The contempt, animosity, and disrespect Democrats show the American people is astounding and unbelievable.
Hope & Change 2.0
The contempt, animosity, and disrespect Democrats show the American people is astounding and unbelievable.
Isn’t it obvious by now that the EU doesn’t really care about a nuclear Iran? Well, not more than they care about selling goods and services to Iran.
If they can’t survive economically without Iran, they’ve got a huge problem. There’s a world of customers out there, Iran doesn’t have to be one of them. And, funding a state sponsor of terror to the point that would enable Iran to lob a nuke their way makes sense to who?
Link: Europe Asks U.S. for an Exemption From Sanctions on Iran
Ha! Trump was excellent.
Naturally, Obama weighed in.
“I believe that the decision to put the JCPOA at risk without any Iranian violation of the deal is a serious mistake.”
He obviously didn’t hear the speech.
I like the part where he laid out the justification for this decision, including the bogus information about Iran’s nuclear assets, that was the basis of the deal. And how that deal made the world less safe.
The deal that 61% of Congress voted against, but was done with a Bob Corker workaround. Around Congress.
Trump is open for a new agreement that would not include nuclear weapons and missiles to deliver them. One that would be fool-proof with real inspection verification. With no areas, including military areas, off limits to the nuclear inspectors.
He also gave a shout out to the Iranian people.
Finally, I want to deliver a message to the long-suffering people of Iran. The people of America stand with you. It has now been almost 40 years since this dictatorship seized power and took a proud nation hostage. Most of Iran’s 80 million citizens have, sadly, never known an Iran that prospered in peace with its neighborhoods and commanded the admiration of the world. But the future of Iran belongs to its people.
Do you remember when President Obama pledged America’s support for the Green Movement in Iran? Then abandoned them? No different than his red line. Tonight, Trump said he “doesn’t make empty threats. When I make promises, I keep them.” And from his record so far, there’s no reason to doubt him.
History was made today. And the unspoken message, made clear today, is that when it comes to matters this important, he doesn’t play. And that’s a good thing.
The more President Trump accomplishes for the country, the more irrational his detractors, the media, and the Washington establishment become.
The garbage thrown at Trump started before his inauguration. From Russian collusion alleged in a phony document that was used as intelligence, used to spy on his campaign and his administration. To obstruction of justice over same. To now, he’s crazy and should be removed from office.
Lets see who’s crazy.
Iran: One president breaks laws to get billions of dollars flown illegally, pallets of cash into the hands of the people who run the largest state sponsor of terrorism in the world, Iran, and they export it. And this president does everything he can to get them hundreds of millions of dollars in cash. This same country to whom we gave this cash is committed to creating a nuclear arsenal delivered by ICBMs, all of which are known to be under development because this president enabled them to move forward on their research.
The other president is working to stop all of this. The other president is working to unwind this insane deal and do what he can to prevent this state sponsor of terrorism from getting nuclear weapons. Now, who’s the smart one and who’s the dumb one?
Health Care: One president went out there and literally seized one-sixth of the U.S. economy and lied to the American people in doing it. He promised the American people if we would just entrust our health care to him, somebody who doesn’t know anything about it beyond being a theoretician in the academic lounge. Somebody who’s never run a hospital, who’s never talked to anybody who’s run a hospital, who’s never had the slightest interest in running a hospital took over one-sixth of the U.S. economy along with the rest of his party, lied to the American people to do it, claiming that if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor, and if you like your insurance plan, you can keep that.
The other president is doing everything he can to unwind that and deregulate as much of the Obama health care takeover as he can. Who’s the smart one, who’s the dumb one?
ISIS: A brutally inhumane, militaristic gang which one president said, “We’re doing everything we can. There’s not much we can do. Get used to it. They’re here.” Destabilizing the Middle East, destabilizing a victory in Iraq, leading to terror attacks around the world.
The other president has systematically wiped out this organization in under a year. Surrendering in Iraq. Who is the smart one and who’s the stupid one? Who’s the dangerous one and with whom are we in safer hands?
The Swamp: One president spies on his political opponents. One president knowingly takes opposition research from the presidential candidate of his party, knowingly allows it to be used as legitimate intelligence, when it’s lies and made-up BS, allows his Justice Department to get a FISA warrant to surveil and spy on the presidential candidate of the opposite party. The other president, in the midst of an entire effort by all of Washington to destroy him with this phony dossier, exposes this.
Who is it that’s unraveling? Was it the Obama team? Was it the Hillary team? Was it the Democrat Party? Is it the Washington establishment unraveling, or is it Donald Trump perhaps getting rid of the filth and the dirt and giving this country a working chance again?
The Economy: One president micromanages the economy into the ground and tells the American people that our better days are behind us. And, “you didn’t build that.” Government did. He says the great days of America’s past were not really legitimate. They were built on phony policies, trickle-down economics from the Reagan administration. The United States is not exceptional or deserving of superpower status. We now must manage the decline. And I, Barack Hussein Obama, am the smartest guy in the world to manage the decline of the United States and its economy.
His replacement liberates the economy, to the point in under a year it is growing at twice the rate it ever grew under Barack Obama. The reason is not just his taking the regulation shackles off of business and industries, introducing tax laws that allow us to compete in the world economy, but on curbing illegal immigration. And the beneficiaries of that where jobs are concerned are the poor, of all races. The less illegals taking American jobs means jobs available for our own citizens. Which is clear by the fact that unemployment for Blacks and Hispanics are at all time lows. And yet we’re told Obama is brilliant, he’s so smart, we can’t even stay in the same room with him. Donald Trump is silly. He’s insane. He’s obsessed. His unfit. We need psychiatrists examining him. We need the 25th Amendment.
Who’s the nutcase, who’s the dangerous one, and who is, in under a year, unraveling all of the mistakes borne of the either poor ideology or just blatant stupidity of the previous administration? Or both?
h/t: Rush Limbaugh
And why we are where we are now.
Nuclear proliferation in North Korea and Iran is history. You might ask, how did that happen? Fair question, especially when you recall what President Clinton and President Obama told us about their “deals” with the respective countries. It will also give you an appreciation for the problem that President Trump inherited from his predecessors that has metastasized to where it is today, with North Korea threatening to attack the U.S. and its territories with nuclear weapons.
Here’s what President Clinton said about the deal he and Sec. of State Madelyn Albright crafted.
That turned out real well didn’t it.
Not to be outdone, another Democrat President, Barack Obama, crafted a deal with Iran thought to be impossible, getting Iran to back off of their nuclear weapons program. He wanted it so bad, for his (ostensibly good) legacy, that part of “the deal” was a prisoner swap three days before President-elect Trump was to be sworn in.
In his Sunday morning address to the American people, Obama portrayed the seven men he freed as “civilians.” The senior official described them as businessmen convicted of or awaiting trial for mere “sanctions-related offenses, violations of the trade embargo.”
In reality, some of them were accused by Obama’s own Justice Department of posing threats to national security. These civilians, that he called businessmen, were engaged in rather unique businesses. Most having to do with missile guidance and nuclear technology, weapons trafficking, and connections to Hezbollah, the U.S.-designated terrorist organization.
Now you know how successful, or how bad, the “deal” President Obama made turned out. For all practical purposes, there is no deal, and everything Obama said about how dangerous Iran would be had he not done this deal are coming to fruition today with this deal.
He said “We do not have to accept an inevitable spiral into conflict, we certainly shouldn’t seek it.” What we have to deal with is North Korea and Iran (the largest State sponsor of terrorism) sharing their nuclear technology, making the world a far more dangerous place.
Thank you President Obama for making a bad situation worse, and leaving your successor with a more dangerous world and less options to avoid conflict.
In response to the ongoing threats and missile tests from the DPRK, President Trump calls them out to stop, or the regime will feel the “fire and fury” of the United States. You could interpret that as the beginning of negotiations with someone who means business. What happens next is up to Kim Jong-un. Predictably, the media’s reaction to the president’s choice of words is that it is very different from the rhetoric of the last three presidents. Well, YEAH! Their rhetoric combined with the Clinton/Albright “deal” was so effective in ending DPRK’s nuke program. Wasn’t it?
It might help to bring some perspective to how President Trump views the belligerent and threatening behavior of North Korea today by seeing how he felt about it in 1999, the day before he left the Republican Party to register Independent.
You decide how in tune the President is to what is going on in the world, and consistent about it. He was right then, and he is right now.
The full 20 minute interview below
Links: Flashback: Here’s What Trump Told Tim Russert in 1999 About Launching a Preemptive Strike Against NK | Obama’s hidden Iran deal giveaway
Regardless of whether the American people would support the President if he chose to act preemptively, it isn’t our decision to make. It is only his. And the time to act is sooner than later. There are no good options with this Axis of Evil actor.
Not long after GW Bush was President, he was thrown into being a wartime president after 9/11/2001. The way things are going, and unless Kim John-un changes his tune, and quickly, I’m afraid that President Trump, already inheriting the war on terror, will be the next wartime president. Only with North Korea, it shouldn’t be a long one.
Since the story broke today, Kim Jong-un is already threatening to bomb Guam. His big mistake.
The Lunch Counter supports President Trump. Unlike recent past presidents, this one doesn’t bluff, nor does he kick the can down the road. I trust him to fix the problem he was given.
What Hillary Clinton said in response to Donald Trump’s comment about the Iran nuclear deal being a disaster, was one of the highlights, or lowlights, of the night. Given the magnitude for disaster that nuclear weapons pose, so much was said by Clinton that contradicts her claim to being fit for duty as our President.
Speaking of Iran and the “Deal,” Hillary Clinton said . . .
“They had built covert facilities.”
Barack Obama, herself, and John Kerry “got a deal that put a lid on Iran’s nuclear program.”
False. First of all, the so-called “lid” is temporary (10 yrs.), after that they can do whatever the hell they want. The “lid” is gone. The deal also presumes that Iran won’t cheat during that 10 yr. timeframe. From the country that “had built covert facilities,” why would we think Iran might cheat? They’ll still have their nuclear weapons whether they cheat or not.
“Nuclear weapons pose the number one threat we face in the world. And it becomes particularly threatening if terrorists ever get their hands on nuclear weapons.”
Iran is the largest State sponsor of terror and terrorists in the world. Led by Mullahs who chant ‘death to America, the Great Satan’ and death to Israel. “Threatening” (to quote Hillary Clinton) to us, Israel, and our allies in the Middle East. The Iran Deal paves the way for them to achieve the nuclear status they want. And it isn’t for producing electricity. This deal is the nuclear proliferation that she claims she does not want. In other words, it’s not good if Japan or South Korea have them, but it’s just fine if Iran does?
And here’s the kicker, the Deal was . . .
“Very successful in gaining access to Iranian facilities that we never had before.”
This is very telling, in how weak a deal it is just so President Obama, John Kerry, and Hillary Clinton can say that they made one. It’s from the very same perspective that they say our Southern border has never been as secure as it is today.
They caved to Iran on “anytime anyplace” inspections. That was one of the conditions Obama bragged about. (Remember him bragging about Obamacare, none of which has come to fruition?) But true to form, Iran stuck to their guns, and Kerry caved to the point that, not only are there no anytime anyplace inspections, but there are nuclear facilities that are “off limits” to independent inspectors. What could go wrong with a deal like that?
And who will stop Iran from using their nuclear weapons capacity? Won’t be the United States. According to the deal, we have to protect Iran’s nuclear facilities. According to the deal that she, Kerry, and Obama have made, if Israel finds it necessary to act on their own for their own national security, it will be the U.S. who will protect Iran’s nuclear facilities. That means fighting against our ally and protecting this terrorist State. And that makes sense to who? To Barack Obama, who’s mission is building his legacy, even if it is fake, built on lies and naiveté.
Continuing to lie to the American people, like her former boss does, when the American people are trying to decide on their next president, is Hillary Clinton’s most “qualifying” moral trait.
Remember the $1.7 billion that the Obama admin gave Iran? That was in cash too! We know that the $400 million ransom payment was made in cash, in foreign currency. We also know why it was made in cash. To bypass U.S. sanctions.
Now we learn . . .
Treasury Department spokeswoman Dawn Selak said in a statement the cash payments were necessary because of the “effectiveness of U.S. and international sanctions,” which isolated Iran from the international finance system.
The U.S. sanctions were so effective, that like a drug lord or organized crime boss, Obama made an illegal transfer of cash to a terrorist state. Why is he not impeached already and on trial on RICO charges, if not treason itself?
Link: US payment of $1.7 billion to Iran made entirely in cash
After two Palestinians killed 4 diners in a Tel Aviv restaurant and wounding others before being caught alive, the New York Times writes about how Israelis find solidarity in the aftermath of the attack.
The mainstream media isn’t covering the attack. But The State Department made a statement about it. Deputy Spokesperson Mark C. Toner made it clear how the administration feels about the attack and how if feels about Israel’s response to it.
He made it clear that the United States did not share the solidarity subsequent to that attack that Israelis are feeling. Instead, he admonished Israel five times to not over-react. Not to “escalate tensions any further.” Translation, leave them to fight another day.
This is – I think a couple thoughts on that is – one is that we would just hope that any measures that Israel takes would be designed to not escalate tensions any further. But we certainly respect their desire to express outrage and to protect the safety of their people.
I think what I’m trying to say, Arshad, is that we understand the Israeli Government’s desire to protect its citizenry, or its citizens rather, after this kind of terrorist attack, and we strongly support that right. But we would hope that any measures it takes are designed to – would also take into consideration the impact on Palestinian citizens, or civilians rather, who are just going – trying to go about their daily lives.
And why I prefaced my response by saying that we understand their desire to protect their citizens and to send a message, but we would only urge that any measures that it takes be done under – with the consideration towards the many innocent Palestinians who are simply trying to go about their daily lives.
I think ultimately, first of all, that’s something for the Israeli Government to ultimately decide about, decide on. I’m just simply trying to give a full sense of the dynamics here, which are that this is going to affect thousands of Palestinian civilians who are, again, just trying to go about their daily lives.
Said, again – and let me be very clear – we condemn yesterday’s attack. We completely understand the right of Israeli authorities to ensure the security of their civilians and to carry out measures that they believe will, in fact, provide for that security. I would simply caution – and we’ve said this before – that in carrying out those kinds of measures that they do take into consideration the impact on innocent Palestinians and that they exercise restraint.
Exactly the wrong response to an ally responding to acts of war from a country, or territory, with an elected government that refuses to recognize Israel’s right to exist and, wants them dead. They are no longer renegade terrorists. They are a duly elected terrorist state that has been (with Iran’s help) lobbing missiles at Israel and using suicide bombers for decades. The Palestinian people are the ones who elected Hamas. They have democratically and simultaneously picked their fight and chose their fate. To make matters worse, which explains the administration’s adversarial attitude towards Israel, the United States has been and still is giving $400 million a year to the terrorist government in Gaza, Hamas.
Have you heard similar admonitions of France or Belgium after they were attacked? That the Obama administration is on the wrong side of the war on terror is not even debatable. The mere fact that Raqqa, the ISIS capital, has not been leveled two years ago, and their oil assets were not attacked (pin pricked as they were) until Donald Trump called them on it, is all the evidence you need to come to that conclusion. And that’s if you don’t count the previous post.
Links: Israelis Find Rare Moment of Solidarity in Aftermath of Tel Aviv Shootings | Tel Aviv attack: Israel clamps down on Palestinians | GAZA SOLUTION THE SAME | U.S. Foreign Aid to the Palestinians
Since the Orlando terrorist attack last weekend, the Obama theme ‘not to let a crisis go to waste’ has kicked in.
Don’t fall for this meme.
With Republicans and the National Rifle Association gun lobby under pressure to respond to the worst mass shooting in modern U.S. history, Trump said he would meet with the NRA to discuss ways to block people on terrorism watch or no-fly lists from buying guns.
No. The response is, Obama’s failure to prosecute the war on terror has made us victims in our own cities. And the pressure belongs on him and Democrats. Not on Republicans and the National Rifle Association.
And that doesn’t even include giving Iran $1.5 Billion dollars to fund Hamas and Hezbollah and to expand their nuclear weapons program, or funding the Palestinian Authority and Hamas with hundreds of thousands of dollars each year, so they can attack Israel.
To deflect his failure to keep us safe, his response, is the same as always. Not to let a crisis go to waste. That’s what this is about. In this case, he makes the case for taking away our rights to defend ourselves, a constitutional right, for his inability to protect us from terrorism. In other words, to protect us from the terrorist invasion that he is creating, his response is to disarm law-abiding citizens. This might makes sense if you are a Mullah in Iran, or an ISIS terrorist. But it does make sense to Barack Hussein Obama.
Besides all that, there is no constitutional right to fly on an airplane. There is a constitutional right to protect oneself with a firearm. In fact, the right was intended to protect oneself from a tyrannical government. Not a deer or a duck. And never has this been as imperative since the forming of the Bill of Rights when we broke from the tyrannical Crown of King George III.
UPDATED: 6/16/2016, Countering Violent Extremism program added, explains our ineptness in fighting terrorism here.
Links: Senators, Trump open to ban on some gun sales after Orlando | SIMILARITIES OF PRESIDENT OBAMA AND KING GEORGE III | House GOP Leaders Set To Endorse Obama’s Failed Anti-JIhad Strategy | Obama’s CVE Program Is an Outrage — and the Republicans Are Funding I How not to counter domestic terrorism