Chief Justice Moore has done nothing illegal, immoral, or unethical, and the COJ lacked the required 9-0 vote to remove him from the bench
Oct 22, 2016 By Liberty Counsel
MONTGOMERY, AL – Chief Justice Roy Moore filed a motion with the Alabama Supreme Court siding with the Alabama Political Reporter’s (APR) request to unseal the record on the petition he filed in May 2016 against the Judicial Inquiry Commission (JIC). Under JIC Rule 5, the JIC investigation of a complaint is confidential, but the confidentiality ends when a charge is issued. On May 4, Chief Justice Moore filed a petition with the Alabama Supreme Court against the JIC when he learned that the JIC’s investigation and impending charges were leaked to the media in violation of Rule 5.
When the petition was filed on May 4, it was sealed because the JIC had not yet filed charges. On May 6, the JIC filed charges against him, two days after Moore’s petition. Once a charge is filed, the matter is no longer confidential, and thus Chief Justice Moore and APR have requested the case be unsealed to the public. The case is No. 1150818, Ex parte Roy S. Moore (In re: Roy S. Moore v. Judicial Inquiry Commission of the State of Alabama).
In his affidavit, which accompanies the motion to unseal, Moore stated: “I requested twice by motion that the case be unsealed once the JIC filed charges against me in the Court of the Judiciary on May 6, 2016. Once the charges were filed, the mandate for pre-filing confidentiality in the JIC rules was no longer relevant. For inexplicable and unstated reasons, the Special Court that ruled on this case denied both motions that I filed to unseal the record. I am the only person with a legally cognizable interest in confidentiality in this case. That interest dissipated once the JIC filed charges and the matter became public.” Moore further stated, “The public has a right to know….”
Moore also stated yesterday: “Although I have not been removed from my position as Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court, my chief of staff and two attorneys in my office have been terminated and my secretary has been removed. Today, Acting Chief Justice Lyn Stuart ordered the court marshals to deny me access to my office at the Alabama Supreme Court.”
The appeal of the order from the Court of the Judiciary is pending before the Alabama Supreme Court. Moore has filed a motion to recuse four current justices on the Alabama Supreme Court and three former justices who were specially appointed to hear the May petition. He has asked that neither Justice Stuart, nor any others he requested to recuse, play “any part in selecting replacement justices for that appeal.”
Other than Justice Stuart sending Moore a letter telling him to clean out his office and removing his name from the official Supreme Court letterhead, the firing of his three staff attorneys, and barring him from retrieving a file from his office, the Alabama Supreme Court has remained silent regarding its response to Chief Justice Roy Moore’s appeal and motion to recuse. Chief Justice Moore requested that replacement justices be selected by a random and publicly observable drawing from a pool of sitting circuit judges.
“Chief Justice Moore is calling for an open and transparent process and wants nine unbiased judges to decide his case. These judges should not have conflicts of interest against him or his case,” said Mat Staver, Founder and Chairman of Liberty Counsel. “No one should act as if this case is already decided. Chief Justice Moore has done nothing illegal, immoral, or unethical, and the COJ lacked the required 9-0 vote to remove him from the bench,” said Staver.
Gina Loudon outlines simple steps’ to ‘Make America Great Again
Oct 23, 2016
Mr. Trump is the most innovative change agent in recent history. He is a revolutionary. Hillary Clinton and her spin-liars would have you believe something wholly contrary to the truth. This election will not only determine who the next president of the United States is; it will uncover the critical thinking skills of Americans today, and whether or not the greatest scam (Hillary’s campaign of lies intended to deceive) ever exacted on the American people will fail, or whether America will fail.
Donald Trump is the only candidate offering something to vote for. He created a rebellious movement against the status quo that has become dangerously corrupt. Hillary Clinton offers nothing new, only platitudes, failed policies and promises to make things better for the very Americans she wants to control.
Donald Trump is the only one with a contract with the American voter: Make America Great Again in eight simple steps:
1) Mr. Trump will make America efficient again. Bloated bureaucracies and Hillary’s corrupt pay-to-play agenda has created a sluggish economy burdened by regulations, taxes, fees and waste. Mr. Trump has committed to invest in the same infrastructure as Hillary brags about, but in a much smarter, leaner way. He will leverage public-private partnerships, along with private investments through tax incentives. This will create $1 trillion to invest in infrastructure over 10 years. This will not impact the debt negatively. He will eliminate billions in pay-to-play fake science programs and use the money to actually fix America’s water and environmental infrastructure.
2) Mr. Trump will make America prosperous again. Hillary has no plan for this. Mr. Trump, on the other hand, has said that he wants to create such a prosperous America that all Americans can be as successful as he is. The irony is that many union people support Hillary despite their vanishing jobs, because their union bosses tell them to, since they get cushy salaries and White House dinners. What is in it for the rank-and-file union person? Nothing. Zip. Nada. But Mr. Trump has a plan that will establish tariffs that will make companies think twice before laying their workers off to relocate.
Mr. Trump’s first 100 days plan will cut and simplify taxes for everyone. This will reboot the economy right off the bat and bring new prosperity to our economy immediately.
He will renegotiate Clinton/Obama’s failed NAFTA and TPP. Hillary lies to the American people about her support of these massive failures that cost more than 700,000 jobs.
3) Mr. Trump will make America healthy again. He has committed to fully repeal the expensive, bureaucratic-laden, failed Obamacare within his first 100 days and replace it with market friendly health savings accounts, and across-state-lines health insurance. Hillary wants to expand Obamacare, although she admits the costs will continue to rise for the already unaffordable plan. Mr. Trump will cut the FDA red tape to expedite drug-to-market wait time. There are 4,000 drugs waiting for FDA approval. This will save countless lives.
4) Mr. Trump will make America safe again. Mr. Trump will end dangerous Hillary’s open borders. He has courageously committed to end illegal immigration so families can be safe and secure in their homes and jobs. In addition to Hillary’s plan to open borders and leave Americans vulnerable to further attacks from within, she wants a 550 percent increase in Syrian refugees. This will cripple America, increase violence against women and children as we have seen in Europe and leave the refugees welfare dependent. There are far better solutions for everyone involved, and Mr. Trump has a smart plan that will help refugees and keep Americans safe. Hillary is first hand responsible for the growth and proliferation of ISIS and for the loss of American lives. She has no plan to change. Mr. Trump is the only one with a plan that truly puts America first, a concept lost on globalist, anti-colonialist, third-term Obama/Hillary.
5) Mr. Trump will make America respectable again. He will end D.C. corruption and re-establish a government accountable to only the people. Hillary has proven that she believes she is above the law, above prosecution and above the American people. She colludes with government agencies, foreign governments who kill women and gays and fund ISIS, and the media against the American people. She and all of her cronies are terrified of the true change that Mr. Trump brings, and that is why they are lying about and trying to paint him “dangerous” or otherwise evil. It isn’t true, and the Podesta emails, the FBI FOIA and the Project Veritas videos all confirm her corruption. No one denies the validity of any of the above, including Hillary. It is all true.
6) Mr. Trump will make America strong again. Due to the dangerous policies of Hillary Clinton and Obama, America has the smallest Navy since 1917. Through Hillary’s 30-year tenure in D.C., she has only helped to reduce our military and make Americans less safe, creating the most dangerous military depletion in American history. Thirty-five key defense experts have endorsed Mr. Trump’s plan to rebuild our military, including 350 Navy ships. This will benefit key states like Virginia and Philadelphia, and Mr. Trump will use his business genius to ensure that this is done with private industry where possible, avoiding massive tax allocation and creating unprecedented private-sector jobs.
7) Mr. Trump will make American government accountable again. Hillary Clinton risks national security over and over again for personal profits. The multi-billionairess has made all of her money via the Clinton Foundation, and at the expense of the integrity, safety and security of the American people. It goes all the way back to her cattle futures scandal and beyond, but continued with her illegal server, her lies to the American people, her collusion with the FBI, DOJ, State Department and media, and her callousness continued up and until the Fox News debate, during which she revealed U.S. time constraints regarding our nuclear code! She doesn’t have the instinct, capacity, intellect or temperament to be president of the United States.
Thanks to your tips, I was the first person I know of who pointed to the fact that Hillary further risked national security when she disclosed more classified information, in my post-debate analysis with Sean Hannity that night:
But as we expect, the lamestream media dropped this topic and turned, instead, to Trump’s comment about rigged elections.
8) Mr. Trump will make America colorblind once and for all. Martin Luther King Jr. envisioned a colorblind society, where people were judged by the content of their character. The Democrat machine has used plantation politics on minorities for so long, most don’t even know they are still on the plantation, being used for their votes with lavish promises and then quickly discarded until they are needed again for their votes. The hypocrisy of the left is as criminal as any slave owner and more dishonest. Mark my words, if elected (God forbid), Hillary Clinton will use the minority vote to accomplish her goals, and nothing will change for groups who have encountered bigotry and enslavement of one form or another, all of their lives.
On the other hand, if Mr. Trump is elected, we will not only see vast economic opportunity for minority populations, we will also see reduced crime, more families intact and a massive reduction in racial turmoil.
Mr. Trump can win, but we have little time. Rasmussen polls have him up two points, and he continues to dominate the Los Angeles Times/USC Dornsife tracking poll. The Investor’s Business Daily/TIPP poll has him up two points, and it looks as though, despite her spending more than $160 million to make you believe she is something she is not, she has hit her ceiling. Mr. Trump is winning or within the margin of error in most battleground states, but the media do not want you to know that.
The future of America is literally in our hands this election. Mr. Trump, though flawed like all of us, has passionately and fearlessly adopted the battle of the rebel against the machine that has become our political elite. Leave no stone unturned, and fight as though your future and that of your children depends solely on your fight. I believe it does. http://www.wnd.com/2016/10/8-reasons-it-must-be-trump-this-election/
Oct 22, 2016 by Ace Worldwide News Group
WASHINGTON: Clinton V Trump: Clinton’s pollster Benenson Strategy Group says she is tanking Trump supporters unstoppable Anonymous released report – DC Clothesline – @AceNewsServices
On October 18, 2016, the hacker(s) Anonymous claims that “a source inside the [Hillary] Clinton campaign has leaked an internal polling document that shows her support is gone”. The document is a report titled Salvage Program from the Benenson Strategy … Continue reading →
I would remind you that this blog is produced free for the public good and you are welcome to republish or re-use this article or any other material freely anywhere without requesting further permission.
Prof. Helmut Norpoth: Trump Could Defy Polls with Another ‘Dewey Defeats Truman’ Race
24 Oct 2016 by John Hayward
Stony Brook University Professor of Political Science Helmut Norpoth, author of the forthcoming bookCommander in Chief: Franklin Roosevelt and the American People, joined SiriusXM host Alex Marlow on Monday’s Breitbart News Daily to discuss his critique of polling methodology. Although most mainstream media polls give Hillary Clinton a commanding lead in the 2016 election, Norpoth has forecast an 87 percent probability that Donald Trump will win.
“The polls rely on reaching people by phone. Most of them do that. It’s very difficult these days, as everybody knows, because people don’t answer their phones any more – landlines, cell phones, et cetera,” Norpoth explained. “You reach a very small fraction of the people that you try to reach. The numbers aren’t quite so well-known, but I think it’s pretty low. It’s probably below ten percent. So that’s one issue.”
“The other one is, I mean, in the end, it doesn’t matter what people tell you in a poll. They have to go out and vote,” he continued. “We know that just about over half of the people who are eligible to vote actually do vote, so the problem is, how do you figure out exactly who’s going to turn out and who is not?”
“These are pretty big issues that have bedeviled some of the polls in the past. Gallup, for example, in the last election, 2012, had Mitt Romney winning with a final poll, and, of course, that wasn’t the case – and Gallup is no longer in the horse race business. The gold standard had to quit the business. I think that should tell you something,” he said.
Marlow asked about the Investor’s Business Daily poll, regarded as one of the most accurate surveys in the 2012 election, which currently shows the 2016 race as a statistical tie nationwide.
Norpoth said he had no details about this poll’s methodology, surmising that “they would have the same problems as all the others.”
“It’s interesting that you have quite a spread right now. I mean, you have that poll, and then you have I think the ABC poll had Clinton up by 12,” he observed. “You can see that there’s quite a range, and I’m not enough of an expert on the details of these things, because I don’t know them, to make a judgment about maybe who is right or wrong. I’m just saying it’s very uncertain.”
Norpoth noted that polling companies “do a lot of weighting after the fact” to compensate for the low response rate for phone surveys.
“They get what they get, and then they check against the Census distribution,” he said, citing the example of the L.A. Times tracking poll, which does not use the same weighting assumptions as the other surveys.
“The L.A. Times poll has usually been a poll that’s showing Trump doing quite well, being ahead or at least tied, when the other polls are showing him way behind. Somebody did a re-weighting of the polls based on some of the others and found that if they used the same weights as the others, the polls would come out very similarly. So a lot of it depends on how the weighting works, and that’s a big problem,” he contended.
Norpoth and Marlow also discussed the famed example of 1948, in which polling was halted a few weeks before the election, causing news organizations to miss how “the race tipped” in the final days, as Norpoth put it. The resulting “Dewey Defeats Truman!” headline has become the iconic example of polling malpractice.
“I would never rule that out, that you have some changes, and especially with a candidate like Trump, who is trying to establish himself, and often sort of shoots himself in the foot, and then he suffers at the polls. The question is, can he recover from that, and I think that’s sort of the big problem for him right now,” Norpoth said of the 2016 race.
“I think we learned a long time ago, when Richard Nixon put out this notion of the ‘silent majority,’ that it’s very risky to sort of judge things by signs of overt protests in those days, and maybe enthusiasm this time,” he said of the “enthusiasm gap” in 2016, which appears to strongly favor Trump.
Norpoth recalled seeing an article about Google searches, which have become “another predictor of the election that people have used,” and based on the number of people searching for Trump or Clinton, “Trump is doing very well.”
“But of course, some of those searches may be because people are scared about him and trying to find out what he’s all about, so I’m a little skeptical of that too,” he added.
“I think we’re really in a new world with some of these tools and techniques that we have to fathom how voters are behaving, so we may be in for a surprise,” he proposed.
Norpoth said he takes the “long historical view that this election is poised to tip the scales toward the Republicans because of the swing of the pendulum, with or without Trump.”
“My feeling always has been, what I saw in the primaries, was that Donald Trump did very well. He beat a large field. According to my metric, about how primaries are shaping up, he did better than Hillary Clinton in the Democratic race, so that gave him a leg up,” he said, leading to his prediction seven months ago that Trump would win the election.
“I still feel that there are these factors at play that may be obscured right now, or trumped – to use a pun – by things that the candidate does himself. If he can find a way to help himself a little bit more, I think he would be able to capitalize on those advantages,” he said.
Norpoth explained that his model does not rely on opinion polling: “It’s real polls. It’s what happens in elections, past elections, general elections, and primary elections. This time, I simply based my prediction on what happened in New Hampshire and South Carolina, and Trump, as we know, won both. Hillary won just one of them. Relative to the strongest opposition, Trump came out ahead in that kind of a metric. That’s what I’ve used in past elections, since 1996, to make predictions, and it has worked in all of those five elections to predict the popular vote winner. That’s my sense and my confidence, that the prediction might be right.”
“If you go back to 1912, when we had presidential elections with a good number of primaries – that’s about a hundred years, quite a few elections – if you compare the candidates based on their performance in primaries, you’ll find that the candidate who was stronger in the primaries wins the general election,” Norpoth elaborated. “That was the case in 1912, with Taft against Wilson, and you find it in many elections since then. It’s that kind of historical irregularity, that I think is in play, that puts Trump ahead.”
Breitbart News Daily airs on SiriusXM Patriot 125 weekdays from 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. Eastern.
Boom! National Poll: Trump Leading 67% To Hillary’s 19% Of 50,000 Voters
Clinton attack featuring Miss Universe was months in the making, email shows
Hillary’s history of corruption, without consequences, should be a deal breaker
Oct 24, 2016
Historically, voters send an individual to the White House who is in good standing on Election Day. Most serve their country well.
Sometimes, though, the president surprises and disappoints citizens by committing a potentially impeachable act after being sworn in. Voters don’t have a crystal ball and can’t predict what any elected official will do, once in office.
This election, though, voters know before marking their ballot that Hillary Clinton has committed wrongdoings so serious that they would likely be impeachable offenses had she committed them as president.
The Watergate Articles of Impeachment show uncanny similarities between the actions of President Nixon and those of presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton.
The articles charged Nixon for, “Withholding relevant and material evidence or information from lawfully authorized investigative officers and employees of the United States,” and also, “Interfering or endeavoring to interfere with the conduct of investigations by the Department of Justice of the United States, the Federal Bureau of Investigation,…and Congressional Committees.”
Clinton stated that she, “never received nor sent any material that was classified” on her private email server while Secretary of State, a claim the FBI found to be untrue. Also, Clinton’s emails were deletedafter she received a congressional subpoena. And Clinton’s phones were destroyed with hammers, according to an FBI report.
There is the unseemly defense that she may have been unaware of what was happening or couldn’t remember what happened in the State department, for which she had final authority, as she repeatedly testified. But that could make her the most unknowing and forgetful person to seek the highest office in the land. If not brazenly corrupt, then completely incompetent.
Remarkably, the FBI has characterized this behavior as carelessness. For the average citizen, it would likely be considered felonious.
For Nixon, it caused him to resign from the presidency. But for Clinton, she’s still on path to ascend to the Oval Office.
It seems that Hillary Clinton is above the law, that the rules don’t apply to her, and that she receives special treatment instead of consequences.
Donald Trump is a flawed candidate, as well, with a cringe-worthy communication style. But although he’s not a great talker, he is a hard worker.
He sees the work that needs to be done in this country including appointing Supreme Court justices who will defend and uphold the Constitution, rebuilding our nation through a strong military and strong trade agreements that will benefit American workers, and repealing Obamacare and reducing regulations that are strangling small businesses and the jobs they create.
Most importantly, though, he’s called attention to the corruption in politics and the bias in the mainstream media for liberal candidates. Our country won’t have a chance to accomplish anything until these two wrongs get righted.
The Center for Public Integrity reports that 430 individuals working in the journalism field made political donations and that nearly all of the money, or about 96 percent, benefited Clinton. The donation totals were relatively small: $382,000 for Clinton and $14,000 for Trump. But the money isn’t the biggest problem. It’s the mindset of the journalists, who control the airways and the newspapers—who hold the extremely powerful role of telling voters what to think about. And those journalists have invested financially, and emotionally, in a Clinton win.
The mainstream media is no longer the trusted, watchdog press that it used to be.
If the numbers aren’t damaging enough, recall the imagery of the hug that moderator Rachel Maddow, of MSNBC, gave Hillary Clinton after a Democratic debate.
The press is hugging Clinton. Figuratively, literally and financially.
It seems that Hillary Clinton, if not outright corrupt, is a benefactor of corruption. Positive changes won’t happen with her.
My father had a way of sharing his wisdom and then ending with, “Don’t ever forget that.” One of those teaching moments came when I was quite young, and it stuck with me. He told me that I wasn’t better than anyone else. But at the same time, nobody—(including a presidential candidate)—was better than I was.
And he’s still right.
Hillary Clinton is not above the law.
I’m not sure if Donald Trump can make America great again, but he correctly understands the best way to start—by draining the swamp of corruption.
New O’Keefe Video: Hillary Clinton Approved Robert Creamer Plan Directly
24 Oct 2016 by Joel B. Pollack
James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas has released video evidence that left-wing organizer and high-level Democratic Party operative Robert Creamer is, in fact, linked directly to Hillary Clinton, who personally approved at least one of his disruptive tactics.
Last week, O’Keefe produced video showing Creamer, the co-founder of the Democracy Partners consulting group, and his colleague, Scott Foval, discussing their past and present efforts to incite violence at Donald Trump rallies and other events.
The stated goal was to create “anarchy” around Trump, presumably to make him less appealing to American voters. Foval described Democracy Partners as a contractor for the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee.
Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook tried to evade the controversy by denying a direct link between Creamer and the campaign.
When Breitbart News’ Washington political editor, Matthew Boyle, confronted Mookabout Creamer and his firm in the spin room after the third presidential debate, Mook claimed: “They’ve never worked for our campaign.” When asked if Clinton had ever discussed the controversial political operations with Creamer directly, Mook replied: “I don’t think so.”
Now, however, O’Keefe and Project Veritas have released video of Creamer claiming that Clinton directly approved one of his more bizarre plans — an effort to attract media attention and incite violence by dressing an activist in a Donald Duck costume and sending that activist into Trump events, emphasizing the argument that Trump was “ducking” releasing his tax returns.
Creamer has also been closely linked with the White House and with President Barack Obama himself. He is listed as having visited the White House some 342 times since Obama took office, 47 of which were with Obama himself.
Robert Creamer (Screenshot / Project Veritas)
Last week, White House deputy spokesperson Eric Schultz declined to explain those visits: “I’m not sure that I can describe [their relationship] because I’m not sure that there’s much of one,” he said.
In response to the denials, O’Keefe told Breitbart News: “We have hours and hours of footage, including audio recordings of phone calls between Robert Creamer and the White House.”
Clinton attack featuring Miss Universe was months in the making, email shows
Oct 24, 2016
The Clinton campaign’s recent attacks on Donald Trump for his comments about a beauty queen’s weight problems were months in the making, according to an opposition research report uncovered in emails released by WikiLeaks on Sunday.
Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton invoked those comments during the first presidential debate on Sept. 26. Near the end of the showdown, during a sustained riff about the Republican nominee’s past remarks about women, Clinton cited the case of Miss Universe 1996 Alicia Machado.
Trump asked: “Where did you find this?”
The answer is: in a 157-page opposition research file that Clinton’s campaign had been using since at least Dec. 19, 2015, the day research director Tony Carrk emailed it – and research files on Sens. Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio – to Clinton Campaign Chairman John Podesta. Podesta’s emails were subsequently hacked and more than 25,000 of them have been released so far by anti-secrecy group WikiLeaks.
The serious planning to battle Trump as nominee stretches back to at least September 2015 for Team Clinton. In a Sept. 15 email to campaign manager Robby Mook, Podesta advocates dropping Sen. Rand Paul from a nightly analytics report on Clinton’s potential adversaries in favor of adding Trump.
In February, former Bill Clinton strategist Joel Johnson wrote to Hillary Clinton communications adviser Jennifer Palmieri asking about the plans to attack Trump.
“Who is in charge of the Trump swift boat project? Needs to be ready, funded and unleashed when we decide,” Johnson wrote, referring to the 2004 campaign when the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth unleashed stinging attacks on Vietnam veteran and Democrat nominee Sen. John Kerry.
Meanwhile, other emails in the Podesta trove show Clinton aides’ initial reaction to some of President Obama’s first comments about Clinton using a personal email address for government business, a controversy that has dogged her presidential campaign.
Obama told CBS News on March 7, 2015 that he learned of Clinton’s email practices through news reports at the same time the general public did. Campaign aides quickly circulated a New York Times article featuring the president’s remarks and appeared confused by Obama’s claim. Palmieri emailed senior Clinton adviser Philippe Reines early on March 8 with a suggestion.
“Suggest Philippe talk to [White House press officials]. They know POTUS and HRC emailed,” Palmieri wrote, using acronyms for president of the United States and Hillary Rodham Clinton. “Josh has been asked about that. Standard practice is not to confirm anything about his email, so his answer to press was that he would not comment/confirm. I recollect that Josh was also asked if POTUS ever noticed her personal email account and he said something like POTUS likely had better things to do than focus on his Cabinet’s email addresses.”
The following day, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest tried to clear up any confusion during his daily press briefing.
“The point that the president was making is not that he didn’t know Secretary Clinton’s email address, he did,” Earnest said. “But he was not aware of the details of how that email address and that server had been set up or how Secretary Clinton and her team were planning to comply with the Federal Records Act.”
Soros-Linked Voting Machines Cause Concern Over Rigged Election
Oct 24, 2016 by Joseph Jankowski of Planet Free Will
A U.K. based company that has provided voting machines for 16 states, including important battleground states like Florida and Arizona, has direct ties with billionaire leftist and Clinton crusader George Soros.
As Lifezettereports, the fact that the man in control of voting machines in 16 states is tied directly to the man who has given millions of dollars to the Clinton campaign and various progressive and globalist causes will surely leave a bad taste in the mouth of many a voter.
The balloting equipment tied to Soros is coming from the U.K. based Smartmatic company, whose chairman Mark Malloch-Brown is a former UN official and sits on the board of Soros’ Open Society Foundation.
According to Lifezette, Malloch-Brown was part of the Soros Advisory Committee on Bosnia and also is a member of the executive committee of the International Crisis Group, an organization he co-founded in the 1990s and built with funds from George Soros’ personal fortune.
In 2007 Soros appointed Malloch-Brown vice-president of his Quantum Funds, vice-chairman of Soros Fund Management, and vice-chairman of the Open Society Institute (former name of OSF).
Browns ties also intertwine with the Clintons as he was a partner with Sawyer-Miller, the consulting firm where close Clinton associate Mandy Grunwald worked. Brown also was also a senior advisor to FTI Consulting, a firm at which Jackson Dunn, who spent 15 years working as an aide to the Clintons, is a senior managing director.
t When taking that into account, along with the poor track record Smartmatic has of providing free and fair elections, this all becomes quite terrifying.
An astonishing 2006 classified U.S. diplomatic cable obtained and released by WikiLeaks reveals the extent to which Smartmatic may have played a hand in rigging the 2004 Venezuelan recall election under a section titled “A Shadow of Fraud.” The memo stated that “Smartmatic Corporation is a riddle both in ownership and operation, complicated by the fact that its machines have overseen several landslide (and contested) victories by President Hugo Chavez and his supporters.”
“The Smartmatic machines used in Venezuela are widely suspected of, though never proven conclusively to be, susceptible to fraud,” the memo continued. “The Venezuelan opposition is convinced that the Smartmatic machines robbed them of victory in the August 2004 referendum. Since then, there have been at least eight statistical analyses performed on the referendum results.”
“One study obtained the data log from the CANTV network and supposedly proved that the Smartmatic machines were bi-directional and in fact showed irregularities in how they reported their results to the CNE central server during the referendum,” it read.
With such suspicion and a study which claims to prove that the U.K. firm’s equipment tampered with the 2004 Venezuelan recall election, should be enough for states to reject these machines if they desire a fair election.
Smartmatic is providing machines to Arizona, California, Colorado, Washington DC, Florida, Illinois, Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri, New Jersey, Nevada, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Washington and Wisconsin, which means these Soros and Clinton linked machines are going to take the votes of thousands of Americans.
While GOP nominee Donald Trump has been voicing his opinion that the elections are indeed rigged due to media bias, and the proof that mainstream polls are heavily weighted to favor Clinton, it is needless to say that if the results show Hillary as a winner in November, there is going to a mess to shuffle through to find signs of honesty.
Podesta Files Part 17: Wikileaks Releases Another 3,400 Emails, Bringing Total To Over 30,000
Oct 24, 2016 by Tyler Durden
With just 2 weeks to go until the election, today Wikileaks continued its ongoing Podesta files release when it unveiled another 3,432 emails in the latest Part 17 of its release, bringing the total emails released so far to 30,235 total emails, over 60% of the total set for publication ahead of the elections.
Everyone has taken to dismissing Donald Trump’s claims that the election is rigged. Here are eight times liberals claimed an election had been or would be stolen.
Oct 19, 2016 By Bre Payton
Over the past couple of weeks, Donald Trump has ramped up complaints that the election process is rigged in favor of Hillary Clinton. Many have been quick to dismiss his claims and have been acting like he’s crazy for saying as much.
On Tuesday, President Obama lashed out at the GOP nominee during a press conference at the White House, saying that Trump’s gripes are historically unprecedented and that he should stop “whining.”
“I have never seen in my lifetime or in modern political history any presidential candidate trying to discredit the election process before votes have even taken place,” he said.
Obama’s memory must be pretty short, so I’ve compiled this list to remind him — and everyone else — of eight times liberals claimed an election was or would be stolen.
1. Labor Union Leader Roseann Demoro
The national vice president of the AFL-CIO wrote an article for Salon in which she explained how the Democratic Party primary was “rigged from the start.”
She explained the debate times, media bias, and vote rigging were what kept Bernie Sanders from clinching the Democratic nomination for president. Demoro also claimed Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid met with casino owners where many caucuses were being held, in order to tamper with the election process.
“The Nevada caucuses were then rigged with massive voting irregularities such as casino owners orchestrating which workers would be allowed to vote and, in clear intimidation, openly monitoring how they voted,” she wrote.
2. NYU Professor Mark Crispin Miller
This New York University professor has taught several courses and authored several books claiming that George W. Bush’s presidential victories in 2000 and again in 2004 were the result of large-scale fraud.
After John Kerry lost the 2004 presidential election, Miller told Democracy Now! that the Democratic nominee said the election was stolen from him.
“[Kerry] told me he now thinks the election was stolen,” Miller said. “He says he doesn’t believe he is the person that can be out in front because of the sour grapes question. But he said he believes it was stolen.”
His book “Loser Take All: Election Fraud and The Subversion of Democracy, 2000 – 2008” explains how Republicans were going to try to steal the 2008 election away from Obama. Here’s a synopsis of the book:
Among the subjects treated here are: myth of George Bush’s victory in Florida in 2000, and FOX News’s key role in propagating it; Senator Max Cleland’s dubious defeat in Georgia in 2002; Bush’s ‘re-election’ in 2004, including evidence of systematic fraud outside of Ohio; startling evidence of fraud committed in the 2006 midterm elections, which the Democrats appear to have won by a far larger margin than officially reported; and, crucially, evidence that the Republicans will attempt to steal the presidential election in 2008.
In a PBS interview from 2008, Miller explained that voting machines can’t be trusted because the companies that make them have close ties to Republican candidates.
“The use of this kind of voting apparatus is extremely worrisome and something that we should be watching very carefully,” he said.
Amusingly, the title of his 2005 book: “Fooled Again: How the Right Stole the 2004 Election & Why They’ll Steal the Next One Too (Unless We Stop Them)” appears to have been changed to simply “Fooled Again: The Real Case For Election Reform.” The apparent change seems to imply that his fears of the elections being stolen in favor of the GOP were invalidated by Obama’s 2008 victory.
3. Vox’s Ezra Klein
In 2014, Klein wrote a piece explaining that the election process is skewed in favor of incumbent candidates. Once in office, candidates often get to have a say in where the electoral lines are drawn — which means they can gerrymander their way into staying in office.
“A new Rasmussen poll finds that 68 percent of Americans think elections are rigged in favor of incumbents,” he wrote. “And they’re basically right. . . Few congressional elections are seriously competitive. Reelection rates for incumbents tend to hover around 90 percent.”
4. Vox’s Dara Lind
Lind wrote a piece today entitled “A short history of white people rigging elections,” in which she explains how white people intimidated black people by acting violently towards them at the polls.
“Let’s be clear: Rigged elections have happened in American history,” she writes. “But the people who’ve most often rigged elections aren’t liberal elites acting in cahoots with nonwhite shock troops — they’re white supremacists trying to maintain white power in the face of a diverse electorate.”
She’s not wrong — poll taxes, “literacy tests,” and other methods were often employed to disenfranchise black people, but her assertion that it never happens in other circumstances is . . . interesting.
What’s ironic is the publication has taken strides to dismiss Trump’s claims that the election process is rigged, publishing a piece today entitled “I’m a Republican lawyer, here’s why the election can’t be rigged.”
In August, Wofford wrote a piece explaining how the election could be hacked in seven minutes. The piece focuses on a professor who bought an $82 voting machine and hacked with it so he could manipulate results.
“In American politics, an onlooker might observe that hacking an election has been less of a threat than a tradition,” he writes, citing Huey Long’s infamous rigging in 1932, and the 1948 “Lyndon Landslide” during which Lyndon B. Johnson “mysteriously overcame a 20,000 vote deficit in his first Senate race.”
6. Talking Points Memo’s Josh Marshall
In 2006, Marshall accused the Ohio secretary of State of helping to steal the 2004 election in favor of Bush. Now, he says Trump’s claims of election-rigging are “disgusting.”
Trump's wholesale effort to discredit the US election process is truly unprecedented and frankly disgusting, an assault on who we are.
In recent years several factors — 1) crazily hackable voting machines, 2) generally heightened partisanship, 3) very close races, and 4) a real, honest-to-goodness purloined race (see Bush v. Gore) — have raised the paranoid in all of us. Wondering if any election outcome is honest has become a standard post-election emotion; not wondering, now that’s just crazy.
Manjoo concluded his piece by saying that even if we fixed our voting machines, it still wouldn’t make elections fair.
8. Sen. Elizabeth Warren
Today, Warren chided Trump on Twitter:
It's not rigged, @realDonaldTrump. You're losing fair & square. Put on your big-boy pants because this is what accountability looks like.
In 2013, however, Warren went on the Senate floor to chastise Republicans for making“naked attempts to nullify the results of the last presidential election. To force us to govern as though President Obama hadn’t won the 2012 election.” At the time, she conveniently seems to have forgotten that Republicans in Congress had also won an electoral mandate through their own re-elections. Unless she was implying Republican lawmakers’ re-elections were fraudulent despite being conducted by the same process as Obama’s re-election.
As John Gibbs wrote, voter fraud is very much a real thing. According to a 2012 Pew Charitable Trust report, roughly 18 million voter registrations are either “significantly inaccurate” or invalid — enough to tip an election. Yet somehow when Donald Trump echoes the concerns about election integrity many Americans have had for years, it’s totally insane. I guess election-rigging only matters when Democrats lose.
Bre Payton is a staff writer at The Federalist. Follow her on Twitter.
The latest allegation of potential impropriety and conflict of interest involving the Democratic Party and the FBI, which over the summer famously cleared Hillary Clinton of any criminal wrongdoing as relates to her personal email server, comes not from a Podesta email or a Wikileaks disclosure, but the WSJ which overnight reported that the political organization of Virginia Govenor Terry McAuliffe, an influential Democrat with longstanding ties to Bill and Hillary Clinton, gave nearly $500,000 to the election campaign of the wife of an official at the Federal Bureau of Investigation who later helped oversee the investigation into Mrs. Clinton’s email use.
Campaign finance records show Mr. McAuliffe’s political-action committee donated $467,500 to the 2015 state Senate campaign of Dr. Jill McCabe, who is married to Andrew McCabe, now the deputy director of the FBI.
Andrew McCabe, deputy director of the FBI
McAuliffe was prominently featured here most recently for his August decision to restore the voting rights of some 13,000 West Virginia ex-felons, an effort he was expected to continue until the voting rights for all 200,000 ex-criminals have been restored.
The WSJ adds that the Virginia Democratic Party, over which Mr. McAuliffe exerts considerable control, donated an additional $207,788 worth of support to Dr. McCabe’s campaign in the form of mailers, according to the records. That adds up to slightly more than $675,000 to her candidacy from entities either directly under Mr. McAuliffe’s control or strongly influenced by him. The figure represents more than a third of all the campaign funds Dr. McCabe raised in the effort.
Despite the boost in funding, after McAuliffe and other state party leaders recruited Dr. McCabe to run, she lost the election to incumbent Republican Dick Black.
A spokesman for the governor said he “supported Jill McCabe because he believed she would be a good state senator. This is a customary practice for Virginia governors… Any insinuation that his support was tied to anything other than his desire to elect candidates who would help pass his agenda is ridiculous.”
Among political candidates that year, Dr. McCabe was the third-largest recipient of funds from Common Good VA, the governor’s PAC, according to campaign finance records. Dan Gecker received $781,500 from the PAC and $214,456 from the state party for a campaign that raised $2.9 million, according to records; and Jeremy McPike received $803,500 from the PAC and $535,162 from the state party, raising more $3.8 million that year for his candidacy.
Seeking to clear away any speculation of impropriety and conflicts of interest , the FBI said in a statement that during his wife’s campaign Mr. McCabe “played no role, attended no events, and did not participate in fundraising or support of any kind. Months after the completion of her campaign, then-Associate Deputy Director McCabe was promoted to Deputy, where, in that position, he assumed for the first time, an oversight role in the investigation into Secretary Clinton’s emails.”
FBI officials said that after that meeting with the governor in Richmond on March 7, Mr. McCabe sought ethics advice from the bureau and followed it, avoiding involvement with public corruption cases in Virginia, and avoiding any campaign activity or events.
Mr. McCabe’s supervision of the Clinton email case in 2016 wasn’t seen as a conflict or an ethics issue because his wife’s campaign was over by then and Mr. McAuliffe wasn’t part of the email probe, officials said.
Of course, despite the prompt denial that this fund transfer was not out of the ordinary, the money was not refunded and will serve as the latest suggestion that “pay-to-play” is alive and well, and involves not just the judicial branch, but also the supposedly impartial FBI.
As the WSJ also notes, McCabe is a longtime FBI official who focused much of his career on terrorism. His wife is a hospital physician who campaigned in northern Virginia, where the couple live with their children. The 2015 Virginia State senate race was Dr. McCabe’s first run for office and her campaign spent $1.8 million. The race was part of Mr. McAuliffe’s failed effort to win a Democratic majority in the Virginia legislature, which would have given him significantly more sway in Richmond, the state capital.
Some more details:
Mr. McAuliffe has been a central figure in the Clintons’ political careers for decades. In the 1990s, he was Bill Clinton’s chief fundraiser and he remains one of the couple’s closest allies and public boosters. Mrs. Clinton appeared with him in northern Virginia in 2015 as he sought to increase the number of Democrats in the state legislature.
Dr. McCabe announced her candidacy in March 2015, the same month it was revealed that Mrs. Clinton had used a private server as secretary of state to send and receive government emails, a disclosure that prompted the FBI investigation.
At the time the Clinton probe was launched in July 2015, McCabe was running the FBI’s Washington, D.C., field office, which provided personnel and resources to the Clinton email probe.
The rabbit hole gets deeper: “That investigation examined whether Mrs. Clinton’s use of private email may have compromised national security by transmitting classified information in an insecure system. A review of Mrs. Clinton’s emails concluded that 110 messages contained classified information. Mrs. Clinton has said she made a mistake but that she never sent or received messages that were marked classified.” We now know that also was incorrect.
At the end of July 2015, Mr. McCabe was promoted to FBI headquarters and assumed the No. 3 position at the agency. In February 2016, he became FBI Director James Comey’s second-in-command. As deputy director, Mr. McCabe was part of the executive leadership team overseeing the Clinton email investigation, though FBI officials say any final decisions on that probe were made by Mr. Comey, who served as a high-ranking Justice Department official in the administration of George W. Bush.
The paper concludes that “it was unclear the extent to which Mr. McCabe may have recused himself from discussions involving Mr. McAuliffe. When Mr. McCabe’s wife began her campaign, he shied away from involvement in Virginia public corruption cases, according to officials.” He was, however, instrument in supervising Hillary’s investigation the subsequently clearing her.
The punchline: “once the campaign was over, officials said, Mr. McCabe and FBI officials felt the potential conflict-of-interest issues ended.”
James Polk, a pro slavery democrat, was the 11th president of the United States, known for his territorial expansion of the nation chiefly through the Mexican-American War.
Polk was a warhawk who sent US troops into a disputed area on the Texas Mexican border knowing Mexico considered that to a provocation of war.
The US easily won the war with Mexico and occupied Mexico City. Polk knew if he had annexed all of Mexico that area would have become slave states. Polk knew the anti slavery Republicans in the north would not tolerate new slave states. Polk settled for the current US Mexico border. The US also paid Mexico for the area won in one in the Mexican American War.
In order to settle the west Polk made ‘treaties’ with the Native American Indians, took their land and put them on reservations.
Polk threatened England with war to have the Oregon territory ceded to the US.
Polk called it Manifest Destiny to expand the US by war and taking land.
Hillary. a pro slavery democrat, is responsible for the invasion of Libya, deposing Qaddafi, much of the upheaval in the Middle East, providing Iran with Nukes, and the formation and rise of ISIS. ISIS is now active in or controls about 33 countries. Many states in the US have ISIS training camps.
Hillary wants to use the flood of Rapefugees to take over America. Taking from Americans their land and Rights and giving them to her ISIS led Rapefugges.
James Polk was born in 1795 in North Carolina, and went on to become the 11th and youngest (at the time) president of the United States (1845–1849). Polk’s annexation of Texas led to the Mexican-American War (1846–1848), and the U.S. victory thereby led to the acquisition of large territories in the Southwest and along the Pacific coast, which in turn led to the establishment of the Department of the Interior. The northern border of the United States was also established under Polk, as were the Naval Academy and the Smithsonian. He died on June 15, 1849, in Nashville, Tennessee.
James Knox Polk was born in Pineville, a small town in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, on November 2, 1795, and graduated with honors in 1818 from the University of North Carolina. Leaving his law practice behind, he served in the Tennessee legislature, where he became friends with Andrew Jackson. Polk moved from the Tennessee legislature to the United States House of Representatives, serving from 1825 to 1839 (and serving as speaker of the House from 1835 to 1839). He left his congressional post to become governor of Tennessee.
Approaching the Presidency
Leading into the presidential election of 1844, Polk was the frontrunner for the Democratic nomination for the vice presidency. Both would-be presidential candidates, Martin Van Buren for the Democrats and Henry Clay for the Whigs, sought to skirt the expansionist (“manifest destiny”) issue during the campaign, seeing it as potentially controversial. The first step in distancing their campaigns was declaring opposition to the annexation of Texas. Polk, on the other hand, took a hard stance on the issue, insisting on the annexation of Texas and, in a roundabout way, Oregon. Polk won the nomination on the ninth ballot.
Enter Andrew Jackson, who knew that the American public favored westward expansion. He sought to run a candidate in the election committed to the precepts of manifest destiny, and at the Democratic Convention, Polk was nominated to run for the presidency. Polk went on to win the popular vote by a razor-thin margin, but took the electoral college handily.
Presidency and Expansionism
James Polk took office on March 4, 1845—and, at 49 years of age, he became the youngest president in American history. Before Polk took the oath of office, Congress offered annexation to Texas, and when they accepted and became a new state, Mexico severed diplomatic relations with the United States and tensions between the two countries escalated.
Regarding the Oregon territory, which was much larger than the current state of Oregon, President Polk would have to contend with England, who had jointly occupied the area for nearly 30 years. Polk’s political allies claimed the entire Oregon area for the United States, from California northward to the 54° 40′ latitude (the southern boundary of what is now Alaska), and so the mantra “54-40 or fight!” was born. Neither England nor the Polk administration wanted a war, and Polk knew that only war would likely allow the United States to claim the land.
After back-and-forth negotiation, and some effective hard ball played by Polk, the British accepted the 49th parallel as the northern border (the current border between the United States and Canada), excluding the southern tip of Vancouver Island, and the deal was sealed in 1846.
Things went less smoothly in the hunt for California and New Mexico, and ever-increasing tensions led to the Mexican-American War. After several battles and the American occupation of Mexico City, Mexico ceded New Mexico and California in 1848, and coast-to-coast expansion was complete.
Facts point to Benghazi’s use as transfer hub to ship guns to ISIS
The House Select Committee on Benghazi released a report attacking the Obama administration’s response to the terror attack in Benghazi, while conveniently omitting information pointing to Benghazi’s use as a staging ground for clandestine arms transfers to Al-Qaeda-linked rebels in Syria.
The nearly 800-page report, released earlier this week, attacked then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton over her failure to provide adequate security for America’s diplomatic facilities in Libya in the aftermath of the Western-backed overthrow of Libyan President Muammar Gaddafi, as well as President Obama and his administration for perpetuating the narrative that the attack was caused by outrage over a YouTube video depicting the Muslim Prophet Muhammad.
Yet the committee’s report omitted all facts relating to the circumstances surrounding the Benghazi attack and the CIA’s clandestine arms smuggling program to Al-Qaeda-linked rebels fighting to overthrow the Syrian government.
As Kurt Nimmo reported, “a number of guests appearing on the Alex Jones Show following the attack have built an indisputable case that the CIA was shipping arms from U.S.-controlled facilities located at the U.S. mission in Benghazi to its mercenaries in Syria and the murder of ambassador Stevens was carried out by an al-Qaeda affiliated group as part of a turf war between the CIA and elements in the Pentagon.”
Retired Army Lt. General William G. Boykin, speaking with CNS News, suggested the United States was using the CIA annex in Benghazi to facilitate secret arms transfers to rebels in Syria, explaining Ambassador Chris Stevens’ presence in the city.
“Then what was Stevens doing there on September 11 of 2012?” Boykin said. “More supposition was that he was now funneling guns to the rebel forces in Syria, using essentially the Turks to facilitate that. Was that occurring, (a), and if so, was it a legal covert action?”
According to reports, the CIA subjected operatives to monthly polygraph tests in an attempt to suppress details of the arms smuggling operation in Benghazi that was ongoing when the attack occurred.
It should come as no surprise that any facts detailing arms transfers to Al-Qaeda-linked rebels in Syria would be kept secret, as the United States, NATO, Saudi Arabia and the Sunni Gulf States have made it their mission to fund and arm radical Wahhabist groups to destabilize the Middle East and bring about a clash of civilizations.
Hillary Clinton’s campaign spokesman, Brian Fallon, called the report a rehash of “discredited conspiracy theories,” a term ironically coined by the CIA in 1967 to attack anyone who questions the government narrative.
Ryan Mauro on O’Reilly Factor: 5 Islamist Groups in America
Jan 15, 2015
Clarion Project National Security Analyst Ryan Mauro talks to Bill O’Reilly about five Islamist radical groups in America: Muslims of the Americas; Dar al-Hijrah Islamic Center; the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA); Masjid at-Taqwa led by Siraj Wahhaj and the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).
Violent Clashes Erupt As French Police Begin To Clear Calais Migrant “Jungle” – Live Feed
Oct 24, 2016 by Tyler Durden
Violent clashes erupted overnight in the Calais jungle as 1,200 French police began the process of relocating the camp’s 8,000 migrant residents to 450 separate facilities across France. The plan calls for a mass evacuation to be conducted on Monday and Tuesday with heavy machinery expected to be sent in Tuesday afternoon to clear any remaining debris and officially demolish the camp. That said, many of the migrants chose not to leave peacefully launching rocks at French police and setting fires to property adjacent to the camp.
French authorities have arranged for migrants to be transported to over 450 facilities across the country where housing will be provided and they will be given the opportunity to claim asylum. According to BBC, 2,500 people are expected to leave the camp on Monday with the remainder expected to depart on Tuesday.
The Jungle migrants are being placed into separate queues to determine who are in families, travelling alone or whether they are in vulnerable categories.
After processing they will leave for various parts of France and be given the opportunity to claim asylum. If they do not, they could face deportation.
There are 7,500 beds being made available in 450 centres across France.
By mid-morning there were long lines at the entrance to the registration centre. French officials said the operation was proceeding well, although Calais’ police commissioner said some migrants would have to return to the Jungle and try again on Tuesday.
Parts of the camp were emptying quickly, the BBC’s Gavin Lee reported. By 13:30 local time, 23 buses had left carrying 900 people. Officials have predicted that some 2,500 people will leave the camp on Monday.
Heavy machinery is expected to be sent in on Tuesday to clear any remnants of the camp left behind by migrants while those who choose not to leave voluntarily will be forcibly removed.
From Tuesday, heavy machinery will be sent to clear the tents and shelters that have been left behind. The whole operation is expected to take three days.
The French interior ministry said it “does not want to use force but if there are migrants who refuse to leave, or NGOs who cause trouble, the police might be forced to intervene”.
Below is a live feed of the current evacuation efforts.
For those not as familiar with the situation, the “Jungle” camp, near the port of Calais in Northern France, has become home to ~8,000 migrants as Europe has struggled to deal with the flow of refugees from Northern Africa and the Middle East. The camp has drawn a lot of criticism from nearby French citizens as a haven for violence and crime. Tensions climaxed last month whenFrench farmers, truckers and police all united to block the Calais port while calling on President Hollande to announce specific plans for the demolition of the “Jungle” camp.
Of course, camps like these have grown as Europe has struggled to accommodate several hundred thousand migrants flowing in from Northern Africa and the Middle East.
A real soldier's view of WW II
I have a story to tell about my fathers WWII days and someone suggested that I start a blog. So here I am with no idea of what the heck I am doing. I have pictures of my fathers time overseas. I also have a suitcase full of letters. The first letter is f
Alex Jones' Infowars
Because there is a war on for your mind this website provides information you may not see elsewhere. Information is what we all need to have.
I Have Vanished
The goal of this website is to focus on both runaway juveniles and individuals who are missing against their will primarily within the United States. Reasons people go missing include being abducted, incapacitated or injured, a victim of a catastrophe, a
Islam 101 is meant to help people become better educated about the fundamentals of Islam and to help the more knowledgeable better convey the facts to others
Karen Hudes a well know World Bank Whistleblower
Karen Hudes worked in the US Export Import Bank of the US from 1980-1985 and in the Legal Department of the World Bank from 1986-2007. She has been exposing the WORLD Bank, the IMF, and the Fed for many years
Oath Keepers – Guardian of the Republic
Oath Keepers is a non-partisan association of current and formerly serving military, reserves, National Guard, veterans, Peace Officers, and Fire Fighters who will fulfill the Oath we swore, with the support of like minded citizens who take an Oath to sta
PAVE Shattering the Silence of Sexual Assault
Promoting Awareness | Victim Empowerment (PAVE) is the only national nonprofit that works both to shatter the silence and prevent sexual violence through social advocacy, education and survivor support.
The Manhattan Declaration
A CALL OF CHRISTIAN CONSCIENCE Christians, when they have lived up to the highest ideals of their faith, have defended the weak and vulnerable and worked tirelessly to protect and strengthen vital institutions of civil society, beginning with the family.
THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD A Special Report
This Special Report aims to analyze the Muslim Brotherhood organization as a global movement, in particular their ideology and the key players involved in the movement as well as charting the extent of their global reach.
U.S. Terror History Map
There are three sections: “Court Cases”, “Radical Activities”, and Mosques and Islamic centers listed at one time were home to radical clerics or to conspirators in a terrorism-related investigations
Veterans For A Stronger America
America is safe – when America is strong.Veterans for a Strong America is a non-partisan action organization dedicated to educating the public, members of Congress and the Executive Branch about our 5 Step Mission to make America Strong:
Presenting America’s Forgotten History and Heroes with an Emphasis on our moral, religious, and Constitutional heritage