortar rounds within 90 seconds at 5:15 a.m. on September 12, according to the State Department’s official review of the Benghazi incident known as the Accountability Review Board (ARB). The last three mortar rounds hit the roof of one of the CIA annex buildings, where two CIA contractors and former Navy SEALs, Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty, were keeping watch. Both men were killed by the mortar fire; another diplomatic security officer standing watch on the roof was severely injured, nearly losing a leg.

    How the attackers knew about what was supposed to be a secret CIA facility is important. If the attackers had known for weeks about the facility and had staked out a position to fire the mortar rounds, it suggests the Benghazi attack was planned in advance and not the “flash mob with guns” that Obama administration officials described to reporters in the weeks following the attack.

    If the attackers learned the location of the facility that evening, it would suggest the Benghazi assault was more of a target of opportunity and was therefore not planned well in advance of the 11th anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on New York and Washington.

    One U.S. official familiar with the briefing told The Daily Beast that one working theory about the attack on the annex is that the militants that fired the mortars learned of the CIA annex location earlier that evening, when Woods and others rescued U.S. personnel from the diplomatic mission, and then drove a convoy through Benghazi to get to the annex. The convoy carrying the Americans was chased and fired on by attackers along the route back to the annex.

    How the attackers knew about what was supposed to be a secret CIA facility is important.

    (How secret was it? A drone was sent there by Panetta in the situation room watching the attack unfold in real time. Generals in several over seas locations were willing to mount up and attempt a rescue but were told to Stand Down by who?)

    However, one U.S. intelligence official with detailed knowledge of the events in Benghazi disputed that view. This official said the Special Operations team that arrived by aircraft that evening from Tripoli was tailed by the attackers on the drive from the Benghazi airport to the CIA annex.

    The State Department’s own ARB says the Special Operations team from Tripoli arrived at the annex at 5 a.m. Benghazi time. “Less than 15 minutes later, the Annex came under mortar and RPG attack, with five mortar rounds impacting close together in under 90 seconds,” it says.

    When asked whether the Special Operations team from Tripoli was followed from the airport to the CIA annex, Morell said he did not have any evidence to support that claim, according to U.S. officials familiar with the closed hearing.

  4. May 26, 2013 7:55 am

    Published Nov 6, 2012

    Query: Republicans are dragging their feet on this investigation. Assuming at least 90% of the House and Senate are Christians. Are they so foolish to think because of their position as unique to the rest of our nation’s population extremist Muslims will spare their lives when their assistance is no longer needed for the overthrow of the Government and Christianity in the US?

    What guarantees do they have Muslims will keep their word? What will compel Muslim extremists to keep their word when there is no one left able to enforce their deal made with our Christian oppressors? Zilch, dummkopfs!

  5. May 26, 2013 8:56 am

    Bearing in mind, in today’s vernacular where you see the words, Russia and Communist in the Congressional Record recorded in 1963; substitute European Union for Russia/Communist, nwo, global elites, globalist’s agenda, war on terrorism, etc any of the above suited to today’s nomenclature within the original manifesto… You see how far this agenda has achieved fruition with little more to go before completion.

    Communist (Socialist) Goals (1963) Congressional Record–Appendix, pp. A34-A35 January 10, 1963

  6. May 26, 2013 11:18 am

    another commentator said:

    Not often mentioned that Holder took over a campus building at Columbia while Armed… Was he part of the Black Panthers? “His people…”

    Not often mentioned the wife Sharon Malone owns Atlanta abortion clinics…

    Not often mentioned while Asst US Attorney had the FBI train with special ops at Fort Hood for a couple weeks…before going in to Waco…where the Branch Davidians bought and sold guns legally.

    Student African Society took over ROTC at Columbia for 5 days while armed…. demanding lounge be named for Malcolm X…Holder admits involvement!/entry/as-college-student-eric-holder-participated-in-armed-takeover-of,519fd3ddda27f5d9d0cd60d6/1

  7. May 26, 2013 3:36 pm

    Published on May 25, 2013

    On Friday’s Mark Levin Show: Mark talks about AG Eric Holder’s testimony regarding the Associated Press and says that he lied when he said he didn’t know about them targeting journalists. A document appears under his signature proving that he signed the court documents requesting such surveillance. We know that Holder signed off on the DOJ going after James Rosen of Fox News. Will Holder be held accountable for deliberately lying to Congress? Mark calls for a Special Prosecutor in the IRS case, the Associated Press case and others.

  8. May 26, 2013 5:23 pm

    Excerpt taken from Ricochet by Dave Carter:

    A fine Memorial Day tribute:

    “If Heaven isn’t guarded by Marines, it will be mighty disappointing.”

    Omaha Beach

    Troops Landing on Omaha Beach June 6, 1944

    But for all the service members perform overseas, it’s the families back home who sacrifice their peace of mind and contented souls, who spend hours transfixed to news networks, simultaneously hoping to hear news of their loved ones and dreading what they might hear. They keep the home fires burning, the bills paid, the yard trimmed, and the children cared for when they ask, “When is Daddy coming home?” When Daddy, or Mommy, or a son or daughter, lose their lives in our defense, every day becomes Memorial Day for these families. They deserve our honor and prayers, our kind thoughts and our help, as they continue their own lives with an empty place at the table and in their hearts.”

    A few years ago, there was a regular caller to Sean Hannity’s radio show. He was a senior citizen named Marty, and he was among those who stormed the beaches at Normandy. Time after time, Hannity would ask Marty to tell listeners about his experience that day, and Marty would always change the subject, eventually signing off with the words, “Take care, my son.” Then, one day, he gave in to Sean’s request. He said that when the door lowered, the first thing they had to do was push the bodies of their friends into the water. You see, the hail storm of bullets cut through the first row or two. As Marty told of having to get through the bodies of his buddies while bullets whizzed all around striking flesh, helmets, gear, and water, his old heart broke anew and he began crying on the air. With a delicate touch, Sean backed away from the discussion and, obviously moved, thanked Marty for his heroism, to which Marty disagreed. The heroes were the guys who never made it home.

    We who remain have an obligation to honor the memory and sacrifice of our fallen, though I would respectfully submit that our obligation extends beyond a moment of silence before a barbecue, or even a solemn remembrance at a cemetery. Our obligation is no less than the continuation of their mission, to ensure that a nation conceived in liberty not only survives, but that it prevails.

    Brave men and women did not spill their blood and pour out every drop of fidelity to this country so that the IRS could badger and torment American citizens whose political beliefs are antithetical to a government whose prevailing ethos is antithetical to America’s founding.

    The 2,000 men who died at Valley Forge (two thirds of whom died from disease alone), and those who died at Lexington, Bunker Hill, Trenton, Saratoga, and Brandywine, didn’t give their lives so that their regretful progeny could stand on that holy ground today in Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania and surrender their sovereignty to a government that demands to know the content of their prayers! They didn’t fight for centralized authority, but rather against it. And they sure as hell didn’t scoff at the vigilance required to remain free from tyranny.


    Daughter grieving for her Dad…


    Today…and always until the end of time…

    The Sentinel’s Creed, at Arlington

    My dedication to this sacred duty

    Is total and wholehearted-

    In the responsibility bestowed on me

    Never will I falter-

    And with dignity and perseverance

    My standard will remain perfection.

    Through the years of diligence and praise

    And the discomfort of the elements

    I will walk my tour in humble reverence

    To the best of my ability.

    It is he who commands the respect I protect

    His bravery that made us so proud.

    Surrounded by well meaning crowds by day,

    Alone in the thoughtful peace of night,

    This soldier in honored Glory rest

    Under my eternal vigilance.

    May the sentinel’s vigilance become our own, so that even as he guards the hallowed remains of our honored dead, we respect and advance the living principles for which they gave everything.

  9. May 26, 2013 8:03 pm



    EXCLUSIVE: Alleged Hezbollah Member Trying to Infiltrate Defense Dept Arrested in US

    by Brandon Darby

    An alleged former Hezbollah commander who was attempting to infiltrate the US Defense Department has been arrested in San Antonio, Texas, according to the FBI. The alleged Hezbollah commander’s name is Wissam Allouche.

    In an exclusive interview with Breitbart News, FBI Spokesman for the San Antonio division, Special Agent Erik Vasys, confirmed that the individual was trying to obtain a sensitive government position.

    “We [FBI] worked closely with ARMY CID (Criminal Investigation Command) and the San Antonio Police Department,” said Special Agent Vasys. “This guy lied on his entry documentation into the United States and other documentation. He was not honest about his affiliation with a terrorist organization.”

    An online search of the name “Wissam Allouche” reveals the suspect was possibly already working as a linguist for the US ARMY. The ARMY CID’s involvement reinforces this likelihood.

    Details of the story first emerged on the website of the San Antonio Express-News. Guillermo Contreras reported that the FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force identified Allouche as a former “fighter with the Amal militia in Lebanon in the early to mid-1980s”; Allouche became a commander in the Amal militia after being released as an Israeli prisoner of war. Hezbollah was formed by former members of the religious wing of the Amal militia.

    “We do not wish to comment on any further details of this case,” said Special Agent Vasys.

    (Editor’s Note: Brandon Darby has previously worked as an undercover operational source with a San Antonio Division Joint Terrorism Task Force.)

  10. May 27, 2013 7:47 am

    Ben Carson: Not Too Late to Stop Obamacare


    Renowned pediatric neurosurgeon Dr. Benjamin Carson cautioned on Thursday that putting the embattled IRS in charge of overseeing Obamacare was “probably not going to be good” and said that it was not too late to stop the Affordable Care Act.

    “Unfortunately, we don’t seem to be learning from our mistakes,” Carson, director of pediatric neurosurgery at the Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, told Neil Cavuto on Fox News. “It’s very clear that the government is too large. People don’t know what’s going on. The president doesn’t know what’s going on. None of his top people know what’s going on.”

    “You’re going to take all these people who don’t know what’s going on and put them in charge of the largest expansion of government in history,” Carson said. “It’s hard to imagine what’s going to happen, but it’s probably not going to be good.”

    He suggested that legislators should now say “we’re moving in the wrong direction” and “take stock of what we’ve learned here and use our collective intellect to figure out a way out of this rather than just continuing down a path of destruction.”

    Under Obamacare, 47 separate provisions involve the Internal Revenue Service. It is the second largest agency, after the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, charged with carrying out the act.

    The IRS has to implement Obamacare’s required purchase of health coverage, checking whether millions of Americans are in compliance.

    Carson noted that before Obamacare was signed into law in 2010, 250 million Americans had health insurance.

    “Eighty percent of them were happy with it,” he told Cavuto. “I suspect, a year from now, if you ask that question, there’s not going to be anywhere near that many people who will have health insurance that they will be happy with.

    “It’s just getting worse,” Carson added. “There’s still time to stop.”

    Editor’s Note: Should ObamaCare Be Repealed? Vote in Urgent National Poll

    I agree with Dr Carson but I would like to see more facts elaborating on what the 47 IRS provisions entail. On it’s face, in these hard economic times, it’s hard to envision ALL people enrolled in this program being in compliance with so many requirements. Therefore facing severe penalties (which who knows exactly what those penalties are?) such as Incarceration? Losing their homes? Separation from their families? What?

  11. May 27, 2013 8:49 am

    Is THIS missing piece to Benghazi puzzle? Congressional probe lacks crucial detail

    By Aaron Klein

    (published April 25, 2012)

    A House Republican report released this week on the Obama administration’s response to the Sept. 11, 2012, Benghazi terror attack is missing one essential piece that could help to answer many of the questions raised in the report.

    That piece is the alleged illicit activities transpiring inside the U.S. facilities that were attacked.

    The 46-page report by five committees of the Republican-led House says the White House scrubbed terrorism and al-Qaida from talking points and misled the American public by blaming the attack on an obscure YouTube film.

    The report further questions why the White House falsely claimed the U.S. facilities were targeted in unplanned, popular street protests while it was known to the government almost immediately that the Benghazi mission and nearby CIA annex were attacked by militants in a premeditated fashion.

    One key question of the congressional probe centers on why the State Department chose to reduce security at the U.S. Benghazi mission and to deny multiple requests for more security assistance.

    The report rejects State Department claims that funding was the reason for the security reductions.

    States the report: “It is clear that funding – or a lack thereof – is not the reason for the reductions in security, as Deputy Assistant Secretary for Diplomatic Security Lamb testified and as emails reviewed by the Committees attest.

    “Moreover, a lack of funding would not have been at issue with respect to the rejection of the request to extend the deployment of the [U.S. Military Security Support Team], as that team was provided via the Defense Department at no expense to the State Department.”

    A key accusation in the report alleges the White House generated talking points for the public that “excluded details about the wide availability of weapons and experienced fighters in Libya, an exacerbating factor that contributed to the lethality of the attacks.”

    The report does not mention that the weapons and fighters may actually be the reason for the coordinated assaults on the U.S. facilities. According to Middle Eastern security officials, the U.S. mission was allegedly used to help coordinate arms and other aid to the jihadist-led rebel; insurgencies in Libya and in Syria.

    The U.S. mission’s alleged role in arming the rebels, as first exposed by KleinOnline, may help to answer many of the questions in the probe, including why the White House did not want to draw attention to al-Qaida’s role in the attacks.

    It also could explain why security was reduced as the compound. An increased security presence at the U.S. mission would have drawn attention to the shabby, nondescript building that was allegedly being used for such sensitive purposes.

    KleinOnline has filed numerous reports quoting Middle East security officials who described the mission in Benghazi as a meeting place to coordinate aid for the rebel-led insurgencies in the Middle East, including the transfer of weapons to rebels.

    Two weeks after the Benghazi attack, KleinOnline also broke the story that murdered U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens himself played a central role in recruiting jihadists to fight Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria, according to Egyptian security officials.

    (At who’s request? If so, does anyone think that Stevens would have taken on this role had he known Obama would abandon him if in trouble because he knew too much? Could Obama risk Stevens spilling the (the LIE) whole story to the press if a rescue were successful? ) (the people involved in underhanded dealings always pay the price when the primary initiative is to protect the candidate running for reelection! yes?)

    In November 2012, Middle Eastern security sources further described both the U.S. mission and nearby CIA annex in Benghazi as the main intelligence and planning center for U.S. aid to the rebels that was being coordinated with Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar.

    Many rebel fighters are openly members of terrorist organizations, including al-Qaida.

    Among the tasks performed inside the Benghazi facility was collaborating with countries, most notably Turkey, on the recruitment of fighters – including jihadists – to target Assad’s regime, the security officials said.

    Stevens served as a key contact with the Saudis to coordinate the recruitment by Saudi Arabia of Islamic fighters from North Africa and Libya, Egyptian security officials told KleinOnline. The jihadists were sent to Syria via Turkey to attack Assad’s forces, said the security officials.

    The officials said Stevens also worked with the Saudis to send names of potential jihadi recruits to U.S. security organizations for review. Names found to be directly involved in previous attacks against the U.S., including in Iraq and Afghanistan, were ultimately not recruited by the Saudis to fight in Syria, said the officials. (But, they might have been recruited by jhadist operatives in the US as we’ve experienced in the Boston Marathon bombings!)

    White House officials previously denied aiding arms shipments to the rebels.

    However, confirming KleinOnline’s exclusive reporting for over a year, (see link) the New York Times last month reported that since early 2012, the CIA has been aiding the Arab governments and Turkey in shopping for and transporting weapons to the Syrian rebels. (also reported here the Saudis are using US forces for ultimate control of the ME)

    Previously, multiple establishment news media reports described the U.S. role in helping to arm the Libyan rebels attacking the regime of Moammar Ghadaffi. At the same time it was widely reported that al-Qaida groups were among the Libyan rebels.


    “White House officials previously denied aiding arms shipments to the rebels”.

    Just yesterday, Obama made a statement that al Qaida was no longer a threat to the US and terrorism. Obama seems to be playing both sides of the aisle as he does in Congress. Only he has not yet been caught red handed (in the middle) as a betrayer of both sides with only HIS agenda not the interests of the American people doing the job he was hired to do-

    Rand Paul said the other day: “Obama has lost the moral authority to lead.” Truer words were never spoken. Obama has not only undermined the Trust of the American people but through his unseemly double dealing, undermined any chance of stability in the ME and by proxy, the World. Putting Americans at risk with more Marathon like Bombings paying with our lives and limbs for this deceitful president’s secretive agenda.

  12. May 27, 2013 10:19 am

    Memorial Day


  13. May 27, 2013 6:31 pm


    Former president Bill Clinton’s love for humanity and his disdain for unnecessary suffering, created out of an idea what someday may be recognized as one of the greatest boons to mankind in the new millennium. The Clinton Global Initiative. If you are unfamiliar with CGI, you can access the CGI link and read about the wonderful work his foundation has done for the last 10 yrs bettering the lives of millions and millions of people throughout the world. Just as he did for US- when president from 1992-1999. Americans remember it as the time of “Peace and Prosperity.”

    Hold on to your seat now…. Here comes John Kerry:


    John Kerry unveils $4 billion Palestinian investment plan

    May 27, 2013

    AL SHUNAH, JORDAN: US secretary of state John Kerry unveiled on Sunday a plan to boost the Palestinian economy by attracting $4 billion in private investment, saying it could transform the lives of the people.

    (you mean using Clinton’s template after witnessing his 10 yrs of hard work producing the fruits of success for CGI?)

    As he seeks to bring Israel and the Palestinians back to the table to negotiate a peace deal, Kerry said it was also imperative to create jobs and meet the hopes of young people for a better economic future.

    He has tasked Tony Blair, the Quartet’s special envoy to the Middle East, with drawing up a plan to revitalize the West Bank through boosting industries such as tourism, construction, information technology and agriculture.

    Blair’s plan, being aided by some global business leaders who are giving their time free, could be “ground-shaking,” Kerry said.

    The group was putting together recommendations for the Palestinian leadership to decide on, aiming to “mobilize some $4 billion of investment”.

    “These experts believe we will increase the Palestinian GDP by as much as 50 percent over three years,” Kerry told the closing session of the World Economic Forum meeting on the shores of the Dead Sea in Jordan.

    “The most optimistic estimates foresee enough new jobs to cut unemployment by two-thirds to eight percent down from 21 percent and to increase the median wage by 40 percent,” said the top US diplomat.

    Some 100,000 jobs in home construction alone could be created in the next three years, while tourism could triple.

    While details of the plan remained sketchy, Blair’s office said in statement they were “analyzing the potential of various sectors of the Palestinian economy and identifying measures that could be taken to spur trans-formative growth.”

    They were “consulting with a number of key international and local experts and stakeholders from the different economic sectors” and would provide details “in due course,” it added.

    ( a little premature when you should have come to the table with commitments in hand?)

    Kerry warned the forum however it stood before a historic moment, amid the yearnings for greater economic and social freedoms unleashed by the Arab Spring.

    (the Arab Spring has backfired. The only thing it’s unleashed is instability in the Middle East.)

    “We ignore the lessons of the Arab awakening at our own peril… it is imperative that all of us channel our creativity and energy into making sure that people do actually have better choices,” he said.

    ( jihadists vs serious working people?)

    He urged public and private sectors to work together saying they each “have a responsibility to meet the demands of this moment and one can’t do it without the other. We need you at the table”.

    “If we don’t eagerly grab this moment we will condemn ourselves to a future conflict. We are staring down a dangerous path filled with potential violence, with the capacity to harden divisions, increase instability. And this will be a path filled by violent extremists who rush to fill the vacuum.

    (hard to believe- when we’ve given them billions of aid over the years for free and they’ve neither appreciated it, apologized or used US aide to improve their own people’s lives-)

    (I wonder if the gift givers will be alive at the end of it all? When the money they donate buys more terrorism.)

    In a separate initiative unveiled at the forum in the Jordanian town of Al Shunah, some 300 Israeli and Palestinian business executives also urged their governments to move towards a two-state solution.

    The ‘Breaking the Impasse Initiative’ vowed to use their influence to convince leaders on both sides to resume serious talks, stalled since late 2010.

    “The current situation endangers the economy and the social fabric of both nations, and may render the two-state solution unattainable,” it said in a statement.

    (If there aren’t any strings attached to the gifting- nothing will change. If I recall correctly, Congress STOPPED Palestinian aide because of their demonstrated violence…)

    Israeli President Shimon Peres urged Palestinian leader Mahmud Abbas, who was sitting in the same front row of chairs, to “return to negotiations as soon as possible and bring peace”.

    “President Abbas, you are our partner and we are yours,” the Nobel Peace laureate said, adding that he was the gaps between the two sides could be bridged. (huh? unclear)

    Abbas also called for young Palestinians to be given hope of a better future, and said his people “want to live with neighbors who we respect and they respect us also”. (huh? unclear)

    But in a sign of the wide divisions, Abbas stressed he would not take the issue of the return of Palestinian refugees off the negotiating table, and called again for Israel to free prisoners held since before 1993.

    Late Sunday, Kerry had a private dinner with the United Arab Emirates Foreign Minister Abdullah bin Zayed, Jordanian Foreign Minister Nasse Judeh, Blair and American businessman Tim Collins.

    He was also expected to meet again with Abbas following his trip to Israel and the West Bank last week.

  14. May 27, 2013 6:59 pm

    Pressure Cooker Discovered At Dearborn Hotel

    May 27, 2013

    DEARBORN (WWJ) – Police in Dearborn are trying to understand why a pressure cooker was left in the restroom of the Adoba Hotel, forcing the evacuation of guests until the early morning hours.

    The evacuation also canceled Sunday night’s banquet of the University of Muslim Association of America.

    Asgar Zaidi of Washington D.C. has been attending the organization’s conference for the past 11 years. He says it’s the first time it’s ever been held in Dearborn.

  15. May 27, 2013 7:01 pm

    War memorials vandalized

    Vandals have attacked two of Britain’s most celebrated war memorials, apparently daubing them with the word “Islam” and covering over inscriptions.

  16. May 28, 2013 7:34 am

    McCain slips into Syria to meet with rebel leaders

    By Andrew Rafferty and Kasie Hunt, NBC News

    Sen. John McCain, one of Congress’ strongest advocates for increasing America’s role in Syria, on Monday became the highest-ranking U.S. official to visit the country since a bloody civil war broke out there more than two years ago, NBC News has confirmed.

    McCain, R-Ariz., crossed the Turkey-Syria border with Gen. Salem Idris, the leader of the Supreme Military Council of the Free Syrian Army, The Daily Beast first reported.

    McCain stayed in the country for several hours during the unannounced trip and met with rebel leaders, who called on the U.S. to increase its support of the Syrian opposition by providing weapons, a no-fly zone and air strikes on forces loyal to President Bashar al-Assad.

    A pattern here for Republicans considered by Team Obama as one of “our” Republicans, John McCain. Running cover for Obama’s covert gunrunning activities in Benghazi meeting with rebels in Syria against Assad.. Might as well include Sen Lindsay Graham as McCain’s partner in crime. Oh, the bluster and outrage heard from these twin actors whenever a scandal breaks. Both of them belong in Hollywood rather than paid by Tax-payers to convincingly pretend to represent the people’s best interests.

    As reported here on May 27th @ 8:49am. You can scroll up to read the connection or click this link and read Aaron Klein’s article here @.. Kleinonline

  17. May 28, 2013 7:52 am

    Don’t Forget Barack Obama’s “Civilian Killers” Military Speech…

    On this Memorial Day, as Barack Obama attempts to portray himself as supportive of the men and women of the United States military, don’t forget this more honest depiction Obama gave regarding his views of the military when he was running for president in 2007. At that time, being anti-war and anti-military was more accepted – and Barack Obama was more than happy to further promote that anti-military agenda. He is, and has never been, a friend to the United States military…

    excerpt from another commentator:

    “Obama uses his Armed Services to do his personal dirt, just like he used Lerner to do what Holder can’t do. Wait until he completes the assemblage of the civilian forces – and acts. Right now, there are two dead FBI agents with his fingerprints all over their dead bodies – they made the mistake of killing a Muslim who bombed the Boston Marathon, just as the SEALS made the mistake of doing their jobs in Afghanistan and were executed for it.”

    “The President is an enemy of the Armed Forces – except for his personal army of brownshirts, which will eventually be replaced like real Brownshirts were. Not unlike the press, who have been turned into brown-nosing sycophants and snitches, who will be replaced by the President’s own hatchet men. It’s like the succession of a forest in reverse, with the taller, more noble trees being replaced by scrub and weeds and dirt.

    He has done his best to ruin America in every way possible; he has shat upon our Armed Forces in ways President Clinton could only dream of doing.”

    How Many Scandals Does It Take Before Obama’s Approval Rating Drops?

  18. May 28, 2013 8:11 am

    Rand Paul: Senate Is Arming Al-Qaeda and Rushing to War in Syria

    “This is an important moment. You will be funding, today, the allies of al Qaeda.”

    That was the declaration Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.; pictured) made on May 21 during a hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Paul’s comments were directed at his colleagues, nearly all of whom voted to send arms to Syrian rebels.

    Senators Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) and Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) co-sponsored the bill that authorizes “critical support to the Syrian opposition through provision of military assistance, training, and additional humanitarian support.”

    The bill sailed through the committee, passing with bipartisan support by a vote of 15-3.

    Senator Paul offered two amendments to the bill — officially styled the Syria Transition Support Act — one that would have forbidden the transfer of weapons to the rebel forces fighting to oust the government of current Syrian president Bashar al-Asad, and another that would have prevented the use of U.S. military armed forces in Syria.

    Both of Paul’s amendments were rejected by the committee.

    Apart from supplying lethal and non-lethal weaponry to Syrian opposition forces, the Menendez-Corker bill contains several other regime-toppling provisions, all of which are boastfully reported by Mendendez on his website. They include:

    • “Creation of a $250 million transition fund each year through FY2015 drawn from funds otherwise appropriated for regional transition support”;

    • “Sanctions on arms and oil sales to Assad: Targeting any person that the President of the United States determines has knowingly participated in or facilitated a transaction related to the sale or transfer of military equipment, arms, petroleum, or petroleum products to the Assad regime.”; and

    • “Amendment to the Syria Accountability Act: To allow for sanctions removal once a transitional government is in place and certain terrorism and WMD criteria have been met.”

    Neither Paul’s warnings nor his amendments were enough to counteract the powerful politicians pushing to arm the Syrian rebels. A cadre of lawmakers from seemingly distinct bands of the political spectrum lined up behind the move to add Syria to the list of Middle Eastern countries with U.S.-approved ruling parties. As in the case of Iraq and Afghanistan, these dictators-in-waiting will walk a path to power paved with American money and likely covered in the blood of American soldiers.

    Rubio, described by many as a Tea Party favorite, chastised Senator Paul, refuting his allegation that a vote for arming the Syrian rebels was tantamount to giving guns to al-Qaeda.

    “I don’t think any member of this committee would vote for anything we thought was going to arm al Qaeda,” said Rubio. (Rubio has become a defacto advocate for Team Obama.. slime)

    Mendendez piled on, saying, “Al Qaeda, unfortunately, is well-armed. That is the present reality in Syria.” (yes, well armed by Benghazi guns-)

    Senator Corker tried striking a less hostile tone, arguing that arming rebels vetted by Congress — as called for in his bill — would prevent U.S. weaponry from being funneled into more radical segments of the coalition of anti-Assad armed forces. ( Corker’s doublespeak is really a ‘corker’ if you buy it.)

    Seeing through Corker’s false dilemma, Paul responded, saying, “It’s impossible to know who our friends are.” He later said that the vote was nothing more than a “rush to war.”

    In an exclusive interview with The New American, Senator Paul pointed out the irony in the fact that the original Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF) enacted after September 11, 2001 called for finding and destroying al-Qaeda, while the legislation passed on May 21 by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee would arm known associates of that very organization.

    “These people [Syrian rebels] will say they love America knowing that that’s how to get weapons. They lie to us and then shoot us in the back,” Paul explained.

    Another bit of irony apparently lost on 15 members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee is the fact that the United States has walked this road before. In the 1980s, Congress voted to arm militant Islamic forces under the pretext that the enemy of our enemy was our friend. Then, within 20 years, the very beneficiaries of U.S. military largesse in Afghanistan seized control of that country and reportedly sheltered and trained the men who carried out the attacks of September 11.

    One wonders how (or if) the Senate fails to appreciate the destruction that will surely come from once again sowing the wind and reaping the whirlwind that comes from arming those who would do us harm. Some senators, however, seemed determined to deploy troops in every corner of the planet, regardless of the fact these young men and women could be killed by militants armed with weapons supplied by their very own government.

    Never one to miss a chance to take his turn banging on the war drum, Senator John McCain mocked an amendment offered by Senator Tom Udall (D-N.M.) that would have placed more stringent controls on the type of weapon shipped to Syrian rebels. (It’s his new role as an overt operative for Team Obama)

    “The senator from New Mexico wants to use shotguns against SCUD missiles,” McCain said.

    Rand Paul has been banging another drum, however. During the hearings on the attack on the American mission in Benghazi, Libya, Paul brought up the possibility that the Obama administration was covering up the existence of a gun running pipeline running throughout the Middle East. (For Sure!)

    Paul, in fact, tried to get answers to these questions from then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton during the Senate’s investigation of the Benghazi raid that left four people dead, including U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens. Addressing Secretary Clinton, Paul asked directly, “Is the U. S. involved with any procuring of weapons, transfer of weapons, buying, selling, anyhow transferring weapons to Turkey out of Libya?”

    Clinton demurred, claiming that she’d never heard about that allegation.

    Undaunted, Paul continued, “It’s been in news reports that ships have been leaving from Libya and that may have weapons, and what I’d like to know is the annex that was close by, were they involved with procuring, buying, selling, obtaining weapons, and were any of these weapons being transferred to other countries, any countries, Turkey included?”

    Always the savvy politician, Clinton responded, “Well, Senator, you’ll have to direct that question to the agency that ran the annex. I will see what information is available.”

    “You’re saying you don’t know?” asked Paul.

    “I do not know,” Clinton said. “I don’t have any information on that.”

    Americans have a right to know, however, who’s receiving millions in tax dollars taken from them.

    A Reuters article from last August, which detailed a secret order signed by President Obama providing support to Syrian rebel forces opposing the regime of Bashar al-Assad, noted, “Recent news reports from the region have suggested that the influence and numbers of Islamist militants, some of them connected to al Qaeda or its affiliates, have been growing among Assad’s opponents.”

    Later, The New American covered the same story, writing that “Western governments, brutal Sunni-Arab dictatorships, an assortment of terror groups including al-Qaeda, and other powerful interests have all been backing the uprising since long before violence even broke out last year.”

    In a story covering the violence of the Syrian uprising, the BBC added credibility to the accusations:

    The al-Qaeda-styled group in Syria is Jabhat al-Nusra li-Ahl al-Sham (the Front for the Protection of the Syrian People).

    Like other al-Qaeda affiliated groups, al-Nusra’s statements and videos are usually issued by its own media group, al-Manara al-Baida (the White Minaret) in Syria.

    Al-Nusra has claimed responsibility for several attacks against the Syrian army, security and shabiha (state-sponsored thugs) since it announced its formation early this year.

    Finally, under a headline reading “Al-Qaida turns tide for rebels in battle for eastern Syria,” The Guardian (U.K.) reported:

    They try to hide their presence. “Some people are worried about carrying the [black] flags,” said Abu Khuder. “They fear America will come and fight us. So we fight in secret. Why give Bashar and the west a pretext?” But their existence is common knowledge in Mohassen. Even passers-by joke with the men about car bombs and IEDs [improvised explosive devices].

    According to Abu Khuder, his men are working closely with the military council that commands the Free Syrian Army brigades in the region. “We meet almost every day,” he said. “We have clear instructions from our [al-Qaida] leadership that if the FSA need our help we should give it. We help them with IEDs and car bombs. Our main talent is in the bombing operations.” Abu Khuder’s men had a lot of experience in bomb-making from Iraq and elsewhere, he added.

    Regardless of Rand Paul’s efforts to keep the U.S. from running headlong into an armed conflict in Syria and his accurate depiction of the duplicity of those Syrian opposition forces waiting for the shipment of weapons from the United States, the Senate is speedily moving toward awarding al-Qaeda with crates of technologically advanced U.S. weaponry.

    The Menendez-Corker bill will now move to Senate floor for debate by the entire body. A member of the staff of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) told The New American that he was unsure when the bill would be put on the calendar.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: