The Greatest Phony America's Ever Known

by Ted Nugent

It is very difficult to ignore accusations of phoniness from the master of all things phony who has dedicated his entire life to one phony scam after another. But when this unprecedented level of criminal abuse of power is so flagrantly dictated from the most powerful man in the world, good Americans should be quivering in our boots.

No, Mr. President, those are not phony tears from Brian Terry’s mother. Those are real tears, unlike your constant phony blather about caring about the middle class as you continue your well-orchestrated kamikaze economic swan dive for the average American family.

And, be assured, you old Chicago ACORN scammaster you, that those were not phony body bags that arrived home from Benghazi. As the greatest phony America has ever known, like your phoniest phony “job” as community organizer, your phony claims to get to the bottom of that horrific dereliction of duty by your phony secretary of state was just another scam of phony smoke and mirrors to placate your phony sheep-like constituency.

Phony is as phony does, Mr. President, but none of the tea party or conservative Republicans’ claims of illegal targeting by your phony IRS jackboots is phony by any stretch of the imagination.

We believe your earlier claims that such accusations were serious was just more of your phony baloney.

You want phony, Mr. President? I give you your top cop of the United States, your own phony attorney general who refuses to charge your Black Panther buddies with any crimes even though you both saw the same footage of your phony buddies committing numerous federal and state felonies when they threatened and intimidated voters in Philadelphia.

Nothing phony about those criminal gangsters.

And with all due respect, your holy phoniness, who can’t see the terminal phoniness of wasting more tax dollars with more phony charges against George Zimmerman in defiance of your own FBI investigation and the same exhaustive evidence that proved his obvious innocence to the jury of his peers and everyone paying attention who was not blinded by your phony racism?

And we mustn’t forget your phony Nobel Peace Prize, or your phony real estate scammaster ripoff artist Tony Rezko, or your phony claims that your phony “Affordable Healthcare” scam will make our healthcare system cheaper and better when just the opposite is guaranteed.

And let’s all be honest here; more of us believe in the American hero Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s thorough investigation into your phony birth certificate and phony history than the phony media’s smoke and mirrors.

We all know that Van Jones is a phony and all your green scams are as phony as phony can be.

We know that your Mao-loving communications czar Anita Dunn is as phony as they come.

Everyone knows your phony claims to “all of the above” for America’s energy independence is dangerously phony.
We know your so-called Department of Justice is as phony as the insane phony claim that your Allah Ahkbar buddy Maj. Hasan is about as guilty of “workplace” violence as I am the tooth fairy.

I could go on and on and on, but in order to avoid the inevitable violent vomiting impetus from more of your nasty phony baloney than America can possibly handle, I would just like to say: “How dare you, Mr. President, claim the nonstop ugly scandals during your Saul Alinsky inspired attack on America are phony, when everyone with a brain, a heart and a soul knows damn well what you are up to and how you are intentionally implementing the ‘Rules for Radicals’ agenda so appropriately dedicated to Satan.”

We know your hope-and-change lie is as phony as it comes. We know the rotten America-hating preacher that married you and baptized your children is a phony man of the cloth, a soiled cloth as it were.

It brings me no pleasure at all to have to admit all this ugliness. But as a participating “We the People” American in this sacred experiment in self-government, it is clearly my duty, a moral obligation that I owe to the hero warriors of the U.S. military and their families for sacrificing so dearly for our God-given individual rights, as guaranteed by the sacred U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights.

They, and I as a law enforcement officer, took a sacred oath of honor, to defend, protect and enforce the U.S. Constitution. But unlike the president of the United States, we weren’t being phony when we raised our hand and placed our hands on the Holy Bible, and gave our solemn pledge as Americans.

We meant it.

No, these are not phony scandals, but we are heartbroken that we have a phony president.

HIROSHIMA - THEN AND NOW

Did Obama break law to win re-election?

The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act 

Former Homeland Security attorney exposes shrewd maneuver

Did Barack Obama win re-election by violating the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act?

This is the question posed by former Homeland Security attorney Stewart Baker, a blogger for The Volokh Conspiracy, a group blog organized by Eugene Volokh, a professor of American law at the UCLA School of Law.

Baker’s credentials make the question a serious one.

A partner in the Washington office of Steptoe & Johnson LLP, he returned to private law practice after serving for three and a half years as the assistant secretary for policy at the Department of Homeland Security, where he created and managed the 250-person DHS Policy Directorate responsible, among other duties, for relationships with law enforcement and public advisory committees.

The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, enacted by Congress in 1986, is a broadly written law that in practice regulates virtually all computers and cellphones, largely because communications over the Internet tends to have implications for interstate commerce.
Baker argued that the Obama presidential campaign in 2012 possibly violated the act by an arrangement with Obama supporters posting on Facebook. It allowed the Obama campaign to search the person’s Facebook network for likely voters the campaign could identify as unmotivated or unregistered.

The likely voters would then get tailored messages from their Facebook friends urging them to register and turn out.

 Baker’s appreciation for the creativity of the tactic was moderated by his conclusion the tactic might have been a criminal violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.

“It’s clever. It’s the future,” Baker conceded. “And it’s a violation of the CFAA. Facebook doesn’t let users share access to their accounts, and anything Facebook doesn’t authorize is very likely a federal crime.”

Baker explained that Facebook’s customer service agreement was written to limit access to information, not just use of the information.

“Maybe the campaign never thought about the possibility that it was violating federal law,” Baker wrote. “That’s not a scandal, though it strikes me as unlikely that not one of these tech-savvy geeks failed to notice that they were breaching Facebook’s terms of service.”
Given the importance of turnout to the outcome of the 2012 presidential campaign, Baker argued President Obama arguably won re-election by violating federal law or by getting special treatment from Facebook, and maybe from federal prosecutors as well.

“I think this issue will go mainstream,” Baker insisted. “Half the country will want to know exactly how that happened. And I don’t see how the extraordinary discussion conferred by the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act can survive the storm that follows.”

Trolling for voters
WND senior staff reporter Jerome R. Corsi, author of the WND book “What Went Wrong: The Inside Story of the GOP Debacle of 2012 … And How It Can Be Avoided Next Time,” agrees.

“There is no doubt the Obama computer strategies and capabilities gave Obama an advantage in 2012,” Corsi said. “A major goal of the Obama voter intelligence campaign was to network from strong Obama supporters to find likely Obama voters that could be converted into Election Day votes.”

Corsi pointed out that despite Obama winning six of the seven swing states in play in 2012, many of the key states were very close, within reach for Romney had Republican turnout been higher.

In 2012, when all the precincts were counted, Obama won Ohio by only 103,481 votes, approximately 2 percent of all votes cast in the state, and he won Florida by 73,189 votes, approximately 1 percent of all the votes cast.

“Turnout was the key to victory in 2012,” Corsi pointed out. “Approximately 6.7 million fewer white voters voted in 2012 than voted in 2008. Romney got 59 percent of the white vote. The white voters who stayed home were the conservatives. Had Romney gotten the same numbers of white voters to the polls as McCain got in 2008, Romney could well have been president.”

Maximizing turnout in the Democratic Party base was a necessary strategy for Obama to be re-elected, Corsi pointed out, stressing that Obama got 4.5 million fewer votes in 2012 than in 2008.

“The Obama team had the social science studies that showed how you can increase turnout by telling a prospective voter how his or her neighbors plan to vote,” Corsi noted.
He said the Facebook strategy analyzed by Baker is “very powerful, when the Obama campaign accesses your friends to ask if they know you plan to vote for Obama.”

If Baker is correct, Corsi stressed, the Facebook strategy rapidly moves into the liability column if the Obama campaign did not adequately research the information-access restrictions of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.

“The geeks in the ‘cave’ in Obama’s Chicago campaign headquarters were trolling for votes over the Internet wherever and however they could find them,” Corsi said. “It would not surprise me if Obama’s computer geniuses cut legal corners on the Internet, much like hackers couldn’t care less if they violate a few federal laws breaking through firewalls.”

CHOICE AMERICA NETWORK - 10 YEARS STRONG!

Not Guilty -- Beyond Reasonable Doubt

By Pat Buchanan

That the prosecution in the Zimmerman trial asked the judge to allow a verdict of "third-degree murder" -- i.e., child abuse, since Trayvon Martin was 17 -- testifies to the prosecution's failure and panic. 

For George Zimmerman's defense has proven, beyond a reasonable doubt, that he shot Trayvon Martin not out of malice, rage or hate -- but in a desperate act of self-defense.
Zimmerman was being beaten "ground-and-pound," mixed martial arts style. His head was being banged on the cement. Screaming again and again for help, he pulled out his gun and fired. 

Even the prosecution is now conceding Trayvon might have been on top, and is now scrambling for a compromise verdict on a lesser charge than second-degree murder, a charge that never should have been brought. Indeed, this trial should never have been held.
What we have witnessed in Sanford, Fla., is the prosecution of an innocent man for murder because the politically and socially powerful demanded it. 

That Trayvon is dead is a tragedy, and an avoidable tragedy. But it was not murder. And it does not justify railroading a man who, whatever his mistakes that night -- and George Zimmerman made them -- committed no crime. 

The case comes down to four questions. And the answers, supported by the evidence, testimony and common sense, point straight to an acquittal. 

First, who was the aggressor? 

All agree it would have been better if Zimmerman had never left his car or followed Trayvon that night.

Yet, ask yourself: 

Would a pudgy, out-of-shape 28-year-old with a gun, facing a 17-year-old athletic kid, 4 inches taller, with a longer reach, throw a punch and start a fistfight with him?

If Zimmerman threw the first punch, what would be his motive? If you have a gun and your adversary does not, is not the sensible stance to keep your distance so you can be free to pull the gun? Who armed with a pistol starts a fistfight with a suspicious stranger?
Moreover, Trayvon's body showed no signs of having ever been punched, while George's nose looks like he was sucker-punched. 

Second, who was on top in those final moments of the fight? 

If Zimmerman was on top and Trayvon was on his back, Trayvon would have been found on his back. He was found dead on his stomach.

If Zimmerman was on top and Trayvon was on his stomach, he would have been shot in the back. He was shot in the chest. 

How could Trayvon have been found lying on his face, with a bullet hole in his chest, if Zimmerman was sitting on top of him? Only if George Zimmerman, after shooting Trayvon, would have turned him over as he lay dying. No one has even suggested that.
Why was the back of Zimmerman's jacket soaking wet, and the back of Trayvon's dry, if Trayvon was on the bottom? Why were the knees of Trayvon's pants wet, if he was on the bottom? 

Third, who was screaming for help? 

His mother, brother and father say it was Trayvon. George's mother, father and half a dozen friends say it is George's voice on the tape, screaming for help. 

Trayvon's father and brother apparently told investigators initially that the voice was not Trayvon's, or they did not know. And the eyewitness John Good says the guy on the bottom in the red jacket, George Zimmerman, was the one screaming. 

But, again, let us assume it was Trayvon screaming. 

Why would he be screaming? If he was being beaten up martial arts style on the ground, would Trayvon not have had cuts and bruises? 

What, exactly, was George Zimmerman doing to this 17-year-old football player that he should be screaming for help? 

Where is the physical evidence that Trayvon had been hurt in any way before he was shot? Is screaming how a tough 17-year-old male reacts in a fistfight, even one he is losing?
Trayvon was a stranger in that neighborhood, and George was the neighborhood watch guy. Which of the two is more likely to be yelling for help from the neighbors? 

Fourth, was the use of a firearm justified, even if Zimmerman was losing the fight and being beaten up?

Were his injuries that serious? Was he really is danger of grave bodily harm? 

Experts disagree. But the real question is: What did Zimmerman think at the time? And judging by those piercing screams, was not that screaming man frightened, even terrified? 

Trayvon's parents think these were the desperate cries for help of a son about to be killed. But if they were Zimmerman's cries, could George not have had those same thoughts? 

George Zimmerman should have informed Trayvon he was the neighborhood watch. Trayvon should not have pummeled him. Both made mistakes. One is dead. To send the other to prison for what happened that night would be an act of vengeance, not justice, an invocation of the old lex talionis -- an eye for an eye.

That's not what America is supposed to be about. 

 

IRS Sent $46,378,040 in Refunds to 23,994 ‘Unauthorized’ Aliens at 1 Atlanta Address

 By Terence P. Jeffrey

(CNSNews.com) - The Internal Revenue Service sent 23,994 tax refunds worth a combined $46,378,040 to “unauthorized” alien workers who all used the same address in Atlanta, Ga., in 2011, according to the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA).

That was not the only Atlanta address theoretically used by thousands of “unauthorized” alien workers receiving millions in federal tax refunds in 2011. In fact, according to a TIGTA audit report published last year, four of the top ten addresses to which the IRS sent thousands of tax refunds to “unauthorized” aliens were in Atlanta.

The IRS sent 11,284 refunds worth a combined $2,164,976 to unauthorized alien workers at a second Atlanta address; 3,608 worth $2,691,448 to a third; and 2,386 worth $1,232,943 to a fourth.

Other locations on the IG’s Top Ten list for singular addresses that were theoretically used simultaneously by thousands of unauthorized alien workers, included an address in Oxnard, Calif, where the IRS sent 2,507 refunds worth $10,395,874; an address in Raleigh, North Carolina, where the IRS sent 2,408 refunds worth $7,284,212; an address in Phoenix, Ariz., where the IRS sent 2,047 refunds worth $5,558,608; an address in Palm Beach Gardens, Fla., where the IRS sent 1,972 refunds worth $2,256,302; an address in San Jose, Calif., where the IRS sent 1,942 refunds worth $5,091,027; and an address in Arvin, Calif., where the IRS sent 1,846 refunds worth $3,298,877.

Since 1996, the IRS has issued what it calls Individual Taxpayer Identification Numbers (ITINs) to two classes of persons: 1) non-resident aliens who have a tax liability in the United States, and 2) aliens living in the United States who are “not authorized to work in the United States.”

The IRS has long known it was giving these numbers to illegal aliens, and thus facilitating their ability to work illegally in the United States. For example, the Treasury Inspector General’s Semiannual Report to Congress published on Oct. 29, 1999—nearly fourteen years ago—specifically drew attention to this problem.

“The IRS issues Individual Taxpayer Identification Numbers (ITINs) to undocumented aliens to improve nonresident alien compliance with tax laws. This IRS practice seems counter-productive to the Immigration and Naturalization Service’s (INS) mission to identify undocumented aliens and prevent unlawful alien entry,” TIGTA warned in that long-ago report.

The inspector general’s 2012 audit report on the IRS’s handling of ITINs was spurred by two IRS employees who went to members of Congress "alleging that IRS management was requiring employees to assign Individual Taxpayer Identification Numbers (ITIN) even when the applications were fraudulent.”

In an August 2012 press release accompanying the audit report, TIGTA said the report “validated” the complaints of the IRS employees.

“TIGTA’s audit found that IRS management has not established adequate internal controls to detect and prevent the assignment of an ITIN to individuals submitting questionable applications,” said Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration J. Russell George. “Even more troubling, TIGTA found an environment which discourages employees from detecting fraudulent applications.”

In addition to the 23,994 tax refunds worth a combined $46,378,040 that the IRS sent to a single address in Atlanta, the IG also discovered that the IRS had assigned 15,796 ITINs to unauthorized aliens who presumably used a single Atlanta address.

The IRS, according to TIGTA, also assigned ITINs to 15,028 unauthorized aliens presumably using a single address in Dallas, Texas, and 10,356 to unauthorized aliens presumably living at a single address in Atlantic City, N.J.

Perhaps the most remarkable act of the IRS was this: It assigned 6,411 ITINs to unauthorized aliens presumably using a single address in Morganton, North Carolina. According to the 2010 Census, there were only 16,681 people in Morganton. So, for the IRS to have been correct in issuing 6,411 ITINS to unauthorized aliens at a single address in Morganton it would have meant that 38 percent of the town’s total population were unauthorized alien workers using a single address.

TIGTA said there were 154 addresses around the country that appeared on 1,000 or more ITIN applications made to the IRS.

WHEN WILL THE WEST WAKE-UP?

By Pat Buchanan

After a British soldier wearing a Help for Heroes charity T-shirt was run over, stabbed and slashed with machetes and a meat cleaver, and beheaded, the Tory government advised its soldiers that it is probably best not to appear in uniform on the streets of their capital.

Both murderers were wounded by police. One was photographed and recorded. 
His message:

"There are many, many (verses) throughout the Quran that says we must fight them as they fight us. An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. I apologize that women had to witness this today, but in our land women have to see the same. Your people will never be safe."

According to ITV, one murderer, hands dripping blood, ranted, "We swear by almighty Allah we will never stop fighting you."

Both killers are Muslim converts of African descent, and both are British born.

Wednesday also, Stockholm and its suburbs ended a fourth night of riots, vandalism and arson by immigrant mobs protesting the police shooting of a machete-wielding 69-year-old.

"We have institutional racism," says Rami Al-khamisi, founder of a group for "social change."

Sweden, racist?

Among advanced nations, Sweden ranks fourth in the number of asylum seekers it has admitted and second relative to its population.

Are the Swedes really the problem in Sweden?

The same day these stories ran, The Washington Post carried a front-page photo of Ibrahim Todashev, martial arts professional and friend of Tamerlan Tsarnaev, who, with brother Dzhokhar, set off the bombs at the Boston Marathon massacre.

Todashev, another Chechen, had been shot to death by FBI agents, reportedly after he confessed to his and Tamerlan's role in a triple murder in Waltham, Mass.

Though Tamerlan had been radicalized and Moscow had made inquiries about him, he had escaped the notice of U.S. authorities. Even after he returned to the Caucasus for six months, sought to contact extremists, then returned to the U.S.A., Tamerlan still was not on Homeland Security's radar.

His father, granted political asylum, went back to the same region he had fled in fear. His mother had been arrested for shoplifting. Yet none of this caused U.S. officials to pick up Tamerlan, a welfare freeloader, and throw the lot of them out of the country.

One wonders if the West is going to wake up to the new world we have entere
d, or adhere to immigration policies dating to a liberal era long since dead.

It was in 1965, halcyon hour of the Great Society, that Ted Kennedy led Congress into abolishing a policy that had restricted immigration for 40 years, while we absorbed and Americanized the millions who had come over between 1890 and 1920.

The "national origins" feature of that 1924 law mandated that ships arriving at U.S. ports carry immigrants from countries that had provided our immigrants in the past. We liked who we were.

Immigration policy was written to reinforce the Western orientation and roots of America, 90 percent of whose population could by 1960 trace its ancestry to the Old Continent.

But since 1965, immigration policy has been run by people who detest that America and wanted a new nation that looked less like Europe and more like a continental replica of the U.N. General Assembly.

They wanted to end America's history as the largest and greatest of Western nations and make her a nation of nations, a new society and a new people, more racially, ethnically, religiously and culturally diverse than any nation on the face of the earth.

Behind this vision lies an ideology, an idee fixe, that America is not a normal nation of blood and soil, history and heroes, but a nation erected upon an idea, the idea that anyone and everyone who comes here, raises his hand, and swears allegiance to the Declaration of Independence and Bill of Rights becomes, de facto, not just a legal citizen but an American.

But that is no more true than to say that someone who arrives in Paris from Africa or the Middle East and raises his hand to declare allegiance to the Rights of Man thereby becomes a Frenchman.

What is the peril into which America and the West are drifting?

Ties of race, religion, ethnicity and culture are the prevailing winds among mankind and are tearing apart countries and continents. And as we bring in people from all over the world, they are not leaving all of their old allegiances and animosities behind.

Many carry them, if at times dormant, within their hearts.

And if we bring into America -- afflicted by her polarized politics, hateful rhetoric and culture wars -- peoples on all sides of every conflict roiling mankind, how do we think this experiment is going to end?

The immigration bill moving through the Senate, with an amnesty for 11 to 12 million illegals already here, and millions of their relatives back home, may write an end to more than just the Republican Party.