Obama’s New World Order | July 2016

Police Get Shot Down in Dallas After Black Lives Matter Rally

– Youtube

 

Two Suspects in Custody in Shooting Death of 4 Dallas Police Officers in Rally

– KLIF Dallas Radio

“(WBAP/KLIF NEWS)   Dallas – Two suspects are now in custody after four officers were killed during a shooting in downtown Dallas during a protest rally.

Police say they believe there were two snipers involved.

Police are asking for anyone downtown to get off the street and take cover.”

….Continue reading and listen to KLIF @ KLIF Radio

11 officers shot, 5 dead, SWAT in standoff with 1 person after shooting after Dallas rally

– Dallas Morning News

1467961081-NM_07blmprotest18SP

What we know so far:

*  4 Dallas police officers, one DART officer killed

*  Six officers and one civilian wounded

* One suspect was dead in a garage at El Centro College after exchanging gunfire with with police.

* A woman near the shootout in the garage is in custody

Snipers fatally shot three Dallas police officers and one DART officer, and wounded several others as a demonstration against shootings of black men by police wrapped up Thursday night.

Dallas police Chief David Brown said about 8:58 p.m., at least two snipers shot 11 officers and one civilian from elevated positions with rifles during the rally in downtown.

Two officers were in surgery earlier in the night and three were in critical condition, police said.

Three other DART officers were wounded but their injuries were not believed to be life-threatening, said Morgan Lyons, a spokesman for DART.

The officers were shot “ambush style,” Brown said, with some shot in the back.

“Give our officers strength to catch these suspects and bring them to justice tonight,” he said.

About 1:20 a.m., an explosion went off at El Centro. It was unclear whether police detonated a suspicious package they found earlier or if it was something else, such as a flashbang intended to distract the suspect who remained in the parking garage.

At a 12:30 a.m. news conference, Brown said officers had been exchanging gunfire for 45 minutes with a man the garage who was not cooperating.

“He has told our negotiators that the end is coming and he’s going to hurt and kill more of us –meaning law enforcement — and that there are bombs all over the place in this garage and in downtown,” Brown said. He said police aren’t certain they have all the suspects.

“We as a city, we as a country must come together, lock arms and heal the wounds that we all feel from time to time,” he said. “Words matter, leadership matters at this time. I’m proud of our chief.”

Rawlings asked for everyone to focus on the officers, their families and those fighting for their lives.

“It is a heartbreaking morning to lose these four officers who proudly served our citizens,” Rawlings said. “To say that our police officers put their lives on the line every day is no hyperbole, ladies and gentlemen, it’s a reality.”

…Continue reading @ Dallas Morning News

Radio KFI Reporting more here with Video

 

German agency accuses Iran of trying to buy nuclear technology after 2015 deal

– Financial Times

http-%2F%2Fcom.ft.imagepublish.prod.s3.amazonaws

Intelligence report tracks last year’s activity before and after July atomic accord

Iran has attempted to acquire nuclear technology in Germany even after the atomic accord it reached with western powers in Vienna last July, according to the German domestic intelligence agency.

The annual report of the Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz (BfV) said that illegal Iranian attempts to procure technology “continued on a quantitatively high level by international standards” in Germany in 2015.

“This was particularly the case for merchandise that could be deployed in the field of nuclear technology,” the report said. There was also an increase in Iranian efforts to buy parts for missiles that could be fitted with nuclear warheads, it added.

…Continue reading @ Financial Times

 

California gang members charged in attacks targeting blacks

– Yahoo News

Part-WAS-Was76543-1-1-0

A nun walks past a giant sign at the entrance of Ramona Garden projects in East Los Angeles in this picture from 2000 (AFP Photo/Hector Mata)

“Los Angeles (AFP) – Seven members of a notorious Los Angeles street gang with ties to the Mexican Mafia were charged in an indictment unsealed Thursday for their role in attacks targeting African-Americans.

The men, all members of the Big Hazard gang, allegedly took part in the 2014 firebombing of several residences of African-Americans in the city’s Boyle Heights neighborhood in a bid to push blacks out, according to the indictment handed down June 22.

“The defendants used firebombs to drive the victims from their homes because of their race,” said Vanita Gupta, head of the Justice Department’s civil rights division. “This is a hate crime.

“Such violence and intimidation have no place in our society.”

Authorities said the attacks were spurred by the gang’s bid to reclaim control of the neighborhood’s Ramona Gardens housing project, once a bleak crime-infested area where the police dared enter only in groups.

In recent years, however, crime has lessened in Ramona Gardens and more black families have moved in.

The indictment alleges that Hazard members would spray paint or “tag” gang monikers and symbols on businesses and residences in the neighborhood and would meet to discuss ways to deter blacks from living there.

On May 12, 2014, the gang members, wearing gloves and disguises, went on a firebombing rampage, authorities said.

They split into groups, breaking victims’ windows before hurling the firebombs to maximize damage, according to the charge sheet.

Following the attacks nearly 40 gang members were indicted in 2014 on drug-related and other charges but the firebombing attacks went unresolved.

The seven men named in the 10-count indictment unsealed Thursday were identified as Carlos Hernandez, 31; Jose Saucedo, 22; Francisco Farias, 25; Joseue Garibay, 23; Edwin Felix, 23; Jonathan Portillo, 21; and 21-year-old Joel Monarrez.

They were charged with conspiracy to violate civil rights, arson, carrying explosives, racketeering and several other related crimes.

Saucedo, aka “Lil’ Moe,” allegedly would confront black residents in Ramona Gardens, including children, and bluntly tell them they were not welcome in the neighborhood and risked harm if they stayed.

Saucedo and his co-defendants face maximum prison sentences of 110 to 115 years or life behind bars.”

…Continue reading @ Yahoo with comments.

 – Looks like the New World Order is more like the New World Disorder./CJ

Hillary’s FBI Interrogation Wasn’t Under Oath or Recorded | July 2016

Comey: Hillary’s FBI Testimony Wasn’t Under Oath Or Recorded

– LawNewz

hc25

““I don’t think our investigation established she was particularly sophisticated with respect to classified information and the levels and treatment.”

FBI Director James Comeytestified on Thursday before Congress about his decision to recommend that Hillary Clinton should not be criminally prosecuted for her use of a private email server while serving as Secretary of State.  Here are the most revealing moments from FBI Director Comey’s testimony, in no particular order:

1) “Gross Negligence” was not a key determination in deciding whether to bring charges in this case:

The FBI Director explained that the statute with “gross negligence” was never really considered in this case because of a fear at the Department of Justice that it was possibly unconstitutional.

 2)  Hillary Clinton was not “sophisticated enough” to understand the classification system:

“I just want to take one of your assumptions about ‘sophistication,’” Comey said. “I don’t think our investigation established she was particularly sophisticated with respect to classified information and the levels and treatment.”

“Isn’t she an original classification authority though?” DeSantis asked.

“Yes, sir, yes, sir,” Comey responded.

“Good grief,” DeSantis said.

3) Congress will submit a referral to the FBI asking for an investigation into whether Hillary Clinton lied under oath:

“Did you review the documents where Congressman Jim Jordan asked her specifically, and she said ‘There was nothing marked classified on my emails either sent or received.’ … Did the FBI investigate her statements under oath on this topic?” Congressman Chaffetz asked.

“Not to my knowledge — I don’t think there has been a referral from Congress,” Director Comey replied.

4) Director Comey made it clear that any other government employee who did this would face serious consequences:

He was asked to follow up on this statement more than a few times during the hearing.  While he was generally hesitant to comment on hypotheticals, Director Comey left no doubt that any other government employee who did something similar to Clinton would immediately be sent to a “suitability review” process to determine their fitness to hold a clearance.  He also said that a person would be subject to a number of other consequences, ranging from a suspension to termination and prohibition from future in employment in the United States government.

5) Hillary Clinton’s lawyers did not have security clearances when they sorted through her classified emails:

Congressman Jason Chaffetz asked Director Comey whether Hillary Clinton’s attorneys had the required security clearances necessary to view classified material.  As Clinton has stated numerous times, she retained several attorneys to help her sort through her emails to determine what was work-related before turning them over to the State Department.

In a fiery exchange towards the end of today’s testimony with Congressman Jason Chaffetz, Director Comey revealed that Clinton’s attorneys did not have proper security clearances.  Congressman Chaffetz was dumbfounded and asked the Director to explain how this did not show intent to disclose classified material to persons without a proper security clearances.

6) Director Comey refused to comment on the existence of a second FBI investigation into the Clinton Foundation

Earlier this year, reports surfaced that federal investigators had expanded the probe to include possible “pay for play” allegations between the State Department and the Clinton Foundation. Director Comey was asked about this in the latter part of his testimony, but he declined to answer the question.

“I’m not going to comment on the existence or non-existence of any other investigations,” Director Comey said.

“Was the Clinton Foundation tied to this investigation?” congressman Chaffetz asked.

“I’m not going to answer that,” Comey replied.

…Read more at LawNewz

 

 

Jason Chaffetz Digs in on Comey at Start of Capitol Hearing

– CSPAN  |  Youtube

– Chaffetz: “Given the fact pattern that you laid out less than 48 hours ago, would a person who dealt with classified information like that, would that person be granted a security clearance at the FBI?

Comey: “It would be an important consideration…..”

Chaffetz: “Personally, that sounds to me like a political answer..”

 

Trey Gowdy GRILLS James Comey On Hillary Clinton Emails

– CSPAN  |  Youtube

 

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) Q/A with FBI Director James Comey

– CSPAN  |  Youtube

– On the question of ‘context’ and prosecutorial discretion, Mr. Comey cites extenuationg circumstance determine ‘context’ for the FBI, for instance, “was it somebody who had a sufficient level of education and training  and experience that we can infer certain things from that….to ascertain…to consider the entire set of circumstances  of the person’s  offense conduct….”

– So essentially, is the FBI director saying Hillary can walk because she was ignorant of the law, and sufficiently incompetent with respect to handling national security information.

– Sadly, Mr. Comey seems like just another DC political bureaucrat, making excuses for the political elite he is dependent upon./CJ

Hillary’s Emails – “She Would Have Been Safer on the Gmail” | July 2016

Libtalker Randi Rhodes Returns to Airwaves Just in Time to Slam Hillary

NewsBusters

rhodes_screenshot_third

“Talk about timing — a liberal radio host arguably best known for once labeling Hillary Clinton “a big f***ing whore” relaunches her show on the same day Clinton dodges prosecution after putting national security at risk through the use of private, vulnerable email servers while secretary of state.

At one point during her show, Rhodes played clips of FBI Director James Comey’s devastating verbal indictment of Clinton’s email recklessness while she ad-libbed over the audio. Even though Rhodes feigned mock horror throughout, she also sounded genuinely distressed —

After a few glitches with Rhodes’ website, the launch proceeded smoothly enough. Rhodes spent most of the two-hour show focusing on Trump, Clinton’s email debacle, her bout with cancer, and the logistics of returning to the fray. She’s brought back her old slogan — “Turn Up Your Mind” — and trademark shtick, a combination of Stephanie Miller’s clown-act theatrics and the unhinged politics of Ed Schultz.

At one point during her show, Rhodes played clips of FBI Director James Comey’s devastating verbal indictment of Clinton’s email recklessness while she ad-libbed over the audio. Even though Rhodes feigned mock horror throughout, she also sounded genuinely distressed —

RHODES: So I believed him. I believed that he had dignity. I believed that he had integrity. (Rhodes alluding to the so-called “hospital showdown” involving Comey, then-attorney general John Ashcroft, and the Stellar Wind surveillance program). And today, although he said he wasn’t going to press any charges, he did explain that any reasonable person would have reason to believe that what she did was completely irresponsible, was out of convenience, and not with the interest of the national security of this country in her mind, that she did not do her sworn duty, she showed very poor judgment … let me see if this plays …
COMEY: From the group of 30,000 emails returned to the State Department in 2014, 110 emails in 52 email chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was top-secret at the time they were sent. Thirty-six of those chains …

RHODES: Oh my God …

COMEY: … contained secret information at the time …

RHODES: At the time …

COMEY: … and eight contained confidential information at the time.

RHODES: At the time …

COMEY: That’s the lowest level of classification. Separate from those …

RHODES: Separate!

COMEY: … about 2,000 additional emails …

RHODES: Oh no …

COMEY: … were up-classified to make them confidential. Those emails had not been classified at the time that they were sent or received.

RHODES: Oy! So all this that she told us about never sending classified, secret, you know, confidential, which is the lowest, but the secret is, you know — she wasn’t telling the truth. Oy! It takes my breath away. I’m shocked, I tell you, shocked. The little woman that would not sit home and bake tea and cookies did something that jeopardized national security — I’m shocked, I tell you!

But this was the part of it that really got me … listen and learn —

COMEY: Although we did not find clear evidence (glitch here in Rhodes’ recording — transcript follows as stated at the FBI website) that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information. For example, seven email chains concerned matters that were classified at the top-secret, special-access program at the time they were sent and received. Those chains involved Secretary Clinton both sending emails about those matters and receiving emails about those same matters.

RHODES: Oy!

COMEY: There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position or in the position of those with whom she was corresponding about those matters should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation. In addition to this highly sensitive information, we also found information that was properly classified as secret by the U.S. intelligence community …

RHODES: Oh my God …

COMEY: … at the time it was discussed on email. That is excluding any later up-classified emails. None of these emails should have been on any kind of unclassified system. But their presence is especially concerning because all of these emails were housed on unclassified personal servers, not even supported by full-time security staff like those found at agencies and departments of the United States government or even with a commercial email service like Gmail.

RHODES: She would have been safer on the Gmail!

…Continue reading at Newsbusters.org with interesting comments.  Go there for the audio which is hilarious. 

 

Hillary ‘Extremely Careless with National Security’ | July 2016

Comey Calls Clinton’s Server ‘Extremely Careless’

– FoxNews | Youtube

– “I continue to believe she has not jeopardized national security….but there’s a, uh, uh, a carelessness in terms of managing……..emails.”

 

‘Any person in her position should have known….Extremely Careless with National Security….’

– Youtube

 – Hillary was extremely careless with national security information. In a serious world, where weakness is tested, it is a good thing Hillary was not entrusted with radioactive or biologically dangerous material.
Imagine if she handled such material in a ‘careless manner?’
Now imagine Hillary entrusted with our national security? Why is she not prosecutable. If it were an ordinary citizen she would be seeking bail.
No wonder Hillary Clinton is laughing. The law is for the ‘little people’ no doubt./CJ

 

 

Faith in Government – God and the Declaration of Independence | July 4th 2016

Four Times the Declaration of Independence Mentions God, and Why It Matters

– PJ Media

Declaration_independence.sized-770x415xc

“Many historians call the Founding Fathers “deists,” and many of them were not true Christians — after all, Thomas Jefferson tore all the miracles out of the Gospels! But judging by the Declaration of Independence, our Founders were more religious than many think: our founding document mentions God no less than four times.

This is not to say America was founded as an explicitly Christian nation — the federal government has never had an established religion. But the Jewish and Christian understandings of God deeply influenced the founding generation, and that influence radiates from the Declaration of Independence.

Here are the four times the Declaration mentions the deity:

1. The Laws of Nature and Nature’s God…

The very opening of the Declaration features a reference to God (emphasis added):

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

This reference to God has been cited as an example of deism, but it actually is doing something more than tying nature to God. Deism states that a Creator God made the world and gave humans the capacity to reason but left them to run on their own (it also rejects scripture as twisted and a bad source of truth and morality). He does not engage in human events, and there is (and was) debate on whether He is the source of morality.

God Has Granted Us a Happy Fourth of July

This document explicitly states that the God revealed in nature is also the giver of a moral law between peoples — a law which states that the American colonies ought to be free and independent states. This is, arguably, going farther than deism by giving God the ultimate moral authority. The Declaration of Independence only has force because it appeals to the Natural Law and the law of the one who made nature itself — making the deity the clear source of morality.

2. Endowed by their Creator…

The second reference to God is perhaps better known:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

This sentence, which lays out the three most fundamental rights that all government is bound to respect, is both well-known and beloved by millions of Americans. Yet, it seems few really notice the meaning of this simple statement: our rights come from God Himself, from the being who made humanity.

Of course, this does not mean the Creator is the Christian God, YHWH, or Allah. This is not a statement endorsing one religion above any other, but making the claim that the rights which all governments ought to respect come from the highest moral authority, and that authority is the one singular being who made the universe, and humanity especially.

3. The Supreme Judge of the world…

The Declaration further emphasizes the Creator’s authority:

We, therefore, the Representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by the Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States;

God is not just the creator of the world and the giver of the moral law, but He also has the authority to judge all men and women on earth. This is sounding less and less like an uninvolved deist God and more like a theist God, like the omnipotent being in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.

While some deists at the time of the founding did believe in an afterlife, many did not, and it was unclear even if those who believed in an afterlife also believed that God would judge all human beings after death, a key tenet of the theistic faiths. Deism did not preach that God would judge the world, but the Declaration did.

4. The protection of divine Providence…

Finally, the Declaration declares the least deist idea ever:

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.

Yes, a document primarily drafted by a deist par excellence proudly declares that the authors submit themselves to God’s protection. How could a deist God, who by definition does not interfere in the world of men and women, be relied upon to safeguard this budding nation? He could not.

While some forms of more recent deism do assert that God interferes in the realm of humanity, “classical deism,” which many of the founders are said to have believed, definitely did not. The Declaration of Independence is not a deist document, whether or not its authors were. If you want a stronger example of deism in politics, look at the anti-religious and anti-clerical French Revolution.

Why it matters.

So the Declaration of Independence mentions God four times, saying He created the world, is the foundation for morality, will judge the world, and interferes in the lives of nations and peoples. Why does this matter today?

These references to God matter because they reveal a key point the Founding Fathers often brought up. Perhaps President John Adams articulated it best in his letter to the Massachusetts militia in 1798. He warned against an unchecked release of passions:

…we have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, abmition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.

The leaders who formed our country based their arguments for independence on the laws of God, and they trusted Him to guide America through its struggles. They looked to faith as a bulwark of freedom, not as its opposite. Would that Americans today might see this with their understanding.”

…More at PJ Media with comments.

Fellow Citizens, We Cannot Escape History | July 4th 2016

Aaron Copland: Lincoln Portrait

– Youtube

“Fellow citizens, we cannot escape history.”
That is what he said.
That is what Abraham Lincoln said: “Fellow citizens, we cannot escape history. We of this Congress and this administration will be remembered in spite of ourselves. No personal significance or insignificance can spare one or another of us. The fiery trial through which we pass will light us down in honor or dishonor, to the latest generation. We – even we here – hold the power and bear the responsibility … “  –  Abraham Lincoln, 16th President of the United States

…More here at Youtube

 

‘Lincoln Portrait’: Music of Copland, Words of a Leader

– VOA News

B52B7900-6E92-4B66-BA1B-F4463C957511_w987_r1_s

…More at Voice of America News